This is what happens when the Trump cultists refuse to acknowledge anything outside their extremely insular bubble: they can’t grasp that the majority of the country thinks he sucks and voted him out.

Not once in 4 years of Gallup’s 3-day tracking of Trump’s approval rating was it ever higher than 49%.

He was the least popular incumbent since Carter to run for re-election. It’s not shocking that he got his ass kicked in the election. https://t.co/7BSCQR2vI2
But if you do nothing other than consume conservative media, you’d be under the false impression that he’s popular, that his ideas are popular, and that the people who oppose him are a small group of haters.
In Gallup’s last update before the election, Trump had a -6 net approval rating. The last time it was a net positive was in May when it was +1.
And here’s how you get numbers like that: you do absolutely nothing to try to win over people who aren’t already part of your base. Look at those numbers among independents.
Just look how he compared to each of the previous 3 presidents at this point.

He banked on the Electoral College being tilted enough in favor of red states to get him re-elected. Turns out that it’s not “get 39% approval rating POTUS re-elected” level tilted.
Each of these “can you BELIEVE Biden got x number of votes more than Obama?!” takes ignore a.) population growth, and b.) highest turnout ever because people really, really wanted to kick him out of office because he’s wildly unpopular
You could tell me that a ham sandwich got 85 million votes, and as long as it was running against Trump, I’d think, “Yeah, that tracks.”
A few months ago, I wrote a piece that just took stock of how a.) Democratic policies tend to be much more popular than Republican ones, and b.) how despite this, Dems are the ones more often referred to in mainstream media as “extreme.” https://t.co/e6sZWFm45C
On this point, I think it’s worth exploring why it is that the press constantly scolds Democrats for supporting progressive policies are “out of step with America,” while those are policies are actually pretty popular. https://t.co/4KGMzeOuFV
Trump spent his time in office fighting for policies that *barely* even played well with Republican voters. For instance, he devoted time and resources to enacting policies about trans people in the military or accessing healthcare. https://t.co/CV3871q9Ai https://t.co/6qKK7wq023
The tl;dr is that Trump probably would have done better had he not obsessed with right-wing culture war crap and instead just worked on, you know, trying to govern as though he wants the support of everyone.
Like hey, you know what's actually really popular but is constantly treated like the most extreme policy on the face of the earth? Taxing the rich https://t.co/bQVPLiFrKb
And you know what wasn't popular? Trump's tax cut. https://t.co/e6sZWFm45C

If you're wondering why the framing of these things are often so tilted to show GOP policies as mainstream and Dem policies as extreme, it's media decision-makers looking out for their own interests.

More from Parker Molloy

This is a good piece by @AaronBlake. I've been scratching my head over claims that there was something in this trove of emails that implicated Fauci in something bad because pretty much everything matched up with what was being said publicly at whatever time the emails were from.


One thing that's occurred to me over the past few years is that there's a sense that the mere *existence* of emails is seen as evidence of wrongdoing, which is obviously nonsense.

It played out that way when it came to the DNC and Podesta emails in 2016, the Hunter Biden e-mails in 2020, these e-mails in 2021. It wasn't that there was much that was damning in, say, the DNC emails that helped sink Clinton's candidacy, but just their existence ...

... gave off a sense of corruption/scandal/etc., that weighed more heavily on people's perception of them as the result of them taking the form of a leak/data dump.

And it's kind of similar with the Fauci e-mails (which weren't leaked, but were FOIAed).

Anyway, again, @AaronBlake's post is a good and methodical breakdown of some of the bizarre claims being thrown about. If there's anything we didn't already know contained in those e-mails, I haven't seen it.
"Communist Blogger" is my favorite Neutral Milk Hotel song


Anyway, here are some of the "communist" blog posts about the Qongresswoman from Georgia (thread)

In 2018, she agreed with someone who said that 9/11 was an inside job and argued that the school shooting in Parkland, FL was a false flag.

And then there's another time she said that the Parkland shooting was fake

She claimed that there was "never any evidence" that a plane was flown into the Pentagon on 9/11

More from Government

The Government is making the same mistakes as it did in the first wave. Except with knowledge.

A thread.


The Government's strategy at the beginning of the pandemic was to 'cocoon' the vulnerable (e.g. those in care homes). This was a 'herd immunity' strategy. This interview is from


This strategy failed. It is impossible to 'cocoon' the vulnerable, as Covid is passed from younger people to older, more vulnerable people.

We can see this playing out through heatmaps. e.g. these heatmaps from the second


The Government then decided to change its strategy to 'preventing a second wave that overwhelms the NHS'. This was announced on 8 June in Parliament.

This is not the same as 'preventing a second wave'.

https://t.co/DPWiJbCKRm


The Academy of Medical Scientists published a report on 14 July 'Preparing for a Challenging Winter' commissioned by the Chief Scientific Adviser that set out what needed to be done in order to prevent a catastrophe over the winter
Which metric is a better predictor of the severity of the fall surge in US states?

1) Margin of Democrat victory in Nov 2020 election
or
2) % infected through Sep 1, 2020

Can you guess which plot is which?


The left plot is based on the % infected through Sep 1, 2020. You can see that there is very little correlation with the % infected since Sep 1.

However, there is a *strong* correlation when using the margin of Biden's victory (right).

Infections % from
https://t.co/WcXlfxv3Ah.


This is the strongest single variable I've seen in being able to explain the severity of this most recent wave in each state.

Not past infections / existing immunity, population density, racial makeup, latitude / weather / humidity, etc.

But political lean.

One can argue that states that lean Democrat are more likely to implement restrictions/mandates.

This is valid, so we test this by using the Government Stringency Index made by @UniofOxford.

We also see a correlation, but it's weaker (R^2=0.36 vs 0.50).

https://t.co/BxBBKwW6ta


To avoid look-ahead bias/confounding variables, here is the same analysis but using 2016 margin of victory as the predictor. Similar results.

This basically says that 2016 election results is a better predictor of the severity of the fall wave than intervention levels in 2020!

You May Also Like

1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.

Please add your own.

2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you


3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.

“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”

“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”

4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:

“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”

“What’s end-game here?”

“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”

5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:

“What would the best version of yourself do”?