[Discussion] The 2018 Midterms Catch-All

News and discussion related to the 2018 midterms.

Maybe Democrats could just own the term "Democrat Party" and then it couldn't be used as a slur anymore. Kind of like other groups have done with other words intended to be slurs against them. If every time someone, intentionally or by accident, says "Democrat Party" only to cause a whole bunch of people to get all freaked out about it, then those intending it as a slur have accomplished their goal of getting folks all riled up.

They could but it a move the goal posts type scenario. Those that use the term disparagingly will just find another way to demean their foes.

The way to own it is to simply call out anyone who uses it and ask them if they are either so f*cking stupid that they don't know the proper name of the only other major political party in the country or they're just being a petty asshole.

OG_slinger wrote:

The way to own it is to simply call out anyone who uses it and ask them if they are either so f*cking stupid that they don't know the proper name of the only other major political party in the country or they're just being a petty asshole.

So making people angry and defensive about it is going to have the results you want? If they weren't intentionally using it before, they would certainly be using it after that sort of reaction.

bekkilyn wrote:

So making people angry and defensive about it is going to have the results you want? If they weren't intentionally using it before, they would certainly be using it after that sort of reaction.

It feels like they came into the situation angry and offensive so I am not sure the situation is worse.

farley3k wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

So making people angry and defensive about it is going to have the results you want? If they weren't intentionally using it before, they would certainly be using it after that sort of reaction.

It feels like they came into the situation angry and offensive so I am not sure the situation is worse.

I'm not really talking about the relatively small number of people who are doing it intentionally just to be jerks, but what is probably the majority of people who really don't know the difference and really never thought about it before. I don't feel that jumping all over them and calling them stupid the very moment they slip up is a very productive way of handling the situation.

And then the people who *are* doing it to be jerks are even more entertained by the reactions they are getting and will troll even more.

bekkilyn wrote:

So making people angry and defensive about it is going to have the results you want? If they weren't intentionally using it before, they would certainly be using it after that sort of reaction.

So we should be nice to mean bullies otherwise they're going to be meaner bullies?

How they decide to react after getting called out for their petty behavior is up to them. What I'm not going to do is accept their intentional (and malevolent) misnaming of a political party and its members, especially a party that it literally larger and more representative of American than theirs.

And it's not like conservative politicians (or voters) have been helpful and cooperative--or even acted in the interests of the average American citizen or the entire country--when they weren't getting called out for being petty assholes.

These are people who have promoted the idea since the 90s at least that political compromise is not just bad, but the root cause of all the things they don't like. These are the people who pushed for wildly more radical candidates after 2008 and wanted to absolutely make sure those candidates would pledge to not cooperate with Democrats ("compromise is a four-letter word"). Things aren't going to get better on that front until moderates either take back the GOP or start a 3rd party.

bekkilyn wrote:

I'm not really talking about the relatively small number of people who are doing it intentionally just to be jerks, but what is probably the majority of people who really don't know the difference and really never thought about it before. I don't feel that jumping all over them and calling them stupid the very moment they slip up is a very productive way of handling the situation.

And then the people who *are* doing it to be jerks are even more entertained by the reactions they are getting and will troll even more.

We're talking about this now because a freakin' sitting member of Congress said "Democrat party" instead of "Democratic party." As I said before, what this means is that at best dropping the "ic" has become so common in conservative circles that they honestly think the Democratic party is really called the Democrat party. It doesn't bode well for the future of our country if that level of lazy ignorance is just accepted--nay, encouraged lest we hurt their feelings--in one political party.

OG_slinger wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

So making people angry and defensive about it is going to have the results you want? If they weren't intentionally using it before, they would certainly be using it after that sort of reaction.

So we should be nice to mean bullies otherwise they're going to be meaner bullies?

How they decide to react after getting called out for their petty behavior is up to them. What I'm not going to do is accept their intentional (and malevolent) misnaming of a political party and its members, especially a party that it literally larger and more representative of American than theirs.

And it's not like conservative politicians (or voters) have been helpful and cooperative--or even acted in the interests of the average American citizen or the entire country--when they weren't getting called out for being petty assholes.

