That's the high-level summary. But once you get into cooperative and iterated games, you can see the underlying logic of how a lot of social institutions formed.
and even of that weren't true, what is Valdimir Putin's word worth? Russian recognised Ukraine's sovereignty back in '92, what value is there in them doing it again?
It's not just the Democrats either. As I noted on a previous thread there has been exactly one major party nominee for President who was born after the 1940s - Barack Obama. I have to wonder how much the lack of top tier talent contributed to making the Republican party vulnerable to a Trumpist takeover.
There are 350m people in the US and a lot of them were born after the 1940s, even after you exclude the under-35s. What is going on here?
I think Buttigeig has what it takes, but he's still a bit green yet. Giving him Transport was a smart move, but he probably needs a little more time before he's good to go.
I get the frustration. Trump is clearly neither mentally nor morally fit to lead. But because his mental decline manifests in long inchoate rants instead of fumbling to find the right word, he get seen a smore capable because more talking = smarter in a lot of peoples' minds.
And of course those newsies thought Biden was a bad idea the first time. Mostly because eh wasn't interesting enough. People often talk about journalistic bias in terms of them being left-biased (because journalists tend to be liberals) or right-based (because media companies are corporations), but the media's biggest biases are toward novelty and narrative.
If the President has the explicit constitutional power to do a thing, then it can't be a crime per se to do it. The idea that the President has to me made immune to prosecution to exercise the standard powers of office is an argument so idiotic I can't credit anyone actually believes it.
Here's an example of why this is a problem. Let's stick with Letters of Marque sicne you brought it up. What if a President accepted a bribe to give a letter of Marque to someone? That would be a crime, right? Last I checked bribery was illegal. But under this ruling the President would be able to argue that issue Letters of Marque was an official power an therefore they can't ever be prosecuted for it. And if the prosecution wanted to try argue otherwise, they wouldn't be allowed to enter the issuing of the Letter of Marque into evidence, making it almost impossible to prove there was a quid pro quo.
Legal powers can be used in illegal ways, in fact that's the entire risk represented by abuse of office. And the Supreme Court has rendered such prosecutions nearly impossible. And to be frank, if it were a Democrat violating the law I very much doubt you'd have trouble seeing that.
Thanks for the Explanation Em. From my perspective, The Appeals Court was clearly correct - a government official's power is defined by the law - be it common, statutory or constitution. Therefore an illegal act cannot be an official act. If Trump wants to claim that holding him accountable represents an as-applied constitutional violation, let him try that argument on appeal.
It's notable that the Roman Republic, which fell because it didn't restrain its executive enough, understood that post-office prosecution was an important accountability mechanism for former officials.
That doesn't work either. Gen-X (born in 1965 onward) started being old enough to be President in 2000. The US has had a quarter of a century to skip over the boomers.
That's the thing though, it's not just that you keep nominating boomers, Wikipedia puts the boomers from 1946 - 1964. The nominees I listed above aren't merely boomers, they're right at the oldest edge of boomers. Hell some of them aren't boomers because they're too old to be (including Biden). Even Obama is a boomer, he's just at the younger end.
Don't get me wrong, even if Joe Biden dies, his corpse would be a better choice for President than Trump and I can well believe that Biden was the Democrats' best choice. The part I don't get is why, in 2024, he is their best choice.
Bill Clinton, Bush the Younger and Donald Trump were all born in 1946. Biden was born in 1942. For that matter, look at the birth years of failed presidential candidates in that period: Bush the Elder (1924), Al Gore (1948), John Kerry (1943), John McCain (1936), Mitt Romney (1947) and Hillary Clinton (1947) . What that means is that with the sole exception of Barak Obama (born 1961), every realistic candidate for President has come from the same age cohort, if not the previous one. Assuming the winner of this election lives through their term, this one generation will have held power for 36 years.
This clearly isn't just an issue for the Democrats, because the Republicans have been following the same playbook, still it is very strange that there is essentially an entire lost generation of American political leaders at his point.
I mean, this isn't the worst problem the Presidential selection process has (that would be nominating Donald Trump), but it is a problem that US politics has had almost no fresh blood at the high level for over 30 years.
