Election 2020

[Burning Petard]

CP, you are right on the money about filters and bubbles. That has been the basic meat and potatoes of politicians for generations. Keep the people happy and ignorant and stuff your pockets. When I was a student in Michigan, the local congress critter came back to make an appearance to make a presentation of a check for housing development in a small indian reservation within his district. That was the first time he had shown up in his 'home district' when it was not less that a month before the election, in more than 10 years. He had been serving for more than 20 years. He maintained a very symbolic 'home' in the district and his family made their real home in D.C. This was all public knowledge for a public that did not care. The anti-Viet Nam movement was making the party hacks nervous so he decided to show up and demonstrate he was doing something for the district. It was a very safe one party district and he never bucked the party line about anything.

What is different now is the various means of communication are no longer run through a very narrow choke-point or funnel controlled by a relatively tiny establishment. Freedom of the press exists only for those who own the printing press. Now anybody who can use the computer at the public library now owns their own press. The traditional major daily newspaper out of Philadelphia asks me to buy a home subscription, not so I will be informed about the issues of the day important to my daily life, but to get the best discount grocery coupons.

With all those choices of sources of information now available, most people have erected noise filters that let in very little or nothing, that does not act to confirm pre-existing bias.

snailgate.

[Crackpot]

It is not nearly as sinister as that. Many People have enough on their plates without having to worry about politics so it gets relegated Ed to background noise. The filter is not merely confirmation bias as it is the ability for any given message to pierce the fog of background noise. (Note nuance and detail is unlikely to penetrate unless it is tied to something the listener finds relevant to them). Trump is expert at manipulating this. He can score by acting anti establishment and not take the reputation hit because everything beyond the “Trump shocks Democrats” headline has already filtered into background noise.

[BoSoxGal]

Looks like Democrats are already starting to eat their own, determined to persist in a long-standing habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Scooter]

I think that what you are asking for is more difficult when you have someone prepared to offer simplistic (and useless) solutions to complex problems and tell whatever lie the people want to hear (even when they know it's a lie).

The decline of manufacturing goes back to the 1960s, both industry and government ignored the signs and what they eventually offered was a lot of rearguard actions instead of dealing with the reality that there was no place for many of those jobs in the world economy. I certainly blame politicians for being unwilling to admit that, and for offering little more than rearguard actions in response, and for not championing a radical re-imagining of the whole sector and its place in the economy.
.
A certain kind of Democrat believed that trade deals were the problem and had a particular hatred of NAFTA long before Trump latched onto it. It's hard to explain the benefits of increased trade to someone who lost their job and thinks NAFTA is to blame, but someone should have tried long ago instead of allowing the alleged unfairness and damage caused by trade deals to fester and become an article of faith.

Along came Trump with simplistic solutions that were also lies - (1) You'd be better off with no trade deal than any currently in effect or proposed,
(2) A trade deficit means the other country is cheating us and shows that the trade deal is bad for you. (3)Tariffs are the right response to any trade issues. (4) Those manufacturing jobs you have been losing for 50 years will all come back.

I'm not sure if there's any way to reach those who have latched on to obvious lies because they have never had anyone tell them the truth.

Will they be willing to hear "It's complicated, and even if we can reboot the industrial sector, it will take decades to make it happen. And before you blame NAFTA for shifting auto production to Mexico while U.S. auto workers continued to be laid off, being able to allocate production to optimize efficiency was a key contribution to the continued feasibility of several U.S. auto plants. There would be a lot more cars being produced in Mexico if the Big 3 mothballed their U.S. plants"?

I have not paid a lot of detailed attention to specific proposals of the candidates other than the same few issues we keep hearing about. I was surprised not to see something specific about industrial renewal on Buttigieg's website, because he has pointed to the South Bend example to call for federal government funding for cities in decline to attract new industries and investment. Proposals for federal investment in infrastructure and Green New Deal, and strengthening organized labour are all couched in terms of providing good paying jobs and attracting investment to grow the economy

[Scooter]

Looks like Democrats are already starting to eat their own, determined to persist in a long-standing habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

There have been a few pointed attacks among the candidates, none that seem to have done major damage. How it played out when Harris called out Biden for his alleged flirtation with racists may be instructive going forward - the zinger got her noticed, but black voters don't seem to view it as the mark of Cain.

