An open thread under the bridge downtown

by

by Ugh

I could not get enough.

Donald Trump continues as President of the United States of America, having been nominated by the "Party of Lincoln" no less.  

Not that Micheal Pence could carry that banner with any more authenticity.

OT

312 thoughts on “An open thread under the bridge downtown”

  5. So, via the AP:
    Judge: White House must immediately return press credentials of CNN’s Jim Acosta .

  6. So, via the AP:
    Judge: White House must immediately return press credentials of CNN’s Jim Acosta .

  7. I suppose that could be it. I guess I’m thinking the Pentagon is still mad at him for releasing the unflattering Chelsea Manning videos.

  8. I suppose that could be it. I guess I’m thinking the Pentagon is still mad at him for releasing the unflattering Chelsea Manning videos.

  9. The triumph of American exceptionalism:
    https://xkcd.com/2073/
    In a related item, I note that the long-standing metric for automobiles of the time to go from 0 to 60 mph has morphed into 0 to 62 — essentially 0 to 100 kph. 😉
    As with liter bottles of drinks, the metric system is gradually creeping into everyday American life. And the culture wars folks either aren’t noticing or have given up the fight.

  10. The triumph of American exceptionalism:
    https://xkcd.com/2073/
    In a related item, I note that the long-standing metric for automobiles of the time to go from 0 to 60 mph has morphed into 0 to 62 — essentially 0 to 100 kph. 😉
    As with liter bottles of drinks, the metric system is gradually creeping into everyday American life. And the culture wars folks either aren’t noticing or have given up the fight.

  11. Judge: White House must immediately return press credentials of CNN’s Jim Acosta .
    Note that the judge is . . . a Trump appointee. (Do you suppose this will make Trump decide to abandon the Federalist Society vetted list for something else?)

  12. Judge: White House must immediately return press credentials of CNN’s Jim Acosta .
    Note that the judge is . . . a Trump appointee. (Do you suppose this will make Trump decide to abandon the Federalist Society vetted list for something else?)

  15. Not content with praising lynching previously, the GOP candidate in the Senate run-off in Mississippi offers up this:

    they remind me that there’s a lot of liberal folks in those other schools who maybe we don’t want to vote. Maybe we want to make it just a little more difficult. And I think that’s a great idea.

    Got that? It should be made more difficult for her opponents to vote.
    The definition of a gaffe: saying outloud something that pretty much everyone knows is true, but you are supposed to be denying.

  16. Not content with praising lynching previously, the GOP candidate in the Senate run-off in Mississippi offers up this:

    they remind me that there’s a lot of liberal folks in those other schools who maybe we don’t want to vote. Maybe we want to make it just a little more difficult. And I think that’s a great idea.

    Got that? It should be made more difficult for her opponents to vote.
    The definition of a gaffe: saying outloud something that pretty much everyone knows is true, but you are supposed to be denying.

  19. In other news, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, commenting on Acosta:
    There must be decorum at the White House.
    Quite possibly the funniest thing said by anyone in the administration since Trump’s inauguration.

  20. In other news, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, commenting on Acosta:
    There must be decorum at the White House.
    Quite possibly the funniest thing said by anyone in the administration since Trump’s inauguration.

  23. “We should just redefine a pound as an American Kilogram”
    If someone gave Trump a bathroom scale marked in kilograms, he’d be all over it.

  24. “We should just redefine a pound as an American Kilogram”
    If someone gave Trump a bathroom scale marked in kilograms, he’d be all over it.

  33. I am finding it hard to distinguish some comments on this board from what I read about GAB or whatever the Pittsburgh guy posted on.

  34. I am finding it hard to distinguish some comments on this board from what I read about GAB or whatever the Pittsburgh guy posted on.

  35. I’m in Pittsburgh at the moment.
    A United States Senator predicts and threatens violent Civil War if he and the Federalist Society, which is now staffing all of the courts in the land, don’t have their way, including getting rid of the interstate highway system, social security and Medicare, and a nothing like me is the dangerous one?
    Elections stolen and I’m the fucking crazy one?
    A lot of video will need to be doctored to make me the bad guy.
    Nearly all republicans, including the crazy murderers they send out to murder their enemies, own weapons.
    Grover Norquist, among the many filth, have made the point numerous times over the past three decades that they will use their weapons to kill government.
    I don’t.
    I’m as dangerous as the Jews the republican gunman murdered in the synagogue in my hometown.

  36. I’m in Pittsburgh at the moment.
    A United States Senator predicts and threatens violent Civil War if he and the Federalist Society, which is now staffing all of the courts in the land, don’t have their way, including getting rid of the interstate highway system, social security and Medicare, and a nothing like me is the dangerous one?
    Elections stolen and I’m the fucking crazy one?
    A lot of video will need to be doctored to make me the bad guy.
    Nearly all republicans, including the crazy murderers they send out to murder their enemies, own weapons.
    Grover Norquist, among the many filth, have made the point numerous times over the past three decades that they will use their weapons to kill government.
    I don’t.
    I’m as dangerous as the Jews the republican gunman murdered in the synagogue in my hometown.

  37. Poisonous rhetoric not only infects others, but also makes anyone who is ever connected with this board ‘responsible’ for what you way.
    I am out.

  38. Poisonous rhetoric not only infects others, but also makes anyone who is ever connected with this board ‘responsible’ for what you way.
    I am out.

  39. To rant or not to rant: that is the question.
    Whether tis nobler in the blogosphere to suffer the tweets and gabs of right-wing fascist gobshites, or to take keyboard to a gang of actual criminals and by imitating denounce them.
    Alas, poor Count: RWNJs have a copyright on threats and instigations of violence. The only moderate thing to do is respect their intellectual property.
    We have to wait until they learn to make proper bombs before we even mention that maybe, possibly, after obtaining their consent, we should take the liberty of tut-tutting at them and threatening a strongly worded letter to follow.
    –TP

  40. To rant or not to rant: that is the question.
    Whether tis nobler in the blogosphere to suffer the tweets and gabs of right-wing fascist gobshites, or to take keyboard to a gang of actual criminals and by imitating denounce them.
    Alas, poor Count: RWNJs have a copyright on threats and instigations of violence. The only moderate thing to do is respect their intellectual property.
    We have to wait until they learn to make proper bombs before we even mention that maybe, possibly, after obtaining their consent, we should take the liberty of tut-tutting at them and threatening a strongly worded letter to follow.
    –TP

  41. Tony P.
    ‘Killing millions of republicans in the full scale civil war they long for in every state and street in this country is how I want to spend the rest of my life on this Earth.’
    This is not a rant, this is a threat.

  42. Tony P.
    ‘Killing millions of republicans in the full scale civil war they long for in every state and street in this country is how I want to spend the rest of my life on this Earth.’
    This is not a rant, this is a threat.

  43. Hell, jrudkis, you are a valued contributor here.
    You could issue an ultimatum that either I’m banned or you are out of here.
    I would happily give way to keep you here.
    You stay. I’ll go.

  44. Hell, jrudkis, you are a valued contributor here.
    You could issue an ultimatum that either I’m banned or you are out of here.
    I would happily give way to keep you here.
    You stay. I’ll go.

  45. Count,
    Thanks.
    To be honest, I have generally avoided reading your posts for as long as I have been here. Your posts are often, impossible to ignore, but long so I can scroll.
    I will not be a constant presence here, so in no way can I replace you. I do not think you should leave so I can stay.
    I think you are wrong to give conservatives ammunition with your rhetoric. No one here intends to use violence. If any one here happens to be in a position to make change, they may be poisoned by the words posted here.
    How can we condemn racist violent posts, and condone yours?

  46. Count,
    Thanks.
    To be honest, I have generally avoided reading your posts for as long as I have been here. Your posts are often, impossible to ignore, but long so I can scroll.
    I will not be a constant presence here, so in no way can I replace you. I do not think you should leave so I can stay.
    I think you are wrong to give conservatives ammunition with your rhetoric. No one here intends to use violence. If any one here happens to be in a position to make change, they may be poisoned by the words posted here.
    How can we condemn racist violent posts, and condone yours?

  47. I’ve been around, but been a bit busy, but the latest kerfluffle has me doing my version of the Top Gun’s I feel a need for speed, which is I have it up my arse, the need to parse…
    At any rate, the Count wrote:
    Killing millions of republicans in the full scale civil war they long for in every state and street in this country is how I want to spend the rest of my life on this Earth.
    That part in bold is the key for me. If the repubs don’t want this, the count’s ‘threat’ disappears. (I put threat in scare quotes because I sure as hell don’t think what he writes is the same as what Jeffrey Clark wrote.)
    jrudkis equates the count with what he read about GAB or whatever the Pittsburgh guy posted on. Perhaps he hasn’t been attending the discussion, but I believe that the Count knows not only Pittsburgh, but the Squirrel Hill neighborhood, which was where the shootings took place. In fact, I’m not positive, but it seems like the count is within a few degrees of separation of some of the victims. So, reading between the lines, I’d say that comment hit a nerve. So he lets loose with his reply.
    If I’m reading this right, I’m not really willing to ban the count because jrudkis didn’t like his reply. On the other hand, I’m really hoping that jrudkis doesn’t follow thru on his ultimatum because he is a valued member here.
    At any rate, that’s my attempt to try and answer the last question
    How can we condemn racist violent posts, and condone yours?
    Count’s post while violent, wasn’t racist. And if my reading is correct, the Count isn’t starting anything, he’s simply saying he’s going to finish it. That might not make a difference to some, but it does to me.
    Furthermore, if there is a conservative who wants to use the words of the Count (or the words of some other figure, such as Eric Holder) without reference to the words that constantly spill out from Republicans high and low, it is, it seems to me, a prima facie case of bad intentions. This is not to accuse jrudkis of bad intentions, but I tend to agree with what Hillary said, which is
    “you cannot be civil with” the Republican Party because it “wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.”

  48. I’ve been around, but been a bit busy, but the latest kerfluffle has me doing my version of the Top Gun’s I feel a need for speed, which is I have it up my arse, the need to parse…
    At any rate, the Count wrote:
    Killing millions of republicans in the full scale civil war they long for in every state and street in this country is how I want to spend the rest of my life on this Earth.
    That part in bold is the key for me. If the repubs don’t want this, the count’s ‘threat’ disappears. (I put threat in scare quotes because I sure as hell don’t think what he writes is the same as what Jeffrey Clark wrote.)
    jrudkis equates the count with what he read about GAB or whatever the Pittsburgh guy posted on. Perhaps he hasn’t been attending the discussion, but I believe that the Count knows not only Pittsburgh, but the Squirrel Hill neighborhood, which was where the shootings took place. In fact, I’m not positive, but it seems like the count is within a few degrees of separation of some of the victims. So, reading between the lines, I’d say that comment hit a nerve. So he lets loose with his reply.
    If I’m reading this right, I’m not really willing to ban the count because jrudkis didn’t like his reply. On the other hand, I’m really hoping that jrudkis doesn’t follow thru on his ultimatum because he is a valued member here.
    At any rate, that’s my attempt to try and answer the last question
    How can we condemn racist violent posts, and condone yours?
    Count’s post while violent, wasn’t racist. And if my reading is correct, the Count isn’t starting anything, he’s simply saying he’s going to finish it. That might not make a difference to some, but it does to me.
    Furthermore, if there is a conservative who wants to use the words of the Count (or the words of some other figure, such as Eric Holder) without reference to the words that constantly spill out from Republicans high and low, it is, it seems to me, a prima facie case of bad intentions. This is not to accuse jrudkis of bad intentions, but I tend to agree with what Hillary said, which is
    “you cannot be civil with” the Republican Party because it “wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.”

  49. I don’t think anybody wants the count banned. I feel comfortable saying that nobody at all wants jrudkis to leave.
    the count has been here longer than almost anybody. longer than me, for sure. that’s a long time, more than ten years. maybe 15? yikes.
    If anyone other than the count posted the kind of stuff he posts, that person would be out of here in about a second and a half. That doesn’t happen to the count because of his history here, and basically because of the affection we all hold for him.
    But the violent language of his posts of the last few years put all of us in a difficult position.
    Why does the count get to do this? Nobody else would.
    How can we condemn the violent rhetoric of the Gab and Breitbart crowd, but tolerate similar language from the count?
    we know the count, so we know he’s unlikely to actually kill anybody. but it’s a quandary.
    net/net, it would be really really really helpful if the count would lay off the bloodthirsty language. to all of us.

  50. I don’t think anybody wants the count banned. I feel comfortable saying that nobody at all wants jrudkis to leave.
    the count has been here longer than almost anybody. longer than me, for sure. that’s a long time, more than ten years. maybe 15? yikes.
    If anyone other than the count posted the kind of stuff he posts, that person would be out of here in about a second and a half. That doesn’t happen to the count because of his history here, and basically because of the affection we all hold for him.
    But the violent language of his posts of the last few years put all of us in a difficult position.
    Why does the count get to do this? Nobody else would.
    How can we condemn the violent rhetoric of the Gab and Breitbart crowd, but tolerate similar language from the count?
    we know the count, so we know he’s unlikely to actually kill anybody. but it’s a quandary.
    net/net, it would be really really really helpful if the count would lay off the bloodthirsty language. to all of us.

  53. I skip much of what count writes, mostly the takeoffs on links I know I wont read.
    I do read his longest stuff, prose designed to express an emotional POV. It is often a powerful affirmation of the collective fear and anger on the left. It oddly comforts me that they are as afraid of my leaders as I am of theirs.
    The most violent stuff makes it hard to read, I had the same reaction to Bobby Seale and Malcolm X as I recall.
    My only complaint is that the more individually specific the threat, the less meaningful it is.

  54. I skip much of what count writes, mostly the takeoffs on links I know I wont read.
    I do read his longest stuff, prose designed to express an emotional POV. It is often a powerful affirmation of the collective fear and anger on the left. It oddly comforts me that they are as afraid of my leaders as I am of theirs.
    The most violent stuff makes it hard to read, I had the same reaction to Bobby Seale and Malcolm X as I recall.
    My only complaint is that the more individually specific the threat, the less meaningful it is.

  55. I think the Count operates under the reasonable expectation that the very small collection of mild-mannered, at least semi-nerdy people here aren’t going to act on his performance art, which is based on factual grievances, rather than looney conspiracy theories. Not that I’m opposed to his toning it down a bit, but the context here isn’t one of self-reinforcing nuttery among a bunch of socially isolated, gun-hoarding kooks. I don’t buy the equivalency one little bit.

  56. I think the Count operates under the reasonable expectation that the very small collection of mild-mannered, at least semi-nerdy people here aren’t going to act on his performance art, which is based on factual grievances, rather than looney conspiracy theories. Not that I’m opposed to his toning it down a bit, but the context here isn’t one of self-reinforcing nuttery among a bunch of socially isolated, gun-hoarding kooks. I don’t buy the equivalency one little bit.

  61. But the violent language of his posts of the last few years put all of us in a difficult position.
    I respectfully demur. Furthermore, he is a damned good writer.

  62. But the violent language of his posts of the last few years put all of us in a difficult position.
    I respectfully demur. Furthermore, he is a damned good writer.

  67. I have been dismayed by the number of instances this time where a candidate — some winning, some losing — sued, and the relief sought was effectively “stop counting ballots that were properly cast.” In Utah, Mia Love’s case was dismissed with prejudice, with the judge writing, “…the Love Parties failed to point the Court to a single statute, rule or case that would entitle them to any of the relief sought in the Petition.” The relief sought was to stop counting ballots in the populous county where Ms. Love’s opponent drew most of his support.
    I can understand a certain amount of frustration in some states. Lookin’ at you, California. You’ve apparently got considerably more revenue than anticipated, and are very largely a vote-by-mail state already. Why not take the last step and buy the hardware and software to automate most of the counting and speed things up?

