For those of who have watched Trump over many decades and seen him as a rich playboy who hangs out in nightclubs with a different woman on his arm every time, for those of us who know him as a publicity-seeker who used to call the tabloids and pretend to be his own PR agent hawking tips about his latest exploit, for those who remember him as a crony of Roy Cohn, the elevation to Saint of the Republican Party is incomprehensible. For those of us who watched the insurrection on January 6, the GOP adulation of Trump is baffling.
Will Bunch, a columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer, attended the Republican Convention in Milwaukee and reported:
MILWAUKEE — I came to the American Heartland to cover a political convention, but all I found was a tent revival, Brother Trump’s Traveling Salvation Show.
The Republican National Convention took just minutes after Monday’s opening gavel to officially nominate its Dear Leader for the third and probably not the last time. The roll call, once the highlight of past conventions, is now an empty ritual. A party platform that was probably written on a Mar-a-Lago cocktail napkin was rammed though with no dissent. RNC schedulersquickly liberated all four nights for the only real purpose they had here in Wisconsin.
The deification of Donald J. Trump.
The undulating white hats that staked a claim for Texas; the buttoned-down accountants under their ill-fitting, newly purchased red MAGA hats; and the tightly-wound blonde women in their adult cheerleading outfits — all of them populated the crowded floor of the Fiserv Forum wearing a badge that read “Delegate,” but they were only extras in the ultimate reality show. They mildly whooped for the transphobic jokes and Second Amendment bravado of faceless GOP Congressional candidates but by 8 p.m. Central most were sucked by a cosmic force toward the back corner of the floor, iPhones aloft to capture a moment of political transubstantiation.
It reaches fever pitch as the Village People’s gay disco anthem “Y.M.C.A.” floods the massive basketball arena, with images of the Leader’s goofball dancing on a big screen. A house band segues into The Romantics’ “What I Like About You” as he finally enters the long tunnel and climbs to his seat, white bandage covering the stigmata of his right ear, which bled from Butler, Pa. to Milwaukee for the salvation of America and this delirious throng.
In the minutes that follow, vanquished rivals like Nikki Haley or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis plead for mercy by pledging their undying fealty. The faithful thank their God for intervening Saturday to save Trump and save America. Eventually, the speeches all start sounding like a riff on The Manchurian Candidate: “Donald J. Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.”
But the camera is drawn, like a moth to flame, to Trump — head-cocked, absorbing the adulation, probably hoping the TV talking heads are speculating wildly about this obviously changed man. Here in Milwaukee, the political pundits finally saw the thing they’ve been pleading for — unity — and what that really looks like. It looks a lot like Jonestown.
“It seems that our party is really getting unified quite well,” Daniel Bobay, an ex-Californian who retired near Sulphur Springs, Texas, and was attending his first RNC as an alternate delegate, told me inside the Fiserv Forum. It was a variation of a quote I heard again and again and again. Bobay said he hopes the Trump shooting will reduce overheated rhetoric — but only from the media, and not especially from Republicans. “That’s always been the message,” he said with a slight chuckle, referring to tough talk on immigration. “You can’t only build half the wall, or deport only half the people.”
Like any cult, the real mysticism in Milwaukee was the things that went unsaid. I never thought I’d see a four-day national celebration of a presidential candidate who just 45 days earlier had been convicted on 34 felony charges, stemming from his efforts to win the 2016 election by paying off the porn star who would later testify she had sex with him.
But I’m much, much more flabbergasted by how quickly those convictions just vanished from your TV screen and the national conversation — just like the massive financial fraud, just like the E. Jean Carroll rape case, just like the taking of our top secret documents, just like the role he played in trying to tamper with his 2020 election defeat, and his summoning of a violent mob to the U.S. Capitol.
Any need to “tone it down” or “lower the national temperature” after Saturday’s shooting in Butler doesn’t undo the fact that all of those disqualifying things have happened. But here’s the other thing: Nobody at the RNC was really toning it down or lowering the temperature. Instead, it was like a weeklong heat dome of baseless accusation settled over eastern Wisconsin.
The harsh tone was set early on Monday, when Wisconsin GOP Sen. Ron Johnson welcomed the faithful to his home state by declaring “the Democrat agenda, their policies, are a clear and present danger to America, to our institutions, our values and our people.” Johnson then claimed that “the wrong speech” had been stuck into the teleprompter.
Really? In that case, the teleprompter guy must have brought all the wrong speeches. Because if there was some kind of memo about a new GOP message of peace, love, and understanding, it was not widely circulated. As I looked on from the upper deck Tuesday night, I heard a string of “everyday Americans” present a nonstop saga of murder, rape, and drug-related deaths. I wasn’t sure at times if I was watching the RNC or if Comcast had reactivated FEARnet. While some of the crimes were committed by undocumented migrants and others they sought to blame on liberal prosecutors, these truly awful, heartbreaking incidents were always tied back to President Joe Biden.
“I hold Joe Biden and Kamala Harris — the border czar, what a joke — and every Democrat who supports open borders, responsible for the death of my son,” a Southern California mom named Anne Fundner, who lost her 15-year-old son to a fentanyl overdose, told the delegates. Fundner burst into tears while the crowd erupted in chants of “Joe must go!” It was a moment which, like so many at the RNC, turned only emotional dials, without context about any link between Biden’s actual policies — or Trump’s, for that matter — and the calamity that befell Fundner’s son.
And look, no one expects convention goers to mount the RNC podium and admit that Biden’s border policies — which refugee advocates say are too strict and too similar to what Trump did — and his recent curbs on asylum have brought southern border crossings to their lowest levels of the 2020s, But did anyone expect that emotional dog-whistle speeches like Fundner’s would be greeted with delegates waving pre-made placards, “Stop Biden’s Border Bloodbath.”
Did they bring “the wrong signs,” just like Johnson brought “the wrong speech”? Or is this how the Republican Party lowers the temperature, even as it commits a type of stochastic terrorism by describing the most awful rapes and murders and telling America: Biden did this? Their version of “tone it down” is…”bloodbath”? Seriously? And yet when I walked around the inner bowels of the Fiserv Forum, RNC delegates swore that only Democrats are responsible for violent rhetoric.
“The level of violent rhetoric on the left has been escalating for years — they’re awful,” Bob Witsenhausen, the GOP county chair of Santa Fe, N.M., an alternate delegate wearing a red MAGA hat autographed by Laura Loomer, told me. He insisted that the “bloodbath” signs were OK because they address undocumented migrants — but he claimed Biden is “trying to label every MAGA Republican as a domestic terrorist.” He slammed Black Lives Matter but when I asked about the violence on Jan. 6, 2021, he replied with debunked tales about undercover FBI and “antifa” infiltrators. “Jan. 6 was a set up. Anybody who has their eyes open can see that.”
