|
Judgy Fucker posted:Chicken or the egg. Why are they GOP primary voters? Specifically, the people making less than $50k a year? Because they are inculcated in that belief through almost 50 years of right wing messaging. The scariest words in the english language? They still trot that out at every opportunity. This guy is talking about all men being gay sissies, stop trying to shove his square peg in a "well, if we just offered him free healthcare" hole. He has free healthcare.
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 06:16 |
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:People who are committed to the Republican ideology do not believe the government can help them, and generally want to abolish as much of it as they can. Why would the Democrats promising or proposing policies to improve their material existence move them? They believe government aid is actively harmful the economy, and are constantly yelling about it, and I don't see any reason not to believe them. This is a driving factor for many GOP voters and I think gets undersold in importance. They do not believe the government should do almost anything. Except the specific things they want like keeping people from building houses so theirs is worth more. Or free healthcare since they’re old. But not for anyone else. And it’s pretty hard to argue against someone’s base selfishness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
zoux posted:Because they are inculcated in that belief through almost 50 years of right wing messaging. The scariest words in the english language? They still trot that out at every opportunity. Why was the right wing messaging necessarily successful for the last 50 years? What was done to counter the message? And 1) I'm talking about more than one person, and 2) that person has free healthcare? Really? How do you know?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Why was the right wing messaging necessarily successful for the last 50 years? What was done to counter the message? Because he's 69 years old and therefore qualifies for federal Medicare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
zoux posted:Because he's 69 years old and therefore qualifies for federal Medicare. If you think Medicare is totally free of charge I have news for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Chicken or the egg. Why are they GOP primary voters? Specifically, the people making less than $50k a year? It was a concerted effort by Republicans to convince white racists and young people who had grown up in the successes of the New Deal to vote for the people who wanted to tear it down. It worked real well, due in large part to the enthusiastic acceptance by formerly solidly pro-labor Democratic voters who lost their minds once black people got to participate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
zoux posted:Another interesting crosstab in that big poll is that Trump's highest support in the party comes from 18-29 year olds. Probably because if you are a young person in the Republican party, it's because you like how Trump is changing it. It's also probably why the GOP brand is going to be permanently radioactive to 18-29 year olds who are not Republicans. Right-wing reporter for a right-wing website does right-wing speaking engagements to young right-wingers explaining that right-wingers need to hide their racism better. Makes perfect sense to me. It's all that economic anxiety.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:It was a concerted effort by Republicans to convince white racists and young people who had grown up in the successes of the New Deal to vote for the people who wanted to tear it down. It worked real well, due in large part to the enthusiastic acceptance by formerly solidly pro-labor Democratic voters who lost their minds once black people got to participate. I know all that, but thank you for answering the rhetorical question anyway (sincerely) since it's a good segue: If racism can get people to vote against their economic interests, what can bring people back? Or is the final calculation here that racism wins over materially beneficial policy? I refuse to believe that, and think that such people can be won back, but it'll take 1) time and 2) policies that actually help people, as in stopping the cycle of living paycheck to paycheck, or becoming an indentured servant of banks because you took out student loans, or actual, for realsies, universal healthcare. But the problem is there is zero political will to implement the policies that will help people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:I know all that, but thank you for answering the rhetorical question anyway (sincerely) since it's a good segue: Isn't the corollary to this line of reasoning that the lack of political will can be easily stoked among the (white) voters with either dog-whistles or out-right racist statements about helping "those people"? This was the fundamental message of ol'Ronnie's "welfare queens with their lobster-eating limousine rides" shtick, and it worked out for him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Why was the right wing messaging necessarily successful for the last 50 years? What was done to counter the message? I would say right wing messaging his been successful, in large though not exclusive part, because they have basically infinite money from billionaires/megacorporations pushing their ideology and an entire globe spanning propaganda machine ensuring that at any, and all, time whatever topic they want to talk about is what WILL be the topic of discussion. What has been done to push back on that is probably the point you're trying to make, since what has been done for the last 70 or so years is "lol I dunno figure it out yourself we ain't fixing poo poo for you peasants". Just wanted to make the point that while their audience is super open to that message, the source of that message isn't some unknowable ether. It's got very definite sources.