With the attacks on Harris falling flat, the GQP cannot define her to voters. The maga cult members never needed her to be "defined," because they believe whatever they are told. This past weekend a democratic strategist on MSNBC said the republicans had decades to define Hillary Clinton, but can't do it with Harris and they don't have time. It's also worth noting that the GQP are going crazy about being called "weirdos," they whine about it constantly. But their efforts are like trying to scrape dog shit off your shoe; you never can get it all.
I do think there is going to be tons of ugliness, despite Hillary clearing the path and revealing things about ourselves we probably didn't know but now do--to our eternal shame.
I also think the fact BLM occurred opened our eyes further to how deep the racism has drifted in this country, and people are more aware of racial attacks (DEI failed because of this--but also because Harris is so overqualified for the job).
I personally found the JD Couch meme childish and rather stupid. I would prefer it hadn't lasted as long as it has. Yeah, I know young people are delighting in blowing off steam, but...oh, well.
I rather love the 'weird' or even better 'creepy' label getting plastered to the Republican foreheads. So tired of Press treating their crazy statements as normal.
There's already tons of ugliness, facebook is a cesspool of racist / misogynistic comments and memes. But none of them are landing - most are just laughed at. And the couch meme is the GQP's fault, they have used this tactic for years and gotten away with it. The whole thing would have faded from memory if they hadn't gotten the press to report the fact that it wasn't in his book. After that it took on a life of it's own. The political adage is "if you have to deny it, you're losing." They are now reaping what they have sown.
“No matter what the facts actually were—a strong economy, low unemployment, low inflation, crime and border crossings down—people just didn’t dig Joe Biden. “
Statements like this are talking either mean, median or mode which means nothing to those at variance with central tendencies.
I don’t understand how anyone can be undecided, unless they just got rescued from a deserted island or jungle. What phenomenon creates an undecided voter?
I guess that most people who say they are undecided when responding to polls are not really undecided... either they are lying to the pollster or not yet admitting to themselves that their minds are made up. Yes, there may still be some undecided swing voters out there, but it's not a very big pool. The big pool is the unenthusiastic voters who can't be bothered to support the party they align with. The 26% change in enthusiasm among Democratic voters is massively more important, and Harris's appeal to young voters is a potential game changer.
Well, if you’re a parent with a couple of kids, all the demands of working and struggling to cover costs and deal with daily challenges of living, it’s not that hard to imagine that you haven’t fully focused on who you’re going to vote for yet. Someone might also want to wait until after the conventions, or want to get a better idea about political realities closer to the election - all of which seems reasonable.
Good point and understand a busy/hectic lifestyle. Not everyone has 3-4 hours a day to read Jay, Heather, Joyce, Dan, et al, as well as most of the comments, and feel fully informed. I imagine the average working-class MAGA has no time to read much about anything, only turn on the news at night and get their fix.
This is also true for Democrats, independents, and many other Americans. Plus there are people who truly don't care, don't want to know much, and don't plan to vote. There's the anti-Trumper who told me that Indivisible, the hundreds of pro-democracy and anti-Trump groups around the US, is "a cult," that Joe Biden is "a bastard," and that she's writing in Eleanor Roosevelt on her ballot. That is weird.
Not true, my friend. I personally know many retired women proucly flying a Trump flag and convinced he's a great man. And they don't even watch "the news", just talk to each other. Oh, and they DO vote.
I can understand how a person doesn't know what's going on in the political world, so when asked who they would vote for might say "undecided." When Obama first ran for president I was so overwhelmed with a challenging leadership role and raising two teens that I had no clue what the issues were. Back then I was a legacy Republican so that's how I voted. Not any more!
Such good news! We’re all feeling it, but now my big worry is that the GQP has one more COUP in mind. I fear that the GQP will not certify the elections or certify them for the old and hideous orange ass through their minions in so many states! Anyone else concerned?