But paranoia strikes deep. Big-time Republicans here in Milwaukee like Donald Trump Jr. and the veep pick, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, both said in interviews that “they” had tried to kill the GOP nominee in Butler County. Wait, I thought the GOP absolutely hates “preferred pronouns.” Why are they calling a 20-year-old registered Republican male “they”? What’s more outrageous — that Republicans only want the rhetoric cooled off toward them? Or that the elite media is letting them get away with it?
The bubble of disinformation walled off in downtown Milwaukee from the rest of America by a maze of concrete barriers could be suffocating at times. I kept wondering one thing: What would the great gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson have made of all of this? How long before he started seeing hideous green lizards crawling from underneath the MAGA hats of these rhinestone cowboys, before the numbing conformity revealed the psychedelic terror of the grim American future that crawls just underneath the surface?
But even if everything they said here about Biden and his porous border were actually true, there still wouldn’t be enough illicit pharmaceuticals to satisfy the Hunter S. Thompson of 1972, or to make sense of this Republican Kool-Aid acid test. Besides, America needs less hallucination and more clarity.
The 2024 RNC is indeed all about unity, but only the creepiest and most cultist kinds. I saw unity of fear, in a party of ritual humiliation where dissenters like Mitt Romney or Liz Cheney are tossed down the memory hole. I saw the unity of people professing their love of community and a so-called “real America” that looks like the floor of the Fiserv Forum, overwhelmingly white, with any “different” folks pushed down the escalators.
We should be worried about the far right’s Project 2025, but we should be horrified by what we’re seeing right now in 2024, right here in the all-American city of Milwaukee. The cult of personality around Donald Trump is already creating its own reality, starting with his campaign’s refusal to release any medical information about his treatment or prognosis after Saturday’s shooting.
Monday’s shock cancellation of MSNBC’s Morning Joe proved that Big Media can be cowed from asking any tough questions that might pierce this bubble. The mostly desolate city blocks here — with cops on bicycles and helicopters and in large gaggles of officers on street corners — feel like a sneak peek at what Trump has in store for Democratic-run cities if he wins in November.
On Tuesday afternoon, five members of the RNC’s massive security force — imported from Columbus, Ohio, patrolling in a unfamiliar neighborhood one mile away from the Fiserv Forum — confronted a 43-year-old homeless man wielding a knife in an apparent altercation and killed him. The incident is still under investigation, but it felt like an opening volley of a Trump presidency that promises to send law enforcement and even troops into cities like Milwaukee, to round up the homeless or knock on the doors of undocumented migrants.
“Had that been Milwaukee PD, that man would be alive right now,” a neighborhood resident, David Porter, told the Huffington Post. “I know that because they know him.” You could argue that the homeless man, Samuel Sharpe, from the wrong side of the concrete barriers, is the first victim of a Trump restoration. And as the cult of Donald Trump swoons and sways toward November with little resistance, you can probably guarantee he won’t be the last.

The Trump campaign is being really savvy this year. Its candidate is still the Fascist he has shown himself to be, OF COURSE, but in sharp contrast to the last Repugnican Convention under Trump, which looked like a Leni Riefenstahl Nazi rally production, this one was extremely subdued and carefully crafted to portray the message that Trump is the humble, caring, family-centered, patriotic, Christian fighter for ordinary people. Lots of shots of Trump with a grandchild on his knee (Trump spent almost zero time with his children as they were growing up, with the exception of weird thing for Ivanka), Trump promising to end the taxes on tips for waitresses and cab drivers and caddies and others, etc. But ofc what he will actually do is give himself and other billionaires another big tax break and vastly increase the cost of goods to ordinary people by putting tariffs on imports. Bizarrely, the speech he gave was about one third claims to be the candidate of ordinary working people, lies about the border and promises to deport and irreparably harm hard-working immigrants, and Pat Buchanan-style America First isolationism. What was particularly noticeable in all this was the style–subdued, caring, humble. LOL. EXACTLY WHAT TRUMP IS NOT. He was coached really, really well. It was the best piece of ACTING I’ve ever seen the con man do. Effective. And chilling for that reason.
LikeLike
I am glad you could watch it. I used to work in the city sewer, my hands touching effluent all day. I have shoveled whole loads of cow manure, some of which got in my eyes, ears and mouth. I have graded papers given to me by hands just smearing their noses (ironically the dirtiest of the things above). But I could not bring myself to watch any of this.
I had the radio on long enough to hear the most irreligious sycophant I ever studied claim that he felt peace after his assassination attempt because he felt God was on his side. I turned off the radio. According to people who have a stronger stomach than I, He then went on to talk about how immigrants were evil, ignoring the central tenets of the religion he had just claimed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nailed it, Roy.
LikeLike
Roy,
You have a stronger stomach than I. I did not turn on the TV.
A friend commented this morning: “Isn’t it funny that both Trump and Vance stir up anti-immigrant fervor yet they are both married to immigrants?” Technically that’s not true. Vance’s wife was born here to immigrant parents from India. Trump’s wife is an immigrant who used to make a living posing for nude photographs.
LikeLike
Well, at least she has that going for her! ROFL!
LikeLike
While the Democratic coalition would be unifying in its messaging, never expect anything like that from the “Republicans.” Behind all this emotional hype is the hand of the Heritage Foundation’s rich oligarchy. If their boy gets into the White House again, they will get everything they want. The MAGAs will get fleeced the most, in their glee, never admitting or even realizing it.
LikeLike
Trump supporters will get fleeced and never know it
LikeLike
It’s the same old rich get richer scenario and the poor get poorer, both wrapped in a cross.
LikeLike
Republicans screaming about immigrants harming people after Trump bold faced the compromise immigration law is exactly where the Republican agenda has been since Reagan. For four decades, they have rejected any solutions to societal problems that might give government a good name. They wish to replace government of the people with various private entities that act as government. In health care, they want insurance companies to be government for health care. Disparate sources dispense education. Stay with this long enough, and we will come back to the days of Pinkerton, when law enforcement was hired.
Trump is the logical choice for a party which is now filled with people who will derive no benefit from his party’s rule. The adoring crowds of Trump supporters I know will never see one dime from Republican policy. Like the minions of the old south slaveholders hoodwinked thousands of hard scrabble Scott’s-Irish farmers to die for slavery, which hurt them s lot more than it hurt northern free soil people, Trump supporters will die more often, get less of an education, and see their beloved religion discredited in the eyes of future generations by its association with a corrupt political class. All this to support a small class of people who long to make their world safe for oligarchy.
LikeLike
“. . . and see their beloved religion discredited in the eyes of future generations by its association with a corrupt political class.”
I can only hope so!
LikeLike
Jennifer Rubin:
“SPICY SUMMARY: 1. the worst, most rambling, most insane, dishonest acceptance speech, the disgusting reference to Paul Pelosi and the vile anti-immigrant comments should cause media to hang their collective heads in shame for spending days normalizing him and pretending he underwent a conversion. 2. Their failure to EVER take his mental defects seriously is malpractice and disservice to voters. 3. describing the speech as just “long” or that Trump was conflicted is simply MAGA spin…”
NYT reporting on Trump’s speech:
“Donald J. Trump’s dramatic acceptance of his party’s nomination just days after a failed assassination attempt put an exclamation point on a triumphant week for a Republican Party that emerged from its convention confident and unified.
