entertain ideas of great communion

I am Erin. I like politics and music and history and baking and sport and the internet. I also like to read, often about politics and music and history and baking and sport and the internet. My longform blog is here. I tweet here.
Recent Tweets @erinrileyau
Who I Follow
Posts tagged "US Politics"

I understand that “redefining where life begins” is a good headline, but to me, the real crazy starts about 80% of the way through the article, which tells of: 

The other two bills passed by the House include the state’s "wrongful birth, wrongful life" bill that prohibits lawsuits against doctors who do not provide information about a fetus’ health if that information could lead to an abortion. 

So doctors have impunity to willfully mislead patients if they think an abortion could result. 

I’m certain this will get struck down in court, but the fact that it’s politically possible for this bill to be passed, a bill that denies the rights of citizens to proper medical care, is just staggering. 

War on women indeed.

citizen-cam replied to your post: Why Paul Ryan won’t be the VP nominee. I think you’re right. I still think he’s a strong possibility for a presidential run later though. Maybe governor or senator first. Nicky Haley for VP then? Or Chris Christie?

I think there’s a chance he’ll run at some point in the future, but it’s so hard to tell what will happen before then and how electoral politics will change.  The fact is, the Ryan budget is a very, very ideological document, and if the electorate shifts even a little more to the left, it’s hard to see him ever being a viable candidate.

My money is on Rubio for the VP nomination- I wish Sportsbet had a market so that could be literal as well as metaphoric. I know he’s said he won’t do it, but everyone says that.  He’d be a good way of getting votes in Florida, he’s got base cred, and he would be a way of reaching out to Latino voters.  Plus, he’s got a strong conservative record on social issues, which might go some way to convincing the base that Romney’s going to be reliable on them, which is something of an issue for him.

Nikki Haley would, IMO, be a good choice- again, solidly conservative but might help with the gender gap, which the Republicans REALLY need to address if they’re going to win.  Not that nominating a woman necessarily means anything in terms of policy- Arizona, who has a female governor, just passed the most ridiculous anti-choice laws I’ve seen yet, including one that grants doctors impunity for deliberately misinforming patients about their pregnancies if they believe that information could lead to the parents choosing to have an abortion. But it might at least do something to undermine the idea that the Republican party is actually anti-woman. 

citizen-cam replied to your post: A telling email Do you think Ryan will be the VP nominee? I suspect not but I think he’s going to be a candidate in 2016 or 2020.

I do not, despite the fact I do think the Obama campaign is preempting a Ryan selection. And I think that for three reasons:

The first, as Jonathan always reminds me when I excitedly suggest that Ileana Ros-Lehtinen would make a great VP choice, picking someone from the House of Representatives isn’t good politics. House members represent districts with very specific demographics and needs, and so their record always contains things that could be poisonous to a political campaign. 

The second is that, despite its popularity among a certain group of conservatives, the Ryan budget is pretty far to the right. There are strong arguments to be made that it is not fiscally responsible, and it totally guts entitlement programs that are the issues senior voters- one of the groups who have the highest turnout on election day- care about. If the Republican party learnt anything from 2008, it would be don’t choose someone who is electric, but comes with potential liabilities. Safety would be smart.

Finally, with the gender gap problem I alluded to earlier, and pretty major disparities in voting patterns among various ethnic groups, I suspect picking a white, male protestant would not be the smartest move.  Not that they won’t do it- the Republican party is, after all, dominated by white male protestants- but I think it would hurt their capacity to reach out to the voters who aren’t voting for them at the moment.

It’s funny ‘cause it’s true.

It’s funny ‘cause it’s true.

Finally, in the winning candidate market, Romney is again good value.  If you take the odds of him getting the nomination ($1.30) and multiply by the odds of the Republicans getting the presidency ($1.91), you get $2.48, so $2.88 is good value by that alone.  Plus, in reality, there is probably a 98% chance that Romney and Obama will be the nominees and, then, I would not think that Obama’s chances of reelection are more than 50% higher than Romneys, which is what the market would suggest.

While I still tend to think Obama will win a second term, $2.88 is a pretty damn good price on Romney.

This one is interesting. Last Thursday, the Dems were paying $2.20 to Obama’s $1.91.  The Democrats have firmed to $1.80, while Obama himself is still paying $1.91.  This is the first time since I’ve been following this market that the generic Democrat is beating the generic Republican for the Presidency.

It’s interesting to consider whether this is because of factors regarding the state of the US, or the Republican primary.  Obviously, for such a plunge, there must have been a fair bit put on the Dems. Is that a rational decision?  Presidents usually can’t win with economic conditions like the US is facing right now, but perhaps the lack of a strong Republican candidate means the Dems are still pretty good value at $1.80

You get to the point where you evolve in your life where everything isn’t black and white, good and bad, and you try to do the right thing. You might not like that. You might be very cynical about that. Well, fuck it, I don’t care what you think. I’m trying to do the right thing. I’m tired of Republican-Democrat politics. They can take the job and shove it. I come from a blue-collar background. I’m trying to do the right thing, and that’s where I’m going with this.
Roy McDonald, a New York State Senator and Republican, on his decision to vote yes on a bill legalizing same-sex marriage.

‘The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams’
Eleanor Roosevelt 

This woman is one of my heroes. I’m happy to share initials with her.


‘The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams’

Eleanor Roosevelt 

This woman is one of my heroes. I’m happy to share initials with her.

That at this point, I think I may officially love Conor Fridersdorf. I don’t always (often!) agree with him, but I really admire his intellectual honesty. The following post has a good collection of examples.

In recent months, I’ve been endeavoring to prove that certain media elites in the conservative movement are perfectly willing to mislead their audiences. It’s true of Rush LimbaughMark Levin,Andrew Breitbart, and Andy McCarthy, among others. And this attitude has consequences.

As Byron York shows, we can now add Erick Erickson to the list. In fact, he is the first on the list to acknowledge that he deliberately misled his readers because he perceived that he could make gains against his ideological enemies by doing so.

-Conor Friedersdorf, “Data Point

Were that there were more conservatives like him!