DirtyWaterHotDog
No bio...
User ID: 625
MAGAs must make up their minds about whom they dislike first.
Are you worried about demographic replacement, elite takeover or unintegrated criminals ?
"Stop all non-white immigration" may resonate in some circles, but isn't representative of American or Trump voter preferences.
In response to the Afghan national
His actions are in reaction to unintegrated criminals, primarily from Islamist nations. Why would you expect it to affect Mexico, India or the Philippines ?
Trump's post only vaguely points to his intentions vis-a-vis legal migrants.
end all Federal benefits and subsidies to noncitizens of our Country, These goals will be pursued with the aim of achieving a major reduction in illegal and disruptive populations - Trump
Lets see.
This would imply removal of benefits for all green card holders ? Visa holders don't get federal benefits anyway. Immigrants must pay into social security, pay taxes and rising visa fees. All while being ineligible for benefits. Cool. What was that about taxation without representation ?
denaturalize migrants who undermine domestic tranquility, and deport any Foreign National who is a public charge, security risk, or non-compatible with Western Civilization. - Trump
Americans already agree that violent felons who lied on their naturalization doc should be deported. Visa & green card holders with felonies are already banned from reentry. Outside existing norms (terrorism, child predator, Nazi), it is very hard to de-naturalize an American who got their citizenship legally. Trump has limited power and courts have a ton of precedent. Doesn't help that it requires a jury to convict.
Apart from criminality, How does Trump define 'incompatible with western civilization' ? Maybe he means the Amish, the native Americans, the Mormon or the Scientologists ? Does he mean pluralist, liberal & tolerant ? Does he mean white, protestant and english speaking ? IMO, it's a whole lot of words that mean nothing. Trump 101.
Personally, I'm sick of white supremacists using motte-and-baileys to criticize immigrants.
It's revealing that Indians, Mexicans and Filipinos are the main groups they have issues with.
Indians are a model minority, speak English, from a pluralistic democracy and uniquely economically productive. Other than color and religion, they satisfy every bar for a model American.
Mexicans are devout Christians, take all the 'shit' jobs, have a fair claim to the land and work harder than any 'sanctity of work' protestant I've seen. There are valid concerns about criminals and cartel members. But, as we covered before, Americans and Trump are already aligned on their deportation. If every illegal immigrant and every Mexican criminal is deported, Mexicans will still continue immigration in large numbers through legal family based migration and birthright citizenship for children of legal workers.
Filipinos are devout Christians, pre-indoctrinated (due to American colonial occupation), peaceful and most immigrate to fill middle-of-the-pack essential jobs in healthcare, military and education.
There is no venn diagram that fits all 3 groups except - "not white". If you want fewer non-whites. Just say that.
P.S: I've heard geographic arguments claiming 'America is full' and they don't want more immigrants of any color. I am not going to address why this opinion is bad. It's a tired one.
Welfare fraud is rampant in the US. Given the scope of IRS's surveillance, welfare fraud looks like an intended loophole rather than a egregious crime.
How does welfare fraud work ? My understanding is:
- Minor fraud - Household composition misreporting. IMO, this is called smart accounting when done by billionaires. A person would have to be making just slightly over the limit for welfare, to massage their house hold composition to fit into welfare limits. That's okay.
- Major fraud - Not reporting income. This has been a major issue even outside welfare fraud. If the IRS truly cared, then tips, employment and gig-economy work would be more strictly surveilled. It would be trivial to implement from a technical perspective. Definitely an intended loophole, similar to illegal workers employed by farms and hospitality businesses around America, much to my chagrin.
I followed links in the article, and the sources are weird.
The first link points to a Pandemic relief fund scandal.
$250 million in pandemic relief funds. Aimee Bock, the 44-year-old founder of Feeding our Future, was found guilty on federal charges of wire fraud, bribery and conspiracy for recruiting a network of people and organizations to operate as many as 250 fraudulent meal assistance sites throughout the state
The primary culprit is a white lady who used pandemic relief funds to fraudulently route money to for-profit restaurants and live a lavish lifestyle.
Abdullahe Nur Jesow had become the 56th defendant to plead guilty in the $250 million Feeding Our Future fraud scheme.
Based on another link (which I had to chase down separately), there are many Somali secondary defendants, but the primary perpetrator was a white woman.
The 2nd link points to election integrity concerns. Nothing to do with fraud.
