Search options (Page 8 of 58)

Yeah I thought it was bizarre and something Clark should be more prepared for.

Holy cow.  If this guy was consistently showing up, Biden would be crushing it.  If he'd shown up in the debate, it would've been a totally different story.

We need *much* more of this in a *very* public forum, and the criticisms of him will fall apart.

(Please note: I'm still enthusiastic about Biden.  I promise to make a donation to his campaign as soon as I press submit)

My friends and I had a thought experiment.  Let's say Biden talks with his people and decides it's best for the country that he not run.  There was some rumor by some random person on Twitter that perhaps Whitmer and Newsom are in play and that Harris is mad that she's not.  Let's say that's all true and Biden agrees.  Let's also say that the Democratic Party does something and convinces Harris to come out and enthusiastically support the next ticket.

For the thought experiment, Newsom is the presidential candidate and Whitmer is the VP candidate.  They instantly come out hard, and MAGA struggles to tear them down since most people don't know who they are.  Newsom can stand up to Trump in a way that Biden never did, and looks young and charismatic.  Whitmer is able to run circles around Scott or whoever Trump picks as VP. 

How does that feel?  I know almost nothing about either.  But Whitmer is very popular in Michigan - does that seal one of the six swing states for the new ticket?  Does it feel like turning the page? 

Or does California (and hatred of California) ruin Newsom?  Would America still be too sexist to elect Whitmer if she's the nominee?  Are the polls right and people actually like Biden more than him (or Whitmer) or does Biden inherit all the Biden voters plus any people on the fence?

I think its an interesting thought experiment.  I think it would rely exclusively on everyone being completely on board from Biden to Harris to the two candidates, and I think it would all need to be announced at once.  But would that work as a thought experiment?

I agree with a lot of what you have to say about Biden which I'm happy to get into, but you're going to have to share your work here.  I look at polls almost daily, and I'm not seeing anything like what you're saying.  Basically every poll has them tied.  Biden has started taking the lead nationally, in Wisconsin, and in Michigan.  Pennsylvania is basically tied.  If those polls are accurate and Pennsylvania tips to Biden, Biden wins with 270 electoral votes.

Georgia is still looking rough.  Arizona is closing but not great.  But Nevada is closing.  Biden has gained a couple points and he led in a recent poll there.

So maybe I'm not looking at the same polls as you, or maybe you're getting talking points from someone who's listening too much to Trump.  But even if I give you "Biden is losing in the vast majority of polls" (which you could argue is true), I don't see *any* that are bad, let alone stunningly bad.  The polls that Biden is losing, he's losing by 1 point.  And some of the polls have Biden winning with registered voters and Trump winning with likely voters.  Which means Biden's voters are more likely (irony acknowledged) than Trump's are.  That's the issue with the shifting demographics - Republicans picked up a ton of voters but they're people that don't usually vote.  The ones they lost (college educated) usually vote in every election.

********

So, the debate.  I think the first 30 minutes was a disaster.  And the first 30 minutes is probably the parts that people watched.  I struggled to stay engaged, and even some of my liberal friends dropped out early.  So even though I think Biden got a lot better as the night went on, I don't know if anyone saw.  Or if anyone is going to care.

I had two thoughts last night.  First, it's so frustrating that we're in this position because it was avoidable.  But at the same time, I see why we're here.  I think it all goes back to the VP decision, and I think they needed to pick someone with less baggage.  I know Kamala had the experience you'd want, but I wish they'd found someone else.  I know there weren't a ton of choices, and I don't know if Stacey Abrams would've had any less baggage.  But if they could've found a black woman mayor or state representative or something, they could've spend 2020 to now building her up.  The problem is that the VP choice is the obvious successor, and if she's not the successor, you end up potentially upsetting black and/or female voters if they'd switched to, say, Gavin Newsom.  Even if it was an open primary, I think it would've potentially cost you the election right that.  So I think everyone agrees that they should've gone with someone else, but if that someone else HAD to be Harris, I think Biden is the right choice.  She's already more unpopular than Biden with less experience and her own baggage.  Not to mention racism or sexism.

My second thought is...I don't know if this performance really matters.  Biden looked old and fragile, but that's basically what people already thought of him. No one's opinion changed on Biden last night.  Maybe people forgot he was old and fragile and his polling might dip, but if they forgot before, they might forget again.

Biden's actual words and policies and performance weren't terrible.  He didn't say anything controversial, and he stood up to Trump a bunch of times.  I think the worst part of the debate for Biden is that Trump never really went on any crazy tangents.  He didn't start randomly talking about water pressure or sharks or stuff like that.  I think the more senile and crazy Trump looks, it sorta takes away the advantage.  If people walk away thinking that they're both old and/or senile, that's a huge win for Biden.  And that didn't really happen.

Trump did lie a ton, and he lied about stuff that's verifiable.  MAGA people won't care, but I assume independent voters know that there aren't after-birth abortions in any state.  Independent voters know that Pelosi isn't in charge of the national guard and can't override the president.  In all the stuff I've seen, Trump's lies and Biden's age are being reported side by side.  Some people might be okay with Trump's lies but not be okay with Biden's age.  Some people might be okay with Biden's age and not be okay with Trump's lies.  But in both cases, I gotta think those opinions are already baked into to most people's decision.  If Trump looks crazy or if Biden lies, that might do more to move the needle.

So it was bad.  Almost worst case scenario.  But I don't know if it was a doomsday scenario.  Not yet.  But the pressure is on Biden in the second debate now.  Which might lead to a doomsday scenario.

I think that's totally fair.  I have considered doing a rewatch of Smallville, but it isn't something that I've been able to do.  There's so many new things that I want to watch that I struggle with going back and watching something that I've already seen.  My wife and I have been *very slowly* watching shows we think the other will like since our marriage started (as in we've watched 1.5 shows in 6 years), but Smallville is on the short list of shows we could do.  Considering how slow we are (or, more appropriately, the long gaps we do in between month-or-so binges), that might be the last show we do before we die

I know that Clark was a bit of a soapy character, but I still remember him being friendly and caring.  I think often to the final scene of "Run" where Bart and Clark race.  I think Clark genuinely wants to help Bart and genuinely wants him to stay.  I struggle to consider Cavill's Clark being that open or friendly.  Not only do we not have any scenes of Clark hanging out with anyone (other than his mom or Lois), but like you said, Cavill comes off as guarded.  He's probably the most introverted Clark we've ever had, and it just isn't what I want my version of Superman to be.

I'm not saying being introverted is bad, I'm just saying that my head-version of Superman is someone who is both eager and happy to approach basically anyone with a smile and something kind to say.  I think about the girl from All-Star Superman who was going to jump off the building and Superman talks her down.  That feels more like Welling's Clark.  I'm not saying Cavill's Clark wouldn't have saved her, but I wonder if he'd be less likely to approach and if he'd have to save her after she jumped.

The problem, to me, is that I don't think Snyder likes the traditional Superman.  He likes Batman, and he wrote a Clark that's a little bit brooding.  Who has a little bit of a darkness to him.  Who thinks its more cool to be a superstrong alien than a normal guy from Kansas.  That's why his Superman is in three movies and 1) dies in one and 2) ends up going evil.  I think a kindhearted, good-natured Clark doesn't interest Snyder, and that's why we don't get much of that.

And even if that's not true, the characterization of Clark that we're shown paints that picture to me.  Maybe Clark rescued a bunch of people after Metropolis.  Maybe he has tons of friends that he hangs out with.  Maybe he's outgoing and kind and friendly.  There's just not anything in the films to really prove that, outside of the fact that people seem to love Superman in that universe.  Lex, Bruce, and Wallace Keefe (the amputee that works with Lex) seem like the only people who don't trust him.  I don't think they'd love him if he was always cold and brooding like he appears whenever we see him.

And it's absolutely not fair to compare Welling's Clark and Cavill's Clark because their screentime is drastically different.  We get a couple hundred hours of Smallville, and Clark is on screen for most of that.  Cavill gets a lot of screentime in Man of Steel, but he's a secondary/tertiary character in BvS and he's dead for most of Justice League (even the 4-hour version).  So we spend so much more time with Welling than Cavill.