It was an evening of raw emotions, as Mr. Trump, for the first time on Thursday, recounted how a bullet “came within a quarter of an inch of taking my life.” Warning a rapt crowd that he would tell this tale only once because it was “too painful” to repeat, he spoke in a deliberate, almost meditative, cadence. He described being saved by providence and emerging “more determined than ever” to take back the White House.
The near-universal Republican embrace of Mr. Trump this week — after a deadly riot at the Capitol, an impeachment, four indictments and one criminal conviction since his last nomination — was all the more vivid because Democrats were tumbling further into turmoil over President Biden’s viability.
Trump being Trump, his remarks stretched past midnight on the East Coast, shattering his own record for the longest nominating speech. By the end, his meandering resembled the familiar grievances of his rallies. But nearly every ad-lib and scripted line was gobbled up by a party that has never seemed more in his grip.”
LikeLike
More from the NYT – and this is their NEWS, not opinion:
“The evening, and week, captured who Mr. Trump is: powerful and polarizing, prodigious and pugilistic. He also tried to reclaim the mantle of insurgency that fueled his only successful run, in 2016. “It’s time,” he declared, “for a change.”
Typical so-called liberal media “spin” to normalize Trump. Jennifer Rubin nails what is wrong with the so-called liberal media today.
LikeLike
I was up late. The TV was on silent. Trump was just getting finished speaking and his trophy wife was by his side. I was struck by his need for her to lead him to the part of the stage where he could be surrounded by his younger family and new VP choice. I thought Trump looked older and more fragile than Biden.
LikeLike
shhhh….only Biden is fragile. Trump is powerful and pugilistic. Trump is strong. Even the liberal NYT agrees, so it must be true.
Amazing that a speech full of lies is brushed off with a vague reference to Trump making his usual “familiar grievances” – in the NYT!
LikeLike
Hitler’s speech showed what a powerful, pugilistic leader he is. He made his familiar grievances about an ethnic group, but held the crows in his grip with his soaring rhetoric that harkened of better days to come for a country looking for strong leadership.
LikeLike
This is exactly the case. The day before the election in which his party gained enough seats to tip the balance and lead to Hindenburg naming him Chancellor, Hitler gave a LONG, LONG speech about the dangers to Germany posed by immigrants. Trump’s speech (probably written by Stephen “Goebbels” Miller; it sounded just like him) and Hitler’s–same stuff.
LikeLiked by 1 person
^^^held the CROWDS..
LikeLike
The frightening thing about Trump’s frailty is Vance. A Silicon Valley Yale graduate who claims to speak for rural people. Sounds like a southern planter claiming to speak for the plain folk of the old south.
LikeLike
Top NYT story, above the fold:
More of the NYT’s convention coverage from yesterday and today:
Other coverage of Trump’s speech:
Why is the New York Times so relentlessly positive about Donald Trump? It’s not fair!!!
LikeLike
ROFL, Flerp!
LikeLike
This is the front page of the NYT website on my computer – maybe it is different for you?
Top news headlines:
“11 Days in July: Inside the All-Out Push to Save the Biden Campaign”
“More Democrats Call on Biden to Exit the Race”
The Republican Convention is old news after 12 hours! but I can scroll down to find these headlines:
“Donald Trump Promised a Softer Image. He Delivered Hulkamania: The last night of the Republican National Convention featured glimpses of a more sober tone — and a whole lot of testosterone.”
(Hulkamania is FUN. It isn’t dangerous.)
“We Fact-Checked Donald Trump’s Free-Wheeling and Often Ad-Libbed Speech”
(I just adored Hitler’s free-wheeling speeches, didn’t you? Hitler’s ad libs were just marvelous, dontcha think?)
“The Republican Convention ended with the party unified around Donald Trump”
“Melania Trump, Bandages and Patriotism: The Most Effective Trump Accessories”
Now I will search to find some negative headlines that warn Americans of the danger of Trump, as the NYT has been warning of the extreme danger of cognitively unfit Biden.
LikeLike
Why would you include two Paul Krugman column headlines as if that was news reporting? Those aren’t NEWS stories – they are Paul Krugman columns.
LikeLike
I didn’t know what the rules were, sorry! I saw you post a Jen Rubin column as a contrast to the Times story you also posted and I guess I didn’t care about the distinction, which I think is a pretty fair way to characterize the way most readers distinguish between the two. Also your example of a Times “news” story was basically a running live blog, not really a “reported” story. So whatever, I guess.
LikeLike
Wait, yet another of those headlines is an op ed piece! Why would you post the headlines of OPINION columns to buttress your case?
People are not complaining about how NYT columnists talk about the Republicans.
They are talking about the daily news stories that are very different than the daily news stories about Biden.
I post NEWS articles. Not opinion pieces.
LikeLike
I guess this qualifies as a “highly negative” Trump story — this is the first actual NEWS story from that list:
“What Undecided Voters Thought of Trump’s Speech: Mostly, Not Much: Former President Trump did not win them over, not that they like the alternative.”
Wow, that is so negative! The NYT is really doing their bit to inform readers that Trump’s speech gets a typical response from undecided voters – it didn’t win them over yet. How NEGATIVE!
I am still trying to find if any of the other headlines are news, since they have already been minimized by the “bad news for Biden” headlines.
LikeLike
The only other news headline from the list of mostly op ed headlines that some people mistake as news coverage is this one — and I had to first find a link to “Republican Convention” coverage, and the scroll down a ways to find it:
“Trump Struggles to Turn the Page on ‘American Carnage’”
The negative subhead has disappeared already.
Credible media criticism distinguishes between news coverage and a headline on an op ed column that is clearly noted as “OPINION”.
The Wall Street Journal was famous for its very right leaning opinion pages but the NEWS coverage (in the days before Murdoch) was not reported with a right wing slant.
I am comparing apples to applies, news coverage of Biden to news coverage of Trump.
Is there any point in comparing negative news coverage of Biden to negative opinions of Trump voiced by NYT op ed columns clearly noted as “opinion”?
I stipulate that NYT columnists like Paul Krugman do write negative Trump articles. Just like NYT columnists like Bret Stephens writes many negative headlines about Biden.
Why would anyone resort to citing headlines from opinion columns to support their case that the NYT is extremely negative in their news coverage of Trump? Is it because it’s not easy to find any NEWS headlines? Because it is very easy to find negative Biden news headlines.
Right now, the Biden needs to go news headlines are above the Tech outage news. The Republican convention news is already less important, because informing readers of what the Republican Party has become is now merely “opinion” and “some liberal columnist’s POV”.
LikeLike
Holy crap did you just send five replies to my comment? Being angry about what the NY Times writes truly seems like it’s the most important issue of the campaign to you.
