Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Trump Presidency – 2016 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=92014)

CrimsonFox 04-08-2020 08:31 AM

I went digging for more info on the Wisconsin thing as I was really confused about who did what and when and I found this political analyst on facebook spelling it out:

Quote:

Heather Cox Richardson
Yesterday at 3:47 AM ·
April 6, 2020 (Monday)

There is complicated news about voter suppression tonight out of Wisconsin. It has overridden today's news of the extraordinary outburst of Trump’s acting Secretary of the Navy, Thomas Modly, who flew almost 8000 miles to Guam to harangue the sailors from the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

I'll cover the Mobly story later in the week, but for tonight, Wisconsin.

There is a crucial election there tomorrow that landed tonight at the US Supreme Court. The backstory is that in 2010, thanks to REDMAP the Republican Redistricting Majority Project I wrote about on Saturday, the Wisconsin legislature was controlled by Republicans. They worked to guarantee their control, gerrymandering the state so effectively in 2011 that in the 2012 elections, Republicans lost a majority of voters, but took 60% of the seats in the legislature. (They won only 48.6% of the votes, but took 61% of the seats.)

With this power, they promptly passed a strict voter-ID law that reduced black and Latino voting, resulting in 200,000 fewer voters in 2016 than had voted in 2012. (Remember, Wisconsin is a key battleground state, and Trump won it in 2016 by fewer than 23,000 votes.)

Now, there is a move afoot to purge about 240,000 more voters from the rolls, thanks to the old system called “voter caging.” The state sent letters to registered voters, largely in districts that voted Democratic in 2016, and those who did not respond to the letters have been removed from the voter rolls on the argument that the fact they didn't respond to the letters must mean they have moved. Initially, the purge was supposed to happen in 2021, after the election, but a conservative group sued to remove them earlier and a conservative state judge, Paul V. Malloy ordered it done. Malloy’s decision has been appealed to the Wisconsin state supreme court, which has deadlocked over the issue by a vote of 3-3.

On tomorrow’s ballot is a contest for a seat on that court. The Republicans desperately want to reelect their candidate, Justice Daniel Kelly, who recused himself from the voter purge vote pending the election. Trump has endorsed Kelly, who will uphold the purge if he is reelected. Before the pandemic, observers thought Kelly’s opponent had a good chance of unseating him because of expected high turnout among Democrats. But now, of course, all bets are off, especially since the Democratic strongholds in the state are in the cities, where the residents are hunkered down.

The election was originally scheduled for tomorrow, but the pandemic has gummed up the works. A stay-at-home order went into effect in the state on March 25, and more than a million voters have requested absentee ballots. But this huge surge means the state is running behind and hasn’t been able to deliver the ballots. Meanwhile, roughly 7000 poll workers, who are volunteers and often elderly, have said they would not come manage the election, so a large number of polls can’t open. The city of Milwaukee, whose 600,000 people normally would have 180 polling places, will have five. Milwaukee tends to vote Democratic.

Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, a Democrat, tried to get the Republican-dominated legislature to postpone the election or to mail ballots to all voters for a May 26 election deadline, but it refused. Over the weekend, the mayors of Wisconsin’s ten biggest cities urged the state’s top health official, Andrea Palm, to “step up” and use her emergency powers to replace in-person voting with mail-in voting, as Ohio did when faced with a similar problem. On Monday, Evers signed an executive order postponing the election until June 9—something even he was unsure he had the power to do, but he said he felt he had to try to keep people safe-- but Republicans challenged the order and the Republican-dominated state Supreme Court blocked it.

Last Thursday, a federal judge permitted absentee ballots to be counted in the election so long as they arrived back to election officials by April 13, but Republicans immediately challenged the decision. Tonight, in a 5-4 decision, the US. Supreme Court refused to permit this extension of time for the state to receive absentee ballots, arguing (apparently without any self-awareness) that the federal judge made a mistake by changing the rules of an election so close to its date. This means that absentee ballots have to be postmarked tomorrow, even if the voter hasn't gotten one by then.

The court insisted that the issue in the decision was quite narrow, and had nothing to do with the larger question of the right to vote. The four dissenting justices cried foul.

