i don't think that harris should concern herself much with palestinian activists. they have very wealth donors, but they're a fringe minority.

she should focus more on pocketbook issues, and on restoring the democratic party's cultural status as the party of young people, which might be difficult. people are concerned about making ends meet right now.

this is black box harris at work: you can imagine she'll do whatever you want her to do. baby.

i actually think that harris is probably more pro-jewish than biden and that her language about too many people dying is just politics. biden is the master of smoke and mirrors, so it takes a little bit of effort to figure out that at the root of his policy is a a personality conflict with netanyahu, and a desire to take him down a notch. frankly, not many people can get away with this, either, but biden should not be meddling in this process the way he has been, he's just creating problems, not solutions. i've posted about this before. a summary is that while many arabs may legitimately want peace, the iranians and their proxies do not, and he's consequently out of touch and fighting the wrong war. that boat has sailed. he actually wants to put the palestinian authority in charge of gaza, which is just literally turning the clocks back and will obviously create a civil war.

i don't actually expect harris is going to spend much time on the middle east at all, if she wins (which i'd consider to be unlikely at this point). i hope she sends blinken to the Neville Chamberlin Cemetary of Failed Statesman. besides that, i wouldn't expect much at all.

rather, i would expect harris to take a dramatic veer towards domestic policy and hold to it, while delegating these foreign policy issues to military experts that know better, which is what biden should be doing but isn't.

for now, though, you can imagine what harris will do, and pretend you can support it. that's her upside as a candidate, and sometimes it works, but not this time, i don't think.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/18/opinion/biden-israel-policy-harris.html

the reason that putin invaded ukraine was to prevent a nato military buildup.

everything that's happened, to this point, proves his analysis was right: the west was intending on stockpiling weapons in ukraine until it burst over, so the russians could strike first or have to deal with a trilogy of russian history books one day called {napoleon bonaparte, adolf hitler, kanye west}. we were on the brink, truly.

so, he was right, and it's time for the naysayers to admit it.

it's also increasingly looking like he took too long to react and has failed.

everybody loses here except china, who cleans up the mess.

biden won't live to see it or understand it if he can see it.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/15/biden-missiles-ukraine-russia-00174147

of course mr. t would be mr. t.

mr. t is always mr. t.

imagine mr. t explaining that he ain't got nothing against cat ladies, but he pities the one that doesn't change the litter regularly.

it's potentially genius.

the problem with that cast is that it would likely actually be funny, so scratch that.

what's will ferrell up to?

conan o'brien is still alive.

i think.

also, it's too bad norm macdonald is dead.

i guess the next best rfk would be colin quinn.

what?

you can't tell what colour the macaque's skin colour is underneath the fur, anyways.

reading through this, i'm left to conclude that your average snl fan is about 75 years old, which is probably true.

they should give this a good go because, like biden, they are about set to retire.

fwiw, i'd like to see mr. t play jd vance and al franken play tim walz.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/08/arts/television/snl-2024-election-harris-trump.html

send joe biden your wishlist, i think he might be in the mood to be your easter bunny.

what do i want him to do in the next couple of months that he might actually do?

i'm not sure, actually; i don't live in the united states.

think about it.