Who actually still supports the Republicans?

[jake williams]

I'm trying to figure out who is still actually supporting the Republican Party, in terms of concrete business interests mainly. The public certainly isn't. The international business press is furious with them, as are, as far as I understand, a lot of big domestic businesses, banks in particular.

There's obviously oil, but is there anyone else?


EDIT: Please do not talk about what racist, homophobic, ignorant Southern white trash voters you think are supporting the Republicans, unless you are willing to make the case that those people substantively control the party. Bourgeois political parties do not make economic policy based on the wishes of a segment of the public, except in rare circumstances, and I don't think the present circumstances are there included. It's clear that the Republicans have a base of voter support among "conservative-minded" workers, but this is totally irrelevant to policy. They have this base of support because business allows them to cynically exploit it. Why are they doing so?

[WyoLeftist]

Jesus. Jesus supports the Republicans... Just ask them. They'll tell you!

[Yazman]

THe tea party movement in general seems to support them. Funnily enough, the guy that is often labelled as the founder of this movement (Ron Paul) has explicitly disavowed the tea party movement itself as well as the tea party caucus.

But yeah, the tea party movement and it's supporters is generally Republican.

[Rusty Shackleford]

The international press is upset with News Corp. Just one of the many bourgeois press corporations. MSNBC and the likes are by no means "left." And News Corps isnt solely representative of the right wing.

Virtually all of the bourgeoisie and large sectors of the petit-bourgeoisie are in support of the republicans and the tea party (in america) And even if capital sides with the liberals and right soc-dems, it doesnt mean capital has gotten a sense of humanity. if just found a new place to seek refuge and self-interest.

it doesnt really matter whether or not its republicans, national deocrats, democrats, soc-dems, torys, labour or whatever. Capital will side with whomever it deems as best suited to support its own interests.

sure, there are some sectors of the bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeoisie aligning themselves with the democrats and other that are inches farther to the left. but like i said, its all in its/their own interests.

[Public Domain]

There's lots of confused idiots who support that damn party still.

[jake williams]

There's lots of confused idiots who support that damn party still.
I'm not talking about the general public, who don't support the Republicans anyway.


THe tea party movement in general seems to support them.
Then who supports the Tea Party?


Virtually all of the bourgeoisie and large sectors of the petit-bourgeoisie are in support of the republicans
Is that actually true though? Finance is certainly furious about the debt ceiling shenanigans.

There's also the fact of the virtual unanimity from serious establishment figures that the Democrats will take the presidency in 2012. Unless you're suggesting that workers have acquired some newfound and apparently invisible capacity to control American politics, and that's why the Democrats are the clear favourites?


And even if capital sides with the liberals and right soc-dems, it doesnt mean capital has gotten a sense of humanity. if just found a new place to seek refuge and self-interest.
I don't disagree at all. If I were a businessman in the US right now I'd probably support the Democrats because the Republicans are a catastrophe.

My point is, since they are such a catastrophe, who is still keeping them in business?

[Rusty Shackleford]

My point is, since they are such a catastrophe, who is still keeping them in business?
actually you did raise a few good points. but ill answer with this.

id say that there isnt really anything keeping them in business, but elections havent happened again so they havent had to face possible losses.

even then, i dont think the capitalists are furious with the republicans so much as they are irritated with the clusterfuck that is congress in general.


no matter what though, social spending WILL be cut drastically and there will be no new taxes on the wealthy.

[Pretty Flaco]

I'm not talking about the general public, who don't support the Republicans anyway.


How did you come to that conclusion? Lots of people vote republican, you probably just pulled that out of your ass.

[ComradePonov]

The Republican party gets the majority of its support from the corporations, who support the Republican party for their reluctance to raise taxes on the rich (but instead cut spending in health care, education, social security, and other necessities of life for the workers of America.)

[Ocean Seal]

In terms of class basis, a disproportionate amount of middle managers, and small business owners support them. Then there are also low income workers in rural areas and right to work states, and of course military personnel. Ideologically they are still supported by Christian conservatives, older citizens (they recently acquired seniors), people living in rural areas, Cubans, the Tea Party movement, culture war-ists. In terms of corporate support they draw their greatest amount from oil, pharma, and agribusiness.

