Archives for category: Elections

Our reader “Democracy” always posts wise, deeply researched comments. In this comment, Democracy makes us wonder whether Trump’s nomination of Matt Gaetz was a deep fake that would make anyone else look better. Such as Pam Bondi.

Pam Bondi will be loyal to Trump. Loyalty is the trait that matters more to Trump than competence or experience.

The Washington Post wrote about Bondi:

“Bondi said the Justice Department’s special counsel investigation into whether Trump associates coordinated with Russian interference in the 2016 election needed to be dissolved. She declared that the 45th president’s first impeachment in 2019 was a “sham.” And when Trump was indicted four times after leaving office, Bondi was blunt about who deserved legal scrutiny — and it wasn’t the former president.

“The prosecutors will be prosecuted, the bad ones,” Bondi declared on Fox News in 2023, soon after Trump’s fourth set of criminal charges. “The investigators will be investigated.”

Democracy writes:

Pam Bondi as Attorney General.

What could go wrong? Let’s see.

Bondi was never a supporter of the Affordable Care Act and tried to extinguish it. As of February of this year, Florida had more than 4 million people receiving health care through the Affordable Care Act, the highest ACA enrollment in the country.

Bondi has been a long-time opponent of LGBTQ rights and same-ex marriage. After the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, Bondi said she had OPPOSED same-sex marriage NOT for any personal beliefs or political partisanship but because of “the rule of law.”

Bondi took that $25,000 political donation from a Trump CHARITY and then dropped any participation by Florida in a lawsuit against the Trump University flim-flam scheme. She denied that she did anything wrong or that there was any connection between the moola and her decision not to participate in the suit against Trump’s crooked tactics. Indeed, as one Trump University official said in court testimony, enrollees in the courses were directed to

“call their credit card companies and raise their credit limits two, three, or four times so that they would be able to invest in real estate,” to “charge the course to multiple credit cards” or “to open up as many credit cards as they could.” 

Bondi is a 2020 election denier, parroting Trump’s false claims that the election was “stolen” by “fake ballots” — she could never provide any evidence of this — and that any investigation into Trump’s incitement of the violent January 6 insurrection was a weaponization of the Justice Department for political purposes. Just last year she said on Fox ‘news” that,

“When Republicans take back the White House, you know what’s going to happen? The Department of Justice, the prosecutors will be prosecuted — the bad ones — the investigators will be investigated.”

Kinda sounds like “weaponization” doesn’t it?

The mission of the Department of Justice is “to uphold the rule of law, to keep our country safe, and to protect civil rights.” According to its website, DOJ core values are

• Independence and Impartiality.

• Honesty and Integrity. 

• Respect.

• Excellence.

Obviously, the nomination of Matt Gaetz was laughably terrible. Pam Bondi may be a bit more palatable, but not by much. She is a liar, and a bigot, and a right-wing hack, and a seditious traitor…but with a “pretty” face. She’s the lipstick on the pig.

So what could go wrong? A whole lot.

Timothy Snyder, professor of history at Yale University, is the author of On Tyranny. He writes and speaks frequently on television about the importance of defending our institutions against authoritarianism and resisting Putin’s quest to reclaim the Soviet Union.

He posted:

Each of Trump’s proposed appointments is a surprise.  It is comforting to think that he is simply a vengeful old man, lashing out this way and that.  This is unlikely.  He and Musk and Putin have been talking for years. And the whole idea of his campaign was that this time he had a plan.

We should be wary of shock, which excuses inaction.  Who could have known?  What could I have done?  If there is a plan, shock is part of the plan.  We have to get through the surprise and the shock to see the design and the risk.  We don’t have much time. Nor is outrage the point. Of course we are outraged. But our own reactions can distract is from the larger pattern.

The newspapers address the surprise and the shock by investigating each proposed appointment individually.  And we need this.  With detail comes leverage and power.  But clarity must also come, and quickly.  Each appointment is part of a larger picture.  Taken together, Trump’s candidates constitute an attempt to wreck the American government.  

