Open Mic for the week of 7/29/2024

Jaybird

Jaybird is Birdmojo on Xbox Live and Jaybirdmojo on Playstation's network. He's been playing consoles since the Atari 2600 and it was Zork that taught him how to touch-type. If you've got a song for Wednesday, a commercial for Saturday, a recommendation for Tuesday, an essay for Monday, or, heck, just a handful a questions, fire off an email to AskJaybird-at-gmail.com

Related Post Roulette

181 Responses

  1. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    I have a bit of a hobby at looking at repeat phrases in political fundraising emails and texts and what they think politicians of various political parties think about their base. I’ve heard that these emails and texts are basically A/B tested to get the most skittish members to donate every time an email or text is sent.

    Here are some common words and phrases I have seen used in Democratic politician emails and texts. These proport to be directly from the politician instead of a PAC.

    1. Pummeled. I’ve seen this word used by numerous Democratic politicians in texts and emails. Often but not always by politicians in purplish states. Monies are needed, not because the politician is behind in the polls, but because the opposition is pouring tons of cash into the race and launching volley after volley of attack ad. I wonder if this is because Democrats like to see themselves as protecting/rooting for the underdog.

    2. “Please let me explain, Saul.” These emails and texts are usually sent at the end of the day and after receiving 6 or 7 previous emails. I suspect the subtext here is “Yes, we realize this is absurd to send 6 or 7 emails a day but…..”Report

  2. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Biden endorses Supreme Court reforms, amendment to limit immunity

    For Biden, who has long resisted calls for Supreme Court reform, the call marks a major shift in his posture toward one of the three branches of government.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/29/biden-supreme-court-reform-ethics-code-term-limits/

    It seems like the right thing, at the right time. The idea that one entire branch of our government should enjoy lifetime tenure without any accountability or oversight seems absurd, especially in light of the revelations of corruption.Report

  3. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    In Europe and America, the century-long focus of the far right on demographic emergencies supposedly created by declines of White births and upticks in non-White immigration have created support for controls on female bodies. These controls are predicated on negating the personhood of women and consigning them to roles as vessels of population growth.

    For men to preserve their “natural” right to dominate, and White Christian civilization to continue, women must be deprived of reproductive rights and demeaned, disciplined, and criminalized if they resist.

    This larger frame of authoritarian gender politics is key for understanding the assaults on abortion rights that are making news today, as in the new ban on abortion in Arizona that has no exceptions for rape or incest.

    Misogyny can be expressed as a desire to distress and shame women who seek to exercise reproductive rights. That’s why in Viktor Orban’s Hungary, where abortion rights have been increasingly restricted, a 2022 law requires a woman seeking an abortion to listen to the heartbeat of her fetus.

    https://lucid.substack.com/p/the-republican-war-on-women-is-straightReport

    • Chip Daniels in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      This is why I’ve come around to the notion that misogyny, more than racism, is the gateway drug to illiberalism.

      Its easy to live your life and only occasionally come in contact with members of a minority group, but everyone has an intimate and very personal relationship to a woman. And we are seeing how much of our current politics is driven by deeply personal attitudes towards women and sexuality and gender identity.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Chip Daniels
        Ignored
        says:

        I think racism allows a more convenient outlet for the same impulses. Its far easier to oppress a whole social segment based on the amount of melanin they possess then it is to confront your own daughters or wife or mother.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to Chip Daniels
        Ignored
        says:

        There seems to be too many non-white men moving towards the Republicans because of misogyny. Andrew Tate was not a white man. I am not certain that a situation where one party is associated wholly with women and the other party wholly with men is that great. In fact, it seems a lot worse than the current method of non-white vs. white.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      Weird theory. For starters, the largest authoritarian power has promoted and even forced abortions. Beyond that, the past 100 years has been a huge increase in the availability and legality of abortion worldwide. The author seems unaware of this. Also, the article claimed that Trump has “repeatedly appointed and defended men accused of sexual harassment or domestic abuse”, but I think it’s more that the men he appointed have been repeatedly accused of sexual harassment and domestic abuse. The causality flows in the other direction.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        Weird theory. For starters, the largest authoritarian power has promoted and even forced abortions.

        Yes, China did that, because it had an over population problem. Something the US doesn’t suffer from.

        Beyond that, the past 100 years has been a huge increase in the availability and legality of abortion worldwide.

        So women now denied abortion care in Iowa should, what, go to Denamrk?

        Trump has “repeatedly appointed and defended men accused of sexual harassment or domestic abuse”, but I think it’s more that the men he appointed have been repeatedly accused of sexual harassment and domestic abuse.

        To anyone who actually cares about women that’s a distinction without a difference.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        I almost mentioned China as evidence that controlling women’s sensuality and reproduction is a hallmark of authoritarianism.

        When the state controls your body you don’t just lose the right to say yes to birth control you also lose the right to say no.Report

    • InMD in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      I am a pro-choice kind of guy when it comes to public policy but I think this approach meticulously dodges all of the interesting and challenging questions about lowering fertility rates, especially in the developed world, but also worldwide. Now as JD Vance et al. are learning, it doesn’t matter how many notes you crib from Europeans about family support policy or new fangled traditionalist movements in America that are willing to give socialism and economic interventionism another look. If you seem at a basic level like a sexist creep or holder of retrograde or otherwise derogatory attitudes about the place of women in society they aren’t going to like or vote for you no matter what, and neither will a lot of men for that matter.

      The real question is what the long term solutions are for maintaining anything like a robust welfare state plus ever improving productivity and technological advances in a world where the proportion of workers to retirees becomes unsustainable. Immigration only goes so far, particularly if the immigrants are of the low wage variety. If beyond a certain point it results in political crisis that delegitimize the entire liberal democratic order then it isn’t a real solution. Neither of course is restricting freedom of the individual to make their own reproductive decisions. That principle should be just as sacrosanct as democracy.

