Trump: 100k-200k COVID-19 Deaths Would Mean A Job Very Well Done

Tom Porter, writing for Business Insider:

President Donald Trump spent the early phase of the coronavirus outbreak in the US downplaying its likely impact

This is, of course, despite having received multiple reports from our intelligence agencies indicating that COVID-19 could become a disastrous pandemic if not handled properly.

In a press conference on Sunday, Trump sought to set new parameters for what would constitute a successful handling of the virus, saying that 100,000 or fewer deaths in the US would constitute a "very good job."

About a month ago, on February 26, he predicted that in a matter of days the total number of coronavirus cases in the US would be "close to zero." Instead, the US now has the most confirmed cases of any nation.

When you suck at your own game, just change the rules. As of today, more people have died from COVID-19 than the attacks on 9/11.

Unfortunately, the only game Trump really cares about is the rating game.

Hitherto unseen levels of sociopathic narcissism, folks. Are we great again, yet?

🇺🇸 United States: 0

🦠 COVID-19: 3

UPDATED: 04/03/20, 22:25

Check out CopyrightBro’s COVID-19 coverage roundup.

HiRise Wireless from TwelveSouth
12s_HiRise_Wireless_iPhone11_SpaceGrey_Child_1024x1024.jpg

Our friends at TwelveSouth have recently provided us with a review unit of their HiRise Wireless inductive charging phone stand, which we’ve carefully reviewed! If you’re in the market for an inductive charging solution and are considering this offering from TwelveSouth, read on.

First things first, a few comments on design and build quality. The build quality is solid, with the base and stand made of a sturdy metal that has a nice weight to it and doesn’t move when you place a device on it. The design of the charger is really nifty because the surface that actually charged the phone detaches from the stand for situations where you want to lay a device flat instead of propping it up. This also makes it much more portable, but instances where you might want a portable inductive charger seem few and far between: on their website, they show someone using the charging pad disconnected from the stand and plugged into a MacBook, but while the charging pad is more portable than the whole stand, this isn’t actually a great use case for it because it still has to have a wired connection to your laptop for power, and it’s less convenient than just charging your phone with a cable when considering overall bulk and the inability to move the phone from the pad (as opposed to the relative freedom of movement afforded by a cable).

The charger itself is not the fastest, though. It’s alright as far as inductive chargers go, but it doesn’t seem to be leading the pack and it’s certainly quite a bit slower than most wired chargers these days. Still, if you’re using it to charge your phone overnight, this could be a good bedside option since it also props your device up for a better view of alarms, notifications, etc. That said, if you’re often finding yourself in a pinch and just needing to quickly charge up a bit, this is not the best option for that.

Overall, this is a nice product, but it’s just not quite practical enough to justify the price of $79.99 (or even the current sale price of $59.99) for most people. Unless you’re looking for an overnight charger and you have a very specific bedside aesthetic that requires that charger to match a very modern, leather and metal style with a black and gunmetal color palette, you can probably find something a bit cheaper.

Side note: if you have an iPhone 11 Pro, the camera system on the back is just large enough to slightly overlap with the edge of the charging pad and prevent the phone from sitting perfectly horizontal on the base of the charger. This will be a nonissue for most people, but for a select few like myself, it’s maddening.

On The Deployment of Facts

Monica Black, writing for The Sewanee Review:

But the reality is that sometimes what matters—and what really moves the wheels of history, as Mussolini might have put it—is what you can make out of the facts. Sometimes myths are much more compelling than humble, modest truths. In that sense, it did not matter much whether the Reichstag fire was set by a young communist who opposed the Nazis, or if that’s merely what they said happened. What mattered was the chain of events that flowed from the fire, and what the Nazis made of those events. What mattered was how the facts were interpreted and put to work.

By the way, just yesterday, one of our illustrious Tennessee state senators, Frank Niceley—who in 2013 addressed the Southern National Congress, which the Southern Poverty Law Center says is an offshoot of the neo-Confederate hate group League of the South—posted this question to Twitter: “isn’t it a #Fact that #COVID-19 originated in #China?”

Dr. Black is an Associate Professor of History at The University of Tennessee, and she also happened to be my thesis advisor. Additionally, I had the pleasure of taking her course “Medicine in The Third Reich”, during which I was consistently delighted by her thought provoking lectures which always provided a historical lens useful to interpret the present, and were somehow always intriguingly relevant to current events while following an established syllabus.

