I am interested in rural Dems checking in with ideas for Dems to attract rural voters

[Quixote1818]

Last edited Sat Dec 17, 2016, 08:35 PM - Edit history (1)

I work in a lot of rural towns and have a lot of family in small towns and for whatever reason rural voters don't connect with the Democrats we have been running. I personally feel like I can connect with them a lot better than the candidates we have been running. Growing up in New Mexico we had a popular Democratic Gov. named Bruce King.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_King



He was born in a tiny rural town and was very much a cowboy. He connected to rural folks as does Brian Schweitzer from Montana. Meeting these folks, many are absolutely wonderful, welcoming people and I think if someone just reaches out to them in a way they can connect with I think many can become Democratic voters. It may just be a matter of explaining why Democratic policies will help them and Republican policies will hurt them but they need to feel like the candidate understands them, is reaching out and cares about them. Howard Dean had the right idea with his 50 state strategy. Remember, we don't have to win a crap load of rural voters, just 2 or 3% more than we normally get to solidify a few close states. However, I see no reason why we should not be able to get 50% or more of the rural vote. We already get 40 to 50% in many rura areas. Rural areas are purple, not red.

Lets remember that George Bush reached out to Hispanic voters and did quite well with them. We don't have to abandon our core values to court these folks. If someone like Trump can win their votes, a New York City Yankee, certainly we can! By the way, I would never run Ed Schultz but he knows how to connect with the "Heartland". This is how you do it:

[Squinch]

1. I'd like to add the caveat that it should be NEW ideas, not things that were ALREADY part of the

platform that they rejected.

[msongs]

2. things they rejected like equality and full rights for women? nt

[tecelote]

11. No.

Goldman Sachs and TPP.

Most of America agrees with most of the views Democrats hold. For some reason, the messaging screws it all up.

[Humanist_Activist]

22. Rural whites are the most socially conservative group around...

those who voted economy in this election voted Hillary Clinton most of the time, including many rural whites. There just weren't enough in those few swing states to actually matter though, due to our archaic voting system that over represents rural areas.

Most of America agrees with Democrats on social issues, but not enough vote, and on top of that, Republicans hold a geographic advantage. Its a minority government.

[Hortensis]

36. Sociologists say Americans are separating out geographically

by personality type to a degree never seen before.

Conservatives are tending to avoid urban areas and instead choose towns and rural areas with relatively conforming populations of people who are generally like them and who think the way they do. No big surprise--in general conservatives tend to dislike change, value conformity, value cohesive, structured communities, be less receptive to new experiences, etc. Urban areas are full of restaurants they don't want to try, people who are unpleasantly different, neighborhoods they're proud to refuse to enter, etc.

Conservatives tend to like to think urban areas run heavily Democratic mainly because they're full of poor minorities living off social programs. Reality is that they draw liberals, who like the diversity, high-quality and high-pay jobs, leading-edge-of-change qualities, and variety of amenities of larger populations--the more so as communities they grew up in become too conservative for their comfort.

All this both arises from and, especially, contributes to this highly partisan era. Democrats can talk all they want to conservative rural populations but it's not going to make a big difference. We saw that this time. The people of coal country, for instance, listened to the Democrats' large plans for strong investment in their region, their commitment to developing new, good-paying jobs, improved schools, shopping, healthcare, etc., for them and their children and rejected the Democrats outright. It took them several months to work up all the necessary rationalizations, but they voted for a Republican candidate who was and threatened to double down on just about everything they claimed to be against.

Right now a large percentage of liberal votes are wasted because we win "our" urban areas by 100,000 instead of 1000, meaning 99,000 "wasted" votes. Conservatives are more spread out and win their towns with smaller margins, much less waste. Add to that the fact that the demographic table was deliberately tilted to favor rural areas long ago, and we can only win by winning by large margins.

Only good times--prosperity and a comforting sense of wellbeing and security--would cause conservatives to become less so. A Trump administration is instead going to heighten all their anxieties. So, nice as it sounds to "read out" and persuade rural dwellers to appreciate liberal solutions, we'll accomplish far more if we can unskew our voter demographics so the vote is more representative of the public will.

[Humanist_Activist]

37. Convincing rural voters to vote with us is a bandaid at best, in the future...

things are going to get worse, as far as democratic governance go, rather than better.

As the population grows and demographics shift even further to when whites become a plurality, I can see the House maintain a Republican, very white, very conservative majority through gerrymandering. At best, the Democrats might be able to win the Senate and Presidency occasionally, depending on if they can get their voters motivated enough to bother to show up to the polls.

Such as situation is untenable, add in gerrymandering in the State Legislatures, and you have recipes for disaster. I don't see the majority tolerating have no representation at all levels of government above local, particularly when state and federal governments start restricting cities from doing things such as expanding civil rights.

[Kilgore]

63. Not a bandaid but a return of traditional Democratic voter

See my post #24 below and the sub thread.

Lots of generationally faithful Democratic voters the party walked away from.

[Wiseman32218]

75. You are right.

It starts at the state level and the republicans can gerrymander the state voting districts to ensure a dominate white majority in the house for another decade if we don't figure out how to take some state legislatures back before 2020.

[Humanist_Activist]

82. This year, in Missouri, we had 3 state senate races that were competitive...

thankfully the one I live in went to the Democrat, Scott Sifton, but it was a squeaker.

