I totally reject Teixeira's allegation Biden and Democrats have not moved to the center or constrained extremist elements of the party. What is Biden supposed to do? Excommunicate the squad? What administration policies are supposedly out there in the ozone? Biden is solidly center left. Only neutralizing Manchin and Sinema can enable him to move further leftward.
I totally reject Teixeira's allegation Biden and Democrats have not moved to the center or constrained extremist elements of the party. What is Biden supposed to do? Excommunicate the squad? What administration policies are supposedly out there in the ozone? Biden is solidly center left. Only neutralizing Manchin and Sinema can enable him to move further leftward.
Actually, compared with the first six months of the Squad’s first term in 2018, they have been much more disciplined and better focused. At least it seems so from afar. They aren’t making bold moves that get the reflexive headlines and pearl clutching. They do seem to be working away from the cameras doing the hard work in the committee rooms
I too question his conclusions but if he scares the Dems into paying more attention and getting out of their bubbles (which cost them election after election) then I'm all for him terrifying them!
Teixeira’s article in the Washington Post last week characterizing Democrats as both “exuberant” and “lulled into complacency” exemplifies his bizarre and out of touch rhetoric and thinking.
This might just be a problem with the substack format. We are lucky as Bulwark readers that there is a whole production team involved, authors talk ideas out, editors read and suggest things before we ever see them. I feel as if some celebrity journalists, Teixeira, Sullivan etc... become more extreme because they have no one close pushing back at them.
If you think back to some of our extremely out there personalities they got worse the fewer people around them who could say no. Think of Glenn Beck or Lou Dobbs, both rode the edge and stepped over when they were under the CNN umbrella and then they went to Fox and went off the rails. Beck with the Blaze has no constraints at all now.
It is a good argument for some type of gatekeeping and one of my real worries as substack grows.
I think there's something there, but he's not pointing at the real issue. I do think that working class men have lost something, but so has everybody else. People know that they are working longer hours and have less to show for it, and have less security, both material and emotional, as a result. When you operate in a framework of scarcity, you start to hoard resources, and become vigilant and resentful of others who appear to have more than you do. LBJ summed it up very well: “If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”
The other thing that Democrats tend to do that drives me up a wall is that in standing up for minorities, which is a good thing, they constantly point to the edge cases and insist that the protections cover every possible scenario. Ezra Klein calls that the "everything bagel" form of liberalism. I tend to think of it as the "pregnant people" pretention. Yes, we should include transgender people and treat them with dignity and respect and advocate for their rights. But should we remake the language for the tiny minority of an already tiny minority--the natal females who identify as men, but who also want to experience the most deeply and exclusively female process of pregnancy and birth? Sorry....that's where you lose me.
We remade the language to include women. When I got my first job as a reporter in 1968 it was accepted that women didn’t rate being acknowledged as women. Words like “mankind” were understood to include woman as did chairman, councilman, newsman, policeman, etc. It was like pulling teeth and it still happens but the generations that grew up thinking it didn’t matter are mostly dying off and younger generations accept that individuals deserve to be addressed as they present to the world. It’s not difficult - reporter not newsman, police officer not policeman, even referring to someone as they/them is slowly becoming the norm amongst people with good manners. Language changes along with society.
Brilliantly said, esp your first paragraph (with which I obviously agree).
I grew up in the Deep South and I can swear that the most racist southerners were the poorest white people, those called "rednecks" before it was cool, or "white trash" which meant the same thing. It was the lowest-on-the-rung white people who needed someone to be better than. Which in itself says something disturbing about society.
And its true about scarcity. One of the Dems biggest problems is that they let the GOP create scarcity and impoverish what used to be the middle class while at the same time blaming the Dems for it. Dems have never paid attention to messaging, apparently thinking since they were "the good guys" they didn't have to sell themselves. In part because the Dems are the all-inclusive party, they have always been like herding cats. And still the GOP has abandoned trying to win elections and gone to just stealing them.
[It was the lowest-on-the-rung white people who needed someone to be better than. Which in itself says something disturbing about society.]
I'd say it was that lowest on the rung part you noticed because it had a racial aspect to it. We all have a need to feel superior to others in some way.
I find myself nodding my head when Ruy gets on the subject of economic populism and IMO (no expert but I’ve read several of his pieces) to me that’s been his point: that Dems (like Republicans) emphasize cultural issues over economic ones. Teixeira says get on those econ issues, like child tax credits etc, that have broad support in the working class.
