In one of yesterday’s threads, Baud asked for a review of AOC’s Instagram presence. This is a little harder than it sounds because Instagram is a “walled garden” — Meta wants you to have an account to see content. Also, Instagram has (at least) three kinds of posts. There are regular posts, which are pictures with comments that live forever on your feed. Then there are “stories”, which are 30 second videos that last for a day and then disappear. Stories can be gathered into “features” that live forever, but the person posting needs to choose to do that. Then there are “reels”, which are longer videos. Basically, Instagram is trying to be Instagram, Snapchat and Youtube all in one. So to review AOC’s IG, I took some screenshots, and I’ll relay some other facts from memory, but its difficult to capture the entire flavor of what’s going on there.
AOC has an official Instagram feed and her personal feed. The official feed is curated/created by a staff member in her office. Her personal feed is created solely by her. She posted about this in a story a while ago, so I can’t link to it, but the gist of what she said is that she is still learning the best way to do social media, and she’s settled on IG because she found the platform easier to use to express herself than Twitter. Her Twitter posting has tapered down since she started using Instagram more heavily. Note that she has 8.5 million followers on IG, which is a lot for a politician but not much compared to, say, Beyonce, who has 265 million followers.
I tried to use a service called Imgur to embed screenshots, but it appears to be broken. So you’ll have to follow the links to see the screenshots. The first set of shots is some of her Roe v Wade posting. As you can see, she’s explaining why Obama couldn’t pass a reproductive rights bill. Her highlight on this also go into details about Plan C, deleting period apps, and so forth. Her frenchie Deco is often featured in her IG content, as he is here.
This one is a set of posts about her congressional trip to Puerto Rico. It’s a pretty typical example of her explainers – she goes into depth, solicits questions from her audience, and presents both sides of an issue.
If you do have an Instagram account, you can go to her page and view highlights on issues like inflation and vaccines. She also has an interesting one on hospitality work where she explains the pros and cons of a job like bartending versus a 9-5 job. This was in response to an “ask me anything” question from one of her followers.
Her use of social media is a foreshadowing of how other politicians will use social media in the future. She uses Twitter for a more official public presence, where she’s quick to clap back at selected Republicans who say stupid things, and to make announcements. Instagram is where she is more relatable and human, where she goes in depth with longer reels and Q&As.
AOC does very little (to no) bashing of other Democrats, nor does she do much of anything she’s commonly accused of in the comments here. When she does discuss her Democratic colleagues, she tries to explain why they vote or act a certain way, and those explanations are pretty interesting. For example, she has noted that she is in a privileged place compared to many of her colleagues because she doesn’t need to fundraise. It is a little-noted fact about DC that most Senators and Representatives spend hours on the phone every week talking to prospective big donors, and also spend a lot of time at fundraisers in their district. For the average constituent, this is wasted time — their Rep could be spending it actually doing something that matters. Another point she’s made in the past is the snail’s pace of advancement in the House, where you have to hang around for years to work your way up the committee and leadership ladder.
Finally, in the comments yesterday there were questions about AOC’s comment that Biden could build healthcare clinics on federal land, given the Hyde Amendment’s prohibition on using federal funds for abortions. Here’s former front pager Angry Black Lady’s take on that. My take in the comments was that there are plenty of ways to weasel around the Hyde Amendment, such as having the feds build the main clinic and then having Planned Parenthood build nearby and handle the abortions there. In this, as in many other issues, AOC is not afraid to throw something against the wall and see if it sticks. Her current use of Instagram reflects that trait.
The Jan.6 Committee Open Thread: Spoiling Today’s Surprise (Maybe)
SiubhanDuinne
Baud is nothing but a troublemaker.
O. Felix Culpa
This is useful information. Thank you.
mistermix
The Imgur embeds I was using were fubar so I had to resort to links. Please let me know if you can’t see the screenshots. Thanks.
Betty Cracker
Interesting and informative — thank you! I follow AOC on Twitter but will start paying more attention to her IG page now that I know that’s where she’s most active. (I have an account but don’t post — mostly stalk chefs!) I don’t always agree with AOC, but I am really grateful to her for convincing my youngs that party politics is something people who aren’t boring old mom think is important. Also, if you just follow her on Twitter, you’d miss the adorable dog.
Immanentize
Thank You. AOC is certainly THE Bete Noire of the democratic ‘center.’ but it ends up all of the so-called squad are really effective representatives for their districts. More liberal than the bog standard Dem in Congress? Absolutely. But Jayapal, Omar, Presley, and AOC are all putting in the work. (I cannot really speak to Cori Bush, who was not one of the originals.)
mistermix
@O. Felix Culpa: You’re welcome.
@Betty Cracker: Yeah, my daughter is a big fan, too. Another thing about AOC is that she has grown in the job. She’s not afraid to experiment and to adapt.
Baud
Fascinating. Now to read the rest of your post (hopefully no footnotes).
Baud
@SiubhanDuinne:
Not true. I am also a scoundrel.
gvg
I don’t believe the Federal land idea. It seems like bullshit to me. They still have to follow state laws there. Federal land is not exempt from state laws. The only way federal law trumps state is if the Feds have actually passed a law in which case the state law saying different would be moot. This idea is wishful thinking.
Tribal lands might be different but I wouldn’t count on it.
Washington DC might be something like a blue state.
Baud
I don’t do social media, but at least with Twitter, I can see tweets people bring to my attention. It’s too bad that IG is more walled off, if that’s where a lot of the action is.
Jinchi
Was coming to make this point, but saw that ABL did it already and better.
gwangung
@Baud: What’s fascinating is that she herself is saying she’s still learning, when it was clear she started out at a very high level.
mistermix
@Immanentize: There was an article in the Atlantic in the 90’s I think that detailed just what was involved in being a member of congress, and how burdensome the fundraising was. I will search for it again – last time I couldn’t find it – but it’s notable just how little that’s mentioned. AOC has like $4.3 million cash on hand. She will never have to fundraise. That’s probably true for the rest of the squad. That gives them a huge amount of time to actually do the work of being a MoC.
MisterDancer
I think back just over a decade, and recall all the Blue Dogs who many kept hating on, wishing they’d go away. Boy, the days when comments hear and elsewhere were filled to the brim with hate-ons for, say, Lieberman! Remember those days?
And then, they did go away, as the GOP extremists took all those seats — and with them, much hope for a Democratic Senate.
I think about that recent past sometimes, when stuff like these criticisms of people like Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and like-minded folx come up — obviously, from another angle politically, but the discussion feels all-too-similar.
I don’t think The Squad is beyond criticism. I also think we need to have a thought about what happens if they do go away. Is our goal in our criticism to have them align to the Party better? To not enable “bad faith actors”? Or to just go away for “real Progressives?”
That’s not to say that criticism must have a goal. Venting is real, and needs to happen. It is to say that, at some point, maybe the venting needs to move from raw — and real — anger and frustration into a process for change, and goals therein.
Baud
@gvg:
FWIW, my issue isn’t with people throwing out ideas. It’s when people tuen their ideas into litmus tests. (And I’m not saying AOC has done this).
germy shoemangler
@Jinchi:
Very sad to see Imani Gandy is now part of “Do Something!” twitter.
/
Baud
@gwangung:
The Beyonce number is off the charts. I can’t even comprehend.
SiubhanDuinne
@Baud:
Yes, and a rapscallion.
germy shoemangler
@mistermix:
Mitch McConnell is a master at fundraising. Most of the Republicans are, it’s their primary skill.
mistermix
@gvg:
ABL seems to think it could have legs. I think “bullshit” is a bit harsh.
I see it as part of the never-ending debate on just how much Democrats should follow norms when Republicans are busting them left and right. Part of our reluctance (and I’m not saying this about you, I don’t know you, but in general) is that we’re afraid that if we do X worth of norm busting, Republicans will do 10X or 100X of it next time they have power. (I know a norm is not a law but we tend to not go to the very edge of what a law would allow because the norm is to stay within the law, while Republicans go there and over all the time.)
Immanentize
@germy shoemangler: She is very upset, for good reason. But do something Twitter just bores me to death.
Ohio Mom
I said yesterday that I admire AOC, Katie Porter and Elizabeth Warren’s communication skills. They are all fabulous at presenting the Democractic/liberal position on complex issues in an easy-to-grasp, engaging way.
We often complain that Republicans are good at messaging awful ideas. Well here are three that are good at messaging our great ideas. These examples of AOC’s social media posts just prove my point.
I know that a Juicer or two are not happy with some of the things AOC has done but at this point in my life I’m beyond nitpicking like that. It’s the overall pattern I’m looking at.
daveNYC
@germy shoemangler: Fundraising is easier if your targets are crazy wealthy and you’re willing to do anything they want as long as they sign a check.
Ohio Mom
@germy shoemangler: Eh, when your job goal is to do stuff for obscenely wealthy people, of course it’s easy to fundraise.
ETA: I see daveNYC got here first.
Baud
@Baud:
Tuen = turn
MisterDancer
She’s not, in my opinion. I’ve read a lot of “Do Something” Twitter, and usually they just call “The Democrats” feckless. If you’re “lucky,” they’ll either:
Gandy’s doing none of that. She’s espousing very much a Governmental-oriented Direct Action approach that has multiple attack tactics, not just one or two. She’s advocating efforts that delay implementation, and provide media attention tactics towards a goal of getting this Abortion situation to get more notice, as well as give as many people chances to get Abortions as possible.
Her tactics make the Biden Administration out to be the Good Guys, to build up goodwill for them and the Party, while showcasing how extreme the anti-Abortion assholes really are.
