Friday the 13th Forum
Steven L. Taylor
·
Friday, September 13, 2024
·
89 comments
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a retired Professor of Political Science and former College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored
A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog).
Follow Steven on
Twitter and/or
BlueSky.
If Trump becomes convinced he will lose, I believe he will drop out, believing that Vance has a better shot and will certainly pardon him if put in office. At this point, though, I’m wondering how many states still have the time to replace Trump with Vance on the ballot?
@MarkedMan: I cannot imagine a scenario where Trump:
1) Believes he will lose
2) Drops out
3) Even cares about the policies that he and Vance talk about.
The two reasons for running are to delay prison another 4 years, and to have more years to siphon money from the American people. Vance can’t pardon non-Federal crimes, and there are a lot of those.
Quitting destroys both of those reasons.
Trump will not drop out.
@Tony W: Totally agree with #3. I mean, Trump doesn’t care about policy, much less Vance’s policies.
I think it is unlikely that Trump will drop out, but there is a non-zero chance. If he becomes convinced he is likely to lose to a black woman, I think he will drop out. Many people believe Trump is a “fight to the last drop” kind of guy, but that doesn’t match his history, which is more of a “turn everything to shit and storm off in a huff when it all comes crashing down” scenario.
Again, I don’t think is likely, but it is possible. But if you can’t wrap your head around that, substitute “dies” for “drops out”. Which states are beyond the point of no return for ballots text. Doesn’t mail-in start in a couple of weeks in some states?
@MarkedMan:
Does it matter? The voters vote for electoral college electors, not people, so just would be voting for the Republican elector slate.
Trump is not going to drop out. Too many of the people around him know which buttons to push to prevent that. They’ll say everyone will think he’s quitting because he’s losing like Biden was – I’m pretty sure being compared to Biden on anything at all would be good for a 20-minute tantrum ending up on the ceiling. And that he can’t trust Vance to follow through on any airy pledge to pardon him if Vance wins. He’d want lawyer-written agreements signed in advance before he’d quit.
And there are other people counting on Trump being in power to pardon or exonerate them, and they certainly wouldn’t trust Vance to follow through on Trump’s commitments. (Yeah, I know the value of Trump’s promises but hope springs eternal in MAGA-ville.)
But I agree with others above: he just isn’t going to quit because he thinks he can still win. If he’s taking advice from Tulsi Gabbard and Laura Loomer at this point, he has exited Earth’s orbit and is sailing away to the far edges of the universe.
@charontwo:
.
Seems like the NC courts are concerned about the candidates name.
@Not the IT Dept.:
I agree that as long as he thinks he can win he will not drop out.
@MarkedMan:
All states must send ballots to registered overseas military personnel by Sep 21 this year (federal law).
In my vote by mail state, county election officials must have physical possession of printed ballots by Oct 4. At least in the larger counties, that also implies the ballots are folded and inserted in the proper envelopes. Those larger counties hire the printing, folding, and insertion out to one of a few qualified firms. Contracts, including schedules, are negotiated months and/or years in advance.
Republicans are eating their own…
Catfight?
@Mister Bluster:
“Catfight?”
No Haitian jokes, please.
Holy s–t, @Not the IT Dept., I think he can still win.
@Mister Bluster: Speaking of Laura Loomer: Why isn’t the Harris campaign or reporters not making more of a deal concerning Loomer’s attendance at the 9/11 ceremony. It would tie Trump’s disrespect for the deceased, Trump’s dallying with far right looney conspiracies, and contempt for the 9/11 first responders.
@Scott:
Reporters? Because they know Trump is fucking Loomer and they can’t figure out how to both-sides it. Greene and Graham’s BS is because they are freaking out and trying to scare her off.
Both nuts and senile:
“tweet TFG in AZ”
Trump is making more and more own goals. A day after Johnson had to pull the CR because he didn’t have the votes, Trump posted this:
Trump’s CR is done. Dead. Repubs are more afraid of the electorate than they are of him. And after that has been clearly demonstrated, he still posts (essentially), “IT’S ME OR HIM BRENDA! DECIDE RIGHT NOW!!!” The craven Repubs will put a finger in the wind and choose, “HIM”, and that will make Trump look even weaker.
