# In the Face of the Blue Wall, The 2016 Presidential Election IS the Democratic Primary **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [December 29, 2014, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446 "2014-12-29T15:50:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/181 "2015-01-06T14:12:13Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > This just started two months ago? Sorry, I know what you mean, but I’m really skeptical that Democrats in 2016 will be able to focus a winning campaign on scaring twenty seven distinct special interests with twenty seven different messages, which was pretty much the 2014 strategy. It’s especially unlikely to work among Latino voters if Bush is the nominee. While I don’t know if Bush can win given his family baggage, I do know that if he runs Democrats will have to figure out how to win again with no more than 60% of the Latino vote and I don’t know if they can wrap their minds around that anymore. To beat Bush, there’s no way around competing for the white middle class vote, which Democrats seem to have forgotten how to do. Let’s not kid ourselves. Both parties appeal to their own supporters. They just call it a special interest when the other side does it. The Republicans have essentially put all their eggs in one basket - their base is older wealthier white men. They focus on this one special interest group. The Democrats have a different strategy. They appeal to a coalition of different groups: women voters, black voters, hispanic voters, asian voters, gay voters, poor voters, young voters, etc. The disadvantage for the Democrats is they have to develop a mixed bag of ideas to appeal to these different groups and it can get confusing and even contradictory. But the advantage for the Democrats is they have a larger base. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/182 "2015-01-06T15:05:07Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > I still believe demographics are pushing the country leftward. Maybe not to new england degrees of leftward, but probably a fairly consistent 52-48 split in the national vote in presidential elections, which will make it very uphill for the GOP. Demographics are pushing the country toward the Democrats, not necessarily leftward. Even in states that are turning blue, and which they’ve been winning more often than not lately(such as Virginia), they still aren’t running liberal candidates. Demographic change isn’t making the country more liberal, it’s making it less ideological and less interested in politics, which benefits Democrats, having a bigger tent than the more ideologically extreme Republicans. If that changed and Democrats became a progressive party with no room for centrists, while the GOP opened up, you’d see the worm turn in a hurry. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/183 "2015-01-06T15:10:37Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > One suggestion I’ve heard is that it’s a backlash over affirmative action. Some Asian voters worry that if opportunities for blacks and hispanics are increased it’ll be done at the expense of Asians. That could be part of it, and there’s no “could”. Given Asians’ academic achievement, if you’re going for a college population at the best schools that “looks like America”, there’s no way to do it without holding down Asian enrollment. But I don’t think that’s a really big issue at this point. I think it’s more that Asian voters focus on economic issues, especially how friendly a party is to small business. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/184 "2015-01-06T15:16:09Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Safer streets how? Cheering when unarmed black men are murdered by police? Giving police military equipment and uniforms? Precisely what do Republicans propose that makes streets safer? I’m not going to give Republicans credit for making the streets safer in the 90s, but it’s clear to me that the drop in crime was mainly due to conservatives winning that argument. Rudy Giuliani imposed his brand of crime control on New York and it was wildly successful and Bill Clinton embraced the more conservative approach to crime fighting as well. Democrats figured out that being soft on criminals was politically deadly and changed. Since crime disproportionately affects minorities, minorities benefitted most from the drop in crime. > [@](#): > > Better education? How? By pulling money out of inner city schools via vouchers? By tacking up the Ten Commandments? By giving creationism a pulpit in the classroom? Precisely how do Republicans promote better education? Not that your arguments aren’t valid, but you’re focusing on minutiae instead of the big picture. Republicans demand accountability in education and want parents to have choices. Democrats cater primarily to the teachers’ unions and tend to have only one idea for improving education: more money. Because it’s the only change teachers’ unions support. Much as with the crime issue, the more reformist Democrats kinda triangulate on the issue, trying to secure more money for education but also embracing Republican calls for accountability and choice. And I think that within about 20 years, maybe 10, that’s an argument conservatives will have won decisively as well. You can’t improve education by doing whatever the teachers’ unions want and avoiding whatever they don’t like. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/185 "2015-01-06T15:19:53Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Let’s not kid ourselves. Both parties appeal to their own supporters. They just call it a special interest when the other side does it. > > The Republicans have essentially put all their eggs in one basket - their base is older wealthier white men. They focus on this one special interest group. > > The Democrats have a different strategy. They appeal to a coalition of different groups: women voters, black voters, hispanic voters, asian voters, gay voters, poor voters, young voters, etc. The disadvantage for the Democrats is they have to develop a mixed bag of ideas to appeal to these different groups and it can get confusing and even contradictory. But the advantage for the Democrats is they have a larger base. When Democrats see no alternative to that strategy, they almost always lose. They win when they come up with a unified message. The Republicans also have a unified message, and when it works, it gets them every group but African-Americans and the poorest voters. GWB. for example, may have won by a narrow margin, but he competed with Kerry among every demographic except the two I mentioned, whereas Romney and McCAin were more limited to the older white men you described, getting their asses kicked among women, Latinos, Asians, and the young. But is that a function of the GOP, or Obama? We find out in 2016. I think it’s Obama, because those numbers didn’t hold up in midterms. Democrats want to think, “Oh, we have a midterm problem”, but I think it’s worse than that. You have an Obama problem. If he’s not on the ballot, you’ve got several million voters who just aren’t interested. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/186 "2015-01-06T15:20:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I’m not going to give Republicans credit for making the streets safer in the 90s, but it’s clear to me that the drop in crime was mainly due to conservatives winning that argument. Rudy Giuliani imposed his brand of crime control on New York and it was wildly successful and Bill Clinton embraced the more conservative approach to crime fighting as well. Democrats figured out that being soft on criminals was politically deadly and changed. Since crime disproportionately affects minorities, minorities benefitted most from the drop in crime. Crime went down in the 90s everywhere – I don’t think there’s anything special that Giuliani did to stand out. Crime has been trending downwards for a while. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/187 "2015-01-06T15:26:17Z")
Crime went down in New YOrk more than anywhere else, taking it from one of the most dangerous cities in the country to one of the safest. By contrast, cities like Chicago, Atlanta, and LA had crime drops too, but still deservedly retain their status as pretty dangerous places. Current murder rates: NY: 4.0 Chicago: 15.2 Atlanta: 17.7 LA: 6.3 Philly: 15.96 DC: 13.9 > [@](#): > > Violent crime in the city has dropped by three quarters in the twelve years ending in 2005 with the murder rate at its lowest then level since 1963 with 539 murders that year, for a murder rate of 6.58 per 100,000 people, compared to 2,245 murders in 1990 The murder rate continued to drop each year since then. In 2012, there were 414 murders, mainly occurring in the outlying, low income areas of NYC. Among the 182 U.S. cities with populations of more than 100,000, New York City ranked 136th in overall crime. > **[Crime in New York City](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_New_York_City)** > > Crime rates in New York City have been recorded since at least the 1800s. The highest crime totals were recorded in the late 1980s and early 1990s as the crack epidemic surged, and then declined continuously from around 1990 throughout the 2000s. As of 2023\[update\], New York City has significantly lower rates of gun violence than many other large cities. Its 2022 homicide rate of 6.0 per 100,000 residents compares favorably to the rate in the United States as a whole (7.0 per 100,0 During the... > **[Crime in Chicago](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago)** > > Crime in Chicago has been tracked by the Chicago Police Department's Bureau of Records since the beginning of the 20th century. > The city's overall crime rate, especially the violent crime rate, is higher than the US average. Gangs in Chicago have a role in the city's crime rate. > The number of homicides in Chicago hit a 25-year high in 2021. > **[Crime in Atlanta](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Atlanta)** > > Crime in Atlanta, Georgia is above the national median and has been a major problem for the city since the middle 20th century. > Atlanta's public safety improvement between 2001 and 2009 occurred at more than twice the rate of the rest of the country. After ranking in the top five highest violent crime cities for most of the previous three decades, in 2009 Atlanta ranked 31st, and in 2015, 24/7 Wall Street ranked it 19th. While various news sources report rankings by crime rate, FBI strongly c... > **[Crime in Los Angeles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Los_Angeles)** > > Crime in Los Angeles has varied throughout time, reaching peaks between the 1970s and 1990s. Since the early 2020s, crime has increased in Los Angeles. > In 2012, the Los Angeles Police Department reported that crime had declined in the city for the 10th consecutive year. In 2013, Los Angeles reported 296 homicides in the city proper, which corresponds to a rate of 6.3 per 100,000 population—a notable decrease from 1980, when the all time homicide rate of 34.2 per 100,000 population was reporte... > **[Crime in Philadelphia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Philadelphia)** > > Philadelphia consistently ranks above the national average in terms of crime, especially violent offenses. It has the highest violent crime rate of the Top 10 American cities with a population greater than 1 million residents as well as the highest poverty rate among these cities. It has been included in real estate analytics company NeighborhoodScout's "Top 100 Most Dangerous Cities in America" list every year since it has been compiled. Much of the crime is concentrated in the North, West, and ... [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime\_in\_Washington,\_D.C](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Washington,_D.C). ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/188 "2015-01-06T15:28:56Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > … and Bill Clinton embraced the more conservative approach to crime fighting as well. I think you’re mostly right on this, but just a side comment: the centerpiece of Clinton’s crime policy was clearly Community Oriented Policing grants, to fund an additional 100,000 police on the streets. It is obviously a centrist to conservative position, in which the assumption is that more police equal less crime. It’s astonishing to see how conservatives have been wanting to [gut the budget](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/house-panel-approves-cuts-police-hiring-grants) of that program for several years now. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/189 "2015-01-06T15:33:42Z")
