Lots of family health issues, and now John Lewis announces that he has stage IV pancreatic cancer.
My recollection was that one of my first votes ever was for John Lewis. Certainly I voted for him in 1986, I just don't know if I voted for him in '84. There are many overuses of the word "hero," but Lewis undoubtedly qualifies. Someone mentioned that Lewis marched with Martin Luther King. More often than not, though, King marched with Lewis. He was at the cutting edge of SNCC, but also was able to bridge the divide with SCLC in ways that other members of SNCC never could.
I would hope that the advances in treatment give him a chance, but the reality is all of us face that day when there are no more days left. And we face many, many more days when people we admire face that last day. That day will come for Lewis and so many other eventually.
There is a line at the American cemetery in Normandy: Think not only on their passing; remember the glory of their spirit.
Seems apt.
Monday, December 30, 2019
Sunday, December 29, 2019
What Impeachment Is All About
Donald Trump will not be removed from office via the impeachment office, because the GOP has become a cult of personality.
However, that's not really the point of impeachment. This is. People who aren't political junkies aren't following this very closely. They don't know who Lev Parnas or Fiona Hill are. But it's beginning to sink in that Trump was impeached, even if they aren't clear on what impeachment actually is. They know he's volatile and unpredictable. (And impeachment and the ego wound it provokes will only make him more erratic.)
The point has always been to make Trump sink below 40% approval ratings. He can't win at those levels. That's why having his tax returns presumably being released in June is better than having them released now. Yes, the tax returns could provoke additional impeachment charges, but that won't matter. You aren't getting 67 votes in the Senate. Period.
You keep reinforcing how corrupt this MF is until people vote for an old shoe just to make the chaos go away.
However, that's not really the point of impeachment. This is. People who aren't political junkies aren't following this very closely. They don't know who Lev Parnas or Fiona Hill are. But it's beginning to sink in that Trump was impeached, even if they aren't clear on what impeachment actually is. They know he's volatile and unpredictable. (And impeachment and the ego wound it provokes will only make him more erratic.)
The point has always been to make Trump sink below 40% approval ratings. He can't win at those levels. That's why having his tax returns presumably being released in June is better than having them released now. Yes, the tax returns could provoke additional impeachment charges, but that won't matter. You aren't getting 67 votes in the Senate. Period.
You keep reinforcing how corrupt this MF is until people vote for an old shoe just to make the chaos go away.
Saturday, December 28, 2019
Thursday, December 26, 2019
The Two Most Important Questions Of The Next Decade
The first question is obviously: how we will address climate change. If we don't get a reasonable handle on that, we are screwed no matter what.
The second question is: what is the future of the Republican party. The question of Trumpistan is not whether Trump wants to a dictator. He does. The question is whether the GOP is the Party of Trump because of Trump or because that's where they are headed institutionally. Put another way, is Trump the herald of the GOP's descent into authoritarianism or have they simply slipped into authoritarian impulses because of Trump? It certainly seems like a large faction of the GOP has decided that un-democratic practices are OK, because the Democrats are so awful. Steeped in a simmering broth of Fox News bile, the threat that Democrats pose to America - presumably by making health care affordable, the climate livable and inequality less problematic - warrants thwarting democratic practices.
America has two competing impulses here, historically. On the one hand, Americans distrust the power of the state, and any GOP effort to make the state powerful will butt up against America's libertarian streak. On the other, America has long used coercive methods against populations of color, to keep them from democratic autonomy.
America can't function with a GOP that is basically United Russia, servile before the cult of whomever their Dear Leader is at any given moment. We have been lucky that Trump is such an incompetent clown. If Tom Cotton was trying to pull roughly the same thing, the news media would be easily manipulated into "both sides" nonsense like "Sure, Cotton wants to put gays in cages, but Democrats want them to use your son's bathroom."
I still think Trump loses in 2020. I wouldn't mind a mild recession to cement that, frankly, but even getting rid of Trump will not resolve the GOP's descent into authoritarianism. They have be crushed at the polls over several election cycles, and I just don't see that happening.
The second question is: what is the future of the Republican party. The question of Trumpistan is not whether Trump wants to a dictator. He does. The question is whether the GOP is the Party of Trump because of Trump or because that's where they are headed institutionally. Put another way, is Trump the herald of the GOP's descent into authoritarianism or have they simply slipped into authoritarian impulses because of Trump? It certainly seems like a large faction of the GOP has decided that un-democratic practices are OK, because the Democrats are so awful. Steeped in a simmering broth of Fox News bile, the threat that Democrats pose to America - presumably by making health care affordable, the climate livable and inequality less problematic - warrants thwarting democratic practices.
