If liberals didn’t participate in the justice system we’d all be screwed when the 100% conservative judicial system passed whatever vile laws Trump could think of.
You remain Pure by staying out of difficult roles in politics, but that doesn’t help anyone.
Enthusiastic is the one word you missed that is pretty important for the message sammich is saying there.
Have there ever been any high ranking public defenders? I can't think of a one but rather than Harris I'd rather have someone like that.
High ranking what? How the heck would you become a high ranking "thankless public service job that nobody wants to fund or even pretend is important"? It's basically anathema to the whole concept of high ranking.
Generally if you're on the fast track in law you wouldn't be caught dead near a PD job. Which is horrible and stupid but the system we've got.
Have there ever been any high ranking public defenders? I can't think of a one but rather than Harris I'd rather have someone like that.
High ranking what? How the heck would you become a high ranking "thankless public service job that nobody wants to fund or even pretend is important"? It's basically anathema to the whole concept of high ranking.
Generally if you're on the fast track in law you wouldn't be caught dead near a PD job. Which is horrible and stupid but the system we've got.
Yeah I know traditionally they are not given high positions but Democrats would do well to elevate those people.
There are plenty of high-speed lawyers who are public defenders early in their career. Their pay/importance is also far from uniform—a Delware PD, for example, is hitting six-figures in a couple of years.
The perception of few “high-ranking” defenders is because rising in defense work generally means switching to private practice where there’s far more money/prestige. By contrast, promotion for prosecutors stays in government service.
I don’t think “Copmala” is killing Harris’ campaign, but I do think it’s telling that she can’t come up with something to balance it out.
As others have said, she hasn’t really laid why she should be President. I hate to use the phrase “inspiring candidate,” but you have to be about something more than “I am politician, give me power, om nom.”
Of course, I think who the candidate is should be of secondary importance to removing Trump from power. It’s always better to get 30% or 40% of what you want than 0%, however much it stings.
If the Dems run Skeletor, every voter left of Lindsey Graham should be planting campaign signs and smiling while they do it.
I think there would/will be a lot more analysis of harris' record if/when she becomes more of a challenge to the front-runners; right now nobody's hitting her because there isn't much reason to hit her
I do think her record as a prosecutor makes her look bad; she seems to have had the view that every problem could be solved by prosecuting someone (truancy, drug abuse, etc) which doesn't exactly bode well for her performance in an office that has vastly more power at its direction
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
ALRIGHT FINE I GOT AN AVATAR
Steam: adamjnet
+3
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
The most recent debate may have changed people's minds.
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
Prophesies are nonsense. Magic cannot see into the future.
issue with Warren coming across as an educator is that it implies a power imbalance - i am educating you, meaning i am smarter than you and have authority over you
this is broadly what people don't like about liberals - the sense of constantly being treated like they're stupid for not getting it
It's not an insurmountable issue, and honestly one that's going to be everpresent regardless. I don't think you're going to find any Democrats that opponents won't attempt to qualify as 'smug' regardless of their actual conduct.
It's not an insurmountable issue, and honestly one that's going to be everpresent regardless. I don't think you're going to find any Democrats that opponents won't attempt to qualify as 'smug' regardless of their actual conduct.
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
Things change. Warren has been the only candidate seeing what looks like a real shift in the polls recently, so this might just be another part of that.
It is an unusually good poll for Warren, showing her leading nationally. It's probably a little generous, but yeah. That could be the Bernie supporters tuning more as the debate schedule increases and noticing how he and Warren are ideological (and political, honestly) allies.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
Things change. Warren has been the only candidate seeing what looks like a real shift in the polls recently, so this might just be another part of that.
So far it looks mostly like her pulling politically active and relatively well off voters from the also-rans.
This is of course good for her but these are likely safe votes anyway. Crimson King is talking about her ability to appeal to less dedicated voters and given her numbers with undereducated and poor voters theres remaining cause for concern
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
Things change. Warren has been the only candidate seeing what looks like a real shift in the polls recently, so this might just be another part of that.
So far it looks mostly like her pulling politically active and relatively well off voters from the also-rans.
