Founder and editor-at-large, "Why We're Polarized," coming January: Podcasts:
Understanding impeachment demands grappling with deeper questions in our political system that don’t get covered in the daily news crush. Our new weekly podcast, Impeachment, Explained with @ezraklein, breaks through the noise. Subscribe today:
One key difference between the Nixon era and today’s impeachment saga: the conservative media ecosystem. Nicole Hemmer, a @Columbia historian, joins @ezraklein to explain on this week’s Impeachment, Explained podcast. Listen:
RT @_mdtyler: Second, we explain when individuals consume more or less news. Using an event study design and a synthetic control method we…
RT @Yascha_Mounk: German public television is retransmitting its coverage from the 9th of November 1989. Right now: watch "live" as an Eas…
RT @sashaperigo: Have y’all been following what’s happening with Instacart this week? The company is retaliating against workers, and it’s…
RT @smotus: No, the death penalty is like the death penalty. Impeachment is like getting fired.
RT @pastpunditry: It’s impossible to understand the impeachment of Donald Trump without understanding conservative media. I explain why in…
Much more from the poll — and a deep dive into the role the conservative media-verse has played in shaping this story — in this week's episode of Impeachment, Explained:
We don’t get the political system we deserve. We get the political system we accept.
The scary thing about that is it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the Republican Party chooses to treat what Trump has done as normal and protect him from consequences or sanction, then perhaps it will become normal.
That’s the level of cynicism Trump is forcing his supporters to embrace. It’s not quite, as Nixon famously said, “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” It’s closer to: when the president does it, that means it’s typical.
It's not that they don't believe abusing office for personal political advantage is impeachable. 67% of Republicans say it is.
But in the face of overwhelming evidence that Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, Republicans have convinced themselves this is normal. 65% of Republicans say presidents do this all the time. Only 39% say it's even morally wrong.
This poll shows you exactly how Republicans are managing to defend the indefensible. It's not that they've turned against impeachment in theory. 52% say if Trump abused his powers, he should be impeached.
Tomorrow, on Impeachment, Explained: - An exclusive poll we did with PerryUndem and Ipsos on when Americans think impeachment is necessary. - An amazing conversation with @PastPunditry on how the Fox News-iverse is making this impeachment different than those before.
Subscribe wherever you get your pods:
RT @clasticdetritus: I highly recommend this interview w/ marine scientist Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson (@ayanaeliza) on Ezra Klein's (@ezra…
Trump hasn't succeeded in becoming the authoritarian leader of a country dedicated to his glory. But he's succeeded in becoming the strongman leader of a political party dedicated to his glory.
Imagine wanting power back this badly that you would abase yourself this completely at age 72.
I can't stop watching it. It's so perfectly humiliating and dystopic. It's art.
This isn't a campaign ad, it's a hostage video.
That's from @Aarti411's searing, searching memoir "Here We Are." Looking forward to interviewing her tonight at @TheBatterySF.
"To migrate to America—to cross the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean or the Sonoran Desert—is the boldest act of one’s life. You do it to be the hero of your own story."
"Only, God must have a sense of humor because, as every undocumented immigrant knows, you can’t cross over and stand proud. You have to be invisible."
I basically agree that Bloomberg seems likeliest to split the Buttigieg/Biden/etc vote, smoothing a Warren or Bernie path. OTOH, I can see how Tom Steyer managing to poll above zero just by spending money would make someone like Bloomberg go hmm...
The big exception here is conservative media. But that's the point: look at how sharply Tucker Carlson has pivoted to reflect Trump and build out a Trumpism. You don't see much that's comparable among conservative think tanks, interest groups, etc.
My best guess is that it reflects Trump's own lack of interest in Trumpism as an ideology, as opposed to a vehicle for personal power and glory, but it's striking how few Trumpist institutions have emerged, and how much the conservative think tanks, etc, remain the same.
Something Lind and I discuss here that I continue to find surprising is that there's been so little effort to build an intellectual infrastructure around Trumpism.
This. This is what identity politics looks like.
RT @hamandcheese: The latest @ezraklein podcast with Michael Lind is self-recommending.
This is the candidate running to reduce the power of money in politics, right? Just checking.
This is the chair of the Arizona GOP. One of the most dangerous trends in American politics right now is Republicans coming to explicitly see democracy as dangerous to their rule, and the answer being less democracy, not a more popular agenda.
RT @jbouie: surprisingly self-aware column from politico’s editor
RT @voxdotcom: BREAKING: New York City has voted to switch to a ranked-choice voting system. NYC is the most populous place in the US yet…
Back in my blogging days, I think I had a name for this tendency, but I can't remember it. "The law of the ruthless adversary" or something.
It's absolute dogma on both sides that the other side has been treating political like a war for decades, and that's why they're winning, while my side has been politely playing pattycake, and it's time to wake the hell up and fight.
Fascinating @Edsall column on whether we're polarized by identity or ideas. This is a big part of what my coming book is about, and to offer a spoiler, I think the right understanding of this is that the two forms of polarization are mutually reinforcing:
As group polarization rises, that makes us likelier to adopt the ideas of our in-group, and to loathe the ideas of the out-group. As policy polarization rises, that smooths the way for group polarization, as the differences become clearer, and the stakes higher.
Switching some percentage of meals (or all of them!) to meatless is also cheap and in people's direct control, unlike a lot of other items on this and other lists. If you have to travel for business, or commute by car to work, that's hard to change.
RT @mattyglesias: Really underappreciated that the anti-democratic strand in contemporary GOP politics has nothing in particular to do with…
RT @rebzsays: This ⁦@today_explained⁩ is such a fascinating look at the mindset of attendees who go to Trump Rallies.…
Imagine a president with Trump’s will to abuse power but a moderate level of strategic sense and savvy. A president who picked capable staff and rewarded loyalists. A president who knew what not to say, and when not to say it, to get his way. What defense do we have against them?
Party loyalty creates vast zones in which corruption and abuse fester unchecked. That corruption and abuse can increase the party’s power — as Trump sought to do here —and further weaken oversight, as the out-party never has the strength to exercise it.
We are not special. There is no magic to our structure. Our system, in its modern form, depends on parties to sometimes put the country's interest before their own. If they don't, corruption will consume us. And in today's Republican Party, we are seeing how, and why.
Forget our myths and stories. Look at what is happening in front of us. If we saw this in another country, we would see where it was, eventually, going to lead.
Lindsey Graham’s comments today should make you think one thing: it can happen here. Arguably, it is happening here, right now. Ambition was supposed to check ambition. But now ambition *protects* ambition. Parties cooperate across branches.
We crossed that rubicon some ways back.
Donald Trump is brazen and crude. His abuses are blatant. His henchmen are largely clowns. His underlings are turning on him. He is the easiest possible test case for can our system hold a president accountable. And we are failing, because Republicans are failing.
Americans have long believed we designed a form of government that protects us from the authoritarians and corruption that destroys so many other systems. What we’re seeing now is we haven’t. Or if we did, we've lost it.
I’m old enough to remember when Lindsey Graham’s problem was that the hearings were closed and what we needed was an open process so everyone could evaluate the testimony for themselves.
And it'll be updated continuously as the story unfolds, the cast of characters grows, etc. The news is unrelenting, but this'll be a place to get the whole story, so people can follow along no matter when they start paying attention.
This is what Vox was built for
© 2009 creamsocial