bureaucracybusters

WHY THE POOR VOTE REPUBLICAN: PART TWO (END)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on September 18, 2026 at 12:08 am

Republicans have long tried to prevent or eliminate programs that aid the poor and middle-class, including:   

  • Social Security (since it began in 1935)
  • Medicare
  • National health insurance
  • Food stamps
  • WIC (Women, Infants, Children).

So why are so many poor Americans now flocking to this party’s banner?

Two reasons: Racism and greed. There are historical parallels for both.

First, race:

In 1999, historian Victor Davis Hanson noted the huge gap in wealth between the aristocratic, slave-owning minority of the pre-Civil War South and the vast majority of poor white Southerners.

Victor Davis Hanson (@VDHanson) | Twitter

Victor Davis Hanson

“Before the war in the counties Sherman would later ruin, the top 10% of the landowners controlled 40% of the assessed wealth.”

In contrast, “more than half of those who were lucky enough to own any property at all still possessed less than 15% of the area’s valuation.”

So Hanson asked: “Why did the millions of poor whites of the Confederacy fight at all?”

He supplied the answer in his brilliant work on military history, The Soul of Battle: From Ancient Times to the Present Day, How Three Great Liberators Vanquished Tyranny.

One of those liberators was General William Tecumseh Sherman, who led 62,000 Union troops in a victorious “March to the Sea” through the Confederacy in 1864.

So why did so many poor Southern whites literally lay down their lives for the wealthy planter class, which despised them?

According to Hanson: “Behind the entire social fabric of the South lay slavery.

“If slavery eroded the economic position of the poor free citizens, if slavery encouraged a society of haves and have-nots…then it alone offered one promise to the free white man—poor, ignorant and dispirited—that he was at least not black and not a slave.”

And the planter class and its allies in government easily fobbed off their poor white countrymen with cheap flattery. Said Georgia Governor Joseph Brown:

“Among us the poor white laborer is respected as an equal. His family is treated with kindness, consideration, and respect. He does not belong to the menial class. The negro is in no sense his equal. He belongs to the only true aristocracy, the race of white men.”

Related image

Arlington House and plantation, former home of Robert E. Lee

Similarly, poor whites now flock to the Republican Party—which holds them in equal contempt—in large part to protest the 2008 election of the first black President of the United States.

According to a Pew Research Center study released on July 22, 2011: “Notably, the GOP gains have occurred only among white voters; a 2-point Republican edge among whites in 2008 (46% to 44%) has widened to a 13-point lead today (52% to 39%).”

Since the 1960s, Republicans have pursued a campaign policy of “divide and rule”—divide the nation along racial lines and reap the benefits at election time.

  • Republicans opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  • Republicans opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
  • Republicans, with Richard Nixon as their Presidential candidate in 1968 and 1972, pursued what they called a “Southern strategy”: Use “code language” to stoke fear and hatred of blacks among whites.
  • Republicans have falsely identified welfare programs exclusively with non-whites. (Of the six million Americans receiving food stamps, about 42% are white, 32% are black, and 22% are Latino–with the growth fastest among whites during the recession.)

Thus, in voting Republican, many of these poor whites believe they are “striking a blow for the white race.”

And they can do so in a more socially acceptable way than joining a certified hate group such as the American Nazi Party or Ku Klux Klan.  

Since 2015, openly racist groups such as the Klan and the American Nazi Party have flocked to the banner of Presidential candidate mogul Donald Trump. By enthusiastically courting their support, the real estate mogul has made it possible for Republican candidates to openly display their own racism.

Now greed:

In the hit play, 1776, on the creation and signing of the Declaration of Independence, there is a telling exchange between John Dickinson and John Hancock. It comes during the song, “Cool, Cool, Considerate Men.”

Dickinson, the delegate from Pennsylvania, urges Hancock, president of the Second Continental Congress, “to join us in our minuet.”

By “us” he means his fellow conservatives who fear losing their property and exalted status by supporting American independence from Great Britain.

John Dickinson

Hancock declines, saying: “Fortunately, there are not enough men of property in America to dictate policy.”

To which Dickinson replies:  “Perhaps not. But don’t forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. And that is why they will follow us.”

Today,  poor whites generally identify with the CEOs of powerful corporations. They believe the Republican gospel that they can attain such wealth—if only the government will “get out of my way.”

They forget—or ignore–the truth that government, for all its imperfections, is sometimes all that stands between them and a wide range of predators.

