After 10/7 America needed a coherent, empassioned rally cry from a President with a moral compass. We needed an evening address from the Oval Office, reminding us all that we are not the type of people who stand by silent, tolerating the atrocities. That we would not tolerate displays of antisemitism and threats and violence against our Jewish citizens. And that if there were immigrants here who felt entitled to do so, we will be preparing their exit papers. And to the universities that provide safe spaces for haters, we are coming for you. No more federal money, no more tax free endowments, no more accepting millions from nations that hate us.
But that didn’t happen because we have a bumbling idiot for a President. We are weak, morally lost, and the world sees it.
The only qualifications now for President are moral clarity and the ability to rally the nation. Another Reagan.
But suppose Biden is not as bumbling as he seems, that he is fully in command of his own faculties, and actually in charge in his administration.
His first responses after October 7 suggest that he remains a staunch ally of Israel, and would make executive and command decisions to support Israel in its hour of need. Deploying the carrier groups to the region, to remind Iran that it doesn't quite have the run of the place, just yet, suggests as much.
But Biden is up for re-election, and beating his likely opponent depends on having support from the far-leftward portions of the Democratic base . . . who are currently busy cheering for Hamas. So, he has to soften his position, call for a "pause" - whether "humanitarian" or "tactical" - and all that.
Perhaps the thing would be for Biden to announce that he will not be running for re-election, after all. Then, he could tell the pro-terrorist far-left precisely what they can do with their masks . . .
He has been supportive of Israel militarily but has a complete lack of moral clarity on the pro-mamas evils we have seen here in the US. Yes, trying to straddle both sides because he is running for reelection. Pathetic.
One can dream that you have a clue. If Biden had a clue Biden would have ended his support for Iran’s nuclear program. And America wouldn’t have open borders, a mandate for a vaccine that doesn’t work and wouldn’t have hyper inflation because of its futile War On Mother Nature.
That's why I so enjoy the comments section. It's the civility, the willingness to hear people out and give them the benefit of the doubt, the commitment to the principle that reasonable people of good will may disagree with one another.
The US needs a Maximus Decimus Meridius, not another Reagan. Reagan's fiscal policies are a massive reason we're such a disaster of a nation to begin with.
The only hope the US has is to return the power to the people. Dismantle the swamp, return federalism, and let the people govern themselves. Today we're governed not by people but by bureaucracy as a verb. When Elon talks to Lex Fridman and says there are over 200 regulatory agencies that govern Tesla we should all stop and think about how absolutely insane that is.
I've said it before, and I'll say it many times more - a nation's potential is represented by its generals proximity to war (most of our "generals" couldn't even name the places we're fighting, much less locate them on a map) and its tax collectors proximity to its taxpayers. We are, very simply, a post-opportunity society. At best Amsterdam or France with significantly worse architecture and infrastructure but significantly greater natural resources or at worse the East Indian Trading Company soon to be scattered to the wind.
Unless we find a Maximus. Maximus led his troops into battle and he returned the power to the people. Yes, he's a metaphor, but he's the character embodiment of the only hope we have. Vivek is the closest to this - in that at least he understands that to lead at scale you need to decentralize, and not only empower, but encourage, distinct operating cultures that fit the people and the place. Trying to govern CA the same way you govern North Dakota, the same way you govern CT is a failure before you even begin. The leader who realizes this and begins unwinding federal bureaucracy is the only leader with an actual chance to restore American opportunity.
Maureen, I was in your camp about Vivek until recently. His grandstanding during the debates has been, yes at times, valuable - his response to his first question in the last one was gold. But overall he sounds more and more like a typical political narcissist IMHO.
I see your point, when you made your first billion by the time you were 30, when you went to Yale Law School while working full time on Wall St, you can get a big opinion of yourself. Maybe a little deserved?
I like his energy and ideas, and he speaks well and with passion. Not every idea a smart young man has is going to be right, but I think he is willing to learn and adjust. Anyone as successful as he has been in business has that core competency.
He is passionate, for sure! Perhaps with some time to gain some more experience and tempering. He will need to deal with the House and Senate if he is going to get anything done and we know how much they love an outsider lol. But there is potential there.
I believe the problem is the concept of he career politician (Joe Biden, anyone?). There are too many who live off the taxpayer paid gravy train of public office. Whether without much of a prior career in the private world, or following one...once they get it they do all in their power to stay in. We need term limits on both the House and the Senate.
The US government now exists only to support the US government. They don't actually have any responsibilities. And I mean that literally. We're now like 15 years into continuing resolutions to fund the government, and our bureaucracy is SOOOO outlandish that every single bit of responsibility that used to live in the house and congress has been outsourced to salaried lifetime employees. And so they spend their time in office extending their time in office and making as much money as they can. That's now the job description. Term limits would help, I guess, in that they'd make less money off tax payers, but it doesn't solve the problem of eliminating regulatory capture and dismantling the blob so our politicians are actually held accountable for doing a job again.
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":
First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
The problem with term limits, as I see it, is that it would give politicians even more incentive to ignore their constituents and focus all their efforts on buttering up some potential future employer.
My thought on this is that politician's don't get rich from "influence" like they used too (Biden's house essentially gifted to him by credit card magnates he was fighting on behalf of), they get rich from fundraising and access. All the influence now lives in the bureaucracy not in the politicians. It's the FDA going straight to Pfizer and the SEC going straight to Goldman and a million other micro examples of this happening all over the country every single day that none of us see because none of us can really grasp the size and breadth of the blob.
What term limits do is slow down the growth of government - which by itself is worth its weight in gold.
The US citizenry has forgotten that government is a tax on the people. It is, by definition, anti-growth. We think of government as there to "help the people." But that is a hilarious misunderstanding. The government was created to hinder opposition, not help the people. Those are two different things. The minute the government started looking inward was the day we died as an experiment because it meant the opposition they were hindering was now a segment of the US population.
One day we'll all understand this again, but that day we'll all be way too late.
You forget, or don’t know, what preceded Reagan, namely double digit inflation, double digit interest rates and high unemployment. It was a very unhappy time. Reagan turned it all around in 3 years. He gave people hope. He created a booming economy with full employment and lower interest rates. And he, along with Thatcher and Pope John caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Yes, Reagan realized that if you just print money and give it to rich people you can absolutely solve a nations short-term financial problems.
Like all leaders, Reagan has his pluses and his minuses and I'm not necessarily arguing that Reagan was a net negative, and certainly the attitude of the nation matters, and he did oversee a massive shift to the positive in that regard, but he bought that happiness with fake money and the lasting effect of his specific fiscal policies, including immigration, are huge contributors to our wealth inequality, debt, and the size of our federal bureaucracy, today. He started a snowball that never stopped rolling.
He also started this "leader of the free-world" nonsense while dismantling the soviet union (an obvious plus) that has led to the US "spreading freedom" through MIC money laundering the world over ever since (we have not NOT been at war since Reagan invaded Grenada.
I realize that Reagan did a lot of good things in the moment, but it's impossible for me to look positively on anyone who increased the size of the federal government and, by definition, further restricted the rights of the people that government restricts.
RR along with Thatcher ushered in the Neoliberal economic agenda. Privatization, Austerity, “Free” Trade, Deregulation ( which obviously isn’t always bad however often enables corruption )….and the “debts don’t matter” philosophy as well
Hence “Reaganomics AKA What GHW Bush labeled “Voodoo Economics”.
Also he embraced the culture wars by cynically getting in bed with the “Moral” Majority. Oh, and accelerated the hell out of the War On Drugs.
Agreed, Terence. And Reagan also presided over our hostages' return to the U.S. from Iran, and fired the arrogant unionized air traffic controllers when they defied his warning not to jeopardize the public interest by striking. I offer only one correction to your post: it was Pope John Paul II, not Pope John, in that freedom-loving trio you duly credited!
Well reasoned and we'll put. I have been dismissive of Ramaswamy because I viewed him as an outsider, which I like, without the experience to dismantle the bureaucracy. But a wrecking ball might indeed be the solution. But I need to see the replacement specs.
Well said, Maureen. The silence from the man in the WH was deafening and unconscionable. Beyond despicable that there has been no position from him about the hateful and threatening displays by the pro-hamas crowd here...always equivalence. Anyone on a student visa (a great privilege) who spouts anti-semitic hatred should be expelled from their schools, have their visas revoked and deported. The leadership of their schools have been either complicit or silent. end their federal funding.
I think DeSantis is a strong contender. He gets bad press saying he is unlikable, but I think that is just wrong-headed. He is calm and collected, knowledgeable and coherent. These things we need. He is also a patriot and has served our country, and the state of Florida, quite well.
I like DeSantis, but it's true that he lacks charisma (likability). That doesn't take away from the fact that he wouldn't be a great president. The mainstream media and liberal organizations have gone after him with a vengeance since COVID. Many people now think he is a tyrant and that Florida is not safe. Amazing how easily we are manipulated by the media.
I love my plumber. He spent 10 minutes fixing my low flush toilet and I had to force him to take a payment. I also love my auto mechanic, who is competent and charges much less than the better known chains. And I love DeSantis. He doesn’t have Reagan’s charm or sense of humor, but who does? Trump has a very good sense of humor, but he lacks DeSantis’s character.
