***Official Political Discussion Thread***

23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
Put him signing the letter aside, what came afterward is where the real ****ty behavior starts imo.

That is not what his coworker did though. She didn't report him to HR, she didn't throw him under the bus, she actually said Matt has been nothing but kind to her, she didn't there to be any official pushback from Vox management toward him. She was apparently one of many people at Vox used a letter to the editor program to make their disagreement with Matt more official.

So I don't how she came close to doing what you characterized. Like she called him an ally, called him kind, what to make sure no disciplinary action was taken against him. In return Matt cherry picks parts of the story to craft a narrative, this results in Emily getting attack and threaten online, to the point Yglesias had to demand people stop it.

Now he quits, runs to conservatives writers to be a posterboy of free speech being stifled, and then cites that one instance again, misrepresenting what Emily did. Which results in another wave of disgusting **** being thrown at her.

If anything, Yglesias is an example of a practice many white affluent liberals like to do. Use their claim allyship as a shield to do ****ty things against marginalized groups. Then when the pushback comes, they pearl clutch. Yglesias doesn't seem like he is pissed his allyship for used against him, he is pissed that his feelings were not central to the discourse around the situation. Even worse, he keeps hinting there is more to the story, yet the only thing he is talking freely about is this one instance. How he was wronged by a transgender coworker who....checks notes...disagreed with him disagreeing with others.

Seems to me that Yglesias is a privilege white dude that loves to kick the hornet's nest whenever he a) thinks it is necessary b) for his own assumment, but this time the right person pushed back, and he ended up with egg on his face. And the thing is that his handling of the situation is not an outlier when it comes to left wing spaces. Sure he is a much better actor/human being/writer than Sullivan and Weis. Weis and Sullivan are entitled bigots. But I think it is a fair comparison to make considering how he is behaving just like them after he quit. Telling a convenient story that paints him as the the only one that was wronged.

Dude is a critic that couldn't handle criticism. A person that couldn't handle the same energy he puts out in the world being return to him in the smallest way.

I think there is a difference between saying members of marginalized groups on the left should have some patience with other members because solidarity is necessary, people are not perfect, and disagreements should be able to exist within the coalition without breaking it. I am all for stop the purity testing. But I am not sympathetic to someone that confuses that sentiment (intentionally or unintentionally) with being allowed to say whatever you want, even if you are an *******, with no pushback.

I think calling him fragile is me letting him off easy.
seems to me you're doing a lot of mind reading when the dudes stated rationale makes total sense.
he wants to write more provocative takes but was told that with him as a Vox founder he has to be more diplomatic in public,


combine that with the fact that younger people at Vox have further left than him and he's no longer in a management position it was worth to go for more independence and take a shot trying the sub stack game.


all this stuff about using ally ship as a shield, and fragility just seems like mind reading. he didn't say he was wronged by anyone, or that he should be a poster child for free speech or anything like that.

i dunno seems to me like you're drawing a lot of extreme inferences when the reality, it's just a dude switching jobs.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
Additionally, they have zero interest in even addressing or acknowledging the systemic racism and inequities that their policies make worse.
yah i think this is our principle disagreement.

it seems to me their are plenty of black voters, particularly older non college educated males. who either don't care, or don't understand the modern conception of systemic racism.

according to pew

22% of black people believe we talk too much about race.

48% of black people believe individual racism is a bigger problem than institutional.

seems to be their are ton of people a conservative populist message could appeal to. maybe the party is too dysfunctional to make it happen. but to it's clear the votes are there.
 
5,270
11,391
Joined Jun 28, 2004
Big picture, 2020 Trump had pretty much the same, as Ta-Nehisi Coates put it in 2016, vast, white coalition as the last time around. The GOP is neither a workers’ party nor is it a multi racial party nor will it become that any time soon.

That said, every part of the Democratic coalition should be concerned that in such a high turnout election, Democrats didn’t romp. With this turnout and with a Republican incumbent facing a huge crisis of his own making, like 2008, but not getting 2008 results should be of grave concern.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
LOL. Bless your heart.
it's very strange to me

the implication is that you think that 90% of black people are always going to vote democrat for the rest of time?

I dunno, I don't think democrats should be so complacent,

imo democrats should work harder to deliver material gains for black and brown communities.

because it seems pretty clear that democrats need to hold that 90-10 margin for their coalition to be viable

and it's totally possible for republicans to make a dent in that.
 

