That'd at least partially because she wasn't at the NYT before 2010. And there wasn't comparably much intrigue in the Obama admin.
-
-
Replying to @AndresFreundPol @yashar
Right. During that administration, reporting was (to a greater degree than the current degree, which is zero) focused on actual policy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Isn't that to a significant degree because there was a working policy process back then? Currently policy is partially made by intrigue.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'd love more policy focused stuff, but I do think tick/tocks behind decisions are worthwhile when it shows the absence of process.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundPol @yashar
(I think we are by and large agreeing, PS).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yea, seems that way. Disagreement seems to be that I think Maggie largely highlights preex crazyness, while you think she contributes.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundPol @yashar
Also I do think tonight's quasi-Trump-apology, particularly in light of the very real human suffering he is about to cause, is heinous
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Andres Freund (Pol) Retweeted Donald J. Trump
If you read Trump's most recent tweet, her prediction actually seems kinda correct:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/905228667336499200 …
Andres Freund (Pol) added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That doesn't mean he's not causing massive pain etc. He is. The approach doesn't make lick of sense, but it's not coherently anti-DACA.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundPol @yashar
Also it's fucking embarrassing that the MSM coverage of this obscures that many Congressional R's passed on a chance to codify this in '13
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Indeed. And in 2010. And in ...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.