Re No. 9 - I think Biden aligned himself with the Israeli people, not Netanyahu. In fact, Biden has been the single most important yoke on Netanyahu and his steps to deter a broader war involving a fully open front on Israel’s northern border have been successful so far. Hopefully that does not deteriorate any further.
In any event, it denies a meaningful example of Biden’s impeccable statecraft to look at the extraordinarily difficult work he and Blinken had to do post 10/7 by framing his actions as “aligning with Netanyahu.”
If the rift in our coalition is to be healed before November, it’s important to avoid fostering the notion that Biden has been a patsy for Bibi.
I hope the gist of your prediction comes to pass sooner rather than later.
If Biden had preemptively demanded a ceasefire in October like progressives wanted it would only have empowered Bibi and convinced Israelis and their supporters that they were only secure under Republican presidents.
I do think the underrated factor of the presidential race is how completely bonkers Trump has gotten. Like, even relative to 2020. Also how many people are just plain tired of him. He’s exhausting, like all domestic abusers, and I think a lot of people who voted for him because of his game-show persona are just tired of him.
Of course, these factors are underrated because our “liberal” media are still actively covering for him, so we’ll see what happens there.
It's hard to see how he can expand his vote from 2020. If anything it looks to me like the total will go down. But then I was convinced he had no chance in 2016...
Happy New Year. I think Trump will go to trial in DC. I'll give you my reasons here as well as raising another issue that might be worht thinking about.
I think you are right on predictions 1 and 2. Prediction 3 I disagree with for a couple of reasons.
1. Look at the majority you just proposed: Trump's three appointees plus the 2 most corrput justices, one of whom has a pro-insurrection wife and a big pro-insurrection faction among his former clerks. One coudl reasonably suspect him of being, at the very least, insurrectionist-curious himself. That would be an extraordinarly toxic majority.
2. They cannot act sneakily here - which they are always more willing to do - they will have to act overtly.
3. Even with the Jan 6 obstruction charge under are view, I am skeptical that the toxic 5 will be willing to throw a lifeline to 1) hundreds of the more serious Jan 6 offenders or 2) to Trump himself. I also think that a narrowed version of the charge at issue here may still be applicable to Trump given that part of his conspiracy involved the creation of false papers (electoral vote certificates). I could maybe see Jack Smith looking at the DC circuit dissents and trying to present evidence at trial that would satisfy those dissenting judges.
All in all, I think SCOTUS will affirm or mostly affirm the corruption charge, and that for one reason or another, it may not hinder Jack Smith.
I also think you are right about which way SCOTUS will go on the 14th Amendment Section 3 cases.
But I wanted to mention on thing that bothers me a lot about the coverage and the reaction sof various elected officials.
When losing candidate Trump and his campaing and supporters filed scores of lawsuits in 2020, most if not all of them were completely without merit, and arguably if not obviously frivolous. Plenty of people opposed to Trump defended those lawsuits. Liz Cheney must have said 50 different times that Trump had a right to seek redress in the courts and in cour constitutional system we should trust the courts to get it right.
Contrast that to a lot of what we are hearing in commentary on the 14th Amendment cases. Here, we have an argument that is, at the very worst, credible. And yet, we have media and even elected officials saying that these suits and challenges are bad and that we should "let the voters decide." 3 of Maine's 4 members of Congress have criticized the Maine Secretary of State for doing her job to the best of her abilities. Why shouldn't everhyone be following the Liz Cheney 2020 lead here and saying "In our constitutional system, voters have a right to seek redress through our legal system, just as then President Trump did in 2020. Whatever our personal views may be, we should be trusting the courts to get this right, just as we did back then. That's what our constitutional all about."
I think it is destructive to assert that the single greatest opponent of our constitutional order in over 150 years should be entitled to every benefit the constitution gives him, while those who oppose him should not avail themselves of the same benefits.
Not done reading, but definitely agreed with #2. To me, this is one of the most gratingly tiresome aspects of the current era - the absurd extent to which hopium and wishcasting so ubiquitously masquerade as meaningful commentary.
Inclined to agree. But I probably fall into that gratingly tiresome group, since I have no particular expertise and am left with little besides hopes, wishes and other feelings to share. Imagine an online discussion from which the latter were completely barred: I for one would feel completely alone and therefore completely without hope, which is a very hard way to live, and is not conducive to the ACTION that is so needed.
For me, I just got so tired of the constant day-to-day outrage cycle. It felt energizing and activating, but over time it began to feel *wrong* that nothing ever changed despite all the effort and outrage.
I started looking for answers, and stopped letting myself ride that daily cycle. I stopped commenting on every last going-on in the news. And I stopped feeling like I had to have answers for it all - I got more comfortable with accepting nuance and uncertainty.
I still don’t have all the answers. But what I’ve been able to piece together is that this stuff most closely resembles that old quote about how “there are decades that go by as if it was only a week, and weeks where entire decades happen”.
Change happens both gradually and in fits and spurts. The people who manage to make the most of it are the ones who correctly understand what’s going on, who don’t allow their partisan blinders to misguide them, and who understand that they need to be ready at a moment’s notice. So, that’s mostly what I try to do these days.
