I loved your take on the "unity by" theories. Spot on. However, I tentatively disagree with your doom take on the Democrat party temporary ceasefire, tho time will tell. From out here it looks more like the party is finally growing and evolving despite their internal differences. Hopefully. I also think it's a bit disingenuous to call out those select portions of Michelle Obama's speech. It seems obvious that she was speaking about her mother, then about the the very real experience of most Americans, not herself or her own children. To you her words ring hollow, to me they reflect most of the population.
I totally agree with you Heidi. Gabe, I’m feeling like your efforts to report events impartially are a tad in the vein of faultfinding for this democratic convention and it actually got my full attention around Michelle’s speech. Stay true to your mission. We just need the facts.
Good article. While I love the Obamas and Michelle's ability to quash Trump (Black jobs) I thought Doug Emhoff's speech was spot on. His use of relationship building, support for others, and humor was very effective in reminding people of how governing works. His reference to blended families also reminded that" family values" have changed over the years from only traditional families. It was human, heartfelt, and effective.
"Republicans, meanwhile, have subtracted their way to party unity, simply cleaving off the leaders who dissent instead of searching for ways to work together. The GOP, as one reporter put it to me when I tested out this thesis on him, is experiencing “unity by amputation.”"
Regarding your comments about Michelle Obama’s speech: I’ve been thinking about this a lot as I’ve watched the DNC convention. I’ve noticed that some of the speakers have at times seemed to come off as a bit less than authentic. I’ve been wondering if this was just that some people are much more comfortable using the teleprompter than others or if in fact, there is any sense in the room that the speeches are more of a manufactured product than the heartfelt opinions and ideas of the speakers. I’m curious what your overall impression around this issue is Gabe. I recognize that speaking to such a giant crowd can be intimidating and nerve-racking, however, there have been several instances where the speakers seem to be struggling to keep up with the teleprompter which at the same time seemed to lend a bit of disingenuousness to their words.
Great points. So much of the dem’s accelerations right now seems to be in large thanks to drifting behind of (a flailing and swerving) Trump without much thought of how it’ll hold together without a clear platform post victory in November.
One point about the Sanders/Pritzker divide: yes, ironic placement, but I think the billionaires buying election claim draws a circle Pritzker might be on the outside of, or at least straddle the border of. His policies in Illinois have famously angered other billionaires, enough to get Griffin out of the state after he couldn’t buy a governorship, and he attempted to pass a graduated tax that was presented as a bit of an “eat the rich” policy. Not going to deny the man’s wealth, but he presents his wealth as almost a philanthropic well to pass progressive policy rather than special interest influence.
I loved your take on the "unity by" theories. Spot on. However, I tentatively disagree with your doom take on the Democrat party temporary ceasefire, tho time will tell. From out here it looks more like the party is finally growing and evolving despite their internal differences. Hopefully. I also think it's a bit disingenuous to call out those select portions of Michelle Obama's speech. It seems obvious that she was speaking about her mother, then about the the very real experience of most Americans, not herself or her own children. To you her words ring hollow, to me they reflect most of the population.
I totally agree with you Heidi. Gabe, I’m feeling like your efforts to report events impartially are a tad in the vein of faultfinding for this democratic convention and it actually got my full attention around Michelle’s speech. Stay true to your mission. We just need the facts.
I am complete agreement with your take on Michelle Obama’s speech. She was very genuine.
Good article. While I love the Obamas and Michelle's ability to quash Trump (Black jobs) I thought Doug Emhoff's speech was spot on. His use of relationship building, support for others, and humor was very effective in reminding people of how governing works. His reference to blended families also reminded that" family values" have changed over the years from only traditional families. It was human, heartfelt, and effective.
Some good points!
I had to lol literally at this:
"Republicans, meanwhile, have subtracted their way to party unity, simply cleaving off the leaders who dissent instead of searching for ways to work together. The GOP, as one reporter put it to me when I tested out this thesis on him, is experiencing “unity by amputation.”"
Regarding your comments about Michelle Obama’s speech: I’ve been thinking about this a lot as I’ve watched the DNC convention. I’ve noticed that some of the speakers have at times seemed to come off as a bit less than authentic. I’ve been wondering if this was just that some people are much more comfortable using the teleprompter than others or if in fact, there is any sense in the room that the speeches are more of a manufactured product than the heartfelt opinions and ideas of the speakers. I’m curious what your overall impression around this issue is Gabe. I recognize that speaking to such a giant crowd can be intimidating and nerve-racking, however, there have been several instances where the speakers seem to be struggling to keep up with the teleprompter which at the same time seemed to lend a bit of disingenuousness to their words.
Mr. Emhoff’s presentation was “true-blue” - in the best way!
Great points. So much of the dem’s accelerations right now seems to be in large thanks to drifting behind of (a flailing and swerving) Trump without much thought of how it’ll hold together without a clear platform post victory in November.
One point about the Sanders/Pritzker divide: yes, ironic placement, but I think the billionaires buying election claim draws a circle Pritzker might be on the outside of, or at least straddle the border of. His policies in Illinois have famously angered other billionaires, enough to get Griffin out of the state after he couldn’t buy a governorship, and he attempted to pass a graduated tax that was presented as a bit of an “eat the rich” policy. Not going to deny the man’s wealth, but he presents his wealth as almost a philanthropic well to pass progressive policy rather than special interest influence.
I appreciate the mention of the Palestine question. I notice Prem Thakker has a much more dour take on the proceedings