Letters to the Editor
-
Defending Brazile, doubting white working class
I say this as no fan of Brazile, whose dreadful spinmastering has normally annoyed me to the point of switching channels as soon as she's on the TV screen. In this case however, she's completely right. She was refuting the notion that only the white working class matters, and indeed that's not nearly enough to win. Assumed in her statements, but it needs saying, is that new voters form habits in their first 2-4 elections that last a lifetime. Young voters are more engaged than ever since the voting age was set at 18, judging by their turnout. Put those things together, and winning young voters is vital. Given how heavily Democratic they're leaning, it would be an immense screw-up not to emphasize them this year.
The same applies to Latinos. They're not just growing in relative population, but they're younger than other ethnic groups, and have a lot of new citizens, which means Latinos have a disproportionate level of new voters just forming their habits. Winning them now could mean winning them for a couple generations. Nativist Republicans are driving them into our hands if we're smart enough to focus on them, just like the Know Nothings turned the Irish into Democrats for a hundred years.
Besides, I challenge the assumption Democrats lose the white working class or rural white vote. In total probably, but take out the Southeast, and I don't buy it. If they're so Republican and so determined to vote against their interests, why do Republican have such a tough time winning Midwestern rural US House seats? Why do Republicans hold just one New England seat, and I believe that's suburban? Outside the Southeast, Democrats are at least competitive for rural whites or the white working class. The Republicans are close to being reduced to a suburban party, so unless we're specifically talking about the Southeast, the concern about losing whites is overblown.
-
Metaethics
I propose another addition to the letter writing process: that prospective letter-writers read and agree to a clause prohibiting the most obvious of mistakes in argumentation. The new policy refusing to post anonymous letters has helped, but it hasn't prevented some of the really grating behavior.
The quality of a letter-writer's argument has an inverse relationship to the frequency of the following: 1) patronizing use of the author's name; 2) personal attacks; 3) hollow sarcasm; 4) oversimplification of complex issues; etc.
If you are about to submit a post and it looks like this, "Hey, JOAN, I think what you wrote is stupid, and frankly, JOAN, it's pretty obvious to me that this whole complex question of electoral politics can be boiled down to a single freaking cause for which I offer little evidence. If you can't see THAT, JOAN, then how do you expect me to take you seriously?!" then please reconsider posting.
With a little effort, we can raise the bar on public discourse.
-
well said spoon daddy.
Great point.
the dlc is nothing but republcains sabtuers posing as democrats. They took a man who lost his election as their leader. I guess liberman was unavailable as he is shilling for mccain. clinton will follow him, as the ford lead traitor dlc will.
Where were these "moderates" the last eight years when we were fighting the gop? the same place their are now. fighting with them. what get's me is these sellouts like joan clinton and the dlc, then have the nerve and courage to come out and blame US. For them selling out to the gop for profit or power.
they are stuck in the old politics. where only republcains, or republcains posing as democrats can win. that ship has sailed. We've seen where they would take us. A fascist police state.
time to return america to it's founding principles and send the divde and conquer sabotuers to the basement for thrity years, where they belong. Irrelevance. They gop and thei rsell-out dems had their chance. they wasted it. time for a change.
yes we can.
If the sell-outs want to be gop, let them. See how the world looks at america nov 08 if anyone but obama wins. you can't win gop, clinton included. the worse outcome for you would be to steal the nomination. Second worse would be to steal the ge from him based on race or flimsy associations. you can't win gop. think about the future. I suggest you compromise and work towards a better future. If you want to play all or nothing, two can play at that game gop. this time you lose. If you are scared of change , compromise. be part of the process. Continue to play all or nothing and the rules will apply to you.
your scared of change now? I suggest you compromise. to not compromise will change america huge in 4 8 or 12 years. think about the big picture. think about the future. You lost yoru fascsit grip gop. Compromise, or don't. But please stop the blaming whining and complaing about the choices you choose.
Again, I suggest the gop compromises. Otherwise you get nothing. The future is ours. be a part of it or don't. But you are making yoru bed. time is not on your side. Please work with your children and grandchildren gop. Think about the future.
-
Some things never change
Joan is still making rationalizations for Hillary Clinton.
Brazile comments were not dismissive of working class whites and Latinos. She didn't say thte Obama camp was writing off their importance. She recognizes there are new ways to increase the Democratic base. As you point out, losing white working class voters is not a new problem for Dems, therefore it is not a unique deficit to Obama. We have no way of knowing if Clinton would carry them come November when she would be competing against a white male.
Clinton's remarks were far more offensive, especially since she and Bill are not surrogates, but the candidates. Disgusting.
-
@ webcelt (aside)
I say this as no fan of Brazile, whose dreadful spinmastering has normally annoyed me to the point of switching channels as soon as she's on the TV screen.
Thanks for articulating this. I mentioned the other day that I was surprised to hear this exchange because I'd formed the impression that Brazile was a glorified hack. Several people (Joan included) defended her and I took these defenses at their word and began to wonder whether I'd unfairly judged her.
I believe I have, based upon this last exchange, but it's nice to know I wasn't crazy (or at least, alone) for developing the opinion that she was hackish.