A hit dog barks loudly. Carville was hit by an ever-evolving society which happens to include progressive Democrats.
Carville says people are “too woke” – too woke for whom? too woke compared to what? If Carville is comparing 2021 society to Clinton-era society, then yes, Carville thinks people are “too woke.”
Carville once opposed gay marriage and LGBTQ rights when his bosses, the Clintons also opposed gay marriage and LGBTQ rights.
James Carville said: “Here’s another stupid thing: Democrats talking about free college tuition or debt forgiveness. I’m not here to debate the idea. What I can tell you is that people all over this country worked their way through school, sent their kids to school, paid off student loans. They don’t want to hear this shit.”
Wrong again James. Americans do want to hear this shit. Not only do they want to hear this shit, they want BIG GOVERNMENT TO 100% ELIMINATE STUDENT DEBT and support free college tuition.
“A new poll released today by Student Defense, the Defend Students Action Fund, and Data for Progress indicates there is substantial, bipartisan support for student loan relief programs and widespread student loan forgiveness. 67% of respondents, including 58% of Republicans, support some form of widespread student loan forgiveness — whether it is universal, tied to income, or based on specific program eligibility. Only 26% of respondents said student loan debt should not be forgiven.
78% of likely voters, and 80% of Republicans, support holding the owners and executives of predatory for-profit colleges personally liable for fraudulent behavior that harms student loan borrowers.”
A majority of Americans and Democrats support progressive policies. 76-yr. old Carville is UNAWARE a majority of Democrats support progressive policies.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and her Republican critics have both called her proposal to dramatically increase America’s highest tax rate “radical” but a new poll released Tuesday indicates that a majority of Americans agrees with the idea.
Carville reminds me of conservatives who wish they could “turn back the hands of time” to a woke-free time where people like Carville and old school conservatives ruled and reigned the day.
I think Carville needs to go back to sleep and leave “too woke” voters alone.
VOX & FRIENDS
And just exactly what is VOX’s Sean Illing’s malfunction? Here’s a clue: Sean Illing said to Carville: “Is the problem the language or the fact that there are lots of voters who just don’t want to hear about race and racial injustice?”
Dear Mr. Gaslighter Sean Illing: contrary to what you said and ASSUME, most voters do want to hear about race and racial injustice. Do you know who doesn’t want to hear about race and racial injustice? REPUBLICANS. Only about 25% of registered voters claim to be Republican. Democrats make up a larger group than Republicans while independents (no party affiliation) nearly outnumber Republicans and Democrats combined.
WHAT CARVILLE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND
1) Carville doesn’t understand AOC or the majority of democrats who support AOC and progressive Democrat policies.
2) Carville doesn’t understand why Democrats use the term, “LatinX” or “communities of color.” Democrat representatives use those terms for several reasons; for example, Democrats support a political group called Coalition of Communities of Color, whose mission statement offers a glimpse:
“Advancing racial justice through cross-cultural collective action. The Coalition of Communities of Color’s mission is to address the socioeconomic disparities, institutional racism, and inequity of services experienced by our families, children and communities; and to organize our communities for collective action resulting in social change to obtain self-determination, wellness, justice and prosperity.”
Is the term “Latinx” the same as the term “Hispanic?” While the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, for example, by the United States Census Bureau, Hispanic includes people with ancestry from Spain and Latin American Spanish-speaking countries, while Latino includes people from Latin American countries that were formerly colonized by Spain or Portugal.
3) Carville doesn’t understand the reason Democrats lost seats has nothing to do with the MEDIA’s intentional, overuse of the term “defund the police.” Democrats lost seats for the same exact reason most Democrats lose seats: A) GOP GERRYMANDERING and B) Democrats’ inability to adapt to social media and modern electronic political campaigning techniques in those 2020 races Democrats lost. Those losses had nothing to do with the term, “defund the police.”
4) Carville, like most conservatives and Democrat moderates, do not understand the use of the term “defund the police.”
The first time I heard the term “defund the police” was from newly-elected progressive Democrat, Missouri Congresswoman Cori Bush, who used the term to express her solution to the police problems Cori witnessed and encountered firsthand in Ferguson, Missouri. (Ferguson police murder of Michael Brown)
Immediately following Cori’s initial utterance of “defund the police” virtually every media outlet from CNN and MSNBC to FOXNEWS and OAN, constantly repeated that term ad nauseum in the most negative light they could come up with, eclipsing and distorting the desperate cries of HELP from whom? COMMUNITIES OF COLOR who have been suffering police murder and abuse for their entire lives and are sick and tired of it!
