Home / General / The Coming Modest Shift to the Right From the Second of America’s Two Similarly Neoliberal Parties

The Coming Modest Shift to the Right From the Second of America’s Two Similarly Neoliberal Parties

Comments
/
/
/
750 Views

butheremails
[Photoshop by  by John Flynn via Joseph Slater]

If you think the political economy of Mississippi is a international model, you’ll love Trump/Ryan/McConnell:

The desire to southernize the entire United States is not new, and in some ways it’s been happening for a while, at least where Republicans have control of government. But now that Republicans have complete control in Washington, they’re going to try to accelerate and deepen that process. Let’s look at it piece by piece:

The Southern economic model. The first and most far-reaching component of this project is to take the Southern economic model national. The foundation of that model is the elimination of collective bargaining and the destruction of the labor unions that are able to negotiate higher wages and better benefits for workers. The Southern model replaces the North’s high-wage, unionized manufacturing with a low-wage, low-benefit version that has succeeded in drawing many factories southward. Southern states have lured companies with gigantic tax breaks and the promise of a powerless and desperate workforce. The result is often more jobs in those Southern states, but worse jobs. And what those states give up in taxes means poorer schools and fewer social services.

[…]

It’s deeply ironic that Donald Trump won by promising white working class voters that he could turn back the clock to the halcyon days of American manufacturing when unionized workers had secure jobs with high wages and benefits, while his administration is going to pursue policies that will essentially initiate a race to the bottom for workers. Yesterday we learned that Trump will nominate Andrew Puzder, the CEO of the fast-food company CKE Restaurant Holdings, to be Secretary of Labor — the person in charge of looking after workers’ interests. Puzder is an ardent opponent of minimum wage increases, expanded overtime pay, paid sick leave, health coverage for workers, and collective bargaining. While he’s toiling at the Labor Department for the interests of corporations, Republicans will almost certainly try to pass a federal “right to work” law — the kind now in force in states across the South — as part of their effort to destroy labor unions once and for all.

OK, maybe Puzder is a strong opponent of labor rights, but the NEOLIBERAL Tom Perez once observed that Hillary Clinton was more popular among African-Americans than Bernie Sanders, so really Both Sides Do It but Clinton is probably worse.

The Southern health care model. The Republicans’ first legislative priority is to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and while we don’t yet know what form that repeal (or its replacement) will take, the people most vulnerable are the estimated 12 million who would lose the coverage they gained because of the law’s expansion of Medicaid. Nineteen states refused to accept that expansion, preferring to keep their poor citizens uninsured rather than allow them to get coverage paid for by the federal government. Those 19 included some conservative states in the Midwest like Kansas and Nebraska, but the largest group of states was in the South: 10 of the 11 states of the Confederacy (Louisiana being the sole exception) refused the Medicaid expansion.

Republican statehouses are just protecting their citizens from the BAILOUT of the insurance industry that happened when Obama passed the Heritage Foundation’s health care plan.

The Southern civil rights model. For his Attorney General, Trump picked Alabama’s Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, named for the president of the Confederacy and a Confederate general. Sessions was rejected by the Senate in the 1980s for a judgeship because of his history of what these days we call “racially charged” comments. His most famous case as a prosecutor involved his unsuccessful prosecution of a former aide to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., whom Sessions went after for helping elderly African-Americans to vote absentee. While we don’t know exactly what Sessions’ agenda is, it’s a fair bet that vigorous enforcement of civil rights protections will not be high on his list.

In addition, Republicans will almost certainly be taking their voter suppression crusade national, especially given how successful it has been in putting up voting barriers to African-Americans, Latinos, and other people who might cast ballots for Democrats. Look for federal versions of voter ID laws, limits on early voting, and bans on same-day registration. Trump has also appointed Ben Carson to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; Carson has compared efforts to enforce the Fair Housing Act to communism.

There Waldman goes again with his “identity politics.”

Anyway, the Slave Power may have lost the Civil War, but they’re still winning presidential elections.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • aturner339

    Political Scientists have suspected for quite some time that as we get into the home stretch of white Americans losing a more or less total monopoly on political power in the US voting patterns will begin to resemble the only region of the country to be awakened to this fact in no uncertain terms.

    I was born and raised in central Alabama and I held out hope the Pennsylvanians and Wiscons(onians?) would recoil at cutting off their noses to spite the black neighbor’s face but I was wrong about that.

    It appears to be a stable and somehow attractive political model and we should probably figure out how to counteract it.

    • Steve LaBonne

      Well, it would really help if we had a highly qualified and competent, gracious, and dignified black man in the White House for a couple of terms to show white people there’s nothing to fear. Oh, wait.

      • D.N. Nation

        He let his daughters listen to Beyonce. Also I don’t like Michelle because *reasons*.

        • Domino

          Collin Kapernick takes a knee during the national anthem, therefore BLM is like the KKK.

          Am I doing it right?

        • q-tip

          I work at a juvenile correctional facility. The other day, I overheard one guard asking another whom he’d prefer to screw: Michelle or Melania? The right answer was implied in the tone of the question.

          To my shame, I just kept walking.

          (Not that speaking up would’ve been a good idea: the probation department that oversees the institution can get teaching staff like me 86’d like that.)

          But yeah, MO is a hate-object for these people, and it’s not because she tells us that eating healthy and exercising is a good idea.

          • Derelict

            As has been gently explained to me, it’s not about race. Those pictures my conservative friends circulated of Obama wearing a grass skirt with a bone through his nose, the White House lawn with a watermelon garden, Michelle photoshopped into an ape wearing a dress and high heels, the White House state dinner menu showing fried chicken and chitlins as the main courses–NONE of these things had anything to do with race. It was all just, well, you know, like, uhm, kinda, like a politics thing. Sorta.

      • rea

        You surely don’t mean the man whose plans to nuke Charleston and turn the army loose on Texas were so narrowly thwarted?

        • StellaB

          And take away all the GUNZ!

        • Colin Day

          This nation has a tradition of dropping the big one on South Carolina.

          Dropping the bomb on South Carolina

          • Steve LaBonne

            Too small for a republic, too big for an insane asylum, but just the right size to be a pile of smoldering radioactive rubble.

          • Steve LaBonne

            By the way let us not forget that Prick Erry will soon be in charge of the nukes. Anything can happen!

    • Got any links? I’d love to read more about that for sad and obvious reasons.

      • aturner339

        A lot of talk about an interesting interview at Vox with Cornell Belcher:
        http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/12/12/13894546/obama-race-black-white-house-cornell-belcher-racism

        I’m going to see if I can recall who worked on the more basic question of racial polarization in voting.

        Also:
        http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/30/13765248/donald-trump-race-priming-political-science

      • Ronan

        Might be interested in some stuff here

        http://www.publicbooks.org/feature/trump-syllabus-20

        Eric kaufmanns quite interesting on the political demography of dominant group decline.

        This is on my reading list

        http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10516.html

        (All are tangential but related to your question)

        • Ronan

          I’m reading Carol swains book on white nationalism at the minute. I kind of like it but have reservations. Looking up swain recently I see she’s gone a little peculiar (teapartier,pro trump etc)
          Anyone know about the quality of her work before this turn ?

          • dl

            she’s been off the rails (though more subtle about it) for at least the past 10-15. contributed to a Peter Brimelow edited volume for example.