Her ideas are by and large doable. And although not every one makes 100% sense to me, it’s clear she’s gamed this out. She shows angry, as is her right, yet also insight and intellect in her suggestions on what the current Administration can do to win it. And that makes her massively different than Yet Another “Biden promised to kill student loan debt!” person, to me at least.
Geminid
@mistermix: Lauren Underwood and Sharice Davids also seem to find plenty of time for their “actual work” in Congress. I think they are worth as much as any two “Squad” members, maybe even more because they flipped red seats in 2018.
Raoul Paste
I wonder how many of Beyoncé‘s followers are American. I trust she is urging people to vote
germy shoemangler
@Geminid:
You missed the sarcasm tag at the end of my comment
schrodingers_cat
Curious that an effective Congresswoman from the 2018 cohort like Rep. Underwood who has written legislation that has passed into law doesn’t get 1/10 the press or BJ front page posts that the NYC rep gets. Underwood even flipped a red seat.
To many in the media and the public at large Instagram celebrity matters >> than writing effective legislation.
What progressive policy goals has the representative actually accomplished. To earn the label of a progressive what progress has the representative actually contributed to. How much legislation has the legislator written and had pass the committee and become a law? Can we have a post on that too?
My definition of progress for a congressperson is not the # of social media followers they have or the lovely explainers they write. YMMV.
Betty Cracker
@MisterDancer: Chris Murphy replaced Lieberman — a giant upgrade! But I agree with your overall point that even an annoying Blue Dog is better than any Republican.
germy shoemangler
@daveNYC: @Ohio Mom:
Yes, I was thinking about that as I wrote my comment. You don’t really have to beg for donations when donors know you’re a reliable advocate for their interests. The phone calls are friendly chats and a few reassuring chuckles.
mistermix
@MisterDancer:
I was here and posting more regularly. The archives are gone but I don’t remember bashing true Blue Dogs who were trying to keep their seats in red districts. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin is one I think I wrote about back then, since she’s from South Dakota. She was doing the best she could in a state that is now as red as a butcher’s floor. I didn’t like it, but I could understand it.
But, really, fuck Joe Lieberman. He was to the right of where he could be given the party makeup of his state (his seat is now held by Democrat Chris Murphy) and he was a constant drama queen throwing sand in the gears of Democrats’ legislative goals. Good riddance to him. Look at him versus his colleagues at the time, Chris Dodd and Richard Blumenthal. Both solid Democrats who didn’t feel the need to blue dog it. It’s like Krysten Sinema and Mark Kelly. One of them needs to be the star of the show. The other is a solid vote and a solid worker for the party.
Jinchi
The norms are already dead. Democrats should dedicate themselves to the agenda that government should solve problems. The rules should serve the objective.
MisterDancer
I wish I recall the conversation always being that nuanced.
I do not.
And yes, we cannot count them, anymore. Yet it was a sufficient number that it stuck with me, through the years. Recollections are what they are, and I could be wrong.
daveNYC
@germy shoemangler: Although I do think even the Republican Representatives have to do the phone bank hell like pretty much everyone. I’m not sure if it’s actually financially necessary or if it’s just some form of hazing the leadership imposes.
schrodingers_cat
@MisterDancer: FWIW my recollection hews closer to yours.
Scout211
FYI, there is supposedly a run on emergency contraception at the big chain pharmacies. They are limiting purchases to three pills per person.
Baud
@MisterDancer:
I seem to recall Claire McCaskill getting her share of derision. What we wouldn’t give to have her back?
UncleEbeneezer
I don’t use Instagram but I do use Twitter and see AOC all the time. I think “little-to-no bashing” of Dems and the Dem Party is being awfully gracious here. Bashing her own party is a big part of the brand she has built, and while I don’t think she’s the wicked witch that many make her out to be, I find that she way to often spreads BothSides framings that hurt voter/Party enthusiasm. I don’t have the time to go digging up a bunch of examples but I’ll just say that I know several very online, Progressive organizers/activists who are always looking for excuses to bash Dems. One of them just yesterday predictably said re: Dobbs “You know who I blame?…the Democrats.” People like him and my BernieBro Father-In-Law absolutely love AOC. And to me that’s pretty much all I need to know about her messaging strategy. It has a very strong appeal to Dem-haters on the Left. And many of these people take absolute glee in spreading misinformation/criticisms that encourage voter apathy and did so repeatedly in 2016, helping put us where we are now. So while I often personally feel like AOC’s messaging is not wrong, I’m not sure it’s always helpful. That said I’d vote for her in a heartbeat.
Anyway
Related to this – read a WP article where Rev. Barber and Rep Cori Bush were critical of Democratic leaders for being passive (“tepid” -ha) in the face of Rethug aggressiveness in passing through their priorities. Paraphrasing from the WP – asking people to vote is not enough, our side needs to be more creative — but they seem to escape the wrath of Jackals – that was reserved for AOC for some reason.
Baud
@UncleEbeneezer:
Interesting. Does she have different approaches to each site?
Immanentize
@MisterDancer: I think you have not been reading her twitter feed lately. She has done some of what you say, but she has taken a turn toward “Democrats aren’t doing anything and they could solve this problem if they wanted to” in the last few days. She is certainly passionate, but she is also extremely unrealistic.
Like: Put abortion clinics on military bases and order the military to perform abortions! That is not a serious proposal for oh so many reasons. Her new attack is that the Democrats had a long time to codify Roe and they did nothing!!!!11! Which absolutely ignores the House Democrats passing legislation to nationally codify Roe, which could not get passed in the Senate. She is big on the “Democrats haven’t acted!” wagon right now. Ignoring actual things that have been done.
Baud
@Anyway:
First I heard of it. I hadn’t heard of anything about AOC before yesterday.
Ken
Sort of the opposite of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Eolirin
I think one of the really big problems we have is that our base expects our elected officials to be activists.
That’s not what their job is. Their job is to use the levers of power in their particular part of government to enact outcomes that align with the policy objectives that the base pushes them to adopt.
It’s our job to be activists.
The right gets this. It’s part of why they keep kicking our ass. Though the amount of money their very rich backers can funnel into messaging and organizational coordination helps a ton too. But they don’t rely on their politicians to do that.
schrodingers_cat
@Immanentize: Criticizing Democrats gains followers and likes.
Geminid
@germy shoemangler: Wrong commenter, I think.
Baud
@Immanentize:
I despise this line of argument. So what? You’re going to let women suffer to punish Dems for past inaction?
The Moar You Know
@Jinchi: She’s not wrong. The Republican party has been successful in spite of being a minority because of two things:
Fight like it’s your life on the line. If you’re female or non-white in America, it literally is.
Also re: federal lands. In San Francisco, if you got caught with a joint back in the 90s, you got a ticket at worst. If you were so stupid as to roll through the Presidio, on a public road, and caught by their cops with one, you could get ten years in jail. State law did NOT trump federal law and I think it’s definitely an idea worth looking into.
schrodingers_cat
@Anyway: They may or may not be equally problematic but neither of them have the media presence the NYC rep does.
Geminid
Have any of the Tribal Governments weighed in these new plans to use their land?
mistermix
@MisterDancer:
So I joined B-J around 2006-2008. My memory of that time is that front pagers here were not in the forefront of supporting Ned Lamont’s primary challenge of Lieberman. That was a DailyKos/Netroots thing. I went to Netroots Nation in 2012 with DougJ, sponsored by B-J, and a lot of the coverage of that event was very skeptical of the whole NRN project and their purity politics. B-J was always skeptical of what we called manic progressivism, and dead-end Democrats that were progressive darlings but couldn’t get elected. Darcy Burner is one great example of that. We tried to separate people like her from the real thing in progressive circles, which at NRN 2012 was Elizabeth Warren, who gave a barnburner speech.
As someone who was raised in a state where Democrats had to tack right to win, I certainly didn’t write a bunch of “blue dogs are shitty” posts.
narya
@MisterDancer: Hard agree! I also listen to her podcast, and I really appreciate what she’s bringing to the table.
I have to admit that I like hearing a range of opinions and approaches. I think it’s what makes being a Democrat difficult–it is a huge damn tent–but I also think that it is better in terms of finding solutions that work for a lot of people. But sometimes I seem to be in the minority on this.
Baud
@Eolirin:
Agree.
People always say emulate the right when it comes to norm-busting or messaging or whatever. But no one wants to emulate the right when it comes to party line, down ballot voting. It’s offensive to even suggest that in some circles.
Betty Cracker
@mistermix: That tracks with my decade-plus recollection of the now-vanished content. Personally, I never enjoyed voting for fake astronaut (now NASA administrator) Blue Dog Bill Nelson, but I always did because he was up against (and was eventually replaced by) a horrid GOP ghoul. (Seriously, Katherine Harris was one opponent, and Nelson lost to Rick Scott!)
Old School
Deleted. I was confused over who was being discussed.
Baud
@Old School:
I think he’s talking about Angry Black Lady.
daveNYC
Two things that got me about the Blue Dogs back in the 2008-2010 period.
That’s a huuuuuuuge change from the current batch (Manchin and Sinema) who negotiated in bad faith to stroke their egos, and then killed the BBB. Two Democratic Senators voted to kill a Democratic President’s signature legislative package. I’m not expecting Republican lockstep here, but I’m still stunned that they did that.
mistermix
@Geminid:
Just to be clear, on one of the AOC posts that I didn’t screenshot, she specifically said that tribal land is not the federal land she’s talking about.
Another Scott
Thanks for this.
She’s a great talent. She’s young. She’s highly visible in the modern media. And she’s been set-upon by monsters who are looking to turn her into the next HRC punching bag to be beat upon for the next 30 years. Seeing how she handles all those things (and more) will be very instructive for her younger colleagues and for those who follow afterwards.
Cheers,
Scott.
