[Updated x2] Comment Policy Change
A warning of impending change.

An incident in one of the week’s Open Forum posts has prompted us to decide on a change in our commenting policy. Starting Monday, only registered site users will have commenting privileges.
Most of our regulars already created accounts some time back in (alas, vein) hopes that it would solve a longstanding problem with the inability to edit one’s own comments. Regardless, registration is free and easy.
To be clear: we’re not going to require commenters to post under their own names or even reveal their identity to us. They simply have to create a free account linked to a working email address.
What do we hope to gain by this? The ability to more easily enforce bans on trolls and others who poison the discussion. It’s still not perfect, in that banned users could still theoretically come back under a new persona. But it’ll be easier to monitor and easier to simply delete their entire accounts, hopefully making their efforts less enjoyable.
[Update 1 from Matt – Saturday Night]
First, thank you to everyone who is already registering.
Second, as some people have already noted, you may experience emails from OTB being automatically sent to your SPAM folder. This is a known issue with Gmail. The best way for Gmail users to check if this is happening is to use the following search string in your Gmail search bar:
in:spam ***@***il.com” target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>drjjoyner+ot*@***il.com
Sometimes flagging the emails as “not spam” will be enough. However, you may need to create a rule.
Third, during this transition period, it may take a moment for you to see your comments. This should only happen for a short amount of time. The TL;DR is that from our SPAM filter’s perspective posting under your official account is different from posting from the name/email combo you are using. Once I’ve approved your new account’s ability to post, you should be set. If you’re not sure about that please use this post to test things.
Also, let us know if you hit any other challenges. Your traditional name/email combinations will work during this transition period, so post here using them.
[Update 2 from Matt – Sunday Morning]
Things continue to progress smoothly. I’m seeing fewer comments going to moderation–that’s a good sign.
There are a few commenters whose posts are repeatedly getting sent into auto-moderation. I’m going to start a list and reach out to you all via email. My hope is that as our SPAM filter updates, this will resolve itself.
I am not sure if I am registered. I just clicked on the create a free account link and it asked for username and eMail. I am assuming that these must match my current name and Email.
Also I have used two different emails to post comments to display two different avatars. Am I now limited to one email for posting? Will registration prohibit me from changing my name on comments in the future?
@Mister Bluster: I’m not seeing a user account for anyone with “Bluster” in their name. The username is permanent, but not the display name. You’d have to use the same email address for the login, but it can be changed.
@James Joyner:
Been here a few years but …
Not sure I’m formally registered either.
Thanks, James
This will probably turn out to be one of those not wanting to join a club that lets in the likes of me thing for me. Good luck. It’s been fun.
I know I registered, but I tend to use a different e-mail address than the one I gave when I registered.
I filled out the registration form and was informed that I would get a confirmation email. Never got the email so I tried to fill out the registration form again and was informed that the username and email that I entered are registered so I guess I am registered.
@Mister Bluster: Check your email spam folder, if you haven’t. That’s where the link ended up when I registered. Once I found it, it worked fine.
This is probably user error on my part…I am registered, but I get a “your comment is awaiting moderation” response. What am I doing incorrectly?
ETA: which is even weirder since it says this policy will take effect Monday?
Just checking
ETA: Le shrug
I agree this is a necessary move to keep alive the spirit of the blog. This is not an ideological thing. I for one would absolutely love it if some people from MAGA could join up and debate honestly. Emphasis on honestly. Assess a contrary position, attack it with logic and evidence and at least some courtesy. But also believe something, state it, defend it. Can’t just have the one, you need to have both.
@Mikey:..spam…
Found it! Always helps when someone else does my thinking for me. Thanks!
I remember registering a long time ago, but just decided to re-register, and I have yet to get a confirmation email or be able to set a password.
Looks like I must have registered a while ago, and was smart enough to record the information in 1password 🙂
It seems one’s personalized icon is tied to the account that one registered with?
@just nutha:
It just wouldn’t be the same, IMO.
Just re-registered.
Got the confirmation email, and the form for username and password.
Just hope I can remember the password, for a change.
LOL.
I hope it works; I’ve lately given up on the septic swamp that Xitter has devolved into.
The sheer level of pig-headed trollery was just making me annoyed and depressed.
Bluesky might be better, but lately I’m more occupied with having fun with music (Bitwig and VCV Rack, yay!) and playing around with Baldur’s Gat,e or going through my LP collection on my new Technics turntable.
Escapism? We haz it.
I just need to de-stress a bit, perhaps.
I’m cutting down my news consumption to the BBC daily news, the Economist, the FT, and OTB.
The last because OTB helps me a lot to understand whats going on in US politics.
And because the conversations are, generally, informative, and quite often, fun.
@Eusebio: I understand, but my history with registration sites is perfect. I’ve never successfully logged on to a site at which I’ve had to register more than 3 times without having to reset my registration. I have registered usernames at LGM, Patheos, and 3 or 4 others from decades ago that I have no access to anymore.
I’ll still be here, you just won’t realize it. A great relief to some, I’m sure.
@Michael Reynolds:
Indeed.
I’ve known, and know, some (Brit) Conservatives able to argue rationally; and I rather like talking to them, despite periodic irritation.
They make me think.
Trollery-lollery and nastiness is a diffrenet matter.
Which is why I’ve abandoned Xitter
(“X” is now pronounced “sh”, I think.)
@just nutha:
Place would not be the same without ye.
James
Not sure what this really means. What is it you want/need/expect?
I am routinely called a troll. I’m not a troll. I simply have alternative views. Your commenters just claim troll as a cheap debating tactic.
I have no desire to “poison” a thread.
I admit, when treated like crap, no matter what I say, I can respond in kind. Why do you or Dr Taylor never criticize the Daryl’s of the world? It’s just invective 24/7. Reynolds and I have a long history. Oddly, perhaps, I read his stuff because I think he’s a smart guy. I’m willing to listen. But have you read his responses to me? It’s just psychotic. Similarly, I read you , and Dr Taylor and digest it. (And news, Dr Taylor, I may not agree with you, but I read and consider). Why else come here? I want alternative views.
You really IMHO need to look at your commenters. Are they open to debate? Or just pile up on anyone with a different views. Has it ever crossed your mind that you have only a couple people who are just not raw partisans backslapping each other? Your blog has become an echo chamber. It wasn’t that way 10 years ago.
I go way back. Blog talk radio. You, Verdon, Knapp…perhaps Schuler. . This was a “go to” website. What happened? Again, not a troll, no intention to poison, but what happened? My current commentary is intended to stir a debate. What do you really want this site to be?
Looks like I’m hung up on comment moderation after a re-register?
Ooh, and now back.
Ain’t ye all so lucky to still have me?
lolalol.
😉
Testing. Testing.
20 years and it’s still works! Impressive. And fortunate, the dumb email address has been dead for ~10 years.
So, does one need to stay signed in to comment?
OK, I think I got all registered properly. First comment logged in!
I almost never say anything, but it’s nice to know I could.
@Connor:
Recent postings from you:
I could go on. Now perhaps you think some of those are “debate”–the thing is on most of those threads and many others, you never actually respond to substantive replies. In fact, in most cases, you didn’t reply at all (the Allegator Alcatraz was an exception).
You may not think so. But when people like @Andy, who is in no way part of the hive mind, essentially identify you as one—well, perhaps that should give you some pause. Ditto Hal_1000 (though I can’t find where he did). And again, he’s not a lefty either.
I don’t go as far back as you. I started reading back in 2008. I agree that there were far more right wing commenters on the site then. But a decade ago was 2015 and the commentariate hasn’t changed all that much. Most of the old school right wing folks were no longer commenting by then–most likely because they were not willing to go on the trip that James and Steven had from being on the right. A few more moderate voices have moved off commenting here to other places (or began to run other blogs). Some folks no longer comment–either out of choice, in a few cases being banned (for epic breakdowns/flames outs), or health issues/death.