Her remarks here are also very thought provoking, and we would do well to heed the warning: in times of uncertainty and crisis, we need to be questioning the “facts”, but we also need to be paying attention to how certain facts may be deployed to bolster agendas.

Sure, the coronavirus started in China. That is a fact. But does this fact help us slow its spread, stabilize the economy, or help the sick recover? No. Is it consistent with Donald Trump’s (and his pals’) nationalistic tendency to deflect blame for the United States’s shortcomings by painting them as foreign threats? Certainly. If you’d like an example, look no farther than the wall Trump promised (and failed) to build as a silver bullet measure to solve our broken immigration system and bring back “stolen” jobs.

‘President Trump's Coronavirus Guidelines’ Mailers Apparently Aren't Meant to Be Political

Kevin Stankiewicz, reporting for CNBC:

Painter, who has previously been critical of Trump, said he felt the decision to label the “critically important health advisory” as being Trump’s guidelines was “unwise.”

“Half the Country likes him; half the Country does not. But disease knows no party. Don’t we want all Americans to read the message that is mailed to them at substantial cost to the government?” said Painter, who added he felt the postcard was meant to serve Trump’s bid for reelection. 

White House Spokesman Judd Deere rejected the notion that the postcard was at all political. 

“The President has said he has no higher priority than the health and safety of the American people,” Deere wrote in an email. “It’s ridiculous to suggest that in the middle of a global pandemic the White House’s efforts to get critical information to the American people to slow the spread of COVID-19 is somehow political.”

I definitely perceived this as politically charged when I got it in the mail. In fact, I actually thought it was so on brand with Trump’s usual narcissism that I actually flipped it over to find the part where it said “Paid For By Donald J. Trump For President” or “Paid For By The Republican National Committee”, but alas, these mailers were sent out on the taxpayers’ dime.

The branding turned me off pretty much immediately, so I didn’t actually read what it said about the virus itself. So well done, White House: half the people you sent this to won’t read it because they’re immediately turned off by the glorification of Trump, and the other half probably can’t read anyway.

🇺🇸 United States: 0

🦠 COVID-19: 2



Check out CopyrightBro’s COVID-19 coverage roundup.

The United States Now Has More Coronavirus Cases Than Any Other Nation

Dave Sanders, reporting for The New York Times:

In the United States, at least 81,321 people are known to have been infected with the coronavirus, including more than 1,000 deaths — more cases than China, Italy or any other country

Hard to see how anyone could believe that this has NOTHING to do with Trump’s mismanagement of the of the outbreak.

Let’s not forget that our intelligence agencies were warning Trump about the coronavirus a few months ago, and he chose not to act.

🇺🇸 United States: 0

🦠 COVID-19: 1

Ps. If you don’t like the idea of a $1,200 stimulus check going out to American citizens because you think it’s socialist, nobody is going to force you to cash your check. The ball is in your court, “patriots”.

Check out CopyrightBro’s COVID-19 coverage roundup.

The New Patriot Act

Governments are considering tracking citizens locations as a way to monitor the spread of coronavirus and enforce quarantines and lockdowns.

My thoughts are as follows: fuck that. This will be the new Patriot Act. The world is quickly becoming an episode of Black Mirror.

Israel is doing it. Fuck them.

The Israeli government has approved emergency measures for its security agencies to track the mobile-phone data of people with suspected coronavirus.

The new powers will be used to enforce quarantine and warn those who may have come into contact with infected people.

Absolutely atrocious. If Israel ever had a brain, they’ve lost it.

Unfortunately, the United States isn’t very far behind. Terrifyingly enough, this is an idea I’ve heard reverberating a bit in recent days, both on a podcast I usually enjoy (Crooked Media’s Pod Save America*) as well as a blog I stumbled across. I never expected to see the day where American government leaders would be calling for a mass surveillance system, much less American citizens themselves asking for it.

If the U.S. government allows this to happen, then fuck them, too. I‘ll stop carrying a phone before I just go along with something like this, pandemic or not. This is deeply un-American.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

— Benjamin Franklin

And oh yeah, of course, Facebook is involved in this, so #deletefacebook

UPDATED: 04/09/20, 17:12

Check out CopyrightBro’s COVID-19 coverage roundup.

Former G.O.P. Congressman Aaron Schock Comes Out As Gay

A few days ago, former Republican Congressman Aaron Schock made a blog post confirming long held suspicious about his sexuality. He had a lot of critics who raised some fair points about his past stances and actions, but he was also the target a lot of unfair personal attacks on Twitter.