Even here, in the comments, societal issues are mentioned instead of his overall message. I understand a bit of why Dems are because that’s the war the Republicans are fighting but honestly? As an independent who votes mostly Dem, its their economic message that resonates me. Anyway, I’m glad that the Bulwark mentions him as often as they do.
Mel, the problem with ruy is he has been saying this the last 3 elections. He has been consistently and constantly wrong and never course corrects. You can’t cry wolf every damn election, be wrong and not course correct
So, Dems should focus on policy items like a child tax credits? A great idea! Let's enact that! Oh wait, Dems tried to do so only for it to get shot down by another Bulwark "centrist" darling, Joe Manchin.
Well... of course he does... Charlie is a Conservative (the sort of conservative who was always a very very small minority of those who thought of themselves as conservatives). That's not a bad thing, that just describes it. In a rational world the Charlies and people like me would be on opposite teams... but playing the same game, under the rules, winning and losing as the chance fell out, like ladies and gentlemen.
What the Charlies of the world (the few, unfortunately, and one of those with whom I would consider it a privilege to respectfully disagree— your best friend in all the world is your rival who will tell you you have your pants unzipped) have come to realize is that the people they thought were on their team playing the game actually weren't -- playing the game. The game being—a fair contrast, where there is truth on both sides, tempered by human decency)
And what the people like me (few too, I think, too few most likely) have come to realize is that I used to think all the people on the other team were dissembling bigots without honor or scruples who knew full well what their allies really were and really wanted-- but I was wrong. Not wrong perhaps about most of them, because I do think most human beings are pretty much either vicious and knowingly hypocritical, or deluded and unknowingly hypocritical. But some aren't.
I'm pretty sure now about Charlie. I think maybe I'm clear about myself, but I reserve the right to realize I am mistaken. And I'm even more persuaded about most of us. If you want to know your standing in this regard, consult the souse you have had the benefit of for decades..
The thing about the Bulwark is -- the "right wingers" there are of the 300. We can count on them at Thermopylae. Not count on them to win, of course -- that's not in the cards -- but count on them to be there and stay there with us through to the end If we can count on ourselves. And actually -- hether we can count on ourselves to stay there too.
Totally agree. and an example is with immigration. Though not done out of spite or meanness, the president is trying to toughen the asylum process - but for the left this is an outrage and for the GOP any expansion of the infrastructure needed to process migrants is incentivizing illegal immigration. Can't win.
Am I the only one who feels like Ruy Texiera is a bit of a fraud? I get the impression he has staked out an unoccupied territory of a naysayer in Democratic politics, because it’s easy to get attention.
As to Biden’s low approval ratings, I recently heard someone rattle off the approval ratings of other leaders in large western democracies and they were ALL in the same numerical range. It’s a global phenomenon; the restless citizenry and the flirtation with authoritarianism.
Absolutely agree with you about Texiera. This is one of the annoying hangovers that Charlie has from when he was a fascist mouthpiece in Wisconsin. Like Mona (although not as bad) he sometimes just can’t resist the siren call of whataboutism and naysaying. And Trxiera is all over that.
Often so is Will Saletan. Years ago he was certainly well-know in liberal circles for being "that guy." That said, Saletan has been somewhat better lately, we'll see how long it lasts.
Teixeira was 100% wrong about 2022. He's wrong about cultural issues, he's wrong about the Democrats left flank. The bulwark really needs to stop amplifying that guy.
Also, he doesn't specify what he means by "cultural extremists" on the left, but if he thinks letting LGBT people live their lives without state interference is "cultural extremism" he can fuck right off. Also, note his source for that point is Fox news, which as we all know, would never lie to their audience. /s
Agree. I really do not understand why the Democrats have been always accused of moving to the extreme left when, in fact, the right clearly moves to the extreme right. It doesn't matter how well the Democratic leaders including POTUS rein in those extrem left minority. It is always the Democrats are the one go too left. Please somebody explain to me.
My personal favorite use of the name "Karen", is when Elon first took the reins of Twitter, and his own employees were calling him all kinds of insults, my favorite was "Musk is a Space Karen"... hahhahha... Poor Mars! If he moves there he will ruin it!
I could not make myself read the whole thing, only the headlines. However, the polls seem particulary useless. Konracki was on the other day with the latest NBC poll and it could have been developed by a Republican push poll company. The language was just ridiculous. Example: Do you agree with the Democrats promotion of the LBGQ and trans communities? Promotion? How about protection? Sound like GOP talking points to you? Does Chuck Todd have anything to do with developing the polls?
