Skip to content

Month: November 2022

Breaking bad

“Blue check” chaos for Musk’s new toy

Twitter users rub Elon Musk’s “blue check” plan for Twitter in his face. Via Tech Crunch:

Elon Musk’s mercurial leadership and half-baked product plans are already creating fertile ground for confusion on Twitter.

We’ve lost count of how many times Musk has changed his mind or offered contradictory claims about what a new paid $8 verification badge would do, but after pushing the feature live, fake accounts are seizing on the chaos.

Twitter’s bought blue check marks are now available for some paying subscribers, injecting the timeline with tweets that appear to be from official accounts. And apparently Musk’s Twitter skeleton crew made no meaningful changes to the visual language of the blue check, so right now it signals that you’re either really who you say you are — @CocaCola, for instance — or you’re somebody random who just coughed up $8 and got a stamp of approval.

Musk was really unhappy about that one (above).

Elon Musk scrambles to reassure advertisers amid ‘blue check’ verification chaos

And there was plenty of chaos.

A-a-a-a-nd, early reports this morning suggest Twitter Blue is all but gone.

Musk was not the only rich guy melting down on the internet Thursday. Some deeply, needy and more deeply insecure “stable genius” in Florida was rather unhappy about the New York Post’s front page. About the failure of his midterm picks. And about Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Perhaps the International Olympic Committee would consider adding “super-rich narcissists losing their shit” competition to future games. (Would it be a summer or “winter of our discontent” event?) We’re already assembling a U.S. squad.

Not a whit of self-awareness

A well-adjusted adult doesn’t do this

People who camp out in line overnight to see/hear Mr. Insecurity are in serious need of a life.

“What’s annoying is that Trump, in all his childish, insecure, and narcissistic prose, is right about DeSantis. I hate agreeing with Trump,” tweets Medhi Hasan.

One could hope.

When we win, keep talking about the winning! @spockosbrain

I was really anxious & depressed for the last 2 weeks. Today I’m feeling a bit better because it wasn’t the blow out that the BS polls were predicting. 

During my delusions of grandeur I think about how to change the system. Part of it is Spreading the Good News about what good Democrats have done and can keep doing.
But that is REALLY boring to the media and Social Media.

What is more exciting to the media is when we Fight the Bad Guys. So, talk about our wins then talk about fighting bad guys!

He won! Let’s talk about how great that is!

Hey, that Fetterman win felt good! RIGHT? I’d also I’d like to say, “F that Oz guy!”
But talking about crushing Oz is uncool. The consultant class says “Be the bigger man… ” Well, Fetterman is, but they will also push him to “be a uniter.”

The MSM will ask what he is going to do next. 
“Are you going to “Reach across the Aisle to all the people who didn’t vote for you?” 
He’s supposed to look out for  “all Pennsylvanians, no matter their party.”

Gene J. Puskar AP

But that’s different from his role in the Senate. He can support the need to prosecute people where we have evidence and probable cause they committed crimes that harmed the country during a coup attempt. But Fetterman doesn’t need to go after the coup plotters and the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol, but we can. DEMOCRATS CAN. GO! Go! Go! Do it NOW!

We have probable cause Republicans  COMMITTED CRIMINAL ACTS. They need to be indicted. 
Keep talking about their crimes!

Say, “The can have their ‘day in court’ where they have to testify under oath. (Vs lying to the public on social media.)
They can see the EVIDENCE against them.
They can argue about the evidence. They can question it. They can provide exculpatory evidence, if it exists. (Which I doubt.)
They want to prove their innocence? Great, bring it!

During this time will a House REPUBLICAN majority want to start investigating Democrats for no reason? Sure! They’ve already said they would. So what? We just CONSTANTLY point out the huge amounts of evidence that points to probable cause that they committed CRIMINAL ACTS.

Glenn Kirschner reminds us that a Republican controlled House can NOT stop the DOJ.

A Republican controlled House can NOT stop us from saying, “When there is probable cause people committed crimes they should be indicted.”

 The Republicans will play the victim, even when they control of the House.
They play the victim as they harass and intimidate others. 
They just straight out LIE that Democrats are the criminals, because they project. 