Addendum: One thing that this has helped me with is to “see around corners” better. The usual news cycle rarely shocks me anymore. I can relax and anticipate things. I can see the trends for what they are, and how they ACTUALLY might end, not just how I *want* them to end.
I still don't buy that SCOTUS will use the Fischer case to delay Trump's DC trial (or at least, delay it past June). However, I do think if Biden wins, and Ds take the House and keep the Senate, Ds will carve out the filibuster for not just Roe but a new VRA. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the VRA takes precedence over Roe (I personally think it should).
This actually all seems plausible to me except for Biden offering Ivanka anything at all. I realize it may have entertained you greatly to write that, but, seriously? Why would he? It will appease no one and piss off many.
It really does feel like the whole world is tip-toeing through land mines. We have numerous far-right militias who are increasingly radicalized, emboldened by Trump himself, Fox, and countless online fascist influencers. Ongoing wars and brewing conflicts. Both likely presidential nominees are so old that if there was headline tomorrow that either one of them died in their sleep, it wouldn’t be much of a surprise.
There’s just so much unknown coming this year. Trump is so increasingly deranged, every rally and interview is an opportunity to say something wild like “Hitler’s ghost is going to be my VP” or whatever. That’s my prediction: Trump continues to out-crazy himself, which ends up in more Republicans staying home, and more Dems turning up to vote.
All the stuff we know about seems fraught scary, and all the unknown elements are even scarier! Glad to have a commentator like yourself during such crazy times.
I suspect when the Fed cuts interest rates, it will be a turning point. I think it is one of those things that the financial media is obsessed with. Outlets like the WSJ saying soft landing will give Dem politicians, main stream media, and regular joes the perspective that we are on a good economic road with a lot of runway.
If you can get the Red Dog Dems to not run against their party, which good economic sentiment will likely do, the Dems have a real chance to make their economic message heard.
Lots to like here! Though on the SCOTUS issues my prediction is that they will simply decline to hear the appeal of his immunity defense and let the outcome from the DC circuit stand.
I like that your predictions are a mix of serious and some not quite serious and that you take accountability for them. The mainstream journos would probably take the assignment and themselves too seriously to see the futility in trying to predict with certainty what's going to happen in 2024. My prediction is "it's going to be nuts."
I'll take it
Re No. 9 - I think Biden aligned himself with the Israeli people, not Netanyahu. In fact, Biden has been the single most important yoke on Netanyahu and his steps to deter a broader war involving a fully open front on Israel’s northern border have been successful so far. Hopefully that does not deteriorate any further.
In any event, it denies a meaningful example of Biden’s impeccable statecraft to look at the extraordinarily difficult work he and Blinken had to do post 10/7 by framing his actions as “aligning with Netanyahu.”
If the rift in our coalition is to be healed before November, it’s important to avoid fostering the notion that Biden has been a patsy for Bibi.
I hope the gist of your prediction comes to pass sooner rather than later.
If Biden had preemptively demanded a ceasefire in October like progressives wanted it would only have empowered Bibi and convinced Israelis and their supporters that they were only secure under Republican presidents.
I do think the underrated factor of the presidential race is how completely bonkers Trump has gotten. Like, even relative to 2020. Also how many people are just plain tired of him. He’s exhausting, like all domestic abusers, and I think a lot of people who voted for him because of his game-show persona are just tired of him.
Of course, these factors are underrated because our “liberal” media are still actively covering for him, so we’ll see what happens there.
It's hard to see how he can expand his vote from 2020. If anything it looks to me like the total will go down. But then I was convinced he had no chance in 2016...
Happy New Year. I think Trump will go to trial in DC. I'll give you my reasons here as well as raising another issue that might be worht thinking about.
I think you are right on predictions 1 and 2. Prediction 3 I disagree with for a couple of reasons.
1. Look at the majority you just proposed: Trump's three appointees plus the 2 most corrput justices, one of whom has a pro-insurrection wife and a big pro-insurrection faction among his former clerks. One coudl reasonably suspect him of being, at the very least, insurrectionist-curious himself. That would be an extraordinarly toxic majority.
2. They cannot act sneakily here - which they are always more willing to do - they will have to act overtly.
3. Even with the Jan 6 obstruction charge under are view, I am skeptical that the toxic 5 will be willing to throw a lifeline to 1) hundreds of the more serious Jan 6 offenders or 2) to Trump himself. I also think that a narrowed version of the charge at issue here may still be applicable to Trump given that part of his conspiracy involved the creation of false papers (electoral vote certificates). I could maybe see Jack Smith looking at the DC circuit dissents and trying to present evidence at trial that would satisfy those dissenting judges.
All in all, I think SCOTUS will affirm or mostly affirm the corruption charge, and that for one reason or another, it may not hinder Jack Smith.
I also think you are right about which way SCOTUS will go on the 14th Amendment Section 3 cases.
But I wanted to mention on thing that bothers me a lot about the coverage and the reaction sof various elected officials.
