Replies

It's no coincidence that most of the blue-collar voters you've mentioned on this thread had such an ingrained distrust of government that they were the driving force behind what was arguably the closest thing this country ever had to a populist competitor to big-government bureaucracy -- the Catholic parish schools of the northeastern U.S.

Those people were Democrats when the Republican Party was seen as "the establishment," and they became Republicans when the Democrat Party was seen as "the establishment." Contrary to what the author of this article has stated, having the GOP stand up and promote big-government initiatives like mandatory medical insurance isn't going to get them strong support among that shrinking cohort of voters.

You have narrowed the definition of "blue collar voter" to be the Northern urban Catholic, the kind who left the cities for the suburbs generations ago. Blue collar voter also means the Southern evangelical who was a William Jennings Bryan voter three generations ago and a New Deal Democrat for the past two generations. It means that half of the American work force that is not college educated.

A lot of that demographic is single mothers who are under tremendous socio economic and cultural pressure. A national health plan would go halfway to resolving her most pressing problems.

And it is the reality of her life that she cannot spend as much time with her children as she would like. You may find this unusual but she has to work to support them. Her power to shelter them from the world around them, from the ceaseless economic insecurity of their lives is very limited. She can't fight Viacom for the souls of her children singlehanded. So she supports the GOP against a culture that wants to teach her children MTV values.

Those people were Democrats when the Republican Party was seen as "the establishment," and they became Republicans when the Democrat Party was seen as "the establishment." Contrary to what the author of this article has stated, having the GOP stand up and promote big-government initiatives like mandatory medical insurance isn't going to get them strong support among that shrinking cohort of voters.

I think they became Republicans for a whole lot of reasons, mostly cultural. The authors of this very long piece raise some good points, and I think this is what Dubya had in mind with the whole Compassionate Conservative idea. I personally found the label offensive, but I understand what he was attempting: He wanted to bring some conservative principles to the government, but not compromise economic security among the working class, whose loyalty to the conservative cause was owed more to cultural and social issues.

Try to discuss economic policy with the average American, and they will tune you out in 5 seconds flat. You have to appeal to people at a personal level.

We have an aging population, and a permanent underclass. Society will have needs that have to be met. We can all work to minimize those needs, but we have to be honest about the fact many folks will depend on us.

I welcome discussions like this here, and always look forward to them.