  68. I have been dismayed by the number of instances this time where a candidate — some winning, some losing — sued, and the relief sought was effectively “stop counting ballots that were properly cast.” In Utah, Mia Love’s case was dismissed with prejudice, with the judge writing, “…the Love Parties failed to point the Court to a single statute, rule or case that would entitle them to any of the relief sought in the Petition.” The relief sought was to stop counting ballots in the populous county where Ms. Love’s opponent drew most of his support.
    I can understand a certain amount of frustration in some states. Lookin’ at you, California. You’ve apparently got considerably more revenue than anticipated, and are very largely a vote-by-mail state already. Why not take the last step and buy the hardware and software to automate most of the counting and speed things up?

  69. I respectfully demur.
    I should probably qualify that.
    I, personally, have no particular problem with the count’s posts.
    As a ‘front-pager’, I have some nominal responsibility for what gets posted here. Although honored more in the breach then otherwise, we actually do have posting rules, and the count’s posts consistently violate them.
    So, it places me, personally, in what I find to be a difficult position. I.e., we afford the count special treatment, due to his position of long-standing here on ObWi, and because we like him. But that’s not a privilege we extend to basically anybody else, and that seems unfair.
    In general, folks don’t seem overly disturbed by it, so we just let it be. But sometimes, folks object, for any of a variety of perfectly valid reasons.
    I’d appreciate it if the count would tone it down, not because his posts offend me personally, but because nobody else gets to color outside the lines to quite the same degree, and it is sometimes awkward to look the other way.
    And, it sometimes prompts contributors like a jrudkis to say “Maybe I should get out of here”.
    Which I think we all agree would be highly regrettable.
    That’s pretty much where it’s at. From my point of view, anyway.
    In any case, nobody’s getting banned today as far as I can tell, and hopefully jrudkis is still here, because we appreciate pretty much everything he has to say.
    As you were. Carry on.

  70. I respectfully demur.
    I should probably qualify that.
    I, personally, have no particular problem with the count’s posts.
    As a ‘front-pager’, I have some nominal responsibility for what gets posted here. Although honored more in the breach then otherwise, we actually do have posting rules, and the count’s posts consistently violate them.
    So, it places me, personally, in what I find to be a difficult position. I.e., we afford the count special treatment, due to his position of long-standing here on ObWi, and because we like him. But that’s not a privilege we extend to basically anybody else, and that seems unfair.
    In general, folks don’t seem overly disturbed by it, so we just let it be. But sometimes, folks object, for any of a variety of perfectly valid reasons.
    I’d appreciate it if the count would tone it down, not because his posts offend me personally, but because nobody else gets to color outside the lines to quite the same degree, and it is sometimes awkward to look the other way.
    And, it sometimes prompts contributors like a jrudkis to say “Maybe I should get out of here”.
    Which I think we all agree would be highly regrettable.
    That’s pretty much where it’s at. From my point of view, anyway.
    In any case, nobody’s getting banned today as far as I can tell, and hopefully jrudkis is still here, because we appreciate pretty much everything he has to say.
    As you were. Carry on.

  71. It oddly comforts me that they are as afraid of my leaders as I am of theirs.
    Except for two things. First, I don’t think for a minute that right wing advocates of violence (including Senator Lee) qualify as “your leaders”, Marty. You may end up defending them, but I don’t see you actually following them. Too sane by half.
    Second, and similarly, I don’t see the likes of Bobby Seale or Malcolm X as leading the liberals here. Again, some of them defend some of their positions. But follow were they lead? No.

  72. It oddly comforts me that they are as afraid of my leaders as I am of theirs.
    Except for two things. First, I don’t think for a minute that right wing advocates of violence (including Senator Lee) qualify as “your leaders”, Marty. You may end up defending them, but I don’t see you actually following them. Too sane by half.
    Second, and similarly, I don’t see the likes of Bobby Seale or Malcolm X as leading the liberals here. Again, some of them defend some of their positions. But follow were they lead? No.

  73. I don’t think either Bobby Seale or Malcolm X would see (or would have seen) themselves as liberal leaders either.
    Analogies can be tricky.

  74. I don’t think either Bobby Seale or Malcolm X would see (or would have seen) themselves as liberal leaders either.
    Analogies can be tricky.

  77. Lookin’ at you, California. You’ve apparently got considerably more revenue than anticipated, and are very largely a vote-by-mail state already. Why not take the last step and buy the hardware and software to automate most of the counting and speed things up?
    It is automated. Ballots are scanned at the polling place. The chip from the scanner (and the ballots) gets transported to the county seat by sneakernet — because none of the voting machines is Internet enabled. Avoids issues with hacking. 😉 Getting the polling places closed up, and the results on their way takes (took, last week) about 45 minutes. Driving the chips in takes up to an hour, depending on traffic.
    What holds up the final count in California is 1) checking that the name (and address) on the vote-by-mail envelope is for a registered voter, and confirming that the envelope got signed, as required by law.** And then opening the envelope without damaging the ballot so much that the automated scanners can’t process it.
    2) Again by law, ballots in California get counted if they are postmarked by Election Day. Which means we have to wait until Saturday after Election Day before we know that we even have all the ballots in hand.
    The delays with absentee/vote-by-mail ballots aren’t about lack of automation at all.
    Provisional ballots are a different story. A few of those are people who showed up at the wrong polling place. Their ballots get checked against the register from their correct polling place, to be sure that they didn’t vote twice, then counted just as if they voted in the right place. (We even swap the handful who managed to show up in the wrong county — amazingly, it does happen — so at least their votes on statewide contests can be counted.)
    But the vast majority of provisionals are people who signed up to vote by mail, and who didn’t bring their vote-by-mail ballot along to the polling place to turn in (which a lot of people do). Those, for obvious reasons, can’t be counted until the deadline for mail-in ballots to be received rolls around. Again, to check against voting twice. (To be clear, what very few examples of that we see are almost entirely people who simply forgot that they mailed in their ballot already. Sigh.)
    ** For the benefit of those living elsewhere, while it is required that the envelope be signed, we don’t resort to the nonsense of having a bunch of laymen “verify” the signatures.

  78. Lookin’ at you, California. You’ve apparently got considerably more revenue than anticipated, and are very largely a vote-by-mail state already. Why not take the last step and buy the hardware and software to automate most of the counting and speed things up?
    It is automated. Ballots are scanned at the polling place. The chip from the scanner (and the ballots) gets transported to the county seat by sneakernet — because none of the voting machines is Internet enabled. Avoids issues with hacking. 😉 Getting the polling places closed up, and the results on their way takes (took, last week) about 45 minutes. Driving the chips in takes up to an hour, depending on traffic.
    What holds up the final count in California is 1) checking that the name (and address) on the vote-by-mail envelope is for a registered voter, and confirming that the envelope got signed, as required by law.** And then opening the envelope without damaging the ballot so much that the automated scanners can’t process it.
    2) Again by law, ballots in California get counted if they are postmarked by Election Day. Which means we have to wait until Saturday after Election Day before we know that we even have all the ballots in hand.
    The delays with absentee/vote-by-mail ballots aren’t about lack of automation at all.
    Provisional ballots are a different story. A few of those are people who showed up at the wrong polling place. Their ballots get checked against the register from their correct polling place, to be sure that they didn’t vote twice, then counted just as if they voted in the right place. (We even swap the handful who managed to show up in the wrong county — amazingly, it does happen — so at least their votes on statewide contests can be counted.)
    But the vast majority of provisionals are people who signed up to vote by mail, and who didn’t bring their vote-by-mail ballot along to the polling place to turn in (which a lot of people do). Those, for obvious reasons, can’t be counted until the deadline for mail-in ballots to be received rolls around. Again, to check against voting twice. (To be clear, what very few examples of that we see are almost entirely people who simply forgot that they mailed in their ballot already. Sigh.)
    ** For the benefit of those living elsewhere, while it is required that the envelope be signed, we don’t resort to the nonsense of having a bunch of laymen “verify” the signatures.

  79. Two separate and distinct points being made in one comment, if I’m reading Marty correctly. But easy enough to mistakenly mush together.

  80. Two separate and distinct points being made in one comment, if I’m reading Marty correctly. But easy enough to mistakenly mush together.

  81. I’d appreciate it if the count would tone it down, not because his posts offend me personally, but because nobody else gets to color outside the lines to quite the same degree, and it is sometimes awkward to look the other way.
    And, it sometimes prompts contributors like a jrudkis to say “Maybe I should get out of here”.
    Which I think we all agree would be highly regrettable.
    I agree with all of this. Like hsh I too reject any equivalence between the Count’s pieces and those of GAB etc. But FWIW, I think that although he is a brilliant, witty and impassioned writer, his violent rants are the least successful and (please forgive me Count) the most self-indulgent of his pieces. Almost all of us here are in basic agreement with his general viewpoint (and in huge sympathy with his despair at current developments), and his surreal flights can be awe-inspiring, but in my opinion the sometimes endless violent rants evoke what otherwise he is utterly incapable of producing: boredom. I understand that this will be an extremely unpopular view with many I respect, especially the Count, but so be it.
    It ain’t what they call you, it’s what you answer to.

  82. I’d appreciate it if the count would tone it down, not because his posts offend me personally, but because nobody else gets to color outside the lines to quite the same degree, and it is sometimes awkward to look the other way.
    And, it sometimes prompts contributors like a jrudkis to say “Maybe I should get out of here”.
    Which I think we all agree would be highly regrettable.
    I agree with all of this. Like hsh I too reject any equivalence between the Count’s pieces and those of GAB etc. But FWIW, I think that although he is a brilliant, witty and impassioned writer, his violent rants are the least successful and (please forgive me Count) the most self-indulgent of his pieces. Almost all of us here are in basic agreement with his general viewpoint (and in huge sympathy with his despair at current developments), and his surreal flights can be awe-inspiring, but in my opinion the sometimes endless violent rants evoke what otherwise he is utterly incapable of producing: boredom. I understand that this will be an extremely unpopular view with many I respect, especially the Count, but so be it.
    It ain’t what they call you, it’s what you answer to.

  83. @wj, are signatures checked manually or by machine? Here, the bar code on the return envelope sent to me is used to access the copy of my signature in the database, and the machine compares them. IIRC, manual checks only happen (a) when the computer declares a mismatch, (b) on a random subset of accepted signatures as an ongoing audit of the machines, and (c) people casting an in-person ballot. Because registered voters have to opt out annually in order to vote in person, relatively few do. By a few hours after the polls close, everything’s been counted except the last-minute odd cases.
    AZ, which I know isn’t you, admits that it takes them a long time to count their ballots because 75% or so of their ballots are handled by an 80s-era absentee ballot system that was designed to handle a few tens of thousands of ballots, not the millions that they have today.

  84. @wj, are signatures checked manually or by machine? Here, the bar code on the return envelope sent to me is used to access the copy of my signature in the database, and the machine compares them. IIRC, manual checks only happen (a) when the computer declares a mismatch, (b) on a random subset of accepted signatures as an ongoing audit of the machines, and (c) people casting an in-person ballot. Because registered voters have to opt out annually in order to vote in person, relatively few do. By a few hours after the polls close, everything’s been counted except the last-minute odd cases.
    AZ, which I know isn’t you, admits that it takes them a long time to count their ballots because 75% or so of their ballots are handled by an 80s-era absentee ballot system that was designed to handle a few tens of thousands of ballots, not the millions that they have today.

  85. The Count has a sense of humor, which is the basic ingredient of sanity. I do not worry that he will start imitating the grimly humorless fascists, Nazis, and Confederates who mail pipe bombs, gun down worshipers, and howl “Lock her up!” at their mob rallies.
    If I thought there was any chance that some RWNJ somewhere would be frightened by the Count’s “threats” I might feel a twinge of sympathy for that poor, race-baiting, vote-suppressing, press-bashing lil’ ole RWNJ.
    As it is, I think the Count’s blood-curdling proclamations that amount to “Go ahead, punk, make my day” serve to remind us that there are actual punks out there.
    –TP

  86. The Count has a sense of humor, which is the basic ingredient of sanity. I do not worry that he will start imitating the grimly humorless fascists, Nazis, and Confederates who mail pipe bombs, gun down worshipers, and howl “Lock her up!” at their mob rallies.
    If I thought there was any chance that some RWNJ somewhere would be frightened by the Count’s “threats” I might feel a twinge of sympathy for that poor, race-baiting, vote-suppressing, press-bashing lil’ ole RWNJ.
    As it is, I think the Count’s blood-curdling proclamations that amount to “Go ahead, punk, make my day” serve to remind us that there are actual punks out there.
    –TP

  87. Michael, I believe the comparison of the information on the ballots to the polling place registry is done manually. Signatures are not checked in the sense of being compared to anything; what is checked it the existence of a signature on the envelope.
    Why are the polling place registries kept manually? Because every hour or so a copy, including who has voted, is posted outside the polling place. So that those working GOTV efforts can see which of their voters have voted and which have not.
    Plus there’s the detail that in-person voters are required to sign in when picking up their ballots. I don’t know about you, but my experience has been that the various electronic signature pads in use are extremely difficult to use. At least in the sense of writing anything that even slightly resembles by signature.
    I don’t know the exact date of the counting machines we use (most in use for this past election are Dominion ImageCast Central v. 5.2.0.707, but each county can select their own from a list of those approved by the Secretary of State). However I believe they are circa 2017.

  88. Michael, I believe the comparison of the information on the ballots to the polling place registry is done manually. Signatures are not checked in the sense of being compared to anything; what is checked it the existence of a signature on the envelope.
    Why are the polling place registries kept manually? Because every hour or so a copy, including who has voted, is posted outside the polling place. So that those working GOTV efforts can see which of their voters have voted and which have not.
    Plus there’s the detail that in-person voters are required to sign in when picking up their ballots. I don’t know about you, but my experience has been that the various electronic signature pads in use are extremely difficult to use. At least in the sense of writing anything that even slightly resembles by signature.
    I don’t know the exact date of the counting machines we use (most in use for this past election are Dominion ImageCast Central v. 5.2.0.707, but each county can select their own from a list of those approved by the Secretary of State). However I believe they are circa 2017.

  91. I’m feeling a bit better since the election. Particularly this.
    I hate these people (yes, the h word), but I’m hoping that working hard, nonviolently, for democracy is still the best way out of this mess. For now, I believe that. I sure hope that Democrats can find a way to avoid the circular firing squad for a change. I’m trying to ignore the anti-Pelosi freakout.

  92. I’m feeling a bit better since the election. Particularly this.
    I hate these people (yes, the h word), but I’m hoping that working hard, nonviolently, for democracy is still the best way out of this mess. For now, I believe that. I sure hope that Democrats can find a way to avoid the circular firing squad for a change. I’m trying to ignore the anti-Pelosi freakout.

  95. I am once again amused that lj thinks I must have read my opinion somewhere.
    I listened to Abrams speech and Gillum refusing to concede even though all the countings over. Plus a few others, not sure I know who Rich Lowry is.

  96. I am once again amused that lj thinks I must have read my opinion somewhere.
    I listened to Abrams speech and Gillum refusing to concede even though all the countings over. Plus a few others, not sure I know who Rich Lowry is.

  97. Hi Marty, given that you didn’t list any names, it’s pretty rich to complain but I’m assuming. And apparently you do you have the same opinion as rich Lowry, regardless of whether you know who he is or not, so the link basically puts paid to your notion The fact that you never give any names or links leads me to assume that you just don’t have the courage to post the actual names. You’re welcome to prove me wrong anytime you’d like.
    But don’t worry, I’m sure Abrams and Gilliam are just being uppity…

  98. Hi Marty, given that you didn’t list any names, it’s pretty rich to complain but I’m assuming. And apparently you do you have the same opinion as rich Lowry, regardless of whether you know who he is or not, so the link basically puts paid to your notion The fact that you never give any names or links leads me to assume that you just don’t have the courage to post the actual names. You’re welcome to prove me wrong anytime you’d like.
    But don’t worry, I’m sure Abrams and Gilliam are just being uppity…

  99. I wasnt complaining lj, I was amused. I had no issue so I named some names.
    There is nothing gracious about how either accepted the results.

