Very well stated. I’ve been reflecting about condescension. If you surround yourself in a thick media bubble that reinforces all your desired outcomes (and does not tell you the truth) then you literally have no idea how to reach out and ask for support from people who don’t think like you do. Because you “pity their ignorance” from your moral high ground, condescension may be the only emotion you can muster.
And yes, that Time Magazine piece was infuriating. I shared it at the time with some people who smugly were proud of it.
Infuriating doesn’t even begin to describe it. I’m still a little shocked it was published. unless it was her clandestine way of exposing what happened without getting in trouble.
Excellent observations and reading of events. Diplomatic too. Condescension is a treating choice of word but I am not sure it fully captures the arrogance of Obama and crew. They sincerely believe that the Democratic Party alone stands for moral rectitude and social progress. Monica Harris’s stats are powerful but they will not have any impact on the Democrats. This is just stupid people who are not fully educated. And I love the point about class. This much neglected concept in American political life has thrust itself into the faces of The elites. Class and economy are the same thing. Inflation kills working people. All politicians, including Trump, should take note.
Well thought out and presented. I had missed the Times article and appreciate its inclusion in this piece. Overall I must agree that the Democrats (and I am one) have thoroughly lost touch, not only with the electorate, but with reality. The rejection of historical and biological facts in favor of various flavors of woke ideology was the source of my earliest disappointments but it is the willful, aggressive inability to accept any responsibility for their failures that has me wondering where my political home should now be.
The Time magazine article didn't - at all - support your conclusion that the election was stolen. That is just nonsense. Give me one concrete thing from that article that was an inappropriate thing to do - particularly given Trump's very real indications that he was going to claim fraud before the election - and did just that forever more. I do think that the Democratic party self-sabatoged but this has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
I think we’re all just confused about how it objectively did what you’ve said it’s done. Time magazine is legacy media with a liberal bias, as are many of the outlets you have mentioned that “suppressed” news stories. But like the Wall Street Journal is fairly conservative legacy media and they did a lot of reporting on the laptop and the excesses of progressive leftists, as did the AP. Were millions of voters, with multiple sources of news, legacy and non, really so influenced by this one kinda benign article about democrats making it easier to legally vote in elections. A lot of Trump supporters HATED voting by mail (something the shadow dems advocated for) until this election when more people voted by mail than ever before.
‘This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan rule-of-law advocacy group. “But it’s massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen accidentally. The system didn’t work magically. Democracy is not self-executing.”’
‘That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures.’
It is not clear why you see these quotes as “most damning.” I interpret these quotes as meaning that Ball wrote about a movement that worked to ensure the election was 1) fair and honest and 2) perceived to be fair and honest. I think Ball’s a bad journalist here - she used hyperbolic language rather than factual to sell a story (“conspiracy” “secret history” “paranoid fever dream” “cabal”? - really?). But bluntly, what is damning about ensuring a fair election? What is damning about “fortifying an election”? What is damning about countering disinformation, or changing rules to ensure everyone’s vote counts and that there is transparency in the process? Why is pushing for a transparently fair election not “justified”?!?
Trump was insisting before hand that the 2020 election would be rigged or stolen. To counter those claims, people worked very hard to ensure it was fair and was perceived to be fair. Trump continues to insist it was stolen, but has no evidence. Now in 2024, Trump started making claims that the Pennsylvania election was fraudulent - until he ended up winning it. Now he no longer makes those claims or seems to care about it. So which is it? As an outsider, I observe that he - and many of the Republicans who won their seats - seem to claim election fraud only when they don’t like the results.
You are explaining to me something we’ve all been aware for the past four years. I and everyone else understands your position at length. I am simply letting whoever reads this know that that article was a really bad move. It angered a lot of people even further. Rubbed salt in the wound.
You can think that’s ridiculous, but that is what happened and it was objectively a stupid move.
I don’t disagree with you on this - a poorly written article by Ball. But your response to another person on the thread implies you actually do think there was something wrong with the 2020 election.
No, I think you’re just reading into that. Lots of people were suspicious, Trump made huge claims, and her article right in the beginning, said that he wasn’t completely wrong.
It’s not an opinion of mine. I’m just telling you what the feeling was on the ground. It was a poorly timed, very poorly worded article that added fuel to the fire.
I also think Ball wrote that claim poorly. As an outside observer, the slow count was operating as it should. If there were premature claims for any candidate, that would of course be bad.
I don’t disagree with many of your points. But that someone who tried to commit election fraud has now been elected (yes, fairly!) as president? Good luck hanging on to your democracy! And good luck hanging on to basic human rights. I hope the US survives this with a minimal loss of life and loss of rights.
