Trying the AirPods Max again and they still seem too heavy and bulky. Am I the only one who feels this way?

I both love Chess and am unsure how I can become better at it. I may be stuck playing at my fairly basic level.

Just doing a little light reading.

Just doing a little light reading.

Am adopting a ‘’less Twitter, more books” lifestyle. I hope I can make it stick.

Sadly, most people aren’t as interested in Chess as they are in reading about cheating in Chess.

And we have black mold in a ceiling. 😔

I’m going to shamefully admit that I haven’t seen Hocus Pocus 1. 🫢

Currently reading: What We Owe the Future by William MacAskill 📚

About a third in. Have listened to several podcasts featuring interviews with William MacAskill. He’s amazing at framing the impact of our societal choices in long-term, even universal-level ways.

“In a time of recession, we could drop taxes on new spending, giving the rich and poor alike more reason to spend. In times of inflation, we could raise taxes on new spending, particularly among the wealthy, giving them a concrete reason to cut back immediately and to save and invest more at the same time.”

— Ezra Klein

Really interesting idea here for having automatic tax policy for controlling inflation in a fair way for all income levels.

I’ve come to realize that being forced to do something you don’t enjoy often also forces you to learn in unexpected ways. A good perspective to keep in mind.

Bruce Willis’ Rep Refutes Report That He Sold Likeness for Deepfakes – The Hollywood Reporter

I guess this story wasn’t as bad as I thought. Still creepy, though.

I’m very late to the party on The Old Man with Jeff Bridges. Just fantastic. Two episodes in and can’t wait to see where it goes.

Deepfake Bruce Willis may be the next Hollywood star, and he’s OK with that - Ars Technica

In case you haven’t had enough dystopian news lately.

Currently reading: Station Eleven by Emily St. John Mandel 📚

I’ve found in recent years that my attention span has shriveled. I either take forever to get through books or abandon them. Not so with Station Eleven. I’ve torn through it in less than a week and will finish shortly.

Emily St. John Mandel is a stunning talent. Every character feels so nuanced and real. She finds such beauty in scenes of utter bleakness. I plan on watching the HBO mini-series based on this book soon and will definitely try another of her books.

I don’t consider myself a source of wisdom. But, one can’t help but pick up a few useful nuggets across the decades. Here are some of mine.

• Your ego is bigger than you realize. It keeps you from trying new things and tackling challenges rather than avoiding them. It’s ok to fail. It’s ok for others to see you fail. Life will go on, and you will grow. Playing chess is a recent growth area where I often fail horribly. I’m marclafountain on chess.com if you’d like to view my many lost games. Maybe we can play!
• Meditation is wonderful, but it’s about being more present in the current moment rather than reaching a profound Aha Ha Moment. You need to have that realistic expectation for it. If meditation hasn’t worked for you, try different teachers, apps, prompts, koans, etc. You will find something that clicks eventually. This prompt was a game-changer for me: “What would it feel like if there was no problem to solve?"
• As a child and young adult, you’re forced to try a lot of new things—foods, activities, learning topics, etc. You use this experience to figure out what you like and don’t like. With age, you gain more agency in making choices and often stick with known likes. But, the you of today is somewhat different from the younger you. Maybe you’re assuming you wouldn’t like something now when you’d actually love it. Don’t be afraid to question your assumptions and experiment at any age. (That said, the me of today still thinks eggplant is weird.)
• You would like yourself better if you became a vegetarian. Think about a dog or cat that you’ve loved. Think about their intelligence, personality, and emotional range. If a dog or cat is that complex, aren’t cows, pigs, and lambs likely complex beings too? Do you owe those other animals less respect than a pet? The reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by going vegetarian is also profound. And, you may be surprised at how much easier it is to go vegetarian now versus times past. The veggie options at restaurants and grocery stores are vastly better than they were even a few years ago.
• Yoga is awesome both physically and mentally. It’s not just awesome for women, young people, or the mythical “naturally flexible.” It’s awesome for anyone at any age who can safely do it. As with meditation, try different teachers, classes, apps, styles, etc. You will find something that clicks eventually. For me, Yin Yoga is what clicked. It focuses less on balance, strength, and flow and more on holding stretches for longer to increase range of motion.
• There’s lots of research that people are made happier by having experiences than by owning objects. I feel that deeply. Time spent with family, friends, and pets. Travel to beautiful and interesting places. Great food and drink. Great TV shows, movies, and books. Those experiences make me happy, and reflecting back on them does too. Owning objects rarely makes me happy for very long. Granted, the line between experience and object can be blurry. When considering a significant purchase, ask yourself if it will create or enhance experiences for you. If not, it may just be an object that will bring you little pleasure in the long run.
• Speaking of buying things, never start out subscribing to the one-year or lifetime version of anything new. Your enthusiasm for a shiny new thing in the first days, weeks, and even months will often wane with time. And, your life circumstances may change and reduce the appeal of the new thing. If you’ve used a thing for more than a year, you can better evaluate a longer-term subscription to it.
• As we age, many of our early human relationships wither. You may have old friends and extended family with whom haven’t meaningfully interacted in many years, even decades. At some point, it can feel like too much time has passed to ever reconnect. I’ve found that’s not true. When I make the effort to reconnect with people from my past, it’s always rewarding. We tend to pick up right where we left off and enjoy each other’s company again. Don’t hesitate to reach out to people that you care about.

That feels like enough pearls of wisdom for today. Hope you found something in there useful.

Despite controlling the presidency and Congress, Democrats have failed to deliver for those who elected them. They have created inflation and can’t stop it.

This is the political perception of our moment. But, that perception is deeply flawed, and we must change it before the critical mid-term elections.