I have another (wild?) theory about Trump saying he didn't need the votes at one of his rallies. In MN he said he DID need their votes one last time and after THAT he wouldn't need their votes. I think he got his timing mixed up. His handlers probably told him too soon the plan to not need votes once he was elected and he jumped the gun and said he didn't need the votes now. (He does, and won't get them if Dems keep up the enthusiasm for Harris.)
Yes! Reading about Venezuela it became real - and I read that 70 electors in swing states are ready to throw it to Tr no matter what. How can they be stopped beforehand?
I think the local county level challenging of cast ballots and voter suppression along with sympathetic embedded judges and state Attorney Generals has been the game plan of the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society all along. Republicans, the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society have been busy for months on this. Two prong approach - challenge the name of any Democratic nominee other than Biden (these efforts will quickly fall flat) and denying voters at the polling stations and counting centers. The latter has always been my biggest fear and the most probable. That’s why Leonard Leo can speak and act like they already have the election in the bag.
Democrat court challenges on these technicalities can win, but it’s a distraction, will cost the DNC and candidates lots of money and attorney fees, and will suck up MSM air time and ink. Think nationwide Bush v Gore on steroids.
I actually got goosebumps and a lump in my throat when I saw that. It felt like it did in the theater. Spider Pete and Big Gretch cracked me up though.
tRump-Hillbilly ticket is all about airing out tRump grievances, his criminal and civil trials, the 2020 "stolen" election, etc., etc. It's looking backward rather than forward, playing to a minority of cultish voters, and shows no indication of broadening its appeal. Far-right cranks, "weirdos", the Project 2025 horror show, all of these "features, not bugs" combine to heighten the comparative attractiveness of the Harris campaign, even currently minus a VP mate.
Yes, there is a "vibe", it does favor the Democratic candidate, but much of that comes from a "thank god Biden's out" feeling, and it's possible the MAGA set will regain their footing and actually find an attack point that works, rather than the grab-bag shite they're throwing out at the moment...and of course there's the MSM, led by the NYT, poised to launch the formulaic "why her position on [fill in the blank] spells trouble for Harris" line.
But, tbh, the wind is at her back, tRump and his messages are old, tired, and self-referential, and IMHO the election is Harris' to lose. Momentum is nothing but growing, and despite the media's attempt to go all "honeymoon is over" in their election coverage, people ARE excited, new voters ARE signing up, and big donors ARE chunking in major dollars.
We have a winner here, and let's keep it up through Election Day.
I look at Dinesh de Souza's Facebook page on a regular basis. I am fascinated (my husband would say obsessed) with the folks who also read it and comment. One of the consistent comments is about how Democrats are communists/socialists/fascists. Sometimes all three; sometimes just two. ALL Democrats. We are all described as such. It is quite amazing to see and very scary. We are demonized and not considered legitimate. It doesn't take much to go from there to removing us from our positions in society.
It is really strange to read WSJ now, especially comments on articles that are even slightly critical of JD Vance. The trolls always existed (and probably a hell of a lot of them are paid by Putin), but they were so damn secure they just haughtily lectured everybody from their safe little podiums.
But now they are really bristling and harumphing and diving into cognitive dissonance that is epic.
Example: one article covered JD's "cat ladies who are childless" comment mildly, mentioning the damage it has done. The Trump supporters admitted it was an 'unfortunate' comment that was losing women's votes--but what Vance said was true, we really ought to be scared of becoming like Korea or Japan, and we've got to get American women pumping those babies out STAT.
To these guys (seems like they were all guys) Vance's tone is the problem, not the content, and they are perfectly fine with describing women as baby machines and not much else. Or they complain it was maliciously taken out of context--still true, of course, it just needs refinement and further explanation to land properly. Or they bitterly attack the writer as 'leftie': shoot the messenger.
It never ever seems to occur to them Vance might be dead wrong. Not even a possibility.
