In a civil suit he might get convicted, but in a criminal case, there is infinitely little chance that at least one of the 12 jurors wouldn’t vote to acquit.
Best way to “get Trump” is for Biden to pull a Ford and pardon Trump for any federal offenses (civil and state cases aren’t covered). Of course, there will be howls from anti-Trumpers, and he likely wouldn’t accept since it is acknowledgment of guilt. But it would make it harder to play the victim card.
I realize you mention Youngkin only in passing in the section on Cheney, but DAMN does he have presidential ambition. Which means Larry Hogan might as well resign himself to enjoying retirement.
Sure, Youngkin is going to campaign for every Republican candidate who'll let him because he's building up a horde of political IOUs. Positioning himself as the NON-asshole choice for those who don't care to choose between Trump and DeSantis as the greater asshole.
How does no one ever ask a follow up question - When stated that Republicans are under pressure to impeach Joe Biden - how is the next question for what would that be?
The stock market goes up and down; inflation is largely due to macroeconomics and (at this point, especially) world-wide issues, so I don't know how anyone (R or D) gets the credit and blame for these things. But making me a second-class citizen in my own country? Taking away my bodily autonomy? That's ALL on the Republicans, and they should pay for it.
Just a friendly reminder that the oft-cited “kill all the lawyers” Shakespearean quip is made during a discussion of how to overthrow orderly government. In other words, how does one ensure the success of an angry mob? First, kill all the lawyers.
"Populist hostility to immigration, pro-business economic policy, support for federalism, and social conservatism on religion and cultural issues": Minus the "populist hostility," these could be components of a center/center-right political platform that is very conservative but not antidemocratic. It's the hostility that pitches the program toward the far-right. What I'm suggesting is, the trumpist and European neofascist movements have underlying pedigrees and ideologies that need to be carefully explicated to expose their unique danger to democracy.
A lot of articles out today on how US manufacturing has really come back, the hourly wage is up for many workers, unemployment is incredibly low, gas prices are down, & there are job openings in just about every field for college grads & non- college grads. I understand that inflation is high, but that’s a worldwide problem, not just in the US.
So why are people writing about a recession? I’m not an economist, but in my town in Maine & throughout the state, the economy seems to be humming along just fine, though we could definitely use some immigrants to fill all those Help Wanted ads in our local paper every week.
Personally, the people I talk to are more upset about the recent Supreme Court decisions & the fact that the Orange Jesus is still walking around a free man.
It is kinda the reverse of that old saying about the difference between a recession and a depression. All that good stuff you mention is happening for other people. Me, I'm in the same job where they haven't kept my pay up with inflation and the damn store shelves aren't as full as they once were and I have to wait longer in line to check out. Am I better off that I was 3 years ago? No.
Now, I'm fine, and my country is much better off than it was 4 years ago, but I try to maintain some perspective on these things and actually use that empathy concept, unlike all those who want to bitch about the economy. We just went through a once in 100 years disruption coupled with the largest war in Europe since the one that turned the world upside down. That we're making it through so far with a little chop in the water should be celebrated.
I live in Texas - you there driving a big-ass truck to the packed restaurant of your choice - I don't really want to hear you bitching about the cost of gas or food.
Somehow, they just put the pandemic and the war in Ukraine out of their mind? God, if we lose democracy and freedom, we never fucking deerved it.
We've mostly forgotten about the pandemic. The vaccinated are vaxxed and done and those who aren't vaccinated are going to cling to their stubborn notion that it was never a big deal. Never mind the million deaths so far (a hit to the labor force - 262K working age deaths so far) and the ~2K deaths a day that are still ongoing. Never mind the disruptions to the rest of the world through their dealing with it.
As for Ukraine, well that's a war in a place people couldn't have located on a map before it started, and we're Americans, we aren't affected by such things!
Last election I had good results with polls. I just added 4 points to GOP in every swing state except out west as I don’t have a feel for AZ or NV. I picked every state except got burned on GA. I don’t know why pollsters don’t give this spread.
"But here we are; this is what we got. The legal system may be our last line of defense, and that's a shame."
That is more than a shame. More than sad. That is frightening when one considers that there are people in that system such as U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. So, what else have we got?
