The challenge, after a loss, is to learn something *new.* Most people aren't doing that right now. They're taking in information and trying to fit that within their prevailing world view.
The NEW thing I'm learning is: People do not and will not vote for harm mitigation...
We see this most obviously with the people who withheld their votes due to Gaza, and instead invite Trump's Armageddon. But we see it elsewhere. Latinos did not vote for harm mitigation, they voted to harm others and think they'll be spared.
White women did not vote for harm mitigation. They voted to allow white men to do harm and think they'll vicariously benefit.
Workers did not vote for harm mitigation. They voted to let Elon bring them pain and think one day his money will trickle down to them.
This... is a *problem* for the Democratic Party, because what we're selling most often is harm mitigation. It's been that way since Reagan. There's an old @billmaher joke: "Republicans are pissing you, Democrats are offering an umbrella."
Democrats see value in blunting the worst aspects of society. But a majority of people don't. A majority of people agree with Republicans that some people should be hurt (the "right" people, of course) some helped (rich people) and everybody else should just deal with reality.
People will vote for the party that appears to be harming their enemies. They'll vote for the party that seems to be directly helping their interests.
They will NOT vote for the party who is promising to do *less harm* to them than the other guys or the state of nature.
That's a hard lesson for me to learn, because I value harm mitigation greatly. DECREASING SUFFERING seems valuable to me, so the choice between a "lesser of two evils" is always easy for me to make. Less suffering IS PREFERABLE.
But people, most people, don't agree with me. Help the "worthy" harm the "unworthy", that's what they want. That's what they think is "fair." That's what they think is the point of government.
I will learn this lesson. And understand that it will lead to more suffering.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I can't do this justice on Twitter, but I have a whole theory on why GenX white men (and we're talking about Wisconsin here, so we're definitely talking about white men) have been most susceptible to Trump's campaign of open misogyny and "retribution" against women.
It starts with AIDS and how the disease completely weirded our early sexual encounters. Continues to how "the rules" changed on us rapidly during our most sexually active years (for the better but try telling that to some guys) Lack of non-problematic male role models and heroes
And now that they're old and ostensibly "in power," people are totally DONE with the toxic male interoffice creepiness these guys thought they'd "earn," and DEMAND language discipline some guys learned in the 90s but most didn't.
I'm getting sick of people saying "cancelling subscriptions hurts the writers not the owners." It's an objectively true statement that lacks the context of:
A. Well if we're being real about NOTHING *hurts* billionaires. Being a billionaire literally buys you out of consequences
B: Cancelling a subscription to a publication is pretty much the only way to register DISPLEASURE with the publication's offerings.
C: The writers cannot be expected to resign en masse (newsflash, writers are generally poorly paid and having any kind of actually paying journalism job is something most people need to hold onto). But if the WaPo loses stature and reach, some will find better places to work.
Really kinda gotta hand it to Turkey for investing in corrupting a lowly Brooklyn Borough President. Big payoff for them. They should probably be in charge of the Jacksonville Jaguars next draft board.
Businessman-3 is the Nate Silver of Turkey, y'all
"During their meeting, ADAMS and the Promoter solicited campaign contributions from Businessman-3, who as a Turkish national could not lawfully contribute to any U.S. campaign. During the meeting, Businessman-3 agreed 18 to contribute $50,000 or more to the 2021 Campaign, believing that ADAMS might one day be the President of the United States and hoping to gain influence with ADAMS."
Okay let’s do this: 1. my wife waiting to see how I’m going to butcher essential details about our own children. 2. My mother hoping I don’t fuck up my solo in the recital. 3. I’ve walked through the door, 2hrs after curfew not already dead, which was my only way to stay alive.
4. My sister would like to know what the fuck I’m talking about. 5. My mother would like to know what I’m talking about. 6. My wife would like to know what I’m talking about. 7. They realize I’m actually talking about that thing I should never be talking about in public.
8. Something I said or did in the past is about to be read back to me like I’m a child and I’m about to be exposed for my hypocrisy. Documents will most likely be produced. I hate this fucking look so much. I KNOW WHAT I SAID IM NOT A CHILD.
Overheard on the Amtrak: A mother was explaining that she won’t let her son play high school football… as the punter/kicker… because the coach could not “100 percent guarantee” that her kid would never be tackled or have to make a tackle.
And, I was kind of on her side until
She revealed that her *other* son plays… LaCrosse , and she doesn’t understand why her kicker boy won’t just play LaCrosse too.
And now I’m just sitting here wondering how many times I’ve made *important parenting decisions* based on truly having no idea what I was doing.
This lady, she was struggling to come up with the word “punter” so she clearly doesn’t know a lot of about football. But she knows it’s dangerous (which… it is!!) and that’s pretty much that.
But there hasn’t been a brain injury documentary about LaCrosse yet, so that’s good.