hotair--2020-02-10--The Complete Evergreen Story episode 17: Community Policing

It has been a few months since I wrote about Benjamin Boyce ’ s ongoing series about the meltdown at Evergreen State College in the spring of 2017 .
I left off with episode 14 which was focused on Black Lives Matter and how a 2015 police shooting set the stage for some of what happened at the school a couple of years later .
That ’ s actually a perfect jumping off point for this latest video which focuses on a community police review board where students were invited to come and share their opinions about campus police .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not really fair to say students took over this meeting since it was open to them , but their concerns were the primary topic discussed .
Boyce lets the video of the meeting run for several minutes as protesters discuss “ Community Love ” and the fact that their protests at Evergreen have gone viral and , as a result , they have eyes from around the nation on them .
There ’ s even a bit of self-criticism here as students recognize that taking over the administration building the previous day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were coming was an overreaction .
Eventually , the chair of the review board opened the meeting to student comments and it quickly becomes clear that what the protesters wanted is for the police to go away .
As one student put it , “ no more cops in our communities .
That ’ s all.
” Another student said , “ We don ’ t want the cops to have guns at all .
Like , forget rifles , like—no guns .
And , like , forget weapons , we don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here.
” “ We can control our own community , I think , ” he added .
At this point the video runs on for several more minutes with a faculty member telling the students she agrees with them and describing how she helped shut down another campus during a protest .
Progressives love the sound of their own voices .
Just as I was beginning to wonder where this episode was going , it suddenly became clear .
Having claimed that the community could police itself , suddenly we see an example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like .
A student gets up and claims that another student who is filming the meeting has made Islamophobic comments in the past .
“ As a Muslim man , I ’ m afraid to be in this room with you right now , ” the accuser said .
Another student asks that the video the accused student has been shooting be deleted .
“ Listen up , this is uh—this is an opportunity for community policing .
Like , why are we in this room ?
Okay ?
So I want the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delete every photo that he ’ s taken of this space , ” one of the protesters said .
As more students demand the person recording delete his video , he says he intends to leave .
Students ask to be shown the videos he has taken , presumably to screen them for offensive content , before he can leave .
He asks why he ’ s not allowed to film an open forum and no one seems to have an answer to that question .
Eventually another student suggested the student who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making everything about himself .
Of course , he didn ’ t make himself the issue , the protesters did .
So in the meeting where student protesters claimed they could police themselves , we get a clear example of how that would work : Far left students accusing someone of Islamophobia and malicious intent ( with no evidence of either ) and on that basis demanding he self-censor his right to film an open student meeting .
There ’ s even a hint they may not let him leave until he complies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leave .
It ’ s exactly the sort of community policing I ’ d expect from the protesters .
They would be quick to abridge other people ’ s rights if they were given any real power .

It has been a few months since I wrote about Benjamin Boyce’s ongoing series about the meltdown at Evergreen State College in the spring of 2017. I left off with episode 14 which was focused on Black Lives Matter and how a 2015 police shooting set the stage for some of what happened at the school a couple of years later. That’s actually a perfect jumping off point for this latest video which focuses on a community police review board where students were invited to come and share their opinions about campus police. As Boyce points out, it’s not really fair to say students took over this meeting since it was open to them, but their concerns were the primary topic discussed.
Boyce lets the video of the meeting run for several minutes as protesters discuss “Community Love” and the fact that their protests at Evergreen have gone viral and, as a result, they have eyes from around the nation on them. There’s even a bit of self-criticism here as students recognize that taking over the administration building the previous day based on a rumor that the police were coming was an overreaction.
Eventually, the chair of the review board opened the meeting to student comments and it quickly becomes clear that what the protesters wanted is for the police to go away. As one student put it, “no more cops in our communities. That’s all.” Another student said, “We don’t want the cops to have guns at all. Like, forget rifles, like—no guns. And, like, forget weapons, we don’t even want the cops to be here.” “We can control our own community, I think,” he added.
At this point the video runs on for several more minutes with a faculty member telling the students she agrees with them and describing how she helped shut down another campus during a protest. Progressives love the sound of their own voices.
Just as I was beginning to wonder where this episode was going, it suddenly became clear. Having claimed that the community could police itself, suddenly we see an example of what that community policing would look like. A student gets up and claims that another student who is filming the meeting has made Islamophobic comments in the past. “As a Muslim man, I’m afraid to be in this room with you right now,” the accuser said. Another student asks that the video the accused student has been shooting be deleted.
“Listen up, this is uh—this is an opportunity for community policing. Like, why are we in this room? Okay? So I want the people next to him to watch him delete every photo that he’s taken of this space,” one of the protesters said.
As more students demand the person recording delete his video, he says he intends to leave. Students ask to be shown the videos he has taken, presumably to screen them for offensive content, before he can leave. He asks why he’s not allowed to film an open forum and no one seems to have an answer to that question.
Eventually another student suggested the student who was filming is perpetuating white supremacy by making everything about himself. Of course, he didn’t make himself the issue, the protesters did.
So in the meeting where student protesters claimed they could police themselves, we get a clear example of how that would work: Far left students accusing someone of Islamophobia and malicious intent (with no evidence of either) and on that basis demanding he self-censor his right to film an open student meeting. There’s even a hint they may not let him leave until he complies, though it appears he eventually does leave.
It’s exactly the sort of community policing I’d expect from the protesters. They would be quick to abridge other people’s rights if they were given any real power.


hotair--2020-02-10--It's time to think about reducing the deficit, says Pete Buttigieg. Wait, what?

Unexpected .
So much so that we ’ re left to wonder what game he ’ s playing at here , particularly in light of the timing .
Trump ’ s new budget proposes cuts to Medicare and Social Security , a fact that Democrats will feast on politically all this year .
That being so , the last thing they ’ d want in a nominee , one would think , is a guy who ’ s also calling for belt-tightening .
No matter how right he might be on the merits .
Out : “ This Buttigieg character @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s seeking.
” In : “ This Buttigieg character might be just the technocratic breath of fresh air we need in Washington.
” Asked at a town hall here how important the deficit is to him , Buttigieg said it ’ s “ important ” and vowed to focus on limiting the debt even though it ’ s “ not fashionable in progressive circles.
” “ I think the time has come for my party to get a lot more comfortable owning this issue , because I see what ’ s happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trillion deficit — and his allies in Congress do not care .
So we have to do something about it , ” Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , said in a packed middle school gym , drawing cheers… “ It ’ s not fashionable in progressive circles to talk too much about the debt , largely because of the irritation to the way it ’ s been used as an excuse against investment .
But if we ’ re spending more and more on debt service now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infrastructure and health and safety net that we need right now , ” he said .
“ And also this expansion , which I think of as , by the way , just the 13th inning of the Obama economic expansion .
It isn ’ t going to go on forever.
” I ’ ve come to accept some weird realignments on issues in the Trump era , like Democrats becoming stronger advocates of free trade and Republicans becoming stronger advocates of rapprochement with Russia .
But I ’ m fully unprepared , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party of deficit hawkery .
No matter how grossly unjust it would be for the GOP to lay claim to that title .
My instinct is that Buttigieg is just following his political rebranding here to its obvious conclusion .
He began the race as a basically dogmatic progressive ( and remains one deep down , no doubt ) but wised up after Elizabeth Warren started rising in the polls and realized that there wouldn ’ t be room in the left lane of the primary with her and Bernie both in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believing — shrewdly — that Biden might ripe for a calamitous fall as the campaign wore on and expecting that Klobuchar wouldn ’ t get traction in polling .
Biden is fading but still alive in the early states right now while Klobuchar has come on in the past few days after her winning debate performance on Friday night , which means there ’ s momentarily a three-way fight to become the champion of centrist Democrats — with Mike Bloomberg set to make it a four-way fight in a few weeks .
Mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s willing to go to out-centrist the rest with his deficit comments .
And of course , by insisting on fiscal responsibility , he ’ s underlining the blowout deficits that Bernie Sanders ’ s agenda would saddle America with .
But wait .
That can ’ t be his strategy .
Yeah , fine , Buttigieg has made a bold gesture here to show how moderate he is , but it ’ s possible to be too moderate for the electorate ’ s tastes .
Embracing deficit reduction in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Bernie ’ s domestic policy is a bit like embracing a nuclear strike on Iran to set up a contrast with Bernie ’ s foreign policy .
Even if Pete frames the issue in more Democrat-friendly terms , by emphasizing tax hikes to close the gap between revenue and expenditures instead of spending cuts , he ’ s still aligning himself with an idea famously championed — if not implemented — by right-wingers .
Even if he wins the nomination , he ’ ll need progressives to turn out next fall .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ his deficit spiel may be a short-term strategy that he ’ ll abandon in due course , as circumstances require .
I ’ m thinking back to this CNN story from two weeks ago , shortly before Iowa went to vote : Pete Buttigieg will close out his campaign in Iowa focusing on his ability to win over disaffected Republicans who backed President Donald Trump in 2016 , his campaign tells CNN , hoping that Democrats who are hellbent on defeating Trump in November will be wooed by a candidate who can eat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with dozens of voters reflect that this strategy could be successful for the former mayor .
Voters who backed Trump in 2016 but are considering backing Buttigieg in 2020 tell CNN that they were drawn to the fact he is a veteran , openly talks about his faith and appears to have an integrity they believe is lacking in the White House .
He did okay with that approach on caucus night .
And he has a reason to double down on it in New Hampshire since NH allows independents to vote in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day .
Fully 42 percent of the state ’ s electorate is unaffiliated with either party and there ’ s no competition on the Republican side this year to draw right-leaning indies away into the GOP primary .
Buttigieg is hoping/expecting that conservative independents will turn out to vote in the Democratic primary tomorrow night and decide to opt for the most centrist choice on the menu in the name of defeating socialism .
Chattering about deficit reduction is bait to those people .
Exit question : Could Buttigieg ’ s deficit talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s legacy , something he ’ s been eager to do throughout the primary as a young midwestern pol who ’ s long on cerebral charisma and short on actual legislative achievements ?
O had mammoth deficits in the thick of the Great Recession but the tea-party wave in Congress and the slow economic recovery cut those deficits in half by his second term .
“ I ’ m a fiscal conservative like Barack , ” Buttigieg might say , inducing aneurysms in conservatives everywhere .
Or , better yet , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservative than Donald Trump.
” Which may well be true .

