Ban Cars
@carabolitionist.bsky.social
Also a suburbs abolitionist. Land use lawyer. Brooklyn expat to San Francisco. Legalize it (housing). he/him
“Get lucky” essentially *has* to be part of the strategy because “invest in party infrastructure that works to change people’s minds slowly over time” really depends on candidate quality and it’s just not that easy to recruit candidates who are a) good, and b) willing to keep losing indefinitely.
November 16, 2025 at 1:56 AM
“Get lucky” essentially *has* to be part of the strategy because “invest in party infrastructure that works to change people’s minds slowly over time” really depends on candidate quality and it’s just not that easy to recruit candidates who are a) good, and b) willing to keep losing indefinitely.
This is good with the caveat that in MTG’s case and more broadly with the groyper stuff, I can see the Epstein stuff being one of several catalysts for the thing fracturing the current MAGA coalition to be The Jewish Question, which is uhhh not great.
November 16, 2025 at 12:00 AM
This is good with the caveat that in MTG’s case and more broadly with the groyper stuff, I can see the Epstein stuff being one of several catalysts for the thing fracturing the current MAGA coalition to be The Jewish Question, which is uhhh not great.
I honestly think that’s consistent with my theory. That’s what he cares about right now because he thinks about legacy (to the extent he does at all) in terms of physical buildings, as a Real Estate Guy.
November 15, 2025 at 6:22 AM
I honestly think that’s consistent with my theory. That’s what he cares about right now because he thinks about legacy (to the extent he does at all) in terms of physical buildings, as a Real Estate Guy.
The ballroom thing has made me really start huffing this particular form of hopium. Why does he need the ballroom so fast if he’s not dying?
November 15, 2025 at 6:07 AM
The ballroom thing has made me really start huffing this particular form of hopium. Why does he need the ballroom so fast if he’s not dying?
My first question upon seeing this was “did the court include a picture of the dog in the opinion?” and I was not disappointed.
November 14, 2025 at 7:24 PM
My first question upon seeing this was “did the court include a picture of the dog in the opinion?” and I was not disappointed.
To your point about the “supporting filibuster reform”/“understanding the gravity of the threat from the right” axis, though, I still wonder how much norm/collegiality-destroying arm twisting Kaine et al would willing to stomach in 2029 to get there for the sake of democracy reform/accountability
November 13, 2025 at 9:01 PM
To your point about the “supporting filibuster reform”/“understanding the gravity of the threat from the right” axis, though, I still wonder how much norm/collegiality-destroying arm twisting Kaine et al would willing to stomach in 2029 to get there for the sake of democracy reform/accountability
I think that that makes some sense re Kaine specifically. I think my point about other potential holdouts stands (and that we’re in agreement on that). FWIW I remember the CW in 2021 was that there were definitely some Ds who were happy that Manchin/Sinema were being such public fall people.
November 13, 2025 at 8:58 PM
I think that that makes some sense re Kaine specifically. I think my point about other potential holdouts stands (and that we’re in agreement on that). FWIW I remember the CW in 2021 was that there were definitely some Ds who were happy that Manchin/Sinema were being such public fall people.
So your theory is because he wasn’t up until 2024 and was unlikely to be primaried, the only reason he would have publicly favored filibuster reform in 2021 is if he genuinely wanted it and was trying to pressure Manchin? Maybe he just didn’t think about it too hard when the stakes were low, though.
November 13, 2025 at 8:46 PM
So your theory is because he wasn’t up until 2024 and was unlikely to be primaried, the only reason he would have publicly favored filibuster reform in 2021 is if he genuinely wanted it and was trying to pressure Manchin? Maybe he just didn’t think about it too hard when the stakes were low, though.
I believed this *more* in 2021 than I do now. (And to your point about Kaine having less incentive to lie then, I think coming out in favor of nuking it helps him more in a primary with highly engaged Ds than it hurts him in a general with low propensity voters who care less about inside baseball.)
November 13, 2025 at 8:27 PM
I believed this *more* in 2021 than I do now. (And to your point about Kaine having less incentive to lie then, I think coming out in favor of nuking it helps him more in a primary with highly engaged Ds than it hurts him in a general with low propensity voters who care less about inside baseball.)
