2021年8月7日 星期六

It takes more than popular positions to win

The problem with "popularism."
Author Headshot

By Jamelle Bouie

Opinion Columnist

There is a continuing debate among writers, observers and strategists associated with the Democratic Party on the best way to win elections in closely divided (or even Republican-leaning) areas. The ascendant position is called "popularism," in which you "talk about popular issues, and not talk about unpopular issues," as David Shor, a Democratic pollster and proponent for the approach, recently explained.

Writing for The Week magazine, Ryan Cooper gives a critique of popularism that I agree with. First, that polling is too imprecise and unreliable to be the basis for a durable political strategy, and second, that what's popular isn't necessarily what's strategically wise or tactically advantageous. Here's Cooper:

Obsessively monitoring polls and instantly trimming down or throwing out policies that don't register a strongly positive poll result will tend to reinforce that wimpy attitude. It will also tend to rule out unpopular but tactically sound moves, like for example pushing through with an economic stimulus that may not poll well today but will ensure unemployment is low on Election Day. Conversely, Bill Clinton's passage of free trade deals may have paid off politically in the short term, but did tremendous damage to the Democrats' long-term performance in the numerous places that were harmed.

There is another problem with popularism. The idea that voters will respond mechanistically to candidates with popular policies depends on a picture of voters as essentially rational, utility-maximizing actors. But voters are notably irrational. They don't calmly evaluate candidates on the basis of their positions; they make character and value judgments mediated by partisanship and external conditions. Affect and demeanor matter as much as ideology and belief.

It does not hurt to emphasize popular policies over unpopular ones. But successful candidates in difficult races need more than just popular positions to succeed. They need to show — through image and language — that their values align with voters' as much as their positions. They need to embody the kind of politics they hope to pursue.

ADVERTISEMENT

We have good examples of this. Bernie Sanders did not become a popular, beloved political figure because he had positions in line with those of the median voter. He became a popular, beloved political figure because his affect, demeanor and language demonstrated a deep commitment to values held by millions of American voters. Raphael Warnock, the recently elected senator from Georgia, accomplished a similar feat, running a campaign that was as much about his identity as a husband, father, religious leader and native son of the state as it was about his positions.

Given a strong enough and distinct enough identity, candidates can even turn a controversial or unpopular belief into a sign of their authenticity and independence. This, I think, was one of Donald Trump's great political talents. (And to the popularists' point, Trump was closer to the median voter on Social Security and Medicare than previous Republican presidential candidates.)

For as much as there is a lot to learn from the systematic study of political life, it's also true that the practice of politics is not a science and that there is no set formula to selecting candidates or running winning campaigns. I am not opposed to popularism per se, but I would also urge its proponents to consider the possibility that the kinds of candidates who can win might be rough and idiosyncratic in unpredictable and unquantifiable ways.

What I Wrote

My Tuesday column was on Donald Trump's continuing attempt to essentially overthrow American democracy and install himself as president, regardless of what the American people say:

ADVERTISEMENT

It is not hard to see the endgame here, especially if Trump makes another bid for the White House after capturing the Republican nomination for a third time. Not an after-the-fact fight to "stop the steal," but a pre-emptive attempt to make sure the election can't be "stolen" — that is, won — by his opponent.

My Friday column took Tucker Carlson's newfound fondness for the Hungarian autocrat Viktor Orban as a jumping-off point for exploring a tendency of conservative intellectuals to embrace authoritarian leaders and governments:

At this point, students of American political history — and specifically students with a working knowledge of the history of the conservative movement — will recognize something familiar about this story. Here we have prominent conservative writers and intellectuals using their platforms to support or endorse regimes whose politics and policies align with their preoccupations, even as the values of those regimes stand in direct opposition to the ideals of American democracy.

I also did a Twitter live chat and Q. and A., which you can watch here.

Now Reading

Richard L. Hasen on the future of election subversion in Slate.

