That's pretty disturbing. I still think the long term is going to be broad, re-legalization of abortion in those states that have bans in effect, but it will be a bloody road.
Ahem... let me recite this first: If Trump and his supporters weren't so detached from reality and ginned up with anti-democratic fanaticism that they're willing to violently disrupt lawful election processes or lash out over a loss then we wouldn't have this problem. They have agency and are the source of the (hypothetical) crisis. Theres no BSDIing around it.
Ok, now that I've said that, I think there's a basic problem with long held positions becoming out of step with existing realities and circumstances. Now that Democrats are (rightly!) most concerned about election crisis I'd like to think some investment would be made to sure up these processes, which I'd also think should be an easier sell to a party that's becoming a lot more gentrified. The problem I believe is that there are still way too many people still drinking the emerging majority, demographics as destiny kool aid. The Republicans of course aren't operating at a level of self awareness to understand that it's them most likely to pose a threat to election integrity. Or if they are it wouldn't shock me if they made up some reason to torpedo reform the same way they did the border bill in February.
I'm also with you on VBM. Doesn't offend my sensibilities but it might be more trouble than its worth. At least in those eastern states that haven't been doing it since Michael Cain rode west in his covered wagon. If anyone is hiding anything with it my bet is it's more likely husbands concealing their Trump votes from their wives.
Fair enough. I once, long ago, played games but found it became necessary for me to renounce them. My last real experience of online gaming is probably something like Quake, or maybe taking a few runs at Warcraft III. Suffice to say I have no idea what's going on and haven't for generations of advances.
He raises a good point about the trustworthiness problem. Is he the right person to raise it, right now, in this moment? Suffice to say I understand the counter arguments. The proof I suppose will be in the pudding. My household hasn't canceled our subscription (not yet anyway, my wife pays for it). I will be on the lookout for major improvements in quality and credibility.
But, you raised something else. I randomly heard about the Concord thing due to an offhand comment on a substack I don't regularly read. What is your take on that? I googled to try to better understand it but all I found were official reports mentioning the shut down but talking around what went wrong and screeds on reddit, none of which were particularly illuminating.
I agree. I also think a big but rarely remarked upon asymmetry is that the right is a lot easier to placate with signals and messages (and antics) alone.
Just further pondering your point about what era we're in, I guess I would say something without clear, recent precedent. The reason I say that is that in those past instances you reference politics was still something people did, sometimes out on the street (as opposed to something you tweet), in solidarity with each other, and they kept at it over a relatively long haul. That's true of right and left. It's hard for me to envision that when all directions and forces push towards lower solidarity, lower levels of trust.
But on a larger level I think the ongoing crisis across the developed world come down to the three i's, up from two before the pandemic: immigration, (post) industrial economies, and now add inflation. The mainstream left and right haven't responded to any of these particularly well anywhere, (though inflation may fall off the list soon) and in a democracy that gets you voted out of office.
Both you and Matt Yglesias. Here's the first of his 27 takes on the election posted this morning:
The most important context for this race — what broadly distinguishes the family of takes you should pay attention to from those you should dismiss — is what’s happening internationally. The UK Conservatives got thrashed recently. The Canadian Liberals are set to get thrashed soon. The incumbent center-left party lost its first post-Covid election in New Zealand, and the incumbent center-right party lost its first post-Covid elections in Australia. The incumbent coalition in Germany is hideously unpopular. This means that if you’re asking “How did Democrats blow it?” or “Why is this even close?” you’re asking the wrong question.
On the larger point I agree with you and that's what I was getting at in my previous comment. I don't think the current state of the Republican party leadership and other officials is one where you can distinguish the policies from the people.
Eh I wouldn't be that hard on Koz, disagree with him as much as I may. Deep in this piece is an echo of what a responsible conservatism might look like. It probably wouldn't be something I'd find a lot to agree with and I'd imagine based on your views that you'd have even less.
Where I think he is fundamentally wrong is the belief that Donald Trump, or the type of conservatism that the GOP has degenerated into, can ever be remotely constructive. He says his goal is to hold Democrats accountable but I would say that Trump and the Republican party are fundamentally incapable of doing that even if they win. Look at the various strains of charlatans and know-nothings that have come to completely dominate the GOP caucus in Congress. These bizarre personalities can serve as a kind of f*ck you to the 'libs' or 'elites' or whatever right wing bete noir they were elected to oppose. But they're fundamentally incapable of accomplishing anything on the border or the economy or the other issues mentioned in the OP, nor even of creating an appealing alternative vision of what the values should inform government decisions.
