Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

Socialism

Socialist Moment

Plus: right-wing burrito wars, a star scholar resigns, Fauci's pandemic phone, and more...

Peter Suderman | 8.6.2026 9:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Abdul El-Sayed | Andrew Roth/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom (edited)
(Andrew Roth/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom (edited))

Socialist calculation problem: Remember the libertarian moment? Well, this feels like the socialist moment. 

Young insurgent candidates on the left, many of whom have current or former ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, are winning in the Democratic Party. It's basically the "socialism" rap from the 1998 Warren Beattie movie, Bulworth, played out in real life. And rather than fight back, the party's leadership seems to be mostly embracing those left-of-center wins. 

Yes, as Shane Goldmacher reports in The New York Times, some avowedly moderate Democratic activist groups like Third Way want to fend off the takeover of what the group calls "radical, far-left candidates." 

The Reason Roundup Newsletter by Liz Wolfe Liz and Reason help you make sense of the day's news every morning.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

But the same article also notes that after progressive insurgent Abdul El-Sayed won yesterday's big Senate primary in Michigan on a campaign that harshly critiqued the party's center, "most party leaders—from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan to Senator Chuck Schumer of New York to former Vice President Kamala Harris—quickly embraced Dr. El-Sayed's Senate candidacy, given the stakes of the Michigan seat at the play."

There are real questions, however, about whether El-Sayed can actually win that seat in November.

A separate Times story frames the upcoming midterm as a test of a long-running argument inside the party: "Since Senator Bernie Sanders exploded onto the national stage in 2016, progressives have argued that their party's path to victory runs through a populist economic agenda that can attract a broad coalition of working-class voters. Centrists have pushed back, saying such proposals alienate the moderate voters the party must sway to win back areas where it has lost ground in recent years." The centrists may have a point. 

In the days leading up to the vote, El-Sayed's radical campaign looked like it would coast to victory. Some polls had him up by double digits. But in the end, he only won the primary by a narrow margin. 

His problem, it turns out, is that like so many of the party's new radical-left up-and-comers, he doesn't perform well with the party's key voting blocks. Democrats know this. Puck reports that "Democratic lawmakers repeatedly pushed the D.S.C.C. [Democratic Senate Campaign Committee] to fund attack ads against El-Sayed," focusing on his dicey associations with controversial characters like Hasan Piker.

One question going into the primary was whether a loudly left-leaning candidate would play outside of deep blue, highly educated coastal metro areas—places like New York's so-called commie corridor. 

So who is the constituency for El-Sayed's brand of fiery populism? Turns out that even in Michigan, it's basically the same demographic that lives in New York's commie corridor. 

As The Wall Street Journal notes: "El-Sayed topped [moderate rival Haley] Stevens in counties where bachelor's degrees are plentiful, including those that are home to the University of Michigan and Michigan State. But he lagged behind in counties with lower educational attainment, a sign that working-class voters might be skeptical of candidates modeling themselves as champions of the working-class." El-Sayed is not an outlier in this respect. The new working-class populism, it turns out, is not very popular with the working class. But with El-Sayed's win, and others, Democratic leaders are standing behind it. 

Burrito Wars. Socialism is dividing the left. So what's dividing the right? Burritos. Specifically, burritos that supposedly cost $20.

pic.twitter.com/TEGeIyoC06

— The Drunk Republican (@DrunkRepub) August 5, 2026

As is often the case with social media arguments, this one takes some twists and turns and doesn't exactly proceed in an easy-to-follow, linear fashion. 

But Matt Yglesias had a terse, reasonably useful summary of how things went. 

Matt Walsh says high grocery prices are a key vulnerability for Trump.

Andrew Kolvet says expensive Chipotle doesn't hurt either.

Thiessen defends Trump.

Vance calls Thiessen fat. pic.twitter.com/tpuaNktpuN

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) August 5, 2026

In many ways, this is a debate about inflation.

Burritos don't quite cost $20, unless you have them delivered (or you're eating really fancy burritos).

And there are ways to economize on food, though they require some advance planning and responsibility. 

"A burrito shouldn't cost $20." But that's what it costs.

This is why I pack a lunch every single day, no exceptions! I almost forgot this morning, so I went back to the kitchen even though I was running late.

Note that when I was a financially irresponsible young person, I… https://t.co/kgeHP1Gvvc

— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) August 5, 2026

But food prices really have gone up since COVID-19, thanks first to inflation resulting from former President Joe Biden's overspending, and then to price increases stemming from President Donald Trump's tariffs, war in Iran, and labor crackdowns. 

But look deeper, and it's really an argument between the right's domestic populists and more internationally focused conservative hawks. 

The intra-right burrito debate basically has two camps: On the one hand, there are folks like Ben Shapiro, who are more supportive of the war in Iran (at least in theory, if not necessarily the precise way it has been executed), but who would also like to see an end to Trump's tariffs and a revitalized focus on market-friendly domestic economic policy.

Current "common good conservative" inflation messaging: $20 burritos are a human right but also every serious methodology for making them cheaper (i.e. kill the tariffs, break the unions, and deregulate the food supply chain) isn't America First, so we need to complain a lot… https://t.co/GKST1az6jf

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 5, 2026

On the other side are right-wing war skeptics, some of whom have supported populist domestic economic policies, like tariffs. 

So which is the more important conservative priority: Trump's unpopular tariffs or Trump's unpopular war? 

Under Trump, it turns out, we get both. 


Scenes from the greater Boston area: Boston's restaurants are in deep, deep trouble, reports The Boston Globe. I recently visited The Baldwin Bar, a fantastic Chinese bar/tiki bar hybrid in Woburn, Massachusetts, about half an hour from Boston proper. I've been several times before, and the food and drinks remain excellent. But even on a weekend night, it felt half empty. It's a shame; Boston could use a great food scene. But regulations, taxes, and overall food-price inflation have made it tougher than ever to operate a restaurant. 


QUICK HITS

  • University of Cambridge professor Jason Arday, once vaunted as the youngest black professor in the university's history, has resigned after mounting questions about plagiarism and fabrication in his academic work and personal history. Arday has denied academic malfeasance. But it has been pretty obvious that there were multiple serious problems with his work and his biographical claims; what's notable is how long Cambridge and others stood by him. Arday has a book scheduled to come out next week. When The New York Times asked about the book in light of the scandal, the publisher "had no comment beyond the statement about Arday it released last week, citing 'the professionalism and integrity he has brought to every stage of the publication.'" We'll see how long that position can hold.
  • A Senate panel has obtained a copy of the iPhone Anthony Fauci used during COVID-19, reports The Wall Street Journal. 
  • The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the government savings effort headed by Elon Musk, got a lot of details wrong, including touting some spending cuts that never actually happened, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office. 
  • James Cameron, the blockbuster director behind Aliens, the first two Terminator films, True Lies, and Titanic, might finally be moving on from the Avatar films. I hope he makes some non-Avatar movies! 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Why James Madison Wanted Greater Limits on States’ Rights

Peter Suderman is features editor at Reason.

SocialismDemocratic PartyCampaigns/ElectionsProgressivesInflationMichiganIranPoliticsReason Roundup
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (252)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    Remember the libertarian moment?

    I do not, in fact.

    1. Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)   2 months ago

      Welch and gilespy wrote a book about it. And the book turned out to be as accurate as all of their comments

      1. Dakotian (descendent of Kulaks)   2 months ago

        I think one of the reasons Welch and Gillespie has such a personal problem and hatred of Trump and MAGA is that MAGA ruined their "Libertarian Moment". Pre Trump Republicans dissatisfied with the RINO status quo in their party would look at the Libertarian Party as an option. But then Trump came along with MAGA and gave a lot of conservatives another, more popular, option.
        It didn't help that the Libertarian party nominated terrible candidates in the last 2 Presidential elections.

        1. Marshal   2 months ago

          I think one of the reasons Welch and Gillespie has such a personal problem and hatred of Trump and MAGA is that MAGA ruined their "Libertarian Moment"

          Public libertarians, like Reason writers, ruined the Libertarian Moment by openly attacking people trying to ally with us as not perfectly libertarian. When they opposed spending we attacked them for not accepting abortion. When they wanted to lower taxes we attacked them for not legalizing all drugs.

          Nobody is more to blame for missing the libertarian moment than Reason.

          1. mad.casual   2 months ago

            I think there's a bit of talking past each other going on.

            There should be some clarity about what Welch and Gillespie *thought* was going on in and around Trump and The Libertarian Moment and what was actually going on.

            Even within Reason across the more-than decade since "Ron Paul/It's happening!" meme, there was a turn from "[increasing intonation]*Libertarian-leaning!*[mumble]republican" to "[mumble]libertarian-leaning[raised, gruff voice]*Republican!*".

          2. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

            Those that bypassed the MAGA KoolAid stand would state it like this.

            Public libertarians, like Reason writers, ruined the Libertarian Moment by openly attacking people trying to ally with us as not perfectly libertarian [overtly authoritarian]. When they opposed spending we attacked them for not accepting abortion [massively increasing spending]. When they wanted to lower taxes we attacked them for not legalizing all drugs. [illegally creating the largest tax increase in decades via tariffs by executive order].

            1. Marshal   2 months ago

              we attacked them for not accepting abortion [massively increasing spending].

              As is usual leftists combine the groups so they can claim people supported the things they actually opposed. In reality this is exactly what Tea Partiers opposed, and once they were marginalized others did this. Naturally leftists try to pin it on them because they aren't interested in reality, only in attacking the enemy.

              [illegally creating the largest tax increase in decades via tariffs by executive order].

              This was a decade after the fact and shows QB has no understanding of events and is grasping for post-hoc justifications.

              1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                Tea Partiers? Dakotian's comment is about MAGA ruining the libertarian moment, not the Tea Party.