You can pretty much gat a poll to say whatever you want by the way you ask the questions, who you talk to, how you contact them, many ways to tip the scales. Some polls play it straight up and get useful info. But do some they decide what they want and then go get the data that fits.
Why does anyone with a brain care about polls? I get landline phone calls - answering machine picks up. No calls. I get stuff in the mail - 90% "polls" from Rs - recycle bin. Emails - hell, I rarely do even legitimate store survey, and the "legitimate" polls are all from Rs - sent to spam/delete. If anyone, person, asked me - answer: "None of your business." And the questions are ALL inane.
In an age when polling has become increasingly unreliable, it’s time to find a new way to take the pulse of the electorate. Gen Z and millennials turned out in 2022, and they not only make up a significant portion of the electorate, they are notoriously hard to poll. Not to be ignored, this new group of voters cares deeply about those “cultural” issues that R(AEI ate my brain)T wants to position as the kiss of death. They were, after all, quite ready and willing to append their preferred pronouns to their signatures. What we may consider silly labeling, they consider natural -- you know, like LGBTQ+ -- unlike RT (Ho/Hum).
Anytime any of these guys talk polls, I change the channel. It’s a waste of my time. If politicians want to use polls, fine. I’m ok with focus groups (especially Sarah’s). Those to me are different. Hearing actual people say what they think-or even what they are willing to say they think
Polls are no better than the pollster and the questions. Statistics can be used to validate one's biases. But a lot of media and political types make their livings on such unhelpful and possibly-detrimental nonsense. I like stats/data sometimes (I read today that it takes about 66 days to develop a habit and 21 days to change it; I found that interesting and counterintuitive though probably meaningless). But polls esp this far out are worse than useless. And lead to even less trust in the Fourth Estate.
Teixeira has been beating that drum forever. He's already written repeatedly that Hispanics don't really care about democracy (presumably the legacy of all those Latin American dictators). Apparently you also need a college degree to care about the US Constitution.
But it's noteworthy that Trump has not fetishized the culture war to the extent DeSantis has - no doubt because, with his cult following, he hasn't had to. If DeSantis can't overcome Trump's appeal despite playing cultural grievances like a broken record, how are Biden and the Democrats supposed to do it?
Biden doesn't need to. He needs to focus on those who have open minds, that all-important 5% or so of independents (used to be 10-20%). Some will always vote (D) and some will always vote (R) and there are some who will evaluate, and those are the only ones he has to really convince. I think TFG still scares a lot of us in both parties to death!
That's exactly what Texiera wants. There's a certain type of Democratic strategist who is obsessed with the idea that the way you win moderates is by burning your left flank with "Sister Souljah moments," because Bill Clinton did it once and it worked for him. Never mind that the electorate was different, and Bill Clinton was one of the most gifted politicians of our era, which meant he could get away with things that would have crushed a normal candidate. That's the only way forward to him.
"Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line" is more truth than fiction. Dems love to fall in love with a charming candidate. Bill but not Hillary (stupidly). Obama but not Biden (except as Not Trump). Republicans vote Republican. Republicans only care about winning. Democrats (voters) want to be thrilled and excited! They care about character and charm and even policy and get into the weeds instead of getting in line. Democrats are starry eyed when they need to be clear eyed; Republicans are just determined to win at all costs.
There’s also that Daddy/Mommy party thing. America had been punished enough when Biden showed up. The big question now is if we think we need to be disciplined or nurtured.
Unlike Trump, Bill and HRC usually WIN their elections. Even in 2016, HRC got 3 million votes more than Trump: she just didn’t get them in the right places.
It’s one thing to cling to a car that may be old, yet almost always gets you where you need to go. It’s madness to keep a junker that looks flashy, yet breaks down almost every time you try to drive it.
Last I looked, ridin’ with Biden is doing just fine. Bill with his New Democrats turned the party away from the base over time, setting up W and his ruinous 8 years.
Ruy Texiera’s constituency are people who are cultural conservatives. He doesn’t speak for all Latinos. I’m not saying his reading of Latino concerns is wrong or invalid. But it may be that a subset of the group are happier in the GOP. Godspeed to them.
It's the same electorate. Really. The side crises people will gnash their teeth and wail over may be different, but it's the same demographics of people (though fewer Boomers) with the same hierarchy of needs and desires.