Writing for the four other judges in dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg wrote that “the court’s order, I fear, will result in massive disenfranchisement.” “The majority of this Court declares that this case presents a “narrow, technical question”…. That is wrong. The question here is whether tens of thousands of Wisconsin citizens can vote safely in the midst of a pandemic. Under the District Court’s order, they would be able to do so. Even if they receive their absentee ballot in the days immediately following election day, they could return it. With the majority’s stay in place, that will not be possible. Either they will have to brave the polls, endangering their own and others’ safety, or they will lose their right to vote, through no fault of their own. That is a matter of utmost importance—to the constitutional rights of Wisconsin’s citizens, the integrity of the State’s election process, and in this most extraordinary time, the health of the Nation.”

The New York Times editorial board echoed Ginsburg, warning that what is happening in Wisconsin, where Republicans are trying to use the pandemic to steal an election, could happen nationally in 2020. This is why Democrats tried to get robust election funding in the $2.2 trillion coronavirus bill to bolster mail-in ballots, and why Trump said: “The things they had in there were crazy, they had things, levels of voting that if you ever agreed to, you would never have another Republican elected in this country again.”

This crisis in Wisconsin has national implications. The reelection of Kelly will likely mean Wisconsin loses another 240,000 voters, most of them Democrats. This will increase Trump's chances of winning the state in 2020, and Wisconsin is likely key to a victory in the Electoral College.

This is why I watch the minutia of politics so carefully. It's hard to imagine that the election of a state judge in Wisconsin matters to our nation of fifty states and 330 million people, but it does. Oh, boy, does it.

--

Also available as a free newsletter at heathercoxrichardson.substack.com.

NobodyHere 04-08-2020 10:44 AM

Pelosi, Schumer call for another $500B-plus as part of ‘interim’ coronavirus relief bill

How many stimulus packages to do we need? We haven't even spent the first one yet and Trump has decided that no accountability is needed on how the money is spent.

The one thing that gets bipartisan support nowadays is spending lots of money.

I really wish someone cared about the debt.

JPhillips 04-08-2020 11:25 AM

The Dems need to say no to anything unless it includes better oversight and voting protections.

sterlingice 04-08-2020 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3273992)
The Dems need to say no to anything unless it includes better oversight and voting protections.


If they don't, they're complicit.

SI

JPhillips 04-08-2020 11:38 AM



This attitude will guarantee we're back to mass isolations in a month or two.

whomario 04-08-2020 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3274006)


This attitude will guarantee we're back to mass isolations in a month or two.


Fits with this:

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/cor...-self-isolate/
I think that is insanely premature if actually aplied oitside critical jobs (and by that i mean healthcare and food production)

Is it really that costly if people stay home 10 business days versus sending the more likely candidates for being infected back into contact with people ? Even if they follow the guidelines and execute properly (wearing a mask all day and not screw up is tricky) they are hardly foolproof. Especially with the Masks unlikely to be 'the good stuff' and presumably their colleagues not wearing one.

Just seems weird to put a muzzle on the fox and sending him into the hen house is still inherently more risky than kepping him away.

Wonder if Fauci/Birks agree/support this or had to essentially concede it with even worse ideas on the table.

albionmoonlight 04-08-2020 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whomario (Post 3274008)
Fits with this:

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/cor...-self-isolate/
I think that is insanely premature if actually aplied oitside critical jobs (and by that i mean healthcare and food production)

Is it really that costly if people stay home 10 business days versus sending the more likely candidates for being infected back into contact with people ? Even if they follow the guidelines and execute properly (wearing a mask all day and not screw up is tricky) they are hardly foolproof. Especially with the Masks unlikely to be 'the good stuff' and presumably their colleagues not wearing one.

Just seems weird to put a muzzle on the fox and sending him into the hen house is still inherently more risky than kepping him away.

Wonder if Fauci/Birks agree/support this or had to essentially concede it with even worse ideas on the table.


Quote:

Under the new guidance, people who are exposed to someone infected would be allowed back on the job if they are asymptomatic, test their temperature twice a day and wear a face mask, a person familiar with the proposal under consideration told The Associated Press. The person described the proposal on the condition of anonymity because the draft had not been finalized.

