I've become convinced our Democratic leaders don't have any idea about messaging and the use of framing. Everyone needs to frame Trump for what he is. And frame things in our own way. This is a great start.
Then instead of saying to ourselves "it won't matter because his followers are in a cult", remember that not everyone is in the cult, and repeat, repeat, repeat.
Never work with their framing. Never use their words. Work with our own.
Whenever he does something stupid/crazy/depraved, respond with the same messages -- he is a declining, demented old man being run by billionaires to enrich them and increase their power. He has no empathy or concern for ordinary people.
Or however you want to put it.
Do not be too distracted by the details of the latest insanity. Respond consistently. Relate his stupid and depraved actions to the same message about a lack of empathy and values.
I recommend everyone read, for starters, "The Political Mind" by George Lakoff to understand this.
Where is the Democratic leadership? Harris and Walz went under a rock after the election. People want to rally, resist, protest but leadership is in a vacuum.
Kamala Harris was still the Vice President until yesterday; Tim Walz still has a day job as governor of MN. What did you expect them to do? I agree that the Dems need public-facing leaders, but we don't have to wait around to be told what to do. We have elections to win this year in NJ and VA and other places. It's time we stopped waiting around for someone to rescue us and start building our own raft.
Agreed. The craving for a savior is the root cause of the authoritarian party. We need to continue to build grass roots movements. Indivisible is a good place to start. Supporting the ACLU matters hugely.
I finally broke down and paid for this subscription. It’s worth it. I don’t know how long I’ll keep paying but I will read it whether I can post or not.
I’m a contrarian like the blog reads. But I’m not partisan. Or I should say and I’m not partisan. So here is my retort. I learn by examples and incidents in my life. If I do something and it goes wrong, I reflect what I have done wrong. I feel we have gone in the wrong direction as democrats although in name only, I often disagree with us/them.
Diversity to me means declaring war on Caucasians. Yes I said it. Learn by examples right as I stated? I have been repeatedly told I’m privileged. No doubt from folks reading CRT. I’m a single small business proprietor. I once applied to be a vendor at a democratic function and the app demanded of me these questions. 1. Minority-owned? 2. Woman-owned? 3. Union friendly? 4. LBGTQ? (Ya believe it this is where we have gone.) I’m a fricken small business single proprietor. I don’t belong there.
Another example: A friend in my business line is a Black woman and she can get into a particular showcase for free and I need to pay a lot for that privilege. And she is more prosperous than I am. I’m sorry, DEI, Diversity has declared economic and social war on white people. Sure we have. Even Hillary coined that stupid term, “Deplorables” after her husband signed the NAFTA accords which didn’t have a net positive for the rust belt and all those good paying line jobs. Ok that issue is more nuanced than I can speak too. But fear not, I will never move to the right MAGA movement. I will always steer my ship into safer waters of democratic control. But I sure am peed over the direction we have taken. And I know that this direction has aided in the MAGA movement. And I even had the tenacity to write a book about the monster now in the room, “Donald’s Vanity Tantrums.”
"Diversity to me means declaring war on Caucasians. Yes I said it. Learn by examples right as I stated? I have been repeatedly told I’m privileged. No doubt from folks reading CRT."
That sentiment reminds me of the old saying, 'When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.' Your interpretation of collecting demographic information on a vendor form as an attack should have made you stop and think. If it didn't, do it now. --Average White Woman from NC
Jane, you may rightfully argue on my points but if I were anyone else, I would be raising my right arm in the air with my palm down. That was the point that you conveniently passed by. And this is why we are at least partially in the pickle we are in. So may it warm your heart to know or think you know that you have the answers.
Now try and read my mini screed again to understand it.
Condescension is neither the way to make friends nor to influence people, Bill. If you really are that close to throwing a Nazi salute, you're the one who needs to go back and think again, not me. Even on my worst day, that thought wouldn't even cross my mind.
Diversity, equity and inclusion are worthwhile goals. If you want to compare life experiences, I spent many years as an HR director and I know from first hand experience how many employment decisions were made by people who wouldn't even consider a female or non-white candidate. As John Adams said, 'if men were angels, we wouldn't need laws.' Without affirmative action and now DEI, the majority of the employment pool would be out of luck.
Leveling the playing field to people who've always had it tilted in their favor does, indeed, feel like oppression - as long as you never consider who was disadvantaged by your advantage.
I'm a Democrat who agrees with you to some extent. While I do not believe the Dems have a goal of waging war on whites (I am Caucasian myself), I do see how DEI can be experienced that way by certain groups of white people such as sole proprietors of small business like yourself. As a Roman Catholic, I am a strong support of social justice, in the US and around the globe, but not a supporter of modern DEI and Social Justice ideology with its division of the world into categories of either oppressor or oppressed. I identify with the social justice activists of the 1960s and 70s who wanted the same human dignity and opportunity for all, regardless of identity, and feel the Dems, or perhaps I should say the Progressives among the Dems, have become too extreme, ideological, scolding, divisive and impractical, and as a result, off-putting, in their attempts to achieve justice for traditionally marginalized groupsl.
New injustices are being created. As a woman for example, I do not want biological males in spaces set aside for biological women, regardless of how those males see themselves. At the same time, in any other circumstances, I gladly treat trans-identifying persons with the same courtesy and respect I extend to all. As human beings, they have a right to it. But again, one does not eradicate injustice by replacing one form with another.
I have a transgender grandson, the smartest trans in the world 💗& I’ve come to realize that there’s so much more to gender than just 1 chromosome. He’s an amazing person, kind, smart, open minded & openhearted. I suspect we need to reconsider what gender actually means; scientifically, we know so literal. As our population continues to explode, there are So many more opportunities for species growth/transformation. It’s truly wonderful (& mind-boggling🙃).
Well Bobbette, if I could hook up with a pretty Bonobo female, I would marry her in a heart beat and get the hell out of the human race. (Ok, that was a joke.)
You got it same here. I have absolutely no issues with any trans stuff. I have accept other life styles since young teen years. But I am against or as I say, no balls in girls stalls.
I have t even touched on more issue like zoning changes to allow cluster or subsidized housing for the poor. I am most certainly against this crazy notion. In my line of work, I mostly seek to African Americans most of whom are much wealthier than I am. The few occasions where I engage in broader conversations, I have sometimes asked if they would be amendable to subsidized housing in their neighborhoods. Could you guess the answers? Of course you can. None would want zoning changes to allow for this. This is a touchy subject. So many of us, mostly progressives and liberals are dead determined to change zoning. When will we stop thinking that every move we make is based on a racial divide. It’s simply not. Yes there are inequities in the system. Anyway, I need to get back to work.
I do agree that we need to listen to every one, and in fact try to focus more on values and less on ethnic groups or other groupings.
This can come by focusing on issues and problems that cut across groups. Everyone is going to be affected by high prices, low wages, etc.
The way I think we should be discussing diversity issues is to make it clear that the elites and the billionaires use these things to keep people with shared interests divided. People are fighting for a place in a hierarchy and when they do that often do not vote their interests.
I think it is definitely true that the Democratic Party, over time, has unintentionally exacerbated the divisions by the mechanism you state. Just by ignoring people from groups labeled "privileged" is a form of discrimination.
We should be talking to EVERYONE and listening to EVERYONE, and if we don't do that we are discriminating at least by ignoring people. Also, people who are in the so-called "privileged" group can struggle for any number of reasons, and a lack of empathy is problematic. Calling a struggling person "privileged" is like pouring salt on a wound.
We also can't expect that a struggling young white male trying to make his place in life is going to be focused on minorities or women, etc. They should be empathetic, but it's hard enough to be young and trying to make your way.
We also shouldn't exclusively tell people that they should go to college if they want to be successful, because we are telling people if they didn't go to college, that is why they are unsuccessful. It makes it their fault.
A good book about these things, and there are some videos too, is by Michael Sandel, "The Tyranny of Merit". He's a liberal academic but he would acknowledge a lot of what you are saying.
I find it hard to understand how a living minimum wage, protecting the environment, fighting climate change, affordable childcare, reliable infrastrucure, negotiating drug prices, etc. don't cut across groups and somehow ignore people. Beyond hateful immigration rhetoric and dishonest economic messaging, what is the great outreach of the GOP? I don't know about the rest of you, but if you've had to call a plumber, electrician, HVAC service person or roofer lately, you'd know that a college degree is not required for financial success. Why are these young, white males struggling so?
It's a good question. I think there are many factors.
One thing I heard is that there is an expectation of both men and women that the man should be more educated/successful/high earning than the woman, and that this is causing difficulties for both men and women with those expectations finding partners.
Women outnumber men 60-40 at universities.
But I'm sure there are many, many contributing factors that make them feel undervalued.
Bill, I have seen you making this "strawman" argument in another newsletter which could mean you are just a bot. But I want to comment on your statement about your black friend getting into a showcase for free and you having to pay giving the impression that because she is black she was privileged and you were not. However, it is also possible her getting in free didn't have anything to do with her color. In America, knowing the right person can get you access or someone may be responding to a favor that was done for them or maybe someone she was dating was in a position to let her in for free. I'm sure there could be other reasons that I didn't mention.
Why is diversity declaring war on Caucasians? What this mindset suggests is that anyone who is not a Caucasian is inferior to them; therefore, if they are given a position, they have illegitimately replaced a deserving Caucasian person. That is racist thinking. Diversity means that "qualified" applicants are given an opportunity without regard to their color, gender, or religious beliefs. Once you can acknowledge that discrimination has been a real thing, you can appreciate that those who have been discriminated against should be given equal opportunity. In a merit-based system, if all things are equal, the organization should generally reflect the make-up of the population of potential candidates. DEI just means every qualified candidate is included in the pool of potential candidates and haven't been automatically excluded because of their race, sex or religious beliefs.
Bill, regarding your concern about the questions being asked on your application for vendor access, assuming multiple vendors applied, and several were all equally qualified in all other aspects, levelling the playing field by giving those "minorities" preference is a step toward real equality. Or do you believe nothing should be done or attempted to begin levelling that playing field?
To me, leveling the playing field means who ever applies if there remains an opening, gets in not on the bases of ethnic background. I used an example of an acquaintance who is in the same business as I and as a Black woman, gets into a particular exhibition without charge. And she happens to have a bigger business than I. Is that fair? I don’t think it is. I’m not by any means thinks the world is totally fair and equal.
I think my original point was that a large portion of the population voted for a monster and I want to believe that I at least partially understand why this happened. And what as a society can be done. And as I said in my first post, when I do something that goes wrong, I first question what it was I did wrong instead of blaming others. I think democrats keep pushing when maybe just maybe they/we should begging a big re-think. But that is t likely to happen. So I’ll end with a short from my book that I will post in a moment and the title is, “Welcome to the New Snazzy Nazi States of America.” Btw, it was written 5 years ago. My oh my how well I predicted.
(From 'Donald's Vanity Tantrums')
Welcome to The New Snazzy Nazi States of America
(Introducing The Goose-Step, Two-Step March)
A new dance craze is sweeping the nation called, The Goose-Step, Two-step March. This invigorating new exercise is easy to learn! First, link arms on the dance floor. As you move backward in line, turn your head to the right and lift your left leg straight up as high as it will go. Then step forward as you turn your head to the left and lift your right leg straight up in the air.
It's very similar to square dancing or line dancing. Soon the dance floor will be filled with goose-steppers. Forward, backward, round and round. If you step out of line, you are tagged, the caller detains you, interrogates you, strip searches you, and sends you off to detainment camps for disloyalty.
This new dance craze is not to be confused with serious charges of criminal activity. By the time the youngins reach the age of reason, they will be quick to form into lines upon request for impromptu Goose-Step, Two-Step Marches and other forms of family entertainment.
I’m smiling 😊 right now because I see that only 4 people agree with my position while others have far more likes. I know my points are unpopular but sometimes truthfulness comes with resistance.
All the while it’s interesting that though this blog reads “Contrarian,” perhaps there are no so many contrarians reading it? Anyone care to speculate?
Nothing wrong with having an opinion that goes against the mainstream, if it's honest, and especially if it's well thought out. I like how you put it that you often "disagree with us/them (small 'd' democrats). I'm not much of a debater myself, and dislike arguing, but I have tended to be in agreement with one side of my family on socio-political issues, but not spiritually and on matters of faith (though the latter is making progress, thankfully). Whereas on the other side it's been completely the reverse. It's important that we, small 'd' democrats who value our republic (again, small 'r') talk these things out, and decide what to do about it. One idea I have never accepted (and never will) is "there's nothing we can do about it."
Like you, I'm tired of the blame game...especially the one pointing to Harris. I've worked in every presidential campaign since Jimmy Carter. I can honestly say this: Harris and Waltz had the best ground operation I've seen. The problem that I encountered was the media stating she "had no policies" when, in fact, at every rally and every event AND on her website, her plan for America was well-stated and a STARK contrast to Orange Man's. IDK how you overcome MEDIA BIAS and, until we solve that problem, we are screwed.
Repeat: Harris and Waltz ran a fantastic campaign.
