WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2024
Could they perhaps include Us? Just how badly was she defeated in this year's presidential election?
It all depends on what the meaning of "how badly was she defeated" is! Also, it all depends on the origin of the tribal messaging.
If you're watching the Fox News Channel, the messaging continues unabated. It's delivered by the ever-changing assortment of Stepfords placed on the air every night.
How badly was Candidate Harris defeated? Here are snatches of that messaging, as delivered on a pair of yesterday's primetime shows:
How badly was Candidate Harris defeated?
Harold Ford, The Five, 11/26/24: Let me be clear. I said this yesterday. The Democrats need to step back and understand, we just lost. We got thrashed at the polls. I agree with you, Dana. One interview is not going to change that.
Jim Norton, Gutfeld!, 11/26/24: She reminds me of an incel at a sorority party. She just won't leave. Like she's just lurking from person to person, going, "Hey's what's going on?" and they're like, "Nobody likes you. We don't want to talk to you. We're not interested in you, somebody else invited you," and she just won't take the hint.
It's gotta be hard when you're that close, when everybody's telling you that, "Oh, Trump sucks, he's not going to win," and then all of a sudden you get creamed. You gotta think, like something went wrong.
To watch Ford's statement, just click here. To see Norton offer his thoughtful remarks, click this.
On Fox News Channel programs, the insults continue apace. They accompany the messaging in which Candidate Harris got "creamed" on November 5, or perhaps got "thrashed at the polls." Very few numbers will ever be offered—numbers which now look like this:
Nationwide popular vote (to date), 2024
Candidate Trump: 77,108,788 (49.83%)
Candidate Harris: 74,709,131 (48.28%)
As votes continue to trickle in, the victory margin is nearing 1.5 points. In the three Blue Wall states, the overall margin is closer to one percent.
By normal standards, that would be scored as a close election. Then again, until quite recently, insults of the type Norton delivered would never have been permitted within major news orgs, with major orgs in Blue America agreeing that they mustn't notice or report such departures from long-standing norms.
Yesterday, the insults were general on Fox News Channel programs. These insults are delivered each night from deep within a revolt of the masses. Over here, in Blue America, our own tribunes can often be numbered among the ranks of "they who choose not to see."
When an election is fairly close, its outcome can be "explained" a hundred different ways. In a close election, many such "explanations" are plausible to some degree or another.
In the current case, 77 million different people decided to vote for Candidate Trump. Within the ranks of Blue America, millions of people who lean Blue decided not to vote.
Presumably, many reasons lie behind the tens of millions of decisions which produced those numbers. That said, we who frequently choose not to see prefer to offer simple solutions to the puzzle of Why Our Blue Candidate Lost:
Blue American explanations:
Thom Hartmann: More than half of American voters are just "deeply racist."
Speaker McClinton: "This nation does not want a woman president."
Roxanne Gay: People who voted for Trump don't share the same reality We do.
Michael Moore: "We [Americans] are not a good people."
The Stepfords are crawling all over Fox. But the Stepfords often seem to be general in our own Blue America too.
Long ago and far away, all the way back on November 8, a person who was perhaps a bit less verklempt offered a starter list of possible reasons for Candidate Harris's defeat.
We refer to Tim Alberta, speaking on the PBS program Washington Week. As a cultural matter, Alberta doesn't hail from Blue America, but he's strongly anti-Trump. Simplifying matters a bit, he offered this starter list of possible explanations:
Tim Alberta's possible reasons:
1) The Biden administration's handling of the southern border
2) The cost of living in the past four years
3) The apparent dissembling about President Biden's apparent mental decline
We'd be inclined to agree! Almost surely, all those topics helped move the electorate over towards Candidate Trump.
Before we're done, we'll add at least four more possible reasons for Harris's (rather narrow) defeat. But for today, let's look at one more (self-defeating) explanation—an explanation which comes with great regularity from our own Blue American camp:
Additional Blue American explanation:
BLUE AMERICAN OBSERVER (11/16/24): That Harris was swept in all of the battleground states suggests that 3-4% of Americans—the folks we call low-propensity/low-information voters—had bought what Trump was selling.
Why would they buy his lies? Because they're low-propensity/low-information Americans...
Lots of groups and people are responsible. The only solution is to let these folks see the consequences of their choices so that it won't be repeated in the midterms. Beyond that, well, Americans have short memories.