The media will both sides this, but we have the stronger story. WE HAVE HARD EVIDENCE that they committed CRIMES, whereas they lie and make shirt up!  

NOW is the time to start talking about their CRIMES. Also the media will love it, it makes for an exciting news story, now that the horse race is almost over.

Start spreading this story on all your new social media channels!

A Truth Social Tantrum

But he’s not mad at all …

I’m just going to leave these posts here for you to peruse. They are just a sample. Does he sound …. distressed?

That’s right. He actually reminds us all that he is a “stable genius”

Ok, so it’s Trump being Trump ranting and raving. but get a load of this:

This is the big one. You just won’t believe it:

What the fuck????

By the way, he’s deleted these texts. I think you can imagine why.

The educated voter shift

There is a lot of hand-wringing about Democrats losing the non-college educated white voters in this country. But there is a little silver lining. They are gaining college educated voters by the millions. And what’s amazing about all that is that their policies are all designed more to help the middle and working class along with providing much more assistance to the poor. Go figure:

Here’s your insane political stat of the day. In Michigan, Hillary Clinton lost white college grads by 8 pts in 2016.

In 2022 Whitmer won them by 21 points. That’s a 29 point shift in 6 years

Now let's take a look at Georgia. In 2016, Clinton lost white college graduates 28/69. In 2022, Warnock lost them 40/58 … a 21 point shift

How about the GA Gov race … Abrams lost them 36/63. That's a 14 pt shift from 2016

In Pennsylvania, Clinton and Trump tied among white college grads. In 2022, Fetterman won them by 13 .. Shapiro won them by 25

Last one … North Carolina. Trump won white college grads by 19 points in 2016. In 2022, Cheri Beasley (a Democrat) won them my 7 — a 26 point shift.

Originally tweeted by Michael Cohen (@speechboy71) on November 10, 2022.

Betting markets or wishful thinkers?

They didn’t do well…

Kevin Drum on the betting markets miss this election:

[Y[ou know who else lost big? Betting markets. Here is Rick Maese of the Washington Post just a couple of days ago:

With control of Congress at stake in next week’s midterm elections, political observers and polling data both suggest Republicans have a strong chance of retaking the House, while the fight for the Senate is considered extremely competitive. The election betting markets, however, see less ambiguity, already essentially handing the House speaker’s gavel to Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and giving Republicans about a two-thirds chance of controlling the Senate.

….Political observers study the ever-changing markets to assess candidates’ chances of winning. While traditional polling data might gauge voter sentiment from a specific period in the recent past, researchers say the betting markets offer more of a real-time snapshot as bettors react to events, endorsements and gaffes.

Hmmm. Here’s a betting market on control of the Senate:

That sure changed on a dime within a day of the election! Here’s the House:

That looks a little better on first glance, but it doubled between November 8th and 9th. Not so great! […]

Ordinary pollsters were a whole lot closer than this.

You can find a bunch more like these if you feel like googling for a few minutes. Nate Silver obviously has a personal interest in all this, but nonetheless here’s his explanation for why betting markets aren’t really that great:

One weakness of these markets is that they tend to follow the media narrative about the race more so than they do the underlying evidence. The source for this claim: yours truly, because I’ve been doing this for a very long time.

….The other weakness in these prediction markets is that the traders don’t have a lot of technical sophistication about election forecasting….There are some questions for which actually going through the process of building a model helps a lot, such as in determining how much an election forecast should shift in response to a modest but noisy shift in the polls.

I agree. Say what you will about betting markets, but the bettors themselves are mostly just talking to their friends and reading the same stuff everyone else does. Even aggregating several thousand of them doesn’t average out their systemic bias toward whatever their favorite call-in show is saying.

Yep. They don’t know any more than the rest of us. Why do people pay any special attenttion to them?

Where’s Trumpie?

He’s fulminating at MAL. But is he cooked?

Uh Huh…

I don’t think so. Here’s the NY Times on where he sits in these first couple of days after the election:

Donald J. Trump faced unusual public attacks from across the Republican Party on Wednesday after a string of midterm losses by candidates he had handpicked and supported, a display of weakness as he prepared to announce a third presidential campaign as soon as next week.