Delivering Results

What have Joe Biden and Congressional Democrats delivered? A partial list:

• Got Donald Trump out of office, an achievement that cannot be overstated.
• Conducting an incredibly effective House investigation of the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.
• Led a comprehensive effort to roll out COVID vaccines and boosters.
• Passed a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill.
• Passed $550 million in new investment in an infrastructure and jobs bill.
• Responded decisively and effectively to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
• Passed the first federal gun control legislation since 1994.
• Had the U.S. rejoin the Paris Agreement to combat climate change.
• Brokered an agreement with 130 countries to require corporations to pay at least 15% income tax wherever they operate.
• Had the U.S. rejoin the World Health Organization.
• Made Kamala Harris vice president, the first woman, African American, and Asian American to hold that office.
• Named a diverse presidential cabinet, including Pete Buttigieg as the first openly-gay cabinet member.
• Made Ketanji Brown Jackson the first African American woman to serve on the Supreme Court.
• Filled 73 other federal judicial vacancies with a diverse set of appointees, with 46 more nominations pending in the Senate.
• Ended wasteful funding for a border wall with Mexico that would have been ineffective at stopping illegal immigration while causing environmental and diplomatic harm.
• Revoked the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline, along with creating executive orders to combat climate change.
• Strengthened U.S. relationships in vital international organizations such as NATO, the G7, the Quad, and AUKUS.
• Passed a $280 billion CHIPS Plus bill to alleviate the microchip shortage and shore up U.S. competitiveness with China. (Added this point on August 2, 2022.)
• Killed Al Qaeda leader and 9/11 plotter Ayman Al Zawahiri. (Added this point on August 2, 2022.)
• Passed the PACT Act to help veterans who were exposed to toxic chemicals while deployed abroad. (Added this point on August 3, 2022.

This Congress is likely to pass yet more legislation, potentially including:

• Vital revisions to the Electoral Count Act to protect elections.
• A Respect for Marriage Act protecting same-sex marriage.
• An Inflation Reduction Act authorizing $370 billion in spending on energy and climate change, $300 billion in deficit reduction, three years of Affordable Care Act subsidies, prescription drug reform, and tax reform.

Do the lists above contain everything Democratic constituencies want? Nope. Did many of those items involve compromises liberals didn’t like? Yep. But, with Democrats controlling the Senate by a single vote and the House by ~1% of votes, these are good outcomes. Democrats should crow more about them.

Inflation

“But, Democrats and inflation!” you may cry. Inflation in the U.S. is indeed alarming. And, Democrats have contributed to the problem with too much recent fiscal stimulus. But, that is far from the full, bipartisan picture.

In December 2017, Trump and Congressional Republicans passed massive tax cuts favoring the wealthy and corporations without corresponding spending cuts. The cuts are estimated to add $2 trillion to $2.4 trillion to the national debt over ten years. Too much fiscal stimulus is a bipartisan problem.

Trump paired his tax cuts with protectionist trade policies that raises prices or keeps them high. He pulled the U.S. out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and imposed tariffs on Chinese imports. But, Biden hasn’t joined TPP’s successor or removed the tariffs on China. Protectionist trade policies are a bipartisan problem too.

Inflation is also being driven by supply chain issues due to COVID and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Republicans and Democrats didn’t create either of those problems. (Though, I would argue Biden has responded more effectively to COVID and Russian aggression than Trump did.)

Finally, the Federal Reserve waited too long to raise interest rates to combat inflation. That’s a bipartisan problem, too, given that both parties have nominated Fed governors in recent years. (Clearest example: Chair Jay Powell is a Republican appointed to the board by Obama, later made chair by Trump, and then renominated as chair by Biden.)

Massive tax cuts, massive stimulus, supply chain problems, and loose monetary policy. Many things have combined to create our inflationary environment, most of them being bipartisan in nature.

Changing Perception and Changing Policy

Democrats need to trumpet their achievements, to revel in them. They need to make it clear that Republicans bear their share of the blame for the current economy. And, they need to convince mid-term voters to give them larger Congressional majorities to more meaningfully tackle major problems. The most important of those problems is, yes, inflation.

The Inflation Reduction Act is a good start, but bolder action is needed. While free trade and immigration may look like political third rails, Democrats should dare to touch them.

A good start would be for the U.S. to join the successor to TPP, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or a new agreement much like it. More goods entering the U.S. at lower prices would reduce inflation while helping to balance against Chinese influence in APAC.

Congress also needs to take another stab at comprehensive immigration reform. Allowing appropriate numbers of new immigrants with needed skills would help bring high wage growth and low unemployment to healthier levels. It would increase entrepreneurship in our economy. It would also help deal with our below replacement level birth rate and aging population.

Biden and Democrats shouldn’t allow misperceptions about their achievements, the causes of inflation, or the best solutions for it to continue. Voters need to understand what Democrats have gotten done and what they want to do next.

What would a national abortion rights law that can get 60 votes in the Senate look like?

With the Supreme Court poised to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, that is the vital question supporters of abortion rights should be asking themselves. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be where most of us are—at least not yet.

We don't just need anger and outrage. We need an achievable solution that preserves abortion rights as much as possible in all states of Union.

Roe and Casey Won't Become Federal Law

The Senate will likely soon vote on legislation to make the abortion rights created by Roe and Casey federal law to some degree. That vote will fail to clear the 60-vote threshold to stop a filibuster by a large margin.

Perhaps 49 Senate Democrats and Independents—all Democrats but pro-life Joe Manchin of West Virginia—will vote in favor.  Perhaps pro-choice GOP Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska will also vote in favor. Likely all other Republican Senators will vote against. The measure will still be at least nine votes short of clearing the filibuster.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer says "every American is going to see which side every senator stands" with this vote. But, as my prior paragraph notes, it's already pretty clear where every senator stands.

More importantly, it's unlikely any pro-life senator will pay a political price by casting a vote against abortion legislation as permissive as Roe/Casey. These days, GOP senators are most worried about looking like a RINO in a Republican primary. Alienating pro-choice voters who probably never supported them is much lower on their list of concerns.

Calls to scrap the Senate filibuster and pass Roe/Casey legislation with a simple Senate majority are misguided. Manchin, Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, and GOP senators are against scrapping the filibuster for any reason. And, Manchin certainly won't help kill it for pro-choice legislation. The votes to end the filibuster simply aren't there. (Democrats may also be glad they have the filibuster if they lose control of the Senate this year or in 2024.)

So, we will end up with a contentious vote on Roe/Casey legislation that fails to clear the filibuster, further embitters both sides, likely has no effect on which senators win reelection, and does nothing to protect abortion rights. This is not how abortion rights advocates should expend their energy.

A Different Legislative Path

We need to create a national abortion rights law that can pass the Senate with 60 votes. While that may sound impossible, with some painful compromise by all sides, it may be achievable.

The compromise I suggest below may seem heretical to many pro-choice proponents and a long shot to attract enough Republican votes. However, we clearly cannot continue to rely on the Supreme Court to protect an unenumerated right to abortion in the Constitution.

If we continue on our current path, abortion rights will soon disappear in Red states. Republicans will also continue to push federal judicial nominations and laws that attempt to curtail abortion rights nationally. Now, while Democrats control the Presidency, House, and Senate, we must push for a bold deal with Senate Republicans on abortion rights.