Biden is an abomination: corrupt, dishonest, feeble minded and clueless. The only purpose he serves is that he is a good barometer of the intelligence of the American public.
This society doesn’t produce Reagan types any more. They’re viewed as so naive and dangerous to the “at all costs” wealth and power accumulation mania which dominates our leaders’ inner beings. This is the ethic now. Why we’re living in dystopian times. It’s 100% fake construct. We will end it but not without pain.
I was with you all the way, until your final sentence. Reagan, really!
Remember Iran-Contra? (Full disclosure: I didn't, so had to look it up during my 3rd time through The Americans.) Reagan's arms for hostages (and subsequent lies btw), to me sounds a lot like Biden-Hamas, and the moral clarity is lost on me.
Yes, oh yes. Where indeed is another Reagan? I watched the excellent speech by the German vice chancellor after 10/7 and thought: where is the comparable American speech? Not that I am suggesting either oil President ie God forbid Vice President could have done such a job...bur ANY significant speech by any leader would have been nice.
Our education system is a disaster. Thirty years in education and I've wondered often why the GOP has not taken up the cudgel as it is such a civil rights issue. From the other end of the spectrum from the medical students I recently met a man in prison with three life sentences who shares how he grew up in a large blue city and his report card would be mailed home showing him passing all his classes. He would shake his head and wonder why as he wasn't even going to school!
The Blue city education fulfilled their own rhetoric regarding "School to Prison Pipeline".
Dunno about that. When I entered an engineering school in 1965 the humanities and social sciences were beginning to die off. I suspect that there's very little left in any technical syllabus, even more so in med school, that's not part of the main dish. Another "progressive" sin.
Elon did not attack Jewish people. He attacked the ADL, a group which has been pushing de-facto racism against whites (and now Asians) for years now. I don't want to paint all Jewish people with the same brush I would the ADL, and I'd hope Elon doesn't do that either.
Thanks for providing context to that tweet. Sadly, the media and FP did not give context in that tweet. The ADL, like all other self-appointed left-wing goon squads, are nothing more than groups used to intimidate unapproved thoughts and speech. I will keep looking more into the context, but thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
It's extremely disappointing but bottom line TFP is not an honest broker on this subject in general. TFP has undeniably done some great things but I'm out once my subscription expires.
The Venn Diagram for "media" and "context" has an infinitesimal intersection populated by no organizations of any significant size. Mr Musk is a 1984esque Goldstein in FP space.
Correct. The ADL has been trying to silence him. Musk, but most standards is slightly center left (he has posted a famous meme showing the Democratic Party running to the far left).
I came to say exactly the same thing. People who follows what Elon Musk is about would know that. Unfortunately many don't. On the left especially they believe ever stupid thing their MSM propaganda tells them. Elon is also at fault though. It's not the first time he liked and affirmed some others idiotic tweets without checking the source or reading more carefully what the OP said, then followed up with something unclear that the hounds are always waiting to pounce on. One would think he had learned better already.
I know Bari had a fall out with Elon but Bari, you should've known better than this. If anything, I expected TFP to clear up this than to intentionally perpetuate this false narrative. Come on, Bari! Am disappointed.
I happened to be scrolling Twitter just as this was unfolding. It was in response to a new ad about antisemitism which featured a young, white, farmer-type as the perpetrator rather than the rabid, foaming at the mouth people we’ve seen at the pro-Hamas rallies or those we saw on CCTV attacking Asian Americans and Chasidim in NYC. Many rational people, including a contributor to TFP, objected to this dishonest and cowardly depiction.
Musk, who loathes the ADL, incorrectly assumed it was behind the ad and then started generalizing about all Jews’ agreeing with the ADL. He was called out by several prominent Jews for his comments.
The Coleman Hughes article was informative and had great logical points, but sadly, the woke and Palestinians are religious zealots, and it won't work on them. That leads me to the coming battle royal of 2024. For the first time in my voting life, I will vote for someone other than a Republican. If Trump wins the nomination and Machin is the No Labels candidate, I will vote for him. He is the best person to lead the country for the next four years. Trump is too toxic to lead, and Biden and team are tired, old, and dangerous. RFK has no executive experience and knows nothing about what he will run. Manchin has eight years of experience as a governor and knows Washington. Making any reform will take consensus of about 60% of Congress. Manchin has the best chance of marginalizing the Woke Squad and MAGA team and doing something that might work. Next year will be fun to observe, but in the end, I want 2025 and beyond to be fun to live in.
You don't like Trump. Neither do I. Neither does anyone I know. His own mother probably didn't like him.
But let me ask you.....was your life that bad while he was president?
Was the country safer? The world? Did he PERSONALLY affect your life in a negative manner?
If not voting for him meant 4 more years of this disaster, with a half-dead racist do-nothing word salad idiot waiting in the VP slot for her turn, you'd take that instead?
In my view, that is a pretty pathetic, short-sighted, un-patriotic view.
To me this argument is not persuasive. The world is much much different than 4 years ago or 8 years ago. I'm really tired of and fearful of the woke left getting more unhinged and radioactive. Another Trump presidency will just turn them into further overdrive. Like fellow commenter Celia here said, it's best to take their favorite toy away. Give them boring to neuter them and tone down their decibels.
I get what you're saying. But for me it's not about their rules or owning the libs. I'm fatigued out by all their crazy protests. I want them and him to all go away and some form of normalcy to be restored. They're all one big wrecking ball.
Do we really think that the left will tone it down if Trump is out of the picture? They will tear down anyone who stands in their way. When DeSantis was considered a viable threat, we saw the “he is more dangerous than Trump because he is MAGA with competence” theme. They will destroy anyone that stands in their way. At least Trump is battle tested and to me the attacks are tiresome.
No I don't. But they'll also not have someone deliberately baiting them every day, and picking pointless fights with liberals like Rosie O'Donnell. Trump basks in these stupid fights and drama because it's how he gets his base riled up to show him their love. Can't see this happening with say, Tim Scott, Haley, Manchin, etc. Even DeSantis is just posing and I don't get a feeling he enjoys it. Vivek enjoys it but even he can't get the Woke Crazy Train going like Trump can. Not even close. RFK might if he goes off into vaccine territory but he's not into being a cult leader-like figure wanting to bask in love. That's the difference. If Trump goes away, at least the Republican side can move on and maybe those of us who has had enough of crazy can follow and leave the Left looking evermore unhinged if they want. They'll finally look like the mad dogs they really are.
I'll also add that Trump had also made Republicans unhinged and radioactive, to the point they were willing to oust their own speaker to prove how Trump-like they are. That man has lowered the standards for politicians across both aisles.
My life was no different under Trump than under the second Obama term or Biden term. Remember Trump started this inflation mess with all of the government spending. He was very average. I voted for him twice but he failed as a leader and is a loser. I think Manchin would do a much better job. So not wanting a crybaby, thin skinned, petualant failed leader makes me pathetic, short sighted and un patrotic? How?
You are the one with the other TDS - Trump Devotion Syndrome. He was an average President who didn't do much outside of Tax reform and cleaned up Obama's mess. And I do blame him not the Pandemic. It was the government's response to the Pandemic with printing and spending that caused this Inflation. He simply can't lead - He is an awful communicator, can't build a consensus, is a horrid judge of talent, and is as undicplined as they come. I know he is your hero but I think anyone outside of Biden, West, Stein could do worse. I think Manchin would be much better. He's competent.
I am voting for DeSantis so I am not a liberal. I think any of the GOP outside of Chrstie could do a better job than Trump. But if its Trump vs. Biden, I will vote third party. Thanks for an enlightning conversation.
You say Trump “was an average President who didn't do much outside of Tax reform and cleaned up Obama's mess. He did much more positive things than that, but even if it was limited to your view, cleaning up eight years of Obama’s mess was a major accomplishment in and of itself. You have to realize that he attempted to govern with a rabid D party, their media pawns, and most of the Republican party against him. He also faced spying by the intelligence agencies and a baseless investigation by the DOJ/FBI.
I think you make some good points Albert. Thanks for posting. Our first attempt at improvement should be to support non-Trump candidates for the nomination. I am voting for whoever is polling in second place. If that fails, I could go Manchin
Agree 100%. You have to vote out Democrats and that means whoever has the greatest chance of beating them and as a consequence to destroy the deep state fascist power.
Please vote policy over personality. If Manchin does run, but stands little chance of winning, his candidacy puts us at risk for another Biden presidency which will lead to a Kamala presidency as he will most likely retire during his second term. I do admire Joe Manchin. but another third party candidate at this point in the cycle(there are two now) could very well end up getting Biden re-elected. I wish that he had announced months ago.
Manchin, who read the writing on the wall from WV and realized he had no chance of re-election will now canvas the country in the hopes that someone, anyone will help him continue his ride on the public gravy train corruption car. Hilarious yet pathetic.
Correct. I have relatives who until recently lived in WV and had plenty of exposure to and interaction with Manchin. Likeable, in a folksy way, but make no mistake - a political creature to his core. Look at his voting record - yea on “Inflation Reduction Act”, for one. And yes, Jim Justice would have cleaned his clock in the next election. Better than Biden? Yes, but so is my cat.
