This is a mind-blowing way to think about wealth inequality. If I have my napkin-math right, that's about 240K people with more wealth than 144 million of us!

five living writers that you've read five books by each Ta-Nehisi Coates Ann Patchett Seanan McGuire Marilynne Robinson Susan Cooper

He is very clear here: his Christianity is nationalistic. It leads him to prioritize "real Americans" above the worldwide poor. Also, I do not recognize his version of humanity here, especially when he can't answer the question of a single time where his faith challenged his political views.

Here's the thing: both as an academic and a human, I try to extend grace to members of the other party. There could be lots of reasons people vote for candidates I find revolting. But then their leaders keep saying things like this.

For the record, this is garbage. He pretends like he wants people to trust the election system while he's actually spreading false concerns to diminish faith in that system. It would take him 30 seconds to understand "what is happening here." His 'questions' are intended to fan the flames.

I was on the academic job market in 2008, '09, and '10, as the bottom fell out. Assurances that a wave of retirements was *just about to* open things up never materialized. I'm forever grateful that I found my pivot and have a meaningful new career. But it was a scary time.

Reading this made me think of how much Lego has changed from when I was young. I remember their first IP expansion (Star Wars) and how that's changed what LEGO means, particular as it reshapes how one interacts with the individual pieces, narrowing the creative possibilities in fundamental ways.

Yikes!

I was assigned in my church to teach a religion class for HS students before school. Thought that if I liked them this much at 5:45 am, I just might enjoy them when they were awake. I was right.

Janitor at an Air Force base; high-speed photographer (trained by the Navy, then worked for a defense contractor).

I once tried to ask my old Scout Master, who taught me these traits, how he could possibly support Trump as a many who exemplified none of them. He wasn't interested in engaging.

Another way to read this is that Sweden, France, and (to a lesser extent) the UK have done a better job of maintaining that change than China, Russia, and the US have done. Instead of an outlier, it could be the new normal.

Very few people with as much deep contextual knowledge of the conservative movement (and as skilled at connecting so many dots) as Nicole — can't wait for this one.

All of this would be fine *if it was the government's responsibility to make sure citizens had documentation, rather that the other way around*! That's what real 'voter ID' should look like. States that don't ensure citizens have necessary documentation should lose seats in proportion.

This is a clear call to abolish ICE. If this is this is "according to their training," they have been trained to be a goon squad, not law enforcement.

The "split-second decision making process" comment reminded me of this gem: theonion.com/sometimes-un...

Serious question: At what point does this involve illegal orders for which others risk prosecution?

For those who would like to understand how we got here, might I recommend @pastpunditry.bsky.social 's fantastic "Messengers of the Right"? I'm thinking particularly of her analysis of Human Events and their editorial values rejecting objectivity as a goal in reporting.

This is going to be an interesting year.

This is absolutely bonkers. Honestly, a great example of how history can be used to distort and attack. Saddened that I used to be able to point students to government sources as generally accurate, careful, and reliable (if a bit traditional). First we lost the National Parks sites and now this?!?

So ... representation for 4M Americans, a responsive Congress, a respectable court, and a crucial element of health care returned to a constitutional right, like it was for 50 years?

"Without interrupting each other, we both said at the same time, 'Lets never get out of touch with each other.' And we never have, although her death has come between us." - Norman Maclean, A River Runs Through It

Among the many points worth making: It is laughable that Trump is sincerely upset about people who criticize judges. It's a standard tactic of his, since before he won the office. He just likes to sound "law and order" when it's convenient.

Please, not Hegseth poetry. Also, literally saying he doesn't care about legality.

Sometimes I pause and think what terrible messages 24 sent to the whole nation. The ticking-clock idea of national security, where laws just got in the way and torture (a) worked and (b) was absolutely necessary. Not hard to imagine that making the difference for Bush's and now Trump's abuses.

If an expert teacher with 30 years experience was willing to volunteer their time, but ... sometimes: they just made things up that sounded good, were a bit racist, a bit sexist, exposed minors to inappropriate content, and blatantly stole from others ... every school would pass. So why adopt AI?

This is a good example of the way in which Justice Thomas is himself hostile to the law of the land. Same-sex marriage is a constitutional right. The idea that it being recognized in a book in a public school is someone an insidious threat to religious liberty is ridiculous.

To be really clear: The reason members of Congress can't just walk right in is because of the guns. Armed DHS personnel won't allow entry. In other words, DHS is using armed force to *break* laws. Democrats need to wrap their minds around that. Accept that the frog is boiled.

In a situation where the president is violating the law passed by Congress, the courts should be able to step in. But we've developed a standard of standing that assumes Impeachment is a live possibility, which would serve as a check on such blatantly unconstitutional action. So, here we are.

I feel like this should fall under the "you break it, you buy it" principle. If they don't want courts telling them how to "conduct foreign policy" they shouldn't illegally deport people. Very simple: Don't break the law, then we won't have to limit your exercise of power.

There are more than 10x as many people each year at the American Historical Association's conference! What if major news orgs covered that and similar events? Can you imagine how much better informed our country might be about its own history, institutions, and social structure? Instead, this.

The language at the end of the paragraph here is so crucial. No "public interest" is served by unlawfulness, while there is a significant "public interest" in *the rule of law.* Trump is not the embodiment of the public, certainly not more than laws duly authorized by Congress.

He's on the wrong side of all of this and his payouts are illegal. But our whole system of government should not hinge on such points. We should have a democratic system so robust that it's not decided by gerrymandering. That does not come down to a handful of votes in a handful of states.

So far, the president claims he can ignore the Constitutional actions of Congress (appropriations), judges (legal rulings on immigration), and presidents (Biden's pardons). Will someone point to the parts of the Constitution that do still apply?

@pomonacollege.bsky.social: I hope you will appropriately resist this. If they have a specific case, let them make it in court and cooperate. Otherwise, fight this illegitimate pressure on academic freedom.

We have a president who fundamentally does not care about people. Not one bit. He sees a humanitarian crisis, thinks "What if all those people were just gone?", and then salivates over the development opportunity, with himself at the center. Lacking all human empathy.

Happy Birthday to W.E.B. Du Bois. He'd be 157 today, which means that his long life (95.5 years!) was still longer than the time since he died (61.5 years ago). He continues to inspire me in my historical work and political understanding.

This seems useful right now. That 1/5 figure is astounding to think of. What happens to your local school funding if the state suddenly has 1/5 of it's budget frozen? School lunch for your kid? Salary for your teacher? Maintenance on the buildings? usafacts.org/articles/whi...

Some Republicans have been talking for decades about destroying the federal government. It appears that they've finally found a president willing to pull down the house around him. Tomorrow they take a step toward unilaterally cutting up to $3T, subordinating it to their own political principles.

"The time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity." - MLK

If nothing else, studying history should help you learn not to look like a fool. I'm no Jefferson expert and I would know enough to be suspicious of this prayer. A quick google search would then clear the matter up.

This is fantastic.

A Trump loss may have spelled the end of the GOP as a stable, majority party. What if a Trump win spells the end of the Dems, with a new opposition party emerging? Like the Whigs who buckled against the Dems when it came to slavery, maybe we're ready for a new populist anti-authoritatian party?

An Onion headline that lives in my head rent-free.

The Dakotas are the rotten boroughs of the U.S. Each have fewer than a million people and their governors were just nominated for major federal offices. Meanwhile, Puerto Rico's 3.2m people get nothing.

The election results have again reminded me of Du Bois's statement on Robert E. Lee: "People do not go to war for abstract theories of government. They fight for property and privilege." It seems clear that people did not vote on democracy but on property and privilege.