Why do we keep having to go to this well of 'popularism?' It's a word that doesn't mean anything. Saying 'oh just do things that are popular' sounds good, but it's a bit like saying 'just make infinite energy machines!'
Question. Democrats didn't pass the BID with BBB. You know, the thing that centrists said would be better and super popular. They then didn't pass BBB. They didn't pass vote reform. They didn't defund the police, in fact, police have record budgets. And they've spent their time as Russia hawks at a time when the broader public has never been more anti-russia. And the result? Pretty much jack squat.
Which means the entire time we've been doing what the moderates want. They've gotten everything. You didn't want BBB, so you didn't get it. You wanted a russia hawk, you got it. You wanted the police funded, they are. And the result is that by and large, the public is acting like they always have: they elect GOP people who wreck the country, and then elect Democrats to fix it, only to turn around and punish the Democrats for doing so by electing more GOP members.
If you're going to say 'run on things that are popular' you need to actually, you know, explain what that means. What issues would you like them to run on? Because they've basically passed a stimulus, the BID, and nothing else, all because of the moderates being really worried Democrats might actually legislate something. Good luck going to voters and say 'the choice is because fascists who will do things and Democrats who won't, choose wisely!' Because we all know the public prefers people who will do bad ideas to people who won't do any ideas.
Here's the problem: despite the amount of people in the moderate camp, you can't cater to people who don't actually want anything. What do people who are moderate want to actually do? Because they've not proposed any ideas or legislation that they actually want. Instead, they seem content to just sit around and blame liberals while doing nothing and voters decide that the fascists are preferable to do-nothing Democrats.
It's very sad to see. And sadder to see people throw their hands up and go 'just do what's popular' as the GOP rides forcing women to bear children and banning math textbooks for being CRT to victory and probably the white house. Not sure that current success story is going to be compatible with the idea that popularism is a coherent policy set, unless you accept that by and large the American people want awful things.
If Desantis is willing to revoke Disney's special status for remarks made about legislation he signed into law, then surely he'd be on board for revoking The Villages special status for the rampant MAGA voter fraud that took place there in 2020.
How would any Republican in Congress think that Democrats were going to take care of that son of a bitch for them? The system is not set up so that you can take care of the son of a bitch through strict party-line votes, unless one party holds 2/3 of the Senate and a majority of the House. It never was going to be and never could be just Democrats. The GOP, almost to a person, has spent the last seven years bitching off the record to any reporter who would listen about how unfit Trump is, about how poisonous he is to the country, while publicly doing everything they can to keep him in place. They scream about Biden not standing courageously enough with Ukraine, offer no insight into what he should actually be doing differently, and yet where has their courage been since Trump became president? Has Paul Ryan done anything other than enable this disaster? Have Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, JD Vance done anything other than fall into line once Trump won in 2016, going from critic to lickspittle over night? The raw cowardice of these people, and the shamelessness, is really revolting.
Democrats have two basically problems at the moment:
They are the party in the White House, which means they are saddled with the problems of today. What are the problems of today? Not winning the war in Ukraine and high inflation. Obviously, both are not something entirely in the hands of Biden or the Democrats. While I think Biden's Ukraine response has been pretty good, the public seems to think the proper response is victory or bust, and there's obviously no guarantee we get there.
The second one, inflation, is similar. Inflation has previously been driven by two products: microchips, and fossil fuels. There's some mixed news on that front: used car prices (driven up by the absence of these microchips), are starting to fall, though are still pretty high. New car prices appear to be peaking as well. The second one is something we've talked about more often: crude oil prices. There's some mixed news here too. While prices are near historical highs, they've been flat over the last month. Futures are quite flat too.
Trying to be too certain about economic trends is obviously a fool's errand, but it does seem like inflation might be slowing.
That second one, popularism. Why doesn't the political party in power just do what 50%+ of the country wants them to do? Well:
1) It's impossible. No party could snap their fingers and fix Ukraine or inflation, even if they wanted to. See above.