“Defund the Police” actually means LET US REASSESS AND REASSIGN COMMUNITY SERVICES TO MORE ACCURATELY REFLECT THE WILL AND THE NEEDS OF WE THE PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY.
For example, THE COMMUNITY needs emergency services: “defund the police” means recognizing the fact that much less than half of all 911 calls DO NOT REQUIRE AN ARMED POLICE OFFICER RESPONSE!
“Defund the Police” is the idea that community dollars would be more efficiently spent DOWNSIZING THE POLICE DEPT. AND POLICE DEPT. BUDGET WHILE INCREASING THE COMMUNITY’S ABILITY TO RESPOND TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF 911 CALLS WITH NON-POLICE COMMUNITY SERVICES. That is what “defund the police” really means.
The problem is people who do not understand what progressives mean by “defund the police” tend to use that phrase as a political tool in furtherance of their own agenda.
If I must use a phrase, the phrase I use is “ABOLISH AND REPLACE.” I’m talking about abolishing all 18,000 police departments and replacing those police departments with a federal police force approximately one-third the former size of all 18,000 police depts. No one is going to fix the institutionalized violence, racism, misogyny and bad police policies, patterns and practices one at a time, or even in groups. We need a complete overhaul that makes dollars and sense to local communities. For example, in every city in America the police dept. budget eats half or more of a municipality budget. If we eliminate your local police dept. and replace that police dept. with a FEDERALLY-FUNDED police force, a city could free up half or more of their annual budget, thereby increasing the municipality’s ability to provide quality public services for their communities.
Of course every city needs a “Crimes Against Persons Unit,” which would be a local federal police force response to rape, robbery and murder cases. It is absurd and evidence of bad faith for the media or anyone to mis-characterize the term “defund the police” as meaning no response at all to rape, robbery and murder. NO ONE IS ADVOCATING THAT!
Most of the moaning and groaning you hear about regarding progressives’ use of the term “defund the police” is coming from Republicans and police unions who feel their existence is being called into question and sense their end may be near.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Below is the VOX interview of James Carville:
VOX INTERVIEW OF JAMES CARVILLE
What do you make of Biden’s first 100 days?
Honestly, if we’re just talking about Biden, it’s very difficult to find something to complain about. And to me his biggest attribute is that he’s not into “faculty lounge” politics.
“Faculty lounge” politics?
You ever get the sense that people in faculty lounges in fancy colleges use a different language than ordinary people? They come up with a word like “Latinx” that no one else uses. Or they use a phrase like “communities of color.” I don’t know anyone who speaks like that. I don’t know anyone who lives in a “community of color.” I know lots of white and Black and brown people and they all live in … neighborhoods.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with these phrases. But this is not how people talk. This is not how voters talk. And doing it anyway is a signal that you’re talking one language and the people you want to vote for you are speaking another language. This stuff is harmless in one sense, but in another sense it’s not.
Is the problem the language or the fact that there are lots of voters who just don’t want to hear about race and racial injustice?
We have to talk about race. We should talk about racial injustice. What I’m saying is, we need to do it without using jargon-y language that’s unrecognizable to most people — including most Black people, by the way — because it signals that you’re trying to talk around them. This “too cool for school” shit doesn’t work, and we have to stop it.
There may be a group within the Democratic Party that likes this, but it ain’t the majority. And beyond that, if Democrats want power, they have to win in a country where 18 percent of the population controls 52 percent of the Senate seats. That’s a fact. That’s not changing. That’s what this whole damn thing is about.
Sounds like you got a problem with “wokeness,” James.
Wokeness is a problem and everyone knows it. It’s hard to talk to anybody today — and I talk to lots of people in the Democratic Party — who doesn’t say this. But they don’t want to say it out loud.
Because they’ll get clobbered or canceled. And look, part of the problem is that lots of Democrats will say that we have to listen to everybody and we have to include every perspective, or that we don’t have to run a ruthless messaging campaign. Well, you kinda do. It really matters.
I always tell people that we’ve got to stop speaking Hebrew and start speaking Yiddish. We have to speak the way regular people speak, the way voters speak. It ain’t complicated. That’s how you connect and persuade. And we have to stop allowing ourselves to be defined from the outside.
