It was so bizarre to see the media suddenly decide that Madison fucking Square Garden was a well known notorious irredeemably Nazi tainted building as if there haven’t been a million other events there since including Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton rallies and also it’s not the same building since it was rebuilt in 1968. Looking forward to hearing how the Knicks (or should I say Knizis?) need to renounce MSG and move to a different venue immediately.
I went to a Harry Styles concert there with my wife in 2022. That's basically just like Triumph Of The Will, if it were a film starring mostly teenage girls, some of whom are vaping through pretty much the entire movie.
It's also technically, not the Madison Square Garden where Nazi rally occurred. That was the 3rd MSG, located between 49th and 50th St on the block between 8th and 9th Ave. (The space is now called the Urban Plaza at World Wide Plaza).
Fun fact, the German American Bund held 1 Nazi rally at Madison Square Garden in 1939, the American Communist Party held a rally there in 1940. So why is it not Socialist to hold a rally there?
It's the potential new Trump cabinet I'm most concerned about. His former cabinet kept things in check and did their jobs, along with lots of longtime government personnel. Those safeguards may be gone in a new administration. He is who he is.
By comparison, the potential Harris cabinet likely will be more centrist and retain valuable current government personnel to keep things in order. She is who she is, and seems to understand that she isn't everything.
I don't know if that's worth two cents but it's where I am now.
I agree, the cabinet matters a ton. Especially the Attorney General; if Trump gets a true toady as AG (Barr was close but even he eventually turned on Trump!), we could witness some truly shocking things.
Enjoyed the article tremendously (Thanks!) and realize the predictions weren't really the point (though might make an interest "I Might Be Wrong"). But (respectfully, of course) whaddya mean "if". I've been trying to comfort myself with Trump's work ethic and organization as well, but as far as he's concerned the biggest failure of his presidency was not enough toadies (cabinet and agencies and trickle down from there). I resisted "toadies all the way down", but the toadies--some energetic and organized--will be the number 1 policy priority of a second term (fueled by number 1 motivation--his only motivation--of "what's good for me") ... now with a seemingly way larger pool of identifiable "qualified" applicants and way fewer guardrails ... seems to me anyone with Flynn-level baggage would coast in. Trump (you know I have to admit to at least a little derangement when typing his name feels like typing Voldemort) has pretty effectively neutralized any power Truth can have against him. I'd expect more of that guardrail dismantling in a second term--and third. I'm not smart enough to understand the practical feasibility of the mechanics or what would come of all of it, but it worries me. Just all seems a recipe for he-and-they-can-do-bad-stuff-and-get-away-with-it. And whereas very big abuses + potential for gross, existential abuses don't equal actual gross, existential abuses (his performance with COVID excepted, also I expect him to fold on Ukraine), that we have to split those hairs is depressing. As is the trending.
I'm desperately hoping that's what J.D. Vance is really doing, pretending to be totally gaga-MAGA so he can have some restraining influence over Trump.
My secret hope is the JDV is sort of like Lyndon Johnson - purely interested in power but also smart and clever. If Trump expires in office (seems likely given his diet and throbbing aorta) JDV takes over and supported by his Edith Wilson-style intelligent wife decides that being centrist is what will keep him in office for two terms and have a future Robert Cato write a giant book about him.
The left cannot fret about Trump potentially breaking norms that they have already trashed. The left has already abandoned the concept of equal protection under the law, and has already done everything it can to break media outlets that don't single-mindedly push its propaganda.
If Trump wins, I hope he doesn't waste political oxygen settling old scores, but that doesn't mean a lot of democrats don't deserve it.
Sorry, freedom of speech and equal protection under the law are important concepts to me.
That Russia gag never gets old, does it.
Do you people have mirrors in your alternative universe. I feel like Bobbi Fleckman explaining to Ian Faith why Polymer Records rejected the cover for Smell The Glove.
And you guys are like Nigel Tufnel asking "What's wrong with being sexy?"
The Dems, and I am a centrist one, ascribe to this magical thinking that after Trump's 13,943rd idiocy the bell is going to go off and people will awake.
The best way to defeat Trump and Trumpism is to make our opposition better, and as Maher recently stated, if Harris, when asked the question by FOX new, if she would do anything different from the very unpopular Biden administration, you can only say "I can't think of anything" then don't be surprised if you get your clock cleaned.
I notice that on the yard signs around here all of Trump's are issue focused- Trump to reduce crime, Trump for a secure border, Trump for not doing sex surgery on prisoners, whereas Harris signs just say Harris/Walz. I dont think her arguments, other than abortion are getting through and that might be why she is currently polling about 8 points behind where Biden was in 2020.
Yes, the comparisons with 1939 are overwrought, although I don't doubt that MSG was chosen to jerk liberal chains. But more fundamentally, I think you're wrong.
