Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Unfortunately, she also proved that the politics of this matter more than the truth. What Hillary said was pretty reasonable. It immediately got twisted into a fodder for white grievance. Many more people are familiar with Sebby's version than with what she actually said, and the conventional wisdom is that it was her fault for making a gaffe.

Come on. You are correct. She shouldn't have tried to make a nuanced argument in a world filled with idiots who don't read or listen and who are influenced by sound bites.

But the fact that the right was able to twist what she said into, "If you support Trump, you are deplorable," doesn't mean she was incorrect in what she actually said.

If the only way to win elections is to constantly tip toe around the feelings of white people who can't ever hear any type of criticism or they will be driven into the arms of a sexist, racist, xenophobic brain-dead idiot, then we are truly fucked. Because the only way Democrats are going to win is to actually look at their base and try to increase it instead of trying to capture the vote of hyper-fragile white people. And increasing that base means actually addressing issues that affect the expanded base.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Your average conservative Rust Belt swing voter is not Bill Maher. When you suggest he's a racist or sexist based on his "traditional" culture, or he's a bigot because he supports some bathroom use bill, he doesn't wonder how you reached that conclusion. To him, those are fighting words. And he picks a side -- Trump's side.

Bullshit. That asshole was always going to vote for Trump. Because his "traditional" culture IS racism.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

That I remember it wrong makes it clear it was a gaffe. Politics doesn't go over in a paragraph like T quotes, we get one or two word slogans. She couldn't see that would be a excerpted blurb?

I think the point (at least mine) is that if a gaffe like that can drive voters into a gaffe-machine's arms after he says and does shit 1000 times more awful constantly, did the gaffe really drive them into his arms or were they already there looking for a justification to stay? And if reasonable people actually were driven there by that after hearing and seeing everything coming from Trump, then let's just give up on this country right now.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

You are exhausting. Truly.

I'm not sure anyone is wondering why Trump won at this point. People are weighing the importance of many reasons. And yeah, voter suppression is a big one. Russian bots on social media? I don't know. Racism, sexism, xenophobia, Islamophobia? Sure. You're stuck on the left pushing people away by identifying issues related to race or identity or whatever as dispositive. The fact that you can look at someone who jumps into the arms of a small-minded racist who doesn't know shit because they don't like being called out on their actual racism and blame the person calling them out is sickening.

What the fuck are you talking about? I am disagreeing with you and telling you why. Is that how you read posts that disagree with you? If so, you have serious problems.

You need to stop telling us about your liberal friends and your right wing friends. We all know that you exaggerate their experiences and sometimes outright make them up to facilitate your arguments. Do you think you're the only person who has friends from both sides? Do you hear anyone else employing this as a strategy to debate anything? Retire it.

Typical Sebby bullshit.

TM

You do not have friends from both sides. That's bullshit. You know some moderate Rs, and think those are right wing Rs. You don't know right wing Rs.

I look like I fell out of Brooks Bros catalog. White conservative Rs think the can say things to me they wouldn't say in a broad group of people with many backgrounds. I have friends whove said shit since this election that disturbs me.

If you heard the kind of shit that I hear, you'd lose your mind.

And I don't need to exaggerate anything regarding the left. It's right here, on this board. That's what I'm referring to.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Bullshit. That asshole was always going to vote for Trump. Because his "traditional" culture IS racism.

TM

Could you more prove my point?

You argue for taking things by degree on one hand then flip and go absolutist the next.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Now you're being ridiculous. There is no argument that will bring Sebby around on anything. Hell, I continue to bang my head against the wall, but even I know this.

TM

You at least are trying to reason with him.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You do not have friends from both sides. That's bullshit. You know some moderate Rs, and think those are right wing Rs. You don't know right wing Rs.

I look like I fell out of Brooks Bros catalog. White conservative Rs think the can say things to me that shock me. I have friends who say shit that disturbs me.

If you heard the kind of shit that I hear, you'd lose your mind.

