“Progressive” mayors gathered by @ppi say Midnight Basketball helps. Split on trade.

| 1 hour ago on Twitter


Hack shows pro-Hillary DNC thinks immig “advocates” are reckless. Maybe Putin is trying to elect Hillary after all. twitter.com/MarkSKrikorian…

| 5 hours ago on Twitter


Was persuasive piece–“bounce” hard to get w/2 well-known candidates. Makes pro-Trump swing all the more impressive twitter.com/kausmickey/sta…

| 7 hours ago on Twitter


I admit I exepcted more. 19,000 emails and this is all there is? Maybe they all have private servers … twitter.com/DavidMDrucker/…

| 1 day ago on Twitter


That “2016’s increase in gunfire deaths so far came aftr decades of decline” is precisely wht makes [it] so striking city-journal.org/html/trump-rig…

| 1 day ago on Twitter


Don’t understand why it’s so bad to let a source see story, as long as you only fix errors & otherwise stand firm read.bi/2a1XLbI

| 1 day ago on Twitter


Problem is editorials are what people least want to pay for, but what you most want people who won’t pay to read. twitter.com/EmGusk/status/…

| 1 day ago on Twitter


It would be easier to agree that Kaine is “fluent” in Spanish if I heard him say one sentence I didn’t understand. (I am not fluent.)

| 2 days ago on Twitter


Hillary thinks Vilsack, Perez, Booker, Castro not ready to “serve as President if she can’t”? Good to know!

| 2 days ago on Twitter

1 President Truliani

Trump’s speech:  Effective enough.

1) Reagan’s famous circuit-tested “The Speech” was all facts like Trump’s opening. Can be very powerful.

2) Smart decision to implicitly praise Obama (for putatively regretting appointing Hillary!);

3) ‘Americanism not Globalism’ — This section kind of skimpy. Trump seems to have chosen the more conventional law-and-order template. Not so interesting, but he’s not trying for tenure.

4) “Things will never change” vs. “things have to change.” Auspicious anti-reification theme! ‘The Democrats have explained the economy in various ways. …’

5) Hillary’s ‘Terrible, terrible crimes’ — a bit overstated, no? Terrible judgment, yes.

6) Not sure I like the ‘I’m the strong man who can defend you powerless people’ posture.  In a democracy, people aren’t powerless. Why not say that?

7)  “Abandon policy of … regime change.” Can’t say it’s substanceless.

8) “Decades of record immigration have produced lower wages and higher unemployment for our citizens, especially for African-American and Latino workers.” OK, I’m happy. But Trump quickly goes back to talking about violence. Would prefer mockery of open-borders economic Polyannaism, like that of … Paul Ryan.

9) ‘Not alone any longer.’ OK, that resonates.

10) Any sellout on The Wall just got a bit harder;

11) Visa overstay issue is important to Latino voters — i.e. it’s not just the people (mainly Latinos) sneaking across the Mexican border who can bid down wages and take U.S. jobs.

12)  “Americans want relief from uncontrolled immigration. … Hillary Clinton is proposing mass amnesty, mass immigration, and mass lawlessness. Her plan will overwhelm your schools and hospitals.” Brexit-tested!

13) OK, the Steve Miller section’s over. Time to wrap it up. …

14) Promise to appoint “a person of similar views” to Scalia seems way more significant than Trump’s previously released list of judges (a list that he said could be added to later, meaning it didn’t restrict him much);  

15: “I will fight for you.” Bob Shrum wins again.**

[Posted yesterday at Breitbart.com, where the commenters don’t seem to like it much. They’re very strict! ]


**–Though Trump adds, “and I will win for you,” which isn’t insignificant. The classic Shrum formulations — “I’m on your side,” “I will fight for you” — always seemed to implicitly acknowledge the futility of the Democratic effort to, for example, reverse growing income inequality or — more recently — wage stagnation.


Not an actual, measured contraction. A decline in purchasing manager confidence “consistent with” .4% contraction. twitter.com/HPSInsight/sta…

| 3 days ago on Twitter