Edit:

uneducated Americans / rednecks.
Your whole post is off. You sound like Bill Mahr here. "Uneducated Americans" aren't the one's supplying them with hundreds of millions of dollars to run Presidential campaigns. People don't vote Republican because their uneducated in the same sense that people don't vote Democrat because their uneducated, there is a reason for all of this. The state has taught people that they have to chose between two parties and each party has a different appeal. From a Marxist perspective, I would say that they're both useless. The fact that their is no opposition to both of these reactionary parties is a flaw of the left not of the workers.
And please don't say "rednecks", because "rednecks" as you say comprise a good part of the working class. They reason that they call them "rednecks" is because their necks are red from working in the fields all day. Now do they sound like an ally or an enemy?

[Tim Finnegan]

I've heard it suggested that there's a serious possibility that if the Republicans drift any further into the territory of rabid social/cultural reactionaryism, we may end up with a situation where the Democrats constitute a de facto single-party in the US- Russia was offered as a comparison- with the Republicans receding to a fringe and regional party. Any thoughts on that? Realistic proposition, alarmist hogwash, or something in between?

[Ingraham Effingham]

The brainwashed part of the country, usually marked 'red' on political maps (ironically enough) support it for the purported 'christian family values' the GOP espouses. They also still buy into the 'trickle-down' economics BS.

Financially, they are supported by big corporations, almost as an investment. In returm the Reps lower their taxes and help them financially rape the red states that vote them in.

[Fopeos]

The Koch brothers are bankrolling the tea party. The republicans still have plenty of support among christian-conservatives of all classes and races. Many truly believe that Obama and the Dems are socialists who want a European style social-democracy.

[jake williams]

How did you come to that conclusion? Lots of people vote republican, you probably just pulled that out of your ass.
Well, there's opinion polls. There's opinion polls on the parties themselves, where the Republicans aren't doing great, and there's the opinion polls on issues, where the Republicans are even less popular, whether or not people know it.

But I think there's a more important point - workers don't control politicians. Lots of people vote Republican, but that doesn't explain their policies or actions. In capitalist societies, politicians act on behalf of business. But I can't find exactly what business is still supporting the Republicans.


In terms of class basis, a disproportionate amount of middle managers, and small business owners support them. Then there are also low income workers in rural areas and right to work states, and of course military personnel. Ideologically they are still supported by Christian conservatives, older citizens (they recently acquired seniors), people living in rural areas, Cubans, the Tea Party movement, culture war-ists. In terms of corporate support they draw their greatest amount from oil, pharma, and agribusiness.
I think those are mostly plausible suggestions, with some reservations.

One important one is the idea that voters really matter. It'd take a lot to convince me that the Republicans were actually in some predominant sense a populist voice of ordinary white, Christian conservatives. Business has carved them out as a supportive bloc, but the party doesn't act on their orders or represent their interests. Cubans are important in a pretty minor sense, mostly only in Florida. "Small business" is of limited use as a term: it refers to sectors that are obsessively Republican, say medium-sized manufacturers or businesses who have a real problem with certain types of regulations, but it also refers to small businesses who have good reasons to be pro-Democrat - some immigrants, folks who want Keynesian stimulus, some high tech. It's a mixed bag, and hard to talk about as a political bloc.

Military personnel are marginally pro-Republican, but the military as an institution is more mixed.

I'm sure pharma is a mixed bag too - generally pro-Republican, was very concerned about the Healthcare bill, but dumped a bunch of money to right-wing Democrats to make sure they got their way, and they did. I can think of reasons in the near future where pharma could go blue.


The Koch brothers are bankrolling the tea party. The republicans still have plenty of support among christian-conservatives of all classes and races. Many truly believe that Obama and the Dems are socialists who want a European style social-democracy.
I keep hearing about the Koch brothers, to the extent it raises eyebrows, because I have a hard time believing that the entire intellectual right is singlehandedly bankrolled by a couple of billionaires.


I've heard it suggested that there's a serious possibility that if the Republicans drift any further into the territory of rabid social/cultural reactionaryism, we may end up with a situation where the Democrats constitute a de facto single-party in the US- Russia was offered as a comparison- with the Republicans receding to a fringe and regional party. Any thoughts on that? Realistic proposition, alarmist hogwash, or something in between?
I think that's a definite possibility, although we should be cautious about it and not oversimplify things. I probably wouldn't elevate their obsession with "social issues", an obsession which if anything would be extremely useful for a business party if the Republicans otherwise had pro-business policy. But the thing is, business doesn't seem happy with them right now, nor were they under the late Bush administration.