BTW, if I pull comments from you from that time–you were posting as Drew at that point (one of at least four bans that you’ve had during my reading time) you were complaining that James had gone to the left to chase his audience–not out of actual ideological and policy differences from the Republican party.
I could go on about all the ways the site hasn’t changed much in terms of commentary and direction over the last decade, beyond the tragic loss of Doug. Alex, who you often bring up, had moved on to professionally writing for Fortune and other publications by then. And people were complaining the Blog had become an echo chamber back a decade ago too.
Here’s the bottom line–I don’t know why James instituted this change. I do know that we, as the hosts, have been discussing what to do about people we keep kicking off OTB who keep coming back (something you know all too much about) for a while. Or who have been utterly derailing threads and don’t respond to requests not to (why Paul L is now banned). Regardless, I personally fully support James.
James is not banning anyone at the moment–not Fortune or you. He’s just asking for people to take an additional step in order to be able to comment.
All you have to do is register an account. If that’s too much of a step for you, well, then don’t register. You can still keep reading.
I’ve tried to respond with as few bon mots as possible, Kingdaddy. If there is anything substantive in what I wrote above that you want to have an actual give-and-take debate on, go for it.
Beyond that I’m going to follow Kingdaddy’s advice which is now on a post it on my monitor :
@Connor:
For what it counts, which is likely little, you seem to be relatively sane.
If, imho, fundamentally mistaken in both your premises and your analysis.
But you seem often to assert wickedness on the part of opponents on rather insubstantial bases.
You might respond: “So do others here about President Trump, and MAGA!”
But that omits the crucial factor that the current President of the United States is, in fact, an idiot.
And that many of his supporters are fools driven by imagined grievance.
This has really very little to do with conservative, or Conservative, political or economic concepts.
But more to do with the current President of the United States of America being a f@ckwit.
And, for some ungodly reason, a f@ckwit who can get devoted political base support by being a cross between a WWF kayfabe barker, and a reality TV actor.
Eisenhower he ain’t.
For what it’s worth, I have occasionally crossed swords with several other commentators here, in some cases in rather emphatic ways
Sorry, Andy. (Not sorry 😉 )
Also good old Lounsbury.
Engage with me politely, and I shall always return the favour.
Engage with me impolitely: doubled, redoubled, in spades.
I was out of the country for a week and then too busy to do anything more than scan this blog since coming home. What incident is James referring to?
@Connor: When the elephant in the room doesn’t realize he’s the elephant.
It’s people like you, Connor/Jack/Drew/Guarneri. You’ve been banned multiple times and you keep coming back. At least Fortune had the decency to show himself out when asked.
The times have changed, and people change. Their viewpoints changed. The political landscape has changed, A LOT, since I first started reading here in 2008. The commenters have changed. Change is natural, and unavoidable.
This might seem like an echo chamber to you, but I’ve noticed there’s a fundamental difference between the type of Republican you are, and the type of Republican Dr Joyner is. His views have been forced to change because he has a moral compass, and you do not. Don’t bitch because nobody wants on your cruelty train anymore.
@JohnSF: Well, thank you. That’s very kind.
@Eusebio: Thank you, also.
@just nutha: I’d miss you if you weren’t commenting! Luddite’s been hit or miss, lately, but sometimes he’s here and sometimes he’s not. Is what it is.
@Jax:
I first started reading OTB posts back in the early oughts.
And the political landscape has surely changed since then.
Fewer “conservatives” then, imho, were inclined to “let’s just praise the maximum leader, and jump off the cliff. What could possibly go wrong?”
The transition of “conservatives” into neo-Maoists would be hilarious, if it was not so dangerous.
@just nutha: I’ve always imagined you and Luddite as the two old guys on Second Hand Lions. 😉
I logged in with the password stored in Chrome, so I assume I’m registered.
The trick will be Monday at work. I do most of my comments there.
Testing, since I reregistered. Again using a different e-mail here to see if that works.
@JohnSF: Connor’s bitching because nobody at OTB is cheering the Trump gravy train like they did with Bush, when he first came here and this blog first started. It’s never going back to that. The times have changed in those last 25 years. He needs to get used to it. Change is hard, for Republicans.
2nd test. My prior entry on this thread went to awaiting approval status.
Does every comment now go to “awaiting moderation” status? I’m registered.
@Connor: Let me give you as honest an answer as I can.
The problem with you is not, at all, that you don’t agree with the general POV of the main authors. The problem with you is almost always linked to your propensity to spout off in a rude fashion (as @Matt Bernius did a good job of sampling). Futher, like you did to me the other day, make unsupported accusations and then run away when confronted with counter evidence.
If you want to be respected, back up your claims and don’t play hit and run.
At times your appear to try to interact but at other times you just throw poo.
And while I can’t remember if I have ever admonished Daryl, I have asked MR to back off more than once and have told others to cool it about certain things (like wishing death on people). You are not the only person I have ever argued with (far from it) and not at all the only one I have criticized for how they behave on the site.
@Matt Bernius:
Maybe bad on me. Point taken. But one of my frustrations here is that legitimate differences of opinion are simply not tolerated.
You guys just think you are right. And the debate ends on that note. And then the shit slinging starts.
I’ll clean up my act. Will your commenters? If you tell me they already have I’ll know you are unserious. This was a great site years ago. It truly was. I never agreed with 90% of what Knapp said. But I respected him. The current crew is just crazed.
I’ll say it again. What do you guys want? An echo chamber, or a forum for debate. It used to be the latter. Not now. If you just want sycophants just say it. Become Raw Story. Lunatics.
I again admit my frustration can lead to bad comments. But do you guys actually read what you write, what you commenters say? It’s a daily stream of just Trump sucks. Trump sucks. Trump sucks. How can you be taken seriously when that’s all you have? I read a lot of cites. This once great blog has just gone into the toilet.
My motives are pure. Ignore if you want. Disagree if you want. But your commenter population should tell you something. No unconforming views allowed.
Endeth the rant.
A general observation. Yes, the site is different than it was 20+ years ago. For one thing, blogging changed over that period of time. But James and I have changed as well. I content it is a hallmark of people who aspire to be intellectuals (yes, that is pretentious) that they change their views because they think about them. We would both be piss-poor academics if we thought the same way about everything now as we did in 2003–especially writing about it all daily.
I know that some of the things I have changed my mind on are because I have been tossing thoughts out into the public for a very long time now.
@Connor:
What is your definition of “tolerated”? Being given a free forum to post whatever you like isn’t tolerance?
Is being asked to justify your views intolerance?
Yes, we think we are right. And we often write 100s, if not 1000s of words trying to explain why.
And the debate doesn’t end because the comment section is always open, is it not?
From you? Evidence and arguments for your positions.
This is, of course, a gross mischaracterization but if you have evidence to counter what we write, please bring it.
BTE: we don’t control the conmenters. If we did, you would provide better comments, yes?
You are more than entitled that opinion.
You do know that you aren’t forced to read it, yes?
I guess that raises the question; what is it you want from us?
And what are those motives?
To quote the First Lady: be better.
While I will allow you have been banned in the past, you aren’t now. As such, you views are allowed.
That you can’t convince anyone to agree with you is comment on either the quality of your values and the strength of your arguments/evidence (or both).
@JohnSF:
Well. I take your point as I think intended. Politics can get emotional. Just please don’t tell me quite a number of left oriented commenters here are civil. Simply not true.
Perhaps a good launch point
@Connor: I would argue that in comparison to most places on the internet, the commenters here are pretty damn civil.
But, it does get heated sometimes, and it occasionally goes further than I would like.
And I get that being a dissenter is not a pleasant position. Nobody likes being piled upon.
Dr Taylor.
With all due respect. I just don’t have the energy tonight. I would simply ask you to read your posts and ask, “is this balanced?” “Do I treat politicians I agree with in the same manor?”
I have noted before. It’s selective outrage. I have far too much respect for you to think that’s where your views end. It’s just partisanship. Politicians are what they are. Miserable fucks. I like to look at policy, and results, and ask “how are they doing?”
Is Trump Hitler? Really destroying rights? How is the economy? The financial markets? Inflation? Real wages? Things that matter to real people.
