2024

Yesterday was another day in which the "Political Discussion" forum dominated. Fully 8 of the top 10 most active threads were posted in that forum. That includes three of the top four threads  that I will discuss today. The most active thread was titled, "Uh, seems like Trump's visit to the NABJ is not going well...". This thread is about an appearance by former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump at a conference of the National Association of Black Journalists. As the title suggests, things did not go well. Trump's attendance at the conference was controversial before he even arrived. Convention co-chair Karen Attiah resigned in protest over the invitation to Trump and other journalists boycotted the event. There were enough controversies during Trump's appearance — which ended prematurely when Trump's aids intervened — to fill a book. Right out of the gate Trump called ABC News "fake news" and described a question — in which panelist Rachel Scott listed several of Trump's statements about people of color — as "very rude". Then Trump questioned Vice President Kamala Harris' ethnicity, saying that he had known her for a long time and she had always been of Indian heritage. Trump claimed that she suddenly "turned Black". Trump spewed lies at such a rate that the panel of journalists questioning him couldn't keep up correcting him and, eventually, simply gave up. When Fox News' Harris Falkner asked Trump whether his running mate, Ohio Senator J. D. Vance would be ready on day one to run the country if necessary, Trump ignored the question and argued that historically the pick for Vice President didn't affect the election. That was not much of a vote of confidence for Vance. Within the thread the topic that caught on the most was the issue of Harris' ethnicity. Like Trump, several of his supporters in the thread sought to downplay Harris' race. Both Trump and his supporters seem to struggle with the concept of being biracial. Pro-Trump posters pointed to instances in which Harris has identified as being Indian as if that is proof that she is not Black. One poster made the false claim that Harris' father was half-White. These allegations harken back to Barack Obama and claims that he was not "Black enough". It is not at all clear to me what Trump and his supporters hope to gain from questioning Harris' race. The number of Black people who will be convinced that Harris is not Black based on what Trump has to say must be close to zero. Maybe a few White people might go along with Trump, but the likelihood that they would have ever voted for Harris in the first place is also probably close to zero. Basically, this is a stupid tactic with no real benefit and Trump's supporters in this thread are simply stupid enough to go along with it.

Yesterday I discussed the thread about the Olympics Opening Ceremony, devoting significant discussion to outrage at part of the opening that many Christians have interpreted as mocking "The Last Super" and, hence, Christianity itself. Yesterday's most active thread, titled, "Why are Christians insisting the opening ceremony depicted The Last Supper when it really was the Feast of Dyonisus?" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum, is specifically about that controversy. The original poster asks why the outrage among Christians is not only continuing, but actually escalating. The original poster even quotes a Christian paster attempting to clarify the misunderstanding. Finally, the original poster notes that, "It seems as if Christians are very invested in feeling persecuted and disrespected these days." Many posters agreed with the original poster that the anger being expressed was misplaced. The more charitable among them conceded that a misunderstanding about what was being depicted was understandable given that those angered are more likely to be familiar with the "The Last Super" than "Le Festin des Dieux". In contrast, several posters remain very upset and offended. For their part, they don't believe that they are confused. They are quite certain that the depiction was aimed squarely at mocking their religion and any contrary explanation is simply an attempt to gaslight. I have repeatedly written that resentment and anger are the motivating forces of MAGA adherents. This is a group that largely feels that every other group has been given advantages at their expense. Having taken what is rightfully theirs, the "others" have the temerity to mock or laugh at them. Many of those posting clearly love the opportunity to feel persecuted and they are not going to allow anyone to take that away from them. A sense of unfairness, that everything is rigged against them, is part of the MAGA world view. Hence the complaints that only Christianity would be mocked in this manner. Nobody would risk offending Jews or Muslims in a similar manner, they say. In fact, if the ceremony mocked anyone, it was Greek gods, not Christians. But the world view of the angry posters does not allow for such nuances. Similarly, the targets of these posters' anger is broad. They are, of course, upset with those who produced the ceremony. They are also angry with the French more generally. But they also hold U.S. Democrats responsible as well. Democrats obviously had nothing to do with the events but still they are blamed. The connection appears to be the Democrats' support for LGBTQ rights. The MAGA anger is not simply that (according to their view) Christianity was mocked, but rather that it was mocked by members of the LGBTQ community. Apparently, that makes it even worse. They seem to believe that Democrats, who support the LGBTQ community, share responsibility because they are obviously part of a worldwide effort to spread LGBTQ acceptance, replacing traditional Christian values in the process. The Olympic ceremony was simply one instance of that effort. The angry posters promised to take this out on Democrats in November, making the Olympic Opening Ceremony the least expected campaign issue so far.

