July

The most active threads yesterday were mostly threads in the "Political Discussion" forum that I've previously discussed and will skip today. As a result, the first thread that I will discuss today was actually the sixth most active yesterday. Titled, "so sick and tired of gymnastics Olympics coverage" and posted in the "Sports General Discussion" forum, the original poster is, as the title says, sick and tired of the coverage of gymnastics. Her view is that nobody cares about gymnastics outside of the Olympics and, even then, they are only pretending to care. She is bothered generally by sports that have judges because judges are subjective. So that is another knock against gymnastics. She wants more coverage of archery and shooting. Several posters immediately chimed into say that they have subscribed to Peacock so that they are able to watch whatever events they choose. A month of Peacock for $8 seems like the deal of a lifetime if you really want to watch the Olympics. The original poster presented her complaint as if she were speaking for everyone. As the responses show, she clearly was not. Many posters enjoy gymnastics and are happy about the coverage. Some posters don't care about the judging at all, but simply enjoy watching the routines. A few gymnastics fans had nostalgia for the gymnasts of the past who they considered to be more graceful then today's athletes. Other posters argued that their interest in gymnastics is year long. One poster pointed out that there is nothing wrong with only being interested in gymnastics during the Olympics. It's fun to enjoy something different occasionally. Moreover, several posters were critical of the archery and shooting events that the original poster enjoys. These posters said that while they like participating in those sports themselves, they are boring to watch. Another poster agreed with the original poster but went on to complain that Simone Biles has received so much coverage. I don't understand that complaint. Biles has earned more medals of any U.S. gymnast. Of course she should receive outsized coverage. The original poster was told that if she doesn't like gymnastics, she should just not watch it. For their part, the gymnastics fans were happy to have as much coverage as possible. Throughout this thread posters pitch their favorite sports or athletes while others criticize the ones they dislike. The so-called "pommel horse guy" seems to have a lot of fans in the thread. But, the original poster was not among them. "Literally ZERO people ever care about the pommel horse. What a weird and stupid event", she wrote. This provoked a spirited defense of pommel horse events from other posters. While several sports received criticism in this thread, the announcers received even more. They were almost universally panned and the best defense one poster could rustle up was to postulate that they had been instructed to speak at a 4th grade level.

The most active thread over the weekend probably comes as no surprise. Titled, "Joe is out", and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum, this thread was created minutes after President Joe Biden posted a letter on X (formerly known as Twitter) announcing that he would stand down as a candidate for President. The thread has already reached 133 pages, making it among the fastest-growing threads in DCUM history. Because Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris within minutes of announcing that he would no longer run for President, most of the thread is about Harris rather than Biden. With regard to Biden, posters mostly praised him for putting the interests of the country above his personal interests. For the most part, posters had only good things to say about Biden's record as President. There were a number of complaints that Biden was being pushed out in an anti-Democratic manner. This concern extended to Harris' likely selection as Biden's replacement. I think that this is a situation in which two things are both simultaneously true. Clearly there was a group of wealthy donors whose interest in removing Biden from the top of the ticket was in good faith. Several of these individuals have their own agendas and the best interests of the Democratic Party and not necessarily part of those. The New York Times also played a particularly active role that often went well beyond it's mission as a provider of news. On the other hand, polling data, along with simple anecdotal evidence, shows that there has been significant grassroots support for replacing Biden. Democratic Members of Congress have reported strong constituent pressure to find an alternative to Biden. As such, I don't think Biden stepping down can accurately be described as solely the work of the rich and powerful or as only the result of an upswell of grassroots activity. It is a combination of both. With regard to Harris, the primary function of a vice president is to serve in the case that the President is unable. In this case, Biden appears to be unable to continue the campaign and, hence, the Vice President should rightfully step in. Those who voted for Biden in the primary elections were voting for a ticket that included Harris. As such, it can be argued that voters have cast ballots for her. The reaction to Harris, of course, included both support and opposition. I want to focus on the opposition because it is likely indicative of