@charontwo: and 95% of Republican politicians will continue to support Trump as long as they think they can get more money or power by pandering to his supporters. After all, it won’t be their houses that the mob burns down.
Putin must be smiling.
The following has long been my favorite excerpt from Laura Loomer’s Wikipedia page.
@Mister Bluster: I was baffled by this. MTG realized a curry joke was racist, and actually said so? She must really hate Loomer for some reason.
@Joe:
And current polling says he can still win. His rally attendance appears to be down, which I have been looking for for eight years as a sign he’s losing his grip on the MAGA. And a lot of rats, most recently Alberto Gonzales, are leaving the ship. And yet he has better odds of winning than he did in 2016.
Gonna be an interesting couple of months. I don’t think he’ll quit. He can’t. Winning is his only legal defense. In any case, ballot deadlines are passing. But he may have a public meltdown.
@charontwo:
Ahead of the rally at her namesake hometown hall, Ronstadt endorsed Harris. She added that her two kids were adopted and she owns a cat.
@MarkedMan:
I would be unsurprised if a Trump pardon was very likely part of the deal when choosing a vice presidental running mate.
@Franklin: From what I understand, Greene’s district contains a surprisingly large East Asian contingent, who tend to be more conservative and therefore are more likely to vote for her. She’s protecting her local base. My guess is her shock at discovering gambling in her own Party doesn’t extend beyond counting her own votes.
@Argon:
Makes sense, but I don’t think an explicit deal is necessary. I don’t care who it is, if a Republican gains the White House with Federal Criminal cases pending, they will pardon Trump. They could not possibly withstand the interanal pressure to end it, and wouldn’t want the constant distraction anyway.
Boeing’s machinists in Everett, Washington, have rejected the deal Boeing offered, and have also voted to strike.
They have a really big point. In the last contract, negotiated in 2014, they gave up pensions and accepted increased health insurance costs. Since then Boeing has made a mess of the MAX, losing tons of money on it, and also spent around $68 billion on stock buybacks and dividends since 2010.
Since Boeing moved production of the 787 exclusively to South Carolina, where the workforce is no unionized, now they face the very bad problem of halting production of their best seller, the 737 MAX. For both Boeing and Airbus, the narrow body mainline jets represent well over half their revenue. these planes cost less than widebodies, but sell in much greater numbers.
So, a word of advice to Boeing’s new CEO: get your dick out of the meat grinder if you’re going to keep cranking it.
@MarkedMan:
Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin!
From a Three Stooges short:
Moe: “I’m prepared to flight to the last drop of his (Curley’s) blood.”
I do not dismiss the possibility that Trump will bail out if he knows he’s losing to a Black woman. Is he sufficiently in touch with reality to reach that conclusion? Eventually, probably. If he sees Kamala up by 5 points in the swing states even he will get a clue. Maybe.
The one thing we can be sure of is that he will need to construct a narrative that allows him to declare some sort of win, or at least a victimization story.
If he does get to this point of seeing a looming loss, how does he play it? Does he wait and take his beating on election night? If he loses does he call for violence? Likely, but not likely that much will happen. He will of course demand the House negate the election and appoint him king. But if Kamala has a convincing win, is the GOP House ready to go fill 1860? And BTW, we will still have the WH at that point, so Biden could use his SCOTUS demigod powers to put a stop to it.
I am not one of those who believe he will never face imprisonment for his crimes. That will terrify him. That would be intolerable. But then, losing to a Black woman would be almost as intolerable.
There is a non-zero chance that he will read the writing on the wall, concoct a story about death threats or DOJ conspiracies, hop on his plane and flee, leaving his toadies (looking at you Drew and JKB) to weep and wail and gnash their teeth and begin their Lost Cause pity party.
But the list of places he can flee to is shrinking fast. Russia? North Korea? Budapest is nice, but would even Orban be that stupid?
