web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "shift"

Study: Independents six points less likely to vote Democratic when told that candidates have shifted left

Westlake Legal Group ew Study: Independents six points less likely to vote Democratic when told that candidates have shifted left warren Trump The Blog shift sanders republican left indies independents democratic biden Allahpundit Alexander Agadjanian

A noteworthy caution to Democratic voters on a day when Biden’s lead in the RCP poll of polls has slipped to just 4.2 points, easily the smallest margin he’s enjoyed since entering the race. Progressive flamethrower Elizabeth Warren is now hot on his heels and has even led narrowly in a couple of polls taken over the last 10 days. Maybe the exciting left-wing candidate who can mobilize Dem voters is the way to go against Trump!

Or maybe not, says researcher Alexander Agadjanian:

The experiment’s procedure was simple. A random half of participants read a news snippet illustrating the leftward shift, while the other half read about unrelated topics, such as the schedule of election dates. The news item was a few sentences that included policies discussed by the candidates: decriminalizing unauthorized border crossings; expanding undocumented immigrants’ access to government services; replacing private health insurance with a government-run system; and establishing free public college for all children from working-class families. The content was drawn directly from real news coverage.

Both sets of respondents then indicated how they planned to vote in 2020 (whether for President Trump or the eventual Democratic nominee), how strongly they were considering voting Democratic, and how motivated they felt to turn out and vote for or against the Democratic nominee. Because of the random assignment — with some reading about the policy positions and others reading innocuous, unrelated information — the difference in responses between the groups can be attributed to the effect of reading about the leftward shift.

When deciding between Mr. Trump and the Democratic nominee, voters in the middle — the independents who could ultimately tilt things in Mr. Trump’s favor — became six percentage points less likely to vote Democratic after reading about the leftward turn compared with the independents who had read the innocuous content.

The good news for Warren is that *Democratic* voters who read about the leftward shift were *more* likely to say they’d strongly consider voting for the eventual nominee — but only by a margin of three points, less than the share of indies who were repelled by the leftist trend. If you’re a true-believing progressive, maybe none of that matters. Better to place a risky bet on meaningful change in the form of Warren or Bernie Sanders as nominee than to place a safe bet on the status quo by backing Biden. Or maybe you think the “alienated independent” effect here will be weaker than Agadjanian expects. For instance, if Trump ends up bogged down in impeachment and scandal, or if the economy slows down, indies who might be reluctant to vote for a leftist might nonetheless be more reluctant to vote for Trump. And maybe Warren as nominee will so energize Democrats, including far-left Democrats who sneered at Clinton three years ago, that Democratic turnout will blow the roof off and more than compensate for the loss in independents.

But alienating independents is a big risk, obviously. And the result here buttresses Trump’s strategy to run against socialism next year no matter who the nominee ends up being, even the not-particularly-socialist Biden. That would have been an interesting follow-up question for Agadjanian — do candidates with a rep for being far-left, e.g., Sanders and Warren, lose more independents than a moderate like Biden does when indies are made to read about the party’s leftward shift or is the effect uniform across all candidates? If it’s less pronounced for Biden, obviously that supports his electability pitch.

Another possibility: Maybe Warren as nominee would simply reposition herself as kinda sorta centrist in the general election. All nominees move towards the middle a little, after all. Perry Bacon argues today at FiveThirtyEight that that’s unlikely to happen this time, though. In recent history, party nominees have tended to pander to the center of the general electorate more through “tone” and their VP choice than by backing down on policy promises they made during the primaries. Watering down one’s policies for the general election might not even amount to effective pandering:

The previous Democratic presidential nominees were all in some ways following a kind of “median voter’ model, imagining that there was a set of voters whose views were basically in between the positions of the Democrats and the Republicans. But there is a lot of evidence that moderate, swing and independent voters aren’t particularly centrist, but hold a lot of different views, some of which are conservative, some of which are liberal.

So maybe Sanders or Warren, in a general election, keep their populism pretty amped up in an effort to woo voters who may swing between the two parties but would prefer an unabashed economic populist. Maybe Harris, instead of choosing a centrist white man as her running mate, picks Warren — or Warren chooses Harris — and they run a campaign with strongly liberal stands on issues of race and identity, hoping to win the election by energizing voters particularly turned off by Trump’s racialized and racist appeals.