what we will see in the future from Harris' opponents. While a few posters based their opposition on policy grounds such as Harris' performance on border issues, it was much more common for criticism to be based on sexism and racism. I think that it is undeniable that the next several months will be filled with sexist and racist attacks on Harris. In terms of sexism, the most common attacks were lewd, often explicit sexual references. There is a sizable contingent of — I assume men — who cannot stop themselves from sexualizing women. The same posters who excuse former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump's sexual escapades with a porn star while his wife was home caring for their newborn child are quick to condemn a relationship that a young Kamala Harris had with Willie Brown. "Slut shaming" will clearly be a mainstay of conservative opposition to Harris. Racism in the thread was demonstrated most often by claims that Harris is a "DEI" candidate and with questions regarding her legitimacy as a candidate due to the fact that her parents were immigrants. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion has become one of the lastest conservative bugaboos, apparently replacing "CRT" in the conservative lexicon of evils. Obviously, Harris' race and gender played a role in her selection because Biden promised to selected a Black woman. But Harris was, and is, a qualified Black woman. Indeed, at the time she was chosen by Biden, her qualifications were far stronger than those of the current Republican nominee for Vice President. Given that being a White male was almost certainly a requirement of his selection, J. D. Vance is as much of a DEI candidate as Harris. Attacks on citizenship only seem to be made against people of color. U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, for instance, was born in Canada, yet his eligibility for president is not questioned. Some posters seem to fear that sexist and racist attacks on Harris are a reason to choose someone else. That rewards misogynists and racists. It is better to simply prepare for such attacks and defeat them as they arise.

The most active thread yesterday was the one about the Republican National Convention which I've already discussed and will, therefore, skip today. After that was a thread titled, "NYT and WaPo report Biden is close to stepping down" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster overstated things in the thread's title. The two articles to which he linked were not as definitive. One, in the Washington Post, said that U.S. House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi had told members of the House that President Joe Biden can be persuaded fairly soon to leave the presidential race. The second, in the New York Times, reported that people close to Biden have said that he has begun to accept the idea that he may have to drop out. There have been multiple reports that Pelosi is now leading the effort to convince Biden that he cannot win the election and that he should leave the race. My assumption is that leaks that lead to articles such as these are part of the process. Going public with expectations that Biden will soon agree to drop out is probably aimed at creating an air of inevitability that will lead to a self-fulfilling prophesy. This effort has been mishandled from the beginning. In the aftermath of Biden's disappointing debate performance, Democrats were really faced with two choices: 1) accept that Biden had had a bad night but rally around him nevertheless; or 2) launch a full-court press to replace Biden. But Democrats split between the two option and some chose a third alternative of simply giving up altogether. What resulted was a continual trickle of Biden opponents calling for him to withdraw and, as I described it before, subjecting Biden to a death of a thousand cuts. That many of the first to publicly call for replacing Biden were wealthy and elite only made matters worse. Those statements got publicity, but only made Biden and his supporters even more determined to resist. This soon developed into a worst-case scenario for Democrats who face going into their convention completely divided. Pelosi, the adult in the room if you will, apparently decided it was time to step in. It may have been true the day after the debate that Biden still had a chance to defeat former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump. The argument can be made that those calling for him to be replaced jumped the gun. Regardless, I am fairly confident that Biden has been so seriously wounded by the ongoing public efforts to convince him to step down that whatever chances he may have once had have evaporated. Regardless of whether those initially in favor of replacing Biden were prescient or have simply created enough damage to make their desire inevitable, we are at the point where a continued Biden candidacy is untenable. As the posts in this thread demonstrate, there is considerable frustration that we have arrived at this point and quite a few posters are clearly not pleased. Others, however reluctantly, accept that it is time for Biden to step down. Others are happy and predict that this will give the Democrats their best chance of defeating Trump. If the Band Aid could not have been pulled off quickly in the first place, let's hope that the process will not be drawn out very much longer.

