I think this is true now because the democratic party found that providing a focus on income imbalances and stressing these imbalances in elections is the way to win. Securing the lower income vote is much more important. Compare this election to the strategy used by Gore in 2004. The strategies were not even close to being related. I believe that as we move forward this will become the standard strategy to be used. Forget anything else… forget foreign policy, forget debt, forget domestic policy…simply play the card of imbalance and that I will fight to take from others to give to you and I think that can secure a majority of the vote, especially in high electoral areas.
That is the political side of it.
Make no mistake about it, the track record of the republicans and their ineptitude makes this a very easy task. Insisting that make over 250k but under 1 million was as stupid as a move as ever. They make it so easy. Yet however politically incorrect Romneys 47% statement was, essentially the idea holds water.
************
Another make no mistake about it, the policies of the past 40 years have in fact laid the foundations for these imbalances. In some administrations they grew faster then others. Yet the fallacy that the current administration takes steps to slow this down are true. The current administration is not any different in that regard, the rich are getting richer, Wall Street has seen incredible wealth increases. The success is that this administration has laid down what I believe is a very successful blueprint in political victory. In 2016 we will still be in a world of hurt with regard to debt and deficit. There will still be problems galore but I bet that the 2016 blueprint used by the Hillary or Biden or whoever will indeed pander get the lower income vote by motivating class warfare.
No these programs have not been cut or decreased. You are not correct. more important, the number of people needing the assistance has grown. Take a look at the number of people needing food stamps. It doesn’t matter if the programs grow. What matters is that these people think they are entitled to phones or snap cards or whatever and that these must come from the rich. In reality they come from the middle class.
After squat pointed out the cost of education and displayed how much of an imbalance there is for a middle class family to send their kid to school when a child from a a low income family can get it for much less cost your response was “it is worth it”.
Sorry I don’t agree with that. I think that examples like that are indeed exactly what dooms the middle class.
