Democrats seemed to be doing well this summer as their approval level surged following the Dobbs decision. But now Republicans are surging back. This is partly because the out party always does well in midterm elections, but David Brooks thinks there's more to it:
The Trumpified G.O.P. deserves to be a marginalized and disgraced force in American life. But I’ve been watching the campaign speeches by people like Kari Lake, the Republican candidate for governor in Arizona. G.O.P. candidates are telling a very clear class/culture/status war narrative in which common-sense Americans are being assaulted by elite progressives who let the homeless take over the streets, teach sex ed to 5-year-olds, manufacture fake news, run woke corporations, open the border and refuse to do anything about fentanyl deaths and the sorts of things that affect regular people.
Sure, I guess. But this is the farthest thing imaginable from something new. The details change from election to election, but this narrative began with Richard Nixon and became fully weaponized by Newt Gingrich and Fox News in the 1990s. It's been part of the core Republican message for 50 years, and it's been their nearly exclusive message for the past 20.
The most discouraging part of this is not that Republicans do it. What do you expect an opposition party to do? The discouraging part is that after 50 years Democrats still have no idea how to fight it.
It's not that we lose every culture war battle. In fact, we win quite a few. But when Republicans sense weakness, they circle the wagons and beat the class war drums loudly and in unison. That's what we don't know how to fight.
Practically all the evidence suggests the United States is fundamentally a strong country right now. Probably the strongest in the world, and with the brightest future. It's extraordinary to think of just how good a place it could be if only we could figure out a way to overcome the debilitating fear that so many people still have of progress and change.
We will literally sell out our daughters for $0.25 less per gallon of gas.
C'mon, give those Americans some credit. They won't settle for anything less than $1.00/gal for the reproductive rights of their daughters.
Yeah. I mean, I think Kevin's right that Democrats haven't learned to deal with unified GOP scare tactic political communication after all these years. And yet they're perfectly able to do just fine in plenty of elections. In recent years Democrats have had good elections in 2006, 2008, 2012, 2018 and 2020. Indeed, if you use the '06 election as your starting point, Dems have won 5 out of 8.
If Democrats have a lousy election next month, it'll mostly be down to thermostatic effects and the economy.
Think the biggest impact to the Dems ability to address the GOP in these areas is due to the current nature of the parties. The Dems are a coalition, more than a singular party. Many groups with overlapping interests. You could say the same for the GOP (evangelicals vs business types) , but they behave more like a cult and loyalty to party supersedes everything.
That Kari Lake is a fucking demented sociopath.
Her Hitler's girlfriend outfit almost killed me.
It has little to do with whether its 50 years old or 50 minutes old.
The question is not the message, the question is how many voters are on board with it?
The number is shrinking, but as the number shrinks you are left with more and more hard core adherents. See abortion. As you pass 50 percent, and get down to like 70 percent in favor of it being legal, the 30% who think it should be illegal are the hardest of the hard core.
It is the same with all the component parts of the Trump coalition.
These people cannot be responded to or convinced. Its up to us to just get out in vote.
Ds for some reason seem to be unable to think and act strategically as a cohesive group.
That's because Democrats are not a cohesive group. They are made up of a large number of disparate groups, each with their own priorities and assumptions. There is no policy idea that will win the hearts of all of them. Everything has to be hashed out, and the groups that lose the contest will continue to badmouth the result.
One major advantage that Republicans have is that they are much more homogeneous. There are really only about three groups that they are made up of, and those can generally agree on what policies are desirable, though they might fight on which to prioritize.
Amen [insert personal pronoun of choice]. I'm always fascinated by the folks who make perfect the enemy of good. While I applaud their enthusiasm, I regret their inability to compromise.
Ds for some reason seem to be unable to think and act strategically as a cohesive group
I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.
(Couldn't resist)
I think the issue is that the Democrats really have no answer to Faux news- When you have an out-and-out fascist propaganda machine that is broadcasting 100% pure hate & fear of Democrats directly into the brains of millions of Americans without as much as a peep in opposition, you have a problem.
As a conservative, I feel like this is an extremely alternative view of reality. You guys are 100% winning the culture war and it's not even close. I'll try not to incite anyone, but teachers (at least in the central valley of California) are being told things like "you have to refer to Berenice as "he/him/Jim" at school, but during parent conferences, you must refer to Berenice as "she/her/Berenice" because they have not been informed of the change yet".
I'm late 40's, could literally anyone think that this would be the real world in 1988? You guys are winning/have won the culture war by so much I think you've literally forgotten what it actually was.
1988 was filth.
The subjective impression a teacher may have of any particular student's personality school is trivial.
