MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 1 year 2 months ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 5 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 2 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 4 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 4 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 4 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 4 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 4 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 5 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 5 months ago
How the Democrats Are Failing the Resistance
By artappraiser on Fri, 11/03/2017 - 11:38pm |By Andrew Sullivan @ NYmag.com, Nov. 3
Mostly analyzing what the activities in the VA governor's race mean for the bigger picture and concluding
[....] They have learned nothing from 2016. Their intelligentsia seems determined to ensure that no midwestern whites ever vote for the party again. Their public faces are still Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi. They still believe that something other than electoral politics — the courts, the press, the special counsel — will propel them back to power. They can’t seem to grasp the nettle of left-populism. And they remain obsessed with a Russia scandal that most swing voters don’t give a damn about.
They think they are “woke.” They are, in fact, in a political coma.
URL:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/how-the-democrats-are-failing-the-resistance.html
- Add new comment
- 5318 reads
Comments
Andrew's on fire.
Though I'm confused - "wonky" seems to be code for "details".
Embrace key jugular adrenalin concerns, but don't get into the weeds of real numbers and implementation.
We want a Google Play store for politics - an app with enough likes/stars with the desired effect, downlad and click install, just works.
Except with my phone I can easily delete the apps that don't work or are too snoopy or ad-infested. With politicians, we're stuck 2-6 years, more when you consider the power of incumbancy.
Anyway, who's an example of this elusive semi-mythical exciting non-wonky but sincere and competent and non-corrupt candidate that fits Andy's and all the other critical pundits' litmus test?
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 4:30am
It's not a litmus test. It's a warning. I hope he's wrong, but I fear that he is not.
by Michael Wolraich on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 7:52am
I see it as a litmus test or some kind of standard that I haven't seen anyone pass in decades. Really, when I'd hear Obama or Sanders speak, it's just so much blah blah blah to me, but so are TedTalks - nicely packaged pablum, but at least not evil. What's this motivational enlightenment I'm supposed to feel? I mean, when the mayor of New Orleans spoke on statues, I was impressed that he summarized a complex feeling succinctly. But I don't need a dozen bullet points to hit the G spot - I can handle complexity as well.
He's saying don't be like Trump, don't be like Hillary - too many negatives on what not to do - howabout a goal line?
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 9:09am
He's offering a diagnosis, not a cure. I would love to hear the cure from him as well, but its absence does not cause me to discount the diagnosis. Negativity is not the same as inaccuracy.
by Michael Wolraich on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 2:27pm
Yeah, enough bitching as "diagnosis". I've read through about 10,000 pages over the last year on everything the Democrats are doing wrong, nothing much sensible on what can help them win with this horribly shifted, irrational playing field. Yes, a few more glib epithets to touch America's fickle heart is all we need... Be more populist, in touch with the people, meaning what exactly? For all of Andrew's British education and conservative indictrination with Hajek et al, he's never told me how you reason with a bunch of white hillbillies in the throes of an opioid epidemic, among other key demographic challenges, and that's the kind of inside info we need, not more pundit bullshit about being more exciting, unless we're going to fight fire with fire and start streams of illegal money funding our coffers, in which case I'm pretty sure we can compete, because the little people do love money, even if we're not sure what else.
And like so many others, Andrew ignores that Hillary actually won the popular vote and would have rather easily won the electoral vote if not for 1) Comey, and 2) massive Russian disinfo as illegal campaign advertising, and 3) coordinated vote suppression. Put another way, "other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?" We don't protect black people when getting mauled by the police, even with a black prez, and we don't protect a female candidate getting mauled by the Russians, the media, the GOP, etc. If they can run over her woth impunity, they can crush anyone else we put up, so I'm rather gobsmacked to see Andrew supposed opting for some more political philosophy in the face a tsunami of money.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 4:56pm
I actually don't know if I agree with him. But I nonetheless posted it because I think he's a pretty important voice having been a swing voter himself for a very long time. I was surprised that he still thinks the "white midwestern" vote will be key and that "left populism" is where the party needs to go for 2020. Maybe for now and for 2018, but after that, I am skeptical. I especially am surprised because he could see the potential of other types of swing voters, himself being a gay Catholic who is conservative on some policy.
I am thinking more along the lines that there will be a counter-reaction by then and populism will lose it's allure among a big enough segment of swings that are enthralled with it right now, to add to the majority that voted for Hillary in the last election. (Flavius' comment downthread is along the same lines, i.e., in 2008 Obama got a nice coalition to win, in 2012 some of those dropped away, then comes Trump to really mess with things.)
