1) So massively boost inflationary pressures, also I'd note he'll have to change the laws to do that and I don't think he's going to find a filibuster proof majority in the Senate eager to do that after the stunt he pulled in '24.
2) Yep they could probably do that, but probably will be too inept and busy stealing everything not nailed down to actually make is happen in a systematic way- also they need those issues to rile up their voters.
3) So on the issue the voters overwhelmingly care the most about you agree Biden did a spectacular job.
4) Uh sure. The truth is out there.
5) Well that's not a Republican constituency so they can kick them as much as Biden tried (foolishly) to indulge them. Probably won't be effective. I'm guessing they'd need to change the laws either which way.
That's interesting. What do you think Trump *SHOULD* do differently than Biden? Not what will he do, but what should he do?
Considering the hand Biden has left him the only thing that a theoretically sane and sensible Trump (I know, it's VERY theoretical) should do on the economy, at least, would be not a lot other than switching from yelling about how everything is burning down to crowing about how he fixed everything. Given that most of the dour mood on the economy was rooted in Republican opinion which was automatically negative (Dems also have this predilection but to a much lesser degree) because a Democrat was in the White House it's technically a solved problem.
On the border he could... well... mostly stand pat and pass the bill he previously opportunistically tanked along with, again, switching his blathering from doom to triumph.
On trade Trump's biggest perils lie because if he does what he campaigned on doing then he's going to reap a whirlwind. Especially if he pairs it with the massive tax cuts for the wealthy he's planning on.
Frankly I'm struggling to think of a President since W who's been left a better hand by their predecessor.
Well that article is mostly about how NIMBY's are fishing up everything in the major urban areas and is entirely correct. It can't just be ignored or awkwardly gestured at by Dems at any level now but unfortunately it's also not an easy nut to crack since housing controls are heavily localized and, to the degree the obstacles are not localized, they're seated in environmental sacred cows like NEP and CEQA.
But on the brighter note, this same warning was sounded with left coasters fled to Colorado and Arizona in the early aughts.
Naw, I was sad but, unlike in 2016, I paid close enough mind to the polls to recognize that a Trump victory or even a wide but shallow victory like what he brought home was a very real possibility. Also, frankly, after a week on a boat, even a luxurious boat, one pines for home.
Happened on his watch AND was massively exacerbated by his policy choices during that time AND was executed by a Palestinian group his political party and ideology expressly promoted, supported and advanced in order to diminish a different Palestinian group that has, in the past decades, been largely peaceful and cooperative (undemocratic, scholeric and corrupt, mind, but also cooperative and peaceful).
Well yes, we're talking about the same thing from opposite sides. You're pondering if Rogan should have gone to her. I'm pondering if she should have gone to Rogan. Michael is pointing out, helpfully, that the cost in organizational juice for Harris to go to Rogan is probably even higher than we realize.
But your superposition point is correct if anodyne. If she wins everything she did will be amazeballs and if she loses every path not taken will be a missed opportunity.
Can't say with any certainty that she made the wrong call. There's an opportunity cost to flying out to Austin to do an interview at his studio in the last days of the campaign. Harris and her people seem to have decided the possible benefits don't outweigh the opportunity cost.
I agree, the books will be written and if Harris loses it's possible that could be one of the titles. And until those books from Bidens famously tight lipped inner circle are written we won't know- heck, even once they're written we won't know exactly until historians balance the whole genre against itself.
More like projection than make believe. We don't know when exactly Biden declined to the point where he was incapable of both being President and running for the job of being President. We know the right was saying it since prior to Biden being elected in 2020 which was patently nonsense. We know Biden reached that point sometime around the time of the debate but prior to that? We don't know and neither do you.
Correct me if I'm mistaken but when the current conservative majority passed Dobbs (after expressly saying in their various appointment hearings that they'd respect precedent but that's just griping) didn't they specifically suggest in their ruling that a national abortion law would pass constitutional muster even as they discarded the idea of a found constitutional right? If so why do you think they'd strike down a national abortion ban? I do suspect they'd probably quite merrily strike down a national codification of Roe.
Yes indeed. China is, of course, another subject. Not so much as a member of such an Axis, exactly, so much as simply the emerging opposite pole of a bipolar global scene and the pole that's more sympathetic to the Russian Axis while having a number of self interested red lines- nuke use for instance where is expects the Axis to toe their line and they have to or else.
