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 -
To be fair, I would also ignore any media organ asking for comment from me on something long ago. In 2022 one reached out about an old college roommate who was running for office, and I sent the email straight to the trash.
I don't think McDonald's headquarters would respond about a private employment matter, and I'm not even sure it would have employment records from almost half a century ago.
Wouldn't the Harris campaign (who were contacted by Snopes) be highly motivated to provide some evidence for this if it were true? They couldn't find one childhood friend who said 'yeah we worked at Mickey D's together'? This has (at least for the next couple of days until the next cycle) blown up to be front and center in the presidential race.
I agree that the Harris campaign would have more motivation than anyone else. I just think this is assuming malice when incompetence is more than sufficient. Campaigns are extremely crazy internally (it's really hard to convey just how crazy they get unless you've been on one), with unclear lines of responsibility and a giant workload that you'll never get fully through. Even if they have Harris' lifetime tax records on hand (they should if they're available, but they might not be), there's no particular reason to think some intern or junior staffer would have an easy line to pass them on to Snopes. And even if they did, the expected benefit of convincing a Snopes reader that Harris worked at McDonald's might be outweighed by other considerations (giving away unrelated information that could provide avenues of attack, or just in setting a precedent).
Even the IRS doesn't keep more than a decade or so of records on hand ... but apparently the Social Security Administration does? With Form SSA-7050-F4, a $144 request for "Detailed Earnings Information" should provide a record which "Includes periods of employment or self-employment and the names or addresses of employers."
I don't see how the timing would have worked out, though. Harris mentioned working at McDonalds while campaigning in 2019, but I can't find mention of Trump calling this a lie until she brought it up at the end of this August, by which time it would have already been too late for the SSA to provide evidence. ("Please allow SSA 120 days to process", after which point you may call to "leave an inquiry" about why it still hasn't been processed, after which point I guess you just get to enjoy the sloth scene from Zootopia more.)
Huh. Didn't know that. If I were vetting candidates to be VP, I would almost require that they submit their detailed earnings report and their tax returns, so it would surprise me if she didn't have it from 2019.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Have you worked in a big campaign? I think it would be fun and enlightening if you shared your experiences on the thread!
All I know comes from West Wing and I have a feeling that the reality is way more regarded than the typical mass media depiction.
I recall talking to someone in the industry in some social event like a decade ago and being told that real life is much closer to Veep than to West Wing, except that Veep depicted everyone as far more competent than the real-life versions. I imagine they were being facetious, but I chose to take it at face value and believe it unironically, and the older I get, the more I think that was correct.
More options
Context Copy link
Democratic Senate campaign, prominent at the time but losing, and I was lowest level paid staffer. Also a mayoral campaign for a major city but minor candidate.
It is indeed very regarded, but my personal experiences were dominated by 1) having a giant crush on the press secretary I worked under, 2) pretending to be the candidate to call major donors' offices, and then transferring to him if his secretary said they were available, repeat. Also, going to a strip club where every stripper was 50+ after a major victory. At one point we had a freakout over baking soda being sent in the mail (accompanied by an abortion letter).
The only real insight I have is that any conspiracy theory requiring that Democratic candidates and staffers be hyper competent ideologues is wildly off-base.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Fair enough.
The New York Times has now seemed to find a friend that got told second hand by Harris's deceased mother that Harris was working there.
“Donald Trump claims, without evidence” is essentially the same statement Trump has made about Kamala’s fast food job.
It’s Harris that has made the positive claim and Trump says there’s no evidence.
More options
Context Copy link
Am I missing something? That doesn't seem like very compelling evidence.
It's not really. The New York Times' investigative branch can only find hearsay and Snopes can't find anything. I am trying to steelman the argument that Harris was telling the truth and this is all I can come up with.
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