washingtonmonthly--2020-07-14--Trump Is Responsible for One of America’s Most Colossal Failures

For those of us who live in the reality-base world , Donald Trump ’ s presidency has been exhausting .
Future historians will write volumes about all of the ways he ’ s failed , so I won ’ t even try to summarize them .
But for right now , everything else pales in comparison to the president ’ s mishandling of the coronavirus crisis .
As this video demonstrates , he has been in denial about it since day one .
It took Trump until March 17th to admit that we were dealing with a pandemic .
By @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the world .
Four months later , the U.S. has documented almost 3.5 million cases of COVID-19 and nearly 140,000 deaths .
While Trump ’ s initial denial of the problem certainly made things much worse in this country , the fact of the matter is that the pandemic didn ’ t care who was president and would have posed a huge problem to anyone that occupied the White House .
But we are beginning to get a glimpse of just how much of the suffering being experienced by Americans can be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
Two weeks ago the European Union began to reopen their borders to foreign travel .
In a direct rebuke to this country , Americans remain banned from nonessential travel .
As reported at the time , the decision was “ based on health criteria , and European Union officials went to great lengths to appear apolitical in their choices.
” Here ’ s a glimpse of what that data looks like .
On a per capita basis , the European Union is now reporting about eight cases per one million people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 185 cases per one million .
As you can see , the trajectory of cases was initially pretty similar .
But according to my calculations , the uptick in the U.S. began sometime around the first of April .
We see exactly the same divergence in a comparison of the U.S. and Canada .
So on March 17th , Trump finally admitted that we were dealing with a pandemic .
But a week later , he began talking about reopening the economy .
Then on April 16th , the White House put out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governors simply ignored and reopened immediately .
That is precisely when cases began to surge in this country , even as the European Union and Canada began to get things under control .
According to the Washington Post , the Trump administration developed some new talking points about COVID-19 about a week ago .
The goal is to convince Americans that they can live with the virus — that schools should reopen , professional sports should return , a vaccine is likely to arrive by the end of the year and the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials also hope Americans will grow numb to the escalating death toll and learn to accept tens of thousands of new cases a day , according to three people familiar with the White House ’ s thinking , who requested anonymity to reveal internal deliberations .
Americans will “ live with the virus being a threat , ” in the words of one of those people , a senior administration official .
“ They ’ re of the belief that people will get over it or if we stop highlighting it , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will learn to accept 50,000 to 100,000 new cases a day , ” said a former administration official in touch with the campaign .
In other words , if we simply stop talking about this crisis , people will get over it and learn to live with the toll it is talking on our lives .
While Trump should be held accountable for his lack of response to coronavirus initially , it is clear that from the moment he admitted that we had a problem , he dropped the ball like a hot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is responsible for everything that has happened since then .
Beyond the decision by the Confederate states to succeed from the Union , I can ’ t think of a more colossal failure by public figures in the history of this country .
Unless something dramatic changes , we are on a trajectory for things to actually get much worse .

For those of us who live in the reality-base world, Donald Trump’s presidency has been exhausting. Future historians will write volumes about all of the ways he’s failed, so I won’t even try to summarize them. But for right now, everything else pales in comparison to the president’s mishandling of the coronavirus crisis. As this video demonstrates, he has been in denial about it since day one.
It took Trump until March 17th to admit that we were dealing with a pandemic. By that point, so was the rest of the world. Four months later, the U.S. has documented almost 3.5 million cases of COVID-19 and nearly 140,000 deaths.
While Trump’s initial denial of the problem certainly made things much worse in this country, the fact of the matter is that the pandemic didn’t care who was president and would have posed a huge problem to anyone that occupied the White House. But we are beginning to get a glimpse of just how much of the suffering being experienced by Americans can be laid directly at the feet of Donald Trump.
Two weeks ago the European Union began to reopen their borders to foreign travel. In a direct rebuke to this country, Americans remain banned from nonessential travel. As reported at the time, the decision was “based on health criteria, and European Union officials went to great lengths to appear apolitical in their choices.” Here’s a glimpse of what that data looks like.
On a per capita basis, the European Union is now reporting about eight cases per one million people, while the U.S. is currently experiencing 185 cases per one million. As you can see, the trajectory of cases was initially pretty similar. But according to my calculations, the uptick in the U.S. began sometime around the first of April. We see exactly the same divergence in a comparison of the U.S. and Canada.
So on March 17th, Trump finally admitted that we were dealing with a pandemic. But a week later, he began talking about reopening the economy. Then on April 16th, the White House put out guidelines for states to reopen—which many Republican governors simply ignored and reopened immediately. That is precisely when cases began to surge in this country, even as the European Union and Canada began to get things under control.
According to the Washington Post, the Trump administration developed some new talking points about COVID-19 about a week ago.
The goal is to convince Americans that they can live with the virus — that schools should reopen, professional sports should return, a vaccine is likely to arrive by the end of the year and the economy will continue to improve. White House officials also hope Americans will grow numb to the escalating death toll and learn to accept tens of thousands of new cases a day, according to three people familiar with the White House’s thinking, who requested anonymity to reveal internal deliberations. Americans will “live with the virus being a threat,” in the words of one of those people, a senior administration official. “They’re of the belief that people will get over it or if we stop highlighting it, the base will move on and the public will learn to accept 50,000 to 100,000 new cases a day,” said a former administration official in touch with the campaign.
In other words, if we simply stop talking about this crisis, people will get over it and learn to live with the toll it is talking on our lives.
While Trump should be held accountable for his lack of response to coronavirus initially, it is clear that from the moment he admitted that we had a problem, he dropped the ball like a hot potato and, along with Republican governors, is responsible for everything that has happened since then. Beyond the decision by the Confederate states to succeed from the Union, I can’t think of a more colossal failure by public figures in the history of this country. Unless something dramatic changes, we are on a trajectory for things to actually get much worse.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-14--Is Chris Christie the Future of the GOP?

In an interview with Steve Clemons published by The Hill on Tuesday , former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie declared his interest in running for president in 2024 .
That Christie has presidential ambitions is no surprise , but he does seem to be a bit delusional : But once you ’ ve been a governor , I think you always feel like you ’ ve got something to contribute .
And so , yeah , I would certainly , you know , look at the race in 2024 and I would not back off from that at all .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of atmospheric things that happened in the lead up to the ’ 16 race , especially the Bridgegate matter which now has been dismissed by the United States Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote that there was no crime committed there .
And yet the media and others convicted people before they even had a trial , and it materially affected my ability to run for president .
Now that we ’ ve had that cleared away and it ’ s no longer a controversy , you know , from my perspective , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go after that job again .
Chris Christie maintained that he had nothing to do with the closure of lanes over the George Washington Bridge in New York City , but now he is hiding behind the fact that the Supreme Court found that it didn ’ t constitute a federal crime because it was an example of petty political payback rather than self-enrichment .
I think people were outraged that Christie would inconvenience and endanger citizens for petty , political reasons , and I don ’ t think most people were pleased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the law .
However they feel about the Court ’ s ruling , they concluded that they didn ’ t like Christie .
It ’ s about what he did and why he did it , not about what some judge or prosecutor thinks about it .
And it will always be a controversy .
If the 2020 election is a blowout win for Joe Biden , the Republican field in 2024 will be wide open .
I supposed Chris Christie will have as much chance to win the nomination as anyone , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out what Republican voters want .
I imagine that if Trump loses Texas and other supposedly reliable red states , the party will at least attempt the kind of introspective process that led to Bill Clinton ’ s rise in the Democratic Party after the crushing defeats of 1980 , 1984 , and 1988 .
The GOP might conclude that an outright conservative no longer has a chance .
That could free up Christie to emphasize his Mid-Atlantic style of politics while trimming on the pandering he ’ s traditionally done to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to picture the people who are still staunch Republicans in the Trump Era suddenly learning to become pragmatists , however , and I ’ m skeptical that a moderate will win the nomination in 2024 .
I can more easily see Trump making a comeback , assuming he hasn ’ t been impeached and convicted to preclude that possibility .
If Trump loses narrowly , I ’ m not sure any lessons will be learned other than the nominee should have more practical experience .
But if it looks like the country has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only an Eisenhower type of candidate has any chance , we could see a quicker learning curve .
The Democrats didn ’ t take the warning from 1968 seriously and didn ’ t quickly adapt to the rising power of the Conservative Movement .
I don ’ t expect the Republican Party to do better .
But , as 2016 showed us , the people have more say than the party leaders .
I can see a situation where the leadership concludes that they need a non-conservative standard bearer to have any chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
My guess is that Chris Christie is too optimistic about his chances .
He thinks people like him more than they do , and it ’ s probably not likely that the party would nominate someone like him four years from now .

