5 ms·

When party X acts wrongly, it hands a win to party Y. Here, the Arizona GOP is handing Arizona Democrats an easy moral victory. When you no longer support som

When party X acts wrongly, it hands a win to party Y. Here, the Arizona GOP is handing Arizona Democrats an easy moral victory. When you no longer support something as essential as open records, you’ve sunk to despotism. Open records should generally be like a ratchet: once clicked, you can’t go back.

duxup 4y ago
I’ve found, to my disappointment, that important but subtle nuances of government don’t seem to motivate voters :(
- irrational 4y ago
  subtle?
  - duxup 4y ago
    Yes, my bad.
snarf21 4y ago
Who will watch the watchers? This should reiterate to everyone that the real enemy is not an R or a D but power at any cost and the money that enables it.
- Fezzik 4y ago
  From the very beginning of the article this resulted from “new rules adopted by majority Republicans over vigorous opposition from minority Democrats.” Which is not to exempt Democrats from any due criticism, but this is in fact a problem from only one side of the aisle.
  - bluGill 4y ago
    Is it, or is the minority of Democrats only not doing it because the Republicans are, but they would be happy to do it if they were a majority - and the minority Republicans would scream about how bad it was. I wish the above cynicism wasn't well warranted in many cases.
munk-a 4y ago
I think we're coming up on and partially into a serious issue here though - when the partisanship gets to a certain point "X acts wrongly" is no longer accepted as fact or viewed important by the X voters. At a certain point "X acts wrongly" is viewed (either by the voters or by partisan media) as so inconsequential compared to the "evils" of Y that X remains the correct choice. There is always some level of this - that's perfectly natural, in our minds a lot of things go into decisions. However, we've reached the point where corruption, embracing antivax, and pursuing underage partners - all amongst a plethora of other examples... those are no longer ills strong enough to lower X below the level of Y in the eyes of a very significant portion of the electorship.
- TylerE 4y ago
  It's even worse than that. X voters don't think X is wrong, and they're being persecuted by Y.
- tshaddox 4y ago
  > At a certain point "X acts wrongly" is viewed (either by the voters or by partisan media) as so inconsequential compared to the "evils" of Y that X remains the correct choice. Surely that can be a valid conclusion of a reasonable person though, right? Party X can just actually be better than Party Y and that can still be true when Party X does some bad things. In my view, this doesn't become problematic partisanship until a significant chunk of value someone is getting from their party comes from their own sense of identity as a supporter of that party, because that sense of identity has nothing to do with the policies or other actions of the party in question: it's by definition completely divorced from any serious political estimation of the virtues and ills of a party.
  - munk-a 4y ago
    I completely agree with you about it being a valid conclusion from a reasonable person. I think we all do that to some extent - we're always softer on "our team"... but it's also quite rational to look at a minor corruption scandal and feel it's outweighed by a politician's view on some highly sensitive topic like reproductive rights. The issue is that we're taking it to extremes.
tptacek 4y ago
Well then, a surprising number of states are despotic, because deliberative process privilege is indeed textbook public records law.
BaseballPhysics 4y ago
> Here, the Arizona GOP is handing the Arizona Democrats an easy moral victory. You're assuming morals play any role in the modern world of extreme partisan politics. If the last 6 years has proven anything, it's that partisan affiliation is more powerful than morals or good governance for at least 40% of the US population.
- munk-a 4y ago
  > for at least 40% of the US population. I think the GOP hardline is about 35% of the population - those are voters politicians could eat babies in front of without losing their votes. I think politics is pretty symmetrical (but not fully) so I think it's pretty safe to bump your estimate up to 60% of the US population... depending on how cynical you are I don't think 80% is out of the question. People who don't just look at D or R on a ballot are in the minority of American voters.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    No, it is more like 23+/-5% of population is hard line Democrat, 23+/-5% of the population is hard line Republican, people in both of those groups will vote the party no matter what, "politicians could eat babies in front of without losing their votes" from either camp 54% of the population are combination of Independents or Single Issue Voters. That is what sets the outcome of national elections
vkou 4y ago
If moral victories could actually turn into political victories, this country would have purged the entirety of one party, and most of the other party decades ago. Instead, winning is seen as more important than doing the right thing, and, well, we get the exact consequence of those values.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Alupis 4y ago
> Here, the Arizona GOP is handing Arizona Democrats an easy moral victory. Right, and just like with the Georgia voting laws, it doesn't matter that a bunch of other states already have similar laws and/or the new law is a return to the status quo - it only matters when it's the "other side" that does it. Now, that's what motivates people to vote, apparently.

duxup 4y ago

I’ve found, to my disappointment, that important but subtle nuances of government don’t seem to motivate voters :(

irrational 4y ago
subtle?
- duxup 4y ago
  Yes, my bad.

snarf21 4y ago

Who will watch the watchers? This should reiterate to everyone that the real enemy is not an R or a D but power at any cost and the money that enables it.

