I continue to be surprised by the GOP. I shouldn’t be; so many House members come from extremely gerrymandered districts that you can get elected with no political skill as long as your policy prescriptions are radical and bigoted enough.
Of course the left has a few of those Reps from a district so blue that my German Shepherd could get elected if he declared as a Dem (but he strongly maintains he’s a left-leaning independent).
The big difference is that Democrats, wherever they fall on the liberal spectrum, believe in government, and disagree only on where and how government should lift up and stand behind all individuals.
The MAGA hate government, and despise its power to make society a fairer place. But their increasing lack of political instincts and skills push a bad agenda and out-of-tune proposals that increasingly are anathema to the majority of voters.
I believe the GOP is approaching a tipping point where all their sins combine to make them a minority party for a generation. That’s happened to one party or another several times in the country’s past. I personally am looking forward to it.
Dan's first item today, “The Road to A Political Realignment in American Politics” by Doug Sosnik (via Politico Playbook)," explains why the GOP is so hell-bent on destroying public education -- they are well aware that educated people find their ideas and politics toxic. Book bans, working to fund religious schools (and hence taking much-needed funds from public schools), etc., are all part of their plan. Dems need to be clear-eyed about these efforts, especially in small rural communities who have small tax bases and are therefore more dependent on state and federal funds. I'm not smart enough to know how to address this but I hope the Dems have enough bright minds to figure it out.
The college educated have never been a majority, being roughly one-third of workers until recent years boosted their numbers somewhat. 2008 created low employment leading to unpaid internships and an increase in requiring a college degree for employment, further reducing the financial security of those without a degree. Without a way for the lower educated to realize expectations of what it means to live in America, resentment increased. With the lower educated a constant majority, trouble over the resentments was inevitable.
What to do? Yes, good luck with that. It appears that deep in the American psyche worth as an individual came primarily from employment. With employment offering fewer rewards, self-worth plummeted and looked for a new expression. Enter rage politics, an easy way to feel important. Creating an economy that would put self-worth back into employment is probably impossible. Self-worth can be transferred to other acts, but that switch has to fight the long-standing narrative of the American Dream, which says you should be able to have more than you can presently achieve.
Politically rage politics are ineffective for governing, so they are limited by the need to actually govern well. This will move the right to back off of MAGA eventually. In the meanwhile, MAGA is going to do a lot of damage.
I'm not sure I have a well-thought-out comment here, so bear with me. I disagree with Adam Serwer and the big bummer of the Fox lawsuit. Money talks. Money is really the only thing that matters when it comes to influencing politics. Dominion is a business, and the lies of Fox News disrupted their business. They weren't there to bring down Fox, necessarily. However, if it costs Fox enough money, they would have to change their policies about how far they can lie for viewership. Murdoch wants to make money. If every time Tucker or Jeanine or Lou open their mouths and it costs money in lawyers and settlements, eventually something has to give. This lawsuit was never going to change Fox viewer's minds, they are too long gone for that. Also, Serwer casually states that if Fox goes down, something else would rise in its place. Well, we have proof that isn't the case. OAN and Newsmax - bleh. Nobody has Murdoch money. And soon, the big guy will be gone and his two, less money-over-everything sons will decide which direction they want to sail this ship (we think - insert theme song to Succession here). My point is, you can't change people's minds. We know this. But if there's no money to run the machine, the machine breaks.
The question is whether insurance and cash on hand softens the financial blow enough that lying to viewers, but a little less extremely, is still the better financial practice, since the lies are what brings in the most income for Fox. The judgement against Fox is more of a warning to media without similar deep pockets. The settlement moves the needle back toward democracy, just not as far as it could have, since people's minds can be changed, which is why we're seeing polling and election results changing.
If you pay out of cash on hand, it's still you paying someone else your money. As for insurance, after this and with insurers on the hook for the coming Smartmatic suit (even if they dropped them today, the insurer is liable for anything that happened while covered), they'll have no insurance unless they can demonstrate to the underwriters solid evidence that they're changing their ways.
I had a more pessimistic take on the Dominion settlement but if it caused Fox to dump Carlson then it was more consequential than I thought. Good call!
I found the Sosnik highly explanatory for the northern midwest-- but it doesn't account so clearly for the political tendencies in the states where I've worked since 2004: New Mexico and Nevada. There's something else going on there, as well as evidently Georgia.
