Democrats Confront The Real Limits Of Their Messaging Problems
Lately there’s been a LOT of digital ink spilled over the Democrats being in disarray, being underdogs, and virtually handing the House and Senate back to the Republicans next November. Were it not all so morbid it might be amusing. And you have to hand it to the media types – it does get the clicks flowing.
Problem is, it’s mostly smoke and mirrors, or as my esteemed OT colleague Dark Matter likes to intone — a perception problem. Take infrastructure. I’m pretty certain Donald Trump campaigned on new investment in infrastructure — and its support of blue collar jobs held by “real Americans.”. Many folks like to think he achieved something — he issued six executive orders directing the federal workforce to nibble around the edges of infrastructure. He proposed a $200 Billion package to congress in 2018 that he claimed would generate $1.3 Trillion in private sector investment, and even met with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer in 2019. Yet there was never a bill to debate, and no real private sector investment. Promise Broken.
Along comes Joe Biden, and almost a year into his Presidency he’s gotten an actual by God bipartisan infrastructure bill passed. $550 B of that is new spending — the rest redirected funds — but it focuses on actual things that support actual communities that are sorely in need:
- $110 billion for roads, bridges and major infrastructure projects.
- $39 billion to modernize public transit
- $66 billion in passenger and freight rail
- $65 billion investment in improving the nation’s broadband infrastructure
- $17 billion in port infrastructure
- $25 billion in airports
- $65 billion to rebuild the electric grid
- $21 billion to clean up Superfund and brownfield sites, reclaim abandoned mine land and cap orphaned gas wells
That’s a lot of good, solid, middle America bread and butter there folks.
And yet to hear the media tell it, a Republican rout of the House and Senate are all but assured, even if Kevin McCarthy gets out of his own way and manages to not destroy his own caucus because they voted for things that might benefit their constituents.
So, what gives? Why the long media faces? And what if anything should Democrats do about it?
For starters I’d point them to my longtime friend and former OT mentor Mike Dwyer. His own take — now an entire administration old — on how bad the left mismanages their messaging to the right is still very salient:
They want quality jobs, but they do not want to have to move to cities to obtain them. Nor do they want their children to be forced to move away.
Dennis Sanders reminds us (still timely) that:
… Trump is President for a reason. (No, the answer is not Russia.) He is the Commander-in-Chief because both political parties had nothing to offer to an electorate that was upset and looking for someone, anyone to listen to them.
… Trump exposed something that we Americans are loathe to talk about — class. As hard as it is to talk about race in America, we like to pretend class doesn’t exist. But the fact is, it does, and it shows itself in how middle- and upper-income Americans look at low-income Americans, especially those who are poor and white. The well educated in American society tend to view the working class, especially the white working class with contempt.
… The Democrats, which were once known as the party of the working class, slowly but surely shed that title. The party became bifurcated party; a coalition of upscale whites and persons of color.
Where did the white working class go? You probably already know: the GOP.
… Trump won because he had a vision for the nation. It is a dystopian vision in reality, but it was a vision, nonetheless. The problem is that the president’s opponents don’t have a vision for the country. We don’t have an idea of what can give people hope. People who whose jobs may not be around tomorrow, people who see loved ones overdose on heroin, people who wonder if their children will do better than they do.
I quote those essays because their authors were right then and are still right. Joe Biden became president largely as the anti-Trump, with a healthy dose of middleclass white women recoiling for his misogyny, and the Democrats coalition (led by many many women of color) being willing to choose safe and sound over progress.
Even now the media and many here firmly believe that Joe Biden has no vision for America, and that liberals — on the best of days — are pesky flies to be swatted away by “real Americans”. We liberals have offered no real victories for the working man, so the thinking goes, and the unemployment rate now being 4.6% in a job seekers’ market is surely nothing to do with the President. Gas prices are SOARING (though nowhere near the Bush Administration highs and in line with Trump’s pre-pandemic high point). Inflation is already out of control (but historically it’s not)! Biden failed at getting us out of Afghanistan – though that seems to have been an argument of style, not substance as we did, actually withdraw. Another Trump campaign promise fulfilled by Joe Biden.
At the same time, however, Joe Biden is creating a different America. He’s creating an America where people are empowered to demand better wages, working conditions and benefits from their employers (HERE, HERE, HERE). He’s building an America where we actually spend the people’s money on the people’s needs – as that list above makes quite clear. He’s getting shots in arms by deploying the vaccine Donald Trump paid to develop, and so case counts are coming down — which means we will get to our new normal. And his Administration is fully cooperating (if too slowly IMHO) in Congress’s investigation of the coup on January 6th.
What he’s not doing is messaging this the way Trump did. He’s not rage tweeting about how few Republicans voted for the infrastructure bill. He’s not forcing his caucus to strip the committee assignments of those on the progressive left who fought to keep this bill and the Build Back Better plan from shrinking. He’s not perpetuating lies about the election.
And I don’t want him or Democrats to start doing any of those things. But maybe – maybe – they could grab some midwestern Democrats from the House and Senate who aren’t in the Squad and have those members be the face of announcements of the bill. Maybe he could get them, union presidents, and underpaid striking workers to attend a Rose Garden address touting the benefits of the infrastructure bill to ordinary Americans. Maybe Joe Manchin — having gotten this bill voted on separately and gotten the BBB plan negotiated down really close to his topline number — should be arm twisted to do some pressers on how good the infrastructure bill will be for West Virginia, and thus how good it will be for the rest of the U.S.
Maybe. But I’m not holding my breath.
The laser-sharp focus on the true concerns of the working class:
Goddard school district orders 29 books removed from circulation
WICHITA, Kansas — The Goddard school district has removed more than two dozen books from circulation in the district’s school libraries, citing national attention and challenges to the books elsewhere.
The list of books includes several well-known novels, including “The Handmaid’s Tale” by Margaret Atwood, “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison, “The Hate U Give” by Angie Thomas and “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” by Stephen Chbosky.