Just because a program is doing good doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be cut in an era of big deficits. But you’re right, what I should have said is that as on education, many Democrats triangulated on the crime issue. They didn’t give up on attacking the “root causes” of crime, but they also got tough on current criminals who mostly are beyond help. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/190 "2015-01-06T15:43:04Z")
But if it were called the Ronald Reagan Thin Blue Line between Justice and Obamacare grant program, yet doing exactly the same thing that COPS grants do, there’s no way that Republicans would be trying to zero the program in a time of austerity. It’s entirely about a Democratic president being strongly associated with the program. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/191 "2015-01-06T15:45:47Z")
I think that’s true of programs like Obamacare which are strongly identified with a Democratic President, but I’m not sure about a program enacted 20 years ago. Bush increased spending in a lot of areas, how are Republicans treating NCLB, Bush’s programs for the homeless, and his Africa AIDS programs? I think it’s just more about what Congressional Republicans are prioritizing these days. There’s a lot of them that are even willing to reduce the defense budget nowadays. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/192 "2015-01-06T15:58:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Crime went down in New YOrk more than anywhere else, taking it from one of the most dangerous cities in the country to one of the safest. > > By contrast, cities like Chicago, Atlanta, and LA had crime drops too, but still deservedly retain their status as pretty dangerous places. > > Current murder rates: > > NY: 4.0 > Chicago: 15.2 > Atlanta: 17.7 > LA: 6.3 > Philly: 15.96 > DC: 13.9 > > [Crime in New York City - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_New_York_City) > > [Crime in Chicago - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago) > > [Crime in Atlanta - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Atlanta) > > [Crime in Los Angeles - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Los_Angeles) > > [Crime in Philadelphia - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Philadelphia) > > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime\_in\_Washington,\_D.C](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Washington,_D.C). Thanks for the cites, but where does it say that crime dropped faster and/or by a larger amount in NYC than in these other big cities? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2015, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/193 "2015-01-06T16:08:31Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I think that’s true of programs like Obamacare which are strongly identified with a Democratic President, but I’m not sure about a program enacted 20 years ago. Bush increased spending in a lot of areas, how are Republicans treating NCLB, Bush’s programs for the homeless, and his Africa AIDS programs? I think it’s just more about what Congressional Republicans are prioritizing these days. There’s a lot of them that are even willing to reduce the defense budget nowadays. Except that the final defense budget for this year is higher than what Obama had proposed, by a few billion dollars. It’s also worth noting that Republicans have never fully funded the NCLB program (plus the program really hasn’t been cut at all), and PEPFAR budgets have gone up slightly under the Republican Congress. I’m not familiar with Bush’s homeless programs, but I don’t think you’re factually right on the programs you’ve pointed out. COPS grants ARE being treated differently than NCLB and PEPFAR. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2015, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/194 "2015-01-10T04:54:23Z")
Looks like I am not the only progressive who thinks it’s time to put the heat on the Democratic leadership: [Progressive Seek Control of the Democratic Party](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/progressives-assert-control-democratic-party) Great minds think alike! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2015, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/195 "2015-01-10T06:12:51Z")
You can’t control a party from a minority position. There’s only two ways to control a party: with money or numbers. Progressives have neither. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2015, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/196 "2015-01-10T19:27:11Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > You can’t control a party from a minority position. There’s only two ways to control a party: with money or numbers. Progressives have neither. If progressives don’t have numbers, why do polls keep showing that the bulk of the American people, MUCH LESS American Democrats, are considerably to the left of the Democratic “centrists” on a number of policy positions, PARTICULARLY economic positions? Hmmmmmmmm? My position would be the the vast majority of Congressional Democrats are so ensconced in their Beltway Bubble and so addicted to Wall Street money that they have NO IDEA what hit them in the last election, and will have NO IDEA what will hit them in the next election, though it will be the same thing. That’s why they’re surprised and outraged at the progressives actually trying to, you know … influence policy. Those upstarts! Let them eat cake! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2015, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/197 "2015-01-11T04:12:01Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > If progressives don’t have numbers, why do polls keep showing that the bulk of the American people, MUCH LESS American Democrats, are considerably to the left of the Democratic “centrists” on a number of policy positions, PARTICULARLY economic positions? Hmmmmmmmm? “On a number of positions” tells you nothing. Priorities are where the differences exist more than actual positions. Progressives have made much of the fact that they won ballot intiatives at the same time they lost races between actual candidates. They forget that in 2006 gay marriage bans passed in many states where Republicans lost. Because in 2006, no one cared about gay marriage. Likewise, in 2014, no one cares about minimum wage or abortion or pot. Those aren’t even top 10 issues for voters. Jobs, safety(crime and national security), the economy, and general feelings about how things are going decide elections, not the small differences where progressives differ from fellow Democrats. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2015, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/198 "2015-01-11T23:04:24Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > What does the GOP have to offer a poor voter? Aspiration? Freedom? Self-determination? The ability to escape horrible government schools? And end to the cycle of dependency? Just out of curiosity, have you ever been poor? Really poor? I have, and I was a libertarian then as I am now. Why? Because I saw what big government was doing to my own community. We lived in a neighborhood where most of the families were single parent households, and many of them were on welfare. My mother was also a single parent, but she was raised to believe that taking charity was an absolute last resort. So she went to school at night while working a minimum wage job, improved her condition, worked her way up the ladder, eventually bought a house and a small store and lived a fulfilling life that didn’t depend on anyone else. She wasn’t that smart, she had no connections, but she worked her ass off. And it paid off. My brother and I both worked 20-hour-per-week jobs starting in grade 7 to help make ends meet. My grandparents lived down the street. A series of life events left them broke in their early 50’s, so they moved into a small crappy apartment and my grandfather took a job as a pump jockey at a gas station. They saved every nickel for almost 5 years, then used it for a down payment on a small decrepit farm. They built that farm into a half-million-dollar property and retired comfortably. They never took a nickel of government money. In the meantime, my friends on welfare were trapped in a dead end. Their mothers became unemployable and spent their time sitting around watching ‘their stories’ and drinking and smoking. Some of their children got out because our public education system in Canada allows children to go to any school, so we don’t have ‘ghetto schools’ to the degree you have in the U.S. But many of them became criminals, or lazy slackers who subsequently wound up on public assistance as well. One girl I knew had 2 kids by the time she was 20, and was intentionally screwing anyone who would ask so that she could get pregnant again, because the rules at the time said that any single mother with more than 2 children could claim welfare without the requirement to look for work. That was her holy grail - especially since her mother was raising the kids anyway. So I got a first-hand look at the unintended consequences of well-meaning legislation. Also, when you’re poor you get to experience government at its worst. You’re the one who has to stand in endless lines to fill out government paperwork for your assistance checks. You’re the one who discovers the soft tyranny of a large bureaucracy full of people with guaranteed jobs. You’re the one who gets to experience what the police are like when dealing with the riff-raff (hint: They don’t say ‘sir’ a whole lot). You’re the one whose monthly income is dependent on the whims of politicians rather than your own work ethic and ability. This tends to make you angry and unhappy - especially when ‘community organizers’ come around to tell you how horrible your life is so they can gain political power. What made it all tolerable for my family was the belief that in a free country you can rise to the level of your ability, and therefore poverty need not be a permanent condition. That’s what the free market offers you - the ability to rise as far as your skill and work ethic will take you. The government offers you a subsistence wage in return for a state of permanent dependency. It offers you life-crippling loans to get an ‘education’ that has been watered down by ideology and the need to pass every warm body that comes through the door. And left-wing government promises you that if you make it out of the cycle of dependency and actually achieve something, your income will be taxed away and you will be vilified if your success takes you too far. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 11:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/199 "2015-01-13T11:13:40Z")
**Sam Stone** , you were asked about the GOP. The GOP is not remotely libertarian. And your experience with Canadian liberalism is not all that relevant to American liberalism. Welfare runs out here, for example. Plus, you literally cannot go to school at night while working a minimum wage job. At least, not without government assistance. My sister makes around 125% minimum wage and depends on a Pell Grant to get any schooling. And she’s lucky that our community college is actually cheap enough that a Pell Grant can cover it. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446/200 "2015-01-13T11:20:18Z")
It helps that the GOP actually liked regular joes, whereas the Democrats disdain them. Making fun of the rubes is a staple of any liberal comedian’s act and Democrats constantly get busted making dumb statements about people who cling to guns and religion or are too stupid to know what’s good for them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-the-face-of-the-blue-wall-the-2016-presidential-election-is-the-democratic-primary/708446.md?page=11)