The only Democrat I have seen that has any common sense at all is Tulsi Gabbard. But since she knows the difference between boys and girls, the Democrats will not choose her.
Well for all his faults (and there are many) at least he can only be said to be a Republican.
But if you don't like him just listen to the Democrats.
or any historican who knows anything about facism. Trump and his enablers are facists.
You might like facism and be fine with it. If so, at least be honest and say so, that would make more sense and can at least have an honest discussion.
The last I checked, it's the left that wants to use regulations and government to control the economy, culture, media, education, etc and have a uniparty system where nobody is allowed to disagree….so not sure your argument makes any sense. The Cheny clip you linked to is over a year old. They were trying their best to make the illegitimate January 6th commission look legitimate. I don't like Donald Trump, but I despise the authoritarian left. Whenever I disagree with the left, I get called a bad name (fascist, denier, racist, blah blah blah).
I think it is very important to be able to have a discussion without resorting to simple name calling. There is so much propaganda and misinformation and wilful ignorance (at best) from our media and politicians that we the voters will suffer from all of that.
In my view, regulations and governance is a requirement for any government to regulate the economy, education, media etc. Regulation is generally there to protect consumers, think of the regulations against banks to abuse its customers. Regulation is there to enforce e.g. building standards, to make sure builders build safe homes that conform to requirements for, like, frost, earth quakes, heat, electric safety, gas safety. Etc.
So regulation is not a "left" or "right" thing, but a necessary helpful tool for society.
Can it be abused? Sure. Overdone? Sure. But don't assume that all regulation is bad. It usually has a good reason.
The Jan 6 commission was not "illegitimate", in my view. It is legitimate to query what happened on Jan 6, it was a momentous, important, historical moment that will live in the US history "forever". It had echoes of modes of government that we do not want, presumably, in the USA. Things we thought we left in the past, names like Mussolini, Hitler, Chavez, countries and names of the past that ended badly. A violent incursion into a parliament/congress, is a momentous thing. Jan 6 must be seen in that light and investigated.
And it was. By people who were not violently leftists or nutcase "libs", but people from the party whose candidate/president was actually in office on Jan 6.
So it was not biased against the president. And they found troubling things. Many things we should not want in the USA, things politicians and people in power should not get away with, because it is on a path to a future that we, as people not in power, would not be good in.
People living under governments abusing their power generally dont thrive.
And the goverments don't change anymore once a government disables the safeguards and institutions of our founders.
if it does not change, and does not have offsetting institutions, it is totalitarian.
That is what Jan 6 was about and the story is not over.
This is what we have to think about as citizens, voters, people under this government.
Even if you believe that the left is authoritarian, look at which of the "left" and "right" would protect the US institutions and ensure fair elections every 4 years.
Then you might get closer to the answer on a better path for the USA.
I guess I believe in the principles of due process. If congress creates a commission to investigate an important issue, then all sides should have fair representation for the sake of cross examination. They obviously didn't want to be cross examined, and that's why I consider it illegitimate. That's the sort of thing that real fascists do, in my opinion.
well, the J6 commission was an investigation, not a trial. They followed due process as should be done by an investigation and they had witnesses from all sides of politics. Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Judge Luttig, to mention some, all are card-carrying republicans.
So it was a proper investigation. An investigation is not a trial and is not supposed to be.
Senator Joe Manchin for president and Liz Cheney his VP. Both politicians understand the importance of cheap, abundant and reliable energy. I have come to admire these two; Cheney for standing up to Trump and Manchin for being pragmatic when the Dems were trying to to pass IRA.
It seems like your only argument is finding a candidate who has broad enough appeal to "send Trump packing".
But what about policies that benefit the average American? What is it about the Socialist/Progressive agenda that you think helps America? How is it better than Trump policies? You wanted a substantive discussion, but you failed to provide any substance. Honest Brokers should avoid politics and cross examine the issues for the greater good.
Yes, this post sends both Biden and Trump packing.
Others will disagree, and that’s good, but it is my view that they both need to go so that we can again refocus on policies and not just politics and personalities.
I am a fan of the Constitution’s separation of powers and therefore I am not too worried about normal politicians from either party, as passing effective policy is best from somewhere in the fat part of the bell curve.
That means I don’t get worked up about isms or ists — like fascism or socialists.
I agree with you about the importance of focusing on policy, which is why 99%+ of THB happens in that space 😎🤓🙏
I appreciate your response. I think a better discussion would be what gives rise to candidates like Trump, because we're seeing it in other countries. The media and his opponents try to paint a picture of white supremacy and nationalism, which is intellectually dishonest. I believe it's the broken "establishment"...a government and bureaucracy that has become so large and powerful in every facet of American life, and people no longer feel like they have representation. It's the feeling of having beliefs forced on people by the woke culture that has permeated our society. Beliefs that don't align with their values. Classical liberals of the past didn't want religious beliefs forced on them, just like classical liberals and free thinkers of today don't want woke beliefs forced on them. People should be free to believe what they want, but when policies rooted in critical race theory or gender theory are enacted, it's no different than the religious Zealots of the 1920s who were trying to use legislation to keep evolution out of the classroom. Forcing beliefs by law will never be popular by freedom loving people.