Immanentize
@Baud: I hate it too. It is so lazy and happens to be wrong. Others are saying, “Dems haven’t produced and they just tell us to vote harder. Why will that solve anything?” These are the children. As if not voting will improve things. What you get when you don’t vote for democrats is Republicans.
And most of the people saying this are well to do mostly white men and women. I consider this line of argument to be active vote supression methodology.
Old School
@Baud: You’re right. I didn’t click back enough comments to find the subject.
Eolirin
@Old School: Deleted, Baud got there first
Starfish
@gvg: When I spoke to a local US Representative at PRIDE, they had concerns about these abortion bans and what it means for women in the military stationed in states with bans. They are going to have to do something about healthcare access for our armed forces. Providing that healthcare on military bases and telling states to piss off is an option that needs to be considered here.
Ken
@mistermix: Yellowstone Park, then?
Dorothy A. Winsor
I like AOC. She’s rational
mistermix
@Eolirin:
Hmm– I think that was true in the earlier Republican Party, but now we have bomb throwers like MTG and Boebert (and others) who are nothing but activists. I mean, they literally do nothing related to their duties of office. And more of the MTG types are coming to red districts, if you see who’s winning primaries.
As others have pointed out here, the Squad represent their districts, no matter what you think of their activist work.
Immanentize
@mistermix:
@Geminid:
To answer you question about tribal weigh in — yes, there has been quite a discussion in the tribal law world. Some support the idea, but many (including many Indian women) think it is ridiculous to be seen as a serious answer to this messed up question when so many tribes and tribal members have been forced into subsistence poverty and have too many issues in their own communities. Many who already experience white violence on tribal lands fear more.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: McCaskill could be maddeningly both-sidesy when she was in the Senate. I remember being pissed off by something she said many times, even while understanding we weren’t getting anyone further to the left out of Missouri. That said, I am sure we supported her here in the 2012 election. I remember being positively giddy when she unexpectedly won after her nutcase opponent imploded.
debbie
I wonder if the FB stories come from Instagram stories and whether users have to give permission first.
Starfish
@germy shoemangler: “Do something” Twitter is way more fun than “do nothing” Twitter.
When we see bad things happening, doing something is indeed what we should be doing. Expecting that our politicians do something is also reasonable.
mistermix
@Ken:
Every red state west of the Mississippi has huge tracts of federal land. BLM, National Forests, Grasslands, etc. National Parks are just a small fraction of the total. But there are also military bases, with hospitals.
Jinchi
McCaskill got derision for literally campaigning against “those crazy Democrats”.
She was one.
So I guess her campaign was successful?
UncleEbeneezer
@The Moar You Know: “They vote every election for any Republican.”
And that right there is the difference between our side and theirs, and how we got here. They vote, repeatedly, collectively and in a partisan way. We, far too often, don’t (especially in mid-terms).
Eolirin
@Immanentize: As I said, they’re treating our elected officials as if they’re supposed to be the activists. It means they don’t have to do any of the work.
That’s not how any of this works. It gets the relationship between voter and politician exactly backwards. And it’s a large part of why we keep struggling despite holding all the popular positions.
We don’t have the infrastructure we need because our side needs to build it via collective action instead of a couple of rich psychopaths throwing huge amounts of money at the problem. But we have no real chance to succeed in that collective action problem until enough of our base stops treating politics like consumerism.
germy shoemangler
@MisterDancer:
See sarcasm tag at the end of my comment
Immanentize
This thread by Sherrilyn Ifill is my perspective entirely. It is the view of an Old, I suppose, but this is where I have to come from because this is where and who I am:
germy shoemangler
Without a public option, thanks to Lieberman.
UncleEbeneezer
@Baud: Perhaps. All I know is that I’ve seen enough AOC Tweets over the years (usually shared by my most Dem-hating Leftist/DSA friends) to know that I would not say she does “little-to-no bashing” of Dems and the Party. That would be true of Stacy Abrams. Not AOC.
MisterDancer
@Immanentize: I follow Gandy on Twitter. I just reviewed back to around the day of release her Tweets (as best as you can with Twitter’s interface).
I do not see her saying anything about Democrats failing to codify Roe. In contrast — until today, she’s been mostly raising awareness, from what I see, about state-level efforts, see https://twitter.com/AngryBlackLady/status/1541469509755604992
I’m willing to be corrected.
As for the military base idea, it’s an idea. As I noted, her point is far more about the Administration going above and beyond the norm, than any specific act in and of itself. The “actions” are, as she herself says, in service to this idea: “ I don’t understand why the Biden admin thinks things are going to be different if he doesn’t do something extraordinary to protect us. ”
As well as this tweet at https://twitter.com/AngryBlackLady/status/1541745987244392448:
“symbolic action? It’s not about symbolic action. It’s about how many days can we provide abortions to people. If it’s 2 weeks worth of abortions then let’s do that. It’s literally life and death. But keep talking about how the administration can’t do anything. I don’t accept that”
Or, earlier at https://twitter.com/AngryBlackLady/status/1541545072801353728 :
“Literally just do things. Do all of the things. And fucking litigate it. Yes the courts are fucked but use litigation as a delay tactic and get people abortions while you litigate it. That’s what CRR did with the Louisiana trigger ban. ”
You can disagree about specific actions, but I think she’d be willing to have this disagreement, if there was concrete actions, even if they were likely to fail.
That’s what I’m seeing from her Twitter, in the majority. And I’m more invested in that majority, than in picking out one or two items that I might find frustrating, in this crisis moment.
I try to give a lot of grace to — and learn from — the people who’ve been neck-deep in these issues than I, by and large.
Eolirin
@mistermix: The Republican party does not rely on MTG or Boebert to accomplish their aims. If they disappeared nothing would happen.
I’m not talking about whether any particular politician happens to also be an activist. I’m talking about the base rejecting their role in the political process.
No one on the right is less engaged because they have MTG to be engaged for them. Too much of the left expects engagement to end at voting. That the politicians will do both ends of the process, the effecting policy outcomes and the functional advocacy, activism and value setting.
That’s not how it works! The base is responsible for the latter half of that. We have to do stuff to make that happen.
mistermix
@Immanentize:
Hate it as much as you want, but it’s in the water. Anyone who markets knows that you start with the image you have, not the image you wish you had. The image Democrats have, in places that you, Baud and others have identified, is that we dish out fight rhetoric without fighting, we ask people to vote harder without telling them what they’re voting for. (Again, since people hate it when I point this out, I’m not saying I believe it, but it is in the water.)
So, what do we do? As I argued yesterday in a post that got completely sidetracked, you pick up the suggestion that Josh Marshall, AOC and others are making to give a specific achievable goal about the most important issue of the day. In other words “if you give us 2 more senators and we keep the house, we will codify Roe.”
Mnemosyne
Instagram is probably a better choice for a politician than Twitter — you don’t really have a character limit, so you can write longer pieces to go with your images. Plus Twitter is becoming its own walled garden. If you’re not signed in, it won’t let you scroll down or see comments for posts, which is more than a little frustrating.
MisterDancer
@germy shoemangler: Ah. The “s” is missing, at least in my view of your comment. But others seem to be legitimately concerned, so I took some time to review.
lowtechcyclist
It’s more than just wasted time. We’re all shaped by how we spend our time, and who we spend it with. When Congresspersons spend such a huge chunk of their time interacting with people who have a lot of money, they’re going to take into mind the interests of those folks a lot more than those of their more typical constituents.
But I would have thought that by now, this wouldn’t be so true anymore, at least for Dems. Two reasons:
So yes, AOC is privileged in that she doesn’t have to fundraise, but she should have plenty of company. If so, why is it still the conventional wisdom that, with rare exceptions, Congresspersons have to fundraise all the time? And if not, then what’s going on?
I’ve been wondering this for a couple of cycles now, and this seems like as good a place as any to ask this question.
mistermix
@Eolirin:
OK, I get what you’re saying. Thanks for the clarification.
Jinchi
Particularly galling in that they were given carte-blanche to restructure it, strip it down to the bare bones, and then scuttled it anyway after the party agreed to pass their infrastructure legislation first.
MisterDancer
@mistermix: I don’t think there’s a clear way for me to address this debate. I’ll just say that yes, my recollection of the comment section — not the Front Page — differs from what I take you to say.
Mnemosyne
@Immanentize:
A great many of the “people” saying this on social media are actually bots. Adam mentioned it in his Ukraine post, I believe.
Gee, I wonder which country doing bad actions right now might have a vested interest in keeping the US divided and has been known to work directly with Republicans? It’s a mystery.
Immanentize
@Eolirin: extremely well said. Especially the consumerism aspect. That is a great insight.
I was talking with my son today about what I call “law firm history” which is not real history but the selective use of some historical evidence to support your advocacy position. Scalia was historically wrong in Holder, Alito in Dobbs, and Thomas in Bruen. But law firm history also applies to facts, as we see Gorsuch just ignoring the extensive record of facts developed in the lower courts to create his untrue made-for-TV show about the greatness of football coaches.
I then said, the silver lining was that the obvious false reading made the cases more vulnerable in the future. My son said, only if you are still operating in a world in which law is anything different than the momentary expression of political power.
Ouch. But how else can one act?
narya
@Immanentize: The Strict Scrutiny podcast had SHADE for specific men who were pro-Kavanaugh/Boney/Gorsuch. And were: hey, maybe LISTEN TO THE WOMEN WHO GOT THIS RIGHT FOR JUST A FEW MINUTES??!?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
What was Cokie Roberts’ infamous comment: “It doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. It’s out there” ?
O. Felix Culpa
Just dropping this article by Jennifer Rubin (WaPo):
Pelosi has the right idea on abortion. The Senate must follow.