2) Some of them actively don't want to, because parties are made up of multiple politicians whose' opinions matter. Build Back Better, for example, had large elements embraced by the public. But Joe Manchin didn't want to pass those. Kyrsten Sinema didn't want to repeal tax cuts for corporations even that polls well too. Neither Biden nor Manchin appear to want to legalize marijuana.
So, we are where we are. However, seems wise to point out that your average Republican is even further from what the average American wants than the current Democratic establishment.
I would like to see more of Mallory McMorrow. Not sure if her other legislative and leadership skills are like, but if half way decent, Michigan Dems better keep an eye on her for bigger roles. That speech was impressive and fits into what Sarah said that you must go offensive and not just tell people you are not a groomer.
re: McCarthy and McConnell: here is my comment I wrote for the NYTimes: These men have no dignity. They lack moral courage. But the most frightening aspect of this entire sordid affair is that they are pandering to their know-nothing base that takes every opportunity to vote against their own self interest.
This is the antithesis of leadership. It's simply following the crowd. And the money. And the Federalist Society. And all the other "think tanks" that give the word think, a bad name. And finally, they work together to split this country apart so that they can usher in an authoritarian that plays Putin's useful idiot. This is dangerous and it is wrong.
Absolutely love the Mallory McMorrow speech. Love the hyper-aggressive decency. I think Democrats could make this a theme. For example, one of the leading candidates for governor in my state of Nebraska made a fortune raising huge numbers of hogs. His workforce included large numbers of Hispanic immigrants, both legal and illegal. (Of course he claims he never "knowingly" hired any illegal immigrants.) But in his advertising he is aggressively anti-immigrant, never uttering a kind word or acknowledging the humanity of immigrants, legal or illegal. Surely a McMorrow-esque attack could be constructed from these facts. What type of man makes millions on the backs of immigrants, and then aggressively attacks their political interests?
On a side note, I've noticed a subtle shift in the meaning of the word "liberal" in this election cycle. One of the three leading candidates for the Republican nomination for Governor is being attacked as a "liberal." I think this is being interpreted by the electorate as making the charge that he is not sufficiently Trumpy and not that he is deficient on tax policy or some other issue. Interestingly, this candidate seems to be rising in the polls and as of now, may be tied for first.
"But Mr. McCarthy’s resolve seemed to harden as the gravity of the attack — and the potential political fallout for his party — sank in."
Can't the press be clear just once - it had EVERYTHING to do with "the potential political fallout for his party" and nothing else. That's exactly what governs today's GOP.
Two points. Someone In the media should also read the offering docs on Disney bonds. This is all performative bs. Second. I’m a registered Dem, and my Congressman, who I love, is Raskin. But I have voted for Hogan because he’s a rational, competent, hardworking public servant. And he’s not nuts. Very important that last point. The GOP tussle will be entertaining, but we will not elect a candidate who is nuts. Yes, I know…Agnew…but he was corrupt, not nuts.
As a graduate of one of the Claremont Colleges I'd like to make it very clear that the infamous Claremont Institute is not affiliated with the colleges. The Institute was founded by students of a professor at the colleges (CMC, CGS) and is headquartered in an adjacent town, and that is the extent of the connection. I am ever grateful for the education (in humanities) provided by Claremont, which has guided my life from A-Z.
"The American Mind has made something of a habit of publishing pseudonymous writers: 'Peachy Keenan,' 'The Huntsman,' 'Horatius,' 'Rebecca,' 'Privata,' and others. So it is, too, with the article worried about Western man’s sperm count—but its pseudonymous author, 'Raw Egg Nationalist,' stands apart for having recently published a book with a Nazi publishing house."
So, is this Raw Egg fellow Tucker's testes-toasting pal? Likes some eggs raw but not others?