RustyShackleford

Supporter
46,144
115,706
Joined Jul 20, 2009
seems to me you're doing a lot of mind reading when the dudes stated rationale makes total sense.
he wants to write more provocative takes but was told that with him as a Vox founder he has to be more diplomatic in public,


combine that with the fact that younger people at Vox have further left than him and he's no longer in a management position it was worth to go for more independence and take a shot trying the sub stack game.


all this stuff about using ally ship as a shield, and fragility just seems like mind reading. he didn't say he was wronged by anyone, or that he should be a poster child for free speech or anything like that.

i dunno seems to me like you're drawing a lot of extreme inferences when the reality, it's just a dude switching jobs.
So he is not talking to Conor Friedersdorf (a known complainer of so called liberal cancel culture) and Andrew Sullivan (the ultimate complainer of liberal cancel culture), giving a one sided take on a situation as a prime example of why he felt he should leave Vox. He didn't do that?

He doesn't spend his time on Twitter, day after day, being flippant and trollish toward people on the left whenever he feels like it He doesn't do that?

Tons of people journalist switch jobs, do they do they all act like Matt has done on his way out. Hell is Ezra acting like him.

German Lopez openly stated multiple time he dislikes woke politics, and pretty much subtweet that Matt is full of it

Seems like though you are a fan of him, and you are just want to give him the benefit of the doubt. You will rant about ****ty white liberals all day, but it stops at the ****ty white liberal you like.

I guess it all makes sense if I listen to Matt, and only Matt.
 
Last edited:

RustyShackleford

Supporter
46,144
115,706
Joined Jul 20, 2009
it's very strange to me

the implication is that you think that 90% of black people are always going to vote democrat for the rest of time?

I dunno, I don't think democrats should be so complacent,

imo democrats should work harder to deliver material gains for black and brown communities.

because it seems pretty clear that democrats need to hold that 90-10 margin for their coalition to be viable

and it's totally possible for republicans to make a dent in that.
That's the simple solution to the issue?

Damn, never thought about it that way.

They should just ask Mitch to take a vote on the dozens of bills that would improve the material conditions of black communities

Or they could push for policies when they don't have the White House, even though the GOP might take credit for it, and use those things as talking points. Like criminal justice reform, expansionary monetary policy, and stimulus checks.

I wonder why they never try that stuff.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
So he is not talking to Conor Friedersdorf (a known complainer of so called liberal cancel culture) and Andrew Sullivan (the ultimate complainer of liberal cancel cluture), giving a one sided take on a situation as a prime example of why he felt he should leave Vox. He didn't do that?
you make it sound like because he talked to x person it makes his point more extreme than it actually was. it's not like by talking to Friedsersdorf or Sullivan he automatically agrees with all their takes on cancel culture.

again the claim does not sound that extreme or crazy.

the claim just doesn't sound that crazy. it's obvious that younger progressives have different views on speech and harm caused by speech and he disagrees with them he said as much.

“Something we’ve seen in a lot of organizations is increasing sensitivity about language and what people say,” he told me. “It’s a damaging trend in the media in particular because it is an industry that’s about ideas, and if you treat disagreement as a source of harm or personal safety, then it’s very challenging to do good work.”

it's natural as you get older, the younger people are more progressive than you are. and that culture clash can make it harder to do your job.

it just seems to that Ygleiasis is just popular enough that he start his own thing and not have to deal with it.

im not even making value judgment claims about who is right about this cancel culture stuff. it seems to me that minds can differ on the subject and it's not that big of a deal.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
That's the simple solution to the issue?

Damn, never thought about it that way.

They should just ask Mitch to take a vote on the dozens of bills that would improve the material conditions of black communities

Or they could push for policies when they don't have the White House, even though the GOP might take credit for it, and use those things as talking points. Like criminal justice reform, expansionary monetary policy, and stimulus checks.

I wonder why they never try that stuff.
yah you know im aware all that

im saying when they have the power to do stuff they should work harder to deliver for black and brown and not take the vote for granted.

when people act like 90-10 republicans is a hard ceiling as some have said in this thread, it strikes me like that's a recipe to take black voters for granted.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
I think there is a lot of nuance in this "cancel culture" debate that gets lost.

it seems like people get lumped into

"cancel culture is a scurge that's destroying society" or "cancel culture is not real at all."



I used to be more on the it's not at all real and white people are just complaining that they actually have to listen to the concerns of black, brown, gay trans people now.

but as time as gone on I think that's not totally true. I think the social morae's young progressive have generated around speech can definitely be harmful and unproductive a times

and the nature of social media and the internet exacerbates this. if you define that as "cancel culture" than yah id be inclined to believe it's real.
 

