The Virginia Society for the Preservation and Appreciation of High-Quality Posts

[NOVA Green]

The war against improving the standard of living outside the cosmopolitan major urban areas, waged by socially liberal laissez-faire capitalists (or corporatists) that views Everytown, USA as a blighted uncultured wasteland because they don't have a mosque or tax breaks for tech start ups or a tesla charging station or whatever - thus deserving to fall into ruin and drug addiction.

Bernie derangement syndrome is real on this board because the wealthier members resent being called the villains of society, and this board skews wealthy.

Yeah, that's a damn good post indeed.

This.

Agreed and QFT.

[NOVA Green]

The war against improving the standard of living outside the cosmopolitan major urban areas, waged by socially liberal laissez-faire capitalists (or corporatists) that views Everytown, USA as a blighted uncultured wasteland because they don't have a mosque or tax breaks for tech start ups or a tesla charging station or whatever - thus deserving to fall into ruin and drug addiction.

Bernie derangement syndrome is real on this board because the wealthier members resent being called the villains of society, and this board skews wealthy.

Yeah, that's a damn good post indeed.

This.

Agreed and QFT.

I'd hardly call a comically ridiculous strawman a "good post".

Perhaps you are right regarding the standards of what qualifies as a "good post" on this thread...

I had to reread the OPs post within context multiple times to determine that the post was not sarcastic in nature, reflect upon many of the Bernie supporting communities in the '16 Dem Primary in rural and small-town areas.

So, I carefully parsed the OPs post

"The war against improving the standard of living outside the cosmopolitan major urban areas, waged by socially liberal laissez-faire capitalists (or corporatists) that views Everytown, USA as a blighted uncultured wasteland because they don't have a mosque or tax breaks for tech start ups or a tesla charging station or whatever - thus deserving to fall into ruin and drug addiction.

Bernie derangement syndrome is real on this board because the wealthier members resent being called the villains of society, and this board skews wealthy."


The war against improving the standard of living outside the cosmopolitan major urban areas, waged by socially liberal laissez-faire capitalists (or corporatists)

It is true that MNCs overwhelmingly focus their major facilities investments within larger Metro areas throughout the US, rather than investing in facilities located in smaller cities/towns. There are obviously many different reasons for what are essentially business based decisions depending upon the particular industry/sector, workforce profile, infrastructure, etc....

Larger corporations do tend to skew more socially liberal at a Senior Management level, especially MNCs that have a large international employee base, global brand, as well as the top brass generally don't consider investing in communities where they need to drive 2-3 hours from the airport to their facility to conduct business.

Is there a "war being waged"? Certainly not in terms of deliberate and systematic attempt to oppress small town and rural areas. There is certainly a Class War going on in the US where Big Businesses that are publicly traded are ultimately beholden to Wall Street and the push for margins and extremely positive P&Ls are directly tied to the job performances (and bonuses) for the CEOs/CFOs etc....

Ultimately, when you live in smaller communities outside of the larger Metro areas, in many cases employment is heavily based upon a small handful of larger employers. For decades we have seen patterns from the Auto Sector that started closing down Union plants in the Midwest and opening up new Non-Union plants in the South initially. Meanwhile, you have this phenomenon called BPO (Business Process Outsourcing), subcontracting certain manufactured goods to external suppliers that pay much less with much worse benefits than existing "In-House" employees.

Suddenly MFN gets signed into law by Bush Sr only a few brief years after the massacre at Tiananmen Square which was a sleeping giant when it came to mass exportation of US jobs overseas.

Side show Bill Clinton signs NAFTA into law, despite the opposition of a large majority of Democratic US Senators and Reps....

I can talk about what I saw in a large manufacturing and R&D facility working for a Fortune 50 Company.... In roughly a five year period we went from 9,000 employees in the plant to 4,000. When they cut our hours briefly in the early '00s we were told by Management that we were eligible for NAFTA $$$ since the US Gvt had deemed job losses at the plant to directly a result of the MNCs shifting manufacturing operations overseases. Five years later, the facility was down to about 2,500 employees.