Why did Candidate Harris lose? According to this familiar explanation, "the folks we call low-information voters" bought what Candidate Trump was selling, all of which is represented here as a passel of lies.
(Is it possible that Candidate Trump, however disordered, ever made any valid points? Not in this presentation, no!)
Without any question, certain parts of that observer's full presentation are accurate. Sadly, one such accurate element is this:
Over here in Blue America, we do refer to people as "low-information voters." In fact, we do so with great regularity. When we discuss the Others, we do that all the time!
We also have a strong inclination to refer to "Americans" as if the term doesn't include Us. In this presentation, "Americans" are said to have short memories. We'll only suggest that this sneering denigration doesn't seem to be directed at any of Us.
The passage we've posted is drawn from a comment to this post by Kevin Drum. This comment seems to come from a regular person. As far as we know, it doesn't come from a Democratic Party official or from a media figure..
That said, this kind of comment is quite common in Blue America. In the past two days, two major movie stars have given voice to their versions of this familiar denigration. In our view, it's the kind of reflexive denigration which helps explain why the candidate of our Blue America could possibly have lost an election to a widely disliked and disordered candidate like Candidate Donald J. Trump.
We Blues! We love to refer to "low-information voters" (transformed in that presentation into "low-information Americans"). It never seems to occur to us that the ranks of "low-information Americans" could also perhaps include Us!
Indeed, Pogo may have said it best. We'll adjust his statement a bit:
We've met the low-information voters and the low-information voters are Us!
Why dd Candidate Harris (narrowly) lose to a guy like Trump? We'll be expanding on Tim Alberta's list of possible reasons on the days ahead.
We expect to end up with a list of (at least) seven possible reasons. In those ways, we Blues could be said to have earned our way out. Tribal denial, a powerful force, tends to blind us to this fairly obvious state of affairs.
It may be too late for a gain in tribal self-awareness to mitigate the damage which has already been done. Sacred Troy must die, Hector said. The same may be true around here!
Having said that, we'll also say this:
We Blues! Our role in this mess dates back many years. We ourselves were there at the start!
Next: An additional, angrier list
Blue America should consider their own role in the election outcome.
ReplyDeleteYes, more of us should have voted for Harris, including Somerby and assholes like Bill Maher and Jon Steward, who think being "unbiased" means being anti-Harris (to keep red viewers happy). There was nothing wonderful about helping Trump regain office, the way Somerby did. And now he wants to blame the left for all those right wing votes for a conviced felon, rapist, criminal who stole and passed along classified documents about national secrets. But Blue America is to blame, sez Somerby. If Pogo met Somerby, he would know the enemy isn't "us" [sic] (that word we are required to use in place of them, to describe the miscreants who put Trump into the presidency again, learning nothing the last time around).
DeleteAnd I am the bestest bridge player.
DeleteTrump can't even follow suit and he definitely can't count to 13.
Delete@11:33 thinks that calling someone a good bridge player is an insult! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
DeleteDid they get tired of calling everyone Corby?
Here is a list of the points of disinformation believed by Trump supporters. This too explains why Harris lost.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/11/26/2288359/-Gaslighting-and-Lies-that-Trumpers-fervently-believe?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web
Somerby's obsession with the size of the Harris loss is bizarre. Trump won, and that is all that is of consequence right now, since we must look to the future in order to survive the next four years. Somerby again wastes space presenting irrelevant numbers, as if they mean something (they don't).
We are all low information voters. Even I, an obsessive political junky, know almost nothing about the world outside the sphere in which I move. And some of what I think I know is probably wrong.
ReplyDeleteSpeak for yourself, David. I am a high information voter and I know quite a bit about the world and the sphere beyond my own. I hang out with quite a few similarly high information voters and we discuss politics a lot. Somerby's idea that everyone is stupid and no one knows anything (anything is possible, after all) is called nihilism and it is objectively wrong. Don't buy it unless you really don't know anything, in which case you should start reading more. Ignorance is curable.
Delete“Somerby’s idea that everyone is stupid and no one knows anything”
DeleteThat’s not what Somerby is saying, at all.
In your opinion...
Delete12:08 - Somerby’s post today is here for all to read. We can all see that there is no passage which can be fairly summarized as saying everyone is stupid and knows nothing.
DeleteHave you never heard Somerby say that humanity is incapable of reasoning very well? He does that nearly every day, if not today.
DeleteYou’re proving his point.
Delete10:54 You speak well for yourself, not others.
