US Politics: Be Careful Out There

[Tywin et al.]

33 minutes ago, DMC said:

.......Huh?

It's just a bad joke. Don't overthink it, else you might fall asleep and wake up on @BigFatCoward's train. I'm sure the next guy to piss him off on there will be blasting Creed.

[karaddin]

At risk of sparking a discussion I don't actually want to get into, fucking hell the wave of anti trans legislation is grim. Ty and Kal are in here arguing whether the Dem's could use more simple messaging to get people to accept Republicans are actually shit at the economy and the right wing media doesn't even have to put much effort into maintaining that lie you're trying to counter act while the GOP state parties just continue to pour misery onto minority groups.

How the fuck do you overcome that disparity in media coverage to actually convey reality.

ETA: This one prompted by North Dakota enshrining legal protections for misgendering people, clearly the most pressing issue for the people of North Dakota is ensuring they can continue being assholes. It may put impacted employers in a bind where they're forced to violate either state or federal law though given this puts them at odds.

Edited May 9, 2023 by karaddin

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, karaddin said:

the right wing media doesn't even have to put much effort into maintaining that lie you're trying to counter act while the GOP state parties just continue to pour misery onto minority groups.

How the fuck do you overcome that disparity in media coverage to actually convey reality.

I'm not sure there is that much of a disparity in media coverage on the continuous onslaught of anti-trans legislation by red states.  It certainly gets plenty of coverage from the outlets I consume.

This, of course, is the issue with selective exposure.  But also, just the frank reality it's not that important to most voters.  Which is something I've tried to emphasize throughout the years.  Are the elites and media to blame for the state we're in?  Absolutely.  But the voters share in the blame - as well as many of the disenfranchised non-voters.  There's enough blame to go around.

[karaddin]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

I'm not sure there is that much of a disparity in media coverage on the continuous onslaught of anti-trans legislation by red states.  It certainly gets plenty of coverage from the outlets I consume.

This, of course, is the issue with selective exposure.  But also, just the frank reality it's not that important to most voters.  Which is something I've tried to emphasize throughout the years.  Are the elites and media to blame for the state we're in?  Absolutely.  But the voters share in the blame - as well as many of the disenfranchised non-voters.  There's enough blame to go around.

I've got covid again at the moment and wasn't very clear. What I was trying to say is that the GOP doesn't even have to pretend it's prioritising the economy, it gets to run culture war shit 24x7 and yet despite that still gets seen as the party of adult economic management. I was talking about the same narratives/messaging as Ty and Kal, not the media narrative around the anti trans shit.

[DMC]

Just now, karaddin said:

What I was trying to say is that the GOP doesn't even have to pretend it's prioritising the economy, it gets to run culture war shit 24x7 and yet despite that still gets seen as the party of adult economic management.

Ah.  Well, sure, that's certainly what they do.  And I understand, policywise it fucks over a lot of people in a lot of red states and that shouldn't be understated. 

However, whether that will be successful or not on the national level and/or in the aggregate is a whole other matter.  Other than the education thing in Virginia gubernatorial race, hasn't seemed to help them much recently in any competitive states/districts.

[karaddin]

Still missing part of what I'm trying to get at.

Obviously the culture war stuff is intentional on their part, it's a wedge tactic that's meant to get people voting against their own interests because they're scared of the Other etc.

But the (baseless) baseline association of the "conservatives = good economy" doesn't even seem to degrade in the absence of them putting any focus on it. They get to exploit the wedge politics and still get treated like they're good economic managers. 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, karaddin said:

But the (baseless) baseline association of the "conservatives = good economy" doesn't even seem to degrade in the absence of them putting any focus on it. They get to exploit the wedge politics and still get treated like they're good economic managers. 

I guess my point, which I intimated above, is the notion they're though of as "good economic managers" isn't really accurate.  They're just the opposition party during a time when most people think the economy is going bad and therefore blame the president.  This has happened to Republicans too - even Reagan in 82!  Bush lost the presidency because of it in 92.  Dubya nearly took his whole party down not because of Iraq (although that was some of it), but because he presided over the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression.

