FANCY THAT
For those re-constructing how transpeople got thrown under the bus, so to speak, it turns out that before the HRC was launching its "10 in 10" campaign on October 10th, it had put a stacked poll into the field. A week before, at least.
When Donna Rose (who I do not know) resigned, I wondered if she may have been over-reacting or being a little dramatic in doing it so quickly.
Now, I think her insights or intuition may have been dead on. I'm sure the rest of the story of what really went on will get told, eventually.
It's clear that the poll is "stacked":
"parallel" questions:
1. I agree because this does x
2. I disagree because this does not do x
"stacked" questions:
1. I agree because this does x
2. I disagree because, although this does not do x, it does y
[even though "y" in this case is false or merely speculative]
THE LONG SWEEP OF HISTORY
Meanwhile, there are these lists purporting to vindicate 2007 ENDA as "incrementalism" - even though it doesn't increment the law, rather than Democratic politics, at best.
People writing these lists ought be gently reminded that Democrats can "fail" on civil rights. Lynching laws - blocked by Democrats for decades. Truman - eloquent and forceful, blocked by his own party (some things may have even been voted down, not just left to hang, too). Roosevelt - capitulated in the face of a march on Washington, only. J.F. Kennedy - mixed. Those wanting to "trust Barney" or "remain engaged in the process" - are we sure this is not what is going on, instead?
It's hard to see how a population as small as transfolk are ever going to have the money and support on their own to catch the eye of self-interested politicians at the Federal level, who are at least as interested in holding on to their "conservative seats" as keeping the PAC money flowing...
Friday, November 9, 2007
Poll Smoking with the HRC
