Patterico's Pontifications

6/26/2019

Thinking about the Dem Debate, Part 1: Wednesday

Filed under: General — JVW @ 3:00 pm



[guest post by JVW]

Since the silly season more-or-less officially launches tonight (forget all of those town halls and such; it’s the debates that kick off the election), it’s time to look back on a comment that the great humorist P.J. O’Rourke made over 20 years ago, back in the horrid days when Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich bestrode the narrow earth like colossi. Mr. O’Rourke (the funny one, not the one pretending to be Mexican) advised that when evaluating politicians, it makes a lot of sense to try to place them in the context of the people with whom you attended high school. With that in mind, let me make the following comparisons with respect to the candidates we will see on stage tonight (well, some of us that is; I’m going to watch the Vanderbilt-Michigan College World Series final). Going alphabetically, we have:

Cory Booker – The guy who was thought to be popular but secretly nobody really liked all that much. All-conference football player, delegate at-large in the school senate, and member of the National Honor Society, but never once in his four years attended any social event. Claimed to volunteer for the local soup kitchen, but no one who worked there seemed to know who he was.

Juan Julian Castro – The twin who was slightly better looking, slightly smarter, slightly more charismatic than his identical brother, but still kind of a dweeb. It was rumored his community activist mom would browbeat the school’s teachers and administrators and accuse them of racism if her sons got anything less than an “A” on their report cards. [Edit: Such a nonentity that I put down the wrong Castro brother initially.]

Bill de Blasio – One of those blowhards who would tell you how smart he was while avoiding taking any difficult courses because they supposedly didn’t fit into his schedule, even though he found time to register for study hall and work as an office aide every semester. A tall, strapping guy who worked out daily but for some reason didn’t bother to try out for any varsity teams, mumbling some nonsense about how the competitive nature takes all the fun out of sports.

John Delaney – You knew he was a lineman on the football team and spent a lot of time in the weight room, but you never had a class with him and don’t recall ever seeing him outside of the football field. Honestly, when you were assigned a seat next to his at graduation it was the first time you had ever given him any real thought.

Tulsi Gabbard – That cute chick whom you had a slight crush on but didn’t pursue because you thought she was a New Age dippy surfer girl, then were really surprised to discover she was in JROTC. When you see her at the ten-year (and twenty-year, thirty-year, etc.) reunion, you are filled with immense regret.

Jay Inslee – Secretary of the Key Club his sophomore year, then after that the first person in school history to serve as Key Club president for two consecutive years. But that was literally the only extracurricular activity he participated in. Still, his friends will swear to you he was the best president Key Club ever had.

Amy Klobuchar – Volunteer hall monitor who wanted you to think that she would let you sneak a smoke on the patio in between classes, but would in fact secretly report you to the vice-principal. She’s the mean girl who quietly told all of the senior boys which ones of her female friends were sexually active. Signed up to be a candy-striper at the hospital, but never showed up to work.

Robert O’Rourke – Punk rock fan who got away with periodically being a stoner because his dad was on the school board so he knew he wouldn’t face any real disciplinary issues. Secretly did all his homework while maintaining an aura of detached cool. The freshmen and sophomore girls were madly in love with him, but he ended up aggravating the ones he dated and they would break up with him within a couple of weeks.

Tim Ryan – The guy who had a mad crush on the head cheerleader but couldn’t get anywhere past the friend zone with her. Not a great student, not a great athlete, not a social animal, just a normal everyday unexceptional guy. Inscribed in your yearbook, “Let’s hang out over the summer,” but you had zero interest.

Elizabeth Warren – The teachers loved her because she always had her homework done on time (it was rumored that she paid college students to do it) and neatly written on fresh notebook sheets, and she would turn in her English papers (which were later found to be largely plagiarized from The New Republic) double-space typed on heavy-stock paper and tucked in a clear plastic folder. Won a scholarship from the Elks Club after telling them during her interview about the ongoing anguish she carried owing to her father having been killed in Vietnam, which became a small scandal when it was discovered years later that he had simply run off with his secretary.

So, that’s how I see them. I frankly had to look up John Delaney and Tim Ryan, but I hopefully pegged them at least somewhat correctly. Please feel free to add your own analyses of the candidates in the comments, and enjoy watching the debate if you are so inclined. Check back tomorrow for part 2 of the debate participants.

– JVW

141 Responses to “Thinking about the Dem Debate, Part 1: Wednesday”

  1. Powerline has a post on turning the debates into a drinking game, but I wouldn’t advise playing along unless you can drink like an Irish-American Democrat Senator from the Northeast.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  2. It’s good to see some nice words about Tulsi Gabbard, and what she says deserves some attention, but it’s hard to shake the feeling that she’s auditioning for a cabinet post.

    John B Boddie (72f331)

  3. Well, I’ll be hornswoggled! There really is a Vanderbilt-Michigan College World Series final!

    I’ll be reading old (Ross) Macdonald detective stories.

    nk (dbc370)

  4. Powerline has a post on turning the debates into a drinking game, but I wouldn’t advise playing along unless you can drink like an Irish-American Democrat Senator from the Northeast.

    As a somewhat safer option, I’ve created a Bingo card.

    Visit this page to generate and print your own, personalized version, or go here play along online during the debates!

    Dave (1bb933)

  5. Since you have to fictionalize this into high school students , none of this is very cllose

    Tulsi Gabbard grew up in a cult, and now claims to be a Hindu – and she’s maye ot ou of that cult.

    The New York Times had a front page story in the New York Tmes magazine about Elkizabeth warren/

    AN interesting questin might be about the student loans. Bernie Sanders plan may not add up, (because if people had to pay a tax of 1/2% any time they bought or sold astick, they;d buy or sell a lot less, at least within the United States, but at least the tax is constitutional.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  6. Good stuff, but I can’t relate. I hated high school and have actively tried to erase those four years from my memory with, I’m pleased to say, considerable success.

    nk (dbc370)

  7. * Tulsi Gabbard…is maybe not out of that cult. (what I read wasn’t clear)

    This debate is the undercard. NBC was probably figuring the less important debate should go first.