We hillbillies aren't that bright, but we can smell a phony from a mile away. Many of us were quite taken with Joe Manchin, who, from a Yellow-dog Democrat family suddenly found himself in a state transformed from 80% Democrat to about 80% Republican after Crooked Hillary told us to forget about mining coal and learn to code.
Lawsy, what was he gonna do? Couldn't switch parties; the Manchin Family would turn him from a rooster to a hen with one shot (HT to Dolly Parton in "9 to 5.") So, ever the smart boy, he decided to Talk Republican and Vote Democrat - which he did reliably, even getting re-elected the last go-around.
But now, with his vote along Democrat party lines to usher in the Inflation Creation - er, Reduction, Act, we hillbillies finally see him in all his buck-naked glory, and We Don't Like It A Bit. He's figured that out and decided against running for senate again, since the six-foot-fifteen inch Joy-Behar-Can-Kiss Babydog's-Ass governor, Jim Justice, is set to leave Manchin as a greasy spot in the senate electoral dust.
No, you can turn your attention elsewhere. Joe Manchin has now joined the Mike Pence train to the dustbin of history. Good riddance. I've heard they need a dogcatcher somewhere.
I would love to see a four party political system in the US. So many western countries have 3, 4, or 5 real choices on the ballot. Most Americans do not fit into one of the current two boxes. It is time to reflect true representation of the electorate.
Lily, as a poli sci major many years ago, I studied other political systems where there are multiple parties. Our government isn’t set up that way so a multiparty system won’t work in the US.
Why not? I don't think there is anything specific in our system that demand only 2 parties. It's just easier for the parties to eventually distill down into 2.
It’s the way we are set up. Our voting is winner take all with >50% of the vote. In most European countries, they have rank order voting and when no one party wins 50%, the parties are forced to form coalition governments.
I know the mechanics. I am just not sure how winner takes all necessitates 2 parties. Why not only 1? Why not 3? Yes it will eventually distill down, but that has more to do with us (the voters) caring more about 'winning' than voting our consciences. There is no rational reason that everyone somehow falls into 2 camps and only 2 camps, when most of us are more nuanced than that.
Can you imagine figuring out who does what to whom in the houses of congress? IIRC, the rules give the right to name committee chairs in both chambers and far more in the House. What if no one has a majority?
One way to have more than two parties in the U.S. system would be to change how voting works. An alternative that is being tried in some jurisdictions is "ranked choice" or "ranked preference" voting, which operates a little like an "instant runoff". Basically, each voter selects a number of candidates from an array of parties, then ranks them from most to least preferred. Then the votes are tallied in rounds: if your first-choice candidate doesn't make the cut in the first round, your second-choice candidate would be counted in the second round, and so on.
The approach is intriguing, but can also skew the results in odd ways, and poses logistical challenges. I mean, could you imagine if someone insisted on a recount?
The real fix would be just to change the federal constitution and all the state constitutions to a proportional system of representation . . . and I don't see that happening.
Ranked voting is not the answer. One party will load the field to take votes away from the leader. The crooks in Cook County (Mike Madigan) have been unofficially doing this for years. They plug in candidates they know will not win to undermine opponents.
The only way to fix voting is to apply in person with a photo id for an absentee ballot, be sure it's in the mail for the districts to receive and count it on election day, or vote in person with a photo id. No mail in ballots. Period.
We are heading to the scrap heap of history. America will become the United States of Islam if we're not paying attention. The Pro-Israel rally, which I attended, was peaceful and invigorating. The Anti-Israel, Pro-Hamas, anti-Semitic protest was anything but. The Left has no morals. Sad state of affairs in our country and around the world. We need a strong leader in the Oval Office. The current guy is a skeleton of a man. It's sad and scary all at the same time.
It would be nice if some journalist would.umpack the gross statistic of life expectancy, For.most of history in most places low life expectancy was mostly a function of infant and child mortality. Total life expectancy numbers are not informative and journalists should stop reporting them without investigating the details and unveiling the real information hidden I that gross statistic.
There was a time I would have regarded a credible charge of being a "warmonger" to have been an automatic disqualification: I would never vote for such a person!
Since October 7, I have found myself - an old-school give-peace-a-chance liberal - turning into a hawk. I could not now vote for any candidate for the presidency who did not make U.S. military preparedness and strong alliances with other free nations a top priority.
Yes, the security state is a serious problem, and requires the vigilance of citizens and of a free press (ahem!), but I'll be taking a closer look at Haley's qualifications and intentions, as she may bring much to the job that we need right now.
Strong military and border and seeking peaceful relations with other countries is the heart of MAGA foreign policy directives. Only engaging in kinetic war when there is a clear threat to America and Americans
I am BEYOND EXHAUSTED at the mischaracterization of MAGA as “isolationist”. Avoiding war and needless deaths is wisdom not isolation
P.S. I've never really been a strict pacifist. For many years now, whenever I've seen one of those "War Is Not the Answer" yard signs, I think: "But doesn't that depend on the question?"
Still sorting that out, honestly. I mean, I've only been a foreign policy hawk for a few weeks now, it may take some time to adjust!
My first draft, subject to revision: I think we need to be strong enough and have enough backbone - militarily and diplomatically - to stand up to the main threats to open societies in the Western tradition, on several fronts (v. Iran, China, and Russia).
My hope would be that sufficient strength would act as a deterrent, keeping a lid on Iran's ambitions, and giving China less scope to imagine it can go after Taiwan. As it is Russia, China, and Iran have been taking full advantage of American weakness and inattention, as we've been too busy engaging in the politics of resentment - on all sides - to notice that Western civilization is faltering.
On that score, Trump's "America first" disengagement from the world is every bit as bad as - if not ultimately worse than - Obama's appeasement of Iran.
Bullshit. Trump was fully engaged. He kept the peace. Abraham accords were Nobel worthy. Defanged North Korea. Starved Iran and it’s proxies of cash. And more. You just weren’t paying attention
I was initially on board with Obama's approach to Iran. The story - as I understood it - was that stabilizing relations and easing sanctions would strengthen the modern and moderate elements in Iranian civil society, and weaken the theocratic state as a consequence, all while slowing down Iran's development of nuclear weapons.
It was a pleasant thought, but in hindsight shows itself to be cripplingly naive in its assumption that it is possible to negotiate in good faith with radical Islamists. (I just finished listening to the episode of Sam Harris' podcast that Bari re-posted here; it clarifies some things.)
Or maybe it's because the unhinged left will dox you, report you to your employer for WrongThink like a man is not a woman, and send you death threats and rape threats against you AND your minor children.
When I was younger, I agreed with your feelings on using public names. But at the same time, I don't think it is the governments job to trying to clean up the internet. Each place on the web is perfectly capable of implementing their own rules. If, for instance, TFP decides to only allow full name posting, then that is fine. Each of us can make a choice on that.
But allowing the government to force that...man you have way more faith in people than I do...
Meanwhile, Nikki Haley would surely have been on the British side in the lead-in to the American Revolution, demanding identification of those pesky pamphlet authors Publius and Common Sense. Fortunately the British didn't have cell phone tracking at the time.
Nothing about the poor bus drivers who all got sick Tuesday and could not make the drive to Dulles Airport? I hope they did not have to stay in bed the rest of the week.
Frankly I am in agreement with Haley’s idea. Social Media has become a human stain and consuming the brains of our youth. The number of likes one receives on a post of a photo is determining self worth. It has become the land of “bots” and cranks...far more than blithely suggested by the author. Obviously you cannot force Social Media companies to do anything but making people use their real names would certainly cut down on the garbage currently being spewed, like anti semitism. I have no problem with using “shame” to modify inappropriate behavior.
Not just the right, but women who have been sounding alarms about the insidious gender ideology destroying all women's rights and our youths' physical and mental health. Some women have been able to do so only anonymously without putting themselves and their families including children into harms' way, as in literally under threat of violent harms, and losing their jobs and livelihood. The GOP basically took everything these women have been saying and broken down in the last 5 years and packaged them into a publicly consumable narrative to get the truth out once they got wind of it and saw the political opportunity. But it was the underground drumbeat that brought things out to the open to this point. To do away with anonymity will absolutely only help the authoritarian left silence every dissent.
This is the first unforced error I've seen from the Haley campaign. I'm glad she walked it back but when she said it, I had to wonder who the hell was advising her.
Come on, Eric. Really? That was a good example of the media twisting and exaggerating what she said and what she meant. I'm not defending her specifically. I would point out media twisting things said of anyone including those I don't agree with. This one though is all on her and she deserves all the flaks she's getting for it.
I remember her saying it, and reading about it in right-leaning media which would not be prone to making her look bad. That there should have been ANY talk of taking in Jew-hating refugees from Gaza after 10/7 - especially by a Republican - was thoughtless at best and dangerous at worst.
I agree so strongly with you on this, QX. We would not have Libs of Tik Tok if she'd had to start with her name. And, since most women do not have the wealth and power of J.K. Rowling they need anonymity to call out the Trans Travesty and to properly state that Admiral as a man who wants to trans our kids. https://www.leftyliars.com/why-rachel-levine-is-still-a-man/
I have long thought that Haley was weak on "cultural matters". Now, I see her stumble into taking a page out of 1984. George Orwell was not writing a handbook.
