You are right that the mainstream and liberal press largely gives black (and Hispanic and all kinds of marginal groups') politicians license to say really terrible things by not reporting them or treating them lightly. Much as was done with Palestinian politicians/leaders for a very long time. And even Russian media to this day. And much as it does for Trump by allowing his poisonous dog whistling and policy tripe to go unchallenged (mostly) and his arrant nonsense to go unreported. It's a general media failure not to take on stuff that goes outside the bounds of rationality, decency, or historical accuracy (even of the most general type). It means you have to judge or answer and not just report. It's another indicator of how delicate our "balance" is in this country - norms even more than laws and social contract really keep us together. I would love to see a lot of reform in voting laws and rules (ranked choice, transparency of donations, and a multitude of other technical fixes) to move us toward the middle, along with a general understanding - not cynical, but just savvy - by the media that much of what it is reporting as public debate is really appeal to the ardent, participatory and often bigoted extremes.
Joe, I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you sense "more dismay than hatred". You can sense it on the Republican side with the votes for Nikki long after the nomination was a done deal. They have ties to the party, but not to the carnival barker. You can sense it on the Democratic side with the purported drifting of young people, black men and latinos. They too have ties to the party, but not to a fossil who is programmed to speak to ideas a person of his generation and experience cannot plausibly believe. How have we wandered so far so quickly from George H. W Bush and Bill Clinton?
I was just telling my wife how much I hated these mood of the people stories -- in part because I too did them working for Time and Life (in a much different way) and, in fact, loved doing them. In the end, though, it is the group of people that is off-putting; mostly because "regular" people are just regular people and mostly boring. And it's lazy journalism to throw all these average people at other average people when in fact, they want us to give them smart people to tell them what's going on.
Just got out of the voting booth having voted for Latimer (2nd vote of the day in my electoral district, natch), based on the scene at the New Rochelle train station this morning, he is in good shape. Fifty years in, even my more liberal friends can tell (and resent) when someone is incessantly playing the race card. That is something the successful black politicians - Obama, Booker, Jeffries, even Kamala Harris, don’t do. Would have preferred if AIPAC had kept its toxic nose out of the race, but this will hopeful be a big step for sanity in a year ( and week) that needs it desperately.
Also, that rally of Bowman’s? It was in the South Bronx, miles out of the district.
You are right that the mainstream and liberal press largely gives black (and Hispanic and all kinds of marginal groups') politicians license to say really terrible things by not reporting them or treating them lightly. Much as was done with Palestinian politicians/leaders for a very long time. And even Russian media to this day. And much as it does for Trump by allowing his poisonous dog whistling and policy tripe to go unchallenged (mostly) and his arrant nonsense to go unreported. It's a general media failure not to take on stuff that goes outside the bounds of rationality, decency, or historical accuracy (even of the most general type). It means you have to judge or answer and not just report. It's another indicator of how delicate our "balance" is in this country - norms even more than laws and social contract really keep us together. I would love to see a lot of reform in voting laws and rules (ranked choice, transparency of donations, and a multitude of other technical fixes) to move us toward the middle, along with a general understanding - not cynical, but just savvy - by the media that much of what it is reporting as public debate is really appeal to the ardent, participatory and often bigoted extremes.
black = "Black" - that really was inadvertent.
Joe, I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you sense "more dismay than hatred". You can sense it on the Republican side with the votes for Nikki long after the nomination was a done deal. They have ties to the party, but not to the carnival barker. You can sense it on the Democratic side with the purported drifting of young people, black men and latinos. They too have ties to the party, but not to a fossil who is programmed to speak to ideas a person of his generation and experience cannot plausibly believe. How have we wandered so far so quickly from George H. W Bush and Bill Clinton?
I was just telling my wife how much I hated these mood of the people stories -- in part because I too did them working for Time and Life (in a much different way) and, in fact, loved doing them. In the end, though, it is the group of people that is off-putting; mostly because "regular" people are just regular people and mostly boring. And it's lazy journalism to throw all these average people at other average people when in fact, they want us to give them smart people to tell them what's going on.
Just got out of the voting booth having voted for Latimer (2nd vote of the day in my electoral district, natch), based on the scene at the New Rochelle train station this morning, he is in good shape. Fifty years in, even my more liberal friends can tell (and resent) when someone is incessantly playing the race card. That is something the successful black politicians - Obama, Booker, Jeffries, even Kamala Harris, don’t do. Would have preferred if AIPAC had kept its toxic nose out of the race, but this will hopeful be a big step for sanity in a year ( and week) that needs it desperately.
Also, that rally of Bowman’s? It was in the South Bronx, miles out of the district.