In an interview with Steve Clemons published by The Hill on Tuesday, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie declared his interest in running for president in 2024. That Christie has presidential ambitions is no surprise, but he does seem to be a bit delusional:
But once you’ve been a governor, I think you always feel like you’ve got something to contribute. And so, yeah, I would certainly, you know, look at the race in 2024 and I would not back off from that at all. I feel like there are a lot of atmospheric things that happened in the lead up to the ’16 race, especially the Bridgegate matter which now has been dismissed by the United States Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote that there was no crime committed there. And yet the media and others convicted people before they even had a trial, and it materially affected my ability to run for president. Now that we’ve had that cleared away and it’s no longer a controversy, you know, from my perspective, maybe 2024 is time to try to go after that job again.
Chris Christie maintained that he had nothing to do with the closure of lanes over the George Washington Bridge in New York City, but now he is hiding behind the fact that the Supreme Court found that it didn’t constitute a federal crime because it was an example of petty political payback rather than self-enrichment. I think people were outraged that Christie would inconvenience and endanger citizens for petty, political reasons, and I don’t think most people were pleased to learn that this is permissible under the law. However they feel about the Court’s ruling, they concluded that they didn’t like Christie. It’s about what he did and why he did it, not about what some judge or prosecutor thinks about it. And it will always be a controversy.
If the 2020 election is a blowout win for Joe Biden, the Republican field in 2024 will be wide open. I supposed Chris Christie will have as much chance to win the nomination as anyone, but he’ll have to figure out what Republican voters want. I imagine that if Trump loses Texas and other supposedly reliable red states, the party will at least attempt the kind of introspective process that led to Bill Clinton’s rise in the Democratic Party after the crushing defeats of 1980, 1984, and 1988. The GOP might conclude that an outright conservative no longer has a chance. That could free up Christie to emphasize his Mid-Atlantic style of politics while trimming on the pandering he’s traditionally done to the conservative base.
It’s hard to picture the people who are still staunch Republicans in the Trump Era suddenly learning to become pragmatists, however, and I’m skeptical that a moderate will win the nomination in 2024. I can more easily see Trump making a comeback, assuming he hasn’t been impeached and convicted to preclude that possibility.
If Trump loses narrowly, I’m not sure any lessons will be learned other than the nominee should have more practical experience. But if it looks like the country has tilted so far to the left that only an Eisenhower type of candidate has any chance, we could see a quicker learning curve.
The Democrats didn’t take the warning from 1968 seriously and didn’t quickly adapt to the rising power of the Conservative Movement. I don’t expect the Republican Party to do better. But, as 2016 showed us, the people have more say than the party leaders. I can see a situation where the leadership concludes that they need a non-conservative standard bearer to have any chance, but the voters prefer Louie Gohmert.
My guess is that Chris Christie is too optimistic about his chances. He thinks people like him more than they do, and it’s probably not likely that the party would nominate someone like him four years from now.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-15--Ivanka Trump Is Promoting a New Program the Globalists Will Love

One of the things that has always fascinated me about politics is the way that myths are developed about public figures and persist , regardless of the person ’ s actual behavior .
For example , Dick Cheney was cast as the serious , experienced politician in comparison to George W. Bush .
That myth allowed him to shamelessly lie about WMD ’ s in Iraq and then recklessly invade that country based on the lies .
The myth that developed about Donald Trump was that he was a “ populist ” who would fight the globalists and champion the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters .
It wasn ’ t just Trump supporters who bought into that myth .
Most journalists and pundits did as well .
But here ’ s a guy who didn ’ t .
By contrast , the myth that developed about Obama was that he was an elitist who didn ’ t care about the working class .
Back in 2012 , Rick Santorum called Obama a “ snob ” for suggesting that everyone should go to college .
But here ’ s the kind of thing the former president actually said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration did things like institute the Trade Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training competitive grant program .
But for a lot of people , the push towards retraining American workers in the kinds of competitive fields that create the jobs of the future was just another example of his elitism .
He was looking down his nose at working class folks and telling them what they should be doing .
What ’ s fascinating about all of that is that the guy who has been mythologized as a champion for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same kind of training program , which they are calling “ Find Something New.
” A new White House-backed ad campaign aims to encourage people who are unemployed or unhappy in their jobs or careers to go out and “ find something new.
” …The Trump administration has long emphasized skills-based job and vocational training as an alternative to two- or four-year college degree programs , arguing that college isn ’ t for everyone and that many jobs don ’ t require a degree .
The campaign is a product of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Advisory Board , which President Donald Trump created in 2018 .
The board is co-chaired by Trump ’ s daughter and White House adviser , Ivanka Trump , and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross .
“ There has never been a more critical time for Americans of all ages and backgrounds to be aware of the multiple pathways to career success and gain the vocational training and skills they need to fill jobs in a changing economy , ” said Ivanka Trump , who graduated from the University of Pennsylvania ’ s Wharton School @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about bringing back coal mining or manufacturing jobs , as Trump has often promised to do .
Instead , it is about developing the skills that will be needed “ to fill jobs in a changing economy.
” That ’ s exactly the kind of thing a so-called “ globalist ” might say .
Personally , I think that offering skills training is a good thing .
But the Trump ’ s can do it and still be hailed as champions of the working class , while Obama got tarred as an elitist @ @ @ @ @ @ @

One of the things that has always fascinated me about politics is the way that myths are developed about public figures and persist, regardless of the person’s actual behavior. For example, Dick Cheney was cast as the serious, experienced politician in comparison to George W. Bush. That myth allowed him to shamelessly lie about WMD’s in Iraq and then recklessly invade that country based on the lies.
The myth that developed about Donald Trump was that he was a “populist” who would fight the globalists and champion the cause of America’s working class voters. It wasn’t just Trump supporters who bought into that myth. Most journalists and pundits did as well. But here’s a guy who didn’t.
By contrast, the myth that developed about Obama was that he was an elitist who didn’t care about the working class. Back in 2012, Rick Santorum called Obama a “snob” for suggesting that everyone should go to college. But here’s the kind of thing the former president actually said.
Tonight, I ask every American to commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training. This can be community college or a four-year school; vocational training or an apprenticeship. But whatever the training may be, every American will need to get more than a high school diploma.
That is precisely why the Obama administration did things like institute the Trade Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training competitive grant program. But for a lot of people, the push towards retraining American workers in the kinds of competitive fields that create the jobs of the future was just another example of his elitism. He was looking down his nose at working class folks and telling them what they should be doing.
What’s fascinating about all of that is that the guy who has been mythologized as a champion for the working class is now attempting to recreate the same kind of training program, which they are calling “Find Something New.”
A new White House-backed ad campaign aims to encourage people who are unemployed or unhappy in their jobs or careers to go out and “find something new.”…The Trump administration has long emphasized skills-based job and vocational training as an alternative to two- or four-year college degree programs, arguing that college isn’t for everyone and that many jobs don’t require a degree. The campaign is a product of the White House’s American Workforce Policy Advisory Board, which President Donald Trump created in 2018. The board is co-chaired by Trump’s daughter and White House adviser, Ivanka Trump, and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. “There has never been a more critical time for Americans of all ages and backgrounds to be aware of the multiple pathways to career success and gain the vocational training and skills they need to fill jobs in a changing economy,” said Ivanka Trump, who graduated from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.
Notice that this isn’t about bringing back coal mining or manufacturing jobs, as Trump has often promised to do. Instead, it is about developing the skills that will be needed “to fill jobs in a changing economy.” That’s exactly the kind of thing a so-called “globalist” might say.
Personally, I think that offering skills training is a good thing. But the Trump’s can do it and still be hailed as champions of the working class, while Obama got tarred as an elitist for doing the exact same thing.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-15--The Only Place In the World Not Yet Rocked By the Virus