RustyShackleford

Supporter
46,144
115,706
Joined Jul 20, 2009
you make it sound like because he talked to x person it makes his point more extreme than it actually was. it's not like by talking to Friedsersdorf or Sullivan he automatically agrees with all their takes on cancel culture.

again the claim does not sound that extreme or crazy.

the claim just doesn't sound that crazy. it's obvious that younger progressives have different views on speech and harm caused by speech and he disagrees with them he said as much.

“Something we’ve seen in a lot of organizations is increasing sensitivity about language and what people say,” he told me. “It’s a damaging trend in the media in particular because it is an industry that’s about ideas, and if you treat disagreement as a source of harm or personal safety, then it’s very challenging to do good work.”

it's natural as you get older, the younger people are more progressive than you are. and that culture clash can make it harder to do your job.

it just seems to that Ygleiasis is just popular enough that he start his own thing and not have to deal with it.

im not even making value judgment claims about who is right about this cancel culture stuff. it seems to me that minds can differ on the subject and it's not that big of a deal.
Did I say that?

Is not that they signed the letter, or he left, or he even talked to those people, is that he is using a ****ty one sided take on a situation as an example too. If dude's beef was that his editors didn't give him freedom to do good work. Then why the hell is he bringing up a situation where someone went out there way to be critical of him but make sure there was no fromal profession blowback.

Something you seem to want to handwave to paint it as though I am reaching to criticize the dude.

If minds could differ and it not be that big a deal. Then why the **** does he even have an issue with his coworkers criticism then.

Walk your *** out the door and shut the **** up, because at the end of the day all your co-workers did was disagree with you.
 
Last edited:

RustyShackleford

Supporter
46,144
115,706
Joined Jul 20, 2009
yah you know im aware all that

im saying when they have the power to do stuff they should work harder to deliver for black and brown and not take the vote for granted.

when people act like 90-10 republicans is a hard ceiling as some have said in this thread, it strikes me like that's a recipe to take black voters for granted.
Huh?

So your point is that the Dems should do what they were planning to do if they got the trifecta?

Cause unless you can name the leaders of the Democratic Party than advocate for doing nothing for black voters, cause 90% will always vote Dem, seems like you care take a sentiment that might exist among a few individuals, and applying it to every Dem.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
Did I say that?

Is not that they signed the letter, or he left, or he even talked to those people, is that he is using a ****ty one sided take on a situation as an example too. If dude's beef was that his editors didn't give him freedom to do good work. Then why the hell is he bringing up a situation where someone went out there way to be critical of him but make sure there was no profession blowback.
i said it sounded like that, if im wrong my bad, you made a point of pointing out Sullivan's and conors thoughts on cancel culture so my assumption was you were implying their views were all aligned.

If dude's beef was that his editors didn't give him freedom to do good work. Then why the hell is he bringing up a situation where someone went out there way to be critical of him but make sure there was no profession blowback.
um ecause it was an example of his opinion on speech and harm vs the younger more progressive vox faculties opinion on speech and harm? the whole point is that there was a tension between me being a vox founder and me just being a opinion columnist and the whole letter incident was an obious example. it's not like he was saying vox is bad, or emily van de worff was bad. he was just pointing out the obvious tension with him being a founder and a sometimes contentious opinion writer.

he also used the tom cotton op-ed as an example

If minds could differ and it not be that big a deal. Then why the **** does he even have an issue with his coworkers criticism then.
he disagrees?

he didn't say they were bad people, or that vox is bad, or that he was screwed over. or not that ive seen?

he just said as far as i can tll, that it's easier to write opinions, when Im not a former founder beholden to a much more progressive faculty especially on the subject on speech and harm.

like i just don't think this departure is as like dramatic or contentious as you make it sound.

he went into it a bit more on the sub stack. how older management dealing with younger faculty is an issue at every media organization.

maybe im crazy but it doesn't seem like it's really like a heated breakup / firing.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
Huh?

So your point is that the Dems should do what they were planning to do if they got the trifecta?

Cause unless you can name the leaders of the Democratic Party than advocate for doing nothing for black voters, cause 90% will always vote Dem, seems like you care take a sentiment that might exist among a few individuals, and applying it to every Dem.
i was responding to comment in this thread. not to the democratic party writ large.

my point is if you take the attitude that 90-10 vote share is a lock, then logically it would lower the urgency to deliver for communities of color.


my point is it's not a lock and the level of urgency should remain high.
 