Thank you! It was so maddening to witness that extreme media bias about "where are her policies?" Not to mention Trump's torrential spigot of lies about her policies. It was obvious that Harris and Walz ran a terrific campaign. Much appreciation for working on so many campaigns!
I agree Ellie. Blame is a waste of time. Blame is playing into MAGA's game. Let's find our commonalities, recognize MAGA's tactics of fear, blame, scapegoating that is splitting us apart. Life will become hard but we are intelligent and strong in our unity and belief in our positive freedom for our diverse America.
The problem I see is young men, who, crazed because of their self-perceived & vastly immature, irrelevancy in an America (& world, actually) couldn’t stand the idea of a female president - & a dark-skinned one at that. I saw a couple of them, as I left my voting place in Hawai’i, smirking at their opportunity to strike back. Where the hell are their mothers?!?
Where are their mothers AND fathers? What have they learned in their homes? Do they see their parents treating each other with respect, with love and kindness? Have they seen their mother's take on all or most responsibility for household work?
Have their parents shown and told them that women are full human beings who have the ability and right to make their own decisions about their lives?
As a grandmother who raised 2 sons AND 2 grandsons, they were all raised as bitchybitchybitchy suggests by a single female parent. One grandson chose to interpret my abilities and success and choice not to remarry as "hating men". Although his voting tendency is still Democratic, he subscribes to the Joe Rogan, Lex Friedman, Jordan Peterson "blatherings".. The other, while very loving, kind and respectful, got wrapped around all the YouTubers spreading the "they are all the same" and fell for the prolific anti-Democratic propaganda and the online apps reinforced it by pushing more to him.
I'm not as upset with them as I am with the morons in Congress. They can NEVER, EVER seem to get on the same page. There is zero organized push-back about any of this crap. Dems, for far too long, have expected the media to carry their water instead of going out and taking a message to the American people. We are reaping that strategy today, in spades.
Our side (I’m only a democrat so I can vote in important primaries in my city) has blown it. Please read my screed above. Politicians will always most always protect their positions. And if an issue is unpopular and their minders don’t support it, they will not either. That’s the sordid way of the political world.
Well I think leaders have to emerge and have not yet emerged. I don't think Harris and Walz are great choices for that going forward. Or, I would say at least, we need other people to step forward. Losing presidential candidates need to rebuild if they are going to ever run again.
Walz isn't up to being a national leader. I like him but he's just not of the right caliber for this.
Michelle O is in her 60s and has expressed no interest in playing a political role. She can be very effective on stage as a supporter or surrogate, but will not be that leader.
Yes! He would be a start to the reformation of the DNC. Continuing to operate in the same way hasn't worked, so continuing to do it this way isn't good thinking. Maybe it's time to abandon the idealistic positions and address the real problems that voters face, and present strategies and programs to address them. At the same time, develop a network that gets the messages out across all of the media.
I think the most important thing right now after opposing T's appointments and policies is reaching out to your local state, county, and assembly representatives. Get to know what's happening locally; what's pending; what's being held back and why -- tracking legislation and making these reps know you hold them accountable. Wherever you are, build a strong base to withstand challenges to come.
Actually, protesting did a lot for me: marching in my pink pussy hat with my daughter & son in law & grandchildren did a Lot for me. Gotta speak up against ignorance & toxic machismo. Bring on the tee-shirts!!
Walz is already engaged with his state of Minnesota, so not much blame should come his way. No doubt, he's got his hands full planning resistance concerning the incoming administration. Harris, however, has not been seen nor heard from since the defeat. If I'm wrong, then my apologies here forth with. However, I simply have not seen her on the news nor read any recent quotes by her.
Give her a minute, will you? She’s only 1 day past being Veep. And taking daily abuse from the new jerk in the White House. I love it that she wore black to that sham of an inauguration. “Pray for the dead, & work like hell for the living.” -Mother Jones
It's only the first full day of the latest abomination administration. First, we must regroup, come up with messages and solutions that can be implemented, and find the people to broadcast them, realising that the mainstream media may be less of where voters currently get their news. There is no instant strategy, though it's time to start working on one for the midterm elections next year.
Agreed, and Daniel, I'll repeat what many of us have been saying: Garland took too long to name Jack Smith. The chain also leads back to McConnell et al who failed in their duty to find the malevolent menace guilty in the Senate.
On Jan 6, 2025, anyone taking the oath should have had to swear they did not support insurrection in 2001.
During the confirmation hearings, few, if any of the senators knew how to ask questions on cross examination to identify those candidates who might have aided, abetted, or gave aid and comfort to insurrectionists.
To grant pardons to insurrectionists violates the statute.
I don't disagree with you, Doug. I think I am feeling impatient about all the talk about who did what wrong. I am not finding any benefit there.
So, when I see a comment about how the former attorney general botched it or how the senate didn't step up or how Harris didn't say something she should have said at some interview or other, it just looks to me like us running around in circles and not going anywhere.
The election is over, and we have a sick person in the oval office now who surrounds himself with people who benefit from the destruction he so giddily causes.
The failings that caused us to get here now are just academic. We can talk about who started the fire after the fire has been put out. Right now, we've got to protect each other.
And, you know, you can talk about who did what wrong or whatever. It's not up to me! I just don't see how it does us any good at this point.
But, go ahead and ruminate on the election and failed legal efforts if you want to! I think the most important thing is, does it help you feel better or worse? If it causes you to feel worse, I don't much see the point.
Marji, you ask if it makes me feel better. No, of course not. Nothing will until profound change happens, if thats possible.
Does it make me feel worse? Only in the sense that it could have been nipped in the bud, from the Senate Republicans to Garland and ultimately by voters, the ultimate decider of his fate.
But I don’t find that it's unproductive to look back, nor does it cause me to run in circles, as I have my eyes set straight ahead. As for protecting others, I've long seen that as my duty in life — nothing new here. Family first, neighbors and friends next, and so on.
We must each process where we are, how we got here and how we choose to handle what things may befall us and others in our own way, and I respect your choice.
There is always a “block” option if you find some of us, including me, to be dwelling too much on any particular issue.
"And, you know, you can talk about who did what wrong or whatever. It's not up to me! I just don't see how it does us any good at this point."
Looking back, assessing, and processing leads to looking forward, creating new strategies, and demanding that we and our candidates do things differently.
Otherwise, it's like trying to drive quickly to an unfamiliar location without a map.
Our institutions held back evidence. As much as I hold Garland accountable, it was the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA and everyone involved cluster fucked this whole thing up. Why did they do that? The empire protects wealth and white privilege. Liz Cheney protected the Supreme Court, especially the Thomas's. They're very good friends. Where does this hypocrisy end.
Lisa, although I haven't seen or heard about these supposed institutional interferences, I'll accept your word for the moment. But remember, the whole world watched the events of on Jan 6, 2021. He was subsequently impeached. The House held a lengthy, televised investigation doe all to see (and I'll grant that the Jan 6 committee held back on sharing their research with DoJ, but it could have run its own parallel investigation). So why did Garland wait until November of 2022 -- 22 months after that tragic day, to name Jack Smith? Even Larry Tribe, Garland's former constitutional law professor at Harvard, implored him to take action.
I still blame Garland, along with the cowardly/myopic Republican Senators for this.
I read on the Lawfare site, the more insulated from the popular will an institution is, the more it has struggled to check Trump or his outright disclaimed any responsibility. Our legal system isn't set up to deal with anti democratic threats posed by the person who leads the executive branch. The House refused to do it. Only voters can remove him.
Having worked as an election judge in several roles in the very thorough, secure vote processing here in Colorado, I honestly believe Musk was involved in multiple instances of interference in the vote counting processes in multiple "swing states" to ensure this election went to Trump. Small incremental interference spread across multiple polling places adding up to just enough to ensure the win. I have suspicions that the spreadsheet with the hidden tabs that was discovered posted to the SOS site here in Colorado (containing partial passwords to access voting machines in every Colorado county for those of you not familiar) was an intended step toward that here that was foiled.
Have since read online of several hundreds of voters in different states whose votes were tracked as received but not counted, until it was way too late to remediate the situation.
Not sure there is any remediation possible for overturning the final result at this point, but definitely enough suspicion to merit a thorough investigation (and to hell with anyone concerned about being mocked by the other side as doing what we criticized them for!!)
Yes, let's keep bashing the Democrats. That will definitely help things, to keep all opposition to the authoritarians divided, and bolster the false narrative that "both sides are the same."
I think you might want to look at capture of our institutions by billionaires and what that has done to the media messaging.
And yes, blaming this on the Democratic party is totally missing the point of what actually happened in this election, and who is at fault.
Thinking Democrats could have just "messaged better" when Musk was flooding X with crap and CNN/WAPO/NYTs were downplaying Biden's accomplishments (and not BOOSTING his language and messaging, no matter HOW he worded it) for FOUR YEARS, and then sane-washing the crap out of Trump all throughout the election season is frankly delusional. What about the nonstop drumbeat of "WE'RE IN A RECESSION" from every media outlet, and a complete silence every time the administration fixed one of these problems? The suppression of progressive voices on Facebook? The constant drumbeat of "Genocide Joe" and the flooding of the airwaves with other propaganda, much of it originating from messaging straight out of the Kremlin and rightwing think tanks, as well as other hostile actors?
Do you honestly think "better words" would have overcome these problems? I'm tired of hearing this frankly. It's delusional.
This is about capture of our country by enemies, foreign and domestic, and by a malicious oligarchy that is deeply anti-democratic. We need more than "better words" to overcome that.
I agree. For some time, the only voice I heard talking about Biden accomplishments has been Dr. Heather Cox Richardson. As a subscriber to both the NYT and the Wapo, I have been confused because I couldn’t figure out why their reporting downplayed Biden and highlighted Trump. I ended up dropping both papers and relying on the reporting by an historian (Dr. Richardson).
HCR is an absolute gem. We need a few dozen more like her, frankly. She's one of the few voices that cuts directly through the propaganda by focusing on the facts and the parallels to history. She's doing a great service to this nation and to the historical record (assuming we get through this at some point with our histories intact).
Yes, HCR is the greatest and the leader, but she is supported by [coming up on a dozen?) Joyce Vance, Josh Marshall, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Lucian Truscott IV, Jen Rubin and her The Contrarian, Tim Snyder, Jess Piper et al. As Joyce Vance Says:: "We are All in this together."
Good for you, Janet! I too was part of the WAPO exodus. Yet I still cling to the NYT, even though they must have fired all their copywriters. They also keep accumulating wannabe novelists who insert their own opinions and subjective language into what used to be straight news stories. "The paper of record"! Oy!
The deterioration has been palpable for a while, but frankly I'm loathe to give up my Spelling Bee. I guess I'll wait til they spin off the increasingly commercial pieces: Wirecutter, cooking, puzzles, etc., and charge for access.
(For actual news, I've been getting The Guardian.)
Here's a tip about the NYT. I quit the WAPO after Bezos canned the Kamala endorsement. When the NYT online headline after the Amsterdam pogrom "brawl breaks out at soccer game" I quit the NY Times, which I'd been reading as a former New Yorker my entire life. But when I quit they came back to me with a 3-month offer for something like $9/month, much much less than I had been paying. So I took the offer and will end my subscription when that deal expires. The joke's on the Times.
What they are doing is exactly why they are effective -- repeating messages with their own framing. We need to do the same.
All I am suggesting is that we need to learn to do the same thing. Or else what? Give up? We give up because it is hopeless? We can't do better?
The things you are saying about what has happened in the capture of our media by billionaires is exactly part of the message that needs to be repeated.
We need people who are good at repeating the right messages. We don't know how to do it and we need to learn. We have plenty of money to develop networks to deliver the messages too.
I'm not saying give up, not at all. But we don't have to do the authoritarians' work for them, either. And we have to look at facts, and the true root causes of this, not pretend there was some magical thing Harris or Biden could have said that would have won us the election. There also need to be mass campaigns to educate people about propaganda, how it works, and just how insidious it is. I'm honestly shocked at how easy it was to divide the left, and how much people fell for the circular firing squad. People dumped Biden because the corporate media told them to. That's damned alarming, whether you think Kamala Harris was the better candidate or not.
But no, I haven't given up. I just want to look at this for what it is. I think the whole country is so awash in propaganda right now that it's difficult to even have conversations on the left/liberal/moderate side of the house. Anti-democracy actors had the progressive wing of the party actively HELPING to elect Trump for over a year. That's the kind of soul-searching the party has to do. It's not about messaging so much, it's about facing the reality that our security has been breached by these companies and actors and we need to develop the skills to be able to fight that. The left is woefully naive about propaganda and what it looks like, and they think they are immune to it if they are "smart." I'm here to tell you... none of us are immune. We've all been warped by this stuff. But when I tried to point that out, I was told today's youth is "too smart" to be taken in by propaganda (while they screamed that Joe was "too old' and that "the Democratic establishment is pro-genocide and railroaded Bernie Sanders").