Yesterday's most active threads were again dominated by political topics which filled three of the top four places. The first of those was titled, "Biden’s ‘Big Boy’ press conference" and, obviously, posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster started this thread in anticipation of a press conference that would be held yesterday evening by President Joe Biden following the conclusion of the NATO summit held in Washington, DC. Following Biden's poor performance in the presidential debate with former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump, he has been under tremendous pressure to participate in unscripted events that would allow the President to demonstrate his cognitive fitness. This press conference was such an opportunity. For reasons that I cannot begin to understand, the White House itself chose to refer to the event as the "Big Boy Press Conference". As has been the case in all recent Biden public events, this thread immediately started off with conspiracy theories. Posters predicted that Biden would be given the questions in advance, that everything would be rehearsed, and that Biden would be drugged to perform better. These same claims had been made prior to the debate and, obviously, did not turn out to be true. But a track record of being wrong has never stopped these posters. Many posters had very low expectations for Biden, assuming that the debate performance was an accurate indicator of his neurological state. The President did little to convince them otherwise when earlier in the day he introduced Ukrainian President Zelenskyy as "President Putin". Biden started the press conference off strongly with a prepared statement that was obviously read from a teleprompter. But, whatever hopes Biden might have had of changing minds about his fitness were almost immediately shattered when he referred to "Vice President Trump" when he obviously meant Vice President Kamala Harris. Of course posters in the thread immediately jumped on both of these gaffes which almost completely set the tone for the rest of the press conference. It cannot be denied that Biden is no longer a very good communicator. He has a stutter which causes him to speak slowly in order to avoid. His voice is gravely and he has a tendency to stumble over words. But as he showed throughout the rest of the press conference, he has a solid grasp of details of complex topics and can understand and explain the nuances of complicated issues. When it comes to being able to understand and articulate policies, Biden is far more able than Trump. Many posters in the thread recognized this, but others either could not or would not get past the gaffes. These misstatements are unfortunate, but which of us parents has not called our own children by the wrong name on occasion? That doesn't mean that we don't know who our children are or that we are suffering from dementia. But, in Biden's case, it reinforces a concerning perception that he has lost his mental sharpness. Biden's performance was almost the worst cases scenario. Had Biden entered the room unable to remember what day it was and promptly provided a recipe for banana bread in response to a question about his plans for the Middle East, the decision to replace him would have been easy. Alternatively, had he put in an error-free performance that included Obama-level oration skills, he probably would have quelled most of the criticism. However, he did neither. This press conference was neither fish nor fowl. As such, the fight over the Democratic presidential nominee will go on.

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "pit bull on a plane" and posted in the "Pets" forum. The original poster says that as she was debarking from a regional airplane, she noticed that a pit bull had been in the seat behind her. This caused her to wonder what would happen if the dog had "snapped" in the confines of a small airplane. She asked for advice about what to do if that happened again in the future. This thread was reported a number of times with the accusation that the original poster is a troll. So, let me commment on that first. I can't say whether the poster is a troll or not. What I can say is that she has been creating a large number of threads, mostly on fairly mundane topics. She was also the author of the thread that I discussed yesterday about hiding a trip from a friend. Whether the poster is a troll or just has a knack for provoking engagement I can't say. While I have not read every post in this thread, I am fairly comfortable saying that it is unlikely that the original poster received any useful advice about what to do about a pit bull that suddenly goes bersek in an airplane. The most common reaction was to ask the original poster why she was concerned about a dog that she hadn't even noticed during the flight. In the original poster's defense, she was asking about what to do on future flights, not the one that she had just completed. The second most common reaction was to argue about put bulls. In the pets forum there are two topics that are guaranteed to launch flame wars. The first is whether pets should be adopted from shelters or purchased from breeders. Posters will fight like cats and dogs over that topic. The second is pit bulls,. There are posters who detest pit bulls, considering them to be unreasonably dangerous. In fact, one of the main arguments against adopting from a shelter is that many of the dogs are at least part pit bull. There was actually a thread in which a poster attempted to document attacks by pit bulls. The thread reached 23 pages before I locked it. I locked it because a pro-pit bull poster kept posting off-topic posts which the anti-pit bull poster would report. There was a constant cycle of anti-put bull post, off-topic post, and then a report to me resulting in my removing the post. This went on long enough that I got tired of it. In the case of this thread, posters on both sides of the pit bull debate showed up. The anti-pit bull position is, of course, that the dogs are dangerous and should be banned. None of these posters would want to be on an airplane with a pit bull and they don't think pit bulls should be allowed on airplanes. They would ask to move or leave the plane if they were seated near one. The pro-pit bull position is that it is not the dogs but the owners who are the problem. In the case of this dog — which most of the pro-pit bull posters don't believe even existed because they consider the original poster to be a troll — the dog was very well behaved and not a threat to anyone. The dog obviously had a good owner. Any behavioral issues with a pit bull are the fault of the owner rather than the breed, these posters say. In any case, they argue, dogs from other breeds also attack people. Personally, I believe that if you are on an airplane and suddenly attacked by a pit bull you should do exactly the same thing that you would do if you were attacked by a poodle or a great dane. I am not sure what that is, but I don't think that air travellers need to learn specific anti-pit bull defense responses.