Immanentize
@MisterDancer: It is stupid to try to argue about someone’s tweets here, no? You stated your read, I mine. I think everyone should just read them for themselves and decide?
Bonus! Imani has a new puppy so you will get puppy posts as well as those regarding her old dog, Spaniel Day Lewis.
Eolirin
@mistermix: I’m somewhat confused by the thinking that that isn’t exactly where we are already.
The house already passed that bill, didn’t they? What do you think Roe is on the ballot is about? Tim Ryan is campaigning on getting rid of the filibuster to get the house bill out of the senate, isn’t he?
Really tired of people basically telling the Democrats to do what they’re already doing.
The electorate needs to get itself together, not the Democratic party. White people making those kinds of comments that also seem reachable need to have their role in the process better explained to them. The ones that seem unreachable should be completely ignored in favor of focusing attention on people who are willing to put in the work.
germy shoemangler
Balloon-Juice contains multitudes.
People complain that AOC associates with communists, and then the title of the next thread is “Don’t mourn, organize”
Immanentize
@mistermix:
“Many people are saying!” — Donald Trump
mistermix
@lowtechcyclist:
This is a good question and there’s so very little reporting on it. All I know is that in one of her stories (not saved) AOC mentioned that her colleagues still have to do a lot of fundraising.
Concrete example: Rep Joe Morelle, my rep, who is basic solid D but by no means a firebrand and certainly not someone that is going to get a lot of ActBlue action. Joe gets most of his money from local PACs and unions.
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00043207
#1 source of money is Insurance PACs. His list of contributors (at a high level) is no different from what I’d expect of a D member of congress in the 80’s. I’ll bet he spends a good deal of time fundraising to get the $800K he’s raised.
His seat is relatively safe – D+6 or so depending on the new gerrymander. But it’s by no means a lock. He needs some money to run an organization and do some campaigning.
Immanentize
@narya: I totally agree. I opposed a Katyal tweet and was shocked to see the men who rushed to support him. That guy is a jackass
gwangung
Ahem. Selection bias.
schrodingers_cat
The privileged and those in the direct firing line of the Rs see things differently. Until 2016 I saw things like most of the BJ cohort does. I have been posting comments here since 2009. We hardly had any major differences of opinion wrt politics. The election of the Orange Error changed all that. We are not the same. We see the world differently. More vulnerable you are the the more attuned you are to danger. I comment here to warn you of the dangers that you may not see because I still do see you as my friends.
Of course you can ignore what I say or dismiss it out of hand. That is your choice.
I have seen this movie at least twice before, where the lefty infighting decimates the moderates and vacuum created is filled by RWNJs.
ksmiami
@gvg: Best thing is to start the process of shuttering bases and relocating US military assets since Birthing Slave states are dangerous to our military readiness.
mistermix
@Eolirin:
Yes, the House passed the bill and the Senate killed it with the filibuster. The point of the proposal by Josh Marshall is to get us to a place where we have a majority in the Senate that will kill the fillibuster to pass reproductive rights. Now he has people calling and asking their D senators if they’ll vote to repeal the filibuster to pass reproductive rights. They aren’t getting straight answers (Shaheen is one example recently posted on TPM). So that’s why a straight answer about what someone’s vote will get them is required. I think it’s reasonable and not obvious, given what Manchin and Sinema did to the party.
ian
@Geminid:
I can’t speak of tribal governments, but a good deal of First Nation people I follow on social media are bemused. Their line of thought goes something like this- “Now you notice that there are reservations?”
The requests to use tribal land for abortion procedures might be going over better if the Democratic party had put more effort into supporting First Nations. Why didn’t we push to seriously increase reproductive services on reservations before the fall of Roe V Wade? To many First Nation people we are doing this now because we need it, not because they need it. We are making progress with Deb Haaland at interior and Biden’s reclassification of federal monuments, but a year and a half of progress after centuries of neglect doesn’t inspire confidence.
Some key examples?- Bill Richardson, former NM governor and UN ambassador, used to pull shenanigans with NM legislature to regularly steal federal funds for education on reservations to shore up NM’s budget. In Colorado, the two Ute reservations have some of the lowest levels of state funding and support. In Montana the state Democratic party just recently got around to including NA issues in their central platform. Here is a link to AP about Montana
So the sudden rush/desire to turn reservations into pro-choice sanctuaries seems more like a ‘what’s good for Euro-Americans’ than ‘what’s good for First Nations’. Is there some way forward with this? Maybe. The Federal Government and the Democratic party will need to deliver more economic security and legal protection to First Nations. Republicans control many state governments out west, and could target reservations or the areas around them for retaliation in return for providing reproductive services. As a national political strategy, we shouldn’t look to placing reproductive services on reservations as an end-goal. It should be part and parcel of a strategy of actually improving First Nation livelihoods, not for solving the problems of non-indigenous society
edit-TLDR – see Imm at 69. She sums it up better.
Immanentize
@Mnemosyne: I agree the bots are piling on in a big way in comments/mentions. But I’m not referring to bots so much as smart young women clearly progressive attorneys who I follow who are just saying the dumbest political stuff. I am staying out of the fray as I am chalking it up to anger, fear and frustration. But if this continues in the fall, I’m gonna have to respond (and likely get blocked).
MisterDancer
Because billionaires aren’t pumping money into most Democratic races. And I mean “races” — the ability to create a Dark Money SuperPAC is far more on the Conservative side.
Moreover, Conservatives have access to well-funded think-tanks that do everything from creating memes for social media to astroturfing to “independent” media to bill writing, all in service of promoting and pushing their views as widely as possible. Progressives have nearly none of these, thus having to fund everything out of the money we give them.
And now, of course, SCOTUS has green-lit pumping donations right into the candidates’ personal pockets.
I had a post on the old site about how just Koch’s “think-tanks” were promoting anti-Russian Sanctions ideas, partly to support a Koch subsidiary staying in the country post-Ukraine invasion. But that’s just a sideline for those groups; their primary job is to push toxic Conservative ideas into the media and our politics, in more general terms.
Similar Progressive groups like MoveOn are far more independent, more ethical — and far less funded. So Progressive Representatives have to do what they can, mostly on their own.
Eolirin
Am I wrong in my recollection that MoC fundraising drives were set up to collect money for the entire caucus to be distributed as needed?
So even people in safe seats or with their own massive warchests were expected to be doing it because it helped protect the people who were more vulnerable or to be spent in races where there was a viable challenger?
Ruckus
@germy shoemangler:
Is it possible that people with demands and money to pay for them are supporting people like mitch?
And their demands are in line with his natural politics/desires.
I’m of the persuasion that says a lot of people who are wealthy tend to be more conservative, in that they like their ability to live how they want and they want to keep that. They like that a more conservative approach keeps their taxes a lot lower, wages for their lower level workers lower, control of the economy more to their liking so that their economic well being is higher. People with Scrooge McDuck syndrome do not want change, do not want better for those that are making them rich.
Jinchi
Right. This is dirty campaign tactic 101. In 2010 we had “Latinos for Reform” which told Latino voters “Don’t vote”.
Spoiler alert, that was not a group of disgruntled Latinos. It was a Republican campaign op. This is why I don’t take complaints about “left-twitter” seriously. If you can’t name the people pushing the agenda, it probably isn’t who they claim to be.
Kropacetic
I volunteered for an election campaign today and am coming around to the idea that I may need to embrace social media beyond Balloon Juice.
Anyone know anywhere I can find useful primers on features and culture in the various platforms? I was going to check Youtube after work, but I like getting direction.
ksmiami
@Jinchi: Hope we all elect a ton of Dem Senators And then kick these two to the curb. Enjoy their offices in the bathrooms….
Eolirin
@mistermix: Is Tim Ryan literally not already campaigning on this? Pelosi is scheduling a bunch of votes.
Schumer probably does need to schedule a vote on suspending the filibuster again so we can see it fail with 48 votes just like the voting rights bill did. But we already know there are 48 votes to suspend the filibuster there. I really don’t think there’s gonna be any less for this.
I will be intensely surprised if that doesn’t happen.
lowtechcyclist
@MisterDancer:
I think others have already pointed out that Lieberman represented a very blue state, so I’ll let that go. But Lieberman also threw a LOT of sand in the gears. I remember the final Senate negotiations over the ACA in December 2009, and there was a golden moment when it looked like they were going to lower Medicare eligibility to age 55.
Lieberman was one of the dicks who killed that, and I’ll always be pissed at him for that. That would have been a big step towards…what’s the phrase? Oh yeah, Medicare for all. Because if we’d lowered the age once, it would have been easier from both a political and a cost perspective to keep lowering it until everyone was covered.
Ruckus
@daveNYC:
@Ohio Mom:
You both got there before me, even as we said the same thing in different ways.
germy shoemangler
I think it takes a tremendous amount of privilege to dismiss and hand wave away the concerns of progressive and radical young people. To dismiss crippling student debt as irrelevant when one’s own education was free, or arguing against medicare for all because one is on a spouse’s (who is a college administrator) excellent employer policy, or ignore the rent crisis because one owns a large house in an expensive neighborhood.
If AOC had endorsed an anti-choice candidate like Cuellar these comments would be burning white hot with condemnations. The site would probably crash under their weight. But instead Nancy Pelosi did, so that subject is “neither here nor there.”
Immanentize
@Ruckus: My Dad had a million pithy trueisms and one was:
“People don’t become conservative until they have things to conserve.”
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@lowtechcyclist:
Yeah, he jumped up and down and proudly took credit for it, and used it to get into a public pissing match with Anthony Wiener, but it’s highly unlikely the Dems could have gotten that to fifty. In Obama’s Senate (which of course was not Obama’s but the more powerful half of a co-equal branch of government), there were many Manchins.
mistermix
@Immanentize: Pardon me?
