Clarity Of Language

Say What You Actually Mean

Why did Joe Biden win where Hillary Clinton lost? The answer you'll hear is probably that it was the suburbs that did it for Joe. And, like, that's true, as far as it goes. But it's also the wrong way to describe that's happening.

…

It's probably an overused truism, but the true test of intelligence is how well you can describe your field of expertise to someone with a very basic level of understanding, and whether you can do so quickly and simply. If you can't figure out how to do that, you're probably not as smart as you think you are. High level expertise is important, but understanding how to distill difficult or complex ideas into digestible nuggets is pretty crucial too. And, when it comes to election analysis, it is a struggle.

You either have the lightweight analysis of Cillizza et al, designed to pander to those who think that that analysis is actually informative, or you have smart people who have absolutely no ability to communicate difficult topics in a way that can be digestible. As someone who loves US politics but doesn't love it the way that some people do, the heavy reliance on a high level knowledge base - including, frequently, of esoteric concepts or facts - can be a struggle, especially when I'm trying to care about four sets of national politics closely, plus provincial politics in Canada, the Scottish, Welsh, and North Irish political scenes, and the state governments in Australia.

So yes, a lack of linguistic clarity can be annoying. The assumption that everyone is spending as much time as you are in old Almanacs and on the fucking Atlas is a huge barrier to discourse. The other problem is the way that people discuss voter shifts. They describe the land, and not the voters. Why did Joe Biden win? Because of the suburbs. Except, of course, that's not really a useful answer.

Not every suburb moved, and not every suburb moved by the amount that others did. It's nothing innate about the suburbs, but it's a story of the voters in suburbia. When you describe the reason that Biden won as "well-off white social liberals" going blue, suddenly the fact that Mississippi still has a ton of red suburbs makes a lot of sense. "The suburbs" is whatever someone wants it to be, and so, if you're using the vague term, you're not actually explaining what happened. When you're more specific, you're painting a better picture of who moved, and why.

Go to Houston, and you'll see why the distinction is so important. Democrats did Beto-levels with well-off white social liberals, but their failures with Hispanics meant that much of that result isn't apparent. It wasn't a failure of "the suburbs", it was a Hispanic failure. Misidentifying the problem will necessarily lead to misidentifying the solution.

Realistically, I have a following right now because of my clarity of language. Whether I have been right or wrong, I've certainly been willing to say what I think, and I think that - more than any specific brilliance - is what people come to me for. I'm not saying that I've never used "the suburbs" as a shorthand, or that I never will again - I'm not perfect - but by specifying the actual, real reason behind the movement, and not speaking in a generality, you'll actually get a result that allows people to understand what you're talking about.

I know everyone loves to refer to "Ancestral Democrats," but that phrase is another one that's just needlessly vague. It makes sense if you know what it means, but that's not a given. Describing those voters properly - as white cultural conservatives - allows for everyone to understand what the fuck you're talking about without needing a nerd-to-English dictionary.

I've long complained that politicians don't speak like the voters they represent. Honestly, political discourse has much the same flaws. The built in assumption - that if you don't know the acronyms and the buzzwords, then, don't even bother - is ludicrously exclusionary, but more importantly, self defeating. If the point of oratory and writing is to persuade, wouldn't it be nice if your audience could be persuaded? Speaking with clarity of language will make it more likely that you can actually be understood, and your argument given fair hearing.

Down with "Democrats gained in the suburbs," up with "Democrats gained with well-off white social liberals." Everyone will thank you later.