These are people who have promoted the idea since the 90s at least that political compromise is not just bad, but the root cause of all the things they don't like. These are the people who pushed for wildly more radical candidates after 2008 and wanted to absolutely make sure those candidates would pledge to not cooperate with Democrats ("compromise is a four-letter word"). Things aren't going to get better on that front until moderates either take back the GOP or start a 3rd party.

bekkilyn wrote:

I'm not really talking about the relatively small number of people who are doing it intentionally just to be jerks, but what is probably the majority of people who really don't know the difference and really never thought about it before. I don't feel that jumping all over them and calling them stupid the very moment they slip up is a very productive way of handling the situation.

And then the people who *are* doing it to be jerks are even more entertained by the reactions they are getting and will troll even more.

We're talking about this now because a freakin' sitting member of Congress said "Democrat party" instead of "Democratic party." As I said before, what this means is that at best dropping the "ic" has become so common in conservative circles that they honestly think the Democratic party is really called the Democrat party. It doesn't bode well for the future of our country if that level of lazy ignorance is just accepted--nay, encouraged lest we hurt their feelings--in one political party.

While I largely agree with you about the bullies, you didn't limit what you said to just the bullies who are using it as an intentional slur. And while I do understand the anger, it plays right into the hands of the bullies. Fact is, it's not just people in conservative circles who think it's called Democrat Party, it's a whole bunch of everyone else, including many liberals. I'm sure the same thing would have happened if the Republican party had been the "Republicanic Party" and the Democratic party was the "Democrat Party". Putting an "ic" on one and no "ic" on the other isn't consistent, so people are going to be inclined to treat both parties the same. Many people (maybe even most) aren't going to understand why someone gets all bent out of shape just because they left out the "ic" when the Republican party doesn't have an "ic". For many people, it likely falls under the "who cares?" category, and if some of those people happen to be conservatives, they're going to roll their eyes about yet one more silly thing that liberals get upset about.

bekkilyn wrote:

While I largely agree with you about the bullies, you didn't limit what you said to just the bullies who are using it as an intentional slur. And while I do understand the anger, it plays right into the hands of the bullies. Fact is, it's not just people in conservative circles who think it's called Democrat Party, it's a whole bunch of everyone else, including many liberals. I'm sure the same thing would have happened if the Republican party had been the "Republicanic Party" and the Democratic party was the "Democrat Party". Putting an "ic" on one and no "ic" on the other isn't consistent, so people are going to be inclined to treat both parties the same. Many people (maybe even most) aren't going to understand why someone gets all bent out of shape just because they left out the "ic" when the Republican party doesn't have an "ic". For many people, it likely falls under the "who cares?" category, and if some of those people happen to be conservatives, they're going to roll their eyes about yet one more silly thing that liberals get upset about.

There is no one doing this accidentally. This hypothetical confused person either carefully fomented their ignorance in a stewpot of dismissive contempt, or they've managed to spend a lifetime never accidentally hearing or seeing someone from the other Party speak or write about the Democratic party and wonder why that sounded funny. Libral tears, LOL. *Calvin peeing on something American*

Edit: To be clear... The people you are describing have a Russian term: Useful Innocents.
Edit2: And this entire discussion keeps making me think of this clip so now I'm going to inflict it on you all. https://youtu.be/dyTa0NZV7Bg?t=157

Rezzy wrote:

There is no one doing this accidentally.

Man, really? Noun adjuncts are incredibly common in English, and adjectival forms of words don't always get used correctly in that construction. You'll call your hockey goalie mask a "face mask" instead of a "facial mask", for example, or talk about the "cell cycle" in biology instead of the "cellular cycle". It's really not that big of a stretch to imagine that someone reaching for a noun adjunct for a political party would land on the more commonly heard noun ("Democrat") than the adjectival inflection of that word ("Democratic"). Attributing it to malice or malicious ignorance is silly; this is just how language gets used and evolves over time.

Hot take: even if Gingrinch and company hadn't ever said a god damn thing about it, people would still use "Democrat Party", only instead of ruffling partisan feathers it would only rankle pedants.

In a weird void world where there is no one else using Democratic? Maybe. This world where every other mailer during an election, every subtitle, every billboard uses it correctly? Give me a break. There's only so much willfull ignorance that can be attributed to language evolving especially when the overwhelming usage comes from just one side. Show me a mainstream candidate, talking head, pundit from the Democratic party, a party mailer, a fundraising letter, a banner over a podium using 'Democrat Party' and I will concede the point.

