He assuredly did. He may have been entirely lying about it but that was still a big change from the GOP's previous messaging. Heck, he still is now as he obfuscates and triangulates blatantly on abortion.
The PA is non-democratic and corrupt, agreed, but so are the overwhelming majority of Arab states. The Palestinians say vile things about the Israelis but so do the majority of people in Arab states. Israel treats productively with Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Quatar etc... and your tea leaf reading would say the exact same thing about an Israeli hostile government winning an election in any of those states (though, after what they've done in Gaza, I very strongly doubt that Hamas would be able to win an election in the West Bank).
None of that changes the fact that the PA administers more Palestinians and has been behaving generally quite well towards Israel for the past decade or so. Nor does it change the absolutely indefensibly (morally or intellectually) way Israel has behaved in the West Bank.
Hamas tends to "get a pass" because it is the opponent both the Israeli and American right wants. The same way that a lunatic babbling on Twitter about the most identarian nonsense gets branded, by the right, as representative of the left. To be fair the left does the same to the right- it's just that said lunatic is also the Rights' presidential nominee. Let us not forget that the Israeli right stood up Hamas in the first place to split the Palestinian movement and to provide a more "ugly" face to the Palestinians cause.
I still feel compelled to protest, Jay:
-Hamas was elected in Gaza once, subsequently discontinued elections and rules over around 600k Palestinians.
-Fata/The Palestinian Authority was Elected a few times in the West Bank, subsequently discontinued elections and rules over 3 MILLION Palestinians.
-Finally, there are estimated around 6-7 million Palestinian refugees/their descendants living in various places around the Middle East governed nominally by their host countries.
Hamas has largely been violent towards the Israeli’s attacking civilians and soldiers furiously with only intermittent pauses to regroup/rearm. The Israeli’s have responded by turning Gaza into an open air prison and, now more recently, levelling it.
Fatah, while it has a history of violence, has largely been not only peaceful to the Israeli’s, in the last decade and change, but has actively suppressed violence against Israeli’s through maintaining order in the West Bank, cooperating with Israeli security services and keeping rival militants in check (or in prison) in the West Bank. The Israeli’s have responded by alternately neglecting the West Bank, strangling the Palestinians movement in it, terrorizing Palestinian residents and slowly, steadily, expropriating their land.
Now, just to be clear, my sympathies -still- lie more with the Israeli's than the Palestinians and always have (though they have waned steadily in intensity as the years and Israeli choices have worn on them). I try, however, to be at least somewhat fair to the Palestinians. It seems to me that to talk about Hamas, which nominally governs between 16.66% or 5.66% of the total Palestinian population (depending on if you count refugees or not) as representing Palestinians in general or Palestinian leadership just strikes me as profoundly unfair and also innumerate.
I reread the comments and think my own high altitude overview remains correct. Unfortunately I also think that your prediction (which I ruefully agreed with) that the Israeli's would continue to pursue the "NuLikud" strategy also remains correct. The next inflection point is probably the Israeli elections.
Sure, and why would they? To what end? Doesn't change the fact that the West Bank Palestinians haven't let themselves be governed by lunatics for quite some time now. Corrupt? sure; scholeric, Probably, Democratic? Not since 2007. But lunatic? No. Not for quite some time now.
You are, I would like to gently note, discussing the Palestinians in terms only of the minority of them who live in Gaza rather than the majority of them who live in the territories.
I agree, but even your downer comment has an upside- I don't get the vibe that anyone on the left or Dems in general thinks the current numbers are worth resting on ones laurels over.
They seemed punchy at the convention and have run a pretty assertive campaign so I would presume that Harris' team is going to continue going on the offensive going forward. So long as the numbers keep improving then I'm content- it's not a terrible place to be right now and it's a worlds' worth of difference from before.
I have to admit that, as a cynical political viewer, I found the convention very solid and bordering on moving at odd moments. The roll call/DJ blast was a fresh twist that I thought landed well. I feel like the amped up patriotism was very appropriate and I'm amused at how little caterwauling it's prompted from the usual suspects. The pitch was mostly excellent and the smooth operation of everything felt deeply reassuring.
