"The permanent Democratic majority is actually happening."
Is the argument at hand and the one that I dispute should be interpreted as you imply -- especially as regards progressive priorities within the Democratic coalition.
There are many inefficiencies in the voting game we have built... and I've been extremely vocal on knocking out as many inefficiencies as possible:
* Re-Legislate Reapportionment Act of 1929
* RCV and/or Proportional Representation ^
* Commission based districting -- with algorithmic preference for compact districts & competitiveness.
^ I would prefer a blended geo/at-large hybrid for states with sufficient representatives.
My hypothesis and argument is than these changes would address your concerns about BSDI gerrymandering and simultaneously disrupt the game of voting as it is played (iterated) today.
The results would not favor the extremes of either party. Join me in ending the extremes of both parties.
JB's right, this is classic will-to-power formulation of the non-existence of truth.
Doesn't matter how you cloak it or to what sentiments you appeal... it's all preferred emotions backed by power. The irony is the head-fake to fascism.
Now, my philosophical critique of the OP is that Natural Law (while perhaps 'True') isn't a satisfying philosophical response to emotivism... which is partly why we are where we are.
I literally posted the results from 2020 elections (Ballotpedia) for one of your showcase states which illustrate that in the same election voters voted for both Dems and Republican in majorities.
What I think you don't fully appreciate is that if you alter the rules of the game, you will get different actions in the game by the players.
There's no Democratic demographic wave that will give progressives what they want.
2020:
Donald Trump/Mike Pence (R) 49.9 2,758,775
Joe Biden/Kamala D. Harris (D) 48.6 2,684,292
Total Votes: 5.442M
Delta: 74k +R
2020:
Roy Cooper (D) 51.5 2,834,790
Dan Forest (R) 47.0 2,586,605
Total Votes: 5.420M
Delta: 248k +D
Which means that a significant chunk of Gov Dem Voters switched votes and/or didn't vote for National Dems. That's not a Demographic phenomenon... but a local/national phenomenon.
Which suggests that the Permanent Democratic Majority isn't aligned with National Democratic narratives... and that's a sub-point we are making about Virginia too.
I'm in favor of taking districting out the the hands of the beneficiaries - for simple conflict of interest / good governance reasons - but the end result for both parties would be candidates that are 'less' doctrinaire D's & R's, not more.
Which leads us inevitably back to what's the point of a national narrative on what the parties must stand for when national messages hit local issues orthogonally. Good candidates adjust, bad ones press on and keep the money.
In the realm of counter-factuals... sure, plausible but not likely. Are you in the VA/MD media market? The campaign was as boring and predictable as a Clintonite vs. Venture Capitalist could be. The thing exploded after that and it got Youngkin second looks where he needed it.
The 'gamble' that McAuliffe took wasn't with the Teachers' Union stuff it was the lame "[Youngkin in grainy photo at picnic with kids eating jello] Voicover: You know who else likes to eat strawberry jello? That's right, Donald Trump" Those were the desperation gambles that didn't land.
The other key factor is that the School gaffe -- in addition to being about people's kids -- also tapped into a sizable reservoir of lock-down resentment against Schools ... particularly in NOVA. I don't know exactly how universal that is in the US right now -- I suspect it it locale by locale -- but it was pretty big in Virginia and the biggest resentment was in the Blue districts.
This was not an election to pander to Schools... so I'm less inclined to think he was pandering in desperation; the pandering created the desperation. That is, usually it's a 100% safe bet to pander to Schools -- just not on the back-end of a pandemic where the schools alienated large chunks of otherwise pro-school voters.
"The Democratic Party is currently in the position of fighting back against entrenched power."
This is just a strange sentence. On the one hand, sure there are $billions arranged against the Democrats and there are $billions arranged against Republicans... trenches are trenches.
What strikes me as somewhat obvious as a recent participant in the Virginia election is that McAuliffe's gaffe was the sort of gaffe that is costly not becuase it is some mal adroit phrasing that causes the other side to 'pounce' but because it is the sort of thing that uncovers what lots (enough) people are concerned might be really true about a particular party... it demoralizes some who would vote for you, turns away some who might vote for you, and energizes those who won't vote for you.