It also includes “Fences,” a play by August Wilson that won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama in 1987, and “They Called Themselves the K.K.K.,” a historical look at how the white supremacist group took root in America.
Truly, the Democratic Party has lost sight of what really concerns the working class, and instead spends their time on infrastructure packages supported by, ah…*checks notes* 62% of voters, and 0% of Republican Senators.Report
Nothing wrong with removing books from libraries. It’s *BANNING* them that is the problem.
And if you can still purchase them, they haven’t been banned.
It’s absurd to argue that every library needs to have every book ever written.Report
I wonder if these books will be available in the University of Austin library?Report
Looks like it.Report
Wrong university.Report
Oh, I get it.
I honestly have no idea. Do online-only universities have libraries?Report
The University of Phoenix has a Library!
Unfortunately, my attempt to search for Fences by August Wilson has resulted in it asking for me to log in.
So I am stymied.Report
Thumbing through a couple of accreditation organizations’ requirements the other day, it appears that one of the common requirements is ownership of, or guaranteed access to, a suitable library.
I doubt that at this point in time, the University of Austin has gotten around to thinking much about the cost of having library access.Report
I expect Sohrab is planning to incorporate the Index Librorum Prohibitorum in UATX’s charter.Report
He is pondering the proper way to break Sullivan of his unnatural urges, while Sullivan is planning to measure Sohrab’s skull with calipers.
Those faculty meetings are going to be wild.Report
Massively unfair to Sully, but funny.Report
This legitimately made me laugh out loud. Thank you, Chip.Report
You might want to check your notes again Chip:
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/10/1026081880/senate-passes-bipartisan-infrastructure-billReport
I stand corrected.
I would be terribly embarrassed, pwned even, if it turned out that the infrastructure bill turns out to be the key to winning back all the working class white voters.Report
Goddard, Kansas, has a total population of 5,084 (in 2020). Their school population will be a subset of that.Report
What’s the population of Spotsylvania? Enough people to attend a good ol’ fashioned book burning?
https://fredericksburg.com/news/local/education/spotsylvania-school-board-orders-libraries-to-remove-sexually-explicit-books/article_6c54507a-6383-534d-89b9-c2deb1f6ba17.htmlReport
RE: What’s the population of Spotsylvania?
140k. 24k students. (ish).Report
B-but you have to understand! Some woke college student put up a stupid poster somewhere!Report
More like social conservatives protesting there’s no way their kids can be gay. Or maybe if they don’t learn about it then it won’t happen.
This is more shooting the messenger/message. Some level of risk is part of the “parent” package.Report
Question: I tried to see what ‘redirected funds’ amounted to, but couldn’t… do you have a link/descriptor? If the bill is $1.2T with $400B in new spending, understanding the other $800B is relevant.
Observation: There’s a reason fundraisers always talk about the problem of Infrastructure… it’s necessary, but the value is soft… you notice it in its absence, not in its fulfillment. The old joke in Church circles is that people will fund a new decoration for the Church, but no-one wants to pay for the boiler repairs.
Onward: Where I think the ‘Progressives’ are correct (though I disagree with their priorities/preferences for spending the money) is that the BBB bill is the ‘Vision’ bill that would impact how people experience a Democratic legislative agenda — for good *and* for ill.
Execution: Of the above $400B there’s certainly a lot of good investments/repairs that are needed. However, capping wells and expanding ports will not change any votes… not because they oughtn’t be done, but because everyone expects the boiler to provide heat. Conversely, we’re still in a volatile position vis-a-vis Globalization where the focus on Global Supply Infrastructure without a clear plan for re-shoring runs risks with it’s own success. Plus, infrastructure at this level is never ‘shovel ready’ it takes years to execute and see any sort of notable return. So, I don’t expect any payoff, even if a lot of this is likely money well spent (eventually).
Sizzle: If there’s ‘sizzle’ in this package, it probably comes from the $65B in Broadband expansion… but here I refer back to execution… I’ll be impressed if this actually delivers meaningful Broadband expansion to the areas of the country that would benefit from the opportunity that it would provide — instead I suspect it will go mostly to improve speeds in metro areas so that more meaningless Netflix content may be consumed. There’s also some danger/temptation that expanding Broadband to the hinterlands (where it happens) won’t also have policies designed to decentralize commercial concentration… such that all we do is expand meaningless Netflix content to the hinterlands. A sort of opiate of the masses to go with their opiates.
Applause: As I note above, sometimes you need to direct funds to repair the boiler. We all benefit from that; but I get what the Progressives are warning y’all about… repairing the boiler without a heavenly vision won’t raise the funds you need to keep things going.
Faint Praise/Caution: From what I’ve seen of the BBB, I’m not sure that it’s a good vision for America, and passing it isn’t without risk. Whether that risk is worth taking resides with the Dem caucus… I’d recommend a lot of different directions from what I see in the BBB outlines, but then the American Solidarity party is a loooong way from influencing National priorities. So, good luck storming the castle.Report
I see what they’re going with with the broadband expansion. But if we’re 5 years away from 6G, the broadband expansion is the same as making sure that every household in America has a VHS player.Report
rural 5G – heck even fully implemented rural 4G – would be a vast improvement over the at best spotty state of play now. As the last year plus of trying to do online learning in rural communities has pointed out.Report
I suppose that there are households that would benefit from a VHS player even now. I’m sure that a disproportionate number of them are in rural areas.Report
there are roughly 4.6 million rural households in the US that lack broadband access. Some subset of those folks lack internet of any kind. YMMV on what the impact of bringing them rural broadband would be.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/19/some-digital-divides-persist-between-rural-urban-and-suburban-america/Report
My brother in law the rural Kansas family farmer got “broadband” access. He says it has had a significant profitable impact on his business practices.
After spending years in the broadband business, my immediate concern about the infrastructure bill is “Who’s going to pay for the maintenance?” That particular part of Kansas experiences ice storms fairly regularly — talking about a quarter-inch or more of frozen rain coating most surfaces. Who’s going to pay the bill when some thousands of miles of aerial fiber and copper lines are pulled down?Report
How and Why are related… you have to have a commitment to ubiquitous Communication/Electricity so that the Why can be within striking distance.