I kind of wonder how many of these words will still be floating around in, say 2030. Like... do gay people really appreciate being referred to as 'queer' in mainstream publications and the like? That ain't my battle to fight but I know I'd never call someone that. I also can't imagine referring to a group of human beings as 'BIPOCs' or something similar without it being received as strange and disrespectful.
I agree that the case against her became way overstated, and that there's a certain 'the party will unite behind anyone minimally acceptable' factor (a bar Harris easily clears) particularly when the opponent is Trump.
But... her favorables were even worse than Biden's for most of the administration, her primary run was a total failure, and she never seemed to rise to any of the opportunities she was given as VP. In fairness to her on the last point she seems to have been set up for failure until she kind of disappeared off the radar. But these are all just well established facts, not made up false equivalence with the Republicans or sanewashing crazy right wing talking points.
I'm also saying these things having already cast my ballot for her last week. I'm rooting for her.
Given that a year ago and more recently than that she was thought to be an albatross I think she's done quite well. She's turned a race that was being lost into a coin flip going into the final stretch. That's not nothing. And I say all of this as someone who can think of quite a few others I'd have picked over her in a primary.
It's just a tough, tough anti incumbent environment.
I won't rub it in. When Snyder owned the team we were on the receiving end of that kind of thing all the time. My oldest son is on the Jayden Daniels bandwagon and I have gotten several lectures from him about needing to stop being so negative. My wife dies with laughter every time. As if a 7 year old has any idea what I've been through.
Still, if this continues, he might convince me to start using the word 'Commanders' whatever that even is (HTTR, etc.).
On “What If Kamala Wins?”
Among the reasons to hope for a Harris win IMO is that it is much more likely to lead to a general lowering of the temperature.
"
I'm in agreement. But If I didn't have that first paragraph I'd be fragged. You know how this place is in the run up to an election.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
That's pretty disturbing. I still think the long term is going to be broad, re-legalization of abortion in those states that have bans in effect, but it will be a bloody road.
On “What If Kamala Wins?”
Ahem... let me recite this first: If Trump and his supporters weren't so detached from reality and ginned up with anti-democratic fanaticism that they're willing to violently disrupt lawful election processes or lash out over a loss then we wouldn't have this problem. They have agency and are the source of the (hypothetical) crisis. Theres no BSDIing around it.
Ok, now that I've said that, I think there's a basic problem with long held positions becoming out of step with existing realities and circumstances. Now that Democrats are (rightly!) most concerned about election crisis I'd like to think some investment would be made to sure up these processes, which I'd also think should be an easier sell to a party that's becoming a lot more gentrified. The problem I believe is that there are still way too many people still drinking the emerging majority, demographics as destiny kool aid. The Republicans of course aren't operating at a level of self awareness to understand that it's them most likely to pose a threat to election integrity. Or if they are it wouldn't shock me if they made up some reason to torpedo reform the same way they did the border bill in February.
I'm also with you on VBM. Doesn't offend my sensibilities but it might be more trouble than its worth. At least in those eastern states that haven't been doing it since Michael Cain rode west in his covered wagon. If anyone is hiding anything with it my bet is it's more likely husbands concealing their Trump votes from their wives.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
Fair enough. I once, long ago, played games but found it became necessary for me to renounce them. My last real experience of online gaming is probably something like Quake, or maybe taking a few runs at Warcraft III. Suffice to say I have no idea what's going on and haven't for generations of advances.
"
Yea the timing is, as my son would say, 'sus.'
"
He raises a good point about the trustworthiness problem. Is he the right person to raise it, right now, in this moment? Suffice to say I understand the counter arguments. The proof I suppose will be in the pudding. My household hasn't canceled our subscription (not yet anyway, my wife pays for it). I will be on the lookout for major improvements in quality and credibility.
But, you raised something else. I randomly heard about the Concord thing due to an offhand comment on a substack I don't regularly read. What is your take on that? I googled to try to better understand it but all I found were official reports mentioning the shut down but talking around what went wrong and screeds on reddit, none of which were particularly illuminating.
"
Bezos weighs in on the Bezos situation:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/10/28/jeff-bezos-washington-post-trust/
On “The Way Through is Donald Trump for President”
I always thought the buy Greenland thing was an underrated idea.
On “What If Trump Wins?”
I agree. I also think a big but rarely remarked upon asymmetry is that the right is a lot easier to placate with signals and messages (and antics) alone.
"
Just further pondering your point about what era we're in, I guess I would say something without clear, recent precedent. The reason I say that is that in those past instances you reference politics was still something people did, sometimes out on the street (as opposed to something you tweet), in solidarity with each other, and they kept at it over a relatively long haul. That's true of right and left. It's hard for me to envision that when all directions and forces push towards lower solidarity, lower levels of trust.
