One of these weeks, I’m going to make a plan for what I’m going to talk about and then carry it out. Ever since the conventions ended, I’ve been planning to write a state-of-the-race article. But something else always comes up: Trump desecrates Arlington National Cemetery, or Georgia election officials lay the groundwork for another January 6, or something.
This week, an apparent Trump assassination attempt broke too late for me to say anything substantive about it, but the eating-dogs-and-cats thing was just impossible to ignore. So I’ll just have to double up: the state-of-the-race post will come out later this morning, maybe around 11 EDT.
But I also found an interesting slant on the Springfield dogs-and-cats story: The Bug-Eyed and Shameless blog draws a parallel to the Irish Fright of 1688, when tens of thousands of Englishmen became convinced that rogue Irish troops from the British army were marauding through England, destroying everything in their path. Spontaneous militias barricaded bridges and crossroads, waiting for rampaging Irishmen who only existed in their imaginations.
It turns out that disinformation can spread and start a panic even without the internet.
Anyway, I think there’s a lot to be learned from Americans’ propensity to believe bizarre and scary things about non-White immigrants. I’ll collect some in “Lessons from the Haitian Fright”. I’ll try to get it out soon. The state-of-the-race article will follow, and then the weekly summary, which will review the Harris-Trump debate, what little we know about the shots fired in Trump’s vicinity, the Laura Loomer thing, and a few other notes. I’m aiming to have that out by noon, but it may run later.
This week everybody was talking about tomorrow night’s debate
I’m not going to say much about this because I’m trying not to think about it. It will happen, I can’t influence the outcome, and by Wednesday morning we’ll know how it went. Kamala Harris is smarter and sharper, but a shameless liar always has a puncher’s chance in these things, especially when moderators refuse to fact-check, as they did in the Trump-Biden debate.
Recent polls have Harris up nationally by 2.8%, according to the 538 polling average. Given the Electoral College’s thumb on the scale, that’s a toss-up. Hillary’s popular-vote margin of 2.1% wasn’t quite enough, but Biden’s 4.5% definitely was. Democrats hold a similar 2.6% edge in congressional generic ballot polls.
The Electoral College shames our country. Twice in this century, it has allowed the candidate who got the second-most votes to claim the presidency. People only support the Electoral College to rationalize the unfair advantage it gives their side. Can you imagine how Trump would scream if he got more votes than his opponent, but still lost the election?
I’ve decided not to do a state-of-the-race post until after the debate. But here’s Ruben Bolling’s account of the campaign so far.
and Russia, Russia, Russia
We all know that “the Big Lie” is Trump’s claim that he really won the 2020 election, and his victory was stolen from him by fraud. But a lie of similar size is his claim that “Russia, Russia, Russia” was a hoax cooked up by his enemies, and that investigations like the Mueller Report “cleared” him of wrongdoing. (This is covered in Chapter 1 of Steve Benen’s new book “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, reality, and the Republicans’ war on the recent past“.)
John Durham’s sham investigation of “the Russia hoax” went on longer than the Mueller investigation, and came up empty when juries quickly dismissed two prosecutions against minor characters in its conspiracy theory. The “crime of the century” Trump advertised was never revealed.
This week we got a reminder that Russia has never stopped trying to promote the American right wing. An indictment released Wednesday charges that the Russian state media company RT funneled $10 million through an American company (obviously Tenet Media, though the indictment does not name the company) to fund right-wing influencers online.
The people who ultimately got the money are all claiming they were duped, and had no idea Russia was funding their work. Author Renée DiResta observes:
Buying authentic influencers is a far better use of funds than creating fake personas, because they bring their own trusting audiences and are actually, you know, real.
The Democratic Mormon X-account Dem Saints notes “The irony of calling Kamala a communist while cashing Russian checks.”
and the Georgia school shooting
Wednesday, a 14-year-old brought an AR-type weapon to Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia and began shooting, killing four and wounding nine. He has been charged with murder and will be tried as an adult. His father faces manslaughter and other charges for providing the gun “with knowledge [his son] was a threat to himself and others.”
I’m not sure how I feel about either of those prosecuting decisions. No matter what he’s done, a 14-year-old is not an adult. And the father deserves consequences of some sort, but manslaughter seems a bit much. More punishment is not the solution to every problem.
Another Republican response came from Governor Kemp:
This is not the day to talk about safety or policy. We need thoughts and prayers for the victims, law enforcement, and educators.
For Kemp, it never is the day. Just two years ago, he signed a law that allows Georgians to carry handguns in public without a license or background check.
During my four years, nothing happened. And there was great pressure on me, having to do with guns. We did nothing.
This TikTok video is a very raw response from a Mom who says she takes pictures of her kids every day so she will know what they were wearing in case something happens. She contrasts Trump’s attention to imaginary issues like schools changing kids’ genders with his disinterest in actual problems like kids getting shot at school.
Former Missouri high school teacher (and one of my favorite Substack bloggers) Jess Piper describes how disturbing active shooter drills are for teachers, not to mention students.
I also know that kids who are stuck in the hallway during an active shooter event are left in the hallway. Every single police officer who conducted drills told us the same thing: if you have a student begging to get into your classroom, refuse them. They could be the shooter.
During one drill, complete with explosions and smoke in the hallway, someone pounded on her locked classroom door and begged to be let in. She followed instructions and did not open the door. Even though she knew it was a drill, she felt traumatized afterwards. (Fortunately this was a teachers-only drill with no students present.)
Piper lists the common-sense changes the vast majority of voters would like to see: universal background checks, safe storage laws, and red flag laws.
Those proposals run into the same objections gun-violence apologists always raise: They won’t stop every shooter. No solution is perfect, so we should do nothing.
If you’re willing to accept school shootings as a “fact of life” and think government should “do nothing” about them, you know how to vote. If you believe that it doesn’t have to be this way, you also know how to vote.
and the corporate media covering for Trump’s mental decline
That’s the subject of the featured post, introducing the term sanewashing, which has been around for a while, but whose usage has recently exploded.
and Trump’s legal cases
Judge Juan Merchan delayed sentencing Trump for his 34 felony convictions until after the election. Frustrating as this is, Politico’s Ankush Khardori explains the judge’s thinking.
The federal January 6 case is back in Judge Chutkan’s court, which now has to deal with the Supreme Court’s invention of presidential immunity. There are so many issues to sort out that we are still months or maybe even years away from trial, even if Trump doesn’t win the election and order the Justice Department to drop the charges. But between now and election day Chutkan may hold evidentiary hearings or request briefs that could allow Jack Smith to introduce evidence the public hasn’t seen yet.
Trump must think the E. Jean Carroll defamation cases (where juries found him responsible for sexual abuse and defamation, totaling up to nearly $90 million in damages) works in his favor politically, because he purposefully called attention to it Friday.
The appeals court can’t just substitute its own judgment for the jury’s, because the jury heard witness testimony live rather than reading it in a transcript. So who the jury decided to believe is not reviewable. What the appeal is about is whether the jury should have been allowed to hear one of the witnesses at all, or listen to the infamous Access Hollywood tape, where Trump confessed to doing in general the kind of thing Carroll accused him of specifically.
The witness in question supported Carroll’s case by testifying that Trump had groped her on an airplane, something he continues to deny. In his press statement, Trump did what he so often does, saying that the witness wasn’t attractive enough to assault.
Frankly, I know you’re going to say it’s a terrible thing to say, but it couldn’t have happened, it didn’t happen, and she wouldn’t have been the chosen one. She would not have been the chosen one.
“The chosen one” — as if it’s an honor, and women are lining up hoping that Trump will grope them. All I can say is: “What an asshole.” You can watch the video here; it looks and sounds just as bad as it reads.
I was going to write a summary of the Democrats’ best chance to retain the Senate, but I was going to say exactly what Jay Kuo says: It all comes down to Jon Tester winning in Montana and Debbie Mucarsel-Powell beating Rick Scott in Florida. Doing both probably keeps the 51-49 margin.
The knock on most renewable energy is that it’s unreliable; the sun isn’t always shining and the wind doesn’t always blow. The answer to that problem is battery storage. The Economist reports on the state of grid-scale batteries.
How fast climate change causes sea level to rise depends to a large extent on what is happening under the glaciers of Greenland — and nobody really knows.
It’s September and Republicans control the House, so it must be time to talk about a government shutdown. The issue House Republicans are pushing this time is to require proof of citizenship to register to vote.
That provision may sound reasonable if you don’t think about it too long — after all, we all want American elections to be decided by Americans. But basically it causes a problem without solving a problem.