            • Ronan

              Do you know her white nationalism book ?

              https://www.amazon.com/New-White-Nationalism-America-Integration/dp/0521545587

              Was blurbed favourably by William Julius Wilson which would incline me to take it seriously, though I’m also under the impression that about 1/4 of is dedicated to blaming affirmative action for a white backlash (although I haven’t got there yet)….

              • Colin Day

                Affirmative action may well have been the correct policy, but being correct policy might not prevent white backlash.

                • Ronan

                  True. I’m thinking her position is more “it’s not the right policy” though (for one reason because of said backlash)
                  Having said that, I haven’t got that far yet so shouldn’t speculate

              • dl

                Ronan,
                No, that I haven’t read. In addition to WJW, Robby George blurbs it favorably too. Then again, blurbs mean almost nothing.
                At one point, though, she was taken seriously in her field, so the book could be OK (I read her 2007 Debating Immigration for a seminar back in the day, and that was pretty reactionary, though maybe not as flat out unhinged as she appears now).

        • Domino

          Eric kaufmanns

          Damnit, that made me think of SEK. Gone way too soon. F*ck this year.

      • MAJeff

        I just picked up Carol Anderson’s White Rage for a little light reading over the break.

        http://www.bloomsbury.com/us/white-rage-9781632864123/

    • SatanicPanic

      California managed to get over this. I suspect it’s a matter of white people becoming the minority and brown people asserting some power. When people see it doesn’t come at their expense their freakouts become less justifiable, even if they don’t entirely go away.

      • PJ

        Someone pointed out that we already went through the fights about deindustrialization, resource allocation, and influx of brown people. Most recently, it resulted in Pete Wilson overreaching and making the Republican party nonexistent for the last decade.

        I don’t know that it’s white voters specifically than the fact that our brown masses and/or our non-traditional economy makes their fears less salient. Maybe that population shift for the rest of the country is coming too late to prevent our downfall.

        However, here’s one POV.

        • SatanicPanic

          I was thinking about that very op-ed when I wrote my comment.

        • CP

          Interesting op-ed. It strikes me that what’s happened in California is to a large extent what we hoped would happen nationwide.

          • econoclast

            I think the people who really couldn’t take it decamped to Idaho. On a national level, we need to encourage the people who can’t take it to decamp to Russia.

            • jim, some guy in iowa

              I used to think North Korea, but since so many of them seem to genuinely admire Putin, yeah

              • CP

                North Koreans aren’t white, so there goes that idea.

                There’s a reason that it’s specifically Putin who gets so much admiration and not Xi Jinping or Kim Jong Eun or any number of other Strong Dictators, and it ain’t the bare-chested pics.

                Well, it ain’t just the bare-chested pics.

          • postmodulator

            Optimistic take: Everything that happens in America happens in California around ten or fifteen years before that.

            Pessmistic take: For a while my guess was that the white power structure would deal with whites becoming a minority by redefining who was white. It’s happened before, after all: my grandfather wasn’t white when he got off the boat, and only a hundred years later his son voted for Trump! So you just say Asians and some Latinos are white now, problem solved.

            What I’ve come to think instead is that the white power structure will deal with this by embracing full-on apartheid and minority rule. I mean…we’ve got the minority picking our President and our Senators and sometimes the House majority already. It’s not a big leap.

            • CP

              Yeah, I think the field is more slanted to favor whites in the nation overall than in California specifically, and they fully intend to take advantage of that.

          • Donna Gratehouse

            It might have happened but I think it’s been stymied by the growth of contempt for “partisanship” by pretty much anyone who isn’t Republican (they love theirs and don’t give a fuck if you don’t think it’s cool). In CA the people who were furious at Wilson for his bigoted law organized as Democrats and eventually Democrats took over.

            Here in AZ we have a hard time getting Latinos and others who hated and were harmed by Arpaio, Jan Brewer, SB170, etc. to understand that becoming Democrats is the most effective collective way to oppose them politically. They’ve been fed a steady diet of Both Siderism and political parties as corrupt and self-serving. (It’s similar to anti-union propaganda – powerful union bosses!)

            As a result, Democratic numbers declined while “independents” are the fastest growing affiliation here. Voters whose interests would be better served by registering and regularly voting Democratic are deliberately and systematically persuaded that being “independent” is the way to go, thus ceding their collective power as a voting bloc and the increased representation they would get, as happened in CA.

        • Linnaeus

          Someone pointed out that we already went through the fights about deindustrialization

          True, but I think that what sometimes gets lost when talking about the economy of the US west, and California in particular, is that the federal government was massively involved in the economic development of the US west for many decades.

          California was a significant beneficiary of what effectively functioned as US industrial policy, really from the 1930s onward: lots of federal investment in high technology, especially via the military-industrial-academic complex (not to mention the numerous military installations placed in California). This gave the state the infrastructure it needed (on a several levels) to deal better with the decline in employment in heavy industry than other states have been able to do.

          Which is not to say that this is the only reason why California’s economy looks as it does or is as large as it is. I do think it’s a significant factor, however, and is something to think about when we consider what can be done for some areas of the country that are struggling economically.

          • PJ

            That’s fair, although one can also argue that other places in the Rust and Sun Belt ALSO have federal infrastructure going back decades AND massive land grant universities.

            But we are a large state — our economy is/can be diverse for that reason. I don’t know how applicable that model is for other states.

            (And certainly, it should be repeated that not everyone is profiting off the massive CA economy. But we get a lot more out of government, it seems. Is it because we vote that way? It seems so! Why do we vote that way? I don’t really know.)

          • gkclarkson

            My understanding is that due to the presence of the electronics and aerospace industry, which were both heavily fueled by federal defense spending, California’s post-WWII manufacturing wasn’t ever nearly as dependent on the steel or automotive sectors as the rest of the country. Consequently, California’s manufacturing employees were much more likely to be either high-wage, skilled workers, or low-wage, unskilled workers, and much less likely to be the medium-wage, semi-skilled industrial workers that were the main beneficiaries of unioniziation and were the main victims of deindustrialization.

            Essentially, they were able to bypass the pain of deindustrialization by never having much of the painful industries to begin with.

        • davidsmcwilliams

          Jesus, the comments. I should have known better.

      • CP

        California managed to get over this. I suspect it’s a matter of white people becoming the minority and brown people asserting some power. When people see it doesn’t come at their expense their freakouts become less justifiable, even if they don’t entirely go away.

        Also a matter of more white people having to interact with nonwhites in an overall diverse environment as opposed to sheltering in your all-white enclaves. It’s been pointed out by multiple people that self-segregated exurbs and suburbs remain the bastion of conservatism in this country, and not by accident.

        • PJ

          While maybe the general point stands, it needs to be said that at the granular level, California’s major urban areas are still pretty segregated in terms of schools and housing. We are decidedly NOT holding hands and having the same resources, although, yes, we see more of each other at work and in public areas.

          Also, our infrastructure is poor, and our commutes and housing are bankrupting us pretty good. Income inequality if off the charts, as is our homeless population. I realize that being poor in the Rust Belt is different than being poor in Los Angeles, but by how much?

          But that, for me at least, adds to the question of why California is becoming different in its response to this stuff.

          • faine

            California actually does pretty damn well on segregation measures (go Sacramento!).

            http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

            • Philip

              Irvine is the most integrated city in the US according to those metrics. Color me skeptical.

              • SatanicPanic

                That’s not particularly surprising to me. It’s only 200,000 people with a UC school within city limits. Wiki says 45% Asian.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irvine,_California#Demographics

                • Philip

                  Sorry, yeah, I should have been clearer. If you look at white/Asian integration it’s believable. But African American and Hispanic? No way.

