Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ‘Illegal Aliens Are My Constituents’

submitted by SundogsPlace from thelibertarianrepublic.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It just really clicked the other day for me how Republicans are against abortion because they want more white babies to have more Republican voters. And that's why democrats are pro-abortion...

I really don't think the typical voter cares about abstract concepts like electoral power politics. I've never heard anyone make argue policies in order to affect the voting base. All pro-choice support I have ever heard is based around the bodily autonomy of the mother. Pro-life support is ostensibly in favour of not "ending life", usually on some conceptual basis of when life begins or on the basis of future possibilities of that life. The pro-life support often seems rooted in religious beliefs rather than concern for the quality of life of the child however.

Operating under the assumption that you are correct:

The payoff of abortion legislation would have a minimum of 18 years delayed effect. No voter gives enough shits about politics to plan that far in advance. People don't even plan what they're going to have for breakfast the next morning lol.

Plus: being pro-life wouldn't necessarily help republicans nor would being pro-choice necessarily help democrats in terms of sheer voter base. Based on this report "Among the 30 areas that reported cross-classified race/ethnicity data for 2014, non-Hispanic white women and non-Hispanic black women accounted for the largest percentages of all abortions (38.0% and 36.0%, respectively)". Black people vote overwhelmingly democrat, like 90% and above, so being pro-choice (and thus allowing more abortions) would actually decrease the number of democrat voters in the long run.

And this is totally ignoring the point that adopting these policies is what actually swings voters more than the long term effects of this bizarre population control worldview that you seem to have.

With regards to immigration, maybe. I'll concede that immigrants are generally more democrat, and that the possibility of the Democratic Party choosing policies to maintain power (read: increase voter base) in this manner isn't entirely unlikely. Again I would question if the typical democrat voter takes such a cynical viewpoint however - based on my experience most people supporting increased immigration (or refugees) support the development of the economy (or saving people from horrible circumstances).

Looking at "the whole immigration debate" or "the whole abortion debate" purely in the framework of electoral power politics seems unilateral, deeply cynical, and avoids any interpretation of the morality of the actual policies.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I really don't think the typical voter cares about abstract concepts like electoral power politics.

Oh I completely agree. I just think they care about it because that's what the media tells them is important, and the media talks about it because DNC pays them to. The main reason both abortion and immigration have become such explosive issues is because of the media, which is because of who pays the media to push stories.

pro-life wouldn't necessarily help republicans

I think this is true now, but wasn't true 30 years ago and there's just leftover momentum. Also see the Catholic Church did the same thing, which is why they're so anti-contraception, because they want more Catholics, to grow the power of the Catholic Church.

I don't mean to say this is the only dynamic at play with these issues, but rather the over-focusing on these issues is due to people paying the media to goat people in to focusing in to them, because those are the issues that benefit the Republican Party and Democrat Party.

When election advertisement funding for presidents is over a billion for each candidate, it's not hard to imagine that they would spend similar money sending out a messaging signal to the media to the public, to grow their own voting demographics, and shrink the demographics of their opponents. It's just another way for people in power to secure their power. Why wouldn't they?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The main reason both abortion and immigration have become such explosive issues is because of the media

...the over-focusing on these issues is due to people paying the media...

The only use of this rhetoric is to provide topics that the media is intentionally sidelining, or other topics that may be more relevant. Abortion and immigration both seem relevant given that the president has significantly defunded planned parenthood and implemented policies which are causing issues such as the hunting down of DACA children and the expansion of racist rhetoric. I wouldn't say that the focus on these issues is purely media driven, people's lives are actually affected by this. Obviously everything is exacerbated by media, but this isn't some spectre which doesn't exist. More interesting and relevant examples of media bias may be the Democratic Party's silencing of Bernie from most media and the Republican's portrayal of the situation in Venezuela, both of which serve the interests of higher capital.