It causes a problem because lots of legal American voters can’t easily produce proof of citizenship. In general, poor people have little incentive to get a passport, and Americans who have moved around a lot may have lost track of their birth certificates a few hops ago. (Again, there’s a socio-economic factor: If you’ve ever had to leave someplace in a hurry, taking all your important papers with you may not have been a priority.) You can probably go back to the county where you were born and pay a fee to get a new copy, but that’s a big enough hurdle to keep many people from voting — which may be the whole point.
As for the problem this idea is supposed to solve — noncitizens voting — it isn’t really a problem. Noncitizen voting is already illegal, and there is absolutely no evidence that significant numbers of noncitizens are voting (other than in local elections in cities that allow it). U.S. News summarizes:
Almost all available data says that noncitizen voting in federal elections, though not unprecedented, is incredibly rare.
In 2016, North Carolina audited its elections and found that 41 legal immigrants had cast ballots despite not yet being citizens out of 4.8 million votes cast. The state’s election board found that the votes made no difference in any state election.
Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger conducted an audit of the state’s voter rolls in 2022 and found that 1,634 had attempted to register but all were caught and none were actually registered.
In our nation’s 248-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump. He tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him. He can never be trusted with power again
I still hold him responsible for the Bush administration’s torture policy and would like to see him tried at The Hague. But he’s right this time, and I appreciate him not including some poison pill in his endorsement. I couldn’t have made the point better.
The way the announcements are dribbling out makes me wonder if someone in the Harris campaign is orchestrating the timing. But apparently it’s not all leading up to George W. Bush, whose office says he won’t endorse anyone this year.
In case you still respect Elon Musk: On September 1, he retweeted (with the comment “Interesting observation.“) a totally wacko theory that only “high-status” or “high-T” men should have input into political decision-making. The justification is that “people who aren’t able to defend themselves physically” process everything through a “safety filter” and aren’t free to ask “Is this true?” The ideal is “Democratic, but a democracy only for those who are free to think.”
Maybe I’m having a low-T day, but I can’t remember ever considering the idea that testosterone might enhance rationality. There’s a reason why we talk about guys who “think with their dicks”. When the ancient Athenian playwright Sophocles got old and felt his libido waning, he compared it to being freed from a harsh master.
Oh I don’t know, I think that territory is actually very well charted.
The Economist edited, replacing “uncharted” with “dangerous”.
and let’s close with something tasty
Have a few thousand gallons of milk you need to do something with before they go bad? Maybe you too can take a run at the Guinness record for the largest ball of string cheese. The UPI story and the YouTube link disagree about the exact weight. (Was it 2200 pounds or just 1400 pounds? I think the YouTube link just did the kilogram/pound conversion wrong.) But it’s big. Sadly, the story doesn’t say whether anyone will get to eat it.
The transgender thing is incredible. Think about it, your kid goes to school and comes home a few days later with an operation. The school decides what’s going to happen with your child, and many of these children, 15 years later, say “What the hell happened? Who did this to me?”
Incredible? Absolutely, and rightfully so: What Trump is telling us is literally beyond credibility, because it bears no resemblance to reality. Schools aren’t performing unauthorized gender-changing operations, or operations of any kind (beyond possibly the school nurse pulling a splinter out of a child’s finger). Not even the wildest radical is proposing that they should. And nobody is looking back on some surgery-at-school that happened 15 years ago.
This goes way beyond any political lying we’ve seen in the past. Trump isn’t exaggerating a statistic, cherry-picking a quote, or spinning some actual incident to his advantage. He’s not implying something nasty about an opponent that can’t be proved either way, or making some bizarre prediction that may not come to pass. Instead, he’s inviting us to come live in a completely delusional world of his construction.
Harris’ housing ideas are relatively straightforward policies amenable to ordinary political and economic analysis: tax cuts to stimulate construction of affordable housing and a $25K benefit targeted at first-time home buyers. Trump’s “housing” idea is a side-effect of his insane proposal for “mass deportation”: If millions of undocumented people are forced to leave the country or herded into detention camps, the couches they’ve been sleeping on will become available to American citizens.
Nothing monstrous here. Just a normal presidential candidate’s policy idea, whose effectiveness economists might “doubt”. Former NYT public editor Margaret Sullivan quotes former NYT reporter (and Pulitzer-prize winner) James Risen: “At first, I thought this was a parody.”
Speaking of economists, Thursday Trump appeared before the Economic Club of New York. A woman asked him what specific legislation he would propose to make childcare more affordable. Here was his answer:
Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down. You know, I was somebody — we had, Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka, was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about — that, because look, child care is child care, couldn’t — you know, there’s something — you have to have it in this country. You have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers, compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to. But they’ll get used to it very quickly. And it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us. But they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care. We’re going to have — I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country. Because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care. But those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just — that I just told you about. We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars. And as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s, relatively speaking, not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers will be taking in. We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people. And then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about make America great again. We have to do it because right now, we’re a failing nation. So we’ll take care of it. Thank you. Very good question. Thank you.
Got that? The NYT looked at that answer and divined a policy proposal: tariffs. It disapproved of Trump’s proposal, saying that it was a 19th century proposal for a 21st century country. “Trump Praises Tariffs, and William McKinley, to Power Brokers“. [1] But the fact that he was asked a serious question and responded with an incoherent ramble about something else — that wasn’t news.
The Washington Post thought the most significant thing Trump did Thursday was deepen his alliance with Elon Musk. Deep, deep in that article it summarized the childcare back-and-forth like this:
Trump made several other promises during his speech at the Economic Club of New York. … When asked about how he’d make child care more affordable, Trump suggested that he would help pay for it by placing taxes on foreign governments. “We’re going to be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s relatively speaking not very expensive compared to the kinds of numbers we’re going to be taking in,” he said. He did not provide details or specifics about how this would work; experts have warned imposing tariffs on such a scale would risk triggering an international trade war.
Just a normal candidate explaining a normal policy amenable to normal critique. The word “suggested” does a lot of work here: It means that Trump’s words inspired WaPo’s three byline reporters to imagine a coherent proposal in which tariff revenue pays for childcare.
Oh, and Trump has an explanation for his rambles: It’s an art. He calls it “the weave”.
You know what the weave is? I’ll talk about like nine different things, and they all come back brilliantly together, and it’s like, friends of mine that are, like, English professors, they say, “It’s the most brilliant thing I’ve ever seen.”
It might be fair to see that explanation itself as evidence of insanity. But the NYT wrote an article taking it seriously. “Meandering? Off-Script? Trump Insists His ‘Weave’ Is Oratorical Genius.” It compared Trump’s verbal stylings to Shakespeare, William Faulkner, and James Joyce. Seriously. [2]
Just two months ago, the press took a very different attitude towards the mental processes of an aging candidate. On July 11, President Biden held a news conference to talk about the recently concluded NATO summit. He was asked questions on a variety of foreign-policy topics and answered them all in considerable detail, demonstrating an impressive mastery of a number of complex situations. Reuters’ headline captured none of that, because Biden had also occasionally misnamed people, like saying “Putin” when he meant “Zelensky”. “Biden makes a series of verbal gaffes at NATO summit“. The Hill also found Biden’s flub newsworthy: “Zelensky dismissed Biden accidentally calling him Putin as a ‘mistake’“.
If Biden made a verbal error, that became the headline. It eclipsed whatever else he had been trying to say.
Why isn’t Trump being covered the same way? When Trump says something insane or incoherent that should be the news. It’s not just smoke that a reporter needs to blow away to reveal some underlying policy point that may or may not actually exist. The nominee of a major party regularly says things that are insane or incoherent. That’s what’s significant. That — and not whatever policy a reporter can interpret from his ravings — is the news in these Trump events.
Blogs like this one have been making this point for months. But that understanding is beginning to creep closer to the mainstream. It is being aided by the existence of a term that perfectly describes what the NYT and its ilk have been doing: sanewashing.
Apparently the term goes back at least to 2020 and has been popularized more recently by Aaron Rupar, whose X/Twitter feed I often quote. But I hadn’t noticed sanewashing until this week, when suddenly it exploded into public consciousness and usage. TNR’s Parker Malloy defines it like this: “reframing Trump’s incoherent and often dangerous rhetoric as conventional political discourse”. Her article gives many examples I have not mentioned here.
With dizzying regularity, Trump lies. He says toxic, antidemocratic things over and over again. And he still gets treated like a normal candidate. It’s often the case that the media, presented with another one of his addled rants, will dive in, scoop, and separate enough words to make it seem like he’s got enough actual gray matter gooping around in his skull to form a complete sentence, and present their director’s cut of his wandering mind for public consumption.
