You keep saying the Ds have a majority in the Senate. But they don't. It's 50-50. What they have is a tie-breaker in the President of the Senate. And Kamala has already cast a tie-breaking vote more than any other VP in recent memory (15 times in just 12 months).
As you know, our bi-cameral system was set up to prevent the tyranny of the majority. You can support that feature or not, but advocating that Ds have some sort of mandate in this instance is as incorrect as it irrelevant.
As cynical as I am at times, I have to believe a bi-partisan attempt to tackle voting rights & voting security could have been hammered out in a somewhat functional Senate. Perhaps that is naive, but this partisan bill never had a chance, and that's entirely on the Ds.
Promotion-relegation would wreck havoc on every athletic conference, destabilize every other D1 sport and not solve the problem of having a few super teams competing for a national championship in football.
Confirmation Bias is easy to spot in others and takes a herculean effort to recognize in oneself, even when you think you are actively trying to guard against it.
It's similar to the planning fallacy. Your default is always closer to best case scenario regardless of how much you try to fight being overly optimistic. Kahneman had a great anecdote about the time he was on a committee of behavioral psychologists and despite how well versed they were in the concept, still were disastrous planners.
It's always interesting to observe "Team Good" discuss amongst themselves why their wildly popular policies are not at all popular. The conclusion is almost always, "it's not us, it's THEM." And if not THEM specifically, it's another outside factor victimizing Democrats.
I thought Trump's victory would have been cause for more critical introspection, but alas...
Interesting despite being an obvious "shock" poll - altho I didn't see any Jim Crow motivations...
"These poll results indicate a strong ideological enmity and distrust between the two parties. About 83 percent of the Trump voters were concerned about radicalism and immorality ruining the country. Curiously, 62 percent of Biden voters were concerned about radicalism and immorality, but perhaps from a different perspective."
Hey, at least we all do have something in common!
Still, it's hard to take these shock polls too seriously. Answering "yes" to a pollster who asks you if you would support a red/blue split is a much different thing than actually voting for it.
Re: Texas: West said a thing on TV a year ago trying to raise money. Nothing remotely serious. It doesn't appear to be anything more to it. Saying ridiculous things in order to be heard is an American tradition that predates all of us.
"Give me artificial insemination of farm animals or give me death." - Patrick Henry, probably
Honestly, I think "redistricting" of states doesn't sound like a particularly horrible idea as a representative democracy matures. It's definitely tricky, but worth considering.
Leaving the Union altogether is a whole other story.
Which modern red states are proposing they secede from the union? And which vestiges of Jim Crow are still intact (that they wish to preserve)?
The only state I remember hearing about recently was California, and I didn't take that seriously either. This all seems like another example of "someone said a thing" news.
Foreign language films have always been a barrier in the U.S, but as the world shrinks and streaming makes consuming this content easier, it's less of an issue than probably ever before. We will never be like Europe, which has relied on subtitles out of necessity.
I mentioned Parasite, but the year before was Roma - and with Netflix producing and pushing it that year it found a huge American audience. You also have the wild success of Squid Games - a show like that being a hit here would have been unheard of 20 years ago.
Ultimately it's about availability and awareness. Given its buzz, if "Drive My Car" were to be featured and promoted on Netflix, it would have a huge US audience.
Doubling down on national crime stats to make a definitive claim about crime in cities like New York (which is what I thought we were discussing) is largely irrelevant. It's like looking at a national home price index and thinking that applies everywhere.
I have not looked at Chicago and SF crime stats, but I imagine they are more in line with NYC than the national averages.
Or do you think the progressive Mayor of SF who just issued a state of emergency to handle the crime wave there is just falling for a false media narrative?
This is a NYC thread, so if you want to look at other cities and counter with much better clearance rates, feel free to do so.
But in NYC, 3 out of 4 murders committed in 2018 were solved and it appears likely to be trending lower (56% of cases solved through November were solved- altho that will likely rise some if/when 2021 murders are solved in 2022). Either way, not good.
" It was amazing but again, one of those movies that few Americans will see because it is a human drama and not something filled with action, explosives, CGI, superhero intellectual property, etc."
Don't you think the fact that it is in Japanese, only playing in select cities and not available through streaming is a bigger reason few Americans have/will see it?
Obviously nothing competes with comic book movies at the box office, but I think you're selling American audiences shorter than they deserve. If it gets nominated for best picture, it will likely be available to rent via ppv and (like Parasite) will find a respectable US audience in the run up to the Oscars.
Agree with all. My guess is that part of the "ignore petty crime" policy is directly related to the rightful unpopularity of stop & frisk, exacerbated by police misconduct (e.g. Eric Garner selling loose cigarettes).
Apparently, it was decided that if they can't get rid of bad cops, they'll just get rid of the petty crimes. Problem solved!