I acknowledged we're both speculating on alt history. The point remains that W's speech and subsequent actions on that speech closed off an opportunity for lowering the temperature on that relationship when the Iranians had every reason, at the time, to want that temperature lowered. It was foreign policy malpractice- it had real opportunity costs while gaining us nothing.
That's a lot of assertions of fact that're more opinions and alt-history speculation than actual fact. Saudi Arabia and Iran are pretty much equally hideous and the primary reason the Saudis don't want to upset the applecart while the Iranians do is that the Saudis have a deal with us/the developed world while the Iranians don't (and were never offered one when they had the temerity to throw out the government we chose for them). Had W and his administration not been a passel of chuckleheaded idiots possibly we could have moved Iran more towards a Saudi Arabia state and away from an Iran-of-Now state.
Which brings us back around to Jaybirds point which was that W approached the subject of Iran deontologically rather than in a more transactional manner. I can't know that an attempted deal with Iran would have succeeded in making them engage more productively in the Middle East- that's alt history- but neither can you know that it would have failed. The point is they didn't even try. Yet another example of how catastrophically badly that awful administration handled things.
Yeah that wasn't such a prominent problem in 2002 as it is now. It also bears noting that the Iranians adhered to the (later) nuclear deal until Trump reneged on it. Also we were in Afghanistan and Iraq on either side of Iran- cutting any level of deal with them could have made life a lot easier and they indicated openness to the idea but W and his lackeys wanted an idiotic speech item so we got the Axis of Evil instead. Yet another lump of crap on the wagon full of fecal matter that is neocon reputation in hindsight.
On “How Republicans Can Save Trump’s Presidency”
1) So massively boost inflationary pressures, also I'd note he'll have to change the laws to do that and I don't think he's going to find a filibuster proof majority in the Senate eager to do that after the stunt he pulled in '24.
2) Yep they could probably do that, but probably will be too inept and busy stealing everything not nailed down to actually make is happen in a systematic way- also they need those issues to rile up their voters.
3) So on the issue the voters overwhelmingly care the most about you agree Biden did a spectacular job.
4) Uh sure. The truth is out there.
5) Well that's not a Republican constituency so they can kick them as much as Biden tried (foolishly) to indulge them. Probably won't be effective. I'm guessing they'd need to change the laws either which way.
On “Ordinary Times Needs Your Help”
I've also thrown some money in the hat.
On “How Republicans Can Save Trump’s Presidency”
Nope, I imagine they're maybe gonna knife Gatz because even the GOP in DC despises him but otherwise Trump'll get whomever he wants.
"
That's interesting. What do you think Trump *SHOULD* do differently than Biden? Not what will he do, but what should he do?
Considering the hand Biden has left him the only thing that a theoretically sane and sensible Trump (I know, it's VERY theoretical) should do on the economy, at least, would be not a lot other than switching from yelling about how everything is burning down to crowing about how he fixed everything. Given that most of the dour mood on the economy was rooted in Republican opinion which was automatically negative (Dems also have this predilection but to a much lesser degree) because a Democrat was in the White House it's technically a solved problem.
On the border he could... well... mostly stand pat and pass the bill he previously opportunistically tanked along with, again, switching his blathering from doom to triumph.
On trade Trump's biggest perils lie because if he does what he campaigned on doing then he's going to reap a whirlwind. Especially if he pairs it with the massive tax cuts for the wealthy he's planning on.
Frankly I'm struggling to think of a President since W who's been left a better hand by their predecessor.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/11/2024”
Well that article is mostly about how NIMBY's are fishing up everything in the major urban areas and is entirely correct. It can't just be ignored or awkwardly gestured at by Dems at any level now but unfortunately it's also not an easy nut to crack since housing controls are heavily localized and, to the degree the obstacles are not localized, they're seated in environmental sacred cows like NEP and CEQA.
But on the brighter note, this same warning was sounded with left coasters fled to Colorado and Arizona in the early aughts.
"
Mea maxima culpa .
"
Naw, I was sad but, unlike in 2016, I paid close enough mind to the polls to recognize that a Trump victory or even a wide but shallow victory like what he brought home was a very real possibility. Also, frankly, after a week on a boat, even a luxurious boat, one pines for home.
"
Yeesh I go away to sea for a week and change and the whole country goes to pot- sorry all.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
Happened on his watch AND was massively exacerbated by his policy choices during that time AND was executed by a Palestinian group his political party and ideology expressly promoted, supported and advanced in order to diminish a different Palestinian group that has, in the past decades, been largely peaceful and cooperative (undemocratic, scholeric and corrupt, mind, but also cooperative and peaceful).