  100. I wasnt complaining lj, I was amused. I had no issue so I named some names.
    There is nothing gracious about how either accepted the results.

  101. Marty would be gracious as all hell to someone who picked his pocket. He would concede that his money was stolen fair and square. He would wish the pickpocket well and assure the Very Serious People that he will “work with” the pickpocket to “get things done”. At least, that’s the impression I get from reading Marty’s words, for I cannot read his mind. I’m not psychic.
    Alternatively, Marty would shout bloody murder if he were in Stacy Abrams’s shoes. But I’d hate to think Marty is that hypocritical.
    –TP

  102. Marty would be gracious as all hell to someone who picked his pocket. He would concede that his money was stolen fair and square. He would wish the pickpocket well and assure the Very Serious People that he will “work with” the pickpocket to “get things done”. At least, that’s the impression I get from reading Marty’s words, for I cannot read his mind. I’m not psychic.
    Alternatively, Marty would shout bloody murder if he were in Stacy Abrams’s shoes. But I’d hate to think Marty is that hypocritical.
    –TP

  103. Marty, what’s amusing to me that you choose Abrams and Gillum (and earlier namechecks Bobby Seale and Malcolm X). I’m sure it’s just a coinkidink and has nothing to do with “a powerful affirmation of the collective fear and anger…”
    I wonder what percentage of the Kemp or DeSantis votes were simply because those voters didn’t like black folks. Given the margin of the vote, if you took that percentage, you then have to say that Abrams or Gillium would have to win 50% + x% + 1 to win the election. So anything that is done to reduce the number of base voters for Abrams or Gillum has a larger effect than simply taking those people out of play, I would think.

  104. Marty, what’s amusing to me that you choose Abrams and Gillum (and earlier namechecks Bobby Seale and Malcolm X). I’m sure it’s just a coinkidink and has nothing to do with “a powerful affirmation of the collective fear and anger…”
    I wonder what percentage of the Kemp or DeSantis votes were simply because those voters didn’t like black folks. Given the margin of the vote, if you took that percentage, you then have to say that Abrams or Gillium would have to win 50% + x% + 1 to win the election. So anything that is done to reduce the number of base voters for Abrams or Gillum has a larger effect than simply taking those people out of play, I would think.

  105. I thought Abrams’s comments measured, and exceptionally restrained in the circumstances.
    She is quite impressive, and I would not be surprised if she is one day President.

  106. I thought Abrams’s comments measured, and exceptionally restrained in the circumstances.
    She is quite impressive, and I would not be surprised if she is one day President.

  107. Emotionally I am with the count but, as I have stated here repeatedly, my fantasies are more about creative cruelty to the main instigators along the line of ‘let them live in the very hell they created for other people as long as possible (death being too good for them)’
    Let them walk the streets with a new face, cut/altered vocal cords, stripped of all assets and followed by the spread of nasty rumors about their alleged past and see how they like it.

  108. Emotionally I am with the count but, as I have stated here repeatedly, my fantasies are more about creative cruelty to the main instigators along the line of ‘let them live in the very hell they created for other people as long as possible (death being too good for them)’
    Let them walk the streets with a new face, cut/altered vocal cords, stripped of all assets and followed by the spread of nasty rumors about their alleged past and see how they like it.

  109. A news article for wj
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/17/rip-california-gop-republicans-lash-out-after-midterm-election-debacle-1000481
    LOS ANGELES — In the wake of a near-political annihilation in California that has left even longtime conservative stronghold Orange County bereft of a single Republican in the House of Representatives, a growing chorus of GOP loyalists here say there’s only one hope for reviving the flatlining party: Blow it up and start again from scratch.

  110. A news article for wj
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/17/rip-california-gop-republicans-lash-out-after-midterm-election-debacle-1000481
    LOS ANGELES — In the wake of a near-political annihilation in California that has left even longtime conservative stronghold Orange County bereft of a single Republican in the House of Representatives, a growing chorus of GOP loyalists here say there’s only one hope for reviving the flatlining party: Blow it up and start again from scratch.

  113. There is nothing gracious about how either accepted the results.
    Nothing particularly gracious about any aspect of those specific races.

  114. There is nothing gracious about how either accepted the results.
    Nothing particularly gracious about any aspect of those specific races.

  117. I did see that this morning hsh. Fine concession.
    My point, hopefully, doesn’t get lost that in these elections there is no evidence that Republicans are less likely to accept the results.
    There is nothing gracious about these races applies to a lot of them. But there is no evidence that Republicans wont accept an election loss.
    I pointed to those two races as evidence that Democrats have issues and can be acrimonious also. We could just point to Bill Nelson and Rick Scott to see both sides can be asshats.

  118. I did see that this morning hsh. Fine concession.
    My point, hopefully, doesn’t get lost that in these elections there is no evidence that Republicans are less likely to accept the results.
    There is nothing gracious about these races applies to a lot of them. But there is no evidence that Republicans wont accept an election loss.
    I pointed to those two races as evidence that Democrats have issues and can be acrimonious also. We could just point to Bill Nelson and Rick Scott to see both sides can be asshats.

  119. “But there is no evidence that Republicans wont accept an election loss.”
    So you don’t recall the MN Senate outcome (Coleman vs Franken) in 2008?
    SURE, GOPers are ever so gracious in concession. Except when they aren’t.
    Selective vision/memory is a hell of a drug.

  120. “But there is no evidence that Republicans wont accept an election loss.”
    So you don’t recall the MN Senate outcome (Coleman vs Franken) in 2008?
    SURE, GOPers are ever so gracious in concession. Except when they aren’t.
    Selective vision/memory is a hell of a drug.

  121. Both sides CAN be “asshats”. Only one “side” makes a habit of it.
    There is NO equivalence between the un-graciousness of refereeing your own race and calling foul on the “winner” for refereeing his own race. There is NO equivalence between cozying up to racists and being called out for cozying up to racists.
    When russell says “Nothing particularly gracious about any aspect of those specific races” he is being generous to a fault.
    –TP

  122. Both sides CAN be “asshats”. Only one “side” makes a habit of it.
    There is NO equivalence between the un-graciousness of refereeing your own race and calling foul on the “winner” for refereeing his own race. There is NO equivalence between cozying up to racists and being called out for cozying up to racists.
    When russell says “Nothing particularly gracious about any aspect of those specific races” he is being generous to a fault.
    –TP

  123. But there is no evidence that Republicans wont accept an election loss.
    does inventing millions of fraudulent voters to explain a loss counts as not accepting?

  124. But there is no evidence that Republicans wont accept an election loss.
    does inventing millions of fraudulent voters to explain a loss counts as not accepting?

  125. cleek, no. And as far as I can tell Dems never lose an election. There is always a reason they really won, an excuse or an accusation of cheating. Up to and including that the election system itself should be scrapped.

  126. cleek, no. And as far as I can tell Dems never lose an election. There is always a reason they really won, an excuse or an accusation of cheating. Up to and including that the election system itself should be scrapped.

  127. Marty: as far as I can tell Dems never lose an election.
    President Obama: “It was a shellacking.”
    He, Trump:

    THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you very much. Please, thank you.
    It was a big day yesterday. An incredible day. And last night, the Republican Party defied history to expand our Senate Majority while significantly beating expectations in the House for the midtown and midterm year. We did this in spite of a very dramatic fundraising disadvantage driven by Democrats’ wealthy donors and special interests, and very hostile media coverage, to put it mildly. The media coverage set a new record and a new standard.
    We also had a staggering number of House retirements. So it’s a little tough. These are seats that could’ve been held pretty easily, and we had newcomers going in, and a lot of them worked very hard. But it’s very difficult when you have that many retirements.
    We held a large number of campaign rallies with large, large numbers of people going to every one — and to the best of my knowledge, we didn’t have a vacant or an empty seat; I’m sure you would have reported it if you spotted one — including 30 rallies in the last 60 days. And we saw the candidates that I supported achieve great success last night.
    As an example, of the 11 candidates we campaigned with during the last week, 9 won last night. This vigorous campaigning stopped the blue wave that they talked about. I don’t know if there ever was such a thing, but could’ve been. If we didn’t do the campaign, probably there could’ve been. And the history really will see what a good job we did in the final couple of weeks in terms of getting some tremendous people over the finish line. They really are tremendous people, but many of them were not known. But they will be known.

    When you live on a planet where water flows uphill, it’s Democrats who “never lose elections”.
    –TP

  128. Marty: as far as I can tell Dems never lose an election.
    President Obama: “It was a shellacking.”
    He, Trump:

    THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you very much. Please, thank you.
    It was a big day yesterday. An incredible day. And last night, the Republican Party defied history to expand our Senate Majority while significantly beating expectations in the House for the midtown and midterm year. We did this in spite of a very dramatic fundraising disadvantage driven by Democrats’ wealthy donors and special interests, and very hostile media coverage, to put it mildly. The media coverage set a new record and a new standard.
    We also had a staggering number of House retirements. So it’s a little tough. These are seats that could’ve been held pretty easily, and we had newcomers going in, and a lot of them worked very hard. But it’s very difficult when you have that many retirements.
    We held a large number of campaign rallies with large, large numbers of people going to every one — and to the best of my knowledge, we didn’t have a vacant or an empty seat; I’m sure you would have reported it if you spotted one — including 30 rallies in the last 60 days. And we saw the candidates that I supported achieve great success last night.
    As an example, of the 11 candidates we campaigned with during the last week, 9 won last night. This vigorous campaigning stopped the blue wave that they talked about. I don’t know if there ever was such a thing, but could’ve been. If we didn’t do the campaign, probably there could’ve been. And the history really will see what a good job we did in the final couple of weeks in terms of getting some tremendous people over the finish line. They really are tremendous people, but many of them were not known. But they will be known.

    When you live on a planet where water flows uphill, it’s Democrats who “never lose elections”.
    –TP

  129. Thanks, lj. That article pretty much echoes what I’ve been saying (here and elsewhere) about the California GOP for years.

    “It is completely unfathomable … for a Republican nominee to run on building a wall,’’ said Madrid**, a nationally recognized expert on Latino voting trends who noted that the party has spent 20 years trying to extricate itself from the damage done by Prop. 187, the anti-illegal immigration ballot measure that eviscerated Latino support in the state. “And everyone acts like it’s normal … Cox was running on that, in California. Are you out of your mind?”

    As the article also notes, we’re “talking about a party where 77 percent of Republican likely voters in California are white. And the population that’s white here is 39 percent.”
    Unfortunately, as the article also notes, the folks currently in charge have no apparent desire to change. Sigh.
    ** Incase you missed it, this is a long-time GOP political consultant . . . who last year was advising a Democratic candidate for Governor. Due, I suspect, do the total lack of viable Republican candidates.

  130. Thanks, lj. That article pretty much echoes what I’ve been saying (here and elsewhere) about the California GOP for years.

    “It is completely unfathomable … for a Republican nominee to run on building a wall,’’ said Madrid**, a nationally recognized expert on Latino voting trends who noted that the party has spent 20 years trying to extricate itself from the damage done by Prop. 187, the anti-illegal immigration ballot measure that eviscerated Latino support in the state. “And everyone acts like it’s normal … Cox was running on that, in California. Are you out of your mind?”

    As the article also notes, we’re “talking about a party where 77 percent of Republican likely voters in California are white. And the population that’s white here is 39 percent.”
    Unfortunately, as the article also notes, the folks currently in charge have no apparent desire to change. Sigh.
    ** Incase you missed it, this is a long-time GOP political consultant . . . who last year was advising a Democratic candidate for Governor. Due, I suspect, do the total lack of viable Republican candidates.

  131. See also https://calmatters.org/articles/commentary/my-turn-gop-is-dead-in-california-a-new-way-must-rise/

    Republican principles used to be about helping other people. We believed in lifting people up out of poverty by giving them robust and free economic opportunities and by providing a world-class education. We stood for giving people the freedom to run their own lives and businesses without undue government interference.
    We welcomed people from all over the world who sought to live the American Dream and contribute to the economy and society. They could be secure in knowing that they would not be persecuted for who they are and that they could build strong families and vibrant neighborhoods.
    Unfortunately, tragically, that is not the Republican Party promoted by President Donald Trump and his brand of national politics today.

    This from a woman who has spent her whole adult life in Republican politics.

  132. See also https://calmatters.org/articles/commentary/my-turn-gop-is-dead-in-california-a-new-way-must-rise/

    Republican principles used to be about helping other people. We believed in lifting people up out of poverty by giving them robust and free economic opportunities and by providing a world-class education. We stood for giving people the freedom to run their own lives and businesses without undue government interference.
    We welcomed people from all over the world who sought to live the American Dream and contribute to the economy and society. They could be secure in knowing that they would not be persecuted for who they are and that they could build strong families and vibrant neighborhoods.
    Unfortunately, tragically, that is not the Republican Party promoted by President Donald Trump and his brand of national politics today.

    This from a woman who has spent her whole adult life in Republican politics.

  133. Re the Republican retirements… A contributing factor, at least for the House, is the changes the Republicans made back in the 1990s regarding committee chairmanships. When the Republicans hold the majority and assign chairs, those positions are term-limited. The main purpose was to create opportunities for younger members. Eg, Paul Ryan at age 48 has chaired Budget, Ways and Means, and then backed into the Speakership. Chairs get a lot of perks: better offices, more staff, the responsibility for writing any major legislation on that subject, more attention from the media. Certainly for some, the prospect of a pension and a part-time pundit gig is going to look quite attractive compared to returning to back-bencher status.

  134. Re the Republican retirements… A contributing factor, at least for the House, is the changes the Republicans made back in the 1990s regarding committee chairmanships. When the Republicans hold the majority and assign chairs, those positions are term-limited. The main purpose was to create opportunities for younger members. Eg, Paul Ryan at age 48 has chaired Budget, Ways and Means, and then backed into the Speakership. Chairs get a lot of perks: better offices, more staff, the responsibility for writing any major legislation on that subject, more attention from the media. Certainly for some, the prospect of a pension and a part-time pundit gig is going to look quite attractive compared to returning to back-bencher status.

  135. Anyone else see the reports that the Cleveland Browns want to interview Condoleeza Rice for head coach?

  136. Anyone else see the reports that the Cleveland Browns want to interview Condoleeza Rice for head coach?

  137. “Anyone else see the reports that the Cleveland Browns want to interview Condoleeza Rice for head coach?”
    I’m sure that she’s preparing a pep talk, to be delivered to the players just before the beginning of the season, on how they need to keep a careful watch on the looming threat from The Boston Red Sox.
    The lady’s got a track record, y’know?

  138. “Anyone else see the reports that the Cleveland Browns want to interview Condoleeza Rice for head coach?”
    I’m sure that she’s preparing a pep talk, to be delivered to the players just before the beginning of the season, on how they need to keep a careful watch on the looming threat from The Boston Red Sox.
    The lady’s got a track record, y’know?

  139. There is always a reason they really won, an excuse or an accusation of cheating.
    you do realize your entire party, top to bottom, is dedicated to the fantasy that elections are routinely stolen from them by the votes of invisible hordes of illegal aliens, right?
    and, here is, not an accusation of cheating, but a description.

    Rep. David Lewis, a Harnett County Republican and House redistricting leader, said at a meeting that he wanted the maps drawn “to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats because I do not believe it’s possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats.”

    in this last election, the Dems got 48.4% of the vote, but won only those three seats Mr Lewis allowed them to win. mind you, that’s 48.4% despite not even running a candidate in one of those 13 districts.
    these districts have been deemed illegal by courts, twice, but couldn’t be changed in time for the election.
    you think this is the way things should be? you wouldn’t complain?
    bullshit.

