Personally I like my time piece to be correct more than twice a day. A constitutional amendment resolving abortion boundaries would be best. That is as likely as having a lunch date with Bigfoot. So the states and courts will wrestle with abortion. Maybe Congress will weigh in. Eventually Roe the sequel will be cobbled by the Supreme Court.
People liked to say that DJT was on record as supporting “16 weeks”….which recent events help to demonstrate as to the usefulness of whatever DJT puts on the record.
This newsletter is at its best when you're covering critical Constitutional issues, and how they're being approached by members of both parties. Outstanding piece.
" Personally, I Think Trump's Position Is The Correct One. ".
I Don't. But This Loud, Proud, Unapologetic, Never - Trump Conservative Is Glad That Trump Is Staking Out His Wimpy " States Rights " Position. It Serves The Purpose Of Slapping All My Fellow Pro -Life Conservatives In The Face With The Hard Reality: Donald Trump Is Not, And Never Was, Genuinely " Pro - Life. ".
WeDonald Trump Did Not Create This Conservative Supreme Court. Mike Pence And Other Conservatives In The Administration Appointed The New Supreme Court Justices. Yes, Mike Pence And Other Conservatives In The Previous Administration Enjoy The Credit For Creating The New, Conservative Supreme Court. Thank You, Mike Pence!!!
Donald Trump? What About Him? He's Invisible When It Comes To The Responsibility For Creating The New Supreme Court.
Nope, I Stand With Mike Pence And The True Pro-Lifers ( Abortion Abolitionists ). I Stand With The Arizona Supreme Court. I Don't Care If It Hurts Fake " Pro-Lifers " Like Donald Trump And Kari Lake, In The State Of Arizona. That Serves My Anti-Donald Trump Agenda, Perfectly.
Yep, I Don't Care If The Arizona Supreme Court's Decision Costs Donald Trump The State Of Arizona And, As A Result, The General Election. Just As Long As The Arizona Supreme Court's Decision And The 1864 Statute Stands And Remains In Effect.
I only have one thing to say to David Thornton. Liar, liar, pants on fire! Donald Trump most certainly did NOT urge his supporters to go to the Capitol building on Jan. 6th to cause an insurrection. He said for them to go PEACEFULLY! To state anything else is a total and complete lie, and Mr. Thornton should be ashamed of himself.
He shows up in court occasionally to criticize the democrat lawfare against him. But Cameron's comment was in reference to the January 6 Capitol riot. Mr. Trump is not on trial for that. You really ought to give Mr. Sprow credit for being an ally instead of lambasting him for pointing out factual errors.
He does not show up in court to criticize the Dem lawfare, he shows up to defend himself in a court of law. Despite ample resources, he is rarely ever able to convince a judge and jury on the merits.
True, maybe. He has little chance to do so in NY. He does take advantage of the publicity opportunities. It might turn out different in venues other than NY and DC.
OK well, the facts and timeline are exceedingly clear that he did intend to overturn the election illegally, and he did intend to use the physical presence of his supporters at the Capitol to accomplish that goal. In my experience, the only people who see things otherwise are rabid partisans. My Trump supporter friends have all conceded this point. It's not controversial.
If you're Trump supporter friends have all conceded the point, why are they still Trump supporters? All Trump did was hire a bevy of lawyers to question and try to find evidence of voter fraud that, if found, would overturn the election. I happen to believe there was foul play in the 2020 election. No one will ever convince me that Biden got 81 million votes legitimately, especially considering the best Obama got was 65 million, and he was the golden boy in 2012. And if stating as fact that the democrats stole the election in 2020 is somehow a crime, well the FBI surely knows where they can find me.
That's essentially why they continue to support Trump.
They believe that Dems rigged it, but they're reasonable enough to judge that none of Trump's arguments stood up in court, and that the courts are not part of some elaborate Democrat conspiracy. They're reasonable enough to conclude that if fraud happened, Trump didn't convincingly expose it, and acted illegally to try and manifest his will in the absence of credible evidence.
For whatever it's worth, I think that people who disbelieve 81M Biden voters grossly underestimate how many people hate Trump. 81M people didn't vote for Biden, but that many people plausibly voted AGAINST Trump. Remember, our whole world is a bubble. One of modern man's greatest errors is to extrapolate public opinion from his bubble. That is, of course, exactly what happened to liberals in 2016. In my view, it happened to MAGA in 2020.
And it should be noted: there were more registered voters that didn't vote than voted for either Biden or Trump. Yes, it was a fairly historic high in terms of participation, but ~1/3rd still didn't actually take part.
“The difference between the two is key. Biden’s policy may be bad, but he is pursuing bad policy in a peaceful, traditional, and legal way. Biden’s bad policy won’t break the Constitution, but Trump’s assault elections might.
“It’s the distinction between a broken leg and a heart attack. Both are bad, both are problems, but one is much more serious than the other.”
You are SO close to getting it right here, but then you flub it up in your metaphor.
I really like your writing, David. You’re clearly principled conservative (disclaimer: I am not), but the crazies taking over your party has allowed you to see more clearly the intentions and motivations of the opposition than most. That’s why I enjoy reading your content—even though I largely disagree with your positions, you’re honest and don’t imply malicious intent to those you disagree with.
Back to the quote above. You describe a policy disagreement you have with Biden… then you liken it to a broken leg. That is very uncharitable. I don’t think you’ll find many people who disagree on the “virtues” of a broken leg. However, I can assure you that you’ll find supporters of student loan forgiveness as a policy position!
All that said, I mostly agree with this article. The student loan program (and higher education funding more broadly) is a mess right now—and very ripe for reform. But clearly Congress is not up to the task. I don’t know how to fix Congress, but the pragmatic side of me says we can’t wait for Congress to get its act together.
"the pragmatic side of me says we can't wait for Congress to get its act together." That's a very illiberal side, and it's what principled conservatives fight against. Yes, we can wait for Congress to get its act together. Not only can we wait, but we should wait. Not waiting and subverting the very underpinnings of our pluralistic, democratic society is what fuels "The Flight 93 Election" impulse on the right (not principled conservatives, but rabid right-wing progressives who want illiberal solutions). What we must always fight to preserve is the institutions that preserve our republic and if that means waiting a hard wait for a particular problem to be solved, so be it. It's messy. Biden is a half-measure hack, who isn't an activist on any given topic but is a politician on all of them. Even when Biden is right, he doesn't do enough (like Ukraine). And when he picks low-hanging fruit, he's all wrong. Student loan debt will solve itself...the rising college generation is more and more declining to go. That will fix the bloat.
I guess I'm just not as optimistic as you that these things will fix themselves ... I just see entropy and race-to-the-bottom outcomes. :(
And, do understand that I recognize the illiberal nature of what I'm suggesting. I hate it--I really do. I just know there are a lot of people in bad situations who can't afford to wait around for congress to reclaim its job. And I say all of that from a place of amazing privilege--I have a good job, no student loans, etc... of all people, I can stand to wait out the status quo.
Personally I like my time piece to be correct more than twice a day. A constitutional amendment resolving abortion boundaries would be best. That is as likely as having a lunch date with Bigfoot. So the states and courts will wrestle with abortion. Maybe Congress will weigh in. Eventually Roe the sequel will be cobbled by the Supreme Court.
You mean Bigfoot won't show for my lunch date? Dang.
People liked to say that DJT was on record as supporting “16 weeks”….which recent events help to demonstrate as to the usefulness of whatever DJT puts on the record.
This newsletter is at its best when you're covering critical Constitutional issues, and how they're being approached by members of both parties. Outstanding piece.
" Personally, I Think Trump's Position Is The Correct One. ".
I Don't. But This Loud, Proud, Unapologetic, Never - Trump Conservative Is Glad That Trump Is Staking Out His Wimpy " States Rights " Position. It Serves The Purpose Of Slapping All My Fellow Pro -Life Conservatives In The Face With The Hard Reality: Donald Trump Is Not, And Never Was, Genuinely " Pro - Life. ".
WeDonald Trump Did Not Create This Conservative Supreme Court. Mike Pence And Other Conservatives In The Administration Appointed The New Supreme Court Justices. Yes, Mike Pence And Other Conservatives In The Previous Administration Enjoy The Credit For Creating The New, Conservative Supreme Court. Thank You, Mike Pence!!!
Donald Trump? What About Him? He's Invisible When It Comes To The Responsibility For Creating The New Supreme Court.
Nope, I Stand With Mike Pence And The True Pro-Lifers ( Abortion Abolitionists ). I Stand With The Arizona Supreme Court. I Don't Care If It Hurts Fake " Pro-Lifers " Like Donald Trump And Kari Lake, In The State Of Arizona. That Serves My Anti-Donald Trump Agenda, Perfectly.
Yep, I Don't Care If The Arizona Supreme Court's Decision Costs Donald Trump The State Of Arizona And, As A Result, The General Election. Just As Long As The Arizona Supreme Court's Decision And The 1864 Statute Stands And Remains In Effect.
I only have one thing to say to David Thornton. Liar, liar, pants on fire! Donald Trump most certainly did NOT urge his supporters to go to the Capitol building on Jan. 6th to cause an insurrection. He said for them to go PEACEFULLY! To state anything else is a total and complete lie, and Mr. Thornton should be ashamed of himself.
Trump is no profile in courage.
If that's the case Cam, then trump should be fighting to get his day in court and clear his stellar good name. How's that working out for you/us?
He shows up in court occasionally to criticize the democrat lawfare against him. But Cameron's comment was in reference to the January 6 Capitol riot. Mr. Trump is not on trial for that. You really ought to give Mr. Sprow credit for being an ally instead of lambasting him for pointing out factual errors.
He does not show up in court to criticize the Dem lawfare, he shows up to defend himself in a court of law. Despite ample resources, he is rarely ever able to convince a judge and jury on the merits.
