I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You can't talk down to or ignore a person without creating deep responsive hatred. We've done that to roughly half the country. And we're only making it worse calling them all bigots and racists.

I'd love not to call people racists. It should be done sparingly and carefully.

But, you know, there are a lot of people making that very, very tough these days. And it's frightening.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Read that first link I cited in response to you above. The "do as I say, you troglodyte" attitude is a huge cause of elitist hatred.

You can't talk down to or ignore a person without creating deep responsive hatred. We've done that to roughly half the country. And we're only making it worse calling them all bigots and racists.

Yes, Gallup showed a lot of Trump voters aren't voting solely because they're economically screwed. But other polls have shown a different picture. And even if we accept Gallup's recent poll as more than "noise" - as some breakthrough poll that finally shows us the "real" Trump voter... Still, it is not a basis to discard these people exclusively as racists and xenophobes. It simply states that these people do not live in areas with a lot of different races and ethnicities. To jump to exclusively "racist" and "xenophobe" is lazy and reckless.

Seriously, read that piece. It predicted exactly what's happening... What occurs when those of us who know better tell half the country to fuck off, or ignore them. The less enlightened tend to still live in "honor culture." Their essential currency, more than actual currency, is respect. And they aren't going to simply accept us derisively telling them how to think and live any more than the honor cultures of fundamentalist Islam abroad have done.

They demand respect, and a seat at the table. We're making it a zero sum game. This is understandable, of course, as a lot of what they believe is regressive and unscientific, and we feel they need to be forced to think differently. But they won't, and they aren't going away any time soon, and we need to find a more effective way to deal with them than broad brush name-calling.

Because I love you like whatever the fuck NotBob was talking about when he said he loves you, I'm going to assume that you are engaging in exquisite irony when you chastise whoever it is you are chastising for using broad brush name calling.

I've fallen down on the funk a bit, and I am going to get back to it with a departure from my usual early 70s fare. I just saw the Rebirth Brass Band, who always know how to get things jumping, but I want to talk about openers Cha Wa. Based on a familial relationship with the Wild Magnolias, this band is helping to keep the Mardi Gras Indian tradition alive, and the band is tight. As an example, I bring you perhaps the most cliched (but still wonderful) of the traditional New Orleans songs, Jack-A-Mo:

http://www.tubman.org/events/wing-ding.html

Oh this tune can get anyone dancing, from the hardcore N'Awlins music heads to those Deadheadhippiepotsmokers. It has a storied history, so as a bonus for failing the funk the last couple of days, I will present you with a few favorite versions throughout the years.

Dixie Cups. So minimalist it is sublime:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5GzVZjd0iI

Dr. John. If you don't own this album, you have made some serious strategic errors in your life:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_UYPu5RFXI

Sugar Boy and his Cane Cutters. The original?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgOrIar_qGk

The Wild Tchoupitoulas' Brother John:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvMofiuaW98

I'm not sure what the fuck this is, but I kind of like it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMQRfliyznQ

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Because I love you like whatever the fuck NotBob was talking about when he said he loves you ....

Like the cousin who doesn't hide the fancy booze. I may have also previously compared him to the cousin who likes to play for me drum solos from bootleg jam ban recordings.

You, in contrast, are totally like the cousin who introduced me to weed and Frank Zappa ("Titties and Beer," IIRC) one fine summer afternoon in the Anvesteal Homeland.

Dr. John. If you don't own this album, you have made some serious strategic errors in your life:

Indeed. She don't say nothing, but baby make her blue jeans talk.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Watching Fox News on Trumps new team, it strikes me that the entire Republican Party has forgotten how to run a national campaign. It's like Lee Atwater never existed.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Watching Fox News on Trumps new team, it strikes me that the entire Republican Party has forgotten how to run a national campaign. It's like Lee Atwater never existed.

There are a lot of Republicans who know how to run a national campaign, but Trump does not want to turn over control to someone else.

[SEC_Chick]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I could put together and implement a school choice program that would do a ton, but have never seen such a policy proposed by Rs.

Charter schools are very popular with Rs, and are generally vehemently opposed by Democrats and teacher's unions. Most every voucher program I can recall has been geared towards low-income communities with failing schools. Remind me who it was that wanted to withhold funding from the DC voucher program that significantly increased high school graduation rates?

[SEC_Chick]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Watching Fox News on Trumps new team, it strikes me that the entire Republican Party has forgotten how to run a national campaign. It's like Lee Atwater never existed.

Two problems. First, Fox News is an alternate reality, so I would assume anyone that is talking on that network not named Dana Perino is on crack. Second, there are many Republicans that do know how to run campaigns. If you recall, Ted Cruz had assembled a very effective operation. No one competent wants to work for Trump, and a number of RNC staffers have left after they were told to get on the Trump Train or head out. The joke in R circles is that anyone with a suspiciously timed gap in their resume is probably likely to want to explain it with rehab or prison time rather than the truth.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I'd love not to call people racists. It should be done sparingly and carefully.

But, you know, there are a lot of people making that very, very tough these days. And it's frightening.

I see four types of Trump voter:

1. Bigots;
2. People who just want to "blow it all up;"
3. The economically fucked/anti-globalists; and,
4. People who are a combination of 1 through 3.

