4 ms·

From the article: But a lot of people on the Clinton campaign tricked themselves into the idea that they didn’t have to placate the social views of racist white

From the article: But a lot of people on the Clinton campaign tricked themselves into the idea that they didn’t have to placate the social views of racist white people. This seems like a pretty important insight and I really wish the interview could have unpacked this a lot better. It seems to be an operating assumption of the Democratic campaign, and I imagine if one is locked into this view (by implacable statistical analysis), then it would be really difficult to hear any other concern as anything but dog-whistling racism. While Shor did somewhat outline his thinking, it would be nice to be able to follow this trail to see why, exactly From the article: There’s a paper by the political scientist David Broockman that made this point really famous — that “moderate” voters don’t have moderate views, just ideologically inconsistent ones. The words a paper in that quote links not to the paper itself, but to a Vox interview, from which all links are to a draft paper that 404. I would like to read this paper for myself, but apparently it has been withdrawn I wonder if David Shor is quick to cite papers that support his preconceptions, rather than let the quality of the papers lead him to conclusions? This is why I would like to actually see the results of these polls and such for his first assertion.

nyanpasu64 6y ago
Took a while to find, but "How Ideological Moderation Conceals Support for Immoderate Policies: A New Perspective on the “Disconnect” in American Politics" http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.688.8618&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.688...
- rendall 6y ago
  Thanks. Oof. 54 pages is no joke. It will take me some time to absorb it
sideshowb 6y ago
I'd like to see that paper too if you find it. Over in the UK, Cummings credits his win of the Brexit campaign to a similar insight about "moderates". (Oh and there's a PG blog on the topic too).
raxxorrax 6y ago
I think it is dead wrong on almost all accounts. I don't think people are widely racists and the accusation wasn't even underhanded, it was very well perceived. That did cost a lot of votes. Especially since the democrats even wanted to penalize people for allegedly being racist. Like a monarch that went crazy. This is really bad overall advice in my opinion. > that “moderate” voters don’t have moderate views, just ideologically inconsistent ones. Anyone advocating ideologically consistent views should be eyed with suspicion. Perhaps people are interested in how their situation can be improved instead of how their alleged opinions can be bettered. Some of those people hoped for a little less hubris, which was in vain if you read stuff like this. Sorry, but it is really that bad and I wonder how these people became sociologists in the first place. To suggest that you can only win an election while appealing to racist white people is so far removed from reality...
- rendall 6y ago
  "I think it is dead wrong on almost all accounts." I suspect it is too, but I would at least like to see the reasoning behind it if any
rayiner 6y ago
His argument doesn’t even make sense within his own theory. Obama-Trump votes correlated strongly with Google searches indicating “racial resentment.” Okay, but why did those people vote for Obama in the first place? Sure, someone could be a racist and vote for Obama, but what changed? Schor says the salience of different issues changes in different elections. That makes sense. But surely race was a highly salient issue during the election of the first Black President. Yet Iowa voted for Obama by almost a 10-point margin in 2008 and for Trump by almost the same 10-point margin in 2016. Wisconsin voted for Obama by a 14 point margin and Michigan by a 17 point margin.
rawgabbit 6y ago
David Shor is a pollster and cannot admit that fact that polls do not tell the whole story, especially with a unpopular candidate like Hillary. Hillary, in America, is loathed by many as a pretentious Marie Antoinette who rode her husband's coat tails and looked down upon the working class. I personally know several folks who voted Democrat their whole life and voted for Trump in 2016. i.e. her infamous deplorables speech. https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorabl... Working class voters saw their manufacturing jobs shipped overseas. They were told to "retrain" to get high tech jobs. They took on a mountain of student loan debt and still could not find jobs that were as good as their manufacturing jobs. Even white collar workers are angry with what they see as corporate malfeasance. e.g. H-1B programs that make it legal to replace American citizens with low paid foreign workers. Under Title 8, of the US Code, you can be imprisoned for six months for hiring an unauthorized alien but with H1-B, the corporations can get away with it. What David Shor and other Democratic Party Elitists describe as "racist white people" are the working class who feel abandoned by the Democrats. I think the working class mostly voted out of frustration in 2016. What worries me is that the Democratic Party Elite still don't get it and will continue to foist tone-deaf candidates on us, who only know to toe the corporate line and ignore the working class who are becoming more and more desperate.

nyanpasu64 6y ago

Took a while to find, but "How Ideological Moderation Conceals Support for Immoderate Policies: A New Perspective on the “Disconnect” in American Politics" http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.688.8618&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.688...

rendall 6y ago
Thanks. Oof. 54 pages is no joke. It will take me some time to absorb it

sideshowb 6y ago

I'd like to see that paper too if you find it. Over in the UK, Cummings credits his win of the Brexit campaign to a similar insight about "moderates". (Oh and there's a PG blog on the topic too).

raxxorrax 6y ago

I think it is dead wrong on almost all accounts. I don't think people are widely racists and the accusation wasn't even underhanded, it was very well perceived. That did cost a lot of votes. Especially since the democrats even wanted to penalize people for allegedly being racist. Like a monarch that went crazy. This is really bad overall advice in my opinion. > that “moderate” voters don’t have moderate views, just ideologically inconsistent ones. Anyone advocating ideologically consistent views should be eyed with suspicion. Perhaps people are interested in how their situation can be improved instead of how their alleged opinions can be bettered. Some of those people hoped for a little less hubris, which was in vain if you read stuff like this. Sorry, but it is really that bad and I wonder how these people became sociologists in the first place. To suggest that you can only win an election while appealing to racist white people is so far removed from reality...

rendall 6y ago
"I think it is dead wrong on almost all accounts." I suspect it is too, but I would at least like to see the reasoning behind it if any

rayiner 6y ago

His argument doesn’t even make sense within his own theory. Obama-Trump votes correlated strongly with Google searches indicating “racial resentment.” Okay, but why did those people vote for Obama in the first place? Sure, someone could be a racist and vote for Obama, but what changed? Schor says the salience of different issues changes in different elections. That makes sense. But surely race was a highly salient issue during the election of the first Black President. Yet Iowa voted for Obama by almost a 10-point margin in 2008 and for Trump by almost the same 10-point margin in 2016. Wisconsin voted for Obama by a 14 point margin and Michigan by a 17 point margin.

rawgabbit 6y ago

David Shor is a pollster and cannot admit that fact that polls do not tell the whole story, especially with a unpopular candidate like Hillary. Hillary, in America, is loathed by many as a pretentious Marie Antoinette who rode her husband's coat tails and looked down upon the working class. I personally know several folks who voted Democrat their whole life and voted for Trump in 2016. i.e. her infamous deplorables speech. https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables-transcript https://time.com/4486502/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorabl... Working class voters saw their manufacturing jobs shipped overseas. They were told to "retrain" to get high tech jobs. They took on a mountain of student loan debt and still could not find jobs that were as good as their manufacturing jobs. Even white collar workers are angry with what they see as corporate malfeasance. e.g. H-1B programs that make it legal to replace American citizens with low paid foreign workers. Under Title 8, of the US Code, you can be imprisoned for six months for hiring an unauthorized alien but with H1-B, the corporations can get away with it. What David Shor and other Democratic Party Elitists describe as "racist white people" are the working class who feel abandoned by the Democrats. I think the working class mostly voted out of frustration in 2016. What worries me is that the Democratic Party Elite still don't get it and will continue to foist tone-deaf candidates on us, who only know to toe the corporate line and ignore the working class who are becoming more and more desperate.