[BoSoxGal]

I was referring more to the current public pissing match between AOC and other newly minted congresswomen and leader Pelosi, creating just the kind of controversy the party doesn’t need when it should be laser focused on dumping Trump.


Excellent post about the changing job market, the decline of manufacturing and the growth of free trade - Andrew Yang’s candidacy focuses on this issue, on creating a UBI and refashioning the working world for human employees, he’s worth hearing from.

[Crackpot]

nafta was a problem it immediately eliminated local protectionist barriers for broad long term gain without having the foresight to address the regional desolation it caused. Then Trump decided to start monkeying with it once the broad long term gains were starting to be realized. Now I fear a second run at plant closings to adjust for the “new” Normal and I seriously doubt they will learn from past mistakes and allocate funds for community retraining/reinvigoration.

[rubato]

Pelosi, and before her, AOC have both behaved badly in a way that is destructive to themselves and the party. AOC needs to get over herself and learn that there is only so much bandwidth avail. for political change. She cannot spout off about every thing she disagrees with in her party and learn to be disciplined and focus on the most important things. Pelosi needs to accept that AOC is the future and treat her with respect so she (AOC) can mature into a capable leader.

They both need a good whack across the muzzle with a rolled up newspaper and to apologize for their selfish idiocy.

yrs,
rubato

[RayThom]

... They both need a good whack across the muzzle with a rolled up newspaper and to apologize for their selfish idiocy.
yrs,
rubato

Yeah, sure. As if force works in the long term. That only builds resentment, not obedience.

[Burning Petard]

How did AOC become the poster for the winning future of the dems? She won her election in a one-party safe district where the establishment including the incumbent, were fat, happy, and complacent. She added nothing to the Dem majority in Congress beyond sound-bites that make lazy news writers happy.

snailgate

[Econoline]

• ...sound-bites that make lazy news writers happy.

I think maybe you just answered your own question there?

(In fairness, whenever the quote used is longer than a sound bite, it's usually also quite intelligent.)




Also too: her looks (arguably the most physically attractive woman in the House) ain't bad.

[Econoline]

[Econoline]

[Crackpot]

I’m hoping Amash gets in the race.

[Lord Jim]

That would be very bad news for the Democrats, especially if they nominate one of the "If you like your plan, go fuck yourself" 13% Solution candidates...(Like Sanders, Warren or Harris)

And if additionally the candidate's proposed replacement for Trump's racist, vicious, draconian immigration policies is to "decriminalize" illegal immigration entirely, (a proposal just about as popular as Mandatory Medicare For All) it's even worse news...

Of course if they nominate someone embracing those wildly unpopular positions they've probably booted the election anyway, no matter who else runs...

[Crackpot]

I seriously doubt Amash has the voting record to woo the center. What he has however is the belief in the purpose of government to shake up the partisan malaise. Either way I think he’ll wait for at least a few definite front runners to emerge on the Democratic side before he makes a decision.

[Econoline]

To return to snailgate's question re AOC. I know you've sometimes quoted, with approval, Jim Wright of Stonekettle Station)...though I don't know whether you follow him on Facebook. Here's something he posted there this morning:

• Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez went after Trump this morning.
  
  In response to his openly racist comments yesterday, and his complete meltdown this morning, Ocasio-Cortez condemned Trump for using the "language of white supremacists."
  
  You know, agree or not with her various positions, I'm damned glad to see there are at least a few representatives in the House who actually remember their duty to the country, the oath they swore, and who have the moral fortitude to take on Trump toe-to-toe without regard for themselves or their political future.
  
  That's courage.
  
  And we need a hell of a lot more of it.
  
  

[Bicycle Bill]

First, you stoke hatred and fear of minorities.
Then you round them up and put them in camps.
Next, you send out raiding parties to get those who have been driven into hiding.
The armbands come next right?        .... from author Stephen King's Twitter feed

-"BB"-

[rubato]

... They both need a good whack across the muzzle with a rolled up newspaper and to apologize for their selfish idiocy.
yrs,
rubato

Yeah, sure. As if force works in the long term. That only builds resentment, not obedience.

Usually you are more perceptive than this.

1. rolled up newspapers do not injure or even cause pain.

2. I thought the reference to female canids was pretty obvious.

Go pet your cat!

yrs,
rubato

[RayThom]

No, rubato, with you nothing is ever obvious.

If there is anyone who is wrong and/or confused most of the time it's you.

And what's with the cat reference? I don't get that, either.