As the sheer number of missed Republican opportunities sank in, the rush to openly blame Mr. Trump was as immediate as it was surprising.

Conservative allies criticized Mr. Trump on social media and cable news, questioning whether he should continue as the party’s leader and pointing to his toxic political brand as the common thread woven through three consecutive lackluster election cycles.

Mr. Trump was seen as largely to blame for the Republicans’ underwhelming finish in Tuesday’s elections, as a number of the candidates he had endorsed in competitive races were defeated — including nominees for governor and Senate in Pennsylvania and for governor of Michigan, New York and Wisconsin.

“Republicans have followed Donald Trump off the side of a cliff,” David Urban, a longtime Trump adviser with ties to Pennsylvania, said in an interview.

Former Representative Peter King, a Republican from Long Island who has long supported Mr. Trump, said, “I strongly believe he should no longer be the face of the Republican Party,” adding that the party “can’t become a personality cult.”

The chorus of criticism, which unfolded on Fox News and social media throughout the day, revealed Mr. Trump to be at his most vulnerable point politically since the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Still, Mr. Trump has built a deep well of loyalty with Republican voters, and party officials cautioned that it was too soon to tell whether he would suffer any lasting political damage beyond a flurry of bad headlines, or whether a rival will emerge to challenge him. Mr. Trump has built a career on outlasting political controversy, and Trump aides insisted that any suggestion of weakness was a media confection.

“I am proud to endorse Donald Trump for president in 2024,” Representative Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican, said in a statement. “It is time for Republicans to unite around the most popular Republican in America who has a proven track record of conservative governance.”

Senator-elect J.D. Vance, Republican from Ohio and an early choice of Mr. Trump, said he believed Mr. Trump would be the nominee if he runs. “Every year, the media writes Donald Trump’s political obituary. And every year, we’re quickly reminded that Trump remains the most popular figure in the Republican Party,” he said. And Representative Jim Banks of Indiana said he supported Mr. Trump, who “transformed our party.”

Ms. Stefanik, Mr. Vance and Mr. Banks all provided statements after The New York Times sought comment from an aide to Mr. Trump.

Publicly, Mr. Trump put the best face on the results, pointing to dozens of wins for his endorsed candidates in less competitive races.

In an interview on Wednesday with Fox News, he pointed to Mr. Vance, who delivered a convincing victory, and to Herschel Walker, the former football star, who will face Senator Raphael Warnock in the Georgia runoff.

“We had tremendous success — why would anything change?” Mr. Trump said when asked whether he would delay his announcement.

But at his home in Florida, Mr. Trump was privately spreading blame, including to Sean Hannity and the casino mogul Steve Wynn, for his endorsement of Mehmet Oz, the defeated Pennsylvania Senate candidate. He included his wife, Melania, among those he complained had offered poor advice, according to several people familiar with the discussions.

Among Republican operatives who have been open to working with another Trump presidential campaign, a handful said they were reconsidering. That could present a challenge for Mr. Trump, who has a handful of trusted advisers but almost no one yet staffing key aspects of a campaign-in-waiting.

Kayleigh McEnany, a former Trump White House press secretary and one of his longtime defenders, said on Fox News on Wednesday that her former boss should hold off on an announcement, at least until after the runoff election for Senate in Georgia.

“He needs to put it on pause, absolutely,” Ms. McEnany said. “If I’m advising any contender, no one announces 2024 until we get through Dec. 6.”

Mr. Trump, however, has been teasing rally crowds for weeks with hints of another presidential bid — one that was meant to capitalize on the momentum gained by what he repeatedly predicted would be a towering Republican victory in Tuesday’s elections. That would allow him to claim credit for endorsing the winners, holding dozens of rallies to showcase them and, in a new spirit of benevolence, spending millions of dollars from his campaign treasury on advertisements to support them.

Instead, the party fared far more poorly than it had expected, though it remains within reach of control of one or both houses of Congress.

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump was said to be furious with Mr. Hannity, to whom the former president often turns for political advice, and who was among several people who urged him to endorse Dr. Oz.

In Arizona, where the governor candidate Kari Lake and Blake Masters, running for Senate, had campaigned together as “America First” candidates carrying Mr. Trump’s banner, both were behind as the counting continued in races too close to call.

