A bit behind here, but I'm so excited you are moving to lemonada media. The first season of Last Day utterly transformed my life, as a partner to someone in recovery with substance use disorder. The transparency, grace and skill at unpacking challenging topics is a real gift, and you fit right in with their vibe. The kind of podcasting being produced on their channel is just incredible. You belong there.
Listening a few days behind it’s hard to relate to the first relief of the nominations. 😬 obviously you all are feeling that same whiplash now though. I’m trying to not freak out knowing I only have so much capacity for fear.
However, a word about mis/disinformation. I can’t remember if Beth or Sarah said it’s not a way to win elections to tell people they are susceptible to misinformation and I agree so I don’t think that’s a strategy. But as a Tennessean where disinformation runs rampant, and straight from the mouths of our elected leaders, I do think it’s a massive problem we have to address as citizens. Not that one of us can change the disinformation infrastructure of the right, but I do think it’s a systemic problem and we can’t win national elections if our policy and messaging change but it never gets to the majority of people because their social media and media sphere is mostly lies and propaganda. So how do we get the message to people and break through the echo chamber? This is likely not the job of PP, but I do think it’s our job as a collective if we are people who care about truth and democracy.
One of the first things (of many) that I thought about with the Trump win was immigration and my heart broke for the people and even more the children that will be affected by this.
I just read this book "In the Shadow of Liberty: The Invisible History of Immigrant Detention in the United States" By Ana Raquel Minian.
It gave me even more perspective on immigration history in the USA and how we got to where we are today. And there is such a massive need for reform and to treat people humanely. Googled this saying so I’d get it right:
“The measure of a society is found in how they treat their weakest and most helpless citizens" - Jimmy Carter.
I would even take out citizen since undocumented people are not, and even green card holders aren't citizens (husband is a green card holder) and say the people that live in your country.
Just here to say thank you to Sarah and Beth for your rational and measured approach to the news. As the wife (who wants to stay married) to a Trump voter and citizen of a very red county, I’m desperately trying to understand the motivations that his voters wanted to convey by voting for him while trying to tamper my anger and disappointment that our values didn’t align. All this to say that I APPRECIATE YOU BOTH!
The part the stood out: Y'all talking about people going into hotels and there's no one at the front desk or people not having servers at restaurants. This is a huge disconnect I think needs to be addressed. My MAGA relatives don't travel. They don't have the money to go to a hotel. They rarely go out to an actual restaurant. They just use fast food so they have no problem being anti-immigration. They see construction sites full of Hispanic men and they think that their unemployed White friends in the construction trades should have those jobs.
As someone who lives in a big farming community in CA, I have always been a little confused about the “the illegal immigrants are stealing our jobs” argument because here we have a large population of undocumented folks and every day you see them doing the backbreaking field work that I’m sure no one else would do. Our produce is shipped all over the country. What is going to happen when we remove our entire labor force? Obviously there is a lot of nuance and complications with the hiring of undocumented folks and whether or not they are treated ethically/fairly etc but it is interesting to me that people are maybe unaware of how truly valuable these folks are.
I agree and part if me hopes trump goes through with his plan so the "they steal our jobs" folks can see what happens to produce prices when we don't have a Labor Force.
Thanks for this episode. I keep trying to reason through stuff and I'm trying to absorb all the inputs that range from extreme doom to "maybe the guardrails will hold". But I just can't get past so many people whom I know and love saying “I don't like who he is, but I like his policies" and then vote for someone convicted of sexual assault, is a felon, and who attempted to overthrow an election! It just boils down to that for me. These are people see sexual purity and patriotism as primary characteristics of being moral. Heaven forbid you say penis in sex ed class (if you are lucky enough to have one) but grabbing p*ssy is fine! In the Clinton era everything was "you can't be morally corrupt personally and pass moral policy publicly"—this was pounded into my head daily back on those days. And here we are…In 2016 Trump was a bit of an unknown, but 2024 comes with full knowledge of Trump's awful behavior—behavior that he has actual convictions on.
Which then leads me to reflect on the lines we all draw between being an (im)moral person and supporting (im)moral policy. My first election was Bush and Mondale and like a good Christian girl, I voted to Bush because I was told Republicans were the moral ones who loved America and God. But by the next election, my left-leaning independence was sprouting and I voted for Clinton and loved his policies and considered them moral—hey I was a U2 fan who fought Apartheid and supported Amnesty International (yes, it was the 80s and 90s😜). But my being a Democrat was immoral–I was the one who wasn’t patriotic or on God’s side.
