Thread by @bpicampus

Democrats' challenge with working class white women may be an individual-vs-comparative-vs-relational issue. (Thread)

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1059122904711991296

2/ There are many ways to evaluate one's own political interests. You can do that individually -- will I find a better job, will my take-home pay go up, will it be easier for me to get health care, will I be more protected from sexual aggression, etc.

3/ By those *individual* metrics ... yes, progressive policies offer more help than conservative policies for working class white women.

But you could choose different *individual* metrics and get a different outcome. What's more....

4/ Not everyone considers only *individual* metrics. Working class whites, in particular, are deluged with agit prop telling them to use *comparative* metrics:

"Will my stuff be *more/better than* these Others' stuff?"

(Others = POC, LGBTs, non-Christians, etc.)

5/ Worse, the agit prop tells working class whites to evaluate that question by anecdote: "Did some Other get something that you wanted?"

(Implicit: if you're white-hetero-Christian, you deserved it more than the Other.)

6/ And it needn't even be an personal experience anecdote. A friend-of-a-friend, saw-it-on-the-internet anecdote will do. In the agit prop world, unprovable (and usually false) stories that 'feel' true are valid data.

7/ In that anecdotal *comparative* frame - the frame relentlessly pushed by agit proppers like Fox News, right-wing talk radio and blogs, etc. - the question for white working class voters comes down to:

"Does it FEEL LIKE those Others get more/better stuff than you?"

8/ In that anecdotal *comparative* frame, progressive policies WILL NOT offer more help to working class white women. Democrats can't offer a winning message *within that* frame ... without abandoning POC, LGBTs, etc.

Even worse....

9/ Surveys show that many working class white women weigh *relational* analysis very highly: "Will MY MEN (partner, dad, brother, son, etc.) do better?"

And that's rational, because 'my men' are the first line of support for many working class white women.

10/ The analysis runs: "If I get fired/hurt/sick/threatened, I'll turn to MY MEN for help. I need THEM to have what THEY need, so they'll be able to help me if I need them."

And that analysis goes to: "What policies are better for WHITE MEN?"

11/ Again, agit prop casts that *relational* analysis in an anecdotal *comparative* frame, so it comes down to: "Who will make sure my white men have more/better stuff than those Others?"

And thus we get many working class white women voting for ... white patriarchal policies.

12/ The key -- for those working class white women, voting for white patriarchal policies 'feels like' voting in their own best interests. If you accept the anecdotal comparative frame and meld it to relational analysis, they are voting in their best interests!

13/ And progressives simply CANNOT compete in the Who Does More for White Patriarchy contest. It would be immoral. It would abandon Democrats' actual voting base. And they'd still lose because, in a choice between Republican and Republican-Lite, the real Republican always wins.

14/ The question, then, is how to get working class white women (and men!) OUT OF the anecdotal comparative frame?

How to get them to ask "Will I get more/better stuff?"

... and NOT ask ...

"Will I get more/better stuff THAN THOSE OTHERS?"

15/ And with all the agit prop pushing them to the anecdotal comparative frame, that's a huge challenge. It comes down to ...

How do we get working class white women (and men) to reject the white patriarchal agit prop that warps their analysis?

16/ That's not a Democratic/progressive policy question.

It's not even (really) a Democratic/progressive messaging question.

It's a 'Which Information Pond Do You Swim In' question ... and I don't think anyone has yet found a good answer.

Summary: When people say "Democrats must do better with white working class women," that's not about policy or messaging.

It's about how those voters frame their interests, shaped by what information pond they swim in. And that's a VERY hard question. (End of Thread)