In historical context we can see this.  There is a history of the modern democratic state.  There is also a history of engineered regime change and deliberate state destruction.  In both histories, five key zones are health, law, administration, defense, and intelligence.  These people, with power over these areas of life, can make America impossible to sustain.

The foundation of modern democratic state is a healthy, long-lived population.  We lived longer in the twentieth century because of hygiene and vaccinations, pioneered by scientists and physicians and then institutionalized by governments.  We treat one another better when we know we have longer lives to lose.  Health is not only the central human good; it enables the peaceful interactions we associate with the rule of law and democracy.  Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the proposed secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, would undo all of this.  On his watch, were his ideas implemented, millions of us would die.  Knowing that our lives will be shorter, we become nasty and brutish.

A modern democratic state depends upon the rule of law.  Before anything else is possible, we have to endorse the principle that we are all governed by law, and that our institutions are grounded in law.  This enables a functional government of a specific sort, in which leaders can be regularly replaced by elections.  It allows us to live as free individuals, within a set of rules that we can alter together.  The rule of law depends on people who believe in the spirit of law.  Matt Gaetz, the proposed attorney general, is the opposite of such a person.  It is not just that he flouts law himself, spectacularly and disgustingly.  It is that he embodies lawlessness, and can be counted upon to abuse law to pursue Trump’s political opponents.  The end of the rule of law is an essential component of a regime change.

The United States of America exists not only because laws are passed, but because we can expect that these laws will be implemented by civil servants.  We might find bureaucracy annoying; its absence, though, is deadly.  We cannot take the pollution out of the air ourselves, or build the highways ourselves, our write our Social Security checks ourselves.  Without a civil service, the law becomes mere paper, and all that works is the personal connection to the government, which the oligarchs will have, and which the rest of us will not.  This is the engineered helplessness promised by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who are to head a black hole named after a cryptocurrency.  There are already oversight instruments in government.  DOGE is something entirely different: an agency of destruction, run by people who believe that government should exist for the wealthy or not at all.

In a modern democratic state, the armed forces are meant to preserve a healthy, long-lived people from external threats.  This principal has been much abused in American practice.  But never before Donald Trump have we had a president who has presented the purpose of the armed forces as the oppression of Americans.  Trump says that Russia and China are less of a threat than “internal enemies.”  In American tradition, members of the armed forces swear an oath to the Constitution.  Trump has indicated that we would prefer “Hitler’s generals,” which means a personal oath to himself.  Pete Hegseth, Trump’s proposed secretary of defense, defends war criminals and displays tattoos associated with white nationalism and Christian nationalism.  He is a fundraiser and television personality, with a complicated sexual past and zero experience running an organization.  

In a world of hostile powers, an intelligence service is indispensable.  Intelligence can be abused, and certainly has been abused.  Yet it is necessary to consider military threats: consider the Biden administration’s correct call the Russia was about to invade Ukraine.  It is also necessary to counter the attempts by foreign intelligence agencies, which are constant, to harm American society.  This often involves disinformation.  Tulsi Gabbard, insofar as she is known at all, is known as a spreader of Syrian and Russian disinformation.  She has no relevant experience.  Were she to become director of national intelligence, as Trump proposes, we would lose the trust of our allies, and lose contact with much of what is happening in the world — just for starters.  We would be vulnerable to all of those who wish to cause us harm.

Imagine that you are a foreign leader who wishes to destroy the United States.  How could you do so?  The easiest way would be to get Americans to do the work themselves, to somehow induce Americans to undo their own health, law, administration, defense, and intelligence.  From this perspective, Trump’s proposed appointments — Kennedy, Jr.; Gaetz; Musk; Ramaswamy; Hegseth; Gabbard — are perfect instruments.  They combine narcissism, incompetence, corruption, sexual incontinence, personal vulnerability, dangerous convictions, and foreign influence as no group before them has done.  These proposed appointments look like a decapitation strike: destroying the American government from the top, leaving the body politic to rot, and the rest of us to suffer.

