Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
skews13

New Research May Explain The Weakness Of Centrism And The Religious Left

Recommended Posts

In brief, Bitecofer disputes the conventional wisdom that elections are won or lost on the decisions of swing voters. Most forecasters assume that voters who switch back and forth between Republican and Democrat make up between 15 and 20 percent of the electorate. Bitecofer thinks it’s more like 6-7%, with the remainder being “closet partisans” who despite all protestations to the contrary almost always side with the same party. In her model, the deciding factor is instead competing bases: the party that gets its base to the polls wins—or more precisely, the party whose base stays home loses. It’s better for politicians, in this view, to give up trying to win over the undecided, and simply start tossing red meat to their base.

 

Modern elections, in her view, aren’t about candidates, or their positions, or compromises appealing to the broadest swathe of voters. They aren’t even about the art of persuasion, when it gets down to it. They’re about group identity, and hating the other guys more than you hate your own. It’s negative partisanship that makes U.S. politics go around, according to Bitecofer: American society is divided into two sprawling coalitions that fear and loathe the other, and the side that best taps into that existential ego threat is likely to come out on top.

 

https://www.alternet.org/2020/02/new-research-may-explain-the-weakness-of-centrism-and-the-religious-left/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Bitecofer is correct, and her findings sound an intuitively true note with me at least, then there is good news and bad news:

 

The good news is, that by throwing out enough red meat, Democrats can get more voters to the polls than Republicans.  More non-voters lean left than right.

The bad news is, we would have to sacrifice a good deal of integrity to guarantee Democratic wins.  We would have to match the right in exaggeration and falsehoods.  Could we do this and still retain our ideals of equality and democracy after having compromised ourselves by lying to voters? 

 

It will be tempting for Democratic politicians to put Bitecofer's theory to the test.  And if it is successful enough in winning votes, its application will probably become standard practice for the Democratic Party.  We will have joined Republicans, using their own tactics against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bludog said:

If Bitecofer is correct, and her findings sound an intuitively true note with me at least, then there is good news and bad news:

 

The good news is, that by throwing out enough red meat, Democrats can get more voters to the polls than Republicans.  More non-voters lean left than right.

The bad news is, we would have to sacrifice a good deal of integrity to guarantee Democratic wins.  We would have to match the right in exaggeration and falsehoods.  Could we do this and still retain our ideals of equality and democracy after having compromised ourselves by lying to voters? 

 

It will be tempting for Democratic politicians to put Bitecofer's theory to the test.  And if it is successful enough in winning votes, its application will probably become standard practice for the Democratic Party.  We will have joined Republicans, using their own tactics against them.

Quote

The good news is, that by throwing out enough red meat, Democrats can get more voters to the polls than Republicans.  More non-voters lean left than right.

 

This has been my thinking for the last 30 years. It has taken the advent of social media to get Democrats, and especially Liberal, and Progressive Democrats to come out into the open, and unapologetically own their position. Rightwing media was able to cow Liberals and Progressives for to long, by turning Liberal into a pejorative, that they have been shamed into owning. 

 

To the contrary. It is a shlt for brains, sister humping conservative that should be shamed into owning, because there is nothing normal about conservatism. It is quite definitively, the ideology of shame, perversion, and predatory behavior. But as i've been doing now for the last 20 years on sites such as this one. I've shown Liberals who are passive in their demeanor, that they don't have to agree with, kowtow to, or take any crap from a conservative on any issue, at any venue. 

 

And in case nobody has been paying attention, it is an ideological war we are winning quite handily, despite losing a battle here and there, which happens in a war.

 

We need to double down on the campaign of 2018, and not allow those who are to timid to get into the fight, to make what they might think is the safe choice, which is anything but. We're not going to beat Trump by playing nice, or playing it safe. Sling that red meat.

 

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/2/16/1919608/-Time-to-rally-around-the-candidate-s-Aggressively?utm_campaign=recent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, skews13 said:

It is a shlt for brains, sister humping conservative that should be shamed into owning, because there is nothing normal about conservatism. It is quite definitively, the ideology of shame, perversion, and predatory behavior.

 

So true.  Their political and media talking heads have been telling them of their goodness and virtue so loud and often that now, many have been emboldened to preach hate from a position of false moral superiority.  We need to take back the high ground.  Bitecofer is on to something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2020 at 8:14 AM, skews13 said:

Modern elections, in her view, aren’t about candidates, or their positions, or compromises appealing to the broadest swathe of voters. They aren’t even about the art of persuasion, when it gets down to it. They’re about group identity, and hating the other guys more than you hate your own. It’s negative partisanship that makes U.S. politics go around, according to Bitecofer: American society is divided into two sprawling coalitions that fear and loathe the other, and the side that best taps into that existential ego threat is likely to come out on top.

 

to me it would seem like there are three societies  the moderate 

 

with only 6-7%  just what side the moderate lands on in that divide has yet to be witnessed  and the moderate seem to account for almost 1/3  of the voting population  

 

 I Wonder if Obama pulled in 15 to 20% on his transparency push ? that idea alone sells itself to most Americans 

   and I feel like I am still voting for that but I am not hearing it or the other things that could be done without a tax dollar 

 things that desperately need to addressed 

 

 felt Obama pushed transparency harder hen anything else. I felt safe going forward with the other ideas i understood less about/ cared less about, under that light  

 

 all and all I would rather bring my ideas to light under Obama's voting mass then  then Trumps 

 almost 70% of the population did not elect Trump  his own party is jumping ship just to run against him

 

 I think I only want Biden in that boat surrounded by red meat loving piranha's

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

No holds barred chat

  • By Imgreatagain

    Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • By deezer shoove

    grgle


  • By rippy38

  • By Str8tEdge

    Where’s at @slideman?


  • By Robot88

    Hola


  • By teacher

    I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • By kfools

    Where does it say 2?


  • By kfools

    So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • By teacher

    How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • By Duck615

    Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • By kfools

    Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • By Imgreatagain

    Mine too. 


  • By Imgreatagain

    I thought it was my location.. 


  • By kfools

    Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • By Duck615

    OK thanks

     


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...