          • gkclarkson

            I think that it probably has to do with (a) once you reach a tipping point of a critical mass of minorities (evidently to the point where whites are only a plurality), whites are eventually forced to interact and consequently empathize; and (b) a very substantial portion of white Californians are themselves transplants or the children of transplants, so a message of “taking back our country” loses a lot of traction without an ancestral connection to the region.

        • saraeanderson

          And then there are the people who moved to super-white areas. The “Welcome to Idaho, now go home!” bumper stickers are less popular now than they were in the 90s, but the influx of Californians to weirdo white places was a thing.

      • It’s worth pointing out that the places in the U.K. that had the largest populations of immigrants were the least supportive of Brexit. When you actually know minorities or immigrants, you become less likely to support discrimination, it seems.

      • DAS

        When people see it doesn’t come at their expense

        Except that during a critical period when African Americans were starting to see tge economic fruits of the civil rights movement and women’s rights, [email protected] rights, etc., movements were accelerating, White people did start to lose ground with stagflation. So it did at least appear to many whites that increased rights and economic participation by the underprivileged did come at the expense of white (economic) security.

        Of course, those whites then reacted by voting against New Deal economic policies, which made them more economically insecure, resulting in a vicious cycle. As the response to “why do ‘they’ riot, ultimately hurting their own neighborhood economies?” goes: white people express their frustration in a self-destructive and violent way too — they vote Republican.

    • BartletForGallifrey

      Poison in the pumpkin spice lattes?

      • aturner339

        Or barring that can we take the secret sauce that is Obama’s race speech and turn it into constant political messaging?

        • Linnaeus

          Here’s Obama’s view on his secret sauce.

          • ASV

            That’s an incredible segment.

      • Karen24

        No, the people who drink pumpin spice lattes are the ones you want to encourage. Poison Coors and Budweiser.

        • N__B

          Poison Coors and Budweiser.

          How would we be able to tell?

  • Good post, Scott – you’ve been on a roll for a while now. But hat tip to Joseph Slater for that photoshopped picture. Genius.

    • Moondog von Superman

      Or John Flynn?
      See thread re working on the reflection in the water.

      https://twitter.com/bryne/status/808481890738896896

      • Good catch… credit wherever it is due.

        • Joseph Slater

          Yeah, I never claimed that I created that, I just saw it on the internets and thought it was worth reposting on another thread. Very nice of Scott to give me credit, but I don’t deserve it.

          • Scott Lemieux

            Fixed!

            • Joseph Slater

              Excellent.

            • Crowdsourced solutions! If only fixing electoral politics was so easy.

    • Marek

      Is there a Pulitzer for photoshopped images? There ought to be.

      • It takes more work and skill than a Maureen Dowd essay, that’s for sure.

        • DAS

          I dunno. Writing while drunk and/or stoned is the epitome of what being an author or journalist is all about, isn’t it. And it’s damned hard work to physically be able to type in such a state.

  • CaptainBringdown

    Might take a little longer, but the Southern Climate Model should be making its way up north too.

  • I have a semi-serious question: Just where are the southern states going to go for a handout once the rich(er) blue states have been converted to dirt poor welfare states too?

    • aturner339

      They are absolutely certain that this only reason their states are net recipients of government funds is because a lot of black people live in them.

      This is not an oversimplifation or an exaggeration. This is what I grew up with.

      • StellaB

        They are absolutely certain that they are supporting the blue states. After all, there are more people receiving public services in CA than in MS, and CA is “almost bankrupt” due to its billion dollar debt (in a $2.5T economy) QED.

        • aturner339

          That too. Government services and problems are all geographically centered around large concentrations of brown people. Fact!

        • DAS

          You see this even within states. Many Northern and Western NYers are convinced that downstate NY is a net drain on NY government coffers.

      • This is what I grew up with.

        Regrettably, me too. Which is why I left many years ago and never looked back.

    • medrawt

      I don’t know, but one has to believe that if a state has spent decades failing to do anything well, its government and citizenry probably have a limited awareness of just how not well they do what they do.

      • CrunchyFrog

        And, let’s be honest, after generations of the smart people moving away the remaining people are at the shallow end of the gene pool. You see this in small towns in American, including the one where I went to high school. They get dumber by the generation.

  • kped

    The online left is going after Perez now too. So maybe they do think they are the same.

    https://twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/808735649138348032

    (is this guy really on the left? He seems to only be going after liberals…is there something wrong with these guys? Do they think that attacking people on their side in a 2 party system will get them…anything?)

    Here’s another tweet from today from Mr Jilani:

    trump’s 2020 re-elect should just be ads featuring amanda marcotte and peter daou tweets then he can take rest of campaign off

    Or, after Krugman said “People voted Trump to spite liberals who (they imagined) thought them ignorant, are now shocked that they may lose health care. Just saying.”, Jilani replies with…”krugman gets 225k annually of taxpayer cash to teach at CUNY, one of many sources of income”. Which…doesn’t refute the point at all.

    and all of these are from today. These Intercept guys are all in on supporting Trump by attacking his critics, aren’t they?

    • XTPD

      Segura, Biddle, Scahill & their Palestine reporter (forgot his name) are literally the only people worth saving at that POS.

      The rest of the staff deserves to be fired into the sun.

      (Also, for some reason our use of the term “alt-left” means something completely different from what seems to be general usage.)

      • kped

        Seems their alt-left is…anyone not on the right? Brian Stelter as alt-left?

        But I’ll give them this: Conservatives are way better at branding and making a message stick, so this might hold.

        edit: …oh dear… https://theintercept.com/2016/12/13/matt-bors-cartoon-how-a-democracy-gets-hacked/

        • Dr. Waffle

          Matt Bors seems like the kinda guy who really enjoys the Lumineers.

          • brewmn

            Wow. That’s a little over-the-top, don’t you think?

        • Alex.S

          For me, the alt-left are people who decided that their litmus test on liberal is a $15 minimum wage and not increasing the minimum wage.

        • I guess I agree with the overall point: it wouldn’t have been possible for the Russians to influence the election if not for a multitude of failures elsewhere in the American political system, and there is a temptation to blame it all on them and leave the media, etc. blameless.

          But the particulars are so dumb. The most scandalous thing about the DNC leak was the violation of PCI compliance in handling donor financial information. There’s nothing else particularly compelling in there, but a certain subset of internet morons insist that they somehow prove the DNC rigged the primaries.

          And the idea that Clinton would have done better in the election if she had supported a $15 minimum wage is fucking laughable. Polling shows that a large majority supports increasing the minimum wage, but only a small subset of that supports increasing it to $12, let alone $15. $12 was already a position well to the left of the public center.

          • humanoid.panda

            I guess I agree with the overall point: it wouldn’t have been possible for the Russians to influence the election if not for a multitude of failures elsewhere in the American political system, and there is a temptation to blame it all on them and leave the media, etc. blameless.

            The overall point is so banal as to be meaningless: any major event has both long term and short term causes, and to argue that only it has only one is dumb. Which is why no one besides the strawmen the Intercept beats to death, argues that the Russians gave the election to Trump. The other rhetorical trick they are employing is to imply that liberals are arguing that Russians somehow faked the election results (hacked the election!), rather than did something specific: hack into a bunch of emails and give it to Wikileaks.

