Thread by @SethAbramson

I often disagree with Bill, and disagree with some of this. I think he oscillates between pretending the far left and the Democratic Party are synonymous and acknowledging they're not. The Democratic Party is diverse; it's the *GOP* that made its fringe the whole of its project.

https://twitter.com/billmaher/status/1461938829946880002

(PS) What idiot conservatives like Scott Adams are missing in trumpeting this video is that Maher *is* a classical liberal, and *is* saying that the Democratic Party's *policies* are where most of the country is—including, yes, the white Heartland.

The issue is, paradoxically...

(PS2) ...that folks like Maher conflating the Democratic Party and its left-most fringe is *precisely* the problem the party faces. Why? Because a party can't control all its fringes—unless it's an authoritarian party like the GOP—but it *can* ask people to focus on its policies.

(PS3) A political party is what it *does*—and what it does *in the main*, not scattered anecdotes of unreasonableness dredged up by enemies or a fake metanarrative that pretends the fringe is the center. Bill misses *his* responsibility in talking about how politics really works.

(PS4) When conservatives—led by the nose by far-right demagogues—*choose* to focus on fringe-left nonsense instead of the fact that Democrats are representing middle-class, working-class, and poor interests far better than the GOP, why gaslight Democrats over that? Blame the GOP.

(PS5) Notice that—in saying this—I don't feel a need to address Maher's criticisms of the leftist fringe, because yes, it's part of the Democratic Party, but no, it is not where most Democrats are.

It's where the best pro-GOP anecdotes come from; it's not where policy-making is.

(PS6) What's really crappy is Maher going after AOC—who's a *very* policy-oriented person whose agenda would benefit nearly all Americans. The folks Maher is *really* angry at are far-left social media users with no power whatsoever and really no relevance to daily American life.

(PS7) The paradox Maher misses: the very *reason* fringe-left culture is so foreign to Heartland Americans is because *it's not part of their life experience*. Which literally means they're obsessing over something that *isn't part of their life* rather than policies that *are*.

(PS8) The only "wokeness" most Americans ever need worry about is being awake to the fact that most pols, media folks, and (yes) pundits are lying to them by trying to get them to focus on issues that aren't actually relevant to their daily life. *That* is what *needs* to change.

(PS9) I focus on threats now posed to American democracy, American rule of law, Americans' voting rights, and U.S. national security because the implications of *ignoring* the Trumpist insurrection are so dire that—yes—they could destroy all our lives all at once and irrevocably.

(PS10) In contrast, I *don't* focus on the outrage du jour being pushed by elements within my political party because in nearly every instance it doesn't actually affect the life of anyone but the small number of people directly involved.

Maybe Maher should start doing the same.

(NOTE) I understand that Maher's point is that folks *are* focusing on the outrage du jour whether I like it or not. But in that case, the people to harangue are the far-right demagogues distracting everyone from what really matters and the GOP voters who choose to be so lied to.

(NOTE2) If I were Maher, I'd tell people to stop pretending "wokeness" is part of their lives when it isn't. You find a stranger too woke? Avoid them. On Twitter? Block them. In politics? Don't vote for them. But *obsession* should be reserved for *actual public policy debates*.

(NOTE3) And no, Glenn Youngkin, it isn't an "actual policy debate" when a Youngkin donor gets her son—who works for the GOP—to say that a Pulitzer Prize winning book gave him a nightmare when he was 17. I'm talking about whether folks have healthcare and can pay their damn bills.