James Carville is on tv again warning Dems not to alienate moderate voters by being too woke

[StarfishSaver]

"Woke" is generally defined as being aware of and actively attentive to issues of racial and social justice.

So Carville is telling Black and Brown folk that Democrats should stop being aware of and actively attentive to our concerns because it might upset moderate (white) voters.

And people wonder why many of us are telling him to STFU.

[spooky3]

1. Very annoying. There is no need for him to be so dismissive and

so anti-intellectual.

Yes, we need to appeal to more voters, but that’s not the way to do it.

[StarfishSaver]

4. He's not interested in appealing to more voters

He just wants to appeal to white voters.

But he obviously found something that wi get him a lot of media attention, so he's going to be on this like a dog on a bone.

[spooky3]

7. Maybe to appeal to dumb white voters. I think he's forgetting the

Voters who put Biden and Harris in the White House.

[PurgedVoter]

20. Yep, he was quiet all during the Trump years.

Now he wants to dog whistle and he apparently doesn't get what Stacy Abrams contributed and continues to contribute to the party. I am tired, dead tired of the pundit class telling us we need to be more like Republicans.

Has Mr. Carville even looked at the crazy evil that Republicans are? Oh yes I guess he has. He married to one of the core members of the crazy gang. Mr. Carville makes me embarrassed for my skin color.

[leftyladyfrommo]

76. Obama said something important one time when I

watching him . He said "We want to win!"

If you win you can make your more progressive changes once you get in office.

[StarfishSaver]

77. That's not the same thing as Carville is saying

Not even close.

Obama was talking about policies, not principles. Carville's doing something completely different and he should be ashamed of himself.

[Hortensis]

116. Carville IS talking about winning. "Keep your eyes on the prize." nt

[StarfishSaver]

118. He's talking about winning by making some of us stop talking about certain principles in order

not to offend white people who are offended when we talk about those principles.

[uponit7771]

142. You don't "win" by telling people to stop using terms black people appropriated 100 yrs ago, that's

... stupid on its face.

Are people even reading their own posts?!?!

[Hortensis]

145. Are people even thinking instead of just reacting

would be the question if the answer that many aren't weren't obvious. Not agreeing with a black DUer or their acolytes on racism threads is not proof of racism. This may shock, but not everything is even about racism.

Keeping Republicans out of office is, however, intensely anti-racism. People who won't commit to win are not committed to combating racism.

Anyone who insists on using terms proven to stoke frightened resistance against electing Democrats is empowering the Republicans and white supremacy. Doesn't matter how much they deceive themselves that they're not.

[uponit7771]

147. ... and not everyone is saying everything is about racism. Telling people to stop using words black

... people appropriated years ago because he's unaware might not be racism either it might just be lack of knowledge due to privilege.

You don't "win" by appropriating the oppositions framing of a subject, that's not even rational thought

[Hortensis]

151. Try telling that to the many thousands who shifted their votes

to Republican reps last fall and see if one pays enough attention to yawn.

ELECTIONS ARE REAL, AND THESE WORDS HAD REAL CONSEQUENCES. We lost 13 seats in the house alone, and this language weaponized against us was the #1 reason. THAT is exactly why we're talking about it.

Most using those poisoned terms weren't even Democrats, of course; Fox et al and Russia were the big ones.

Some will learn and refuse to be useful idiots for them. And some won't.

[uponit7771]

152. Biden won the election last year

[Hortensis]

153. Right. nt

[uponit7771]

155. By not appropriating the oppositions framing on anything including outgroup words. Right?

[StarfishSaver]

154. If these voters shifted their vote because of a slogan, we need to adjust our lingo

Last edited Thu Apr 29, 2021, 02:45 PM - Edit history (2)

But if they switched because they think Democrats are too woke,, we need to write them off and find other voters who aren't offended by Democrats trying to live up to our principles.

[uponit7771]

157. +10000!! SS, we're so screwed that we don't to talk to groups of humans. There's science behind

... talking to groups of humans in a certain way and we as a party don't know the first thing about it and is a reason why kGQP can say "Biden hates meat" and sane folk don't see that as stupid on its face.

Like EarlG said we don't win an argument by appropriating and the oppositions framing of anything and not attacking said framing but I've got nearly 20 post of people saying its the slogans fault !!!

No!!

Its bad campaigning to accept kGQP framing of 95% of anything and people are arguing till their blue in the face a freakin slogan lost us votes with no empirical proof !!

[Hortensis]

158. Well, we're not talking about informed or

ideologically committed voters, are we? They apparently did what swingy voters extremely often do, which is to balance a president they wanted but were encouraged to think might be "too radical" by sending conservative reps to congress.

Outrageously ignorant and irresponsible given today's realities, but then that's even more common than the voting pattern.

[JoeOtterbein]

2. I liked James better when Tucker still...

...wore a bow-tie.

[mzmolly]

3. I took it to mean, too academic?

He said Democrats can come across as condescending and miss reaching the average voter as a result.

[StarfishSaver]

6. That's not what he said and that's not what he meant

Carville knows good and well what woke means - and he knows it doesn't mean overly intellectual. He's dog whistling to beat the band.

And if he REALLY means that, he needs to stop referring to it as "woke."

[mzmolly]

9. If that's the case his comments were well over

my head.

That said, it's ignorant for him to use terminology that can be easily confused. Especially while he's lecturing Democrats on voter outreach.

[StarfishSaver]

12. Exactly - and especially since he's lecturing Democrats about the language we use

in that outreach.

And fyi - you probably didn't hear it because he's not talking to you. But the people he's talking to heard it loud and clear.

[mzmolly]

15. I'm glad Joe isn't

taking his advice, if it's what you suggest it is.

We need to be MORE "woke" on issues of racial and economic injustice, not less.

