And to that side of the argument, there are some who are hypersensitive to anything that can be spun as “demonizing them” - think of the way Obama’s “They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” haunted him. And in turn HRC’s “basket of deplorables”.
But should you try win them over by ignoring the racist impacts of what they actually do support? Will that win them? What impact would that on the turnout of those in your camp who do care about those issues more?
That’s always been my quandary; how do you thread the needle on topics like women’s right to abortion, gun control, LGBTQ, environment, etc…? These are core principals that divide an electorate. You’re either on one side, or the other. Very few people seem to be interested in finding a real middle ground. Sometimes, there is no middle ground to be had.
When it comes to issues like military spending, immigration, economic and trade policies, there is tons of room for middle ground. But these are complex subjects which very few people take time to understand, let alone try to compromise on. So people simply accept their party’s line on the matter, based on more visceral feelings, and vote accordingly.
I get that insulting your political counterparts is not going to persuade them to consider your side of the argument. But when you can’t get someone to accept that women’s right to abortion are not “progressive” rights, but actually politically agnostic rights, then what choice do you have but to call them out on their willful ignorance?
I want to know what things Democratic leaders are doing that hurt whites, that would support why the Democratic Party is responsible for losing these voters. That is not a straw man question. It’s a question that any voter who feels a particular party is bad for them and their interests needs to ask themselves. What are the actual elected officials doing that justifies associating them with anti-whiteness?
From this thread, I’ve learned that Dems have the reputation for being pro-minority and anti-white because liberal essayists and bloggers have harsh and unpleasant things to say about white privilege that conservatives take as personal attacks. And also because people on the internet ridicule Trump voters and call them mean names. Okay. But that looks as shallow as me pointing to the obnoxious opinions on FoxNews and other outlets and the mean-spirited chatter that goes on in conservative message boards as reason for not voting Republican. I don’t think anyone would take that stance very seriously if it was coming from a 40 year-old Black woman because its going to be assumed very little would make a person like me vote Republican. And for good reason! The Republican Party has a history of being anti-black and anti-poor, and that history continues to the present. I don’t have to point to the commentary of random conservative folk to form a bias against the GOP. That Joe Blow trump voter might call me a militant black femoid looking for her next govt handout has nothing to do with my voting behavior.
So why should we not expect the same for all the white males the OP is talking about? Why should we assume their votes have less to do with the policies and rhetoric coming from party officials, and more to do with the unflattering and often times mean-spirited assumptions that come from some internet liberals?
I agree, but I think folks are overestimating the influence that strangers have other people’s politics. It would be one thing if someone could point to some tangible evidence that Dem leaders and others on the ground leading recruitment efforts were out there doing this demonizing, but the fingers are being pointed at this nebulous group called “progressives” whose opinions range from “ Trump’s policies are racist and here is why” to “Trump voters are backward racists and here is why”. If we’re now at the point that even opinions like the former are considered too incendiary to fence-straddling whites, then I don’t know what to do with that except write them off as lost causes and focus on appealing to the less frail.
So you state your position on on the issue — and, you add, you get that insults won’t persuade the other side to consider your side. As far as I can tell, you weren’t, like, replying to a question, there; you simply pointed out, on your own, that you get that insulting ‘em isn’t going to so persuade ‘em.
And then, in the next sentence, you ask: if you can’t get ‘em to accept what you say, then what choice do you have but to call them out for their willful ignorance?
…what?
If they don’t accept what you’re saying — and you grant that insulting them still won’t get them to accept what you’re saying — then why bother? You can’t even see what other choice you have than to do stuff that gets nothing out of them?
If you and I disagree about some issue, then we — disagree about that issue. And if you think telling me I’m willfully ignorant can win me over on that, then let me have it; but if you think that won’t win me over, then what do you gain by saying that loudly and often? Maybe I agree with you on half the issues, and agree with someone else on the other half; which of you will I vote for when the day comes?
Again, if you think it’s a winning tactic, then, sure; but if you don’t? Then why?
Exactly. The whining right who says ‘fuck your feelings’ and insults the left daily thinks we’re being mean to them. :smack:
Right: “Fuck you guys! Liberals should all be shot!”
Left: “Well fuck you too!”
Right: “Help! Help! I’m being repressed! Come and see the violence inherit in the system!”
If anyone on the right wants to prove to me that they DO NOT support all these racist and destructive policies but they’re going to vote for them anyway because we’re being mean to them, then I’d like to see some evidence that they have actually opposed these policies and attempted to ‘fight the good fight’ by getting their own side to knock it off first.
It also occurs to me that anyone who sees the GOP as a better alternative to the Dems simply because of progressive “sneering” has more issues going on than can be unpacked here. Because there’s a whole lot more happening right now than race and gender politics.
