We've all seen the quote:
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
When I first heard this quote, I was like: "Okay. What did he say next?" J went on: don't I see, it was a huge mistake. You can't call people bitter when you're trying to get them to vote for you. Apparently
most voters agreed. He almost stood by his remarks ("If I worded things in a way that made people offended, I deeply regret that."), but since backtracked.
I didn't see it as a mistake. OK, politically, if it received the reaction it did, and he didn't stand by the remarks, then it was probably a mistake because it's dropped his popularity. But the thing is, IT'S TRUE. It IS true. That's why I wanted to know what he said next-- this is the "straight talk" he always promises and sometimes delivers. (Another example of the straight talk was when he said what he'd do in Pakistan if the government didn't cooperate with US forces, which also got him in trouble.) I thought I was alone thinking this, but then I found another
article that agreed.
Barack is talking about people who have becomed disenfranchised for economic reasons, and turn to conservative social issues. It's a great way to explain why huge swaths of the midwest and south are red states. Do they really prefer private schools to public in Nebraska? Capital gains tax breaks in Louisiana? No, they vote red because of social issues-- gun rights and/or religion (where religion is anti-abortion rights, anti-homosexuality rights, anti-stem cell research, etc.). I have always struggled to find a link between the Republican economic platform (lower taxes, smaller government) and the social platform (big military, restricting civil liberties, christian values). To say that government's role should be small and then federally restrict individual liberties doesn't make sense to me.
OK--I'm thinking as I write now-- I wonder if many people think that if the 1950's were the Golden Age for the American middle class (it was), and that decade was founded on nuclear families, Christian values, and having just exerted military supremacy over the rest of the world in WWII, then by replicating those social values now we can go back to that time when the middle class was great. Today's middle class can barely afford college, fears terrorist attacks and school shootings, loses jobs to immigrants or outsourcing, and is forced to have 2 working parents in order to afford any discretionary spending. Maybe it's reasonable to think that a return to the social values of the 1950's could fix these problems.
I don't think it is, that's why I'm a Dem. I think the country and its place in the world is fundamentally changed, and we'll never go back to having a middle class like that, with one working parent and job security and discretionary income... but the reasons for that are economic, not social. In my view, the policies to help the middle class will be to tax everyone, but tax the highest income earners most, and reinvest primarily in education and infrastructure, not the military. If the highest income earners decide to go elsewhere then fine, but they won't find many 1st world countries with lower taxes in the top bracket than the USA, even if we hike it by 10%.
The way we will remain a superpower in the 21st century will be to become a leader in the development of new ideas, technologies and art, that's why education and immigration are so important to our future.
In closing, the people Barack is talking about are bitter, and they should be bitter. They should think about what they can do for future generations to improve their stake, and while it's arguable whose social policies are right for the country, when it comes to economic policies the Republicans won't get them anywhere different from where they are now. Which leaves them clinging to guns and religion.