Truly, they don't. They will easily pass national legislation when it favors them, and revert to "States Rights" when it suits them.

Anonymous wrote:They prefer states rights over federal. That would make sense if it were about closeness to the people. But conservatives also welcome state level bans on local governments from doing things they don't like. So it's not about that.

So state is most legitimate, federal the least but state more than local. Make it make sense.

The GOP places legitimacy where it has control. They cannot control a federal bureaucracy and they cannot control urban governments, so they develop rhetoric around the states, particularly those like Texas, where there are huge blue areas but they can gerrymander and bribe their way to subjugation.

They only care about state's rights when they're not in power. It's a rear guard action.

“States rights” was their battle cry for slavery and it’s become a cultural value. It means nothing to them other than it sounds good to people with a propensity for ODD.

It’s turtles all the way down. They like the idea of doing what they want, and telling other people what to do—that’s mostly achievable at the state level. Particularly if you stack federal courts with judges that strip rights away from the people living in those states.

Conservatives represent rural cultural and economic interests. State government allows this minority to maximize its power.

Come on now... you took US history, right? I think the context it benefits from most is European history for the last thousand years. Then you really get it.

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lot easier to manipulate. Look at how many votes Democrats get in badly gerrymandered states vs how much representation they get.

Me again.

Go look and see what the Wisconsin GOP is doing right now, for example.

It’s a lot easier to manipulate. Look at how many votes Democrats get in badly gerrymandered states vs how much representation they get.

We don't have a homogenous culture. People want maximum freedom from faceless bureaucrats, far away, who don't share their values. They don't want "the swamp" telling them how to live, what to teach in their schools, what vaccinations to get, what display to put on the town hall lawn. Also whether they can own slaves or shoot kids who ring their doorbells.

Anonymous wrote:They prefer states rights over federal. That would make sense if it were about closeness to the people. But conservatives also welcome state level bans on local governments from doing things they don't like. So it's not about that.

So state is most legitimate, federal the least but state more than local. Make it make sense.

Start here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism_in_the_United_States

10th amendment

And its easier to buy state legislatures

Because cities are mostly liberal, as are most feds.

Easier to buy and influence state and local officials? That’s my observation.

They prefer states rights over federal. That would make sense if it were about closeness to the people. But conservatives also welcome state level bans on local governments from doing things they don't like. So it's not about that.

So state is most legitimate, federal the least but state more than local. Make it make sense.