Teixeira’s main points can be most easily understood by taking account of the two elephants dominating this election — negative partisanship and the biggest turnout since 1900.
The most accepted observation about our present state of polarization is that it has shifted voters into a state of negative partisanship. Can anyone doubt that the main motivator for the huge Democratic turnout was hatred of Trump rather than love of Joe Biden?
According to data on negative partisanship, which is confirmed by Trump’s negative campaign strategy, the main reason for the huge Republican turnout would have been fear of and hatred of the Democrats. So what about the Democrats provoked fear and hatred intense enough to boost Republic turnout by about 20% — that’s truly enormous.
Well we know it wasn’t Joe Biden. Neither was it the moderate Democrats who espouse programs that are fairly bipartisan. Adopting the negative partisanship framework makes the title question trivially easy to answer … Yes, the woke did help Trump! “Woke” is a Democratic label that provokes Republicans enough to seriously boost their turnout.
There are a few other Democratic positions that hit hot buttons — open borders, socialism, etc. All of them are, of course, on the extreme left. Moderate positions just do not stir up enough negative partisanship to send turnout through the roof.
So this is why Teixeira’s main points are right (even though he did not mention either elephant). But he sometimes shifts to positive-partisanship issues, for example when discussing the Latino vote: “they feel that Trump is still a guy who can shake things up, make things work. And they don’t really get what the Democrats are going to do for them.”
These points ring true, but I would stick with the insistence of political scientists that negative partisanship is dominant. And I would look to the impact of Bernie’s socialism in Miami-Dade, and the impact of open borders — a hot button for those who came legally and don’t want a flood of competition in the labor market. And I’d wonder about the demand that people say only “Black lives matter” and never “all lives matter” — a demand that is blindly accepted by the entire Democratic Party.
Negative partisanship doesn’t provide all the answers, but we know it’s 90% of the story among Democrats. And forgetting to think about it when analyzing Republicans is surely a mistake.
The Democrat’s attitude from 2000 (or whenever) has been worse than believing they controlled the future: it’s been disbelief that conservatism was still a viable trend in American politics. That’s continued despite Bush vs. Gore, McConnell’s crushing of Obama’s agenda and Trump’s 2016 win. The woke movement is the inevitable culmination of that belief. More than that, too many liberals were narrow-minded enough to write off all Trump supporters as racist, even those who supported Obama in 2008-2012 and who Biden is currently bringing back into the fold. Again, this was despite the many stories of Trump voters who genuinely cringed at Trump’s rhetoric, who identified themselves as non-racist, or were fed-up with politically correct moralism.
I believe that Trump is a mendacious, maniacal . Apparently a lot of people don’t. I want to know why that is. I want to learn how to defeat this type of demagogue now before it’s too late.
It’s stunning to me how many liberals would quietly accept an America where the Republicans are identified as the ‘white’ party and the Democrats as the ‘minorities’ party with a finite number of college-educated whites thrown in. Yes, similar perceptions have been true for decades but they’re more entrenched than ever.
These are not presciptions for effective governing in a multi-racial population like ours. The author declares; “Most Latinos are working class and their issues are primarily around material things about their community….it’s less that the more flamboyant Trump rhetoric around immigrants and race is hugely appealing to those voters…Trump is still a guy who can shake things up…’
This idea that all Trump voters are racist makes CRT or ‘race reductionism’ easy to fall into. In reality, however, the Republican weakness is their dependence on divisiveness to hold on to their white voters. Teixeira (and Biden), on the other hand, know that the black, Latino, and white populations in America are predominantly working and middle class with similar hopes and asperations for themselves and family. Democrats need to shake things up, too.
I hope politicians from both parties take the lessons from this election to heart. Identity politics is over, demography is not destiny, and what will persuade voters is policies that lead to prosperity, safety, and liberty for the most people. Notice I did not say equality or equity- while I am sympathetic to the arguments that inequality is destabilizing, I truly think that it is prosperity, safety, and liberty that can motivate persuadable voters. If people can live their lives comfortably the way they want they don’t care what Jeff Bezos has or who’s smoking weed. A party platform focused on market based strategies for the progressive aim of increasing prosperity across the board and safeguards of constitutional rights along with expanding liberties on hot-button social issues would have broad support from the persuadable center. Rhetoric like “safe, legal, and rare” was able to capture these voters for the Clinton coalition, and “compassionate conservatism” took them back for Bush. It would be wise for both parties to look to recent history and try to fight for the center once again.