Republican Minn. gov candidate blasts Tim Walz on election integrity: ‘fraud capital of the country’
Finally, the 3rd link gives us something useful
The HSS program paid $104 million in 2024. On August 1, Minnesota’s Department of Human Services moved to scrap the HSS program, noting that payment to 77 housing-stabilization providers had been terminated this year due to “credible allegations of fraud.” Joe Thompson, then the Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota, went even further, stating that the “vast majority” of the HSS program was fraudulent.
On September 18, Thompson announced criminal indictments for six members of Minnesota’s Somali community.
Ok, finally, we're onto something.
Somalis have committed welfare fraud at least half a billion, maybe more, over the last couple decades. Much of it going home to Somalia to fund terrorist groups.
I believe your claim has validity, but all the linked articles take many leaps of logic and rounding of numbers to reach this specific conclusions.
Yes, on the balance, around half a billion in funds were used in programs that had fraud. It is not clear than 100% of those funds were fraudulently used. It is not clear that 100% of the fraudulently used funds were used by Somalis. It is not clear that 100% of the Somalian fraud had to do with sending money back to Somalia. It is not clear that 100% of the money sent back to Somalia was sent to terrorists.
If you 50% at each step, it is still many millions being sent to Somalian terrorists. I also agree with your wider point, that integration of ghettoized tribal societies should not be taken for granted. But, the eventual sum sent to Somali terrorists is likely less than $100 million.
In cases like this, I'd prefer if we shared the more reputed sources (City Journal) instead of rage-baiting sources like NY Post which add nothing to the original [City Journal] sources.
DirtyWaterHotDog
23d ago
Standardized tests are excellent for what they are: A first-pass filter to reduce the candidate set.
If you're planning to enroll 500 students, then use standardized testing to bring the 100,000 applicants down to a candidate set of 5000. After that, you can use affirmative action, holistic evaluation, essays or personalities to evaluate the remaining 5000. A student with a 1550 SAT won't be noticeably smarter than one with 1500. But going from a 1550 SAT student to one with a 4.0 GPA and 1200 SAT is worlds apart.
DirtyWaterHotDog
25d ago
Fwiw, my female peers in tech has been promoted faster than the men. I have my opinions on which group was more competent, but even at face value, the absoluteness of it is suspicious. Not so much IC roles, but definitely in being promoted from IC to manager to director.
Seems most prevalent in fields that are male dominated though.
The reality is that men are fairly expendable.
It is a reality that can't be accepted. If men and women are the same, then they must be the same everywhere. Physical strength is one thing, but an evolutionary difference in the value of a gender would break any pretense of gender similarity. Too often this is phrased a gender equality. No, girl-boss feminism doesn't aspire to be equal. They aspire to be the same.
I'm going on a slight tangent by rehashing a tired topic. But, women in military can't be decoupled from girl-boss feminism.
Girl-boss feminism states:
"1. The patriarchy exists."
This patriarchy gives men power over women. It allows men to self-actualize and gain power in their fields of interest. As a result, the woman is rendered powerless and forced into a contrasting lifestyle they may not want. To them, the military is the ultimate representation of this. Men 'get to' fight their favorite wars while powerless wives and mothers become the 'primary victims of war'.
If men are disposable, and if war is a horrible thing that they're forced into, then it bestows neither power nor self-actualization. It renders soldiers more powerless than their civilian wives, breaking the narrative of the patriarchy.
"2. Men and women are the same. And like men, the ideal woman is a woman's idea of a powerful man."
Instead of acknowledging that their framing of the patriarchy is wrong, girl-boss feminism treats this perceived male-power as the holy grail. Here, positions of power are objectively desirable. It's an inviolable axiom of the movement.
Women must be in the military, because military gives power, and power is good. If war weren't so desirable, then why would men 'choose' to do it ?
"3. Being a mother is not an identity"
Women can want kids, but it can't be their identity. A child is like a pet. A nice to have. Now, why would anyone spend 2 decades rearing a child if they're forbidden from making it their identity ? If I spent 20 years learning the guitar, it would be all I talk about. It would be my life's work. But no, a woman is not allowed to do that anymore. I've seen women get bullied for this. The bullying has a 'you lack ambition' or 'I can balance a job and kids' or 'your husband is a misogynist' framing. But it is effectively shaming the woman for wanting kids as her primary focus. I've seen Zillennial feminists push back against this. So, hopefully this one can be salvaged.
"4. 'Society' is how the powerful keep the powerless compliant. Rid yourself of its expectations. Rid yourself of society's burdens."