And I'll say this.  Cavill looks the part.  Maybe more than Welling and definitely (at least to me) more than Corenswet.  I think you're right that Whedon's version allows him to be more like a traditional Superman, and he carries it off.  To me, this is an issue with Snyder's interpretation of the character and not Cavill's performance.  I think if you'd reversed the characterizations, Cavill could've been great.  I also don't know if Welling would've been good in Snyder's version of Clark, but I just haven't seen Welling in enough roles to know.

Ha, I'll just have to settle for another donation

Poll update (FiveThirtyEight)

- Biden has expanded his lead in the national poll average to 0.4%.  Basically insignificant except for my mental health
- Biden has also taken the lead in Michigan and Wisconsin.  Less than 1% and insignificant except for my mental health.
- Biden has closed the gap in Pennsylvania to 0.3%.  It was over 1% a week ago.
- Biden has also closed the gap in the Sun Belt.  Arizona (2.8%), Nevada (3%), and Georgia (4.7%) are looking better.  It would obviously be best case scenario for Biden to win at least one of these states.  We wouldn't want this to come down to a single state (or a single electoral vote) because even if Biden gets to 270, Trump still has a few (illegal) avenues to try and steal this thing.

But it's good to see that Biden is starting to take the lead both nationally and in the electoral college.  If Hopium guy is right and if there is some sort of error in the polling that will help Biden, then we're in even better shape.  But it's good to know that Biden is winning even with some potential garbage in the numbers.

For the first time in a long time, Biden leads Trump in 538's polling average.

- it's by the most insignificant margin (0.1%)
- Biden is going to need to lead by a lot more than that to win

But it feels really good to see that.

Biden has been taking a national lead in some of the polls (understanding that some of these polls are partisan), and he's closed the gap in the last few days to within a percentage point on 538's polling average.  More importantly, IMO, this is due to a combination of Biden gaining support and Trump losing support.  Right now, the polling average has Trump at 40.8% and Biden at 40.3%.  So while it's possible that Trump is shedding votes to "undecided" that he'll get back, there's a chance some of those votes are going from Trump to Biden...which is obviously the best results.

The blue wall in the Midwest also appears to be tracking towards Biden.  The polling average for Michigan is basically tied, the one in Wisconsin is within 0.2%, and Pennsylvania is now at 1%.  Even in the Sun Belt states, Biden is gaining but still about 5% down in all three states.

What's scary about the blue wall is that it 100% includes the Nebraska 2nd district.  If Biden wins PA, WI, and MI, and Trump wins GA, AZ, and NV, the Nebraska 2nd decides the election.  If Biden gets it, it's 270-268.  If Trump gets it, it's 269-269 and Trump wins in the tiebreak.  So the blue wall needs to be 4 pieces, not 3.

I'm a little annoyed that the polls didn't shift much after the conviction, although there hasn't been a ton of polling since then.  I'm a little annoyed that the Supreme Court isn't releasing their immunity decision in a timely fashion when they know every day they wait helps Trump.

I'm not completely giving up because I think Trump will shed more voters than he'll gain.  I assume voters that aren't completely entrenched in one side or the other are giving Trump the benefit of the doubt, and Trump is benefitting from low visibility.  Outside of a major stumble by Biden, I think voters will either be annoyed by Trump, turned off by Trump, or find out about Trump's felon status.

At least that's my hope.  I've been pretty wrong recently.  I'm still confused how RFK is siphoning any votes from Biden, but that's still where we are.

Yeah I think the consensus is that Trump's crowds aren't as naturally big as people think.  In addition to people being paid, it's also a lot of the same people that travel from place to place

I've long said that Biden needed to do *something* at the border.  When you look at the issue, Biden is incredibly underwater, and it's one of the top issues in this election.  And unlike the economy (something that Biden is also very underwater on), it's something Biden can actively do something about.  The people that think Biden's doing a great job on immigration (or the people that think he's not being liberal enough with the border) are a very small subset of the population and almost all of them are probably going to vote for Biden no matter what he does.

But there are tons of possible Biden voters who don't like him because of his handling of the border, and those votes are up for grabs if Biden veers to the right on the border.  And he's finally doing that.  I don't know if he did enough - both sides spoke out against his executive order.  Which may be exactly what he needs to get independents that hate both candidates.