  140. There is always a reason they really won, an excuse or an accusation of cheating.
    you do realize your entire party, top to bottom, is dedicated to the fantasy that elections are routinely stolen from them by the votes of invisible hordes of illegal aliens, right?
    and, here is, not an accusation of cheating, but a description.

    Rep. David Lewis, a Harnett County Republican and House redistricting leader, said at a meeting that he wanted the maps drawn “to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats because I do not believe it’s possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats.”

    in this last election, the Dems got 48.4% of the vote, but won only those three seats Mr Lewis allowed them to win. mind you, that’s 48.4% despite not even running a candidate in one of those 13 districts.
    these districts have been deemed illegal by courts, twice, but couldn’t be changed in time for the election.
    you think this is the way things should be? you wouldn’t complain?
    bullshit.

  141. does inventing millions of fraudulent voters to explain a loss counts as not accepting?
    cleek, no.
    all-righty then!
    The most significant difference between the parties on this topic, IMO, is that (D)’s don’t try to keep people from voting. (R)’s do.
    I’m not sure that “graciousness” is the correct response to that.
    And that uses up all of my “let’s talk about both sides!” tickets for today.

  142. does inventing millions of fraudulent voters to explain a loss counts as not accepting?
    cleek, no.
    all-righty then!
    The most significant difference between the parties on this topic, IMO, is that (D)’s don’t try to keep people from voting. (R)’s do.
    I’m not sure that “graciousness” is the correct response to that.
    And that uses up all of my “let’s talk about both sides!” tickets for today.

  143. They could be secure in knowing that they would not be persecuted for who they are and that they could build strong families and vibrant neighborhoods.
    doesn’t sound like any GOP i’ve ever known.

  144. They could be secure in knowing that they would not be persecuted for who they are and that they could build strong families and vibrant neighborhoods.
    doesn’t sound like any GOP i’ve ever known.

  145. Trump channels Chili Palmer.
    Also, we need to rake our forests. Like the Finns do.
    80% of the trees in Finland are conifers. Just saying.
    The truest thing ever said about Donald J Trump was Marco Rubio’s comment that, had he not been born to wealthy parents, he’d be selling wristwatches on the street in Manhattan.
    Except it’d probably be Jackson Heights or Flushing, not Manhattan.

  146. Trump channels Chili Palmer.
    Also, we need to rake our forests. Like the Finns do.
    80% of the trees in Finland are conifers. Just saying.
    The truest thing ever said about Donald J Trump was Marco Rubio’s comment that, had he not been born to wealthy parents, he’d be selling wristwatches on the street in Manhattan.
    Except it’d probably be Jackson Heights or Flushing, not Manhattan.

  147. A lot of water under that bridge. I just wanted to go back a bit and answer Marty’s accusation that I don’t think he has an original thought. That is one way of looking at it, but in a glass is half full, I was really hoping that he had glommed on to the ‘dems aren’t gracious’ argument because he had heard it somewhere else. I really don’t believe that he sought out Abrams and Gillum’s speeches, out of the set of Democrats who lost close elections, and juxtaposed it with McSally (who probably will be appointed to fill McCain’s seat, so pissing off half of Arizona by telling them the candidate they voted for would not really be a good strategy) all by his lonesome. To believe that, I’d have to think that Marty was a stone cold racist rather than someone who has been influenced by the constant stream of racism that flows underneath political discourse in the US. Still, if he feels like he needs to cite Bobby Seale (82 years old according to Wikipedia) and Malcolm X (45th anniversary of his assassination coming up in 2020), maybe he did. HIIK.
    I suppose it is a bit strange, I’m one who always wants people to own their words and realize that the ramifications of the arguments they make, yet here, I’m saying I don’t really believe that Marty came up with this by himself. But honestly, I don’t think that you thought of this by yourself, and I think you read too many facebook posts where someone was quoting Kemp, who said Abrams is a “disgrace to democracy”.
    I may be wrong, but I don’t think you live in Georgia, though I thought you were in the South. But it is important to realize that Kemp’s rhetoric has a strategic goal.
    https://politics.myajc.com/blog/politics/the-jolt-behind-brian-kemp-push-for-stacey-abrams-concede/ZqFizPsI6vQ59ZCauelI6O/
    So let’s get back to the Kemp name-calling: I.e., referring to Abrams as a “disgrace to democracy” and some sort of electoral burglar. That’s not the patient language of a campaign that’s comfortable in its victory. Confidence does not shine through in that kind of phrasing.
    We can rule out some motives. As the Florida governor’s contest has reminded us, concessions are not binding. They are political statements, not legal ones.
    Nor, we hope, is this about Kemp wanting to be addressed as “governor-elect” in the media for the next eight weeks. If he’s due the title, that will come soon enough.
    We can also rule out that the Kemp campaign is actually trying to pressure Abrams to do something she’s not inclined to do. A campaign that implies that a female African-American opponent is consorting with an armed “Black Panther Party” only 24 hours before Election Day can’t seriously believe it has increased its persuasive hold on her a week later.
    But Kemp’s hostility does have much to do with Stacey Abrams and whether she continues as a cause celebre among Democrats.
    There is the longer-term threat she might pose to U.S. Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., who is up for re-election in 2020.
    But more immediately, there’s the question of whether Abrams and her turnout machine can dispense with a Democratic jinx and help John Barrow win his statewide Dec. 4 runoff against Republican Brad Raffensperger.
    Clearly, Abrams recognizes the importance of controlling the office of secretary of state. And Republicans are very worried about their misfire last Tuesday in the populous northern suburbs of metro Atlanta. One of your Insiders has more details here.
    Kemp’s not trying to persuade Abrams to concede. He’s trying to make sure that his own people don’t stand down — and that hers do.
    speaking of graciousness, there is also this.
    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/gop-seeks-last-ditch-laws-in-states-where-its-power-slipped

  148. A lot of water under that bridge. I just wanted to go back a bit and answer Marty’s accusation that I don’t think he has an original thought. That is one way of looking at it, but in a glass is half full, I was really hoping that he had glommed on to the ‘dems aren’t gracious’ argument because he had heard it somewhere else. I really don’t believe that he sought out Abrams and Gillum’s speeches, out of the set of Democrats who lost close elections, and juxtaposed it with McSally (who probably will be appointed to fill McCain’s seat, so pissing off half of Arizona by telling them the candidate they voted for would not really be a good strategy) all by his lonesome. To believe that, I’d have to think that Marty was a stone cold racist rather than someone who has been influenced by the constant stream of racism that flows underneath political discourse in the US. Still, if he feels like he needs to cite Bobby Seale (82 years old according to Wikipedia) and Malcolm X (45th anniversary of his assassination coming up in 2020), maybe he did. HIIK.
    I suppose it is a bit strange, I’m one who always wants people to own their words and realize that the ramifications of the arguments they make, yet here, I’m saying I don’t really believe that Marty came up with this by himself. But honestly, I don’t think that you thought of this by yourself, and I think you read too many facebook posts where someone was quoting Kemp, who said Abrams is a “disgrace to democracy”.
    I may be wrong, but I don’t think you live in Georgia, though I thought you were in the South. But it is important to realize that Kemp’s rhetoric has a strategic goal.
    https://politics.myajc.com/blog/politics/the-jolt-behind-brian-kemp-push-for-stacey-abrams-concede/ZqFizPsI6vQ59ZCauelI6O/
    So let’s get back to the Kemp name-calling: I.e., referring to Abrams as a “disgrace to democracy” and some sort of electoral burglar. That’s not the patient language of a campaign that’s comfortable in its victory. Confidence does not shine through in that kind of phrasing.
    We can rule out some motives. As the Florida governor’s contest has reminded us, concessions are not binding. They are political statements, not legal ones.
    Nor, we hope, is this about Kemp wanting to be addressed as “governor-elect” in the media for the next eight weeks. If he’s due the title, that will come soon enough.
    We can also rule out that the Kemp campaign is actually trying to pressure Abrams to do something she’s not inclined to do. A campaign that implies that a female African-American opponent is consorting with an armed “Black Panther Party” only 24 hours before Election Day can’t seriously believe it has increased its persuasive hold on her a week later.
    But Kemp’s hostility does have much to do with Stacey Abrams and whether she continues as a cause celebre among Democrats.
    There is the longer-term threat she might pose to U.S. Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., who is up for re-election in 2020.
    But more immediately, there’s the question of whether Abrams and her turnout machine can dispense with a Democratic jinx and help John Barrow win his statewide Dec. 4 runoff against Republican Brad Raffensperger.
    Clearly, Abrams recognizes the importance of controlling the office of secretary of state. And Republicans are very worried about their misfire last Tuesday in the populous northern suburbs of metro Atlanta. One of your Insiders has more details here.
    Kemp’s not trying to persuade Abrams to concede. He’s trying to make sure that his own people don’t stand down — and that hers do.
    speaking of graciousness, there is also this.
    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/gop-seeks-last-ditch-laws-in-states-where-its-power-slipped

  149. I do wonder, how large a Democratic majority is required, to overturn Cleek’s Law?
    GOP keeps vetoing that, at every opportunity.

  150. I do wonder, how large a Democratic majority is required, to overturn Cleek’s Law?
    GOP keeps vetoing that, at every opportunity.

  151. cleek: doesn’t sound like any GOP i’ve ever known.
    Ah, youth!
    Actually, the California GOP used to be quite like that. Not just when Earl Warren was Governor, but even when Ronald Reagan was Governor — which, admittedly, was before Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” came along. And even then the GOP here (can’t speak for the rest of the country) didn’t really get serious about bigotry-based suicide until the early 1990s.

  152. cleek: doesn’t sound like any GOP i’ve ever known.
    Ah, youth!
    Actually, the California GOP used to be quite like that. Not just when Earl Warren was Governor, but even when Ronald Reagan was Governor — which, admittedly, was before Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” came along. And even then the GOP here (can’t speak for the rest of the country) didn’t really get serious about bigotry-based suicide until the early 1990s.

  153. wj: … the GOP here … didn’t really get serious about bigotry-based suicide until the early 1990s.
    So WHY did the CA GOP “get serious” about that? What drove them to it?
    Maybe the Dems had fucked things up? But even if so, why did the GOP feel compelled to go big on bigotry? Did Republicans worry that they needed just that extra little dash of racism to beat the Democrats who supposedly fucked things up?
    What made bigotry the New Idea (TM) that the GOP brought to the table?
    –TP

  154. wj: … the GOP here … didn’t really get serious about bigotry-based suicide until the early 1990s.
    So WHY did the CA GOP “get serious” about that? What drove them to it?
    Maybe the Dems had fucked things up? But even if so, why did the GOP feel compelled to go big on bigotry? Did Republicans worry that they needed just that extra little dash of racism to beat the Democrats who supposedly fucked things up?
    What made bigotry the New Idea (TM) that the GOP brought to the table?
    –TP

  155. Did Republicans worry that they needed just that extra little dash of racism to beat the Democrats who supposedly fucked things up?
    In a word, yes. Although perhaps not so much the last 4 words.
    Governor Wilson, running for re-election in 1994, embraced a harsh anti (illegal) immigrant proposition (Prop 187). The Democrats hadn’t been messing things up . . . for the simple reason that they hadn’t been in charge.
    He did win. But the Republicans haven’t won since, either the Governorship** or the Presidential Electoral votes. This after having been solidly Republican for half a century or more.
    ** From 1943 thru the end of Wilson’s term, if you were Governor of California and not named Edmund G Brown, you were a Republican. Since? Nope.

  156. Did Republicans worry that they needed just that extra little dash of racism to beat the Democrats who supposedly fucked things up?
    In a word, yes. Although perhaps not so much the last 4 words.
    Governor Wilson, running for re-election in 1994, embraced a harsh anti (illegal) immigrant proposition (Prop 187). The Democrats hadn’t been messing things up . . . for the simple reason that they hadn’t been in charge.
    He did win. But the Republicans haven’t won since, either the Governorship** or the Presidential Electoral votes. This after having been solidly Republican for half a century or more.
    ** From 1943 thru the end of Wilson’s term, if you were Governor of California and not named Edmund G Brown, you were a Republican. Since? Nope.

  157. Well, 1994 was the Gingrich revolution, so I’d argue that Wilson’s push was part and parcel of a larger Republican effort. 1994 was also the year the The Bell Curve came out so there was something in the water, methinks.
    Googling found this article
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/how-the-clinton-gingrich-years-became-the-good-old-days-republicans-revisit-1994/2018/01/02/a98ed2ae-dc2b-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.84d63d29c9a0
    which had this anecdote
    Wamp: I told you the real corrupt way they defeated my son [in a Republican primary] for Congress with a Photoshopped picture of him burning the U.S. passport because he said in the debate we should not deport 11 million people. [The incumbent] sent it to every Republican voter in the district. This is Weston Wamp’s position on immigration. He barely lost. But that’s the kind of rancid politics that we see today in America.
    A little more googling pulled up this
    https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/opinion/freepress/story/2014/jul/29/congressman-is-this-the-best-youve-got/262966/
    What this has me thinking is that if this the sort of thing Republicans use against each other, is it any wonder that the stuff they pull out about people on the other side?

  158. Well, 1994 was the Gingrich revolution, so I’d argue that Wilson’s push was part and parcel of a larger Republican effort. 1994 was also the year the The Bell Curve came out so there was something in the water, methinks.
    Googling found this article
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/how-the-clinton-gingrich-years-became-the-good-old-days-republicans-revisit-1994/2018/01/02/a98ed2ae-dc2b-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.84d63d29c9a0
    which had this anecdote
    Wamp: I told you the real corrupt way they defeated my son [in a Republican primary] for Congress with a Photoshopped picture of him burning the U.S. passport because he said in the debate we should not deport 11 million people. [The incumbent] sent it to every Republican voter in the district. This is Weston Wamp’s position on immigration. He barely lost. But that’s the kind of rancid politics that we see today in America.
    A little more googling pulled up this
    https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/opinion/freepress/story/2014/jul/29/congressman-is-this-the-best-youve-got/262966/
    What this has me thinking is that if this the sort of thing Republicans use against each other, is it any wonder that the stuff they pull out about people on the other side?

  163. and now those California conservatives…
    https://www.vox.com/2018/11/19/17841946/trump-conservatism-california-gop-shapiro-midterms-2018

    Conservative podcast host Michael Knowles — a trained actor and native New Yorker who got his start in politics working on a Republican campaign his sophomore year at Yale, and who wrote a best-selling book called Reasons to Vote for Democrats: A Comprehensive Guide (the pages inside the book are largely blank) — told me that California conservatism was more of an “anti-ideology,” one largely based on kulturkampf, not policy.

    yes, i know.

  164. and now those California conservatives…
    https://www.vox.com/2018/11/19/17841946/trump-conservatism-california-gop-shapiro-midterms-2018

    Conservative podcast host Michael Knowles — a trained actor and native New Yorker who got his start in politics working on a Republican campaign his sophomore year at Yale, and who wrote a best-selling book called Reasons to Vote for Democrats: A Comprehensive Guide (the pages inside the book are largely blank) — told me that California conservatism was more of an “anti-ideology,” one largely based on kulturkampf, not policy.

    yes, i know.

  167. Cleek, I think the critical bit if that article may be this:

    To understand this apocalyptic approach to politics, you need to understand the recent history of California conservatives. As Kesler told me, “The experience of seeing California go from a solidly Republican, Reaganite state to a very solidly Democratic state — so solid that the Republicans are virtually an endangered species in statewide offices — that experience has been very sobering for a whole generation of California conservatives, and that has helped, I think, to create a separate consciousness.”