Unlike the past two days, the most active threads yesterday were not all political topics, though half of them still were. The most active thread, however, was not political at all, unless you include family politics. Titled, "Napping on vacation when you have kids?" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum, the original poster is upset about her husband's nap routine. On days off, weekends, and vacations, the original poster's husband expects to have a two-hour nap each day beginning at 4:00 p.m. The original poster is especially frustrated by this with regard to vacations. This forces the family, which includes their two tween/teen children, to return to the hotel each day for nap time, depriving them of two hours a day that could be spent on other activities. Moreover, since the original poster doesn't feel the children are old enough to explore strange cities on their own and the hotel pool does not allow the children to swim without supervision, the original poster doesn't get to enjoy downtime herself during her husband's nap because she has take care of the kids. The original poster thinks that her husband is being unreasonable and wants to know if she is wrong. There is a surprising amount of interest in this topic which produced 21 pages of responses in less than a day. For her part, it seems that the original poster bowed out after the second page, perhaps not wanting to waste vacation time on DCUM. Also surprising was the amount of support shown for the original poster's husband. DCUM, at least as represented by this thread, is apparently very pro-nap. A fairly common type of response was for a poster to explain that they make a bazillion dollars a year and normally work 25 hour days, but on vacation they like to take a nap. In fact, very few posters seem to take issue with the original poster's husband's nap habit. Rather, they provided ideas for the original poster to accomodate it. Many posters thought that the children were old enough to do activities on their own, despite the original poster's reservations in that regard. Even if the kids weren't able to go to the pool or venture out into the city, they could at least read or have screen time while their father napped. Several posters argued that the issue wasn't the two-hour nap, but rather the inflexibility of its timing. Not all activities lend themselves to being back at the hotel at 4, they suggested and they didn't like the idea of being forced to plan around a daily nap at that time every day. Other posters said that they intentionally plan in such a manner so that they can have their daily naps. A number of posters advised the original poster to simply plan their day and go about their activities, allowing her husband to depart for his nap and catch up with the family later. That way, only his day would be interrupted. A considerable number of posters worried that the nap requirement was caused by a medical condition such as sleep apnea. But this idea was scoffed at by posters who consider daily naps to be completely normal.

The two most active threads yesterday were the two British Royal Family related threads (Kate photo, Meghan lifestyle brand) that I've already discussed and will skip today. As it happens, I finally lost patience with the need to constantly moderate those threads and locked them both yesterday. So this should be the last we hear of those threads, if not the personalities involved. The next most active thread was titled, "I guess I don’t get why infidelity is a big deal if sex before marriage isn’t" and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. To be honest, I had quite a bit of trouble understanding all that the original poster was trying to say and I will probably make a shambles of summarizing it. The bottom line is that she (I am assuming the poster is a woman) notes that society has more or less accepted sex before marriage but once a couple is married, sex suddenly becomes "sacred" and has entirely different connotations. She doesn't seem to believe that sex should have elevated importance in this manner. Rather than seeing infidelity as a traumatic betrayal, she views it more as mistake, "a really really bad one, but a mistake nonetheless." Several posters hasten to point out that the issue with infidelity is not so much the sexual acts, but rather the violation of trust. One of the earliest posters to respond explained this viewpoint very well, saying, "The sex isn't the point, the vow of fidelity is the point" and argued that the original poster was "trying to frame infidelity [as] an extension of sex positivity, but what you're looking for is a free love scenario." As with this poster, most of those replying focused on infidelity as breaking a commitment and suggested that they maintained a zero or near-zero tolerance for what is essentially breaking a contract. A few agreed, at least in part, with the original poster. They were less worried about the physical act of sex than the often common impacts of an affair. These include lying, gas lighting, loss of affection, and other negative fallout. As such, they could imagine scenarios that avoided the negative ramifications, resulting in infidelity being forgivable or even, in some cases, acceptable. There were a number of outliers in the thread who had viewpoints that weren't widely shared and, subsequently, also not widely discussed. This included a poster who contended that humans are not meant to be monogamous. That mostly only elicited responses saying that some are and some aren't. Another poster argued that sexless marriages justify infidelity. Posters with this viewpoint are a fixture of the relationship forum and I think most posters simply ignore them now. The few posters that took notice simply said that the sexless poster should either divorce or reach an agreement that infidelity was allowable.

