The Moderate Case For Kirsten Gillibrand

Anik Joshi

Anik Joshi a student at the university of Michigan majoring in philosophy politics and Econ. He is also on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

9 Responses

  1. Fish says:

    I understand the idea that a person running for puclic office should have “the courage of their convictions,” but how do we differentiate between a “flip-flopper” and someone who changed their mind in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary to their “courageous conviction?” Good post.Report

  2. Ozzy! says:

    I like that KG takes an originalist approach to the definition of Representative. What a breath of fresh air! Probably doesn’t translate to Presidential, but hell yeah I want my rep to rep her electorate before during and after any changes!Report

  3. Jaybird says:

    I expected Franken to come up.Report

    • George Turner in reply to Jaybird says:

      I was more expecting Joe Piscopo or Gilbert Gottfried to come up, because nobody ever expects that.Report

    • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

      I find that less of an affront than her continued support of mattress girl and other #metoo excesses. A little pragmatic flexibility is good, intentional blindness to facts not so much. Same deal with the cringey privilege stuff from last week. I’ll be glad once she’s off the stage.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to InMD says:

        I am in a place where it’s possible to run on Franken not as an affront but as a way to reach out to fence-sitting moderates. “Hey, all those people are cynical as hell. I follow my principles where they lead. *EVEN WHEN IT’S NOT IN MY TRIBE’S INTEREST TO DO SO*.”

        It’s a selling point.

        I have no idea why so many Dems are not only willing to turn away from what she did but actively *DENOUNCE* it.

        It’s nuts.Report

        • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

          I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb, and give people a little credit (stupid, I know). Outside of the progressive activist subset I think that kind of principle is exactly what people don’t want and that we might just be hitting the backstop for the offense archaeology it stands for.

          Look at the Northam situation in Virginia for example. Every time they poll it they find that those who are supposed to be most outraged want him to stay.

          Also there’s this New Yorker article from a couple weeks ago she might not be eager to discuss.

  4. Dark Matter says:

    So… she’s an amoral windsock. She’ll say whatever she needs to in order to get elected, and has no core beliefs other than being elected. And we have no clue what she’ll do after she’s in office.

    Sorry, I’m going to pass on this one.Report

  5. Marchmaine says:

    That’s a nice way to put it. But, I wonder if Gillibrand’s challenge is that while she’s willing to be flexible on her own positions to court an electorate, she runs into problems as the electorate broadens and she can’t send a consistent signal to any particular constituency.

    That is, in her original district her positions were clearly aligned; so too with the State of New York… what’s interesting about the two is that she doesn’t need the former to retain the latter… so she’s not really signalling any moderation, rather she’s the “extreme middle” of different groups. That’s not really moderation.

    Her campaign doesn’t really show her trying to grab a US Middle Vector range, but rather chasing votes, somewhat haphazardly, mostly to the left – or so it seems from my distant vantage. Its not that she possesses an uncanny ability to follow the lodestar to the electoral middle (of her constituency), she’s unmoored and adrift. And for any constituency, like the US as a whole, where there’s not even a “simple middle” she’s not only adrift but rudderless.Report