Lol one of these people was an organizer who marched with King and the other adamantly opposed a holiday for King in AZ but okay
McCain voted against the 1990 Civil Rights act, a bill that made it easier for ppl to sue employers for discrimination.
The optics of GOP opposition were so bad — David Duke went to DC to cheer its failure in person — that GOP senators tried to override Bush’s veto of the bill.
McCain was not one of those senators. The veto override fell short by one vote.
Oh, and also McCain’s campaign manager in South Carolina in the 2000 campaign was a *literal* neo-Confederate.
CNN's pundits – not Dana Basch and Abby Phillip but that unholy quartet of Van Jones and Rick Santorum and Axelrod and whassaname — are already doing that "It will be good if GA's two Senate seats go to the GOP bc then Biden will have to govern from the sensible middle" thing.
the "sensible middle' is one of the most inane, nonsensical constructions in mainstream US political discourse.
besides the fact that it presumes that Biden is going to govern from the left — tuh — it also assumes that the two parties are symmetrical ideological opposites.
Now Kasich is doing it: "Now is the time for Democrats to listen to the other side...we need to listen to what those Republicans want."
It doesn’t make sense. A Black registered voter has a 90% chance of voting for Democrats. A Latino voter has a 70ish% chance of doing so. But a white voter has a <50% chance of doing so — and a white Republican way less than *that* — why not focus on Black and Brown turnout?
So much of the “conventional wisdom” espoused by pundits on CNN is just nakedly dumb and wrong
They were chocking up AZ trending blue to a revolt of suburban moms and Cindy McCain’s endorsement of Biden. So these moms rocked with Trump and Joe Arpaio but flipped bc of Cindy? 🤔
If white ladies were revolting against Trump in the traditionally red suburbs of AZ...wouldn’t they also be doing so else in the country?
As a few people pointed out to me yesterday, to the extent that the blue flip in Maricopa County was because of suburban moms, it was because those suburban moms are now *brown* and their energized kids have been doing work:
again, Trump is only a viable candidate because of his overwhelming white support, up and down the income ladder and across generations.
white voters are the constant. if Trump lightly underperformed with white voters in, say, Florida, the map looks different.
But go off.
In Florida, one candidate won SIX in 10 white voters in a state where EIGHT in 10 people identify as white (including a LARGE number of Hispanic people).
It has the effect of overstating Trump's appeal to people who are...not white.
this was Ta-Nehisi in 2016. How different does any of this look *now*?
whiteness has always been elastic in the US, but it's always expanded to absorb different kinds of people of European descent.
it's an open q as to whether it will/can expand to subsume groups of Asian Ams or Latinos — and whether their racial formation in the US will allow it.
Italians and the Irish and Germans and European Jews were subsumed into broader USian whiteness, but are the mechanisms by which that happened available today (and available to enough people) of MENA ancestry or Latin American ancestry or South Asian ancestry?
racial formation in the US isn't as simple and neat as "white people have power and new populations will become 'white' in order to access that power."
There's a systemic/structural dynamic to this as well: Does the world *treat* you like a white person?
Trump's WH bids have rested entirely on running up the score with white voters.
As Robert points out here, the fact that the Trump is unpopular among younger voters is not because younger white people don't rock with Trump – it's that younger gens are much browner.
"In 2024, the two younger gens are expected to equal the older ones as a share of actual voters on Election Day. And by 2028, Millennials and Gen Z will dwarf the older generations as a share of both eligible and actual voters."