ChrisG

Spell check

bsky.app/profile/g-ch...

He thinks we need more legal immigration which is compatible with being tougher on illegal immigration.

I’ve followed your back and forth with Morris for a while now and this is the perfect response to his obfuscation.

I like his analysis, but I’m very annoyed with his constant bait-and-switch on this topic.

A common thread among Yglesias detractors, they struggle to understand a country that voted Biden over Bernie in 2020 & Trump over Harris in 2024.

There is a practical reason to pull left-wing discourse towards the center that they all hand-waive away.

All due respect, that ignores the fact those folks won in the first place. And yeah they got wiped, but after extending HC to 30M people, covering pre-existing conditions, and bending the HC inflation curve.

Maybe we could get that coalition back for a specific purpose, like fixing courts.

“Scummy” insinuates a negative motive to do harm. As if he were trying to hide the source.

I don’t know why he didn’t include the link, but I doubt it was an active intention to deny credit.

Love your stats updates, but your Yglesias obsession is getting weird. His screen shot says The Downballot in bold right at the top. Sure a link would be convenient, but you’re insinuating some dark motive here when the source is clearly visible.

There is no national ID card though. If his view is that carrying the current forms of proof are untenable because there is no national ID card, then there’s no inconsistency here.

It would be nice to see an argument with more thought put into it than just lazy screen grabs.

There’s an ongoing debate about how Dems should moderate, or if they should moderate at all, to pick up more independent voters.
I’m curious to hear your opinion on what you think a winning message in Texas would be regarding immigration and LGBT rights.
Do you think moderating on guns is enough?

Let’s see how this survey question breaks down.

“Is it okay to be completely intolerable and spout racist conspiracies at Sunday dinner, while wearing a hat that says “grab em by the pussy”?”

You’re delusional. She said she would extend all of Biden’s policies and she didn’t really pitch anything coherent that would appeal to the broader electorate. The only example you folks point to with this silly argument was that photo-op with Liz Cheney like a week before the election.

Totally agree with you Mark. I’m moderate-to-left wing on all issues and agree with a lot of BS posters in theory, but 2024 should be a wake up call to what kind of message is going to win across America.

To rebuild after Trump Dems need a broad platform, 50.1% of the vote ain’t going to cut it.

There’s much less reputational risk to making the same terrible decisions as everyone else than there is to making a slightly bad decision on your own.

You’re right, I found this old pic of yours. You probably have your choice of the nicest weiners. So jealous.

Funny thing is that they don’t prefer you. When life gives you lemons go suck a dick I guess.

I don’t argue with dicks, I suck them.

“Gleep gloop”
- robot

bsky.app/profile/g-ch...

“9 out of 10 doctors agree, smoking doesn’t cause cancer.”
- study prepared by US tobacco

Cover of Al Frankens book. Lies and the lying liars who tell them.

A shame he turned out to be a bit of a creep because Al Franken nailed this thesis back in mid-2000’s.

Didn’t you not read either article?

You’re being kind of silly regarding average vote share. Obviously anything could happen but the reason statistics exist is to determine the likelihood of certain events. Averages and medians are important in statistical analysis.

You’re not making sense when it comes to “On average”. Either way 1% of votes share is not meaningless. Biden became president in 2020 bc he won Georgia by less than 1%.

Also, we have a lot of real world examples where moderate politicians do well in general elections. Especially in purple areas.

Also, Matt’s bigger point is that across both parties moderate candidates do better; they outperform the national candidates. So finding issues to moderate on would help win elections.

Morris says that “Moderation does increase vote margin by about one percentage point…”, which I understand to mean that in a tight race, moderation can swing 1% of votes. In 2024, 7 House races were within 1%.

So being able to move the needle by 1% does matter.

going to moderate on an issue you should be up front about the trade offs.

He’s not criticizing the statistics, that’s my point. Morris says moderation is worth +1% according to his model. Yglesias feels that Morris and many other liberals act like moderation isn’t worth considering. His point is that moderation would lead to more electoral victories and if you’re not…

My favorite is, “I lifted this 100lb weight with no problem, but later I reached to put some dishes away and now I can’t turn my head.”

Did you read Matt Yglesias’ column though? He gets a lot of shit, but I haven’t seen you or Morris confront the point he is making.

He’s not a statistician. His point is that moderation has an effect (Morris himself says 1%), which is consistently downplayed or ignored.

Isn’t Matt’s primary argument that
a) you both agree “Moderation does increase vote margin by about one percentage point”
b) you tend to downplay that consensus in many of your posts
c) a large portion of voters, donors, politicians don’t agree or acknowledge (a), avoiding debate over tradeoffs.