Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Lillia Gajewski's avatar

An astute article in general. I agree with one of your other commentators. Focusing on readability scores, casting the working class as undereducated, is . . . a very elitist approach. I'll say it gently.

I would look more to the content of the speeches. The working class knows the system is rigged economically and they want results, not platitudes. That's not what AOC offers. She offers platitudes and shame; even if buried in there are some half solutions, they're lost in a lot of PMC drivel. The working class also has the game figured out (they have street smarts, even if they only "talk" at an eight grade level): you want to take someone who challenges authority out, you go after meaningless things like tattoos and mean tweets. In fact, the more you go after those, the more likely the working and middle class are to support the victim of your "cancellation" campaign.

So in the end you are absolutely correct: Platner would be well served to say, "Yeah, I did something stupid when I was young and I will likely do stupid things in the future, but we're not the party of scolds. We're the party of the working class. The working class's interests are not feelings and norms; they're results and improvement of their lives. That's why you should vote for me." I rather think it would work. It would work on me.

Keese's avatar

The problem with your comparison is that Trump is authentic, Platner isn't, and I think voters won't be fooled. You also have the problem of Democrats hyperventilating about Hegseth's tattoos or Elon's "salute" or any number of other real or imagined cases of Nazi allusions or imagery, so if the same people are then suddenly full of excuses for this guy who had a real Nazi tattoo, people are rightly going to ask how genuine the Dems are about any of this at all. Is this guy really that talented?

10 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?