Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
This week, Bolton bolts, we debate the debate with The Washington Post’s Henry Olsen, kick around the culture with The Atlantic’s Andrew Ferguson, we’ve got a new Long Poll question for you (but you have to be a Ricochet member to vote), Lileks awards the coveted Member Post of The Week, and some thoughts on the 18th anniversary of 9/11.
Music from this week’s show: My City of Ruins by Bruce Springsteen
Subscribe to The Ricochet Podcast in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
“Statism always expands.”
The simple fact is, nonpublic goods, politicians guessing at tax brackets and deductions, and showing them down our throats, centralization, and the Federal Reserve supposedly helping the economy are all negative value.Every single government actuarial system is a thieving implosion machine.
All of these things make everything worse. Then people want more government to fix it.
In addition to that,
“There were scores of little petty chiefs and tyrants who lost no opportunity of causing trouble in the unsettled times, and the usual Afghan pastimes of blood-feud, robbery, and murder-for-fun were going ahead full steam. Our army prevented any big rising—for the moment, anyway—but it was forever patrolling and manning little forts, and trying to pacify and buy off the robber chiefs, and people were wondering how long this could go on.”
That’s how Harry Flashman described it in his account of his military service there in 1841-42. And my friends who are serving there lately say it hasn’t changed much, if at all.
Especially Democrats. And Democrats don’t just want more government in general, they want more Democrats to supposedly fix what the previous Democrats already screwed up.
How has the GOP ever been serious about breaking up this dynamic? They never have. If they had any brains they would let Trump run interference for them and get something done.
Rob’s assumptions on that are interesting. I didn’t vote for who I voted for because I thought it was who I thought would be the easiest to beat. Not at all.
I voted for Bernie, because I thought it would be the most entertaining.
Sorry, Rob – if you’re looking for an answer to a specific question, then phrase the poll so it does that. Otherwise you’re extrapolating from your assumptions about what people are thinking, not what they think in response to the poll’s question.
Apropos the discussion about writer’s block. It’s one of my favorite quotes.
It was a poorly worded poll question because it could be taken in two or three different ways.
And…
All of the podcast discussion (e.g. that the voters were wrong, etc.) seemed to assume the first interpretation, but that was an incorrect assumption.
Given that people voted for candidates according to wildly different interpretations of the vague question, the results are a muddle and it’s doubtful whether the results tell much at all.
p.s. “Which Democrat Do You Think Has the Best Chances Against Trump?” is far more clear and meaningful. The apparent discrepancies between the polls reflect the ambiguity of the first one.
nm
I found it refreshing to hear Peter curse like a sailor.
Now, if we can just get him to quit sighing mid-statement.
Here on the site you can use the left / right arrow keys to skip back (left) and forward (right) 5 seconds at a time. I strongly encourage everyone to listen to the podcasts with a podcast app, either on your computer or phone or tablet, though. It’s a lot easier for you (podcast apps are designed specifically for listening to podcasts) and better for us if you subscribe to the Superfeed or individual show feeds.
Just to be clear, you guys get credit when we subscribe to individual shows over iTunes? Right?
We get credit for both the SuperFeed and individual shows.
I did not know this. Thanks, @max!
I also voted for Biden in the Long Poll for the same reasons Joseph outlined – the last election taught me to be careful about my assumptions regarding electability. Clinton’s team wanted Trump to get the nomination. Whoops. I know Biden polls best against Trump, but honestly he is the best option for the rule of law and the Constitution on that stage. Scary, I know. I actually plan to vote for him in the primary for this very reason. It will be the first (and hopefully only) time I ever vote for a Democrat. Sanders as President would be a nightmare.
Re: Gladwell, I think The Tipping Point is actually a good book and contains insights worth pondering. Blink was trash.
This is exactly what I did. I was confused when Rob started talking about this poll. There’s a risk/reward calculation. Even if Biden is stronger against Trump, I would vote for him in the Dem primary at this point, because President Warren is not unthinkable. There’s also an unknown number of Ricochet members who would probably prefer Biden to Trump, which also screws up the poll.
And finish his sentences, rather than just stop mid-word apparently assuming that everyone knows what he was going to say.
