Skip to comments.Party of the Rich? That's the Democrats
Posted on 09/21/2013 10:06:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
As we continue to knock down individual members from the long list of liberal talking points, another we can add to the scrap heap of history is that Republicans are the "party of the rich."
In polling data during the 2012 election campaign, two and a half times more registered voters said that the Republicans' policies favor the rich versus those of the Democrats. Twice as many voters thought the Democrats' policies favored the middle class compared to those of the Republicans. And twelve times as many voters indicated that the Democrats' policies favored the poor over those of the Republicans.
And yet, when we look at the data, what do we see? The Democrats are actually the party of the rich, the Republicans are the party of the middle class, and the Republicans may even have a slight lead over the Democrats in representing the poor.
The US Census Bureau has released its latest installment of "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States," a document that includes measures of household income dispersion.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
the Republicans suffer from poor messaging. They can’t or won’t scream stuff from the rooftops. But then the MSM is the Dem’s partner in crime in this. The Republicans can and should be SMART enough to over come this but they won’t. They are timid. Maybe IF we ever get enough Cruz, Paul, Lee and a faint few others to get on board we can get the truth out there.
Just like the Dem’s are the party of the KKK but yet they managed to revise that history too. Shame on the Republicans.
DemocrAtes have no interest in the plight of individuals they cant get money from... and their “poors” are in fact a collective pool of voters or membership payers.
They are the essence of marry for money gold digging sluts.
The richest counties in the USA are where the government masters live. The peasants are barely scraping by.
They got rich the old fashioned way — by being born.
In every language, money talks, sometimes in disproportionately loud volume. Every few years, there is a circle of liberal-leaning lawmakers who write new "campaign fairness doctrines" which are supposed to limit the effects of large sums of money, and specifically prohibits great sums of wealth to be given to any one candidate. But there is always a loophole written into these supposed campaign finance reforms, and the flow of money from the wealthy interests is uninterrupted.
Oh, there is a lot of railing about how skewed the distribution of income has become, but it is always more pronounced under Democrat administrations than under Republican administrations. There were more millionaires under FDR than there were under the first Republican President in some 20 years, Dwight Eisenhower. Eisenhower did not defund the millionaires, he made it possible for those who had not shared in the prosperity to now enjoy it, since the former millionaires no longer had this long-standing constipation of money tied up in their systems. Their money was no longer sitting in some bank account, but was out circulating in the community and across the nation, with greatly accelerated velocity, the definition of prosperity.
You’re right - most of the wealthiest ZIP codes in the country are clustered around Washington DC... Our ‘public servants’ are spreading our wealth around - AMONG THEMSELVES...
Democracy “IS” Mob Rule by mobsters.....
IF you forget that you’re already a democrat..
Even if you have an “R” by you’re name..
Democracy is a “FILTHY” word.. nasty.. a political disease..
Causes Socialism.. in all it’s forms..
“the Republicans suffer from poor messaging.”
We have a winner.
What Bush allowed the Democrats to do to him was a disgrace as far as messaging.
Yes, that just irritated me to no end how he let them abuse him over and over again. I was like fight, say something, do something . . . anything. In the very beginning, yes it may have been noble and statesman like to take the high road but that high road turned into a dead end or cliff. It really hurt the R’s. And they all still suffer from the disease of not fighting back on the messaging. Except for Cruz, Lee, and a very few others.
The Democrats are actually the party of the rich, the Republicans are the party of the middle classThere is plenty of evidence for this. The Democratss contributions are fewer and larger than the contributions to the Republican Party. And the Red County/Blue County map shows Democrats getting majorities in the inner cities and in the tony inner suburbs of metropolitan areas. The Democratic Party is actually the party of the rich, defined as anyone who is comfortable patronizing others as poor, and the poor, defined as anyone who is willing to be patronized as poor, in a pincer against the middle class.
The middle class depends on the Republican Party to defend it against that combination - all too often, in vain. I refer you to the Kemp-Gore VP debate of 1996, in which Kemp signally declined to defend the middle class against Gores demagoguery. It blew up Kemps prospects for the Republican nomination forever after. The middle class had been Kemps base, and he threw it away in one disastrous night.
Rich Liberals: Warren Buffet, Investing, $60B; Bill Gates, Microsoft, $72B; Jeff Bezos, Amazon, $28B; George Soros, stock trader, $23B; Paul Allen, Microsoft, $15B; Michael Bloomberg, politician, $27B; David Geffen, DreamWorks, $6B; Steve Jobs, Apple, $11B; George Lucas, Movies, $8B, Ted Turner, Media, $2B; Oprah Winfrey, Entertainment, $3B; Larry Ellison, Oracle, $41B, Larry Page, Google, $22B; Steve Ballmer, Microsoft, $22B; Phil Knight, Nike, $21B, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook, $20B; Ralph Lauren, Designer, $6B; Steven Speilberg, Movies, $4B; Jon Corzine, Politician, $400M; Dianne Feinstein, Politician, $40M; Clintons, Politics, $105M, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Actress/family, $3B, Jamie Gertz, Actress/marriage, $2B.