Again, perhaps the best single critique of the abundist deregulatory agenda is:
The last time we tried deregulation without reining in corporate power, we got mortgage cheating and big-bank profiteering and the 2008 financial crisis.
"Abundance" has no answer to this.
Quaintly bizarre seeing judicial reforms advocates claiming yes, everyone in the legal academy is completely onboard with reform and totally has been. Not only absurd but bizarrely self-defeating.
would just like to point out that an equivalent interpretation of this paper is
"centrist billionaires and corporate donors are to the right of the Democratic voter base"
Democrats' pursuit of small donors has shifted Dem legislative behavior to the left. Whether this is good (responsiveness!) or bad (polarization!) is up for debate, but if the party wants to moderate, distancing itself from the current crop of small donors is a legit priority.
But it also shows recipients of small donor dollars vote more with Dems and less with Repubs? My understanding is the party also wants to oppose Republicans in which case aligning with small donor dollars should be a priority.
the problem w/ “abundance” is that it’s either making claims so generic as to be incontestable (regulatory capture from reactionary forces is bad) or it’s making claims specific enough they quickly reveal the world’s most obvious billionaire-funded astroturfed deregulation agenda
If forced to choose between adopting economic policies that poll well -- and those most likely to actually work -- Democrats should ignore the polls, per @simon_bazelonvox.com/politics/466253/why-…
Democrats should ignore wonks who offer an incorrect diagnosis of inflation in 2021-23. This take parrots standard right-wing talking points about "too much fiscal stimulus" and ignores critical role of global supply chain disruptions, hence inflation happening worldwide.
If forced to choose between adopting economic policies that poll well -- and those most likely to actually work -- Democrats should ignore the polls, per @simon_bazelonvox.com/politics/466253/why-…
The backlash against wonkery and the reduction of politics to data isn't "anti-intellectual." It is the recovery of intellectualism against the wave of shallow, gamified casino-empiricism that has drowned our public discourse.
Hearing that that Senate Republicans have a vote queued up today for a national day of remembrance for Charlie Kirk - and Dems can stop it by simply objecting. Will one of them do it?
Word is that no Dems are saying they will object right now.
This should be the easiest ask.
Moreover, Democrats should use the opportunity to say that Charlie Kirk had bad values and did bad things, and deserves no honor. Why is that hard? It’s the simple truth.
Janelle Stelson is running as a Dem, but she's pushing these pro-GOP messages and even though they poll well! — is hurting every other Democratic candidate.
She's micro-optimizing for herself instead of thinking about beating Trump.
Happy to share that my article Lawbreaking as a Method of Competition will be published in @AmULRev
I argue that large-scale corporate violations of consumer protection, labor, and other laws of general application should be treated as an antitrust problem by the FTC
“And if this were Jonathan Greenblatt’s last interview on any mainstream show—because if you lie this blatantly, there should be some consequence—then we could be getting somewhere, right?”
Greenblatt could have been pushed out of the discourse yrs ago.
Suspect we’ll eventually learn about an absolute epidemic of steroid use amongst the DOGE and Trump people.
Between RFK, Mullin, and now Coristine this weekend, these dudes seem all hopped up on performance-enhancing roids, HGH, or similar.