    The names were picked at random – that it could split this unevenly had maybe a 30% chance or less – then, after the two panels were picked, NBC decided which would go first.

    NBC also arranged the candidates by putting the more important ones in the center.

    The most important candidate in this debate is Elizabeth Warren. Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are both in the other one.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  8. NBC was probably figuring the less important debate should go first.

    It’s just how the random draw (which observers from the campaigns monitored) turned out.

    Dave (3c40e2)

  9. 3, Vandy in the CWS should be no surprise. Even the double-digit placers in the SEC get an invite. I’m just happy a northern team got this far and, against my Illi-Buck better judgement, will be rooting for Blue.

    urbanleftbehind (6f8e50)

  10. 4. Some of these words I’d expect to hear, some not at all.

    Words Id expedt to hear:

    Student loans, Trump, climate, Medicare for all, progressive, banks, LGBTQ or some component, obstruction of justice, border, wealthy, tax, reparations, women, middle class, racism, Iran, plan or plans, website, war, housing, Congress.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  11. R.I.P. Beth Chapman (Mrs. Dog the Bounty Hunter)

    I.C.Y. (d1ec3e)

  12. 8. Dave (3c40e2) — 6/26/2019 @ 4:14 pm

    It’s just how the random draw (which observers from the campaigns monitored) turned out.

    The random draw merely picked the two panels.

    Then NBC decided which one went first, and they picked the one with the less prominent names.

    That it split this unevenly was probably less than 50%, but not all that unlikely.

    The two panels might not have been all that different, but as it actually split, this first one definitely is an undercard.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  13. Hey, look at that! My post showed up. Still don’t know why my other IP address put me in Patterico prison. 🙁

    I.C.Y. (d1ec3e)

  14. This will be like watching O.J. in a white bronco. Seen that.
    Read a few chapters of Young Ben Franklin and watch sneaky binders.

    mg (8cbc69)

  15. I think I’m wired weird.

    I really like Tulsi Gabbard… she doesn’t have a chance, but I think she’s about the only one who doesn’t look unhinged when she explains her various positions.

    whembly (4605df)

  16. 10. I forgot Roe v Wade, Census, Republican, maybe the names of some states.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  17. If we are destined to elect a Democrat, I would prefer Rep. Gabbard over any of the others.

    JVW (4f5f43)

  18. Gonna add a few more options to the card when I get home:

    Racism (hat tip Sammy)
    Our Communities
    Minimum Wage
    Reach Out
    Blasey-Ford
    Victims

    Dave (3c40e2)

  19. Hey, look at that! My post showed up. Still don’t know why my other IP address put me in Patterico prison. 🙁
    I.C.Y. (d1ec3e) — 6/26/2019 @ 4:27 pm

    Patterico was concerned that might happen to you when he had to block a block of IPs to block out a troll.

    nk (dbc370)

  20. Isn’t Gabbard one of the more liberal Dems?

    I confess I know next to nothing about most of them.

    Dave (3c40e2)

  21. They’re all simply awful. Its too bad, because we need a responsible, left-wing party to balance the R’s. I can remember when people complained how boring Mondale was, and how “the Duke” looked like Snoopy in a tank. But, by God, they look like Giants compared to this lot.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  22. Isn’t Gabbard one of the more liberal Dems?

    Here economics are hopeless — straight out of the Sanders playbook — but I get the sense that unlike a true-believer like Comrade Bernie, she can be convinced that’s it’s economically impossible to tax the same dollar four times and come up with four dollars. So whereas he will steer the state of ship straight into the rocks chasing the sirens of socialism (my metaphors are working overtime tonight), her economics are more aspirational and she’ll dial down the Marxism once it’s time to put together a real plan.

    But maybe my crush on her is coloring my perceptions.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  23. Answer: 60% Trump bashing, 10% substance, and 30% hot air.
    Question: What will happen at the D’ debate tonight.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  24. Patterico was concerned that might happen to you when he had to block a block of IPs to block out a troll.

    I.C.Y., how would you like to handle it? Would you like me to see about unblocking your other IP address (if I can find it) or do you just want to continue with this account?

    JVW (54fd0b)

  25. Isn’t Gabbard one of the more liberal Dems?

    the Center-right ALWAYS wants to believe there’s a normal one. She seems to have some good aspects, but she’s still 80% kooky-liberal. No doubt if she was 60 y/o and looked like Ruth Ginsberg, you’d hear less about her.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  26. Gabbard is an island commie, according to friends in Hawaii.

    mg (8cbc69)

  27. This is the warm-up. The big one is tomorrow. Crazy Bernie vs. Slow Joe.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  28. Will be interesting to see just how hard the msm pushes the Warren wagon the next couple of days.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/mainstream-media-already-has-headlines-written-elizabeth-warren-is-big-winner-in-first-debates/

    harkin (0db537)

  29. What I really like about Rep. Gabbard is that she doesn’t seem to be interested in reciting the litany of laments about how Republicans, businesspeople, gun owners, religious observers, white heterosexual men, stay-at-home moms, etc. are somehow ruining America and enslaving everyone else. My opinion may change as I read the summary of the debate, but it doesn’t seem like she wants to pit blue America against red America, and she shows no real interest in the level of intersectionality grievance-mongering that her fellow candidates do. She had a bit of controversy about her based upon some of the things that her dad has said about LBGTQ advocates (remember back in 2008 when we weren’t supposed to hold the bigoted opinions of a candidate’s parents against the candidate?), and she has now disowned them but without the kind of groveling that you would have expected from any other candidate.

    So again, the coming weeks or months may make me change my opinion of her, but for now I think she is one of the more authentic candidates in the field.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  30. But maybe my crush on her is coloring my perceptions.

    Oh my.

    Do you think AOC knows about the two of you?

    I worry about how she’ll react. She’s just an innocent child, after all.

    Dave (1bb933)

  31. By the way, Dave, I like your bingo card. For tomorrow’s debate, though, given that both Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden will be on stage, you should change “Obama” to “Barack” and “Clinton” to “FDR.” Just a thought.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  32. Do you think AOC knows about the two of you?