We are STILL doing it, frankly. We're a captured nation, in more ways than one. So I'm sorry if my language was angry... as someone who's spent a lot of time studying propaganda and language, this stuff is incredibly frustrating for me.
I guess I'm rather confused by what you are saying.
Yes we are naive about propaganda. That's sort of the point.
The point is to instead of amplify their frames and messages, to develop our own frames and messages.
I'm not sure how else you counter propaganda. Propaganda works by repetition. You counter it with your own repetition.
I'm honestly not sure what you are contending with what I am saying. I am fully in agreement we are not immune to the propaganda. The point is to flood the zone with repetition of the messages that we need to get across.
I agree with much of what you have written, except this: "People dumped Biden because the corporate media told them to." Wrong. People dumped Biden because we saw with our own eyes at the debate how infirm he truly is. Don't gaslight us, the entire world saw it in real time. We didn't need corporate media to tell us.
Re "We need people who are good at repeating the right messages." See my off-the top-of-my-head collection above: ". . .
"yes, HCR is the greatest and the leader, but she is supported by . . . Joyce Vance, Josh Marshall, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Lucian Truscott IV, Jen Rubin and her The Contrarian, Tim Snyder, Jess Piper et al . . ."
"This is about capture of our country by enemies, foreign and domestic, and by a malicious oligarchy that is deeply anti-democratic." Totally agree! Why haven't the Democrats, including Biden, Harris, Walz, Schumer, Jefferies and Pelosi been saying this non-stop for the past two presidential elections. Don't even get me started on the capitulation of the legacy media.
Less we forget, the "malicious oligarchy" has been hard at work for the last 40+ years trying to capture the US government to serve their insatiable greed. Congress has routinely appeased them and given them more wealth and power.
So, yeah, feckless Democrats are equally responsible for allowing Trump to win this election. I'm sorry that some people do not understand that the present is a direct reflection of the past. In other words, we couldn't have got to where we are today by ignoring or discounting past failures. You would think pleas to learn from past mistakes would be a positive contribution to moving forward more proactively.
Republicans win elections by changing how elections are conducted, i.e. tilting the playing field. A fair election in a democracy is based on the will of the majority. We have elections but we don't have a democracy. This election was decided by .001 percent of the population or the billionaires who have enough money and power to impact the outcome.
To paraphrase Einstein and others, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity. Where we are today is the result of decades of political insanity. Going forward and overcoming the greatest threat to the Western world will require learning from our mistakes, not repeating them, and developing strategies (beyond elections) to overpower the enemy, foreign and domestic.
JC, what you say is true. However, we need new Democratic leadership. People who play by a different set of rules. Schumer, using an example, is too much the institutionalist. I like Jeffries.
Dems are rightly at odds with each other -- we were beaten in November and we must use political forensics to determine what, and whom, needs changing.
"I think you might want to look at capture of our institutions by billionaires and what that has done to the media messaging.
And yes, blaming this on the Democratic party is totally missing the point of what actually happened in this election, and who is at fault."
I guess I don't see this whole mess in terms of a single election, or even two. The messaging issue is a problem Democrats have had for DECADES. The lack of a strong, consistent message is what allows, as you say, the capture of our institutions because the right-wing media machine, and the messaging discipline within the Republican ranks, has, like an armored division, been rolling over us for decades.
And the fact that you're using the term "participation trophies" tells me a lot about how much of this mindset you've already absorbed, frankly. Pointing out that it benefits authoritarians to have us divided is now a cause for name calling? Is it that much easier for you to believe that Democrats could have overcome this tsunami of disinformation from the corporate media and social media platforms than it is to look at what we're actually facing in this country now?
I would prefer to keep my eyes on the true enemy, and not get distracted with pretending this isn't a coup by the oligarchy and by foreign enemies. Ignoring what they did to completely rig the election (both in terms of propaganda, and, if Trump himself is to be believed, by Musk "fixing the machines in PA") to pretend the Democrats could have won the election through "better messaging" doesn't strike me as particularly good use of my time.
The Democratic Party might not be perfect (Biden himself admitted he miss-stepped badly in appointing Garland), but they are the only truly democratic (small "d") party we have left. They also aren't a monolith, which is true of any truly democratic political party... nor would you want them to be. They are a coalition party, which means that they have a lot of faces, not just one, as they are actually balancing multiple constituencies. I agree we have to come up with strategies to combat fascism, now that it's on our doorstep, and language is one of them. But let me ask you this... did you vote for the Democrats? If so, then YOU are part of the Democratic party, too. The leaders were outplayed by a complicit media and massive corruption. So were all of us. I don't think framing this as "the Democratic Party are losers because they lost the election" is particularly helpful, personally.
Well, what's missing from everything you are writing is any kind of answer for a way forward. How does "keeping your eyes" on the enemy help?
If losing an election isn't a cause for self-introspection, then what is? We aren't allowed to call out leaders who fail, because ... why?
I think you should read "The Political Mind" by George Lakoff, or one of his other books. It isn't just about "words", it's about how to frame issues, and how to start from values before policy. Also "Thinking, Fast and Slow" is another book worth reading. There is science behind these things.
I think the Democrats as a party have been poor at messaging for some time.
Yes we are now captured by an oligarchy. That's exactly the kind of messaging we finally got from Biden (too late) that we need going forward. If he had delivered some of those messages earlier, maybe we would've won.
I have read Lakoff. And you're still not understanding what I'm suggesting if you think this is a nihilist position I'm taking. I'm saying we need to mature out of this phase of our interaction with propaganda. See my note above. Thinking that "better messaging" would have won the election in the face of the forces aligned against democracy IS propaganda. We need to become exponentially more savvy about how propaganda works. That goes BEYOND messaging and looks at the effects certain words have on people's behaviors. We need to start educating ourselves on how propaganda actually works, and how it pushes people to behave in various ways. Why constantly talking about Trump helps him, even when it's mostly negative. Why framing a coup as an "election loss" is actually helping the authoritarians retain legitimacy. We need to get smarter about this stuff, frankly. We need to unite the opposition in the face of an overwhelming enemy. Part of that is to stop bashing one another and just admit that we weren't equipped to win this battle, and that we need to find some way to unite all of the factions that propaganda have driven apart. Without that coming together, we'll never win our country back, frankly. Never. No amount of messaging will change that.
OK we weren't equipped to win the battle. I think that is what I am saying. What I am proposing is we figure out how to equip ourselves, and better messaging is a part of that.
Yes we need to be more savvy about propaganda. Again that is my point. We need to counter it.
I don't get how saying we need to improve is "bashing each other". That I don't get at all. How is what you are saying, that we need to become more savvy, any different from what I am saying?
What I would say is we shouldn't be blaming or bashing different groups in our coalition. Holding leaders accountable to up their game is exactly what we should be doing.
No I don't get it at all.
Ordinary voters aren't going to "become savvy", they need competing messages.
I may vote a straight Democratic ticket, but that does not mean that I 100% support them. I voted for Biden but I thought he was a bad choice for saving the country from becoming a kleptocracy. I thought he made a mistake when he chose Garland. Now that Biden failed, largely because Garland failed, you think us wrong for bashing the Democrats now?
The false equivalency narrative misses the point that both sides always contribute to an outcome, plus the actions taken and policies enacted cannot be fully measured in terms of harm. To suggest that Republicans are solely to blame for the rise of a kleptocracy is shortsighted. I could point to a long list of Democratic failings. Keep in mind that both political parties have grazed at the trough of the billionaires for decades. Both political parties are responsible for the massive inequality in America. Both political parties sold out the middle class and labor unions which are the backbone of what has made America economically great. The social safety net of the wealthiest country in the world is tattered and torn because both parties have routinely favored the robber barons over everyday hard-working Americans. On these and many other issues, the vast majority of Americans agree.
Democracy will not be restored unless or until, the Democratic Party is reconstituted to serve the vast majority of Americans. No more taking the high road against an enemy that wishes to destroy our lives and livelihoods for personal gain.
Personally, I don't recognize Trump as president, or any Republican in office. Everyone of them has forsaken their oath of office which means to me they are illegitimate. Resistance to their coup is required. Going forward, I will not support any Democrat or strategy that refuses to loudly and forcefully resist these traitorous political enemies.
I remember that my father, uncles and other family members served, fought, and some died fighting against an enemy who was less powerful and financially capable. I strongly suggest that we need to recognize that the peril ahead will not be mitigated by voters! The past has taught us this lesson numerous times.
What people ought to do, before donating money to their representatives and Senators, is buy a copy of that book and send it to them. One could hope they take a professional view and learn their job, which involves messaging.
Couldn't agree more about Lakoff. I read "Don't Think of an Elephant" first, then "Moral Politics" first edition, then Moral Politics third edition and will now read "The Political Mind". Thanks for the recommendation.
I'm so glad you recommended Lakoff. As I read your post, I kept thinking Lakoff, Lakoff, Lakoff . . . "Don't Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate."
"Lakoff offers advice about how to counteract politicians' lies. He maintains that the act of stating that a lie is false reinforces the lie because it repeats the way the lie is framed. Instead, he recommends what he calls a "truth sandwich":
"1. Start with the truth. The first frame gets the advantage.
2. Indicate the lie. Avoid amplifying the specific language if possible.
3. Return to the truth. Always repeat truths more than lies."[18]
Lakoff calls this a "truth sandwich" even though the baloney is in the middle. The position of the lie avoids both primacy and recency effects." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lakoff
Thank you for bringing up George Lakoff. His first book "Don't Speak of an Elephant" is all about "framing," and it is also a must read. It opened my mind.
Don't hold your breath. The New York Times and the Atlantic are debating whether Elon Musk's Nazi salute is a Nazi salute. They won't even call that out. They are all terrified of Trump and are folding like a house of cards. Right now I only trust this source, The Contrarian.
And let's not leave out Maureen Dowd, who appears to have a pathological hatred of Biden. She was foaming at the mouth in print about Biden prudently issuing pre-emptive pardons.
Dowd has often struck me as someone who is stuck in adolescence, reveling in being a cool girl who the guys liked because she would tolerate their buffonery and sexism.
Simple language also works better. I know what oligarchs are... many people do not. It is government of the few, but we might just call them "billionaires" or "elite rich people".
Well yeah... but let's not start by calling people "stupid". People can't choose their IQ level any more than I could've become an NFL quarterback. If they look up "oligarch" they are trying as you point out, which is about all you can ask for. It's pretty good actually.
In my experience, the thing we have a tendency to do is complain that voters are what they are, instead of accepting it and figuring out how to deal with it.
Like "why don't people vote their self-interests"? They don't. Work with it.
That's how malignant narcissistic psychopaths roll. They're criminals. They're fucking greedy whores. Who would take the nickels off their dead mother's eyes. King Shitpants is Leonard Leo's useful tool. Just dangle a shiny object. Shitpants is like a puppy with a new toy. Will Americans ever get tired of being the collateral damage of the ultra wealthy??
Popular culture has encouraged veneration of wealthy people simply because they are wealthy.
Does anyone else remember "Lifestyles of The Rich and Famous"? Consider reality TV and series set in luxurious resorts,hotels,mansions. Thry all sell the illusion that we can have that kind of life, which, of course,is a joke.
Think of Mark Burnett helping to create Trump as a successful business mogul through "The Apprentice".
SO well-said; corrupt and malignant narcissist, a perfect example of what happens when an ignorant father treats his children, especially his sons, with contempt.
Thomas, presumably progressive writers are preaching to the choir, but your point is taken. I personally love "consumer tax" which should be employed by all, especially Dems in Congress.
AND my favorite words are demented, insane and corrupt... someone some where must disconnect the electricity from the computer power calculation of his newest psycho coin. It's that simple.
They are not quite the same. Trump is both transactional and corrupt. All corrupt actions are transactional , but not all transactional behavior is corrupt in the sense of a tit for a tat
Being transactional with billionaire donors is corruption. But he is transactional even if the only gain is a boost to his ego. He might offer to help someone who can't really return any favor, IF he thinks he can get positive publicity and praise from it, especially the recipient's own effusive public thanks and support.
The pardoning of the January 6 insurrectionists is so horrific it beggars belief. My heart is broken for the families of the police officers wounded or killed, and I'm incensed that the rule of law so carefully implemented in the J6 trials has been discounted and discarded.
Some weeks ago, on another blog I follow, I offered this food for thought. Bear with me - this is relevant. When it became clear that Ukraine was going to resist the Russian invasion like so many angry buzzsaws, Russia opened wide the doors of its prisons, unleashing a literal army of murderers, r*pists, and thieves onto Ukrainian civilians - some of them repeat offenders. In some cases, Ukrainians delivered the ultimate penalty (you are welcome, Russian people!), but in some cases those people survived and returned home.
After years in prison and months of doing pretty much whatever they wanted at the Ukrainian front, they felt bored, and guessed what they went back to doing? Yeah.... same thing as they did before they landed in jail. In some cases, if the victims complained, there were either very light penalties for these people or no penalties at all, because they were now "war heroes". Those who did end up back in prison simply signed another army contract and were back out - back to torment Ukrainian civilians.
