Nothing would scream "Populism" more than signing a bill that further enriches billionaires and screws minor league ballplayers. Hard to believe that DeSantis would fall into a trap like that.

Nothing would scream "Populism" more than signing a bill that further enriches billionaires and screws minor league ballplayers. Hard to believe that DeSantis would fall into a trap like that.

guy's going to war against micky ####### mouse. i don't think "traps" matter to that ######.

Part of the settlement last year was an explicit agreement to pay minor leaguers for all such activities going forward. This law won't negate a signed agreement.

Also won't overrule anything in the forthcoming CBA with the newly unionized Minor League players.

Then what's the point of the law to begin with?

FTA:

The legislation was filed on Feb. 16. The next day, records show, DeSantis received a $1 million contribution from Joe Ricketts, the billionaire patriarch of the family that owns MLB’s Chicago Cubs.

The Cubs do their spring training in AZ and have no minor league affiliates in Florida. Why would Rickets give away $1 million to try to get this passed? How could it benefit him?

The Cubs do their spring training in AZ and have no minor league affiliates in Florida. Why would Rickets give away $1 million to try to get this passed? How could it benefit him?

Sure seems like that could be just coincidence - Joe Ricketts supporting a prominent Republican while a Presidential primary ramps up is a story with big dog-bites-man energy.

Makes sense.

The more cynical possibility is that Ricketts made that contribution on behalf of MLB in general, the owners choosing for obvious optics reasons to have the donation actually made by someone whose team doesn't train in Florida.

But probably most of MLB's owners have made, or will make, or both, big "donations" to DeSantis at some point, just because they're megamillionaires and that's what megamillionaires do.

DeSantis is going to be the new Trump on this board, isn't he?

DeSantis is going to be the new Trump on this board, isn't he?

If that happens, it's essential that you let us know with continued tut-tutting and smug metaphorical eye-rolls. Absolutely essential!

Joe Ricketts is a horrible racist monster of a person, but he has very little interest in the goings on with his children's baseball club. He is giving large amounts of money to a Republican presidential candidate because that's what horrible, racist monsters do.
USA Today
Ricketts forwards articles to acquaintances in other emails that claim Obama is suppressing a video in which he verbally admits to being a Muslim and that Obama has a secret past as a gay sex worker and drug mule.
This donation likely has nothing to do with the pending legislation.

The more cynical possibility is that Ricketts made that contribution on behalf of MLB in general, the owners choosing for obvious optics reasons to have the donation actually made by someone whose team doesn't train in Florida.

Yes, well, there's always a more cynical possibility, isn't there?

But does this make even a little bit of sense on its face? Not really.

DeSantis lacks Trump’s charisma, but he’s achieved more actual on-the-ground fascism than anyone else in America to this point. He does represent Trumpism without Trump (or if you prefer, American Orban-ism) exceptionally well.

I’m sure he’ll move to give owners whatever they want, for a price.

The Ricketts donation is just a random donation. Everyone knows that the payoff "campaign contributions" go through Super PACs that don't have to be reported. That's where all the teams donated to help get this passed.

DeSantis lacks Trump’s charisma, but he’s achieved more actual on-the-ground fascism than anyone else in America to this point.

Thomas the Tank Engine enters the room.

DeSantis lacks Trump’s charisma, but he’s achieved more actual on-the-ground fascism than anyone else in America to this point.

Some people apparently believe their own propaganda. DeSantis was just re-elected by a 19.4% margin, a landslide in a swing state that initially elected him by only 0.4% in 2018. That just doesn’t happen for extreme candidates of any kind. Of course, maybe the unspoken part of #13 is that Florida Democrats are unelectable communists, which would be about the only way to account for the absurd contention in the actual post.

That just doesn’t happen for extreme candidates of any kind.

REally? This is how we measure extremism these days? I mean you probably consider FDR a socialist right?

REally? This is how we measure extremism these days?

Yes. Thinking that ~ 60% of the voters in a swing state support extremist candidates would be the real extremism. One has to be in quite a bubble for that one.

Swing state? That's what you are going with? The last D governor died in office in 1998. The 2 US Senators are R, have been since 2019, and that is very likely to continue until at least 2029. The current US House delegation is 20-8 R. The state legislature is even more imbalanced. The Senate is 28-12 R and the House is 84-35. It's a one party state and has been for at least 6 years.

Benito Mussolini says ''hello''.

I guess Italy was not a swing country.

It's a one party state and has been for at least 6 years.

Trump carried Florida by 1% in 2016, and 3% in 2020. That’s a swing state margin by any definition. As previously noted, DeSantis won by .4% in 2018, with Rick Scott elected to the Senate by .12%. Again, those were among the closest races in the country, and well within swing state territory. True, Florida had a Red Wave in 2022, which should tell you something about how ineffective the Democrats phony claims of GOP extremism are. No one except hard core Democrats believes such nonsense. Labeling everyone who opposes him a fascist hasn’t helped Vladimir Putin much, and it won’t do anything for today’s Democrats, although they should be ashamed for resorting to such tactics.

DeSantis is going to be the new Trump on this board, isn't he?

So here's the thing - is Biden the new Obama who was the new Clinton who was the new Mao?

My disgust, contempt, and complete rejection of the shitweasel gameshow host as wholly unacceptable is well-known (as it is with plenty of others).

Objectively? I'll take a billion Ron DeSantis's over a single Trump. I strongly dislike that RDS appears to be trying to use no small part of Trumpisms for his own political fortunes, but that's politics. However nakedly opportunistic, neither party has any sort of monopoly on opportunistic fear-mongering.

HOWEVER - this is my beef: You mopes continue to try to normalize Trump. Pretend he wasn't a ridiculous grifter, a joke of a silver spoon, gossip page playboy cum gameshow host who expressed multitudes of horrid bullshit that ought to be totally anathema to any functioning democracy... getting pissy with Denmark because Greenland isn't for sale... Group executions televised... using the government to go on a revenge tour (FFS, people... the guy explicitly SAYS he'd be justified in doing so. Nobody who believes - much less explicitly SAYS - that has any business in office).