"
that views Everytown, USA as a blighted uncultured wasteland because they don't have a mosque or tax breaks for tech start ups or a tesla charging station or whatever - thus deserving to fall into ruin and drug addiction"

Ok---- here's where I suspect you might be viewing the Strawman side of the argument. Do we really know these are the reasons as to why these same MNCs have been stiffing American workers?

It is true that tax breaks, which essentially is a transfer of wealth from taxpayers in various counties and municipalities directly into the pockets of the MNCs as part of a "race to the bottom" or effectively a "lowest bidder" style of contract award pits smaller cities and towns against each other to race to somehow capture the jobs that might materialize, as part of both a mixture of desperation combined with a naive belief that the benefits will outweigh the costs.

I could go through an entire list just in Oregon of communities that have given huge concessions to obtain major facilities/plants based upon the "X number of jobs generated", and ultimately the number of direct jobs that these companies provide is significantly lower than what they claimed in order to obtain these various concessions. In many cases, such as the Semiconductor Plant in West Eugene that taxpayers are still footing the bill for, the facility opened employed people for a few brief years, and then was mothballed.

The original plant was heavily opposed prior to development because of all of the Corp tax breaks from City and County Gvt, as well as being located on ecologically sensitive wetlands.

Now the article below was from '15, and the plant is still an industrial wasteland, and according to someone I know who used to work there on the Facilities side, the cracks in the concrete subflooring is so severe, that essentially the building would need to be torn down to even make it possibly habitable as a Factory/Office Space.

http://www.oregonlive.com/silicon-forest/index.ssf/2015/11/mystery_solved_communications.html

Now the whole Mosque comment is a bit silly, but if we look at the comments about drug addiction, these are very real consequences of massive collapse of "company towns" in rural and small-town/city communities in the US.

Here in Oregon Meth abuse and addiction skyrocketed after the Bush Sr and Bush Jr recessions, when Timber Mills laid off huge numbers of workers. After the Great Recession, we started to observe a new phenomenon in the form of prescriptions from Doctors for synthetic Opioids....

More Americans die now from drug ODs than car accidents and suicides, and as a Middle Aged individual that actually lives and works in these tight knit smaller communities, I have seen first hand the impacts of the aftermath for family, friends, former co-workers, etc....

"Bernie derangement syndrome is real on this board because the wealthier members resent being called the villains of society, and this board skews wealthy"

Ok--- the third sentence basically wraps the argument around as a final conclusion that directly references the Original Thread Topic (OTT?)

I believe it is likely true that a large majority of Atlas posters come from significantly higher than average MHI family backgrounds.... Now, one can be an underemployed and overeducated individual and post on Atlas, and be "like wait what.... I'm working $9 Hr while going to school, barely able to pay my rent and eat right, etc...)

Although I don't in any way shape or form presume to speak for the OP and their post, my interpretation is that the author/poster was attempting to present the perspective of many Bernie Sanders Dem Primary voters (Which contrary to the Media hype) tends to skew heavily Middle-Aged voters in Blue Collar occupations.

The Obama economic recovery largely bypassed smaller cities and towns, and although it's easier to get a job than it has been in awhile in many of our communities, they still pay crap wages. Wall Street gets a huge bailout from Bush Jr, while struggling homeowners get the shaft in a place where the sun don't shine.

HRC attempted to run on the Obama legacy, and actually I really like and respect Obama and his works....

Still, it's hard to make an argument to families and communities still struggling and rebuilding from the Great Recession that the same-old Centrist "New Way" Bill Clinton Dem Model of "jobs and prosperity for all" is the right solution, while almost ten years after the Great Recession we (Working Class Folks) are still picking up the pieces caused by a human made natural disaster of epic proportions.

[NOVA Green]

Context: Discussion of the Civiqs  US-SEN TX Poll that showed Cruz only up +2 versus Beto, that developed further into political and demographic change and potential compare/contrast in various States....