Lastly, if you also believe that suppressing social media accounts that reported stories that hurt the Biden campaign, even if they were true, was “pushing for a transparently fair election,” i’m not sure you fully understand why the red wave was so huge.
From the article: “They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.”
-
It is not even a question that one of the biggest stories that was labeled disinformation and suppressed was the Hunter Biden laptop story, which was later admitted to be true, as linked in my article.
I hate that social media companies can suppress info like that, but they are private business who set their own policies on content and how it’s distributed. No one repressed the story when it was published in the NY Post, and I’m sure it was easily searchable online for everyone who wanted to draw their own conclusions. Social media companies abuse their power and the government allows these private platforms to do so. That doesn’t mean information isnt available to view offline or in other online spaces like it wouldn’t be under a fascist regime.
The damning about it was first and foremost, the timing, as I stated to introduce the entire segment. Secondly, the wording she used. To millions of Americans, it felt like gloating after getting away with murder. Like OJ Simpson’s book. I’m not sure how to make it any more clear than what I wrote.
Very good writing,and it agree with most of what you wrote.
BUT SHAME ON YOU!
When you wrote that people said something was off with 2020? Does the fact that you have your President elect spewing falsehoods, the fact that he was caught on tape begging for Eleven Thousand votes. Intimidating Election officials, and January 6th. Every Republican held state certified the election, the vote count,or have you already forgotten those facts?
I could go on and on, but I will spare you.
I am writing to you not as a Democrat or Republican, but as an observer from up north.
I was one of the people who said things were off. My wife too. This was when everything shut down for the night, and we were sitting in our living room in the middle of the night wondering what was going on. This was before Trump said anything.
Many people felt this way before anything was officially said by anybody. I don’t know why we can’t disagree with each other without casting shame on one another, but like the article, I’m speaking from my personal experience. Seeing the Time magazine after that solidified things.
Yeah. These are all ways to make people feel bad when they are being subjected to systematic torture. It all makes sense once you buy into the system created to oppress. While our aspirational goals are toward democracy, justice and inclusion, the actual mechanisms available for use in our political system is based on America’s original sin. You cannot fight evil with evil. The MAGA campaign is pure evil backed by institutions such as oligarchical wealth (see Elon Musk and Peter Theil), maniacal think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, and intransigent constitutional poison pills such as the Electoral College. To fight evil within those systems IS the handicap that holds back true democracy from playing better than par. Commentators often conflate ignorance with the state of being entrapped. Commentators often conflate failure with the state of being entrapped. Commentators often conflate self-sabotage with the state of being entrapped in having to work within a system where having intelligence, grit and experience historically doesn’t matter as much as how evil can bring the full power and force of an entire fully functioning cultural system against your cause. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke about the arc of morality. It is never been a straight line. Only those at the controls of our corrupted system get that.
No lies were told here....100% accurate, all of it. I would also add just the flagrant hypocrisy - essentially every accusation was a confession. "Trump is the end of Democracy" says the party that tried to throw him off the ballot, prevent RFK from removing his name from the ballot, and ejecting Biden and promoting Kamala as the lead nominee in very suspect and undemocratic ways; "Trump will use law fare to punish his enemies" - meanwhile this was going on in various ways led by Democrats; "Trump will censor his enemies" - meanwhile prominent politicians and social media platforms were using the specter of "misinformation" to silence dissent, "Trump will eliminate bodily autonomy" - says the party of the vaccine mandate, etc. I could go on for miles.
I agree with most of your points. Your article is very well written, and I thank you for sharing. I guess I’m just confused as to why the democrats’ shadow networks are a reason they lost. Republicans have them, too, including groups that work behind the scenes to get conservatives in office. Don’t get me wrong, the Dems need to change, but having “shadow networks” happens on both sides of the aisle. It just seems like people care only when they learn that the party they hate is doing the exact same thing.
It’s not the shadow networks alone. It was the gloating article. The tone was incredibly infuriating to voters who already felt like they were being disenfranchised. Again, not my opinion. This was the sentiment of those who read the article. It was a middle finger.
Yes, and I can understand that. I felt the exact same way about shadow right wing, Christian lobbyists. I don’t agree with the Times article (and I’m not sure I agree with lobbying more generally), but I do think it’s a touch hypocritical for readers of the article to use this as ammo against Dems when the Republicans do the exact same things. Also, right wing media is plenty boastful, and folks seem to love it based on the popularity of sites like Breitbart.
And on top of all that, being told that you are a crazy conspiracy theorist for posting a particular story, and being banned from using certain platforms, only to find out a few years later that you were absolutely right. That’s beyond frustrating. Not quite the same thing as lobbying.