McCauliffe was going to be the next Governor precisely because he wasn't fighting against entrenched power... he had entrenched power backing -- all he had to do was run an imperfect campaign that didn't veer into wackadoodle territory, which was his within his rights but not within his ability.
The counter-balance to that was that Youngkin could also make a plausible appeal to entrenched power (not a better one -- he LOST all the entrenched power strongholds - but plausible) so not having a Trumpkin on the ballot exposed McAuliffe's gaffe fatally.
In fact, going back to the original quotation, what's strange about the Dems right now is that they are winning the 'entrenched power' battle -- they don't need perfection, they just need to not screw up. But not screwing-up in this definition is explicitly jettisoning the far left (esp. on Social Issues)... which is difficult because the far left has trenches too, which run perpendicular to other trenches.
Yeah... as much as I like a good volunteer fire brigade fund raising video, it isn't hard to fry a turkey... it's only worth noting that there are things you should consider/look-up if this is your first time sort of thing.
Astonishingly, many people do not consider those things when it's their first time.
Regarding the section on psychic powers... my (long ago) reading of that was less psychic than hyper genetic... the key (for me) was the 'Mitochondrial Inheritance' of the Bene Gesserit (literaly both 'Do Gooders' & 'Good Bearers') that enabled them to inherit the fullness of the previous lives via their genetic inheritance. It struck me as a balance between pure science and mystic discipline (powered by spice)... like a breakthrough that required proper breeding/genes to have access to the mystic discipline -- which was then unlocked by a chemical, spice, via a mystic ritual that either granted access to the DNA memories or death. The absence of the Mystical Training/Discipline is the madness that overtakes Aliya. It's all very rational; hyper rational; mystically rational.
[We can ignore, if we wish, Brian Herbert's next evolutionary discovery regarding male orgasms... and insect like reflexes... but that's part & parcel of their hyper genetic approach to mysticism.]
I like the pre-cognition comparing it to a hyper-mentat state... plausible... but oddly, here I'm not entirely sure how it reconciles with the Golden Path... the Path is Teleological, the computing the grains of sand is mathematical. I guess I just reduced the Teleology to preventing extinction... but that's a pretty monstrous Teleology, all things considered.
Of course, the Teleology and Hyper-Genetics come together under Leto II rather spectacularly.
Lady Marchmaine is mostly indifferent to him; but I think he's the epitome of GenX Guy indulging our inner 16-yo self at that moment we tried (and failed) to leave behind our childish ways. It's precisely because we're enjoying it ironically that we're enjoying it fully.
The earnestness of Green Lantern is the chrysalis that gave us Deadpool.
Wife and I watched Enola Holmes the other day, and instantly regretted not watching Red Notice.
The Holmes movie managed to combine bad acting with an implausibly boring plot, a love story as compelling as the one between Frankenstein and his Monstoer, and a Feminist ending only a Patriarch could enjoy (I at least chuckled)... all the while feeling like being preached at by a Seminarian working from class notes.
Predictably Holmes enjoys a 91% critic / 70% audience score ... probably not quite the reverse ratio that Red Notice will see ... but I will at least appreciate that Red Notice knows what it's doing and does it well - compared to the Holmes fiasco.
I appreciate the sentiment; but at the risk of belaboring discussions we've had here dozens of times... the primary issue is structural with a first-past-the-post duopoly.
The negative partisanship is stronger than willingness to tank the electoral prospects of a party you wish to reform.
I've discussed this in great depth with many reluctant Red team voters... the only thing they respond to is the prospect of voting for a candidate/faction that would not result in "throwing away" their vote or worse, actually enabling the other team to win.
RCV resonates somewhat ... the idea is surprisingly novel and not something they've ever encountered ... but once they hear about it, they are open to it -- as long as they don't see it as a way for the 'other team' to manipulate the electorate. But that's just if we want to see a reform at all. Obviously, the biggest impediment to this are the parties themselves who benefit from the absence of other options.