Well, we've got Liz Cheney, who's become the prima facie example of why there's nothing inherently wrong or *evil* with being a conservative or a Republican if, while being those things, one steadfastly refuses to cross the red line into lip service to the Constitution, the rule of law and to our liberal democratic institutions and processes in the pursuit of political power or personal gain. That so many of her fellow conservatives and Republicans have crossed that line - or have failed to raise so much as a whisper to denounce and object to those who have - is the root cause of her now being so much in the limelight, and the reason we now must contemplate 'lawyers' as our last line of defense in this fight to 'save democracy' in our country. And as robust as her efforts are in that endeavor, Liz ain't gonna' be able to do it by herself. So, what else do we have?
Ourselves. Which is where the ultimate responsibility for the preservation of what we hold dear in our country is vested. And we should be contemplating our own roles as individuals in being that last line of defense for that which we hold so dear.
Don't ask me what *you* can do. I don't know. I know we all want answers to that question, but I don't have them. I can only speak to what I can do. Which is vote, of course. But also, I can take inspiration from Lincoln's words. And add resolve from Cheney's example to my determination to look for any opportunity to stand up for 'what's right' as I go about my daily life, be that in how I respond to a neighbor or co-worker promulgating the lies and deceit that have led us to where we now find ourselves, or donating money to a candidate who's worthy of representing me and the ideals that our country is supposed to stand for in our halls of government, or simply by speaking or behaving in a way toward someone of a different political outlook that shows them *I* am not their enemy, that their true enemy is to be found elsewhere.
These things I can do. And I will do them, along with anything else I can conjure. Beyond that, I can only suggest that we all contemplate the words of a former President of our country, which I heard as a child. And set aside all partisan bias and take them at face value. And hopefully adopt them as our own:
"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from the responsibility. I welcome it."
I left the attribution out on purpose, in keeping with my remark about setting aside bias and taking those words at face value. But props for looking them up.
Different time, different circumstances...the cold war was flirting with going hot, and almost did soon after Kennedy spoke those words, as those of us like you and me who were around back then would soon witness. And Kennedy was very good at speaking publicly and had great speech writers. Still, your point is a good one. And I can't imagine something as powerfully straight forward and clear as this along with "Ask not..." coming from the lips of any pol of any stripe since then, and especially now.
Speaking of Reagan... “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
Interesting that he spoke those words not long after Kennedy's death and long before he became President himself. But righteous words are righteous words, regardless of who speaks them or when. I just wish more people would take heed of them and recognize their value. And maybe even speak a few of them themselves.
Reagan: Ironic that in later decades he was one of the architects of our current decline. Not knowing it, of course. I suspect most of his actions were simply to reduce the taxes of people like him. I'm not sure if he'd end up as a Liz or as Romney/Collins/etc.
It is indeed sad that many institutions have been weakened and that it has come down to the law. So far, it is holding but there are issues. One are the judges appointed by Trump. Many are good, but I wonder how many are similar to Aileen Cannon. If I recall, a number of those nominated were found to be unqualified by the bar association. And there is the report about Jones Day law firm and their work to support Trump's judicial picks. This institution is certainly under attack as well.
When you look at the statistical data, crime has been on a downward trend for quite some time.
Despite that fact, people have historically believed that crime is worse now than it was before--year after year despite the downward trend.
This is (TLDR version) an artifact of the media culture that we have--accounting for political messaging as part of that media culture.
Violent crime is currently up, but is still lower than it was in the 90s. This is attributable to several factors most of which have more to do with the psychology and culture of the time (the political and cultural extremism) than with law enforcement action.
Property crime continues to go down.
The reality is that crime is not an actual issue--it is in most cases an issue of perception vice reality. Your stance on crime vis-a-vis politics isn't about crime but about (political) identity, for the most part.
There is crime, and there is violent crime. And within violent crime, there is unpreventable violent crime, and there is preventable violent crime. The epidemic of mass-shootings in this country that began with the Austin Texas shooting and has accelerated alongside the rise of easily-obtained, high-capacity, magazine-fed semi-automatic firearms leaves a lot of people feeling unsafe outside of their homes, regardless of what the odds of being in a mass-shooting in your lifetime looks like. Add a certain tolerance of political violence and violence against law enforcement into the mix and it gets worse. Then add the smart phone everyone carries in their pocket that tells them every time there is a horrifically violent crime taking place anywhere in the country--often accompanied by images and/or video--and you end up with a populace that is hyper-sensitive to lower levels of violent crime that are over-reported because the media knows our psychology and what will move the ad clicks at this point. "If it bleeds, it leads" still dominates not just TV media, but now social media as well, and Americans are MUCH more connected to their social medias than the TV news.