I think these are the main reasons why Trump is so popular. He speaks out against all the bull$@!* without fear, because if the average American spoke out against it, they would be fired or chastised for not being PC. The indictments and impeachments make him more popular for this reason. The left has weaponized PC and fake news, and Trump is the antidote.
I almost think it will take a Great Drepession to change the current system, for better or worse.
You didn't answer Mike's question. "What is it about the Socialist/Progressive agenda that you think helps America? " Your implicit assumption is that the Republican/Conservative side has nothing and no candidate to offer.
I don't really have a problem with your Progressive leanings but please explain why you believe that the decision is so clear.
Given the current state of affairs, what is worse endorsing Trump or endorsing Biden?
The only potential Blue Dog Democrat is John Fetterman, hoody and all. As far as Rockefeller Republicans, the Rockefeller family and their myriad foundations have gone all in on climate change and bogus environmentalism.
WOW. I think your nominees did not acquit themselves well in Covid, net zero or this gratuitous divisive DEI nonsense. Where was the scientific method?
Roger, many thanks for agreeing to be the keynote speaker at the JOLT energy conference in Montrose last week! I’m disappointed that you were unable to able to appear in person, but appreciate that you fought through your illness to give a Zoom presentation.
Have you re-affirmed any resolution to stay out of the purely political realm?
The situation with Biden reminds me of Reagan’s re-election campaign, when critics expressed concerned about his age and fitness for office.
My conservative Vietnam vet cousin David relentlessly repeated this Reagan campaign slogan:
THB should stop digging the hole deeper. There is a reason Harris dropped out of the 2020 Primary with less than 2% support AMONG DEMOCRATS. Wholly unqualified for every job she has ever held, she would be a disaster and a horrifically divisive President. And nothing about a Harris/“Moderate Republican” administration would offer “common sense”. It would instead offer continuing resolution budgets guaranteeing bankruptcy and continuation of government by unseen elites and unelected bureaucrats. Please THB, better analysis.
I was somewhat taken aback by over 300 comments and only 76 likes until I realized that most of the comments came from about a dozen people.
As far as your proposed new approach, maybe you should stick to the need for integrity in climate science.
Are you trying to encourage more of your subscribers to cancel by characterizing a Harris presidency as an "ideal world" with common sense prevailing and Trump being sent packing in November? Maybe you should check with Nate Silver to find out what the polls and his new super duper model say about Harris' electability.
I was surprised when you identified Governor Whitmer as your pick to replace President Biden, but I'm not sure who I would have predicted would be your pick. I would not have chosen her, but I'm undecided at this point because so much is in question, Biden's mental state and Trump's legal challenges among them.
For years, I've been fascinated by the many reasons why people disagree. By the way, I have many friends and family that I love dearly, but still differ on any number of issues. I see disagreements as net positives. We progress in life by exploring where our knowledge is at odds and where our experiences and perspectives differ. I've enjoyed this dialog, seeing the thoughts of those who subscribe to THB.
I have my own website on WordPress (Reactions at DocStephens.org). Most of my followers are family and friends as well as a few former professional colleagues (I'm retired). I do not promote it and my readership is tiny, dozens. About five years ago, I wrote a post "Why Intelligent People Disagree." Here is the link if anyone is interested.
J. B. Pritzker a "serious leader"? Really? In what universe?
Too funny, Roger.
The only Democrat I have seen that has any common sense at all is Tulsi Gabbard. But since she knows the difference between boys and girls, the Democrats will not choose her.
Our republic is under a greater threat than any time in our history (Dick Cheney):
https://x.com/rpsagainsttrump/status/1809766330578374804?s=46&t=Iy_zfhh0ogjE6gtyP6P0Kg
More propaganda from the establishment.
Well for all his faults (and there are many) at least he can only be said to be a Republican.
But if you don't like him just listen to the Democrats.
or any historican who knows anything about facism. Trump and his enablers are facists.
You might like facism and be fine with it. If so, at least be honest and say so, that would make more sense and can at least have an honest discussion.
The last I checked, it's the left that wants to use regulations and government to control the economy, culture, media, education, etc and have a uniparty system where nobody is allowed to disagree….so not sure your argument makes any sense. The Cheny clip you linked to is over a year old. They were trying their best to make the illegitimate January 6th commission look legitimate. I don't like Donald Trump, but I despise the authoritarian left. Whenever I disagree with the left, I get called a bad name (fascist, denier, racist, blah blah blah).