Here are the presidential numbers of TX from 2000 to 2016(rounded to the thousand)
2000
D-2,434,000
R-3,800,000
2004
D-2,833,000(+399,000)
R-4,527,000(+727,000)
2008(D WAVE)
D-3,529,000(+696,000)
R-4,479,000(-48,000)
2012
D-3,308,000(-221,000)
R-4,570,000(+91,000)
2016
D-3,878,000(+570,000)
R-4,685,000(+115,000)
As you can see, the R numbers have actually been stagnant for a while, and its been the Ds who have seen voter fluctuation and gains. Its also important to note that 2016 was a poor year for D turnout, and so these numbers could be have been larger with a better candidate.

I am not saying Beto is going to win by 10%, what I am saying is that he has a chance, and that TX will not always be an R state.

So let's go back and take another look at these numbers. If you put them all in a spreadsheet and then draw a linear best fit for both the Democratic votes and the Republican votes, it looks like this:



i.e. if you extrapolate linear trends of vote gains, Texas is safe R/lean R until 2040, and is only a tossup (not even lean D, much less safe D) by 2040. That hardly looks like a blue state.

If you throw out the 2000 data and start with 2004, it crosses in 2032.

If you throw out both 2000 and 2004 and start with 2008, it crosses in about 2070...


Believe me, I would like to be wrong about this, but there is just no real support in previous election results to think that Texas is quickly shifting blue.

It is possible, of course, that it could shift more quickly, but if so, the shift will not be based upon just extrapolating previous Dem gains. It will be a different magnitude/degree/trend of Dem gains than has been seen before over the past decade or two. The best case for this happening is the possibility that Republican gains in rural and exurban areas have finally been maxed out, and that White millennials in TX replacing older voters in the electorate will start voting significantly less heavily R than their parents/grandparents. But even if that is the case, it is hard to see that coming into effect sufficiently to make TX a tossup (or lean D) before 2028/2032 or so. Which is not soon enough to make a difference for 2018, or 2020...


Other sunbelt states, such as Georgia (or Virginia) are different. In those states, demographic change turns more quickly into Democratic gains, because the demographic trends are based more on African American population growth and White Liberal population growth. Because African Americans and White Liberals vote at much higher rates than Hispanics do (especially Texas Hispanics), those states have much more of a substantive and faster Democratic trend. For example, GA is on track to pretty much be a tossup by 2020, and has been on that track since at least 2008, for a candidate who can get Obama-level turnout from African Americans and/or Clinton level gains among suburban whites. But for Texas, the timeline is more like 2040 or so.

Colorado is also different, because Democratic gains there are largely based on white liberals/moderates in Denver/Boulder flipping Dem. Minority/Hispanic growth makes some difference, but is comparatively small and slow (like in Texas). If you cut out East Texas, West Texas, and South Texas and had a state centered on Austin, the trend there would be a lot more similar to Colorado.

Arizona is also different because Democratic gains there... have not yet actually materialized... If Democratic gains do materialize there, it seems to me that this is again mostly a result of a shift in White voters, flipping from R to D (similar to Colorado). Yes, Hispanic population growth helps, but only on the margins. Presuming Sinema wins, she is not going to win just because Hispanics suddenly start voting in huge numbers in AZ. She is going to win because suburban whites are turned off by Trump and flip Dem, and because (in comparison to Texas), Arizona has many, many fewer exurban White Rs and rural White Rs.

While Arizona has also been fairly inelastic (similar to Texas), in comparison to Texas it has more of a recent history of splitting tickets and occasionally supporting Democrats. White voters (in particular white suburban voters) in Arizona have previously been much more elastic than white voters in Texas, and willing to elect people such as former Governor Janet Napolitano. AZ was also considered sufficiently elastic to be briefly somewhat contested in the 2004 Presidential election, and probably voted a bit more R than it otherwise would have in 2008 (McCain homestate) and 2012 (Romney mormon vote), so on a baseline level it is a tad less Republican than the last decade's Presidential results would indicate.

From 2004 - https://www.thenation.com/article/arizona-turning-blue-kerry/

Whereas white suburbanites in AZ voted sufficiently for Napolitano for her to win in a less rural/exurban state than Texas, white suburban voters in Texas would previously never have considered voting for a Democrat for anything, going back to roughly 1970 or so.