      But what would a solution look like? And who would bear the costs? Are we really so certain that a culture that prioritizes hustle bustle all for increased individual consumption and immediate gratification to the point that children are often seen as a burden(!) has it right? Even when survey data suggests people would prefer more children than they have? Is raising these kinds of questions at all racist, sexist, or reactionary? I don’t think so and I think it’s a great mistake to leave answering them entirely to the reactionary right.Report

    • Chris in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      Here’s a long piece on demographic decline from a left perspective. It has a really interesting deep dive into historical trends in population growth and decline, and their relationships to material conditions and relations of production.Report

  4. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    One question is now apparently answered:

    The FBI has confirmed that former President Donald Trump was struck by a bullet or a bullet fragment when a gunman fired at him earlier this month.

    “What struck former President Trump in the ear was a bullet, whether whole or fragmented into smaller pieces, fired from the deceased subject’s rifle,” the agency said in a statement Friday.

    Trump was struck in the ear on July 13 during a political rally in Butler, Pa., and wore a bandage during the Republican National Convention. A 50-year-old former fire chief was killed and two other rally-goers were seriously wounded in the attack. The gunman was killed by the Secret Service.

    https://www.npr.org/2024/07/27/nx-s1-5053981/fbi-trump-bullet-assassinationReport

    • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      This does seem to be a more likely explanation than Trump faked it with a blood capsule while having one of his most fanatic followers be willing to sacrifice himself in the act of sniping some of the people behind Trump.Report

  5. Damon
    Ignored
    says:

    Five-day stay limit for migrants, plane tickets to leave

    https://www.boston25news.com/news/local/massachusetts-offer-new-five-day-stay-limit-migrants-plane-tickets-leave/FDST4JGJSREXFD4N4TMKQ3Q3O4/#:~:text=The%20state%20will%20limit%20stays,those%20who%20want%20to%20leave.

    ““I want to be clear, particularly to people outside of Massachusetts who may have gotten word that this is a place to come, that we do not have room here in Massachusetts,” said Governor Healey during a Tuesday afternoon press conference.”

    Seems like this “sanctuary state” decided the burden was too much.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Damon
      Ignored
      says:

      Well, when one reads the actual story, one finds this ONLY applies to four overflow shelters in four specific communities. Seems to me the state is still serving migrants in all its other places and programs.

      Though the state officials are correct that federal help is needed on the federal problem of immigration. Too bad the GOP chose cheap short term campaign wins over bipartisan solutions to an actual problem.Report

  6. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    Republicans Pounce: Why the Kamala Harris of Four Years Ago Could Haunt Her in 2024

    Subhed: She ran to the left as progressive ideas dominated the last competitive Democratic primary. Now, in a tough general election, Republicans are digging up her old stances.

    Question: Is it fair to go back four whole years to dig up old things that a politician says that they don’t even mean in order to differentiate themselves from the other politicians also running?Report

  7. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Russia serves as the template for MAGA:
    Have babies for Russia: Putin presses women to embrace patriotism over feminism

    Putin has restored a 1944 Soviet “Heroine Mother” award for mothers of 10 or more children, as well as an “Order of Parental Glory.” From the Kremlin’s situation room, Putin on May 30 held a video conference with nine large families across Russia who had won such awards.

    Making sure Russians have “as many children as possible,” he declared, is “the underlying goal of our state policy.”

    The idea here is that women are simply vessels for state policy. And as has been pointed out many times, denying rights to one group denies them to all. No one in Russia enjoys rights but merely possess privileges which can be offered or denied at will.Report

  8. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    I have a dumb football question. There are new kickoff rules for the NFL.

    Onside kicks are now restricted to the 4th Quarter. No more 2nd Quarter onside kicks!

    Also, only the losing team may use them.

    You have to announce them before you do them.

    Here’s my dumb question:
    Were onside kicks being abused over the last few seasons?

    By teams that were ahead, even?Report

    • Pinky in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      No idea. I know that the NFL has its highest rate of injuries on special teams, and they’ve been trying to limit the number of kickoffs for a while. Kickoffs are the worst because players collide going full speed in opposite directions. I don’t know if/how this change would decrease the number of injuries though.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        But they also got rid of fair catches. Or I think they did. Here’s the rule:

        No fair catch or signal is allowed. Officials will blow the play deadReport

        • InMD in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          They want a combination of more returns but less danger. Watch the below link to an XFL kickoff to get a sense of what this will look like. Part of the new rule is that only the returners can move before the ball is caught so the tacklers will not have the same momentum as they would starting from the kick. I went to a DC Defenders game last year and saw it in action. Thought it was pretty interesting and may actually work. Lack of onside until 4th and losing team only is baloney but whatever.

          https://youtu.be/ss57Rv4lzIA?si=qRCdiCdhuJ62mOoFReport

    • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Because they changed the kickoff rules, they subsequently had to change the onside kickoff rules. The new kickoff procedure does not allow for any sort of onside kick. So in order to allow for an onside kick, you have to completely change how they are being done.

      I don’t know if they otherwise changed the onside kick procedure. Rules introduced in recent years made the kick MUCH less effective, especially if it was anticipated.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
        Ignored
        says:

        That makes sense. If you change kickoffs, you change all of them.

        I was curious because I have seen two onside kicks, and one failed, one didn’t.

        They didn’t strike me as being used often enough to change the game.

        But if you change how kicks are done…

        Thanks.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          It’s like the new PAT thing. When it was all done from the two, you could run a play for 2 points, kick for one point, or fake kick for 2 points.

          Now the kick is done from the 25 and the 2-pointer is done from the 2. So you have to declare your intent to go for 2 (unless you foolishly want to run a fake from the 25).Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
            Ignored
            says:

            If I wanted to make the game more exciting, getting rid of the extra point would be a good way to do it. Force a run. If you don’t have a running back worth fighting over in fantasy football, it’s your loss.Report

  9. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Olympic observations:

    The men’s Olympic skateboarders are dudes in their early to mid 20s. The women’s Olympic skateboarders are barely teenage girls.

    Also it is interesting that the sport is dominated by Japan seemingly. Japan won the gold in men and women’s and the bronze in women’s. Americans won silver and bronze in men’s skateboarding and none in women’s.Report

  10. Marchmaine
    Ignored
    says:

    Surprised we don’t have a separate thread for the 28th Amendment, SCOTUS Term Limits and SCOTUS Code of Conduct.

