1/ Some people on the left have this magical thinking problem when it comes to why our ideas don't often carry the day within the Dem Party. We act like it's all "big Pharma money" etc. And yes, that money is corrupting. But it's not magic...
2/ If a Rep knew the majority of THEIR constituents (not Dem voters from other parts of the country but THEIR constituents) supported more left policies *and would actually show up & vote against them if they didn't vote for those policies* they would vote for them, obviously.
3/ A major goal of a Rep is to keep being one, so no one would go against the wishes of the majority of their constituents just to get contributions, if that would cost them the job. But it WON'T. Either bc the folks who could punish them don't bother to vote, or, more likely...
4/ bc most voters are savvy enough to care about more than one issue, so even if a Rep doesn't fight for M4A, they might be good on other things voters care about and much better than the GOP alternative. Now, if these are progressive districts where the D is sure to win..
5/ ...it's different. THERE it makes sense to push hard for those Reps to do the left thing. But that means running good candidates in primaries, so those Reps feel the heat. Twitter shaming them or forcing floor votes to "expose" people means nothing w/o a viable alternative...
6/ ...and if that shaming also ends up hurting Dems in districts where they don't have the luxury of just relying on solid Dem votes and progressive leaning voters (and that's a lot of districts btw), then the outcome is nothing changes but some folks on Twitter feel righteous...
7/ So far, in most races where left candidates have challenged more establishment Dems, the left candidates have lost. We can't just say "oh it's the power of money" bc there are examples where insurgents ousted establishment candidates despite that...
8/ It's bc the message (or messenger) simply did not resonate with enough people in that district. We tend to point to national polls of Dems to show how popular and left most Dem voters are, but that is aggregate data, which is meaningless at the district level in most cases...
9/ ...and which ignores how many independents (who are not as progressive/left) and even soft republicans many D reps have to win just to keep an actual R from winning the seat. Please note: I hate that this is the reality, but it is...
10/ It is a function of how gerrymandering has worked to skew democracy, among other things, but it's also a function of most people really not being as left as I would like them to be -- at least not so consistently so as to have that determine voting choices...
11/ Most Americans are decidedly non ideological, so even if they believe in one or two things that are strongly progressive in orientation they believe in other things that are not, and thus it's hard to know which thing(s) will be most important to getting them to vote...
12/ Simplistic opinion surveys on single issues, worded in such a way as to almost ensure a certain outcome, are pretty shitty proxies for where people really are politically, and certainly on Election Day...
13/ If we want people to embrace left politics we have to inculcate those through time consuming grass roots organizing & education efforts. But some people find that work too...I dunno, work-like, I guess. Performative shaming of Reps and yelling on YouTube is more fun
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ Wanting M4A is righteous & correct. Forcing the vote bc 'people are dying & can't wait' is empty rhetoric bc every rational person knows it won't pass. Doesn't mean forcing the vote is wrong but supporting it as if it will stop even 1 person from dying is grossly dishonest...
2/ The only other arguments I hear are essentially: a) this way we can figure out which Dems to primary (i.e., the ones who won't support M4A) and b) "we've tried it the patient way and it hasn't worked, so fuck it!" Let's look at these in reverse order...
3/ The "we've tried it your way" argument is vapid bullshit. First, the people saying that rarely have tried anything. They scream on Twitter & YouTube. They aren't organizers. They haven't run for office to try it that way. They're just pissed (rightly) and think rage = change..
1/ Trumpism is not about ideas. It’s a politic of grievance, which grafts policy onto disaffection as an afterthought. This is why we can’t defeat it with policy proposals or logical appeals to supposed self interest. Trumpers aren’t motivated by these things, but by rage alone..
2/ This is the most fascist thing about Trumpism: its lack of coherent ideology. That vacuum is what makes it possible for a fascistic cult of personality to thrive, and the notion of an autocrat motivated by grudges and the desire to dominate for domination’s sake to flourish...
3/ It’s not even necessarily a conscious fascist politic but a fascism that derives from the base’s “nothing matters” mentality...the idea that owning the libs, making liberals cry, or hurting one’s perceived race, ethnic, religious, gender and sexual enemies is everything...
THREAD: The loss of 1 in 1k Americans (including about 175k white ones) due to COVID & the pandemic's economic devastation are both the collateral damage of anti-Black and brown racism. Sound hyperbolic? It's not, and it's easily proved. Please follow along...
2/ On the one hand, sure, the Administration's nonchalance in the face of the virus is the initial cause of the devastation. And that had been evident since January. But that was actually starting to shift a bit by late March, right up to April 7. What happened then?...
3/ As @Thom_Hartmann has noted, that day the NYT & WaPo (among others) reported that the disproportionate death toll of COVID was among Black & brown folks. THAT NIGHT, Tucker Carlson (who had actually been taking C19 seriously) changed his tune. A few days later so did Trump...
A few thoughts about the Nashville bombing and how folks are reacting to it. On the one hand, yes, were the bomber Arab and/or Muslim, the "sad loner" narrative would have been eclipsed by talk of possible religious/ideological motives and the label "terrorist." That said...
2/ the fact that we'd affix that label to others doesn't make it proper to call this bomber a terrorist. The answer is to STOP affixing that label in cases where it clearly does not fit. Allow that everyone can have motives for awful shit that aren't linked to their identities...
3/ So in the case of Muslims, they can just be loners, w/mental illness & personal grudges or who want to commit suicide for the same reason others do: reasons that are personal not ideological. And white guys can do evil shit and not have it be about white nationalism or Trump..
1/ Conspiracy theories are for those who don't understand how systems function, so they cling to the idea of evil forces behind the scenes, when in fact, most awful things that happen happen because the social structures within which we operate contribute to various outcomes...
2/ Sadly, American culture is so hyper-individualistic, it is easier to think of everything (good and bad) as flowing from either good or bad people, rather than social systems and structures that are far more complex...
3/ And unfortunately our schools don't really teach systemic thinking, or encourage people to have a sociological imagination. So it's easier to blame false flags and a "pending gun grab" for mass shootings, rather than look at the mental health system or violent culture...
The worst takes on the Nashville bombing remind us how awful some people can be..
"Nashville's run by Democrats!"
???
Who was Mayor of NY when 9/11 happened? Oh yeah.
Bombings happen in cities bc it gets more attention than bombing a barn, dumbass...
2/ Or how about...
"The bomb exploded outside the AT&T data center" (true)...
"And that's because they had data proving the election was stolen" (and there's the shark...make sure to jump)...
To be clear it also exploded right outside the Melting Pot, so...
3/ Or "it was antifa or BLM"...neither of which have ever bombed anything, anywhere, even once, as opposed to right wingers (who may not have done this either -- it might not have been ideological per se), but who have done literally dozens of bombings in the past 25 years...