Yesterday was another day in which politics dominated the most active topics. In fact, eight of the top ten most active threads were political. One of the two exceptions, however, was actually the most active thread of the day. That thread, titled, "Dad leaves toddler to die in hot car while he plays games on Play Station", was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. The original poster linked to an article about an Arizona man who was charged with murder after leaving his 2-year-old daughter in the car. After several hours in the hot Arizona sun, the child died. The father apparently had a habit of leaving his kids — he has three including the child that passed away — in the car. While he would leave the air conditioning running, it would stop after 30 minutes and he routinely got distracted and forgot about them. In this instance he is alleged to have been playing video games and putting away groceries. The original poster is critical of the father due to his irresponsibility, but also blames his wife who was aware that he frequently left the kids in the car but still allowed him to care for them. The original poster believes the mother had a duty to make alternative arrangements due to her husband's negligence. I'm a bit surprised that this thread — which is currently 22 pages long — has received so much engagement. Of course everyone is appalled by the father's behavior. Several posters say that they are generally sympathetic towards parents whose children die after being inadvertently left in the car. But they consider this instance to be different because the father purposely left the child behind and neglected her for so many hours. There is some difference of opinion about the mother's culpability. Many posters agree with the original poster that she should also be charged. A number of posters say that women like the mother in this incident who have irresponsible husbands are in a no-win situation. If the couple divorced, the father would likely have at least part time custody and the kids would be in even more danger of his neglect. Staying together allowed her to have more responsibility for the children, but she appears to be the family bread winner and, therefore, needs to work. As such, the mother was left with no good choices. However, because the mother has strongly defended her husband in court, several posters are unsympathetic to her and more willing to see her punished. A lot of the discussion in this thread approaches the story as if it were a soap opera. Posters dig into court documents to learn that the father has children with a previous wife and has apparently stopped paying child support. They speculate that he is a "stay at home dad" only for purposes of avoiding child support payments. Posters explore the couple's lifestyle, determining that they appear to have plenty of money. Other posters discuss how technology might help to prevent children from being left in cars. But others argue that since in this case the child was left intentionally, such systems would have been overriden.

The first thread that I will discuss today was actually the fourth most popular because the three more active than it are ones that I've already discussed. The thread was titled, "Official RNC convention thread" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The thread started with the original poster noting that among the first night's speakers at the Republican National Convention was Amber Rose, an OnlyFans creator. The original poster finished by sarcastically saying that she can't wait to see what else is in store. The second post of the thread complained about the presence of Dana White, CEO and President of Ultimate Fighting Championship, who in 2022 was filmed hitting his wife after she slapped him. This led to jibes about a stripper and a wife beater starting off the conference. More seriously, it provoked one poster to launch a strident defense of White and claiming that he had the right ot hit his wife because it was self-defense. What has occurred since then is basically a running commentary about the various speakers. Democrats generally pan them while Republicans praise them. This thread also demonstrated the speech restrictions that Republicans are hoping to assert over Democrats. When a poster embedded a video showing several trucks apparently deployed by Democrats that had the message "Dictator Day One" on their sides, Republicans criticized Democrats for "having no shame". Apparently the message, which directly quotes former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump, is considered unacceptable in the aftermath of the attempted assassination of Trump. Meanwhile, within in the convention hall, Republican speakers were free to be as inflammatory toward Democrats as they wished. One speaker who the was subject of considerable discussion was Sean O’Brien, President of the Teamsters union. O'Brien had asked to be speak at both party conventions and has been granted the opportunity. Speaking at the RNC, O'Brien did not endorse Trump and he made a number of statements that were very much out of place in a gathering of Republicans. Within the thread, his speech was quite divisive. Republicans interpreted it as shift by labor towards Republicans. Democrats, generally seeing it similarly, saw O'Brien as betraying the Democrats who had supported his union. O'Brien's presence highlighted a reality of the Republican party that is often ignored. The Party's agenda clearly favors the wealthy, promising tax cuts to corporations, reduced regulations, and — despite the invitation to O'Brien — opposition to labor unions. But the voters to whom Trump and, even more so his pick for Vice President J. D. Vance, attempt to appeal are the working class. Whether O'Brien's speech will cause workers to wrongly believe that the the Republican Party is friendly to their interests or, instead, highlight the fact that Republicans represent owners and management rather than labor, will be interesting to see.