I propose a compromise where the legal time limit for unrestricted abortion is moved earlier in pregnancy. (I'll talk about new time limit specifics in a bit.) This time limit change would be made in return for new social policies and major government spending that:

• Reduce unwanted pregnancies through non-abstinence based sex education and improved access to contraception.
• Make pregnancy and childbirth easier for women with low incomes through paid or heavily-subsidized medical care.
• Guarantee access to abortion clinics in all states for women wishing to use them within the bounds of the law.
• Protect pregnant women by legally guaranteeing they may have an abortion at any time if their pregnancy endangers their health or if their fetus has fatal abnormalities.
• Make raising a child easier through programs for all families like paid maternity/paternity leave and universal Pre-Kindergarten and means-tested programs like expanded Child Tax Credits and paid or heavily-subsidized child care.
• Properly resource foster care and adoption systems so that children in them have better care and a chance at more rapid adoption.

Can we get everything on that list at the level we want it in a deal with Republicans? No. But, we could negotiate for a lot because we can offer Senate Republicans things at least some of them will want in return:

1. Unwanted pregnancies will be reduced through better sex education and access to contraception.
2. Pregnant women will choose to have fewer abortions as they will have better social and economic support for having a baby and either raising it or giving it up for adoption.
3. Abortions for non-medical reasons will have an earlier time limit in Blue states. This will be a big win for pro-lifers. More than two-thirds of abortions occur in Blue states despite Roe/Casey currently providing abortion rights in Red states. The percentage of abortions taking place in Blue states post Roe/Casey will likely be even higher. Republicans will care deeply about this.
4. We will help to create a "culture of life" that reduces abortions, supports families in raising children, better supports foster care and adoption, and begins to reverse America's plummeting birth rate.

I'm sure you're already thinking about all the reasons this compromise would never get enough support from either side. Let me address some of the major concerns.

Why Accept A Shorter Time Limit?

I'm a man. I'm suggesting that women give up a degree of bodily autonomy through an earlier legal time limit for unrestricted abortion. I get the optics of that. But, pregnant women living in all states would get a great deal of legal and economic support in return with this compromise.

That support would reduce unwanted pregnancies. It would help with abortions within the new legal time limit and with abortions for medical reasons at any time. It would help with having a baby and giving it up for adoption. It would help with having and raising a baby. Women would still be empowered to make the choices that are best for them and then would be better supported after making those choices.

So, what would the new time limit for unrestricted abortion be? Something between 15 weeks and 20 weeks, depending on how much new social policy and spending Republicans are willing to offer in return.

Your immediate reaction may be that a limit of 15-20 weeks into pregnancy doesn't give enough time for a woman to make an abortion decision and have one. But, it is actually already enough time now in the vast majority of cases.

Pregnant women can currently have unrestricted abortions for up to 24 weeks into pregnancy. That is the generally accepted standard of fetal viability under Casey. However, women rarely wait anywhere near that long. In 2019, 92.7% of abortions were performed at 13 weeks or less, 6.2% were performed at 14–20 weeks, and <1.0% were performed at 21 weeks or more.

Less than 7.2% of abortions in 2019 happened after the 13th week. If we move the time limit for unrestricted abortion to something in the 15-20 week range—still higher than 13 weeks—and maintain protection for medically-necessary abortions, the change would impact a small percentage of abortion seekers.

Those impacted could choose to have earlier abortions with better legal support, still have medically-necessary abortions at any time, or use the new support systems to help have their babies. Also, perhaps some women will have now avoided unwanted pregnancies with better sex education and contraception access.

While I realize an earlier time limit isn't something pro-choice advocates will like, it is manageable for all the reasons above.

Why Would Republicans Agree to This?

Republicans aren't known for supporting abortion rights, social programs, or major government spending. So, yes, this will be a hard sell. I'm not denying that.

But, if Republicans can forge a compromise to reduce abortions, have unrestricted abortions limited at an earlier time nationwide, help parents raise children, and help reduce US population decline, there's a lot of conservative red meat to like there.

Also, polls consistently show that a majority of Americans supports abortion with restrictions. It's one thing for a Republican senator to oppose Roe/Casey. It's another to oppose a compromise that shortens the time limit for unrestricted abortion and helps raise families. By embracing this compromise, Democrats could make Republicans take on unpopular positions if they don't compromise in turn.

Finally, we don't need that many more Senate votes. As noted at the start of this piece, there could be ~51 Senate votes to pass something like Roe/Casey into law now. If the benefits of this compromise can keep those votes and sway nine more, it will clear the filibuster.

Manchin and Utah Republican Mitt Romney have independent streaks and like a good bipartisan deal.

Several Republican senators are retiring this year. So they may be feeling more independent or looking toward their legacies. Roy Blunt (a dealmaker from Missouri), Richard Burr (North Carolina), Rob Portman (a moderate from Ohio), Richard Shelby (a former Democrat from Alabama), and Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania) are all worth approaching.

Republican senators considering a presidential run in 2024 may also consider this compromise if they can sell voters on the conservative benefits of it while looking like a bipartisan leader.

We Must Move Forward

Unsuccessful show votes in the Senate and energizing pro-choice voters aren't enough of a response to what the Supreme Court will soon do to Roe/Casey. We need to pursue a bold legislative compromise on abortion rights. And, we need to do it while Democrats control the Presidency, House, and Senate. The time to act is now.

Update on August 10th, 2021

Apple's Chief Privacy Officer seemed to say CSAM scanning of iCloud servers was already happening back in January 2020 and Apple's Privacy Policy has allowed it since May 2019. However, it is now unclear whether iCloud server CSAM scanning has actually been happening.

Apple now seems to be telling media that server-based CSAM scanning will start when on-device scanning starts. If so, my understanding around existing scanning was likely incorrect. I have made significant changes to this post to no longer assume that any scanning has been happening.

For many years now, the world has experienced an increasing lack of privacy. It’s been deeply troubling, but Apple has been a beacon of hope. To see a tech company with Apple’s market capitalization and brand power champion privacy as a core value and human right has made me feel that all was not lost.

Apple recently announced that iOS and iPadOS will use image fingerprint hashes to do on-device checks for the presence of known Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) before the images are uploaded to iCloud Photos in the United States. This system may scale to other countries over time.

I disagree with this decision, and I will discuss why in detail. But, first, let me be clear: I hate CSAM. I don’t want it to be on iCloud Photos or anywhere else. In fact, during Tumblr’s first five years, I managed a Trust & Safety team that routinely took down potential CSAM content and reported it to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC).