RustyShackleford

Supporter
46,144
115,706
Joined Jul 20, 2009
i was responding to comment in this thread. not to the democratic party writ large.

my point is if you take the attitude that 90-10 vote share is a lock, then logically it would lower the urgency to deliver for communities of color.


my point is it's not a lock and the level of urgency should remain high.
No one in this thread is a Democratic member of Congress, or a employee of the Democratic Party.

So I don't know how addressing a comment in here, relates to the party's actions, unless you can show me that it does somehow.
 
16,236
5,999
Joined Jul 7, 2005
it's very strange to me

the implication is that you think that 90% of black people are always going to vote democrat for the rest of time?

I dunno, I don't think democrats should be so complacent,

imo democrats should work harder to deliver material gains for black and brown communities.

because it seems pretty clear that democrats need to hold that 90-10 margin for their coalition to be viable

and it's totally possible for republicans to make a dent in that.
Let me give you the background so I can give you the breakdown champ. As the Republican Party currently stands and the direction they continue to go they have definitely hit their ceiling.

In order for the Republican Party to even gain a good portion of the black community they would have to do the Three R’s. I’m talking about racists, reparations, and repent champ. The Republican Party as a whole would have to condemn and get rid of all the RACISTS/RACISM within their party.....(which is highly unlikely. The Republican Party would have to pass a REPARATIONS bill for the black community...(which is highly unlikely). The Republican Party would have to REPENT for all their past and current sins against all black people....(which again is highly unlikely).

That’s a tall order for the Republican Party to fill. I don’t see how it can be accomplished given their present agenda. Also, are you black osh kosh bosh osh kosh bosh ??
 
21,335
41,581
Joined Nov 16, 2018
Either the gop reforms & becomes more moderate or self destruct from when they whistleblow some horrendous **** that'll lead anyone w/ half a bird brain to not want to associate w/ that "republican" label. They're looking like the separatist council w/o the diversity.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
Let me give you the background so I can give you the breakdown champ. As the Republican Party currently stands and the direction they continue to go they have definitely hit their ceiling.

In order for the Republican Party to even gain a good portion of the black community they would have to do the Three R’s. I’m talking about racists, reparations, and repent champ. The Republican Party as a whole would have to condemn and get rid of all the RACISTS/RACISM within their party.....(which is highly unlikely. The Republican Party would have to pass a REPARATIONS bill for the black community...(which is highly unlikely). The Republican Party would have to REPENT for all their past and current sins against all black people....(which again is highly unlikely).

That’s a tall order for the Republican Party to fill. I don’t see how it can be accomplished given their present agenda. Also, are you black osh kosh bosh osh kosh bosh ??
1. I don't really know how you have such certainty about the direction the Republican Party is gunna go in. Things seem pretty up in the air right now. but okay.

2. Yah hard disagree. Last I checked reoperations was pulling sub 50% with black Americans. Donald Trump improved his margins in black areas without really toning down the racism. so it seems to me they don't gotta do any of that. to get past 90-8 vote share.

3. Yes im black.
 
5,270
11,391
Joined Jun 28, 2004
I couldn’t see the GOP winning a majority of the black vote unless there is a radical realignment.

That said, Democrats have trouble talking about racism, repentance and reparations in a meaningful way and if they, as a Party, get worse at it over this decade as they pivot towards a more and more white, affluent, moderate voter, the GOP can certainly BS their was to 15-20% of the black male vote. This will especially be true if Trump does not run again and less visibly racist Republicans become the face of the GOP.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
No one in this thread is a Democratic member of Congress, or a employee of the Democratic Party.

So I don't know how addressing a comment in here, relates to the party's actions, unless you can show me that it does somehow.
i think if the conventional wisdom in among liberal people is that 90-10 black vote is a lock, yeah i think that works way up to the politicians eventually.
 
23,495
12,587
Joined Aug 2, 2006
I couldn’t see the GOP winning a majority of the black vote unless there is a radical realignment.

That said, Democrats have trouble talking about racism, repentance and reparations in a meaningful way and if they, as a Party, get worse at it over this decade as they pivot towards a more and more white, affluent, moderate voter, the GOP can certainly BS their was to 15-20% of the black male vote. This will especially be true if Trump does not run again and less visibly racist Republicans become the face of the GOP.
i didn't say majority, I just said 90-10 is not the ceiling.
 
Top Bottom
  AdBlock Detected

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker or head over to our upgrade page to donate for an ad-free experience Upgrade now