                QB has no understanding of events

                Now what was it you were saying about leftists turning to personal attacks? Also, do events include the comment you are responding to?

                1. Marshal   2 months ago

                  Tea Partiers? Dakotian's comment is about MAGA ruining the libertarian moment, not the Tea Party.

                  The Tea Party began the libertarian moment, giving libertarians hope that our interests could be prioritized over other issues we didn't care about. That culminated in the hope that Gary Johnson's run in 2016 could be impactful, which was then crushed by Trump whose MAGA brand became ascendant when he announced his candidacy in 2015. That became clear when we won that election and Johnson was limited to 3% of the vote in the most favorable election for libertarians ever.

                  If you check the calendar you'll notice this is a decade ago, long before tariffs. So how exactly did Trump tariffs in 2024 end the libertarian moment in 2015/2016? Again QB has no understanding of anything at all including how time works.

                  Now what was it you were saying about leftists turning to personal attacks?

                  The interesting thing here is noting which came first:

                  1. Those that bypassed the MAGA KoolAid stand

                  2. Or my response to it?

                  The key is noting that left wingers don't apply their own standards to themselves. To them it is perfectly normal to both routinely engage in personal attacks and whine that others do so. Like on this occasion it's so ingrained they don't even recognize much less care they are doing it.

                  That happens because they are completely cocooned in institutions which support this behavior, academia and media, which demand the strictest possible standards of decorum by any non-leftist while encouraging the most outrageous comments by leftists. I refer to this dichotomy as Left Wing Privilege.

                  1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                    If you check the calendar you'll notice this is a decade ago, long before tariffs. So how exactly did Trump tariffs in 2024 end the libertarian moment in 2015/2016? Again QB has no understanding of anything at all including how time works.

                    If you check the post you were commenting on you'll see it said,

                    "I think one of the reasons Welch and Gillespie has such a personal problem and hatred of Trump and MAGA is that MAGA ruined their "Libertarian Moment"</

                    >

                    Again QB has no understanding of anything at all

                    Says the guy arguing that MAGA came a decade before MAGA.

                    Just admit you made a mistake. It would look much better for you. It happens to all of us. But not all of us double down in our cognitive bias when our errors are pointed out to us.

                    1. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

                      Again QB has no understanding of anything at all

                    2. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                      Well I have no understanding of html formatting at least.

                  2. Dakotian (descendent of Kulaks)   2 months ago

                    Marshal, you said it way better than I did.
                    For what it is worth, I have always thought Trump/MAGA was a reaction to the failure of the Tea Party. Conservatives tired of the ineffectual Republican Party looked to the Tea Party to change things. When that didn't work, they moved to MAGA with an aggressive "take no prisoners" attitude toward politics.

                    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

                      This is exactly the issue. Saw this with the MC in the LP as well.

                      The tea party ended up being coopted by people like Kizinger as well.

                      GOPe in sheep's clothing. Getting not only no wins, but many losses, while voting against all small wins under the guise of it wasnt perfect.

                    2. Marshal   2 months ago

                      I think that's true if you look at it as a group. But there are subgroups whose ideas remain more consistent, what changes is the leadership. The Tea Partiers ascended to leadership because the issue of the day, opposition to bailouts and government freely spending taxpayer dollars, fit their priorities. But two things ended their leadership: (1) refusal of non-Reps to ally with them which showed the Rep population such prioritization could not help them grow enough to win elections or meaningfully impede Dems, and (2) Obama killing off their entities by illegally refusing to grant them legal status. The TP leaders spent their time fighting this instead of organizing rallies and people started to look at the movement as a spent force. It doesn't help that Reps don't have professional activists funded by government and NGOs as the left does, so they just don't have the organizing force.

                      Then MAGA happened and leadership passed to them. Obviously it's been much more successful and thus their leadership has continued longer. The Tea Partiers still believe the same things, but they lost their chance to direct the priorities of the group.

                    3. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

                      Actually the advancement of the Tea Party and Trump was due directly to the FAILING DEMOCRATS and their move to socialism, no fiscal responsibility and funding horrific and stupid policies bent on destroying America.

                      Any opposition to the democrats was bound to grow and take over because of how stupid and horrible democrat policies and their elected talking heads were/are.

                      The mid terms will prove this. DNC will lose both house and senate seats because of their march to madness.

              2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

                The funniest part about Mike's claim that abortions save money os he openly supports welfare and open borders, making his claim literally meaningless.

                He was also against the BBB, which stopped taxes from being raised by 400B a year. This is quadruple even the most retarded of estimates of tariff taxes on citizens.

                Nothing he says is consistent.

                1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                  I get that you get a adolescent kick out of calling me Mike, but your mind is too weak to differentiate my principles from the actual Mike Laursen's.

                  Or you're a GIGANTIC FUCKING liar.

                  And Marshal, while being obviously orders of magnitude smarter than you, is apparently biased enough to believe your bullshit.

                  None of those apply to me except opposition to the BBB due to the massive spending increases it contained.

                  1. Marshal   2 months ago

                    <And Marshal...is apparently biased enough to believe your bullshit.

                    None of my comments in this thread are even in response to Jesse, so how did you reach this absurd conclusion? More pathetically shitty analysis driven only by your need to attack those you hate.

                    Maybe you should pack it up for the day, you might be too hung over to keep up.

                    1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                      There's only 2 commenters here that I hate and you're not one of them.

            2. Rick James   2 months ago

              Public libertarians, like Reason writers, ruined the Libertarian Moment by openly attacking people trying to ally with us as not perfectly libertarian [overtly authoritarian].

              I guess that would be reflected in the strategic and reluctant support of Marxist/Marxist-aligned leftists...

            3. Dillinger   2 months ago

              >>[illegally creating the largest tax increase in decades via tariffs by executive order].

              in all friendliness this right here is why the snobs who cockwalk around here like "libertarian" means a fucking thing can't get anyone on their team. nobody wants a doomer at the lunch booth. mho

              1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                It's OK. I got used to it.

                1. Dillinger   2 months ago

                  I mean I'd still eat lunch with you but we'd have to talk about music or baseball or something

                  1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                    Yeah, definitely.

                    My best friend is a fervent Trump supporter as is most of my family. It's not a problem. We all know when to back off, but online those cues are absent.

                    1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 months ago

                      Huh. Anecdotal, but my coworkers and most of my family are fervent trump haters and they NEVER know when to back off, so I do not engage at all when I see the anger coming on. Not worth it.

                      They are also completely miserable people. I seriously worry about some of them.

                    2. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                      Yeah. I know the type. And it sucks to be outnumbered in that situation. Sorry.

                    3. Dillinger   2 months ago

                      complaining about tariffs when there are face-eating leopards threatening all of us because (D) let them loose seems ... idk something ... we should always all be same-team against communists ... but tariffs

                    4. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

                      I get you, but right away we're going to disagree about how to fight the communists when I say we have to rein in the imperial presidency so the commies can't get it and you'll (maybe?) say we need a strong president to nip the commies in the bud.

                      I'll say we need free trade so our economy booms thus socialism never gets a foothold. Perhaps you'd say we need to protect our industries with tariffs in case it comes to a shooting war.

                      I'd argue the unpopularity of Trump is fueling the rising socialism movement. You might say it doesn't matter because he'll crush them.

                      I think we have the same end goals, but it's complicated and we won't agree on the path to those goals.

                      The communist threat in the US is now the greatest its been in our lives, I think. Maybe we'll align better under these conditions. You never know, maybe we'll even be on the same chain gang in the re-education camp.

                    5. Dillinger   2 months ago

                      I'd say we need free trade at all times but we've never been at the 50% level of free trade with anyone and certainly never >50% we take it on the chin for the world. some temporary tariffs to even the table didn't hurt my feelings. islamist-marxists in the senate probably will

            4. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

              Nice fiction, I doubt it will sell though.

          3. But SkyNet is a Private Company   2 months ago

            Boom

    2. BYODB   2 months ago

      I remember mocking it, at least.

      1. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

        And now we know why it never truly materialized. Thanks.

        1. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

          That and because Chase Oliver is gay.

          1. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

            He is?

            1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

              If only jeffsarc had told us.

    3. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

      "I close my eyes, only for a moment, then the moment's gone..."

  2. But SkyNet is a Private Company   2 months ago

    Let’s hope the Socialist Moment goes over about as well as the Libertarian one

    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      They've already been more successful. Embraced by leaders who prioritize control.

      1. mad.casual   2 months ago

        Maybe we can hope for a moment of clarity within Reason and the libertarian-left that all the people they appealed to and hung out with at cocktail parties with are openly supportive of Socialists while being being backhandedly tolerant of "libertarians".

        I mean, it would be about the 4th or 5th time MAGA and MAGA-adjacent ideologues have pointed out that the Establishment Left never gonna sleep with those cucks, but maybe the 6th or 7th rejection is the charm.

        I mean, you'd think that when the "Abstinence is the best policy" and "One man and one woman" Christian Nationalists are calling out "Dude, she's just not that into you." from across the room, you'd get the hint, but who knows?

    2. Kungpowderfinger   2 months ago

      Team Blue will agree to anything to win elections, and this includes embracing the horrific commie/rag-head team up that’s growing in their ranks.

      For what it’s worth, El-Sayed‘s “let’s go arrest a Jew” smile isn’t as photogenic as Mamdani’s, needs a little more work.

      1. Juliana Frink   2 months ago

        You can be sure his handlers are working on that smile.

        To help combat these phonies I think we should all be promoting Earth-based Human Skeptic's proposed Mamdani Toilet Brush, and I would like to propose someone market an El-Sayed version as well. Also, I think an AOC Head-On-A-Stick Floor Mop would be a good household item, to make use of all that long hair.