I hope you are right. The only public comment I've seen from Bragg since his memo was a tweet thread in which he stated "I've prosecuted gun cases and if you use a gun to rob a store, or any armed robbery, you will be prosecuted."
He did not say how it will be prosecuted, but according to his own memo, it's now a misdemeanor.
I agree that the system is drowning . Sentences are also too long and overly punitive. Totally agree about the war on drugs.
However, you have an extremely optimistic view of how decriminalization will end up working in the real world. I'm not sure how you can observe what's going on in places like SF and Chicago and maintain such optimism.
And again, the negative societal impact will be felt first and foremost in underserved communities .No banks, no retail, unchecked drug dealing, and prostitution, less personal safety, cops turning a blind eye - how is that considered progress?
6. The following offenses shall be charged as follows:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05
that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force
or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but
does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
To translate: Burglary in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree will not be charged as felonies if no one gets hurt. They will be charged as petit larceny, which is a misdemeanor.
"The safety and security of families and communities is not really impacted by fare dodgers is it? "
C'mon Philip, that's a poor attempt at framing my concern.
Fare dodging, shop-lifting, etc all seem frivolous individually but they are just symptoms of the greater issue which is zero repercussion for committing or being caught doing an exceedingly growing number of crimes. Add on top of that the reclassification of what constitutes a felony and warrants pre-trial incarceration.
Any way you want to slice it, these policies result in 1. more criminals in society and 2. greater incentive for criminals to commit crime. That's irrefutable.
It really comes down to what people are going to put up with. What's the "acceptable" level of crime increase a community is willing to suffer in order for these policies changes to stick?
Of course the well intended UWS progressives are more than willing to suffer a few inconveniences here and there. But they will never bear the brunt. That's reserved for people who live in places like Bushwick.
Of course, the Manhattan DA's latest directive is only a continuation of what has already been happening in NYC for the last few years under DiBlassio. It's why he is wildly unpopular. It's why Eric Adams was elected. NYC (at least the outer boroughs) are pretty fed up with how things have gone in their own communities. It's not a surprise that Manhattan voters are an outlier. All Alvin Bragg had to do was get through a Dem primary there.
This is is a pretty interesting map. If you're not familiar with NYC, the purple areas are either the worst neighborhoods in the city or the most "conservative" by NYC measure.
Philip, you may want to read the entire memo (apologies if you have) and understand what you are signing up for before sincerely hoping these approaches catch on where you live.
When it comes to things that "truly matter as a society" I imagine the safety and security of family/community and overall quality of life rank pretty high for most people.
Given the early evidence these type of "reforms" have resulted in SF, Chicago and Philadelphia, I too will hang on to my well-formed skepticism, but for entirely different reasons. These policies will ultimately do more damage to the very communities they are intended to help.
"The _outcome_ of those elections in which Democrats lost was not been called into doubt by those Democrats."
A quick Google search will show you several recent articles that assert Gore won Florida in 2000.
Stacy Abrams and Hillary Clinton came immediately to mind because they have spent an enormous amount of time "questioning the outcome" of their elections. The later has made a career out of it. You want to parse the way in which they assert their elections were "stolen"? Facebook and the white supremacy were the respective reasons. Have at it. But it all seems to end at the same conclusion. It's a variation on the same theme - denial.
Partisans can spin the "we're righteous, it's the other side is evil" narrative all they (you) want, but it's nonsense and the rest of us in the middle just roll our eyes.
Jean Sheppard narrated "A Christmas Story" - he also wrote the screenplay
Sheppard had a few movies in that same style (narrating stories of his childhood) that ran on PBS.
The Great American Fourth of July and Other Disasters (1982) was one that I remember enjoying as a kid. "Ralph" was now a teenager and he was played by a young Matt Dillon.
On “Filibuster Rule Change For Voting Rights Legislation Fails 52-48 in Senate”
What it actually shows is the assumption that anyone who disagrees with a partisan leftist narrative is..
[checks notes]
A white supremacist.
"
You keep saying the Ds have a majority in the Senate. But they don't. It's 50-50. What they have is a tie-breaker in the President of the Senate. And Kamala has already cast a tie-breaking vote more than any other VP in recent memory (15 times in just 12 months).
As you know, our bi-cameral system was set up to prevent the tyranny of the majority. You can support that feature or not, but advocating that Ds have some sort of mandate in this instance is as incorrect as it irrelevant.
As cynical as I am at times, I have to believe a bi-partisan attempt to tackle voting rights & voting security could have been hammered out in a somewhat functional Senate. Perhaps that is naive, but this partisan bill never had a chance, and that's entirely on the Ds.
On “We Should Unfix the College Football Postseason: A Rebuttal”
What you consider sarcasm would get 2 hours of serious discussion on Paul Finebaum's SEC radio program.
