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 -
The Republican primaries are mostly winner-takes-all outside the early states, so a candidate with a plurality of the vote in a divided field can get a majority of the delegates and the nomination (this is also how McCain won the nomination in 2008). The Democratic primaries are proportional everywhere, so if a candidate is persistently getting a plurality but not a majority of the votes the Dems are headed for a brokered convention. Bernie was not doing well enough to win the nomination on delegate count, and had no plausible route to win it except a deal with Warren. (Either for her support in the primaries, or for her delegates at the convention)
The is the strategy Hilary Clinton used unsuccessfully against Obama in 2008, whereas Obama focussed on delegate counts all the way back to Iowa and New Hampshire. Bernie had the money, organisation, and name recognition to go all the way to the convention, as did whoever turned out to be the leading establishment candidate. He didn't need attention or endorsements - he needed delegates. And in proportional primaries he gets roughly the same number of delegates regardless of how the anti-Bernie vote is split.
It is not how Trump won 2016. By the start of 2016, it was obvious that (absent some kind of blow-up) Trump, Cruz, and Rubio all had the resources and support to go to the convention, and Cruz and Rubio didn't drop out until they were mathematically eliminated. Once winner-take-all primaries started, Trump was consistently winning 2/3 or more of the delegates available each week. Cruz and Rubio didn't do a deal to stop Trump because they hated each other as much as they hated Trump, and in any case it is unlikely either of them could have delivered enough votes with an endorsement to let the other beat Trump. Trump because his narrow pluralities in winner-take-all states got him delegates, not because they got him headlines.
More options
Context Copy link