Aaron Schock is, like everyone else, a flawed person. Was it wrong for him to oppose gay marriage and other gay rights issues? Yes. Is it surprising that he would do so? Not at all. He acknowledges his misguided past positions while also offering a pill difficult for the left to swallow; a reminder that just a few years ago, they also weren’t terribly “woke” when it came to marriage equality.

No one gets to choose when we learn our lives’ big lessons. Mine have been no different. In 2008, as a Republican running in a conservative district, I took the same position on gay marriage held by my party’s nominee, John McCain. That position against marriage equality, though, was also then held by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as well.  

That fact doesn’t make my then position any less wrong, but it’s sometimes easy to forget that it was leaders of both parties who for so long wrongly understood what it was to defend the right to marry.

His story is exemplary of the fear felt by many young men who remain closeted, and it demonstrates that while some people receive warm reception upon coming out, many do not. His personal journey was one hugely shaped by overbearing religion and regressive politics, and it shows just how difficult it is for young men to come out in environments where they’re raised to treat same sex attracted people as defective or morally deficient.

To characterize some of these conversations with my family in general,  it’s fair to say it has not been a case of instant acceptance and understanding.  What I had to share was unwelcome news to every single person in my family, out of the blue in some cases, and was met with sadness, disappointment, and unsympathetic citations to Scripture. 

He is representative of a type of same sex attracted person who experiences even more intolerance than most, because not only was he rejected by many conservative and evangelical people close to him, but he is also actively being rejected by the political left who claims to be open and tolerant of everyone despite their background (except, it seems, when they don’t subscribe entirely to their political platform), and who have explicitly demonstrated in Schock’s case that they clearly aren’t above trying to out someone they believe to be closeted when it is politically expedient for them:

I was a single guy, and people would comment on how I dressed, and about my preoccupation with physical fitness. Untruthful stories were written. Even years into my time in Washington, I was still naïve enough to wonder why the news media would run with an utterly false story about me and a show I’d never even heard of, and still haven’t seen, Downton Abbey. 

It took me a while to figure out that it was really just the media’s own way in which they got to say THAT about me in print…to tie me to a stereotype. In fact, if you want to learn  something about the “woke” media, Google my name and consider how  prominently that fabricated lie, still without even a single source to back it up, will feature in stories about me by people who otherwise call themselves journalists. It was another way, albeit more sophisticated, to be teased about being gay. A dog whistle.

Towards the end of the post, he again acknowledges his prior missteps, and also advocates for the right of gay men to maintain their own individual thoughts and belief systems, rather than adopting the one society tells them they’re supposed to take up upon coming out. If there’s one thing in this post that I hope gay men will take away from it, it’s this: that being gay doesn’t exclude you from being able to form your own set of opinions and beliefs.

The truth is that if I were in Congress today, I would support LGBTQ rights in every way I could.   I realize that some of my political positions run very much counter to the mainstream of the LGBTQ movement, and I respect them for those differences.   I hope people will allow for me the same.

To that end, I hope that others can respect that for me being gay has not required stepping into some entirely new belief system, disconnected from every other facet of my life’s experiences. I haven’t overcome one kind of repression for another.

Starbucks Pauses Reusable Cup Program Amid Coronavirus Fears

Chauncey Alcoron, writing for CNN Business:

Starbucks (SBUX)on Wednesday announced it is temporarily suspending the use of personal cups and tumblers at its stores around the world to help prevent the spread of coronavirus.

This is unnecessary (it borders on fear mongering), and it’s another instance where Starbucks’s insincere commitment to the environment is demonstrated by a lack of emphasis on their reusable cup program.

UPDATE: 7/30/20, 16:55:

Well, this didn’t age gracefully at all. Still, I maintain that Starbucks was never serious about their reusable cup program.

Check out CopyrightBro’s COVID-19 coverage roundup.

Elizabeth Warren Drops Out of Presidential Race

Elizabeth Warren announced today that she is ending her campaign for the presidency. After Buttigieg dropped out, Warren became my top pick. I felt like she was the last truly good candidate with a shot at the nomination, but her performance on Super Tuesday did not yield results that would allow her to practically remain in the race.