This is of course good for her but these are likely safe votes anyway. Crimson King is talking about her ability to appeal to less dedicated voters and given her numbers with undereducated and poor voters theres remaining cause for concern
Who knows how those will show themselves. Probably once a candidate says something meme worthy
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The whole "they don't like her because they don't like teachers" thing feels perilously close to "they don't like because they're stupid." I also don't think using such a broad and nebulous generalization to diagnose a specific problem is going to work very well.
There are plenty of reasons someone might not support, or even like, Warren that aren't some deep-seeded anti-education bias.
I'm a Warren supporter, but I can understand why someone might not be.
The whole "they don't like her because they don't like teachers" thing feels perilously close to "they don't like because they're stupid." I also don't think using such a broad and nebulous generalization to diagnose a specific problem is going to work very well.
There are plenty of reasons someone might not support, or even like, Warren that aren't some deep-seeded anti-education bias.
I'm a Warren supporter, but I can understand why someone might not be.
That's not really the idea. It's a communication style thing not an anti education thing.
The whole "they don't like her because she sounds like she's smarter then them" mostly seems like some random thing that isn't supported by any evidence.
I'm not sure what the basis of it is supposed to be.
Theres two seprate claims there. "These voters dont like teachers" is nonsensical gibberish, but "these voters already feel like Democrats are too condescending and her professorial speaking style does her no favors in this regard" is likely true.
Theres no seprate claims there. "These voters dont like teachers" is nonsensical gibberish, but "these voters already feel like Democrats are too condescending and her professorial speaking style does her no favors in this regard" is likely true.
We will see as time goes on. If her numbers solidify there, then it isn't true.
Sadly for all our speculation, time will supply the only evidence we are going to get.
Theres no seprate claims there. "These voters dont like teachers" is nonsensical gibberish, but "these voters already feel like Democrats are too condescending and her professorial speaking style does her no favors in this regard" is likely true.
Theres no seprate claims there. "These voters dont like teachers" is nonsensical gibberish, but "these voters already feel like Democrats are too condescending and her professorial speaking style does her no favors in this regard" is likely true.
I agree with this. It's not fair to Warren, but it's the truth.
I've plugged this before, but Tom Nichols wrote a book about this stuff and there are absolutely segments of the population that feel looked down upon, frustrated, with. and angry at people they view as "smarter" than them.
It's all conjecture, but conjecture provides insight on the mindset of others, allowing you to tailor your future arguments for maximum effect.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The whole "they don't like her because she sounds like she's smarter then them" mostly seems like some random thing that isn't supported by any evidence.
I'm not sure what the basis of it is supposed to be.
It's the inverse if the "Seems like someone I'd like to have a beer with" effect.
i mean a lot of the people our society chooses to recognise as "smart" are actually pretty dumb. university professors are often very bad at their jobs, for example
I agree her failure to gain traction is more a symptom of lacking a message or niche and not her record but claims that criticisms of her record are bad faith or whatever are dumb.
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
Prophesies are nonsense. Magic cannot see into the future.
It's not prophecy, it's people admitting who they'd vote for in second place. Prophecy would be saying this is true without doing any polling to gauge the voting populations feeling on the subject.
i mean a lot of the people our society chooses to recognise as "smart" are actually pretty dumb. university professors are often very bad at their jobs, for example
The university professors I know are very smart, smarter than me for sure.
I would bet that most university professors have a lot of expertise in their field of study. The problem is when you extrapolate ‘they are smart here, so they must be smart there as well’
See: Ben Carson.
It’s why I’m very endeared by Warren just straight up taking other people’s plans on things and saying ‘yes, that’s good, let’s do that.’ Being smart enough to know when they’ve heard a good idea, even if it isn’t theirs, is a quality I really want on a President.
i mean a lot of the people our society chooses to recognise as "smart" are actually pretty dumb. university professors are often very bad at their jobs, for example
The university professors I know are very smart, smarter than me for sure.
In context one would hope so. But smart people in one subject can be not smart in others.