@Joe:
Just to be clear, I also think he can still win, my hypothetical notwithstanding.
@Michael Reynolds: Sounds about right.
BTW, still no sign of our trumpers? Not showing up in any thread?
@MarkedMan:
Lol! That’s no typo!
@Beth:
MTG is jealous because Loomer is sleeping with Trump, and MTG thought that would be her thing. And the same with Lindsay Graham. The competition to be Eva Braun is fierce.
Trump says he won the debate because only losers, such as Harris, ask for a rematch.
Lately traffic has been incredibly bad. Now, it’s true traffic in Mexico City tends to be bad. We neither invented it nor perfected it, but we’re really good at bad traffic with poor street planning, unsynchronized traffic lights, free for all public transportation, excess vehicles, and about 98% of the global number of speed bumps*.
With all that, traffic’s been terrible lately. Example, without any traffic, as in the trump pandemic era lockdown, it took me about 18 minutes to drive from office to home and viceversa. With normal traffic, it takes about 25-30 minutes. Since late August, I’ve been averaging over 45 minutes. Tuesday it was 90 minutes. The total distance is 11.6 kilometers.
I can find no explanation or cause. From what most coworkers say, it’s like that in other parts of town as well. We’re all stumped, and very much annoyed.
Also, I cancelled my remaining vacation for the first two weeks of September, because the first of the big Hell Week requests for proposals was set to publish the first week of the month. It’s the end of the second week, and it hasn’t dropped.
I moved my time off to the last two weeks of September. I’m taking it even if every other customer publishes their requests. The bosses won’t let me, but that’s their problem. One of my nieces married a doctor, who I’m sure will be amenable to say I need to quarantine for two weeks for reasons 😉
*I’ve measured the distance from home to office and the number of speed bumps. The average is a speed bump every 300 meters. Most of them are in the residential area comprising the first 3/5 of the commute.
@charontwo:
Just on the basis of our having experienced 9 years of this bullsh*t, and we’re prospectively looking at 4 more years of civic and cultural PTSD … I’d say that there’s no need for you to apologize for posting ‘what it is.’
@CSK:
After the June debate, Trump was calling for new debates with Biden (not just the already scheduled one in September). So by his current logic, Biden won that debate.
@al Ameda:
Did you notice the blockquote, that recap was from the Twitter link I posted – but I very much concur. I will be overjoyed when that sorry attention whore becomes unable to compel my attention.
@Argon: Talk about Freudian slip!
@Mister Bluster: I’m trying to figure out why MTG objected. Was it because she didn’t think of it? As political quips go, it strikes me as fairly clever and pretty tame. Though just now writing that I realized that it lacks the rabid anger that MAGAts and their leadership crave.
[Emily Litella voice] Nevermind.
@MarkedMan:
here is a tweet with embedded video plus some text, from Trump’s psychologist niece Mary Trump:
“Mary L. Trump”
re: debate fallout:
An additional point:
Trump is still angry that Obama roasted him at the White House Correspondents Dinner many years ago.
I think over the coming weeks many knock on effects of the debate will develop to Trump’s disadvantage. Less enthusiastic GOTV volunteers for example. Which is why I regard that debate as a torpedo below the waterline of the Good Ship Donald J, Trump.
Mad Vlad is now saying if Ukraine is allowed to strike deep(er) into Russia with Western supplied weapons, that then NATO will be directly at war with Russia.
For a change, he declined to rattle the nuclear sabre. Though his UN ambassador made it a point to remind the security council Russia is a nuclear state.
I think he’s bluffing. Sure, the countries in the NATO alliance don’t want to fight Russia. If they did, they’d have sent troops to Ukraine, and carried out strikes very deep within Russia and Belarus by now. But neither does Mad Vlad want such a war.
