There's truth to that. There's also though truth to the US still being among the most welcoming countries in the world to immigrants from all places. It's a push and pull.
Mass immigration happened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, then was cut off for a few decades. We've had it again for over 30, maybe more like 40 years. It's clear that the choice is increaingly between continuing mass illegal immigration and maintaining our liberal democracy. That's an easy one for me, and the nice thing about liberal democracy is that we can always revisit increasing immigration again when we're ready.
I also think people that disagree with me should just take the W. We've let in millions upon millions outside of any real process in addition to those that followed the rules. A bunch of ugly things are very likely about to happen but I have a feeling Trump is going to find the logistics of whatever mass deportation scheme he tries pretty daunting. Most of the people who have entered illegally will end up staying. Indeed quite a few have already gotten away with it by being amnestied, or legalized through various roundabout methods. A pause isn't the end of the world.
I think the illegal immigration thing doesn't tell the whole story. They came in and reversed Trump era orders including in particular the remain in Mexico policy. Trump and the GOP's torpedoing the bill was the height of cynical BS but what the Biden admin did was begging for a backlash with no substantive upside.
Where I think Jaybird is a bit off is not putting inflation at the top of the list. It's seemingly been tamed but stuff remains way more expensive than it was 4 years ago, which has clouded the larger, 40,000 foot economic recovery for many average working people. Under those circumstances this election was going to be hard for Biden or Harris and the numbers have suggested that for quite some time.
I still think it's early for all of this but I think you've got two factors. Factor one is that our demographics are very different than they were in the immediate post civil rights settlement and even pretty different than they were 20-30 years ago. That's just an objective fact but our political parties and establishment haven't really pivoted to it.
Second there's reason to suspect that we are slowly depolarizing around race. Big picture that's a good thing, but it does mean that old play books around race are going to be less effective. I mean, the big fact that never seems to enter all of this calculation is that something like 70% of hispanics are (or at least identify as) white, and the fact that someone's crusty old grandpa may not see them that way isn't of very limited relevance to their opinions and voting behavior.
Of course we will. And if Trump drops massive inflationary tarrifs or blows up the deficit with unfunded tax cuts they'll only have themselves to blame, yet will likely remain constitutionally incapable of seeing it.
My long term hope is that the party re-tools itself. Some of this is bad luck with inflation, but we can't lose to this guy twice in 10 years and not be prepared to do some serious recalibration. The good news is that trends have a way of turning against incumbents, whoever they are.
I saw a softer version of that when I popped on CNN for a few minutes. I imagine we are still a couple weeks away from the full post mortem, but it's clear to me that's pure cope.
And thats coming from me, someone who was hoping Harris would pull it out. It baffles me how many people can't see the flaws in that angle.
I like in person but also prefer going early to avoid the lines. Last time I went on election day was 2016
It took almost an hour and I didn't like it.
We need some kind of ancillary to Godwin's law that says any internet discussion, when allowed to go on long enough, will eventually involve a white man calling another white man, a white man.
It all depends on where you set the bar. People as recently as the spring considered her so bad as to be unelectable. That has obviously not been the case, which, may in some (large?) degree be attributable to the lack of primary to screw up and the desperation for a non-nursing home candidate. But either way she isn't the disaster people thought she was, not by any means.
In terms of what the parties are capable of producing right now she is probably something like a B- Democrat. She's been able to look the part when she's needed to, can successfully best her actual (as opposed to hypothetical) opponent when she has the opportunity, and hasn't committed any clear malpractice since taking the torch. Of course you always want the A+ candidate, the 2014 Patriots, if you will. But it also isn't like you're playing the 2014 Patriots either, and competent game managers win often enough, especially when they don't turn the ball over.
There's a part of me that has wanted very badly to go to that map but I tend to lean in Saul's direction, that if Harris is getting both NC and GA it'll be part of a blowout.
The reason I still kind of like your map though is that it's consistent with where the fundamentals are for the economy, sentiments towards the incumbent party, inflation, immigration, etc. BUT has the GOP blowing their advantage by nominating a candidate beyond the pale for too many people, and the economic situation isn't so bad that on the fence voters are willing to entertain it. I mean, imagine telling people a year ago Trump would win PA and still narrowly lose the election. It seems crazy but it's also just the kind of thing that could happen.
