Why do people vote against their own best interests?

Along with wondering why do people fight against what will help them, why so many people choose to vote against what is in their own bests interests?  Everyone knows, or should know, that clean air and clean water are life-sustaining necessities.  Yet when a political party denies that there are serious problems with the climate and want to eliminate or at least render totally ineffective the Environmental Protection Agency, the question which begs to be asked is why do people support that?  Why would people think that eliminating the agency which serves as a means to protect the planet, including the air we breathe and the water we drink is the best way or even a good way to respond to scientists who have been sounding the alarm for years that we are on a path which will not only destroy the planet but humanity as well?  Everyone needs to breathe and everyone needs water in order to live.  Yet some are willing to risk the present and the future to allow corporations to make more money.  Money which will never, despite all the promises, make its way down the corporate ladder to the workers.  So why do people do that?

Why do senior citizens consistently support a political party which promises to privatize Social Security and Medicare?  Taking those programs out of the control of the Federal Government perhaps sounds like a good idea.  After all, as one political party explains in great detail the Federal Government is far too involved in the every day lives of the citizens of the United States.  But what happens when private interests take control of a social program?  That of course depends entirely on who has control.  The question is who would be in control and how would privatizing Social Security and Medicare work?  How would payments be made into the system?  How does the system protect the money?  Why are those changes necessary?  How would that benefit anyone now or in the future?  Have those questions been answered adequately by anyone supporting the issues?  Or is it enough that the political party supports it so that is all some people need to know?

One political party talks about the need for widespread deregulation.  Their message is simple: government regulations hurt businesses and cause problems which lead to loss of jobs.  If the government stayed out of the way, then businesses would thrive and people would be employed.   Sound like a good idea, actually sounds like an excellent idea, but what are some of the areas government regulates in business?  How about safety?  Perhaps people have long since forgotten the twenty-five workers who died in a fire in a North Carolina chicken factory as a result of blocked exits. But their families surely have not forgotten those deaths which could have been prevented.  Oh, but that is the exception, not the rule.  Yes, it is because of government regulations!  Without regulations or with a loosening of  regulations, job safety becomes an issue.  Regulations are not a punishment, but rather a reminder that there are certain standards and codes of conduct which businesses must abide by in order to provide safe conditions for workers and customers.  So why would anyone other than a business owner really think that voting for deregulation is good?

There are so many more examples, but the question remains, why are people so willing to vote against their own best interests?  Or for that matter, the best interests of future generations?  What would they tell those future generations?  That their political party said it was good and helpful so they believed them?  That they did not really understand what was happening because they only listened to certain news programs which reinforced their political party's platform?  Or that they just did not care about the future?  Those are tough questions to have to answer.