Harris herself turned in a rock solid performance capping off a stream of excellent performances. Conventions inevitably produce a glow in the hearts of their dedicated partisans but I must confess I felt moved more than usual by this one. Competence porn? Maybe just because they tonally tacked in a very centrist direction without crossing over into right wing territory? I don't know what it is but I liked it.
It shocks you mainly because you forget that, while Defund the Police was deeply popular on the internet left, it was not a formal policy of the Democratic Party. So it's a very big change from what you imagine their policy position was but a considerably smaller move from what their actual policy position was.
I do as well. I do very much want her to engage more along those lines but, contrasting her and Walz's frenetic campaigning event pace to Trump and Vances' I don't have a lot of justification to accuse Harris of being lazy. Personally I intend to reserve judgement of her media engagement operation until after the convention/labor day. I get a general vibe and feel that their strategy is to try and roll the good vibes through to that point when voters typically start engaging more. If she tries to run dark beyond that point I'll definitely have criticisms/concerns but all indications are she's going to engage- just on her own timetable.
Hard to say. I expect she'll be doing legacy media sometime shortly after her convention. She's said end of August and I think if she blew through a deadline she, herself, set that'd be interesting and worthy of note. The articles point, that she has zero obligations both in principle and in practice, to legacy media is rock solid though.
But goodness knows an implosion or paradigm shift in media is desperately needed. What noone knows is how to do it. The money for media has mostly been sucked up by tech giants and everyone is just scribble scrabbling around after the crumbs. The legacy media exists because there's literally no replacement org and no revenue to replace it but it still does things people value (and, equally importantly, it's a place really smart people and well off people will work at for peanuts).
And, again, it wouldn't matter if she uses the media or not in that event. If she screws up badly she screws up badly- her availability to the media, or not, would have no effect on the fallout of her screwing up badly.
Well for one thing, if servers are being paid entirely in wages then the sleepy day shift on Wednesday and the busy friday evening shift suddenly both invert in desirability.
Except David Brinkley would give her the hard questions from the get go as would any of the legacy media while being muted about correct answers and shouting mistakes virally across the country. So by your own measure there's considerable sense in eschewing the legacy media. Also, in light of their behavior with the Trump campaign hacks they do richly deserve a rolled up newspaper across the nose.
Of course they say that, and they'll go on saying that right up to the moment one of their leaders walks out of a private negotiation with the Israeli's with a deal. And even then they'll be like "Victory my brothers, a right of return for all refugees (mumbled- to de jure Palestine) has been agreed to by the leaders of the Jewish entity!" You know how posturing and negotiation works as well as anyone.
Nor do we see any evidence that the Israeli's are willing to pull their settlers out of the territories or let the PA resume administration of Gaza or even put forth any vision at all of exactly what they intend to do about the millions of Palestinians who life under their de jur total control. And those problems, unlike the right of return, do not have any possible easy answers.
I would agree that is a pretty point in favor of the "Biden is too old to successfully run for President again while being President" premise. Though a die hard Biden partisan, of whom there are thankfully very very few, would retort that this is simply a consequence of the media rewarding the Dems for knuckling under to the medias campaign against Biden.
On “The Party of the Middle”
He assuredly did. He may have been entirely lying about it but that was still a big change from the GOP's previous messaging. Heck, he still is now as he obfuscates and triangulates blatantly on abortion.
On “Open Mic for the week of 8/26/2024”
The PA is non-democratic and corrupt, agreed, but so are the overwhelming majority of Arab states. The Palestinians say vile things about the Israelis but so do the majority of people in Arab states. Israel treats productively with Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Quatar etc... and your tea leaf reading would say the exact same thing about an Israeli hostile government winning an election in any of those states (though, after what they've done in Gaza, I very strongly doubt that Hamas would be able to win an election in the West Bank).