But yes, I agree tangentially, if we’re expanding broadband so that people may watch Netflix, and we’re indifferent to the requirements of Work/VPN/App/WFH requirements… then we’re just making Porn more available… like VHS.Report
Work/VPN/App/WFH isn’t as much of a concern for rural communities, in as much as that where our agricultural, forest products industries – and even a lot of our small manufacturing – occurs. rural broadband certainly helps those workers and those businesses, but its not the same need.Report
Relevant to your link to Pew above… what y’all are missing is that most ‘rural’ folks have ‘access’ to some broadband – usually cellular – but the access isn’t reliable, consistent, or ubiquitous. It’s not enough to build a business upon, or make a life-decision upon, or open up new opportunities.
You can, however, if you stand in the right part of the house, watch Netflix.
But secondarily (or Primarily depending on how you want to sell it) getting the ultra fast business backbone connections more widely dispersed is likely the main focus… and that’s good. But as someone surrounded by ultra-fast business backbone infrastructure… it doesn’t alleviate rural issues if the state/counties don’t make use of the infrastructure so that the best internet connection isn’t only at the MacDonald’s wifi hotspot.
There’s a ton of self-dealing/self-regulating/self-reporting by the providers… if the $65B is just being fed into that meatgrinder, then prepare for disappointment.Report
Pew agrees:
Report
Thanks I missed that reference; partially because I’ve become accustomed to the reporting that implies that coverage is available — which the Pew Report reinforces on the surface.
In my case, technically I have access to fiber, but practically I do not. My coverage for several years has been ‘Grey Market’ unlimited 4G from a broker that’s leveraging artifacts from past mergers which aren’t available on the ‘open market’.
This is pretty common when Providers report on their contractual obligations and provide coverage numbers upline. So if you poll me, yes, I have Broadband Access ($150/month for 10-25mbs) … but not reliable and not under the coverage my county/state think they’ve negotiated.
That’s why I bring this up in execution/sizzle… saying there’s $65B in broadband expansion is one of the primary voter experiences with the infrastructure package. If the Dems rely on the current pathways for Broadband? I’m saying explicitly that those $$ will be poorly (and seriously probably fraudulently) allocated.Report
and here i thought my lousy and expensive rural broadband was expensive and lousy. my condolences, sir.Report
Heh, solidarity :fist:
What’s mildly interesting is that TMobile just started offering direct market access to the Grey Market service for $50/month. So nature is healing.
I’m currently subscribing to both as I test the differences / expand capacity. Key takeaway, the TMobile direct service uses terrible hardware compared to Grey Market… so it’s less reliable in actual use. Ugh.Report
I don’t expect either party to engage in re-shoring talk. It’s too “central planned government” for anyone’s liking. The best we could hope for is more federal support and funds – which the infrastructure bill has – for port and rail yard expansion. Second best would be to lean on the railroads to rehire furloughed engineers and reopen closed classification yards, since railroads are now very much into “just in time delivery” through a nasty concept called Precision Scheduled Railroading.
But with so much logistics network parts in private sector hands, you can’t drive on-shoring without even MORE badly constructed tax breaks. Which as a general rule I oppose. Making beds and lying in them and all.Report
I think it’s too ‘central planned government’ when Dems talk about it… but that’s what I’d call a ‘Real Limit of Their Messaging Problem’ 🙂Report
its really a dichotomous choice – you have logistics in private hands and end up where we are (which Republicans seem remarkably ok with), or you have government run logistics networks which can be effective but are definitely centrally planned no matter how you execute the planning. Government owning and operating trucking, railroads, warehousing etc isn’t going to happen in the US – and no democrat has proposed it. But clearly leaving it in private hands creates systemic weaknesses because of really bad incentive structures.Report
If you really think those are the only two options, then I appreciate the hesitation to attempt to redress.Report
why don’t you write out a third option?Report
The root problem of our current logistics failures was the government shutting down the economy because of Covid.
It’s certainly possible to imagine it would have been better if the government had more control over these things… but in practice we’d have be adding politics as a negative incentive without adding any more insight.Report
I too was pissed when Biden shut down the port at Shanghai, and Governor Newsom ordered a lockdown at Rotterdam.
Not as pissed as the Chinese or the Dutch, though.Report
For clarity, when I talk about Infrastructure Bills my point of reference isn’t short term disruptions like the Coronavirus, but long-term policy questions brought up by Autor and the China Shock analyses.
I think supply chain, manufacturing and raw material issues that were made explicit and more visible during Covid-19 should add to the discussion, but part of what I’m suggesting in my primary comment is that Infrastructure is almost always a long game… and it’s not clear to me that this Infrastructure Bill wanted to address some of these other aspects of long term infrastructure health.Report
My son works for a company that designs and sells high-end model railway stuff. It’s manufactured in China (as is their competitors’ stuff). He points out that the big impact on their supply chain has been the Chinese government closing the factory where the models are stamped, painted, and assembled for an extended period both of the last two summers.Report
Depending on who that is – and I probably can nail it in three guesses or less – I pay some portion of his annual salary.
He right – and model railroad fora spill way more digital ink on that then we do here.Report
Exactly. Sheer decadence that we’ve lost our own capacity to manufacture scale-model railroad stuff. I’d’ve reached out directly to Manchin with a proposal for a WV plant. Bump up the Amtrak angle and that’s an easy attach.Report
Don’t be greedy. Children overseas need those jobs.Report
The toxic luminescent paint hardly bothers their little lungs. Competitive Advantage in a nutshell.Report
As I noted above, some of those longterm issues would require forcing private companies to retract around 30 years of corporate decision egged on by federal tax policy. You need a serious change of incentives to undo that, and no, this bill doesn’t address that at all.Report
Last I read, the root problem was less the shutdown, and more that a lot of truck drivers stopped driving trucks. It’s actually put a lot of push behind autonomous trucks and getting them on the road (an autonomous truck can wait in line at a port for days and not need to eat, or use the bathroom, or get paid, etc.).Report
I have seen reporting that something like 72,000 truckers didn’t pass the new federal drug testing requirements put in place (!) by the Trump Administration. A significant portion of that loss is not people who are actively using, but folks who don’t want to do the hassle of rehabbing their administrative records, and the most common drug found was marijuana.