Second, let me also be clear: I understand Apple and NCMEC have positive intent here. They are trying to protect children from sexual abuse. It is a noble goal that I support. I am not seeking to demonize them, just to share an opposing point of view.

As with many things in life, what we have here is a question of how to best balance competing needs.

On one side of the scale, you have an understandable desire to keep known CSAM off iCloud Photos. On the other side, you have an understandable desire to protect user privacy.

How would I balance that scale? I would focus on these points:

• Server-based scanning can catch fingerprinted CSAM on iCloud just as well as on-device scanning of uploads destined for servers.
• On-device scanning is not a significant privacy improvement over server-based scanning. Apple can still view, fingerprint, and fingerprint scan any iCloud Photo on its servers.
• On-device fingerprint scanning is a potential Pandora’s Box for privacy that authoritarian governments will try very hard to pry open once Apple has created it.

Let’s explore those points in detail.

Server-Based vs. On-Device Scans

Server-based scans can find known CSAM if they are done comprehensively. So, what is the privacy justification for turning every iPhone and iPad in America into an on-device CSAM fingerprint scanner for iCloud Photos? Is that solution striking the right balance for the competing needs here?

It seems many people feel on-device fingerprint scanning that only sends matches to Apple is more privacy-friendly than server-based scanning. I disagree with this view.

Yes, with on-device scanning non-matches are not sent to Apple. That may seem like a big privacy win, but it’s actually a pretty small one.

iCloud Photos lack end-to-end encryption. Photos are encrypted on Apple’s servers, but Apple has the encryption keys. So, it can still view, fingerprint, or fingerprint scan any iCloud Photo on its servers at any time. (Many iCloud services similarly lack end-to-end encryption, including Backups, Drive, and Mail.)

On-device fingerprint scanning doesn’t meaningfully enhance user privacy compared to server-based scanning. But, on-device scanning does create a new potential way for user privacy to be violated on a massive scale.

Governments, Data Sovereignty, and Pandora's Box

Apple has historically worked hard to make its devices encrypted black boxes. This has allowed it to tell governments that it has no way to see what is on a device, only what is on Apple servers that isn’t end-to-end encrypted.

With the notable exception of China, Apple has located its servers in countries with laws that align with its focus on privacy. For example, if Apple doesn’t want to scan servers located in the US at the behest of another country, it probably doesn’t legally have to. In fact, there might even be US law preventing the sort of scanning that the other country wants.

Some people claim that on-device scanning is just moving scanning from servers to devices and thus nothing to worry about. But that isn’t true. On-device scanning could compromise user privacy greatly. It's potentially a Pandora's Box for user privacy.

Some governments may claim that data sovereignty means they can control how fingerprinting is used on devices that are physically in their country. Instead of devices being encrypted black boxes, they are now potentially data stores under the jurisdiction of local governments.

Apple is creating an on-device fingerprinting system focused on scanning for known CSAM in iCloud Photos. But, from a technical perspective, fingerprints for any photo could be scanned for. With a little work, fingerprints for any type of file could be made and scanned for. Perhaps all fingerprints could be harvested from devices rather than only matches.

While the term often gets overused, the potential for mass privacy violation here is Orwellian. Authoritarian regimes and court orders under seals could try to compel Apple to extend the use of fingerprinting to identify or spy on whistleblowers, activists, journalists, watchdogs, political opponents, LGBTQI persons, and more.

Apple tells us not to worry. Erik Neuenschwander, the company’s User Privacy Manager, says in the same Times article that Apple will simply reject such demands from governments:

“We will inform them that we did not build the thing they’re thinking of,” he said.

Many governments don’t deal well with rejection. They can impose import tariffs and fines, close physical and online stores, revoke business licenses, imprison employees, and in some cases block apps and services with firewalls.

Will Apple be able to resist that sort of pressure if a government tries to apply it? Apple's experience in China gives me doubts. That said, Apple has lots of money, lawyers, and lobbyists. It may be able to say no in some cases. Or, it may be able to accept penalties or lost business in smaller markets.

However, what Apple can get away with may be very different from what smaller and more localized tech companies can get away with. And, the course that Apple sets here could have major implications for whether other companies implement on-device scanning.

Apple’s Global Privacy Leadership

I have a sheepish confession to make. When I first heard the news about Apple’s on-device scanning plan, I got angry. I dashed off a couple of hot-take tweets shaming Apple and Tim Cook for using devices and a service I pay for to surveil me. I said I would stop using Apple products over this. I suppose I was a part of what NCMEC has termed the screeching voices of the minority.

After I had some time to calm down, I deleted those tweets. This post is my attempt to be a more thoughtful voice of the minority. Writing it has helped me to understand why I initially reacted with such anger.

I care deeply about privacy. I know that when privacy is eroded, it is rarely restored. Of all the big tech companies, Apple is the privacy leader. If Apple isn’t championing on-device privacy, what major company will? If I wanted to leave Apple for a more privacy-focused tech ecosystem, what would that realistically be? I feel like my only Big Tech privacy champion has laid down its sword. And I’m worried that Apple’s leadership in privacy will cause other companies to embrace on-device scanning too.

I hope with all my heart that Apple changes course here. I’ve joined thousands in signing an online petition asking it to do so. If this post has been at all persuasive, I hope you will join me.

Despite Joe Biden’s victory, the results of the Nov. 3rd election were decidedly mixed for Democrats. With a thin House majority and control of the Senate in doubt, dreams of sweeping legislation like the Green New Deal have little chance of becoming a reality.

Biden is a moderate, and many moderate Democrats are still in Congress. So a centrist legislative agenda was always more likely anyway. Given these political realities, Democrats should try for a more achievable “Green Deal” with Republicans.

A Green Deal could be a lighter, simpler version of the Green New Deal. It wouldn’t tackle issues around housing or health care. But it would support further development of technologies for:

• Carbon-free power generation, such as solar, wind, and geothermal
• Efficient power transmission and storage
• Replacement of vehicles and equipment that use fossil fuels with electric-powered alternatives
• Capturing and sequestering greenhouse gases

Many cynically believe progress and compromise aren’t possible in D.C., especially around climate change. But Biden’s decades of relationship building in Congress could make him effective at cutting a deal.

Yes, there are plenty of things for Democrats and Republicans to argue about here. Is climate change real and non-cyclical? Is human activity the primary driver of climate change? Should greenhouse gas emissions be taxed or capped-and-traded? Most Democrats would answer all in the affirmative, while many Republicans would disagree.

