HaroldWilson
3mo ago
Hanania's entire method here is to present a parade of horribles from the Trump administration, some of them still hypothetical, and to quietly allow all previous disasters to sink into unmentioned obscurity.
The scales here are totally different. There is no policy from the Biden administration that even comes close to the destructive idiocy of these tariffs, and more saliently for Hanania's point, no policy more ill-thought through. He couldn't even be bothered to properly calculate a reciprocal tariff!
HaroldWilson
8mo ago
violently disrupt the 2017 inauguration
There is simply no comparison here. Here is what Hillary said on it becoming clear she would lose;
We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought. But I still believe in America and I always will. And if you do, then we must accept this result and then look to the future. Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead.
There is nothing Trump ever said with one hundredth the degree of grace and humility in her concession, and it wasn't even a particularly exceptional concession speech.
Further, Democratic-allied members of the government bureaucracy both supported false information (e.g. the Steele dossier) and falsely denigrated true information (the Hunter Biden laptop)
Again none of this is on the scale of Trump's contempt for the democratic process. This is not really much different from the general rough and tumble of political life - the Republicans had been dishing out similar nonsense for years. Members of Congress openly indulged birtherism! While I would no doubt question your interpretation of the Trump/Russia or laptop episodes, even if I accept Democrats were knowingly lying, politicians lying is not something new. Major politicians refusing to concede elections is.
When a Democrat says 'I just want to find [the number of votes it would take to change the outcome]', then I'll worry about them as much as Trump.
HaroldWilson
4mo ago
'Twas ever thus. The idea that states not co-operating with or even obstructing the Federal government in the exercise of its powers is some sinster and unchartered political development is obviously absurd. The Fugitive Slave Law, Reconstruction and the black codes, prohibition, desegregation etc. etc. What is actually the problem, and more abnormal, here, is the federal government using the legal system to intimidate and blackmail political opponents into doing what they want (and before some retard starts moaning about the Trump cases, they were not conditional on anything, they were just prosecutions that were attempted to be carried through to their conclusion, and stood or fell on the merits, not on political cooperation). If the charges are real and would stand up, they should be carried through, not dismissed to get a quid pro quo.
HaroldWilson
6mo ago
That certain companies are drifting away from DEI doesn't imply that that the relative prevalence of DEI policies is largely a function of government disposition, nor even that those programs were uneconomical or counter-productive. In many ways it seems likely that extensive DEI stuff was a zero-interest rate phenomenon. When capital was scrambling about for productive uses, putting some of it into DEI to try to improve hiring/retention/productivity may have been perfectly rational, even if it has ceased to be now interest rates are higher.
HaroldWilson
2mo ago
As others have gestured at, this is just a rehash of the sanctuary cities arguments from Trump 1. The problem with using state courts/police as a convenient piggyback for immigration enforcement is that is encourages illegal immigrants to never show up at court or co-operate with police ever, either for their own minor offences or as witnesses etc.
HaroldWilson
8mo ago
I remember other discussions on this forum. Inflation and unemployment data. Long arguments about not trusting the economic data. This is why. These figures are totally arbitrary. There is no neutral competent adults-in-the-room authority anymore. Everything is this bad.
This is just intellectual cowardice. Ignoring for a second that this particular controversy is a total nothingburger (see my reply to @gattsuru), statistics which are in some sense 'constructed' are the only way of understanding any large scale and complex societal phenomena, whether it be crime, inflation or whatever else, and the solution if you don't trust the people constructing them is to investigate the particular processes by which any particular one is constructed to see what flaws there are/might be, whether they be minor or totally disqualifying. Otherwise, there is simply no point discussing anything.
Says to the extent that the figures weren't made up, they have basically no basis to reality
Congratulations, this is an observation every undergraduate social scientist and humanities students has about 6 weeks into their studies - in the same sense this is true, history books also have no 'basis to reality' - they are necessarily vast abstractions and simplifications of an infinite amount of possible evidence. Like E.H. Carr says, evidence is like fish in the sea, not in fish on the fishmonger's block, and we are all groping around in the dark in the face of impossibly vast and complex problems of social measurement. However, we don't on that basis dismiss history as a worthless enterprise with no truth value, and nor should it be with statistics. If you find the FBI or the Treasury's statistical work inadequate or too easily manipulable, please don't ever read quantitative history, you might have a heart attack.