Blasting the other sides pols is fun. But really, how is the Average Joe doing? Pretty good. Does this blog just have to fire howitzers every day?
It’s your blog, not mine. But I say it could be better if more balanced. It used to be.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Well. Thank you for that. See my post from a few minutes ago.
Look. Despite certain comments, I’m just trying to express some different views. But when the first response is “you an idiot” it’s not a good start.
I hope you believe me when I say my comments are well intentioned. If perhaps inflammatory. Schulers place was, and is, always my first read. OTB is second. Balance. That’s my ultimate point. Balance. Anyone can have a bitching session blog.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Well. Thank you for that. See my post from a few minutes ago.
Look. Despite certain comments, I’m just trying to express some different views. But when the first response is “you an idiot” it’s not a good start.
I hope you believe me when I say my comments are well intentioned. If perhaps inflammatory. Schulers place was, and is, always my first read. OTB is second. Balance. That’s my ultimate point. Balance. Anyone can have a bitching session blog.
Primarily, checking that I’m properly registered to comment.
Secondarily, chuckling that Connor thinks he’s the open minded one.
@Connor:
If you start engaging as I detailed above: logical, on-point, willing to state a position not just snark from the sidelines, I’ll be nothing but pleasant. Personally I don’t think you have the chops. I don’t think you know or care about anything but the balance in your accounts. Prove me wrong. I actually like to be proven wrong, it’s called learning.
@Connor: What part of Rosie O’Donnell’s citizenship being revoked on order of the President did you miss? Would you like the next President to have the power to revoke yours?
Just because you disagree with him, politically?
Just checking
I’ll sign up.
@Connor:
A hit dog will holler. You’re here daily complaining OTB sucks OTB sucks OTB sucks precisely because you take this site seriously. Your conscience is indicted because what’s said here about Trump is accurate.
Your bitter frustration is in your inability a) to refute substance of these critiques and b) to silence those making them.
You can’t present sober, persuasive contrary evidence that holds up. The facts of Trump’s amorality, corruption, dishonesty, and incompetence show that he does suck. Hence why high profile backers are scrambling to jump off the Trump trainwreck.
Since the facts are not on your side, your only responses are:
First, crying and complaining about existence of unapologetically relentless Trump critique. That’s childish and unserious. If you can’t handle the anti-Trump heat, then leave.
Second, making obviously false statements pulled from rightwing echo chambers, like claiming Kilmar Garcia visited Mexico 100 times or suggesting it’s somehow Obama’s fault that Manafort publicly admitted Russian collusion. Desperate and unserious.
Third, running away to hide when your false statements are debunked. Pathetic and unserious.
If you have proof Trump does not suck, offer it. But you can’t show your work in any consistent, sober, serious way because Trump actually does suck big donkey balls. That’s really why you’re mad. With Trump apologists, there’s no there, there. Because Trump is a garbage person who is unfit for office. Obviously.
@Michael Reynolds:
Because there’s no effective way to defend the indefensible.
Trump actually does suck: that’s why his own VP compared to him to Hitler. Connor is mad he can’t force people here to stop telling that truth, sell their soulds, and toe the party line, like JD eventually did.
Connor is not concerned that OTB is an echo chamber. There’s a diversity of opinion here and heated debates because of that diversity all the time. Literally. He’s mad that OTB is not a pro-Trump echo chamber.
That so many with disparate views can all still agree Trump is a horrible scumbag who is unfit for office indicts the conscience of bootlickers who run interference for everything Trump does. They want you to lie about Trump — like pretending the economy didn’t slow from Obama to Trump and Biden to Trump — so they can feel better about being partisan sellouts to an Epstein-bestie rapist.
There are a range of beliefs and ideological backgrounds here who all retain the ability to do what Trump apologists cannot: a) assert that honesty, decency, and morals actually do matter still and b) change their opinions when the facts on the ground change. Rather than blindly making excuses for an unethical, corrupt, fascistic, incompetent asshole (who called for Hitlerian generals, incited a Hitlerian terror attack on Congress, and who shreds due process to illegally deport people to foreign prisons like Hitler did) just because he’s a Republican.
@Connor: Just clarifying that you’re totally ok with a President revoking a person who was born here’s citizenship because they disagree with him, politically. Moral Compass and all. If we’re gonna roll like that, your citizenship has been revoked, and you’ve come back multiple times. You’re technically an “illegal immigrant”.
As someone who reads OTB but doesn’t comment much I went ahead and registered (unlike the early days around 2005 where I was a contributor here and there were few comments – you young whippersnappers need to get some time here – ha (I’m not Social Security age (quite) yet)). So I did a memory lane tour at OTB.
My last posting in 2008 regarding Canadian happenings garnered 8 comments, mostly about encryption https://outsidethebeltway.com/news_from_north_of_the_border/
Zero Comments on this one Por que no te callas regarding VZ (Why don’t you shut up?) https://outsidethebeltway.com/por_que_no_te_callas/ (calling Kathy)
[Please don’t comment on those ancient posts]
I am a volunteer (unpaid) political appointee on a Commission (you WILL address me as Commissioner, ha) and I follow the rule of not making rude obnoxious comments that could later be traced back to me (and no way will I run for minor political office seeing the abuse they take – I’d likely snap back and tell them to go F themselves). So I post under my name. Meanwhile if all you do is bitch about national politics and don’t know your local elected officials, well pox on you. (Cough, God-Emporer desire)
Before starting the registration process I cleared my spam. Oh course the registration email went to SPAM (and I marked NOT Spam).
Then from WordPress: “The password should be at least twelve characters long. To make it stronger, use upper and lower case letters, numbers, and symbols like ! ” ? $ % ^ & ).” Um, sure. It suggested some hieroglyphics. My selected PW got medium security, likely from not being over 12. This is as bad as my medical wanting me to change passwords every 6 months when I’m on maybe once a year (knock on wood) = single use password
@Matt Bernius – thanks for the Connor – Drew linkage (Guarneri). I really don’t have the time to follow the open forum much. If it is something I’m very knowledgeable in (like nuclear non-proliferation (to include Iran and NORK), Tomahawk missiles, energy distribution, thermodynamics (really!), or PNW Antifa Cos-players) then I’ll do so.
Over the decades I’ve engaged with some interesting characters here (um, why so many fiction writers?).
Meanwhile there is a swarmy-ness to some of the leftist commentariant here. Get over yourselves.
Looking at old posts: Bithead, DC Loser, Dave Schuler (still around?), John Burgess, John425, Anderson, Jim Henley pretty sure I met him in DC), .yetanotherjohn . Stormy Dragon was around back then – had no idea trans.
If the future looks like what I’ve seen since I came back from dinner, I’m not sure I’ll miss the conversation to any degree. I’ll miss people, except I’ll still be here, so I won’t.
I spent many years teaching students who kept telling me “I don’t need nobody telling me how to write, I right good enough now.” I won’t miss participating in pointless quarrels about how to talk to an audience. I don’t read those now.
@a country lawyer: By virtue of your username, you’re our #1 commenter. That is, you’re the first name in our user database.
Testing
OK not sure if I know the registration worked but here I am
Well, happy Sunday, everybody. Just a comment to test things out.
BTW, I am sometimes puzzled by the controversy. I guess I just don’t have much problem with ignoring people I don’t want to engage with. Usually just say my piece and move on.
Plus I engage mostly in the early morning so my time on this space is limited.
*** Posted, edited. Guess everything is working.
Testing again
@Moosebreath: You should be able to change your email to whatever it is you prefer once you’re logged in.
@Richard Gardner: I’m pretty sure you already have an account, since you posted occasionally back in the day.
@Scott: As Steven and I discussed on the phone yesterday, the problem often isn’t the trolls themselves but other people’s inability to ignore them. But it gets tiresome to constantly have threads derailed from the OP’s topic.
Yes, this part is…
… unfortunate. And as a person who has had spectacular anger management issues in the past, I can empathize with all parties–even the trolls (but not as much despite being one occasionally).
