Joe Biden: polls of approval and favorability

[David Horn]

(02-01-2021, 12:19 PM)mamabug Wrote:

(02-01-2021, 11:41 AM)David Horn Wrote: To be honest, I'm not sure that's true. You live in the solid Blue Seattle area.  I live in solid Red country, where the Trump signs and flags are still up and show no sign of coming down.  The hold by the rightwing media on the people here keeps that fire stoked and hot.  I don't see it declining soon.

I'm going by sociological studies that indicate hard right is roughly 6% of the population.  For what it's worth, hard left is around 8%.  True, though, that they may not be distributed evenly geographically.  

There is also the issue of what qualifies as "the center" in comparison to other liberal democracies..
See the second chart for US politicians on the international political compass. It's enlightening.  Which brings us back to the question of radicalism and who qualifies.  If Elizabeth Warren is a centrist (both axes) then we've moved far to the authoritarian right as a nation over the last 50 years. If that's true, and my like experience tells me it is, then the fringe right is much larger and more to the fringe, than the fringe left.

mamabug Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:Really?  We are the most conservative advanced world nation on earth -- even to the right of Australia. There is no chance of sliding anywhere close to a leftwing revolution, though the potential for a rightwing attempt is omnipresent. Just ask Classic-Xer.  If anything, we may finally join the rest of the advanced world with universal healthcare and real social security, birth to grave.  It's not an accident that the most entrepreneurial nations on earth are Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands -- all social democracies. The downside risk of business failure is mitigated, encouraging people to take those business risks.  In comparison, we're relatively stagnant.

'Runaway train' revolutions happen when a society gets stuck in a positive feedback loop.  That happens all to easily within groups when anything that might provoke critical thinking of the groups values and ideology are silenced.  For the record, I see this happening on both sides at the moment.  What is critical in a functioning society is for their to be a sizeable, protected minority 'voice' that forces the majority to think critically about it's proposed policies.  In a 1T and 2T that minority is one that pulls us towards needed change, in a 3T or 4T it is more conservative and keeps us from careening off a cliff.  

This still assumes that both sides have radical positions that are nearly equal in intensity and adherence. Sorry, but I just don't see it.  Yes, the radical left is mobilized, but triggers are required to make things happen. It took George Floyd's death to bring them into the streets.  That indicates a negative feedback loop -- one that decays on its own with time.  I don't see that on the right, where this has been percolating along for decades.  Waco and Ruby Ridge are precursors, and the Oklahoma City Bombing is the first true military action.  Are the Proud Boys any less militant and wacky today?  No!

mamabug Wrote:The generic left-wing ideas that have been floating around since the 60's don't worry me all that much.  I think there is room to agree on objectives and quibble over the best way to get there.  There are some truly scary and illiberal ideas coming from the further left that haven't been shut down by the DNC and which are actively promoted by some of its younger members which concerns me.  It is worth remembering that the truly scary 'populists' are cynical politicians positioning themselves as being on the side of change.

Most of the truly whack-nut LW stuff is too fringe sociologically to be the basis of militant action.  Cancel Culture, for example, is an attempt to make things go away with magic.  It's no call to arms.  I agree that the worst actors are cynical politicians looking for their own private armies, but I see none on the left actively encouraging violence (AOC and the Squad aren't asking others to march on <insert the target of choice>), but several on the right have called for specific actions and not been disciplined in the least.  When the GOP throws Marjorie Taylor Greene under the bus, I may become less critical.

mamabug Wrote:

David Horn Wrote:The Golden Rule applies here. Listen to RW talk radio, ignore the talking heads, and concentrate on the politicians being interviewed. The venom is everywhere.  If you want comity, you have to give as well as receive. Right now, the Dems are reacting to the backstabbing they received under Obama and the excesses under Trump. If the Reps want common ground, they need to go first.

I'd be interested to know how dems feel Obama backstabbed them, that isn't a story I hear much.   

Typically, it is the winner who needs to make the first move towards comity, as they are the only ones with the power to realize it.  I'm still withholding judgement on whether the unity being preached will actually move the needle towards real consensus.   Politics is downstream of culture so, in a way, it doesn't matter what the GOP politicians are saying as much as it matters what those who might vote for them are thinking.

Actually, AOC raises the issue of Nobama a lot.  So does Obama himself.  He realized too late that he arrived at a gun fight unarmed. 

But I disagree about the politicians on the right. Several are actively fomenting violence -- even Ted Cruz who usually tries to keep it below boiling. Greene and Boebert are actually threatening other members.  It's the 1850s all over again. If this festers, it will get really bad, and it will all be on the right.