His link is to a Jason Linkin tweet, which calls this phenomenon “coherency bias”. But sanewash is the term that seems to be winning out. Thursday, James Fallows asked his followers on X/Twitter whether they can
think of an example of main media “sane-washing” Biden the way they are even today doing w Trump?
A phenomenon with a widely-used name is harder to ignore, and harder to make excuses for, than some vague intuition that a lot of us share. Perhaps now we can hope that Trump’s delusions and incoherent rambles will themselves become news, just as Biden’s word-substitutions did.
Greg Sargent, who wrote The Plum Line blog for the WaPo until 2023 and now writes for TNR, described what that would mean:
Trump’s mental fitness for the presidency deserves sustained journalistic scrutiny as a stand-alone topic with its own intrinsic importance and newsworthiness. Real journalistic resources should be put into meaningfully covering it from multiple angles, as often happens with other big national stories of great consequence.
He illustrated the point by rewriting actual headlines about Biden as they might apply Trump.
Are these headlines really stretches, based on all we’ve seen? I submit that they are not. Note that all of these treat signs of the subject’s questionable mental fitness for the presidency—and the politics surrounding them—as themselves being the real news. How often do you see headlines like this? Why don’t we see more of them?
Why indeed?
[1] It’s worth pointing out that even if you give Trump the benefit of the doubt and interpret his nonsense as having something to do with tariffs, he still isn’t making sense. A tariff does not “tax foreign nations”. A tariff is a tax paid by an American importer, not a foreign exporter. If that importer isn’t going to go broke, it needs to raise the prices its American customers pay. So a tariff is ultimately a tax on American consumers, not on foreigners.
This has been well understood for a long time. Back in 1828, a tariff very nearly started the Civil War decades early, because it taxed British goods Southerners needed in order to benefit Northern industries that otherwise couldn’t compete with British imports. Southerners like John Calhoun labeled the proposal “the Tariff of Abominations“, because they grasped that the British weren’t paying the tax, they were.
So calling a tariff a “tax on foreign nations”, like talking about schools performing surgeries on unsuspecting students, is delusional.
[2] I am reminded of a possibly apocryphal story (recounted without reference in the Illuminatus! trilogy) of a conversation between James Joyce and Carl Jung. Joyce excuses his schizophrenic daughter’s ravings by comparing them to similar to passages in his own writing. “You are diving,” Jung supposedly replies, “but she is sinking.”
I’m not writing about tomorrow’s debate, other than to explain briefly why I’m not writing about it: It’s going to happen, I have no control over it, and by Wednesday morning we’ll all know how it came out. Speculating about who has the advantage or what strategy each candidate should adopt serves no purpose. Plenty is being written about this elsewhere, if you want to spend your time that way.
This week’s featured post is about “sanewashing” — a word I didn’t know last week that seems to be everywhere this week. Sanewashing is when a reporter takes in some insane or incoherent Trump statement and refines it into a solid policy point to highlight for readers. The mainstream press has been sanewashing Trump for years now, as when it turned Thursday’s word-salad answer to a question about child care into advocating tariffs. I believe that Trump-speaks-in-word-salads is the news to be gleaned from that event, and not his support for tariffs.
But now that there’s a word to describe the phenomenon, it should be harder to get away with. We can hope.
Anyway, “The Word of the Week: Sanewashing”, should be out around 10 EDT. The weekly summary should appear noonish.
It was the labor movement that helped secure so much of what we take for granted today: the 40-hour work week, the minimum wage, family leave, health insurance, Social Security, Medicare, retirement plans. The cornerstones of middle-class security all bear the union label.
This week everybody was talking about Trump’s downward spiral
As I explained in the Teaser, I didn’t really set out to write two Trump articles this week. I planned the Georgia article, but then as the week went on, there was some new Trump outrage every single day. This summary was getting swamped with them, so I moved them all to their own article.
and the Harris interview
Wednesday night, CNN aired a much-ballyhooed interview (transcript, video parts 1, 2, 3) where Dana Bash asked questions and Kamala Harris and Tim Walz answered them. The Democratic ticket survived the interview without blundering, but overall the interview just underlined the point I was making two weeks ago: Mainstream political journalism is broken. Answering their stupid questions does nothing to serve the cause of democracy.
Bash spent the interview asking Harris and Walz to respond to baseless accusations Trump and Vance keep making. Basically, she was playing the role of the trouble-making gossips I knew in junior high. (“Do you know what Marcy is saying about you?”) I find myself agreeing with Jeff Tiedrich (who elaborated in more colorful language than I’m going to use here):
“Tim Walz lied about IVF” is a right-wing talking point. “Kamala Harris isn’t really Black” is a right-wing talking point.
pestering Democratic candidates about right-wing talking points is not journalism. it’s being a Republican tool.
The exchange that sums up the interview is this one:
BASH: Speaking of Republicans, I want to ask you about your opponent, Donald Trump. … He suggested that you happened to turn Black recently for political purposes, questioning a core part of your identity. HARRIS: Yeah. BASH: Any— HARRIS: Same old, tired playbook. Next question, please. (LAUGH) BASH: That’s it? HARRIS: That’s it.
Bash may have been surprised by Harris’ dismissal of her question, but did it deserve any lengthier answer? Like a junior-high gossip, wasn’t Bash angling for Harris to insult Trump in some way she could then carry back to him? (“Kamala Harris says you’re a racist. How do you respond to that?”)
Even the questions that sounded substantive really weren’t. For example, Bash started the interview with: “What would you do on Day 1?”
Day 1 is only interesting when there is a change in parties, because — unless the new president wants to be a dictator, as Trump has said he does — the only possible actions are executive orders that reverse the previous administration’s orders. So Biden’s Day 1 was significant because he
rejoined the Paris Climate Accords
reversed Trump’s Muslim ban
stopped construction on Trump’s border wall
reversed Trump’s moves to disengage from the World Health Organization.
Harris doesn’t have any similar night-and-day disagreements with Biden’s orders. Everything she has been talking about — restore the protections of Roe v Wade, safeguard voting rights, restore the child tax credit, build more affordable housing, subsidize first-time home buyers, shift some of the tax burden from the middle class to the very rich, pass the border bill Trump had his minions in Congress block, etc. — requires the cooperation of Congress, which isn’t going to get any of it done in one day.
Bash knows this, so why is she asking? To set up critical headlines, like Politico’s “Harris Dodged Questions About Her Day One Plans“. (Politico’s article went on to describe the dramatic actions five presidents took on Day 1. All five, of course, replaced presidents from the opposite party.)
How do maneuvers like this serve the voters, or democracy in general?
Asha Rangappa posts an interesting analysis of why Harris dismissed Bash’s turned-Black question, and how this tactic is driving Trump nuts.
Rangappa points to the Karpman Drama Triangle, which simplifies interpersonal conflicts down to three roles: persecutor, rescuer, and victim. From time to time Trump takes any of the roles, but his goal is always to wind up as the Victim, as in “I did everything right, and they indicted me.“
By saying “Next question, please”, Harris is refusing to strike back at Trump and give him something to play the Victim over.
In contrast to their criticism of Harris for avoiding interviews, the media often gives Trump credit for responding to questions. But they never ask him anything hard, like: “What were you planning to do with the classified documents you were keeping at Mar-a-Lago? And why did you tell the government you had given them all back when you hadn’t?”
They don’t ask such questions because they know what the response (which doesn’t qualify as an “answer”) would be: “That’s a nasty question. You’re the fake media.”
Let’s be honest: When Trump faces real questions, he never answers them. To this day, he hasn’t given a coherent response to the charges in any of his four indictments. (Instead, he attacks the prosecutors, the judges, the FBI, the witnesses, the jurors, and the Biden administration. He makes sweeping denials like “I did nothing wrong.” But he never addresses the evidence against him.) He complains that the media doesn’t tell his side of the story, but that’s because he has never settled on a single story to tell.
In view of all the stuff Trump has gotten away with (so far), I have to laugh at the attempt to drum up some Lilliputian Harris scandal. This week’s attempt: She claims she worked at McDonalds, but never listed it on a resume. Does anybody applying for a job after law school list their fast-food summer jobs on their resumes?
The media often digs into the nuts-and-bolts inside-baseball of campaigning — fund-raising, polls, ads, strategies — but presents a very naive view of governing. They want a detailed picture of a candidate’s policy proposals, as if presidents were kings who could simply decree those proposals into law.