Tangentially related:
Years ago I began the practice of always posting under my real name, wherever I go.
The intent was to follow the dictum that I should never write anything I wouldn’t want printed on the front page of the NYT.
I’m not saying everyone must or even should follow the pratice- there are plenty of people whose jobs or safety require anonymity.
But I found that when I use my real name my comments are a bit more measured and temperate, even when I am advocating strong beliefs (such as that everyone involved in current immigration policy is a criminal who needs to be locked up).
I think that strong beliefs delivered in a cool manner are more effective and carry more weight.
But of course, YMMV.
Let’s see if this works.
My test – was able to log into the account created back when.
It looks like you still have to enter a name and email address for each comment though – is that correct?
@Scott: I also do not find it all that hard to ignore people who don’t make a contribution. However, if they start chasing off people who do make a contribution, then I think that is a problem.
@James Joyner:
https://xkcd.com/386/
Weeeeelllllll, apparently I’ll have to lurk, as the name I’ve been using here has illegal characters. I’m not sure I can come up with a snappy nom de whatever
Once a criminal, always a criminal, I guess
ETA coulda sworn I registered ages ago, but I am a simple Luddite.
@Flat Earth Luddite: I created one for you. Check your spam filter. [Your username can’t have spaces in it, but your display name can and will.]
@Andy: Yes, I have no idea why but even I have to. Thankfully, the browser autofills it for me when I click on each box.
@Connor:
I don’t want to get into a tit-for-tat, but this isn’t just an issue with one side. I know I–and the other hosts–have experienced with you as well. This includes a number of topics where we are commenting on areas of our expertise (again, I’m happy to pull past interactions with you for proof).
Ultimately, this is true of most, if not all, humans: we usually think we’re right.
Again, ask this of yourself as well. I realize this is a challenge for all of us. But the fact that you repeatedly cite extremely partisan sources–like the Federalist–to advance the idea that Obama=” Evil man. Everything that people accuse Trump of, on steroids.” (literally your words) really calls this type of “selective outrage” (again literally your words) into question.
The challenge is–as I have pointed out to you multiple times across multiple banned identities–you expect the respect that you never are willing to give to others.
This is my last posting on this topic. I’ll let your comments here really speak for themselves. But generally speaking, if you are going to say you are as “confident, clear-eyed, nonpartisan, and open to debate” as you say you are, then you need to show it through your posts.
I for one would welcome that. In fact, I’ve said that to you the countless times you’ve promised you’ll do better. And, given how all of those past times have turned out–highlighted by the fact that I feel this is at least the third conversation like this we’ve had–I’m not going to hold my breath.
@just nutha:
First, I hope you don’t go.
Second, I would argue that since this is a thread at least in part about the act of commenting, trying to explain to Connor why he gets the pushback he gets is utterly fair game. I have some wistful hopes that people can learn to be better. Context matters.
Not clear about how the posting routine will change starting tomorrow
Monday July 14, 2025.
I am assuming that nothing has changed yet.
Exactly how will commenters register to receive clearance to comment?
Is there going to be an extra page/window/whatever to fill out with username/display name and password?
Will this sign in be required for each individual comment on a thread?
Looking forward to the new routine.
GLB
@Jax:
You won’t get a response, because the facts are on the MAGA’s side per usual. This is more wildly inappropriate Trump behavior. Obviously unacceptable.
But bootlicking, biased, partisan hack Trump slaves are incapable of admitting that Trump is ever wrong. So they will just run away hiding. Like always, when Trump’s actions are indefensible.
But it’s OTB that’s unserious and that has a credibility problem, not rightwingers who are literally incapable of writing the words, “Trump is wrong”? Sure lol
Matt,
A couple of notes on the site and implementing this system:
– On a standard browser, the top banner has a “register” but not a “login” link. To log in, I need to click register and then on the WordPress registration page, click the login link below the registration information. Adding a prominent login link would be helpful for people, I think.
– Additionally, on mobile, there are no links in the header at all. To find a login link, you have to scroll down to the footer and again, click the “register” button, and then the same thing as above.
– Also, Yahoo sends emails from OTB to spam or “bulk” folders by default, like Gmail, so anyone using Yahoo will need to whitelist.
@Connor: Because I think this is truly worth underscoring, a couple of points.
My main guiding issue is the quality of democracy in the US. I have been consistently writing about this for a very long time. I have written plenty of general critiques of US institutions.
And I would be criticizing a Democrat who was undermining US democracy the way Trump is.
Also, the blog is substantially a daily reaction to the news.
Who is in the news? Who is in power?
There is no faux need to write a story about Democrats just because I write one about Trump.
The funny thing about this statement is that, to use a phrase you like to deploy, you need to look in the mirror. Your POV on all of this would be much more reasonable if you treated Trump this way, but you don’t. You are constantly defending the administration and rarely acknowledge the negatives, save in vague ways.
Do I prefer the Democratic Party at this juncture in my life? Yes. But it is because I have two choices and one is anti-democracy and pro-white nationalist. What choice do I have? What choice do we all have? (That is a moral question directed at you and anyone who votes for Trump).
Speaking of selective, so you like the results of millions of dying because PEPFAR was cancelled? You like the results of ICE sweeping up people because they look Hispanic (to include US citizens)? You like the result of sending hundreds of people to a torture prison without due process? You like the threats to take away citizenship because Trump doesn’t like someone’s views? You like the result of the press paying extortion money? You like law firms doing the same? You like him politicizing the military? I could go on, but here’s a bunch of posts of results I do not like.
On Trump and Hitler: Defining and Discussing Fascism, Part II. I would add that since I wrote that, he has increased his attack on what it means to be an American, has gotten funding for a massive quasi-military police force with agents who wear masks and grab people off the streets without warrant and send people to makeshift camps.
I could go on, but you tell me why I am wrong to be concerned,
A lot depends on the next tariff deadline, doesn’t it?
The funny thing is that when the markets react negatively, you tell me to wait and see. But since the numbers are good, you want to take a snapshot.
But tell me how all of those things were in December and tell me that we need all the disruption Trump is creating.
The Average Joe is going to suffer because of the OBBB. Millions of people are about to lose health insurance. That’s a policy outcome.
But even if the Average Joe is ok at the moment, should I ignore the manifestly awful policies and actions of this administration?
Here’s a tl;dr question: why do you think your preferences should guide what is written here?
(BTW, I only say all of this, because part of me thinks maybe you will learn not only what I am doing and why, but maybe make you into a better interlocutor. More than anything else, I actually would like you to change your mind and really take in what is going on around us and not see all of this as just partisan howitzers–and maybe someone else reading this will start to change their minds as well.)
@just nutha: FWIW (yeah I know), reading your comments about teaching has always made me wish that I could have taken one of your classes. I’ll miss catching those little pieces of advice on writing that you periodically drop. I guess what I’m really trying to say is “thank you.” Not just for the tidbits of writing wisdom, but also for your perspective, which I didn’t always agree with but that I will definitely miss
@DK:
It’s the difference between preferring a side, and belonging to a cult. Every liberal and progressive here can, and has, openly criticized Clinton, Obama and Biden. We criticize them for failing to live up to the ideals we share with them. That’s freedom of speech, that’s intellectual integrity. It’s the accountability which is at the core of democracy.
But cult members cannot criticize any more than a North Korean can criticize. We are free, and we exercise our freedom, while they have enslaved themselves to a mad king.
@James Joyner:
Grazzi!!!!!
And now, back to your regular programming.
@Andy:
Thanks for those suggestions. I haven’t had a chance to think those things through and I really appreciate you calling my attention to them.
@just nutha:
Hey man, don’t leave!
I like your perspective on things.
@Andy:
Technically you shouldn’t need to. If you are logged in you can leave those blank and still post.
That said I don’t know why those field didn’t automatically prepopulate. I will add it to the “investigate” lost.
I registered and WP said there was an error, but an email appeared in my inbox, so I”m good to go.
EDIT: I guess comments are being moderated now?
