ByKat Hours Updated
Comments 172 Comments

Coffee Break: Albert Croquis Convertible Tote

extremely colorful bag in a trapezoidal shape

This bag isn't for everyone, but it's rare to see something this colorful, so I had to post. Compared to so many bags in neutral or muted colors, seeing something this bold and joyful is a nice change.

You can apparently carry it as the trapezoidal shape pictured (a signature look for Akris!), or a classic shopper, and wear it on your shoulder or carry by hand.

The bag is $1790 at Nordstrom — they also offer a crossbody in the same print.

Sales of note for 12.5

172 Comments

    1. But if we can cut down on regulations, it’ll be cheaper and everyone can afford it!

      1. If we cut down on paying for corn, we could divert that money to vegetable growers. More veggies, less high fructose corn syrup.

    2. May I ask that when people share a link, they share a gift link? I can’t be the only one who doesn’t subscribe to all publications.

      2. Your public library probably has a subscription. You can use your library card to access it.

  2. In my dream life everything in my wardrobe is from Akris, including this bag.

  3. Is it possible that the next 4 years won’t be that bad? I am trying to tell myself this since I am terrified. My hope is he has slim majorities in Congress and that he isn’t able to pass anything abhorrent that requires Congressional approval.

    I’m most scared about the executive orders or things that don’t have to pass the House. Things like gutting every government agency and replacing every functionary with MAGA stooges, blowing up our foreign policy and enraging Iran and North Korea, abandoning Ukraine and Taiwan (and NATO allies). Be bought by Russia and Saudi Arabia.

    Things I’m hoping he won’t be able to do: actually impose tariffs, overturn Obamacare, national abortion ban, limits on birth control, raise the age limit for Medicare, get rid of federal income tax, militarize the border, etc etc.

    My question for those of you who are knowledgable about this: what can he actually do? What requires congressional approval and what doesn’t? What are you most scared of? Will we come out unscathed?

    1. I do not think the first term was as bad as my most liberal friends were projecting on the day after the election, and I do not think this term will be as bad as people here are catastrophizing, either.

      That is not to say it will be great. But the frothing about the destruction of the union is less credible when it’s happening for the second time. Boys who cried wolf, etc.

        1. And you presumably watched the following four years, when America continued to function and the union was not destroyed.

          2. It wasn’t for lack of trying on the part of Trump and his sycophants. Pretty soon they’ll be back.

          3. And they will likely have the same level of effectiveness. That is my entire point.

          4. I thought there was a whole plan to ensure that it goes very differently this time by replacing “disloyal” people with people who won’t get in the way.

          5. His lack of success on January 6 came down to Mike Pence having a spine. You really think it’s good to have the future of free and fair elections depend on what man? Especially when that man is JD Vance? He was chosen as running mate because he was explicit that he would do what Pence refused to do.

          7. Yes. But those same people and maybe more are even more emboldened now. Also, the ability to put even more justices on the SCOTUS is terrifying.

          9. No, January 6 happened when Trump was voted OUT of office, so during next four years, during the Biden (not Trump) administration, of course America continued to function and the union was not destroyed was the past four years during the Biden administration.

        2. The thing I’m taking solace in is that Trump is self-interested and egotistic above all else. He tried to stage a coup because he couldn’t accept defeat. He ran again to hold onto power and stay out of prison. But in 2028 he’ll be 82, prison won’t be on the table and he can retire without losing so I don’t think it will be hard for him to walk away. And he’s not going to stage a coup to help JD Vance. Trump doesn’t give two sh*ts if Vance wins or loses. Trump fundamentally only cares about Trump, which makes the movement much less likely to survive his retirement or death.

          1. I agree with all of this. I also think that even with sycophants in appointed positions, the USG is a giant aircraft carrier to try to turn. Cutting the federal workforce by half is not actually practical, and Trump and Musk both know it. Trump is 70% bluster and plays to the cameras. I don’t think he has the attention span or desire to make a lot of major policy change happen, especially the type that is unsexy. I also still trust that congress — at least the Senate — will blunt the worst of his impulses.