[Ismail]

Both parties are bourgeois and are backed by businesses. Both are promoting austerity measures. When Soviet professors analyzed US politics they tended to say that the Republicans were backed by financial capital while the Democrats were backed by industrial capital.

Talking about "uneducated voters" and "rednecks" and such is ridiculous and un-Marxist. Many of those who vote Republican are working-class persons. They view the Democrats as pursuing a culturally relativistic agenda and think that "big government" (as defined by conservatives) stifles economic progress and personal liberties while "small government" promotes the American Dream and common bonds between people. The problem is that while Republicans do often appeal to ignorance (e.g. social conservatives denouncing evolution as devaluing human life, for example), many do in fact vote for them because of the social contradictions caused by capitalism which cannot be solved within it, but which the Republicans claim to want to solve through appeals to Christianity and what have you.

[A Marxist Historian]

I've heard it suggested that there's a serious possibility that if the Republicans drift any further into the territory of rabid social/cultural reactionaryism, we may end up with a situation where the Democrats constitute a de facto single-party in the US- Russia was offered as a comparison- with the Republicans receding to a fringe and regional party. Any thoughts on that? Realistic proposition, alarmist hogwash, or something in between?

Au contraire.

The Obama administration is taking America right off the cliff. The *way* they are taking America right off the cliff is through capitulating to the extremely anti-working class propositions of the Republicans, which Obama calls irresponsible & cruel but always capitulates to.

Why? Because he is a coward, spineless, lacks backbone, whatever?

No, because at heart he agrees with them.

So when the collapse happens, the party in power--the Democrats--will be demolished, and the Tea Party Republicans will sweep the elections next year.

After Wisconsin, the Democrats had a brief rise in the polls as the labor leaders diverted working class anger into Democratic Party politics. But they did so so successfully that this is now meaningless outside Wisconsin itself, which likely will go Democrat.

What can change this picture? Only one thing, working class struggle. If the American working class *continues* to take it on the chin without resistance, America will keep moving further to the right, and the Tea Party will take the presidency, the House and the Senate next year.

-M.H.-

[Catma]

MH is exactly right. It's kind of Democratic wishful thinking that the Republicans will right-wing themselves into oblivion, usually done by the kind of partisans that only see the letter next to a person's name and never their policy stances. People have been saying that for a long time and it never comes to pass.

The system is very strong, and a major part of its function is to channel all opposition and anger into "throwing the bums out" every major election, whoever is in power. The policies don't even matter. If you watch polling as an election approaches you can see how effective the political campaigning is. Most people will eventually get into line for their "team", with a relatively small number of "independent" voters deciding things, depending on how the campaigning has been.

[jake williams]

Both parties are bourgeois and are backed by businesses. Both are promoting austerity measures. When Soviet professors analyzed US politics they tended to say that the Republicans were backed by financial capital while the Democrats were backed by industrial capital.
I think right now it's rather the reverse - the Democrats being backed by finance and the Republicans backed by industry.


Au contraire. ...
To be totally honest I think that's even more adventuristic, but not inconceivable. The fact is that right now, business really does view the Democrats as more stable and reliable stewarts of something like a functional capitalism.

It's at the point where they really do give up on that that they decide to back the fascists, fuck it all, but I don't think they're there yet.

[j'y_vais]

The republicans always have the racist population of the USA to support them, so about 95% of the population that lives in the traditional southern states. Blind ignorance, IMO :P

[A Marxist Historian]

I think right now it's rather the reverse - the Democrats being backed by finance and the Republicans backed by industry.


To be totally honest I think that's even more adventuristic, but not inconceivable. The fact is that right now, business really does view the Democrats as more stable and reliable stewarts of something like a functional capitalism.

It's at the point where they really do give up on that that they decide to back the fascists, fuck it all, but I don't think they're there yet.

Disgusting as they are, the Tea Party are *not* fascists. Indeed they run around and bizarrely accuse Obama of being a fascist.