GIVE US TESTS YOU IGNORANT FUCKS!

This thing passes when people are asymptomatic. Taking temperatures makes as much sense as asking someone if they've been to Wuhan.

You want us back to work? You want things back to normal? You want the GDP growing again? Guess what? SO DO WE. We just aren't willing to kill our parents (who are your voters by the way) to do it.

Spend 1% of the time and effort you spend yelling at reporters getting us tests AND WE WILL--EAGERLY--GET BACK TO WORK.

albionmoonlight 04-08-2020 03:12 PM

dola:

I'll get off this in a second b/c I could talk about it until the heat death of the universe, and I know that I'm not convincing anyone of anything.

But, I mean, they know what they have to do to get what they want. And they are so allergic to actually doing the right thing that they aren't doing it. They would rather not get what they want if getting what they want means having to admit that scientists are correct.

Atocep 04-08-2020 03:24 PM

We have Ammon Bundy back in the news out here. He's encouraging residents to reopen their businesses and trying to get a 1,000+ person Easter service organized in defiance of state orders while promising armed protection against government overreach.

Kodos 04-08-2020 03:47 PM

These people drive me nuts. Stop being part of the problem!

Brian Swartz 04-08-2020 03:54 PM

The testing thing is actually happening now, unless i'm missing something. The way I'm reading the numbers, we're up to the point that only a handful of nations worldwide are testing in higher numbers than we are on a population-adjusted basis. It's also continuing to go up. Was less than 140k daily a few days ago, up to 160k yesterday and should be about that much at least today - though I think we're close to the lab capacity limit so in the short term I don't think we can go a lot higher.

That's not excusing the screwups and inaction earlier in the process, I'm just saying it really is happening now, unless I've missed something.

albionmoonlight 04-08-2020 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3274036)
The testing thing is actually happening now, unless i'm missing something. The way I'm reading the numbers, we're up to the point that only a handful of nations worldwide are testing in higher numbers than we are on a population-adjusted basis. It's also continuing to go up. Was less than 140k daily a few days ago, up to 160k yesterday and should be about that much at least today - though I think we're close to the lab capacity limit so in the short term I don't think we can go a lot higher.

That's not excusing the screwups and inaction earlier in the process, I'm just saying it really is happening now, unless I've missed something.


I hope you are right.

Widely available testing (not taking temperatures) will be the way we get out of this before a vaccine.

whomario 04-08-2020 04:20 PM

Put an answer in the other thread, seems to fit better there :)

RainMaker 04-08-2020 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whomario (Post 3274008)
Fits with this:

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/cor...-self-isolate/
I think that is insanely premature if actually aplied oitside critical jobs (and by that i mean healthcare and food production)

Is it really that costly if people stay home 10 business days versus sending the more likely candidates for being infected back into contact with people ? Even if they follow the guidelines and execute properly (wearing a mask all day and not screw up is tricky) they are hardly foolproof. Especially with the Masks unlikely to be 'the good stuff' and presumably their colleagues not wearing one.

Just seems weird to put a muzzle on the fox and sending him into the hen house is still inherently more risky than kepping him away.

Wonder if Fauci/Birks agree/support this or had to essentially concede it with even worse ideas on the table.


They can't even get health care workers masks, how are they going to get the work force masks?

Fidatelo 04-08-2020 05:09 PM

I don't see how testing helps until we are at the point of being able to test everyone at once/repeatedly. Just because I passed the test yesterday doesn't mean I didn't contract it today.

molson 04-08-2020 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 3274050)
They can't even get health care workers masks, how are they going to get the work force masks?


The CDC is advocating home-made masks. My girlfriend sewed about 10 last night for friends and co-workers. I have no idea how much it helps, but that is the official advice and what some businesses are requiring.

cuervo72 04-08-2020 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fidatelo (Post 3274063)
I don't see how testing helps until we are at the point of being able to test everyone at once/repeatedly. Just because I passed the test yesterday doesn't mean I didn't contract it today.


Yep. My wife is a nurse (thankfully working at a NICU, which should carry a somewhat lesser risk) and has tested negative, but she's been back to work again since, so who knows?

The only tests which are of any use in my mind are a) positive tests, or b) positive antibody tests.