Yet another reason to support Jay’s quest for decrimminilizing wacky weed.Report
The Republican Party continues to demonstrate its keen grasp of the problems faced by the working class:
Former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao Calls on Americans ‘To Do Their Patriotic Duty’ and ‘Help the Economy’ By Rejoining Workforce
If only the Democrats could craft such a message!Report
Given the performative patriotism of the GOP these days I’d say its a well crafted message that reinforces the GOP’s orthodoxy of who is and isn’t a “real American.” And it keeps Democrats reactive instead of getting them proactive in messaging. SO while I’m sure you were being snarky, I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss this stuff.Report
I’m just pointing out how receptive Republicans are to Soviet style messaging- Homeland Security, Great Patriotic Duty.
I’m not even saying it doesn’t work. But we should all see what really issues and messages really animate the White working class.Report
Agreed.Report
Good post. As with so much of this the loudest and most screechy issues of the day remain those that are the lowest stakes. Infrastructure and generally good governance are helpful but it isn’t going to be useful for messaging compared to the noise that the populists and nativists who’ve taken over the GOP stem to stern will churn out. Nor will it compare to the fuss that the Dems ferociously noisy woke loon fringe will make with the eager aid of their handmaidens in the media and twitter.
I’m not convinced that either side can be effectively and directly countered by messaging though. Were I in Bidens inner circle my own suggested courses of action would be:
-Try and implement the infrastructure bill as effectively and visibly as possible.
-Continue to push and work on BBB. Something called Build Back Better needs to pass. Find out what the maximum is that the right wing Dems will permit and then pass that. The progressive wing has already demonstrated that they’ll take what can be obtained- we don’t need to fear it being defeated due to being too small (the Dems are, for all the lefts foibles, not afflicted with a left wing variant of the rights lunatics).
-Jump with both feet on every lever that you can find to address supply chain questions. Find areas where the feds rules are slowing things down and suspend those rules. Find areas where local government rules are slowing things down and go down the channels to suspend those too. Nimbies and other interest groups will shriek. Ignore them. Improving supply chain/inflation pressures will yield better public results than those groups loudest howls will hurt them.
-Going to war with the wokesters is a losing proposition- you’ll never do enough to impress the righties who focus on this stuff and you’ll enrage actual left wing voters who you currently have in your coalition. That said Bidens admin could tamp down on any woke excesses that’re coming from within the administration. Narrow the administrations woke profile to provide less easy targets. You don’t have to be anti-woke, just clean the woke-speak out of the administrations public utterances so you’re not idiotically visibly woke. The identarian left will continue to provide plenty of fodder for the anti-woke right but the more the right has to depend on idiot tweets and comments from professors on twitter the less it’ll move the electorate at large.
-I’d comment on vaccine/covid policies but I think, by and large, the admin is already there. Though maybe Fauci should retire and be replaced. Whatever the mans merits he’s easily replaceable and replacing him removes a cultural touch point without costing, well frankly, anything.Report
Good suggestions all. Too bad the only listening will be in the OT echo chamber.Report
I don’t consider OT particularly echo chamberish. If we must be meta, though, 99.99% of the stuff everyone chats about on the internet outside of the right is not listened to in meat space. It’s just a replacement for water cooler chat- and that’s fine.Report
What are these woke excesses? I think one of the reasons the so-called evil wokes have had success in changing some education policy in some places is because that is rhetorical and costs nothing to the powers that be and monied interests.
The supply-chain issues are largely not because of things in the control of Biden as far as I can tell. The median truck driver is 54 years old and a lot of companies seem to be responding to labor bargaining power by holding their breath until they are blue in the face at the prospect of lower profit margins for themselves and shareholders because they need to pay more. I would love it if the government can compel the owners into market reality with a “suck it up, buttercup” but that requires magical powers that do no exist. I have had potential employers more or less admit that it is a labor market, that I am probably worth my base salary because of my experience as a lawyer, but nope that they do not want to pay it. Sorry this is a bit of a sore spot for me. Other aspects are foreign countries still adhering to COVID zero policies which can shut down factories and ports beyond our jurisdiction for weeks.
The idea that the supply-chain supply crisis can be solved by cutting regulations like this is the Regan-Clinton 80s and 90s is risible.Report
There are reports that things are starting to ease a little at the Ports of LA and Long Beach since we’re now less than a week away from fines levied against the ship companies for containers that sit too long in the port. In addition to paying to get the loaded containers moved out of the port faster, the ship companies are also starting to run in empty ships to take away some of the huge number of empty containers that are also slowing the process.Report
How high can you stack empty containers on a ship I wonder? It’s not like they weigh anything. Or does their volume simply mean you can’t put any more on board than normal and the ship just skips across the wave crests like a soap bubble?Report
Tall container stacks are less like a mountain and more like a sail, one that, if the wind is right, can capsize a ship. So yeah, you don’t want to stack them too high without the ship being able to take on sufficient ballast.Report
I have seen cargo ships with them stacked three or four high. I have also seen more than one story where a massive traffic jam or accident happened because a tractor hauling an empty container was blown over by a strong wind. I imagine that insurance companies also have very strong concerns and considerations regarding stacking because of potential loses for property damage and personal injury claims. Plus those containers are heavy and can probably do a lot of structural damage even if nothing else is harmed.Report
Pictures of the ship stuck in the Suez Canal showed stacks nine high.Report
Zip ties. Nautical.Report
NPR claimed one of the problems was you have full-containers which don’t have places to go. The owners have the choice of having them sit there “waiting to be claimed” or renting space in a warehouse.