      2. Yeah I freaked out basically from the day of the 2016 election until Biden was sworn in. Did me being anxious and stressed all the time do anything for anyone? No. I’ve decided to take whatever steps I can to help people in real life, but otherwise not catastrophize or give mental energy to wondering “what if.”

      3. I thought this time the SCOTUS ruling on presidential immunity laid out the red carpet.

        1. THIS is the 5-alarm fire. There’s no stopping Trump now. Except immunity may not extend to henchmen tasked with carrying out unlawful orders. Perhaps that is a saving grace. As I remarked pre-election, the choice was between President Harris or King Trump. I guess the electorate chose King Trump. God help us.

    2. As a general rule of thumb, you should always believe the dictator when he says what he plans to do. He has a lot of useful idiots supporting him and people working to enact his policies. A lot of them will be insidious and go unnoticed by most of the public– like regulatory changes or gutting staff at specific agencies. Others will be dramatic and public. I do think it’s going to be bad. Worse, I don’t think Dems will get it together to fight back against his third term.

      1. Agh that is my worst nightmare. If he actually does what he says he’ll do, I want to hyperventilate.

      2. Do dictators normally wait until their second term to cement power? This is catastrophizing and hysterical.

        1. Is it? It doesn’t seem that way to my family who fled an authoritarian regime at great personal cost.

          1. I have close friends whose parents left communist countries after the fall of the Soviet Union at extreme personal cost. They fought to come here legally. They too voted for Trump.

          2. Cool, they should go home and live under Putin then. After all, he’s teaching Trump all there is to know about cementing power as a strongman. He’s also playing Trump like a fiddle.

      3. The constitution explicitly bars a third term and he will be 82 at the time of the next election. The suggestion of a “third term” is so wildly out of nowhere and so wildly based on nothing that it undermines the rest of your comment.

        2. Please remember we had this conversation today four years from now. God, I hope I’m wrong and you’re right.

          1. One of us will be right. One of us will be wrong. One of us will experience anxiety over this, and one of us won’t. Both of us are powerless to do anything to change the outcome.

            I’d rather be wrong and spend the next four years not fretting over something I cannot control than be right and have spent four years fearing something I could not control.

          2. Was this a thread about anxiety levels? I thought it was asking for opinions on what’s going to happen.

          3. Yep. And my opinion is that it’s stupid to think him pursuing a third term is an option and is probably a manifestation of unchecked anxiety.

    3. it won’t just be the next 4 years. even if the 2028 election is fair and free (doubtful), he’s going to appoint even more judges, and is sure to replace Alito and Thomas with people in their 30s.

      also, the republicans have a majority in the house and senate. i think the only things they can’t do are things for which congress needs a supermajority.

      1. The majority in the house (especially) and senate both rely on non-MAGA Republicans from purple and blue states who are not going to go along with every crazy thing Trump proposes. This happened in his first term too.

        1. I think the vast majority of those people have left the building. We’re basically hoping for acts of extraordinary individual strength like that Nebraska guy who wouldn’t agree to change the state to winner takes all.

          I’m kind of curious whether the smart Democrat politicians will decide their time is better spent elsewhere than in the House or Senate. I think that’s when we’ll know whether resistance is futile.

          1. Huh? I don’t understand the analogy. First of all, impeachment in the senate requires much more than a simple majority, and Democrats never came close to having 67 votes. But just because someone wouldn’t vote to convict him doesn’t mean they’re going to sign off on every crazy piece of legislation he proposes. It’s two totally separate things.

    4. I pretty much agree with everything you’ve said. I think domestically it may not be as bad as feared, especially for those of us who are upper middle class. I don’t think he will do most of the things he’s proposed. He has a very slim house majority and a fairly slim senate majority and isn’t going to have the votes for anything truly awful. I do think he may cut some social programs like Medicaid and cut taxes for rich people, but these things are relatively easy for the next admin to undo. The abandonment of Ukraine, Taiwan, NATO allies, and the abandonment of climate change mitigation will be the worst and longest lasting effects, imo. I honestly don’t believe Ukraine will be on the map in a few years unless Europe steps up in a big way, which is just gutting. Also giving such a huge platform to antivaxxers who are going to destroy public trust in vaccines is going to do a lot of damage to the country and will be hard to undo (I’m not even talking about RFK who probably won’t get Senate-confirmed… even his VP says he’s been “redpilled” about vaccines, which is truly scary). Personally that worries me a lot more than tariffs, repealing Obamacare, national abortion ban, etc. none of which he’s going to actually do.

      1. Your privilege is showing. . . if people aren’t getting access to Medicaid they wouldn’t otherwise have, it means they are not getting healthcare or skilled nursing services during this 4 year period. That means people are dying.

        1. Yes, some people will die. It’s not good. But it’s not as bad destroying our NATO alliances and accelerating climate change, which threaten a global population of 8 billion.

      2. i heard yesterday that they tried to repeal Obamacare 7x during the first administration and only John McCain saved it.

        2. This sounds right, they basically continuously were tweaking either formally via introduced legislation or announcing via media/unofficial channels variations on ACA repeal that basically lead for ongoing waves of repeal that lasted from the day after Election Day 2016 to McCain’s infamous thumbs down vote. Say what you will about some of his choices (cough Palin cough) but I will always respect him for that.

          Source: My job from 2016-2017 was doing the fiscal impact analysis on an ACA repeal for the state I was living in. A huge part of my waking hours were spent looking through legislation and possible legislation and trying to figure out what it would look like. This is also my reminder that there are tons of people working at the state level to try and hold things together.

    5. One concept I keep coming back to: Is there currently a border wall? Informative on how likely Trump is to do the (awful) things he says he will do.

      1. Thank you for this. I will say a border wall now sounds so quaint and wonderful compared to all of what he is currently proposing.

      2. That’s what I never understood about his nonsense. There has been a wall/very tall fence along parts of the southern border for a long time, pre-Trump.

    6. I’m sorry but this talk about a national abortion ban is so crazy. I can’t stand Trump and enthusiastically voted for Kamala, but Trump has never expressed that a national abortion ban is something he wants and in fact has said he would veto one if passed, and Dobbs, which was decided by an ultraconservative court, explicitly states that the issue is returned to the states, which has long been the right wing position on abortion. The red state bans are very concerning and yes, women are losing their lives, even women who had wanted pregnancies with incomplete miscarriages. That’s where our attention should be as far as reproductive rights go, and recent elections have shown that pro-choice ballot initiatives can pass even in otherwise red states (way to go Missouri!) We need more of that and more advocacy on behalf of red state women, especially poor ones who can’t easily travel out of state. But this fearmongering here about how wealthy white women in California are not going to be able to get abortions next year makes Democrats seem completely paranoid and out of touch.

      1. +1. Some of the fearmongering on the left is “that’s not how any of this works” right now.

      2. Not a popular position here: I am very pro life. Before you @ me on this, please keep reading.

        I think the response to the bans in red states demonstrates that the general public, even in pro-life states, people are very squeamish about the levels of restrictions in place.

        I think there is a lot of work to be done with good-faith members of the pro-choice community, such as “please propose better language regarding ectopic pregnancies, miscarriage care, babies conceived via SA, etc.”

        There is far more common ground there than people want to believe.

        1. Yeah, getting some doctors in the room to spell out the issues with the current carve outs would be helpful. The laws were pretty crudely drafted, maybe because some of them are pre Roe legacy laws and we have much better maternal care now.

          1. This is definitely an issue people in my very pro life, very religious circles are asking questions about and I think would be up for changes on, if they were convinced that the laws are genuinely vague/leading to problems even for pro life doctors(as opposed to, health systems are ignoring women/generally dismissive/sending them home because of insurance issues or overcrowding or what have you & then blaming the poor outcome on anti abortion laws)

      3. Project 2025 has a proposed ban on one of the two medications used in at home procedures. I dearly hope that is a third rail the current legislators won’t want to touch.

      4. I disagree. He is so wishy-washy, do whatever seems ok in the moment, please whoever I spoke to last, that if Congress passed a nationwide abortion ban and sent it to the White House, he would sign it into law. He is not a profile in courage by any means, and doesn’t give two hoots about whether women live or die.