Unexpected. So much so that we’re left to wonder what game he’s playing at here, particularly in light of the timing. Trump’s new budget proposes cuts to Medicare and Social Security, a fact that Democrats will feast on politically all this year. That being so, the last thing they’d want in a nominee, one would think, is a guy who’s also calling for belt-tightening.
No matter how right he might be on the merits.
Out: “This Buttigieg character is grossly underqualified for the position he’s seeking.” In: “This Buttigieg character might be just the technocratic breath of fresh air we need in Washington.”
Asked at a town hall here how important the deficit is to him, Buttigieg said it’s “important” and vowed to focus on limiting the debt even though it’s “not fashionable in progressive circles.” “I think the time has come for my party to get a lot more comfortable owning this issue, because I see what’s happening under this president — a $1 trillion deficit — and his allies in Congress do not care. So we have to do something about it,” Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, said in a packed middle school gym, drawing cheers… “It’s not fashionable in progressive circles to talk too much about the debt, largely because of the irritation to the way it’s been used as an excuse against investment. But if we’re spending more and more on debt service now, it makes it harder to invest in infrastructure and health and safety net that we need right now,” he said. “And also this expansion, which I think of as, by the way, just the 13th inning of the Obama economic expansion. It isn’t going to go on forever.”
I’ve come to accept some weird realignments on issues in the Trump era, like Democrats becoming stronger advocates of free trade and Republicans becoming stronger advocates of rapprochement with Russia. But I’m fully unprepared, intellectually and emotionally, for Dems becoming the party of deficit hawkery.
No matter how grossly unjust it would be for the GOP to lay claim to that title.
My instinct is that Buttigieg is just following his political rebranding here to its obvious conclusion. He began the race as a basically dogmatic progressive (and remains one deep down, no doubt) but wised up after Elizabeth Warren started rising in the polls and realized that there wouldn’t be room in the left lane of the primary with her and Bernie both in contention. So he shifted right, believing — shrewdly — that Biden might ripe for a calamitous fall as the campaign wore on and expecting that Klobuchar wouldn’t get traction in polling. Biden is fading but still alive in the early states right now while Klobuchar has come on in the past few days after her winning debate performance on Friday night, which means there’s momentarily a three-way fight to become the champion of centrist Democrats — with Mike Bloomberg set to make it a four-way fight in a few weeks. Mayor Pete’s just showing how far he’s willing to go to out-centrist the rest with his deficit comments.
And of course, by insisting on fiscal responsibility, he’s underlining the blowout deficits that Bernie Sanders’s agenda would saddle America with.
But wait. That can’t be his strategy. Yeah, fine, Buttigieg has made a bold gesture here to show how moderate he is, but it’s possible to be too moderate for the electorate’s tastes. Embracing deficit reduction in a Democratic primary to set up a contrast with Bernie’s domestic policy is a bit like embracing a nuclear strike on Iran to set up a contrast with Bernie’s foreign policy. Even if Pete frames the issue in more Democrat-friendly terms, by emphasizing tax hikes to close the gap between revenue and expenditures instead of spending cuts, he’s still aligning himself with an idea famously championed — if not implemented — by right-wingers. Even if he wins the nomination, he’ll need progressives to turn out next fall. Will they after this?
I think his deficit spiel may be a short-term strategy that he’ll abandon in due course, as circumstances require. I’m thinking back to this CNN story from two weeks ago, shortly before Iowa went to vote:
Pete Buttigieg will close out his campaign in Iowa focusing on his ability to win over disaffected Republicans who backed President Donald Trump in 2016, his campaign tells CNN, hoping that Democrats who are hellbent on defeating Trump in November will be wooed by a candidate who can eat into the President’s support… Conversations with dozens of voters reflect that this strategy could be successful for the former mayor. Voters who backed Trump in 2016 but are considering backing Buttigieg in 2020 tell CNN that they were drawn to the fact he is a veteran, openly talks about his faith and appears to have an integrity they believe is lacking in the White House.
He did okay with that approach on caucus night. And he has a reason to double down on it in New Hampshire since NH allows independents to vote in either party’s primary on Election Day. Fully 42 percent of the state’s electorate is unaffiliated with either party and there’s no competition on the Republican side this year to draw right-leaning indies away into the GOP primary. Buttigieg is hoping/expecting that conservative independents will turn out to vote in the Democratic primary tomorrow night and decide to opt for the most centrist choice on the menu in the name of defeating socialism. Chattering about deficit reduction is bait to those people.
Exit question: Could Buttigieg’s deficit talking points be his way of claiming Obama’s legacy, something he’s been eager to do throughout the primary as a young midwestern pol who’s long on cerebral charisma and short on actual legislative achievements? O had mammoth deficits in the thick of the Great Recession but the tea-party wave in Congress and the slow economic recovery cut those deficits in half by his second term. “I’m a fiscal conservative like Barack,” Buttigieg might say, inducing aneurysms in conservatives everywhere. Or, better yet, “I’m more of a fiscal conservative than Donald Trump.” Which may well be true.


hotair--2020-02-10--James Carville: 'If we nominate Jeremy Corbyn it's going to be the end of days'

Look at Carville ’ s face when the camera cuts to him in this segment .
He has been sounding this warning as loudly as he can for a week now and he looks tired .
He looks like someone who knows his party is about to lose in a big way .
Part of that weariness is probably just that this was an early morning interview but part of it may be that even as he bangs this gong the news keeps getting worse .
Maybe that sense of desperation is why his warning keeps getting more dire .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of biblical apocalypse to describe the looming disaster : “ I ’ ll say this just as clearly and directly as I can .
The only thing—the only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party .
That ’ s it , ” he said .
“ And if we go the way of the British Labour Party—if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn , it ’ s going to be the end of days , ” he added .
When he says Jeremy Corbyn he means , of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black voters in the south are going to set the party straight .
“ They ’ re looking for somebody that can come in and not just excite them but talk about things that really matter to them in everyday life , ” he said .
He continued , “ They ’ re not interested in socialism and the revolution and all that foolishness you hear.
” “ If we lost that we ’ re going to be the British Labour Party and we ’ re going to be out in some theoretical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
He continued , “ The word that I like and respect and have always been proud of is politics .
I ’ m not about a revolution .
I ’ m not an ideologue .
Politics means building coalitions .
It means listening to people…It means being able to go in an African American church and give a speech and relate to people and not talk about reparations or any kind of goofy left-wing thing out there.
” “ There ’ s a certain part of the Democratic party that wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m not interested in being in a cult , ” he said .
I ’ ll never get enough of moderate Democrats tearing into the far left .
Carville is exactly right about this .
If anything , he ’ s downplaying how far these views have taken over his party from the inside .
The proof of that is that polls show Bernie Sanders is now the leading candidate .
Sanders is advertising himself as the real socialist in the race and that ’ s what people appear to be responding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we get to the clip .
There ’ s a report today that Sanders is trying to moderate his Medicare for All message a little bit : That ’ s not very moderate but it ’ s more flexibility than I expected from Sanders and could help him win over some nervous Democrats .
But it ’ s still an incredibly expensive proposition and I don ’ t think people are going to be won over by this slight moderation in the general election .
Here ’ s Carville once again predicting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the party .

