Thread by @JuliusGoat

Yes, we’re aware of the bigots, thank you.

https://twitter.com/nprpolitics/status/1075330559751151616

Imagine resenting the notion that you should be so sensitive to the feelings of others.

Imagine finding it so onerous that you have to take the extraordinary step of acknowledging other people matter, that you vote for a criminal fool.

The problem with this article is the same as what I suspect is the problem with the poll: it's written in a code that it doesn't acknowledge and it might not even be aware of.

Every time you read "sensitive" in this article, replace it with, "caring about people different than yourself."

Every time you read "speak your mind freely" add "without being told those views are hurtful."

How do you read "sensitive" as a presumed negative when it comes to people's feelings, without acknowledging the counterfactual, that 'insensitive' is a presumed value?

They don't care that people are offended by their words. They care that those people now feel free to say so.

There are 'too many things people can't say anymore,' huh?

What things?

Which people?

What do you mean, "can't?"

What things? Well, insensitive things.

Which people? Men and white people, mostly, by the polls.

Can't? Can't without being criticized, I guess. Which means that actually these days there are more things that more people CAN say.

Huh. How about that.

Let me propose two theories.

Theory #1: "Political Correctness" is simply the phenomenon of previously marginalized people speaking up for their own perspective and experience, and insisting it be acknowledged.

Thus, PC means MORE people are allowed to speak their minds.

Theory #2: Anyone who would switch their vote to Donald Trump because of "PC" was already voting for Trump, knows it's shameful, and was just looking for some excuse.

Democrats need to never return to the strategy of trying to court voters who will never vote for them.

And finally, a question. Why would you run this poll, and then when interviewed frame "political correctness" around impeachment?

What set of assumptions makes this analysis even slightly coherent?

What was the purpose of this poll, anyway?

It's really weird, right? How is impeachment the PC issue? How are women's issues or gun control the opposite? Shouldn't those be switched?

This is basically the Republican's new false dichotomy of "legislate don't investigate" ... but how is it relevant to PC?

If I had to guess why we have such an incoherent analysis, I'd say there are people right now who are trying to shoehorn literally anything into that "legislate don't investigate" narrative, and Miringoff is either one of those people or it's just entered into his thinking.

Meanwhile, NPR can write a headline like "Warning to Democrats on Political Correctness," but then it logically follows the takeaway for Democrats would have to be "be more bigoted" and NPR doesn't want to say THAT.

But they have to suggest something.

So sure, impeachment.

My conclusions are:

1) People voted for Democrats because of issues. Those issues include: protection for the marginalized, climate, economy, AND accountability, and they'd better fight for all.

2) People who say "you can't speak your mind anymore" are telling on themselves.