I really liked some of Warren’s policies, and felt like she was an incredible alternative to Bernie Sanders. She had similar ideas but she was remarkably more relatable, and she ran a much more respectable campaign. A lot of people are assuming that Warren’s supporters will flock to Bernie’s campaign now, but given how poorly they were treated by Bernie Stans online, I wouldn’t count on that. Similar policies likely won’t be enough to make up for completely opposite approaches to how you should treat people with whom you have slight disagreements; Warren’s team was warm, engaging, and welcoming, while Bernie’s was militant, aggressive, and off putting.

At this point, we’re down to a decision between a rock and a hard place, and we have a collection of selfish democrats to thank. Fortunately, Tulsi Gabbard has not caved to the pressure, but her path to the White House seems nearly impossible, despite the fact that she’s garnering impressive support from moderate republicans and independents who are feeling let down by Trump. She’s a hell of a lot better than Biden or Sanders, so at this point, CopyrightBro is endorsing Tulsi Gabbard.

Pete Buttigieg Drops Out of Presidential Race

To my dismay, Pete Buttigieg surprised supporters on Sunday by announcing that he was ending his campaign for the presidency. Pete’s exit was surprising given that he won the Iowa caucuses and was seen as one of the strongest moderate candidates in the field who enjoyed notable support from independents and moderate republicans.

I personally supported Pete’s campaign, and hoped to see him win the nomination. Unfortunately, he was robbed of the attention usually paid to the winner of that contest due to the absolute fumble by the Iowa Democratic Party in reporting the results, and this cost him a lot of name recognition which could’ve carried him to more impressive delegate hauls in Nevada and South Carolina, where his performance was less than impressive due to his lack of support among black and latino voters, who seemed more comfortable supporting candidates with more name recognition, like Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders. I found it peculiar that Pete decided to drop out when he did, even given his shallow support in Nevada and South Carolina, he still seemed as well positioned as any other candidate to do well on Super Tuesday. He had lasting momentum, something Klobuchar, Biden, and Bloomberg did not. I’m curious if Pete decided to take one for the team in hopes of being offered a VP spot, if his campaign lacked funding to remain competitive, or if unseen actors influenced his decision through some sort of bribery or coercion.

Pete was the internet’s favorite candidate to pick on, with relentless attacks being lobbed (primarily by Bernie Sanders’ supporters) attacking him for a myriad of non-issues. I could spend weeks debunking all their bogus criticisms, but instead I’d like to address just one. It was a common trope that Pete “wasn't gay enough” to be the first gay president. This is an absolutely appalling argument, especially from people who claim to be progressive and woke. If Pete’s sexuality is relevant to his capability to successfully execute the responsibilties of the president, then saying he’s “not gay enough” is just making it okay for people to say that he’s “too gay”. Those who made this criticism were clearly projecting their own shortcomings; a lot of gays can’t relate to someone who is comfortable enough with themselves to the degree that they’re able to allow their sexuality not to be the orienting aspect of their entire personality, and therefore those people perceived Pete’s lack of reliance upon his sexuality as something that makes him disingenuous. Shame on them, and how dare they now remark on the historical nature of a campaign they tried to sabotage with bush league personal criticisms.

As someone pointed out, Pete could run in every election between now and 2060 before reaching Bernie’s age, so a Buttigieg presidency is certainly not off the table yet.

Special Thanks To Democrats

This is the most discouraging and disappointing Super Tuesday of my life, and it may very well hold that title for decades time to come. The democratic field started off very crowded, but there truly were good options. Now, the democratic establishment has finally moved to narrow the field, a task completed with remarkable haste. In the course of a weekend, three moderate candidates dropped from the race to clear the way for Joe Biden to challenge Bernie Sanders for the nomination, while Mike Bloomberg looms in the wings as a wild card. At this point, Elizabeth Warren and Tulsi Gabbard are the only candidates remaining who are worth endorsing. Despite numerous, well funded attempts, neither of these women have allowed the establishment to force them out of the race. While Gabbard is a great candidate she’s unlikely to attain viability in any state. In the wake of Pete Buttigieg’s exit from the race, CopyrightBro is proud to endorse Elizabeth Warren. We strongly encourage readers to vote for Liz and donate to her campaign.

Aside from Warren, the Democratic Party has three viable options, all of whom are straight white men who are either 77 or 78 years old. They consist of:

  1. Joe Biden, a career politician who’s waning mental faculties hardly permit him to formulate a coherent sentence, and who has a well documented history of touching and sniffing young girls inappropriately.

  2. Bernie Sanders, a self proclaimed socialist whose militant followers are fascistic in their unwavering support and willingness to attack anyone who presents a dissenting opinion.

