Honestly, Democrats are screwed, because we - or, I suppose, the media we consume - can't go two seconds without doing some kind of useless thought exercise like this. It's a complete waste of time. It is hard to properly articulate with mere words what a waste of time it is.
I mean, I'm not blaming Matt for writing about it. People wrote to him to ask about it, and it is, in theory, an interesting topic. It's just a really great example of a particularly corrosive kind of political content that became has become ubiquitous. A poll is not a news story. Demographic forecasting is not a news story. A survey result is not a news story. But the news spends a lot of e-column space on that crap, because we all collectively click on it too much.
Why can't we just... campaign? Why can't we just tell people "hey, you should vote for us, because we're a lot better", and repeat it a whole bunch? Seriously, nobody has tried that in over a decade. Something that stupid and simple would be better than the useless micro-targeted demographic BS strategy we do, that in the end is always only targeted at ourselves.
At some point, you would have to explain *why* you are better, and what your specific policy proposals are; and those positions would have to be on the things that people care about.
If the average new housing development had the density of the neighborhood that X user finds so distasteful, we'd be a lot better off than we are.
I mean, I get that's an ugly block. But people underrate the density you can achieve with single family homes - even detached ones, which most people strongly prefer to an arrangement like the one pictured.
I do think a very likely electoral outcome is that Trump retires, no Republicans can recapture the magic, and Democrats go back to grinding out inexorable looking electoral victories in national elections.
No soul searching or awkward hippy punching needed.
Trump won Texas by 8.99% in 2016 and 5.53% in 2020 before coming back to win by 13.7% in 2024 this on the back of significant shift in South state Latino voters in 2020 and 2022. That said, the Latino vote seems pretty swingy to me given how ICE is targeting people who merely "appear" to be Hispanic.
Given all the changes of the past 7 months, it feels very premature to assume anything whatsoever about the electoral college in 7 years time, up to and including its existence. Certainly one can count on the Supreme Court to find a way to make it disappear if/when Donald Trump and his supporters find it inconvenient.
Culturally, my guess of a prediction is that the era of redesigning company logos, state flags, etc to a flat, minimalist, “it has to look perfect shrunken to an App logo and drawable by a child!!!” aesthetic will be dated to end today with Cracker Barrel going back to the original logo. All design eras end, and today just feels like it will be seen as a focal point in the future for a transition to some sort of “busier”, “more meaningful” design style.
My galaxy-brained take of poptimism vs rockism is that music critics as a whole have basically ignored a substantial subset of electronic music, which is increasingly becoming the genre du jour of my age group (early 20s). As someone who loves the art of criticism, but also mostly listens to electronic stuff, it's really frustrating that music critics essentially feel like they get a free pass to not even engage with genres that represent a major piece of the pie.
"ignored a substantial subset of electronic music, which is increasingly becoming the genre du jour of my age group (early 20s). As someone who loves the art of criticism, but also mostly listens to electronic stuff, i"
I thought this ended like 5 years ago with the whole Skrillex / Dubstep / EDM movement.
Realistically, what I would like to see is critics finding and evaluating interesting electronic musicians before they’ve done a Boiler Room and achieved celebrity status within the genre. A question my parents always ask me is how I find out about any of the stuff I listen to, and the answer is always that I found it in some YouTube video, and the artists I listen to are not especially niche! I’ll believe that the critical-industrial complex cares about electronic music when they start showing off interesting new voices, which is what I’ve always admired about my favorite music critics in other genres.
It's also very much not reflected on the streaming charts, so I don't actually think this statement is accurate at least in the US (not sure where the poster is from).
I don't know every song on the current Spotify US Top 50, but I know a majority and there are very few electronic songs on it.
As I've said before, while the differences between California & Texas is migration is mostly housing (and I'm all for a nationwide ban on SFH zoning), you could make Ezra & Matt dictators of New York & Illinois respectivally and put your favorite NIMBY enemy in charge of housing in the entire South and people would still move to the South for the same reasons they have since the end of Jim Crow and widespread adoption of air conditioning in the 60s - because North American winters really suck and people attempt to escape if they can most of the time.
It's not taxes. It's not that the South was anti-union. It's not even really jobs (outside of y'know, socialist stuff like the Research Triangle basically being jumpstarted by the state of North Carolina). It's weather.
Yes, there was a small boomlet of conservative-leaning people moving to Florida because of COVID restrictions (or lack thereof), but notice nobody really moved to say South Dakota or whatever square red state also basically had no restrictions after summer 2020.
