It's the argument from the Congress in 2010 all over again and I think it cuts in favor of the left. Yes the ACA was passed. Yes they lost their majority. The ACA endures and is even popular now and the majority has been regained and lost a couple times since.
The summer of Floyd happened. Two things can be true at once:
-The massive daytime protests were overwhelmingly peaceful.
-Then when it got dark bad actors, both among the protestors; among the cops supporters and especially the opportunistic dirtbags who sensed that the Law was on hiatus; caused no small amount of damage and trouble.
Walz was in charge when the initial troubles cropped up and the right will, no doubt, try to rag on him for it to varying effect. It will be complicated slightly by the fact that the police unions and worst police actors are/were unabashed right wing Trumpists.
Walz also was in charge when everyone got sick of it and the National guard and police got sent back in to put paid to the disorder. The left could rag on him for that but, thankfully, in the intervening times the idiocy of the "property violence is the righteous cry of the oppressed" minority got thoroughly shellacked so I suspect there won't be much heart behind it. Note that Walz and Mayor Frey ultimately squashed the misbehavior in the cities very firmly and both got easily re-elected.
But absolutely I'd expect that the right will go after Walz for 2020. I'm not sure it's a good idea for them because Kamala is a Kop and the sting on the left has mostly been excised from that so they'd be basically lobbing a slow pitch over the plate for her to repeat Bidens position on the whole matter.
First I've heard of it. The Right certainly has the capacity to try and make hay out of anything but this doesn't sound like it'll get legs outside the already decided bubble.
Walz is, in some ways, a mini-Biden. He got a narrow trifecta in MN and then enacted a truck load of policy changes using it. He's overseen legalizing pot which is a significant win not just on policy but also on politics- MN has had two sock puppet Pot legalization parties propped up by the right to split the left vote on pot grounds which have long been a drag and now, with pot legalized, are basically defunct.
Walz has vulnerabilities- his policies are kryptonite for libertarians and some brands of Trumpist populists and he was Governor during the 2020 summer of Floyd.
Personally I'm a fan. Picking Walz was the safer bet compared to Shapiro who is less vetted, less tested and carries more risk (both upside and downside risk). Walz is a party man, a folksy mid westerner and also seems to have some good political instincts. He's a formidable pick but not an inspired one.
Oh yes, I'm not remotely unhappy about things. It is entirely plausible that Harris' vetters said "no bueno" and that was that- I was trying to suggest as much when I mentioned that Shapiro had more downside as well as upside risk.
So Reagan wouldn't have met this criteria. Bush HW would have. Neither Clinton, Carter, Obama or Trump would have met this criteria. So basically only HW Bush in the past forty some years is that right?
Walz is a pretty strong pick but, agreed, also the safer one. Shapiro had more upside and downside risk. I've certainly thought quite well of Walz as my Governor but I'd have never guessed he'd be a contender for veep. With how vital PA will be I'd have leaned in the Shapiro direction myself but Shapiro has more vulnerable attack surfaces on him (not the Israel thing though, he's indistinguishable from the other candidates on that).
Eh that's just partisanship. A wealthy libertarian coming to a Republican to complain that a given Republican tax cut was bad will get a much different (and more tongue bathy) reception than a Dem or a leftist coming to say the same thing.
I could never criticize a libertarian* for voting for the libertarian party. That has a considerable internal intellectual coherence though I do, occasionally see clips of Libertarian party goings on and sigh with a certain degree of pity.
Now green party voters? In this country? Yeah, I'm sorry they're either dupes or delusional.
Slight quibble- the masses generally think that the ACA is aces now. Just took Trump and his party actually coming close to taking it away and Biden polishing it up again once he got into office. To find the "ACA sucks" contingents you gotta go to republicans or medicare for all leftists now.
He didn't say probable, Philip, he just said theoretically. Theoretically I could walk from my office in Minneapolis to Buenos Aires given enough time- it is physically and legally possible. I am extremely unlikely to ever do so (almost as unlikely to do so as those third parties are unlikely to get to the White House) but I could, in theory, do it.
Interesting comparisons considering that Hill lost, and Trump won in the election where those two other terms were used which seems to suggest you think Weird will also be effective?
Personally, I think most of the weird thing, and also the furniture erotica, is just summer doldrum stuff.
I agree with Andrew. We need to wait until September to get a good idea of where the race actually stands. The hopium is good, enjoy it, but don't forget that September will likely give us a colder message. As Chip says, there's a lot of Trump voters out there.
No, a proud, self centered and aging man would run again, having won twice already in the face of the usual suspects claiming he couldn't do so, and would hang in there hoping against hope he could pull it out again for a third time.
And, yes, the party had to organize and push hard to dislodge him (so much the better that the party could do it) but a truly venal man would never have stepped aside regardless and would have taken the whole thing down with him.
I'll just endorse what Ken said about the "adoring press" bit.
I will admit that I had been feeling a dreary malaise since the debate that lifted when Biden stepped aside. What an incredible thing for him to do (for whatever reasons he did step aside- a venal man faced with a strong push to oust him would have said "fish you" and taken us all down flaming with him out of sheer spite),
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Tim Walz Tapped to be VP Kamala Harris Running Mate”
It's the argument from the Congress in 2010 all over again and I think it cuts in favor of the left. Yes the ACA was passed. Yes they lost their majority. The ACA endures and is even popular now and the majority has been regained and lost a couple times since.
"
Is that a policy they're pushing? Deaf people can't be allowed to drive?
"
The summer of Floyd happened. Two things can be true at once:
-The massive daytime protests were overwhelmingly peaceful.
-Then when it got dark bad actors, both among the protestors; among the cops supporters and especially the opportunistic dirtbags who sensed that the Law was on hiatus; caused no small amount of damage and trouble.
