Grifman wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2024 2:06 pm
The Dems need to break through alternative media:
Have we considered the uninterested, unmotivated population is actually the problem?
I get that people aren't interested in classic media in general, but overall my experience after nearly 3 decades of public service is the general public does not give a crap about anything related to politics or the political process. I'm not sure a TikTok about the importance of voting rights or immigration is going to fix the disinterest.
I think you missed the point of the article. As disinterested as these people may be, they ARE being reached by forms of media the Democrats have largely ignored. As such their views ARE being shaped by that media. If the Dems continue to ignore it, then they are going to forfeit these potential voters to the Republicans who do play in the media world.
And yes, it would be great if we had highly engaged and knowledgeable voters, but you have work with the voters you have, not the ones you wish you had. And I don’t think voters are more or less interested/disinterested than in the past. I don’t think there is some mythical past where voters were highly engaged, interested, etc. than they are now. This isn’t a new problem. The change is that they no longer take their cues from traditional media such as TV and newspapers, but from multiple non-traditional sources. And if you don’t play in those sources, your messsge isn’t reaching that audience.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
As a disciple of McLuhan, I'm going to suggest that I didn't miss the point of the article. Instead I will insist that changing the medium inherently changes the message. More to the point, the medium(s) we all use today isn't geared toward encouraging the American version of democracy that our parents and grandparents enjoyed. This is why (I believe) we're sliding into something completely different in the shadow of the dawn of the internet. We just all happen to be alive while it's happening and the transition is going to be painful.
If you don't think the media (and more importantly where the average person gets their information from) has changed significantly over the last 70+ years (by leaps and bounds over the last 20) and how that's changed public discourse and engagement with the political process I'm not sure what to add that might convince you otherwise.
EDIT: I guess to be clear - "playing to the sources" isn't going to encourage democracy, in my opinion. The medium isn't conducive to growing community and a shared sense of what it means to be in a society made of different viewpoints. The medium drives tribalism and serves to magnify extremes.
“We become what we behold. We shape our tools, and thereafter our tools shape us.”
Smoove_B wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2024 7:44 pm
In short, we don't deserve the responsibility of democracy...at least how we've come to understand it.
I sometimes think that we did too well after WWII. We haven't had enemies at the door. We haven't had common cause. We haven't been under immediate threat (save for the more abstract threat of the cold war.) We haven't had serious hunger, and things like drought have been regional.
We developed the means to allow ourselves to become stupid, lazy, and selfish, while having no need for any sort of even semi-unified national identity.
I also think at times that the US is just too large to function the way we want it too. We keep trying to pretend that we're one nation, one culture, when in practice we're not. We're a range of cultures spread across different regions with different needs and priorities, and it's hard to create change to solve one group's/region's problem without screwing over another.
Blackhawk wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2024 1:11 am
I sometimes think that we did too well after WWII. We haven't had enemies at the door. We haven't had common cause. We haven't been under immediate threat (save for the more abstract threat of the cold war.) We haven't had serious hunger, and things like drought have been regional.
I can't imagine Americans coming together to wage total war now under any circumstances. Sacrifice for a greater good isn't in our repertoire. Plus we're the fascists this time, so there's that.
Grifman wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2024 2:06 pm
The Dems need to break through alternative media:
Have we considered the uninterested, unmotivated population is actually the problem?
I get that people aren't interested in classic media in general, but overall my experience after nearly 3 decades of public service is the general public does not give a crap about anything related to politics or the political process. I'm not sure a TikTok about the importance of voting rights or immigration is going to fix the disinterest.
I think you missed the point of the article. As disinterested as these people may be, they ARE being reached by forms of media the Democrats have largely ignored. As such their views ARE being shaped by that media. If the Dems continue to ignore it, then they are going to forfeit these potential voters to the Republicans who do play in the media world.