[uponit7771]

57. RIGHT !!

[Bev54]

18. Yes in a way. What he is trying to say is quit using new fangled phrases

that could be said in plain language. Speak to people like you would your neighbour instead of using language to replace a normal conversation. He is absolutely correct, quit saying stupid shit like defund police when that is not what the intentions are. Say what you mean so non political voters know exactly what you mean. I 100% agree with him.

[StarfishSaver]

21. No, that's not what he's saying

If that were the only message he was trying to convey, he'd just say that - and he would leave "woke" out of it since "wokeness" has nothing to do with language or messaging.

[Bev54]

31. Woke is exactly it

Most non political people are not even sure what "woke" is so stop using it.

[tonedevil]

41. Most white people maybe. /nt

[uponit7771]

42. Black people have been using woke for nearly 100 years, we didn't use it as a political term

[joetheman]

65. Slaves used to tell each other to "stay woke."

Perhaps James would feel better if blacks said "stay awake?" Wonder what James would have thought about the phrase, "a trains' acomin?"

[StarfishSaver]

68. Because the Ragin Cajun is such a devotee of the King's English

[Bev54]

90. Yes but have they also used defund police and socialism?

People hear different things when those statements are used. To many immigrants, and actually to many people, if you use the word socialism it means communism and if they look it up in the dictionary that is what they will get. If you say defund the police people will think you want to take away or underfund police instead of reforming how they are funded and trained. Just spell out what you want to do and stop with platitudes and catch phrases and just lay out the agenda so it is simple to understand, what and how you plan to achieve it, without republicans defining your catch phrase.

[StarfishSaver]

94. Wokeness is not a slogan

It's a state of mind.

Carville telling people to abandon "wokeness" because someone came up with a slogan he doesn't like is like saying we should walk away from feminism because some men were offended by some of the signs at the Woman's March.

If he has a problem with the slogans, he should talk about the slogans. But bringing wokeness into it takes it to another level - he's saying that the principle is the problem. And he's right. For many of The white people he wants to attract, that principle is offensive and they don't want to hear anything about it, regardless the language that's used.

[Bev54]

98. What I am trying to say is we all have language in our own

environments that mean one thing to us within our community (be it work, home, friends or community) that may mean something else to someone else or they do not understand it. America is a lot of different communities so speak to each of them, using simple language that everyone understands and there is no misunderstanding and people walk away wondering what you are talking about. I use my work as an example, we used acronyms, platitudes, catch phrases etc that were well known within the work environment but if you use them outside, you may as well be speaking a different language.

[StarfishSaver]

101. The problem is that only Black and Brown people and our allies have our language policed this way

Last edited Thu Apr 29, 2021, 12:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Meanwhile, white folks - especially progressives - feel free to say whatever they like however they like and if anyone even suggests that they could say it in a different way, they throw a fit.

In this instance, just as Carville thinks that different language should be employed, He needs to be mindful of what he's saying, the implications thereof and how it's heard by people of color and our allies.

But for some reason, people are doubling down to defend his words while still insisting that we should be expressing ourselves more carefully and with greater precision so that white people better understand what we're saying.

This shouldn't be a one-way street, but unfortunately, it always is.

[Bev54]

102. I am not doubling down. I think he was inarticulate in what he said

and I do think he was addressing the progressives more than anyone else, it is their words that hurt the dems in the house and senate elections and he is trying to tell them to knock it off.

[uponit7771]

105. Do you have any polls that indicated these words hurt dems down ballot? I'm asking because

... when I asked even yesterday people can't point to a poll just claims by people we respect and who I think are wrong.

If a slogan that a candidate didn't ascribe to beat them in an election than that person was .... sleep .... during their campaign.

[Bev54]

107. No I don't have any polls at my fingertips and I am not going to go search for them

It has been discussed at length by many (in print and video) and I know I cringed at hearing progressives using that language, knowing damn well it will be defined by republicans, as it was, and continues to be.

[uponit7771]

108. thx, I know there aren't any so there's no data to back up the notion that slogans beat us

... down ballot and if they did and the person didn't ascribe to them that's bad campaigning on the persons that got beat part.

It can be discussed until the cows come home but until there's some facts to back it up its just that ... a discussion.

There's no facts backing up that those slogans beat us down ballot and its whistling past the grave yard to blame a slogan few to no one ascribed to on bad campaigning

[Bev54]

159. You wanted polls and articles here are just a few.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/11/defund-police-slogan-election-polls-democrats.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/07/usa-today-ipsos-poll-just-18-support-defund-police-movement/4599232001/

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/542108-poll-finds-only-18-percent-support-defund-the-police

[uponit7771]

163. Those aren't polls of how the slogan affected votes just whether or not they were popular

[LetMyPeopleVote]

167. The Law and Order Election

It has been clear to me that you have never worked in a campaign and have no idea as to how campaigns work in the real world. Your emphasis on exit polls has been a source of amusement to me in that this is a great example as to how little you understand how the real world operated. Thank you for the laughs

I finally decided to humor you (after all you have provide me with some good laughs) and found some exit polls for you. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2020/11/09/defund_the_police_backfired_on_democrats_528914.html

Instead of a blue wave for the Democrats, there was a red Republican wave in the 2020 elections. Many analysts are explaining this unexpected outcome in ways that confirm their prior assumptions. Anti-woke centrist liberals: The Democratic Party was too woke. Bernie Sanders-type social democrats: The Democrats blew it by not running on Medicare for All. Professional conservative pundits: Trump and Trumpism are more popular with Americans than we thought.

I beg to differ. I think this was a law and order election.

According to early exit polls, here were the reasons that voters voted for Trump and presumably other Republicans: The economy (82%), crime and safety (71%), health care policy (36%), the coronavirus pandemic (14%) and racial inequality (8%).....

Maybe the slogan “defund the police” backfired.