[NOVA Green]

Context: Discussion of campaign expenditure and strategies in the 2018 US-SEN Election in Texas.   Link to thread at bottom of post and effort post from Cruz Will Win (We need more of this style of campaign expenditure analysis on Atlas and less of the "Op-Eds" and interpretations of 3rd Party Data Sources, and delve more into the Raw Data where regardless of partisan affiliation, we can at least discuss facts and not just opinions....

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=261509.msg6387075#msg6387075

Wow--- just came home from work and we have tons of interesting discussions and information sharing regarding the funding priorities of the Cruz/Beto campaigns in Tejas, that opens up all sorts of interesting angles.

I guess two questions that I do have is:

1.) Why is it that Cruz has spent $5 Million more than Beto according to the Open Sources link, but yet his poll numbers appear to have dropped and the race has tightened up by all objective indications (Not saying that Texas is going to vote DEM for US-SEN in '18), just that there is something that feels different about this race.

2.) Where has the Cruz campaign been spending their money and why isn't it working?

So regarding the question of "how did Cruz spend all his money," I took a quick look at the FEC reports on expenditures for both Cruz and for Beto.

The data is somewhat out of date (only through the end of June), so we are missing the last 2 months, but nonetheless is pretty informative. There will only be updated data with the next FEC filing deadline in 1.5 months (mid Oct). I grouped all the FEC expenditure data by the categories of type of expenditure listed on the FEC forms. These are not entirely consistent, because the people filing the reports don't use completely consistent categories, but they paint the general picture. After the top 25 categories, I grouped everything else into "other."

First, here is Cruz's spending:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

From this you can see that the biggest single thing Cruz has been spending on is fundraising. That is the fundraising phone calls, and probably a lot/all of the printing/postage (i.e. mail). Then there is payroll. The other important thing to note is that Cruz spent a pretty good amount of money on database management, list rental, etc. In addition, Cruz spent money on a variety of consultants, which adds up. That is to support his fundraising, and also later on will be to support his voter contact/GOTV.


Next, here is Beto's spending:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

By far and away the biggest category for Beto is digital advertising. He is going nuts on digital advertising. The second thing is Payroll/Salary. Beto probably has a larger campaign with more field staff (this is normal for Democrats as compared to Republicans), so he pays more salary. And then the 3rd category that Beto is spending on is T-Shirts, Merchandise (i.e. yard signs). Those 3 things are basically the entirety of Beto's campaign (or were until he started running TV ads) ---

1) Digital Advertising.
2) Payroll for his staff/field campaign.
3) Yard signs, T-shirts, and bumper stickers.

That is basically it, and this also answers the question of why Beto has so many yard signs - because that is one of the main things he has spent money on. He has spent a huge amount of money on yard signs and other campaign swag/merchandise.

And not the expenditures on consultants etc in comparison to Cruz.



Finally, one more important thing to note... The makeup of the Payroll/Salaries between the two campaigns is quite different.

For Beto's campaign, the salaries/payrolls are split up between about 160 people, who received an average of about $6300 each (exact numbers will be off somewhat because the data is a bit noisy). What does that mean? It means that Beto is running a large field campaign with a lot of people being paid to campaign for him.

For Cruz's campaign, on the other hand, the salaries/payroll is split up between more like 20-25 people, with an average of more like $30,000-$50,000 each (with noise in the data again, for things like where only someone's first name was entered, a comma put in the wrong place, etc), with multiple people having received more than $100,000 in salaries. On Beto's campaign, there are 0 people who have gotten that much in salaries/payroll. That means that Cruz has a much smaller campaign with a relatively small number of people who get paid comparatively well to sit around in their offices and do office work of various sorts, as opposed to contact voters and organize volunteers directly.

[NOVA Green]

Posted by VPH: DEM from KS on the thread: Who Are The 15-20% of Clinton Supporters in Deep Red Backcountry?

