I definitely get it. I don't remember the last time I went to the grocery store and didn't freak out a little, inside, when I saw the total on the screen. And while I'm doing OK financially now, I've spent much of my adult life not doing well financially, so I definitely understand how hard this is for a lot of people.
And while I think you're right that groceries and rent, as well as car prices, which have gone up by about $10,000 since 2019), construction costs, etc., are probably the big issue, I really do think that the anxiety it causes makes other issues -- immigration (which I think is a non-issue, but easily gets tied into other issues, including inflation and crime), crime (regardless of what's actually happening with crime), homelessness (especially homelessness: homelessness is even more salient when you feel a bit closer to it), and even pronouns -- more salient, because anxiety likes to add anxieties, and because fear makes people more conservative (and inflation makes people afraid).
Put differently, if people can afford a decent car, eggs and milk don't cause sticker shock, and rent for a decent place stays under a third of your income, it's much more difficult to tell people that they should vote for the other party because of pronouns and too many people coming across the border to work jobs no one else wants to do.
I'm not a big fan of pure bread dogs, but my brother had a dog that was part Catahoula Leopard, and that dog was the smartest dog I've ever met, so maybe that one.
Talking to an ex-OTer on Twitter, and he says it's pretty easy to explain a loss when the current administration has an approval rating in the 30s and people are really upset about inflation and immigration (I think especially inflation). It might be that we're all trying too hard, and that if you get rid of inflation in particular, a lot of the other stuff (like pronouns) just doesn't land. Who knows?
My worry, of course, is that, in reaction to this election the Democratic Party becomes even more Republican-lite than it already is. I suspect that I'm one of the few here who worries about this.
Yeah, Latinx and preferred pronouns are kinda opposites: the former, very few people to whom the label is supposed to apply want to use it or want it to be used, whereas preferred pronouns are precisely about what the people being referred to want to be called.
Thinking about the different trajectories of Atrios and Yggles over 20 years, their politics weren't all that different back in the heyday of the progressive blogosphere, but here's Atrios' postmortem:
The best way to do that is going to be to continue to run towards the middle as the Republican Party becomes more radical.
Running towards the middle produced an effective landslide loss. I'm sure doing more of the same is the way to go.
I see people above saying that she didn't deny any of her old positions, but this time around she was pro-fracking, pro-tough on the border (you can say that as the Border Czar or whatever she wasn't, but that wasn't actually her job, and everyone here who pretends it was of course knows better), didn't talk about culture war stuff much (except abortion), etc. Does running towards the center just mean being a Bush-era Republican? I mean, she had those people are on her side this time, so...
I find the criticism from the center, criticisms coming after she ran in many ways as a moderate Republican, bringing moderate Republican endorsers with her to rallies, to be particularly silly.
#2 in particular, seems both out of touch with her campaign, and out of touch with the reality of climate change.
Immigrants, particularly undocumented immigrants, make up such a huge portion of Texas' workforce that I fail to understand why it's such an issue here. And I wonder what people think will happen when those construction and farm workers are deported in huge numbers.
I wonder how these policies would have helped. It looks like as many as 16 million fewer people showed up to vote this time, and of those, 14 million fewer voted for Harris. Do you think those 14 million people didn't show up because Harris wasn't tough on crime, immigration, or the media, which just happen to be your pet issues? I'm skeptical, I have to say.
I think this is right. She was a very poor candidate in '20, and has not done much, or even been particularly visible, since. The circumstances of her nomination, her (relative) youth*, and who her opponent, have produced more enthusiasm than she could have produced in pretty much any other context, I think.
She's older than me, but I heard an interview of a college student (I can't remember if it was local or on national radio) a week or two ago say that they felt she was a young person like them, and I felt like this was such an indictment of our political system and its tendency to put very old people in power.
How does letting them take off on a day that's likely going to be full of anxiety both among their parents and their peers, making it significantly less likely that they'll get anything out of a school day, sound like learned helplessness to you?
If it looks like moral panic, walks like moral panic, and quacks like moral panic, it's probably moral panic.
This one case, the unreasonableness of which has not been explained, merely stated as obvious, has been used to launch an entire discussion about pampered kids. That's a lot of looking, walking, and quacking for a non-moral panic.
Do I think smart phones, tablets, and streaming media generally are bad for kids? Maybe. These are in many ways societal revolutions, and we're still figuring how to live with them. There's a really good chance we're not doing it quite right, and that this affects kids.
Do I think taking kids' emotional well-being into account in schools has anything to do with this? Absolutely not, and I wish parents didn't have to pay $65k per year to get that.