HaroldWilson
4mo ago
not running an uncalled for and unbecoming smear campaign against Romney
I think this is a little silly. Without wishing to start the endless and pointless 'who started it' conversations, the idea that the Romney 'smear' campaign was some turning point in the breakdown of partisan relations is I think not very likely. After all Republicans ran their own set of vituperative ads in the 2012, including 'small business owners' getting faux-outraged at the stupid 'you didn't build that' (mis-)quotation and that work/welfare ad making a bare-faced lie about welfare reform. At least Bain actually did close that factory in that Obama ad.
I don't think there was ever a realistic off-ramp from where America is now, but it isn't that bad, all things considered. At least Senators don't beat each other near to death these days. Trump is pretty unique and when he sees out his term of dies I think the populist right probably loses its momentum and things start to cool down again, especially when it becomes apparent that all he will have achieved is some tax cuts which outweigh by a factor of a zillion any savings from cutting 'bureaucracy'.
HaroldWilson
15d ago
the left worshiped him.
Maybe for a short while but left-wing opinion turned cool on Obama surprisingly quickly, and the 'anti-imperialist' Chomskyite left never liked him. As early as 2009 not-exactly-radical-lefist Bill Maher said that:
Barack Obama is not a socialist -- he’s not even a liberal....this country needs a left wing. It doesn’t have it, and part of the reason is the media... I don’t know if this administration has really caught up to the idea that Americans are a lot more liberal, perhaps, than we think they are- or they think they are
More importantly, I think the election denial/J6 clearly puts MAGA a class apart from any other modern American political movement in terms of cultishness.
HaroldWilson
1mo ago
Very dependent on individual experience, of course, but it definitely seems like Twitter is much more of a slop factory under Musk. If we just look at things which are not just directly related to the changed political valence of the platform, scams and bots are way more prevalent than they used to be, even paid advertisements are pushing scams and the comments under any big post are utterly worthless because of the boosting of blue-check replies
HaroldWilson
2mo ago
naked attacks on suburbanites by urban enthusiasts
If you like the suburbs so much then don't go to Manhattan, nobody is forcing you to do so.
HaroldWilson
3mo ago
Why should my state put the interest of someone who has zero right to be here above mine?
The point is that the same logic which is being applied here could be used to deport and abandon citizens. Just ignore due process, do what you want and then, oops, looks like you're in a tinpot dictatorship now so nothing we can do because there's no way to redress your grievance.
'I don't care about due process because this guy was guilty anyway' is not a very coherent position.
HaroldWilson
9mo ago
who had to have the rest of the party candidates drop out
I never understand this line. Is the idea that all of the moderate candidates were just going to keep splitting the vote right up until the convention, and then just, idk, let Bernie have it on a plurality or something? The dynamics of primaries demand that candidates drop out to endorse similarly positioned frontrunners. Do you think it's just a coincidence the 2016 and 2008 Democratic primaries also become two-horse races?
and couldn't manage to get anyone to show up when he did'
'Enthusiasm' is overrated. For every Obama or Trump there is a Starmer or Scholz who coasts by on the incompetence or divisiveness of their opponent - that is definitely not unique to Biden. Similarly;
secretly such a charismatic candidate that he shattered voting results
The obvious explanation is negative polarisation - maybe Biden didn't drive huge turnout himself, but it's very plausible to Trump did both for and against him.
I am also to simply ignore Georgia closing up polling stations due to a water main bursting, sending observers home, then dumping votes that went 100% for Biden that were totally already counted before Republican observers were given the boot, nothing to see here, it's honestly disturbing you'd even think to question such a thing, really. I am to simply take in stride that observers were kicked out, and windows blocked from outside observation, totall normal, totally legit, only a loony would think there might even be the barest scintilla of a possibility that something untoward was going on.
This is just nonsense. The water main 'bursting' happened a 6 a.m. on the morning of election day, disrupting things for a few hours, way before any shift towards Biden was beginning to be observed. There was no big tranche for Biden co-incident with the water problem. The whole kicking out observers thing I have only ever seen reported third-hand by people like Giuliani - the Chief Investigator of the SOS's offices has testified that this never occurred, no doubt you don't trust her but I'm curious what in particular convinces you this did happen.
