Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Michael Steele, the RNC’s man of mystery, asks for private jet, does research in bondage-theme club Previous entry: The Marine Corps’ top officer says he wants separate homo barracks if DADT is repealed

Nothing new about tea partiers

One of the most evocative examples of how media bias towards novelty works in politics has to be the way that mainstream media is covering the teabagger movement. Any fool could see from the outset that the teabaggers are a bunch of Fox News-addled right wing nuts that are sore losers whose anger is exacerbated by racist resentments.  But the mainstream media insists on covering it like it’s an exciting, fresh shift in the political landscape.  I don’t think they’re carrying Republican water on this issue, though.  I think the eagerness to run with this “teabaggers are fed-up independents” narrative is stoked by a desire for novelty above all other things.  But it defies common sense.  You can look with your own eyes and see that the teabaggers aren’t really a collection of spring chickens.  But should your eyes deceive you, then you should also note a) that the average age of Limbaugh and Fox News’ audience is past retirement age and b) that enough of them were so far out of the loop, slang-wise, that they initially called themselves “teabaggers” without realizing how that would cause a nation to titter wildly.  The point here is not to bash old people, but to point out that human beings aren’t known for our willingness to change our habits and beliefs suddenly in our golden years.  It happens, of course, but it’s rare enough that if you see a big group of people with an average age older than 40, you can safely assume they didn’t all just wake up to their brand-new political beliefs.  The far more likely explanation is that the people you’re seeing have been nursing their grievances for a long ass time, and were activated by some flagrant violation of long-held beliefs.  My money’s on the most obvious explanation.  There was a one-two hit of shit happening they thought would never happen: a black man elected President and the passage of health care reform.

But of course, in order for the obvious to sink in, you need some cold, hard numbers.  And those have been produced—-teabaggers mostly identify as Republicans, or they’re those assholes who call themselves something like “libertarian” but always vote for Republicans. I’d probably put money on the possibility that the few who identified as Democrats are also Republicans; they’re just nursing the youstabee grievance, where they pretend they want to vote for Democrats, but Democrats just make is so hard because they insist on being Democrats.

On that subject, it’s worth pointing out that the original sin of the Democrats that created legions of youstabees was the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1965. Digby has a handy chart showing how the Democrats basically lost their ability to command national majorities of white voters after that.

Click to see it full size.  I know I sound like a broken record on this, but the data is pretty damn compelling in terms of explaining exactly what teabaggers mean when they say they’re “losing” America, that they’re the Real Americans, and when they engage in nostalgia for the way it used to be.  You’re seeing a very slight trending upwards of white voters post-CRA who are voting for Democratic presidential candidates (though never the majority) but you’re seeing a dramatic plunge downwards of what percentage of the voters are white, from 90%+ of voters in 1968 to 74% in 2008.  Both these trends would be expedited if younger people voted at the same rate as our elders, but even though this reluctance of younger people to vote has stymied progress, the writing has been on the wall for a long time now.  And the cast of villains the teabaggers hate tailors neatly to the demographic groups that are changing the trends.  Fancy that. 

None of this means that Democrats shouldn’t be worried about November.  The trends you see in presidential elections will be muted in a mid-term, where the older generations that created the data from previous decades will be even more overrepresented at the ballot box.  Teabaggers will also be effective at get out the vote efforts, even if the promises made about repealing health care reform have no chance of coming to fruition.  I don’t really think the teabaggers even care about that; they vote their resentments and so the promise of simply punishing Democrats they see as elected by illegitimate, non-real Americans will be enough.  But it has nothing to do with any new trends, that’s for sure.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 11:12 AM • (83) Comments

She wants her country back? Fine, buy a ticket to Alaska

Comment #1: firefall  on  03/28  at  12:46 PM

I think the 2010 election has the potential to seriously blunt the already-frustrating progress of the Obama administration, or else to dramatically advance the collapse of the Republican party.

My hope for America right now is that the GOP will go completely down the tubes, allowing the Democrats to assume their natural role as America’s conservative party and opening up opportunities for a new, genuinely leftist party.

Comment #2: Dr. Psycho  on  03/28  at  12:53 PM

I don’t know, Dr. Psycho.  The tea baggers seem united around anger and xenophobia, not around any particular policy or platform.  They know what they hate but they turn and eat their own if any of them put forth an actual agenda.  Any GOP candidate running in 2010 is going to have a heck of a time representing them because they have no idea what they want.  There will probably be 3 parties running this fall, the Dems, the Repubs and the “SCREW YOU!” party.

Comment #3: BadKitty  on  03/28  at  01:02 PM

Y’know what this crazy, right-wing country needed? An even righter-wing organization than the Republicans. Thanks, CNN; in your efforts to fill enough time to get to another commercial break, you gave the nutters the keys to the black helicopters.

Comment #4: DoktorJerusalem  on  03/28  at  01:08 PM

Amanda, can’t you see that the Tee Partee represents the most important political occurrence in the entire history of <strike>America</strike> the World?  Finally, here is a <strike>bowel</strike> political movement that acknowledges the importance of Real Americans™ like our own Dana The Troll!

After decades, nay, centuries of systemic oppression of The White Conservative Man by brown Democrats (going all the way back to the Constitution where White Males were counted as only 3/5’s of a Negro), it’s about time someone came along and packaged their petty resentments and selfish concerns about their entitlements into a childish expression of regressive political action with no goal other than to punish Democrats and impure conservatives (defined as anyone who doesn’t follow Glenn Beck as if he was a prophet of god, or Ronald Reagan).

