the article suggested that the dividing line between affluent and poor was $50K per household, but for a married couple where both spouses work that only comes out to $25K per person, which isn't much once you figure in the high cost of living in america. plus, the article doesn't say who in these salary ranges pay for their own insurance and retirement funds.
― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:43 (eighteen years ago) link
read: "we won't send your existing jobs to india."
― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:45 (eighteen years ago) link
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:47 (eighteen years ago) link
― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:48 (eighteen years ago) link
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:50 (eighteen years ago) link
it could happen, provided the elected politicians don't have any vested corporate interests. and monkeys might fly etc.
― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:52 (eighteen years ago) link
― Polysix Bad Battery (cprek), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:53 (eighteen years ago) link
hahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhohohohoHOHOHOHOHOHOOHheheheheheHEHEHEHEEEHEHEEEHEEHAHAHAHAHAHASNORTSNORTSNORT!
sorry
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:54 (eighteen years ago) link
― dar1a g (daria g), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:54 (eighteen years ago) link
Er wait, am I talking about Americans, or ILXors?
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:57 (eighteen years ago) link
it is funny how many "affluent" "property owners" are up to their necks in mortgages and high-interest loans. it's like that commercial where the rich white suburban lawnmower dude says "i'm in debt up to my eyeballs!"
― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 19 January 2006 15:58 (eighteen years ago) link
In the vast swaths of country between the megapolises there are people raising families of 5 on $57,000 a year and doing it relatively painlessly. And yeah, economic issues don't mean a goddamned thing to them.
― TOMBOT, Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:00 (eighteen years ago) link
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:03 (eighteen years ago) link
― patrick bateman (mickeygraft), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:04 (eighteen years ago) link
Wow, what an incredible insight. Very novel!
"Environics found social values moving away from the authority end of the scale, with its emphasis on responsibility, duty, and tradition, to a more atomized, rage-filled outlook that values consumption, sexual permissiveness, and xenophobia. The trend was toward values in the individuality quadrant."
I've long thought that if the Democratic party would focus their message on individualism (and the resulting freedom it implies) that they might get somewhere.
Today’s average American “worker” is, in short, very much on his or her own -- too prosperous to be eligible for most government assistance programs and, because of job laws that date back three quarters of a century, unable to unionize. Such isolation and atomization have not led to a new wave of social solidarity and economic populism, however. Instead, these changes have bred resentment toward those who do have outside aid, whether from government or from unions, and an escalating ethos of every man for himself. Against that ethos, voters have increasingly flocked to politicians who recognize that the combination of relative affluence and relative isolation has created an opening for cultural appeals.
"Every man for himself" has been an American credo for hundreds of years. It's the essence of competition, of capitalism, of industry. There's a bridge somewhere between individualism and community--is the Democratic party forcing people over a bridge or seeking one?
American voters have taken shelter under the various wings of conservative traditionalism because there has been no one on the Democratic side in recent years to defend traditional, sensible middle-class values against the onslaught of the new nihilistic, macho, libertarian lawlessness unleashed by an economy that pits every man against his fellows.
Maybe they're taking shelter because they don't think it's an economy that's pitting man against man, it's shelter from the resulting culture war. What are "traditional, sensible middle-class values" anyway? The only hint we get from this article is that candidates should talk about religion and that will mitigate their stance on the death penalty (in Virginia.)
I am happy to see the wasteland that is the Democratic Party looking inward. The Republicans wouldn't dare stare into their own dark abyss.
― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:35 (eighteen years ago) link
As for the "average American household" that makes $60K a year, it would have been more informative to see the median income, because the average is skewed upwards by those at the top of the scale - ie., less than 50% of Americans make the "average" income.
― o. nate (onate), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:37 (eighteen years ago) link
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:44 (eighteen years ago) link
― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:45 (eighteen years ago) link
Lakoff's extensively written about the need for Democratic candidates and progressives in general to start explicitly talking about values. Also, for campaigns to work at creating more of an overall narrative for a candidate than just a laundry list of policies. It's only his work on the framing aspect that's received attention lately, not so much his work on defining the values systems that right/left folks tend to hold(e.g. "maintaining authority" vs "care & responsibility").
