Is owning a pickup truck a sign of being a "man of the people"?

Now, I'm bringing this up because of the big deal that has been apparently made about Senator Brown's truck. It's not about his politics, it's about the fact that this truck was made into a symbol of him being "folksy".

I was a construction worker for 11 years and owned trucks and work vans which were used for their intended purpose.

Now, my view is that when someone owns a pickup who doesn't use it for real work (i.e. not helping your friends move every now and then or driving to their "job", but as a tool utilized while pursuing a career in a field where they actually work for a living.) they are just using the truck as a fashion accessory to try and look "cool".

A real truck is dented. It's got **** all over it... a bit of concrete hardened in the bed, dirt and stray nails rolling around int eh bed as well.

It gets used as a truck, not as an oddly shaped car. It's got a bunch of empty coffee cups on the dashboard from the cold days when you take your coffee breaks inside of it to stay warm.

To me, a truly "folksy" person doesn't use a truck as an accessory, because they've had to use it for it's intended purpose. Which is work.

IMO, a pickup truck with 200,000 miles that isn't covered in ****, dented to hell and gone, but still plugging away doing it's intended job is a sign that the owner of said truck is the exact opposite of being "folksy". It's a sign of being a white collar person who thinks he or she will look really "cool" if they drive a truck. It's superficial.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that. If people want to look cool, that's their business. But I can't ****ing stand the fact that this purely superficial attemtp to look cool is being portrayed as a sign that the superficial person trying to look cool is some sort of a "man of the people".

Most of the people I know who use or have used trucks and vans for their intended purposes feel the same way.

But my opinion on this is clearly biased by my own experiences. I want to know what people think of the general idea about people pretending to be blue-collar as a reflection on them as a man of the people, not about Senator Brown's politics.

So what do you guys think? Is owning a pickup truck a sign of being a "man of the people"?

so a pickup truck is a ute, just had to check that out, different name here in Oz.

but yeah, if your not using it for work, its a but if a waste of time having one, you could just get a station wagon if you need to carry stuff.

just something interesting, google image "pickup truck", you get american GM's and stuff, google image "ute" you get the Australian Holden Commodore VE, which is much nicer looking, and also slightly different to the american one's.

My experience is that people have a truck for three reasons.

1. As stated, for work. There are tons of trucks around here that are at least thirty years old or have all sorts of toolboxes all over them.
2. As a fashion statement. I see a lot of trucks with modified engines that tend to make them less useful for work, such as lights in strange places or engine modifications that make them less reliable.
3. Recreation. Going off-road (the local term is muddin') is a popular past-time around here.

I rarely see trucks that are use for more than one of those purposes, except perhaps large tires which could serve both 2 and 3, but even in the deep south, those trucks tend to be rare.

In terms of a truck making a person more authentic or manly, that's just silly romanticism.

Only in the minds of partisan hacks. Who the hell cares what vehicles politician's own?

How about all the soccer moms driving around in big SUV's who don't ever go off road? They probably don't know what 4WD is for. In reality a mini-van would suffice if they have a bunch of kids. But I've seen more than one family with only 1 child driving a huge SUV. So where's the outrage there? (not saying this is outrage per say)
Edit:
I've heard there are companies who will spray mud on your vehicle to make it look like you actually use it!

Embrace the symbolism. Massachusetts is a primarily blue-collar Democrat state. Brown is a politician but tapped into that and convinced the state he was one of them, and not an elitist who will ignore the people's wishes. That politically played well in Mass. I think it's the same as tapping into something vacuous as "hope and change" and it worked.

It's smart politics. It got him in the door. Coakley is an awkward fit and there was something about her, and I can't pin it down, that I just didn't care for. Believe me, if Obama needed to get votes he'd send out every grass roots activist in D-Kal baseball hats, overalls and dirty trucks if it meant getting votes.

Let's see how much character and conviction he has when and if good 'ol Harry shoves 500 million in front of his fact and asks him to simply abstain his vote for healthcare, or change his vote. Then we'll see if the people's trust was well placed or not.

I own a truck and use it for real work. My hands are calloused and scratched and embedded at the creases with stains from tannins of one sort or another.

I'm really an effete snob at heart, though.

static_engineer said:

How about all the soccer moms driving around in big SUV's who don't ever go off road? They probably don't know what 4WD is for. In reality a mini-van would suffice if they have a bunch of kids. But I've seen more than one family with only 1 child driving a huge SUV. So where's the outrage there? (not saying this is outrage per say)
Edit:
I've heard there are companies who will spray mud on your vehicle to make it look like you actually use it!

Click to expand...

SUV's are nothing more than fancy mini-vans. Their nature is to be an accessory. That's understood by the fact that they offer no practical utility. Why would I be outraged over something being used for it's intended purpose?

As far as the difference to what I'm saying is that SUV's are totally worthless to a working man unless you tear out the seats and put steel plates over the windows.

I guess they might be useful for a person who tows a boat every now and then and is married to a soccer mom. Otehr than that, they are pretty worthless in my opinion.

I have a Suburban, a Dodge Van & a Honda accord, they all have their purpose....
The wife has a Honda CRV, I find that it is a great all around vehicle...
You have to wonder about those guys driving Prius or Subarus....:lol:

I guess if ya don't have a "Jeep" a pick ups OK.

Tucker Case said:

SUV's are nothing more than fancy mini-vans. Their nature is to be an accessory. That's understood by the fact that they offer no practical utility. Why would I be outraged over something being used for it's intended purpose?

As far as the difference to what I'm saying is that SUV's are totally worthless to a working man unless you tear out the seats and put steel plates over the windows.

