[ttyprintk]

Great interview. Andreessen was a Democrat who, one day, realized that he could get more by trading abortion, clean energy and trans rights for a seat at the Republican table. He didn’t like the terms for the equivalent chair among Democrats.

We’re beginning to see analyses talking about a reordering of social issues since the 2008 near-collapse. Andreessen cherry-picks when the cure is worse than the disease, so 2008 doesn’t come up in this at all.

One big inversion is the swamp. The DOGE is an unelected attendant government, bulging out of the frontier between executive and legislative branches. It could fail and need to be bailed out. It could succeed and deliver solutions to the mostly-social issues Andreessen feels personally attack him.

As long as I’ve been a Republican it’s mythological but well-supported that Democrats govern better, and the interviewer in this piece knows why. Andreessen is well-rehearsed in his faction’s talking points, much better than, say, JD Vance.

What I see is Andreessen basking in the afterglow of Trump doing a 180 on crypto. Not even the first issue 180. But he has a point: it’s too fashionably biased to choose a president based on principles.