I am the whitest person that has ever existed and it is absolutely fucking awesome.
6 Likes
All people can be coaxed into us/them narratives. Itās part of the human condition.
The dynamic in China and the US is the same, people will want to be in the powerful āin groupā, whether its white people or Chinese people doesnāt really matter.
3 Likes
Someone went to Mastrianoās victory party just to troll him. They get one-on-one (2-on-1 I guess) time with him at the end of the video.
https://twitter.com/waltermasterson/status/1590716412469080064
1 Like
This would be so entertaining
https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1591069936465891328?s=46&t=DTlAMsoXO7nO2fLb_vOUXQ
Is Nancy still the speaker if dems win 218-217? If so I might be rooting for a 218R-217D outcome. I also think Rs trying to impeach Biden with a one vote majority would completely backfire on them worse than overturning RvW did
I think Iād actually want Nancy as speaker with a 218-217 margin, and I think Iām pretty staunch in my hatred of Pelosi. But with a one-vote margin itās all about holding the caucus together and whipping votes, and experience would be at its biggest premium ever. Plus getting anything progressive through would be impossible anyway.
That said, there could be Dems who ran on not voting for Pelosi as speaker.
Dems 218-217 is really a tie to start because one of the candidates is dead right?
EDIT; oh never mind, was only a state rep, thought was a House electee from PA
If its that close a House version of Manchin/Sinema will emerge that suddenly canāt vote for anything because of their newfound lifelong commitment to fiscal responsibility.
1 Like
Will just be wild too because people do leave the House with some frequency so might get deadlocks and reorganizations and all sort of fun for the next two years. Like how the hell do we write a budget in a 217-217 House?
I have never understood the hate for David Shor.
1 Like
I mean at that point itās basically passing budgets, continuing the 1/6 committee, and trying to get very bipartisan reconciliation bills through.
1 Like
The hate is that he always magically lands on ādemocrats should win by being republicansā even when thatās obviously discredited. The eDem establishment hates Fetterman and tried to tank him in the primary but will never admit they were wrong. Next cycle theyāll once again condescendingly drone on about how electable the next Connor Lamb is. Fuck. Off.
3 Likes
as long as she wants it, yes
wat
this is like the most obvious thing ever
I typically think the stuff that he says makes a lot of sense!
I donāt interpret his message as being, āIn order to win, Democrats must become Republican-lite.ā Instead, I think his message is largely, āIn order to win, Democrats must have the message discipline to focus on things that are appealing to a lot of independents.ā
To further add to the flames, I think Matt Yglesias has roughly the same message, and I agree with it, too. Democrats believe a lot of things and want to accomplish a lot of things. But some of those things are more broadly popular than others. So when campaigning, Democrats should focus their messaging on those broadly popular things, so that when they win, they can actually do all the things.
Hereās an example that I thought was interesting - a discussion of what he (Matt) would focus on in terms of messaging, largely informed by the fact that the median voter is a 50-something white person who didnāt go to college and lives in an unfashionable suburb:
You donāt have to agree with all of these, but I do think the general theme of āfocus on the things that the median voter cares aboutā is a good one, especially because there are so many Democratic policies that the median voter has favorable opinions on.
[I recognize that this will probably get me flamed, but I am feeling strong this morning.]
Edit: And I donāt think he (Shor) wants Democrats to replace the Fettermans of the party with Lambs. I think he views Fettermans campaign as a successful illustration of what heās talking about:
As for ideological positioning and message discipline, if you really look at what these candidates actually did, Fetterman took a lot of care to distance himself from a lot of unpopular ideas, including defunding the police.
He really focused on economic issues and reproductive rights. And, as I said earlier, the Democrats who won in close races all generally did that. And I think the importance of their message discipline is illustrated by the fact that they did so much better than Democratic incumbents in safe districts. So I really do see all of this as a victory for the idea that disciplined campaigns that try hard to appeal to the median voter can succeed. The key thing here is that these candidates won by persuading independents. This wasnāt a mobilization story.
2 Likes
where did the porn thing come from? iāve legit never heard that in anyoneās platform or agenda?.. is that some personal crusade the writer of that has?? shutting down porn sites?
1 Like
This. One of these things is not like the other. Thatās some puritanism stuff right there, porn addiction has been studied, its very inconclusive I think if its even a problem, and thereās no way its broadly popular. Also if you donāt want your kids watching porn its easy enough to lock it out.
Itās definitely odd!
I think itās an attempt to offer bread crumbs to socially conservatives with something that isnāt broadly unappealing. Like, as a parent, I donāt want my kids accessing porn!
Edit:
I consider myself moderately technologically competent, and I donāt think this is true. Even if I were to install a blocker on my kidsā phones, they still get access through their friendsā phones. I mean, at a first glance, Iād conceptually treat it like alcohol. Sure, parents can lock out alcohol in most cases, but is there really harm in legislating a prohibition for kids?
1 Like
Hereās another illustration from someone who I think is less controversial than Yglesias or Shor:
Ahead of Novemberās midterm elections, Democrats should offer a straightforward, comprehensive agenda and commit to passing it if they keep control of Congress (or, in the case of the Senate, gain true control). Such an agenda could mobilize the partyās base, woo swing voters and, most important, guarantee that we donāt see a repeat of the demoralizing do-little Washington of the past two years.
- Eliminate the filibuster.
- A national law guaranteeing a right to an abortion in the first trimester and in all cases of rape and incest.
- A democracy reform law mandating independent commissions to draw state and congressional districts lines free of gerrymandering; vote-by-mail and two weeks of early voting; proportional representation through multi-member congressional districts; and measures to prevent election subversion.
- A ban on the sale of military-style weapons such as AR-15 rifles and high-capacity magazines, along with universal background checks for gun sales.
- A minimum income tax of at least 20 percent on billionaires.
- A ban on members of Congress buying individual stocks.
- National marijuana legalization.
- A climate change plan that puts the United States on a path to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.
- A required civics and life-skills course for high school seniors, with the same curriculum throughout the country.
- Voluntary term limits of 12 years in Congress for all Democrats (six terms in the House, two in the Senate).
Again, the idea is to focus messaging on the Democratic ideas that have the broadest support. This seems not very controversial to me, which is why I donāt understand all the hate that Shor gets. (I understand why Yglesias gets hate. I am not a moron.) Maybe I am interpreting Shorās message too charitably?
2 Likes