This article cites “prominent presidential historians” as predicting Biden would be the next FDR and for evidence, linked to an NPR interview with Doris Kearns Goodwin.
Meanwhile, my sense is every practicing historian who is not a professional commentator has said the opposite.
Scholarly historians always laugh at the notion of a “presidential historian.” Precisely for the reason that someone who focuses overwhelmingly on the presidency—especially from a biographical perspective—tends to have a very limited stable of analogies & interpretive frameworks.
Second, historians, especially those who study American politics, have always understood that whatever they thought of Biden’s own agency, his presidency would be constrained by razor thin majorities in Congress & a reactionary Supreme Court. And you didn’t need a PhD to see that
Like, reserving a small number of spots for the children of potential large donors may offend your sense of fairness but those future donations aren't affecting tuition rates.
This quote is shocking, as it was designed to be. Be skeptical.
For example, were all Americans excited about going to the Moon? No. This poll is from 1967, two years before Apollo 11. Going to the moon is "not worth it" by 20 points.
Nearly a year after the first moon landing (and half a year after the second), the results are nearly the same.
As someone who’s contributed to my university’s policy on returning, this article misstates, misframes, and misinforms about what we are doing and why. No one thinks this is 3/20 & our brief window of remote instruction is precisely to insure the rest of the semester’s in-person.
Everyone on campus—students, staff, and faculty—overwhelmingly prefer in-person instruction (though we, like others, will probably experiment with more hybrid courses in the future if they work). Prof. Oster is right that the health risks now to most students are very low.
It’s true that not everyone on a campus is 18-24 years old & in otherwise perfect health. Yes, there are staff, faculty, & students who remain at greater risk, either unable to get vaccinated or for whom vaccination is insufficient protection. These will remain risks to manage.
Dholes used to live in North America but were among the megafauna that went extinct around the end of the Pleistocene.
Every time I read the latest arguments for the overkill hypothesis I'm like, of course, that makes sense. But then I read the latest objections and I'm like, damn, those sure are fatal.
Please. I beg of you. Stop using completely inapt historical analogies. Just describe what is happening.
(In 1981 there was one union that held a chokepoint on a major sector of the economy; there is nothing remotely like that for the nearly 14,000 school districts in the US.)
I actually think making K-12 schools go temporarily remote needs to be an absolute last resort. But if you're gonna say it should never happen you should also explain what to do when 10% or 20% of your teachers are home sick.
I don't know what Newark's numbers are but this is the problem over the coming weeks. What are schools supposed to do when a good chunk of teachers are out–and so are subs? This is not an easy problem to solve!