As an aside, one reason Democrats are in such miserable shape in Ohio is that Ohio Republicans, unlike Republicans in certain other states, actually try hard to be popular with a clear majority of the electorate.
Okay it seems that Oregon, Maryland, Arkansas and New York are doing variations on the Ohio thing.
A special "vaccine lottery" (as in Ohio, Maryland and Oregon) seems more compelling to me than giving people regular lottery tickets for being vaccinated (New York and Arkansas) but that's just a guess.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It damages the NYT’s reputation to have a key reporter on the most important story of the year say a valid news angle shouldn’t be discussed because it has “racist roots.” Aren’t they supposed to be in the news business?
But basically reporters at the NYT are allowed do whatever they want on social media, however damaging to the paper’s reputation, so long as they have the right politics.
The core issue here is that management at the NYT is cowardly. They are afraid of their young, noisy, leftist reporters. So they don't manage, and insubordination is rampant. And it's very damaging to the product.
30% of the “incidents” with race data in this sample (“incidents” defined to include accusing the CCP of covering up a lab leak) are Donald Trump personally.
The political narratives being pushed here are that white supremacy is at the root of every social ill, and that fighting hate incidents does not conflict with de-policing proposals.
The question is what is Pride (the organization and the march, not the broad concept) for? I think it's possible Pride has served all its integrationist and acceptance functions and doesn't need to try to speak for all LGBT people anymore. nytimes.com/2021/05/18/opi…
Like, "we are everywhere, we're in your organizations, we're part of every part of the community" was a very important message for the parade to send 20 years ago. But we've won that fight.
Which is to say, that if Pride organizationally adopts an agenda that speaks for only some LGBT people, that excludes in certain ways -- maybe that's fine? Not everything has to be an umbrella, and certainly not everything has to speak for me.
On this week’s @LRCkcrw, I diagnose the unhinged response to @ebruenig’s Mother’s Day column as largely about people not wanting to own their choices. I don’t have or want kids, I’m at peace with that, I’m not threatened when other people do differently. kcrw.com/news/shows/lef…
Often, people with above-average incomes say they “can’t afford” to have children at a certain time or a certain number of children, when what they really mean is they want to make other consumption choices. It’s fine to make other consumption choices. Stop being so defensive!
There are a lot of people with degrees from highly selective colleges who think it’s “unaffordable” to have three children in the New York area on $400,000 a year.