Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!panix!.POSTED.panix2.panix.com!panix2.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Pearls Before Swine: Uncle Is Not Good With Money
Date: 9 Feb 2025 22:59:17 -0000
Organization: Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <vobc05$jca$1@panix2.panix.com>
References: <vlpb2u$3h575$2@dont-email.me> <nc0dqjdbtvq6qttr523gvg487d9fh232i2@4ax.com> <m0s37fF5fm6U1@mid.individual.net> <9f37e0d5-b1a0-fb50-10d6-cc9d7a22edc6@example.net>
Injection-Info: reader2.panix.com; posting-host="panix2.panix.com:166.84.1.2";
	logging-data="14159"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@panix.com"
Bytes: 1426

On Sun, 9 Feb 2025, Chris Buckley wrote:
>
> The whole reason I entered into this debate was not Trump, but the
> claim that a survey of *historians* would possibly objectively rank
> Trump.  I know historians. My father was a Republican historian and
> for decades I would hear his stories of dwindling Republican presence
> among historians. There weren't enough to get together for meals at
> conferences by the time he retired.

This is likely true and pretty sad, and it's not a sign that historians
have changed so much that the Republican party has changed in that time.
--scott

-- 
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."