81 thoughts on “Morning Ed: World {2016.07.14.Th}”

  1. Clothing: “However, the United States and the United Kingdom, the largest exporters of second-hand clothing, can also help to mitigate the problem by recognizing the effects of the second-hand donations on other markets and working with the governments and people of impacted countries to reduce the unintended consequences of the donation market.” Good question. The article didn’t provide any answers though.

    Toilet: Yep. Doubt anyone could not notice that. Gotta be intentional.

    Muslim brotherhood in Sweden: Time to panic!!!!!! OMG OMG OMGReport

  2. Seeing a lot of “Hey! Maybe we can unbind delegates!” on my twitter timeline.

    When you use a trick that only works once, you pretty much need to make sure that the trick works the one time you can get away with using it.Report

    1. Sort of. Unbound delegates is not a “trick” exactly. it’s the norm. This is the first elections in which the delegates are all bound by RNC rules. So having unbound delegates isn’t a one-time thing.

      Changing the rules to overturn a primary outcome would be. Which is one of a handful of reason I don’t expect it to happen.

      I’m honestly on the fence. Early on, when I thought Trump had a shot in November, I thought they should do whatever it takes. When he slid and it looked less likely, I moved more towards a “Let him lose” position. His conduct since the end of the primary, though, has moved me towards “The party would be justified to use every lever it has” (and to some extent, if you don’t use them now, they effectively don’t exist anyway).

      Ultimately, though, doing this would require a degree of coordination that the party lacks and that, if the party had it, would not be in this position in the first place.Report

      1. Not to mention, if the party machinated to change its rules at the 11th hour, what credibility would the chosen candidate have – and why would party members bother to vote in future primaries, knowing the party is willing to change all the rules if it doesn’t like the effects of democracy?Report

        1. The ability to change the rules is one of the rules. The last word was explicitly given to not-the-voters. The main question is whether or not to play that… errr… trump card this time around. Whether the disaster threshold is sufficiently met by him.

          To me, that hinges on whether or not he has a chance in November. Losing an election because of terrible primary voters is one thing. Putting Trump in the White House is another. That’s how I view it, anyway. The delegates see things differently.Report

          1. I don’t think that anybody is disputing the… what? Right? Power? Ability? of the party leaders to do this thing.

            I think that what they’re arguing about is the extent to which the village that they’ll be saving will be destroyed by their intervention.Report

            1. There is no obvious answer to that question.

              If it’s David Duke, it’s worth doing. If it’s Ted Cruz, it’s not worth doing. Where does Trump fall in that spectrum?

              You don’t know that until you know what the next four months look like. And we won’t know that for another four months.

              But unadulterated Trumpism is the future of the party, then there is nothing to save. You’re not doing it it save. You’re doing it for a different reason.

              As it stands, though, I don’t know which path leads to the fastest route of defeating this and getting back to a better place. If there is one. If there is not, see the previous paragraph.Report

      2. I don’t want to get all “moral authority” because we’re talking about the people who nominated Mittler Rommelney but it seems to me that the twisted, Uruk-Hai, version of moral authority that the Republicans have would be internally damaged for at least until the primaries for 2018 and it’s as likely to result in a Tea Party on Orc Draught for those elections as the party leaders setting everything right.

        “You’re not in charge. We’re in charge. Hey. Where are you going?”Report

        1. I don’t know why but I burst out cackling uncontrollably and tented my fingers. I shouldn’t have; the country would be better off if the engines on both wings were running.Report

          1. I’m still noticing how many, erm, “incidents” we’ve had so far this summer and wondering if we’re going to have more.

            And wondering if there is a number of incidents that would impact the election negatively.

            And, by negatively, I mean “in Trump’s favor to the point where he’s going to be doing a better job of convincing undecideds than Hillary will be.”

            I’ve also been wondering about whether there is a Bradley effect and “undecided” is a much more socially acceptable way to say “Trump”.

            I’ve been wondering about Brexit.

            Surely Hillary has this in the bag, no?Report

            1. Polling of Brexit was fine. It predicted a close outcome and that’s what happened.

              Not worried about Trump until he hits the high 40’s outside of Rasmussen.

              Polling in the GOP primary actually exaggerated Trump’s support until the end when voters were moving towards him.

              With Pence, he might get more than 50% saying they prefer him as the nominee. At least temporarily. He has a lot of numbers that need fixing.

              So does Hillary, but not quite the same climb. I think it’ll be easier for her to get supporters back than Trump to get support he never had.Report

              2. Well, in the days that followed Brexit, I was gobsmacked by the sheer number of “but I don’t know anyone who voted for Brexit!” kinda essays that showed up.

                Do we know anyone who voted for Trump?Report

              4. I’m not really interested (yet) in “will vote for Trump”. I understand that there is a dynamic now where people will feel that they have to choose between one of the two “real” parties.

