Not op, but I was coming to make this point anyway. I think they absolutely do pay such a penalty. But I think the argument as you put it in the piece seems to lead straightforwardly to something like “to come to power, the left will need to be led or figureheaded by a white man.”
I DON’T think that’s what you probably mean, but I also th…
Not op, but I was coming to make this point anyway. I think they absolutely do pay such a penalty. But I think the argument as you put it in the piece seems to lead straightforwardly to something like “to come to power, the left will need to be led or figureheaded by a white man.”
I DON’T think that’s what you probably mean, but I also think it’s a good faith extension of the argument as you’ve made it in this piece. I’m also genuinely curious where you find the break in that logical chain*, or if it comes down to “the left just has to not be an asshole about it.”
*which tbf I should explicitly lay out: if by dint of their non-white-man qualities the squad are unelectable, and this is a general condition of relevant politics, it follows that the left would want a white man champion (if it wants to win => ~unelectable).
I think it’s logically possible to think that those headwinds along with the specific and potentially amplified headwinds associated with a leftist candidate would be overwhelming in a way that they weren’t for Obama. Articulated that way I’m not sure I agree (but it’s also a slightly different argument now), in particular because I think Obama got a fair amount of juice in ‘08 by being perceived as more left wing than he was.
But of course he also had 3/4 of a billion in fundraising against a candidate who stuck with the public funding of about half that; there’s widely an idea that the sense of moment there was exhausted by it and the Obama presidency such that it can’t be replicated, and so on and so on.
FWIW I think there’s a just-believable-enough not to laugh off path for AOC to the presidency IF she can win the primary AND keep the party from splitting off into a major centrist faction (Bloomberg spoiler campaign); but I also think that’s not worth doing because having a leftist president without a congress would be borderline useless, and certainly a poor use of her talent. But that’s now fully aside from my original q, too.
>it follows that the left would want a white man champion (if it wants to win => ~unelectable).
For the record I think this is basically correct. I think that being black or hispanic means getting more penalized for being more on the left, and I think there's just generally a being a lady penalty.
Not insurmountable, but they make things harder. I think gender-flipped Hillary Clinton pulls it out in 2016, for example.
All of which is to say, let's hope Fetterman hangs on in Pennsylvania. Fetterman 28 or 32 would be possible then, but he has to have a win before then.
Not op, but I was coming to make this point anyway. I think they absolutely do pay such a penalty. But I think the argument as you put it in the piece seems to lead straightforwardly to something like “to come to power, the left will need to be led or figureheaded by a white man.”
I DON’T think that’s what you probably mean, but I also think it’s a good faith extension of the argument as you’ve made it in this piece. I’m also genuinely curious where you find the break in that logical chain*, or if it comes down to “the left just has to not be an asshole about it.”
*which tbf I should explicitly lay out: if by dint of their non-white-man qualities the squad are unelectable, and this is a general condition of relevant politics, it follows that the left would want a white man champion (if it wants to win => ~unelectable).
I'm just baffled as to how anyone can seriously think that only a white man can lead the Democrats to victory. Obama was President SIX YEARS AGO.
That's a stinging criticism of something I didn't say.
I was directly responding to Samuel, not to you. Sorry for the confusion.
I think it’s logically possible to think that those headwinds along with the specific and potentially amplified headwinds associated with a leftist candidate would be overwhelming in a way that they weren’t for Obama. Articulated that way I’m not sure I agree (but it’s also a slightly different argument now), in particular because I think Obama got a fair amount of juice in ‘08 by being perceived as more left wing than he was.
But of course he also had 3/4 of a billion in fundraising against a candidate who stuck with the public funding of about half that; there’s widely an idea that the sense of moment there was exhausted by it and the Obama presidency such that it can’t be replicated, and so on and so on.
FWIW I think there’s a just-believable-enough not to laugh off path for AOC to the presidency IF she can win the primary AND keep the party from splitting off into a major centrist faction (Bloomberg spoiler campaign); but I also think that’s not worth doing because having a leftist president without a congress would be borderline useless, and certainly a poor use of her talent. But that’s now fully aside from my original q, too.
No edit button, so as well: nor do I think I’m representing fdb’s point of view here directly above. Damn would I like an edit button
There's an edit button under the three dots.
Must be an app vs website thing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- I have only share, hide, and delete in the iOS app.
Said app can’t (well, wont) even route me to a specific comment from a notification about it, so it’s probably in need of developer attn anyway...
>it follows that the left would want a white man champion (if it wants to win => ~unelectable).
For the record I think this is basically correct. I think that being black or hispanic means getting more penalized for being more on the left, and I think there's just generally a being a lady penalty.
Not insurmountable, but they make things harder. I think gender-flipped Hillary Clinton pulls it out in 2016, for example.
All of which is to say, let's hope Fetterman hangs on in Pennsylvania. Fetterman 28 or 32 would be possible then, but he has to have a win before then.