Social Media's Cringiest Conservative Is Running for School Board -- As a Democrat

MicroWave@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 359 points – Social Media's Cringiest Conservative Is Running for School Board -- As a Democrat
rollingstone.com

Bethany Mandel, the controversial right-wing pundit, home-schooling advocate, and prolific social media poster, is running for county school board — as a Democrat.

Though the school board race in deep-blue Montgomery County, Maryland, is technically nonpartisan, Mandel’s campaign published a graphic on Tuesday listing her as a Democrat. The move quickly raised eyebrows online, and prompted a community note on X (formerly Twitter) stating, “Bethany Mandel has identified as a Republican numerous times on her personal Twitter account.”

…

Those who know Mandel recognize her for writing molten-hot takes and far-right political commentary. The most infamous was a column, published in the wake of the violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, titled “We Need to Start Befriending Neo Nazis.” (Mandel is Jewish.) Her content can be cringey, like her column defending Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ wife: “If Casey DeSantis is a Karen, she’s our Karen.” She’s posted dehumanizing rhetoric, too. “Not nuking these fucking animals is the only restraint I expect and that’s only because the cloud would hurt Israelis,” she’s written about Palestinians.

82

Classic gop fraud

I can't count the number of times a Democratic candidate has tried this shit in a deep red district. As soon as I hear about it happening, then... y'know... one time.

Didn't Kyrsten Sinema basically do this?

Yes, basically. But she did hold office as a dem for a term before she flipped. Though she was basically Joe Manchin in horn-rims and a skirt, at best.

This needs to not be legal.

As a condition of running for a nonpartisan office I think you should be forbidden to claim association with any political party.

Which party a school board member was a part of was incredibly impactful during the pandemic and directly influenced what actions were taken to protect the students. 'non partisan' is a myth in this day and age.

People should not be required to pick between teams and should instead be able to choose their opinion on individual issues. Parties just remove middle ground and force voters to cluster together. What if you were against an issue that your party championed? Doesn't matter, you either need to get on board or change teams.

Killing the political party seems like it would be in the people's best interest.

For lots of local offices, there can almost no information about the candidates...but I've found that if you take 5 mintes to search facebook, the extremists are pretty good about outing themselves...especially if you take the time to learn a few dog whistles.

"We Need to Start Befriending Neo Nazis.” (Mandel is Jewish.)

“Not nuking these fucking animals is the only restraint I expect and that’s only because the cloud would hurt Israelis,” she’s written about Palestinians.

Oh hey, looks like you already started making those friends. What a worthless cunt.

“Playing along with delusions isn’t a kindness to those suffering from other psychological conditions.”

Yet, you worship Donald Trump. Curious!

School boards have political parties?

Homey this is America in the 21st century. Hamburgers have political parties.

My previous favorite hamburger is 2 faced. In my state they have no mask restrictions, in other states they operate in they prohibit masks under any condition. Now I spend a bit (4x as much as I used to spend, 2x as much as current prices) more at a local place, and my burger looks like one you'd see in an advertisement, every time.

Name and shame.

I'm surprised, disappointed, that it was swept under the rug that well, but I guess "food company commits to spreading the next virus as much as possible" is a relatively mild headline in the modern day.

https://www.foxla.com/news/in-n-out-burger-employees-mask-ban "The policy further states this will help "balance two things that In-N-Out is known for – exceptional customer service and unmatched standards for health, safety, and quality.""

"We are introducing new mask guidelines that emphasizes the importance of customer service and the ability to show our associates’ smiles and other facial features while considering the health and well-being of all individuals,"

https://www.kqed.org/news/11956720/in-n-out-and-other-california-workplaces-cant-prevent-employees-from-wearing-masks-regulators-say

Jesus. Not like I'm worried about getting COVID from food but wtf is that stance? That's the worst logic I've read in s while. We care about health and safety but we're not going to wear anything that'll actually do that because we want talk to see our face. But trust us, no disease here to spread.

Fucking braindead.

I was quite a fan of their burgers (for fast food), I could ignore the Bible verse # printed on the bottom of their cups, but, and I'm not sure if I blame religion ignorance or greed (though the first preys on the latter) but the result is, even in California, I'm not going to give them another dime.

It’s literally in the summary

Yes I read that, I was expressing shock at the concept itself. Sorry for any confusion

I didn’t mean to be curt either. My reply could easily be seen as dickish, so my apologies. But yes in the USA school board elections are ‘non-partisan’, but any keen observer can glean the partisan leaning of a candidate. It looks as if in this case one must be even keener than usual.

As a gently raised Canadian I too was very confused.

But then the whole "registered party member", primary voting thing doesn't really exist here either. Like parties have internal democratically held meetings to figure out their best candidates... But I could technically go to and participate in every party meeting if I wanted to figure out their schedule. People just can't run for office for multiple parties in an election.