America has two competing impulses here, historically. On the one hand, Americans distrust the power of the state, and any GOP effort to make the state powerful will butt up against America's libertarian streak. On the other, America has long used coercive methods against populations of color, to keep them from democratic autonomy.
America can't function with a GOP that is basically United Russia, servile before the cult of whomever their Dear Leader is at any given moment. We have been lucky that Trump is such an incompetent clown. If Tom Cotton was trying to pull roughly the same thing, the news media would be easily manipulated into "both sides" nonsense like "Sure, Cotton wants to put gays in cages, but Democrats want them to use your son's bathroom."
I still think Trump loses in 2020. I wouldn't mind a mild recession to cement that, frankly, but even getting rid of Trump will not resolve the GOP's descent into authoritarianism. They have be crushed at the polls over several election cycles, and I just don't see that happening.
Wednesday, December 25, 2019
Tuesday, December 24, 2019
Kentucky...
Matt Bevin is a uniquely awful person. So awful, in fact, that even in deep red Kentucky, voters tossed him out in favor of Andy Beshear, a Democrat and son of a popular former governor. It was still a very close election. Bevin has lived up to his awfulness by pardoning a bevy of horrible people, including child rapists.
Every once in a while, a Democrat says or does something regrettable. Whatever that might be immediately becomes the default position of every Democrat until they specifically disavow it. For Republicans, that never seems to be true. Matt Bevin basically has a few dozen Willie Horton (without the racism) events running around now. Frankly, Democrats in Kentucky should be trying to link Bevin to Mitch McConnell with every breath. Keeping linking Bevin with Moscow Mitch until next November.
Knock him off, and the people of Kentucky will have done their greatest service to the Republic since they elected not to secede in 1861.
Every once in a while, a Democrat says or does something regrettable. Whatever that might be immediately becomes the default position of every Democrat until they specifically disavow it. For Republicans, that never seems to be true. Matt Bevin basically has a few dozen Willie Horton (without the racism) events running around now. Frankly, Democrats in Kentucky should be trying to link Bevin to Mitch McConnell with every breath. Keeping linking Bevin with Moscow Mitch until next November.
Knock him off, and the people of Kentucky will have done their greatest service to the Republic since they elected not to secede in 1861.
Monday, December 23, 2019
Stupid Is As Stupid Does
I mean....what the living hell...
The fact that over 40% of Americans think THIS GUY should be president is nauseating.
The fact that over 40% of Americans think THIS GUY should be president is nauseating.
Friday, December 20, 2019
It Would Be Nice If This Mattered
Christianity Today calls for Trump to be removed from office. The baffling support of evangelical Christians has defined Trump's presidency and politics. There is nothing Christian about caging children and breaking up families. There is nothing Christian about serial sexual assault. There is nothing Christian about ranting and threatening those you disagree with.
The ultimate conclusion, of course, is that being an evangelical is not a theological position but a cultural one. You become an evangelical because you hate that this country is no longer a homogenous, white, Protestant country. Of course, it never really was, but then again, I don't think Jonah was literally swallowed by a great fish, so...
Anyway, it would be nice if, say, 15% of evangelicals who supported Trump in 2016 stayed home in 2020. I doubt it will happen, though.
The ultimate conclusion, of course, is that being an evangelical is not a theological position but a cultural one. You become an evangelical because you hate that this country is no longer a homogenous, white, Protestant country. Of course, it never really was, but then again, I don't think Jonah was literally swallowed by a great fish, so...
Anyway, it would be nice if, say, 15% of evangelicals who supported Trump in 2016 stayed home in 2020. I doubt it will happen, though.
In A Normal World...
There have been two "deep dive" stories that have come out recently. The first was a brutal expose in the Washington Post about Afghanistan, and how administration and Defense Department officials lied about the war. The second just came out in the Times, about how vulnerable our private data is to private companies. And let's add climate change to the docket, too.
All of these stories - and many more - are buried under the avalanche of outrage and bullshit that is a day in Trumpistan. His constant ability to violate basic norms means that important stories go reported, but unnoticed.
Trump has cost us four years of human progress.
All of these stories - and many more - are buried under the avalanche of outrage and bullshit that is a day in Trumpistan. His constant ability to violate basic norms means that important stories go reported, but unnoticed.
Trump has cost us four years of human progress.
Thursday, December 19, 2019
So, It Happened
Trump was impeached. He will be acquitted in the Senate.
The only remaining questions are
- Will his impeachment humble him or his acquittal empower him?