This wasn't a comedy club performance. A rally like this is supposed to show your candidate's goals and values, and a joke calling Puerto Rico a floating garbage dump, or Tucker Carlson making fun of Harris ethnic background by calling her a "Samoan Malaysian low IQ" whatever, well, those are statements that mean the candidate thinks that Puerto Ricans are garbage and Harris's ethnic background obviously means she shouldn't be president.
And if you listen to the tone of the speakers saying this crap, it's not joking, it's anger. Anger that Harris has the nerve to run for President.
And no, I'm not one of those politically correct a-holes criticizing comics. I like Dave Chappell. I listened to post-cancellation Louis CK until I got bored with his "Woe is me" shtick.
But like the RomneyBot 3000's "47%" comment, if you listen to the MSG rally, you know in your heart of hearts this is what they really think of you.
I think we agree that the rally featured a lot of terrible stuff, as Trump and his movement feature a lot of terrible stuff, generally. My point is that when something that maybe registers an "8" on the one-to-ten terrible scale gets reported as a "10", that allows a narrative to develop that the terribleness is being exaggerated. And, annoyingly, the narrative will be partly true. And that leads to some people mentally writing off the whole episode.
At the bottom of this piece, I linked to my piece from two years ago called "'OMG Stop Freaking Out!!!' is a Bad Response to Right-Wing Freak-Outs". That's because I'm making basically the same point, but with the roles reversed. In that scenario, there will be some dumb woke thing, and some on the left will skip to "the right is completely freaking out" without adding "though the dumb woke thing is legitimately dumb". They just react to the reaction. And the same dynamic (with the roles reversed) is happening here: The right is focusing on the liberal reaction without actually confronting the bad thing, and I think they should be forced to confront the bad thing.
My main point is that the standards here, not just for Hinchcliffe but the other speakers as well, are higher than for a comedy club.
I don't really see myself as freaking out about this election. If 51% of the population losing the right to medical care for failing pregnancy, the prospect of losing health insurance that covers pre-existing conditions, the 1/6 riot, the prospect of even more tax cuts for the rich, Trump's kowtowing to Russia, and Trump's overall freakish and failing behavior, don't push Harris over the finish line, then either:
1 -- there really is something in our water that's as damaging as lead in the water supply, and historians in a later era will use that to explain this century, or
2 -- this country isn't the country I think it is *
* Yes, I read Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72. And volunteered for the McGovern campaign for that matter. I'm still optimistic.
Spot on and so fucking obvious. I don’t even think Trump WANTS the responsibility of governing. He’s running to kill the eminintly legit federal prosecutions if he loses. Once that’s accomplished he’ll either serve as a doddering, raving figurehead or get bounced pursuant to the 25th Amendment, possibly by his own sycophants. But others far smarter, far more energetic and far more ideologically committed know he’ll provide them the keys to the castle once elected. BTW, yeah I get the point about hyperbole on the Left and, occasionally, Center Left, but that flaming asshole’s pathetic attempt at comedy at Puerto Rico’s expense is totally fair game as campaign fodder. And indeed the Trump campaign does seem shit scared about the blow back.
"Consider that implementing a fascist vision takes work, and Trump’s work ethic makes Homer Simpson look like Thomas Edison."
No argument there. The problem is that he will bring on board hundreds of people who are fired up and eager to ruin the country in a thousand different ways. And because Trump is so lazy, he'll just sign off on everything they put in front of him.
I mean, flip that around and it’s the same argument for why someone right leaning can’t vote for Kamala. “Sure, she says nice moderate things but she’s just a word salad figurehead and we know she’s gonna appoint a bunch of woke ideologues like Rachel Levine.”
Neither side’s fringe should be let anywhere near the levers of power and if it comes down to “whose fringe is going to be more effective at doing their scary fringe shit”, that’s a place where things start getting fuzzier.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy this. As with many analogies, just saying "this is like that" doesn't make it so.
I mean, I'm not disputing that there are people out there who really believe that Kamala Harris is bent on creating the New Woke Marxist Paradise or whatever, but come on. That's nothing but brain rot that comes from living on a diet of FoxNews™ and MAGAt tweets.
There is no evidence to suggest that Harris will be anything different from every other Democratic president since back to Bill Clinton at least: a few left-leaning ideas, maybe, but more emphasis on trying to build and sustain the proverbial big tent. Look at the Biden Administration's record -- it'll probably be pretty much like that.
To suggest that the Trumpanzees that would be coming into power are just a mirror image of the Dem staffers in the White House now, or who would be coming in with Harris, is just mindless "they're all the same"/"both sides are just as bad"-style pontificating. It really shows no awareness of the past eight years.