You really need to get over your hatred of the "others" you hate above all else... so much that you're willing to ignore, countenance, or otherwise excuse or ignore the fact that *TRUMP*, singularly and beyond anyone else, is *explicitly* stating his desire to lock up, execute, punish-via-government, etc the "others".

Find your spine.

You won't because you think any RDS viability requires finding some way to satiate the MAGA/Q/etc set... that may even be correct, but you chose your path.

Sharp elbows and ridiculous nonsense has gotten tossed about my entire adult life on a bipartisan basis about Clinton, W, and Obama. Trump is a different level.

Acknowledge and accept that. "Both sides" fail entirely on the Trump issue. Stop being cowards.

Zonk, well said. That was the mike drop this discussion needed; unfortunately, it will not be heeded as such.

Trump carried Florida by 1% in 2016, and 3% in 2020. That’s a swing state margin by any definition. As previously noted, DeSantis won by .4% in 2018, with Rick Scott elected to the Senate by .12%. Again, those were among the closest races in the country, and well within swing state territory. True, Florida had a Red Wave in 2022, which should tell you something about how ineffective the Democrats phony claims of GOP extremism are. No one except hard core Democrats believes such nonsense. Labeling everyone who opposes him a fascist hasn’t helped Vladimir Putin much, and it won’t do anything for today’s Democrats, although they should be ashamed for resorting to such tactics.

Cool. Now tell me that West Virginia is a swing state because of Joe Manchin.

Cool. Now tell me that West Virginia is a swing state because of Joe Manchin.

You’re putting your political ignorance on full display today. Trump carried West Virginia by ~ 40% in both 2016 & 2020. Quite a bit different than Florida. West Virginia used to be a rock solid Democrat state, even Michael Dukakis carried it, but Blue Collar voters have turned away from the Democrats, so they are no longer working class heroes, but objects of derision by much of the left. Such tactics will likely work as well in Florida, and the 2022 Red Wave may no longer be an outlier, but the routine outcome, which would probably prompt Misirlou to claim he was always right.

EDIT: The most precise description of Florida politics may be that it is a swing state that Democrats are in the process of kicking away.

Your "no true scotsman" fallacy is showing.

I just want the guardrails back.

If we can learn from our recent history and maybe be a bit more sober in not so blithely tossing about Hitler, Mao, and Stalin (and communists and fascists), I guess that's a good thing too... but not the point (because again, politics).

I am left-of-center because I *do* think the work is never done... and whatever demographic, racial, economic, orientation, etc slice - we'll always have more to do (and always need to check our work and potentially refactor).

However, I also believe that on the aggregate and on the odds - there is no better time to believe. The opportunities, acceptance of the minority 'other', etc is better now than previously. Revanchism is the enemy.

And moreover, social and economic revanchism channeled through a single Strong Man is the biggest danger we face.

It needs to be rejected across the board, even if that means alliances among people with diametrically opposing principles.

I said many times back in 2016 that I'm not so naive to think my left-leaning principles and ideology are any kind of shield against the same sort of Trumpism with a different hue. Butterfly effect, I guess, but I don't find it difficult to imagine an alternate reality where Trump/a Trump simply tinkers a bit with the playbook and I'm finding myself Bulwarked with the equivalent of the left-leaning David French, Charlie Sykes, (and god help me) Jonah Goldbergs and Bill Kristols...

Whatever else you might think of them - Obama, Clinton, Biden... even Newsom, Harris, hell - even Bernie Sanders - ain't Trump.

That's the baseline I just want to get back to... we can loudly and even nastily disagree on all manners of paths forward on everything under the sun. But - we ought to have a universal agreement on the idea that "it's not so simple" as identifying the "enemy" and wanting a fuhrer whose entire raison d'etre is identifying and punishing the "bad people".

That way lies madness... and we should take advantage of our 2nd chance. The recent America isn't a nascent democracy with less than 20 years to its name, we certainly aren't living in a world of late 1920s Weimar (or Italy), and we don't have nearly the external and historical catalysts that create fertile soil for rise of the Strong Man Who Will Punish The Enemies.

I'm sorry - truly - that it doesn't require equal sacrifice... that would perhaps make it easier... but - let's be realistic. Lady Sage Williamson isn't going to come anywhere close to being in a position to propose national required morning yoga over essential oils fragrances where we muse on generational sins. Nina Turner can't even win a deep blue congressional district primary as a springboard to lining up bankers against a wall for summary execution. And RuPaul has never even expressed a desire to run for office.

However, we all make our own beds... and it's high-time that some people lie in them.

You’re a joke, Miserlou. Florida has been a swing state since the 1990s, carried twice by Bill Clinton, twice by George W. Bush, twice by Barack Obama, and twice by Donald Trump, all in close elections. It doesn’t get more swingy than that. Democrats are losing in Florida lately because they have moved so far to the left, and on the state level the GOP has fielded better candidates. You can keep thinking that labeling your political opponents fascists is an effective campaign tactic, but please, no whining if it doesn’t work.

If we can learn from our recent history and maybe be a bit more sober in not so blithely tossing about Hitler, Mao, and Stalin (and communists and fascists),

Says the guy who fled the country after the 2016 election while repeatedly lecturing any who would listen about ‘the parallels’ to 1930s Germany? Well, better late than never, I guess.

Democrats are losing in Florida lately because they have moved so far to the left, and on the state level the GOP has fielded better candidates.

So, you don't understand the No True Scotsman fallacy. OK.

Democrats are losing in Florida lately because they have moved so far to the left, and on the state level the GOP has fielded better candidates.

So Florida is the photographic negative of Michigan.

Possibly, although the GOP has a stronger presence in the Michigan Legislature.

DeSantis is such an unmitigated piece of horse crap. And yet, because he's not "orange hitler", he actually appeals to less insane republican voters.

What a sad and pathetic statement on the republican party.

Says the guy who fled the country after the 2016 election while repeatedly lecturing any who would listen about ‘the parallels’ to 1930s Germany? Well, better late than never, I guess.