I do not defend the status quo. I have no doubt whatsoever that the Department of Defense and the Food and Drug Administration require reform.  But such a reform, of these or other agencies, would have to be guided by people with knowledge and experience, who cared about their country, and who had a vision of improvement.  That is simply not what is happening here.  We are confronted instead with a group of people who, were they to hold the positions they have been assigned, could bring an end to the United States of America.  

It is a mistake to think of these people as flawed.  It is not they will do a bad job in their assigned posts.  It is that they will do a good job using those assigned posts to destroy our country.

However and by whomever this was organized, the intention of these appointments is clear: to create American horror.  Elected officials should see this for what it is.  Senators, regardless of party, should understand that the United States Senate will not outlast the United States, insist on voting, and vote accordingly.  The Supreme Court of the United States will likely be called upon.  Although it is a faint hope, one must venture it anyway: that its justices will understand that the Constitution was not in fact written as the cover story for state destruction.  The Supreme Court will also not outlast the United States.

And citizens, regardless of how they voted, need now to check their attitudes.  This is no longer a post-electoral moment.  It is a pre-catastrophic moment.  Trump voters are caught in the notion that Trump must be doing the right thing if Harris voters are upset.  But Harris voters are upset now because they love their country.  And Harris voters will have to get past the idea that Trump voters should reap what they have sown.  Yes, some of them did vote to burn it all down.  But if it all burns down, we burn too.  It is not easy to speak right now; but if some Republicans wish to, please listen.

Both inside and outside Congress, there will have to be simple defiance, joined with a rhetoric of a better America.  And, at moments at least, there will also have to be alliances among Americans who, though they differ on other matters, would like to see their country endure.

The blog known as “That’s Another Fine Mess” declared November 25 , 2024, the worst day in our history. Read on to know why.

Do you agree?

Donald Trump’s real reason for running for re-election in 2024 was to stay out of prison. He knew that only a return to the White House would prevent him standing trial for initiating the January 6 insurrection, and standing trial for the theft of top secret documents. Conviction in either case would mean he would end his days as a convicted felon, quite possibly dying in prison.


Mission accomplished.


November 25, 2024, will be remembered in American history as the day the constitutional rule that no individual is above the law was ended.


Whether this leads to the end of the democratic constitutional republic – that has existed because of that rule – being overthrown by Donald J. Trump is unknown at this point, but it is at a minimum a severe blow to the foundation of that republic that will be difficult if not impossible to repair.


This morning, Special Counsel Jack Smith moved to drop both cases. This afternoon, that motion was granted in the case of the Seditious Insurrection by Juge Tanya Chutkan. The action was taken “without prejudice,” meaning that the charges could be brought again at some time in the future. Does anyone think that one of the first acts of Attorney General Pam Bondi will not be to drop the cases in such a way that they can never be reinstituted?


This is the worst defeat of the forces of democracy in the history of this country.


Two men are solely responsible for this outcome: President Joseph R. Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland.


As productive as his presidency has been, Joe Biden suffered from the fatal flaw of being unable to see that his bedrock belief in “go along to get along” congressional bipartisanship had been decisively overthrown over the 20 years before he took office as president – something he hold have learned from his botched handling of the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court in 1991 – and was no longer an operating philosophy that could be successful. His Irish stubbornness led to his inability to see modern Republicans as the deadly enemy of everything he believed in that they were – which he only began to clearly see in the final two years of his presidency, when it was too late – was directly responsible for this defeat. His inability to take the kind of decisive action against that enemy – commencing the investigation and prosecution of the criminal Trump and his fellow conspirators on Day One of his term of office – meant that the enemy would be able to use the rights and privileges of a defendant when the investigation and prosecution was finally authorized too late, and defeat the system by retaking power, using the rules of the system to defeat it.

Biden’s inability to understand the true nature of the threat he faced was compounded by his decision to nominate the exact wrong candidate to be his Attorney General. Merrick Garland did not and does not have the heart of a fighter, which is the quality that was most needed in whoever took that office at that time. His judiciousness would have been excellent had he been able to become the Supreme Court Associate Justice President Obama nominated him to be. It is tragic that neither Garland – the victim of the “conservative movement” that had consumed the GOP – nor then-Vice President Biden who took part in making the nomination and was an eyewitness to the treason of Mitch McConnell as President of the Senate – took the proper understanding from what they had been part of. 