Ironically, in large part they’re pissed off because of structural problems (like incredibly unequal distribution of wealth and taxes) that the party they have voted for, and will vote for again, is largely responsible for creating.  Morans…

Comment #5: MikeEss  on  03/28  at  01:35 PM

This is what happens when a political group doesn’t have adult leadership.  There simply aren’t any adults in conservative circles anymore.  There are adults who are conservatives, such as David Frum and Andrew Sullivan, but they aren’t devoted to party politics enough to be Republicans or be accepted by Republicans.

A party that refuses to believe in government, as the Republicans have shown themselves to be, simply won’t govern and can’t govern and will never develop the maturity to govern.  Childishness is the norm for those who refuse to learn and grow and deal with the world as it is rather than how it should be.

I’m in favor of opt-out provisions for adults who reach retirement age: let them forgo Social Security and Medicare and regulations regarding their pensions.  I’m sure the evil Big Government will be left by a few yahoos, but it really is time for these people to shit or get off the potty.  Mommy Pelosi will clap for their good try.

Comment #6: 3letterjon  on  03/28  at  02:25 PM

I’d probably put money on the possibility that the few who identified as Democrats are also Republicans; they’re just nursing the youstabee grievance, where they pretend they want to vote for Democrats, but Democrats just make is so hard because they insist on being Democrats.

There’s also a distinct possibility that many of these self-proclaimed “Democrats” are actually Lyndon LaRouche supporters.

Comment #7: "Fair and Balanced" Dave  on  03/28  at  02:30 PM

This really goes back to the fact that Republicans have only two/thirds the membership of the democratic party.  Due to this natural deficiency they rely on independents/democrats to jump ship during certain elections to win out of the southern voting bloc.  So when they look at the tea party crowd no matter if they were really independents or just republicans any losses to their voting bloc is more devastating than changing policies. 

They face a reality where they’ve always been the minority party in terms of membership and if the tea party group stays home or tries to form a third party their membership would dwindle even further to a point where they wouldn’t even be a national party anymore.  This is why McCain took on Palin.  McCain had “moderate” likability but was losing the republican votes and thus took on crazy shoot wolves from a helicopter Palin to satisfy the needs of his core.  Turns out his core though is angry, old, and apparently fairly stupid.

To take a step back to an earlier post, technically the democrats are liberal by American standards.  The progressive era was never as progressive or liberal as some European countries (and certainly not really socialist).  So pointing out democrats after the collapse of the republican party would be the new right is a bit hard to believe.  There are too many corporations that would never be satisfied with half of the democrats who vote against them to really get in bed with the party as it stands.  The altmires of the world would jump ship to a new corporate party before the democrats would become a “new right-wing” party.

Comment #8: Xeranar  on  03/28  at  02:53 PM

Y’know what this crazy, right-wing country needed? An even righter-wing organization than the Republicans.

This is par for the course in the post-civil rights movement era.  You had George Wallace in ‘68, and Perot in ‘92 and ‘96.  The escalating desperation is interesting, because I think there’s a real chance that you’re going to get a Republican candidate and Sarah Palin as a Tea Party candidate, and both together will still have fewer votes than the Democrats, for the first time in the history of right wing populist freak outs.

Comment #9: Amanda Marcotte  on  03/28  at  03:11 PM

Dave @7: those idiots are like the youstabees put through the paranoia ringer.

Comment #10: Amanda Marcotte  on  03/28  at  03:17 PM

I thought McCain picked Palin because he was throwing a tantrum:  You want me to pick a lunatic?  FINE.  I’ll pick a lunatic!

Comment #11: keshmeshi  on  03/28  at  03:35 PM

It’s that reason that I don’t think the Tea Party will every really coalesce into a legitimate party. They’re just interested, as you said, in punishing Democrats. Since that is an approximately 100% overlap with the existing Republican party, there’s no real need to field their own and split the vote. Though, I wouldn’t be surprised if Palin “ran,” the ducked out to endorse the Real American de jour.

Comment #12: DoktorJerusalem  on  03/28  at  03:39 PM

You forgot the 3rd hit: the second most powerful person in the U.S. is a WOMAN.

Comment #13: Chester  on  03/28  at  03:44 PM

I thought McCain picked Palin because he was throwing a tantrum:  You want me to pick a lunatic?  FINE.  I’ll pick a lunatic!

No, McCain chose Palin for one reason:  she has a vagina.  In doing do, he demonstrated his contempt for the intelligence of women and the voting public as a whole in one swell foop. 

Women voters, to their credit, voted their interests rather than for the candidate with similar equipment.  If only we men were as smart.

Comment #14: Captain Bathrobe  on  03/28  at  03:49 PM

I’m a youstabee! I youstabee Republican! Which is something that never seems to make it into the discourse of the right and the “take back the country”—droves of young folks raised in Republican homes (and in my case, towns/states) who realised the rhetoric was empty and the Repubs were acting contrary to all notions we’d ever been taught about this country being a land of opportunity.

They (the conservative right) are probably flying the youstabeeDem flags as hard as they can, because otherwise they’d have to admit they are fighting a war of attrition in the younger generation. Even those that nominally stay in the Repub camp have issues (my sibs, frex, hate No Child Left Behind and the Patriot Act; many of my old classmates, despite being Mormon, feel less strongly against gay marriage than their parents did.)  This is why the reliance on the old wedge issues comes ever more into play—and even then, the expected Pavlovian response is attenuating since most sane people look at the FAR right and don’t want to be associated with it.

