I approve of the UK dumping Theresa May… » « There goes the neighborhood — the FLDS is trying to move in

This isn’t just a cartoon, it’s our Democratic reality

We should start throwing milkshakes at every journalist and pol who uses the word “electability” right now.

I approve of the UK dumping Theresa May… » « There goes the neighborhood — the FLDS is trying to move in

Comments

  1. says

    The classic metaphor is that people on a beach will go to the nearest ice cream vendor, so if there are only two vendors and they can move to maximize sales, they will end up next to each other in the center of the beach. So we’re all supposed to accept the logic portrayed in the first panel, there — that the Democrats have to move right to capture more votes.

    Somehow, this explanation does not explain how the Republicans keep moving rightward, too. Somehow they’re still selling ice cream to people in the center of the beach who have to walk past the Democrats on their way to make their purchase.

    Nor does it take into account that, once you have to walk a certain distance for ice cream, you may decide you’d rather just do without, which is the real cause for Democratic losses in the last 30 years.

  2. stroppy says

    We know markets aren’t rational. Dem vendors are secretly hot for Republican ice cream and their $$$$ franchise. Repubs think the Dems are stalking them, so they move rightward up the beach.

  3. Bruce says

    Exactly. As The Vicar noted in #1, the big issue is nonvoters. That is, the decisions in the last few months are rarely by voters wondering left or right. Usually, the question is which side’s marginal voters will feel MOTIVATED enough to bother voting. It is so easy to get discouraged and skip it. But this rarely occurs to political professionals, such as those who administer our parties.
    AOC won her primary by energizing voters who otherwise would not have voted. We need to do this in primaries and in Novembers. So we need nominees who will inspire the disaffected. That means NOT Biden, imho.

  5. ck, the Irate Lump says

    I can’t believe anyone is still using the term “electability” after the supposedly ultimate “unelectable” candidate won in 2016. “Electability” keeps failing, but keeps being used. John Kerry was highly “electable”, and lost to Bush. Hillary Clinton was probably the most “electable” candidate in history, and lost to Trump. Both should’ve been landslides if “electability” was the most important characteristic.

  6. DanDare says

    There are so many people caught in internet bubbles who do not have real life community or their community is caught in the same bubble.
    My friend I was shocked to discover was trapped in a Jordan P bubble and knew nothing of the election’s actual issues here in Oz.

  7. kome says

    “Electability” is just a code for “won’t upset the status quo that keeps us insiders comfortable”