Can Candidate Biden turn it around?

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 2024

Also, what's up with Trump voters? Presumably, it starts tomorrow night, with the State of the Union address.

Can Candidate Biden turn it around? In this recent post, Kevin Drum outlines one reason to think that he can. 

Kevin cites numbers from a recent YouGov survey—numbers which illustrate general voter ignorance. Here's where those numbers lead him:

DRUM (3/5/24): Hell, only 34% [said they] had heard [a lot] about the Hur report. Only 24% knew we were striking back against the Houthis. And the fact that a star witness had lied about bribes paid to Hunter and Joe Biden? Only 22%.

Most people don't know anything about anything. In fact, I'll bet that even these numbers are inflated, with lots of respondents saying they've heard a lot about these things because they watched a segment on the evening news or got pointed to a Facebook post.

This is why I think Biden has a fair amount of upside in the presidential race. In September, when people start paying attention, what are they going to learn? Mostly bad stuff about Trump and good stuff about Biden's little-known positive accomplishments. That's where the greatest ignorance is right now, so it's also where there's the greatest potential for change.

At this site, we're amazed to see that 22% of respondents said they had heard that we were striking back against the Houthis!

That fact doesn't get mentioned on Fox—and it certainly doesn't get mentioned on MSNBC, where nothing interferes with round-the-clock speculations about Trump getting frog-marched to jail.

As a general matter, it's almost always true that "most [of us] people don't know anything about anything." As to what people will start to hear in September, that will depend on where they're getting their soundbites.

Remember, though, an intelligent campaign doesn't try to win every voter; an intelligent campaign tries to win some voters. More specifically, it will try to win the most persuadable voters—not the ones we tend to picture when we say that you simply can't reason with Those People Over There.

In our view, Candidate Trump is unelectable, but so is Candidate Biden. In our view, this will still turn on Biden's ability to campaign in a vigorous fashion. We strongly doubt that he'll be able to do that, but we're also prepared to be wrong.

From there, we move to the weekly colloquy between Bret Stephens and Gail Collins. We were intrigued by this part of this week's exchange:

STEPHENS (3/5/24): I’ve always thought that Trump’s obstruction of a subpoena in the documents case is the strongest of the indictments against him. Unfortunately, a Florida courtroom is not an ideal jurisdiction for getting a guilty verdict, and it doesn’t look like the case will be tried anytime soon.

COLLINS: More than the idea of seeing Trump marched off to jail, I love the idea of a bankrupt Trump spending his 80s doing podcasts from a motel room in Tampa or Bridgeport. But when it comes to punishment, no bad deed is more important than trying to subvert the democratic process in such a big-time manner.

STEPHENS: It’s horrible. But not quite as horrible as the idea that tens of millions of Americans are willing to vote him right back into office. Serious question: Why?

At this very late date, Stephens is still wondering why tens of millions of people are eager to vote for Trump.

First suggestion—a person might start by asking people why they plan to do that. That said, Stephens ended up offering one idea about why Trump voters are like that:

COLLINS: But hey, you’re in charge of understanding Republicans. What’s the bottom line?

STEPHENS: He’s a raised middle finger at all the people whom his supporters see as a self-satisfied, self-dealing cultural elite. The more that elite despises him, the more they love him.

That’s why any good analysis of the Trump phenomenon has to begin with an analysis of the Us phenomenon, if you will: Where did those of us who were supposed to represent the sensible center of the country go so wrong that people were willing to turn to a charlatan like Trump in the first place? 

I have endless theories, but here’s another one: We tried to change the way people are instead of meeting them where they are. Neocons (like me) tried to bend distant cultures in places like Afghanistan to accept certain Western values. Didn’t work. Progressives tried to push Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on. That isn’t working, either.

Again, it seems to us that Stephens would be better off asking Trump voters to explain their preference.  But when he does mindread a general answer, he partially blames his own behavior, and the behavior of other elites:

He says that red tribe elites—people like himself—engaged in deeply unwise behavior on the international front. And he says that progressives—blue tribe figures who aren't like himself—"tried to push Americans to accept new values on [a wide array of] issues."

Is it possible that some of us within the blue world have pushed a lot of new values very hard, perhaps before their time? Over here within our blue tribe, we tend to reject the very premise of that idea. There's no such things as "woke," we frequently say. The term can't even be defined!

