I knew when I heard Champ’s age, the Joe was going to lose another family member, during his presidency I just didn’t think it would be so soon. When it comes to personal loss, Joe Biden’s had more than his share.
Timex
3204
So this guy wants to NOT improve our highways OR our airports?
What exactly are we supposed to do to… you know… move around the country? Trains everywhere?
Or maybe it doesn’t matter, since this guy lives in a big city?
Guy correctly points out that a bill to improve highways and airports doesn’t really address climate change and shouldn’t be touted as a climate change bill, and your response is…this?
Better roads means more efficient driving… So maybe?
Not sure about Airports.
I think decades of highway capacity improvement shows that the volume of traffic always increases to fill the capacity and ultimately produce the same inefficiency. What you get from more driving capacity is…more driving.
In any event, the guy is right, this isn’t really a climate change bill.
Actually, I’m thinking better material on roads, reducing wear and tear of tires, and the roads themselves, which should reduce the need for maintenance and replacement on both, which ultimately is better for the environment.
Potholes and road damage have an impact on tires and cars in general. Reducing those should have a read world impact on climate, even if small.
Timex
3209
The actual bill has stuff that isn’t JUST roads and bridges.
It includes the surface transportation bill that was approved unanimously by a Senate committee last month and boosts funding for highways, roads and bridges to $300 billion — a more than 30 percent increase from what we previously spent. It will fix rail lines and improve public transit, easing congestion, cutting commute times, reducing emissions, and connecting people with new opportunities in nearby cities and towns. It will reduce bottlenecks by expanding port and airport capacity, and it will build out electric vehicle infrastructure and modernize our electric grid.
Perhaps, but there aren’t any numbers in that summary, and in any event, it doesn’t make this response any more correct:
You might as well ask why he hates America.
sometimes infrastructure week finds you
Your early front-runner for big issue in 2022 and 2024?
Crime.
Huge issue in the NYC mayoral race. And that is not super-great news for the Democratic party’s progressive wing. Whether it’s a fair assessment or not, the perception is that progressive Democrats in office or progressive candidates aren’t strong on crime – again, at least in the perception of independent voters.
I agree with that assessment. It’s worrying, because the Dems need really strong Black turnout to win, and Dems getting strong on crime hurts Dems with that base.
That said, that NYC mayoral race, lots of places voted for the cop mayor and for defund the police council.
Dems need to find a way to blame the Republicans for crime.
When it comes to politics, there really is nothing new under the sun.
Alstein
3215
Most folk don’t see themselves as criminals or think the police will come after them. While that’s changing a bit due to 2020, it’s still a minority. The police kinda know that the white moderate is the one group they need to keep on their side.
Point out all the criming done by elected Republicans?
Not infrastructure per se, but another horrible collapse:
I mean, i agree and have been hearing about this for some times, but it’s also funny that crime isn’t really an issue until it hits NYC - it’s clearly a reflection of who are doing the talking. Even during the crime surges in Chicago, well, it’s apparently a midwest state and there wasn’t a top-down worry about crime from the intelligencia other than its more local effects.
I mean obviously a crime surge across the country combined with Progressives demanding massive reductions in police aren’t going to fit together. It’s like i’ve warned about for some time, progressives need to peel apart police militarization and the decline in police fatalities, even though they track almost 1:1 with one another, or accept that the two are related.
Fox so racialized the crime in Chicago that Dems won’t listen to the complaints anymore.
I usually hear Fox propganada once every two weeks or so for about 15-20 mins. Every single time I hear black-on-black crime and dogwhistles about black folks.
I’ve seen the effects its had on my mom, who went from being surprisingly tolerant to pretty bad now over 20 years of this shit rotting her brain.
If the purpose of policing is reduce police fatalities, they should just stay home. Certainly they shouldn’t drive anywhere. Maybe avoid the bathtub or shower, too.
I wasn’t trying to get into that debate - though i suppose i asked for it by asserting a proposition in such a way that the reader has to assume its truth without comment - but just made an example parallel to how the rise of violent crime post-Pandemic seems at odds with “defund the police” movements, and that these movements are now going forward going to look like a liability if voters in areas suffering from violent crime (the implicit assertion here) are going to vote against “defunding” and for bringing crime levels down.
The horrible core problem with racism in the US democratic systems is that African Americans lack the numbers to act as a decisive voting block, and defund the police movements are more or less in defense and service of African American communities. When liberals start tut-tutting about crime, they’re worried that the larger non-AA voting blocks are going to swing against them decisively on this issue. Defund the Police is all well and good on paper until Conservative pols start blowing out Dems in election campaigns on issues of containing crime, and to some extent DtP depends upon an underlying lack of criminality needing policing. I worry liberals may be mixing up cause and effect, like my example asserts above.
Certainly otoh criminal scientists don’t believe there’s a strong correlation between falling crime levels and increased policing, but i’m also skeptical of these findings to be honest, because i’m suspicious of social sciences in general today where too often answers chase evidence. It’s also the only lever that has an easy answer (more crime, more police).
Banzai
3222
Especially if fox says it’s all those people with less than pale skin doing the criming. Gotta keep them under heel.
