Why are fiscally conservative Democrats demonized? I think it’s a good question to ask in today’s political climate here in Montana.
A lot of people don’t understand this idea of liberalism and they throw progressivism in there and everything gets blamed.
Population trends have evolved over time and so have our politics. Different people are speaking to different voters, addressing their wants and needs. Divisions develop and you get what we have here in Montana, urban areas that are heavily Democratic and rural areas that are overwhelmingly Republican.
The thing is, those rural counties are losing population while the urban areas are gaining them. Still, that legislature is represented by counties in the Senate, the last place where legislation has to go before it can become law. If a majority of those seats are controlled by these minority-population counties then you know that nothing the more urban areas want to do is going to get done regardless of their population.
That’s what the House is for, but if you’ve got so much urban areas crowding in on those urban areas then this causes problems.
Here in Missoula you see the city stretching out into the county, trying to take over some more of that land. This could make it easier to fiddle with statehouse representation later…who knows?
There are lots of questions around this, but it’s clear there is a huge divide on how people feel in the state.
Mainly you get more conservative voters in those rural areas and that translates into economic conservatism…something I think is a great idea.
We’ve got a $17 trillion debt and that has to be taken care of. There has to be cuts everywhere.
I hate it when people say a household is not like a government and you can’t run a budget that way. I know this – my household would be living under the bridge if I ran it the way the government does.
Generations are skipped, we know this. The ideas of one generation are rebelled against because…well, they were their parents. Anything they did was wrong and we’ve got to do something else.
That’s how New Deal Liberalism was replaced by the Goldwater Revolution and our current infestation of Sun Belt politics that have now spread to all rural areas regardless of their weather or growing conditions.
I like that New Deal Liberalism myself because it means we’re using tax money to fund things in this country that we need and that create jobs that put money into local economies. I don’t like putting money overseas.
Call me a Bourbon Democrat, a title I think is damn good. We need competition and we need regulation and we need a fair playing field. We don’t need schools in Iraq. We can ensure banks are strong without subsidizing them and the same goes for multinational companies, energy companies…you name it!
We need hard money in this country, not endless lines of credit. Alexander Hamilton might have liked debt, but I don’t and most fiscally conservative Democrats today don’t either. Our first treasury secretary never envisioned $17 trillion of the stuff.
That’s why I think it’s so unfortunate that fiscally conservative Democrats in Montana are demonized. I know we’re on the right side of history.
A lot of people don’t understand this idea of liberalism and they throw progressivism in there and everything gets blamed.
Population trends have evolved over time and so have our politics. Different people are speaking to different voters, addressing their wants and needs. Divisions develop and you get what we have here in Montana, urban areas that are heavily Democratic and rural areas that are overwhelmingly Republican.
The thing is, those rural counties are losing population while the urban areas are gaining them. Still, that legislature is represented by counties in the Senate, the last place where legislation has to go before it can become law. If a majority of those seats are controlled by these minority-population counties then you know that nothing the more urban areas want to do is going to get done regardless of their population.
That’s what the House is for, but if you’ve got so much urban areas crowding in on those urban areas then this causes problems.
Here in Missoula you see the city stretching out into the county, trying to take over some more of that land. This could make it easier to fiddle with statehouse representation later…who knows?
There are lots of questions around this, but it’s clear there is a huge divide on how people feel in the state.
Mainly you get more conservative voters in those rural areas and that translates into economic conservatism…something I think is a great idea.
We’ve got a $17 trillion debt and that has to be taken care of. There has to be cuts everywhere.
I hate it when people say a household is not like a government and you can’t run a budget that way. I know this – my household would be living under the bridge if I ran it the way the government does.
- You can’t keep spending more money than you take in. Why is this so hard to understand?
- Why is saving money seen as a bad thing? Why does every single last penny and then some have to be spent?
- Is this the kind of attitude we want future generations to have, that you can just spend and spend and everything will be fine?
Generations are skipped, we know this. The ideas of one generation are rebelled against because…well, they were their parents. Anything they did was wrong and we’ve got to do something else.
That’s how New Deal Liberalism was replaced by the Goldwater Revolution and our current infestation of Sun Belt politics that have now spread to all rural areas regardless of their weather or growing conditions.
I like that New Deal Liberalism myself because it means we’re using tax money to fund things in this country that we need and that create jobs that put money into local economies. I don’t like putting money overseas.
Call me a Bourbon Democrat, a title I think is damn good. We need competition and we need regulation and we need a fair playing field. We don’t need schools in Iraq. We can ensure banks are strong without subsidizing them and the same goes for multinational companies, energy companies…you name it!
We need hard money in this country, not endless lines of credit. Alexander Hamilton might have liked debt, but I don’t and most fiscally conservative Democrats today don’t either. Our first treasury secretary never envisioned $17 trillion of the stuff.
That’s why I think it’s so unfortunate that fiscally conservative Democrats in Montana are demonized. I know we’re on the right side of history.
Let's get back on the right side of the curve