There actually is such a thing as "woke," and our tribe has routinely advanced new values and ideas which fly in the face of traditional "common sense" understandings. There's nothing morally wrong with doing that, but it also isn't a surefire way to win national elections.

Collins reacted as shown:

COLLINS: It’s true that the Trump folk find progressives irritating, but we’re going to have to discuss how you avoid making people feel like they’re being lectured to while simultaneously standing up for critical principles like gay rights.

In the meantime, we march forward. Sigh.

STEPHENS: Gail, this is so depressing. Let’s switch gears. 

How do you "stand up for critical principles like gay rights" without "making people feel like they’re being lectured to?" 

One possibility: Stop lecturing to people! Also, stop calling people names.

Sigh! Some extremely impressive public spokespersons did such things in (let's say) the 1990s as public acceptance of gay rights slowly began coming into its own.

They absorbed a lot of undisguised guff on cable programs like Hardball. In the process, they showed the way such things can (sometimes) be done. Some of our journalistic elites don't seem to know that this happened.

Eventually, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton came out in favor of marriage rights. Biden got there first, but the groundwork had been laid, by patient and persistent people, several decades earlier. 

We admired their forbearance. Slowly, attitudes started to change.


129 comments:

  1. How do you "stand up for critical principles like gay rights" without "making people feel like they’re being lectured to?"

    I think this is the central question Somerby poses. It might be nice to discuss this question, rather than ridiculous conspiracy theories.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you often feel when people talk about gay rights that you are being lectured to?

      Delete
    2. Anonymouse 3:31pm, I’ve never experienced a “discussion” on gay marriage.

      Gay marriage proponents allowed Democratic politicians to hedge their bets till the time was more amenable, but with civilians it’s always been straight to name-calling.

      Delete
    3. Many conservatives feel that even discussing gay rights is “forcing homosexuality, a deviant practice, down their throats.” We could still be discussing the possibility of black people being able to freely exercise their right to vote, if the US hadn’t passed laws to that effect. Gay marriage was found to be a constitutional right by the Supreme Court. It could reverse itself, of course. It’s still ok to question Supreme Court verdicts, although Somerby seems to cast doubt on that by his frivolous ridicule of the critics of the Colorado decision. But the point is that the verdict was rendered. People can be personally opposed to gay marriage, or civil rights, or what have you, but the question is more or less settled legally.

      Delete
    4. Is it a part of the MAGA agenda to overturn Obergefell? How about Griswold? Loving v Virginia? If we had just been nicer to them, dang it …

      Delete
    5. Pied piper, I have never once read Somerby give a “nice liberal’s” defense of gay rights. It’s odd, isn’t it, that he never seems to approve of any either?

      Delete
    6. As a bronze-age pervert, I routinely resort to name-calling. For example, I call my beloved Cecelia “Mercedes”.

      Delete
    7. Anonymouse 4:05pm, that certainly renders the discussion between Stephens and Collins as being largely performative.

      No surprise there.

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 4:15pm, that brings back memories. When I was fourteen I drove my 12-year-old “boyfriend’s” father’s Mercedes around. His dad was well-known and a well known son-of-bitch and the local police never looked our way. I felt like a Mercedes.

      Delete
    9. How can we persuade a few of the persuadable others to value the values that liberals hold dear?

      It can be done. MLK did it. Harvey Milk did it. But don't look to this comment section for any hints on how they did it or how we can do it now.

      Delete
    10. That boy was too young for you.

      Delete
    11. She appears to have been using him for his daddy's car.

      Delete
    12. I love her, but she’s a naughty lady.

      Delete
    13. I don't love or admire women who use men as if they were objects. A case in point is Melania and Trump. They have an entirely transactional marriage in which there is both a pre-nuptial agreement and a post-nuptial one. That's what happens when money (or expensive cars) enter the picture. People treat each other as objects instead of human beings. It makes you wonder what Cecelia provided to that kid in exchange for driving that car around.

      Delete
    14. A two-year difference is nothing to adults, but it is a huge difference to children in terms of interests, development, and emotional maturity. And car theft really isn't that funny when you think about it a bit. Nor is a sheriff who doesn't enforce the law for certain cronies (family and friends?). I am hoping she made this all up.

      Delete
    15. Anonymouse 4:27pm, we drove around with him sitting in the back seat between other two other teenaged girls.