    Aw, come on. I’ve told you countless times: AOC is my adorably clueless niece. There’s no hanky-panky going on there. I’m just hoping she finds herself a nice Wall Street banker to settle down with, and stop all of this Congressing stuff.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  33. The Bronx baba booie

    mg (8cbc69)

  34. Aw, come on. I’ve told you countless times: AOC is my adorably clueless niece. There’s no hanky-panky going on there.

    Uh-huh.

    :)

    Dave (1bb933)

  35. Wonder if anyone is going to ask them if they support tech companies colluding to deplatform people who disagree with them or run counter to the preferred agenda?

    I’m shocked this isn’t of interest to anyone on here either.

    NJRob (de9ec1)

  36. What I really like about Rep. Gabbard is that she doesn’t seem to be interested in reciting the litany of laments about how Republicans, businesspeople, gun owners, religious observers, white heterosexual men, stay-at-home moms, etc. are somehow ruining America and enslaving everyone else. My opinion may change as I read the summary of the debate, but it doesn’t seem like she wants to pit blue America against red America, and she shows no real interest in the level of intersectionality grievance-mongering that her fellow candidates do. She had a bit of controversy about her based upon some of the things that her dad has said about LBGTQ advocates (remember back in 2008 when we weren’t supposed to hold the bigoted opinions of a candidate’s parents against the candidate?), and she has now disowned them but without the kind of groveling that you would have expected from any other candidate.

    So again, the coming weeks or months may make me change my opinion of her, but for now I think she is one of the more authentic candidates in the field.

    JVW (54fd0b) — 6/26/2019 @ 5:25 pm

    Yup… pretty sums up my views on Gabbard.

    whembly (4605df)

  37. This game show needs an emcee.

    Badly.

    Here’s to the best of them all:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVIJ955kC7g

    Always remember who’s watchin’ in flyover country– like the good folks in Huntley, Montana. Especialy in a time when Americans don’t want to be governed; they wish to be entertained.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  38. My thoughts
    I am not going to vote for any of these people, so why bother watching?

    Kishnevi (1c16da)

  39. Memo to set designer and production manager who over produced this televised crap: shimmering ‘rain flag banner’ is awfully distracting and makes some viewers red with anger, white with OMG horror and blue with knowing they screwed up. It’s as bad a that Fox News debate ‘doorbell.’

    How did JFK and The Big Dick manage with just a chair and a podium, kids?

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  40. Which one is Spartacus; they’re all standing.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  41. How did JFK and The Big Dick manage with just a chair and a podium, kids?

    If a candidate is truly comfortable in his or her ability to debate, that campaign should demand a debate be held live from a TV studio, no audience, one moderator, each candidate seated and facing each other, and a full debate with each candidate allowed two minutes (or more) to give a complete and full response to a question, and each candidate allowed to directly question the other.

    Now if it comes down to Biden and Trump in fall of 2020, I just hope that everyone decides to cancel the debates.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  42. JoeyBee will flame out, JVW; he’s like nearly every guest star on episodes of Combat!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  43. Someone should call the ASPCA and complain about NBC airing a roadkill, live: Beto was just run over.

    He’s done.

    But hey, nice tie… finally wore one, eh, kid.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  44. Wow.

    Booker gave Warren The Spartacus Stare. Creepy.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  45. The Democratic field summed in haikus
    https://betterlivingthroughbeowulf.com/comic-haikus-launch-2020-election/
    (I am using this link so you don’t need to bother with Grey Lady paywalls.)

    Kishnevi (1c16da)

  46. Booker gave Warren The Spartacus Stare. Creepy.

    Can’t wait to read about it.

    Warren fans: That’s creepy that Sen. Booker had no problem with giving the evil eye to a woman candidate. How misogynistic of him.

    Booker fans: That’s awful that Sen. Warren is accusing a black candidate of aggressive behavior towards her just for looking in her direction as she was speaking. How racist of her.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  47. Really bummed that nobody said “single payer” during the health care segment.

    Kinda hoses my card…

    Dave (1bb933)

  48. I’d say Warren and Klobuchar have looked best so far, if you ignore the content of their answers…

    Dave (1bb933)

  49. Incredibly sloppy production, even by cable television standards; folks will spend more time reviewing the audio to catch the comments made on the hot mikes by the “moderators” now. “Debates” should not be interrupted by commercial sponsors, either.

    Some associate producer just lost his/her job.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  50. @46. She didn’t see it looking forward but the television audience did.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  51. @48. Amy has the best hairdo tonight.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  52. Some associate producer just lost his/her job

    Dare the Dems reevaluate their disposition re: Fox News as a host?

    JVW (54fd0b)

  53. I’m looking at the pictures online. Rep. Gabbard looks quite fetching in red. Really, Dave, if you’re going by “looks” how could she not have run away with the evening?

    JVW (54fd0b)

  54. 52, only if its Shep, Geraldo and pro-Trump Brian Kilmeade doing the modding.

    urbanleftbehind (6f8e50)

  55. I can’t believe any of these clowns can beat Trump – but if they do, God Help the United States of America.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  56. pre-Trump pre-2017 Kilmeade

    urbanleftbehind (6f8e50)

  57. JVW (54fd0b) — 6/26/2019 @ 7:37 pm

    I don’t find her close-ups very flattering.

    Nor her calls to surrender to the Taliban, for that matter.

    Dave (1bb933)

  58. @52. Fox will never live down that damn ‘doorbell’ fiasco.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  59. @55. Can’t blame the people running– on either side from any point of the compass. The problem with this kind of presentation is the structure and format of the presentation itself.

    It should not be sponsored w/commercials disrupting the flow of discourse; it does not need the garish sets which distract from the messaging. It does not need pundits and talking heads shaping the game field like an NFL telecast and it does not need a televised ‘spin room’ post debate for clean-up. And there are too many contestants; only three on ‘Jeopardy.’ These are entertainment elements. As formatted, trying to watch this for any content is no different than watching ‘America’s Got Talent’… or ‘The Gong Show.’ And this problem is only getting worse.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  60. Klobuchar, Delaney and Ryan came across as the only (sort of) sane ones on my scorecard. All three of them are flat-lined on the charisma meter though.