Democrats might reply: But Biden and Harris rejected the phrase “defund the police.” Indeed, they did. And Donald Trump has repeatedly denounced and rejected white supremacy and white nationalism. Nevertheless, the mainstream media and Democratic propagandists (but I repeat myself again) have told us for four years that by denouncing white supremacy in public, Trump is secretly approving of white supremacy, dog-whistle-style.

Turnabout is fair play. Having tried to persuade voters that all Republicans are closet Nazis whose public statements cannot be taken at face value, Democratic spinmeisters in the media cannot be surprised if it turns out that some swing voters have concluded that apparently mainstream Democrats are closet antifa sympathizers. Possibly many swing voters thought that actions—or, in the case of the summer riots, inaction—spoke louder than words about the Democratic Party’s attitude to law enforcement, particularly when many Democratic urban governments from Minneapolis to Austin proceeded relentlessly to cut police budgets in the name of racial justice, even as the violence was going on.

When you put together two facts—the fact that the Republican Party as a whole picked up voters, and the fact that 71% of voters for the Republican presidential candidate said they were motivated by “crime and safety”—it all adds up. The voter backlash following the urban riots of 1967 helped to produce the Nixon victory of 1968. And the voter backlash following the urban riots of 2020 helped to produce the Republican electoral wave in November 2020.

[Caliman73]

129. Agreed.

Policies affecting Black and Brown people or women is called "identity politics". Policies affecting White people is called... Politics.

Why is that? White is an identity. Unfortunately it is the identity that most of society caters to. The default, so if Black and Brown people, and women, who have been left out of the full benefits of society are asking to be let into the game, we are being "divisive" and will turn people off.

Again, Why? Why does it turn people off for a Black person to ask for police to stop shooting unarmed Black people, to say Black Lives matter. We already know White lives matter. Black Lives Matter too, or at least they should.

[uponit7771]

103. Woke was never a platitude for black people, we never asked white people to use it and black people

... shouldn't even be informed that it doesn't communicate to others folk by an unaware (at the least) white person.

Yes, DTP communicates to me as a black man ... who in the world wants to fund assholes to terrorize them?

That's stupid on its face, few people think they should pay any oppressor to oppress them.

I understand its for the most part sentiment because black people don't hate police like a lot of uninformed and racist people like to think.

Again, outgroups use silly shit like terminology to distract from the true issue of oppression under the guise of "that'll scare that other group of people who doesn't give a shit about you" :rolleyes:

[StarfishSaver]

109. +1,000,000

[Caliman73]

130. And unfortunately it works.

Which is why right wingers like to lie about it. If you abolish the police, like Democrats want to... chaos will reign. Black people will come to your house, steal your stuff, rape your wives and children...etc...fucking etc... AND PEOPLE FALL FOR IT.

I am not particularly in favor of "Defund the Police" as a slogan, only because it is too easy to corrupt it, as has been done. I am in favor of using the billions upon billions of dollars used to arm police and put more and more into our neighborhoods, and use those funds for social services that build up communities rather than surveil and police them. A person with a home, a good job, with goals, with access to health services, and with connections to their community is way less likely to commit crime than people who live in squalor, where they are isolated, lack resources, and see illicit activity as their only shot out of that existence.

Police do not provide any of the things I mentioned above, and they take up the vast majority of city budgets. The slogan I would choose is:

Fund Communities. Decrease Crime.

[uponit7771]

136. Does Biden hates meat work? thx in advance

[Caliman73]

138. Probably less effective.

The whole issue of "woke" and "defund the police" play on the racial animus that was used to justify slavery, the taking of indigenous people's land, and to facilitate the financial exploitation of poor White people by giving them targets to look down upon.

I am sure that with enough time and hammering of the false message that Biden wants to come for your hamburgers, it may be more effective, but racism is built into the fabric of American society, so it takes very little to activate that fear and/or hatred.

I grew up in LA where Black people and Latinos often lived in proximity. Both were looked down upon by White people in power but we often fought among ourselves because each were taught to believe the most negative things about each other rather than really understanding the situation.

When you try to imagine as a White person, who has never really had to consider the color of their skin as a safety and survival mechanism, who has lived in a society that while still challenging, was basically set up to conform to their standards, traditions, and experiences, then you have people coming up and challenging that narrative. That is where you get people like Carville who don't want that in their face, and it gives cover for others who are uncomfortable with the ideas.

[uponit7771]

140. The correct answer is hell naw because the people who believe that stupid shit aren't reachable

... by democrats.

We have some ... SERIOUS ... issues on human behavior science and who as a party we should be reaching out to.

[Caliman73]

143. Yeah but this isn't about behavior science...

This is still about trying to coddle White people rather than deal with the 400+ year old elephant in the room.

I don't think that Carville is saying anything about reaching out to conspiracy believers, but he is saying that us Black and Brown people need to tone it down, so as not to upset the White people who are feeling put upon by our demands for full equality.

We do seriously need to be better, as a party, on our messaging. We need to let people know that we want them to make more money at their jobs, feel safe in their homes and communities, have a bigger say in their government, etc... We need to speak plainly about that stuff and pass laws to make it happen. We also need to have a hard and honest conversation about race, gender, etc... and how that has affected large groups of American Citizens' lives over the past decades.

[uponit7771]

146. IT IS !! Omg I couldn't disagree more. You don't throw gasoline on people and expect them to

... like you and you don't reach out to stupid people with weak positions as a group and think they're return in favor.

Yes, science works ... jus damn

[Caliman73]

148. Okay?

Who is throwing gasoline on people?

Who is reaching out to "stupid people"?

Science is certainly the best tool for gathering and analyzing certain information, but it is not infallible and science has been used in some very unscientific ways in the past.

Remember that science was used to codify "differences" in race that were then used as justification for slavery and taking of indigenous people's lands.