Jas_lov 04-08-2020 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fidatelo (Post 3274063)
I don't see how testing helps until we are at the point of being able to test everyone at once/repeatedly. Just because I passed the test yesterday doesn't mean I didn't contract it today.


This was my thought as well. Every morning you go into work your employer tests you. If youre positive you go home and isolate for 14 days. If you're negative you stay at work and if you leave and come back you have to get tested again. Schools, sporting events, concerts, restaurants would also test when you come in.

whomario 04-08-2020 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3274064)
The CDC is advocating home-made masks. My girlfriend sewed about 10 last night for friends and co-workers. I have no idea how much it helps, but that is the official advice and what some businesses are requiring.


Only really helps if everybody wears them and does so diligently/properly (change when wet, washing hot after every use, not pulling down all the time to drink, not constantly touching the cloth etc) even then no substitute for practicing social distancing. Essentially an extra layer of protection, but not if you then end up sitting bunched up in Meetings or huddled over a worktable like before the Virus.

Brian Swartz 04-08-2020 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fidatelo
I don't see how testing helps until we are at the point of being able to test everyone at once/repeatedly. Just because I passed the test yesterday doesn't mean I didn't contract it today.


Nobody is ever going to be able to test that much, unless much better (faster and more accurate) tests show up. It still helps to isolate those you know for sure have it, esp. once we get past the peak in terms of hospital capacity. Those people then don't spread it around as much, etc.

JPhillips 04-09-2020 08:59 AM

Art Laffer is being considered to chair some sort of reopening committee. His ideas so far include taxing non-profits and cutting the salaries of public workers and college professors, and then something something with the money.

Seriously, that's his plan.

tarcone 04-09-2020 09:31 AM

Thats terrible. Our Governor cut spending to higher education a couple weeks ago because of budget short falls. And then they feds want to tax them? AMd public workers? Wow, F the middle class. Once again carrying the burden.

Why not tax the damn rich.

sterlingice 04-09-2020 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3274123)
Art Laffer is being considered to chair some sort of reopening committee. His ideas so far include taxing non-profits and cutting the salaries of public workers and college professors, and then something something with the money.

Seriously, that's his plan.


"But I'm not voting because Joe Biden would be just as bad or somesuch"

SI

NobodyHere 04-09-2020 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarcone (Post 3274124)
Thats terrible. Our Governor cut spending to higher education a couple weeks ago because of budget short falls. And then they feds want to tax them? AMd public workers? Wow, F the middle class. Once again carrying the burden.

Why not tax the damn rich.


Aren't you a conservative Trump supporter? And you're asking why they aren't proposing to tax the rich?

tarcone 04-09-2020 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3274126)
Aren't you a conservative Trump supporter? And you're asking why they aren't proposing to tax the rich?


You must not pay attention.

Not either of those things. Independent, with a leaning towards things that affect me. For example, Im for M4A. Absolutely think it is a must. Anti-big corp, they get a free pass all the time. Pro 2nd amendment, I believe in gun rights and think all should have the right to own a gun.

Many issues I go left or right. I do not shoe horn myself into a party and just blindly pull a lever. I think for myself. I, also, believe there should be a multiple party system in this country, because both these parties are the exact same.

albionmoonlight 04-09-2020 10:40 AM

Has anyone checked to see if spontaneous spinal growth is a side effect of Corona?

Congressional Dems again refusing to roll over and vote for a "Everything the GOP wants and nothing you want" bill from McConnell/Trump.

This is some through the looking glass shit.

Big holdup seems to be that Trump/GOP is refusing to include money for states/localities and hospitals as part of the increased business relief being proposed.

NobodyHere 04-09-2020 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3274132)
Has anyone checked to see if spontaneous spinal growth is a side effect of Corona?

Congressional Dems again refusing to roll over and vote for a "Everything the GOP wants and nothing you want" bill from McConnell/Trump.

This is some through the looking glass shit.

Big holdup seems to be that Trump/GOP is refusing to include money for states/localities and hospitals as part of the increased business relief being proposed.