I actually would've recommended he go further.  I would've done what Trump keeps saying that he was going to do, and I'd shut the border down.  I think this accomplishes two things:

1. It probably helps him with some undecided/independent/soft Trump voters.  If they start to see the good economy and start to get annoyed by Trump, doing something at the border would be helpful.  It could be enough to tip the scales to Biden.

2. It 100% won't work and it cuts Trump's argument at its knees.  Immigration groups could immediately sue, and they'd win.  The border would get open again, and things would move on.  Then, in a debate, when Trump says he'll shut the border down on day one, Biden could say he did that and it didn't work.  Then, Biden could remind people that he'd previously tried something that would've worked with bipartisan legislation and Trump himself shut it down.

I'm not saying it would be enough to flip the issue or convince MAGA voters, but that's not going to happen.  Biden just needs to move towards even, and I think that would've worked.

Will this work?  Maybe?  Considering how close the election is, it doesn't have to work that much to get Biden a win.

It's so frustrating to see a decorated medical professional harassed by a PTA reject who barely seems to have any education at all.

So I've come across a few people in the wild and a lot of people through actual journalism (I'm still off social media) that are either switching from Biden to Trump or just voting for Trump.  None of these people are MAGA as far as I'm aware.

The reasoning seems to be mostly economics.  They feel that prices are too high under Biden, and that specifically translates to the economy is bad.  None of the other metrics of the economy seem to matter, and the fact that Biden seems to keep saying that the economy is great seems to bother them even more.  To me, I think Biden needs to do a few things to reach these people.  I don't know if Biden wants to do any of these, and I don't know that him doing these things would help.

1. Biden needs to acknowledge that, while a lot of the metrics of the economy are great, a lot of people are still struggling.  When people are struggling and Biden and the media keep talking about how great the economy is, he's losing touch with these voters.  I think he needs to admit that the economy still needs to get better.

2. Biden needs to get across two messages.  First, that he's doing everything he can to improve inflation.  And second that there's not a ton of things the president can do to fix inflation.  I think people need to understand that, just because Trump gets re-elected, doesn't mean that Trump can just press the "make inflation go down" button and that's it.  I think there's clearly a disconnect on the economy, and I think he needs economic experts to make it clear that the winner of this election won't be able to fix inflation overnight.

3. Biden needs to make it very clear that he's not interested in raising the taxes of the middle class.  Trump keeps talking about renewing the Trump tax cuts, and Biden keeps talking about how he's not going to renew them.  From my understanding, he's going to raise the taxes of the uber-wealthy and corporations to pre-Trump levels.  But that most people won't be affected.  I don't know if that's true, but if it's true, that's what he needs to talk about.  If he is planning on raising the taxes of the middle class, he probably shouldn't do that.

4. There's gotta be something he can do about prices.  Maybe there's some sort of tax benefit for manufacturers that can decrease prices (or tax penalties for companies that are shown to be artificially increasing prices).  I don't know.  Maybe none of that is legal.  But I think it would be helpful to see Biden doing something.  There are legitimately people who think Biden is actively trying to make prices higher, and he needs to dispel that.

5. I think he needs to be very vocal about his economic plan in these debates, and he needs to try and nail down whatever "plan" Trump has.  One of the ways I think Biden can gain support is if he can show people that Trump doesn't have any idea what he's doing with the economy.  When he left office, his approval rating was in the 30s on the economy.  Now it's double that.  People need to be reminded of why they felt that way four years ago.

*******

I really, really want to believe the polls are wrong or at least slanted enough to impact the results.  I'm not there yet.  I'm still going to keep actively supporting the president and sending him money when I can.  I will not be discouraged enough by the polls, but I can't just hope the polls are wrong.  I'd love to see Biden take a lead, especially in the swing states, before I feel better.

I actually really enjoyed the final season of Discovery.  I wish there was more mission of the week stuff, but I thought the season was engaging and fun.  I maintain that the future setting is a much better playground for these characters, and I thought the show ended up being a lot of fun.

The finale, released today, has a lot of fun character moments and a couple fun little reveals.  After not loving the start of it, I think it's a nice inclusion in the canon.  It just needed to find its true home.

Interesting.  I hope he's right in the sense that polls are wrong, but I hope that no one gets depressed enough not to vote.  I will vote Biden as early as possible, and I'll continue to make donations when I'm able.

