mtutiger

Because he's a party man who would like his party to win more elections in a state that, result aside, is still tough for Rs to win these days. Also, regarding the power grab comments, he still has a Dem Senate to deal with for (at least) the next two years. He's not gonna be "grabbing" much of anything during that time.

I get that he has family connections to Kenosha. As I said, that changes things. But people just shorthand saying Antioch is basically a suburb of Kenosha just grates on me because, pre-Rittenhouse, nobody would have ever said that. In the grand scheme, it doesn't matter much, but I just don't think that, separated from the Rittenhouse case, it's a factual statement.

Because one was elected in a red state where the dominant political ideology is right wing, and the other was elected by less than 2 points in a state that leans blue and will be inheriting a split legislature? The political incentives for Abbott and Youngkin aren't really comparable

Yes.

Ehh. I get that he has family in Kenosha which changes things, but I really don't buy the "Antioch being part of the Kenosha community" line. I just don't. I lived a few months in a town adjacent to Antioch and, iirc, generally people tended to congregate more in Gurnee, Crystal Lake or McHenry. Again, not saying there weren't family reasons for his connections to Kenosha, but I just don't buy that particular line.

Its getting really tiring. There are actual R politicians who worry me on this front, especially the ones where I live. Glenn Youngkin? Unless he wants to tank his party's chances in future elections in a state that Biden won by 11, he's gonna govern more like a Chris Sununu. It's still Virginia after all

The Virginia Senate is held by Dems at the moment. At least for the first two years, my money is on Youngkin being Bruce Rauner 2.0.

I'll bet at least 1/3 Americans disagree with that verdict... that's what the polls said at the time iirc. That's not a an insignificant amount of people at all. Also, there were zero problems with the Chauvin jury and there were zero problems with the Rittenhouse jury. I'm not sure why we have to do this "I agree with their decision, but..." bs... just admit it and move on.

I still remember seeing a lot of chatter on conservative social media back in July before and after the Chauvin verdict questioning that jury. I know I heard it from some family too. Guessing their tune has changed on this one...

I believe Biden's statement said that while he was angry about the verdict, he said that the jury system works and that he respects the decision. If anything, my own opinion (which you appear to have agreed with above) aligns pretty closely with his statement. The right verdict by law may have been reached, but Kyle Rittenhouse is no hero either and shouldn't be glorified for what he did.

Lol, like that matters in the cable news business. For instance, Fox News is currently being sued for defamation by a voting machine company about lies that crossed its airways, yet I doubt that has had any of their viewership asking any questions about the quality of the narrative they helped spread.

My immediate reaction, without following the case closely, is that people need to be a little more discerning about the law in these particular high profile cases and whether it was ultimately broken, as well as the quality of the case made. We have this tendency to turn these cases into big things where wrongs have to be righted regardless of whether the facts ultimately fall on one's side (I've been guilty on this front as well in the past). But that's not how the justice system works; its a prosecution that makes a case, a jury of peers that renders a verdict, etc. And from what I gather, the result matches the combination of facts plus the quality of the prosecution. I dont love what Rittenhouse did. He really didn't have to be there that night. But I really can't argue with the ultimate result here. And my takeaway is a lot like Buddha's in that the real travesty isn't this ruling, its that it reinforces that there is an unevenness to reasonable doubt and how it is afforded to certain Americans.

Actually agree with both you and Buddha on the general point, but do we really have to throw Nazi comparisons around so loosely?

To the extent that there have been any positives for the Ds, its that the Rs, with the exception of North Carolina, have thus far been less aggressive than expected in redistricting. But we'll see on that front... will Ohio's gerrymandering stand up in court, how aggressive is New York with their maps, etc?

After five years of following American politics way too closely, it's hard not to consider how many anonymous leaks are done with an agenda. I have no reason to believe the same isn't true in baseball as well. Doesn't mean Correa is gonna sign here, but it could just be gamesmanship in an open and ongoing negotiation. We just don't know.

He reminds me of Lynn Henning. Just close enough to the action to be dangerous, but too far away to hit much

Maybe seems a little less likely versus yesterday, but on the other hand, it doesn't advantage the Tigers for everyone to think they they are desperate to sign Correa. Basically suggesting that this leak could be selective and in furtherance of interest in Correa

In terms of negatives, there was a philosophical debate between the moderates and progressives about doing more with sunset periods or picking a couple of things and doing them for longer periods (perhaps permanently). And BBB tends to do more of the former. I get it, but I tend to be on the "do less that can be made permanent" bandwagon versus "funding stuff for two years only to have it yanked away" train.

As young parents who are in the process of thinking about how to pay for Pre-K, that provision is a big one for us....

I really think we are done with lockdowns in this country... even if it were justified, I don't see nearly the political will to do it in great swaths of the country.

Not that I know the contours all that well, but isn't the past allegory Bernhard Goetz?

Who knows, maybe AJ and Carlos both just share a love for a good breakfast?

Sure. Point being that things will change. We will be debating different things 11 months from now.

I believe BoJo has borrowed it over in the UK as well

I think they are playing a bit of a longer game, but the history is what it is.... President's typically lose seats in a midterm, sometimes quite a few. What I would suggest is that because, for better or worse, there's so little daylight these days between a President's JA and voting intention for Congress (because of polarization), that could redound to the D's benefit in the event that Biden were to go up from the 42-43 that he's at now up to around 49-51. But that's gonna require changes to the status quo in terms of inflationary pressure on things like gas prices or food costs (ie. things people notice)... not to mention on COVID I will say that the tendency of political pundits to look at everything going on right this moment through a midterm lens despite the fact that we are a over 11 months away from the midterm probably undersells the possibility that we may be debating an entirely different set of issues in October 2022.