I mean, what are you suggesting about third parties in America with reference to LibDems?

So my understanding is that Lib Dem party take positions that make otherwise Labour voters vote for them, this causes Labour to lose more seats and doesn't really gain anything for the Lib Dems, as I said they have few seats but last election had 11.5% of total votes. This helped the Cons get more seats than they deserved per the popular vote.

My analogy is that if the Democratic Progressive faction believes that the Democratic Party is not giving them the policies they want, cause centrism or cause the conservative Dems/Lincoln Republicans are influencing the party, there is a significant chance they would splinter off as a third party depending on how good the majority leader is at doing their job. My original point is that we should be worried about who will follow Pelosi as majority leader, cause such mismanagement would give the GOP an opening to win where they shouldn't if Progressives go rogue. Do you believe the narrative that Bernie Bros potentially cost Hillary the election given how 80,000 people across three states made the difference? If yes, then can you see my point? If not, then disregard.


But this is a pretty notable development. Why did this happen?

I can believe your earlier points to the extent that the party apparatus including Fox and the other propaganda arms did not work explicitly for Trump because they were skeptical of how he would rule. I don't believe that logic comes into play for average GOP voters, to clarify. Once he got in and they saw how well he would advance the agenda, they started working to get the base to rally around him. They don't seem to have a hard time convincing GOP voters of falsehoods, I mean they convinced that poor old woman that Obama was a Muslim before he was even elected and she was so confused in the video when McCain said "No ma'm he's not."


Republican elites have been concerned with judges for 60 years, and it's trickled down to voters as polling shows. Republican voters very commonly cite "judges" as one of those single issues. This is changing under Trump in that Dems have come to see the courts as more salient than before.
As a methodological nit pick, when these surveys go out asking what your priorities are, are they are blank lines to fill in or are they giving voters a pre-determined list of choices and they are checking off judges? GOP propaganda has been bringing up 'activist' judges for decades now, so it is a common talking point. Let me flip it on you, if GOP voters responded to judges strongly wouldn't the better play for the election be to withhold the Barret nomination until after the election?


In other words, Republicans came to worship Trump because he reflected their truest long-standing values (of which there is plenty of independent corroboration over the years).
Why is Trump durably more popular with the Republican base than most other Republican politicians or the generic Republican? Because he's an open white male supremacist who triggers the libs. That's what it comes down to.

Because conservative media radicalized their base into white male supremacists. My notion is that propaganda is actually really, really successful. Especially when you have convinced people that every other news source is propaganda.
“I regret in a way voting for Trump. I really do.” She is still fuming about his do-not-sell-your home remarks in Youngstown. “He promised that nobody was going to have to sell their homes. He said they [GM] were going to stay. That’s why I can’t vote for him this year.”

Her sister still strongly supports Trump. “She says she’s going to put a Trump sign in my yard, and I told her, no she’s not.

“My sister says, ‘You should be watching Fox News. You need to be watching Fox News.’ I really don’t have time. If I’m not at the doctor’s, I’m watching my grandkid.”
Same situation, but one is still a true believer and the other has regrets. The only difference? Fox news.



But again, the racism and sexism and cruelty and grievance are essential to that. The loyalty can't arise without those underlying factors. Republicans and their media were loyal to Bush the so-called "compassionate conservative," but not like this. It's not simply the case that Republicans have no underlying values or beliefs while being very easily tribally-manipulated. It's more the exact reverse in fact, that because they have these attributes and values they are more prone to embracing authoritarianism and especially to authoritarianism in the Trumpist cast.
The anger is needed to turn out the base and the angrier you can make them the better come election time. They have no attributes except what the tv tells them, and the tv has been making them angry for a long time.
Monty, you probably know people who are still Mets fans. Tribal-identity is a very strong thing.


But there's little basis to predicate inequality reduction as a means to influencing Republicans, and even less of one to imagine that trying one more time to make an affirmative policy case to them before the act will acutely change their behavior or mindset.
I disagree, I think the current iteration of the Republican party that started with Reagan came in off of stagflation, when the economy boomed under Clinton we had Bush tout 'compassionate' conservatism like you said, when 07 happened we started to see the conservative culture get crazy and now with Corona we are seeing absolutely degenerate behavior. I think there is a link.


Republicans are not economically anxious, as surveys repeatedly find, they are culturally anxious. Republicans are not mad about their lives, they're mad about other people's lives.
Because culturally we dignify people based on their labor and their wealth. You cannot separate the two so cleanly.