The time article details, much more than simply lobbyist. But even so, I think you are missing the point of the anger. The time magazine article admits that Trump wasn’t completely wrong when he said that something was unusual and weird. And then goes into how social media was pressured into suppressing certain stories, which millions of Americans did experience. Some were actually hoaxes, and others were absolutely true. All suppressed anyway.
That’s not something that Christian lobbyists have ever done to this point.
Yes, they do. And again, I think you’re kind of missing the point: politicians do shit like that ALL the time. And as far as platforms banning folks, I don’t agree with that, but the owners and operators had some say in that matter and they caved.
What you just shared is peanuts in comparison to the time article. I know what my point is, and I’ve been clear about it since the beginning. Since you’re the one who came here, it’s you who’s missing the point of this discussion.
I’m not telling you that I think people were probably mad at the time article. I’m telling you that the time article is what threw gasoline on the fire. I didn’t say nobody else does it, but according to the article itself, which brags about this, the level at which they influenced the election was unprecedented.
Do what you want with that information, but this did play a huge role, and until Democrats can understand all of this, they will continue to lose for the next generation at least.
Sometimes I don’t know if people are intentionally missing what I’m saying, or are so caught up in what they are saying, they're just not listening.
I didn’t say shadow networks are unique to Democrats. Objectively, the article angered further millions of Americans. It was poorly timed, intentionally worded to gloat, and fueled suspicions like crazy. It would’ve been foolish to do that if everything was reversed and it was written by a Republican. Doesn’t matter. I’m saying it further disenfranchised the people. You don’t have to agree, but it’s just the reality.
Very well stated. I’ve been reflecting about condescension. If you surround yourself in a thick media bubble that reinforces all your desired outcomes (and does not tell you the truth) then you literally have no idea how to reach out and ask for support from people who don’t think like you do. Because you “pity their ignorance” from your moral high ground, condescension may be the only emotion you can muster.
And yes, that Time Magazine piece was infuriating. I shared it at the time with some people who smugly were proud of it.
Infuriating doesn’t even begin to describe it. I’m still a little shocked it was published. unless it was her clandestine way of exposing what happened without getting in trouble.
Excellent observations and reading of events. Diplomatic too. Condescension is a treating choice of word but I am not sure it fully captures the arrogance of Obama and crew. They sincerely believe that the Democratic Party alone stands for moral rectitude and social progress. Monica Harris’s stats are powerful but they will not have any impact on the Democrats. This is just stupid people who are not fully educated. And I love the point about class. This much neglected concept in American political life has thrust itself into the faces of The elites. Class and economy are the same thing. Inflation kills working people. All politicians, including Trump, should take note.
What a great piece. Very cogent and salient and direct. Also very easy to follow and well-presented.
Well thought out and presented. I had missed the Times article and appreciate its inclusion in this piece. Overall I must agree that the Democrats (and I am one) have thoroughly lost touch, not only with the electorate, but with reality. The rejection of historical and biological facts in favor of various flavors of woke ideology was the source of my earliest disappointments but it is the willful, aggressive inability to accept any responsibility for their failures that has me wondering where my political home should now be.
All of this. Thanks for posting.
What a great piece. Very cogent and salient and direct. Also very easy to follow and well-presented.
The Time magazine article didn't - at all - support your conclusion that the election was stolen. That is just nonsense. Give me one concrete thing from that article that was an inappropriate thing to do - particularly given Trump's very real indications that he was going to claim fraud before the election - and did just that forever more. I do think that the Democratic party self-sabatoged but this has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
1. My conclusion was not that the election was stolen. Please read it again.
2. The fact that you don’t see how that article played into the sabotaging is unfortunate, but it objectively did.
3. The fact that you think that what the article admitted to is justified just shows that you are still in your bubble.
I think we’re all just confused about how it objectively did what you’ve said it’s done. Time magazine is legacy media with a liberal bias, as are many of the outlets you have mentioned that “suppressed” news stories. But like the Wall Street Journal is fairly conservative legacy media and they did a lot of reporting on the laptop and the excesses of progressive leftists, as did the AP. Were millions of voters, with multiple sources of news, legacy and non, really so influenced by this one kinda benign article about democrats making it easier to legally vote in elections. A lot of Trump supporters HATED voting by mail (something the shadow dems advocated for) until this election when more people voted by mail than ever before.
Not all of you are confused.
Then what is your claim about that article?
You state:
“One quote that is the most damning says:
‘This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan rule-of-law advocacy group. “But it’s massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen accidentally. The system didn’t work magically. Democracy is not self-executing.”’