LikeLike
Holy crap, you listed 7 headlines and asked the question: “Why is the New York Times so relentlessly positive about Donald Trump? It’s not fair!!!”
I did what other people often do and split up my replies to address those 7 headlines. So ironic that you pick on that to attack me instead of providing credible evidence that supports you being so upset and defensive because I was critical of the NYT Republican Convention NEWS coverage.
My criticism of the normalizing coverage in the NYT is similar to what many people who do a lot more careful analysis than copying and pasting some opinion column headlines make.
The NYT is a big boy. They don’t need to be defended from critics who see how problematic their normalizing news coverage of Trump is, and they definitely shouldn’t be defended by people citing opinion column headlines to support the view that the NYT is actually very anti-Trump in their news coverage.
LikeLike
You can do better than this, NYC PSP. What is this? Only the 28th post you’ve made about whether sthe stories listed by Flerp were news stories? Since EVERYONE has as their most pressing concern whether you think that Flerp was right to list those stories and since the future of the country and the cosmos both hinge on this, please, please continue. War and Peace is 587,287 words long. Surely you can outdo that. Of course, the point of Flerp’s original post is that these were all anti-Trump pieces. Whether they were news stories or not is irrelevant. But do go on.
and on
and on
and on
LikeLike
“But Paul Krugman was critical of Trump in his opinion column” is not a very credible defense of the normalizing news coverage the NYT (and other news organizations) did when reporting on the RNC.
LikeLike
Do say! Tell us MORE! Much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much more. Like mulch for all the gardens of America more! Much more mulch!
LikeLike
NorMaLIZinG!
LikeLike
You two are becoming parodies of yourselves. Have you even noticed that while the two of you often tag team and come to “rescue” one another by gratuitously popping up to add an insult directed at me, no one else joins in?
I made perfectly reasonable replies addressing the specific headlines that were posted to contradict my criticism of the NYT.
Why does it bother you that I informed readers that the headlines posted to “prove” that the NYT news coverage is highly critical of Trump were primarily from opinion columns not news articles?
This isn’t a joke. Jennifer Rubin gets it. The media does play a role and simply putting your fingers in your ears and yelling “the NYT is so anti-Trump, the liberal media is so anti-Trump just like Republicans keep saying” is part of the problem.
LikeLike
But Jennifer Rubin is not categorized as “news”!!!!
LikeLike
I don’t know what your point is.
Marcy Wheeler isn’t “news”. Jennifer Rubin isn’t “news”. David Kurtz at Talking Point Memo isn’t “news”. Heather Cox Richardson isn’t “news”. Rebecca Solnit isn’t “news”.
They have all made criticism of the media, often the NYT, using credible evidence and argument and that has informed my opinion. When I check their evidence, I don’t find them complaining about a Bret Stephens column in the NYT being “anti-Biden”. They cite NEWS coverage, because they understand the difference between a Bret Stephens anti-Biden opinion column and anti-Biden news coverage, and they know the difference between a Paul Krugman anti-Trump column and news coverage that normalizes Trump.
For some reason you have some knee jerk need to defend the NYT from criticism. You seem obsessed with proving that the NYT is extremely anti-Trump, which I respect, but you are doing it by citing Paul Krugman headlines which I don’t respect.
If I were making my case that the NYT was too pro-Trump by citing the headlines of their most Republican columnists, I’d be making a weak argument. But Marcy Wheeler and Jennifer Rubin and David Kurtz and Heather Cox Richardson and Rebecca Solnit are NOT criticizing the NYT columnists. They are criticizing the news reporters who are covering the news, who write negative Biden news articles and normalizing Trump/Republican news articles.
It feels like you are now being willfully obtuse about the difference, and I am not interested in having this conversation any further. I think folks can read this and whatever insulting reply you make and judge for themselves.
LikeLike
I’m obsessed? lol ok.
Try not to let the New York Times ruin your weekend!
LikeLike
I’ve heard that CRT and the NYT both hang around schoolyards in trench coats and sunglasses.
LikeLike
You don’t disappoint. Any word on the publication date for your 12-volume set “The Incorrectness of Flerp”? Maybe you could do a companion television miniseries. It’s not just incorrectness of Flerp scholars who cannot wait to get their hands on this, of course. His incorrectness is what doubtless what keeps people riveted to these pages.
LikeLike
Nothin’ from nothin’ leaves nothin’…
You can’t change something with nothing. Defining a SYMPTOM doesn’t change the DISEASE. The vipers hiss in their pit with you or without you. The appointed rule without media consent. It ain’t what is unknown about the opposition, that causes trouble. It’s doing more of what doesn’t stop them. Action still precedes reaction.
Nothin’ from nothin’ leaves nothin’…
LikeLike
LikeLike
Here’s how the Democrats turn this around…First, Biden has to step aside. Yes, I know there are many that feel he has been wronged, but he has done little to ease the concerns of his aging since the debate and the polls of everyday Democrats are clear that they want another option. Second, the DNC arranges media to allow any who want the job to vigorously make their case leading up to the Democratic Convention. Third, the first three days of the convention should be a series of open roll calls until a candidate is nominated. Finally, Thursday should be a unifying statement that shows Democrats understand there are numerous members of their party with presidential timber but that they will all get behind the winning nominee. What will also be important that week is that Democrats show their love for all that Biden has done for them and that the marching orders going forward are to continue the progress we have seen over the last four years. Now, that would be unity!
LikeLike
This is going to be interesting.
LikeLike
What happened to “Kamala will be the nominee, sure as the sun rises tomorrow, sure as circles are round?”
LikeLike
It will be interesting to see the initial reactions to the fact that Kamala will be the nominee.
LikeLike
The key with Kamala is that she has to put a better campaign team together than she had in 2020. I get a sense that this is where the hesitancy comes from. I was thinking about it last night. For a political class that is so dominated by the Ivey League. Kamala is not that at all. She needs to lean on this to present a candidate who is not beholden to an eastern elite.
LikeLike
yes
LikeLike
Her approval numbers are horrific. Poll I saw yesterday had her at 29% approval, 49% disapproval. That’s almost Hillary Clinton levels of disapproval in 2016, but without Hillary’s approval numbers (~40%), which themselves weren’t that great. Things change after a nomination, for sure, but these aren’t hypothetical head-to-head matchup numbers. These are straight approval numbers, after four years as Vice President. Not great.
LikeLike
It was bizarre that the NYT described Trump at the convention as “pugilistic.” The most remarkable thing about his demeanor throughout was how uncharacteristically nonpugilistic he was. He had definitely been coached to tone it way, way, way down in an attempt to go after the undecideds and independents. Of course, he’s the same vengeful, angry, dangerous criminal he ever was, but that was not his Presentation of Self at the event.
LikeLike
Let’s hope so…
LikeLike
Tend to agree. But I’m skeptical it will happen like that. It is taking an enormous burst of political energy from Dem politicians to pressure Biden to step aside. That effort may succeed. But it would take another burst to prevent Biden from anointing Harris. I don’t know that they have a second burst in them. Wildcard is, do we actually know if Biden prefers Harris to other candidates?