I definitely would have used them interchangeably until reading this thread. Even after reading it's hard for me to distinguish between them, much less make the word Democrat sound distasteful in my mind.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

Gingrinch

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Even after reading it's hard for me to distinguish between them, much less make the word Democrat sound distasteful in my mind.

Democrat Party. Maybe it's my German roots, but for 'mouthfeel' it's like saying United States of Americ.

Rezzy wrote:

In a weird void world where there is no one else using Democratic? Maybe. This world where every other mailer during an election, every subtitle, every billboard uses it correctly? Give me a break. There's only so much willfull ignorance that can be attributed to language evolving especially when the overwhelming usage comes from just one side. Show me a mainstream candidate, talking head, pundit from the Democratic party, a party mailer, a fundraising letter, a banner over a podium using 'Democrat Party' and I will concede the point.

I've been talking about regular, everyday people, not people who make politics into a profession. Of course a professional (or serious hobbyist or volunteer) would know all the (grammatically-correct) buzzwords of a given field.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

I definitely would have used them interchangeably until reading this thread. Even after reading it's hard for me to distinguish between them, much less make the word Democrat sound distasteful in my mind.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

Gingrinch

:)

I know...if "Democrat" was such an awful word, why would Democrats be Democrats rather than Democratics?

bekkilyn wrote:

I've been talking about regular, everyday people, not people who make politics into a profession.

Either you have a really low opinion of people or I overestimate them. Either way this discussion is depressing. Two main parties and enough people have bought into a decades long mind-f*ck campaign to not even know the name of one of them despite a continuous barrage of evidence. Ultimately it boils down to respect. Not using the name they ask you to use is rude and continuing despite polite protestation is disrespectful. And now here we are.

If I have a party and invite a bunch of penguins, it's a Penguin Party.
If you have a party and invite a bunch of swingers, it's a Swinger Party.
A party with a bunch of people wearing pajamas is a Pajama Party.
Similarly, the Republicans have the Republican Party and the Libertarians have the Libertarian Party.
So what do the Democrats have?

I know that it's the Democratic Party. I generally just refer to them as "the Democrats". I also had no idea until reading the last couple pages of this thread that "Democrat Party" was any kind of insult, although I've never heard anyone use it. I would have just figured it was someone who didn't care enough about what it was actually called. People get names wrong all the time. I certainly won't ever use the incorrect term now that I know there's some negative connotation to it.

Also, maybe some people just think they're two different names for the same thing. For example, I know that "soda" refers to an often delicious drink and "pop" is just a noise, but there's just no arguing with some people.

To get back on topic, though, just when I thought my opinion of Mississippi couldn't get any lower they go and elect Hyde-Smith again despite all her idiotic remarks.

The best kind of gaslighting is when you can have people that don't even really care one way or the other justify the ongoing attack.

Again and again.

Propaganda works, kids. Merry Christmas! <- We're bringing it back, baby!

Out of all the things the Republicans have done in terms of information warfare, getting people to call the Party of Democrats the Democrat Party is pretty much the lamest of their dirty tricks. Heck, they've done worse just calling the Democrats...Democrats

Just change the name of the party to Gritty Has a Posse

I would sign up for that party.

IMAGE(https://www.dailydot.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Dpu_LYMUYAAQsWZ.jpg)

There's some crazy stuff going down in Wisconsin. The GOP lost the Governorship and Attorney General races, but still has control of the legislature due to heavy gerrymandering. The Republicans have decided to see if they can take the North Carolina playbook to the next level, and just introduced a stack of legislation on Friday that would transfer a lot of power from the offices they lost back to the (again, heavily gerrymandered) legislature. The bills get one day of hearings on Monday, and a vote on Tuesday.