- Will the Online Left react with anything approaching perspective when he's acquitted, or will they rail against Democrats for...Republicans acquitting him?
- Will there be any repercussions of this - beyond the judgment of history - in November?
- Will the Senate trial be anything more than a pro forma show trial?
- And will that matter?
For that matter, does any of this matter in terms of real world power arrangements? Pelosi's reluctance to impeach was based on knowing these outcomes. She's usually a few steps ahead of her critics in understanding what will happen, so let's see if her reluctance was warranted.
The only remaining questions are
- Will his impeachment humble him or his acquittal empower him?
- Will the Online Left react with anything approaching perspective when he's acquitted, or will they rail against Democrats for...Republicans acquitting him?
- Will there be any repercussions of this - beyond the judgment of history - in November?
- Will the Senate trial be anything more than a pro forma show trial?
- And will that matter?
For that matter, does any of this matter in terms of real world power arrangements? Pelosi's reluctance to impeach was based on knowing these outcomes. She's usually a few steps ahead of her critics in understanding what will happen, so let's see if her reluctance was warranted.
Wednesday, December 18, 2019
Trump's Letter
Martin Longman and Jon Chait read it so you don't have to.
I'm just surprised it wasn't written in crayon.
I'm just surprised it wasn't written in crayon.
Threading The Needle
Matthew Yglesias made a facile version of this argument on Twitter, but he unpacks it here with some interesting data.
Basically, there is an overwhelming bias in the Senate and the Electoral College in favor of small, rural, white states and working class white voters. He runs through the data on this, so if you're interested, go read the link. The conclusion he reaches though is worth looking at.
If we live in a country with a system that disproportionately over-represents WWC (white working class/whites without college) voters, how do we change that system to properly represent the ideal of "one person, one vote." There are some suggestions like DC and Puerto Rico statehood that are reasonably "easy" compared to amending the Constitution. In order to get even those "easy" solutions, you need a Democratic Senate majority.
Senate Democrats currently have 47 seats. They need to win a net of three and the presidency to change that. Susan Collins and Cory Gardner are the most vulnerable Republicans, and Doug Jones is the most vulnerable Democrat. Joni Ernst, Tom Tillis, Martha McSally and possibly Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell are potentially vulnerable. A second Blue Wave MIGHT deliver the Senate, but the point of the argument is that the Senate's natural gerrymander protects Republicans where they otherwise wouldn't be protected.
Yglesias makes a further political argument that deserves more attention.
He harkens back to the 2006-08 political cycle, and how Democrats largely avoided talking about same sex marriage. Obama would later "evolve" on the issue, but he pointedly did not run on marriage equality for one simple reason: it was a losing issue.
The race for the nomination has seen a leftward sprint from many of the candidates. On some issues, there is real potential to poach WWC voters: health care, minimum wage, infrastructure, the Billionaire Tax, maybe even some green energy tied to jobs. But obsessing about pronouns or calling for open borders or eliminating private health insurance is a terrible, terrible political strategy.
As Martin Longman has argued, Democrats don't need to win WWC voters. They win all the other demographics, in some cases by large margins. What they can't afford to do is lose WWC voters by huge margins. You can win Philly, Pittsburgh and their suburbs, but you can't get wiped out in the rural and exurban areas. You can and will lose them, but if you're losing by 75% or 65% matters. Getting to losing by 65% is the goal. In order to do that, you maybe should soft-pedal some of the more "woke" positions on social issues. Julian Castro's open border or Beto O'Rourke's "we're coming for your guns" are simply bad politics. Whether they are good policies or not is irrelevant if you can't implement them.
This is why I do think Biden might actually be the most "electable." He's an old white guy who has huge support from African Americans. He might have mentioned that he's from Scranton once or twice. He would be a mediocre president most likely, but there is a reason why he beats Trump pretty easily. The concerns about whether he can keep it together during the long campaign is legitimate, but demographically and in terms of what he's talking about? He might just be the safest bet.
Basically, there is an overwhelming bias in the Senate and the Electoral College in favor of small, rural, white states and working class white voters. He runs through the data on this, so if you're interested, go read the link. The conclusion he reaches though is worth looking at.
If we live in a country with a system that disproportionately over-represents WWC (white working class/whites without college) voters, how do we change that system to properly represent the ideal of "one person, one vote." There are some suggestions like DC and Puerto Rico statehood that are reasonably "easy" compared to amending the Constitution. In order to get even those "easy" solutions, you need a Democratic Senate majority.