Yet, there is still room for compromise. Consider some things about the two parties:

• Democrats want to combat climate change.
• Republicans want tax cuts and deregulation whenever possible.
• Both parties want lower unemployment, higher wage growth, and less income inequality.

Given all of that, the outlines of a potential Green Deal compromise are clear:

• Federal tax cuts and reasonable deregulation should go to businesses that design, manufacture, install, and maintain technologies to combat climate change. The job creation and wage growth opportunities here are profound.
• Federal tax cuts should go to people and businesses who buy technologies that combat climate change. We should incentivize everyone to go green.
• We will need a green workforce to make all these technologies. Thus, more federal money should be spent on targeted education and research. We need more STEM grads and research grants focused on combating climate change.
• To further help green the workforce, we need more immigration visas that allow people with useful skills to come to the United States.

This Green Deal would not be “socialism.” It would create incentives for people, businesses, and educational institutions to be innovative and solve problems. It would put capitalism to work against climate change. Think of it as Climate Capitalism.

Such a compromise would allow Democrats to address climate change, allow Republicans to get tax cuts and deregulation, and allow both parties to create new jobs that pay well.

Paying for Green Deal tax cuts with spending cuts or tax increases in other areas would be politically challenging. Generally, I’m a deficit hawk. But our climate is in crisis, and our political process is broken. So if we need to engage in deficit spending to get this done, I would hold my nose and support that.

Let’s hope Biden and Congress are willing to compromise and cut something like a Green Deal.

Main blog image by Dan Meyers.

Like many, I’m ecstatic about Joe Biden’s historic victory in the presidential race this week. It’s made me want to share a brief interaction with Biden many years ago. It’s a short story, but it speaks to who Biden is in a very human way.

Picture it. Washington, D.C. July 1994. Hot and humid as hell outside. Forrest Gump is all the rage. Bill Clinton is in his first term. I’m a 20-year-old Senate intern who favors ill-fitting blazers paired with ugly ties.

Clinton had nominated Stephen Breyer to a vacancy on the Supreme Court. One afternoon, I was able to go and watch some of Breyer’s confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

I will admit the hearings were a bit dull. Breyer was a qualified, uncontroversial nominee, and the Democrats in the Senate majority were inclined to be nice to him. In fact, Breyer ended up being confirmed by the full Senate 87-9. The outcome was never in doubt.

Still, for a political geek like me, just being in that hearing room was heady stuff. Many of the senators had a degree of fame from the Clarence Thomas confirmation or other events. Ted Kennedy, Paul Simon, Strom Thurmond, Orrin Hatch, Arlen Specter, Howell Heflin, Carol Moseley-Braun, Diane Feinstein, Alan Simpson, and more. Big names were everywhere. At the center of it all, chairing the committee, was Joe Biden of Delaware.

The hearing was so packed that I didn’t get a seat. I had to lean against a wall next to a rope line. That rope line separated spectators like me from Breyer, his team, the senators, and their aides. Eventually, Biden called a break, and everyone stood up and started milling around.

“Excuse me, can you help me?” asked a woman who had walked up to me. “I’m from Delaware, I’ve always wanted to meet Senator Biden, and his office said if I came here during a break I might be able to catch him. Could you ask if he will see me?”

I had an intern badge on, but I wasn’t a Biden intern or a Judiciary Committee intern. So, the appropriate response would have been to decline to help. But she seemed nice. And, to be honest, I wanted to meet Biden too. So, I said I would see what I could do.

The woman suggested that she write down her name and hometown for me to take to Biden. She began rummaging through her purse. She had a pen, but neither of us had anything to write on. Eventually, she found a matchbox. She dumped the matches into her purse, wrote inside the matchbox, closed it, and handed it to me.

You would think the idea of handing a note written inside a matchbox to a Senate committee chair would have seemed insane. But, my 20-year-old brain just went with it.

I confidently let myself through the rope line, walked past numerous lions of the Senate, and managed to reach Biden right as one of his aides stepped away. He was seated in his committee chair and glanced up at me.

I introduced myself, explained that one of his constituents was asking to meet him, and offered him the matchbox.

Biden didn’t take the matchbox right away. He stared at it for a moment, gave me a hard look, and finally took it. He opened it, read it, and snapped it closed.

“I have a question for you…” a pause as Biden read my badge. “…Marc. And I need a serious answer. Does this woman seem mentally stable to you?”

It took me a moment to realize the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee was cracking a joke with me. I smiled and said that she seemed stable to me.

“Well,” he said, laughing. “Why don’t you bring her back then?”

I went among the senators again and returned with the woman. Biden flashed a dazzling smile and gave her a hug. She was clearly bowled over, almost giddy to meet him.

They began to chat about her life in Delaware. I was struck by how Biden was genuinely interested in the conversation. It wasn’t just a surface contact with a potential voter. He was truly engaged with her.

At that point, I decided I’d pressed my luck far enough and left them to talk. And that’s my Biden story. He’s a lovely, sincere guy who was far nicer to an intern than he had to be. That’s Joe Biden. And, thankfully, that’s also the kind of person we need to be president right now.

Main blog image by Gage Skidmore.

Apple released its Apple One service bundles on Friday. Let’s take a look at the value of the bundles, considerations when choosing one, and how One may help Apple’s offerings grab market share.

The Apple One Bundles

Individual

• Apple Music
• Apple TV+
• Apple Arcade
• 50GB of iCloud storage
• $14.95 per month
• $6 cheaper per month than purchasing everything separately
• Apple TV+ and Apple Arcade support Family Sharing, but in this bundle Apple Music and iCloud do not support sharing

Family

• Apple Music
• Apple TV+
• Apple Arcade
• 200GB of iCloud storage
• Family Sharing of services
• $19.95 per month
• $8 cheaper per month than purchasing everything separately

Premiere

• Apple Music
• Apple TV+
• Apple Arcade
• 2TB of iCloud storage
• Apple News+
• Apple Fitness+ (being released later this year)
• Family Sharing of services
• $29.95 per month
• $25 cheaper per month than purchasing everything separately

Overall Thoughts on the Bundles

• If you already buy all the services in a bundle separately now, buying the bundle will save you money. It’s a no-brainer, but most people probably don’t already buy everything in a bundle.
• If you already buy most of the services in a bundle, buying the bundle will give you additional services for less than buying them all separately. You also won’t spend much more than you pay now. Obviously, this is the sweet spot Apple and any bundler is targeting. I’m guessing many people are in this boat.
• For people who’ve already been paying for Apple Music Family and 200GB of iCloud storage, the Apple One Family bundle is a pretty sweet deal.
• Family Sharing makes the Family and Premiere bundles much more compelling if you have 1-5 people to share with.
• As others have commented, Apple should give more than 5GB of storage free with iCloud. Box gives 10GB for free. Google Drive gives 15GB. But at least Apple One is helping to make the bundled cost of additional iCloud storage a bit more bearable.
• Launching Premiere without shipping Apple Fitness+ is weird and makes the value of Premiere harder to evaluate. That said, you get the first month of Apple One for free and can change bundles or cancel at any time. So, it’s not really a risk to try it. I’m guessing Fitness+ will ship soon, perhaps even at Apple’s Nov. 10th event.

