Tuesday, August 16, 2005

The Electoral-Based Community

Responding to Dean Barnett's piece on lefty-blogs' new litmus test, lefty blogger Bob Brigham contributes this bit of perfection. First, Brigham quotes Barnett's piece as saying:
In the aftermath of a shocking election night, one that was widely described by left-wing bloggers as "colossal" and "tidal," Bill Schneider bestowed his "Play of the Week" award on Brigham and his peers. The only downside from the Democrat party's perspective is the inconvenient fact that Hackett lost.

Brigham then responds:
No, we won. It was a 70-30 district, we beat the spread by a healthy margin. Democrats need to stop judging success on Election Day, we need to judge success every day.

Get that? Politics now has a handicap, like golf or bowling. Stop judging success by how many votes you get! Start judging it by, uh, other stuff! (Preferably non-falsifiable stuff, please.)

I'd make more fun of this, but I'm a Philadelphia sports fan and I understand this psychosis all too well. In my heart I know that the Sixers shellacked the Lakers in the 2001 Finals, even if they didn't--technically--"win" the "championship."


Anonymous said...

It does suggest that "spin" has gone about as far as it possibly can when it ends up with politics turning into a game about beating point spreads, and losing is really a deferred win!

Reality-based community, aside!

Anonymous said...

I read this not as a psychosis so much as a concession to mediocrity.

Being a Philly fan myself, let's use the most recent example of being grateful for the Eagles even making it to the Super Bowl rather than being angry for their g*d-awful way they played once they got there

I am still bitter we didn't tear the Vet to pieces after we lost to Tampa Bay in 2003.

Anonymous said...

I like it when the "reality-based" community comes up with stuff like this because it is excuse making and spinning. In essence, it is loser talk.

D. Carter said...

The Dem may have beat the spread, but he still, y'know, LOST, as in, "he doesn't get to cast a vote".

Anonymous said...

The point spread comment is telling in another way: political partisanship has become as fundamentally irrational as rooting for your team in sports. One of the joys of sports rooting is saying "Ortiz stinks!" when clearly as a rational matter he does the opposite of stink. But the localizing of all problems in this country with the rival political party is equivalent to actually believing Ortiz stinks just because he is on the other team. The Dem blogger litmus test which focuses so much on hating the Pres and the Republican party is about as constructive for the country as beginning a sports discussion with a red Sox fan by asseting that Ortiz stinks; it contains not only a false premise, it precludes anything approaching dialogue, compromise or consensus. that's no harm when sports are the issue, but the ascendence of this type of thinking/strategy in politics means that we are in danger of having a society being run by the "face-painters" among us. That's not good for anybody.

ELC said...

No, we won. It was a 70-30 district, we beat the spread by a healthy margin. Democrats need to stop judging success on Election Day, we need to judge success every day. There is a certain... adhesion to unreality... involved here. I am reminded how Howard Dean was the frontrunner in the Democratic presidential primary cycle -- until people actually started voting. And John Kerry had George W. Bush beat by a wide margin -- in the polls in July last year.

Matt said...

Beating the spread might get you your money back, but it's the trophy people are fighting over.