  3. Mike Bloomberg, a billionaire with a track record of imposing blatantly racist policies who admitted on live TV during the most recent debate that he had “bought” congressional seats, and clearly thinks he can buy the presidency just as easily.

The stakes of this election are high, not only for democrats, but for everybody. The Democrats have a massive responsibility as the only political machine capable of saving ALL of America from Donald Trump and delivering a new vision for our country, and it’s a responsibility they’re almost entirely disregarding.

Elizabeth Warren is the best option we have to defeat Donald Trump and replace him with someone who won’t either tear the country apart or take us back to the politics of Y2K. So, special thanks to the Democratic Party for scrubbing the field to get rid of anyone whom they don’t have a long history of control over, but also thanks to the narrow-minded Bernie stans who have worked tirelessly to ensure that their demagogue has his fair chance to shred the good will of the American people, too. So again, thanks, Democrats, for all but wasting this opportunity.

On Foldable Phones

Why though? What added utility does it offer? What problem does it solve? How does it improve upon the experience? These phones have fundamentally bad designs; not because of how they look (though that doesn't help many of them), but because of how they work.

The Samsung Galaxy Fold was a complete disaster. The new Motorola Razr seems pretty poorly built as well. The Samsung Galaxy Flip Z looks like a GameBoy and can’t really be used while it’s closed, and they’re marketing it as having “foldable glass”, which is clearly a lie.

Not only do these phones not offer a measurably better experience, by all indications, they’re garbage. Even the ones that seem well built break and fall apart, often in a very short amount of time.

I think we’ll eventually see foldable devices that feel like they’re truly more useful than non-foldable ones, but so far nobody knows what the use case is for a phone with a folding display. As of right now, all of these phones have a gimmicky feel to me. They’re strangely reminiscent of the phone I had in seventh grade, the Motorola Krave, which was a touchscreen flip phone with a completely transparent flip. Sure, phones like this look cool and they seem to be pushing the envelope of what technology can do in the present, but their blockbuster features arguably make them less useful. At least the Motorola Krave had decent build quality.

Mark Zuckerberg’s 2006 ‘Book of Change’

Check out this great piece on Mark Zuckerberg by Steven Levy, writing for WIRED.

In the early days of Facebook, Zuck kept his plans for world domination in handwritten journals. He destroyed them. But a few revealing pages survived.

Much of Levy’s piece was informed by what Zuckerberg wrote in those journals, as well as interviews with Zuckerberg himself and other Facebook executives. The pattern of corporate irresponsibility and depravity we’ve seen from Facebook recently has been there since the very beginning.

What distinguished Facebook from other social networks was the assumed privacy provided by its gated setup [when Facebook was only available to college students]. Open Reg[istration] would throw open those gates to the masses. But would people then no longer see Facebook as a safe space? In designing Open Reg, he posted one final question to himself.

“What makes this seem secure, whether or not it actually is?” He seemed at least as concerned about the perception of privacy as with privacy itself.

”What makes this seem secure, whether or not it actually is?” Incredible.

Using Facebook needs to feel like you're using a futuristic government-style interface to access a database full of information linked to every person. The user needs to be able to look at information at any depth … The user experience needs to feel “full.” That is, when you click on a person in a governmental database, there is always information about them.

A government-esque catalog of every person in the world. Charming. But not everyone would sign up for Facebook, so this wasn’t achievable. Not to fear, Zuckerberg had a plan.

He took three pages to lay out a vision for something he called “Dark Profiles.” These would be Facebook pages for people who, whether by omission or intention, had not signed up for Facebook. […]

Zuckerberg was aware that allowing the creation of profiles for people who had no desire to be on Facebook might stir up privacy concerns. He spent some time pondering how this could avoid being “creepy.” Maybe, he mused, dark accounts might not be included in search engines.

Shadow profiles are not a joke, they’ve been a part of Facebook’s plan from the very early days.

There will be a tipping point for Facebook. One after another, the curtains are being pulled back and what we’re finding is that the people behind Facebook have always been immeasurably negligent and downright disrespectful of their users. Hopefully, stories like this will move public opinion against Facebook sooner than later, and embolden people to delete their profiles.

#deletefacebook

Pete For America

A Primer On Pete

This time last year, like most people, I had no clue who Pete Buttigieg was. I first heard about him when my cousin sent me a tweet from The Hill that linked to a story where Chasten Buttigieg, Pete’s husband, told of making Pete taking the Pottermore sorting quiz (R.I.P. Pottermore), and finding out that he was a Hufflepuff. I thought this was interesting and out of character for a politician (they’re a very Slytherin-y bunch), so I decided to look into him a bit more, and I liked what I found.

