[redrockcoulee]

Larry, I'm thinkin your guy is just a wannbee redneck. I drove a Subaru for a while and a buddy of mine has an Imprezza , he's a bigger redneck than me. 4wheel drive in a non truck makes alot of sense for some in the snow belt.
Now those Saabs that another story.

My Saabs have all been the old classic 900 hatchbacks except for the convertible. I also have a RAV4 (1998) and a 97 Mazda 626 that is too bland to be either conservative or liberal but I used to have a Datsun truck that would have embarrassed most of the folks in a trailer park.

My friend had a Subaru for a little while and was always getting stuck in his driveway backing out of the garage. Was not aware that there are purposes for snow shovels. He had a 4runner or Pathfinder before that and now a Grand Cherokee. And compared to him my politics is strong to the right.

[seacapt]

It is funny the assumptions people make based on your ride. My old dentist had the most beat to crap Chevy pick up you'd ever want to see. He loved driving that truck especially to the country club. Really enjoyed handing the keys to a vallet too.
Most of my adult life I've driven Blazers both K5 and S10. I started long before the term SUV existed. Then one day the yuppies decided they were cool. Prices sky rocketted and insurance rates went up because the ex BMW drivers were now in full size trucks which they didn't know how to handle.
This thread made me remember a bumper sticker I saw some years ago in the middle of the SUV craze. It said : "God made asphalt so yuppies could go 4 wheelin' " , it was on the back of a Cadillac pick up truck.

[larryinlc]

Most of my adult life I've driven Blazers both K5 and S10. I started long before the term SUV existed. Then one day the yuppies decided they were cool. Prices sky rocketted and insurance rates went up because the ex BMW drivers were now in full size trucks which they didn't know how to handle.
.

Yup. I bought a new 1985 S10 Blazer and they weren't that expensive. Since then I had rear wheel drive cars....mostly Chevy and the last being a Camaro which sucked on snow. I decided I needed a good car for winter. I was shocked at the prices of 4x4 and AWD SUV's. Enter Subaru. A nice AWD car for not much money. Liberal car or not, it does the job intended and I think I have about 10k left over for camera stuff.

Larry

[GeneV]

It is funny the assumptions people make based on your ride. My old dentist had the most beat to crap Chevy pick up you'd ever want to see. He loved driving that truck especially to the country club. Really enjoyed handing the keys to a vallet too.
Most of my adult life I've driven Blazers both K5 and S10. I started long before the term SUV existed. Then one day the yuppies decided they were cool. Prices sky rocketted and insurance rates went up because the ex BMW drivers were now in full size trucks which they didn't know how to handle.
This thread made me remember a bumper sticker I saw some years ago in the middle of the SUV craze. It said : "God made asphalt so yuppies could go 4 wheelin' " , it was on the back of a Cadillac pick up truck.

Not only that, but they turned into overequipped luxury cars. It is not just American trucks. My old 4-runner from the 80s had no back seat. It was an option. (no radio, either) It went up mountains with a 4 cylinder engine, and got nice mileage, though.

[JohnInIndy]

Wouldn't it actually be the opposite? Since American cars are, in general, made by union workers and unions, in general, support left wing nutjobs buying an American made car built to the same or better quality than a union made car is the totally Conservative thing to do. Keep real Americans working while not supporting union thugs. It's the perfect scenario, is it not?

Love you union guys that buy non union made stuff. Guess you know first hand how bad(ly over priced, low quality) union made really is after all.

And lets not forget that Chrysler hasn't been fully American since Daimler bought it out. Now it's Fiat and union thugs that "own" it. Ford's about the only American manufacturer left.

[shooz]

Feeling a bit peckish today, aren't we John?
Perhaps you should take few photographs.

[Nesster]

That's funny John, cause there's truth in it... but also there's more variation than that, for example in this (conservative) newspaper article:
Study: Political leanings drive car choice - Washington Times

The Volvo-driving liberal and the redneck in a Chevy pickup are long-held stereotypes. But a map of car ownership - produced by R.L. Polk & Co. - overlaid on the electoral map reveals the surprising extent to which how we vote corresponds with what we drive.

Blue-staters on each coast, from Los Angeles to Seattle and from Boston to the District, are the most likely to drive foreign cars. Domestic brands have their highest levels of market share in the mostly conservative interior of the country.

In some blue states - where a Democrat has won at least three of the last four presidential contests - foreign cars have as much as 60 percent of the market, as measured by vehicle registrations. It is mostly in red states - Republican strongholds - where domestic cars have 74 percent of the market or more.

