Last night I went to a political rally for a young representative from South Jersey, Andy Kim. He’s in a three-way race in the Democratic Primary for Senate, along with Senator Gold Bar, Robert Menendez, and the Governor’s wife, Tammy Murphy. In an old church, he spoke to a packed audience about his Korean background, opposition to Trump, and outsider status.
Despite the fact that the Democratic Jersey machine is backing Murphy’s wife, Kim is up by 12 points. Scanning the crowd, I knew many faces in the room and noted the absentees — almost all the elected Democratic officials and other power players in town. A local political activist told me that she was told who to vote for — instructions which she was defiantly ignoring.
The room was wildly supportive, despite a Pro-Palestinian heckler in the back and Kim’s policy-free speech. The audience was excited to support a young guy, who wasn’t hand chosen for them by the machine. People want a choice, especially as we face the most depressing presidential election in recent history — Old Guy v. Old Guy.
Read more at Apt. 11D, the newsletter
Apt. 11d 
Question: what do you think ranked choice would do, if used? Would Murphy’s and Menendez’s number twos – if they are the candidates of the ‘steady as she goes’ In Crowd go to each other?
LikeLike
oooh, good question. Hard to know how ranked choice would work out. Menendez is only polling at like 8 percent. He’s political dead meat. Probably the only people voting for him are neighbors, family, and people who owe him money. I don’t think Murphy’s number twos would be Menendez.
LikeLike
A friend of mine lives in Kim’s district and has been volunteering for him since his first campaign in 2018. She has been singing his praises. So he’s been on my radar for a while.
LikeLike
FWIW – I think heckling is almost never an effective *political* strategy.
It doesn’t convince anyone to change their views (or even think about an issue) – it just hardens any political divides amongst the audience.
However, that’s not why the hecklers do it.
It’s performative art (‘art’, in the widest sense here). It’s about gaining affirmation from the in-group as an ‘activist’. Which is why they are just as happy if they get removed, or even attacked – since they can stream the footage, and gain kudos as ‘real’ protesters.
They have no interest in actually converting anyone in the audience – since they don’t care about your opinion, only about the opinions of those in their little echo chamber of activist validation.
None of them are interested, at all, in whether their protest is an effective strategy.
It’s much the same psychology as the activists who attack public art.
In the ‘old’ days of the political stump meeting – heckling was often clever comments from the floor, designed to puncture the pomposity of the speaker. The best were highly specific and relevant (and often very funny). And, equally often, were turned around by a quick-witted speaker, with a quip back at the heckler, and a laugh from the audience.
It wasn’t mindless chanting of slogans – disrupting the meeting.
At worst, this type of heckling is a form of cancel culture. Attempting to de-platform those with whom the heckler disagrees. That this is effectively anti-democratic doesn’t worry them in the slightest. Democracy is not something that they value.
LikeLike
Darn. This comment was meant to be on the heckling post…. Will try to shift it.
LikeLike