Most important , however , is that it doesn ’ t belong to any one nation .
Like outer space , Antarctica does not fall under the jurisdiction of any one country or fly one flag .
It is both no one ’ s and everyone ’ s .
COVID-19 has been kept off the continent through a joint decision by several nations .
Antarctica is not only free of disease and exploitation of its resources , it is also a fully non-nuclear and demilitarized zone .
In fact , there ’ s a 1958 international treaty that guarantees that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peaceful purposes only .
There shall be prohibited .
.
.
the establishment of military bases and fortifications , as well as the testing of any type of weapons.
” The treaty remains in force until 2048 .
And that is when all hell could break loose .
Treaties sometimes are not worth the paper on which they are written .
China signed a 1997 treaty with the United Kingdom to keep Hong Kong free in a one country-two systems status quo until 2047 .
That treaty just got crushed last week .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the current Antarctic treaty to evaluate the world ’ s willingness to enforce it .
Beijing and Moscow are also preparing to build cultural symbols , send personnel , deploy dual-use military hardware and plop down oil- and gas-extraction rigs on the day the Antarctic treaty lapses .
This is a real cause for concern .
Antarctica may look barren , but it is resource rich .
Under all that ice lie precious ores and minerals , from gold to uranium .
The Ross Sea that surrounds Antarctica has massive untapped energy reserves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The most obvious , plentiful and valuable resource in Antarctica is—wait for it—ice !
About 70 percent of the world ’ s fresh and potable water is trapped in Antarctic ice .
Getting to all those valuable resources is the challenge , of course .
But time and technology march on , and what seems foreboding today may be easy-peasy tomorrow .
Can ’ t the world ’ s major powers just get along , collaborate on shared interests , and protect the global commons ?
If the Antarctic ’ s polar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer is nyet .
Near the North Pole , the fight over the Arctic ’ s sea lanes , resources and strategic military basing already have heated up .
As global warming melts down and opens up a once frozen north , China covets the prospect that a northern sea channel can alter trade routes and dramatically cut shipping times from its ports to Western markets .
Russia , for its part , is way ahead on controlling those sea channels .
Moscow ’ s formidable collection of icebreaker navy ships means that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swaths of ice , open lanes , patrol , pilot and free ships .
The United States and other Arctic Council nations object to Russia ’ s asserting greater control there , but its presence and plans are bolstered by military might .
From a commercial perspective , the Arctic ’ s climate-change story has a silver lining via the opening of new trade routes and allowing access for resource exploitation .
There is , however , also a significant downside to warmer climes .
Right now , Siberia is on fire , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dioxide and on track to be the largest Arctic fire on record .
An unprecedented heatwave has fueled this fire and brought Siberian temperatures to over 100 degrees Fahrenheit .
Further , increased Russian commercial activity led to a massive Arctic fuel spill that has an environmental watchdog seeking more than $ 2 billion in damages .
As in the Arctic , Russia and China would like to lay claim to Antarctica ’ s continental resources as soon as possible to make sure they get and retain access , rights , control and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for now , but when Antarctica does open up and nations rush to cash in , is there any doubt that some of the ills that are already plaguing the north will eventually migrate south ?

Most important, however, is that it doesn’t belong to any one nation. Like outer space, Antarctica does not fall under the jurisdiction of any one country or fly one flag. It is both no one’s and everyone’s. COVID-19 has been kept off the continent through a joint decision by several nations.
Antarctica is not only free of disease and exploitation of its resources, it is also a fully non-nuclear and demilitarized zone. In fact, there’s a 1958 international treaty that guarantees that, “Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only. There shall be prohibited . . . the establishment of military bases and fortifications, as well as the testing of any type of weapons.” The treaty remains in force until 2048. And that is when all hell could break loose.
Treaties sometimes are not worth the paper on which they are written. China signed a 1997 treaty with the United Kingdom to keep Hong Kong free in a one country-two systems status quo until 2047. That treaty just got crushed last week.
Similarly, China and Russia are eyeing the current Antarctic treaty to evaluate the world’s willingness to enforce it. Beijing and Moscow are also preparing to build cultural symbols, send personnel, deploy dual-use military hardware and plop down oil- and gas-extraction rigs on the day the Antarctic treaty lapses. This is a real cause for concern.
Antarctica may look barren, but it is resource rich. Under all that ice lie precious ores and minerals, from gold to uranium. The Ross Sea that surrounds Antarctica has massive untapped energy reserves, according to a U.S. Geological Survey.
The most obvious, plentiful and valuable resource in Antarctica is—wait for it—ice! About 70 percent of the world’s fresh and potable water is trapped in Antarctic ice. Getting to all those valuable resources is the challenge, of course. But time and technology march on, and what seems foreboding today may be easy-peasy tomorrow.
Can’t the world’s major powers just get along, collaborate on shared interests, and protect the global commons? If the Antarctic’s polar opposite—the Arctic—is any indication, then the answer is nyet.
Near the North Pole, the fight over the Arctic’s sea lanes, resources and strategic military basing already have heated up. As global warming melts down and opens up a once frozen north, China covets the prospect that a northern sea channel can alter trade routes and dramatically cut shipping times from its ports to Western markets.
Russia, for its part, is way ahead on controlling those sea channels. Moscow’s formidable collection of icebreaker navy ships means that it has the technical ability to cut swaths of ice, open lanes, patrol, pilot and free ships. The United States and other Arctic Council nations object to Russia’s asserting greater control there, but its presence and plans are bolstered by military might.
From a commercial perspective, the Arctic’s climate-change story has a silver lining via the opening of new trade routes and allowing access for resource exploitation. There is, however, also a significant downside to warmer climes. Right now, Siberia is on fire, a raging inferno releasing tons of carbon dioxide and on track to be the largest Arctic fire on record. An unprecedented heatwave has fueled this fire and brought Siberian temperatures to over 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Further, increased Russian commercial activity led to a massive Arctic fuel spill that has an environmental watchdog seeking more than $2 billion in damages.
As in the Arctic, Russia and China would like to lay claim to Antarctica’s continental resources as soon as possible to make sure they get and retain access, rights, control and ownership early. Claims are on hold for now, but when Antarctica does open up and nations rush to cash in, is there any doubt that some of the ills that are already plaguing the north will eventually migrate south?


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-16--What Republicans Must Do to Reform Their Party

The presidential race ’ s national polling average compiled by RealClearPolitics has Biden leading Trump by 8.6 points .
The former vice president ’ s lead has grown by almost four points since mid-March .
Similarly , FiveThirtyEight ’ s average on the congressional ballot gives Democrats an 8.2 edge over Republicans .
But perhaps even more importantly , the fact that Trump has demoted his campaign manager , Brad Parscale , indicates that the president knows he is in trouble heading into November ’ s election .
On the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue , Mitch McConnell has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knows his Senate majority is seriously threatened .
All of that means that , unless something drastically changes between now and election day , we ’ re going to be hearing a lot of pontificating about what happens to the Republican Party once Donald Trump leaves the Oval Office .
William Kristol weighed in on that recently with more questions than answers .
I have to admit though , that I ’ m somewhat puzzled by the language he used to begin his piece .
While I don ’ t agree with Kristol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact is that he is a pretty intelligent man .
He has to know what it means to use a term like “ lost cause ” when contemplating the future of the Republican Party—especially during a time when the country is wrestling with what to do with all of the monuments that attempt to honor the leaders of the Confederacy .
A principal goal of the Lost Cause was to reintegrate Confederate soldiers into the honorable traditions of the very American military they had once fought against .
Members of the Lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ built military bases named after Confederate generals several times without success .
But during Woodrow Wilson ’ s second term as president , they found a more hospitable reception .
Thanks to Wilson , the Lost Cause ideology came fully into the mainstream , reaching the apex of its influence as America entered the First World War .
But whether he meant to or not , Kristol alludes to the so-called “ elephant in the room ” of the modern GOP : racism .
That is the point of an article by Francis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Can not Survive in a Multiracial Democracy.
” He documents all of the times over the last three decades that Republicans were offered an “ exit ramp ” to move away from their racist underpinnings , but refused to do so .
In reviewing Steve Benen ’ s book , The Imposters , for the latest edition of the Washington Monthly , Ed Kilgore makes a similar point .
I would take it a step further and suggest that the Christian right has a long history of being on the wrong side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that the Tea Party ’ s opposition to economic redistribution was cover for their outrage at the election of our first African American president .
As an example of a group attempting to define the GOP post-Trump , the Pepperdine School of Public Policy launched something called “ The American Project.
” They developed a white paper laying out their analysis of a way forward for conservatives .
We ’ ll have to leave a critique of their proposals for another time , but in outlining their view of how we got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems we face as resulting from a sense of radical individualism and alienation in American culture .
The authors go on to suggest how progressives responded .

