He's right in a way. Elections don't work to elect the far right candidates that the Republicans keep putting forward. The problem doesn't lie with elections, though. If Republicans regained their sanity and went with candidates that moderate Republicans and independents could support, they would win more elections.
Of course, that's crazy talk. Instead, they will move even further right and advocate for getting rid of democracy to make things "more fair" for them.
Except the ‘elections’ DO ‘work’ where they have gerrymandered the shit out of places. And look, they have a majority in the Senate where they can rat-fuck anything that has a whisper of equality, justice, fairness, or PROGRESS towards a nicer, better world.
And why?!?!?
Because not only are home-grown fascists supporting them, but LOTS of dark money from Russia and China are pumping up their campaign finances and social media effluent.
LOTS of dark money from Russia and China are pumping up their campaign finances and social media effluent.
This is the biggest driver IMO, as these far right dipshits are all chasing social media engagement and then wonder why they're electoral prospects suffer anywhere they don't have a finger on the scales.
Gerrymandering definitely helps them, but there are limits to this tool. If Republicans gerrymander an area and there's a blue wave, they might not be able to stop it. This upsets the Republicans because they think they've rigged this race and how dare the voters defy what should have happened.
The Boomers are slowly dying out and, with them, a large part of the Republican base. (Boomers are about a third Republican, a third Democrat, and a third Independent.).
My generation, GenX, tends to be about 44% Democrat, 30% Republican, and 27% Independent. That's a loss for Republicans, but one they could gerrymander past.
Millennials are 52% Democrat, 27% Independent, and 21% Republican. GenZ is 52% Democrat, 31% Independent, and 17% Republican. As these two generations take over, not even the most aggressive gerrymandering will help.
Republicans are facing a potential collapse of public support in all but the deepest red areas. This is why they are looking for non-democracy solutions like "state legislatures can override the elections if the voters decide wrong" or even outright "get rid of democracy and install a (Republican) king."
A healthy political party, facing obsolescence, would change their platform to attract more voters. Perhaps a "theoretical healthy Republican party" could drop the "LGBTQ folks are evil" stuff as well as the "overthrow elections" garbage. They could stick to fiscal conservatism and might make headway that way. Unfortunately, the real Republican party believes that if the voters won't support the Republicans' views, then it's the voters that need to go.
(And, yes, foreign dark money factors into this to a large extent. It amplifies their party and keeps them around long after they should have died off.)
Gen X here.
Reagan was such a productive fraud. Goddam his filthy soul.
I’m just glad that I’m not a flyover state middle aged parochial fool. I mean, I’m fool enough as it is, but worldly enough to steer clear of MAGA shitforbrains-itis.
I still think Ronnie Raygun might have done more damage in one administration than nearly any other. Though donnie's one term is arguably worse. Maybe some distance of time might tell.
But Ronnie's wrecking crew really, really got things going. And the infection persists - so much nonsense that started with that bunch is still with us today, and much of it has taken root in the Democratic Party, too. See: Clinton's administration, for instance.
And if anyone wants to test the "liberal media" nonsense a bit, just see how they treat Raygun's admin - the collective hagiographies are nauseating. And the way in which Iran/Contra is treated (more like: "covered up") - which is far, far, far worse than Watergate. So many boomers attached "-gate" to every scandal since Watergate, but they should have been finding ways to tie things back to Iran/Contra after that.
I think so many boomers were trained to chant stuff at LBJ and were so shocked by Nixon (and were so worn out from things in the 60s overall) that they got into a lot of self-indulgent things and self-help. Not to mention switching to chemicals that dulled the senses like booze and cocaine and very schmaltzy music in the 70s and started being good little yuppies by the time the 80s rolled around that they mostly stayed quiet about Ronnie Raygun. Now that their asses were not really on the line via a draft for Vietnam, most of them got very complacent.
Again, this is very much general terms. Not all boomers, and again, most of the stuff about "generations" is hokum. The notion that people in their teens and twenties are going to be self-centered narcissist twits is hardly a new observation, nor is it confined to one generation in particular. The technology and the specific complaints of older generations may change in their details, but it's an old story. Boomers were probably unique in the West for being the first that were so studied/catered to/marketed to and being SO large in numbers. Their every whim was catered to for the most part - if they wanted to protest for Civil Rights, for gay rights, against the war, try out different religions/cults, experiment with chemicals, pose as communists, then, later, get totally self-indulgent in the extreme - there was not a whole lot other groups could really do to stop them - the best that could be done was to make sure they were diverted into mostly harmless posturing and sell back their own culture to them in order to keep the capitalist game going. As long as they kept working and buying stuff.
When Gen X started to come into their own - most people shrugged, as their numbers were smaller. And boomers wanted to think they've seen and done it all...
My parents are Boomers and very well thought-out folk. Both scientists and left wing. Generous towards demographic failings on the lower end of financial clout in recognising that society has failed most people and continues to do so.
We were rich in cultural capital but relatively lower middle class in finances.
I’ve developed a rather more strict and harsh view of ‘aspirational’ values when it comes to Veblen Goods and status. My patience with society’s failings are much less generous.