That’s how you get questions like Bash’s “The steps that you’re talking about now, why haven’t you done them already?” A bunch of those “steps” — codifying Roe v Wade protections, passing the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, passing the border bill, restoring the child tax credit — have gone to Congress and been blocked by the House Republican majority. Others, like shifting the tax burden from the middle class to the billionaires, stand no chance of getting Republican support.
Every administration’s policies are a compromise between the president’s vision and what can get through Congress. Implicit in all of Harris’ proposals is the assumption that Democrats will hold the Senate and regain the majority in the House.
During its first two years, when it had slim Democratic majorities, the Biden/Harris administration managed to get done an amazing number of things — far more than Trump — like funding infrastructure (which Trump kept promising but never accomplished), and beginning to transition away from a fossil-fuel economy that is leading to a climate-change apocalypse (a transition Trump wants to reverse with a drill-baby-drill policy, which somehow will make bacon cheaper). But no, they weren’t able to implement the full Democratic change agenda. During the last two years, they have artfully kept MAGA nihilists in the House and Republican partisans on the Supreme Court from undoing all that progress, but they haven’t managed to push further.
In this environment, ten-step plans are beside the point. Voters need to understand the sharp contrast in the underlying values of the two parties.
Women have rights vs. wombs belong to the state.
Save the planet for future generations vs. drill-baby-drill.
Stand up for democracy vs. give in to Putin.
Focus policy on the middle class vs. cut billionaires’ taxes and wait for prosperity to trickle down.
Support the rule of law vs. let presidents commit crimes and become autocrats.
How many details do you need to pick a side?
and the hostages
Six more Israeli hostages were found dead in Gaza over the weekend. According to AP:
Three of the six hostages found dead — including an Israeli-American — were reportedly scheduled to be released in the first phase of a cease-fire proposal discussed in July.
The deaths sparked massive protests in Israel yesterday, with protesters charging that the Netanyahu government is not doing enough to get the remaining hostages returned. The nation’s largest union has announced a nationwide general strike to begin this morning.
The Biden administration perpetually claims to be on the verge of getting a hostages-for-ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, but something always falls through at the last minute. Naturally, each side blames the other for not negotiating in good faith and not really wanting peace. It is difficult to criticize one side without seeming to endorse the other.
According to local authorities, more than 40,000 Palestinians have died as a result of the fighting in Gaza. It is never clear how many of them were Hamas warriors and how many were civilians in the wrong place at the wrong time.
and you also might be interested in …
I’ve been wondering for some while about the persistent charges that Democrats support “abortion after birth”. Since I’ve never seen a Democrat endorse the idea, or heard any examples of an after-birth abortions happening somewhere, I’ve assumed these are just lies.
But lies are usually based on something, even if reality has been grossly distorted by the time the claims get made. I think I’ve finally found the something in this case.
The law came in response to the prosecution of two Kings County women who were criminally charged after having miscarriages. Though charges in both cases were dismissed, one woman spent 16 months in jail and the other spent nearly four years. The Kings County District Attorney has vowed to bring new charges in one case, according to CalMatters. According to Wicks’ office, at least 1,300 people have been criminally prosecuted for having miscarriages, stillbirths or self-managed abortions in the last 20 years.
AB 2223 and its author drew heavy criticism from the conservative anti-abortion movement, with some organizations, such as the California Family Council, alleging that the bill would effectively decriminalize infanticide. That is not true. The law does prevent pregnant people from being criminally charged in the event that an infant dies due to pregnancy-related causes. It does not decriminalize the killing of infants.
So if a miscarriage or self-managed abortion results in a baby who is alive but fatally damaged, the woman can’t be charged if the baby dies from that damage.
Other states have since passed similar laws, resulting in the after-birth abortion rhetoric.
The dispute stems from X’s usefulness as a tool for spreading dangerous disinformation, like bad health advice or incitement to political violence. Brazil demanded that X block certain disinformation-spreading accounts, which Musk called “censorship” and refused to do.
I’m sure many other countries are also worried about X and disinformation, so they are watching to see how this plays out.
Back in the 2000 campaign, Republicans would sum up Bush’s charm advantage over Gore by asking which candidate you’d rather have a beer with (ignoring the fact that Bush was a recovering alcoholic who couldn’t drink any more). In 2024, I propose a different test: Who would you rather go to the state fair with?
and let’s close with something that takes training
Throwing out the first pitch is a longtime baseball ceremony that is typically used to call attention to some local celebrity or community leader. Some honorees wilt under the pressure of being watched by thousands, and bounce the ball to the plate or toss it so wide of the mark that it can’t be caught.
But Wednesday, Shohei Ohtani’s dog Decoy delivered a memorable first pitch for a game between Ohtani’s Dodgers and the Baltimore Orioles. With Shohei behind the plate, Decoy squatted on the pitching rubber waiting for the sign, then picked up the baseball with his mouth and delivered it directly to his master, dropping it onto home.
Shohei also had a good game, hitting a home run and stealing two bases.
Once the election board picks a side, does it matter what the voters want?
The usual methods of stealing elections go back to Athens and Rome: Bring in unqualified voters of your own, or use force or trickery to prevent your opposition’s voters from showing up in the right place. If voters vote by dropping tokens in a box, miscount the tokens, or maybe lose boxes from precincts where you don’t expect to do well. There’s a long history of such tried-and-true methods being used in the United States, and voting systems are designed to avoid such shenanigans.
For the most part they’ve been designed pretty well, and by now actual election-day cheating is fairly rare (despite Donald Trump’s baseless claims about every election he’s ever lost, going back to the Iowa caucuses in 2016 and even the Emmys “The Apprentice” lost). That’s why most current cheating goes on before election day, by “purging” the voting roles of legitimate voters, or requiring IDs that your voters are more likely to have than your opposition’s voters.
2020. But in 2020, Trump came up with a novel scheme to cheat after all the votes had been cast and counted: At every level from county election boards to the counting of electoral votes in Congress on January 6, Trump did his best to delay certification of Biden’s victory. The goal of this delay was not just to declare himself the winner (as he hoped Mike Pence would do by counting the votes of his fake electors), but to delegitimize his loss by pushing certification past certain legal deadlines.
If January 6 had come and gone with no recognized winner, he might have been able to push the decision into the House, where each state has only one vote and Republican delegations outnumbered Democratic delegations. Or possibly the succession might have been decided in the Supreme Court, where the 6-3 Republican majority has shown its willingness to decide cases on a partisan basis. If January 20 had arrived and no new president could be inaugurated, then he might simply have stayed in power temporarily until … well, until never. If voters had taken to the streets to protest their disenfranchisement, right-wing militias could make sure that demonstrations turned into riots that required federal troops and temporary martial law.
And what I would urge of this body is that we do the same [as in the contested Hayes/Tilden election of 1876]. That we [appoint an] electoral commission to conduct a 10-day emergency audit, consider the evidence, and resolve the claims [of fraud]. For those on the Democratic aisle who says, say there is no evidence, they’ve been rejected, then you should rest [in] comfort if that’s the case.
From today’s perspective, when Trump is still making claims of fraud despite uncovering no evidence in nearly four years, it seems naive to imagine that any ten-day audit could have resolved the doubts Trump had falsely instilled in his followers. If the electoral commission didn’t decide in Trump’s favor, then it too would have been “rigged” and “fake”. So then it’s January 16, with four days to inauguration, and there’s still no president-elect. What then?
2024. Four years later, Trump has had time to refine this plan. In many ways, he’s in worse shape to pull it off: He isn’t president. So if Harris wins, but her victory can’t be certified by January 20, it’s Biden who might stay in power. (Biden might then resign and let Harris become president until her victory could be certified.) And as President of the Senate, it’s Kamala Harris who will preside over the joint session of Congress on January 6.
Also, one state where the election is likely to be close (Arizona) now has a Democratic governor, but another (Nevada) has flipped in the other direction.
But he has one advantage now that he didn’t have in 2020: Despite the lack of evidence, the myth of the 2020 stolen election has become dogma among Republicans, who have worked to make local election posts more partisan. Republican officials like Aaron van Langevelde, who voted to certify Biden’s victory in Michigan because that was his legal duty, have been replaced by people more loyal to Trump than to the law.
Across the country, county-level boards of canvassers have what is legally known as ministerial duties. They aren’t supposed to be investigators and they aren’t supposed to make judgment calls. The law assigns them the mundane job of receiving vote totals from the precincts, adding them up, and passing the information up to state officials by some set deadline. Recounts and challenges to the votes-as-first-counted are somebody else’s job.