The presidential race’s national polling average compiled by RealClearPolitics has Biden leading Trump by 8.6 points. The former vice president’s lead has grown by almost four points since mid-March. Similarly, FiveThirtyEight’s average on the congressional ballot gives Democrats an 8.2 edge over Republicans.
But perhaps even more importantly, the fact that Trump has demoted his campaign manager, Brad Parscale, indicates that the president knows he is in trouble heading into November’s election. On the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Mitch McConnell has been signaling for a while now that he knows his Senate majority is seriously threatened.
All of that means that, unless something drastically changes between now and election day, we’re going to be hearing a lot of pontificating about what happens to the Republican Party once Donald Trump leaves the Oval Office. William Kristol weighed in on that recently with more questions than answers.
In these cases, often the best one can do is to stop planning for a triple-bankshot inside-straight at some point in the unspecified future, and instead simply to fight for an outcome that is right and just in the short term. While at the same time keeping an open mind for the medium and long term.
I have to admit though, that I’m somewhat puzzled by the language he used to begin his piece.
Is the Republican Party a lost cause? Let me be definitive and unequivocal: I don’t know.
While I don’t agree with Kristol on most of his policy agenda, the fact is that he is a pretty intelligent man. He has to know what it means to use a term like “lost cause” when contemplating the future of the Republican Party—especially during a time when the country is wrestling with what to do with all of the monuments that attempt to honor the leaders of the Confederacy.
A principal goal of the Lost Cause was to reintegrate Confederate soldiers into the honorable traditions of the very American military they had once fought against. Members of the Lost Cause movement had lobbied to have newly built military bases named after Confederate generals several times without success. But during Woodrow Wilson’s second term as president, they found a more hospitable reception. Thanks to Wilson, the Lost Cause ideology came fully into the mainstream, reaching the apex of its influence as America entered the First World War.
But whether he meant to or not, Kristol alludes to the so-called “elephant in the room” of the modern GOP: racism. That is the point of an article by Francis Wilkerson titled “Trump’s Party Cannot Survive in a Multiracial Democracy.” He documents all of the times over the last three decades that Republicans were offered an “exit ramp” to move away from their racist underpinnings, but refused to do so.
In propping up Trump’s corrupt and derelict administration, the GOP has grown increasingly authoritarian. Having repeatedly failed to take an exit ramp from white nationalism, the party finds an exit from democracy itself beckons as the only sure means to stave off further electoral decline. The next four months may be a very dangerous patch of road.
In reviewing Steve Benen’s book, The Imposters, for the latest edition of the Washington Monthly, Ed Kilgore makes a similar point.
Over the last several decades, the Republican Party has been conquered by the Christian right and the overwhelmingly white Tea Party movement. The former has a theocratic vision for America. The latter militantly opposes economic redistribution. These movements converged with a realization that demographic trends were unfriendly to their party’s older base, generating a white identity politics that found its natural expression in the intensely divisive and intermittently racist stylings of Trump.
I would take it a step further and suggest that the Christian right has a long history of being on the wrong side of this country’s struggles with racism and that the Tea Party’s opposition to economic redistribution was cover for their outrage at the election of our first African American president.
As an example of a group attempting to define the GOP post-Trump, the Pepperdine School of Public Policy launched something called “The American Project.” They developed a white paper laying out their analysis of a way forward for conservatives. We’ll have to leave a critique of their proposals for another time, but in outlining their view of how we got here, they zero in on blaming radical individualism and alienation as the root of our problems. The authors go on to suggest how progressives responded.
Some American progressives also observed it, and responded by defining “community” through the creation of identity politics, elevating ethnic, racial and sexual qualities to the point where the self is seen as fully determined by these characteristics. Though promising a communitarian fix, it created a paradoxically exclusionary politics, limiting membership to those possessing very particular identities, and confining individuals into immoveable categories of those with and without “privilege.” Nowhere do they mention that what they call “identity politics” actually arose from Republican initiatives like Nixon’s Southern Strategy, or Reagan’s dog whistle of launching his presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, or George H.W. Bush’s use of the Willie Horton ad, or George W. Bush’s efforts to turn the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice into a unit to investigate so-called “voter fraud” (read: voter suppression). Those are just a few examples of how Republicans go to the well of racism again and again to maintain their power. As that happens, progressives, of course, organize to stop them. For doing so, they are maligned for engaging in identity politics. No one really knows what will happen to the Republican Party once Trump is gone. But I can tell you one thing for sure: in a changing America, their only hope of being a party that is taken seriously when it comes to actual governing will be if they can reckon with their racist past and begin the process of eradicating racism from their playbook.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-16--Shut Everything Down and Remove Trump

Shut Everything Down and Remove Trump

Back when this was all beginning , people referred to COVID-19 as “ a novel coronavirus.
” That little phrase carried two important pieces of information , neither of which the president of the United States understood .
It told us that this infection was not influenza or “ the flu , ” and it told us that human beings had no immunity against it because we had never encountered it before .
What this meant was that the viral outbreak would keep spreading through the population with ease because literally everyone could be infected , and that we shouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disappear ” over the summer .
Scientists still have much to learn about this novel coronavirus , and they ’ ve made some mistakes in recommendations and treatments .
But they ’ ve gotten the basics right .
That ’ s why Alexis Madrigal of The Atlantic is correct when he writes : “ There is no mystery in the number of Americans dying from COVID-19.
” When people are exposed to a sufficient concentration of the virus , they will get infected , which is why anywhere that people congregate , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak .
We ’ ve learned that the virus spreads most efficiently in indoor spaces , particularly any place that doesn ’ t have good circulation or a fresh supply of air .
It spreads from person to person best when people expel the virus a good distance from their bodies , by singing or talking loudly , for example , so choir practice and bars are particularly dangerous .
We ’ ve all gotten used to the charts that show whether the rate of infection or testing or death is going up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grow in the Mid-Atlantic , Midwest and Northeast in the spring and then fall as hard quarantines had the desired effect .
We watched the South and Southwest express skepticism about the seriousness of the problem and ignore this hard-won wisdom .
Now they are the ones experiencing the infection spikes .
It ’ s their hospitals and morgues that are overflowing .
And they ought to know exactly what to do , because they witnessed what worked in the first instance .
But they ’ re struggling .
Partly this is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secular and religious culture .
Partly it ’ s a reflection of how difficult it can be to admit mistakes and correct course .
Mostly , it ’ s due to Republican leadership being afraid to contradict the president of the United States , especially wherever religious fundamentalism predominates .
When skepticism about science and the educated elite is instinctual and tribal , it ’ s hard to get people to listen to reason , especially when their trusted leaders spend a lot of energy giving them bad information .
As cases began @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some people at first took comfort that there wasn ’ t a corresponding rise in deaths .
This was in part due to some improvement in treatment , so that some who would have died , had they been infected in March , were now surviving an infection in June .
But , mostly , it was an illusion , and a simple function of the roughly three to four-week delay between getting sick and actually dying .
As Mr. Madrigal points out , “ America ’ s deadly summer coronavirus surge is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole time by looking honestly at the data.
” Once the Sun Belt states opened up their economies , things transpired exactly how we were told they would .
First there was a spike in reported cases , which was followed by a spike in hospitalizations , and finally a spike in fatalities .
This was predictable because it isn ’ t remotely complicated .
When people congregate , the infection spreads .
It spreads because only a tiny percent of the population has already been infected and thereby has antibodies that can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infected person gives the virus to an average of more than one other person , the outbreak will grow .
The only way to bring that number below one is to practice extreme social distancing .
Obviously , masks can reduce the likelihood of person-to-person spread , but they are nowhere near as effective as a hard quarantine .
When the outbreak is raging , the only way to get it back under control is to shut everything down and have people shelter in place .
But , this doesn ’ t make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem down to a manageable level , where hospitals are not overwhelmed and perhaps testing and contact tracing can quickly identify and isolate future outbreaks .
This was done in New York and Boston .
It was done in Europe and Asia .
But it is not being done in the Sun Belt , and it ’ s not even being done consistently in other regions where it proved effective .
The main thing is that the virus will make a comeback as soon as we relax because we still have no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sun Belt gets its act together and gets the virus under control , they can ’ t think anything is solved .
As things stand , their outbreak is going to reinfect the regions that went through this once already .
These are stubborn facts that won ’ t bend to wishful thinking and rhetoric .
So , no , we can ’ t just reopen our schools .
We can ’ t put kids on school buses and in indoor classrooms and not have outbreaks of the virus .
We can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It doesn ’ t work like that .
The infection spreads wherever and whenever it has the chance .
Medical outcomes may improve , but the complications of the disease are serious and lasting .
If we want to get some semblance of normalcy , we have to do what other nations have done , and shut down until the infection rate is low enough to control through testing and contact tracing .
We got halfway there and then we just gave up .
It may be frustrating , but the answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to start over from scratch .
That means people have to admit they were wrong .
That means people who were misinformed have to get good information .
And , obviously , it means that we have to replace the president .
We can do that now , or we can wait until January .
Do you want to know what waiting for January might look like ?
Hopefully , better treatment will prevent the numbers from getting quite that high , but the price of leaving Trump in office until January 20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives .
That ’ s why I said Nancy Pelosi would be doing the Republicans a favor if she impeached him again and gave them a chance to avoid renominating Trump as their standard bearer .
It ’ s the only thing right now that can prevent a historic catastrophe .