    Warren got almost no time in the second half of the debate.

    Dave (1bb933)

  61. @61. Such is the flaw of the format which in this case, was to her advantage. OTOH, give JoeyBee plenty of time tomorrow and it’s that much more opportunity for him to drop a verbal grenade down his pants.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  62. Warren, for all her far Left positions, gave a surprisingly soft answer on gun control that will probably not win her many primary votes, saying gun violence was a problem we need to research as a public health problem, and refusing to be drawn on confiscating guns from legal owners.

    Climate change fruitcake Inslee had the best line of the evening, IMO.

    When they asked each candidate for a one or two word answer to “What is the greatest threat to the security of the United States,” he replied “Donald Trump is the greatest threat to the security of the United States”.

    Dave (1bb933)

  63. . . . saying gun violence was a problem we need to research as a public health problem. . .”

    I was just reading about that. Leave it to an academic to try to buy time by saying an issue needs more study. But at least she’s not spewing ignorance about various types of firearms calling stuff “assault weapons” and engaging in that typical flim-flam. Give her credit for that.

    I understand that Señor Castro ripped Mr. O’Rourke a new one on immigration issues. I’ll have to find that clip online, though I imagine it will be everywhere tomorrow. Remember way, way, way, way back when — I mean like four whole months ago — when Robert O’Rourke was supposed to be a rising star and a serious candidate?

    JVW (54fd0b)

  64. Missed the debate tonight (packing) and will miss the one tomorrow (en route to Sweden for two weeks). I’ll check to see if the Republic still exists before I come back.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  65. Remember way, way, way, way back when — I mean like four whole months ago — when Robert O’Rourke was supposed to be a rising star and a serious candidate?

    First time I’ve ever seen O’Rourke speak – they guy is such a mental midget I almost felt sorry for him.

    Castro wants to the repeal the law that makes it a crime to cross the border illegally (he wants to make it a civil offense).

    About half of the candidates voiced support for the idea; Beto (and Klobuchar) were not among them. Booker, IIRC, was. I don’t think they asked Warren.

    Dave (1bb933)

  66. Klobuchar, Delaney and Ryan came across as the only (sort of) sane ones on my scorecard.

    Just caught a post-debate interview with John Delaney and he said that his plan calls for — yes, he said it — “free” health care, so right out the window goes the whole idea that he could be considered sane.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  67. Just caught a post-debate interview with John Delaney and he said that his plan calls for — yes, he said it — “free” health care, so right out the window goes the whole idea that he could be considered sane.

    Well, I don’t recall him actually going into policy specifics about much.

    He and Ryan were the ones saying “If we as a party don’t appeal to working class people in middle-America and stop looking like coastal elitists, all the rainbows and unicorns the rest of you are promising people don’t mean jack.”

    He also said the people he talks to on the campaign trail don’t give a proverbial about impeaching Trump, they care about pocketbook issues that affect their families. Which seemed like a surprisingly sane thing to say. This followed an extended discourse from Beto on how he’d prosecute Trump after he leaves office.

    Courtesy of CNN, here are the speaking times:

    Cory Booker: 10 minutes, 55 seconds

    Beto O’Rourke: 10 minutes, 39 seconds

    Elizabeth Warren: 9 minutes, 17 seconds

    Julián Castro: 8 minutes, 52 seconds

    Amy Klobuchar: 8 minutes, 25 seconds

    Tulsi Gabbard: 7 minutes, 22 seconds

    Tim Ryan: 7 minutes, 21 seconds

    John Delaney: 6 minutes, 49 seconds

    Bill de Blasio: 5 minutes, 40 seconds

    Jay Inslee: 4 minutes, 52 seconds

    Dave (1bb933)

  68. Jay Inslee playing the Scott Walker role. Governors from states beginning with “W” just don’t get any love.

    Jim Geraghty and Michael Brendan Dougherty at NRO have posted their analyses. Both agree that Booker and Castro had good nights which could raise their profiles, and Warren didn’t do anything that ought to hurt hers. Both also think that O’Rourke was awful.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  69. Most searched candidates during the debate, minute-by-minute:

    https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/445123/

    I’m sure the Russians would never exploit something like this for their own nefarious aims…

    Dave (1bb933)

  70. Oh yeah, Delaney also said that Medicare for All would drive every hospital in the country out of business. That kind of realism surprised me.

    Dave (1bb933)

  71. I think Booker wins the award for identity politics pandering.

    He first called out the plight of transsexuals who need abortions but afford them, and then later brought up minority transsexual teenagers being bullied in high school.

    He said something about “our health care system transitioning” right after the transsexual abortion line too, which was a bit jarring.

    Dave (1bb933)

  72. *but can’t afford them

    Dave (1bb933)

  73. Oh yeah, Delaney also said that Medicare for All would drive every hospital in the country out of business. That kind of realism surprised me.

    Wild. That’s hard to square with the soundbite I heard post-debate where he told an interviewer that he had a plan for “free” health care. I’ll have to go back and see if I misheard that.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  74. After reading these comments, sounds as if Trump won the debate.

    mg (8cbc69)

  75. They can be as loony as the want in the primary, justifiably confident that once they get the looniest to give them the nomination, the media will not remember a word of their looniness* when they pivot for the general.

    *I know it’s “lunacy”. Shut up!

    nk (dbc370)

  76. And, since everything is about Trump, I give him credit for not pivoting. He stayed just as loony in the general as he was in the primary. Not that it means that’s what he wanted to do. He could not, because that’s not his nature. Nonetheless, involuntary sincerity is still sincerity.

    nk (dbc370)

  77. nk, those MacDonald detective stories worth reading?

    mg (8cbc69)

  78. Is that Hillary hiding behind the curtain with the super delegates?

    mg (8cbc69)

  79. The Lew Archer stories, yes, definitely. I’d put them on a par with Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler. I first read them as a teenager and did not appreciate the writing near as much as I do now.

