Dan Cassino

I think Danielle’s construction of “Guy” is really useful. And it’s an empirical question! “Guy” = perceived as masculine, and perceived as likeable. We can just ask people, and they’ll tell us who fits the bill.
(If I have it in the budget, I’ll run it this summer)

a cartoon says yes your anguish sustains me on the bottom ALT: a cartoon says yes your anguish sustains me on the bottom

Against me *and* the Lord.

I’ve written a lot of gametimes for EHG over the years, but this episode from earlier this week has one of my all time favorites.

These are troubled times, but it's worth taking a moment to learn that there's a Mario Lopez electric toothbrush.

YouTube video by MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATER 3000 MST3K: The Day the Earth Froze - You Gotta Dress For It

I haven't seen this in my timeline yet, so I'm gonna post it myself.

"It was just so ding-dang cold…"
youtu.be/qYcB_0ZHRkE?...

Perhaps; historically, attitudes don’t always translate immediately into registration and voting. I’d expect stronger effects in elections 10-15 years down the line, when today’s young people become more likely to vote.

I’ve been using the UAS panel out of USC a lot. Wish there were more political variables in it, but it’s got great sampling and a large n.

The same is true for the Iraq War or the elections of Trump or Obama: polarization went both ways. I think the optics are worse for Republicans on this, though: few young people are looking at ICE admiringly.

Gotta say, I've found Way less impressive on the stump than Beecher or Gill. Good bio story, not terribly well delivered. Gill comes off as Generic Democrat Number Three, but if you're worried about electability (which no one should be right now), maybe that's a plus.

If someone can get new voters to the polls for a special primary on a Thursday in February, they deserve to win.

I've had multiple conversations with people who asked me who to vote for in order to block Malinowski after seeing those AIPAC ads. But if they're looking for a centrist candidate, I'm not sure they go to Mejia so much as Gill (is this where Beecher comes in?).

For me, the fundamental questions of the race are the information level of the electorate and turnout. Large turnout implies low average information, and probably helps Malinowski, as name rec dominates. Lower turnout favors the labor backed canddiates.

I'm with you on Croft as a dark horse coming in from the left. In forums, she's done a great job of making a case for why she's well positioned to be anti-Trump, and done so with a strong gender story of a protective mom. It's a very well done performance, if she can break through to awareness.

In a low information race, race and sex heuristics are going to matter. Way gets perceived as rather more progressive than her rhetoric or record would indicate.

I'll be honest: I don't know who the Beecher constituency is. Not saying he doesn't have one, but it's not clear what lane he's going in. I'd also keep an eye on Cammie Croft. She's competitive with fundraising - a respectable $350K - and is the most anti-Trump candidate in the race. Could pay off.

If I'm a Mejia supporter, I'm a little concerned about her fundraising. If Mejia wins, the story is going to be that Gill and Malinowski split the center lane. But that only happens if she has the progressive lane to herself, and Way may be swamping her there.

The surprises for me, here, are Beecher (500K+) and Grayzel (400K), who were able to raise a lot more money than I would have expected. Malinowski is outspending everyone, and Gill is throwing a lot of his own money into the race.

I’m obsessed with Governor Sherrill’s gold “Jersey” chain, which might be the most Jersey thing ever.

I haven’t see any data looking at this- maybe the Pol Comm folks have been looking at it? - but I share your expectations.

Entirely possible. I'd also throw out the idea that para-social relationships with content creators would tend to make the views of those creators carry more weight than, say, what we might see on the news.

🧵; the literature on cohort effects in political socialization suggests that current events will have a profound impact on the shaping of partisanship among those 18-25 yrs of age — an impact that will likely create predispositions that persist over the life course of

And as for AI/Misinfo, I have to imagine it just exacerbates the effects of motivated reasoning, making it easier to believe whatever you want to believe.

And to add to Dan's point, present moment can change how parents think about child socialization. We've seen families show up at MN protests, for instance, but we can also think of more distal impacts.

Evidence from 2020 BLM protests.

www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

I think it’s all social media now. The narratives get shaped quickly and pretty definitively, but, of course “social media” has very different content depending on where you start (sex plays a big role: what boys and girls see has very little overlap).

People forget about the series finale, where we find out that Rizzoli was working for the mob the whole time.

These events have the potential to radicalize (and polarize) a generation, and we’re likely to feel the consequences for decades. Some had thought the Kirk killing would have a similar effect, but that was quickly reduced to a trolling meme by the kids, who portray him as a loser.

The kids are paying a lot of attention to what’s going on in Minneapolis. Most, I suspect will be outraged. It will push them to side with the protestors; others (fewer, I’d imagine) will side with the administration. Either way, this sets them on the partisan path they’ll hew to for decades.

They decide where they come down on that event- in a way that’s shaped by their parents and community- and if they feel strongly, motivated reasoning starts to kick in. Now they have a side, they’re motivated to defend it, and it’s harder to push them away from it.

But at some point during their teens or early twenties, they notice a major political event, and this has the potential to set their partisan path for life. Because they don’t really have a strong partisan identity yet, they’re not as motivated to interpret the event in a particular way.

Early on, kids and young teens express what’s call proto-partisanship: ask a 10 yo, and many will say that they’re Democrats or Republicans, based mostly on what’s around them, with little idea of what that means.