It’s unclear who’d win, even with Russia’s forces bloodied and weakened as they are now. A long stalemate is a possibility, and so is the use of nukes by Russia. Driving the no Red Army out of Ukraine, even including Crimea, is not an existential threat to Russia, but it is to Vlad. Any serious intervention by NATO would cause massive damage. I’m far less certain how much Damage Russia could inflict on NATO countries. A lot, no doubt, on the Baltic republics, and perhaps on Poland.
Would he use nukes? It’s hard to say. Rationally, the answer is no. Any use, even a small tactical nuke for clear, limited military battlefield objectives, risks escalation. A delusional person can build a narrative that predicts how things will go, and convince himself a 10 kiloton bomb dropped on a troop concentration or air base won’t escalate matters.
I still think his bluffing. But calling a bluff always carries the risk it may not be a bluff.
One thing I’m a tenth part confident in predicting, is that all NATO leaders will wait until the election results in November before making a decision.
I am perhaps being a bit picky/pedantic but I did not much care for a post headline yesterday:
A more appropriate title:
The Haitian/pets thing was early bouncing around extreme right websites, then J.D. Vance started pushing it hard, repeatedly. Trump only picked it up later, typical of most of the crap he spews.
@Kathy:
I don’t think there’s any doubt who’d win a NATO/Russia war. Russia would lose conclusively.
@Kylopod:
Oh, the MAGAs are all on board with Trump spurning another debate. When did they ever mind–or even notice–Trump reversing himself?
Lots of delightful speculation that trump is banging Laura Loomer. Someone on Reddit called her Temu Melania.
@Michael Reynolds:
A lot depends on what constitutes a win. Did America win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Besides that, at what cost? Ukraine has taken a lot of damage, especially deaths. Russia has long range heavy bombers. NATO defenses may be good enough to keep Germany and France safe, but what about the Baltics, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, maybe even Greece?
On top of all that, what shape are NATO arsenals in? A lot of ammo has been expended in Ukraine already.
Good new. Grocery prices are now at lower than 2019 levels when you calculate them as a percentage of hourly wage. This is for non-supervisory workers.
https://x.com/ernietedeschi/status/1833855226794709405?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Also, per CDC, Fentanyl related deaths are now decreasing and the increase during the Biden years has been much, much less than during the Trump years. Roughly 27,000 during the Trump years and 5,000 during the Biden years.
Steve
@charontwo:
The Springfield situation has been developing for months, with neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations heavily involved along with J.D. Vance, according to a long detailed piece at Talking Points Memo.
“TPMt“
@charontwo:..Trump is still angry that Obama roasted him at the White House Correspondents Dinner many years ago.
The Republican Party is still pissed that Richard M. Nixon resigned in the face of impeachment by the House of Representatives and removal from office by the Senate a half century ago. They will never give up on getting a Democratic President to resign or to be impeached in the House of Representatives and removed from office by the Senate.
Just another reason to vote for Democratic candidates in United States Federal elections.
Here is a different TPM piece:
“TPM Gift”
snip …
@MarkedMan:..trumpers?..
See the JKB lament at 11:23 on yesterday’s Dershowitz thread. Then scroll down for witty replies.
@Kathy:
I think Mad Vlad is reacting as we might in the same position. If this was a war on our border and Russia officially declared their weapons could be used to attack NYC, DC, or any place in the US, we would view it as an act of war. Therefore I suspect the people running things will still have restrictions.
@Kathy:
Putin’s only possible kinetic moves against NATO are direct against Poland. Or count on closing the Sulweki Gap and roll up the Baltics.
A direct move against Poland would be a one-sided massacre. The Ukrainians are magnificent, but they do not have anything like our arsenal, or our numbers, or our training, or our doctrine. Remember that Ukraine has stopped them without F-16s, let alone B-1s, B-2s, B-52s and F-35s. Nor does Ukraine have the ability yet to conduct combined arms warfare. Long story short: NATO airpower would annihilate any Russian attack. We would lose a lot of planes, but they would lose all their radars and SAMs, and the entirety of whatever air forces they were dumb enough to commit.