Back when this was all beginning, people referred to COVID-19 as “a novel coronavirus.” That little phrase carried two important pieces of information, neither of which the president of the United States understood. It told us that this infection was not influenza or “the flu,” and it told us that human beings had no immunity against it because we had never encountered it before. What this meant was that the viral outbreak would keep spreading through the population with ease because literally everyone could be infected, and that we shouldn’t expect it to “magically disappear” over the summer.
Scientists still have much to learn about this novel coronavirus, and they’ve made some mistakes in recommendations and treatments. But they’ve gotten the basics right. That’s why Alexis Madrigal of The Atlantic is correct when he writes: “There is no mystery in the number of Americans dying from COVID-19.”
When people are exposed to a sufficient concentration of the virus, they will get infected, which is why anywhere that people congregate, there’s a good likelihood of an outbreak. We’ve learned that the virus spreads most efficiently in indoor spaces, particularly any place that doesn’t have good circulation or a fresh supply of air. It spreads from person to person best when people expel the virus a good distance from their bodies, by singing or talking loudly, for example, so choir practice and bars are particularly dangerous.
We’ve all gotten used to the charts that show whether the rate of infection or testing or death is going up or down. We watched the charts grow in the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Northeast in the spring and then fall as hard quarantines had the desired effect. We watched the South and Southwest express skepticism about the seriousness of the problem and ignore this hard-won wisdom. Now they are the ones experiencing the infection spikes. It’s their hospitals and morgues that are overflowing. And they ought to know exactly what to do, because they witnessed what worked in the first instance.
But they’re struggling. Partly this is a simple reflection of a regional difference between secular and religious culture. Partly it’s a reflection of how difficult it can be to admit mistakes and correct course. Mostly, it’s due to Republican leadership being afraid to contradict the president of the United States, especially wherever religious fundamentalism predominates. When skepticism about science and the educated elite is instinctual and tribal, it’s hard to get people to listen to reason, especially when their trusted leaders spend a lot of energy giving them bad information.
As cases began to rise in the Sun Belt, some people at first took comfort that there wasn’t a corresponding rise in deaths. This was in part due to some improvement in treatment, so that some who would have died, had they been infected in March, were now surviving an infection in June. But, mostly, it was an illusion, and a simple function of the roughly three to four-week delay between getting sick and actually dying.
As Mr. Madrigal points out, “America’s deadly summer coronavirus surge is undeniable. And it was predictable this whole time by looking honestly at the data.” Once the Sun Belt states opened up their economies, things transpired exactly how we were told they would. First there was a spike in reported cases, which was followed by a spike in hospitalizations, and finally a spike in fatalities. This was predictable because it isn’t remotely complicated. When people congregate, the infection spreads. It spreads because only a tiny percent of the population has already been infected and thereby has antibodies that can fight off the virus. If an infected person gives the virus to an average of more than one other person, the outbreak will grow. The only way to bring that number below one is to practice extreme social distancing. Obviously, masks can reduce the likelihood of person-to-person spread, but they are nowhere near as effective as a hard quarantine. When the outbreak is raging, the only way to get it back under control is to shut everything down and have people shelter in place.
But, this doesn’t make the problem go away. It gets the problem down to a manageable level, where hospitals are not overwhelmed and perhaps testing and contact tracing can quickly identify and isolate future outbreaks. This was done in New York and Boston. It was done in Europe and Asia. But it is not being done in the Sun Belt, and it’s not even being done consistently in other regions where it proved effective.
The main thing is that the virus will make a comeback as soon as we relax because we still have no immunity. So, even if the Sun Belt gets its act together and gets the virus under control, they can’t think anything is solved. As things stand, their outbreak is going to reinfect the regions that went through this once already.
These are stubborn facts that won’t bend to wishful thinking and rhetoric. So, no, we can’t just reopen our schools. We can’t put kids on school buses and in indoor classrooms and not have outbreaks of the virus. We can’t go to bars or choir practice. It doesn’t work like that. The infection spreads wherever and whenever it has the chance. Medical outcomes may improve, but the complications of the disease are serious and lasting.
If we want to get some semblance of normalcy, we have to do what other nations have done, and shut down until the infection rate is low enough to control through testing and contact tracing. We got halfway there and then we just gave up. It may be frustrating, but the answer isn’t complicated. We have to start over from scratch.
That means people have to admit they were wrong. That means people who were misinformed have to get good information. And, obviously, it means that we have to replace the president. We can do that now, or we can wait until January.
Do you want to know what waiting for January might look like?
New York City is and probably will remain the worst-case scenario. New York City has lost 23,353 lives. That’s 0.28 percent of the city’s population. If, as some antibody-prevalence surveys suggest, 20 percent of New Yorkers were infected, that’s an infection-fatality rate of more than 1.3 percent, which exceeds what the CDC or anyone else is planning for. To put it in the same terms discussed here, New York City saw 2,780 deaths per million people. A similar scenario across the South and West would kill over 550,000 more Americans in just a few months, moving the country to 680,000 dead. It is unthinkable, and yet, 130,000 deaths—the current national death toll—was once unthinkable, too.
Hopefully, better treatment will prevent the numbers from getting quite that high, but the price of leaving Trump in office until January 20, 2021 could be half a million lives. That’s why I said Nancy Pelosi would be doing the Republicans a favor if she impeached him again and gave them a chance to avoid renominating Trump as their standard bearer.
It’s the only thing right now that can prevent a historic catastrophe.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-16--Senate Republicans Have the Blood of COVID-19 Victims on Their Hands