At no point do they ever admit what Trump and Vance are pushing is offensive or anti-democratic. They jeer and scoff when people raise the call to the Georgia AG asking for votes as a sign Trump is anti-democratic; one commenter shot back "so the Democrats had DOJ harass Trump". Showing in gloriously unaware triumph their conviction that Democratic institutions have absolutely no right to defend themselves against direct attempts to change votes.
These guys are not used to being questioned. Like Trump, they've surrounded themselves with 'alternative fact generators' who say what they like to hear, and they've really, really enjoyed getting to 'own the libs' by haranguing us constantly, mocking us, dismissing us. It is unsettling to them to have articles like that come out in WSJ. Their contained bubble gave them a tiny pinprick of reality, and their response is not curiosity, it is to pontificate even harder and louder, as if screaming it in our ear will make it truer.
I think they are brittle. They'll crack and rage even more furiously, rather than smoothly pivot and adapt. And it is all because in their love of authoritarianism, they've completely lost the ability to check and question themselves. If you hear someone say, "I've never liked Politics, I'm not political, all politicians are corrupt." that's a Trump supporter bitterly retreating--or pretending to retreat.
But they'll be back. They love their delightful stew of shared resentment way too much.
Thanks Jay! Momentum is kicking up but so are the attacks. I haven't confirmed yet but there was a Tiktok circulating about some ass-shitery going on in Georgia with the electoral board. Board members are being replaced with maga-ots and they are attempting to change the voting rules. In Texas there is non-profit of mag-gots getting long time voters removed from the voter polls: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/29/politics/voter-rolls-ballot-challenges-true-the-vote-elections/index.html
One thing the “weird” framing gets right—in addition to being true—is it finally breaks this notion that Democrats have had all my life: that voters compile a list of issues important to them, sit down with position papers and news reports and say “Well, I agree with Candidate A on 3 of my 7 big issues and Candidate B on 5, so Candidate B it is.” Sure there’s an element of that I guess, but it’s not really how people make these decisions.
I have been so puzzled by people’s lack of being able to see and understand and process truth. The idea of a schema makes sense, but there’s still a part of me that’s wondering why people can’t look at facts and data and see through the biggest con man on the American stage. Former Evangelical, still a Christian, very progressive, an ally here, I’m still flabbergasted at the Christian nationalist movement and how my old friends have fallen for this crap. Schemas, gonna have to think about schemas. Love the cool auntie vibe for Kamala.
* New information changes or replaces existing knowledge
* New schemas may develop
* Transforms current interpretation of reality
I think the longer you've held onto an idea, and how central that idea is to your perception of the world and of yourself, the harder it is to change.
Are you a hard working, grass roots, good ole boy American patriot? Y'know, the REAL American!
Or are you a racist, misogynistic, homophobic, Christo-fascist, who has been hoodwinked by a conman who only serves the interests of billionaires who think you are barely human?
Not hard to see why you might reject new information that might require you to accommodate that information via changes in your schema...
<side note> Whilst the example in the article talks about dogs and cats one of the other classic examples is when British explorers first came to the West coast of Australia they were forced to change their schema on "swan" from "white bird" to "white or black bird" by the (literal) black swans that live there. It was an event that sent shockwaves through society that still ripple today.
Thanks for the insight into Piaget, Stephen. The ideas of schemas make so much sense. I LOVE that someone in the Harris team knew that and understood it so completely and found a way to use it. The schema I had of her from the primary four years ago was not very positive. They turned this around for me so quickly - and for many others of us who were less than enthralled about her. Now I understand how they were able to turn my schema :)
It's all about relatability, right? W came off as a guy we would want at our cookouts, while John Kerry seemed stiff, humorless, and aloof. Trump defeated Hillary Clinton because, in part, she also came off as stiff and aloof - unwilling, when she was a US senator, to answer a question about the subway World Series. Trump was then defeated by a candidate who proudly talked about his blue collar roots, and often discussed his love of family and his empathy for those who have lost loved ones. Once again, Trump is facing off against a candidate who is infinitely more likable, and relatable. Hoping to see similar, or better, results as 2020.