      When I looked at his expression thru the rear view mirror, he didn’t seem to think he was being used.

      Delete
    16. Anonymous 4:43pm, all I can say to the you now and to the teenaged you, is that I’m sorry.

      Delete
    17. That isn't how you decide. You girls all took advantage of a child to steal his daddy's car. If this is what passes for Republican values, I'm glad I'm not like you. Do you really not see anything wrong with this?

      Delete
    18. Anonymouse 4:58pm, I do now from the perspective of his father (ex-wife in different town) being aware of it and not stopping it and calling all the other parents.

      As for my “boyfriend”, we’re still friends, and went on to other escapes.

      Delete
    19. I do think that certain right wingers have a different attitude toward law than perhaps others do. Trump clearly believes himself to be above the law. His followers seem to consider Trump to be the law, and whatever he says goes, which is why they are delighted when he tells them to be mean to others.

      But Somerby's mention of BAP led to background that suggested a fascination with Nietzsche and his idea of ubermensch, which suggests that there are some supermen who are above the law because they are superior beings. Those with narcissistic personalities will imagine that they themselves are the ubermenschen, not lowly followers, and bask in his descriptions of how law does not apply to themselves.

      Somerby displays a bit of narcissism, which is probably natural for a stand up performer, but if Trump appeals to him, and Bronze Age Pervert appeals to him too, because of their permission to transcend the restrictions upon normal people, that is problematic. It would explain Somerby's tendency to play verbal games and his delight in fooling people with an adopted false persona (it is called "duping delight" and is characteristic of psychopaths). It is closely akin to "owning" the libs and conning the rubes, which Somerby used to talk about when he first started his blog.

      Self-styled ubermenschen would get off on cheating the little people, because it reinforces their status as above societal restrictions and norms. This is certainly true for Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, Alex Jones and the host of ugly types who fanned ugly behavior on 1/6 and in other contexts, for their own pleasure and gain, imagining that there will be a revolution that places them on top.

      It would be too bad if Somerby is a participant in this kind of thing, but it is hard to say he isn't given his total lack of interest in social justice, equity, kindness or helping downtrodden people. A lot of people in Nazi Germany succumbed to the siren lure of thinking of themselves as superior and the riff-raff as expendable or to be used for their own purposes. We all saw the result of that.

      Delete
    20. Here is an example of the lack of respect for law (or the presidency or anything else) by those who consider themselves to be above the law:

      "House Republican leaders are asking lawmakers to behave during President Joe Biden's State of the Union address this Thursday.

      Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) loudly heckled the president during last year's address, and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called for "decorum" at this year's joint session of Congress, reported Axios.

      "He's reminding us to be respectful of the institution," said Rep. Mark Alford (R-MO), "and to the president of the United States and the office, whether we agree or not."

      Johnson asked members during a closed-door caucus meeting to "maintain a high standard of decorum," but some GOP lawmakers doubt their Republican colleagues can behave.

      "Will they do it? Does the Baptist Church have a bus? Of course they do," said Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN). "They did it to Trump and nobody said 'boo,' but when we do it, we're going to get made an example of."

      Greene, in particular, will likely be unable to refrain from "spontaneous" outbursts during the speech, her colleagues say."

      Delete
    21. 5:36 - So, now Somerby believes he's an ubermensch and is comparable to the Nazis. You have completely lost your senses.

      Delete
    22. I'm beginning to believe you're pulling our legs, trying to see how far we'll go in believing that you believe this bizarre shit you spout.

      Delete
    23. That isn’t what 5:36 said, PP.

      Delete
    24. That’s what Bronze Age Pervert believes.

      Delete
    25. I’m the one who thinks extremist white supremacist narcissists believe they are uber like the Nazis in their nifty uniforms. Somerby just admires their viewpoint.

      Delete
    26. I hope Cecelia and all the other kids fastened their seatbelts.

      Delete
    27. 6:17. < chef's kiss > The whole comment was great, but it was the "nifty uniforms" that put that one over the top.

      Delete
    28. The SA uniform wasn’t nifty, it was dorky.