This pattern holds in 36 states and the District.

The three politically purple states - those that have evenly split the last four elections - strongly prefer domestic cars.

Be careful with that party label, though - and check out the union label.

Its true that liberal Democrats are the least likely group to consider an American car, according to a recent Gallup poll. And conservative Republicans clearly prefer domestic cars. But one species turns the car-buying political spectrum inside out: conservative Democrats. The commitment of this group to buy American cars is so strong that conservative Republicans look downright bicoastal by comparison.

Fourteen states depart from the pattern, and five of them are in the Midwest. Michigan likes its politics just like its football: deep blue. But the seat of the domestic auto industry sees red about foreign cars. Import-driving visitors should consider renting a Big Three model at the state line.

Wisconsin also votes staunchly blue and drives dark red. A lot of Green Bay Packers fans work in the auto industry.

Liberal Minnesota does not have a substantial auto work force. But Midwesterners of any persuasion tend strongly to drive American cars. Dark-blue Illinois and light-blue Iowa heavily favor Detroit makes.

Maine, Pennsylvania and New Mexico - all Democratic states - have among the highest levels of domestic auto share.

In six Republican-leaning states, domestic cars have their second-lowest level of market share - as low as 55 percent. (R.L. Polk divides market share into four quartiles, with the lowest representing domestic share from 40 percent to 55 percent and the highest from 74 percent to 86 percent.)

Polling illustrates how car preferences are more of a liberal-conservative issue than a party-line matter.

Twenty-two percent of liberal Democrats say they would never consider an American car, according to a recent Gallup poll, the highest of any group. Among conservative Republicans, 14 percent would only consider a foreign car. But moderate to conservative Democrats and conservative independents put both groups to shame: Only 6 percent of the former and 8 percent of the latter said they would not consider a Detroit car. “Liberals are the least likely to buy American, but I think you also have to look a little deeper to see that a higher percentage of those liberals would buy only American - more than would buy only foreign,” said Roger Simmermaker, author of “How Americans Can Buy American: The Power of Consumer Patriotism.”

Twenty-seven percent of liberal Democrats say they would only consider a U.S. car., but that, too, is the lowest of the five political groups broken out by Gallup.

(The number of respondents who identified themselves as liberal Republicans was too small to justify its own category, Gallup said.)

As fun as it is to color by numbers, a variety of factors correlate to car-buying decisions: Age, household income and geography all exert a strong influence, according to Gallup.

But the type of driving you do may play the biggest role.

“If you’re looking at more fuel-efficient vehicles, smaller vehicles, [imports] have the edge,” said Bruce M. Belzowski of the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute. “If you look at people who need a larger vehicle, who need towing capacity, they probably go more toward the Big Three.”

Behind the stereotypes are millions of individual decisions. A conservative in a BMW is not a contradiction, nor is a liberal in a pickup - without the NRA sticker, of course.

And now that Toyota is making pickups in Republican Texas, all bets could be off.

You can bet, though, that made-in-Texas doesn’t cut it in Michigan.

Though thousands of Americans work for foreign car makers in the United States, it is Ford, GM and Chrysler that do the most for the country, said Mr. Simmermaker, who also runs the Web site howtobuyamerican.com.

“From the people they employ to the retirees and dependents they support to the fact that they buy most of their parts in the U.S., any way you want to look at it, they have done right by the American economy,” he said, adding that both liberals and conservatives bear some blame for their current troubles.

Personally, as a liberal, I don't see those union thugs as the primary problem with American cars; I see poor management and design decisions that essentially look at a less than 5 year life.

Having a 'reality based' and 'rational' approach to these things, I read Consumer Reports reliability ratings (I'm cheap too, so I want something that lasts and is cheap to run).

I drive a Ford and a Toyota. I will sell the Ford and buy a Japanise label car to replace it, sometime. (I've had the Ford, which replaced a prior Ford, for 13 years)

I do not need or want a semi-SUV, but I need and want a station wagon or van. I won't buy German, and Volvos are expensive and unreliable, Saab is going out of business again... which leaves me: Subaru.

When it comes to these decisions, I am a market driven guy, not political or loyality based. Is that a contradiction? Only if your image of liberals is a carricature. Really: our politics are to have society set standards where we don't believe the market will, and to use our own market presence to drive things towards better things. In other words, we are in fact free market capitalists also, though our ideas about what's sufficient and necessary regulation is different than those of the libertarians.

[JohnInIndy]

Feeling a bit peckish today, aren't we John?
Perhaps you should take few photographs.