I'm not particularly afraid of some limited progressive ideas (call it moderate wokeness if you will) but "Look at the Biden Administration's record" isn't the best idea here. His staffers and policy people tried (and largely failed) to push some fairly leftish ideas for the first 2 years. Much more than was expected from the "return to normalcy" pitch that was made during Biden's campaign. Now that doesn't justify the "same-sideism" but I do expect Harris staffers to push the Overton window on their policies as far as they can, some of which will be thwarted, some of which will backfire, and some probably that gets rolled out as part of other initiatives. The bigger question is if any of that prevents otherwise more moderate policies, that would in practice move the needle more directionally left, because they are able to actually succeed (perfect being the enemy of the good here). Guys like Jeff and MattY have been calling the current administration to task on this the whole time. It seems like they got their act together on immigration and criminal justice, but I'm just not sure.
Good points. For me the uncertainty is this: is the woke stuff pushed by Biden staffers merely a bit of post 2020 hangover that is on the wane? Or is it indicative of “the future of the party” temporarily held in check by the party leadership that gave us Biden-Harris?
I got burned a bit by the “it’s all a bunch of college kids who will grow out of this stuff” dismissal in the 2010s when it turned out all those college kids were keeping their ideology intact and starting to bend institutions in that direction.
Ah yes, calling people Trumpanzees definitely convinces me that you’re approaching this with a charitable eye to someone genuinely right leaning but Trump-skeptical.
Rachel Levine still has a job. The administration is still pushing their Title IX stuff. Walz still has an education appointee helping define ethnic studies requirements who thinks the country is “irreversibly racist” and should be “overthrown”. Despite being “Big Tent”, I don’t see any evidence that the Harris admin would not throw a lot of bones to the identity politics crowd, and Harris hasn’t really pushed any of this stuff since her appointment, but she also hasn’t disavowed it. “My values haven’t changed”. “I can’t think of anything we’d do differently”.
My point is that “Sure [the president] may not be that bad but look at the kooks they are going to appoint to actually run things!” is an argument both sides are making, and it has legs with both sides.
I call Trumpanzees Trumpanzees precisely to distinguish them from the right-leaning anti-Trumpers.
I don't know what your problem is with Rachel Levine, but I'm 99% sure I don't want to hear any explanations, based on the rest of your post.
In conclusion, I estimate that you are pretty far to the right, which makes anything left of center seem radical to you. So be it. At least you identify as "Trump-skeptical." So, one point for that. Unfortunately, repeating the "both sides" thing costs you a penalty of ten points.
I don't assess the value of someone's thoughts on a particular issue based on what sort of label one might be attached to them.
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to read that piece closely enough to discuss it. I don't know why so many on the right are so obsessed with the transgender issue; I suspect for some it's just the new, fashionable bigotry that hasn't yet been completely dismissed as such; I suspect for others (like Sullivan) it's just the hot-button issue of the day -- due to rightwing hysteria -- and so of course as pundits, they are compelled to weigh in.
FWIW, I used to read Sullivan regularly, many years ago. Then he started announcing that he was ending his blogging career, and then starting it up elsewhere, and then ending it again, and eventually, it didn't seem worth trying to keep track. But back then, I read him because I considered him one of the "reasonable conservatives" -- someone with whom I was not always going to agree, but who at least had some respectable bases to support his arguments.
No evidence? How about everything she said when running for president in 2019? That really wasn’t a long time ago. It’s a legitimate concern that she runs centrist for 2 months and reverts back to 2019 Kamala Harris once elected. If democrats had dumped Biden sooner and chosen a real centrist, this election would not be close.
Dems: “the Republicans are a literal pack of wolves! To protect us and our beloved chicken coop from Pack of Wolves, you MUST vote ‘Fox-Weasel 2024’!”
I’ve been a proud not-Trump voter for 8 years and have no plans to change, but crap like this makes it really hard to take the extra step and actually endorse Harris.
The dude is bad. Why do you need to lie to me and condescend to me to make him seem even worse? I don’t like liars, but I really break out in hives around people convinced that lying is okey dokey when it’s for The Greater Good.
This MSNBC image is bad. That’s the thing about Trump he makes everyone worse not just his supporters. I think much less of Democrats because of how they react to Trump. Yes Trumps an asshole. He is not Hitler. When you say it the thing I learn is about how crazy you are not the thing you want me to learn about Trump.
