Carl The justice system can and should be race blind and give every offender equal treatment under the law. I don't think this is actually challenging for liberalism in any way.

This isn’t meant to be a dig at AOC in particular, but this got me thinking. How much do taxpayers pay Congress people. Are we really getting our moneys worth? In AOC’s case, it seems that she’s mostly a social media personality. Not sure that’s a good public investment.

It will never not be odd to me that huge swaths of people disagree with Piper on this.

Admittedly, I haven’t read the original piece, and I agree with the big points here about moderation, but I’m curious how this can be achieved. What’s the mechanism here. I’m not sure they’ve identified the path to do this, or the roadblocks, or how to overcome them.

1) It is now harder for Dem candidates to differentiate themselves from the national Dem brand & ideology is only 1 among a few things making vanishingly small differences 2) Ideology & issue focus of national Dem brand is harder to move, given party network, media, & Rep attacks

I said previously that this reminded me of other similar initiatives that fizzled quickly after pushback from left. Not just Abundance, but remember this Third Way report? politico.com/f/?id=00000195…

Also, if they are a made-up person for a political anecdote to make a point, you may call them aunt or uncle, as long as there’s not enough information to verify.

Very unclear if there’s any strategy at ago being this book and book tour.

Yes, Medicare for All polls well if you don’t mention the fact that taxes would have to rise. Everything polls well until you mention trade offs. But when you ask voters if they are willing to pay higher taxes for Medicare for all, or get rid of private insurers, they say no.

It’s really weird to realize that one group of people see this and assume Smith was performing his job fairly, some see him abusing his power and applaud it, some see an abuse and criticize it, and the biggest group of people have no idea it happened at all.

I know people on the left want to believe that the FBI’s actions were reasonable given the circumstances, and, look, maybe they were. But I caution against just assuming that. Were any crimes uncovered through these? If not, that’s an indication of abuse.

I think it was Chait that asked how KJP got her job. The better question is to ask how it’s possible that Chait and his counterparts only see this now.

This is similar to my view, but not quite. Yes, it’s a train wreck and completely inexplicable endeavor, but the interviewers aren’t even being that hard on her. Their questions are very, very basic. They seem hard because KJP is utterly unable to answer them cogently.

This is a rare example of a person going on a post-administration publicity tour and *reducing* the opportunities open to her. I can’t think of another time this happened. I’m flabbergasted by how poorly thought-out this plan was, on top of its obvious errors in execution.

What’s crazy is how confident people were a whole 4 months ago that Google was toast. Should make people more skeptical about all the big predictions here.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins: “You said that Mike Johnson isn’t willing to sit down and have a conversation. Y’all did have a phone conversation, I believe you said earlier today. Who initiated that call?” Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY): “It was a call from Mike Johnson. It was very brief and

New York City has a huge amount going for it so something like this won’t kill the city, but it will, on the margins reduce its growth going forward. Given other policies, it’s not impossible that overtime NYC falls behind other, more friendly cities.

One of the benefits NYC has that is less visible is that there’s no single competitor to it, and network effects and agglomeration keep it on top. If a bunch of cities are equally enticing for business, none of them can match the agglomeration.