Monday, September 25, 2017

Misogyny Among White Married Women Helped Elect Trump

Married white women in large numbers went along with their men and rejected Hillary Clinton. The why of this has been hard to determine because it’s difficult to look inside people’s minds. Most of the white women who voted for the Russian backed serial bankrupt assaulter of women and insulter of all races and ethnicities said they did so because they admired him and honestly believed she was a crook and a liar and unpatriotic. (Hillary has often remained seated on the sofa while the national anthem played during the TV broadcast of NFL games.)

My own belief, based on nothing, and roundly rejected by everyone I spoke with, was that women whose husbands or partners loved Trump and hated Hillary simply didn’t want to spend four or eight years being subjected to abuse and ridicule and blame if the first woman president ever did anything wrong. And women are likelier than men to understand that leaders sometimes make mistakes. Maybe some of them or a lot of them trusted the polls and believed Hillary would win anyway, and if bad stuff happened their partners would abuse Hillary but wouldn’t abuse them. Possible? It would be hard to get a woman to admit it.

It was very hard on white male egos to have eight years of embarrassment under a white male Republican president followed by eight non-catastrophic years under a black male president who didn’t blow the budget with a trillion dollar unnecessary and disastrous war and trigger a massive economic crisis. (It was extra humiliating that the black guy rescued the economy from what the white guy fucked up.) But to follow the very competent and cool black guy with a woman was simply too too humiliating for white men. They couldn’t bear it. I am sure their spouses and partners could tell that it would set them off in unpleasant directions for the next four, possibly eight, years. Violence against people of color rose dramatically during the Obama presidency. Would violence against women skyrocket during the first female presidency? And you can bet, just as Republicans swore to block everything Obama tried to accomplish, and the faithful in thousands of white superchristian churches prayed fervently for him to fail, that all the Republicans would do their damnedest to make sure Hillary failed. Because she made every Republican man and lots of Democratic men feel like a failure. Not only had a black man jumped the queue but now a woman had. The natural order of things was being upset. It upset people, especially white people, especially white people with dicks, but also the women who were married to them. So white women joined the Dickish Party. (It didn't hurt Trump's electability that thousands of Russian trolls and bots were pushing this same misogyny and race-worry at white voters in swing states.)

This new study doesn’t make this point but it does explain the pressure, both economic and political, that shaped the Trump vote among white married women. Deference is an old-fashioned idea some women still subscribe to. Maybe it's out of self-defense. Self interest is pretty human; people vote their pocket book. This study combines the two because it says deference to the man’s income shaped the vote of married white women; they voted against women’s economic interests to support their subservience to the man’s economic interests.

The study is reported on in the Guardian.

It’s worth looking at the unfairness at the root of all this. There is a double standard. Women are required to be perfect and at the same time deferential to their male counterparts even if those males are far less perfect than the women. Because failing to be deferential makes the males feel diminished. Some probably feel a greater need for male enhancement products if they are compared unfavorably with a woman, and that male dysfunction is contagious: when one man experiences it all men start to go flaccid and angry. Women may love their men in spite of their faults but men tend to feel uncomfortable around women who outperform them. A ultra competent woman is less attractive than a man who fucks up.

But her emails!

Last fall Newsweek published a story about how many emails George W Bush and Dick Cheney managed to lose to avoid having their Iraq War motives scrutinized. W lost 22 million emails, but nobody minded.

"According to the Boston social media analytics firm Crimson Hexagon, which ran a study for Newsweek, there have been 560,397 articles mentioning Clinton’s emails between March 2015 and September 1, 2016.”

W and his boss Cheney spent trillions on an unnecessary war based on phony reasoning and what we would today call “fake news” and they covered up their machinations by “losing” 22 million emails. That’s million with an M, almost a thousand times more emails than Hillary allegedly lost. (Full disclosure: I delete emails every month, which I suppose makes me a suspicious character.)

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Your Daily Trump––Sympathy For The Devil

This election is being shaped by something I call The General Theory of "Murder She Wrote”.

That program was widely popular across middle America. It was also very influential on that subliminal level where Americans make judgments of good and evil, safe and dangerous. It taught millions of Americans that the person who appears least likely to be a monster is the actual monster, and the most monstrous person is actually completely good and decent. Our judgment has been clouded ever since.

Which might explain why the whole news media is now behaving like the right wing nut jobs at Breitbart News.

Te Nehisi Coates explains at the Atlantic.

The Canadians believe we are insane and wonder what has happened to American news reporting.

The Canadian newsmagazine Maclean's examines the bizarre double standard of coverage.

New York magazine reports that more than half of Trump supporters believe Obama wasn’t born in the U.S.

Mic.com reports that almost half of Trump supporters in Iowa think it was a good idea to put Japanese Americans into camps during WW2.

Meanwhile the pro-Trump governor of Kentucky said that if Hillary is elected that patriots will have to murder the tyrant. Reported by VOX.