        As a bonus, if sold in pairs, these Marxist icons (and future iterations) will magically start singing Marxist-inspired Work Songs via hidden blue tooth feature. Imagine your whole household bursting into Soviet style revelry every time you clean!

    3. Cyrano   2 months ago

      Scratch a Democrat, get a socialist/communist. Progressivism was always commie-lite. And the most consistent ideology always wins.

  3. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    Young insurgent candidates on the left, many of whom have current or former ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, are winning in the Democratic Party.

    Young commie staffers enjoyed being president when Biden was in office, and they want more.

  4. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

    A Senate panel has obtained a copy of the iPhone Anthony Fauci used during COVID-19

    Big deal. Apple makes millions of them every year.

    1. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

      LOL

    2. mad.casual   2 months ago

      It's almost quaint to cast your mind back to the Obama Administration's FBI trying to force Apple to backdoor iPhone security over Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik. They killed like a dozen people and had the audacity to expect the privacy that any other commoner enjoys?!? Fuckin' plebs, man.

  5. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

    Too much space dedicated to burrito based tweets.

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Needs more coconuts and 'brat'?

  6. Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)   2 months ago

    James Cameron's time has passed I hope he retires

  7. Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)   2 months ago

    If yglasias mentions it it must be the number 1 topic on the right

    1. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

      The one true right-winger.

  8. Moderation4ever   2 months ago

    My burritos are not costing $20 but the cost is now in excess of $10 and I would put the price similar to restaurant hamburgers. I don't buy my burritos from chains. One thing I can say about Wisconsin is that most small towns will have at least one authentic Mexican restaurant.

    1. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

      BFD

    2. But SkyNet is a Private Company   2 months ago

      LOL “authentic”

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        Where salsa is just ketchup.

      2. Moderation4ever   2 months ago

        I judge authentic by looking at the staff, the diners, and the menu. Most of the restaurant's menu have the food favored by the average American. But the menus also have foods favored by people from Mexico. Want a hint look for Menudo on the menu, particularly for it offered on Saturday.

        1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

          So youre a racist?

          1. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

            Skin color is the most important thing

            1. Moderation4ever   2 months ago

              Really you are focused on skin color? What I tend to notice far more is language. When staff speak to each other or to their customers using their first language. I also notice what people are eating and if it is typical American Mexican or more traditional Mexican. You can learn a lot if you use your senses for more than just looking at peoples skin color. But for too many commentors here that is what is most important.

              1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

                So racism?

                You know authentic Latinos can and do speak English as well right?

                I mean you claim seeing menudo = authentic as part of your racist rationalization. Lol.

              2. Murray Rothtard   2 months ago

                i love when the outside of the place has a bunch of signs in english touting their burritos and chimichangas, but theres a corner sign with "tenemos menudo y pozole"

                gonna be good

                the language thing is real.my favorite Schezuan place in chicago has a white manager, but he speaks fluent mandarin with the staff.

                1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

                  Abu was cancelled because he was white

              3. Corey   2 months ago

                Mexicans do not prepare food the same way for gringos as they do for Mexicans. Simply because the kitchen staff speak Spanish (which is spoken in 20+ countries) or look Mexican does not mean you are getting anything resembling "authentic" Mexican food, whatever that even means. Also, a lot of the Mexicans running restaurants in the United States are terrible cooks. Back home they would be albañiles or in some other non-skilled occupation, not running a bad Mexican restaurant.

                1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 months ago

                  “..,.,,,”authentic” Mexican food, whatever that even means.”

                  Shhh. It is very important to m4e to persuade himself that he’s not just another terrible gringo.

                  How dare you question his lived experience? Lol.

                  1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

                    Neither him nor chitard seem to even know there are multiple styles of Mexican food dependent on region.

                    Bet if you showed them food from the Chihuahua region they would call it inauthentic.

        2. Eeyore   2 months ago

          Menudo is best if you can find a place that serves it for breakfast. It tastes best if you are still drunk from the night before - preferably from drinking a bottom shelf mixto.

    3. Eeyore   2 months ago

      A restaurant hamburger with fries and drink and tip is $30.

  9. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

    President Donald Trump's tariffs, war in Iran, and labor crackdowns.

    Here Pete and Reeeeeason give away the game. Illegal immigration is all about cheap labor.

    #libertarians4ChattelSlavery

    1. Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)   2 months ago

      Who will pick our cotton now?

      1. mad.casual   2 months ago

        Not even cotton. Who will pick our blueberries and kale?

        1. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

          Who will drive the food truck!!

          1. mad.casual   2 months ago

            Who will pick the mint leaves to garnish our drinks while we sit on the porch and drink our Mint Juleps Moscow Mules?

            1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 months ago

              Who will wipe our asses?

    2. Murray Rothtard   2 months ago

      slavery?! wut?

      the immigrants desire the jobs so much that they risk their lives, and hide from federal enforcement in attempts to remain there.

      do you think ICE is freeing the slaves by capturing free humans and locking them in cages?

      1. damikesc   2 months ago

        Nothing says free market quite like a worker with zero ability to argue about pay, rights, or benefits. That seems totally like a free worker.

        You are aware that, literally, every single human "being locked in cages" are there because they violated the law and refuse to stop doing so. They could all go home and not face any of it.

      2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        Oh. Thats why so many of them brag on tiktok about handouts and there are fraud networks all over.

        Oh. And go take a look at the testimonies from illegals Steve hilton is pushing. They seem to disagree with your denials regarding slavery.

        More ignorant bumper sticker beliefs from our resident chitard.

      3. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

        "do you think ICE is freeing the slaves by capturing free humans and locking them in cages?"

        Do you think ICE is freeing citizens by capturing criminals and deporting them?

        1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

          Democrats say youre deporting the real citizens.

  10. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Maybe reason will cover it now. Waj tells the story of a peaceful pro life portedtor who had garlands DoJ raid his home with guns drawn in front of his kids. He won his settlement, sorry sullum.

    https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-fbi-raided-my-house-guns-drawn-over-a-peaceful-protest-a82f809b?st=JxEibG

    1. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

      See, we don't need a victims fund. The system worked.

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        Just took 4 years for each one! Think of the cost savings!

  11. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

    A Senate panel has obtained a copy of the iPhone Anthony Fauci used during COVID-19

    And nothing happened

    1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

      It seems the auto pen pardon needs to be nullified, then Fauci will get is comeuppance. All the way back to 2014?

      What could Fauci been involved with for 5 years before Covid was released? Fondling pangolins?

  12. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Seems like jusy 2 decades ago the Columbia School of Journalism was respected.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2026/08/fired-60-minutes-journalist-scott-pelley-hired-by-columbia-school-of-journalism/

    1. Marshal   2 months ago

      Left wingers believe the primary function of academia is re-directing taxpayer resources to advance their politics. This includes incentivizing people acting in their interest by providing financial security if their actions in support of leftism cost them their jobs.

      There's long history of this including academia hiring terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

    2. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Seems like jusy 2 decades ago the Columbia School of Journalism was respected.

      My favorite part about the Chinese podcast interview with Chris Nolan is how the first comment in every comment section I've read is a politically-neutral "Holy Cow! What a great interviewer!" and the second is a, politically-neutral in turn, "No, that's an objective, Chinese-educated mediocre interviewer. Western journalism has just declined to the point that it seems great."

      And then, of course, the usual apt debate and backhanded reveals about how Nolan absolutely butchered the tradition and tale in favor of his "for modern audiences" take.

      Even the modestly educated are beginning to step around or get a view from around the mirror and realizing "I'm not skinny, gorgeous, and smart. I've just been staring at the intellectual equivalent of a funhouse mirror."

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        This was them just 6 years ago.

        As Trump’s first or only term winds down, this view of journalism has never looked creakier, or more deficient. Journalists in newsrooms across America are assailing the old notion of “objectivity” as morally inadequate: calling Trump a friend of “virulent racists” isn’t invective but a truth that must be told. For his part, Trump has ruthlessly gamed old-school journalists’ commitment to covering “both sides” of the story, winning more than equal time for his lies, as well as “he said, she said” fig leaves for his obscene behavior.

        Since 2017, we have, between us, observed these failures in real time—tracking the coverage of almost every day of Trump’s presidency for CJR’s daily newsletter, The Media Today. (Pete wrote the newsletter until October 2018, when Jon took over; our colleagues Nausicaa Renner and then Mathew Ingram wrote it once a week throughout, mostly on the intersection of journalism and tech.) With the election approaching, we looked back at every one of our newsletters to remind ourselves of the debates, narratives, and missteps that have defined the Trump presidency.

        https://www.cjr.org/special_report/coverage-trump-presidency-2020-election.php

        They didnt learn the lesson they tried to publicize.

    3. Dillinger   2 months ago

      Pelley's pension for decades of pushing the lie

    4. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

      Columbia, Bill Ayers? Mohamed Abdou - Joseph Massad

      How many radical leftists?

      Easier to count who is not

  13. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Obamas leftover at DoJ kept continuing to create premises to investigate trump his first term despite them already knowing trump Russia was a false clinton created story. Another investigation just got declassified.

    https://thefederalist.com/2026/08/05/fbi-used-comey-firing-to-open-new-russia-hoax-investigation-using-debunked-information/

    Ironically this one was for firing comey.

    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      Link to the unclassified documents to not be read by most here.

      https://t.co/8l9NWPnCx0

      1. damikesc   2 months ago

        Jesse, don't you get it.

        Trump and his voters are ICKY, thus, they deserve it.

      2. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

        And still this is not considered newsworthy by the lame stream.

        Do you think it was because they knew they were lying when fomenting the democrats fake news?

  14. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Half of aca medicaid expansion was fraudulent.

    https://thepostmillennial.com/nearly-half-of-aca-medicaid-expansion-enrollees-were-ineligible-in-2024-paragon-study

    1. Rick James   2 months ago

      Bullshit it was only half.