It's not, though. The trans stuff is a good example; it barely moves Millennials, and is actively poisonous to Gen Z. Guns are similar. Republicans take it for granted that such people don't vote because they live in an echo chamber where it's still 1995, but their big cultural bugbears work less and less well each year, as the turnout in the 2022 midterms shows.
There are fewer Boomers voting. Will the Millennials (or any younger demographic) *actually* fill that vacuum, or with the surviving Boomers have that much more voting power? There is a reason the Republicans try to kill the "get out the vote" projects: they think they have their votes in hand.
(Fixed to put stress on "actually." 2024 will show whether 2022 was an outlier or the new reality.)
Yeah, it is a good point. What are the dems supposed to do, announce a shorter list of books to ban? Restrict trans lawmakers from speaking just on odd days? Propose legislation that 'only' requires trans people to put a sign on a public bathroom when they go in?
Even on topics where there is more room for good faith debate and concerns, can someone seriously tell me that Republicans are going to come to the table in good faith? They're busy banning anything they can that they don't like.
Short answer to your first question: yes. This kind of talk assumes that the Democrats MUST advance some of the culture war nonsense. That's what they're supposed to do. Second question: Republicans in good faith.... ha ha, good one!
Abortion is also code for "women's rights" and "keep them barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen" and my guess is that no woman under 65 and in her right mind will tolerate that for long. This isn't just about health care and medical decisions.
I totally reject Teixeira's allegation Biden and Democrats have not moved to the center or constrained extremist elements of the party. What is Biden supposed to do? Excommunicate the squad? What administration policies are supposedly out there in the ozone? Biden is solidly center left. Only neutralizing Manchin and Sinema can enable him to move further leftward.
Actually, compared with the first six months of the Squad’s first term in 2018, they have been much more disciplined and better focused. At least it seems so from afar. They aren’t making bold moves that get the reflexive headlines and pearl clutching. They do seem to be working away from the cameras doing the hard work in the committee rooms
I too question his conclusions but if he scares the Dems into paying more attention and getting out of their bubbles (which cost them election after election) then I'm all for him terrifying them!
Teixeira’s article in the Washington Post last week characterizing Democrats as both “exuberant” and “lulled into complacency” exemplifies his bizarre and out of touch rhetoric and thinking.
This might just be a problem with the substack format. We are lucky as Bulwark readers that there is a whole production team involved, authors talk ideas out, editors read and suggest things before we ever see them. I feel as if some celebrity journalists, Teixeira, Sullivan etc... become more extreme because they have no one close pushing back at them.
If you think back to some of our extremely out there personalities they got worse the fewer people around them who could say no. Think of Glenn Beck or Lou Dobbs, both rode the edge and stepped over when they were under the CNN umbrella and then they went to Fox and went off the rails. Beck with the Blaze has no constraints at all now.
It is a good argument for some type of gatekeeping and one of my real worries as substack grows.
I think there's something there, but he's not pointing at the real issue. I do think that working class men have lost something, but so has everybody else. People know that they are working longer hours and have less to show for it, and have less security, both material and emotional, as a result. When you operate in a framework of scarcity, you start to hoard resources, and become vigilant and resentful of others who appear to have more than you do. LBJ summed it up very well: “If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.”
The other thing that Democrats tend to do that drives me up a wall is that in standing up for minorities, which is a good thing, they constantly point to the edge cases and insist that the protections cover every possible scenario. Ezra Klein calls that the "everything bagel" form of liberalism. I tend to think of it as the "pregnant people" pretention. Yes, we should include transgender people and treat them with dignity and respect and advocate for their rights. But should we remake the language for the tiny minority of an already tiny minority--the natal females who identify as men, but who also want to experience the most deeply and exclusively female process of pregnancy and birth? Sorry....that's where you lose me.
We remade the language to include women. When I got my first job as a reporter in 1968 it was accepted that women didn’t rate being acknowledged as women. Words like “mankind” were understood to include woman as did chairman, councilman, newsman, policeman, etc. It was like pulling teeth and it still happens but the generations that grew up thinking it didn’t matter are mostly dying off and younger generations accept that individuals deserve to be addressed as they present to the world. It’s not difficult - reporter not newsman, police officer not policeman, even referring to someone as they/them is slowly becoming the norm amongst people with good manners. Language changes along with society.
Brilliantly said, esp your first paragraph (with which I obviously agree).