In return, the CEOs despise them as the privileged have always despised their social and economic “inferiors.”

Unless the Democratic Party can find ways to directly address these bitter, Politically Incorrect truths, it will continue its decline into insignificance.

WHY THE POOR VOTE REPUBLICAN: PART ONE (OF TWO)

In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Medical, Politics, Social commentary on September 17, 2026 at 12:10 am

On July 22, 2011, ABC News carried the following story:     

The Pew Foundation, analyzing voter identification, found “the electorate’s partisan affiliations have shifted significantly” since Barack Obama won office in 2008.

The GOP had gained strength among white voters, most specifically “the young and poor.”

A seven-point Democratic advantage among whites under age 30 three years ago had turned into an 11-point GOP advantage. And a 15-point Democratic advantage among whites earning less than $30,000 annually had swung to a slim four-point Republican edge by 2011.

Pew Charitable Trusts - InfluenceWatch - InfluenceWatch

In addition:

  • The GOP gains had occurred only among white voters.
  • Republicans had made sizable gains among white voters since 2008. Fifty-two percent of white voters called themselves Republicans or leaned to the GOP, compared with 39% who affiliated with the Democratic Party or leaned Democratic.
  • Democrats had lost their edge among lower income white voters.
  • In 2008, Democrats had a 15 point lead among white voters with family incomes less than $30,000.  By 2011, Republicans had a four-point edge among this group.
  • The GOP’s lead among middle income white voters had grown since 2008, and Republicans held a substantial advantage with higher income white voters.
  • Republicans have made gains among whites with a high school education or less. The GOP’s advantage over Democrats had grown from one point in 2008 to 17 points in 2011 among less educated whites.
  • Republicans had made smaller gains among whites voters who had college degrees.

What is fascinating about these findings is this: The Republicans have, since 1980, pursued a policy of gutting programs aimed at helping the poor—while repeatedly creating tax-breaks for the wealthiest 1% of the population.

For Republicans, the patron saint of this “love-the-rich-screw-the-poor” ideology remains Ronald Reagan–two-time governor of California and twice-elected President of the United States (1981-1989)

Ronald Reagan, who taught Americans to worship the wealthy

Among those charting Reagan’s legacy as President was former CBS Correspondent David Shoenbrum.

In his bestselling autobiography, America Inside Out: At Home and Abroad from Roosevelt to Reagan, he noted:

  • On January 28, 1981, keeping a pledge to his financial backers in the oil industry, Reagan abolished Federal controls on the price of oil.
  • Within a week, Exxon, Texaco and Shell raised gasoline prices and prices of home heating oil.
  • Reagan saw it as his duty to put a floor under prices, not a ceiling above them.

America Inside Out: Schoenbrun, David: 9780070554733: Amazon.com: Books

  • Reagan believed that when government helped business it wasn’t interfering. Loaning money to bail out a financially incompetent Chrysler was “supporting the free enterprise system.”
  • But putting a high-profits tax on price-gouging corporations or filing anti-trust suits against them was “Communistic” and therefore intolerable.
  • Tax-breaks for wealthy businesses meant helping America become stronger.
  • But welfare for the poor or the victims of a predatory marketplace economy weakened America by sapping its morale.

“In short, welfare for the rich is good for America. But welfare for the poor is bad for America, even for the poor themselves, for it encourages them to be shiftless and lazy.

“Somehow, loans to the inefficient management of American corporations would not similarly encourage them in their inefficient methods,” wrote Shoenbrun.

Republicans have sought to dismantle Social Security ever since that program began in 1935. And Republicans have furiously opposed other programs aiding the poor and middle-class—such as Medicare, food stamps and WIC (Women, Infants, Children).

In short, this is not a political party with a history of rushing to the defense of those most in need.

So the question remains: Why are so many poor Americans flocking to its banner?

The answer lies in the history of the American South—and slavery.

FAILING AT IRAN, NOW HE WANTS CANADA: PART THREE (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on September 16, 2026 at 12:26 am

On January 20, 2026, in a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney called for greater cooperation among the world’s middle-sized nations.      

The reason: To protect themselves from great powers using tariffs to extort control over them.

An example of this: Ottawa and Beijing now have a limited tariff agreement that swaps reduced Chinese duties on Canadian canola seeds for lower Canadian tariffs on a capped volume of Chinese electric vehicles.

