[vkou]

> I always hear this and I never hear anyone say they voted for senate based on Abrams tank manufacturing or whatever.

You never see a senator take credit for a plant opening/expanding on their re-election blurb/townhall? You must be in an incredibly safe state.

> Why doesn't the logic apply to infrastructure projects which seem more marketable?

It applies to them, too. Again, if you're not seeing this, either your senator isn't doing much of it, you're not paying much attention to their campaign, or they are in such an incredibly safe district that their only challenger is Bozo the Clown.

[woooooo]

I didn't say that, I said I've never seen it swing a vote. I'm sure people working at the missile factory vote but it's a relatively small number.

Re: infra, you're right, I guess I'm just letting my personal bias in when wondering why they don't do more of that compared to the weapons. It seems like such an easier sell to voters, but the emphasis seems to go the other way.

(Also, in my limited sample size, all of this has taken a smaller and smaller back seat to culture war stuff in modern day campaigning)

[mannerheim]

Raytheon employs 12,000 people in Tucson alone, about 6% of the number of people who voted in the election for Arizona's 7th congressional district in 2022. Those people also have friends and family who would care if they got laid off.

[woooooo]

Thanks for the numbers, that puts it in better perspective.

Although I'm guessing that was an uncontested election, sounds like <10% turnout. Still, it's material.

[mannerheim]

Unclear what turnout was, but it was at least 25%; district 7 has fewer than 800 thousand people, not all of whom are registered voters.