DeleteSomerby is proposing Blue America consider their own role in the election outcome. Which calls for self-reflection and humility, encouraging people to examine their own role rather than assuming they have all the answers or blaming others entirely.
Delete11:01 carries a tone of superiority and defensiveness. They assert a high level of knowledge and dismiss alternative perspectives as "nihilism," suggesting that those who disagree are ignorant and need to "read more."
This attitude inhibits the self-reflection and openness advocated by Somerby, as it implies a belief that one's own knowledge is beyond reproach. It may be precisely this lack of humility that prevents the introspection encouraged by Somerby.
What is Somerby's evidence that the left is not considering their role? I hear nothing but that kind of analysis on the lefty news stations and podcasts.
DeleteWhy wouldn't someone be defensive when attacked? I think it is someone's right to defend themselves.
Somerby's stance is nihilistic. That has been argued here several times before, with evidence from Somerby's own writing.
It strikes me as ridiculous that anyone would think that self-reflection and openness require anyone to sit still and be called names by assholes. When a statement is contradicted by facts, evidence, with cites, then they are ignorant and demonstrably did need to read more. That this is true, is what is being said by the Pew research, not by assertion but with facts. Accepting the denigration offered by Somerby and the right is not a lack of humility but a lack of self respect.
Note that Somerby and the various fan boys here never, not ever, accept correction with any humility, openness or self-reflection. David feigns it occasionally but then comes back with the same incorrect garbage. PP doesn't read and Cecelia doubles down on her name-calling. Where is all that famous humility on the right?
It may be possible that dismissing Somerby’s argument outright is an example of the lack of self-reflection he critiques. Make sure you apply the same standard of scrutiny to the left that you demand of the right.
DeleteNihilism definition:
Delete"In philosophy, nihilism (/ˈnaɪ(h)ɪlɪzəm, ˈniː-/; from Latin nihil 'nothing') is any viewpoint, or a family of views, that rejects generally accepted or fundamental aspects of human existence,[1][2] namely knowledge, morality, or meaning.[3][4] There have been different nihilist positions, including that human values are baseless, that life is meaningless, that knowledge is impossible, or that some other highly regarded concepts are in fact meaningless or pointless." Wikipedia
I went to lengths to connect this description with Somerby's own attitude toward knowledge, expertise, the knowability of reality, and values. He insists that "anything is possible" and will not acknowledge obvious facts, saying "who knows". He states he is not religious but he also has no other values, especially when it comes to Trump's criminality and people like Roy Moore. He falls well within the nihilist philosophical camp with his denigration of expertise, professors, knowledge, experience and qualifications, and acceptance of untenable positions as unknowable or unprovable. Look at his attitude toward Einstein and Godel (among others). And then look at what he says about humanity, that we cannot think well, that violence and conflict is bred in the bone, that women are made to be subservient (also bred in the bone) and so on. It is fair to call him nihilist based on his own behavior at this blog. It is the best description of his nonsense.
I’ve heard Democrats agonize over every loss. There is no dearth of people on the left publicly criticizing others on the left. It’s chronic. The idea that no one on the left is doing this is ridiculous, disproven by Somerby’s own blog and his quoting of others doing just that. It’s a false argument.
DeleteWhat would count as sufficient evidence to prove or disprove the claim of self-reflection on the left?
DeleteAll the hair-tearing and breast-beating in lefty op-eds, on cable and in statements by pundits. Harris got more advice than any candidate in history.
DeleteThat proves it, a lack would disprove it.
Delete“The American people are pretty sharp? Actually no, we aren't!”
ReplyDelete(http://dailyhowler.blogspot.com/2024/11/new-normals-american-humans-are-pretty.html?m=0)
This is Somerby’s own assessment of the American people.
But heaven forbid someone else voices this opinion.
“low-information Americans...”
ReplyDeleteThe idea here, which is correct to a large extent, is that there are people who are in a bubble, a” silo”, to use a Somerby term, which prevents them from evaluating Trump’s promises and lies in the light of reality. The media they listen to is particularly prone to propaganda.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2023/07/12/demographic-profiles-of-republican-and-democratic-voters/
DeleteThis one shows that Democrats have more education than Republicans.
Pew also says:
"The Republican Party now holds a 6 percentage point advantage over the Democratic Party (51% to 45%) among voters who do not have a bachelor’s degree. Voters who do not have a four-year degree make up a 60% majority of all registered voters.