            • Well, for instance, I would not like the staff at the New York Times to be comfortable concluding “oh, Trump won because of Russia, not our shitty reporting.” I don’t want the Villagers as a whole to decide that Trump’s election was some sort of foreign intrusion into a healthy democratic society.

              • humanoid.panda

                Sure! But again, the point that “cartoonist” is making is aimed at strawmen.

              • econoclast

                But even that doesn’t let them off the hook. We knew about the foreign intrusion in the summer, but the media is only taking it seriously now.

          • Murc

            There’s nothing else particularly compelling in there, but a certain subset of internet morons insist that they somehow prove the DNC rigged the primaries.

            I’ve recently started encountering vote suppressors who are seizing on this. “The Democratic Party rigs its own primary even according to leftists, and you want us to believe they’re not engaged in widespread voter fraud?”

            • jim, some guy in iowa

              arrgh

            • Trump said it in his stump speeches, too. And I’d be surprised if troll brigades weren’t told to spread the meme.

            • ASV

              *Democrat Party

          • Phil Perspective

            Polling shows that a large majority supports increasing the minimum wage, but only a small subset of that supports increasing it to $12, let alone $15. $12 was already a position well to the left of the public center.

            Proof? Because I bet you’re full of shit.

            • jim, some guy in iowa

              y’know, it’s the person who can’t even say “the polling *I* read says otherwise” who is probably full of shit

        • Scott Lemieux

          Look at panel #2 — I don’t agree with all of the content in the cartoon but he’s not Freddie either.

          • XTPD

            Marcotte made a better multi-causal argument for the results, IMAO.

      • Lost Left Coaster

        I had high hopes for the Intercept when they launched. They’ve done some good reporting and continue to do some. But something about the 2016 campaign broke their collective brain. I thought that the whole point of having a billionaire tyrant fund their venture was so that they didn’t just go chasing cheap clicks, but they spend a lot of time these days chasing cheap clicks.

        • Philip

          They were always mostly shit. You just had to know a bit more about the subject matter to figure that out before.

        • ForkyMcSpoon

          Well, you see how Greenwald just loves to talk about how influential he is so that he can dismiss random internet commentators.

          The rewards are not all monetary.

      • Philip

        Biddle is and always has been a stopped clock at best. Buzzfeed got the only good person to come out of Valleywag imo.

        • Morbo

          “Look at these ridiculous nouveaux riches, how gauche” loses a bit of its edge when you go to work for Pierre Omidyar.

    • D.N. Nation

      The “criticizing Russia is the new McCarthyism” line from Glenn, Zaid, Lee n Pals is rather redolent of the neocons’ “criticizing anti-war protesters is the REAL rebel shit” from around 2002-2003.

      As for your questions, I don’t think there’s any endgame other than “lulz I troll you,” which I believe won’t age particularly well in the shitshow of an administration to come. When Paul Ryan massacres Medicare and yet another round of massive 1% tax cuts bankrupt the country, being a whiny little twit about Paul Krugman isn’t going to seem quite vital anymore, the opposite in fact.

    • I love Jilani responding to someone asking “what do unions think of [Perez]?” with “AFT is with Keith”.

      Because the honest answer to that question is that unions love Perez.

      These “leftists” are having to make up reasons to prefer Ellison over Perez because they’ve already invested in casting the DNC chair campaign in ideological terms. It is a huge problem for their outrage generation process to have both candidates be solid progressives.

      What really impresses me is that the same people that a couple weeks ago were celebrating the “end of identitarianism” are now using identity-based arguments in favor of Ellison and against Perez (whose Hispanic identity they tend to erase).

      • kped

        But…Keith is supported by Chuck Schumer! And Pelosi! I mean…doesn’t that make him bad too?

        (note: I think both would be fine in the role, I don’t get the online left acting like one is a neoliberal sellout while the other is great. It’s so fucking stupid…)

        • EliHawk

          It’s of a piece with believing that the DNC chair is the most important, powerful position in the Democratic Party. If it isn’t, then the 2016 primaries weren’t rigged by the evil neoliberals, you see…

          • kped

            Also, while the DNC is uber-Powerful and did definitely rig the election, it’s just conspiracy theory bullshit to think a combination of Russian hacks and Comey had any impact on the election.

            • Dennis Orphen

              Also, while the DNC is uber-Powerful and did definitely rig the election, it’s just conspiracy theory bullshit to think a combination of Russian hacks and Comey had any impact on the election.

              fixed

              • kped

                …one day i’ll learn how to do that text…one day.

                • Rob in CT

                  [code] what you want to say [code]

                  Where the second code has a / in front of it.

                • kped

                  Oh sure, like that will work

                • N__B

                  Use greater-than and less-than symbols rather than the square brackets.

                • efgoldman

                  Use greater-than and less-than symbols rather than the square brackets.

                  Or just highlight your text and click the "code" button above the comment window, same as you would the other formatting buttons.

              • petesh

                Or, use the button between “b-quote” and “Close Tags” Took me ages to notice that
                ETA: what efg said

      • Phil Perspective

        Because the honest answer to that question is that unions love Perez.

        LOL!! So why did the AFL-CIO endorse Ellison already? They don’t love Perez because he was pushing TPP. But believe as you will.

        • ForkyMcSpoon

          Do you have some statements from major unions saying that they don’t like Perez?

          Endorsing Ellison is not in contradiction with liking Perez.

    • Brien Jackson

      Jilani and Fang seem to be engaged in perpetual battle to prove who the bigger, pettier, most useless asshole is.

      • kped

        …Mr Greenwald is offended that you didn’t name him.

        • Brien Jackson

          Pretty sure Glenn is just doing what Putin tells him to.

      • shaqnicholson

        Of the online “fuck liberals” troll left, Jilani and Fang are pretty unique in that they don’t even pretend to have an ideology; they’re simply bitter. The stuff after the Podesta e-mails confirmed it: to them the fate of the country is secondary to their score-settling with CAP.

    • Aexia

      Jilani supports voter id laws because he’s never had any trouble getting one.

      • kped

        …is that real?

        • Aexia

          Yeah, it was hilarious during primary season because he thought expecting Sanders supporters to actually register for a political party in order to vote in its primary was an unconscionable hurdle while voter id was a common sense reform that Democrats should support.

          • petesh

            I believe you but … what a maroon

            • kped

              Same. I totally believe you, and it shows again what a fucking clown he is.

              I first noticed him on Twitter, when someone asked him why he was spending all his time attacking Clinton, and he responded “lol, Trump won’t win anyway”…and now he is pretending he was an oracle and knew Trump would win, and pins one tweet to prove it!

              • I remember when the word from these guys is that we had missed this perfect opportunity to run a leftist, since Trump was so unelectable.

                Can you imagine if Sanders had actually been the candidate, and he had lost, too? It’d have been a horrible blow to the Democratic left. It’d be the rebirth of the DLC.

                • BartletForGallifrey

                  It would still be Hillary Clinton’s fault somehow, also.

    • Rob in CT

      I’m assuming that Krugman is referencing this:

      http://www.vox.com/2016/12/13/13901874/obamacare-trump-voter-health-insurance-repeal

      Christ, these people.

      • D.N. Nation

        Some of the area programs would talk to teachers, and ask for a list of their poorest kids and get them clothes and toys and stuff. They’re not the ones who need help. They’re the ones getting the welfare and food stamps.

        That’s…something. I, a mere voter and not a policy-maker, am according to these types to feel *immediate* empathy and compassion and for some strange reason I just can’t do it.