Look at Carville’s face when the camera cuts to him in this segment. He has been sounding this warning as loudly as he can for a week now and he looks tired. He looks like someone who knows his party is about to lose in a big way. Part of that weariness is probably just that this was an early morning interview but part of it may be that even as he bangs this gong the news keeps getting worse.
Maybe that sense of desperation is why his warning keeps getting more dire. Today he’s using the language of biblical apocalypse to describe the looming disaster: “I’ll say this just as clearly and directly as I can. The only thing—the only thing between the United States and the abyss is the Democratic Party. That’s it,” he said. “And if we go the way of the British Labour Party—if we nominate Jeremy Corbyn, it’s going to be the end of days,” he added.
When he says Jeremy Corbyn he means, of course, Bernie Sanders.
Carville said he hopes black voters in the south are going to set the party straight. “They’re looking for somebody that can come in and not just excite them but talk about things that really matter to them in everyday life,” he said. He continued, “They’re not interested in socialism and the revolution and all that foolishness you hear.”
“If we lost that we’re going to be the British Labour Party and we’re going to be out in some theoretical left-wing la la land,” Carville said. He continued, “The word that I like and respect and have always been proud of is politics. I’m not about a revolution. I’m not an ideologue. Politics means building coalitions. It means listening to people…It means being able to go in an African American church and give a speech and relate to people and not talk about reparations or any kind of goofy left-wing thing out there.”
“There’s a certain part of the Democratic party that wants us to be a cult. I’m not interested in being in a cult,” he said.
I’ll never get enough of moderate Democrats tearing into the far left. Carville is exactly right about this. If anything, he’s downplaying how far these views have taken over his party from the inside. The proof of that is that polls show Bernie Sanders is now the leading candidate. Sanders is advertising himself as the real socialist in the race and that’s what people appear to be responding to.
One minor caveat though before we get to the clip. There’s a report today that Sanders is trying to moderate his Medicare for All message a little bit:
Bernie explaining his M4A proposal now notes that it will be transitioned in. Dropping eligibility age to 55 in yr 1, 45 in yr 2, 35 in yr 3, etc…. He also obliquely made a reference to being able to keep one’s doctor, though he didn’t elaborate on this. — Sam Stein (@samstein) February 10, 2020
That’s not very moderate but it’s more flexibility than I expected from Sanders and could help him win over some nervous Democrats. But it’s still an incredibly expensive proposition and I don’t think people are going to be won over by this slight moderation in the general election. Here’s Carville once again predicting the nomination of Sanders would be a disaster for the party.


Can the XFL last?

This weekend marked the return of the retooled XFL , the brainchild of professional wrestling bigwig Vince McMahon .
Since the last , short-lived experiment in football league alternatives to the NFL ( the AAF ) didn ’ t even finish its first season , many fans are probably hoping this one does a bit better .
Personally , I was particularly enthused to see that the XFL at least has a team from New York , the Guardians .
I got the chance to watch them play the Tampa Bay Vipers yesterday and I must confess that I found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Guardians simply trounced the Vipers .
CBS Sports has a review of some of the highlights of the four games that took place and shares a few thoughts on how the league is shaping up .
The first weekend of the XFL started fast and ended with a thud .
Perhaps that ’ s to be expected for a start-up football league , but in four games , there was a lot of potential of what this league can be … and what it hopes it won ’ t be .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrilling , fun football .
It was the perfect start for a league looking to put its best foot forward .
And the show put on by Houston quarterback P.J .
Walker ( more on him later ) gave this league a lot of reason for optimism… What ’ s not good are the mistakes .
Turnovers , penalties , negative plays and general miscues are the type of things that make casual fans lose interest quickly .
Granted , every team needs a few weeks to work out the kinks .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great quarterback .
Understanding those things are prerequisites to enjoying this league .
The major complaints from CBS centered not on the structure of the new league and the rule changes from the NFL ( which I ’ ll get to in a moment ) but on the performance of the teams .
The Saturday games seemed more well balanced and close , while the Sunday games , including New York ’ s blowout win over Tampa Bay , were too lopsided .
It ’ s a fair assessment , I suppose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great quarterback and a killer defensive line , while the Vipers simply struggled to keep their hand in for most of the game .
But that was inevitable for any group starting out from scratch .
The teams will need to get into the flow and work the bugs out .
You can watch a highlight reel of the New York game here if you missed it and want to get a sense of the action on the field .
As to how well the XFL “ works ” under the new rules @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are traditional NFL fans , I found it to be a mixed bag , but mostly positive .
And I honestly didn ’ t find any of the changes so offputting that they would make me just want to shut off the television .
NBC Los Angeles recently published a full summary of the rules changes that you can check out , but I ’ ll just touch on a few of what I considered the biggest ones .
Many of the rule changes are intended to speed up play .
This comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clock stoppage in between plays .
The 25 second clock ( as opposed to 40 in the NFL ) didn ’ t seem to bother the teams very much and kept the game moving along .
That ’ s made easier by stopping the clock on every play until the ball is spotted by the official .
Teams don ’ t have to always try to run out of bounds near the end of each half , so they can use their entire playbook .
I liked it .
One great feature is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenge play calls because they really don ’ t need to .
All plays are subject to review and the best part is that the play review official is on camera and has a microphone so viewers can watch the review process , see which replays he ’ s looking at and hear him discuss his decisions .
I wish the NFL would adopt this rule as it would save a lot of heartaches .
The kickoff and punt rules take some getting used to , but they also didn ’ t detract @ @ @ @ @ @ @ play .
They ’ re also designed to decrease injuries , which is great .
As I said… it ’ s an adjustment , but I barely noticed by the end of the game .
The really weird rule change they implemented deals with conversions after touchdowns .
There are no more extra-point kicks .
Instead , the teams can choose between one , two or three point conversions from the two , five or ten yard line respectively .
Not sure how I feel about that one .
NFL point after kicks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ automatic while running the ball in , even from the two yard line , is far from assured against a tough defensive line .
But , again , it ’ s really not a deal breaker for me .
As I said above , all in all , I genuinely enjoyed the game that I watched and I ’ ll definitely give it a chance again next weekend .
They ’ ve got eight teams in two divisions playing a ten week season with an abbreviated postseason and championship .
And for those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the Super Bowl , it ’ s kind of nice to have this option .
We can only hope that the ticket sales and television ratings allow the league a chance to catch on and give the teams some times to come together and improve their play .

This weekend marked the return of the retooled XFL, the brainchild of professional wrestling bigwig Vince McMahon. Since the last, short-lived experiment in football league alternatives to the NFL (the AAF) didn’t even finish its first season, many fans are probably hoping this one does a bit better. Personally, I was particularly enthused to see that the XFL at least has a team from New York, the Guardians. I got the chance to watch them play the Tampa Bay Vipers yesterday and I must confess that I found it enjoyable, perhaps more so because the Guardians simply trounced the Vipers.
CBS Sports has a review of some of the highlights of the four games that took place and shares a few thoughts on how the league is shaping up.
The first weekend of the XFL started fast and ended with a thud. Perhaps that’s to be expected for a start-up football league, but in four games, there was a lot of potential of what this league can be … and what it hopes it won’t be. The second half of the D.C-Seattle game was thrilling, fun football. It was the perfect start for a league looking to put its best foot forward. And the show put on by Houston quarterback P.J. Walker (more on him later) gave this league a lot of reason for optimism… What’s not good are the mistakes. Turnovers, penalties, negative plays and general miscues are the type of things that make casual fans lose interest quickly. Granted, every team needs a few weeks to work out the kinks. And not every team is going to have a great quarterback. Understanding those things are prerequisites to enjoying this league.
The major complaints from CBS centered not on the structure of the new league and the rule changes from the NFL (which I’ll get to in a moment) but on the performance of the teams. The Saturday games seemed more well balanced and close, while the Sunday games, including New York’s blowout win over Tampa Bay, were too lopsided. It’s a fair assessment, I suppose. New York wound up with a great quarterback and a killer defensive line, while the Vipers simply struggled to keep their hand in for most of the game.
But that was inevitable for any group starting out from scratch. The teams will need to get into the flow and work the bugs out. You can watch a highlight reel of the New York game here if you missed it and want to get a sense of the action on the field.
As to how well the XFL “works” under the new rules, particularly for those of us who are traditional NFL fans, I found it to be a mixed bag, but mostly positive. And I honestly didn’t find any of the changes so offputting that they would make me just want to shut off the television. NBC Los Angeles recently published a full summary of the rules changes that you can check out, but I’ll just touch on a few of what I considered the biggest ones.
Many of the rule changes are intended to speed up play. This comes into effect mostly with how they handle clock stoppage in between plays. The 25 second clock (as opposed to 40 in the NFL) didn’t seem to bother the teams very much and kept the game moving along. That’s made easier by stopping the clock on every play until the ball is spotted by the official. Teams don’t have to always try to run out of bounds near the end of each half, so they can use their entire playbook. I liked it.
One great feature is that coaches don’t get to challenge play calls because they really don’t need to. All plays are subject to review and the best part is that the play review official is on camera and has a microphone so viewers can watch the review process, see which replays he’s looking at and hear him discuss his decisions. I wish the NFL would adopt this rule as it would save a lot of heartaches.
The kickoff and punt rules take some getting used to, but they also didn’t detract from the action or the pace of play. They’re also designed to decrease injuries, which is great. As I said… it’s an adjustment, but I barely noticed by the end of the game.
The really weird rule change they implemented deals with conversions after touchdowns. There are no more extra-point kicks. Instead, the teams can choose between one, two or three point conversions from the two, five or ten yard line respectively. Not sure how I feel about that one. NFL point after kicks are *almost* (though not entirely) automatic while running the ball in, even from the two yard line, is far from assured against a tough defensive line. But, again, it’s really not a deal breaker for me.
As I said above, all in all, I genuinely enjoyed the game that I watched and I’ll definitely give it a chance again next weekend. They’ve got eight teams in two divisions playing a ten week season with an abbreviated postseason and championship. And for those of us who go into football withdrawal after the Super Bowl, it’s kind of nice to have this option. We can only hope that the ticket sales and television ratings allow the league a chance to catch on and give the teams some times to come together and improve their play.