By comparison, the Democratic Party has a 13-point advantage (55% vs. 42%) among those with a bachelor’s degree or more formal education."
Somerby claims that we blue voters are to blame for having too much college education, as if that were a bad thing.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/government/politics-elections/2024/11/08/men-and-white-people-vote-differently-based-education
And they also say this:
"4. Americans who mainly got news via social media knew less about politics and current events, heard more about some unproven stories"
https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2021/02/22/americans-who-mainly-got-news-via-social-media-knew-less-about-politics-and-current-events-heard-more-about-some-unproven-stories/
Here is a source that identifies the partisanship of various news media and shows which stories are being heard mainly on the right, compared to those heard mainly on the left:
Deletehttps://ground.news/
If you spend some time at ground.news, you find that Somerby's belief that there are silos is not as true as he claims. There are still centrist news sources and only a few stories that are segregated by partisanship, far fewer than Somerby pretends. It may be that Somerby is confusing social media and news media, or he has decided that there is no center and everything that is not far right is "Blue America."
DeletePogo did not say anything about Americans being low information voters. He was complaining about littering in that famous cartoon.
ReplyDeleteThere are statistics showing that red voters and not only less educated generally than blue voters, but also less well informed about current events and election issues. This is not the blue voter position, but the objective research finding. It may not be polite to point that out, but it is true and it does underlie why Trump voters are so easily fooled by his lies.
Defending truth is part of defending our democratic system. If our education system has fallen down on the job, we can still try to improve our understanding of politics and government by talking about it with our children, friends and neighbors, coworkers and on the internet. Somerby could have been doing this, but he chose a different path.
Somerby’s frequently stated view is that Trump is deranged. Why didn’t his voters see that? I guess it was all the valid points he made, like “ they’re eating the pets.“
ReplyDeleteOnce again, Somerby promises a list of reasons but pushes that forward in time. He does not have a list, but he wants to repeat the same propaganda every day while making empty promises.
ReplyDeleteHonest to God, can you read?
Delete1. Immigration
2. Inflation
3. Hiding Biden’s senility
4. More to come
Biden isn’t senile.
DeleteMore to come is not a reason.
DeleteImmigration and inflation can be combined in one category called “Trump lies”
DeleteBiden is now doing better than Trump precovid on immigration.
Delete"Sacred Troy must die, Hector said. The same may be true around here!"
ReplyDeleteFirst, of course, the Iliad is a work of fiction, not history. Second, Somerby arbitrarily assigned the Democrats to be Troy and the Republicans to be the Achaens. It could easily be the reverse, in which case it would be the Republicans dying in Troy and the metaphor wouldn't work well. Third, there is a faction on the far right that is obsessed with ancient civilizations like Rome and Troy, nearly as much as Somerby is. They like the warrior ethic in the Iliad and they like the subjugation of women, also depicted, which Somerby wrong calls "sexual politics." Somerby may or may not be one of those guys, which would make him a not very nice person in my opinion, and a massively under-informed asshole (if the other points don't already do that). Trump couldn't point out the location of Troy on a modern map.
You only have to be high information enough to know that Democrats are drugging and mutilating children and promoting and spreading mental illness, abusing children by indoctrinating them to hate themselves and pushing porn in schools, invested in protecting and funding illegals including criminals, abusing power by persecuting their political opponents, conspiring with media to lie to the voting public (Steele dossier, Hunter's laptop), hating whites and men and awarding jobs to less qualified members of other groups.
ReplyDeleteOnce these things are noticed, a voter decides nothing that might recommend the opposing party is going to be enough. We told you to stop being weird.
Democrats are not doing any of that, which makes you very low-information on the topic of Democrats. If you are suggesting that the problem is that the right (Trump supporters) believe lies, you may be correct, but you aren't very self-aware (in Somerby's terms).
Delete11:14,
DeleteBe honest. Do you ever see yourself forgiving Joe Biden and the Democrats for the lowest Unemployment Rate in over half a century?
Idiots-Democrats think that hiring more soros-bots will save them.
DeleteHow many Musk-bots are shilling for Trump? And musk was actually paying people…
DeleteThat Putin's bitch won the United States Presidential Election is a reflection of where we are as a nation.
DeleteNo, it is not a reflection of where "we" are but of where "they" are, which is why Somerby has forbidden the use of the pronouns they/them. We/us didn't vote for Trump, no matter how hard Somerby tries to convince us this was all our fault.
