tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post904502579549829995..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: What Mattered This Week?Jonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-1183864584444560452012-10-31T10:24:48.795-05:002012-10-31T10:24:48.795-05:00@the classicist -- Thank you for elaborating. Per...@the classicist -- Thank you for elaborating. Personally, I think there are very significant natural differences between the sexes… so it sounds like we may differ there. Of course, that doesn’t mean that 15% female participation in Congress is acceptable and the problem could always be addressed directly by establishing minimum quotas for female participation. <br />Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-15472375011525476322012-10-30T22:30:25.100-05:002012-10-30T22:30:25.100-05:00@Couves -- I meant that there are artificial and s...@Couves -- I meant that there are artificial and systemic reasons why women are much more hesitant to run in the first place -- the "whole other matter" you mentioned.<br /><br />Btw: all of my suppositions on this are informed by my being a woman in a field with a male-female ratio somewhere between 2:1 and 4:1 (among senior, powerful, prominent people, often >4:1). Which is both anecdotal and not strictly parallel. So I am plenty open to the possibility that I'm misreading the politics through my particular lens; and more particularly to the possibility that the upper echelons of politics are so different from the lower in terms of burdens assumed and publicity imposed, that there will always be more men at the top. But right now I don't see much evidence. Right now the proportions of women in state legislatures seem roughly parallel to national proportions. (Which btw isn't the case in philosophy at all, in which the number of women drops very significantly at each stage of the process -- undergrad to grad, grad school to employment, any employment at all to having tenure, ..... If you're interested in how that happens, check out <a href="http://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow">the feminist philosophers blog on wordpress</a>, which people who are willing to ruin their days by checking depressing sites tell me is chock full of information.)<br /><br />Haha, also -- it's okay if you're just done with this subject, I won't be surprised if you don't respond to this!the classicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08691196845661570282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-91263857844322587502012-10-30T17:21:13.089-05:002012-10-30T17:21:13.089-05:00@the classicist: One more thing -- I do agree tha...@the classicist: One more thing -- I do agree that we could have closer to 40-45% women in Congress, simply by changing the design of our system.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-33490165815106757612012-10-30T17:13:16.707-05:002012-10-30T17:13:16.707-05:00@the classicist: That's my very point -- it I...@the classicist: That's my very point -- it IS artificial and systemic precisely because our Founders designed a system that guaranteed that our leaders would be disproportionately aggressive, power-hungry people. In my experience, a far greater percentage of men fit this description than do women (how much of this is natural or due to social conditioning is a whole other matter).<br /><br />It would be possible to design a system that rewards a whole different set of personality traits -- a party list system, for example, puts a greater premium on dedication and working with a team rather than on raw personal ambition and risk-taking. Still, I'm not sure it's realistic to expect there to be as many women who want to be top dog as there are men.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-90321338004419228882012-10-30T11:50:40.142-05:002012-10-30T11:50:40.142-05:00@Couves -- where I would disagree with your descri...@Couves -- where I would disagree with your description is in the generality of your claims. I agree that whatever we did now we would not be seeing more than 40-45% female representation. But that we fall THIS far short of it THIS consistently seems to me to be in large measure artificial and systemic rather than a healthy, natural result of individual choices.the classicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08691196845661570282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-27219099393364821622012-10-30T01:35:34.514-05:002012-10-30T01:35:34.514-05:00@the classicist I thought we had interacted at le...@the classicist I thought we had interacted at least once before. It doesn't sound like we're really in disagreement. Of course, it would be good for a lot more women to get more involved in politics at the highest level. But I just think it's unlikely that we'll see it happen...<br /><br />Our Founders set up a system that was designed to channel the energies of power-hungry men towards advancing the general welfare (as opposed to raising up armies of conquest). The fact that fewer women fit this description is perhaps a tribute to their sex, but doesn't change the problem that they're then largely excluded from power.<br /><br />While the Founders' system has produced domestic tranquility, it's also been used to build up concentrations of power that now threaten the general welfare. What we most need right now is the fish swimming upstream -- the politician not interested in exercising power, but in returning it to the people.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-22638167676511481612012-10-29T19:00:02.912-05:002012-10-29T19:00:02.912-05:00@Couves -- of course yoi're right that women a...@Couves -- of course yoi're right that women are excluding themselves! That is why I am a big fan of projects like Kirsten Gillibrand's "Off the Sidelines" that encourage women to run and then help out if they do run. As to "by choice" ... that's a whole set of other issues ... about which we disagree ...<br /><br />Btw: thanks for responding! (is this a weird thing to say? probably! but it's true:) After so long just appreciating your comments, I'm glad to be interacting with you at last.the classicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08691196845661570282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-68802490777922726062012-10-29T11:37:20.717-05:002012-10-29T11:37:20.717-05:00"Easier, sure, but not by much."