At the time, Pete had very little name recognition, so he was a bit less reserved in sharing his opinions, and he didn’t have to be quite as “on” in all of his interviews. He felt distinctly human, and he wasn’t afraid to opine on weighty topics like court reform and other issues that more standard candidates weren’t enthusiastic to tackle. One of the most interesting aspects of Pete’s campaign early on was his focus on healing the division in our nation through expanded public service programs. He used his military experience to provide anecdotes to illustrate the strength of service to heal wounds and bring people together who may have drastically different political beliefs and world views. Pete remains the only candidate to have put forth such a proposal, and I think it has real potential.

49515624783_87349ce0bd_k.jpeg

I was also encouraged that the first gay candidate to make a serious run for President wasn’t one who relied upon his sexuality to build a base of support; being gay was a part of Pete’s personal story but it’s far from the dominant aspect of his personality. He’s done a good job of not allowing his sexuality to become his personality, as so many openly gay men do.

Pete’s campaign continued to steadily gain steam from when I first learned about him in March, eventually making it to the debate stage in June, where he impressed me again. He didn’t get a ton of talk time, mostly due to the crowded field of hopefuls, but he did well enough to justify the interest I’d had in him for the past few months. After the second debate, I felt a little let down. It was clear that Pete was gaining in popularity, but he still wasn’t performing how I’d have liked in the debates, and his second round seemed a little weaker than the first. Throughout the next several debates, Pete‘s performances had a very “same story, different day” feel that I couldn’t see past. It was as if his gaining popularity had tongue tied him a bit, and he was more afraid to keep up the genuine persona he had brought forth in the interviews that made me like him so much. He stopped talking about his truly new ideas and started relying on cliches about a “new generation” of American politics. In turn, I began to look toward other candidates for a potential favorite, but I kept Mayor Pete in my back pocket.

Fast forward a few months, and Pete has made it farther than I expected, while no other candidate has been able to pique my interest the way he did. We’re now at the point where a Buttigieg presidency is not a pipe dream. After all, from a delegate standpoint, he’s currently winning the race for the Democratic Party’s nomination (delegates aren’t necessarily the best metric and the race is far from over, but still, he’s doing much better than most people predicted in the run up to the Iowa caucuses).

Pete has a wide base of support, in part because he made it a point early on to welcome independents and frustrated Republicans to his campaign. His appeal reaches across demographics like education level, class, and sex, though he struggles mightily with minority voters. His welcoming rhetoric from a year ago has helped him position himself as serious candidate who is diametrically opposed to Donald Trump in almost every way, though without alienating the moderate Republicans and independents he’ll need to win the general election. While Trump is old, steeped in corruption, temperamental, and offensive, Pete is young, a political newcomer, measured, and compassionate, and he knows that’s what a lot of “future former Republicans”, as he calls them, are looking for.

His appeal to Republicans is not negated by the fact that the way he speaks is strikingly reminiscent of Barack Obama. Many have drawn this conclusion, and for better or for worse, he seems to be leaning into it, having ramped up on the cliches and the dramatic-yet-matter of fact tone of voice. Colin Jost called him out for it on SNL last week, and it was a pretty funny sketch.

Buttigieg has his critics though: he seems to be the internet’s favorite person to attack, lately. The air left, social Justice Warriors, and Bernie fans across the Twittersphere jump at the opportunity to lambast Pete whenever they unearth any tiny morsel of a reason for them to dislike him. Some go so far as to call him a “closet Republican” or a “corporate tool”. They accept his decade-ago work with McKinsey and his openness to accepting donations from wealthy individuals as stone cold proof that he’s a conservative double agent. We shouldn’t ignore relevant evidence that provides insight into any candidate’s intentions, but what they've got on Pete is pretty sparse.

While his policies aren’t as progressive as some of the candidates’, to call Pete a “closet Republican” is severely misguided — I’m unaware of any Republican politicians who are calling for any meaningful action to combat the climate crisis, universal healthcare, more affordable college, gun control, or expanding DACA — Pete would have the most progressive agenda of any President, if elected. At the same time, he’s drawn out his policy proposals carefully, and he hasn’t gone as far as some candidates, not only because he doesn’t want to alienate moderates, but because he’s pragmatic, and he knows that some of the proposals coming out of the Bernie and Warren campaigns simply aren’t feasible.