I find the idea of a duvet without a top sheet confusing. Would the duvet cover get dirty quickly due to contact with your skin? The top sheet helps keep your duvet cover clean, so you don't need to change it as often.
I think the "eat your vegetables" aspect is a key part of what puts people off a political work. It's not so much that people dislike politics in their media, it's that dislike being lectured by their media.
I'm with you on this. I think AI tools will function as a powerful force multiplier but won't economically replace experts. Much like previous technological innovations.
At some point the US and EU are going to have to reckon with the geopolitical consequences of their trade policies. There have been concerns raised in the US and EU about New Zealand being pulled into China's orbit because of our close trade ties with China. But why do we have such close trade ties with China? Why does a country that mostly makes dairy products sell so much to a country that's majority lactose intolerant? Because they will actually buy our stuff.
New Zealand pursues trade agreements with a lot of countries, but most developed countries restrict trade in agricultural products, even in their trade agreements with us, and that makes it hard for us. I'd really rather not have our economy at the mercy of Xi Xinping, and New Zealand could be a useful bulwark against growing Chinese influence in the South Pacific. But at some point the US is going to have to decide it would rather remain the predominant global power or whether it would rather coddle its farmers.
On “Open Mic for the week of 6/10/2024”
That's the high-level summary. But once you get into cooperative and iterated games, you can see the underlying logic of how a lot of social institutions formed.
On “Open Mic for the week of 7/8/2024”
and even of that weren't true, what is Valdimir Putin's word worth? Russian recognised Ukraine's sovereignty back in '92, what value is there in them doing it again?
On “About Last Night: Labour Landslide in UK Elections”
Agreed on all points.
On “Dems in Disarray! No, For Reals This Time”
It's not just the Democrats either. As I noted on a previous thread there has been exactly one major party nominee for President who was born after the 1940s - Barack Obama. I have to wonder how much the lack of top tier talent contributed to making the Republican party vulnerable to a Trumpist takeover.
There are 350m people in the US and a lot of them were born after the 1940s, even after you exclude the under-35s. What is going on here?
"
I think Buttigeig has what it takes, but he's still a bit green yet. Giving him Transport was a smart move, but he probably needs a little more time before he's good to go.
"
I get the frustration. Trump is clearly neither mentally nor morally fit to lead. But because his mental decline manifests in long inchoate rants instead of fumbling to find the right word, he get seen a smore capable because more talking = smarter in a lot of peoples' minds.
On “Fourth of July Group Activity: Civics Quiz”
10/10, though I had to guess the rivers question.
On “Open Mic for the week of 7/1/2024”
Yeah, there's a reason the First Amendment doesn't only protect true statements.
"
And of course those newsies thought Biden was a bad idea the first time. Mostly because eh wasn't interesting enough. People often talk about journalistic bias in terms of them being left-biased (because journalists tend to be liberals) or right-based (because media companies are corporations), but the media's biggest biases are toward novelty and narrative.
On “A Semi-Short Explainer of Presidential Immunity Decision”
No, that's insane.
If the President has the explicit constitutional power to do a thing, then it can't be a crime per se to do it. The idea that the President has to me made immune to prosecution to exercise the standard powers of office is an argument so idiotic I can't credit anyone actually believes it.
Here's an example of why this is a problem. Let's stick with Letters of Marque sicne you brought it up. What if a President accepted a bribe to give a letter of Marque to someone? That would be a crime, right? Last I checked bribery was illegal. But under this ruling the President would be able to argue that issue Letters of Marque was an official power an therefore they can't ever be prosecuted for it. And if the prosecution wanted to try argue otherwise, they wouldn't be allowed to enter the issuing of the Letter of Marque into evidence, making it almost impossible to prove there was a quid pro quo.
Legal powers can be used in illegal ways, in fact that's the entire risk represented by abuse of office. And the Supreme Court has rendered such prosecutions nearly impossible. And to be frank, if it were a Democrat violating the law I very much doubt you'd have trouble seeing that.