hotair--2020-02-10--Hmmm: Buttigieg drops six points in post-debate NH tracking poll

This seems curious , and potentially even more anxiety-inducing for Democratic Party leadership .
Did Pete Buttigieg do this poorly in Friday ’ s debate , or is this a case of Berniementum ?
Both men took shots during the debate , but at least according to the Suffolk/Boston Globe tracking poll , only one man took damage : Scan the two tracking polls at these links — one taken the two days preceding Friday night ’ s debate , and the other two days afterward .
They aren ’ t long , and they don ’ t have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ re pretty easy to parse .
The most recent iteration has a slightly larger pool of unaffiliated respondents , but otherwise they ’ re pretty much the same , demographically .
So why the large shift ?
As Jim Geraghty writes , Buttigieg ’ s toughest moment relates more to South Carolina voters than New Hampshire ’ s : If you didn ’ t watch , you missed Joe Biden trying his hardest to be feisty and combative .
Bernie Sanders was particularly non-combative against the rest of the field , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re now a serious front runner and will probably need to eventually win over the fans of your rivals .
Pete Buttigieg had a generally good night , but he may have suffered some damage from some particularly tough questioning from ABC News anchor Linsey Davis about the increase in arrests for African Americans for marijuana after Buttigieg was elected mayor .
Buttigieg initially tried to argue that the overall rate was lower than the national rate , but Davis emphasized that the rate increased after Buttigieg ’ s election .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were connected to an attempt to reduce gang violence : “ We adopted a strategy that said that drug enforcement would be targeted in cases where there was a connection to the most violent group or gang connected to a murder .
These things are all connected , but that ’ s the point .
So are all of the things that need to change in order for us to prevent violence and remove the effects of systemic racism , not just from criminal justice , but from our economy , from health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy itself.
” Davis then set up Warren for an easy lay-up : “ Senator Warren , is that a substantial answer from Mayor Buttigieg ?
” Warren answered , “ no.
” The racial disparity in marijuana possession arrests in South Bend will come up again — say , as the South Carolina primary approaches .
Perhaps this was enough to call Buttigieg ’ s general-election viability into question for New Hampshire voters , but this isn ’ t a new issue for Buttigieg .
Joe Biden ’ s devastating attack ad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s African-American police and fire chiefs began running over the weekend , which might have taken the bloom off the rose : Again , these aren ’ t new issues .
It might be that New Hampshire voters just decided that Buttigieg isn ’ t the right person for this fight , or it could be that they found someone they liked better in the debate .
Take a look at Amy Klobuchar ’ s numbers , which have vaulted her into third place after running for almost a year in the bottom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this tracking poll , and now RCP has her Granite State polling average in double digits : CNN ’ s also seeing a surge for Klobuchar over the weekend : New Hampshire voters must have liked what they saw from Klobuchar on Friday Night .
If it ’ s for real and goes beyond New Hampshire , watch out .
Nate Cohn sees a “ Klobosurge ” as trouble ahead for the Democratic establishment , and perhaps Bernie Sanders ’ “ dream scenario ” : The longer that different ( quasi- ) centrist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay in .
Sanders benefits when more of those candidates remain in the field .
A Klobusurge in New Hampshire , followed by a Biden rebound in South Carolina and a Bloomberg surprise or two on Super Tuesday could effectively give Sanders a large enough head start that the only hope for Democrats is the brokered convention .
It might get even better for Sanders after tomorrow , if this tracking poll accurately reflects voter sentiment .
Elizabeth Warren dropped nearly three points ( 14.2 % to 11.6 % ) after the debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wrong direction .
If Warren can ’ t muster a good finish in her neighboring state — if indeed Klobuchar finishes ahead of her — then Warren ’ s likely to be out of the race entirely .
Where does she win if she can ’ t compete in New Hampshire ?
And if Warren leaves , then Sanders can expect to pick up at least some of her support , even if it comes without Warren ’ s blessing .
Voters get the last say in New Hampshire , of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll get a reliable result .
One thing ’ s for sure — the circus will continue for longer than Democratic leadership will like .

This seems curious, and potentially even more anxiety-inducing for Democratic Party leadership. Did Pete Buttigieg do this poorly in Friday’s debate, or is this a case of Berniementum? Both men took shots during the debate, but at least according to the Suffolk/Boston Globe tracking poll, only one man took damage:
New Hampshire @Suffolk_U/@BostonGlobe tracking poll,
Pre Debate ➡ Post Debate: Sanders 24% ➡ 27% (+3)
Buttigieg 25% ➡ 19 (-6)
Klobuchar 6% ➡ 14% (+8)
Biden 11% ➡ 12% (+1)
Warren 14% ➡ 12% (-2) https://t.co/XETrrbnLuF — Political Polls (@Politics_Polls) February 10, 2020
Scan the two tracking polls at these links — one taken the two days preceding Friday night’s debate, and the other two days afterward. They aren’t long, and they don’t have a lot of data in them, so they’re pretty easy to parse. The most recent iteration has a slightly larger pool of unaffiliated respondents, but otherwise they’re pretty much the same, demographically.
So why the large shift? As Jim Geraghty writes, Buttigieg’s toughest moment relates more to South Carolina voters than New Hampshire’s:
If you didn’t watch, you missed Joe Biden trying his hardest to be feisty and combative. Bernie Sanders was particularly non-combative against the rest of the field, which is what you do when you’re now a serious front runner and will probably need to eventually win over the fans of your rivals. Pete Buttigieg had a generally good night, but he may have suffered some damage from some particularly tough questioning from ABC News anchor Linsey Davis about the increase in arrests for African Americans for marijuana after Buttigieg was elected mayor. Buttigieg initially tried to argue that the overall rate was lower than the national rate, but Davis emphasized that the rate increased after Buttigieg’s election. The former mayor insisted the arrests for drugs were connected to an attempt to reduce gang violence: “We adopted a strategy that said that drug enforcement would be targeted in cases where there was a connection to the most violent group or gang connected to a murder. These things are all connected, but that’s the point. So are all of the things that need to change in order for us to prevent violence and remove the effects of systemic racism, not just from criminal justice, but from our economy, from health, from housing, and from our democracy itself.” Davis then set up Warren for an easy lay-up: “Senator Warren, is that a substantial answer from Mayor Buttigieg?” Warren answered, “no.” The racial disparity in marijuana possession arrests in South Bend will come up again — say, as the South Carolina primary approaches.
Perhaps this was enough to call Buttigieg’s general-election viability into question for New Hampshire voters, but this isn’t a new issue for Buttigieg. Joe Biden’s devastating attack ad hammering Buttigieg over firing South Bend’s African-American police and fire chiefs began running over the weekend, which might have taken the bloom off the rose:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3beFOnjBoE
Again, these aren’t new issues. It might be that New Hampshire voters just decided that Buttigieg isn’t the right person for this fight, or it could be that they found someone they liked better in the debate. Take a look at Amy Klobuchar’s numbers, which have vaulted her into third place after running for almost a year in the bottom tier. She gained eight points in this tracking poll, and now RCP has her Granite State polling average in double digits:
CNN’s also seeing a surge for Klobuchar over the weekend:
https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1226916152208740352
New Hampshire voters must have liked what they saw from Klobuchar on Friday Night. If it’s for real and goes beyond New Hampshire, watch out. Nate Cohn sees a “Klobosurge” as trouble ahead for the Democratic establishment, and perhaps Bernie Sanders’ “dream scenario”:
A Klobusurge, if confirmed in the results tomorrow night, would raise the possibility of something of like a dream scenario for Sanders. And Bloomberg looms as a possible additional source of division on the center-left down the line — Nate Cohn (@Nate_Cohn) February 10, 2020
For Sanders, you can even dream about scenarios where he can get 50% of delegates on Super Tues. with even <30% of the vote with this many candidates. Not saying it's likely–it would be hard to maintain that kind of balance. But the number 15 starts to loom really large — Nate Cohn (@Nate_Cohn) February 10, 2020
The longer that different (quasi-)centrist candidates keep surging, the longer they stay in. Sanders benefits when more of those candidates remain in the field. A Klobusurge in New Hampshire, followed by a Biden rebound in South Carolina and a Bloomberg surprise or two on Super Tuesday could effectively give Sanders a large enough head start that the only hope for Democrats is the brokered convention.
It might get even better for Sanders after tomorrow, if this tracking poll accurately reflects voter sentiment. Elizabeth Warren dropped nearly three points (14.2% to 11.6%) after the debate, within the MoE but still going the wrong direction. If Warren can’t muster a good finish in her neighboring state — if indeed Klobuchar finishes ahead of her — then Warren’s likely to be out of the race entirely. Where does she win if she can’t compete in New Hampshire? And if Warren leaves, then Sanders can expect to pick up at least some of her support, even if it comes without Warren’s blessing.
Voters get the last say in New Hampshire, of course, and at least this time we’ll get a reliable result. One thing’s for sure — the circus will continue for longer than Democratic leadership will like.