This idea is the bow on top that makes girl-boss feminism such a potent package. A young girl may ask: "If I do #1 -> #3 won't it destabilize society?". Well my strapping young lady, you're thinking about it all wrong. Because society itself is bad. People are not society. The peace, safety and stability of modern life are never at risk. Society can't take credit for any of it. Society is just all the bad things. So you rid yourself of the limitations of society, without worrying about destabilizing. You will get all of the freedom and it will have no negative implications. Because, the stability of modern society can be taken for granted.
You can see this in how European liberal women treat immigration. Integration of conservative arabs ? No big deal, piece of cake (NOT). Doubling the population of some rural area by dumping thousands of refugees ? Piece of cake (NOT). Remove maths from school curriculums ? Sure why not. Who needs it anyway ?
It is entitlement, plain and simple. In my experience, women undergo a change of opinion on this one the second they have kids. Once you have family, you interact with public services and society a lot more. You get to see how essential it is. This is when women swing to the right, violently. However, because women keep delaying when they have kids, relegating childcare to third parties or not having kids at all.... this reality punch keeps getting delayed by the year.
OP, your worries about society and male expend-ability, might as well be about Santa Claus. To girl-boss feminists, they aren't real. This belief is axiomatic in the way that for a religious person, God exists. Period.
Now ofc, I clearly believe that girl-boss feminists are hypocrites. Girl-boss feminism is a contrived belief system that requires continuous rejection of the self in pursuit of an identity you've been told you should want. The fragility of this house-of-cards is never revealed because the first world is sheltered. It stops the rubber from ever meeting the road.
Girl-boss feminists aren't unique in this. We are all hypocrites in our own ways. Whether that be residents of flooded Florida towns or white collar professionals who're convinced that their power point slides are made of gold. We're all hypocrites. But, girl-boss feminism is special in the sheer size of the cultural shadow it casts. No other non-religious ideology comes close.
The most radical position you can hold in modern politics is believing people before the 1960s were sane and had rational motivations for doing what they did
Yeah.
DirtyWaterHotDog
26d ago
Happened to me a couple of times. If your portion of the bill is under 500$, they legally can't report it to credit rating companies.
I move locations frequently, so bills got lost in the move. Collections called me twice. But, because they didn't know where I lived, they gave up.
They were small (100-200$) bills, but still. Odd feeling.
Is there a repo with tickets that we're tracking ?
I am happy to volunteer 8 hours (1 weekend day) of my time for fixes. I should be able to find 1 day the week after thanksgiving. Could pick up a couple of tickets and make some progress on them if no-one is looking at them.
I mostly do ml/backend work, but have done a little bit of front end too. If it is just profiling and debug cycles, it should be straight forward.
There is a wider question here: discoverability. Some friends have inquired if a space like the theMotte exists. I usually shurg and pretend this place doesn't exist. My policy has been that if you are meant to find it, you will find it. But, after our divorce from Reddit, I'm not so sure anymore.
Ah, that makes more sense. I am a 30 something Indian engineer in the US. So..... guilty as charged.
America's missing STEM kids is an incentive problem. Most STEM grads make average salaries, have a demanding job and are considered uncool. CS was the exception, but CS new grads have been in dire straits since 2023. Why would American kids pursue STEM degrees ?
Contemporary US is a nation of lawyers, salesmen and MBAs. America's smartest grow up admiring one of these 3. Ofc they don't want to be engineers. If they are nerdy and smart, they become doctors instead. More reliable money and higher status.
Even among tech billionaires, there is a reason why many are STEM program drop outs. It says : "Gaining expertise in this difficult subject is meaningless. I must transform into a salesman, make money and then I'll hire all the experts".
In the US, the Senate is about 50% Lawyers and the house is about 33% lawyers. In contrast, the Senate has 1 engineer and the house has 9. Now see China. 13/24 Politburo members are have engineering degrees and only 2/24 are lawyers. Tells you what the culture and people think is prestigious.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
I seriously doubt that the Indians struggling in math courses. Indians struggle at writing and capacity for self-actualization. But, 'math' ? That's like saying the Brazilians struggle at football.
Given the nature of affirmative action, Asians at UCs (Indians or East Asians) are already more qualified than their peer whites or POCs.
What informs your negative perception of Indians ?
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
I wonder how much of this has to do with viewing the university as a monolith. I believe this may be a case of increased enrollment in 'underwater basket weaving' majors giving an impression that the rigor for STEM courses has gone down.