"
This is a great point. It would have a salary-cap like effect on the sport. It will never happen, but it's a great idea.
"
Promotion-relegation would wreck havoc on every athletic conference, destabilize every other D1 sport and not solve the problem of having a few super teams competing for a national championship in football.
On “The Paradox of Democratic Governance”
That's really funny.
Confirmation Bias is easy to spot in others and takes a herculean effort to recognize in oneself, even when you think you are actively trying to guard against it.
It's similar to the planning fallacy. Your default is always closer to best case scenario regardless of how much you try to fight being overly optimistic. Kahneman had a great anecdote about the time he was on a committee of behavioral psychologists and despite how well versed they were in the concept, still were disastrous planners.
"
It's always interesting to observe "Team Good" discuss amongst themselves why their wildly popular policies are not at all popular. The conclusion is almost always, "it's not us, it's THEM." And if not THEM specifically, it's another outside factor victimizing Democrats.
I thought Trump's victory would have been cause for more critical introspection, but alas...
On “Local Gets Things Done!”
Interesting despite being an obvious "shock" poll - altho I didn't see any Jim Crow motivations...
"These poll results indicate a strong ideological enmity and distrust between the two parties. About 83 percent of the Trump voters were concerned about radicalism and immorality ruining the country. Curiously, 62 percent of Biden voters were concerned about radicalism and immorality, but perhaps from a different perspective."
Hey, at least we all do have something in common!
Still, it's hard to take these shock polls too seriously. Answering "yes" to a pollster who asks you if you would support a red/blue split is a much different thing than actually voting for it.
Re: Texas: West said a thing on TV a year ago trying to raise money. Nothing remotely serious. It doesn't appear to be anything more to it. Saying ridiculous things in order to be heard is an American tradition that predates all of us.
"
"Give me artificial insemination of farm animals or give me death." - Patrick Henry, probably
Honestly, I think "redistricting" of states doesn't sound like a particularly horrible idea as a representative democracy matures. It's definitely tricky, but worth considering.
Leaving the Union altogether is a whole other story.
"
I don't think New Jersey (which is uniquely weird) and a few of the New England states really fit your hypothesis.
"
Which modern red states are proposing they secede from the union? And which vestiges of Jim Crow are still intact (that they wish to preserve)?
The only state I remember hearing about recently was California, and I didn't take that seriously either. This all seems like another example of "someone said a thing" news.
On “Sunday Morning! “Hangsaman” by Shirley Jackson”
Foreign language films have always been a barrier in the U.S, but as the world shrinks and streaming makes consuming this content easier, it's less of an issue than probably ever before. We will never be like Europe, which has relied on subtitles out of necessity.
I mentioned Parasite, but the year before was Roma - and with Netflix producing and pushing it that year it found a huge American audience. You also have the wild success of Squid Games - a show like that being a hit here would have been unheard of 20 years ago.
Ultimately it's about availability and awareness. Given its buzz, if "Drive My Car" were to be featured and promoted on Netflix, it would have a huge US audience.
On “Manhattan DA Joins The Progressive Side of Law Enforcement Reform”
In NYC murders, shootings, felonious assaults, grand larceny and auto theft are all up.
https://www.amny.com/news/major-crimes-up-5-percent-as-nyc-entered-final-days-2021/
Doubling down on national crime stats to make a definitive claim about crime in cities like New York (which is what I thought we were discussing) is largely irrelevant. It's like looking at a national home price index and thinking that applies everywhere.
I have not looked at Chicago and SF crime stats, but I imagine they are more in line with NYC than the national averages.
Or do you think the progressive Mayor of SF who just issued a state of emergency to handle the crime wave there is just falling for a false media narrative?
"
This is a NYC thread, so if you want to look at other cities and counter with much better clearance rates, feel free to do so.
But in NYC, 3 out of 4 murders committed in 2018 were solved and it appears likely to be trending lower (56% of cases solved through November were solved- altho that will likely rise some if/when 2021 murders are solved in 2022). Either way, not good.
https://nypost.com/2021/12/18/fewer-nyc-detectives-means-more-unsolved-murder-cases/
On “Sunday Morning! “Hangsaman” by Shirley Jackson”
" It was amazing but again, one of those movies that few Americans will see because it is a human drama and not something filled with action, explosives, CGI, superhero intellectual property, etc."
Don't you think the fact that it is in Japanese, only playing in select cities and not available through streaming is a bigger reason few Americans have/will see it?
Obviously nothing competes with comic book movies at the box office, but I think you're selling American audiences shorter than they deserve. If it gets nominated for best picture, it will likely be available to rent via ppv and (like Parasite) will find a respectable US audience in the run up to the Oscars.
On “Manhattan DA Joins The Progressive Side of Law Enforcement Reform”
Agree with all. My guess is that part of the "ignore petty crime" policy is directly related to the rightful unpopularity of stop & frisk, exacerbated by police misconduct (e.g. Eric Garner selling loose cigarettes).