Amanda Mull on American shoppers and American consumerism in The Atlantic.

Rebecca Traister on Andrew Cuomo in New York magazine.

Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò on "racial capitalism" for Dissent magazine.

Annette Gordon-Reed on W.E.B. Du Bois's data visualizations in the New York Review of Books.

ADVERTISEMENT

Feedback If you're enjoying what you're reading, please consider recommending it to your friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week's newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at jamelle-newsletter@nytimes.com. You can follow me on Twitter (@jbouie) and Instagram.

Photo of the Week

Jamelle Bouie

This is the base of what was the Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson statue in Charlottesville, Va. It was removed on the same day the Robert E. Lee statute was, albeit without the same coverage or fanfare. The city also removed a statue of Lewis and Clark — on account of its pretty awful imagery — and the University of Virginia removed a statue depicting the conquering of the West. All were placed in the 1920s, and you should understand them as part of a singular project: to claim Charlottesville on behalf of its white elite.

Now Eating: Chicken in Oaxacan Yellow Mole With Green Beans and Potatoes

I made this for dinner last night. It's from the cookbook "Mexican Everyday" by Rick Bayless. I had intended to use beans for this, but decided to go with the chicken. The recipe calls for using boneless, skinless chicken thighs, but I think it is easier — and works better — to just used already cooked chicken, like a grocery store rotisserie chicken. You should serve this with corn or flour tortillas on the side, preferably homemade.

Ingredients

  • 4 dried guajillo chiles, 1 ounce total, stemmed, seeded and torn into several pieces each
  • 1 15-ounce can diced tomatoes in juice, drained
  • 1 medium white onion, cut in 4 pieces
  • 3 garlic cloves, peeled and halved
  • ½ teaspoon each ground cumin, allspice and cinnamon
  • 1 teaspoon dried Mexican oregano
  • 4 cups chicken stock, divided
  • 2 tablespoons olive oil
  • 2 tablespoons masa harina
  • meat from 1 whole rotisserie chicken, skin removed
  • 6 ounces green beans, trimmed and cut into 2-inch pieces
  • 1 pound baby Yukon Gold potatoes, cut in half
  • ½ cup roughly chopped cilantro

Directions

In a blender jar, combine the torn guajillo chiles, tomatoes, onion, garlic, spices, oregano and 1 cup of the chicken broth. Blend until as smooth as possible.

In a medium-large, heavy pot (like a Dutch oven), heat the oil over medium-high. Set a medium-mesh strainer over the top and pour in the chile mixture; press the mixture through the strainer into the hot oil. (Note: You won't need to take this step if you're using a high-powered blender, like a Vitamix.)

Cook over medium heat, stirring, until the mixture is reduced to the consistency of tomato paste, about 15 minutes.

Whisk the masa harina into the remaining 3 cups broth, then pour into the cooked chile mixture. Whisk until the sauce comes to a boil and thickens. Reduce the heat to medium-low. Add the chicken, green beans, potatoes and 1 teaspoon salt. Simmer gently, stirring regularly, for about 20 minutes, until all the chicken and vegetables are tender. Serve.

IN THE TIMES

Jesse Wegman

Thomas Jefferson Gave the Constitution 19 Years. Look Where We Are Now.

A meaningful new amendment hasn't been passed in 50 years, and there is no prospect of reform anytime soon.

By Jesse Wegman

Article Image

Guest Essay

No, the Unvaccinated Aren't All Just Being Difficult

"Sometimes you have to make it too convenient so that people can't say no."

By Bryce Covert

Article Image

Guest Essay

Our Families Fought for Civil Rights. Don't Let Jim Crow Stand.

Family members of civil rights icon Medgar Evers and former Vice President Henry A. Wallace lament the filibuster in light of their loved ones' life and work. 

By Myrlie Evers and Henry Scott Wallace

Article Image

Feature

Andrew Cuomo's White-Knuckle Ride

Amid scandals, accusations and calls for his resignation, the New York governor seems determined to prove that the instincts that have gotten him into trouble can get him out of it too.