If you want to continue to cower behind the increasingly failing and bashed "guardrails" of a democratic republic and take your opportunistic potoshots, whereby nobody will *really* be "locked up" because they oppose the fuhrer or nobody will exiled, deported, or otherwise tossed out -- you do you.

It's - at this point - picking at scraps to believe you have the moral fiber or courage to do anything more than pass on showing up in the town square to salute and chant should such a thing come to pass.

That may sound awfully... mean... but you've proven over a good 5+ years now that you can't even rise to the occasion of simply saying on backwater website "This is wrong. I oppose it. I will fight it. I consider a proponent of it wholly unacceptable, regardless."

That's on you.

It's not the fault of your "enemies." You weren't forced into that position. You made the choice - actively or passively.

As I said, I have zero problem denouncing and refusing - loudly and explicitly - to go along with say... Nina Turner demanding we arrest 'bankers' for treason. She can't even win a deep blue district primary... I would also oppose say, Parker Malloy, demanding that anti-trans activists be sent to reeducation camps (and FTR? Malloy has never voiced anything close to that that I'm aware of).

You're a bad citizen. You should try to do better. Unless you don't consider the many various things along those lines that He Must Be Named to be anathema.

It's wholly on you to prove - or at least have the guts to *say* - That is Wrong. I object.

You're just a cowardly Mitläufer, at best.

It’s rather amazing that the guy who literally fled the country over the 2016 election, only to come crawling back a year later, thinks he is the arbiter of acceptable political discourse. Zonk has always held his own opinions in the highest regard, but this might be a ‘personal best’ for him.

Zonk: Clapper = Br'er Rabbit: The Tar Baby

It’s rather amazing that the guy who literally fled the country over the 2016 election, only to come crawling back a year later, thinks he is the arbiter of acceptable political discourse. Zonk has always held his own opinions in the highest regard, but this might be a ‘personal best’ for him.

You'll have to forgive me for - at least attempting - to hew to a higher standard than prevailing national political opinion.

The fact that I might believe X as a general concept is right doesn't mean that I think the government, much less a demagogue who occupies a seat of high power in government ought to be able to mete out harsh punishment - like "changing libel laws" or "charging someone with treason" or whatnot.

Clapper, through his history of silence, clearly feels differently.

Hence - why he tries to boil the real value of principles to the safe space of "discourse" rather than taking off his team jersey, actually considering and more importantly, hewing to a principle.

This is why I say I am disgusted by you, Clapper.

I honestly do not know. If a revenge tour Trump were to be elected... or hell, not even "elected", but pull off a more 'successful' J6 - what would you do?

2024 might well be as close as 2020... and if a matter of a few red state legislatures that have changed composition plow ahead with what they couldn't/wouldn't do in 2020; namely override the state vote and do what your guy wanted in 2020... What would you do?

Subsequent to *that* hypothetical - revenge tour Trump gets installed... and now, given the lessons of first-term Trump, he installs temporary agency heads and deputies (see DoD and DoJ specifically in the waning days of the last clown show) who *will* carry out his orders, despite the ridiculousness of them. Despite the obvious illegality of them. Despite... well... anything.

Would you, Clapper, object?

This isn't a cray hypothetical. We *already* lived through it - and enough people, fortunately, decided it was bridge too far.

But- you, Clapper, were not among them. Even as an anonymous poster on backwater website, you couldn't muster even the slightest bit of objection. Not even just the bare minimum to -- again, *anonymously* - add your voice to "That's Wrong. No. I Object." chorus.

Even that bare minimum was beyond your courage, beyond your moral fiber.

That, to me - is scary.

We will probably never agree on anything specifically policy-related... and that's fine. I can live with that.

But - how do I live with the fact that you, at least through your silence and in the absence of any (again, even anonymous) explicit, stated objection, would certainly sit by as your "enemies" are carted off to camps?

Look... whatever you think of me and whatever you think of people I don't even support - I can tell you without exception and without condition that I would absolutely, positively denounce Rupaul loading you onto a train to be reeducated in a camp.

You've never, even in the absolute most minimum, slightest indicated you would do the same in the inverse.

It makes me wonder if I'm the fool because I feel there are abiding principles that transcend nominal partisan politics... and if every element of my being should subservient to jersey and partisan alignment? Maybe I'm just being naive.

This isn't a cray hypothetical.

I’m afraid you’re quite wrong on that. Your efforts to demonize those who don’t vote as you prefer seems to know no bounds, but you’re just doing what you purported to object to in the post I initially responded to.

I’m afraid you’re quite wrong on that. Your efforts to demonize those who don’t vote as you prefer seems to know no bounds, but you’re just doing what you purported to object to in the post I initially responded to.

Keep cowering and refusing to express the ridiculously bare minimum because... reasons.

I'm sorry your feelings are hurt and you need a safe space for them, but the fact remains... there is a guy with a legitimate chance at being elected in 2024 who has more than just doubled down on the things he said in 2016, but is quite clearly damned set on following through (for once in his life).

Even with your prior lauding of the supposed Great Short Hope, you still cannot bring yourself to mouth even the slightest, simplest, anonymous objection to his primary opponent?

Why is that?

Explain it to us.

Zonk, not a single GOP-controlled state legislative chamber even voted on alternative electors in 2020. Not in committee, not on the floor, not in either chamber of any state. Not one. Nor did the GOP make any such effort where they were in the minority. Your ‘hypotheticals’ are just made up nonsense. You’re free to take yourself seriously, but faulting those who are less delusional makes you look even sillier.

Zonk, not a single GOP-controlled state legislative chamber even voted on alternative electors in 2020. Not in committee, not on the floor, not in either chamber of any state. Not one. Nor did the GOP make any such effort where they were in the minority. Your ‘hypotheticals’ are just made up nonsense. You’re free to take yourself seriously, but faulting those who are less delusional makes you look even sillier.

Absolutely.

I give mucho props to say, George Raffensperger - though he's the Georgia SoS, not a legislator - and if I lived in GA? I'd have voted for him (granted, the D opponent was a classic SomeDude) if not only to emphasize a point.

But let's look beyond that...

