Why are poorest states mostly GOP; Richest mostly Dem???

[jasonnfree]

Even without the minorities the south would remain poor due lack of unions and right to work laws.

America's 10 Poorest States: 24/7 Wall St.

If the Democrats only vote to give more free shit to the poor....why are their states usually more wealthy? And if GOP policies are truly meant to make everyone wealthier, to REALLY help the poor by getting them jobs.......then why are the poorest states so RED???

Poorest: Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, W Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina (look at the pic, they have the yellow "Dont Tread on Me" flag flying ABOVE their own state flag what a bunch of yahoos), Kentucky, Alabama, North Carolina.


America’s Richest States - 24/7 Wall St.

Richest: Maryland, Alaska, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Virginia, Hawaii, Delaware, California.

With the exception of Alaska....few of the richest states seem to hold a high number of...Tea Partiers. But among the poorest states.....seems there is a Tea Party every weekend.

I dont get it. Seems the poorest states would be filled with the most Democrats (vote to give more to the poor) and the richest states would vote to give less aid to the poor and be filled with Republicans.

Because the southern states have a larger population of blacks and other minorities who tend to be on the lower end of the economic scale.

 

[Cowman]

I am good with being anti-poor. Kind of like being anti-anything. I don't want people being poor. As you point out the Democrats are definitely pro-poor.

No... by anti-poor you view them as a disgrace in society. You look down upon them... treat them like an enemy who threatens the rich.

You're aristocracy against the peasant rabble, my friend! They're out tilling your fields, and you're powdering your wig.

How in the hell do you know what I view on anything? Try speaking for yourself you might sound semi-intelligent.

Because I see into your soul... which is powered by poor people.

 

[buckeye45_73]

America's 10 Poorest States: 24/7 Wall St.

If the Democrats only vote to give more free shit to the poor....why are their states usually more wealthy? And if GOP policies are truly meant to make everyone wealthier, to REALLY help the poor by getting them jobs.......then why are the poorest states so RED???

Poorest: Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, W Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina (look at the pic, they have the yellow "Dont Tread on Me" flag flying ABOVE their own state flag what a bunch of yahoos), Kentucky, Alabama, North Carolina.


America’s Richest States - 24/7 Wall St.

Richest: Maryland, Alaska, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Virginia, Hawaii, Delaware, California.

With the exception of Alaska....few of the richest states seem to hold a high number of...Tea Partiers. But among the poorest states.....seems there is a Tea Party every weekend.

I dont get it. Seems the poorest states would be filled with the most Democrats (vote to give more to the poor) and the richest states would vote to give less aid to the poor and be filled with Republicans.

Well those states are "old" money, The started out way ahead and now they have been losing ground for a looong time. The republicans went south and so is the economy in most of those "rich" states, but in the south it's going much better...hmmmmmm. And the blue states are a joke, gotta love those unions and pensions.

Even the pride and joy of the blue states is having big problems:
California demographic shift: More people leaving than moving in - Los Angeles Times

 

[Qantrill]

Probably because Dems value education more than Reps and spend accordingly. ignorant people don't thrive.

So you're not taking care of our black friends like you say you are? Because they sure as hell aren't "thriving".

Of course they are, I mean look at places like Chicago and LA, they can afford the best guns and ammo to blow each other away with. With the number of Maobama voters dying in Chicago I'm surprised he's still ahead in ILL.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Does that mean that many liberals are pro-poor?

Flip side and all.

I am good with being anti-poor. Kind of like being anti-anything. I don't want people being poor. As you point out the Democrats are definitely pro-poor.

No... by anti-poor you view them as a disgrace in society. You look down upon them... treat them like an enemy who threatens the rich.

You're aristocracy against the peasant rabble, my friend! They're out tilling your fields, and you're powdering your wig.

That is MASSIVE PROJECTION....it's the libtards that put up barriors (ie regulations) that make it difficult for people to do anything.