And in 36 House races that the Cook Political Report rated as tossups, Mr. Trump endorsed just five Republicans. Each one lost on Tuesday.

“Almost every one of these Trump-endorsed candidates that you see in competitive states has lost,” Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor, said Wednesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “It’s a huge loss for Trump. And, again, it shows that his political instincts are not about the party, they’re not about the country — they’re about him.”

Mr. King said the results showed that it was time for the party to move on, and he faulted Mr. Trump for sniping at political allies.

“His self-promotion and his attacks on Republicans including Ron DeSantis and Mitch McConnell were largely responsible for Republicans not having a red wave,” Mr. King said. “We can’t allow blind fealty to Trump to determine the fate of our party.”

Scott Jennings, a longtime adviser to Mr. McConnell, the Senate minority leader, pointed to exit polls that showed Mr. Trump was less popular than President Biden. He said if Mr. Trump wanted to see a Republican elected president in 2024, he should not run.

Mr. Jennings suggested Mr. DeSantis, the Florida governor, and Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia as potential alternatives. He called for those Republicans to move urgently, pointing to the former president’s rapid political recovery after his supporters rioted in the Capitol, after Mr. Trump had falsely told them that his re-election victory had been stolen.

“The void has to be filled,” Mr. Jennings said. “After Jan. 6, the G.O.P. hesitated and he quickly recovered. DeSantis cannot hesitate.”

Adding to Mr. Trump’s long night on Tuesday, one of the few Republican bright spots in the midterms came in Florida, where Mr. DeSantis — widely viewed as the leading alternative to Mr. Trump in 2024 — won re-election with the widest margin of any Republican in the 24 years the party has controlled the governor’s office in Tallahassee.

The New York Post, one of Mr. Trump’s favorite publications, devoted its cover on Wednesday to an election-night photo of the 44-year-old governor celebrating with his young family. The tabloid’s headline, “DeFuture,” turned his family name into a compliment — just four days after Mr. Trump dismissed Mr. DeSantis as “DeSanctimonious” at a rally.

On Wednesday, Mr. Trump pointed out on his social media website, Truth Social, that he had received more total votes in Florida during his 2020 presidential race than Mr. DeSantis won on Tuesday. Mr. Trump’s margin of victory, however, was only about one-tenth as wide.

It remains to be seen how durable the criticisms of Mr. Trump will prove, but in the immediate aftermath of votes being cast, some Republicans were willing to deliver unusually blunt on-the-record criticisms of Mr. Trump.

“Americans tend to support candidates who look forward and not backward,” said Mr. Urban, the former Trump adviser. “If Trump can do that, people would be excited. But can he? If history is any judge, I don’t think he can and it’s shame. He’s an incredibly skilled politician in many ways, but in other ways, he just doesn’t get it.”

Mike Cernovich, a conservative blogger and longtime defender of Mr. Trump, broke with his political ally on Wednesday, posting a series of messages to his one million followers on Twitter, in which he referred to the midterms as “an ass-kicking” for Republicans, and suggested the only silver lining was “at least no one has to suck up to Trump anymore.”

“The country doesn’t care about the 2020 election,” Mr. Cernovich wrote. “Trump can’t move on, oh well. Bye.”

Really?

All I can say is :Access Hollywood, Charlottesville, 2018, 2020, January 6th.

Maybe this time is different. I’ll believe it when I see it. He has a stranglehold on about 35% of the GOP. Are they ready to abandon Dear Leader? If not, they have a veto proof minority. It’s not as if Trump will graciously step back and tell his people to vote Republican…

QOTD: Roy Edroso

A little silver lining:

One of the good things about this election is the apparent failure of straight-up white nationalist appeals to move the needle. The tendency of normal voters to hug the middle of the road can be very frustrating for liberals, but say this for Mr. and Mrs. America, they don’t seem to cotton to conservative weirdos talking like cartoon villains about the future of the white race, either

I have to agree with this. I am as intensely frustrated by normie complacency and navel gazing as any good liberal but I too have had some faith in Mr and Mrs America restored a bit. I was not sure that they would overcome the intense media insistence that they be so upset about gas prices that they should blind themselves to growing fascism, but it seems enough of them did to prevent a GOP rout.

