19:42
Hispanics vote about 30% conservative nation wide. Even for trump, they did.
What would be interesting is to see if, however they vote, it looks like the rest of the state they are in. So a red state like Montana, do their Hispanics vote only 30% Republican, or is it 80% like the rest of the state?
Either way, it looks like identity politics hasn't been as successful on Hispanics as it has on blacks, who rarely vote higher than 10% Republican.
I'll take great interest in the Hispanic vote next year, in light of the immigration drama.
If it pulls 30% Republican again, I have one of two conclusions: 1) Hispanics don't care that much about immigration, 2) they're all just as entrenched as everyone else. I'll favor conclusion 2 over 1, as the only consistent predictor of voting outcome I've ever seen is previous voting patterns.
So if I'm right, @TRiG, does racism, real or perceived, actually matter to the outcomes that we'll get?
My point being, American politics is polarized and immobile. That shows in its policies.
Most Republicans I know think trump is insufferable. They still voted for him. They probably will again. Same story in the blue states.
So called swing states don't have a more discerning electorate. They just have more even numbers of both sides and differences in outcome is mostly due to population variances and redistricting.
Democrats painting Republicans as money grubbing racists is mere identity politics. For the most part, they're about as racist and greedy as everyone else. Republicans generally avoid identity politics. "Red voting is for the patriotic, believers in the constitution, and supporters of freedom." Those are issues divorced from any specific identity.
Where they've come close, but very few politicians say it, is trying to make Republican the "white" and "Christian" party.
I think that's more a natural phenomenon for them, however, as their entrenched base has almost always been mostly that.
And Democrats have been very clever in putting themselves as the underdog's party. Many concepts were use today were pushed and basically invented by Democrats, with terminology that serves them.
And many Republicans notice this, which is why Orwell and wars on minds and words keeps coming up.
In general, Democrats are much better at running campaigns, but I personally think they're more likely to have weak convictions, whatever their platform. Sort of a "win at all costs" mentality.
Republicans, I think for the most part, are earnest in their platforms.
@TRiG So, it hasn't changed. Just your opinion of it and likely your exposure to honest discussions if it.
Republicans, I think, are honestly seeking "the best course". I don't think Democrats have been in general for at least 3 or 4 decades.
On the lgbt issues, of which I know you take great personal interest, Democrats have been very clever. They've pretty much always had their vote, on identity again. "All good gays vote Democrat". But it never meant much because it's a very small chunck of the population. definitely under 5%, probably under 3%.
The clever part is they've managed to make it a defining feature of their party. Your average Democrat has zero interest in lgbt issues. There's close zero reasons it's personally important to almost all of them. Yet "solidarity with the lgbt" community is not just a talking point. It's dogma. All good Democrats support lgbt issues.
This all sounds fine so far, I'm sure you agree. The framing of it as a moral issue of the highest order is what's been impressive.
Protection under the law already existed a long time for them. A few kinks in application needed work 20 years ago, but mission accomplished, if you're honest about it.
Civil issues, especially marriage, are always more than they appear. Everyone brings a lot of baggage with them when taking about things like marriage, or freedom to associate (or not).
Civil issues are always up for debate, and in western civilization, mostly managed by case law, not legislation. And that's how it should be.
Case law has given gays marriage rights. It did not come from Congress, and there's a large school of thought that such things shouldn't. Most of them are conservatives of a libertarian variety (which is classically liberal, btw).
With lgbt issues holding the moral conscience of "all good Democrats", the Democrats have created a powerful political tool from virtually nothing. Damn, you have to admire the political genius!
This tool is so powerful now, now, backed up by a "fall in line" media supremacy, that even single words can and have taken down opponents. I'm taking about the pronouns, but also "dog whistles" and the idea that you have a right to be shielded from personally offensive words and ideas.
My consolation at this point is that there's evidence it's turning in on itself. The still sizable Republican base doesn't buy in, so increasingly conservatives are immune to blows from this club.
Fellow Democrats are not. The more radical ones are hitting the less radical ones.
As evidence, the current democratic primaries. They're all ganging up on Biden, a guy they couldn't stop loving when he was vice president.
Even Obama, liberal heartthrob, is now getting "hindsight criticism".
If this doesn't backfire and implode, it will lead to massive governmental upheaval. Don't believe me, check your history books.
Current far left ideas are becoming mainstream. Reparations, wealth redistribution, property control, wage mandates ...
As much as I hate "communism" as a specter, these ideas are shooting us down the same paths that greatly harmed much of eastern Europe and China about 150 years ago in their communist revolutions.
The Orwellian (god I'm tired of saying it, but I keep seeing it) nature of it is disturbing.
Republicans might be greedy for money. Democrats are greedy for hearts and minds.
And can I really fault someone for seeking to better their wealth? Don't we all want that? No one wants to be poorer. Just operate within the law, that's all I want from you.
But I can fault someone for aggressively resenting me for having a different thought. The idea that I must be filled with hate because we disagree is itself a show of hate.
Sorry, I'm American. It doesn't work like that. Think, believe, feel, and say whatever you want. You still get equal protection under the law.
I’m David Fullerton, Stack Overflow’s CTO, responsible for the product, engineering, and community teams.
I joined Stack Overflow in 2010 because I believed in the vision and mission of Stack Overflow. I wanted to be a part of building a community where programmers come together to help one anot...
Cross posted from Meta Stack Exchange
Dear Stack Exchange, Inc.,
We know you know about this already, so we'll keep this brief. The past two weeks have been rough. Lots of moderators have lost confidence in you; for some, it was the final straw. For many of us, though, we like being here and we...