Democratic House, odds 90% it is 5 seats or fewer, 10% 5-10 seats, 1% more than 10.
GOP Senate 52-48....
...Harris victory, 287-251.
This has her holding PA, MI, AZ, NV, WI. I just don't think the fundamentals have shifted in favor of Harris for anything more decisive than that, but today will be about the GOP underperforming the odds with numerous unforced errors, most notably nominating Trump himself. Her win will go through the midwest, not the south.
It isn't hard to find article after article citing studies finding strong correlations between smart phones and declining mental health. Maybe you think thats not sufficiently conclusive, and it may well not be. Bad reporting and sensationalism are far from unheard of. It's also possible we'll find out it's something else but reasonable people can disagree.
As for accounting for emotional well-being it sounds a lot more like training children into a state of learned helplessness. I suppose if that's what the rich want they'll have it but I have no idea why we'd celebrate or hope to emulate it.
For the record I don't disagree with any of that. I don't think there's some grand conspiracy. I do however think there's a cultural shift among parents, which I'd wager is most pronounced among those able to send their kids to $65k/year schools, combined with risk aversion due to increased litigiousness over the last 40 years, plus probably some weird level of stuff coming out of all the graduate credits a lot of teachers have to take to get a raise, which itself is coopted by administrators in self interested ways.
And it isn't like you don't come across plenty of parents caught up in some kind of vaguely political paranoia and and catastrophic thinking. A lot of adults probably could also stand with way less screen time themselves.
You and to a degree Chip are the ones responding like there's some kind of moral panic. I don't think screens, or crazy risk aversion, or overwrought concern about emotional well-being is going to kill anyone, nor do I think that tablets, smart phones, or modern video games are going to create a generation of psychopaths and/or totally useless and effette weaklings. I'm not Tipper Gore and I'm not someone who subscribes to the idea that children need to be raised by drill sergeants. However I do think these things have a good chance of working in concert to produce a lot more overly anxious, neurotic adults with a lot of trouble finding happiness. YMMV as to whether you care about that but if that's the case just say so instead of arguing against straw men.
Heh, that was about elementary aged students, Chip.
Back in the 90s in high school I did a lot of smoking pot and cigarettes, chasing girls, and trying to get adults to buy me beer. Got into plenty of stupid trouble with various authority figures and other teens and I shudder to think at a number of things we got away with in automobiles.
My assumption then was that we were downright tame compared to our post 60s predecessors. But look if you think we're in a better place now I'll let you make that case.
There's some of that. However I also think culture and technology has really changed things. I've come across studies suggesting that risky behavior is part of human development and that closing it off with safety-ism and screen based childhoods may be a driver of the decline in mental health reported by teens and young adults.
That doesn't mean we need to totally let everything go but there's a point where it starts doing more harm than good. FWIW the principal at my kids' school made a major point at back to school night this year that anyone not letting their kids have unstructured low or no supervision play time need to get comfortable allowing it ASAP.
My take is that the safety-ism operates as the default but that a person can still mostly opt out of it. The catch is that opting out takes planning, effort, and at times resources. I am also of course not operating in the world of people able to send their kids to these types of schools so no idea what the norm is for them. Though part of the reason we do Catholic school is because we find they haven't ever heard of the kind of thinking expressed in that email, not that there aren't other trade offs.
I think it's as simple as women in the UK not having to chose between defending their reproductive rights and the rights they have carved out to sex segregated spaces more generally. One greatly outweighs the other, and understandably so.
If there is a surprise result in Harris' favor one would have to assume Dobbs is the main factor, maybe in combination with the GOP nominating obviously ridiculous people down ballot like Robinson and Lake.
On “History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?”
There's truth to that. There's also though truth to the US still being among the most welcoming countries in the world to immigrants from all places. It's a push and pull.
Mass immigration happened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, then was cut off for a few decades. We've had it again for over 30, maybe more like 40 years. It's clear that the choice is increaingly between continuing mass illegal immigration and maintaining our liberal democracy. That's an easy one for me, and the nice thing about liberal democracy is that we can always revisit increasing immigration again when we're ready.