Comment #15: PixelFish  on  03/28  at  04:56 PM

These are the people who think taxation is theft.  They think Democrats take their money and/or their stuff and either give it to lazy/undeserving/black/gay/female/Spanish-speaking people or tell them they shouldn’t do the things they like because it’s bad for them.  It’s the mentality of a seven-year-old boy who wants to eat cookies for dinner and when told he can’t runs out of the room screaming “I hate you I hate you I hate you!”  The only interesting wrinkle was when they were mad about the bank bailouts, and even then it wasn’t clear what they thought was wrong, apart from The Government spending money.  On the up side, they’re old and angry, so their days are doubly numbered.

Comment #16: FlipYrWhig  on  03/28  at  05:06 PM

they don’t think, they believe.  there’s a difference…

Comment #17: Woodrowfan  on  03/28  at  05:16 PM

The other factor is that as you get older you lose all sense of shame, my proof is that my dad just started wearing velour shirts from K-mart; so a political belief that you may have had in your twenties but had the good sense to keep quiet about, becomes something that you are happy to espouse once you are in your sixties.

Comment #18: John Rove  on  03/28  at  05:16 PM

@ John Rove, I live in a town with a high proportion of retirees, and the locker room at the gym—because it’s run by the county, I call it the Public Option—bears awful witness to exactly your view that old dudes lose shame fast.

Comment #19: FlipYrWhig  on  03/28  at  05:34 PM

I think the 2010 election has the potential to seriously blunt the already-frustrating progress of the Obama administration, or else to dramatically advance the collapse of the Republican party.

I’m not even going to hazard to guess what will happen in the House, but it’s hard to imagine us not losing some seats in the Senate.

There are 18 Democratic seats and 18 Republican seats in play this November.

Of the Republican seats, I would say that Missouri, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Kentucky are the only realistic possible pickups for the Democrats.  The other 14 GOP seats are probably fairly safe.

Conversely, the Democrats have a lot more uncertain seats in play - Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Nevada, and Pennsylvania are all within the GOP’s reach.  And the Democrats are almost certain to lose North Dakota, Delaware, and Indiana.  The Democrats have about 10 relatively safe seats.

If I had to guess, I would say that the Republicans will get some pickups later this year, but that they will fall way short of the huge gains they seem so confident about.  I’m guessing that they’ll probably pick up 2-4 Senate seats, and 20-30 House seats.  All of that still leaves the Democrats in solid control of Congress.

But whatever happens, even if the GOP only makes modest gains with one Senate seat and five House seats, I fully expect Fox News to run with the message that the election is the absolute repudiation of our evil black Muslim Marxist Commissar.  Should the Democrats somehow do the seemingly impossible and actually come out ahead, I expect Glenn Beck to commit suicide on live national television.

Comment #20: DTG in STL  on  03/28  at  05:37 PM

Any GOP candidate running in 2010 is going to have a heck of a time representing them because they have no idea what they want.

Nope.  In large part, Obama (or, in an alternative world, Any-Democrat-Not-Obama) won because he (she) was not George Bush.  You can get a lot of milage running against stuff without having to be explicit on what you actually stand for.

And we know any Republican candidate will stand patriotically against the values of IslamoKenyanSocialism.

Comment #21: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  03/28  at  05:38 PM

What’s a youstabee?  Google is failing me.

Comment #22: Antigone  on  03/28  at  05:39 PM

@ Antigone:  “I used to be [youstabee] a Democrat, until they lost my support by doing X.”

Comment #23: FlipYrWhig  on  03/28  at  05:41 PM

Once upon a time (7th of October, 2008), John McCain referred to Barack Obama as “that one”. On national tv, as seen by millions of potential voters. And yet somehow millions of (mostly white) people still voted for him.
The Republican voters are so worried about the decline of white privilege and the fictional rights of fetuses that they ignore actual, real problems that face the nation. ...but at least they got to start two wars in countries with lots of non-white people. They got that going for them.

Comment #24: artiofab  on  03/28  at  05:42 PM

What’s a youstabee?  Google is failing me.

Youstabee = used to be

Comment #25: Denise  on  03/28  at  05:52 PM

No, McCain chose Palin for one reason:  she has a vagina.  In doing do, he demonstrated his contempt for the intelligence of women and the voting public as a whole in one swell foop.

You oversimplify.  There were three reasons.  One was the vagina.  Two, she was popular in Alaska so McCain thought that might mean something in the country at large and was told she had right-wing cred.  Three, and this may be the single biggest one, is that she’s attractive.

There are a number of potential Republicans he could have chosen if it was just a matter of picking a woman, on a state and federal level.  Hell, two of them in Maine (and that brings you twice as many popular votes as Alaska) alone.  There are a number of women he could have picked with some conservative credentials.  But none of them met that third category.  Anyone who denies that isn’t the single biggest reason she got exposure is smoking something.

Which actually enhances your point.

Comment #26: KeithM  on  03/28  at  06:46 PM

As a white person, the Republican Party embarrasses me.  One day A. the majority of white people will stop voting Republican or B. enough non-whites will vote for Democrats.  When that day comes, the Republican Party and hopefully conservative ideology will be irrelevant.

