The Weinstein Brothers are brilliant in their fields but fucking morons when it comes to politics. It happens to plenty of smart people who are used to being told how smart they are - they lose the ability to question themselves and their biases.
It's why I don't find either of them particularly wise, and as such, not worth listening to outside of their expertise.
Eric is a technocrat who thinks if we just elect someone smart enough they'll fix all our problems. In his perfect world people like Dr. Fauci would be running things.
Bret is an academic who apparently doesn't realize that ultimately he was hoisted by his own petard, and that by pushing the idea that minorities were "separate" (he had supported the same "day without a minority" event in the past when it was minorities doing the "leaving", so he had no issue with identity politics) it was inevitable they'd want their own space exclusive of other peoples.
You won't convince either of them of anything. They'll go to their mass graves failing to understand how things ended up the way they did, and how they played a role in their own demise.
And yes, they acknowledge the spoiler effect in the article, but I have no confidence in their fail safes. Someone needs to tell them Trump isn't as bad as they seem to think he is and that they're playing with fire by trying to introduce a third party. And to tell them in a way that will actually stick in their fucking heads.
I don't really think they believe they have a chance of getting things done. The idea you can draft a candidate is a bit naive and the idea they floated of essentially sharing a presidency requires a level of trust that two different people aren't going to have at day one.
The main problem with their plan is imaging you could fix the problems in the US in such a short amount of time. You can't. Changing the political climate is going to require the current political leaders to age-out (or more realistically, pass away) and likely for the next generation to as well as we are not electing younger people who put the interests of the country ahead of their own interests either.
While it's cliche, reform starts at the local level and is going to require a voting basis that pays attention to our politicians. You can't pick one person as "your guy", you have to make sure that individual earns your vote each and every election and you have to ruthlessly oust a politician as soon as they demonstrate they've been compromised.
I just don't see that happening in the current political climate.
The Weinstein Brothers are brilliant in their fields but fucking morons when it comes to politics. It happens to plenty of smart people who are used to being told how smart they are - they lose the ability to question themselves and their biases.
It's why I don't find either of them particularly wise, and as such, not worth listening to outside of their expertise.
Eric is a technocrat who thinks if we just elect someone smart enough they'll fix all our problems. In his perfect world people like Dr. Fauci would be running things.
Bret is an academic who apparently doesn't realize that ultimately he was hoisted by his own petard, and that by pushing the idea that minorities were "separate" (he had supported the same "day without a minority" event in the past when it was minorities doing the "leaving", so he had no issue with identity politics) it was inevitable they'd want their own space exclusive of other peoples.
You won't convince either of them of anything. They'll go to their mass graves failing to understand how things ended up the way they did, and how they played a role in their own demise.
And yes, they acknowledge the spoiler effect in the article, but I have no confidence in their fail safes. Someone needs to tell them Trump isn't as bad as they seem to think he is and that they're playing with fire by trying to introduce a third party. And to tell them in a way that will actually stick in their fucking heads.
I don't really think they believe they have a chance of getting things done. The idea you can draft a candidate is a bit naive and the idea they floated of essentially sharing a presidency requires a level of trust that two different people aren't going to have at day one.
The main problem with their plan is imaging you could fix the problems in the US in such a short amount of time. You can't. Changing the political climate is going to require the current political leaders to age-out (or more realistically, pass away) and likely for the next generation to as well as we are not electing younger people who put the interests of the country ahead of their own interests either.
While it's cliche, reform starts at the local level and is going to require a voting basis that pays attention to our politicians. You can't pick one person as "your guy", you have to make sure that individual earns your vote each and every election and you have to ruthlessly oust a politician as soon as they demonstrate they've been compromised.
I just don't see that happening in the current political climate.