Kids are certainly psychically damaged by social media - but they are harmed by many who even use their own names - including those who use officially sanctioned Trans Names (calling their own names "dead") and plastic surgeons like Dr. Gallager who appeal directly to minors on line to "Yeet" those "Teets". And, they harm each other parroting what they see. If we want to set the age to legally have a smart phone at 18 - that works for me.
But, I do not see such a move against free speech even working in the intended way any more than that National Do Not Call list did for dumb phones. It would just give the government even more tools to use against citizens. Who decides what is misinformation? Or hateful? Am I hateful not to believe in the cult of "gender"?
You read my mind re: getting the government involved in social media free speech. The National do not call list was the first thing that sprang to mind. After I signed up over 15 years ago, I was deluged with sales calls. The website is still active and federal employees are still getting paid for this useless charade. Haley deeply disappointed with this. Is she starting to pander since she is up in the polls?
This puts it well: "The Morning Briefing: So Much for 'Nikkimentum'"
"Even the politicians who seem to have the purest, most liberty-minded intentions when they start out get warped by the national stage and greater fame."
"As Haley's stature grew in the Republican Party, there were a couple of soft shoedrops along the way." I agree - like when she dodged a question about GI in the schools and talked about how she would focus on reading.
"I've been dealing with anonymous randos on the internet for a very long time now. Yes, they can be very irritating. On the other hand, there are many anonymous social media accounts that are valuable contributors to national political conversations."
And,
"The call for "civility" was almost as offensive as the unconstitutional aspect of Haley's Soviet proposal. This is not the time in history for civility or nice guy/gal Republicans. Were in a battle for the future of the United States. The Democrats are doing all that they can to permanently destroy our freedoms. The last thing we need are Republicans like Nikki Haley giving them an assist."
"Under Haley's proposal, "Publius" would not be allowed to publish the 1787-88 Federalist Papers on Twitter or Facebook, and maybe not even on a free Blogspot site, depending on how "social media" is defined. Once given the power to compel speakers to reveal their identities, you know that Washington would define its new authority as broadly as possible. "
And, "Some of my favorite conservative Twitter accounts are anonymous — and they're having none of it." Then he links to "Aelfred the Great" who has a political cartoon.
Getting the government involved in social media and free speech is a Democrat party worthy idea. Right now the Federal Government promotes Gender Ideology (which is more cult than science). And, who knows what it might be in the future?
Quoting from a prior FP/thread:
"The war is fought in our culture, in our institutions, our halls of power, our corporations, our newsrooms, our apps, our managerial-class administrators, our classrooms, our campuses."
"They're coming via social media and woke ideology to control and indoctrinate a generation of American kids."
From PITT ""Most of the children claim to be some type of queer." When your five year-old comes home from kindergarten and tells you that even though he has a penis, maybe he's a girl, you're living in the Queer Zone."
"Queering" refers not to homosexuality per se, but to acting in ways that subvert and dismantle the foundational norms of society, biological and everything else. It is not a movement that has a stopping point. DIE/Queering/"implicit" bias... all bad and promoted via government and other institutions.
I never thought that Haley was good so much as people projected what they wanted to see onto her. I am for DeSantis who is smart, measured, knows how to put good people in place, was a Navy Jag...
You clearly are not on the right. People on the right are being doxxed and having their lives destroyed for even modest dissent - like opposing transgenderism, wanting control of our borders, opposing reverse discrimination or backing Trump.
In an era where a ruthless, totalitarian fascist left controls BigTech, news media, Big Law, the Security Apparatus, education and even most corporations via HR and legal departments, you had better damn well believe that we need anonymity.
Wrong. Very wrong. I assume your politics lean left, so you would be largely immune to this thuggish behavior. Those of us on the right are painfully aware of it.
Earl, either you are purposely being misleading or you have been ignorant of what has been happening. People across the country have lost jobs for things they simply said, sometimes years or decades ago. Some states are trying to pass laws where they can take your kids aware for not gender affirming them.
Your views only work in a non-corrupt system. Which does not exists, especially right now.
I think the opposite. I think it would be used to identify those who can and do defend their position to protect the sheep who just do as told by TikTok or the trendy app of the day.
Exactly, Eric R. . Haley doesn't "get" it while DeSantis is political leader - smart - not stumbling around making crazy un-thought-through statements but methodically implementing good policy and then explaining it. Has Haley heard of the Federalist Papers?
"Haley said that if she were to become president, her second priority—after forcing the platforms to disclose their algorithms—would be to require name verification of all social media users.
"It's a national security threat," she said. "It gets rid of the Russian bots, the Iranian bots, and the Chinese bots. And then, you're going to get some civility, when people know their name is next to what they say.""...
"anonymity is a cherished aspect of political speech, and rightly so. Sometimes, people have important truths to tell but for various reasons cannot risk attaching their names to their words. As noted by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R–Fla.) and Vivek Ramaswamy—two of Haley's rivals for the GOP nomination—anonymous speech was an integral part of the U.S.'s founding: James Madison published the Federalist Papers under a pseudonym, for instance."
I hope more people understand what a terrible president Haley would be, including FP which seems to adore her. What is the idea with compelling us all to be "civil"? Did Biden bring us "together"? Our names could be listed and then we'd be toast for "misgendering" or whatever the compelled speech of the moment is.
This does not mean that social media is good. Maybe take the smart phones away from the children? But, lets not use the Russians or the Chinese as an excuse to tamp down on American freedoms.
The comparisons between anonymous writers in early America to social media today are silly. An anonymous tweet isn't going to have any impact, other than drive online and media discourse.
You’re being mendacious. We are not talking about people who make good faith policy arguments or points of view. Let alone satarists. We have bots, we have anti semites, racists, terrorists propaganda, state propaganda. So I have to call BS...on BS
Besides I haven’t seen a Mark Twain or a Will Rogers or a John Adams or James Madison let alone a Lincoln around these parts in decades. We seem to have only the small minded and the extreme.
After 10/7 America needed a coherent, empassioned rally cry from a President with a moral compass. We needed an evening address from the Oval Office, reminding us all that we are not the type of people who stand by silent, tolerating the atrocities. That we would not tolerate displays of antisemitism and threats and violence against our Jewish citizens. And that if there were immigrants here who felt entitled to do so, we will be preparing their exit papers. And to the universities that provide safe spaces for haters, we are coming for you. No more federal money, no more tax free endowments, no more accepting millions from nations that hate us.
But that didn’t happen because we have a bumbling idiot for a President. We are weak, morally lost, and the world sees it.
The only qualifications now for President are moral clarity and the ability to rally the nation. Another Reagan.
"But that didn’t happen because we have a bumbling idiot for a President."
No, we have a bumbling idiot figurehead. The real President is a malevolent, America-hating, Jew-hating Marxist.
But suppose Biden is not as bumbling as he seems, that he is fully in command of his own faculties, and actually in charge in his administration.
His first responses after October 7 suggest that he remains a staunch ally of Israel, and would make executive and command decisions to support Israel in its hour of need. Deploying the carrier groups to the region, to remind Iran that it doesn't quite have the run of the place, just yet, suggests as much.
But Biden is up for re-election, and beating his likely opponent depends on having support from the far-leftward portions of the Democratic base . . . who are currently busy cheering for Hamas. So, he has to soften his position, call for a "pause" - whether "humanitarian" or "tactical" - and all that.
Perhaps the thing would be for Biden to announce that he will not be running for re-election, after all. Then, he could tell the pro-terrorist far-left precisely what they can do with their masks . . .
Well, one can dream.
He has been supportive of Israel militarily but has a complete lack of moral clarity on the pro-mamas evils we have seen here in the US. Yes, trying to straddle both sides because he is running for reelection. Pathetic.
Biden isn’t running. He can’t even walk without looking like he is on his last legs. His support is less than 40%.
Surely, pro mama isn’t all bad.
Bob K
One can dream that you have a clue. If Biden had a clue Biden would have ended his support for Iran’s nuclear program. And America wouldn’t have open borders, a mandate for a vaccine that doesn’t work and wouldn’t have hyper inflation because of its futile War On Mother Nature.
That's why I so enjoy the comments section. It's the civility, the willingness to hear people out and give them the benefit of the doubt, the commitment to the principle that reasonable people of good will may disagree with one another.
It really warms the heart.
Your comment made me LOL
me as well
If Mr Gains was a flamethrower, he ranked (in the post I assume is at issue) approximately birthday candle-level.
Spot on Terence!
Excellent reply
And who would that be? Mr. Obama?
Who do you think?
No one would surprise me at this point.
We have bumbling idiots for voters. He didn't just show up.
As was his mother.
The US needs a Maximus Decimus Meridius, not another Reagan. Reagan's fiscal policies are a massive reason we're such a disaster of a nation to begin with.
The only hope the US has is to return the power to the people. Dismantle the swamp, return federalism, and let the people govern themselves. Today we're governed not by people but by bureaucracy as a verb. When Elon talks to Lex Fridman and says there are over 200 regulatory agencies that govern Tesla we should all stop and think about how absolutely insane that is.
I've said it before, and I'll say it many times more - a nation's potential is represented by its generals proximity to war (most of our "generals" couldn't even name the places we're fighting, much less locate them on a map) and its tax collectors proximity to its taxpayers. We are, very simply, a post-opportunity society. At best Amsterdam or France with significantly worse architecture and infrastructure but significantly greater natural resources or at worse the East Indian Trading Company soon to be scattered to the wind.