It's very weird that we've got a bunch of old farts here complaining in a now long thread about a school taking kids' emotional well-being seriously. And lest I be pilloried for suggesting that the election has anything to do with emotional well-being, I'll remind the old farts that many of them are among the people acting as though this election has existential consequences for the country, in full view of school age children everywhere.
Coincidentally, this is a school that's well known among the left not because it's a generally progressive institution (though I gather it is), but because 4 or 5 years ago they fired a (Jewish) teacher for pro-BDS tweets.
This is an anti-vouchers tactic I had not seen before: appealing to the "get off my lawn!" crowd using "kids these days, amirite?!". I'm skeptical, but more power to ya.
I can promise you that this is not now, nor would it have been 40 years ago, the worst sort of pampering rich kids experience at elite private schools. Does it look silly? Sure. Is it harmful? I can't imagine how, particularly in context.
And besides, why wouldn't kids be distressed? Adults, including many on this site, have been telling everyone who'll listen that our country and system of government are at stake, and that if the wrong person wins, it means disaster. If this is bad for kids, it ain't that school's fault.
Y'all sound like a couple of old men yelling at clouds.
I'd swear just a couple months ago the every story and meme I saw from conservative media and Facebook was about how gone Biden was mentally. If they actually believed that, the "garbage" comment shouldn't mean much to them, right? In which case, the pouncing part is the story.
In case I wasn't clear, I'm not worried about conversions -- I've actually seen a lot of those from former OTers -- but about realignment. Maybe this isn't a realignment, but for the reasons I gave above, particularly the potential long-term MAGA control of the GOP, I worry that it is.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Trumped”
I definitely get it. I don't remember the last time I went to the grocery store and didn't freak out a little, inside, when I saw the total on the screen. And while I'm doing OK financially now, I've spent much of my adult life not doing well financially, so I definitely understand how hard this is for a lot of people.
And while I think you're right that groceries and rent, as well as car prices, which have gone up by about $10,000 since 2019), construction costs, etc., are probably the big issue, I really do think that the anxiety it causes makes other issues -- immigration (which I think is a non-issue, but easily gets tied into other issues, including inflation and crime), crime (regardless of what's actually happening with crime), homelessness (especially homelessness: homelessness is even more salient when you feel a bit closer to it), and even pronouns -- more salient, because anxiety likes to add anxieties, and because fear makes people more conservative (and inflation makes people afraid).
Put differently, if people can afford a decent car, eggs and milk don't cause sticker shock, and rent for a decent place stays under a third of your income, it's much more difficult to tell people that they should vote for the other party because of pronouns and too many people coming across the border to work jobs no one else wants to do.
On “Puppy Love in the IG Era: Ten Favorite Dog Breeds”
I'm not a big fan of pure bread dogs, but my brother had a dog that was part Catahoula Leopard, and that dog was the smartest dog I've ever met, so maybe that one.
On “Trumped”
Talking to an ex-OTer on Twitter, and he says it's pretty easy to explain a loss when the current administration has an approval rating in the 30s and people are really upset about inflation and immigration (I think especially inflation). It might be that we're all trying too hard, and that if you get rid of inflation in particular, a lot of the other stuff (like pronouns) just doesn't land. Who knows?
My worry, of course, is that, in reaction to this election the Democratic Party becomes even more Republican-lite than it already is. I suspect that I'm one of the few here who worries about this.
"
Yeah, Latinx and preferred pronouns are kinda opposites: the former, very few people to whom the label is supposed to apply want to use it or want it to be used, whereas preferred pronouns are precisely about what the people being referred to want to be called.
"
Pretty much any Bernie policy, but especially the very popular ones like Medicare for All, which I gather she was in favor of 4 years ago.
"
I find this mind-boggling.
Why do they care about gender-affirming care? Why do they care about pronouns?
"
I wonder how many people actually vote based on gender-affirming care, in either direction. It can't possibly be many.
"
Yeah, it's hard not to think the Dems avoided saying anything is wrong, and Trump was the only alternative to the head-in-the-sand party.
"
Thinking about the different trajectories of Atrios and Yggles over 20 years, their politics weren't all that different back in the heyday of the progressive blogosphere, but here's Atrios' postmortem:
https://www.eschatonblog.com/2024/11/are-we-going-to-do-this-again.html
"
The best way to do that is going to be to continue to run towards the middle as the Republican Party becomes more radical.
Running towards the middle produced an effective landslide loss. I'm sure doing more of the same is the way to go.