My dad was a Professor of History and he was a smart guy in his field but (RIP Dad) was a complete idiot when it came to things like money. He grew up very poor and even though he had a good job his kids also grew up pretty (but less) poor. Because he was a Prof, many of my childhood friends were from that culture and it always amazed me how rich they were.
“Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
― Marcus Aurelius
Oh yeah, they aren’t universal geniuses or anything but they are always very sharp and interesting to talk to. I like academics.
Me too, but that exact thing can feel intimidating and condescending. It's not guaranteed - you can be an academic and not come off that way. I'm not sure Warren pulls it off.
The elements of being "smart" are not necessarily proportional or related. Most intellectual achievements are gained by experience and hard work. The brain does what it does best - adapts to the problem that the world presents it - and if it is functioning properly, rewards proportional to effort over the long term. The basic elements governing intellectual achievement can be laterally applied, but they are basic and require effort and investment. This is what "smart" people fail to, or more accurately don't care to realize: it is the initial framework of skills that must be applied when learning something new.
In Ms. Warren's defense, this is why people who teach are often best suited to learn - they constantly expose themselves to the primordial battle of early education. That is, until they become more and more specialized and their experiences etch themselves into a once plastic and agile brain. Adaptation is then sacrificed for expertise. This is a rewarding sacrifice, but those who must have the best of both worlds and a willingness not to rest on their laurels can easily retain this basic mental flexibility by constantly learning new skills or choosing a career that demands more breadth.
The truth of academia is that while it retains a good number of intelligent and mentally gymnastic people, that is certainly not a prerequisite to succeed, and often the best and brightest will go off and use their talents elsewhere. It is one of many professions with an aspect that could nurture and preserve a mind capable of excelling in a good many things. The actual individuals and titles that comprise its campus are really just individuals and titles. Sure, you won't find a neurosurgeon in a coal mine, but that's because you're looking for a neurosurgeon, not a person with a cunning and gifted mind.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Posts
Good news, he's the front runner.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Enthusiastic is the one word you missed that is pretty important for the message sammich is saying there.
I wouldn't mind Biden as AG I suppose, but he is pretty old. I coulda been clearer about why I was asking about Public Defenders.
High ranking what? How the heck would you become a high ranking "thankless public service job that nobody wants to fund or even pretend is important"? It's basically anathema to the whole concept of high ranking.
Generally if you're on the fast track in law you wouldn't be caught dead near a PD job. Which is horrible and stupid but the system we've got.
Yeah I know traditionally they are not given high positions but Democrats would do well to elevate those people.
The perception of few “high-ranking” defenders is because rising in defense work generally means switching to private practice where there’s far more money/prestige. By contrast, promotion for prosecutors stays in government service.
I don’t think “Copmala” is killing Harris’ campaign, but I do think it’s telling that she can’t come up with something to balance it out.
As others have said, she hasn’t really laid why she should be President. I hate to use the phrase “inspiring candidate,” but you have to be about something more than “I am politician, give me power, om nom.”
Of course, I think who the candidate is should be of secondary importance to removing Trump from power. It’s always better to get 30% or 40% of what you want than 0%, however much it stings.
If the Dems run Skeletor, every voter left of Lindsey Graham should be planting campaign signs and smiling while they do it.
We have the power!
Here's an analysis of second choice for all the major candidates.
1st choice Warren:
Sanders 21
Pete 21
Harris 20
Biden 13
Booker 6
1st choice Biden:
Warren 37
Harris 14
Pete 10
??? 10
Sanders 7
1st choice Sanders
Warren 59 (this is new)
Gabbard 11
??? 8
Biden 5
Harris 4
Bernie 3 (the Bernie or bustiest, I guess)
1st choice Pete
Warren 36
Biden 18
Harris 13
Yang 8
??? 6
1st choice Harris:
Warren 57
Biden 13
Castro 6
Pete 5
Klobuchar 4
I'm such a good pundit. I said in February Warren would win because she was everyone's second choice.