Big picture this is disruption from Covid. Not direct disruption, but the disruption caused by that disruption.
It’s like how airplane traffic software crashed at one hub and then for weeks later there are still disruptions and three weeks later the carrier canceled a lot of trips to reboot their entire system.Report
That’s about to change at the Ports of LA/Long Beach. Escalating fines on containers that sit for too long kick in on the 15th, I think. I saw a report yesterday that there’s already been a significant increase in pick up of the containers that are going to catch heavy fines.Report
As to the idea of deregulation being risible- the Port of Long Beach was, for example, forbidden by the locals to stack containers more than 2 high because it obstructed their view. One example and your sweeping emotionally energized point is in rubble. C’mon Saul.
I agree that a large part of the supply chain issues lie beyond the Administrations control but some portions of it do and the Administration could and should find and eliminates any of those roadblocks it can. Whether that be by more or less regulation I’m quite agnostic on. Find what’s slowing it down and go after it. The boomers aren’t dead yet and they remember the 70s. Biden needs inflation reined in as much as possible because the GOP knows how to do this song and dance with the left pushing for spending while inflation increases. Whatever the Admin can do to tamp down on inflation without sacrificing core liberal goals should be done. This is politics 101.
As to the “evil woke” I entirely agree with you. Woke-ism is so successful because it’s so easy. A few changes in language, some illiberal chilling of dissent (hurray, now we have new excuses and means to terminate problem employees and professors) and burning a few pinches of incence while chanting the appropriate identarian approved magic words and *poof* wokeness achieved. It’s no wonder the c-suite loves identarianism- it’s the cheapest date the left has ever put up.Report
As to the idea of deregulation being risible- the Port of Long Beach was, for example, forbidden by the locals to stack containers more than 2 high because it obstructed their view.
Cite, please, with it being upheld in court? Every picture I’ve seen of LA/Long Beach has containers stacked five-high, per the federal limit on height.Report
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/city-of-long-beach-allows-logistics-companies-to-stack-containers-higher
Is the first one I found from a quick search though it looks like there may be a distinction between the port itself and its inland zone. Regardless, though, local zoning forbad the inland storage area from stacking containers more than two high for aesthetic reasons.Report
Re: woke excesses. It looks highly likely that Kyle Rittenhouse is going to get away with murder. Texas and Florida and maybe some other red states are getting very close (if they haven’t already gotten there) to implicitly allowing murder against liberals/the left with laws like “it is okay to ram your truck into protestors.” Paul Gossar is a sitting member of Congress who posted a video in which he murdered another member of Congress. He has not apologized, his brother and sister are on the news stating that he is a psyychopathic loon, and Republicans clearly do not want to punish him for his tweet or refusal to back down. In any other workplace, even the most heavily unionized workplace, such an action would be grounds for termination.
But here we are being concerned about online twitter as being the real problem? I don’t agree with them on a good number of issues but they are not advocating or implicitly endorsing murder and political violence. For all my disagreement in terms of substance and style, I think think they are still working within well regarded procedural norms.
Doesn’t it imply something is deeply broken and morally off-compass that this situation exists? Boebert, MTG, and Gossar are not harmless cranks.
The Clinton 1990s are over man. We can’t triangulate our way to success anymore.Report
There’re no heroes in the Rittenhouse story. Some underage idiot gets his idiot mother to drive him across the state so he can pack heat and play Rambo-Jesus in a town wracked with violent douches who’re taking advantage of the BLM protests to raise Cane. Of course, the murdering fish-wit is going to get off. The rioting fish-wits he shot were burning buildings down and gave the murderous fisher a plausible excuse. Now the little punk will go off and live it up in the right-wing celebrity circuit; Kendi will get paid bank to write some pompous screed about black bodies; the left-wing prosperity grifter DiAngelo will get paid a fortune to appropriate black complaints about racism and everyone will be fine- except the poor dead idiots that murderous fisher shot but who cares about them?
This is not a discussion about morality. You know, and I know, the right is worse but so the heck what? This is a discussion about politics and, more importantly, about winning in politics. In politics you don’t make it easy for your opponents to tar you with the worse excesses of your own flank. Or you lose. Virginia’s last election saw education, a historical point of strength for the modern left, ju-jitsu’d into a weakness. And for what? So twitterati, professionals in the decaying academies and media and politicians in safe gerrymandered districts can sit powerlessly and assure each other about how righteous they are in their own special endlessly changing left wing insider language? Fish that. We wanna stop the right-wing loons and for that we need to win which means we need to play to win. We have to persuade the low info voters in the middle who’re dumb or not paying attention or hyper focused on single parochial interests. That means we have to downplay the lunatic wokesters who are somehow managing to even alienate the minority communities they claim to be crusading for and play to the fishing middle. Why the heck shouldn’t we? It’s not like woke even has any content or principles that can be sold out- it’s all just an affect and a pose. So ditch the affects and the poses so you can win and do some actual fishing good!Report
Huzzah! Huzzah!Report
We’re doing a deep dive on Rittenhouse over here: https://ordinary-times.com/2021/10/28/a-victim-by-any-other-name
The upshot is the media has done a remarkably poor job of describing what happened and who the players were.Report
Based upon some videos I’ve seen of the prosecutor, it appears he’s generally incompetant at doing his job, or he’s actively trying to sabotage his case.Report
The prosecution office has a very high profile case. The underlying facts are one sided against them but the media isn’t reporting that. Since it’s public, whoever loses it will have their career damaged.
The guy who gets the short straw and needs to play prosecutor isn’t going to be the best guy in the office. He’s smart and skilled enough to dodge this bullet.Report
“The underlying facts are one sided against them”
And who’s office decided to bring this to trial? The DA. So, isn’t this a self made problem? And who’s gonna get blamed if the DAs office cocks up the prosecution? I assume the DA’s elected, and he’d take the ultimate rap.Report
“Mistakes were made and I have fired the people responsible.”