    That’s Ross Macdonald, pseudonym of Kenneth Millar. Not to be confused with John D. MacDonald, the Travis McGee writer.

    nk (dbc370)

  80. If you can find “The Name Is Archer”, a collection of seven Lew Archer short stories, that would be a very good sampler.

    nk (dbc370)

  81. Thanks a bunch, nk.
    Appreciate it.

    mg (8cbc69)

  82. Both of the W state governors were essentially single issue candidates, JVW. And Walker didnt so much trim the fat across WI state government as he did rationalize the benefit package.

    urbanleftbehind (82d2e3)

  83. 61. 67. 71. 74.

    Dave: Delaney also said that Medicare for All would drive every hospital in the country out of business.

    JVW (54fd0b) — 6/26/2019 @ 11:20 pm

    Wild. That’s hard to square with the soundbite I heard post-debate where he told an interviewer that he had a plan for “free” health care. I’ll have to go back and see if I misheard that.

    What he said was that if everybody in the country was put on Medicare, and Medicare paid hospitals the same rate they are paying now, every hospital in the United States would have to close. (or every hospital executive he talked to about this said their hospital would have to close.)

    In other words, the Medicare for All policy, as outlined, (in a proposed bill) wouldn’t work.

    There was also a little dispute about how this would take good insurance away from people. One or two candidates opposed that, another one claimed that he present situation wasn’t good for a lot of people. One, I think Tim Ryan, talked about people whose unions had negotiated good health care coverage.

    The New York Post ran ten quotes, one from each candidate, on the top of pages 8 and 9, and put in brackets for John Delaney [Medicaid payments are so low] but it’s opponents who call Bernie Sanders’ plan “Medicaid for All”

    The proponents call it Medicare for All. Nobody is saying “single payer” any more but I did hear the term “public option.” (from the Governor of Washington State who I think, said it had been made available in his state)

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  84. 83 Re: Single issue candidate:

    Jay Inslee, the Governor of Washington State said ours was the first generation that felt the impact of climate change and also the last generation that could do anything about it.

    But he also considered Trump dangerous to the well being of the United States.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  85. Mayor Bill de Blasio, who answered first on that question, actually gave the best answer as to threats to the United States, but the others soon preferred the general issue of nuclear war.

    Chuck Todd succeeded in eliciting differences between the candidates on several matters.

    There were some good comments, more bad ones, and some bad ones I am used to. Julian Castro actually explained how that Mexican man and his daughter drowned. They tried crossing the Rio Grande because of Trump’s policy of “metering” asylum requests, and not letting them present themselves at a port of entry..

    He also named a specific section of law he wold repeal, but that was one of three changes he would make.

    Several candidates spoke a little in Spanish, one of them perhaps to disguise the fact that he was avoiding answering the question. Whoever spoke Spanish wanted to show it off, it appeared.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  86. O’Rourke definitely came out looking not on top of things, but I am not sure people other than well informed media people) would notice that. He didn’t make an outright fumble. On the other hand, he obviously did not impress people.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  87. On the other hand, the Trump Administration might be outdoing a hypothetical President Walker in the latter’s wheelbase:
    http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/450505-critics-slam-epa-for-rolling-back-union-protections-with-latest

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  88. Yes sammeh the question is why wasnt the 70% tax rate insane?

    Narciso (30eb7e)

  89. Breaking cosmically big news, so far just a headline at the WSJ: Supreme Court Declines to Set Limits on Political Gerrymandering: High court says such cases present political questions that courts can’t decide.

    But here’s the full opinion in Rucho v. Common Cause. I’ll wait until DRJ or someone puts up a new post to comment in detail, but at a glance, from the official syllabus:

    Partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts….

    ….

    Any standard for resolving partisan gerrymandering claims must be grounded in a “limited and precise rationale” and be “clear, manageable, and politically neutral.” [citing Vieth v. Jubelirer‘s plurality opinion.]

    ….

    None of the proposed “tests” for evaluating partisan gerrymandering claims meets the need for a limited and precise standard that is judicially discernible and manageable….

    This — very significantly — is a majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts, joined fully by Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh. The liberal justices joined in Kagan’s dissent.

    Biggest case of this term, by far. This is the new SCOTUS we’ve been waiting for, friends and neighbors.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  90. Colin Powell and Bret Stephens must be salivating over these candidates.

    Munroe (1e6b2b)

  91. Oh, there will be gnashing of teeth and cursing of Trump, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh at the DNC today. This takes away one of the Dems’ favorite tools — rushing to court to overturn Congressional districts drawn by state legislatures.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  92. “And Walker didnt so much trim the fat across WI state government as he did rationalize the benefit package.”

    He also exposed the stealthy and corrupt connection between the public unions and the insurance companies who had a monopoly. After the members were given an actual choice on policies, the average price dropped over 15%. The unions had actually been skimming extra $$ from their members thru this scheme.

    He gave public union members the right to decline paying dues (which they did in droves)

    He also made the public workers actually pay for a small piece of their medical and retirement benefits.

    And his right-to-work law, private sector unions could no longer order a business to fire a worker for refusing to pay union dues.

    harkin (0db537)

  93. None of the proposed “tests” for evaluating partisan gerrymandering claims meets the need for a limited and precise standard that is judicially discernible and manageable.

    You could make a test that is precise and limited and manageable – the wasted votes in previous elections test – but any limiting figure that was set would be arbitrary, (and thus not judicially discernable?) Or maybe the proposed standards are missing a rationale for why this amount of wasted votes and not another.

    You could say the smallest number of wasted votes, but the fairest, or simplest, apportionment of voter between districts would cause more lost votes to one party than the other because of geographic concentration. (now to the disadvantage of Democrats)

    The Supreme Court, or the litigants, might also have been aware that such a “wasted votes” test would knock out all this apportionment to create “minority districts. Or perhaps it is the fact that divisions between political party preference aren’t the only divisions between voters (although they might be of the most interest to legislative leaders.)

