Yup, loved the hell out of that.  There were several lines in that I laughed out loud at.  

 

"Vote for us you pieces of ****"  Yup.  The philosopher is spot on about identity politics as well.  "Bleeding woke"  Love it.  I'll be voting with the left from here on as far as I can see, but good lord I wish they'd all watch this and take some real lessons from it.

 

Yup, loved the hell out of that.  There were several lines in that I laughed out loud at.  

 

"Vote for us you pieces of ****"  Yup.  The philosopher is spot on about identity politics as well.  "Bleeding woke"  Love it.  I'll be voting with the left from here on as far as I can see, but good lord I wish they'd all watch this and take some real lessons from it.

I have few problems with the concept of identity politics. It's the execution, when coupled with the searching for outrage, where it all goes wrong.

 

The silo effect and people searching for righteous high ground prevent anyone from working together, which means we get more conservative politics winning over a fractured liberal base.

 

"I'm getting screwed because of how/where/whatever I was born" is fine. The inability to say "hey, you're probably getting screwed too, let's team up!" is where it goes wrong.

 

I've been forced to admit that large portions of the left have become incredibly selfish. It feels as if they're more interested in screaming than actual change. Someone needs to remind them that perfect is the enemy of good.

 

 

 

The silo effect and people searching for righteous high ground prevent anyone from working together, which means we get more conservative politics winning over a fractured liberal base.

 

"I'm getting screwed because of how/where/whatever I was born" is fine. The inability to say "hey, you're probably getting screwed too, let's team up!" is where it goes wrong.

 

That's just it, I don't disagree with the idea that some identities are at a serious disadvantage in society. The problem comes not in the identity issues, it comes with turning it into politics.  Politics are about building voting coalitions and identity politics necessarily fractures that.  

 

I wish the left would cool the outrage long enough to see that you need to take the identity out of the politics and concentrate on the root issues of unfairness - incarceration rates, educational equality, workplace harassment, etc.  Many of those issues appeal across identities and help you create a voting coalition and still help the identity groups achieve more fairness.  

 

As currently practiced.....it's a losing strategy in large areas of the country.

Not super relevant, but this is just a devestating political ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZuayQFD51w

Not super relevant, but this is just a devestating political ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZuayQFD51w

Wow. What impact has that had, though?

Gosar is such scum.  Arizona has a ridiculous number of guys like him too.

Edited September 22, 20188 yr by TheLeviathan

Ban pre-shredded cheese.

Make America Grate Again.

The Columbus, OH newspaper endorsed a Democrat for governor for the first time in 56 years......

This just screams of a golden opportunity.  I really hope the Dems on the ground are getting people ready to vote.

 

Flipping this one would be huge.  This one too.  They could permanently plant the purple flag in two formerly deep red states.

 

This just screams of a golden opportunity.  I really hope the Dems on the ground are getting people ready to vote.

 

Flipping this one would be huge.  This one too.  They could permanently plant the purple flag in two formerly deep red states.

I didn't really have any kind of a feel for Sinema, but after the debate, I came away pretty impressed with her composure, especially vis-a-vis with McSally who seem exasperated many times.

 

Like you, I really hope there is a strong ground game on election day, and before then to get people to vote early. 

 

Beto winning Cruz' seat feels a bit out of reach.  But his popularity, even if he doesn't win, will help other Democrats down ballot in Texas.

That is a major reach. Texas won't be a viable opportunity for a while, but we'll get a peak at how close it is. Of course, a huge turnout would win for Beto.

I'm not sure saying you'd vote to impeach Trump is going to go over so well in Texas. He had a good run, but that opens the door for Cruz to paint him as am extreme liberal.

 

I'm not sure saying you'd vote to impeach Trump is going to go over so well in Texas. He had a good run, but that opens the door for Cruz to paint him as am extreme liberal.

Beto already is a pretty far left guy; I don't see why that would have any more traction than his other overtly progressive stances.

I'm not sure it matters how liberal a candidate is or isn't...they'll get painted as a pinko liberal regardless.

The Republicans have long had a winner, with the "their candidate looks down on you" theme. It didn't start with their latching on to "deplorables" in 2016 - there was more than a whiff of it way, way back, when The Silent Majority was their battle cry. This Onion visual captures that.

Maybe we could get rid of this awful stain  too?

Edited October 20, 20188 yr by TheLeviathan

 

Maybe we could get rid of this awful stain  too?

The loyalty Republican voters have for their own is amazing.  Well, I suppose they could support King because they are genuinely racist.

The loyalty Republican voters have for their own is amazing. Well, I suppose they could support King because they are genuinely racist.

Again, I live in this district, and it is full of racists. He will get re-elected. It is a shame. This area is very old, very white, very uneducated, and very set in their ways. I can't wait to move.