Both men desperately held on to obsolete beliefs with the tenacity of French Generals who stared uncomprehendingly at the German panzers that thoroughly defeated them in 1940. They clung to the idea that they could “look forward” and ignore the Great Crime that had been committed, but this time papering over the recent past only made the defeat inevitable. How thorough this defeat will loom in the history of the United States cannot be known at this time, but it cannot be seen as anything other than the Major Defeat that it is. There is no argument to be made that it is anything other than a disaster.

Those who fail to understand when the knowledge on which they have based their lives becomes obsolete cannot end other than how Joe Biden and Merrick Garland have arrived at the end their careers. This failure will outweigh all their other successes, viewed with the 20-20 hindsight of history.

Joe Biden should have listened to the counsel of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who said: “Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me.”

Last week, the House of Representatives passed a dangerous bill–HR 9495– that would allow the Treasury Department to shut down nonprofit organizations that it believes are funding terrorism. Initially, it had strong bipartisan support, but after Trump won the election, most Democrats turned against the bill, realizing that Trump could use it to silence his critics. In a recent vote, 15 Democrats voted for it.

Trump could use this authority to shut down the ACLU or any other organization that criticizes him.

Please contact your Senators and urge them to oppose this horrible bill!

The Intercept wrote about it:

A BILL THAT would give President-elect Donald Trump broad powers to target his political foes has passed a major hurdle toward becoming law.

The House of Representatives on Thursday passed the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act in a 219-184 vote largely along party lines, with 15 Democrats joining the Republican majority.

The bill, also known as H.R. 9495, would empower the Treasury secretary to unilaterally designate any nonprofit as a “terrorist supporting organization” and revoke its tax-exempt status, effectively killing the group. Critics say the proposal would give presidential administrations a tool to crack down on organizations for political ends. 

The provision previously enjoyed bipartisan backing but steadily lost Democratic support in the aftermath of Trump’s election earlier this month. On Thursday, a stream of Democrats stood up to argue against the bill in a heated debate with its Republican supporters.

“Authoritarianism is not born overnight — it creeps in,” Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, said Thursday on the House floor. “A tyrant tightens his grip not just by seizing power, but when he demands new powers and when those who can stop him willingly cede and bend to his will….”

A previous bill with the provision was initially introduced in November 2023, in the early days of Israel’s U.S.-funded devastation of Gaza, with the ostensible goal of blocking U.S.-based nonprofits from supporting terrorist groups like Hamas. Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., and other supporters of the bill touted it as a tool to crack down on pro-Palestine groups they claim exploit tax laws to bolster Hamas and fuel antisemitism…

It is already illegal for nonprofits or anyone else in the U.S. to provide material support to terrorist groups, and the federal government has means to enforce it, including prosecution and sanctions. Tenney’s bill, however, would sidestep due process. 

The bill includes some guardrails to ensure due process, but much of the language is vague on specifics, and critics fear that even if a group were to successfully appeal their designation, few nonprofit organizations would survive the legal costs and the black mark on their reputation.

Democratic Flips

While a previous version of the bill enjoyed broad bipartisan support and passed 382-11 in a House vote in April, many Democrats have withdrawn their support, citing a fear that the incoming Trump administration could weaponize the bill.

“The road to fascism is paved with a million little votes that slowly erode our democracy and make it easier to go after anyone who disagrees with the government,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., on the House floor Tuesday. “Donald Trump says you’re a terrorist, so you’re a terrorist. My friends on the other side of the aisle know it’s nuts, even if they don’t want to admit it.”

The GOP majority in the House made an initial attempt to pass the bill last week under a suspension of the rules, a parliamentary procedure that requires a two-thirds supermajority to pass. That effort foundered on November 12, when 144 Democrats and one Republican came out against the bill, just barely meeting the threshold to block it…

Despite a majority of Democrats coming out against it in last week’s vote, the bill still received the support of 52 Democrats on November 12. On Thursday, that number dwindled to 15, as Democrats flipped in opposition, including Reps. Angie Craig, D-Minn., and Gabe Vasquez, D-N.M., both of whom cited Trump’s increasingly unhinged cabinet selections in their statements prior to the vote.