The Gap issue is tougher, but manageable. First, Putin would have to concentrate very large forces near the border without being detected. That is not happening. By the time he could commit we’d have moved ships into the Baltic and brought ground forces up from Poland, Germany and France, as well as NATO’s entire air force. Russians are continental fighters and imagine that they could roll into Lithuania and Estonia and take so much ground so quickly we’d be left on the back foot. They never have understood naval power. Hell, they don’t seem to understand air power. NATO naval forces carry a very large punch and the Baltic Sea belongs to us.
Meat grinder tactics – all Vlad has – do not work on a modern NATO battlefield. And that’s before we look at counterattacks against St. Petersburg which is a brisk walk from Finland. And they would of course leave themselves open to NATO moves through Ukraine to hit them from the South, something they are manifestly incapable of coping with. And in a very few years, Poland by itself, would be able to stop them.
And, BTW, all this before additional US forces could arrive from the States. The Russians don’t have the numbers, or the weapons systems, or the morale, or the tactical ability. A Russian attack would leave their many, many other borders undefended. One of their neighbors is China, which considers much of far-eastern Russia as Chinese homelands.
@Michael Reynolds: I’m not sure I agree with everything you post.
However, the Ukrainians have demonstrated the ability to take out the Russian S-3 and S-4 air defenses, which only a few years ago were very scary.
Which leads me to believe that if NATO fully engaged, it would gain strategic air superiority in short order.
The Russians have already spent a bunch of manpower and materiel on Ukraine. They do well with relatively static lines, and human wave tactics. NATO can win such a fight economically, but it would take a long time, and the political situation could be a problem.
Making things more mobile seems more sensible, and NATO is focused on doing that, and has been focused on beating the USSR (which used exactly the same ideas in conducting warfare) for a long, long time.
Yeah, I say it goes to NATO, too. But it would be costly, and nuclear deterrence is a thing.
Putin’s posture might be “World annihilation is preferable to a successful occupation of Mother Russia.” He could have political support for that in Russia, even.
Which is why all these guys at, oh let’s say Defense Institutes get paid the big bucks to think about this stuff.
@MarkedMan:
I believe Trump, if he loses, will claim the election was stolen and announce his candidacy for 2028. This running for POTUS stuff has been by far the most profitable scam of his entire career and he knows the moment he stops fighting will be the moment the money stops flowing.
@dazedandconfused:
If the US started a war of conquest on a neighboring country, they’d deserve it, too.
@Michael Reynolds:
Mad Vlad wouldn’t try to take over territory in NATO countries, just bomb them heavily to cause casualties and damage. BYW, this now would also include Finland and Sweden.
Although in such a war, maybe the US could take Vladivostok and give it to China in exchange for leaving Taiwan alone.
@dazedandconfused:
I’d bet he doesn’t make it to 2028.
I hope he won’t make it through 2025.
None of which precludes him from running again.
@becca:
That was mean spirited and totally uncalled for. 😛 Still, I can see what they’re going for.
@Kathy:
I suspect you may be right, the legal issues will catch up to him. Sometimes two flushes are needed but that usually gets it done.
@Kathy:
We have more bombs and more missiles and more precision for both. If Russia directly attacked European Cities it wouldn’t even be mad, just stupid. Mass destruction on both sides. Qui bono?
Don’t forget that we can hit Russia from Europe, and Putin can hit Europe, but unless he’s going nuclear he can’t hit the US or any of our far-flung bases. And then there’s the Navy which can hammer St. Petersburg and Murmansk and Vladivostok without much worry.
Russian FSB trolls will try to tell you different, but the US and its allies are many times stronger than Russia. Russia would be left with no military forces of significance. They’d be defenseless and nibbled to death by Ukraine, Poland, the ‘Stans and China.
Putin’s only hope for the future is Donald Trump.
@Kathy:
Also, China doesn’t need our help to take Vladivostok, they can take it tomorrow.
In the mid-term Putin is weak. In the longer term, he’s irrelevant aside from nukes. Russia is just Italy with nukes. He can of course commit national suicide, but that’s all he can do.