Comment #27: Albert Cirrus  on  03/28  at  07:00 PM

I think that an increasing number of people see the stunning corruption in Washington and want it to end.
It’s sad that Palin latched on to it.
The easy answer to how to reduce government corruption is to reduce government

Comment #28: Bilejones  on  03/28  at  07:09 PM

Don’t forget that McCain’s handlers told him outright he couldn’t have Joe Lieberman.  McCain really wanted him, and when he was told that he couldn’t possibly be elected with such a “bipartisan” ticket and he needed to pick a conservative to buck up his credentials, he went all mavericky and just snagged a random candidate.

Again, he failed to understand the question when asked “Why didn’t you pick a more qualified woman?”  Because all women are unqualified, are by definition unqualified.  So why not pick a VPILF?

What do you mean the very concept “VPILF” is offensive?  It’s not like she’d really be running anything!

Comment #29: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/28  at  07:09 PM

Bilejones-

Let me follow your “logic” on this, shall we?  There’s a perception that there is a lot of corruption in Washington.  People get together and decide “there’s corruption, we need to get it under control” and go “We’ll just have less government”.  This to me sounds like “We have cancer in the body, we cancer is terrible, therefore we need to have less body.  Let’s bleed the victim”.

If you want to get rid of corruption, there needs to be oversight which means more government, not less. 

But maybe I’m wrong.  Demonstrate a single time where “less” government lead to less corruption, and I shall take it under consideration.  But small town politics have tended to dissuade me from that notion.

Comment #30: Antigone  on  03/28  at  07:30 PM

I think that an increasing number of people see the stunning corruption in Washington and want it to end.
It’s sad that Palin latched on to it.
The easy answer to how to reduce government corruption is to reduce government

this shit is what the saying “to every problem there is a simple and wrong solution” talks about. the problems with corruption in America stem from the fact that business owns the government. all you’d do by removing even the last shred of govenment controls on business is to remove the middle-man, and let business lord it over people directly. IOW, you’re advocating a return to Feudalism.

Comment #31: jadehawk  on  03/28  at  07:41 PM

There are a number of potential Republicans he could have chosen if it was just a matter of picking a woman, on a state and federal level.  Hell, two of them in Maine (and that brings you twice as many popular votes as Alaska) alone.  There are a number of women he could have picked with some conservative credentials.  But none of them met that third category.  Anyone who denies that isn’t the single biggest reason she got exposure is smoking something.

Three of the most likely female Republicans after Palin had one glaring drawback among wingnuts - none of them were sufficiently anti-choice.  Senators Hutchison, Snowe, and Collins would all have been castigated as “social liberals”, which none of them really are, but in the minds of wingnuts, if you are to the left of Joe McCarthy, you’re a wussified RINO.

From what I understand, McCain personally had almost nothing to do with the selection of Palin - he wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate, and the RNC boys said “Hell no!” and then introduced him to Palin.

The irony about Teabagger Queen Palin campaigning for McCain right now is that he’s facing a primary challenge from J.D. Hayworth, a bona fide Birther who epitomizes the teabagger movement.  Palin is actually stumping for the guy that Arizona wingnuts consider the RINO in the race.  Much as I dislike McCain, I’d take him in a heartbeat over that whackjob Hayworth.

Comment #32: DTG in STL  on  03/28  at  07:43 PM

Young people don’t vote at the same rate as older people because the system is designed for them not to.  The politicians rarely speak to young people and our concerns.  Young people are new to the process and more likely to be scared of the red tape.  The republicans run voting misinformation campaigns on college campuses.  Even if we actually get registered young people are more likely to be purged from the rolls. 

Minorities and poor people are often underrepresented at the polls for the similar reasons.  The demographics that tend to vote republican will continue to vote more as long as the system stays biased the way it is.

Comment #33: semi_factual  on  03/28  at  08:13 PM

Obama just needs to push forward with immigration reform to win in 2010. Once all of the heart attacks and strokes thin out the over 80 demographic, the tea partiers should run out of steam.

Hateful? Maybe, but I’m the one who’s going to have to live in this country for the next 50 years.

Comment #34: Seebach  on  03/28  at  08:19 PM

I’s like to add there are yustabeeReps that are not young. My parents are sick to their cores by the racism and anti-everything attitude of their former party. Yes, they should have left it a long time ago, but they couldn’t hear the dogwhistles. Now the Republicans have lost all subtlety… and life experience is making my parents a little more liberal, I think: my dad is pro-Medicare-for-all/single payer system, was pro-nationalizing the mortgage market.

Comment #35: Samantha Vimes  on  03/28  at  08:22 PM

Well, look on the bright side. Assholes like Byron York will still get to go on about how Obama didn’t get a majority of white people and thus he’s not really popular, because nonwhites don’t count.

Comment #36: Bitter Scribe  on  03/28  at  08:30 PM

Keith, curious here.  I understand why not Collins and Snowe - for reThugs, they’re sane and not obedient.  But what about Bachmann?

Comment #37: phylosopher  on  03/28  at  08:31 PM

What do you mean the very concept “VPILF” is offensive?

Well, it was two years ago…

Comment #38: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  03/28  at  08:35 PM

@#32, thank you DTG in STL for pointing this out. Even though McCain’s record on choice is pretty pathetic, the Christian right faction of the Republican Party needs to have at least one stringent anti-choicer on a presidential ticket or else they will not throw votes or money at it. Listening to Christian talk radio in late 2007 / early 2008, while painful, taught me that McCain needed a Huckabee-level of crazy beneath him on the ticket to fully appeal to the Christian right. He went for it and (arguably) gained enough Christian right voters to make up for any losses among more moderate Republicans.

