Based on everything I've ever heard, Mudcat Saunders is an asshole. Thus, I wasn't especially surprised to see him acting like an asshole, slamming bloggers and the dread "Metropolitan Opera wing" of the Democratic Party. It was a bit surprising to learn that he's a John Edwards advisor. It seems odd to have one of your aides out there insulting a bunch of people who've treated you well.
« Occupation is Hard | Main | What Would Harry Truman Do? »
Mudcat
12 Jun 2007 09:01 am
Comments (47)
Fuck Mudcat's Johnny Reb ass. I'm not sure his employment ought to be held against Edwards, though. The point is to win elections, and--I seem to recall--Mudcat helped win VA for Webb, Warner, and Kaine. I guess I'd want know more about the rest of Edwards' team.
Assuming we don't hear much more of this from Mudcat for the duration of the campaign, all's forgiven vis-a-vis Edwards as far as I'm concerned. But, still, Edwards should get him to knock this shit off.
I tend to assume Sanders's apology came at the cranky urging of his bosses in the Edwards camp.
he has apologized. what i don't get is the cliches he uses; "metropolitan opera wing", do folks really think that is an actual grouping of people? similarly, his notion of down-home rural folk, does that exist outside of his polling data? i mean, VA has been turning blue mostly cause of the growing density of Fairfax county ...whether it will ever vote for a Dem for president is debatable.
That Mudcat feller is wearing a NASCAR hat in his photo.
I think Mudcat was/is naive about the blogosphere. His po' boy shtick probably kills them in DC, but bores commenters. Then he went in with strawman arguments against unspecified "elite liberals", which absolutely drive commenters crazy, but are fairly ordinary in the MSM commentariat. The very first comment on his first post called him an ignorant hillbilly (ironically, but Mudcat might have misnterpreted).
Online, you're supposed to cherry pick the most substantive commeents and ignore the pointless abuse. Mudcat seems to want to do the opposite.
> he has apologized.
He has "apologized" in the "I am sorry you feel bad about what I said" manner, followed immediately by a few more pokes at "eastern liberals". Not much of an apology in my book.
This episode is forcing me to re-examine my thoughts about Edwards - and not in a good way.
Maybe Petey could call up John and "Mudcat" and have a chat with them.
Cranky
Just so you know, a lot of rural Democrats really do have an animus toward east coasters. And from experience it's not entirely unjustified.
That may be the least sincere 'apology' I've ever seen. How stupid would someone have to be to be fooled by that line about 'buts', given the rest of what we wrote?
The 'Metropolitan Opera' line is pretty telling. As always, he's trying to spin his own prejudices into accusations of others' intolerance. These days, though, his targets are a lot less likely to sit quietly while they're being lectured and insulted.
The Edwards campaign needs to think hard about whether this guy is actually helping them. I've been waffling between Edwards and Obama, and trivial as this issue may seem, I just can't imagine donating as long as this clown is on the payroll.
Reminds me of Puccini's famous opera about a aristocratic liberal stranded in the American south:
"Sola, perduta, abbandonata in landa desolata... Orror!"
This episode is forcing me to re-examine my thoughts about Edwards - and not in a good way.
So touchy! So Edwards employs someone who turns out to be a dick. Does this really have any serious implications for Edwards's health care plan, or his foreign policy, or his stance on global warming? No - Sanders's specialty isn't policy, it's politics, and in either case it doesn't especially matter whether the man is personally distasteful. So why would this force you to "re-examine" your thoughts about Edwards? Do you think there are no assholes working for Clinton and Obama? Isn't it less important how many mean people are on a given candidate's campaign staff than what they're actually going to do as president?
The interesting thing, to me, about this article is that he doesn't even get his stereotypes right.
There's two things he's talking about here: "Metropolitan Opera elite" Democrats, who sip lattes and hold gala fundraisers with Barbra Streisand, and "angry blogger" Democrats, who live in their parents' basement and are unhinged and use dirty words. He completely conflates these two very different strawmen, which confuses his argument.
It's a special kind of cluelessnes, kind of like a square dad talking about "that Puff Doggy Dogg fellow you kids like," or Tom Delay saying that the lefty blog community is a conspiracy to elect Hillary Clinton.
who are these rural democrats and how were they offended? i am not trying to be snarky, but i believe a lot of these supposed slights are the result of lazy cliches, just as i believe that mudcat's diatribe is simplistic.
As a native rural white Southerner, I have to say that many of us can tell when somebody's overdoing the native rural white Southerner schtick, and Saunders is clearly over-schticking.
Just so you know, a lot of rural Democrats really do have an animus toward east coasters. And from experience it's not entirely unjustified.