The most active thread yesterday was once again the thread about the attempted assassination of former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump. But I'll skip that thread today because I have already discussed it. After that was a thread that was also Trump-related. Titled, "Official Trump VP thread", and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum, the thread was created back in January to discuss potential candidates to be Trump's vice president. The original poster provided a list of frontrunners for the position and third on that list was J. D. Vance, the junior Senator from Ohio. Yesterday Trump announced that he had picked Vance to be the Republican candidate for Vice President. Nearly 40 pages were added to the thread after that, consisting of sometimes heated back and forth about Vance. Vance first gained public stature due to his book, "Hillbilly Elegy". When the book was first published, my Twitter feed was filled with praise making it sound like one of the most enlightening analysis of recent times. When I read it myself, I found the book to be severely lacking and was confused that so many who I believed to be more knowledgeable than me were impressed by it. I wrote a very cautious review of the book on DCUM in which I outlined some of my criticisms. Now, years later, I believe that I was correct in my judgement and that I was far too tempered in my review. My criticism, in short, is that Vance took an ideological framework and fit the facts of his life — sometimes with a bit of artistic license — into it. In other words, he made the facts fit his conclusion rather than the other way around. In doing so, he put far too much blame on individuals while ignoring the external influences that impact their lives. I think that it is somewhat ironic that Vance's thesis in the book, that hillbillies suffer because they make poor choices, is at odds with the MAGA ethos that the plight of the White working class is caused by immigrants, coastal elites, the government, and "globalization", or almost exactly the opposite of Vance's earlier position. To the extent that Vance may have values and beliefs, they are far from rock solid and extremely flexible. Also of concern with Vance is his relationship with billionaire Peter Thiel. Thiel contributed $15 million to Vance's Ohio senate campaign, a record contribution at the time. Thiel has been unabashed about his political leanings, once writing that "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible." Vance appears to be quite sympathetic to this viewpoint and is an admirer of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Russian President Vladimir Putin, both of whom represent this "freedom through dictatorship" style of governing. Vance appears to be primarily focused on self-promotion and willing to contort himself as necessary for personal advancement. Having once suggested that Trump might be an "American Hitler", it is really no surprise that Vance would seize the opportunity to serve as Trump's vice president. Vance's ambition is such that advice I read saying that, if Trump wins the presidency, Vance should not be allowed to have sharp instruments in Trump's vicinity is not much of an exaggeration.

The most active thread over the weekend will probably come as no surprise to anyone. Titled, "Shots fired at Trump rally", and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum, this thread reached nearly 200 pages and well over 2600 posts since the attempted assassination of former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump on Saturday evening. The first few pages were devoted to simply posting details — a few of them vaguely correct — about what had happened. But soon the thread devolved to little more than finger-pointing. Trump supporters in the thread were sure that the shooter was a liberal motivated by Democratic rhetoric. Their posts were filled with anger with many insinuating that any DCUMer who didn't share their rage was essentially personally responsible for the attempt on Trump's life. For their part, many of the liberals insisted that Trump's own often violent words that consistently inflamed his supporters had come home to roost. When the the shooter was identified and records showed that at 17 years of age he had made a $15 donation to a progressive organization and then, months later, had registered as a Republican, both sides were given ammunition to claim he belonged to the other side. The debate about this was interminable with posters intent on making the most of his party affiliation and others determined that no mention of his registration would go unanswered. The responses pointing out the shooter's $15 contribution were often accompanied by a graphic that was posted so many times that I fear it may