Comment #39: artiofab  on  03/28  at  08:42 PM

Obama just needs to push forward with immigration reform to win in 2010.

I’ve totally thought this all along.  That he needed get health insurance reform DONE so he could move on to immigration reform.

Fox isn’t remotely ready for it…you saw how they completely ignored over 100K people marching for reform (except to imply they were teabaggers).  CNN and MSNBC dropped the ball as well, as it takes a lot of organization to get that many people together, so they all should have been prepared.

They aren’t going to be able to control the teabaggers b/c first of all, they pride themselves on being leaderless and independent (snicker).  Secondly, they are racist fucks who have lost their shit b/c a black man is President.  The entire Birther movement is because they can’t deal with a black man being President nor with the fact that most of the people in America voted for him (he won both the popular vote as well as a crushing electoral college vote).  Then you’ve got the Patriot movement baggers, who are, among other things, racist fucks with guns.

The quickest way to more Democrats is to highlight teabaggers as Republicans.

———-
Bachman wasn’t famous enough, but her name is tossed around plenty as a potential VP now.  By other crazy people.  But we’ve learned a good quarter of our populace is stupid, racist, sexist, theocratic, authoritarian, and/or ignorant of how democracy and government function.

Comment #40: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/28  at  09:02 PM

I think there is one new thing in the mix. Until the financial meltdown—and especially during the post-2002 Bush administration—the people who have since become teabaggers could pretend that this was still the america they pretended to have lived in way back when. If you just paid no attention to the demographics, no attention to the investment bankers behind the curtain, and lots of attention to bombing brown people, you could believe it was Morning in America once again.

In fact, there’s a good argument that most of the damage of the last 30 years has been done by stupid white people trying to pretend that the US was still in a sitcom version of the 50s (no 90% top bracket, no bus boycotts or Brown v. Board of Education, no spending on the interstate highway system). And now that it’s impossible to keep that wackaloon shite up, the obvious answer is to kill the messenger.

Comment #41: paul  on  03/28  at  09:11 PM

“History shows that the civil rights acts of the early sixties were both held up by democrats.”

Technically true, but an incomplete and misleading statement.  The conservative Southern Democrats who resisted civil rights legislation either became Republicans themselves, or their political heirs became Republicans, all directly related to the passage of laws they hated and the appeal of Nixon’s Southern Strategy.

So what you’re really saying is people who were unthinking hateful bigots back then, went on to become unthinking hateful bigots now — they simply switched their party affiliation.

That is what you meant, right Mr. Rockhead?...

Comment #42: MikeEss  on  03/28  at  09:36 PM

It’s funny you should mention all that, MikeEss. I’m going to be giving a lecture in my Intro class tomorrow about the re-alignment of the party system after 1964-5, and the U.S. finally beginning to attempt a multi-racial democracy.

Comment #43: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  03/28  at  09:50 PM

MAJeff, the “But Democrats opposed civil rights!” trope pisses me off.  The other one I get pissed hearing is “Republicans are the Party of Lincoln!”.  One of these days I hope Zombie Abraham Lincoln, and Zombie Lyndon Johnson rise up and slap the shit out of morons who spout off idiocy like that…

Comment #44: MikeEss  on  03/28  at  10:03 PM

I’m going to be giving a lecture in my Intro class tomorrow about the re-alignment of the party system after 1964-5, and the U.S. finally beginning to attempt a multi-racial democracy.

You sound like a Communist.  Don’t you know that the only thing your students need to know is that Robert Byrd used to be a member of the KKK?  The only thing! 

Republicans have always been conservatives!  Democrats have always been liberals!  Democrats have always been racists!  Therefore, all liberals are racists!  Always!  No political realignment happens unless we say it happens!

Don’t make me break out the ALL CAPS and multiple exclamation points!!!!!!!!  Because then you’ll really be sorry.

Comment #45: Captain Bathrobe  on  03/28  at  10:17 PM

One of these days I hope Zombie Abraham Lincoln, and Zombie Lyndon Johnson rise up and slap the shit out of morons who spout off idiocy like that…

...‘cos they’re not going to get far trying to eat their brains.

Comment #46: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  03/28  at  10:54 PM

Phoenician, true indeed…

Comment #47: MikeEss  on  03/28  at  10:56 PM

MAJeff, the “But Democrats opposed civil rights!” trope pisses me off.

Over on Scalzi’s blog, he had to gently point out to some bozo that George Wallace was not a “liberal Democrat”. Seriously. It’s like the guy could not fathom that a member of the Democratic party, ever, at any time, was to the right of Wavy Gravy.

Comment #48: mythago  on  03/28  at  11:31 PM

I hate whenever someone points out the Democratic Party was the party of racism/slavery and then concern trolls us about reaching out to the conservative/Reagan/youstabee Democrats more often even though they were the racist Democrats they accuse us as being.  We can’t win with that.  I think it’s important to remember that we put ideology before party and that the racist ideology is a conservative one and modern day Republicans should be the ones having to apologize for racism and slavery and not us.

Comment #49: Albert Cirrus  on  03/28  at  11:45 PM

It’s also important to note that the Civil Rights Act legislation was introduced and pushed by the leadership of the Democratic Party; you know, the President (actually two presidents, since JFK introduced the bill but was assassinated before it passed). The Republicans mostly voted the right way, but the bill wasn’t exactly a major part of the party agenda.