One silver lining of global warming is that it could slow or reverse this trend and also make the blue areas on the West Coast that have cooler summers due to the oceanic effects much more desirable. They need to build more housing though!
where is the evidence that it is weather rather than taxes, jobs, or housing? utah, oregon, and washington (and hawai...) all have great weather. the winter in the parts of the midwest i have lived in is less of a problem than the summer, when the humidity really gets to you. I imagine this problem is exacerbated in the south (although I have not lived there).
I don't remember exactly when it starts but at some point in the summer in the South just leaving the house makes your skin feel sticky... Torrential rain isn't great either though the thunderstorms can be fun.
Midwest states tend to offer the highest cost-of-living adjusted incomes but people are still moving away from them to places like Florida where wages are much lower and yet housing is more expensive. That’s hard to explain other than weather.
I wrote a big long post this morning, but lost it in the ether when I accidentally clicked on an email notification. Anyway, Matt's take on poptimism v. rockism helped me understand why I disagree with Matt's basic political take. Poptimism v. rockism was an argument within music criticism and between fans of criticism. It didn't reflect the experience of being a music listener or the behavior of the music industry. Both poptimism and rockism assume that it is the aesthetic content of music that determines artistic value and/or popularity. But pop music fans enjoy pop music not just for the aesthetics, but the expression of conformity, the community, the normalcy, and just the persistent exposure. And the same is true of rock music fans, who enjoy their own expression of non-conformity, community, and variety. The "debate" wasn't about music, it was just about criticism. Similarly, in politics, the debate between popularism and progressivism is between ad amongst political critics and their fans. Both presume that voters care about policy; popular policies attract voters and progressive policies charge up the "base". But for the voter, the experience of politics is not about policy, or this debate about policy. It's about conformity, community, tradition, novelty, and even baser things. Policy seems to be a secondary, or even tertiary, concern for the average voter.
saying that criticism has no impact on the music business is like saying that the rotten tomatoes score has no impact on whether or not you choose to watch a movie. i'm skeptical of this.
Honestly, Democrats are screwed, because we - or, I suppose, the media we consume - can't go two seconds without doing some kind of useless thought exercise like this. It's a complete waste of time. It is hard to properly articulate with mere words what a waste of time it is.
I mean, I'm not blaming Matt for writing about it. People wrote to him to ask about it, and it is, in theory, an interesting topic. It's just a really great example of a particularly corrosive kind of political content that became has become ubiquitous. A poll is not a news story. Demographic forecasting is not a news story. A survey result is not a news story. But the news spends a lot of e-column space on that crap, because we all collectively click on it too much.
Why can't we just... campaign? Why can't we just tell people "hey, you should vote for us, because we're a lot better", and repeat it a whole bunch? Seriously, nobody has tried that in over a decade. Something that stupid and simple would be better than the useless micro-targeted demographic BS strategy we do, that in the end is always only targeted at ourselves.
At some point, you would have to explain *why* you are better, and what your specific policy proposals are; and those positions would have to be on the things that people care about.
If the average new housing development had the density of the neighborhood that X user finds so distasteful, we'd be a lot better off than we are.
I mean, I get that's an ugly block. But people underrate the density you can achieve with single family homes - even detached ones, which most people strongly prefer to an arrangement like the one pictured.
Also, wouldn't it make more sense to prioritize building housing in the swing states that lean blue, not CA & NY, which are solid blue?
Because of course...
I do think a very likely electoral outcome is that Trump retires, no Republicans can recapture the magic, and Democrats go back to grinding out inexorable looking electoral victories in national elections.
No soul searching or awkward hippy punching needed.
Isn’t there a housing slow down and rising insurance rates in these red states?
The assumption here is that the voters moving will just vote red along with their new neighbors. Now sure some will but what percentage?
Trump won Texas by 8.99% in 2016 and 5.53% in 2020 before coming back to win by 13.7% in 2024 this on the back of significant shift in South state Latino voters in 2020 and 2022. That said, the Latino vote seems pretty swingy to me given how ICE is targeting people who merely "appear" to be Hispanic.
Given all the changes of the past 7 months, it feels very premature to assume anything whatsoever about the electoral college in 7 years time, up to and including its existence. Certainly one can count on the Supreme Court to find a way to make it disappear if/when Donald Trump and his supporters find it inconvenient.
Culturally, my guess of a prediction is that the era of redesigning company logos, state flags, etc to a flat, minimalist, “it has to look perfect shrunken to an App logo and drawable by a child!!!” aesthetic will be dated to end today with Cracker Barrel going back to the original logo. All design eras end, and today just feels like it will be seen as a focal point in the future for a transition to some sort of “busier”, “more meaningful” design style.
It was obvious at the outset that they needed something that would look good in an app... Maybe an Olde Tyme border would've helped?
State seal on navy blue backgrounds just suck as flags though that practice has to end eventually.