That said, I still think that science is the best tool for exploration, but it has limits too.

Still not sure exactly what you are trying to communicate here.

Do you agree with Carville? Totally? Somewhat? Not at all?

[StarfishSaver]

149. This:

"he is saying that us Black and Brown people need to tone it down, so as not to upset the White people who are feeling put upon by our demands for full equality."

[krawhitham]

161. Yes he is

DIRECT QUOTE

You ever get the sense that people in faculty lounges in fancy colleges use a different language than ordinary people? They come up with a word like “Latinx” that no one else uses. Or they use a phrase like “communities of color.” I don’t know anyone who speaks like that. I don’t know anyone who lives in a “community of color.” I know lots of white and Black and brown people and they all live in ... neighborhoods.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with these phrases. But this is not how people talk. This is not how voters talk. And doing it anyway is a signal that you’re talking one language and the people you want to vote for you are speaking another language. This stuff is harmless in one sense, but in another sense it’s not.

[Hekate]

168. This is exactly what I heard him say. The very words.

The only part I disagree with is he said “faculty lounges,” when all along I’ve been thinking “late night bull sessions in college dorms.”

I am over 70. I remember being an undergraduate, especially that heady time as a sophomore and junior, when new vocabulary and new concepts were flooding into my brain, and I just had to share them. Other people — those not in college, for instance — were obligated to understand me, not the other way around. But at the time I was very excited by the newness of it all, and did not understand the rolling of the eyes.

Am I not woke? Kids, I was woke before you were born. And so was James Carville. We are not your enemy.

[mzmolly]

22. I agree

with your sentiments about language like 'defund police' ... and I believe if that's what Carville is saying, he's right.

I am sorry that he chose the word 'woke' to describe the issue, as that can confuse an otherwise good message.

[StarfishSaver]

23. Funny how he's using confusing and misleading language to lecture us a out our language

But I don't think that's what he's doing. He's not stupid, uniformed, naive, or inarticulate. He knows exactly what "woke" means and he knows it has nothing to do with such slogans as "defund the police."

He's not just telling Democrats to be more precise in our language - If that's what he meant, he would just say that. He's attacking a mindset and worldview of people who are paying close attention to issues of racism and social justice. He's not complaining about what we say. He's complaining about how we think.

[mzmolly]

25. I hope that's not so.

https://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/James_Carville_Civil_Rights.htm

If it is, he can suck it.

[Bev54]

33. No he is not, he is talking strictly about messaging

and he is so right, I do believe the defund police, and a few other terms used, scared the hell out of people and opened the dems up to having the republicans determine their messaging. It has to change, it reminds me so much of when I worked in business, the buzz phrases were everywhere and everyone used them until the next one came along, it was all bullshit but everyone did it. I hated it and our clients would look at us like we were in some other universe.

[tonedevil]

37. Better to use the language of Wypipo.

[uponit7771]

43. So black people should use terms white people understand to convey a message ?! REALLY ?!

[Mossfern]

54. If they're trying to communicate with White people

Yes. That's what communication is about.

[StarfishSaver]

55. Maybe white people should try harder to understand what they're being told

Instead of playing stupid.

This isn't complicated language. It's been explained to them every which way for decades. They don't "understand" because they don't WANT to understabnd.

It's long past time for white people to stop playing this game - as if they are some kind of clueless but ultra desirable object of great desire and affection whom Black people must win over, but ONLY if we woo them JUST right with the perfect words and gestures so as not to be banished from their presence with a wave of their dainty wrist and actually take some responsibility in this endeavor.

This "I'd be open to caring about your equality if you just asked me right ... No, that's not right. Ask me again, but better this time. No, that's no good either. Say it again, this time with more feeling. Nope, sorry. Try again, but this time with less feeling because you're scaring me" approach is bullshit.

[Mossfern]

131. You're missing the point

and generalizing and stereotyping. People will not respond well to hostility.

[StarfishSaver]

133. "hostility"

Of course

[Mossfern]

139. Well,

maybe you might want to explore that. Maybe "woke" means something else to you, but my nephew's wife is divorcing him because he is not woke enough. That kind of behavior is what pushes people in the exact opposite direction. That's my experience with the term.

It's become that people sometimes have to prove that they're not bigoted - doesn't works so well that way.
It's like telling someone who has a pimple in the middle of their face "Hey, you got a pimple in the middle of your face."
BTW, my analogies are usually far fetched, so I accept that you won't except it.

[uponit7771]

56. The question was rhetorical, if people don't WANT to understand a message they focus on ...

... the messenger or semantics or something else relatively small to deflect away from the priority issue at hand.

This is text book deflection; focusing on semantics as insular (which is what really Carville doesn't like) vs focusing on the issue of systemic racism that is in front of us.

The real reason he's bringing it up is because of the people he hangs around and doesn't hear these terms from.

He needs closer relationships to the PoC he's around or more ethnically (not just culturally) diverse set of friends.

[Bev54]

89. I don't even know what you mean by that

nobody has brought race into this at all.

[uponit7771]

91. Woke in this context was appropriated by black people nearly 100 years ago some white people

Last edited Thu Apr 29, 2021, 11:01 AM - Edit history (1)

... are just now using it

Then a white person is telling people, including black people, that another word should be used to describe people who are socially aware of

This is some ingroup outgroup crap

[StarfishSaver]

97. Not just telling them not to use the word

But instructing us to stop talking about the concept altogether.

Because the idea of white people becoming more sensitive to and aware of racism in America is cryptonite to the white voters Carville wants to attract to our party.

[uponit7771]

100. +1, I don't get it with some people seeing we should go after the suppressed and non voter vs ...

... the voters who voted for Trump and most likely aren't going to change.

He's stuck in an error were the middle ground voter takes way more resources than a suppressed or non voter to get involved.