Rusy Bowers lost his primary in Arizona. He was the state House Speaker. His only crime was pooh-poohing the ridiculous stuff that you claim is... nonsense... (or do you? Are you capable of saying that?). Hell, he even said - a point against him in my mind - he'd vote for Trump again. Despite the fact he actually had to leave his home because of the MAGA nutters (is that *you* are afraid to speak clearly?). He lost his primary by 30 points.

Take Ed McBroom - a Michigan UP rep who headed the committee investigating "election fraud" in Michigan. MAGA guy, but - again, limited credit to him - was (more courageous than you) vocal when the committee he led ended up landing on the obvious answer: The objections were stupid nonsense. He didn't even run again... because the combination of knowing he'd lose + the grief he (and his family) got was too much. LATE EDIT: My bad. McBroom did run again, but elevated from the House to the Senate. I misremembered... I was thinking of this - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/06/michigan-republican-truth-election-fraud/619326/


Why, Clapper, cannot you -- a random, anonymous commenter on a baseball website -- not even rise to level to a Rusty Bowers or Ed McBroom?

I'm not even asking for Raffensperger level spine/courage/principle.... you cannot even rise to the level Bowers or McBroom?

Why?

Why can't you even pass that low, limited bar?

Why, Clapper, cannot you -- a random, anonymous commenter on a baseball website -- not even rise to level to a Rusty Bowers or Ed McBroom?

I'm not even asking for Raffensperger level spine/courage/principle.... you cannot even rise to the level Bowers or McBroom?

Why?

Why can't you even pass that low, limited bar?

zonk,

I admire your persistence, but....

If you have to ask, you'll never know.

But then you already do know the answer. If Trump shot someone on Fifth Avenue, he'd blame it on the Democrats being soft on crime.

I think it seems perfectly fair to say that Florida has been a swing state up to this point, but now its swinginess is in question. Lots of states used to be swing states but aren't any more; quite possible that Florida just isn't now. We'll see. Right now it has roughly the same feel as swearing up and down that California was still a swing state in 1994.

Florida's trended pretty heavily to the right in Presidential elections lately, too:

2012 - R +3.0 more R than the US overall
2016 - R +4.3
2020 - R +7.7

IMO it's pretty close to the point where FL won't look like a swing state if the D and R nominees are closer to 50/50 vote split nationwide. DeSantis's reelection was pretty impressive from an electoral standpoint, but maybe we just have to give some credit also to Andrew Gillum, who was probably a better candidate in 2018 than was recognized at the time. And of course Nelson was an incumbent when he lost a close election (to a sitting governor, no less) in 2018 also, and unless you're Lori Lightfoot, incumbents tend to punch above their weight.

To me, all available evidence suggests that FL is on the far right side of swing-state status, and in danger of going the way of IA and OH (and CO to the other side), recent examples of swing-state status being lost recently.

The simple fact is trump and the GOP could have wiped their arse with the constitution in 2021 and the YC and JE of the world would have come up with a reason to excuse it. That it didn't happen simply means they can act like it was no big deal.

Zonk raises an absurd hypothetical that didn’t happen in 2020, and won’t happen in 2024, then insists that everyone must join him in wearing ‘the ribbon of denunciation’. Pass. I’m content to just note that his hypothetical is yet another effort to tar people for something they never did.

I suppose you have a quote to back up your ridiculous assertion, McCoy? You being such an expert on the Constitution and all, eh?

From 1940 through 1976, pretty much every big state was a swing state. In those 9 elections, I can't think of any of them that didn't vote for the D and the R candidate at least 3 times each. I could be mistaken, but I don't think so.

From 1940 through 1976, pretty much every big state was a swing state. In those 9 elections, I can't think of any of them that didn't vote for the D and the R candidate at least 3 times each.

There were 6 landslide presidential elections in that timeframe, 3 for each party, so that may not be the best measure for determining swing state status. Being consistently close in non-landslide years would be more definitive.

Zonk raises an absurd hypothetical that didn’t happen in 2020, and won’t happen in 2024, then insists that everyone must join him in wearing ‘the ribbon of denunciation’. Pass. I’m content to just note that his hypothetical is yet another effort to tar people for something they never did.

At some point, Clapper, you really need to stand for something beyond a jersey.

I mean, right now - you've got the GOP field leader sounding like midterm Dem PAC attack ad on Social Security. If we're all supermajority agreed that we're neither cutting benefits nor raising retirement age? Bully... sign me up for a supermajority agreement.

I have always been a nominal free trader. Uneven and sometimes exploitative as it has been? It's got a better record than any other in spreading opportunity and liberty. I have no idea what the prevailing thought is on trade in the GOP. It felt like we used to disagree on where the nexus was between national interests, respect for human rights, and the limits of profit margins. Now? Setting aside Snapper, whom I think would be cool with limiting trade to the next valley? What IS the idea on trade?

Perhaps most importantly for the office in question, given that US POTUS is supposed to be primarily responsible for foreign policy - I would *really* like to know what the Clapper/JE foundation is... I oppose direct US intervention, but I do think a democratic nation opposing invasion ought to be supported to the greatest extent we can support it. I also think - and this is a change for me from 10 years ago - that NATO has real value. I don't think you have to look further than Sweden, who sat out WWII FFS!, now wishing to join NATO. I'm sorry that Ukraine didn't play ball with Rudy Giuliani's capers... but... ?

From 1940 through 1976, pretty much every big state was a swing state. In those [correction: 10] elections, I can't think of any of them that didn't vote for the D and the R candidate at least 3 times each.

There were 6 landslide presidential elections in that timeframe, 3 for each party, so that may not be the best measure for determining swing state status. Being consistently close in non-landslide years would be more definitive.

More definitive, yes, but there were also 4 close races (1948-60-68-76) where many big states also went back and forth during those years. In those 4 elections, here were a few sample outcomes:

NY: R-D-D-D

PA: R-D-D-D

MI: R-D-D-R (also R in 1940, an FDR landslide year)

CA: D-R-R-R

IL: D-D-R-R

FL: D-R-R-D

WI: D-R-R-R

It wasn't until the Clinton years that most of those states became pretty much one party states in presidential years, with NY / PA / IL / CA / MI (exception: 2016) / WI (also except for 2016) becoming reliably Democratic, while TX became almost exclusively Republican. Not that those state legislatures always followed suit---far from it.

Not that those state legislatures always followed suit---far from it.

The Dakotas for example. Solidly D in every way, except Presidential elections, which were reliably R.

I mean you probably consider FDR a socialist right?

RM Nixon would not be elected president today; he's too liberal for the democrats to nominate.

Learned revanchism today; no true scotsman, looked it up on wikipedia; still don't quite understand it; maybe I can get Don Lemon to look it up for me on google.

The next day, records show, DeSantis received a $1 million contribution from Joe Ricketts, the billionaire

That is one heck of a display of free speech; Buckley v. Valejo and its progeny; any one ever read the original opinion? It's more tough for me to understand than the no true scotsman fallacy; argued by Ralph Winter, later to go on the 2nd circuit; teach at Yale law school, good work by him, not so nice for the country.

In this country, each one of you reading this is also free to give $1mil to the Florida legislature or whomever else you desire.

Both parties serve the ultra rich, not the thousandaires or the single digit millionaires.

Former President Trump is a master orator. For two years, his party held both houses of congress. What was the signature achievement? Tax cuts for billionaires. Mr. Ricketts needs to be able to speak even more. You reading these words have free speech, too.

Learned revanchism today; no true scotsman, looked it up on wikipedia; still don't quite understand it;

Simply. That can't be a Scotsman, because no true Scotsman would do X. Applied here. DeSantis cannot be a Fascist because no true swing state would elect him by such a large margin. The fallacy being that Florida is a swing state. And the fallacy there is that while yes, Florida is an overwhelmingly Republican state, it is still a swing state because Democrats are so terrible, and if only the democrats weren't so terrible, Florida would be more balanced.

No, the fallacy is that DeSantis is an extremist. It’s amazing the lengths some will go to avoid acknowledging that DeSantis was initially elected in 2018 by only 0.4%, but re-elected in 2022 by almost 20%, because lots of Democrats & Independents approved of his governance and voted accordingly. If Florida is no longer a swing state, it’s because DeSantis made it that way, which is hardly a good argument for him being an extremist.

No, the fallacy is that DeSantis is an extremist. It’s amazing the lengths some will go to avoid acknowledging that DeSantis was initially elected in 2018 by only 0.4%, but re-elected in 2022 by almost 20%, because lots of Democrats & Independents approved of his governance and voted accordingly.

And I was one of them. I lived in Florida until late 2021. For his first 2 years, though a Democrat, I was supportive and pleased with DeSantis. He stood up to the legislature to enact legislation corresponding to the will of the voters in constitutional referenda. He was excellent in disaster response. Then he went for the big ring and got all performative authoritarian.

54. Thank you for the explanation; makes it a lot clearer for me.

the fallacy is that DeSantis is an extremist

Mr. Clapper, how do you define an extremist?

Governor DeS may be in the mainstream of his party, but again, Tricky Dick would be too liberal for today's Dems.

Governor DeS has the approval of Florida's voters. The Florida voters know what they like.

What he makes the national news on doesn't speak to me, but maybe he speaks to you.

Governor DeS seems like a really intelligent fellow, who is super ambitious; he wants to be president.

But, what's he going to do for me? I have a good idea what he's going to do for Dave Ricketts.

Tricky Dick would be too liberal for today's Dems.

By every indication, that is very much a minority opinion among today’s Democrats.

Governor DeS seems like a really intelligent fellow, who is super ambitious; he wants to be president. But, what's he going to do for me?

Ending Biden’s Jimmy Carter level inflation might be the most noticeable effect.

I hope I am not being a true Scotsman here.

Do you Clapper think that a candidate, let's call him Nick Dixon, who advocated a negative income tax and universal healthcare, throw in advocating to establish a governmental agency to regulate the environment (you can call it the Environmental Regulatory Agency, ERA, instead of the EPA), do you think such a candidate would have a chance? Do you think such a candidate would receive money from the donor/corporate class? You really do?

Jimmy Carter level inflation

Great political observation in quotes, blame the other guy, but factually inaccurate. I envy your youth, because you must not remember that the inflation started under RMN's watch. Anyone on this board like wage and price freezes? Is that some wacky liberal/commie idea? Go back to 1971 when Tricky Dick was prez, that's what you got for 90 days, crazy regulations on that economy man. "WIN" was Gerald Ford's slogan for "Whip Inflation Now" Then, he turned the button upside down to "NIM" for "No Instant Miracles" Catchy, but it didn't sell. Biden's inflation? He's a standard corporate dem. He must be a lot more competent than the R's give him credit for. He is able to cause worldwide inflation, really?

Again, Mr. Clapper, what is an extremist? Gov DeS is not an extremist, we can agree on that. But, from your thoughtful viewpoint, what would be an extremist? You have some interesting views; I welcome that one.

Both parties support tax cuts for billionaires/huge corporations. They support Smith Barney, not Barney Smith. Billionaires/corporations have a place in our society, it's just too much of a place in terms of influence. It's not an R or D thing, because each take that dough from the same place. President Trump said he would drain the swamp. He delivered tax cuts for billionaires. As significant as declaring abortion not a constitutional right may be, the major economic significance of the appointment of President Trump's justices is they will side with large businesses on the civil/regulatory matters (with the Chamber of Commerce position). That's where the dough is man; it's not emotional issue, but financially, very big, huge wonderful and fantastic (if you are a billionaire or large corporation). Of course, President Trump referred to McConnell and his judges; because the senior senator from KY is a master politician; he knows where the money is. You can talk about abortion all you want it's tax cuts, deregulation and privatization that rule the roost, bring home the cash.

I'll take Jesse Unruh (who lost to Saint Ronny in 72 for gov of CA): “if you can’t drink a lobbyist’s whiskey, take his money, sleep with his women and still vote against him in the morning, you don’t belong in politics.”

So, again, what Mr. Clapper is an extremist?

