@eyesquash no. the alternative is to point to institutions and leaders. the electorate is what it is, the crooked timber we all constitute. but it doesn’t have a voice or will independent of the institutions we develop to give it one. under different electoral systems, we’d have drastically different outcomes. we’d have a drastically different electorate, because institutions shape the public much more than public opinion can reshape institutions.

@falcennial (oh, i think the general point is right on and well-deserved, scorn on! but thanks!)

@falcennial i’d join your mockery, except i’m about to publish such a take even though i was sure that Kamala would win… 🤷‍♂️

terrible circumstances, but this is a wonderful observation by Martha Derthick, via @adamgurri https://www.liberalcurrents.com/a-practical-program-for-resisting-a-trump-second-term/

touting a record stock market as an indicator of Biden’s great economy seems kind of dumb now, doesn’t it?

@wim not a counterpoint at all. i totally agree. delivering on a forward-looking rate of change is not delivering substantial, material results people really perceive in time. what was perceivably delivered was high prices, matched among most (not all) by wage gains perceived as personally earned, not macroeconomic, but then stolen by inflation.

@BenRossTransit that last is the whole problem. Biden was a good start, domestically, economically! but these four years were just a start, too soon to bear dividends really perceptible to ordinary people. yes, if people were part of social formations with trusted leaders who could vouch for nascent trends, that helped. but pretending this was a great economy and anyone who failed to accept that was obtuse didn’t match experience, felt like a kind of bullying.

@KarlHeinzHasliP i think the planet would be even less likely to survive a bitcoin standard.

management of the US dollar is now in the hands of… the people who’ve been buying a ton of bitcoin in a bet on the imminent death of the US dollar.

@nougatmachine i’d like to say no, but i think in fact most teamsters saw that as protecting what was already theirs, which is something a government is supposed to do rather than something you give extra credit because it’s done. a Trump Administration wouldn’t have done it. but that’s abstract, counterfactual. nobody did anything more than the right thing.

the resolution to the debate about “deliverism” is it only works if what gets delivered is substantial, material results prior to the election.

if what’s delivered is just the legislation, maybe some change that will eventually bear fruit but takes time, opponents gin up cynicism and fear no problem.

@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org I definitely think communicating kindly on a human to human basis is essential. Everything else can fly off in terrible directions so easily. Reinforcement of our common humanity is our best protection from that.

@akkartik @BenRossTransit You participate, and I bet mostly constructively. I don’t think you lack anything.

@admitsWrongIfProven@qoto.org you are always better than useful. you are not reducible to what others can use you for. the analysis attributing our difficulties to human nature may not be so useful, but that doesn’t say anything about you.

@dpp right back atchu!

@BenRossTransit and that when we act collectively, there are paths to bad action even when the vast majority have only good intentions.

@dedicto not an average. remember, US elections are decided on a very weird margin.

if you are blaming “we” or “the electorate” or “the American people”, you are not doing anything useful.

i am so terrified and heartbroken i am almost catatonic.

but the future is not yet written. the worst outcomes are far from certain. we still, all and each, have our parts to play in writing this story.

all things to everyone, it turns out, is no things to anyone.