The Elephant In The Room

Contrary to the historical nature of Pete being the first gay candidate to make a serious run for the White House, his sexuality seems to be the aspect of his candidacy that people are most reluctant to discuss. My primary concern with Pete at this point is that he is gay, and I think we’ve got to stop pretending that America is now so progressive that we don’t even need to look at how running a gay guy against Donald Trump may not be a great plan. The issue isn’t that I believe his sexuality would prevent him from winning, though it would be a hurdle with some voters. Instead, I fear that his candidacy, whether he wins the general election or not, would do more harm than good for LGB people, particularly those in less progressive areas: allow me to elaborate.

Despite Donald Trump’s remarks that he thinks Pete’s marriage is “great” and “absolutely fine”, he knows as well as we do that many of his evangelical supporters do not think Pete’s relationship is fine, much less great. While Trump himself may refrain from outright homophobic attacks, his supporters will not, and we know that Trump has no moral qualm with benefiting from dangerous social problems like racism and xenophobia that enflame his base — to assume that he would be above benefitting from homophobia would be a rosy assumption. Given the extreme political division in our country right now, it’s easy to imagine the outrage from the right and the low levels to which they would stoop to tear down and discredit a Democratic presidential candidate who is gay. The smears and attacks that would emanate from the far right nuts and evangelicals would give young people in less progressive areas who are questioning or coming to terms with their sexuality a debilitatingly grim idea of what the future may hold for them. And that’s not even to mention that Trumpism can be clearly associated with significant increases in hate crimes, which could pose a direct threat to LGB people who are already out in regressive communities.

While LGB rights gained traction with historic haste, a gay presidential candidate would drag LGB issues back into the spotlight just a mere handful of years since the legalization of gay marriage. My personal philosophy is that the best way to achieve societal normalcy and acceptance is to, more or less, fake it ‘til you make it. If you act like you’re already the same as everyone else, soon enough, they’ll see you that way. Obviously, there are going to be some homophobic assholes who never get on board, but feather boas and pride parades aren’t going to convince them, it’s just going to validate their misguided beliefs. I don’t think it’s in our best interest to have our individual liberties thrust back into the arena of public opinion for deliberation such a short time after the legal rights have been afforded to us.

Even despite the unease I feel for the future prospects for young men like myself who will have to deal with coming out to unaccepting family members in the south and other regressive places, I still think Mayor Pete is our best option for 2020. Occasionally, what may be best for you personally or people like you isn’t necessarily what’s best for everyone. Even if same sex attracted people have to sustain a few blows to oust Donald Trump, it will have been for the greater good, and I believe Pete Buttigieg has the best chance of defeating Donald Trump.

Decision Time

There are several good democratic candidates, though they each have their own electability hurdles. Bernie Sanders is clearly Pete’s biggest competition for the nomination at this point, but his self proclaimed status as a democratic socialist will hurt him among moderates and more or less guarantee the absence of any noteworthy level of Republican support, if only for the abysmal connotation of the word “socialism” in the United States. Amy Klobuchar, who’s popularity is spiking, hasn’t really had her record scrubbed yet, and she also has extremely low minority support, and she’s a woman (I’m not saying I wouldn’t vote for a woman or that she’s any less qualified or capable on account of her sex, but that there are still plenty of sexists in the United States who may vote for a man but not a woman (a gay man though, who knows?)). Elizabeth Warren’s support is fading fast, and while her policy positions are clear, her position among the field of democratic candidates is not; increasingly few people seem to have an appetite for Diet Bernie®. Joe Biden's support is crumbling at an astonishing rate. Tulsi Gabbard is simply not a viable candidate. Andrew Yang has now dropped out. Mike Bloomberg is a billionaire, and if the left has learned anything over the past three years, is that candidates who buy their way into power are rarely suited for it.

Regardless of which Democrat wins the nomination, anyone who wants rid of Trump should support them wholeheartedly. In any case, throughout the primary process, we should focus on building up our favorite candidate, not tearing down his or her competition or threatening not to vote for them in the general election.

Pete has demonstrated that he has staying power and that he can attract voters from across the political spectrum. He’s the candidate we need. If you agree that Pete Buttigieg is the best candidate to take on Donald Trump, you can support him by donating to his campaign and telling your friends and family about why you think he’s our best bet.