My Apple One Considerations

I already was paying for:

• Apple Music (personal) at $9.99 per month
• Apple TV Plus (already has Family Sharing by default) at $4.99 per month
• iCloud storage 200GB (already has Family Sharing by default) at $2.99 per month

So, I was already spending $17.97 a month.

My considerations:

• I can’t do Apple One Individual since I need more than 50GB of iCloud storage.
• $19.95 for Apple One Family is just $1.98 more a month than I spend now. I would keep what I have and get Apple Music for my wife and Apple Arcade for my wife and me. Seems like an easy call to do that.
• $29.95 for Premiere is $10 more a month than Family. I don’t need more than the 200GB of iCloud storage in Family. But, I’m interested In trying Apple News+ and Apple Fitness+ for my wife and me. We already use Apple News and regularly exercise.

So, we are starting with Premiere and seeing how we like News+ and Fitness+ (when it ships). If we like them well enough, we’ll stay Premiere. If not, we’ll drop down to Family.

I remain annoyed that a premium “news” service lacks The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Economist, and doesn’t have all of The Wall Street Journal. But, I already like News+ more than I thought I would.

News+ does have The New Yorker, National Geographic, TIME, New York Magazine, The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, and many other publications. Not too bad at bundle pricing.

Competition Concerns

Spotify has expressed concerns about Apple One. It says such bundling is an anti-competitive practice. It believes Apple is using the combined Apple One services to unfairly take market share from smaller or less diversified services players.

That may be correct. I was already on Apple Music, so Spotify didn’t have me to lose. But, Apple One has prompted me to reconsider my under-utilization of iCloud storage. I’m now moving to the free plans for Evernote and Dropbox. iCloud storage and apps that work with it can meet my needs just as well for less money.

Several news outlets have noted that Apple One is likely to greatly increase the number of iCloud storage customers. If that happens, others may do what I’m doing with Evernote and Dropbox. Music services like Spotify could also be impacted as bundled Apple Music looks more attractive.

Overall, I’m torn. Apple products are designed and integrated well. And it’s certainly nice to get them for more attractive prices. Yet, I do worry that smaller and less diversified players will be hurt by Apple One. And I further worry that we may soon live in a world where everything comes from a few gigantic players like Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook. We’re pretty close to that world now.

Of course, Apple notes that it lacks majority dominance in any of its product categories and that all the Apple One services can be purchased separately. That’s technically true. But, for someone like me, who is deeply immersed in the Apple ecosystem, it’s also true that the pull of Apple is difficult to resist. I’m guessing people deeply immersed in the Google and Microsoft ecosystems often feel the same way.

I sense public opinion and political will has started to move against the big tech companies. I will be interested to see what happens with the Justice Department’s antitrust case against Google.

If Joe Biden becomes president, I will be even more interested to see how his Justice Department treats all the big tech companies. Some Democrats on the far left, such as Elizabeth Warren, clearly favor breaking them up. I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple and others are forced into some unbundling in the future.

Main blog image by Priscilla Du Preez.

Research clearly shows that having routines in your life has positive impacts on your mental health. But, COVID-19 has shredded many of our routines. It can be easy not to recognize your routines are gone and hard to make new ones. But it’s worth your while to do both.

How Routines Are Formed

Sometimes we consciously think about how we want to structure our time each day and week. We then create routines to achieve those self-directed goals. But, more often, we have goals and timelines imposed upon us and evolve routines in response.

Getting kids to and from school. Getting to and from the gym. Getting to and from work. Grocery shopping. Life is usually filled with things that require us to adopt some level of routine. That’s not a bad thing. Routines can help make us happier and more productive when we construct them well.

For example, if you need to leave your home around a certain time each weekday morning, that leads to waking up at a certain time, cleaning up and getting dressed at certain time, eating breakfast at a certain time, etc.

But what happens when our routines get suddenly ripped away?

COVID-19 Attacks Routines Too

Before the virus, I went to a gym each weekday morning and shared a ride there with my wife at 7:30 a.m. That created clear parameters for my morning routine. I needed to be ready to leave at 7:30, so I woke up, ate, brushed my teeth, and dressed to hit that time. After the gym, I was into the groove of my day and generally clicked into other routines as the day progressed.

When COVID-19 spiked in Jakarta in March, my gym closed. All of my morning routines went away very suddenly. I didn’t really think much about that at the time, though. The potential health and economic consequences of the virus were overwhelming and took most of my attention. It was also unclear how long it might be before things would return to normal.

Six months later, we’re living in an ongoing “new normal,” where my gym remains closed. I wish I could say I recognized early on that new morning routines were needed. But I didn’t. I watched TV, browsed the web, read ebooks, and doom-scrolled Twitter, waiting for normality to return. With no regular start to my day and the virus altering life in numerous ways, I rarely clicked into routines at all.

That wasn’t good. I’ve spent the past few months slowly figuring out solutions.

My New Routines

Over time, I’ve added some new routines to my days and weeks:

• I walk outside for 20-30 minutes each weekday morning and evening. (And sometimes on weekends too.) It’s a reason to get out of bed at a specific time and a nice way to end the day. If it’s raining, I do laps of the first floor of our house. Our cats find this very confusing.
• I learn with Brilliant.org each day, as I wrote about earlier. I try to do one module per day, though I sometimes just do a few questions on weekends or busy days.
• I’m trying to blog more often. Once a week is my current goal. This seems to be a harder routine to keep than the others. It may be because writing requires the most sustained focus on my part.
• I’m meditating for 15 minutes once per day while listening to Endel. (I wrote about Endel earlier as well.) Some days it goes well. Many days I feel very unfocused and distracted. This is why they call it a “practice.” I will keep practicing!
• I do two 90-minute Indonesian lessons with an instructor each week. This actually predates the pandemic. The lessons are less effective now that they’re online rather than in person. And the virus means that I go out into Jakarta less to reinforce my learning. But maintaining the lessons is keeping me from losing what I’ve learned so far.
• I’m recently started doing body-weight exercises three or more times a week, which I’ll cover more below.