I ’ ll be the first one to admit that I was shocked on election night in 2016 .
As I told my friends in the lead-up to that fateful moment , I didn ’ t think that the country that elected Barack Obama would follow up by electing Donald Trump .
Boy was I wrong !
As a result , the hardest thing for me to deal with emotionally was the loss of faith in my fellow citizens .
Over the course of the next few years , we learned that one of the few things Trump said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he bragged that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in broad daylight and his supporters wouldn ’ t abandon him .
It has been mind-numbing to watch them stick with him no matter what he said or how badly he screwed things up .
But with all of the caveats about how the 2020 election is still a little more than three months away , it is looking increasingly possible that Trump will lose in a landslide .
I tend to agree with David Atkins that the president wasn ’ t on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus crisis .
Biden had maintained the advantage all along .
But with every day that passes , that lead has grown .
So it would seem that ignoring a pandemic is obviously worse that shooting someone in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue , because at least some of Trump ’ s loyal supporters are starting to abandon him .
In a twisted way , that is the good news .
But it sure hasn ’ t lifted my spirits much .
That ’ s because , as someone told Greg Dworkin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s a countdown.
” Finally , the clock might be ticking down to the day that Donald Trump is no longer president .
But while he continues to commit impeachable offenses that would have resulted in previous presidents being removed from office , it has become clear that that is not going to happen .
So we are left to simply endure the havoc that this man will create until inauguration day in January 2021 .
God help us all .
That is why , as much as Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 victims on their hands .
There was a moment not too long ago when they could have removed this incompetent narcissist from office for abuse of power and obstruction of justice .
Other than Senator Mitt Romney , they chose to not do so—even though Representative Adam Schiff presciently warned them about what would happen .
That ’ s why this ad from the Lincoln Project absolutely nailed it .
Referring to Senators Mitch McConnell , Lindsey Graham , Thom Tillis , Cory Gardner , Martha McSally , Ted Cruz , Joni @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , John Cornyn , Jim Inhofe , Mike Rounds , Steve Daines , and Tom Cotton , the ad says that we must “ Learn their names .
Remember their actions .
And never , ever trust them again.
” I suspect that as Donald Trump continues to fail , there will come a time during this countdown when at least some of those Republicans senators will begin to distance themselves from the nightmare he is creating .
But they had their chance to stop him and didn ’ t .
As Schiff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tied to his with a cord of steel and for all of history .
”

I’ll be the first one to admit that I was shocked on election night in 2016. As I told my friends in the lead-up to that fateful moment, I didn’t think that the country that elected Barack Obama would follow up by electing Donald Trump. Boy was I wrong! As a result, the hardest thing for me to deal with emotionally was the loss of faith in my fellow citizens.
Over the course of the next few years, we learned that one of the few things Trump said that wasn’t a lie was when he bragged that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in broad daylight and his supporters wouldn’t abandon him. It has been mind-numbing to watch them stick with him no matter what he said or how badly he screwed things up.
But with all of the caveats about how the 2020 election is still a little more than three months away, it is looking increasingly possible that Trump will lose in a landslide. I tend to agree with David Atkins that the president wasn’t on a glide path to re-election prior to the coronavirus crisis. Biden had maintained the advantage all along. But with every day that passes, that lead has grown. So it would seem that ignoring a pandemic is obviously worse that shooting someone in broad daylight on Fifth Avenue, because at least some of Trump’s loyal supporters are starting to abandon him.
In a twisted way, that is the good news. But it sure hasn’t lifted my spirits much. That’s because, as someone told Greg Dworkin, “this is not an election, it’s a countdown.” Finally, the clock might be ticking down to the day that Donald Trump is no longer president. But while he continues to commit impeachable offenses that would have resulted in previous presidents being removed from office, it has become clear that that is not going to happen. So we are left to simply endure the havoc that this man will create until inauguration day in January 2021. God help us all.
That is why, as much as Donald Trump, Senate Republicans have the blood of COVID-19 victims on their hands. There was a moment not too long ago when they could have removed this incompetent narcissist from office for abuse of power and obstruction of justice. Other than Senator Mitt Romney, they chose to not do so—even though Representative Adam Schiff presciently warned them about what would happen. That’s why this ad from the Lincoln Project absolutely nailed it.
Referring to Senators Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Thom Tillis, Cory Gardner, Martha McSally, Ted Cruz, Joni Ernst, Marco Rubio, Susan Collins, John Cornyn, Jim Inhofe, Mike Rounds, Steve Daines, and Tom Cotton, the ad says that we must “Learn their names. Remember their actions. And never, ever trust them again.”
I suspect that as Donald Trump continues to fail, there will come a time during this countdown when at least some of those Republicans senators will begin to distance themselves from the nightmare he is creating. But they had their chance to stop him and didn’t. As Schiff said, their names “will be tied to his with a cord of steel and for all of history.”


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-15--Trump Isn’t Opposing a New Stimulus Because of Bad Politics

As the number of COVID-19 cases continues to spike across the country , it is not just American lives that are threatened , the economic toll continues to rise .
For example : Renters are nearing the end of their financial rope .
People who rent have largely been able to survive the initial months of the pandemic helped by unemployment and federal relief checks .
But the extra $ 600 in unemployment benefits ceases at the end of July and local eviction moratoriums are expiring… The COVID-19 Eviction Defense Project , a coalition of economic researchers and legal experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million Americans are at risk for eviction by the end of September .
Just as the situation becomes more dire , some of the relief measures passed to address the situation are set to expire at the end of this month .
While the House passed a bill to extend them quite a while ago , Majority Leader McConnell is dragging his feet in the Senate and the White House seems content to let him do so .
In a piece titled “ Why Would Trump Oppose Stimulus , ” Jonathan Bernstein writes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ He seems to think that taking dramatic action to solve a problem is bad politics compared to pretending the problem doesn ’ t exist.
” That isn ’ t just commentary on Trump ’ s colossal failure when it comes to his response to the pandemic , it is a pretty good summary of his entire presidency .
You might recall that the guy who refers to himself as a “ stable genius ” has said that things like winning trade deals and replacing Obamacare would be easy .
But when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying .
That ’ s because governing is hard work that requires both skill and persistence .
Solving problems also requires a leader who actually cares about something other than his own narcissistic ego .
As I ’ ve been saying since the beginning , this president has demonstrated that the only skills he has are to lie , distract , and blame .
So I ’ d disagree with Bernstein that his lack of interest in a stimulus bill isn ’ t so much that he thinks doing so would be bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nor has the skills necessary to craft something that would be effective .
He has simply reverted to his old pattern of lying about the problem ( ie , testing is creating more COVID-19 cases ) , distracting by focusing on the need to reopen schools , and blaming Anthony Fauci for getting things wrong .
In the end , Trump ’ s solution is always to pretend that a problem doesn ’ t exist .
His delusions are activated when it becomes clear that he is incapable of solving the challenges we @ @ @ @ @

As the number of COVID-19 cases continues to spike across the country, it is not just American lives that are threatened, the economic toll continues to rise. For example:
Renters are nearing the end of their financial rope. People who rent have largely been able to survive the initial months of the pandemic helped by unemployment and federal relief checks. But the extra $600 in unemployment benefits ceases at the end of July and local eviction moratoriums are expiring… The COVID-19 Eviction Defense Project, a coalition of economic researchers and legal experts, estimates that 19 million to 23 million Americans are at risk for eviction by the end of September.
Just as the situation becomes more dire, some of the relief measures passed to address the situation are set to expire at the end of this month. While the House passed a bill to extend them quite a while ago, Majority Leader McConnell is dragging his feet in the Senate and the White House seems content to let him do so.
In a piece titled “Why Would Trump Oppose Stimulus,” Jonathan Bernstein writes a sentence that grabbed my attention: “He seems to think that taking dramatic action to solve a problem is bad politics compared to pretending the problem doesn’t exist.” That isn’t just commentary on Trump’s colossal failure when it comes to his response to the pandemic, it is a pretty good summary of his entire presidency.
You might recall that the guy who refers to himself as a “stable genius” has said that things like winning trade deals and replacing Obamacare would be easy. But when the going got tough, he simply quit trying. That’s because governing is hard work that requires both skill and persistence. Solving problems also requires a leader who actually cares about something other than his own narcissistic ego.
As I’ve been saying since the beginning, this president has demonstrated that the only skills he has are to lie, distract, and blame. So I’d disagree with Bernstein that his lack of interest in a stimulus bill isn’t so much that he thinks doing so would be bad politics, but that he neither cares nor has the skills necessary to craft something that would be effective. He has simply reverted to his old pattern of lying about the problem (ie, testing is creating more COVID-19 cases), distracting by focusing on the need to reopen schools, and blaming Anthony Fauci for getting things wrong.
In the end, Trump’s solution is always to pretend that a problem doesn’t exist. His delusions are activated when it becomes clear that he is incapable of solving the challenges we face as a country.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-15--It’s Biden, Not Trump, Who Has the Enthusiasm Advantage

