When the alternative was Clinton NeoLiberalism of the outsourcing "globalist" variety (funny, I didn't think "globalism" meant shifting all our jobs to China and Indonesia where labor got paid shit wages with no benefits or regulations!)? It's not that hard to understand why people who didn't know what a petty grifter Donald Trump really is would get suckered in by him—and it really didn't help that the supposedly pro-labor Democratic Party was more desperate to crush Bernie Sanders than to revitalize unions!
It's what worries me about Kamala Harris, though we need to slam the brakes on going backwards off a cliff with Trump before we can start to move forward. As started to happen with Biden (at least domestically!), my hope is that the Democratic Party has finally gotten over its NeoLib binge and will start to remember who its base really is—the working class, the minorities, the women, the LGBTQs, and everybody else whose not as much fun to hang with as the Elon Musks or Peter Thiels but comprise the majority of Americans....
Well, Biden's been...surprisingly pro-labor, which pleases me a great deal. In most ways, I found Joe Biden a much better President than I ever thought he would be—if you ignore Israel's genocide of Palestinians, which I don't and you don't, either.
I think dealing in absolutes like "All Trump supporters are bigots!" or "Biden is the most Pro-Labor President ever!" (both Presidents Roosevelt might want a word with you about that) isn't really making your case as well as you think it is. Also, Joe Biden is the first Democratic President in...a while who hasn't been so pro-corporate as to be anti-labor, which is one reason I ultimately found Obama a disappointment and I've come to hate the Clintons so much!
I hope Kamala Harris keeps up and expands much of what Biden did well, and takes a harder line on Netanyahu than Biden has....
I wasn't really talking about Trump here so much as I was Clinton NeoLiberalism and how it made "President Trump" possible.
As for FDR—were his policies "extremely racist" by the standards of the 1930s, or "extremely racist" by the standards of the 21st Century? We can certainly agree about FDR's more bigoted policies (like refusing to push for an anti-lynching bill because he wanted Dixiecrat support for his economic plans, or interning Japanese-Americans during WWII!), but didn't he also heavily support Blacks and Women working in Defense industries during WWII, and pressure companies with government contracts to hire them?
if you haven’t noticed, we’re still a very racist country!
There were lots of people at the time who were less racist than FDR, including, notably, his wife, who consistently lobbied him to do better on the issue.
So, the real reason Osborn is not a D is because of negative partisanship. NE is very, very red, and that means that most voters see themselves as Rs, and hate Ds. Many would never consider voting for a D. By running as an independent, Osborn can give people who hate Fischer but also hate Ds permission to vote for him. His success in the state is probably largely attributable to this dynamic.
I would say vote for him 100% vote for him! it's unclear what he'll do, and I'm not 100% sure he'll even caucus with Ds, but he's a huge upgrade over your current senator. Every little bit helps.
Thanks Noah! I always feel more informed when I finish reading your analysis. 😄❤️
When the alternative was Clinton NeoLiberalism of the outsourcing "globalist" variety (funny, I didn't think "globalism" meant shifting all our jobs to China and Indonesia where labor got paid shit wages with no benefits or regulations!)? It's not that hard to understand why people who didn't know what a petty grifter Donald Trump really is would get suckered in by him—and it really didn't help that the supposedly pro-labor Democratic Party was more desperate to crush Bernie Sanders than to revitalize unions!
It's what worries me about Kamala Harris, though we need to slam the brakes on going backwards off a cliff with Trump before we can start to move forward. As started to happen with Biden (at least domestically!), my hope is that the Democratic Party has finally gotten over its NeoLib binge and will start to remember who its base really is—the working class, the minorities, the women, the LGBTQs, and everybody else whose not as much fun to hang with as the Elon Musks or Peter Thiels but comprise the majority of Americans....
this is a common analysis on the left, but it's been pretty thoroughly debunked. Donald Trump's voters were racists, not poor people.
Also Biden's been the most pro labor president in history!
Well, Biden's been...surprisingly pro-labor, which pleases me a great deal. In most ways, I found Joe Biden a much better President than I ever thought he would be—if you ignore Israel's genocide of Palestinians, which I don't and you don't, either.
I think dealing in absolutes like "All Trump supporters are bigots!" or "Biden is the most Pro-Labor President ever!" (both Presidents Roosevelt might want a word with you about that) isn't really making your case as well as you think it is. Also, Joe Biden is the first Democratic President in...a while who hasn't been so pro-corporate as to be anti-labor, which is one reason I ultimately found Obama a disappointment and I've come to hate the Clintons so much!
I hope Kamala Harris keeps up and expands much of what Biden did well, and takes a harder line on Netanyahu than Biden has....
FDR’s admin was extremely racist in its labor policies.
Every empirical analysis of trump support finds him doing poorly with the working class, and doing best with ppl who have a lot of racist resentment.
I wasn't really talking about Trump here so much as I was Clinton NeoLiberalism and how it made "President Trump" possible.
As for FDR—were his policies "extremely racist" by the standards of the 1930s, or "extremely racist" by the standards of the 21st Century? We can certainly agree about FDR's more bigoted policies (like refusing to push for an anti-lynching bill because he wanted Dixiecrat support for his economic plans, or interning Japanese-Americans during WWII!), but didn't he also heavily support Blacks and Women working in Defense industries during WWII, and pressure companies with government contracts to hire them?
if you haven’t noticed, we’re still a very racist country!
There were lots of people at the time who were less racist than FDR, including, notably, his wife, who consistently lobbied him to do better on the issue.
Wha...?
Yes, we're still a very racist country—I didn't think that was open to debate, as you're not my late Mom's (thankfully) late husband.
Having said that, I'm just walking away because, as I've said a lot recently, we need to stop moving backwards before we can start to move forward....
Bill Clinton was as close to being a Republican as a Democratic president could be. I consider him Republican lite.
Hi AJ!
So, the real reason Osborn is not a D is because of negative partisanship. NE is very, very red, and that means that most voters see themselves as Rs, and hate Ds. Many would never consider voting for a D. By running as an independent, Osborn can give people who hate Fischer but also hate Ds permission to vote for him. His success in the state is probably largely attributable to this dynamic.
I would say vote for him 100% vote for him! it's unclear what he'll do, and I'm not 100% sure he'll even caucus with Ds, but he's a huge upgrade over your current senator. Every little bit helps.