When you say that people are saying something on Twitter that you hate, it’s legitimate. When I use the gloss “in the water” and explain how I think we can push back, I get a quote from Trump.
Noted.
Immanentize
@Eolirin: So is Fetterman in Pennsylvania. He has been clear about right to abortion, getting rid of the filibuster, and legalizing weed. He was the first candidate I know of who tweeted opposition to Dobbs as soon as it was released.
Dems are already doing what people say Dems should be doing.
ETA he has also been walking the walk on LGBT rights for a long time.
germy shoemangler
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
“My father’s house has many Manchins”
Immanentize
@mistermix: hit dog hollers. News at 11.
ETA see, also, Jim, F.L.; at comment 93.
mistermix
@Eolirin:
Maybe, but the more clear and obvious we make it, the better, IMO. Given the experience that some TPM readers had with Shaheen, I wonder if there’s a reluctance to get on the record supporting filibuster repeal for some reason like the fear that McConnell will use it as a pretext if he gets a majority.
Eolirin
‘@lowtechcyclist:
@germy shoemangler: I don’t think either of you realize just how awful Medicare actually is as a program.
We should not want it to be the cornerstone of our healthcare policy.
ACA and Medicaid are better programs, structurally, and we should be building on those.
CaseyL
@germy shoemangler:
It takes a tremendous amount of privilege to think you can punish the only political party that pays any attention at all to your concerns (Democrats have issued $6 billion in student loan forgiveness so far) by withholding your vote, letting the GOP take over, and think that will make anything better.
Unless a subclause of that “heighten the contradictions!” idiocy is “Well, if the fascists take over, or a hot civil war starts, I won’t have to pay my loans back at all!”
janesays
@Immanentize: Technically, the original squad is AOC, Pressley, Omar, and Tlaib, all of whom were first elected to the House in 2018. Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman are considered 2020 additions.
Jayapal is the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and while she generally aligns pretty closely with “The Squad”, she’s never technically been a member.
germy shoemangler
@Eolirin:
Yes, that’s why the slogan is Improved Medicare For All.
Republicans have been killing it with a million knife thrusts for years.
schrodingers_cat
@germy shoemangler: She endorsed and campaigned for Sharice Davids opponent in 2018 who was pro life.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
And people who say, “Why don’t we win more elections when we have the more popular ideas!” and “Democrats need to get better at marketing and branding!”.
Then a whole thread is dedicated to pretending that someone who did everything she could to make socialism and Defund The Police! part of the Democratic brand is good at politics because of an Instagram post.
But then it’s not like Florida is important.
Served
@Immanentize: mistermix is right, though. It’s a not uncommon sentiment, especially among young voters right now, and it’s reflected in Biden’s poll numbers with that cohort.
We can not like it and not agree with it, but it’s there and it’s a problem that needs to be acknowledge and addressed with a strategy.
Baud
@germy shoemangler:
It would be out of character for her, but I wouldn’t condemn her for it for the same reason I didn’t condemn Nancy for it.
germy shoemangler
Who was the opponent?
Another Scott
@lowtechcyclist: It was a different time. Remember when Al Gore (history’s greatest monster, #5123412) picked him to be his running mate??
Politics are slow. Politics change over time. Politicians usually closely follow the electorate rather than actually lead it.
We’ve got to drag them kicking and screaming to make progress – it’s just the way it is. Vote, donate, organize, do all the things. It’s the only way forward.
Cheers,
Scott.
Mnemosyne
@germy shoemangler:
I would have way more sympathy for the young people calling for “Medicare for All” if they could (1) actually agree on what that means, because they all seem to think it means something different and (2) they had some clue as to why Medicaid is not available to people making less than 125% of the poverty level in their state (hint: it’s not because it wasn’t written into PPACA).
I’m in favor for a pretty big chunk of student debt relief, except to that one Bernie asshole who took out hundreds of thousands in loans to go to Harvard Law and then decided she hated being a lawyer so therefore the rest of us should bail her out. Brie something?
Baud
@Served:
Right. The problem is that the best strategy might be to try to make up those votes somewhere else. None of us wants to do that, but we need help from actual voters.
schrodingers_cat
The Roe decision is the result of the lefties that bought into the following Republican propaganda.
Bush and Gore are the same (Bush becomes President)
ACA is a Heritage Foundation plan stay at home (Rs take back the House )
Hillary the hawk, Trump the Dove. (Trump becomes President)
Now these same people are criticizing Ds for raising money and blaming them for the Roe reversal.
germy shoemangler
@Eolirin:
How would a person who owns a house, or have some money in savings qualify for Medicaid?
mistermix
@germy shoemangler:
AOC spends significant time listening to this group and advocating for them, so of course she’s popular with them.
Eolirin
@mistermix: I would argue the reason it’s not already obvious is because the things the Dems are saying and doing aren’t getting signal boosted and everyone going “the Dems aren’t doing anything, why don’t they do this” are. Which you’re actually engaging in in this thread.
You’re pointing at suggestions and saying we should do this, instead of pointing at Fetterman and Ryan and Pelosi’s actions, etc etc. It creates the appearance that Democrats aren’t doing what they actually are doing.
How many people screaming about Dems not codifying Roe know that the house already passed a bill doing that? Why isn’t there an avalanche of voices on social media making this exact case? I mean besides the lack of our side having a bot net.
Why aren’t you making that case? This doesn’t need to be left to our elected officials. We should be signal boosting every positive action they’re taking, and they are taking them!
Mnemosyne
@Eolirin:
I’ve known people on both Medicaid and Medicare. For all its faults, Medicaid is a much better and broader program with a far lower out-of-pocket cost to the end user, but the middle-class revolutionaries don’t want it because it’s for poor people.
Immanentize
I heart Magdi Semrau:
Ruckus
@Immanentize:
Politics overall in this country has changed a lot over the last 50 yrs. First it’s easier to follow in depth now. This leads to differing expectations which often do not understand how and why things work the way the do. Next we have that same issue with the general population. We all get to see the sausage being made, we didn’t used to be able to do that near as easy nor as much. Third, we have had some major gains in democratic goals, which has led to higher expectations of results. But that works both ways, right and left. The right has become even more entrenched as they have lost more and the left has higher expectations because we have had more overall wins. And both are more noticeable because of communications, like what we are doing right now.
What I’m saying is there has always been a fight between left and right in this country, but it is more obvious today, gains and losses are more obvious and hurt more. The world is changing and conservatives are more entrenched because they have had major losses, which they should have had. This is a better country when we work towards the equality and improvement that it is supposedly built upon. But it costs conservatives, both in politics and in money. And conservatives sure don’t mind fucking over others to obtain their goals, it’s almost as if that may be one of their goals.
Eolirin
@germy shoemangler: Medicaid expansion is easier than Medicare expansion and would cause fewer issues because it has a saner program structure, is the argument I’m making.
Right now you automatically qualify for Medicaid in medicaid expansion states if your earnings are below a certain amount, no asset testing like legacy medicaid. That threshold can just go up. More money can be put into the program to increase reimbursement rates and make it easier to get provider access. Etc.
Immanentize
@Mnemosyne: But heaven forbid any of those folks have a severely disabled child or parent in care…. Medicaid does it all.
I have also said — also imperfect — but we could expand the VA system like USAA expanded their insurance business — include spouses and children. Go from there.
germy shoemangler
Let’s say, for example, our cause is Weight Loss. “Weight Loss Now!”
Establishment Democrats say “Dieting. Dieting is a proven way to lose weight”
And then young progressive activists take to the streets yelling “Dieting isn’t enough! You need exercise! Exercise!!”
Would commenters here be complaining that the Left is against dieting?
Mnemosyne
@germy shoemangler:
Read PPACA. Medicaid reform was supposed to be the stopgap between the exchanges and having no medical coverage at all by covering people at 125 percent of the poverty line and then letting them transition to exchange insurance with no penalty.
There was an entire fucking plan to handle this that was deliberately kneecapped by the Republicans on the Supreme Court, but all people remember is that the Democrats screwed them somehow because that’s what leftists keep telling them.
janesays
@schrodingers_cat: There’s absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Brent Welder was or is anti-choice.
https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/181204/brent-welder
Immanentize
@Ruckus: This is a really useful comment for me. Thank you.
germy shoemangler
@Eolirin:
Can we fix Medicaid for those who aren’t in Medicaid-expanding states? I’m in favor of universal healthcare, no matter whether you live in NYC or Alabama. If you hate Medicare and love Medicaid, fine.
Immanentize
@germy shoemangler: I don’t know about the left, but it seems I remain firmly against dieting. SAD!
To add a serious response. I am concerned about those who can see the House passed he “Diet, Exercise and Action Defense” bill, but Republicans senators will not support is because they are in Twinkie States. Then people scream, The Dems won’t do anything to help the weight problem.
Eolirin
@Mnemosyne: Yep. If you’re going single payer you do it by expanding Medicaid, fixing some of its rough edges in the process, and then rebrand it to Medicare.
Also getting rid of Hyde.
Betty Cracker
@Eolirin:
I’m sympathetic to this view, but as a recovering marketer, I’m glad most politicians don’t think this way (or at least don’t say it out loud). I am also often “really tired of people basically telling the Democrats to do what they’re already doing,” but if an electorally significant number of people don’t know what you’re doing, you’ve got to figure out a way to reach them. It’s part of the job.
germy shoemangler
@Immanentize:
[democrats]: “Portion Control!”
[republicans]: “Liberals want to decide how much portions we get. They’re communists!”
Mnemosyne
@Immanentize:
As I said in my return post, I am here to point out to all of the Berniebros who complained that I was “blackmailing” them with the Supreme Court in 2016 that I was fucking right, and now we all have to reap what they sowed.
