2020 Elections

[dismalist]

How did it work then, before adjuncts became so ubiquitous in universities?

Because there was no large supply of adjuncts! Look, universities do it because they can.

Adjuncts will remain a good deal with union wage raising, but fewer of them.

So you are in favor of this, right?

Tenure track faculty claim they don't like adjunct hiring because competition for the jobs is lightweight and standards are low. So higher pay would mean more competition and better options in hiring and better teaching.
Except in reality, they don't seem to want this at all. If they did, there would be much more partnering of tenure track and adjunct unions for increased clout. More often they let us twist in the wind.
Because if wages rise they don't have a second-rate professoriate with whom they easily compare advantageously?

...and you appear to be dissuading us from unionizing here. Or do I read too much into your remarks?

Wrong. My statements are like those of a doctor: S/he doesn't want patients to die, but the road of unionization means that some will.

An individual who joins a union or is forced to unionize may make hem or her self better off, but not all adjuncts can be made better off that way.

Don't give even a second thought to tenured faculty's opinions. These are also in self-interest. Adjuncts are competitors to full-time faculty. They are not your friends.

[marshwiggle]

Why, oh why, is there still all this talk about Trump? It's clear he lost the election, even to him, as he said he would quit when the electoral college decides against him.

It may be that the Democratic Party has nothing else but Trump.

Because he is still the President.

Soledad O'Brien, on The Daily Show, said the problem the media has is because DJT is President, his actions and even his words are newsworthy. Once he is no longer an elected official, the media won't be obligated to report on him. Let's hope they stop with the clickbait-like-actions of whatever ridiculous thing he does/says and go on to more attention-worthy topics.

Obligated? He's been a gold mine for them. His oturageousness makes their job trivial; they can just film him and no analysis or commentary is required. If he actually leaves the limelight in a couple of months the media will be in a crisis of having to actually investigate things, which they haven't had to do for the last 4+ years. (Imagine a student who entered a journalism program at the beginning of the Trump era and who is just graduating now. What possible idea will such a student have about having to look at an issue from all sides, when there are many different well-meaning people with different perspectives? Their brains will explode.)

[ergative]

Why, oh why, is there still all this talk about Trump? It's clear he lost the election, even to him, as he said he would quit when the electoral college decides against him.

It may be that the Democratic Party has nothing else but Trump.

Because he is still the President.

Soledad O'Brien, on The Daily Show, said the problem the media has is because DJT is President, his actions and even his words are newsworthy. Once he is no longer an elected official, the media won't be obligated to report on him. Let's hope they stop with the clickbait-like-actions of whatever ridiculous thing he does/says and go on to more attention-worthy topics.

Obligated? He's been a gold mine for them. His oturageousness makes their job trivial; they can just film him and no analysis or commentary is required. If he actually leaves the limelight in a couple of months the media will be in a crisis of having to actually investigate things, which they haven't had to do for the last 4+ years. (Imagine a student who entered a journalism program at the beginning of the Trump era and who is just graduating now. What possible idea will such a student have about having to look at an issue from all sides, when there are many different well-meaning people with different perspectives? Their brains will explode.)

I think that's a little unkind to the media. I absolutely, absolutely agree that they were just having a good time for a while before they realized how serious things were. But they did start shaping up around the beginning of the general election season. Remember the real-time fact-checking during debates, and the deep dives into the measures preventing voter fraud from being the problem that Trump claimed it was? Remember the analyses of whether and how much mail service was being slowed down under DeJoy?

I suspect they'll continue in this vein for a while, because there will be lots of Trump-adjacent stories related to cleaning up after him. My concern is that with a competent, boring administration they'll start losing readers again now that the crisis is over and people don't care as much about keeping up with the competent boring government business, and have to return to the sideshow approach to prevent people from canceling subscriptions.

[mahagonny]

One thing I have noticed among Black and Latino friends is a certain level of inurement to racist comments, just like women become inured to sexist comments.

Not that these comments are not noticed, it's just that they are so used to it that they assume all whites, males, or whomevers think that way. Some just say it out loud, that's all. So these comments aren't always a deal breaker. People look at other issues. What do they think about... guns, abortions, education, religion, taxes, immigration, etc etc etc?

A little perspective would help though.
First, some whites these days are so worried about saying the wrong thing around a black person that they get tongue tied or quiet.

Second: consider a red state white guy who's sizing up the candidates.  Alternatively, he could vote for the people who want to talk about systemic racism and white privilege, but are no better, and likely weaker than his guy (republican) at getting the economy humming. Picture a white guy who grew up on a farm, can barely read, had an alcoholic father, repeated fourth grade, who has to drive a truck for $25/hour his whole life while being told he should have gone farther in life because he's got nice, white skin? There are many problems that people experience. There are many unpleasant experiences you can get from being around insensitive people. Racism is one of them. People rubbing it in that you're lucky you never had to be anything but white and male is another. And this is where, particularly coastal liberals and the media have been campaigning for republicans and still don't even know it. And I wouldn't surprised if that continues even with Trump gone (if indeed he is). And there could be a lot of people that are something like this man. It pays to be able to count.
This point has been made before but bears repeating.