The new logo Cracker Jack logo gave me zero info.
My galaxy-brained take of poptimism vs rockism is that music critics as a whole have basically ignored a substantial subset of electronic music, which is increasingly becoming the genre du jour of my age group (early 20s). As someone who loves the art of criticism, but also mostly listens to electronic stuff, it's really frustrating that music critics essentially feel like they get a free pass to not even engage with genres that represent a major piece of the pie.
"ignored a substantial subset of electronic music, which is increasingly becoming the genre du jour of my age group (early 20s). As someone who loves the art of criticism, but also mostly listens to electronic stuff, i"
I thought this ended like 5 years ago with the whole Skrillex / Dubstep / EDM movement.
Realistically, what I would like to see is critics finding and evaluating interesting electronic musicians before they’ve done a Boiler Room and achieved celebrity status within the genre. A question my parents always ask me is how I find out about any of the stuff I listen to, and the answer is always that I found it in some YouTube video, and the artists I listen to are not especially niche! I’ll believe that the critical-industrial complex cares about electronic music when they start showing off interesting new voices, which is what I’ve always admired about my favorite music critics in other genres.
It's also very much not reflected on the streaming charts, so I don't actually think this statement is accurate at least in the US (not sure where the poster is from).
I don't know every song on the current Spotify US Top 50, but I know a majority and there are very few electronic songs on it.
I'm inclined to trust david's expertise over the NYT on this one
https://twitter.com/davidshor/status/1960158192219918759
https://twitter.com/davidshor/status/1960159748726087873
Sort of depends where people move: AZ, NC, and GA, it might help Dems. FL and TX: not so much.
As I've said before, while the differences between California & Texas is migration is mostly housing (and I'm all for a nationwide ban on SFH zoning), you could make Ezra & Matt dictators of New York & Illinois respectivally and put your favorite NIMBY enemy in charge of housing in the entire South and people would still move to the South for the same reasons they have since the end of Jim Crow and widespread adoption of air conditioning in the 60s - because North American winters really suck and people attempt to escape if they can most of the time.
It's not taxes. It's not that the South was anti-union. It's not even really jobs (outside of y'know, socialist stuff like the Research Triangle basically being jumpstarted by the state of North Carolina). It's weather.
Yes, there was a small boomlet of conservative-leaning people moving to Florida because of COVID restrictions (or lack thereof), but notice nobody really moved to say South Dakota or whatever square red state also basically had no restrictions after summer 2020.
Many people are moving south specifically to get single family homes with yards and decks.
Politically, people who like density tend to differ from people who don’t.
One silver lining of global warming is that it could slow or reverse this trend and also make the blue areas on the West Coast that have cooler summers due to the oceanic effects much more desirable. They need to build more housing though!
where is the evidence that it is weather rather than taxes, jobs, or housing? utah, oregon, and washington (and hawai...) all have great weather. the winter in the parts of the midwest i have lived in is less of a problem than the summer, when the humidity really gets to you. I imagine this problem is exacerbated in the south (although I have not lived there).
I don't remember exactly when it starts but at some point in the summer in the South just leaving the house makes your skin feel sticky... Torrential rain isn't great either though the thunderstorms can be fun.
Midwest states tend to offer the highest cost-of-living adjusted incomes but people are still moving away from them to places like Florida where wages are much lower and yet housing is more expensive. That’s hard to explain other than weather.
Or maybe the movements will turn red states purple?
Shoot for Indiana and Missouri and land amongst Ohio, Texas, and Florida
I wrote a big long post this morning, but lost it in the ether when I accidentally clicked on an email notification. Anyway, Matt's take on poptimism v. rockism helped me understand why I disagree with Matt's basic political take. Poptimism v. rockism was an argument within music criticism and between fans of criticism. It didn't reflect the experience of being a music listener or the behavior of the music industry. Both poptimism and rockism assume that it is the aesthetic content of music that determines artistic value and/or popularity. But pop music fans enjoy pop music not just for the aesthetics, but the expression of conformity, the community, the normalcy, and just the persistent exposure. And the same is true of rock music fans, who enjoy their own expression of non-conformity, community, and variety. The "debate" wasn't about music, it was just about criticism. Similarly, in politics, the debate between popularism and progressivism is between ad amongst political critics and their fans. Both presume that voters care about policy; popular policies attract voters and progressive policies charge up the "base". But for the voter, the experience of politics is not about policy, or this debate about policy. It's about conformity, community, tradition, novelty, and even baser things. Policy seems to be a secondary, or even tertiary, concern for the average voter.
saying that criticism has no impact on the music business is like saying that the rotten tomatoes score has no impact on whether or not you choose to watch a movie. i'm skeptical of this.