The thought of Trump back in the White House just makes me nervous.  I'm happy to pay more at the pump, more at the grocery store checkout, and more in taxes if it means a) he doesn't get to be president b) we the people get our day in court.

I mean he is the only realistic alternative.  And maybe people don't believe some of the scarier things that Democrats are saying.  But what percent chance are people willing to take that Trump's willing to cross the line next time?  5%?  10%?  Those are low chance odds but really dangerous risks.

He's already floating the idea of a 3rd term, which he also did a bunch in his first term.  What chance are we willing to take that he won't try something.  What chance he'd succeed?  What are the chance we're willing to take for us to pull out of NATO?  To send American troops in to wipe out the Palestinians?  3%?  5%?  20%?  What about deporting hundreds of thousands of people?  10%?  25%?

To me, it's a matter of risk and reward.  Does Biden suck?  I don't know, I guess it depends on the metric you're using.  Does getting Biden out help?  Maybe?  I guess it depends on what you're talking about.  If you're talking about getting prices to 2019 levels, the answer is that it's extremely unlikely.  If the answer is lower taxes, you get that with Trump.  The median income in the US is about $75,000.  Most people had about a 3% drop in taxes.  So for $75,000, that equals $2,250.

Is $2,250 worth throwing out the Constitution?  Is it worth getting out of NATO?  Is it worth deporting Americans mistaken for illegals?  Is it worth giving Russia Ukraine?  Poland?

I just don't think Americans are doing the math in their heads on the risk and reward.  This isn't "democrat" vs "republican."  If this was DeSantis or Haley or even guys like Cruz or Gaetz or Vance, I wouldn't have the same level of concern.  Trump is outright saying that he wants to be a dictator and already talking about a third term.  He's threatening to completely restructure the government for his own needs.  He's talking about things like eliminate the FBI.  He's going to throw out legitimate cases that are pending trial against him.

Is $2,250 worth all of that?  Is $2,250 worth any of that?

Yeah I'm not saying that it won't happen ever, but it doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon.  They've already greenlit some other things (including another reboot film?) and they're moving ahead with the Starfleet Academy show.  So my guess is Picard Season 3 either didn't perform or they didn't like working with Matalas?  Because I think if Picard worked well (or if they liked Matalas), they'd do Legacy before they did Starfleet Academy.

But maybe they'd committed to Academy and that's all they can afford to do.

Terry Matalas has been hired to work on a Vision show for Marvel.

I guess we aren't getting Star Trek: Legacy

I agree that Snyder's versions aren't that far off.  I think I have two problems with his versions:

- Snyder's Superman is Kryptonian first and human second, and he has a weird connection to humanity.  I understand Clark's desire to connect with this alien heritage, but he's been a human his entire life.  By the end of Man of Steel, he seems to have almost no humanity left outside of his love of Lois Lane.  After that, he has no human friends outside of Lois (and his mother, I guess).  This is one reason why many commenters think it was a mistake to kill Jimmy (and make him a CIA operative, I guess).  The only non-Lois/Martha/Bruce scenes are Clark being super alien and emotionless as he saves people.

My understanding of Clark is mostly drawn from Smallville and an alleged rapist so maybe I'm not the right one to judge what the "right" version of Clark is.  But Smallville Clark would've never allowed all those people to die in Metropolis in Man of Steel (or he would've essentially rebuilt the city on his own), and Smallville Clark would've figured out a way to help Bruce before things got to the fight.  Smallville Clark would've found joy in being Superman.  Smallville Clark would've been so obviously good that Bruce would've never had a reason to want to kill him.

- Snyder's Bruce is understandable, but I didn't feel like it was earned. In 7+ hours of Snyder's time with Batman, we still have no idea what set Bruce off on his dark path.  Was it Robin dying (and what happened there?)?  Was it Superman's arrival?  Was it something else?  Alfred seems to imply that it was just everything adding up and turning him to darkness.  Alfred seems to disapprove of what Bruce is doing, but he doesn't stop him.  If Bruce is willing to kill, why isn't the Joker dead?  Are all of Batman's other villains dead?  Why is Batman going out of his way to kill random goons but not their leaders?