It's a detailed comprehensive and thoughtful post from an individual has been active in "grassroots level political activities in Kansas from many different parts of the State, in a part of the country that frequently doesn't get that much attention because it is so heavily Republican at various levels of Government for so long.

We need more similar style of contributions like this from posters representing all 50 States of the Union, and perhaps a similar style thread such as "Who are the 15-20% of Trump Supporters in Deep Blue Country".

Effort post....

Speaking anecdotally here, but I have met enough of these voters and activists to notice some trends. A lot of the candidates I have met from these places were not vocal in support of Hillary, but they likely voted for her.

One subset seems to be more conservative Democrats who have always considered themselves Democrats. Most of them have some sort of family connection to the New Deal, and lots of them are older. There is a decent amount of them in historically Democratic counties, especially in deeply Catholic areas here. Their influence showed in the Kansas 4th District special election nomination contest, as most of this type of delegate from rural areas picked Dennis McKinney (from Kiowa County-11% Hillary), who was very much one of their own. They tend to be more Democratic on economic issues, emphasizing the importance of government in fostering a fairer, more equitable society. Gubernatorial candidate Josh Svaty (from Ellsworth County-19% Hillary) would be another example of this type, although he is younger and decidedly more progressive on some issues.

Taken to one end, some of these more conservative rural Democrats are very very conservative. I knew one activist and his wife (from Elk County-13% Hillary) who supported Rocky De La Fuente in the 2016 Democratic Primary and some other minor candidate in the 2012 Democratic Primary. Not the most likely to vote for Hillary in the general election, considering he had some choice words for her when we talked. Sadly, this couple passed away before the election but they were always interesting to talk to.

The second subset is mostly female and more concerned with social justice. I know a number of activists who fit into this category. These voters tend to be indistinguishable on most policy issues from a lot of the more urban "indivisible" types. Many backed Bernie Sanders in the primary, because of his progressive stances. My theory is that these voters are more to the left because they're surrounded by conservatives. As an example, an awesome state senate candidate in Eastern Kansas, Mark Pringle, who won his home county (Woodson County-19% Hillary) was deeply progressive on many issues. Some smaller scale family farmers fall into this category. They are also prevalent around small town university campuses, as in Pratt County (20% Clinton).

Yet another subset, which I have not met that many people from, are very poor voters. Many of them depend on forms of government assistance, but my thought it lots of them don't vote. Some certainly factor into the Clinton support in very red areas. Interesting to think whether or not Bernie would have gotten more in this group to vote.

Another group of people who fit this are rural Latinos who can vote. In many Western Kansas counties, there is a high Latino population, but many are ineligible to vote. While the Latino populations here tend to be more conservative than elsewhere, many do support Democrats. I have a hunch that this helps explain some of the swings in rural Western Kansas (even outside of Dodge City, Garden City, and Liberal). Stafford County (16% Clinton) has some too.

Then there are small historically Black settlements in very red, White counties. Nicodemus KS (Graham County-15% Clinton) is one example, and so are parts of Coffeyville (Montgomery County-22% Clinton) and I know some exist in Oklahoma.

[NOVA Green]

KY Politics at the State level are statewide politics but tie into an Historical Narrative, which can trickle into Federal GE Races....

The revival of the Trade Union Movement in the Form of the Teacher's Strikes in Kentucky have revived the memories of older retirees in a heavily white impoverished State.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/13/us/teacher-walkout-kentucky-oklahoma-arizona/index.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2019/03/20/teacher-strike-sickout-kentucky-jcps-wayne-lewis-names-list/3223587002/

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/education/2019/02/28/kentucky-teacher-sickout-strike-due-to-pension-system-bill/3012091002/

https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/409014-some-in-kentucky-teacher-strike-were-confused-says-governor

https://apnews.com/3622dc9b61204787a5b5f3da24e409e1


Although this did not directly cripple the KY State Republican Party, it is clear that they got a punch in the face from segments of the electorate that they had expected to win, based upon the popularity of the 'Pub brand on items such as Energy Policy, Social Conservative Religious Platforms, and even possibly even Gun Owners (Although that vast majority of KY Voters have a firearm within their house).