Any “alienated independents” who are lost now aren’t likely to be wooed back next year in the general, in other words. Democrats are going to have to beat Trump with a version of Trump’s own strategy from 2016, with sky-high turnout among their own base and indies concluding that the other party’s candidate is just a little bit more reprehensible on balance. Every election is a “lesser of two evils” election now!

Speaking of centrism and electability, go read this story about Pete Buttigieg trying to reposition himself as a centrist in the primary now that Biden’s grip on the frontrunner role has begun to slip. Moderate Dems are going to demand an alternative on the ballot next year to Warren and Sanders, even if Grandpa Joe suddenly appears unelectable. Right now, with Harris having collapsed and none of the other also-rans showing signs of life in the polls, Mayor Pete is the only game in town.

The post Study: Independents six points less likely to vote Democratic when told that candidates have shifted left appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group ew-300x153 Study: Independents six points less likely to vote Democratic when told that candidates have shifted left warren Trump The Blog shift sanders republican left indies independents democratic biden Allahpundit Alexander Agadjanian   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

NYT editor sets new narrative in staff meeting: The Trump story is shifting from Russia to race

Westlake Legal Group n-1 NYT editor sets new narrative in staff meeting: The Trump story is shifting from Russia to race unity times The Blog shift racism nyt headline editor dean baquet

A nice catch by Byron York from this transcript of audio from a Times staff meeting that was leaked to Slate — a meeting that was held to address concerns from the left about the Times’s Trump coverage, of course, not the right. The paper recently sustained a double whammy among the progressive activist class, first for the Bad Headline it published on the day Trump spoke in the White House about the El Paso and Dayton shootings and second for some Bad Tweets that its Washington editor posted about Ilhan Omar and other minority women pols. I wrote about both; you can catch up here and here. The headline was the greater offense — “Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism,” it read, an accurate summary of his remarks about the El Paso shooting but one which glossed over his emerging campaign strategy of picking fights with minority pols like the Squad, Elijah Cummings, and Al Sharpton to try to galvanize the white working class.

The story that accompanied the Times headline did provide that context, but that wasn’t enough. For a paper with the Times’s outsized influence, at a moment when the Resistance is preparing for battle to oust Trump next year, even a headline can be guilty of treason against the cause.

So executive editor Dean Baquet called a meeting. The staff would huddle and consider ways to address the plague of Problematicness that had recently befallen them. Nothing will tune you into the tone of what followed better than this single quote, from a question posed by a Times staffer:

The Times should consider appending that to every story it publishes, as a sort of standing disclaimer: “Racism is in everything.”

Read the transcript and you’ll see that much of the meeting involved Times staffers pressuring Baquet to let them frankly describe Trump or the things he says as “racist.” Baquet was ambivalent about that, encouraging staffers to use concrete examples of things Trump has said that might qualify rather than inject their own verdict. Who, what, when, where, why, and how — just give the readers the facts and let them come to their own conclusions. “I think that a bizarre sort of litmus test has been created,” he complained to staffers. “If you don’t use the word racist, you’re not quite capturing what the president said.” That’s exactly what his staff and their activist cohort are suggesting, and it’s of a piece with their objection to the Bad Headline. It’s not enough for the Times to note, say, that Trump’s Telepromptered call for unity after a mass shooting sounds like it came from a different person than the one who invited the Squad on Twitter to go back where they came from. They want the Times to be as aggressive as possible in expressing their moral objections to Trump. Are they on the team or not?

But then, towards the end of the meeting, Baquet seemed to reassure his staffers that he wasn’t insisting on a pure “just the facts” approach to Trump, with the Times content to let the day’s news cycle carry it along to destinations unknown. There will be a narrative frame to the next 18 months:

Baquet: OK. I mean, let me go back a little bit for one second to just repeat what I said in my in my short preamble about coverage. Chapter 1 of the story of Donald Trump, not only for our newsroom but, frankly, for our readers, was: Did Donald Trump have untoward relationships with the Russians, and was there obstruction of justice? That was a really hard story, by the way, let’s not forget that. We set ourselves up to cover that story. I’m going to say it. We won two Pulitzer Prizes covering that story. And I think we covered that story better than anybody else.

The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened. Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, “Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.” And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we’re talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We’re a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that’s what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?