Comment #50: grolby  on  03/28  at  11:46 PM

Bachman wasn’t famous enough, but her name is tossed around plenty as a potential VP now.

True enough.  She became famous when she appeared on Hardball in October 2008 and she told Tweety that she thought that Congress needed to hold hearings to determine which legislators were socialists.  Before that bizarre outburst, I doubt many people outside her Congressional District knew who the hell she was.  Both she and Rep. Steve King have become famous as two of the most batshit members of Congress in the past year or so.

By the same token, Sarah Palin was also a relative nobody in the political sphere in mid-August 2008.  The potential McCain VP candidates being speculated on were Lieberman, Ridge, Crist, and Pawlenty - the Palin choice totally stumped all the Villagers.  I remember the day she was introduced as McCain’s running mate, all the talking heads were scrambling to find out anything about her, and some of them didn’t even know how to pronounce her last name.  I’m guessing that 99% of Americans had absolutely no idea who Mama Mooseburger was on August 28, 2008.

Thanks to John McCain, that nimrod is about to be a multimillionaire with her new Mark Burnett reality TV show which got picked up by TLC.  But she will never, ever be president.  Nor do I think she’ll even run… she’s more concerned about how large she can make her bank account because of her folksy idiocy.

Comment #51: DTG in STL  on  03/29  at  12:19 AM

“Thanks to John McCain, that nimrod is about to be a multimillionaire with her new Mark Burnett reality TV show which got picked up by TLC.  But she will never, ever be president.  Nor do I think she’ll even run… she’s more concerned about how large she can make her bank account because of her folksy idiocy.”

Except for the VPOTUS loss, it’s been like winning the White Trash Lottery for the Palins.  Now all they need is to load up their stuff into the old truck and move into a mansion in Beverly Hills, one with a nice see-ment pond in the back…

Comment #52: MikeEss  on  03/29  at  12:35 AM

“This is why the reliance on the old wedge issues comes ever more into play—and even then, the expected Pavlovian response is attenuating since most sane people look at the FAR right and don’t want to be associated with it.”

@PixelFish #15 Too bad more people don’t look at Religious Reich and decide they don’t want to be associated with them! *Shudders* (The Earth <7000 years old—Dinosaur fossils were put there by the devil—The Separtion of Church and State is a myth—Haiti had an earthquake because they made a pact with the devil—Riiiiight… I’ll back away so they can start shooting the trank guns now…)

Comment #53: PhantomOne  on  03/29  at  12:35 AM

The potential McCain VP candidates being speculated on were Lieberman, Ridge, Crist, and Pawlenty - the Palin choice totally stumped all the Villagers.

That’s because she was pretty much hand-picked by Rush Limbaugh.  He touted her on his show many times, bright boys like William Kristol thought it was a great idea, and now I’m stuck having a goddamned snowbilly on my TV whining about something 24/7.

Comment #54: Mnemosyne  on  03/29  at  12:55 AM

It’s what they originally called themselves, Newt.

Comment #55: Captain Bathrobe  on  03/29  at  02:12 AM

The teabaggers realize that the America of traditional white suburban families, cheap gas, and massive pop culture is gone. Gone for good. All we’re doing now is deciding whether in the future we want to look more like the European Union or more like Russia. Meaning, are we going to embrace being mulitcultural and economically liberal, or are we going to turn into a tiny, vastly wealthy hierarchy using poverty and crime to control the proles?

Immigration reform is playing right into their fears about The Brown People Burying Us. They’ll lose their shit. The Obama Administration knows this and knows that taking on that issue has the potential to really shore up the long-term success of the Democratic party—but also to lead to a total freakout by these whipped-up nutters and a lot of unpredictable damage. I just hope they have the courage and the conviction to take on reform anyway.

Comment #56: sophronia  on  03/29  at  02:54 AM

I should add that the teabaggers want to have a tiny hierarchy controlling everything, as long as it’s the proper hierarchy. They haven’t even really been very subtle about communicating this, with all the “take your country back” rhetoric.

Comment #57: sophronia  on  03/29  at  02:56 AM

I had an email back and forth with a NY Times reporter last month.  The latest front page spectacular on the teabaggers had run, and I was so annoyed I emailed the woman whose byline appeared.  I told her that I thought it was a real shame that the Ny Times was giving so much coverage to these people, especially when compared with the coverage they gave to the far larger peace movement during the bush years.

She wrote me back and informed me that she personaly had written a story about a peace march during the bush years, and “you can’t tell me we didn’t cover the peace movement!”

Of course, I had told her no such thing.  I wrote her back informing her of that, and restated was I was telling her:  that the coverage was very light compared to our numbers, that I marched in one huge event right past the NY Times building iwth hundreds of thousands of other people and they didn’t cover that event at all, and that when they did cover us, they always interviewed ten Gathering of Eagles counter protesters (yep, they’re teabaggers today), and gave the impression that there was two demonstrations of pretty much equal turn out.  And then I told her, don’t tell me what I can or can’t tell you, I was there.

I never got an answer to my second email, but I wasn’t expecting one.  The thing is, you have to email the reporters when you see this shit. Seriously.  That’s how the right got where they are. Working the refs, as Eric Alterman has so ablely documented.

You have to fucking whine, and complain.  There must be some blowback.  I wish more liberals would ream their asses when they do this.