Fezzik 4y ago
From the very beginning of the article this resulted from “new rules adopted by majority Republicans over vigorous opposition from minority Democrats.” Which is not to exempt Democrats from any due criticism, but this is in fact a problem from only one side of the aisle.
- bluGill 4y ago
  Is it, or is the minority of Democrats only not doing it because the Republicans are, but they would be happy to do it if they were a majority - and the minority Republicans would scream about how bad it was. I wish the above cynicism wasn't well warranted in many cases.

munk-a 4y ago

I think we're coming up on and partially into a serious issue here though - when the partisanship gets to a certain point "X acts wrongly" is no longer accepted as fact or viewed important by the X voters. At a certain point "X acts wrongly" is viewed (either by the voters or by partisan media) as so inconsequential compared to the "evils" of Y that X remains the correct choice. There is always some level of this - that's perfectly natural, in our minds a lot of things go into decisions. However, we've reached the point where corruption, embracing antivax, and pursuing underage partners - all amongst a plethora of other examples... those are no longer ills strong enough to lower X below the level of Y in the eyes of a very significant portion of the electorship.

TylerE 4y ago
It's even worse than that. X voters don't think X is wrong, and they're being persecuted by Y.
tshaddox 4y ago
> At a certain point "X acts wrongly" is viewed (either by the voters or by partisan media) as so inconsequential compared to the "evils" of Y that X remains the correct choice. Surely that can be a valid conclusion of a reasonable person though, right? Party X can just actually be better than Party Y and that can still be true when Party X does some bad things. In my view, this doesn't become problematic partisanship until a significant chunk of value someone is getting from their party comes from their own sense of identity as a supporter of that party, because that sense of identity has nothing to do with the policies or other actions of the party in question: it's by definition completely divorced from any serious political estimation of the virtues and ills of a party.
- munk-a 4y ago
  I completely agree with you about it being a valid conclusion from a reasonable person. I think we all do that to some extent - we're always softer on "our team"... but it's also quite rational to look at a minor corruption scandal and feel it's outweighed by a politician's view on some highly sensitive topic like reproductive rights. The issue is that we're taking it to extremes.

tptacek 4y ago

Well then, a surprising number of states are despotic, because deliberative process privilege is indeed textbook public records law.

BaseballPhysics 4y ago

> Here, the Arizona GOP is handing the Arizona Democrats an easy moral victory. You're assuming morals play any role in the modern world of extreme partisan politics. If the last 6 years has proven anything, it's that partisan affiliation is more powerful than morals or good governance for at least 40% of the US population.

munk-a 4y ago
> for at least 40% of the US population. I think the GOP hardline is about 35% of the population - those are voters politicians could eat babies in front of without losing their votes. I think politics is pretty symmetrical (but not fully) so I think it's pretty safe to bump your estimate up to 60% of the US population... depending on how cynical you are I don't think 80% is out of the question. People who don't just look at D or R on a ballot are in the minority of American voters.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  No, it is more like 23+/-5% of population is hard line Democrat, 23+/-5% of the population is hard line Republican, people in both of those groups will vote the party no matter what, "politicians could eat babies in front of without losing their votes" from either camp 54% of the population are combination of Independents or Single Issue Voters. That is what sets the outcome of national elections

vkou 4y ago

If moral victories could actually turn into political victories, this country would have purged the entirety of one party, and most of the other party decades ago. Instead, winning is seen as more important than doing the right thing, and, well, we get the exact consequence of those values.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Alupis 4y ago

> Here, the Arizona GOP is handing Arizona Democrats an easy moral victory. Right, and just like with the Georgia voting laws, it doesn't matter that a bunch of other states already have similar laws and/or the new law is a return to the status quo - it only matters when it's the "other side" that does it. Now, that's what motivates people to vote, apparently.