In this piece, @Jbarro notes my frustration with people who will not vote to save democracy because they're worried about inflation. I take the point, but I have *always* felt this way about voters reacting to stuff that presidents don't control. /1
In fact, one of the reasons I became a Republican in the late 70s was that I grew up in a blue collar area where people thought it was the responsibility of the President to find a job for every wage-earner, which isn't the way it works. (And I heard that a lot.) /2
I pleaded with people: You have mayors, state reps, governors. State government. You have to vote at the national level for things of national importance and solve local stuff at the local level. But nope. /3
For all my voting life, I've had almost zero empathy for the "the President better find me a job and fill my tank" voter. Presidents can have a lot of influence over a lot, but even I knew sitting in line in my car in 1979 that gas prices were not Jimmy Carter's fault./4
"But Tom, wasn't that your argument for Reagan?" No. I voted for Reagan and the national GOP mostly on foreign policy, while casting some votes for Dems - one of whom I later worked for - at the local level. (I did not vote for Dukakis, but that's another story for another time.)
I agree with Josh and others that Democrats cannot run on a "save democracy" platform.
I recognize the truth of this, but I can still find it utterly tragic that millions of people will hand power to a sociopath because gas hit four bucks or we ran low on cat food. /5
Also, a lot of the people saying "But the common folks are suffering from inflation!" know full well that the "common folk aren't voting for creeps like Ted Cruz or Paul Gosar because of inflation. That's a rationalization, not a reason. /6
Add to this the utter irony that today's careerist Republican elites will completely screw those "common folks" for a giant tax cut; the only red meat they'll get is Texas abortion bounties and anti-vaccine laws. Lib-owning won't reduce gas prices, but hey, who cares. Owned!/7
Most Americans once cared about their democracy. (Need an example? The Democratic rise from 1974-1976 as a reaction to Watergate.) But no longer. So I guess autocracy it is, as long as there's enough cheap pork roasts at Costco. 🤷♀️/8x
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I read this piece recommended by @JVLast on how participating in the 1/6 insurrection ruined three lives. I read it trying to summon compassion, as he suggested we all do.
And yet, I'm struggling. /1
@JVLast There's a lot in the piece about protecting people from the consequences of free speech, vulnerable and gullible people. But the only way I can agree with that is to just give up on human agency and accept that a paternal state should have kept these people out of trouble. /2
@JVLast I don't know how to do that. I've always lived with pride in a country that never fears free speech, especially not if it's just nincompoopery writ large. (I don't even like hate speech codes.) So to feel compassion, I have to think of these people as no better than children. /3
I've been busy all day, but catching up on the Great Mask Outrage confirms to me that
- Americans are terrible at risk assessement
- The goalposts for public health mandates have, for some people, now moved from "temporary emergency measures" to "because you might get a cold" /1
The people who are implying I am a heartless cad (which I am, but not on this) weren't here when I was taking rafts of shit from MAGA world about masking up, locking down, and getting vaxed. All of which I have affirmed with vigor.
But emergencies are not permanent. /2
Wear a mask in the shower if you want to. But it is *bad public policy* to create mandates that the public eventually just tunes out, for reasons ranging from symbolism to incoherence. I just drove through four states that all had different requirements, include *town* rules. /3
This question is being asked by @cmclymer with a clear streak of bad faith, but I'm going to answer it. And some of my friends on the left aren't going to like the answer, because it involves words like "strategy" and "winning elections." /1
"What should we do to educate people" presupposes that racism was a mystery until yesterday and so today's progressives must champion something no one ever thought of. This is presumptuous and suffers from the idea that no one has tackled this until you thought of it. /2
FWIW, I don't think decades of education about racism - including changes in the 1990s - have failed, but it is a hallmark of current progressivism to believe that all consciousness started last Tuesday and therefore everyone else is way, way behind and need "educating."/3
A good read by @20committee on the arrest of Danchenko and the Steele dossier. A couple of comments from me: First, the idea that the dossier had disinformation in it was something I think most Russia-heads assumed. Like John, I warned back in the day that this was likely. /1
John goes farther here, wondering if the entire dossier wasn't just a setup by the Russians, the old CI problem of a "paper mill." I see it a little differently: Steele was paid to go find dirt. So he went and found dirt, knowing some of it *had* to be fed from the Russians. /2
Whether just about *all* of it came from the Russians is a different matter, or whether the Russians were using Steele as a dupe to create chaos. (I think they did, but I think Steele knew it because that's just par for the course.) So Steele produced a file of raw intel. /3
In the midst of all the 1776-ing about the guy who was elected to the New Jersey Senate because he had a beef over a concealed carry permit, he's already doing the "I'm sorry if I said a bunch of hateful stuff" dance, because of course he did.
Just as the Founders dreamed of!
/1
I love the idea that ordinary citizens run to make a difference. My mother - woman with a 9th grade education - did it in our hometown to shut down a drug market on our street. She won. She shut it down. That's citizen action, right there.
/2
But "I have no idea what I'm doing and I'm just mad at the local cops" isn't civic involvement, it's score-settling. The guy has every right to run and win - and the guy he beat probably deserved it - but this isn't how you get better government. /3
Reminds me of nuclear weapons protests back in the 70s and 80s, which accomplished nothing, and assured that anti-nuke politicians and organizations were frozen out of the policy world.
Self-actualizing stunts like this convince no one, and I'd bet have zero effect on Manchin. /1
And before any of you get misty-eyed thinking protests against nukes got anywhere: Yes, people in the 80s were scared, and rightly so. The Cold War was getting hot. That didn't stop anything. And Reagan proposed SDI in part to undercut the arguments of anti-nuke protesters. /2
Reagan and Gorbachev took the first steps back from the brink, but I'd argue that super-dramatic protests actually made that harder to do for a while. Sometimes, protests make it harder for political leaders to back down, because they don't want to be seen as caving to them. /3