LikeLike
This is similar to what James Carville proposed last week. Although he is aging as well, he has the credibility of heading two winning Presidential campaigns in the 1990’s. I think people should listen. Harris is polling well with no effort while maintaining her loyalty to Biden. Democrats could do worse. Besides, the MAGA bigots are already rolling out “DEI” and showing their true colors. This will come back to bite them.
LikeLike
Harris has been a good VP in a very successful administration. No way she is not the logical successor.
LikeLike
I doubt we will ever know who Biden prefers, since Kamala Harris will be the nominee.
To clarify, if we do know that Biden wanted someone else, because that is reported ad nauseam as part of the 10 negative stories a day in the NYT about Kamala that we are about to be subject to, then maybe Kamala won’t be the nominee. But it will be Kamala, so if there are those negative stories (Biden didn’t want her!), the Dems will have shot themselves in the foot by forcing Biden out. Because Kamala will be the nominee.
By the way, I reiterate my idea that the best way for the “dump Kamala” crowd of elites that is forcing Biden out to also “dump Kamala” is as follows:
First they force Sandra Sotomayor to retire. Then Biden nominates Kamala to replace her as a Supreme Court Justice and the Dems in the Senate quickly confirm her. Then Biden nominates whatever heir apparent the elites want to be president as his Vice President.
Easy peasy.
LikeLike
I don’t get a sense that the Democrats are that diabolical.
LikeLike
It’s also not possible. A new veep has to be confirmed by both houses of Congress.
LikeLike
Ah, the NYT again!
LikeLike
Much ADO about Nothing: Revised Edition: Revised Edition by William Shakespeare 9781472520296 | eBay
LikeLike
What you propose is unconstitutional.
LikeLike
removing Biden and not keeping Harris is problematic to some extent, given that she pulls in a few voters who see women and African-Americans as being required to step aside for old white guys
LikeLike
For what it’s worth, I think Harris will be the candidate if Biden steps aside. I’m hoping that either Governor Gretchen Whitmer or Senator Amy Klobuchar would be her running mate. What a great ticket that would be.
LikeLike
I keep hearing this and I’m really not sure how strong the evidence is that black or women voters would not vote for a non-black or male Dem candidate. It feels like an assumption. I’d go with Whitmer and Shapiro.
LikeLike
Whitmer and Shapiro?
Shapiro? Is that affirmative action for white guys?
Josh Shapiro has been Governor for all of 18 months and previously he was Attorney General of a large state for 6 years.
Kamala was the VP of the US for 4 years, a US Senator for 4 years, and Attorney General of an even larger state for 6 years.
Whitmer would make a fine VP pick for Kamala.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have a bad feeling about Shapiro because he supports vouchers. I have heard (may not be true) that he made a bargain with the Trump-loving Jeff Yass, the richest man in Pennsylvania. Yass has funded vouchers in several states, including Texas
LikeLike
It may end up not mattering that the Democrats settle late on their ticket. The American public has a short memory. They like new things. The Dem ticket will be a breath of fresh air. Trump is old and stale. Vance is a mini-Trump
LikeLike
Shapiro is a popular governor of an essential swing state.
Whitmer is a somewhat less popular, but still fairly popular, governor of an essential swing state.
Harris is a hugely unpopular vice president who has won as many primaries as Whitmer and Shapiro.
You’re probably right that it will be Harris if Biden steps aside. I just think a much better idea is Whitmer and Shapiro.
LikeLike
If Harris dropped, the black vote will sit out the election. Sure loser strategy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just don’t know that that’s true. What’s the evidence that black voters will not vote for anyone other than Biden and Harris?
LikeLike
If Harris is passed over, the fact that she was, will be HUGE news. And it will, in particular, be huge news on black media. There will be a LOT of very angry folks out there.
Me among them.
LikeLike
You’d still vote for the Dem nominee though.
You and Diane might be right but I haven’t seen evidence that this is how it would play out.
LikeLike
I would. But that’s not the issue. The issue is whether black people rightly furious about Harris being passed over would then choose to sit out or even to vote for Trump. I think that there would be a LOT of such people. This would be a slap in the faces of black Americans.
LikeLike
I get the argument, but I’m not sure the impact would be that big. Or that it would outweigh the positive impact of having a more popular candidate on top of the ticket. Again, Harris’s approval ratings are mindblowingly bad. Probably the worst ever for a vice president. She’s around a net -20 favorable/unfavorable.
LikeLike
If she gets the nod, she will suddenly be all bright and shiny. AND remember that the black vote was key to Biden’s victory in 2020. As I have argued here before, Democratic victory is always contingent on bringing out the large numbers of young and black Democrats who generally sit out the elections. That is, it depends upon the galvanization of the periphery of the Democratic electorate. This is why the DNC errs enormously in typically backing the safest, most “moderate” candidate. The core Dems will come out for whoever the nominee is. But winning the election will depend upon adding to that group the disaffected and wishy-washy Dems.
LikeLike
Eh . . . maybe.
LikeLike
Trump will never agree to debate Kamala because she would leave him an orange puddle on the stage. She is smart AF, and her public speaking skills have really improved. She’s dynamite onstage now.
LikeLike
What a contrast: an overweight balding guy full of hot air vs a dynamic, well-spoken, experienced woman. She has all her marbles. He doesn’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think you can move favorability numbers up. But unfavorability numbers are difficult to move. If 50% of adults don’t like Kamala, that’s a real problem.
On the other hand, what do I know. Also, none of this is up to me. And I would vote for whoever.
LikeLike
I agree, Diane
LikeLike
That would REALLY blow up in the Democrats’ faces. NOT. A. GOOD. IDEA.
LikeLike
Weren’t folks just citing polls saying that Harris was the strongest candidate against Trump? Now she’s an even weaker candidate than Biden?
AOC is right. The dump Biden movement is also a dump Kamala movement.
But I know that Kamala will be the nominee because Bob already explained that the sun won’t rise if she isn’t, and a circle will no longer be round if Kamala isn’t the nominee.
LikeLike
I wasn’t citing polls saying she’s the strongest candidate against Trump, and I’m not saying she’s a weaker candidate against Trump than Biden. My opinion is that Harris is an upgrade from Biden, because she is capable of speaking clearly and coherently without trailing off inaudibly. But I don’t see her as a huge upgrade or the best candidate. If I had my way, I would go for the route of some kind of “mini-primary” where delegates made the decision. But I acknowledge it’s risky. But so is going with a weak candidate. It’s a difficult choice, because we are in a difficult position.
So now you know my position!
LikeLike
Would YOU vote for Kamala?
What makes you think swing voters won’t?
Kamala is unfavorable with Trump voters. Just like Trump is unfavorable with Biden voters.
What reason would undecideds have for hating Kamala other than her race and/or gender? She’s done nothing to deserve their negative feelings. What’s their problem with her?
