30 Comments

It would be interesting if the people behind these stories reported where they get their news from.

“I sure wish they could care about basic principles like the right to vote, to a free and fair election, and the peaceful transfer of power.”

This is pure MSM rhetoric. Everyone has the right to vote, but they have a right to be skeptical of mass mail in vote dumps for days with no photo ID. 2020 was not a free and fair election because MSM suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop. 2016 was not a peaceful transfer of power because the deep state launched the fake Russia narrative to hamper a duly elected president.

Expand full comment
Jun 26·edited Jun 26

So... you're going to vote for the mass invasion that the puppet masters who control the corpse of Joe Biden are letting into the country?

Why? Because some book convinced you that the bloated unelected bureaucracy that is spying on all of us, putting Christians and concerned parents on terror watch lists while they ignore actual terrorists and rampant child sex trafficking, and continue to censor us and poison our food and manipulate interest rates and everything else terrible they do... is somehow NECESSARY?

I don't believe for a minute you're politically homeless. You even believe the Jan-6 Report. You BELIEVE it. Insane.

Good Lord... when they define TDS in the dictionary, you should submit your picture.

Expand full comment

Nailed it. This diatribe had all the earmarks of liberal disinformation.

Expand full comment
Jun 26·edited Jun 26

Please don't call it liberal. I appreciate the back-up, but I AM LIBERAL. What you're thinking of is Leftist or Woke / Cultural Marxist.

Liberal ≠ Woke. They are opposites. We need to be clear in how we use language, because the Woke who control just about everything in media, journalism, academia, pop culture, and the federal bureaucracy ARE clear and purposeful in their misuse of language. Please don't give these Woke lunatics cover by calling them or confusing them with Liberals or liberalism.

Moderates, Libertarians, and Conservatives need to stop misusing the word Liberal. Please. True liberals are not Woke, and the Woke hate liberalism.

Expand full comment

That's why you are number one in their crosshairs. The woke get far more deranged over Good Faith liberals who dissent than conservatives, who they can easily dismiss. Just out of interest, are you a Bill Mahler liberal, a Jonathan Haidt liberal or one of a dying breed of liberals who really used to stand up for the blue collar class?

The problem is that nobody foresaw just how powerful the social incentives are to remain cowed, when you can be accused of racism for simply dissenting from woke orthodoxies. That was one of the interesting insights surrounding the Jordan Peterson Cambridge affair- when support for Jordan Peterson could lead to cancellation, few were willing to speak out on his behalf, and as soon as the question was to put before a secret ballot it quickly became clear that support for his return was overwhelming.

It's the Dictatorship of the Small Minority. All the research shows that in most Western countries the appetite amongst the masses is for a small shift to the Left on economics and a significant shift to the Right on culture- although conservatives would call the former tackling crony capitalism. The problem is the Democratic Party is giving ground to the loons on culture and not shifting an inch on economics (unless it involves 'tackling climate change'). Don't believe me? Then why is Joe Biden pushing ahead on insane gender-based changes to Title IX, when some of the most progressive countries in Europe have stopped transitioning children?

The problem is that gender ID not only can be abused, but currently IS being abused. More than 50% of trans women in female prison populations in the UK are former sex offenders, and there have been several instances of trans women raping women in British prisons. British nurses are suing their NHS Trust because they've been forced by their HR department to share changing rooms with a masculine trans women with a penis who has a habit of staring at them whilst they change.

With the exception of the UK, where the Tories broke their promises, most of Europe is shifting to the Right in terms of the Overton Window, especially amongst the young. If you want liberalism, you have to fight for it- and that includes Islamic Supremacy. What do people expect, when more than half of French Muslims want to turn all catholic churches into mosques and Muslim communities have implemented Sharia Law through municipal laws in clusters across Europe?

Expand full comment

My brother in Christ, you are as deep into an echo chamber as it’s possible for a human being to be. You need to see more of what’s out in the real world, and get your news from other places.

Expand full comment

I’m no fan of Trump, I voted third-party in 2016 and held my nose to vote for Biden in 2020 (because I fell for his claim to be a common sense moderate Democrat which his administration has since been anything but) and I won’t be making that mistake again in 2024, I’m leaning towards third-party again (RFK Jr. most likely) but like other commenters I don’t understand how this reader went from where they were all the way to voting for Biden in 2024

Expand full comment

He or she is a plant.

Expand full comment

This person is absolutely not politically homeless. They are clearly very comfortable at their home in the Democratic Party, and they are relatively far-left. That’s always the funny part with these letters, as this is not at all uncommon.