HaroldWilson
2mo ago
"using it as it was meant to be used?"
Fundamentally he seems either deliberately unwilling or simply unable to comprehend that the interviewer is asking about means rather than ends. Saying 'I was elected to close the borders/change our terms of trade' is just a total non-sequitur response to the question 'have you expanded the powers of the presidency'. It would be one thing to say 'I don't care about process, I care about results', but he doesn't say that, he's just talking past the question.
HaroldWilson
6mo ago
the movement
What movement? Trump heads no movement (no global one anyway), he has no ideology other than narcissism and vague sentimentalism about the past. He has no coherent ideal or theory about how the world system ought to work in the way that Wilson, FDR, H.W. Bush or Churchill did, certainly none that can be reconciled with his actions - or inaction - as President first time round.
HaroldWilson
8mo ago
If you're not voting with reference to the outcome, why bother going at all? If it's just a question of making yourself feel better, stay at home and throw darts at a picture of Kamala Harris, and let the people who actually care about who becomes President do the voting.
HaroldWilson
8mo ago
This is the exact kind of thinking he is criticising. It would be more than a little narcissistic to choose whom to elect as President based on where each of the candidates fits into your own personal psychodrama (his word not mine) - that might be the narrative most personally compelling to him, but it isn't objectively of any importance compared to everything else at stake in the election. Voting isn't a question of 'aid and comfort', it's a dispassionate selection between the range of options offered to you. And Scott is saying that one shouldn't let personal animus or revulsion lead one into an erroneous selection. If one objects to Harris on the grounds she is closely associated with the broader cultural milieu that 'cancelled' Scott, one must also consider that Trump is personally extremely quick to 'cancel' or attempt to do so, and you aren't released from that obligation of considering what the alternative is just because you really hate the left-liberal establishment.
HaroldWilson
9mo ago
This line of thought is actually highly atypical. Even in 2022/2023 iirc a majority of Americans rated their own economic circumstances as good/improving, they just thought the country as a whole wasn't.
HaroldWilson
1mo ago
If you believe this you probably consume too much low-quality media. Turn off the TV and pick up the Financial Times, Economist or other such prestige publications.
HaroldWilson
2mo ago
writing indigenous studies slop essays
If you are at an elite-ish university like Columbia and you are writing 'slop' essays that is almost certainly entirely your own fault, or at least a failure in your own imagination. Even in the most modish areas the questions they are grappling with are almost always interesting and important, even if one disagrees with the way those questions are presented and the assumptions within them (incidentally, there is nothing examiners love more, no matter their outlook, than answers which 'interrogate' the question set). I doubt there is a single humanities essay/coursework/examination question at Columbia to which an intelligent and engaged student could not engage with in an enriching and interesting way.
HaroldWilson
2mo ago
This might be more compelling if MAGA ever criticised Trump when he goes the other direction. When the tariffs came out MAGA defended them as sound economic policy. When he backtracked they still defended them as a brilliant negotiating tactic, despite having supported them in substance days before.
HaroldWilson
2mo ago
s Prima notes, the Supreme Court did not order a result. The courts that have denied 'make easier' efforts as sufficient facilitation are lower courts. Tthe Supreme Court has not specifically weighed in on their ability to demand a result versus an effort.
This is currently a moot point given that the Trump administration hasn't put in any effort whatsoever. If he asks Bukele to send him back and he says no, then we can move to the question of whether that is sufficient attempt at 'facilitation'.
HaroldWilson
3mo ago
It's pretty amazing that the solution to the harm caused by liberal immigration policy is to give even more money to liberals in the department of economic equity to distribute according to equity metrics designed by some other liberal consultant from harvard.
Don't be facetious. The proportion of money redistributed via welfare which goes to administration of that welfare is pretty low, and that mostly consists of ordinary administrative workers not high-level policy wonks.
Like all those "teaching coal miners to learn to code" programs that, wow, didn't get any coal miners good jobs, but sure did hand out a lot of money to the kind of people whose nonprofits run those programs.