While I may not agree with Tarcone in saying both parties are the same, I think the bill will pass once the parties agree that they both get to spend a lot of money.

panerd 04-09-2020 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarcone (Post 3274124)
Thats terrible. Our Governor cut spending to higher education a couple weeks ago because of budget short falls. And then they feds want to tax them? AMd public workers? Wow, F the middle class. Once again carrying the burden.

Why not tax the damn rich.


In defense of our governor they can't just "release" 2 trillion dollars on a whim to cover costs like the feds they actually have to balance the budget. Now of course they could find other revenue streams though I doubt higher taxes will go over with anyone.

whomario 04-09-2020 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3274132)
Has anyone checked to see if spontaneous spinal growth is a side effect of Corona?

Congressional Dems again refusing to roll over and vote for a "Everything the GOP wants and nothing you want" bill from McConnell/Trump.

This is some through the looking glass shit.

Big holdup seems to be that Trump/GOP is refusing to include money for states/localities and hospitals as part of the increased business relief being proposed.


:lol:

Great idea, no way that has ramifications down the line !

Hospitals are bound to run up huge losses during this, both those hard hit and those preparing like they should by cutting elective (and often lucrative) procedures.

And this whole "unemployment can't be incentivised" thinking from that Laffer guy is so damn ancient even outside a crisis situation ... If the US would consider joining the Rest of the major western nations in the 21st century, they are saving you a seat.

JPhillips 04-09-2020 11:26 AM

Who is the first Fox person or right-wing radio host to come out and say that COVID killing minorities is actually a good thing?

Radii 04-09-2020 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whomario (Post 3274138)
And this whole "unemployment can't be incentivised" thinking from that Laffer guy is so damn ancient even outside a crisis situation ... If the US would consider joining the Rest of the major western nations in the 21st century, they are saving you a seat.


No way man. We're better than the rest of the world, and we're bigger too, so everything that other countries have done is irrelevant. It just wouldn't work here/is socialism/no reason, just fuck the people - take your pick.

Also the 21st century is scary. We really, really liked the 1950s over here, those are the "good old days", back when women were in the kitchen and far fewer people raised a stink when you killed black people who got in the way of things. Come to think of it, the 1850s were even better, but, well, best not say that in too straight forward a manner.

I. J. Reilly 04-09-2020 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3274141)
Who is the first Fox person or right-wing radio host to come out and say that COVID killing minorities is actually a good thing?


Donald Trump

BYU 14 04-09-2020 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarcone (Post 3274131)
You must not pay attention.

Not either of those things. Independent, with a leaning towards things that affect me. For example, Im for M4A. Absolutely think it is a must. Anti-big corp, they get a free pass all the time. Pro 2nd amendment, I believe in gun rights and think all should have the right to own a gun.

Many issues I go left or right. I do not shoe horn myself into a party and just blindly pull a lever. I think for myself. I, also, believe there should be a multiple party system in this country, because both these parties are the exact same.


Much like me, though I lean left, and as far as the bolded part, no truer words have ever been spoken. We need a LOT more moderates in government because despite what many seem to believe, you can support a woman's right to choose, legal marijuana, the second amendment and a strong military at the same time.

ISiddiqui 04-09-2020 12:41 PM

The only real way to get a multi party system in the US is to go to a Parliamentary system, at least in one house. Otherwise, the consequences of taking votes from one of the big coalition parties is way too risky.

Ryche 04-09-2020 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui (Post 3274154)
The only real way to get a multi party system in the US is to go to a Parliamentary system, at least in one house. Otherwise, the consequences of taking votes from one of the big coalition parties is way too risky.


Or Ranked Voting everywhere.

NobodyHere 04-09-2020 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryche (Post 3274174)
Or Ranked Voting everywhere.


this

Radii 04-09-2020 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryche (Post 3274174)
Or Ranked Voting everywhere.


Yes please.

albionmoonlight 04-09-2020 03:11 PM

Some structural changes that I think would help:

(1) Enshrine 9 Supreme Court justices in the Constitution. They serve 18 year terms. Every 4-year Presidential administration gets to pick two. If one dies/retires during her term, then you can nominate a replacement, but only for the length of that term.

(2) As the population increases, we get more reps. As each member of the House has to represent more and more people, they get less and less attuned to the people they are supposed to be representing and instead simply become pawns of the national parties. Making more of them would keep them more grounded.