Or alternatively, he’s trying to make sure his community doesn’t have another 40 buildings burned down.Report
“If I have to subject one innocent kid to a trial costing him and the taxpayers millions in the remote chance of ending the violence in the streets, I’m gonna do it.”
Yeah, that’s a winning strategy. You want that guy in office where you live?Report
I live in a crime free neighborhood in a crime free city. Ergo if protesters started burning down buildings here, I have to assume our authorities would also be out of their depth.
Highly likely that someone like that guy is in office here.Report
The twitter left for all your dislike of them have not endorsed murder as far as I know and operate within the confines of democratic debate and speech. They are not trying to turn Rittenhouse’s trial into an implicit endorsement of murder either.
I know who wants to march me to Dachau and who doesn’t. I might not agree with the twitter left all the time and I might find them loud but I know they don’t want to march me to Dachau. I’m not going to soft peddle to the University of Austin folks with underwear in a bunch.Report
They’d never do that. They’re more interested in seeing how it would work out if we tried doing things more like Yugoslavia or Lebanon.Report
I don’t know why people use references to places far away.
I mean, within living memory George Takai was herded into a camp, while 10,000 Americans saluted the swastika in Madison Square Garden.
Pundits and politicians talked openly about tattooing Americans infected with HIV, in the 1980s.
The Natives were being herded onto reservations and their children ripped away to be sent to schools as recently as a century ago.
The book was called It Can’t Happen Here, but it already has, many times. We don’t need to look at someplace far far away, just look around at our own history.Report
It wouldn’t take long for someone with a stronger stomach for twitt space than me to find some left wing twitter idiot who’s all for murder and violence so long as it’s an approved non-minority individual suffering it (rule 44- there’s no idea so idiotic that you can’t find someone on twitter espousing it).Report
Get back to me when that twit is elected to Congress.Report
Yes but is that a random nutjib or a sitting member of Congress?
Wokism at this point has a distinct “I know it when I see it” category that mainly scares middle aged and older people because they are no longer connected to the youth.
It is kind of revealing that more people are outraged by random young lefties on twitter and tik toc than by members of congress winking that it is okay to kill the opposition and suggesting suburbanites would feel similarly. Not a great look for democracies future in the United States.Report
Psh, could you two stop arguing with someone who’s not me? I lead off the 2nd paragraph stating there’s no moral equivalence between the left and right. This isn’t the argument so you’re basically just posting non-sequiturs.
That the right is morally awful and their loons are generally in control of the operational apparatuses of the rights’ political party in a way the lefts worst loons aren’t even close to achieving is not really a matter of debate- it’s a matter of fact. That makes every point I made in my previous comment even more salient- not less. If the Republicans were just my Granddad’s ol’ libertarian-socialcons-and-plutocrat-fellatio-with-some-nativist-freaks-in-the-bleachers-party then maybe indulging in the woke/identarian affects and postures could be considered harmless. They’re not, so it isn’t. If it’s as serious as you say, and I’m inclined to generally agree it’s as serious as you say, then adopting woke affects and mannerisms are a ludicrous indulgence. It fires up our opponents, turns off the muddled middle and does nothing to fire up our own side. It’s stopping midway across the burning rope bridge to self-apply a quick nose piercing so you look fetch when you finish running across. The academy is the academy and twitter is (alas) twitter but there’s no excuse for Democratic politicians in office to indulge in this stuff or to let its incendiary language get smuggled into their operations. It’s all downside and no upside.Report
There’s a Left twitter guy named Will Stancil who I sometimes read who thinks this is all weak sauce (and the same for Philip and the OP to some extent). In fact, I think he is somewhere by you IIRC you live somewhere in the Land of No Sun.
It’s kinda funny, because for me at least he’s right on a couple of points (including this one) and horribly wrong about everything else.
Thing is, I really don’t know what the Democrats want to stand for if, hypothetically they weren’t Woke, or even gave it up now.
It’s going to be hard to cheerlead for this latest infrastructure bill that passed the House (as the OP would have them do) if the activist class views this as a meager consolation prize at best.
As you’re probably aware, this bill was delayed in the House for several months because lib activists and the Congressional Progressive Caucus desperately wanted for intraparty leverage against the reconciliation bill failing.
I suspect that the Demo political establishment, and lots of Demo voters are either indifferent to Woke or at some level hostile to it. But lib staff, press, activists and pundits are deeply committed to Woke and its cultural attachments. And as of yet, there’s no idea as to how Left politics in America are suppose to work without them.Report
I believe Philip is the OP actually.
As to the “there is no Democratic policy without woke”, that’s silliness. Woke is, at most, an Avant Garde plastic decal on the vehicle that is political liberalism. It doesn’t have much in the way of policy pronouncements, just a lot of nonsensical linguistic affectations. You can toss or downplay woke and 99% of the liberal policy agenda remains basically unaltered.Report
Yeah, that’s what I meant, sorry for not being clear.
Well not really, that’s the point of the earlier comment. Or in other words, you may believe this to be true, but I assure Will Stancil doesn’t. He and his buddies are going to gin up lib Twitter and quasi-Establishment lib media. Lib twitter and lib media are going to bring in the Congressional Progressive Caucus and lib pols in general.
And in fact, for Will in particular, the idea isn’t even about policy. It’s about keeping the Demo voting base, (ie, the not Woke Demos) and low-information voters of all ideologies onside through bread and circuses and whatever media tricks, leaving the lane open for progressives to run through whatever policy _they_ want.
Now, I don’t believe that. But from here, it’s just that he’s wrong, it’s that you’re both wrong.
He’s wrong in that the voters (low-information or otherwise) aren’t nearly as malleable as he thinks. They have real intentions and beliefs, and they are perfectly capable of propagating them, even if they are typically not expressed in policy terms.
You’re wrong because you don’t have enough resources to run an effective campaign, inside election season or out of it.
