Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
Sat Dec 3, 2016, 01:30 PM Dec 2016

There are many norms that got broken this election cycle, that ultimately lead to an EC loss

and I don't think we should normalize these things. Part of us running around like headless chickens trying to fix the democratic party, is normalizing many things that went wrong this election, and not having a plan for them in future elections

1. How do we hold the FBI accountable for interfering in the Democratic process?

-- Comey should not have editorialized when he chose not to indict. That was breaking a norm
-- He shouldn't have sent a vaguely worded letter to congress a few days before the election. That was breaking a norm

2. How to we ensure foreign governments do not interfere in our elections?

--Russian hacked the DNC and Podesta's emails. That's breaking a norm. It ended up with a complete asymmetry in transparency between both candidates.

3. How do we ensure both parties candidates release tax returns before an election? DJT did not. That was breaking a norm since Nixon.

4. How do we ensure the media covers both D and R candidates as though both could be president? The media covered HRC as though she was PEOTUS already and therefore needed severe vetting, whereas they covered DJT as a celebrity who occasionally did eccentric things. This is especially true of TV media, less true of print media.

That's breaking a norm.

5. The proliferation of fake news and fake news websites by both conservative propagandists and random foreigners. Even some Democrats started citing from these propaganda cites to claim that the primaries had been stolen. Not to mention how many said absurd things like paid protesters, Hillary killed enemies etc.

That's breaking a norm.

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
There are many norms that got broken this election cycle, that ultimately lead to an EC loss (Original Post) La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 OP
A well-considered list of issues that we must address! LongTomH Dec 2016 #1
for the 10,000 thread on replacing Pelosi with a moderate democrat for house leadership La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #2
Some of the norms aren't; some are voluntary. Igel Dec 2016 #3

LongTomH

(8,636 posts)
1. A well-considered list of issues that we must address!
Sat Dec 3, 2016, 01:35 PM
Dec 2016

Some of these we may be able to, at least alleviate before 2018 and 2020; but, I think we will have to be prepared to try to win despite those we cannot fix.

 

La Lioness Priyanka

(53,866 posts)
2. for the 10,000 thread on replacing Pelosi with a moderate democrat for house leadership
Sat Dec 3, 2016, 01:41 PM
Dec 2016

there have been very few for the ones i have articulated.

demanding accountability is within our control. we may never get it, but there is hardly any demand of any either.

Igel

(36,083 posts)
3. Some of the norms aren't; some are voluntary.
Sat Dec 3, 2016, 06:13 PM
Dec 2016

1. The FBI does what the FBI does. Same for the DOJ.

HRC emails; GOP voting-right restriction claims. Not in court, not proven, but there were a lot of things best described as quasi-news.

2. You can't. We complained when it looked like Russia was helping Trump (when a more likely alternative is that they simply hated HRC, although these views are nearly mirror images and distinguishing between them experimentally might be difficult).

Nobody complained when foreign leaders said bad things about Trump; that's interference. too, and lacking in any ambiguity.

3. You don't. It's voluntary. If the electorate doesn't impose that test on the candidates, it's still the case that the US government can't.

4. Unless you want to have political parties or the Executive control the press, you don't. It's voluntary.

My take is that the media for the most part found Trump to be buffoonish and they gave him a lot of free PR which they thought would kill his candidacy--in every poll of media folk taken since I've been literature a majority have been (D). Even NPR (hardly Trumpficionados) did this. Now they're engaged in self-flagellating, some finally admitting perhaps they aren't the world and not everybody shared their views. D'oh.

They also go for what's sensational. Hence the HRC's bloodletting, which became less and less as it looked like the race was narrowing.

5. Again, unless you're ready for a government truth-in-media agency a la Venezuela or other countries with a leashed press, you don't. It's up to an educated, enlightened electorate to apply its own wisdom, morals, and principles in evaluating news sources. (And we seen how having partisans decide what's true about themselves and what's true when it comes to their policies and procedures works out.)

Note recent stories that media-savvy millennials suck at distinguishing fake from reasonable news. Low SES folk have the same problem. So a majority of Americans at this point lack the educated, enlightened stance that we think our democracy enjoys. Does that sound elitist? Sure. It should because it is. It's like being elitist by saying that most college-educated people have better literacy skills than high-school drop-outs, or that engineers usually have better math skills than English majors. 0

And the reasonable media play a stupid, foolish game, letting interviewees speak while the listener or reader assumes that they're saying facts and news, but that's another post.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»There are many norms that...