Parsing Out Pete Buttigieg, Parenting And Otherwise

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his food writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.

Related Post Roulette

91 Responses

  1. John Puccio says:

    Good perspective, Andrew. There is enough there there to completely hammer the administration without wading into social issues that are, frankly, beside the point. The supply chain problem didn’t just materialize. It was a happening before the head of the DOT decided to take as much time off as he did. And it’s obviously still a problem with no immediate end in sight. The decision of not communicating to the American public that he was taking leave is a big problem however – as is never having a plan in place to get on the problem sooner. Under any other time, they all could have gotten away with it, but certainly in August 2021 they should have anticipated this blowing up. That’s on the Biden Administration and is representative of their judgment, or lack thereof, on this and several other issues from the border to Afghanistan. Wading into the social aspects only gives the administration a way to change the conversation away from their incompetence. Foolish to do that, imo.Report

  2. Jaybird says:

    Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg has plenty to answer for in his official capacity, and with the supply chain crisis not abating anytime soon he will remain in the hot seat.

    This booty has been judged: Guilty.Report

  3. Chip Daniels says:

    Out of deference to Andrew’s instructions I won’t mention the name of the vile person.

    But I will mention, over and over again, that the vile person is one of the most watched and has the devoted attention not just of a clear majority of the Republican party, but has access to the most powerful members of American politics.

    And I will never stop pointing out that the Republicans behave as if none of this matters. A latter day Father Coughlin spews Radio Rwanda level ethnic fear and hatred every night, and not one sitting Republican can bring themselves to call for his censure and shame.

    Not one! Even the Mitt Romneys and Susan Collinses who get regular tongue baths from the media about their dignity and gravitas and statesmanship, flinch and wet themselves in impotent fear.

    Attention isn’t the oxygen that bullies need, but indifference. The vile person is relying on our silence and acquiescence, on our willingness to turn our heads and feign ignorance.

    The vile man has about 60 million willing accomplices. We can’t allow the accomplices to escape the shame.Report

    • It’s not a dictate of course, but the best course of action for what I try to do here both individually as a writer and as part of the OT team. Folks can of course do as they see fit with TFGReport

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:

        Early on, a lot of my fellow liberals tried to treat Trump like an annoying toddler, or a braying jackass on the streetcorner; Ignore him, maybe point and mock, or give him a silly nickname like “Hair Furor”.

        This was based on a terrible misunderstanding of the dynamics. They thought he and his followers were conventional politicians, vulnerable to the normal tools of partisan warfare like mockery and embarrassment.

        But the proper lens to understand our current political moment is the lens of fascism and ethnic tribal warfare. Like the Balkans in the 90s, or Rwanda, or maybe the Italian Fascists in the 1930s.

        The Trumpists didn’t get to the place they are by reason and can’t get out by it. The Jesse Kellys, Jack Prosobiecs, the Proud Boys and Boogaloos don’t want a future of peace and prosperity they want conflict and an epic battle in which their hated enemies are no more. They aren’t embarrassed or shamed.

        Its too late for silence, too late to hope they will just get tired and go away. Jan.6 was a dress rehearsal and they have learned and are improving their strategy for the next election.

        And like I keep saying, they are banking on one fact that we, people like us here on this blog, can take them from.
        They are banking on that vast army of onlookers who will be silent and turn away and passively accept whatever they do. The multitudes who will equivocate and waffle and dither in feigned helplessness. Those who can still be shamed and cajoled and persuaded.

        We can deprive them of this tool by demanding that our fellow citizens take a stand and choose a side.Report

        • I’m reminded of the chronically bad at strategery Ryan Grimm, now of the Intercept, and a few others making the decision to change all HuffPost coverage of then-candidate Donald Trump to the entertainment section thinking this was a brilliant statement. It was not only foolish but had the exact opposite affect since it was, to the Trump fans, one more example of (insert various grievance trope about media here, there are many to choose from). Folks fueled by that stuff are like dealing with the Borg, nothing you throw at them is going to work, it just assimilates into their worldview of never being wrong and everyone out to get them. That’s not a unique thing to Trumpian die-hards, but they are the glaring example at this particular moment in time.