The day after the election, I opened an account at social media site BlueSky. I intend to abandon my Twitter account in a few weeks. I had over 140,000 followers on Twitter, but I don’t know how many are bots. On BlueSky, I have picked up 2,000 followers and expect to see the number rise. I know that every one of them is a real person.

I’m not the only one. According to the New York Times, one million people joined BlueSky since the election. Twitter claims 50 million in the U.S., over 500 million worldwide. BlueSky, founded by Jack Dorsey, the Twitter pioneer, has 14.7 million.

BlueSky is growing now at the rate of 1 million new accounts daily.

The numbers go up every hour, as people seek a site that moderates content.

Elon Musk has changed Twitter for the worse. It’s overloaded with ads for Trump merch. His own tweets are ads for Trump. He has restored the accounts of Nazis, anti-vaxxers, and haters. Misinformation is rampant, especially since he fired all the content moderation group. “Let hatred and lies prevail” seems to be the Twitter motto.

I am now posting at BlueSky.

BlueSky is a welcoming community. The tone is friendly. Commenters are not angry. No nazis, racists, or misogynists. There are lots of historians, journalists, academics, familiar names.

People offer advice about how to navigate the site.

It has good vibes.

I don’t want to be part of Elon Musk’s world. I had to leave.

Governor DeSantis hired Dr. Joseph Ladapo as Florida’s Surgeon General because he wanted a doctor who took a contrarian view on COVID: to support those who were anti-vaccine, anti-mask, and unwilling to follow public health guidelines. In other words, in the world of people who care about science, a quack.

Now, Dr. Ladapo is calling for the end of fluoridating the drinking water of Florida. He’s taking cues from the nation’s leading medical crackpot, Robert F. Kennedy.

The Washington Post reports:

The top health official of the nation’s third-largest state called Friday for a halt to adding fluoride to Florida’s water, citing controversial studies that suggest the widely hailed public health practice poses a risk to developing brains.

Surgeon General Joseph A. Ladapo issued a recommendation citing “the neuropsychiatric risk associated with fluoride exposure, particularly in pregnant women and children,” and noting the availability of alternative sources of fluoride intoothpaste and mouthwash.

“It is clear more research is necessary to address safety and efficacy concerns regarding community water fluoridation,” Ladapo said in a statement.“The previously considered benefit of community water fluoridation does not outweigh the current known risks, especially for special populations like pregnant women and children.”

Ladapo’s announcement comes three weeks after Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is President-elect Donald Trump’s choice to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, said the Trump administration plans to issue a similar recommendation nationwide next year. Kennedy’s remarks drew rebukes from public health experts who say that the practice has helped protect Americans’ teeth, particularly in vulnerable communities where children might not regularly brush their teeth.

“It’s madness,” said Kurt Ferré, a retired Portland, Oregon, dentist and longtime pro-fluoridation activist. He said Florida’s seniors especially benefit from fluoride because of the oral health issues that come with age and medical care for older adults.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has long recommended putting fluoride in Americans’ drinking water, hailing it as one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century and citing data that the practice reduces cavities by about 25 percent in children and adults. The water systems of more than 200 million Americans are fluoridated, according to CDC data.

Fluoridation has been a key public health strategy for decades, and proponents have pointed to studies showing oral health problems declining in cities that added the mineral and rising in communities that removed it.

Trump announced the appointment of Dr. David Weldon, a former Congressman from Florida, as director of the Centers for Disease Control. He has unorthodox views, to say the least. But we can always count on the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to maintain the integrity of our premier public health agency.

Oh, wait, Trump’s nominee for Secretary is the noted conspiracy theorist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Is Trump trying to gut our public health agencies? How many career physicians who are noted authorities in their field will quit rather than work for know-nothings?