By Matt Flegenheimer

Article Image

Subscribe Today

New York Times Opinion curates a wide range of views, inviting rich discussion and debate that helps readers analyze the world. This work is made possible with the support of subscribers. Please consider subscribing to The Times with this special offer.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Jamelle Bouie from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

2021年8月6日 星期五

The Daily: Why Aren’t People Going Back to Their Jobs?

And why we might need to look abroad to reimagine the future of work.

By Lauren Jackson

This week, our team talked to a lot of hesitant people. Today, we heard from those who were skeptical of getting vaccinated about their decision making. And for Tuesday's episode, we spoke with both employers and prospective employees across the country to get a better sense of why so many Americans are reluctant to return to work.

Both are extremely personal decisions with significant social ramifications. So in this newsletter, we wanted to take a closer look at the latter — digging into the context and proposed solutions for America's labor shortage. Then, we take a look behind the scenes at how our team is thinking about covering recent news related to race and identity.

Why Aren't People Going Back to Their Jobs?

A restaurant in St. Louis advertised positions for servers and bartenders. Whitney Curtis for The New York Times

Like many of us, the American labor market is "sick with the virus," with companies complaining about a shortage of workers that is slowing the country's economic recovery. The employers we spoke to for Tuesday's episode said that generous unemployment benefits, which have incentivized workers to stay home, are to blame (a sentiment echoed by Republican lawmakers).

ADVERTISEMENT

But the reality is more complicated. While many states are halting federal unemployment benefits, employees still aren't rushing back to work. Many experts have proposed solutions: They say increasing wages (which many companies have), ensuring workplaces are safe and building more flexible scheduling options will re-engage workers. But the workers we spoke to in our episode say that the problems run deeper, and that a fundamental reimagination of American work culture is necessary. So what could that look like?

Both companies and the federal government are scrambling to find an answer. The United States has historically ranked low in assessments of workplace protections, accused of a "systematic violation of rights" by the International Trade Union Confederation. Now, President Biden is declaring that this moment provides an opportunity for employees to "demand to be treated with dignity and respect in the workplace."

For help envisioning a future of work that is both dignified and flexible, we asked economists and researchers to point to international comparisons that could help Americans imagine a new future.

Increased protection for gig economy workers

Fabian Stephany, a researcher at the Oxford Internet Institute studying the gig economy, believes that the pandemic is expediting the "platformization" of work, or the allocation and monitoring of labor via digital platforms. This business model pervades the growing, and increasingly precarious, gig economy.

ADVERTISEMENT

With more people working online, he believes we need to imagine new ways of ensuring that flexibility for employees and the efficient allocation of work for employers doesn't come at the cost of worker protections. He points to the world's first collective agreement for a platform company — between a Danish union and Hilfr, a company connecting clients to cleaning services — as one example in which workers were able to secure "holidays, sick pay, pension contributions and a minimum wage of  19 euros per hour."

This kind of bargaining relies on strong unionization. But in the U.S., many gig economy workers are classified as contractors, not employees, limiting opportunities for collective bargaining.

Dr. Stephany sees opportunities for governments to change federal policies to better support workers, such as the European Union's establishment of minimum rights for gig economy contractors. Dr. Stephany also points to Estonia, Lithuania and Sweden's facilitation of easier tax payments and income reporting for Uber drivers, a policy that eases friction in platform workers' access to social security benefits.

Creating re-entry support for working parents

American women are struggling to re-enter the workforce after many gave up their jobs in response to the disproportionate demands placed on them during the pandemic.

ADVERTISEMENT

Now, working mothers are facing brutally hard choices about whether to stay home or to search again for work. This decision has been made easier for many British women who, thanks to the country's furlough policy, stayed employed throughout the pandemic with the government choosing to pay partial salaries in the interest of avoiding mass unemployment. "This means it has been seamless to bring those employees back to work when demand picked up again," said Thomas Pope, deputy chief economist at the Institute for Government, based in London.

