You're missing the point. I'm Catholic and support gay marriage in the Church. So do most millennials in the Church. Because they're liberal, not "growing more conservative", which had been the subject motivating my initial comment.
Charlie - I love your daily podcasts, but I especially enjoy the new Thursday sessions with Ben Wittes. You two are a superb team. You ask wonderful questions and Ben answers them with calmness, reason, and a strategic vision of how the rule of law should function. I learn more from 40 minutes with you two than I do reading a dozen articles on the subject. Many, many thanks!
It simply isn't true that people become more "conservative", unless you cherry pick one particular issue or another to misrepresent the reality. Millennials believe in climate change, a guaranteed living wage, social security, Medicare, they support legal weed and want to see gay marriage in the Catholic Church.
It took the catholic church over 200 years to get on board with the earth moving around the sun. Millennials might not want to suspend respiration in anticipation.
But that isn't the point in question, first of all. Also, Millennials aren't intimidated by cynicism. They're not afraid to do the right thing, even if older Americans don't really know how.
They can do the right thing all they want to, but I don't see that rapidly moving the Catholic Church. And while I have no dog in that particular fight, I can't see why it matters to anyone who isn't catholic who the catholic church will or won't marry. To my mind it is just one of many religious sects that is stuck in the past and is constitutionally protected to be so.
That wasn't the point. Millennials support gay marriage in the Catholic Church. Because millennials are liberal. Not "growing more conservative", which had been the topic motivating my comment.
Has anyone considered that Trump's attempts to move his cases to Federal Court are an effort to make them easier to pardon? Trump would clearly pardon himself and DeSantis has indicated that he would pardon Trump as well. But can a President overturn a state conviction? That may be why they are trying to get them held as Federal trials.
Another part is that it will be a lot easier to claim that it was some biased federal jury rather than a jury of Georgians. They already did that spin on the NYC jury that decided he had sexually assaulted a woman.
FL is a perfect storm in a plethora of ways. I live in the northeast, which I think makes a difference. There is a kind of exodus taking place which includes people fleeing the area for "better" weather, in that the govt will keep bailing out hurricane damage, right wingers searching for a RW utopia and the confluence of both. FL has turned dark red and is turning darker red. People from the northeast are going right past NC (voted for Obama), SC (tried to secede) and GA (rational gov, 2 dem sens) and going right to FL. It would be pointless for the DNC to throw money at it. It's gone.
I am kind of tired of "Jack Smith now knows this" and "Jack Smith now knows that." all I can think of is 20 months of "Robert Mueller now knows this" and "Robert Mueller now knows that." So we will eventually get a damning report and piles of evidence of obstruction, and an explanation from Merrick Garland why it will not lead to a prosecution. the only difference seems to be that others have learned not to lie to the FBI about what they know so that they get prosecuted but never Trump. The type of stuff that Trump did before 2016 will get you prosecuted in New York. After that all of his criminality is "political."
That Steve Schale piece is terrific, even though it had me close to swearing more than once. A Bulwark Podcast or even a Thursday Night Bulwark with Steve Schale AND James Carville would be an instant classic. Food for thought.
"In a message posted on the conservative social media platform Gettr on Wednesday night, Bannon called on Greene and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio—who also voted in line with party's leaders—to "Both Face Primary Challenges from Real MAGA."
-----
The attitude expressed by Mr Bannon is nothing new - from either side of the aisle. For years now both the MAGA Right and Progressive Left have functioned under a similar guideline: "You've been by my side for years now, but you just said/did something antithetical to our movement. You are no longer an ally and we will bury you."
The bottom line is that political extremists of any ilk do not function from a place of reason. All they seem to know and care about is *today's* fight, the past is the past and it has no bearing on the current ideological battle. It all seems to boil down to where one stands right now only, what you have previously said or done is immaterial.
After listening to your and Michael Steele’s podcast, I am completely and totally depressed. You guys are right, an ankle bracelet on Trump plays great with his base and support. Are we done? How can an attacking Republican candidate for nomination whittle away at Trump’s support? I think Christie has the willingness, but I’m not sure he can be effective. I would love to hear from the Bulwark how a campaign can successfully attack Trump. Please, I need a lifeline...
One positive outcome of the debt ceiling vote is that it shows if anything else meaningful gets done in the House it'll require Dem votes to make it happen, and this really weakens the Freedom Caucus's power as well as Kevin's. Maybe he can get GOP majority votes for messaging bills that have zero chance of becoming law, but other than that look for basically a do nothing Congress from now 'til next election.
Where I live, when a Black person in government resigns and moves on to a better job, there is anguished clutching of pearls. "Was it us, was it something we said?" The person in question won't say, being busy transitioning into the new job, so the wisdom of DEI consultants is sought. "Damn right it was something you said, it was microaggressions." "Microaggressions? Who said what to whom?"
We never do find out. Instead we are given *examples* of microaggressions. "Like that. Must have been." "
We *clearly* have a lot of work to do," the electeds intone. Better hire more DEI consultants.
You're missing the point. I'm Catholic and support gay marriage in the Church. So do most millennials in the Church. Because they're liberal, not "growing more conservative", which had been the subject motivating my initial comment.