Comment #58: JennyLI  on  03/29  at  07:55 AM

Seeback ,it’s not hateful.  I am in my early forties, and I won’t live another fifty years, but I still understand that when the teabagging generation dies off, OF NATURAL CAUSES (i mean, are we supposed to be rooting for immortality for them? that they of all people, will somehow beat the heretofore unbeatable odds and simply not die because America needs em?) - we are going to get a big and much needed Spring Cleaning in this country.

And it will be a breathe of fresh air.

Comment #59: JennyLI  on  03/29  at  08:02 AM

that they of all people, will somehow beat the heretofore unbeatable odds and simply not die because America needs em?

No no no, AnglScarlett!  They aren’t going to die because they’re going to be Raptured!  They NEVER die b/c they believe Jesus is their Savior!  Nevermind that bit where he said he wouldn’t recognize them b/c it’s actions not words that matter, or that the whole notion of rapture is a 19th C invention Jesus wouldn’t have understood.

They’re never dying!

Biggest bunch of cowards ever.  And they’re throwing temper tantrums of idiocy.

Comment #60: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/29  at  08:19 AM

Hmmm… got curious and answered my own question re: Michelle Bachman - too much baggage? 

And on another note, what is it with both Bachman and Palin and the strabismus?  Is that a requirement for ReTHUGlican sexual attractiveness?

Comment #61: phylosopher  on  03/29  at  08:55 AM

Hey all, sorry for the OT, but just came across petition re: Cariboo Barbie’s discovery show:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/21/boycott-the-discovery-channel-networks

Comment #62: phylosopher  on  03/29  at  09:31 AM

Thanks for the repost of the data.  I noticed the influence of these trends in the HCR vote among conservadems, where in southern states there were some definite outliers in the HCR vote—many of them in border districts in Texas.  A lot of previously conservative states have rapidly growing Hispanic populations and health care reform tends to be popular among immigrant populations.  The GOP’s vocal spasms of pain at the idea of any immigrant getting health care may be their Waterloo of a sort.  I know Dubya spent all that time learning to say “Hola,” but health care may cement the Hispanic population as a firmly Democratic and—importantly—politically active demographic.  The GOP is not helping by introducing a variety of state-level measures to deny prenatal care to non-citizens.  It’s a stupid, petty and mean move that plays well with the rabid teabags but just further puts them out of touch with the reality of the American population.

Incidentally, some of the Palin pick was, pure and simple, a political distraction.  I’ve heard Steve Schmidt talk about Palin with a note of regret because he wound up hating her personally but he still maintains that they probably would have lost more had she not been on board.  They knew the media would be distracted and fixated on a shiny new object and they weren’t wrong; she is still their object of fascination. And they wanted a woman just to keep the discussion of divisions among Dems continuing (note—and I mean here the discussion not the reality of division because in reality, the Great Divide was a media fantasy).  Anything to avoid talking about the complete disaster 8 years of GOP rule had been.

Comment #63: pennylane  on  03/29  at  09:33 AM

The whole Real American meme really chaps my hide:
1.It implies that the majority of Americans are nothing more then outsiders in our own country.
2.The only real Americans are Native Americans, a fact which escapes them time after time. I’m sure they feel the way John Wayne did:
I don’t feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them. There were great numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves.
John Wayne
Playboy interview.

Comment #64: pitbullgirl65  on  03/29  at  10:09 AM

Excellent analysis indeed Amanda.  And no, you don’t sound like a broken record.  Keep saying it and keep saying it loud.

Comment #65: Weezie Jefferson  on  03/29  at  10:13 AM

Incidentally, some of the Palin pick was, pure and simple, a political distraction.  I’ve heard Steve Schmidt talk about Palin with a note of regret because he wound up hating her personally but he still maintains that they probably would have lost more had she not been on board.  They knew the media would be distracted and fixated on a shiny new object and they weren’t wrong; she is still their object of fascination.

Yep, pennylane, that’s also supported by ‘Game Change’ which I just finished reading.  That book makes it absolutely clear how rushed and barely-vetted the Palin nomination was, because the campaign was deliberately just looking for a shocker to get the media’s attention and distract them with something crazy and unexpected.  The VP McCain really wanted to serve that role was Joe Lieberman, but they couldn’t alienate the base with a pro-choice Jewish ‘Democrat’, so they were left scrambling for any other pick they could think of who wasn’t BORING and could steal the spotlight from Obama’s way more exciting narrative.

But who knows if McCain would’ve lost by a wider or narrower margin without her?  I can’t count on one hand all the genuinely undecided voters in my family and neighborhood who turned against McCain/Palin once they saw those mob rallies and her painfully stupid interviews.  She was a huge liability to a party that doesn’t get their “Real America” is rapidly aging and shrinking.  The average voter does not get their code words, and they’re turned off by incompetence and extremism when they see it.

Comment #66: NicoleG  on  03/29  at  10:40 AM

Young people don’t vote at the same rate as older people because the system is designed for them not to.

Holding elections on a Tuesday when most under-60s are working, sure doesn’t hurt that dynamic

Comment #67: firefall  on  03/29  at  11:14 AM

Yikes - perhaps something new:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-met-fbi-raid-whiting-20100328,0,6967476.story

your neck of the woods, Caren?

Comment #68: phylosopher  on  03/29  at  11:36 AM

I’s like to add there are yustabeeReps that are not young. My parents are sick to their cores by the racism and anti-everything attitude of their former party.