But Republicans see county election boards as places to stand while they throw monkey wrenches into the system. If counties don’t certify totals and pass them up the line, then states also can’t certify elections. This has been tried out in various state and local elections since 2020, usually unsuccessfully. (Often the refusal to certify comes from rural Republican counties who are protesting election fraud that they imagine happens in urban Democratic counties.)
A few weeks ago, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) published a report Election Certification Under Threat. The report identifies 35 officials in eight states who have already refused to certify an election. Nearly all of them are either still in office or likely to be reappointed at any moment. The report lists, state by state, the actions that can be taken to overcome the threat.
Those steps usually begin with a mandamus lawsuit. Mandamus is Latin for “we command”, and is related to the English word mandate. In a mandamus case, a court has the power to force an official to do his or her job. If the official refuses, the court has options that vary by state. The court may appoint a new official, or fine or even jail the resisting official.
What gives a court this kind of power is the ministerial nature of the job. Typical state law says that election supervisors shall (not should or even may) certify an election within a certain time period. If they don’t, they’re violating the law. Even if the officials are correct in thinking that vote totals are tainted, dealing with that is somebody else’s job. They’re just supposed to collect numbers from the precincts, total them up, and pass the results on.
Mandamus suits should work just about everywhere. Local officials can call attention to their cause by initially refusing the certify an election, but ultimately they’ll have to.
Georgia. But “just about anywhere” may not include Georgia, which Biden carried by less than 12,000 votes in 2020, and where Harris/Trump polls are very close.
In a series of meetings in July and August, the Georgia State Election Board voted 3-2 to change the rules governing local election boards. (The three members voting to change the rules all deny that Joe Biden won Georgia in 2020, despite the complete lack of evidence for that view. Trump has given them a shout-out at a political rally. When was the last time a national candidate paid any attention to a state election board?) Lawrence Tribe and Dennis Aftergut summarize the new rules and their apparent purpose:
The first rule requires local election officials to conduct “reasonable inquiry” into election results before certifying them. The term “reasonable inquiry” is dangerously elastic, creating an opening for authoritarians to do whatever they want. No sensible court would ever approve such a system, by which unelected appointees could issue open-ended election rules making certification discretionary, especially without any such directive from the legislature of Georgia to end democracy.
The second rule permits individual county board members “to examine all election related documentation created during the conduct of elections prior to certification of results”. The opportunities are unlimited to delay certification by demanding that documents great and small be produced before certification.
One apparent goal is to bypass federal and state law requiring states’ votes certified in time for Congress, on 6 January 2025, to bless the election results. If enough states’ certifications are stalled so that too few electors are actually appointed as of 6 January, under the 12th amendment, the presidential election goes to the House. There, per the constitution, the election is determined by one vote per state delegation. Given gerrymandering and how the House is structured, Republicans have held a majority of the state delegations for years. In November, by their votes, Trump would become president, regardless of whether he has won the electoral college vote or a popular vote majority.
The board has five members: one appointed by the state House, one chosen by the state Senate, one each from the Republican and Democratic parties, and a nonpartisan chair selected by the General Assembly or by the governor if the General Assembly is not in session when there is a vacancy.
The three Trumpists trying to monkey-wrench Georgia elections are the House, Senate, and Republican Party appointees. The Democratic appointee and the chair appointed by Republican Governor Kemp voted against the new rules.
You may notice from that description that none are elected by the People of Georgia, and so they really shouldn’t (and almost certainly don’t) have the power to circumvent laws passed by the legislature. If state law says that the local election officials have until 5 p.m. the next Monday to certify Tuesday’s election (as it does say), the GSEB can’t authorize further delay.
Remedies. With that in mind, some Georgia voters and the Georgia Democratic Party are suing the GSEB in state court
To remedy these harms and prevent chaos in November, this Court should follow decades of binding precedent and declare both that the statutes mean exactly what they say and that SEB’s rules must be construed consistent with those statutes in order to be a valid exercise of SEB’s authority. …
Such relief is needed now, before the November 5 election and the start of the six-day clock the election code sets for certification. Election officials are already setting procedures and staffing for canvassing. Similarly, candidates and political organizations are already allocating resources and making efforts to ensure that every vote is counted. Withholding relief until a county board or other superintendent relies on the rules to delay certification or not certify at all risks disorder, including extremely rushed emergency judicial proceedings across multiple courts; imposes additional burdens on Georgia’s courts, election officials, and political organizations; and could lead to the discarding of valid votes cast by qualified electors
Democrats may have some allies in this effort: Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and Governor Brian Kemp. Both have denounced the new rules, and Kemp reportedly has asked the state attorney general to determine whether he can remove the GSEB’s three Trumpist members.
At a rally in Atlanta on August 5, Trump denounced Governor Kemp, who has consistently denied Trump’s claim that the 2020 Georgia election was rigged against him. But they have since patched up their differences and Kemp is supporting Trump. If Kemp removes board members Trump picked out for praise, though, the feud may start up again.
Harris’ best strategy: Win big, win everywhere. Of course, this disruption will only occur if Trump loses Georgia, and is only one of the tricks he can be expected to play in any state where the election is close. The best way to avoid another tense November, December, and early January is if Harris wins by margins large enough to dwarf Trump’s complaints, and to win in enough states that no single one is necessary for an Electoral College majority.
The most direct path for Harris to get 270 electoral votes (exactly) is to win Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, along with the 2nd congressional district in Nebraska. (Nebraska and Maine give separate electoral votes to each of their districts. Nebraska’s lone Democratic electoral vote should cancel the lone Republican vote from Maine.) Also in play are Georgia, Arizona, Nevada, and North Carolina. Winning two or three of those would protect the election from a lot of shenanigans.
Trump has always done offensive things, and said ignorant, incoherent, or insane things. But I don’t think he used to say or do them every day.
One thing I’ve heard about aging, which I can verify from my own life, is that it doesn’t change your character so much as magnify it. Whatever you’ve always been, you’ll be moreso as you get old.
This week revealed that pattern in 78-year-old Donald Trump, who did something stereotypically Trumpy every day from Monday to Saturday.
Monday. He started the week with a bang, by desecrating the hallowed grounds of Arlington National Cemetery to film a campaign TikTok video. You can dive into the long explanation of what ANC’s rules are, why those rules exist, and how Trump violated them. Or you can take another long dive into the flim-flam he, Vance, and his campaign spread to excuse his inexcusable behavior. But all you really need to do is look at this photo:
You know this is wrong.
Trump giving an inappropriate thumbs-up is becoming a meme, like this image of Thumbs-Up Trump at Jesus’ crucifixion. I’m hoping Thumbs-Up Trump becomes as ubiquitous as Bernie in his mittens.
Tuesday. Trump announced a new line of NFT trading cards showing him in fantastically heroic settings — in superhero armor, wielding a lightning bolt — and looking slimmer and more muscular than he has in many years, if ever. For a mere $99 you get one digital file of a card-image. If you buy 250 of them ($24,750), you get one physical card, two tickets to a Trump-attended dinner at his golf club (I assume the one in New Jersey), and a piece of the true cross suit he wore when he debated Biden.
But MAGA isn’t a cult and Trump isn’t a grifter. It’s totally unfair to say that the man who made these cards or the people who spend money on them are weird.
Wednesday. Trump unleashed a series of Truth Social posts that were extreme even by his standards. He reposted memes that
called for “public military tribunals” to try Barack Obama,
suggested indicting the House January 6 Committee for sedition,
commented on a photo of Harris and Hillary Clinton together that “blowjobs impacted both their careers differently”,
pictured Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Anthony Fauci, Nancy Pelosi, and Bill Gates in orange prison jumpsuits with the caption “How to Actually Fix the System”.
When he’s called on stuff like this, the usual excuse is that he didn’t create the memes, he just reposted them. But reposting without criticism is endorsement. It says, “I think more people should see this.”
Look at bacon and some of these products and some people don’t eat bacon any more. And we are going to get the energy prices down. You know, this was caused by their horrible energy. Wind. They want wind all over the place. But when it doesn’t blow we have a little problem.
Also Thursday, he began a two-day flip-flop on abortion, an issue that he insists voters don’t really care about. Currently, Florida bans almost all abortions of fetuses more than six weeks old. (Embryos, actually. They’re not considered fetuses until eight weeks.) NBC News asked Trump how he (a Florida resident) planned to vote on an upcoming Florida referendum to guarantee abortion rights “before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider”.
He replied: “I am going to be voting that we need more than six weeks.” That sounded like a Yes vote on the referendum, which would repeal the six-week ban. A No vote would leave it in place.