        • kped

          When it’s worded like that…I can’t help but feel it is 100% about race. “They get special stuff!” And yeah, it’s hard to feel empathy.

          Not that i won’t still support policies that will help these assholes. but…do I feel sorry for them? No. I really don’t.

          • humanoid.panda

            When it’s worded like that…I can’t help but feel it is 100% about race. “They get special stuff!” And yeah, it’s hard to feel empathy.

            Nah. This county is like 99% white. Which in some ways makes hatred for the poor even worse, because everyone knows that one cousin who is a bad seed and gets SSDI regardless, etc.

        • Rob in CT

          Right? Definitely the “best” part.

      • brewmn

        I’m not really a fan of his policies, but I like the fact that he gave me health insurance.

        And that, my friends, is our problem stated in twenty-five words or less.

        • Alex.S

          Yeah, it was a losing argument in 2012 as well.

          Democrats — “Republicans want to take away your health insurance. They are going to get rid of Medicare, Obamacare, and Social Security”.

          Voters — “No, they would never do that”

          • Rob in CT

            It’s difficult, sometimes, not to wish that these voters get it good & hard.

            • BigHank53

              Well, it looks like they’re going to. Unfortunately it looks like we’re going to be keeping them close company.

            • Morbo

              Markos appears to have hit that threshold.

          • Hogan

            As I said in another thread:

            “I can’t vote for Clinton, because I don’t believe she’ll do what she says she’ll do. I’m voting for Trump, because I don’t believe he’ll do what he says he’ll do.”

            • aturner339

              “Racism is not merely a simplistic hatred. It is, more often, broad sympathy toward some and broader skepticism toward others”

              Ta-Nehisi Coates

            • SNF

              Voters believe that politicians are liars, so everything they say is actually the opposite of what they mean.

              So when Hillary said something they liked they discounted it, and whenever Trump said something awful they assumed he was lying. Which means that Trump comes out ahead if you interpret everything as its opposite.

              Most politicians do what they say they will, so it’s a stupid way to look at the world. But it makes people feel smart and skeptical to say that politicians break their promises all the time.

          • The Lorax

            Hell, the GOP ran on this in 2010 “Obama is cutting your Medicare!”

    • humanoid.panda

      Or, after Krugman said “People voted Trump to spite liberals who (they imagined) thought them ignorant, are now shocked that they may lose health care. Just saying.”, Jilani replies with…”krugman gets 225k annually of taxpayer cash to teach at CUNY, one of many sources of income”. Which…doesn’t refute the point at all.

      So now those guys are embracing the “professors are bums eating at the taxpayer’s expense” line? Can you feel the revolutionary zest and moral superiority?

    • Scott Lemieux

      Jilani and Fang had some sort of beef with Neera Tandeen at CAP and this informs all of their ostensibly political writing. They’re just complete hacks.

      • BartletForGallifrey

        They had a beef with Neera and couldn’t make a few grand off it? That *is* hackery!

  • DrDick

    Somehow, this seems appropriate here:

    “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”

    • aturner339

      It’s as if we never fought an incredibly bloody war and then spent a century continuing to fight over this very problem.

      We keep thinking that if we just make their lives easier: more healthcare, more PTO, more job growth that will change the dynamic but it pretty clearly doesn’t.

    • Darkrose

      That’s pretty much this election in a nutshell.

  • tonycpsu

    Semi-OT: Not content to kill parody and defile its body, Trump is now incinerating what’s left and launching it into the sun.

    BREAKING: State Department source tells me Trump considering disgraced ex-Fox News boss Roger Ailes for Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy

    • Lurking Canadian

      I guess he decided “Minister of Truth” was too much on the nose.

      • BigHank53

        I thought he’d be doing outreach to women, because he seems to despise the fact that some women are out of his reach.

        • N__B

          An Ailes’s reach should exceed his grasp because if not holy fuck.

  • CP

    Nineteen states refused to accept that expansion, preferring to keep their poor citizens uninsured rather than allow them to get coverage paid for by the federal government. Those 19 included some conservative states in the Midwest like Kansas and Nebraska, but the largest group of states was in the South: 10 of the 11 states of the Confederacy (Louisiana being the sole exception) refused the Medicaid expansion.

    Note that the only option left after that are charities, and a lot of these charities are religious, and in the South, that means fundiegelical. They know what they’re doing.

    • aturner339

      As an Alabamian I can tell you what they are doing is making sure the blacks don’t get too comfortable.

  • liberal

    …the NEOLIBERAL Tom Perez once observed…

    Yawn. More pointless hippie punching.

    I don’t know a lot about Perez, but nothing I heard about him indicated anything other than that he’s a committed liberal/progressive/whatever.

    Obama is a mixed bag. Perhaps one can’t call him a neoliberal. Certainly, if we look at pieces, support for the TPP is neoliberal.

    If your endless harping is directed at the idiots who think there’s not a dime worth of difference, fine. But the claim that “neoliberal just means stuff that purity ponies disagree with” is stupid and laughable.

    That said, anyone with a fucking brain in their head would crawl over glass to vote for someone who is notionally 100% neoliberal on every issue against Trump, or pretty much any Republican for that matter.

    • If your endless harping is directed at the idiots who think there’s not a dime worth of difference, fine.

      Maybe it’s directed at the person who wrote the tweet that was linked to in those words.

      • humanoid.panda

        I was the person who linked to the tweet, and the NEOLIBERAL was meant ironically. In fact, the fact that the internet is going to have an acrimoniuous fight about which of two excellent candidates is a monster is giving me all the sads.

    • Scott Lemieux

      More pointless hippie punching.

      Christ, again with this shit. Lee Fang is not a hippie, nor is he particularly left-wing; he’s just a hack. You don’t get to avoid having your arguments exempt from criticism by declaring them leftier-than-thou.

      I don’t know a lot about Perez, but nothing I heard about him indicated anything other than that he’s a committed liberal/progressive/whatever.

      WHY ARE YOU HIPPIE-PUNCHING LEE FANG? Seriously, what the hell are you even arguing about?

  • Rob in CT

    http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/12/13/13848794/kentucky-obamacare-trump

    Fucking infuriating.

    Now I don’t know if the views of a bunch of people in Kentucky can be assumed to stand in for the views of a bunch of people in WI/MI/PA, but…

    Oller voted for Trump too.

    “I found with Trump, he says a lot of stuff,” she said. “I just think all politicians promise you everything and then we’ll see. It’s like when you get married — ‘Oh, honey, I won’t do this, oh, honey, I won’t do that.’”

    Many expressed frustration that Obamacare plans cost way too much, that premiums and deductibles had spiraled out of control. And part of their anger was wrapped up in the idea that other people were getting even better, even cheaper benefits — and those other people did not deserve the help.

    There was a persistent belief that Trump would fix these problems and make Obamacare work better. I kept hearing informed voters, who had watched the election closely, say they did hear the promise of repeal but simply felt Trump couldn’t repeal a law that had done so much good for them. In fact, some of the people I talked to hope that one of the more divisive pieces of the law — Medicaid expansion — might become even more robust, offering more of the working poor a chance at the same coverage the very poor receive.

    The political reality in Washington, however, looks much different: Republicans are dead set on repealing the Affordable Care Act. The plans they have proposed so far would leave millions of people without insurance and make it harder for sicker, older Americans to access coverage. No version of a Republican plan would keep the Medicaid expansion as Obamacare envisions it.

