I've been too chicken to write it, but I have a theory about the small but noticeable movement of black & hispanic men to Trump, namely: for some men, the attraction of patriarchy & toxic masculinity exceeds aversion to racism. Support for this theory: nytimes.com/2020/10/14/us/…
One of the more memorable conversations of my life was with a wealthy gay man at an LGBTQ Dem fundraiser in ... 2012 I think? We were both, uh, somewhat intoxicated. He put his hand on my shoulder, gestured at the crowd of well-heeled attendees, & said:
"In a few years, we will all be Republicans." I asked why. "We're rich white people! Once we don't face formal discrimination for being gay, we will revert to our natural selfishness & vote to keep our taxes low." At my dismay & horror, he grinned & said, "pray Rs stay dumb."
I've thought about that a lot since. The GOP is alienating so many natural allies with racism & religious bigotry. If it dropped all that & just kept the core of patriarcy & economic royalism, it could cannibalize huge chunks of the Dem coalition.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Don't wanna be grumpy old guy but: ACB's views on climate change really don't matter. Her legal opinion is that the vast bulk of the administrative state is unconstitutional, including the parts devoted to mitigating climate change. That's what matters.
If she "believed" climate change but still held that view, it wouldn't be any better. Conversely, if she was a hardcore skeptic but viewed the administrative state as legitimate, it would be a vast improvement. We need to start judging public figures based on their roles/powers.
I guess I just wish Dems -- both commenters & legislators -- spent more time explicitly defending a progressive view of LAW. They should be bashing originalism & defending a more sane approach. That's what is bad about ACB; that's the disagreement that functionally matters.
#EnergyTwitter: I have a vague theory that the massive Chinese effort to subsidize silicon PV panels did drive their cost down, but also had the effect of stifling research into advanced PV, which will come back to haunt us when silicon reaches limits. Is there anything to this?
Didn't @vsiv advance this theory at some point? Or am I making that up.
"A right-wing authoritarian movement is engineering minority white rule" is a one-sided story. Literally the most important story in the world right now! But it makes US journalists uncomfortable. You can feel their palpable & increasingly desperate need for an "other side."
And so, after the right has rigged a 6-3 majority in SCOTUS, appointed entirely by presidents/Senate majorities that got fewer votes, preparing to take a series of wildly unpopular anti-democratic steps, the big question in politics ...
... is not whether any of that is OK or defensible, but whether Joe Biden, IF he wins & IF Dems take the Senate, will take a step to push back against he. HE'S the one "contemplating a radical step." HE'S the one "violating norms." It's a fucking joke.
Why don't reporters ask Republicans about the way they've been packing courts for years? Has a single prominent Republican had to answer for or explain it? Did a single reporter worry about Rising Partisanship before Ds started talking about fighting back? washingtonpost.com/opinions/repub…
The most important "bias" in US political media is that GOP fuckery - decades of it, perpetually escalating - is simply viewed as a feature of the landscape. Only Ds are treated as having volition, as making *choices* for which they must answer.
I think back to when Reid nuked the judicial filibuster. It was treated as a radical choice, a deliberate escalation of partisan warfare. The fact that McConnell had deliberately decided to filibuster ALL nominees -- violating tradition, breaking a basic Senate function ...
I have a question. I'm an enthusiastic consumer of Zillow porn. Gawking at houses in the Seattle area, I've noticed something. Up to around the $2 or $3 million mark, houses get cooler & cooler: modernism, open floor plans, huge windows, elaborate decks, etc. HOWEVER ...
... when you get above that, into the truly mega-rich houses, they become ... ugly. Like real ugly. Lots of faux colonial or mediterranean nonsense, columns & other decorative frippery, pointless fancy dining rooms, etc. Just a sharp tip over into bloated grossness. So ... why?
Here's an example of what I'd call the mid-rich house. You may not be into the boxy, open-floor-plan modernist thing (I am!), but it's ubiquitous a this price point & lower. zillow.com/homedetails/61…