hotair--2020-02-10--Hooooooo boy: Sanders 25, Biden 17, Bloomberg 15 in new national poll

Contested convention , bro .
It ’ s going to be amazing .
Bernie ’ s ragtag black-bloc brigades versus Bloomberg ’ s lavishly paid baton-wielding Pinkerton guards .
Hand-to-hand combat on the arena floor in Milwaukee .
Winner gets the honor of losing badly to Trump in November when half of his own party stays home in protest .
National polls mean less than state polls , of course , but they ’ re a useful snapshot of where the entire Democratic electorate is at a given moment .
And they ’ re illuminating in what they can reveal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s been one shining trend in national polling since last April that ’ s been almost unbroken in nine months , despite dozens of polls having been taken over that period .
Biden always leads .
Or almost always ; there have been a handful of polls since last spring that have showed a different frontrunner .
Normally , though , come rain or shine , no matter what ’ s going on in Iowa or New Hampshire , Grandpa Joe retains his pride of place on the national leaderboard .
His consistency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why so many data nerds have continued to give him solid chances of winning the nomination even as his polling in Iowa and New Hampshire slipped .
The national electorate wants Joe , and in a long 50-state race one might assume that the national electorate will get its way .
But what if the national electorate no longer wants Joe ?
What if , hypothetically , Democrats nationally were choosing Joe because they ’ d bought the hype that he was the most electable choice on the menu ?
And once they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , soon , New Hampshire ) that he wasn ’ t , their interest in him evaporated overnight ?
To appreciate how unusual it is for Biden to trail nationally , let alone by eight points , you need to scroll through RCP ’ s archives of national polls dating back many months .
He trailed Bernie recently in a couple of polls by one and three points , respectively , and last fall during the Warren surge he trailed her in a few — once by seven .
An eight-point deficit is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Quinnipiac knows what ’ s causing it : “ Biden no longer dominates on the key question of electability , as 27 percent say Biden has the best chance of winning against Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election , while 24 percent say Sanders , 17 percent say Bloomberg , and 9 percent say Buttigieg.
” A month ago Joe led 44/19 on that crucial metric .
If he finishes fifth in New Hampshire tomorrow night , which is now a distinct possibility , what will the electability numbers in next month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looks Democratic voters are about to hit the gong and usher Biden offstage for good .
But that ’ s half the story .
The other half , of course , is Mike Bloomberg ’ s surge into the top three , past Iowa co-winner Pete Buttigieg .
A month ago he was at just eight percent but has nearly doubled that share in just a few weeks thanks to Joe ’ s crapola performance in Iowa .
A poor Biden finish tomorrow night may well end up boosting Bloomberg into second ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s already second nationally among Democratic moderates , trailing Biden 22/21 .
The number political junkies are oohing and ahhing over this afternoon , though , is Bloomberg ’ s share of the black vote in the table above .
Bloomy ’ s supposed to be doomed among black voters because of his long support for stop-and-frisk policies as mayor of New York .
He only finally recanted on the issue once his campaign was revving up .
It was assumed that black voters would turn their backs on him , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with large black populations as Pete Buttigieg appears to be .
Instead he ’ s pulling 22 percent among African-American voters , good for a close second behind Biden , who ’ s most definitely finished if his lock on the black vote breaks .
If Quinnipiac ’ s numbers are right , it looks like there ’ s a large chunk of black Dems out there who aren ’ t crazy about Bernie and will join with whichever Democrat seems best positioned to beat Trump .
For nine months that was Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The black vote may be in play , which is endgame for Joe and a lifeline for Bloomberg .
At least until Bernie starts running ads about stop-and-frisk in key states .
One more data point on Bloomberg ’ s perceived electability : He now leads Trump 51/42 head-to-head , the best mark in the field .
Bernie is second at 51/43 .
Biden , the “ electable ” candidate , stands at 50/43 , only a point better than Amy Klobuchar .
Here ’ s a table that grabbed my eye @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg vs. Trump ” race , asking supporters of various other Democratic candidates whom they ’ d vote for if presented with that choice in November : Fans of Biden , Buttigieg , and Warren are all very comfortable with voting for Bloomberg .
Bernie fans are less comfortable , but way more comfortable than I would have expected given his pedigree as a Wall Street billionaire and former Republican .
By comparison , fewer than 90 percent of Biden , Sanders , and Bloomberg supporters said they ’ d vote for Pete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg voters typically were more finicky towards the other candidates vis-a-vis Trump than fans of those other candidates were towards Bloomberg himself .
Make of that what you will .
But maybe Bloomberg ’ s ubiquitous ad campaign has reached even very casual Dem-leaning voters who otherwise might not bother with the election ( at least right now ) if not for him .
What if Bloomberg ’ s money , not just Bernie ’ s radical chic , is a turnout engine ?
And what if Bloomy ’ s rivals can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change their newly formed opinions about him once they ’ re competing directly with him on Super Tuesday ?
Trump was impervious to attacks because his TV-honed image as a business genius was part of pop culture by the time he ran in 2015 .
Bloomberg might be impervious to attacks because , when push comes to shove , he can smother them with his own ad barrage .
Who are you going to believe , one Bernie ad touting experts claiming that stop-and-frisk was a racially discriminatory policy that didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg ads touting NYC ’ s years-long decline in crime with a variety of black Bloomberg-supporting residents attesting to what a great mayor he was ?
I ’ m trying to imagine now what the ideal Mike Bloomberg result from New Hampshire tomorrow night might be .
He wants Bernie to win , of course ; the path to a Bloomy nomination requires a fear of socialism rising .
Having Buttigieg , Klobuchar , and Biden place second , third , and fourth also works for him since it ’ ll ensure that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week or two , forcing moderate Dems to look to him as a guy who might sort this out for them .
He ’ s quite likely to get that result per the latest polling .

Contested convention, bro. It’s going to be amazing.
Bernie’s ragtag black-bloc brigades versus Bloomberg’s lavishly paid baton-wielding Pinkerton guards. Hand-to-hand combat on the arena floor in Milwaukee.
Winner gets the honor of losing badly to Trump in November when half of his own party stays home in protest.
National polls mean less than state polls, of course, but they’re a useful snapshot of where the entire Democratic electorate is at a given moment. And they’re illuminating in what they can reveal about trends in opinion. There’s been one shining trend in national polling since last April that’s been almost unbroken in nine months, despite dozens of polls having been taken over that period. Biden always leads. Or almost always; there have been a handful of polls since last spring that have showed a different frontrunner. Normally, though, come rain or shine, no matter what’s going on in Iowa or New Hampshire, Grandpa Joe retains his pride of place on the national leaderboard. His consistency in national polling is a key reason why so many data nerds have continued to give him solid chances of winning the nomination even as his polling in Iowa and New Hampshire slipped. The national electorate wants Joe, and in a long 50-state race one might assume that the national electorate will get its way.
But what if the national electorate no longer wants Joe? What if, hypothetically, Democrats nationally were choosing Joe because they’d bought the hype that he was the most electable choice on the menu? And once they had hard evidence from Iowa (and, soon, New Hampshire) that he wasn’t, their interest in him evaporated overnight?
New from Quinnipiac:
To appreciate how unusual it is for Biden to trail nationally, let alone by eight points, you need to scroll through RCP’s archives of national polls dating back many months. He trailed Bernie recently in a couple of polls by one and three points, respectively, and last fall during the Warren surge he trailed her in a few — once by seven. An eight-point deficit is extremely rare air for him. And Quinnipiac knows what’s causing it: “Biden no longer dominates on the key question of electability, as 27 percent say Biden has the best chance of winning against Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, while 24 percent say Sanders, 17 percent say Bloomberg, and 9 percent say Buttigieg.”
A month ago Joe led 44/19 on that crucial metric. If he finishes fifth in New Hampshire tomorrow night, which is now a distinct possibility, what will the electability numbers in next month’s poll look like?
Sure looks Democratic voters are about to hit the gong and usher Biden offstage for good.
But that’s half the story. The other half, of course, is Mike Bloomberg’s surge into the top three, past Iowa co-winner Pete Buttigieg. A month ago he was at just eight percent but has nearly doubled that share in just a few weeks thanks to Joe’s crapola performance in Iowa. A poor Biden finish tomorrow night may well end up boosting Bloomberg into second(!) nationally; in fact, he’s already second nationally among Democratic moderates, trailing Biden 22/21.
The number political junkies are oohing and ahhing over this afternoon, though, is Bloomberg’s share of the black vote in the table above. Bloomy’s supposed to be doomed among black voters because of his long support for stop-and-frisk policies as mayor of New York. He only finally recanted on the issue once his campaign was revving up. It was assumed that black voters would turn their backs on him, leaving him as hopeless in blue states with large black populations as Pete Buttigieg appears to be. Instead he’s pulling 22 percent among African-American voters, good for a close second behind Biden, who’s most definitely finished if his lock on the black vote breaks. If Quinnipiac’s numbers are right, it looks like there’s a large chunk of black Dems out there who aren’t crazy about Bernie and will join with whichever Democrat seems best positioned to beat Trump. For nine months that was Biden. Now suddenly it isn’t. The black vote may be in play, which is endgame for Joe and a lifeline for Bloomberg.
At least until Bernie starts running ads about stop-and-frisk in key states.
One more data point on Bloomberg’s perceived electability: He now leads Trump 51/42 head-to-head, the best mark in the field. Bernie is second at 51/43. Biden, the “electable” candidate, stands at 50/43, only a point better than Amy Klobuchar. Here’s a table that grabbed my eye from the crosstabs of that hypothetical “Bloomberg vs. Trump” race, asking supporters of various other Democratic candidates whom they’d vote for if presented with that choice in November:
Fans of Biden, Buttigieg, and Warren are all very comfortable with voting for Bloomberg. Bernie fans are less comfortable, but way more comfortable than I would have expected given his pedigree as a Wall Street billionaire and former Republican. By comparison, fewer than 90 percent of Biden, Sanders, and Bloomberg supporters said they’d vote for Pete Buttigieg against Trump. In fact, Bloomberg voters typically were more finicky towards the other candidates vis-a-vis Trump than fans of those other candidates were towards Bloomberg himself. Make of that what you will. But maybe Bloomberg’s ubiquitous ad campaign has reached even very casual Dem-leaning voters who otherwise might not bother with the election (at least right now) if not for him.
What if Bloomberg’s money, not just Bernie’s radical chic, is a turnout engine?
And what if Bloomy’s rivals can’t quite break through with voters to change their newly formed opinions about him once they’re competing directly with him on Super Tuesday?
Same way in NYC/DC in 2016 assumption was rest of the country knew Trump’s record in business vs Apprentice, Bloomberg record as mayor remains unknown + being mostly ignored by rivals means he tells his story with his $ the way he wants. https://t.co/sLCsRr8poM — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) February 10, 2020
Trump was impervious to attacks because his TV-honed image as a business genius was part of pop culture by the time he ran in 2015. Bloomberg might be impervious to attacks because, when push comes to shove, he can smother them with his own ad barrage. Who are you going to believe, one Bernie ad touting experts claiming that stop-and-frisk was a racially discriminatory policy that didn’t do anything to stop crime or 8,000 Bloomberg ads touting NYC’s years-long decline in crime with a variety of black Bloomberg-supporting residents attesting to what a great mayor he was?
I’m trying to imagine now what the ideal Mike Bloomberg result from New Hampshire tomorrow night might be. He wants Bernie to win, of course; the path to a Bloomy nomination requires a fear of socialism rising. Having Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Biden place second, third, and fourth also works for him since it’ll ensure that the centrist muddle drags on for another week or two, forcing moderate Dems to look to him as a guy who might sort this out for them. He’s quite likely to get that result per the latest polling.