But seriously, out of 18 races, only 3 were competitive, and most were unopposed. That isn't a democracy.

[Wiseman32218]

88. I agree, I do not know the makeup of the state legislature but I am guessing it must be republican

controlled. We need to start local immediately, I vote liberal when I vote but I am severely outnumbered here by repubs.

[radical noodle]

26. Most rural voters I know don't give a spit

about Goldman Sachs and/or TPP. They want someone to talk to them about things they know about, and it isn't that.

[tecelote]

28. Yuppers. We don't want to talk about nothing we don't know about.

[Squinch]

53. If they were very against Goldman Sachs, shouldn't we have heard a peep from them

about the fact that Trump's cabinet is basically the members of the Goldman Sachs annual golf outing?

[Squinch]

12. Yes, and federal minimum wage and jobs programs and safety nets for poorer areas and

empowerment zones in rural areas and high speed internet throughout the country to allow technology jobs into rural areas, and infrastructure programs and education and training programs in the rust belt and .... well. We could go on.

[OregonBlue]

77. But for lots of older white Democratic voters, the party has become the party of the blacks and the

hispanics and the gays and the "takers". Most of my neighbors weren't Trump supporters, I live in a very rural area, but they voted for Trump because they we didn't offer them anything other than those issues. We should have been pushing the fact that the GOP is going to take away their social security and medicare, etc. but if you watched the Dem convention, there seemed to be more minority speakers who were critical of whites than old fashioned rural democrats. I loved the convention but my husband, a died in the wool Dem, watched it and said, they are gonna loose. They are not talking about what rural poor people care about.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

3. Good idea. I'm surprised there isn't a "Group" on DU for them too. n/t

[Quixote1818]

4. It's kind of sad that we don't. nt

[awoke_in_2003]

27. Coastal bias

The rest of the country is just inconvenient fly over territory

[Squinch]

38. Groups here are started by those who feel the need for them. If there are people who

feel the need, why haven't they made a group for it?

[raging moderate]

5. They may have grievances we could champion.

They surely must have legitimate complaints with which the Democratic Party could really sympathize and problems with which we could really help them. It sounds to me as if we may have had some miscommunication between rural and urban workers. Maybe there are some government regulations that could be changed to accommodate their needs without doing harm. Maybe there are some industry practices that we could help them challenge to get fairer return for their efforts.

[LonePirate]

6. You need to rephrase. Ask what they want which can actually be achieved.

Bringing back the 1950s or the blue collar manufacturing jobs is never going to happen regardless of how much they want them to return.

[Quixote1818]

8. I agree and they will learn this after 4 years with Trump's broken promises

However, most rural areas never had blue collar manufacturing jobs to begin with. They are just simple small towns, many farming and ranching based.

[SamKnause]

7. I live in rural Ohio.

My friends, my niece, and I definitely connected with Bernie and his message.

[Quixote1818]

10. Bernie was making an effort which is all one probably needs to do

He even went into Liberty University and perhaps won over 1 or 2% of the kids there without compromising his core values and emphasizing the values he shared with them. You just have to reach out to folks.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

17. Bernie didn't get the African American vote.

That's especially costly in Democratic primaries where AA's make up a larger percentage of the vote.

I hope that I'm wrong about this, but I'm worried that candidates who put class issues (rich vs. poor) at the forefront don't do well with AA's because they're not putting social issues at the forefront instead.

Jerry Brown in '92. Howard Dean in '04. Bernie Sanders in '16. (To be honest, I lost interest in Bernie after he proposed free college without providing much information about exceptions to it. That was "too liberal" for me because I met too many freshmen at my alma mater -- a school that would admit almost anyone, but also had very high drop-out rates which just about anyone could've predicted after talking to some of the new students.)

I've long thought that wealth inequality is at the root of many of this country's problems, but "my guy" never wins on that message. Well, except for Obama... but even he wasn't very "grassroots oriented" considering all of the contributions that he took from Wall Street.

I understand that the aforementioned Democrats were also concerned about social inequality! It just seems like they don't get the benefit of the doubt in Democratic primaries if they talk about class problems very much.

[Quixote1818]

20. The African American vote was very loyal to the Clinton's who had reached out to them

Bernie was making inroads but the Clinton's had laid down years solidly paved roads. For example the group Black Men for Bernie were going around showing Sanders work during the Civil Rights Movement which was helping him out but I think Sanders was hurt because he was from a tiny white state and perhaps he had not had enough outreach to black while he was a Senator. I agree that Sanders might have struggled with the black vote had he got the nomination. Hillary should be commended for her outreach.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

23. I commend Clinton for such outreach.

If we can nominate candidates who provide the double-whammy of very strong social and economic inequality messaging, I think we'll do extremely well.

Trump smeared Clinton in polling about special interest groups according to Pew Research! That was his biggest lead among all of the issues asked about, even immigration and terror attacks! (Not with me, of course, but so much of polling/voting deals with perception.)
http://www.people-press.org/2016/07/07/4-top-voting-issues-in-2016-election/

[bettyellen]

80. The Blacks for bernie guy was a con man... he became black for Trump overnight...

That's the problem with being a lone wolf/ outsider / purity candidate, many of the people who latch on to you are using you for their own agenda. Tulsi comes to mind, Killer Mike and his campaign manager that tried to turn his group into one taking corporate contributions.
Politicians are always going to have less than savory people trying to use them. I don't buy into this "insider bad" crap - when people have a track record it's good to evaluate it, when they come out of nowhere you have to ask why?