    The question is not whether Republicans will end coverage for millions. It is when they will do it. Oller’s three years of work could very much be undone over the next three years.

    In southeastern Kentucky, that idea didn’t seem to penetrate at all — not to Oller, and not to the people she signed up for coverage.

    “We all need it,” Oller told me when I asked about the fact that Trump and congressional Republicans had promised Obamacare repeal. “You can’t get rid of it.”

    “I’m really having a problem with the people that don’t want to work”

    But Atkins’s frustration isn’t just about the money she has to pay. She sees other people signing up for Medicaid, the health program for the poor that is arguably better coverage than she receives and almost free for enrollees. She is not eligible for Medicaid because her husband works, and the couple will earn about $42,000 next year.

    Medicaid is reserved for people who earn less than 138 percent of the poverty line — about $22,000 for a couple like the Atkinses. Ruby understands the Medicaid expansion is also part of Obamacare, and she doesn’t think the system is fair.

    “They can go to the emergency room for a headache,” she says. “They’re going to the doctor for pills, and that’s what they’re on.”

    Atkins felt like this happened a lot to her: that she and her husband have worked most their lives but don’t seem to get nearly as much help as the poorer people she knows. She told a story about when she used to work as a school secretary: “They had a Christmas program. Some of the area programs would talk to teachers, and ask for a list of their poorest kids and get them clothes and toys and stuff. They’re not the ones who need help. They’re the ones getting the welfare and food stamps. I’m the one who is the working poor.”

    “I really think Medicaid is good, but I’m really having a problem with the people that don’t want to work,” she said. “Us middle-class people are really, really upset about having to work constantly, and then these people are not responsible.”

    Oller had told me earlier that she had enrolled on Medicaid for a few months, right before she started this job. She was taking some time off to care for her husband, who has cancer and was in chemotherapy treatment. I asked how she felt about enrolling in a program she sometimes criticizes.

    “Oh, no,” she said quickly. “I worked my whole life, so I know I paid into it. I just felt like it was a time that I needed it. That’s what the system is set up for.”

    • aturner339

      What liberals have is policy. Conservatives have a narrative. That narrative is that the government is constantly looking out for people who “don’t work” (and we know who they are) and ignoring you. Even when this narrative is contradicted by observable reality it remains powerful.

      We have to do more than change reality. We have to change the narrative.

      • Rob in CT

        Against the “deep story” we contend in vain, it seems.

        • aturner339

          I think we’ve not yet begun to contend. We figured if we gave them something tangible (like healthcare) they’d realize it isn’t reparations and be open to hearing more. Instead Rush Limbaugh said it really was reparations and they figured he might have a point.

          Maybe giving them something tangible isn’t enough. Maybe we have to convince them that the young bucks with their T bones are taking all the welfares.

          • Rob in CT

            I remember liberals arguing against the RW lies. There was a liberal narrative. It was true. But it wasn’t short, simple, and it didn’t blame all their problems on people they don’t like, so…

            • aturner339

              I think there were liberal rebutals but our overall narrative is still False Conscientiousness which makes them look like idiots (I know) and is therefore not attractive to them.

              • Rob in CT

                False Conscientiousness

                I love this typo. False conscientiousness actually fits – whining about the toys for poor kids drive at the school, while patting oneself on the back for being a hard workin’ good citizen (and no doubt god fearin’ Christian too).

                • aturner339

                  No doubt. I’ve known a fair few of them. Regular church goers all.

            • efgoldman

              It was true. But it wasn’t short, simple, and it didn’t blame all their problems on people they don’t like, so…

              That’s why I began harping after the election that Dems should be out front every day (and also buying ten second spots all over the place) with the simplest of messages: “Why does [Republiklown senator and/or congresscritter here] want to help [Granny Starver] take away your medicare and social security?”
              Make it a meme. Make them play defense and explain. Don’t let up, even for e second. Don’t get into the weeds of details. USE THEIR PLAYBOOK AGAINST THEM!

    • humanoid.panda

      I’d say that there is something here deeper than just deep narratives and resentment of the poor etc. Especially in a place like rural Kentucky, where even people fairly above the poverty line tend to be unhealthy, a person making 40K a year, and getting a big subsidy to purchase a high deductible does indeed a raw deal in comparison to someone making 30K a year and being able to go on Medicaid. This is something where leftist critiques of means testing really does have a bite: it creates a lot of resentment and perverse incentives on the margins.

      [And as I say upthread- this is a an all-white county, so the race story doesn’t fit here either: its more of a disgust at ne’er do well cousin..]

      • Rob in CT

        Someone making $22k a year, I thought? And… is Medicaid gold-plated coverage all of a sudden?

        I’m certainly not going to try and claim that a HH income of $42k can’t be legitimately feeling squeezed (even in a country with a median HH income of slightly more than half that*). I too have been convinced that means testing sucks and needs to go (though I’d defend it partly here – the ACA has subsidies that decrease with income. It’s not like you cross a barrier and boom you’re screwed).

        But in one breath they’re complaining about a lack of jobs and in the next complaining that people don’t want to work. If there are no jobs, how can they work? Hello?

        * I looked it up and if Wikipedia is right the median HH income in that county is basically the Medicaid cutoff level.

        • humanoid.panda

          I too have been convinced that means testing sucks and needs to go (though I’d defend it partly here – the ACA has subsidies that decrease with income. It’s not like you cross a barrier and boom you’re screwed).

          The big problem with the ACA is the deductibles. The subsidies can bring down the premium, but an 8K deductible can be ruinous for someone making 40K a year. From the POV of someone suffering from, say, chronic pain and afraid to go to doctor because deductible, Medicaid does seem like gold-plated insurance.

          But in one breath they’re complaining about a lack of jobs and in the next complaining that people don’t want to work. If there are no jobs, how can they work? Hello?

          Just to clarify: I am not saying all their complaints are reasonable; I am saying that the one about Medicaid vs. high deductible insurance rings true. (as for the jobs: that lady would probably say that only jobs out there are crappy, and that’s unfair she takes them, and that guy over there is on SSDI.)

          • Rob in CT

            Agreed, deductibles (and coinsurance and to a lesser extent copays) matter too.

            I’m sure Trump will fix it (and to be clear, I know you’re not saying this!).

            • humanoid.panda

              This is just an important lesson for next time we have a chance to solve the health insurance riddle. It has to be generous and universal, and fiscal probity be damned.

              • The Lorax

                Well, were it not for Joe Lieberman, many of these people could buy into Medicare. And were it not for Ben Nelson, all of these people would have a public non-Medicare option.

                • ForkyMcSpoon

                  May they burn in hell.

                  Or may they feel deep sorrow and remorse and dedicate their lives to helping the poor. Whatever.