As always, this comes back to "it's a voter/consumer/viewer problem." We're constantly victims of our own stupidity. Society's weakest links will always hold back progress because that's what easily-manipulated stupidity does: it holds back progress. The GOP is FILLED with easily-manipulated and stupid voters who do not know how to parse good data sources from back ones. They are people who you can fuck in the ass for as long as you want so long as you whisper into their ears it's actually just a liberal and/or an immigrant fucking them in the ass, not someone from their own tribe. They will actively let you grift them so long as you lie to them and reaffirm their most insane conspiracies out loud. These are very VERY simple people.
That's a very interesting website. Take a look at reported rapes, and the high-water mark is 2018. That's very strange to me. Violent crimes were much higher in the 90s in every other category. There's no specific category for domestic violence, though. Looking at the crime clearance rate, violent crime has a 40% clearance rate but rape is counted separately (??!), and has a 30% clearance rate, I guess it not being as important as other violent crimes. In other words, crime has gone down quite a bit since the 90s as long as you factor out crimes against women.
I think that th rape numbers are a lagging indicator of sorts--in that as the culture changed, rates of reporting increased.
Because of a lot of the cultural factors around sexual crime, especially rape, it would be my thought that it is both underreported (even now) and more difficult to investigate and clear than straightforward violent crime.
Americans relying on *lawyers* to save democracy (lol) might be the most depressing thing I've ever heard. I guess we should ask ourselves which side has the best lawyers that money can buy, the government or a very very rich billionaire? Because juries are composed of very simple people, only one of whom the best lawyer money can buy needs to turn into a 1-vs-11 juror. Wealth inequality leads to inequality of education, and inequality of education leaves us with very simple jurors uncapable of saving democracy.
By allowing private citizens to become more powerful than the government through wealth-hoarding, we have at the least sold ourselves to an oligarchy through our embrace of Reaganism and wealth-worshipping, and at the worst we have let democracy fall to an oligarchy through our embrace of Reaganism and wealth-worshipping. Here we are folks, at the center of our decadence and wealth-chasing fuckin HOPING that the lawyers will save us lmfao.
You can thank the Republicans for the economic illiterates and idiots. Republicans have waged a forty year war on public education by decreasing funding and/or trying to privatize public education with charter schools user taxpayer money or voucher programs for private schools. Add in that many people are just intellectually lazy.
First, charter schools are public schools. Second, funding for public schools has soared above the inflation rate for like the last 30 years. We are not short-changing K-12 education. Not by a long shot.
Depends on the state and the district. A few months ago, I was researching what the population of a small rural school would be in a red state (Oklahoma to be exact). One thing led to another, and I was in the state's statistics for funding and what their reading/math scores for HS graduates. And over a 20 year period during which the funding for those schools went into a steep decline, the scores went from an 80+ percentile in reading/math for graduates to the 20s. I suspect that has happened in more than one state. And now we've got politicians in the states in an uproar because the textbooks had mentioned a black mathematics educator in them.
There's no fixing the lazy part. At least not without working to change our culture that glorifies those who can put a ball in a small space or those who can look pretty and or sound good on our screens.
This week's Paola Ramos's Field Report focuses on Republican Maya Flores and her Evangelical supporters. Flores is interesting because she is a former Democrat "converted" to the Republicans for religious reasons. And she flipped a traditionally Latino-dominated south Texas district from blue to red in a special election earlier this year. What makes this show poignant is Flores's sincerity, her basic decency, and her naïveté.
One of the basic ideas through Ramos's show is how many Latinos who habitually voted Democratic have come to discover that Democrats simply don't represent their values, which they define as God, family, country. The Republican Party, in their view of it, comes much closer to representing those conservative values than the Democratic Party, so why do they just mindlessly vote Democrat?