With the attacks on Harris falling flat, the GQP cannot define her to voters. The maga cult members never needed her to be "defined," because they believe whatever they are told. This past weekend a democratic strategist on MSNBC said the republicans had decades to define Hillary Clinton, but can't do it with Harris and they don't have time. It's also worth noting that the GQP are going crazy about being called "weirdos," they whine about it constantly. But their efforts are like trying to scrape dog shit off your shoe; you never can get it all.
And the stench lingers!
I do think there is going to be tons of ugliness, despite Hillary clearing the path and revealing things about ourselves we probably didn't know but now do--to our eternal shame.
I also think the fact BLM occurred opened our eyes further to how deep the racism has drifted in this country, and people are more aware of racial attacks (DEI failed because of this--but also because Harris is so overqualified for the job).
I personally found the JD Couch meme childish and rather stupid. I would prefer it hadn't lasted as long as it has. Yeah, I know young people are delighting in blowing off steam, but...oh, well.
I rather love the 'weird' or even better 'creepy' label getting plastered to the Republican foreheads. So tired of Press treating their crazy statements as normal.
There's already tons of ugliness, facebook is a cesspool of racist / misogynistic comments and memes. But none of them are landing - most are just laughed at. And the couch meme is the GQP's fault, they have used this tactic for years and gotten away with it. The whole thing would have faded from memory if they hadn't gotten the press to report the fact that it wasn't in his book. After that it took on a life of it's own. The political adage is "if you have to deny it, you're losing." They are now reaping what they have sown.
👍👍👍
The "DEI" label failed miserably because as one powerful speaker on the Women for Harris Call last night 7/29 said:
*Harris was ELECTED District Attorney for San Francisco!
*Harris was ELECTED twice for CA Attorney General!!
*Harris was ELECTED US Senator from CA!!!
*Harris was ELECTED Vice President of the United States!!!!
Comparing MAGA with dog shit is an insult to dog shit.
The latter, at least, is valuable fertilizer.
Agreed 💯!
The Dems need some wisdom at the margins.
“No matter what the facts actually were—a strong economy, low unemployment, low inflation, crime and border crossings down—people just didn’t dig Joe Biden. “
Statements like this are talking either mean, median or mode which means nothing to those at variance with central tendencies.
I don’t understand how anyone can be undecided, unless they just got rescued from a deserted island or jungle. What phenomenon creates an undecided voter?
Privilege.
exactly.
I guess that most people who say they are undecided when responding to polls are not really undecided... either they are lying to the pollster or not yet admitting to themselves that their minds are made up. Yes, there may still be some undecided swing voters out there, but it's not a very big pool. The big pool is the unenthusiastic voters who can't be bothered to support the party they align with. The 26% change in enthusiasm among Democratic voters is massively more important, and Harris's appeal to young voters is a potential game changer.
Well, if you’re a parent with a couple of kids, all the demands of working and struggling to cover costs and deal with daily challenges of living, it’s not that hard to imagine that you haven’t fully focused on who you’re going to vote for yet. Someone might also want to wait until after the conventions, or want to get a better idea about political realities closer to the election - all of which seems reasonable.
Good point and understand a busy/hectic lifestyle. Not everyone has 3-4 hours a day to read Jay, Heather, Joyce, Dan, et al, as well as most of the comments, and feel fully informed. I imagine the average working-class MAGA has no time to read much about anything, only turn on the news at night and get their fix.
This is also true for Democrats, independents, and many other Americans. Plus there are people who truly don't care, don't want to know much, and don't plan to vote. There's the anti-Trumper who told me that Indivisible, the hundreds of pro-democracy and anti-Trump groups around the US, is "a cult," that Joe Biden is "a bastard," and that she's writing in Eleanor Roosevelt on her ballot. That is weird.