But do..."Easier, sure, but not by much."<br /><br />But don't women exclude themselves from politics by choice? You can't win if you don't run.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-65386406856061374132012-10-29T08:57:09.030-05:002012-10-29T08:57:09.030-05:00@Crissa -- actually, one of the tiny silver lining...@Crissa -- actually, one of the tiny silver linings of the 2010 cycle for liberals was the return of black elected officials to the national GOP. Allen West isn't even the only one! There's also Tim Scott in South Carolina (thanks, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a>!) And of course there are no blacks in the Senate at all.<br /><br />As to Republican women -- yeah, I was pretty disappointed 2010 didn't make a difference in the House. But they did have several women who either were favored to win (the one who was supposed to win in NV) or did win Senate primaries (Fiorina, or was it Whitman, in CA, McMahon in CT, O'Donnell in DE, Angle in NV, and maybe more I'm forgetting), besides Kelly Ayotte who actually won her seat (NH). And it's been much more noticeable this year. The Republican Senate candidate is female in CA, CT, HI, NE, NM, and NY, and Steelman had been favored in the Missouri primaries. McMahon, Lingle, and Wilson have had reasonably close races (NM especially), Steelman probably would have won, and Fischer will win. So ... not enough to replace retiring Hutcheson and Snowe, but 6/33 is 18%, much better than one might have expected. And the Democrats are fielding 12 female Senate candidates, including non-incumbents in HI, MA, ME, ND, NV, and WI.<br /><br />P.S. @Captain Future: you embed links by typing [a href="www.website.com"]hyperlink text[/a], except replacing the square brackets with <>.the classicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08691196845661570282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-87707888208418093952012-10-29T00:30:31.815-05:002012-10-29T00:30:31.815-05:00Actually I stated part of that wrong. Obama loses...Actually I stated part of that wrong. Obama loses 5 points because of racist attitudes towards black, but gains 3 from pro-black attitudes, for a net loss of 2 points. It's not the race etc. of the source, it's the sentiment.Captain Futurehttp://dreamingup.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-57308483609746141402012-10-29T00:24:41.052-05:002012-10-29T00:24:41.052-05:00Sorry I didn't check back to reply sooner. Th...Sorry I didn't check back to reply sooner. There's a Washington Post story on the AP poll athttp://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ap-poll-majority-of-americans-still-express-negative-view-of-blacks/2012/10/27/421d683a-2009-11e2-8817-41b9a7aaabc7_story.html?tid=pm_politics_pop<br /><br />(If there's a way to embed links in the comments I don't know how, sorry.]<br /><br />It does say,by the way, that Obama loses 5 points because of racist attitudes against blacks, but gains 3 from non-whites, for a net loss of two points. This is actually close to but below another study's conclusion of what he lost in 2008 because of race.<br /><br />That the AP poll finds 79% of Republicans are racist might also be considered in the Gallup poll figures that show Romney's rise fueled by an enormous uptick in the South, and Andrew Sullivan pointing out on Sunday that if Romney wins NC, VA and FLA, he'll have the entire Old Confederacy. Captain Futurehttp://dreamingup.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-60963587283666734742012-10-28T21:23:12.513-05:002012-10-28T21:23:12.513-05:00There's barely 10% women in the Republican rep...There's barely 10% women in the Republican representation in the House; there's 0% black. Easier, sure, but not by much. I chose the House because the Senate just makes their numbers sound worse...Crissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13389565751169783614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-40622313251067773532012-10-28T18:07:39.795-05:002012-10-28T18:07:39.795-05:00For someone concerned about political lies, your v...For someone concerned about political lies, your view of "the Benghazi non-story" is surprising.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-68864928258253606042012-10-28T18:02:28.787-05:002012-10-28T18:02:28.787-05:00Anon -- Well yes, there does seem to be a kind of ...Anon -- Well yes, there does seem to be a kind of liberal equivalency to Catholic guilt. It's ironic that the Reality-Based Communities are so culturally indebted to Christianity.Couveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926561539205771774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-71631210399242459532012-10-28T17:31:10.166-05:002012-10-28T17:31:10.166-05:00I think that reporters are getting tired of writin...I think that reporters are getting tired of writing, "It's a dead heat and we don't know who's going to win," so they're sending in more stories when they're drunk.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-19811650459490192232012-10-28T17:29:52.249-05:002012-10-28T17:29:52.249-05:00Anon @ 10am, there was no way, absolutely no way, ...Anon @ 10am, there was no way, absolutely no way, that any black man could have been elected President in 1992. It would not have mattered if he walked across Lake Michigan to a debate on live TV.<br /><br />We had to bury my parents' generation first. I think my white supremacist father is still spinning in his grave.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-12952055604913486892012-10-28T17:26:16.868-05:002012-10-28T17:26:16.868-05:00Too Catholic for my tastes, Couves!Too Catholic for my tastes, Couves!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-85647466428637106902012-10-28T16:36:27.339-05:002012-10-28T16:36:27.339-05:00@Anon 10:05: yes, "white" will still be ...