Personally I find it a little fucked up that you register your intentions and essentially choose your political circular mail during the initial voting process in the first place. It would not be out of character from this outsider's perspective if school boards in the US were a partisan affair because there's already more infrastructure to create a distinct two party supremacy down there then we of the north are used to.

Just explaining our electoral system to my American friends usually has them very jealous at the general lack of extra steps. Complaining that we still have very much have proportional representation issues to address on the Canadian side usually falls on deaf ears.

As somebody whose dad was involved in getting 2 schools built while I was in school and was also president of the schoolboard for a time before that, I can confidently say that anybody who runs for a schoolboard position is doing so because they have an agenda.

Oftentimes, that agenda is "I want our schools to be better for our kids," but not always. Sometimes, people run because they have differing opinions on what making schools better means, but sometimes (and rather often right now, it seems) you get somebody whose only goal is to burn it to the ground. Those are the kinds of people who care about political parties in schoolboards - because they're so obsessed with the us vs. them of their politics that it shapes the rest of their lives.

Local politics can be a cutthroat and dirty game. I'll always remember my dad telling me about how he was walking out of a town meeting one time when he saw an old lady point to him and loudly say to her friends, "That's him! That's the enemy!"

They do where I live, yes. I know they don't everywhere though.

Run as a Dem and win: LLUL DEMZ ZO ZTUPID

Run as a Dem and lose: WAAAAHHHH CENZURSHIP CANZEL CULTURE

Calling it.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Bethany Mandel, the controversial right-wing pundit, home-schooling advocate, and prolific social media poster, is running for county school board — as a Democrat.

Though the school board race in deep-blue Montgomery County, Maryland, is technically nonpartisan, Mandel’s campaign published a graphic on Tuesday listing her as a Democrat.

The most infamous was a column, published in the wake of the violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, titled “We Need to Start Befriending Neo Nazis.” (Mandel is Jewish.)

Mandel’s campaign is part of a broader push by conservative culture warriors to take over school boards and decide what children can be taught.

Oklahoma’s Republican superintendent of public schools recently appointed the woman who runs Libs of TikTok, the anti-LGBTQ meme account, to a state library advisory committee.

In a column defending her refusal to use trans people’s chosen names and pronouns, she wrote: “Playing along with delusions isn’t a kindness to those suffering from other psychological conditions.”

The original article contains 1,226 words, the summary contains 156 words. Saved 87%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

"If not me, then who?" An opposing candidate, that's who, even if that opposing candidate is my cat, you flaming sack of kookery.

Is that what he looks like? Oh yuck! No wonder she's such a bitter hag

I've registered as republican a long time ago to vote in their primaries so just in case the republican nomination won the general election, it was at least someone I could somewhat tolerate until the next election. People do do this.

There's a difference between changing registration to vote in a primary and changing party label to run for an actual seat.

Did you run for political office as a Republican at any point?

Shes lying about her party affliction in an attempt to win an election. These are wildly different things.

Maybe this will finally be a wakeup call for people who go around saying "vote blue no matter who"

Fuckers give homeschooling a bad name when it has so much potential.

Homeschooling is child abuse, in the majority of cases. Kids need to interact with other kids, and be taught by people who are trained to do it effectively with curriculum that isn’t based on the invisible man in the sky’s alleged preferences.

haha no it isn't, don't be absurd about topics for which you only scratch the surface in knowing anything about. Please further don't pretend you're a child psychologist who has the end-all interpretation of understanding what children need.

You refer to homeschooling in stereotypes as though every homeschooled household is the Turpin family. Your frame of reference is squarely based on on the worst offenders that hit the news headlines. Yet throughout university you probably didn't realize there were many of us in your classes who socialized just fine and aced classes in a variety of difficult majors.

You stereotype homeschooling from these outliers; such pointing to worst offenders is like if I were to point out the prevalence of school shooters and teen suicides public schooling produces and the associated risks and blanketing that as a reason to not go to public-school. It's almost like there's a bit more nuance than you lend credence. I'll even be willing to submit cons that should be addressed and considered before anyone else considers for themselves.

So if you're really interested in extending this beyond your shallow understanding, then please, let's engage in this wholeheartedly and I can provide with both reason and evidence precisely why you're incorrect. You miss a wide variety of benefits from homeschooling that I'd be happy to walk you through if you are genuinely interested in going beyond mere stereotypes.

For starters, please separate religious fundamentalism from the act of schooling; these are two separate things and secular homeschoolers like us who believe in science and quality education exist.

Signed, a homeschooled person now in his 30s who excelled in a STEM field and is now married with 2 kids to a publicly-schooled wife who agrees with the merits of homeschooling.

Why are you writing like you're attempting to sound smart? Anyway, for someone who "excelled" in college, you provide surprisingly little substance in your argument. So I'll gently call you out: Convince us you're not just basing your entire argument off of personal experience.