Yep. There's a group of comedians -- Rickles first among them -- who are able to signal "I don't mean any of this." I used to open for Lisa Lampanelli; it's obvious to everyone that she's doing a bit. Hinchcliffe failed to establish that vibe. (and yes, I watched the whole thing)
No one really likes deconstructing a joke, but the Puerto Rico joke was worse (as in low-quality, not just offensive) than it seems. For at least a decade, there's been a joke format that's similar, but only makes sense in a context where the Great Pacific garbage patch could credibly be getting referenced but the joketeller instead fills in an actual island. For example, if the NYT publishes a headline like "The Ocean’s Biggest Garbage Pile Is Full of Floating Life" they retweet that with "yeah, they're called the English" and a picture of gammon or chavs at the beach. I've mostly seen the garbage island joke used on the UK, but I think I've also seen it reference Ibiza or other tourist destinations.
Of course, the point of the joke is that it subverts expectations. It seems like you're going to reference the giant garbage patch, but instead you say Great Britain. This is entirely lost when you just blurt out "There's a garbage island and it's called Puerto Rico". I wonder if it would have landed better if Tony had set it up by talking about environmental problems or microplastics pollution for a few lines, then brought up a garbage island. After a beat, he could clarify that he meant Puerto Rico. Or Long Island or Manhattan if he wanted a less sympathetic target.
Anyways, that my armchair comedian input. Next I'll tell you all what the Bears should have done on defense against the Commanders.
1) The Hinchcliffe thing seems to have traction. If so, it's not crying wolf, it's kicking them while they're down.
2) Fascism comes in many flavors. Trump would like to rule like Hitler, but we'd be more likely to get a retarded Orban, which is still a big fucking wolf to cry about. And as long as John Kelly's remarks that Trump wanted generals like Hitler's have traction, again, kick him while he's down.
I would be interested in your take on Kamala. Also on the weaponization of the justice system by the Biden/Kamala admin ( Obama/Clinton/Soros). The propaganda from the media to create a Hitler like state/fear. Instead of how bad you all think Trump is. Is anyone looking at Kamala’s corrupt past? How did she get into politics and how has she climbed the ladder when she can’t speak a coherent sentence without a teleprompter. Cleaning out the corruption by Trump is good for the country. We are in a fascist state now under this admin following the WEF’s agenda 2030. The lies/confusion is over whelming for most which is part of the plan. Look at how many days Kamala has shown up for work in all her positions and that she wouldn’t change a thing moving forward. God help us if she’s elected.
Weaponizing the justice system? Do you know who was actually convicted by federal prosecutors during the last two years?: not Trump, but the current president’s OWN SON. As a former career prosecutor, I can tell you the your claim is utterly baseless.
As a conservative Dem who might have considered a vote for Haley, of course there is corruption everywhere, and I dont care for Harris, but you seem totally removed from reality and just giving party lines. Only one candidate said they would consider ignoring the Constitution. That for me is just an immediate no vote. It is like saying that you dont believe in free speech. Only one candidate in the last 150 years has refused to concede an election that he clearly lost. Sure, everybody has some dirty laundry, but if you think that they are equivalent, you have drunk the Kool Aid.
Yes, they all lie to some degree, as do you and me, we are humans, but I knew in 2016 when Trump spent two years propagating the absurd Obama Birther lie that this was a different level of lying, just like Jewish apace lasers, and Pizza gate. I dont see Trump as having a filter any more than Alex Jones. He knows he lost the election. He knows Obama was born in Hawaii. He knows that Muslims did not cheer in NJ after 9/11 and he knew that Haitians weren't eating dogs and cats. Let me amend that, he might not have fact checked it actually, but his modus is to say anything that helps him get over, rather than to check anything out.
There is no equivalence between Trump and whatever spin the Dems do, or for that matter a normie Republican like Haley. They are in different universes.
I liked this piece generally, but it is interesting that you can only see the threat of what DJT might potentially hypothetically do to our rules and norms based system, rather than the threat from what the DNC order has done, and is actively doing
I am disappointed my choice at the top of the ticket comes down to Harris Trump. But personally I am much more worried about the threat from the former than the latter.
The stuff you write at the end that Trump might do are really really bad. Eroding rule of law and our democracy are the biggest nightmares I have about another Trump presidency. That stuff easily makes Trump match the text book definition of a Fascist.
I guess I should add I still agree with the overall premise of the post and think using comparisons to actual Nazis actually detracts from the argument being made rather than strengthening it. Perhaps we just disagree on where the line is that converts “wolf” to “several wolves”.
It was so bizarre to see the media suddenly decide that Madison fucking Square Garden was a well known notorious irredeemably Nazi tainted building as if there haven’t been a million other events there since including Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton rallies and also it’s not the same building since it was rebuilt in 1968. Looking forward to hearing how the Knicks (or should I say Knizis?) need to renounce MSG and move to a different venue immediately.
I went to a Harry Styles concert there with my wife in 2022. That's basically just like Triumph Of The Will, if it were a film starring mostly teenage girls, some of whom are vaping through pretty much the entire movie.