But man, does it ever take effort …

Will the media take a look in the mirror?

… Sadly, probably not.

James Fallows has another fantastic analysis of the media’s performance in this last cycle and I’m just going to shamelessly share the whole thing here. (Do subscribe to his newsletter if you do that sort of thing. It’s exceptional.)

So much is still in flux from the 2022 midterms. The control of the House and the Senate could go either way. The political careers of Herschel Walker, Lauren Boebert, Kari Lake, Blake Masters, and others may be ending—like that of Mehmet Oz. Or they could just be getting underway, like that of J.D. Vance.

Joe Biden could have a much harder time ahead of him in appointing judges. Or easier. We don’t know.

Here’s what we do know:

First, that the results will not be remotely on a scale with previous first-term midterm wipeouts, especially for Democrats. As a reminder, among post-World War II Democratic presidents:

In 1946, Harry Truman’s Democrats lost 55 seats in the House, and 12 in the Senate, in his first election after succeeding FDR and ending World War II.

In 1962, John Kennedy lost 5 seats in the House, after his guidance through the Cuban Missile Crisis.

In 1966, Lyndon Johnson lost 47 seats in the House but still held a majority because of the Democrats’ landslide victories over Barry Goldwater in 1964.

In 1978, Jimmy Carter lost 15 seats.

In 1994, Bill Clinton lost 54 seats, and Newt Gingrich became the first Republican Speaker of the House since the 1950s.

In 2010, Barack Obama lost an astonishing 63 seats, the worst midterm defeat ever.1

Every first-term president since World War II (except one) has suffered midterm election losses. The average loss has been around 30 House seats. The one exception is George W. Bush in 2002, then at a height of public support after the 9/11 attacks and before the invasion of Iraq. His party gained 8 seats in the House.2

A lot has changed over this span—including, crucially, that far fewer House seats are potentially “in play” any more, since so many have been gerrymandered into one-party locks. But in historic terms, the midterm results under Joe Biden in 2022 are likely to be far better for the incumbent party and its president than for other modern presidents. As Biden would say, it’s a BFD.

Second, what has happened appears to be entirely at odds with what the political-reporter cadre — the people whose entire job is predicting and pre-explaining political trends — had been preparing the public for.

Share

What the ‘pre-write’ looked like.

For an illustration of how prepared our leading press organizations were to declare a Biden failure and a Republican sweep, consider the early edition of the New York Times, which went to the printer last night as the first results, of GOP flips in gerrymandered Florida districts, were coming in:

From a photo of the “Late Edition” of the NYT, taken this morning in a hotel in New Haven by law professor Anil Kahlan and used with his permission and my thanks. This version of the front page, headline, and presentation can no longer be found on the NYT’s web site. The site offers digital front-page images, but the one for the “New York Edition” (with the same “Late Edition” tag) has the updated and less embarrassing headline, “GOP Gains Edge, But Its Expectations Dim.”

What’s perhaps most notable about this page is not just the declaration that the initial, gerrymandered Florida results were “pivotal” or the context that the Democrats “face intense national headwinds.” It is also the play of the “explainer” story on the left side, obviously planned in advance, with its premise that the U.S.’s self-correcting tendencies would have been shown once again to have failed.3

And here is a pre-write from the front page of this morning’s WSJ. The news operations of the Journal (as opposed to its Fox News-counterpart editorial pages) have overall been much more careful about a “Dems in disarray” framing of the 2022 election than the Times has.

But the framing the Journal was prepared for was “pocketbook issues” — inflation, interest rates, “pain at the pump”—determining results. This seems to be what some people who answered their exit polls claimed, but it doesn’t appear to have been what happened.

What did happen? The Washington Post gave a clue with an online banner this afternoon, making a point notably absent from most of the pre-writes:

Give a gift subscription

The pre-narrative we have heard.

The Democrats have “defied expectations,” as the Post headline above puts it, largely because of the expectations our media and political professionals had set.

The premises of “analysis” pieces and talk shows over the past year-plus have been:

Biden is unpopular,” which may be true but seems not to have been decisive.