[StarfishSaver]

44. If he were just talking about messaging, why talk about "wokeness" at all

He's not talking only about messaging. He's telling Democrats to stop worrying about being "woke" - i.e. stop worrying about being acutely aware of racism and the bed for social justice - because that's making us say things that offend a particular group of moderate (i.e. white) voters.

If he's worried strictly about messaging he would just say to change the message or stop saying certain things. But he's not blaming what he thinks is a problem on language but on "wokeness." You can try to sugarcoat it all you want, but he's engaging in an age-old ploy and many people - especially those of us who are the subject of it - recognize exactly what he's doing.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

62. "circle round" "no worries" :)

[mzmolly]

67. Like "kudos"

That word still makes me cringe.

[Duppers]

35. Exactly - it's not about being "woke" but vocabulary.

Carville needs to alter his vocab.

[StarfishSaver]

46. Don't you find it interesting that then man who's lecturing us about our vocabulary

needs to alter his own vocabulary he's using to lecture us?

He needs to get his own shish straight before telling us what we should be doing.

But this isn't just vocabulary.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

61. 100% agree too.

[Hortensis]

113. Also agree completely. That's what people who genuinely want

to build coalitions that can smash racism do.

[StarfishSaver]

115. Lol!

[Hortensis]

117. "Keep your eyes on the prize." Carville's not your enemy.

We're all allies in the battle for equality.

[StarfishSaver]

119. You're also not a victim here, so please stop pretending you are

[Hortensis]

120. Yes, actually I am. You really should know that. nt

[StarfishSaver]

125. Yes. I guess I should know by now you would think that.

[Hortensis]

126. Lol, I did know you would deny my problems with equality.

Fortunately (AA are 13+% of the population and not accomplishing anything without a whole lot of help from larger groups), those who support equality for everyone -- because it's in their bones -- can't be driven away from their own cause. It's about them, it's about everyone. And no matter how much more embattled some may feel, they're all part of our great cause.

Which includes, btw, all the other embattled minority groups and women virtually never mentioned here, strangely including by those most passionately engaged. More allies with problems denied?

“It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America.” ~ A white woman (like she'd know anything about it!)

[Claire Oh Nette]

28. THe Faculty Lounge language

He said democrats come off as pedantic and condescending. Carville also noted Bill Clinton never sounded like he was talking down to people. Biden doesn't either.

Carville's point is not to speak in the language of Wokeness--who sounds like that?? Biden's speech was plain-spoken. The Biden Republicans will respond to that forward looking, America building, plain spoken language.

[Bev54]

34. That is exactly correct.

[StarfishSaver]

47. What is "the language of Wokeness"?

In my experience, whenever people complain about how they're being talked down to in this context, they're really complaining about the topic, not how it's being framed. That is the case here.

The moderates whose cause Carville is taking up don't like the "language of Wokeness" because they're not interested in hearing about civil rights and social justice and, in fact many if them are offended by any discussion about it.

They're just like the people on this board who get pissed off whenever race and racism is brought up because they see any discussion beyond "aside from people who wear hoods and burn crosses, white people are wonderful and white Democrats are perfect allies to whom Black and Brown people should be eternally grateful" as a personal attack on them.

Complaining about how the "language of Wokeness" offends moderates is a classic way of telling Black and Brown people and our allies to shut up already.

[Claire Oh Nette]

106. THank you for your analysis.

I took it to mean saying things like Black people instead of "People of color," or the democrats tendency to be wonky about issues. It's not just the big words or factually accurate use of words, but connecting unresolved issues of race to every aspect of our society.

Kind of like Black history is American history. Start with Black people, and you'll get white history, too. Start with white people, and you might never know natives or Black people existed.

[mzmolly]

70. That

was my take. But he should consider different terminology to articulate that message.

[StarfishSaver]

73. He should use different terminology to tell people they should use different terminology?

[mzmolly]

81. Yes.

'Woke' has meaning beyond terminology, which is what you started the thread to discuss.

[StarfishSaver]

82. I don't think you realize what you're aaying

[mzmolly]

83. I do.

I've been voting Dem for decades. I grew up in low income, diverse areas and have an interracial family. I've never heard the term 'woke' and until college kids I worked with, used it about two years ago.

[StarfishSaver]

88. You still don't seem to get it

You are defending Carville's attack on the terminology people are using to describe being aware of oppression and systemic racism (and the fact that they're talking about that awareness at all) by saying he shouldn't be criticized because he just uses the wrong terminology. You don't see the irony in that?

And the fact that you didn't hear the term "woke" until a couple of years ago in no way means the term is somehow less valid, useful or relevant.

[mzmolly]

92. I'm not defending it.

I said he should use different language to critique the language/messaging used by some in the party. Yes, I understand the irony.

And the fact that you didn't hear the term "woke" until a couple of years ago in no way means the term is somehow less valid, useful or relevant.

It's a meaningless word to me. I am among those who prefer specifics like 'justice' and 'equality'.

[StarfishSaver]

95. "Justice and equality" are discussed ALL the time

And the same people Carville is chasing find those terms offensive, too - at least when they're used in a context that actually means anything or that means THEY have to do anything about it.

Pretty much everyone claims they're all for "justice and equality." Even right-wing Republicans say that. The problem comes in when we try to define what that means - and we press them to recognize the systemic problems in our society that make justice inequality almost impossible to achieve unless we make some major changes to the very foundations of our country. THAT's where the problem comes in.

People who are "woke" understand that. They know that justice and equality are not just empty terms to be thrown around to make everyone feel good, but requires honest and often painful self-reflection, difficult admissions, and hard work.

Carville's problem is not that people are using the wrong words to describe this. His problem is that it's being talked about at all - because he thinks it makes certain white people uncomfortable. But the people made uncomfortable by this need to feel some discomfort since that's the only way that this can be addressed. Otherwise we're just playing kumbaya and throwing around feel-good buzz words that don't mean anything

[mzmolly]

96. He's not offended.

He's suggesting we can reach more people with less AOC lingo.