          I’m reminded of when we did firefighting training, they douse hay bails in accelerant and then place them in the corners of the fire tower. The reason – and lesson for the newbies – is if you hit a flaming hay bail directly with the hose, instead of putting out the fire the water pressure explodes it like a bomb and spreads fire all over the room. But you can use indirect methods to change the flow of oxygen in that same room, and lessen the fire and then attack it in the weakened state. Fire doesn’t negotiate, it eats fuel and breaths oxygen and relentlessly seeks out both regardless what you think about it, so the reality of that needs to be drilled into the heads of those tasked with stopping it.

          Part of dealing with fire is understand what is already on fire is gone already even if it isn’t completely invovled yet, so you pick your line and stop the spread, starve it, then kill it. The damage done by the populist Trumpist that have gone full cult of personality isn’t changeable by normal means, and its foolish to pretend the fire damage isn’t there. But going forward we can attack it with indirect methods, and as it burns all its own fuel up deny it further fuel and oxygen and contain it going forward. That’s not a popular thing, like with a fire the house is probably already damaged beyond repair. But it’s your only option for dealing with it. Trumpism is going to continue to seek fuel and chase media/political oxygen. Those tasked with stopping it need to realize and come to terms with that if they are going to be successful in opposition.

          Just how I approach it.Report

          • Chip Daniels in reply to Andrew Donaldson says:

            I think the worst things citizens can do is think in terms of strategy and gamesmanship, as though we were clever political consultants instead of engaged citizens.

            We see a bully whipping up a thuggish mob to hate on an outgroup .

            What’s the clever play? What super savvy trick can be deployed?

            If it doesn’t begin with “speak the truth loudly even if your voice trembles” then it is foolish.

            The thuggish mob isn’t the target of speaking, but the bystanders who might possibly be formed into a counter group to stop it. But only if they hear us speak and know that they are not alone. Because to remain silent gives them the false impression that we ourselves are supporting the mob.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Chip Daniels says:

      I don’t like Tucker, I don’t watch him, I don’t trust him. If he’s the monster you depict him as, I’d want him exposed. But I’ve never heard him actually do the things you often claim about him. So, where’s the proof? I remember one time he used the word “replacement”, which scandalized some liberals so much that they felt the need to lie about what he said. Other than that, he’s controversial, and not particularly a good journalist or interviewer, but I need proof he’s worse than that. As for this story, I found one line he said that was pointed derision at both same-sex marriage and paternity leave, but I can’t believe that was enough to move him to Voldemort status.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Pinky says:

        You’ve already made your choice, so you really aren’t the target of my comments. I’m talking to the bystanders who can see and understand Tucker’s comments.

        I’m speaking to those who can look at the Trump rallies, Fox News, the tweets of prominent Trumpists, bloggers and the comment sections where everyday Trumpists let their unguarded thoughts fly and put it all together into a picture of a faction that is driven by ethnic and cultural resentment and belligerent grievance. And that this faction now sees democracy as an obstacle to their goals.Report

  4. Brent F says:

    Honest question, is the supply chain problem something that’s the Secretary of Transportation’s responsibility and/or something he has the policy levers to address?Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Brent F says:

      If he doesn’t (and I’m not saying he does), who would?

      “This is outside of the purview of the government!” is something that I normally say and get a lot of pushback on.Report

      • Michael Cain in reply to Jaybird says:

        “This is outside of the purview of the government!” is something that I normally say and get a lot of pushback on.

        In this case, outside the purview of the federal government might be accurate. Biden has announced that LA’s ports will operate 24/7. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are managed by the Harbor Departments of those two cities respectively. The Alameda Corridor reportedly handles 15% of all US container traffic and is owned and managed by a combination of those two city governments and the two port authorities. The California Air Resources Board has a great deal of say about how ships, trains, and trucks all operate in accessing the ports. Beyond the state and local governments per se, there’s a ton of union contracts, the fact that a surprising amount of the container traffic belongs to a handful of giant companies (eg, Wal-Mart) who have their own constraints, and so on.

        I’d be more impressed by the plan if Buttigieg were delivering a message that said, “The EPA agrees not to punish California for air quality violations for two years, and the administration is willing to direct sizeable funds to electrification and the regional electric grid in the not too distant future, if the cities and other players will increase the ports’ throughput right now.”Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Michael Cain says:

          This is where I do the dumb thing and remember arguments given in the past.