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/29/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-bold-plan-to-reform-the-supreme-court-and-ensure-no-president-is-above-the-law/

    I’ll save my fabulous thoughts on these items for the bigger thread…Report

  11. LeeEsq
    Ignored
    says:

    Is it just me or does there seem to be a lot more genuine popular enthusiasm for the 2024 Summer Olympics than there was for previous recent Summer Olympics going all the way back to Beijing in 2008?Report

  12. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    From the “Republicans eating their own” File, 2024 section:

    “Under Paul Dans’ leadership, Project 2025 has completed exactly what it set out to do: bringing together over 110 leading conservative organizations to create a unified conservative vision, motivated to devolve power from the unelected administrative state, and returning it to the people,” Roberts said. “This tool was built for any future administration to use.”

    In a statement Tuesday, Trump campaign managers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita said, “President Trump’s campaign has been very clear for over a year that Project 2025 had nothing to do with the campaign, did not speak for the campaign, and should not be associated with the campaign or the president in any way.”

    They continued, “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should serve as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign — it will not end well for you.”

    https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/30/politics/project-2025-paul-dans/index.htmlReport

  13. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    The election is already over. Lock it up. Kamala Harris has masonic ties.Report

    • Burt Likko in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      I suspect cursory investigation will reveal parallels to, or borrowing of ideas from, the sovereign citizen movement.Report

    • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      OK this part made me laugh out loud:

      A meeting was scheduled between members of MFPD and Capt. Roosevelt Johnson with the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station on Feb. 4.

      During the meeting, the group claimed they were descendants of the “Knights Templar” and that their police agency was created in 1100 B.C. The members also claimed their department had sovereign jurisdiction in 33 states and Mexico.

      The meeting raised red flags, and LASD detectives began an investigation into the group.

      Their claim that their organization was 3,000 years old “raised red flags”.Report

  14. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    More on the weirdo beliefs of Vance:

    “Let’s give votes to all the children in this country and let’s give control over votes to the parents in this country,” he says.

    It’s an old idea called “Demeny voting,” named after 20th-century Hungarian demographer Paul Demeny (a vocal champion of the idea). Typically, the argument for Demeny voting is rooted in fairness. Children are people who, like anyone else, deserve political representation. Since they lack the maturity to make informed choices about their interests, parents should vote on their behalf — much in the same way they make decisions about children’s medical care or education. To get a sense of how this argument works, I’d recommend a recent paper by two law professors at Harvard and Northwestern making the case at length.

    But for Vance, the policy isn’t just about ensuring fairness for families: it’s about punishing childless adults. Vance sees Demeny voting as a tool for creating two-tiered citizenship, one where parents have more and better political representation than other adults.
    https://www.vox.com/politics/363473/jd-vance-weird-voting-parents-demeny-postliberalism

    The idea is, as ever with Republicans, the desire to create a hierarchical society where some people are just better than others.Report

  15. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Hamas’ political leader was assassinated in Iran: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/31/world/israel-gaza-war-hamas-iranReport

    • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      It happened in Iran itself and the only two people hit were the dude and the dude’s bodyguard.

      That’s one hell of a card to reveal.

      Of course, if you’re not going to play it there, when are you ever going to play it?Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        NYT has the deets: Bomb Smuggled Into Tehran Guesthouse Months Ago Killed Hamas Leader

        Ismail Haniyeh, a top leader of Hamas, was assassinated on Wednesday by an explosive device covertly smuggled into the Tehran guesthouse where he was staying, according to seven Middle Eastern officials, including two Iranians, and an American official.

        The bomb had been hidden approximately two months ago in the guesthouse, according to five of the Middle Eastern officials. The guesthouse is run and protected by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and is part of a large compound, known as Neshat, in an upscale neighborhood of northern Tehran.

        Mr. Haniyeh was in Iran’s capital for the presidential inauguration. The bomb was detonated remotely, the five officials said, once it was confirmed that he was inside his room at the guesthouse. The blast also killed a bodyguard.

        Dang.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      Israel critics: Israel should have responded to October 7th like it responded to the Munich Olympics massacre.

      Ismail Haniyeh assassinated.

      Israel critics: No not like that. He was a moderate*, who checks notes was happy when his family killed and said it was for the glory of God, Islamist who we could negotiate with.

      *One of the strangest phenomenons that occurred since 9/11 was the fiction of the moderate Islamist. Nobody on the liberal-left side would talk about there being a moderate Evangelical, a moderate Hinduvata nationalist, or a moderate Jewish Religious nationalist but moderate Islamist theocrats exist for some reason.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      This is what Ismail Haniyeh did when he learned that his three sons and four grandchildren were killed during the Israel-Hamas War, he thanked God for the “honour” bestowed on him by what he called the “martyrdom of his children and grandchildren”. This guy was a fanatic and not a moderate that could be negotiated with.Report

  16. Kazzy
    Ignored
    says:

    If you trust these sort of things, PredictIt (as of 1PM) had Harris and Trump winning selling for the same price (52-cents): https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7456/Who-will-win-the-2024-US-presidential-election

    Silver’s got Kamala with a 43% chance of victory (higher than Biden ever was), polling ahead of Trump (44.4 vs 44.2), and every swing state poll is moving her way over last 7 days.

    I am happy to be wrong that Biden stepping aside was going to doom the Dems.Report

  17. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/31/us/harris-trump-election

    Trump can’t help himself and is questioning Harris’ background and ancestry in front of a crowd of Black Journalists.Report

  18. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    Okay, let’s look at the polls…

    Here’s Nate Silver

    Here’s RCP

    They both seem to have Kamala ahead (though RCP has her out aheader than Nate Silver does… Nate’s is 44.4% to 44.2% but RCP’s most recent poll is DailyKos and, well, but that one has Harris up 4%).

