Tweet

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @drvolts

David Roberts

@drvolts

14 Jan

The stance of "objective" media seems to be, if you listen to arguments on both sides of an issue & then decide one side is correct, you then become "partisan," which means you can't be trusted. Thus, the only way to truly be open-minded & trustworthy is to never take a position.

But of course, the people who have studied an issue most & understand it best are those *most likely to make a judgment on the merits*, so if you exclude them as "biased," you're left with glib, mealy-mouthed, "both sides have points" poseurs.

Read 7 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

14 Jan

I just got online ... and ... Playbook did *what*?

If you want to spotlight & understand the very heart of US political media dysfunction, think about the nest of background assumptions required to imagine Chris Hayes & Ben Shapiro as equivalent.

One tries his best to tell the truth; one lies freely. One has a coherent, principled worldview that he tries to apply fairly; one glibly hops from faux principle to faux principle as it suits him. One has experience & skill in reporting; one has never done anything but Takes.

Read 13 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

13 Jan

I know this exercise is futile, but still: imagine if thousands of disaffected black voters gathered, stormed the US capitol, & came very close to kidnapping or killing lawmakers. Would anyone be saying, "they were just angry, they need to be heard, let's unify & move on"?

It's obvious to the point of absurdity, but still: if this were ANYONE except for rural & exurban white people ("real Americans"), this act of terror would have prompted an absolute national convulsion. Every participant would be in jail, every black person under suspicion.

If black members of Congress had egged it on, called them "my people," tweeted to them about the location of their colleagues ... they'd be gone already, not just booted from Congress but brought up on charges.

Read 4 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

13 Jan

Question: if the House impeaches but the Senate votes *against* removal from office (like last time), is Trump thenceforth banned from public office? When does that particular prohibition become active?

All right, my above-average readers have informed me that the ban from public office is *not* an automatic result of impeachment. It's a vote in the Senate, held separately from the vote to convict.

My one remaining question: can the vote to prohibit future public office happen *before* the vote to convict? Or if the vote to convict fails, can there still be a subsequent vote? Does the prohibition from public office *require* conviction?

Read 4 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

12 Jan

https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1348839749621055488

It's not that he won't ever accept any blame or responsibility, it's that he literally *can't*. Pathological narcissism means his psyche is working frantically at all times to prop up his ego; it can't afford even a brief slip. His world forms & rearranges around his ego needs.

https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1348839749621055488

This is all Narcissism 101, of course, which everyone should have understood about Trump within minutes of exposure. But other people are narcissistic to varying degrees too, with their own ego needs, which they think Trump can serve. They fool themselves.

I fleshed this out in a piece about Trump I wrote back in 2016. vox.com/2016/9/29/1308…

Read 4 tweets

David Roberts

@drvolts

11 Jan

1. A giant offshore wind project in NY would substantially increase the region's carbon-free energy, relieve grid congestion, & lower prices. It's being blocked by NIMBYs. Specifically, the wealthy residents of Wainscott, NY have formed Citizens for the Preservation of Wainscott.

2. Wainscott is an exclusive coastal enclave with some of the most expensive property in the world. Its population was 650, as of the 2010 census. Basically, it's a small cluster of millionaires. Why do they oppose this project, which would help so many people?

3. It's not the turbines. It's the cable that would bring the turbines' energy to shore. Is it unsightly? No -- the project developers have agreed to underground it. After it's done, it will quite literally be invisible to residents. It will simply pass beneath their enclave.

Read 9 tweets

Share this page!

David Roberts

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @drvolts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

David Roberts

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?