The most active thread yesterday was the Kate Middleton thread that I discussed yesterday. I'll skip that one today, but will mention that DCUM's usage statistics showed a significant bump in traffic yesterday. When I checked Google's search statistics, I saw that searches for Kate Middleton were driving users to our site and were responsible for the increased traffic. The next most active thread was titled, "Dad fell, SIL lives closest" and posted in the "Family Relationships" forum. The original poster says that her father-in-law was injured by a fall and will be immobile for several weeks. He has moved in with the original poster's sister-in-law who lives close to him and she has been taking care of him. However, the sister-in-law has run out of sick leave and asked the original poster's husband if he can come stay at her house for a week. The original poster and her family live about 3 hours away. The original poster's husband is currently unemployed and, as such, has a flexible schedule. However, the original poster is scheduled to travel for work during the week, which would leave nobody available to care for their children. She asks for suggestions about what to do. As is typical of DCUM, not all of the responses are helpful. But, a number of posters do attempt to provide useful answers. For some reason, the original poster tended to respond more often and more substantively to the unhelpful posts, often with a combination of self-pity and aggression. This started a spiral in which posters reacted even more negatively to the original poster, causing her to increase her complaints about the how unhelpful the responses were. The result was a thread that has a mostly negative tone. In addition, many responses were clouded by what appears to have been chips on the shoulders of many posters over the fact that women — in this case the original poster's sister-in-law — often get stuck with the bulk of the responsibility in cases such as these. There were several complaints that the original poster's unemployed husband had not been doing more to help. The original poster, in turn, devoted a lot of effort to defending her husband and stressing the assistance that he had been providing. The problem with situations like this is that there are no easy answers and whatever answers exist all have drawbacks. Ultimately, the perfect solution will not be found and, instead, the original poster and her family will have to make compromises. Many of those responding clearly recognize that fact, while not explicitly articulating it. The solutions proposed are imperfect, but probably the best available. However, the original poster's tendency is to either ignore such proposals or fixate on their downsides. This added to an increasing level of frustration among almost all posters in the thread.

Yesterday the District of Columbia region received its first significant snowfall of the year, though as a native midwesterner, I am practically required to scoff at what Washingtonians consider "significant snowfall". Nevertheless, with little more than flurries that barely stuck to the pavement, posters could hardly write about anything other than snow-related closings. Fully half of the top ten most active threads were weather related. Therefore, rather than discuss a bunch of threads that are all pretty much the same, I'll lump the five weather-related threads together and discuss them all at once. The most active of the bunch was titled, "Snow day predictions? Anyone" and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. As I mentioned in a recent blog post discussing a thread about Montgomery County Public Schools closing early due to wind and rain, MCPS is particularly sensitive about weather issues, leading to repeated controversies. Next was a thread titled, "Snow closing tracker" and posted in the "Private & Independent Schools" forum. In the world of private schools, nearly anything can be turned into a competition and reactions to snow is no exception. Either being the first to announce a closure or the last can be a point of pride depending on one's pont of view. Third was a thread titled, "Will schools be open next week?" and posted in the "Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)" forum. This thread was actually started last Friday by a poster looking ahead but gained more traction — apparently unlike cars on Fairfax County roads — yesterday. After that was a thread titled "ROADS ARE BAD STAY HOME!!!!" which, if I remember correctly, was originally posted in the "Off-Topic" forum before I moved it to the "Cars and Transportation" forum. Other than the snow, the most discussed issue in this thread was "236" and exactly what road that is and whether or not anyone actually calls it that. Finally, rounding out the top ten most active threads as well as the top five snow-related topics was a thread titled, "Chances that school will be canceled tomorrow?" and posted in the "DC Public and Public Charter Schools" forum. This thread, in addition to the snow discussion, was dominated by a debate about whether fathers can competently adjust to the threat of a delayed opening or cancellation. Apparently the logistics of this are well beyond the capabilities of some men. Good job to the guys who have figured out that acting helpless can secure a couple of hours of extra sleep on a snowy day while their wives struggle with the kids.