        1. Trump is obviously not a profile in courage, but the votes are not there in Congress with the narrow majorities, and the Supreme Court, even in its current extremely conservative form, has never expressed support for anything other than returning the issue to the states.

    7. I could end up being entirely wrong here as I and of my coworkers have been panicked for the last few days as we are at a federal agency in Elon’s cross hairs. But we just learned this afternoon of the four or five names being floated as chair of this agency and let me tell you – none are bad at all. Three of them have been here as leadership before and two in administrations that pre dated Trump. While we all thought we’d get Maralogo stooges and we still might, it appears that there are Republicans are willing to overlook who the president is because it gives them the resume line they’ve always wanted. For today I’m taking this as a potential win.

      2. I actually concur as a fellow longtime fed who has served under numerous admins. My agency was threatened with all manner of things under the last Trump presidency and it honestly wasn’t that bad. Dare I even say that we improved? My experience was better with Trump politicals than Biden politicals. Trump’s people brought in actual SMEs.

        1. Agree. I’m a long time Fed, at the end of my career and so the appointees we had under Trump were some of the best. I started under Reagan, so have a lot to compare them to.

      4. It’s DC. Never doubt how much people are willing to overlook to get that coveted resume line as Chair of X or Secretary of Y. And FWIW amongst white males that I know that are this type, they are very willing to let you know how eager they are about JD Vance and Elon – like Trump is just president but those two are visionary blah blah. I definitely don’t agree but my point is there are definitely chairs of law firms, chief legal officers or CEOs of places that are thinking this, so they WOULD take up a chair of agency position that no one else wants even if it is for Trump. From a country standpoint, that is a far better than than having a government run solely by Jared and Ivanka’s besties.

    8. No one knows of course but I do think he will do some kind of high profile deportation of migrants and he’ll do that in like January. The same way he did a Muslim ban in January last time. It’s red meat for the base. Not suggesting it’ll be anything huge or expansive but something that people can watch on tv and be like our guy is getting rid of them illegals on day one. The Muslim ban last time didn’t hold as it went through the courts, but he got the immediate air time he wanted showing his base who is boss.

      I think it will be much harder to tear down Obamacare than they think.

    10. It’s certainly possible, probably even likely, that he won’t be able to do all the stuff he says he wants to do. Awful stuff, yes, but unfortunately we’ll have to wait and see what kind of nonsense happens this time around.

  5. Hi, reposting here because I put it on the other afternoon post (oops!) Thanks for any thoughts:

    I’ll be leaving my job for a new role soon. Outside providing my teams with a brain dump of everything coming up in the next annual cycle and all of the little pieces of client knowledge I have retained over the past decade, what else can I do to be helpful to my teams after I depart? Anything you’ve received that has helped you during times of transition?

    1. Confirm how your company wants you to handle, but communicating to your clients that you’re leaving and who they should reach out to instead – with that person on copy – will help everyone. Set client expectations and make sure they get to the right place once you’re gone.

  6. i was always taught that “the company you keep is a reflection of you” and that we should want leaders we admire and respect – is that not something people think about when voting? while I voted for Kamala, and I definitely don’t agree with all of her policies. Trump stands for MAGA and believes in MAGA, and while I know people who vote for him like to say they aren’t MAGA people, I don’t understand how that works.
    (and yes I realize that IRL thinking of all Trump voters like this will never help the dems win another election).

      1. yea but i’m talking about some of the posters from this morning who say that they dont like him, but like his policies

        1. Right, his “policies,” like his lily-white skin (other than bronzer on the face) and his penis. We are and always have been a white supremacist, racist and sexist country. It’s ugly.

      2. I think humans, as a whole, are not logical beings. We fall on some part of a bell curve. And the mass of that bell curve is short sighted and perhaps inclined towards authoritarian rule, even if the individual is not.

        It is what it is.

        1. I agree. Humans are generally short sighted and will go for what will make their lives easier in the short term and much much harder long run.

          1. oh I 100% agree with this, i just find it somewhat laughable to be like I don’t like MAGA, but I voted for Trump…

    2. Because you have tons of options for who’s company you keep, and essentially only two for who you vote for president for?

