No comments yet, but plenty of downvotes. I wonder if anyone here actually read the article past the headline.
I guarantee pretty much no one that downvoted it did read it. It's not the type of analysis I'd agree with as it seems to suggest dems ever wanted to win; but it's very well written, it correctly identifies behaviors that should be concerning to any voter, it doesn't really offend liberal sensibilities, and really only lacks a more in depth analysis of how voters picked up on this without apparently realizing it.
Interesting article.
Nice article. I recommend putting a small part of it in posts for people to read at the landing page.
I would do that if I thought people would actually read it, not sure if people would
Marvelous! This article is one of the rare ones. It doesn't tell me anything I did l didn't already know, but explains it in a way that makes the pieces fit together with a satisfying snap.
Like, trans rights. If the moral legitimacy of the trans cause comes from their status as an oppressed group, then advocating for them necessarily means criticizing the American system, which I think is what a lot of people react negatively to. (Think about the appeal of the other guy's slogan.) As another commentator I read said years ago, we should appeal to traditional leave-us-alone conservatism, and cast it as the American ideal that we protect them because they are citizens deserving freedom like anybody else, and doing so is what makes our country great.
But, bigger picture, the idea of learned helplessness really resonates.
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.