[Auggie]

58. What you posted ...

Bernie and his message.

Sanders hit the anti-insider chord and Trump copied it, albeit from a different angle. The paradox is that Saunders is part of that establishment whereas Trump wasn't. Bernie was the new face/new message. That mattered to rural voters, something Hillary Clinton couldn't quite pull off.

[frazzled]

9. The problem with putting forth a rural-appealing Democrat like Schweitzer

is that for every vote he'd gain from rural citizens, he'd lose them from urban citizens. Just a few examples of positions that have allowed the rare Democrat like him to succeed in the West but that would alienate more national Democrats:

Becoming famous as a “blue man in a red state,” Schweitzer compromised on core liberal commitments to gun control and allied himself with the NRA. In his 2008 run, Schweitzer was endorsed by the NRA with an “A” rating and a personal visit by Wayne LaPierre for a campaign rally. Schweitzer signed an array of NRA-backed bills into law, including a 2009 “stand your ground” bill that the NRA called a “victory.”

...

On the environment, Schweitzer has similarly been far to the right of the Democratic Party, and he isn’t sorry about it. He blamed “jackasses” in Washington for the delays on the building of the Keystone Pipeline. While Western Democrats have a tradition of producing some of the party’s greatest conservationists, including Secretaries of the Interior Stewart Udall and Bruce Babbitt, Schweitzer has gone the other direction. He has been one of the strongest advocates for expanding coal production, with extensive plans to ship coal to China. That plan has been met with fierce resistance from groups such as the Sierra Club.

https://newrepublic.com/article/116138/brian-schweitzer-2016-populist-hopeful-nra-darling

It's a conundrum. I don't think we can easily sew up the divide between rural and urban Democrats.

[Quixote1818]

15. Good point

I don't think you have to run a Brian Schweitzer but maybe put someone like him on the ticket. More than anything I think it's about outreach. George Bush with his Viva Bush! stickers for example. And remember Bush courted the Latino vote but kept the white vote. Not sure Republicans can go down that road again though. Their base would not allow it now and it may be their undoing in the future. Especially if Dems can start reaching out to rural folks.

[RBInMaine]

43. What you don't seem to get is that guns in the country are not the same as guns in the cities.

If you want to keep losing, keep equating guns in cities with guns in the rural areas. It is a different culture. Guns in the country means needed meat in the freezer.

[forthemiddle]

46. Agree!

Guns in rural Wisconsin are tools! They keep the coyotes away, and as you said keep the freezer full in the winter.
They keep us feeling a little safer when the closest police or sheriff is 45 minutes away. Guns aren't evil here they are tools, and yes semi automatics are great for deer hunting!

[RBInMaine]

48. AMEN! I am a gun owner and hunter, and in rural Maine we "harvest" deer and target shoot.

Yes, people also use them for home protection because the closest cops can be maybe 50 miles away. You are spot on correct. Gun ownership is part of the HERITAGE!!!

[Kilgore]

65. AMEN Again!

Same here except its Elk.

[Old Vet]

78. Some people dont understand whats its like to have law enforcement to take a minimum...

Of 20 minutes to arrive even with lights and sirens. Its just a big ass county I live up here in upstate NY , We have no local police but county police. God forbid we have a intruder on my property myself and my sons have a plan to defend it until the police arrive. Its a reality up here and part of my dream of living out in the country enjoying nature. So although a staunch democrat, A avid gun supporter.

[uponit7771]

91. Bernie said the same thing and was damn wrong then as this statement is now...

... what he didn't propose was an even ground or anything to delineate the legislation from the two areas and use some common sense in regards to gun access.

We can do common sense stuff and keep both demographics, Bernie just gave a "I live in rural" as if he's not running to represent urban.

also

SYG is dead on arrival, I lived in the inner city, SYG = kill PoC and get away with it if you're white... period... end of story...

You want a negative turnout? Proffer someone who supported SYG...

[RBInMaine]

49. Why would a city Democrat care if a rural Democrat hunts and target shoots out in the country?

This does not have to be a divisive issue AT ALL.

[frazzled]

71. Because to be effective

we need federal gun safety measures, that work across, not just within states. But those who love guns more than their country or its people won't get that.

Why should rural people care if an assault weapons ban is put in place? You don't need those for hunting or target shooting. It shouldn't be a divisive issue AT ALL. Sheesh.

[Abq_Sarah]

83. Rural people

Do care when people from urban areas lecture them on what they "need". Especially when that lecture comes from a position of ignorance.

[uponit7771]

92. Urban people do care when rural folks "wants" trump other peoples safety, its not divisive untill

... people proffer some of these fuck you and where you live positions.

We can have background checks and waiting periods and area ban on assault rifles etc...

[RBInMaine]

89. They don't care as long as it is a local city ordinance, but leave it alone in THEIR areas.

They also target shoot, collect guns, and use guns for home safety. They also have no problem with rifles that are semi-automatic only.

If you want any kind of gun regulations, what you do is you go to them and ask them what they are willing to do on these issues, and then do referendums that they help to craft. Rural folks HATE people trying to tell them what to think, what they should want, and how to live.