@Richard Gardner:
FWIW, this is why I chose to post on l under my full name. Yes, I know some of my posts have been snarky and probably obnoxious. And I do my best to stand by what I wrote there (and apologize when I get out of line).
Also totally agree about your local politics point.
@Andy:
Ahhhh…thank you. Mystery somewhat solved.
After reading through the thread, I supposed I’ll throw my 2 cents in on the debate.
The first thing is I haven’t been paying enough attention to know that Conner is the same person as Drew, or at least that’s what people are saying. Not that it matters much.
Secondly, I think Connor does come into convos that appear intended to instigate. I can’t read Connor’s mind, but it does often come across as poking the bear. That said, it take two to tango. And it’s clear to me that lots of regulars here “like” Connor in the sense that he (assuming gender here, sorry), is a vessel for others to pour their righteous outrage into. Like of a lot of the internet, this back-and-forth drives engagement. I know when I click to a thread that already has 50+ comments, the likelihood that Connor/JKB and some of the others who get under people’s skin here have gotten involved is extremely high. From my perspective, lots of regulars seem to really enjoy rising to the bait and bashing these folks. Which is fine, I just skip over it, but I can see why it’s frustrating for the proprietors who have to moderate.
Third, the comment section here has long has a left-wing/Democratic bias, which I attribute as part of the political sorting that is happening in many other parts of society and politics. There are some people here who seriously try to engage with commenters from the right, and there are others who are bomb throwers. Such is the nature of online discussion.
I’m not a right-winger by any means, ideologically I’m eclectic, and I’ve long had a skepticism of partisanship, really since I was a kid. While during the Trump era I’m functionally a Democrat in terms of voting behavior at the national level, I have a lot of disagreements with Democrats and parts of the coaltion and when I voice those disagreements, I always get pushback here, much of it in ways that I think are unfair. On the opposite side, I could say anything negative about Republicans and no one would bat an eye. Such is the zeitgeist.
Finally, this is only the latest in a long-line of meta-posts/threads about the commenting zeitgeist here, and I won’t repeat what I’ve previously written. In short, I think that if I weren’t a regular who has been reading and commenting here for over two decades, and if I were just dipping my toes in, I could see myself being chased away. As it stands I’ve taken several steps to manage my engagement here:
– Some people I just don’t respond to, unless they attack my integrity/character.
– I self-censor on many topics and threads. I’ve been here long enough to have a decent sense of when my engagement on a topic will result in me having to spend half a day and thousands of words working through and deflecting criticism. Given how busy I have been recently, I don’t have time for that, and frankly, even when I do have time, I don’t think it’s worth the mental effort.
– I tend to write very long comments, and the reason is that when I write short comments, they are mischaracterized, and then I have to explain myself. So I feel the need to do a lot of throat-clearing. I’m not gonna lie, it’s annoying.
– I’m a borderline alcoholic (working on that), and I’ve found I should not comment online after a few drinks. That is rare these days, but if I come of as appearing dickish or in a particularly bad mood, this is often the reason.
To Conner, the advice I would give is that the way you usually engage here doesn’t promote reasoned discussion. As I’ve personally found many times, even if one has a reputation for being somewhat reasonable and makes a controversial point, you’re going to get piled on. It’s the nature of the beast, and complaining about it won’t change anything.
Something else to keep in mind is that this is an imperfect medium. We read words, sentences, and phrases, and they are colored with emotional baggage. Our species is better designed for face-to-face communication than words on a screen.
Yes, this blog and comment section is very much “Trump sucks” much of the time – most of the time since he got elected again. You complain that OTB has changed, well, we all have changed and politics certainly has changed too, especially from Trump. If you think Trump doesn’t suck, then it would be more useful to explain why rather than complaining about the zeitgeist here. I do understand how difficult this is. Even though I’m in the “Trump sucks” bucket, I don’t think everything he does is bad, and don’t just mindlessly parrot the worst imagined interpretations of everything he says & does. And when I’m seen as “defending” Trump from what I think are dumb or incorrect takes, believe me, I often get both barrels from the regulars here. Again, the nature of the beast.
One thing I try to do with my engagement (with varying degrees of success) is treat this as an Oxford-style debate. My goal isn’t to convince anyone commenting here of anything; it’s to perhaps convince or bend the curve for whatever mass of non-commenting readers there may be. To do that, it’s helpful not to be perceived as a douchebag and to make logical and evidence-based arguments.
Edited to add: My advice doesn’t just apply to Connor, but also some of the more bombastic regulars here.
3rd test for posting cycle
Nope. Still goes to awaiting moderator.
@Jax:
Thanks for the kind words. Over five decades of friendship with Cracker, sometimes we’re Lions, sometimes we’re Waldorf and Astoria. But you’re a beautiful audience, we’ll be here all week.
What can I say? Cracker’s always been better at corrupting innocent young minds, while I’ve frequently demonstrated why anger management is a critical life skill.
@Matt Bernius:
I run a browser with addons that blocks a lot of that kind of stuff. If the autofill is working for others, don’t bother investigating on my behalf, because I’m pretty confident it’s just my setup.
@Beth:
Hey and howdy, Beth! Missed you, and hope you’re doing better.
Oh shoot, there’s Luddite’s shadow! Back into my burrow!
@just nutha: keep in mind that your password can be terrible — there’s nothing here that needs to be protected. If the struggle is with password managers, just use something dumb.
I wouldn’t make it your username, as that is displayed and would allow people to post as you, but anything that is forever burnt into your brain would be fine. I’m not sure if WordPress would let you use your email as the password but it could otherwise be literally that dumb and memorable.
Not your social security number.
I keep one password for every account where I don’t care about security. It’s based off a physics thing that I learned a mnemonic for in high school. I will never use that bit of physics again in any real capacity, but it lives on forever.
Dumb question: does being logged in look any different? And is there an obvious link to log in?
I logged in (link at bottom to register, and then go from there to the login) got the admin page, clicked the link to view site… and it’s all very anticlimactic. Still have to type name and email, etc.
Anticlimactic to the point where I wonder if it is working at all (iOS, Safari on an iPad… haven’t tried the phone)
@Gustopher: Click.
Testing.
@Andy:
I assume I am among the bombastic, and I don’t take offense at that. You’re an analyst, I’m a writer. Anything involving words that I’m not getting paid for is a type of play. Actually an awful lot of what I do get paid for is play. I doubt that in your line of work you ever sit back from the computer and laugh maniacally while taking pleasure from the knowledge that you just gave some kid nightmares.
I can certainly do analysis, and I’d argue that I have a pretty strong record of being right, but like James Gunn directing a Superman movie, I have to also have my fun, whether or not it serves the plot. I engage the trolls as a form of play. Sadistic play, at times, but still play. Someone the other week was taking something I wrote way too literally, and I explained that I always start from a position of self-mockery. I’ve known myself for most of my life and I know I’m a character in a comedy.
But I’m going to assert a right to play with words, and to digress, to fantasize, to hopefully entertain, because our hosts may all be professors but I am not in a college seminar.
Testing
@Andy: Just to emphasize.
This is absolutely true. Not surprisingly, the commentators, and likely most readers, have shifted to the center-left. And the main authors certainly mostly write from what would be considered a center-left position in terms of contemporary American politics. Part of that is all about the evolution of American politics. At least three of us used to vote either regularly or at least sometimes for Republicans. I still vote regularly in the Republican primary, given that it tends to be the real election in many Alabama races. Does that make me a Republican? (The constant flow of GOP texts I get suggests that at least some people think so).
I will stand by the notion, btw, that OTB’s comment sections are fair more civil, even at their worst, than the typical FB or X interaction.
I think this is key. People want to argue with the “other side,” and if a commenter wants to be the representative of that side, they are going to get a lot of attention.
It seems worth noting that even James and I get piled on sometimes. Not asking for sympathy, just noting that we are not strangers to the phenomenon.
Agreed.
@Michael Reynolds:
That’s correct.