Republican presidents get blamed for bad economies too.  It's just, right now, we don't have a Republican president, and most people think the economy is bad.  That's how simplistic voting is - again in the aggregate - in the United States.

[karaddin]

Yeah maybe I'm projecting local attitudes there, the conservative party is definitely seen as a safer pair of hands here and the media plays to that all the time. And as much as I dislike them, they haven't gone nearly as hard on culture war as the US and UK conservatives have (and have gotten wrecked when they try go harder) so they do have to put in more "maintenance" of that association.

It's easy to mix them up sometimes, especially since some of the opposition catch cries are shared (debt! deficit! etc)

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 hours ago, karaddin said:

But the (baseless) baseline association of the "conservatives = good economy" doesn't even seem to degrade in the absence of them putting any focus on it.

We really need to divorce this idea of competency=cruelty.

[Jace, Extat]

Not a political scientist but I think Rs get something out of not looking at prospective voters who would struggle to replace a broken window without financing and saying shit like "in the aggregate your economy is wholesale, with good ballast and blibberdorp. Blibberdorp, blibberdorp, blibberdorp. Smigglesmackle! Smag smag sigatag. Yes, I will take fries with that as I pretend to pretend enjoying slumming it with you repulsive creatures. Don't forget your list of RightThink jargons to bring to the voting booth, now! We wouldn't want you to need re-educating."

But that's just, like, my opinion man.

[DMC]

19 minutes ago, Secretary of Eumenes said:

Not a political scientist but I think Rs get something out of not looking at prospective voters who would struggle to replace a broken window without financing

K.  So?

[Jace, Extat]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

K.  So?

Like, it's foundational. Baked in to the party, and I don't think your superstitious devotion to bar graphs bears it out. 

Elections are not won by being within margins of polling error or winning popular votes or having popular positions. Or positions at all. Some places just don't fucking like Democrats, for the simple reason that you people talk like assholes. 

That's fucking real. It is now and will continue to determine the increasingly insolvent future of this ramshackle of a country.

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Secretary of Eumenes said:

Like, it's foundational. Baked in to the party, and I don't think your superstitious devotion to bar graphs bears it out. 

Elections are not won by being within margins of polling error or winning popular votes or having popular positions. Or positions at all. Some places just don't fucking like Democrats, for the simple reason that you people talk like assholes. 

That's fucking real. It is now and will continue to determine the increasingly insolvent future of this ramshackle of a country.

First, yes, "bar graphs" show exactly what you think they don't show.  And they are - literally by design - not superstitious.  Your anti-intellectualism is tired and pathetic, and frankly if you feel this strongly about it go join the other party where people might listen to your ramblings.

Second, yes, of course elections are won by "margins of error."  Have you been paying any fucking attention to any presidential election this century?  Once you get to the state level, they're all won by "margins of error."  Wake the fuck up.

Third, I only talk like an asshole to people like you, who should know better.  And does, but just wants to seem "cool" by shitting on my discipline.  Get a fucking a grip.

[Gaston de Foix]

Will Saletan brings the receipts on Lindsey Graham's career: https://specialto.thebulwark.com/p/the-corruption-of-lindsey-graham. 

[Phylum of Alexandria]

58 minutes ago, Secretary of Eumenes said:

Like, it's foundational. Baked in to the party, and I don't think your superstitious devotion to bar graphs bears it out. 

Elections are not won by being within margins of polling error or winning popular votes or having popular positions. Or positions at all. Some places just don't fucking like Democrats, for the simple reason that you people talk like assholes. 

That's fucking real. It is now and will continue to determine the increasingly insolvent future of this ramshackle of a country.

Isn't it all of these factors at once, though?

The Republicans do enjoy structural advantages, so despite Democrats tending to win the Presidential popular vote by large margins, who actually wins the election is determined by a small margin of electoral votes in certain battleground states.