Ten years from now when we’re talking about the current incarnation of the Republican Party with the nonpartisan 20/20 hindsight typically reserved for stuff like the Vietnam War, I literally can not wait for someone to defend their Trump vote on the basis of someone calling them racist on the internet. I doubt it wil happen though because by then, it’ll be more obvious that there’s nothing any random progressive could say that is worse than corruption, treason, and incompetence, and arguing otherwise will only get you mocked and scorned.
Recognizing that there are real problems being experienced by certain white demographics and trying to meaningfully address them without condescension is the way squeeze worth the juice. Trying to serve as the thought police of others who others identify as being on your side, not.
I do though get why a less educated white man who is falling farther and farther out of middle class, farther away from the so-called American Dream his parents achieved, ho has no sense of job security and who is not being paid all that well for the job he has, can bristle at the term “white privilege” even as I completely accept the concept as 100% valid. He does not feel very privileged and there is no reason to think he would.
Unless the D side offers some meaningful and understandable alternative, he is easy pickings for someone who will give him a simplistic albeit fictional “other” to to blame.
The problem is, is that the only meaningful alternative that is understandable to someone in that condition is that it is someone else’s fault. They are looking to blame someone for their perceived condition, they are not looking to be told how to improve their condition, or what policies will improve the condition of their children. They don’t even necessarily want their own condition improved. They just want someone to blame.
You are absolutely correct that they will glom onto the party that gives them this scapegoat, but the question is, if the democrats stoop to that level, will I still be voting for them?
If the Democrats start apologizing to people for their policies and for not throwing minorities to the wolves to assuage white people, then a lot of us Dems will stop voting for them.
We need to stand firm in our convictions, or we have no character.
Really? Every last white person in that condition is unreachable except by offering them someone to blame? You really believe that? Or, let me not be so absolute in that question. The number of white people in that condition who are reachable is so small that they aren’t worth worrying about?
Seriously? You figure that, in 2020, if given a choice between Trump and someone that’s less bad than Trump, you wouldn’t vote for the Less Bad Than Trump one?
The number of people who currently bristle when they hear the term “white privilege” who are reachable through positive messaging about the superiority of the policies offered by democrats is, IMHO, near non-existent. Maybe not 0, but close enough that, no, it’s not worth worrying about.
How do you figure that they are less bad than trump? If they get into power through blaming others, by demonizing their opposition, by doing all the things that trump did to get elected, then they would be as bad as trump.
Trump is not the wort person in the world. There are worse. He’s the worst person who has ever held his current office, but that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t find someone even worse to fill those shoes.
So, no, if someone with a D in front of their name gets the nomination through following the same path as trump has, then I will not be supporting them.
I don’t know who that was addressed to, but I suspect it wasn’t me.
I’m not offering anyone a victim to blame. I think that entire way of thinking is offensive and needs to die. I’m not interested in assuaging that need in others.
What do you think that meaningful and understandable alternative would be, that would also be honest and pragmatic?
Dems could start promising (like Trump did) that they will force companies to source their workforce here rather than overseas. They can also promise to keep dying industries like coal viable forever, again like Trump did. But as attractive as these promises might be, they are impossible to keep. This is what got the GOP elected in2016, though. Should Dems follow suit?
The reality is that struggling white men are going to have to find a way to manage just like everyone out here is trying to manage. That means studying subjects that are marketable in this new economy, starting their own business, or even working low-wage service jobs. You know, the kind of jobs women and minorities have been expected to do for centuries and do with a smile on their faces.
That’s a bitter pill to have to swallow, I know. (And I’m not being facetious.) I don’t blame anyone for feeling bad because they are doing worse than their parents did. But if the GOP is deliberately feeding a sense of entitlement that keeps whites feeling victimized, I don’t know what the Dems can do it to fight that short of out-lying them.
Well, yes, it’s theoretically possible to imagine a candidate who is exactly as bad as Trump, or one who is even worse than Trump. But I kind of thought that the whole point of your post — the only thing that makes it interesting — was the idea that we were envisioning a candidate who (a) matches Trump on that point, but who (b) is otherwise, to your way of thinking, not nearly as bad as Trump.
Sure, if they’re even worse than Trump then it isn’t especially remarkable that you wouldn’t support them; and if they’re just as bad as Trump, then, uh, likewise, I guess. But if, for the sake of argument, they’re less bad than Trump in every way but one; and, oh, yeah, they’re merely as bad as him when it comes to that one?
The problem is allowing the right to portray outliers as representative of Democratic thought. Dems, as a group, are more discerning and know the difference between Ann Coulter and her clones (Tomi and whoever that other one is) and mainstream Republican opinion.
The problem is that Republicans listen to other Republicans telling them what they think Democrats think, when that is almost always pure bullshit designed to slander Democrats, not an actual representation of what we think.
Unfortunately, that is often because their own media does such a great job of misinforming them and filling them with propaganda that they can only see Democratic opinions and positions through that filter.
Seriously, if you want to know what Democrats think, listen to actual Democrats. Not some hairy eyeballed fringe lunatic or college student your side likes to hold up as being representative of the rest of us.