I see people above saying that she didn't deny any of her old positions, but this time around she was pro-fracking, pro-tough on the border (you can say that as the Border Czar or whatever she wasn't, but that wasn't actually her job, and everyone here who pretends it was of course knows better), didn't talk about culture war stuff much (except abortion), etc. Does running towards the center just mean being a Bush-era Republican? I mean, she had those people are on her side this time, so...
On “History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?”
Oh sure, I agree the Cheneys and Torture Memo Gonzales were horrible choices for many reasons.
"
I find the criticism from the center, criticisms coming after she ran in many ways as a moderate Republican, bringing moderate Republican endorsers with her to rallies, to be particularly silly.
#2 in particular, seems both out of touch with her campaign, and out of touch with the reality of climate change.
"
Immigrants, particularly undocumented immigrants, make up such a huge portion of Texas' workforce that I fail to understand why it's such an issue here. And I wonder what people think will happen when those construction and farm workers are deported in huge numbers.
"
Looks like I was looking at incomplete numbers and it will be close to 2020? Not sure though.
"
I wonder how these policies would have helped. It looks like as many as 16 million fewer people showed up to vote this time, and of those, 14 million fewer voted for Harris. Do you think those 14 million people didn't show up because Harris wasn't tough on crime, immigration, or the media, which just happen to be your pet issues? I'm skeptical, I have to say.
On “The Joy Of Opening Time Capsules: The Night Before the 2024 Presidential Election”
I think this is right. She was a very poor candidate in '20, and has not done much, or even been particularly visible, since. The circumstances of her nomination, her (relative) youth*, and who her opponent, have produced more enthusiasm than she could have produced in pretty much any other context, I think.
She's older than me, but I heard an interview of a college student (I can't remember if it was local or on national radio) a week or two ago say that they felt she was a young person like them, and I felt like this was such an indictment of our political system and its tendency to put very old people in power.
On “Final Thoughts Before November Fifth”
There is a fair amount of research (see, e.g.).
How does letting them take off on a day that's likely going to be full of anxiety both among their parents and their peers, making it significantly less likely that they'll get anything out of a school day, sound like learned helplessness to you?
"
If it looks like moral panic, walks like moral panic, and quacks like moral panic, it's probably moral panic.
This one case, the unreasonableness of which has not been explained, merely stated as obvious, has been used to launch an entire discussion about pampered kids. That's a lot of looking, walking, and quacking for a non-moral panic.
Do I think smart phones, tablets, and streaming media generally are bad for kids? Maybe. These are in many ways societal revolutions, and we're still figuring how to live with them. There's a really good chance we're not doing it quite right, and that this affects kids.
Do I think taking kids' emotional well-being into account in schools has anything to do with this? Absolutely not, and I wish parents didn't have to pay $65k per year to get that.
"
It's very weird that we've got a bunch of old farts here complaining in a now long thread about a school taking kids' emotional well-being seriously. And lest I be pilloried for suggesting that the election has anything to do with emotional well-being, I'll remind the old farts that many of them are among the people acting as though this election has existential consequences for the country, in full view of school age children everywhere.
"
Coincidentally, this is a school that's well known among the left not because it's a generally progressive institution (though I gather it is), but because 4 or 5 years ago they fired a (Jewish) teacher for pro-BDS tweets.
"
This is an anti-vouchers tactic I had not seen before: appealing to the "get off my lawn!" crowd using "kids these days, amirite?!". I'm skeptical, but more power to ya.
"
I can promise you that this is not now, nor would it have been 40 years ago, the worst sort of pampering rich kids experience at elite private schools. Does it look silly? Sure. Is it harmful? I can't imagine how, particularly in context.
And besides, why wouldn't kids be distressed? Adults, including many on this site, have been telling everyone who'll listen that our country and system of government are at stake, and that if the wrong person wins, it means disaster. If this is bad for kids, it ain't that school's fault.
Y'all sound like a couple of old men yelling at clouds.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
Biden's been famous for his gaffes for literally decades. I think the most parsimonious explanation is that it was Joe being Joe.
"
I'd swear just a couple months ago the every story and meme I saw from conservative media and Facebook was about how gone Biden was mentally. If they actually believed that, the "garbage" comment shouldn't mean much to them, right? In which case, the pouncing part is the story.
On “What If Kamala Wins?”
In case I wasn't clear, I'm not worried about conversions -- I've actually seen a lot of those from former OTers -- but about realignment. Maybe this isn't a realignment, but for the reasons I gave above, particularly the potential long-term MAGA control of the GOP, I worry that it is.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.