Then I voted for Clinton again and did my own share of mental gymnastics navigating my support for him after all his sexual misconduct stories were broken. So what do I think about that now? I would like to think that if he was coming into the picture as a candidate now, especially after the me-too movement, that he wouldn't even have been considered by the Democratic Party. And I feel pretty confident in that because of how quickly Al Franken was kicked out of the senate...but who knows for sure. And I'm still working on how fondly I reflect on the Clinton presidency. I do think I have some work to do there.
So this then leads me to how I might feel if it were Nikki Haley or Mike Pence the party and its people rallied behind. I would hate it for sure, just like I hated it when George W Bush won. And I would fight against their policies tooth and nail on moral grounds. But I also remember being very impressed with Bush right after Sept 11 in how he addressed the country and that I actually felt comforted by his words....but then I went back to being furious and joined weekly protests on the war in Iraq. I don’t remember thinking Bush was morally bankrupt as a person—I thought his policies were and I thought he was very, very wrong. I'm pretty sure I would feel the same way about Nikki Haley or even Mike Pence. Maybe? Pence at least made one right decision that was for the greater good. But what If he passed a law nullifying all gay marriages? Should/could/would I think that he is morally bankrupt or just his policies? As the famous book title goes, I Think You're Wrong, But I'm Listening 😜 But I do have to reflect on where that line between the morality of policy and the morality of a person is. I don’t have skin in the gay marriage debate. Does it make it easer for me to say it’s just his politics for that reason? I need to reflect.
Trump is sooooooo different to me though. I do think he is morally bankrupt..he flaunts his bad behavior and wears it with pride. I just can't get past that for so many it was easier for them to hold their nose and vote for Trump than it was a Democrat. At worst, they love how he behaves. I’m disgusted by Steven Miller and Tom Homan being nominated to Trump’s cabinet. Anyone who creates a policy that purposely separates immigrant children from their parents is morally bankrupt. I have no grace there and it makes it hard to extend that grace to people who put a stamp of approval on it.
But I hate cancel culture in all its forms and from any side. I want to have grace. I’ll do my best to fight the name calling and demonization from whatever direction it comes. But I’ve lost all sense of where the lines belong. Maybe for now I am just glad that I’m still questioning where I draw them? If I draw the lines in sand, I can easily change them.
That said, there were sooooooo many opportunities for Republicans to pick someone else and they didn't. And so the price of eggs, or too many immigrants, or wokeness, or whatever it is just feels like a shell coating of something much deeper. Their line feels carved in stone and it’s labeled Democrat.
That was a lot….I think I need to watch a Netflix holiday movie now.
Beth, could you talk about the part of Project 2025 that discusses the dismantling/reorganizing of DHS in light of the appointment of Noem? If Project 2025 really is the road map for this second Trump term, I'm a little surprised he's even appointing someone - unless he wants his person in charge of the reorg.
Obvious jokes about the gravel pit aside, I'm really interested in the possibilities because the DHS plan was a section of the Project I actually agree with. The hodge podge of the organization makes no sense, as does the placement of the Secret Service in Treasury. If some much-needed reorganizing could happen, does Noem's background give any indication she's up to the job?
I've heard the theory that Noem is mostly meant to be a figurehead with the bulk of the work being done by Stephen Miller and Tom Homan (the "border tsar") Trump got pushback from his previous DHS secretaries and he wants to avoid that. I doubt their focus on going to be on reorganizing. Just using the agency as much as they can to handle deportations.
I feel like this episode is going to need a major addendum. Working hard to avoid outrage and just be a clear eyed observer, but… wow! SecDef and AttorneyGeneral???
One of my co-workers would call this the limbo… I’m lowering my expectations, down, down, down… and he keeps limboing UNDER the bar!
Hopefully I'll stop pausing to comment soon. But I believe I just heard Sarah say that California swung hard for Trump by 10 points, and I refer her to her previous comment of how they are still counting the votes in California. Biden won 63.5% of the popular vote in California in 2020. Harris is currently at 58.8%, so that's now 5 points more for Trump, not 10. If she didn't say that, I stand corrected.
I think what she meant is that CA votes for Trump were 10 points higher than in previous elections. In my neck of the woods, Harris won NY and NJ, but it was a lot closer than the last two elections.