So.... going back to our January 6th insurrectionists. If you look at the records, many of them were turned in by their current and former spouses and significant others, friends, family members, colleagues. What will happen to all of those people once these goons are set free? It's not like anyone is going to offer them protective custody. And we know things like restraining orders will hold these people back. What are the choices for all the people who did their duty and reported the insurrectionists to law enforcement? Who is going to protect them? Their families? Their livelihoods? Nobody.
Oops — didn’t realize it posted. I was going to say — to pardon the likes of Stuart Rhodes- a violent, anti-government, insurrectionist, domestic abuser and founder of the Oath Keepers was gut wrenching.
Yesterday the BBC in their hourly news discussed Trump's "strong mandate." This was while I was driving and I yelled at the radio (not too effective). But if the nascent pro-democracy leaders like you, BTC, the Bulwark etc. start calling out all the lies it will help. Another one that Trump keeps saying is that he won the youth vote by 36 (sometimes 39) percent. The real numbers are that Americans under the age of 30 voted for Harris by 4 points (50 percent Harris – 46 percent Trump). Keep calling out the reality of this totally corrupt administration.
Better, sue to recoup for the Treasury all those bribes Trump is receiving, all his merch earnings, etc, as a result of his status as president elect and as # 47.
Let's keep it simple. The opposition needs two things:
1) a message, couched the right language, (I agree with Patrick) and
2) a medium, or media, to get that message out, repeatedly, to everyone who might oppose Trump now and in 2026.
One of the things we should have learned from Trump is the power of repetition. We need to keep hammering home the same points, enhanced every time Trump does something destructive.
AND, the message needs a positive side, what we will do for you, and not merely detail Trump's crimes, faults, grifting, selling out Ameria, etc.
Congratulations on The Contrarian. We also need shorter, angrier, and free sites to get the message out.
Good points. A lie repeated often enough becomes reality. Karl
Popper said, effectively, “Nothing can be said so plainly that it can’t be willfully misunderstood.” The Resistance needs to hammer home simple messaging.
Wonderful points but preaching to the choir! I have no idea how to fight this new administration and return to the previous world view of the Biden administration. I think the Dems need to start to push their many talented and charismatic leaders and help to make them a household word in the hopes of changing the current abomination.
But this is the right thing. Developing messaging and repeating it is exactly what our side needs to figure out. It's not about preaching a message to the choir, is developing the right way to talk to other voters.
I do agree, but how to do this? I am almost 85 and have spent many years watching injustice by brilliant propagandists who have the ability to sway people who do not have the ability to see through the obvious manipulation.
For starters, we need to run people EVERYWHERE instead of not contesting races we think we can't win. We need to develop as much talent as we can in areas of the country we can't compete in. Talented people will rise up and show everyone else how to do it.
It can be done. Although he lost this time, John Tester won many times in Montana. Breshear is a progressive Democratic governor in Kentucky.
Run everywhere, talk to everyone. We need to stop thinking we are a plurality or a majority and that we just need to get "our voters" to the polls. Sometimes we take them for granted too.
Paula, I live in a red section of a blue state and fully agree. I can be more verbal, and insist on more positive action by local Dems, and anyone with a conscience. Not much point laying back because I'm afraid.
Yes! North Dakota's Dem candidate Tryve Hammer may have lost, but he hasn't disappeared. He started his own substack, and I recommend everyone who can do so follow him. He's brilliant and down to earth. He connects many of his military experiences to his subject of the day.
We’re at a disadvantage because of Meta and X, both platforms spew lies and those who get their news from these platforms, generally don’t have critical thinking skills. We have a significant electorate that chooses ignorance over truth and facts. We can talk all we want but we have just witnessed an election being hijacked by the uninformed thanks to social media.
Uninformed and misinformed. And then those, of course, who WANT to believe that what they think is true, is true. One can convince oneself of almost anything no matter the facts staring them in the face. Trump to MAGAs… are you going to believe me or your lying eyes? Ppl will hold on to their “beliefs” no matter what facts they’re confronted with because the alternative that they have been conned/lied to, to admit they were wrong, is just too much for them to accept. Just MHO.
I'm surprised you're not off it already, no judgment. But this is one action we can take to support truth. Same with META. The former FB was strictly social when it was launched. Now, it's a global nightmare of lies and misinformation, and, like Musk, Zuckerberg could care less as long as his pockets get fatter.
I agree. We are in an echo chamber and need to get a much broader audience. If many of the smart people I know get their information from Fox News, they are in a different, and much larger, echo chamber, and as smart as they are, they can't help but be swayed by the constant propaganda of the far right. I don't listen to Fox and they don't listen to MSNBC; nor will they read/listen to/watch The Contrarian. I think this is our big hurdle.
I agree. It’s not about intelligence. One of my sisters is a Trump supporter. She is very intelligent. I’d say smarter than I am. But she went down the MAGA, Alex Jones, etc rabbit holes and she’s now part of the MAGA cult. Being intelligent and being susceptible to brainwashing aren’t mutually exclusive. (Hope that makes sense.) I still have a relationship with her. (I refuse to lose my sister over this orange turd and MAGA.) But in order to hold onto my relationship with her, we don’t talk about politics. I haven’t figured out how to un-MAGA her yet. When the orange POS first ran back in 2015, and then during his first term, whenever I tried to talk to her about politics, she’d start telling me that I was watching the wrong news. Fox was telling her the truth. MSNBC, NYT, Wapo, etc weren’t telling the truth. At that point we agreed to avoid talking about politics. She tries to bring it up from time to time, but I don’t engage. I honestly don’t know how to reach her. Many ppl can’t even consider that they may have fallen victim to a conman. Being confronted with the truth and facts just forces them to double down. A few months ago during a family get together she learned about Citizens United. She had no idea what it was, and how it has affected our politics and elections. She was shocked. It was a small step, but hopefully not the last.
And Ms. Rubin, I would make the same point about liberals. If you support a woman's right to bodily autonomy, if you support reasonable controls on weapon technology to safeguard human life, if you believe that voting is a sacred right that must be allowed all eligible Americans, or the right to breathe, drink and eat substances that are not contaminated; if you believe that a society's duty is to educate its young, if you believe that your relationship with your god, oe disbelief in any deity is a private matter; if you believe that a government has a fundamental duty to protect its citizens by the use of reasonable regulations, (and I could go on), then you are not a liberal -- you are smack dab in the middle of the political spectrum, because those are all issues supported by a majority of Americans.
We should stop using soft words. Let's stop calling Donny the Mouth an authoritarian. He's a freakin Dictator (as he said he would be). Also, let's bury the label "Republican". There's the Trump Party where the Rs used to be. If our messages can't fit on a bumper sticker and be understood by a 10-year old they are wasting words. Improvise, adapt, and overcome.
" If our messages can't fit on a bumper sticker and be understood by a 10-year old they are wasting words. Improvise, adapt, and overcome." I totally agree.
Since gop word-miesters like Frank Luntz and Newt Gingrich came up with a list that define the terms of the debate, I've been carping on how we've allowed the enemy free reign with Orwellian speak. I quit referring to them as conservatives long ago as a result.
I've also begun to pronounce the "gop" acronym just as I pronounce others like NASA, NATO, AIDS, COVID etc. As in stop fascism. Stop the gop. It doesn't deserve capitalization. My former gop acquaintances hate it.
And yes while the Democratic Party is the only game in town at present it's still in desperate need of reform but at least it's still reformable. The gop cult is beyond reform at this late date.
Moreover we have nothing comparable to the gop's juggernaut of rightwing propaganda outlets like Fox/Murdoch and its ilk. My personal solution was to leave the legacy media behind and use the money saved to subscribe to such as Jennifer Rubin, Greg Olear, Josh Marshall (TPM), Dan Pfeiffer, The Guardian, Judd Legum and many other proven journalists. The $120 saved on dropping the W. Post covers a host of such writers on Substack and Medium.
I'm saving this essay for rereading, paraphrasing and quoting.
Thank you Jen, very much happy to be here. I really think the “Republican” moniker needs to be eliminated as well, because it causes cross-over confusion with the current convulsing of the MAGA party and its new adherents to this dangerous condition. I think it needs a completely different name. It is wholly the MAGA party now, fully authoritarian and is being run by oligarchs and far right ideologues who have purposely used a false veneer of so called “Christian” religiosity and grievance to silence and control the people of the U.S. It is a totalitarian regime now who have been orchestrating this for decades - complete greed, power, and control over everyone. Our checks and balances organized by the founders are in shreds because of the capitulation to them. And our current President is not more than a puppet they have curated and controlled through his biggest weaknesses - vanity, insecurity, incompetence, and venality among others. He wants to be America’s Putin, and it is being used by the actually powerful - his supplicants (who have fooled him) who have co-opted him to actually kill off our Democracy. They need a new name entirely.
Great article that's what calling a spade a spade is all about, that's what Donald trump is a power hungry carpetbagger that will destroy the democracy if we let him
You are correct he's a pure fascist however a carpetbagger was a grifter that can to control and steal from the south and Donald Trump is a grifter power hungry carpetbagger
The potential revoking of birthright citizenship is ridiculous. My parents weren’t citizens until 4 years after I was born in Chicago. I have an adopted grandchild whose birth parents may not have been citizens. This Executive Order is blatantly unconstitutional, but it deeply affects and concerns me and millions of fellow American citizens. And I’m not sure if I am one now!
Rest easy, for now. It takes more than an edict (refuse to call it an executive order) to revoke the Constitution's 14th amendment. ACLU is all over this one!
This post I think is very, very, very good.
I've become convinced our Democratic leaders don't have any idea about messaging and the use of framing. Everyone needs to frame Trump for what he is. And frame things in our own way. This is a great start.
Then instead of saying to ourselves "it won't matter because his followers are in a cult", remember that not everyone is in the cult, and repeat, repeat, repeat.
Never work with their framing. Never use their words. Work with our own.
Whenever he does something stupid/crazy/depraved, respond with the same messages -- he is a declining, demented old man being run by billionaires to enrich them and increase their power. He has no empathy or concern for ordinary people.
Or however you want to put it.
Do not be too distracted by the details of the latest insanity. Respond consistently. Relate his stupid and depraved actions to the same message about a lack of empathy and values.
I recommend everyone read, for starters, "The Political Mind" by George Lakoff to understand this.
Repeat repeat repeat.
Where is the Democratic leadership? Harris and Walz went under a rock after the election. People want to rally, resist, protest but leadership is in a vacuum.
Kamala Harris was still the Vice President until yesterday; Tim Walz still has a day job as governor of MN. What did you expect them to do? I agree that the Dems need public-facing leaders, but we don't have to wait around to be told what to do. We have elections to win this year in NJ and VA and other places. It's time we stopped waiting around for someone to rescue us and start building our own raft.
Agreed. The craving for a savior is the root cause of the authoritarian party. We need to continue to build grass roots movements. Indivisible is a good place to start. Supporting the ACLU matters hugely.
I finally broke down and paid for this subscription. It’s worth it. I don’t know how long I’ll keep paying but I will read it whether I can post or not.
I’m a contrarian like the blog reads. But I’m not partisan. Or I should say and I’m not partisan. So here is my retort. I learn by examples and incidents in my life. If I do something and it goes wrong, I reflect what I have done wrong. I feel we have gone in the wrong direction as democrats although in name only, I often disagree with us/them.
Diversity to me means declaring war on Caucasians. Yes I said it. Learn by examples right as I stated? I have been repeatedly told I’m privileged. No doubt from folks reading CRT. I’m a single small business proprietor. I once applied to be a vendor at a democratic function and the app demanded of me these questions. 1. Minority-owned? 2. Woman-owned? 3. Union friendly? 4. LBGTQ? (Ya believe it this is where we have gone.) I’m a fricken small business single proprietor. I don’t belong there.
Another example: A friend in my business line is a Black woman and she can get into a particular showcase for free and I need to pay a lot for that privilege. And she is more prosperous than I am. I’m sorry, DEI, Diversity has declared economic and social war on white people. Sure we have. Even Hillary coined that stupid term, “Deplorables” after her husband signed the NAFTA accords which didn’t have a net positive for the rust belt and all those good paying line jobs. Ok that issue is more nuanced than I can speak too. But fear not, I will never move to the right MAGA movement. I will always steer my ship into safer waters of democratic control. But I sure am peed over the direction we have taken. And I know that this direction has aided in the MAGA movement. And I even had the tenacity to write a book about the monster now in the room, “Donald’s Vanity Tantrums.”
"Diversity to me means declaring war on Caucasians. Yes I said it. Learn by examples right as I stated? I have been repeatedly told I’m privileged. No doubt from folks reading CRT."
That sentiment reminds me of the old saying, 'When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.' Your interpretation of collecting demographic information on a vendor form as an attack should have made you stop and think. If it didn't, do it now. --Average White Woman from NC
Jane, you may rightfully argue on my points but if I were anyone else, I would be raising my right arm in the air with my palm down. That was the point that you conveniently passed by. And this is why we are at least partially in the pickle we are in. So may it warm your heart to know or think you know that you have the answers.