Spent the last 2-3 weeks doing just that. No phone. No computers. Not much of anything. But my employees wanted to go and they voted on it so off we went.

[shooz]

Spent the last 2-3 weeks doing just that. No phone. No computers. Not much of anything. But my employees wanted to go and they voted on it so off we went.

Post some, please.

[redrockcoulee]

Wouldn't it actually be the opposite? Since American cars are, in general, made by union workers and unions, in general, support left wing nutjobs buying an American made car built to the same or better quality than a union made car is the totally Conservative thing to do. Keep real Americans working while not supporting union thugs. It's the perfect scenario, is it not?

Love you union guys that buy non union made stuff. Guess you know first hand how bad(ly over priced, low quality) union made really is after all.

And lets not forget that Chrysler hasn't been fully American since Daimler bought it out. Now it's Fiat and union thugs that "own" it. Ford's about the only American manufacturer left.

I have driven Saabs and Peugots and Dodges and they are all union mades. Besides when you buy a 12 year old car does it really support or lack of support unions or non unions. And the Japanese system is really a system that does not require unions in the same way that the North American style of labour relations does.

And maybe some of us do not live in the world of Dogma that you do. You seem to believe that unions are evil and must be destoyed and anyone who sees a place for them has to support them 100% all the time. In the real world buying a 12 year old car you buy what is available for example. I just hope that you never travel to Canada or Europe and need emergency health care as you would not be able to get it as the workers are unionized and that would go against all you believe in. DOGMA AND HATE AND MORE DOGMA. Name calling as in thugs is an insult to an intelligent conversation and does not prove anymore than if every time I mentioned businesses I called them crooks. Some are but what is the point in name calling for the sake of name calling? Unless you know you absolutely no facts to back you up. You do know of course that not all American cars are built by UAW workers do you? And they are still made by union workers! You claim that people who belong to a union are not real Americans. Who are you to decide who or what makes a real American or human or whatever? Sounds like you would like to be the dictator and decide what a person can believe in or support and what they cannot. Not a conservative view or at least a traditional one.

Enjoy your little bitter world and have a nice day.

[JohnInIndy]

I am talking about US Union thuggery here.
As for UAW made cars here's the list off their website.

My thanks go out to you. If it wasn't for your post I would have never looked this up. Now I know which cars I'll won't buy again until the union changes its ways for the better.

[JohnInIndy]

Post some, please.

Don't see that happening.

[Ratmagiclady]

Ye Gods, Jogiba, what or who do you carry in that monster?

Wouldn't it actually be the opposite? Since American cars are, in general, made by union workers and unions, in general, support left wing nutjobs buying an American made car built to the same or better quality than a union made car is the totally Conservative thing to do. Keep real Americans working while not supporting union thugs. It's the perfect scenario, is it not?

Love you union guys that buy non union made stuff. Guess you know first hand how bad(ly over priced, low quality) union made really is after all.

I think if there's political affiliations involved, John, certain vehicles get associated with liberals cause some brands are seen as less *consumerist:* with the American corporations building things more for testosterone than to last or be environmentally-responsible: who *made* something doesn't much matter if you don't want to *buy* it.

Of late, the US auto industry had been making the same mistakes as they did in the Seventies: trying to keep marketing the testosterone and consumerism of bigger and bigger vehicles, when the cars just weren't as suitable ...half the reason some big automakers had such a need of bailouts is in fact cause they had lots and lots full of SUV's and hemi's during an energy-crisis like spike in gas prices and lots of people just not being able to afford to drive the things.



But that's often the perceived difference: I hear somewhat more about people thinking like 'Real (conservative) men don't drive those,' (and backhandedly, therefore women who want to be taken seriously ought to avoid them, too, ) ...it's about the consumerism, ...management wanting to manufacture *demand* for the things *they* find most profitable to make, rather than manufacture the *things* most suited to various markets.

And, frankly, 'conservatives' tend to have a self-image as being the only ones who drive trucks cause of an image that 'Only we work for a living,' (Even if the big pickup is totally symbolic and just for show.) Half the reason a lot of 'liberals' are associated with like Subaru and Volvo is cause they've been about the only ones consistently making a decent *station wagon.* (Got me an older one, just recently, though I'd expected I'd end up with an older SUV: that would have been OK since I don't actually drive a lot of miles, ...as long as I can carry things at need, and maybe get myself out of here with some of my life if things don't go well. ) I do think the stereotypical conservative is going to be much more about status and a certain kind of image: 'liberals' who need a work vehicle always seem to get used ones. ...and stereotypically aren't too interested in buying new vehicles over and over, if we even can. I think this partly means that the American corporate marketing doesn't know how to appeal to those who do buy new vehicles now and again, whereas the attitude in Sweden or with Subaru, who've long been a certain niche market, is somewhat different.