Martin Shkreli, the wealthy hedge fund wizard who got rich by jacking up the cost of medications is acting as a guerrilla Trump surrogate. The reliably right wing NYPost has this story.

Trump Trolls may not constitute half of Trump voters but there are plenty of nasty Trumpsters out there eager to slur a columnist who has a Hispanic last name. Reported from Cleveland.

Speaking of double standards, remember when W lost 20 million emails and nobody investigated it. Reported at Newsweek.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, August 08, 2016

What's All This About Hillary?

Hillary has been the object of constant scrutiny for the past 25 years, ever since she and Bill entered the public eye. Most of the scrutiny has been antagonistic. Politicians attract enemies when they try to do things. It's almost as bad as the resentment politicians get from not doing things exactly as each individual voter wanted.

The greatest danger to our nation in recent years is running for president at the top of the Republican ticket. And yet there are still people who feel uncomfortable voting for the only viable alternative. Casting a pure vote is an irrational and dangerous hobby. Voting is not a hobby, it needs to be an act of reason and compromise. Noam Chomsky is not a great fan of Hillary Clinton, but he explains why it's vitally important that reasonable and intelligent voters on the liberal side unite behind her.

This article is from DemocracyNow, which isn't a centrist or neoliberal news organization.

Hillary is being accused of dishonesty. Actually she is the most honest politician in the race this year.

Jill Abramson explains why this is so.

An interesting interview explaining what liberal communitarians stand for. Hillary is one.

It's weird some of the things Hillary is attacked for. Last week she was attacked for putting her hand over her heart...

This article from the Boston Globe is about how any woman running for president must be perfect in every way.

And Americans aren't too keen on people who are too perfect. Actually, if you are a woman and too perfect they really hate you.

This writer hated Hillary, until she sat down and read the emails Hillary is being hounded over.

This article is about the many sexist questions Hillary has had to answer (politely) for the past several decades.

Meanwhile, from the LATimes, we have Trump rallies where small children are applauded for screaming obscenities about Hillary Clinton.

So... what's all this about Benghazi?

What Hillary's values are.

From MEDIUM.

Hillary's convictions about social progress, from The Tablet.

What happened to the feminist excitement that surrounded Hillary in 2008? From SLATE.

Thinking about voting for Jill Stein?

Prominent ethicists are saying voting your conscience on a minor party candidate in an election like this one is actually immoral.

And by the way, in case you are still angry Bernie didn't win, NO the DNC email leaks do not contain evidence the system was rigged against Bernie. I was and am as big a Bernie supporter as anyone, and a Bernie fan of longer standing, and I am expressing that by putting all my support behind Hillary Clinton. As Bernie has done.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, August 17, 2015

Fact Avoidance as Republican Policy

The people worked up about Planned Parenthood’s policies regarding fetal tissue don’t seem concerned about the fetal tissue that fertility clinics donate to science on a routine basis.

The Washington Post reported on this double standard.

The people worked up about Hillary possibly deleting emails do not get worked up about the 22 million White House emails deleted at the order of Karl Rove...

Pensito Review reported on this double standard.

What makes this difficult for the thinking half of the population is this. These people who are getting selectively worked up are not being intentionally dishonest. They are lying to themselves, you are just in the way.

“…One of the most frustrating things about attempting to engage "a Republican argument" is precisely how often the arguments seem disingenuous. It is not as if rank-and-file activists are actively lying about their motives. It is that they have never questioned them themselves. They have simply heard and regurgitated the talking points so often that they believe their own bullshit and are beyond questioning it. The frustrating thing is not that they are lying to you. It is that in effect (to borrow a Colbert construction), they are lying to themselves at you."

Digby's Blog reported on this interesting and useful gift of self-deception.

Trying to persuade them of the truth is dangerous the way trying to rescue a drowning person will sometimes drown the rescuer. A friend of mine once pointed out that the more you point out the truth to people the less they will believe it.

What are we supposed to do? Wouldn’t you think an advanced society would have mechanisms for revealing and destroying this kind of malicious bullshit? Because it’s all intentional, whether the people know they are being fooled or not.

That corrective mechanism is supposed to be journalism. When Karl Rove explained that the truth about Iraq didn’t really matter because “we create our own reality” it was a journalist who reported that. A lot of us thought the cat was out of the bag, but it wasn’t, because half of America took Mr. Rove at his word about George Bush being able to create new realities. A useful godlike ability, that. Why didn’t that revelation sink the Bush White House?

Journalism Professor Blog discusses the weird reality bending powers of Karl Rove here.

Too often the reporting class just reports, just repeats the bullshit. By reporting the bullshit it becomes news and most people figure news and fact are the same. They have a problem telling bullshit from fact. If it’s reported by a newspaper or a news channel it’s assumed to be fact. Just as Mr. O’Reilly declaring his program is a “no spin zone” means he would never spin a story. Ever. Because he says this with incredible force and conviction makes it even truer. And because Fox viewers are spinning at the same speed as O’Reilly is himself it begins to seem like the spin isn’t spin at all.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,