Now try and read my mini screed again to understand it.
Condescension is neither the way to make friends nor to influence people, Bill. If you really are that close to throwing a Nazi salute, you're the one who needs to go back and think again, not me. Even on my worst day, that thought wouldn't even cross my mind.
Diversity, equity and inclusion are worthwhile goals. If you want to compare life experiences, I spent many years as an HR director and I know from first hand experience how many employment decisions were made by people who wouldn't even consider a female or non-white candidate. As John Adams said, 'if men were angels, we wouldn't need laws.' Without affirmative action and now DEI, the majority of the employment pool would be out of luck.
Leveling the playing field to people who've always had it tilted in their favor does, indeed, feel like oppression - as long as you never consider who was disadvantaged by your advantage.
Trust me, Bill, we understood it.
DEI says: BIPOC, LGBTQ+, Neurodiverse, ALL ARE WELCOME. How is that an attack on your whiteness???
You’re right. Why didn’t I think of that.
I'm a Democrat who agrees with you to some extent. While I do not believe the Dems have a goal of waging war on whites (I am Caucasian myself), I do see how DEI can be experienced that way by certain groups of white people such as sole proprietors of small business like yourself. As a Roman Catholic, I am a strong support of social justice, in the US and around the globe, but not a supporter of modern DEI and Social Justice ideology with its division of the world into categories of either oppressor or oppressed. I identify with the social justice activists of the 1960s and 70s who wanted the same human dignity and opportunity for all, regardless of identity, and feel the Dems, or perhaps I should say the Progressives among the Dems, have become too extreme, ideological, scolding, divisive and impractical, and as a result, off-putting, in their attempts to achieve justice for traditionally marginalized groupsl.
New injustices are being created. As a woman for example, I do not want biological males in spaces set aside for biological women, regardless of how those males see themselves. At the same time, in any other circumstances, I gladly treat trans-identifying persons with the same courtesy and respect I extend to all. As human beings, they have a right to it. But again, one does not eradicate injustice by replacing one form with another.
I have a transgender grandson, the smartest trans in the world 💗& I’ve come to realize that there’s so much more to gender than just 1 chromosome. He’s an amazing person, kind, smart, open minded & openhearted. I suspect we need to reconsider what gender actually means; scientifically, we know so literal. As our population continues to explode, there are So many more opportunities for species growth/transformation. It’s truly wonderful (& mind-boggling🙃).
Well Bobbette, if I could hook up with a pretty Bonobo female, I would marry her in a heart beat and get the hell out of the human race. (Ok, that was a joke.)
Little, not literal. Stupid autocorrect
You got it same here. I have absolutely no issues with any trans stuff. I have accept other life styles since young teen years. But I am against or as I say, no balls in girls stalls.
I have t even touched on more issue like zoning changes to allow cluster or subsidized housing for the poor. I am most certainly against this crazy notion. In my line of work, I mostly seek to African Americans most of whom are much wealthier than I am. The few occasions where I engage in broader conversations, I have sometimes asked if they would be amendable to subsidized housing in their neighborhoods. Could you guess the answers? Of course you can. None would want zoning changes to allow for this. This is a touchy subject. So many of us, mostly progressives and liberals are dead determined to change zoning. When will we stop thinking that every move we make is based on a racial divide. It’s simply not. Yes there are inequities in the system. Anyway, I need to get back to work.
I do agree that we need to listen to every one, and in fact try to focus more on values and less on ethnic groups or other groupings.
This can come by focusing on issues and problems that cut across groups. Everyone is going to be affected by high prices, low wages, etc.
The way I think we should be discussing diversity issues is to make it clear that the elites and the billionaires use these things to keep people with shared interests divided. People are fighting for a place in a hierarchy and when they do that often do not vote their interests.
I think it is definitely true that the Democratic Party, over time, has unintentionally exacerbated the divisions by the mechanism you state. Just by ignoring people from groups labeled "privileged" is a form of discrimination.
We should be talking to EVERYONE and listening to EVERYONE, and if we don't do that we are discriminating at least by ignoring people. Also, people who are in the so-called "privileged" group can struggle for any number of reasons, and a lack of empathy is problematic. Calling a struggling person "privileged" is like pouring salt on a wound.
We also can't expect that a struggling young white male trying to make his place in life is going to be focused on minorities or women, etc. They should be empathetic, but it's hard enough to be young and trying to make your way.
We also shouldn't exclusively tell people that they should go to college if they want to be successful, because we are telling people if they didn't go to college, that is why they are unsuccessful. It makes it their fault.
A good book about these things, and there are some videos too, is by Michael Sandel, "The Tyranny of Merit". He's a liberal academic but he would acknowledge a lot of what you are saying.
I find it hard to understand how a living minimum wage, protecting the environment, fighting climate change, affordable childcare, reliable infrastrucure, negotiating drug prices, etc. don't cut across groups and somehow ignore people. Beyond hateful immigration rhetoric and dishonest economic messaging, what is the great outreach of the GOP? I don't know about the rest of you, but if you've had to call a plumber, electrician, HVAC service person or roofer lately, you'd know that a college degree is not required for financial success. Why are these young, white males struggling so?
It's a good question. I think there are many factors.
One thing I heard is that there is an expectation of both men and women that the man should be more educated/successful/high earning than the woman, and that this is causing difficulties for both men and women with those expectations finding partners.
Women outnumber men 60-40 at universities.
But I'm sure there are many, many contributing factors that make them feel undervalued.
Bill, I have seen you making this "strawman" argument in another newsletter which could mean you are just a bot. But I want to comment on your statement about your black friend getting into a showcase for free and you having to pay giving the impression that because she is black she was privileged and you were not. However, it is also possible her getting in free didn't have anything to do with her color. In America, knowing the right person can get you access or someone may be responding to a favor that was done for them or maybe someone she was dating was in a position to let her in for free. I'm sure there could be other reasons that I didn't mention.
Why is diversity declaring war on Caucasians? What this mindset suggests is that anyone who is not a Caucasian is inferior to them; therefore, if they are given a position, they have illegitimately replaced a deserving Caucasian person. That is racist thinking. Diversity means that "qualified" applicants are given an opportunity without regard to their color, gender, or religious beliefs. Once you can acknowledge that discrimination has been a real thing, you can appreciate that those who have been discriminated against should be given equal opportunity. In a merit-based system, if all things are equal, the organization should generally reflect the make-up of the population of potential candidates. DEI just means every qualified candidate is included in the pool of potential candidates and haven't been automatically excluded because of their race, sex or religious beliefs.
Bill, regarding your concern about the questions being asked on your application for vendor access, assuming multiple vendors applied, and several were all equally qualified in all other aspects, levelling the playing field by giving those "minorities" preference is a step toward real equality. Or do you believe nothing should be done or attempted to begin levelling that playing field?
To me, leveling the playing field means who ever applies if there remains an opening, gets in not on the bases of ethnic background. I used an example of an acquaintance who is in the same business as I and as a Black woman, gets into a particular exhibition without charge. And she happens to have a bigger business than I. Is that fair? I don’t think it is. I’m not by any means thinks the world is totally fair and equal.
I think my original point was that a large portion of the population voted for a monster and I want to believe that I at least partially understand why this happened. And what as a society can be done. And as I said in my first post, when I do something that goes wrong, I first question what it was I did wrong instead of blaming others. I think democrats keep pushing when maybe just maybe they/we should begging a big re-think. But that is t likely to happen. So I’ll end with a short from my book that I will post in a moment and the title is, “Welcome to the New Snazzy Nazi States of America.” Btw, it was written 5 years ago. My oh my how well I predicted.
(From 'Donald's Vanity Tantrums')
Welcome to The New Snazzy Nazi States of America
(Introducing The Goose-Step, Two-Step March)
A new dance craze is sweeping the nation called, The Goose-Step, Two-step March. This invigorating new exercise is easy to learn! First, link arms on the dance floor. As you move backward in line, turn your head to the right and lift your left leg straight up as high as it will go. Then step forward as you turn your head to the left and lift your right leg straight up in the air.
It's very similar to square dancing or line dancing. Soon the dance floor will be filled with goose-steppers. Forward, backward, round and round. If you step out of line, you are tagged, the caller detains you, interrogates you, strip searches you, and sends you off to detainment camps for disloyalty.
This new dance craze is not to be confused with serious charges of criminal activity. By the time the youngins reach the age of reason, they will be quick to form into lines upon request for impromptu Goose-Step, Two-Step Marches and other forms of family entertainment.
I’m smiling 😊 right now because I see that only 4 people agree with my position while others have far more likes. I know my points are unpopular but sometimes truthfulness comes with resistance.
All the while it’s interesting that though this blog reads “Contrarian,” perhaps there are no so many contrarians reading it? Anyone care to speculate?
Nothing wrong with having an opinion that goes against the mainstream, if it's honest, and especially if it's well thought out. I like how you put it that you often "disagree with us/them (small 'd' democrats). I'm not much of a debater myself, and dislike arguing, but I have tended to be in agreement with one side of my family on socio-political issues, but not spiritually and on matters of faith (though the latter is making progress, thankfully). Whereas on the other side it's been completely the reverse. It's important that we, small 'd' democrats who value our republic (again, small 'r') talk these things out, and decide what to do about it. One idea I have never accepted (and never will) is "there's nothing we can do about it."
On the other hand, why do we readily accept that the Right is understandably justified in its thinking? Where's the call for review there?
Yes, let's just pile on Harris, because that's productive, right?
Like you, I'm tired of the blame game...especially the one pointing to Harris. I've worked in every presidential campaign since Jimmy Carter. I can honestly say this: Harris and Waltz had the best ground operation I've seen. The problem that I encountered was the media stating she "had no policies" when, in fact, at every rally and every event AND on her website, her plan for America was well-stated and a STARK contrast to Orange Man's. IDK how you overcome MEDIA BIAS and, until we solve that problem, we are screwed.
Repeat: Harris and Waltz ran a fantastic campaign.
Thank you! It was so maddening to witness that extreme media bias about "where are her policies?" Not to mention Trump's torrential spigot of lies about her policies. It was obvious that Harris and Walz ran a terrific campaign. Much appreciation for working on so many campaigns!
Thanks, Ellie. That's what I saw.
I agree Ellie. Blame is a waste of time. Blame is playing into MAGA's game. Let's find our commonalities, recognize MAGA's tactics of fear, blame, scapegoating that is splitting us apart. Life will become hard but we are intelligent and strong in our unity and belief in our positive freedom for our diverse America.
The problem I see is young men, who, crazed because of their self-perceived & vastly immature, irrelevancy in an America (& world, actually) couldn’t stand the idea of a female president - & a dark-skinned one at that. I saw a couple of them, as I left my voting place in Hawai’i, smirking at their opportunity to strike back. Where the hell are their mothers?!?
Where are their mothers AND fathers? What have they learned in their homes? Do they see their parents treating each other with respect, with love and kindness? Have they seen their mother's take on all or most responsibility for household work?
Have their parents shown and told them that women are full human beings who have the ability and right to make their own decisions about their lives?
Better that- WHO are their mothers? Who are raising these guys?
As a grandmother who raised 2 sons AND 2 grandsons, they were all raised as bitchybitchybitchy suggests by a single female parent. One grandson chose to interpret my abilities and success and choice not to remarry as "hating men". Although his voting tendency is still Democratic, he subscribes to the Joe Rogan, Lex Friedman, Jordan Peterson "blatherings".. The other, while very loving, kind and respectful, got wrapped around all the YouTubers spreading the "they are all the same" and fell for the prolific anti-Democratic propaganda and the online apps reinforced it by pushing more to him.
Not sure what else a parent can do..
Social media influencers and video game developers.
I'm not as upset with them as I am with the morons in Congress. They can NEVER, EVER seem to get on the same page. There is zero organized push-back about any of this crap. Dems, for far too long, have expected the media to carry their water instead of going out and taking a message to the American people. We are reaping that strategy today, in spades.
Dems need to figure out how to harness the media like the R's. Let's get some of our own billionaires to help us out. Cuban? Soros? Where are you??
Soros is closing in on 95 years old. The idea that he's the ubiquitous activist is another right wing fabrication.
Cuban seems to be trying via Bluesky (not sure if he still is trying on Twitter as I left that).
Our side (I’m only a democrat so I can vote in important primaries in my city) has blown it. Please read my screed above. Politicians will always most always protect their positions. And if an issue is unpopular and their minders don’t support it, they will not either. That’s the sordid way of the political world.
Many are too beholden to well heeled interests. With some occasional small murmurs they go along to get along…and to get re-elected.
Well I think leaders have to emerge and have not yet emerged. I don't think Harris and Walz are great choices for that going forward. Or, I would say at least, we need other people to step forward. Losing presidential candidates need to rebuild if they are going to ever run again.
Walz isn't up to being a national leader. I like him but he's just not of the right caliber for this.
We absolutely need some charismatic leaders. Who will they be? Newsom? Whitmer? Michelle Obama (there, I said it.)?