I have openly indicated my liberal/progressive leanings here, and at the same time I have plenty of criticism for Obama, Clinton, and Biden. Albeit, my criticisms do not align with the hackneyed agitiprop that spews forth from MAGA culture warriors. Plus, I can provide reasonable argument for my criticisms.
The “curse” and the democracy of liberals: the “circular firing squad” often undermining pursuit national narrative. It is a phenomenon that is less often seen among the MAGA crew. Talking about knee-jerk uniformity, such a criticism is more justly applied to that crowd. The recent Trump/Musk flap and the current Epstein files conflict are outliers, and lack any real soul searching.
@Steven L. Taylor: On point two, I don’t disagree, but I have become fatigued with the conversation given that it has been going on for well over a decade now, by my perception. But carry on. I hope you’ll find a formulation of the message that resonates with him at some point.
@Andy: I haven’t paid much attention to Connor’s recent contributions, though I did get in a few beefs in the past with some of his earlier incarnations (or were they? It’s hard for me to keep track), and I definitely attest that he’s the type who does little more than drop stink bombs, completely ignore any rebuttals, then with a laughable lack of self-awareness accuse us of being closeminded. If you want to see one of my devastating (and, yes, bombastic) takedowns of him, here it is:
https://outsidethebeltway.com/where-have-all-the-commenters-gone/#comment-2390862
@James Joyner: Nice to know, but I always seem to be the last in line at Walmart.
@Erik:
That’s very kind, thank you. Your statement puts you among
a vast thronga mere handful of students over about 25 years.I tried to recover my password, but when I did I got this
Nothing in my email inbox or junkmail folder. I waited for 15 minutes or so and the cycle repeated. I suppose I could register as a different user…
@Steven L. Taylor:
Dead on, and it’s almost … almost … not debatable.
Look, when it comes to Blogs and commenting there are no Nirvanas. By cherry picking anecdotes it’s too easy to build a ‘both sides do it’ false equivalency, but most of the flame-throwing comes from the Right.
I think this is likely a numbers game, more than anything else. If you have (made up numbers for example only) 50 or so regular commenters who are center-left, and 3 or fewer people post a center-right or conservative point, it’ll appear to be a pile-on even if only a small percentage of regulars jump on and respond to the point. It’s also likely a function of not reading ALL of the comments first, to see if someone else has already made the point one was going to make.
Edited to note: I’m logged in and comments are still going to moderation, just noting for troubleshooting purposes! 🙂
@Gustopher: Since I got logged in, I have a WordPress icon at the top left, Outside the Beltway, then a Howdy, Jax with my avatar pic on the top right.
@Gustopher: That’s good advice. Thanks. Still, I decided that I wouldn’t register during the first registration era for the reasons I’ve outlined.
(Seems I’m more of a Luddite than Flat Earth is. Ironic, eh?)
@Andy:
I think your eclectic approach to politics and the length of your posts helps you, at least for someone like me.
The front-pagers are a separate issue from the commenters. All three of the most frequent writers, particularly Joyner and Bernius, regularly address counter-arguments in their OPs.
I have mixed feelings about Connor. I agree with you that some posts appear intended to agitate. A recent example was that ridiculous op-ed linked a couple days ago. On the other hand, Connor is capable of producing an argument.
I do find it curious that someone so focused on Econ bellyaches about intellectual diversity on a blog considering the narrow ideological content in the most prominent and influential Economics departments.
To draw an analogy, imagine if MIT’s physics and chemistry departments refused to acknowledge the validity of quantum mechanics. But rather than losing their reputation, the departments get boosted by moneyed interests to produce polemic attacks on Heisenberg as postmodern, woke ideology pushed by cultural marxists.
From my view, too many people don’t see the broad economic consensus as an ideology, rather they see it as scientific truth—as accurate and precise as Newtonian mechanics. Pretending that economics is not a social science produces tunnel vision in the most politically influential soft science.
I wrote all of that, because from what I have seen, Connor fits the mold as a self-selected economics person whose perspective is intentionally narrow.
As always, YMMV.
@Andy:
FWIW, part of the reason I think this happened was because James, Doug, and Steven tended to take more small “c” conservative positions in the past without dipping into Conservative Inc, waters. The fact that they also tended to write from an expert position.
All of that attracted left-leaning people who were looking to read opinions from people to the right of them.
What happened, to some degree, was that Obama’s election (if not the late GWB years) upended the structure of the political right. Or, perhaps more accurately, the structure of very online who comment on blogs.
A lot of our right-leaning posters began to complain more and more during the Obama years about how this blog was moving to the left. That especially accelerated as Trump became the presumptive nominee and then later the President.
It also didn’t help that a few of our more regular right-wing commenters at the time had pretty problematic positions on topics like race and sexuality.
As a net result, they found the environment less and less welcoming–especially as more and more right wing commenters stopped posting here (for whatever reasons).
I also agree that all too often more “independent” posters catch way too much static. It’s something I’ve seen happen to you and have done my best to call out. I definitely think that we have a lot of left leaning commenters who think they are much more open to other viewpoints than they actually are (and I know all of us hosts have experienced that at times).
@Steven L. Taylor:
I’ve been coming to OTB for over a decade and I came here first explicitly to engage with those further right than me such as the main authors. I was bored by leftist echo chambers (And since I know what those look like, I tend to bristle when this corner of the internet is branded as such.) and wanted to debate with the “other side” in order to learn.
So, from where I sit, I haven’t “shifted” per se. Still a center-leftist, but primarily my core political affiliation is Pragmatist – I believe an advanced society such as ours should be able to solve our most vexing problems.
But, American politics has shifted a LOT. To appropriate Reagan, “I didn’t leave American bi-partisanship, American bi-partisanship left me.”
Hoping this works. Maybe I already registered, but I haven’t gotten an email yet, or logged in, if that’s required.
@Steven L. Taylor:
@Andy
And therein lies the relativity which colors all things of this nature. I’d been reading OTB for years but only started posting approximately a year ago. I was drawn to primarily the topical commentaries of your and Joyner’s, finding them somewhat rightward of my own, but well grounded for honest discussion and contemplation. Subjectively, I categorize OTB, in my mind, as “center-center,” the rapidly fomented MAGA having distorted our entire frame of reference for any realistic self-appraisal. We are caught “in a moment.”
And secondarily, I was drawn to a smaller comment community that largely stays focused on topic.
Now, all we encounter here, is a smaller slice of anyone’s mind, and it would be deluding to draw a complete image of a person’s belief system. We’re here responding to individual stories, events, articles, comments, and inevitably a sort of profile emerges. But that is all. So while I might be labeled here as a liberal, I’m am also a successful bootstrapping capitalist that supports labor (with gratitude) and pro-regulation; strong on national security issues, that equally includes engagement of global social ills. It’s a complicated world, humans and their needs are exceedingly complex requiring immensely complex solutions driven by innovation.
So I really hate labels as shorthand for actual policy debate. But, I too succumb to stereotyping and pigeon-holing folk. Sometimes there’s too much stuff to sort out. It’s a problem.
It seems this entire thread and OTB comment section policy upgrade was, in part, the result of friction generated by the engagement style of a couple of long time commenters. While I found both tedious, and insufficient to maintain my interest, ultimately I simply chose to focus on meaningful discussion with other OTB guests. I leave the policing to the owners.
At any rate, you and Joyner, have created here a space for serious discussion of the daily issues that concern us all, and provide and outlet and an exchange. No small task. Humans are confounding, pesky critters. Thanks, guys.
No ability to register. Locked out of the system. Can’t create a password, and the system says my email doesn’t exist. *sigh* Maybe I’ll have better luck tomorrow.
Registered. The email went to spam, but I was aware that could happen, so I checked right off the bat.
@Steven L. Taylor:
@James Joyner:
@Matt Bernius:
Gentlebeings,
Once again, my sincere thanks for all of the work you (and some late contributors), have done to make this a welcoming haven for your participants over the years.
Sure, you can’t make everyone happy, but to me, this has been a happening place, with diverse opinions. I’ve learned a lot, and like to think I’ve contributed a skoosh.