The Biden Administration has a weird top-and-bottom coalition. Obama did too, but this is a different one. The Biden Administration is like having an army where the generals and the corporals are on the same page and ready to fight, but the sergeants through captains are rooting for the enemy. And armies just can’t win if they work that way.
Point is, _you_might think Woke is just the bumper sticker on _your_ car, but the Woke surely don’t think that. And they’re going to be fighting you for the steering wheel every mile. Good luck getting somewhere with that.Report
Hah, thanks for the reassurance. When arguing about wokeness I always have to ask myself “Self, could you be wrong about this?” but having an honest to God(ess?) conservative roll up and read from the same hymnal as the wokesters is a reassuring confirmation that the given assertion is mostly wrong.
The woke believe and the conservatives want to believe (because it’d make their job so much easier) that woke is a fearsome political force but that simply ain’t the truth. This polity still runs on votes and the woke simply don’t have the votes. Not in the primaries and certainly not in the general. That’s why, by and large, you don’t see Democratic politicians shaking in fear of getting primaried by the woke- the woke try but in general they lose. Look at the last presidential primary- the overwhelming winner was a non-woke, non-woke-approved candidate AND the runner up was a honest to Jebus non-woke socialist. The woke and woke approved candidates barely made it into the running.
Now plenty of wokeness creeps in by inertia and via young staffers as both you and Shor have observed before. While that ain’t nothing it is far from dispositive. Woke linguistic tics and what few actual dumb genuinely woke policies there are could be quietly sent off to that farm where all the family dogs go when they get sick and it would barely move the needle on policy or electoral implications.
Woke is popular because it’s easy- specifically it’s easy for all the academic, bureaucratic, corporate and media types to appear to be doing something huge while not actually doing much at all. But because Woke is easy that also makes simply not indulging in Woke also pretty easy. It doesn’t require much of an overhaul of principle or policy, it just requires not indulging in woke-speak. Like that decal on the car it may be stuck on really tight but if you pry it off you still have the same fundamental car.Report
Sort of but not really. Basically, there’s more than one kind of politics going on here and its a mistake to group them all together.
To wit, there’s cultural politics, policy politics, election politics and factional politics. At least. There may be others, but those are the important ones in play at the moment.
Pertaining to me and Will Stancil, I am deeply invested against him re: cultural politics, but as to factional politics he’s fine by me: let’s you and him fight. The others are touch and go depending on the circumstance.
The libs, or the Woke, they are deeply invested in factional politics, maybe a bit less in cultural politics, and for now at least not as much for the others since their agenda really isn’t on radar.
To that end, you should more careful than you are to say the Woke are losing (or winning) because there’s more than one criteria to judge by, and they are not at all interchangeable.
In particular, it’s shortsighted to say they’re losing at policy politics when they are much more invested in factional politics and they’re doing much better there. Will Stancil types say (and they’re right) that Sinema and Manchin are the flaky types, but they themselves are dead center mainstream American Left. That doesn’t necessarily get them what they want, but it’s not nothing either.
But where this hurts you isn’t in some Woke Leviathan that you imagine some conservative believes in. It’s actually a bit simpler than that.
Because you and the Woke are fighting factional politics against each other, my team is busy putting points on the election politics scoreboard. That is, I shtt on you from my side, Will Stancil shtts on you from his side, we have a committee meeting in the middle, and sack the quarterback, ie, you and Biden.
Whether Woke is strong or weak is a complicated thing. Certainly my side is winning politically right at the moment, maybe both of us are losing culturally, though that one is itself complicated as well.Report
I would have agreed with this a few months ago. As things have progressed though this is an unfair characterization of Kyle Rittenhouse. The trial has shown pretty clearly that a hero is exactly what he is.Report
I wouldn’t say a hero, ’cause what’s a hero? Sometimes there’s a man, and I’m talkin’ about Kyle here, sometimes there’s a man, well, he’s the man for his time and place.Report
He said he was there to defend my property. When the people who threatened my property confronted him, he fled. When those people caught up with him, he shot them to protect himself, not my property. He didn’t ask if I would rather take the insurance money and rebuild rather than have people killed. It wasn’t his choice to make.
I may have missed it, but did the defense call any witnesses who said, “Bless Kyle, he protected my property.”?Report
The prosecution did call the guys who owned the car dealership.
They were testifying as if their counsel explained the answers that they’d need to give to avoid liability, though.Report
That is the only intelligent thing to do.Report
My impression is, despite the claims, that he wasn’t there to protect property. He was there for career (EMT) experience. The gun was just because it was dangerous and all of his friends had guns. What he really wanted to use was the first aid kit in a chaotic situation. Something he could put on his resume when he’s trying to get a job.
Now that me putting selfish motivation on him to match his supposed life plans and I can’t prove it.Report
I used to fence with a guy who was an EMT, who got his training in the military. He worked the worst parts of town. He never went armed. He told horrible stories about rolling into the ER entrance and telling people they had to let him into emergency surgery with the victim because the only reason the victim hadn’t bled out was he had a thumb and two fingers in the bullet holes.
I’m not ever going to be a hero on that scale.Report
Him and everyone he shot. First guy was beyond-bad-movie heinous and crazy.Report
I believe there’s a deep dive on Rambo-Jesus going down in another thread actually: https://ordinary-times.com/2021/10/28/a-victim-by-any-other-nameReport
Yeah I saw that and I might write something there but for the most part I don’t wade into that sort of thing much.
I will say that I am quite surprised at the extent to which Rittenhouse seems to be completely blameless in the whole episode.