It's also technically, not the Madison Square Garden where Nazi rally occurred. That was the 3rd MSG, located between 49th and 50th St on the block between 8th and 9th Ave. (The space is now called the Urban Plaza at World Wide Plaza).
It is amazing watching the Borg establish narratives in real time.
Fun fact, the German American Bund held 1 Nazi rally at Madison Square Garden in 1939, the American Communist Party held a rally there in 1940. So why is it not Socialist to hold a rally there?
It's the potential new Trump cabinet I'm most concerned about. His former cabinet kept things in check and did their jobs, along with lots of longtime government personnel. Those safeguards may be gone in a new administration. He is who he is.
By comparison, the potential Harris cabinet likely will be more centrist and retain valuable current government personnel to keep things in order. She is who she is, and seems to understand that she isn't everything.
I don't know if that's worth two cents but it's where I am now.
I agree, the cabinet matters a ton. Especially the Attorney General; if Trump gets a true toady as AG (Barr was close but even he eventually turned on Trump!), we could witness some truly shocking things.
Enjoyed the article tremendously (Thanks!) and realize the predictions weren't really the point (though might make an interest "I Might Be Wrong"). But (respectfully, of course) whaddya mean "if". I've been trying to comfort myself with Trump's work ethic and organization as well, but as far as he's concerned the biggest failure of his presidency was not enough toadies (cabinet and agencies and trickle down from there). I resisted "toadies all the way down", but the toadies--some energetic and organized--will be the number 1 policy priority of a second term (fueled by number 1 motivation--his only motivation--of "what's good for me") ... now with a seemingly way larger pool of identifiable "qualified" applicants and way fewer guardrails ... seems to me anyone with Flynn-level baggage would coast in. Trump (you know I have to admit to at least a little derangement when typing his name feels like typing Voldemort) has pretty effectively neutralized any power Truth can have against him. I'd expect more of that guardrail dismantling in a second term--and third. I'm not smart enough to understand the practical feasibility of the mechanics or what would come of all of it, but it worries me. Just all seems a recipe for he-and-they-can-do-bad-stuff-and-get-away-with-it. And whereas very big abuses + potential for gross, existential abuses don't equal actual gross, existential abuses (his performance with COVID excepted, also I expect him to fold on Ukraine), that we have to split those hairs is depressing. As is the trending.
I'm desperately hoping that's what J.D. Vance is really doing, pretending to be totally gaga-MAGA so he can have some restraining influence over Trump.
My secret hope is the JDV is sort of like Lyndon Johnson - purely interested in power but also smart and clever. If Trump expires in office (seems likely given his diet and throbbing aorta) JDV takes over and supported by his Edith Wilson-style intelligent wife decides that being centrist is what will keep him in office for two terms and have a future Robert Cato write a giant book about him.
Yes- JDV is a moron, his wife will secretly run the administration with her vastly superior intellect. Genius take!
The left cannot fret about Trump potentially breaking norms that they have already trashed. The left has already abandoned the concept of equal protection under the law, and has already done everything it can to break media outlets that don't single-mindedly push its propaganda.
If Trump wins, I hope he doesn't waste political oxygen settling old scores, but that doesn't mean a lot of democrats don't deserve it.
Have another potato, comrade. The false equivalence gambit at this point is beyond nonsensical .
Sorry, freedom of speech and equal protection under the law are important concepts to me.
That Russia gag never gets old, does it.
Do you people have mirrors in your alternative universe. I feel like Bobbi Fleckman explaining to Ian Faith why Polymer Records rejected the cover for Smell The Glove.
And you guys are like Nigel Tufnel asking "What's wrong with being sexy?"
The Dems, and I am a centrist one, ascribe to this magical thinking that after Trump's 13,943rd idiocy the bell is going to go off and people will awake.
The best way to defeat Trump and Trumpism is to make our opposition better, and as Maher recently stated, if Harris, when asked the question by FOX new, if she would do anything different from the very unpopular Biden administration, you can only say "I can't think of anything" then don't be surprised if you get your clock cleaned.
I notice that on the yard signs around here all of Trump's are issue focused- Trump to reduce crime, Trump for a secure border, Trump for not doing sex surgery on prisoners, whereas Harris signs just say Harris/Walz. I dont think her arguments, other than abortion are getting through and that might be why she is currently polling about 8 points behind where Biden was in 2020.
“hot Asian MILFs” is redundant
Yes, the comparisons with 1939 are overwrought, although I don't doubt that MSG was chosen to jerk liberal chains. But more fundamentally, I think you're wrong.
This wasn't a comedy club performance. A rally like this is supposed to show your candidate's goals and values, and a joke calling Puerto Rico a floating garbage dump, or Tucker Carlson making fun of Harris ethnic background by calling her a "Samoan Malaysian low IQ" whatever, well, those are statements that mean the candidate thinks that Puerto Ricans are garbage and Harris's ethnic background obviously means she shouldn't be president.