When losing candidate Trump and his campaing and supporters filed scores of lawsuits in 2020, most if not all of them were completely without merit, and arguably if not obviously frivolous. Plenty of people opposed to Trump defended those lawsuits. Liz Cheney must have said 50 different times that Trump had a right to seek redress in the courts and in cour constitutional system we should trust the courts to get it right.
Contrast that to a lot of what we are hearing in commentary on the 14th Amendment cases. Here, we have an argument that is, at the very worst, credible. And yet, we have media and even elected officials saying that these suits and challenges are bad and that we should "let the voters decide." 3 of Maine's 4 members of Congress have criticized the Maine Secretary of State for doing her job to the best of her abilities. Why shouldn't everhyone be following the Liz Cheney 2020 lead here and saying "In our constitutional system, voters have a right to seek redress through our legal system, just as then President Trump did in 2020. Whatever our personal views may be, we should be trusting the courts to get this right, just as we did back then. That's what our constitutional all about."
I think it is destructive to assert that the single greatest opponent of our constitutional order in over 150 years should be entitled to every benefit the constitution gives him, while those who oppose him should not avail themselves of the same benefits.
Not done reading, but definitely agreed with #2. To me, this is one of the most gratingly tiresome aspects of the current era - the absurd extent to which hopium and wishcasting so ubiquitously masquerade as meaningful commentary.
Inclined to agree. But I probably fall into that gratingly tiresome group, since I have no particular expertise and am left with little besides hopes, wishes and other feelings to share. Imagine an online discussion from which the latter were completely barred: I for one would feel completely alone and therefore completely without hope, which is a very hard way to live, and is not conducive to the ACTION that is so needed.
I felt similarly at one point.
For me, I just got so tired of the constant day-to-day outrage cycle. It felt energizing and activating, but over time it began to feel *wrong* that nothing ever changed despite all the effort and outrage.
I started looking for answers, and stopped letting myself ride that daily cycle. I stopped commenting on every last going-on in the news. And I stopped feeling like I had to have answers for it all - I got more comfortable with accepting nuance and uncertainty.
I still don’t have all the answers. But what I’ve been able to piece together is that this stuff most closely resembles that old quote about how “there are decades that go by as if it was only a week, and weeks where entire decades happen”.
Change happens both gradually and in fits and spurts. The people who manage to make the most of it are the ones who correctly understand what’s going on, who don’t allow their partisan blinders to misguide them, and who understand that they need to be ready at a moment’s notice. So, that’s mostly what I try to do these days.
Addendum: One thing that this has helped me with is to “see around corners” better. The usual news cycle rarely shocks me anymore. I can relax and anticipate things. I can see the trends for what they are, and how they ACTUALLY might end, not just how I *want* them to end.
If prediction #10 turns out to be correct, then #19 will at least FEEL correct for about 80 million Americans.
I still don't buy that SCOTUS will use the Fischer case to delay Trump's DC trial (or at least, delay it past June). However, I do think if Biden wins, and Ds take the House and keep the Senate, Ds will carve out the filibuster for not just Roe but a new VRA. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the VRA takes precedence over Roe (I personally think it should).
I hope you're right!
This actually all seems plausible to me except for Biden offering Ivanka anything at all. I realize it may have entertained you greatly to write that, but, seriously? Why would he? It will appease no one and piss off many.
I mostly included it for fun.
Thought so.
I like reasonable hopium!
It really does feel like the whole world is tip-toeing through land mines. We have numerous far-right militias who are increasingly radicalized, emboldened by Trump himself, Fox, and countless online fascist influencers. Ongoing wars and brewing conflicts. Both likely presidential nominees are so old that if there was headline tomorrow that either one of them died in their sleep, it wouldn’t be much of a surprise.
There’s just so much unknown coming this year. Trump is so increasingly deranged, every rally and interview is an opportunity to say something wild like “Hitler’s ghost is going to be my VP” or whatever. That’s my prediction: Trump continues to out-crazy himself, which ends up in more Republicans staying home, and more Dems turning up to vote.
All the stuff we know about seems fraught scary, and all the unknown elements are even scarier! Glad to have a commentator like yourself during such crazy times.
Thanks as always Jacob.
Totally loved this.
I suspect when the Fed cuts interest rates, it will be a turning point. I think it is one of those things that the financial media is obsessed with. Outlets like the WSJ saying soft landing will give Dem politicians, main stream media, and regular joes the perspective that we are on a good economic road with a lot of runway.
If you can get the Red Dog Dems to not run against their party, which good economic sentiment will likely do, the Dems have a real chance to make their economic message heard.
I want like 100 more predictions
Lots to like here! Though on the SCOTUS issues my prediction is that they will simply decline to hear the appeal of his immunity defense and let the outcome from the DC circuit stand.
Well, I am glad SOMEBODY is optimistic. Saving this to read weekly.
Younger, you say. Please sell that elixir. I will pay any price.
I like that your predictions are a mix of serious and some not quite serious and that you take accountability for them. The mainstream journos would probably take the assignment and themselves too seriously to see the futility in trying to predict with certainty what's going to happen in 2024. My prediction is "it's going to be nuts."