318
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
318 points (94.7% liked)
politics
19080 readers
3529 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Gerrymandering definitely helps them, but there are limits to this tool. If Republicans gerrymander an area and there's a blue wave, they might not be able to stop it. This upsets the Republicans because they think they've rigged this race and how dare the voters defy what should have happened.
The Boomers are slowly dying out and, with them, a large part of the Republican base. (Boomers are about a third Republican, a third Democrat, and a third Independent.).
My generation, GenX, tends to be about 44% Democrat, 30% Republican, and 27% Independent. That's a loss for Republicans, but one they could gerrymander past.
Millennials are 52% Democrat, 27% Independent, and 21% Republican. GenZ is 52% Democrat, 31% Independent, and 17% Republican. As these two generations take over, not even the most aggressive gerrymandering will help.
Republicans are facing a potential collapse of public support in all but the deepest red areas. This is why they are looking for non-democracy solutions like "state legislatures can override the elections if the voters decide wrong" or even outright "get rid of democracy and install a (Republican) king."
A healthy political party, facing obsolescence, would change their platform to attract more voters. Perhaps a "theoretical healthy Republican party" could drop the "LGBTQ folks are evil" stuff as well as the "overthrow elections" garbage. They could stick to fiscal conservatism and might make headway that way. Unfortunately, the real Republican party believes that if the voters won't support the Republicans' views, then it's the voters that need to go.
(And, yes, foreign dark money factors into this to a large extent. It amplifies their party and keeps them around long after they should have died off.)
Gen X here. Reagan was such a productive fraud. Goddam his filthy soul.
I’m just glad that I’m not a flyover state middle aged parochial fool. I mean, I’m fool enough as it is, but worldly enough to steer clear of MAGA shitforbrains-itis.
I still think Ronnie Raygun might have done more damage in one administration than nearly any other. Though donnie's one term is arguably worse. Maybe some distance of time might tell.
But Ronnie's wrecking crew really, really got things going. And the infection persists - so much nonsense that started with that bunch is still with us today, and much of it has taken root in the Democratic Party, too. See: Clinton's administration, for instance.
And if anyone wants to test the "liberal media" nonsense a bit, just see how they treat Raygun's admin - the collective hagiographies are nauseating. And the way in which Iran/Contra is treated (more like: "covered up") - which is far, far, far worse than Watergate. So many boomers attached "-gate" to every scandal since Watergate, but they should have been finding ways to tie things back to Iran/Contra after that.
Pre-internet innocence, eh?
I think so many boomers were trained to chant stuff at LBJ and were so shocked by Nixon (and were so worn out from things in the 60s overall) that they got into a lot of self-indulgent things and self-help. Not to mention switching to chemicals that dulled the senses like booze and cocaine and very schmaltzy music in the 70s and started being good little yuppies by the time the 80s rolled around that they mostly stayed quiet about Ronnie Raygun. Now that their asses were not really on the line via a draft for Vietnam, most of them got very complacent.
Again, this is very much general terms. Not all boomers, and again, most of the stuff about "generations" is hokum. The notion that people in their teens and twenties are going to be self-centered narcissist twits is hardly a new observation, nor is it confined to one generation in particular. The technology and the specific complaints of older generations may change in their details, but it's an old story. Boomers were probably unique in the West for being the first that were so studied/catered to/marketed to and being SO large in numbers. Their every whim was catered to for the most part - if they wanted to protest for Civil Rights, for gay rights, against the war, try out different religions/cults, experiment with chemicals, pose as communists, then, later, get totally self-indulgent in the extreme - there was not a whole lot other groups could really do to stop them - the best that could be done was to make sure they were diverted into mostly harmless posturing and sell back their own culture to them in order to keep the capitalist game going. As long as they kept working and buying stuff.
When Gen X started to come into their own - most people shrugged, as their numbers were smaller. And boomers wanted to think they've seen and done it all...
My parents are Boomers and very well thought-out folk. Both scientists and left wing. Generous towards demographic failings on the lower end of financial clout in recognising that society has failed most people and continues to do so.
We were rich in cultural capital but relatively lower middle class in finances.
I’ve developed a rather more strict and harsh view of ‘aspirational’ values when it comes to Veblen Goods and status. My patience with society’s failings are much less generous.