Heh. In my experience it is COMPLETELY unjustified. Most of the rural Dems (and Republicans) in my family who have an "animus" against east coasters have, in fact, never met anyone from the East Coast or ever been outside of the Midwest. Their "animus" against east coasters tends to come from believing what they see on television and hear from morning DJs on the radio (or, in the case of the Republicans, from Rush and Hannity).
Conversely, most of the East Coasters (and West Coasters) I've known haven't hated anyone, though a few of them have been surprised that there aren't more farms in the Midwest and that our cities are actually kind of city-like, if a bit less dense than the ones they're used to. They also tended to believe what they saw on television and its stereotypes about the Midwest.
So, really, the common thread here is that television promotes unhealthy stereotypes about folks in different regions in the US. And to bring it full circle, political hacks actively EXPLOIT those unhealthy stereotypes to convince us that there are divisions where none exist. A liberal from Columbus Ohio has more in common with a liberal from Newark New Jersey than he might think, and a conservative from rural Ohio probably has more in common with a conservative from upstate New York than he might think.
"Maybe Petey could call up John and "Mudcat" and have a chat with them."
Someone certainly ought to have a chat with Mudcat about the particulars involved here. He seems to be swimming outside his area of expertise. I thought SDM's comment upthread was apropos.
That said, I normally like the guy.
a lot of rural Democrats really do have an animus toward east coasters.
By which you mean "Bush supporters"?
. Does this really have any serious implications for Edwards's health care plan, or his foreign policy, or his stance on global warming?
Yeah, there's no chance that the composition of the electoral coalition you intend to build would have any effect on policy or implementation of policy. Gawd, that's never happened.
That said, I normally like the guy.
There's a shocker.
Pathetic, it's the Marcotte scandal in precise reverse, but this time it's the liberal bloggers calling for someone's head because they didn't like what they said.
It's amazing how puffed up and egotistical some of these people can be. Near as I can tell all the people pissed off at Sauders are coastal, rich, well-educated liberals who post on the internet a lot, not exactly representative of the Democratic party or indeed America. Oh noes an Edwards consultant called us names! Off with his head!
Sauders is probably a dick, but so are all of you. So there.
I need to update my computer. I had no idea you could discern where someone lives, how much money they have, and where they went to school just by reading their comments on Swampland.
Near as I can tell all the people pissed off at Sauders are coastal, rich, well-educated liberals who post on the internet a lot...
Um...how exactly can you tell? Is it because they use all those big words? Do their posts have the unmistakable aroma of latte and chardonnay?
Um...how exactly can you tell? Is it because they use all those big words? Do their posts have the unmistakable aroma of latte and chardonnay?"
Coastal= because they said they were.
Well-educated= because they use nice words, yes.
Rich= okay, you got me there. I'm sure there are some poor people that like to comment on liberal blogs.
Post on the internet a lot= by definition.
There was a homeless guy who had a blog back in the early days of blogging. I think I read about him on MSNBC.com or some such place. I don't think it was a political blog though.
it's the Marcotte scandal in precise reverse
If by reverse you mean that in the "Marcotte scandal" as you put it, the people pissed off were folks who would never vote for Edwards in the first place while here, Mr. "Mudcat" is going out of his way to piss on a group of people who are likely Edwards supporters. Then yes, that's the precise reverse.
all the people pissed off at Sauders are coastal, rich, well-educated liberals who post on the internet a lot
I live in Ohio. I am not even close to being rich. I probably count as well-educated, though, so you're at about 33%.
And I'm mainly pissed off because he's spreading this goddamn stereotype that those of us who don't live on the coasts are backwards redneck hillbilles who need to be pandered to with God and Guns and other things that stereotypical redneck hillbillies like. Meanwhile, most of us who actually live out here between the coasts and might be inclined to vote Democratic would like to see someone who will work to fix our damn broken healthcare system, do some reasonable things that might actually keep us safe from terrorists while not tromping on our civil liberties, and maybe not go off and start foreign wars that kill off our friends and relatives in the name of a President's wounded ego.
Mudcat can go to hell, and take his damn focus grouped sterotyped attitudes towards the middle of the country with him.
I'm always surprised how so many people are willing to generalize all Northeasterners as being rich and snobby. It's as if the entire east coast is populated by millionaires. I make 30,000 a year and live on Long Island and generally vote democratic and read blogs. Why do people assume I'm some stuffy aristocrat?
Their "animus" against east coasters tends to come from believing what they see on television and hear from morning DJs on the radio - NonyNony
To what extent do you think their "animus" comes from believing that the wankers of our punditocracy and elite media are representative of East Coast liberals? I'm sure outside of the Faux newsroom, many elite journalists even believe themselves to be liberals, and some of them indeed match the stereotype of the elite, effete "liberal" east-coaster ... of course, as you and I know (and that this Mudcat guy should know -- and if he doesn't know, this reflects on not only Mudcat but Edwards ... if Edwards can't hire for his campaign, how do we know he won't slip up and put an anti-choicer on SCOTUS -- that's why this is important! A President is an executive, after all ...) these pseudo-journalists are certainly not representative of liberals.
