Why are the poorest states in this country vote republican?

United States
September 21, 2011 8:51pm CST
When the latest poverty statistics came out the top states on the list were all dark red states. Yet, none of the republicans candidates have even said a word about the poverty in the states they represent, and have actually blamed Obama. The problem with blaming Obama is that these states were the poorest in the Bush years, and the Clinton years. So why won't republicans help the people that vote them into office? http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/21/opinion/martin-gop-poverty/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
2 people like this
7 responses
@finlander60 (1804)
• United States
22 Sep 11
The largest percentage of households living BELOW THE POVERTY LINE is the state of Mississippi. In the 2008 election they voted for OBAMA. The lowest percentage of households living BELOW THE POVERTY LINE is the state of New Hampshire. In the 2008 election they voted for OBAMA, too. Can you quantify these two facts? I don't think so.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
22 Sep 11
I didn't think they seemed right so I had to check. Mississippi went for McCain by around 14%: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/ms.htm I didn't think Mississippi would ever vote for a Democrat! Annie
3 people like this
• United States
22 Sep 11
I didn't think the Mississippi voted for Obama either.
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
22 Sep 11
Republican voters don't want the help because they don't want anyone else to get the help. Those states have higher than average populate levels of minority groups, which the vast majority of those groups vote Democratic where as the white majority in those states vote Republican by a vast percentage. If Republican law makers decided to help out their geographic voting block this would help out Democratic voters in those states also. The millionaires and billionaires that control the GOP have successfully been able to pit these two groups against each other, i.e the Nixon Southern Strategy.
1 person likes this
• United States
22 Sep 11
Wow, that is so not true. The truth is that a State like Florida that tends to go Republican because it has a large retiree population or a state like Virginia which has a large Military population. The truth is that these minority groups just don't go to the polls. Whereas, the retirees and military are more likely to cast votes. You also have to look at how many people actually vote. Real voter turnout is typically very low. It has nothing to do with the setup of the districts. If you have a Democratic district and a Republican district but the people in the Democratic district don't vote and the Republican district does than it is unlikely that the Democrats will win just from a lack of interest in voting. This is still a majority wins society. Non-votes aren't counted. Frankly, districts change all the time. It isn't only Republicans who play that particular game. But the most troubling part of your statement is lumping all minority groups into one political party. That isn't true either. One group might have a majority block voting one way or another but there are always members who will vote differently.
• United States
22 Sep 11
Sorry, but you don't have a voice if you don't vote and they don't vote.
• United States
22 Sep 11
I would have to agree with you Gew, and it has hurt the poor people in the south because of it.
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
22 Sep 11
Maybe some one forget to tell these people they were poor.
1 person likes this
• United States
22 Sep 11
Or they aren't smart enough to realize that if you keep voting the same way nothing is going to change. The southern states have been poor for decades and continue to be today.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
22 Sep 11
Because there is little truth to the stereotype that the Democrat party is for the poor and the Republican party is for the rich.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Sep 11
And not all people who are considered "poor" need or want the government handouts being pushed by the left. I know I don't.
• United States
22 Sep 11
Ted, if republicans cared so much for the poor people that voted for them, then why have these states been so poor for so long?
• United States
22 Sep 11
Taskr, I have seen many pet projects that went to southern states, that cost tax payers millions. It's not like tax payer money doesn't make it to them. Must be that "right to work" problem they have done there.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Sep 11
Because "poor" is misleading. Those states have much lower costs of living than states in the Northeast, which are democratic strongholds. The cost of living in Little Rock Arkansas, for example, is 62% of the national average and that's probably the most expensive city in the state. Compare that to the cost of living in a state like New Jersey, which is 131% of the national average and you'll see that "poverty" isn't defined simply by income. That means the average cost of living in New Jersey is more than DOUBLE the cost of living in the capital of Arkansas. That's why the census is showing that the majority of people who are considered "impoverished" own nice houses, cars, TVs, modern appliances, stereos, etc. They aren't really poor. Many of them just live in an area with a low cost of living and make wages that are in step with that cost. How exactly do you think republicans SHOULD help those people? Should they promise these people free money? I think people are best helped by encouraging personal responsibility instead of telling them to mooch off the government. Nobody betters themselves by being a sponge and asking for handouts. Should republicans be like Obama and just tell the unemployed to sue anyone who won't hire them for discriminating against the unemployed?
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
22 Sep 11
And I work in Camden, NJ. Every state has it's horrible areas, but you're talking about states as a whole, not just the worst parts of them. That's why I referred to Little Rock, AK as opposed to a crappy part of the state.
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
22 Sep 11
That is always the answer...Put folks on the dole, that will shut them up and take care of them. The real problem is that companies are moving offshore to avoid taxes and so that they can pay their stockholders a bigger piece of the pie. When BP dumped all of the oil in the Gulf, they found every possible excuse not to pay the locals and the fishermen. They did pay hotels in Orlando Fl however...Whats up with that??? They are still trying to hide the fact that the sandy bottom of the gulf is contaminated several feet deep. They are doing nothing to cure this. When you test the water, the ppm. of oil in the water is way higher than they want to admit because it is the dispersing material, not just the oil contaminating the water. All of this is hurting the southern Gulf States and will for generations. For years and generations, the Gulf states have been damaged over and over my major storms. They never get a chance to recover. They are always promised help from the Gov., but after a few months the media goes away and so does the promise of help. Look at New Orleans...It is still a mess in many places, and many of its poor residents may never get to come home. They rich will end up with their home sites. The East Coast has always been able to attract industry and money easier than places like Oklahoma and the Appalachian Mts. etc. They may be pretty, but they have always been poor and taken advantage of.
• United States
22 Sep 11
Taskr, I have a friend of mine that moved to Georgia a about ten years ago and told me about his experience down there. I have personally been to the back woods of Kentucky and seen how bad it is, and many are living off the government.
@crossbones27 (48417)
• Mojave, California
24 Sep 11
I think you bring up a good point but you might be looking at the wrong way. The question should be whether you are happy or not. If you are not happy with your state why do you keep voting the same way? With that being said I looked it up and it is pretty much the same as your original statement. I was surprised to see California was one of the happier states even with all of its problems. It must be all that warm weather, sunshine, beaches, and mountains that keeps people happy. I imagine even if you were to be well off in Arkansas you still might be unhappy because there is nothing to do in Arkansas.
• United States
25 Sep 11
I can tell you this from my experience, California is beautiful, and I would love to live there someday. I tell everyone I know that they have to drive down route 1 just once in their lives to see how beautiful it really is.
• United States
25 Sep 11
I have driven many places, and every time you would come down a hill and see nothing but cliffs, and ocean it is beautiful. I really would love to go back again some day.
• Mojave, California
25 Sep 11
Indeed, also known as the Pacific Coast Highway. Social Distortion also made a kick @ss song about it called "Highway 101." It is worth the trip.
• United States
22 Sep 11
well they still vote for a republican because they know voting for a democrat would be a mistake i think obama was a perfect example of that i am not big into political stuff i think it is rather confusing and boring maybe just because the republican does not say anything about the poor states or poverty issues does not mean they do not plan on doing anything about it or maybe the poor states are just not at the top of the list to get fixed right away i mean the list of things for them to fix is a country mile long
• United States
23 Sep 11
Well the problem is that these states have voted republican for decades, and they still top this list. If it changed when they voted a different way it might say something, but they continue to vote the same party in over and over again. You would think that someone would want to do something about this, but that would mean caring, and we all know that politicians only care about money, and themselves.