But is there any good reason to believe that progressive or centrist aims can only be achieved with market based strategies? It can be argued that the excessive power of two industries in America; the financial industry and the healthcare industry hurts both efficiency and equity. Generally speaking, no legislation can pass in America unless the lobbyists for these industries are OK with it. It is not just the Left that needs to be concerned with such problems, there is evidence that this also hurts economic dynamism and partly explains the falling rate of new business formation in United States. Both the Left and Right needs to be concerned about corporate power and how it prevents faster and (more equitable) economic growth.
Just like there can be a "not so thoughtful" version of progressivism and conservatism, there can be a similar version of centrism. For example, American economic elites tell us that we have to support free trade and globalisation and there is nothing we can do about that. We are helpless victims of global economic forces; any other strategy is so obviously stupid that it cannot even be considered, except by irresponsible populists like Trump. But previous administrations could easily have takes a stronger stand against China's mercantilism or unfair economic policies that hurt American workers. (not going into details here). And there was no reason NOT to take such a stance, except that some people in Wall Street may not have liked it. It may have been bad for the stocks during that month!
It’s not the lobbyists that create the problem, it is the open hands of the politicians- both parties. I believe the only way to bring back conscience voting is term limits.
Wonderfully thought provoking conversation -- and I hope that last note ("Interview condensed and edited for clarity") is not just a tease, and there might be more.
But what was most provocative was Teixiera's comment that wokeness has helped brand the Democratic party. Given the long-developing weakness of both parties that has been discussed for a couple of decades now -- including their lack of any control over candidates because they've effectively given the primary process over to their voters -- what does it mean now for either party to have a brand? Aside from vague generalities that don't do much more than nod to the party's past, how much do each party's activists control the branding? Stated another way, how much does the media's addiction to extreme activists impede any party efforts to disseminate a message or a brand?
Which is not to say parties don't try. But the erosion of the parties as institutional managers of a larger guiding philosophy has left each of them hollowed out and vulnerable to the melodramatics that our narrative-obsessed journalists cannot get enough of.
This is just my impression from the liberals and conservatives that I know, but I think the "brands" of both parties are:
a) a vague, general sense of what kind of person they represent rather than specific issues and
b) defined as much by who they are against as what they are for
Republicans are branded by their loyalists as the party of "Common Sense" and "Regular People" against "Smug Elites" and "Woke Millennials with Pronouns."
Democrats are branded by their loyalists as the party of "Justice" and "Smart People" against "Bigotry" and "Uneducated Rednecks."
I would be interested to see a poll of Biden voters who cringe, as I do, at identity politics in general, and gag at AOC and the 1612 project in particular. Further, a poll of their thoughts on the nuts and bolts of the green new deal. What makes me nervous is that the democratic congress won’t realize what the majority of their constituents want.
I live on the border of red and purple states. TV ads against Biden and Dem Senate candidates from both states focused almost exclusively on "the far left". Wokesters absolutley pull down Dem support. But this is nothing new. The radical left has been doing so for 55 years. Burn baby burn.
A few people I follow who don't love Biden and do hate woke began publicly advocating for people to not vote for Biden this fall. (Eric Weinstein for one) These are not conservatives. They don't love Trump or Trumpism. I've no idea how many people they might have persuaded, do any of you? In any event, I think incessant BLM marches and the absurdity of Portland and Seattle did play a role. I also wonder if the prospects of a Biden landslide gave some the freedom to vote for Trump, not to re-elect Trump, but the prevent a landslide. Any thoughts on that?
I live in a retirement home, so I can't leave. But a few weeks ago I bought a can of spray paint so I could cover a bunch of ACABs (all cops are bastards) graffiti on my walk to the grocery store. I voted for Biden but was surprised that I felt relief that he doesn't have a landslide. Hope the woke actually wake up.