Thread covering it, with sources, starts here:
https://twitter.com/benwikler/status/1068785267157360640

Some highlights!
- Legislators would be able to intervene in any case where state law is being challenged, and appoint private attorneys to handle it instead of the AG, and at taxpayer expense. This would effectively kill a pending case challenging said heavy gerrymandering.
- Restrict the governor's ability to change the voter ID requirements, and limit early voting to 2 weeks, down from up to 6 in some places.
- Move the state primary election a month earlier. Why? Because there's a far-right state Supreme Court justice up for election on the same date as the primary is currently scheduled for, which means higher turnout and more risk of losing that election. Move the primary, reduce turnout for the SC race. That would also mean that there would then be three state-wide elections scheduled within three months. Every county clerk in the state is opposed to this plan, because it's nuts.
- Prevent the new AG from withdrawing the state from the lawsuit aiming to kill ACA pre-existing conditions protection. This was one of the new AG's core campaign promises.
- Force the new governor to implement Walker's last minute Medicaid work requirements, and force him to get legislative approval for any changes to the federal waiver program.
- Prevent the new governor from banning guns inside the Capitol.

Rezzy wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

I've been talking about regular, everyday people, not people who make politics into a profession.

Either you have a really low opinion of people or I overestimate them. Either way this discussion is depressing. Two main parties and enough people have bought into a decades long mind-f*ck campaign to not even know the name of one of them despite a continuous barrage of evidence. Ultimately it boils down to respect. Not using the name they ask you to use is rude and continuing despite polite protestation is disrespectful. And now here we are.

One of things I've had to learn in life is that what comes naturally to me doesn't come naturally to other people and vice versa. It's not that they're stupid but they have different gifts, talents, priorities, interests, etc. than I do. Most people would have no clue there was a decades long campaign even if they've never watched FOX news. Most people really aren't all that political. They just choose whatever party to belong to (or no party) and when elections come up, they just vote for that party or for whatever issues they deem important. This goes for people who are professional rocket scientists as well as those who may not have an 8th grade education.

I agree it is rude to not use the name you are asked to use, but that goes more into the "bully" category than for those who are just unaware there is even a problem and aren't actively attempting to be malicious.

NPR: Amid Fraud Allegations, State Election Board Won't Certify North Carolina House Race

November's unreturned ballots were disproportionately associated with minorities, according to the News & Observer:

More than 40 percent of the ballots requested by African Americans and more than 60 percent of those requested by American Indians did not make it back to elections officials. For white voters, that figure was just 17 percent.

In one affidavit received by the board, a woman named Emma Shipman said she was visited by a person who claimed to be gathering absentee ballots, WFAE reported.

Shipman said she filled out the form while the woman waited outside. "She took the ballot and put it in an envelope and never sealed it or asked me to sign it. Then she left."

Collecting absentee ballots by a third party is illegal. But, Shipman said, "Because of the way she presented herself, I thought she was legitimate."

bekkilyn wrote:

I agree it is rude to not use the name you are asked to use, but that goes more into the "bully" category than for those who are just unaware there is even a problem and aren't actively attempting to be malicious.

We're pretty much in agreement, EXCEPT that being tricked into passive aggressively bullying someone and then making excuses for it when it is pointed out isn't a good look. We can do better. The whole people 'arriving at Democrat Party via First Principles' thing is utter bullsh*t while evidence that uses the actual name is all over the place. They use it because they were exposed to the disrespect again and again and never questioned it. Rationalizing it after the fact is the whole point of the propaganda. Being a useful innocent and then defending that role with claims of 'common sense' means it worked. The fix is for the people using it to stop or accept that they are willful cogs in a campaign to disrespect political opponents of the Republican Party. Full stop.

I'm an immigrant-raised atheist progressive living in the MidWest. This kind of sh*t is pervasive and dangerous and plays into the discord being sown by those that would see this country tear itself apart. It's a fantastically effective campaign when you look at how few Republicans ever use 'Democratic Party' in any communication with the media anymore. It's purposeful, malicious, and too many people have adopted it with spiteful glee and are dragging along useful innocents to amplify the damage. Ignoring it is dangerous for me because the other campaigns riding the coattails of this one are penis=male, abortion=murder, America=Christian, and all the other subtle little verbal ticks that try to immanentize the Eschaton.

It's important, even if it doesn't seem like it, and we can do better.

And with that I think I've said all I should and probably more, but if we wanna explore Propagandized Disrespect and purposeful cultivation of language and culture then maybe a thread is in order.

Thanks!

Rezzy wrote:

We're pretty much in agreement, EXCEPT that being tricked into passive aggressively bullying someone and then making excuses for it when it is pointed out isn't a good look. We can do better.

I actually agree with you on this one too. There is really no excuse for any sort of bullying.