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Isn't the corollary to this line of reasoning that the lack of political will can be easily stoked among the (white) voters with either dog-whistles or out-right racist statements about helping "those people"? This was the fundamental message of ol'Ronnie's "welfare queens with their lobster-eating limousine rides" shtick, and it worked out for him. Well yes, the white racist voters have lapped up the message. But the voters aren't the ones casting votes on the floor of Congress, it's our elected officials. They have no political will for economic policies needed to help people because the entities financing their election campaigns don't want it. It's why we always hear nice-ish things from Democrats when they're running--they need votes, after all--but once the election is over everything gets backpeddled, means-tested, etc. bird food bathtub posted:I would say right wing messaging his been successful, in large though not exclusive part, because they have basically infinite money from billionaires/megacorporations pushing their ideology and an entire globe spanning propaganda machine ensuring that at any, and all, time whatever topic they want to talk about is what WILL be the topic of discussion. Agreed completely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Chicken or the egg. Why are they GOP primary voters? Specifically, the people making less than $50k a year? My point is that the demographic of 50,000 or below vote Democratic as a group. I can't find a race break down of that demo though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 18:58
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:My point is that the demographic of 50,000 or below vote Democratic as a group. I can't find a race break down of that demo though. Well yeah, most people who make under $50,000
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Why do you think [Republican belief that government can do no good] is? The current condition of the right is basically 0% because the liberals let them down, or whatever you're implying. Like I said, these people have been here for the entire history of the country, with varying degrees of influence. They weren't invented by Bill Clinton replacing AFDC with TANF. bird food bathtub posted:What has been done to push back on that is probably the point you're trying to make, since what has been done for the last 70 or so years is "lol I dunno figure it out yourself we ain't fixing poo poo for you peasants". To whatever extent government inaction and right wing politics are related, I would say it's more the influence of right wing extremists causing the government to be ineffective, rather than an ineffective government creating right wing extremists. It's racism, guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Or is the final calculation here that racism wins over materially beneficial policy? I refuse to believe that, and think that such people can be won back I'll be blunt here, and I don't think many itt would agree with me, but I actually don't think this is true. Or, phrased another way, I think, yes, there is a good chunk of people for whom their bigotry outweighs material benefits. I don't know if it's a majority of the current gop base, I hope it's not, but they exist and I'm related to some of them  That's not saying that it's not worth pursuing policies that make life better for the average person, because obviously it is! I'm just not optimistic about how that would change people's attitudes regarding race
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:17
|
|
|
i say we do the free health care, social safety nets, and all those other things anyways. couldn't hurt
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:17
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yeah, like zous said, because of years of propaganda that plays into their racial biases and convinces them that the government is dedicated to taking them down a peg because of their ethnic/cultural identity. They weren't turned off of social welfare because LBJ's programs were ineffective, it was because LBJ's programs gave money to "undeserving" (you know what that means) people. Yes, the Paranoid Style is not new to American politics, it is in fact as old as the country itself. But that doesn't explain its ascendancy in the last few decades. What do you think does, if the Democrats ceding economic conditions to the right isn't the explanation? Because I can sure see an intellectual journey of "the government doesn't help me," to "the government is in it for themselves," to "the government can do no good, they're all crooks." Yes, RWM has had a bullhorn going full blast the last few decades. Where is the counternarrative, or if there has been one, why has it not been effective? "Everyone's too racist for their own good" seems like a gross oversimplification, because: Mellow Seas posted:It's racism, guys. Are people born racist? Where does the racism come from? Can once-racists become non- or anti-racist? Why is it agiven that racism should trump (no pun intended) materialism?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Looks like they took the money and ran? My understanding from people in relevant fields, as implied by the 1.4b in debt thing, is that Yellow was already circling if not down the drain. I'm not sure how much money there was left to take. Fake edit: article says they're filing for bankruptcy, as one would expect. Sucks for the workers that the execs were idiots I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