Every conservative view is their rationale for why they should be able to injure one or another group as a general principle.
Why should such character be allowed the least respect?
in 1988, i couldn't imagine that a republican nominee for governor in pennsylvania would make outrageously ridiculous lies about the children's hospital of philadelphia conducting trans experiments on homeless kids and and still be taken seriously by the voters of the state.
I always take this "culture war" talk to mean "In liberal states, women have a choice to go to school and then work, in addition to getting married in high school and having babies, and we oppose the former". Am I right?
More generally, it's pretty obvious when you/they say "culture war" what you/they mean is "stop gay marriage and abortion". It's true in most liberal states everyone is working too hard to worry about this stuff. It's only in red Republican states where unemployment is high enough that people sit around worrying about what gay people and women are doing. Here in blue America, we have work to do, since the economy depends on us.
More generally I find this comment intriguing, especially in reference to the famous (alleged) Andrew Breitbart comment that "politics is downstream of culture". If that's true, then a sure corollary is that politics is always a few years behind culture. That's one reason why I'm less worried about Donald Trump than many of my friends. He's really 2016's news, and if it weren't for his genius ability to poke the inflamed underbelly of the media and get clicks, he'd be the forgotten figure he'll surely be soon.
I stand by my point. Liberals have won the culture war so completely that they're now confused as to what it actually was. I'm a conservative libertarian in the sense that I prefer conservative fiscal policies, live my life "traditionally", and don't give two effs what other people do so long as it doesn't impact me.
However, the current debate is whether there are two genders or not. I believe there are. I realize that you might agree or disagree with me (most likely disagree). I find it NUTS that my holding this belief is considered somewhere between antiquated and nazism, but you don't see this as evidence that liberals have won the culture war. (Please understand that my thoughts on gender aren't my point, it's the reaction to them that is - and, again, proof of liberals dominating the culture wars).
Tell us more about the conservative fiscal policies you prefer. Because my experience for the last 40 years is that "conservative fiscal policies" means tax cuts focused on the well-off, exploding deficits, and tearing up the social safety net. Privatizing Social Security and Medicare in ways that mean cuts to beneficiaries, and additional profit for connected individuals and corporations. And letting businesses consolidate enough to have monopolistic pricing power.
Haha. While I won't pretend that we'd agree on fiscal policies, I will admit that I share some of your frustrations with "conservative" fiscal policy. That's one of the major reasons that I haven't voted for a Republican in several elections and quit considering myself one in the first place.
I definitely consider the Republican Party the one that "lies to me the best" though. Of course, I have no belief that they want anything other than to be reelected and consolidate more power though - similar to Democrats (or any politicians really) in that regard.
In the end, I'd love for there to be a legitimate 3rd party to siphon off voters like myself on the Conservative side or liberals that think the Democratic party has had a rough couple of years. For instance, many of the Hispanic voters are switching to Republicans instead of my mythical 3rd party.
I think you are in part correct that liberals have won the culture wars in many arenas. Our popular culture, by and large, is not dominated by conservative cultural ideas.
I think one of the conundrums of our politics is that even though the msm is dominated by cultural liberals it is much less so on the economic axis. This hurts Biden and Democrats in general. See Dean Baker for just one example :
https://www.cepr.net/retailers-slashing-prices-more-bad-news-for-biden-new-york-times-edition/
As for third parties, it is usually advocated by people in the libertarian quadrant on both economics and culture (live and let live) but that is NOT where many voters are. See the chart in Paul Krugman's piece:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/18/opinion/liz-truss-uk-conservative-politics.html
Trump's success in 2016 was a result of the appeal of his reactionary culture war on "elites" and minorities but also as a populist on the economic front. The latter turned out to be mostly bs nd he went ahead and adopted the conservative GOP economic agenda - lower taxes, especially on the rich and deregulate as much as possible and try to kill the ACA.
The GOP is no longer controlled by traditional conservatives. It is now a reactionary cult trying to stop the currents of time.
people in the libertarian quadrant on both economics and culture (live and let live)
Also known as "the empty quadrant".
So, if I understand you right, you're saying "people are talking about gender and that proves liberals dominate the culture wars".
I'd like to hear your theory of how voting Republican will solve that problem you identify.
I assume if Republicans assume power we again have a slowing economy, increased government deficits, higher unemployment -- all the ill economic effects Republicans have reliably delivered for decades. My own view is government is pretty good at creating the framework for the economy and pretty ineffective at everything else.
Since you asked... I don't really have an opinion on the two genders question. I haven't read about it enough to say. I don't think it's a question for government to take a stand on. If you're a libertarian who is saying "government must force everyone to choose one of two genders and dress accordingly", there we probably disagree.
It's true, I think, that there's a general trend among "liberals" and "Democrats" to believe that equality of opportunity should be extended to all, and some of that philosophy is slopping over into the idea that an individual should be able to express their gender identity however they want. Personally I'm okay with that and I don't see how a vote for Republicans fights against that, but I do see how a vote for Republicans brings all the likely ill economic effects that Republicans always bring. In other words, to me "owning the libs" by voting Republican is hardly worth it. The downsides are way too big.
If you were really a libertarian you wouldn't give a damn about a person's sexual orientation or gender for the good and sufficient reason that it's none of your damn business.
But you're not really a libertarian, are you, troll?
"and don't give two effs what other people do so long as it doesn't impact me"
Your complaints seem to go against this very much. The entirety of culture war issues Republicans use to rile up the base are things that wouldn't affect them in the least (Think abortion is bad, don't get one. Don't like same sex marriages, don't marry someone of your own sex. Think that gender identification is determined at birth, identify by that, etc.), and yet, here you are complaining about things that don't really affect you.
Recognizing that not every person identifies as male or female doesn't affect you, since no one is forcing you to identify as something you are not, which is what Conservatives are actually trying to do.
How is addressing a person by their preferred pronoun affecting you?
Do you complain or do you find too onerous a request if a person asks you to refer to them by a nickname, or a name different from their legal name? If stepparents want to be referred merely as parents and everyone in that family is happy with that, do you object to or feel oppressed if asked to use the "Step" prefix?
"I find it NUTS that my holding this belief is considered somewhere between antiquated and nazism"
Holding these beliefs isn't equated with nazism. What gets equated with nazim are the vitriol, legal threats, and constant dehumanizing attacks directed against the groups of people you object to, and anyone who asks for them to be treated with respect and where appropriate legally protected.
"Think abortion is bad, don't get one."
Pro choice people will never understand that this is a completely irrelevant argument. To people that are pro-life, that's like saying, "think murder is bad, don't commit murder". Or, "think arson is bad, don't commit arson". I'm not planning on burning down anyone's house, but I don't think you should burn down anyone's house either.
What percentage of people opposed to abortion truly believe it is like murder ? Is it murder at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, before viability ? Is contraception as morally reprehensible as abortion ? What are the extenuating circumstances people are willing to accept for abortion to be ok ? Rape victims ? Mother's health ? What level of risk to a mother's health is acceptable for abortion to be ok. I think the latest Gallup poll shows only 13% are opposed to abortion in all circumstances. I think you are inflating the moral clarity of most "pro-life" folks.
Most "Pro life" people don't really give a rat's ass about anyone or life in general, otherwise they'd be the first demanding for conditions to be improved both for expectant mothers and kids already born, to you know, better protect their life, yet the vast majority of them are the first ones to call for cuts and restrictions to all kinds of support. They would also be the first calling for better sexual education and use of contraceptive methods, but again, here they are the first one to call for curtailing these things.
They're so pro-life that they refuse to support any effort to help poor women support the children they are forcing them to bear. No one believes your piety.
Quick's posts are like the only opportunity to actually discuss something, and this is probably over, but here goes.
My response to quick, me, or anyone else finding something "NUTS" is so F-ing what?
Its the entire point of moving from a small tribe consisting of several families to an actual civilization.
It takes a but of effort to get ones head around the concept of separating gender from biological anatomy, but, as I just said, "so what?"
I mean, come on, life is hard enough if you happen to agree with the gender assigned to your biological anatomy, but if you don't its not really a big ask for the rest of the world to refer to you as you desire.
People get to chose their own name as an adult. I mean, what could be more fundamental than that?
Maybe this is an example of liberals winning some culture war, but you could say the same about the elimination of slavery, yeah, its a "win" but lets not break our arms patting ourselves on the back, eh?
Most of human history consists of almost unspeakable cruelty to each other, and efforts to rise above that. I guess its not obvious enough.
It's a big ask for teachers who have 100+ students to remember 3 pronouns applied nontraditionally for each student. Especially when some of them actually have been sued or fired for getting this wrong. There is currently a huge teacher shortage. Wages are meh, scut work is major, and who needs the drama of transitioning pubescence?
Progressives need to cut some slack to their natural allies if they expect support for their broader goals, but that would be impure.
I think this comment highlights Kevin's statement that the GOP's scare tactics are working. How many kids have you talked to that are in 1st-12th grades? Sure, transgender kids (like in the rest of society) are present. The fact that the liberty-focused GOP doesn't support this individual freedom shows me they're full of shit and only want to protect what doesn't scare them. But I digress... regardless of the presence of girls wanting to dress and be called boy names or vice versa, kids don't freaking care (unless they are told to by Fox or their parents). Let people be who they want to be and let parents raise their kids how they see is best, Mr. LIBERTARIAN.