I do think her record as a prosecutor makes her look bad; she seems to have had the view that every problem could be solved by prosecuting someone (truancy, drug abuse, etc) which doesn't exactly bode well for her performance in an office that has vastly more power at its direction
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
That Biden / Warren figure seems off. Hasn't the story been that Biden and Bernie are the 2nd choice for each other's voters since the start?
Steam: adamjnet
The most recent debate may have changed people's minds.
Prophesies are nonsense. Magic cannot see into the future.
Biden stayed steady. Warren gained in some. Bernie was steady in most polls. I would say the rest are *ehh*.
Overall a mix of the polls did have Warren going up a bit.
this is broadly what people don't like about liberals - the sense of constantly being treated like they're stupid for not getting it
Hes not talking about opponents.
Some people, unfortunately, believe / have been taught / have internalized that there is no such thing.
And will not give her the chance to prove it.
Things change. Warren has been the only candidate seeing what looks like a real shift in the polls recently, so this might just be another part of that.
So far it looks mostly like her pulling politically active and relatively well off voters from the also-rans.
This is of course good for her but these are likely safe votes anyway. Crimson King is talking about her ability to appeal to less dedicated voters and given her numbers with undereducated and poor voters theres remaining cause for concern
Who knows how those will show themselves. Probably once a candidate says something meme worthy
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
There are plenty of reasons someone might not support, or even like, Warren that aren't some deep-seeded anti-education bias.
I'm a Warren supporter, but I can understand why someone might not be.
That's not really the idea. It's a communication style thing not an anti education thing.
I'm not sure what the basis of it is supposed to be.
We will see as time goes on. If her numbers solidify there, then it isn't true.
Sadly for all our speculation, time will supply the only evidence we are going to get.
Why is it likely true?
I agree with this. It's not fair to Warren, but it's the truth.
I've plugged this before, but Tom Nichols wrote a book about this stuff and there are absolutely segments of the population that feel looked down upon, frustrated, with. and angry at people they view as "smarter" than them.
https://m.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-death-of-expertise-tom-nichols/1122713126?ean=9780190469436&st=PLA&sid=BNB_ADL+EBooks+Generic+Mobile+Medium&sourceId=PLAGoNA&dpid=tdtve346c&2sid=Google_m&gclid=CjwKCAjwq4fsBRBnEiwANTahcDhsIcMvKoNq4VEKxbrGu7712947uyvupx1oQtIhUTxaNyKJBbDwyRoCNvsQAvD_BwE
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
It's the inverse if the "Seems like someone I'd like to have a beer with" effect.
It's not prophecy, it's people admitting who they'd vote for in second place. Prophecy would be saying this is true without doing any polling to gauge the voting populations feeling on the subject.
The university professors I know are very smart, smarter than me for sure.
See: Ben Carson.
It’s why I’m very endeared by Warren just straight up taking other people’s plans on things and saying ‘yes, that’s good, let’s do that.’ Being smart enough to know when they’ve heard a good idea, even if it isn’t theirs, is a quality I really want on a President.
In context one would hope so. But smart people in one subject can be not smart in others.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Me too, but that exact thing can feel intimidating and condescending. It's not guaranteed - you can be an academic and not come off that way. I'm not sure Warren pulls it off.
In Ms. Warren's defense, this is why people who teach are often best suited to learn - they constantly expose themselves to the primordial battle of early education. That is, until they become more and more specialized and their experiences etch themselves into a once plastic and agile brain. Adaptation is then sacrificed for expertise. This is a rewarding sacrifice, but those who must have the best of both worlds and a willingness not to rest on their laurels can easily retain this basic mental flexibility by constantly learning new skills or choosing a career that demands more breadth.
The truth of academia is that while it retains a good number of intelligent and mentally gymnastic people, that is certainly not a prerequisite to succeed, and often the best and brightest will go off and use their talents elsewhere. It is one of many professions with an aspect that could nurture and preserve a mind capable of excelling in a good many things. The actual individuals and titles that comprise its campus are really just individuals and titles. Sure, you won't find a neurosurgeon in a coal mine, but that's because you're looking for a neurosurgeon, not a person with a cunning and gifted mind.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.