Expand full comment

I agree with this writer about many things, including Trump's failings. Like him, I've also lost friends due to political differences and seen them go down various rabbit holes. My only concern about this letter is related to my own pet issue, which is the way people attach themselves to a particular media stream and absorb that into their identity. I get the strong impression that this writer has fallen into the legacy MSM orbit. My advice would be to pay more attention to the money and motives behind the news sources he ingests. Follow Taibbi, Shellenberger and the like. Trust nobody, they all have an agenda, some more sinister than others, perhaps.

Expand full comment

Considering the amount of introspection it seems you’ve done, I can’t even begin to grasp how you have arrived at the conclusions you have.

Expand full comment

“While I believe Fauci was doing his best…”

My sweet summer child. Go research how he denied the use of Bactrim & other ABs to AIDS patients in the 80’s. This was just wash-rinse-repeat for him.

The losses from Covid were from iatrogenic causes. Three tablets of azithromycin would have saved so many people who had died from post viral bacterial pneumonia.

Trump is on the hook for the vaccines. He signed the papers that made it all possible. Biden is on the hook for the continued fraud & everything else including ostracizing people who didn’t get the vax.

Expand full comment

In terms of iatrogenic causes, there is an interesting corollary with the Spanish Flu epidemic (which many online sources are now calling a misnomer). It's highly likely that a large number of people were killed from wearing masks. Of course, there are no end of fact-checking sites which dispute this claim, but the fact remains that good, impartial science has shown that the moist environments created by some types of mask are ideal for culturing many types of bacteria...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8072811/

This is one of the most disappointing aspects of the pandemic. It demonstrated that the epistemic rationality of science shifts to instrumental rationality under the unforgiving glare of social media, and especially when policy and politics are involved.

Here's an interesting aside. Although many pro-government policy wonks don't like the fact that Sweden has had the lowest excess mortality in Europe in the wake of the pandemic, because it argues against lockdowns, they are however quite happy to argue that Sweden's relatively high vaccine uptake shows that mRNA vaccine injuries and deaths are overstated. What they fail to take into account is that the Swedes quickly abandoned the two shots in quick succession approach, in favour of making sure that every citizen received one dose. The higher rates of vaccine injuries and deaths seen in other countries might have significantly influenced by spacing- especially given that we know now that vaccine injuries were far more likely to occur with the second dose.

Top tip- Microsoft Bing seems to have developed a glitch here in the UK in relation to censorship of vaccine deaths, particularly with regard to foreign language translation and specifically in relation to Japan. The Japanese have specifically isolated 1,325 cases of vaccine death through myocarditis related to mRNA vaccines (although, excluding natural events, this likely to be closer to 1,000)- although obviously the true death toll, in relation to permanent heart injury, is likely to be far higher.

Expand full comment

Thanks to author for writing. Their journey is interesting...not one I have ever heard. But there are others likely in the same boat. The author's view of the Jan 6th events seems distorted. To me...1/6 looked more like a poorly organized...and somewhat raucous...guided tour of the White House. But I wasn't there so what do I know? Nevertheless, the author explained clearly why they don't like Trump. What confuses me is how they came to the point where they would vote for Joe Biden...especially since they seem to value honesty, morality and ability to solve problems? Hard to make a case for Biden using that criteria, particularly if they are politically homeless.

Expand full comment

I knew this one would get the ratio

Expand full comment

I agree with you a hundred percent. Unlike you, I came from the other side. Started out a leftie, was even ostracised for not being woke enough when I pushed back against more radical ideas.

Living in a blue state and getting older I became more realistic. I did not like the left wing policies of letting people get away with crime, not being able to fire bad workers, generous handouts for those who didn't need them, and government wasteful spending of people's hard-earned tax dollars.

We will be voting Republican this November, especially in our own state, but not for Trump. I cannot believe anyone would vote for the man after Jan 6. He watched his supporters actually break into the Capitol and did nothing. Did not even reach out to DHS or dept of def for National Guard backup (Pence did). Did not call off his supporters even after congress had to flee and then not even after a person was actually shot. In fact, he watched the violence on TV for over 3 hours and did nothing. That's not a Commander in Chief.