hotair--2020-02-10--The coronavirus spread as China treated warnings like fake news

Today Vox published a story pointing out that China hid facts about the coronavirus outbreak and outright lied about what was happening for weeks : On December 31 , when China first announced the outbreak of a mysterious pneumonia , officials there emphasized a few things .
Most of the patients had been to a food market in Wuhan , the city that ’ s still the epicenter of the outbreak .
There was also “ no clear evidence ” of human-to-human transmission , meaning the virus wasn ’ t yet spreading from one person to another but instead , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humans .
And the earliest case had shown symptoms only recently — on December 12… A study published on January 24 in The Lancet showed that in the first days of the outbreak , by January 2 , more than a third of patients had no connection with the Wuhan food market , including the outbreak ’ s index ( or first ) case .
What ’ s more , that person became ill on December 1 , nearly two weeks earlier than Wuhan health authorities had said of the first case .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ moving through Wuhan as early as October , Daniel Lucey , an infectious diseases physician and adjunct professor of infectious diseases at Georgetown University Medical Center , told Vox .
The Lancet paper also reported that the first person who died from the virus , on January 9 , passed it along to his wife a week prior .
Similarly , another recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine also shows there were already seven health care workers infected by January 11 .
“ This is the smoking-gun evidence of human-to-human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China expert and senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations , told Vox .
“ But the public was not kept informed about this situation until January 18 , ” said Huang .
Instead , “ People were still told there was no strong evidence of human-to-human transmission.
” At a time when many on the left are eager to see social media companies crack down on “ fake news , ” with some even suggesting the government could push them to do so , it ’ s instructive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the virus as fake news and threatened the doctor who was trying to get the word out .
In the middle of the night , officials from the health authority in the central city of Wuhan summoned Dr. Li , demanding to know why he had shared the information .
Three days later , the police compelled him to sign a statement that his warning constituted “ illegal behavior.
” … A reconstruction of the crucial seven weeks between the appearance of the first symptoms in early December and the government ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , based on two dozen interviews with Wuhan residents , doctors and officials , on government statements and on Chinese media reports , points to decisions that delayed a concerted public health offensive .
In those weeks , the authorities silenced doctors and others for raising red flags .
They played down the dangers to the public , leaving the city ’ s 11 million residents unaware they should protect themselves .
They closed a food market where the virus was believed to have started , but didn ’ t broadly curb the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last week , having contracted the virus from a patient he was treating .
Before his death , he criticized the government ’ s lack of transparency : “ If the officials had disclosed information about the epidemic earlier , ” Dr. Li told The Times .
“ I think it would have been a lot better .
There should be more openness and transparency.
” … “ I think a healthy society should not have just one voice , ” he recently told Caixin , a Chinese magazine that has reported aggressively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge criticized the government ’ s treatment of Dr. Li and decision to crack down on chatroom “ rumors ” saying people might have been better off if they ’ d believed the rumors : “ It might have been a fortunate thing if the public had believed the ‘ rumour ’ then and started to wear masks and carry out sanitisation measures , and avoid the wild animal market , ” the judge said , referring to a market believed to be the source of the outbreak in Wuhan… “ If rumours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time after time , then the people will naturally choose to believe them in times of a breaking event , ” it said .
“ To punish any information not totally accurate is neither legally necessary nor technically possible .
This Chinese judge seems to have a better handle on freedom of speech than some American progressives .
Of course actual fake news doesn ’ t help anyone in a crisis , but once you ’ ve put the government ( or companies answering to the government ) in charge of deciding what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to wind up with a situation like this where “ rumors ” of a catastrophe are silenced despite the fact that the rumors are essentially true .
More than 900 people have died from the virus so far , with 97 of those deaths on Sunday alone .

Today Vox published a story pointing out that China hid facts about the coronavirus outbreak and outright lied about what was happening for weeks:
On December 31, when China first announced the outbreak of a mysterious pneumonia, officials there emphasized a few things. Most of the patients had been to a food market in Wuhan, the city that’s still the epicenter of the outbreak. There was also “no clear evidence” of human-to-human transmission, meaning the virus wasn’t yet spreading from one person to another but instead, they suggested, from an animal to humans. And the earliest case had shown symptoms only recently — on December 12… A study published on January 24 in The Lancet showed that in the first days of the outbreak, by January 2, more than a third of patients had no connection with the Wuhan food market, including the outbreak’s index (or first) case. What’s more, that person became ill on December 1, nearly two weeks earlier than Wuhan health authorities had said of the first case. This means the virus could have been moving through Wuhan as early as October, Daniel Lucey, an infectious diseases physician and adjunct professor of infectious diseases at Georgetown University Medical Center, told Vox. The Lancet paper also reported that the first person who died from the virus, on January 9, passed it along to his wife a week prior. Similarly, another recent report in the New England Journal of Medicine also shows there were already seven health care workers infected by January 11. “This is the smoking-gun evidence of human-to-human transmission,” Yanzhong Huang, a China expert and senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Vox. “But the public was not kept informed about this situation until January 18,” said Huang. Instead, “People were still told there was no strong evidence of human-to-human transmission.”
At a time when many on the left are eager to see social media companies crack down on “fake news,” with some even suggesting the government could push them to do so, it’s instructive to notice that China treated a warning about the virus as fake news and threatened the doctor who was trying to get the word out.
In the middle of the night, officials from the health authority in the central city of Wuhan summoned Dr. Li, demanding to know why he had shared the information. Three days later, the police compelled him to sign a statement that his warning constituted “illegal behavior.”… A reconstruction of the crucial seven weeks between the appearance of the first symptoms in early December and the government’s decision to lock down the city, based on two dozen interviews with Wuhan residents, doctors and officials, on government statements and on Chinese media reports, points to decisions that delayed a concerted public health offensive. In those weeks, the authorities silenced doctors and others for raising red flags. They played down the dangers to the public, leaving the city’s 11 million residents unaware they should protect themselves. They closed a food market where the virus was believed to have started, but didn’t broadly curb the wildlife trade.
Dr. Li Wenliang died last week, having contracted the virus from a patient he was treating. Before his death, he criticized the government’s lack of transparency:
“If the officials had disclosed information about the epidemic earlier,” Dr. Li told The Times. “I think it would have been a lot better. There should be more openness and transparency.”… “I think a healthy society should not have just one voice,” he recently told Caixin, a Chinese magazine that has reported aggressively on the epidemic.
Even a Chinese judge criticized the government’s treatment of Dr. Li and decision to crack down on chatroom “rumors” saying people might have been better off if they’d believed the rumors:
“It might have been a fortunate thing if the public had believed the ‘rumour’ then and started to wear masks and carry out sanitisation measures, and avoid the wild animal market,” the judge said, referring to a market believed to be the source of the outbreak in Wuhan… “If rumours are proved [to be true] time after time, then the people will naturally choose to believe them in times of a breaking event,” it said. “To punish any information not totally accurate is neither legally necessary nor technically possible.
This Chinese judge seems to have a better handle on freedom of speech than some American progressives. Of course actual fake news doesn’t help anyone in a crisis, but once you’ve put the government (or companies answering to the government) in charge of deciding what news is fake, you’re going to wind up with a situation like this where “rumors” of a catastrophe are silenced despite the fact that the rumors are essentially true.
More than 900 people have died from the virus so far, with 97 of those deaths on Sunday alone.