Only 53% of Bernie Supporters Say They'll Support The Democratic Nominee Even If It Isn't Bernie

Emerson College Polling:

Among Sanders supporters, 16% will not vote for the nominee if Sanders doesn’t win, while 30% say it depends on the nominee.

This is clearly an issue among the Sanders campaign, in particular. If you’re one of these “Bernie or bust” people, you have a serious lack of foresight, and you should be ashamed. The time for moral absolutism is not when Donald Trump is the alternative. Stop being selfish and support the nominee, no matter who it is.

AirFly Pro from TwelveSouth
AirFlyPro_QS_Hero_1024x1024.jpg

CopyrightBro has recently partnered with TwelveSouth, a company committed to making the finest accessories available for Apple products, to bring our readers reviews of some of their latest products.

The first product we reviewed was the AirFly Pro, which is a nifty little bluetooth dongle that provides bluetooth input and output functions for devices that otherwise rely on wires. An example of a use case where it would serve as a transmitter for output would be if you have wireless headphones that you want to use with a source that doesn’t support bluetooth output, like machines at the gym or the seatback screens on airplanes. An example of a good use for input is if your car has an AUX port but doesn’t connect to your phone via bluetooth, the AirFly Pro is the missing link that can give you a wireless audio setup.

I was able to test the output functionality at the gym so that I could hear the TVs on my AirPods, and everything went off without a hitch. However, unless you really like listening to whatever is playing on the TV at the gym or you’re a frequent flier who loves their airline’s in-flight infotainment systems, most people are probably just going to connect to their own devices anyway. Despite being marketed more for this use case, I found the input use to be far more handy.

My car has an AUX port but no bluetooth support, so the AirFly Pro has been able to save me from the messy situation I had before, where I was having to use an AUX cord and Apple’s lightning to 3.5mm headphone jack adapter. Now, I have the AirFly Pro connected to my AUX port and also plugged into the charger (it is battery powered, so you have to either take it inside to charge it every couple days, or just leave it connected to power in the car). The actual pairing process is easy: you just press the big button on the dongle for a second or two each time you get in the car, and it connects with no hiccups.

While it works well for input and output, I can’t help but imagine most people are going to use it for input. At $55, it’s not cheap, and there are certainly other options out there that don’t cost as much. However, the one-button simplicity of the AirFly Pro is very convenient, and it’s ability to work for a variety of use cases put it a step ahead of its competition. If you’re only looking for an input solution, you may find something better, but if you care about convenience and versatility, the AirFly Pro is a great option.

Target is All In.. What Are They In?

Target recently launched a new brand, All In Motion, which makes various activewear garments. They seem to be of decent quality, and I like some of the designs for the men’s products. However: the logo.

Yikes.

Yikes.

 

Surely, I’m not the only one who thinks this looks like “KKK” backwards?! What corporate dunce in Target’s marketing department let this horrible design get past the drawing board?

As I mentioned, I like several of the All In Motion products, but I’m honestly not comfortable buying a product with that logo on it. Hopefully they rebrand sooner rather than later.

Trump Thinks Mayor Pete’s Marriage is ‘Great’ and ‘Absolutely Fine’

Bookmark this for future reference.

"Don't you think it's just great to see the fact that you've got a guy there on the stage with his husband and it's normal?" Fox's Steve Hilton asked. 

"I think it's absolutely fine, I do," Trump said.

He agreed with Hilton’s assessment that Buttigieg’s candidacy “is a sign of great progress,” adding “yeah, I think it’s great. I think that’s something that perhaps some people will have a problem with, I have no problem with it whatsoever.”

This excerpt is from a CNN article*, but you can find the original video here.

Hopefully the day never comes when Trump falls back on attacking Buttigieg’s sexuality, but if it does, we’ll at least have this to sow discord among the homophobic bigots who never question Trump’s commitment to their straight white interests.

*It’s worth pointing out that CNN’s analysis of this story was a bit jaded and poorly informed, despite the fact that this was a rare occasion where they could’ve painted Trump in a positive light. They make the mistake of conflating LGB issues with transgender issues, as well as deploying the tired tactic of bringing up Mike Pence’s alleged historical support for conversion therapy to paint the Trump administration as homophobic. The fact is that while portraying Trump and his cronies as homophobic makes CNN’s more left leaning audience more likely to despise the administration, CNN’s status as a left leaning media outlet criticizing Trump for alleged homophobia is only going to entice Trump’s supporters to be more brazenly homophobic. The leftist media is, once again, throwing gay people under the bus for their own benefit. Division drives ratings.