He's offered up Schwarzneggar's campaign as an example of a guy who ran entirely on narrative & perceived identity, and expressively refused to offer up any policy suggestions. Most folks don't have the time/energy/inclination to get into policy specifics, but if they trust your guy, they're trust him to take care of the details.
As he says,
"The pollsters didn’t understand it because they thought that people voted on the issues and on self-interest. Well, sometimes they do. But mostly they vote on their identity -- on persons that they trust to be like them, or to be like people they admire"
which connects to that aspirational bit that the article mentions.
Jim Wallis has talked about several of these same issues over the last year as well, especially with on the whole "onslaught of the new nihilistic, macho, libertarian lawlessness unleashed by an economy that pits every man against his fellows" bit.
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:52 (eighteen years ago) link
Wallis has written about conversations his group has had with Frank Luntz and some other Repub pollsters who were quite open about their m.o. being to get voters so caught in such intense issues that they vote against their economic interest.
As other folks have pointed out, the Republicans have been better that bring the polls to them(gay marriage is the biggest thing you care about) vs the Democrats moving to where the polls now seem to be(well i guess we need to move rightward on gay marriage).
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 16:53 (eighteen years ago) link
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:01 (eighteen years ago) link
That's the thing, innit? If you build up an entire apparatus to both promote & reinforce certain narratives, people will believe them even if they have no basis in fact. George W. Bush is steadfast & strong, Kerry's a weak-willed flip-flopper, Republicans are all about a smaller government, supply-side economics works, etc
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:06 (eighteen years ago) link
oh fuck yeah this is a major bit of it, too. But since when did we start promoting self-reflection and critical thought?
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:07 (eighteen years ago) link
― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:39 (eighteen years ago) link
For real despair, look at how Sen. Rodham Clinton is pandering to libs and righties on alternate days. "Congress run like a plantation," "I'd bomb Iran," etc.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:47 (eighteen years ago) link
xpost
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:49 (eighteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:54 (eighteen years ago) link
Please God, take Hilary quietly so she won't fuck up the party with a presidential campaign. WORST POSSIBLE CANDIDATE EVER.
― elmo, patron saint of nausea (allocryptic), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:54 (eighteen years ago) link
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:55 (eighteen years ago) link
Huh? He's only been going this stuff in the press for about two years. Second, there are plenty of other folks who have made the connection, but have gotten shit for coverage(not fitting in with "religious = rightwing conservative" media narrative?), even when they got arrested for it on the Capitol steps.
DLC-candidate-in-centrist-message shocker
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:56 (eighteen years ago) link
very much otm. The change will come from the outside.
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 17:58 (eighteen years ago) link
― o. nate (onate), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:00 (eighteen years ago) link
Re the direction of the party, past actions indicate the party will be quicker to line up behind someone with Clinton's politics as opposed to Tasini's. I'm not too hopeful when it comes to the future of the Dems.
― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:02 (eighteen years ago) link
do you think it's necessary for dems to use the religious right's language ("morals" and "values")? would a less-loaded word like "ethics" skew too liberal?
― stockholm cindy (winter version) (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:03 (eighteen years ago) link
my question is, when do they not? unless a voter has completely descended into some cynical nihilism, of course.
i mean, yeah, "values" has come to signify a very specific set of values, which just goes to further show that democratic types do need to start talking about theirs.
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:05 (eighteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:06 (eighteen years ago) link
― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:07 (eighteen years ago) link
I don't think it's necessarily too liberal, but it definitely lacks the primal grip of "values"
I mean, we all value things, right? We value ethics, for example, since honesty, fairness, & justice are core principles.
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:08 (eighteen years ago) link
not necessarily, but quite possibly, and yes, respectively.
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:09 (eighteen years ago) link
name one
― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:10 (eighteen years ago) link
― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:11 (eighteen years ago) link
I don't think they need to use the words "morals" or "values" at all, but on the other hand I don't think "ethics" is necesarily what we're talking about either. "Ethics" to me connotes a branch of philosophy - ie., sterile debates which have little to do with people's daily lives. What they need to communicate is that they are decent people who voters would admire/like/agree with. If the voters think you're a good person, then they will gloss over lots of little policy details. If they don't think you're a good person, you can promise them the moon, but they won't believe you. Unfortunately, things like abortion and gay rights have become a short-hand for some voters on figuring out whether a candidate has values. That is probably a moral fundamentalist fringe whose votes the Dems will not be able to win and probably shouldn't even want to win. But they do need to capture the votes of more moderate voters who worry about rampant sex on TV and loose values among their childrens' friends.