That’s my 75-year-old dad. He was a hardcore Republican until the era of George W. Bush. As he puts it, the scales fell from his eyes because of the massive corruption and incompetence of that presidency.

Comment #69: louC  on  03/29  at  11:58 AM

The movement is rather geriatric, which is why all the talk of “civil war” is so ridiculous. There’s a reason they draft people in their 20s and not in their 60s.

Comment #70: Ben D.  on  03/29  at  02:12 PM

Unfortunately, there are the homegrown terrorists it looks like the elderly raised - take a look at the link above - TImothy McVieghish?

Comment #71: phylosopher  on  03/29  at  03:00 PM

Another reason Palin was selected was that she had “executive” experience as a governor.  Remember, most of the candidates on the GOP side had been governors and they were all running hard against Obama’s supposed lack of executive experience -  other than deriding his experience as a community organizer.

Comment #72: CParis  on  03/29  at  03:05 PM

Young people don’t vote at the same rate as older people because the system is designed for them not to.</blockquote>

Holding elections on a Tuesday when most under-60s are working, sure doesn’t hurt that dynamic</blockquote>

True.  Holding it on a weekend when the under 30 and/or working class crowd is the most likely to be working isn’t really going to help with that either.  The better way to do it, I think, is the way Oregon does it*, where everyone can easily mail/turn it in ahead of time, but then you can also vote at the polls the day of if you like (or lost your ballot, or whatever).  And so the voting day acts as a deadline reminder more than anything.

*or did it when I lived there. dunno if they still do it that way.

Comment #73: jennygadget  on  03/29  at  03:45 PM

Unfortunately, there are the homegrown terrorists it looks like the elderly raised - take a look at the link above - TImothy McVieghish?

Yeah, but I’d be willing to bet there are a lot fewer 20 something right wing nuts than there were in the ‘90s even. The Republican Party and conservatism in general is about as popular as STDs in that group.

Comment #74: Ben D.  on  03/29  at  05:04 PM

But, then again, it only takes one. So I could see a lone nut doing something violent as always) but there’s not going to be any widespread civil disorder when 95% of the group is 55+.

Comment #75: Ben D.  on  03/29  at  05:05 PM

OT @phylo

Not surprised that there’s a Chicagoland connection: when I heard people in Hammond/Whiting were arrested, I figured as much.  That’s just over the border.  People in Hammond commute.

As for Whiting, In?  Why do you think it was named “Whiting”?  Because black people were not allowed.  Where else would you expect people who’ve lost their shit over a n*gger in the WHITE House to be?  Same for Whitestown, where there are still no black people.

I am not making this shit up.  The Grand Wizard of the KKK was once elected Governor of Indiana.  My birthstate is a shit place at times.  Corn grows really well there, though, so there’s that.  Also.

————
jennygadget, OR still does it that way.  Illiinois now has early voting for a week or so before an election (though I think it actually ends a few days before the election—so you have to wait to vote officially if you miss it.)  It’s really nice, b/c the lines aren’t long b/c people have plenty of time to vote.  Even on election day proper, lines are less b/c of the early voters.  For Obama, most people had already voted before election day.

Comment #76: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/29  at  05:12 PM

Wasn’t Michele Bachman the one who was falling all over herself to try to suck face with Bush at one of his later (maybe the last) SOTU addresses? I think that was the first time I’ve heard of her, although her profile has absolutely increased exponentially since the election. I’m not 100% sure it was her, but in retrospect, it sounds like she’s about the only person who would go to those lengths to be caught on camera embracing a guy with a 20% approval rating.

Comment #77: Epsilon82  on  03/29  at  05:24 PM

I have a friend six years younger than me.  She hasn’t moved for ten years.  She’s been scrubbed from the rolls twice.

Like, WTF?

Comment #78: Crissa  on  03/29  at  06:19 PM

But should your eyes deceive you, then you should also note a) that the average age of Limbaugh and Fox News’ audience is past retirement age

I can’t click on a media meta site without a headline admitting “Real ink’n'paper newspapers are dying because their readers skew older, less educated, less economically upscalable, and less adaptable (culturally and technologically) than the country as a whole. This is a problem and will spell their doom as the desired consumers of information are all tweeting stuff and watching live streaming video on their smartphones, and we can’t make them pay.”

Likewise, I can’t find anyone in the media biz who will write that the triumph!!11!!one! of Fox News is jeopardized with the fact that their viewers skew older, less educated, less economically upscalable, and less adaptable (culturally and technologically) than the country as a whole. Only us DFHs seem to notice.

Comment #79: ThresherK  on  03/29  at  07:35 PM

Wasn’t Michele Bachman the one who was falling all over herself to try to suck face with Bush at one of his later (maybe the last) SOTU addresses?

yes, that’s her.

ThresherK, age-skewing is true for talk radio as well.  The internet and blogging?  Far more liberal-owned, which is why corps fight against net neutrality so hard.

Comment #80: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/29  at  08:10 PM

“The name “Whiting” predates the city of Whiting. In 1869, when “Pop” Whiting, a fearless (some have preferred to call him reckless) engineer ditched his heavy freight train so a fast passenger train behind him could have the right of way, not many signs of human habitation could be found at the site.”

So this story is just a cover, Caren?

Comment #81: phylosopher  on  03/29  at  09:25 PM

Per Wikipedia, Whiting IN has a lower percent of white and higher percent hispanic than IN as a whole.

Comment #82: helen w. h.  on  03/30  at  11:23 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.