DeleteIronic that the right has stopped talking about civil war while the left has increased our talk about resistance. An exception is MTG who is still proposing national divorce (out of retribution I suppose).
DeleteThose on the left who cannot afford to move to another country may plan a move to CA, NY, CO,
MA instead.
1.6 million American expats live in Mexico -- it is the top destination for those leaving the US. It might not be a bad thing if Trump deports those of us who cannot afford to move their on our own $.
their=there
DeleteSomerby refers to "tribal self-awareness." By this he means that we should develop a tribal inferiority complex and believe that all of the values we hold strongly are crap and must be abandoned. What supposedly blue voter would agree to that agenda? Not me, but Somerby seems to think we would have won the election if we had been harder on ourselves and abandoned all of the things we think our leaders should do.
ReplyDeleteExperts on authoritarian regimes (Masha Gessen, Timothy Snyder) are adovcating that we not surrender in advance to the dictates of authoritarian Trump appointees, but "wait for the memo" before going along to get along. Somerby tells us yet again today that we needed to become more Republican-ish before the election and if we had, Trump might not have won. That is nonsense, but it gives Somerby yet another way to chide blue America.
Meanwhile, the rest of the internet believes that it is the lack of a dedicated blue media (beyond the legacy news) that handicapped Blue America in the last election. I agree with that, since now that they are enumerating the alternative, independent blue media sources, I see that I was only aware of a few of them. Harris used alternative media more than Trump (until the final week or so of the campaign). But it appears that the talking heads are now saying Harris didn't use social media enough. It isn't as though Trump did better, but there does exist a network of right wing Trump enthusiasts who are all over social media (aided by Russia) and if that was the more effective way to campaign, they are the ones who did it, not Trump specifically.
I doubt Somerby will say a single word about that. His screed will be all about wokeness, how old Biden is, and Harris's inability to interview well (a right wing lie). I predict his list, when finally divulged after this long build-up, will be a nothing-burger. Just like his daily essays are.
Before PP comes along and asks why we read someone like Somerby, remember that Somerby today is telling us that we don't know enough about our enemies, and he is exhorting us to study-up on the right wing, so we can be less under-informed on the left. They have nothing to teach us, but we are supposed to follow them anyway -- Somerby said so.
Democrats lost big in the house and senate under both Clinton and Obama, then went on to win back the presidency, the senate, and the house in subsequent years. The Republicans lost their house majority in 2018 under Trump, in a fairly substantial win for Democrats. You can and should always examine why a particular loss occurs, but every new election brings a new set of outcomes and every so called “mandate” can turn out to be ephemeral.
ReplyDeleteIf you are a principled person, you cast your vote based on your values applied to the issues, but also considering the character and past experience of the nominees. I cannot see how voting (or running) the way Somerby suggests will achieve that choice. He praised only Harris's smile and nit-picked her interview skills, but where did he consider anything beyond that? And he didn't support her to others here in his blog (and presumably in real life), as someone does when they think one candidate is better than the other for our nation. He did damage to our party by claiming to be a Democrat while failing to support the party's nominee, after first echoing the right wing propaganda campaign about Biden being "confused" while he was actually dealing with major national issues in a highly competent way.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't vote for Somerby for any office. He is hard to pin down in his opinions, contradicts himself and lies about issues and candidates, demonstrates bad values by excusing the character flaws of rapists and child molestors (Roy Moore, Brock Turner, Trump) and attacking the #MeToo movement and feminists. And Somerby never talks about the criminal grifting and corruption among Trump and his family and cronies, but only complains when a female journalist makes what he thinks is too much money (even when it is less than comparable male journalists). Somerby has nothing to say to thinking and informed people, only to those who are too lazy to inform themselves and do the work of choosing the better leadership for America.
So: We are the “thinking and informed people, and They are the people “who are too lazy to inform themselves.”
DeleteThere are none so blind as those who will not see.
Yes, and I provided the stats to support that in an earlier comment, based on Pew research. Dems are better informed and better educated, as a group. And yes, there are many people who never read another book after they graduate from high school, who don't check out the candidates and issues when they receive their sample ballots, and who switch off the news because it is depressing and follow social media and TV more than any current events source. And that is easier and more pleasant than being an informed citizen, so they are avoiding work and seeking pleasure (ie being lazy) when they do this. It is their right and their choice to behave that way, but they don't get to be called smart or educated when they do so. That is reality.