@dazedandconfused: Even if his fragile health holds up, he could be in prison or overseas. I don’t see it as likely that he’ll run in 2028.
@Michael Reynolds:
The only doubt is whether the US would also lose.
This is massively unfair. Why should only Harris get a limited edition ice cream from a major manufacturer?
Unfair, manypeoplesaythat! Ben and Jerry’s should do the honorable thing, and issue an El Weirdo Felon Bullshit Swirl Ice Cream. With real, creamy, actual bullshit scooped fresh off the best ranches in Texas! Justice demands no less.
@Gustopher:
Well, unless we’re having nuclear armageddon, the US would do just fine – as we did in WW1 and WW2. It’s lovely having big oceans all around. If we weaken are Canada and Mexico going to do to us what China et al will do to a weaker Russia? The US has the luckiest geography of any country with the possible exception of New Zealand.
@dazedandconfused:
I’m thinking more like natural causes will catch up to him.
@Michael Reynolds:
Remember the laws:
Nothing is ever that simple.
Everything costs more and takes longer.
No battle plan survives intact upon contact with the enemy.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
@Kathy:
I don’t think you will find a single non-Russian military expert who thinks Russia could even begin to handle NATO. They can’t beat Ukraine, FFS. Russia has never been good at war. No, not even in WW2. Losing half your country and something like 20,000,000 people is not your first rate war fighting. Germany was fighting half the world and lost a third of that.
I wouldn’t worry about it. As long as we don’t elect Trump, NATO is secure.
@Kathy:
Follow up question, why should only people in battleground states get ice cream? I want ice cream, too. And as a not-registered-to-vote person, I deserve ice cream as an incentive to register. The fact that I live in a D +40 or so city in a D+16 state shouldn’t matter. Not at all. [eyeroll]
@Just nutha ignint cracker: well, since Loomer has called many other innocent people far worse, I meant it mean-spirited and no backsies.
Personally, I can’t get over how big her head is.
Okay. I’m done.
https://www.cfr.org/report/preventing-us-election-violence-2024
Although the Russian armed forces have been exposed as having limited capability to mount a major conventional action against Western forces, talk of a Russia/NATO war seems a bit fantastical. It’s predictable that Russia would threaten consequences over the use of Western weapons systems in some unspecified ways inside Russian territory, but the US administration has made it clear to the world that we will not risk a WWIII. And despite what the Russian Foreign Minister said a couple of years ago, Biden discussing restraint versus what “would be WWIII” is not a threat to use nukes–in fact it’s the opposite. The only world leaders I can recall having openly threatened to use nuclear weapons during the last decade are Putin, Kim, and Trump.
@Michael Reynolds:
And there’s no way the Taliban could take on America.
@Kathy: Next you’ll be into crazy talk, like Iraq had no WMDs, or North Vietnam wasn’t a threat to us, and what was Grenada about.
@Michael Reynolds:
I’ve been reading a history of WWI in the East. Going in Russia had the most feared army in Europe. I’m only up to early 1915. Russia has masses of men, but they’re already sending new recruits to the front without rifles, they can’t replace boots, and they’re about out of artillery shells.
@charontwo:
WRT to the TNR piece referenced in the TPM excerpt:
This corrupt influence applies to military and federal civilian personnel as long as there’s a threat of TFG regaining the presidency. The open discussion of plans to remove tens of thousands of employees and replace them with loyalists has left no doubt. Career employees may now be considering their actions in light of how they’d be viewed by the current administration (execute the job effectively and as required) versus that of the TFG (high value on personal loyalty, acceding to superiors’ political pressure). In some respects, the TFG perversely holds more sway over some employees than the current administration. A possible recent example is the FBI bending to political pressure following Wray’s testimony that they didn’t know whether the striking projectile was a bullet or shrapnel, followed by an FBI statement saying it was likely either a bullet or fragment, which is what TFG needed to say “apology accepted.”
@gVOR10: Does that book touch upon the Russian-Japanese war? Talk about a charlie foxtrot.
@Michael Reynolds:
@gVOR10:
No country is just one thing forever.