I. Fucking. Told. Them. So.
I told them that this would happen if Trump got elected, and now they’re all looking around for someone else to blame for their own fucking idiocy in getting caught up in the anti-Hillary hate.
Baud
@germy shoemangler:
Reducing calorie intake is much more important to weight loss than exercise.
And find me someone who has criticized a message of voting+protests.
debbie
@Mnemosyne:
Medicare is also 1/6th the cost of COBRA, FWIW.
Kropacetic
@Mnemosyne: You’re here to bully and harass.
Geminid
@mistermix: I did not mention Representative Ocasio-Cortez. Other people were jumping in with this proposal right after last Friday’s Court decision. Denise Oliver-Velez pushed back hard on it because it was not coming from the Tribal Govdrnments themselves.
Mnemosyne
@germy shoemangler:
We tried. That was the whole point of PPACA. But, as usual, Democrats get the blame for Republicans undermining them.
schrodingers_cat
There are no easy solutions. Voting in every election is key.
BTW next time check out the audiences that gather around the self anointed progressives when they give speeches. It is almost always 90% white
Eolirin
@Betty Cracker: It’s part of our job too as engaged base voters.
Party activists aren’t just our elected officials. We are falling down on that front. That’s an area where we have direct agency and we need to be encouraged to use it.
We can signal boost better. We should be doing that. We shouldn’t be participating in signal boosting garbage takes when we can be signal boosting useful things.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
I agree. But part of that job is pushing back against critics. And that gets people upset, depending on who the critic is.
Immanentize
@Mnemosyne: I saw that and many people are demanding similar in different forums. Especially people who were specifically told to sit down with that SCOTUS nonsense in 2016. Hillary was right about everything.
But being very very wrong in the past seems not to be a barrier to bad hot takes now.
Geminid
@UncleEbeneezer: I’ve observed a lot of criticism of Ocasio-Cortez from members of her other party, the Democratic Socialists of America. Some argue that she has sold out and is now a “sheepdog.”
mistermix
@Eolirin:
Because you’ve named pretty much every Democrat running for Senate (except perhaps Demings) who is making the case about the most important blocker to codifying Roe. Are there others? I’m definitely going to post about Ryan and Fetterman and Demings and all the other Senate candidates, and I’ll be happy to do it. But there’s by no means a consensus by Democrats on filibuster repeal. That’s why Josh Marshall has started a campaign to call Senators and ask them whether they’re willing to do it
Also, as to why Pelosi’s strategy of passing legislation and noting that it is dead because of the Senate doesn’t get signal boosted or noticed, it’s because of the filibuster. The filibuster is everything to Democrats right now, like it or not. I can write a post every morning about what Pelosi’s House has passed and that signal can get boosted but without an answer to the filibuster, we’ve just signal boosted impotence
That all said, I appreciate your thoughtful comments, and much of what I’m expressing here is frustration with the electoral situation.
germy shoemangler
@schrodingers_cat:
Brent Welder? He’s pro-choice.
gwangung
@schrodingers_cat: Just pointing out there are a hell of a lot of BIPOC folks supporting AOC.
Kropacetic
Agreed. Helping spread the word of successes and active attempts to improve people’s lives can go a long way. A generalized weekly review of action in Congress could help keep us all informed.
I don’t know if the best approach there would be for everyone to periodically skim Congress’s calendar and press releases or if someone could FP a weekly summary.
Jinchi
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Just to be clear, AOC has been in Congress less than 3 years. It seems a bit much to blame her for all the problems in the current political climate.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Jinchi: Show me where I did that
Citizen Alan
@Scout211:
I assume that means 3 packages not 3 individual pills. Don’t they come in little packets that have a 30 day supply?
Eolirin
@mistermix: I’m not opposed to Josh Marshall trying to get clarity there faster, though I have faith we’ll get plenty of clarity there in a couple of weeks.
But as a general thing if you’re someone with a platform and you’re about to make a post that is offering suggestions for what the party should be doing, or complaining about what the party isn’t doing, stop.
Go find some things people are actually doing. Those things are getting buried by people making suggestions or complaining about what the party should be doing or isn’t doing. The people doing stuff need to be signal boosted out of that noise.
Anyone who has a platform needs to focus their attention better if they aren’t doing this already.
Baud
@Jinchi:
I think the problem is this subculture of destructive leftism that has been with us since at least Nader in 2000 and is all over social media today. Whether AOC should be considered part of that appears to be a YMMV question. But I believe the underlying problem is a real one that we are forced to deal with.
Kropacetic
@Citizen Alan: Emergency contraception comes as one dose, usually one or two tablets depending on which you choose. Daily contraceptives are packaged as 21 or 28 count, intended to last 28 days.
Eolirin
@mistermix: Ryan, Demmings, Fetterman and Warnock are solutions to the filibuster.
Sure Lurkalot
@Baud:
How’s that different than blaming everything on Bernie Sanders? Did the media not have any effect with their daily email stories? Was Comey’s self-serving scolding not covered? Did the Clinton campaign not ignore some bell weather regions despite boots on the ground advice?
A boss of mine used to always say “it is what it is.” Drove me crazy. “We are where we are” does too when singular causes are laid to “blame”. The constructive “do something” crowd (as opposed to the burn it all downers) have at least come to terms with the past enough to propose solutions, however unlikely.
Geminid
@ian: Yes, the Native Tribes have been grossly neglected, but thiere has been a change. This Congress and the administration have started to rectify this injustice. The Infrastruture bill alone directs many billions towards reservations for clean water, wifi, clean energy and other social goods, as did the American Recover Act. This is only the Tribes’ due, and it’s not enough, but it should still be recognized.
Buckeye
@Baud: And Bernie also has a recent history of supporting an anti choice candidate. So while I think the Dems really going to the mat for Cuellar was stupid, it’s also not entirely out of the ordinary, even for other more progressive politicians.
Kropacetic
Mainly because you can’t swing a dead cat around here without hitting a comment that’s basically “look what this random no- ame leftist said on Twitter” or vague lamentations of “I hate the left.”
It’s ok to have problems with the leftier folks in the party, but if you’re going out of your way to beat up on people on Twitter who don’t post here and hold our left commenters accountable.for said Twits…sad.
dc
@Immanentize:
The main post shows a capture where she explains why Roe could not be codified before. You did not read it, and what you say she said is the opposite of what she said about codifying Roe.
Geminid
@germy shoemangler: Speaker Pelosi has gotten got plenty of flak here for campaigning for the “pro-life” Cuellar.
But how “pro-life is Henry Cuellar? He’s so “pro-life” that the National Right to Life Commitee gives him a rating of 7%. The Susan B. Anthony List rates him at 0%
On Cuellar’s more general politics, he gets a 0% rating from Heritage Foundation Action.
Soprano2
@Baud: Yes, too many people didn’t realize that McCaskill is the best Democrat you’re going to get elected in MO. The people from states like CA and NY complaining about her have no idea what they are talking about usually.
Eolirin
@Buckeye: I think there are legitimately huge problems with any policy that doesn’t prioritize support of incumbents in primaries.
The only exception is for people who have done things that are really problematic for the party; severe ethics violations, massive scandal, etc. And you push them to resign before you go the support their challenger in the primary route. Or they’re like Joe Manchin, where they simply aren’t a reliable vote, and then you can use pulling support as a potential stick to bring them back in line.
But that doesn’t work if policy purity is what gets your support pulled. His vote isn’t needed to pass pro choice legislation, so he can be released on those votes, and he’s shown he can get elected in that district being anti choice. You support him. He’s a vote on other things and he isn’t an obstacle on abortion rights.
Eolirin
@dc: He was not talking about AOC
Kropacetic
That’s why I volunteered for her in (I think) 2018. The online platform they used was a mess and really limited my time texting and making calls by having to spend a lot of time troubleshooting.
Mnemosyne
@mistermix:
Why not signal boost that Democrats actually ARE taking the action you’re demanding but getting blocked? Is it not important for people to understand that we’re being blocked when the story they’re coming up with is, well, I never see the Democrats taking action, so they must all be out of touch and ignoring their voters.
At this point, I have to assume that you prefer people thinking that the Democrats are just ignoring their concerns since you know that the House is passing the legislation that addresses those concerns and you never bother to mention it unless pressed.
Baud
@Sure Lurkalot:
Because Bernie contributed to the problem. He wasn’t the only one, but he was the only one inside the tent.
mistermix
@MisterDancer:
This could sure be true. I don’t remember much of what I posted back then, never mind the comments.
I think the comments at B-J in the early era were mainly from progressives who commented heavily on blogs due to them being a new medium that progressives felt would empower them. Then we had the PUMA vs non-PUMA era after Hillary was beaten by Obama. Then we had the “everyone who wasn’t for Hillary on day 1 in 2015 is a berniebro” era. Now I’m not sure what era we’re in, but I sure do like approving new commenters because it’s good to have different perspectives.
Baud
@Kropacetic:
It’s not just here. It’s all over the place.
Kropacetic
@Mnemosyne: Being seen trying and having the nature of those attempts explained would certainly be helpful.
Kropacetic
@Baud: Well, this is the full extent of my social media engagement and has been for years. Even the time when I was barely here.
Immanentize
@Eolirin: Thank you. See what happens when you try to do some work?
Mnemosyne
@Mnemosyne:
Or, to put it another way, what’s more likely to get people to press for filibuster reform — thinking that the Democrats never do anything and are ignoring voter concerns, or knowing that the legislation addressing voter concerns is getting passed but blocked by the Senate?
If we’re trying to think strategically, a strategy to get filibuster reform that makes it look like the Democrats aren’t even trying to pass legislation seems like a very bad strategy.