DeleteAnd your cryptic, unexplained remark about being blind sounds like name-calling without YOU stating what you mean by it. You don't get to call the left "blind" without challenging the evidence. Otherwise it is just name-calling. Given that is what you mainly do, I don't expect to hear anything intelligent back from you.
TL;DR
Delete12:42 Thanks for responding to 12:33 with all the statistics you can muster. Nicely done.
DeleteBeing blind means being unaware. It is not the same as being aware of something but disagreeing, which I believe is the case in politics.
DeleteYour attitude of smug superiority is off-putting and, in my view, is an attitude that fosters electoral defeat. As a Democrat, it pisses me off that you’re too blind to see that.
DeletePP, anon 2:07 wasn’t running for office. No actual Democrat ever ran on a platform of smug superiority.
DeleteIncels don't tend to be female.
ReplyDeleteWhy does Somerby quote some random comment (that illustrates his own complaint) but not the actual, very short post by Kevin Drum that the comment was about?
ReplyDelete"As we continue to argue about why Kamala Harris lost, I want to remind everyone that only about 3% of the electorate switched from D to R this year—less in swing states. So regardless of whether you think the culprit was cultural issues or the economy or misogyny or Latino defections or a bad campaign—no matter which it is, it only had to influence 2-3% of the voting public. You can make a plausible argument for practically anything doing that.
UPDATE: But wait! What about lower turnout? If you account for that you get to about 4%. Still a very small number."
Drum should have also noted that any explanation does not have to explain the entire swing, but a combination of explanations could account for that small number.
Somerby has never liked it when people call anyone he identifies with some derogatory name. I remember when he used to complain about anti-South bias, long before Trump appeared to give stupidity a better embodiment. Somerby was born in MA, but he seems to have switched sides in college (rooming with Southerners) and picked up a chip on his shoulder about how the South is treated. That may have motivated his move to Baltimore, which is in a Southern state, and his assumption of attitudes traditional to red states. Converts are the most fervent believers, the saying goes.
Somerby coupled that whining about disrespect for the South with his own criticisms of elitism in Ivy League schools and among journalists from such universities. He doesn't like it that some people are smarter than others, better educated, more accomplished, more experienced, having more expertise in specialized areas. His attacks on Einstein, Godel, and professors in general have been motivated by promoting respect for the underinformed by tearing down the educated. Odd attitude for someone who was a teacher -- thank God he stopped working with children!
Today's essay is more of the same. I think people who managed to avoid voting for Trump deserve a commendation. Somerby thinks they should be excused, although he hasn't told us why yet -- that list of reasons for supporting Trump still eludes him. But you don't get to goof off in class and never do the reading and then call yourself smart or educated, as Somerby complains. If you play dumb you become dumb and then bad things happen to you because reality doesn't reward dumbness.
Fewer blue voters are dumb as rocks, and yes, we get to acknowledge that because making the effort to become educated is a good thing, for individuals and for our nation. And it would have prevented Trump's election if red voters hadn't been so fucking dumb and if more blue voters had voted for Harris, setting aside whatever kept them from doing so.
If a body builder puts a lot of work into exercising and developing his muscles, is it a tone of superiority and lack of humility if he says he is strong? Or has he earned the right to be called that?
ReplyDeleteSimply stating that someone has "earned the right" to claim intellectual superiority does not prove that they are correct or reflective.
DeleteUsually it implies both because they have acquired the knowledge to know their own limits along the way. The less educated the person, the more they overestimate their own intellect. I know you guys wish it were not so, but it is.
DeleteThis is downright depressing. I forget which founding father said it, but he stated we've created a democracy- now, "if you can keep it". Sadly, I think we're now well past that point. This election result may be in part a result of racism, but more to the point it's about pure rank stupidity. I'm not running for office so I don't need to coddle anyone's sorry week ass thus I'll tell it like it needs to be told.
ReplyDeleteRecent polling reflected a significant majority blame Joe Biden as responsible for the overturn of Roe v Wade, that that the economy is in a major recession (economic growth is currently 3.0%, the stock market is at record highs and we are experiencing the best jobs market in my lifetime), While a majority of Americans can tell you who's J-Lo's current boyfriend,, they don't know the 3 branches of government, name a single Supreme Court Justice, or know who their Congressperson is, and increasingly turn to the likes of Greg Gutfeld and Joe Rogan as primary sources of information. Let's face it folks, we're screwed as a democracy. Time to welcome the oligarchy with open arms. Trickle down and suck up fools.