"
Thanks for the Explanation Em. From my perspective, The Appeals Court was clearly correct - a government official's power is defined by the law - be it common, statutory or constitution. Therefore an illegal act cannot be an official act. If Trump wants to claim that holding him accountable represents an as-applied constitutional violation, let him try that argument on appeal.
"
It's notable that the Roman Republic, which fell because it didn't restrain its executive enough, understood that post-office prosecution was an important accountability mechanism for former officials.
On “The Master Debaters (Not)”
That doesn't work either. Gen-X (born in 1965 onward) started being old enough to be President in 2000. The US has had a quarter of a century to skip over the boomers.
"
That's the thing though, it's not just that you keep nominating boomers, Wikipedia puts the boomers from 1946 - 1964. The nominees I listed above aren't merely boomers, they're right at the oldest edge of boomers. Hell some of them aren't boomers because they're too old to be (including Biden). Even Obama is a boomer, he's just at the younger end.
"
One of the many problems with Trump is that his presence lowers the bar for everyone else.
"
Also, I just realised I forgot about Bob Dole, but he was born in 1923, so he fits the pattern.
"
Don't get me wrong, even if Joe Biden dies, his corpse would be a better choice for President than Trump and I can well believe that Biden was the Democrats' best choice. The part I don't get is why, in 2024, he is their best choice.
Bill Clinton, Bush the Younger and Donald Trump were all born in 1946. Biden was born in 1942. For that matter, look at the birth years of failed presidential candidates in that period: Bush the Elder (1924), Al Gore (1948), John Kerry (1943), John McCain (1936), Mitt Romney (1947) and Hillary Clinton (1947) . What that means is that with the sole exception of Barak Obama (born 1961), every realistic candidate for President has come from the same age cohort, if not the previous one. Assuming the winner of this election lives through their term, this one generation will have held power for 36 years.
This clearly isn't just an issue for the Democrats, because the Republicans have been following the same playbook, still it is very strange that there is essentially an entire lost generation of American political leaders at his point.
I mean, this isn't the worst problem the Presidential selection process has (that would be nominating Donald Trump), but it is a problem that US politics has had almost no fresh blood at the high level for over 30 years.
On “Weekend Plans Post: GenX is, apparently, the last generation to use a top sheet”
We have horrible damp problems in new Zealand too, we just open the windows during the day to circulate the air.
"
I find the idea of a duvet without a top sheet confusing. Would the duvet cover get dirty quickly due to contact with your skin? The top sheet helps keep your duvet cover clean, so you don't need to change it as often.
On “Ordinary World: Juneteenth Edition”
There's a solid treatment of this question in A City on Mars, they also conclude the number is in the millions at minimum.
On “Safe Nerdy and the Early Adopter Problem”
I think the "eat your vegetables" aspect is a key part of what puts people off a political work. It's not so much that people dislike politics in their media, it's that dislike being lectured by their media.
On “Why AI Could Be Good for the Liberal Arts”
I'm with you on this. I think AI tools will function as a powerful force multiplier but won't economically replace experts. Much like previous technological innovations.
On “When War Becomes Criminal”
That's the thing about sovereign countries - they can ask "you and who's army?" and you need to have a good answer.
On “Will the Real Free-Trade Party Please Stand Up?”
At some point the US and EU are going to have to reckon with the geopolitical consequences of their trade policies. There have been concerns raised in the US and EU about New Zealand being pulled into China's orbit because of our close trade ties with China. But why do we have such close trade ties with China? Why does a country that mostly makes dairy products sell so much to a country that's majority lactose intolerant? Because they will actually buy our stuff.
New Zealand pursues trade agreements with a lot of countries, but most developed countries restrict trade in agricultural products, even in their trade agreements with us, and that makes it hard for us. I'd really rather not have our economy at the mercy of Xi Xinping, and New Zealand could be a useful bulwark against growing Chinese influence in the South Pacific. But at some point the US is going to have to decide it would rather remain the predominant global power or whether it would rather coddle its farmers.
On “Libertarians for Trump?”
But the fact he tries so hard to fake it tells you that he thinks it's important.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.