Hell look at speech, it you cant say anything without fear.....call someone a water buffalo and you'll be called a racist....that aint republicans doing it

Liberals want high gas prices so the masses (but not the "elites") to use public transportation

And they all want to stop using coal, so all of us poor folks can run out and outfit our houses with solar panels, just ask courseofhistory, they're only $10,000 dollars......probably for one panel......and who has that kind of cash?????

or food.....hey we have ethanol gas....a joke and higher food prices....who caused that? Iowa and environmentalists....so Chuck Grassley a republican and about 100 democrats.......I wouldnt call that bipartisan....

 

[Cowman]

I am good with being anti-poor. Kind of like being anti-anything. I don't want people being poor. As you point out the Democrats are definitely pro-poor.

No... by anti-poor you view them as a disgrace in society. You look down upon them... treat them like an enemy who threatens the rich.

You're aristocracy against the peasant rabble, my friend! They're out tilling your fields, and you're powdering your wig.

That is MASSIVE PROJECTION....it's the libtards that put up barriors (ie regulations) that make it difficult for people to do anything.

Hell look at speech, it you cant say anything without fear.....call someone a water buffalo and you'll be called a racist....that aint republicans doing it

Liberals want high gas prices so the masses (but not the "elites") to use public transportation

And they all want to stop using coal, so all of us poor folks can run out and outfit our houses with solar panels, just ask courseofhistory, they're only $10,000 dollars......probably for one panel......and who has that kind of cash?????

or food.....hey we have ethanol gas....a joke and higher food prices....who caused that? Iowa and environmentalists....so Chuck Grassley a republican and about 100 democrats.......I wouldnt call that bipartisan....

Do you even know what projection means?

I'm against the aristocracy mentality that many rich people have about the poor. I'm on the side of the poor, and I fight for less of a divide.

That's hardly projecting, from what i said.

 

[Dreamy]

Does that mean that many liberals are pro-poor?

Flip side and all.

I am good with being anti-poor. Kind of like being anti-anything. I don't want people being poor. As you point out the Democrats are definitely pro-poor.

No... by anti-poor you view them as a disgrace in society. You look down upon them... treat them like an enemy who threatens the rich.

You're aristocracy against the peasant rabble, my friend! They're out tilling your fields, and you're powdering your wig.

I do think you are projecting greatly.

Not all poor or rich are the same or got to their economic situation by the same road or means.

Some poor pave their own way poor(substance abuse, lethargy, and or just by following the generational business of welfare and EBT cards) whereas others were simply hit with bad times.(job loss, death, illness, abuse). There are others who will never be educated enough or skilled enough to truly work their way out of the working poor. The latter two groups face circumstance out of their control. The first group can affect change if they truly want to and pursue it no matter how hard it might be.

The rich either are born into, work hard to make it happen or run a profitable often illegal "business". I think most people I can assume applaud anyone who creates his own wealth through his skill, labor and efforts.

 

[MarcATL]

These numbers have to be put in perspective because republican states are WAY cheaper than democrat states.

WAY cheaper and far less desirable.

Well...you get what you pay for.

 

[jillian]

And what states will be going bankrupt first? California, New York, Illinois.

you mean ny with its republican mayors?

 

[jillian]

i love when idiots start talking about ny going bankrupt.

 

[Oddball]

NYC needed to be bailed out before...What makes you so naïve to believe it can't happen again?

I mean besides your given naïveté.

 

[MarcATL]

Soggy, Im not voting. Im now mostly just pointing out stupid shit about both parties and the people who are blindly loyal to them.

This thread brought out a little secret: That the far right Southern states take in FAR more government welfare aid and money than they pay in. So, far right ultra Republican South Carolina...is actually a welfare state of the Feds. SC takes far more than it gives, and the GOP owns that state from top to bottom. AND...the fact that so many of the poor on food stamps are white trailor trash...not just blacks and mexicans.

Post of the thread.

Why are poorest states mostly GOP; Richest mostly Dem???

Here 'ya go:

Are the 10 Poorest U.S. States Really Republican? - Forbes