What’s the mantra? It’s OK when a Republican does it? Where is the outrage over the fake candidates funded by Republicans? The NYT article either mixed up the Hafners or simply omitted the fact that Eric Hafner (serving a prison term in New York State) is on this year’s ballot as the official Democrat nominee for our lone Congressional seat.
His candidacy was funded by a Republican PAC.
However Peltola’s use of a sound-alike Senate candidate will probably scuttle her chances on Election Day. Contrary to what others have said above, I think a lot of voters, including any who may have been wavering, will view this as evidence of sneaky, underhanded nature (conveniently forgetting all the many, many dirtier tricks the GOP has employed).
It was also stupid. She was out-polling Sullivan without the sound-alike, and had a good shot at winning the election on her own merits. This only gives the Republicans ammunition.
This also stands a good chance of giving a win to those who want to take away Ranked Choice Voting. They will use this as an example of too many candidates in front of voters’ eyes and a system that lends itself to spoilers and other abuses.
Forget the fact that ranked choice is likely to decrease the influence of spoilers, there will be just enough outrage to tip the balance. Ranked choice won by a thin, thin margin last time, and this time it may not stand up to the assault.
This is just a basic political trick that both parties have used in in races all over the country at various times.
Saying that people shouldn’t vote for Peltola because of this is like saying that football fans should stop rooting for their team because they should be morally outraged about a ten-yard holding penalty.
It’s certainly possible that she might lose votes because of this move, so it’s arguable that it was a dumb thing to do. I would be inclined to agree with that argument, in fact. But there’s no cause for moralistic pearl clutching here.
(Disclaimer: the author of the above post is from Chicago, where political ethics go to die)
This seems bizarre to me. Do you have any cite for the notion that clearing one’s throat is an antisemitic dog whistle now? I didn’t even notice it.
To be clear, my praise of this ad wasn’t based on a belief that it was politically smart. I can certainly understand why people might find it anti-Semitic, and it may well be a vote loser. I thought the first part of the ad was pretty heavy-handed. What specifically filled me with delight was the repurposing of the “They/Them” line. However, I accept that I should not actually be the target audience for Democratic TV ads.
Vote Blue No Matter Who. Except Josh Turek. Fuck that guy.
Turek is the Democratic candidate for US Senate in Iowa, and he might actually win, which on paper is obviously cool.
I understand that US parties need to be big tents, and different approaches are needed in different States. Although I strongly disagree with those who want to keep trans girls from playing school sports, I don’t believe that people who hold that position, such as Turek, should be ostracized from the Democratic Party.
If Iowa is even in play, that means the Democrats have already won a comfortable Senate majority. I’d rather have one less seat than allow this level of transphobia to get a foothold in the Democratic Party.
Of course not, because I didn’t say such a ridiculous thing, did I?
Clearing ones throat, winking, saying hint hint nudge nudge, or if you know what I’m saying, none of these things are dog whistles in and of themselves. But they absolutely serve as an indication that what you’re about to say is in fact some kind of dog whistle.
Not every race is tightly correlated: Iowa can be in play and Senate control still on knife edge. You just can’t know for sure that he could the race that matters, and the vote that approves another extremist SCOTUS jurist
Is he worse on this issue than the Republican who is the alternative? No. Definitely not
Honestly the GOPs beating him down on the issue have a valid point: politicians say whatever is expedient to say; pay more attention to how they have voted. Turek, explanations of why given to transphobic Iowans notwithstanding, has voted the way a supporter of trans rights should vote. Criticizing the pandering to transphobia is very justified; essentially supporting a truly transphobic Republican’s winning a contestable Senate seat to keep someone who ran a despicable ad (but who voted the right way) from being part Democratic majority is potentially a classic cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Anything is theoretically possible, but current polling shows that there are five States where Democrats have a better chance of flipping Senate seats than in Iowa, and another three potentially within reach. The chance that control of the Senate hinges on exactly Iowa is not zero, but pretty close.
And if he wins, people will be holding him up as a role model for red State Democrats. I’m not interested in having those extreme views become acceptable within the Democratic Party, and if I lived in Iowa I would abstain in that race.
I respect your instincts, and I can totally see why people might feel the ad has antisemitic overtones. What I don’t see is how the throat-clearing specifically is the dog whistle.
Really? I didn’t hear that. That was about the tamest political ad I’ve seen from a Republican in the last 30 years. I don’t know why that former Collins staffer said “the race is over.” That’s ridiculous.
I feel like it also has anti-trans overtones. But i didn’t think “throat clearing” was indicating a dog whistle, either. And i didn’t notice throat clearing, for that matter.
Twitter is idiotic and only shows the time from the end of the clip instead of the timestamp, at least on mobile, but it’s about 8 seconds from the end.
“Mike Rogers is for - AHEM - tiny chuckle - They/Them”.
Did you really not hear that previously? Did you see the ad online, or on TV? Was it a clip or the whole thing as originally Tweeted by Cenk?
As a reminder, the point of constantly accusing Jews of stealing isn’t to find out if someone is stealing from you, it’s to take glee in making Jews turn out their pockets. Playing the “I can convince the DSA that the racist ad they love is racist if I just reason with them” game is falling for the trick. You will not convince them. They are not interested in being convinced. They are interested in making you dance for them while they go “I don’t know what anyone could find objectionable about this and anyway isn’t Israel Bad?” and smirk at you.
The point is that no one actually thinks Israel’s policy in Gaza has fuck-all to do with the price of bananas, and the ad is just “The Jew is Our Misfortune” in which the supercause of every problem in the world is blamed on the conspiracy, which 100% of people viewing the ad understand to be The Jew and not “Israeli policy.” The problem is not throat-clearing noises, the problem is the entire concept and the people who are willfully pretending not to understand that concept for no reason beyond toying with the ethnic group they dislike.