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.
Haven’t been following this giant bucket of stupid; but it has occurred to me that I’m extremely grateful that my Demo’s and Presentations are not broadcast.
Twitter: Only Marchmaine could screw-up a simple add-on sale like this. The customer specifically told him not to mention that feature, but he’s constantly referring to that feature; doesn’t he get it? Sure, it’s the best feature in the solution, but they don’t care about it. That stupid question from the back of the room he just handwaved? That was the executive sponsor. Is he really parking questions until the end of the presentation? Nobody likes that. Hah! The demo is hanging… good luck selling that stuff. OMG, is he building his closing pitch around the product’s best feature that they don’t care about?
The only thing about sales is that there’s no referee… or everyone’s a referee… or maybe better, the real referee is hidden. Anyway, I’m glad no one watches me work.
On “Yes, Democrats Do Have to Be Perfect”
"The permanent Democratic majority is actually happening."
Is the argument at hand and the one that I dispute should be interpreted as you imply -- especially as regards progressive priorities within the Democratic coalition.
There are many inefficiencies in the voting game we have built... and I've been extremely vocal on knocking out as many inefficiencies as possible:
* Re-Legislate Reapportionment Act of 1929
* RCV and/or Proportional Representation ^
* Commission based districting -- with algorithmic preference for compact districts & competitiveness.
^ I would prefer a blended geo/at-large hybrid for states with sufficient representatives.
My hypothesis and argument is than these changes would address your concerns about BSDI gerrymandering and simultaneously disrupt the game of voting as it is played (iterated) today.
The results would not favor the extremes of either party. Join me in ending the extremes of both parties.
On “Make Truth Self-Evident Again”
JB's right, this is classic will-to-power formulation of the non-existence of truth.
Doesn't matter how you cloak it or to what sentiments you appeal... it's all preferred emotions backed by power. The irony is the head-fake to fascism.
Now, my philosophical critique of the OP is that Natural Law (while perhaps 'True') isn't a satisfying philosophical response to emotivism... which is partly why we are where we are.
On “Yes, Democrats Do Have to Be Perfect”
I literally posted the results from 2020 elections (Ballotpedia) for one of your showcase states which illustrate that in the same election voters voted for both Dems and Republican in majorities.
What I think you don't fully appreciate is that if you alter the rules of the game, you will get different actions in the game by the players.
There's no Democratic demographic wave that will give progressives what they want.
"
Not really, no.
2020:
Donald Trump/Mike Pence (R) 49.9 2,758,775
Joe Biden/Kamala D. Harris (D) 48.6 2,684,292
Total Votes: 5.442M
Delta: 74k +R
2020:
Roy Cooper (D) 51.5 2,834,790
Dan Forest (R) 47.0 2,586,605
Total Votes: 5.420M
Delta: 248k +D
Which means that a significant chunk of Gov Dem Voters switched votes and/or didn't vote for National Dems. That's not a Demographic phenomenon... but a local/national phenomenon.
Which suggests that the Permanent Democratic Majority isn't aligned with National Democratic narratives... and that's a sub-point we are making about Virginia too.
I'm in favor of taking districting out the the hands of the beneficiaries - for simple conflict of interest / good governance reasons - but the end result for both parties would be candidates that are 'less' doctrinaire D's & R's, not more.
Which leads us inevitably back to what's the point of a national narrative on what the parties must stand for when national messages hit local issues orthogonally. Good candidates adjust, bad ones press on and keep the money.
Edit: Jinx 1.2.3... you owe me a coke.
"
It's part of the Dems constant war on Entrenched Power.
"
"Conservative minorities who would totally vote Republican if only the Republicans would jettison their white supremacists."
Lots of people are asking exactly that.
I keep saying that it's an open race to the upper left for either party... both parties have pathways to a better and enduring realigned coalition.
The 'entrenched powers' in this article aren't what Dems are fighting... they are going along with the entrenched powers so they don't have to adjust.