[mahagonny]

Voting on policy and issues rather than one's identity....yes, people do that.

[kaysixteen]

Policy and issues, yes, but the guy you describe probably does not know what these are.  Likely does not care, either.

If he did, he'd  realize that Trump and his policies have actually done nothing for men like him, whereas the Democrats do have ideas and views that would.

[marshwiggle]

Policy and issues, yes, but the guy you describe probably does not know what these are.  Likely does not care, either.

If he did, he'd  realize that Trump and his policies have actually done nothing for men like him, whereas the Democrats do have ideas and views that would.

And all it will cost him is having to accept his "white male privilege" and his part in "systemic racism".
If his dignity has no value to him, then it's easy.

[mahagonny]

The man I described is someone I know. He voted for Trump in 2016 but Biden this time. He's miserable because the price of his insulin has skyrocketed, and he thought Trump would make the pharmaceutical companies behave. Now he probably thinks Biden will, which is another long shot.

Policy and issues, yes, but the guy you describe probably does not know what these are.  Likely does not care, either.

If he did, he'd  realize that Trump and his policies have actually done nothing for men like him, whereas the Democrats do have ideas and views that would.

And still the democrats can't barely get his vote, because he suspects they think they are smarter than everyone else, and he's right.

And all it will cost him is having to accept his "white male privilege" and his part in "systemic racism".
If his dignity has no value to him, then it's easy.

And still the hapless democrats can only get his vote sporadically. Which is what they deserve.

[Parasaurolophus]

Turns out Michele Flournoy, Lloyd Austin, and Antony Blinken are also involved with Pine Island Capital Partners (they're partners in the firm). IApparently, in its filings to the SEC, the firm boasted it would have special access to the Biden administration, and could secure big profits.

[kaysixteen]

That guy's insulin would cost almost nothing for him if he were on medicare, in a blue state that allowed for medicare expansion.   Heck, even the regular Obamacare plan here in Mass. requires me to pay almost nothing for mine, given my income.   Ideas, and policies, have consequences.

[marshwiggle]

That guy's insulin would cost almost nothing for him if he were on medicare, in a blue state that allowed for medicare expansion.   Heck, even the regular Obamacare plan here in Mass. requires me to pay almost nothing for mine, given my income.   Ideas, and policies, have consequences.

As do ideologies.

[jimbogumbo]

This pretty succinctly captures my thoughts on the Cabinet picks so far: https://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/editorials/2020/11/29/The-professionals-Joe-Biden-Cabinet-President/stories/202011290054

[Langue_doc]

Most immigrants do not like to be categorized under the broad brush of "people of color" as this is not how they see themselves. Many of the votes for Trump were in fact votes against the Democrats who according to immigrants lump them into homogenous groups such as "Latino" and "Asian-American" and thus lack the ability to think for themselves or have any kind of agency.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opinion/sunday/immigrants-vote-election-politics.html?searchResultPosition=2

[lightning]

Most immigrants do not like to be categorized under the broad brush of "people of color" as this is not how they see themselves. Many of the votes for Trump were in fact votes against the Democrats who according to immigrants lump them into homogenous groups such as "Latino" and "Asian-American" and thus lack the ability to think for themselves or have any kind of agency.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/opinion/sunday/immigrants-vote-election-politics.html?searchResultPosition=2

You are touching on something that should be discussed more often, but no one wants to go far enough. It's very true that "Most immigrants do not like to be categorized under the broad brush of "people of color" as this is not how they see themselves."

Going deeper into uncomfortable territory, think of very recent Sudanese immigrants or Haitian immigrants who are quick to point out that they are not the same as the people who are referenced as "black" or even "African-American" and do not want to think that they share anything in common with those that have the same skin color, but whose ancestors were forcibly brought over to North America centuries earlier.  Think of new Asian immigrants who get frustrated when they are confused with Latinos. Think of more pale-skinned Latin Americans, who look down on the darker-skinned people from their same region. They all want a leg-up, and they are willing to un-identify with those that they share more relatively common common roots (when compared with those that have European ancestry), and even throw them under the bus, and further, even exercise their option to vote for an anti-immigrant politician, so they can assure themselves that they are different from those that they look down upon.

[dismalist]

They all want a leg-up, and they are willing to un-identify with those that they share more relatively common common roots (when compared with those that have European ancestry), and even throw them under the bus, and further, even exercise their option to vote for an anti-immigrant politician, so they can assure themselves that they are different from those that they look down upon.

An offer of success associated with identity can only be made by politicians, and then only if identity means anything real to many, many people.

Immigrants can individually succeed without a Pied Piper.

That is the fundamental political divide.