That's very powerful question to pose to Latinos who have voted for Democrats not out of conviction but out of habit. There are a lot of Latinos in Texas and elsewhere right now that are being confronted with that question, and what answer do the Democrats have for them? That they're not as mean as Republicans on immigration?
That is very weak tea compared to the need so many people feel for their politics to align with their deepest metaphysical longings. That's what explains both Meloni in Italy and Flores in Texas--there is this deep desire for a more meaningful politics, a politics that is not just about fixing bridges and paying medical bills, a politics that aligns the world down here with the world up there. Such a longing, whether on the Left or the Right, seeks a cure that is worse than the disease, but is nevertheless something that has to be understood and confronted by Democrats better than they do.
Frankly, meaningfulness is my issue, my issue exactly. Neither party aligns with some of my deepest held beliefs. But, because I am an evangelical, I believe change comes from the heart not from politics.
But, that doesn’t mean that I am not troubled even though I continue to vote for Democrats. I feel like the left despises me because of my faith and my belief children belong within marriage, for their sakes. I look with deep dismay at the amount of children born out of wedlock and raised by parents who continue in serial relationships, as the girlfriend or the boyfriend come in and out of the children’s lives. 
I am sorry you feel despised. Religious beliefs in general benefit the lives of the faithful in innumerable ways. It has greatly helped civilization move away from lawlessness and immorality. However we are now a civilization of laws & knowledge; not yet perfect, but with other tools and norms to support the kind of behaviors that keep us civilized. We don't need religious faith to know that a stable home is beneficial for the child. I think what the left doesn't like is 1) bringing church back into state, 2) People who use their faith to judge others and 3) people who use their faith to try to control others. We have good laws built around trying to be blind and treat everybody the same. This is a system that can work for everyone; attaching religion to government automatically puts people of other religions in opposition.
And please don't be offended if I ask, are you doing anything to promote publically the benefits of a stable home environment with married parents?
Oh good heavens. I think you’ve been reading too much Atwood. Stay away from binging Handmaid’s Tale. You obviously think we’re all gunning for a theocracy.
Not all, and not you. I meant the left does not despise you because of your views, the left despises Lauren Boebert, MTG, Josh Hawley, Kristy Noem and others that literally say there should be no separation of church and state. The left despises people who publically proclaim their faith in one sentence then demonstrate judgement or call for violence in the next. I may have been making a veiled case against faith and apologize for addressing you with it. Please do not restrict your interactions in places like these because of me. I was probably triggered by something else when I commented.
Thank you for your response. I admit I was tired when I responded. I try to be respectful but don’t always succeed.
Christian Nationalism and Seven Mountain Dominionism are heretical. Jesus responded, even at the time, to the agitation of His followers telling them His Kingdom was not of this world. To this day some Xns still find that perplexing.
I have the same issues with Boebert et. al. that you do. I add to it embarrassment that these politicians are considered exemplars of my faith.
Keep in mind, plenty on the left are religious. We've got just our second Catholic President right now, and that's a bit of a bounce back after four years of an atheist in office.
That said, the left is not immune in the slightest from intolerance and bigotry, but it is by no means universal. Personally I have no problem with those who believe so long as they aren't trying to push that into the realm of governing and/or are being willfully blind that theirs is just one of hundreds (thousands?) of belief systems that are out there.
Our religious convictions are central to our being, and so of course they must influence our political choices. Politics should never be a substitute for religion; it should never be a source for giving one's life meaning. You need to find that elsewhere.
The problem becomes when we think of politics as being anything more than people getting together to solve practical problems of common concern. Whenever it becomes a religious project, it usually corrupts both politics and religion.
In a civil suit he might get convicted, but in a criminal case, there is infinitely little chance that at least one of the 12 jurors wouldn’t vote to acquit.
Best way to “get Trump” is for Biden to pull a Ford and pardon Trump for any federal offenses (civil and state cases aren’t covered). Of course, there will be howls from anti-Trumpers, and he likely wouldn’t accept since it is acknowledgment of guilt. But it would make it harder to play the victim card.
Ha, on the Tom Nichols meme
I realize you mention Youngkin only in passing in the section on Cheney, but DAMN does he have presidential ambition. Which means Larry Hogan might as well resign himself to enjoying retirement.