When Chauvin was convicted after months of protesting for "Justice for George" we were told by AOC not to use the word "justice" but instead to say "accountability" ... bullshit. I prefer the term justice and that's what I'll continue to say to express my sentiments on the conviction of Chauvin on three counts of murder.

[StarfishSaver]

99. If this is just about "lingo" why is he talking about "wokeness" at all?

He's saying we need to abandon "wokeness" because it's causing us problems. That's like saying we should abandon feminism because some men were offended by the signs at the Women's March.

And, fyi, wokeness about far more than "justice." And until more white people open their eyes to the existence and insidiousness of systemic racism in this country, their view is what constitutes "justice" will remain a serious problem. Lots of white people (some right here on this board) think it's "justice" for a police officer to shoot an unarmed Black man in the back because "he was in fear of his life." They don't know or care that institutionalized racism has so contaminated our institutions that many people believe that Black people are more dangerous and this deserve to be shot and such an outcome isn't racist at all, but is actually "justice."

So until we start looking seriously at the underlying problems in our institutions, "justice" really doesn't mean anything. That's what weakness is. And telling us to abandon it is a very damaging thing

[mzmolly]

104. It's a matter of how he defines

"wokeness" vs. how you do.

I don't know of people on this board who don't recognize the impact of institutional racism.

[StarfishSaver]

110. It's not up to him to define it

It is what it is and isn't up for interpretation or "he said-she said."

Besides, he knows exactly what it is.
If he doesn't, he should ask the people who coined the term and used it long before white folks tried to appropriate it. But he already knows.

And there are plenty of people on this board who don't recognize the existence of systemic racism. Oh, sure - they say they recognize that it exists, but whenever it comes into play they always deny that that particular instance has anything to do with systemic racism - They're big on telling us "Sure, racism exists, but that's not happening in THIS case. You can't assume just because it happened in another case, that that's what's going on here."

Either they really don't understand how SYSTEMIC racism actually works (among other things, it cannot be addressed or viewed in isolation) or they don't care and they're just giving lip service.

[Deuxcents]

5. I just watched him

I did not get the message you described.

[dweller]

8. I liked carville better

when he wore a trash can over his head

✌🏻

[Champion Jack]

10. Not this crap again.....

[StarfishSaver]

13. Yup. Carvilles's spewing this crap again

[BootinUp]

11. This aint the 1990's Jimbo.

[tishaLA]

14. Brian Williams eats that shit up

He doesn't know what to do when Jason Johnson goes on one of his righteous rants against narrow minded, "race blind." safe politics.

[ismnotwasm]

16. Yeah well fuck that kind of coded racism

It’s bullshit

[johnp3907]

17. Do we need to be more "rural" and less "urban" Jimbo?

Next he’ll be telling us to pipe down about Women’s Lib.

[Fiendish Thingy]

19. Carville apparently didn't get the memo that Pragmatic Incrementalism has been cancelled. Nt

[WHITT]

24. Hate To Break It To Carville

He claims nobody uses the term 'Latinx', but a lot of younger Latinos, and I don't just mean just kids, do describe themselves as 'Latinx'. Just because Carville is a cloistered old fart, doesn't mean we all should be.

[Celerity]

29. even worse, when he says he doesn't know a single person of colour who has ever used that term

smdh

[uponit7771]

45. RIGHT !!

[Hoyt]

26. Glad to have the Carvilles in the Party. He's not always right, gaffes a lot,

but there are millions like him. But I get OP’s point too.

Until we consistently win elections, people are going to worry.

[Bucky]

51. Carville is looking at the US Senate.

Right now it's going to be damn hard to get a strong majority with 40% of the country in thrall to Mussolini's American zombie. Carville thinks he can still crack that egg.

But honestly, we didn't get to be the Democratic Party by not fighting for the people who need our support. We could always be a little wiser--the kookie stuff like de-naming schools after Lincoln and Washington can bite Bender's SMA--but you look at what the Biden admin is doing, infrastructure, voting rights, refunding Obamacare, that's not far left stuff.

I think Carville is just getting distracted and worn down by all the right wing noise. Which makes sense. That's his playground.

[tulipsandroses]

27. I did hear him say that Dems can be condescending. That was news to me

I don't agree with him on this. It sounds like he is asking Dems to dumb themselves down, not take on issues that wrankle " rural" folks.
There can be no true progress if things don't get wrankled.

In an article regarding this same "Wokeness problem" - he mentioned something about Dems paying a price for AOC meanwhile the rethugs don't pay a price for MTG. So is it our fault that repubs have resorted to the lowest of the low?
I don't think that's the problem. Dems will be demonized no matter what. A good section of the country is brain washed. They are continuously fed lies and conspiracies. Many have shown that they are willing to give up democracy if it means that they get to hold on to bigoted beliefs and actions. I don't believe there is anything Dems can do to win those folks.

[StarfishSaver]

48. Exactly o matter what we say, they will twist it into something else

So why demand that Democrats adjust our language so they don't? It's stupid. But bringing "wokeness" into it takes it beyond stupid into something else more insidious.

[Bucky]

52. I think he wants to have a grown up, respectful conversation with conservatives

Good luck with that, Jim. Hope you find one

[uponit7771]

59. +1, this is my impression too; he thinks they're reachable republicans instead of getting the

... people who are suppressed or disenfranchised to vote.

[msfiddlestix]

30. Never been a big fan of Carville..

I heard that interview, and he didn't say what you're saying he said.

He was referencing College Academics coming up with language which isn't relatable to the general population. For instance he referenced Lantinx .. the general population has no idea what that means. And why should they? He surmised these terms were being generated from University Academia and that it was condescending to the average voter/general population.