True, maybe. He has little chance to do so in NY. He does take advantage of the publicity opportunities. It might turn out different in venues other than NY and DC.
One comment about staying peaceful and many about violence, including refusals to tell supporters to stand down during the insurrection.
https://www.justsecurity.org/91904/dissecting-trumps-peacefully-and-patriotically-defense-of-the-january-6th-attack/
There was no insurrection. Riot? A case could be made, but nowhere near an insurrection.
insurrection
noun
in·sur·rec·tion ˌin-sə-ˈrek-shən
: the act or an instance of revolting especially violently against civil or political authority or against an established government
also : the crime of inciting or engaging in such revolt
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurrection#:~:text=Legal%20Definition-,insurrection,or%20engaging%20in%20such%20revolt
You should work on that rabid partisanship. It is unbecoming.
Nice try, but I'm a nevertrumper. I was one before they coined the term.
OK well, the facts and timeline are exceedingly clear that he did intend to overturn the election illegally, and he did intend to use the physical presence of his supporters at the Capitol to accomplish that goal. In my experience, the only people who see things otherwise are rabid partisans. My Trump supporter friends have all conceded this point. It's not controversial.
If you're Trump supporter friends have all conceded the point, why are they still Trump supporters? All Trump did was hire a bevy of lawyers to question and try to find evidence of voter fraud that, if found, would overturn the election. I happen to believe there was foul play in the 2020 election. No one will ever convince me that Biden got 81 million votes legitimately, especially considering the best Obama got was 65 million, and he was the golden boy in 2012. And if stating as fact that the democrats stole the election in 2020 is somehow a crime, well the FBI surely knows where they can find me.
That's essentially why they continue to support Trump.
They believe that Dems rigged it, but they're reasonable enough to judge that none of Trump's arguments stood up in court, and that the courts are not part of some elaborate Democrat conspiracy. They're reasonable enough to conclude that if fraud happened, Trump didn't convincingly expose it, and acted illegally to try and manifest his will in the absence of credible evidence.
For whatever it's worth, I think that people who disbelieve 81M Biden voters grossly underestimate how many people hate Trump. 81M people didn't vote for Biden, but that many people plausibly voted AGAINST Trump. Remember, our whole world is a bubble. One of modern man's greatest errors is to extrapolate public opinion from his bubble. That is, of course, exactly what happened to liberals in 2016. In my view, it happened to MAGA in 2020.
And it should be noted: there were more registered voters that didn't vote than voted for either Biden or Trump. Yes, it was a fairly historic high in terms of participation, but ~1/3rd still didn't actually take part.
“The difference between the two is key. Biden’s policy may be bad, but he is pursuing bad policy in a peaceful, traditional, and legal way. Biden’s bad policy won’t break the Constitution, but Trump’s assault elections might.
“It’s the distinction between a broken leg and a heart attack. Both are bad, both are problems, but one is much more serious than the other.”
You are SO close to getting it right here, but then you flub it up in your metaphor.
I really like your writing, David. You’re clearly principled conservative (disclaimer: I am not), but the crazies taking over your party has allowed you to see more clearly the intentions and motivations of the opposition than most. That’s why I enjoy reading your content—even though I largely disagree with your positions, you’re honest and don’t imply malicious intent to those you disagree with.
Back to the quote above. You describe a policy disagreement you have with Biden… then you liken it to a broken leg. That is very uncharitable. I don’t think you’ll find many people who disagree on the “virtues” of a broken leg. However, I can assure you that you’ll find supporters of student loan forgiveness as a policy position!
All that said, I mostly agree with this article. The student loan program (and higher education funding more broadly) is a mess right now—and very ripe for reform. But clearly Congress is not up to the task. I don’t know how to fix Congress, but the pragmatic side of me says we can’t wait for Congress to get its act together.
"the pragmatic side of me says we can't wait for Congress to get its act together." That's a very illiberal side, and it's what principled conservatives fight against. Yes, we can wait for Congress to get its act together. Not only can we wait, but we should wait. Not waiting and subverting the very underpinnings of our pluralistic, democratic society is what fuels "The Flight 93 Election" impulse on the right (not principled conservatives, but rabid right-wing progressives who want illiberal solutions). What we must always fight to preserve is the institutions that preserve our republic and if that means waiting a hard wait for a particular problem to be solved, so be it. It's messy. Biden is a half-measure hack, who isn't an activist on any given topic but is a politician on all of them. Even when Biden is right, he doesn't do enough (like Ukraine). And when he picks low-hanging fruit, he's all wrong. Student loan debt will solve itself...the rising college generation is more and more declining to go. That will fix the bloat.
I guess I'm just not as optimistic as you that these things will fix themselves ... I just see entropy and race-to-the-bottom outcomes. :(
And, do understand that I recognize the illiberal nature of what I'm suggesting. I hate it--I really do. I just know there are a lot of people in bad situations who can't afford to wait around for congress to reclaim its job. And I say all of that from a place of amazing privilege--I have a good job, no student loans, etc... of all people, I can stand to wait out the status quo.