Teixeira’s main points can be most easily understood by taking account of the two elephants dominating this election — negative partisanship and the biggest turnout since 1900.
The most accepted observation about our present state of polarization is that it has shifted voters into a state of negative partisanship. Can anyone doubt that the main motivator for the huge Democratic turnout was hatred of Trump rather than love of Joe Biden?
According to data on negative partisanship, which is confirmed by Trump’s negative campaign strategy, the main reason for the huge Republican turnout would have been fear of and hatred of the Democrats. So what about the Democrats provoked fear and hatred intense enough to boost Republic turnout by about 20% — that’s truly enormous.
Well we know it wasn’t Joe Biden. Neither was it the moderate Democrats who espouse programs that are fairly bipartisan. Adopting the negative partisanship framework makes the title question trivially easy to answer … Yes, the woke did help Trump! “Woke” is a Democratic label that provokes Republicans enough to seriously boost their turnout.
There are a few other Democratic positions that hit hot buttons — open borders, socialism, etc. All of them are, of course, on the extreme left. Moderate positions just do not stir up enough negative partisanship to send turnout through the roof.
So this is why Teixeira’s main points are right (even though he did not mention either elephant). But he sometimes shifts to positive-partisanship issues, for example when discussing the Latino vote: “they feel that Trump is still a guy who can shake things up, make things work. And they don’t really get what the Democrats are going to do for them.”
These points ring true, but I would stick with the insistence of political scientists that negative partisanship is dominant. And I would look to the impact of Bernie’s socialism in Miami-Dade, and the impact of open borders — a hot button for those who came legally and don’t want a flood of competition in the labor market. And I’d wonder about the demand that people say only “Black lives matter” and never “all lives matter” — a demand that is blindly accepted by the entire Democratic Party.
Negative partisanship doesn’t provide all the answers, but we know it’s 90% of the story among Democrats. And forgetting to think about it when analyzing Republicans is surely a mistake.
The Democrat’s attitude from 2000 (or whenever) has been worse than believing they controlled the future: it’s been disbelief that conservatism was still a viable trend in American politics. That’s continued despite Bush vs. Gore, McConnell’s crushing of Obama’s agenda and Trump’s 2016 win. The woke movement is the inevitable culmination of that belief. More than that, too many liberals were narrow-minded enough to write off all Trump supporters as racist, even those who supported Obama in 2008-2012 and who Biden is currently bringing back into the fold. Again, this was despite the many stories of Trump voters who genuinely cringed at Trump’s rhetoric, who identified themselves as non-racist, or were fed-up with politically correct moralism.
I believe that Trump is a mendacious, maniacal . Apparently a lot of people don’t. I want to know why that is. I want to learn how to defeat this type of demagogue now before it’s too late.
It’s stunning to me how many liberals would quietly accept an America where the Republicans are identified as the ‘white’ party and the Democrats as the ‘minorities’ party with a finite number of college-educated whites thrown in. Yes, similar perceptions have been true for decades but they’re more entrenched than ever.
These are not presciptions for effective governing in a multi-racial population like ours. The author declares; “Most Latinos are working class and their issues are primarily around material things about their community….it’s less that the more flamboyant Trump rhetoric around immigrants and race is hugely appealing to those voters…Trump is still a guy who can shake things up…’
This idea that all Trump voters are racist makes CRT or ‘race reductionism’ easy to fall into. In reality, however, the Republican weakness is their dependence on divisiveness to hold on to their white voters. Teixeira (and Biden), on the other hand, know that the black, Latino, and white populations in America are predominantly working and middle class with similar hopes and asperations for themselves and family. Democrats need to shake things up, too.
I hope politicians from both parties take the lessons from this election to heart. Identity politics is over, demography is not destiny, and what will persuade voters is policies that lead to prosperity, safety, and liberty for the most people. Notice I did not say equality or equity- while I am sympathetic to the arguments that inequality is destabilizing, I truly think that it is prosperity, safety, and liberty that can motivate persuadable voters. If people can live their lives comfortably the way they want they don’t care what Jeff Bezos has or who’s smoking weed. A party platform focused on market based strategies for the progressive aim of increasing prosperity across the board and safeguards of constitutional rights along with expanding liberties on hot-button social issues would have broad support from the persuadable center. Rhetoric like “safe, legal, and rare” was able to capture these voters for the Clinton coalition, and “compassionate conservatism” took them back for Bush. It would be wise for both parties to look to recent history and try to fight for the center once again.
But is there any good reason to believe that progressive or centrist aims can only be achieved with market based strategies? It can be argued that the excessive power of two industries in America; the financial industry and the healthcare industry hurts both efficiency and equity. Generally speaking, no legislation can pass in America unless the lobbyists for these industries are OK with it. It is not just the Left that needs to be concerned with such problems, there is evidence that this also hurts economic dynamism and partly explains the falling rate of new business formation in United States. Both the Left and Right needs to be concerned about corporate power and how it prevents faster and (more equitable) economic growth.
Just like there can be a "not so thoughtful" version of progressivism and conservatism, there can be a similar version of centrism. For example, American economic elites tell us that we have to support free trade and globalisation and there is nothing we can do about that. We are helpless victims of global economic forces; any other strategy is so obviously stupid that it cannot even be considered, except by irresponsible populists like Trump. But previous administrations could easily have takes a stronger stand against China's mercantilism or unfair economic policies that hurt American workers. (not going into details here). And there was no reason NOT to take such a stance, except that some people in Wall Street may not have liked it. It may have been bad for the stocks during that month!
It’s not the lobbyists that create the problem, it is the open hands of the politicians- both parties. I believe the only way to bring back conscience voting is term limits.
Wonderfully thought provoking conversation -- and I hope that last note ("Interview condensed and edited for clarity") is not just a tease, and there might be more.
But what was most provocative was Teixiera's comment that wokeness has helped brand the Democratic party. Given the long-developing weakness of both parties that has been discussed for a couple of decades now -- including their lack of any control over candidates because they've effectively given the primary process over to their voters -- what does it mean now for either party to have a brand? Aside from vague generalities that don't do much more than nod to the party's past, how much do each party's activists control the branding? Stated another way, how much does the media's addiction to extreme activists impede any party efforts to disseminate a message or a brand?
Which is not to say parties don't try. But the erosion of the parties as institutional managers of a larger guiding philosophy has left each of them hollowed out and vulnerable to the melodramatics that our narrative-obsessed journalists cannot get enough of.
This is just my impression from the liberals and conservatives that I know, but I think the "brands" of both parties are:
a) a vague, general sense of what kind of person they represent rather than specific issues and
b) defined as much by who they are against as what they are for
Republicans are branded by their loyalists as the party of "Common Sense" and "Regular People" against "Smug Elites" and "Woke Millennials with Pronouns."
Democrats are branded by their loyalists as the party of "Justice" and "Smart People" against "Bigotry" and "Uneducated Rednecks."
I would be interested to see a poll of Biden voters who cringe, as I do, at identity politics in general, and gag at AOC and the 1612 project in particular. Further, a poll of their thoughts on the nuts and bolts of the green new deal. What makes me nervous is that the democratic congress won’t realize what the majority of their constituents want.
I live on the border of red and purple states. TV ads against Biden and Dem Senate candidates from both states focused almost exclusively on "the far left". Wokesters absolutley pull down Dem support. But this is nothing new. The radical left has been doing so for 55 years. Burn baby burn.
A few people I follow who don't love Biden and do hate woke began publicly advocating for people to not vote for Biden this fall. (Eric Weinstein for one) These are not conservatives. They don't love Trump or Trumpism. I've no idea how many people they might have persuaded, do any of you? In any event, I think incessant BLM marches and the absurdity of Portland and Seattle did play a role. I also wonder if the prospects of a Biden landslide gave some the freedom to vote for Trump, not to re-elect Trump, but the prevent a landslide. Any thoughts on that?
I live in a retirement home, so I can't leave. But a few weeks ago I bought a can of spray paint so I could cover a bunch of ACABs (all cops are bastards) graffiti on my walk to the grocery store. I voted for Biden but was surprised that I felt relief that he doesn't have a landslide. Hope the woke actually wake up.