And his point is that being condescended to is a turn off.

I'm paraphrasing, but that's essentially what he was trying to convey.

[StarfishSaver]

49. That may be all you heard, but that's not all he said

The dog whistle may have been out of your range. But plenty of other people heard it.

If he were only saying what you heard, he could have done all of that without going anywhere near "wokeness." Carville's not stupid and he's not inarticulate. He's an excellent communicator and chooses his words very carefully.

He's sending a message. And many of us can hear exactly what's it is.

[msfiddlestix]

63. I didn't intend to suggest what I wrote was all I heard...

just to be clear on that point.

My intention was to clarify the apparent perception he holds of the language describing a range of current talking points which he perceives as a creation of the current community of academia, and that it comes off as condescending to the general population.

Suggesting it is factor among voters to whom is feeling/perceiving as another way to be looked down on, which will be felt at the voting box, meaning Dems are going to lose more and more elections.

That's essentially the meaning of what I heard him say. I don't see it as a dog whistle, but as a factor that maybe should be considered
a little bit more carefully when addressing the general public with thoughts on matters such as say, Police Reform for instance.

[StarfishSaver]

66. It's interesting that people are going through so much effort interpreting what he said

in order to prove that it's not offensive ...

while not seeing the irony in devoting this much effort to explaining what he REALLY means when he's telling people to stop saying something because some people claim not to understand what we mean.

As usual, Black and Brown people and our allies are being told that we have no agency to express our truth in our own words because our words make shrinking group of white people uncomfortable, so we should therefore not say it - and yet people have no problem with the fact that being told to be quiet time and again is extremely offensive to US.

Maybe Carville should take his own advice and stop saying things that we see as tone-deaf and insensitive.

[msfiddlestix]

78. You've asserted intentions in my words and intentions which are simply not true.

But I see that you're not willing to hear me. I'll lay some of that on me, for not going out of my way to specifically express my understanding of your perceptions.

My negligence, which I'll bare in mind in any future conversations I attempt to engage in this context, because it takes two to concede another point of view, and it takes a lot of time and effort. No shortcuts, no assumptions.

[StarfishSaver]

85. I know nothing about your intentions and haven't inferred or suggested what they may be

I'm simply responding to what you have said.

[Sympthsical]

32. "Woke" is generously defined by those who consider themselves it

Just as "Christianity" is a great thing to those who practice.

Those who have seen the detrimental effects of it and how it interferes in their own lives have a less positive feeling for the word.

Woke doesn't mean simply racial and social justice. If it did, no one would care. Other liberals and progressives wouldn't care.

Woke has become a toxic, dogmatic, ideological orthodoxy that actively goes after and harms heretics who don't adhere to terms and demands obedience and uniformity in a way that most fundamentalist religions do.

I am all here for racial, social, and economic justice. God knows our society is sorely overdue for some true equality and the policies that will ameliorate the wrongs of the past.

But that's not what wokeness is. And after spending an evening on Twitter watching the "woke" explain why Asian lives don't matter so much, because they're practically white and whites are the worst.

Your and my definitions of woke are super different. And I don't appreciate the gas-lighting about it.

I now have to protect the communities I care about not just against the right-wing, but the dogmatism of the Woke who do just as much harm.

It's a fun existence. Those interested in justice would join me in being horrified by it all. But again, Wokeness isn't about justice. It hasn't been in a number of years. It's a tribalistic religious-like political dogma that thinks racism is ok if it's against the right people, that only some lives matter if the circumstances fit the narrative, think Bad Words are the same things as answers to arguments, that feelings trump truth, and that anyone who steps out of line is a heretic whose life should be destroyed.

The problem with fundamentalists of every stripe - they always think they're on the side of the angels.

They never figured the Devil was coming from inside the house.

[Mossfern]

137. Amen!

gazillion +

[misanthrope]

160. Very well stated.

All the stringency of fundamentalist Christianity with none of the redemption.

[Sympthsical]

165. I will absolutely steal that

So perfectly put.

[mzmolly]

162. Well

said!

[King_Klonopin]

36. Dixie-Dem speaking from the past. n/t

[orleans]

38. carville -- ugh. and (imo) he's been out of touch for years

too much life with mary perhaps?

i liked him years ago but the last five or ten years? fuck him.

[ibegurpard]

39. Really not super interested in the opinion of someone

Who can actually maintain a marriage with someone who could vote for Trump twice.

[Sgent]

40. The most interesting thing he said

is that 18% of the country elects 52 senators. Let that sink in. Our system sucks but a voter in MT or IA is worth a lot more than one in CA or NY when it comes to the Senate, and to passing any type of legislation.

[msfiddlestix]

64. This 10,000 %

That's essential bottom line that isn't being factored in by some of our elected Congress members going on tv to talk about a range of issues relative to this discussion.

[mzmolly]

84. That was stunning.

I agree.

[JHB]

50. If he were really concerned about "wokeness" he would work against...

...the people who have put great effort into giving the word the meaning which he (supposedly) is so concerned about.

And those people are not Democrats. It's the Republicans and conservative media that have seized on it as their new favorite chew toy, their new bucket to vomit bile into. With that to deal with, there's no way to "not alienate moderate voters" because even if we dropped one word they've taffy-pulled the meaning of, they'll just seize on something else and do the same with that.

Or, to borrow from a certain someone,
"It's the right-wing media, stupid!"


Work on that problem, Jimbo, instead of concern-trolling Democrats.

Oh, and how's the wife? Still running that wingnut-welfare book mill?

[Maxheader]

58. I don't see a problem.

An awareness the issues are being addressed. And that the

politicians are aware of their voters preferences. Don't beat

it to death......imho...

[StarfishSaver]

60. Except that's not even close to what he's saying

[Maxheader]

164. Well maybe I didn't understand what he said relative to the op?

Linky?....