Not true, my friend. I personally know many retired women proucly flying a Trump flag and convinced he's a great man. And they don't even watch "the news", just talk to each other. Oh, and they DO vote.
You clearly are a metropolis resident 🙂
I can understand how a person doesn't know what's going on in the political world, so when asked who they would vote for might say "undecided." When Obama first ran for president I was so overwhelmed with a challenging leadership role and raising two teens that I had no clue what the issues were. Back then I was a legacy Republican so that's how I voted. Not any more!
Ignorance
I think they’re becoming a lot less undecided in the past week.
i’m not going to be able to vote this november.
because i died when i read “Vladimir Futon”
Hahaha!
😂
Such good news! We’re all feeling it, but now my big worry is that the GQP has one more COUP in mind. I fear that the GQP will not certify the elections or certify them for the old and hideous orange ass through their minions in so many states! Anyone else concerned?
I wrote about some of this in a piece in The Big Picture. I hope you are subscribed! https://thinkbigpicture.substack.com/p/trump-overturn-biden-election-2024?r=1zr8b&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR09CFrQwVGtJvq3LK20m8P7xGbioPtoBqGiN5ZwGsRcS-dcb83Jro0zKaQ_aem_2ZkN38aUk9uvWEJmFheJYQ&triedRedirect=true
Good to reread this!
Thank you Jay, I think I am subscribed there too.
Yes, that is my main concern. That they already have a plan, and that
‘s why trump says things like “I don’t need the votes”.
I have another (wild?) theory about Trump saying he didn't need the votes at one of his rallies. In MN he said he DID need their votes one last time and after THAT he wouldn't need their votes. I think he got his timing mixed up. His handlers probably told him too soon the plan to not need votes once he was elected and he jumped the gun and said he didn't need the votes now. (He does, and won't get them if Dems keep up the enthusiasm for Harris.)
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/election-denial-cant-overcome-election-certification-protections
Very concerned they are going to double down if things don't go their way.
Rachel Maddow reported this last night on her show.
I saw that. Chilling. Democrats had better be prepared to counter the fascists. People are mentioning the DOJ as a resource….
They do but that doesn't mean they'll succeed. We're prepared. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/election-denial-cant-overcome-election-certification-protections
Thank you Judith
Yes! Reading about Venezuela it became real - and I read that 70 electors in swing states are ready to throw it to Tr no matter what. How can they be stopped beforehand?
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/election-denial-cant-overcome-election-certification-protections
Thanks so much for this!
They've already started:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/29/politics/voter-rolls-ballot-challenges-true-the-vote-elections/index.html?utm_term=172229049695468f9f57343ad&utm_source=cnn_What+Matters+for+July+29%2C+2024&utm_medium=email&bt_ee=QmWttnRfrn47qMIv7n434TNlqgmxSIRTbfxFQWO1oGMrU%2B8ZsYfUzPLHuCjpWhjX&bt_ts=1722290496956
I think the local county level challenging of cast ballots and voter suppression along with sympathetic embedded judges and state Attorney Generals has been the game plan of the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society all along. Republicans, the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society have been busy for months on this. Two prong approach - challenge the name of any Democratic nominee other than Biden (these efforts will quickly fall flat) and denying voters at the polling stations and counting centers. The latter has always been my biggest fear and the most probable. That’s why Leonard Leo can speak and act like they already have the election in the bag.
Democrat court challenges on these technicalities can win, but it’s a distraction, will cost the DNC and candidates lots of money and attorney fees, and will suck up MSM air time and ink. Think nationwide Bush v Gore on steroids.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/election-denial-cant-overcome-election-certification-protections
Love the Avengers clip! Brilliant!
I actually got goosebumps and a lump in my throat when I saw that. It felt like it did in the theater. Spider Pete and Big Gretch cracked me up though.
Pete as spider💀
I feel a BLUE TSUNAMI headed our way, and Florida is going to turn BLUE! Cant wait to cheer on Madam President Harris!
