Michael Gerson:
“Dehumanization,” argued Bruneau, “morally disengages us.” Most humans hold to a morality that forbids harm to other humans. But if someone is regarded as less than human, those moral rules no longer apply. This rationalization is what allows people who commit genocide to go home, kiss their children and sleep at night. It is also what leads Bayer to say: “Whoever runs over a Gypsy child is acting correctly if he gives no thought to stopping and steps hard on the accelerator.”
How does this relate to U.S. politics? In a survey of Americans conducted by Bruneau and Kteily, the dehumanization of Muslims (as you’d expect) was a strong predictor of support for policies such as carpet bombing in the Middle East and denying visas to Muslims. “Conservatism does predict some support for these positions,” said Bruneau, “but dehumanization goes above and beyond this. It is more strongly predictive than political ideology.”
Blatant dehumanization was also more strongly correlated with support for Donald Trump than for any other candidate.
WaPo:
The Obama administration’s instructions to schools on how they must accommodate transgender students prompted a mixed reaction Friday, with some politicians, districts and parents embracing the directive as an important civil rights protection. Others immediately vowed to fight back against what they consider an illegal federal intrusion into local matters that carries a threat of withholding billions of dollars in aid meant to help disadvantaged and disabled children.
The sweeping guidance from the Education and Justice departments details what K-12 schools and colleges that receive federal funding must do in order to comply with Title IX, the federal law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex. Among its most controversial provisions is the requirement that schools allow students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their gender identity.
WaPo:
Facing the unpredictable candidacy of Republican Donald Trump, Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton is preparing to dispatch resources to vote-rich industrial states that have been safely Democratic for a generation.
Clinton’s plans include an early, aggressive attempt to defend Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan — reflecting a growing recognition inside her campaign of the threat that Trump’s unconventional bid for president may pose in unexpected places, particularly in economically struggling states that have been hit hard by global free-trade agreements.
Joel Benenson, Clinton’s chief pollster and senior strategist, acknowledged that Trump’s popularity, particularly among white, working-class voters, could make states in the country’s industrial midsection more competitive than they have been in recent elections.
“There is no state where they can put us on defense that we don’t already treat as a battleground,” Benenson said. He added: “The key here is to really protect the territory we have to protect, then play offense.”
No one should be surprised at this. The problem would be if they weren’t paying attention at all. More from same source:
The extended Democratic primary has frustrated party leaders in battleground states who are eager to get to work. Campaign aides say that Clinton is contesting Sanders in the primary while also delivering a broader message to suburban voters, particularly women, by focusing on issues including pay equity and child care.
“For every person that Donald Trump appeals to with his economic message, which is entirely unrealistic but sounds good when you hear it, he turns off a lot of suburban, Republican-leaning women and men,” said Dillon, the Democratic chairman in Michigan. “It’s about making sure that people understand the product that Donald Trump is selling is really fool’s gold.”
Stu Rothenberg:
Clinton Starts with a Decisive Advantage
Working-class whites aren't enough to carry Trump to victory
Can Trump peel off Pennsylvania or Nevada? Maybe, but that would not be enough. Michigan? Even New York, as he says? Don’t be silly. Even raising New York as a possible Trump state is delusional given its demographic and partisan make-up.
If Trump loses the popular vote by 7 or 8 points, he isn’t going to carry any states that Obama did four years ago.
One of the reasons why political analysts (including myself) missed Trump’s strength is that we dismissed the early polls, which Trump cited so often. They showed him leading last fall and in the early primaries, but we discounted those numbers, promising things would change. They didn’t.
But now, the early numbers show Trump trailing badly and even more unpopular than Clinton. That makes sense given Trump’s controversial campaign and often contradictory message.
So, don’t get caught up in all the white working-class chatter or the hesitation to call the race what it is. It isn’t close now, and it may never get all that close. Hillary Clinton is the clear and undeniable early favorite in this race, and a double-digit win would not be surprising.
Analysis: The Presidential Race Is Close. Get Used To It
The expected Clinton-Trump presidential race is no blowout. It may well be one by the time November rolls around, but right now the polls show a close race that is following similar patterns to recent elections.
Neil Gross:
While there’s ample evidence of the professional class using its economic and educational capital to preserve its advantages — think of the clustering of professionals into exclusive neighborhoods, or the early immersion of professional-class children into a world of literacy, art and science — its move left is evident even on questions of economic redistribution. My own analysis of data from the General Social Survey shows that in recent decades, as class inequality has increased, Americans who hold advanced degrees have grown more supportive of government efforts to reduce income differences, whether through changes to taxes or strengthening the welfare system.
On this issue, the views of the highly educated are now similar to those of groups with much lower levels of education, who have a real material stake in reducing inequalities. Even higher-income advanced degree holders have become more redistributionist, if less so than others.
What explains the consolidation of the highly educated into a liberal bloc? The growing number of women with advanced degrees is part of it, as well-educated women tend to be especially left-leaning. Equally important is the Republican Party’s move to the right since the 1980s — at odds with the social liberalism that has long characterized the well educated — alongside the perception that conservatives are anti-intellectual, hostile to science and at war with the university.
One of the many reasons I get annoyed with class warfare (and generational warfare and all the other things that sunder alliances) is that it turns out to be ally punching. Incorporate this data into your world view if that’s where you want to go.
Dana Milbank after making good on his threat to eat his column about Trump not being able to win:
Those dishes with the largest chunks of newsprint (at one point I noticed I was eating a Rolex ad) were less enticing because the paper tended to form spitballs in the mouth. But there was nothing about the experience a cordial of Pepto-Bismol couldn’t fix. In the end, eating my words was perfectly palatable.
In that sense, it was a metaphor for Trump: He is unsavory, but covering him is a guilty pleasure. And this, I would argue, is the dirty secret of the news media in this election. Trump, virtually all of my colleagues in the news business agree, would be disastrous for America, and the world. But he’s good for us. Too often we tend to “vote the story” and devote lavish coverage to that which produces the most conflict, the most outrage — and the largest audience.
Trip Gabriel:
With few exceptions, Donald J. Trump’s week in the news was a blur of unflattering reports.
His refusal to disclose his effective tax rate eclipsed an audiotape of him posing as his own spokesman. That, in turn, upstaged reports about his former butler saying racist, violent things about President Obama. Which had already overtaken Mr. Trump’s waffling over his own call for a ban on Muslims entering the country.
But Mr. Trump somehow seemed to win the news cycle anyway.
“He is the first candidate to truly take advantage of the fact we are an A.D.D. society,’’ said J. Tucker Martin, a Republican communications strategist in Virginia. “He moves so quick and creates outrages so fast, you almost forget what happened.’’
I like this piece because the analysis is so bad. “LOL nothing matters” because one reporter can’t keep up and because Trump supporters don’t care and blame it on the NY Times. Keep believing that. Remember, none of this matter to Trump supporters, but that’s not the point. What matters is what everyone else thinks (aka ’the majority of voters’). Milbank, above, has it right.