To add insult to injury, Trump then put his own VP in danger based on a lie. Without checking on his safety first. It is absolutely unimaginable to me that anyone would still trust him with the highest office of the land after that. Btw his own dept of justice and all secretary of states told him he lost before Jan 6. They were the experts. They were Republican. They voted for him. You have to be either delusional or malicious to disregard your own experts. Why would you want someone who is delusional back in the white house? He still has not conceded today. To top it all off, Trump then actually hired his own team and they confirmed he lost as well, ALL BEFORE JAN 6 (read Ken Block). So for him to then call a mob to the Capitol regardless is absolutely batshit insane.

Instead of apologizing to the 120 injured Capitol Police officers, to Congress for having to flee, and to the general public for interfering in the peaceful transfer of power, Trump has called Jan 6 a "beautiful day". He has called the day where they chanted to hang his VP a beautiful day. Think about that for a second, how insane that is. I challenge anyone to tell me why such a person should be anywhere near the White House ever again.

Expand full comment

I'm probably one of the few people who is likely to agree with you, but I do. Perhaps it takes an ocean (although technically, I could vote if I reactivated by American citizenship- something I've been thinking of doing anyway, purely because of the fact that the UK seems to be swirling around the drain). The main thing holding me back is that I really, really don't want to become subject to the IRS. Our tax system may extract more, but at least the Inland Revenue is far less predatory, with fewer powers.

And I agree with you on Jan 6th- it was disgraceful riot. I'm not so sure about the premise that there weren't genuine concerns about the election, though. One of the inconvenient truths for the NYT is that there are historical articles from them which show that mail-in ballots are about twice as likely to be fraudulent than in-person voting. All one has to is search Google with a custom range for the NYT and mail-in voting from 2000 to 2014. And here's the icing on the cake- long after the dust had settled Rasmussen performed a survey in December 23. It showed that not only did just under 20% of mail-in voters get someone else to fill out their ballot, but 17% of mail-in voters admitted voting in a state in which they were no longer resident.

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/one_in_five_mail_in_voters_admit_they_cheated_in_2020_election

Setting aside all the other wilder thoughts about the election, even if only a portion of the survey answers in this poll were truthful, then it swung the election in a way which didn't reflect the wishes of the electorate. Simply put, Republican voters had the same inconveniences, but were less likely to avail themselves of the same methods for cheating, in one way relatively minor, but in the other heinously fraudulent. This meant that the Dems possessed a structural advantage which directly changed the outcome of the election, even before one considers the deliberate suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop, with its suggestion that Joe Biden had been benefiting from bribes from foreign agents and companies, '10% for the Big Guy'.

But here's the issue. This time the Heritage Foundation has prepared Project 2025. Yes, personally I don't like the influence of the Christian Right- even though personally I'm a Christian. But it's the first and only attempt I've seen anywhere in the West in the past 50 years, aimed at curtailing the rights of unelected bureaucracies to rule and reign over citizens.

Here's the thing. American government has long performed a sleight of hand to conceal the extent of the federal bureaucracy. If you look up the total number of federal employees then most sources will quote somewhere around 3 million. However, most of the federal bureaucracy has been buried at the state level- mandatory spending and welfare are just one example. There are plenty of others. Here's the thing. I'm not against Rawlsian Redistribution, especially for the working poor, but a negative income tax of the type which both Milton Friedman and MLK argued for, would transform and eradicate the federal gatekeeper bureaucracy. It's why academia is always quite happy to trial basic income, but as far as I'm aware has never once piloted a negative income tax.

Plus, there are plenty of other ways in which the federal bureaucracy can be transformed. Most farmers admit they would like to do something to prevent the effects of nitrogen run-off on fisheries (ocean dead zones). They are quite supportive of fishermen and their traditional way of life, and so are most agricultural colleges- but all are emphatic that they don't want the federal agencies which have been destroying farming in America involved- or making America susceptible to poisonous imports containing chemicals which have long been banned in America (oats in breakfast cereal is a good example). The best why to do it would be with cover crops. The commercial insurance sector is familiar with farming and its risks. They could run a compensation scheme which refunded farmers for the labour and costs in trialling cover crops. This could be a transformative measure for improving American coastal nurseries and building future wealth- 6% of farmers whose land feeds into the Mississippi already use cover crops- the rest just need a little help to get over the speed bump of risk which trialling cover crops represents. The federal bureaucracy would just make it mandatory and put a huge segment of small and medium sized farms out of business.

It might be worth holding your nose because of the huge change Project 2025 represents- a check to the power of unelected bureaucracies within the permanent state.

Expand full comment

I agree 100%. First, in-person voting only, back to paper ballots, and required photo ID. The Dems make cheating way too easy!