      3. Right, but why was this choice so difficult and close? It was between an atrocious felon and a competent candidate. Hard to attribute it to differences in policies.

    3. It has not been hard to not have close relationships with Trump supporters. I live in a red state so I certainly couldn’t function if I refused to interact or do business with them, and I can have short, civil conversations with people that I disagree with, but I’m completely comfortable limiting my close family and friend circle to people who don’t to elect a racist, sexist wannabe dictator.

      1. i meant more in terms of people who voted for him who say they don’t like MAGA/don’t consider themselves MAGA. i guess i also have trouble with all of these people who claim to believe in “Christian values” but i find a lot of things Trump and MAGA represent to be inconsistent with that

        1. I think there’s a double standard here. Plenty of people voting for Harris urged people to view voting like public transportation and vote for her because her policies were more closely aligned with theirs even if they didn’t endorse her whole platform.

          I understand he’s an awful person but I do think it’s a little ridiculous to say anyone who voted for him endorses everything he says or stands for when no one would say the same about Harris voters.

          1. It’s the level of awful. I voted against Mitt Romney and I would vote for him over Trump. I hated George W Bush and think the war in Iraq is one of the worst mistakes America has ever made and I would vote for him over Trump. Do you see how that works?

        2. They don’t want to be viewed as racist and sexist or adhering to white supremacy, but they are and they do.

    4. My comment is in moderation on the other thread.

      I think fixating on if your kids can look up to the president foraying too much into respectability politics. I also find plenty of fault in Kamala’s past that are simply ruled out as sexist should you point it out.

      Trump often gets painted as a reckless madman, but I don’t think that’s fair or accurate.

      I do find him distasteful but that is not reason enough for me to vote for a party that doesn’t align with my needs and interests.

      1. And to the point above there are two options. Just because you find Kamala more palatable is not reason enough for me to vote for her.

          1. Dems. Elitist morality police. Keep doing what you’re doing. It’s working really well for you.

          2. I don’t think Democrats are really doing worse electorally than Republicans? The incumbent party has lost in pretty much every election after 2012 (including midterms), so it’s basically just been swapping positions back and forth. Don’t really get this “Dems are getting crushed narrative,” as gutting as this election is.

          3. Biden was actually the first president in a long time to not get killed in the midterms.

      2. Ah you mean sleeping her way to the top. IF that’s true — if she slept her way all to the Vice Presidency, she’s got to be extraordinarily good at it. Shouldn’t we applaud it when skill, preparation, and opportunity intersect?

        1. I see her accomplishments but I do also see her cushy assignments courtesy of Willie Brown. It’s simply fact. He assigned her to the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the California Medical Assistance Commission. These were considered well-paying roles with limited responsibilities. It gave her a significant boost in both income and political connections.

          I don’t think she slept her way to the top but I think her romantic relationships certainly helped establish herself.

          So no, I don’t think she slept her way to the top but this board is very selective with how they direct their own distaste.

          If someone asked about the morality and ethics of this for themselves or a friend here, this board would contort themselves into a fit.

          1. ok so either someone whose romantic relationships helped them get their way to the top or a man who has sexually assaulted women, a man who regularly targets the most vulnerable for his own gain, and still refused to concede he lost the 2020 election. How many tax dollars did Trump waste by not conceding the election?

          2. + someone who stole classified documents and probably sold them to our antagonists, and someone who probably sold pardons for $2 million a pop. It’s difficult to describe the magnitued of incompetent and un-American that Trump is.

        2. This struck me as not a great loook. “San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris’ office violated defendants’ rights by hiding damaging information about a police drug lab technician and was indifferent to demands that it account for its failings, a judge declared Thursday.” https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-rips-Harris-office-for-hiding-problems-3263797.php

          https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/how-a-crime-lab-scandal-shook-kamala-harris-s-district-attorney-office/ar-BB1qBRXQ

          “In an email in 2009 to Madden’s supervisor, Assistant District Attorney Sharon Woo under Harris called Madden “undependable” and said she had been perpetually calling in sick on days Madden was needed to testify, court documents show. Just four days later, in November of that year, a criminologist noticed that envelopes in Madden’s work area intended to house drug samples were “in disarray,” leading to the criminologist confronting Madden and informing her supervisor of a “security breach,” the court documents say. Harris has since said that she was not informed of the brewing lab problem by her aides or police.