And if you listen to the tone of the speakers saying this crap, it's not joking, it's anger. Anger that Harris has the nerve to run for President.
And no, I'm not one of those politically correct a-holes criticizing comics. I like Dave Chappell. I listened to post-cancellation Louis CK until I got bored with his "Woe is me" shtick.
But like the RomneyBot 3000's "47%" comment, if you listen to the MSG rally, you know in your heart of hearts this is what they really think of you.
I think we agree that the rally featured a lot of terrible stuff, as Trump and his movement feature a lot of terrible stuff, generally. My point is that when something that maybe registers an "8" on the one-to-ten terrible scale gets reported as a "10", that allows a narrative to develop that the terribleness is being exaggerated. And, annoyingly, the narrative will be partly true. And that leads to some people mentally writing off the whole episode.
At the bottom of this piece, I linked to my piece from two years ago called "'OMG Stop Freaking Out!!!' is a Bad Response to Right-Wing Freak-Outs". That's because I'm making basically the same point, but with the roles reversed. In that scenario, there will be some dumb woke thing, and some on the left will skip to "the right is completely freaking out" without adding "though the dumb woke thing is legitimately dumb". They just react to the reaction. And the same dynamic (with the roles reversed) is happening here: The right is focusing on the liberal reaction without actually confronting the bad thing, and I think they should be forced to confront the bad thing.
My main point is that the standards here, not just for Hinchcliffe but the other speakers as well, are higher than for a comedy club.
I don't really see myself as freaking out about this election. If 51% of the population losing the right to medical care for failing pregnancy, the prospect of losing health insurance that covers pre-existing conditions, the 1/6 riot, the prospect of even more tax cuts for the rich, Trump's kowtowing to Russia, and Trump's overall freakish and failing behavior, don't push Harris over the finish line, then either:
1 -- there really is something in our water that's as damaging as lead in the water supply, and historians in a later era will use that to explain this century, or
2 -- this country isn't the country I think it is *
* Yes, I read Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72. And volunteered for the McGovern campaign for that matter. I'm still optimistic.
I actually think you're saying "OMG stop freaking out" more than being the rastional voice you think you are being.
I believe the difference is OMG stop freaking out, is a valid reaction to your own side, when they're overreacting.
I worry about the people Trump is going to hire to do all the work while he watches Fox news until noon.
Project 2025 is a real guidebook not some fantasy wishlist.....
Which is more real. Project 2025 or the green new deal?
Why can’t I get an answer!
Spot on and so fucking obvious. I don’t even think Trump WANTS the responsibility of governing. He’s running to kill the eminintly legit federal prosecutions if he loses. Once that’s accomplished he’ll either serve as a doddering, raving figurehead or get bounced pursuant to the 25th Amendment, possibly by his own sycophants. But others far smarter, far more energetic and far more ideologically committed know he’ll provide them the keys to the castle once elected. BTW, yeah I get the point about hyperbole on the Left and, occasionally, Center Left, but that flaming asshole’s pathetic attempt at comedy at Puerto Rico’s expense is totally fair game as campaign fodder. And indeed the Trump campaign does seem shit scared about the blow back.
"Consider that implementing a fascist vision takes work, and Trump’s work ethic makes Homer Simpson look like Thomas Edison."
No argument there. The problem is that he will bring on board hundreds of people who are fired up and eager to ruin the country in a thousand different ways. And because Trump is so lazy, he'll just sign off on everything they put in front of him.
I mean, flip that around and it’s the same argument for why someone right leaning can’t vote for Kamala. “Sure, she says nice moderate things but she’s just a word salad figurehead and we know she’s gonna appoint a bunch of woke ideologues like Rachel Levine.”
Neither side’s fringe should be let anywhere near the levers of power and if it comes down to “whose fringe is going to be more effective at doing their scary fringe shit”, that’s a place where things start getting fuzzier.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy this. As with many analogies, just saying "this is like that" doesn't make it so.
I mean, I'm not disputing that there are people out there who really believe that Kamala Harris is bent on creating the New Woke Marxist Paradise or whatever, but come on. That's nothing but brain rot that comes from living on a diet of FoxNews™ and MAGAt tweets.
There is no evidence to suggest that Harris will be anything different from every other Democratic president since back to Bill Clinton at least: a few left-leaning ideas, maybe, but more emphasis on trying to build and sustain the proverbial big tent. Look at the Biden Administration's record -- it'll probably be pretty much like that.
To suggest that the Trumpanzees that would be coming into power are just a mirror image of the Dem staffers in the White House now, or who would be coming in with Harris, is just mindless "they're all the same"/"both sides are just as bad"-style pontificating. It really shows no awareness of the past eight years.