Mallory McMorrow's turn is indeed impressive, but I'm a bit confused: exactly how is it that critics of the "woke" left think this is a promising new departure for Democrats? She sounds pretty "woke" to me, defending LGBTQs, asserting white responsibility for continuing systemic racism, etc. She echoes everything I keeping hearing from others on the Democratic left: that we need to stand firm on DEI even while insisting on dealing with the *non* culture-wars issues that Republicans are leaving in the dust when they're not actually making the problems worse. Yes, she presents her credentials as a straight white Christian parent; so do a lot of us. Unfortunately, none of this brings inflation down, or makes Covid go away, or keeps us out of danger with Russia, or produces any of the "outcomes" that people think government can provide with its magic wand.
Regarding the speakership and the incoming Republicon majority of the House, I'll be surprised if Kevin McCarthy's dream comes true. While, in darker moments, I worry about a loudmouth like MTG or TFG getting that role, it will probably go to someone previously "below the radar", as it went to Dennis Hastert long ago. They will attempt to select someone who evokes the least revulsion by the greatest number of party MoCs. After all, the objective is to accomplish nothing.
It's interesting that Trump's followers display such a lack of guts, both good and bad. Many were down on Trump when it was obvious that he was bad for US democracy but none of them were willing to step up personally. Ironically, that gutlessness also saved US democracy when Mike Pence and others were ok being willing pawns in the attempt to cheat Biden out of the presidency, even suggesting ways it might be done, but none of them wanted to be the one to be seen as pulling the trigger. This includes Trump himself. He always wanted others to step up and do the deed. He could have attempted to invoke martial law but didn't. He tried to replace certain people with toadies but either allowed himself to be talked out of it or, when he succeeded, the replacement realized that they'd be seen as the one pulling the trigger and backed out.
Maybe the Democrats Should Try Popularism
Why do we keep having to go to this well of 'popularism?' It's a word that doesn't mean anything. Saying 'oh just do things that are popular' sounds good, but it's a bit like saying 'just make infinite energy machines!'
Question. Democrats didn't pass the BID with BBB. You know, the thing that centrists said would be better and super popular. They then didn't pass BBB. They didn't pass vote reform. They didn't defund the police, in fact, police have record budgets. And they've spent their time as Russia hawks at a time when the broader public has never been more anti-russia. And the result? Pretty much jack squat.
Which means the entire time we've been doing what the moderates want. They've gotten everything. You didn't want BBB, so you didn't get it. You wanted a russia hawk, you got it. You wanted the police funded, they are. And the result is that by and large, the public is acting like they always have: they elect GOP people who wreck the country, and then elect Democrats to fix it, only to turn around and punish the Democrats for doing so by electing more GOP members.
If you're going to say 'run on things that are popular' you need to actually, you know, explain what that means. What issues would you like them to run on? Because they've basically passed a stimulus, the BID, and nothing else, all because of the moderates being really worried Democrats might actually legislate something. Good luck going to voters and say 'the choice is because fascists who will do things and Democrats who won't, choose wisely!' Because we all know the public prefers people who will do bad ideas to people who won't do any ideas.
Here's the problem: despite the amount of people in the moderate camp, you can't cater to people who don't actually want anything. What do people who are moderate want to actually do? Because they've not proposed any ideas or legislation that they actually want. Instead, they seem content to just sit around and blame liberals while doing nothing and voters decide that the fascists are preferable to do-nothing Democrats.
It's very sad to see. And sadder to see people throw their hands up and go 'just do what's popular' as the GOP rides forcing women to bear children and banning math textbooks for being CRT to victory and probably the white house. Not sure that current success story is going to be compatible with the idea that popularism is a coherent policy set, unless you accept that by and large the American people want awful things.
If Desantis is willing to revoke Disney's special status for remarks made about legislation he signed into law, then surely he'd be on board for revoking The Villages special status for the rampant MAGA voter fraud that took place there in 2020.