However, the Tea Party in power would instantly generate huge opposition to their policies, and the deluded white workers and petty bourgeois who might vote them into office would have a sharp shock. Indeed that's kinda what happened in Wisconsin, where you saw a Tea Party governor in action.

Which is the real reason why the powers that be would rather not see them in office. Plus of course the fact that they are nutcases, as they are demonstrating to everyone right now, including the capitalists.

-M.H.-

[Ismail]

Disgusting as they are, the Tea Party are *not* fascists. Indeed they run around and bizarrely accuse Obama of being a fascist.This is correct. The Tea Partiers despise "big government." Pat Buchanan or Lyndon LaRouche would be better examples of persons leading quasi-fascistic movements. Buchanan actually sympathizes with Hitler and promotes himself as a "friend of labor." LaRouche, well, you can see here: http://lyndonlarouchewatch.org/fascism7.htm

Of course Buchanan is a has-been and LaRouche leads a political cult, so neither are much of a threat anymore, but still.

[jake williams]

Disgusting as they are, the Tea Party are *not* fascists. Indeed they run around and bizarrely accuse Obama of being a fascist.
I wasn't really referring to the Tea Party when I mentioned the fash, because in part you're right; although the Tea Party as a broad "movement" is extremely diverse and there are definitely fascists of various stripes who identify with and participate in it.

The Tea Party is never going to control the US state because the whacko faction of the petty bourgeoisie never does control the state. But I wouldn't rule out a reactionary faction of big business using the Tea Party to basically establish a fascist state. It would only need to have as much in common with American right-libertarianism as Nazism did with socialism.

[GPDP]

It's not even about establishing a fascist state, though. The Tea Party is useful insomuch as it helps move public discourse and policy ever rightward, by serving as attack dogs against progressive and even bourgeois Democratic initiatives and pressuring the Republicans to hold out for more and to campaign for them. If Obama says we need to cut a few billion dollars in services and the Republicans say they won't settle for less than 10 billion, the Tea Party will be there to demand 30.

[MarxSchmarx]

The republicans always have the racist population of the USA to support them, so about 95% of the population that lives in the traditional southern states. Blind ignorance, IMO :P

Although your numbers are way, way off (95% of the white population maybe but the American south has a sizeable non-white voting age population), this gets at the core of what the Republican's support base is.

For better or worse, American politics is still best understood through the prism of race. The Republican party is the party of white resentment.

Yes, they are also the party of misogynists, war-mongerers, and religious fundamentalists. But the heart of their strength as an electoral force on the national stage as an authoritarian reactionary party in America is race. Until the demographics shift and the whites born before the civil rights movement start to die off, the Republicans will remain a formidable force in American politics.

Sure, American racism is a symptom of the capitalist's "divide and rule" strategy. But it is important to understand that this plays out differently in different realms of life. In electoral politics, it plays out in the form of the Republican party. Corporations support republicans to win elections. Republicans win elections mostly based on the issue of race. The elite know this works, and that's why they don't waste their money on something like the Libertarian Party that doesn't speak to white resentment.

[Gorra Negra]

A lot of people still do, but their vote is based on mis-information and ignorance. I know it sounds like an elitist point of view but it is true. News outlets like Fox are the most responsible for this.

[Delenda Carthago]

On the energy bussiness, I think its pretty obvious that republicans have the oil companies while the democrats have the "green energy" ones.

[tanklv]

I know a lot of republicans from work. Maybe this conversation can better explain:

When we were just talking one day, one of them was increduluous that I was a Liberal & a Democrat. He asked me why - since I was aparently doing pretty well at the time and that the republican party should be a natural choice for me since I was 1) white, 2) not poor, 3) educated.

After all, the republicans would help me protect my "wealth" and offer lower taxes, and all the other bullshit monetary crap.

I tried to explain to him that why would I be for a party that was for the rich at the expense of the poor, who would (really) like to see people like me - a gay person - DEAD, literally, who were bigoted and racists on top of it all. Who were against all the things we now take for granted - unions, 40 hour work week, employeer healthcare, vacations, pensions.

He then came back with the - "So it's the "gay thing" then..."

He had no concept of fair play, economic justice, workers rights, etc. He just had GREED as his whole reason for being...

And when Obama was running, EVERY ONE OF THEM was "you have to see this - hee hee hee - always followed by some racist cartoon - FROM THE TEABAGGERS (their original name for their "tea party" group until they found out what that term actually meant) - because since they saw I was white they just assumed I would laugh and just think it was the cleaverest thing!!!