    2. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

      Just half? That might be a win.

  15. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Examples of H1B fraud.

    OpenAi was listing jobs on radio late at night and requiring paper resumes so they could justify their H1B asks when people didnt know about open jobs.

    https://redstate.com/rusty-weiss/2026/08/04/trump-doj-nails-openai-for-hiding-jobs-from-americans-to-hire-foreigners-n2205196

  16. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Another democrat whose family enriched themselves pushung Chinese propaganda. Rep voted against Chinese funding transparency in colleges.

    https://redstate.com/ben-smith/2026/08/05/dem-rep-josh-rileys-china-problem-is-all-in-the-family-n2205210

    Also... former dem appointed generals caught in retirement creating china backed lobbying groups to push Chinese propaganda and desires. Clinton's involved.

    https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/revealed-top-american-generals-joined?r=gb03o&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true

    1. Idaho-Bob   2 months ago

      Can't wait for MollyG's MAGA comment.

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        These guys got paid way more than molly does.

    2. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

      And so we see the patterns forming which in my opinion point directly to the Democrats paying for Covid to be released under Fauci and the lame stream media fomented the fake news and pushed the narratives for shut downs to collapse the economy of the USA. The only way they could get rid of Trump.

      China was on board because Trump ripped up the 500 billion dollar climate check Obama promised. Of course Biden immediately wrote another to China when he took office.

      Not to mention Biden removing Iran sanctions and pardoning Iranian arms dealers and people linked to terrorism. Another fact the lame stream media completely ignored. Again reversing what Trump did to shut down Iran pointing to their involvement. Iran purposely incubated Covid among it's people and then went to spread it around the world in acts of terrorism.

      Ever wonder how it appeared first in Old folks homes before anywhere in public outside of coming off cruise ships and cargo ships from China?

  17. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Big win.

    SCOTUS Wire
    @scotus_wire
    A federal judge has ruled that major portions of the National Firearms Act are unconstitutional after Congress eliminated certain taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and other covered firearms.

    https://x.com/scotus_wire/status/2085056990405865743

    Will be funny to see if Reason covers this win as the entire reason for it was the removal of the tax it was justified with under the BBB. Another example of people raging against something they didnt actually read.

    1. Murray Rothtard   2 months ago

      https://reason.com/2026/08/06/a-federal-judge-rejects-national-firearms-act-regulations-saying-their-tax-rationale-no-longer-applies/

      they covered it, but its sullum, so you cant read it

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        You realize this actually proves my comment right? Guess what isnt mentioned in that sullum link? Hint, the vehicle used to remove the tax. The one you and reason raged against.

        Comment?

  18. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    So what's dividing the right? Burritos.

    Why aren't we deporting the burritos?

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      At least the violent ones, the worst of the worst.

    2. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

      Cilantro haters also wonder why

  19. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

    The DNC should stand against ranked choiced voting.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2026/08/the-dnc-discovers-the-perils-of-election-reform/

    "The Democratic National Committee meets on August 15, and on the agenda is a ban on ranked-choice voting (RCV) in the Democrats’ 2028 presidential primaries. This is causing an understandable uproar, since progressive and socialist Democrats are the ones pushing RCV around the country. The DNC would be right to take a stand against it, since RCV — like many other “election reforms” — makes the election process more difficult, less meaningful, and harder to trust."

    "The DNC has good reason to worry about complex election procedures and decreased transparency. Its 2020 Iowa caucus debacle led to multiple Democrats claiming victory as it took weeks to decipher the final results. The DNC had hoped to “reform” the caucuses to allow remote participation, but the added complexity depended on unproven technology even as it diminished transparency. When it broke down, it damaged the DNC’s credibility and voters’ trust in the process.

    Ranked-choice voting would be even worse. It makes every step of the election process more complex and difficult. Ballots are longer, contain more instructions, and ask voters to rank multiple candidates for each office, which makes voting slower and lines longer."

    "Those pushing RCV claim it guarantees majority winners. This is false, not only because of ballot exhaustion, but also because it pretends that a second, third, or fourth choice is the same as a first choice.

    What ranked-choice voting does is turn supporters of fringe candidates into kingmakers. A voter who backs a leading candidate may have the same first-place ranking counted in every round. But a voter who initially supports an extreme candidate with little chance of winning can help decide the contest between the finalists when that voter’s later ranking is moved up the list. In a close race, those transferred rankings can determine the winner."

    "Politics is complicated enough. The “KISS principle” should guide election policy: Keep It Simple, Stupid. RCV adds complexity to every step in the process. It relies on technology to adjust and even eliminate ballots within a “black box” that most voters cannot verify, and it delivers slower results."

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Once again: RCV is so simple and straightforward that only idiots couldn't comprehend it as an unmitigated good, but requiring ID to vote is racist.

      1. mtrueman   2 months ago

        ", but requiring ID to vote is racist."

        They point is that it suppresses the vote. Racism is just icing on the cake.

        1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

          Requiring ID suppresses the vote.... of illegals and ineligible voters.

          So what is the problem? Oh I know, don't worry. You are afraid that without allowing anyone to vote regardless of elligibility, like in NYC, that more Mamdani's will never get elected.

          1. mtrueman   2 months ago

            "So what is the problem? "

            It's not a problem. In 2024 Trump only managed to get elected because Democrat turnout was so low. Check this out:
            2020
            votes for Trump: 74.2 million
            votes for Biden: 81.3 million
            2024
            votes for Trump: 77.3 million
            votes for Harris: 74.9 million

            Do you see a problem here? Trump won. Some people can't take yes for an answer.

      2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

        ""RCV is so simple and straightforward that only idiots couldn't comprehend it ""

        I defer back to Justice Rehenquist's opinion in Bush v Gore. He was commenting about how some voters had a problem with understanding you needed to poke a hole in the card.

        1. mtrueman   2 months ago

          Those machines are no longer in use. Not because some voters found them too difficult to understand, but because of the doubts raised that the resulting ballots didn't necessarily reflect the voter's intentions.

          1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

            "", but because of the doubts raised that the resulting ballots didn't necessarily reflect the voter's intentions.""

            Hanging chad, dimpled chad. Those were because they didn't follow the instructions that said to make sure the hole was properly punched. If they properly punched the hole, like the instructions said, their intentions would have been clear.

            1. mtrueman   2 months ago

              Surely the manufacturers of the machines were given instructions that their machines should have no issues when it comes to punching holes and correctly reflecting the voter's intentions. Failure to 'properly punch' the ballots, in your words. Blaming the voters for the shoddy workmanship of the manufacturers is partisanship. The fact remains that the machines were not reliable and are no longer in use.

              1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

                The voter would punch a hole in the ballot. Failure to properly punch the hole could result in scanning issues. There were instructions about punching the hole to ensure people were doing it correctly. They failed to follow the instructions. That's not the machines fault.

        2. mad.casual   2 months ago

          +1 for Pat Buchanan

    2. mtrueman   2 months ago

      I don't think RCV is all that complex. If no candidate gets more than 50%, the candidate with the poorest showing drops out and their votes are redistributed among the remaining candidates. If there is still no one with 50% the process is repeated until there is. It's more complicated than the existing first past the post system, but requires no special knowledge or mathematical skills to comprehend. The voter under either system is more likely to be challenged parsing the difference between two candidates and their competing health insurance initiatives or tax policies, for example.

      The nice thing about RCV is that it allows the voter to more fully express their preferences in one ballot, one election. If the voter likes a poorly funded candidate with little chance of winning, they have the option of expressing that preference without feeling that the vote is going to waste. The system should encourage more competitive elections, which, granted, will likely disadvantage the two major parties. It will encourage smaller parties and poorly funded independents, and enable voters to more precisely rank the candidates. .

      1. damikesc   2 months ago

        The nice thing for those in power is that it takes damned near forever to come to the result which ONLY increases trust in the outcome.

        1. mtrueman   2 months ago

          According to information I learned from the Internet, it takes Alaska about a week to announce the results. If it's a tight race and there are many absentee ballots, more time is necessary. If it's a blow out, expect the winner to be announced on the same day.

    3. Mike Parsons   2 months ago

      "Ranked-choice voting would be even worse. It makes every step of the election process more complex and difficult. Ballots are longer, contain more instructions, and ask voters to rank multiple candidates for each office, which makes voting slower and lines longer."

      Curious how long CA will take to get us election results when we have to factor in RCV with their scam mail in system as well?

      1. mtrueman   2 months ago

        It shouldn't take appreciably longer if computers are used to count the votes. And it's really not so complex and difficult as you seem to believe. Scrutineers can take advantage of the longer lines to help confused voters understand the new system while they wait. There are people on hand to help confused voters in the current system, so this is nothing new.

        1. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

          How do you apply the ranked choice voting procedure before you have every vote in?

          1. mtrueman   2 months ago

            Good question. I suspect you need to impose a deadline before you begin counting and eliminating candidates. ie wait till every vote is in before you start counting. I recommend this for any system, including first past the post systems, as it improves transparency and voter trust.

            Alaskans wait a week or more before election results are clear. Google tells us:

            Strategies for Managing Late Ballots

            Clear Communication:
            Inform voters about deadlines for ballot submission.
            Provide updates on the counting process and expected timelines for results.

            Extended Voting Periods:
            Consider allowing a longer voting period to accommodate late ballots, ensuring that all votes are counted.

            Tracking Ballots:
            Implement systems that allow voters to track their ballots to confirm they have been received.

            Educating Voters:
            Offer resources on how to properly submit ballots to minimize the chances of delays.

            1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

              ""Educating Voters:
              Offer resources on how to properly submit ballots to minimize the chances of delays.""

              And if they don't follow instructions?