Dump Trump and the Hillbilly Eulogy!
tRump-Hillbilly ticket is all about airing out tRump grievances, his criminal and civil trials, the 2020 "stolen" election, etc., etc. It's looking backward rather than forward, playing to a minority of cultish voters, and shows no indication of broadening its appeal. Far-right cranks, "weirdos", the Project 2025 horror show, all of these "features, not bugs" combine to heighten the comparative attractiveness of the Harris campaign, even currently minus a VP mate.
Yes, there is a "vibe", it does favor the Democratic candidate, but much of that comes from a "thank god Biden's out" feeling, and it's possible the MAGA set will regain their footing and actually find an attack point that works, rather than the grab-bag shite they're throwing out at the moment...and of course there's the MSM, led by the NYT, poised to launch the formulaic "why her position on [fill in the blank] spells trouble for Harris" line.
But, tbh, the wind is at her back, tRump and his messages are old, tired, and self-referential, and IMHO the election is Harris' to lose. Momentum is nothing but growing, and despite the media's attempt to go all "honeymoon is over" in their election coverage, people ARE excited, new voters ARE signing up, and big donors ARE chunking in major dollars.
We have a winner here, and let's keep it up through Election Day.
I look at Dinesh de Souza's Facebook page on a regular basis. I am fascinated (my husband would say obsessed) with the folks who also read it and comment. One of the consistent comments is about how Democrats are communists/socialists/fascists. Sometimes all three; sometimes just two. ALL Democrats. We are all described as such. It is quite amazing to see and very scary. We are demonized and not considered legitimate. It doesn't take much to go from there to removing us from our positions in society.
Or simply removing us…
That too, although that is so scary, I was actually afraid to write it.
Margaret Atwood went there in the Handmaids Tale
It is really strange to read WSJ now, especially comments on articles that are even slightly critical of JD Vance. The trolls always existed (and probably a hell of a lot of them are paid by Putin), but they were so damn secure they just haughtily lectured everybody from their safe little podiums.
But now they are really bristling and harumphing and diving into cognitive dissonance that is epic.
Example: one article covered JD's "cat ladies who are childless" comment mildly, mentioning the damage it has done. The Trump supporters admitted it was an 'unfortunate' comment that was losing women's votes--but what Vance said was true, we really ought to be scared of becoming like Korea or Japan, and we've got to get American women pumping those babies out STAT.
To these guys (seems like they were all guys) Vance's tone is the problem, not the content, and they are perfectly fine with describing women as baby machines and not much else. Or they complain it was maliciously taken out of context--still true, of course, it just needs refinement and further explanation to land properly. Or they bitterly attack the writer as 'leftie': shoot the messenger.
It never ever seems to occur to them Vance might be dead wrong. Not even a possibility.
At no point do they ever admit what Trump and Vance are pushing is offensive or anti-democratic. They jeer and scoff when people raise the call to the Georgia AG asking for votes as a sign Trump is anti-democratic; one commenter shot back "so the Democrats had DOJ harass Trump". Showing in gloriously unaware triumph their conviction that Democratic institutions have absolutely no right to defend themselves against direct attempts to change votes.
These guys are not used to being questioned. Like Trump, they've surrounded themselves with 'alternative fact generators' who say what they like to hear, and they've really, really enjoyed getting to 'own the libs' by haranguing us constantly, mocking us, dismissing us. It is unsettling to them to have articles like that come out in WSJ. Their contained bubble gave them a tiny pinprick of reality, and their response is not curiosity, it is to pontificate even harder and louder, as if screaming it in our ear will make it truer.
I think they are brittle. They'll crack and rage even more furiously, rather than smoothly pivot and adapt. And it is all because in their love of authoritarianism, they've completely lost the ability to check and question themselves. If you hear someone say, "I've never liked Politics, I'm not political, all politicians are corrupt." that's a Trump supporter bitterly retreating--or pretending to retreat.
But they'll be back. They love their delightful stew of shared resentment way too much.