"
In the realm of counter-factuals... sure, plausible but not likely. Are you in the VA/MD media market? The campaign was as boring and predictable as a Clintonite vs. Venture Capitalist could be. The thing exploded after that and it got Youngkin second looks where he needed it.
The 'gamble' that McAuliffe took wasn't with the Teachers' Union stuff it was the lame "[Youngkin in grainy photo at picnic with kids eating jello] Voicover: You know who else likes to eat strawberry jello? That's right, Donald Trump" Those were the desperation gambles that didn't land.
The other key factor is that the School gaffe -- in addition to being about people's kids -- also tapped into a sizable reservoir of lock-down resentment against Schools ... particularly in NOVA. I don't know exactly how universal that is in the US right now -- I suspect it it locale by locale -- but it was pretty big in Virginia and the biggest resentment was in the Blue districts.
This was not an election to pander to Schools... so I'm less inclined to think he was pandering in desperation; the pandering created the desperation. That is, usually it's a 100% safe bet to pander to Schools -- just not on the back-end of a pandemic where the schools alienated large chunks of otherwise pro-school voters.
"
"The Democratic Party is currently in the position of fighting back against entrenched power."
This is just a strange sentence. On the one hand, sure there are $billions arranged against the Democrats and there are $billions arranged against Republicans... trenches are trenches.
What strikes me as somewhat obvious as a recent participant in the Virginia election is that McAuliffe's gaffe was the sort of gaffe that is costly not becuase it is some mal adroit phrasing that causes the other side to 'pounce' but because it is the sort of thing that uncovers what lots (enough) people are concerned might be really true about a particular party... it demoralizes some who would vote for you, turns away some who might vote for you, and energizes those who won't vote for you.
McCauliffe was going to be the next Governor precisely because he wasn't fighting against entrenched power... he had entrenched power backing -- all he had to do was run an imperfect campaign that didn't veer into wackadoodle territory, which was his within his rights but not within his ability.
The counter-balance to that was that Youngkin could also make a plausible appeal to entrenched power (not a better one -- he LOST all the entrenched power strongholds - but plausible) so not having a Trumpkin on the ballot exposed McAuliffe's gaffe fatally.
In fact, going back to the original quotation, what's strange about the Dems right now is that they are winning the 'entrenched power' battle -- they don't need perfection, they just need to not screw up. But not screwing-up in this definition is explicitly jettisoning the far left (esp. on Social Issues)... which is difficult because the far left has trenches too, which run perpendicular to other trenches.
On “Weekend Plans Post: Thanksgiving (American)”
Yeah... as much as I like a good volunteer fire brigade fund raising video, it isn't hard to fry a turkey... it's only worth noting that there are things you should consider/look-up if this is your first time sort of thing.
Astonishingly, many people do not consider those things when it's their first time.
On “Joe Biden Needs to Be The Next Democratic Nominee”
Change gay to guy and that sentence is just as silly.
On “Video Throughput: An Astronomer Reacts to Dune”
Another good episode.
Regarding the section on psychic powers... my (long ago) reading of that was less psychic than hyper genetic... the key (for me) was the 'Mitochondrial Inheritance' of the Bene Gesserit (literaly both 'Do Gooders' & 'Good Bearers') that enabled them to inherit the fullness of the previous lives via their genetic inheritance. It struck me as a balance between pure science and mystic discipline (powered by spice)... like a breakthrough that required proper breeding/genes to have access to the mystic discipline -- which was then unlocked by a chemical, spice, via a mystic ritual that either granted access to the DNA memories or death. The absence of the Mystical Training/Discipline is the madness that overtakes Aliya. It's all very rational; hyper rational; mystically rational.
[We can ignore, if we wish, Brian Herbert's next evolutionary discovery regarding male orgasms... and insect like reflexes... but that's part & parcel of their hyper genetic approach to mysticism.]
I like the pre-cognition comparing it to a hyper-mentat state... plausible... but oddly, here I'm not entirely sure how it reconciles with the Golden Path... the Path is Teleological, the computing the grains of sand is mathematical. I guess I just reduced the Teleology to preventing extinction... but that's a pretty monstrous Teleology, all things considered.