I'm not particularly afraid of some limited progressive ideas (call it moderate wokeness if you will) but "Look at the Biden Administration's record" isn't the best idea here. His staffers and policy people tried (and largely failed) to push some fairly leftish ideas for the first 2 years. Much more than was expected from the "return to normalcy" pitch that was made during Biden's campaign. Now that doesn't justify the "same-sideism" but I do expect Harris staffers to push the Overton window on their policies as far as they can, some of which will be thwarted, some of which will backfire, and some probably that gets rolled out as part of other initiatives. The bigger question is if any of that prevents otherwise more moderate policies, that would in practice move the needle more directionally left, because they are able to actually succeed (perfect being the enemy of the good here). Guys like Jeff and MattY have been calling the current administration to task on this the whole time. It seems like they got their act together on immigration and criminal justice, but I'm just not sure.
Good points. For me the uncertainty is this: is the woke stuff pushed by Biden staffers merely a bit of post 2020 hangover that is on the wane? Or is it indicative of “the future of the party” temporarily held in check by the party leadership that gave us Biden-Harris?
I got burned a bit by the “it’s all a bunch of college kids who will grow out of this stuff” dismissal in the 2010s when it turned out all those college kids were keeping their ideology intact and starting to bend institutions in that direction.
Noted. I'm sorry, but I don't really have the energy right now to discuss the nuances you have brought up.
Ah yes, calling people Trumpanzees definitely convinces me that you’re approaching this with a charitable eye to someone genuinely right leaning but Trump-skeptical.
Rachel Levine still has a job. The administration is still pushing their Title IX stuff. Walz still has an education appointee helping define ethnic studies requirements who thinks the country is “irreversibly racist” and should be “overthrown”. Despite being “Big Tent”, I don’t see any evidence that the Harris admin would not throw a lot of bones to the identity politics crowd, and Harris hasn’t really pushed any of this stuff since her appointment, but she also hasn’t disavowed it. “My values haven’t changed”. “I can’t think of anything we’d do differently”.
My point is that “Sure [the president] may not be that bad but look at the kooks they are going to appoint to actually run things!” is an argument both sides are making, and it has legs with both sides.
I call Trumpanzees Trumpanzees precisely to distinguish them from the right-leaning anti-Trumpers.
I don't know what your problem is with Rachel Levine, but I'm 99% sure I don't want to hear any explanations, based on the rest of your post.
In conclusion, I estimate that you are pretty far to the right, which makes anything left of center seem radical to you. So be it. At least you identify as "Trump-skeptical." So, one point for that. Unfortunately, repeating the "both sides" thing costs you a penalty of ten points.
https://open.substack.com/pub/andrewsullivan/p/rachel-levine-must-resign-2d7?r=3s99g&utm_medium=ios
Is Andrew Sullivan “far right”?
I don't assess the value of someone's thoughts on a particular issue based on what sort of label one might be attached to them.
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to read that piece closely enough to discuss it. I don't know why so many on the right are so obsessed with the transgender issue; I suspect for some it's just the new, fashionable bigotry that hasn't yet been completely dismissed as such; I suspect for others (like Sullivan) it's just the hot-button issue of the day -- due to rightwing hysteria -- and so of course as pundits, they are compelled to weigh in.
FWIW, I used to read Sullivan regularly, many years ago. Then he started announcing that he was ending his blogging career, and then starting it up elsewhere, and then ending it again, and eventually, it didn't seem worth trying to keep track. But back then, I read him because I considered him one of the "reasonable conservatives" -- someone with whom I was not always going to agree, but who at least had some respectable bases to support his arguments.
No evidence? How about everything she said when running for president in 2019? That really wasn’t a long time ago. It’s a legitimate concern that she runs centrist for 2 months and reverts back to 2019 Kamala Harris once elected. If democrats had dumped Biden sooner and chosen a real centrist, this election would not be close.
Dems: “the Republicans are a literal pack of wolves! To protect us and our beloved chicken coop from Pack of Wolves, you MUST vote ‘Fox-Weasel 2024’!”
I’ve been a proud not-Trump voter for 8 years and have no plans to change, but crap like this makes it really hard to take the extra step and actually endorse Harris.
The dude is bad. Why do you need to lie to me and condescend to me to make him seem even worse? I don’t like liars, but I really break out in hives around people convinced that lying is okey dokey when it’s for The Greater Good.
This MSNBC image is bad. That’s the thing about Trump he makes everyone worse not just his supporters. I think much less of Democrats because of how they react to Trump. Yes Trumps an asshole. He is not Hitler. When you say it the thing I learn is about how crazy you are not the thing you want me to learn about Trump.
Anthony Jeselnik truly is awesome!