As I read this stack Nina Simone's "Feeling Good" came floating into my mind, so I had to go find it on You Tube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHRNrgDIJfo
Ear worm warning! Now I gotta go listen to it…😋
Yes! It's on a loop in my brain right now.
Thanks Jay! Momentum is kicking up but so are the attacks. I haven't confirmed yet but there was a Tiktok circulating about some ass-shitery going on in Georgia with the electoral board. Board members are being replaced with maga-ots and they are attempting to change the voting rules. In Texas there is non-profit of mag-gots getting long time voters removed from the voter polls: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/29/politics/voter-rolls-ballot-challenges-true-the-vote-elections/index.html
Watching GA closely yes
One thing the “weird” framing gets right—in addition to being true—is it finally breaks this notion that Democrats have had all my life: that voters compile a list of issues important to them, sit down with position papers and news reports and say “Well, I agree with Candidate A on 3 of my 7 big issues and Candidate B on 5, so Candidate B it is.” Sure there’s an element of that I guess, but it’s not really how people make these decisions.
Jay,
Your reporting almost puts you ahead in the race to be my favorite grandchild…I’ve grown to love coconuts and your reporting.
Garry Woodward
(poppa garry the proud grandfather of 15)
Awwww!
I have been so puzzled by people’s lack of being able to see and understand and process truth. The idea of a schema makes sense, but there’s still a part of me that’s wondering why people can’t look at facts and data and see through the biggest con man on the American stage. Former Evangelical, still a Christian, very progressive, an ally here, I’m still flabbergasted at the Christian nationalist movement and how my old friends have fallen for this crap. Schemas, gonna have to think about schemas. Love the cool auntie vibe for Kamala.
The schema stuff comes from Piaget, and the idea of "assimilation vs accommodation" https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-assimilation-2794821
Assimilation
* New information is added to existing knowledge
* Schemas remain the same
* Fits into current interpretation of reality
Accommodation
* New information changes or replaces existing knowledge
* New schemas may develop
* Transforms current interpretation of reality
I think the longer you've held onto an idea, and how central that idea is to your perception of the world and of yourself, the harder it is to change.
Are you a hard working, grass roots, good ole boy American patriot? Y'know, the REAL American!
Or are you a racist, misogynistic, homophobic, Christo-fascist, who has been hoodwinked by a conman who only serves the interests of billionaires who think you are barely human?
Not hard to see why you might reject new information that might require you to accommodate that information via changes in your schema...
<side note> Whilst the example in the article talks about dogs and cats one of the other classic examples is when British explorers first came to the West coast of Australia they were forced to change their schema on "swan" from "white bird" to "white or black bird" by the (literal) black swans that live there. It was an event that sent shockwaves through society that still ripple today.
Of course, this has particular significance to me because I was born in Perth, Western Australia, so to me, "swan = black bird", so I was very excited the first time I saw wild white swans in the UK, much to the bemusement of my English friends. https://www.shawview.com/post/2018/08/24/black-swans-disruption-and-dealing-with-the-unexpected-lessons-from-the-17th-century
Thanks for the insight into Piaget, Stephen. The ideas of schemas make so much sense. I LOVE that someone in the Harris team knew that and understood it so completely and found a way to use it. The schema I had of her from the primary four years ago was not very positive. They turned this around for me so quickly - and for many others of us who were less than enthralled about her. Now I understand how they were able to turn my schema :)
It's all about relatability, right? W came off as a guy we would want at our cookouts, while John Kerry seemed stiff, humorless, and aloof. Trump defeated Hillary Clinton because, in part, she also came off as stiff and aloof - unwilling, when she was a US senator, to answer a question about the subway World Series. Trump was then defeated by a candidate who proudly talked about his blue collar roots, and often discussed his love of family and his empathy for those who have lost loved ones. Once again, Trump is facing off against a candidate who is infinitely more likable, and relatable. Hoping to see similar, or better, results as 2020.