Although like you, I do get tired of the folks two cars over at the light, with their bass turned up so high my fillings rattle.
Registered, commenting to test.
I come here daily for the posts and the comments. I disagree with quite a few of you but in a way that makes me examine my own assumptions on a topic, and that’s why this commentariat is a community.
I haven’t read this whole thread because it has 100+ comments but I did have a question and a comment.
1. What is the tl;dr summary of the instigating event for this registration scheme? I gather it’s from Thursdays thread but that is also 100+ comments and im not going to wade through it. I’m guessing a particular commenter made a horse’s ass of themselves, but I don’t know how registering would prevent that. Is it to stop ban evasion from said Horse’s Ass?
2. A few comments above questioned why everyone thinks connor is also drew is also guarneri is also etc. I recall that everytime the commentariot has alleged that a new commentor sounds an awful lot like ConDrewGuar, JJ has checked the IP of the new commentor and confirmed it’s a sock puppet of Drew’s, hence the surety of some of us.
Peace
Neil
@Neil Hudelson: The tl;dr version of why registration is that it is something that we have considered doing for a long time now, and after all of the backend work was done, it seemed a good time to implement. The stuff earlier this week was less a proximate cause as an example of why we needed to just make the move.
There was also a spate of spam not that long ago and registration is a better solution than having to ad hoc the things the filter misses.
Seems like I registered the last time around, so I’m going to take a shot a posting even though I have nothing to add.
And yes, I know…
@wr:..nothing to add…
I remember you posting about an old TV show that you had a hand in. Twilight Zone? It was a story about the US Revolutionary War I think. Maybe not the TZ. In any event I could read about it again.
@Scott F.: Just making up an excuse to try posting: I think you and I are at about the same point on the various political axes.
People who complain about the site becoming center-left should aim their ire at the GOP and conservatives who have been marching to the right for decades and are approaching authoritarian/Handmaid’s Tale territory. Don’t blame us….
@Steven L. Taylor:
Appreciate the explanation.
I am thankful for the change, and welcome it,
I’m really not bothered by the obvious trolls among us. I find it pretty easy to ignore them, or, when I really need to respond, just hit them with the “F**K You”, and be done with it.
I’m more bothered by the people on this site who make “factual” comments which are clearly wrong, yet refuse to even acknowledge this fact when called out on them, and instead double down.
(Without naming names, one particular commenter who doesn’t live in California, when triaging the reasons for Palisades fires, had no fucking idea what he was talking about – which was obvious to any of us here in Los Angeles at the time, and when called out on it, by people right close to the fires who had lived here their entire lives, just doubled down on the ignorance, claiming it was just analysis based on fact. It wasn’t. It was then, and still is, bullshit.)
I don’t comment nearly as much as I used to, and part of the reason is that some just refuse to engage in good faith. The number is small, but it’s enough to derail so many good conversations. I’ve learned alot from people here. Kathy has taught me quite a bit about airlines and airplanes (I’ll often go to google after a thread to do a deeper dive into whatever subject matter she discussed.). Dr. Taylor has made me think about the deeper, structural problems within our democracy. I’ve lived vicariously through JohnSF for my love of the United Kingdom, and it’s eccentric ways. But too often threads get derailed by bullshit, and it’s maddening.
But I have very little patience for the people who don’t think we are at an existential crisis in this country, and who continue to minimize what’s happening. We have armoured vehicles with Marines and National Guard patrolling the streets of Los Angeles. That’s happening. How this isn’t the lead story on every newscast daily I’ll never understand. We have masked men, in unmarked cars, with no identification or warrants, snatching up people off the street in the name of our Federal Government. This is what happens in “other countries”, not the USA.
Yet here we are.
And some here, on this very site, still insist that all is fine, and we need to wait to react until something bad really happens. I’m waiting for just one of them, just one, to say, “You know what. I was wrong. This administration is much worse than I thought it would be, and I was completely wrong to give them any benefit of the doubt.” Will it happen? Maybe when more people are in camps, but probably not until it directly affects them – wherever they are.
My comment is in moderation.
@reid:
Repeating for emphasis.
Most regular readers perhaps recall that I worked in Republican politics for a while. I was the deputy political director for a state party in the Midwest, and worked as a legislative aide for a conservative Republican state senator. Worthy of mention: I also was close friends with a lot of young women who had roughly the same CV. One was a legislative aide to another Republican state senator–who is now a sitting member of Congress.
The vast majority of the women I worked with on the Republican side of the aisle now vote Democratic. THAT says something. THAT means something.
According to the Center for Women in Politics: “In 2024, college-educated white women further cemented their shift to Democratic support since the 2016 presidential election. This group backed Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by seven points, according to Edison’s 2016 exit poll. In 2020, Biden expanded that margin of support among college-educated white women to nine points. This year, Harris’ margin of victory among college-educated white women was 17 points.”
Did the commentariat really move left? Or has the right moved so far away from reason that many of us are embarrassed we once voted that way?
@Jen: I vote for option two. That’s what makes Connor so mad. Old man yelling at clouds about why OTB is so “lefty”. I mean, some of us are, but the reality is that it’s the Republican party that’s changed, and not in a good way. Moral compasses and all. He’s mad because he can’t come here and get affirmation anymore. Change really does seem to be harder for MAGA than other people.
Test
Testing for registration purposes, y’all have a great Sunday
ETA works gooood
Testing. Why not, everyone else is doing it.
ETA – looks like you’re stuck with me.
@EddieInCA: “We have armoured vehicles with Marines and National Guard patrolling the streets of Los Angeles. That’s happening. How this isn’t the lead story on every newscast daily I’ll never understand. We have masked men, in unmarked cars, with no identification or warrants, snatching up people off the street in the name of our Federal Government. This is what happens in “other countries”, not the USA.
Yet here we are.
And some here, on this very site, still insist that all is fine, and we need to wait to react until something bad really happens.”
That pretty much sums up my take on the current state of the Union, too. Does that make me an echo chamber?
I have been reading for…maybe 5 yrs? I just began commenting a short time ago, but I do think that this place feels like a community, and I like it.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Dr Taylor
Thank you for a thoughtful response. (Look at some of the responses to me. It’s just “I’m right, you are wrong, so shape up). But reasonable people can disagree.
I have a very utilitarian worldview on politicians. As I said last night. Miserable fucks. Self serving. So I focus only on policy and results. Things are ok despite so many claims on this website. And I’m a minimalist on govt intrusion. I think the country does just fine when the people do what they do, and the govt sticks to a few basics. Enforce the law. Steward the finances. Basic safety net. Defend the nation. I defy anyone to tell me government, fed, state, local hasn’t overreached. Govt meddles in everything, because they can. And despite the usual comment about how govt shouldn’t be a business, it is a drain on resources. A dead weight loss. The empirical evidence is clear.
Anyway. So many other of my views continue; read all the responses to me. It’s basically you have no reasonable point of view, agree with us, or you are a troll. Your commenting population is extremely self unaware.
@Steven L. Taylor:
Dr Taylor
Thank you for a thoughtful response. (Look at some of the responses to me. It’s just “I’m right, you are wrong, so shape up). But reasonable people can disagree.
I have a very utilitarian worldview on politicians. As I said last night. Miserable fucks. Self serving. So I focus only on policy and results. Things are ok despite so many claims on this website. And I’m a minimalist on govt intrusion. I think the country does just fine when the people do what they do, and the govt sticks to a few basics. Enforce the law. Steward the finances. Basic safety net. Defend the nation. I defy anyone to tell me government, fed, state, local hasn’t overreached. Govt meddles in everything, because they can. And despite the usual comment about how govt shouldn’t be a business, it is a drain on resources. A dead weight loss. The empirical evidence is clear.
Anyway. So many other of my views continue; read all the responses to me. It’s basically you have no reasonable point of view, agree with us, or you are a troll. Your commenting population is extremely self unaware.
Testing for moderation lag.
Testing for moderation lag.
Ooops. Still lagging.