Jasmine Crockett, Pete Buttigieg
Michelle O is in her 60s and has expressed no interest in playing a political role. She can be very effective on stage as a supporter or surrogate, but will not be that leader.
Chris Murphy ~ we need new people in many corners and he's great
Can’t wait to see who will step forward
BEN WIKLER!!!!
Oh yes! I quite agree. Wish I had the ability to vote for him
I don't see it. He's done some good things in WI, but Dems need a passionate fighter, an opposition leader.
Yes! He would be a start to the reformation of the DNC. Continuing to operate in the same way hasn't worked, so continuing to do it this way isn't good thinking. Maybe it's time to abandon the idealistic positions and address the real problems that voters face, and present strategies and programs to address them. At the same time, develop a network that gets the messages out across all of the media.
Judith, do you blame them? And let's not forget that Tim Walz is still governor of Minnesota.
Support Ben Wikler as DNC chairman!!!!!!
It will come from the election of the DNC chair. I hope it is Ben Wikler.
There's an article in the NYT today about the futility of public protests, rallies, etc.
It did noting last time.
Quiet, strategic work building democracy at your local level is what will move the dial. Not one day of marching.
I think the most important thing right now after opposing T's appointments and policies is reaching out to your local state, county, and assembly representatives. Get to know what's happening locally; what's pending; what's being held back and why -- tracking legislation and making these reps know you hold them accountable. Wherever you are, build a strong base to withstand challenges to come.
Actually, protesting did a lot for me: marching in my pink pussy hat with my daughter & son in law & grandchildren did a Lot for me. Gotta speak up against ignorance & toxic machismo. Bring on the tee-shirts!!
Walz is already engaged with his state of Minnesota, so not much blame should come his way. No doubt, he's got his hands full planning resistance concerning the incoming administration. Harris, however, has not been seen nor heard from since the defeat. If I'm wrong, then my apologies here forth with. However, I simply have not seen her on the news nor read any recent quotes by her.
Give her a minute, will you? She’s only 1 day past being Veep. And taking daily abuse from the new jerk in the White House. I love it that she wore black to that sham of an inauguration. “Pray for the dead, & work like hell for the living.” -Mother Jones
Competent, but I don't see her as charismatic.
Bobbette, your point is well taken. My apology in my post still stands.
It's only the first full day of the latest abomination administration. First, we must regroup, come up with messages and solutions that can be implemented, and find the people to broadcast them, realising that the mainstream media may be less of where voters currently get their news. There is no instant strategy, though it's time to start working on one for the midterm elections next year.
We lost to Russian psy ops. Potential voters were scared to death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_2024_United_States_elections#:~:text=The%20indictment%20revealed%20a%20key,and%20Benny%20Johnson%2C%20among%20others.
The margin of defeat in many states was less than 2%. https://www.nj.com/politics/2025/01/house-dem-questions-whether-trump-maga-billionaire-rigged-election-in-critical-swing-state.html
IMHO Biden/DOJ failed to defend the Constitution, as Trump was ineligible re 14th Amendment.
Agreed, and Daniel, I'll repeat what many of us have been saying: Garland took too long to name Jack Smith. The chain also leads back to McConnell et al who failed in their duty to find the malevolent menace guilty in the Senate.
On Jan 6, 2025, anyone taking the oath should have had to swear they did not support insurrection in 2001.
During the confirmation hearings, few, if any of the senators knew how to ask questions on cross examination to identify those candidates who might have aided, abetted, or gave aid and comfort to insurrectionists.
To grant pardons to insurrectionists violates the statute.
Daniel, there are way too many couldas, wouldas and shouldas leading to where we are today.
Yes. And?
Enough with the backward glances at how things should have gone. The time for that has past and cannot help us now.
What are YOU going to do to protect the most vulnerable people in your community?
We all need to be looking at how we protect those most likely to be harmed.
Yes. I think that's a powerful choice to make.
Marji, one can be both introspective and compassionate.
I don't disagree with you, Doug. I think I am feeling impatient about all the talk about who did what wrong. I am not finding any benefit there.
So, when I see a comment about how the former attorney general botched it or how the senate didn't step up or how Harris didn't say something she should have said at some interview or other, it just looks to me like us running around in circles and not going anywhere.
The election is over, and we have a sick person in the oval office now who surrounds himself with people who benefit from the destruction he so giddily causes.
The failings that caused us to get here now are just academic. We can talk about who started the fire after the fire has been put out. Right now, we've got to protect each other.
And, you know, you can talk about who did what wrong or whatever. It's not up to me! I just don't see how it does us any good at this point.
But, go ahead and ruminate on the election and failed legal efforts if you want to! I think the most important thing is, does it help you feel better or worse? If it causes you to feel worse, I don't much see the point.
Marji, you ask if it makes me feel better. No, of course not. Nothing will until profound change happens, if thats possible.
Does it make me feel worse? Only in the sense that it could have been nipped in the bud, from the Senate Republicans to Garland and ultimately by voters, the ultimate decider of his fate.
But I don’t find that it's unproductive to look back, nor does it cause me to run in circles, as I have my eyes set straight ahead. As for protecting others, I've long seen that as my duty in life — nothing new here. Family first, neighbors and friends next, and so on.
We must each process where we are, how we got here and how we choose to handle what things may befall us and others in our own way, and I respect your choice.
There is always a “block” option if you find some of us, including me, to be dwelling too much on any particular issue.
I wish you well, cheers.
Marji,
"And, you know, you can talk about who did what wrong or whatever. It's not up to me! I just don't see how it does us any good at this point."
Looking back, assessing, and processing leads to looking forward, creating new strategies, and demanding that we and our candidates do things differently.
Otherwise, it's like trying to drive quickly to an unfamiliar location without a map.
Marji, I can only agree with all you say. But I wish you hadn't written the last paragraph.
The chain starts with McConnell.
I agree, Anne-Louise, and used the same phrase elsewhere.
Our institutions held back evidence. As much as I hold Garland accountable, it was the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA and everyone involved cluster fucked this whole thing up. Why did they do that? The empire protects wealth and white privilege. Liz Cheney protected the Supreme Court, especially the Thomas's. They're very good friends. Where does this hypocrisy end.
Lisa, although I haven't seen or heard about these supposed institutional interferences, I'll accept your word for the moment. But remember, the whole world watched the events of on Jan 6, 2021. He was subsequently impeached. The House held a lengthy, televised investigation doe all to see (and I'll grant that the Jan 6 committee held back on sharing their research with DoJ, but it could have run its own parallel investigation). So why did Garland wait until November of 2022 -- 22 months after that tragic day, to name Jack Smith? Even Larry Tribe, Garland's former constitutional law professor at Harvard, implored him to take action.
I still blame Garland, along with the cowardly/myopic Republican Senators for this.
I read on the Lawfare site, the more insulated from the popular will an institution is, the more it has struggled to check Trump or his outright disclaimed any responsibility. Our legal system isn't set up to deal with anti democratic threats posed by the person who leads the executive branch. The House refused to do it. Only voters can remove him.
Arguably the tech bros stole it. But Trump's ridiculous claims about 2020 make it difficult at best to contest any election.
The Russians admit it. Brag about it.
And Trump openly bragged about Musk doing it in PA.
Having worked as an election judge in several roles in the very thorough, secure vote processing here in Colorado, I honestly believe Musk was involved in multiple instances of interference in the vote counting processes in multiple "swing states" to ensure this election went to Trump. Small incremental interference spread across multiple polling places adding up to just enough to ensure the win. I have suspicions that the spreadsheet with the hidden tabs that was discovered posted to the SOS site here in Colorado (containing partial passwords to access voting machines in every Colorado county for those of you not familiar) was an intended step toward that here that was foiled.
Have since read online of several hundreds of voters in different states whose votes were tracked as received but not counted, until it was way too late to remediate the situation.
Not sure there is any remediation possible for overturning the final result at this point, but definitely enough suspicion to merit a thorough investigation (and to hell with anyone concerned about being mocked by the other side as doing what we criticized them for!!)
1. Need affadavits from all the witnesses.
2. Most probably a state crime in Colorado. https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/info_center/laws/Title1/Title1Article13.html
3. Contact Propublica.
SCOTUS ruled otherwise. Biden failed to pursue any court reform, another lost opportunity.
Yes, let's keep bashing the Democrats. That will definitely help things, to keep all opposition to the authoritarians divided, and bolster the false narrative that "both sides are the same."
Wanting them to get better at messaging is "bashing Democrats"?
So we should applaud them for losing elections? Maybe give out participation trophies?
I think you might want to look at capture of our institutions by billionaires and what that has done to the media messaging.
And yes, blaming this on the Democratic party is totally missing the point of what actually happened in this election, and who is at fault.
Thinking Democrats could have just "messaged better" when Musk was flooding X with crap and CNN/WAPO/NYTs were downplaying Biden's accomplishments (and not BOOSTING his language and messaging, no matter HOW he worded it) for FOUR YEARS, and then sane-washing the crap out of Trump all throughout the election season is frankly delusional. What about the nonstop drumbeat of "WE'RE IN A RECESSION" from every media outlet, and a complete silence every time the administration fixed one of these problems? The suppression of progressive voices on Facebook? The constant drumbeat of "Genocide Joe" and the flooding of the airwaves with other propaganda, much of it originating from messaging straight out of the Kremlin and rightwing think tanks, as well as other hostile actors?
Do you honestly think "better words" would have overcome these problems? I'm tired of hearing this frankly. It's delusional.
This is about capture of our country by enemies, foreign and domestic, and by a malicious oligarchy that is deeply anti-democratic. We need more than "better words" to overcome that.
I agree. For some time, the only voice I heard talking about Biden accomplishments has been Dr. Heather Cox Richardson. As a subscriber to both the NYT and the Wapo, I have been confused because I couldn’t figure out why their reporting downplayed Biden and highlighted Trump. I ended up dropping both papers and relying on the reporting by an historian (Dr. Richardson).
HCR is an absolute gem. We need a few dozen more like her, frankly. She's one of the few voices that cuts directly through the propaganda by focusing on the facts and the parallels to history. She's doing a great service to this nation and to the historical record (assuming we get through this at some point with our histories intact).
Yes, HCR is the greatest and the leader, but she is supported by [coming up on a dozen?) Joyce Vance, Josh Marshall, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Lucian Truscott IV, Jen Rubin and her The Contrarian, Tim Snyder, Jess Piper et al. As Joyce Vance Says:: "We are All in this together."
Perhaps one day Heather will get a presidential medal of freedom or another national honor, but that won't happen for at least 4 years.
Good for you, Janet! I too was part of the WAPO exodus. Yet I still cling to the NYT, even though they must have fired all their copywriters. They also keep accumulating wannabe novelists who insert their own opinions and subjective language into what used to be straight news stories. "The paper of record"! Oy!
The deterioration has been palpable for a while, but frankly I'm loathe to give up my Spelling Bee. I guess I'll wait til they spin off the increasingly commercial pieces: Wirecutter, cooking, puzzles, etc., and charge for access.
(For actual news, I've been getting The Guardian.)
Here's a tip about the NYT. I quit the WAPO after Bezos canned the Kamala endorsement. When the NYT online headline after the Amsterdam pogrom "brawl breaks out at soccer game" I quit the NY Times, which I'd been reading as a former New Yorker my entire life. But when I quit they came back to me with a 3-month offer for something like $9/month, much much less than I had been paying. So I took the offer and will end my subscription when that deal expires. The joke's on the Times.
And the Wordle
Ditto
What they are doing is exactly why they are effective -- repeating messages with their own framing. We need to do the same.
All I am suggesting is that we need to learn to do the same thing. Or else what? Give up? We give up because it is hopeless? We can't do better?
The things you are saying about what has happened in the capture of our media by billionaires is exactly part of the message that needs to be repeated.
We need people who are good at repeating the right messages. We don't know how to do it and we need to learn. We have plenty of money to develop networks to deliver the messages too.
I'm not saying give up, not at all. But we don't have to do the authoritarians' work for them, either. And we have to look at facts, and the true root causes of this, not pretend there was some magical thing Harris or Biden could have said that would have won us the election. There also need to be mass campaigns to educate people about propaganda, how it works, and just how insidious it is. I'm honestly shocked at how easy it was to divide the left, and how much people fell for the circular firing squad. People dumped Biden because the corporate media told them to. That's damned alarming, whether you think Kamala Harris was the better candidate or not.
But no, I haven't given up. I just want to look at this for what it is. I think the whole country is so awash in propaganda right now that it's difficult to even have conversations on the left/liberal/moderate side of the house. Anti-democracy actors had the progressive wing of the party actively HELPING to elect Trump for over a year. That's the kind of soul-searching the party has to do. It's not about messaging so much, it's about facing the reality that our security has been breached by these companies and actors and we need to develop the skills to be able to fight that. The left is woefully naive about propaganda and what it looks like, and they think they are immune to it if they are "smart." I'm here to tell you... none of us are immune. We've all been warped by this stuff. But when I tried to point that out, I was told today's youth is "too smart" to be taken in by propaganda (while they screamed that Joe was "too old' and that "the Democratic establishment is pro-genocide and railroaded Bernie Sanders").