The right wing is free and emboldened by national discourse to show their racism and hatred, while we have to hide our displeasure speak in hushed tones - it is the workplace and I could get fired for expressing "contrary" views.

THAT'S today's republicans. They are to a person racist, bigots, homophobic, selfish and greedy. End of discussion. There are no "good" republicans anymore. This ain't your parent's republicans anymore. They have "learned" all this and learned it well. And these are the YOUNG TWENTY & THIRTY SOMETHINGS!!!

Don't kid yourselves either with the foolish assumption that "once the old geezers die out - they will all be gone" either!

LOOK AROUND! ALL the teabaggers' signs, their candidates, their "town hall brownshirts". The teabaggers are all KKK and former John Birchers, only they now have a new label for themselves (even "now new and improved!" that they found out their original label was not fit for their "christian" sensibilites).

[HEAD ICE]

sometimes i think this is given too much consideration. the economy sucks and the democrats are in power, what do you know the republicans are able to capture the mass discontent and direct it towards their election campaigns. rinse and repeat obama>mccain, clinton>bush, reagan>carter etc...

[Delenda Carthago]

Au contraire.

The Obama administration is taking America right off the cliff. The *way* they are taking America right off the cliff is through capitulating to the extremely anti-working class propositions of the Republicans, which Obama calls irresponsible & cruel but always capitulates to.

Why? Because he is a coward, spineless, lacks backbone, whatever?

No, because at heart he agrees with them.

So when the collapse happens, the party in power--the Democrats--will be demolished, and the Tea Party Republicans will sweep the elections next year.

After Wisconsin, the Democrats had a brief rise in the polls as the labor leaders diverted working class anger into Democratic Party politics. But they did so so successfully that this is now meaningless outside Wisconsin itself, which likely will go Democrat.

What can change this picture? Only one thing, working class struggle. If the American working class *continues* to take it on the chin without resistance, America will keep moving further to the right, and the Tea Party will take the presidency, the House and the Senate next year.

-M.H.-

Actually, this is pretty close to what happened when Hitler took over.

[Sam Varriano]

No one, the GOP stole both the 2000 as well as the 2004 elections. I am guessing the 2008 elections just weren't close enough to get away with it. But seriously though, John Kerry got fucked in Ohio, I just read a great article on Common Dreams about it, but I'm too lazy to find it atm.

Seriously though, they rig elections, I shit you not.

[CAleftist]

As said before: small and medium-sized business owners, middle managers, oil, energy in general, construction, agribusiness, pharmacetueticals, mining, foresting...

Basically, the "material coordinators" of capital, the labor-intensive occupations, the "blue-collar" and "grey-collar" managers.

EDIT: In addition, there's a whole industry dedicated to the promotion of "conservative" reactionary right-wing politics. Lobbyists, lawyers, activists, organizers, etc.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Its difficult to say who the social base and the main corporate base of the Republican Party currently is. Both parties are instruments of the ruling class and for now the Dems are seen as the best instrument of that rule, the best able to ram though the "needed" cut backs to Social Security, Medicare, etc.

The social base of the Republicans have traditionally been petit bourgoise suburban small busness owners and some farmers.People in more traditionally religious areas of the US who are afraid of "cultural relativism" and what is perceived as "liberal elitism". The military is traditionaly very Republican.

The Republicans are certainly not fascist but there has traditionally a small but very active authoritarian fascist strand (Reagan's visit to Bitburg). There is a deep racist streak as well.The GOP has long practised subtle or not so subtle race baiting and appeals to layers of "white" people who traditionally feel threatened by non-whites.They are, more or less, the party of nativism.

Traditionally people who have "made it" to the upper middle class vote Republican."Decent, hard working people who have made this country what it is today" Yuck yuck yuck.

As far as corporate backing, both parties receive their share. As I understand big pharma, most of Silicon Valley (originally a military spin off) and the famous defense contractors -Northup-Grumman, Boeing, Honeywell and elements benefiting from the system of military Keynsianism are Republican.

[Lucretia]

When we were just talking one day, one of them was increduluous that I was a Liberal & a Democrat. He asked me why - since I was aparently doing pretty well at the time and that the republican party should be a natural choice for me since I was 1) white, 2) not poor, 3) educated.