I think that we’ve got to change. I mean, the vision for coverage for the next two years is what I talked about earlier: How do we cover a guy who makes these kinds of remarks? How do we cover the world’s reaction to him? How do we do that while continuing to cover his policies? How do we cover America, that’s become so divided by Donald Trump? How do we grapple with all the stuff you all are talking about? How do we write about race in a thoughtful way, something we haven’t done in a large way in a long time? That, to me, is the vision for coverage. You all are going to have to help us shape that vision. But I think that’s what we’re going to have to do for the rest of the next two years.

This is no longer a story where the Washington bureau every week nails some giant story by [Washington correspondent] Mike Schmidt that says that Donald Trump or Don McGahn did this. That will remain part of the story, but this is a different story now. This is a story that’s going to call on different muscles for us. The next few weeks, we’re gonna have to figure out what those muscles are.

What’s revealing about that is how explicit Baquet is in framing the recent coverage of Trump and white nationalism as part of a grand anti-Trump narrative comparable to Russiagate, a new “chapter” in how Trump’s presidency will be organized by historians. He could have presented the paper’s coverage lately as a matter of simply following where the news leads. There was a terrorist attack by a racist in El Paso; Trump has in fact been sparring with a series of minority pols, the Squad foremost among them; therefore the paper needed to devote resources to both stories and whether they converge. Instead Baquet is explicitly focused on what the paper’s anti-Trump readership wants to see as a means to the end of ousting him. They craved Russiagate material because they thought it would lead to him being indicted and eventually removed from office. With that having failed, they’re craving material on Trump The Racist, doubtless with an eye to galvanizing suburban voters against him next fall. There’s no reason *right now* to think that Trump The Racist is how voters will organically think of the next 18 months; if I had to bet on a single narrative to define the rest of his presidency at this moment in time, it’d be “Trump the trade warrior copes with the economic and electoral fallout of his protectionism.” But Baquet doesn’t have that luxury. He’s writing for a readership that leans a certain way and which includes a noisy activist class that leans further and so their narratives to some extent need to be the Times’s narratives. He might not let his reporters call Trump a “racist” overtly but he’s making clear here, it seems, that they’re free to make that the moral of their news stories about him. Encouraged, even.

The post NYT editor sets new narrative in staff meeting: The Trump story is shifting from Russia to race appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group n-1-300x153 NYT editor sets new narrative in staff meeting: The Trump story is shifting from Russia to race unity times The Blog shift racism nyt headline editor dean baquet   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Heeeere’s Jimmy: “The Shining,” starring Jim Carrey, part three

Westlake Legal Group j-1 Heeeere’s Jimmy: “The Shining,” starring Jim Carrey, part three The Blog swap shining shift nicholson kubrick Horror Face duvall deepfake ctrl carrey

One last entry in this growing genre to cleanse the palate at the end of a long week. Having done two famous scenes from the movie already with Carrey’s face substituted for Jack Nicholson’s, the deepfaker responsible for this series was destined to eventually take a shot at the most famous scene of all. I agree with the YouTube commenter who said this would have been perfect if only “Heeeeere’s Johnny” could have been replaced with “Alllllllllrighty then.”

Soon. Another year or two, figure, and the technology will be there.

Actually, this deepfake is interesting because it’s *not* perfect. It’s the most technically flawed of the three Carrey “Shining” clips I’ve posted this week. I don’t know whether the person who made it didn’t bother trying to swap in Carrey’s face for Nicholson’s in the side shots of Jack Torrance attacking the bathroom door with an axe or if the tech just doesn’t handle profile shots well yet, but to my eye that looks like Nicholson, not Carrey. You’ll see visual artifacts for a moment or two as well around Carrey’s face in the famous close-ups of Nicholson peeking through the hacked door and terrorizing Shelley Duvall. Whether that’s because this clip was rushed out or because close-ups are just inherently more difficult for face-swapping than shots taken from 10 feet away, when detail is less noticeable, I leave to the pros to say.

Next week are we gonna get Nicholson swapped in for Carrey in “Dumb & Dumber”? I might pay to see that.

The post Heeeere’s Jimmy: “The Shining,” starring Jim Carrey, part three appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group j-1-300x159 Heeeere’s Jimmy: “The Shining,” starring Jim Carrey, part three The Blog swap shining shift nicholson kubrick Horror Face duvall deepfake ctrl carrey   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com