Sure, Youngkin is going to campaign for every Republican candidate who'll let him because he's building up a horde of political IOUs. Positioning himself as the NON-asshole choice for those who don't care to choose between Trump and DeSantis as the greater asshole.
How does no one ever ask a follow up question - When stated that Republicans are under pressure to impeach Joe Biden - how is the next question for what would that be?
The stock market goes up and down; inflation is largely due to macroeconomics and (at this point, especially) world-wide issues, so I don't know how anyone (R or D) gets the credit and blame for these things. But making me a second-class citizen in my own country? Taking away my bodily autonomy? That's ALL on the Republicans, and they should pay for it.
Bodily autonomy = human rights
Just a friendly reminder that the oft-cited “kill all the lawyers” Shakespearean quip is made during a discussion of how to overthrow orderly government. In other words, how does one ensure the success of an angry mob? First, kill all the lawyers.
"Populist hostility to immigration, pro-business economic policy, support for federalism, and social conservatism on religion and cultural issues": Minus the "populist hostility," these could be components of a center/center-right political platform that is very conservative but not antidemocratic. It's the hostility that pitches the program toward the far-right. What I'm suggesting is, the trumpist and European neofascist movements have underlying pedigrees and ideologies that need to be carefully explicated to expose their unique danger to democracy.
I’m a little surprised we don’t hear the term “Liz Cheney Republican” more
A lot of articles out today on how US manufacturing has really come back, the hourly wage is up for many workers, unemployment is incredibly low, gas prices are down, & there are job openings in just about every field for college grads & non- college grads. I understand that inflation is high, but that’s a worldwide problem, not just in the US.
So why are people writing about a recession? I’m not an economist, but in my town in Maine & throughout the state, the economy seems to be humming along just fine, though we could definitely use some immigrants to fill all those Help Wanted ads in our local paper every week.
Personally, the people I talk to are more upset about the recent Supreme Court decisions & the fact that the Orange Jesus is still walking around a free man.
It is kinda the reverse of that old saying about the difference between a recession and a depression. All that good stuff you mention is happening for other people. Me, I'm in the same job where they haven't kept my pay up with inflation and the damn store shelves aren't as full as they once were and I have to wait longer in line to check out. Am I better off that I was 3 years ago? No.
Now, I'm fine, and my country is much better off than it was 4 years ago, but I try to maintain some perspective on these things and actually use that empathy concept, unlike all those who want to bitch about the economy. We just went through a once in 100 years disruption coupled with the largest war in Europe since the one that turned the world upside down. That we're making it through so far with a little chop in the water should be celebrated.
This^^ exactly.
I live in Texas - you there driving a big-ass truck to the packed restaurant of your choice - I don't really want to hear you bitching about the cost of gas or food.
Somehow, they just put the pandemic and the war in Ukraine out of their mind? God, if we lose democracy and freedom, we never fucking deerved it.
We've mostly forgotten about the pandemic. The vaccinated are vaxxed and done and those who aren't vaccinated are going to cling to their stubborn notion that it was never a big deal. Never mind the million deaths so far (a hit to the labor force - 262K working age deaths so far) and the ~2K deaths a day that are still ongoing. Never mind the disruptions to the rest of the world through their dealing with it.
As for Ukraine, well that's a war in a place people couldn't have located on a map before it started, and we're Americans, we aren't affected by such things!
Last election I had good results with polls. I just added 4 points to GOP in every swing state except out west as I don’t have a feel for AZ or NV. I picked every state except got burned on GA. I don’t know why pollsters don’t give this spread.
"But here we are; this is what we got. The legal system may be our last line of defense, and that's a shame."
That is more than a shame. More than sad. That is frightening when one considers that there are people in that system such as U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. So, what else have we got?
Well, we've got Liz Cheney, who's become the prima facie example of why there's nothing inherently wrong or *evil* with being a conservative or a Republican if, while being those things, one steadfastly refuses to cross the red line into lip service to the Constitution, the rule of law and to our liberal democratic institutions and processes in the pursuit of political power or personal gain. That so many of her fellow conservatives and Republicans have crossed that line - or have failed to raise so much as a whisper to denounce and object to those who have - is the root cause of her now being so much in the limelight, and the reason we now must contemplate 'lawyers' as our last line of defense in this fight to 'save democracy' in our country. And as robust as her efforts are in that endeavor, Liz ain't gonna' be able to do it by herself. So, what else do we have?