I think this was a situation where we needed the context for why Batman is that way, but even in the extended versions, Snyder doesn't seem interested in explaining it.  Robin is dead and it's important, but he doesn't want to spend time on it.  Bruce is angry and violent but he doesn't seem interested in explaining it.  How long has he been that way?  What has he done to cross the line?  Has he even crossed the line or is this the story of him trying to cross the line?

Ironically, I think the Snyderverse would've worked better if he made a Batman movie first and introduced Superman in the sequel.  Snyder doesn't seem all that interested in doing anything with Clark in the sequels, and Batman desperately needed more backstory and context.  I'm totally fine with a Batman that kills and who's ready to kill Superman, but if this is a Batman that went down a dark path, we need to see that path.  To me, that's more interesting than him punching Superman.

I think I've said it before but they should've done a Batman movie before BvS.  I know they wanted to rush things, but they could've done a Superman movie, a Batman movie, a BvS movie, a Wonder Woman movie, and an "anthology" movie with the origins of Aquaman/Flash/Cyborg before the Justice League movie.  It wouldn't have added that much time before Justice League, and it would've set the universe up well.

Instead, we really only got a solo movie for Superman, and that was the only character that probably didn't need a solo movie (because once we got passed it, Snyder gave Superman almost nothing to do).

To me, the DCEU failed for a variety of reasons, and I think Snyder probably gets an unfair share of that.  I think he's a talented guy, and I don't even think his movies are bad.  I think Snyder's biggest problem is that he doesn't really understand the characters.  Or he does understand them and thinks that the only thing interesting you can do with them is make them into something different.  We've talked this to death, but I think that's really Snyder's only issue.  And the universe tried to make it after Snyder.  Was the damage done?  Maybe.  But at the same time, a lot of the post-Snyder movies aren't any better than the ones Snyder did.

I think Snyder's biggest problem was trying to make alternate versions of these characters and making them the primary versions for a universe.  Even if all he did was take different versions of Batman and Superman (who had already had a dozen movies made about them at that point), those are two characters you probably need to get right.

Now if the DCEU was a success first and they brought in Snyder to make an Injustice trilogy after the characters had already been established, that could've been cool.  I think that's what makes The Maker and Invincible Iron Man and Superior Spider-Man so interesting.  But you need a standard version of the character first, or the "evil" version doesn't really work.

********

But, yeah, I tried to make Snyder's Avengers as much like Snyder's DC movies.  I just think it's funny that Snyder made three movies to try and get to the part he thought was most interesting (the full Knightmare world) and never got there.

I wasn't trying to base Snyder's Captain America on anything.  Rather, I was trying to think of what Snyder might do with Marvel characters.  I was originally going to make Iron Man the first movie in Snyder's Avengers saga like it was in the MCU, but I decided that if Snyder had his pick, he'd make Cap first (even if he really liked Iron Man more).  He'd see a boring character (to him) and try to add some nuance (to him).  I would think he'd suspect that Cap would be turned off by modern America and become jaded and disillusioned.  Just like he'd think its natural that Batman and Superman would kill bad guys, he wouldn't be interested in a Captain America that always tries to do the right thing.

And like he preferred evil Superman to normal Superman, I think he'd find Captain Hydra more interesting than Captain America (I don't even think the timeline works for that version of the character to be around but it's an alternate history).  And since I couldn't think of a good situation where Steve allows millions of people to die (like Superman does in Man of Steel), I decided to let Steve do something that I wouldn't think he'd otherwise do - let someone die so he can get the kill.

My issue with Snyder's superheroes isn't that they're bad.  I just don't think he thinks of them as being good guys.  They do good, sure, but good guys are boring.  So Superman has a bad side.  Batman kills.  Not because they have to, but Snyder can't see anything interesting in a story where Batman has to find a way not to kill.

My problem is that I don't think it's interesting for Batman and Superman to just be random soldiers doing what it takes to win.  A Batman who kills is more efficient, sure, but I don't think it's more interesting.

Of course, I also needed Snyder to burn through stories while teasing way more stories.  I needed Tony to just be Batman.  I needed Snyder to make a bunch of movies but never get to Thanos.