be permanently burned into my retinas. A similar never-ending dispute was over whether Trump had been wounded by a bullet or fragments of glass. It is not clear to me why this is even an important distinction, let alone one worth arguing about for two days. Trump-supporting posters kept returning to their allegation that the shooter had been inspired by accusations and claims made by Democrats, including President Joe Biden. It is interesting that a party that once rallied around a profane statement concerning what liberals should do with their feelings has transformed into a fragile collection of snowflakes. Calling Trump a threat to democracy had put his life in danger, posters claimed. While Trump often promotes violence from the stage of his rallies, MAGA posters had to dig deep to find words with which to implicate Biden. The best that they could do was a statement that Biden had made privately during a phone conversation with party financial donors. He said that he was done talking about the debate that that Trump should be put in the bullseye. He then went on to discuss Trump policies that he planned to criticize more forcefully. The context of this clearly has nothing to do with violence, but that didn't stop Trump supporters who interpreted this as a direct order to shoot Trump. The shooting has created an uneven balance in the rhetoric battle. Trump's MAGA cult, built on resentment and anger, will hardly be satisfied with a new humbled and emphatic Trump who is interested in lowering the temperature and creating unity — if such a thing were even a possibility. Therefore, Trump's inflammatory words will likely continue. Democrats, on the other hand, have been brow-beaten to the point where they will have to be practically apologetic with any criticism of Trump. As one poster in the thread asked, "what if you think that Trump is a threat to democracy?". MAGAs have never considered that to be legitimate criticism and now they claim that it is a provocation to murder. Therefore, while the violent rhetoric that is common among Trump and his supporters will likely continue, Democrats will only be allowed to respond with expressions of respect and desires of unity with Trump.

Yesterday's most active thread was a bit of a surprise to me. Titled, "2024 AP Exams - Results", and posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum, the thread was literally about the results of the 2024 advanced placement exams. Started at 4:33 a.m., the thread was meant to alert posters that the scores had been released three minutes earlier at 4:30 a.m. I was a bit surprised that parents would be up at 4:30 to check their kids' test results, but then I noticed that the original poster was in California. Still, that would be 1:30 a.m. her time. Clearly, my dedication as a parent is not measuring up very favorably because I would be sound asleep at either 1:30 or 4:30 a.m. I would find out about my kids' test results if or when they got around to telling me about them. Because many of the parents posting in this thread were obviously learning about the results before their kids — who were likely still asleep — had had a chance to check them, there was some discussion about whether the parents should stay mum until the kids saw their scores themselves or go ahead and tell them. There were also concerns expressed that checking the scores was an invasion of the kids' privacy. But most of the thread was simply posters posting the results. Those whose kids received all 5s (the top score) were obviously thrilled. Some were pleased with a 4 but some were a bit let down. Some posters argued that the difference between a 4 and a 5 is minimal and doesn't indicate much about a student's abilities. Scores of 3 were a bit more controversial. Some colleges award credits for a 3 and, therefore, several posters were satisfied that their kids had received 3s. But others viewed 3s as disappointing. I didn't read the entire thread which is currently 18 pages long, but I did notice several posts saying that scores this year had improved over previous years. Some attributed this to better prepared students and pandemic set backs finally being overcome. But others argued that the tests are getting easier and that high scores should not be taken that seriously. AP scores are particularly important to those students who are applying to universities in the United Kingdom where ACT and SAT results are not accepted but AP exams are required. Therefore, in some cases, these results will determine where kids will be going to college next year. Despite the concentration on scores, there is quite a bit of additional discusion on the topic of AP exams. If you are not familiar with the exams or are interested in deepening your knowledge, this would be a good thread to peruse.