I also think people that disagree with me should just take the W. We've let in millions upon millions outside of any real process in addition to those that followed the rules. A bunch of ugly things are very likely about to happen but I have a feeling Trump is going to find the logistics of whatever mass deportation scheme he tries pretty daunting. Most of the people who have entered illegally will end up staying. Indeed quite a few have already gotten away with it by being amnestied, or legalized through various roundabout methods. A pause isn't the end of the world.
"
I think the illegal immigration thing doesn't tell the whole story. They came in and reversed Trump era orders including in particular the remain in Mexico policy. Trump and the GOP's torpedoing the bill was the height of cynical BS but what the Biden admin did was begging for a backlash with no substantive upside.
Where I think Jaybird is a bit off is not putting inflation at the top of the list. It's seemingly been tamed but stuff remains way more expensive than it was 4 years ago, which has clouded the larger, 40,000 foot economic recovery for many average working people. Under those circumstances this election was going to be hard for Biden or Harris and the numbers have suggested that for quite some time.
On “Open Mic for the week of 11/4/2024”
They should have as soon as the term ended.
On “History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?”
*is of very limited relevance.
"
I still think it's early for all of this but I think you've got two factors. Factor one is that our demographics are very different than they were in the immediate post civil rights settlement and even pretty different than they were 20-30 years ago. That's just an objective fact but our political parties and establishment haven't really pivoted to it.
Second there's reason to suspect that we are slowly depolarizing around race. Big picture that's a good thing, but it does mean that old play books around race are going to be less effective. I mean, the big fact that never seems to enter all of this calculation is that something like 70% of hispanics are (or at least identify as) white, and the fact that someone's crusty old grandpa may not see them that way isn't of very limited relevance to their opinions and voting behavior.
On “2024 Election Day Live Stream, Reaction, Open Thread”
Of course we will. And if Trump drops massive inflationary tarrifs or blows up the deficit with unfunded tax cuts they'll only have themselves to blame, yet will likely remain constitutionally incapable of seeing it.
My long term hope is that the party re-tools itself. Some of this is bad luck with inflation, but we can't lose to this guy twice in 10 years and not be prepared to do some serious recalibration. The good news is that trends have a way of turning against incumbents, whoever they are.
On “History Was Made in 2024 Election, Now What?”
I saw a softer version of that when I popped on CNN for a few minutes. I imagine we are still a couple weeks away from the full post mortem, but it's clear to me that's pure cope.
And thats coming from me, someone who was hoping Harris would pull it out. It baffles me how many people can't see the flaws in that angle.
On “2024 Election Day Live Stream, Reaction, Open Thread”
Oof. Well this should be stupid. I guess we'll be pressure testing the whole system again.
Fingers crossed for a D house to at least create some speed bumps.
On “The Joy Of Opening Time Capsules: The Night Before the 2024 Presidential Election”
He was apparently on Fox News earlier losing it.
"
I turned on CNN when I was eating lunch. Tone struck me as 'cautiously optimistic, but maybe a little defensive.'
"
I like in person but also prefer going early to avoid the lines. Last time I went on election day was 2016
It took almost an hour and I didn't like it.
"
We need some kind of ancillary to Godwin's law that says any internet discussion, when allowed to go on long enough, will eventually involve a white man calling another white man, a white man.
"
It all depends on where you set the bar. People as recently as the spring considered her so bad as to be unelectable. That has obviously not been the case, which, may in some (large?) degree be attributable to the lack of primary to screw up and the desperation for a non-nursing home candidate. But either way she isn't the disaster people thought she was, not by any means.
In terms of what the parties are capable of producing right now she is probably something like a B- Democrat. She's been able to look the part when she's needed to, can successfully best her actual (as opposed to hypothetical) opponent when she has the opportunity, and hasn't committed any clear malpractice since taking the torch. Of course you always want the A+ candidate, the 2014 Patriots, if you will. But it also isn't like you're playing the 2014 Patriots either, and competent game managers win often enough, especially when they don't turn the ball over.
"
There's a part of me that has wanted very badly to go to that map but I tend to lean in Saul's direction, that if Harris is getting both NC and GA it'll be part of a blowout.