              1. mtrueman   2 months ago

                My guess is the ballots might be invalidated as spoiled. Same as with improperly filled in ballots in a first past the post style election. But what do I know? Ask the Alaskans who have to deal with these issues. I get that a supporter of the two party system is motivated to present the RCV system as super complicated and extremely difficult for the voter to understand. I just don't find this approach convincing.

  20. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    Remember the libertarian moment? Well, this feels like the socialist moment.

    When you promoted be anti racist and former gay obama canvassers and dropped libertarian support by half?

    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      Well, this feels like the socialist moment.

      Remember how you screamed at those who noticed this coming as a culture war?

      1. Mike Parsons   2 months ago

        Ya, its not even satisfying to give the "I told you so" to everyone that said "this is just stupid college kids" or "this is a moral panic" or "muh culture war!!!".

        Ya, everything we said has become a major problem, the way we said it would. They can all eat shit.

        1. Marshal   2 months ago

          This is true, but note how they still pretend it isn't. Now that they finally accept Dems are authoritarian socialists they still try to pretend people who recognized this a decade ago were wrong and extremists. Apparently we're to believe the mass movement taking over the Dem party spontaneously developed last Thursday and anyone who said it was a problem Wednesday was a nut job.

    2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      And rather than fight back, the party's leadership seems to be mostly embracing those left-of-center wins.

      Left of center? Doesn't reason throw far right around like candy?

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        Democratic activist groups like Third Way want to fend off the takeover of what the group calls "radical, far-left candidates."

        Oh. Its the dems who use terms like far left, nice use of quotes, that are the activists.

        Not even hiding it reason.

    3. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      "Since Senator Bernie Sanders exploded onto the national stage in 2016, progressives have argued that their party's path to victory runs through a populist economic agenda that can attract a broad coalition of working-class voters.

      Only 4% of the dsa voters are working class. Liz noticed, why cant you?

      1. Spiritus Mundi   2 months ago

        Defintions are fluid in the democrat world.

  21. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    But regulations, taxes, and overall food-price inflation have made it tougher than ever to operate a restaurant.

    Taxachusetts? More like Taxes-it-doesn't-chews-it. Am I right, people?

  22. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    ...once vaunted as the youngest black professor in the university's history, has resigned after mounting questions about plagiarism and fabrication in his academic work and personal history.

    The low expectations to disgrace pipeline continues to run without clog.

  23. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    A Senate panel has obtained a copy of the iPhone Anthony Fauci used during COVID-19...

    I eagerly await nothing coming from this.

  24. Fist of Etiquette   2 months ago

    The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the government savings effort headed by Elon Musk, got a lot of details wrong [...] according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office.

    It's a watchdog eat watchdog world.

  25. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

    But Matt Yglesias had a terse, reasonably useful summary of how things went.

    Does he though? Reset the counter boys.

    Look. A big part of reasons issue is they use lower retards like Matty Y to get their viewpoints on their opposition party, ie conservatives.

  26. Agammamon   2 months ago

    Cameron has really dropped in quality.

  27. Adans smith   2 months ago

    So it's the 'educated elites' that love them some socialism and us peasants that don't. Take what you want from that.

    1. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

      Us peasants have false consciousness and need to submit to our anointed betters vision of the future.

    2. Juliana Frink   2 months ago

      The one thing you can always be sure of:

      Socialism is the ELITES' Paradise.

  28. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

    "Billionaire tax, Prop. 40, wins Labor Federation endorsement in ‘overwhelming’ vote"
    https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article316761807.html

    "Labor" hasn't gotten any smarter since the Iron Lady.

    1. middlefinger   2 months ago

      Yep- free healthcare for illegals. And all of the billionaires who fled to Texas (but voted for Dems their entire lives) are now facing a close governors race. The quip “they’ll come for you” is just getting started.

  29. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

    Maybe Alameda County has:
    "Alameda County Supervisors Delay $30 Minimum Wage Ballot Initiative"
    https://www.kqed.org/news/12093947/alameda-county-supervisors-delay-30-minimum-wage-ballot-initiative

    1. Eeyore   2 months ago

      Send it back. They need to raise it to $32.31 now, according to their own data. That extra $2.31 is needed so they won't die.

  30. Marshal   2 months ago

    Note Reason waited to mention Arday until he resigned because they didn't want to criticize the left openly. By waiting they are just reporting on past events instead of taking a position against their allies. Plus there's no mention of how the Arday promotions reflect corruption in academia. They very carefully try to help the left contain the fallout of being discovered to not give a ship about scholarship, only politics.

    Compare that to how they eagerly jump in to criticize the right over burritos. There's quite a difference in their approaches.

    1. mtrueman   2 months ago

      You should never expect a magazine to approach all stories in identical ways. They have editors and editors follow the editorial policy. I'm sure if you look around you can find magazines whose editorial positions more closely mirror your own. If that's what you want. I recommend following at least one publication whose policies oppose your own, just for variety's sake, if nothing else.

    2. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

      Jill loves breakfast tacos

  31. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

    Russia, Russia, Russia.

    ""CBS News’ Jennifer Jacobs and Kristin Brown dropped a report on Wednesday about the declassified documents, which referred to a probe known as Oxferd Comma, which was a part of the overall Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.""

    ""“I was unaware that the predicate for the obstruction included a claim that Donald Trump was somehow acting on behalf of [Russian President] Vladimir Putin,” the official told the outlet. “The short of it is, almost everything in the FBI’s possession at that point had debunked or ruled out that Trump or his campaign was colluding with Russia at that time.”""

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/revealed-declassified-info-shows-fbi-probed-whether-or-not-trump-was-a-russian-asset/ar-AA29tuBN?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=6a749c5781444e06a1bfab5cc0e0cb2d&ei=52

    1. Dillinger   2 months ago

      Oxferd C0mma they tossed in zero too. can't spell 0bstruction without that zero

    2. Rick James   2 months ago

      Trump retaliating!

  32. mad.casual   2 months ago

    I hope he makes some non-Avatar movies!

    [Shrugs] Hopefully more Alita: Battle Angel and less Terminator: Dark Fate, but I won't hold my breath.

  33. DeAnnP   2 months ago

    "But food prices really have gone up since COVID-19, thanks FIRST to inflation resulting from former President Joe Biden's overspending, and then to price increases stemming from President Donald Trump's tariffs, war in Iran, and labor crackdowns. "

    So we are just pretending Trump never signed the CARES act?

    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      Are we pretending that was the primary cause of inflation?

      1. DeAnnP   2 months ago

        Are we pretending the 2.2 Trillion passed under Trump had NOTHING to do with it? Because that is what the sentence I was quoting seems to be implying by the word FIRST. And lets not pretend the 2020 OPEC deal TRUMP made with Saudi and Russia had ZERO effect as well.

        1. MT-Man   2 months ago

          Again see below. You focus on one part, there's a whole section of responsibility to be taken that you don't want to admit to. This very large market of "running a business in the red" convenience while expecting high wages needs to be acknowledged also by folks like you.

          1. DeAnnP   2 months ago

            I am not the one focusing on one part. Again, the writer by saying thanks FIRST to Biden bailout. That is discounting anything that happened during the Trump portion of COVID (which started under his Admin).

            again, here is the sentence "But food prices really have gone up since COVID-19, thanks FIRST to inflation resulting from former President Joe Biden's overspending, and then to price increases stemming from President Donald Trump's tariffs, war in Iran, and labor crackdowns."

            1. damikesc   2 months ago

              You're aware that the Biden bailout is STILL being spent every year, right? Government baseline budgeting insures that once spending is approved, it never ends. Ever. We are still spending the bank bailout of 2008 every year.

              1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

                None of these cares act noise machines ever mention the continued democrat only passed bills under Biden. Apparently just one bill caused everything.

                1. DeAnnP   2 months ago

                  Apparently Trump being the person in charge during the beginning of COVID and also striking the OPEC 2020 deal had NOTHING to do with anything according to the word FIRST. I am not the one blaming one person for it all. The writer is.

                  1. damikesc   2 months ago

                    Trump spends way too much money. Do I think ANY Democrat President will spend less?

                    You are aware the COVID spending passed on massive majorities that Trump could not have a veto not be overridden.

                    1. DeAnnP   2 months ago

                      I do not know how to reiterate my original post any clearer to you fucking morons. You just cannot handle Trump being criticized in any way, shape or form. LMFAO.

        2. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

          You didnt answer my question.

          Some of the cause sure, was a short term insertion of capital, continued yearly ubder dem control of congress and Biden. But even there the problem is showing ti be more tied to a) fraud with most in blue states during biden, he did pass a second bill you seem to ignore and b) the continued reliance on foreign markets and costs from rebuilding supply chains.

          So what are the long term causes? Hint... 5T in new regulations under Biden.

          So amusing watching retards scream cares being the same retards against recissions and DOGE though.

          1. DeAnnP   2 months ago

            AGAIN, my post was regarding the wording of the writer by using the word FIRST. I said NOTHING about that being the only cause. The writer totally excluded anything that happened in the first Trump admin (which was in charge all the way to Jan 21, 2021 with his use of the word FIRST. JFC. Why the fuck are you even answering/giving a shit if YOU did not write the article? Did I reply to someone else's post. No.

  34. Rick James   2 months ago

    Socialist calculation problem: Remember the libertarian moment? Well, this feels like the socialist moment.

    How could I forget the Libertarian Moment? I was one of its chief critics. Mainly, that it wasn't happening-- in that we were steadily moving in a socialist direction. The Socialist moment, unlike the Libertarian Moment, IS happening.

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Long, slow march of socialist moments punctuated by the occasional cheer of "Libertarian Moment!" by Tween Reason Magazine.

  35. Dillinger   2 months ago

    not. Socialists. this fucking guy's been a part of CAIR for fucks' sake they don't do Socialist

    1. damikesc   2 months ago

      Islamists and Marxists are close allies --- until Islamists gain power. Then they kill Marxists.

