You are entitled to whatever misunderstandings you want to cling to. Sure, the poorest states have always gone Republicant since the days of Nixon’s Southern strategy, because they are heavily rural, religious, less educated, and with a link to the confederacy, with attitudes that are anti-abortion, anti-government, gun-fanatic, and racist. Nixon recognized this and shifted the Republicant brand to appeal to these ideals.

The article you link merely says that there are many very rich Democrats. So what? That has nothing to do with political party. That is the result of Dems being more urban and more educated. The ONLY significant accomplishments of the R party over the last several decades are massively increasing spending on the military, blowing up the national debt, drastically reducing tax rates primarily for the very richest Americans, destroying labor unions, selling off national lands and resources to predatory corporations, and starting several wars.

The fact that Josh Hawley is appealing to voters with a populist pitch is just more of the same kind of issue appropriation as religion and guns and abortion. Rs are not any more religious than Ds, and Ds love their guns as well. But Rs have conned millions into accepting them as their saviors on conservative hot button issues. Hawley sees the data showing the vast majority of Americans sinking under the weight of the oppression of the 1%, and he senses the American sentiment shifting left. So he is going to use that as his campaign pitch, try and steal Dem voters away from their party. But he is a phony, these are lies, and he will never truly be on their side.

You are making a false comparison. Do you really — I mean honestly — believe that poor people in rural states vote Republicant because the R party is the better party for poor and working people? If you really believe that, there is no chance of getting anything into that brain of yours. Go ahead, keep clinging.