In that same interview, he said that in his next administration, the government would pay for all IVF treatments (which are very expensive) but didn’t say what program would cover them or where the money would come from.
Friday. A busy day. After a freakout from Evangelical “Christians”, he walked back the previous day’s statement on the Florida referendum, announcing that he would vote No. The anti-abortion faction hates his IVF proposal too, but so far he hasn’t walked it back.
(Naturally, though, it’s Harris who gets bad press for changing the position she held on fracking five years ago, and for not providing details of her proposals. It would be completely unacceptable for Harris to change her position on some major issue from one day to the next, or to announce an expensive new program with no supporting details.)
Also Friday, he shared this insane dark fantasy with a Moms For “Liberty” gathering:
The transgender thing is incredible. Your kid goes to school and comes home a few days later with an operation. The school decides what’s going to happen with your child. And then many of these childs [sic] 15 years later look back and say “What the hell. Who did this to me?”
This kind of stuff deserves to be judged by the Greyhound standard: If you were sitting next to a stranger on a cross-country bus, and he said something this detached from reality, you’d get up and move, wouldn’t you?
Friday night in Jonestown, Pennsylvania, Trump was introduced by Florida Congressman Byron Donalds, who (like Kamala) is Black. When Trump got on stage, he said:
That one is smart! You have smart ones and you have some that aren’t quite so good.
When I was growing up in the 1960s, I heard lots of people say things like this. But usually those statements explicitly included the N-word rather than just implying it. So I guess there has been progress.
He confessed to “interfering” in the certification of the 2020 election, but claimed
Whoever heard, you get indicted for interfering in a presidential election when you had every right to do it?
As MSNBC’s Joyce Vance noted, “There’s no right to interfere in a presidential election.” And former prosecutor Elizabeth de Vega added: “Keep talking, moron.”
On the trade deficit with China, he claimed “I had them down much smaller”, which is a fantasy. Here are the actual year-by-year US trade deficits with China. Note the peak in 2018, a Trump year, and the low in 2023, a Biden year.
He also claimed “China paid me hundreds of billions of dollars.” That might be a reference to tariffs, which Trump imagines are paid by foreign exporters rather than American importers. Ultimately, of course, tariffs are passed on to US consumers the same way that sales taxes are.
In the same interview, Trump called Kamala Harris “nasty” for the way she treated Mike Pence, presumably during their vice presidential debate in 2020. However, Harris supporters have never called for Pence to be hanged, as Trump supporters did on January 6.
But today begins a new week. Who knows what marvels it will reveal?
I’m somewhat ashamed to admit that both featured posts this week have “Trump” in the title.
I only meant to write one: “Can Trump Steal Georgia?” There’s a been a lot of talk these last two weeks about changes Trumpists on the Georgia State Election Board have made in the rules governing local election boards, and whether these changes might allow a 2020-on-steroids election crisis should Harris get more votes than Trump in Georgia. Short version: That’s clearly what Trump has in mind, but it’s probably not going to work. Either the courts or Governor Kemp should take care of it.
But then as the week went on and I compiled notes for the weekly summary, I noticed something: There was an outrageous new Trump story every single day, starting with bringing his campaign team to Arlington National Cemetery on Monday. This wasn’t some unified scandal that kept building through the week (though the Arlington thing did that), it was some totally new batshit crazy thing each day.
By Saturday, my single Trump-did-some-crazy-stuff entry in the weekly summary had broken through its levees and was threatening to wipe out the flood plain. So I turned it into a separate article “A Week in Trump’s Declining Spiral”. It should post before 9 EDT, with the Georgia article appearing by 10.
With the flood of Trump news diverted into the featured posts, the weekly summary should be short this week, and come out around noon.
This week everybody was talking about the Democratic Convention
The featured post focuses on how the DNC reclaimed Reagan-era values that Republicans have stopped taking seriously or have let drift away from American reality: freedom, family, marriage, tradition, masculinity, and what makes someone American.
I know I mentioned this in that post, but it deserves a second plug: One standard element of a political convention is the roll call of the states as the delegates announce their votes. The DNC did it a little differently from the RNC.
The DNC turned roll call into a dance party, with each state choosing music appropriate to itself, like Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Sweet Home Alabama” or Illinois choosing Alan Parson’s “Sirius”, the walk-on music the Chicago Bulls use when they play in that same arena. My own state, Massachusetts, picked the Dropkick Murphy’s “I’m Shipping Up to Boston”. But Georgia stole the show by getting Atlanta’s Lil Jon to perform his own “Turn Down for What”.
One difference between the conventions the featured post didn’t cover: The RNC’s message centered on hero-worship: America is in terrible shape, but if we elect Donald Trump again, he will save us. The DNC was more of a pep rally for activists. Speaker after speaker urged the delegates (and by extension those watching at home) to “do something”: volunteer for the campaign, send money, make sure your friends are registered to vote. Kamala Harris will not save us by herself; her campaign is the vehicle through which We the People will save ourselves and each other.
I’ve never seen condoms used for political advertising before.
Major media fact-checking during the conventions was somewhere between comical and infuriating.
If you’re a person actually interested in the truth, the main thing you need to know about the Democratic Convention speakers is that they were far and away more truthful than the Republican speakers. Nothing at the DNC rivaled the big lies that form the scaffolding for MAGA policies: the “migrant crime wave“, or that illegal immigrants are voting, or that other countries are emptying their jails and insane asylums to send their unwanted people to the US.
None of that is even remotely close to being true.
But both-sides-ism decrees that fact-checkers had to flag Democrats for something. So when Tim Walz said that “IVF and fertility treatments” are “personal for Gwen and I”, USA Today had to point out that the Walzes’ daughter Hope resulted from a different fertility treatment than IVF, as if IVF hadn’t been the next option, and as if succeeding before reaching that point would give the Walzes less empathy with infertile couples who do need IVF. In short: Nothing Tim said was wrong or needed correction.
Or when Pete Buttigieg said that “crime was higher on [Trump’s] watch”, USA Today found it important to point out that not all crime rates were higher all the time. So the murder rate (which rose under Trump) continued rising for Biden’s first year before falling to a level below where it was at the end of Trump’s term.
And when Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker said “Donald told us to inject bleach” as a Covid treatment, that was “misleading“, because Trump only made that ridiculous suggestion as something scientists should waste their time investigating.
Bill Clinton said that since the end of the Cold War, 50 million American jobs have been created under Democratic administrations and only 1 million under Republican administrations. PBS rated that only “mostly true“, because even though what Clinton said was exactly right, 1989 was a particularly fortuitous time to measure from. Starting the clock running somewhere else might give less lop-sided results.
Summing up: While Republicans told big whopping lies that they can’t justify their policies without, Democrats sometimes failed to include all the footnotes a journal article would require.
It seems like a conscientious fact-checker would want to note that distinction. But AP’s headlines looked like this:
Good lines from the convention that I haven’t found another place for. D. L. Hughley:
Republicans for Kamala? I guess Donald Trump will finally know what it’s like when you get left for a younger woman.
JD Vance said ‘if you don’t have kids you have no physical commitment to the future of this country.’ When I deployed to Afghanistan, I didn’t have kids then. Many of the men and women with me didn’t either. But let me tell you, our commitment to the future of this country was pretty damn physical.
We believe that a patient’s room is too small and cramped for space for a woman, her doctor, and the United States government. That’s too many people in the room.
On paper, this looks to favor Trump, but it also ratifies Harris/Walz framing: Trump, Vance, and Kennedy are all weird, so of course they would wind up together.
I’ve seen lots of triumphal posting by Trumpists, claiming that this is a big development that nails down Trump’s election. But Nate Silver is unconvinced. His model has Harris up 4% with her convention bounce just starting to show up in the data. Her margin drops about 0.3% when Kennedy is taken out.
and the horse race
I’m not going to pay much attention this week, because if Kamala gets a bounce out of the convention, it won’t show up fully in the polls until at least next week. But generally, her slow and steady momentum has continued. 538’s polling average has her up by 3.4%, which is close to where she needs to be to overcome the Republican advantage built into the Electoral College.
But there is reason to expect a convention bounce. Here, a CNN reporter is stunned that 6 of the 8 undecided voters he talked to in November have decided for Harris. One has decided for Trump and one still isn’t planning to vote.
and you also might be interested in …
Maybe “Communist” and “Marxist” don’t mean what Trumpists think they mean.
and let’s close with something cold-blooded
OK, I’ve heard of support dogs, cats, and even monkeys. But a support gator? I’m picturing a bumper sticker: My support animal can eat your support animal.