          How is this not Interstate Commerce?Report

          • CJColucci in reply to Jaybird says:

            All the interstate commerce power means is that IF the federal government enacted laws that would give it a role here, they would be constitutional. It isn’t self-executing.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci says:

              Please understand: I’m coming at this from the perspective of someone who had it argued that the AUMF covered bombing Syria on behalf of the “moderate rebels”.

              So I find it odd to hear that the federal government has not, in fact, enacted any laws that might give it a role here.

              Like, to the point of incredulity.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Jaybird says:

                So I find it odd to hear that the federal government has not, in fact, enacted any laws that might give it a role here.

                Take that up with someone from whom you heard that. You brought up Interstate Commerce, I explained what it has to do with the question here, which is basically nothing.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci says:

                I am talking about the whole “outside of the purview of the Federal Government” thing.

                “Interstate Commerce” is how I’d see this as falling under the umbrella of the Federal Government in response to arguments that this is only a State issue.

                (Insert paragraphs about Wickard and Raich here.)Report

              • JS in reply to Jaybird says:

                Interstate commerce is commerce between and among the states.

                That has nothing to do with commerce between America and the rest of the world. I mean you’ve probably noticed the distinct lack of references to the commerce clause in trade treaties, right?

                You seem to be casually conflating the two with utter disdain for reality. Why?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to JS says:

                Because I remember during the Obamacare discussions and during the Raich discussions asking the question “Can you name something that would *NOT* be interstate commerce according to the definition we have now?”

                And pointing out that even congress with one’s spouse would qualify as Interstate Commerce given the definition in Raich.

                And, all the time, the answer was staring us in the face:

                Shipping ports.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to JS says:

                “The Congress shall have power . . . .[3] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”
                —U.S. Const., Art. I, Sec. 8 (emphasis added)

                And it would be pretty silly to grant Congress the power to regulate commerce between Virginia and Massachusetts, but not grant the power to regulate commerce between the US and France.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci says:

                CJ, have you read Raich?

                Dig this: the argument was that Angel Raich was given (NOT SOLD) marijuana that was grown in California, by people who lived in California, using California soil, using California sunshine, and went on to be ingested in California and the argument Raich gave was that, therefore, this did not qualify as Interstate Commerce.

                Can you believe that?

                Anyway, the Supreme Court found, and let me copy and paste this:

                Even respondents acknowledge the existence of an illicit market in marijuana; indeed, Raich has personally participated in that market, and Monson expresses a willingness to do so in the future. More concretely, one concern prompting inclusion of wheat grown for home consumption in the 1938 Act was that rising market prices could draw such wheat into the interstate market, resulting in lower market prices. Wickard, 317 U.S., at 128. The parallel concern making it appropriate to include marijuana grown for home consumption in the CSA is the likelihood that the high demand in the interstate market will draw such marijuana into that market. While the diversion of homegrown wheat tended to frustrate the federal interest in stabilizing prices by regulating the volume of commercial transactions in the interstate market, the diversion of homegrown marijuana tends to frustrate the federal interest in eliminating commercial transactions in the interstate market in their entirety. In both cases, the regulation is squarely within Congress’ commerce power because production of the commodity meant for home consumption, be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity.

                Given that “substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity” (AND THAT IS A DIRECT QUOTATION!) is the standard we’re using, I find myself standing agape at the argument that people are seriously arguing that INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING PORTS do not qualify.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Jaybird says:

                Of course I’ve read Raich. It’s my f*****g business to read and know such things. I share your astonishment (though not surprise) at any argument that Congress lacks authority — if it chooses to exercise it — over international shipping ports, but no one has to scare up edge cases like Raich or Wickard, which some folks disagree with. This is right in the uncontroversial wheelhouse of the commerce power.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci says:

                I completely misread you and thought you were agreeing with the proposition that Congress lacks authority over international shipping ports.

                Mea culpa.

                I would like to say that my comment from October 19, 2021 at 12:38 pm ought be aimed at JS and not you.

                I apologize.Report

              • Michael Cain in reply to Jaybird says:

                The real question remains, though, what do people think would have been done, or would be done now, if the feds regulated the big shipping ports?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Michael Cain says:

                Probably screwed everything up.

