This is the problem I have with the particularly anti-government crew - If you fundamentally don't believe in government, and you manage to find yourself in charge of government, your incentive is to prove yourself correct by doing a poor job. They never manage to actually shrink government (which is often warranted, but difficult to do while maintaining services), or reduce costs, or manage to improve anything. But they get to leave pointing the finger and saying 'see, I was right'.
They don't promote your particular vision of government but they are fine with using it to advance their aims. They aren't anarchists, they just want to use that power toward different ends.
They also aren't clever enough to play as subtle a game as you accuse them of. These are deeply, deeply stupid people.
It's not incompetence. They are actively taking actions to get these outcomes. Best case it's simply a case of mis-aligned incentives. Worst case it's active, spiteful maleficence. Reality is probably halfway in between.
I dunno islander. I have spent some time with freedom, anti-government types. They are almost without exception favourable to national defence, law enforcement and keeping public highways safe.
Not budgeting correctly to plow the snow and ice from the dangerous roads of Helena in winter.
As a question of political strategy, I would be inclined to emphasize the incompetence which in this case could easily have deadly consequences. Ideological rules of thumb almost invariably lead to bad outcomes.
Not budgeting correctly to plow the snow and ice from the dangerous roads of Helena in winter. This led the sheriffâs office to call a state of emergency on February 10th, 2017. Schools were closed and multiple accidents occurred.
This is the problem I have with the particularly anti-government crew - If you fundamentally don't believe in government, and you manage to find yourself in charge of government, your incentive is to prove yourself correct by doing a poor job. They never manage to actually shrink government (which is often warranted, but difficult to do while maintaining services), or reduce costs, or manage to improve anything. But they get to leave pointing the finger and saying 'see, I was right'.
Or.... maybe some of us are putting the cart before the horse so to speak.
Racism and other forms of 'us versus them' outlooks can be grouped under the title of 'confirmatory bias'. In stronger and extreme cases, that implies the individual has trouble learning. So perhaps the glaring incompetence should come as no surprise.
It's not incompetence. They are actively taking actions to get these outcomes. Best case it's simply a case of mis-aligned incentives. Worst case it's active, spiteful maleficence. Reality is probably halfway in between.
Not budgeting correctly to plow the snow and ice from the dangerous roads of Helena in winter. This led the sheriffâs office to call a state of emergency on February 10th, 2017. Schools were closed and multiple accidents occurred.
This is the problem I have with the particularly anti-government crew - If you fundamentally don't believe in government, and you manage to find yourself in charge of government, your incentive is to prove yourself correct by doing a poor job. They never manage to actually shrink government (which is often warranted, but difficult to do while maintaining services), or reduce costs, or manage to improve anything. But they get to leave pointing the finger and saying 'see, I was right'.
Or.... maybe some of us are putting the cart before the horse so to speak.
Racism and other forms of 'us versus them' outlooks can be grouped under the title of 'confirmatory bias'. In stronger and extreme cases, that implies the individual has trouble learning. So perhaps the glaring incompetence should come as no surprise.
Not budgeting correctly to plow the snow and ice from the dangerous roads of Helena in winter. This led the sheriffâs office to call a state of emergency on February 10th, 2017. Schools were closed and multiple accidents occurred.
This is the problem I have with the particularly anti-government crew - If you fundamentally don't believe in government, and you manage to find yourself in charge of government, your incentive is to prove yourself correct by doing a poor job. They never manage to actually shrink government (which is often warranted, but difficult to do while maintaining services), or reduce costs, or manage to improve anything. But they get to leave pointing the finger and saying 'see, I was right'.
Not budgeting correctly to plow the snow and ice from the dangerous roads of Helena in winter. This led the sheriffâs office to call a state of emergency on February 10th, 2017. Schools were closed and multiple accidents occurred.
The whole episode was a Back to the Future version of the same criticisms leveled at anyone who opposes regime change in Venezuela today â if you protest the policy, youâre not antiwar, you must support the targeted foreign leader.
Did you read the Times piece? I think RS is being completely inaccurate about it. It's not sandbagging and I don't see much if any skewed reframing in any of that reporting. As a liberal, I think you can read that piece and see Sanders as unique and heroic. As a conservative, you'll probably think he's a Marxist. As long as he's a contender, this chapter of Sanders past is going to be written about regardless. If anything, I think the press was remiss in not writing about it in 2016. Sanders fans think the NYTimes did him an injustice and promoted Clinton. As a daily reader, I saw the opposite - no vetting of Sanders while running endless pieces about the email server. Sanders got a pass on negative press in 2016 in large part because the GOP wanted him to derail Clinton - if they really saw him as a threat, he would have been written about ad nauseam, and this is the kind of stuff Fox would have turned into mountain ranges.