Ksmiami
@Immanentize: we have to make it clear that voting is necessary but not sufficient- and the people have to keep fighting the ORCS…
Jinchi
It means Universal Healthcare.
I don’t know why you’d expect them to have a fully formed piece of legislation in mind, since they aren’t in a position to write it.
Matt McIrvin
I think AOC is herself an intelligent politician whose instincts are not destructive, but she came out of DSA/Bernieworld which is full of useless performative leftism. So she’s got all these associations with people who are far worse than she is.
Eolirin
@Mnemosyne: Yes. Exactly this.
Martin
So, here’s a measure of AOCs impact.
This is a video of a YouTuber speaking to a festival audience about a fundraising livestream he had done which went viral, and attracted AOC.
If you aren’t steeped in YouTube and gamer culture and their humor and all that, it will probably feel very weird, but this is the world that zoomers and millennials live in. This guy has a million followers and gets millions of views per video – roughly on par with a show like Deadliest Catch.
Why is there the kind of immediate and degree of support for her that you see from the audience. AOC had been in congress for about 3 weeks when the original event took place. She is able to reach young people in a way that no other candidate can match. Hillary became a meme among young voters because her campaign outreach to young people was so fucking bad.
Other politicians have come along that are good at this – the squad, which is why they are the squad. But Katie Porter is surprisingly good because she leans into her single mom persona. She’s not trying to cast herself other than who she genuinely is (which I can attest to having known her before she ran for office.) and is pretty good at using the appropriate social media channels to reach voters in the appropriate way.
This is the mechanics of politics. There are two views for why young people don’t vote:
Politicians like AOC fix #2 in a dramatic way. They aren’t just marginally better at it, they are radically better at it, and so young people have come to venerate these politicians in a ‘holy fuck, someone gets us’ way.
This is why AOC is so important to the party (and Ilhan Omar etc) because they unlock about 50 million voters in a way that nobody over the age of 40 can do. I adore Nancy Pelosi and am infinitely proud to have a Californian as speaker, but if AOC became speaker, it would be radically transformative to the Democratic Party. She lacks the institutional experience that the party leadership has, and that’d be a real hurdle, but there’s a reason why Sanna Marin and Jacinda Ardern were chosen to lead their nations because they understand and can speak to the future challenges and urgency of their countries in a way I don’t see in our leadership.
That said, Hakeem Jeffreys will make an outstanding Speaker. Less radically transformative, but transformative nevertheless. Nancy picked a good successor.
taumaturgo
@germy shoemangler:
To be a master fundraiser, corruption is a prerequisite. What we called fundraising in our political system, is legalized bribery which is not allowed in most if not all advanced democracies. Having the ruling class directly buy politicians should be outlawed, but it won’t because unelected SC justices have the last say and more than not would favor the rich and powerful interests over the working class.
Ksmiami
@Betty Cracker: Speaking of marketing- the Dems need to brand themselves as the Pro human rights, pro liberty, pro privacy party; The Republicans want you to live under their toxic thumb- we want you to live your best life….in the manner you choose and we want to build a society that helps people from all walks of life achieve….
Captain C
@germy shoemangler:
If the Left was also shouting that we shouldn’t bother dieting at all then, of course we would. Just like we point out that those who are loudly telling everyone (or at least everyone to the left of Mitt Romney) not to bother voting are being unhelpful and counterproductive.
Mnemosyne
@Jinchi:
Outside groups write legislation all the time. Ever heard of ALEC? They’re not the only group like that, either.
But, sure, universal healthcare. What does that look like? Is it like Medicare, where you have to pay a percentage of the cost and need additional supplemental insurance? Is it like Great Britain, where the entire system is run by the government? Is it like France, where the hospitals are state-run but the doctors are independent and paid by the government? Is it like Switzerland, where it’s all insurance-based but the insurance companies are nonprofit?
Every country with universal healthcare does it differently, which is why it’s glib to say “universal healthcare, duh.”
taumaturgo
@Matt McIrvin:
Really? What say you about Biden’s fun memories of hanging out with his dear openly racist friends in the Senate? Enough with the double standards.
Ruckus
@Immanentize:
Xactly.
And we have a number of people in this country with a fair amount to conserve. Almost 800 billionaires. A few of them worth on paper, likely more than some countries.
Jinchi
ALEC is a 50 year old organization funded by big pharma, big energy, big tobacco…. you know – big money. Big Money that gives them a blueprint for legislation that they want passed. Lots of that legislation is literally written by corporate lawyers. Big Money that also gives direct contributions to politicians with the advice that they contact ALEC for ideas on legislation they’d like passed.
How does this compare to “young people” at all?
Right, there are 100 different ways to get to the target. They want a mechanism that doesn’t leave millions of people uninsured or at risk of medical bankruptcy.
And just for the record “duh” is your word, not mine.
Edmund Dantes
@mistermix: leader of the democratic party disagrees with court reform and Filibuster reform. This is why it’s hard to get consensus from the rank and file Dem politicians to say “yes I wholeheartedly support filibuster reform”. Who wants to stick their neck out of the leader of the party is saying “no I disagree”
Mnemosyne
@Jinchi:
So do I. PPACA was going to get us pretty far and lay the groundwork for a truly universal system, but the Republicans blocked and undermined it at every turn. Apparently the lesson people learned from that was to give the Republicans even more power to wreck everything in 2016, and here we are.
Not voting and hoping that the magical healthcare fairy will change Republicans’ hearts so they’ll allow universal healthcare isn’t working. Maybe voting for the party that actually did pass a massive healthcare reform bill to give them enough power to pass more and better legislation rather than staying home would be the better bet? Just as a lark?
schrodingers_cat
Young person with clout on the left and in the media had this to tweet not a long time ago
How is this helpful or progressive.
schrodingers_cat
@Martin: There is no evidence that the message of these so called progressives is popular outside of their deep blue districts and spaces dominated by college educated mostly white liberals like this one.’
If BJ was reflective of the Democratic voters EW would have won the nomination not Joe Biden.
Buckeye
@Jinchi: yet I interact with people of all age groups who have decided that M4A is The One True Way for universal health care.
This is unhelpful.
The Thin Black Duke
@schrodingers_cat: Remember, Hogg became politically engaged when it affected him personally. That’s how it works for white progressive. Marginalized people are born into it.
schrodingers_cat
@The Thin Black Duke: Indeed. His parents are Rs I remember reading somewhere. I guess that’s where the contempts for Ds comes from.
Jinchi
Ah. I think I see our disagreement now.
I don’t believe that young people are planning on not voting to punish Democrats or to change Republican hearts. People who don’t vote, typically do so because they think it’s futile.
Democrats need to convince voters that two more Senators and control of Congress is all they need to enact major change. And to be clear, young people did come out in record numbers in 2018 and 2020. It’s worth giving them a little credit for that.
Jinchi
Really? We’re kicking David Hogg, now?
He’s 22 years old. He spent most of the last 4 years rallying to reform gun laws, because 17 people were murdered at his high school. This month he saw 21 more killed at an elementary school and the Supreme Court decide that what we really need in the country is fewer gun laws.
I think he has a right to be a bit frustrated at the level of inaction. He’s spent his adulthood helping Democrats get elected, but sure, screw him for venting about it in a tweet.
JoJo
@Eolirin: Yes, this is so.
I recently read Rick Perlstein’s books about the rise of the right wing. 2 of the key takeaways, for me anyway, were:
In this sense, the real pioneer of current right-wing success wasn’t the National Review or, say, Barry Goldwater or even Ronald Reagan-it was people like Richard Viguerie and Phyllis Schlafly. I believe that this set-up is why the Republican party is so solicitous of their base, despite the base being a group of drooling goons, and despite the fact that doing so in some districts will cause them to lose.
By contrast, our side has too many people who say things like “we need a great leader to rally around!” (I won’t even get into how frustrating third-party types are in this regard). I see that as backwards. Instead, we should lead in the grassroots, and candidates should rally around us. And, if we don’t like the leadership in the official Dem party, work to take it over. Most importantly (in my obviously 100% correct opinion), we recruit low-info voters, based around issues where they are in agreement with our side, and then expand our activist base, and then have those people recruit more, with targets in red areas as well as blue and purple ones. I also know that recruiting otherwise disengaged or low-info voters is really hard (I have attempted it many times). However, it is key if our side wants to be able to expand whatever base of power we have and also be able to effectively demand that those we elect actually follow through. Too many people i have run into IRL say things like “why won’t (x politician) LEAD on this?,” which I see as a dead end. Some politicians might, but a lot of them (most?) are too risk-averse to take real stands on controversial issues, or even issues that aren’t that controversial but have high noise factor.
The Thin Black Duke
@Jinchi: As I said, white people’s pain is what gets white people’s attention. What happens to POC falls under the radar. But don’t mind me.
Buckeye
@Jinchi: it’s not just one tweet, he does it often.
And yes, he’s a kid who has been through terrible trauma.
But on Twitter, on most anything political not related to gun control, he sounds less frustrated and more like an entitled kid who doesn’t actually know how things work, or actual history.
schrodingers_cat
@The Thin Black Duke: Well said.
Mnemosyne
@Jinchi:
And we have AOC going to rallies headlined by groups that tell people that voting is futile. Yay. That’s a great message for her to endorse, even implicitly
I’m perfectly willing to give young people credit for getting out and voting. The kids are alright. It’s the adults who keep telling them that voting is futile and they may as well give up if they don’t get everything they ever wanted with a single presidential vote that I’m pissed at, not the kids.