      Remember 1979 Iran.

      1. Marshal   2 months ago

        That's the silver lining. I wonder if their last thought is regret or if they convince themselves their sacrifice is necessary to reach the utopia.

        If only Comrade Stalin knew this was happening!

      2. Dillinger   2 months ago

        >>Remember 1979 Iran.

        I do. clearly JD was not around.

  36. middlefinger   2 months ago

    It’s funny that Reason believes the Democrats have ever been anything but socialists. 😂

  37. Dillinger   2 months ago

    >>University of Cambridge professor Jason Arday ... resigned after mounting questions about plagiarism and fabrication in his academic work and personal history.

    delicious they propped him because of his melanin but irrelevant

    1. Mike Parsons   2 months ago

      ^this.

      And now how many have we seen rise to the top of academia with an openly fraudulent career, for DEI/affirmative action?

      That Harvard dean was a full on retard. This 'historic first' is a complete clown and phony and they wouldnt call him out because racism. Hanna-Jones landmark project has been debunked by every other historian and her grand work is essentially fan fiction.

      How much longer are we going to keep as a society propping up low IQ frauds in the name of equity?

      1. Marshal   2 months ago

        her grand work is essentially fan fiction.

        She didn't create the idea that the American Revolution was fought to preserve slavery. African American Studies departments across the US developed this myth over decades because it helped them delegitimize America. Creating mythology to advance extreme left wing politics is why these departments were created.

        The revealing fact is that the history departments don't oppose this mythology (except in rare cases) both because (1) they agree the political angle is more important that the truth and (2) because they know prioritizing the truth is a career limiting move.

        The important takeaway is that NHJ almost certainly believed she was telling the truth because she literally never heard anyone dispute an obviously false statement presented as fact despite being surrounded by educated people many of whom had to know it was total bullshit.

        1. mtrueman   2 months ago

          If we want to avoid historical accounts that mention slavery, instead of cotton or tobacco or cane, we should focus on the whaling industry. The whaling crews were notoriously diverse in their composition. Check out Melville's Moby Dick. There were Whites, queers, Africans, African Americans, American Indians, Europeans, Arabs, South Sea Islanders, paid according to their skill, courage and dedication. I'm not sure there was any other activity in 19th century America where skin color, and ethnicity mattered so little.

          1. Marshal   2 months ago

            If we want to avoid historical accounts that mention slavery,

            There's no rational way to conclude my point is that we shouldn't mention slavery. I'm torn between concluding (1) left wingers intentionally say these sorts of things even though they know it's stupidly wrong because they believe some tiny fraction of readers people will believe it or (2) they are so indoctrinated they literally cannot understand what anyone else is saying.

            But I believe in the principle of generosity by which we should act according to their best possible motivation.

            1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

              (3) they are taught that their indoctrination is sacrosanct and beyond question. Anyone questioning it is part of the problem.

              1. mtrueman   2 months ago

                We are taught that slaves were key to the industries that drove the economies of the South - cotton, tobacco and cane. It was the case in 1861. It was the case in 1776. Deal with it. If that's too painful a subject to face, look into the whaling business, which never resorted to slavery, and was meritocratic.

                1. Marshal   2 months ago

                  We are taught that slaves were key to the industries that drove the economies of the South - cotton, tobacco and cane. It was the case in 1861. It was the case in 1776. Deal with it. If that's too painful a subject to face,

                  Notice how he pretends the objection is somehow to the existence of slavery rather than to the assertion the Revolution was fought to preserve it, then tries to psychologically pathologize opposition to place those speaking the truth on the defensive.

                  Basic propaganda techniques.

                  1. mtrueman   2 months ago

                    Those who owned slaves in 1861 fought to preserve slavery rather than abolish it. I see no reason why the slave owners of 1776 would have been any different. Do you?

                    1. Marshal   2 months ago

                      It's revealing how many different ways you try to avoid admitting that the American Revolution was not fought to preserve slavery. Regardless of whether they would have done so they did not because Britain had no plans to end slavery. While you're trying to infer motives between unalike circumstances in reality we know why each war was fought directly from the sources.

                      In the Civil War the southerners who wanted to fight advocated doing so specifically to preserve slavery, and this motivation was explicit throughout all of their documents: letters, articles, pamphlets, and even official legal documents like the Confederate Constitution. By contrast there is not a single document describing protecting slavery as a motivation for the Revolution, nor is there any document describing opposition to the Revolution to help end it. There's no pamphlet, newsletter, or even congratulatory letter between two slaveholders a decade after the fact supporting this assertion. It is entirely made up by modern leftists to delegitimize America. Creating this mythology is why leftists work so hard to eliminate dissent in academia.

                    2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

                      ""It's revealing how many different ways you try to avoid admitting that the American Revolution was not fought to preserve slavery.""

                      Yep

                    3. Mike Parsons   2 months ago

                      Remember this argumentation algorithm he is going down, because this is how every fucking indoctrinated leftist prof, including Hannah Jones herself, end up at the point she did, and defend it the way she does.

                      Every answer here was a misdirect and smoke/mirrors. Goal posts moving around like a fucking electron, going to need to plug in the formula to see where they land next

            2. mtrueman   2 months ago

              You seem to have trouble with linking slavery to the American Revolution. How about the Civil War? Surely the link is clear enough in that conflict. Slavery was no less vital to the Southern Economy in 1776 as it was a century later. You don't really think the American slave holders of 1776 cared little about their fortunes and livelihoods, do you?

              Now whaling was a Northern concern, centered around the isle of Nantucket, Massachusetts. It's a vicious business and no doubt some of the skippers were tyrannical, even mad like our Ahab, but on the whole it was meritocratic, and it's inconceivable that slavery would have been used. Even little Pip, the African American cabin boy, was treated with respect:
              "When Pip falls overboard he is left stranded in the sea, and rescued only by chance and becomes "mad". The book's narrator, Ishmael, however, thinks that this "madness" gives Pip the power to see the world as it is. Pip is first described as "insignificant", but is the only member of the crew to awaken feelings of humanity in Ahab, the ship's monomaniacal captain."

              1. Marshal   2 months ago

                You seem to have trouble with linking slavery to the American Revolution. How about the Civil War? Surely the link is clear enough in that conflict. Slavery was no less vital to the Southern Economy in 1776 as it was a century later. You don't really think the American slave holders of 1776 cared little about their fortunes and livelihoods, do you?

                What a bizarre summary. I wouldn't say I have trouble linking slavery to the Revolution, I simply deny a causal link because one doesn't exist. I also don't have "trouble" linking the moon with green cheese. My clear and obvious position is that the revolution was not fought to preserve slavery and your response is that slavery existed as if such existence proves it as a cause? Like I said, bizarre.

                The clear difference in the wars was that the Civil War was fought because the Union was going to outlaw slavery while Britain was not.

                But it's interesting seeing how you try to link unlike things because they share unrelated similarities. Your linking these wars implies that because the Civil War was fought to preserve slavery the American Revolution must also have been. The fact that one of these wars was fought with an entity which threatened slavery while the other did not is omitted. It's interesting to see how propagandists work.

                1. mtrueman   2 months ago

                  "My clear and obvious position is that the revolution was not fought to preserve slavery and your response is that slavery existed as if such existence proves it as a cause? "

                  I agree. For those who fought and didn't own slaves. For those that did own slaves, it's a different story. They weren't idiots. They knew perfectly well Mother England no longer viewed the slave trade with the support it once had and its days were numbered. They also knew a slave tolerant United States was their best bet to hold onto their livelihoods and their economic dominance.

                  1. Marshal   2 months ago

                    They knew perfectly well Mother England no longer viewed the slave trade with the support it once had and its days were numbered. They also knew a slave tolerant United States was their best bet to hold onto their livelihoods and their economic dominance.

                    Stupidly wrong, the nascent abolition movement was far stronger in the US than in Britain. Moreover this isn't ancient Sumer. We have these people's words for why they fought and it wasn't protecting slavery no matter how much idiot left wingers want that to be true.

                    1. mtrueman   2 months ago

                      "Stupidly wrong, the nascent abolition movement was far stronger in the US than in Britain. "

                      Maybe so, but the American slave owners had an advantage over that of England ie the Constitution. It protected and legitimized the institution of slavery in the US. Russia and Brazil both managed to abolish slavery in the 19th century without much fuss. Neither were saddled with anything like the pro-slavery document the US followed. It took a war which killed over half a million and a re-writing on the Constitution before the US managed to abolish slavery.

                      "We have these people's words for why they fought and it wasn't protecting slavery no matter how much idiot left wingers want that to be true."

                      We don't need their words. We have documents detailing the buying and selling of slaves. Had they wished, the owners could have set their slaves free. They had that ability in 1861. They had it in 1776. They chose to keep it instead.

                      Now, imagine yourself as the owner of a Nantucket whaling fleet in 1776. Imagine further that you despise the British Crown. You naturally put your life on the line and fight for Independence. Very commendable. Did you do so to protect the institution of slavery? No, of course not. You own no slaves and don't benefit from the enslavement of your fellow man. In fact it's safe to assume it repulses you, knowing as you do from years of experience employing men from all over the globe, that skin color doesn't make the man.

                    2. Marshal   2 months ago

                      Maybe so, but the American slave owners had an advantage over that of England ie the Constitution. It protected and legitimized the institution of slavery in the US

                      The constitution didn't exist when people made up their minds whether to support the Revolution or not.

                      Flail around again to see if you can come up with anything else.

                      Russia and Brazil both managed to abolish slavery in the 19th century without much fuss.

                      Britain ending slavery 50 years later proves Americans fought the Revolution to preserve slavery? This is why I say the number one criteria to be a left winger is a willingness to say stupid shit in public.

