Thursday, August 30, 2018
Political Mayhem Thursday: Midterm update
Tuesday was yet another fascinating day of primaries. Here were some of the highlights:
1) In Florida, two very different candidates emerged with upset victories. The Democrat, Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, ran from the Bernie Sanders wing of the party and won over four active opponents-- despite polling in 4th place fairly recently. On the other side of the fence, Republican Ron DeSantis ran as an ardent Trump supporter (and almost immediately created controversy by making a racist comment on Fox News). This is one general election that will provide a very stark choice.
2) In Arizona, Martha McSally won the Republican nomination for Senate, seeking the seat vacated by Jeff Flake. McSally was seemingly the most moderate of the candidates (albeit, one of her opponents was Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was trounced). Arizona is a state with quickly changing demographics, and the races there will be fascinating to watch in November.
Meanwhile, the State Fair has been running here in Minnesota (I plan to head over there on Monday). Two people-- neither of them ardent Democrats-- have described walking into the Republican tent at the Fair as "a visit to the nursing home." And that does not bode well for Republicans.
I suppose that sounds like a dig at the Republicans, but it reflects a truth: if they only care about the votes of older white males, they are going to stultify and lose-- and will deserve to do so. We need two vibrant parties in this country which appeal to a broad cross-section of the electorate. It seems that we are moving away from that at the moment.
Comments:
<< Home
First off, the NC State Fair is also full of elderly during the day time. Perhaps you were there on Senior Day? I usually volunteer at the Fair for a charity. We are included in the local news tent and it is astounding how many people (primarily older since the kids are in school) wait in line every year to see the news personalities.
As for Arizona... should I be disturbed that, despite getting trounced, Joe Arpaio received 90,000 votes.
As for Arizona... should I be disturbed that, despite getting trounced, Joe Arpaio received 90,000 votes.
As an elderly white male, I am deeply troubled that too often it is assumed that I am a Republican. Something like 80%-90% of today's Republicans support the actions of Donald Trump. I am afraid to go outside without an Obama For President shirt on.
And yes - in NC they are mostly Republicans. I worked the State Fair prior to the 2016 election and they were almost exclusively wearing Trump stickers.
RE the so-called racist comment:
The Onion is provocative here: https://politics.theonion.com/ron-desantis-clarifies-that-monkey-comment-was-intend-1828728794 Basically, their theory goes that it was not overtly racist but way down in the deep background to appeal to just one element (the racist element of the GOP coalition). The old dog whistle idea.
But even the incredibly insightful Onion may have missed the mark. As many have asserted over the past 24 hours, why do you need a dog whistle for racist voters when your opponent is black? No need for code words. And does a candidate really believe that extra votes might be gained by using demeaning language somehow? Is there an idea that racists will come out stronger against the black candidate if the white candidate sends the secret signal that he too is racist? It is all very complicated--but that doesn't mean it isn't true.
But, if we are willing to entertain the notion of complicated political bank shots, what about this one? This was a dog whistle not to racists--but rather a dog whistle to the media. Knowing that the media and activists would not be able to lay off the high fastball, DeSantis is really out to make hay out of the widely held perception among Republican voters that the media is completely out of their minds, making up stuff, and frothing at the mouth to spin wild stories that cast every GOP candidate into the worst possible light? Knowing that the media would attack, and know that most voters are way beyond the era in which "monkey" (if there ever was an era*) meant black people.
And, of course, there is the less interesting explanation that the remark was merely thoughtless and, in retrospect, poorly chosen.
*NOTE: My non-scholarly anecdotal impression in this area indicates that most of the racist simian slurs were usually ape and gorilla. This is true, in fact, for white men as well. Abraham Lincoln and George Bush were sometimes drawn as apes. Generally, monkeys are small and mischievous (more childlike). I cannot recall seeing instances in which adult African Americans were compared to monkeys.
Post a Comment
The Onion is provocative here: https://politics.theonion.com/ron-desantis-clarifies-that-monkey-comment-was-intend-1828728794 Basically, their theory goes that it was not overtly racist but way down in the deep background to appeal to just one element (the racist element of the GOP coalition). The old dog whistle idea.
But even the incredibly insightful Onion may have missed the mark. As many have asserted over the past 24 hours, why do you need a dog whistle for racist voters when your opponent is black? No need for code words. And does a candidate really believe that extra votes might be gained by using demeaning language somehow? Is there an idea that racists will come out stronger against the black candidate if the white candidate sends the secret signal that he too is racist? It is all very complicated--but that doesn't mean it isn't true.
But, if we are willing to entertain the notion of complicated political bank shots, what about this one? This was a dog whistle not to racists--but rather a dog whistle to the media. Knowing that the media and activists would not be able to lay off the high fastball, DeSantis is really out to make hay out of the widely held perception among Republican voters that the media is completely out of their minds, making up stuff, and frothing at the mouth to spin wild stories that cast every GOP candidate into the worst possible light? Knowing that the media would attack, and know that most voters are way beyond the era in which "monkey" (if there ever was an era*) meant black people.
And, of course, there is the less interesting explanation that the remark was merely thoughtless and, in retrospect, poorly chosen.
*NOTE: My non-scholarly anecdotal impression in this area indicates that most of the racist simian slurs were usually ape and gorilla. This is true, in fact, for white men as well. Abraham Lincoln and George Bush were sometimes drawn as apes. Generally, monkeys are small and mischievous (more childlike). I cannot recall seeing instances in which adult African Americans were compared to monkeys.
<< Home