I wasn't super happy with my Ayer Strange, but I couldn't think of a good approximation of the Suicide Squad.  Something to introduce a bunch of characters and establish that this is a lived-in world without using any of the Justice League.  So I just said "well, RDJ looks like Dr Strange so let's just shoehorn him in here"

Cannon essentially killed the documents case (or at least put it in a coma).  It was incredibly genius for Trump to install such a friendly and loyal judge in this district, and I wish the Democrats had been a bit more aware and tried to stop her appointment.  I know they wouldn't have had the votes along party lines, but by all accounts, they simply ignored her during hearings.  That was obviously a mistake - Cannon is incapable of ruling fairly, and I assume a number of other judges would've already brought this case to trial.

Just have to hope that the DC trial can start.  The good news is that Florida can't block that anymore.  So if the Supreme Court doesn't mess up the immunity ruling, DC should have an open schedule.

Well that's what's so silly about some of the stuff you heard from them.  Talking about how this is a decision for the ages and all that.

No.

It's the decision for now.  The conservatives have the majority now, but Alito is 74 and Thomas is 75.  Neither will be around forever, and actuarily speaking, will be the next to go.  If a Democratic president replaces both of them, it's back to being a liberal majority.  Roberts is 69.  They act like they're doing historical business, but all of it could be unwritten in a decade or two.  This is a group of people who think they're more important than they are, and I assume the next liberal court (whenever that is) will spend a lot of their time undoing what they did.

A few years ago, I was pretty active on Twitter and followed election coverage pretty closely.  I even waded into waters where I tried to calmly convince MAGA of the error of their ways.  Eventually, I didn't like the person I was.  I was doom-scrolling through twitter all the time, and I was feeling myself growing more and more annoyed.

So I quit.  I was doing it because I was bored, and there are a billion apps that I could use to stop myself from being bored.

About a year ago, I got curious about some things and waded back into those waters.  I had deleted the app but I could still access the website through Safari on my phone.  There were a couple of people I liked to follow for news on the Trump indictments or whatever and that was that.  Eventually, Elon closed that loophole and made you register to access the website.  So I was closed off.  Then, more recently, I decided I was curious enough and I created a second account (I didn't remember the login and thought this was more reasonable) and accessed the website (again, not downloading the app) to get my news.  I went from checking it only in the evenings to checking it all the time.  And, again, I could feel my blood pressure going up every time I visited.

The Trump immunity Supreme Court was the last straw.  I was upset all day.  So I decided to quit again.  I logged out of my dummy account and deleted all my shortcuts.  I haven't been back since.

Me doomscrolling through twitter isn't going to stop Trump from getting elected or make him go to jail, and at least now, I'm not forcing myself to constantly think about it.  The unfortunate thing for everyone else is that now I'll be much less informed.  The fortunate thing for me is that I'll be much happier.

Apparently, vote by mail info goes out 50 days before the election.  Haley dropped out exactly 50 days before.  So she would've been on the ballot (obviously), but she would've dropped out before people would've received their vote by mail.  Maybe some could've immediately filled it out before they found out, but I assume a lot of people knew.

As for those podcast points....

Really hoping SCOTUS doesn't drag their feet with their decision.  We should have the DC trial this summer.

I was thinking about it the other day, and I have a decent amount of enthusiasm to vote for Biden.  He's done a good job, and he's the man standing between us and Trump.  I assume that will rise as times goes on.  I assume I'm not alone in that and people will get more excited to vote for Biden once they realize they have no other choice.

MAGA voters have nowhere to go but down in their enthusiasm.  It's maxed out.

I hope Trump is serious and spends money in New York and California and places like that.  He's way behind in money so any money he spends outside of battleground states is a waste.

It sounds like the Biden campaign is doing things right.  He can't only spend money in AZ, NV, GA, MI, WI, and PA, but I'd like to see that be the focus.  Travel there, speak there.  Send Obama and other popular surrogates.  I think NC is a possibility.  FL seems like a lost cause, but I can see making Trump waste money there (same in Texas...really hoping we can get Allred to beat Cruz).  They might be able to make a run at OH, but that also seems out of reach.