Ourselves. Which is where the ultimate responsibility for the preservation of what we hold dear in our country is vested. And we should be contemplating our own roles as individuals in being that last line of defense for that which we hold so dear.
Don't ask me what *you* can do. I don't know. I know we all want answers to that question, but I don't have them. I can only speak to what I can do. Which is vote, of course. But also, I can take inspiration from Lincoln's words. And add resolve from Cheney's example to my determination to look for any opportunity to stand up for 'what's right' as I go about my daily life, be that in how I respond to a neighbor or co-worker promulgating the lies and deceit that have led us to where we now find ourselves, or donating money to a candidate who's worthy of representing me and the ideals that our country is supposed to stand for in our halls of government, or simply by speaking or behaving in a way toward someone of a different political outlook that shows them *I* am not their enemy, that their true enemy is to be found elsewhere.
These things I can do. And I will do them, along with anything else I can conjure. Beyond that, I can only suggest that we all contemplate the words of a former President of our country, which I heard as a child. And set aside all partisan bias and take them at face value. And hopefully adopt them as our own:
"In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from the responsibility. I welcome it."
I had to look it up - said by a Democrat John F Kennedy. Anyone think an R since Reagan would say, let alone believe, that?
I left the attribution out on purpose, in keeping with my remark about setting aside bias and taking those words at face value. But props for looking them up.
Different time, different circumstances...the cold war was flirting with going hot, and almost did soon after Kennedy spoke those words, as those of us like you and me who were around back then would soon witness. And Kennedy was very good at speaking publicly and had great speech writers. Still, your point is a good one. And I can't imagine something as powerfully straight forward and clear as this along with "Ask not..." coming from the lips of any pol of any stripe since then, and especially now.
Speaking of Reagan... “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
Interesting that he spoke those words not long after Kennedy's death and long before he became President himself. But righteous words are righteous words, regardless of who speaks them or when. I just wish more people would take heed of them and recognize their value. And maybe even speak a few of them themselves.
Reagan: Ironic that in later decades he was one of the architects of our current decline. Not knowing it, of course. I suspect most of his actions were simply to reduce the taxes of people like him. I'm not sure if he'd end up as a Liz or as Romney/Collins/etc.
Hard to say. But he's gone. We're still here. And I hope it ends up being us and not the lawyers who ultimately determine where we all go next. :-)
It is indeed sad that many institutions have been weakened and that it has come down to the law. So far, it is holding but there are issues. One are the judges appointed by Trump. Many are good, but I wonder how many are similar to Aileen Cannon. If I recall, a number of those nominated were found to be unqualified by the bar association. And there is the report about Jones Day law firm and their work to support Trump's judicial picks. This institution is certainly under attack as well.
When you look at the statistical data, crime has been on a downward trend for quite some time.
Despite that fact, people have historically believed that crime is worse now than it was before--year after year despite the downward trend.
This is (TLDR version) an artifact of the media culture that we have--accounting for political messaging as part of that media culture.
Violent crime is currently up, but is still lower than it was in the 90s. This is attributable to several factors most of which have more to do with the psychology and culture of the time (the political and cultural extremism) than with law enforcement action.
Property crime continues to go down.
The reality is that crime is not an actual issue--it is in most cases an issue of perception vice reality. Your stance on crime vis-a-vis politics isn't about crime but about (political) identity, for the most part.
https://www.statista.com/topics/2153/crime-in-the-united-states/#topicHeader__wrapper
There is crime, and there is violent crime. And within violent crime, there is unpreventable violent crime, and there is preventable violent crime. The epidemic of mass-shootings in this country that began with the Austin Texas shooting and has accelerated alongside the rise of easily-obtained, high-capacity, magazine-fed semi-automatic firearms leaves a lot of people feeling unsafe outside of their homes, regardless of what the odds of being in a mass-shooting in your lifetime looks like. Add a certain tolerance of political violence and violence against law enforcement into the mix and it gets worse. Then add the smart phone everyone carries in their pocket that tells them every time there is a horrifically violent crime taking place anywhere in the country--often accompanied by images and/or video--and you end up with a populace that is hyper-sensitive to lower levels of violent crime that are over-reported because the media knows our psychology and what will move the ad clicks at this point. "If it bleeds, it leads" still dominates not just TV media, but now social media as well, and Americans are MUCH more connected to their social medias than the TV news.