LikeLike
I already said I would in another comment.
I think a lot of swing voters won’t because she has the worst approval ratings for any Vice President in history. She has unfavorable ratings around 50%. That’s going to include a fair number of swing voters.
LikeLike
I think Kamala is getting dragged down by Biden’s numbers.
Trump has a huge number of people who will never vote for him.
LikeLike
Yes, and Kamala has almost Trump-level unfavorables. That’s a terrible thing for your candidate to have.
You may be right about Biden dragging Harris down. But I’m not sure that hypothesis is testable.
I think a new face would be the best move. Whitmer at the top of the ticket, and Shapiro below. But I’m just little ol’ me and nobody cares what I think.
To reiterate, all these hypotheticals carry a lot of risk. There’s no safe path forward.
LikeLike
One thing that has been consistent over the past two years in polling is that 75% of the electorate don’t want Trump or Biden. There’s significant reporting that Trump’s whole campaign has been geared up to go against Biden. If that changes panic will ensue among Republicans.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, there’s a semi-popular notion that Trump wants to get rid of Biden but I think the opposite is true.
LikeLike
I have watched a lot of elections, and it seems to me that Republicans win all the time with supposedly “unpopular” nominees. If anything, the nominees who were more generally popular – like McCain or Romney – often lost. G W Bush wasn’t popular until he was made to be popular. people viewed him as a lightweight who traded in on his dad’s name.
People have amnesia about how incredibly popular she who must not be named was when she was NY Senator (even though she was definitely a carpet bagger) and when she was Secy of State. The memes with her sunglasses on. Hard to remember there was a time she was considered cool even by young people.
The Republicans are going to have a field day with all the candidates named, and they are going to be far more unpopular than Kamala Harris when they are done.
But I don’t understand how in the course of a week, Kamala’s approval ratings can be one of the lowest in history AND polls showed that she was the only Dem who could beat Trump. Maybe it’s time to stop choosing candidates based on polling and start working on making them popular instead of helping the right wing make them unpopular. As Bernie and AOC tried to tell people to do about Biden, but everyone treated them like idiots because of “polls”.
LikeLike
Democrats have won the popular vote in 7 of the past 8 presidential elections. Democrats have done very well since Trump took office in 2017. Trends matter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul,
I’m hoping that most people see him as the charlatan that he is.
LikeLike
It’s been a while but I think you’re right that Hillary was popular back then, but she always had huge unfavorable ratings nationally. A lot of people who really did not like her. Unfavorable ratings over 50% are just terrible, very difficult to overcome. Maybe it can be overcome here because Trump is such an awful alternative. Then again, that’s what we thought in 2016.
No alternative candidate who might be nominated instead of Biden or Harris would end the election cycle with unfavorable ratings higher than Harris. It’s not possible.
I’ll vote for whoever the nominee is, but in the meantime I’ll also speak frankly here about my estimation of the chances of Biden, Harris, and anyone else. If you want to restrict yourself to make only laudatory comments about Biden and Harris and their chances in November, that’s up to you. One thing I do know is that nothing you or I write in comments here is going to “make [any candidate] popular” or unpopular.
LikeLike
Hillary is a very impressive and likable person. Since Bill won in 1992, the GOP was determined to destroy her. She is a brilliant, knowledgeable, experienced woman who would have been a great president. James Comey took her out by announcing that he was reopening the FBI investigation of her emails because of emails found on Anthony Weiner’s computer. A few days later, he said “Whoops! We were wrong.” That killed her candidacy and gave us the most horrible president of our history.
LikeLike
All true, except the 2016 election would have been extremely close even without Comey.
My point is that one of the reasons the election was so close that it could have been upended by Comey is that there were huge numbers of voters who disliked her. Whether you think that dislike was justified is another thing. But elections don’t turn on how people should feel or think or vote. They turn on how people actually do feel and think and vote. And I think Kamala is not the best candidate out there.
LikeLike
Flerp, how will the Dem candidate fare if black voters stay home?
LikeLike
Depends how many stay home, in what states, and how many other voters turn out.
LikeLike
Being unpopular improves one’s chances of winning an election.
Now that’s a novel analysis.
Robert D. Shepherd
Writing | Editing | Graphic Design
Tel: 978-985-2008
https://rshepherdportfolio.wordpress.com/
https://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/
“E questo dubbio e impossibile a solvere a chi non fosse in simile grado fedele d’Amore.” –Dante, La vita nuova
[logo]
LikeLike
FLERP– Harris’s approval rating runs at the same level as Biden’s 37%, 38% (hers was 39% in April). 3 years ago, it was indeed “mind-blowingly bad,” but that didn’t last. It tracks Biden’s approval rating. [And let’s keep in mind: Trump’s approval rating in office averaged only 41%.]
I don’t see the approval rating as having much relevance, compared to the polls on how registered voters would vote in the upcoming election. All recent national polling shows a “dead heat,” whether head-to-head or including 3rd parties [Biden slightly ahead, but within normal margin of poll error]. Harris head-to-head polls 1% ahead of Biden (but still within margin of error). Whitmer, Newsom, Shapiro poll same to slightly less [Shapiro].
LikeLike
NYCPSP– I assume your proposal for Biden to nominate Harris to SCOTUS was facetious? Of the 9 justices now on the court, only Kagan was never a judge (the others were all judges in federal courts). And Kagan was Solicitor General, as well as clerking for fed judge & SCOTUS justice, as well as (while a law prof) author of a highly influential law review article recommending how SCOTUS should approach First Amendment cases. Harris has admirable background for a politician, but not for a SCOTUS justice.
[speaking of Solicitor General: let’s get Elizabeth Prelogar on SCOTUS!]
LikeLiked by 1 person
None of it matters because a president can’t just name anyone he wants to be vice president. This is in the 25th Amendment. Needs approval of both houses of Congress, which would not be possible here.
LikeLike
I’m hearing so many conflicting stories about what Biden is going to do that it’s mind numbing. Just heard a report on NPR radio that Biden is adamant that he will stay in the race and will NOT step down. But I’m hearing many more reports that Biden is close to stepping down and passing the baton to Harris (I presume).
Gee, just what we need when we are faced with the Trump/Vance malignancy. The claims made by Trump, Vance and the other GOP gargoyles are vile, vicious and false, lies heaped upon lies. And these 2 thugs could win in November.
LikeLike
Correction, it was WCPT 820 radio (via the Internet), a liberal radio station featuring folks like Thom Hartmann, Hal Sparks and Stephanie Miller, etc. I listen to this station over the Internet, it’s currently playing Thom H. from 12:00 to 3:00 on the east coast. In any case, the WCPT station restated that Biden is staying in the race in a news report quickie during commercial break.
LikeLike
AOC is so good on this.
She basically said that the dump Biden people are determined to also dump Kamala. Which is probably why wise Bernie Sanders was fighting so hard to keep Biden on the ticket. Because with Biden, Kamala Harris is standing in the wings and the plan is to dump both of them and cause chaos and division.