Afghanistan was the effective end of his presidency,” a widespread view 14 months ago. You can look it up.

Democrats have no message” — which in turn is an amalgam of (a) “Roe was a long time ago,” (b) “no one cares about infrastructure,” (c) “it’s all about crime” [or immigrants], and (d) “it’s all about Prices At The Pump.” Here is a representative Page One framing from the NYT just one week ago, which I mention because of how much the NYT shapes and legitimizes other coverage:

Dems in disarray.” On the day before people went to the polls, the Times’
front page had two “analysis” stories on how bleak the Democratic prospects looked. Below you’ll see a comparison of this week’s pre-election front page, on the right, with the one four years earlier, the day before the Trump midterms of 2018.
In 2018, shown on the left, the analysis stressed the uncertainty of how things would go. This is always the right note for election-week coverage to strike. And as it turned out, the Democrats had a huge win, gaining their 41 seats.But in 2022, two days ago, the front-page stories and framing were different. They said: “[Democratic] party’s outlook bleak,” “[Dems] view the coming days with dread,” “brace for losses,” “clear signs of rejecting Democratic control.”It’s not so much that this proved to be wrong. It’s that they felt it necessary and useful to get into the “expectations” business this way.4

What is to be done.

Prediction is hard. But there are people who have to keep trying:

Weather forecasters give us advice on matters from the trivial (“Be sure to bring your umbrella!”) to the consequential (“You must evacuate now”).

Business analysts suggest trends for companies, technologies, entire economies.

Climate scientists give guidance on drought, floods, shifts in crops.

Epidemiologists tell us where new threats may arise.

None of them is perfect. But we depend on all of them giving us their best guess.

If any of them was as off-base, as consistently, as political “experts” are, we’d look for someone else to do those jobs.

Or ask whether it even needs doing. Which in politics it only rarely does. If you had never read an “expert” analytic column about “what this means for the midterms,” or gone to a single political-insider panel discussion, you’d be about as well informed on what has just happened as if you’d spent all day every day doom scrolling.

There is so much to explore, learn about, and share in our world. Speculating about what’s going to happen in the next election is about the least useful insight to add.

I thought of this when I saw the first stories about “why Biden faces trouble in the midterms” stories 18 months ago. I will think about it tomorrow when I read the next “How this shapes the 2024 field” speculation-fest.

No one knows what is going to happen. Least of all — it seems — the political “experts.” So let’s waste less time pretending to know, and invest more in looking into, sharing, and learning from what is actually going on.

How about this, in practical terms: For the next three stories an editor plans to assign on “Sizing up the 2024 field,” or the next three podcasts or panel sessions on “After the midterms, what’s ahead for [Biden, Trump, DeSantis, etc.],” instead give two of those reporting and discussion slots to under-reported realities of the world we live in now.

Whatever you say about the 2024 race now will be wrong. And what you say about the world of 2022 could be valuable.

I think that says it all.

How can they miss you if you won’t go away?

Who gets custody of Marge, Matt and Gym?

Dan Hicks predicted Republican buyer’s remorse. The Murdoch’s have it, too.

If the GOP is ready to split with Don, who gets custody of Marge, Matt and Gym?

Not that it’s sunk in with Matt that “Big Daddy Don” has any responsibility for the flacid Republican performance on Tuesday.

Someone quipped on Wednesday that “Dancing With The Stars” has already contacted Rep. Lauren Boebert whose reelection hangs in the balance. Greene won her Georgia reelection easily and could make House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s dreams of being Speaker a nightmare.

One incoming Republican congressman from New York at least performs distancing from Trump’s cult of personality. He wants to see “a different direction.” But Mike Lawler hedges on supporting investigations of Biden. His wife is from Moldova, says Lawler, adding he is “fully committed” to support for Ukraine at current levels. He’ll have trouble selling that to a Republican House caucus dominated by Greene’s dead-ender brand of MAGA.

With Murdoch’s News Corp. turning on Trump, one wonders how long it will take before Fox News celebrities move on fully from Trump to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis? No amount of Fox fluffing will breathe life into the right’s next authoritarian gasbag.