    It bears noting that California in 2018 isn’t drastically different in its overall ideological views from California in 1970 (when Reagan was being reelected Governor). Some evolution, of course, but not notably more than anywhere else in the country.
    What changed was actually the Republican Party. As its candidates went more xenophobic and further right, voters went away. All those moderately conservative folks, including me, are still here. We just don’t see a lot of people like us on the GOP ticket. The moderate conservative candidates on offer are, like my state senator, mostly running as Democrats. It’s become something of a death spiral.
    So while the author may think that California conservatives have found the experience of becoming an electoral irrelevance sobering, the evidence shows otherwise. They are still drinking the KoolAid that the state has changed, not them. Routinely I hear complaints that it’s all about “white flight” from California due to rampant socialism. Even though the actual policies of the state government aren’t particularly different from what they were in the 1980s.
    The closest thing we have to a big government / socialist folly is Governor Brown’s determination to build a high speed rail line thru the Central Valley. Which, since it doesn’t go anywhere near any of the major destinations here at the northern end (not sure how well it does near LA), means it will never acquire the ridership needed to put it on a par with such trains elsewhere in the world. But other than that? Not much.

  168. Cleek, I think the critical bit if that article may be this:

    To understand this apocalyptic approach to politics, you need to understand the recent history of California conservatives. As Kesler told me, “The experience of seeing California go from a solidly Republican, Reaganite state to a very solidly Democratic state — so solid that the Republicans are virtually an endangered species in statewide offices — that experience has been very sobering for a whole generation of California conservatives, and that has helped, I think, to create a separate consciousness.”

    It bears noting that California in 2018 isn’t drastically different in its overall ideological views from California in 1970 (when Reagan was being reelected Governor). Some evolution, of course, but not notably more than anywhere else in the country.
    What changed was actually the Republican Party. As its candidates went more xenophobic and further right, voters went away. All those moderately conservative folks, including me, are still here. We just don’t see a lot of people like us on the GOP ticket. The moderate conservative candidates on offer are, like my state senator, mostly running as Democrats. It’s become something of a death spiral.
    So while the author may think that California conservatives have found the experience of becoming an electoral irrelevance sobering, the evidence shows otherwise. They are still drinking the KoolAid that the state has changed, not them. Routinely I hear complaints that it’s all about “white flight” from California due to rampant socialism. Even though the actual policies of the state government aren’t particularly different from what they were in the 1980s.
    The closest thing we have to a big government / socialist folly is Governor Brown’s determination to build a high speed rail line thru the Central Valley. Which, since it doesn’t go anywhere near any of the major destinations here at the northern end (not sure how well it does near LA), means it will never acquire the ridership needed to put it on a par with such trains elsewhere in the world. But other than that? Not much.

  169. Also this

    While the number of registered Democratic voters in California hasn’t changed much in recent years, the number of registered Republicans has dropped by 10 percent, and might be surpassed by the number of registered independents by the November midterms. Currently, Democrats hold a 19 percent advantage over Republicans in California.

    Tells you everything you need to know about what’s really changed.

  170. Also this

    While the number of registered Democratic voters in California hasn’t changed much in recent years, the number of registered Republicans has dropped by 10 percent, and might be surpassed by the number of registered independents by the November midterms. Currently, Democrats hold a 19 percent advantage over Republicans in California.

    Tells you everything you need to know about what’s really changed.

  173. I was going to critique the Salon article that Nigel linked to at 1:15 AM, but my man Charlie Pierce beat me to it.
    Mark Twain had it right: “Let us call a spade a spade, instead of coldly symbolizing it as a snow shovel.”
    –TP

  174. I was going to critique the Salon article that Nigel linked to at 1:15 AM, but my man Charlie Pierce beat me to it.
    Mark Twain had it right: “Let us call a spade a spade, instead of coldly symbolizing it as a snow shovel.”
    –TP

  177. A high-speed LA to SF rail line is in the “really kewl!” category, but IMO doesn’t make a lot of sense.
    Better to rebuild the Acela corridor, where there’s an existing ridership base and the distances are less. The NYC to BOS link in particular could use some faster connection.
    Even better to follow the example of France and Japan, and build the high-speed rail lines starting 30 years ago.
    “Quick! To the Time Machine!”

  178. A high-speed LA to SF rail line is in the “really kewl!” category, but IMO doesn’t make a lot of sense.
    Better to rebuild the Acela corridor, where there’s an existing ridership base and the distances are less. The NYC to BOS link in particular could use some faster connection.
    Even better to follow the example of France and Japan, and build the high-speed rail lines starting 30 years ago.
    “Quick! To the Time Machine!”

  179. Better to rebuild the Acela corridor…
    As the LA to SF line is being built with California’s dollars, they are probably reluctant to spend the money in the Boston to DC stretch. OTOH, spending the $70B+ on local light rail would let them connect a lot more places that people want to go, and would likely put a lot more butts in train seats than the high-speed line would.

  180. Better to rebuild the Acela corridor…
    As the LA to SF line is being built with California’s dollars, they are probably reluctant to spend the money in the Boston to DC stretch. OTOH, spending the $70B+ on local light rail would let them connect a lot more places that people want to go, and would likely put a lot more butts in train seats than the high-speed line would.

  181. As the LA to SF line is being built with California’s dollars, they are probably reluctant to spend the money in the Boston to DC stretch.
    Selfish…

  182. As the LA to SF line is being built with California’s dollars, they are probably reluctant to spend the money in the Boston to DC stretch.
    Selfish…

  183. endless violent rants evoke … boredom
    GFTNC speaks for me in this.
    When the Count is at his angriest, I go read other things for a week or two.

  184. endless violent rants evoke … boredom
    GFTNC speaks for me in this.
    When the Count is at his angriest, I go read other things for a week or two.

  185. A high-speed LA to SF rail line is in the “really kewl!” category, but IMO doesn’t make a lot of sense.
    A high speed line that actually went to SF (or San Jose, aka Silicon Valley) might make good sense. The big problem is that this one ends 75 miles east of San Francisco. Which makes no sense at all.

  186. A high-speed LA to SF rail line is in the “really kewl!” category, but IMO doesn’t make a lot of sense.
    A high speed line that actually went to SF (or San Jose, aka Silicon Valley) might make good sense. The big problem is that this one ends 75 miles east of San Francisco. Which makes no sense at all.

  187. As the LA to SF line is being built with California’s dollars, they are probably reluctant to spend the money in the Boston to DC stretch.
    Well if those were red states between DC and Boston, it would be a routine case of Federal dollars from blue states going to red states. But since they aren’t….
    On the other hand, a little fast action might get a high speed DC to Atlanta line done. If it gets funded before too many people notice that Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia are in the process of turning blue.

  188. As the LA to SF line is being built with California’s dollars, they are probably reluctant to spend the money in the Boston to DC stretch.
    Well if those were red states between DC and Boston, it would be a routine case of Federal dollars from blue states going to red states. But since they aren’t….
    On the other hand, a little fast action might get a high speed DC to Atlanta line done. If it gets funded before too many people notice that Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia are in the process of turning blue.

  191. Passenger rail, highspeed or otherwise, occupies a nitch between automobiles and airplanes. If autonomous vehicles become a thing, that nitch may come close to vanishing. And light rail and subways aren’t exempt. Uber and Lyft are already cutting into their ridership. Autonomous vehicles would have a much greater impact.

  192. Passenger rail, highspeed or otherwise, occupies a nitch between automobiles and airplanes. If autonomous vehicles become a thing, that nitch may come close to vanishing. And light rail and subways aren’t exempt. Uber and Lyft are already cutting into their ridership. Autonomous vehicles would have a much greater impact.

  193. A high-speed LA to SF rail line is in the “really kewl!” category, but IMO doesn’t make a lot of sense.
    That seems weird.
    I agree that the NE corridor could use some major upgrades, but hopefully it’s not an either/or proposition.
    And unless you think that the NE corridor is literally the *only* place in the US where HSR makes sense – which is silly – then CA is near the top of any list you could make of other places that could really use one.
    The CA regional air market is actually several times larger than the DC-NY-BOS corridor – probably in large part because the air infrastructure in CA is bearing a lot of the extra load created by the missing rail system. The potential ridership base is certainly there.
    I suppose it’s not “existing”, as in the NE, but that’s sort of begging the question isn’t it? At some point, maybe it should be given a chance to start existing.

  194. A high-speed LA to SF rail line is in the “really kewl!” category, but IMO doesn’t make a lot of sense.
    That seems weird.
    I agree that the NE corridor could use some major upgrades, but hopefully it’s not an either/or proposition.
    And unless you think that the NE corridor is literally the *only* place in the US where HSR makes sense – which is silly – then CA is near the top of any list you could make of other places that could really use one.
    The CA regional air market is actually several times larger than the DC-NY-BOS corridor – probably in large part because the air infrastructure in CA is bearing a lot of the extra load created by the missing rail system. The potential ridership base is certainly there.
    I suppose it’s not “existing”, as in the NE, but that’s sort of begging the question isn’t it? At some point, maybe it should be given a chance to start existing.

  195. From the Economist:

    A federal judge in America temporarily overturned an order from Donald Trump that migrants entering illegally from Mexico could not claim asylum. Mr Trump signed the order earlier this month, in response to the “caravan” wending its way from Honduras. Separately, it was reported that troops sent to the border would begin withdrawing this week, before many migrants reach it.

    Of course, since both were purely electioneering, the administration may not even bother to push back.

  196. From the Economist:

    A federal judge in America temporarily overturned an order from Donald Trump that migrants entering illegally from Mexico could not claim asylum. Mr Trump signed the order earlier this month, in response to the “caravan” wending its way from Honduras. Separately, it was reported that troops sent to the border would begin withdrawing this week, before many migrants reach it.

    Of course, since both were purely electioneering, the administration may not even bother to push back.

  199. They’d have had far fewer problems if they’d come up the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, along I-5. It’s mostly ranch land there, not orchards and farms. Instead, they decided to go up the east side. Not sure why; that does allow service to a bunch of intermediate towns, but how much traffic would involve them is not obvious to me.

  200. They’d have had far fewer problems if they’d come up the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, along I-5. It’s mostly ranch land there, not orchards and farms. Instead, they decided to go up the east side. Not sure why; that does allow service to a bunch of intermediate towns, but how much traffic would involve them is not obvious to me.

  201. The Democrat running against Mia Love in Utah declared victory this morning. Up by 739 votes when they stopped counting yesterday, with reportedly fewer ballots than that remaining. Has to be just a hair closer before a recount can be requested.

  202. The Democrat running against Mia Love in Utah declared victory this morning. Up by 739 votes when they stopped counting yesterday, with reportedly fewer ballots than that remaining. Has to be just a hair closer before a recount can be requested.

  203. Since joel hanes seconded GFTNC’s spot on observations, among others’ comments, regarding what are rightly termed my self-indulgent and boring outbursts, I would like to apologize for using the good offIces of Obsidian Wings to vent my anger, getting it all over you, and causing my friends here the discomfiting quandary of what to do about a guy abusing his legacy status here.
    I’m especially aggrieved at the prospect of driving jrudkis and joel away, so I’m hoping they reconsider.
    I’ll do my part by becoming scarce.
    For the time being, I’m going to take a break from these pages and if I do re-enter the fray I’ll watch the ways in which I express my anger.
    I’d like to thank lj, as everyone should, for being such an observant reader and tweezing out meaning, with forensic skill, that I deliberately inserted (“they long for”) into the offending comment, but I’d also like to thank GFTNC for putting her finger on exactly how I felt as I hit the post button on that comment …… God, this is self-indulgent of me and I expect extremely tiresome for everyone else that I’m once again writing these things.
    Ouch …. twice, with the second ouch being the deserved, tough love therapeutic one.
    That said, I own what I’ve written here and I’m not going to retract because I think we are up against something monstrous and viciously indomitable in this country.
    But this is not the venue for the expression I’ve chosen, not that there is
    one, short of donning a uniform.
    hairshirthedonist’s amusing musings that I’m not trying to recruit among the good, smart people here are not only correct, but a credit to all of you, because what would the kitty think if a plurality of you said “we await your orders, Count!”
    One thing: I read just about every comment and the links therein on every thread, because I’m endlessly interested. For some reason, that sounds horrifyingly anal, but on the other hand I have plenty of other replacement reading to fill my free time going forward.
    Finally, and wtf -ally, I’m sitting in the front room of my brother’s house in Pittsburgh and as I finish up this comment, the UPS driver just left a box of toilet tissue and a box of bullets at the door, apparently for the incontinent hunters in the house.
    I’m compelled to tell it as I see it. Happy Thanksgiving and the seed pods have indeed opened.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x3cZJ3iURzk

  204. Since joel hanes seconded GFTNC’s spot on observations, among others’ comments, regarding what are rightly termed my self-indulgent and boring outbursts, I would like to apologize for using the good offIces of Obsidian Wings to vent my anger, getting it all over you, and causing my friends here the discomfiting quandary of what to do about a guy abusing his legacy status here.
    I’m especially aggrieved at the prospect of driving jrudkis and joel away, so I’m hoping they reconsider.
    I’ll do my part by becoming scarce.
    For the time being, I’m going to take a break from these pages and if I do re-enter the fray I’ll watch the ways in which I express my anger.
    I’d like to thank lj, as everyone should, for being such an observant reader and tweezing out meaning, with forensic skill, that I deliberately inserted (“they long for”) into the offending comment, but I’d also like to thank GFTNC for putting her finger on exactly how I felt as I hit the post button on that comment …… God, this is self-indulgent of me and I expect extremely tiresome for everyone else that I’m once again writing these things.
    Ouch …. twice, with the second ouch being the deserved, tough love therapeutic one.
    That said, I own what I’ve written here and I’m not going to retract because I think we are up against something monstrous and viciously indomitable in this country.
    But this is not the venue for the expression I’ve chosen, not that there is
    one, short of donning a uniform.
    hairshirthedonist’s amusing musings that I’m not trying to recruit among the good, smart people here are not only correct, but a credit to all of you, because what would the kitty think if a plurality of you said “we await your orders, Count!”
    One thing: I read just about every comment and the links therein on every thread, because I’m endlessly interested. For some reason, that sounds horrifyingly anal, but on the other hand I have plenty of other replacement reading to fill my free time going forward.
    Finally, and wtf -ally, I’m sitting in the front room of my brother’s house in Pittsburgh and as I finish up this comment, the UPS driver just left a box of toilet tissue and a box of bullets at the door, apparently for the incontinent hunters in the house.
    I’m compelled to tell it as I see it. Happy Thanksgiving and the seed pods have indeed opened.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x3cZJ3iURzk

  205. Which, since it doesn’t go anywhere near any of the major destinations here at the northern end (not sure how well it does near LA)
    This is also confusing to me. San Francisco, e.g., isn’t a major destination? It’s been a few years since I’ve visited, and I’ve heard the electric scooter situation is pretty insufferable, but it hasn’t gone down hill *that* much, has it?

  206. Which, since it doesn’t go anywhere near any of the major destinations here at the northern end (not sure how well it does near LA)
    This is also confusing to me. San Francisco, e.g., isn’t a major destination? It’s been a few years since I’ve visited, and I’ve heard the electric scooter situation is pretty insufferable, but it hasn’t gone down hill *that* much, has it?

  207. Here’s another fun item.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/murphy-case-supreme-court-rules-muscogee-land/576238/
    The mind boggles to consider what Our Leader will have to say if the Supreme Court (likely including his appointee Gorsuch) agrees. That is, the Eastern half of Oklahoma ends up being, in law, “indian country”**
    ** Which, apparently, is the technical legal term for not only Native American reservations, but also for a lot of other land in which they have various historical interest.

  208. Here’s another fun item.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/murphy-case-supreme-court-rules-muscogee-land/576238/
    The mind boggles to consider what Our Leader will have to say if the Supreme Court (likely including his appointee Gorsuch) agrees. That is, the Eastern half of Oklahoma ends up being, in law, “indian country”**
    ** Which, apparently, is the technical legal term for not only Native American reservations, but also for a lot of other land in which they have various historical interest.