Also, polarization has increased, and people view "the other side" much more negatively than they view their own side. Given that viewpoints are increasingly entrenched, there is less room for persuasion. The undecideds, independents, and otherwise persuadable voters are an increasingly small swath of people who determine how elections swing.

There's also the problem of Democrats being a big tent coalition, and having to communicate soberly to various demographic interest groups. At best, this can seem milquetoast compared to the right's bloody red meat sizzling on fire and brimstone. Rabble rousing is so much easier, because it gives answers that are easy to digest, and plays into people's weaknesses. Someone like Joe Biden does prioritize speaking to blue-collar concerns, but can it really compete with "We feel your pain...and it's all Joe Biden's fault" ?

That said, I think the general problems that you mention about Democrats sounding elitist and out of touch has some truth to it as well. The party seems more and more like the party of college educated academics and technocrats. I think Biden's impulse in placing more emphasis on working class concerns is generally a good one, but there's a chance it's too late. Many disaffected blue collar voters think that their concerns are no longer a priority, and they've fallen down the rabbithole of grievance soothsaying.

Some of this perhaps can't be helped, but there are aspects in which lefty wonks have needlessly contributed to this perception. This article from the early COVID days is a great example.

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/10/2/21493933/covid-19-vaccine-black-latino-priority-access

It sounds dry and intellectual, but it's actually quite stupid. The author openly acknowledges that race is but a correlate of a more central factor in health vulnerability: socioeconomic status. Yet rather than propose we tackle systemic racism by implementing a vaccination system prioritizing low-income communities, the author proposes a race/place-based priority system. This is of a piece with a larger trend; activists and thought leaders on the left leaving class issues in the background--even when it's staring them in the face. 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Phylum of Alexandria

[Jace, Extat]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

First, yes, "bar graphs" show exactly what you think they don't show.  And they are - literally by design - not superstitious.  Your anti-intellectualism is tired and pathetic, and frankly if you feel this strongly about it go join the other party where people might listen to your ramblings.

Second, yes, of course elections are won by "margins of error."  Have you been paying any fucking attention to any presidential election this century?  Once you get to the state level, they're all won by "margins of error."  Wake the fuck up.

Third, I only talk like an asshole to people like you, who should know better.  And does, but just wants to seem "cool" by shitting on my discipline.  Get a fucking a grip.

I love you too baby 

[Mindwalker]

I want to wring Sinema's neck. Uh... figuratively ofc.

[Gaston de Foix]

The jury has begun deliberations in the E.Jean Carroll v. Trump trial.  Unanimity is required for a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, although the jury has wide latitude to determine what happened (i.e., rape, sexual assault, battery) and what the damages should be.  

I don't expect any immediate verdict, although you never know with juries.  

[Kalbear]

3 hours ago, DMC said:

Second, yes, of course elections are won by "margins of error."  Have you been paying any fucking attention to any presidential election this century?  Once you get to the state level, they're all won by "margins of error."  Wake the fuck up.

Yeah, you know better than this. Some things are margins of error (like Georgia or Arizona's POTUS race) but other things are systemically locked in to get Republicans in regardless of virtually anything else (like the NC State House and the upcoming NC congressional delegates). And for things like what karradin is talking about the latter are a pretty big deal.

None of that has to do jack shit with messaging, of course. 

Not really trying to take Jace's side because OMG WTF BBQ but the US political system is really weird and fucked up, and Republicans figured out better than most that it's much better to not make elections matter whenever possible. 

 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Yeah, you know better than this. Some things are margins of error (like Georgia or Arizona's POTUS race) but other things are systemically locked in to get Republicans in regardless of virtually anything else (like the NC State House and the upcoming NC congressional delegates). And for things like what karradin is talking about the latter are a pretty big deal.

Yeah, I really don't..and I hope you don't think you "know better" either.  Literally every presidential election this century has been about margins of error within a handful of states.  I was responding to Jace there, not karaddin.