One thing I feel my group and many others demonstrated in 2020 was that there's no relationship between political giving to state house races and the outcomes of those elections. In fact, there's some evidence it backfires. Hold on to your wallets with both hands.
I normally hate to pee on other people's fundraising, but I think it's important to make new mistakes rather than repeating old ones. And we've seen in state after state that pouring any amount of national money into state legislative races just doesn't work.
The political spending cycle is spinning out of control, and as everyone runs out of ways to spend money upballot, the money is moving downballot. At the same time, those races have become nationalized (and therefore tethered to political identities local spending can't shift)
I can promise you on bended knee that there will not be a single political candidate above the level of dogcatcher whose campaign will fail for lack of money in 2021 or 2022. All your donation will do is feed a growing chain of parasites that dead-ends in Facebook profits.
I wish I knew the answer! But we have to at least learn from failure. Even trying new stuff at random is better than repeating what doesn't work.
Before you make political donations based on emotion, please look at what happened in 2020 with Senate campaigns ($15M left unspent in Maine, for example) and state campaigns in Iowa and Florida, where record fundraising combined with massive losses in places we expected to flip.
I'm 100% in favor of political giving if you're doing it to feel good. But at least make people charge you for fresh stories, not the same reheated stuff about door knocking, early money, and chronic non-voters all being left of Trotsky if we could just mobilize them.
If you've ever had your vote determined by an out-of-state college freshman calling you at dinnertime and reading from a prepared script, a bulk text message, or a stranger knocking on your door to talk politics, then by all means support those tactics. But if not, reflect a bit.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Large aircraft carriers live in an interesting twilight zone. They would be instantly sunk in any real conflict, but we've grown fond of usin them as mobile airports for use against third world powers. There hasn't been a carrier engagement against real opposition since WWII
A contentious debate over whether large warships are vulnerable against air attack was settled over the course of six hours in 1941. We're likely to get an equally brisk and definitive answer about large ships vs. missiles when two major powers go to war. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_o…
In the meantime, we keep building the things, part of a dysfunction in the American military where all the major weapons systems are obsolete, designed to fight wars we never had, and being used at fantastic expense to blow up Toyota Hiluxes that look like they're up to something
Biden is now throwing his own border patrol staff under the bus for enforcing his border policy. politico.com/news/2021/09/2…
The pattern with Biden on immigration has been one of constant mendacity—whether it's lying to himself or to us isn't clear. He lied about the (nonexistent) legal barriers to processing SIV applications stateside, he lied about undoing Trump policies, now he's lying about Haiti.
In this case, first they went after the horses, and now they're going after the border agents who were riding them. But the people responsible are those who have set this policy, not the people who are being made to enforce it. Who knew Biden could out-lie Trump on immigration?
This claim is such a profound misunderstanding of how corporate campaign finance works. For one thing, the money goes to the campaign, not the senator personally, and for another, not a single incumbent senator has any difficulty fundraising these days.
The article mentions that Sinema has raised $923,065 from various nefarious interest groups, which is approximately 5% of her 2018 campaign budget. She could flip all of her political positions and raise the same funds from PACs and corporations that back the other stance.
Make no mistake, the current system of campaign funding and PACs is institutionalized corruption. But the idea that senators are somehow beholden to their $5,000 corporate donors is ridiculous and obscures the real way power and influence flow in Washington.
One politically difficult fact about climate change is that based on IPCC models, the next 10 years look the same whether we make massive cuts in emissions or increase emissions. Climate outcomes only diverge decades after the economic impacts of trying to reduce emissions hit.
This is one reason I argue the current "climate emergency" framing popular among educated liberals is harmful. When you have an emergency, but nothing you can do can affect the situation for years, the outcome will be backlash. We just saw this with covid on shorter time scales.
Instead of giving us a pathway to mitigating climate change, climate alarmism instead becomes an expression of righteousness and civic identity, which drops it right into the meatgrinder of media-driven polarization. Nothing could better guarantee failure cnn.com/2021/09/15/ent…
The Carrington Event in 1859 is a scary geomagnetic storm that would probably take out the GPS system and large parts of the power grid if it happened today. But evidence is mounting that it's small on the scale of potential solar flares to worry about knowablemagazine.org/article/physic…
There are signs in tree rings and ice cores that the Sun really roasted us in 994, 775, 660 BC and on earlier occasions. The 1859 size events probably happen on the order of 2-3 times a century, but (just like with California earthquakes this century) we've been unusually lucky.
If you've followed me a long time, you know my fascination with predictable natural disasters that are just rare enough to be outside living memory. A satellite-roasting solar flare is a 100% certainty, but imagine a world that can't even fight covid successfully planning for it.
If Democrats were committed to breaking Congressional deadlock they would hold the defense authorization bill, and not their own agenda, as a hostage. But it's going to sail through Congress like it always does.
We live in a country where defaulting on the public debt is normal political brinksmanship, but withholding military spending is unthinkable.
The Democrats could also kill the debt ceiling drama dead tonight by using the coin trick (the treasury has the legal power to mint platinum coins of arbitrary value). But the party, unlike their more creative opponents, appears incapable of *using* power while they have it.