 

Again, I live in this district, and it is full of racists. He will get re-elected. It is a shame. This area is very old, very white, very uneducated, and very set in their ways. I can't wait to move.

Keep forgetting you live there.  Jesus.  

Edited October 20, 20188 yr by PseudoSABR

Not sure if anyone is watching the re-boot of Firing Line on PBS, but they had Ben Sasse of Nebraska on this week. I enjoyed his discussion. After the past two guests made me question humanity, Sasse was a nice reality break.

I appreciate Sasse for his willingness to speak out, but it’s sounding more and more calculated as his actions do nothing to back it up.

Maybe we could get rid of this awful stain too?

Heh, called it. Before I even clicked on the link, I suspected it was about King.

I don’t know exactly what this news means, but it can’t be bad for Democrats.

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-democrats-unprecedented-fundraising-edge-is-scary-for-republicans-and-for-our-model/

 

I don’t know exactly what this news means, but it can’t be bad for Democrats.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-democrats-unprecedented-fundraising-edge-is-scary-for-republicans-and-for-our-model/

I've read the early voting numbers are demonstrate a huge turnout, as well. 

Edited October 21, 20188 yr by PseudoSABR

I'm really hoping Congress blocks the arms deal to Saudi Arabia. Sasse and Paul have come out against it.

I have several thoughts about politics, let's start with King. To get a guy like this representing a district in the Upper Midwest demonstrates that the brand is pretty strong for Republicans. 

 

Advertising--if Democrats have such a money advantage, I haven't noticed it here. I live on the border between the first and second Congressional Districts, but get TV from the Twin Cities and see ads for all four contested Congressional seats, plus the Smith-Housley Senate election. I'm seeing far more ads for Republicans than Democrats. Further on the ads--Republican ads are almost universally negative, Ads against all four of the Democrats in contested races throw in Ellison and Pelosi, with an occasional reference to Hillary or Walz. Outside ads for Democrats are negative too, but they are far fewer than the Republican outside ads. I haven't seen a positive ad for Paulsen and few for Hagedorn or Stauber. The Republican claims stretch my belief far more than the Democratic ads. My supposition to quote the song is "when you ain't got nothin', you got nothin' to lose".

 

 

The chalk for the midterm now is that Democrats will win the house, but not with resounding sweep that Republicans did in 2010 and that Republicans will hold their advantage or perhaps gain a seat or two in the Senate. There will be some nailbiters in the Senate. From what I can see, Democrats would have to win every one of the close races to take a majority or have a complete surprise come out of Texas or Tennessee.

 

Finally, the Flakes and Sasses and Corkers of the Senate (Susan Collins too!) bug me. They talk about working with the other party, but when Mitch McConnell needs their vote, he gets it. The lady and gentlemen should be protesting the way the Senate has been run--there is no regular order, bills and nominations are not debated but rather pushed. It happened for the tax bill, it happened for ACA repeal and now Republicans are pushing archconservatives into the judiciary. While Democrats have their warts, there is no equivalency with what the Republican party has become.  

 

Advertising--if Democrats have such a money advantage, I haven't noticed it here. I live on the border between the first and second Congressional Districts, but get TV from the Twin Cities and see ads for all four contested Congressional seats, plus the Smith-Housley Senate election. I'm seeing far more ads for Republicans than Democrats.

I don't know if this is the case but it's entirely possible that Democrats simply aren't spending TV dollars.

 

This isn't 20 years ago when newspapers and TV were the way to connect to voters. If a candidate used those avenues exclusively to sell themselves to voters, people like me would literally never see anything about that politician.

 

I don't watch TV. I don't read physical newspapers. But I still spend a large portion of my day exposed to media.

 

There are lots of ways to spend campaign money nowadays.

How much of political budgets are on TV advertising? I'd have to guess it is way over half of their budget. The sheer number of ads for political candidates is staggering this year. I truly don't watch a lot of TV either, but when I do, I can't help but notice the plethora of pitches for (actually mostly against) politicians.

Even though the Democrats are still out raising Republicans.   Conservative PACs, etc., probably have significantly more resources than the candidates themselves, much less than liberal PACs.  

 

In Arizona, there's non-stop negative ads from a group called Defend AZ, who I recall reading have outspent both candidates.  But the commercials are so extreme, trying to make Sinema look like she supports child pedophiles etc., that I don't know they'll have any traction with the middle, but they could rile up the base.

 

Here's a website with spending for Arizona, I'm sure you can look at the other states from there as well.  (Defend Arizona has spent 17 mil; Rep. Sen. Com. 6 mil; the Dem Com 4 mil) 

Edited October 22, 20188 yr by PseudoSABR