          • Connecticut Yankee

            There’s probably something to this, but my personal experience tells me it’s far from the whole story. I know white people who are actually on Medicaid, in Connecticut, a state where it’s reasonably easy to get and the coverage is fine, who think the exact same way. Even they believe there’s a huge pile of Secret Black People Money they aren’t getting. Sometimes it’s in response to real inadequacies in the system like DSS being as slow as it always is or the absurd restrictions on WIC – but it’s more common to hear people blame those on black people or illegal immigrants taking “our money” than rich people not wanting to pay taxes or even the programs having inadequate funding for any reason at all! Sometimes it’s not even in response to real problems. I know someone who is, herself, lying to the government to collect disability while working under the table – still furiously resentful about how Those People are gaming the system. Thinks it’s different because she used to pay taxes. It’s tremendously racialized, though they resent other white people who are “undeserving” too. It’s more complicated than “disgust at a ne’er do well cousin” though – people will often call someone else undeserving for doing something they do as well! So there’s a lot of different, distinct beliefs in the mix. I should be getting that and he SHOULDN’T be because I paid into the system and he didn’t is the big one. Who is considered to have paid into the system doesn’t have a 1:1 relationship with how long that person has worked or paid taxes or anything else, and is instead much more subjective and nebulous. So I’m not convinced making these programs universal would help politically, even if it might be good policy. People (and not just poor people!) are very willing to apply the deservingness logic to justify cuts to Social Security retirement, too – thought process is along the lines of “They only need to cut it because illegal immigrants are taking what they don’t deserve”

            • humanoid.panda

              My response to that would be that this sort of thing would always be with us, but public opinion polls consistently show 80-90% opposition to SS/Medicare cuts. It’s really a question of margins.

              • humanoid.panda

                And of course, there is the politics/policy distinction: it is quite possible to have a world where the GOP wins elections, but can only attack the ACA on the margins and indirectly. This is a world much better than the world we live in.

              • Connecticut Yankee

                And nearly half of that 90% votes for politicians who say they’re going to cut Social Security anyway. They hear what Republicans say and think it means they’re going to stop giving money to undeserving blahs so there will be more left for you, a deserving white person. “Protect Social Security By Decreasing Benefits” doesn’t seem crazy if you think a huge portion of it is going to people who don’t deserve it

    • AMK

      But Atkins’s frustration isn’t just about the money she has to pay. She sees other people signing up for Medicaid, the health program for the poor that is arguably better coverage than she receives and almost free for enrollees. She is not eligible for Medicaid because her husband works, and the couple will earn about $42,000 next year.

      Medicaid is reserved for people who earn less than 138 percent of the poverty line — about $22,000 for a couple like the Atkinses. Ruby understands the Medicaid expansion is also part of Obamacare, and she doesn’t think the system is fair.

      “They can go to the emergency room for a headache,” she says. “They’re going to the doctor for pills, and that’s what they’re on.”

      So maybe I’m from another planet, but the obvious answer to this problem is expanding coverage for working people so everyone has the same/pays the same, so the benefits of mooching are insignificant, everyone is taken care of and nobody gives a shit. But that’s just me.

      • ForkyMcSpoon

        Duh, that’s what they voted for Trump for.

        Because maybe he will expand Medicaid! And bring back all the coal jobs!

        oy, it makes my head hurt.

  • The ability to stand tall and say Merry Christmas just like Jesus preached is better than affordable, effective health care.

    • tsam

      Every time I say it, food appears on my table.

  • Joseph Slater

    Scott: While I’m tickled that you liked the image I posted, I can’t take credit for doing the photoshop. It was just something I found Somewhere On the Internet (and I’ve already forgotten where).

  • dogboy

    While we sit here yammering, real progress is being made elsewhere, and once again USA is losing! Sad!

    Today was a show of force that Temer still has a majority in congress to approve these reforms,” said João Castro Neves, Latin America director at Washington DC-based consulting outfit Eurasia. “From a more market perspective it’s also a victory because it’s a first step towards a more sound fiscal framework.”

    • dogboy

      In my rush to be snarky, I missed this actual fact: The government also said Temer had telephoned the US president-elect, Donald Trump, on Tuesday, who congratulated him “for the reforms and measures to promote the growth of Brazil”.

      • sonamib

        Trump probably meant to congratulate Temer and his buddies on utterly destroying the Brazilian democratic institutions and dancing on the rubbles. I mean as of now Brazil has been treated to :

        – judges who have no jurisdiction over president investigations leaking illegally wiretapped conversations
        – a frivolous impeachment
        – an unelected government pushing for an incredibly unpopular constitutional amendment (which will freeze government spending for 20 goddamn years), and succeeding
        – the Senate’s president refusing to obey the Supreme Court’s order to step down

        Things are going to hell very fast. And it only took 2 years. Watch out, USA. I know your institutions are more robust than Brazil’s, but please don’t let them crumble. The consequences would be so much worse for the world at large.

  • LeeEsq

    This is based on the first part of the comments section but I want to go down here rather add to a long thread. Much of the Democratic/Liberal plan for future politics in the United States is based on the assumption that Hispanic-Americans and Asian-Americans will continually be seen and see themselves as non-white, continue more or less having the same voting patterns as they do now, and America will have a majority of people of color by a certain date.

    During the early 20th century, White Protestant America had a similar demographic crisis because of the millions of Southern and Eastern European immigrants coming into the United States. White Protestant America didn’t like their religions or the political radicalism of some of the immigrants. They didn’t like their food and culture that much either. The short term result was strict immigration quotas and a new KKK that hated Catholics nearly as much as they hated African-Americans. The long term result was that the White majority was kept because the American definition of White was expanded to include the descendants of these immigrants.

    There is a possibility that we could see a similar situation happen with Hispanic and Asian Americans. Both groups have a rather high inter-marriage rate with White Americans. The earlier situation might not happen. The Southern and Eastern European immigrants and their children and grandchildren were actually white despite protestations to the contrary. Hispanic and Asian immigrants are not. I’d say 50/50 for either a re-definition of white or continuing as things are. There is evidence of both.

    Even if we assume that the United States does become a person of color majority nation, that doesn’t mean politics will necessarily become more liberal or be what we want them to be. Different groups have different political interests. Its likely as people of color become the majority that the political differences between them will come to the forefront.

    Resting your political hopes on demographic change seems like a very bad political strategy. People thought that the Baby Boomers would take America to the Left and make us more like Europe. This didn’t really work out.

    • aturner339

      Yes though Asian Americans have been particular difficult to fold into the “white” conception (hence the ever present “where are you from?”).

      I don’t think anyone takes for granted the incredibly powerful incentive this country offers to “become white” if you can. The question is whether the Conservative movement will be accommodating in that regard.

      • LeeEsq

        Based on past history and some current evidence, I’d say yes. The White Protestants of the early 20th century hated and I mean really outright loathed, the Southern and Eastern European immigrants. One of the more infamous lynchings in the 1890s involved Italian immigrants in New Orleans. By the mid-1940s, all of these immigrants and their descendants were white.It won’t exactly be like it was in the mid-20th century but it could be enough like it for the United States to have a continued white or white-ish majority.

        My other point is that creating a political strategy based on future demographics is always a bad political strategy because it assumes that while demographics will change, the politics of different groups will remain the same. That didn’t exactly work out with the Baby Boomers. We also don’t know what future demographics are going to be exactly but we can make some pretty good guesses.

        • aturner339

          Sure they loathed the yellow peril too and they still aren’t white. We’d have to watch the data to know for sure. Are recent generations of US born Latinos more likely to self identify as “white” in the way German and Scots Irish Americans identity as “American”)?

          It is true that predictions are hard especially about the future but that’s the basis of all long term strategic planning. the Conservative movement planned the southern strategy and it hasn’t stopped paying out yet.