    One proposal for a standard had been they do a Monte Carlo simulation of possible apportionments and limit the number of wasted votes in the last elections if these had been the lines to – what? – what 50% or some other percentages of outcomes were. (this actually wouldn’t stop a legislature from drawing lines calculated to elect friendly members of the opposition party who might even caucus with the current majority like happened with the New York State Senate. (this arrangement broke down after the 2018 election)

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  94. And in the Census race question case, it looks like (finally) a win for the Trump Administration, albeit in a splintered opinion that will take some sorting through to figure out: Dep’t of Commerce v. New York (again from the syllabus):

    . The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, and by extension the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the census questionnaire. That conclusion follows from Congress’s broad authority over the census, as informed by long and consistent historical practice that “has been open, widespread, and unchallenged since the early days of the Republic.”

    As for the Commerce Secretary’s decision, it’s being remanded for reconsideration to see whether it was properly made, and that result was unanimous, but the instructions on what to do on remand appear to be rather fractured. There will be more litigation about this, in a hurry, before the 2020 Census is taken, but clearly there’s a path whereby the Trump Administration can get the question on the Census.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  95. Do the previous federal orders to remap now become void? Do states get to go back to their old maps if they followed federal court orders?

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  96. According to SCOTUSblog, the census case gives the administration a chance to put forward a more reasonable explanation. IF they had done that in the first place, they would have won this outright.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  97. (the second sentence is my conclusion, not SCOTUSblog’s.)

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  98. The only thing clear about the Dem debate is that the Democrats will put up a true liberal and the GOP will presumably put up Yosemite Sam again.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  99. 96.

    Only in one or two cases maybe were the legislative districts disqualified because of partisan gerrymandering, and I actually don’t know what states were effected. Pennsylvania?

    In cases not under appeal where they ruled against lines because of partisan gerrymandering and the decision was not stayed, that is, where new district lines were drawn, those lines remain, but they won’t remain in any case after the 2020 election.

    A state is free, of course, on its own, to outlaw partisan gerrymandering and set standards for determining what it is. Here there could be litigation if this conflicts with some voting rights cases.

    Very often districts are drawn the way they are in an attempt to avoid litigation so having the law settled will affect things.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  100. NBC managed to handle 10 candidates quite well. They let them speak. And some questions started out with a show of hands.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  101. Still reading the opinion, but I’m curious how the court’s demurral on “partisan” gerrymandering will play out.

    They acknowledge that racial gerrymandering remains with their purview. Given that the racial composition of the political parties’ voters is not uniform, couldn’t partisan gerrymandering to disadvantage Democrats (something the court says is OK) also be viewed as racial gerrymandering to disadvantage the disproportionate share of minorities among Democrat voters? (One could make a parallel argument that depriving Republicans out of seats is tantamount to racial discrimination against whites.)

    This Achilles’ Heel in the majority’s logic seems obvious, but it is not raised in the (extremely unpersuasive) dissent.

    Dave (1bb933)

  102. …depriving Republicans out of …

    Dave (1bb933)

  103. All they had to say on the Census was that they wanted to ask the question because of the possibility that the courts would rule either that states have to or can apportion on the basis of citizenship, not population, but states would need the raw data to be able to do that.

    Of course there are other possible basis’ for apportionment if you are arguing equal protection. You could also do the reapportionment on the basis of registered voters, or on the basis of average number of votes cast in each precinct in the last election or last several elections. But nobody seems to want to go there.

    Doing it on the basis of actual votes cast in previous elections leaves you with the problem that
    everyone knows that depends on whether there is an active contest there. Even statewide elections aren’t free of distortion.

    Equal protection on the basis of the current election would be an argument for some form of proportional represenaation, i.e. that single member districts decided by who gets first past the post denies equal protection.

    There is also the argument that, whether they wanted to do it or not, asking a citizenship question, in the current political atmosphere risks sabotaging the Census, but the Supreme Court seems disposed to believe, (correctly) that that was not the purpose, and that if there is a problem with that, the question of intention doesn’t matter. I think they are going to decide this without worrying what Wilbur Ross really wanted to do.

    I can see this question, or this controversy, actually working the other way to damage the accuracy of the census. If there is too much advertising to people to participate in the Census because it will help their community, people could become disposed to enter people as living there who were not.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  104. The Census opinion was nuts. You’d need a week just to read it all. According, to the MSM its a big Loss for Trump, since it puts it back to the lower courts, who will then continue to tie it up until its too late to be included.

    After all, once its past the deadline, its another 10 years.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  105. The Gerrymandering decision was good news. The SCOTUS finally, actually, said for ONCE – its none of our business. Of course, Kagan blubbered when she read her dissent because of all the “injustice”. Thank God for Gorsuch and Trump – otherwise, we’d have the Federal Courts drawing the district lines in every state – forever.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  106. Where 1,000 district court judges get the right to second guess any/every Federal administrative decision is unclear to me. It seems Federal Judges after WW2, just decided that was their right, and Congress isn’t going to do anything about it.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  107. The Census opinion was nuts. You’d need a week just to read it all. According, to the MSM its a big Loss for Trump, since it puts it back to the lower courts, who will then continue to tie it up until its too late to be included.

    After all, once its past the deadline, its another 10 years.

    rcocean (1a839e) — 6/27/2019 @ 9:04 am

    Not sure if it’s a loss…

    The conservative majority explicitedly said that the question wasn’t unconstitution… it’s just that the Commerce Dept needed a better justification under the APA.

    Seems like a quick remedy there…

    whembly (51f28e)

  108. it’s weak tea, but it’s what we can deal with:

    https://twitter.com/alimhaider/status/1144269283742162945

    narciso (d1f714)

  109. As for the Democratic debate, I’m hoping that Tulsi is getting some momentum.

    I get that she’s dangerously naive about her foreign policy positions, but I attribute that to her unabashedly non-interventionist stance. Frankly, isolationism is a bedrock of populism, so it’s interesting that she’s getting a bit of attention now. The question remains though – will it generate any meaningful momentum for her?

    I’m hoping that her “lead” in the google searches last night means something good for Tulsi…

    The only other candidate that stood out to me was Booker as I don’t think he hurt himself last night.

    As for the rest? Holy Batman the cray-cray is strong! o.O

    whembly (51f28e)

  110. The gerrymandering case is really in Roberts’ wheelhouse of keeping the courts above politics.

    He hits this one out of the park (and demolishes the dissent too).