      Delete
    29. For example:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniforms_and_insignia_of_the_Sturmabteilung#/media/File%3AViktor_Lutze_(1890-1943)_NSDAP_Stabschef_der_SA_Sturmabteilung_Uniform_kepi_dagger_etc_Nazi_Germany_1934_National_Archives_NARA_(US_seized_WW2_enemy_property)_242-HF-0218-A_001_Unrestricted_No_known_copyright.jpg

      Delete
  2. Despite inflation, real (inflation-adjusted!) incomes are up across the board throughout Biden’s tenure – with the fastest growth occurring at the bottom of the economic ladder.

    Biden’s first three years in office have seen the fastest real GDP growth since Bill Clinton’s first term.

    Joe Biden has created more jobs than any other president EVEN EXCLUDING the jobs that came back from the pandemic, and wages are way up AND the growth is heavily weighed towards lower and middle income earners.

    Now, on the flip side, Biden is old, unelectable, and feeble, Sleepy Joe, in other words. And Somerby is determined to use his tiny platform not to try to correct those misperceptions, but to further them. We all make choices.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A Houthi missile has killed two and injured six on a cargo ship.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68490695.amp

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you applauding this? Why post it here?

      Delete
    2. In a YouGov survey cited by Kevin Drum, only 24% know we’re hitting the Houthis back.

      Delete
    3. Drum thought that was a high percentage. Most people do not follow any news closely. You failed to mention that the Houthis are backed by Iran and that there is a coalition of nations trying to get them to stop attacking our shipping.

      Delete
    4. Anonymouse 4:13pm, why is it inappropriate to bring that info here?

      Delete
    5. Who said it was inappropriate? Nobody.

      Delete
    6. What do you think “Why post it here?” means?

      Delete
    7. It means what it says. It asks why the person who put up the comment did so in this group, which has not been talking about Houthis. The poster replied and the conversation continued. How is this your business?

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 5:41pm, it’s my business because it’s posted on a public blogboard.

      The anonymouse 4:13pm didn’t just suggest that it’s information that is out of context here, but also that the person posting it was celebrating the carnage.

      Delete
    9. That is one possibility for why the info was posted. The person posting it clarified things, so your hostile intervention is not necessary.

      Delete
    10. Anonymouse 6:00pm, my “hostile intervention” was necessary.

      The anonymouse who was challenged clarified his position.

      The anonymouse who insultingly did the challenging has not responded.

      Delete
    11. Don’t you have anything better to do tonight?

      Delete
    12. Cecelia is welcome to intervene with me any time she wants.

      Delete
  4. "Again, it seems to us that Stephens would be better off asking Trump voters to explain their preference."

    This has been done to death. It depends on those being asking having insight into their own motives, and that isn't possible for most of them.

    There is an article today in the NY Times in which a former Trump supporter explains that Trump's followers are looking for an authoritarian figure to follow. He is annointed and they are less than, so they do what he tells them to do. It is difficult to detach such people from their source of certainty in a world that is portrayed as chaotic. Trump says he's the only one who can fix things.

    This world view is foreign to those of us who make our own decisions and live our own lives. But there is nothing to be gained by understanding these people because it is extraordinarily difficult to detach them from Dear Leader. Nikki Haley tried, from the right, and she couldn't do it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is the link (but it is at Rawstory, not NY Times, sorry for any confusion):

      https://www.rawstory.com/trump-supporters-2667441614/

      Delete
  5. "There actually is such a thing as "woke," and our tribe has routinely advanced new values and ideas which fly in the face of traditional "common sense" understandings. There's nothing morally wrong with doing that, but it also isn't a surefire way to win national elections."

    These so-called new values and ideas are really very old ones. There have been gay people in all cultures throughout time, treated differently in different times and place. It seems odd to me that Somerby does not blame the demise of fundamentalist religion for the decline in persecution of gay people in our own culture. It isn't the Democrats but the rising sense that gay people are people and thus have human rights, that has changed our culture. The TV shows Ellen and Will & Grace did more to normalize gay people than any legislation. But once we saw gays as people, we could no longer treat them as "less than" others. The right is still enmeshed in antiquated religion, so it is dragging its feet. But how do you advance gay marriage without shouting at people? You just do it. You stop refusing to serve gay couples looking for wedding venues, clothes and food. You stop being surprised when you hear someone has a gay spouse. You stop treating people differently. That is what happened in blue areas like San Francisco and West Hollywood and Manhattan and Palm Springs. No lecturing, just treating people like people as you live side by side, instead of murdering them and hanging their bodies on barbed wire fences, or forcing them to sue for rights that should be theirs without notice.