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "CNN’s inaugural Road to 270 shows Trump in a position to win the White House" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. The original poster linked to a graphic produced by CNN showing US states color-coded by the current leading presidential candidate. According to CNN's analysis, former President Donald Trump is currently leading in enough states to secure 272 electoral votes, two more than necessary to win the election. Notably, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Arizona, all states that President Joe Biden previously won, are listed as "toss-ups" with their votes not being distributed. However, even if Biden were to pick up all three, he would still be short of the winning number. Therefore, Biden will need to flip at least one state currently leaning towards Trump. As is the tendency for political threads, most of those responding simply engage in partisan bickering. Pro-Trump posters beat their chests and make outlandish predictions. Pro-Biden posters argue that the current polling does not reflect the probable results in November. There are a few sensible posts from those who attempt serious analysis, though it is often difficult to tell where these posts cross the line to wishful thinking. As is also the tendency for political threads, posters do a poor job of staying on topic and the thread soon goes off in several different directions. By the end of the thread posters were engaged in a debate about whether or not Trump should legally be allowed on the ballot. My own thoughts about this are that early polling is often inaccurate, but it is undeniable that Biden is carrying a lot of baggage that he did not have during the last go around. Democrats have a terrible time controlling the narrative and, as a result, Biden's age and mental acuity have become issues with many voters while Trump's similar age and obvious mental shortcomings have not. More importantly for Biden, his policy regarding Israel and Gaza has turned off many young voters who have been key to Democrats' success. Expected red waves over several elections have failed to materialize due to women and young voters motivated by abortion rights. Whether that same pattern will hold true remains to be seen. In Biden's favor, almost constant predictions of a recession have been proven wrong and now conventional wisdom has turned away from such expectations. With inflation coming down and the job market remaining strong, the economy should favor Biden. Many prognosticators say that is the single biggest factor in elections. A lot can and probably will happen between now and the election, so it would be unwise for anyone to begin counting chickens or reconciling themselves with defeat.

The Gaza war thread was again the most active over the weekend but I will skip it since it has been previously discussed. Similarly, I will skip the second most active thread which was the one about a woman in Ohio being charged after miscarrying. After that was a thread titled, "Baby Missing After Carjacking in Georgetown Early This Evening (30th & M St. NW)" and posted in the "Metropolitan DC Local Politics" forum. The thread was started after a report that a vehicle had been carjacked in Georgetown while a 4-month-old baby girl was inside. Not quite a hour later, the baby was discovered outside the door of a house in DC's southeast quadrant (Georgetown is in northwest) where the carjackers apparently dropped her off. The car has still not been recovered as far as I know. This thread represents almost all that is wrong with crime discussions on DCUM and most other mediums. On the one hand are posts from those simply interested in obtaining or sharing facts and expressing concern. I have no issue, of course, with those posts. But, other posters seem to simply be triggered by any mention of crime in a thread's title and rush to post reflexive talking points regardless of their relevance. There were a number of complaints about ANC 3C, which represents Cleveland Park. This crime was in a completely different ward, not to mention ANC district. Similarly, posters rushed to blame the DC Council with one poster wrongly asserting that the Council had attempted to change the law so that offenses such as this would not be considered kidnapping. Ironically, the tweet that the poster embedded to support his allegation actually said the opposite, but I guess the poster didn't bother reading it completely. There, of course, were the normal complement of racist posts that I had to delete. Much of the focus of the thread was on the mother involved. She had apparently left the vehicle running with the child inside, but it was not clear why she left the car. Information provided by police said that she claimed to have had a flat tire but witness reports circulating on social media said that she had gone into a store. It is not clear how a car with a flat tire could drive around DC for a hour or more and some posters suggested that the woman and invented the tire explanation to avoid legal problems as a result of leaving the child unattended. At any rate, the fact that the mother was not in the vehicle when it was taken caused the crime to be reclassified as car theft rather than carjacking. There was also discussion about what public officials describe as the difficulty of prosecuting carjacking and car theft. When stolen vehicles are recovered, apparently fingerprints can't be used as evidence because the cars may have passed through multiple drivers and it is not clear which had stolen it. Discussion also touched on whether or not an Amber Alert had been issued. Police said that they were in the process of preparing one when the baby was found.