Maybe you're right. Let me rephrase. I know people who are right wing. Hell, Slave is pretty far to the right and we are good friends. Another is so far right that I used to think of him as a friend until I was exposed to some of his views, but I definitely can't consider him one now. I work with plenty of right wing assholes, though. But you're probably right that I don't hear the truly awful shit.

I think it's sad that you're friends with someone who says things that shock you.

In any case, the cocktail party/I have friends who think ________ shit is tiresome.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Actually, this is not how it happened. One of the organizations I was involved in brought in Marc Solomon to talk about the Freedom to Marry Campaign. His speech was specifically about how one could apply the lessons they learned to other movements (including BLM).

What he said was the tight, coherent, logical, rights-based argument was a complete loser. They tried it again and again and lost for years and couldn't understand why. What they had to do was send people out to talk to people and what they found was the arguments that worked were the amorphous ones that had more to do with pointing out that gay people actually love each other and want the ability to make that love official. The next step was to engage people who are actually gay to actually visit the local politicians to talk to them about why they deserve the same rights. It is much harder to vote against the people you see every day (and who you may not have known were gay). He gave very specific examples, one of which was of how they researched a key politician and found out that one of his teachers who influenced him most was retired and lived closed by. She is gay and they had her pay him a visit to talk about her relationships. She almost managed to change his mind. The next step was explaining to him that they had the means to fund his next primary opponent who would vote the way they wanted.

In short, a logical approach with a clear, airtight argument didn't mean as much on the march to marriage equality.

What?

You realize, of course, that the reason why they don't have the vote is so that they can't affect elections, right?

You've said three different things. You are lumping a bunch of different things into your argument because then you can dismiss it all. When Adder says you're taking a Fox pundit approach to this stuff, this is what he means.

People protest unfair treatment. The fact that many people gather and have many complaints may not effect immediate change on every issue, but these expressions of anger have surely been heard. It's partly cathartic and it also demonstrates to the victims of injustice that they are supported. Just because you don't care about this shit doesn't mean it has no value. I really wonder what you'd be saying about the Civil Rights Movement in the Sixties if you had been alive then.

Opposing Nazis on the streets isn't effective? You are joking, correct? You don't think what happened this past week has had an effect on this country? You think it would have been better to have them march unopposed? Municipalities all over the country have taken down monuments celebrating the Confederacy as a direct result. Racists have been exposed to white people who thought it wasn't a big problem, including the ones in The White House. Take a look at the photo of the Boston protests. The right wing assholes fit in that structure. The anti-fascist protestors dwarf them. In Boston.



Finally, stop pitching this "calling every slight racism" bullshit. No one is doing that. You are being dismissive because you purposefully do not want to discuss the effects of racism on any level besides that which costs people their lives. I'm sick of that shit. And as the co-chair of my firm's diversity committee, which addresses these types of issues regularly, we see partners like you all the time. Thank god they are a dying breed and that so many are starting to be open to gaining an understanding of how they can improve and how certain things they do are based on racial bias (which is not the same as being a racist). Just being able to have a discussion like that without assholes completely focused on not being called, "racist," is progress.*

Maybe you're not paying attention, but just because you see people fighting general injustice and inequality at a rally does not mean that there aren't movements that focus specifically on the justice system attacking the problems in just the manner you describe. If your argument is that white people who have to experience a general complaint about inequality when they drive past a rally or flip past one on television no longer have the capacity to think about specific issues in a thoughtful way, then we're all fucked more than I thought.

TM

*Jesus, what a fucking fight this has been, by the way. White people close their ears completely when you talk about racial bias, which almost everyone has because they think you're accusing them of being racist.

Yeah, hearts and minds has been winning the day. Corey Booker and Rand Paul have made that case quite effectively.

You aren't going to change the mind of a racist. Ain't happening.

You need a legislative change. Or a SCOTUS ruling. Where's the prison reform movement's traction? Where's justice reform's?

But hey... You got it covered. You folks on the Left need no advice, you're smaht... like Fredo.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Could you more prove my point?

You argue for taking things by degree on one hand then flip and go absolutist the next.

?

How is that absolutist?

The guy was surely going to vote for Trump.