The New York Times reported about Dr. Weldon:

President-elect Donald J. Trump chose Dr. David Weldon, a former congressman, on Friday to serve as the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dr. Weldon, 71, is a native of Long Island and earned a medical degree in New York before moving to Florida to practice. Starting in 1995, he served seven terms in Congress, representing the 15th District of Florida, before forgoing re-election and returning to his medical practice.

As a member of Congress, Dr. Weldon pushed the false notion that thimerosal, a preservative compound in some vaccines, had caused an explosion of autism — a hypothesis that experts say has no evidence. He also introduced a “vaccine safety bill” that aimed to relocate most vaccine safety research from the C.D.C. — which he said had an “inherent conflict of interest” — to a separate agency within the Department of Health and Human Services.

Mr. Trump’s choice signals yet again his commitment to reforming the role of federal health agencies in radical ways. Though Dr. Weldon is an internist, his skepticism of vaccine safety and concern about C.D.C. overreach echo those of other nominees, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“In addition to being a Medical Doctor for 40 years, and an Army Veteran, Dave has been a respected conservative leader on fiscal and social issues,” Mr. Trump wrote in a statement released Friday night, saying that Dr. Weldon would “restore the CDC to its true purpose.”

“Americans have lost trust in the CDC and in our Federal Health Authorities, who have engaged in censorship, data manipulation, and misinformation. Given the current Chronic Health Crisis in our Country, the CDC must step up and correct past errors to focus on the Prevention of Disease.”

As a member of congress, Dr. Weldon also authored the so-called Weldon Amendment, which barred the Department of Health and Human Services from funding federal or state programs that “discriminated” against health insurance plans that did not cover abortions.

He unsuccessfully sought a Senate seat in 2012 and a Florida House seat in 2024.Dr. Weldon also served as president of the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries, a trade group for Christian organizations that offered an alternative to traditional health insurance.

The groups have come under scrutiny for potentially misleading people into thinking the groups had some legal obligation to pay their medical claims. Dr. Weldon has said that the members of his association were clear that they were not offering insurance, which is subject to strict regulations.

For the first time, the incoming C.D.C. director will need Senate confirmation. If Dr. Weldon is successful, he will sit at the helm of an agency with a budget of more than $15 billion, which has historically been used to track and respond to infectious disease outbreaks.

But Mr. Trump’s choice to lead its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, is Mr. Kennedy, who has been outspoken about his plans to deprioritize communicable disease research in favor of preventive medicine.

If Mr. Kennedy, too, is confirmed by the Senate, the mission and focus of the C.D.C.’s work may change.

Reed Abelson contributed reporting.

Rex Huppke writes for USA Today.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on a minute. President-elect Donald Trump has started appointing screwballs for important government positions, making plans for immigrant detention camps and leaning, authoritarian-style, on Republicans in Congress to obliterate check and balances?

Are you telling me the man who said he was going to do all these crazy things is actually going to do all these crazy things? What the heck?

I was told by many Trump supporters that he’s a showman who talks tough, but when he gets into office again he’ll govern like a sensible conservative, just like he didn’t do the first time around.

I am shocked to see Trump do exactly what he told people he’d do

And now I find the next president is, in fact, going to let a certifiable nutball like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “go wild” on American health and medicine? I mean, when Trump said he was going to let Kennedy “go wild” on American health and medicine, I assumed he was kidding around. And besides, I was mad that eggs are expensive.

But now it looks like vaccines are going to become optional and Americans will be told the best way to protect against infectious diseases is to put a clove of garlic in your ear and avoid processed foods.

I am shocked – shocked, I tell you! – that a presidential candidate who spoke in run-on sentences that sounded like they were written by a dumb version of Jack Kerouac on a Benzedrine bender might have actually been telling the truth about his intentions.

Trump is letting Elon Musk run the country, because of course he is

Trump has appointed unelected billionaire weirdo Elon Musk to a fake department he claims will slash-and-burn the federal government in the name of imagined efficiency. And since nobody on Trump’s transition team apparently knows what “efficiency” means, Musk can’t do it alone, so Trump paired him with another wealthy weirdo, Vivek Ramaswamy, who talks like he should be selling Veg-O-Matics on late-night TV infomercials.