Yeah, that's what I thought she said and my point is it is inaccurate as of Wednesday morning 11/13/24 11:30PST. Trump definitely did better in CA than he did in 2020, but you're going to have to wait for all the votes to be counted before you say by how much. I had a friend on Wednesday afternoon last week lamenting that Harris only got 1 million more votes than Trump in CA, but today the current count is closer to 3 million.
I'm only 6:59 in, where Beth and Sarah are talking about the slow process in California, and I want to wail. I hate America right now. I'll get over it. I don't hate America, but I hate its behavior. Ranked choice voting is too complicated? Get over it! LIFE is complicated, and we all hate the two party system, every last one of us. And why in the WORLD do we need to know results before we go to bed election night? OK, I'm done ranting. Thank you for listening.
I agreed with Beth that the Dems would 💯have considered the exact same margins a mandate from the country. Sarah’s example/counter argument that that’s what we did in 2022 and it didn’t work out didn’t connect with me. If we won in 2024, Dems would have considered back to back years of wins meant they had full support moving forward. Honestly, for me it’s the increase of support for Trump that makes me support the concept of it being a mandate. The country seems to be moving to the right. I’d feel more on board if it were anyone *but* Trump but this is where we are.
I agree with Sarah that Trump and Co will think it's a mandate and govern accordingly.
However, I don't know how we get 7 more states enshrining protections for reproductive rights into their state law/constitutions - including Missouri, of all places - and consider that a national move to the right. Voters elected women - including women of color and a trans woman - alongside Trump. If that's a mandate for the Right, it's certainly not my daddy's Right.
The country is shifting, has been shifting, but I think it's more seismic then merely a deeper shade of red (or blue, as people are claiming about Washington state). The old language doesn't work for describing this new reality.
Yes, and that goes to my point. The parties have been morphing over the last quarter century under the pressure of forces like 9/11, the Tea Party, Occupy, BLM, MeToo, social media. Tossing issues like abortion into the Blue box and military into the Red box doesn't really reflect reality anymore, if it ever did.
Politicians have always simplified the issues for voters, but it feels like the voters are getting out in front of the pols in defining the terms. I think what we're seeing with these state laws is the voters recognizing that the issue is healthcare, reproductive care, not just Women's Lib-era culture war boogeyman Abortion. It's about the right of men as well as women to make choices to ensure they have a healthy family. The scare tactics about abortion that worked in the 20th century, when young woman were a) encouraged to not have sex at all, b) encouraged to give up college and have the baby, or c) carry to term so a deserving family could adopt, don't have any place in our modern world full of birth control options. I think the Right may have been slow to see that the country no longer sees this as a morality issue but as a health issue - as in, how can a woman, or a man's wife, stay healthy so as to have a healthy pregnancy in the future.
I think the same nuance shift has blindsided the Left, which is why they are losing ground with constituents they've taken for granted. We need to stop fighting the last war, and start adjusting to what has changed in the ground.
completely agree with you and beth. this was clearly a mandate and even though sarah said it wasn’t, she seemed to kind of say it was later? or maybe I misunderstood.
You also said you want them to be status quo & not be able to call Trump an outsider anymore. Which is maybe a little closer or similar to a mandate? You can’t have your cake & eat it, too. But, neither can he.🙂
I keep thinking about the scene in O Brother Where Art Thou where the politician’s aide is like, “I got an idea! Let’s make your platform ‘Reform’! People love Reform!” And the politician says, “I’m the incumbent you fool! The incumbent can’t be for Reform!” And I’m watching everything now just thinking “people love reform!” I think there’s something there, in how y’all have been talking about incumbency no longer being a safe bet, and how DT has somehow cemented himself in everyone’s mind as The Reform Candidate and thus the Republicans are the Reform Party, whether that’s grounded in reality or not.
I read an interview with a young Venezuelan Trump supporter who said he likes Trump’s stance on illegal immigration and is hoping he makes legal immigration more efficient and I wanted to yell at the article. He’s not going to do that. He’s going to try to shut it all down like he did last time.
The DHS secretary pick has high qualifications: shooting her dog and goats. With the kind of plans for immigration I think you need kind of heartless psychotic personality. Sorry not all that nuanced these days. So Elon and Vivek in charge of efficiency to purge the bureaucracy.
I don’t think that being elected for something is, by itself, qualification for a particular place.
Why is it that when there’re workplace raids they get the undocumented workers but never the employers or executives of the corporations get in trouble?
A bit behind here, but I'm so excited you are moving to lemonada media. The first season of Last Day utterly transformed my life, as a partner to someone in recovery with substance use disorder. The transparency, grace and skill at unpacking challenging topics is a real gift, and you fit right in with their vibe. The kind of podcasting being produced on their channel is just incredible. You belong there.