With a near-perfect convention in Chicago, Democrats stole themes Republicans have been running on for decades: freedom, opportunity, tradition, patriotism, family, manliness, small-town values, and who the “real Americans” are.
When they left Milwaukee, Republicans were happy with their convention. True, Trump’s acceptance speech had failed to stick the landing, and many were still uncertain that J. D. Vance had been the best (or even a good) choice for VP, but those seemed like quibbles. For four days — right up to the last hour of Trump’s 90-minute speech — the party had been united, put on a good show, and looked poised to do well in November against a Democratic ticket headed by Joe Biden.
And then Biden did something beyond Donald Trump’s imagination: He sacrificed his own ambitions for the sake of his party and the country. Republicans still resist grasping what Biden did: With occasional help from the NYT, they describe his voluntary withdrawal as a “coup” (as if January 6 hadn’t shown us what a coup really looks like) and keep portraying Biden as bitter and angry. Weeks later, Trump was still fantasizing that Biden would make a scene at the convention.
What are the chances that Crooked Joe Biden, the WORST President in the history of the U.S., whose Presidency was Unconstitutionally STOLEN from him by Kamabla, Barrack HUSSEIN Obama, Crazy Nancy Pelosi, Shifty Adam Schiff, Cryin’ Chuck Schumer, and others on the Lunatic Left, CRASHES the Democrat National Convention and tries to take back the Nomination, beginning with challenging me to another DEBATE. He feels that he made a historically tragic mistake by handing over the U.S. Presidency, a COUP, to the people in the World he most hates, and he wants it back, NOW!!!
But Monday night, as in all his public appearances, Biden was gracious and generous towards Kamala Harris and the entire Democratic Party. If this was all an act, it was an act far beyond Trump’s abilities. Under no circumstances could Trump have contained his disappointments and resentments in front of a national audience for 50 minutes. And yet somehow, he imagined that “senile” Joe Biden could be such a brilliant performer. But Trump can hold those two thoughts together in his mind — Biden is senile and Biden can make an Oscar-worthy presentation — more easily than he can imagine the truth:
It’s been the honor of my lifetime to serve as your president. I love the job, but I love my country more.
Biden’s speech was just the beginning of a four-day master class in how to run a convention. All week, I felt like the Democrats were teaching Republicans how it’s done: You had Kid Rock and Jason Aldean? OK, we’ve got Stevie Wonder, John Legend, and Pink. We see your celebrity Hulk Hogan and raise you Oprah Winfrey. Your people waved signs saying “Mass Deportation Now!”, but we prefer “Freedom” and “USA”. Your rising talent was Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz, but we could showcase people who are authentically gifted speakers: Pete Buttigieg, Josh Shapiro, AOC, Gretchen Whitmer, and Wes Moore.
I’ve got a message for the Republicans and the justices of the US Supreme Court: You can pry this wedding band from my cold, dead, gay hand.
Turning old Republican tropes upside-down became a repeating motif of the Democratic Convention. Republicans used to be the party that wanted to “defend marriage”, but now it is Republicans like the corrupt Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas who threaten marriage, and Democrats like Nessel who pledge to defend it to the death.
But marriage was just one of the concepts that Democrats took back from a Republican Party that had owned them for too long.
Freedom. Republicans used to style themselves as the party of freedom, but Tim Walz yanked that word away from them:
When Republicans use the word “freedom”, they mean that the government should be free to invade your doctor’s office. Corporations, free to pollute your air and water. And banks, free to take advantage of customers. But when we Democrats talk about freedom, we mean the freedom to make a better life for yourself and the people that you love. Freedom to make your own health care decisions. And yeah, your kids’ freedom to go to school without worrying about being shot dead in the hall.
Josh Shapiro tied it to Trump’s efforts to stay in power through fraud and force after losing the 2020 election:
It’s not freedom to tell our children what books they’re allowed to read. And it’s not freedom to tell women what they can do with their bodies. It sure as hell isn’t freedom to say, “You can go vote, but he gets to pick the winner.” That’s not freedom.
Family. When Ronald Reagan ran on “family values” with the support of Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority, Republicans meant the (implicitly White and Christian) Mom-Dad-and-2.1-perfect-children families of 1950s sit-coms. But this week the DNC showcased and celebrated American families as they actually are.
It started with the candidates. On the surface, no family’s story could be more Reagan-era normal than the Walzes: Two White Midwestern high school teachers fall in love and are still together decades later, having raised a boy and a girl. But they are open about relying on fertility treatments to accomplish that feat, and they don’t keep their neuro-divergent son hidden at home. (More about him later.)
And then there’s the blended Emhoff-Harris family: A Jewish lawyer was married for 16 years and had two children (again, a boy and a girl). But then he got divorced, and five years later he went on a blind date with the Afro-Asian-American attorney general of California, who was herself the child of divorced parents. They got married and remain on good terms with his first wife (who produced a video for the convention). Doug Emhoff has always supported Kamala’s ambitions, and Ella Emhoff had tears in her eyes as the convention cheered for her apparently-not-wicked stepmother.
Family was everywhere in the convention speeches, with speaker after speaker quoting wisdom instilled in them by a parent, mentor, teacher, or coach. (You will search Donald Trump’s speeches in vain to find a comparable passage. In his stories, he has always known everything.) Harris presented her own it-takes-a-village childhood like this:
My mother worked long hours. And, like many working parents, she leaned on a trusted circle to help raise us. Mrs. Shelton, who ran the daycare below us and became a second mother. Uncle Sherman. Aunt Mary. Uncle Freddy. And Auntie Chris. None of them, family by blood. And all of them, family by love.
Family who taught us how to make gumbo. How to play chess. And sometimes even let us win. Family who loved us. Believed in us. And told us we could be anything. Do anything. They instilled in us the values they personified. Community. Faith. And the importance of treating others as you would want to be treated. With kindness. Respect. And compassion.
In the Democratic world, as in America, family is defined by love rather than blood. Your family is made up of the people you can count on when you need them, and not just the people who share your DNA.
Masculinity. The Republican Convention was nothing if not masculine. Trump entered the hall on Day 3 to James Brown’s “It’s a Man’s Man’s Man’s World“. And prior to the candidate’s acceptance speech the next night, Hulk Hogan tore off his shirt and lumped together Trump’s fraud convictions, his lost civil trials, and his assassination attempt as the work of a mysterious “they” who need to be punished.
When I look out and I see all the real Americans, I think about how Donald Trump, his family was compromised. When I look out there and I see Donald Trump, I think about how his business was compromised. But what happened last week when they took a shot at my hero and they tried to kill the next President of the United States, enough was enough. I said, “Let Trump-a-mania run wild, brother! Let Trump-a-mania rule again. Let Trump-a-mania, make America great again.” …
You know, guys, over my career, I’ve been in the ring with some of the biggest, some of the baddest dudes on the planet, and I’ve squared off against warriors, ooh, yeah, savages, and I’ve even, like I said, body slammed giants in the middle of the ring. I know tough guys but let me tell you something, brother, Donald Trump is the toughest of them all. …
This November, guys, we can save the American dream for everyone, and Donald Trump is the president who will get the job done. All you criminals, all you lowlifes, all you scumbags, all you drug dealers, and all you crooked politicians need to answer one question, brother. Whatchya gonna do when Donald Trump and all the Trump-a-maniacs run wild on you, brother?
But the DNC presented a different model of masculinity, whose manliness is unlikely to “run wild” on anyone: Tim Walz — coach, teacher, soldier, mentor, neighbor, father. I’ve heard a new phrase used to describe Walz: tonic masculinity rather than the toxic masculinity of dominance and violence. Ben Ingman, who remembered Walz as his geography teacher and 7th-grade track coach, started his speech with this:
Tim Walz is the kind of guy you can count on to push you out of a snowbank. I know this because Tim Walz has pushed me out of a snowbank.
Ingman invited members of Walz’ state-championship-winning football team up onto the stage, and they cheered for their former coach.
He described Walz’ coaching style, which also took the track team to a state championship:
Coach Walz got us excited about what we might achieve together. He believed in us, and he helped us believe in each other.
It was important to have a person who was so well-liked on campus, a football coach who had served in the military. Having Tim Walz as the adviser of the gay-straight alliance made me feel safe coming to school.
Over the last several years there’s been this kind of perversion that has taken place, which is to suggest that the measure of the strength of a leader is based on who you beat down, when what we know is the real and true measure of the strength of a leader is based on who you lift up.