Of course, the Teleology and Hyper-Genetics come together under Leto II rather spectacularly.
On “Joe Biden Needs to Be The Next Democratic Nominee”
I agree it's too early to start the horse race itself; but its hard to see this horse running again.
Which makes the Harris/Buttigieg slap fight all the more fascinating as I don't think either will be in the race at the end.
"
Biden '16 would have been Biden's moment.
Now he's too little, too late, too old.
I hope he lives to a ripe old age on some lovely property in Delaware... but I don't see him campaigning in 2024.
"
Heh... I get your joke. Like we can spend that money in a year!
On “The Maximum MacGuffin of Red Notice”
It's a guy thing.
Lady Marchmaine is mostly indifferent to him; but I think he's the epitome of GenX Guy indulging our inner 16-yo self at that moment we tried (and failed) to leave behind our childish ways. It's precisely because we're enjoying it ironically that we're enjoying it fully.
The earnestness of Green Lantern is the chrysalis that gave us Deadpool.
"
Wife and I watched Enola Holmes the other day, and instantly regretted not watching Red Notice.
The Holmes movie managed to combine bad acting with an implausibly boring plot, a love story as compelling as the one between Frankenstein and his Monstoer, and a Feminist ending only a Patriarch could enjoy (I at least chuckled)... all the while feeling like being preached at by a Seminarian working from class notes.
Predictably Holmes enjoys a 91% critic / 70% audience score ... probably not quite the reverse ratio that Red Notice will see ... but I will at least appreciate that Red Notice knows what it's doing and does it well - compared to the Holmes fiasco.
On “NeverTrumpers Must “Fork” the GOP”
I'm sure it would've worked but those darned Proclaimers came along...
"
You would think...
Jeb! as everyone's universal 4th choice might still be with us...
On “Weekend Plans Post: The Most Important Video You Will See This Year”
I'm desperately working on a treatise on why that method is wrong.
So far I'm just staring at a blank word doc.
On “NeverTrumpers Must “Fork” the GOP”
I appreciate the sentiment; but at the risk of belaboring discussions we've had here dozens of times... the primary issue is structural with a first-past-the-post duopoly.
The negative partisanship is stronger than willingness to tank the electoral prospects of a party you wish to reform.
I've discussed this in great depth with many reluctant Red team voters... the only thing they respond to is the prospect of voting for a candidate/faction that would not result in "throwing away" their vote or worse, actually enabling the other team to win.
RCV resonates somewhat ... the idea is surprisingly novel and not something they've ever encountered ... but once they hear about it, they are open to it -- as long as they don't see it as a way for the 'other team' to manipulate the electorate. But that's just if we want to see a reform at all. Obviously, the biggest impediment to this are the parties themselves who benefit from the absence of other options.
On “Democrats Confront The Real Limits Of Their Messaging Problems”
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.
"
Zip ties. Nautical.
On “A Victim, By Any Other Name”
Sometimes customers want to record the session and I'm like, ugh... y'all are barely paying attention live... but recorded?
"
Haven’t been following this giant bucket of stupid; but it has occurred to me that I’m extremely grateful that my Demo’s and Presentations are not broadcast.
Twitter: Only Marchmaine could screw-up a simple add-on sale like this. The customer specifically told him not to mention that feature, but he’s constantly referring to that feature; doesn’t he get it? Sure, it’s the best feature in the solution, but they don’t care about it. That stupid question from the back of the room he just handwaved? That was the executive sponsor. Is he really parking questions until the end of the presentation? Nobody likes that. Hah! The demo is hanging… good luck selling that stuff. OMG, is he building his closing pitch around the product’s best feature that they don’t care about?
The only thing about sales is that there’s no referee… or everyone’s a referee… or maybe better, the real referee is hidden. Anyway, I’m glad no one watches me work.
On “Democrats Confront The Real Limits Of Their Messaging Problems”
Oops, wrong topic.