What does that mean?
Take someone like Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She’s obviously very bright. She knows how to draw a headline. In my opinion, some of her political aspirations are impractical and probably not going to happen. But that’s probably the worst thing that you can say about her.
Now take someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene, the new Republican congresswoman from Georgia. She’s absolutely loonier than a tune. We all know it. And yet, for some reason, the Democrats pay a bigger political price for AOC than Republicans pay for Greene. That’s the problem in a nutshell. And it’s ridiculous because AOC and Greene are not comparable in any way.
I hear versions of this argument about language and perception all the time, James. It’s an old problem. What’s the solution?
That’s why I’m doing this interview. Lots of smart people are going to read it, and hopefully they can figure out that which I can’t. But if you’re asking me, I think it’s because large parts of the country view us as an urban, coastal, arrogant party, and a lot gets passed through that filter. That’s a real thing. I don’t give a damn what anyone thinks about it — it’s a real phenomenon, and it’s damaging to the party brand.
Part of the issue is that Republicans are going to paint the Dems as cop-hating, fetus-destroying Stalinists no matter what they say or do. So, yeah, I agree that Democrats should be smart and not say dumb, alienating things, but I’m also not sure how much control they have over how they’re perceived by half the country, especially when that half lives in an alternate media reality.
Right, but we can’t say, “Republicans are going to call us socialists no matter what, so let’s just run as out-and-out socialists.” That’s not the smartest thing to do. And maybe tweeting that we should abolish the police isn’t the smartest thing to do because almost fucking no one wants to do that.
Here’s the deal: No matter how you look at the map, the only way Democrats can hold power is to build on their coalition, and that will have to include more rural white voters from across the country. Democrats are never going to win a majority of these voters. That’s the reality. But the difference between getting beat 80 to 20 and 72 to 28 is all the difference in the world.
So they just have to lose by less — that’s all.
So what do you want the Democrats to do differently besides not having people peddle politically toxic ideas like abolishing the police? How do they change the conversation so that Republicans aren’t defining them by their least popular expressions?
You’re a strategist, James. I want to know what you’d advise them to do. You don’t have any complaints about Biden because he’s getting stuff done. He’s putting money in people’s pockets. But the Democratic Party is a big coalition and you’re always going to have people promoting unpopular ideas, right? Whereas the Republican Party is more homogenous, and that lends itself to a tighter, more controlled message.
Tell me this: How is it we have all this talk about Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Matt Gaetz (R-FL) and we don’t talk about Dennis Hastert, the longest-serving Republican speaker of the House in Congress? If Hastert was a Democrat who we knew had a history of molesting kids and was actually sent to prison in 2016, he’d still be on Fox News every fucking night. The Republicans would never shut the hell up about it.
So when Jim Jordan was pulling all these stunts with Anthony Fauci [Fauci was speaking at a congressional hearing about ending coronavirus precautions], why didn’t someone jump in and say, “Let me tell you something, Jim, if Fauci knew what you knew, if he knew that a doctor was molesting young people, he would’ve gone to the medical board yesterday. So you can go ahead and shut the fuck up.” [Ed. note: Jordan denies knowing about the allegations of abuse when he was an assistant coach at Ohio State University.] I love that Congresswoman Maxine Waters told Jordan to “shut your mouth,” but that’s what I really wish a Democrat would say, and I wish they’d keep saying it over and over again.
Can I step back for a second and give you an example of the broader problem?
Look at Florida. You now have Democrats saying Florida is a lost cause. Really? In 2018 in Florida, giving felons the right to vote got 64 percent. In 2020, a $15 minimum wage, which we have no chance of passing [federally], got 67 percent. Has anyone in the Democratic Party said maybe there’s nothing wrong with the state of Florida? Maybe the problem is the kind of campaigns we’re running?
If you gave me an environment in which the majority of voters wanted to expand the franchise to felons and raise the minimum wage, I should be able to win that. It’s certainly not a political environment I’m destined to lose in. But in Miami-Dade, all they talked about was defunding the police and Kamala Harris being the most liberal senator in the US Senate. And if you look all across the Rio Grande Valley, we lost all kinds of solidly blue voters. And the faculty lounge bullshit is a big part of it.