Why are you on a website for members committed to revolutionary leftist politics if you are a liberal and a member of the Democratic party?

Not that your political sympathies weren't obvious from your numerous threads complaining about those evil, wicked Republicans.

[Tim Finnegan]

Why are you on a website for members committed to revolutionary leftist politics if you are a liberal and a member of the Democratic party?
A lot of posters here are not open about their politics in all situations, particularly in the workplace where it can sometimes actually threaten their employment. I would give Tanklv the benefit of the doubt and assume that he "presents" as a liberal, for want of a better word.

[AnonymousOne]

I'm trying to figure out who is still actually supporting the Republican Party, in terms of concrete business interests mainly. The public certainly isn't. The international business press is furious with them, as are, as far as I understand, a lot of big domestic businesses, banks in particular.

There's obviously oil, but is there anyone else?


EDIT: Please do not talk about what racist, homophobic, ignorant Southern white trash voters you think are supporting the Republicans, unless you are willing to make the case that those people substantively control the party. Bourgeois political parties do not make economic policy based on the wishes of a segment of the public, except in rare circumstances, and I don't think the present circumstances are there included. It's clear that the Republicans have a base of voter support among "conservative-minded" workers, but this is totally irrelevant to policy. They have this base of support because business allows them to cynically exploit it. Why are they doing so?

Buisness people, doctors, cuban americans, the rich, white, middle-class, elderly, religious, catholics, evangelicals, social conservatives, southerners, people living in rural areas.

[DinodudeEpic]

There is actually a huge difference between Tea Partier policy and American 'Right'-Libertarianism (The American Libertarian Party is actually leftist in my opinion. Just the kind that was dead for a century, known as Classical Liberalism. In fact, it would be better to call them Classical Liberals. Now, we're not including Austrian school of economics here, just the Libertarian Party.)

Tea Partiers are actually quite authoritarian (Considering what they did in my home-state of Michigan.) In fact, they are the opposite of what they say they are. They are not populist. The power-structure is elitist, and they have massive corporate support. They do not shrink government, considering what they want to do with the army. They are not freedom minded, they took away the democratic rights of city governments in virtual coups/patriot act.

The Libertarian Party actually is better then the Democrats in some aspects, (Like UNIVERSALY allowing homosexual marriage, legalizing some drugs, and much more social policies.)

The only problem is their economic policies, but that's not the point. They are not the Tea Party, and the Tea Party is not liberty-loving just because of their marketing campaign. They're a plague upon freedom where ever they place their corporate hands into.

Anyways, the Republican party is not falling...In fact, it's rising. And, it's very scary. They are taking over state governments everywhere, and they are growing. Everyday, I see more and more people tell me the same crap the Tea Party and their propaganda machine Fox News spouts all day long. They control the government via pushing Democrats around, corporate money, and media control.

[Red Commissar]

The republicans always have the racist population of the USA to support them, so about 95% of the population that lives in the traditional southern states. Blind ignorance, IMO :P

While the southern states have a strong core of support for the Republicans, that party also gets support outside of the south. While many of these Congressional districts are in rural, sparsely populated places, compared to the more urban and densely populated areas much of the Democrat seat are in, it's worth noting they have significant chunks of the mid-west as of the current Congress.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/112th_US_House.svg/800px-112th_US_House.svg.png

Note: Regarding the grayed out part in Nevada, that is a Republican district too, but its temporarily "empty" until the special election can be held to fill the vacancy left by its representative when he was appointed to take the senate seat held by another Republican. Meaning it'll probably go Republican.

[Bardo]

The American Libertarian Party is actually leftist in my opinion.

What





The only problem is their economic policies, but that's not the point.


I don't know, that's a pretty big problem. One could say that the problem with capitalism is private property, but other than that it's great.

[jake williams]

As far as corporate backing, both parties receive their share. As I understand big pharma, most of Silicon Valley (originally a military spin off) and the famous defense contractors -Northup-Grumman, Boeing, Honeywell and elements benefiting from the system of military Keynsianism are Republican.
I think of course for the last several decades the defence industry has been very pro-Republican, but the very interesting thing is that the Tea Partiers and the present House Republican caucus are making more noise about cutting defence than the Democrats are.