That said, the experts went through it all and found no fraud to change the outcome of the election. Watch Rusty Bowers and Brad Raffensperger's testimony at the January 6 hearing. They recounted everything 3X. They were data people (unlike Trump). They were experts (unlike Trunp). They ran the elections. They voted Republican. Unlike Trunp, they had no incentive to say what they said. But also look at their integrity. Raffensperger TOLD TRUMP 4 dead voters, next day Trump goes out and tweets 10.000 dead voters. That's straight up lying, deceiving the public. He did the same with Mike Pence. Pence told him he can't refuse to certify the election; next day Trump tweets out "we're in total agreement". That's dishonest.

Lastly, about Project 2025. I'm a political moderate with some libertarian leanings. I think we need to cut the government way down. Milei is doing it right now in Argentina and it seems to be working. Democrats have a tendency to bloat it, which also makes it inefficient. So much more to say about that! So yeah I agree with that in principle, but not the way Trump wants to do it, like you have to pass a loyalty test. And don't forget, Trump's second term won't be like his first, because he fired all the people who stood up to him. Next time he won't hire them.

Again, I'm for smaller government at this point, so I would like to vote Republican, but I won't be able to if it's Trump.

Expand full comment

As I stated, I largely agree with you on Jan 6th. But what we have remember is that it was a protest turned into a riot, and not an insurrection or even a serious attempt to overturn the results of the election. The FBI stated as much, before the Washington establishment moved in and began to build a narrative. The truth is that Jan 6th was probably Steve Bannon's brainchild- an act of protest kayfabe designed to subject all of Trump's potential political mainstream rivals to an ideological loyalty test from which they could never recover electorally. In that respect, it worked beyond Bannon's wildest dreams cementing the populist hold on the Right for a generation.

Sure, they eventually turned up a few fantasists who had planned some form of popular uprising in secret and in an unorganised fashion, but the day itself proved them fantasists, because unlike the rioters not one of them acted upon their conspiratorial wet dreams. Instead, what did turn what would have otherwise been a larger version of a 2A protest, was the presence of 119 to 121 hardcore Trump fans, all of whom had lost businesses or homes in 2008 and all of whom blamed their government for bailing out the banks and not them. To them, Trump was the Second Coming, and they honestly believed a lot of the Conspiracy Theories which had been circulating after the election. What they failed to recognise is that just as Trump was great at getting out the vote in his favour, he was also incredibly good at mobilising voters, especially the young, against him. It's why this election will be different- because a huge number of voters have seen Biden's record in office and are hugely disappointed- although to be fair to the man he deserves at least some credit for finally standing up to Wall Street and saying no to roughly $13 trillion of competition-destroying mergers. That said, it's not the sort of thing which will win back those amongst the two-thirds of voters who state they were better off under Trump economically, and are willing to switch.

Ditto on the political moderate with libertarian leanings, although to be fair I'm more of a civic libertarian than an economic libertarian, even though I largely agree with Hayak. The one exception is immigration- but that's because since Brexit I've read a lot more on economics and also the psychology on ingroup (following on from The Righteous Mind).

Basically, nobody pays attention to the labour side of economics. Here's the thing, over the long-term an economy needs tight labour markets. The post WWII period which liberals always rave about had less to do with most government policies and more to do with the fact that low to no migration. Here is Nobel Princeton Economist Angus Deaton lecturing Paul Krugman on the subject and pointing out that the economic side of the Civil Rights Era improvements would have never happened, if not for tight labour markets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRBsDcHoWZU&t=9s

I checked the numbers- in the period when large scale migration was largely blocked in America, the rate of productivity gain per year was roughly twice that of the post 1980 period. It's all about capital investment per employee. This was the main reason for the period of American exceptionalism. Because corporations couldn't really upon legions of low wage labour, they were forced to invest profits in capital expenditures which made each employee much, much more productive.

This is not to say that America should shut down immigration. But like most Western advanced economies they should shift to the type of points-based immigration system pioneered by Australia, focused upon attracting and recruiting the type of highly educated, highly skilled workforce which can most benefit from the American economy. It's a little known fact that Australia has nearly twice the rate of foreign-born citizens as America, but with none of the living standard decline or labour displacement.

'So yeah I agree with that in principle, but not the way Trump wants to do it, like you have to pass a loyalty test.' Sure, I largely agree with this, in principle. But let's not forget, Trump faces two unique obstacles. One, he's not particularly good at attracting high calibre candidates, because being associated with him is decidedly high risk. Second, he faced an inordinate amount of what effectively amounts to sedition against the democratic veto, from within his own government.

