putting this in the context of other committee fights the Democrats have been having:

77-year-old Jerry Nadler was the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee (which also plays a crucial oversight role)

Nadler’s leadership was successfully challenged by 62-year-old Jamie Raskin.

so Democrats’ version of “younger blood” was to replace a baby boomer (born 1947) with…a slightly younger baby boomer (born 1962, which depending on where you draw the line is the last of the baby boom, or the very beginning of Gen X)

Raskin had previously been the top Democrat on House Oversight, so that spot became vacant.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ran for that leadership position on House Oversight. she’s 35 years old, has an excellent media presence, and is well-known nationally.

instead of AOC, Democrats chose a 74-year old, Gerry Connolly.

and not just any 74-year old…they chose a 74-year-old who has cancer

and not just any 74-year old with cancer…a 74-year-old who has an especially deadly form of cancer

and not just any 74-year old with an especially deadly form of cancer…esophageal cancer. cancer of the esophagus. you know, that thing that’s in your throat. you know what else is in your throat, right next to your esophagus? your voice box. that thing you speak with.

Democrats in a nutshell: the guy we put in charge of oversight of the Trump administration…there’s a good chance he’s going to have surgery that renders him physically incapable of speaking.

the most plausible explanation I’ve seen so far - credit to this post (from one of the hosts of the 5-4 podcast) where I saw it first:

my suspicion is that Kamala is floating a CA governor run or 2028 run not because she thinks she has a chance but because it will help convince wealthy donors that it’s still worth buying influence with her and thus help her fundraise to pay off her campaign’s debts

but also Kamala ending up as the nominee wouldn’t surprise me. if it’s not her, there’ll be a different “establishment” Democratic candidate that the DNC puts their thumb on the scale for. 2028 seems likely to be yet another “this is the most important election of our lives, it’s crucial to the future of the country that you vote for whichever Democrat we tell you to vote for, now shut the fuck up and stop complaining”.

the primary source of this is annoyingly hard to track down for legislation that passed Congress and was signed by the President.

it turns out that’s because it was part of H.R.815 - “Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes.”

if you want to read the actual text of the law, this PDF starting on page 61.

the gist is that it’s illegal to:

Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.

everyone calls this a “ban on TikTok” and it kinda annoys the shit out of me, because as far as I can tell, the website tiktok.com is probably still going to be available in the US.

what this law actually does is require Google and Apple to remove TikTok from their app stores, for US-based users. and makes them subject to a fine of $5000 per user if they don’t comply.

I’m generally in favor of more regulation of tech companies…but this is a really fucking stupid way to do it.

oh golly why would anyone do such a thing

here’s a totally unrelated news article from about a year ago: UnitedHealth uses AI model with 90% error rate to deny care, lawsuit alleges

here in Seattle: the at-large City Council seat (district 8) between Tanya Woo and Alexis Mercedes-Rinck

Woo ran for a different city council seat a year ago, and lost. in the same election, a sitting city councilmember (Teresa Mosqueda) won an election to the King County Council, so she resigned her city council seat. to fill that vacant seat, the other newly-elected city councilmembers appointed Woo, even though she had just lost.

by the rules of the resignation and temporary appointment, the next regular election (now) elects a permanent replacement.

this leads to an unusual scenario - normally, Seattle (and all of Washington state) holds its municipal elections in odd years. the current mayor was elected in 2021, the most recent city council election was 2023. this leads predictably to much lower turnout for the municipal elections, which leads in turn to conservative business interests having an easier time buying the local elections.

Woo is aligned with the “business-friendly”, conservative (by Seattle standards) councilmembers who were elected in 2023. Mercedes-Rinck is significantly more progressive.

based on the primary results and subsequent polls, Woo winning seems pretty unlikely - but the margin of Mercedes-Rinck’s victory will still be interesting, because of what it says about Seattle politics in elections with high turnout. voter turnout in the 2023 elections was a dismal 36%. this year is likely to be in the ~80% range.

it’s also an opportunity for something very funny to happen - Tanya Woo may set a record that will likely never be broken, becoming the first candidate in city history to lose 2 elections in consecutive 2 years, for a seat that normally gets elected every 4 years.