In 1988 I couldn't have imagined GOP elites not taking action to kneecap Donald Trump's run for the presidency in the early days. I couldn't have managed the GOP elites playing footsie with Qanon. I couldn't have imagined GOP elites condoning (and in some cases participating in) a huge movement urging citizens not go get vaccinated during a pandemic. In 1988 I couldn't have imagined a widespread GOP movement to claim a duly elected president from the other party hadn't legitiamtely won. And I couldn't have imagined Republicans wearing Viking horns attacking the capital in an attempt to overthrow our consitutional order.
haha. I'm sure that you can point to an earlier example, but I'm still waiting for Stacy Abrams to concede. I know, I know... "but she's right. The election was stolen from her..."
Also, the vaccine didn't seem super helpful. Be honest, you thought it would be more effective than it ended up being, no? I'll admit that I was vaccinated (even boosted) and felt like it didn't do much in comparison to my expectations. Also, I feel like you're being a little misleading. There's a big difference between saying "it's your choice" and "don't do it". Most were saying it should be your choice.
Democrat elites are playing footsie with antifa and the radical elements of BLM to the point of posting bail. Democrats claimed that we needed criminal justice reform, but ignored Tim Scott, even calling him despicable names.
Also, my original point has nothing to do with any of this. It's just how far the conversations have moved to the left over the past 35 years and it's ALL because liberals have dominated the culture wars.
Stacy Abrams did complain that Kemp won in part by making it harder to vote but she does not deny that Kemp is the Governor of Georgia. The difference is huge. Many Democrats think that Gore really won Florida if a proper recount had been done but very few deny that George Dubya Bush was President. Complaining is not remotely the same as Trump trying to overturn the results long after everyone, including your own people, have conceded the results and all of your challenges have fallen flat for lack of evidence.
Vaccines have almost certainly saved a lot of lies. That they are not
100 percent effective is not the same thing . The current evidence suggests that the highest rates of death from Covid are where the vaccination rates are the lowest. It's fine to be skeptical of the science but I find that most of the push back against vaccines comes from a grade school notion of how science works.
Which Democrats are "playing footsie" with Antifa (whatever that is) and BLM ? This is whataboutism. Some protests that sadly got violent and destructive is not remotely like the assault on the Capital urged on by President Trump who still is the de facto leader of the GOP.
Also, the vaccine didn't seem super helpful.
I'm sorry you're an ignoramous, but that's a you problem.
Do you have any idea *why* a school might have a policy of using a child's preferred pronouns in a school setting and not in front of his/her/their parents? Particularly in a conservative community like the Central Valley?
Take a minute and think about it.
If you're still confused, let me know and, as the parent of a trans child, I'll explain.
LOL. That has NOTHING to do with my point. The point is how far the conversation has moved to the left. I'm not arguing for or against it because it's a sideshow to the main conversation.
Also, do you understand why being asked to lie by omission could be considered a problem for adults? It's not my secret to keep, so maybe don't involve me in it in the first place? Or just come out and own it? But asking people to lie for you is rarely (if ever) the correct solution. It doesn't matter what we're talking about.
'LOL', eh? And a libertarian too. Have you just come out of suspended animation after a twenty year hiatus?
This is a perfect example of the culture messaging and how it works. Take something with a small sample size and treat it as if it's endemic. Plaguing all facets of society.
Fundamental step of FUD.
"What do you expect an opposition party to do?"
I expect them to do what you just told us the Republican party did prior to Nixon: be the loyal opposition. Politics by scorched-earth demagoguery is not, as you assume, expected from an opposition party. The Democratic party somehow gets by without it as did Republicans before Nixon. It is, rather, a marker of a democracy teetering at the edge.
" Politics by scorched-earth demagoguery is not, as you assume, expected from an opposition party. The Democratic party somehow gets by without it..."
I didn't vote for Trump, but the guy (and his voters) weren't exactly well treated. You can say "they deserved it", "they were fascists", "we had to do it", "democracy was at stake", whatever. The point would be that there was 100% scorched-earth demagoguery in full force.
Nobody comedians that I'm aware of have had photoshoots with a decapitated Biden head, for instance.
Plenty of examples of Obama being lynched in effigy, effigies of Hillary being paraded in a jail cell, etc. But the current discussion is about the behavior of major party figures.