Peter I did pretty well at leading the Russian Empire in War, so did Catherine.
On the other hand, Nicholas II f**d up the Ruso-Japanese War worse than anyone would believe.
Russia has three advantages when it gets invaded: 1) size, 2) mud*, 3) winter. Both Napoleon’s armies and the nazis’ found such a vast country had little trouble trading space for time, even relocating whole industries well back of the front lines. In the fall, rains turn the ground to a muddy morass that makes advance difficult and very slow. The same thing happens with the spring thaw when ice and snow melt. In between there’s a really cold, really harsh, really dark winter. The locals are both acclimated and prepared. Invaders tend to be neither.
A war involving NATO against Russia now would be solely to end the occupation of parts of Ukraine, including Crimea. Not to invade Russia nor take over the oil fields. Remember it took weeks of bombing and days of ground fighting to dislodge Saddam’s armies from a much smaller area, and which were far less entrenched and lacked any local support.
Exuberant optimism in war is hubris.
*On the flip side, Mad Vlad’s troops were caught unprepared for the muddy conditions in Ukraine early on in the war. You’d think they’d have known better. There’s even a word in Russian for the muddy seasons, Rasputitsa.
@becca: Maybe I should have use a 😉 emoji instead of the 😛 one. Be as mean spirited and unnecessary as you feel you need to be with my blessing. [thumbs up emoji]
ETA: And the “mean spirited and unnecessary” was about the “Temu Melania” quip. You should let the redditor who invented the quip take the heat. It Trump can play “lots of people are saying…” soican you. (And Loomer REALLY DOES look like Temu Melania. It was my first reaction to claims that Trump and Loomer are a thang.)
@gVOR10: They started buying artillery shells for NK about 2 years ago. I think “about out” is two or three exits behind them.
@Kathy:
I need to make a correction. The time I counted speed bumps and came up with one every 300 meters, was between my old place and the area where I live now (they’re rather close), and the distance is about 5 kilometers, not 11.
On other things, I found the tape measure (it was at the office for some reason), and measured my old monitor I recalled as being small. It’s 19″ these days that’s not big, but it’s far from small. I must have confused it with an even older monitor I no longer have. The laptop, in contrast, measures in at a microscopic 13″.
I found the Mythbusters ep where they test traffic “myths.” I’ve a bit of a bone to pick with their terminology in this case, since what they tested was a valid explanation for one cause of traffic. Other than that, they did very well.
This reminds me of the time they tested the hypothesis (again, not a myth) that minimizing left turns saves time and fuel. they got exactly that result, but they ran the experiment only once each for no left turns, and left turns as needed.
With light traffic in my usual routes home, I do notice a slow down at three points where a left turn is needed, one in each route. All involve getting through oncoming traffic in order to make the turn. Two have stop lights for the turn, one doesn’t.
It’s not a massive slow down most times, and it doesn’t usually create ancillary long lines of traffic, but I do notice it. When possible, I avoid these routes. But I wonder if eliminating most left turns would help ease traffic overall. If it’s something I’ve noticed, chances are someone has studied the matter already. Also, I understand many delivery companies, like UPS, employ the no left turn policy.
@Kathy: in a majority of new Jersey there is no left turns made on major roadways onto other ones or large parking entrances like big shopping areas.
Instead they use, “jug handles” that are right side exits that do a half circle to a stoplight tom make the left. Also an early US heavy user of traffic circles.
@gVOR10:
Netflix has a series “The Last Czar” which covers it nicely.
The Russians have always been bad a war, look at all those crude wins. Napoleon, Adolf, both had vastly superior troops and were good at war. I had hoped it was shaking out like WW1 in the early days of this. Putin had been so sure it would be quick and easy he didn’t even bother to prepare his troops properly. The possibility they would rebel was clear. However he found guys who will fight for a terrible-at-war outfit. There is something frightening about the Slavic character. Perhaps best documented in the HBO series “Chernobyl”. They found guys willing to walk right into hell for that one too.