Biden also has to defend some light blue states like New Mexico, New Hampshire, and Virginia.  But the rest of the map seems pretty secure.  Focus on where they need to focus, and again they only need to win half the tossup states (assuming it's the right half)

Two interesting things have come from this:

- The judge seemed really irritated with Trump's lawyers during the hearing on the gag order.  I think the lawyers are going to struggle to toe that line between trying to do their job but also trying to keep Trump happy. 

- I'm sorta convinced that Trump wants to go to jail to fight the gag order for the optics.  It'll be interesting to see if the judge goes for it or not. 

All that really matters for this is the electoral consequences so some scatterbrained thoughts:

- I don't know if politically unengaged undecideds are paying attention to this case.  If they aren't, I think that could potentially be a win for Trump depending on how much people are not paying attention.  If undecideds aren't paying enough attention to know the details but understand that the case is less serious, then they aren't getting any of the details of the case (the kind of thing Trump wanted to suppress in the first place) and a conviction won't matter and Trump wins.  If people aren't paying attention and have no idea the seriousness of the case, I guess that benefits Biden because all they'll know is that Trump was convicted of a felony.  So I guess if you're Biden, you have to hope that people are either paying a ton of attention or no attention at all.

- Trump looks whiny and tired and repetitive.  I don't know how widespread the stories of him falling asleep (or worse) are, but that certainly doesn't help with Trump's image of being smart or strong or virile. 

- It's obvious that this makes Trump miserable.  And on a personal note, I just love that.

Yeah, I don't see how this helps Republicans.  If they kept the bills together, there could be deniability for GOP House members that want to continue to be anti-Ukraine ("Look, we needed to get money to Israel and Taiwan and the cost was money to Ukraine.  The good outweighed the bad" but also "I sent money to Ukraine and helped them" - they can play both sides).  Now they have to be on record on one or the other.  If there are pro-Ukraine independents, they could be swayed one way or the other by this.

On the other hand, if the Republicans think that they can use Israel as a wedge issue, they can force Democrats to side with either Israel or Palestine.  I could see some benefit there, but I don't know.

I saw an interview with Johnson where he was saying all the right things about Ukraine.  It sounds like maybe he has some sort of assurance that he can survive any move against him.  If so...I guess that's good.

As some of these older polls age out of aggregators, Biden is starting to take small leads in overall polling most places.  Now a small lead nationally won't do it, and I'm pretty sure state-level polling still has Trump with enough states to win the electoral college.  But it's a step in the right direction.

Experts seem to think Trump is going to lose this hush money case.  I would think especially if Trump is muttering himself like a crazy person the whole time.  It won't give him any jail time, but he'll legally be a convicted felon if it happens.  We'll see, again if that happens, if it affects what independents think.  I assume MAGA and democrat voters are pretty locked in with their votes no matter the result of the trial.

I mean I told him that I think evangelicals are extremely radicalized - that if Trump told them to worship him instead of Jesus, they'd happily toss their bibles and crosses in exchange for a golden Trump statue.  But he disagrees.  He goes to an evangelical church (he's liberal) and he has a PhD in religious studies (or something like that).  He says that abortion is the one area they won't follow him down.

This is well known right wing "entertainer?" Matt Walsh.  He's extreme right wing, and he hated what Trump and Kari Lake had to say.  He has 2.2MM followers on twitter, and he's very outspoken that this was the wrong thing to do and he's not willing to budge.  It wouldn't take many people to decide they can't vote for someone that supports any "abortion rights" and either not vote or leave the top of the ballot empty.  And remember these aren't normal Republican voters.  The voters that Trump has added are low-propensity voters so it wouldn't take much for them to just not go on election day (because they won't mail in vote or vote early).

https://www.facebook.com/MattWalshBlog/ … 646268783/

Now the thing about Trump is that he's never been pro-life.  This was the issue with him in 2016 in the Republican primaries.  And it was the issue when he was up against DeSantis.  It didn't matter this year because the abortion folks went all in on Trump.  But as much as Trump brags about defeating Roe, I cannot imagine Trump actually cared about that.  He didn't pick those judges, and he probably has no idea what they stand for.  He did what the Federalist Society told him to do or he did whatever they paid him to do.

Trump doesn't want to ban abortion.  Otherwise he'd have 50 kids, and he hates the ones he already has.