I'm getting really annoyed with a specific emerging narrative.
Namely, that the Democratic party lost voters. That the democratic party needs to be rebuilt. That the democratic party is a failure.
The FBI & CIA agree: Russia interfered in the election. Whether this turned the election or not is unknown pending further investigation.
How the hell is the head of the DNC in South Carolina blaming HRC and Podesta when Putin hacked the election?
How this isn't the dominating story in all news outlets across the world for the next 4 years, I don't understand.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A lot of people feel the Democratic party no longer represents them, including many people who did actually vote for HRC. That's why the narrative exists, and will continue regardless of whether it has any actual explanatory value on the 2016 election.
ReplyDeleteI don't think so, David Hertz . I think the narrative exists, at least in the media, to try to pretend we are operating as usual. Continuity is the main thing.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't both be true.
ReplyDeleteIts no false narrative to say that today's Democratic party is farther right than it has ever been in our lifetimes. Its no false narrative that they are now as tightly tied to big business and Wall Street as the Republicans are.
So it seems inevitable to me that they've lost votes among those who don't want that.
It is a narrative that very conveniently shifts blame away from Comey, Wikileaks, Russia, GOP gerrymandering, MSM culpability, and most importantly of all, voter suppression.
ReplyDeleteThe DNC could use some fixing up, sure. I'd like to see fewer superdelegates and more national involvement in grass-roots activism. But look at the GOP - Evan McMullin is getting ready to burn that sumbitch to the GROUND.
As one of the people who isn't happy with the Democratic party, I'm fairly confident we do exist. I wish there was more polling among registered Democrats about their satisfaction with the party, but I think the copious polling this election showing extremely low approval for both candidates suggests there are many people who feel this way.
ReplyDeleteThis doesn't mean Russian hacking isn't a big deal, of course. It is, and should be treated that way.
Ralph Mazza Lemme clarify a little: Its not that the democratic party didn't lose voters. Of course we did, as we went from 90% of the African America vote to ... less. The narrative, rather, is that the loss of voters caused the loss of the election.
ReplyDeleteDerrick Sanders Precisely. You apparently do get what i'm trying to claim.
ReplyDeleteDavid Hertz You're right, I stated too obliquely. The emerging claim is "The DNC lost the election because HRC was a bad candidate / lack of 50 state party / etc", which puts blame at the party and not, say, at voter suppression or Russian hacking.
ReplyDeleteIt is far, far easier for the media to make money telling stories about how HRC is a such a bad candidate than to actually look at a systemic failure of democracy.
ReplyDeleteIt's easier for party wonks to feel good about themselves and adapt to the perverse new political climate rather than try to restore voting rights. It's easier for party members to be angry at the party rather than try to petition their leadership and representatives to look into the hacking.
It seems to me that the "Russians hacked the election" narrative is trying to conflate two things -- hacking the actual mechanisms of the election like vote counting, which didn't happen, and hacking e-mail accounts etc. to publicize embarrassing information which may or may not have had a marginal effect on some voters decisionmaking. While that second one isn't great it's also not nearly as worrying, especially since many commentators claimed that the e-mail leaks were a "nothing" story anyway.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the presidential election isn't the only thing democrats lost. If I was a democrat I wouldn't be satisfied that the party was on the right track.
CNN called those leaks a billion-dollar story.
ReplyDeleteblaming russia is birtherism for liberals. It's a tidy just-so story that externalizes the problem such that the DNC don't have to change anything and can continue to make the same ghastly mistakes year after year. If we instead focus on the failures of the party, maybe we can actually restructure it so that it is actually progressive/populist in some way such that the likely-negligible effect of russian interference couldn't overturn an election like it did when there was near-zero enthusiasm for who the next president will be.
ReplyDeleteIgnoring it is an existential threat to democracy.
ReplyDeleteBut I'd like to reiterate; The largest threat to democracy right now is the GOP/Koch brothers war on voting rights. Voter ID acts in particular. Wisconsin is a failed state.
ReplyDeleteVeles Svitlychny Perhaps we need a chat about what birtherism is and was.
ReplyDeleteNamely, racist white supremacy claiming the President was not an American citizen because his father wasn't an American. The underlying assumption consistently being that black people aren't Americans, and cannot possibly be President. And, of course, linking this to anti-muslim fear mongering, going so far as to call a fist bump a "terrorist fist bump", linking the President to anti-state terrorism across the world.
What it was not: based in any kind of reason.
Both the CIA and the FBI have said Russia interfered in the election. It is not yet released -- and likely not known -- how far, or what effect, if any, this had. Let me be clear about something: I was remarkably surprised that any part of the election was hacked by a foreign power.
Until we know the extent, it is absolutely ridiculous to claim a caused based on voters. We just don't know.