Baxter, you’re being far too cute with the facts. I’m well aware that the EPA was established under Nixon, however his appointees and policies would find little favor with today’s Democrats. Despite a few somewhat liberal policies for the time, Nixon isn’t ‘too liberal’ for today’s Democrats. It’s an absurd contention. The more honest assessment is that the likes of Jack Kennedy, Scoop Jackson, Daniel Moynihan & Joe Lieberman would be insufficiently liberal for today’s Democrats.

Your efforts to rehabilitate Jimmy Carter are seriously misplaced. Inflation was far worse under Carter than his predecessors, yet somehow his admirers contend that he’s the only President not responsible for what happened on his watch. In the the 1976 campaign, Carter savaged Ford for his stewardship of the economy, using the Misery Index (inflation & unemployment rates) as his cudgel. At that time, the Misery Index was ~ 13%. By the 1980 election, the Misery Index was almost 21%, and Carter lost in a landslide. His VP did even worse in the next election. Carter might make a good neighbor, but he was a lousy President, and the voters responded accordingly.

Since you insist: There appear to be competing definitions of “extremist”. Most dictionaries have some version of “a person who goes to extremes, especially in political matters”. Some of today’s Democrats appear to prefer “any Republican who has a chance to be President”. I side with the first definition, and note that extremists don’t generally get 60% of the vote in statewide or national election in this country.

The dirty little secret of authoritarianism is that it can be quite popular.

When you’re scapegoating minorities, the majority loves you.

When you violate civil liberties, disenfranchise groups, seize the assets of minority groups, “hurt the right people” etc. it can be a popular strategy.

DeSantis is popular in Florida. And evil.

PS The GOP strategy of going after Trans folks is successful because very very few people are trans, but the horrifically insecure American voter gets to revel in his hatred for anyone who isn’t him, and feel superior.

I've read it in both posts, and he did write too liberal for the Dems, but I still think he means "Too liberal for the republicans." Too liberal for the dems is indeed wrong, but too liberal for the Rs is spot on. I hope he clarifies.

Since you insist: There appear to be competing definitions of “extremist”. Most dictionaries have some version of “a person who goes to extremes, especially in political matters”. Some of today’s Democrats appear to prefer “any Republican who has a chance to be President”. I side with the first definition, and note that extremists don’t generally get 60% of the vote in statewide or national election in this country.

The next time you give an actual answer to a direct question will be the first.

Ending Biden’s Jimmy Carter level inflation might be the most noticeable effect.

There is very little a President can do to end/reduce inflation. The two biggest drivers are The Fed and oil prices, with the former being by far the most important. You surely know that already but you just can't resist a dig at any target Fox directs you to fire on.

Average inflation from Jan '77 thru Jan '81 was 9.8%. Avg for Biden's term so far is 6.4% and it's been falling since June '22. I'd post the charts here if I knew how to.

Tell us again about Biden's Carter level inflation, Uncle Clap?

Pre-Carter inflation was primarily the result of Arthur Burns' loose monetary policy, aggravated by Bill Miller under Carter, plus the 1973 oil shock. The misery index you cite being so high in 1980 was because of Paul Volcker willfully shutting down the manufacturing & homebuilding industries to control the inflation caused by his predecessors and two oil shocks, none of which was a Carter policy.

The misery index under Carter was also substantially worsened by LBJ's guns & butter policy of financing the war in Vietnam with 10 year notes (the 30 year Treas didn't exist until 1977, introduced expressly to refi LBJ's 10's).

All this to say, you have no idea what you are talking about re: finance & macroeconomics.

Happy Friday.

I will plead guilty (or no contest) to being too cute.

62 I do indeed believe Tricky Dick would not be nominated by the dems. Thanks for batting around the idea

Too liberal for the R's? Barry Goldwater: you don't have to be straight to shoot straight; ok to have gays in the military.

60. Misery index was a creation of the news media, adding unemployment to inflation; it's not a statistic economists use. Today, unemployment is relatively low and inflation relatively high. Are we more miserable now than in the 70's or less? Rehabilitate Carter? Huh? That Carter was not a good president doesn't improve Tricky Dick's stature. You can blame the fed for most of the inflation (or, hey what 63 said while I'm typing this), but Tricky Dick panicked and put in price controls, made it worse, so he bears part of the blame. You may be "aware" but I will certainly bet you don't remember because you didn't have to live through those times. As billionaire Charlie Munger recently pointed out the 30's were worse, at least for him. Maybe now is worse for a young person, I hope not.

Also, Clapper, as 62 points out, you're a sharp enough fella to know a non-answer speaks volumes more; thanks for putting a little smile on my face, even if you may not have intended it.

Misery index was a creation of the news media

The innerwebs appear to be about unanimous in agreeing that the term was coined by Arthur Okun, an economist who was a key advisor in the waning days of the President Johnson administration in the late 1960s.

and there doesn't appear to be much dispute that Carter made the term more famous as a way to beat Ford - and then Reagan did the same to beat Carter. I don't see evidence that the media was involved, other than by publicizing the campaign speeches during both races.

Avg for Biden's term so far is 6.4% and it's been falling since June '22.

No reason Biden should get much credit for what he inherited from Trump, before his own spending policies kicked in. Once that happened, the inflation rate shot up.

Monthly inflation rates from 2022 on:

January 7.5%
February 7.9%
March 8.5%
April 8.3%
May 8.6%
June 9.1%
July 8.5%
August 8.2%
September 8.2%
October 7.7%
November 7.1%
December 6.5%
January 2023 6.4%

That’s 7.88 per month. Not good. We’ll see what happens between now and November 2024, but you’re delusional if you think Biden would escape responsibility for continued inflation. The public may have a short memory if inflation trends significantly downward, but if not, I doubt the ‘not the prez’s fault’ argument, which seems to only be made when one party is in office, will work that well.

RM Nixon would not be elected president today; he's too liberal for the democrats to nominate.

This is the kind of thing only stupid people say.

...extremists don’t generally get 60% of the vote in statewide or national election in this country.

So is this.

Monthly inflation rates from 2022 on:

So what you're telling me is that Biden has successfully tamed inflation, to the point where it's lower now for several months running than it was when he took office.

PS The GOP strategy of going after Trans folks is successful because very very few people are trans, but the horrifically insecure American voter gets to revel in his hatred for anyone who isn’t him, and feel superior.

How successful has this strategy been, really? You probably noticed that the GOP made this a big issue last year and had a historically poor midterm, most notably blowing a string of important Senate races.

. . . and there doesn't appear to be much dispute that Carter made the term more famous as a way to beat Ford . . .

Minor quibble, the Misery Index wasn’t really famous at all until Jimmy Carter brought it to the forefront of the 1976 campaign, only to be hoisted on his own petard 4 years later.

We’ll see what happens between now and November 2024, but you’re delusional if you think Biden would escape responsibility for continued inflation. The public may have a short memory if inflation trends significantly downward, but if not, I doubt the ‘not the prez’s fault’ argument, which seems to only be made when one party is in office, will work that well

.

For starters, I didn't say Biden would escape responsibility for it. Rare is the president who does. What I said was that there is little any president can do about it, in response to your statement that Biden somehow will or must.

As for the numbers you list, you have no idea how inflation math works, though you do show great skill at moving goal posts.

Minor quibble, the Misery Index wasn’t really famous at all until Jimmy Carter brought it to the forefront of the 1976 campaign, only to be hoisted on his own petard 4 years later.

An accurate statement. Mazel tov! We are all proud of you.

So what you're telling me is that Biden has successfully tamed inflation, to the point where it's lower now for several months running than it was when he took office.

Far from it. Biden took office in January 2021, when the inflation rate was 1.4%. In #66, I started from January 2022 to give time for his inflationary spending policies to take effect.

But Trump's massive tax giveaway to himself and other users of depreciation was not inflationary, nor was the trillions of covid spending on his watch, because it was Republican dollars that were printed. And the inflation didn't kick in 1-2 years later the way Biden's did, for same reason.

I charge a fair bit for my advice at the office, but today only, this little bit is free: stay silent on subjects of which you are ignorant.

67.

This is the kind of thing only stupid people say.

Hey, noted, I'm willing to re-evaluate myself Mr. C. We can disagree, hopefully, on my level of stupidity. I will concede that if I had said "Russ Nixon" that would have been pretty stupid because as far as I know (and I am indeed sure you will correct me if I am wrong), Russ was NEVER prez (at least of the US).

I will also admit that I did NOT use a chatbot to create my post. I love you. I want to hack you. Oops, sorry man.

But, I am curious, Mr. C, how you feel about tax cuts for billionaires.

Far from it. Biden took office in January 2021, when the inflation rate was 1.4%. In #66, I started from January 2022 to give time for his inflationary spending policies to take effect.

Ah whoops, indeed. My internal calendar has not flipped to 2023 yet. Good thing I'm not calling other people stupid in this thread, that would really look bad for me.

Minor quibble, the Misery Index wasn’t really famous at all until Jimmy Carter brought it to the forefront of the 1976 campaign, only to be hoisted on his own petard 4 years later.

minor quibble: if it wasn't famous at all, how did Carter's advisers even know about it?

I suppose 'famous' is an elastic term - but someone created it, and some people were aware of it. which is why I wrote "more famous."

I also find it hard to imagine that a chief economic adviser to a U.S. President coining a meant-to-be-clever term - and I'm not delving into the legitimacy of it - winds up with practically no one at all except a canny (at first) campaign adviser to Carter having ever heard of it.

it was a known term to some, and then Carter's people made it more famous. A lot more famous, if you prefer.

But Trump's massive tax giveaway to himself and other users of depreciation was not inflationary, nor was the trillions of covid spending on his watch, because it was Republican dollars that were printed. And the inflation didn't kick in 1-2 years later the way Biden's did, for same reason.

I charge a fair bit for my advice at the office, but today only, this little bit is free: stay silent on subjects of which you are ignorant.

Your repeated smugness aside, I can’t help noticing that you don’t actually cite the inflation rate during Trump’s tenure. Could that be because the numbers don’t support your assertion? Not a single month of even 3% inflation during Trump’s presidency, with most months well below that.

75. Never heard of the "misery index" until the term "stagflation" started floating around. I have never seen the term in an economics text or a law and economics text or a scholarly article. Admittedly, all the ones I have read have been in crayon.

Okun, had some kind of a law about unemployment. But, remember Stigler's law, economic laws are rarely named for their founders.

perhaps this characterization will be deemed acceptable (from Investopedia, which does not seem impressed by the index):

"During the 1976 campaign for U.S. president, candidate Jimmy Carter popularized Okun’s misery index as a means of criticizing his opponent, incumbent Gerald Ford."

Very clever, this discussion with many adept wordsmiths, mesmerizing me into the rabbit hole of the name of an economic stat as meaningless as productive outs. The bottom line is that Gov DeS will not reduce inflation, maybe the fed will (maybe it can disinter Paul Voelker); maybe world events will align somehow. Sure, the buck stops at the top, so Biden will get the blame for inflation, just like Ford and Carter did. Trump gets credit for tax cuts for billionaires.

Fantastic discussion about economics, about which I know zip, or slightly more.

But, is Gov DeS, whom I have said is NOT an extremist, a proponent of the law referenced in the headline from "The Hill" Florida bill would require bloggers to register before writing about DeSantis

It looks like it applies to other FL lawmakers, other than the gov; does the gov support this?

I welcome Mr. Clapper's view on this; I believe (but he'll correct me if I am wrong) he's a big first amendment supporter.

Also, I welcome Mr. C's views although he's already ravished my feeble intellect.

Very clever, this discussion with many adept wordsmiths, mesmerizing me into the rabbit hole of the name of an economic stat as meaningless as productive outs. The bottom line is that Gov DeS will not reduce inflation, maybe the fed will (maybe it can disinter Paul Voelker); maybe world events will align somehow. Sure, the buck stops at the top, so Biden will get the blame for inflation, just like Ford and Carter did. Trump gets credit for tax cuts for billionaires.

Fantastic discussion about economics, about which I know zip, or slightly more.