Yeah, but you're the one saying Democrats don't do it. I'm not the guy saying Republicans don't. Both parties are embarrassing and act like lunatics, imo.
You cited one example of one individual not even identified with the Democratic Party.
Trump got far better treatment from the mainstream media, and still does, than a failed businessman with a history of racism, sexism, cheating and generally irresponsible and abusive behavior deserves.
Most of the MSM treated Trump with respect he didn't remotely deserve. He was a cruel, disgusting human being and utterly unqualified to hold the office of president. But appearances were maintained.
I mean, I didn't vote for him because the media successfully reported what a jackass he was, so I guess I'll have to respectfully disagree...
No. You just weren't beholden to media direction like many.
Most responses to Trump were based off truly horrible behavior by a president. Meanwhile Obama was smeared for being black and a Dem. None of his policies or behavior was out of the norm for a president (actually very scandal free) and yet you had a constant barrage of smearing.
It's not that Democrats have no idea how to fight it, it's that most of them don't even try for fear of seeming divisive, and the news media is exactly on the same page.
There was an article the other day about a Supreme Court decision that went against Republicans, --there was a lengthy presentation of the view that was decided against, but zero discussion of why it was decided against, which left the only presentation of the topic the Republican view, which will be the only thing the casual reader will take away from it.
I'm one of those aging cynics who think the only answer is for old white people who grew up in the age of leaded gas and decided minorities=crime/disorder/social skills lacking for suburban life... for those old white people to shuffle off this mortal coil.
NextDoor politics is just too potent and too easily mobilized. But thus November? We shall see.
this* November
It sounds pretty reasonable, waiting for the old white folks to die off. But before they do, they manage to produce at least one generation of copies. The ideology persists beyond the life of its individual members.
Count me in on this one.
OMG NextDoor has gotten crazy toxic - I was banned for a few days by pointing out that Tucker Carlson was spouting White Replacement Theory and that my neighbors should be more concious of the company they keep. This came up in a long thread that happened when a person posted stats that showed crime was down in our county and all the conservative nutsos keep saying that stats were wrong because they "felt like there was more crime". There's been a conscious effort to repollute NextDoor with racist crap to drive out enlighten prosecutors.
".... the debilating fear of progress and change ...."
It's not just the fear of progress and change, but the likelihood that progress and change would bypass me and topple me from my position of advantage.
How often have you heard anyone in GA talking about how the republican candidate put a gun in his wife's mouth and threatened to blow her brains out. How is son had to move 6 times in 6 months to avoid being murdered by the candidate. The republicans would go 24/7 with this information about a democrat. And that is why democrats lose. To focused on honest government and ethical behavior to get their hands dirty.
How often have you heard anyone in GA talking about how the republican candidate put a gun in his wife's mouth and threatened to blow her brains out? How his own son had to move 6 times in 6 months to avoid being murdered by the candidate. The republicans would go 24/7 with this information about a democrat. And that is why democrats lose. Too focused on honest government and ethical behavior to get their hands dirty.
You clearly don't live in Georgia. People down here are talking about that all the time. Ads of his wife telling her story are running around the clock, along with others that have Herschel Walker telling all his lies. It doesn't matter. The worst conceivable Republican is better than any possible Democrat to Republicans. Mike Pence is the most recent Republican to say he won't vote for Donald Trump. But do they say they will vote for a Democrat instead? I haven't heard one. They'll vote for their wife, or John Kasich -- nothing that would actually have an impact on keeping Trump out of office because, at the end of the day, Trump may be a dictator in waiting but at least he's not a Democrat. Same dynamic in the Walker-Warnock race.
Heard a walker supporter on the teevee say that if it was all true, he’d be very disappointed, but it wouldn’t change his vote.
Democrats know perfectly well how to fight it:
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/08/democrats-crime-immigration.html
Democratic POLITICIANS can't be bothered to do anything other than ride their hobbyhorses. We don't need better policies. We don't need better arguments. We need better SPOKESMEN to actually make and continue making those arguments. But too many Democratic politicians think "I said it once, now I'm done. I can go back to universal income or green new deal or whatever bullshit has taken over my brain."
Seems like Pete Buttigeig is the only one out there doing that work these days.
Republicans are certainly not fighting a class war, if classes are economic. Since Nixon they have been fighting the race and religion wars. Republican economic policies are obviously not favorable for "working class" people, and when the questions can be divorced from the parties polls show that people favor most Democratic economic policies.
Media pundits and reporters have always seemed determined to hide the nature of the conflict. They accept Republican's characterizations of what their objectives are. They have been a little more ready to call out racism since Trump arose, but still talk about how Trump is a "populist" and how Trump voters resent the "elites". No, what a lot of white Republicans resent or fear is the loss of their racial and religious ascendancy.
