Also rural areas see much less of the impact that government has. They see less infrastructure, they see less of the masses of students that have to be educated, etc. They tend to be pro-small government because they don't have a daily view of the impact government has on daily life.

I don't view that as gullible, I view that as a perspective that is incomplete due to geographical circumstances. And I am sure that's probably a road that goes both ways, with people in urban & suburban areas not seeing the full picture with respect to rural society.

To be clear, rural areas receive more federal support, but it’s farm subsidies, not visible infrastructure.

Farm subsidies aren't a major factor. The federal government spends about $20B per year on farm subsidies.

https://www.cato.org/publications/tax-budget-bulletin/reform...

To put that in context, the GDP of the state of Iowa is $173B. And that's just one state with a large agriculture sector.

Yes, the role of government support in their lives does not take on as much of a visible role.

However I'd also like to comment on a common argument that Blue States/Cities pay for Rural areas. Yes, red states receive a disproportionate amount of federal aid, but that is something everyone benefits from. For example, farm subsidies keep food costs low for everyone in the country. Low income states with a high proportion of people on SNAP & other means-tested government programs mean the social safety net is improving our society as a whole by ensuring fewer people are left behind, which would be an even larger drag on society & the economy. In short, I don't think you can separate funding by state in that way and come to any value judgments based on it because the interwoven nature of our society means we do not stand alone as individual states.

I agree with your second paragraph, with the caveat that it would be nice for the direct beneficiaries of these funds to acknowledge the help they are receiving. That's my beef - not the subsidy, but the illusions held by the people receiving it.

Nonsense. Consider where government jobs are--and the massive economic effects of those jobs: there are substantially more federal government jobs (on a per capita basis) in the cities than the rural areas.

I'm open to an argument, but citing jobs is unrelated to whether federal money flows into or out of a state relative to their income taxes.

> pretends to care about them.

And that's why I said:

Not bad people, but gullible people.

You're missing the point. It's not that they're gullible, it's that one side ignores them completely and the other side is speaking to them. It doesn't matter that the guy telling you what you want to hear is probably lying, its still a better spot than the guy that ignores you because they don't want or need your vote.

It’s amazing how many people in the left still don’t get this. Trump supporters absolutely did not vote for him out of gullibility. They got exactly what they expected.