Walz was in charge when the initial troubles cropped up and the right will, no doubt, try to rag on him for it to varying effect. It will be complicated slightly by the fact that the police unions and worst police actors are/were unabashed right wing Trumpists.
Walz also was in charge when everyone got sick of it and the National guard and police got sent back in to put paid to the disorder. The left could rag on him for that but, thankfully, in the intervening times the idiocy of the "property violence is the righteous cry of the oppressed" minority got thoroughly shellacked so I suspect there won't be much heart behind it. Note that Walz and Mayor Frey ultimately squashed the misbehavior in the cities very firmly and both got easily re-elected.
But absolutely I'd expect that the right will go after Walz for 2020. I'm not sure it's a good idea for them because Kamala is a Kop and the sting on the left has mostly been excised from that so they'd be basically lobbing a slow pitch over the plate for her to repeat Bidens position on the whole matter.
"
I don't recall saying both sides don't do it.
"
First I've heard of it. The Right certainly has the capacity to try and make hay out of anything but this doesn't sound like it'll get legs outside the already decided bubble.
"
Walz is, in some ways, a mini-Biden. He got a narrow trifecta in MN and then enacted a truck load of policy changes using it. He's overseen legalizing pot which is a significant win not just on policy but also on politics- MN has had two sock puppet Pot legalization parties propped up by the right to split the left vote on pot grounds which have long been a drag and now, with pot legalized, are basically defunct.
Walz has vulnerabilities- his policies are kryptonite for libertarians and some brands of Trumpist populists and he was Governor during the 2020 summer of Floyd.
Personally I'm a fan. Picking Walz was the safer bet compared to Shapiro who is less vetted, less tested and carries more risk (both upside and downside risk). Walz is a party man, a folksy mid westerner and also seems to have some good political instincts. He's a formidable pick but not an inspired one.
On “Tim Walz announced as Kamala Harris’s running mate”
Oh yes, I'm not remotely unhappy about things. It is entirely plausible that Harris' vetters said "no bueno" and that was that- I was trying to suggest as much when I mentioned that Shapiro had more downside as well as upside risk.
"
Fair enough.
"
Yeah I missed the 8 years governor part in the first read through. Though Walz is a six year Governor and was in the military prior to that.
"
Probably so. I don't know if Walz is in the Tim Kaine level of safety choice or not. It occurs to me that I haven't seen Walz debate.
"
I mean, Walz specifically has been 6 years as Governor and was military prior to that so he doesn't seem particularly outside your criteria.
"
So Reagan wouldn't have met this criteria. Bush HW would have. Neither Clinton, Carter, Obama or Trump would have met this criteria. So basically only HW Bush in the past forty some years is that right?
"
Walz is a pretty strong pick but, agreed, also the safer one. Shapiro had more upside and downside risk. I've certainly thought quite well of Walz as my Governor but I'd have never guessed he'd be a contender for veep. With how vital PA will be I'd have leaned in the Shapiro direction myself but Shapiro has more vulnerable attack surfaces on him (not the Israel thing though, he's indistinguishable from the other candidates on that).
On “RFK and Dead Cubs”
Heheh that sounds about right though no one outside the party doubts that it's full of earnest libertarians. Can't say the same for the Greens.
On “The Race Is On, And It’s Getting Weird”
Eh that's just partisanship. A wealthy libertarian coming to a Republican to complain that a given Republican tax cut was bad will get a much different (and more tongue bathy) reception than a Dem or a leftist coming to say the same thing.
On “RFK and Dead Cubs”
I could never criticize a libertarian* for voting for the libertarian party. That has a considerable internal intellectual coherence though I do, occasionally see clips of Libertarian party goings on and sigh with a certain degree of pity.
Now green party voters? In this country? Yeah, I'm sorry they're either dupes or delusional.
On “The Race Is On, And It’s Getting Weird”
Slight quibble- the masses generally think that the ACA is aces now. Just took Trump and his party actually coming close to taking it away and Biden polishing it up again once he got into office. To find the "ACA sucks" contingents you gotta go to republicans or medicare for all leftists now.
"
Didn't Trump introduce or popularize the "Fake news" thing?
On “RFK and Dead Cubs”
I also don't think Jaybird (or Saul- or anyone) should vote for Trump.
"
He didn't say probable, Philip, he just said theoretically. Theoretically I could walk from my office in Minneapolis to Buenos Aires given enough time- it is physically and legally possible. I am extremely unlikely to ever do so (almost as unlikely to do so as those third parties are unlikely to get to the White House) but I could, in theory, do it.
On “The Race Is On, And It’s Getting Weird”
Interesting comparisons considering that Hill lost, and Trump won in the election where those two other terms were used which seems to suggest you think Weird will also be effective?
Personally, I think most of the weird thing, and also the furniture erotica, is just summer doldrum stuff.
On “Be Excellent To Each Other”
This is where I land too. Also clever!
On “The Problem of Political Commentary”
I agree with Andrew. We need to wait until September to get a good idea of where the race actually stands. The hopium is good, enjoy it, but don't forget that September will likely give us a colder message. As Chip says, there's a lot of Trump voters out there.
"
No, a proud, self centered and aging man would run again, having won twice already in the face of the usual suspects claiming he couldn't do so, and would hang in there hoping against hope he could pull it out again for a third time.
And, yes, the party had to organize and push hard to dislodge him (so much the better that the party could do it) but a truly venal man would never have stepped aside regardless and would have taken the whole thing down with him.
I'll just endorse what Ken said about the "adoring press" bit.
"
I will admit that I had been feeling a dreary malaise since the debate that lifted when Biden stepped aside. What an incredible thing for him to do (for whatever reasons he did step aside- a venal man faced with a strong push to oust him would have said "fish you" and taken us all down flaming with him out of sheer spite),
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.