As always, this comes back to "it's a voter/consumer/viewer problem." We're constantly victims of our own stupidity. Society's weakest links will always hold back progress because that's what easily-manipulated stupidity does: it holds back progress. The GOP is FILLED with easily-manipulated and stupid voters who do not know how to parse good data sources from back ones. They are people who you can fuck in the ass for as long as you want so long as you whisper into their ears it's actually just a liberal and/or an immigrant fucking them in the ass, not someone from their own tribe. They will actively let you grift them so long as you lie to them and reaffirm their most insane conspiracies out loud. These are very VERY simple people.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know… morons."
Gotta love a Mel Brooks quote
That's a very interesting website. Take a look at reported rapes, and the high-water mark is 2018. That's very strange to me. Violent crimes were much higher in the 90s in every other category. There's no specific category for domestic violence, though. Looking at the crime clearance rate, violent crime has a 40% clearance rate but rape is counted separately (??!), and has a 30% clearance rate, I guess it not being as important as other violent crimes. In other words, crime has gone down quite a bit since the 90s as long as you factor out crimes against women.
I think that th rape numbers are a lagging indicator of sorts--in that as the culture changed, rates of reporting increased.
Because of a lot of the cultural factors around sexual crime, especially rape, it would be my thought that it is both underreported (even now) and more difficult to investigate and clear than straightforward violent crime.
I think you may be seeing an increase in reporting in recent years.
I don't know if a straight line can be drawn between clearance and importance.
One point completely unspoken is that crime is worse in the red states/cities per capita than in the blue states.
But, but, but Chicago!!!
And if those education deprived folks would bother looking it up, Chicago is # 20 in per capita violent crime rates. https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/most-violent-cities-in-america. Most of the others are red areas (Anchorage is higher? Wow.)
It's because of the higher gun ownership rates, higher rates of poverty, and lower rates of people seeing psychologists in those red states.
Americans relying on *lawyers* to save democracy (lol) might be the most depressing thing I've ever heard. I guess we should ask ourselves which side has the best lawyers that money can buy, the government or a very very rich billionaire? Because juries are composed of very simple people, only one of whom the best lawyer money can buy needs to turn into a 1-vs-11 juror. Wealth inequality leads to inequality of education, and inequality of education leaves us with very simple jurors uncapable of saving democracy.
By allowing private citizens to become more powerful than the government through wealth-hoarding, we have at the least sold ourselves to an oligarchy through our embrace of Reaganism and wealth-worshipping, and at the worst we have let democracy fall to an oligarchy through our embrace of Reaganism and wealth-worshipping. Here we are folks, at the center of our decadence and wealth-chasing fuckin HOPING that the lawyers will save us lmfao.
You can thank the Republicans for the economic illiterates and idiots. Republicans have waged a forty year war on public education by decreasing funding and/or trying to privatize public education with charter schools user taxpayer money or voucher programs for private schools. Add in that many people are just intellectually lazy.
First, charter schools are public schools. Second, funding for public schools has soared above the inflation rate for like the last 30 years. We are not short-changing K-12 education. Not by a long shot.
Depends on the state and the district. A few months ago, I was researching what the population of a small rural school would be in a red state (Oklahoma to be exact). One thing led to another, and I was in the state's statistics for funding and what their reading/math scores for HS graduates. And over a 20 year period during which the funding for those schools went into a steep decline, the scores went from an 80+ percentile in reading/math for graduates to the 20s. I suspect that has happened in more than one state. And now we've got politicians in the states in an uproar because the textbooks had mentioned a black mathematics educator in them.
Add in Twitter and the media that reduces thinking to sound bites only.
There's no fixing the lazy part. At least not without working to change our culture that glorifies those who can put a ball in a small space or those who can look pretty and or sound good on our screens.
This week's Paola Ramos's Field Report focuses on Republican Maya Flores and her Evangelical supporters. Flores is interesting because she is a former Democrat "converted" to the Republicans for religious reasons. And she flipped a traditionally Latino-dominated south Texas district from blue to red in a special election earlier this year. What makes this show poignant is Flores's sincerity, her basic decency, and her naïveté.