I think it is very important to be able to have a discussion without resorting to simple name calling. There is so much propaganda and misinformation and wilful ignorance (at best) from our media and politicians that we the voters will suffer from all of that.
In my view, regulations and governance is a requirement for any government to regulate the economy, education, media etc. Regulation is generally there to protect consumers, think of the regulations against banks to abuse its customers. Regulation is there to enforce e.g. building standards, to make sure builders build safe homes that conform to requirements for, like, frost, earth quakes, heat, electric safety, gas safety. Etc.
So regulation is not a "left" or "right" thing, but a necessary helpful tool for society.
Can it be abused? Sure. Overdone? Sure. But don't assume that all regulation is bad. It usually has a good reason.
The Jan 6 commission was not "illegitimate", in my view. It is legitimate to query what happened on Jan 6, it was a momentous, important, historical moment that will live in the US history "forever". It had echoes of modes of government that we do not want, presumably, in the USA. Things we thought we left in the past, names like Mussolini, Hitler, Chavez, countries and names of the past that ended badly. A violent incursion into a parliament/congress, is a momentous thing. Jan 6 must be seen in that light and investigated.
And it was. By people who were not violently leftists or nutcase "libs", but people from the party whose candidate/president was actually in office on Jan 6.
So it was not biased against the president. And they found troubling things. Many things we should not want in the USA, things politicians and people in power should not get away with, because it is on a path to a future that we, as people not in power, would not be good in.
People living under governments abusing their power generally dont thrive.
And the goverments don't change anymore once a government disables the safeguards and institutions of our founders.
if it does not change, and does not have offsetting institutions, it is totalitarian.
That is what Jan 6 was about and the story is not over.
This is what we have to think about as citizens, voters, people under this government.
Even if you believe that the left is authoritarian, look at which of the "left" and "right" would protect the US institutions and ensure fair elections every 4 years.
Then you might get closer to the answer on a better path for the USA.
I guess I believe in the principles of due process. If congress creates a commission to investigate an important issue, then all sides should have fair representation for the sake of cross examination. They obviously didn't want to be cross examined, and that's why I consider it illegitimate. That's the sort of thing that real fascists do, in my opinion.
well, the J6 commission was an investigation, not a trial. They followed due process as should be done by an investigation and they had witnesses from all sides of politics. Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Judge Luttig, to mention some, all are card-carrying republicans.
So it was a proper investigation. An investigation is not a trial and is not supposed to be.
Gretchen Whitmer and Jamie Dimon
Quite a comment thread!
I appreciate the spirited but respectful exchanges.
Thank you!
TRUMP
Senator Joe Manchin for president and Liz Cheney his VP. Both politicians understand the importance of cheap, abundant and reliable energy. I have come to admire these two; Cheney for standing up to Trump and Manchin for being pragmatic when the Dems were trying to to pass IRA.
Roger, You left out Newsom, the Gov of CA. What is your rationale for that?
Thanks Ray
Lot's of folks left out here
My thinking is that the Ds need MI, PA, OH so focus on who can bring them along
There is also the issue that if Harris is on the ticket then another CA cannot
As the post-debate horserace polls start to come out, for Biden but also down ticket, watch this space
Hi,
If you want to focus on MI, PA, and OH, Josh Shapiro of PA seems like a good replacement for Biden.
Roger,
It seems like your only argument is finding a candidate who has broad enough appeal to "send Trump packing".
But what about policies that benefit the average American? What is it about the Socialist/Progressive agenda that you think helps America? How is it better than Trump policies? You wanted a substantive discussion, but you failed to provide any substance. Honest Brokers should avoid politics and cross examine the issues for the greater good.
Hi Mike,
Fair Q!
Yes, this post sends both Biden and Trump packing.
Others will disagree, and that’s good, but it is my view that they both need to go so that we can again refocus on policies and not just politics and personalities.
I am a fan of the Constitution’s separation of powers and therefore I am not too worried about normal politicians from either party, as passing effective policy is best from somewhere in the fat part of the bell curve.
That means I don’t get worked up about isms or ists — like fascism or socialists.
I agree with you about the importance of focusing on policy, which is why 99%+ of THB happens in that space 😎🤓🙏
I appreciate your response. I think a better discussion would be what gives rise to candidates like Trump, because we're seeing it in other countries. The media and his opponents try to paint a picture of white supremacy and nationalism, which is intellectually dishonest. I believe it's the broken "establishment"...a government and bureaucracy that has become so large and powerful in every facet of American life, and people no longer feel like they have representation. It's the feeling of having beliefs forced on people by the woke culture that has permeated our society. Beliefs that don't align with their values. Classical liberals of the past didn't want religious beliefs forced on them, just like classical liberals and free thinkers of today don't want woke beliefs forced on them. People should be free to believe what they want, but when policies rooted in critical race theory or gender theory are enacted, it's no different than the religious Zealots of the 1920s who were trying to use legislation to keep evolution out of the classroom. Forcing beliefs by law will never be popular by freedom loving people.