          • LeeEsq

            This isn’t direct evidence but a Pew Research report from 2014 shows that millions of Americans selected different answers on what race they are on the 2000 and 2010 census forms.

            http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/05/millions-of-americans-changed-their-racial-or-ethnic-identity-from-one-census-to-the-next/

            Hispanic Americans were the most likely to change, mainly from Hispanic to other. On dating apps, many people seem to be selecting other for their race from personal observation. Especially if they look ambiguously between of color and white. My guess is that the other category is a sort of legalistic stepping stone towards white. First your of color, than your other, and finally white. I believe that similar things happened during the 19th century.

            • Ronan

              I think you’re taking this too literally. The point about “becoming white” (as far as it has one) is race and identity are (with caveats) contingent. “Becoming white” is (imo) an idiotic frame because it mistakes race for colour. European groups were racialised, as was everyone, in the late 19th century, but they were still white. This huge theoretical apparatus that has (incorrectly, imo) been built up to.understand 19th century racial hierarchies (becoming white) is not necessarily going to be any use for projecting racial distinctions into the future.(tbh it doesn’t even explain what it purports to explain)
              The question isn’t whether Latinos or Asians “become white”, it’s what does race mean in 20,30,40s years, after you have these demographics transitions , a less white population etc. That’s the question, not whether they self identify as white.

      • XTPD

        I’d also submit that of the various Asian-American groupings, only nonreligious West/Central (i.e., not readily identified as Islamic) Asians have really been accepted as “white.” As for other Asian ethnic groups, Jeet Heer has noted that the prevalence of anti-black sentiment among South Asians seems to be the tribute paid by members of the diaspora for cultural acceptance.

    • Just_Dropping_By

      The Southern and Eastern European immigrants and their children and grandchildren were actually white despite protestations to the contrary. Hispanic and Asian immigrants are not.

      Uh, I’d submit that plenty of Hispanics are already “actually white despite protestations to the contrary.”

    • It’s possible that something like this will happen eventually, but right now the trend seems to be in the opposite direction. You’re Jewish, right? ‘Cause I’m pretty sure that after the shitgibbon’s “election”, neither of us qualify as white anymore.

      • BartletForGallifrey

        Notably, even though the Jews were white for several decades, we remained hella Democratic.

      • LeeEsq

        I never saw myself or Jews as particular white before Trump’s election even if American society generally did. Whether Jews count as white or non-white depends on the needs of the Gentiles at a particular time and its usually to cause maximum discomfort to the Jews or try to gain advantage by appealing to us and than abandoning us when we need help.

  • NorEastern

    Just remember things can never ever get so bad they cannot get worse. And we are approaching worse at an alarming velocity.

    The Republican Party is leading America back to the early 50’s reign of Joe McCarthy without any of the optimism, economic growth or sense of destiny that were present back then.

    • TopsyJane

      Yes, but this is what is needed. Things will become so bad that as neoliberalism dies the death it deserves, the people will rise up and put ethnic and racial resentments aside to unite in the common struggle against the elites. They will take over the Democratic Party or create a new and truly progressive party that will smite down the GOP machine.

      True, there will be a lot of suffering in the meantime, but you can’t make an omelet, etc. Personally, I can’t wait.

  • efgoldman

    The desire to southernize the entire United States is not new, and in some ways it’s been happening for a while [snip]
    The first and most far-reaching component of this project is to take the Southern economic model national. The foundation of that model is the elimination of collective bargaining and the destruction of the labor unions that are able to negotiate higher wages and better benefits for workers.

    Except for more modern unions and communication (and actual legal slavery), this is pretty much what every book about the war of Southern treason says about the 1850s.

  • erick

    I think all the think pieces and Monday morning quarterbacking about what decided the election are way overthought.

    There are two things that determine presidential elections:

    1) the small percentage of swing voters, less than 10% maybe less than 5%. These are the poeple who are completely uninformed and out of touch, no messaging or discussion of issues will sway them. It has been pointed out that in the modern era with only a couple exceptions no one has been elected president more than something like 8-12 after first coming on the national political scene. These voters go for shiny and new. (I know trump has been famous since the 89s, but he wasn’t a politician)

    2) turnout. In ’04 the anti gay ballot measures in places the like Ohio were turn out machines, the religious right used them to bring tons of people who had never voted out of the woodwork. I suspect there were trivial numbers of Obama voters in Pennsylvania, .Michigan and Wisconsin who voted for Trump. I suspect in those small towns the religious right turned out voters using the Supreme Court and abortion and the NRA did the same with “Hillary wants to take your guns”

    • Just_Dropping_By

      Concerning your first point, that’s “Rauch’s Rule,” which holds that a politician has a 14-year shelf life for the presidency: http://www.jonathanrauch.com/jrauch_articles/freshness-test-for-politicians/ Clinton arguably failed that test as noted by Politico in this piece from August:http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/election-prediction-methods-models-2016-214148

    • FMguru

      After a month of consideration, I’ve got two takeaways from the 2016 election:

      1) The eight-year rule is real. It is just really, really hard for a party to win a third consecutive term in the White House. Only once in the last seven tries has a party managed to hold the Presidency for a third term (Bush 1988). It’s a headwind that’s very hard to overcome.

      2) The track record of Accomplished Party Stalwarts in Presidential elections is not good. Dole, McCain, Kerry, Clinton, Mondale, Gore, and on and on. Fresh faces just do a lot better.

      • SNF

        If you have experience, then that means that you have a track record. And you almost certainly made a vote here or there that was popular at the time but which is unpopular now. Public opinion changes, but we loathe politicians who have changed their positions over the years. If you haven’t been in office, you don’t have any votes from a different political time people can criticize.

    • SNF

      Regarding turnout, I suspect that Trump also benefitted from his explicit racism.

      There are probably people out there who felt alienated from politics because their main issue was bigotry, and the GOP’s dog whistles weren’t enough for them. That probably explains the people who voted for Trump in 2016 but skipped voting in 2012.

      • BartletForGallifrey

        This. Very this. I’m pretty sure a couple of people I know who are in their thirties never even bothered to register before, but dammit they were going to vote for him come hell or high water.

      • Gizmo

        Well, bigotry and pissing off the liberals.

  • SamInMpls

    I get that Stoller isn’t popular around here and I don’t agree with everything he writes but I still think that the sections in this piece on the influence of Thurow on the Democratic Party of today are worth chewing on.

    • D.N. Nation

      This particular piece got a whippin’ around here a month or so ago. It’s when I first discovered that apparently Stoller back in ’07 said Obama wasn’t going places because he was “on Oprah all the time,” or something that definitely didn’t betray that dude’s doofy whiteness.

    • Galbraith seems kind of out of place in his progression of neoliberal influences, considering how strongly opposed he was to Reaganite deregulation.

      Incidentally, The Affluent Society is kind of a dark read these days. The portrait of an economy where increased production is mostly driven by creating (through advertising) and then filling a demand for luxury goods has never been more recognizable.

  • AMK

    The southern model has persisted because the south and conservatives more generally take federalism and state governments seriously as a countervailing force against Washington. Every one of the things cited here–economics, health care, civil rights–is a product of the 10th amendment. Liberals are going to have to take lots of pages out of that book over the next 4 years.

  • Donna Gratehouse

    OK, maybe Puzder is a strong opponent of labor rights, but the NEOLIBERAL Tom Perez once observed that Hillary Clinton was more popular among African-Americans than Bernie Sanders, so really Both Sides Do It but Clinton is probably worse.

    Didn’t the Sanders campaign shape its primary campaign strategy specifically around neutralizing Clinton’s African American vote via winning white-majority caucus states? Oh wait, that was for Teh Revolution! Never mind.

It is main inner container footer text