You can see him winking a mile away and it says "come laugh with me."
Yep. There's a group of comedians -- Rickles first among them -- who are able to signal "I don't mean any of this." I used to open for Lisa Lampanelli; it's obvious to everyone that she's doing a bit. Hinchcliffe failed to establish that vibe. (and yes, I watched the whole thing)
No one really likes deconstructing a joke, but the Puerto Rico joke was worse (as in low-quality, not just offensive) than it seems. For at least a decade, there's been a joke format that's similar, but only makes sense in a context where the Great Pacific garbage patch could credibly be getting referenced but the joketeller instead fills in an actual island. For example, if the NYT publishes a headline like "The Ocean’s Biggest Garbage Pile Is Full of Floating Life" they retweet that with "yeah, they're called the English" and a picture of gammon or chavs at the beach. I've mostly seen the garbage island joke used on the UK, but I think I've also seen it reference Ibiza or other tourist destinations.
Of course, the point of the joke is that it subverts expectations. It seems like you're going to reference the giant garbage patch, but instead you say Great Britain. This is entirely lost when you just blurt out "There's a garbage island and it's called Puerto Rico". I wonder if it would have landed better if Tony had set it up by talking about environmental problems or microplastics pollution for a few lines, then brought up a garbage island. After a beat, he could clarify that he meant Puerto Rico. Or Long Island or Manhattan if he wanted a less sympathetic target.
Anyways, that my armchair comedian input. Next I'll tell you all what the Bears should have done on defense against the Commanders.
Here's a typical example from 9 months ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/gojira/comments/1afm5i8/are_they_talking_about_uk/
Two observations:
1) The Hinchcliffe thing seems to have traction. If so, it's not crying wolf, it's kicking them while they're down.
2) Fascism comes in many flavors. Trump would like to rule like Hitler, but we'd be more likely to get a retarded Orban, which is still a big fucking wolf to cry about. And as long as John Kelly's remarks that Trump wanted generals like Hitler's have traction, again, kick him while he's down.
I would be interested in your take on Kamala. Also on the weaponization of the justice system by the Biden/Kamala admin ( Obama/Clinton/Soros). The propaganda from the media to create a Hitler like state/fear. Instead of how bad you all think Trump is. Is anyone looking at Kamala’s corrupt past? How did she get into politics and how has she climbed the ladder when she can’t speak a coherent sentence without a teleprompter. Cleaning out the corruption by Trump is good for the country. We are in a fascist state now under this admin following the WEF’s agenda 2030. The lies/confusion is over whelming for most which is part of the plan. Look at how many days Kamala has shown up for work in all her positions and that she wouldn’t change a thing moving forward. God help us if she’s elected.
Weaponizing the justice system? Do you know who was actually convicted by federal prosecutors during the last two years?: not Trump, but the current president’s OWN SON. As a former career prosecutor, I can tell you the your claim is utterly baseless.
As a conservative Dem who might have considered a vote for Haley, of course there is corruption everywhere, and I dont care for Harris, but you seem totally removed from reality and just giving party lines. Only one candidate said they would consider ignoring the Constitution. That for me is just an immediate no vote. It is like saying that you dont believe in free speech. Only one candidate in the last 150 years has refused to concede an election that he clearly lost. Sure, everybody has some dirty laundry, but if you think that they are equivalent, you have drunk the Kool Aid.
Yes, they all lie to some degree, as do you and me, we are humans, but I knew in 2016 when Trump spent two years propagating the absurd Obama Birther lie that this was a different level of lying, just like Jewish apace lasers, and Pizza gate. I dont see Trump as having a filter any more than Alex Jones. He knows he lost the election. He knows Obama was born in Hawaii. He knows that Muslims did not cheer in NJ after 9/11 and he knew that Haitians weren't eating dogs and cats. Let me amend that, he might not have fact checked it actually, but his modus is to say anything that helps him get over, rather than to check anything out.
There is no equivalence between Trump and whatever spin the Dems do, or for that matter a normie Republican like Haley. They are in different universes.
I liked this piece generally, but it is interesting that you can only see the threat of what DJT might potentially hypothetically do to our rules and norms based system, rather than the threat from what the DNC order has done, and is actively doing
I am disappointed my choice at the top of the ticket comes down to Harris Trump. But personally I am much more worried about the threat from the former than the latter.
The stuff you write at the end that Trump might do are really really bad. Eroding rule of law and our democracy are the biggest nightmares I have about another Trump presidency. That stuff easily makes Trump match the text book definition of a Fascist.
I guess I should add I still agree with the overall premise of the post and think using comparisons to actual Nazis actually detracts from the argument being made rather than strengthening it. Perhaps we just disagree on where the line is that converts “wolf” to “several wolves”.