This strategy relies on arousing basic tribal instincts, which are apparently difficult to arouse on economic grounds. A lot of people just find it more natural to hate people of other races and religions than to hate the real plutocratic economic elites. This is why Democrats keep losing to candidates like Trump, not because they are incompetent in arguing or in some other way.
The Republicans hurt their supporters economic self-interest, e.g. working poor, then blame the Dems for the problems that causes. An angry and upset person is not going to work through a 168 page white paper on a topic, they just want it "fixed". So Republicans have to keep people angry and upset.
Economists care about core inflation, politicians care about headline inflation. Biden has a week to flip the paradigm and it's too late after what The Saudi Murderer of Americans did.
Matt Yglesias (recently):
[Have voters] been given candidates in the purple districts (D+4/R+4) who disagree with progressives about gun control? Who support banning late-term abortions> Who have qualms about trans women competing against cis women in college sports? Who favor changing asylum law to try to cut off the flow of migrants arriving at the southern border? Who think it's a problem that college admission offices discriminate against Asian applicants and low-income whites? I'm not saying every candidate in every swing district should dissent from party leaders on all those subjects, but how many dissent on any of them?
Democrats need another play in the playbook besides "one / two months before the election, SEX SCANDAL". Doesn't work so well when the alternative will give you nothing of what you want, and as Trump proved, the reprobate, will give you everything you want.
A majority of Republicans believe that Trump won the election, and that we thus have an illegitimate government.
This is new. This exceeds 1990s Gingriching. Big time.
A majority "claim" Trump won. I seriously doubt most of them literally believe it, but their tribal identity requires them to say they do. That's where we are now, though. Cheap sloganeering and posturing, even if it's a complete lie, have replaced any actual policy preferences or positions in political discourse.
At most 1% of them actually believe that Trump won. The rest believe that it is agood lie to tell.
No, that's just's just taking a juvenile delight in being butt-headed oppositional: "You can't make me say I know I'm lying so I win!" I wonder just how much of this behaviour is genetic?
Republicans are running on three issues: 1. inflation, 2. crime, and 3. refugees/migrants. Their solution to all of these things is simply racist demagoguery and/or tax cuts for the rich. Literally. The problem is that 1. the causes of these problems are complex and 2. the actual solutions are equally complex. They don't fit on a bumper sticker. Ergo, Democrats are perennially screwed when it comes to tackling problems in a complex, 21st century world filled with voters who want everything solved with snappy slogans and quick fixes. That's why "build the wall!" was such a big hit. Complete bullshit. Did nothing to fix the illegal immigration problem. But hey! Sounded tough!
bingo
Plus a lot!
I second the conclusion of skeptomonomist's 2nd paragraph:
"Media pundits and reporters have always seemed determined to hide the nature of the conflict. They accept Republican's characterizations of what their objectives are. They have been a little more ready to call out racism since Trump arose, but still talk about how Trump is a "populist" and how Trump voters resent the "elites". No, what a lot of white Republicans resent or fear is the loss of their racial and religious ascendancy."
I have no sympathy for insurrectionists. And for this comment I'd like to put the political aspect aside temporarily. Not all of the right wingers are "low information", uneducated, etc. But for those that either barely made it through high school or didn't graduate at all, there was a time in the past where you could be respected in your community as long as you were decent. The problem is that people like that didn't think the respect was due to decency, but rather due to their whiteness. And in today's world which, due to the progress of civilization, is a knowledge-worker's world, those folks are indeed left behind. What is our society supposed to do when a significant percentage of the population doesn't have a place in the modern society. They get mocked by media. And the dominant culture celebrates the advancement of other minorities (disabled, sexual-identity-minorities, and other "others") which must feel like a stick in the eye.
I'm not on the Republicans' side. But I think the problem is more than just political; it's sociological. I'm highly educated, and I know some people who aren't and who aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I don't look down on them unless they are cruel. My individual ethics have me treat those people with respect. But society has not yet figured out how to deal with those among "it's own" whose only way to feel good about themselves is to go to the local bar, get drunk with other people like them, and complain about anyone NOT like them (and potentially doping better with the modern world).
Its a bit late, but I agree with much except "they get mocked by media."
The do not, in fact, get mocked by media, no, they are (or were until Fox and Trump showed up) ignored by media. Which is far from the same thing.
Its not the same. I mean, I am old enough to remember when, in fact, it was actually totally acceptable to make fun of country bumpkin ism. Consider the musical "Oklahoma" considered a classic, written in the late 1940s.
