This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Surely just the opposite? Being self-aware of one's own limitations, especially in a context where they sneak up on you like aging does or where they make it harder to be self-aware like cognitive problems can, is much more honorable than letting those limitations hit reality unchecked.
Self-aware would have been to drop out before the debate. Honorable would have been doing what he suggested and being a one-term President.
Nothing about dragging this out, making every Democrat an accomplice and then haranguing them (some of the leaks imply he's not just a stubborn man but a deeply rude one) for complaining that you'll drag the ticket down is sensible or honorable.
The Democratic party may agree to pretend that him stepping down now is some honorable act of service. But that's just a face-saving measure.
Depends how you spin it. As the proverb goes:
More options
Context Copy link
Just depends on the outcome now. If the Dems win both houses of Congress, or even somehow Kamala wins the presidency, then he goes down as an honorable hero who sacrificed to put the country first. If the Dems get wiped out, he's the villain who hung onto power too long, and couldn't hack it, and put them in this position.
I'd say Ds taking the Senate but Rs hold the house and Trump wins the presidency is the neutral gear, and also a quite likely outcome.
If Trump wins the WH, how do Dems win the senate? They are going to lose WV. They would lose the tie break. I don’t see Trump and a dem senate.
Current 270towin map at least has Republicans projected to get to 50, Democrats getting 48, and two states (OH and MT) as toss-ups. Since presidency is tiebreaker, I have to agree with your analysis here. The two least safe seats outside of that are Texas and Florida... yeah, no chance in hell that happens. That means even if they pick up both toss-ups and all their leaners, they still lose a tiebreaker if they lose the presidential race.
More options
Context Copy link
It's unlikely, but not impossible. Strange things happen. I'd probably also give Biden credit if they hold it to 50/50 and then win Vance's seat in the special election.
R Senate candidates have had it rough since Dobbs. Statewide in general. There's always the chance a pretty blonde teenage rape victim dies as a result of a problem pregnancy.
That hasn’t happened, though, the underaged girl denied an abortion by Ohio law was knocked up by her mother’s illegal immigrant boyfriend.
What hasn't happened? Rs have definitely lost winnable races since Dobbs.
And who knows why one case becomes famous and another fades into obscurity. Why are George Floyd and Michael Brown more well known than Philando Castile? It's a mystery, but it does happen.
But have R's lost winnable races due to abortion, or has it been nominating Dr. Oz for some reason?
I'm thinking more of the Kansas abortion referendum as the most indicative, where it lost in every district.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link