Cities can pass their own ordinances. Leave the country areas the hell alone.

[uponit7771]

93. This is false, cities can't pass ordinances that are outlawed at the state level cause of the 'fuck

... you and where you live' position some people who like guns profer.

Rarely do people who are gun enthusiast slam a bill that is an all or nothing that goes against them if it hurt a rural area ... RARELY !!!

That's not how humans act

[tecelote]

13. A sane voice. +1!

"I think if someone just reaches out to them in a way they can connect with I think many can become Democratic voters."

Perfect.

[CK_John]

14. Running for office is an art form, you have to learn to listen, and

find their bias and ask for their vote.

And most important is to have a great memory for names and birthdays.

Also get local papers and weekly record obits and attend wake services/send condolence.

[JudyM]

16. Good post. K&R.

[Uggwearingdad]

18. Talk to..not at ....listen not lecture

My 1st post here was to someone that said a sector of the voting population was voting against their interests, that may be.. in the long run....that will not win rural voters. It will push any person away...to be told you have to see it our way...it's better for you......we saw how that works since the 2010 midterms...

[Quixote1818]

21. Bingo!

[Squinch]

39. They will know soon enough how far against their own interests their vote is. They won't

be needing any convincing from us soon enough.

[mercuryblues]

19. They need to start going to schools

From town council members to senators. Not as a news covered event, but to give speeches on democratic ideals that will appeal to the younger generation. Then have a question and answer session. Host school field trips to state houses, complete with a luncheon where congressmen serve them. segue that into explaining that their job is literally to serve the population with the best ideas to help their constituency.

They have got to be seen among the people, not just the donors.

[Kilgore]

24. I live in rural WA state and here is what I see

To frame my comments, here are the realities of where I live.

My county historically votes Democrat as often as it does Republican for president. Both Clinton and Obama carried the county as well as both Bushes.

My county has great interest in keeping the forest products industry healthy as well as ranching since they both are the big drivers for employment in the region. Mill closures as well as ranching restrictions result in loss of jobs.

In my county hunting, fishing, boating, and camping are prime leasure time activities.

The nearest large city, 36,000 is a county away and a 40 mile drive down a two lane road. Trucks and SUV's are not a luxury ride which never get muddy, but a necessity. Until a rancher or logger can buy a 4x4 two ton hybrid or electric truck that is up to the task, the cost of diesel will remain a real concern.

Any discussion that raises a hint of gun control is spun into confiscation and viewed as a threat to generations of hunting tradition and the reality of regularly carrying a firearm to deal with snakes and varmits. Any discussion that raises a hint of a threat to the forest products industry raises the possibility of a mill closure and loss of jobs. Any discussion that threatens the ability to graze, or the ability of the rancher to control his land is immediately viewed as a threat.

To be sucessful here, a candidate needs to address their plan to keep the forest products industry healthy, keeping mills open, as well as issues surrounding ranching and the realities of living rural.

Bottom line, its employment and lifestyle. Rarely is there ever any discussion regarding LGBT issues, even though they are members of our local community, or discussion of BLM, even though African Americans are also members of our community, or discussion of student loans. What you do hear regularly discussed is what impacts the community. Employment, land use, fuel costs, taxes, hunting, fishing, and gun control.

Democrats have carried our area before, they can do it again. Just connect or at a minimum, give a nod to whats important to us.

[Quixote1818]

25. I have family in deep red Mormon Utah towns and even they don't care about LGBT issues

The reason they don't is because almost every town has someone with a kid who is LGBT and they want to support those folks because they grew up with them and care about them. Yes, 25% of these town are prejudiced and hate gays and lesbians and people not like themselves but 75% are just like you described and they can be courted and vote Dem.

[radical noodle]

31. While most want to do things to protect

wildlife for fishing and hunting opportunities, they don't necessarily like all the environmental restrictions either. Where I come from there is still much griping about not burning trash anymore. Farmers are tired of all the anti-fertilizer, anti-roundup stuff too. The same things that city folks think of as troublesome, many country folks think of as a blessing. This is why there is so much misunderstanding between the groups.

They like the resurgence of the bald eagle in rural areas but are pissed about wolves and coyotes. It's just a totally different lifestyle. I've been in both camps. I've never lived in a huge city like Chicago or New York, but smaller cities and I was married for almost 20 years to a farmer and lived a lot of my life in a very rural area.

I sometimes think one has to live there for awhile to figure it out.

[RBInMaine]

45. I live on the cusp of rural northern and coastal Maine, and here is what I see which is SO similar.

I grew up in small town coastal Maine, now live right next to rural northern and central Maine, and spend tons of time, as I have all my life, in rural coastal and northern Maine camping, boating, hunting, and fishing. Here is what I see which is so similar to what you see.

* First, rural people have a DIFFERENT SENSE OF PLACE because their PLACE is DIFFERENT, and their CULTURE and ways of seeing the world are DIFFERENT. The first step is UNDERSTANDING THEIR DIFFERENCES just as we understand the differences of people who live in big cities. They live in less diverse much more insular places, so they have different life experiences. UNDERSTAND and RESPECT those differences just as you would with anyone else.

* Rural folks have a STRONG sense of ownership of place, work ethic, and independence. This is why they don't like the idea of "people on welfare" which the R's use against us BIGTIME and VERY effectively. What rural folks want is RESPECT for their way of life and thinking, and they want JOBS!!