          The matter, however, escalated upon Madden’s sister in December 2009 calling authorities to inform them that she found a cocaine vial in Madden’s apartment. Madden left the lab and admitted “she had taken some cocaine salt from the lab for personal use,” according to a sentencing memo.

          It wasn’t until March 2020 that police in San Francisco announced the then-allegations against Madden and shut down all drug testing in the lab, the San Francisco Chronicle reported at the time. Then-San Francisco Police Chief George Gascon, now Los Angeles district attorney, said the matter was “disappointing,” while Harris said her office would “regroup and reevaluate” police drug testing.

          But for three months after Woo’s email, the district attorney’s office continued to prosecute crime lab testing-linked cases. Defense attorneys were also not informed that evidence coming from the lab could be tainted or that Woo had raised concerns just recently over whether Madden, a witness for prosecutors, was credible.

          Harris, then 45, was at the time running to be the next attorney general in California. The Madden situation sparked questions on the campaign trail about what the prosecutor knew and when — with public defender Jeff Adachi, an old friend of Harris, publicly lambasting Harris as always being “out of town or not available” to discuss the matter.

          “We need a district attorney who will give this the attention it deserves,” Adachi said in April 2010.

          Then, in May 2010, as drug defendants requested their cases be dismissed over alleged prosecutorial misconduct, a judge issued a scathing ruling that concluded Harris “failed to disclose information” about Madden “that clearly should have been disclosed” under the U.S. Constitution to defense attorneys, according to the ruling by Anne-Christine Massullo of the San Francisco County Superior Court.

          Harris’s office had a “duty to implement some type of procedure to secure and produce information relevant to Madden’s criminal history,” the judge said at the time.

          Harris’s office tried to fight Massullo’s ruling, accusing the judge of bias due to her husband being a defense attorney, the Associated Press reported in August 2010.

          A Monterey County Superior Court judge, however, ruled that Massullo had no conflict of interest. In the aftermath, Harris’s office reportedly had to dismiss close to 1,500 drug cases. Many cases were those in which sentences were served or convictions were already obtained.”

          1. oh got it you’re for defendant’s rights … so you voted for Trump

            i repeat: this not our lesson to learn.

          3. Also, wtf is wrong with being for defendants’ rights?
            Especially in cases where evidence was mishandled. Wow.

            Again, did not vote for Trump. Not a Trump supporter.

          4. This is a discussion about why people voted for Trump and you cited the article above without noting that you voted for Kamala. It’s fine to be for defendants rights but Trump is not the guy to fix things. He is a racist rapist strongman who will end freedom in America.

            And if you didn’t vote for Kamala, you DID vote for Trump.

          5. i responded to the comments about why not voting for Harris might be for reasons other than sexism. This is the reason I did not vote for her. also I live in a deep blue state. my presidential vote does not matter.

        3. Also this line of thinking should be similarly applied to trump if that’s the case.

        4. I’m starting to wonder why that is even a point of criticism, when you need luck and a boost of good personal relationships to get to this level. Doing excellent work clearly is not sufficient, you need that network. I’ve never heard of a male politician being accused of golfing their way to the top, or poker playing their way to the top. Sleeping your way to the top really seems to me similar to the label nepo baby, as in, you were in the right place at the right time with the right people who helped you get ahead.
          Of course, if women’s sexuality is viewed as a fundamentally shameful thing, then it would be consistent.

      3. what would be a more accurate depiction of Trump? that he is a rapist? unwilling to admit he lost the 2020 election? we do all realize that if he’d lost there would have been no concession speech, but lots of law suits, claims of unfairness and rigged elections, which doesn’t seem very presidential to me.

        1. This. The double standard is crazy. Republicans don’t even concede elections anymore and we’ve somehow accepted that this is normal and fine, but we hold Democratic candidates to the standard of perfection. It’s madness.

          1. +1. The double standard is brutal and unwinnable. I long for the day when a mediocre black woman is allowed to succeed.

    5. I think many people may just be remembering him from The Apprentice. I don’t think the majority of his supporters are heavy news or facts people.

    6. People are answering and you just hate the answers. Keep not listening. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    7. “A vote isn’t a Valentine. It’s a chess move for the kind of future that you want.”

      1. +1 – and how many times did we hear that it didn’t matter if Hillary was unlikeable. If you’re going to accuse people of hypocrisy be consistent.

    8. I live in Scandinavia, in a social democratic style country with less social and financial differences, representative voting, muliti-party system, a no corruption high trust society. No civil servants are replaced in elections, just the politicians.

      I don’t particularly care about the leader. I have never voted for a person, always a set of policies. I have never voted on the party leader’s morals or health.

      So as an outsider’s perspective – not caring about one person blustering and making noise isn’t as weird as it might be on the inside. I would assume the system itself would work.

      1. Has anyone with Trump’s baggage ever ascended to this level of leadership in your country?

        Also, typically, Americans have wanted a POTUS who is “presidential” and “honorable” and insert whatever adjective to generally mean of good character. The best representation of the country. That’s all out the window now though.

        1. That’s certainly one tradition, but USA has also had some real dirtbag presidents before.

        2. No. A single person doesn’t have that level of influence, and leaders with significant personal wealth are not popular.

    9. The line of “I don’t like HIM but I like his policies” is to me a face-saving lie. It may not be conscious lie per se but most people in the MAGA camp are aware that their views are frowned on (to say the least) by Dems/liberals/leftists etc. They know enough to skate around their actual feelings about DT.
      There was a funny TT account where a young lady did lip sync of DTs speeches/meme moments under the theme of “he’s really a teen girl” and it dawned on me: he’s *entertaining*. People were roaring with laughter in the background of these recorded clips, and clapping/cheering. He’s like that drunkle that’s actually a terrible, frightening and dangerous person 90% of the time but is *so funny* after 3 drinks on Christmas and is a “cut-up” at the BBQ. He’s a performer and amusing to many, who absolutely don’t take him seriously but he’s passes the “do I want to have a beer with him” test for many.

      I personally find him sour, unlikable, mean, petty, selfish, deeply unpleasant, incompetent, and a “short-fingered vulgarian” but then again…I’m the dreaded coastal elite so what do I know?

  7. In another example of crowd sourcing my life … has the election changed the cost-benefit analysis of divorce? Vance wants to eliminate no-fault divorce, but on the other hand I could imagine policies that make life much more difficult for a single mother than it already is.

    “Hypothetically” let’s say it’s the kind of relationship that would be called emotional abuse on the internet, but in real life many people would find perfectly normal.

    1. How exactly is he going to do that without a constitutional amendment? I don’t think the constitution currently gives the federal government the power to regulate marriage.

      1. It absolutely does not, and marriage is clearly historically a states’ rights issue under conservative thinking/argumentation/legal precedent.

    2. So many hugs to you. I’m not generally a “pack up and move to a blue state” person, but I think this may be one instance where it would materially benefit your life, if you could get your spouse to agree. This is likely to be mostly a state policy decision, even if red states are taking their cues from the Trump/Vance administration.

    3. If you are unhappy in your marriage, you can leave without tying that decision to some grander thing or cause. You being unhappy is enough of a reason.

    4. Vance may want to eliminate no-fault divorce, but I can’t imagine Trump does. It certainly would have made his divorces easier (NY was very late in implementing no fault divorce).

      1. His wives all had evidence of his infidelity, they didn’t need no fault divorce.

  8. I fell in love with this black sequined midi skirt to wear to my office Xmas party, but I need a top. I was thinking a black t-shirt, but like…a fancy one? Fitted, maybe with some sheen, so it doesn’t look like a regular cotton t-shirt? Has anyone seen any good possibilities lately?