I grew up in the Deep South and I can swear that the most racist southerners were the poorest white people, those called "rednecks" before it was cool, or "white trash" which meant the same thing. It was the lowest-on-the-rung white people who needed someone to be better than. Which in itself says something disturbing about society.
And its true about scarcity. One of the Dems biggest problems is that they let the GOP create scarcity and impoverish what used to be the middle class while at the same time blaming the Dems for it. Dems have never paid attention to messaging, apparently thinking since they were "the good guys" they didn't have to sell themselves. In part because the Dems are the all-inclusive party, they have always been like herding cats. And still the GOP has abandoned trying to win elections and gone to just stealing them.
[It was the lowest-on-the-rung white people who needed someone to be better than. Which in itself says something disturbing about society.]
I'd say it was that lowest on the rung part you noticed because it had a racial aspect to it. We all have a need to feel superior to others in some way.
I find myself nodding my head when Ruy gets on the subject of economic populism and IMO (no expert but I’ve read several of his pieces) to me that’s been his point: that Dems (like Republicans) emphasize cultural issues over economic ones. Teixeira says get on those econ issues, like child tax credits etc, that have broad support in the working class.
Even here, in the comments, societal issues are mentioned instead of his overall message. I understand a bit of why Dems are because that’s the war the Republicans are fighting but honestly? As an independent who votes mostly Dem, its their economic message that resonates me. Anyway, I’m glad that the Bulwark mentions him as often as they do.
Mel, the problem with ruy is he has been saying this the last 3 elections. He has been consistently and constantly wrong and never course corrects. You can’t cry wolf every damn election, be wrong and not course correct
So, Dems should focus on policy items like a child tax credits? A great idea! Let's enact that! Oh wait, Dems tried to do so only for it to get shot down by another Bulwark "centrist" darling, Joe Manchin.
Manchin gives centrists a bad name. His price-gouging daughter is a chip off the paternal block.
Fully agree and am disappointed Charlie posted Teixeira's views. What does he want? That Biden should turn the Dems into MAGA lite?
I was glad to see them- I appreciate knowing what's being said without having to BATHE in it.
I am beginning to suspect that Charlie would like the Democrats to become what Republicans used to be
Well... of course he does... Charlie is a Conservative (the sort of conservative who was always a very very small minority of those who thought of themselves as conservatives). That's not a bad thing, that just describes it. In a rational world the Charlies and people like me would be on opposite teams... but playing the same game, under the rules, winning and losing as the chance fell out, like ladies and gentlemen.
What the Charlies of the world (the few, unfortunately, and one of those with whom I would consider it a privilege to respectfully disagree— your best friend in all the world is your rival who will tell you you have your pants unzipped) have come to realize is that the people they thought were on their team playing the game actually weren't -- playing the game. The game being—a fair contrast, where there is truth on both sides, tempered by human decency)
And what the people like me (few too, I think, too few most likely) have come to realize is that I used to think all the people on the other team were dissembling bigots without honor or scruples who knew full well what their allies really were and really wanted-- but I was wrong. Not wrong perhaps about most of them, because I do think most human beings are pretty much either vicious and knowingly hypocritical, or deluded and unknowingly hypocritical. But some aren't.
I'm pretty sure now about Charlie. I think maybe I'm clear about myself, but I reserve the right to realize I am mistaken. And I'm even more persuaded about most of us. If you want to know your standing in this regard, consult the souse you have had the benefit of for decades..
The thing about the Bulwark is -- the "right wingers" there are of the 300. We can count on them at Thermopylae. Not count on them to win, of course -- that's not in the cards -- but count on them to be there and stay there with us through to the end If we can count on ourselves. And actually -- hether we can count on ourselves to stay there too.
Was there ever a question?
What he nostalgically remembers them being.
Nailed it!!!
Totally agree. and an example is with immigration. Though not done out of spite or meanness, the president is trying to toughen the asylum process - but for the left this is an outrage and for the GOP any expansion of the infrastructure needed to process migrants is incentivizing illegal immigration. Can't win.
Am I the only one who feels like Ruy Texiera is a bit of a fraud? I get the impression he has staked out an unoccupied territory of a naysayer in Democratic politics, because it’s easy to get attention.
As to Biden’s low approval ratings, I recently heard someone rattle off the approval ratings of other leaders in large western democracies and they were ALL in the same numerical range. It’s a global phenomenon; the restless citizenry and the flirtation with authoritarianism.
