Mark Histed
@markhisted.org
How brain neural nets do computations; we aim to understand differences in brain wiring, using lasers and neuro-AI.
Lab head, NIH. Prev: media policy for democracypolicy.network.
linktr.ee/markhisted; Pers. views; neuro posts: 🧠 /🧪
Lab head, NIH. Prev: media policy for democracypolicy.network.
linktr.ee/markhisted; Pers. views; neuro posts: 🧠 /🧪
The Status Interview – Or How To Write Up a Senate Purge List talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-s...
The Status Interview – Or How To Write Up a Senate Purge List
Over the last couple days I’ve argued both that the denouement of...
talkingpointsmemo.com
November 11, 2025 at 9:46 PM
So when I say they picked a big fight and it worked, that’s what I mean:
It was a way to draw attention and educate.
And it was a huge success.
The lesson: Fighting works. Stand up. Stand strong. Say what you believe in. Don’t back down.
That’s true for average people and it’s true for Congress.
It was a way to draw attention and educate.
And it was a huge success.
The lesson: Fighting works. Stand up. Stand strong. Say what you believe in. Don’t back down.
That’s true for average people and it’s true for Congress.
November 11, 2025 at 2:33 PM
So when I say they picked a big fight and it worked, that’s what I mean:
It was a way to draw attention and educate.
And it was a huge success.
The lesson: Fighting works. Stand up. Stand strong. Say what you believe in. Don’t back down.
That’s true for average people and it’s true for Congress.
It was a way to draw attention and educate.
And it was a huge success.
The lesson: Fighting works. Stand up. Stand strong. Say what you believe in. Don’t back down.
That’s true for average people and it’s true for Congress.
@vanhollen.senate.gov and @chrismurphyct.bsky.social and @ramirez.house.gov and others who want to fight were right!
Picking a Big Fight worked.
And @senangusking.bsky.social is badly, catastrophically wrong. To say that fighting did not work completely misunderstands what happened.
Picking a Big Fight worked.
And @senangusking.bsky.social is badly, catastrophically wrong. To say that fighting did not work completely misunderstands what happened.
November 11, 2025 at 2:31 PM
@vanhollen.senate.gov and @chrismurphyct.bsky.social and @ramirez.house.gov and others who want to fight were right!
Picking a Big Fight worked.
And @senangusking.bsky.social is badly, catastrophically wrong. To say that fighting did not work completely misunderstands what happened.
Picking a Big Fight worked.
And @senangusking.bsky.social is badly, catastrophically wrong. To say that fighting did not work completely misunderstands what happened.
The shutdown was something that signaled to the country that things are bad.
Congress picked a fight on the shutdown, and that reached many people in the country, telling them that things are very bad in America right now. That was a huge win. It focused public debate on what was happening.
Congress picked a fight on the shutdown, and that reached many people in the country, telling them that things are very bad in America right now. That was a huge win. It focused public debate on what was happening.
November 11, 2025 at 2:31 PM
The shutdown was something that signaled to the country that things are bad.
Congress picked a fight on the shutdown, and that reached many people in the country, telling them that things are very bad in America right now. That was a huge win. It focused public debate on what was happening.
Congress picked a fight on the shutdown, and that reached many people in the country, telling them that things are very bad in America right now. That was a huge win. It focused public debate on what was happening.
Right now, many Americans do not understand how bad things are. We are in a slide to authoritarianism that is taking science and cancer research with it.
The war on science is part of a larger war on democracy. And large parts of the US public are not receiving info that either is happening
👇👇👇
The war on science is part of a larger war on democracy. And large parts of the US public are not receiving info that either is happening
👇👇👇
Every disaffected Dem & swing focus group we do begins with people asking what's real. They hear, at times, this is authoritarian takeover threatening lives & livelihoods. But perceive most "leaders" not acting as if this were so.
November 11, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Right now, many Americans do not understand how bad things are. We are in a slide to authoritarianism that is taking science and cancer research with it.
The war on science is part of a larger war on democracy. And large parts of the US public are not receiving info that either is happening
👇👇👇
The war on science is part of a larger war on democracy. And large parts of the US public are not receiving info that either is happening
👇👇👇
Reposted by Mark Histed
And this is completely wrong. It’s the opposite of what we need. This isn’t Pick Big Fights. This is Give Up Without Fighting. No.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
November 11, 2025 at 4:22 AM
And this is completely wrong. It’s the opposite of what we need. This isn’t Pick Big Fights. This is Give Up Without Fighting. No.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
And this is completely wrong. It’s the opposite of what we need. This isn’t Pick Big Fights. This is Give Up Without Fighting. No.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
November 11, 2025 at 4:22 AM
And this is completely wrong. It’s the opposite of what we need. This isn’t Pick Big Fights. This is Give Up Without Fighting. No.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
This philosophy killed us with Roberts Court corruption, and it’s still hurting us today.
The failure to fight back then — when this was happening in 2023 — harms us today.
The lesson is: Pick Big Fights. When you’re on the right side, fight!
The fight draws attention, which is essential in today’s media environment.
The lesson is: Pick Big Fights. When you’re on the right side, fight!
The fight draws attention, which is essential in today’s media environment.
Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From Major GOP Donor
Island-hopping on a superyacht. Private jet rides around the world. The undisclosed gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the Supreme Court. “It’s incomprehensible to me tha...
www.propublica.org
November 11, 2025 at 4:20 AM
The failure to fight back then — when this was happening in 2023 — harms us today.
The lesson is: Pick Big Fights. When you’re on the right side, fight!