      1. Oh I vote for the puff sleeve one, that seems like it would go well with the skirt you describe.

  9. I have to go to a wedding this weekend by myself (recently divorced) and I only know the bride and her mom. I am dreading this because I picture myself standing at the cocktail hour by myself with no one to talk to! And just sitting at the table during the reception because I can’t dance by myself. I am an extrovert and still dreading this! Anyone been through this? Tips?

    1. I assume if you don’t know anyone else your table is likely a mix of acquaintances in similar shoes so try to engage your seatmates? And lean into awkwardness! I’m an introvert, and I just stand around with a cocktail in my hand without talking to people all the time, and I leave early if necessary. You don’t have to stay for the whole reception.

    2. I introduce myself often and it’s really totally fine! My one tip is that while a drink or two is fine, don’t get very drunk–it was not so fun to have a very drunk stranger stand too close to me and monologue at a party recently.

    3. Not divorced, but I’ve been to plenty of weddings by myself. My tip is that elderly attendees love to have someone to talk to! And are generally pretty enjoyable conversation partners, since they have more perspective than attendees who are our own age.

    4. Just join a group at the cocktail hour! Everyone is mingling with new people, even if you were there with a partner presumably you and your partner wouldn’t talk only to each other. Tons of easy conversation starters at a wedding.

      As for the reception, IDK about your circle but by NO means is everyone dancing at the reception. Maybe 50% if the couple is lucky. If your table empties out with dancers, go ahead and move over to a table that has some people lingering at it! And not all the dancing will be couples – at all the weddings I’ve been to, there is a circle of ladies dancing whose husbands are not into it. Join in!

    5. There’s a good chance that any dancing will be more “all dance” scrum on the dance floor rather than couples. I went to a wedding solo recently and danced for hours. I did not expect to have much fun and had a great time.

    6. I think weddings are pretty easy places to strike up conversations with strangers, since there is the obvious “How do you know the couple” to start with, and that always provides an opening for the next subject of discussion. And in the case of weddings, the whole point is to get to know the people who care about the couple, so people tend to be very open to meeting one another. I’d use it as practice because you will likely want to be able to socialize alone in tougher situations going forward.

    8. I went to a wedding when I was single and ended up being the only person sitting at the 10 person table when they did a couples dance. It was pretty awful for me as I was newly single and I had way too much Prosecco. If possible, plan to leave early and meet up with friends after, assuming you’re not being rude etc. Either way, you’ll be fine! I survived.

  11. This is a dumb question, but it’s been 15+ years since I’ve applied to a job. If the instructions say to email a resume and cover letter, do you attach the cover letter or put it in the body of the email? I would guess attach as a PDF? In a separate file as the resume or the same file?

    2. Please make it two files, both PDF format, and label the files with your name. So many people just name theirs cover letter.pdf which is annoying.

    3. I’d attach both as two separate PDFs, titled “FirstName LastName Cover Letter” and “FirstName LastName Resume,” and then in the body of the email something short like, “Good afternoon! I am applying for the recently posted Director of XYZ position, and have attached my resume and cover letter for your information and review. I welcome the opportunity to speak with the team about the role. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Anonymous”

  12. In more fun gossipy news – what is the likelihood that Trump is still married to Melania when he takes the white house versus, say, Laura Loomer?

    1. Oh I highly doubt they’ll officially divorce, but it’s clear that they haven’t had an intimate relationship in years. They don’t even live in the same city and I doubt she’ll fully move into the white house.

      2. Agree. And also agree with the poster above that it’s purely a business relationship at this point.

  13. I need to vent for a minute so I don’t respond to my coworkers and get myself fired.

    I’m in house counsel. When you run to me screaming and crying because you caused a HIPAA breach, and you interrupt my day to deal with your error, and I now have to work late to finish my deliverables, I am happy to help you because this is important. But when you ask me for “next steps???” and I tell you to {do XYZ}, the response to me should not then be “I think you should {do XYZ} yourself.” I could scream.

    2. Ha-ha, clients! You mean she doesn’t get to just report it to you and then do the equivalent of staff it out to you to handle and fix for her? It’s a “legal thing,” so why aren’t you doing the “legal thing”? Sympathies.

Comments are closed.