* They want economic opportunity so they can be self-sufficient. WE MUST FOCUS ON JOBS JOBS JOBS. They are SUFFERING economically. NEVER, EVER tell them "The jobs are never coming back." That will kill you dead politically there and then. They want to know what CAN be done. They want to know what manufacturing CAN be brought back, and what we will do to make that happen. JOBS and what that will look like is NUMBER ONE. In Maine we used to make tons of shoes and furniture in rural Maine. It is almost all gone now, but many people want it to come back and are trying to make that happen. TELL THEM THAT COME HELL OR HIGH WATER WE WILL MAKE THINGS AGAIN, AT LEAST TO SOME DEGREE, IN RURAL AMERICA!!!!!!

* In Maine, what you tell them in addition is: We WILL get broadband internet everywhere so we can do small tech company startups. We WILL expand small farming which is something that has already begun. We WILL expand biomass production, such as wood pellet production, which creates jobs and reduces energy costs. We WILL get property taxes down by increasing the Homestead Exemption and Circuit Breaker property tax reduction programs. We WILL expand markets for our blueberry and seafood products. We WILL make shoes again. We WILL make furniture again. We WILL make other forest products. We WILL expand tourism and outdoor recreation.

* They do not want to talk about LGTB or other civil rights issues because it is just not their priority, their communities are not nearly as diverse, and they feel civil rights matters are settled law. They say, "Just enforce the laws currently on the books." Talk about ECONOMIC ISSUES and not civil rights issues.

* GUNS FOR THEM MEANS MEAT IN THE FREEZER!!! Hunting to them means HARVESTING deer and moose and other game BECAUSE THEY NEED THE MEAT and it is deep in their HERITAGE!!! Guns in the country are not the same as guns in the cities. Period!! RESPECT AND STRONGLY SUPPORT THEIR RIGHT TO OWN GUNS!!! In fact, go hunting and target shooting with them!!!

* Finally, and VERY importantly, LISTEN TO THEM!! Have a permanent PRESENCE with them!! Go to their schools, VFW halls, Legion Halls, Elks and Eagles clubs, bowling allies, diners, etc. and TALK TO THEM and LISTEN TO THEM. Make them know they are cared about and VALUED just like anyone else. CREATING RELATIONSHIPS with them is SO important, just like with anyone else.

[Kilgore]

57. Spot on!!

You nailed it much better than I did.

Based on the hate of rural Democrats I see on DU lately, I believe the rural vote has been written off by the party. Why write off a large group of generationally faithful voters is beyond me. For example, three neighbors, all union, all Democratic for generations voted for Trump because he spoke to many of the issues you listed. They did not despise Hillary at all, they just could not see how she cared about whats important to them. Also having a local mill close and go offshore did not help either. Someone who speaks directly about getting those jobs back gets their attention, and obviously their votes.

This is why we had an amazing amount of interest in Bernie here. He did speak to issues they care about. We had a caravan from our town travel around a hundred miles to go see him. Zero interest in Seeing Hillary when she arrived. I clearly remember when the emails were leaked showing the DNC shafted Bernie. That pretty much killed her chances around here.

Until the party gets back to running a candidat that at least tries to understand rural issues, they will continue to be less significant out here. A perfect example of doing it right was Bill. He was tremendously popular here in his day.

[Quixote1818]

60. You two are both making great points. Thanks! nt

[Kilgore]

64. Your welcome

[Quixote1818]

62. Great stuff! Thank you! nt

[Thumperwy]

29. Clearer and more consistent messaging

As someone who lives in a rural, deep red state, I'll offer my $.02. Democrats will always own the popular position when it come to progressive, fair, economic policy. They need to focus more on those issues as well as the issue over control of federal lands. One thing that Republican, rural-state legislatures share is a desire to get control of federal land within the states. The other thing they share is a regular propensity to sell that land off to the "good old boys" once they get it. There are a ton of republican-voting sportsmen and women who are passionate on this issue and could become democratic voters if the party takes the position of opposing this land grab.

Although guns and gender rights are important issues, most rural voters are not that passionate about them. They may need to be a major part of the platform but the high-profile fights should be about economic fairness and things such the federal lands issue; things that are nearer and dearer to the hearts of rural voters. Any form of gun control, regardless how sensible, will be a non-starter in most rural states.

Democrats also need to stop letting the other side control the messaging I'd who we are and what we stand for.

[raging moderate]

30. Could we maybe get some creative ideas about protecting people?

My husband and I both have gun owner cards from Illinois, and we own guns. Gun owner cards are issued after a background check to rule out gun ownership for felons and criminally insane people. However, due to age, arthritis, etc., I cannot possibly handle or shoot these guns safely. Many people in cities don't get good opportunities to learn how to handle guns. I never saw one until I was grown up. We need help. And protection for some little innocent children. That is what the efforts for gun regulation are all about. It is not sinister conspiracy. There must be some way to work this out.

[radical noodle]

33. Well, maybe

But many rural dads start taking their kids hunting at a very early age. My husband starting hunting with his dad at age 5 and got his first rifle at age 8. Of course, there are usually a lot of father/son talks about gun safety too. Their beliefs are normally that city folks with guns need to teach their kids about safety just like their dads did. We all know that's probably not gonna happen, tho.