Reversing 50 years of conservative dominance is going to be hard and require DECADES of work. Telling young voters to give up now because they didn’t get what they wanted within 2 years of electing Biden is exactly the wrong message to give them.
germy shoemangler
@schrodingers_cat:
Members of your family are Modi supporters, as you’ve said here many times. Maybe that’s where you get your authoritarian tendencies?
I can’t believe people are attacking David Hogg in this place now. What a shitshow.
EmbraceYourInnerCrone
@Starfish: Currently medical facilities on military bases will provide abortion services in the case of rape, incest or to protect the life of the pregnant person. They are not allowed to spend federal money or services to provide abortion care in other circumstances. Military medical facilities and Tricare fall under the Hyde amendment which prohibits using federal funds for abortion. This includes Tricare. If you are stationed in a country that does not allow abortion and you want one, you have to pay you own way back to the states or to somewhere you can get an abortion. You also can not get an abortion l on Guam as there are no providers who will do them and the nearest place to get one is Hawaii, which is 4000 miles away…
Military hospitals will perform a D&C after an incomplete miscarriage, that I can tell you from personal experience.
Ruckus
@mistermix:
I think the filibuster is wrong, especially the way it’s currently structured but it can be a catch point to shitty legislation. That it is one for good legislation as well is part of the problem and likely always will be as long as we have a federal government so divided. The two sides of our elected government have seemingly never been so divided. I say seemingly because the conservative side just used to be nominally less obvious. The last 30 yrs of “TV news” coverage is one of the major reasons that has changed. And I’d bet you know who I mean.
schrodingers_cat
@germy shoemangler:
My authoritarian tendencies? WTF is that supposed to mean?
Hogg is constantly badmouthing Democrats for sins real and imagined. I quoted one tweet of his.
What this has to do with my family I have no idea either.
germy shoemangler
@schrodingers_cat:
Did AOC endorse an anti-choice candidate? Still waiting for a clarification on that. You made that claim but someone else provided a link showing this isn’t true.
You mentioned Hogg’s parents being Rs, and said it explains his behavior
And Hogg is right about overpaid consultants.
Buckeye
@germy shoemangler: oh please, Hogg is not above criticism.
germy shoemangler
@Buckeye:
No one is above criticism. But “his parents are Rs, no wonder he “hates” Dems” is not really constructive, just hateful.
Ruckus
I’ve been away from the computer for a bit and as I come back I see we are now infighting about what various fractions of our own parties have screwed the pooch on.
This is politics. We will very, very rarely be 100% aligned on much but we have to recognize that shooting each other in the feet (or possibly the groin!) really, really is ineffective in getting shit done.
We are at another crossroads as a country, we’ve been here before, we have on occasion actually gotten good shit done, but now it seems we are hunting for people/things on our side to be complaining about. And like everything else at times the complaints are going to be real and necessary but we have to recognize the elephant in the room are the folks on the other side of the aisle who would love for all of us to just fucking die and seem to be working on it 100% of the time. IOW let’s not lose sight of the bigger picture, and recognize that change is always choppy, in politics always less than reasonable and often harmful for many. The stakes are high on both sides but often when they are the answers can be extremely painful for the losing side and everyone fights against that. We need to work together or at least look like we are if we want to make good progress.
Jinchi
We’ve had this same debate about BLM activists chanting “Defund the Police!”. They aren’t doing it in service of the Democratic party. They’re doing it because they want the killing to stop.
It isn’t the job of anti-gun or anti-police-violence protesters to toe the line for the good of the Democratic party. The anger in both cases is visceral and Democrats have to deal with that emotion if they intend to be part of the solution.
The Thin Black Duke
If Hogg is beating up on Democrats, he ain’t an ally. Sorry. It’s just the same divide and conquer strategem we’ve seen before and will see again. And some white people can’t wait to find an excuse to “punish” Democrats by electing Republicans. What the Supreme Court did should be a slam dunk, a no-brainer, a bull’s-eye in motivating people to go to the polls. But it’s not. That’s why we’re fucking scared to death because we’ve seen this bullshit before.
The Thin Black Duke
@Jinchi: Narrator: “And nothing changed.”
Jinchi
Could you name some of these people? Because the people you’re attacking don’t seem to be doing that.
germy shoemangler
@Jinchi:
Well, David Hogg seems to be going for a “divide and conquer” strategy. There’s one….
mistermix
@Edmund Dantes:
I think this is right and hence the “call your Senator” effort to pressure them to support ending the filibuster to pass the different House bills that are being held up.
schrodingers_cat
@germy shoemangler: I can’t find any info on Welder being pro life or not. I remember reading it in 2018. I can’t find any mentions of his stance on abortion now. I will keep looking
Bernie Sanders has indeed endorsed pro-life candidates before and AOC has had no objections to them.
Here is one such candidate.
Hoggs parents being Rs was an educated guess (57% white men and 53% white women voted for T). NY Mag says father is an R and mother is D.
I will not share any information about my family henceforth, this is the second time this week the confidences I have shared has been used against me.
I will go back to commenting less frequently.
germy shoemangler
@schrodingers_cat:
Wow, so you really do just make stuff up here. You come on so authoritative with facts, but then a simple online search proves them wrong. The candidate you called “pro-life”, it took me about two seconds to see that wasn’t true. If it happened once it’d be one thing, but it’s a pattern with your comments.
The only reason I brought up your Modi-supporting family is because you decided Hogg’s parents had something to do with his views, that he had somehow inherited a hatred of Ds from them. But now I see you really don’t know his parents’ politics. Even if you’re correct about them, is that really fair? Baseless accusations are a republican strategy.
Talk about your family all you want. Maybe someday you can show them how wrong they are about Modi, and you’ll enjoy a reconciliation. I hope so.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@mistermix:
Right, cause the reason Joe Manchin blocks filibuster reform is because Joe Biden hasn’t given him political cover
Jesus fucking christ
schrodingers_cat
@germy shoemangler: How is it making up stuff. The probability that a weatlhy white family is Republican is quite high. I do say it is a guess that’s where is his contempt for elected Dems comes from.
I have called out my family on their support for Modi, my father no longer supports the BJP and am still working on my mother.
I write comments to the best of my knowledge at the time, when I make mistakes I admit them.
I am no longer among friends here. If and when I comment here I will keep that in mind. And only post something that I have verified references for and not recollections which may be faulty or guesses. Have a nice life
The Trump election has been clarifying to find out who my real friends are and a primer on race in America.
J R in WV
@gvg:
You would be wrong. State agencies have little to no control over tribal nation lands. Driving in many states with many tribal nations frequently have road signs posted, because you may be pulled over by a tribal police officer if you violate the speed limit or commit other moving violations.
Plus many tribes have great museums with great shops filled with their traditional artistic work.
New Mexico, Arizona, and Oklahoma are all examples of this.
J R in WV
deleted, already addressed
J R in WV
@schrodingers_cat:
Nope. We contributed to Senator Professor Warren while she still had a chance, but once the South Carolina primary went solidly for Biden, we were solidly behind him here at up a hollow voting central. ;~)
J R in WV
@schrodingers_cat:
Well, nowhere you go in public are you solely among friends. I think people here are your friends by a large margin. We all get rejection of a comment that runs people the wrong way. Please continue commenting.
You may have noticed that my comments are way less outraged that I used to be. I took a break, and decided I needed to stifle my outrage here. I still get into a froth at times, but less than I once did.
germy shoemangler
It took you until the Trump election to figure out race in America?
Twenty years ago I took my wife and little kids to our town’s free (to residents) park and beach. A policeman showed up suddenly and demanded to see my driver’s license ID because some other bathers didn’t believe we belonged there.
About five years ago my wife (who always wants to support local business) entered a new little store that had opened up. The Indian manager took one look at her and told his assistant “Keep an eye on this one.” I guess he thought all Black people were shoplifters. My wife overheard his comment and told him she was hoping to tell her friends about supporting a new local store, but that she would never set foot in his dump again.
So with all due respect, fuck off with your racial assumptions.
Ruckus
Balloon Juice
I think some are really pissed off and while they may be overreacting out of, if nothing else, self preservation, it still is getting a lot warmer than comfortable in here. I think it’s possible that given the last 5-6 yrs and all that’s transpired we are all a lot stressed out about, well everything and pretty much everyone. I’m seeing remarks from some at a level that I don’t recall ever seeing here and that are seemingly, at least to me, possibly reading too much into things. I think we all need to take a breath and consider the joint we gather in, the people that have been here for a long time and are maybe at a rather precarious level. Given all the political bullshit over the last 6 or so years it’s rather understandable but we seem to all, or at least the vast majority of us, be on very similar pages politically, and I going to say structurally. We do not all think the same way or the exact same direction or for the same reasons, but we do seem to be pretty much on the same side here. One of the things that has always been stressed to me when in battle, and make no mistake we are in a political battle in this country, is that to make it better we have to be a strong enough and big enough group to have power. That’s not all we have to do but that is one of the things that allows winning in a political battle. Given all the crap of the last 6 yrs, SFB acting like he had the faintest idea about how to be fucking human, while disproving that over and over, conservatives wanting to go back in time at least 200 yrs, the not so supreme court actually turning the clock back 50 yrs, and an attempted coup by SFB, I’d bet we are all a bit or more than that on edge. I think it would be more helpful if we at least tried not to bite each other’s heads off and take a moment to remember that we really are on the same side here, with a very few exceptions by those on our side of the aisle with their heads up their asses. VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS. I have all three that I know of pied.
I’d hate to see this place dissolve because this is a pretty damn good place to hang out, discuss politics, destress over some beautiful pets and landscapes and in general have some good friends.
If you’ve gotten this far, thanks for reading.
PBK
@Ruckus: Thank you. Always look forward to reading your thoughtful remarks.
Geminid
@Ruckus: You are welcome and thanks for writing this.