                I’m more interested in whether we know anyone who voted for him in the primaries.

                If the answer to that question is “no”, we’re still in a very weird place.Report

              5. Dave Hackensack (Trumper Dave) did and has been with him since the beginning. Peter and ScarletNumber are registered Democrats, so they couldn’t vote for him in the primary. I suspect Phi did vote for him in the primary.

                With the exception of Omega, just about all of the people I listed are people that wanted Trump to win the GOP primary.

                Outside of HC but still online, there’s also Lion and Ed. Lion has been with Trump since the start. Ed was officially neutral in the primary, but was always Trump-curious and I think by the time the primaries got him, Trump was his preference of the three. Trump has been trying his patience lately, though.

                Which is sort of a thing on Twitter right now. A number of people that aren’t Trumpers, but want to like and support him or at least be okay with him, are having their job made difficult by Trump’s behavior.

                People I know offline supporting Trump are few and far between, I will admit. But we have polls we can look at. They’re indicating what is now a pretty low ceiling.Report

              7. Most of them have tried commenting over here. It didn’t go well.

                If you want to enter Trumpworld, Lion’s blog is here. That’s where a lot of these people came from.

                Dave and Ed are on Twitter. I haven’t mentioned Jonathan, and his account is often locked, but you can try.Report

            3. What I haven’t seen from the various incidents is any sign of Trump making much political hay on them .That’s a horrible thing to say but everyone presumed that that kind of stuff would redound to his benefit. Maybe it’s just because Trump stepped in it royally when they happened, maybe it’s because the attacks have mostly (correctly IMHO) been attributed to mental loons rather than terrorist machinations but I haven’t seen much Trump bounce.

              Right now HRC seems to be doing pretty well. Bernie being nailed down and Emailgazi were the biggest uncertainty in my mind. The former is done with and the latter ended up without criminal charges which means it’s going to be an administrative nothingburger in the general populations mind come November. So yeah the big hurdles seem past.Report

              1. I have long-since thought that reports that Trump would “pivot” to be exaggerated, but he’s really been a worse candidate than I thought he would be. Not in the sense of getting me to vote for him, because obviously that’s not going to happen. But keeping people on the fence and from embracing him? He’s actually made that easier than expected. Some people I thought were going to turn haven’t.

                That being said, HRC is not “doing well.” She’s just running against Donald J Trump.Report

              2. In that this contest is a binary between her and Trump (with the obligatory Kodos reference re third parties) doing well and “just running against Donald J Trump” is pretty much synonymous.Report

  3. I guess I have to watch Gundam now.

    Also, a terrible sounding kid’s movie called ‘The Impossible Elephant’, which was shot in Saskatoon when I lived there, and I accidentally rode my bike through a shot. They’d closed off the street for the shoot, but I left for school through the back alley, inside their exclusion zone. So one of the first sights of my ride was an elephant walking down the street behind my parents’ house – I only noticed the camera crew a moment later. They almost certainly didn’t keep that take, but I guess I’ll only know if I watch it…Report

    1. The best part is when she says Trump needs to read the Constitution. She’s not wrong, but that’s not really a stone she should be throwing, given her choice of materials in building her own house. And then she says goes on to say that if he did, he’d learn something that isn’t actually in the Constitution.Report

    1. And properly so, it was over then line. I’m glad most of my tribe called it out and I’m glad she had the self awareness to walk it back.Report

      1. Seconded. This is how it should go. A number of her natural allies were honest enough to call it out as bad behavior and she did the right thing by admitting that she screwed up. How often does either of those things happen in politics?

        I also happen to think it’s super important that she publicly admitted that it was inappropriate. That would have been a bad precedent to set, and having an example of a justice having to publicly walk her remarks back should serve as a cautionary example. If she hadn’t, the standard would be set the same as it currently is for every other branch of government: Nothing is inappropriate as long as the only consequence is shame and you’re completely shameless.Report

      1. Seriously, vacation time in Germany. It’s in a swamp too, you could probably set up a duck blind around your excavation though you might have a problem with the duck dog and all those bones.Report

      1. Although now I wonder that not being beholden to Trump makes Newt and Christie free to be the loose cannons once again, and decide to hire back on to the Never Trumpers.Report

        2. Newt maybe, but probably not as we’re in election season and he does not want to poison the well, he knows where his paycheck comes from.

          Christie? Definitely not. As Trumwill noted he has job prospects in a potential Trump admin. What the hell would he get from the left if he criticized Trump? A part time job at Chuck-e-Cheese?Report

          1. OTOH, I forgot the whole bit about Christie humiliating and putting Trump’s son-in-law’s father in jail. If he’s blackballed, who knows what he will do.

            Apart from sitting in a dark room, smoking a cigarette, and listening to “Atlantic City” on repeat, as I presume he is presently doing.Report

            1. Maybe a part time job at Check-e-Cheese? Do they have those in Jersey? I hear employees get to take all the leftover pizza they want home with them after close.Report

      2. God, the idea of a Gingrich/Warren debate is awesome. The DerpLOL’s would last for days between the two and their true believers.

