Regarding that pony, Tim Miller recently suggested that progressives simply have higher priorities than, er, averting Trumpy Orbanism. Sure enough, just read Bernie's Tuesday tweet which mentioned the existential threat of climate change but zilch about obvious trivia like saving Biden's presidency and the Dem Congressional majority, on…
Regarding that pony, Tim Miller recently suggested that progressives simply have higher priorities than, er, averting Trumpy Orbanism. Sure enough, just read Bernie's Tuesday tweet which mentioned the existential threat of climate change but zilch about obvious trivia like saving Biden's presidency and the Dem Congressional majority, ongoing GOP subversion or the Electoral Count Act. Hey, if the planet is burning down, nobody gets a pony anyway, amiright? 🐴
While its pretty clear you're mocking the position, you nonetheless get it right. What I don't understand is why its so hard to accept both averting Trumpy Orbanism and addressing is current and future causes (inequality, climate change, flaws in our system of government), or even why that latter part is controversial.
I like to call them Thälmann progressives, after Ernst Thälmann, the German Communist leader who spent the better part of Hitler's rise vilifying the Social Democrats instead of the Nazis. The "near enemy" is often hated more than the "far" one (cf. the special Trumpy loathing of "RINOs" and TFG's latest shout out to Stacey Abrams).
The progressive fury at Manchin and Sinema is hotter than a thousand fire hoses could extinguish.
But again, if the goal is averting Trumpy Orbanism how can that be done without addressing its root causes? Do conservative Dems still just think this is a fad that will blow itself out if they somehow manage block Trumpists from power for a decade or so? Even if that is true how do that plan to hold the coalition together without giving a key partner any of the things they feel they need and are part of the coalition to get?
I agree with the second part of your comment, but not that the root causes of Trumpism are climate change, inequality, etc. Trumpism was latent in the GOP for 30 years and can arguably be traced even further back to the Goldwater candidacy and Nixon's Southern Strategy. The Republicans have spent generations switching out their former suburban constituency for, ironically, half of the FDR era Democratic coalition, ie Dixiecrats and the white working class. Many of the latter even voted for Obama rather than McCain and Romney before switching over to Trump.
It's true that inequality in particular has accelerated since the Reagan Revolution, but it's pretty clear that as it circles the wagons the Trump base is far more susceptible to culture war propaganda than to economic policy arguments, let alone lectures on global warming. That's their story and they're sticking to it.
Well the threat from global warming, as it relates to mollifying the Trump base, is that it creates large migrant flows over the next few decades at least which will create even more fertile ground for culture war propaganda.
Beyond that, if cultural differences are the bedrock issue here, then why would conservative Dems whose goal it is to prevent Trumpy Orbanism antagonize Progressives? Do they think they can appease enough Republicans culturally when Trump and his cronies are there offering them uncut lib ownership to mainline that they can weather the erosion of the Dem base that strategy will cause? What is the play here when we already know just about every single person in the anti-Trump, conservative Dem, Progressive coalition is needed to overcome the current pro-Republican tilt in our system of government?
I would say that Manchin is a special case because W.Va. is Trumpier than Mar a Lago; but the rest of them aren't trying to appease the RW culture warriors, they're going for the suburban swing vote. And swing voters are queasy about that $3.5 trillion. They're also worried about crime, which is presumably why McAuliffe flipped on qualified immunity in Virginia and now supports it. Historically, it has rarely paid to bet on voters' progressive instincts outside of safe lefty enclaves.
Personally I hope Manchin and Sinema et al. are open to a reconciliation bill compromise whether the BIF passes this week or not, if only because it looks increasingly like progressives will tank everything if they aren't. But I doubt they have any illusions about reclaiming MAGA World. Though I can't say the same for Biden.
"The rest of them aren't trying to appease the RW culture warriors, they're going for the suburban swing vote."