Now I'm not saying I'm on either side. I've heard reports from both ends of that spectrum. So, lennybird, which side should we accept more strongly?

The top level comment literally provides zero substance. Why didn't you call it out?

Substance wasn't really my focus. We all have the capacity to look things up ourselves. How the other user said it, the snarkiness and better-than-thou feel, it felt like a bit much. I'm all for opinions, they get conversations going and usually someone learns something or at least has a good time. You're right though, I should have asked for the same from the original comment and not gotten stuck on the one.

Have an upvote, I deserve the call out here.

My god, man.

you provide surprisingly little substance in your argument.

Substance wasn’t really my focus

The double-standard is palpable. So I'm "snarky," but you're a liar.

I matched snarkiness with snarkiness; the previous user literally called what I went through and what I do for my kids "child abuse" and you don't fucking object to that? I'm not supposed to get passionate about that? Should I have written more typos, kissed their ass more? What would've received your blessing, exactly?

Give me a fucking break and grow up.

Tell me, what exactly did I write that makes me, "sound smart"? Please, be detailed. Is that your own insecurity talking? I've written many comments like this on other subjects, but isn't it funny how it's this specific subject-matter that makes people so often attack my character. Isn't that more of a reflection on you? Let's just start here before proceeding further.

For calling me out on little substance, it's curious that both (1) You haven't given any support to the opposite conclusion whatsoever, and (2) have only lightly cherry-picked at what you perceive as being low-hanging fruit without really countering anything, or even offering genuine questions of inquiry.

You're deflecting, just like you have in other replies I've seen. Substance. You have the proof, right? It's important, so share with the class.

They were home schooled. They don't know what that means.

Damn. You're kind of an asshole, aren't you? Mother must be proud, huh buddy?

Did you learn bullying and ganging up on people in school, too?

Did you learn bullying and ganging up on people in school, too?

Ironically, yeah, sort of.

Learning to read the room and make jokes (sometimes at other's expense) is certainly something you learn from frequently socializing outside of your immediate circle.

Something that your extreme touchiness in this thread highlights. You're in an internet forum taking an aggressive stance on something unpopular, and repeatedly whine that other's aren't held to the same expectations.

You stood on the hill to die. You chose that. You homeschooling mommy and daddy can't insulate you when you leave your safe space.

And yes, that last snark was bullying. I couldn't help myself.

Ah yes, the tragedy of identifying cognitive bias and desiring "same expectations."

How very wrong and terrible of me, lol.

But yes, please keep putting doubling-down on your own ignorance and ego above learning.

That I'm nothing like you is something I am quite proud of, so I guess I'll leave it there.

How am I deflecting? Is this projection? You're deflecting, actually. Again, do tell me where I attempt to "sound smart."

Just gave it to the other user. Feel free to read.

Tell me, what exactly did I write that makes me, "sound smart"

Nothing. Trying to, like they said? Plenty.

Oh really? Like where?

Edit: Just as I suspected. Low-blow cheapshot snarkiness;... But nothing in the way of substance.

Are you basing this rant on your personal (anecdotal) experience of it working out for you, or actual statistics?

What statistics are you looking for? I do have statistics supporting the fact that homeschoolers as a general population outperform the average public schooler, academically (which is certainly one major argument of the previous user's concerns when referring to quality teachers).

And of course it goes both ways. I'm curious if those critical of homeschooling are using any sort of statistics to support their arguments as opposed to equivalent anecdotes and skewed perceptions based on news headlines.

Also, just curious: do you view the previous user's response to me a "rant" as well?

Put'em up. Got statistics? Show statistics. I don't care one whit about this argument (I homeschool my kid because I don't want him to get shot), but if you say your allegation is supported by evidence, provide the evidence. Which ones?: Yes. Let's see'em.

Isn't it amusing that nobody down-voted the user who replied to me attacking homeschooling, literally blanket calling everyone who engages in it child abuse without any merit and giving zero credible evidence or statistics, themselves?

I wonder, are you going to ask them for statistics?

And sure; merely a google search away:

Edit: See? Down-voted for literally giving sources while zero has been given as a counter-argument in return and literally not one substantive counter-point or even an acceptance to have an honest conversation so far. Just ad hominems against me and anonymous dissent.

72% of the homeschooled student learned for 5 hours each week

(If this is true that's very alarming) But a few lines later it reads:

The number of students who learned for between 25 to 40 hours a week was 50%.

There are plenty of other examples of contradicting statistics and strange grammar on this page, it makes me feel like it was written by someone homeschooled...

Considering there are kids who've gone through high school and done it in a third of the time or less, I seriously question how many substantive hours of engaged learning is actually occurring. Quality (and with it, engagement), not just quantity is all that matters. At the end of the day, isn't it more concerning to you that such amount of time is sufficient to outperform the average public schooler?