There are many reasons, I can't think of them all right now. But one is the big retirement trend among establishment Republicans. Those seats are in danger of being filled in 2018 by Trumpies, or similar nut cases, because of the type of districts they come from, and because only the passionate in those districts may turn out for midterms. Which will make Congress even wackier and less able to accomplish anything for the short term. So by 2020 there will be a counter-reaction where even those that sometime stay home get off the couch and vote "enough of this! can't take it anymore, we need some sane grownups running this country." And in the presidential whoever is the sane grownup will get a huger majority than Hillary did. And Congress will flip to Dems just by virtue of the "throw the bums out" thing which is traditional.
And that's without a charismatic candidate or even changing platform much.
I think Biden gets it, for one:
Joe Biden’s Platform for 2020: Anti-Populism He's certainly known to understand the white working class, and he doesn't see totally pandering populism as the answer.
Whether he's the one that could do it is another question. But I suspect he's reading where the zeitgeist will be correctly. And he does totally get the charisma thing, even if he can't, as many argue, effect it in himself.
Edit to add: I think everyone should always keep in mind that Hillary won a majority and came very close on electoral. And that those people are far from changing their minds about crazy populism, instead their numbers are growing every day Trump stays in office. And a President Pence will not change their numbers
by artappraiser on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 3:01pm
Despite being saddled with the most unpopular President since forever, the Republicans will very likely regain the governor's mansion in Richmond. The Democratic brand is absolutely toxic in large parts of the country. Things are so bad that I don't know whether any Democrat could have won in the Old Dominion this year. 1) Right-wing media is a big reason. 2) Racism and xenophobia which hate radio and internet sites exploit are also major stumbling blocks for the Democrats. 3) Finally, numerous well-publicized examples of party exemplars siding with Wall Street against Main Street have made it all-but-impossible for Democratic candidates to overcome 1 and 2 in much of the nation.
I wish I had a solution. Purity tests - e.g., every Democrat must support Medicare-for-all, tuition-free public colleges, higher top marginal tax rates, an end to the trade deals, and a significant reduction in military deployments overseas - might help a little since they're all popular and good policy. But they'd also alienate the donor class which - like it or not - does provide party candidates with needed finances. At a minimum, the Dems must clean up the DNC and embrace both progressive populist candidates throughout the heartland and truly redistributionist policies.
by HSG on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 8:25am
White voters are responding to racist ads. There is nothing that can be done about that. Until white hearts change. Northam left his black Lt Governor Justin Fairfax off of campaign literature. Northam also spoke against sanctuary cities despite the absence of sanctuary cities in Virginia. Northam is stupid. Hillary won Virginia. Northam may win his race despite his stupidity. If Gillespie wins it will mean that white voters are responding to a racist message despite Nazis marching in Charlottesville.
Democrats will likely sweep New Jersey.
by rmrd0000 on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 11:48am
RMRD - I
pretty muchagree with everything you wrote here about Virginia. The Justin Fairfax f-up was inexcusable. I hope you're right about New Jersey.by HSG on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 12:17pm
Trump had a decrease in approval in rural America. While Liberals may see that as a sign of progress, The rural voters have seen the light. The truth is that those rural voters are pissed that the Wall has not been constructed and that harsh immigration reform has not taken place.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-popularity_us_59db9763e4b0b34afa5b12b3
The Democrats are accused of abandoning the white working class. The question is never asked if the white working class abandoned the Democrats because of issues of race. LBJ knew that the white South was gone after the Civil Rights Act. Trump got white voters with Birtherism and a fantastical Wall to keep out brown foreigners. We are told if we are just a little more Socialist, whites will love Democrats again.
A more rational plan is to realize that asegment of whites have given up on the Democrats and focus on areas where Democrats can make inroads.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_good_fight/2017/06/democrats_misguided_desire_to_woo_the_white_working_class.html
by rmrd0000 on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 11:29am
Nationwide Obama got a slim white majority in 2008.
Not in 2012. But with my bias towards bread- and- butter explanations I attribute some portion of that decline to the unemployment surge in the interim .That of course was due to the sub prime fiasco which W bequeathed to Obama but that's life.
I'm sure one can't get numbers on this but common sense says that particular Democratic curse will gradually weaken.
But you pick the cherries where the cherries is so I agree with you that an increased Black vote is low hanging fruit.
by Flavius on Sat, 11/04/2017 - 1:24pm