• frazw@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    147
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yeah the logic always stuns me.

    “If I vote for a Democrat they’ll probably take some of my money through taxes and I’ll be poor”

    Trump wins and ruins their business, they lose all of their money.

    “At least I’m not poor because of evil Democrat taxes”

    They have truly been brainwashed. Whatever bad shit republicans do they still believe the Democrats must be worse, because the republicans told them so. Even though the republicans have provably been lying to them for years.

    • Anakin-Marc Zaeger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Many Trump supporters would like to consider themselves to be “devoutly religious” (the way the treat others says otherwise, but that’s beside the point). People who are “devoutly religious” have a tendency to take things they are told as gospel (pun definitely intended), regardless of how utterly illogical and detached from reality it may be. If the “right” person comes along, 100% of what is said will be believed 100% of the time. It’s something that RepubliCons have taken advantage of for years, and it’s something that is second nature to con artists like Trump and that Nigerian prince that won’t stop sending me gods damned emails.

      • drhodl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Meh. So long as they say sorry to Magical Sky Mummy every Sunday, they can do whatever they fucking want to. Don’t look to the religious for examples of humanity and decency.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah the logic always stuns me.

      It shouldn’t. It’s very common on both sides of the aisle. Never heard “vote blue no matter who”? That term was coined and used by large swaths of non-Republicans who agreed to vote for someone they don’t agree with about everything. The fact is that it’s extremely rare for any voter to be 100% aligned with the views of the person they vote for.

      Actually, if you think about it, isn’t it more selfish to change who you vote for based on how you personally are affected by their policies?

      • drhodl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yeah, but you don’t vote for Hitler unless you’re a cunt yourself!

      • Alaik@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Legitimately the point of democracy. Vote for your best interests. If the turn out is good and the majority vote for their own best interests, you end up with more good being done for the majority rather than a small subset of the population (Billionares)

        • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Legitimately the point of democracy. Vote for your best interests.

          I personally don’t disagree, but I’m just making the point that from what I’ve seen, it seems like the above virtue only exists for most people up until the moment the Other Person’s best interests don’t align with theirs, at which point they’re instantly considered scum for voting for their own interests.

    • DagwoodIII@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      72
      ·
      1 day ago

      …And the Left does the same thing.

      Back in the day, a lot of folks couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Jimmy Carter because he wouldn’t take a strong stand on South African apartheid. We got ronald reagan who embraced embrace South Africa.

      • Triumph@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s not at all how that played out.

        One, John Anderson ran as an independent in 1980, after losing the Republican primary. He had been a Republican until then. Early in that primary, he was a viable candidate for the nomination. He was initially likely to take more votes from Reagan than Carter.

        Anderson supported the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), as well as an extension to the time for it to be ratified. The Republican party did not. Carter refused to debate Anderson; Reagan did not. On top of all that, at the time, the conventional wisdom was that Carter was a weak president, partially because of the still-imprisoned diplomats in Tehran, and a failed attempt to extricate them - which Carter took full responsibility for. This set of later circumstances probably took more votes from Carter. All that said, Reagan swept the popular vote by almost nine points, and took the electoral college handily.

        Source: I was there.