The first Long Poll illustrates how difficult it is to create a valid, unambiguous survey question.
Based on my experience of many debates over the years, I believe Ferguson is backing away from politics because he’s losing the argument over Trump and, like many people, can’t admit he was wrong.
Also, endorsing Trump would probably get him fired: the sad life of the token conservative in the liberal media.
Trump’s “incivility” — i.e., saying in public what other Presidents said in private — is laughably insignificant compared to keeping progressives’ grimy hands off the Supreme Court. (Unless you’re fond of “penumbras” and “emanations”!)
Ferguson’s other reason to oppose Trump — his allegedly corrupting effect on his conservative defenders — ascends heights of triviality hitherto unknown to Man.
A plausible argument, but it may be wrong.
Reading Hemingway and Severino’s book on the Kavanaugh fight, we find that Diane Feinstein, once the most collegial of Democratic Senators, is in her old age led by the nose by her increasingly radical staff.
Then there’s the aged Jeff Sessions, whose weakness and vacillation as AG nearly destroyed the Trump Presidency and may yet limit it to one term.
It’s all too likely that a doddering Pres. Biden will not be able to stand up to the radicals, even if he wants to.
Fine. But answer me this: If Trump goes down in flames next year and Ferguson — even after Trump is gone — continues to write about culture instead of politics, will you admit your thesis was wrong?
Did you notice that Ben Sasse got endorsed by Trump? The Never Trumpers on my Twitter feed are very upset. All he ever did was tell people to behave and suck it up. No policies. All he did was pitch books. Ridiculous.
If you’re going to be unrealistic about where this country is and how it happened your positions are going to make a lot of sense. They aren’t going to workout.
It basically comes down to two things in my opinion. David Horowitz is right about everything and some people don’t want to admit it. The other thing is all of the Western governments have done every single thing wrong in the face of job destruction and wage pressure from automation and globalized labor. One way or another you have to be realistic about all of that.
And then they didn’t get the ACA repealed. Unbelievable.
“Dat’s too hyperthetical, Weevil!” “Way too hyperthetical, Mr. Duck!”
(Insufficient data at this time. Some guys who fled to Canada to avoid Vietnam stayed.)
Hypothetical questions — by definition — contain no data. All I was asking was a simple “What if?”
As in, you maintain that Ferguson’s decision to switch to writing about culture instead of politics stems from the fact that “he is losing the argument over Trump.”
So it follows that if your theory is correct, Ferguson will return his attention to politics if Trump loses next year, right? (Why wouldn’t he?)
On the other hand, if Trump loses and Ferguson keeps right on focusing on culture … doesn’t it stand to reason that Ferguson’s decision to jump into that particular lane had little to do with Trump?
Wouldn’t that be a fair deduction?
And if not, why not?
I think that’s a little unfair. He voted with Trump to get decent policies passed. I’d vote for the guy.
You may be able to customize that on the application you use to play your podcasts.
Well it’s just a fact that NTs are mad at Sasse now. I mean really mad. I think he used to use a lot of fairly direct anti-Trump rhetoric and now they are mad he isn’t going to do that anymore.
I can’t stand his political philosophy. Philip Klein was very critical of him in a similar way I’m describing and he’s a hell of a lot smarter than me.
Let me spell it out a little more …
If the Vietnam War ends and an alleged draft dodger stays in Canada … doesn’t it stand to reason that his decision to flee to Canada had little to do with the war?
Short answer: NO. The reason he fled and the reason he stayed need not be the same.
Going back to Ferguson (the man not the city), if editors pay well for his culture stuff, he may never come back to politics. If they don’t, he will have to come back in spite of Trump.
Oh, I see what you’re saying. Okay, fair enough. I don’t fully agree with you (it just seems to me that if a talented pro like Ferguson loves writing about politics but is urged by Trump-derangement into another lane, he’s gonna go back to writing about politics the minute Trump is gone), but fair enough.
I don’t know what evidence there is that he wouldn’t go along with them anyway. And wouldn’t have even when he was much younger and at least theoretically less doddering.
Not a good example. That was very open-ended from the start. Only someone who thought he knew what other people would think of it, would believe it was specific.