The precincts have all reported in Tuesday ’ s Republican Party runoff in the 23rd Congressional District of Texas , and the two candidates are separated by seven votes .
Now the lawyers will get involved and it should form an entertaining spat between President Donald Trump , who endorsed Tony Gonzales , and Senator Ted Cruz , who endorsed Raul Reyes .
Neither of them is favored to hold the seat , which is currently occupied by Rep. Will Hurd , but don ’ t let anyone tell you that your vote doesn ’ t matter .
Do you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though ?
It doesn ’ t matter whether Reyes ’ or Gonzales ’ supporters were more enthusiastic about voting for them , because every vote counts the same .
That ’ s why Trump ’ s embattled campaign manager Brad Parscale is on pretty thin ice when he says the president ’ s enthusiasm advantage over his challenger is “ the most important factor in the campaign.
” As Michael Tesler writes for FiveThirtyEight , “ Biden voters may not be all that excited about voting for Biden , [ but ] they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump , ” and “ the share of Trump voters who rate Biden unfavorably is consistently much lower than the share of Biden voters who rate Trump negatively — nearly 30 percentage points lower as of the last survey conducted at the end of June.
” Of course , it doesn ’ t matter whether a vote was cast for or against a candidate , it only matters how that vote was cast , and right now Donald Trump is down nationally by about nine points and battleground polls point to a thumping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important factor ” in the campaign is who wins , and Trump isn ’ t winning .
If we want to look at an important factor for why Trump isn ’ t winning , it might be that he has a substantial favorability deficit .
As a competent and loyal vice-president to the wildly popular Barack Obama , Biden certainly has his fans within the Democratic base , but he has nothing like a cult following .
It ’ s only when you combine strong Biden supporters with people who hate Trump with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you discover the enthusiasm advantage .
On the other side , you have MAGA lunatics and some reluctant single-issue voters , but not a lot of genuine Biden haters .
This is why we ’ re seeing people like South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham attack “ the Squad ” rather than Biden .
He ’ s on the record saying that Biden is the nicest man he ’ s met in politics , so he criticizes him for being a puppet of “ socialists ” like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez .
That ’ s just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ folks .
So , yes , about twice as many Trump supporters say that they ’ re really jazzed to cast a vote for him as say the same about Biden on the other side , but it remains Biden who has the advantage .
If there ’ s some support for Trump that isn ’ t being detected in the polls , it ’ s not enthusiasm that explains it .
It ’ s probable that a lot of people are simply ashamed to admit that their desire for abortion restrictions or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough to make them support the president ’ s reelection .
There are definitely some folks in this category , but are there enough ?

The precincts have all reported in Tuesday’s Republican Party runoff in the 23rd Congressional District of Texas, and the two candidates are separated by seven votes. Now the lawyers will get involved and it should form an entertaining spat between President Donald Trump, who endorsed Tony Gonzales, and Senator Ted Cruz, who endorsed Raul Reyes. Neither of them is favored to hold the seat, which is currently occupied by Rep. Will Hurd, but don’t let anyone tell you that your vote doesn’t matter.
Do you know what doesn’t matter, though? It doesn’t matter whether Reyes’ or Gonzales’ supporters were more enthusiastic about voting for them, because every vote counts the same. That’s why Trump’s embattled campaign manager Brad Parscale is on pretty thin ice when he says the president’s enthusiasm advantage over his challenger is “the most important factor in the campaign.”
As Michael Tesler writes for FiveThirtyEight, “Biden voters may not be all that excited about voting for Biden, [but] they’re very enthusiastic about voting against Trump,” and “the share of Trump voters who rate Biden unfavorably is consistently much lower than the share of Biden voters who rate Trump negatively — nearly 30 percentage points lower as of the last survey conducted at the end of June.”
Of course, it doesn’t matter whether a vote was cast for or against a candidate, it only matters how that vote was cast, and right now Donald Trump is down nationally by about nine points and battleground polls point to a thumping Electoral College loss. The “most important factor” in the campaign is who wins, and Trump isn’t winning.
If we want to look at an important factor for why Trump isn’t winning, it might be that he has a substantial favorability deficit.
Second, because Trump voters don’t dislike Biden as much as Biden voters dislike Trump, Biden actually has an advantage in net enthusiasm (calculated as the difference between a candidate’s “very favorable” and “very unfavorable” rating).
As a competent and loyal vice-president to the wildly popular Barack Obama, Biden certainly has his fans within the Democratic base, but he has nothing like a cult following. It’s only when you combine strong Biden supporters with people who hate Trump with the fire of a thousand suns that you discover the enthusiasm advantage. On the other side, you have MAGA lunatics and some reluctant single-issue voters, but not a lot of genuine Biden haters.
This is why we’re seeing people like South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham attack “the Squad” rather than Biden. He’s on the record saying that Biden is the nicest man he’s met in politics, so he criticizes him for being a puppet of “socialists” like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. That’s just not that convincing or scary to most folks.
So, yes, about twice as many Trump supporters say that they’re really jazzed to cast a vote for him as say the same about Biden on the other side, but it remains Biden who has the advantage.
If there’s some support for Trump that isn’t being detected in the polls, it’s not enthusiasm that explains it. It’s probable that a lot of people are simply ashamed to admit that their desire for abortion restrictions or lower taxes or more oil drilling is enough to make them support the president’s reelection. There are definitely some folks in this category, but are there enough?


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-16--Robert McNamara Was My Neighbor

Robert McNamara Was My Neighbor

About thirty years ago I was the summer-lodger in a Washington , D.C. townhouse , which was the pied-à-terre of a nice couple from Richmond , Virginia .
I didn ’ t know them well , or really at all : they were the parents of a friend of a friend who offered me their basement flat for $ 100 per month in exchange for looking after a small patch of lawn and their two pets—a large poodle and a Persian cat called “ sister ” ( or , “ sihstaah ” ) .
The house was on Tracy Place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today as the neighborhood of Barack Obama , Jeff Bezos , and Javanka Trump , who now live in a house across the street from the one I lived in .
“ Sihstaah ” escaped one day and made me retrieve her from the shrubbery in front of that house .
If that were to happen now , I probably wouldn ’ t be around to write this portrait .
Tracy Place was less of a security nightmare in those days , although it was certainly secure : there were Secret Service and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time due to the number of embassy residences nearby .
For this reason it was considered a comparatively safe place to live , and particularly so if one were famous , or infamous .
Living a couple of houses down the block from me was Robert Strange McNamara .
He had been U.S. Secretary of Defense under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson , and was reviled by many Americans as the presumptive architect of the Vietnam War .
He had also been head of the Ford Motor Company and , later , of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was reviled in those places as well , but maybe not as much .
In the 1990s , McNamara was still a well-known and recognizable figure .
But not if you saw him on the street .
I used to see him often in Kalorama and Dupont Circle , wearing an old , tan trench coat , loose trousers , and tennis shoes ; and walking very fast , arms waving , head thrust forward , usually at a slant , with his stringy grey hair at a sixty degree angle to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ papers in a People ’ s Drug plastic bag , which bounced against his leg .
If you didn ’ t know him you had to look closely to recognize him , which he made it difficult to do .
Most people , if they cared to notice him at all , perhaps mistook him for a neighborhood wino .
I never saw McNamara at home but I did see on most mornings on my way to work another man taking out the garbage .
He was always well dressed , of late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ features .
I never got up the courage to introduce myself , so I do not have better details about him ; only to say that he ’ d sometimes nod hello , then walk back around the side of the house .
Who was this man ?
Maybe just another summer-lodger like me .
Or maybe not .
Pulling together the threads above it isn ’ t difficult to conjure a dark Poe story or an episode of the Twilight Zone about the dotage of a tormented ex-bureaucrat of a fanatical bent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , pacing its halls in shabby clothing with his People ’ s Drug plastic bag and the ghosts of his past … But was he really alone ?
Perhaps not .
Perhaps every morning he was awoken by the polite , silent , well-dressed man I saw , playing the role of a courteous Vietnamese manservant , delivering a glass of orange juice and a newspaper , and reminding McNamara each and every day without the need of a single word of the millions of dead on his conscience .
I met McNamara @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every couple of weeks—at the organization where I worked ; he was on its Board and liked to come by .
I never told him I was his neighbor .
Hearing him in meetings was an even more jarring experience than seeing him in the guise of a tramp .
He would seize upon a point and begin speaking more or less on autopilot , making the point with the most impeccable logic .
And sometimes you knew the point was wrong , but you could not begin to think of a way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wonder if , in that large house , he talked to himself in the same way .
Or if , in the presence of the imagined manservant , he was another man entirely .

About thirty years ago I was the summer-lodger in a Washington, D.C. townhouse, which was the pied-à-terre of a nice couple from Richmond, Virginia. I didn’t know them well, or really at all: they were the parents of a friend of a friend who offered me their basement flat for $100 per month in exchange for looking after a small patch of lawn and their two pets—a large poodle and a Persian cat called “sister” (or, “sihstaah”).
The house was on Tracy Place in Kalorama. It is best known today as the neighborhood of Barack Obama, Jeff Bezos, and Javanka Trump, who now live in a house across the street from the one I lived in. “Sihstaah” escaped one day and made me retrieve her from the shrubbery in front of that house. If that were to happen now, I probably wouldn’t be around to write this portrait.
Tracy Place was less of a security nightmare in those days, although it was certainly secure: there were Secret Service and other minders watching over us all the time due to the number of embassy residences nearby. For this reason it was considered a comparatively safe place to live, and particularly so if one were famous, or infamous.
Living a couple of houses down the block from me was Robert Strange McNamara. He had been U.S. Secretary of Defense under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, and was reviled by many Americans as the presumptive architect of the Vietnam War. He had also been head of the Ford Motor Company and, later, of the World Bank; I’m told he was reviled in those places as well, but maybe not as much.
In the 1990s, McNamara was still a well-known and recognizable figure. But not if you saw him on the street. I used to see him often in Kalorama and Dupont Circle, wearing an old, tan trench coat, loose trousers, and tennis shoes; and walking very fast, arms waving, head thrust forward, usually at a slant, with his stringy grey hair at a sixty degree angle to his feet. He carried books and papers in a People’s Drug plastic bag, which bounced against his leg. If you didn’t know him you had to look closely to recognize him, which was difficult to do. Most people, if they cared to notice him at all, perhaps mistook him for a neighborhood wino.
I never saw McNamara at home. On my way to work most mornings, though, I saw another man taking out the garbage. He was always well dressed, of late middle age, and with East Asian features. I never got up the courage to introduce myself, so I do not have better details about him; only to say that he’d sometimes nod hello, then walk back around the side of the house.
Who was this man? Maybe just another summer-lodger like me. Or maybe not. Pulling together the threads above it isn’t difficult to conjure a dark Poe story or an episode of the Twilight Zone about the dotage of a tormented ex-bureaucrat of a fanatical bent, living alone in this big house, pacing its halls in shabby clothing with his People’s Drug plastic bag and the ghosts of his past … But was he really alone? Perhaps not. Perhaps every morning he was awoken by the polite, silent, well-dressed man I saw, playing the role of a courteous Vietnamese manservant, delivering a glass of orange juice and a newspaper, and reminding McNamara each and every day without the need of a single word of the millions of dead on his conscience.
I met McNamara several times, actually—usually once or twice every couple of weeks—at the organization where I worked; he was on its Board and liked to come by. I never told him I was his neighbor. Hearing him in meetings was an even more jarring experience than seeing him in the guise of a tramp. He would seize upon a point and begin speaking more or less on autopilot, making the point with the most impeccable logic. And sometimes you knew the point was wrong, but you could not begin to think of a way to counter it.
And I still wonder if, in that large house, he talked to himself in the same way. Or if, in the presence of the imagined manservant, he was another man entirely.


washingtonmonthly--2020-07-17--Did Roger Stone Really Find Jesus?

Did Roger Stone Really Find Jesus?

Regardless of what you think about the allegation that Roger Stone was the Trump campaign emissary to Wikileaks , no one would ever claim that he is anything but a despicable person .
As the editors of the National Review wrote , “ No one would think of letting Roger Stone anywhere near any serious responsibility , and even the Trump campaign in 2016 had the sense to keep him at arm ’ s length.
” In case you aren ’ t familiar with his past , I suggest watching the documentary Get Me Roger Stone , which is available @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sudden , Stone has found Jesus .
Apparently while awaiting sentencing on his conviction for lying to investigators and witness tampering , he attended a Franklin Graham rally and became a Christian .
After Trump commuted his sentence , Stone made an appearance on the Christian Broadcast Network and was interviewed by David Brody .
That was good enough for court evangelical Ralph Reed , who tweeted , “ I am grateful Roger Stone found faith in Christ and is free .
His prosecution was an abuse of power .
He should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reminded of what theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote about cheap grace .
Roger Stone ( and Donald Trump ) are perfect examples of how a belief in cheap grace sets white evangelical Christians up to be easy prey for con men ( and women ) .
All someone has to do is claim to have accepted Jesus as their savior and nothing else is required .
Someone like Roger Stone is welcomed into the fold without ever having to name any of the despicable things they ’ ve done , much less be held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to commit to changing their ways or even say that they ’ ll try to be a better person .
At one point during his interview with Brody , Stone suggests that he ’ s already changed because he isn ’ t interested in seeking vengeance against those who prosecuted and convicted him .
That was right before he called them “ satanic.
” I am personally someone who believes in redemption .
But a spiritual encounter with God would , by nature , lead to a period of soul-searching , self-reflection , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national television that provides the opportunity to attack one ’ s opponents .
Even Richard Nixon ’ s hatchet man , Charles Colson , had the good sense to devote himself to prison ministry after claiming to have found Jesus .
It is not my job to judge the state of Roger Stone ’ s soul .
But I don ’ t ever want to be part of a religion that welcomes him with open arms—no questions asked .

Regardless of what you think about the allegation that Roger Stone was the Trump campaign emissary to Wikileaks, no one would ever claim that he is anything but a despicable person. As the editors of the National Review wrote, “No one would think of letting Roger Stone anywhere near any serious responsibility, and even the Trump campaign in 2016 had the sense to keep him at arm’s length.”
In case you aren’t familiar with his past, I suggest watching the documentary Get Me Roger Stone, which is available on Netflix.
But now all of the sudden, Stone has found Jesus. Apparently while awaiting sentencing on his conviction for lying to investigators and witness tampering, he attended a Franklin Graham rally and became a Christian. After Trump commuted his sentence, Stone made an appearance on the Christian Broadcast Network and was interviewed by David Brody.
That was good enough for court evangelical Ralph Reed, who tweeted, “I am grateful Roger Stone found faith in Christ and is free. His prosecution was an abuse of power. He should never have been charged.”
I am reminded of what theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote about cheap grace.
Cheap grace means grace sold on the market like cheapjacks’ wares. The sacraments, the forgiveness of sin, and the consolations of religion are thrown away at cut prices. Grace is represented as the Church’s inexhaustible treasury, from which she showers blessings with generous hands, without asking questions or fixing limits. Grace without price; grace without cost!
Roger Stone (and Donald Trump) are perfect examples of how a belief in cheap grace sets white evangelical Christians up to be easy prey for con men (and women). All someone has to do is claim to have accepted Jesus as their savior and nothing else is required. Someone like Roger Stone is welcomed into the fold without ever having to name any of the despicable things they’ve done, much less be held accountable. They don’t have to commit to changing their ways or even say that they’ll try to be a better person.
At one point during his interview with Brody, Stone suggests that he’s already changed because he isn’t interested in seeking vengeance against those who prosecuted and convicted him. That was right before he called them “satanic.”
I am personally someone who believes in redemption. But a spiritual encounter with God would, by nature, lead to a period of soul-searching, self-reflection, prayer, and humility—not an interview on national television that provides the opportunity to attack one’s opponents. Even Richard Nixon’s hatchet man, Charles Colson, had the good sense to devote himself to prison ministry after claiming to have found Jesus.
It is not my job to judge the state of Roger Stone’s soul. But I don’t ever want to be part of a religion that welcomes him with open arms—no questions asked.