Still, does people's perception of the so obviously wankerish media -- which many are convinced is liberal -- effect (I love it when I can use "effect" as a verb! Does that make me over-educated? I guess my Ph.D. does that ...) a negative perception of coastal liberals?
Also, I can't imagine that corrupt Democratic political machines in many Midwestern cities help the perception of liberals in smaller Midwestern towns. If your only images of liberals are Mayor Corrupt of the nearest big city and Newsanchor Wanker on the 6 pm network news, I can imagine you might think a certain way about all liberals, nu?
*
It of course follows that to change public perception of liberals and hence to build a new Democratic majority (as people perceive anyone who is a Democrat to the left of Zell Miller as a "liberal" whether we are or not), we must clean house and do something about corrupt, Dem. politicians and urban political machines (I don't see how we can do much about Newsanchor Wanker being represented as and even perceiving himself to be the left edge of acceptable discourse and a liberal par excellance).
Mudcat is right on. It is shameful that the Democrats don't have a strategy for reclaiming the South, with it's growing population, high percentage of African-Americans, absolute need for Democratic social policies, and it's love of nature and the outdoors. For those of you who deny that there is any bias against the South by the elitist East Coast bloggers, you need look no further than MY himself.
If Mudcat twists the panties of some overly sensative east coast types and Edwards loses some votes in NY or Mass, so what? He'll gain twice the votes in SC and FL.
Just so you know, a lot of East Coasters really do have an animus toward rural Democrats. And from experience it's not entirely unjustified.
any bias against the South by the elitist East Coast bloggers, you need look no further than MY himself.
These, of course, are people who voted for Southerners Clinton (twice), Gore, and Edwards (as VP) in the last four Presidential elections in proportions greater than did actual Southerners. And then there's the inconvenient fact that Edwards's support is strongest among the hateful bloggers.
If Mudcat's helpful without being harmful, great. Otherwise, fuck him. Actually, fuck him and his CSA commitments, anyway, but Edwards should get a pass for now.
In Iowa you meet a lot of east coast organizers for various campaigns, and while plenty of them are fine and decent human beings, a more than trivial number are condescending and/or abrasive.
Re: phony-ass Southern pandering by trashing imaginary cultural elitism:
For every vote gained in the South two will be lost in winnable states elsewhere like New Mexico and Ohio.
Mudcat is wrong. 'Re-win the South' morons who still don't get Nixon's southern strategy and the realignment of US politics that followed from it are stupid and wrong.
"Mudcat" is a buffoon. Only in DC could such clownish stereotyping of rural or southern voters get any traction. This act plays like something you might see on a saturday morning cartoon.
At least Carville was a Cajun from Louisiana, where people really are a little over the top, and he was actually smart.
Will no one stand up to defend opera?
What the "pro mudcat" posters don't seem to realize is that mudcat isn't authentically a representative of any real voters, or real voting bloc, or "real americans" or anything else--because he's not a representative of anything. He's a *salesman* whose job is to sell the edwards' campaign on his utility in understanding a bloc of voters. He has this entirely confused with selling "his" voters as more important than other types of voters or blocs of voters to Edwards to get edwards into the whitehouse. That's a game of numbers and proportions of numbers, not of intrinsic worth.
Just because Mudcat postures as representing "good" voters as opposed, apparently, to "bad" voters (who like opera or use big words or live on the east coast) doesn't mean that edwards, or the rest of the democratic party, have to opt into his fantasy. Mudcat and his supporters here have postulated that if mudcat can bring X number of non democratic leaning voters to the polls in some hypothetical rural southern state that that would more than make up for pissing off an identical number of rich, intellectual, opera loving, ingternet using, reliably democratic voting urban elites. That's not necessarily the case, it would depend very much on a number of other factors including the total number of mudcat's "converts" in swing states. If he simply converts someone in a non swing state and doesn't swing the state he's seriously damaged the democratic brand elsewhere without doing edwards or the party any good. If he converts some southern good 'ol boy to voting democratic in this election but only on condition that the party say it hates gays, jews, blacks and government itself he's done us all an even bigger disservice.
Of course the shorter response to mudcat is a simple F-you buddy, we don't need no stinkin' elitist experts on non elite voters we need better policy outreach and if mudcat's writing at the swamp is any sign of it he is not the man to do it.
aimai
Will no one stand up to defend opera?
Vissi d'arte, vissi d'amore,
non feci mai male ad anima viva!...
Con man furtiva
quante miserie conobbi, aiutai...