But, is Gov DeS, whom I have said is NOT an extremist, a proponent of the law referenced in the headline from "The Hill" Florida bill would require bloggers to register before writing about DeSantis

It looks like it applies to other FL lawmakers, other than the gov; does the gov support this?

I welcome Mr. Clapper's view on this; I believe (but he'll correct me if I am wrong) he's a big first amendment supporter.

Also, I welcome Mr. C's views although he's already ravished my feeble intellect.

But, is Gov DeS, whom I have said is NOT an extremist, a proponent of the law referenced in the headline from "The Hill" Florida bill would require bloggers to register before writing about DeSantis. It looks like it applies to other FL lawmakers, other than the gov; does the gov support this?

If DeSantis supported that proposal, wouldn’t The Hill have found it sufficiently newsworthy to put in its article? To my knowledge, neither The Hill nor any other publication has made any such claim, thus you would probably be safe in assuming that this is a not particularly well thought out proposal of one State Senator that is unlikely to go anywhere.

81. I hear you. I want a politician to be like the cockroaches in my living room, tough. I stomp on one, go get a newspaper to pick it up. By the time I come back, he's hidden away (after changing the channel on the TV; they like those Nat Geo programs on insects). Trump, Clinton, they channel that inner roach. I would like to see Gov DeS' reaction to the bill if it were presented to him for signature.

There is very little a President can do to end/reduce inflation.

I am remiss in not noting earlier that with Biden it’s not so much a question of ending or reducing inflation, but rather the responsibility he bears for initiating inflation.

I am remiss in not noting earlier that you claimed that DeSantis would end/reduce the inflation.

Yes, in response to Baxter’s inquiry as to what DeSantis would do for him. However, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t note that inflation took off in March 2021, which in what must be an amazing ‘coincidence’ is when Biden’s huge stimulus program was signed. Check the chart linked in #76.

Florida may or may not be a swing state moving forward, but it certainly was from 1992-2020. Something that I’d be interested in seeing data on is the migration patterns into Florida since DeSantis took over. My working hypothesis is that lots of conservatives moved to Florida specifically because of DeSantis’ covid policies, which helped his and Republicans in general, margin considerably, but also helped Democrats slightly in some of the mid-west and northeastern states where they left. But I haven’t seen any data that supports or refutes that.

Long before DeSantis, geezers from New York and other Northeastern states were moving to Florida because of Florida's then-cheap housing and its lack of an income tax. Bowie Kuhn moved from New Jersey to Florida after declaring bankruptcy, because Florida doesn't allow residences to be seized in bankruptcy proceedings.

But then more generically, Florida is where people come to die. Jerry Seinfeld had that sorry state down cold.

Not everything is political. In the air conditioning era, retirees moved to Florida primarily for the warm winter weather. No income tax helps some, but Florida has other taxes that offset that a bit.

Auto insurance in FL is ridiculous. As is flood and windstorm.

The GOP strategy of going after Trans folks is successful because very very few people are trans, but the horrifically insecure American voter gets to revel in his hatred for anyone who isn’t him, and feel superior.

How successful has this strategy been, really? You probably noticed that the GOP made this a big issue last year and had a historically poor midterm, most notably blowing a string of important Senate races.

I would like to think the GOP's underperformance in the last midterms was more the result of sane voters rejecting StOlEn ElEcTiOn nonsense.

The price of oil has a huge impact on inflation numbers and presidents have very very little effect on the price of oil. 2020 saw the price of oil tank. In 2021 it went up and in 2022 it spiked.

All that would have happened regardless of who was president

McCoy, if trump was president, Russia likely would have crushed Ukraine and the oil spike would have been transitory, and likely filled by Saudi Arabia. Evil would have prevailed and the world would be a much more dangerous place but gas would have likely stayed cheap.

Anyway, that was 2022 and clapper was yammering about 2021. Obviously any discussion of 2021 inflation that ignores the Freightos Baltic Index is a partisan hack job, but it’s hard to remember details like that and easy to blame Biden.

I’m aware that retirees, who tend to lean conservative have been moving to Florida for decades. But the question is whether trends supercharged in the covid era and extended more to conservatives in general than just retirees.

Crazy but true: in the Kennedy v Nixon election, Florida and Iowa had the same number of electoral votes.

And California had the same number as Pennsylvania, while Florida now has the name number as New York.

Since 1940 Florida's population has increased 12-fold, which is way behind the rate increase of Nevada, whose population increased 29-fold. You could've almost fit the entire 1940 population of Nevada into the current Michigan Stadium.

McCoy, if trump was president, Russia likely would have crushed Ukraine . . .

When Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014, Obama sent blankets. Trump provided lethal aid, and upped the training of the Ukrainian military. It’s quite possible that Putin wouldn’t have invaded in 2022 if Trump were in office, although one never knows about the decision making of today’s Kremlin.

The price of oil has a huge impact on inflation numbers and presidents have very very little effect on the price of oil.

I doubt that is true for a President who guaranteed that he would put an end to the fossil fuel industry, and appointed officials intent on carrying that out.

I’m aware that retirees, who tend to lean conservative have been moving to Florida for decades. But the question is whether trends supercharged in the covid era and extended more to conservatives in general than just retirees.

yes. i've been trying to ring alarm bells about this for the last decade.

florida is a glimpse of a potential future where democrats continue to ignore the rise of reactionary/nationalist/fascist propaganda within global poc communities. people of color who support bolsoneiro and erdogan and modi and duterte and obrador (and jews who support netanyahu, too, for that matter) are not going to be the reliable democratic voting bloc that neoliberals expect them to be. they are going to fall in line behind nationalist demagogues like desantis, because he is ideologically in lockstep with the leaders of their ancestral (that's probably not the best word for it) governments.



billy corben's weekly appearances with dan lebatard are invaluable for anyone who wants to know what's actually going on in (south) florida, socially, financially and politically.

I doubt that is true for a President who guaranteed that he would put an end to the fossil fuel industry, and appointed officials intent on carrying that out.

They're doing an awfully poor job of it.

Housing costs are still relatively cheap in parts of Florida. I know people who have moved to the Orlando and Jacksonville regions for that reason.

Oh, there's places far cheaper than that.