Right now I think the press is remiss by completely ignoring Marianne Williamson. She's managed to get enough 65K donors required to be included in DNC debates... though I may have missed it, I haven't seen her mentioned at all in NYT & WP candidacy pieces. I'm not saying she should be a nominee, but she's certainly more qualified to be POTUS than the dotard, and I'd like to hear her voice included in platform discussions.
Can you Lazy8 or anybody else please cite an example of a Black African politician being elected to office by rural Montana voters? Just curious. I can imagine more than a few rural ridings in Canada where that would be a tough act. Or does Collins' service record transcend his skin colour?
We don't have a lot of black politicians because we don't have a lot of black people. I'd say Collins' advantage was more his personality than his record. The previous mayor was an alt-right troll.
This also overshaodows some much better news from Montana: Wilmot Collins, mayor of Helena and a former Liberian refugee, has announced a bid for the US Senate. This guy has a legitimate shot if he can reach beyond his urban base (hey, Helena is what counts for urban in Montana) and connect with a broader audience.
Which I think he can. He's a really personable guy, genuinely nice and easygoing. I think he'd get eaten alive in DC but when Trump comes out to bad-mouth him (and he will, and I predict some memorable ugliness here) it'll probably cost Trump more support than Collins.
Impressive.
Can you Lazy8 or anybody else please cite an example of a Black African politician being elected to office by rural Montana voters? Just curious. I can imagine more than a few rural ridings in Canada where that would be a tough act. Or does Collins' service record transcend his skin colour?
The whole episode was a Back to the Future version of the same criticisms leveled at anyone who opposes regime change in Venezuela today â if you protest the policy, youâre not antiwar, you must support the targeted foreign leader.
No, far from perfect. He's good at soft-pedaling his agenda and logrolling his opposition—which in Montana is pretty inept. Those aren't skills that get you a lot of attention in Democratic primaries and it certainly doesn't get activists fired up to volunteer. He's savvy enough to realize that so I think what he's really angling for is the veep nomination.
He can be the token moderate on the ticket if the progressive wing succeeds in nominating an actual communist or something. Or he could contrast as the young guy next to a fossil like Biden.
But I acknowledge that my gift for political prediction has been returned for a certificate good for one free beverage I don't drink, and his luck may hold. That luck has given him the gift of political opponents as appealing as used toothpaste.
This also overshaodows some much better news from Montana: Wilmot Collins, mayor of Helena and a former Liberian refugee, has announced a bid for the US Senate. This guy has a legitimate shot if he can reach beyond his urban base (hey, Helena is what counts for urban in Montana) and connect with a broader audience.
Which I think he can. He's a really personable guy, genuinely nice and easygoing. I think he'd get eaten alive in DC but when Trump comes out to bad-mouth him (and he will, and I predict some memorable ugliness here) it'll probably cost Trump more support than Collins.
probably unlikely to happen but i'd like to see a moderate/centrist politician from the major parties
preferably someone who is at least open to good ideas and the desire to implement them
collins is a good story, he seems legit, but my initial search with bing on his positions came up a bit short
Montana Gov. Steve Bullock announced on Tuesday that he's running for president, appealing to primary voters as a Democrat elected twice in a largely Republican state and joining a primary field of nearly two dozen candidates.
No, far from perfect. He's good at soft-pedaling his agenda and logrolling his opposition—which in Montana is pretty inept. Those aren't skills that get you a lot of attention in Democratic primaries and it certainly doesn't get activists fired up to volunteer. He's savvy enough to realize that so I think what he's really angling for is the veep nomination.
He can be the token moderate on the ticket if the progressive wing succeeds in nominating an actual communist or something. Or he could contrast as the young guy next to a fossil like Biden.
But I acknowledge that my gift for political prediction has been returned for a certificate good for one free beverage I don't drink, and his luck may hold. That luck has given him the gift of political opponents as appealing as used toothpaste.
This also overshaodows some much better news from Montana: Wilmot Collins, mayor of Helena and a former Liberian refugee, has announced a bid for the US Senate. This guy has a legitimate shot if he can reach beyond his urban base (hey, Helena is what counts for urban in Montana) and connect with a broader audience.
Which I think he can. He's a really personable guy, genuinely nice and easygoing. I think he'd get eaten alive in DC but when Trump comes out to bad-mouth him (and he will, and I predict some memorable ugliness here) it'll probably cost Trump more support than Collins.
Montana Gov. Steve Bullock announced on Tuesday that he's running for president, appealing to primary voters as a Democrat elected twice in a largely Republican state and joining a primary field of nearly two dozen candidates.
======================================= a video i posted about a year ago
I don't have a lot of enthusiasm for any of the Democratic candidates so far. But any of them would be a VAST improvement over the current occupant of The White House. I hate the party system. I want publicly-funded elections and no private money. I will still vote for whoever the Democrats nominate, because the alternative is unthinkable.