I think of him as an inverse Never Trumper.
An “anti-anti-Trumper”. Abbreviated to anti-anti.
Trump’s existence requires linguistic gymnastics.
Agree with this brilliant summary: It’s a global phenomenon; the restless citizenry and the flirtation with authoritarianism.
No not at all. He is constantly wrong and has been wrong for 20 years. I am so sick of him
Absolutely agree with you about Texiera. This is one of the annoying hangovers that Charlie has from when he was a fascist mouthpiece in Wisconsin. Like Mona (although not as bad) he sometimes just can’t resist the siren call of whataboutism and naysaying. And Trxiera is all over that.
> And Trxiera is all over that.
Often so is Will Saletan. Years ago he was certainly well-know in liberal circles for being "that guy." That said, Saletan has been somewhat better lately, we'll see how long it lasts.
Like I said elsewhere, if it scares Dems/Indies to the ballot box, I'm fine with it!
Charlie has taken a lot of ownership of his support of Ron Johnson, Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, etc. You must have missed that.
What extremist elements in Teixeira talking about? The Squad? Jeez do old guys shit their pants over the Squad.
He may also be talking about "Bernie Bros" who voted for Trump (out of spite?).
Well you know they're women and they have, like, opinions. It is pretty audacious and unseemly.
Teixeira was 100% wrong about 2022. He's wrong about cultural issues, he's wrong about the Democrats left flank. The bulwark really needs to stop amplifying that guy.
Also, he doesn't specify what he means by "cultural extremists" on the left, but if he thinks letting LGBT people live their lives without state interference is "cultural extremism" he can fuck right off. Also, note his source for that point is Fox news, which as we all know, would never lie to their audience. /s
Agree. I really do not understand why the Democrats have been always accused of moving to the extreme left when, in fact, the right clearly moves to the extreme right. It doesn't matter how well the Democratic leaders including POTUS rein in those extrem left minority. It is always the Democrats are the one go too left. Please somebody explain to me.
Your second paragraph is fantastic!
hahha Ginny! Don't feel too bad... at least your name's not Karen!
My personal favorite use of the name "Karen", is when Elon first took the reins of Twitter, and his own employees were calling him all kinds of insults, my favorite was "Musk is a Space Karen"... hahhahha... Poor Mars! If he moves there he will ruin it!
I could not make myself read the whole thing, only the headlines. However, the polls seem particulary useless. Konracki was on the other day with the latest NBC poll and it could have been developed by a Republican push poll company. The language was just ridiculous. Example: Do you agree with the Democrats promotion of the LBGQ and trans communities? Promotion? How about protection? Sound like GOP talking points to you? Does Chuck Todd have anything to do with developing the polls?
You can pretty much gat a poll to say whatever you want by the way you ask the questions, who you talk to, how you contact them, many ways to tip the scales. Some polls play it straight up and get useful info. But do some they decide what they want and then go get the data that fits.
Why does anyone with a brain care about polls? I get landline phone calls - answering machine picks up. No calls. I get stuff in the mail - 90% "polls" from Rs - recycle bin. Emails - hell, I rarely do even legitimate store survey, and the "legitimate" polls are all from Rs - sent to spam/delete. If anyone, person, asked me - answer: "None of your business." And the questions are ALL inane.
In an age when polling has become increasingly unreliable, it’s time to find a new way to take the pulse of the electorate. Gen Z and millennials turned out in 2022, and they not only make up a significant portion of the electorate, they are notoriously hard to poll. Not to be ignored, this new group of voters cares deeply about those “cultural” issues that R(AEI ate my brain)T wants to position as the kiss of death. They were, after all, quite ready and willing to append their preferred pronouns to their signatures. What we may consider silly labeling, they consider natural -- you know, like LGBTQ+ -- unlike RT (Ho/Hum).
Anytime any of these guys talk polls, I change the channel. It’s a waste of my time. If politicians want to use polls, fine. I’m ok with focus groups (especially Sarah’s). Those to me are different. Hearing actual people say what they think-or even what they are willing to say they think
Polls are no better than the pollster and the questions. Statistics can be used to validate one's biases. But a lot of media and political types make their livings on such unhelpful and possibly-detrimental nonsense. I like stats/data sometimes (I read today that it takes about 66 days to develop a habit and 21 days to change it; I found that interesting and counterintuitive though probably meaningless). But polls esp this far out are worse than useless. And lead to even less trust in the Fourth Estate.