                (More DEI training, though.)Report

      • Brent F in reply to Jaybird says:

        I think we should normalize when criticizing somebody in government for something requiring that we be clear about why its their job to handle it and what tool the public gave them that could be used to fix it. Otherwise its just heckling at our inferred betters rather than holding a public servant accountable.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Brent F says:

          Are we going to have that standard tomorrow too?

          Are we just using it today?Report

          • Brent F in reply to Jaybird says:

            If you’ve come up in Canadian politics, is a constant issue that informed people keep track of and get frustrated with the rubes about. So yes, this is an important everyday standard to look at.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to Brent F says:

              Well, I’d hate to think that it’d be a standard that we demand when we are in power and abandon the second (AND I MEAN *THE SECOND*) that our opponents win an election.Report

              • Mike Schilling in reply to Jaybird says:

                Remember when the world economy was going to hell in 2008*, and our friends on the Right told us bailing out banks and granting cheap loans to beleaguered businesses wasn’t the answer. That would create moral hazard; the thing to do was nothing. Let it all collapse and the Invisible Hand would build it back better. (Sort of like, let everyone get Covid and the survivors will have natural immunity; so much less Communist than government -mandated vaccinations. Or even employer- or business owner-mandates.)

                Why not the same recommendation? It would be awfully unkind to say our friends on the Right are compromising their principles to win a news cycle.

                * In anticipation of Obama, our friends on the Right told us.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Mike Schilling says:

                As it is, everybody got bailed out and nobody went to jail.

                Just like our friends on the left wanted.Report

    • JS in reply to Brent F says:

      No.

      The supply chain problem isn’t something like “Oh this one port is a problem”.

      It’s every aspect of the supply chain, from top to bottom, in every country on earth. From the transport of raw materials and finished goods to the manufacturing of parts everywhere, including the parts to increase production lines.

      Not that many places will increase production, because everyone knows once pent-up demand (and the shift many companies are making to warehouse a lot MORE critical goods than they’d previously kept under pure JiT logistics), demand will drop back to normal. It’d cost an arm and a leg more to get what they needed to increase their production (because, duh, supply chain issues) and then in two or three years they’d have an idle, massively overpriced production line.Report

      • Michael Cain in reply to JS says:

        Nevertheless, there are big container ships sitting for weeks/months outside the LA ports. There is evidence that the same thing is happening on the East Coast. Empty containers are piling up all over the US. I would be interested in knowing how things stand outside Rotterdam. If I were in the Biden administration, I would look at those numbers and think, “Black Friday’s not happening this year. Sh*t.”Report

        • North in reply to Michael Cain says:

          Yeah it’s wild bleak and I can’t think of anything to suggest and just shake my head.Report

        • J_A in reply to Michael Cain says:

          The situation in Western Europe is probably worse. Felixtowne (UK) is so congested that some lines (Maersk among them) are simply dropping UK bound cargo into Rotterdam and let consignees sort it out (which, after Brexit, is not a trivial, load it on a truck, thing).

          At least in Europe, the root cause, so far, is the lack of heavy and long haul truck drivers. The industry has been hemorrhaging jobs for decades now, with little new blood entering into it and retirees not being replaced. In Europe, Eastern European countries (Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria, the Baltic’s) have been supplying the bulk of drivers in the last two decades. As these Eastern EU countries’ economies have improved, the number of drivers they supplied has fallen, being replaced by Ukrainians and other ex soviet nationals. Those, too, are not enough now, and several EU countries (Germany and Italy jump to mind) have established work and residence permit processes for non-EU truck drivers to move in https://www.make-it-in-germany.com/en/visa-residence/types/other/professional-drivers .

          What COVID has brought to the fore is that our economic system does not have enough resilience. Resilience is expensive, involving investing real money today to avoid something bad that perhaps would never happen, and the first mover to implement it will lose out to its cheaper, less resilient, competitors.

          A government mandate for resilience all along the supply chain would partially alleviate this prisoner’s dilemma, forcing all competitors to engage in this exercise, except that voters would punish a government who raised the cost of everything on the excuse of a pandemic, or global warming, or people not wanting to be a truck driver, or whatever.

