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

This is insightful. https://hbr.org/2016/11/what-so-many...-working-class

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

I care about about a number of things. But if neither candidate is offering a reasonable mix of what I want, and in this race neither of them even came close, then I don't care who wins. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?

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

just found out there were 40,000 third party votes in 2012- there's the race right there.

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

I don't think we particularly need stimulus right now. I'll take it, because we absolutely need infrastructure investment but overall the economy is doing okay and any big gains from stimulus will be offset by Fed rate rises.

But I'll take it on the assumption that any new spending isn't just going straight into Trump's pocket. Which is where it will go.

It's okay (not great) by every available measure, including growing labor force participation, except the attitudes of old and/or uneducated white people. And Sebby.

This number is bullshit.

ETA: In a post where you complain about cooked numbers. Come on, man.

Maybe, but I'm not sure that would have sold any better to the type of voter who is that gullible without the racism that accompanied the Clinton message in 1991.

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

Whole bunch of progressives stayed home. Apparently they disliked Hillary so much that they didn't care whether Trump was elected.

To be fair, they probably didn't think it would happen, but they still took that chance.

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

That article ignores the large portion of the working class that is not white.

Re: I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
 

You're not making shit up. I think there were a few people who Desiron fucked, but I honestly don't remember if I was one. And to be honest, I don't really care.

TM

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

There are many ways we could have won it, this being one of them. We're all to blame.

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

Just noted for the record.

Congrats, you've got at least four years when you get to keep explaining to us why you didn't care.

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

I do not disagree. However, how the fuck do you make an uninformed electorate care about governance or obstruction when they are so uninformed that when you ask them about anything they respond, "All politicians suck"?

For someone who pays attention, even a little bit, it is quite obvious what is going on. But to hold Republicans responsible, the electorate has to be sophisticated enough to hear a message with more nuance than, "Washington is broken." Because when you get to the "Here's why..." part, they have already moved the fuck on.

And you're right, Democrats tend to pick up the scraps of what's available. But that's because they are not willing to play chicken with the future of the entire fucking country. Maybe we should have. Obama could have proposed stuff and when Republicans obstructed, he could have just kept saying, "I'm trying to help you, but the Republicans block everything. Blame the Paul Ryan Republican No Machine." As things fall apart, just keep repeating that. That's what it would take.

When the Republicans rape the fuck out of this country over the next four years, some idiots who voted for Trump will surely flip in 2020. But the message that the Democrats will have to fix everything they destroy will. not. sink. in. And it's not a Democrat marketing issue. It's a fucking lazy, uninformed electorate issue. How do you market sense to the stupid?

TM

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

Sounds like tribalism to me.

TM

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

Yes you can.

TM

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

This is an interesting article. Why the explanation of the WWC's you-think-you're-better'n-me feelings about professionals may explain a lot, what it overlooks is that you apparently cannot speak to these people like adults. That's what Hillary tried to do. Trump beat her on his message because he promised to take them back to a time when they had high-paying jobs for life in industries that can no longer produce those jobs. You would think that if your job is gone, you would look into why it's actually gone and what could be next. No. Instead, the WWC looks to confirm their neighborhood narrative, which is, immigrants and blacks "steal" jobs, trade deals have shipped their jobs overseas, and if we resort to protectionist policies, those jobs will all come back!

I tend to think that the mix of reasons this election turned out the way it did in places like PA, WI, OH, and MI consists of (i) stupidity (i.e., Trump will bring our jobs back!), (ii) racism (eg., reverse racism is holding me back), and (iii) anger (let's fuck DC by electing someone who says what we think*).

And this part of the article is what is the problem:

"At a deeper level, both parties need an economic program that can deliver middle-class jobs. Republicans have one: Unleash American business. Democrats? They remain obsessed with cultural issues. I fully understand why transgender bathrooms are important, but I also understand why progressives’ obsession with prioritizing cultural issues infuriates many Americans whose chief concerns are economic.

Back when blue-collar voters used to be solidly Democratic (1930–1970), good jobs were at the core of the progressive agenda. A modern industrial policy would follow Germany’s path. (Want really good scissors? Buy German.) Massive funding is needed for community college programs linked with local businesses to train workers for well-paying new economy jobs. Clinton mentioned this approach, along with 600,000 other policy suggestions. She did not stress it."

You see the disconnect there? Unleashing business from what? Regulation meant to protect actual workers? Trade agreements that you think have shipped your obsolete jobs overseas but in most case unleash American business so they can sell their shit overseas in industries that may not affect you? Taxes that keep this country running?

If the actual solution is hard--move into the new economy through training that nobody in the WWC wants, then, yeah, Trump's "Let's go back in time" message plays. Hillary's policy positions are held against her because she has expressed more than 2? And the ones she expressed are nuanced and apply to different areas of the country differently?

If you live in coal country, pay the fuck attention, because coal jobs aren't going to be a thing. If you don't know shit else, you should be all over every single coal issue there is, no? How the hell do you vote for a guy who says "he's the last shot for the miners" because he "digs coal" even though what's needed is government support of energy alternatives and the promise to bring those jobs and the necessary training to the places hit hardest by the death of the coal industry. The first part of that sentence is easy in every way. Easy to understand. Easy because all you know is coal. The second part of the sentence is not. The takeaway is Democrats need to learn their lesson and just preach complete bullshit as opposed to trying to actually solve the WWC's problems?

Maybe that's correct when it comes to elections and a deeper understanding of the WWC. But if that's the case, this country is fucking doomed. And the WWC is going to drag everyone down with it.

TM

*This could also be placed in the racism category, but whatever.

ETA: This part of the article is where the author lost me:

'National debates about policing are fueling class tensions today in precisely the same way they did in the 1970s, when college kids derided policemen as “pigs.” This is a recipe for class conflict. Being in the police is one of the few good jobs open to Americans without a college education. Police get solid wages, great benefits, and a respected place in their communities. For elites to write them off as racists is a telling example of how, although race- and sex-based insults are no longer acceptable in polite society, class-based insults still are.'

This is a complete mischaracterization of what is actually happening. The author and the WWC choose to make any critique of policing an "Us" vs. "Them" issue. If I point to the facts that say police target black people way more than white people and we should fix that, that's not a fucking class-based insult. And the fact that police jobs are "good jobs open to Americans without a college education" because of the strength of their union's bargaining power, which is under attack from the right everywhere, is fucking rich.

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

Democrats have delivered two administrations where careful management of the economy has led to consistent growth that surpasses all of our competitors in the international economy. Both Clinton and Obama were, at heart, boring old wonks on economic issues, dutifully doing the blocking and tackling that got shit done.

This is not a sexy selling point.

There are good jobs growing in the economy, but they generally require more education than they used to. The only sector of jobs for non-educated workers we have been able to grow are service jobs. That is frustrating for many people, but also a reality. In the absence of a wave of unionization, the most effective way to get those service jobs to be good jobs is to keep hiking the minimum wage.

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

So back in April, in an op-ed in the Washington Post, there was a suggestion to appoint Merrick Garland without the Senate's rigmarole. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...301_story.html

There were lots of "no he can't" responsive Op-Eds. (See: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-does-nothing/ and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ate/?tid=a_inl)

But why the hell not? I mean he can do it, they can sue, it goes to the Supreme Court.