Teixeira has been beating that drum forever. He's already written repeatedly that Hispanics don't really care about democracy (presumably the legacy of all those Latin American dictators). Apparently you also need a college degree to care about the US Constitution.
But it's noteworthy that Trump has not fetishized the culture war to the extent DeSantis has - no doubt because, with his cult following, he hasn't had to. If DeSantis can't overcome Trump's appeal despite playing cultural grievances like a broken record, how are Biden and the Democrats supposed to do it?
Biden doesn't need to. He needs to focus on those who have open minds, that all-important 5% or so of independents (used to be 10-20%). Some will always vote (D) and some will always vote (R) and there are some who will evaluate, and those are the only ones he has to really convince. I think TFG still scares a lot of us in both parties to death!
That's exactly what Texiera wants. There's a certain type of Democratic strategist who is obsessed with the idea that the way you win moderates is by burning your left flank with "Sister Souljah moments," because Bill Clinton did it once and it worked for him. Never mind that the electorate was different, and Bill Clinton was one of the most gifted politicians of our era, which meant he could get away with things that would have crushed a normal candidate. That's the only way forward to him.
Sherm...ding ding ding. THIS RIGHT HERE.
I cannot say it enough...the 90s aren’t the 2020s. Also, you never here republicans saying you know what bush should do denounce the tea party
Just as the Republicans can’t seem to quit Trump, Democrats can’t seem to quit the Clintons
"Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line" is more truth than fiction. Dems love to fall in love with a charming candidate. Bill but not Hillary (stupidly). Obama but not Biden (except as Not Trump). Republicans vote Republican. Republicans only care about winning. Democrats (voters) want to be thrilled and excited! They care about character and charm and even policy and get into the weeds instead of getting in line. Democrats are starry eyed when they need to be clear eyed; Republicans are just determined to win at all costs.
There’s also that Daddy/Mommy party thing. America had been punished enough when Biden showed up. The big question now is if we think we need to be disciplined or nurtured.
Unlike Trump, Bill and HRC usually WIN their elections. Even in 2016, HRC got 3 million votes more than Trump: she just didn’t get them in the right places.
It’s one thing to cling to a car that may be old, yet almost always gets you where you need to go. It’s madness to keep a junker that looks flashy, yet breaks down almost every time you try to drive it.
Last I looked, ridin’ with Biden is doing just fine. Bill with his New Democrats turned the party away from the base over time, setting up W and his ruinous 8 years.
They are old guys who miss the old days and somehow get paid to write that it should be 1992-1997 forever.
Ruy Texiera’s constituency are people who are cultural conservatives. He doesn’t speak for all Latinos. I’m not saying his reading of Latino concerns is wrong or invalid. But it may be that a subset of the group are happier in the GOP. Godspeed to them.
He’s a predictable contrarian, is my impression.
It's the same electorate. Really. The side crises people will gnash their teeth and wail over may be different, but it's the same demographics of people (though fewer Boomers) with the same hierarchy of needs and desires.
It's not, though. The trans stuff is a good example; it barely moves Millennials, and is actively poisonous to Gen Z. Guns are similar. Republicans take it for granted that such people don't vote because they live in an echo chamber where it's still 1995, but their big cultural bugbears work less and less well each year, as the turnout in the 2022 midterms shows.
There are fewer Boomers voting. Will the Millennials (or any younger demographic) *actually* fill that vacuum, or with the surviving Boomers have that much more voting power? There is a reason the Republicans try to kill the "get out the vote" projects: they think they have their votes in hand.
(Fixed to put stress on "actually." 2024 will show whether 2022 was an outlier or the new reality.)
Yeah, it is a good point. What are the dems supposed to do, announce a shorter list of books to ban? Restrict trans lawmakers from speaking just on odd days? Propose legislation that 'only' requires trans people to put a sign on a public bathroom when they go in?
Even on topics where there is more room for good faith debate and concerns, can someone seriously tell me that Republicans are going to come to the table in good faith? They're busy banning anything they can that they don't like.
Excellent comment ... thank you!
Short answer to your first question: yes. This kind of talk assumes that the Democrats MUST advance some of the culture war nonsense. That's what they're supposed to do. Second question: Republicans in good faith.... ha ha, good one!
Abortion is also code for "women's rights" and "keep them barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen" and my guess is that no woman under 65 and in her right mind will tolerate that for long. This isn't just about health care and medical decisions.