    Stuff I am wondering about:

    Donald Trump’s interview yesterday still can do damage in weird ways (including having people actually talk about race).
    The democratic convention still has to happen (including protests).
    School’s back in September!
    There’s going to be at least one debate, probably.
    And God only knows what else Trump will do.

    Buckle up!

    (But based on nothing else than Nate Silver turning his model back on yesterday night, apparently Biden *WAS* a drag on the ticket and it wouldn’t surprise me if internal polling reflected that to leadership.)Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      You could also have Biden getting two political prisoners released from Russia: https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/russian-prisoner-swap-brings-wsj-reporter-former-marine-home/

      Now, Trump and his folks may try to make this a negative but…

      As the article notes, Trump touted himself as the only man who could get one of the guys released, meaning he recognized it as a good thing that ought to be done.

      Criticizing Russia isn’t exactly in Trump’s repertoire and attacking Biden for this without speaking negatively of Russia/Putin is a very tricky needle to thread.

      We’ll see!Report

      • Kazzy in reply to Kazzy
        Ignored
        says:

        And, if you put stock in these sorts of things (I’m not sure I do but if people are putting their money down, they’re probably not doing so completely foolishly… but who knows)… Kamala has now moved ahead on PredictIt and all of the different markets seem to be trending her way: https://www.predictit.org/markets/3/PresidencyReport

      • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
        Ignored
        says:

        I’d, instead, spin this as Putin realigning who he thinks will win the election.

        Back when it was Biden? You make overtures to the guy who is going to win.
        Now that it’s not Biden? You make overtures to the gal who is going to win.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Or Trump might do… whatever this is attempting to do…

      https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112887108527191005

      Call me crazy but posting family photos of your opponent to try to draw attention to their history of racial identity development feels… weird?Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
        Ignored
        says:

        Eh, as someone who sat through pictures of Usha with captions wondering if Trump knew about Vance’s wife, I don’t know that “can you believe this?” will work.

        But maybe it will.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          “Sat through…”

          Meaning like, someone sat you down and showed you these pictures?

          Who were these people? Were any of them Joe Biden or Kamala Harris?Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
            Ignored
            says:

            The twitters.

            Twitter nobodies.

            I’m sure that none of them were Biden or Harris.Report

            • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
              Ignored
              says:

              Do you see a difference between Twitter nobodies wondering (probably jokingly) if Donald Trump was aware that Vance’s wife was non-white and Trump himself posting a family photo of Kamala to double-down on his attacks of her racial identity history?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Oh, yeah.

                For one, one of them has to be framed in such a way that the people making them were “probably” joking.

                The other gets to be a doubling-down of an attack.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Okay then… let’s reframe. Some randos on Twitter were SINCERELY wondering if Trump knew Vance’s wife was non-white, presumably because they suspected that Trump might not have picked him if they knew.

                Is that better?Report

              • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Do you think that more than .01% of the population is that dumb though?Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Is how dumb?

                Jaybird objected to my framing so I reframed for him.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Eh. I mostly suspect that there are a lot of folks out there with some, if not ugly, *WEIRD* ideas about race and how Republicans are Racist Whites and Democrats are Nonracist Whites and Everybody Else in the Rainbow Coalition and so when they encounter something actually complicated, they resort to “probably” joking about how things are still as simple as they thought, it was just an oversight on the part of the Racists. (If you want a glaring example of this sort of thing, there’s the MSNBC Romney grandchild “one of these things is not like the other” incident.)

                Trump’s attack on Kamala’s racial identity history seems to be a variant on the attacks on Elizabeth Warren… not mocking Native Americans but mocking the whole “authenticity” thing.

                He’s not making fun of her for being Black. He’s making fun of her for not being Black.

                WHICH IS WEIRD.

                And I see it as exceptionally likely to backfire… but not because it won’t get Blacks and Indian-Americans to fight for a short while. It’ll be because of all of the people in the White Women for Harris and White Dudes for Harris meetings now have this as part of their outreach material.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Sorry you had to sit through that.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Eh, homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.Report

              • DavidTC in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                For the record, plenty of Democrats are racist whites.

                But they aren’t this level of overtly racist, and seeing that makes them uncomfortable, and it also comes across as exceptionally stupid that Trump doesn’t know biracial people exist.

                Granted, we’re running into a lot of that stupidity these days.

                And her identify isn’t even vaguely complicated. She has always identified as Black and always identified as Asian American. She’s not running around pretending to be something she isn’t or hiding part of herself. She’s repeatedly joined organizations for both, she’s referred herself as half of each, there is absolutely nothing complicated here.Report

      • InMD in reply to Kazzy
        Ignored
        says:

        If Trump continues down this road I think it will he a major unforced error. It’s one thing to make fun of the hectoring DEI junk in corporate America and Hollywood, or white ladies making duvious claims of Native American ancestry. Trump is at his best as funny Trump pointing out the obvious absurdities that the pointy headed ‘elite’ tiptoe around or full out endorse. This comes off as mean asshole Trump, and I don’t see how it helps him.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to InMD
          Ignored
          says:

          “I don’t see how it helps him”.

          I don’t know that it does but *IF* it does, it’s because it manages to successfully kick off multiple rounds of The Oppression Olympics.Report

          • InMD in reply to Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            I agree that would be the wrong way to respond. But assuming that pitfall is avoided I think this makes Harris seem sympathetic. Look at the picture he shared. It’s her as a kid with her family which is quite humanizing, and the last thing you want to do for your opponent.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to InMD
              Ignored
              says:

              Even if it successfully exposes some of the tensions between the Indian-American community and the African-American community, it won’t scare off a *SINGLE* vote for the ladies who showed up for the White Women For Harris zoom call.

              Which are likely the ones who will decide the election.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                How would that photo expose any tensions between different ethnic/racial groups?Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Exploring a bit further, it seems that photo was from an LATimes article from 2019. The web-version of the article no long seems to contain the photo, though some folks were screenshotting it and discussing it on Twitter back around the 2020 primaries as best I can tell. It IS one of the first photos that appeared when I searched “Kamala family photo” so it isn’t hard to find, but doesn’t appear to be anything she has posted recently or that she sent to Trump as he quasi-indicates in his Truth Social post.

