Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I think you’re speaking to an important but different point: That economic voters may be somewhat nihilist, too transactional. I agree with that.
But as a pure matter of basic business acumen, there is no reason for economic voters to align with the intolerant. Even if you use the tax avoidance argument, the value of creating new industries pays much more in terms of growth (enhanced revenues for all) than short term tax savings.
If we had two parties with identical platforms save gay marriage and pot legalization, an economic voter could not rationally choose the intolerant party. He’d be precluding growth. It would frustrate his reason for voting.
|
I'm speaking to what i said- I guess you're back to a hypo- when we pick a candidate, in the real world where i live, we make a host of choices, we choose what is important to us and we choose what is less important.
By the time the election came up i had a host of reason to vote for Hillary (all negatives re Trump), but the only one that mattered, the first, was that Trump was sending crazy ugly tweets at 3 AM- i knew he was crazy- I'm sure there were other issues eventually where I thought "hmm on issue X I like Trump's position better than Hil's," but those were secondary. My primary issue was Trump is fucking nuts and cannot be President. all votes in the real world carry a number of such choices.
