> I find it ironic how the GOP voters who seem to be disproportionately living in economically distressed areas are the ones most likely to vote for politicians pushing the dog-eat-dog economic model.
I don't. In many cases, people aren't voting for a party because they agree with all its policies, but because they agree with it on one or two policies they don't want to compromise on.
So perhaps one of the GOP's social policies (as much as they're disliked by the left) might just generally be more popular and held as more important than their economics ones.
With the US two party system, you can either vote somewhat more left wing social policies and economics policies, or somewhat more right wing social policies and economics policies, assuming you want to make a difference.
If this changed, then I suspect you'd see a very different picture in regards to what politicians are voted for.