If you’re a Democrat, you could look at the state of play and say, “We’re winning. We won the White House. We won Congress. We have power. It ain’t perfect, but it ain’t a disaster either.”
We won the White House against a world-historical buffoon. And we came within 42,000 votes of losing. We lost congressional seats. We didn’t pick up state legislatures. So let’s not have an argument about whether or not we’re off-key in our messaging. We are. And we’re off because there’s too much jargon and there’s too much esoterica and it turns people off.
Not to beat a dead horse, but Democrats and Republicans are dealing with very different constituencies. Democrats have a big tent, they have to win different kinds of voters and that means making different kinds of appeals. Republicans can get away with shit that Democrats cannot.
Yeah, that’s a problem. We can only do what we can do. People always say to me, “Why don’t Democrats just lie like Republicans?” Because if they did, our voters wouldn’t stand for it. But I’m not saying we need to lie like they do. I’m saying, why not go after Gaetz and Jordan and link them to Hastert and the Republican Party over and over and over again? We have to take these small opportunities to define ourselves and the other side every damn time. And we don’t do it. We just don’t do it.
“DEMOCRATS ARE NEVER GOING TO WIN A MAJORITY OF THESE VOTERS. … BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GETTING BEAT 80 TO 20 AND 72 TO 28 IS ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD”
Republicans aren’t just more comfortable lying, they’re more comfortable with slogans and sound bites, and that’s partly why they’re more effective at defining themselves and the Democrats.
Let me give you my favorite example of metropolitan, overeducated arrogance. Take the climate problem. Do you realize that climate is the only major social or political movement that I can think of that refuses to use emotion? Where’s the identifiable song? Where’s the bumper sticker? Where’s the slogan? Where’s the flag? Where’s the logo?
We don’t have it because with faculty politics what you do is appeal to reason. You don’t need the sloganeering and sound bites. That’s for simple people. All you need are those timetables and temperature charts, and from that, everyone will just get it.
That’s not how the world works; that’s not how people work. And Republicans are way more disciplined about taking a thing and branding it. Elites will roll their eyes at that, but I’d ask, “How’s that working out for you?” Most people agree with us on health care and minimum wage and Roe v. Wade and even on the climate.
So why can’t we leverage that?
What would you have Biden do to counter some of these messaging problems?
I’d have him pick up a phone. I’d have someone in the White House pick up the phone. And when someone in the party starts this jargon shit, I’d call them and say, “We’re only a vote away. Our approval rating is 60 percent. We got a chance to pick up seats in 2022, and if you did this, it would be very helpful to us.”
Are you sure those calls aren’t happening already?
Maybe they are, but they need to be more effective. And we need more of them.
There’s a philosophy on the left right now, which says the Democrats should pass everything they possibly can, no matter the costs, and trust that the voters will reward them on the back end.
Where do you land on that?
“IMAGINE IF IT WAS A BUNCH OF NONWHITE PEOPLE WHO STORMED THE CAPITOL. IMAGINE HOW REPUBLICANS WOULD EXPLOIT THAT AND MAKE EVERY NEWS CYCLE ABOUT HOW THE DEMS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.”
First of all, the Democratic Party can’t be more liberal than Sen. Joe Manchin. That’s the fact. We don’t have the votes. But I’ll say this, two of the most consequential political events in recent memory happened on the same day in January: the insurrection at the US Capitol and the Democrats winning those two seats in Georgia. Can’t overstate that.
But the Democrats can’t fuck it up. They have to make the Republicans own that insurrection every day. They have to pound it. They have to call bookers on cable news shows. They have to get people to write op-eds. There will be all kinds of investigations and stories dripping out for god knows how long, and the Democrats should spend every day tying all of it to the Republican Party. They can’t sit back and wait for it to happen.
Hell, just imagine if it was a bunch of nonwhite people who stormed the Capitol. Imagine how Republicans would exploit that and make every news cycle about how the Dems are responsible for it. Every political debate would be about that. The Republicans would bludgeon the Democrats with it forever.
So whatever you think Republicans would do to us in that scenario, that’s exactly what the hell we need to do them.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Is Latinx the same as Hispanic?
While the terms are sometimes used interchangeably, for example, by the United States Census Bureau, Hispanic includes people with ancestry from Spain and Latin American Spanish-speaking countries, while Latino includes people from Latin American countries that were formerly colonized by Spain or Portugal.