People are born to sort themselves into groups and classifications and to favor those that they consider to be within or allied to those categories and disfavor those who aren't. In our current society this sorts out mostly in terms of genetic phenotype, that is to say, bigotry. In other societies and civilizations, this could be more class-dependent, or geography dependent, or what have you. But every society has a sense of the Other.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:People are born to sort themselves into groups and classifications and to favor those that they consider to be within or allied to those categories and disfavor those who aren't. In our current society this sorts out mostly in terms of genetic phenotype, that is to say, bigotry. Then why isn't everyone a bigot? Why is it necessary to view your in-group in racial terms, and not, say, class or (humanistly) specific terms? eta: you added some more qualifying statements, but I think my questions are still relevant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:33
|
|
|
PoopShipDestroyer posted:What is Pence still doing in this race? He's the most baffling candidate to me, I can't imagine what his people are telling him to convince him he has even the slightest chance in hell Sunk cost. He gave up his governor seat and spent an absolutely miserable four years as Trump's VP to position himself for a future presidential run. If he can't at least be a decent contender, all of that was basically for nothing, and what is even left of his political career at that point? Judgy Fucker posted:I know all that, but thank you for answering the rhetorical question anyway (sincerely) since it's a good segue: I think there's a mistaken assumption at the heart of this post: you're assuming that "racism" is a separate thing unrelated to "materially beneficial policy". The racists believe that racism is materially beneficial policy, and that efforts to reduce racism are actively harmful to them and to society at large. Not just in terms of direct personal impact ("affirmative action takes opportunities from me and gives them to others"), but also in terms of overall societal impact ("taking opportunities from the best and most deserving will cause the decay and downfall of society"). Meanwhile, things that you believe are materially beneficial (such as universal healthcare) are things they feel are obviously disastrous and counterproductive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Why do you think that is? You realize you're talking about the 'Get the Government Out Of My Medicare' crowd, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:36
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:i say we do the free health care, social safety nets, and all those other things anyways. couldn't hurt Judgy Fucker posted:Are people born racist? Where does the racism come from? Can once-racists become non- or anti-racist? Why is it agiven that racism should trump (no pun intended) materialism? There is a very, very strong bias towards tribalism in the human psyche because we lived in tribes for 100,000 years. So yeah, people kind of are born racist. So why isn't everybody racist? Because human society progresses, and new philosophies come to bear, and we have the power to change the way we look at the world and the way we raise the next generation. The fact that we can trust somebody who looks different from us, and comes from a different place, and has a different culture, isn't some kind of natural state, it's something we've achieved through civilization. Anti-racism is the modern invention, not racism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:37
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I think there's a mistaken assumption at the heart of this post: you're assuming that "racism" is a separate thing unrelated to "materially beneficial policy". The racists believe that racism is materially beneficial policy, and that efforts to reduce racism are actively harmful to them and to society at large. Not just in terms of direct personal impact ("affirmative action takes opportunities from me and gives them to others"), but also in terms of overall societal impact ("taking opportunities from the best and most deserving will cause the decay and downfall of society"). That's a good point, conceded. TheDeadlyShoe posted:You realize you're talking about the 'Get the Government Out Of My Medicare' crowd, right? Yes, I am well aware. Why do you think such ignorance exists? Mellow Seas posted:Racism is not caused by capitalism We will have to agree to disagree, at least partially. Mellow Seas posted:So why isn't everybody racist? Because human society progresses, and new philosophies come to bear, and we have the power to change the way we look at the world and the way we raise the next generation. The fact that we can trust somebody who looks different from us, and comes from a different place, and has a different culture, isn't some kind of natural state, it's something we've achieved through civilization. Anti-racism is the modern invention, not racism. Okay then, if we have developed intellectually and philosophically enough to no longer need racism, why have some overcome the hurdle and others not? Is it a personal failing in every single instance, or do other actors in society play some role, too?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:42
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Then why isn't everyone a bigot? Why is it necessary to view your in-group in racial terms, and not, say, class or (humanistly) specific terms? Plenty of them are hating out-groups across class lines too, and across regional lines, and plenty of other lines as well. Nothing really special about the racism, aside from cultural traditions established centuries ago and inflamed in the 19th century by what was perceived as attempts to suppress them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:That's a good point, conceded. And of course being exposed to racism in your family and peers makes you more likely to be racist, as opposed to being around people who are anti-racist... I never denied there were environmental factors to racism, it's incredibly obvious that there are, and that they have a bigger impact than  . It's just that "Dems don't pass enough social welfare policies" is not really one of those environmental factors.There is one thing the government