In the West, a technocratic class has emerged which believes in institutionalism and institutional government. In the UK, it's so bad the civil service believe it is their solemn duty to protect the voters from their own bad decisions and ill-informed opinions.

Here's the kicker- they are completely wrong! With the exception of scientific, engineering and medical innovations which can be freely adopted, or not, through market-based systems the performance of the expert class is markedly inferior to that of the wisdom of crowds. How do we know this? From Africa. Whether it's effective altruism, normal charities or foreign aid, one can employ an expert NGO class or one can give the money directly to African communities to invest as they see fit, with no strings or advice attached, and the African communities markedly outperform the expert technocratic class every time.

And let's face it, most of Trump's ideas aren't that bad, compared to the alternative. He's already talked about building houses at the edge of cities, add replacing America's declining stock of starter homes to the equation and we're cooking with gas. Most existing homeowners don't realise this- but if one provides the younger generation with the means to start on the housing ladder cheaply and pay off their mortgages fast, then it can lead to increased value further up the housing ladder, because you're enabling a generation to reach a little further in terms of lending and stake potential. It should be the number one American priority- building compact three bedroom housing, detached or semi-detached. Short-range rail, especially through developing spur lines with short distances to hub, is also a great investment, because it dilutes scarcity costs and expands the range of viable building land. A minimal planning uplift tax to build schools and roads would also be a good idea, because it changes the incentives within planning bureaucracies.

Trump basically had the entirety of his own government briefing against him, including all of the former heads of the intelligence agencies and James Comey. Don't get me wrong- he was great in law enforcement, but he never should have gotten involved in actively sabotaging a sitting democratically elected president, no matter how much Trump fell outside the established norms of what had come before.

I can understand why he did it, when he should have buried the Steele dossier as an implausible piece of opposition research created by commissioning a foreign agent to invent a work of fiction. He was still reeling from the accusation that Hillary's emails somehow influenced the outcome of 2016, which was about as plausible as Russian interference, both of which have been thoroughly disproven as contributing to the outcome of 2016. The problem was that the educated wealthy CNN/MSNBC watching class believed it, and he knew that if he didn't do something to level the scales in their eyes, they would get their revenge through the institutional process, probably destroying his legacy as one of the more effective FBI Directors.

I'm also highly interested in Milei, but it's a steep hill to climb- Argentina suffers from a strategic high risk profile caused by intermittent Left-wing governments expropriating land and business investments. There is actually a joke amongst economists- there are four types of economy- pre-industrial, industrial, post-industrial and Argentina. What the Pope fails to realise is that previously Argentina, like many developing economies suffered from strategically high risks because of political instability, which makes the normal process of capitalist uplift all but unworkable. It pushes interest rates and lending to the point that most businesses can't make the repayments, and makes the process look exploitatively extractive at the surface level of analysis.

It will be interesting to see whether Argentina is at all salvageable.

Expand full comment

Here’s the other thing. There are only a small percentage of politics and current affairs geeks like us, outside of the two main partisan camps- so most voters are probably more interested in the economy than anything else, other than abortion (which was politically devastating for the GOP, regardless of personal moral beliefs). It would have been far smarter on a purely political level, to reduce the limits on abortion at the federal level, to twelve to fourteen weeks, like most of Europe, excluding the UK- but I really, really don’t want to get into a philosophical discussion on abortion- I’ve tried it before- never again!

Plus, you need to remember that Project 2025 is being run by the Heritage Foundation. They’re the guys who run the Index of Economic Freedom! Sure, there is a Trump loyalty test, and this is at least partially backed by the political reality that the GOP is dead as a viable political party without Right Populism , but my guess is that most of the candidates getting through the vetting process are going to be lip-service only Trump loyalists, with the exception of few with the public profile to garner Trump’s attention.

Expand full comment

I was (am) just about as conservative as they come. Reagan Republican, not the fake "MAGA Republican" of today. There is very little true conservatism left in the MAGA wing of the party.

I sympathize with this author, and even though he(?) has come to the conclusion that a vote for Biden is his only recourse at this point, fortunately I live in a state where my vote for president will not matter, so I have no problem NOT voting for either one of these terrible candidates (and terrible people).

What surprises me in reading the comments here is that it looks like about 3/4 of them seem to be just as "captured" by their preferred media sources as they claim this author is. They just happen to be captured by the other side.

