I'm more interested in measuring the obviousness of "think tanks are just partisan rationalizers." I've been disappointed in a few since 2015 thinking, "they'll stand up to this!" then watching the flaccid response. But why would they -- they're donors love it.
-
-
Replying to @Aelkus
I mostly agree with that (esp. since I think negative partisanship is an artifact globing over a bunch of well-sorted group identities). And the angle I always see is just: how can we smash together groups in a way that benefits us, however it's defined.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
And ideological rationalizations filtered by those group interests works well in doing so, especially for the "policy elites."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @generativist @Aelkus
E.G. "Why hasn't <think tank X> spent attention on <issue y> something they REALLY oppose?!" Because <issue y> implicates the GOP and right now, the GOP is serving the bulk of their (donor's) interests.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So, instead, they mix attention in a way that mutes observable partisan opposition while maintaining ideological consistency for people who want it for rationalizations.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.