          Back to the original subject of the post, since I believe Buttigieg is a person of above average intelligence (full disclosure, I voted for him in the primaries) I think he understands the problem better than most. However, I don’t know how much can he do to change essentially the way we (the whole planet “we”) have been doing business for the better part of five or six decades, since the rise of Japan Inc., the JIT concept, offshoring, and the social -and economic- decline of blue collar jobs like long haul trucking.

          This didn’t start in August, when Buttigieg’s children were born, or in January, when Biden was inaugurated, or in Feb 2020, when China went into lockdown. This is the progression of a myriad things that happened before, and continue to happen now. Things will change dramatically, in the next few decades. I trust the gods that future President Buttigieg will help with that transition.Report

          • Pinky in reply to J_A says:

            I’ve always assumed that he or Kerry is in line for the VP slot if Harris becomes president during this term.Report

          • Saul Degraw in reply to J_A says:

            The average age of an American truck driver is 54. Not exactly old but not quite spring chicken either. Plus it is questionable how many people want to do long haul v short haul.Report

            • JS in reply to Saul Degraw says:

              Not to mention that, like Uber, the whole trucking industry is looking at self-driving.

              And the smart drivers realize it’s coming.

              it’ll start with auto-pilot and drivers at the wheel and handling last-mile stuff and loading/unloading but it’ll eventually move away from that, requiring less and less skill — and wanting to pay less and less money.Report

        • Saul Degraw in reply to Michael Cain says:

          In the link I posted above, there is a link to a long financial white paper. Apparently there are bizarre pricing incentives in shipping containers that make it cheaper to send back empty shipping containers to Asia right now.Report

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Brent F says:

      https://slate.com/business/2021/10/supply-chain-shortages-retail-united-states-explained.html

      This is a good overview of the problem. It is a product of Americans buying a lot more stuff combined with ongoing pandemic issues ( Covid zero policies shutting down international ports and factories) and pre-pandemic just in time shipping and other incentives that the global financial class refuses to budge on.Report

  5. InMD says:

    I for one hope Pete is doing alright and am glad he is getting a free few minutes with his children. Shame on anyone who shames him for it and I hope this freedom can be extended to all dads one day.Report

  6. J_A says:

    I put out a fairly long comment in response to Michael Cains 8:02 pm post that has disappeared, perhaps because it had a link to a German state website. I hope it could be recovered, because it’s quite interesting, even if I say so myselfReport

  7. Jaybird says:

    Good news! He’s doing his job again:

    Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

      Gawker points out that there is a silver lining:

      Report

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird says:

      This is not wrong as much as you are trying to troll. Part of the issue is increased demand meeting much more limited supply because the rest of the world is still dealing with COVID and has COVID zero stances which can shut down entire ports or factories plus American management still being unwilling to move from just in time shipping.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw says:

        The problem isn’t the “filling the containers that get taken to our ports”. The supply is currently floating off of the coast of California.

        Report

        • Michael Cain in reply to Jaybird says:

          Same story at the Port of Savannah (third for container traffic after LA/Long Beach and Newark/New York), per the NYT. Too little space to store containers at the port. Too little transportation capacity to haul it away from the port. Too little warehouse capacity to stack the stuff anywhere else if they could haul it away.Report

        • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird says:

          And this is because the average trucker is 54 years old and driving those things takes a good amount of training.Report

          • My cousin the Teamsters organizer shared an article last week about a high school in the CA Central Valley that has added a “truck driving” track to the high-school curriculum that covers the whole gamut of skills necessary. Graduates can get a commercial license for inside California, but have to be 21 before they can get an interstate license.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw says:

            If only they were 52. We could live like it were 2019.Report

          • PD Shaw in reply to Saul Degraw says:

            My former managing partner got her trucking license around the age of 60 through a six week community college program. I don’t think it takes a lot of training, but she did it to demonstrate she could get the license, and I think she would agree it takes more to commit to the job.Report

  8. Chip Daniels says:

    Is this really even a problem, though?

    My wife ordered groceries and as usual ordered pudding cups for my afternoon snack.

    They delivered super-sized jumbo pudding cups with an apologetic note about “supply chain disruption” making the regular size unavailable, so no added charge.

    I got extra freaking pudding at no charge!

    Thank you Pete Buttigieg!!Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

      Yes. I am looking for “But This Is Good, Actually” to show up more and more in the wild.