@Connor:
Against my better judgement. Square these two comments:
with…
No. Things are NOT alright. American citizens are being arrested and detained for no legal reason.
If you’re okay with that, own it. Be proud of your choice and belief. If you’re okay with Americans being arrested and detained, based on profiling and nothing else, say so – loudly and proudly. If not, speak up. Either defend the administrations actions, or decry them. Either one is fine, but take a stand for fuck’s sake. You don’t seem to be able, under any circumstance, to defend or oppose anything. You just fucking waffle.
So unless you want to answer, I’ll go back to happily ignoring you.
Probably not registered because I’ve always used a fake email address. But testing what happens without reading the rules ….
@Connor: Have you ever considered that some of us actually like a government that cares for the natural resources? Maybe we like clean water? Affordable housing and a wage that makes us able to raise a family? I agree that there are a lot of local regulations that stymie that, but good God, man, look around. Do we want to go back to the Northeastern rivers being on fire due to pollution?
@Connor: I hate Trump with every fiber of my being, and I have since the 90’s. The one good thing he is doing right now is timber sales. Since Mike Lee’s amendment got banished, to sell off the public land to the highest bidder, the forest service is going to go ahead with timber sales. We in the west have needed this for years. So here’s one thing I agree with Trump on. Y’all should mark this down, cuz it’s a one and only. 😉
test
@Connor:
You see the world through a pinhole. Some of here see IMAX. You see a teeny, tiny part of the picture, then you get upset when we aren’t impressed by your pinhole view. As long as you refuse to see more, people who do see more, will remain unimpressed. You are clueless because you are in effect, blind.
@Connor: As others have noted, it has been my impression that you have disappeared rather than engaging when I have tried to engage with you in the past, or, rather, you have elected to engage with people calling you a troll and gotten into a food fight rather than responding to my attempts to engage. But maybe I’m misremembering, and I need to try out my new account, so I’ll try again.
You say that you are in favor of a government that focuses on “Enforce the law. Steward the finances. Basic safety net. Defend the nation”
When I look at “defend the nation” I see incompetent people being appointed to critical positions, to include SecDef, national security posts, and the FBI (critical for counter terrorism). I see destruction of trust with long standing allies such that they might not be so keen to help should we desire their help. What do you see?
I picked this one because it seems to me the area that you brought up where, in my observations, this administration is most obviously failing. But if you’d rather talk about one of the other areas I’m happy to do that.
@Michael Reynolds: I mean, we could say he’s in his very own echo chamber, mad because we can’t see thru his pinhole.
test
This is a test
Of the emergency broadcast system?
Two plus two equals ?
When did the war of 1812 begin?
@Winecoff46: Your username is registered with the same email you’re using to comment. I sent you a password reset.
@Connor:
This is where we rather substantially disagree. You are ignoring this (@from above):
As long as you ignore all of this, your protestations that everything is fine is simply impossible to take seriously.
If you want to just talk the economy, the reason things are better than I personally feared at this point is because Trump always chickens out, and the markets are basically assuming he will do so. If he actually imposes the threatened tariffs on Aug 1 (or whatever date he settles on), things will be different.
What does this even mean?
This statement is, quite frankly, utter dorm room hogwash that doesn’t actually mean anything. PEPFAR, to pick a very simple example, saved millions, and now millions will die without it. But I guess you don’t care.
I, for one, like not worrying about the safety of my food, drugs, and drinking water.
Business broadly defined, and society too, would not exist without government. That is empirically clear.
I honestly don’t know what you expect. This comes across to me as whining. You want respect from the commenters? Make an argument, provide evidence of a higher quality than Zerohedge, and don’t do things like Matt quoted above and what you did to me the other day, wherein you were rude, lied, and cowardly by ignoring me calling you out.
@Connor, you made all of the following statements up thread:
I’m happy to take you are your word that this is what you legitimately think. The issue, as @Steven L. Taylor just pointed out, is that you then turn around and write the following:
The idea that all politicians are “miserable fucks” and “self serving” isn’t a “utilitarian position” that allows much debate. Likewise, looking at only the evidence that matches your priors isn’t a true utilitarian take.
Ditto this:
Again, this opinion isn’t empirical in any way. This is a totalizing statement that only works if you ignore all the places where it doesn’t apply.
I know you might say “well of course I don’t mean all cases… this is just hyperbole.” But anyone who has been in a back and forth with you have seen you say both these things,usually with a “‘cmon” to defend your position. That’s not a debate–that’s dogma. Using terms like “I defy anyone to” doesn’t suggest that you are open to debate.
Worse still, when we push you on it you start insulting people calling us “naive” or worse. I know you’ve done that to me. I’ve also seen you do it to Steven, among others.
This gets to:
I’ve never seen you acknowledge that James, Steven, Kingdaddy, or myself have any “reasonable views” that you disagree with. In fact, your mode of expressing disagreement with us is to–as noted above–insult us. You also have a habit of ignoring any feedback that points to a weakness in your position (something Steven noted above). And if you claim that isn’t the case, I’m happy to pull numerous examples (because you have left a very large record of them).
As I have written again and again, I remain hopeful you might one day change your pattern. And that’s going to require you to actually change your behavior versus just whining about other’s behavior towards you. After all, the only thing within our real control to change is ourselves.
@EddieInCA:
What happened to you dude? You hate me that much that I’m keeping you from participating more?
Why not name names? Why the passive-aggressive Karen bullshit dude?
And here’s the comment that set you off in that thread:
I stand by every word of that. Like the flooding in Texas, I think it was only a matter of time. And as I said at the very beginning – we’ll have to wait for the after-action-reports to know for certain. To people who can read, that’s a statement we didn’t (and probably still don’t these several months later) know all the facts.
Clearly, you haven’t paid attention, because I wrote almost exactly that a couple of times here. Let me say it again, just for you: Trump is turning out to be a lot worse than I expected. The only comfort I can take in being wrong is that I was hardly alone in the incorrect judgment.
And on this, it is you who is being dishonest in your characterization. I guess anyone who doesn’t share your view that the world is ending and ought to move to the DR or wherever is insisting that all is fine? As I’ve said before, my view (this is opinion, since you seem to get confused separating opinion from fact) is that the US is a lot more resilient than you and others claim. This country has been through far worse and survived. I predict (again, an opinon, not fact) that we’ll have elections in 2026 and a new President elected in 2028 that is not named Trump. It’s going to be really, really shitty until then, but IMO it’s not existential. Note that prediction is NOT predicated on everyone being passive. Another thing I’ve said here (which again, you seem to have missed) is that Trump’s actions, especially the most concerning ones (and which ones are the most concerning is a matter of opinion), ought to be vigorously opposed. I’m not advocating for just sitting around doing nothing, and I’ve described in previous threads some of the things I’ve personally been doing and where I’ve been putting my efforts. If you think I’m a fool for having that view, then fine, but don’t try to gaslight me.
As far as wait and see until we react – that’s just how things work most of the time. Especially with someone like Trump, who is unpredictable. What is the alternative? Imagining every possible worst-case scenario and then doing what, exactly? Making a blog comment about it? What, exactly, do you want to happen? This is a blog and everything we write here has little if any effect on the real world. Would it make you happy and give you comfort if I spent my time here emoting more outrage? Well, that’s not gonna happen, it’s not in my nature to emote that way.
Finally,
I suggest you look in the mirror. I’m not the one passive-aggressively calling people out without naming them like a teenager in high school. You seem, for some reason, to hate me so much that you have this twisted, uncharitable, and incorrect view of who I am and what I supposedly believe.
@Michael Reynolds:
Maybe a decade or more ago, but I don’t think you’re that bombastic anymore. Sometimes, sure, but then we all are sometimes.
Your characterization of how you respond to Connor and others like JKB is how it comes across to me. Again, I don’t have a problem with you doing it or with anyone else – most of that I just scroll past.
I would just hope that everyone remembers that our hosts have to moderate here, and feeding trollish behavior that goes on for dozens of comments makes their job a lot harder, and it seems to be part of the reason for this registration change.