                The entire post is very bizarre and frankly, I’m not really sure what he is attempting to accomplish with it.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Here’s a question that will open a can of worms.

                Are you familiar with the concept of “code switching”?Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Yes. I’m a teacher. It’s something we think about often.

                Go on.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                There are people who get really ticked at the idea of “code switching”.

                Like, if you code switch, you’re being deceitful.

                Well, this is an attempt to bring that topic out into the public where people can argue about code switching.

                Which is, as I’m sure you’re aware, a fraught conversation.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Who gets really ticked and who is attempting to create the situation to discuss this?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                The squeakiest of squeaky wheels.

                Trump is attempting to create the situation to discuss this.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                No he’s not.

                He’s attempting to heap scorn on someone who he considers inferior based on both gender and race. He did nearly the same thing against Obama. Its another form of birtherism where she’s not a legitimate American because she isn’t consistent about who she is and where she came from (Even though in reality she is).

                You can’t see the forest most days, can you?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                No, this is a different attack than “she’s not a legitimate American”.

                It’s more like the attack on Warren.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Its not even close to that, since VP Harris IS both Black and SE Asian and has always presented as such.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                There are people who still argue that Elizabeth Warren has a legitimate claim to claiming to be American-Indian!

                The argument isn’t intended to be among those who unironically argue that VP Harris *IS* both Black and SE Asian.

                It’s intended to be among those who find stuff like “code switching” to be offensive.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                Trump isn’t trying to start a meaningful discussion, nor is he looking down on someone he sees as genetically inferior.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                I am well aware TFG is not trying to start a meaningful discussion – Jaybird seems to think otherwise.

                And yes, he is looking down a Harris, just as he does all other women and any black person who achieves prominence. He has a long history of being both racist and misogynistic.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                I didn’t say “meaningful discussion”.

                He wants to start a round of The Oppression Olympics.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                He doesn’t know enough to think of it, and it won’t work anyway.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                I’m guessing that since the playbook worked against Warren, he thinks it’ll work here.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                It’s certainly true that he’s trying to recycle his greatest hits. The Rolling Stones can pull that off, but TFG lacks the energy and focus to come across as anything other than what he manifestly is.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                The Bulwark has a decent article today talking about how Trump is going for “Cheap Heat“.

                That’s a pretty good breakdown of what he seems to be going for.

                It wouldn’t surprise me if he tries to go back to the NABJ to do it again, asking them to maybe start on time this time.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                From the article:

                Here’s the great Jim Cornett explaining why people in the industry disdain cheap heat: “If you drop your pants and shit on the guy in the front row, people are gonna be up in arms about it. But that would be anybody. It doesn’t have to be you doing it.”

                Then, just as Trump was squatting hunched over, pants around his knees trying desperately to squeeze one out, along comes Biden and steals the spotlight with a prisoner exchange.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                I was being a bit lazy and replied to both you and Jaybird with one comment. That said, there have been 8 years of Trump being called racist without anyone really giving examples. Sexist, sure. He exudes it. He surrounds himself with hot women. But not racist.Report

              • InMD in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                What Trump is trying to insinuate is that Harris isn’t really ‘black.’ To the extent there is anything behind it I think it would be the distinctions one could draw between the likely experience of the daughter of recent Caribbean and South Asian immigrants versus that of the descendants of slaves.

                It’s falling flat because it’s obviously a stupid thing to say and as an attack it’s kind of confused as to what exactly the punchline is beyond a really eleborate, racially charged way of trying to call her a phony.Report

              • Pinky in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                It’s the first of thirty or so things that Trump will throw at her to see what sticks.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                Barack Obama wasn’t the descendants of (North American) slaves and that didn’t seem to hurt his candidacy. If I’m not mistaken, Kamala Harris’s Jamaican ancestors included slaves, though the slave experience in the sugar islands was different — and generally worse — than the North American version.Report

              • InMD in reply to CJColucci
                Ignored
                says:

                I am no expert but my understanding is that the socio economic trajectory of black immigrants and their descendants from Africa and the Caribbean post 1960s at an aggregate statistical level is a lot closer to that of other upwardly mobile immigrant groups than to native born descendants of slaves. That’s an interesting fact and may well be something that informs public policy and sociological study. IMO trying to apply it to individuals ends up more like stereotype than insight, even if it can be illuminating as to just how random and arbitrary racial classification ultimately is.

                But look the last thing I’m trying to do is accuse Donald Trump of making an intelligent observation. I don’t think it means anything about Harris from an electoral perspective and comes off as odd and mean spirited. As far as I know it’s not like she claims to have grown up in the ‘hood of Baltimore or something. Even then the belief that the only authentic black people are those that come from material deprivation and/or tough urban environments is its own ill informed kind of racism.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                The MAGAts will see what you see and eat it up because that’s what they like. The normies will see what you see and be disgusted. That covers pretty much everyone who matters electorally.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I have not met those people. Most folks I know who discuss code-switching within a racial/ethnic context typically identify it as a survival mechanism.

                I do recall conservative talk radio hosts I occasionally listened to at the time trying to attack Obama in ‘08 because he spoke differently in front of a Black audience compared to how he typically presented himself in the public sphere. I don’t recall it having any traction outside that bubble.

                For a couple fairly mainstream books that address the topic in part, check out “Covering” by Kenji Yoshino and “Whistling Vivaldi” by Claude Steele. Both are a little older.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Yes. Something like that. Just talking about how this is something a survival mechanism and people should read “Covering” and “Whistling Vivaldi” is probably a minor goal.

                We need to get the AWFLs on the zoom call to read those books, so they’ll be able to speak intelligently about code switching. Maybe even explain to African-American Women that they want to provide a safe space where code switching isn’t necessary.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Oh, I don’t think anyone SHOULD read those books unless they’re sincerely interested in developing an understanding of the topic, as I trust you are!Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Eh, I am not one that minds code switching. It’s something that dorks, dweebs, nerds, geeks, and aspies all eventually start doing. Well, maybe not the aspies… but the other ones.