                      We don't need their words.

                      Interesting you admit evidence is irrelevant, while common usually left wingers know enough to at least pretend it isn't true. See above.

                      We have documents detailing the buying and selling of slaves.

                      And we're back to "slaves existed so the Revolution was fought to preserve slavery. The poor level of thinking isn't admirable.

                  2. mtrueman   2 months ago

                    "Flail around again to see if you can come up with anything else. "

                    The US constitution was written by several slave holders, with the aim to protect their holdings. They could have abolished slavery had they a mind to, but they didn't.

                    "Britain ending slavery 50 years later proves Americans fought the Revolution to preserve slavery?"

                    Proof is for mathematicians and distillers. Suffice it to say, the sentiment in England was anti slavery in 1776. To suggest that the slave holders in America weren't aware of this fact is to stretch credulity. They were slavers, not idiots. And they were keen on doing what was necessary to hold on to their property.

                    ""slaves existed so the Revolution was fought to preserve slavery."

                    Slave holders wanted to protect their property. I don't understand why this idea is so strange to you. It's important to note that not all those who fought in 1776 were slave holders, and so England's growing distaste for slavery wouldn't have been such an issue for them. Think of the whaling industry tycoons of the north. They didn't employ slaves in their business and probably shared England's antipathy. Had they been in the business of growing cotton, they would have different ideas on the subject, no doubt. People tend to look to their own interests, and act to protect them when they feel they are under threat. Yet you seem to feel that America's slavers were somehow exempt from this universal law. Where did this hare brained notion spring from?

                    Since you brought up ancient Sumer, were aware that the earliest existing records of slave transactions were written in cuneiform tablets of baked clay? They are more than 5000 years old.

      2. Dillinger   2 months ago

        landed @Logan last Friday & the first thing I see in the airport is a display of 1619 Project. I didn't even know it was still for sale lol

      3. damikesc   2 months ago

        Ibrahim X Kendi feels slighted that you did not include him.

  38. Rick James   2 months ago

    Burritos don't quite cost $20, unless you have them delivered (or you're eating really fancy burritos).

    Shut the fuck up, Suderman, you literally don't know what in fuck you're talking about.

    It costs me $20 to go through the drive through at Taco Time (which admittedly comes with an order of tater tots).

    I just picked a random mexican (mid-tier) restaurant where I've eaten in the last 5 years. (I'll not link it because I don't need to be DOXXED) Menu prices:

    Mission Burrito: $20
    California Burrito: $20
    Mission Quesadillas: $18
    Carne Asada Tacos (2): $18
    Fajitas: $27
    Kids bean and cheese burrito: $9

    I don't know what fucking backwards ass flyover country bumpkin shit hole you live in, but out here in Democratic Socialist land, Burritos cost at least $20, and a LOT more if you buy fancy burritos.

    1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

      I can get a great burrito for under 10 bucks still at many places. Including the carneceria down the street.

      1. Rick James   2 months ago

        Well then be thankful your social construct isn't overrun by Democratic Socialist Sophisticates. The minimum wage here is $22 an hour. A steak in a mid-tier restaurant costs $70.

        Another restaurant in my neighborhood:

        New York Strip 12 oz: $65
        Ribeye 14oz: $72.
        9oz Top Sirloin: $50
        Baked Potato: $12

        1. rbike   2 months ago

          Wow. I hope you applied for a job there. You will get rich quick!!!

        2. middlefinger   2 months ago

          Sounds like a front. Do all the guys have pinky rings and Italian horns on their gold chains?

      2. Dillinger   2 months ago

        Dallas. no state income tax & within a mile of my home there are three delicious burrito places <$10

        1. middlefinger   2 months ago

          Don’t speak too soon. Governor’s office is in play - supposedly?

          1. Dillinger   2 months ago

            the Paxton - Talafreako nonsense is too much as it is I can't begin to think about Governor Gina

      3. Eeyore   2 months ago

        I can still get a tamale for $5 from the lady with the cooler who hangs out in the day labor parking lot. Even the food counter at the Mexican grocery charges $12 for a burrito if you want chicken or pork. More if you want steak.

        1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

          Youre getting ripped off. 15 for a half dozen here.

          1. Eeyore   2 months ago

            6 for only $20 - if she likes you.

    2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

      What's the difference between a mission burrito and a California burrito? I know what a mission burrito is but never heard of a California burrito. Is it a mission burrito with triple the tax?

      1. JesseAz (RIP CK)   2 months ago

        A burrito that's costs 100B per foot but will never be complete?

    3. Mike Parsons   2 months ago

      Certainly prices across the board are high, and I think Matt Walsh is right on this. We cant put our heads in the sand while grocery prices are sky rocketing and people are getting pissed and do what Biden did with Bidenomics: "shut up everything is fine". Ignoring so many voices is unwise.

      But the answer here is probably in the middle. I think a lot of people still want to do what they did during early COVID and order a 2x meat chipotle burrito, through doordash, and are mad it costs 30$. The Mexican joint in our downtown (med sized city, red state) that is most popular a burrito plate is 14$, and it comes with 2 sides. Cheaper from the food truck that is around town.

      And then to the other extreme, obviously you can make 4-5 burritos for 20$ if you just buy groceries. So we arent in burrito crisis. But we also shouldn't be ignoring the ever rising prices and pretend there wont be consequences (whether deserved or not)

      1. Marshal   2 months ago

        By coincidence I made burritos the other night, $25-30 was enough to feed all 4 of us with enough leftovers we had them again last night. So it was less than $4 per person per meal.

        When someone whines about a $20 burrito they're demanding we pay for someone else to make and deliver their food.

        1. Mike Parsons   2 months ago

          "When someone whines about a $20 burrito they're demanding we pay for someone else to make and deliver their food."

          Part of why the conversation has been annoying from the beginning. All of the above having been discussed, its clear the initial person complaining has unrealistic expectations about the burrito. However, I will say our groceries have absolutely went up in a big way over time. Granted, we do well so its really not a problem, but if we made <6 figures (as the median household does), we would have to be seriously tightening our belts based on how much a cart of groceries has gone up.

          Is the govt responsible for setting prices, or fighting 'price gouging'? Absolutely not. Is there an easy button solution? Of course not. But my initial reaction was, this is something that is hitting everyone, they are grumbling about it, and it would be unwise to, from a perspective of winning elections, say "shut up you are wrong" and at a minimum at least give a "I hear you, prices are high, lets see what reasonable solutions we could come up with".

          We were on the other side of the Biden "inflation is under control and the economy is great" debate, and won it, by calling out the obvious gaslighting and the ignorance of what people were feeling. We shouldnt make the same mistake

    4. Eeyore   2 months ago

      I bet the tiny vegetable protein 50% fake meat Taco Bell burrito is still only $6.50. Probably doesn't count as it's so small you have to eat 2.

      1. mad.casual   2 months ago

        +1 Sounds like a potential $5 Chinese-made, cricket-paste burrito market ripe for the plucking.

    5. XM   2 months ago

      I live in LA and you can get a burrito in places like Aldaberto for under 20 bucks. It’s even cheaper in m more mom and pop places.

  39. MT-Man   2 months ago

    But food prices really have gone up since COVID-19, thanks first to inflation resulting from former President Joe Biden's overspending, and then to price increases stemming from President Donald Trump's tariffs, war in Iran, and labor crackdowns.

    Is it really just this or that having parts of your profits syphoned off by uber eats, grub hub etc walmart delivery (the $99-dollar yearly fee isn't cheap without a hidden cost spread - to food....) and higher required min wages might actually push this up. Why can't we honestly talk about these too. It's always just tarriffs or wars, these prices were outrageous before that, maybe the non-responsible/lazy lifestyle of many has costs for us all?

    1. middlefinger   2 months ago

      It takes a lot of energy to run a restaurant. The areas that subsidize energy and water sewer use, while divesting from cheap energy, create hyperinflation. My state also provides free breakfast and lunches in public schools. If everything in life is subsidized, for anyone on planet earth that wants it, hyperinflation will ensue.

      Pre-Meili Argentina

  40. mtrueman   2 months ago

    "The new working-class populism, it turns out, is not very popular with the working class. "

    It's probably popular enough. What's notable is the change in support of the Black voters. In 2020 it was the Black vote in South Carolina that denied Sanders the nomination. This time around it seems they are more amenable to the Socialist message.

    1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

      ""In 2020 it was the Black vote in South Carolina that denied Sanders the nomination.""

      Wrong.

      Delegate count. Biden had 2727. Sanders had 1118. Sanders would not have got the nomination even if every superdelegate voted for him.

      https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/primaries-and-caucuses

      1. mtrueman   2 months ago

        I don't see you denying that Blacks in South Carolina voted for Biden over Sanders. Instead, you quote CNN at me? What the fuck, man?

        The fact remains that Blacks no longer shun Socialists like Mayor Mamdani.

        1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

          NYC allowing anyone to vote is no indication of what America will do.

          Expect democrats to lose both house and senate seats this year because people have seen with their own eyes the horrible policies and the corruption, but moreso understand democrat failures, 0 fiscal responsibility and promotion of Anti American policies.

          1. mtrueman   2 months ago

            "NYC allowing anyone to vote is no indication of what America will do."

            I have no idea what America will do. Neither do you. My point is that Blacks no longer seem as squeamish about voting for Socialists as they once were. Here is Angela Davis, (noted Black radical academic) on Bernie Sanders in 2016:
            “on the other hand, Bernie Sanders, [engages] in a kind of economic reductionism that prevents him from developing a vocabulary that allows him to speak in ways that enlighten us about the persistence of racism, racist violence, state violence.”

            In other words he privileged class politics over identity politics. I'm saying these days, Socialism and class struggle sits much more comfortably with Black voters.