― o. nate (onate), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:11 (eighteen years ago) link
― Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:12 (eighteen years ago) link
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:14 (eighteen years ago) link
― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:15 (eighteen years ago) link
also, we should probably clarify who we're talking about here. "Dems" includes everybody from DLC types like Clinton & Biden to guys like Feingold...
Also, it seems like we're only limiting this to talking about a very specific range of national politics(akin to referring to states as "red" or "blue"), but this doesn't address the other aspects, like state elections(e.g. Montana electing a Democratic governor and Democratic State House & Senate)
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:16 (eighteen years ago) link
There was some major (spring?) 2005 poll all the progressive press was reporting on that found Americans favor Canada-style healthcare, taxing the rich, full domestic rights for gays, etc. Was it Quinnipiac? Can't find it...
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:16 (eighteen years ago) link
It's pretty simple - the population is much more interested in pulling troops out asap. The Dem leadership is not - in fact, many still appear to be trying to out tough Republicans. You know things are odd when it's people like Murtha who are the furthest left on an issue like the war.
― TRG (TRG), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:18 (eighteen years ago) link
yeah, exactly. I think these things just get talked about in some simplified media narrative(again, "your state is RED," etc), and this narrowing just plays into the hands of guys like Rove who are pretty good at taking advantage of such limitations.
― kingfish kuribo's shoe (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 19 January 2006 18:20 (eighteen years ago) link
struttin on her way to put some more people in jail
― Goose Bigelow, Fowl Gigolo (the table is the table), Tuesday, 29 November 2022 12:00 (one year ago) link
it's true, she can do that as veep
― Malevolent Arugula (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 29 November 2022 13:07 (one year ago) link
she’s walking on sunshine courtesy of prison labor
― Goose Bigelow, Fowl Gigolo (the table is the table), Tuesday, 29 November 2022 14:17 (one year ago) link
“The thing about Florida Democrats is we keep learning with every passing year that just when you thought you had hit bottom, you discover that there are new abysses to fall deeper and deeper into,” said Fernand Amandi, a veteran Democratic operative in the state. “There is no plan. There’s nothing. It’s just a state of suspended animation and chaos — and, more than anything, it’s the mournful regret and acceptance that Florida has been cast aside for the long, foreseeable future.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/22/florida-democrats-losses/
― G. D’Arcy Cheesewright (silby), Tuesday, 24 January 2023 05:06 (one year ago) link
Good morning!
― Malevolent Arugula (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 24 January 2023 10:24 (one year ago) link
NEW: a PAC fighting progressive primary challengers is funded by one man who happens to be the richest person in Pennsylvania, a GOP mega donor who has avoided $1 billion in taxes: Jeff Yass. Biden’s former campaign manager is the PAC’s only consultant https://t.co/t0p8eunM1m— Akela Lacy (@akela_lacy) January 25, 2023
― papal hotwife (milo z), Thursday, 26 January 2023 02:10 (one year ago) link
a story of two men who can discern which side their bread is buttered on
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Thursday, 26 January 2023 02:37 (one year ago) link
Congress must join the AI revolution.— Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) June 21, 2023
― serving bundt (sic), Wednesday, 21 June 2023 23:38 (ten months ago) link
AI President
― the manwich horror (Neanderthal), Thursday, 22 June 2023 00:33 (ten months ago) link
You can call me Al
― Alito Bit of Soap (President Keyes), Thursday, 22 June 2023 00:35 (ten months ago) link
AI Qaeda
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Thursday, 22 June 2023 00:38 (ten months ago) link
Weird AI
― Alito Bit of Soap (President Keyes), Thursday, 22 June 2023 01:32 (ten months ago) link
AIbraham Lincoln
Dwight AIsenhower
― pomplamoose and circumstance (Ye Mad Puffin), Thursday, 22 June 2023 18:12 (ten months ago) link
AIke was with us when AImerica needed hAIm
― sad Mings of dynasty (Neanderthal), Thursday, 22 June 2023 18:28 (ten months ago) link
AIdolf Hitler
― Alito Bit of Soap (President Keyes), Thursday, 22 June 2023 19:32 (ten months ago) link
Chester AI Arthur
― pomplamoose and circumstance (Ye Mad Puffin), Friday, 23 June 2023 03:19 (ten months ago) link
luv 2 have a pro-union president
― serving bundt (sic), Saturday, 24 June 2023 17:33 (ten months ago) link
"This is not an attempt to ban TikTok. It's an attempt to make TikTok better. Tic-Tac-Toe. A winner. A winner."-- Rep. Pelosi pic.twitter.com/ExkX6bxz0O— Howard Mortman (@HowardMortman) March 13, 2024
― bae (sic), Wednesday, 13 March 2024 17:47 (one month ago) link
pokemon tik-tok-toe to the polls
― bae (sic), Wednesday, 13 March 2024 17:48 (one month ago) link
Sippin Ace of Spades, I doGot the K Street everywhere I go
― President Keyes, Wednesday, 13 March 2024 17:55 (one month ago) link
What's at stake for our climate in this November's elections?Absolutely everything. https://t.co/mnBjVGTlzR pic.twitter.com/mzpsSrJiPr— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) April 22, 2024
― bae (sic), Monday, 22 April 2024 18:26 (one week ago) link
Hard to believe she lost.
― papal hotwife (milo z), Monday, 22 April 2024 18:46 (one week ago) link
College Democrats Back Protests and Criticize Biden’s Israel Policy
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/30/us/politics/bidens-israel-college-democrats.html?unlocked_article_code=1.oU0.Ow5p.PAspLsJ-hPpx&smid=url-share
― rob, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 14:17 (three days ago) link
hell yeah
― the talented mr pimply (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 30 April 2024 14:25 (three days ago) link
the Hillary graph is misleading
― jaymc, Tuesday, 30 April 2024 14:32 (three days ago) link
It will be interesting to learn how many of those arrested in Hamilton Hall at Columbia are actually students.— David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) May 1, 2024
― papal hotwife (milo z), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 03:28 (two days ago) link
fuck off, Ax
― ain't nothin but a brie thing, baby (Neanderthal), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 03:32 (two days ago) link
god, the convention is going to be such a fucking nightmare, I hope Brandon Johnson is actually a decent person. If I were him I'd send his family out of town to protect them from CPD.
― JoeStork, Wednesday, 1 May 2024 04:15 (two days ago) link
I don't get why ppl are blaming Biden and the Democratic Party for the actions of the Columbia University administration
― jaymc, Wednesday, 1 May 2024 04:35 (two days ago) link
Let alone the state of Israel!
― G. D’Arcy Cheesewright (silby), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 04:39 (two days ago) link
A new statement from the White House in response to the news of Columbia protestors taking over a campus building. pic.twitter.com/A48LpNGyhg— Asma Khalid (@asmamk) April 30, 2024
― papal hotwife (milo z), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 08:53 (two days ago) link
piece of shit
― Left, Wednesday, 1 May 2024 09:23 (two days ago) link
― butt dumb tight my boners got boners (the table is the table), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 10:48 (two days ago) link
I think the table is the broadly correct here. Biden's seeming inability to exercise any kind of control over Israel's actions is somewhat incongruous with the various conditions imposed on Ukraine in what they can use, where they can use it, when they can use it. The disparity between the former and the latter is particularly striking, and I think its fair to say this is something which lands on Biden's desk, the complete disregard for the concept of leverage that is so readily available in another context. But this is the problem with the idea of "unconditional support"
I think as far as Colombia goes, thats on them not Biden
― anvil, Wednesday, 1 May 2024 11:18 (two days ago) link
I don't think the campus protests and the ridiculous reactions are good for Biden as it might peel away his "coalition" from both sides. I don't blame the protestors for that though.
― il lavoro mi rovina la giornata (PBKR), Wednesday, 1 May 2024 11:28 (two days ago) link
have the White House put out a statement about UCLA yet or do they only weigh in when property is threatened?
― rob, Wednesday, 1 May 2024 12:26 (two days ago) link