I know exactly what birtherism is and was. Liberal birtherism is still rooted in xenophobia and terror over foreign actors interfering with the workings of the US government, it's just not dripping with racism on the surface. That's not surprising, because the racism of the DNC is usually more euphemistic. Just look at all the slander leveled at reformers like Keith Ellison.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I have seen (and all present public evidence indicates), was that russian interference in the election process amounted to hacking the DNC email servers. Given that the hack amounted to Podesta clicking on a suspicious email link, it isn't some mission impossible shit that happened. Given that that is all that happened (as far as we will ever know), reviving the red scare is ludicrous next to actually taking a long hard look in the mirror and realizing that the DNC is just a more polite version of the GOP.
Veles Svitlychny You know what? No.
ReplyDeleteI'm done talking to you. Your conflating of birtherism and russia hacking the election is upsetting my calm. Please go away, and perhaps we'll talk another day.
Perhaps I am a cynic, but it seems to me that sending an army of volunteers out to help poor or otherwise disadvantaged people sign up for things is supposed to be a core competency of progressive activism. I can't wrap my head around why photo ID laws are treated like a stake through the heart of democrats rather than an opportunity for giving progressive activists day jobs at non-profits where they can practice the same skills they'd use for get-out-the-vote activities. And getting poor and otherwise disadvantaged people to have functional IDs seems like it ought to have other benefits in these people's lives. Am I missing something? This seems like one of the most solvable problems in politics.
ReplyDeleteDan Maruschak At the same time as mandating voter ID laws, states shut down places to get voter IDs in majority-minority districts.
ReplyDeleteDan Maruschak because most people who work minimum wage jobs don't get paid time off to spend hours at the DMV. Applying for ID is something that has to be done in person and you're asking people to go hungry or not pay a bill or risk getting evicted to get an ID to vote. Guess who's going to get the shit end of that stick?
ReplyDeleteDan Maruschak Because 1) it's a poll-tax 2) it's impossible. How many DMVs to polling places are there in urban areas? How do you get the working poor to go get an ID?
ReplyDeleteThe GOP sponsors these bills because they are effective at keeping poor and largely minority voters from voting.
"because most people who work minimum wage jobs don't get paid time off to spend hours at the DMV"
ReplyDeleteWhy not ask some wealthy democratic fundrasiser-types to bankroll some organization to do exactly that? Seems like it would be more cost-effective than whatever Hillary's campaign and the DNC are doing with the money.
"Because 1) it's a poll-tax"
I get why it's easy to frame as evil. But even if we stipulate the vilest Jim Crow-ish motives I don't see why it has to be very consequential.
"How do you get the working poor to go get an ID?"
Progressive activists renting vans and chartering busses? Isn't that one of the things that GOTV activists are good at:?
"I get why it's easy to frame as evil. But even if we stipulate the vilest Jim Crow-ish motives I don't see why it has to be very consequential."
ReplyDeleteBack to the logistics. It's also not just a few hours to go to the DMV. You need documentation. Birth certificates. SS card. Time, money, and ACCESS. If it wasn't consequential, it wouldn't be flown. And it's not just 'easy to frame as evil'; it's racist and classist, and in states that aren't corrupt as all hell, generally ruled to be unconstitutional.
Veles Svitlychny I asked you to leave politely. Now I'm telling you: Get off my lawn.
ReplyDeleteFurther comments -- and the one you just posted -- will be deleted. If there are more, I'll ban hammer. Which I don't want, as another day I might want to talk to you.
Ah, my apologies. I misread your earlier request as that you won't be addressing me any more today, not that I shouldn't comment. I'll refrain from any more comments past this apology.
ReplyDelete[ Deleted my own post to Dan Maruschak , as I decided it wouldn't get where I want. ]
ReplyDeleteDan Maruschak When I find myself disagree with Misha B, I've developed a habit of pausing and thinking deeper about what she's saying. All together too often, my own privilege is blinding me. Could something like that be happening here?
I think we need to stop letting the media pick a dominant narrative, and also stop trying, ourselves, to pick a dominant narrative, and instead, make noise and progress on every one of the mentioned fronts, and thus both a) dominate the national agenda, and b) let the GOP play whack-a-mole with us instead of the reverse. Because life is complicated and so are real solutions, and politics is not (as presently, all-too-often cast) the aggregate of many fights over single issues between singular opposing viewpoints, but rather a negotiation on many fronts, among shifting alliances of people who all share a great deal in common.
ReplyDeleteMy main beef with the Democrats is that they continue to fuss over how blame plays on the internet and in newspapers, while failing to set a new local and national agenda that includes jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, minimum wage, social safety net, climate change, electoral integrity and data security, voter rights and universal of-right enfranchisement, income inequality, corporatism/financialism/de-regulationism, feminism, racism, minority rights and equity, police militarization, anti-science, de-secularization, immigration, education and all this other stuff.
And they also keep doing incredibly stupid stuff -- I'm starting to think because they're actually more comfortable (and perhaps more profitable) in a one-down position. If they want to win, they need to run people whose affects and public resonance doesn't scream 'Loser!'
They did set that national agenda and their candidate repeatedly talked about it in every speech.
ReplyDeleteI also don't think the Russian hacks meant much; in the end the country just decided it was done keeping its seething hate behind closed doors and in newspaper comment sections. The nation wails for war, has never forgiven opponents of the war in Iraq for being right about it and needs someone belligerent enough to kick it off. The nation hates peace and jobs if other people get to enjoy it too. We would, collectively, rather be broke and sick if it just means we can kill someone.
The Clintonian neoliberal wing failed to run a field campaign in states that Obama won easily in 2012. The neoliberal message since 1992 has been that triangulation toward the center, compromise, and cooperation with corporate agendas interested in reform that benefits their interests will eventually work for the American people.
ReplyDeleteWhich is total bullshit. I've been involved in Democratic Party politics since 1988, and the one good thing that has come out of this past election is clarity: the Clintonian neoliberal wing needs to go the fuck away, and there is absolutely nothing to be lost by aggressive embracing of a progressive agenda as the country is going to be a lot browner, gayer, angrier, and therefore more progressive in another decade or two. Play the long game, and HRC and the neoliberal hawks can go fuck themselves.
Yeah, that. This is my first year as a registered Dem. On most social things, the party finally caught up to me. I've been way left for my whole life.
ReplyDeleteWe can have a single-payer system and guaranteed minimum income in 6 years. We just need to fire the party 'leadership' (as such) and return to grass roots activism. We need to shave 15 years off of the mean age of party members (sorry mom).
Yes, the party needs to change.
HOWEVER
Look at the widespread trend of how things went down this year. Voter suppression worked. Gerrymandering worked (again, look at the state legislative makeup in Wisconsin now).
Take in some more of the big-picture problems of how European isolationism and ethno-nationalism are spreading. Look at Putin, his stated goals, and his track record of affecting those goals. He is deliberately and systematically undermining democracy. That is not a partisan problem, that is a national problem. And yet, he found a partisan solution to it in the US. As stated in the original post, this is a big fucking deal. A stronger Dem party and a less-corrupt GOP would both help.
Wow, William, I am a little alarmed on your behalf, watching these comments.
ReplyDeleteYou said "there's this false narrative that's really getting on my nerves," and a bunch of people seem (to my eyes) to be responding "oh yeaaaah, that false narrative is my jam! Turn it up!"
Sympathies.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to call it an incomplete narrative rather than a false one. That way there'd be less need to point out that it isn't a false narrative at all, but a completely true one.
ReplyDeleteIf the point was to shift some focus onto the other true narratives, that likely would have been a more successful approach.
Tony Lower-Basch , maybe when a whole bunch of people show up saying "excuse me, our existence is not a false narrative" you should consider believing them.
ReplyDeleteWell, it depends on the context. If it's in a thread where I say "hey, I would like to assert not-X, what do you think?" then yes, hearing lots of people argue for X is likely to sway me.
ReplyDeleteBut if the thread is one posited upon "God, I am sick and tired of hearing about X," then hearing lots of people argue for X seems very different in context.
I'm not seeing the invitation to debate that some folks seem (to my eyes) to be assuming.
No, I thought the root of the question was more "Why is this Russian attack on American sovereignty being ignored, seemingly in favor of this other narrative?"
ReplyDeleteThe answer, judging by this thread, is that the other narrative gives people something to complain about.
Yeah, in particular I'm frustrated and annoyed that leaders of the DNC are casting the behaviors and actions of the campaign as a failure. Losing doesn't necessarily mean you screwed up, but it sure is easier to believe.
ReplyDeleteThere was a line further up, about losing blue votes while pursuing moderate Republicans. I'm guessing that is somewhat the case. From what I've heard, the ground game in Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn, Iowa, was just non-existant. In New Mexico the Dems pretty much ignored us. And look at how the local seats fell all across the country; DNC needs new filed marshalls. More later...
ReplyDeleteI agree, William. But I don't think it will be found the Russians accomplished much. The American people wanted hate and the Democrats weren't offering it.
ReplyDeleteThe Russians hacked the computers of both the DNC and GOP. What do you mean by 'didn't accomplish much?'
ReplyDeleteYou know what, I'm out. I can feel my chill starting to fade, William Nichols , FWIW, I agree that Russian interference in our democratic process is a huge story, especially as this has been Putin's MO with Western democracies for some time. It represents a large threat, and we're starting to see stories now about Russian ties to Neo-Nazi and white supremacist fronts. Hey, I've been banging that drum for 20 plus years, and only ever been scoffed at by Dem elders. Well, this is whatyouget... Nope, chill gone. Out.
Until we meet again, Derrick Sanders
ReplyDeleteDerrick Sanders You are correct, what I should have said is the revelations had little effect on the final outcome of the election. You are completely correct that a breach of this significance is a huge accomplishment. And of course in an election this close every small factor had some relevance. The bigger story to me is the craving a solid 48% of Americans undeniably have for openly expressed hate.
ReplyDelete