Hel, a lot of the American car marketing over the recent decades actually was darn-near *offensive* to the liberal half of the nation, all that appealing to wounded masculinity and the whole 'Prove your denial is justified by driving this huge piece of excess, show your scorn for... Liberals... ' dynamic.

I actually saw an ad for Chevy trucks the other day that may have done better: it was actually about some really *old* Chevy truck that had been in some family... by implication, we're meant to figure that new ones might last as long, but that's getting warmer. I mean, I love cars, but in a way that means I get *attached,* and I tend to favor simplicity. (I was tempted to buy an old old Chevy actually: the simplicity tends to mean I can fix nearly everything. Would have been pretty, too. Baby-blue and white. I found the problem with the SUVs was that for want of being able to spend a little more out of what sweetie could leave me with, I was just looking at dealing with too many front-end problems. Front diffs are expensive and aren't something I can lift. I'm happy in that my new-old gal here is rear drive and not too elaborate or computer-driven, and the problems are mostly an aggregation of smaller jobs I can fix one at a time. )

But, I mean, hey, Larry *is* a liberal, and he bought his Subaru for very practical reasons, and clearly likes the car. (He was showing that vehicle off, even) Telling him he should instead want something else in order to not-get-picked-on-by conservatives doesn't make a whole heck of a lot of sense between people, and why the corporations thought it would sell him a car doesn't make much sense either.

[Just1MoreDave]

Where a car is made and who makes it are complex questions, getting worse every day. Some examples: Saab - Swedish? American? Still in business? I'd have to look it up. Subarus might be made in Indiana, in a plant that also makes Toyota Camrys. There's Australian-Canadian Camaros and Mexican-Japanese Fords. When you get down to parts content and engine assembly plants and UAW contracts and government ownership, I would be surprised if anything is 100%.

I guess the Korean-owned Washington Times can still make some political conclusions because most car owners think their car was made where they think the company is. Like the newspaper.

[JohnInIndy]

I think if there's political affiliations involved, John, certain vehicles get associated with liberals cause some brands are seen as less *consumerist:* with the American corporations building things more for testosterone than to last or be environmentally-responsible, who *made* something doesn't much matter if you don't want to *buy* it.

Of late, the US auto industry had been making the same mistakes as they did in the Seventies: trying to keep marketing the testosterone and consumerism of bigger and bigger vehicles, when the cars just weren't as suitable ...half the reason some big automakers had such a need of bailouts is in fact cause they had lots and lots full of SUV's and hemi's during an energy-crisis like spike in gas prices and lots of people just not being able to afford to drive the things.



But that's often the perceived difference: I hear somewhat more about people thinking like 'Real (conservative) men don't drive those,' (and backhandedly, therefore women who want to be taken seriously ought to avoid them, too, ) ...it's about the consumerism, ...management wanting to manufacture *demand* for the things *they* find most profitable to make, rather than manufacture the *things* most suited to various markets.

And, frankly, 'conservatives' tend to have a self-image as being the only ones who drive trucks cause of an image that 'Only we work for a living,' (Even if the big pickup is totally symbolic and just for show.) Half the reason a lot of 'liberals' are associated with like Subaru and Volvo is cause they've been about the only ones consistently making a decent *station wagon.* (Got me an older one, just recently, though I'd expected I'd end up with an older SUV: that would have been OK since I don't actually drive a lot of miles, ...as long as I can carry things at need, and maybe get myself out of here with some of my life if things don't go well. ) I do think the stereotypical conservative is going to be much more about status and a certain kind of image: 'liberals' who need a work vehicle always seem to get used ones. ...and stereotypically aren't too interested in buying new vehicles over and over, if we even can. I think this partly means that the American corporate marketing doesn't know how to appeal to those who do buy new vehicles now and again, whereas the attitude in Sweden or with Subaru, who've long been a certain niche market, is somewhat different.

Hel, a lot of the American car marketing over the recent decades actually was darn-near *offensive* to the liberal half of the nation, all that appealing to wounded masculinity and the whole 'Prove your denial is justified by driving this huge piece of excess, show your scorn for... Liberals... ' dynamic.

Never thought about party affiliation and cars until this thread actually.

The auto companies may also have made big cars because people wanted them and they were profitable. People may have wanted them because they are safer in an accident then a 2 door Speck that gets airborne.
I think your testosterone example is so far off base it borders on ridiculous.