    Right wingers think that others are preaching at them and "in their faces" because they do not want to change. That is THEIR problem, not ours. That is what elections are showing as people all over the country are rejecting the extremist views of people like DeSantis and other MAGAts.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Biden is “flooding” weapons into Israel despite his ostensible concerns over the way Bibi and the IDF are conducting the war.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/06/us-weapons-israel-gaza/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Biden supports the right of Israel to defend itself and Hamas is still fighting, as are Palestinians all over Israel, so there is still a need for weapons. Biden also is working to pressure Netanyahu and Hamas into a cease-fire and ultimate solution to the Gaza conflict. It does not help that pro-Palestinians keep attacking his efforts in their all-or-nothing struggle, that is one of the reasons why no compromise is possible.

      Delete
  7. There is no such thing as woke. It is a catchall term appropriated by the right wing, referring to anything liberals do that they don't like. It has entirely lost its original black meaning referring to someone aware of their racial history.

    Meanwhile, liberals don't talk about woke. We talk about CRT and the need for African American studies. We talk about gay rights. We talk about feminist issues and women's rights. We talk about income inequality and helping financially struggling people catch up. We talk about unions and workplace inequities and pay gaps (racial and gender-based), we talk about persecution of trans and divergent people (LGBTQ+) and acceptance of all ways of being and forms of identity. We talk about the need for health care for all and we support people fighting against ableism, ageism, looksism, and various forms of discrimination in our culture and working toward greater kindness and tolerance in our society. We fight for gun control and an end to domestic violence and mass shootings and police violence. We want to reverse global warming and preserve our environment and prevent the death of our planet, so we support alternative energy and restrictions on waste and toxicity, especially in poor neighborhoods. And we are still against nuclear proliferation and war, everywhere. We do not refer to any of that as "woke." Woke is a dirty name that we are called by the right wing.

    That Somerby insists there is wokeness on the left is some of the strongest evidence that he is not anything near being liberal. He doesn't understand what it means to be liberal and he is willing to apply the mistaken, warped, name-calling of the right to his supposed peers.

    And that makes Somerby a huge liar.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why are liberals doing those things? Are those things really important? Why do them now?

      Delete
    2. 5:37: are you seriously asking if health care is important? Global warning?

      Delete
    3. Why are CRT, African American studies, persecution of trans and divergent people (LGBTQ+) and acceptance of all ways of being and forms of identity, fighting against ableism, ageism, looksism, and various forms of discrimination in our culture important? Why address those things? Why teach children about trans issues? Why do black lives matter? Liberals didn't use those terms before or have any kind of movement regarding them, even 15 years ago. Why now?

      Delete
    4. Why do Black Lives Matter? Excuse me, 6:35?

      Delete
    5. Yes, why is that important? Liberals weren't saying anything about that 20 years ago. Why now?

      Delete
    6. Why are trans issues important? What do they matter? Why is there a movement to push issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on?

      Delete
    7. If the right would stop interfering with trans people there would be no issue. Live and let live. It matters that they are being targeted and singled out for mistreatment by the right.

      Delete
    8. The right is reacting to a movement to accept new values re. trans issues. You imply that movement doesn't exist.

      Delete
    9. 6:46: what do you think the civil rights movement was?

      Delete
    10. 6:46 because there isn't a movement now among liberals now to promote Black Lives Matter, CRT, African American studies, persecution of trans and divergent people, acceptance of all forms of identity, fighting against ableism, ageism, looksism, and various forms of discrimination.

      Is there?

      Delete
    11. I don’t know a single liberal who doesn’t donate to the ACLU.

      Delete
  8. Being in Argentina gives one a different view of what is important. Hyperinflation has been something people had to live with. Mortgage loans do not exist. Life savings have been wiped out overnight.

    The deficit and the debt should be the biggest issue for US voters. We shouldn’t take stable currency for granted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We can take stable currency for granted because we do not have the same economic problems, nor the same economy, as Argentina, which has always been in trouble. Deficit and debt should only be issues when they deserve the attention, not when they are working fine and we can turn our attention to more urgent problems.

      As for debt, I fully support a large tax increase aimed at the wealthiest slice of our population. There is no reason why individuals and corporations with the most money should escape paying taxes via loopholes that can and should be closed.