A lot of rural schools once taught gun safety classes in grade school or junior high. Maybe that would be something worth pursuing. A program of sorts that would have police officers and others going to schools teaching kids about gun safety the way the firemen sometimes teach kids to stop, drop and roll.

[Horse with no Name]

32. I have lived in rural areas my entire life

For polite society, they are going to tell you that it is economic and it is to an extent. But....that is a simple soundbite answer for a very complex situation.
In rural areas, THE social activity is church. These are conservative churches who preach social issues and intolerance from the pulpit during the service and at the potluck the men are going to talk about the "real reasons" they don't have good paying jobs. The uppity negroes and libril wimmen who are stealing the jobs.
The messicans who are crossing the border and clogging up the ER's and stealing food stamps and healthcare--making these things unobtainable for hard-working folks like themselves.
There are very few rural people you are going to be able to pull in to vote for a Democrat. There might be a few that don't attend church (but they usually don't vote either).
I live in a town that is almost 60% black.
The government is 100% white.
The school is 80% black.
The School Board is 100% white.
The school is falling down. The town will NOT support a bond to upgrade or build the school--even though the surrounding districts (where all of the white kids go to school out of district) all enjoy new schools and facilities.
We have to quit chasing something we can't get unless we want to give up the core of who WE are.
We need to quit holding grudges after primary fights and pull together around the candidate. THAT is why the pubbies win elections.

[Squinch]

42. Yes. There is an assumption, even here in DU, that rural means white. I understand that

people here are sticking up for their homes, and I'm sure there are wonderful things about those places.

We in urban areas are not allowed to turn our faces away from the awful things that go on in cities. Media and proximity don't let us. Despite those problems, I love where I live and I understand that rural people love where they live just the same.

But I don't see these rural issues of race, religious bigotry and xenophobia even mentioned much in these threads that proclaim, "We're rural and special and misunderstood and you have to twist yourself in knots and give us what we want which we can't actually define."

[AirmensMom]

54. Rural does mean white where I live.

You may not see those issues, but they are alive and well here.

[Squinch]

55. I agree that the issues are alive and well. I'm saying that they don't seem to

be mentioned a lot in these threads. Seems to be cognitive dissonance in these threads that extoll rural friendliness and neighborliness without acknowledging the deep vein of racism and xenophobia running through a large part of rural America.

[AirmensMom]

56. Yes.

"Deep vein of racism and xenophbia..." I could not have said it better!

[Horse with no Name]

69. even in areas of high non-white areas

as I tried to point out, the white establishment still rules (I can speak here in this part of the south). Interestingly, many of those that are poverty stricken are classed as such too, regardless of ethnicity.
Most of the time, they are ruled by the iron fist of the police and courts to keep them oppressed.
We saw a great example of this in Ferguson. My town is a mirror image of Ferguson.
So then the next logical step is that NONE of the people that actually oppress these people THINK that they do.
The oppression is done through work and schools and enforced by the heavy legal presence.
We don't have a Food Stamp office....but, we have a heavily staffed probation office.
Our town doesn't have a day care facility but has multiple pay day loan/signature loan offices.
So...if you ask these people what they think about themselves.
They will tell you that they are hard working, tax paying Christians.
They will tell you what THEY need....which is better jobs with better benefits.
What they won't tell you is that they are under the impression that the "others" are all receiving lots of food stamps, free healthcare and paychecks on THEIR tax dollar and that is the SOLE reason that they are stuck in their rut because they are paying for the "lazy welfare queens". They are also under the false belief that the ones receiving these benefits live in nicer houses, drive better cars, get better healthcare and eat better than they do.
So instead of working to promote unions and higher wages and more benefits for themselves, they truly believe the only solution is to TAKE BACK those benefits that these others have as if in so doing, it will increase THEIR take home pay, which it won't.
They can't understand that this is a very small amount of their taxes.
They don't want to hear that the military budget and tax cuts to billionaires are killing them because of the pervasive nationalistic message that invades the local conversation.
They trip over themselves to buy a veteran a sandwich so that they can pat themselves on the back and post on Facebook what a great person they are. However, they don't blink twice when republicans cut the budget to the veterans.
There is an incredible lack of ignorance or understanding on how federal budgets work and what the function of a government is.
So....here is an insight to this. They don't think THEY are the problem. They think THEY are the solution to the problem.
How do you fix that?

[Squinch]

70. Can you turn this post into an OP? It's a really good description. As I have said,

I live in a city, but this is exactly what I get from my relatives who live in the country. I think it is a good counterpoint to the "we're all just salt of the earth and no one appreciates us country folk" OPs.

[PotatoChip]

94. Your rural area is VERY different from my rural area.

I don't know many people who attend church. (Maine is the 3rd least religious state in the nation).

I don't know anyone who talks about "messicans" crossing the border.

I can't remember the last time anyone talked about POC, let alone had issues with them. (This is not to say that there are no racists here. But don't you kind-of need to live among another race in order to oppress them in the ways you describe?)

This year, my area voted R for POTUS for the first time since 1988. The reasons for this ARE economic.

Not saying you personally, but much of DU seems have one stereotype for ALL of rural America that better fits what you are describing. But depending on region, rural areas can be very different from each other.

[Horse with no Name]

95. Mine is east Texas

I really shouldn't have to say more than that.