In the MidAtlantic, you don't hear much support for Trump's anti-Mexican messages. I've not heard a single person I'd categorize as a Trump voter express such sentiment. That's partly because both geographically and socially, I'm running into a somewhat more educated Trump voter than one might see in real flyover land. What I have noticed, however, is open hostility toward Islam. That seems to be a binding thread in groups 1-4. It's not a fear thing. The repeated criticism is cultural: "Look how they're fucking up Europe. We can't let them do that here." And it's more snobby than angry... "Oh, fuck, there'll go the neighborhood."

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

It is rather amusing to read you talking about the fee fees of the poor bigots, and how that makes them Trumpists, immediately after arguing that people would give that all up for honesty and transparency.

You see a lot of mutual exclusivity among concepts. Very binary.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

Charter schools are very popular with Rs, and are generally vehemently opposed by Democrats and teacher's unions. Most every voucher program I can recall has been geared towards low-income communities with failing schools. Remind me who it was that wanted to withhold funding from the DC voucher program that significantly increased high school graduation rates?

We have charter schools here in deep-blue Massachusetts. It just took some intelligent negotiation with the teachers union instead of political point-scoring to get them.

We have also experimented with schools run by universities (BU ran the city of Chelsea's schools for over a decade), and various programs that use private schools (this is particularly heavily used for kids with disabilities). None of these things are panaceas.

What almost none of these programs really address is that the single biggest determinant of educational success is class size (once you are under 18, above 18 it doesn't matter as much) and second is quality of teaching (and the teachers colleges for the most part really suck in this country).

We have good schools by national standards here, even in low income areas. Very good schools.

IMHO, they still suck.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

Two problems. First, Fox News is an alternate reality, so I would assume anyone that is talking on that network not named Dana Perino is on crack. Second, there are many Republicans that do know how to run campaigns. If you recall, Ted Cruz had assembled a very effective operation. No one competent wants to work for Trump, and a number of RNC staffers have left after they were told to get on the Trump Train or head out. The joke in R circles is that anyone with a suspiciously timed gap in their resume is probably likely to want to explain it with rehab or prison time rather than the truth.

Cruz did some respectable blocking and tackling on caucus delegates against opponents who were incompetent buffoons. I didn't see a national campaign out of him, even though his was likely the best campaign in the primary. But running a Texas campaign and a national campaign are totally different things. If his is a model of success, the party is hurting.

There was a time when Republicans were out-gunning Dems on the political operations side, in part because they had their own TV network backing them, giving them a huge messaging advantage, but also in part because the Reaganites even before Fox had really figured out how to organize a campaign message and build organization wide message discipline better than anyone had since Martin van Buren ran Jackson's organization.

But they're total amateurs today, both in the RNC and in Trump's campaign and everywhere else (cough)Jeb Bush (cough). There is a good book in how that happened.

What do you think of the idea that Trump may establish his own network post-campaign, to the right of Fox?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I see four types of Trump voter:

1. Bigots;
2. People who just want to "blow it all up;"
3. The economically fucked/anti-globalists; and,
4. People who are a combination of 1 through 3.

In the MidAtlantic, you don't hear much support for Trump's anti-Mexican messages. I've not heard a single person I'd categorize as a Trump voter express such sentiment. That's partly because both geographically and socially, I'm running into a somewhat more educated Trump voter than one might see in real flyover land. What I have noticed, however, is open hostility toward Islam. That seems to be a binding thread in groups 1-4. It's not a fear thing. The repeated criticism is cultural: "Look how they're fucking up Europe. We can't let them do that here." And it's more snobby than angry... "Oh, fuck, there'll go the neighborhood."

The other trump voter is the loyal republican. Funny thing is, it may be the largest block of these in terms of sheer numbers, but he may run about 60/40 among those voters by election day.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

There are a lot of Republicans who know how to run a national campaign, but Trump does not want to turn over control to someone else.

Nobody wants that job. It's career suicide. You'd be presiding over and blamed for the GOP's loss of the Senate.

The GOP will not learn a single lesson from this debacle because everything will be blamed on Trump.

A cabal of idiots, including Bill Kristol, National Review, Cruzheads, and George Will, among many others, will offer numerous postmortems about how the GOP could have won if only they'd nominated a "true conservative."

There are endless reasons Trump is fucked. Most notable would be his parents' and doctors' failure to place him on a lifelong Ritalin and behavioral therapy regimen. Nowhere among them would be his lack of conservative bona fides. Trump's populist message was exactly the winning argument, and a "true conservative" argument a dead-lock loser. He could have won against a uniquely weak candidate. If only he'd had a brain. And the GOP could win in the future, if only it'd tack toward a populist message. But it won't. Its learned Brahmin know better. They know what a country filled with young voters in dire economic straits wants: The tough love and austerity that comes from true conservatives.

It's hard to assess who's dumber or more deluded - Trump, or the GOP?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I would just like to note the absurdity and lack of self-awareness in this paragraph:



eta: I tried to read it, but I give up. That is a load of twaddle. I can't believe you think it's insightful or well written. I suppose it is amazing that the man can write prose with such a massive chip on his shoulder, but that's no reason to go and read it.

It's bloated, yes, but it's still an excellent distillation of the deep-seated mindsets fighting one another right now.

I don't see a chip on the writer's shoulder. He's being a bit harsh, and there's some bias, but his generalizations are limited, and supported.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

What almost none of these programs really address is that the single biggest determinant of educational success is class size (once you are under 18, above 18 it doesn't matter as much) and second is quality of teaching (and the teachers colleges for the most part really suck in this country).

Nope. The number one determinant of educational success is parental engagement.

Everything after that only matters on the margin.