‘That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures.’
It is not clear why you see these quotes as “most damning.” I interpret these quotes as meaning that Ball wrote about a movement that worked to ensure the election was 1) fair and honest and 2) perceived to be fair and honest. I think Ball’s a bad journalist here - she used hyperbolic language rather than factual to sell a story (“conspiracy” “secret history” “paranoid fever dream” “cabal”? - really?). But bluntly, what is damning about ensuring a fair election? What is damning about “fortifying an election”? What is damning about countering disinformation, or changing rules to ensure everyone’s vote counts and that there is transparency in the process? Why is pushing for a transparently fair election not “justified”?!?
Trump was insisting before hand that the 2020 election would be rigged or stolen. To counter those claims, people worked very hard to ensure it was fair and was perceived to be fair. Trump continues to insist it was stolen, but has no evidence. Now in 2024, Trump started making claims that the Pennsylvania election was fraudulent - until he ended up winning it. Now he no longer makes those claims or seems to care about it. So which is it? As an outsider, I observe that he - and many of the Republicans who won their seats - seem to claim election fraud only when they don’t like the results.
You are explaining to me something we’ve all been aware for the past four years. I and everyone else understands your position at length. I am simply letting whoever reads this know that that article was a really bad move. It angered a lot of people even further. Rubbed salt in the wound.
You can think that’s ridiculous, but that is what happened and it was objectively a stupid move.
I don’t disagree with you on this - a poorly written article by Ball. But your response to another person on the thread implies you actually do think there was something wrong with the 2020 election.
No, I think you’re just reading into that. Lots of people were suspicious, Trump made huge claims, and her article right in the beginning, said that he wasn’t completely wrong.
It’s not an opinion of mine. I’m just telling you what the feeling was on the ground. It was a poorly timed, very poorly worded article that added fuel to the fire.
I also think Ball wrote that claim poorly. As an outside observer, the slow count was operating as it should. If there were premature claims for any candidate, that would of course be bad.
I don’t disagree with many of your points. But that someone who tried to commit election fraud has now been elected (yes, fairly!) as president? Good luck hanging on to your democracy! And good luck hanging on to basic human rights. I hope the US survives this with a minimal loss of life and loss of rights.
Lastly, if you also believe that suppressing social media accounts that reported stories that hurt the Biden campaign, even if they were true, was “pushing for a transparently fair election,” i’m not sure you fully understand why the red wave was so huge.
Is that in Ball’s article?
From the article: “They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.”
-
It is not even a question that one of the biggest stories that was labeled disinformation and suppressed was the Hunter Biden laptop story, which was later admitted to be true, as linked in my article.
I hate that social media companies can suppress info like that, but they are private business who set their own policies on content and how it’s distributed. No one repressed the story when it was published in the NY Post, and I’m sure it was easily searchable online for everyone who wanted to draw their own conclusions. Social media companies abuse their power and the government allows these private platforms to do so. That doesn’t mean information isnt available to view offline or in other online spaces like it wouldn’t be under a fascist regime.
? Isn’t being against disinformation a good thing?
The damning about it was first and foremost, the timing, as I stated to introduce the entire segment. Secondly, the wording she used. To millions of Americans, it felt like gloating after getting away with murder. Like OJ Simpson’s book. I’m not sure how to make it any more clear than what I wrote.
Yes, so Ball is a bad writer and a bad journalist. But so?
Very good writing,and it agree with most of what you wrote.
BUT SHAME ON YOU!
When you wrote that people said something was off with 2020? Does the fact that you have your President elect spewing falsehoods, the fact that he was caught on tape begging for Eleven Thousand votes. Intimidating Election officials, and January 6th. Every Republican held state certified the election, the vote count,or have you already forgotten those facts?
I could go on and on, but I will spare you.
I am writing to you not as a Democrat or Republican, but as an observer from up north.
Not my Circus.Not my Monkees
When writing about Kamala Harris you nailed it.
Thanks for your really good writing.
I was one of the people who said things were off. My wife too. This was when everything shut down for the night, and we were sitting in our living room in the middle of the night wondering what was going on. This was before Trump said anything.
Many people felt this way before anything was officially said by anybody. I don’t know why we can’t disagree with each other without casting shame on one another, but like the article, I’m speaking from my personal experience. Seeing the Time magazine after that solidified things.
We suppressed some harmful disinformation. It's for your own good...
https://images.app.goo.gl/kXeH6Rmtk7W9fBc9A
Yup. But then it’s “please come back to our party.” 😂
Nah. Inflation.
And Merrick Garland sitting on his ass.