One of the basic ideas through Ramos's show is how many Latinos who habitually voted Democratic have come to discover that Democrats simply don't represent their values, which they define as God, family, country. The Republican Party, in their view of it, comes much closer to representing those conservative values than the Democratic Party, so why do they just mindlessly vote Democrat?
That's very powerful question to pose to Latinos who have voted for Democrats not out of conviction but out of habit. There are a lot of Latinos in Texas and elsewhere right now that are being confronted with that question, and what answer do the Democrats have for them? That they're not as mean as Republicans on immigration?
That is very weak tea compared to the need so many people feel for their politics to align with their deepest metaphysical longings. That's what explains both Meloni in Italy and Flores in Texas--there is this deep desire for a more meaningful politics, a politics that is not just about fixing bridges and paying medical bills, a politics that aligns the world down here with the world up there. Such a longing, whether on the Left or the Right, seeks a cure that is worse than the disease, but is nevertheless something that has to be understood and confronted by Democrats better than they do.
Frankly, meaningfulness is my issue, my issue exactly. Neither party aligns with some of my deepest held beliefs. But, because I am an evangelical, I believe change comes from the heart not from politics.
But, that doesn’t mean that I am not troubled even though I continue to vote for Democrats. I feel like the left despises me because of my faith and my belief children belong within marriage, for their sakes. I look with deep dismay at the amount of children born out of wedlock and raised by parents who continue in serial relationships, as the girlfriend or the boyfriend come in and out of the children’s lives. 
I am sorry you feel despised. Religious beliefs in general benefit the lives of the faithful in innumerable ways. It has greatly helped civilization move away from lawlessness and immorality. However we are now a civilization of laws & knowledge; not yet perfect, but with other tools and norms to support the kind of behaviors that keep us civilized. We don't need religious faith to know that a stable home is beneficial for the child. I think what the left doesn't like is 1) bringing church back into state, 2) People who use their faith to judge others and 3) people who use their faith to try to control others. We have good laws built around trying to be blind and treat everybody the same. This is a system that can work for everyone; attaching religion to government automatically puts people of other religions in opposition.
And please don't be offended if I ask, are you doing anything to promote publically the benefits of a stable home environment with married parents?
Oh good heavens. I think you’ve been reading too much Atwood. Stay away from binging Handmaid’s Tale. You obviously think we’re all gunning for a theocracy.
Not all, and not you. I meant the left does not despise you because of your views, the left despises Lauren Boebert, MTG, Josh Hawley, Kristy Noem and others that literally say there should be no separation of church and state. The left despises people who publically proclaim their faith in one sentence then demonstrate judgement or call for violence in the next. I may have been making a veiled case against faith and apologize for addressing you with it. Please do not restrict your interactions in places like these because of me. I was probably triggered by something else when I commented.
Thank you for your response. I admit I was tired when I responded. I try to be respectful but don’t always succeed.
Christian Nationalism and Seven Mountain Dominionism are heretical. Jesus responded, even at the time, to the agitation of His followers telling them His Kingdom was not of this world. To this day some Xns still find that perplexing.
I have the same issues with Boebert et. al. that you do. I add to it embarrassment that these politicians are considered exemplars of my faith.
Keep in mind, plenty on the left are religious. We've got just our second Catholic President right now, and that's a bit of a bounce back after four years of an atheist in office.
That said, the left is not immune in the slightest from intolerance and bigotry, but it is by no means universal. Personally I have no problem with those who believe so long as they aren't trying to push that into the realm of governing and/or are being willfully blind that theirs is just one of hundreds (thousands?) of belief systems that are out there.
I know! I keep saying so. I keep saying that our president, this president, is surely more Christian than the last one. 
You and me both, sister, only I no longer call myself an evangelical.
Our religious convictions are central to our being, and so of course they must influence our political choices. Politics should never be a substitute for religion; it should never be a source for giving one's life meaning. You need to find that elsewhere.
The problem becomes when we think of politics as being anything more than people getting together to solve practical problems of common concern. Whenever it becomes a religious project, it usually corrupts both politics and religion.