hotair--2020-02-10--Uber returning to driverless car testing

Here ’ s a subject that had basically disappeared from the headlines for quite a while .
Back in 2018 , it seemed as if we were getting new stories about self-driving cars and trucks on a daily basis .
Uber was one of the early leaders in the field , preparing to launch a fleet of vehicles that you could summon to give you a ride with no driver on board .
That all came screeching to a halt by the end of that year after one of their driverless prototypes struck and killed a female bicyclist in Arizona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had accurately detected the woman ’ s presence but it just failed to react by pumping the brakes .
Shortly after that , the company suspended development of the autonomous vehicles We heard almost nothing about these programs throughout 2019 .
But now that the new decade is upon us , Uber apparently thinks that it ’ s time to get back into the game .
They ’ re going to resume testing of this project and have been approved to deploy some of their magical machines on the streets of San Francisco @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the international rideshare company , has gotten approval from California regulators to test self-driving cars on state roads , company officials announced Wednesday .
Uber officials said they intend to conduct autonomous vehicle tests in San Francisco , the headquarters city for the 11-year-old company that sparked a transportation revolution with the introduction of app-based ride-hailing .
The company employs independent drivers , but its business model long has anticipated fleets of autonomous vehicles at some future point .
The company previously tested its autonomous cars in San Francisco but was forced by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until the state could come up with safety standards .
While Uber isn ’ t providing a date yet as to when testing will officially resume , it sounds like it ’ s going to be fairly soon .
And I ’ m guessing they won ’ t want to wait too long because it sounds as if they ’ re facing a lot of competition .
The linked report notes that the state of California has already issued permits to no less than 600 companies allowing them to test self-driving vehicles on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chief factor driving Uber back into this market after their rather disastrous crash in Arizona ?
For one thing , California previously halted all such testing until they developed new safety guidelines .
That work is now complete , so any companies meeting those standards will be allowed to conduct testing under controlled conditions .
But I ’ m guessing that politics has played a part in this as well .
The decision almost certainly has something to do with AB5 , the law that redefined private contractors such as Uber drivers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft to treat their drivers like regular employees and offer benefits as well as a minimum wage to them .
That change would break Uber ’ s business model entirely ( which was probably the lawmakers ’ intention to begin with ) .
The passage of the law has spurred any number of lawsuits , most of which are still in progress , as well as forcing the company to change how drivers operate in California .
But if they wind up losing in court , the ultimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply do away with their drivers entirely .
You don ’ t have to pay wages to machines or offer them benefits… at least not yet .
If that ’ s how this all plays out , we will have seen California legislators once again claiming to “ help ” workers in the Golden State wind up helping to drive them out of work .
It ’ s a stunning pattern of big government failure that continues to this day .

Here’s a subject that had basically disappeared from the headlines for quite a while. Back in 2018, it seemed as if we were getting new stories about self-driving cars and trucks on a daily basis. Uber was one of the early leaders in the field, preparing to launch a fleet of vehicles that you could summon to give you a ride with no driver on board. That all came screeching to a halt by the end of that year after one of their driverless prototypes struck and killed a female bicyclist in Arizona. Later analysis showed that the car had accurately detected the woman’s presence but it just failed to react by pumping the brakes. Shortly after that, the company suspended development of the autonomous vehicles
We heard almost nothing about these programs throughout 2019. But now that the new decade is upon us, Uber apparently thinks that it’s time to get back into the game. They’re going to resume testing of this project and have been approved to deploy some of their magical machines on the streets of San Francisco. (Sacramento Bee)
Uber, the international rideshare company, has gotten approval from California regulators to test self-driving cars on state roads, company officials announced Wednesday. Uber officials said they intend to conduct autonomous vehicle tests in San Francisco, the headquarters city for the 11-year-old company that sparked a transportation revolution with the introduction of app-based ride-hailing. The company employs independent drivers, but its business model long has anticipated fleets of autonomous vehicles at some future point. The company previously tested its autonomous cars in San Francisco but was forced by state officials to shut the program down until the state could come up with safety standards.
While Uber isn’t providing a date yet as to when testing will officially resume, it sounds like it’s going to be fairly soon. And I’m guessing they won’t want to wait too long because it sounds as if they’re facing a lot of competition. The linked report notes that the state of California has already issued permits to no less than 600 companies allowing them to test self-driving vehicles on public roads.
So what’s the chief factor driving Uber back into this market after their rather disastrous crash in Arizona? For one thing, California previously halted all such testing until they developed new safety guidelines. That work is now complete, so any companies meeting those standards will be allowed to conduct testing under controlled conditions.
But I’m guessing that politics has played a part in this as well. The decision almost certainly has something to do with AB5, the law that redefined private contractors such as Uber drivers. The new law seeks to force ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft to treat their drivers like regular employees and offer benefits as well as a minimum wage to them.
That change would break Uber’s business model entirely (which was probably the lawmakers’ intention to begin with). The passage of the law has spurred any number of lawsuits, most of which are still in progress, as well as forcing the company to change how drivers operate in California. But if they wind up losing in court, the ultimate solution for Uber would obviously be to simply do away with their drivers entirely. You don’t have to pay wages to machines or offer them benefits… at least not yet.
If that’s how this all plays out, we will have seen California legislators once again claiming to “help” workers in the Golden State wind up helping to drive them out of work. It’s a stunning pattern of big government failure that continues to this day.


hotair--2020-02-10--A-Klo: You'd better believe I'm troubled by a socialist at the top of the ticket

Maybe Amy Klobuchar will be the La ’ Veon Bell of the 2020 Democratic field .
She waited behind the line , dancing around in the backfield , but then saw a small opening and explosively exploited it .
After inexplicably being the only person on stage to express concern over Bernie Sanders ’ surge and having a socialist at the top of the Democratic field , Klobuchar spent today fully embracing the Socialist Scourge message … in a Minnesota Nice manner .
Or maybe she ’ ll just be the New York Jets of the field , full of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place .
Apologies to Jazz Shaw , but ya got ta commit to the bit , man : ED O ’ KEEFE , CBS NEWS : In Friday night ’ s debate , you were the only one to raise your hand when asked if you had concerns about the potential of a self-described Democratic Socialist atop the Democratic Party in November ’ s elections .
Elaborate again on why you ’ re concerned about Sanders being the nominee .
KLOBUCHAR : [ Crosstalk ] The question should be why everyone else didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they didn ’ t , because people were looking at each other and it may not be popular , and you ’ re going to anger some people .
But I believe in leading , and doing what you think is right .
And that ’ s why I raised my hand , because I am troubled by having a socialist lead our ticket .
I like Bernie — we are friends , he would tell you that as well .
We have worked together on prescription drug prices and the like .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who is able to bring in ideas and actually get them done — as I ’ ve said so many times , that people are tired of the extremes in our politics and the noise and the nonsense , that they have a home with me .
That to me is the ticket of winning big .
That hand-raise is likely why Klobuchar ’ s getting a bump in New Hampshire polling .
I ’ ll have more on that phenomenon later , but Klobuchar ’ s right to call out the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own obvious discomfort over this same issue .
Sanders has mostly eschewed the party over his career for his own brand of Socialism , and none of the others are troubled by the prospect of him winning the nomination ?
Come on , man .
On the other hand , this interview demonstrates why Klobuchar hasn ’ t caught fire until now , either .
It ’ s easy to distinguish the labels , but it ’ s a lot tougher to draw a distinction between Sanders and the rest of the field @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she ’ s selling here is a softer , more welcoming approach , not really a centrist policy perspective .
And Klobuchar isn ’ t even selling it so much as describing it , in her taciturn and relatively undynamic manner .
Klobuchar actually does better as a pundit , even when disclaiming such a role : O ’ KEEFE : Can those freshmen members of Congress in Minnesota , in Michigan , in Pennsylvania , and elsewhere get re-elected if Bernie Sanders is the nominee ?
KLOBUCHAR : I think it will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m not going to be a pundit and make predictions , but if you look at the models of how we won in , say , the governor ’ s race in Kentucky , where Mitch McConnell now has a Democratic governor , if you look at how we flipped the Senate and the House in the state of Virginia , if you look at as you note those House races , including in my own state in suburban areas , those candidates — they weren ’ t celebrities .
They were simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fit their districts and pledged to go there to do the work for the people .
Gretchen Whitmer , who we all just heard after the State of the Union , I ’ ve been mentioning her for a long time , the governor of Michigan .
Laura Kelly , the new Democratic governor of Kansas — again , not celebrities , fit the states , got in independents , got in moderate Republicans , and built a big coalition .
[ crosstalk ] O ’ KEEFE : And Bernie could spoil that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ KLOBUCHAR : I don ’ t want to spoil that .
I don ’ t want to , in my words , screw this up .
That ’ s the Democratic establishment position in a nutshell .
They bounced back in 2018 by embracing moderation , and it ’ s hard to imagine screwing that up more than by putting a socialist at the top of the ticket in 2020 .
If it comes down to a brokered convention and a draft , though , Whitmer and Kelly might be more likely candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she does pull it off … I owe George Will an apology .