I mean I live in a suburb of a small city in the south and those priorities aren't mine and they aren't the priorities of the people I know well. The neighborhood has turned over and is pretty young though (as far as politics is concerned) though. I guess I'm just in a bubble. We shall see I guess.
Regarding that pony, Tim Miller recently suggested that progressives simply have higher priorities than, er, averting Trumpy Orbanism. Sure enough, just read Bernie's Tuesday tweet which mentioned the existential threat of climate change but zilch about obvious trivia like saving Biden's presidency and the Dem Congressional majority, ongoing GOP subversion or the Electoral Count Act. Hey, if the planet is burning down, nobody gets a pony anyway, amiright? 🐴
While its pretty clear you're mocking the position, you nonetheless get it right. What I don't understand is why its so hard to accept both averting Trumpy Orbanism and addressing is current and future causes (inequality, climate change, flaws in our system of government), or even why that latter part is controversial.
I like to call them Thälmann progressives, after Ernst Thälmann, the German Communist leader who spent the better part of Hitler's rise vilifying the Social Democrats instead of the Nazis. The "near enemy" is often hated more than the "far" one (cf. the special Trumpy loathing of "RINOs" and TFG's latest shout out to Stacey Abrams).
The progressive fury at Manchin and Sinema is hotter than a thousand fire hoses could extinguish.
But again, if the goal is averting Trumpy Orbanism how can that be done without addressing its root causes? Do conservative Dems still just think this is a fad that will blow itself out if they somehow manage block Trumpists from power for a decade or so? Even if that is true how do that plan to hold the coalition together without giving a key partner any of the things they feel they need and are part of the coalition to get?
I agree with the second part of your comment, but not that the root causes of Trumpism are climate change, inequality, etc. Trumpism was latent in the GOP for 30 years and can arguably be traced even further back to the Goldwater candidacy and Nixon's Southern Strategy. The Republicans have spent generations switching out their former suburban constituency for, ironically, half of the FDR era Democratic coalition, ie Dixiecrats and the white working class. Many of the latter even voted for Obama rather than McCain and Romney before switching over to Trump.
It's true that inequality in particular has accelerated since the Reagan Revolution, but it's pretty clear that as it circles the wagons the Trump base is far more susceptible to culture war propaganda than to economic policy arguments, let alone lectures on global warming. That's their story and they're sticking to it.
Well the threat from global warming, as it relates to mollifying the Trump base, is that it creates large migrant flows over the next few decades at least which will create even more fertile ground for culture war propaganda.
Beyond that, if cultural differences are the bedrock issue here, then why would conservative Dems whose goal it is to prevent Trumpy Orbanism antagonize Progressives? Do they think they can appease enough Republicans culturally when Trump and his cronies are there offering them uncut lib ownership to mainline that they can weather the erosion of the Dem base that strategy will cause? What is the play here when we already know just about every single person in the anti-Trump, conservative Dem, Progressive coalition is needed to overcome the current pro-Republican tilt in our system of government?
I would say that Manchin is a special case because W.Va. is Trumpier than Mar a Lago; but the rest of them aren't trying to appease the RW culture warriors, they're going for the suburban swing vote. And swing voters are queasy about that $3.5 trillion. They're also worried about crime, which is presumably why McAuliffe flipped on qualified immunity in Virginia and now supports it. Historically, it has rarely paid to bet on voters' progressive instincts outside of safe lefty enclaves.
Personally I hope Manchin and Sinema et al. are open to a reconciliation bill compromise whether the BIF passes this week or not, if only because it looks increasingly like progressives will tank everything if they aren't. But I doubt they have any illusions about reclaiming MAGA World. Though I can't say the same for Biden.
"The rest of them aren't trying to appease the RW culture warriors, they're going for the suburban swing vote."
I mean I live in a suburb of a small city in the south and those priorities aren't mine and they aren't the priorities of the people I know well. The neighborhood has turned over and is pretty young though (as far as politics is concerned) though. I guess I'm just in a bubble. We shall see I guess.