[JimBeard]

34. Strict gun regulation is a very good idea and I think many

Democrats approve of that but the NRA labels everything as taking away guns. Relentless attacks on the NRA?

I always vote Democratic but this year I jumped over and voted for Trump, hoping Hillary could beat him.

I got two mail order brochures, one from Trump and the other, the NRA.

[etherealtruth]

40. The NRA is a right wing group.....!

Democrats oppose right wing groups ...additionally, Democrats do not vote for people like tRump

Why would they "take heat" for supporting pro-gun Democrats? Oh right, because having the "correct" opinions about guns isn't sufficient for support, you also have to have the "correct" opinions on minorities, and the inherent evil of government, and all the other far-right notions that Wayne LaPierre and his legion of protoconfederates froth on about during one of their many speeches. Anyway, since 2010 the NRA took steps to correct the problem of accidentally supporting a few pro-gun Democrats here and there. And they're shelling out a lot more cash these days as well.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/15/1336791/-The-NRA-is-a-far-right-conservative-organization-that-works-against-Democrats

[pintobean]

41. You voted for Trump?

[meow2u3]

35. We ought to reframe renewable energy sources as limitless and "depletion-proof" energy

Fossil fuels will eventually run out and the industry will eventually cost people jobs permanently whereas renewable energy will never run out and the only reason there aren't enough jobs in this potentially budding industry is that the fossil fuel fossils are writing laws sabotaging limitless energy sources.

It's time to build the limitless energy industry over the graves of the fossil fuel industry: in rural America and the Rust Belt.

[ileus]

44. Be progressive on the 2A.

That's all it takes to win nearly if not every Red State.

[RBInMaine]

47. Gotta talk JOBS JOBS JOBS. Respect and support HUNTING.

[Paladin]

73. No, no, no. Hadn't you heard?

The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. The Second Amendment is about arming and empowering the citizenry against the excesses of a tyrannical, anti-democratic government.

I mean, the Gun Enthusiasts have been telling us that very thing, for years.

Let's all wait and see how long it takes the pro-gun crowd to reverse course and make an issue out of the excesses of the Trump regime. I'd advise against holding your breath.

[pnwmom]

90. They did an analysis of her speeches and Hillary talked far more about jobs

than anything else, with the next being the economy.

People just weren't listening and/or the media didn't cover it -- because all they wanted to talk about were her emails.

[Arazi]

50. Free wifi and easy internet access would be very popular

It could be our 21st century "rural electrification project" that would reap immediate benefits - it would open up online marketing opportunities for their goods and services, allow them to attend online classes - maybe even earn degrees and certificates at home, offer better information sources etc.

Tax incentives for start ups.

College incentives for children from farming families - typically Dems do better with an educated population so let's get them to school.

Better drug policies - make mj legal so rural America can grow it and profit from it. Stop incarcerating addicts, treatment is the answer.

[Squinch]

59. All of these were in Hillary's platform except the drug legalization.

[Johnathan146]

68. How would free wifi work

There is such limited range to begin with that it wouldn't work outside of a major city.

[tosh]

79. Fixed wireless...

off of a fiber hub.

It's happening but much, much too slowly.

[rzemanfl]

51. Maybe when we go there in droves to die of radiation sickness and flash burns.

They might listen.

[AirmensMom]

52. Most of the rural voters I know are racists.

Plain and simple. Even the Democrats here didn't vote for Obama. The area I'm in might not be a good example of all rural voters. They hang traitor flags all over and put statues of monkeys in their yards. They will not vote for a Democrat. Period. Our party is for inclusiveness and they hate that.

I don't see how we can reach them. Yes, I am discouraged. I have tried talking with them. They just blow me off and tell me they'll pray for me.

[erinlough]

84. This is true of my area as well

And always has been. There is no convincing them, they are generationally racist and conservative, they will only vote Republican. I have enough trouble living with them let alone convincing them of any way but their way. This direction, imo is a losing one, much better to try to convince the younger voters to come to a progressive party. I am in Michigan.

[AirmensMom]

87. I agree.

I'm in eastern TN. Very red, very religious (hypocrites), very Republican.

[gwheezie]

61. They don't want to change

I have lived in a rural county in Virginia for 20years& basically the majority of voters here don't want anything to change.
They also don't want to pay for anything. The school system is terrible but they'd rather keep it that way than raise taxes. The county I live in is about 30% non white. Racism is alive & well here and where you see the most segregation is in the churches.
They want to continue to cut down forest, pollute the rivers & shoot at stuff. They say they want jobs back but they don't want to drive to where jobs are & don't want jobs here either so I don't know where or what jobs they want.
They don't want anything to change. I don't know how you would attract voters here if you propose changing the way of life here.

[Quixote1818]

67. It's interesting you say this because I heard the same thing the other day

I was in a rural school in Arizona and one of the teachers flat out said they just wanted the Gov. to leave them alone. They have some coal mining in that area and God forbid the economy changed to some kind of cleaner fuel and hurt their local jobs. Some of the other folks there seemed more open to change but yes, many just want to live a simple life and even bringing in jobs might be seen as a threat to their quite little community. However, as I said in my OP we don't need all of these folks to vote Dem. just a few more than we are getting now so they are worth reaching out to and many are pretty reasonable.