    Dave (1bb933)

  111. @ rcocean: Re the Census opinion, you frankly admit (#105) that you’ve made no effort at all to actually read the opinion. You could at least have read my prior comment (#95) that linked the opinion and quoted from the syllabus its most significant holding: The question can be asked.

    You then apparently skimmed some news articles that, through bias or ignorance, portray this as a loss for the Trump Administration, when it is in fact exactly the opposite (as I wrote in #95), because the SCOTUS has now given the Commerce Department a roadmap for what it needs to do to properly paper its decision to ask the question — a roadmap that likewise is a guide to the lower courts who may again review that newly-papered-up decision. Rather than tying this up for ten years of further litigation, the roadmap is a frank warning to the lower courts to play this straight up, and it’s a not very subtle signal that the SCOTUS will consider, on an expedited basis, any more horseplay from the lower courts.

    In other words, what you wrote is almost completely bass-ackwards and likely to mislead other readers, who turn to this blog for commentary free from the bias and ignorance of the mainstream media.

    Why do you do insist on doing that?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  112. Delaney still believes in a carbon tax, so much for sensible behavior,

    narciso (d1f714)

  113. he did say according to the MSM, which they are working diligently to make the single source, there is Truth, and there is the recorded version of events,

    narciso (d1f714)

  114. Gabbard, with her Assad fascination, is 25% cray cray, which means she has a 75% buffer of sanity over the others.

    Munroe (e801a4)

  115. in so far as we seem to be in accordance with hts, in idlib, she’s right,

    narciso (d1f714)

  116. I get that she’s dangerously naive about her foreign policy positions

    That’s really all she talked about last night. She completely ignored the first question she was asked on income inequality to recite her military service history (perhaps a good decision, if the search data are to be believed). She basically said “me too” on Medicare for All, making the ridiculous claim:

    “if you look at other countries in the world who have universal health care, every one of them has some form of a role of private insurance”

    That demonstrates clearly that she has no idea what she’s talking about on health care.

    Then she gave a weak, pandering answer on gay rights that prompted Corey Booker to go her one better with “African-American transsexuals”.

    The question remains though – will it generate any meaningful momentum for her?

    Let’s hope not.

    She said, almost in the same breath, that the greatest threat to our security was nuclear weapons, and then that we must not do anything that could get us into a war with Iran.

    She finished her evening by claiming that “we are no better off in Afghanistan today than we were when this war began,” which is nonsense on stilts, and demeans the victories and sacrifices of our soldiers.

    Dave (1bb933)

  117. May I use your comments in a post, Beldar?

    DRJ (15874d)

  118. You always may do so, DRJ.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  119. Thank you and done. Go here.

    DRJ (15874d)

  120. Beldar,

    Think of the Patterico forums like a sports talk show. There is always somebody that thinks the coach is an idiot, if he had any brains or the right sabermetric tilt, he would have made the precise right decision that would have kept that pitcher from throwing that 3-2 meatball that just got hammered out of the park. We get this all day in Atlanta. Folks find it enjoyable. Some even take it seriously.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  121. “if you look at other countries in the world who have universal health care, every one of them has some form of a role of private insurance”

    Isn’t that true even of the United Kingdom? She wouldn’t be talking about Cuba.

    Now she probably got that from some staff member. The “if you look” could be a tell that it is not 100% true.

    Saying words like “if you look” is the type of thing Clinton did. It often means that what the pereson is about to say has problems with it (but it’s difficult to quickly check)

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  122. If one wants a very detailed, very well balanced discussion of the Census decision, I highly recommend this post by Amy Howe on SCOTUSblog: Opinion Analysis: Court orders do-over on citizenship question in census case.

    Postpone the mailing date for the forms slightly; do the re-do with the kind of record and reasoned, well-written justification that Roberts demands; and the do-over is done, successfully.

    Is the Trump Administration capable of that sort of basic competency? That is an excellent question; Roberts stops just barely short of using the term “clown-car conspiracy” to describe the Administration’s initial effort.

    But they know who they have to satisfy, and it happens to be the Chief Justice, and the big question — may the race question be asked? — has already been answered in the affirmative by him and the other four conservative Justices.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  123. the Afghan government controls how much of the countryside after 18 years, there were some serious misteps like retreating from the counterinsurgency strategy in 2011, antagonizing Karzai unnecessarily with the Abdallah boomlet, but lets face facts,

    narciso (d1f714)

  124. @ Appalled: Thank you for your #122, which is assuredly a wise observation that I ought to take to heart.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  125. The biggest takeaway for me was that Chuck Todd is going bald in the worst possible way… no pattern… it’s like each individual hair is making a decision to stay or go.

    Other than that, it was a collection of mutts.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  126. 129. Wait, she said insurance

    Not sure there is any private health insurance in Great Britain (except mabe for travelers to there) There are private doctors.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)

  127. Some countries (including the UK) have supplemental insurance that will cover your copays/deductibles. Nothing like “private health insurance” though.

    Dave (1bb933)

  128. Dave (#129),

    This is actually pretty common. Think of it as a cousin of MediGap.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  129. The most puzzling note was Senator Cory Booker speaking about transgender women who might become pregnant. I suppose we’re all uncertain about what a transgender man or woman is.

    Sammy Finkelman (4eddd7)


  130. Ridiculed Ranga
    @RidiculedRanga
    Replying to
    @ewarren
    imagine canceling a census because you want illegal aliens to be counted as citizens

    tell me more about how Trump is undermining the rule of law

    harkin (58d012)

  131. Debate organzied into categories by NBC

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/full-transcript-first-democratic-primary-debate-2019-n1022816

    It’s not a beginning to end transcript/

    Sammy Finkelman (d007a3)

  132. Primary debates matter more than general election debates and the changes show up by about the release date of pollls two weeks later. Discussion and media coverage matter more than the debate itself.

    Sammy Finkelman (d007a3)

  133. The beginning of the end for JoeyBee begins tonight, when he has to open his mouth, live, on camera, unscripted and unedited. It’ll be like watching a cow wander through a Normandy minefield in 1944.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  134. Does this make sense or is it a flub?

    Julian Castro:

    I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom, I believe in reproductive justice.