                It’s more that I learned “oh, it has a name”.

                Hell, code switching provides an answer to the fun question that got asked a while back about “black jobs”. “WHAT’S A BLACK JOB?”, some asked.

                I saw someone answer “It’s a job where you aren’t expected to code switch” and I thought “damn, that’s a good answer”.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Everyone code switches.Report

              • InMD in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I could be wrong but I just don’t think normie black and/or Indian people are likely to be that sensitive to something like this. The wealthy white ladies on the zoom call strike me as the demographic more likely to have hair triggers and interests around racial hair splitting or who exactly is allowed to claim what.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                I agree 100%. If I didn’t communicate that the ladies on the zoom call were the ones that I thought would decide the election, I failed in my communication.Report

  19. Brandon Berg
    Ignored
    says:

    Kimberle Crenshaw, one of the leading scholars of CRT, the originator of the concept of intersectionalism, and somehow a professor at both UCLA and Columbia, promotes a blood libel, exaggerating by multiple orders of magnitude the number of unarmed black women—and black women in general—killed by police.

    https://x.com/sandylocks/status/1818334908382588985

    There will be no consequences for this, because everybody already knows that CRT is charlatanism. Its entire purpose is to speak moral truths wholly unburdened by petty concerns about facts.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Brandon Berg
      Ignored
      says:

      Not sure how this represents a “blood libel” but it is indeed a pretty ridiculous thing to say given how wrong she is on the numbers. Attention can be drawn to the murder of Sonya Massey without making up stats.

      Time will tell if there are consequences. What consequences would you propose for lying on social media to further one’s political agenda?Report

    • Chris in reply to Brandon Berg
      Ignored
      says:

      There will be no consequences for this, because everybody already knows that CRT is charlatanism. Its entire purpose is to speak moral truths wholly unburdened by petty concerns about facts.

      I’m sure anyone who actually knows what CRT is knows that, but I’m sure everyone who got their knowledge of it from Jimmy Concepts and Reactinoary Rufo believe that.Report

      • Chris in reply to Chris
        Ignored
        says:

        I’ll add that people are reading her tweet pretty uncharitably, and to read it as “blood libel” is to declare oneself wholly unserious.

        A charitable reading would interpret he as saying a third of women killed are black. This isn’t quite true (it’s about 19%, according to the Washington Post’s numbers), so let’s say 1 in 5 instead of 1 in 3. That’s a mistake, and she should correct it, but it’s hardly blood libel (we’re talking a difference of about 60 killings, not hundreds, much less thousands).

        If I were a betting man, I’d guess that she was thinking about black people generally, who make up 27% of all fatal police shootings, which is close enough to a third that I’d accept it for rhetorical purposes in a tweet, though not in a scholarly article.

        She’s more wrong about the unarmed part (for black women, it’s 10%, not a majority), though that category is notoriously difficult to measure, particularly given the extent that it relies on police reports, so a lot of skepticism is due, even if 40 percentage points of skepticism is maybe too much skepticism.

        So did she exaggerate? Yes. Was it intentional? I dunno; it’s a tweet, and she’s understandably angry (if you’ve seen the video, you should be very angry too), so maybe she wasn’t remembering the numbers accurately. Is it blood libel? No, that’s just pure silliness from people who show their full biased asses by saying so.Report

  20. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    In this week’s episode of “The Biggest Loser:”

    Former President Donald Trump’s social media fortune is shrinking.

    The value of Trump’s stake in the corporate owner of Truth Social has dropped by $900 million since Vice President Kamala Harris entered the race for the White House on July 21. Trump Media & Technology Group’s share price has tumbled by about 23% since then, including another sharp drop on Thursday amid a broader market selloff.

    The value of Trump’s dominant stake in the conservative social media company stood at just over $4 billion as of July 19, the final trading day before President Joe Biden exited the race and endorsed Harris. It has since dropped to about $3.1 billion.

    https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/01/investing/trump-net-worth-harris-truth-social/index.htmlReport

  21. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Emma Brockes, writing in The Guardian:

    Among the reasons these approaches don’t land is the profile of Harris herself. Trump’s go-to when facing a female opponent is always, in the first instance, sexual humiliation. He did it with E Jean Carroll (“not my type”), and, even more astonishingly, with her lawyer, who while taking his deposition at Mar-a-Lago in 2022, was informed by Trump: “You wouldn’t be a choice of mine either, to be honest with you.” Trump’s subtext with Hillary Clinton was she’s your frumpy ex-wife, and he cast Elizabeth Warren as a desiccated librarian.

    But the cat lady thing doesn’t work with Harris. Per Trump’s own metrics, she’s simply too young, too polished, too far above him in the rankings in which he puts so much store and habitually uses to denigrate women. In this, Trump’s own value system, it’s Trump himself, two decades her senior, who looks like the guy on the couch picking crumbs from the creases of his vest. Harris looks like his worst nightmare: a former attorney general of California in heels, slick, telegenic, with a corporate image and politics that have been largely in the centre – so that when Trump says “She is a radical left lunatic who will destroy our country,” he sounds ridiculous.

    And while Harris has, to date, not been a particularly assured politician, she seems to know instinctively how to handle Trump. With a smirk that does more work than all of Clinton or Warren’s earnest attempts to debate him, Harris meets Trump at the demotic level and states the bleeding obvious: “These guys are weird.” It works because it’s true, but also because she’s doing the thing Trump hates above all other things: she’s laughing at him.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/aug/01/kamala-harris-donald-trump-democrat-candidateReport

  22. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Let’s look at what Biden, who is probably dead, did today: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/08/01/world/russia-prisoner-swap-us

    The Kremlinology here is that Putin perhaps is doubting Trump’s victory in November.Report

  23. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Harris is announcing her veep pic on Tuesday in Philadelphia. Her team said the location doesn’t provide any hints on the selection but everyone speculates that this is putting Shapiro front and center. Shapiro could be an interesting pick.