can definitely do to make people less racist* and it's to encourage higher education, and the percentage of Americans with a post-HS degree has risen from 37% to 51% just since 2009. Which kind of runs against the whole "nothing ever gets better" argument. (Shame about the expense, but again, the cost of college is not driving people to right wing politics, and the mere suggestion of forgiving loans makes them apoplectic. Why can't we just believe these people when they say what they like and what they don't?) e: * Actually, you can also make people less racist by improving their material conditions, as having more economic security makes people perform better at pretty much everything we consider "virtuous" (which should maybe make us consider what virtue really is.) A more prosperous country would be a more anti-racist one because people wouldn't be looking to blame problems on some outgroup if they didn't have problems. So I think there is definitely some agreement there. But there will always be people who just fuckin' hate that other guy for being the way he is. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Jul 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:01
|
|
|
I don't know how you could watch the politics surrounding COVID-19 over the last few years and come to the conclusion that conservatives are policy-focused, rational actors.Mellow Seas posted:
Not a coincidence that we are seeing some of the most egregious attacks on higher education independence and funding following the extreme decline of the college-educated white GOP voter in the Trump era.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I never denied there were environmental factors to racism, it's incredibly obvious that there are, and that they have a bigger impact than Why do you think so? Mellow Seas posted:There is one thing the government can definitely do to make people less racist and it's to encourage higher education, and the percentage of Americans with a post-HS degree has risen from 37% to 51% just since 2009. Which kind of runs against the whole "nothing ever gets better" argument. (Shame about the expense, but again, the cost of college is not driving people to right wing politics, and the mere suggestion of forgiving loans makes them apoplectic. Why can't we just believe these people when they say what they like and what they don't?) Why is a college degree a material good in its own right, and why do you assume that higher ed will help to solve racism? One of the people quoted in the article that precipitated this conversation was a nuclear engineer, I'm sure they have plenty of schoolin' under their belt. zoux posted:I don't know how you could watch the politics surrounding COVID-19 over the last few years and come to the conclusion that conservatives are policy-focused, rational actors. Is someone saying they are?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:08
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Why do you think so? quote:and why do you assume that higher ed will help to solve racism? quote:One of the people quoted in the article that precipitated this conversation was a nuclear engineer, I'm sure they have plenty of schoolin' under their belt. e: Also  as an engineer I have to point out that he was a technician, not an engineer. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:Fake edit: article says they're filing for bankruptcy, as one would expect. Sucks for the workers that the execs were idiots I guess. Their stock closed at $0.71 on Friday and right now it’s trading at $1.50 in spite of (or because of?) the bankruptcy thing. What a perfectly rational working system we have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Judgy Fucker posted:Is someone saying they are? It's implicit in the argument that GOP voters are they way that they are because they don't see their preferred policies pass the government.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:12
|
|
|
can you quit with this socratic method bullshit? you're in D&D, not a lecture hall. if you want to argue that racism and anti-government rhetoric is a symptom and effect of ineffective government, ok. But you also have to reconcile that stance with the fact such racism and distrust of government continues even in the face of effective policy (i.e. medicare or obamacare or Covid vaccine) that objectively help said people. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
An NYT profile characterizes Tricia Cotham's decision to switch parties and hand NC Republicans a supermajority as the result of a long-simmering grudge against local Democrats, inflamed by Republicans who were working on her since before the electionquote:She won the primary in a redrawn district near Charlotte, and then triumphed in the November general election by 18 percentage points, a victory that helped Democrats lock in enough seats to prevent, by a single vote, a Republican supermajority in the state House. quote:It was around that time that state Democratic Party officials were homing in on a redrawn state House district in Mecklenburg County, where Ms. Cotham lived, and where Democratic voters outnumber Republicans. Partly because of her public Covid battle, party leaders didn’t seriously consider nominating her, but she surprised them by filing at the deadline in March to run for the seat. quote:Democrats, including Ms. Cotham, sponsored a House bill that month to write Roe v. Wade’s protection of abortion rights into state law. Yet she refused to meet or take phone calls from Planned Parenthood, according to Jillian Reilly, a lobbyist for the group. quote:After Ms. Cotham was criticized for missing the vote on gun regulations, Mr. Bishop, the Republican congressman, called her and said he had heard she was thinking of joining his party. I hope it was worth it, she's probably more hated among her own electorate than Krysten Sinema now. haveblue fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Jul 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:can you quit with this socratic method bullshit? you're in D&D, not a lecture hall. This gets at the crux of it, imo. People's understanding of their material conditions is filtered through the lens of their worldview. If their worldview views denying evidence and reason to hew to the party line as an act of devotion akin to fundies speaking in tongues during a church service, policy makers have a big problem. I don't know how chuds would respond to Medicare for all or whatever making their lives better, and I don't trust anyone who's confident they do know. I'm not at all convinced they wouldn't immediately pivot to either "think of how much better we'd be without socialized healthcare" or even "we're physically healthy but spiritually impoverished." Obviously non crazies should still push for UHC. Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Jul 31, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
As she should be considering that she is now going to enshrine a lot of terrible and unpopular policies into law
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:38
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:This gets at the crux of it, imo. People's understanding of their material conditions is filtered through the lens of their worldview. If their worldview views denying evidence and reason to hew to the party line as an act of devotion akin to fundies speaking in tongues during a church service, policy makers have a big problem. I don't know how chuds would respond to Medicare for all or whatever making their lives better, and I don't trust anyone who's confident they do know. I'm not at all convinced they wouldn't immediately pivot to either "think of how much better we'd be without socialized healthcare" or even "we're physically healthy but spiritually impoverished." Fox News and the rest of the RWM would run end-to-end segments about how the USNHS is killing this person or rationing care to this person or how this person had to wait 3 months to have some procedure, it would split dead across party lines. Remember that seniors overwhelmingly love their socialized health care while merrily pulling the lever for the party that wants to gut it. I remember reading an article a few years ago about how political discourse in the US is so asymmetrical because of a hack gap: that is to say, there is no equivalent to the propaganda put out by the RWM on the left. So any policy proposal must consider how the public will move against it, both because of thermostatic effects and because of active and malicious disinformation campaigns against them. People are always like "why isn't Biden speaking on this issue" and the answer is that he was VP to a guy who would instantly see any policy plank or argument drop 20 points because of Fox News.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
Mecca-Benghazi posted:I'll be blunt here, and I don't think many itt would agree with me, but I actually don't think this is true. Or, phrased another way, I think, yes, there is a good chunk of people for whom their bigotry outweighs material benefits. I don't know if it's a majority of the current gop base, I hope it's not, but they exist and I'm related to some of them There are a lot of things you can do to politically convert people to your cause beyond delivering material benefits. Trying to outweigh bigotry with a weaker rhetorical structure like materialism in today's society isn't gonna get you much traction with whole swathes of people, I agree, but that doesn't mean they aren't convertable, and the relative weakness of material benefits politically for the masses is as often a good thing as a bad one. I think it's bad the Democrats don't offer much in the way of social benefits, but I s worth remembering that the last time they won big they didn't do it on the back of offering material benefits but emotional ones, so, y'know, there's that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Who said otherwise?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:58
|
|
|
zoux posted:Fox News and the rest of the RWM would run end-to-end segments about how the USNHS is killing this person or rationing care to this person or how this person had to wait 3 months to have some procedure, it would split dead across party lines. Remember that seniors overwhelmingly love their socialized health care while merrily pulling the lever for the party that wants to gut it. The answer also frequently is "He is speaking on the issue, you just didn't hear it because his every word isn't being massively repeated everywhere." Even Trump only got his rantings of the moment carried around when they resonated with what outlets wanted to repeat or hatewatch, and by later in his administration even Fox was bored with his tendencies to do some press event just to feel validated. The "Why doesn't the President just use the bully pulpit" argument was always based on a misunderstanding of how well that even works.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 06:16 |
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:I don't know how chuds would respond to Medicare for all or whatever making their lives better, and I don't trust anyone who's confident they do know. I'm not at all convinced they wouldn't immediately pivot to either "think of how much better we'd be without socialized healthcare" or even "we're physically healthy but spiritually impoverished." after the ACA was passed, Republican voters voted for people who promised to destroy it insofar as they could and then were shocked that their states stripped medical benefits from them this was particularly obvious in Kentucky where Kynect was legitimately well-designed, the new governor actively tried to trash it, and the general response was "oh no, i didn't realize kynect and my aca subsidies were obamacare  "naturally, this realization is why kentucky in 2022 went *checks notes* 62% republican
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2023 21:10
|
|