There’s some on the Right who’ve said “Well he’ll be found not guilty by the jury and he should but still, it was reckless and incendiary and he shouldn’t have been there.” but I don’t agree. It certainly would be reasonable to stay at home for the safety of his own person if he felt that way but other than that I gainsay a single thing he did.Report
*shrugs* I feel you. I’m not deeply interested in the details since there’re no good guys in that story. He shouldn’t have been there at all. The rest is window dressing. Maybe he wanted to help out, maybe he wanted to shoot his gun off. No clue, can’t read his heart, doesn’t change the fact that he shouldn’t have been there (nor, for that matter, should the rioting fishers taking advantage of the BLM protest to loot and set fires). Since I try to give righties the benefit of the doubt I am calling him Rambo-Jesus rather than Rambo-Psycho since he claims he was there to renter medical assistance.Report
Actually, no. There is a good guy in this story, it’s Kyle Rittenhouse (which frankly surprises me a bit).Report
I’d add Grosskreutz to that list. His honesty and integrity have been impressive (not just from the trial). He’s another armed EMT.
After that, the cops beclowned themselves repeatedly.
Huber I can’t tell if he was a rioter or a protester. Maybe both.
Rosenbaum was a monster.Report
I don’t buy it. He travelled there; he shouldn’t have; the rest is window dressing.Report
He’s a hero like Trump is a leader and Cruz is a statesman.Report
The problem with slim majorities is that they give outsized power to the most squemish members of a coalition. In the case of the Democrats, it essentially turns Manchin and Sinema into co-Presidents. Manchin is dead in the water in 2024 regardless of what he thinks. Sinema is just a straight up perplexing mystery.
The problem with the slim majorities is that we are a big tent coalition where lots of different groups have their pet passion projects and we can never seem to achieve the supermajority necessary to give everyone a unicorn and a pony. Paid family leave is gone again for no good reason except Manchin is a cranky old man who doesn’t understand it because he had kids in an age when housewives where the rule and not the exception. The plan to lower drug prices might be back in a wartered down form.
None the less, some pet projects are going to be excluded and it is hard to tell people that the solution is just to try again and make Manchin and Sinema irrelevant and you need to do this in fifty states.Report
Why is Manchin dead in the water? I understand that WV loves him.
Sinema has wonderful aesthetics, doesn’t she? I love her outfits.Report
Manchin barely won his 2018 election and he only did that because of a third-party spoiler candidate on the right. If he thinks he can win in 2024, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that he might be interested in.
Sinema has burnt her bridges with Arizona Democrats. I am not sure she can survive a primary or if she will even try. Your aesthetic comment makes no sense.Report
He won the popular vote.
I think that he’s got a shot. He can run on “I’ve represented *YOU*, not the weirdos. I will continue to.”
I’m not saying it’s a *LOCK*, but seniority is seniority. And his willingness to play ball will keep him in the game even if the Republicans happen to luck out and win the Senate back.Report
The other strange thing about the Manchin logic is that if he *is* a Dead Man walking, he’s less inclined to negotiate and more inclined to do whatever maximizes Manchin’s exit strategy.
Either way, he’s playing a hand where he’s confident he knows what the odds are.
Edit to add: I’ve heard both sides on Sinema too… she knows she’s gone so she’s playing that hand *and* she know’s she’s got the pulse of AZ just right so she’s playing that hand. Scared folks negotiated with the DNC for help.Report
(Raw Guess)
VP/Board-member for companies he’s helping now.
Lobbyist (although he has to wait a year+)
Something else.
Or all of the above.
He’s been a moderate Dem for years so he’s probably already got contacts with someone who would be screwed by BBB.Report
Minchin’s actions are in good comportment with what a logical simulation of a politician in his circumstances would do. Maybe he believes what he’s saying- if he does his actions comport with that; maybe he wants to make a run at reelection in his current or another WV role- if he does his actions comport with that; maybe he wants to cash out and go into private industry- if he does his actions (eeehh mostly) comport with that.
Sinema? Who the fish knows. The best one can say is that if she falls in line and votes for whatever ends up being settled on and then lays low for the next few years maybe she can win a primary challenge. But that’s the best you can say about her.Report
We have not one but two actual living Manchin constituents on this board.
I’d be curious to hear their assessment of what Manchin voters think and care about.Report
Me too!Report
I’ve always assumed Manchin is speaking for more than just himself, and it’s his circumstances that allow him to do it.Report
Entirely possible but we can only speculate on the unseen actors.Report
Oops, wrong topic.Report
When you check in on the OT after an absence of 2 years and find out your friend mentioned you in their post yesterday… That was delightfully weird.Report
Mike! How I’ve missed your moustache!Report
It’s still here – just with a bit more white in it.Report
Mine to! Fishin’ passage of time.Report
Yes indeed – I’m a grandfather now, so it goes with the territory.Report
Welcome back sir!
And how could I not dispense some of your inestimable wisdom?Report
What’s crazy is that I don’t remember writing a word of that.Report
Google remembers.Report
Welcome backReport
Thanks man.Report
Republicans continue to demonstrate their uncanny insight into what working class voters are most concerned about:
‘But he’s Jewish’: Opponent questions Mandel’s faith in Ohio Senate primary debate
“Are we seriously supposed to believe the most Christian-values Senate candidate is Jewish?” a voice actor asks in Pukita’s radio ad. “I am so sick of these phony caricatures.”
“I agree,” a woman replies in the ad. “We keep electing people like this, we’ll just keep getting the same terrible results.”
These are a simple people of the blood and soil, the common clay of the upper Midwest.Report
Man, this campus culture of loony wokeness is just outta control!
South Carolina governor calls for LGBTQ book to be banned in schools
The director of the ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom, Deborah Caldwell-Stone, told NBC News that while reported challenges against books with LGBTQ content have historically been “constant,” this year, the association has seen a “chilling” uptick.
Virginia’s largest school district, Fairfax County Public Schools, banned the book in September. Brevard Public Schools, a school district in Florida, removed the book last month. And a group of parents in New Jersey, a state of largely Democratic voters, is challenging the book and several others, calling them “perverse.”
The book even came up as a talking point in the recent and contentious Virginia governor’s race, where the Republican candidate, former private equity executive and political newcomer Glenn Youngkin, made education a central issue of his campaign and swept to victory.
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/south-carolina-governor-calls-lgbtq-book-banned-schools-rcna5409
The directors of the University of Austin were not available for comment.Report