        2. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

          ""In 2020 it was the Black vote in South Carolina that denied Sanders the nomination."'

          This is your claim that I am refuting. Even if all of the black people in SC would have voted for Sanders, Sander would still not have won the nomination.

          1. mtrueman   2 months ago

            "Sander would still not have won the nomination."

            I'm not sure you can say with certainty what would have happened. I believe South Carolina and the Black's rejection sealed Sanders' fate. Had he won, he still would have had a possibility of winning.

            If you believe that Black's attitude towards Socialism remains unchanged since 2020 or 2016, make your case.

            1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

              ""I'm not sure you can say with certainty what would have happened.""

              Yes I can because if every single person in SC voted for Sanders, he still would not have won the nomination.

              Again this is your premise I am refuting.
              """In 2020 it was the Black vote in South Carolina that denied Sanders the nomination."'"

              1. mtrueman   2 months ago

                So, are you in fact agreeing with me that Blacks do view Socialists more favorably today than a few years ago, and are merely quibbling over my grasp of the technicalities of the Democrat selection process? If so, I stand corrected.

          2. EISTAU Gree-Vance   2 months ago

            Lol. ^ Ellsworth Toohey up there is always wrong, but he really hates being called on it.

            Such a doosh.

    2. damikesc   2 months ago

      ...except blacks are very much not voting for the Socialists in the primaries. Like at all.

      Now, the black women will fall in line for the general.

      1. Marshal   2 months ago

        Blacks who work in the productive economy are not voting for the DSA. Blacks who have or want government / activist jobs vote for the DSA. Productive work is the important fact, not race.

        1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

          I'm here for my Obama bucks

      2. mtrueman   2 months ago

        "...except blacks are very much not voting for the Socialists in the primaries. "

        They will vote for Socialists when it counts. Mayor Mamdani will attest to that.

        Tell me, why is that the more education a White person has, the closer their voting behavior is to a Black person? A White person with only high school education will likely vote for Trump, but the more education, the more likely to join 90% of Blacks and vote against Trump.

        1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

          False. You have no evidence to back this fallacy.

          1. mtrueman   2 months ago

            I included many fallacies in my comment. Which one is 'this fallacy?'

        2. damikesc   2 months ago

          Because the credentialed (not educated) whites are morons. Utter morons. They believe, deeply, that they are BETTER than those lowly blacks. The more credentials a white has, the overall dumber they have a tendency to be.

          Some ideas are so retarded --- such as STILL believing Marxism can work --- that they can only be blamed on higher education.

          1. mtrueman   2 months ago

            "Because the credentialed (not educated) whites are morons."

            Irrelevant. My point stands. The more education a White person has, the more the voting behavior mirrors that of Blacks.

            "Some ideas are so retarded --- such as STILL believing Marxism can work "

            I'm not talking about Marxism, though. I'm simply pointing out that the higher educated Whites tend to vote like Blacks. If that's not true, make your case. You seem to be saying that the reason Blacks vote the way they do is because they are retarded, or morons. That is racist, arguing that the color of a person's skin determines their intelligence. Now you have every right to be a racist, don't get me wrong, it's a well established American tradition. But it's too reductive and simple minded to convince me. You'll have to do better.

  41. Kungpowderfinger   2 months ago

    It’s bad enough that fucking Team Blue reads 1984 as an instruction manual. Now they’ve included A Clockwork Orange in their how-too series:

    https://abcnews.com/US/public-safety-official-arrested-allegedly-helping-son-flee/story?id=135361295

    “Jennifer Lackard was arrested on Tuesday in connection with a June shooting behind a Bronx courthouse, police said. The high-ranking Mount Vernon Police Department deputy commissioner is accused of "acting in concert" with her husband and their son in the incident, according to an indictment charging all three with more than a dozen counts -- including second-degree attempted murder, firearm offenses and conspiracy”

    1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

      You can throw in an old Star Trek episode. Are you not of the body?

      1. Kungpowderfinger   2 months ago

        +1 Sid Haig

      2. Juliana Frink   2 months ago

        Best Star Trek line ever was when Kirk tells the hooded "Lawgivers" at the end, "...and if I were you I'd start looking for another job."

        *sigh*

        I'd love to say that to all the useful idiots when the whole socialist scam comes crashing down around them (again). They really seem to think they are here "for the Festival."

    2. mtrueman   2 months ago

      A Clockwork Orange is the superior book. Both from a literary stand point and as a harbinger for the future. 1984 was a look backwards to a mixture of totalitarianisms. A Clockwork Orange portrays a once liberal regime, panicking over its wayward youth, on the verge of Fascism.

      Anthony Burgess had been teaching English in Malaysia during the 1950s and returned to England horrified to find the influence of Socialism so deeply rooted. Also, in 1944, two years into their marriage, with Burgess away on war-service, the pregnant Lynne was assaulted by a group of American men (presumably deserting GIs) on her way home from work through the London black-out. Lynne miscarried and one of her attackers tried to break her finger as she lay on the ground to remove her golden wedding ring. These events provided Burgess with the material he needed to write A Clockwork Orange.

      It's worth noting that Stanley Kubrick, who directed a low budget film version of the book, was so disturbed by the public reaction to the film, that he had it withdrawn from circulation in Britain.

  42. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

    The socialist movement better quickly go back under the rock it hid under for decades after killing millions of people in the 20th century.

    Media needs to remind the public of the horrors of socialism so they are not repeated.

    1. Its_Not_Inevitable   2 months ago

      "Media needs to remind the public of the horrors of socialism so they are not repeated."

      I think we've seen enough now to know that ain't gonna happen.

      1. damikesc   2 months ago

        Yeah, the media are looking forward to getting their marching orders.

    2. mtrueman   2 months ago

      "Media needs to remind the public of the horrors of socialism so they are not repeated."

      I'll settle for endless articles detailing the candidate's tattoos.

  43. XM   2 months ago

    We all remember “defund the cops”, which had soft support from this magazine. 5 years later the commies couldn’t disavow it fast enough.

    Why did Pedro Sanchez legalize the illegals? Why is the DSA so keen on abolishing the senate snd the EC? Because they EXPECT to lose. Without Muslim support Pedro Sanchez might be tossed out like keir starmer. Only with unchecked migration and dismantling of representative government can they rule unchecked with their numerical advantage.

    We’re all getting ready to drink their tears when companies and assets move to red states. But the commies know this. When CA and NY can effectively set economic policy for the whole country they can stall their agenda from being exposed.

    The schumck in New York is requiring id to shop in government stores. They’re admitting to upcoming hoarding snd shortages. A fallout is inevitable and the only way to keep funding their floor is direct power.

    5000 years from now “America” will be remembered as an empire destroyed by immigration. An Atlantis where people were free and prosperous but naive, and their suicidal empathy let in wolves in disguise. A tragic cautionary tale.

    1. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

      ""The schumck in New York is requiring id to shop in government stores. They’re admitting to upcoming hoarding snd shortages.""

      I don't think you will need to show your ID to shop, but you will need to show your ration card. Isn't that what it really is? You will probably need to show your ID to get a ration card though.

  44. TrickyVic (old school)   2 months ago

    .

  45. JFree   2 months ago

    Reason must really be panicking. After more than a decade of selling libertarian = economics for billionaires and culture for libertines, the yoots ain't buying.

  46. JFree   2 months ago

    But even on a weekend night, it felt half empty. It's a shame; Boston could use a great food scene. But regulations, taxes, and overall food-price inflation have made it tougher than ever to operate a restaurant.

    Private equity is a major reason restaurants are falling apart. They spent $100 billion buying restaurants over the last decade. Half of all restaurant bankruptcies are now private equity owned - and it is the debt load and the stripping of everything of value (including all the reasons that restaurants became an avenue for franchising or why restaurants became the default food choice) that forced them into bankruptcy.

    It is so easy to tell which restaurants in your town are private equity owned. Because they ALL suck. I don't know what the end game is for them. Are they a real-estate play or is this some slumlord tax-game?

  47. mad.casual   2 months ago

    star scholar resigns

    Far be it from me to allegedly allege anything about the Reason style guide, but shouldn't it be '"star" "scholar" resigns'? We aren't talking about a trial here and when you resign amid controversy or in disgrace... for alleged plagiarism in academia... it seems like whatever record you hold should get an asterisk by your name or you should be excluded from the Cambridge Hall of Fame or whatever.

    Kinda fucked up when Cambridge makes Pete Rose, Jose Canseco, Mark McGuire, and MLB looks honest and forthright.

  48. TJJ2000   2 months ago

    Or maybe, just maybe; Taxing (i.e. Tariffs) and $20 burritos are both a predictable consequence of all the socialism and its spending.

    MORE socialist spending requires more tax revenue else/and inflation.
    MORE socialist minimum wages/benefits requires higher prices.

    Not as-if Education, Healthcare and Housing didn't literally see the exact same UN-affordability after socialism got a hold of it. Guns (Gov-Guns) just doesn't make sh*T no matter how many times the socialist scam-artists (politicians) tell you they can.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

No, Banning Diesel Exports Won't Lower Gas Prices

Eric Boehm | 9.22.2026 1:45 PM

Reflections on Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce's Privacy Fence

Christian Britschgi | 9.22.2026 1:30 PM

Free Speech Groups Say the FCC's Disney/ABC Investigation 'Reeks of Political Pretext'

Joe Lancaster | 9.22.2026 12:30 PM

Paramount Bends the Knee to Rob Bonta

Tosin Akintola | 9.22.2026 12:15 PM

College Sports Don't Need Saving: Here Are 7 Myths Fueling the Protect College Sports Act

Jason Russell | 9.22.2026 12:00 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Reason's July 4 Special!

For America's 250th, Get 2 Years of Reason for $17.76

Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.

Subscribe to Reason