Unless Trump is the headlining act, MAGA ain't turning out for the opening acts. Trump turns out the people that usually wouldn't vote in local stuff.
It was pointed out in multiple Xwitter responses that I read that her performance was for a party of 1. Which is both disgusting and frightening.
I saw something a year or two ago about the building of the Gordie Howe bridge, and it mentioned how it is amazing it is even being built because of all the lobbying by the Moroun family.
Well, two things: 1) I'm describing Trump's "soft support", i.e. mostly longtime conservatives and GOP voters who are just going along with it while trying not to notice or acknowledge how the sausage is made (a group I would argue is an important part, but not a majority--maybe not even a plurality--of Trump's voters in Nov. 2024); 2) I'm not sure that pointing out the moral cowardice of people who choose to accept lies and hide from the actual consequences of their actions is being all that generous. I think it's a pretty harsh indictment of their failure as citizens, even though I'm not talking about the most overtly bigoted cohort of that electoral coalition. But fair point. I knew when I posted that that I was risking giving the appearance of forgiving or whitewashing the ugliness of MAGA, and that's very much not my intent.
Human nature is plastic and relational. One reason I've become more lower-case 'c' 'conservative' in recent years is because I'm more aware of the limits of human nature and the fallacy of traditional liberalism and capitalism both to regard humans as fundamentally rational, independent actors.
Yeah, they're incredibly psychotic about it too. State of Michigan had to sue them for road stuff. Plus, Canada is paying for the bridge and collecting tolls till the costs are recouped. That was done as a result of the Morouns and other factors.
True, but I'm not talking voters. I'm talking the Moms for Liberty, the angry people crashing school board meetings, etc. Those people already existed prior to 2024, and I had feared that in "blue" areas like Northern Virginia, they would smell blood in the water--and increased leverage coming from the Federal government--and therefore feel empowered to go after schools, libraries, Democratic elected officials, etc. They had been somewhat active in this area for years, so I thought they would be motivated to step up and finish the job. Instead--around here, anyway--it's been mostly crickets. Maybe they don't want to be waving the MAGA flag while friends and neighbors were losing their jobs to DOGE, I don't know, but the downhill consequences of the GOP sweep in 2024 I was expecting here didn't materialize.
One bedrock value I will expect from every Democratic candidate in every primary election I vote in will be a stated unwillingness to take any statement by any Republican expressing a concern about morality, character, or decency, at face value. These people have waived the benefit of the doubt for the foreseeable future. I just did a bit of searching, and it looks like she had ties to Scientologists--basically, fundraising--but was not a member herself.
Got it. I think if anything, a lot of it is laziness (Being politically active is tough work), the fact that outside of Trump, getting an actual structure set up is hard work, and most people don't exactly like the angry people you've mentioned crashing meetings. I can't speak for your area, but yeah, I imagine DOGE isn't exactly popular either. I will say that the angry people will find something else to be angry about.
Laziness is a bit part of it, I think you're right. I was thinking the same thing when I posted elsewhere that the slapdash incompetence of the Kid Rock TPUSA show was emblematic of MAGA.
It's what happens when you remove blacks and gays from the entertainment industry. You're left with, well, Kid Rock.
Nah. Artists in general tend to lean leftward. Plus, a good chunk of stage workers tend to be in unions so I imagine TPUSA were also being cheap.
Moms For Liberty candidates have not had great electoral success. Several of the ones that have won have subsequently lost reelection or haven’t run for reelection. They are still there banging on, but I think their appeal has worn out.
When I was living in Memphis, there was a guy who had for a long time been a critic of the Memphis City Council and also the School Board. He would show up to most meetings, have information to make an argument, and do all the right things. I liked him and what he was fighting for. And then he ran and got elected (I think to the City Council, but might have been School Board). Suddenly, he could no longer be in opposition and his effectiveness faded as he had to govern and make decisions. He served only a single term, and his voice ended up being reduced after he lost his election. I bring that up as groups like Moms for Liberty strike me as that. They are a loud voice and complain for what they want, but when it comes to governing or actually having the power, they don't know what to do.
Wait…I thought you left America after the election? How can you know what they’re saying now if you’re not here?
Also, most of them don't really want to destroy public schools or public libraries, they just want those institutions to survive as culture-war punching bags while continuing to provide education and other services.
Groups like that can only win low turnout elections. In 1993, Raleigh was rockin and rollin…#1 or very near in every one of those statistical measures of great cities. Our municipal elections were completely non partisan…you never knew if you were voting for a Republican or a Democrat. Then a group of Jesse Helms-affiliated GOPs decided to run their candidates for city council, and they took power. It was all over within 2 cycles due to the Democratic Party getting involved in those municipal elections. But it has permanently warped Raleigh politics. Democrat-aligned candidates did relatively poorly when Bush 2 was riding high, and much better when the Iraq War turned south. So Raleigh’s leadership was affected by our foreign policy rather than our city’s issues. It’s dumb. I’ll bet that if some poli sci grad student wanted a cool project in, say, 2035, he could compare school boards that had MFL candidates take them over vs those that didn’t. The theory to test would be which set of school boards did better/were more responsive after the MFLs were all voted out (if either.)
I’m gonna let this drop because it’s about to devolve into a series of posts about a poster instead of the issues related to this thread.