@dazedandconfused:
Perhaps.
But the Ukrainians are also Slavs.
Historically, Russia has won despite disadvantages; but also, it has lost, despite advantages.
(Crimean War, Russo-Japanese War, WW1, etc)
It really doesn’t tell us much about how Russia now can cope with massive adverse attrition now, given the evident political/economic problems of a general mobilization.
@gVOR10:
The thing was, pre-1914, nobody thought a full-on war could be sustained for longer than about 6 to 12 months max.
Therefore, the Russian army plus reserves should be decisive.
Oops.
@Kathy:
Which it has not used over Ukraine, because it is liable to lose them, both to Ukrainian SAM and to the residual UAF air interceptor capacity; which nobody talks about much, but is a very real factor nonetheless.
Russian bombers have been reduced to using long range stand-off missiles, which cases damage, but not on a war-winning scale.
To be really effective, they need to be able to carry out direct bombing.
They can’t do so.
@Kathy:
The UK has obviously decided (and did before the election: this is plainly a consensus decision at Privy Council level)
The whole reporting indicates London wants UAF to have near free-fire use of UK weapons vs Russia.
The US and Germany still prefer to play grandmother’s footsteps.
This phrase caught my attention in a Krugman column:
And I wondered if that was true. I mistrust all things epigrammatic on principle, but it made me think. I don’t think it’s right for me. I used to be a fairly decent sociopath. Now I keep the sociopath in the basement. I don’t kill him, I mean, you never know what life will hand you. Might need him.
Krugman said it specifically in reference to Trump. You can’t discount the medical causes of late-stage souring character. He’s got something going on in the dementia spectrum.
He’s clearly collapsing verbally. ‘I weave.” Uh huh, sure you do Grandpa, sure you do. Now I’m gonna need your car keys. But I think it’s too vague to say that people become more themselves. You are what you are at any given moment, regardless of age. It may be that the worst of you comes to the fore, less filtered. But that may be an effect of the approach of death. At 78 even a cretin can figure out that there’s less ahead than behind.
I suspect the big thing, other than medical reasons that people sour is fear of death, often accentuated by physical pain, and a more generalized fear of becoming vulnerable.
@Mister Bluster:
Bwa haha hahahaha hahahahahaha. Sob. Gasp. Giggling cackle.
Oh, stop it, MTG you’re killing me.
@Kathy:
The NATO arsenal has not been appreciably reduced; and European munitions production is ramping at a rate that should cause an underwear crisis in the Kremlin.
Democracies being democracies, and birds being ever eager to wet their beaks, there will be issues.
But the fundamental is: compared to the industrial capacity of Europe alone, never mind Europe plus the US plus the rest of the OECD, Russia is a rounding error.
@Michael Reynolds:
We’ve been saying this in my family for years, if not generations. Old people become the distilled essence of themselves. The facades and filters boil away, and all that’s left if what was really central all along. That can be beautiful, or horrific.
My mother-in-law lost all of her ability to pretend that she was not a classist racist would-be oligarch. My father-in-law became a wholly self-absorbed solipsist. My father is losing his ability to pretend that he hears (or cares) what other people say. No major personality changes — just an intensification of existing trends and patterns.
@Michael Reynolds:
Never mind F-35 😉
RAF Typhoon’s or French Rafale’s, are entirely capable of chomping up Russian air assets and spitting out the bones.
(The Typhoon networked air superiority capability is f’@kin awesome. Trust me on this.)
Russia if attacking NATO loses air control in hours.
Then it faces air/missile attack in depth on every identified command and logistic centre.
And trying to advance against NATO forces that can call down hell on any identified target.
As an artillery guy I know once said, re an exercise: “Oh, come on, let me kill.” Lol.
The Russian loss ratio in Ukraine is massively adverse; it’s trivial compared to what it would face against a NATO force.
And the Russians might be lucky: they might fight Brits, or Germans, or French.
God help them if they meet Finns, or Poles.
@Thomm: When I lived in NJ, I found that design to be very beneficial.