Edit: Moreover have you considered the fact that there is a 1:1 teacher ratio, and a teacher who has an invested interested in seeing their own child succeed? That the learning environment can be adapted according to that child's needs? That there is literally the aggregate of all human knowledge and online learning programs and homeschool co-ops and that homeschooled kids can utilize public school facilities and even join sports teams? Shit, I did theater....

Most critics don't. They only see the ones that make the news or people that "act" differently to them.

But is it 72% learn for 5 hours a week or 50% learn for 25-40 hours? Both can't be true.

Having a student teacher ratio 10x-20x greater than public schools one would hope that homeschoolers drastically outperform public school students, rather than just have marginally better academics. It's also worth considering that many families can't afford to have a parent teaching instead of working.

In my state, there are no reporting or testing requirements, and parents themselves issue highschool diplomas for their kids. With such lax rules in most states, how trustworthy can surveys even be about the academic performance of homeschoolers?

That's a fair point and without delving into which source this comes from in the article, my guess is they meant to say, "72% learn for at least 5 hours a week while 50% learn for 25-40".

But yeah that's fair. As I wrote from the start homeschooling is not without its downsides and definitely circumstantial. For example, if both parents are working full-time jobs, then it's probably not feasible in most cases. Either way, the general data does conclude that outcomes are better, which ultimately is all that really matters for the sake of this discussion.

In the state I lived most of my childhood, we had to do standardized testing like public schooled kids, and in addition be evaluated every end of year by a certified teacher who reviewed our learning materials (an end-of-year portfolio, basically).

In my later years, we moved to a state that like you mentioned has minimal requirements. This can of course be abused but also be a blessing under certain circumstances where an education be adapted to unique life situations.

Well your second link can't be trusted because it's from a biased source. Literally paid research by the home education group.

The first one is interesting in that it seems to be a hirable think tank. But, does at least seem to be pulling data from sources.

Now you did in fact supply sources more than the people you are arguing against but you started with emotional responses and then angrily stated that you provided resources elsewhere which isn't a great look and will build bias against you. So now you are facing a losing argument to pivot to "facts" late and with bias just makes it really hard to take your side seriously at this point.

Take a step back and let it go or start over. And know starting over is also gonna be uphill with the hole that's been dug. Sorry man. Humans are emotional at their core. All of us.

While I can understand taking with a grain of salt on a level of trust, the fact is, I've provided evidence and nobody here has been able to provide a modicum of evidence to the contrary yet. I appreciate your recognition of this. I think it's also worth pointing out that being biased does not preclude being right (e.g., a climate scientist could be considered "biased" on their case for climate change; but their evidence still strong.)

To be clear, I feel I responded to that user with an assertive, passionate response that was proportionate to the amount of substance and emotion they put into their own comments. I question if you gave a second look at what they actually wrote, what evidence they provided, and what "emotion" they brought to the table. I freely admit I'm passionate about this; but I also know for a fact that I know more on this subject-matter than any individual here that has replied to me. Sorry if that sounds arrogant, but it's frustrating when you see the same tropes play out over and over again. As you can imagine, this isn't my first discussion on this topic.

So in the end I ask: to How should I have responded that would satisfy you and meet the equivalent level of detail the user I replied to gave (and was up-voted)?

Lmfao I love that your argument for home schooling includes talking down on someone's intelligence for not being qualified to speak on child psychology. Yet you're advocating that people that aren't qualified should be allowed to teach their kids and don't yourself have a degree relating to the field

My guy, the dude literally called it child abuse without any evidence or position of expertise whatsoever. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you can point to me where homeschooling is classified as child abuse under any major regulatory body or psychology association, I'll eat my words.

There is evidence that homeschooling yields more effective outcomes, so while your response is cute and snarky, it isn't really grounded in anything substantive. One would know this if they actually knew anything about homeschooling.

Fuck it. Since nobody seems to care about hyperbole I'll just call public schooling child abuse. After all, I'd bet money that even after factoring proportionality more suicides and homicides occur as a direct result of public schooling.

I’m just looking at nces statistics, specifically the percentage of parents that homeschool for moral or religious reasons, and drawing conclusions that may very well be bullshit. Glad it worked out for you, but I can’t help but feel sorry for kids I’ve known who would have benefited from a secular education. It’s pretty embarrassing to explain evolution to a twentysomething.

I confess I was a bit triggered by calling it child abuse in blanket terms, so I thank you for this comment. It's not suitable for everyone and yes, absolutely religious fundamentalism is a major issue. It just sucks for secular parents like us to be under that umbrella generalization. I suspect if one could partition data between secular and religious homeschooled groups there would be a pretty stark contrast in performance and objective life satisfaction.

12 more...
12 more...
12 more...