I guess they might be useful for a person who tows a boat every now and then and is married to a soccer mom. Otehr than that, they are pretty worthless in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Outrage was an incorrect term to be used. I was trying to relate (albeit unsuccessfully) to the issue of driving a vehicle that is not necessary for what you do.

static_engineer said:

Outrage was an incorrect term to be used. I was trying to relate (albeit unsuccessfully) to the issue of driving a vehicle that is not necessary for what you do.

Click to expand...

That's called 'freedom of choice'.....

static_engineer said:

Outrage was an incorrect term to be used. I was trying to relate (albeit unsuccessfully) to the issue of driving a vehicle that is not necessary for what you do.

Click to expand...

I don't care if someone drives a pickup who never uses it for it's intended purpose. More power to them. I wouldn't do it, but they can do what they wish.

My point is that if a pickup truck isn't being used for it's intended purpose, it's nothing but an oddly shaped car. To me, a person isn't any more a "man of the people" simply because they drive an oddly shaped car.

The majority of SUV's, IMO, can be nothing but oddly shaped cars because they offer little to no practical utility. To me they are just taller station wagons.

At least pickup trucks have practical value outside of being an accessory.

No, it is a sign that you have need to haul things.

Ockham said:

Embrace the symbolism. Massachusetts is a primarily blue-collar Democrat state. Brown is a politician but tapped into that and convinced the state he was one of them, and not an elitist who will ignore the people's wishes. That politically played well in Mass. I think it's the same as tapping into something vacuous as "hope and change" and it worked.

It's smart politics. It got him in the door. Coakley is an awkward fit and there was something about her, and I can't pin it down, that I just didn't care for. Believe me, if Obama needed to get votes he'd send out every grass roots activist in D-Kal baseball hats, overalls and dirty trucks if it meant getting votes.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree that it is tapping into something as vacuous as "hope and change", and that it was apparently a smart political move. It's like Hillary Clinton going around in a Yankee cap when everyone knows that she doesn't give a **** about the Yankees. Bitch was supposedly a Cubs fan until she ran for senate. :roll:

But what I'm really interested in is trying to figure out how and why these superficial ploys seem to work.

On one hand, I like to think (perhaps pretend?) that people are generally smart enough to see through the political BS of it all. But then I see it working and I've got to question those thoughts.

Thus, the poll and the thread.

Tucker Case said:

So what do you guys think? Is owning a pickup truck a sign of being a "man of the people"?

Click to expand...

No, it is a sign of being a republican.
Who else would use a gas-guzzler that's killing polar bears in the Arctic? (And that's when Palin's not hunting bambi and the polar bears down)

tlmorg02 said:

No, it is a sign that you have need to haul things.

Click to expand...

This actually made me realize something.

A politician may need one to haul around the tons of bull**** they require in order to execute the duties of their job. :lol:

JoeMama said:

Who else would use a gas-guzzler that's killing polar bears in the Arctic?

Click to expand...

People who have to work for a living.

Tucker Case said:

This actually made me realize something.

A politician may need one to haul around the tons of bull**** they require in order to execute the duties of their job. :lol:

Click to expand...

The sad part is that the BS is not needed to do their job, just to keep it.

Tucker Case said:

People who have to work for a living.

Click to expand...

yea, working for a living killing polar bears.

But in all seriousness, yea, driving the truck can be construed to seem more 'down to earth' because the trucker is perceived (whether it should or should not) as a blue-collar working man/woman that actually needs it.

JoeMama said:

yea, working for a living killing polar bears.

But in all seriousness, yea, driving the truck can be construed to seem more 'down to earth' because the trucker is perceived (whether it should or should not) as a blue-collar working man/woman that actually needs it.

Click to expand...

It is indeed funny. In the book The Millionaire Next-Store it says that a majority of millionaires drive Ford F-150's more than anyother vehicle.

JoeMama said:

But in all seriousness, yea, driving the truck can be construed to seem more 'down to earth' because the trucker is perceived (whether it should or should not) as a blue-collar working man/woman that actually needs it.

Click to expand...

So am I supposed to read this as you saying that you perceive blue collar people to be better somehow than other types of workers?

If not, how should the statement be interpreted?

As far as a politician owning a truck, I could care less. It's not going to make me vote or not vote for them depending on what they drive. But for the general Muherican (muher-i-can) public that live back in the boonies like me, you gotta have at least 2 trucks.

Belows my work truck, as you can tell I have a nice, thin layer of sunscreen.



Then you have to have your "perty" truck to take ya lady out on a date with.

megaprogman said:

that you perceive

Click to expand...

Forget about me, I like to take myself out of the equation when dealing with society's perceptions, that stance allows me to be more objective.

megaprogman said:

So am I supposed to read this as you saying that you perceive blue collar people to be better somehow than other types of workers?

If not, how should the statement be interpreted?

Click to expand...

"Better"? Well that is a very vague term.

But regardless, no it should not be interpreted like that.

Who would you think gets screwed up the most in this country? I'd say middle class blue-collar workers. The middle always gets left out. Many find healthcare not affordable, yet they don't qualify (yet - though now Brown won, it may never happen - whether that's good or bad) for Medicaid. Same thing with housing.
---Those problems, coupled with the whole physical labor aspect to their jobs, would make them seem (again, whether such a perception should be warranted or not is another debate) to be down to earth.

Ockham said:

Embrace the symbolism. Massachusetts is a primarily blue-collar Democrat state.

Click to expand...

Massachusetts? Blue collar? :lol: