The MAGAs seem to have the collective memory of an average fruit fly. The reason Macconnell "blinked" at allowing a government default is partly because he saw the damage it would do to the country, but mostly because he saw the damage it would do to Republican political support. The beating they took by allowing a government shut down i…
The MAGAs seem to have the collective memory of an average fruit fly. The reason Macconnell "blinked" at allowing a government default is partly because he saw the damage it would do to the country, but mostly because he saw the damage it would do to Republican political support. The beating they took by allowing a government shut down in 2019 would pail by comparison.
I must also say I am not impressed by political pundits. 2016: total miss. 2018: kinda got it right, but not because of 'cross-over' votes, really it was the Democrat's mobilization of 'left-leaning seldom voters' that did the trick. 2020: they predicted a squeaker - it was not. They have their ear to the ground, but seem to be listening to the old (see Olaf Ribbing's post), rather than to what's actually happening in front of them. One respected pundit stated what we are seeing is the Republican party making the shift from a business party to a working-class party. It is not. It is a party making the shift from a loyal-opposition/ruling party to becoming the machinery of dictatorship.
For all their talent and earnest desire to tell the story, most media outlets seems to be covering all this as just another horse race, rather than a race over a cliff. Our thinking has become too comfortable, too grooved, to be really useful in this time of inflection/opportunity/crisis. The MAGAs, God bless them, can be either a vehicle to wake the rest of us up, or bury us. The (uncomfortable) choice is ours.
Your point about the inaccuracy of the political pundits is something Ive been mulling over. They are forming their positions for two reasons I believe. One, is that the “Horse Race” style sells more ads. Two, how are they reaching voters to do polling research. Our communication technology has altered our personal cultures of information gathering and ability/desire to engage with others we do not wish to hear from. So how does a pollster get an accurate sense of “What people are thinking” or “How people will really vote” when I don’t see how they can truly access a reliable, actual, cross section of voters?
The MAGAs seem to have the collective memory of an average fruit fly. The reason Macconnell "blinked" at allowing a government default is partly because he saw the damage it would do to the country, but mostly because he saw the damage it would do to Republican political support. The beating they took by allowing a government shut down in 2019 would pail by comparison.
I must also say I am not impressed by political pundits. 2016: total miss. 2018: kinda got it right, but not because of 'cross-over' votes, really it was the Democrat's mobilization of 'left-leaning seldom voters' that did the trick. 2020: they predicted a squeaker - it was not. They have their ear to the ground, but seem to be listening to the old (see Olaf Ribbing's post), rather than to what's actually happening in front of them. One respected pundit stated what we are seeing is the Republican party making the shift from a business party to a working-class party. It is not. It is a party making the shift from a loyal-opposition/ruling party to becoming the machinery of dictatorship.
For all their talent and earnest desire to tell the story, most media outlets seems to be covering all this as just another horse race, rather than a race over a cliff. Our thinking has become too comfortable, too grooved, to be really useful in this time of inflection/opportunity/crisis. The MAGAs, God bless them, can be either a vehicle to wake the rest of us up, or bury us. The (uncomfortable) choice is ours.
Your point about the inaccuracy of the political pundits is something Ive been mulling over. They are forming their positions for two reasons I believe. One, is that the “Horse Race” style sells more ads. Two, how are they reaching voters to do polling research. Our communication technology has altered our personal cultures of information gathering and ability/desire to engage with others we do not wish to hear from. So how does a pollster get an accurate sense of “What people are thinking” or “How people will really vote” when I don’t see how they can truly access a reliable, actual, cross section of voters?