205
Now those people just have to vote.
34 here. I've voted in every federal, state, and local election and primary since I was 18. But I guess I'm right on the cusps of this demographic.
Yeah, unfortunately you're the exception.
I was recently looking at the data from the last presidential election and it continues to be disappointing.
It's kind of to be expected, I suppose. It takes time for people to learn that they need to vote, so you'll always see a higher percentage vote in each older group. The data I was looking at showed it peaked at about 75% around 55, then dropped very slightly for people older.
So highest percentage of voters are in the "Fuck! I thought I was going to be able to retire, but I'm going to have to work till I die!" group (my people). Slightly lower among the "The world's turning to shit, but at least I'll die before it gets really bad" group.
I've often thought that, in addition to making election day a holiday, states should give some kind of encouragement to bring kids into the polling places. My wife and I always brought our kids in with us, specifically to make sure they would see us voting. They've all voted in every election they were eligible to vote in.
We need more groups defined the way you do it.
Depends in the issue du jour come election day.
Kids these days. Smfh. Every fucking generation has its hippies.
First, those are rookie numbers, gotta do better. Second, how does this break down by age? Is the anti-DS sentiment spread out across the age range evenly, or is it concentrated at one end or the other? Third, I don't understand how one could be opposed to DS unless they're already fabulously wealthy and an asshole. What makes somebody anti-DS?
HOW is this POSSIBLE! ALL we did is Tell these kids that Taxing Billionaires was SOCIALISM and that NO AI data Centers was SOCIALISM and that Healthcare was SOCIALISM and that FAIR Wages was SOCIALISM and
@BigMacHole @sanitation Taxing billionaires more than they are is illogical & unfeasible, the average billionaire here already yearly pays more in taxes than every citizen combined. None of what you listed is Socialism, please learn about Socialism: T55 ⚒️ (On Socialism/Communism Evil; Capitalism WINS)
Socialism, Democratic Socialism, & Communism, are two peas in a same pod.
https://breakingnewsapp.net/article.php?1=jcbj https://youtu.be/ONbzUwu6Is4
Only half of the core age demographic? Well shit.
Polls don't mean shit
My friend says people turn Republican once they hit 6 figure incomes and get mad that half their money goes "to the lazy poors who are beneath them".
They are rich enough to feel comfortable but poor enough that they still have to pay taxes.
But when most people are poor, that doesn't happen. You get more socialist/leftist.
Of course you also get the people with no critical thinking voting against their own self interest. Poor or otherwise.
We might see that group increase, but since the middle class is collapsing, there are less people in that 6 figures group.
6 figure incomes aren’t suddenly turning republican. That’s not what happens.
I think her point was that once someone gets a little better off than most of the rest of the population they get haughty. And then they see the poorer people as stealing half their money in taxes. And become against taxes and business regulations. Because it affects them more directly.
And holding conservative fiscal values leads to adopting the social ones because it comes back to welfare scapegoating. And who you are rubbing elbows with. The echo chamber.
It's well known with psych research that being more wealthy (even in a pretend game) makes people less charitable and less likely to help out others.
People start to see themselves as better than rest. And likely because of the fundamental attribution bias, believe they are better off because they are deserving. Which means those not doing well, deserve their place too.
My friend was giving a theory on how this trend works to change mindsets.
We were discussing why it is that people who come from poverty and become wealthy, often have no problem exploiting the people from their own background. When you would expect more sympathy.
Your arguments have a few flaws. The most likely explanation is that selfish people continue to be selfish- whether poor or well-off. This particular group simply looks out for their own interests, whether at the benefit or the cost of others, regardless of where they are in life. They don’t change and suddenly “get haughty”.
It's well known with psych research that being more wealthy (even in a pretend game) makes people less charitable and less likely to help out others
You are confusing correlation with causation. Studies indicate those well-off donate ~~less~~ at a lower rate/incidence than the poor. There are several reasons to explain this other than to assume people change because of the money. For one, the personality and nature that often drives wealth accumulation is directly related to a lack of charity. For two, income directly relates to an uptake of religion.. hence charitable giving and a desire to give to community.
I'm not talking about correlation studies only. I'm talking about experiments.
Together they both show more wealth equates to being less charitable.
It makes sense if you understand that most people ascribe in the fundamental attribution error.
To put simply. "If I do well it's cause I deserve it and worked for it. If other people do well it's because they got lucky or circumstances out of their control.
If I do poorly it's because of circumstances out of my control. If other people do poorly it's because they aren't trying hard enough. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error
The better off you are. The more you see others below you as just lazy and undeserving.
Again. This is a trend. Not true for everyone.
Just because you don't fit that trend does not make it untrue.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20649364/ Having less, giving more: the influence of social class on prosocial behavior (Correlation study)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35409667/ Social Class Priming Effect on Prosociality: Evidence from Explicit and Implicit Measures (Experimental effect)
Both of these papers give background reviews of the literature on this topic. There are literally thousands of studies on this topic. Some correlation and some experimental.
When I job hopped and went from $70k to $150k/yr I was really mad I was getting taxed so much because it meant the US government was using it to kill people (before that even I was making more like 20k most my life). I love taxes when they go to the right place, I want to be taxed: I voted in support of every increase in taxes that came across the ballot that was related to things that I felt would benefit the community. Suddenly I had the funds to do real help with mutual aid groups, pay for a friend's housing while they were struggling to afford college, we even bought a (admittedly cheap) car for someone who was going to lose their job because their old car broke
I don't think it is as simple as "once you earn money" or "once you get older". Like you're saying, poor people regardless of ideology often behave in a more leftist way out of necessity. They'll probably stay left or right leaning as they earn more but just have the funds to express it as they go, and when the necessity is gone for republicans they'll stop engaging in community benefit. And while this isn't universal and doesn't make or break someone's leftist status, I feel we're less likely to seek out the kinds of things that earn us high incomes because they're often ideologically unsavory. Then because of working class infighting amongst the left we're additionally less likely to admit to each other in person when we're making bank
Maybe I'm off base or a bit defensive due to my own experience, idk. I feel the others around me who "became republican" the writing was on the wall well before we got more money or older
Generalizations dont apply to every individual. It's just trends.
Research says a lot of people get less charitable when they get more money. But of course that's not true for every person.
I sure hope that there is a tidal wave of people putting the "blame" of this rise on Donvict and gaslighting conservatives with it. :)
Just like the right blamed Obama for feeling that they "had" to vote for a shitheel like Donvict. Because you know, Obama was suuuuch a radical that drastically changed America while stealing all of our guns (nope: the conservative mind completely broke because a black president was in office for two terms).
We'll see how they like it when we pull some DARVO shit on them. Everyone "had" to vote for democratic socialism to balance out all the horrible shit the conservatives actually inflicted on us all.
scarily low
The rest are communist or anarchist
Hahahahahaha
Not really the general masses are lied to constantly, a good chunk of the other half may just not know what it is.
Right? With the media shit talking Bernie and AOC and the rest, I'm honestly surprised it's as high as they say it is.
Just wait until the red-baiting comes roaring right back in full force. Right now they are focusing on shit like "men in women's sports" and so on.
That … sucks.
Have they been informed that Socialism Killed 10 Zillion People?
Do they realize that they've been brainwashed by the Chinese?
I would not be the least bit surprised to see the thesis of "The Black Book of Communism" come roaring back to life as they crank up the red-baiting in full force.
And they will be cranking up the red-baiting...
No, their influencers just keep harping 'WHY DO YOU SUPPORT GENOCIDE?!? REEEEEEEEE!' and they fold like origami.
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2026
205 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30811 readers
2180 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS