Why vote to cut yourself?

[jackfaire]

This is meant to be an apolitical thread. This isn't about who you're voting for or what party you are voting for unless it's to clarify your position.

Now onto the question. My Step-Dad Always votes Republican. Always. Now the reason this makes me scratch my head is that every one he's voted for has flat out said they want to eliminate programs that allow him to collect disability. This would severely hurt him. He is unable to work and hold down a job.

Me personally I look at a candidate and I figure out "What do they want?" and I mean at all levels of government if a third party or a Republican said their big push was raising minimum wage to $15 an hour I would vote for them in a heart beat but if a candidate said in clear and certain language that their big push was to take something away from me some benefit, right etc I would not vote for them because I can't see voting for someone to essentially kick me in the nuts.

So why would you? If a senator has a record of saying things like "Lower Taxes" and then votes to raise your taxes while lowering the taxes of another tax bracket why would you vote for them?

This just has me very curious. And I am not talking about something they said like "I am going to ensure this group of people gets the right to marry" that clearly doesn't affect anyone but that group. Where if you try you can interpret it as devaluing what you have but doesn't really.

I am talking all levels too. Is it because "I must vote for my party even if my party wants to kick me in the nuts" Or do you not believe them when they say they are going to kick you in the nuts. Please what makes people vote for their own nut kicking.

[Daskinor]

Complex issue.

You have your single issue voter. In the US they tend to be more religious in nature. Someone who identifies as pro-life then to only vote with that issue in mind. Much more so then those who identify pro-choice. Anyway, when you have a conflict. A politician who will negatively affect the person, but supports the single issue. They will generally go with the single issue.

Team-politics is your next group. And most likely identify your step-father. Your team is the greatest, you have always supported them no matter what. The rival team are amoral human garbage the deserve to be crushed. There is generally no actual reason for liking your team and hating the rival its more about belonging to a group. You tend to see allot of mental gymnastics and doublethink when there is conflict in what is good for the individual vs what the group believes.

I guess you can also have low information voters. Term gets perverted a little depending on who uses it. But in this case, it means acting on an issue but having little or know knowledge on the subject. Generally people will be riled up by talking points, or even outright falsehoods. Someone is told the Trans-Pacific Partnership is bad for whatever reason, lets say it will cost them their jobs in a general sense. Without looking into why or how, they just jump on the bandwagon. They don't know for sure that it will cost them their job, or how they just believe it. And then they might repeat it adding more to the bandwagon. It the idea is true or not does not matter, the point is the person is acting without understanding what is happening.

\ignore the typos I am 2 shots into the night,

[HYHYBT]

It doesn't have to be single-issue, even: the more issues you care about, the more you have to prioritize them and accept that either way includes *something* that's going to harm you in some way. You mentioned both disability benefits and lower taxes. Where does the money to pay for those benefits, or anything, come from? Other than borrowing, of course.

[jackfaire]

It doesn't have to be single-issue, even: the more issues you care about, the more you have to prioritize them and accept that either way includes *something* that's going to harm you in some way. You mentioned both disability benefits and lower taxes. Where does the money to pay for those benefits, or anything, come from? Other than borrowing, of course.

Right but my point is if the person's BIG ISSUE the thing that no matter what else they do in office is the thing they will see come to pass and that BIG ISSUE will hurt or ruin you then should it really matter that you like their "little issues"


If someone tells me "I am going to burn down your house, bankrupt the company you work for, but if I have time I will also make it so you can marry whomever you want but my BIG ISSUE the thing that I will make happen is burning down your house"

That's kind of what I don't get because anyone that's been through more than one election knows that each President has one BIG ISSUE that is near and dear to their heart and I can't see voting for someone because I like their little issues may or may not make happen when their BIG ISSUE is making sure 20 people kick me in the nuts.

To put it on a smaller scale there are guys that if their friends say "hey we are going to all kick you in the nuts now if you let us do this then we will maybe if we feel like it give you some money"


I would rather hang out with the guys who are all "Hey so we are definitely going to give you a 100 dollars but we might if we feel like it kick you in the balls"

[amandarthegreat]

There's a book called 'What's the Matter With Kansas?' by Thomas Frank that discusses some of these questions. It certainly explained my grandfather--a man who voted red even as they shipped jobs overseas, cut family member's benefits and engaged in various other awful policies. The only thing that needed to be said to get his vote was 'we're pro-life' even if their actions demonstrated otherwise. The GOP has been very good at constructing a narrative of 'us vs. the Godless/Communist/Evil etc...Left'.

[Rapscallion]

My father does something similar. Always votes a particular way, despite being penalised for doing so.

In his case, I suspect it's more to do with when things are pointed out to him as being wrong with the points he is talking about, he digs his heels in and becomes more stubborn. I don't think he wants to admit being wrong.

Rapscallion

[Gravekeeper]

I have no idea. On another forum I got into an argument with a guy who is disabled and barely living off welfare/disability and is voting for Trump. Whats more, is that he was a Sanders supporter in the primaries and is voting Trump because he thinks Clinton is somehow the more untrustworthy one.

When I pointed out Hillary had adopted much of Sander's platform so why would he vote Trump ( let alone become a Republican ) he said he didn't trust Hillary to impliment the platform.

When I asked him why he would take guaranteed opposition to the platform over a chance of not having it fully implemented he stopped talking to me.

Well, okay, thats not entirely true. He stopped responding to me about that topic but is still quite happy to argue with me over how BLM are terrorists because he thinks the black clerk at the social security office is racist against him for being white.

I have yet to have any Trump supporter offer any sane or reasonable reason for their vote. At this point everyone I talk to is typically like trying to talk to your one racist uncle's Facebook news feed.

[Canarr]

I have yet to have any Trump supporter offer any sane or reasonable reason for their vote. At this point everyone I talk to is typically like trying to talk to your one racist uncle's Facebook news feed.

Check out this video clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ekXPfqIzFc

Especially the part around 3:10 where the reporter asks the republican woman about Trump's plan. It's just...

[Kheldarson]

I have yet to have any Trump supporter offer any sane or reasonable reason for their vote. At this point everyone I talk to is typically like trying to talk to your one racist uncle's Facebook news feed.

I found this enlightening:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...0dc_story.html

[Gravekeeper]

Especially the part around 3:10 where the reporter asks the republican woman about Trump's plan. It's just...

Already have. Sam Bee is my spirit animal.

I found this enlightening:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...0dc_story.html

My god. ><

[KabeRinnaul]

I found this enlightening:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...0dc_story.html

That does not offer much in the way of "sane or reasonable".