Yeah. These are all ways to make people feel bad when they are being subjected to systematic torture. It all makes sense once you buy into the system created to oppress. While our aspirational goals are toward democracy, justice and inclusion, the actual mechanisms available for use in our political system is based on America’s original sin. You cannot fight evil with evil. The MAGA campaign is pure evil backed by institutions such as oligarchical wealth (see Elon Musk and Peter Theil), maniacal think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, and intransigent constitutional poison pills such as the Electoral College. To fight evil within those systems IS the handicap that holds back true democracy from playing better than par. Commentators often conflate ignorance with the state of being entrapped. Commentators often conflate failure with the state of being entrapped. Commentators often conflate self-sabotage with the state of being entrapped in having to work within a system where having intelligence, grit and experience historically doesn’t matter as much as how evil can bring the full power and force of an entire fully functioning cultural system against your cause. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke about the arc of morality. It is never been a straight line. Only those at the controls of our corrupted system get that.
No lies were told here....100% accurate, all of it. I would also add just the flagrant hypocrisy - essentially every accusation was a confession. "Trump is the end of Democracy" says the party that tried to throw him off the ballot, prevent RFK from removing his name from the ballot, and ejecting Biden and promoting Kamala as the lead nominee in very suspect and undemocratic ways; "Trump will use law fare to punish his enemies" - meanwhile this was going on in various ways led by Democrats; "Trump will censor his enemies" - meanwhile prominent politicians and social media platforms were using the specter of "misinformation" to silence dissent, "Trump will eliminate bodily autonomy" - says the party of the vaccine mandate, etc. I could go on for miles.
I agree with most of your points. Your article is very well written, and I thank you for sharing. I guess I’m just confused as to why the democrats’ shadow networks are a reason they lost. Republicans have them, too, including groups that work behind the scenes to get conservatives in office. Don’t get me wrong, the Dems need to change, but having “shadow networks” happens on both sides of the aisle. It just seems like people care only when they learn that the party they hate is doing the exact same thing.
It’s not the shadow networks alone. It was the gloating article. The tone was incredibly infuriating to voters who already felt like they were being disenfranchised. Again, not my opinion. This was the sentiment of those who read the article. It was a middle finger.
Yes, and I can understand that. I felt the exact same way about shadow right wing, Christian lobbyists. I don’t agree with the Times article (and I’m not sure I agree with lobbying more generally), but I do think it’s a touch hypocritical for readers of the article to use this as ammo against Dems when the Republicans do the exact same things. Also, right wing media is plenty boastful, and folks seem to love it based on the popularity of sites like Breitbart.
And on top of all that, being told that you are a crazy conspiracy theorist for posting a particular story, and being banned from using certain platforms, only to find out a few years later that you were absolutely right. That’s beyond frustrating. Not quite the same thing as lobbying.
The time article details, much more than simply lobbyist. But even so, I think you are missing the point of the anger. The time magazine article admits that Trump wasn’t completely wrong when he said that something was unusual and weird. And then goes into how social media was pressured into suppressing certain stories, which millions of Americans did experience. Some were actually hoaxes, and others were absolutely true. All suppressed anyway.
That’s not something that Christian lobbyists have ever done to this point.
https://www.au.org/the-latest/articles/top-ten-2023-exposing-shadow-network-christian-nationalists/
Yes, they do. And again, I think you’re kind of missing the point: politicians do shit like that ALL the time. And as far as platforms banning folks, I don’t agree with that, but the owners and operators had some say in that matter and they caved.
What you just shared is peanuts in comparison to the time article. I know what my point is, and I’ve been clear about it since the beginning. Since you’re the one who came here, it’s you who’s missing the point of this discussion.
I’m not telling you that I think people were probably mad at the time article. I’m telling you that the time article is what threw gasoline on the fire. I didn’t say nobody else does it, but according to the article itself, which brags about this, the level at which they influenced the election was unprecedented.
Do what you want with that information, but this did play a huge role, and until Democrats can understand all of this, they will continue to lose for the next generation at least.
Yeah, but the Republicans under Trump also tried to rig an election. Neither party is right to do so but at this point they have both done it.
To uniquely hold shadow networks and lobbying solely against Dems is hypocritical.
Sometimes I don’t know if people are intentionally missing what I’m saying, or are so caught up in what they are saying, they're just not listening.
I didn’t say shadow networks are unique to Democrats. Objectively, the article angered further millions of Americans. It was poorly timed, intentionally worded to gloat, and fueled suspicions like crazy. It would’ve been foolish to do that if everything was reversed and it was written by a Republican. Doesn’t matter. I’m saying it further disenfranchised the people. You don’t have to agree, but it’s just the reality.