Maybe Amy Klobuchar will be the La’Veon Bell of the 2020 Democratic field. She waited behind the line, dancing around in the backfield, but then saw a small opening and explosively exploited it. After inexplicably being the only person on stage to express concern over Bernie Sanders’ surge and having a socialist at the top of the Democratic field, Klobuchar spent today fully embracing the Socialist Scourge message … in a Minnesota Nice manner.
Or maybe she’ll just be the New York Jets of the field, full of promise only to end up in last place. Apologies to Jazz Shaw, but ya gotta commit to the bit, man:
Democratic presidential hopeful Amy Klobuchar: "I am troubled by having a socialist lead our ticket" https://t.co/CEMr79WfD0 pic.twitter.com/35hKMBlw4Q — CBS News (@CBSNews) February 10, 2020
ED O’KEEFE, CBS NEWS: In Friday night’s debate, you were the only one to raise your hand when asked if you had concerns about the potential of a self-described Democratic Socialist atop the Democratic Party in November’s elections. Elaborate again on why you’re concerned about Sanders being the nominee. KLOBUCHAR: [Crosstalk] The question should be why everyone else didn’t raise their hand. But they didn’t, because people were looking at each other and it may not be popular, and you’re going to anger some people. But I believe in leading, and doing what you think is right. And that’s why I raised my hand, because I am troubled by having a socialist lead our ticket. I like Bernie — we are friends, he would tell you that as well. We have worked together on prescription drug prices and the like. But I think a candidate like me, who is able to bring in ideas and actually get them done — as I’ve said so many times, that people are tired of the extremes in our politics and the noise and the nonsense, that they have a home with me. That to me is the ticket of winning big.
That hand-raise is likely why Klobuchar’s getting a bump in New Hampshire polling. I’ll have more on that phenomenon later, but Klobuchar’s right to call out the others on stage for not demonstrating their own obvious discomfort over this same issue. Sanders has mostly eschewed the party over his career for his own brand of Socialism, and none of the others are troubled by the prospect of him winning the nomination? Come on, man.
On the other hand, this interview demonstrates why Klobuchar hasn’t caught fire until now, either. It’s easy to distinguish the labels, but it’s a lot tougher to draw a distinction between Sanders and the rest of the field on policy, Klobuchar included. All she’s selling here is a softer, more welcoming approach, not really a centrist policy perspective. And Klobuchar isn’t even selling it so much as describing it, in her taciturn and relatively undynamic manner.
Klobuchar actually does better as a pundit, even when disclaiming such a role:
O’KEEFE: Can those freshmen members of Congress in Minnesota, in Michigan, in Pennsylvania, and elsewhere get re-elected if Bernie Sanders is the nominee? KLOBUCHAR: I think it will be a lot tougher. I’m not going to be a pundit and make predictions, but if you look at the models of how we won in, say, the governor’s race in Kentucky, where Mitch McConnell now has a Democratic governor, if you look at how we flipped the Senate and the House in the state of Virginia, if you look at as you note those House races, including in my own state in suburban areas, those candidates — they weren’t celebrities. They were simply good people who fit their states or fit their districts and pledged to go there to do the work for the people. Gretchen Whitmer, who we all just heard after the State of the Union, I’ve been mentioning her for a long time, the governor of Michigan. Laura Kelly, the new Democratic governor of Kansas — again, not celebrities, fit the states, got in independents, got in moderate Republicans, and built a big coalition. [crosstalk] O’KEEFE: And Bernie could spoil that if he’s the nominee? KLOBUCHAR: I don’t want to spoil that. I don’t want to, in my words, screw this up.
That’s the Democratic establishment position in a nutshell. They bounced back in 2018 by embracing moderation, and it’s hard to imagine screwing that up more than by putting a socialist at the top of the ticket in 2020. If it comes down to a brokered convention and a draft, though, Whitmer and Kelly might be more likely candidates for it than Klobuchar.
But if she does pull it off … I owe George Will an apology.


hotair--2020-02-10--Antifa rally in Portland results in vandalism, three arrests

There was a KKK rally scheduled to take place in Portland Saturday but the organizer canceled it before it even began .
Despite this , antifa held a large counter-rally .
That rally stated out without incident but over time some members of the group began harassing people and also vandalized a war memorial .
Here ’ s the description from the Portland police : While the rally was being held and was peaceful , Portland Police officers stayed away .
However , some people in the group began acting in a violent , threatening manner against attendees who were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responded to address specific criminal acts .
Metal-tipped umbrellas were used to jab toward people and chase them down the street , and objects ( including rocks , concrete , batons , cans , and food ) were thrown at community members and police .
There has also been vandalism , including spray paint on walls and a war memorial ( photos ) .
At least two incendiary devices ( believed to be flares ) were thrown into the street while vehicular traffic was driving by .
Here ’ s what it looked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away live-streamers and anyone taking photos of the gathering .
They are worried about being ID ’ d despite the masks : More harassment of a live-streamer .
Some NSFW language in these clip : The woman in the pink skirt claimed she was just trying to keep people calm but got shoved into the street : As is always the case , one of the main targets of antifa ’ s ire was the police .
Remember this started as an anti-KKK rally but ultimately most of the energy is directed into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There were three arrests in all , here ’ s one of them .
In the clip below you can see the vandalism of a war memorial with anti-police slogans : Here ’ s a local news report with some additional video of the day ’ s events .
Finally , since we ’ re discussing antifa in Portland , here ’ s a recent interview with reporter Andy Ngo in which he discusses the pro-antifa bar Cider Riot .
The owner decided to sell the business last year after a report critical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oregon Liquor Control Commission :

There was a KKK rally scheduled to take place in Portland Saturday but the organizer canceled it before it even began. Despite this, antifa held a large counter-rally. That rally stated out without incident but over time some members of the group began harassing people and also vandalized a war memorial. Here’s the description from the Portland police:
While the rally was being held and was peaceful, Portland Police officers stayed away. However, some people in the group began acting in a violent, threatening manner against attendees who were legally capturing photos and videos. Officers responded to address specific criminal acts. Metal-tipped umbrellas were used to jab toward people and chase them down the street, and objects (including rocks, concrete, batons, cans, and food) were thrown at community members and police. There has also been vandalism, including spray paint on walls and a war memorial (photos). At least two incendiary devices (believed to be flares) were thrown into the street while vehicular traffic was driving by.
Here’s what it looked like:
This my thread on today’s rallies in Portland pic.twitter.com/YHIOvuzxYl — Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) February 8, 2020
Antifa were eager to chase away live-streamers and anyone taking photos of the gathering. They are worried about being ID’d despite the masks:
Portland police are in the area, but mostly out of sight. Counter protestors are mingling in lownsdale park pic.twitter.com/hfKXUZ5PO3 — Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) February 8, 2020
More harassment of a live-streamer. Some NSFW language in these clip:
By my count that is the 4th videographer chased off by the block pic.twitter.com/0VYI1XgVdx — Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) February 8, 2020
The woman in the pink skirt claimed she was just trying to keep people calm but got shoved into the street:
A scuffle breaks out pic.twitter.com/HXIr6g1tXD — Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) February 8, 2020
As is always the case, one of the main targets of antifa’s ire was the police. Remember this started as an anti-KKK rally but ultimately most of the energy is directed into shouting at police and anti-police vandalism.
Police attempted to take antifa into custody, now ACAB chants pic.twitter.com/LKvvZNeU7C — Zane Sparling (@PDXzane) February 8, 2020
There were three arrests in all, here’s one of them. In the clip below you can see the vandalism of a war memorial with anti-police slogans:
https://twitter.com/PDXzane/status/1226249820089638912
Here’s a local news report with some additional video of the day’s events.

Finally, since we’re discussing antifa in Portland, here’s a recent interview with reporter Andy Ngo in which he discusses the pro-antifa bar Cider Riot. The owner decided to sell the business last year after a report critical of his actions was released by the Oregon Liquor Control Commission: