Saturday’s Forum
Steven L. Taylor
·
Saturday, April 19, 2025
·
36 comments
OTB relies on its readers to support it. Please consider helping by becoming a monthly contributor through Patreon or making a one-time contribution via PayPal. Thanks for your consideration.
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.
All: Sorry that the forums have not been posting. There is some kind of technical problem with the scheduling function.
At last…
Welcome back!
Energy, cost, radiation, and add one more barrier to chief nazi’s dream of Mars: Food.
Odd subject for a cooking channel, I know, but it seemed all correct to me.
The thing about Martian soil, though, needs some more data (a lot more data). Geology can vary a lot by region, and we’ve explored only tiny bits of Mars. At that, we’ve explored tiny bits of the Moon as well, but brought back bits of the Moon to Earth. Plants have been grown experimentally in Lunar soil. Though they don’t grow as well as on Earth soil (not a surprise, seeing they’re adapted to the planet they evolved in).
A short term exploration mission to Mars, meant to last a few years, can bring all necessary food with them (at a very high cost), and might recycle some of it using hydroponics (if they can tap water on Mars). A permanent colony needs to grow its own somehow.
The Revolution started in earnest, today, 250 years ago. And the United States was born. Or at least conceived…
Worth thinking about as the current POTUS tries his best to end it.
For someone who lies as much as Trump does, you’d think he’d be better at it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnewsvideo/comments/1k1yut2/reporter_asks_trump_on_president_xi_regarding/
I suspect people are understanding that confrontation IS THE POINT of tRump and his goon. This is what MAGA nation wants and, tRump, ever the performer, is going to give it to them.
So, if you find yourself in the crosshairs, just realize you have only two choice: capitulation or a direct confrontation. These people do not compromise– there is no ‘give a little take a little’
Good for Harvard. Now SCOTUS needs to decide if they have a place in the future of America as a Co-Equal branch or as a Russian copy that miraculously has the same opinion as Putin on everything.
In the meanwhile, it’s going to get pretty real out here as the trade war claims to MAGA middle class business owners. Are they going to sacrifice their livelihoods to fight Trump’s enemies? My guess is no, they are mostly brash assholes so they’ll need someone to blame after the joy of deportation flights wears off. I think the MAGA coalition ruptures in 4-6 months.
Will this pattern actually become the news? The Trump administration chaos and conflicts totally mirrors 2016.
Pentagon turmoil deepens: Top Hegseth aide leaves post
Trump Officials Tried to Claim Harvard Letter Was Sent by Mistake After University Publicly Rejected Demands
Senior Trump officials give conflicting lines on tariffs after markets turmoil
@Scott:
Well, Trump’s often said that he likes chaos.
@Scott:
This is just another version of their other favorite, “I was joking.”
The incompetence is staggering.
@Jim X 32:
I’ve been wondering when we are going to start getting the sustained crisis shocks. I thought the tariffs were going to more directly nuke things, but it seems the system generally was more resilient. How long before the resilience is gone?
I thought I saw something about West Coast shipping orders dropping in May. By June/July won’t farmers need their immigrants to help with the farms? It seems to me that a whole lot of bits have been hanging on and sooner or later something is going break that can’t be papered over (or stock manipulated), then what?
@Jim X 32:
That’s not the way cults end. It’s rarely pretty.
Some have speculated that they are fighting the Garcia case so hard because they think giving in now would show weakness, and there would be blood in the water, prompting more pushback and resistance.
Kind of like the Harvard situation, it seems to me.
Now that Quinzy the kitten has developed a personality, we realize Kato, as in The Pink Panther, would be a more appropriate name. She’s all about the ambush. Walk down a hall and she jumps in front of you, somehow turns to face you midair, all claws out and ears flat. She seems to hang in the air for a moment, looking like one of those Garfields with suction cups for paws that people put on their car windows. Too funny. (the kitten, not Garfield)
She has grown some, but she is still so small. At 7 months, she has the physiology of a kitten more than half her age. She is something of a cat anomaly.
@Daryl:..The Revolution started in earnest, today, 250 years ago.
Fingertips
1962
This morning Krugman posted a transcript of an interview with Nathan Tankus, the guru behind “Notes on the Crises: https://www.crisesnotes.com/
The gist is that markets (bonds, currencies, equities etc.) see unpredictability as risk, and the perception of high risk by institutions such as banks, bank holding companies, hedge funds and other institutions is very dangerous.
This because safeguards enacted post 2008 mortgage derivatives and 2019 COVID require balance sheets to move to more secure assets in a perceived high risk situation, which could paradoxically cause markets to freeze.
Donald Trump’s unpredictability and volatility being the epitome of the problem.
It’s a difficult read, here it is:
“Krugman“
Top trending at Memeorandum is the late night decision coming down from the Supremes, ruling against Trusk’s deporting Venezuelans now incarcerated in Texas.
Alito and Thomas, of course, dissented.
Things are getting spicy.
@Daryl: The totality of MAGA nation is not cultists. They are not even the plurality. The plurality are band wagon fools that like the entertainment and machismo of MAGA –but still like money and their lifestyles. They HAVE things to lose. If it comes down to Trump or them– they will choose them. Without the plurality, the cultists are niche weirdos again.
These are people that like confrontation with people that disdain confrontation. i.e. the current generation of Democrats. Do you noticed who’s NOT on Trump’s Twitter fingers? Democrats that will clap back and dare him to double down on stupid shit. They will curb stomp granny but back off from her grandson. Dems need to be the grandson
@Jim X 32: @Daryl:
Daryl’s right. The MAGAts will stay faithful and even the burning sensation of the poisoned Kool-Aid running down their throats won’t wake them up. There are still Branch Davidians. There are still Aum Shinrikyo. There are still Scientologists and Christian Scientists. Stupidity is very sticky.
But they aren’t the issue in political terms. They are the 45%. We are another 45%. That leaves 10%, and that’s what all this is about now. Politically we don’t actually want the MAGAts evolving, we want them to cling stubbornly to beliefs that are increasingly absurd. Then the 10% will turn to the somewhat less absurd Left, and the wheel of time will turn, olds will die, youths will be born, culture will change, technology will happen and black swans will float in.
I think focusing on the hoped-for death of MAGA seems to be about restoration, about turning the clock back to the Obama era, but that’s not how things work. Just as MAGA can’t bring back the 50’s of their imagination, neither can we bring back 2008. We need a forward-looking plan of action that acknowledges the realities of social media, male alienation, AI, institutional collapse in Congress and SCOTUS, increased automation, hyper-concentrations of wealth, the decline of consumerism, and a wider world where we the US will have been justly cast as the villain.
@Jim X 32:
Trump doesn’t do ‘mutually beneficial.’
His people were brought into his circle, into his Cabinet, to dominate, to win.
As Rovert Duvall said in Apocalypse Now, ‘I love the smell of Napalm in the morning,’ because it’s the smell of victory. And that’s pretty much where these people are at. There is no compromise to be had
For Kathy:
We are in your hood again. Apparently Mexico City survived the water scare? Things seem normal here.
Yesterday, we visited Tolantongo, which is like a natural water park. Really amazing if you’re into water things (I’m not), but a heck of a long drive from the city.
Hopefully we’re allowed back into the USA….
@Jim X 32:
All due respect…
Look up characteristics of a cult, and tell me what doesn’t match.
@reid:
Yes, well, it’s two states over. I’ve never been there.
Looking at the map, it seems far from everything, even the Tula ruins in the same state.
@al Ameda:
@Jim X 32:
The other part of this is that they genuinely don’t know how to handle it when someone tells them to fuck off. They are so convinced that they are 100% right and 100% smarter than everyone. Someone telling them to fuck off just doesn’t compute for them and then they fold. It’s amazing how brittle they are.
I’m going to port this here.
My commentary will follow in a second post, as I think that Fortune’s genuine effort should be rewarded. Moreover, the post should be considered on its own without my commentary.
So, before any of you post, please consider that @Fortune did what many of us have asked.
@Kurtz:
I’m glad you ported this over, I was going to do it myself but forgot.
@Kathy: heh, yes, 4-5 hour drive each way, particularly with traffic and accidents, sadly. But spectacular scenery.
@Kurtz: and @Fortune:
Democrats are the conservatives. MAGA is not. We believe in the Constitution, MAGA does not. We believe in the rule of law, MAGA does not. We believe in truth, MAGA does not. I’m going to guess, if you are a conservative, that you believe the US should be a reliable international partner, that we should keep our word. If, @Fortune, you have natural political allies, it’s us, not them.
Constitution, rule of law and truth are orders of magnitude more important than Gaza, Tesla or anything else you mention. You agree with them on less important questions, and with us on the transcendent issues.
I have made few friends here by wishing that Democrats would sideline less vital issues and focus on the big things. And even fewer friends by insisting that we clean up our own act by re-dedicating ourselves to principles like free expression. For example, before there were right-wing book bans, there were left-wing book bans. Both sides play the cancel culture game, and I wish we would stop, because that’s not who are meant to be.
Democrats have at times been weak on defense, and are culturally anti-military. But Trump has done more actual damage to our defense than any dozen Democratic presidents you can name. Democrats have been willing to run up deficits, but it’s Republicans who excel at deficit spending by pursuing tax cuts that actively favor the rich over working people. It’s not Democrats who fired all the Inspectors General. It’s not Democrats who let a billionaire gain access to vast troves of personal information.
So on the big ticket items, a genuine conservative should be a Democrat. I think the divide is less over important issues, and more over cultural differences. I can only roll my eyes at Democrats’ strange faith in neologisms and enforced vocabulary changes. But pronouns are not on the same level as national defense, or rule of law, or the primacy of the Constitution, or truth itself.
To @Fortune:
This could easily become a mess of a post. Format: general comments directed toward you, your criticisms of Bailey’s plea, then specific replies to the rest.
I am going to separate the general comments. I cannot say whether the other parts will be one or two posts. However, they probably will be posted well into the evening. If it gets late enough, I will probably save them and post in the open thread tomorrow. Probably both.
I offer a sincere thank you for making this effort. I also think that because I used you as an example in a post directed at the rest of the community, I should post something directly to you. I already did this, but I do not think I executed it properly.
The main thing I ask is that you genuinely think about what I am writing. Whatever you think of my tone, or whether I write and argue from an intellectual standpoint, I know what I am talking about in the areas I will be addressing.
Also note that I take pains to place myself properly in the context of mainstream American thought. I do not expect you to change your views, but I do expect that you acknowledge that I can defend my views well. I have put a ton of effort into reading, writing, discussing, thinking, and ultimately refining them over the years. Some of those views have changed; some have not.
I don’t expect that people with time-consuming careers and families to make that choice. But too many people cannot tell the difference between those who use broad heuristics and those who made the choice, whether professionally or personally, to acquire a depth of knowledge. Yes, everyone has the right to think what they want, and express those thoughts. But that doesn’t mean that their opinions cannot be supported by poor reasoning or just plain incorrect.
So, if I point out that you appear to be working from a flawed or outright incorrect idea of something, I am not calling you ignorant or stupid. I am trying to get you to understand some of the frustration felt by others here. And yes, some people I generally agree with here display some of those behaviors. In the end, I hope that you come to a better understanding of what the actual arguments are.
More thoughts on that frustration: You spend a lot of time here. Many of us make detailed, specific arguments which directly demonstrate that Republicans or Trump or media outlets (often intentionally) mischaracterize the actual arguments. Personally, I think TV news and social media are the worst fora to discuss politics. I think they reinforce, and in many ways, worsen the negative aspects of American political discourse. That only serves the interest of those with ill intent and those whose behavior can only be described accurately as cynical.
Yesterday, I considered replying to Bernius’s request for people to “cut [you] some slack”. But I wanted to give you the chance to reply, because you have alluded to time constraints in the past.
I have written a lot about your posts here. But recall my late post from a few days ago that prompted you to describe me as “rabid”.
That post was a reply to Bernius. Yes, the first part drew a negative contrast between you and the resident Trump apologists. I understand why you may have seen it as a ‘denouncement’ (your word). I admit, I had long given up hope that you would break any of your patterns—low effort, vague, argument by assertion, non-substantive posts. But that post, even if I could have been clearer or expressed it better, was much more about the OTB community as a whole. It was for them.
But, whether you want to admit it or not, I have tried to engage you substantively many times. I have repeatedly admitted that I was not always friendly, but I have tried many times to engage with zero aggression.
Those often went unanswered. Also, note that I have tried to shy away from making conclusive statements about you. I genuinely try to understand people, and as I have stated many times now, including directly to you, I am interested in understanding how people form their views. This is one of the reasons why I have irl, I have close, mutually respectful relationships with people who vote Republican, including for Trump.
I began to doubt your time constraint claim, though again, I forced myself to leave open the possibility you were being honest, because you seem to visit the site multiple times a day. But again, that doesn’t mean you have the time for substantive reply.
Overall, I think people would question your motives less if you eschewed sarcastic remarks in favor of an expression of interest in mutual understanding even if you do not have time to reply at that moment. I get that sometimes you want to reply to a sarcastic post with the same tone. But if that is the bulk of your contributions, does that not call your sincerity into question if you rarely post substance?
Take that as you will. But I am not saying any of this to make you feel bad or dismiss you as a person. There is a reason I don’t call for bans. I hope you can see my perspective. If you have questions, just ask. If you want to point out times I have not met my own standards, fine. But please don’t let those instances that be a reason to dismiss what I write. I am not perfect. I admit that here quite often.
I’ll post the rest in the near future.
@Michael Reynolds:
Yes. The conservative thing jumped out at me immediately as well. I would make a few observations that you do not explore. But I am in general agreement.
I’ll read the rest of your post in a bit. I’m going to do some other things before I get back to Fortune’s post.
@Kurtz: Are you joking? I have a very good sense of your temper and your intellect, and I have no interest in reading your comments.
It seems SCOTUS has decided to wake up and stop ignoring the way Trumpism is jerking the courts around to the point of defying them.
https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/144-the-supreme-courts-late-night
excerpts:
snip
“representations by the government’s lawyers” – there is, after all, voluminous history of Trump’s government lawyers simply lying to federal courts, some serious norm breaking.
@Fortune:
So say it.
Give me an assessment of my intellect.
How about you go through my post, then? Tell me what I got wrong.
Shouldn’t take long.
@reid:
Several years ago, I had to drive to Queretaro and Guanajuato several times within a few months. The highway to Queretaro seemed to be under perpetual repair in some segment or another. The repairs slowed down travel and sometimes created traffic, on top of the massive truck traffic coming out of Queretaro in both directions…
@beca: There’s a nice discussion of this over at LGM
@Daryl: What do you mean? The cultists are the cultists. MAGA is mainstream, which means the cultists are but one faction in Trump’s coalition. The bandwagon MAGAs that rolled the dice on Trump because they believed the economy would be better will be the 1st off the train as prices and their supply chains get more expensive. Later this year, the realization that reshoring is an exurban legend will peel off another single-issue faction–leaving the culture war cultists isolated. Sure, there won’t be a public split, but people will stay home and others will secretly vote Dem.
As I said previously–the Administration has already failed. It’s a felled tree, still green but yet–essentially dead.