Listening a few days behind it’s hard to relate to the first relief of the nominations. 😬 obviously you all are feeling that same whiplash now though. I’m trying to not freak out knowing I only have so much capacity for fear.
However, a word about mis/disinformation. I can’t remember if Beth or Sarah said it’s not a way to win elections to tell people they are susceptible to misinformation and I agree so I don’t think that’s a strategy. But as a Tennessean where disinformation runs rampant, and straight from the mouths of our elected leaders, I do think it’s a massive problem we have to address as citizens. Not that one of us can change the disinformation infrastructure of the right, but I do think it’s a systemic problem and we can’t win national elections if our policy and messaging change but it never gets to the majority of people because their social media and media sphere is mostly lies and propaganda. So how do we get the message to people and break through the echo chamber? This is likely not the job of PP, but I do think it’s our job as a collective if we are people who care about truth and democracy.
One of the first things (of many) that I thought about with the Trump win was immigration and my heart broke for the people and even more the children that will be affected by this.
I just read this book "In the Shadow of Liberty: The Invisible History of Immigrant Detention in the United States" By Ana Raquel Minian.
It gave me even more perspective on immigration history in the USA and how we got to where we are today. And there is such a massive need for reform and to treat people humanely. Googled this saying so I’d get it right:
“The measure of a society is found in how they treat their weakest and most helpless citizens" - Jimmy Carter.
I would even take out citizen since undocumented people are not, and even green card holders aren't citizens (husband is a green card holder) and say the people that live in your country.
Just here to say thank you to Sarah and Beth for your rational and measured approach to the news. As the wife (who wants to stay married) to a Trump voter and citizen of a very red county, I’m desperately trying to understand the motivations that his voters wanted to convey by voting for him while trying to tamper my anger and disappointment that our values didn’t align. All this to say that I APPRECIATE YOU BOTH!
The part the stood out: Y'all talking about people going into hotels and there's no one at the front desk or people not having servers at restaurants. This is a huge disconnect I think needs to be addressed. My MAGA relatives don't travel. They don't have the money to go to a hotel. They rarely go out to an actual restaurant. They just use fast food so they have no problem being anti-immigration. They see construction sites full of Hispanic men and they think that their unemployed White friends in the construction trades should have those jobs.
As someone who lives in a big farming community in CA, I have always been a little confused about the “the illegal immigrants are stealing our jobs” argument because here we have a large population of undocumented folks and every day you see them doing the backbreaking field work that I’m sure no one else would do. Our produce is shipped all over the country. What is going to happen when we remove our entire labor force? Obviously there is a lot of nuance and complications with the hiring of undocumented folks and whether or not they are treated ethically/fairly etc but it is interesting to me that people are maybe unaware of how truly valuable these folks are.
I agree and part if me hopes trump goes through with his plan so the "they steal our jobs" folks can see what happens to produce prices when we don't have a Labor Force.
Thanks for this episode. I keep trying to reason through stuff and I'm trying to absorb all the inputs that range from extreme doom to "maybe the guardrails will hold". But I just can't get past so many people whom I know and love saying “I don't like who he is, but I like his policies" and then vote for someone convicted of sexual assault, is a felon, and who attempted to overthrow an election! It just boils down to that for me. These are people see sexual purity and patriotism as primary characteristics of being moral. Heaven forbid you say penis in sex ed class (if you are lucky enough to have one) but grabbing p*ssy is fine! In the Clinton era everything was "you can't be morally corrupt personally and pass moral policy publicly"—this was pounded into my head daily back on those days. And here we are…In 2016 Trump was a bit of an unknown, but 2024 comes with full knowledge of Trump's awful behavior—behavior that he has actual convictions on.
Which then leads me to reflect on the lines we all draw between being an (im)moral person and supporting (im)moral policy. My first election was Bush and Mondale and like a good Christian girl, I voted to Bush because I was told Republicans were the moral ones who loved America and God. But by the next election, my left-leaning independence was sprouting and I voted for Clinton and loved his policies and considered them moral—hey I was a U2 fan who fought Apartheid and supported Amnesty International (yes, it was the 80s and 90s😜). But my being a Democrat was immoral–I was the one who wasn’t patriotic or on God’s side.