But do we actually believe this, and for which Ds do we believe it? It’s easy to take this position with Manchin/Sinema as fall people. If they’re all willing to vote trade to protect stupid Senate omertà, how can I believe we won’t end up with a couple convenient holdouts once Ds are the majority?
November 13, 2025 at 8:20 PM
But do we actually believe this, and for which Ds do we believe it? It’s easy to take this position with Manchin/Sinema as fall people. If they’re all willing to vote trade to protect stupid Senate omertà, how can I believe we won’t end up with a couple convenient holdouts once Ds are the majority?
One might call that the ultimate “wriggling out of this one.”
November 12, 2025 at 10:22 PM
One might call that the ultimate “wriggling out of this one.”
The only things the federal government is allowed to do are ballroom and pedophilia. It’s right in the constitution.
November 12, 2025 at 1:59 AM
The only things the federal government is allowed to do are ballroom and pedophilia. It’s right in the constitution.
Finally everyone will be forced to enjoy my favorite Depression Era sicko food (peanut butter and pickle sandwiches).
November 11, 2025 at 8:23 AM
Finally everyone will be forced to enjoy my favorite Depression Era sicko food (peanut butter and pickle sandwiches).
I mean I mostly don’t like the dynamic of “if you threaten to nuke the filibuster and actually enact your (unpopular) policies, we’ll step in to save it at all costs because it turns out we similarly don’t want to be forced to enact our (more popular) policies.”
November 10, 2025 at 5:19 PM
I mean I mostly don’t like the dynamic of “if you threaten to nuke the filibuster and actually enact your (unpopular) policies, we’ll step in to save it at all costs because it turns out we similarly don’t want to be forced to enact our (more popular) policies.”
And the reason to suspect it’s the latter and not give them the benefit of the doubt is because they keep Schumer around, whose entire promise to the caucus is famously “I will protect you from difficult votes where Reid didn’t.” Keeping the filibuster is the thing keeping that status quo in place.
November 10, 2025 at 6:34 AM
And the reason to suspect it’s the latter and not give them the benefit of the doubt is because they keep Schumer around, whose entire promise to the caucus is famously “I will protect you from difficult votes where Reid didn’t.” Keeping the filibuster is the thing keeping that status quo in place.
Exactly. It *might* be defensible (maybe) as “we successfully raised the salience of healthcare and now everyone will suffer GOP healthcare policy.” It’s another thing if Ds thought “the GOP might nuke the filibuster so we need to save it because we also don’t want to have to actually take votes.”
November 10, 2025 at 6:32 AM
Exactly. It *might* be defensible (maybe) as “we successfully raised the salience of healthcare and now everyone will suffer GOP healthcare policy.” It’s another thing if Ds thought “the GOP might nuke the filibuster so we need to save it because we also don’t want to have to actually take votes.”
To be fair, I strongly suspect that if the GOP doesn't end the filibuster this is probably where ending the filibuster is within the Dem caucus.
November 9, 2025 at 1:22 AM
To be fair, I strongly suspect that if the GOP doesn't end the filibuster this is probably where ending the filibuster is within the Dem caucus.
When I worked in local gov, my council went from being part time to full time 20 years ago but had never given themselves a raise during those years. They decided to *only* do a COL adjustment for those 20 years, but every headline was still like “politicians gift themselves 50% more of your money.”
November 7, 2025 at 3:50 PM
When I worked in local gov, my council went from being part time to full time 20 years ago but had never given themselves a raise during those years. They decided to *only* do a COL adjustment for those 20 years, but every headline was still like “politicians gift themselves 50% more of your money.”
However many ICE guys they manage to hire, by far the most consequential decisions they've made are variants of "destroy state capacity." Armed goons are necessary but they're not exactly sufficient for regime consolidation. And they know this, which is why they keep trying to just poast through it.
November 7, 2025 at 5:53 AM
However many ICE guys they manage to hire, by far the most consequential decisions they've made are variants of "destroy state capacity." Armed goons are necessary but they're not exactly sufficient for regime consolidation. And they know this, which is why they keep trying to just poast through it.
Price of Jefferies’ endorsement?
November 7, 2025 at 4:54 AM
Price of Jefferies’ endorsement?
*interviewer whipping out the calipers* “What did you think we meant by ‘Heritage?’”
November 7, 2025 at 1:31 AM
*interviewer whipping out the calipers* “What did you think we meant by ‘Heritage?’”