[gottorf]

Not the GP, but obviously as a general rule, Republicans are the hard-on-crime (three strikes, "don't do the crime if you can't do the time") party and Democrats are the soft-on-crime (Soros DAs, "we must address the root causes of crime") party. Even the most partisan on either side must admit this to be true.

From there, it's not a great leap to think that places with a soft-on-crime attitude at the local level might engender more criminal activity than places with the opposite attitude. Similar to why there are so many homeless people in California: the weather is lovely and local attitudes are permissive to it compared to other places, so it sucks less to be homeless there than, say, North Dakota. I think it passes the smell test to suggest that it sucks less to be a violent criminal in Baltimore than, say, Carmel, Indiana.

> are cities with Democrat mayors much larger and diverse than Republic mayor cities

What are you implying about diversity?

[jacquesm]

> Republicans are the hard-on-crime party

That's hilarious. It is interesting that these memes are so persistent even in light of the present. No, Republicans are not 'hard on crime', they are hard on anybody that isn't a white, preferably wealthy, evangelical republican.

[gottorf]

How convenient of your political opponents to be so cartoonishly evil, so that only the most ignorant or craven could possibly support them!

In reality, Trump gained in all minority populations between 2020 and 2024. He actually lost white Protestants, and white voters in general, in the same time period[0]. In income, too, poorer voters shifted more towards the Republican candidate, while the more well-off shifted more towards the Democratic candidate.

This has been a fascinating realignment in traditional partisan composition. You're probably right that historically the Republican Party has been hard on those who aren't white, rich, and religious; but over the past 10 years or so, it's actually the Democratic Party that is the party of the white, rich, and religious[1].

[0]: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/06/26/demographic-...

[1]: The new left-liberal dogma that comes in many names, but has a lot of overlap with traditional religion.

[kashunstva]

> Not the GP, but obviously as a general rule, Republicans are the hard-on-crime … party.

…To the point that they elected a convicted felon to the presidency.

[gottorf]

Believe it or not, there exist pretty good reasons why some people don't find the whole "convicted felon" thing to be very persuasive. But besides, do you dispute my overall characterization of the two parties? Insofar as major political parties can be generalized, this is true, is it not?

[seanmcdirmid]

Maybe you should just retort with a list of your favorite big Republican run cities as counter examples? I’ve noticed you haven’t mentioned any, just throwing out rural areas or small towns in Indiana?

[__d]

I’m curious about the association between income disparity and crime rate.

I suspect big cities tend to have a larger underclass population and a larger wealthy class. Predictable results ensue: Democrat administrations, and higher crime rates.

[righthand]

> Not the GP, but obviously as a general rule, Republicans are the hard-on-crime (three strikes, "don't do the crime if you can't do the time") party and Democrats are the soft-on-crime (Soros DAs, "we must address the root causes of crime") party.

This is not true at all. There are plenty of violent, hard on crime moderate Democrats that run these cities. Your bias and romanticization of politics is showing. Again in your comment the description is disingenuous and lacking sources and evidence.

You might want to research the US moderate political beliefs. Many are RINOs and DINOs which pokes a lot of holes in the current culture war. Especially if you spew bs such as, Rs are hard on crime and Ds are soft on crime.

> What are you implying about diversity?

What are you implying about it? I am implying that any time people of diverse cultures and beliefs are packed together in an area like a city, you probably end up with a higher murder rate situation than if those people weren’t packed together into a city. Yes?