So, before the recent election, The Atlantic ran this article about D.C.’s foie gras ban initiative (“Initiative 86”):
At the time, some asshole with a blogBluesky account noted that the referendum wasn’t tearing D.C. apart. The cool thing about political prognostication is that we often can test hypotheses. So how did Initiative 86 do?
It won 73-27, with no precinct having less than 59% approval of the measure. Not divided! The reason I bring this up is that, when you read the article, it spends a lot of time talking to an opponent of the ban, the owner of Butterworth’s. Butterworth’s is a known MAGA hangout (not just Republican, but MAGA). In other words, this was the high end version of a Cletus safari.
Even more ridiculous, the author tries to place this in the context of well-funded referenda from out-of-state, usurping local control. So, yes, this is a dumb issue and a dumb story, but even with such low stakes, it follows familiar political templates.
Brutally torn apart; how will we ever heal?
mikethemadbiologist