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 -
How did the candidates do in terms of "it's not what you say, it's what they hear"? That is, we're not talking policy, just politics and feelings for the average undecided voter.
Trump dominated tonight. I think some voters could tell that Biden was more focused on policy, and he was much more specific about some things he did do and will do; I think they also noticed that Trump dodged a few questions, at times repeatedly and blatantly. But overall, it's no question at all. Trump sounded more like someone who cares and understands people than Biden. He was usually short and to the point, especially in the first half. He fell into some old habits, but did so with force and personality. He didn't even need to say anything other than raise an eyebrow as Biden melted down in his response about Medicare where he clearly lost his entire train of thought.
On abortion, Trump responded very vigorously about late-term abortions and clearly talks about exceptions, while Biden defended Roe, which seems tactically like at best a middling choice that pleases almost no one. On immigration, Biden took an "everything was good" tack and Trump talked about terrorism and violence, which is probably the more effective tactic. On veterans, a muddled and personal exchange about the losers and suckers quote, but Trump's logic (independent of whatever the fact is) seems more sound. Israel comes up, but nothing of substance is discussed. Biden talks about how a deal is near-done, while Trump implausibly claims it never would have happened with him at the helm and calls Biden a "weak Palestinian". We have a tussle about retribution and democracy, I don't know if anyone landed any body blows here, much of this info isn't new.
Worth noting that many viewers tune out in the first half hour or so, so this was the entire debate for them.
After the break, we see again the "what they hear" be so important. Trump talks about "clean air and water" while Biden talks about Paris and vague talk of pollution; Trump's framing here is always going to play better. Similarly to before, Trump dodges a question on childcare entirely, and he really hits Biden hard on being afraid to fire people when stuff goes badly. Biden seems to suggest, and does so again several times, that America is the best. Trump says the vibe is actually that things are going wrong and need fixing. Easily Trump wins the feelings side here, Biden framed this badly. Later on, when they start name-calling about the worst president (!!), Trump refers to Biden's bad poll numbers, and later, when they have some absolutely asinine smack talk about golf, (and confusing for non-golfers) Trump says "let's not act like children". Moral high ground, kind of crazy to see.
And the age question! Biden reminds voters, unhelpfully, that he's been in politics a long-ass time. Why would he think this is a good answer? Trump talks about his cognitive tests and says "knock on wood", which is quite frankly a pretty relatable answer. Biden brings up Trump's... weight?
They then accuse each other of starting WW3, which I don't think most undecided voters are going to have an opinion about. Closing arguments, Biden paints a picture of good progress on a handful of issues. This is okay. He improved a bit in the second half. Trump in closing is brutal, mimics Biden and makes fun of him, talks about respect being gone. I don't think he actually wins that many points here because of how personal some of this gets, which voters tend to dislike actually, but overall the impression is still vigorous and strong.
And there we have it. Biden is clearly declining, and Trump is just bringing back the Greatest Hits. Overall, the fundamentals of the race are still pretty similar, but I don't think anyone on the fence will swing left. The only undecided voter action will be pro-Trump, almost guaranteed (as a result of this debate). Focus group testing seems to agree quite strongly.
I only listened to the debate for about ten minutes while I was in the car, and that was well over an hour into the debate, so I can't comment on most of it. But from what I did hear, while Biden definitely lacked energy, the actual substance of his responses was much better than Trump's. Trump repeatedly ducked questions, while Biden actually answered them. Not that Biden's performance was that great, but if you were to go off of the transcripts only it seemed about even. Of course, when I got back in the car well after the debate ended and had to listen to the NPR rundown they were sticking a fork in Biden, mainly based on the same things everyone here is criticizing him for, and it reminded me why I hate debates. It's all spectacle. Even when speaking strictly on matters of substance, I want a president who can make reasoned decisions after consultation with experts, not someone who can come up with answers on the fly. Like, yeah, there is some of that in the presidency, but very little, and almost all of it involves foreign policy emergencies where he'll at least get to consult with his advisers. But even that doesn't matter, because the superficial aspects are all anyone seems to care about.
The thing is, I think people on the Motte are overall going to be more charitable to Biden than the average normie voter, even if we don’t like him. Because we have access to a much less tightly controlled info-space. We’ve probably all seen a bunch of compilations of his sentences turning into gibberish, or him talking about how he’s just met a world leader that’s been dead for twenty years, or having to be physically turned around at an event because he’s facing the wrong way. To us, his debate performance would seem about normal, better than average for him even. For most people it’s not like that. If you’re a not particularly plugged-in liberal, your only exposure to him is two State of the Union addresses that he was drilled on for months and read off a teleprompter, and carefully edited CNN clips of his best moments, where he seems quite bright and energetic. For those people, to see him in an unscripted environment and notice that he really does occasionally have trouble finishing his sentences, and sometimes loses his train of thought is very shocking and disturbing.
What do you think about all of the breathless reporting about Democrat insiders losing their shit over this?
Are those people not plugged in or constantly hyper-consuming political information including full speech readouts, press releases, presidential daily schedules, Politico inside scoops etc?
For what it is worth he was worse last night than when I saw him speak live a few weeks ago. Illness, stress and lack of rest can exacerbate age related decline pretty quickly, I've seen it happen in literal days when I worked in social care. UTI's and cold/flu being the most usual culprits.
And if you actually have exposure to him it's possible he was coming across reasonably well in lower stress situations, with less time to have to speak. That plus bias towards your own side would do a lot of heavy lifting.
Most of my contacts are in British politics not American, but a couple of them actually met Biden fairly recently and were shocked to see the difference last night as well, which indicates that perhaps something did get worse in the immediate past.
More options
Context Copy link
I think they thought they could hide his decline.
More options
Context Copy link
I think a lot of them have fallen into the trap of believing their own propaganda, that Biden's apparent frailty and incoherence were merely Republican propaganda brought out by misconstruing events and taking clips out of context.
They did the same thing with Hillary Clinton; the Republicans swore she was ill, Democrats swore this was foul calumny, then Hillary collapsed at the 9/11 memorial. (Obviously her illness, whatever it was, was considerably less serious)
More options
Context Copy link
I think those people have been in quite a lot of struggle sessions where the very suggestion that Biden might be a little bit over-the-hill is laughable Drumphist propaganda and if you humor that idea it’s a sign that you may be a dangerous racist sexist fascist who needs to be voted off the island. But now they have a moment where the conditioning is broken by intense public ridicule and the scales fall off.
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