I mean, just because Trump has spoken highly of Ramaswamy and had Musk more-or-less by his side since before the election, saying he would put Musk in charge of government efficiency, I never expected that…ohhhh, OK, this is starting to make sense now.

So I guess when Trump said he’d do lots of crazy stuff he was being serious

Apparently Trump DID mean all the noodle-brained things he said over and over and over again during the campaign. Things that included being a dictator, but just for the first day of his administration. And rounding up millions upon millions of immigrants and stashing them in detention camps. And punishing his political enemies, and giving police officers greater immunity protection, and implementing massive tariffs and pardoning the convicted Jan. 6 attackers.

I guess I just thought him saying those things, and the media reporting on those things, and pundits warning that Trump will definitely do the things he keeps saying he’s going to do…well, like I said, eggs were expensive, and I figured, “Nah, he’s not gonna do all that.”

Boy do I have expensive eggs on my face.

This guy’s gonna do all that and a whole lot more.

Anyone shocked by what Trump’s doing just wasn’t paying attention

But don’t worry, I won’t complain about it now. The last thing I need is Attorney General Matt Gaetz coming after me.

And besides, I’ve got to stock up on garlic cloves to keep my family safe from infectious diseases before Trump’s tariffs make garlic unaffordable. Of course that might not matter once Musk and Ramaswamy do away with the Department of the Treasury and force all of us to use cryptocurrency and go broke.

It’s strange how all the things we were explicitly told would happen are now going to happen. It really makes you think.

Or at least wish you had done so sooner. 

Among the many theories propounded by pundits with 20/20 hindsight vision: Kamala Harris lost because she was too “woke.” People just got tired of identity politics; they rejected “defund the police,” “protect transgender people,” and every other slogan that made straight white people feel unappreciated.

But they were wrong. Kamala seldom mentioned her race and gender. She always spoke of her great love for this country. She never said “defund the police.” And she avoided the transgender issue. It was the Republicans who kept bringing up issues that made Democrats appear out of touch. Her campaign was stubbornly centrist, even to the point of campaigning with Liz Cheney.

Zeeshan Aleem of MSNBC makes the same argument. I should carry copies of it and hand it out whenever someone claims that Kamala lost because she was too “woke.” (I confessed my personal view that Putin hacked the election. Maybe it’s just my deeply ingrained belief that women would not have voted in large numbers for a man who boasts about taking away an important right.)

He writes:

The Democratic Party is in crisis. In three contests against Donald Trump, it lost one, narrowly squeaked by in another, then lost more decisively than the first time. In Trump’s latest victory, over 90% of counties across the country shifted in his direction. Now people across the left are scrambling to diagnose what ails the party and offer a prescription. 

A group of center-left commentators and party operatives have converged on a diagnosis that could be summarized as “the wokes lost it.” This set argues that social justice activists who focus on oppression tied to identity had too much influence on the Democratic Party and helped torpedo Harris’ campaign. Working class people were alienated, they contend, by issues such as defund the police, trans rights, reparations for Black Americans, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, campus “cancel culture,” diversity, equity and inclusion programs, and the ever-evolving academic-sounding jargon that surrounds these issues. The solution, many of them imply or explicitly say, is for Democrats to become more socially conservative and stop opening their arms to “identity politics” or social justice advocacy.

This narrative is seductive for many veterans in the Democratic establishment, whose instincts have long been to mimic the right when in trouble. But this narrative is mostly wrong. It rests on a fictional account of the past, a handful of indefensible analytic leaps, and easily debunked scapegoating. A more careful reading of the facts helps illustrate how the party would benefit from a wholesale reorientation toward economic populism.   

“The wokes lost it” narrative relies on describing a fantastical presidential campaign that never existed. Harris did not run on defund the police or identity politics or any niche social justice issue. Harris brandished her track record as a former tough-on-crime prosecutor. She virtually never mentioned her racial or gender identity. On the hot-button issue of immigration, Harris promised to enact some of the most restrictive immigration and border policies in decades. She also distanced herself from the trans community by refusing to take a clear position when asked if transgender Americans should have access to gender-affirming care in this country. Harris ran mostly on a mix of positive vibes, an anodyne “opportunity economy” program, a pledge to maintain the international order and a promise to defend democracy, civil rights and normalcy. Harris’ efforts came after Biden ran a defensive and visionless campaign that banked almost entirely on fear of another Trump term and never came close to approaching anything “woke”-coded. In sum, there was no evidence of niche activists controlling the party….

There is a way for Democrats to both tap into universalism and into widespread frustration with the economy: aggressive economic populism. Tap into people’s class identity through class-first left-wing politics that pits working Americans of all backgrounds against billionaires, corporations and the 1%. Under this paradigm, bigotry of all kinds is framed as a tool by which elites distract and divide Americans from their economic exploitation. Conversely, anti-bigotry should be viewed as a war cry of freedom-lovers and a weapon for keeping the citizenry’s focus on class war. Economic proposals would not just be about incremental improvement but bringing down costs and reimagining freedom through the offerings of social democracy and cracking down on corporate greed. This would of course cause a bit of discomfort for an actuallyinfluential interest group that somehow the “the wokes lost it” crowd always forgets to mention: economic elites. But it would unite and excite the people and pave the path for a life of greater freedom in every sphere of life.

Democrats ought to stop whining about social movements, which are a fact of political life. They also ought to stop implying that movements and subcultures possess power that they don’t, while ignoring how wealthy donors shape the party’s economic agenda. The reality is political leaders and parties will always have to manage unruly coalitions and stake out positions that are in dialogue with but distinct from interest groups. Trump fairly successfully distanced himself from the national abortion ban advocates in the Republican coalition, and he successfully deceived many into thinking he would protect Social Security over the instincts of fiscal hawks in his party. Democrats, as the ostensible party of social change and egalitarianism, will always bear this burden of engaging movements even more heavily than the GOP. But a party must have an identity and that identity should be grounded in an economic sensibility. It’s time for Dems to wake up and build a real economic centerpiece for a party that has failed to establish a clear sense of self since the Reagan era.

Edward McKinley of the Houston Chronicle reports that the Texas State Board of Education is on track to approve Bible-based teaching in public schools. The Christian evangelicals are running the show in Texas, with help from Governor Gregg Abbot. They are knocking down the wall of separation between church and state with a sledgehammer. What about the rights of children whose parents are secular or not Christian?

He writes:

The Texas State Board of Education appeared on track to endorse a controversial set of new state-written lesson plans after narrowly defeating an effort to block it on Tuesday.

The lessons and textbooks, known collectively as Bluebonnet Learning, were drafted by the Texas Education Agency. The reading and language arts lessons integrate Biblical stories and characters and are viewed by many as connected to a national effort to return Christianity and prayer into public schools. 

They would likely face a legal challenge if adopted. The SBOE will vote on the curriculum as one of more than 100 sets of lesson plans and textbooks later this week. 

If approved, schools would have the option to use the plans and would receive extra funding if they do. 

The lesson plans have faced criticism from Democrats and some Republicans. Academics have warned that they include teachings from the Bible without contextualizing them as religious beliefs and downplay the role of racism and slavery in American history, while some on the right have argued they teach material too advanced for younger children.

But proponents say the materials are based on a scientific understanding of the best way to teach reading and they believe it will lead to higher standardized test scores.

“There’s a line between indoctrination or evangelism and education. In my view, these stories are on the education side and are establishing cultural literacy,” said Will Hickman, a Houston-area Republican who supported the Bluebonnet curriculum. Hickman added that districts can still choose whether or not to use the lesson plans….

The Bluebonnet curriculum covers kindergarten through 5th grade mathematics and reading, as well as middle school math and algebra…. 

A report from religious scholar David Brockman and the Texas Freedom Network, which has been critical of the lesson plans, said they could effectively turn public schools to Sunday schools by introducing Christian stories and ideas to young kids without contextualizing them properly as religious beliefs. There’s far more focus on Christianity and Jesus Christ than on other world religions, the report says. 

The lesson plans also faced criticism for their teaching of history and downplaying the role of slavery and racism in American history and to the founding fathers and other important American figures.