The reason I still kind of like your map though is that it's consistent with where the fundamentals are for the economy, sentiments towards the incumbent party, inflation, immigration, etc. BUT has the GOP blowing their advantage by nominating a candidate beyond the pale for too many people, and the economic situation isn't so bad that on the fence voters are willing to entertain it. I mean, imagine telling people a year ago Trump would win PA and still narrowly lose the election. It seems crazy but it's also just the kind of thing that could happen.
"
Sticking with where I was in October.
Democratic House, odds 90% it is 5 seats or fewer, 10% 5-10 seats, 1% more than 10.
GOP Senate 52-48....
...Harris victory, 287-251.
This has her holding PA, MI, AZ, NV, WI. I just don't think the fundamentals have shifted in favor of Harris for anything more decisive than that, but today will be about the GOP underperforming the odds with numerous unforced errors, most notably nominating Trump himself. Her win will go through the midwest, not the south.
On “Final Thoughts Before November Fifth”
It isn't hard to find article after article citing studies finding strong correlations between smart phones and declining mental health. Maybe you think thats not sufficiently conclusive, and it may well not be. Bad reporting and sensationalism are far from unheard of. It's also possible we'll find out it's something else but reasonable people can disagree.
As for accounting for emotional well-being it sounds a lot more like training children into a state of learned helplessness. I suppose if that's what the rich want they'll have it but I have no idea why we'd celebrate or hope to emulate it.
"
The only help for them is a stint in federal prison.
"
For the record I don't disagree with any of that. I don't think there's some grand conspiracy. I do however think there's a cultural shift among parents, which I'd wager is most pronounced among those able to send their kids to $65k/year schools, combined with risk aversion due to increased litigiousness over the last 40 years, plus probably some weird level of stuff coming out of all the graduate credits a lot of teachers have to take to get a raise, which itself is coopted by administrators in self interested ways.
And it isn't like you don't come across plenty of parents caught up in some kind of vaguely political paranoia and and catastrophic thinking. A lot of adults probably could also stand with way less screen time themselves.
"
You and to a degree Chip are the ones responding like there's some kind of moral panic. I don't think screens, or crazy risk aversion, or overwrought concern about emotional well-being is going to kill anyone, nor do I think that tablets, smart phones, or modern video games are going to create a generation of psychopaths and/or totally useless and effette weaklings. I'm not Tipper Gore and I'm not someone who subscribes to the idea that children need to be raised by drill sergeants. However I do think these things have a good chance of working in concert to produce a lot more overly anxious, neurotic adults with a lot of trouble finding happiness. YMMV as to whether you care about that but if that's the case just say so instead of arguing against straw men.
"
Heh, that was about elementary aged students, Chip.
Back in the 90s in high school I did a lot of smoking pot and cigarettes, chasing girls, and trying to get adults to buy me beer. Got into plenty of stupid trouble with various authority figures and other teens and I shudder to think at a number of things we got away with in automobiles.
My assumption then was that we were downright tame compared to our post 60s predecessors. But look if you think we're in a better place now I'll let you make that case.
"
There's some of that. However I also think culture and technology has really changed things. I've come across studies suggesting that risky behavior is part of human development and that closing it off with safety-ism and screen based childhoods may be a driver of the decline in mental health reported by teens and young adults.
That doesn't mean we need to totally let everything go but there's a point where it starts doing more harm than good. FWIW the principal at my kids' school made a major point at back to school night this year that anyone not letting their kids have unstructured low or no supervision play time need to get comfortable allowing it ASAP.
"
My take is that the safety-ism operates as the default but that a person can still mostly opt out of it. The catch is that opting out takes planning, effort, and at times resources. I am also of course not operating in the world of people able to send their kids to these types of schools so no idea what the norm is for them. Though part of the reason we do Catholic school is because we find they haven't ever heard of the kind of thinking expressed in that email, not that there aren't other trade offs.
"
I think it's as simple as women in the UK not having to chose between defending their reproductive rights and the rights they have carved out to sex segregated spaces more generally. One greatly outweighs the other, and understandably so.
"
If there is a surprise result in Harris' favor one would have to assume Dobbs is the main factor, maybe in combination with the GOP nominating obviously ridiculous people down ballot like Robinson and Lake.
"
Probably so.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.