        (This is assuming that HRC would be silly enough to bring on someone who is on video attacking her.)Report

        1. I would be surprised if Hillary picks Warren. Not gobsmacked surprised but surprised. Maybe if Bernie had gone rogue or something but with her left wing mostly nailed down (about as much as possible) I don’t see a burning need for her to tap Warren.Report

            1. No way in hell. I don’t know who it’ll be but certainly not a flipping general. Hawkishness is not in vogue right now, last thing she needs is to look more hawkish than her normal tendencies already paint her.Report

              1. hawkishness is rarely in vogue among democrats, but indies and republicans like it.
                Hell, I’ll be more specific. Colorado and Virginia like it.Report

              2. Indies don’t like it particularly right now. And she doesn’t need to court right wing hawks, Trump is driving them out with a pitchfork. And, let’s face it, their ain’t many votes in hawkishness right now.Report

              4. “Stavrides” – retired Admiral. But she can’t pick him because it would violate the “one-syllable name = strength” rule, and isn’t a big part of the idea of picking a military MAN to convey stronger than strong strength vs. the Strongman on the other side?Report

    3. (Originally retweeted by Trumper Dave, who I may have talked about.)

      Report

      2. Coulter wrote a recent piece incorrectly assuming Lincoln had picked Hamlin as his Veep, and that the selection gave clarity of message because Hamlin was also opposed to slavery (zounds!!!). The Convention, not Lincoln, selected Hamlin as a means of reaching-out to the disgruntled New Yorkers who had supported runner-up Seward, but neither Seward nor anyone else from NY wanted to be Veep, and the Maine delegation approached the New York delegation and offered Hamlin, who wasn’t as offensive to New Yorkers as others being considered.

        Pence seems to fit that role, he’s the conservative governor who represents the conservatives and governors that lost out on the nomination, none of whom wanted the job themselves.Report

        1. Pence is (was?) about as good a pick as he can manage. He’s not all that popular with conservatives right now. Or moderates. But he’s acceptable to both, and the congressional delegations like him a lot.

          I kind of want to criticize the pick, but the only knock is that he’s not likely to be good at his job of defending Trump inanity. But picking somebody who is, like Newt, kind of doubles down on it.Report

          1. I’m surprised Jim Webb didn’t get more traction in the discussions. Seems like Trump needs to do two things, seal-up the Republican base and go to the middle, possibly even the left of Hillary. I don’t feel like Gingrich or Cristy would have helped with either. Pence seems to be a reasonable signal to traditional Republicans, when probably few traditional Republicans wanted the job.Report

            3. Webb would have been the best of all possible picks that I would have thought a possibility (if he could get it through the delegates). That he wasn’t considered, and won’t be speaking at the convention, suggests that it wasn’t as possible as I’d thought.Report

    1. Et tu Jaybird? People keep roaming around the parking lot behind our condo bumping into each other and yelling out things like “Ratatata!” Or “Team Mystic!” I assumed they were drunks but they’re too well dressed. Even the local drunks think they’re weird.Report

    2. I saw a video of this game.

      Shesh it looks stupid. I’d rather be casting spells, slaying monsters, and having hot sex with sorceresses, aka WitcherReport

    3. Come to the Texas Capitol. I have seen dozens, I suspect into the hundreds, of people playing over the last few days. Apparently there are many Pokemon and a gem there. Just today I overheard a conversation about Charmander, whom I remember from when my son played Pokemon in elementary school.Report

    4. Something I was skimming the other day said that Pokéstops are a subset of Ingress portals from Niantic’s previous game, and that Niantic isn’t accepting suggestions for new portals. So, a matter of hacking the database, I suppose…Report

      1. You’d think that they’d want to monetize that. “We should make our ice cream parlor a pokestop.” That sort of thing.

        I mean, you’d get people walking through your front door. They’ve got a cell phone… it’s July… presumably they have money enough for the phone (or mom/dad does) and if they’re in the store anyway…Report

Comments are closed.

Related Stories

OTLC-Airship-e1612526045259.jpg

Ordinary World: Ides of March Edition

Andrew Donaldson March 15, 2021 46
world

Ordinary World: Missing President’s Day Edition

Andrew Donaldson February 22, 2021 50
world

Ordinary World: Holiday Hangover Edition

Andrew Donaldson December 28, 2020 38

You may have missed

mashie

Holing a Mashie Shot

Clare Briggs April 17, 2025
triumphantreturn

Weekend Plans Post: Fell For It Again

Jaybird April 17, 2025
faces

Punchable Faces, 1914

Clare Briggs April 16, 2025
nothin

Movie of a Man Who has Indulged in Too Much Black Coffee

Clare Briggs April 15, 2025