To the best of my knowledge, Tim Walz has never body-slammed anybody in the style of Hulk Hogan. But he has consistently lifted people up. And occasionally he has pushed them out of snowbanks.
Walz was only one of many examples of tonic masculinity at the DNC. Another was Astronaut/Senator Mark Kelly, who wordlessly walked his wife Gabby Giffords onto the stage and literally served as her right hand, managing the iPad that contained her speech so that she could gesture with her left hand, the one that still functions. He filled his role so egolessly that I did not even realize what he was doing until I watched the video a second time. (You can bet that if Melania ever needs that kind of help, Trump will move on to Wife #4.)
And then there was Biden himself, sacrificing personal ambitions so that the country he loves will not slide into autocracy. I was reminded of the ending of Lev Grossman’s The Magician King (the middle book of his Magicians trilogy). After plans have succeeded and the day has been saved, the god Ember appears to enforce the rules that have been broken along the way: Quentin (the trilogy’s main character) is to be banished from Fillory, the magical realm he has loved since childhood, when he thought it was fictional.
Quentin protests that he deserves better, because he has been the hero of this story, and “the hero gets the reward.” “No Quentin,” the god replies. “The hero pays the price.”
If American democracy is saved again in 2024, it will be because Joe Biden was willing to pay the price. That’s what a real man does.
That video went viral, but drew ridicule from Trumpists. Former conservative talk-show host Charlie Sykes described it as “the definitive Rorschach Test for the world’s worst human beings”. One of those human beings, Ann Coulter, posted a picture of Gus crying with the comment “Talk about weird …” Former congressman Mike Crispi called Gus “Tim Walz’s stupid crying son” and a “puffy beta male”. He also tweeted “Barron Trump is the future. Tim Walz’s children are nobody’s going nowhere.” And conservative radio host Jay Weber tweeted:
Sorry, but this is embarrassing for both father and son. If the Walzs represent today’s American man, this country is screwed: “Meet my son Gus. He’s a blubbering bitch boy. His mother and I are very proud.”
But Tim Walz is man enough to endure disdain from the Jay Webers of this world, if that’s what it takes for his son to share important moments with him. Personally, I have two reactions: First, you can fake almost anything in politics, but you can’t fake a reaction like Gus had. And second, I imagine most fathers saw Gus and thought: “I wonder if my children feel that way about me.” Pete Buttigieg’s husband Chasten tweeted:
I hope to inspire my kids so much that when they see me speak of the dreams and passion I have for my country they are moved to tears like Gus Walz was. @Tim_Walz has dedicated his life to service and has clearly exceeded in being an excellent, supportive, and loving father every step of the way. We should all be so lucky to know a love like that.
Religious writer John Pavolitz traced the roots of the Republican urge to bully those who don’t fit their cookie-cutter view of the world:
This week has reminded us how morally poisoned our collective bloodstream is.
And the sad part of all of this is, we all know how we got here.
We are witnessing in real-time, the cost of elevating someone like Donald Trump to power: of normalizing his ignorant name-calling, his exploiting of differences, his bullying of those who are vulnerable or different, his hatred of expressions of love that he is incapable of.
This pattern was on display nine years ago when he mocked a disabled reporter and what should have been a campaign-killing moment became the first in an expansive and still-growing resume of filth.
Tradition. Republican rhetoric is full of respect for tradition, from “originalist” legal theory to “that old time religion”. But the current Republican Party is trapped in the present by its worship of Trump. The Republican Convention honored no pre-Trump Republican tradition, and at times gave the impression that the GOP had not existed until Trump came down his escalator in 2015.
By contrast, some of the finest and most emotional moments in the Democratic Convention centered on what the Party owes to the heroes of its recent past. Joe Biden, of course, is not past yet, since he is still president. But he has stood for his last election, so the long ovation he got Monday night and the chants of “Thank you, Joe” that could erupt at any moment constituted a profoundly sentimental send-off.
The Obamas gave a pair of top-flight speeches, with many observers suggesting history will remember Michelle’s as one of the best convention speeches ever. No one could fail to note the appropriateness of Hillary Clinton addressing a convention trying once again to elect the first woman president. (In one reaction shot during Hillary’s speech, Gwen Walz was in tears.) Her mention of Trump’s felony convictions inspired a “Lock him up” chant, which Hillary handled perfectly: She neither encouraged it nor cut it off as she tried to suppress a smile.
But any Republican legacy had vanished down the memory hole: Mitt Romney? The Bushes? Dick Cheney? Paul Ryan? Kevin McCarthy? John Boehner? Mike Pence? They have all become unpeople, because there is no room for them in the Trump personality cult.
Who is really American? I’m not sure which politician coined the phrase real Americans, which I just quoted Hulk Hogan using. I first registered it in 2008, when Sarah Palin kept identifying the rural White counties where she was popular as “real America”. The phrase almost never gets defined, but we all know generally who it points to: White straight native-born Christians who speak English at home and have no obvious mental or physical dysfunctions.
A lot of the legitimacy of Trump’s claim to have won the 2020 election rests on this vague sense that some Americans are more real than others. Even people who understand the absurdity of Trump’s fantasies that vote totals were changed overseas or large numbers of non-citizens voted or mail-in votes were faked or some other less specific claim — even many of them feel in their hearts that Trump should have won, because so many of Biden’s votes came from Blacks, or naturalized Hispanic or Asian citizens, or gays, or Jews, or others whose American-ness is questionable. Real Americans, the people whose votes should count, overwhelmingly supported Trump.
A related question is what an immigrant has to do, beyond the formal naturalization process, to really be American. Melania Trump is a White Christian immigrant, and Usha Vance is a Hindu born in America to Indian immigrants. Presumably they are both OK, so it must be possible.
In a column for The Washington Post, Matt Bai examined how the two VP candidates articulated conflicting visions of what makes someone an American. Vance denied that “America is an idea” and postulated instead that “a group of people with a shared history and a common future”.
Of course there’s room for immigration and racial diversity in Vance’s worldview; his own wife is of Indian descent. But in his view of America, the outsider becomes American by adopting a set of cultural norms — living here “on our terms,” as he put it in his speech. In this way, he sees America as no different, really, from France or Russia or any other country with common ethnic heritage. The price of admission is cultural conformity.
But Walz presented a different view.
In the America Walz described in his convention speech, it doesn’t matter what language you speak at home or what god (if any) you worship, or whether you have kids (naturally or otherwise). Because as long as you believe in the American promise of liberty and adhere to its laws, you’re just as American as anyone else, and anybody who doesn’t like it should “mind their own damn business.”
Community, in Walz’s telling, isn’t defined by somebody’s idea of cultural norms, but rather by your connection to your neighbors. If you’re willing to help out with a stranded car or a bake sale, then he doesn’t care if you’re an atheist or a cat-owner (or, God forbid, both).
Walz’ view, to me, seems very appropriate for a high school teacher: America is neither an abstract idea nor an ethno-cultural nation like France. America is a project. If you pitch in, you belong.
How was this possible? Democrats were able to take these themes (and several others) away from Republicans because the GOP has spent years giving them little more than lip service. When Ron DeSantis began banning books and threatening teachers who taught inconvenient facts about American history, those actions raised no debate about freedom within the Republican Party. There has been no controversy about nominating a philandering, twice-divorced, pussy grabber to lead the party of family values. When one jury of ordinary Americans found Trump responsible for sexual assault, another ruled beyond a reasonable doubt that he had committed fraud, and he avoided his other felony indictments through delaying tactics rather than by challenging the evidence against him, members of the law-and-order party attacked the justice system rather than question their allegiance to a criminal.
The convention speech that brought this all home was by former Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger:
I’ve learned something about my party too, something I couldn’t ignore: The Republican Party is no longer conservative. It has switched its allegiance from the principles that gave it purpose to a man whose only purpose is himself.
Donald Trump is a weak man pretending to be strong. He is a small man pretending to be big. He’s a faithless man pretending to be righteous. He’s a perpetrator who can’t stop playing the victim. He puts on—listen—he puts on quite a show, but there is no real strength there.
As a conservative and a veteran, I believe true strength lies in defending the vulnerable. It’s in protecting your family. It’s in standing up for our Constitution and our democracy. That—that is the soul of being a conservative. It used to be the soul of being a Republican. But Donald Trump has suffocated the soul of the Republican Party. His fundamental weakness has coursed through my party like an illness, sapping our strength, softening our spine, whipping us into a fever that has untethered us from our values.
Whatever they may have meant to past generations, in 2024 Republican values have become a “show” with “no real strength” behind them. That’s why Democrats were able to take them back this week.
The Weekly Sift 