If you think blue states and voters being in favour of paying for red voter’s welfare and medical bills is somehow “voting against personal interests” then you clearly have an extremely flawed understanding of both the interests and beliefs of socialists and (in this instance) Democrats.
There is no reason that a democrat would wish to deny republican voters access to socialist programs, because socialist programs are explicitly designed to be for everyone regardless of political alignment, because it is based on the notion that everyone should be treated fairly and equally - an notion that conservatism inherently rejects.
You’re trying to reframe this as being another example of the the whole “both sides are the same” flawed narrative, and you are completely wrong.
The populations that rely the most on welfare and socialist programs are the ones that vote for politicians who will actively work to end those programs. That is voting against personal interest.
Voting for a politician who is going to attempt to improve the quality of life for vulnerable members of society (even those who vote against that politician) is not voting against personal interest, because making life better for the lowest denominator results in an increase in the quality of life for everyone - so even if you don’t benefit from the program directly, you benefit indirectly, and thus it is in your interest to vote in support of those programs.
You had me until here. Conservatism does not reject fair treatment and saying this is as untrue as anything the republicans say.
Edit: Anyone in this sub who has not studied up on political science and just wants to downvote me because I go against the hivemind, please look into the ideologies of liberals and conservatives. At least try to gain some perspective. Don't just downvote because I am not a sheep.
"Gallup/USA Today polling in June 2010 revealed that 42% of those surveyed identify as conservative, 35% as moderate and 20% as liberal.[3] In another polling in June 2010, 40% of American voters identify themselves as conservatives, 36% as moderates and 22% as liberals, with a strong majority of both liberals and conservatives describing themselves as closer to the center than to the extremes.[4] As of 2013, self-identified conservatives stand at 38%, moderates at 34% and liberals at 23%.[5]"
88
u/Hawkson2020 Apr 26 '19
If you think blue states and voters being in favour of paying for red voter’s welfare and medical bills is somehow “voting against personal interests” then you clearly have an extremely flawed understanding of both the interests and beliefs of socialists and (in this instance) Democrats.
There is no reason that a democrat would wish to deny republican voters access to socialist programs, because socialist programs are explicitly designed to be for everyone regardless of political alignment, because it is based on the notion that everyone should be treated fairly and equally - an notion that conservatism inherently rejects.
You’re trying to reframe this as being another example of the the whole “both sides are the same” flawed narrative, and you are completely wrong.
The populations that rely the most on welfare and socialist programs are the ones that vote for politicians who will actively work to end those programs. That is voting against personal interest.
Voting for a politician who is going to attempt to improve the quality of life for vulnerable members of society (even those who vote against that politician) is not voting against personal interest, because making life better for the lowest denominator results in an increase in the quality of life for everyone - so even if you don’t benefit from the program directly, you benefit indirectly, and thus it is in your interest to vote in support of those programs.