|
Seth D. Michaels@sethdmichaels.bsky.social |
1514 followers 911 following 4230 posts
Bert of the Intellect, Ernie of the Will
he/him, DC based, comms at @ucsusa.bsky.social, ambivalently Online, still People Magazine's Seth D-est Man Alive. please don't argue in my notifications
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I’m ambivalent and trepidatious about a switch and agree generally with your point but: a possession where you don’t score is much worse when your team is behind than when your team is ahead. Status quo ante doesn’t mean much when it’s the result of a missed opportunity to change things.
1 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
Micah
@rincewind.run
[ View ] |
this is one of my least favorite tropes and it is especially ridiculous when the heroes have just shot their way through an army of mooks to get to the villain oh, you can kill 475 henchmen but the guy who is actually responsible for ordering them around is a step too far? do you hear yourself?
26 replies 74 reposts 355 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I think about this every time I get to the “we’re not so different you and I” villain speech in a movie.
2 replies 0 reposts 11 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
couldn’t be me, well into my 10th year of fully acknowledging I don’t know shit
0 replies 0 reposts 10 likes
|
whet moser
@whet.bsky.social
[ View ] |
kind of amazed at how confident people are at predicting which candidates and what political moves will win after the past decade. humans are resilient
4 replies 15 reposts 122 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
every goggle-eyed God-and-Man-at-Yale-pilled evangelical apparatchik on the federal bench is going to have a free hand to say “mmmm no, the law is too ambiguous, because Loper” about any of their hobbyhorses
1 replies 1 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
she was both in the White House during the Benghazi attack and in the embassy, unlocking doors
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
Ed
@notdred.bsky.social
[ View ] |
One of the biggest frustrations with the ongoing “Biden’s too old” story is that there are so many damn things to hit Trump on and none of them can get any oxygen
5 replies 6 reposts 47 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Just picturing him (talking like Politician with a Secret from an episode of a mid-tier police procedural) standing in between Gretchen Whitmer (talking like the funniest person at your neighborhood barbecue) and Wes Moore (talking like the coolest coach on campus)
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
he rubs me the wrong way so much that I don’t understand who he’s for. All smarm, zero have-a-beer-with, not progressive enough to lead the biggest blue state, yet too easily caricatured as a slick CA liberal. I genuinely don’t know if he’s a national liability or if he’s just eating crackers for me
4 replies 0 reposts 26 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
this is perhaps my hottest take
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
this, and: if we take as a given that mainstream national Dems aren’t proving themselves up to the challenge of beating him (which I’m inclined to agree with), that’s an argument for engaging *more*, not less
1 replies 0 reposts 8 likes
|
Chris Ingraham
@cingraham.bsky.social
[ View ] |
"Politics would be interesting again" is such a telling phrase, a sign that you're so insulated by money and power that it's all just entertainment for you.
3 replies 15 reposts 69 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“Lincoln survives and Johnson doesn’t” is really the best case scenario, as the latter assassination gives the rest of the admin the casus belli they need to act as Johnson didn’t
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
supporting your local abortion fund is a good way to help people in immediate need, god bless my friends who routinely raise funds for them
0 replies 2 reposts 3 likes
|
Barred and Boujee aka Madiba Dennie
@audrelawdamercy.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Just unfollowed someone so fast on the other site after they shared a post talmbout people being selfish for 'fearmongering' about Project 2025 in order to get people to vote Republicans' stated intentions are scary, but providing accurate info about them is not fearmongering! It's just the stakes!
11 replies 45 reposts 296 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“gosh it’s weird how 15 new coal-powered electricity generation businesses opened in Amarillo this summer”
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Mitch McConnell saying “hmmm I disapprove of his ‘military tribunal for me’ position but I approve of his ‘military tribunal for Chuck Schumer’ position”
0 replies 1 reposts 4 likes
|
Twitter's Bobby Big Wheel
@kleinman.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Orange Man Bad explains far more than many comparative politics PhDs care to admit
7 replies 66 reposts 351 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
there’s the substance here (bad) but also the method (also bad), which makes it easier for lawsuits to pre-emptively derail policies
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
members of this court are rewriting laws, ignoring the plain text of the constitution, defying their own ethics standards, overstepping their limited constitutional role and operating corruptly in ways that undermine the Republic. Long past time to get creative about it.
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“Supreme Court justices can rule on national cases for 20 years and then cycle out to senior status at lower courts” is totally within Congress’ power to establish by statute. (Alito disagrees? Oh, too bad, he’s on senior status and doesn’t get a say)
1 replies 1 reposts 3 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
as long as there’s one Supreme Court with a specific set of issues under its remand, and judges serve for life “during good behavior,” Congress can build the rest of the judiciary how they see fit. constitutioncenter.org/the-constitu...
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Article III is worth reading just to clarify how limited it is. Outside of a limited set of cases, Congress can create rules and exceptions around what the judiciary can rule on. Congress explicitly gets to set the structure of the courts. Judicial review of laws isn’t really in there.
