I pay attention to what people are actually saying and doing, TC, as does Heather. I think she did a bang up job of analyzing the Republican caucus in Iowa. I don't assume that the turnout is at all representative of all Republicans in Iowa. Or that all Republicans meet the criteria you hold for judging their sanity. We can't tell what most Republicans think or believe in Iowa, because the caucus sample is too small and distorted. So we can't project results onto the rest of Iowa, and we sure can't project their results to other states, let alone to the general election in November.
You are a cynical negativist. I am a cynical optimist. I refuse to let people like you drag me down. So while you are looking at the cracks, I am looking at the common connections and ways to build on them. We might still lose, but I can guarantee that negativity will get in the way of winning.
Here's an irony for you: a member of our select board calls himself "a progressive voice". VT has an official Progressive Party, so he is not allowed to call himself a Progressive. He has one goal: trying to get the town to convert to electric vehicles. His stance is that of an authoritarian, and so is his behavior. As a result, he is a constant obstacle to the SB actually addressing concerns and needs expressed by the town. Our town is tiny and we are highly rural, with rural roads and poor radio and cell reception that fades out when you go round a hill. We are not in a position to pay for very expensive vehicles that also need to be refitted to use as a police vehicle (unproven so far in even cities). I will skip his attempt to change out our dated oil boiler attached to a damaged chimney for a heat pump boiler except to say that the heat pump would be located in the heated basement. It would draw heat from the air around it to heat the water that heats the basement. Everybody else in the room saw the flaw in his reasoning, but it went right past him, and he persisted until the question was called 4-1. Unfortunately, the electric police cars are in the budget, and that may result in the budget not passing- first time in a very long time. That came out of our authoritarian "progressive voice" too. Also, the police dog got cut, and every one, R & D, is pissed about that. That will not fly.
My point here is that some people who think they are progressive are not. This man wants things his way, period. But there are old-style Republicans who think in progressive terms- willing to attend to things in the long term. I assure you that while I disagree with them in some particulars, they are often the people who will seriously consider changing how things are done in order to benefit the town. I get along fine with them- and I am left of almost every body.
There are the reactionary white wingers around too. I just learned that the chair of the town Republican Party committee is a member of Moms for Liberty (think book bans and limiting school curricula) and some other extreme right wing groups. We have avoided that until now. One person on our Dem committee is considering running for school board.
It's going to be an interesting town meeting come March. The town is talking back, and it's interesting to see the unusual alignments.
Sorry, I think she did the same thing I was planning to do, which was to push that Trump's not as strong as he thinks. I think that is true even with the information I put up, but he is still stronger than we wish he was. After eight years of him, I think everyone on our side wishes he'd get zapped somehow.
My first reaction to reading Chris Cillizza's analysis was I didn't like it. I've come over the years to understand when I hear something from someone I usually agree with that my reaction is I don't like it, that I have to look at it and see what's there. In the case of what Chris posted, turn on the calculator on your computer and run the percentages and turn them into numbers and then do some simple arithmetic, and he's right.
None of us are wrong to wish he'd get zapped. And with everyone saying what is now the "party line," it's easy to fall in line without thinking about it. We want it to be true, so we treat it as if it is.
But we have to be clear-eyed if we're going to save ourselves, because we're the only ones who can. It might sound like I am taking a winger position to say we have to do our own research, but we do; we just have to be careful that we are using real data, unlike what the other side does. We've learned the institutions now are not what they used to be, sadly. Renewal is needed everywhere.
Can I have some of whatever it is you have recently ingested? You are thinking there is any part of that party where there are sane people?
I pay attention to what people are actually saying and doing, TC, as does Heather. I think she did a bang up job of analyzing the Republican caucus in Iowa. I don't assume that the turnout is at all representative of all Republicans in Iowa. Or that all Republicans meet the criteria you hold for judging their sanity. We can't tell what most Republicans think or believe in Iowa, because the caucus sample is too small and distorted. So we can't project results onto the rest of Iowa, and we sure can't project their results to other states, let alone to the general election in November.
You are a cynical negativist. I am a cynical optimist. I refuse to let people like you drag me down. So while you are looking at the cracks, I am looking at the common connections and ways to build on them. We might still lose, but I can guarantee that negativity will get in the way of winning.
Here's an irony for you: a member of our select board calls himself "a progressive voice". VT has an official Progressive Party, so he is not allowed to call himself a Progressive. He has one goal: trying to get the town to convert to electric vehicles. His stance is that of an authoritarian, and so is his behavior. As a result, he is a constant obstacle to the SB actually addressing concerns and needs expressed by the town. Our town is tiny and we are highly rural, with rural roads and poor radio and cell reception that fades out when you go round a hill. We are not in a position to pay for very expensive vehicles that also need to be refitted to use as a police vehicle (unproven so far in even cities). I will skip his attempt to change out our dated oil boiler attached to a damaged chimney for a heat pump boiler except to say that the heat pump would be located in the heated basement. It would draw heat from the air around it to heat the water that heats the basement. Everybody else in the room saw the flaw in his reasoning, but it went right past him, and he persisted until the question was called 4-1. Unfortunately, the electric police cars are in the budget, and that may result in the budget not passing- first time in a very long time. That came out of our authoritarian "progressive voice" too. Also, the police dog got cut, and every one, R & D, is pissed about that. That will not fly.
My point here is that some people who think they are progressive are not. This man wants things his way, period. But there are old-style Republicans who think in progressive terms- willing to attend to things in the long term. I assure you that while I disagree with them in some particulars, they are often the people who will seriously consider changing how things are done in order to benefit the town. I get along fine with them- and I am left of almost every body.
There are the reactionary white wingers around too. I just learned that the chair of the town Republican Party committee is a member of Moms for Liberty (think book bans and limiting school curricula) and some other extreme right wing groups. We have avoided that until now. One person on our Dem committee is considering running for school board.
It's going to be an interesting town meeting come March. The town is talking back, and it's interesting to see the unusual alignments.
Sorry, I think she did the same thing I was planning to do, which was to push that Trump's not as strong as he thinks. I think that is true even with the information I put up, but he is still stronger than we wish he was. After eight years of him, I think everyone on our side wishes he'd get zapped somehow.
My first reaction to reading Chris Cillizza's analysis was I didn't like it. I've come over the years to understand when I hear something from someone I usually agree with that my reaction is I don't like it, that I have to look at it and see what's there. In the case of what Chris posted, turn on the calculator on your computer and run the percentages and turn them into numbers and then do some simple arithmetic, and he's right.
None of us are wrong to wish he'd get zapped. And with everyone saying what is now the "party line," it's easy to fall in line without thinking about it. We want it to be true, so we treat it as if it is.
But we have to be clear-eyed if we're going to save ourselves, because we're the only ones who can. It might sound like I am taking a winger position to say we have to do our own research, but we do; we just have to be careful that we are using real data, unlike what the other side does. We've learned the institutions now are not what they used to be, sadly. Renewal is needed everywhere.