How would any Republican in Congress think that Democrats were going to take care of that son of a bitch for them? The system is not set up so that you can take care of the son of a bitch through strict party-line votes, unless one party holds 2/3 of the Senate and a majority of the House. It never was going to be and never could be just Democrats. The GOP, almost to a person, has spent the last seven years bitching off the record to any reporter who would listen about how unfit Trump is, about how poisonous he is to the country, while publicly doing everything they can to keep him in place. They scream about Biden not standing courageously enough with Ukraine, offer no insight into what he should actually be doing differently, and yet where has their courage been since Trump became president? Has Paul Ryan done anything other than enable this disaster? Have Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, JD Vance done anything other than fall into line once Trump won in 2016, going from critic to lickspittle over night? The raw cowardice of these people, and the shamelessness, is really revolting.
Democrats have two basically problems at the moment:
They are the party in the White House, which means they are saddled with the problems of today. What are the problems of today? Not winning the war in Ukraine and high inflation. Obviously, both are not something entirely in the hands of Biden or the Democrats. While I think Biden's Ukraine response has been pretty good, the public seems to think the proper response is victory or bust, and there's obviously no guarantee we get there.
The second one, inflation, is similar. Inflation has previously been driven by two products: microchips, and fossil fuels. There's some mixed news on that front: used car prices (driven up by the absence of these microchips), are starting to fall, though are still pretty high. New car prices appear to be peaking as well. The second one is something we've talked about more often: crude oil prices. There's some mixed news here too. While prices are near historical highs, they've been flat over the last month. Futures are quite flat too.
Trying to be too certain about economic trends is obviously a fool's errand, but it does seem like inflation might be slowing.
That second one, popularism. Why doesn't the political party in power just do what 50%+ of the country wants them to do? Well:
1) It's impossible. No party could snap their fingers and fix Ukraine or inflation, even if they wanted to. See above.
2) Some of them actively don't want to, because parties are made up of multiple politicians whose' opinions matter. Build Back Better, for example, had large elements embraced by the public. But Joe Manchin didn't want to pass those. Kyrsten Sinema didn't want to repeal tax cuts for corporations even that polls well too. Neither Biden nor Manchin appear to want to legalize marijuana.
So, we are where we are. However, seems wise to point out that your average Republican is even further from what the average American wants than the current Democratic establishment.
I would like to see more of Mallory McMorrow. Not sure if her other legislative and leadership skills are like, but if half way decent, Michigan Dems better keep an eye on her for bigger roles. That speech was impressive and fits into what Sarah said that you must go offensive and not just tell people you are not a groomer.
How is supporting voting rights protections and basic civil rights for all Americans "woke?"
If you're the type of person who would GOP in a Federal election after 1/6, then you're irredeemable.
I love that Ronnie's move will cost people down there 100m a year in lost service fees and over 1bn in debt from Disney
re: McCarthy and McConnell: here is my comment I wrote for the NYTimes: These men have no dignity. They lack moral courage. But the most frightening aspect of this entire sordid affair is that they are pandering to their know-nothing base that takes every opportunity to vote against their own self interest.
This is the antithesis of leadership. It's simply following the crowd. And the money. And the Federalist Society. And all the other "think tanks" that give the word think, a bad name. And finally, they work together to split this country apart so that they can usher in an authoritarian that plays Putin's useful idiot. This is dangerous and it is wrong.
Absolutely love the Mallory McMorrow speech. Love the hyper-aggressive decency. I think Democrats could make this a theme. For example, one of the leading candidates for governor in my state of Nebraska made a fortune raising huge numbers of hogs. His workforce included large numbers of Hispanic immigrants, both legal and illegal. (Of course he claims he never "knowingly" hired any illegal immigrants.) But in his advertising he is aggressively anti-immigrant, never uttering a kind word or acknowledging the humanity of immigrants, legal or illegal. Surely a McMorrow-esque attack could be constructed from these facts. What type of man makes millions on the backs of immigrants, and then aggressively attacks their political interests?
On a side note, I've noticed a subtle shift in the meaning of the word "liberal" in this election cycle. One of the three leading candidates for the Republican nomination for Governor is being attacked as a "liberal." I think this is being interpreted by the electorate as making the charge that he is not sufficiently Trumpy and not that he is deficient on tax policy or some other issue. Interestingly, this candidate seems to be rising in the polls and as of now, may be tied for first.
Charlie, if Mandela Barnes wins the Dem primary will you vote for him to help defeat Ron Johnson or vote third party/write-in instead?
Gut check time.
I think the most ill thought-out slogan that could have ever come out of the democratic party is
"Defund the Police." Who's the idiot responsible for that?
"But Mr. McCarthy’s resolve seemed to harden as the gravity of the attack — and the potential political fallout for his party — sank in."
Can't the press be clear just once - it had EVERYTHING to do with "the potential political fallout for his party" and nothing else. That's exactly what governs today's GOP.
Two points. Someone In the media should also read the offering docs on Disney bonds. This is all performative bs. Second. I’m a registered Dem, and my Congressman, who I love, is Raskin. But I have voted for Hogan because he’s a rational, competent, hardworking public servant. And he’s not nuts. Very important that last point. The GOP tussle will be entertaining, but we will not elect a candidate who is nuts. Yes, I know…Agnew…but he was corrupt, not nuts.
As a graduate of one of the Claremont Colleges I'd like to make it very clear that the infamous Claremont Institute is not affiliated with the colleges. The Institute was founded by students of a professor at the colleges (CMC, CGS) and is headquartered in an adjacent town, and that is the extent of the connection. I am ever grateful for the education (in humanities) provided by Claremont, which has guided my life from A-Z.
"The American Mind has made something of a habit of publishing pseudonymous writers: 'Peachy Keenan,' 'The Huntsman,' 'Horatius,' 'Rebecca,' 'Privata,' and others. So it is, too, with the article worried about Western man’s sperm count—but its pseudonymous author, 'Raw Egg Nationalist,' stands apart for having recently published a book with a Nazi publishing house."
So, is this Raw Egg fellow Tucker's testes-toasting pal? Likes some eggs raw but not others?
Mallory McMorrow's turn is indeed impressive, but I'm a bit confused: exactly how is it that critics of the "woke" left think this is a promising new departure for Democrats? She sounds pretty "woke" to me, defending LGBTQs, asserting white responsibility for continuing systemic racism, etc. She echoes everything I keeping hearing from others on the Democratic left: that we need to stand firm on DEI even while insisting on dealing with the *non* culture-wars issues that Republicans are leaving in the dust when they're not actually making the problems worse. Yes, she presents her credentials as a straight white Christian parent; so do a lot of us. Unfortunately, none of this brings inflation down, or makes Covid go away, or keeps us out of danger with Russia, or produces any of the "outcomes" that people think government can provide with its magic wand.
Regarding the speakership and the incoming Republicon majority of the House, I'll be surprised if Kevin McCarthy's dream comes true. While, in darker moments, I worry about a loudmouth like MTG or TFG getting that role, it will probably go to someone previously "below the radar", as it went to Dennis Hastert long ago. They will attempt to select someone who evokes the least revulsion by the greatest number of party MoCs. After all, the objective is to accomplish nothing.
It's interesting that Trump's followers display such a lack of guts, both good and bad. Many were down on Trump when it was obvious that he was bad for US democracy but none of them were willing to step up personally. Ironically, that gutlessness also saved US democracy when Mike Pence and others were ok being willing pawns in the attempt to cheat Biden out of the presidency, even suggesting ways it might be done, but none of them wanted to be the one to be seen as pulling the trigger. This includes Trump himself. He always wanted others to step up and do the deed. He could have attempted to invoke martial law but didn't. He tried to replace certain people with toadies but either allowed himself to be talked out of it or, when he succeeded, the replacement realized that they'd be seen as the one pulling the trigger and backed out.