Lol. To the extent that 'learn to code' was ever a real policy, which it never really was, the vast vast majority of the funding changes downstream of that discourse didn't go to non-profits. In any case what I meant by redistribution was, well, redistribution.
It's so obvious to anyone on the outside how relentlessly self-serving this leftist managerial ideology is, how is it seemingly impossible to notice from the inside?
Lazy and trite. There are problems with left-wing non-profits, especially in the post-Floyd period, but that has nothing to do with genuine government redistributive programmes which do a lot of good and have relatively low overheads.
HaroldWilson
3mo ago
Democrats' rhetoric surrounding immigration and wages has always stood out to me as an obvious example of politically-motivated doublethink. "The experts" are asking us to hold two contradictory axioms simultaneously. One is that maintaining a supply of "off the books" labor is essential to the survival of multiple industries (such as roofing and agriculture) and that ideally we should be increasing the supply of labor to reduce costs (ie wages) even further. The other is that the available supply of labor has has little if any effect on wages (ie costs).
These are not contradictory because immigrant (especially illegal immigrant) and native pools of labour are not easy substitutes, they have very different skill mixes - and when I say 'skills', I don't mean that American citizens are all accountants or nuclear engineers, I mean in the most basic sense. Hence because of complementary task specialisation it is possible for new illegal immigrants to, on average, depress the wages of other illegal immigrants but not, on average, natives, and for such influxes to improve native productivity. It's a bit of a waste of a median American to be working in the fields, but in a constricted labour market wages in non-skilled fields get pushed up until people are pulled out into those fields, which is bad for productivity and standards of living in the long run. In a way it's the logic of automation.
Of course, there will be some in the American citizen labour pool (especially, ironically, recent legal immigrants) who are similarly unskilled to the average illegal immigrant, but the way to remedy that is via fiscal policy and redistribution of the native productivity gains which immigration facilitates.
HaroldWilson
5mo ago
We cannot sustainably be the world’s sugar daddy, protector, doctor, infrastructure manager and nature conservator.
Are you really suggesting that the <1% of GDP the US currently spends on foreign aid is some kind of unsustainable luxury? It's a rounding error as far the deficit is concerned.
This takes the cake for the biggest load of nonsense I have ever read. It blusters a lot with only a few actual points made in defence of the notion that government economic statistics failed to capture true economic conditions post-Covid, all of which are very silly indeed.
In the first place I am disinclined to give this any credence because their calculations are very opaque. Even if you got to their website the 'data' section and 'white paper' for their 'True Living Cost' don't seem to give their actual weights or the changes in weightings (other that impressionistic statements like saying that 'luxuries' have been deweighted). However, even if I could trust their numbers it doesn't at all resolve the 'vibecession' question because based on TLC the Trump years were ones of economic decline too. However, the economic discourse in those years was uniformly positive. So what gives?
Aside from the fairly preposterous gambit of saying that we can count some people in full-time employment as unemployed if their wage is too low (words have meanings, if you want to talk about wages then just do, don't crowbar it in to unemployment figures). More importantly though, what you will see again is that his 'true' unemployment figure tracks exactly the common U-3 figure over the years. So again it's totally worthless in explaining post-Covid dissatisfaction because the post-Covid 'true' rate was actually the lowest it has ever been since his data series starts in the 90s.
This is insultingly dishonest. Why does he say 'since 2013' in an article about the post-Covid economy? Because the trend doesn't hold true - after over a decade of sharply rising inequality, the 2021-23 period was actually saw bottom quintile income rise as a proportion of top quintile income.
This article is utterly irrelevant to post-Covid economic perceptions. What is might prove, if one believes the statistics, is that Americans ought to have been pessimistic about the economy throughout the 90s, 2000s and 2010s as well as post-Covid. But they frequently weren't. It still doesn't answer the question of why Americans get specifically upset in the post-Covid period.
Couldn't resist just dwelling on this for a second too. Now, obviously no-one has to buy into avant-garde views of gender/sex, but to be simply unable to entertain the plausibility of a scheme of gender which includes trans women among women betrays a quite remarkable lack of intellectual imagination, and, frankly, intelligence.
This is talk radio 'why are my enemies all so thick' slop. Take it elsewhere.
More options
Context Copy link