@Anon 10:05: yes, "white" will still be the term in use. Forget that it's already been expanded multiple times -- to include Irish (?!), Mediterranean, and Slavic groups, as well as lots of Native Americans. Just look around now -- depending on the circles of course, but at least a lot of upper-middle-class 20- and 30-somethings in the Northeast don't seem to take "Hispanic/Latino" and "Asian" as incompatible with "white."<br /><br />To put it another way: The racial categories in America aren't really "white/non-white" -- they're "black/non-black." Any group of people that other people, when they see a group member they don't know, generally expect them to speak regionally standard American English is soon going to be called "white" if they aren't already. Except black people.the classicisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08691196845661570282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-10065297584568310932012-10-28T13:59:22.353-05:002012-10-28T13:59:22.353-05:00CF: link to the AP story?CF: link to the AP story?Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-37746172753281371842012-10-28T11:00:07.065-05:002012-10-28T11:00:07.065-05:00Only if she advocates giving up control of her lad...Only if she advocates giving up control of her lady-parts to the church.zicnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-16498344345407679722012-10-28T10:54:45.732-05:002012-10-28T10:54:45.732-05:00If much of the opposition to Obama is race-based, ...If much of the opposition to Obama is race-based, then Secretary Clinton should have an easy time of it in 2016, right?purushanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-78323999534461249632012-10-28T10:37:38.537-05:002012-10-28T10:37:38.537-05:00I read that more whites are turning on Obama becau...I read that more whites are turning on Obama because of his skin color. That we have become more racist. Sununu saying what he did about Powell pushed that view when he said people want someone of their own race in leadership. I can't believe it's how Americans feel as Obama hasn't governed as a black or white man. He's just governed with his philosophy but what it made me wonder is when he did win the second and third debates, sounded very good, strong, knowledgeable, was the reason it didn't help is it reminded racists of his color and they didn't like it? If so, it says more about who we are as a people than who Obama is. It's kind of scary to me.Rain Trueaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07994628226501093880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-70147465828648146452012-10-28T10:05:43.575-05:002012-10-28T10:05:43.575-05:00That's not to say that racism is going to fade...That's not to say that racism is going to fade away. It seems more likely that Latinos and Asian-Americans are going to gradually become a part of the "majority" (will we still call that majority "white" if we're browner and less European-looking?), but there doesn't seem to be any major signs that African-Americans (especially low-income African-Americans) are going to see much change of cultural status. So maybe racism will still exist... it just will focus solely on low-income African-Americans rather than all non-whites. Progress?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-56405129588682034062012-10-28T10:00:10.722-05:002012-10-28T10:00:10.722-05:00It's funny, because I've been thinking mor...It's funny, because I've been thinking more and more how the traditional soft white-supremacy that's been a cultural reality for centuries is really starting to break down in a meaningful way. Honestly, I know that there's a lot of racist rhetoric flying around as the election approaches... but really it hasn't reached the same '08 level of "real Americans" and all that. And Republican strategists are already starting to talk openly about the reality that they're not going to win national elections on the strength of the white vote anymore.<br />It'll be pretty intense if Obama takes Virginia and Colorado (and Florida, maybe) because he'll have done so because of non-white voters. I don't want to say that the reason Obama is tied (ahead slightly?) is because of the non-white vote and that Romney would be in a indisputable lead if the demographics of the country matched '92 (or maybe even '00) because if those demographics were the reality then Obama would have run a different campaign and I'm sure he would still have been competitve/winning (narrowly).<br /><br />But he's the (slight) favorite to win next week because he was able to push up the non-white vote. And it looks like the changes his two candidacies have affected on the electorate are not going to be reversed (even if Obama loses). This election is a huge turning point for that reason.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-54262451632446303392012-10-28T04:19:24.250-05:002012-10-28T04:19:24.250-05:00Captain Future,
Your assumption was somewhat valid...Captain Future,<br />Your assumption was somewhat validated by Colin Powell's former chief of staff stating that his party (Republican), is full of racists. John Sununu displayed the behavior, claiming the only reason for Powell's endorsement was because Obama is black. What mattered here, is that it won't effect the outcome of the "race." What also mattered this week is that Condolezza Rice probably made her last appearance on Fox news by throwing cold water on the Benghazi non-story. What has mattered throughout this campaign has been the network and mainstream medias allowing the Romney campaign to continually distort (lie), on so many occasions without serious consistent push back. There has been some, but not as much as the story warrants. Just last evening on the PBS News Hour, they ran an audio clip of Romney repeating the Chrysler falsehood that the jobs were going to China. It should have been known by last evening that the story is false, and yet there was PBS advancing the falsehood in the public's mind. <br />nanutehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04526158764171117978noreply@blogger.com