But again my basic call to conservatives is to actually engage the case for non-equality in a serious way.

Stop making things up about fraud and articulate criteria for disenfranchisement. Right now being too young and having a felony conviction are commonly used. What else?
Right now we argue in circles as conservatives implement “anti-fraud” measures, progressives accuse them of trying to disenfranchise people, and conservatives pretend to find that charge offensive.

But then quietly they say “yeah we should disenfranchise people.” Who? Why?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Matthew Yglesias

Matthew Yglesias Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @mattyglesias

10 Apr
The difference in my view is that Antifa and its supporters are totally separate from Democratic Party networks, the issue with “defund” is it was backed by a bunch of Dem-aligned groups and progressive foundations who should make smarter decisions in the future.
The reason the argument on the particular defund point remains so testy and bitter is that it’s not some thing that happened randomly, the progressive nonprofit world really threw in behind raising its salience per @danielmarans’ points here.

huffpost.com/entry/republic… Image
So there’s an abstract social science question “how import was this in the grand scheme of things?” but also a narrower question about strategy and funding — “was this a smart decision given the nominal aims of these groups and their funders?”
Read 5 tweets
9 Apr
A useful point here from comments ... not only is "womxn" jargony and weird, but it's very far from clear that the intended trans-inclusive message comes through — as far as I can see, most trans women refer to themselves as "women."

slowboring.com/p/yang-gang/co… Image
The origin as I understand it is there was a move in Second Wave feminism to say "womyn" instead of "women" to decenter men.

But that jargon came to be associated with TERF tendencies. So "womxn" was coined as a trans-inclusive alternative to "womyn."
But it's not like "womyn" was ever in widespread circulation — the much more typical sentiment is "trans women are women" a view that is both *genuinely* inclusive and also comprehensible to any normal English speaker.
Read 4 tweets
8 Apr
This is a really good article and also a useful jumping off point for something I’ve wanted to tweet about for a while, namely the changing meaning of “social issues.”
One version of the Drutman Chart explicitly labels the socially left, economically right quadrant as “libertarian.”

That’s an idea that reflects an era in which “social issues” were mostly about sex, gender, and religion and I think a lot of people still carry that mental model.
But the key moves in Trump Era cultural politics were about race, immigration, and national identity.

Saying “I think gay couples should be allowed to get married, public schools should teach evolution, and stem cell research is good” are not “woke” positions in today’s fights.
Read 4 tweets
8 Apr
I will engage! It seems relevant to me that conservatives are not proposing that you pass a civics or math test to vote, instead they cite vague voter ignorance considerations to defend restrictions that have narrow partisan aims.
DC statehood would pretty clearly increase the political clout of people who are highly informed about American politics and public policy — maybe that would help address some of these concerns?
I think serious critique of America’s conception of good government as “vote vote vote” would be welcome.

We have far too many elections and elected officials and would benefit from a more modest view of what’s a reasonable number of discrete things to ask people to vote on.
Read 5 tweets
7 Apr
I feel like America is under-invested in historical plaque infrastructure — I always want to know more about the story of different locations and buildings.
Biden should get behind this and lock down the History Dad vote. Then start talking about his favorite Churchill biographies.
Here’s a plaque we don’t have but should.

If you’re walking up the 14th Street corridor in DC, you’ll discover that amidst the new developments and gentrification there’s this kind of dreary looking set of houses that was built as a co-op in the 70s so it’s hard to redevelop.
Read 5 tweets
6 Apr
I think it is worth saying that Rep Thompson’s concerns about a tradeoff between majority-minority districts and proportional fairness to Democrats reflects an outdated view of the electoral landscape in the South and his mind should be at ease.
When Thompson first entered congress in the 1990s there were lots of “gettable” conservative white voters left in the rural South, so packing Black voters into VRA-compliant districts improved descriptive representation for African-Americans but also helped Republicans win seats.
That’s not what today’s southern electorate looks like and the tradeoff has gone away.

Compare @Redistrict’s optimal Dem gerrymander of Alabama to his “maximize minority representation” gerrymander of Alabama. ImageImageImage
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!