I went to see the recent revival, which kept all of the existing dialogue, word by word. You couldn't make more jokes at the expense of uneducated Okies if you tried, and its written, of course, by a couple of New Yorkers. And those new Yorkers knew damn well that the audiance for musical theater on Broadway did not, in fact consist of tons of people from Oklahoma. The laughs are not "with" Oklahoma, its "at" Oklahoma. For a later example, see, by the 1970s, "Hee Haw."
No, "they" were not mocked by media, "they" were treated as a subset of vast Americana, and basically ignored, since whatever the F was going on in Oklahoma had nothing to do with New York or LA as long as there was not an oil shortage or a hamburger shortage.
Its now Fox telling them that they are mocked by the media. The excellent thread upstream about the gender issues in Central California says it all. No one is mocking people in Central California, however, the culture has shifted to where stuff considered harmless (of course its harmless to cis gendered whites) has now been pointed out as being harmful.
Its the whole Washington Redskins debate writ large, over an entire country. As if the owner of the Washington Redskins ever even cared what the name of the team was! He's not native american, and its not up to him whether the team name is a slur. But instead of just changing the name years ago, its "don't tell me what the F to do! don't "mock" me!"
The amount of time the average New Yorker or Angelino has spent thinking about Oklahomans in a given year had barely budged (from zero in 1950 to zero and one onethousandth in 2016) , until we found out the friggen Okies were storming the capital like the idiots they are at Trump's bequest.
coping, not doping
The discouraging part is not that after 50 years Dems don't know how to fight it, but that after 50 years everything that goes wrong is still the Dems' fault. Even when the Repubs do it! Then it's: "why didn't the Dems stop them, it's their fault".
Actually it's not. And the more the line is repeated that everything is always the Dems' fault, because they're the only adults in the room and should watch those screaming kids better, the more Dem voters stay at home on election day.
The behavior of voters who vote Republican is consistent with having a death wish. Here in the US, with the large majority living in materialistic comfort, they are discovering that life that does not go beyond the offerings of our mainstream entertainment media sucks.
Boredom rules. Conflict helps relieve it. But it is not the final solution, just a means to it.
Hesitant to comment since the WordPress comment model doesn't really do much for keeping past thread alive. But will say there is nothing surprising about this. We just over over a pandemic (over being relative), have a potential expanding ward in Europe, high inflation, cusp of a Fed-induced recession, etc. People who are not firmly in the camp of one party are going to wonder if the other party can do it better. I wouldn't look into it as some sort of game-changing realignment.
Put me in the right wing propaganda camp, Fox et al. Its a powerful force dumped into the brains of half the country without an ounce of skepticism or critical thought, night after night and all day on Sunday.
Or the Democrats could listen to the complaints and stifle the radicals.
* Why are we allowing children to neuter themselves? This is eventually going to be on a par with eugenics for shock value. It's not a manufactured issue - I personally have it happening in my family and know several people who are also dealing with it.
* I was happy when we switched from Miss and Mrs. to Ms., because that gave less information. I'd be fine with switching everyone to "it" and "they" or whatever, but I'm not fine with trying to memorize each persons chosen pronouns.
*We are abandoning education and workplaces to the woke. What happened to a goal of colorblindness? Now everyone has to identify and is expected to walk the walk of their identity group.
* Men in women's sports and bathrooms? THIS IS HAPPENING, and it's a disaster.
I still find plenty to disagree with the Republicans about, but these issues are just shocking, and they affect our personal lives. Your blogs and its responses seem to think these issues are a distraction - fine, if you want the Republicans to take over.
All right, here's five minutes of my life I will never get back.
As to the first point, I have no idea who "we" is, but if I have to translate this into some form of gender affirming medical care, let me get this straight: you want it to be illegal (which is the only thing a politician can actually do other than fund things via a budget), yes? Its a medical decision, and whether or not its "allowed" is up to doctors. Whether "children" are "allowed" to make their own medical decision is not exactly some new thing. You do realize that, eh? Just because parents, for example don't believe in antibiotics, doesn't mean they can order a doctor to let their child die. All I can say in the end is you have to hand it to Fox news for being able to con millions of people into thinking this is a political issue.
Point two? Let me be clear - its irrelevant what you, or I are "willing" to memorize. Call everyone you meet "Fred" for all I care, or all any Democrat cares. Don't be surprised if the response is "whatever, asshole."
Point three. This anti-woke argument is completely made up by Fox news. Everyone does not "have to identify and walk the walk of their identity group" whatever that sentence even means. Nor, is there any actually law passed to force people to belong to some identity group. Wasn't point one above, and point four, below, the fact that your are upset that we are actually allowing people to choose their identity group? Make up your mind, what is it.
