The democrats work off the flawed premise that big government is best for everyone's economic "self interest", when that is actually the opposite of what is best for one's economic self interest. If you want a higher standard of living, then you are not going to get it from the government. You will get it from a pro-growth economy, which is what the republicans stand for. People are not voting against their self interest when they vote republican. They are voting for their self interest. If you want to vote against your self interest, vote for the democrats and let them tax you to death for the "common good" (which is the opposite of self interest).
As far as the rhetoric about the "haves and have nots", that is just more Marxist class warfare propaganda.
The democrats work off the flawed premise that big government is best for everyone's economic "self interest", when that is actually the opposite of what is best for one's economic self interest. If you want a higher standard of living, then you are not going to get it from the government.I don't disagree with you.
We all have a multitude of interests, self-interests, outside of the economic sphere for most of us.
The author takes it as a given that voters economic interests will trump all else. I dare to say he's thinking lower economic classes, but maybe not.
If Bill Gates acts against his economic interests to advance social causes, private or government sponsored through taxes, that's great. My guess there's a long list of the affluent the author would fawn over for their contributions in that sphere. But if we accept his economic premise that the Dems would be better for a middle class working stiff economically, he can't figure out how that working stiff would vote Republican on a moral basis when the Dems are offering an economic payoff.
A classic elitist, amoral view of the working class.