It's just that I'd be inclined to look for connections between "conservatism" and social Darwinism. The background you provide here fills in some of that since poverty can take you out of the more artificial social systems and land you in nature (the tribal conflicts, contempt for governmental interference, paranoia). Poverty can make you naturalistic, as in boorish and uncivilized. So the ethos of "private Protestantism" might entail social Darwinism.

The point about predicting voting patterns based on their origins centuries ago looks like the genetic fallacy. It glosses over the reasoning liberals and conservatives would currently give to justify their votes. I gloss over that reasoning, too, especially in the case of conservatives since I think their reasoning is disingenuous. But I posit an underlying ideology and a personality disorder (authoritarianism) that's supposed to operate in the present (although it might be genetically inherited). The fact that these voting blocks may have originated from divisions between early settlers would have to do more with facts of city planning and evolution, than with the nature of liberal and conservative ideologies.