The hopes that QAnon will disappear with Biden’s inauguration will unfortunately be dashed.

Some followers will decamp. But a lot will be hardened.

How did we get here? What will happen? Why? And what can we do about it?
A🧵about cults & persuasion

More from Biden

1. Ben Rhodes’s comment dismissing the concerns of former political prisoners and US hostages in Iran regarding Rob Malley’s potential appointment as Iran envoy is deeply unprofessional and offensive. As my own story illustrates, not everything is about partisan DC politics.


2. In 2016 I was a Princeton graduate student who excitedly supported the JCPOA and the new era of Iran-US diplomacy it was meant to usher. Such was my optimism that I actually went to Iran for dissertation research. That’s when my nightmare began.

3. I was arrested by Iranian security forces and held hostage in Evin prison-away from my wife and infant son-for more than 3 years. The regime knew I was innocent and told me so. It took me 40 months in Evin to comprehend what had happened to me.

4. As a political prisoner I’ve likely had more intensive contact with Iranian hardliners than most Iran watchers in the US, especially US govt officials like Mr. Rhodes and Malley. I believe the insights derived from that experience have a unique value.

5. I support strengthening the nuclear deal, but am convinced the JCPOA of 2015 is well-intended yet inadequate. Simply lifting pressure against Iran and allowing it to benefit from economic integration produced NO further incentive for the regime to change its behavior.
Biden clearly should not do #1. The problem with #2 is that reconciliation delays the inevitable and creates a tiered system where issues that happen to be ineligible - like civil rights and democracy reform - are relegated to second-class status and left to die by filibuster.


This👇is the danger. By using reconciliation you’re conceding the point that major legislation deserves to pass by majority vote, but only certain kinds for arbitrary reasons. Plus the process itself is opaque and ugly. You risk laying a logistical & political trap for yourself.


All the “here’s what you can do through reconciliation” takes are correct but also look through the wrong end of the telescope. Any of the items mentioned, or a small number of them, would be relatively easy. But putting them all together in one leadership-driven mega package...

... with no committee involvement and no real oversight, enduring tough press for jamming a massive package through a close process and stories about lobbyist giveaways while dodging the adverse parliamentary rulings that are virtually inevitable and still maintaining 50 votes...

It’s possible! Maybe the mega-ness of the package ends up helping hold 50 votes. But the ugliness of the process is being underpriced. And to what end? You’re just delaying the inevitable since you can’t use it for civil rights nor can you allow civil rights to die by filibuster.
When Biden talked about unity, he was very specific about what he meant, and the insistence of right-wing tools like @Kredo0 to try to frame stuff like this as “betraying his own ‘unity agenda’” (what is that even a quote from?) shows how pointless it is to try to work with Rs.


Guys like @Kredo0 want to a.) put the onus of unifying the country entirely on Biden and Dems, b.) pretend that “unity” is the same as capitulation, while c.) not giving an inch on their end.

No. No, no, no. Nice try.

Really, get all the way the fuck out of here with that take. “Biden didn’t keep Trump’s POLITICAL APPOINTEES in their position, therefore Biden isn’t unifying the country.” Fuuuuuuck off with that bullshit.

When Biden said “unity,” he was talking about trying to help ALL Americans, not just the ones who voted for him. This, sadly, needed to be said after the Trump administration repeatedly tried to screw over people who didn’t support him.

Remember when the Trump administration INTENTIONALLY let the virus rage out of control (really should have been a bigger scandal, but 🤷🏻‍♀️) because it was mostly hitting states that voted for Dems?

You May Also Like

I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.


Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel

He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:

He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:

He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party