      Delete
    2. Hyperinflation is a problem for creditors, not debtors. If we get hyperinflation, we'll be able to pay down the debt with no problem at all.

      Delete
  9. I think this should be illegal:

    "Trump’s RNC Allies Want to Pay His Legal Bills
    March 6, 2024 at 2:32 pm EST By Taegan Goddard

    “A growing number of Republican National Committee members believe its campaign arm should help pay mounting legal bills for former President Donald Trump, a move that could strain the party’s ability to financially support other candidates in the 2024 election,” CNBC reports.

    Meanwhile, the RNC’s Henry Barbour told Reuters that his resolution to block Trump from tapping RNC to pay legal bills “is dead.”

    The DNC did not pay any of the Clintons' legal bills. They set up a Legal Defense Fund but that didn't pay all of them either. According to CBS News:

    "More than four years after leaving office, former President Bill Clinton has finally paid off his legal bills, reports CBS News Correspondent Bob Fuss.

    He and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., owed millions to lawyers who defended them during the years-long investigation of Whitewater and other business dealings and helped in the Monica Lewinsky impeachment mess.

    The news was revealed in financial disclosure forms filed by Sen. Clinton that show she and her husband no longer have any legal debts and are now more than comfortable financially, with millions of dollars in income, mostly from a pair of best-selling memoirs."

    ReplyDelete
  10. “Progressives tried to push Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on. That isn’t working, either.”

    Here’s a straw man. That progressives are all strident, condescending assholes.

    Here’s a factoid: there is always resistance to progress, but it usually wins out.

    Here’s another factoid: if you try to deny me my personhood, I’m not going to be inclined to slink away and lock myself in the closet and say “ok, sir, let me know what I can do for you, sir.” I will fight you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m not progressive, but I’m a strident, condescending arsehole.

      Delete
    2. “ Here’s a straw man. That progressives are all strident, condescending assholes.”

      Start at the top and read down.

      Delete
    3. Does the word “all” mean anything to you, Cecelia?

      Delete
    4. And gee, if I start at the top, I am reading Somerby’s post.

      Delete
    5. The right worries about condescension because they see interactions with others in terms of hierarchy, who is one up and who is one down. They scramble to push others down so they can be seen as on top. So when liberals urge reform they see them as asserting dominance by being condescending. Liberals meanwhile just want to work together as equals including diverse others. Right wingers cannot work with liberals because they think that would make liberals winners (on top) and themselves losers (one down) and that threatens their view of themselves as superior beings.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. 6:34: He is actually a strident condescending asshole, so you got that part right.

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 6:33 pm, oh, no. You aren’t in the same hemisphere with condescending, strident, and superior.

      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 6:38pm, he’s got the gravitas. On him it looks good.

      Delete
    10. Anonymouse 6:41pm, you do lack self awareness.

      Delete
    11. “Progressives tried to push Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on. That isn’t working, either"

      This isn't true is it?

      Did Progressives really try to push Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on?

      Delete
    12. 6:45: You can call it “pushing” or you can call it “trying to persuade.” The verbiage you choose affects the argument you are making. What is wrong with trying to persuade people of that, 6:45?

      Delete
    13. @6:06 There is resistance to change, whether it’s progress or regress.

      Delete
    14. You are saying liberals tried to persuade Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on?

      Delete
    15. 6:53 - Did liberals try to persuade Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns etc.? That is a lie, isn't it?

      Delete
    16. What is wrong with trying to persuade people to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns and so on? Are you really asking that?

      Delete
    17. I think liberals have objected to right wing persecution and intolerance on the right over issues of identity, equity, pronouns. Why would anyone interfere with story hours, for example. Asking to be let alone isn’t pushing values on others. No one asked DeSantis to become a drag queen.

      Delete
    18. That's fair. Some commenter above was trying to say liberals tried to persuade Americans to accept new values on issues like identity, equity, pronouns etc.

      Delete
    19. Anonymouse 7:1)pm, if things had been left alone, drag queens would be an adult proclivity rather than the entertainment in elementary schools and in children’s story hour. .

      Delete
    20. There is no harm in drag queen story hours. None.

      Delete
    21. Men wearing makeup. The horror. Shakespeare would like a word…JFC

      Delete
    22. Anonymouse 7:51pm, it’s not exactly “asking to be left alone” now is it?