Still, new polling shows nearly a third of British parents are concerned their caring responsibilities will make them more vulnerable to layoffs when furlough ends. "I do not think that extending the furlough scheme, especially once the economy is 'back to normal', is the solution to potential problems for working parents," Pope said. "Instead, any solution will be related to flexible working, which we would expect many employers to adopt."

In both countries, Amanda Taub, our Interpreter columnist, points out that supporting flexible re-entry is essential to avoid long-term regression in gender equality. She points to Sweden, which heavily subsidizes day care and has one of the highest rates of female labor participation in the developed world, as one example of success. She also identifies the need for more predictive policymaking, including clarity around reopenings, and a functioning health care system as essential support for parents planning their return to work.

Here's What Else You Need to Know This Week

From our race stories team.

Compiled by Desiree Ibekwe

Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times

At the beginning of the year, the Daily producers and editors formed teams to dive deep into The Times's most urgent, important topics of 2021. Race, of course, was one of them.

Each week, a group of us meet multiple times to talk through stories that focus on issues of race as well as identity. A lot of our discussions have centered on where the racial reckoning that was unlocked by the murder of George Floyd has left us today. What does it actually feel, and sound, like for the entire country to be confronting its past, and debating its future? What has changed in the year since last summer's mass protests, and what hasn't?

Ultimately, in anything we're pursuing, we're always looking to figure out what the story helps us understand about this unprecedented moment that we're in. Like how the passage of reparations legislation in Evanston, Ill., reflects an important shift in what has long been a taboo conversation. Or, how the fierce debate around critical race theory illuminates Americans' deep divisions in how we understand racism and history. We have a lot of ground to cover. Stay tuned. — Anita Badejo, senior editor for The Daily

Here's what the team has been thinking about:

Zoning in Charlottesville: A look at how a hyperlocal zoning dispute in Charlottesville, Va., reveals something deeper about where we are in our national reckoning around race.

The Olympics Reliance on 'Black Girl Magic': A sharp analysis of all the ways in which this year's Olympics have laid bare the burdens that Black women face at the Games.

The Impact of Pandemic Aid: An explanation of how federal aid during the pandemic has slashed the poverty level that goes beyond policy, highlighting the impact on American families.

The Workers Who Kept New York Alive: A beautiful interactive that does in images what we've also spent a year and a half striving to do in sound: telling the stories of people who've carried the weight of the pandemic.

Nooses, Anger and No Answers: An examination of the racially charged events at a future Amazon distribution center in Connecticut that raises important questions about responsibilities that out-of-town employers have to the communities they enter.

On The Daily this week

Monday: What do breakthrough infections mean for the efforts to fight the pandemic?

Tuesday: We hear stories from the frontline of the great American labor shortage.

Wednesday: Tunisia was the darling of the Arab Spring. Now, its decade-long experiment with democracy is in peril.

Thursday: A report into sexual harassment by Gov. Andrew Cuomo was worse than many expected. Could it be his undoing?

Friday: Why not get vaccinated at this point in the pandemic? We hear from some of America's unvaccinated.

Plus: A special show for you. You may have heard that Antoinette Nwandu's "Pass Over" just made its Broadway debut, the first Broadway opening since theaters closed in March 2020 and the first since a coalition of theater artists of color demanded change from the historically white institution.

Nwandu spoke with Michael Paulson, our theater reporter, about the changes she's personally bringing to the theater, and her hopes for the industry — still grappling with the pandemic — as the curtains rise again.

That's it for The Daily newsletter. See you next week.

Have thoughts about the show? Tell us what you think at thedaily@nytimes.com.

Were you forwarded this newsletter? Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox.

Love podcasts? Join The New York Times Podcast Club on Facebook.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for The Daily from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/