  209. This is also confusing to me. San Francisco, e.g., isn’t a major destination?
    In a word, no. I believe the plan is to run trains on existing tracks from the end of the high speed rail in the Central Valley over the hills to, say, Oakland. From which, presumably, you could catch BART (light commuter rail, i.e. no space for luggage) across the bay to San Francisco. Yup, probably two changes of train involved. By that point, you’ve probably lost as much time as you would spend sitting in an airport (or standing in line for security) waiting to board your plane.

  210. This is also confusing to me. San Francisco, e.g., isn’t a major destination?
    In a word, no. I believe the plan is to run trains on existing tracks from the end of the high speed rail in the Central Valley over the hills to, say, Oakland. From which, presumably, you could catch BART (light commuter rail, i.e. no space for luggage) across the bay to San Francisco. Yup, probably two changes of train involved. By that point, you’ve probably lost as much time as you would spend sitting in an airport (or standing in line for security) waiting to board your plane.

  211. O singular count
    I’m angry too, heartbroken and bitter about what has become of the world. I love your wit, but I see that in my own rage I have lost contact with the world of sky and living things, need more green shoots amidst the desolation, need more right mindfulness. Need less rage.
    So “boring” was not the right word after all.
    I rarely look in on Chris Floyd or driftglass any more, not because they’re wrong, but because I’m having trouble handling the truth about this particular Code Red.
    I think it’s a hard time for all those with a heart.
    Kaliyuga for real
    Thanks for all the heart you’ve written from, for all these years, through all these seasons. All of it.

  212. O singular count
    I’m angry too, heartbroken and bitter about what has become of the world. I love your wit, but I see that in my own rage I have lost contact with the world of sky and living things, need more green shoots amidst the desolation, need more right mindfulness. Need less rage.
    So “boring” was not the right word after all.
    I rarely look in on Chris Floyd or driftglass any more, not because they’re wrong, but because I’m having trouble handling the truth about this particular Code Red.
    I think it’s a hard time for all those with a heart.
    Kaliyuga for real
    Thanks for all the heart you’ve written from, for all these years, through all these seasons. All of it.

  213. In a word, no. I believe the plan is to run trains on existing tracks from the end of the high speed rail in the Central Valley over the hills to, say, Oakland. From which, presumably, you could catch BART (light commuter rail, i.e. no space for luggage) across the bay to San Francisco.
    I might be out of date, but that doesn’t match any routing I’ve ever heard of. Nor does it jibe with, e.g., https://buildhsr.com/interactive_map/
    Possibly what you’re outlining there is some kind of interim plan for connections while construction is only partly complete.
    I’m sure the San Jose/San Fran branch is going to be even harder and slower to build than the central valley stuff that’s under construction already, but it’s definitely a key part of the proposal. AFAICT, it’s even still planned for “Phase 1”, for whatever that’s worth.

  214. In a word, no. I believe the plan is to run trains on existing tracks from the end of the high speed rail in the Central Valley over the hills to, say, Oakland. From which, presumably, you could catch BART (light commuter rail, i.e. no space for luggage) across the bay to San Francisco.
    I might be out of date, but that doesn’t match any routing I’ve ever heard of. Nor does it jibe with, e.g., https://buildhsr.com/interactive_map/
    Possibly what you’re outlining there is some kind of interim plan for connections while construction is only partly complete.
    I’m sure the San Jose/San Fran branch is going to be even harder and slower to build than the central valley stuff that’s under construction already, but it’s definitely a key part of the proposal. AFAICT, it’s even still planned for “Phase 1”, for whatever that’s worth.

  217. In a few decades, the California High-Speed Rail infrastructure will make nice bike trails.
    Or repurposed for the new magic highways that will let self-driving cars safely go 200 mph…

  218. In a few decades, the California High-Speed Rail infrastructure will make nice bike trails.
    Or repurposed for the new magic highways that will let self-driving cars safely go 200 mph…

  221. Boondoggle being a highly technical term for “megaproject I don’t like”.
    That’s just, like, your opinion man.

  222. Boondoggle being a highly technical term for “megaproject I don’t like”.
    That’s just, like, your opinion man.

  223. I’m sure the San Jose/San Fran branch is going to be even harder and slower to build than the central valley stuff that’s under construction already, but it’s definitely a key part of the proposal. AFAICT, it’s even still planned for “Phase 1”, for whatever that’s worth.
    The formal plan may say “Phase 1” for the San Jose – Merced line. But if you look at what is actually being done initially it’s pretty clear that that branch is notional at best. Maybe, a few decades after (if) the line from LA to Sacramento is finished and in operation, something concrete (pun intended) will get done on the line over to the coast. But the smart bet would be that your grandchildren will be in retirement before it happens.

  224. I’m sure the San Jose/San Fran branch is going to be even harder and slower to build than the central valley stuff that’s under construction already, but it’s definitely a key part of the proposal. AFAICT, it’s even still planned for “Phase 1”, for whatever that’s worth.
    The formal plan may say “Phase 1” for the San Jose – Merced line. But if you look at what is actually being done initially it’s pretty clear that that branch is notional at best. Maybe, a few decades after (if) the line from LA to Sacramento is finished and in operation, something concrete (pun intended) will get done on the line over to the coast. But the smart bet would be that your grandchildren will be in retirement before it happens.

  225. Thanks for all the heart you’ve written from, for all these years, through all these seasons. All of it.
    O so say all of us, I bet, and particularly me, (retrospectively aghast at my presumption in judging you, you who in many ways are the brightest and best). Don’t stay away, Count, if my theory that Marty is part of the soul of this place holds true, how much more the case is that with you? Surely, to quote your idols, we can work it out….

  226. Thanks for all the heart you’ve written from, for all these years, through all these seasons. All of it.
    O so say all of us, I bet, and particularly me, (retrospectively aghast at my presumption in judging you, you who in many ways are the brightest and best). Don’t stay away, Count, if my theory that Marty is part of the soul of this place holds true, how much more the case is that with you? Surely, to quote your idols, we can work it out….

  229. The formal plan may say “Phase 1” for the San Jose – Merced line. But if you look at what is actually being done initially it’s pretty clear that that branch is notional at best.
    IIRC, the big problem is Phase 1 calls for a currently unfunded 13 mile long tunnel under the Pacheco Pass. Tunnel fairies, perhaps?

  230. The formal plan may say “Phase 1” for the San Jose – Merced line. But if you look at what is actually being done initially it’s pretty clear that that branch is notional at best.
    IIRC, the big problem is Phase 1 calls for a currently unfunded 13 mile long tunnel under the Pacheco Pass. Tunnel fairies, perhaps?

  231. An opinion that I’m far from alone in. And not just from the usual suspects either.
    Looks like pretty much the usual suspects to me.
    And in case the teasing about the word ‘boondoggle’ wasn’t clear, I’m not counting whining about cost overruns, or complaining that it’s not ready already yet* as cogent objections to the thing.
    If there’s a comprehensive analysis out there contradicting the ones that show HSR not only makes sense, but will be absolutely necessary as CA grows, I’ve yet to see it.
    Keep in mind there’s going to be another 10 or 15 million people by the time HSR is a going concern. This in a state that is already on the verge of literally running out of 3 dimensional space to safely route planes through the air. I guess they could build more freeways instead, but it’s not like those are going to be free or built overnight either.
    Praying for the tech pixies to bring us self-driving ultracars, or electric passenger drones with intercity ranges or whatever** is not an actual plan.
    So what’s the alternative?

  232. An opinion that I’m far from alone in. And not just from the usual suspects either.
    Looks like pretty much the usual suspects to me.
    And in case the teasing about the word ‘boondoggle’ wasn’t clear, I’m not counting whining about cost overruns, or complaining that it’s not ready already yet* as cogent objections to the thing.
    If there’s a comprehensive analysis out there contradicting the ones that show HSR not only makes sense, but will be absolutely necessary as CA grows, I’ve yet to see it.
    Keep in mind there’s going to be another 10 or 15 million people by the time HSR is a going concern. This in a state that is already on the verge of literally running out of 3 dimensional space to safely route planes through the air. I guess they could build more freeways instead, but it’s not like those are going to be free or built overnight either.
    Praying for the tech pixies to bring us self-driving ultracars, or electric passenger drones with intercity ranges or whatever** is not an actual plan.
    So what’s the alternative?

  233. Keep in mind there’s going to be another 10 or 15 million people by the time HSR is a going concern. This in a state that is already on the verge of literally running out of 3 dimensional space to safely route planes through the air.
    Of course that population projection assumes that we will magically manage to do something about what is (and has been for decades) California’s Number 1 growth constraint: water. We already fight over it constantly. And, unless someone gets serious about an economic way to distill sea water into something drinkable, it’s only going to keep getting worse.
    For those who aren’t aware, we actually are living in a desert here. One with green lawns insisted upon by people who move here from the East, and don’t realize that it isn’t going to rain at all from April to October — so they are going to have to water that lawn themselves. With water which will then NOT be available for minor things like drinking or growing stuff to eat. (Never mind the ecological damage which results when runoff drops towards zero in the rivers.)

  234. Keep in mind there’s going to be another 10 or 15 million people by the time HSR is a going concern. This in a state that is already on the verge of literally running out of 3 dimensional space to safely route planes through the air.
    Of course that population projection assumes that we will magically manage to do something about what is (and has been for decades) California’s Number 1 growth constraint: water. We already fight over it constantly. And, unless someone gets serious about an economic way to distill sea water into something drinkable, it’s only going to keep getting worse.
    For those who aren’t aware, we actually are living in a desert here. One with green lawns insisted upon by people who move here from the East, and don’t realize that it isn’t going to rain at all from April to October — so they are going to have to water that lawn themselves. With water which will then NOT be available for minor things like drinking or growing stuff to eat. (Never mind the ecological damage which results when runoff drops towards zero in the rivers.)

  235. Maybe it’s because I spent part of my life in Phoenix, but I don’t understand why people wouldn’t be more eager to free themselves of lawncare. Desert landscaping is so low maintenance. Or put down some high-end astroturf.

  236. Maybe it’s because I spent part of my life in Phoenix, but I don’t understand why people wouldn’t be more eager to free themselves of lawncare. Desert landscaping is so low maintenance. Or put down some high-end astroturf.

  239. I guess I’m in the minority but I appreciate the Count expressing a rage I often share, sparing everyone my clumsier mangling of the topics. I get that rules are there for a reason and that they need to be applied uniformly, but I’m okay with a grandfathered carve out in his case.
    That would evaporate instantly if I had any inkling that savage words might turn into savage deeds (or even inspire them). Or if such savagery was the only thing brought to the table. But I ain’t, and I’d rather not cage that canary.

  240. I guess I’m in the minority but I appreciate the Count expressing a rage I often share, sparing everyone my clumsier mangling of the topics. I get that rules are there for a reason and that they need to be applied uniformly, but I’m okay with a grandfathered carve out in his case.
    That would evaporate instantly if I had any inkling that savage words might turn into savage deeds (or even inspire them). Or if such savagery was the only thing brought to the table. But I ain’t, and I’d rather not cage that canary.

  245. The view from Northern California on the high speed rail project:
    https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2018/11/21/editorial-stop-wasting-money-on-california-bullet-train/
    The headline, “California bullet train built on foundation of deceit”, says it all. But I loved this, too.

    Dan Richard, the chairman of the high-speed rail board since 2012 … perpetuates the notion that private investors are just around the next bend.
    Yeah, right … and Mexico is going to pay for a border wall.

  246. The view from Northern California on the high speed rail project:
    https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2018/11/21/editorial-stop-wasting-money-on-california-bullet-train/
    The headline, “California bullet train built on foundation of deceit”, says it all. But I loved this, too.

    Dan Richard, the chairman of the high-speed rail board since 2012 … perpetuates the notion that private investors are just around the next bend.
    Yeah, right … and Mexico is going to pay for a border wall.

  251. The view from Northern California on the high speed rail project:
    I’m not impressed with the reasoning on display there.
    I mean, on the surface, the basic complaint seems to be that the project is mismanaged (perhaps corrupt), and doesn’t have sufficient funding.
    Therefore we should give up.
    I think maybe that’s glossing over an important question. I mean, how would that “logic” work if we applied it to other essential activity?

    “Wildfire fighting is expensive and some of the firefighters are corrupt. We should just send them home and let the fires burn.”

    “High speed internet providers are almost all greedy, inefficient, and overprice their services. We should just go back to dial-up.”

    “Healthcare is expensive and the industry is inefficient and totally corrupt. We should just call the whole thing off and go back to how we did it in 1846.”

    “Solar power plant construction is being mismanaged and underfunded. We should just cancel it and build coal plants instead.”

    “Highway construction is expensive and corrupt. We should never build any more lane miles.”

    Hopefully you get where I’m going with this.
    Those statements are silly, because the questions hinge first and foremost on how necessary the activity is. Whether it is mismanaged or not is secondary.
    If you assume the whole HSR thing is just a pointless vanity project, then yes, it should be canceled. But 1) that assumption needs to be justified, not hidden, because it flies in the face of the evidence, and 2) in that case, it should probably be canceled regardless of the degree of mismanagement.
    On the other hand, if it is a necessary project, then the proper response to any mismanagement* or underfunding would be to fight like hell to fix those problems, not call the whole thing off and go home.

  252. The view from Northern California on the high speed rail project:
    I’m not impressed with the reasoning on display there.
    I mean, on the surface, the basic complaint seems to be that the project is mismanaged (perhaps corrupt), and doesn’t have sufficient funding.
    Therefore we should give up.
    I think maybe that’s glossing over an important question. I mean, how would that “logic” work if we applied it to other essential activity?

    “Wildfire fighting is expensive and some of the firefighters are corrupt. We should just send them home and let the fires burn.”

    “High speed internet providers are almost all greedy, inefficient, and overprice their services. We should just go back to dial-up.”

    “Healthcare is expensive and the industry is inefficient and totally corrupt. We should just call the whole thing off and go back to how we did it in 1846.”

    “Solar power plant construction is being mismanaged and underfunded. We should just cancel it and build coal plants instead.”

    “Highway construction is expensive and corrupt. We should never build any more lane miles.”

    Hopefully you get where I’m going with this.
    Those statements are silly, because the questions hinge first and foremost on how necessary the activity is. Whether it is mismanaged or not is secondary.
    If you assume the whole HSR thing is just a pointless vanity project, then yes, it should be canceled. But 1) that assumption needs to be justified, not hidden, because it flies in the face of the evidence, and 2) in that case, it should probably be canceled regardless of the degree of mismanagement.
    On the other hand, if it is a necessary project, then the proper response to any mismanagement* or underfunding would be to fight like hell to fix those problems, not call the whole thing off and go home.

  253. I mean, on the surface, the basic complaint seems to be that the project is mismanaged (perhaps corrupt), and doesn’t have sufficient funding.
    I haven’t heard allegations of corruption. (Not to say there aren’t any. Just that they aren’t prominent enough for me to have registered them.) And overall management doesn’t seem to be that a big issue either. It could doubtless be improved, but that’s not what’s driving complaints.
    Rather, the problem seems to be bad planning. Or, if you prefer, that the project is ill-conceived. High speed rail that hit San Diego, maybe Long Beach, Los Angeles, perhaps Burbank, San Jose/Silicon Valley, and San Francisco? That would make some sense. But the way it’s actually being done? Not really.
    Plus the financial details — not so much underfunding as badly underestimated funding requirements. Hard to get sufficient funding if you keep claiming it will cost far less than it really will. However critical that underestimating is to selling the project at all.