And yes, it would be great if we had highly engaged and knowledgeable voters, but you have work with the voters you have, not the ones you wish you had. And I don’t think voters are more or less interested/disinterested than in the past. I don’t think there is some mythical past where voters were highly engaged, interested, etc. than they are now. This isn’t a new problem. The change is that they no longer take their cues from traditional media such as TV and newspapers, but from multiple non-traditional sources. And if you don’t play in those sources, your messsge isn’t reaching that audience.
Is there a way to lie, mislead, and propagandize without lying, misleading, and propagandizing?
Tampa state Rep. Susan Valdes on Monday switched her party registration from Democrat to Republican. The move expands the GOP majority in the House to 86-34, the largest Republican majority in the House, according to a memo from Speaker Danny Perez, R-Miami.
In a statement, Valdes, who is term limited and was recently re-elected as a Democrat, said she didn’t want to spend the next two years being “ignored” by her party.
My big worry about the Dems is that the rising generation of voters has never seen any version of American politics that wasn't dominated by either MAGA or the Tea Party.
To us oldsters, Dems still feel like the party of norms, decency, and E Pluribus Unum. But to younger voters (especially men), Dems look like weaklings who get steamrollered by GOP toughness.
I think this, more than Joe Rogan or Elon Musk, is what's driving young men to the right.
Tampa state Rep. Susan Valdes on Monday switched her party registration from Democrat to Republican. The move expands the GOP majority in the House to 86-34, the largest Republican majority in the House, according to a memo from Speaker Danny Perez, R-Miami.
In a statement, Valdes, who is term limited and was recently re-elected as a Democrat, said she didn’t want to spend the next two years being “ignored” by her party.
I assume by "ignored" she means "not getting enough grift?"
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
LawBeefaroni wrote: Sun Dec 15, 2024 12:11 pm
I assume by "ignored" she means "not getting enough grift?"
Heh, my takeaway was that "her party" was the GOP all along. Of course they'd ignore her if she's caucusing with the enemy.
It's too bad that the people who just voted for her as a Democrat don't have a say in how things like this play out, until the next election comes along anyway.
"What? What?What?" -- The 14th Doctor
It's not enough to be a good player... you also have to play well. -- Siegbert Tarrasch
Nothing says integrity like being voted in under one party only to shift allegiances after the fact. Does she think that the voters thought she, personally, was a good choice and that they'll just be happy to have her, whatever banner she flies?
I think anyone personally worthy of serving, is not likely to switch parties mid-term.
GreenGoo wrote: Sun Dec 15, 2024 4:20 pm
Nothing says integrity like being voted in under one party only to shift allegiances after the fact. Does she think that the voters thought she, personally, was a good choice and that they'll just be happy to have her, whatever banner she flies?
I think anyone personally worthy of serving, is not likely to switch parties mid-term.
This isn't even mid-term. If I read it right, she was re-elected as a Democrat one month ago, and her next (and final, because of state term limits) term hasn't even begun yet.
This is someone jumping on the right-wing gravy train because she knows there's nothing her voters can do about it.
I'm beginning to think old people are never going to give up the power they hold:
The battle between Ocasio-Cortez, 35, and Connolly, 74, came as several committee ranking members have fallen to challenges from relatively younger colleagues.
...
House Democrats' Steering and Policy Committee on Tuesday voted to recommend Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) as ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, several sources familiar with the vote told Axios.
El Guapo wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:20 am
Do we know anything about Connolly? I like AOC, but I don't know whether Connolly is particularly objectionable.
In a statement posted on social media, Connolly said he was surprised to learn he has cancer because, other than some occasional stomach pains, he had no symptoms.
Connolly, 74, said he will immediately begin chemotherapy and immunotherapy.
“Cancer can be tough,” Connolly wrote. “But so am I. I will attack this the only way I know how — with Irish fight and humor.”
He added that he is “confident in a successful outcome.”
Connolly said he plans to continue serving in Congress but warned his constituents that he “may be a bit fatigued due to the treatment,” adding, “I hope you’ll understand.”
