Thread. A cautionary thought: the GOP can read polls. They *know* that a solid majority of Americans intensely oppose them on abortion, gun control and insurrection (to name but a few). They know these are big losers, in national electoral terms. Yet they persist.
The extremity of GOP positions reveals their intent. These are *not* positions that are viable in any normal political calculus (on a national level). No party 'playing by the rules' would push them as far as the GOP is doing.
They are acting, instead, like a party freed of the natural constraints imposed, in a democratic system, by the need to reconcile conflicting points of view. They are acting like they're not in that system any more. Because they are not.
We shouldn't indulge the comforting thought that the GOP, in a heedless fit of ideological fervor, has blundered onto the 'third rail' of our political system and will now incinerate itself in November.
It's more prudent to assume, rather, that they know full well that they're a minority party with unpopular policies, and are making preparations to see it through. How do they think they can make these unpopular policies stick ?
First, by subverting the popular vote. We see it in many places. Second, by brute force. Jan. 6 was the 'tell.' Not what Trump did but the acquiescence of virtually the entire GOP. Many have said J6 was a 'dress rehearsal.' The truth of that needs to be fully understood.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2. “All politics is local.” These were local elections. People voted for more efficient, less corrupt local administrations and services. AKP’s corruption at local level has seriously damaged them.
3. Above all, people voted their pocketbooks. Inflation has savaged all but the wealthiest and AKP’s chronic mismanagement of the economy has, finally, been condemned. I view this as LLP probably the most significant factor in today’s elections.
Thread. Almost everyone reading this is of a similar political inclination as me. Almost every politically attuned American is, in the same way, in one camp or the other by now. The orientations are firmly fixed, in my view.
Yes, there are ‘swing voters’ and ‘undecideds’ who might be determinative in a tight election, but in the main, minds are made up, and have been for a long time.
We teeter on the edge of a democratic crisis, threatened by a vicious, corrupt and self-serving minority party, despite there being a decisive pro-democracy majority in the country (so I firmly believe). Why ?
🧵Apropos the Lewiston shooting, I see people saying (for the umpteenth time): "Republicans worship guns." Yes, the GOP has consistently opposed gun control, but I think for somewhat different reasons at different times.
I see three 'phases' to the GOP's opposition to any kind of sensible regulation of guns. It's been about (1) money, (2) tribalism, and (3) insurrection.
Thread, embedding an @lrozen thread on Tom Friedman's warning against a full-on ground invasion of Gaza (with interesting reporting from behind the scenes of Biden 's visit to Israel).
I made similar comments night before last in a podcast with @ZevShalev, noting that something "more like the surgeon's scalpel than a blunderbuss" was needed, at least for now.
I acknowledged the difficulty, in the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7th, of refraining from a 'shock and awe' response, and echoed many in calling for cool heads to prevail in serving Israel's long term interests (with which U.S. interests are intertwined).
Hugh Peyman’s 'America as No. 3: Get Real About China, India and the Rest' is an important book (just out, available on Amazon).
Peyman draws on a lifetime’s close observation of China: Deputy Business Editor of the Cut; reporter for Far Eastern Economic Review; head of Asian equities research at Merrill Lynch; and founder of an influential Shanghai-based economic consultancy.
Peyman writes that the era of unchallenged Western dominance is coming to an end, and that the West must adapt, for everyone’s sake (including its own).
I think it’s become very clear: Leonard Leo is simply an influence peddler. And, in the market for influence, he’s been skillful in matching buyers and sellers. It’s a simple business, stripped of its ideological camouflage, and he’s made a ton of money at it.
In this light, Leo's concerted efforts to handpick Supreme Court Justices and other judges looks less like a conservative 'crusade' than an effort to establish two sides of a market he could exploit.
As a 'business planning' exercise, Leo approached it very logically, like any entrepeneur. First, "what's a 'pain point' I can alleviate ?" Answer: government regulations, first and foremost.