(3) The Senate retains the filibuster, but in drastically changed form. If 41 or more senators want to "filibuster" something, that means that they can delay it for 60 days--during which time they can flood the airways with ads arguing against the proposed law. But, after that time, the legislation can be voted on.

(4) We still average 2 senators per state. But the 1/3 least-populated states get 1 senator, and the 1/3 most populated get 3.

(5) Fix Gerrymandering (I'd adopt a mathematical model like the shortest splitline algorithm, or the minimum district to convex polygon ratio, but there are several solutions to the problem)

(6) Put lots of money into elections--the major parties (defined as having received >X% of votes in the last election) are each given public money to spend on federal races. This would diminish the value of additional money given by big donors. That avoids campaign finance restrictions being struck down on First Amendment grounds.

(7) Ranked Voting.

(8) Vote by mail mandatory in all 50 states.

(9) No felon disenfranchisement.

(10) Current prisoners are allowed to vote--their votes count for the address at which they lived before they were imprisoned. That is also where they are counted as living for census/apportionment purposes.

ISiddiqui 04-09-2020 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryche (Post 3274174)
Or Ranked Voting everywhere.


I would argue that ranked voting probably would just lead to the same 2 party system in the end.

RainMaker 04-09-2020 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3274123)
Art Laffer is being considered to chair some sort of reopening committee. His ideas so far include taxing non-profits and cutting the salaries of public workers and college professors, and then something something with the money.

Seriously, that's his plan.


The dumbest country continues to put the dumbest people in charge of things.

Brian Swartz 04-09-2020 04:28 PM

Yep, because nothing says dumb like a PhD in economics from Stanford.

Edward64 04-09-2020 04:47 PM

It's always a con(spiracy) on this forum.

bronconick 04-09-2020 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3274123)
Art Laffer is being considered to chair some sort of reopening committee. His ideas so far include taxing non-profits and cutting the salaries of public workers and college professors, and then something something with the money.

Seriously, that's his plan.


Was the napkin not available for the job?

RainMaker 04-09-2020 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3274191)
Yep, because nothing says dumb like a PhD in economics from Stanford.


He's a failed economist who has the power to turn anything to shit that he touches. His last foray into politics was as a lead economic adviser to Sam Brownback in Kansas. The governor who practically destroyed the state with his moronic economic policies.

Only people with a vested interested in his policies (wealthy people who want a tax cut) or incredibly stupid people take him seriously.

QuikSand 04-09-2020 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bronconick (Post 3274197)
Was the napkin not available for the job?


strong

QuikSand 04-09-2020 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker (Post 3274209)
...incredibly stupid people take him seriously.


And here we are.

whomario 04-09-2020 07:30 PM

It is really good fortune that the most important tool available now (testing) is quantifiable. Gives Trump him the chance to claim to have "the most" of something.

Brian Swartz 04-09-2020 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RainMaker
He's a failed economist who has the power to turn anything to shit that he touches. His last foray into politics was as a lead economic adviser to Sam Brownback in Kansas. The governor who practically destroyed the state with his moronic economic policies.


I'm not saying you should like him. I'm saying you don't accomplish what Laffer has by being dumb - he demonstrably isn't. I don't get why we have to exaggerate and/or flat make up flaws about people who have plenty of legit things to criticize them for.

Meanwhile, I now state for the record that I am in the category herein described as 'incredibly stupid'. Incidentally that would be a surprise to people who know me, but beyond that anybody accomplished at this level is worth taking seriously. I don't care who they've worked for or whether they are to the left of Krugman or the right of Friedman by a zillion miles, the relevant point is their qualifications and what it takes to achieve those. I.e., the average joe down at the pub doesn't have the mental capacity.

RainMaker 04-09-2020 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3274220)
I'm not saying you should like him. I'm saying you don't accomplish what Laffer has by being dumb - he demonstrably isn't. I don't get why we have to exaggerate and/or flat make up flaws about people who have plenty of legit things to criticize them for.


https://medium.com/incerto/the-intel...t-13211e2d0577

RainMaker 04-09-2020 07:36 PM

Also read Skin in the Game. Great book.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.