Tracking My Progress With Streaks

I’ve found it helps to have a little extra motivation in keeping my routines. There are lots of apps out there for creating and tracking routines. I’ve settled on Streaks and have been extremely pleased with it.

Streaks works in the Apple ecosystem (iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and Mac). Unusually for 2020, it isn’t subscription-based. You pay $4.99 once for iPhone/iPad and $4.99 once for Mac, depending on your needs.

For me, Streaks is just the right amount of simplicity and elegance versus features and configurability. It has a sparse, clean interface. You get two pages that can each contain up to six Tasks. (I’m only using one page of six Tasks to stay focused.) Tasks can be anything you want to make a routine of doing.

You can choose whether a Task is daily, weekly, fortnightly, or monthly and how many times each period you want to do it. You can also set recurring reminders for each Task. Health-related Tasks can be given access to Health data from your iPhone and Apple Watch. That makes it easy to track a Task like walking, for example.

When you tap on a Task to complete it, you see a circle close, hear a sound, and may feel a vibration. As you do a Task again and again, you build a streak and see how long it has lasted. If you complete all of your current Tasks, they turn gold for the rest of the day. There are also some lovely widgets for iOS 14 and iPadOS 14.

Streaks has loads of positive feedback mechanisms. It also makes you not want to break the streaks you’ve labored to build. It’s a great motivator. I’ve liked it so much that I’m using another app from the same creator.

Tracking My Exercise With Streaks Workout

I can’t go to the gym during the pandemic and wouldn’t want to. I also don’t want to spend money and lose free space building a home gym.

This has led me to embrace exercises that can be done without equipment. And Streaks Workout is a great app for creating and tracking no-equipment workout routines.

Streaks Workout also works in the Apple ecosystem, but on slightly different devices (iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, and Apple TV). Again, no subscription. You pay $3.99 once, and it works on everything. It also adds your workout data to Apple’s Health app.

You can use Streaks Workout to build custom workout routines using 30 different exercises. Or, you can tell the app which exercises you’re willing to do and have it build random workouts for you.

Random workouts contain six of your exercises split across a time duration of your choice. I like them. They keep things interesting and fun.

You can motivate yourself to complete your workouts in Streaks too. A Task in Streaks can be linked to Streaks Workout. Streaks Workout then automatically tells Streaks when you’ve done a workout.

I’m also extremely pleased with Streaks Workout. It’s definitely helping me build an ongoing routine and stay in better shape.

Apple Fitness+ will launch later this year. I’ll be interested to see how it impacts Streaks Workout and other fitness apps in the Apple ecosystem. I think it could be a rough road for many of them.

Overall

If you want to create or reinforce some positive routines and use Apple products, I would suggest giving Streaks and Streaks Workout a try.

If you don’t use Apple products or have different needs around routines, I’d look around online. There are lots of apps in the routines/habits space, and you can probably find one that works well for you.

Main blog post image by Drew Beamer.

In November 2018, I self-published a murder mystery novella. It’s been about two years now. For reasons I’ll cover below, the book has essentially ended its journey. So, I wanted to share some lessons learned from the experience.

People can be incredibly kind

When I had finished with my draft manuscript, I put out a call for people I knew to give feedback on it and help me find errors.

I was amazed at how many family members and friends offered to help me. I reconnected with high school English teachers that I hadn’t talked to in 25 years. One of my best friends took time from his beach vacation to help. Numerous people dedicated themselves to finding my many, many typos. My profound thanks go to all of you.

Intellectual property issues are complex

Most books, even self-published ones, generally go through a legal review. You need to make sure you aren’t violating laws around copyright, trademark, libel, etc. I hired a lovely firm in NYC, Klaris Law, to review my book. After a few tweaks, they gave me the go-ahead to publish. I love that there are lawyers who get paid to read books for a living!

My book was an homage to Agatha Christie. Thus, it made many references to her, her works, and her characters. I reached out to Agatha Christie Limited, which holds the copyrights to most Agatha Christie works and is run by her great-grandson.

I knew a partnership with ACL was a long shot, but I was hoping for some advice or at least some encouragement. Eventually, I received a boilerplate response indicating a lack of interest along with vaguely threatening language about copyrights and trademarks that I knew I wasn’t violating.

That was…a rough day. I thought I’d get a more cordial and human brush off, given the reverence and love I was showing for Agatha Christie. I guess it’s all just business.

The technical aspects of the writing and self-publishing processes are interesting, at least to me

I’m a nerd. Writing and self-publishing offer plenty of opportunities to geek out. In fact, I could easily distract myself with picking and configuring tools rather than actually writing if I wasn’t careful.

While I used a number of writing apps over time, the one that got me over the finish line was Ulysses. If you’re a Mac, iPad, or iPhone user who writes a lot, I recommend it highly. I’m actually writing this post on Ulysses. It’s a powerful, flexible writing tool that empowers you while never getting in your way.

The various digital book stores use different formats for their ebooks. And Amazon has a specific format for its self-published paperback books. I was new to all of this, but I found Vellum. If you’re a Mac user looking to self-publish, I also recommend Vellum highly. It made the publishing process a snap.

Online ratings and reviews matter in more ways than you know

Before writing my book, I never left online ratings or reviews for anything. Even if I loved or hated something, I was too lazy to give feedback. My sense is that most consumers are similar. I’ve seen estimates that only one in 100-200 purchases results in a review, for example. I would believe it. Very few people who purchase my novella have left online feedback.

The financial impact of ratings and reviews cannot be overstated. If I get a new five-star review, I see my sales spike. If I get a new one- or two-star review, I see my sales dip. Consumers who won’t leave reviews themselves often still base their purchasing decisions on the reviews of others.

Reviews also have an emotional impact on me as an author. A five-star review can make me glow all day, and a one-star review can make me feel absolutely worthless. It’s especially rough when someone leaves a one- or two-star rating and no review. I have no idea why they didn’t like the book, just that they disliked it enough to tap an icon.

All of this has made me realize human beings are on the other side of rating icons and review boxes. I’m starting to give positive ratings (and sometimes reviews) to more things I like and to blog about things I love. I also don’t generally give less than a three-star rating to anything. I now know how it feels for raters to tell you your baby is ugly. So, I’m much more hesitant to do that to others.