Senate Democrats currently have 47 seats. They need to win a net of three and the presidency to change that. Susan Collins and Cory Gardner are the most vulnerable Republicans, and Doug Jones is the most vulnerable Democrat. Joni Ernst, Tom Tillis, Martha McSally and possibly Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell are potentially vulnerable. A second Blue Wave MIGHT deliver the Senate, but the point of the argument is that the Senate's natural gerrymander protects Republicans where they otherwise wouldn't be protected.
Yglesias makes a further political argument that deserves more attention.
He harkens back to the 2006-08 political cycle, and how Democrats largely avoided talking about same sex marriage. Obama would later "evolve" on the issue, but he pointedly did not run on marriage equality for one simple reason: it was a losing issue.
The race for the nomination has seen a leftward sprint from many of the candidates. On some issues, there is real potential to poach WWC voters: health care, minimum wage, infrastructure, the Billionaire Tax, maybe even some green energy tied to jobs. But obsessing about pronouns or calling for open borders or eliminating private health insurance is a terrible, terrible political strategy.
As Martin Longman has argued, Democrats don't need to win WWC voters. They win all the other demographics, in some cases by large margins. What they can't afford to do is lose WWC voters by huge margins. You can win Philly, Pittsburgh and their suburbs, but you can't get wiped out in the rural and exurban areas. You can and will lose them, but if you're losing by 75% or 65% matters. Getting to losing by 65% is the goal. In order to do that, you maybe should soft-pedal some of the more "woke" positions on social issues. Julian Castro's open border or Beto O'Rourke's "we're coming for your guns" are simply bad politics. Whether they are good policies or not is irrelevant if you can't implement them.
This is why I do think Biden might actually be the most "electable." He's an old white guy who has huge support from African Americans. He might have mentioned that he's from Scranton once or twice. He would be a mediocre president most likely, but there is a reason why he beats Trump pretty easily. The concerns about whether he can keep it together during the long campaign is legitimate, but demographically and in terms of what he's talking about? He might just be the safest bet.
Tuesday, December 17, 2019
Calvinball
The WaPo editors offer a succinct appraisal (in the form of an appeal) of Republican disdain for their constitutional duties regarding the flagrant abuse of power and contempt of Congress that Trump has shown.
He's already in the conversation for the most corrupt president in our history, and that's before we get a really good look at his money laundering and bribe-taking, by looking at his financial records. Multiple members of his campaign staff are in jail, multiple members of his cabinet have resigned under a cloud of scandal.
Let's assume a scenario whereby Joe Biden wins next November. And let's then assume that Republicans keep control of the Senate and then win control of the House in 2022.
They will impeach Biden.
On what charge? Burisma, maybe. Maybe on some colossal nothingburger. Anyone remember Benghazi? Fast and Furious? The Tan Suit?
For the GOP, the Constitution and their responsibilities therein are simply rules to adapt to any situation that allows them to "win."
They are betraying their oaths of office.
He's already in the conversation for the most corrupt president in our history, and that's before we get a really good look at his money laundering and bribe-taking, by looking at his financial records. Multiple members of his campaign staff are in jail, multiple members of his cabinet have resigned under a cloud of scandal.
Let's assume a scenario whereby Joe Biden wins next November. And let's then assume that Republicans keep control of the Senate and then win control of the House in 2022.
They will impeach Biden.
On what charge? Burisma, maybe. Maybe on some colossal nothingburger. Anyone remember Benghazi? Fast and Furious? The Tan Suit?
For the GOP, the Constitution and their responsibilities therein are simply rules to adapt to any situation that allows them to "win."
They are betraying their oaths of office.
Monday, December 16, 2019
Inevitable
All the splenetic, galaxy brains yammering about why Pelosi wouldn't embrace impeachment on their timetable can STFU. In a move that should shock exactly no one with half a brain, Senate Republicans will not remove Donald Trump from office. Does this represent a dereliction of their constitutional duties? Sure. Do they care? No. Will it make a difference in 2020? Probably not.
Impeaching the most corrupt president in our history was necessary, but ultimately, Republicans are going to turn any examination of the factual record into a partisan mudfight and the larger public, made up mostly of morons if the "man on the street" interviews are to be believed, will write the whole thing off.
This was inevitable and sad. And deeply dangerous for constitutional government.
Impeaching the most corrupt president in our history was necessary, but ultimately, Republicans are going to turn any examination of the factual record into a partisan mudfight and the larger public, made up mostly of morons if the "man on the street" interviews are to be believed, will write the whole thing off.
This was inevitable and sad. And deeply dangerous for constitutional government.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)