Charlie - I love your daily podcasts, but I especially enjoy the new Thursday sessions with Ben Wittes. You two are a superb team. You ask wonderful questions and Ben answers them with calmness, reason, and a strategic vision of how the rule of law should function. I learn more from 40 minutes with you two than I do reading a dozen articles on the subject. Many, many thanks!
Evil stoops and picks up luck.
It simply isn't true that people become more "conservative", unless you cherry pick one particular issue or another to misrepresent the reality. Millennials believe in climate change, a guaranteed living wage, social security, Medicare, they support legal weed and want to see gay marriage in the Catholic Church.
It took the catholic church over 200 years to get on board with the earth moving around the sun. Millennials might not want to suspend respiration in anticipation.
But that isn't the point in question, first of all. Also, Millennials aren't intimidated by cynicism. They're not afraid to do the right thing, even if older Americans don't really know how.
They can do the right thing all they want to, but I don't see that rapidly moving the Catholic Church. And while I have no dog in that particular fight, I can't see why it matters to anyone who isn't catholic who the catholic church will or won't marry. To my mind it is just one of many religious sects that is stuck in the past and is constitutionally protected to be so.
That wasn't the point. Millennials support gay marriage in the Catholic Church. Because millennials are liberal. Not "growing more conservative", which had been the topic motivating my comment.
Re: Ryan Goodman's article, "If the glove fits, you must convict."
Has anyone considered that Trump's attempts to move his cases to Federal Court are an effort to make them easier to pardon? Trump would clearly pardon himself and DeSantis has indicated that he would pardon Trump as well. But can a President overturn a state conviction? That may be why they are trying to get them held as Federal trials.
I think that's a big part of it.
Another part is that it will be a lot easier to claim that it was some biased federal jury rather than a jury of Georgians. They already did that spin on the NYC jury that decided he had sexually assaulted a woman.
I'm not interested in the views of convict and criminal defendant Steve Bannon.
FL is a perfect storm in a plethora of ways. I live in the northeast, which I think makes a difference. There is a kind of exodus taking place which includes people fleeing the area for "better" weather, in that the govt will keep bailing out hurricane damage, right wingers searching for a RW utopia and the confluence of both. FL has turned dark red and is turning darker red. People from the northeast are going right past NC (voted for Obama), SC (tried to secede) and GA (rational gov, 2 dem sens) and going right to FL. It would be pointless for the DNC to throw money at it. It's gone.
I am kind of tired of "Jack Smith now knows this" and "Jack Smith now knows that." all I can think of is 20 months of "Robert Mueller now knows this" and "Robert Mueller now knows that." So we will eventually get a damning report and piles of evidence of obstruction, and an explanation from Merrick Garland why it will not lead to a prosecution. the only difference seems to be that others have learned not to lie to the FBI about what they know so that they get prosecuted but never Trump. The type of stuff that Trump did before 2016 will get you prosecuted in New York. After that all of his criminality is "political."
DEI initiatives have become performative, perfunctory and occasionally punitive examples of brown-washing.
That Steve Schale piece is terrific, even though it had me close to swearing more than once. A Bulwark Podcast or even a Thursday Night Bulwark with Steve Schale AND James Carville would be an instant classic. Food for thought.
"In a message posted on the conservative social media platform Gettr on Wednesday night, Bannon called on Greene and Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio—who also voted in line with party's leaders—to "Both Face Primary Challenges from Real MAGA."
-----
The attitude expressed by Mr Bannon is nothing new - from either side of the aisle. For years now both the MAGA Right and Progressive Left have functioned under a similar guideline: "You've been by my side for years now, but you just said/did something antithetical to our movement. You are no longer an ally and we will bury you."
The bottom line is that political extremists of any ilk do not function from a place of reason. All they seem to know and care about is *today's* fight, the past is the past and it has no bearing on the current ideological battle. It all seems to boil down to where one stands right now only, what you have previously said or done is immaterial.
fnord
"The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People's Front."
And maybe those members of the uppity new sect of Christianity, what with their peace, love and compassion crap.
fnord
Too true. The vote last night in the House was a textbook example of our Political Horseshoe in action. Thank God that the Center held again.
After listening to your and Michael Steele’s podcast, I am completely and totally depressed. You guys are right, an ankle bracelet on Trump plays great with his base and support. Are we done? How can an attacking Republican candidate for nomination whittle away at Trump’s support? I think Christie has the willingness, but I’m not sure he can be effective. I would love to hear from the Bulwark how a campaign can successfully attack Trump. Please, I need a lifeline...
One positive outcome of the debt ceiling vote is that it shows if anything else meaningful gets done in the House it'll require Dem votes to make it happen, and this really weakens the Freedom Caucus's power as well as Kevin's. Maybe he can get GOP majority votes for messaging bills that have zero chance of becoming law, but other than that look for basically a do nothing Congress from now 'til next election.
Predicted headline on Wednesday, November 6th, 2024: "Trump joins Tara Reade in self-imposed Russian exile".
And I will help him pack.
Where I live, when a Black person in government resigns and moves on to a better job, there is anguished clutching of pearls. "Was it us, was it something we said?" The person in question won't say, being busy transitioning into the new job, so the wisdom of DEI consultants is sought. "Damn right it was something you said, it was microaggressions." "Microaggressions? Who said what to whom?"
We never do find out. Instead we are given *examples* of microaggressions. "Like that. Must have been." "
We *clearly* have a lot of work to do," the electeds intone. Better hire more DEI consultants.