"2020 was not a free and fair election because MSM suppressed the Hunter Biden Laptop". Same talking point my brother has made to me many times. Each time I explain that if media interference is what determines whether a free and fair election happened or not, then probably every single presidential election going back to the founding of the country should be considered illegitimate. The only criteria that can be used to determine "free and fair" elections are whether the votes are correctly tallied. Trump failed on every count trying to show that there was corruption in the balloting process.

"you are as deep into an echo chamber as it's possible for a human being to be" says the man who sounds like he's deep in his own echo chamber. I see that this author has tried to extricate himself from his former echo chamber, and whether he's entered another echo chamber is a subject for debate, but I think this commenter has probably just remained in his own siloed bunker, no change or introspection at all.

"poorly organized... and somewhat raucous...guided tour"? Seriously? So much violence, so much disrespect of the men in blue, so many injuries to those brave officers. Hardly a guided tour. I can't believe the extent to which the MAGA crowd have come to excuse what happened on that day. Funny how so many Republicans soundly condemned the capitol invaders and Trump alike in the days following the event, but now 98% of those have recanted and have toed the line to once again find themselves in Trump's good graces.

The author never says he loves Biden or is excited to vote for him, just that he feels that is the only way he can do anything to stop Trump, who he believes is more of a threat than Biden. That is not an irrational position. If he had said that he is now 100% behind Biden and his policies, that would be something worthy of criticism. He seems to be voting for the lesser of two evils, yet all you commenters make him out to be a far-left woke warrior. Not at all how he portrayed himself to be.

Bridget, it seems that your comments section is not so much "Politically Homeless", but rather overrun by people who are definitely in the tank for one particular point of view.

Expand full comment

I am like you…. I won’t be voting for either one of these awful candidates. Like you, my vote won’t matter because of where I live.

I’ve said in 2020 common sense flew out the window which was then slammed shut, locked and sealed so it could never come back. The far left and far right are the only ones being listened to. Rational thinking and voices are silenced.

Expand full comment

I second almost everything said in this comment. I lean conservative and won’t be voting for either candidate. And like you, I live in a state where my vote will not matter at all. I also agree with your observation that most of the comments section for the Politically Homeless seem to come from people deeply at home in their politics. I was hopeful this would be an interesting place to hear some different perspectives, and sometimes it is, but it’s also heavy on certainty and political “experts.”

Expand full comment

You're not voting for Biden. You're voting for Kamala.

Expand full comment

This is a really interesting essay, because it shows us a voter who only consults legacy media sources and doesn't bother checking online whether the factoids claimed by the legacy media are true.

For example, it's true that Trump said this on Jan 6th 'If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore'. But he also said this 'Peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard'. It's a bit like the misreporting of the 'bloodbath' comment- to all sane people listening to the excerpt, it's clear (though somewhat muddled) that Trump is talking of a bloodbath in the American auto industry if Joe Biden gets elected (which is true given American car manufacturing is incapable of competing with China on EVs, given their control of the EV supply chain). But to someone with a strong Myside bias against Trump it seems as though they really hear him talking about politically violent consequences to Trump losing.

A good test of sanity is whether a particular person is capable of seeing the BLM protests/riots and the January 6th riots/'insurrection' as equally bad. Personally, I think both were awful- but then again, I'm a Brit (although technically I qualify as a dual national), so I don't have skin in the game. It's also one of the reasons I hate the legacy media. Many Americans believe that what happened to George Floyd couldn't happen to a White guy, blissfully unaware that the video of Tony Timpa being killed by police in almost identical circumstances is readily available on YouTube- and the same thing is true of every single case of viral social media footage of a Black guy getting shot or killed by police. The difference is that police brutality against White people only ever makes the local news. There are even studies which prove that police are less likely to shoot a Black person in a potentially lethal situation than they are a White person, and the 'studies' which 'prove' otherwise don't account for disparate rates of violent crime by race.

Expand full comment

You say Trump was authoritarian during the 2020 summer of love and lacked leadership.

I can maybe agree with the lack of leadership but authoritarian? Please.

He didn't do ANYTHING so how can he be authoritarian? Can you imagine how everyone would have reacted if he HAD sent in the NG or the army?

You need to get a grip and maybe go over your "facts"

Expand full comment

Struggling with how he came to voting for Biden. I understand his points on Trump, but Biden is clearly not in charge and we are creating a scary power vacuum on the world stage with his presidency. Based on his arguments I thought he would go towards RFKJ, especially with his aversion to "virtue signaling". Anyway, interesting take.

Expand full comment