Maybe you need to define what you mean by "traditional" culture.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yeah, hearts and minds has been winning the day. Corey Booker and Rand Paul have made that case quite effectively.

You aren't going to change the mind of a racist. Ain't happening.

You need a legislative change. Or a SCOTUS ruling. Where's the prison reform movement's traction? Where's justice reform's?

But hey... You got it covered. You folks on the Left need no advice, you're smaht... like Fredo.

I find it absolutely amazing that you read that post and came back with this garbage. Well, not absolutely amazing. It is you, after all.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Come on. You are correct. She shouldn't have tried to make a nuanced argument in a world filled with idiots who don't read or listen and who are influenced by sound bites.

But the fact that the right was able to twist what she said into, "If you support Trump, you are deplorable," doesn't mean she was incorrect in what she actually said.

If the only way to win elections is to constantly tip toe around the feelings of white people who can't ever hear any type of criticism or they will be driven into the arms of a sexist, racist, xenophobic brain-dead idiot, then we are truly fucked. Because the only way Democrats are going to win is to actually look at their base and try to increase it instead of trying to capture the vote of hyper-fragile white people. And increasing that base means actually addressing issues that affect the expanded base.

TM

The way for Democrats to win elections is to reframe what they're about so that white grievances aren't so salient. I think this is another way of saying that Democrats lose when they make an election about competence (HRC, Dukakis) because while everyone is generally in favor of competence, no one really cares to vote that way, and other issues (say, Willy Horton) dominate. If Democrats can find issues to run on that have a real salience to ordinary Americans, they can win. For Obama in '08, one of these was health care, and another was Iraq. On this view, you can think that neoliberalism's agenda of targeted tax breaks and retraining is the best thing since sliced bread, and yet no one turns out to vote for sliced bread either.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Maybe you're right. Let me rephrase. I know people who are right wing. Hell, Slave is pretty far to the right and we are good friends. Another is so far right that I used to think of him as a friend until I was exposed to some of his views, but I definitely can't consider him one now. I work with plenty of right wing assholes, though. But you're probably right that I don't hear the truly awful shit.

I think it's sad that you're friends with someone who says things that shock you.

In any case, the cocktail party/I have friends who think ________ shit is tiresome.

TM

I know people who plan R strategy. Slave is not right wing. He's a moderate. I'm a moderate.

I can't cite anything but a cocktail party because the shit these people say is intentionally NEVER written anywhere. That's the whole point.

Bannon was audaciously open about the R strategy in his interview. Read that.

It's Lee Atwater, on roids.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I find it absolutely amazing that you read that post and came back with this garbage. Well, not absolutely amazing. It is you, after all.

TM

I responded to his gay-rights thing in what I thought was a pretty thoughtful way, and: crickets. As if he is happy in his both-sidedist silo and doesn't want to engage with competing views.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The way for Democrats to win elections is to reframe what they're about so that white grievances aren't so salient. I think this is another way of saying that Democrats lose when they make an election about competence (HRC, Dukakis) because while everyone is generally in favor of competence, no one really cares to vote that way, and other issues (say, Willy Horton) dominate. If Democrats can find issues to run on that have a real salience to ordinary Americans, they can win. For Obama in '08, one of these was health care, and another was Iraq. On this view, you can think that neoliberalism's agenda of targeted tax breaks and retraining is the best thing since sliced bread, and yet no one turns out to vote for sliced bread either.

I don't disagree. But in '08 you got an expanded base because black people showed up in record numbers. The trick to what you stated above is finding what is salient to all types of ordinary Americans, which necessarily means that you have to include some of the things that make up the broad spectrum of what so many dismiss as "identity politics." And there's the danger. Because fragile whites apparently can't stand it.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I find it absolutely amazing that you read that post and came back with this garbage. Well, not absolutely amazing. It is you, after all.

TM

That post was thoughtful. But you got me pissed by ignoring another post, do I just went off on one point.

That was unfair.

I get the heart and minds aregument. I'm just reflexively doubtful of fixing racist mindsets. I've met many in my life. They seem beyond repair.