      Instead it’s a rigorous campaign to normalize your druthers in a way that would very likely put you under investigation if you hosted drag queen story hour in your own home with your own children and the neighbors’ kids.

      Delete
    23. Oh, Cecelia, can it. Are you aware that in Shakespeare’s day the women’s parts were played by men in drag? No youth is corrupted by seeing a man in makeup and women’s clothes for God’s sake.

      Delete
    24. Anonymouse 8:03pm, that’s not exactly the same thing is it? That men were the primary public functionaries during that age makes it somewhat different from what you’re trying to accomplish now.

      Delete
    25. Oh, you mean way back then when the supreme monarch was …wait for it…QUEEN Elizabeth I, considered to have ushered in a golden age in England. Besides, your ugly claim that “we” are trying to usher in something sinister, ugly, and perverted is just inane bullshit.

      Delete
    26. Anonymouse 8:13pm, on second thought, men as primary functionaries is what you’re all about.

      After all, it’s not people with vaginas in male attire who are doing story hours with children.

      Delete
    27. Anonymouse 8:16pm, did Queen Elizabeth I have an older brother?

      Delete
    28. She had a younger half-brother, Edward VI.

      Delete
    29. Anonymouse 8:25pm, did he rule?

      Delete
    30. He was a kid, so a regency council ruled.

      Delete
  11. Hey, pied piper. Now is your chance. Show us how you respectfully but persuasively convince Cecelia the right winger why there is nothing wrong with drag queens or gay folks. Do it!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymouse 8:18pm, there is nothing wrong with drag queens in an adult venue. Are you suggesting that drag queens and transwomen are synonymous terms?

      Delete
    2. Here’s a new kind of drag queen:

      https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/minnesota/news/caley-graber-northfield-minnesota-boys-state-wrestling-tournament/

      Delete
    3. She’s not a drag queen, she’s a queen.

      Delete
    4. Anonymouse 8:18pm, Pied Piper merely defends Bob against your coven.

      Why would you invoke PP as being accountable to anything I say?

      Delete
    5. Because you are a perfect example of a right winger who is incapable of changing his mind. Somerby and pied piper think there ought to be some way to reach people like you. I am merely inviting him to try. Now’s his chance. (Crickets) you do like willfully misinterpreting things.

      Delete
    6. What is “adult” about a man wearing makeup and women’s clothes? Drag queens don’t do “blue” story hours for kids.

      Delete
    7. And no, drag queens aren’t the same as transgender. Why would you ask such a stupid question?

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 9:18pm, oh, how could anyone draw that conclusion?

      Read anonymouse/mices at 8:18pm and 8: 42pm.

      Read where you don’t merely confuse transwomen with drag queens, you equate them with male actors during the time of Shakespeare.


      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 9:15pm, neither Somerby or PP do that.

      Neither of them believe for one minute that I am representative of someone who isn’t a staunch conservative.

      That you can’t tell the difference between me and people on the margin is indicative of your tone deafness.



      Delete
    10. How does Cecelia know whether actors in Shakespeare’s time were or weren’t gay or trans. She has no idea.Somerby doesn’t think anything about Cecelia because he doesn’t read his comments. She doesn’t exist to him.

      Delete
    11. Anonymouse 10:08pm, saying that I don’t know if all actors in Shakespeare’s time were gay or straight is utterly specious. I’d wager that some were “gay or trans” because some people are gay or trans. That’s different from equating “drag queens” in Drag Queen Story Hour with Midevial men playing female roles because men were the people who had the freedom and physical security to join acting troops.

      Delete
    12. Anonymouse 10:08pm, I have been deleted, therefore I exist.

      Delete
    13. That isn’t why men played all the roles.

      Drag queen story hour is just for fun, like drag shows, which have been a staple in Vegas for over 50 years. It isn’t grooming children any more than Buffalo Bob was grooming kids to become Buffaloes (or puppets). Look at the tradition in Japan for men to play geishas on stage. Look at Mary Martin playing Peter Pan, which became a traditional women’s role thereafter.

      In America, it has always been true that women can and do wear men’s clothing. But men cannot wear women’s clothes without being stigmatized. That has changed. No one thinks that what you wear makes you biologically any different than when you are naked. The conservative freak out represents a serious misunderstanding of science and social science. I suspect similat ignorance is at the heart of much left/right disagreement.