  254. I mean, on the surface, the basic complaint seems to be that the project is mismanaged (perhaps corrupt), and doesn’t have sufficient funding.
    I haven’t heard allegations of corruption. (Not to say there aren’t any. Just that they aren’t prominent enough for me to have registered them.) And overall management doesn’t seem to be that a big issue either. It could doubtless be improved, but that’s not what’s driving complaints.
    Rather, the problem seems to be bad planning. Or, if you prefer, that the project is ill-conceived. High speed rail that hit San Diego, maybe Long Beach, Los Angeles, perhaps Burbank, San Jose/Silicon Valley, and San Francisco? That would make some sense. But the way it’s actually being done? Not really.
    Plus the financial details — not so much underfunding as badly underestimated funding requirements. Hard to get sufficient funding if you keep claiming it will cost far less than it really will. However critical that underestimating is to selling the project at all.

  255. High speed rail that hit San Diego, maybe Long Beach, Los Angeles, perhaps Burbank, San Jose/Silicon Valley, and San Francisco? That would make some sense. But the way it’s actually being done? Not really.
    Ok, but that’s kind of exactly the plan, no? I guess it hits Anaheim rather than Long Beach, but every other city you list is on the line. *Plus* Sacramento, and some bonus population centers in the Central Valley — since you can’t get from LA to SF without going north somehow (and the coast is arguably harder to build on).
    Which means it seems like what you’re really voicing is a complaint about what’s getting built first.
    And, ok, ,maybe that’s fair. I don’t have any strong opinion about the build order. I’d note that there were and are reasons for the staging plan that exists. Possibly those decisions haven’t held up — to the extent that the right of way acquisition has proved unanticipatedly difficult for example* — but hindsight is 20/20, etc.
    It seems like a very thin reason indeed to oppose the project overall, though.
    And I’m still not crediting the “all the segments I care about won’t be built for another 10 years, if it doesn’t all get canceled first” pessimism as an argument for *preemptively* canceling it. We could all wish we’d started more construction projects like this 15 or 30 years ago so we could be using them already, but not being done as soon as you start is not much of an argument for giving up now.
    —-
    * We don’t (yet) know about the unanticipated difficulties that might have manifested on other alignments, of course.

  256. High speed rail that hit San Diego, maybe Long Beach, Los Angeles, perhaps Burbank, San Jose/Silicon Valley, and San Francisco? That would make some sense. But the way it’s actually being done? Not really.
    Ok, but that’s kind of exactly the plan, no? I guess it hits Anaheim rather than Long Beach, but every other city you list is on the line. *Plus* Sacramento, and some bonus population centers in the Central Valley — since you can’t get from LA to SF without going north somehow (and the coast is arguably harder to build on).
    Which means it seems like what you’re really voicing is a complaint about what’s getting built first.
    And, ok, ,maybe that’s fair. I don’t have any strong opinion about the build order. I’d note that there were and are reasons for the staging plan that exists. Possibly those decisions haven’t held up — to the extent that the right of way acquisition has proved unanticipatedly difficult for example* — but hindsight is 20/20, etc.
    It seems like a very thin reason indeed to oppose the project overall, though.
    And I’m still not crediting the “all the segments I care about won’t be built for another 10 years, if it doesn’t all get canceled first” pessimism as an argument for *preemptively* canceling it. We could all wish we’d started more construction projects like this 15 or 30 years ago so we could be using them already, but not being done as soon as you start is not much of an argument for giving up now.
    —-
    * We don’t (yet) know about the unanticipated difficulties that might have manifested on other alignments, of course.

  257. Ok, but that’s kind of exactly the plan, no? I guess it hits Anaheim rather than Long Beach, but every other city you list is on the line. *Plus* Sacramento, and some bonus population centers in the Central Valley — since you can’t get from LA to SF without going north somehow (and the coast is arguably harder to build on).
    Which means it seems like what you’re really voicing is a complaint about what’s getting built first.
    Close, perhaps, but not quite.
    The cost is substantially more, and growing faster, precisely because it is being routed thru those “population centers” in the central valley. And the very expensive agricultural land around them. That’s also, as indicated in the article back upthread, why things are taking so long: working out just what constitutes “fair compensation” is harder there than if we were just dealing with range land on the west side of the Valley. (Nobody thinks they should come up El Camino Real, aka US 101. As you say, far harder to build on.)
    Also, that mess thru the Central Valley is being done first. If they had, for example, started with San Diego-LA, they would at least have something which would generate revenue while working north. But no. It’s not so much a complaint about what is being done first as about why it is being done first. To my mind, the plan is to build up a substantial sunk cost in the Central Valley first. And then use that to leverage additional funding, lots of additional funding, to get the necessary land in Southern California.

  258. Ok, but that’s kind of exactly the plan, no? I guess it hits Anaheim rather than Long Beach, but every other city you list is on the line. *Plus* Sacramento, and some bonus population centers in the Central Valley — since you can’t get from LA to SF without going north somehow (and the coast is arguably harder to build on).
    Which means it seems like what you’re really voicing is a complaint about what’s getting built first.
    Close, perhaps, but not quite.
    The cost is substantially more, and growing faster, precisely because it is being routed thru those “population centers” in the central valley. And the very expensive agricultural land around them. That’s also, as indicated in the article back upthread, why things are taking so long: working out just what constitutes “fair compensation” is harder there than if we were just dealing with range land on the west side of the Valley. (Nobody thinks they should come up El Camino Real, aka US 101. As you say, far harder to build on.)
    Also, that mess thru the Central Valley is being done first. If they had, for example, started with San Diego-LA, they would at least have something which would generate revenue while working north. But no. It’s not so much a complaint about what is being done first as about why it is being done first. To my mind, the plan is to build up a substantial sunk cost in the Central Valley first. And then use that to leverage additional funding, lots of additional funding, to get the necessary land in Southern California.

  259. wj, other folks in the know. Is the value of the agricultural land going to drop with climate changes and drought like conditions?

  260. wj, other folks in the know. Is the value of the agricultural land going to drop with climate changes and drought like conditions?

  261. Changes in temperature, per se, aren’t likely to make a big difference. Reduced rainfall will have a negative impact on the water table. But that is already dropping due to excessive pumping for irrigation, so at most it will force complete dependence for irrigation on water from snow in the mountains a bit sooner. (The Central Valley receives nowhere near enough rainfall for agriculture without irrigation.)
    Fights over water are a longstanding feature of California politics. Agriculture has enough to support current operations pretty well locked in. These days most of the fights are between those concerned with the ecology on one side and those who want lush greenery suitable for the East Coast in the desert that is Southern California — for an ever increasing number of people. Classic inadequate resource fight.
    But agriculture, while it would like more (especially with increased focus on high water demand crops; the damn fools!), will be OK for the foreseeable future as is.

  262. Changes in temperature, per se, aren’t likely to make a big difference. Reduced rainfall will have a negative impact on the water table. But that is already dropping due to excessive pumping for irrigation, so at most it will force complete dependence for irrigation on water from snow in the mountains a bit sooner. (The Central Valley receives nowhere near enough rainfall for agriculture without irrigation.)
    Fights over water are a longstanding feature of California politics. Agriculture has enough to support current operations pretty well locked in. These days most of the fights are between those concerned with the ecology on one side and those who want lush greenery suitable for the East Coast in the desert that is Southern California — for an ever increasing number of people. Classic inadequate resource fight.
    But agriculture, while it would like more (especially with increased focus on high water demand crops; the damn fools!), will be OK for the foreseeable future as is.

  263. Fights over water are a longstanding feature of California politics.
    All over the American West, and interstate as well as intrastate. Colorado (sometimes called “Mother of Rivers”) is part of nine interstate river compacts. It is a rare time when we are not involved in a lawsuit over one of them.
    We are currently in a lawsuit with Texas and New Mexico over the Rio Grande that could drastically change western water law. Texas has asked the Supreme Court to rule that withdrawals from underground aquifers that are hydrologically linked to surface rivers count as withdrawals from the river. While the engineering answer is obviously yes (with a complicated multiplier), the historical legal answer has been no.

  264. Fights over water are a longstanding feature of California politics.
    All over the American West, and interstate as well as intrastate. Colorado (sometimes called “Mother of Rivers”) is part of nine interstate river compacts. It is a rare time when we are not involved in a lawsuit over one of them.
    We are currently in a lawsuit with Texas and New Mexico over the Rio Grande that could drastically change western water law. Texas has asked the Supreme Court to rule that withdrawals from underground aquifers that are hydrologically linked to surface rivers count as withdrawals from the river. While the engineering answer is obviously yes (with a complicated multiplier), the historical legal answer has been no.

  265. The cost is substantially more, and growing faster, precisely because it is being routed thru those “population centers” in the central valley.
    I mean, it’s sort of a question of building it where the people are, or building it where it’s easy.
    Cheap(er) and easy is often picked for transit projects (e.g., elevated alignments along freeways instead of tunneled to where people actually live and work), but AFAICT it’s invariably a mistake. It’s never actually *that* much cheaper, and you lose out on substantial ridership, synergistic connections to other transit, land development patterns, etc.
    I suspect having the big central valley towns directly on the tracks is a big win in the long run, cost overruns notwithstanding.
    At the very least, you have to admit there are trade offs to be weighed, and valid arguments for going the other way.
    To my mind, the plan is to build up a substantial sunk cost in the Central Valley first. And then use that to leverage additional funding, lots of additional funding, to get the necessary land in Southern California.
    That hardly seems charitable.
    I’m not sure makes any sense either. Surely if one expects funding to run out partway through, the best bet would be to build the shortest, busiest link you possibly could, then point to the success there to lobby for more.
    But it would be a little insane to start a project like this expecting to fail halfway.
    On the other hand, if you are expecting to finish, then there’s a lot of logic to starting where they have – like building institutional experience.
    I doubt this is a serialized process, either. The visible work might be where they’re actually breaking ground, but there are presumably other teams using the time to get a head start on more difficult aspects, e.g., planning that mountain tunneling, or mapping out detailed proposals for alignments in LA and San Jose (now armed with extra knowledge of potential real-world pitfalls in the eminent domain process).
    TLDR: I get that you’d *rather* they had started with LA to SD or something, but as with the Central Valley routing, there are, at minimum, perfectly valid looking arguments for making decisions in the other direction too. I’ll admit I’m no expert, but I’m not convinced yet that not going with your preferences portends disaster.

  266. The cost is substantially more, and growing faster, precisely because it is being routed thru those “population centers” in the central valley.
    I mean, it’s sort of a question of building it where the people are, or building it where it’s easy.
    Cheap(er) and easy is often picked for transit projects (e.g., elevated alignments along freeways instead of tunneled to where people actually live and work), but AFAICT it’s invariably a mistake. It’s never actually *that* much cheaper, and you lose out on substantial ridership, synergistic connections to other transit, land development patterns, etc.
    I suspect having the big central valley towns directly on the tracks is a big win in the long run, cost overruns notwithstanding.
    At the very least, you have to admit there are trade offs to be weighed, and valid arguments for going the other way.
    To my mind, the plan is to build up a substantial sunk cost in the Central Valley first. And then use that to leverage additional funding, lots of additional funding, to get the necessary land in Southern California.
    That hardly seems charitable.
    I’m not sure makes any sense either. Surely if one expects funding to run out partway through, the best bet would be to build the shortest, busiest link you possibly could, then point to the success there to lobby for more.
    But it would be a little insane to start a project like this expecting to fail halfway.
    On the other hand, if you are expecting to finish, then there’s a lot of logic to starting where they have – like building institutional experience.
    I doubt this is a serialized process, either. The visible work might be where they’re actually breaking ground, but there are presumably other teams using the time to get a head start on more difficult aspects, e.g., planning that mountain tunneling, or mapping out detailed proposals for alignments in LA and San Jose (now armed with extra knowledge of potential real-world pitfalls in the eminent domain process).
    TLDR: I get that you’d *rather* they had started with LA to SD or something, but as with the Central Valley routing, there are, at minimum, perfectly valid looking arguments for making decisions in the other direction too. I’ll admit I’m no expert, but I’m not convinced yet that not going with your preferences portends disaster.

  267. As an example, the TGV trains in France go to major city stations, but some TGV stations are located outside of cities (historic concerns?) and a spur line from city center that has runs that are timed to match the TGV schedule.
    If you *really* want your HSR to be *F*A*S*T*, I think you have to go with elevated track, and only connect to major cities so that you don’t have to slow down very often. So farmers in the Central Valley would only have to put up with the occasional footprint from a pylon, not a grade-level track.
    Shinkansen are awesome too.

  268. As an example, the TGV trains in France go to major city stations, but some TGV stations are located outside of cities (historic concerns?) and a spur line from city center that has runs that are timed to match the TGV schedule.
    If you *really* want your HSR to be *F*A*S*T*, I think you have to go with elevated track, and only connect to major cities so that you don’t have to slow down very often. So farmers in the Central Valley would only have to put up with the occasional footprint from a pylon, not a grade-level track.
    Shinkansen are awesome too.

  269. If you *really* want your HSR to be *F*A*S*T*…
    The Colorado Dept of Transportation has actually allocated a half-million dollars to do basic nuts-and-bolts route planning for a hyperloop with one of those companies. The tube would run on existing right of way, or land that can be acquired cheaply. Existing ROW is particularly important if they run a link up through the mountains. I’ve got no idea if they can make it work or not.

  270. If you *really* want your HSR to be *F*A*S*T*…
    The Colorado Dept of Transportation has actually allocated a half-million dollars to do basic nuts-and-bolts route planning for a hyperloop with one of those companies. The tube would run on existing right of way, or land that can be acquired cheaply. Existing ROW is particularly important if they run a link up through the mountains. I’ve got no idea if they can make it work or not.

  271. I suspect having the big central valley towns directly on the tracks is a big win in the long run, cost overruns notwithstanding.
    A simple rule of thumb for whether it’s worthwhile to run a high speed rail line to a city: how many flights a day currently connect it to other cities on the line? If the total is less than six or eight, the demand just isn’t there.
    Mass transit is a totally different animal. For that, you can put the lines in first and the housing for commuters will follow. But for HSR, if the demand isn’t already in evidence you are just looking at a white elephant. And that’s what stations in Fresno and Bakersfield, let alone the smaller towns, are going to be.

  272. I suspect having the big central valley towns directly on the tracks is a big win in the long run, cost overruns notwithstanding.
    A simple rule of thumb for whether it’s worthwhile to run a high speed rail line to a city: how many flights a day currently connect it to other cities on the line? If the total is less than six or eight, the demand just isn’t there.
    Mass transit is a totally different animal. For that, you can put the lines in first and the housing for commuters will follow. But for HSR, if the demand isn’t already in evidence you are just looking at a white elephant. And that’s what stations in Fresno and Bakersfield, let alone the smaller towns, are going to be.

