While certainly on the cards, I suspect that abortion is one of the many in a bag of factors that propelled Trump and the GoP to victory. Nevertheless, interesting exercise in a world captivated by what's going on across the Atlantic.
I agree. I do wonder how much of an effect his uncoupling had. I also wonder if the groups of people who got this into the ballot had the intent to affect the presidential vote through that untangling or through encouraging some people to show up and vote who would otherwise not have voted.
I think there are likely other more important factors.. like the perception of the economy in daily life vs. the macro economic trends that can sometimes take a long time to affect daily life.
Another factor that I've seen bandied about is that people want to stick it to the Democrats for perceived betrayal, failures, wokeness, etc., which was strong enough to sway votes towards the Republicans.
Never underestimate pissed off voters, i guess the lesson here is...?
My suspicion is that people would mostly still have voted the way they did, if abortion had not been on the ballot, because they would have prioritized economic concerns over abortion freedom concerns. This is a guess based on hearing many trusted pundits talking about polls, trends, etc.
I think you are likely right. This was mostly a thought exercise. Recently, I have been thinking that some posts ought to be thoughts--- maybe not as argumentative as others -- but thoughts. In a few of these cases a small shift may have impact those states results.
I suspect your last point is right, too. And i like your idea of thought exercises— it seems that social media tends to reward oppositional stances, and unfortunately it also tends to make responses appear oppositional even when they are not.
I’m also grateful you wrote about the jonathan haidt ideas about how liberals and conservatives frame things differently. This is an important thing for people to understand, and it’s not understood by most people. To understand it, you first have to be curious about why you think a certain way, and why your opponent thinks a different way. Most people think they know why already— it’s because they themselves are morally good and smart, while they opponents are neither. It’s that knowingness you discussed in another piece.
I think I'll try one thought exercise a month. I suppose in a way each post is one --- but one tries to be risk adverse when posting. In this case I suggest taking risks, to say -- I think this could be interesting to think about even if I have not thought about it sufficiently --- it may be a first step to engage rather than defend, or attack a position.
I really do like Haidt's points there. It really helps to try and see why obvious right answers may not be that obvious to others.
While certainly on the cards, I suspect that abortion is one of the many in a bag of factors that propelled Trump and the GoP to victory. Nevertheless, interesting exercise in a world captivated by what's going on across the Atlantic.
I agree. I do wonder how much of an effect his uncoupling had. I also wonder if the groups of people who got this into the ballot had the intent to affect the presidential vote through that untangling or through encouraging some people to show up and vote who would otherwise not have voted.
I think there are likely other more important factors.. like the perception of the economy in daily life vs. the macro economic trends that can sometimes take a long time to affect daily life.
Another factor that I've seen bandied about is that people want to stick it to the Democrats for perceived betrayal, failures, wokeness, etc., which was strong enough to sway votes towards the Republicans.
Never underestimate pissed off voters, i guess the lesson here is...?
My suspicion is that people would mostly still have voted the way they did, if abortion had not been on the ballot, because they would have prioritized economic concerns over abortion freedom concerns. This is a guess based on hearing many trusted pundits talking about polls, trends, etc.
Hi Karl,
I think you are likely right. This was mostly a thought exercise. Recently, I have been thinking that some posts ought to be thoughts--- maybe not as argumentative as others -- but thoughts. In a few of these cases a small shift may have impact those states results.
thank you for reading and commenting
I suspect your last point is right, too. And i like your idea of thought exercises— it seems that social media tends to reward oppositional stances, and unfortunately it also tends to make responses appear oppositional even when they are not.
I’m also grateful you wrote about the jonathan haidt ideas about how liberals and conservatives frame things differently. This is an important thing for people to understand, and it’s not understood by most people. To understand it, you first have to be curious about why you think a certain way, and why your opponent thinks a different way. Most people think they know why already— it’s because they themselves are morally good and smart, while they opponents are neither. It’s that knowingness you discussed in another piece.
Thank you, thats very kind.
I think I'll try one thought exercise a month. I suppose in a way each post is one --- but one tries to be risk adverse when posting. In this case I suggest taking risks, to say -- I think this could be interesting to think about even if I have not thought about it sufficiently --- it may be a first step to engage rather than defend, or attack a position.
I really do like Haidt's points there. It really helps to try and see why obvious right answers may not be that obvious to others.