It has traditionally admitted kid from middle to upper middle class families that maybe weren't deeply thinkers
UCSD is a lot more reputed in my circles (Bio, CS, Engg). UCSD is known for being the most academically rigorous and nerdy among the tier 1 UCs (UCLA is smart party kids. Berkeley is smart hustlers, UCSD is nerds). By research output, UCSD is the world's 4th best university to study CS, above MIT or Stanford. It is top 10 in the world for bio-tech (Top 5 in the US).
UCSD is an elite school by every metric. Arguably better than most Ivy League schools at every field that will define the future (silicon, tech, biotech). Among international students, it's incredibly competitive to get into. In my university's graduating class, couple of students got into graduate programs there (my school needed at least top 1 percentile national scores to get in) and only the university gold/silver medalists got acceptance letters. Practically all of them had perfect quantitative scores on the GRE.
This contrast confuses me. How can a university become increasingly more selective and lower the bar at the same time ?
What programs have selective majors on our campus?
- Data Science
- Public Health
- Jacobs School of Engineering – Bioengineering, Chemical Engineering, Computer Science, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
I think I found the answer. Certain majors are considered 'selective' and students are not allowed to switch into these majors later during their undergrad. It is no surprise that this covers all majors for which UCSD is considered an 'elite school'.
This model is similar to Europe, where getting into a top school is trivial, but a majority of students are weeded out through rigorous freshmen courses. It gives the impression of egalitarianism, while maintaining the high bar necessary to survive in difficult majors. There seems to be a class system emerging at these universities. The name of the university will mean little unless paired with the major that the student completed.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
In context of Pakistan, Lahore (their 2nd biggest city) is an afternoon stroll away from the Indian border. No mountains or jungles in sight.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
I'm Indian, so obviously biased. But, is there credible evidence that India funds terrorists within Pakistan ?
India's beef is with the Pakistani military, first and foremost. An unstable Pakistan is one that needs more military, and therefore such a state is of no benefit to India. India craves a quiet Pakistan. One that does its own thing and leaves India alone. The Pakistani army holds a uniquely self-destructive ideology. A hot border, self-destructiveness and nukes are a trifecta that India wants no part of.
I wish it was different. But, Asim Munir, Pakistan's new leader is a hard-line self-destructionist.
"I am going to use a crude analogy to explain the situation… India is a shining Mercedes coming on a highway like a Ferrari, but we are a dump truck full of gravel. If the truck hits the car, who will be the loser?"
-Field Marshall for life, Asim Munir.
Naqvi (Pakistan's interior minister) alleged that the attack was “carried out by Indian-backed elements and Afghan Taliban proxies” linked to the Pakistani Taliban
Looks like the attackers were armed by Afghanistan, but Pakistan wants to drag India in with it. After all, that's the only narrative that works to the army's benefit. The Pakistani Taliban (who took ownership) takes direct inspiration from the Afghan Taliban who were directly trained by Pakistani military (ISI specifically). Reminds me of Hillary's infamous banger : "You can't keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbors".
In the absence of evidence, I'm going to disregard Pakistani claims about 'India funded terrorists'.
A car bomb at a tourist attraction in Delhi killed 14 people yesterday
This one is more interesting. From the looks of it, a dozen or so attacks were planned and this was the only one that succeeded. Thankfully, most of the plans were intercepted early and the contraband was seized. India has the benefit of catching many of the culprits alive, so more evidence should come out with time.
In Indian media, the story is being sold as a case of Indian success (at stopping 90+% of the planned attacks) rather than one of Pakistani terror. My read is that India does not want another war at this moment. There are no major state elections coming, so increased nationalism at the expense of economy is worthless to Modi. Op Sindoor was forced on Modi because of the performative cruelty of the attackers. This attack's significance was more intellectual than emotional. The attackers were muslim doctors, a bad look for educated muslims. The attack took place outside Kashmir, violating a long held understanding between the Indian and Pakistani intelligence services of keeping the proxy war limited to Kashmir.
In Pakistan, Munir has been saber-rattling since the day of the ceasefire. His posturing has gotten more and more aggressive with every day. I'm worried that he thinks he has to force another war to flip the narrative around Op Sindhoor. Pakistani military has a history of aggressive leaders. But, Munir feels kooky in a way that's different from Musharraf or Bajwa. He has some of Zia's insanity, and that scares me.
I think this occasion will be a nothing burger. That being said, it indicates a steady increase in the likelihood of a hot war with Pakistan sometime in the next few years.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
It shows grace in victory. It's good enough.
