Yet increasingly congressional Democrats, important ones, appear to be leaning in that direction. Are they "fanning the flames" as well, or merely reading the room and the tea leaves, and drawing the same conclusions? I doubt they are consulting with The Bulwark to guide their decisions, which likely are based on a lot more inside inform…
Yet increasingly congressional Democrats, important ones, appear to be leaning in that direction. Are they "fanning the flames" as well, or merely reading the room and the tea leaves, and drawing the same conclusions? I doubt they are consulting with The Bulwark to guide their decisions, which likely are based on a lot more inside information than we have at our disposal. So I can't get too worked up about what the columnists here write. My outrage is reserved for those insiders who likely saw this coming and did nothing to stop it, or at least plan for it, when there was time to do so. So many of us on the outside saw the signs and were holding our breath that there would be no implosion. Yet here we are. I feel played by the DNC. The Bulwark certainly has nothing to do with that.
Did you read the links? Or listen to the psychologists evaluating Biden's cognitive function?
A bunch of congressional dems were part of the initial hysteria and the post hoc rationalization of that hysteria. The calm Dems may have now perceived that the hysteria has irreparably damaged Biden. Biden himself is the same as he ever was. Calm acceptance of the perfectly reasonable explanation would have been the far better approach. https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/we-now-know-what-really-happened From the moment the debate ended, I advised remaining calm and waiting for more information because decisions made in panic seldom work out.
I do get that. But it's not the way most voters see it, going on instinct as they do and not putting the time and effort into the matter that we do. True, media coverage of the spectacle, at the expense of vital facts, does not help, and DJT's own cognitive decline goes woefully underanalyzed. Therein lies the main problem -- voters driven by emotion rather than research. Going back to at least Bill Clinton and Dick Morris, polls seem to be the main driver of anything political anymore. That also appears to be why Schiff, Jeffries, maybe Pelosi and Schumer, and others at a high level are abandoning ship either subtly or overtly. They have much more information than we do and are much closer to the situation than we are. What do they know that we do not?
Yet increasingly congressional Democrats, important ones, appear to be leaning in that direction. Are they "fanning the flames" as well, or merely reading the room and the tea leaves, and drawing the same conclusions? I doubt they are consulting with The Bulwark to guide their decisions, which likely are based on a lot more inside information than we have at our disposal. So I can't get too worked up about what the columnists here write. My outrage is reserved for those insiders who likely saw this coming and did nothing to stop it, or at least plan for it, when there was time to do so. So many of us on the outside saw the signs and were holding our breath that there would be no implosion. Yet here we are. I feel played by the DNC. The Bulwark certainly has nothing to do with that.
Did you read the links? Or listen to the psychologists evaluating Biden's cognitive function?
A bunch of congressional dems were part of the initial hysteria and the post hoc rationalization of that hysteria. The calm Dems may have now perceived that the hysteria has irreparably damaged Biden. Biden himself is the same as he ever was. Calm acceptance of the perfectly reasonable explanation would have been the far better approach. https://sethabramson.substack.com/p/we-now-know-what-really-happened From the moment the debate ended, I advised remaining calm and waiting for more information because decisions made in panic seldom work out.
I do get that. But it's not the way most voters see it, going on instinct as they do and not putting the time and effort into the matter that we do. True, media coverage of the spectacle, at the expense of vital facts, does not help, and DJT's own cognitive decline goes woefully underanalyzed. Therein lies the main problem -- voters driven by emotion rather than research. Going back to at least Bill Clinton and Dick Morris, polls seem to be the main driver of anything political anymore. That also appears to be why Schiff, Jeffries, maybe Pelosi and Schumer, and others at a high level are abandoning ship either subtly or overtly. They have much more information than we do and are much closer to the situation than we are. What do they know that we do not?