None of that changes the fact that the PA administers more Palestinians and has been behaving generally quite well towards Israel for the past decade or so. Nor does it change the absolutely indefensibly (morally or intellectually) way Israel has behaved in the West Bank.
Hamas tends to "get a pass" because it is the opponent both the Israeli and American right wants. The same way that a lunatic babbling on Twitter about the most identarian nonsense gets branded, by the right, as representative of the left. To be fair the left does the same to the right- it's just that said lunatic is also the Rights' presidential nominee. Let us not forget that the Israeli right stood up Hamas in the first place to split the Palestinian movement and to provide a more "ugly" face to the Palestinians cause.
"
Had you said Gazans instead of Palestinians you would have gotten no protest from me Jay-me-lad, sorry for being pedantic.
"
I still feel compelled to protest, Jay:
-Hamas was elected in Gaza once, subsequently discontinued elections and rules over around 600k Palestinians.
-Fata/The Palestinian Authority was Elected a few times in the West Bank, subsequently discontinued elections and rules over 3 MILLION Palestinians.
-Finally, there are estimated around 6-7 million Palestinian refugees/their descendants living in various places around the Middle East governed nominally by their host countries.
Hamas has largely been violent towards the Israeli’s attacking civilians and soldiers furiously with only intermittent pauses to regroup/rearm. The Israeli’s have responded by turning Gaza into an open air prison and, now more recently, levelling it.
Fatah, while it has a history of violence, has largely been not only peaceful to the Israeli’s, in the last decade and change, but has actively suppressed violence against Israeli’s through maintaining order in the West Bank, cooperating with Israeli security services and keeping rival militants in check (or in prison) in the West Bank. The Israeli’s have responded by alternately neglecting the West Bank, strangling the Palestinians movement in it, terrorizing Palestinian residents and slowly, steadily, expropriating their land.
Now, just to be clear, my sympathies -still- lie more with the Israeli's than the Palestinians and always have (though they have waned steadily in intensity as the years and Israeli choices have worn on them). I try, however, to be at least somewhat fair to the Palestinians. It seems to me that to talk about Hamas, which nominally governs between 16.66% or 5.66% of the total Palestinian population (depending on if you count refugees or not) as representing Palestinians in general or Palestinian leadership just strikes me as profoundly unfair and also innumerate.
"
Swap out "Palestinians" and "Palestinian Leadership" for "Hamas" and "Hamas leadership" and I would agree with you.
"
I reread the comments and think my own high altitude overview remains correct. Unfortunately I also think that your prediction (which I ruefully agreed with) that the Israeli's would continue to pursue the "NuLikud" strategy also remains correct. The next inflection point is probably the Israeli elections.
On “Kamala Harris DNC Speech: Watch It For Yourself”
Sure, and why would they? To what end? Doesn't change the fact that the West Bank Palestinians haven't let themselves be governed by lunatics for quite some time now. Corrupt? sure; scholeric, Probably, Democratic? Not since 2007. But lunatic? No. Not for quite some time now.
"
You are, I would like to gently note, discussing the Palestinians in terms only of the minority of them who live in Gaza rather than the majority of them who live in the territories.
"
This is very well put Chip and I agree with it entirely.
"
Well said Saul.
"
I agree, but even your downer comment has an upside- I don't get the vibe that anyone on the left or Dems in general thinks the current numbers are worth resting on ones laurels over.
They seemed punchy at the convention and have run a pretty assertive campaign so I would presume that Harris' team is going to continue going on the offensive going forward. So long as the numbers keep improving then I'm content- it's not a terrible place to be right now and it's a worlds' worth of difference from before.
"
I think I have to agree with Jaybird here. Once again internet sound and fury turns into meatspace teapot tempestry.
"
I have to admit that, as a cynical political viewer, I found the convention very solid and bordering on moving at odd moments. The roll call/DJ blast was a fresh twist that I thought landed well. I feel like the amped up patriotism was very appropriate and I'm amused at how little caterwauling it's prompted from the usual suspects. The pitch was mostly excellent and the smooth operation of everything felt deeply reassuring.