Unless we find a Maximus. Maximus led his troops into battle and he returned the power to the people. Yes, he's a metaphor, but he's the character embodiment of the only hope we have. Vivek is the closest to this - in that at least he understands that to lead at scale you need to decentralize, and not only empower, but encourage, distinct operating cultures that fit the people and the place. Trying to govern CA the same way you govern North Dakota, the same way you govern CT is a failure before you even begin. The leader who realizes this and begins unwinding federal bureaucracy is the only leader with an actual chance to restore American opportunity.
I do like Vivek’s attack on the vast administrative and regulatory apparatus. I would put him in charge of the wrecking ball on day 1.
BTW—-Anyone paying attention to the efforts of the FCC to take over control of the internet?
Maureen, I was in your camp about Vivek until recently. His grandstanding during the debates has been, yes at times, valuable - his response to his first question in the last one was gold. But overall he sounds more and more like a typical political narcissist IMHO.
I see your point, when you made your first billion by the time you were 30, when you went to Yale Law School while working full time on Wall St, you can get a big opinion of yourself. Maybe a little deserved?
I like his energy and ideas, and he speaks well and with passion. Not every idea a smart young man has is going to be right, but I think he is willing to learn and adjust. Anyone as successful as he has been in business has that core competency.
Moronoswammy said those who oppose Russia’s completely unjustified invasion of Ukraine were bloodthirsty. He’s a know-nothing punk.
Does it make you feel like a big smart guy to mock his name?
TG Gain—- added to my list of people I ignore, like comprof. Congratulations
He is passionate, for sure! Perhaps with some time to gain some more experience and tempering. He will need to deal with the House and Senate if he is going to get anything done and we know how much they love an outsider lol. But there is potential there.
Yes, I've heard about the FCC's efforts. Scary.
Agree with you on Vivek. He would be a fantastic member of President Trump’s cabinet and hope he joins.
Vivek is a moronic punk who doesn’t understand the responsibilities of the leader of the free world. He would hasten America’s demise.
YES!
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-398244A1.pdf
And five hours later He Who Shall Not Be Named -- the only nameable wrecking ball in sight --has not been named.
I believe the problem is the concept of he career politician (Joe Biden, anyone?). There are too many who live off the taxpayer paid gravy train of public office. Whether without much of a prior career in the private world, or following one...once they get it they do all in their power to stay in. We need term limits on both the House and the Senate.
The US government now exists only to support the US government. They don't actually have any responsibilities. And I mean that literally. We're now like 15 years into continuing resolutions to fund the government, and our bureaucracy is SOOOO outlandish that every single bit of responsibility that used to live in the house and congress has been outsourced to salaried lifetime employees. And so they spend their time in office extending their time in office and making as much money as they can. That's now the job description. Term limits would help, I guess, in that they'd make less money off tax payers, but it doesn't solve the problem of eliminating regulatory capture and dismantling the blob so our politicians are actually held accountable for doing a job again.
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":
First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.
Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.
The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
All excellent points
The problem with term limits, as I see it, is that it would give politicians even more incentive to ignore their constituents and focus all their efforts on buttering up some potential future employer.
My thought on this is that politician's don't get rich from "influence" like they used too (Biden's house essentially gifted to him by credit card magnates he was fighting on behalf of), they get rich from fundraising and access. All the influence now lives in the bureaucracy not in the politicians. It's the FDA going straight to Pfizer and the SEC going straight to Goldman and a million other micro examples of this happening all over the country every single day that none of us see because none of us can really grasp the size and breadth of the blob.
What term limits do is slow down the growth of government - which by itself is worth its weight in gold.
The US citizenry has forgotten that government is a tax on the people. It is, by definition, anti-growth. We think of government as there to "help the people." But that is a hilarious misunderstanding. The government was created to hinder opposition, not help the people. Those are two different things. The minute the government started looking inward was the day we died as an experiment because it meant the opposition they were hindering was now a segment of the US population.
One day we'll all understand this again, but that day we'll all be way too late.
It is a conflict of interest. And those bureaucrats they have passed the mantle of governance to likewise have a conflict of interest.
ButTheDataSays
You forget, or don’t know, what preceded Reagan, namely double digit inflation, double digit interest rates and high unemployment. It was a very unhappy time. Reagan turned it all around in 3 years. He gave people hope. He created a booming economy with full employment and lower interest rates. And he, along with Thatcher and Pope John caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Yes, Reagan realized that if you just print money and give it to rich people you can absolutely solve a nations short-term financial problems.
Like all leaders, Reagan has his pluses and his minuses and I'm not necessarily arguing that Reagan was a net negative, and certainly the attitude of the nation matters, and he did oversee a massive shift to the positive in that regard, but he bought that happiness with fake money and the lasting effect of his specific fiscal policies, including immigration, are huge contributors to our wealth inequality, debt, and the size of our federal bureaucracy, today. He started a snowball that never stopped rolling.
He also started this "leader of the free-world" nonsense while dismantling the soviet union (an obvious plus) that has led to the US "spreading freedom" through MIC money laundering the world over ever since (we have not NOT been at war since Reagan invaded Grenada.
I realize that Reagan did a lot of good things in the moment, but it's impossible for me to look positively on anyone who increased the size of the federal government and, by definition, further restricted the rights of the people that government restricts.
💯
RR along with Thatcher ushered in the Neoliberal economic agenda. Privatization, Austerity, “Free” Trade, Deregulation ( which obviously isn’t always bad however often enables corruption )….and the “debts don’t matter” philosophy as well
Hence “Reaganomics AKA What GHW Bush labeled “Voodoo Economics”.
Also he embraced the culture wars by cynically getting in bed with the “Moral” Majority. Oh, and accelerated the hell out of the War On Drugs.
Agreed, Terence. And Reagan also presided over our hostages' return to the U.S. from Iran, and fired the arrogant unionized air traffic controllers when they defied his warning not to jeopardize the public interest by striking. I offer only one correction to your post: it was Pope John Paul II, not Pope John, in that freedom-loving trio you duly credited!
Well reasoned and we'll put. I have been dismissive of Ramaswamy because I viewed him as an outsider, which I like, without the experience to dismantle the bureaucracy. But a wrecking ball might indeed be the solution. But I need to see the replacement specs.
💯
Well said, Maureen. The silence from the man in the WH was deafening and unconscionable. Beyond despicable that there has been no position from him about the hateful and threatening displays by the pro-hamas crowd here...always equivalence. Anyone on a student visa (a great privilege) who spouts anti-semitic hatred should be expelled from their schools, have their visas revoked and deported. The leadership of their schools have been either complicit or silent. end their federal funding.
So true NCMaureen.
With no moral compass, we are lost.
True, but do you see anyone on the horizon with Reagan's chops? I sure don't.
I think DeSantis is a strong contender. He gets bad press saying he is unlikable, but I think that is just wrong-headed. He is calm and collected, knowledgeable and coherent. These things we need. He is also a patriot and has served our country, and the state of Florida, quite well.
I like DeSantis, but it's true that he lacks charisma (likability). That doesn't take away from the fact that he wouldn't be a great president. The mainstream media and liberal organizations have gone after him with a vengeance since COVID. Many people now think he is a tyrant and that Florida is not safe. Amazing how easily we are manipulated by the media.
I love my plumber. He spent 10 minutes fixing my low flush toilet and I had to force him to take a payment. I also love my auto mechanic, who is competent and charges much less than the better known chains. And I love DeSantis. He doesn’t have Reagan’s charm or sense of humor, but who does? Trump has a very good sense of humor, but he lacks DeSantis’s character.
Biden is an abomination: corrupt, dishonest, feeble minded and clueless. The only purpose he serves is that he is a good barometer of the intelligence of the American public.
Amen to that! The cut of personality exploded with Obama.
You don’t want the stink problem eliminated?
This society doesn’t produce Reagan types any more. They’re viewed as so naive and dangerous to the “at all costs” wealth and power accumulation mania which dominates our leaders’ inner beings. This is the ethic now. Why we’re living in dystopian times. It’s 100% fake construct. We will end it but not without pain.
You obviously didn’t listen to his speech from the Oval Office.
I was with you all the way, until your final sentence. Reagan, really!
Remember Iran-Contra? (Full disclosure: I didn't, so had to look it up during my 3rd time through The Americans.) Reagan's arms for hostages (and subsequent lies btw), to me sounds a lot like Biden-Hamas, and the moral clarity is lost on me.
You were doing great until your last sentence.
Yes, oh yes. Where indeed is another Reagan? I watched the excellent speech by the German vice chancellor after 10/7 and thought: where is the comparable American speech? Not that I am suggesting either oil President ie God forbid Vice President could have done such a job...bur ANY significant speech by any leader would have been nice.
How do we define "haters?" Who is the "we?" and How will be "coming for them?"
Isn't Israel a completely separate country from the U.S.?
And who would that be, in your opinion?
I JUST read one of the most pathetic comments on an Israeli article where they talked about this exact comparison.
I could NOT believe it. So this is the propaganda distortion the progressives are now pushing.
What an absolute insult to all Jews as well as Blacks.
I despise progressives the older I get. UGH!
I ask my medical students and residents SIMPLE historical questions. They know NOTHING. Very sad.