I think these are the main reasons why Trump is so popular. He speaks out against all the bull$@!* without fear, because if the average American spoke out against it, they would be fired or chastised for not being PC. The indictments and impeachments make him more popular for this reason. The left has weaponized PC and fake news, and Trump is the antidote.
I almost think it will take a Great Drepession to change the current system, for better or worse.
I've written a bit on this before here:
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/why-democrats-will-lose-the-house
And also the responsibilities of the so-called experts:
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/the-public-is-ok-its-us-scientists
You didn't answer Mike's question. "What is it about the Socialist/Progressive agenda that you think helps America? " Your implicit assumption is that the Republican/Conservative side has nothing and no candidate to offer.
I don't really have a problem with your Progressive leanings but please explain why you believe that the decision is so clear.
I did, when I said I’m not a fan of isms and ists
Happy to discuss policies
In the Twitter thread I linked I floated a “coalition” ticket with a moderate D & R
There is a lot of good sense from both parties & a lot of dreck also
The key is telling the difference, which I do not do based on party ID
👍🙏
Could you see R's like Mike Pompeo, Tom Cotton, Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis, Dan Crenshaw, Mike Lee, Bill Barr as part of your coalition?
Yes, most probably
Though I'd expect all of them to endorse Trump if they haven't already
The Blue Dog Democrat and Rockefeller Republican are hard to spot in 2024!
Given the current state of affairs, what is worse endorsing Trump or endorsing Biden?
The only potential Blue Dog Democrat is John Fetterman, hoody and all. As far as Rockefeller Republicans, the Rockefeller family and their myriad foundations have gone all in on climate change and bogus environmentalism.
Busy rethinking my recent subscription. Get back to you later.
WOW. I think your nominees did not acquit themselves well in Covid, net zero or this gratuitous divisive DEI nonsense. Where was the scientific method?
Roger, many thanks for agreeing to be the keynote speaker at the JOLT energy conference in Montrose last week! I’m disappointed that you were unable to able to appear in person, but appreciate that you fought through your illness to give a Zoom presentation.
Have you re-affirmed any resolution to stay out of the purely political realm?
The situation with Biden reminds me of Reagan’s re-election campaign, when critics expressed concerned about his age and fitness for office.
My conservative Vietnam vet cousin David relentlessly repeated this Reagan campaign slogan:
“If he dies, stuff him and run him anyway!”
THB should stop digging the hole deeper. There is a reason Harris dropped out of the 2020 Primary with less than 2% support AMONG DEMOCRATS. Wholly unqualified for every job she has ever held, she would be a disaster and a horrifically divisive President. And nothing about a Harris/“Moderate Republican” administration would offer “common sense”. It would instead offer continuing resolution budgets guaranteeing bankruptcy and continuation of government by unseen elites and unelected bureaucrats. Please THB, better analysis.
I was somewhat taken aback by over 300 comments and only 76 likes until I realized that most of the comments came from about a dozen people.
As far as your proposed new approach, maybe you should stick to the need for integrity in climate science.
Are you trying to encourage more of your subscribers to cancel by characterizing a Harris presidency as an "ideal world" with common sense prevailing and Trump being sent packing in November? Maybe you should check with Nate Silver to find out what the polls and his new super duper model say about Harris' electability.
Thanks in part to the vigorous discussion on this post I’ve proposed a new approach over at X
If you are there, check it out:
https://x.com/rogerpielkejr/status/1807427362344341604?s=46&t=WMSRPCBBWz_Ojw7zB5V3AA
I was surprised when you identified Governor Whitmer as your pick to replace President Biden, but I'm not sure who I would have predicted would be your pick. I would not have chosen her, but I'm undecided at this point because so much is in question, Biden's mental state and Trump's legal challenges among them.
For years, I've been fascinated by the many reasons why people disagree. By the way, I have many friends and family that I love dearly, but still differ on any number of issues. I see disagreements as net positives. We progress in life by exploring where our knowledge is at odds and where our experiences and perspectives differ. I've enjoyed this dialog, seeing the thoughts of those who subscribe to THB.
I have my own website on WordPress (Reactions at DocStephens.org). Most of my followers are family and friends as well as a few former professional colleagues (I'm retired). I do not promote it and my readership is tiny, dozens. About five years ago, I wrote a post "Why Intelligent People Disagree." Here is the link if anyone is interested.
https://docstephens.org/2019/05/14/why-intelligent-people-disagree/