Its not "men" and for that matter there is no Democratic proposal to have men take over women's sports. As for bathrooms, what the F is it with people and bathrooms? Its called a stall. The rest of the women's room, from what I am told consists of sinks. As if Democratic politicians have ever forced a bunch of people to take a crap together.
The Republicans are absolute geniuses to get you to care about any of this. Geniuses. And Trump was the top genius of them all.
And it was Albert Einstien level genius to get you to vote based upon it.
Hey, "Truth", if you want your nieces and nephews not to change their gender move them back to your original Jihadi country. I'm confident you won't have to worry about it there.
It's always been about the economy. I present an October poll, taken by the New York Times, as evidence.
Is American on the wrong track? 64% agree, vs 24%
Are you likely to vote for R or D? 49% R, 45% D
What do you think of Biden? 39% approve vs 58% disapprove
Now, here's why...
What do you think is the most important issue today?
The economy: 26%
Inflation: 18%
Abortion: 5%
The state of our democracy: 8%
With democrats in charge, he takes the blame for the economy and inflation: 44% don't like him because of that! The Republicans take the blame for the latter two: 13%.
44% vs 13% is more than 3:1 against democrats
Children making their own decisions about gender? That didn't get enough traction to even have its own category.
Pronouns? Wokism? Again, those get swept into the "other" category.
Education? Oh, that DOES get its own category: 1%!
Climate change does better, but even it only gets 3%.
It's always been about the economy. Nothing else matters when you have to pay $4 for milk today but only $2 back when Trump was president (just a rough example there, don't nitpick the numbers or the item). People see how their grocery and gas bills have skyrocketed; they want people in power who will keep that from happening, and regardless of whose fault it actually is, those people in power have failed to do so.
THIS is why, when people go to the polls, they'll be chanting "Let's Go Brandon."
...forgot the link.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/10/17/upshot/times-siena-poll-likely-voters-crosstabs.html
Screw you, "glider". Everywhere in the world prices for food and fuel are up. American inflation has perhaps 25% to do with Joe Biden. You can make a coherent case that the last Pandemic tranche of aid was too big, but in our economy one trillion dollars is about 4%, and it has all be absorbed by now. Yet prices continue to rise.
Do you not understand that cows eat feed grains? Surely you've noticed that those feed grains have gone up from 50 to 75% across the board, mostly from the war in Ukraine. Prices can leap rapidly when supply and demand for necessary commodities like get out of whack, which is what the Ukraine war has done.
Has it occurred to you that if we are doing so well we should keep doing it instead of changing to be more like countries that are doing worse?
It's pretty clear why the Republican "story" falls on eager ears. I've been visiting the Southeast to see some of my wife's relatives for two weeks now. We've driven through rural northeast Georgia and the Savannah River valley from around Greenville SC to the coast. I can testify that outside the tourist areas of Northeast Georgia and the cities of the Savannah valley, most Southerners are hurting badly. Their public services are a shambles and they themselves are neck deep in poverty and squalor.
It has always been that way, but everyone -- even those in otherwise squalor -- has a HD TV and a view into the world of "the elite". When all one compares ones prospects with are one's immediate neighbors and townspeople, it doesn't hurt so badly as when one sees the rich frolicking on The Tube.
"Why can't my life be that way?"
Well, you live in a place that doesn't provide much economic value added. Or YOU might not be adding enough yourself to generate a spill over for your employer to share some. These are hard things to accept when you are used to be "better than the Blacks" at least. So when some Snake Oil salesman like Donald Trump or JD Vance comes singing his Hurdy-Gurdy song, you listen.
Of course neither Donald Trump nor JD Vance gives a rat's ass about you, but they point at "them" and say "You deserve better, because you're my kind of guy (or gal)!"
In the meantime, the boring, Democrats, who speak in words for which you have no possible clue of a meaning, are beavering away to make your life a little better. But when they explain why you are hurting -- using those big words to be accurate and not over-promise -- you have no way of understanding what they mean. The Hurdy-Gurdy men are of course saying "They're talking down to you." at the same time.
The country was lost when all of those brilliant women who used to stand in front of classes and teach the lunkheads of America so very well got opportunities to be someone other than "Miss Smith" to eleven year olds.
This is not an argument for sending women back to teaching en masse, but it something to keep in mind. Teachers are obviously very committed to the job, but some simply aren't that coherent themselves.
Pingback: Klingbeil, Youngkin und Thatcher sprechen in Polen ein Machtwort und bekennen sich zu radikalen Verfassungsgerichten - Vermischtes 24.10.2022 - Deliberation Daily