Specifically to the Application: Guns part: At the state level, the Democrats are every bit as all-in on gun control as the national-level Republicans are (referencing Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Colorado mostly), and they seem to be winning with this formula. Maybe my perception is off, but what I'm seeing doesn't seem to match up with your application.
This could be a bait-and-switch, where the Democrats ran and won on other issues (probably abortion) and now have pivoted to the issue that they actually care about, hoping to get some AWBs and magazine bans in place before they get wiped out of office in the next elections.
Or, taking a more sinister view, the Democrats could know that the electoral system is no longer honest, and once they have a majority in a given polity, they can do whatever they want because they no longer have to worry about an electoral reversal.
There is a much longer term shift with the decrease in use of rationality terms and increase in intuitive terms that started well before Fox (1996), mass internet or social media. It coincides with post-Pill surge in female higher education participation and the beginning of cable news (CNN 1980). One wonders how much the shift to more emotionality in language fits in. https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2107848118
Do you think that the workings of a specific attractor (in this case your clear position on guns) is responsible for the fact that despite your (at least declared, I'm slightly dubious here, but definitely more so) neutrality on other issues, your audience, or at least your commentariat, is significantly shifted towards what would, I believe, be considered "loony right" and away from "loony left" of the United States politics?
It will be more than interesting seeing how the effects of The Great Awakening impact the trend. It seems that Our President has a 150 million popular vote target in mind that would result in an historic popular vote total and difference.
Specifically to the Application: Guns part: At the state level, the Democrats are every bit as all-in on gun control as the national-level Republicans are (referencing Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Colorado mostly), and they seem to be winning with this formula. Maybe my perception is off, but what I'm seeing doesn't seem to match up with your application.
This could be a bait-and-switch, where the Democrats ran and won on other issues (probably abortion) and now have pivoted to the issue that they actually care about, hoping to get some AWBs and magazine bans in place before they get wiped out of office in the next elections.
Or, taking a more sinister view, the Democrats could know that the electoral system is no longer honest, and once they have a majority in a given polity, they can do whatever they want because they no longer have to worry about an electoral reversal.
There is a much longer term shift with the decrease in use of rationality terms and increase in intuitive terms that started well before Fox (1996), mass internet or social media. It coincides with post-Pill surge in female higher education participation and the beginning of cable news (CNN 1980). One wonders how much the shift to more emotionality in language fits in. https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2107848118
Do you think that the workings of a specific attractor (in this case your clear position on guns) is responsible for the fact that despite your (at least declared, I'm slightly dubious here, but definitely more so) neutrality on other issues, your audience, or at least your commentariat, is significantly shifted towards what would, I believe, be considered "loony right" and away from "loony left" of the United States politics?
It will be more than interesting seeing how the effects of The Great Awakening impact the trend. It seems that Our President has a 150 million popular vote target in mind that would result in an historic popular vote total and difference.