On “The Way Through is Donald Trump for President”
What immigration? I am pretty sure we don't want to talk about that.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
Well yes, we're talking about the same thing from opposite sides. You're pondering if Rogan should have gone to her. I'm pondering if she should have gone to Rogan. Michael is pointing out, helpfully, that the cost in organizational juice for Harris to go to Rogan is probably even higher than we realize.
But your superposition point is correct if anodyne. If she wins everything she did will be amazeballs and if she loses every path not taken will be a missed opportunity.
On “Declare Your Independence From Donald Trump”
That was my thought too. I felt a little bad honestly because I have little to add to this one so I'll add my well done on with Pillsy's.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
Can't say with any certainty that she made the wrong call. There's an opportunity cost to flying out to Austin to do an interview at his studio in the last days of the campaign. Harris and her people seem to have decided the possible benefits don't outweigh the opportunity cost.
On “The Way Through is Donald Trump for President”
I agree, the books will be written and if Harris loses it's possible that could be one of the titles. And until those books from Bidens famously tight lipped inner circle are written we won't know- heck, even once they're written we won't know exactly until historians balance the whole genre against itself.
"
More like projection than make believe. We don't know when exactly Biden declined to the point where he was incapable of both being President and running for the job of being President. We know the right was saying it since prior to Biden being elected in 2020 which was patently nonsense. We know Biden reached that point sometime around the time of the debate but prior to that? We don't know and neither do you.
On “What If Kamala Wins?”
Correct me if I'm mistaken but when the current conservative majority passed Dobbs (after expressly saying in their various appointment hearings that they'd respect precedent but that's just griping) didn't they specifically suggest in their ruling that a national abortion law would pass constitutional muster even as they discarded the idea of a found constitutional right? If so why do you think they'd strike down a national abortion ban? I do suspect they'd probably quite merrily strike down a national codification of Roe.
On “The Way Through is Donald Trump for President”
Congrats on the editorial Koz, somebody had to do it and I'm glad it was you.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/21/2024”
Ugh, thanks for ruining my morning cuppa Lee.
On “Ukraine and the Axis of Evil”
Yes indeed. China is, of course, another subject. Not so much as a member of such an Axis, exactly, so much as simply the emerging opposite pole of a bipolar global scene and the pole that's more sympathetic to the Russian Axis while having a number of self interested red lines- nuke use for instance where is expects the Axis to toe their line and they have to or else.
"
I hadn't realized quite how deep your neocon sympathies lie in this area I admit. It's refreshing, makes me feel fifteen-twenty years younger!
"
I generally agree though China is, in of itself, a pretty complicated subject.
"
I acknowledged we're both speculating on alt history. The point remains that W's speech and subsequent actions on that speech closed off an opportunity for lowering the temperature on that relationship when the Iranians had every reason, at the time, to want that temperature lowered. It was foreign policy malpractice- it had real opportunity costs while gaining us nothing.
"
That's a lot of assertions of fact that're more opinions and alt-history speculation than actual fact. Saudi Arabia and Iran are pretty much equally hideous and the primary reason the Saudis don't want to upset the applecart while the Iranians do is that the Saudis have a deal with us/the developed world while the Iranians don't (and were never offered one when they had the temerity to throw out the government we chose for them). Had W and his administration not been a passel of chuckleheaded idiots possibly we could have moved Iran more towards a Saudi Arabia state and away from an Iran-of-Now state.
Which brings us back around to Jaybirds point which was that W approached the subject of Iran deontologically rather than in a more transactional manner. I can't know that an attempted deal with Iran would have succeeded in making them engage more productively in the Middle East- that's alt history- but neither can you know that it would have failed. The point is they didn't even try. Yet another example of how catastrophically badly that awful administration handled things.
"
Agreed but that kind of shimmy regarding Afghanistan and Iraq is the only arrow neocons have left in their quiver.
"
Yeah that wasn't such a prominent problem in 2002 as it is now. It also bears noting that the Iranians adhered to the (later) nuclear deal until Trump reneged on it. Also we were in Afghanistan and Iraq on either side of Iran- cutting any level of deal with them could have made life a lot easier and they indicated openness to the idea but W and his lackeys wanted an idiotic speech item so we got the Axis of Evil instead. Yet another lump of crap on the wagon full of fecal matter that is neocon reputation in hindsight.