Self-publishing means hiding your needle in digital haystacks

When self-publishing, you aren’t required to have an agent, a publisher, or a publicist. You also can sell ebooks and print-on-demand paperbacks to avoid a lot of up-front costs. So, that was the good news for me. Anyone can easily self-publish.

What was bad news? Anyone can easily self-publish—and many, many people do. This meant my novella was a needle in digital store haystacks, along with countless other works. I didn’t have fame or a fan base to help me stand out. The book was getting no traction on its own. So, I decided to try my hand at some advertising.

Amazon Advertising works…for a price

I’ve been running Amazon ads on the “Agatha Christie” search term for nearly two years. To get good placement for the ads, I’ve had to pay a high rate in relation to the low price of my book.

My ebook only costs $2.99, Amazon takes 30% of that, I have to pay taxes on the rest, and I have to pay for the ads. The upshot is that I’ve consistently lost money as an author. It’s been a small amount of money. But after pouring my energy into making something, having to prop it up with money-losing ads or not see it sell has been tough to swallow.

I kept hoping that this digital pump-priming would eventually lead to some word-of-month and organic sales. But, that has sadly not happened. Almost all of my sales have been ad-driven.

At the start of September, I saw publishers of Agatha Christie novels placing many more ads that were moving my ad lower and lower in Amazon search results. My sales tanked accordingly. These publishers likely have marketing budgets and book unit prices that allow them to pay more for ads than I can.

So, I’ve decided to turn my ads off. The book will continue to be available. But, without ads, it will not sell many more copies.

I’m glad I did it

I had the core ideas for the novella in my mid-20s and toyed with them for 20 years. I was lazy. There’s no denying it. But, I finally wrote the damn thing. The experience has been ego-bruising at times. But I’ve learned a lot. In the end, I’m proud that I’ve put something out into the world.

Main blog post image by Dan Counsell.

We’re all so focused on Nov. 3rd that we aren’t giving much thought to what will come after. Here’s what I think will happen in American politics in the near future:

Amy Coney Barrett will be confirmed to the Supreme Court on a party-line Senate vote in late October.

• My guess is that she won’t vote to fully strike down Roe v. Wade but will successfully chip away at it over time.

Donald Trump will lose the election to Joe Biden…bigly.

• Yes, polls can be wrong, and most were in 2016. But Biden is not only polling better than Hillary Clinton in 2016; he’s polling at historic highs for any challenger to a presidential incumbent. There is a lot of room for polling error, and Biden still wins.
• Trump, never good at impulse control at the best of times, is incapable of the discipline or personal growth that would be needed to change his toxic political brand at this stage. In fact, he will likely become even worse as we move toward the election.

The Supreme Court will not play a decisive role in the presidential election outcome.

• Most justices will be wary of further politicizing the court and of goading Democrats into adding court seats. Justice Barrett will be wary of seeming a Trump stooge. Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh will worry a bit about that too. This will make the court unlikely to grant cert on most election-related petitions.
• Unlike the Bush v. Gore Florida recount in 2000, the 2020 race is unlikely to come down to a single state. Trump will likely have to claim vote counts in many states are incorrect if he wants to move the overall Electoral College his way. The Supreme Court is unlikely to choose to play referee on voting issues in multiple states at once.

Democrats will retain control of the House and narrowly take control of the Senate in the election.

• Look for AOC / The Squad, Ed Markey, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders to have lots of policy clashes with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. I would expect Pelosi and Schumer to win most of the battles.

Trump will refuse to attend Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20th.

• He will never accept the loss and thus will declare the inauguration a sham.
• Trump also only cares about himself and lacks respect for norms.
• He may refuse to let Biden spend the prior night at Blair House and refuse a White House meeting before the inauguration. There won’t be much grace in Trump’s final days.
• There is a possibility he will stage a speech of his own on Jan. 20th. It could be from the White House the morning of the inauguration or a Trump property in the afternoon. (Doral or Mar-a-Lago are probably lovely in January.) Biden’s inauguration speech will get better ratings, but that will be Fake News.

Trump will issue a blanket pardon to himself and many members of his administration the morning of Jan. 20th to “stop the witch hunt.”

• This could lead to litigation between the Biden Justice Department and Trump over the legality of a self-pardon. It depends on whether Justice under Biden decides to pursue any of Trump’s numerous abuses of power.
• The case could eventually wind its way to the Supreme Court.
• I don’t know how the justices would vote. There are no explicit checks on the presidential pardon power in the Constitution. But the judicial branch does exist as a check on overall executive power. A self-pardon would clearly be an abuse of executive power.
• Regardless, any pardon won’t affect the Cyrus Vance investigation, ongoing sexual assault civil suits, or any other investigation of Trump by state or local governments.

If Vladimir Putin has kompromat on Trump, it will be anonymously released or used.

• Trump’s praise for Putin and refusal to criticize Putin over Ukraine, Syria, or the poisoning of Alexei Navalny all point to Putin potentially having something over Trump.
• Maybe it’s control over some of Trump’s massive debt. Maybe it’s evidence of illegal activity by Trump. Maybe it’s just something highly embarrassing to Trump. (Though, I cringe to think what Trump would consider highly embarrassing.)
• I don’t know whether Putin will make his move while Trump is still a lame duck in office or shortly thereafter. It will depend on the nature of the kompromat.
• Putin would likely time any action to cause the maximum amount of instability and embarrassment for the United States. He would love to force the Biden Administration to focus on Trump in its early days rather than tackling its own agenda.

No new seats will be added to the Supreme Court.

• Joe Biden, a former chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said in the past he’s against adding more seats to the court. Kamala Harris has seemed more open to it in the past.
• Both are now not commenting on the issue until after the election because they know it’s divisive and will take attention away from the ongoing Trump meltdown.
• My guess is that Biden’s thoughts haven’t changed much here, despite Mitch McConnell’s continued game playing with the Supreme Court. And I happen to think Biden is correct. The court is too politicized already. We don’t want to make it worse. And someday Republicans will fully control the federal government again. We don’t want a Supreme Court seat increase every time a single party is in power.

Between Cyrus Vance, sexual assault civil lawsuits, potential investigation and prosecution by the Biden Justice Department, and massive debts coming due soon, Trump’s post-presidency is looking quite unpleasant.

• It will take years for everything to play out, but bankruptcy, jail, or both could be in his future.
• There is one bright spot for Trump. I assume a future Donald J. Trump Presidential Library & Casino will be announced sometime in 2021.

Main blog post image by Hannah Jacobson.