  277. Since this is an open thread:
    I’ve just been reading in the NYT about a Japanese craftsman who specialises in indigo dying, and that reminded me of a documentary I saw years ago about Oliver Sacks, who talked about his ecstatic experience of having seen a true indigo while tripping, and his subsequent lifelong (unsuccessful) search to see it again. I was enchanted by this story (it was easy to be enchanted by Oliver Sacks), and started a poem called The Lost Indigo of Oliver Sacks, which never got finished (it barely got started, to be honest, I just loved the title), but after seeing today’s NYT piece I was inspired to search for a reference to this story online, and I found this for anyone else who might be interested:
    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2015/09/03/the-first-time-oliver-sacks-saw-heaven-1964/

  278. Since this is an open thread:
    I’ve just been reading in the NYT about a Japanese craftsman who specialises in indigo dying, and that reminded me of a documentary I saw years ago about Oliver Sacks, who talked about his ecstatic experience of having seen a true indigo while tripping, and his subsequent lifelong (unsuccessful) search to see it again. I was enchanted by this story (it was easy to be enchanted by Oliver Sacks), and started a poem called The Lost Indigo of Oliver Sacks, which never got finished (it barely got started, to be honest, I just loved the title), but after seeing today’s NYT piece I was inspired to search for a reference to this story online, and I found this for anyone else who might be interested:
    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2015/09/03/the-first-time-oliver-sacks-saw-heaven-1964/

  279. A simple rule of thumb for whether it’s worthwhile to run a high speed rail line to a city: how many flights a day currently connect it to other cities on the line? If the total is less than six or eight, the demand just isn’t there.
    1. Fresno has 6 arrivals and 5 departures today to LA alone, plus a few more to SF, and a couple to San Diego. Dunno how big or full they are, but that ain’t nothing. Other cities like Bakersfield have fewer, but they’re on the way anyway. (Several would have been easily connected even with an I5 alignment.)
    2. I have no idea where you’re getting this “rule of thumb” from. Citations?
    Certainly building a purpose built line out to tiny cities — like the TGV to Le Mans and Tours — seems a little questionable, but the Central Valley is hardly in the same basket. Bakersfield alone has more people than Le Mans and Tours combined.
    There’s surely also an important difference between the threshold one might use for justifying a terminal destination, and for simply building a station at a city that happens to be more or less along the way you were going anyway.
    3. The contention that HSR isn’t mass transit, and doesn’t affect development seems questionable. Rail service in general it certainly capable of rather strong effects on development. Japan being a particularly powerful example of that (thanks partly to some idiosyncratic circumstances, but still).
    I suppose it’s true that the evidence for dramatic economic changes from the addition of HSR service is rather weak, but a lot of that evidence comes from places like Japan or Europe, where previously existing “normal” rail service was already well developed. HSR there is just a thin layer on top.
    Considering the neglected state of US rail, however, CHSR might be more akin to getting proper *rail* service for the first time, rail that just happens to be high speed. It’s hard to say how that will go, but I’m not sure there are any good contemporary parallels with which to form case studies.

  280. A simple rule of thumb for whether it’s worthwhile to run a high speed rail line to a city: how many flights a day currently connect it to other cities on the line? If the total is less than six or eight, the demand just isn’t there.
    1. Fresno has 6 arrivals and 5 departures today to LA alone, plus a few more to SF, and a couple to San Diego. Dunno how big or full they are, but that ain’t nothing. Other cities like Bakersfield have fewer, but they’re on the way anyway. (Several would have been easily connected even with an I5 alignment.)
    2. I have no idea where you’re getting this “rule of thumb” from. Citations?
    Certainly building a purpose built line out to tiny cities — like the TGV to Le Mans and Tours — seems a little questionable, but the Central Valley is hardly in the same basket. Bakersfield alone has more people than Le Mans and Tours combined.
    There’s surely also an important difference between the threshold one might use for justifying a terminal destination, and for simply building a station at a city that happens to be more or less along the way you were going anyway.
    3. The contention that HSR isn’t mass transit, and doesn’t affect development seems questionable. Rail service in general it certainly capable of rather strong effects on development. Japan being a particularly powerful example of that (thanks partly to some idiosyncratic circumstances, but still).
    I suppose it’s true that the evidence for dramatic economic changes from the addition of HSR service is rather weak, but a lot of that evidence comes from places like Japan or Europe, where previously existing “normal” rail service was already well developed. HSR there is just a thin layer on top.
    Considering the neglected state of US rail, however, CHSR might be more akin to getting proper *rail* service for the first time, rail that just happens to be high speed. It’s hard to say how that will go, but I’m not sure there are any good contemporary parallels with which to form case studies.

  281. Shouldnt we differentiate between rail service and hsr though?
    It seems to me that her is designed for a different purpose, ie replacing airplane travel, than multistop rail service.
    At least I would be curious if we were or weren’t mixing goals.

  282. Shouldnt we differentiate between rail service and hsr though?
    It seems to me that her is designed for a different purpose, ie replacing airplane travel, than multistop rail service.
    At least I would be curious if we were or weren’t mixing goals.

  283. Shouldnt we differentiate between rail service and hsr though?
    Sure. And I’m not saying that CA couldn’t use good non-high-speed regional commuter-y train service alternatives too, or couldn’t have used them all along.
    But the fact is they don’t really have those. Nor to my knowledge will any arrive before HSR does. So my point is that the impact of HSR has to be evaluated in light of it being effectively the first decent rail service — of any kind — to many areas.
    It seems to me that her is designed for a different purpose, ie replacing airplane travel, than multistop rail service.
    I don’t know that HSR is necessarily “designed” to replace air travel. It obviously *can* and should, for trips where the ticket prices and travel times are in the right range.
    But by the same token, it can and should compete with other stuff — like medium to long dist. auto trips.
    And there’s nothing wrong with serving in a commuting role, if and where the economics happen to allow.

  284. Shouldnt we differentiate between rail service and hsr though?
    Sure. And I’m not saying that CA couldn’t use good non-high-speed regional commuter-y train service alternatives too, or couldn’t have used them all along.
    But the fact is they don’t really have those. Nor to my knowledge will any arrive before HSR does. So my point is that the impact of HSR has to be evaluated in light of it being effectively the first decent rail service — of any kind — to many areas.
    It seems to me that her is designed for a different purpose, ie replacing airplane travel, than multistop rail service.
    I don’t know that HSR is necessarily “designed” to replace air travel. It obviously *can* and should, for trips where the ticket prices and travel times are in the right range.
    But by the same token, it can and should compete with other stuff — like medium to long dist. auto trips.
    And there’s nothing wrong with serving in a commuting role, if and where the economics happen to allow.

  285. I’m pretty sure that I’ve seen indigo multiple times. It’s in a fairly narrow band around 400nm. Get to 380nm and you’ve got invisible UV, 390nm is kinda borderline visible, 420nm and you’re in blue.
    No tripping required.

  286. I’m pretty sure that I’ve seen indigo multiple times. It’s in a fairly narrow band around 400nm. Get to 380nm and you’ve got invisible UV, 390nm is kinda borderline visible, 420nm and you’re in blue.
    No tripping required.

  287. The BBC link Posted by: Nigel | November 26, 2018 at 11:57 PM produces a mixed bag of reactions, all of which could be described collectively as a form of confusion. The more I learn about our modern world, the less I feel I understand it.
    I have this temptation to post the link on facebook for all my conspiracy-theorizing, Trump-supporting friends to read. But they probably wouldn’t read it. Or, if they did, they would deem it – with no sense of irony – fake news.
    I don’t know what sort of evidence you can produce to convince someone that they’ve been duped that won’t simply convince them that you’re trying to dupe them.

  288. The BBC link Posted by: Nigel | November 26, 2018 at 11:57 PM produces a mixed bag of reactions, all of which could be described collectively as a form of confusion. The more I learn about our modern world, the less I feel I understand it.
    I have this temptation to post the link on facebook for all my conspiracy-theorizing, Trump-supporting friends to read. But they probably wouldn’t read it. Or, if they did, they would deem it – with no sense of irony – fake news.
    I don’t know what sort of evidence you can produce to convince someone that they’ve been duped that won’t simply convince them that you’re trying to dupe them.

  289. they believe what they wanna believe. and they don’t want to live with no refugees. [don’t want to live with no refugees]

  290. they believe what they wanna believe. and they don’t want to live with no refugees. [don’t want to live with no refugees]

  291. One interesting feature of that Mueller filing is that it promises a Sentencing Submission. And a possibly key feature of a sentencing submission is that, unlike either a new indictment or the final report, it doesn’t go thru the Attorney General. That is, Mueller can, if so inclined, make a whole lot of information public. And Whittaker (even if he has taken over oversight) can’t preemptively shut it up.

  292. One interesting feature of that Mueller filing is that it promises a Sentencing Submission. And a possibly key feature of a sentencing submission is that, unlike either a new indictment or the final report, it doesn’t go thru the Attorney General. That is, Mueller can, if so inclined, make a whole lot of information public. And Whittaker (even if he has taken over oversight) can’t preemptively shut it up.

  293. I have no idea where you’re getting this “rule of thumb”[on the number of flights to warrant hsr] from. Citations?
    Actually, I came up with it myself (should have been clearer on that). Looking at it as an estimate for how many potential passengers there would be for hsr from a particular location.
    So my point is that the impact of HSR has to be evaluated in light of it being effectively the first decent rail service — of any kind — to many areas.
    Yes and no. Granted, there hasn’t been passenger rail in a lot of places for decades. But in many of those, there was once. It ended due to lack of use/demand. Sometimes the tracks are still there, and used for freight. Other places, even that demand wasn’t enough to maintain the right-of-way.**
    ** Growing up, there was a rail line — a leftover from when this area was all orchards rather than subdivisions. We saw one train per year thru town. That being the minimum required to keep the right-of-way. When that stopped, the railroad lost it. It’s a hiking trail these days.

  294. I have no idea where you’re getting this “rule of thumb”[on the number of flights to warrant hsr] from. Citations?
    Actually, I came up with it myself (should have been clearer on that). Looking at it as an estimate for how many potential passengers there would be for hsr from a particular location.
    So my point is that the impact of HSR has to be evaluated in light of it being effectively the first decent rail service — of any kind — to many areas.
    Yes and no. Granted, there hasn’t been passenger rail in a lot of places for decades. But in many of those, there was once. It ended due to lack of use/demand. Sometimes the tracks are still there, and used for freight. Other places, even that demand wasn’t enough to maintain the right-of-way.**
    ** Growing up, there was a rail line — a leftover from when this area was all orchards rather than subdivisions. We saw one train per year thru town. That being the minimum required to keep the right-of-way. When that stopped, the railroad lost it. It’s a hiking trail these days.

  295. Granted, there hasn’t been passenger rail in a lot of places for decades. But in many of those, there was once. It ended due to lack of use/demand.
    The same situation exists where I live. They are now planning on putting a line back in place mostly along the same right-of-way where there was once was a passenger line 50 or so years ago. But there has been some amount of growth since passenger rail went away. I’d guess, being on the East Coast and running through mostly very old towns, the growth has been a fraction of what it’s been in California. I could be wrong about that, of course.

  296. Granted, there hasn’t been passenger rail in a lot of places for decades. But in many of those, there was once. It ended due to lack of use/demand.
    The same situation exists where I live. They are now planning on putting a line back in place mostly along the same right-of-way where there was once was a passenger line 50 or so years ago. But there has been some amount of growth since passenger rail went away. I’d guess, being on the East Coast and running through mostly very old towns, the growth has been a fraction of what it’s been in California. I could be wrong about that, of course.

  297. produces a mixed bag of reactions, all of which could be described collectively as a form of confusion..
    Mine was along the lines of WTAF….
    Needs to be read along with the WaPo article.

  298. produces a mixed bag of reactions, all of which could be described collectively as a form of confusion..
    Mine was along the lines of WTAF….
    Needs to be read along with the WaPo article.

  299. Needs to be read along with the WaPo article.
    Just finished that one. It definitely gives a different impression of Christopher Blair from the outset. I guess from my standpoint a more sympathetic impression, or at least a more understandable one.
    But the woman in Nevada. The mind boggles. I wonder what she would think after reading about herself in that article. Would it even register?

  300. Needs to be read along with the WaPo article.
    Just finished that one. It definitely gives a different impression of Christopher Blair from the outset. I guess from my standpoint a more sympathetic impression, or at least a more understandable one.
    But the woman in Nevada. The mind boggles. I wonder what she would think after reading about herself in that article. Would it even register?

  301. But have you considered that those article might really be fakes for the sake of duping us liberals? Maybe I’m just like the phony depiction of that lady in Nevada!

  302. But have you considered that those article might really be fakes for the sake of duping us liberals? Maybe I’m just like the phony depiction of that lady in Nevada!

  303. Yes and no. Granted, there hasn’t been passenger rail in a lot of places for decades. But in many of those, there was once. It ended due to lack of use/demand.
    Well, sure. But to extent that’s true, note that most of those defunct earlier railroads shut down (or stopped offering passenger service) in the middle third of the last century or so. That’s sixty to ninety years ago at this point.
    Whatever the cause *then* — demand or otherwise — circumstances have changed a great deal since. Instead of mid-century automobile utopia dreams, we’ve got congestion, smog, and global warming. The policy picture has certainly changed. It’s more than possible the demand picture has as well.
    It wasn’t necessarily just demand back then, either, or not exogenously so. Decline of demand might be caused in turn by policy decisions, or a lack of investment and service upgrades — I did say “decent” service, and a line built in 1892 with once a day service doesn’t quite fit the bill. There were also exogenous shocks from regulatory side effects, financial misadventures of various sorts*, and, occasionally, outright crookery.
    Suffice to say, the decline of rail and public transportation in the US, and the decision to go all in on automobiles, is a much more complicated story than just “lack of use”.
    —-
    * There was an awful lot of that with railroads over the years. Including with private streetcar and subway systems in the early part of the last century.
    And while the proximate cause might have been insufficient receipts to cover outlays, it often wasn’t a demand problem exactly, not any more than, say, the present-day Toys R Us bankruptcy is a demand problem. In the latter case, it’s not that people stopped buying toys, it’s that the company couldn’t possibly sell enough of them cheaply enough to both compete with Amazon AND keep up with the private equity debt they’d been saddled with.

  304. Yes and no. Granted, there hasn’t been passenger rail in a lot of places for decades. But in many of those, there was once. It ended due to lack of use/demand.
    Well, sure. But to extent that’s true, note that most of those defunct earlier railroads shut down (or stopped offering passenger service) in the middle third of the last century or so. That’s sixty to ninety years ago at this point.
    Whatever the cause *then* — demand or otherwise — circumstances have changed a great deal since. Instead of mid-century automobile utopia dreams, we’ve got congestion, smog, and global warming. The policy picture has certainly changed. It’s more than possible the demand picture has as well.
    It wasn’t necessarily just demand back then, either, or not exogenously so. Decline of demand might be caused in turn by policy decisions, or a lack of investment and service upgrades — I did say “decent” service, and a line built in 1892 with once a day service doesn’t quite fit the bill. There were also exogenous shocks from regulatory side effects, financial misadventures of various sorts*, and, occasionally, outright crookery.
    Suffice to say, the decline of rail and public transportation in the US, and the decision to go all in on automobiles, is a much more complicated story than just “lack of use”.
    —-
    * There was an awful lot of that with railroads over the years. Including with private streetcar and subway systems in the early part of the last century.
    And while the proximate cause might have been insufficient receipts to cover outlays, it often wasn’t a demand problem exactly, not any more than, say, the present-day Toys R Us bankruptcy is a demand problem. In the latter case, it’s not that people stopped buying toys, it’s that the company couldn’t possibly sell enough of them cheaply enough to both compete with Amazon AND keep up with the private equity debt they’d been saddled with.

  305. There was an awful lot of that with railroads over the years. Including with private streetcar and subway systems in the early part of the last century.
    Not to mention cases, as in the cities around here, where the private street car company got bought out by GM. And then closed down, the better to sell more cars. Ah, private enterprise in action.

  306. There was an awful lot of that with railroads over the years. Including with private streetcar and subway systems in the early part of the last century.
    Not to mention cases, as in the cities around here, where the private street car company got bought out by GM. And then closed down, the better to sell more cars. Ah, private enterprise in action.

  307. Not to mention cases, as in the cities around here, where the private street car company got bought out by GM. And then closed down, the better to sell more cars.
    Or, many cases, replaced by GM buses which were cheaper and more flexible.

  308. Not to mention cases, as in the cities around here, where the private street car company got bought out by GM. And then closed down, the better to sell more cars.
    Or, many cases, replaced by GM buses which were cheaper and more flexible.

  309. Or, many cases, replaced by GM buses which were cheaper and more flexible.
    “Cheaper and more flexible” being code words for “we’re cheap bastards and we’re not actually committing to any infrastructure”, therefore “don’t bother to invest in any property development along a route because it could change or disappear at any time.”
    Permanency has its benefits.

  310. Or, many cases, replaced by GM buses which were cheaper and more flexible.
    “Cheaper and more flexible” being code words for “we’re cheap bastards and we’re not actually committing to any infrastructure”, therefore “don’t bother to invest in any property development along a route because it could change or disappear at any time.”
    Permanency has its benefits.

Comments are closed.