Conn McQuinn

It was even worse than that. When Microsoft made this relatively short-lived attempt, they were moving into a market that already existed. They were at the height of their hubris, and seemed convinced they could walk in and obliterate existing products - and if they couldn't, didn't want to play.

I spoke with a teacher who consulted with Microsoft during their educational software era. She was discouraged because she would watch a product go through the entire development process and be ready to release, and the marketing department would kill it because it "wouldn't dominate it's segment."

Thank you. I don’t think many people understand that the president can contest the invocation of the 25th Amendment, and the moment he contests it he is reinstated. His final removal would require the vote of both houses as you describe it.

Sketch of Trump-like figure standing next to a soldier dressed in fatigues. Above the figures, the Trump figure is labeled "Gives illegal order" and the soldier is labeled "Disobeys illegal order." Below the Trump figure is labeled "Traitor" and the soldier is labeled "Patriot." A caption below the sketch says "Just so we're clear."

Exactly! Pessimism and despair are softer forms of complying in advance.

How are rural residents supposed to shop around for emergency care? What do they do when there's only one hospital for miles?
 
Especially when GOP Medicaid cuts are CLOSING those hospitals!

If it’s real, there will be metadata in the original file that would help to verify it. If the person that made the recording were to provide context (time, place, who else was in the meeting or call) that could help verify it. Without either of those things, however, we have to assume AI.

The caveat I would consider is how many of the current GenAI customers will continue to use the products when there is a fee attached.

I think this highlights something crucial that political analysts and journalists have consistently overlooked. Voting is in large part an emotional choice, and what attracts many voters is perceived authenticity. It's why such polar opposites as DJT and Bernie Sanders can have crossover voters.

Every election releases a torrent of commentary from people who see patterns that shockingly mirror their own biases.

Nobody should be allow to explain election results without first reading Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow."

But the prices developers can charge are driven by market forces, not simply what they want. More supply puts downward pressure on prices. In addition, lower in that same section you quoted she proposed restricting the tax deductions used by companies buying up rental properties, reducing demand.

If you do that at the same time as dramatically increasing housing supply, through the policies she proposed in conjunction with this, not necessarily. You can’t view the idea in isolation when trying to evaluate its impact.

Absolutely!

It rubs me the wrong way, too. But Schumer (and others like him) isn’t the party. The party is the coalition of people who came together to elect Mamdani, which includes the DNC.

I agree, but I also think some progressives conflate “having a voice” with having everyone agree to do what they want. Besides, I live in a city that just elected a progressive as mayor, just like NYC. It’s hard to argue that progressives don’t have a voice when so many are in important positions.

I totally agree, and I would have liked to see more support from elected leaders. But it’s important to recognize that Jeffries congratulated Mamdani on his primary win, and the official DNC organization supported Mamdani after his primary victory. Mamdani is in the tent.

I think any framing that reduces this to an A/B binary is misleading. We do need better vocabulary to discuss this, but something that moves us away from the human tendency to oversimplify complicated issues.

My impression has been that there is a significant slice of the progressives that will only come into the tent if the centrists leave. A willingness to share the tent is necessary to enter; purity tests and coalitions are incompatible.

Totally this. Democratic identity politics is about recognizing and listening to people of different identities. Republican identity politics is about classifying people into identities that are good and identities that are bad.

Yes, the next post in my feed was an interview with one of the Democratic representatives explaining they were given 23,000 emails just a few days ago. They’re still going thought then and there are more to be released shortly.

I suspect your comment here is meant as a counter example. It does provide a good reference point, though - for the first 3, 5, 10 years that students used laptops no research found any positive academic effect. I say this as someone who ran multi-million dollar grants to get laptops in classrooms.

This seems like the most straightforward and also basically accurate message.

And the vast majority of Dems still are. The eight Dems that negotiated on the CR are fewer than 4% of the Democrats in the two houses of Congress; over 95% continue to oppose it.

King isn’t a Democrat.

Tell that to the 40+ million people going hungry without SNAP, the millions of federal workers going broke, and the thousands of stranded travelers. Hurting all those people clearly doesn’t bother the Rs, and it doesn’t help the people on the ACA. It’s time to move to the next fight.

This doesn’t mean that outrage isn’t justified, or that our feelings are to be dismissed. What it does mean, however, is that we shouldn’t trust our interpretations of a situation in the heat of outrage. Outrage can feel empowering because it erases our doubts and stops us from thinking. 2/2

In this fraught moment, I want to point out two neurological facts. First, when we are outraged, our executive functions are severely diminished. We can’t think clearly. Secondly, our confidence in our beliefs is intensified. Our doubts disappear at the same time our reasoning ability does. 1/2

I get it. You are pissed but hear me out. This is why Democrats are reopening the government.

Again, with what leverage? The Republicans don’t care if the government reopens. Mike Johnson has used the shutdown to suspend Congress, and he’s happy to do it. I supported the shutdown, but the risk was always that the Rs wouldn’t care about the impacts. They’ve shown they don’t.

There never was a guarantee they would get what they asked for. I 100% supported the shutdown, but the stark fact is that the shutdown is harming tens of millions of people, and the Rs have demonstrated clearly they don’t care. They prefer Congress remains closed and let DJT operate as a king.