Asha, many thanks for the Friday Round Up. Special thanks for the link to Jennifer Mercieca’s article. Now over to the podcast to check on Henry and Pancake. 🤞no on air attack this week 😁
I found the article by Mr Sargent quite enlightening-appreciate you sending it on. The survey questions (wrt things that are way off track) ....and the responses.... were especially telling. Sure wish the survey had follow up Q's about what exactly the respondents thought were things that are "way off track". I suspect many respondents would struggle to identify things that are supported by actual data. Thx for your time and effort Prof Rangappa.
Asha, I just finished listening to your podcast. As you described Trump's strategy - he makes an unfounded claim, like the media is against me, and then the media holds him accountable for something he said, and that's proof that the mediia is against him - I screamed YES!!! at my computer screen. That perfectly and succintly captures his communications strategy.
Also, I am very disturbed that judges - and you and Renato - don't know what to do with his courtoom antics. As a teacher dealing with student rule-breaking behavior, it's very clear to me: We employ escalating consequences. First time, you get a warning. Second time you are sent out of the classroom to the office where your behavior is recorded in your record. Third time, a call from the principal to the parent. If the behavior doesn't stop after that, suspension. At the top is expulsion (this is a private school).
Yes, consequences judges will impose on Trump's rule-breaking in their courtroom will contribute to his victim narrative in the political sphere. So what? Isn't the DOJ watchword "without fear or favor"? Surely that's the same for the judiciary. Isn't favoring him in not adhering to escalating consequences allowing him to destroy the rule of law, the foundation of our Constitutional democratic republic? That's much worse than giving him fodder for his victim narrative. It reminds me of a parent who lacks a sense of their own authority and allows their children to run them (see any episode of Nanny 911).
I've always seen the courts as the last bulwark against Trump. To see such wobbling is very distressing. Am I overreacting?
Asha - just a question for you on another topic. What is it called when in political speech the meanings of words are inverted. For example, in MAGA world, Trump is strong because he never apologizes. In fact, it takes a strong character to admit your mistakes.
Thank you for all you do Asha!!👍👍
Asha, many thanks for the Friday Round Up. Special thanks for the link to Jennifer Mercieca’s article. Now over to the podcast to check on Henry and Pancake. 🤞no on air attack this week 😁
I found the article by Mr Sargent quite enlightening-appreciate you sending it on. The survey questions (wrt things that are way off track) ....and the responses.... were especially telling. Sure wish the survey had follow up Q's about what exactly the respondents thought were things that are "way off track". I suspect many respondents would struggle to identify things that are supported by actual data. Thx for your time and effort Prof Rangappa.
Asha, I just finished listening to your podcast. As you described Trump's strategy - he makes an unfounded claim, like the media is against me, and then the media holds him accountable for something he said, and that's proof that the mediia is against him - I screamed YES!!! at my computer screen. That perfectly and succintly captures his communications strategy.
Also, I am very disturbed that judges - and you and Renato - don't know what to do with his courtoom antics. As a teacher dealing with student rule-breaking behavior, it's very clear to me: We employ escalating consequences. First time, you get a warning. Second time you are sent out of the classroom to the office where your behavior is recorded in your record. Third time, a call from the principal to the parent. If the behavior doesn't stop after that, suspension. At the top is expulsion (this is a private school).
Yes, consequences judges will impose on Trump's rule-breaking in their courtroom will contribute to his victim narrative in the political sphere. So what? Isn't the DOJ watchword "without fear or favor"? Surely that's the same for the judiciary. Isn't favoring him in not adhering to escalating consequences allowing him to destroy the rule of law, the foundation of our Constitutional democratic republic? That's much worse than giving him fodder for his victim narrative. It reminds me of a parent who lacks a sense of their own authority and allows their children to run them (see any episode of Nanny 911).
I've always seen the courts as the last bulwark against Trump. To see such wobbling is very distressing. Am I overreacting?
Asha - just a question for you on another topic. What is it called when in political speech the meanings of words are inverted. For example, in MAGA world, Trump is strong because he never apologizes. In fact, it takes a strong character to admit your mistakes.
Thx.