Connolly was elected Tuesday to his ninth term representing Virginia’s 11th District, located in the Washington, D.C., suburbs. He received 67% of the vote in defeating Republican Mike Van Meter, a retired FBI agent.
There have been more than 22,000 new esophageal cancer cases diagnosed and 16,130 deaths from the disease in 2024, according to the American Cancer Society. Men are about 3½ times more likely than women to be diagnosed with esophageal cancer.
They didn't learn the lesson from losing the election, they chose an old sick man over a young and healthy woman. This is not how you get the young voters to vote for your party.
Last edited by Victoria Raverna on Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
I will say the suggestion that AOC should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years younger does not sit well with me. I like AOC quite a bit and think she should absolutely have a prominent leadership role. But just citing the age difference alone doesn't seem like a sufficient argument.
El Guapo wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:44 am
I will say the suggestion that AOC should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years younger does not sit well with me. I like AOC quite a bit and think she should absolutely have a prominent leadership role. But just citing the age difference alone doesn't seem like a sufficient argument.
How about the suggestion that Connolly should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years older? That sit well with you?
Connolly will join fellow septuagenarians in top committee spots next year. Richard Neal, 75, will lead Democrats on Ways and Means while Frank Pallone, 73, will be the party’s top representative on Energy and Commerce. Eighty-six-year-old Maxine Waters will be the ranking member on the Financial Services Committee, and Rose DeLauro, 81, will helm the Democrats’ presence in Appropriations.
The elderly are not too old to govern. But they may, in this case, be too attached to a failed way of doing things. The job of the Oversight Committee, for instance, is to “ensure the efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability of the federal government and all its agencies,” including the Pentagon. Connolly this past cycle accepted $118,500 from political action committees linked to the defense sector. Ways and Means is the House’s top tax-writing committee, with jurisdiction over the revenue-related aspects of Social Security and Medicare, among other programs. Neal is a top recipient of donations from the insurance industry, having accepted $412,000 from insurance industry PACs during the 2024 campaign cycle, plus generous six-figure donations from HMOs and pharmaceutical companies. Frank Pallone has gotten more than $1 million from electric utilities since joining Congress in 1998.
The old and corrupt politicians won.
Last edited by Victoria Raverna on Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
El Guapo wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:44 am
I will say the suggestion that AOC should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years younger does not sit well with me. I like AOC quite a bit and think she should absolutely have a prominent leadership role. But just citing the age difference alone doesn't seem like a sufficient argument.
How about the suggestion that Connolly should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years older? That sit well with you?
No. But the discussion thus far has focused almost entirely on the age difference, which leads me to think that that's the key factor. If Democratic leadership picked him solely because of his higher age, that would also be less than ideal.
VR knows nothing about the importance of seniority in U.S. leadership positions when political leverage is equal.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
El Guapo wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:44 am
I will say the suggestion that AOC should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years younger does not sit well with me. I like AOC quite a bit and think she should absolutely have a prominent leadership role. But just citing the age difference alone doesn't seem like a sufficient argument.
How about the suggestion that Connolly should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years older? That sit well with you?
No. But the discussion thus far has focused almost entirely on the age difference, which leads me to think that that's the key factor. If Democratic leadership picked him solely because of his higher age, that would also be less than ideal.
That was pretty much the reason he won. He was the senior and waited for his turn. The only reason for him to be picked over AOC is that he waited long enough for his turn to be in charge. And he was supported by the older Nancy Pelosi.
El Guapo wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:44 am
I will say the suggestion that AOC should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years younger does not sit well with me. I like AOC quite a bit and think she should absolutely have a prominent leadership role. But just citing the age difference alone doesn't seem like a sufficient argument.
How about the suggestion that Connolly should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years older? That sit well with you?
No. But the discussion thus far has focused almost entirely on the age difference, which leads me to think that that's the key factor. If Democratic leadership picked him solely because of his higher age, that would also be less than ideal.
That was pretty much the reason he won. He was the senior and waited for his turn. The only reason for him to be picked over AOC is that he waited long enough for his turn to be in charge. And he was supported by the older Nancy Pelosi.