Anybody who chooses to believe that many registered KY DEMs within the Coal Country of SE KY have forgotten their Coal Miner Daughter Roots, let alone Coal Counties of Western Kentucky (Muhlenberg County for one example) have forgotten their Trade Union Ancestral Roots, must be smoking a bigger and stronger form of Crystal Meth than any of the "crackheads" within the declining Timber Mill and Factory Towns of Downstate Oregon....

UMWA Pension Plans have been screwed over from the bosses for a long time, which is currently one of the major items for the rump of the UMWA, while meanwhile there are literally generations of Coal Miners within the tight-knit communities of Appalachia that will always remember and never forget, while meanwhile their kids and grandkids migrate to the bright-lights and big cities of places like Cinci, Indie, Chi-Town....

"Insert John Prine Song from the early '70s"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEy6EuZp9IY

No Question: Beshear's win was directly a result of the Union Movement activists in a heavily Non-Union State, with the small exception of a handful of Public Sector Workers (Teachers, Cops, Firefighters, County, State, and Municipal Employees) that were getting screwed over by the same type of forced "Austerity Politics" we have seen enforced against our rural communities over the decades from both Democratic and Republican Political Leaders alike.

For whatever reason, KY coal was far less unionized than WV, and there are no union coal mines left in KY.  Bloody Harlan actually swung hard towards Bevin in this election, though the coal county swings were generally mixed and minimal.  What won the election for Beshear was a substantial swing in all the "educated" counties in KY (counties with 20% or more of 25 and over with a college degree) and especially in counties with a higher education institution.  Yeah, Bevin definitely made the teachers mad (cause he's a disrespectful jerk) but did they rekindled the union spirit in coal country? no.

At the risk of posting directly into the thread regarding a post that I made late last Night...

1.) Public Sector Workers are the 2nd largest Employer within Kentucky, and have still not seen job levels recover to pre Great-Recession levels because of slashing of funding by Municipal, State, and Federal Government agencies.

2.) The wages paid to public sector employees in KY are significantly lower than equivalent jobs within the private sector, and additionally the State of KY has been slashing benefits for various Union Employees within the State.

3.) These workers live throughout KY, but because of the economic poverty within the most rural parts of KY account for a disproportionate share of public vs private sector employment.

4.) It was not "just the teachers" that were upset, but also fellow public sector workers, parents and grandparents of kids in public school, small business owners in economically declining communities which used to be heavily proud mining communities, and other resource based communities.

5.) There was no "Option 9" for Coal Country like there was for Timber dependent communities in Oregon back in the '90s, no shifts in how State Educational $$$ were shifted so that communities with declining tax base could keep schools running, no vocational retraining programs to ease the transition, like we had in Oregon.

6.) Instead, there was Government austerity under Dem and Pub Politicians alike from Presidents of both parties at the Federal Level, and at the State level attempts to lure FDI into KY, or steal formerly Union Auto jobs from across the Ohio River into KY, under a giant corporate subsidy scheme, get into the Warehouse and Transportation gig. A virtual "Race to the Bottom".

7.) It is true that the swings in Coal Country (and yes I was watching Harlan County last night) were necessary but not sufficient without major swings elsewhere, including the relatively small handful of "Upper Middle Class White Educated Suburbs".

8.) I still stand by my point that KY still has an Ancestral Jacksonian Working Class Populist roots where the Mine Workers were in many ways the ones that set the standard for a dramatic improvement in the conditions of the people over many decades.

9.) You made some good points on the other thread, and quite frankly are well worthy of discussion regarding swings in counties among "Native KY" vs "Non-Native"... Bookmarked the site for future ref since you can drill down by County for every State.   

Anyways, here's just one link about the economic breakdown of KY from '18, but ultimately I think we might need to wait to see the precinct results published to see what's going on in the "Metro" portions of KY vs the "rurals"     

https://kypolicy.org/the-state-of-working-kentucky-2018/

Meanwhile listening to Phil Ochs: "No Christmas in Kentucky" from way back in the early '60s to warm everbody up for the Holiday Season...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK5QSOodqhg