Sempre con fe' sincera,
la mia preghiera
ai santi tabernacoli salì.
Sempre con fe' sincera
diedi fiori agli altar.
(alzandosi)
Nell'ora del dolore
perché, perché Signore,
perché me ne rimuneri così?
Diedi gioielli
della Madonna al manto,
e diedi il canto
agli astri, al ciel, che ne ridean più belli.
Nell'ora del dolore,
perché, perché Signore,
perché me ne rimuneri così?
As a West coast urban liberal elitist I hate to break it to all you rural heartland voters out there: we don't have animus towards you. That would imply we actually thought about you at all. As the old saying goes the opposite of love isn't hate, it's apathy.
You know, we drink lattes down here in Louisiana and Alabama. And many of us live on the coast.
aimai nails it. My point about Mudcat being a buffoon is that the cartoonish nature of his salesmanship shows he is not any kind of true representative of his hypothesized "people". He's like a black civil rights leader playing Stepin Fetchit to show he's authentically down with the people.
Rule of Internet Discourse #26: Anyone who uses the expression "pseudo-intellectual" is a dumbass.
"You know, we drink lattes down here in Louisiana and Alabama. And many of us live on the coast."
Sure. As with everything in a democracy, it's just a question of numbers.
There are plenty of good progressive folks in Utah and there are plenty of bad reactionary folks in Massachusetts. But the Democratic Party regularly gets 50% in one of those states and regularly doesn't get 50% in the other.
And tangentially, I've often noticed that it's generally red-state true-believer liberals who have the worst conception of the realities of the national Democratic Party. It's gotta be some kind of battered-wife syndrome in operation.
It is shameful that the Democrats don't have a strategy for reclaiming the South,
OK, so what is this strategy? Saunders certainly doesn't have one. What Democratic constituencies and policies do propose to throw under the bus to make the South competitive in national elections? Be specific.
How many rich, successful, educated coastal liberals actually go to operas? They might drag their kids to it to expose them to culture, but very few these days truly enjoy it (some pretend to). A lot of liberal elites these days came of age in the age of popular music like the Beatles, Hendrix and the Clash. Maybe Mudcat's confusing opera for Broadway and musical theater.
It is shameful that the Democrats don't have a strategy for reclaiming the South,
OK, so what is this strategy?
Um, we don't have one. But I think we should. Look at Dean's 50 state strategy and how effective it was. Yet, the Democratic Establishment in the form of Rahm Emmanuel and Chuck Schumer bitched and moaned about it and then tried to take credit for it's success.
If he converts some southern good 'ol boy to voting democratic in this election but only on condition that the party say it hates gays, jews, blacks and government itself
This statement by Aimai is exactly the type of prejudice that Mudcat is talking about. It's pure ignorance. I am entirely familiar with Nixon's Southern Strategy, but that was over a generation ago. It's high time we change the paradigm and grow our party. We should not concede anything.
One thing we know is that NE Democratic elites do not win general elections. Southern Democrats do. Would someone please explain to me why that is?
"This statement by Aimai is exactly the type of prejudice that Mudcat is talking about. It's pure ignorance ... One thing we know is that NE Democratic elites do not win general elections. Southern Democrats do."
Y'know, I can't defend some of Mudcat's words here. He employs an attack the blogosphere which I think is the incorrect way of looking at things.
But I generally like Mudcat and where he's coming from. I see him of as a piece with politicians like Jim Webb and Jon Tester, and that's an important set of values for the national party to incorporate.
Mudcat is guilty of needlessly aiming his fire inside the tent right now, and he deserves criticism for that. But his general outlook isn't one to be easily dismissed.
Just Karl,
It's because Southern Dems apparently won't vote for members of their own party if they're from the Northeast. So what is wrong with Southern Dems? Why are they so regionally biased against 'yankees' that they'd rather vote GOP?
And what the hell is "elite," anyway? Is Yalie, Skull & Bones prestigious family scion John Kerry "elite" but Yalie, Skull & Bones, prestigious family scion George W. Bush isn't? When you and others use the word "elite" you sound like Rush Limbaugh. The word actually has no real meaning whatsoever now because just about anyone you don't like politically is a dreaded "elite."
mudcat? people are really taking seriously some self-proclaimed yahoo who's nicknamed himself "mudcat"?
what, "cartoon redneck shitkicker" was taken?
Comments closed June 26, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
I couldn't bear to read the entriety of Mudcat's linked blog post. Nothing pisses me off like a member of the media elite diatribing at the bad manners of the not-so-well-connected.
...and just while I'm at it: Mudcat Sanders? If you'd asked me who that was, I'd have guessed "a minor character from "Dr. Strangelove." But apparently, a real person.
Posted by James Gary | June 12, 2007 9:20 AM