Our education system is a disaster. Thirty years in education and I've wondered often why the GOP has not taken up the cudgel as it is such a civil rights issue. From the other end of the spectrum from the medical students I recently met a man in prison with three life sentences who shares how he grew up in a large blue city and his report card would be mailed home showing him passing all his classes. He would shake his head and wonder why as he wasn't even going to school!
The Blue city education fulfilled their own rhetoric regarding "School to Prison Pipeline".
Very true! Not sure our transgender generation is up for it. The destruction of the family in all this appears to be the goal.
🪒🛎️
And these are MEDICAL students! The crème de la crème.
Dunno about that. When I entered an engineering school in 1965 the humanities and social sciences were beginning to die off. I suspect that there's very little left in any technical syllabus, even more so in med school, that's not part of the main dish. Another "progressive" sin.
Bet they know all the genders. Probably not much about diabetes though.
It makes me sick to know you’re right.
It's truly repulsive
Elon did not attack Jewish people. He attacked the ADL, a group which has been pushing de-facto racism against whites (and now Asians) for years now. I don't want to paint all Jewish people with the same brush I would the ADL, and I'd hope Elon doesn't do that either.
Thanks for providing context to that tweet. Sadly, the media and FP did not give context in that tweet. The ADL, like all other self-appointed left-wing goon squads, are nothing more than groups used to intimidate unapproved thoughts and speech. I will keep looking more into the context, but thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
It's extremely disappointing but bottom line TFP is not an honest broker on this subject in general. TFP has undeniably done some great things but I'm out once my subscription expires.
The Venn Diagram for "media" and "context" has an infinitesimal intersection populated by no organizations of any significant size. Mr Musk is a 1984esque Goldstein in FP space.
Thanks for clarifying Musk's statement. I knew there was something "off" about it. The left hates Musk because he opened Twitter up to all viewpoints.
Correct. The ADL has been trying to silence him. Musk, but most standards is slightly center left (he has posted a famous meme showing the Democratic Party running to the far left).
I came to say exactly the same thing. People who follows what Elon Musk is about would know that. Unfortunately many don't. On the left especially they believe ever stupid thing their MSM propaganda tells them. Elon is also at fault though. It's not the first time he liked and affirmed some others idiotic tweets without checking the source or reading more carefully what the OP said, then followed up with something unclear that the hounds are always waiting to pounce on. One would think he had learned better already.
I know Bari had a fall out with Elon but Bari, you should've known better than this. If anything, I expected TFP to clear up this than to intentionally perpetuate this false narrative. Come on, Bari! Am disappointed.
TFP really doesn't like RFK Jr or Musk. Why??
They’re unfortunately NeoConservative adjacent on Foreign policy🤷♂️
Thank you for that clarification.
I happened to be scrolling Twitter just as this was unfolding. It was in response to a new ad about antisemitism which featured a young, white, farmer-type as the perpetrator rather than the rabid, foaming at the mouth people we’ve seen at the pro-Hamas rallies or those we saw on CCTV attacking Asian Americans and Chasidim in NYC. Many rational people, including a contributor to TFP, objected to this dishonest and cowardly depiction.
Musk, who loathes the ADL, incorrectly assumed it was behind the ad and then started generalizing about all Jews’ agreeing with the ADL. He was called out by several prominent Jews for his comments.
The Coleman Hughes article was informative and had great logical points, but sadly, the woke and Palestinians are religious zealots, and it won't work on them. That leads me to the coming battle royal of 2024. For the first time in my voting life, I will vote for someone other than a Republican. If Trump wins the nomination and Machin is the No Labels candidate, I will vote for him. He is the best person to lead the country for the next four years. Trump is too toxic to lead, and Biden and team are tired, old, and dangerous. RFK has no executive experience and knows nothing about what he will run. Manchin has eight years of experience as a governor and knows Washington. Making any reform will take consensus of about 60% of Congress. Manchin has the best chance of marginalizing the Woke Squad and MAGA team and doing something that might work. Next year will be fun to observe, but in the end, I want 2025 and beyond to be fun to live in.
You don't like Trump. Neither do I. Neither does anyone I know. His own mother probably didn't like him.
But let me ask you.....was your life that bad while he was president?
Was the country safer? The world? Did he PERSONALLY affect your life in a negative manner?
If not voting for him meant 4 more years of this disaster, with a half-dead racist do-nothing word salad idiot waiting in the VP slot for her turn, you'd take that instead?
In my view, that is a pretty pathetic, short-sighted, un-patriotic view.
I hope we have very, very few people like you.
To me this argument is not persuasive. The world is much much different than 4 years ago or 8 years ago. I'm really tired of and fearful of the woke left getting more unhinged and radioactive. Another Trump presidency will just turn them into further overdrive. Like fellow commenter Celia here said, it's best to take their favorite toy away. Give them boring to neuter them and tone down their decibels.
That is just playing the game but their rules. And I am done with that.
I get what you're saying. But for me it's not about their rules or owning the libs. I'm fatigued out by all their crazy protests. I want them and him to all go away and some form of normalcy to be restored. They're all one big wrecking ball.
I have no interest in owning the libs. Or anyone else for that matter. I just vote my self-interest. I fear normal is forever changed.
Do we really think that the left will tone it down if Trump is out of the picture? They will tear down anyone who stands in their way. When DeSantis was considered a viable threat, we saw the “he is more dangerous than Trump because he is MAGA with competence” theme. They will destroy anyone that stands in their way. At least Trump is battle tested and to me the attacks are tiresome.
No I don't. But they'll also not have someone deliberately baiting them every day, and picking pointless fights with liberals like Rosie O'Donnell. Trump basks in these stupid fights and drama because it's how he gets his base riled up to show him their love. Can't see this happening with say, Tim Scott, Haley, Manchin, etc. Even DeSantis is just posing and I don't get a feeling he enjoys it. Vivek enjoys it but even he can't get the Woke Crazy Train going like Trump can. Not even close. RFK might if he goes off into vaccine territory but he's not into being a cult leader-like figure wanting to bask in love. That's the difference. If Trump goes away, at least the Republican side can move on and maybe those of us who has had enough of crazy can follow and leave the Left looking evermore unhinged if they want. They'll finally look like the mad dogs they really are.
I'll also add that Trump had also made Republicans unhinged and radioactive, to the point they were willing to oust their own speaker to prove how Trump-like they are. That man has lowered the standards for politicians across both aisles.
My life was no different under Trump than under the second Obama term or Biden term. Remember Trump started this inflation mess with all of the government spending. He was very average. I voted for him twice but he failed as a leader and is a loser. I think Manchin would do a much better job. So not wanting a crybaby, thin skinned, petualant failed leader makes me pathetic, short sighted and un patrotic? How?
I think your TDS, mild or not, puts you into a bit of denial.
With a straight face you think the country is as safe today as 6 years ago? Or the world? How many wars were started under Trump?
Trump did not start this inflation mess...the pandemic did, and Biden put it on fast forward. Energy independence is a key to keeping CPI in tact.
Biden? Close all future oil & gas R&D. Pay people not to work. Can't pass a Green New Deal bill? Disguise it as the Inflation Reduction Act.
I could go on, but I might throw up.
You are the one with the other TDS - Trump Devotion Syndrome. He was an average President who didn't do much outside of Tax reform and cleaned up Obama's mess. And I do blame him not the Pandemic. It was the government's response to the Pandemic with printing and spending that caused this Inflation. He simply can't lead - He is an awful communicator, can't build a consensus, is a horrid judge of talent, and is as undicplined as they come. I know he is your hero but I think anyone outside of Biden, West, Stein could do worse. I think Manchin would be much better. He's competent.
If you bothered to read (& comprehend) my post I told you I don't like him, dude.
And don't bother directly answering my question....liberals are great at dodgeball.
But you go ahead and vote for mush-for-brains. I hope you don't get your car jacked.
I am voting for DeSantis so I am not a liberal. I think any of the GOP outside of Chrstie could do a better job than Trump. But if its Trump vs. Biden, I will vote third party. Thanks for an enlightning conversation.
You say Trump “was an average President who didn't do much outside of Tax reform and cleaned up Obama's mess. He did much more positive things than that, but even if it was limited to your view, cleaning up eight years of Obama’s mess was a major accomplishment in and of itself. You have to realize that he attempted to govern with a rabid D party, their media pawns, and most of the Republican party against him. He also faced spying by the intelligence agencies and a baseless investigation by the DOJ/FBI.
I think you make some good points Albert. Thanks for posting. Our first attempt at improvement should be to support non-Trump candidates for the nomination. I am voting for whoever is polling in second place. If that fails, I could go Manchin
The problem is that the “non-Trump” candidates are traditional Republicans. This brand has failed since 2008.
Agree 100%. You have to vote out Democrats and that means whoever has the greatest chance of beating them and as a consequence to destroy the deep state fascist power.
Please vote policy over personality. If Manchin does run, but stands little chance of winning, his candidacy puts us at risk for another Biden presidency which will lead to a Kamala presidency as he will most likely retire during his second term. I do admire Joe Manchin. but another third party candidate at this point in the cycle(there are two now) could very well end up getting Biden re-elected. I wish that he had announced months ago.
