First of all, Obama was right. Let's get that out of the way. In fact, I would take it a step further, and say (since I'm not running for President, I have a little more wriggle room on this) that what has happened to small town America in the last 25 years is a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Pun intended.
The economic devastation in rural areas is a direct result of the people in these areas CHOOSING to vote against their own economic interests in favor of other, one might argue less important things, like who prays harder at church, and who hates gay people more, and who thinks that God literally created the world and everything in it and seven days, and who they think will take their guns away, and who is "stronger" on "defense" --whatever that means. As a result, they have an inadequate education, no high-paying factory jobs, no high-paying factory job prospects (no matter what anyone tells them, that train has sailed), and no idea how to fix their problems.
I'm sorry if this sounds cold, but if you consistently choose to vote for candidates for religious or purely social reasons, shouldn't it be reasonable to expect there to be an economic cost to your decisions? Likewise, if you choose to vote purely for economic reasons, wouldn't you expect/deserve to endure a religious/social cost? I think so.
Pennsylvania is the state that very recently was represented in the Senate by Rick Santorum. And Dover, Pennsylvania is where the huge controversy over requiring Intelligent Design to be taught in science classes erupted a couple of years ago. To their credit, they are no longer represented by Rick Santorum, and the Dover School Board was ousted in the subsequent election. Maybe there's hope for Penn's Woods.
Obviously I'm generalizing, and of course there are many more reasons for the economic deterioration of small town America that are too numerous to discuss in a diary, but you get my drift. See, I'm "folksy" and "like real Americans" and I've "bowled" before. I've never even seen a latte.
Update
Look, the four things the people who disagree (to put it mildly) seem to say about this are as follows:
- "You're an idiot. You're generalizing and there are many other factors to blame for economic conditions in rural America." Well, I sort of said that in the diary.
- "You're an idiot. I'm from (insert random small town) and I don't think like that." Well, to be perfectly honest, there seems to be a tinge of "I came from there and I turned out alright" to these, which sort of proves my point.
- "You're off-base. Democrats haven't offered a viable progressive alternative to conservative wedge-issue politics, so there has been no real choice." Fair argument. I disagree in that there has been an alternative, but possibly not a clear enough contrast.
- "You're a jerk. These people have been tricked into voting conservative and deserve our sympathy because its not their fault." This is by far the most interesting argument. Basically, you're saying they're not responsible for voting for conservative politicians because they're too dumb to know the difference? Wow. That's pretty condescending. I may be an ass (or worst, judging by some comments) but at least I respect these people to give them the benefit of the doubt that they know what they're doing...