Harris herself turned in a rock solid performance capping off a stream of excellent performances. Conventions inevitably produce a glow in the hearts of their dedicated partisans but I must confess I felt moved more than usual by this one. Competence porn? Maybe just because they tonally tacked in a very centrist direction without crossing over into right wing territory? I don't know what it is but I liked it.
"
A monumental effort, a generational comment! Scholars of snark will study it for hours to come! Well done!
On “The DNC Republicans”
It shocks you mainly because you forget that, while Defund the Police was deeply popular on the internet left, it was not a formal policy of the Democratic Party. So it's a very big change from what you imagine their policy position was but a considerably smaller move from what their actual policy position was.
On “Is Harris Limiting Press Access Helping Her?”
I do as well. I do very much want her to engage more along those lines but, contrasting her and Walz's frenetic campaigning event pace to Trump and Vances' I don't have a lot of justification to accuse Harris of being lazy. Personally I intend to reserve judgement of her media engagement operation until after the convention/labor day. I get a general vibe and feel that their strategy is to try and roll the good vibes through to that point when voters typically start engaging more. If she tries to run dark beyond that point I'll definitely have criticisms/concerns but all indications are she's going to engage- just on her own timetable.
On “POETS Day! Useful Lines and a Favorite from Pound”
Yes, I loved them when I first read them and love them now. Thank you for the reminder.
"
Kipling all the way for me and, no, I am not abashed by it. I know he's far from in fashion with the leftier set but the man could make words dance.
On “Is Harris Limiting Press Access Helping Her?”
Hard to say. I expect she'll be doing legacy media sometime shortly after her convention. She's said end of August and I think if she blew through a deadline she, herself, set that'd be interesting and worthy of note. The articles point, that she has zero obligations both in principle and in practice, to legacy media is rock solid though.
But goodness knows an implosion or paradigm shift in media is desperately needed. What noone knows is how to do it. The money for media has mostly been sucked up by tech giants and everyone is just scribble scrabbling around after the crumbs. The legacy media exists because there's literally no replacement org and no revenue to replace it but it still does things people value (and, equally importantly, it's a place really smart people and well off people will work at for peanuts).
"
And, again, it wouldn't matter if she uses the media or not in that event. If she screws up badly she screws up badly- her availability to the media, or not, would have no effect on the fallout of her screwing up badly.
On “Trump And Harris Agree on No Tax On Tips”
Well for one thing, if servers are being paid entirely in wages then the sleepy day shift on Wednesday and the busy friday evening shift suddenly both invert in desirability.
On “Is Harris Limiting Press Access Helping Her?”
Except David Brinkley would give her the hard questions from the get go as would any of the legacy media while being muted about correct answers and shouting mistakes virally across the country. So by your own measure there's considerable sense in eschewing the legacy media. Also, in light of their behavior with the Trump campaign hacks they do richly deserve a rolled up newspaper across the nose.
On “Open Mic for the week of 8/12/2024”
Of course they say that, and they'll go on saying that right up to the moment one of their leaders walks out of a private negotiation with the Israeli's with a deal. And even then they'll be like "Victory my brothers, a right of return for all refugees (mumbled- to de jure Palestine) has been agreed to by the leaders of the Jewish entity!" You know how posturing and negotiation works as well as anyone.
Nor do we see any evidence that the Israeli's are willing to pull their settlers out of the territories or let the PA resume administration of Gaza or even put forth any vision at all of exactly what they intend to do about the millions of Palestinians who life under their de jur total control. And those problems, unlike the right of return, do not have any possible easy answers.
On “Is Harris Limiting Press Access Helping Her?”
I agree on this. Never saw this publication before but I found myself nodding firmly along with their points.
On “Open Mic for the week of 8/12/2024”
I would agree that is a pretty point in favor of the "Biden is too old to successfully run for President again while being President" premise. Though a die hard Biden partisan, of whom there are thankfully very very few, would retort that this is simply a consequence of the media rewarding the Dems for knuckling under to the medias campaign against Biden.