      Thank you.Report

    • J_A in reply to Chip Daniels says:

      A friend of mine manages the food and catering at a large Houston hospital.

      He describes what he has been living on for the last several months as a nightmare. He doesn’t know what part of his orders will show up, and when. We had dinner on Saturday: Coke only delivered a third of his order, Pepsi, half (lucky him, my supermarket doesn’t have Pepsi products), Doctor Pepper was a no show. And he has to have six different products in each soda dispensing machine, so he had to creatively distribute his limited soda inventory across the different cafeterias. They are not getting the regular disposable dishes and cutlery they are supposed to use in a CoVid world, and have to improvise. Menus that are supposed to be scheduled months in advance, to lock in prices, are up on the air because they don’t know what food will show up tomorrow morning.

      Next time your wife orders puddings, she might have to take beans instead. Beggars can’t be choosers. Asians make great sweet snacks with beans. That is, if she didn’t have to take ketchup instead of sugar, because supply chain issues.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to J_A says:

        Its a lot like what we learned about the food stream during the mad cow crisis.

        That the global supply chains are so complex and interrelated that it isn’t possible to make a simple connection between a stalled supply here, to a short demand there because in between there are a dozen links and steps and they are all interlinked with other steps and links.

        Its wildly efficient as long as all the links are working properly but if only a few fail, the entire system binds up.Report

  9. Jaybird says:

    Perhaps the problem lies not in the supply chain, but in the fact that Americans are spoiled:

    Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

      Full Disclosure: The Warshington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos.Report

    • InMD in reply to Jaybird says:

      I’m not one to extend charity to the WaPo but I don’t think that’s the right read. Yea it sucks, yea the government should be doing what it can to fix the situation. It’s critical they figure it out quickly because there are service/retail industry and tight margin businesses at risk of being hit bad by yet another economic shock.

      But I also try to remember that my grandfather was asked to storm Japanese held beaches against machine gun and artillery fire. I can deal with not getting my preferred TP for awhile and not getting the new phone I was hoping for until some time next year. Perspective is good.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

      Another variant:

      Report

  10. Chip Daniels says:

    Remember all those polls showing that young people think capitalism has failed?

    I’m sure standing in line for toilet paper will fix that right up.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

      DID SOMEBODY MENTION POLLS?!?!?

      Here’s the new one from Quinnipiac.

      There is stuff in there about Trump. You’ll probably want to quote it in response to this particular section:

      A slight majority of Americans, 52 – 41 percent, say the country is worse off today than it was a year ago. There are sharp partisan divides. Democrats say 76 – 14 percent that the country is better off, while Republicans say 94 – 5 percent and independents say 56 – 38 percent that the country is worse off today than it was a year ago.

      Oh, here’s what wikipedia says about Quinnipiac:

      The poll has been cited by major news outlets throughout North America and Europe, including The Washington Post, Fox News, USA Today, The New York Times, CNN, and Reuters. Quinnipiac University Poll receives national recognition for its independent surveys of residents throughout the United States. It conducts public opinion polls on politics and public policy as a public service as well as for academic research. Andrew S. Tanenbaum, the founder of the poll-analysis website Electoral-vote.com, compared major pollsters’ performances in the 2010 midterm Senate elections and concluded that Quinnipiac was the most accurate, with a mean error of 2.0 percent.

      Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

        I read it.
        Bad news for economic conservatism.

        I suspect the 2022 Republican Party messaging will be something like “We’re From The Government, And We’re Here To Help!”Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels says:

          Personally, I find most polling questions to be obvious variants of “do you support Team Good?” and people answer “Do you support Biden’s policy on kidney dialysis machine regulation?” with whether they support Biden even though they have never heard of his policy on kidney dialysis machines.

          The questions that I don’t think are quite as obvious are the questions involving whether we’re on the right track or whether we’re better off now than X years ago.

          Now, of course, both have a *HUGE* political bias because, let’s face it, they are merely somewhat less obviously asking “Do you support Team Good?”

          But it’s a good indicator for the mushy middle that isn’t quite as sophisticated as the extremes. They might be answering without guile.Report

          • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird says:

            Right Track/ Wrong Track doesn’t tell us much since there are a multiplicity of tracks to choose from, but only two teams to choose from.

            For example, I think the country is on the wrong track, even though Pete Buttigieg got me free pudding.Report