Then I voted for Clinton again and did my own share of mental gymnastics navigating my support for him after all his sexual misconduct stories were broken. So what do I think about that now? I would like to think that if he was coming into the picture as a candidate now, especially after the me-too movement, that he wouldn't even have been considered by the Democratic Party. And I feel pretty confident in that because of how quickly Al Franken was kicked out of the senate...but who knows for sure. And I'm still working on how fondly I reflect on the Clinton presidency. I do think I have some work to do there.
So this then leads me to how I might feel if it were Nikki Haley or Mike Pence the party and its people rallied behind. I would hate it for sure, just like I hated it when George W Bush won. And I would fight against their policies tooth and nail on moral grounds. But I also remember being very impressed with Bush right after Sept 11 in how he addressed the country and that I actually felt comforted by his words....but then I went back to being furious and joined weekly protests on the war in Iraq. I don’t remember thinking Bush was morally bankrupt as a person—I thought his policies were and I thought he was very, very wrong. I'm pretty sure I would feel the same way about Nikki Haley or even Mike Pence. Maybe? Pence at least made one right decision that was for the greater good. But what If he passed a law nullifying all gay marriages? Should/could/would I think that he is morally bankrupt or just his policies? As the famous book title goes, I Think You're Wrong, But I'm Listening 😜 But I do have to reflect on where that line between the morality of policy and the morality of a person is. I don’t have skin in the gay marriage debate. Does it make it easer for me to say it’s just his politics for that reason? I need to reflect.
Trump is sooooooo different to me though. I do think he is morally bankrupt..he flaunts his bad behavior and wears it with pride. I just can't get past that for so many it was easier for them to hold their nose and vote for Trump than it was a Democrat. At worst, they love how he behaves. I’m disgusted by Steven Miller and Tom Homan being nominated to Trump’s cabinet. Anyone who creates a policy that purposely separates immigrant children from their parents is morally bankrupt. I have no grace there and it makes it hard to extend that grace to people who put a stamp of approval on it.
But I hate cancel culture in all its forms and from any side. I want to have grace. I’ll do my best to fight the name calling and demonization from whatever direction it comes. But I’ve lost all sense of where the lines belong. Maybe for now I am just glad that I’m still questioning where I draw them? If I draw the lines in sand, I can easily change them.
That said, there were sooooooo many opportunities for Republicans to pick someone else and they didn't. And so the price of eggs, or too many immigrants, or wokeness, or whatever it is just feels like a shell coating of something much deeper. Their line feels carved in stone and it’s labeled Democrat.
That was a lot….I think I need to watch a Netflix holiday movie now.
Beth, could you talk about the part of Project 2025 that discusses the dismantling/reorganizing of DHS in light of the appointment of Noem? If Project 2025 really is the road map for this second Trump term, I'm a little surprised he's even appointing someone - unless he wants his person in charge of the reorg.
Obvious jokes about the gravel pit aside, I'm really interested in the possibilities because the DHS plan was a section of the Project I actually agree with. The hodge podge of the organization makes no sense, as does the placement of the Secret Service in Treasury. If some much-needed reorganizing could happen, does Noem's background give any indication she's up to the job?
I've heard the theory that Noem is mostly meant to be a figurehead with the bulk of the work being done by Stephen Miller and Tom Homan (the "border tsar") Trump got pushback from his previous DHS secretaries and he wants to avoid that. I doubt their focus on going to be on reorganizing. Just using the agency as much as they can to handle deportations.
Every time I hear someone say that Suzie Wiles will be the first female Chief of Staff, I got, “you forgot about CJ Cregg!!” 😂
I feel like this episode is going to need a major addendum. Working hard to avoid outrage and just be a clear eyed observer, but… wow! SecDef and AttorneyGeneral???
One of my co-workers would call this the limbo… I’m lowering my expectations, down, down, down… and he keeps limboing UNDER the bar!
Matt Gaetz attorney general?
Hopefully I'll stop pausing to comment soon. But I believe I just heard Sarah say that California swung hard for Trump by 10 points, and I refer her to her previous comment of how they are still counting the votes in California. Biden won 63.5% of the popular vote in California in 2020. Harris is currently at 58.8%, so that's now 5 points more for Trump, not 10. If she didn't say that, I stand corrected.
I think what she meant is that CA votes for Trump were 10 points higher than in previous elections. In my neck of the woods, Harris won NY and NJ, but it was a lot closer than the last two elections.
Yeah, that's what I thought she said and my point is it is inaccurate as of Wednesday morning 11/13/24 11:30PST. Trump definitely did better in CA than he did in 2020, but you're going to have to wait for all the votes to be counted before you say by how much. I had a friend on Wednesday afternoon last week lamenting that Harris only got 1 million more votes than Trump in CA, but today the current count is closer to 3 million.