AOC is absolutely right. The Dem politicians who have basically given up the race to Trump should step down. They don’t want to fight for Dems.
LikeLike
^^meant to say that perhaps Biden is reluctant to step down because he KNOWS that plan is to dump Kamala, too, and he also knows that would be a disaster and lead to chaos and unhappiness. Bernie Sanders knows that, too, which is very likely why he was supporting keeping Biden on the ticket.
The people who were fine with Kamala Harris were not in the dump Biden movement. They were scared that Kamala would become president because Biden couldn’t serve a full term, and they didn’t want Kamala to interfere with their plans to annoint their own choice.
LikeLike
Nah. There are a lot of people who think the best course is for Biden to step aside and for Harris to become the nominee. Bob is one. You’re over-generalizing.
LikeLike
Do you mean AOC is over-generalizing?
The feelings of you and I or Bob don’t amount to a hill of beans in deciding whether Biden steps down.
AOC is simply talking about what she has seen behind closed doors.
I am simply pointing out that what she says certainly seems plausible.
But Bob tells me that Kamala will be the nominee or the sun won’t rise, so maybe there’s a higher power than the Dem elites behind Kamala.
LikeLike
No, I meant you were over generalizing when you wrote “The people who were fine with Kamala Harris were not in the dump Biden movement.” There are many people who think Biden should step aside and also think Harris should be the nominee. If you’re only repeating what AOC thinks and you don’t agree with her (which would be almost inconceivable), then I guess I’m only saying AOC is overgeneralizing.
LikeLike
The Hill, 7/19/24
“Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) took a swing at Democratic “elites” who are pushing for President Biden to stand down from the 2024 race, warning they are also “not interested” in seeing Vice President Harris atop the ticket.
…..
“If you think that there is consensus among the people who want Joe Biden to leave that they will support Vice President Harris, you would be mistaken,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “They’re not going to be fully honest, but I’m going to be honest for them.”
“I’m in these rooms. I see what they say in conversations,” she continued. “I’m here to tell you that a huge amount of the donor class and a huge amount of these elites and a huge amount of these folks in these rooms that I see that are pushing for President Biden to not be the nominee also are not interested in seeing Vice President being the nominee.”
flerp!, there is no need to make this personal about me. I am informing people what AOC said she saw in the rooms where the folks who are influential are.
LikeLike
No need to get offended. You wrote something and I gave you my opinion that what you wrote was over-generalizing and wrong. If you didn’t say it or believe it, it’s irrelevant to you.
LikeLike
I’m not offended that you wanted to analyze my comment for what I thought. I’m fine with letting you know if your analysis is wrong.
Now you know that AOC provided an insider view to what the elite who are pushing Biden out want — and it’s not Kamala as the nominee. I assume that would be good news to you since you don’t want Kamala as the nominee either.
Many of us non-elites who have no vote nor any influence (we can’t threaten to hold up our donations like the billionaires!) do want Kamala. Bob says Kamala will absolutely be the nominee. I am more cynical and won’t be surprised if the elites that AOC is referring to get their way.
I’m going to support whoever the nominee is, regardless. But I don’t think anyone who comes out of a contentious convention can beat Trump.
LikeLike
I don’t pay much attention to what AOC says.
LikeLike
lol! My reply began with “AOC is so good on this”. You could have just replied “I don’t pay much attention to what AOC says” and saved us both a lot of time. Presumably you don’t care what I think, either. I am not ashamed to admit that AOC has more insight into DC politics than I do. She is very wise despite her age, and I hope I get to vote for her for US President someday.
LikeLike
Recommending to readers here the exciting autobiography Flerp Is Wrong: How I Showed This, and AOC Agrees, by NYC PSP (1027 pages). And if that’s not enough, grab a copy as well of the thrilling sequel: Why Flerp Was Even More Wrong Than I Thought, OMG.
LikeLike
Bob, why did you leave out Bernie?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think Kamala has done a masterful job speaking on the stump while showing loyalty to President Biden. There needs to be a forceful unified conclusion to all of this. The President’s optics around covid have not been good. It’s not Democrats that have to be convinced, but never Trumpers and independents.
LikeLike
pabonner– Based on polling, it looks like the only voters who have to be “convinced” are Democrats. All the national polls are virtually unchanged from before the debate to today: it’s still a dead heat, with Trump or Biden ahead by a pt or 2, well within poll margin of error. Yet the Dems are running around with hair on fire, convinced they “now” (since debate) are doomed to lose.
LikeLike
It’s so crazy, right? If they just had stuck with Biden, Kamala would take over at some point after the election. It’s crazy it’s so close after Biden has that much negative publicity for a month! And Trump got the assassination attempt bump.
I think it’s a big risk to think that the chaos of an open convention is a good idea.
I also suggested that Biden announce that he is releasing his delegates from any obligation to vote for him, and then the delegates – free to vote for whomever they choose, give a SWEEPING victory to Biden! Now that would change the narrative, fast! Can you imagine the look on the elite folks’ faces if one state after another announced “Alabama gives our 10 electoral votes to President Joe Biden, who has done more for this country in 4 years than any president in recent history, and whom we TRUST because of his unparalleled wisdom and judgement.”
FIFTY separate testaments to Joe Biden’s WISDOM and 50 separate testaments about what Biden has done for Americans over the last 4 years. Change the narrative to “Americans love AND TRUST Joe Biden”.
I can dream, can’t I?
I was serious about making Kamala a Supreme Court Justice, but I hadn’t thought of the fact she was never a judge nor a legal scholar. Was just thinking she was an attorney general for so long. But you have a good point that she would not have the traditional background of justices. I just thought that the ONLY way to have a new nominee other than Kamala is to have her choose to go to the highest court in the land – an honor as close to being nominated for president as it gets, in my opinion.
LikeLike
NYCPSP, the 25th amendment prevents Biden from choosing any replacement VP he wants. So the VP swap plan can’t happen unless the House GOP majority agrees to the new VP.
LikeLike
Here’s why: that margin is horrifying when there is this much at stake. When utter calamity can occur, the precautionary principle applies.
LikeLike
anti-Whitmer talking points already being brushed off:
Forbes.com July 16, 2024
“As Democratic donors, lawmakers, and pundits scramble to find a way to replace President Joe Biden (D) as their party’s presidential nominee this fall, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) continues to be mentioned as a prospective replacement candidate. It’s easy to see why many Democrats believe Whitmer, who recently said that it would not hurt for President Biden to take a cognitive test, would be a more competitive candidate than Biden. A deep dive into Whitmer’s accomplishments as governor, however, turns up a record that could be difficult to defend outside of blue states.
Prominent policy changes enacted by Governor Whitmer since Democrats took control of the Michigan House and Senate — such as the undoing of an income tax cut enacted by her predecessor and repeal of Right-to-Work so that Michigan workers can once again be forced to join a union as a condition of employment — will be viewed as major victories by top Democratic Party donors, but will prove unpopular with voters in Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada, and other 2024 battleground states that will determine whether Democrats maintain control of the White House and U.S. Senate. What’s more, though Whitmer was able to survive the blowback against the draconian lockdowns that she mandated during the pandemic but was herself caught skirting, a national electorate is unlikely to be as forgiving.