In practice, his transition team is a good early tell.
Elana Leopold as executive director. It also includes co-chairs Maria Torres-Springer, the former first deputy mayor; Lina Khan, the former federal trade commission chair; the United Way’s president and CEO, Grace Bonilla; and the former deputy mayor for health and human services Melanie Hartzog
I recognize Maria Torres-Springer and Lina Khan, both appointees by moderate democrats. There is some reconciliation with moderates. So far, mt read is more Trump 1 than Trump 2.
I'm judging Zohran by the standards set for your bang average Democrat mayor. The republicans promised pogroms and govt. mandated namaaz 5 times a day. This ain't it.
Look, I am hoping to spend my life in NYC. I am optimistic because I have to be optimistic. I don't want to leave this place. Therefore, I want Zohran to be good. It is ass backwards. But, It keeps me going. For a moment, let me have this. Reality will hit me in the face soon enough.
My opinion of Zohran has improved over time. It went from negative to neutral.
For one, MAGA twitter and Cuomo's crash outs were embarrassing. It lowered my expectations for political candidates. Zohran seems tame in comparison. Next, he has moderated his positions. Admittedly, he started from a from an extreme place. But, Zohran has extended olive branches to the police & Jewish communities. Good enough. Shows humility and statesmanship.
I love NYC and hope to live here for the foreseeable future. So I'll choose optimism. But yeah, if Eric Adams was electable, I'd have liked to see him re-elected.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
I believe there is enough deterrence to be terrorist already. If anything, the spycraft aspect of it probably makes it more alluring for radicalized youths.
DirtyWaterHotDog
1mo ago
I'd rather have FBI stop terrorists in secret instead of in the open.
Why reveal that you're actively introducing undercover FBI agents into chats and monitoring discord channels ? They'll move to other chat platforms and set up stricter trails for swearing fealty.
It's stupid.
DirtyWaterHotDog
2mo ago
Are there ascendant political figures to the left of Netanyahu for the country to unify around ? I know new leaders have emerged to the right of Netanyahu, but thought that political space to his left had being choked out after Oct 7th.
I guess there is Yair Lapid, but he struggled to stay in power in the calm before Oct 7. So, I don't have much hope for him.
DirtyWaterHotDog
2mo ago
Yeah, Austin is a shining example of how to deal with the problem well.
I expect not. It was easy to build for the longest time and then we artificially made it difficult. The current situation is the more anomalous one.
America has famously lagged behind other cities of the world in dense urbanism. So, we have a few decades of data from tall-dense cities to read into. NYC is the only exception in the US. and it is a good exception at that. Broadly, nothing catastrophic happened. Ofc, the assumption is that densification comes with an increase in aggregate local taxes and greater investment in public infrastructure (transit, services, etc).
I would like to hear the negative side-effects that you suspect more housing will bring.
IMO, The american youth starting to adopt a nihilistic lying flat mindset, and the lack of affordable housing (esp. in urban areas) has played a role in making it worse. However, building more housing alone is not going to solve this multifaceted problem. So, if the YIMBYs win, there will be more housing and nihilism will continue (if slightly slowed down). In 50 years, some may see that the nihilism and YIMBY movement coincided with each other and wrongly draw a causal link.
Building more housing is like fixing the Ozone layer. When you do it right, nothing happens. Life goes on, and people don't appreciate it because the negative thing never happened. Classic preparedness paradox.
To be clear,
build more housing != build more ugly housing.
This is a 5+1, and this is a 5+1. This is one of the reasons I am strongly against "affordable housing". Build more market rate housing, so the buyer can impose their aesthetic preferences onto the developer.
build more housing = building more housing in urban areas with a huge shortages.
Supply-demand is alright in most of the US. Mostly limited to Boston, NYC, DC, Miami, Austin, Phoenix, LA, SD, SF, Portland, Seattle problem.
build more housing != fit a studio into what used to be 4 bed, so we can all live in kowloon walled city.
build more housing != sprawl out more
More housing means more vertical expansion and more infills.
build more housing = build better transit.
That means safer transit too. (this is a huge issue between YIMBYs and Leftists. YIMBYs are generally pro-police and hard on crime)
DirtyWaterHotDog
2mo ago
If they execute on the plans, LA will be in the midst of America's biggest transit boom. I would wait a few years to find out if the up-zoning led to a loss in quality of life. Often, new infrastructure feels like a net negative until the whole plan gets executed. Many of China's once-ghost cities and trains-to-nowhere are a good example.
the shopping centers nearby are so crowded
Isn't that good for local business ?