Totally fair Jean!
I'm only 6:59 in, where Beth and Sarah are talking about the slow process in California, and I want to wail. I hate America right now. I'll get over it. I don't hate America, but I hate its behavior. Ranked choice voting is too complicated? Get over it! LIFE is complicated, and we all hate the two party system, every last one of us. And why in the WORLD do we need to know results before we go to bed election night? OK, I'm done ranting. Thank you for listening.
Jean- rant away. I am over here nodding in full agreement!!!
I agreed with Beth that the Dems would 💯have considered the exact same margins a mandate from the country. Sarah’s example/counter argument that that’s what we did in 2022 and it didn’t work out didn’t connect with me. If we won in 2024, Dems would have considered back to back years of wins meant they had full support moving forward. Honestly, for me it’s the increase of support for Trump that makes me support the concept of it being a mandate. The country seems to be moving to the right. I’d feel more on board if it were anyone *but* Trump but this is where we are.
I agree with Sarah that Trump and Co will think it's a mandate and govern accordingly.
However, I don't know how we get 7 more states enshrining protections for reproductive rights into their state law/constitutions - including Missouri, of all places - and consider that a national move to the right. Voters elected women - including women of color and a trans woman - alongside Trump. If that's a mandate for the Right, it's certainly not my daddy's Right.
The country is shifting, has been shifting, but I think it's more seismic then merely a deeper shade of red (or blue, as people are claiming about Washington state). The old language doesn't work for describing this new reality.
Maybe that’s indicative of how abortion isn’t as polarizing as politicians make it out to be.
Yes, and that goes to my point. The parties have been morphing over the last quarter century under the pressure of forces like 9/11, the Tea Party, Occupy, BLM, MeToo, social media. Tossing issues like abortion into the Blue box and military into the Red box doesn't really reflect reality anymore, if it ever did.
Politicians have always simplified the issues for voters, but it feels like the voters are getting out in front of the pols in defining the terms. I think what we're seeing with these state laws is the voters recognizing that the issue is healthcare, reproductive care, not just Women's Lib-era culture war boogeyman Abortion. It's about the right of men as well as women to make choices to ensure they have a healthy family. The scare tactics about abortion that worked in the 20th century, when young woman were a) encouraged to not have sex at all, b) encouraged to give up college and have the baby, or c) carry to term so a deserving family could adopt, don't have any place in our modern world full of birth control options. I think the Right may have been slow to see that the country no longer sees this as a morality issue but as a health issue - as in, how can a woman, or a man's wife, stay healthy so as to have a healthy pregnancy in the future.
I think the same nuance shift has blindsided the Left, which is why they are losing ground with constituents they've taken for granted. We need to stop fighting the last war, and start adjusting to what has changed in the ground.
Ok
completely agree with you and beth. this was clearly a mandate and even though sarah said it wasn’t, she seemed to kind of say it was later? or maybe I misunderstood.
I want them to think it is so they overplay their hand 😬
You also said you want them to be status quo & not be able to call Trump an outsider anymore. Which is maybe a little closer or similar to a mandate? You can’t have your cake & eat it, too. But, neither can he.🙂
I can get onboard with that!
I keep thinking about the scene in O Brother Where Art Thou where the politician’s aide is like, “I got an idea! Let’s make your platform ‘Reform’! People love Reform!” And the politician says, “I’m the incumbent you fool! The incumbent can’t be for Reform!” And I’m watching everything now just thinking “people love reform!” I think there’s something there, in how y’all have been talking about incumbency no longer being a safe bet, and how DT has somehow cemented himself in everyone’s mind as The Reform Candidate and thus the Republicans are the Reform Party, whether that’s grounded in reality or not.
I read an interview with a young Venezuelan Trump supporter who said he likes Trump’s stance on illegal immigration and is hoping he makes legal immigration more efficient and I wanted to yell at the article. He’s not going to do that. He’s going to try to shut it all down like he did last time.
The DHS secretary pick has high qualifications: shooting her dog and goats. With the kind of plans for immigration I think you need kind of heartless psychotic personality. Sorry not all that nuanced these days. So Elon and Vivek in charge of efficiency to purge the bureaucracy.
I don’t think that being elected for something is, by itself, qualification for a particular place.
Why is it that when there’re workplace raids they get the undocumented workers but never the employers or executives of the corporations get in trouble?
😡