2 replies 5 reposts 25 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
if the *most* compelling reason you can think of to engage in politics is that somebody might throw a parade that annoys you, maybe politics isn’t the hobby for you
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
and I’m sure I’m seeing it from the perspective of someone a little more ambivalent/trepidatious about the prospect of a switch and on the less Biden-hostile end of the set of people I follow, so the certainty of “he’s cooked, what now” sticks out a little more to me!
1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I’m not a lawyer, but “Missouri’s right to have a specific candidate run a campaign outweighs New York’s right to enforce its own state anti-fraud laws” feels…stupid in a deep and novel way
1 replies 2 reposts 7 likes
|
Zander🚈🔰
@kohiwonomu.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Transit funding = antifascist praxis
2 replies 90 reposts 298 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I…have not had this experience, I have seen deep conflict and disagreement, mostly leaning reluctantly towards “he’s gotta go,” I think it’s possible your (reasonable) dislike of the position of status quo certainty is making it stand out more more
1 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
you could imagine, during oral arguments, a minimalist and middle-path set of rulings that follow the old image of Roberts as a modest incrementalist, dotted with minor concurrences and partial dissents from both ends. That option existed but Roberts in particular did not take it.
1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
two years old, but really embarrassing to read in retrospect as Roberts has continually joined the radicals in reshaping the republic
1 replies 0 reposts 6 likes
|
Kendra "Gloom is My Beat" Pierre-Louis
@kendrawrites.bsky.social
[ View ] |
IDK kind of feels like we should be paying more attention to a prominent conservative think tank saying we're in the midst of a second american revolution that will remain bloodless as long as long as the left lets it be, then whether or not Biden should step down.
11 replies 151 reposts 478 likes
|
Nicholas Wallace
@wallace.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Loper-Bright already doing damage
1 replies 3 reposts 8 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
100%. they're trying to Dem-win-proof the Project 2025 agenda; "if you don't elect our friends to the presidency to destroy the administrative state we'll do it anyway"
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
sure, and it's good that the constitution and the understanding of it have changed over time. just saying that the actual drafters of the Constitution, whose takes SCOTUS pretends to respect, had the opposite view of immunity
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
different lawyers argued different things in different venues; during impeachment they argued that impeachment was unnecessary because the normal criminal justice process was sufficient. and Hamilton's language here doesn't actually specify that you need impeachment as a prerequisite for prosecution
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
|
Joel Mathis
@joelmathis.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I've been thinking about this post from the Claremont Institute, a Trumpist think tank, ever since the SCOTUS immunity ruling. Wonder what "unpleasant things" the Trumpists have in mind. open.substack.com/pub/joelmmat...
29 replies 95 reposts 299 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
very true. it's the shrieking bathroom monitors and just-asking-questions fretters and "normal people hate this, definitely not me, i'm just worried for other people" are-we-going-too-far pundits who have put a target on trans people and put their existence and safety on the ballot
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
|
Jamison Foser
@jamisonfoser.bsky.social
[ View ] |
John Roberts pretends not to know what Donald Trump will do with the immunity Roberts just gave him just like John Roberts pretended not to know what Republicans would do when John Roberts gutted the Voting Rights Act.
10 replies 55 reposts 263 likes
|
Kevin M. Kruse
@kevinmkruse.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Luckily, when we hear the excuse "we were just following orders" there's nothing horrific that comes to mind.
6 replies 52 reposts 355 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I’m not usually an I Hate It Here guy but
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law.” couldn’t be clearer!
5 replies 41 reposts 169 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
if only Federalist 69 were just, in its entirely, Hamilton saying super clearly “sure, this constitution has one executive leader, but I can’t stress enough that it’s different from a king because a President is accountable, including to criminal law” avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century...
0 replies 17 reposts 61 likes
|
b-boy bouiebaisse
@jbouie.bsky.social
[ View ] |
sam alito salivating at the chance to make this life for americans
17 replies 217 reposts 1108 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
there are lots of good summary materials, like this one looking specifically at climate implications: blog.ucsusa.org/rachel-cleet... they talk, for instance, about the importance of completely discontinuing “alarmist” climate research
2 replies 8 reposts 13 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“ceaseless partisan prosecutions” is one thing this ruling specifically allows! It explicitly says telling the DOJ what to prosecute and who to target is untouchable presidential power!
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
there are lots of good summary materials, like this one looking specifically at climate implications: blog.ucsusa.org/rachel-cleet... they talk, for instance, about the importance of completely discontinuing “alarmist” climate research
2 replies 8 reposts 13 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
the overall risk is that actual communication gets drowned out by language-esque word slurry, not because it’s “as good” as human communication but because it’s cheaper and easier to generate and “close enough” if you don’t care about the accuracy and quality of communication at all
0 replies 1 reposts 6 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
this is fucking wild, like standing in a burning building and yelling your head off about maybe seeing kids play with matches down the street
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
|
|
Seth D. Michaels
@sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ] |
“we all know Joe Biden was elected president in 2020 with 81 million votes and 306 electoral votes. What our case presupposes is, what if that was actually bad and wrong?”
0 replies 0 reposts 2 likes