"
He makes 26 other points besides that one.
But on a larger level I think the ongoing crisis across the developed world come down to the three i's, up from two before the pandemic: immigration, (post) industrial economies, and now add inflation. The mainstream left and right haven't responded to any of these particularly well anywhere, (though inflation may fall off the list soon) and in a democracy that gets you voted out of office.
"
Both you and Matt Yglesias. Here's the first of his 27 takes on the election posted this morning:
The most important context for this race — what broadly distinguishes the family of takes you should pay attention to from those you should dismiss — is what’s happening internationally. The UK Conservatives got thrashed recently. The Canadian Liberals are set to get thrashed soon. The incumbent center-left party lost its first post-Covid election in New Zealand, and the incumbent center-right party lost its first post-Covid elections in Australia. The incumbent coalition in Germany is hideously unpopular. This means that if you’re asking “How did Democrats blow it?” or “Why is this even close?” you’re asking the wrong question.
https://www.slowboring.com/p/27-takes-on-the-2024-election
On “The Way Through is Donald Trump for President”
I'm talking about the beef between Phil and Koz.
On the larger point I agree with you and that's what I was getting at in my previous comment. I don't think the current state of the Republican party leadership and other officials is one where you can distinguish the policies from the people.
"
Fair enough. I'll stay out of the personal beefs.
"
Eh I wouldn't be that hard on Koz, disagree with him as much as I may. Deep in this piece is an echo of what a responsible conservatism might look like. It probably wouldn't be something I'd find a lot to agree with and I'd imagine based on your views that you'd have even less.
Where I think he is fundamentally wrong is the belief that Donald Trump, or the type of conservatism that the GOP has degenerated into, can ever be remotely constructive. He says his goal is to hold Democrats accountable but I would say that Trump and the Republican party are fundamentally incapable of doing that even if they win. Look at the various strains of charlatans and know-nothings that have come to completely dominate the GOP caucus in Congress. These bizarre personalities can serve as a kind of f*ck you to the 'libs' or 'elites' or whatever right wing bete noir they were elected to oppose. But they're fundamentally incapable of accomplishing anything on the border or the economy or the other issues mentioned in the OP, nor even of creating an appealing alternative vision of what the values should inform government decisions.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
Gas prices projected to drop below $3 a gallon. Take what the election gods giveth.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/falling-oil-prices-may-help-push-gas-below-3-a-gallon-for-the-first-time-since-2021-526b95cd
On “What If Trump Wins?”
Sure, I've read the same. Though I feel like the Nate Silvers, etc. have also said the possibility of that is pretty low.
"
I think the stories are probably already written for anything not a surprise blowout.
On “Open Mic for the week of 10/28/2024”
I kind of wonder how many of these words will still be floating around in, say 2030. Like... do gay people really appreciate being referred to as 'queer' in mainstream publications and the like? That ain't my battle to fight but I know I'd never call someone that. I also can't imagine referring to a group of human beings as 'BIPOCs' or something similar without it being received as strange and disrespectful.
On “What If Trump Wins?”
I agree that the case against her became way overstated, and that there's a certain 'the party will unite behind anyone minimally acceptable' factor (a bar Harris easily clears) particularly when the opponent is Trump.
But... her favorables were even worse than Biden's for most of the administration, her primary run was a total failure, and she never seemed to rise to any of the opportunities she was given as VP. In fairness to her on the last point she seems to have been set up for failure until she kind of disappeared off the radar. But these are all just well established facts, not made up false equivalence with the Republicans or sanewashing crazy right wing talking points.
I'm also saying these things having already cast my ballot for her last week. I'm rooting for her.
"
I agree that this is by no means over.
"
Given that a year ago and more recently than that she was thought to be an albatross I think she's done quite well. She's turned a race that was being lost into a coin flip going into the final stretch. That's not nothing. And I say all of this as someone who can think of quite a few others I'd have picked over her in a primary.
It's just a tough, tough anti incumbent environment.
On “How Times Have Changed”
I won't rub it in. When Snyder owned the team we were on the receiving end of that kind of thing all the time. My oldest son is on the Jayden Daniels bandwagon and I have gotten several lectures from him about needing to stop being so negative. My wife dies with laughter every time. As if a 7 year old has any idea what I've been through.
Still, if this continues, he might convince me to start using the word 'Commanders' whatever that even is (HTTR, etc.).
"
Ruined the game? There was some incredible football just yesterday!
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.