[USALiberal]

69. DU experts acting like they know more than carville! Nt

[StarfishSaver]

72. There are obviously quite a few people here who know far more a out being "woke" than Carville does

Carville was a great political strategist in the 1990s. But that was 30 years ago - and he's been trading on it ever since, with little else to show for it.

What successful campaigns has anyone actually paid him to work on in the last 10 years?

As far as I can tell, he spends most of his time now making money on his reputation and wacky persona. I don't know that anyone serious about winning elections has paid for his advice in quite some time. Probably because his chops have gotten a little, shall we say, dull ...

In 2007, he dismissed Barack Obama as the candidate "most likely to explode or implode."

In 2010, he said, "If Hillary gave up one of her balls and gave it to Obama, he'd have two."

After the polls closed on election night 2018, he looked at the map everyone else was looking at and announced that the Democrats had blown it and there was no Blue Wave.

In 2019, he loudly endorsed Michael Bennett, who, with Carville's wind in his sails, went on to win 0.3% of the vote (with a whopping 963 votes) in the only primary he ran in before dropping out of the race.

So, while he was great a few decades ago, I'm not all that impressed with him these days - and am sure there are plenty of people here who know more than he does. They definitely know not to say the kinds of dog whistles he's throwing out there.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

75. Agree. And sounds like more than Sharpton, Plouffe, Obama too. They

"got it" - the concept.

[gulliver]

71. Where did this word "woke" even come from?

Did the Republicans make it up as a code word to use with their base against those who are, as you say, "actively attentive to issues of racial and social justice?" I watch a lot of liberal TV and read a lot of liberal publications. I never see any of us using the word "woke," at least not seriously. I see it used in jokes from time to time.

Have some on our side inadvertently bought into a Republican framing by defending the word "woke," when words like "fairness, equity, and justice" are perfectly fine and available to use free of charge?

[StarfishSaver]

74. Woke has been around for decades. It's not a new term

It's only a problem BECAUSE people know it means "fairness, equity, and justice" and they don't want to hear it, no matter what words are used to describe it.

Carville isn't complaining about the language. He wants us to stop talking about these ideas altogether because he thinks they're scaring off the white people he is so sure are indispensable to the Democratic Party.

[gulliver]

79. Unlike the other words, "woke" seems to imply that some people are "un-woke"

...i.e., sleeping or unenlightened. Leave aside that it has an element of truth. It's not putting our best foot forward.

If you say you're for "justice for all," you're just saying something every kid says in the Pledge of Allegiance. So "justice" is a noun that is positive and "pro-justice" is something most people would want to be.

[StarfishSaver]

80. Some people ARE unwoke

That's the point.

One thing that well-intentioned unwoke or partially woke people do is try to tell Black and Brown people what we should say and how we should say it so that we don't make white people uncomfortable in any way or feel that they aren't practically perfect in every way - instead of directing their efforts to helping those white people get over themselves and open their eyes.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

86. Like Sharpton this am!!!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

87. Fuck him. How is he still a thing?

[Lars39]

93. He's a hired gun, always looking out for his next gig,

although at his age (77) and where he was raised (Carville, Louisiana, in the town named after his grandfather) he should know what "woke" means and what is at stake. His privilege and self-interests are badly showing, imo.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

111. Rev Al agrees with Carville

Link to tweet

[johnp3907]

112. I don't.

[StarfishSaver]

114. And he's Black, so

So you also defer to Rev. Al when he says things you disagree with - or do you only pull out the "Rev. Al says it so it must be true" card when he happens to agree with you?

[honest.abe]

121. It means this issue is not as slam dunk as you seem to think..

and have been incessantly arguing on this board for days.

Not all progressives, black or white or brown agree with you. Get over it.

[StarfishSaver]

122. Some people don't agree with me about something we're discussing on a discussion board?

Wow. I didn't know that. And I wouldn't have ever known that had you not told me just now that a famous Black man who talks on teevee may see something differently than I do.

[honest.abe]

127. So stop insulting us for not completely agreeing with you.

There are alternate viewpoints.

[StarfishSaver]

128. Your tendency to feel insulted is a reflection of something but utterly unrelated to me

[honest.abe]

132. You are essentially calling Carville a closet racist and not caring about racial issues.

So by association we are too who are defending him.

That's an insult.

[StarfishSaver]

134. Lol.

It's a stretch on so many different levels, but it is so illustrative of a mindset that it's actually quite instructive.

Thanks for sharing.

[honest.abe]

135. So the insults continue..

Im done.

[uponit7771]

144. Indicating someone's not aware and calling them a closet racist are two different things and I think

... in context Sharpton is wrong too.

There's no reason black people should stop using terms they've used for nearly 100 years because someone white is not comfortable with it or racist want to re-appropriate it.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

150. No, I defer to Rev. Al because he has worked on campaigns in the real world

I watch the Rev.'s show on most weekends (except if he has sanders or a squad member on) and the Rev. is on MSNBC all of the time. I tend to have MSNBC on most days except for the Cross Connection and the Hashan show.

The attacks on Carville are sad and not effective. I want to win races and I was involved in two state house races where the GOP ran negative ads using socialism and defund the police. Both of my friends lost these races. The defund the police slogan is a dumb slogan that cost us seats. This slogan was used very effectively by the GOP in 2020 and the GOP will be using this slogan again. Carville is correct about using dumb slogan like this.

BTW, I have lived in Texas all of my life and I have never heard the term Latinx being used in the real world.

[librechik]

123. Being Woke is better than being weak. By far. n/t

[StarfishSaver]

124. Maybe. But some white people don't like it so shhhhhh

[Generic Brad]

141. Should we also get off his lawn?

[yardwork]

156. Reminds me of the handwringing over gay rights some years ago.

[MrsCoffee]

166. Who?