They didn't learn the lesson from losing the election, they chose an old sick man over a young and healthy woman. This is not how you get the young voters to vote for your party.
Huh?
They went with the younger woman. And lost.
AOC was voted into her seat.
Committee appointments aren't voted on by the public.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
While the victory went beyond ideology, there were simmering fears among centrists about how elevating Ocasio-Cortez, an outspoken liberal who has gone viral for her moments on the panel before, would turn out. There was also a sense that it was Connolly’s turn, after he had previously run for the Oversight spot twice and served on the panel for 15 years, according to interviews with eight Democratic lawmakers.
Connolly also used his strong relationships in the centrist New Democrat Coalition, considered the largest ideological bloc in the caucus, to build significant support, after Ocasio-Cortez surged early on. Incoming New Democrat Coalition Chair Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) made calls on behalf of Connolly after the group’s endorsement Friday, said a person granted anonymity to discuss the private outreach.
Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi also phoned other lawmakers on his behalf — a factor other lawmakers said was significant, but not nearly as decisive as Connolly’s own relationships throughout the caucus.
“The membership comes together and makes these decisions. Members make individual decisions,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.). “I’ve seen leadership weigh in on races in the caucus and win some and lose some.”
Connolly’s internal whip count of roughly 130 lawmakers that POLITICO reported Friday almost exactly mirrored the final whip count of 131 votes for him on Tuesday morning.
Ocasio-Cortez’s allies had projected early confidence in the race and had hoped to capitalize on a post-election appetite for change in the caucus. But while other ranking members largely fell to or stepped aside for younger challengers, members still largely felt it wasn’t right to bypass 74-year-old Connolly for the 35-year-old progressive darling. And despite the calls for a shift in leadership and some concerns about Connolly’s recent cancer diagnosis, House Democrats aren’t totally willing to abandon their attachment to seniority.
“I think that there are challenges in totally abandoning the seniority system here, because if seniority is not the rule, money becomes the rule,” said Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), who’d been the first Democrat to call for President Joe Biden to drop his reelection bid earlier this year.
They didn't learn the lesson from losing the election, they chose an old sick man over a young and healthy woman. This is not how you get the young voters to vote for your party.
Huh?
They went with the younger woman. And lost.
AOC was voted into her seat.
Committee appointments aren't voted on by the public.
They lose young voters because they chose to support Biden for too long. They finally switched to Kamala but by then it was too late.
They didn't learn the lesson from losing the election, they chose an old sick man over a young and healthy woman. This is not how you get the young voters to vote for your party.
Huh?
They went with the younger woman. And lost.
AOC was voted into her seat.
Committee appointments aren't voted on by the public.
They lose young voters because they chose to support Biden for too long. They finally switched to Kamala but by then it was too late.
That seems kond of revisionist. When they switched to Kamala, young voters were energized and engaged in record numbers. Then the party tore itself apart on Palestine and other issues.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
El Guapo wrote: Wed Dec 18, 2024 11:44 am
I will say the suggestion that AOC should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years younger does not sit well with me. I like AOC quite a bit and think she should absolutely have a prominent leadership role. But just citing the age difference alone doesn't seem like a sufficient argument.
How about the suggestion that Connolly should be chosen simply by virtue of being 40 years older? That sit well with you?
It's not about age but about ideology. AOC, despite being a world-class communicator and an inspiration to many (especially younger) Dems, is too progressive for the party gerontocracy. This, despite the fact that she has demonstrated a clear ability to work with those less progressive that she is.
It’s not a popular election, it’s an election in the institution. It’s not unexpected for someone who is there longer to draw more support.
This is how Democrats fail, by turning on each other while the Republicans drones fall in line.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
Rank and seniority matter. If this fellow waited 15+ years for his turn AND he now has cancer, maybe he deserves to grab the brass ring at last. (I'm assuming that he's qualified to do the job.) If he's near the end of his career and/or life, it will open up again in due time.