For the second day in a row, all of the most active topics were posted in the "Political Discussion" forum and all but one are related to the presidential debate. The shortest of these threads is 12 pages and the first one is over 50. So I am unable to read all of the posts in the threads and will only provide an overview of the topics. The most active thread yesterday was titled, "The President is Above the Law". This thread was started back in January after oral arguments before the Supreme Court regarding the question of whether former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump has immunity for his actions related to the January 6 insurrection attempt. During the hearing, Trump's lawyer was asked whether a president could order Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political opponent and enjoy immunity for the act. Trump's lawyer argued that Congress would surely impeach a president who did such a thing, but short of impeachment the President would have immunity. This led to the original poster creating this thread. Yesterday, the Supreme Court released its decision in the case, granting considerable immunity to the President. In her dissent, Justice Sonya Sotomayor returned to the example of Seal Team 6 being used to murder a political opponent, claiming that the majority ruling granted immunity for such an act. The majority ruled that presidents enjoy absolute immunity for "core constitutional powers", those duties specified in the Constitution. In addition, the Court ruled that presidents have presumptive immunity for "official acts", actions undertaken in the course of acting as president. Finally, the court confirmed that presidents enjoy no immunity for private acts. On the face of it, this sounds fairly reasonable. But, as they say, the devil is in the details. The Court also ruled that evidence involving acts for which the President is immune cannot be used against him. This presents a significant hurdle to prosecuting a president for crimes that were unofficial acts and for which even the Court agrees, there would be no immunity. As Sotomayor explains in her dissent, imagine that the President gave an official speech during which he stated his intention to prevent a political rival from passing legislation by any means. That would be an official act for which the President would have the presumption of immunity. If the President later hired a private hitman to murder the rival, that would be a private act, but the President's public admission of intent could not be introduced as evidence to support a murder charge. As things stand, the case against Trump has been remanded to the lower court where Judge Tanya Chutkan will have to review the case in light of the Supreme Court's decision. If the actions for which Trump has been charged appear to core constitutional acts, he will have immunity. It is very unlikely that any of Trump's January 6-related actions will fall in that category. However, there will certainly be an argument that the actions were official acts for which Trump should have the presumption of immunity. It will be up to Jack Smith to demonstrate that the acts were, in fact, private. One thing that is already clear is that some evidence, such as that involving Jeffrey Clark, will no longer be admissible because it involved official acts.

The list of most active threads over the weekend was heavily dominated by political topics and all of today's topics are from the "Political Discussion" forum. The most active thread of all was the presidential debate thread that I've already discussed. The most active thread after that was titled, "As a Democrat, it all feels hopeless.", and posted, of course, in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster says that in light of President Joe Biden's poor debate performance it appears that Republicans will "sweep to victory". But, even if that doesn't happen, the Supreme Court has already severely limited the possibilities of implementing liberal policies. Meaningful gun control is not going to happen, efforts to protect the environment are being set back and will be even more difficult after the reverse of the Chevron ruling. In addition, the boundaries between church and state are being erased. The original poster asks what there is to be happy about. This thread is 43 pages long and, as such, I am unable to read much of it. What I did notice is that almost immediately those responding engaged in two behaviors that I have seen dominating more and more threads in the political forum lately. The first is related to the expression, "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." There are a number of posters who seem to respond with their own pet diagnosis, regardless of the specific topic. Early in this thread, for example, posters fixated on age and seemed to blame much of what is happening today on those who are over 60 and suggested things would not improve until those folks were no longer with us. This response is much like the knee-jerk reaction to blame everything bad on "boomers" that we see across DCUM. A second behavior, related in many ways, is to not only bring up a pet issue, but an off-topic pet issue. An example of this was a complaint about the Democratic National Committee not allowing more primary choices. But, with regard to off-topic posts, that was just the beginning. The thread is basically a collection of general gripes and talking points that posters want to share which mostly have no connection to the thread's topic at all. I agree with the original poster that now is a very dismal time to be a liberal Democrat. But to undertand how we got here, I think we need to take a wider view of things than posters in this thread seem to be doing. For instance, I have my own pet issue. One of the most significant changes over the last 20 years or so has been the vastly increased wealth disparity. An ever-increasing amount of the world's wealth is being accumulated into the hands of an increasingly small number of people. This disparity interferes with the proper working of all other systems on which our political and economic systems are based. That disparity has allowed billionaires such as Harlan Crow to essentially purchase multiple Supreme Court justices. It allowed Elon Musk to purchase what was not long ago the World's most influential social media network and turn it into a haven for Nazis. The attitude of billionaire class appears to be to exploit our world for every penny that can be squeezed out of it and then fly off to Mars. People over 60 and the DNC's influence on the primary are small potatoes relative to this. And, yes, the fact that those influencing events have little interest in anyone's well-being other than their own does not inspire much hope.