We are STILL doing it, frankly. We're a captured nation, in more ways than one. So I'm sorry if my language was angry... as someone who's spent a lot of time studying propaganda and language, this stuff is incredibly frustrating for me.
I guess I'm rather confused by what you are saying.
Yes we are naive about propaganda. That's sort of the point.
The point is to instead of amplify their frames and messages, to develop our own frames and messages.
I'm not sure how else you counter propaganda. Propaganda works by repetition. You counter it with your own repetition.
I'm honestly not sure what you are contending with what I am saying. I am fully in agreement we are not immune to the propaganda. The point is to flood the zone with repetition of the messages that we need to get across.
I agree with much of what you have written, except this: "People dumped Biden because the corporate media told them to." Wrong. People dumped Biden because we saw with our own eyes at the debate how infirm he truly is. Don't gaslight us, the entire world saw it in real time. We didn't need corporate media to tell us.
Re "We need people who are good at repeating the right messages." See my off-the top-of-my-head collection above: ". . .
"yes, HCR is the greatest and the leader, but she is supported by . . . Joyce Vance, Josh Marshall, Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Lucian Truscott IV, Jen Rubin and her The Contrarian, Tim Snyder, Jess Piper et al . . ."
Absolutely this, Patrick. You hit the nail on the head.
"This is about capture of our country by enemies, foreign and domestic, and by a malicious oligarchy that is deeply anti-democratic." Totally agree! Why haven't the Democrats, including Biden, Harris, Walz, Schumer, Jefferies and Pelosi been saying this non-stop for the past two presidential elections. Don't even get me started on the capitulation of the legacy media.
Less we forget, the "malicious oligarchy" has been hard at work for the last 40+ years trying to capture the US government to serve their insatiable greed. Congress has routinely appeased them and given them more wealth and power.
So, yeah, feckless Democrats are equally responsible for allowing Trump to win this election. I'm sorry that some people do not understand that the present is a direct reflection of the past. In other words, we couldn't have got to where we are today by ignoring or discounting past failures. You would think pleas to learn from past mistakes would be a positive contribution to moving forward more proactively.
Republicans win elections by changing how elections are conducted, i.e. tilting the playing field. A fair election in a democracy is based on the will of the majority. We have elections but we don't have a democracy. This election was decided by .001 percent of the population or the billionaires who have enough money and power to impact the outcome.
To paraphrase Einstein and others, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity. Where we are today is the result of decades of political insanity. Going forward and overcoming the greatest threat to the Western world will require learning from our mistakes, not repeating them, and developing strategies (beyond elections) to overpower the enemy, foreign and domestic.
JC, what you say is true. However, we need new Democratic leadership. People who play by a different set of rules. Schumer, using an example, is too much the institutionalist. I like Jeffries.
Dems are rightly at odds with each other -- we were beaten in November and we must use political forensics to determine what, and whom, needs changing.
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏‼️
JC Andrijeski,
"I think you might want to look at capture of our institutions by billionaires and what that has done to the media messaging.
And yes, blaming this on the Democratic party is totally missing the point of what actually happened in this election, and who is at fault."
I guess I don't see this whole mess in terms of a single election, or even two. The messaging issue is a problem Democrats have had for DECADES. The lack of a strong, consistent message is what allows, as you say, the capture of our institutions because the right-wing media machine, and the messaging discipline within the Republican ranks, has, like an armored division, been rolling over us for decades.
And the fact that you're using the term "participation trophies" tells me a lot about how much of this mindset you've already absorbed, frankly. Pointing out that it benefits authoritarians to have us divided is now a cause for name calling? Is it that much easier for you to believe that Democrats could have overcome this tsunami of disinformation from the corporate media and social media platforms than it is to look at what we're actually facing in this country now?
I would prefer to keep my eyes on the true enemy, and not get distracted with pretending this isn't a coup by the oligarchy and by foreign enemies. Ignoring what they did to completely rig the election (both in terms of propaganda, and, if Trump himself is to be believed, by Musk "fixing the machines in PA") to pretend the Democrats could have won the election through "better messaging" doesn't strike me as particularly good use of my time.
The Democratic Party might not be perfect (Biden himself admitted he miss-stepped badly in appointing Garland), but they are the only truly democratic (small "d") party we have left. They also aren't a monolith, which is true of any truly democratic political party... nor would you want them to be. They are a coalition party, which means that they have a lot of faces, not just one, as they are actually balancing multiple constituencies. I agree we have to come up with strategies to combat fascism, now that it's on our doorstep, and language is one of them. But let me ask you this... did you vote for the Democrats? If so, then YOU are part of the Democratic party, too. The leaders were outplayed by a complicit media and massive corruption. So were all of us. I don't think framing this as "the Democratic Party are losers because they lost the election" is particularly helpful, personally.
Well, what's missing from everything you are writing is any kind of answer for a way forward. How does "keeping your eyes" on the enemy help?
If losing an election isn't a cause for self-introspection, then what is? We aren't allowed to call out leaders who fail, because ... why?
I think you should read "The Political Mind" by George Lakoff, or one of his other books. It isn't just about "words", it's about how to frame issues, and how to start from values before policy. Also "Thinking, Fast and Slow" is another book worth reading. There is science behind these things.
I think the Democrats as a party have been poor at messaging for some time.
Yes we are now captured by an oligarchy. That's exactly the kind of messaging we finally got from Biden (too late) that we need going forward. If he had delivered some of those messages earlier, maybe we would've won.
I have read Lakoff. And you're still not understanding what I'm suggesting if you think this is a nihilist position I'm taking. I'm saying we need to mature out of this phase of our interaction with propaganda. See my note above. Thinking that "better messaging" would have won the election in the face of the forces aligned against democracy IS propaganda. We need to become exponentially more savvy about how propaganda works. That goes BEYOND messaging and looks at the effects certain words have on people's behaviors. We need to start educating ourselves on how propaganda actually works, and how it pushes people to behave in various ways. Why constantly talking about Trump helps him, even when it's mostly negative. Why framing a coup as an "election loss" is actually helping the authoritarians retain legitimacy. We need to get smarter about this stuff, frankly. We need to unite the opposition in the face of an overwhelming enemy. Part of that is to stop bashing one another and just admit that we weren't equipped to win this battle, and that we need to find some way to unite all of the factions that propaganda have driven apart. Without that coming together, we'll never win our country back, frankly. Never. No amount of messaging will change that.
OK we weren't equipped to win the battle. I think that is what I am saying. What I am proposing is we figure out how to equip ourselves, and better messaging is a part of that.
Yes we need to be more savvy about propaganda. Again that is my point. We need to counter it.
I don't get how saying we need to improve is "bashing each other". That I don't get at all. How is what you are saying, that we need to become more savvy, any different from what I am saying?
What I would say is we shouldn't be blaming or bashing different groups in our coalition. Holding leaders accountable to up their game is exactly what we should be doing.
No I don't get it at all.
Ordinary voters aren't going to "become savvy", they need competing messages.
I'm not sure we are disagreeing.
I may vote a straight Democratic ticket, but that does not mean that I 100% support them. I voted for Biden but I thought he was a bad choice for saving the country from becoming a kleptocracy. I thought he made a mistake when he chose Garland. Now that Biden failed, largely because Garland failed, you think us wrong for bashing the Democrats now?
The false equivalency narrative misses the point that both sides always contribute to an outcome, plus the actions taken and policies enacted cannot be fully measured in terms of harm. To suggest that Republicans are solely to blame for the rise of a kleptocracy is shortsighted. I could point to a long list of Democratic failings. Keep in mind that both political parties have grazed at the trough of the billionaires for decades. Both political parties are responsible for the massive inequality in America. Both political parties sold out the middle class and labor unions which are the backbone of what has made America economically great. The social safety net of the wealthiest country in the world is tattered and torn because both parties have routinely favored the robber barons over everyday hard-working Americans. On these and many other issues, the vast majority of Americans agree.
Democracy will not be restored unless or until, the Democratic Party is reconstituted to serve the vast majority of Americans. No more taking the high road against an enemy that wishes to destroy our lives and livelihoods for personal gain.
Personally, I don't recognize Trump as president, or any Republican in office. Everyone of them has forsaken their oath of office which means to me they are illegitimate. Resistance to their coup is required. Going forward, I will not support any Democrat or strategy that refuses to loudly and forcefully resist these traitorous political enemies.
I remember that my father, uncles and other family members served, fought, and some died fighting against an enemy who was less powerful and financially capable. I strongly suggest that we need to recognize that the peril ahead will not be mitigated by voters! The past has taught us this lesson numerous times.
What people ought to do, before donating money to their representatives and Senators, is buy a copy of that book and send it to them. One could hope they take a professional view and learn their job, which involves messaging.
Couldn't agree more about Lakoff. I read "Don't Think of an Elephant" first, then "Moral Politics" first edition, then Moral Politics third edition and will now read "The Political Mind". Thanks for the recommendation.
I'm so glad you recommended Lakoff. As I read your post, I kept thinking Lakoff, Lakoff, Lakoff . . . "Don't Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate."
"Lakoff offers advice about how to counteract politicians' lies. He maintains that the act of stating that a lie is false reinforces the lie because it repeats the way the lie is framed. Instead, he recommends what he calls a "truth sandwich":
"1. Start with the truth. The first frame gets the advantage.
2. Indicate the lie. Avoid amplifying the specific language if possible.
3. Return to the truth. Always repeat truths more than lies."[18]
Lakoff calls this a "truth sandwich" even though the baloney is in the middle. The position of the lie avoids both primacy and recency effects." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lakoff
Thank you for bringing up George Lakoff. His first book "Don't Speak of an Elephant" is all about "framing," and it is also a must read. It opened my mind.
Yes!
Calling them "weird" really seemed to get under their skin. It may have driven more of them to the polls, though.
Progressive opinion writers and journalists need to stop referring to Trump as "transactional" when the proper word is "corrupt."
Also, he doesn't peddle 'untruths' 'falsehoods' or 'exaggerations'. The word they're looking for is 'lies.'
Absolutely. Take the gloves off, call him and his actions what they are. He’s a a demented useful, idiot that is a tool for autocrats and oligarchs.
Don't hold your breath. The New York Times and the Atlantic are debating whether Elon Musk's Nazi salute is a Nazi salute. They won't even call that out. They are all terrified of Trump and are folding like a house of cards. Right now I only trust this source, The Contrarian.
And let's not leave out Maureen Dowd, who appears to have a pathological hatred of Biden. She was foaming at the mouth in print about Biden prudently issuing pre-emptive pardons.
She is upset at getting the cold shoulder from Biden after her Hunter
columns. She was always ragging on Hillary as well.
I will not miss the NYT nor WAPO
Dowd has often struck me as someone who is stuck in adolescence, reveling in being a cool girl who the guys liked because she would tolerate their buffonery and sexism.
Simple language also works better. I know what oligarchs are... many people do not. It is government of the few, but we might just call them "billionaires" or "elite rich people".
Exactly. When Biden used the word "oligarch" in his final speech, Google results showed a significant uptick in people looking up the word.
Americans are a special breed of stupid. You have to start with that acknowledgement.
Although it was slightly encouraging that so many wanted to actually know what an oligarch is. Only slightly...since they should have known by now.
Well yeah... but let's not start by calling people "stupid". People can't choose their IQ level any more than I could've become an NFL quarterback. If they look up "oligarch" they are trying as you point out, which is about all you can ask for. It's pretty good actually.
In my experience, the thing we have a tendency to do is complain that voters are what they are, instead of accepting it and figuring out how to deal with it.
Like "why don't people vote their self-interests"? They don't. Work with it.
That's how malignant narcissistic psychopaths roll. They're criminals. They're fucking greedy whores. Who would take the nickels off their dead mother's eyes. King Shitpants is Leonard Leo's useful tool. Just dangle a shiny object. Shitpants is like a puppy with a new toy. Will Americans ever get tired of being the collateral damage of the ultra wealthy??
Popular culture has encouraged veneration of wealthy people simply because they are wealthy.
Does anyone else remember "Lifestyles of The Rich and Famous"? Consider reality TV and series set in luxurious resorts,hotels,mansions. Thry all sell the illusion that we can have that kind of life, which, of course,is a joke.
Think of Mark Burnett helping to create Trump as a successful business mogul through "The Apprentice".
SO well-said; corrupt and malignant narcissist, a perfect example of what happens when an ignorant father treats his children, especially his sons, with contempt.
Thomas, presumably progressive writers are preaching to the choir, but your point is taken. I personally love "consumer tax" which should be employed by all, especially Dems in Congress.
AND my favorite words are demented, insane and corrupt... someone some where must disconnect the electricity from the computer power calculation of his newest psycho coin. It's that simple.