Apparently, it was decided that if they can't get rid of bad cops, they'll just get rid of the petty crimes. Problem solved!
"
I hope you are right. The only public comment I've seen from Bragg since his memo was a tweet thread in which he stated "I've prosecuted gun cases and if you use a gun to rob a store, or any armed robbery, you will be prosecuted."
He did not say how it will be prosecuted, but according to his own memo, it's now a misdemeanor.
I guess we will find out soon enough.
"
I agree that the system is drowning . Sentences are also too long and overly punitive. Totally agree about the war on drugs.
However, you have an extremely optimistic view of how decriminalization will end up working in the real world. I'm not sure how you can observe what's going on in places like SF and Chicago and maintain such optimism.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/17/us/san-francisco-state-of-emergency-crime.html
And again, the negative societal impact will be felt first and foremost in underserved communities .No banks, no retail, unchecked drug dealing, and prostitution, less personal safety, cops turning a blind eye - how is that considered progress?
"
6. The following offenses shall be charged as follows:
a) An act that could be charged under PL §§ 160.15 (2, 3, or 4), 160.10(2b), or 160.05
that occurs in a commercial setting should be charged under PL § 155.25 if the force
or threat of force consists of displaying a dangerous instrument or similar behavior but
does not create a genuine risk of physical harm.
To translate: Burglary in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree will not be charged as felonies if no one gets hurt. They will be charged as petit larceny, which is a misdemeanor.
"
Totally.
"
"The safety and security of families and communities is not really impacted by fare dodgers is it? "
C'mon Philip, that's a poor attempt at framing my concern.
Fare dodging, shop-lifting, etc all seem frivolous individually but they are just symptoms of the greater issue which is zero repercussion for committing or being caught doing an exceedingly growing number of crimes. Add on top of that the reclassification of what constitutes a felony and warrants pre-trial incarceration.
Any way you want to slice it, these policies result in 1. more criminals in society and 2. greater incentive for criminals to commit crime. That's irrefutable.
It really comes down to what people are going to put up with. What's the "acceptable" level of crime increase a community is willing to suffer in order for these policies changes to stick?
Of course the well intended UWS progressives are more than willing to suffer a few inconveniences here and there. But they will never bear the brunt. That's reserved for people who live in places like Bushwick.
Of course, the Manhattan DA's latest directive is only a continuation of what has already been happening in NYC for the last few years under DiBlassio. It's why he is wildly unpopular. It's why Eric Adams was elected. NYC (at least the outer boroughs) are pretty fed up with how things have gone in their own communities. It's not a surprise that Manhattan voters are an outlier. All Alvin Bragg had to do was get through a Dem primary there.
This is is a pretty interesting map. If you're not familiar with NYC, the purple areas are either the worst neighborhoods in the city or the most "conservative" by NYC measure.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/23/nyregion/nyc-mayor-primary-results-precinct-map.html
.
"
Philip, you may want to read the entire memo (apologies if you have) and understand what you are signing up for before sincerely hoping these approaches catch on where you live.
https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Day-One-Letter-Policies-1.03.2022.pdf
When it comes to things that "truly matter as a society" I imagine the safety and security of family/community and overall quality of life rank pretty high for most people.
Given the early evidence these type of "reforms" have resulted in SF, Chicago and Philadelphia, I too will hang on to my well-formed skepticism, but for entirely different reasons. These policies will ultimately do more damage to the very communities they are intended to help.
On “Voter Fraud: I Do Not Think That Word Means What You Think It Means”
"The _outcome_ of those elections in which Democrats lost was not been called into doubt by those Democrats."
A quick Google search will show you several recent articles that assert Gore won Florida in 2000.
Stacy Abrams and Hillary Clinton came immediately to mind because they have spent an enormous amount of time "questioning the outcome" of their elections. The later has made a career out of it. You want to parse the way in which they assert their elections were "stolen"? Facebook and the white supremacy were the respective reasons. Have at it. But it all seems to end at the same conclusion. It's a variation on the same theme - denial.
Partisans can spin the "we're righteous, it's the other side is evil" narrative all they (you) want, but it's nonsense and the rest of us in the middle just roll our eyes.
"
"Democrats seem to have little tolerance for questioning the outcome of elections."
That's an interesting take.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/03/politics/stacey-abrams-concession-2018-georgia/index.html
On “The Month in Theaters December 2021”
Jean Sheppard narrated "A Christmas Story" - he also wrote the screenplay
Sheppard had a few movies in that same style (narrating stories of his childhood) that ran on PBS.
The Great American Fourth of July and Other Disasters (1982) was one that I remember enjoying as a kid. "Ralph" was now a teenager and he was played by a young Matt Dillon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zow7fro-WGE