I continue to be surprised by the GOP. I shouldn’t be; so many House members come from extremely gerrymandered districts that you can get elected with no political skill as long as your policy prescriptions are radical and bigoted enough.
Of course the left has a few of those Reps from a district so blue that my German Shepherd could get elected if he declared as a Dem (but he strongly maintains he’s a left-leaning independent).
The big difference is that Democrats, wherever they fall on the liberal spectrum, believe in government, and disagree only on where and how government should lift up and stand behind all individuals.
The MAGA hate government, and despise its power to make society a fairer place. But their increasing lack of political instincts and skills push a bad agenda and out-of-tune proposals that increasingly are anathema to the majority of voters.
I believe the GOP is approaching a tipping point where all their sins combine to make them a minority party for a generation. That’s happened to one party or another several times in the country’s past. I personally am looking forward to it.
Dan's first item today, “The Road to A Political Realignment in American Politics” by Doug Sosnik (via Politico Playbook)," explains why the GOP is so hell-bent on destroying public education -- they are well aware that educated people find their ideas and politics toxic. Book bans, working to fund religious schools (and hence taking much-needed funds from public schools), etc., are all part of their plan. Dems need to be clear-eyed about these efforts, especially in small rural communities who have small tax bases and are therefore more dependent on state and federal funds. I'm not smart enough to know how to address this but I hope the Dems have enough bright minds to figure it out.
The college educated have never been a majority, being roughly one-third of workers until recent years boosted their numbers somewhat. 2008 created low employment leading to unpaid internships and an increase in requiring a college degree for employment, further reducing the financial security of those without a degree. Without a way for the lower educated to realize expectations of what it means to live in America, resentment increased. With the lower educated a constant majority, trouble over the resentments was inevitable.
What to do? Yes, good luck with that. It appears that deep in the American psyche worth as an individual came primarily from employment. With employment offering fewer rewards, self-worth plummeted and looked for a new expression. Enter rage politics, an easy way to feel important. Creating an economy that would put self-worth back into employment is probably impossible. Self-worth can be transferred to other acts, but that switch has to fight the long-standing narrative of the American Dream, which says you should be able to have more than you can presently achieve.
Politically rage politics are ineffective for governing, so they are limited by the need to actually govern well. This will move the right to back off of MAGA eventually. In the meanwhile, MAGA is going to do a lot of damage.
I'm not sure I have a well-thought-out comment here, so bear with me. I disagree with Adam Serwer and the big bummer of the Fox lawsuit. Money talks. Money is really the only thing that matters when it comes to influencing politics. Dominion is a business, and the lies of Fox News disrupted their business. They weren't there to bring down Fox, necessarily. However, if it costs Fox enough money, they would have to change their policies about how far they can lie for viewership. Murdoch wants to make money. If every time Tucker or Jeanine or Lou open their mouths and it costs money in lawyers and settlements, eventually something has to give. This lawsuit was never going to change Fox viewer's minds, they are too long gone for that. Also, Serwer casually states that if Fox goes down, something else would rise in its place. Well, we have proof that isn't the case. OAN and Newsmax - bleh. Nobody has Murdoch money. And soon, the big guy will be gone and his two, less money-over-everything sons will decide which direction they want to sail this ship (we think - insert theme song to Succession here). My point is, you can't change people's minds. We know this. But if there's no money to run the machine, the machine breaks.
The question is whether insurance and cash on hand softens the financial blow enough that lying to viewers, but a little less extremely, is still the better financial practice, since the lies are what brings in the most income for Fox. The judgement against Fox is more of a warning to media without similar deep pockets. The settlement moves the needle back toward democracy, just not as far as it could have, since people's minds can be changed, which is why we're seeing polling and election results changing.
If you pay out of cash on hand, it's still you paying someone else your money. As for insurance, after this and with insurers on the hook for the coming Smartmatic suit (even if they dropped them today, the insurer is liable for anything that happened while covered), they'll have no insurance unless they can demonstrate to the underwriters solid evidence that they're changing their ways.
That's a good point about the insurers needing to cut their risk.
Looks like I was right!
https://abcnews.go.com/US/tucker-carlson-fox-news/story?id=98801613
I had a more pessimistic take on the Dominion settlement but if it caused Fox to dump Carlson then it was more consequential than I thought. Good call!
I found the Sosnik highly explanatory for the northern midwest-- but it doesn't account so clearly for the political tendencies in the states where I've worked since 2004: New Mexico and Nevada. There's something else going on there, as well as evidently Georgia.