In addition to being difficult to sell to independent voters and swing state electorates, Whitmer’s record will provide ample fodder for Republican ad makers. Take the controversial decision by Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) to undo a legislatively enacted income tax cut that was signed into law by Whitmer’s predecessor, Rick Snyder. Income tax cuts have been enacted in more than half of the states over the last four years. At a time when most states, even blue states, are cutting income taxes, this move backed by Governor Whitmer to ratchet the rate back up made Michigan an outlier.”
LikeLike
A rule of politics is if there’s a candidate, there will be anti-candidate talking points. I’ve never seen the rule violated.
LikeLike
There is a rule in the Republican Party not to legitimize anti-candidate talking points. Critics of Trump get excommunicated from the Republican party. In a way, it’s a brilliant PR tactic because Liz Cheney’s criticism of Trump is more easily brushed off as “sour grapes” because the Republicans kicked her out. And the Republicans only have to excommunicate a small number to sending a warning to the rest. Not surprising that Nikki Hayley bent the knee to Trump. Not surprising that Trump could insult Ted Cruz wife and suggest his dad helped assassinate JFK, and Cruz will still bend the knee or at the least be silently complicit. Even Mitt Romney is a bit of a coward and somehow usually retracts former criticism when that criticism might damage Republicans’ election chances. Has he praised J.D. Vance yet? He criticized Trump but embraced the hypocrisy of letting Trump have a 3rd Supreme Court nomination just weeks before the election. Susan Collins shakes her finger vigorously and then does what she is ordered to do to empower the Republicans. Or is silently complicit.
The Dems usually amplify the anti-candidate talking points themselves, as we saw with Biden, she who can not be named, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry, and Carter. Dems rarely come together and stop amplifying anti-candidate talking points, but when they do, they win. I’m not holding my breath, however, because if Kamala is thrown aside by a group of “elites”, there will be a lot of unhappy people after the convention.
No Democrat has ever won when the message from disaffected supporters of other Dem candidates is “we know this candidate is everything the Republicans say they are, but hold your nose and vote for them like we are.” Undecideds aren’t particularly moved when they keep hearing that even the Dems – even the liberal NYT news reporters who cover the Dem candidate – know this candidate is awful.
LikeLike
It’s a shame we can’t just stop people from saying what they think.
LikeLike
Just wait. That’s coming.
LikeLike
It’s in some people’s DNA, the impulse to control what other people are saying. The tendency to conclude that the biggest problem is that people are saying X instead of Y. If only we could stop people from saying X. Even better, what if we could make them say Y?
LikeLike
Another drive through rural Missouri into St. Louis (West County area, generally a conservative area of greater St. Louis) seeing signs/posters for the Republican candidates for various offices.
Not a single tRump sign/poster/flag. In the prior two presidential elections the tRump signs dominated the landscape. Again, I didn’t see a single sign of support for the tRump. Years past those posters/signs/flags were up and flying for years, not just for the campaigns.
I’d say that the true “conservative” Republicans, not the reactionary/revanchist xtian MAGA types, do not like to have a CONVICTED FELON as the party’s nominee and will not support him.
I hope that I am right in my analysis of what I am seeing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe these folks are simply Trumped out. Like the rest of us.
LikeLike
This is my wife’s theory.
LikeLike
At any rate, that’s fascinating, Duane!
LikeLike
Duane to the rescue! . . . made my heart melt. CBK
LikeLike
pabonner/July 19, 2024 at 1:26 pm
“I don’t get a sense that the Democrats are that diabolical.” . . . about getting rid of Harris.
Where the rich and their money are concerned, all judgments grounded in naive projections are off. CBK
LikeLike
“Duane to the . . . “
Thanks for the kind thought.
I caution you that my political analysis and/or prognostications over the years have been quite poor. Never thought Saint Unca Ronnie would be elected. And then Georgie the Least. . . no way! The pre-CONVICTED FELON tRump. . . an impossibility. And many others over the years. I’d have hoped that I learned not to make them. . . but. . . nooooo.
By the way I’ve taken to almost always using “CONVICTED FELON” when referring to the tRump. Am getting many ads on FB for Rethugs proudly proclaiming that they stand with the CONVICTED FELON. The way I respond to them is “So, you’re proud to stand with/throw in your hat with a CONVICTED FELON?” It’s kind of fun in a sick sort of way to see the tRump cultistas defending the CONVICTED FELON.
LikeLike
Hello Duane: The MAGA situation, like the Jim Jones thing but much bigger in scope, is probably the biggest head-banger history has ever known.
I think “we” have to keep showing that the king really has no clothes. And that’s why I think your note about the absence of Trump signs is so comforting.
I do hope “we” can get more and more to climb out of Alice’s rabbit hole . . . the conspiracy-ridden handwringing wonderland, and live to tell the tale to others who, my guess is, will also head-bang from an inability to fully understand what happened to really sincere and otherwise good people. CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
“. . . what happened to really sincere and otherwise good people.”
Yes. I know and interact with many who like and believe in the tRump. Some I’ve been friends with for over 60 years. The conviction has made some rethink their support for him. It is hard to admit that one has been snookered by a conman, in this case a now CONVICTED FELON.
And I think that RFK Jr will draw some of those voters because they certainly won’t vote Democrat. Seems to me that the tRump will get ten million less votes than the last time around. Now if the tRump campaign can corral RFK Jr all bets are off.
The caveat being that I’ve been wrong many times before on political things. Quote me at your own peril. 😉
LikeLike
Duane: Peril or note, it sounds right to me this time–though I’m no paragon of predictive powers either.
I do think this, however, as I channel a deep thread of Orwellian thinking, what is really an old but huge vein of sub- and semiconscious white supremacy has been hiding under the names of “democracy,” “republic,” and “patriot” for a very long time in this country. CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
CBK correction: That’s “not” and not “note.”
But also, such white supremacy (and male and narrow gender identity) has remained hidden . . . and since Obama, . . .
UNTIL the republican polity (extremely expressed as MAGA) began to recognize they could not regularly win without (1) changing their attitudes about black and brown, female, and “other than their narrow identity” powers, or (2) cheating and, basically, without abandoning even their Christian ideals.
I know NO Christians in that group. “Christian” is just another coverall name for all that WS shit that still lives deep in their unrepentant psyches and got “woke” by having lost in a fair election.
We are not newly WOKE. Rather, we are just now facing WOKE. CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
Watch Buttigieg make the case against JD Vance here. Contrast it with the best-of-all-worlds case against Vance that Biden (or frankly any other potential candidate) could make.
https://x.com/yashar/status/1814502680448192741?s=46&t=vV_4bJ7GuABaalzetJofQA
LikeLike