They are not quite the same. Trump is both transactional and corrupt. All corrupt actions are transactional , but not all transactional behavior is corrupt in the sense of a tit for a tat
Being transactional with billionaire donors is corruption. But he is transactional even if the only gain is a boost to his ego. He might offer to help someone who can't really return any favor, IF he thinks he can get positive publicity and praise from it, especially the recipient's own effusive public thanks and support.
100%
Yes!
The pardoning of the January 6 insurrectionists is so horrific it beggars belief. My heart is broken for the families of the police officers wounded or killed, and I'm incensed that the rule of law so carefully implemented in the J6 trials has been discounted and discarded.
Some weeks ago, on another blog I follow, I offered this food for thought. Bear with me - this is relevant. When it became clear that Ukraine was going to resist the Russian invasion like so many angry buzzsaws, Russia opened wide the doors of its prisons, unleashing a literal army of murderers, r*pists, and thieves onto Ukrainian civilians - some of them repeat offenders. In some cases, Ukrainians delivered the ultimate penalty (you are welcome, Russian people!), but in some cases those people survived and returned home.
After years in prison and months of doing pretty much whatever they wanted at the Ukrainian front, they felt bored, and guessed what they went back to doing? Yeah.... same thing as they did before they landed in jail. In some cases, if the victims complained, there were either very light penalties for these people or no penalties at all, because they were now "war heroes". Those who did end up back in prison simply signed another army contract and were back out - back to torment Ukrainian civilians.
So.... going back to our January 6th insurrectionists. If you look at the records, many of them were turned in by their current and former spouses and significant others, friends, family members, colleagues. What will happen to all of those people once these goons are set free? It's not like anyone is going to offer them protective custody. And we know things like restraining orders will hold these people back. What are the choices for all the people who did their duty and reported the insurrectionists to law enforcement? Who is going to protect them? Their families? Their livelihoods? Nobody.
I agree, but can't "like" because you are right and it's abhorrent.
He set them loose to prey upon the people, and to scare us.
Bull
They will be in Hegseth’s paramilitary wing before too long.
I agree. The handwriting is on the wall. White Nationalists have been given the okay to form their own militia.
Brownshirts.
Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.
Sad but true.
I'm scared for Stuart Rhodes family, especially his son, who testified against him.
Agree. Pardoning the likes of Stuart Rhodes gutted me the same way the election did. To pardon the likes of
Oops — didn’t realize it posted. I was going to say — to pardon the likes of Stuart Rhodes- a violent, anti-government, insurrectionist, domestic abuser and founder of the Oath Keepers was gut wrenching.
Yesterday the BBC in their hourly news discussed Trump's "strong mandate." This was while I was driving and I yelled at the radio (not too effective). But if the nascent pro-democracy leaders like you, BTC, the Bulwark etc. start calling out all the lies it will help. Another one that Trump keeps saying is that he won the youth vote by 36 (sometimes 39) percent. The real numbers are that Americans under the age of 30 voted for Harris by 4 points (50 percent Harris – 46 percent Trump). Keep calling out the reality of this totally corrupt administration.
Better, sue to recoup for the Treasury all those bribes Trump is receiving, all his merch earnings, etc, as a result of his status as president elect and as # 47.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201
Hi Jen - and thanks for doing this.
I'd suggest we stop sugarcoating what Trump says - please ditch "untruths" and go with "lies".
Agree that Trumpets are not "conservatives" - far from it. How about "fascists"?
We need to start winning the conversation, and using inoffensive/mild/dissembling terms will go along way to doing just that.
Fight on - Joe
Yes!
Let's keep it simple. The opposition needs two things:
1) a message, couched the right language, (I agree with Patrick) and
2) a medium, or media, to get that message out, repeatedly, to everyone who might oppose Trump now and in 2026.
One of the things we should have learned from Trump is the power of repetition. We need to keep hammering home the same points, enhanced every time Trump does something destructive.
AND, the message needs a positive side, what we will do for you, and not merely detail Trump's crimes, faults, grifting, selling out Ameria, etc.
Congratulations on The Contrarian. We also need shorter, angrier, and free sites to get the message out.
Good points. A lie repeated often enough becomes reality. Karl
Popper said, effectively, “Nothing can be said so plainly that it can’t be willfully misunderstood.” The Resistance needs to hammer home simple messaging.
Thank you, Judd. Agree. To get the message out, we DO need free sites for all to read.
Yes exactly.
Why use the word “untruths” in your lede? Change the language. Use the word lie.
Wonderful points but preaching to the choir! I have no idea how to fight this new administration and return to the previous world view of the Biden administration. I think the Dems need to start to push their many talented and charismatic leaders and help to make them a household word in the hopes of changing the current abomination.
Jasmine Crockett isn't waiting around for anyone to give her the green light, and I applaud her for it!
But this is the right thing. Developing messaging and repeating it is exactly what our side needs to figure out. It's not about preaching a message to the choir, is developing the right way to talk to other voters.
I do agree, but how to do this? I am almost 85 and have spent many years watching injustice by brilliant propagandists who have the ability to sway people who do not have the ability to see through the obvious manipulation.
For starters, we need to run people EVERYWHERE instead of not contesting races we think we can't win. We need to develop as much talent as we can in areas of the country we can't compete in. Talented people will rise up and show everyone else how to do it.
It can be done. Although he lost this time, John Tester won many times in Montana. Breshear is a progressive Democratic governor in Kentucky.
Run everywhere, talk to everyone. We need to stop thinking we are a plurality or a majority and that we just need to get "our voters" to the polls. Sometimes we take them for granted too.
Thank you! I certainly can talk. I live in a blue section of a red state, and I can certainly be more verbal!
Paula, I live in a red section of a blue state and fully agree. I can be more verbal, and insist on more positive action by local Dems, and anyone with a conscience. Not much point laying back because I'm afraid.
Yes! North Dakota's Dem candidate Tryve Hammer may have lost, but he hasn't disappeared. He started his own substack, and I recommend everyone who can do so follow him. He's brilliant and down to earth. He connects many of his military experiences to his subject of the day.
You won't be disappointed!
Yep.
We’re at a disadvantage because of Meta and X, both platforms spew lies and those who get their news from these platforms, generally don’t have critical thinking skills. We have a significant electorate that chooses ignorance over truth and facts. We can talk all we want but we have just witnessed an election being hijacked by the uninformed thanks to social media.
Uninformed and misinformed. And then those, of course, who WANT to believe that what they think is true, is true. One can convince oneself of almost anything no matter the facts staring them in the face. Trump to MAGAs… are you going to believe me or your lying eyes? Ppl will hold on to their “beliefs” no matter what facts they’re confronted with because the alternative that they have been conned/lied to, to admit they were wrong, is just too much for them to accept. Just MHO.
I am thinking of getting off Meta for that reason. If we all did this Zuckerberg will pay the price.
I'm surprised you're not off it already, no judgment. But this is one action we can take to support truth. Same with META. The former FB was strictly social when it was launched. Now, it's a global nightmare of lies and misinformation, and, like Musk, Zuckerberg could care less as long as his pockets get fatter.
Yes! I quit Facebook years ago & my life is so much better because of it!
I agree. We are in an echo chamber and need to get a much broader audience. If many of the smart people I know get their information from Fox News, they are in a different, and much larger, echo chamber, and as smart as they are, they can't help but be swayed by the constant propaganda of the far right. I don't listen to Fox and they don't listen to MSNBC; nor will they read/listen to/watch The Contrarian. I think this is our big hurdle.
I agree. It’s not about intelligence. One of my sisters is a Trump supporter. She is very intelligent. I’d say smarter than I am. But she went down the MAGA, Alex Jones, etc rabbit holes and she’s now part of the MAGA cult. Being intelligent and being susceptible to brainwashing aren’t mutually exclusive. (Hope that makes sense.) I still have a relationship with her. (I refuse to lose my sister over this orange turd and MAGA.) But in order to hold onto my relationship with her, we don’t talk about politics. I haven’t figured out how to un-MAGA her yet. When the orange POS first ran back in 2015, and then during his first term, whenever I tried to talk to her about politics, she’d start telling me that I was watching the wrong news. Fox was telling her the truth. MSNBC, NYT, Wapo, etc weren’t telling the truth. At that point we agreed to avoid talking about politics. She tries to bring it up from time to time, but I don’t engage. I honestly don’t know how to reach her. Many ppl can’t even consider that they may have fallen victim to a conman. Being confronted with the truth and facts just forces them to double down. A few months ago during a family get together she learned about Citizens United. She had no idea what it was, and how it has affected our politics and elections. She was shocked. It was a small step, but hopefully not the last.
Agree
And Ms. Rubin, I would make the same point about liberals. If you support a woman's right to bodily autonomy, if you support reasonable controls on weapon technology to safeguard human life, if you believe that voting is a sacred right that must be allowed all eligible Americans, or the right to breathe, drink and eat substances that are not contaminated; if you believe that a society's duty is to educate its young, if you believe that your relationship with your god, oe disbelief in any deity is a private matter; if you believe that a government has a fundamental duty to protect its citizens by the use of reasonable regulations, (and I could go on), then you are not a liberal -- you are smack dab in the middle of the political spectrum, because those are all issues supported by a majority of Americans.
We should stop using soft words. Let's stop calling Donny the Mouth an authoritarian. He's a freakin Dictator (as he said he would be). Also, let's bury the label "Republican". There's the Trump Party where the Rs used to be. If our messages can't fit on a bumper sticker and be understood by a 10-year old they are wasting words. Improvise, adapt, and overcome.
I agree. They should have “M” after their names. MAGA is its own deal. Call them out. Conservative Republicans are a dying breed.
" If our messages can't fit on a bumper sticker and be understood by a 10-year old they are wasting words. Improvise, adapt, and overcome." I totally agree.
The Billionaire Trump Party, BTP. MAGA will soon see which way the money is flowing, and it won’t be to their pockets.
Since gop word-miesters like Frank Luntz and Newt Gingrich came up with a list that define the terms of the debate, I've been carping on how we've allowed the enemy free reign with Orwellian speak. I quit referring to them as conservatives long ago as a result.
I've also begun to pronounce the "gop" acronym just as I pronounce others like NASA, NATO, AIDS, COVID etc. As in stop fascism. Stop the gop. It doesn't deserve capitalization. My former gop acquaintances hate it.
And yes while the Democratic Party is the only game in town at present it's still in desperate need of reform but at least it's still reformable. The gop cult is beyond reform at this late date.
Moreover we have nothing comparable to the gop's juggernaut of rightwing propaganda outlets like Fox/Murdoch and its ilk. My personal solution was to leave the legacy media behind and use the money saved to subscribe to such as Jennifer Rubin, Greg Olear, Josh Marshall (TPM), Dan Pfeiffer, The Guardian, Judd Legum and many other proven journalists. The $120 saved on dropping the W. Post covers a host of such writers on Substack and Medium.
I'm saving this essay for rereading, paraphrasing and quoting.
Thanks Jennifer.
Thank you Jen, very much happy to be here. I really think the “Republican” moniker needs to be eliminated as well, because it causes cross-over confusion with the current convulsing of the MAGA party and its new adherents to this dangerous condition. I think it needs a completely different name. It is wholly the MAGA party now, fully authoritarian and is being run by oligarchs and far right ideologues who have purposely used a false veneer of so called “Christian” religiosity and grievance to silence and control the people of the U.S. It is a totalitarian regime now who have been orchestrating this for decades - complete greed, power, and control over everyone. Our checks and balances organized by the founders are in shreds because of the capitulation to them. And our current President is not more than a puppet they have curated and controlled through his biggest weaknesses - vanity, insecurity, incompetence, and venality among others. He wants to be America’s Putin, and it is being used by the actually powerful - his supplicants (who have fooled him) who have co-opted him to actually kill off our Democracy. They need a new name entirely.
These so called Republicans have more in common with the Iranian Republican Guards than past Republicans ever.
Absolutely
Agreed! The techbros need to go. The key to this is taking their platforms away.
They need to get them the HELL out of government. The so called “republican” party (MAGATS) are complicit here in all of this. Disgusting.
Not just that. It also requires separating the super rich from 95% of their wealth. No money, no problem.
Tax the shit out of them
I just call them Magats. Close enough.
Excellent piece. Language matters. Reinforcing facts with factual language is also resistance.
Awesome essay.
Great article that's what calling a spade a spade is all about, that's what Donald trump is a power hungry carpetbagger that will destroy the democracy if we let him
He's not a carpetbagger. Carpetbagger was Confederate-speak for people who came to restore the traitor states to the Union. Trump is a pure fascist.
You are correct he's a pure fascist however a carpetbagger was a grifter that can to control and steal from the south and Donald Trump is a grifter power hungry carpetbagger
The potential revoking of birthright citizenship is ridiculous. My parents weren’t citizens until 4 years after I was born in Chicago. I have an adopted grandchild whose birth parents may not have been citizens. This Executive Order is blatantly unconstitutional, but it deeply affects and concerns me and millions of fellow American citizens. And I’m not sure if I am one now!
Rest easy, for now. It takes more than an edict (refuse to call it an executive order) to revoke the Constitution's 14th amendment. ACLU is all over this one!