      Delete
    14. Anonymouse 10:52pm, Klinger on Mash was not a.drag queen. Tony Curtis and Jack Lemon were not drag queens.

      It is grooming of all society to take drag queens out of a very adult niche audience down to the level of elementary school kids.

      It’s grooming and that’s part of your political druthers to hit the kids early with it. That is the entire impetus behind Drag Queen Story Hour in libraries and in public schools.





      Delete
    15. Cecelia, I’m grooming you to vote for Biden.

      Delete
    16. Anonymouse 11:29pm, like you haven’t got a hard enough road in selling Biden already?

      Delete
    17. 8:18
      1. CC and I are polar opposites politically.
      2. She makes me think and she makes me laugh.
      3. She can defend herself against the likes of you.

      Delete
    18. PP, you were asked to use your respectful liberal approach to change Cecilia’s mind. No one asked you to defend her. I was suggesting that there are many conservatives like Cecelia who refuse to entertain ideas contrary to their own, and thus no persuasion is possible.

      Delete
    19. I mean, PP, you were the first commenter here, saying this:
      ‘How do you "stand up for critical principles like gay rights" without "making people feel like they’re being lectured to?"

      I think this is the central question Somerby poses. It might be nice to discuss this question, rather than ridiculous conspiracy theories.’

      I challenged you to try, and you didn’t.

      Delete
    20. There is something wrong with selecting a story teller because she he it is a drag queen. That’s a way of praising drag queens.

      Delete
    21. Above comment from David in Cal

      Delete
    22. There is something wrong with (s)electing a politician who believes women are second-class citizens. That's a way of praising misogyny.

      Delete
    23. Klinger stopped wearing dresses so Jamie Farr’s kids wouldn’t be teased.

      Delete
    24. 4:13 - You're not my assignment editor, and as CC explained, she's not a persuadable Other.

      Delete
    25. PP, I am persuadable via sound arguments. I may not do a 180, but I can move closer to a position and I generally think people hold political POV because they believe them to be moral and wise, though I may not agree.

      I certainly can’t boast over never voting for someone outside my party. I’ve done it many times. Mostly on a local level.

      Delete
  12. A news item from Kevin:

    https://jabberwocking.com/the-filibuster-no-longer-exists/

    ReplyDelete
  13. The Right has a 3-step solution to dealing with our illegal immigrant "problem".
    1. Deport the illegals.
    2. Build a wall.
    3. Whine about the cost of groceries after they remove a huge chunk of agricultural labor from the industry.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Civil rights is still a thing on the left. From today's essay by Heather Cox Richardson, which describes the struggle for voting rights in 1965 in Selma AL, then says:

    "As recently as 2006, Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act by a bipartisan vote. By 2008 there was very little difference in voter participation between white Americans and Americans of color. But then, in 2013, the Supreme Court’s Shelby County v. Holder decision got rid of the part of the Voting Rights Act that required jurisdictions with a history of racial discrimination in voting to get approval from the federal government before changing their voting rules. This requirement was known as “preclearance.”

    The Shelby County v. Holder decision opened the door, once again, for voter suppression. Since then, states have made it harder to vote; in 2023, at least 14 states enacted 17 restrictive voting laws. A recent study by the Brennan Center of nearly a billion vote records over 14 years shows that the racial voting gap is growing almost twice as fast in places that used to be covered by the preclearance requirement.

    Democrats have tried since 2021 to pass a voting rights act but have been stymied by Republicans, who oppose such protections. Last September, on National Voter Registration Day, House Democrats reintroduced a voting rights act, now named the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act after the man who went on from his days in the Civil Rights Movement to serve 17 terms as a representative from Georgia, bearing the scars of March 7, 1965, until he died on July 17, 2020.

    On March 1, 2024, 51 Democratic senators introduced the measure in the Senate.

    Speaking in Selma last Sunday at the commemoration of the 59th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, Vice President Kamala Harris shared that the first thing she sees on walking into her office is a “large framed photograph taken on Bloody Sunday depicting an injured Amelia Boynton receiving care at the foot of [the Edmund Pettus] bridge.”

    “[F]or me,” she said, “it is a daily reminder of the struggle, of the sacrifice, and of how much we owe to those who gave so much before us.”

    “History is a relay race,” she said. “Generations before us carried the baton. And now, they have passed it to us.”

    This is why I support Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

    ReplyDelete