Lights back up
That's just LA.
Also, the rent on these places wasn't any lower and rent has continued to rise precipitously in the area.
Wouldn't it have risen even faster if the apartments had not been built ?
DirtyWaterHotDog
2mo ago
I saw the Mr Hyde version about a year ago, where it was just a nonstop, Tourette’s, yelling swear words, almost incomprehensible what was going on.
I'm surprised that Thiel claims to have just found this out. It was practically an open secret that bill gates was an excitable genius with a short temper.
But he is not talking about Microsoft, but about the stuff which Gates does with his ill-gotten money
From all anecdotes that I hear, he became a lot less 'nonstop' post-microsoft. He was an angry/passionate dude in the 90s and early 2000s. Calmed down after.
s
DirtyWaterHotDog
2mo ago
Sadly, I don't. I did not read western news back then :(
DirtyWaterHotDog
2mo ago
Frankly, I was indeed worried that the bar was that low.
Reviewing the job profile, these qualification demands are more rigorous than I gave them credit for. I said a lot of things today, and I have been corrected on a good few. I am glad that happened. Turns out that US is a liberal first world nation, and standards are standards. I am satisfied.
Do you think 'randos' and 'bottom-feeder men with anger problems looking to get the high of having power over someone else' can qualify for a secret clearance?
Not anymore
NYPD's 26 weeks in their police academy, but plenty for their specialised role.
It's 6 months in the academy and then ~2 years in probation.
“Den Teufel nicht an die Wand malen.” (Don't paint the devil on the wall) - German saying
MAGA's demand for 88mph makes sense in context of their fears. But, by acting in response to those fears, they may in turn be making them real.
Internet MAGA supporters are terrified that a future Democratic govt will level the MAGA project and these 4 years are their last gasp hurrah. They believe they must move the goalposts far enough to the right, that Democrats will be caught up in reversing the damage. Ideally, public opinions will be sufficiently altered that Democrats can't change the new normal at all. To them, the only way to avoid the pendulum from swinging the other way is to break it altogether. Historically, anxious over-extension (ex: last 100 years of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Versailles treaty) often backfires. MAGA demands for 88mph may indeed end up radicalizing enough democrats that the utter demolition of the MAGA movement becomes a reality.
Broadly, the Democrats are a party of educated moderates with a fringe that tags along. The moderates keep the fringe happy and away from power. On the other hand, MAGA is a party of fringe populists with moderates who tag along. Here, the moderates are kept out of power. This causes meaningful differences in how either side operates. Yes, MAGA eventually settles on moderate policies because 'Trump Always Chickens Out'. But, their public rhetoric remains extreme, and as a result, causes faster radicalization of the opposition. This is in contrast to Democrats who take a 'boiling the frog' approach to rhetoric.
For a party that's controlled every elite institution this millennium, the Democrats have been judicious in exploiting this advantage. Some may say they were recklessly passive. Maybe they drank too much of the 'demographics is destiny' and 'reality has a left wing bias' kool-aid. I sense things are changing now. As MAGA proudly exhibits its malicious compliance and loophole finding capabilities, Democrats are taking notes. I won't pretend that MAGA are the only ones to escalate. Yes, Dems have gotten away with violating 14th amendment rules, leaving the border open and letting woke-scolds infiltrate non-partisan institutions. But that was an excruciatingly slow process. Now, they're swinging for the fences. For example: California's about-turn on gerrymandering, NYC voting in Zohran, urban reaction to ICE.
IMO, MAGA's belief in 'pushing the pendulum so far that it breaks' is suicidally risky. Biden, Clinton and Obama were milquetoast liberal elites. Moderates through and through. Yes, if the pendulum breaks, MAGA wins. But if it doesn't, it may create the populist energy for a proper left wing populist President. I don't think anyone in this country is ready for that. Remember, Bernie got pretty far in 2016 & 2020 and Trump seemed far-fetched in 2015.
Cards on the table, I like the elite liberals, but Trump 2 (and Israel vs Palestine) has triggered a clear change in energy among my peers. The Obama-lite messaging of Ezra Klein and Pete Buttigieg has stopped being effective. In comparison, the class resentment oriented populist rhetoric of Zohran and AOC is hyper ascendant. I left the 3rd world to be in civilized country. Sadly, looks like America is rapidly devolving into 3rd world politics. What to do ?
More options
Context Copy link