The fight draws attention, which is essential in today’s media environment.
The lesson is: Pick Big Fights. When you’re on the right side, fight!
The fight draws attention, which is essential in today’s media environment.
Yes. Well-framed here. Manchin has said things that back this up, though from a personal perspective not structural. And MY wrote years ago - 2018? - about the structural piece, but not framed in terms of agenda-setting and break-even/ideal points
November 10, 2025 at 3:58 PM
Yes. Well-framed here. Manchin has said things that back this up, though from a personal perspective not structural. And MY wrote years ago - 2018? - about the structural piece, but not framed in terms of agenda-setting and break-even/ideal points
Yes!
Power of the purse provisions could have at least been publicly floated.
Power of the purse provisions could have at least been publicly floated.
Still upset about no power of the purse language. You truly do hate to see it. The Trump admin undertook the most expansive set of illegal budgetary actions of any president in history, and broadcast as loudly as possible they’d keep doing it, and nothing. Budgetary lawlessness.
November 10, 2025 at 2:24 AM
Yes!
Power of the purse provisions could have at least been publicly floated.
Power of the purse provisions could have at least been publicly floated.
This is correct on backpay: the backpay requirement was already black-letter federal law.
If we have to pass laws twice to stop Russell Vought, we are going to get run over by him.
If we have to pass laws twice to stop Russell Vought, we are going to get run over by him.
One of the talking points I keep seeing from Democrats is that part of the deal is that it will "ensure federal workers receive back pay" but that's the existing law!
That's not something you've won in negotiations. That's just the letter of the law. You don't get to claim that as a win.
That's not something you've won in negotiations. That's just the letter of the law. You don't get to claim that as a win.
November 10, 2025 at 1:51 AM
This is correct on backpay: the backpay requirement was already black-letter federal law.
If we have to pass laws twice to stop Russell Vought, we are going to get run over by him.
If we have to pass laws twice to stop Russell Vought, we are going to get run over by him.
Why not float to the press a provision to declare RIFs back to January null and void?
Let federal workers fight that out in the court of public opinion and let Republican senators squash it. Such a fight would have been clarifying.
Let federal workers fight that out in the court of public opinion and let Republican senators squash it. Such a fight would have been clarifying.
November 10, 2025 at 1:14 AM
Why not float to the press a provision to declare RIFs back to January null and void?
Let federal workers fight that out in the court of public opinion and let Republican senators squash it. Such a fight would have been clarifying.
Let federal workers fight that out in the court of public opinion and let Republican senators squash it. Such a fight would have been clarifying.
This was a negotiated agreement and I get that Republicans had input into it, so we can’t expect unlimited asks.
What I’m disappointed about is that we weren’t in a position to build public support for these, or stronger provisions.
What I’m disappointed about is that we weren’t in a position to build public support for these, or stronger provisions.
November 10, 2025 at 1:14 AM
This was a negotiated agreement and I get that Republicans had input into it, so we can’t expect unlimited asks.
What I’m disappointed about is that we weren’t in a position to build public support for these, or stronger provisions.
What I’m disappointed about is that we weren’t in a position to build public support for these, or stronger provisions.
And yes I said “strongly ruled” 😂.
A little bit rhetorical.
But Judge Illston was vehement in her ruling, and a 9th Circuit panel was vehement too.
A little bit rhetorical.
But Judge Illston was vehement in her ruling, and a 9th Circuit panel was vehement too.
November 10, 2025 at 1:09 AM
And yes I said “strongly ruled” 😂.
A little bit rhetorical.
But Judge Illston was vehement in her ruling, and a 9th Circuit panel was vehement too.
A little bit rhetorical.
But Judge Illston was vehement in her ruling, and a 9th Circuit panel was vehement too.
I wrote out this argument in more detail here.
I wrote an explainer about the mass firings—the RIFs.
The RIFs all year have been clearly illegal. Russell Vought is using them to lawlessly clean out federal agencies. Lower court judges have said so. But the Calvinball Supreme Court has allowed them. 1/
The RIFs all year have been clearly illegal. Russell Vought is using them to lawlessly clean out federal agencies. Lower court judges have said so. But the Calvinball Supreme Court has allowed them. 1/
The mass firings have been lawless: now and all year
The first step in stopping a lawless Supreme Court is being clear about what it’s doing
scienceandfreedomalliance.substack.com
November 10, 2025 at 1:07 AM
I wrote out this argument in more detail here.
I wish that Congress had here challenged Vought’s lawless RIFs far harder.
November 10, 2025 at 1:07 AM
I wish that Congress had here challenged Vought’s lawless RIFs far harder.
You don’t think they’ll get the floor votes for cloture?! That would be a reversal
November 10, 2025 at 1:00 AM
You don’t think they’ll get the floor votes for cloture?! That would be a reversal
I don’t want to be right about this, but if Vought continues to ignore the law with barely-plausible explanations, and the Roberts court keeps signing off, we will regret not including self-enforcing provisions here.
November 10, 2025 at 12:56 AM
I don’t want to be right about this, but if Vought continues to ignore the law with barely-plausible explanations, and the Roberts court keeps signing off, we will regret not including self-enforcing provisions here.
And while most of this is preparation for a future majority, there is room for creative thinking around CRs. For example, some power of the purse provisions could have been at least publicly floated to drive public attention to them.
November 10, 2025 at 12:55 AM
And while most of this is preparation for a future majority, there is room for creative thinking around CRs. For example, some power of the purse provisions could have been at least publicly floated to drive public attention to them.