KevinC
3473
Maybe not everyone, but I think it’s increasingly becoming the case. Most people with principles have already fled the party. What’s left are the cultists and those who are more than happy to ride shotgun with them for their own ends. “Throw children in cages? Fine, as long as my taxes get lowered”. You also have a significant number of that that believe Democrats are far more repulsive and dangerous that pedophiles, traitors, criminals, you name it. Just watch Roy Moore win the next election there, because hey, at least he’s not a Democrat.
I’m surrounded by all kinds of people that typically vote for Republicans. I work with them daily, have family dinner with them, you name it. While I wouldn’t call a lot of them cultists, I can confidently say that nothing Mueller says will move the needle for a single one of them I know. This includes the contingent that insist they are independent and moderate.
Climate change? Not happening, a hoax. Donald Trump? They love the strongman thing, the authoritarian law and order type. Children in cages? Well, it’s their fault, they shouldn’t have come “illegally” and we have a right to protect our borders. Mueller investigation/report? They view it as either total exoneration or something akin to the Benghazi hearings: politicians playing political games.
Mueller reiterating what he said in the report is going to do fuck-all for a single person who voted for Trump that I know, and I know a ton of them. And again, I’m not even talking about the people in the Trump personality cult, of which I know a few.
So are they all cultists? No… but I don’t think that changes the math much, when it comes to Mueller’s testimony.
That very much matches what I see in the Trump voters I know. Even if they agree he’s a buffoon, he’s on the right side of the questions they care about (they’re retired law-enforcement types). They’re cynical about politicians in general, so what they consider political chicanery will not sway them.
Timex
3475
Eh, well, video clips of Mueller testimony have a chance of actually making it onto normal local news coverage, which is dramatically more widely viewed than cable news shows.
Those local news shows gave virtually zero coverage of the report, because doing so was more about trying to do in-depth analysis, which they weren’t really equipped to do.
With Mueller testimony, they can just play a clip.
I basically agree, though much of what I experience consists of a very deep head-in-sand approach along with the occasional Democratic misstep or overreaction. So Republican leaning people can look at something like the Green New Deal, get really, really angry about how it makes no sense (which, to be fair, it kind of doesn’t) and now can handwave away everything Democrats say. That they don’t apply this same logic to their own party can clearly be seen in the behaviors of their own politicians. People like Lindsay Graham are the embodiment of this “it’s all your fault / don’t tell me about things that I don’t want to hear” politics in practice.
Honestly their whole world view is such that they simply cannot be wrong, and so they turn their face away from information that is upsetting and increasingly falling into this whole thing about information not being true. And then they can sleep at night, complain about all politicians and get really, really angry if you point out GOP problems without them immediately flipping out and attacking Democrats at the same time.
Matt_W
3477
It doesn’t in particular or in general? I mean I know that Republicans think it makes no sense (because they’ve been told that, and Republicans are nothing if not slaves to perceived authority.) But why don’t you think it makes sense? It’s an aspirational initiative. And you know, we went from never touching space to landing some dudes on the moon in less than 12 years. Probably we could do what the NGD calls for if there was actually national will to do it. Instead, of course, we’ll mostly die of thirst, hunger, disease, and the conflicts that attend those things.
KevinC
3478
Yes, this whole post is spot-on. I think it’s that way for climate change, for example. They bought the party line for so long, that they just can’t admit they were wrong all this time (granted, that is a very difficult thing to do).
A guy I know works in data analytics. He’s very intelligent, he’s great at breaking down data and making predictions based off of that. Total climate change denier, though. I’m talking about a guy with the skillset, the capability, and (under other circumstances) the intellectual curiosity to find answers to questions. He won’t do it with climate change, though, he totally has his head in the sand. When I argue with him, he’ll fall back on platitudes like “Well, climate has always changed, it’s normal”, completing ignoring A) the mass extinctions that can result in a dramatically shifting climate and B) the scale and time frame of what we’re talking about now.
We know what the effects of CO2 are in the atmosphere. We know that we are pumping out metric fucktons of the stuff into the atmosphere every year. It doesn’t take a great leap in imagination or require anyone to throw out their understanding of physics and how the universe works to grasp this stuff. He still latches on to those “scandalous” emails between climate scientists.
I don’t think it’s that he wants to see the world burn or his children and grandchildren suffer, I think he just can’t admit that he’s been wrong and that he’s been co-opted by the fossil fuel industry. Same thing goes with Trump. I think he represents all kinds of things that they abhor, but they can’t admit they were wrong and that they voted for the wrong candidate. So instead, it’s willful tuning out of any and all information that threatens that.
I think a lot of people who voted for Trump are happy that they are getting what they wanted. Maybe not all of them, but a lot of them.
That’s pretty much the disconnect. They don’t “get” that it’s aspirational, they see the details, they laugh, maybe chortle out something about AOC being a radical socialist, and get back to whatever they were doing.
To be more precise, the mission statement of the GND is the following (and my impression Conservative voter complaints):
- Enact an emergency Green New Deal to turn the tide on climate change, revive the economy and make wars for oil obsolete. Initiate a WWII-scale national mobilization to halt climate change, the greatest threat to humanity in our history. Create 20 million jobs by transitioning to 100% clean renewable energy by 2030, and investing in public transit, sustainable (regenerative) agriculture, conservation and restoration of critical infrastructure, including ecosystems.
So the GND is just a JOBS WORKS PROGRAM. So Democrats want to make 20 MILLION PEOPLE WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT!!
- Implement a Just Transition that empowers those communities and workers most impacted by climate change and the transition to a green economy. Ensure that any worker displaced by the shift away from fossil fuels will receive full income and benefits as they transition to alternative work.
OMG SJW and MORE PEOPLE ON GOVERNMENT DOLE. WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM DEMOCRATS
-
Enact energy democracy based on public, community and worker ownership of our energy system. Treat energy as a human right.
-
Redirect research funds from fossil fuels into renewable energy and conservation. Build a nationwide smart electricity grid that can pool and store power from a diversity of renewable sources, giving the nation clean, democratically-controlled, energy.
The electric grid already works fine, what problem are you solving?
- End destructive energy extraction and associated infrastructure: fracking, tar sands, offshore drilling, oil trains, mountaintop removal, natural gas pipelines, and uranium mines. Halt any investment in fossil fuel infrastructure, including natural gas, and phase out all fossil fuel power plants. Phase out nuclear power and end nuclear subsidies. End all subsidies for fossil fuels and impose a greenhouse gas fee/tax to charge polluters for the damage they have created.”
LOL Democrats don’t understand science. Energy use is increasing, there are NO ALTERNATIVES to fossil fuels, China and India don’t care about pollution, LOOK AT THE SCIENCE alternative energy DOESN’T WORK it DOESN’T WORK and also NO OTHER COUNTRY IS GOING TO DO THIS WE’RE SCREWING OURSELVES AND CHINA IS GETTING AHEAD. [ed: with a large dose of] AND WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR IT?!
AOC IS A RADICAL SOCIALIST AND IS TERRIFYING LOOK AT RUSSIA AND VENEZUELA SOCIALISM KILLS, THE GND IS SOCIALISM…
ok, yikes, too many caps. But, you get the idea.
I get (and agree with) the cynicism which says the Mueller testimony won’t sway Republicans or result in meaningful consequences for Trump but I don’t get the sentiment that we shouldn’t bother having Mueller testify accordingly.
Indeed, the “What’s the point?” resignation is exactly the sort of cynicism that authoritarians foment and depend upon. The point is that we have to keep pushing back even if we don’t think it will change anything because the moment we stop doing so is the moment that we cede total control to them.
KevinC
3482
Oh, we should absolutely get him to testify, I just don’t think it’s going to cause a measurable number of 2016 Trump voters to have an awakening.
Matt_W
3483
Yeah, I’m never surprised by Republicans’ reactions to things, but you said “to be fair, it kind of doesn’t [make sense.]” I was just wondering what you meant there. I don’t entertain any hope of trying to convince any Republican of anything. I figure if a person voted for Trump, they don’t really have two brain cells to rub together and they’re a lost cause. Trump could be personally slitting the throats of their children and they’d find some way to excuse it and blame it on Hillary. But I’d expect to any person is able to think, the GND would seem like a good idea in principle. Just curious why you think it doesn’t make sense. (Maybe it doesn’t.)
I want him to testify. I want everything on public record. The fact that the GOP won’t abandon Trump and that I don’t think Republican voters will care isn’t my main beef.
My issue is that because it won’t result in some obvious groundswell of support for impeachment, I believe Dem leaders will just let it go.
Oh, just that the the GND, and even AOC specifically, wants to “get rid” of nuclear power, when literally it is only nuclear power that will save us. Current political climate, otoh, makes new nuclear plants extremely long term projects that are costly and difficult to pass through all the regulatory hurdles, where all the regulatory framework in place today makes green expansion much easier. But if the GND is serious about “crash” programs to Get Things Done asap, nuclear needs to be on the table as well.
Matt_W
3486
This is highly debatable. Understand I say this as someone who has worked in nuclear power and nuclear power research for nearly my whole two decade career. I actually think the only real long-term solution is moderation of our energy consumption. But, otoh:
Reducing the population would be the easiest solution (ie, least difficult technically to do) if we only all agreed to it. But that’s interesting about your experience, and i’ll take that under advisement. Do you really think solar/wind can overtake nuclear?
I didn’t know she had changed her mind either, thanks.
The problem with the GND is its implicit assumption that legislation to keep Earth habitable is only palatable if it is bundled with a bunch of social programs. It also helps cement the insane, truly insane, perception in our political discourse that keeping Earth habitable is a “liberal” issue.
So, my gripe is a purist’s gripe. But obviously it’s better than barely talking about climate at all, which is where we were for the past 30 years.
Just wanted to quote this since it’s hardly ever discussed.
Oghier
3490
Agree. I’d be happy to see a wide-ranging, 21st century New Deal, and there are elements of that in the GND. But the urgency around the “Green” part merits separating it from the “New Deal” elements.
Once when babysitting my niece and nephew, my nephew said he’d like some popcorn. I told him i made some great kettle popcorn, but he shrugged and said he only liked microwave popcorn. I made kettle popcorn anyway. I brought it in and after watching them happily scarfing it down, asked him if he liked it and told him how i made it.
I expected him to realize the error of his ways and embrace the new experience.
Instead he suddenly threw the popcorn in his hand on the ground and refused to eat another bite the rest of the evening.
That’s pretty much American Conservatives dealing with any ideas any Liberal ever suggests. Because Liberals believe in climate change, Conservatives are compelled to reflexively reject it.
Along the lines of the "What if we create a better world for nothing"cartoon - what we actually need is ubiquitous nuclear Fusion power, as well as better batteries to store power for mobility.