On January 26, Canada announced a plan to significantly expand trade with non‑U.S. countries, strengthen internal Canadian trade, and increase domestic investment by up to one trillion dollars over the next five years.

A map of Canada showing its 10 provinces and 3 territories

Canadian provinces and territories

On February 20, 2026, the United States Supreme Court ruled against emergency tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

This had been the basis—and excuse—for Trump’s slapping tariffs on more than 180 countries. 

Ignoring the Supreme Court ruling Trump imposed a short term 10% global tariff. 

On July 1, after a virtual meeting with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer with his Canadian and Mexican counterparts, Greer announced that the U.S. would not extend the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). 

Its goals had been to boost economic growth, reduce trade barriers, and secure preferential market access across North America.

On July 17, in a Truth Social post, Trump threatened to put new tariffs on Canada after hundreds of wildfires left much of the northern U.S. covered by smoke.

He could have offered to send American firefighters and firefighting equipment to Canada. But acting in a humane way has never been a part of Trump’s character. 

On July 20, Trump alleged that Canada discriminated against American companies supplying alcohol, dairy and cars. He signed three proclamations under the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, imposing 50% tariffs on Canadian dairy, alcohol, cars and other products.

On August 22,  Trump’s 50% tariffs took effect on about $20 billion worth of Canadian goods—dairy products, alcoholic beverages, cement and hockey equipment. 

Trade negotiations had collapsed shortly before a midnight deadline the previous night. 

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said that “last-minute changes in the U.S. proposed terms” had caused the collapse.

Mark Carney - Wikiquote

Mark Carney

“….The general attitude….is that the core Canadian industries either would be subsidiaries effectively of the United States industries or would put in place terms where those industries would be, gradually wound down in Canada and we’re not going to of course….accept those terms.”

And he warned that Canada would match the tariffs “dollar for dollar” starting on September 8.

After Canada suspended trade talks on August 21, Trump signed an executive order “changing” the name of Lake Ontario, which borders New York and Canada’s Ontario province, to Lake America.

Google and Apple, cravenly seeking to win Trump’s favor, immediately displayed maps offering the Trumpian version of geography.

“When the Americans stop doing memes, stop throwing shade, stop trying to be tough and start being serious about having those discussions, we can have those discussions,” said Carney at a press conference.

There is no American precedent for such extortionate behavior—but there is a German one. That of Nazi Germany from t938 to 1939 under Adolf Hitler—first against Austria, then Czechoslovakia, and finally Poland.

It was his aggression against Poland that ignited World War II.

Opinion | Yes, it's okay to compare Trump to Hitler. Don't let me stop you. - The Washington Post

But Trump can be beaten—if his enemies are willing to go all the way.

Democratic nations like Canada and Mexico dare not attack the United States militarily. America’s military is so powerful the country is threatened only by China and Russia.

But they can target with ruthless tariffs those Red states whose Fascistic voting blocs fanatically support Trump—and the House and Senate members who support him.

They can:

  • Deprive Red state populations of the fruits, vegetables, meats, cars, computers, oil, gas—and especially beer and alcohol—they take for granted. 
  • Refuse to stock goods from Red states in their stores.
  • Appeal to the patriotism of Canadians and Mexicans to maintain the boycott despite the suffering this will impose on their own countries. 

Canada, in particular, has a deadly weapon it can unleash at any time:

Provincial authorities and grid operators (such as Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator) can reduce or halt power flowing through cross-border transmission lines to states like New York, Michigan and Minnesota.

The U.S. imports electricity from Canada because it is cheaper than generating more supply domestically. Losing Canadian electricity would force affected states to rely on rapacious energy companies, driving up electricity costs for consumers.

This, in turn, would trigger voters’ anger against Trump-supporting Republican candidates for the House and Senate.

Americans are used to seeking simple, painless solutions to major problems. Thus, in 2024, Trump won 77 million votes by promising to drastically reduce the price of eggs.

Instead, he gave voters an unprovoked and endless war on Iran. This has created a worldwide spiral in oil prices—and fueled inflation in the United States and other nations.

As prices soar for food, energy and housing, Trump focuses on vanity projects like a 90,000 square-foot White House ballroom and a towering “Victory Arch” overlooking Arlington Cemetery. 

When Red states are forced to suffer staggering losses for months on end, they will elect anti-Fascist Senators and Representatives to nullify the evils of Trump’s administration.