    And, you know, what that means is that just because a woman — or let’s also not forget someone in the trans community, a trans female, is poor, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have the right to exercise that right to choose.

    Sammy Finkelman (d007a3)

  135. NBC deliberately chose the order the debates came in. While the panels were picked at random, NBC then chose which debate went first.

    The debate containing Biden and Sanders will have higher ratings than it would have had it come the first night because there’s been all this extra publicity about it, and the Warren debate would have had much lower ratings had it come second. HAd the Biden debate came first it would have had higher ratings than the Warren debate, but the warren debate would have had much lower ratings.

    Sammy Finkelman (d007a3)

  136. Booker and Klobuchae on Iran deal. Booker says he won’t rejoin, although he wouldn’t have pulled out

    HOLT: We’re going to — we’re going to talk about Iran right now, because we’re working against the clock. Tankers have been attacked. A U.S. drone has been shot down. There have been disturbing threats issued by both the U.S. and Iranian leadership.

    I’d like if you can, just for a moment, to put aside how you think we may have gotten here, but what I want to know is, how do you dial it back? So a show of hands. Who as president would sign on to the 2015 nuclear deal as it was originally negotiated? That’s every — well, Senator Booker, why not?

    BOOKER: May I address that? First and foremost, it was a mistake to pull out of that deal. And one of the reasons why we’re seeing this hostility now is because Donald Trump is marching us to a far more dangerous situation. Literally, he took us out of a deal that gave us transparency into their nuclear program and pushed back a nuclear breakout 10, 20 years. And now we see Iran threatening to go further and who are pulled — being pulled further and further into this crisis.

    We need to renegotiate and get back into a deal, but I’m not going to have a primary platform to say unilaterally I’m going to rejoin that deal. Because when I’m president of the United States, I’m going to do the best I can to secure this country and that region and make sure that if I have an opportunity to leverage a better deal, I’m going to do it.

    HOLT: All right, Senator Klobuchar, I’d like to ask you to answer that question, because you’ve said — you’ve said you would negotiate yourself back into the Iranian agreement. Can you argue that that nuclear pact as it was ratified was a good deal?

    (UNKNOWN): Yes, it was.

    KLOBUCHAR: It was imperfect, but it was a good deal for that moment. I would have worked to get longer sunset periods, and that’s something we could negotiate, to get back in the deal.

    But the point is, Donald Trump told us when he got out of it that he was going to give us a better deal. Those were his words. And now we are a month away from the Iranians, who claim now that they’re going blow the caps on enriching uranium. And the Iranians have told us this.

    And so that’s where we are now. He has made us less safe than we were when he became president. So what I would do is negotiate us back into that agreement, is stand with our allies, and not give unlimited leverage to China and Russia, which is what he has done.

    And then, finally, I would make sure that if there is any possibility of a conflict — and we’re having this debate in Congress right now — that he comes to Congress for an authorization of military force. I would do that.

    And this president is literally every single day 10 minutes away from going to war, one tweet away from going to war. And I don’t think we should conduct foreign policy in our bathrobe at 5:00 in the morning, which is what he does.

    Who said trump was in bathrobe or that any decison happned at 5 am Eastern time And what should the president be wearing at 3 am or 5 am? Should he sleep in his clothes, like maybe a fireman, because an emergency might happen at any moment? Or should he get dressed first? Woodrow Wilson made a decision and maybe even convened the Cabinet in his pajamas once.

    Sammy Finkelman (d007a3)

  137. https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/27/tulsi-gabbard-democrat-asked-negative-question-last-night/

    This is spot on:

    Another popular accusation is that Gabbard is some kind of stealth right-winger, owing to the favorable reception she often generates among conservatives on social media. She does attract some idiosyncratic right-wing supporters, but that’s not because she holds any recognizably “right-wing” views. It’s mostly because she is temperamentally the antithesis to “Resistance” left-liberalism, which tends to be overly screechy, performative, and fixated on superficial Trump-related grievances.

    Gabbard has strident criticisms of Trump, but they are substantive rather than aesthetic or emotional, so she is not regarded by certain left-liberals as sufficiently oppositional in her disposition. She doesn’t indulge in culture war grandstanding, unlike most of her colleagues, which clearly endears her to some elements of the right.

    But on a policy level her views are almost uniformly left-wing. She supports Medicare for All, massive infrastructure spending, and large-scale government intervention to redress climate change, among other Bernie Sanders-style initiatives. Uniquely, though, she frames these priorities as inextricably connected to U.S. foreign policy, which has appeal to libertarians and conservatives who might not agree with her proposed left-wing domestic agenda, but also view the U.S. role in the world as over-extended and financially wasteful. (The first question Gabbard received was an invitation to opine on the sexes’ pay gap, but rather than take that bait she opted to go on an anti-war disquisition.)

    whembly (51f28e)

  138. (a) Warren did a great job of articulating her positions (I loved the observation that an insurance company’s business model is built on raking in as much in premiums as it can while paying out as little in claims as it can — this is absolutely unquestionably true, and rarely acknowledged) and was the clear winner of the night.

    (b) Booker and Castro did decent jobs. Castro wiped the floor with Beto in their exchange, showing himself to have a detailed understanding of the law and Beto to be an uninformed clown. I really liked Booker’s mention of violence against trans women of color; this is a real issue for that community, and it’s nice to see it recognized.

    (c) de Blasio and Inslee can go away.

    (d) Castro’s reproductive justice bit was bizarre, and his bit about trans women getting pregnant was obviously a flub. It’s physically impossible for a trans woman to get pregnant.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  139. aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/27/2019 @ 5:39 pm

    (d) Castro’s reproductive justice bit was bizarre, and his bit about trans women getting pregnant was obviously a flub. It’s physically impossible for a trans woman to get pregnant.

    ZZZZZZThe question I had was: What he think is a transwoman?

    1) A woman who becomes a man.

    2) A man who becomes a woman and they can now implant a uterus??

    3) he’s talking about a woman who becomes a man who becomes a woman again.

    4) He got mized up. He was very focused on equality.

    I didn’t read any article that followed up on that.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4533 secs.