    1. Shapiro pros: He is a very popular governor of Pennsylvania which Democrats must win in November but there is conflicting evidence on whether favorite sons/daughters in the Veep slot help win a state;

    2. His views on Israel-Palestine probably generally align with the median Democratic voter (he dislikes Bibi but supports Israel) but he is seen as more of a lightening rod for Israel by the louder segments of pro-Palestinian protestors who seem to be doing cognitive backflips to see Harris’ stance as different than Biden’s. YMMV but I don’t think her stance is different at all.

    3. His support for school vouchers and fracking also disappoints the left edge of the party but might be nothing burgers among median Democrats. I don’t like these stances either but I admit my view on school vouchers might be a minority one.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      The Pro-Palestinian contingent seems to like Walz even though Walz also had Pro-Palestinian protestors arrested.Report

    • Hoosegow Flask in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      I have no data, but going on vibes it seems to me more people would be unhappy with a Shapiro pick than other possible choices.

      I would hate for the VP pick to undermine the surprising unity and enthusiasm in the party.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Hoosegow Flask
        Ignored
        says:

        Where are they gonna go? Trump? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

        Now get back in line or we’ll make Bernie say something nice about Neoliberalism.Report

      • Saul Degraw in reply to Hoosegow Flask
        Ignored
        says:

        I actually have no strong preferences for any of the picks. I dislike Shapiro’s advocacy for school vouchers.

        The vibes are from the chronically online who do not represent the mainstream or median of the Democratic Party.

        Shapiro’s Israel stance is not different than any other veep candidate. He also called Bibi the worst leader and horrible for Israel. He just gets targeted because he is Jewish and that is gross.Report

        • InMD in reply to Saul Degraw
          Ignored
          says:

          I don’t think the VP pick matters that much but popular moderate governor of swing state, parts of which have a lot in common with other important swing states, seems like a no-brainer.Report

        • LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw
          Ignored
          says:

          The funny thing is that many of the anti-Shapiro people because of I/P seem to love Walz despite the fact that Walz said very similar things to Shapiro and also seems to like Netanyahu. During Netanyahu’s speech at Congress, Walz clapped repeatedly.Report

          • InMD in reply to LeeEsq
            Ignored
            says:

            I think the reality is that Israel and Palestine are an elite obsession. Most Americans probably couldn’t find the area on a map, don’t know who Netanyahu is, etc.Report

            • LeeEsq in reply to InMD
              Ignored
              says:

              There are a lot of Evangelicals who I wouldn’t necessarily call elite but who are deeply invested in the I/P conflict. I think the number of people who will base their vote totally on the I/P conflict is very small though.Report

          • Michael Cain in reply to LeeEsq
            Ignored
            says:

            LG&M is running a should pick/will pick poll for the commentariate there. Walz is leading the should pick by a large amount, with 72% of the choices. Shapiro is leading the will pick numbers, but that’s much closer.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      Wait wait wait. This story is from 2 days ago: Pennsylvania Supreme Court to hear arguments over 2011 death of Philadelphia teacher Ellen Greenberg.

      The gist of the story is this: Greenberg was found stabbed 20 times, one of the stabs apparently took place after Ms. Greenberg was no longer alive.

      Why does this matter?

      The Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office reviewed the case in 2019 and ruled the death a suicide, and in 2022, the office under then-Attorney General Josh Shapiro reaffirmed that ruling after again reviewing the case between December 2021 and January 2022.

      Maybe it’s a nothingburger… but the SCoPA is going to be looking at the case now.Report

  24. Kazzy
    Ignored
    says:

    Trump has “Re-Truthed” this and another “Truth” that wrongly claims Kamala isn’t Black.

    https://truthsocial.com/@LauraLoomer/posts/112882910713989624

    WHAT WONDERFUL CLOTHES THE EMPEROR HAS!Report

    • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
      Ignored
      says:

      You’re not going to reclaim the Emperor has no clothes analogy if you’re misusing it. Actually, you’re not going to reclaim it at all. You’re like 10 minutes removed from “Biden is fine”, and less time than that from “‘shot'”. Auto-firing random accusations in an attempt to distract people from your earlier embarrassing moments is very Trumpian.Report

      • Kazzy in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        Cute.

        I said “shot” when we didn’t know exactly what happened. Once we did, I changed course. It’s called “learning.” I don’t recall ever saying “Biden is fine” though I did express concern that him withdrawing was waiving the white flag. I was wrong about that, something I’ve admitted.

        Folks here INSISTED I had the Emperor’s story wrong so I’m merely using their version.

        If you don’t think Trump is both stupid and racist, you’re admiring the Emperor’s clothes. Huzzah!

        Also… me showing you want Trump is putting out there isn’t making “random accusations.” Words have meaning, big guy.Report

        • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
          Ignored
          says:

          I’ve often talked about how the first 48 hours of any breaking story are probably wrong. I understand that. But your comment was dismissive. Your first instinct apparently was to pooh-pooh a possible assassination attempt on a former US president, not based on anything contradictory, but on the possibility that there might be something contradictory. That’s bizarre to me. We are not solely defined by our worst moment, but that was bizarre.

          And how long ago did you decide that Biden should drop out of the race? Less than a month, right?Report

          • Kazzy in reply to Pinky
            Ignored
            says:

            The post’s headline said he was shot. Every other major news report avoided such language at that moment. I pointed out we were out of step. Nothing bizarre about that.

            I never called for Biden to drop out. I felt he shouldn’t. I was dismayed by his chances but felt like a switch was even worse. I was wrong.

            What’s any of that to do with Trump re-Truthing someone who claims Kamala’s birth certificate supports his ridiculous claims about her racial background and identity?Report

            • Philip H in reply to Kazzy
              Ignored
              says:

              It has nothing to do with it. Pinky – who is clear he doesn’t support Trump – nonetheless can’t help himself when an opportunity to distract liberals comes along.Report

            • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
              Ignored
              says:

              It was primarily a response to your attempt to pave over the Emperor’s New Clothes debacle. The fact that you still apparently can’t see that Biden is unfit for the office highlights the problem. I wouldn’t be shocked if Trump is racist, but I haven’t seen it.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                On what grounds do you contend he’s unfit? That he’s making policy decisions and getting stuff done that TFG didn’t and you don’t like?