Manchin, who read the writing on the wall from WV and realized he had no chance of re-election will now canvas the country in the hopes that someone, anyone will help him continue his ride on the public gravy train corruption car. Hilarious yet pathetic.
Correct. I have relatives who until recently lived in WV and had plenty of exposure to and interaction with Manchin. Likeable, in a folksy way, but make no mistake - a political creature to his core. Look at his voting record - yea on “Inflation Reduction Act”, for one. And yes, Jim Justice would have cleaned his clock in the next election. Better than Biden? Yes, but so is my cat.
Hmmm, interesting perspective.
We hillbillies aren't that bright, but we can smell a phony from a mile away. Many of us were quite taken with Joe Manchin, who, from a Yellow-dog Democrat family suddenly found himself in a state transformed from 80% Democrat to about 80% Republican after Crooked Hillary told us to forget about mining coal and learn to code.
Lawsy, what was he gonna do? Couldn't switch parties; the Manchin Family would turn him from a rooster to a hen with one shot (HT to Dolly Parton in "9 to 5.") So, ever the smart boy, he decided to Talk Republican and Vote Democrat - which he did reliably, even getting re-elected the last go-around.
But now, with his vote along Democrat party lines to usher in the Inflation Creation - er, Reduction, Act, we hillbillies finally see him in all his buck-naked glory, and We Don't Like It A Bit. He's figured that out and decided against running for senate again, since the six-foot-fifteen inch Joy-Behar-Can-Kiss Babydog's-Ass governor, Jim Justice, is set to leave Manchin as a greasy spot in the senate electoral dust.
No, you can turn your attention elsewhere. Joe Manchin has now joined the Mike Pence train to the dustbin of history. Good riddance. I've heard they need a dogcatcher somewhere.
Exactly. Thank you.
I would love to see a four party political system in the US. So many western countries have 3, 4, or 5 real choices on the ballot. Most Americans do not fit into one of the current two boxes. It is time to reflect true representation of the electorate.
Lily, as a poli sci major many years ago, I studied other political systems where there are multiple parties. Our government isn’t set up that way so a multiparty system won’t work in the US.
Why not? I don't think there is anything specific in our system that demand only 2 parties. It's just easier for the parties to eventually distill down into 2.
It’s the way we are set up. Our voting is winner take all with >50% of the vote. In most European countries, they have rank order voting and when no one party wins 50%, the parties are forced to form coalition governments.
I know the mechanics. I am just not sure how winner takes all necessitates 2 parties. Why not only 1? Why not 3? Yes it will eventually distill down, but that has more to do with us (the voters) caring more about 'winning' than voting our consciences. There is no rational reason that everyone somehow falls into 2 camps and only 2 camps, when most of us are more nuanced than that.
Can you imagine figuring out who does what to whom in the houses of congress? IIRC, the rules give the right to name committee chairs in both chambers and far more in the House. What if no one has a majority?
And a majority of those other parties are quasi-socialists with similar objectives.
One way to have more than two parties in the U.S. system would be to change how voting works. An alternative that is being tried in some jurisdictions is "ranked choice" or "ranked preference" voting, which operates a little like an "instant runoff". Basically, each voter selects a number of candidates from an array of parties, then ranks them from most to least preferred. Then the votes are tallied in rounds: if your first-choice candidate doesn't make the cut in the first round, your second-choice candidate would be counted in the second round, and so on.
The approach is intriguing, but can also skew the results in odd ways, and poses logistical challenges. I mean, could you imagine if someone insisted on a recount?
The real fix would be just to change the federal constitution and all the state constitutions to a proportional system of representation . . . and I don't see that happening.
Ranked voting is not the answer. One party will load the field to take votes away from the leader. The crooks in Cook County (Mike Madigan) have been unofficially doing this for years. They plug in candidates they know will not win to undermine opponents.
The only way to fix voting is to apply in person with a photo id for an absentee ballot, be sure it's in the mail for the districts to receive and count it on election day, or vote in person with a photo id. No mail in ballots. Period.
Nooooo to ranked choice. That is how Alaska still has Murkowski.
Rank choice got us Eric Adams in NY, now being investigated for possibly taking money from Turkey. Oy.
And here I thought that it was a vast sea of low-liability and/or unwise voters.
We are heading to the scrap heap of history. America will become the United States of Islam if we're not paying attention. The Pro-Israel rally, which I attended, was peaceful and invigorating. The Anti-Israel, Pro-Hamas, anti-Semitic protest was anything but. The Left has no morals. Sad state of affairs in our country and around the world. We need a strong leader in the Oval Office. The current guy is a skeleton of a man. It's sad and scary all at the same time.
It would be nice if some journalist would.umpack the gross statistic of life expectancy, For.most of history in most places low life expectancy was mostly a function of infant and child mortality. Total life expectancy numbers are not informative and journalists should stop reporting them without investigating the details and unveiling the real information hidden I that gross statistic.
Haley is a neocon war monger. She LOVES the security state. I would NEVER vote for her.
There was a time I would have regarded a credible charge of being a "warmonger" to have been an automatic disqualification: I would never vote for such a person!
Since October 7, I have found myself - an old-school give-peace-a-chance liberal - turning into a hawk. I could not now vote for any candidate for the presidency who did not make U.S. military preparedness and strong alliances with other free nations a top priority.
Yes, the security state is a serious problem, and requires the vigilance of citizens and of a free press (ahem!), but I'll be taking a closer look at Haley's qualifications and intentions, as she may bring much to the job that we need right now.
Strong military and border and seeking peaceful relations with other countries is the heart of MAGA foreign policy directives. Only engaging in kinetic war when there is a clear threat to America and Americans
I am BEYOND EXHAUSTED at the mischaracterization of MAGA as “isolationist”. Avoiding war and needless deaths is wisdom not isolation
P.S. I've never really been a strict pacifist. For many years now, whenever I've seen one of those "War Is Not the Answer" yard signs, I think: "But doesn't that depend on the question?"
Still sorting that out, honestly. I mean, I've only been a foreign policy hawk for a few weeks now, it may take some time to adjust!
My first draft, subject to revision: I think we need to be strong enough and have enough backbone - militarily and diplomatically - to stand up to the main threats to open societies in the Western tradition, on several fronts (v. Iran, China, and Russia).
My hope would be that sufficient strength would act as a deterrent, keeping a lid on Iran's ambitions, and giving China less scope to imagine it can go after Taiwan. As it is Russia, China, and Iran have been taking full advantage of American weakness and inattention, as we've been too busy engaging in the politics of resentment - on all sides - to notice that Western civilization is faltering.
On that score, Trump's "America first" disengagement from the world is every bit as bad as - if not ultimately worse than - Obama's appeasement of Iran.
Bullshit. Trump was fully engaged. He kept the peace. Abraham accords were Nobel worthy. Defanged North Korea. Starved Iran and it’s proxies of cash. And more. You just weren’t paying attention
I was initially on board with Obama's approach to Iran. The story - as I understood it - was that stabilizing relations and easing sanctions would strengthen the modern and moderate elements in Iranian civil society, and weaken the theocratic state as a consequence, all while slowing down Iran's development of nuclear weapons.
It was a pleasant thought, but in hindsight shows itself to be cripplingly naive in its assumption that it is possible to negotiate in good faith with radical Islamists. (I just finished listening to the episode of Sam Harris' podcast that Bari re-posted here; it clarifies some things.)
If you have to hide under a nom de plume, chances are you are posting something you might not be proud of or do not have enough conviction about.
Seems to me using one’s own name may tidy up a lot of the hate and stupidity on social media
Kind of ironic that you're posting under a nom de plume.
Or maybe it's because the unhinged left will dox you, report you to your employer for WrongThink like a man is not a woman, and send you death threats and rape threats against you AND your minor children.
When I was younger, I agreed with your feelings on using public names. But at the same time, I don't think it is the governments job to trying to clean up the internet. Each place on the web is perfectly capable of implementing their own rules. If, for instance, TFP decides to only allow full name posting, then that is fine. Each of us can make a choice on that.
But allowing the government to force that...man you have way more faith in people than I do...
Amen.
Or Christiam people. Or people born male. Or female. . . .
Meanwhile, Nikki Haley would surely have been on the British side in the lead-in to the American Revolution, demanding identification of those pesky pamphlet authors Publius and Common Sense. Fortunately the British didn't have cell phone tracking at the time.
Nothing about the poor bus drivers who all got sick Tuesday and could not make the drive to Dulles Airport? I hope they did not have to stay in bed the rest of the week.
There needs to be more investigation into that. If the company did not fire every single bus driver who refused to show up, there need to be lawsuits.
Frankly I am in agreement with Haley’s idea. Social Media has become a human stain and consuming the brains of our youth. The number of likes one receives on a post of a photo is determining self worth. It has become the land of “bots” and cranks...far more than blithely suggested by the author. Obviously you cannot force Social Media companies to do anything but making people use their real names would certainly cut down on the garbage currently being spewed, like anti semitism. I have no problem with using “shame” to modify inappropriate behavior.
I can assure you that Ms. Haley notwithstanding, such legislation will be applied SOLELY by the left to silence the RIGHT.
It will lead to more repression, not less.
Not just the right, but women who have been sounding alarms about the insidious gender ideology destroying all women's rights and our youths' physical and mental health. Some women have been able to do so only anonymously without putting themselves and their families including children into harms' way, as in literally under threat of violent harms, and losing their jobs and livelihood. The GOP basically took everything these women have been saying and broken down in the last 5 years and packaged them into a publicly consumable narrative to get the truth out once they got wind of it and saw the political opportunity. But it was the underground drumbeat that brought things out to the open to this point. To do away with anonymity will absolutely only help the authoritarian left silence every dissent.
This is the first unforced error I've seen from the Haley campaign. I'm glad she walked it back but when she said it, I had to wonder who the hell was advising her.
"This is the first unforced error I've seen from the Haley campaign"
No it isn't. She wants to take in Jew-hating refugees from Gaza.
Come on, Eric. Really? That was a good example of the media twisting and exaggerating what she said and what she meant. I'm not defending her specifically. I would point out media twisting things said of anyone including those I don't agree with. This one though is all on her and she deserves all the flaks she's getting for it.
I remember her saying it, and reading about it in right-leaning media which would not be prone to making her look bad. That there should have been ANY talk of taking in Jew-hating refugees from Gaza after 10/7 - especially by a Republican - was thoughtless at best and dangerous at worst.
I agree so strongly with you on this, QX. We would not have Libs of Tik Tok if she'd had to start with her name. And, since most women do not have the wealth and power of J.K. Rowling they need anonymity to call out the Trans Travesty and to properly state that Admiral as a man who wants to trans our kids. https://www.leftyliars.com/why-rachel-levine-is-still-a-man/
I have long thought that Haley was weak on "cultural matters". Now, I see her stumble into taking a page out of 1984. George Orwell was not writing a handbook.
Kids are certainly psychically damaged by social media - but they are harmed by many who even use their own names - including those who use officially sanctioned Trans Names (calling their own names "dead") and plastic surgeons like Dr. Gallager who appeal directly to minors on line to "Yeet" those "Teets". And, they harm each other parroting what they see. If we want to set the age to legally have a smart phone at 18 - that works for me.
But, I do not see such a move against free speech even working in the intended way any more than that National Do Not Call list did for dumb phones. It would just give the government even more tools to use against citizens. Who decides what is misinformation? Or hateful? Am I hateful not to believe in the cult of "gender"?
Would this mom post publicly on Twitter or Instagram using her name? https://pitt.substack.com/p/if-i-could-have-a-redo-would-it-change
You read my mind re: getting the government involved in social media free speech. The National do not call list was the first thing that sprang to mind. After I signed up over 15 years ago, I was deluged with sales calls. The website is still active and federal employees are still getting paid for this useless charade. Haley deeply disappointed with this. Is she starting to pander since she is up in the polls?
This puts it well: "The Morning Briefing: So Much for 'Nikkimentum'"
"Even the politicians who seem to have the purest, most liberty-minded intentions when they start out get warped by the national stage and greater fame."
"As Haley's stature grew in the Republican Party, there were a couple of soft shoedrops along the way." I agree - like when she dodged a question about GI in the schools and talked about how she would focus on reading.
"I've been dealing with anonymous randos on the internet for a very long time now. Yes, they can be very irritating. On the other hand, there are many anonymous social media accounts that are valuable contributors to national political conversations."
And,
"The call for "civility" was almost as offensive as the unconstitutional aspect of Haley's Soviet proposal. This is not the time in history for civility or nice guy/gal Republicans. Were in a battle for the future of the United States. The Democrats are doing all that they can to permanently destroy our freedoms. The last thing we need are Republicans like Nikki Haley giving them an assist."
He links to https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2023/11/15/nikki-haley-enemy-of-free-speech-n4923928
"Under Haley's proposal, "Publius" would not be allowed to publish the 1787-88 Federalist Papers on Twitter or Facebook, and maybe not even on a free Blogspot site, depending on how "social media" is defined. Once given the power to compel speakers to reveal their identities, you know that Washington would define its new authority as broadly as possible. "
And, "Some of my favorite conservative Twitter accounts are anonymous — and they're having none of it." Then he links to "Aelfred the Great" who has a political cartoon.
Yup! I am still deluged with unwanted calls.
Getting the government involved in social media and free speech is a Democrat party worthy idea. Right now the Federal Government promotes Gender Ideology (which is more cult than science). And, who knows what it might be in the future?
Quoting from a prior FP/thread:
"The war is fought in our culture, in our institutions, our halls of power, our corporations, our newsrooms, our apps, our managerial-class administrators, our classrooms, our campuses."
"They're coming via social media and woke ideology to control and indoctrinate a generation of American kids."
From PITT ""Most of the children claim to be some type of queer." When your five year-old comes home from kindergarten and tells you that even though he has a penis, maybe he's a girl, you're living in the Queer Zone."
"Queering" refers not to homosexuality per se, but to acting in ways that subvert and dismantle the foundational norms of society, biological and everything else. It is not a movement that has a stopping point. DIE/Queering/"implicit" bias... all bad and promoted via government and other institutions.
I never thought that Haley was good so much as people projected what they wanted to see onto her. I am for DeSantis who is smart, measured, knows how to put good people in place, was a Navy Jag...
Eric, having to use your real name has nothing to do with silencing the right. You simply have to stand behind the words you use.
You clearly are not on the right. People on the right are being doxxed and having their lives destroyed for even modest dissent - like opposing transgenderism, wanting control of our borders, opposing reverse discrimination or backing Trump.
In an era where a ruthless, totalitarian fascist left controls BigTech, news media, Big Law, the Security Apparatus, education and even most corporations via HR and legal departments, you had better damn well believe that we need anonymity.
only if you cannot defend your position.
Wrong. Very wrong. I assume your politics lean left, so you would be largely immune to this thuggish behavior. Those of us on the right are painfully aware of it.
Earl, either you are purposely being misleading or you have been ignorant of what has been happening. People across the country have lost jobs for things they simply said, sometimes years or decades ago. Some states are trying to pass laws where they can take your kids aware for not gender affirming them.
Your views only work in a non-corrupt system. Which does not exists, especially right now.
I think the opposite. I think it would be used to identify those who can and do defend their position to protect the sheep who just do as told by TikTok or the trendy app of the day.
Want to discuss that with Brendan Eich?
It's not just the right. You might want to read up on NAACP v Alabama to get an idea why privacy and anonymity matter to free speech.
Exactly, Eric R. . Haley doesn't "get" it while DeSantis is political leader - smart - not stumbling around making crazy un-thought-through statements but methodically implementing good policy and then explaining it. Has Haley heard of the Federalist Papers?
"Haley said that if she were to become president, her second priority—after forcing the platforms to disclose their algorithms—would be to require name verification of all social media users.
"It's a national security threat," she said. "It gets rid of the Russian bots, the Iranian bots, and the Chinese bots. And then, you're going to get some civility, when people know their name is next to what they say.""...
"anonymity is a cherished aspect of political speech, and rightly so. Sometimes, people have important truths to tell but for various reasons cannot risk attaching their names to their words. As noted by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R–Fla.) and Vivek Ramaswamy—two of Haley's rivals for the GOP nomination—anonymous speech was an integral part of the U.S.'s founding: James Madison published the Federalist Papers under a pseudonym, for instance."
https://reason.com/2023/11/15/nikki-haley-social-media-name-verification-censorship/
Then, she walked it back.
I hope more people understand what a terrible president Haley would be, including FP which seems to adore her. What is the idea with compelling us all to be "civil"? Did Biden bring us "together"? Our names could be listed and then we'd be toast for "misgendering" or whatever the compelled speech of the moment is.
This does not mean that social media is good. Maybe take the smart phones away from the children? But, lets not use the Russians or the Chinese as an excuse to tamp down on American freedoms.
It wouldn't be any better if the right ALSO used it to silence or manipulate. Ultimately the issue is that bad actors of all stripes would misuse it.
The comparisons between anonymous writers in early America to social media today are silly. An anonymous tweet isn't going to have any impact, other than drive online and media discourse.
I would as soon promote gun registration.
And just how would using your real name be enforced?
If you're on the right, I am sure the Marxists running BigTech will be all too happy to expose you.
They already do that.
I know, but this idiotic law would give them a legal imperative to do something they want to do anyway.
it would be a term of condition of joining the site. of course it would have to be voluntary. it cannot be legislated.
Riiiiight.
So instead of real named John Smith someone could post under Joanna Dalton.
Stupid idea from a stupid pol who got offended because her 25 year old daughter got outed as being stupid on TikTok.,
You really believe in todays world you cannot match information to a real name? You must live in Idaho with all the other, Doomsdayers.
Oooh. Such a nice leftist.
Been a much less proud Republican these days.
You’re being mendacious. We are not talking about people who make good faith policy arguments or points of view. Let alone satarists. We have bots, we have anti semites, racists, terrorists propaganda, state propaganda. So I have to call BS...on BS
Besides I haven’t seen a Mark Twain or a Will Rogers or a John Adams or James Madison let alone a Lincoln around these parts in decades. We seem to have only the small minded and the extreme.
Mark Twain WAS a a nom de pluere.
Absolutely ;)
I love Coleman Hughes.
"... A big part of the story is Trump and Biden: their obvious shortcomings ...."
Other than mean tweets, I'm not sure what the author sees as obvious shortcomings.