[lunasun]

66. Why not take it all out of General Discussion and form a separate group?

Seems there are enough people and posts discussing this same issue

[libtodeath]

72. When they decide that white,straight males are not the only ones that should matter

I will maybe listen to their whining.

[Rex]

74. They listen to hate radio all day at work. Their bosses love Foxnews on the TVEE.

GO down to the local NAPAA auto part store and it is like a grunt fest full of throwbacks to the 1950s. They don't want to change and YOU coming along with your new ideas just pisses em off more.

Good luck trying to find a way to have a rational conversation with irrational people, I gave that one up a long time ago and now just discuss easy topic that they can comprehend.

[Bayard]

76. There is/was a Rural Group on here

No one ever posted on it. If we can't even connect with rural folks on DU, how are we going to do that with the general populace?

As most of us agree, racism is alive and well in this country. Especially rural areas. I've lived in the Midwest, the South, and Calif. One of the most backward, racist places I lived was rural eastern Calif. How are you going to get to people who are born and raised this way? Start much earlier. Most of them have just never been exposed to other cultures, and don't know any better. I'm a native of Kentucky, and live here now, but went to high school in small town, southern Indiana. My best friend's family brought in an exchange student from Brazil. Everyone was fascinated by her, and she was quite popular. She was a novelty. Even though 100 years previously, they had hung 3 African Americans in the courthouse square. Most people in that area have never lived anywhere else, never traveled, and are buried there. They just don't know anything else, and don't care much to know anything different.

One thing I heard over and over was that Hillary was going to take their guns. That's a huge deal. Like others have said, guns are a necessary tool in the country. Not only for hunting to feed your family, but also for protection: from rabid animals, from animals trying to kill your animals, and in our area, from the "meth-heads" that will break into your home. We own two shotguns by necessity on our little farm.

So, how did Obama win over these people to vote for him? By a positive message of hope. Hope for a better life for them and their kids. One thing about this election was how incredibly negative both sides were, even if Hillary's was in self-defense. "Make America Great Again", not only played to people's fears, it told them they were right to hang on to old prejudices if they wanted to save their way of life, and their morals. You saw clips of Hillary going to various churches, but never saw Trump in church. Why? Because it looked opportunistic. Same as the photos of John Kerry going duck hunting during his campaign to show he could be a man of the people. Most rural people laughed at him. It just didn't ring honestly. Whereas Trump was an asshole up front, and never tried to hide it. "Crooked Hillary" stuck with these people. You can come up with all the evidence you want now of election fraud, business shenanigans, and traitorous collaboration, most country folk made up their minds early on, and you're not going to confuse them with facts.

What's the answer? I think you need to connect with people on a very personal and honest level about issues that really matter to them, and start in early childhood. They need to hear different views rather than what's pounded into them at home. You can't promise one thing for cities, and another for small towns. Open their eyes.

[LWolf]

85. Thank you for

bringing some ideas with substance to talk about.

I'm not sure I agree with "especially rural areas." I think racism is alive and well everywhere; it's obviously easier to spot in rural areas where there are fewer people, and those people know each other better. Also, some rural areas are predominately white. As I mentioned in my OP, in my area there are racists, but they aren't the majority. The majority discriminate more against culture than they do against race. And a lot of that discrimination is based, not on first hand experience, but what the MSM has to say about urban gangs and crime.

And yes, rural people are all about the fight for their guns. My region voted for Obama in '08, but there were still plenty expecting Obama to take their guns every day for the last 8 years. That's one of the big political divides. Guns here are about hunting, about chasing off coyotes from ranch pastures, and, for some, about skeet shooting competitions. I'd love to see some data, if I knew where to find it, comparing the number of guns per person in my region to the number of guns per person in an urban area, and then comparing the number of gun accidents, assaults, and crimes committed with guns. I'd bet that we have more guns per person and fewer gun accidents and crimes, simply because the reasons for having them are different. Still, guns are still a big reason why some locals don't trust or vote for Dems.

The other big issue is religion; I can't speak for all rural areas, but the church is big here, and the messages supporting misogyny and sexual identity bigotry from the pulpit have a big influence.

Still, that positive message of hope won the majority here in '08. And I agree that THAT is the message that they need to hear. Of course, we not only need to hear the message, we need to see that hope unfold. And while the economy eventually recovered for some areas, it didn't here in our rural region. Not enough to make the difference. Too little, too late on that score.

[Kang Colby]

81. Actively work to repeal gun control laws.

Gun control is a losing issue. Democrats and independents aren't single issue gun control voters. We lose nothing by supporting gun rights and we will win more close races.

If you don't think at least 80,000 independent voters across PA, MI, and WI voted on gun rights this time around...well that's too bad.

[LWolf]

86. Here's one.

I may check in with others as they occur to me, but the first to pop into my brain is about logging and lumber mills.

You see, I live in an area that, at one time, depended on logging and the mills to employ people. That went away with stricter regulations on logging.

Now, I agree with the restrictions. I don't support clear-cutting and other logging methods that damage the environment. We've got plenty of trees. I'd like to see sustainable logging practices, including on public land, supported and encouraged. There's still logging, and clear-cutting, on private land happening, and a bit on public land, but I'd like to see us invest in sustainable practices that bring more jobs back. That might involve greatly reducing corporate profits, or doing away with them, and making the lumber industry a public or non-profit concern. And that involves a big fight.

Still, we've got the resources in forests; we just need a better way to manage them.