The flight 93 election - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: The flight 93 election (/thread-19998.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-11.html)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: The flight 93 election (/thread-19998.html)
The flight 93 election - BostonCard - 07-03-2020
At the risk of running afoul of the Terry rule with the subject heading (for those who don’t know, “the Flight 93 Election” was a piece put out during the 2016 campaign making the case that like flight 93 on 9/11/2001, we were headed for a disaster if we elected Hillary Clinton and could only save the country by metaphorically wrestling the controls from the terrorists), I am linking a piece by James Fallows, who is a former Jimmy Carter speechwriter and amateur pilot (and whatever you think of his politics, a thoughtful and engaging writer) doing an NTSB style crash analysis on the response to the pandemic.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/how-white-house-coronavirus-response-went-wrong/613591/
Quote: During the past two months, I have had lengthy conversations with some 30 scientists, health experts, and past and current government officials—all of them people with firsthand knowledge of what our response to the coronavirus pandemic should have been, could have been, and actually was. The government officials had served or are still serving in the uniformed military, on the White House staff, or in other executive departments, and in various intelligence agencies. Some spoke on condition of anonymity, given their official roles. As I continued these conversations, the people I talked with had noticeably different moods. First, in March and April, they were astonished and puzzled about what had happened. Eventually, in May and June, they were enraged.
BC
RE: The flight 93 election - oregontim - 07-03-2020
An excellent read, thanks. And all about the pandemic, not just 'gratuitous' politics.
(07-03-2020, 09:48 AM)BostonCard Wrote: At the risk of running afoul of the Terry rule with the subject heading (for those who don’t know, “the Flight 93 Election” was a piece put out during the 2016 campaign making the case that like flight 93 on 9/11/2001, we were headed for a disaster if we elected Hillary Clinton and could only save the country by metaphorically wrestling the controls from the terrorists), I am linking a piece by James Fallows, who is a former Jimmy Carter speechwriter and amateur pilot (and whatever you think of his politics, a thoughtful and engaging writer) doing an NTSB style crash analysis on the response to the pandemic.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/how-white-house-coronavirus-response-went-wrong/613591/
Quote: During the past two months, I have had lengthy conversations with some 30 scientists, health experts, and past and current government officials—all of them people with firsthand knowledge of what our response to the coronavirus pandemic should have been, could have been, and actually was. The government officials had served or are still serving in the uniformed military, on the White House staff, or in other executive departments, and in various intelligence agencies. Some spoke on condition of anonymity, given their official roles. As I continued these conversations, the people I talked with had noticeably different moods. First, in March and April, they were astonished and puzzled about what had happened. Eventually, in May and June, they were enraged.
BC
RE: The flight 93 election - 2006alum - 07-03-2020
For the foreseeable future, I'll be scaling back both poster and moderator contributions due to new job obligations, but as the co-ratifier of the Terry Rule, I feel like it's worth noting, contra several complaints by posters over the last few days, that the degree to which a post's content is political is *not* what causes something to run afoul of the Terry Rule - it's political content (of any amount or degree) unmoored by meaningful discussion of COVID-19 that runs afoul of the rule. Engaging in line-drawing exercises to decide what is and isn't "too" political are not only fool's errands, but the precise reason for implementing the Terry Rule in the first place: COVID-19 response discussion inevitably begets public policy analysis/debate, which inevitably begets political debate. And the Admins are A-OK with that.
BC's post is a terrific example of why politics aren't our concern, the lack of a focus on COVID-19 is - the linked article is a beyond substantive (but also political) analysis of the U.S. response to COVID-19.
Happy Fourth all - now more than ever, the exhortations to "enjoy (socially distanced) time with your loved ones" and "stay safe out there" have all too real meaning.
RE: The flight 93 election - oregontim - 07-03-2020
This clarification works for me, thanks 2006Alum ... clear and useful ... and thanks for moderation and congrats on the new job. And what's the right way to abbreviate 2006Alum? :)
(07-03-2020, 11:52 AM)2006alum Wrote: For the foreseeable future, I'll be scaling back both poster and moderator contributions due to new job obligations, but as the co-ratifier of the Terry Rule, I feel like it's worth noting, contra several complaints by posters over the last few days, that the degree to which a post's content is political is *not* what causes something to run afoul of the Terry Rule - it's political content (of any amount or degree) unmoored by meaningful discussion of COVID-19 that runs afoul of the rule. Engaging in line-drawing exercises to decide what is and isn't "too" political are not only fool's errands, but the precise reason for implementing the Terry Rule in the first place: COVID-19 response discussion inevitably begets public policy analysis/debate, which inevitably begets political debate. And the Admins are A-OK with that.
BC's post is a terrific example of why politics aren't our concern, the lack of a focus on COVID-19 is - the linked article is a beyond substantive (but also political) analysis of the U.S. response to COVID-19.
Happy Fourth all - now more than ever, the exhortations to "enjoy (socially distanced) time with your loved ones" and "stay safe out there" have all too real meaning.
RE: The flight 93 election - 2006alum - 07-03-2020
(07-03-2020, 12:07 PM)oregontim Wrote: This clarification works for me, thanks 2006Alum ... clear and useful ... and thanks for moderation and congrats on the new job. And what's the right way to abbreviate 2006Alum? :)
Thanks oregontim! Either 2006 or 2006Alum works and has been referenced in the past. "You idiot" probably applies from time to time too. :)
RE: The flight 93 election - 76lsjumb - 07-03-2020
(07-03-2020, 11:52 AM)2006alum Wrote: ... I feel like it's worth noting, contra several complaints by posters over the last few days, that the degree to which a post's content is political is *not* what causes something to run afoul of the Terry Rule - it's political content (of any amount or degree) unmoored by meaningful discussion of COVID-19 that runs afoul of the rule. ...
Although I'm not sure, I'm sensing that I might be one of the "posters" referenced above. If I'm wrong about that, shame on me for being so sensitive. If I'm right, though, I just wanted to clarify that none of my posts about the Terry Rule were ever meant to be complaints. I have no complaint whatsoever about the Rule. Indeed, seeing the way it is applied is a real source of amusement, which is what I've tried to capture in my comments. No complaint, though; simply an observation.
And, a Happy Fourth to all as well!
[Wear a mask! (just in case this post wasn't sufficiently moored already ...)]
RE: The flight 93 election - Nan3cy - 07-03-2020
Great article. Also infuriating. It inspired me to subscribe to the Atlantic. Thanks.