a lot of political “scandal” coverage is just the media making a decision about whether public opinion needs a corrective

Imagine if we treated any other form of safety like this:"We should only install outlet covers in day care centers on a case-by-case basis, such as where a toddler has stuck his fingers in an electrical socket."

focusing on the immediate fire and how it polls is also what prevents the opposition party from ever forming a coherent message and popular platform that can last across cycles instead of constant churn and insincere slogans based on micro-targeting and consultants

for a couple decades that industry was able to leverage high pay and perks to keep their workers in line and the second it looked like they might start demanding more than golden handcuffs guys like andreesen started inviting skull shape bloggers into the group chat

i think this argument resonates with liberal moderates because the left’s rhetoric irritates them personally. But the idea that it’s responsible for ~10 point swings in public opinion is completely detached from the evidence.

i am apparently incapable of thinking beyond "guy said thing, he must be behind the joke." even though you're often (usually?) the one making music refs on the show!

the reality is that these people are far more interested in maintaining their coalition’s power within the party than protecting the party’s power within the country.

a lot of pundits become obsessed with the little contours of conservative politics and ultimately get so lost in them that they get lapped by people who believe simple things like “republicans hate minorities and workers.”

authoritarianism works in large part because they hold the money and the guns - they can present you with choices where, in a vacuum, compliance appears rational. but that’s an illusion; compliance is dangerous.