                I mean he just pulled off a Russian Prisoner swap – mostly for prisoners Russia took when TFG was in office. That he’s not as bombastic as TFG doesn’t mean he’s unfit for office.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                I have no problem with a president who doesn’t agree with me. I expect an administration to perform operations without immediate presidential supervision. The Biden issue is different and you know it.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                I expect an administration to perform operations without immediate presidential supervision. The Biden issue is different and you know it.

                Those two statements contradict each other – though the second is woefully lacking in any useful detail. I have found his administration far more competent at doing the things that need to be done so I can do my job then TFG’s.

                So no, I don’t believe there’s a negative difference here.Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Of course you haven’t, but that’s a statement about the limits of your vision, not about reality.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                “ I wouldn’t be shocked if Trump is racist, but I haven’t seen it.”

                BECAUSE THE EMPEROR HAS THE MOST GLORIOUS, UNRACIST CLOTHES ON!Report

              • Pinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnk in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Every time I hear that reference for the rest of my life I’ll think of the Democrats’ claim that Biden is fit for office.

                PS, my “N” key got stuck.Report

  25. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Republicans Want Someone Younger Than Donald Trump as President: New Poll

    In a YouGov poll conducted between July 25-29, 59 percent of Republicans surveyed said they would prefer a president under the age of 75. Trump celebrated his 78th birthday in June. Forty percent said they had no preference, and just two percent said they would prefer a president over the age of 75.

    Democratic voters were particularly keen on a younger candidate, with 73 percent indicating they would prefer a president 64-years-old or below. Twenty-four percent had no preference.

    “It’s not about age, it’s about competence, and dangerously liberal Kamala Harris has proven to be just as incompetent as Joe Biden,” a Trump campaign spokesperson told Newsweek.

    https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-too-old-age-2024-election-president-poll-1932983Report

    • Philip H in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      The GOP seems really good at ignoring what voters want. This is not going to be any different.Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      Ironically, most of the Democrats complaining about Biden and Trump being too old were simping for Sanders when he was in his mid or late 70s. Republicans are right about Biden and Harris, of course, and about competence mattering more than age, but it takes some chutzpah to say that while backing Trump.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Brandon Berg
        Ignored
        says:

        Given both Biden’s economic success and his diplomatic success – particularly getting Russian held Americans back and keeping NATO in the war in Ukraine against Russia – I remain puzzled why his administration is seen as incompetent. Sure, he’s not doing things you want done, but he seems to be doing his things quite competently.Report

  26. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Bill Barr blocked an investigation into whether Egypt illegally donated 10 million dollars in Trump’s 2016 campaign: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2024/08/02/trump-campaign-egypt-investigation/

    BTW, Trump’s admin freed up 1.3 billion in military aid for Egypt that had been withheld because of human rights abuses.Report

  27. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    What the market did when it still expected Trump to get elected manifested today.

    (Which is silly. That Newsweek poll had Biden up!)Report

  28. Steve Casburn
    Ignored
    says:

    The political party that mocks DEI initiatives as crucibles for mediocrity has now nominated Donald Trump as its candidate for the President of the United States for the third time in a row. #commitmenttoexcellenceReport

  29. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    CNN reports: Emhoff acknowledges affair during first marriage after tabloid report

    Vice President Kamala Harris’ husband Doug Emhoff acknowledged Saturday in a statement to CNN that he had an affair during his first marriage after the alleged details of the relationship were published by a British tabloid.

    “During my first marriage, Kerstin and I went through some tough times on account of my actions. I took responsibility, and in the years since, we worked through things as a family and have come out stronger on the other side,” Emhoff said in a statement provided exclusively to CNN.

    The fact that CNN is even deigning to cover this is a disgrace. Would they be doing this if a man was running for President?Report

  30. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    RFK Jr. voters will be confused to discover that RFK Jr. staged a dead bear cub in Central Park to make it look like it was hit by a cyclist.

    Conspiracy theorists will be delighted to know that the NYT reporter assigned to this story was his niece.

    Report

    • DavidTC in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Will they? Will RFK Jr. voters actually be confused by that? Will they be more confused than they normally are? Or will they, perhaps, be less confused? Is it possible to measure the confusion of an RFK Jr. voter in any way?

      And doesn’t this just _feel right_? Like the fact he literally had brain worms. It just feel like, at some level, something we’ve always known was true, deep in our hearts…of course he’s run into a bear and dumped the body somewhere and framed an imaginary cyclist. Why wouldn’t he have done that? It is very On Brand for the Complete and Utter Dumbass that is RFK Jr.

      Also, what sort of weird premise is ‘I will make it look like a cyclist killed this bear club?’ Like…how small a bear cub are we talking about? I’d be startled if a cyclist killed a _dog_.

      Final score on political evil: Worse than tying a dog to a bike rack, better than shooting a dog cause you don’t like it.

      Additional note: He did it while hanging out with Roseanne, which also seems entirely correct.Report

      • DavidTC in reply to DavidTC
        Ignored
        says:

        Note: By ‘it’ I meant ‘made the video that tells the story’, not ‘kill the bear’. Sorry, that was really confusing. Roseanne has never killed a bear THAT WE KNOW OF.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to DavidTC
        Ignored
        says:

        “I know… we’ll put the head of the bear on the bike. Make the subtext text.”Report

        • DavidTC in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          It appears, looking at articles from back then, that everyone immediately figured out a) the bear had been transported three from elsewhere, and b) whoever did it was trying to blame it on a cyclist.

          That family might be the subject of a billion conspiracy theories, but they can’t originate a believable conspiracy to save their life.Report

    • DavidTC in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Oh, also, I get to make the joke first: This Chappaquiddick remake is really confusing.Report

  31. Steve Casburn
    Ignored
    says:

    A 2011 discussion with the author of a book about the American focus on winning seems appropriate to re-visit during the Olympics…

    https://newbooksnetwork.com/francesco-duinas-winning-reflections-on-an-american-obsession-princeton-university-press-2010/Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *