thebulwark--2020-07-24--Hillsdale Must Join the National Reckoning on Race

In September 1888 , an aged Frederick Douglass made his second visit to a tiny abolitionist college in rural southern Michigan .
He spoke on the looming presidential election , and his words have uncanny relevance today .
“ In a Presidential canvass three things are always in order : First , we have to consider the character of the candidate , ” he said in a typed version of the address that matches descriptions of the ones he gave at the college and elsewhere on that speaking tour .
“ A man in the presidential chair should stand for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politician .
He should be one among millions—a model man ; one to whom the sons of after-coming generations can be referred as an example to them.
” Douglass went on to argue that voters should also consider the past actions of political parties when deciding how to cast their ballots .
“ The past is parent to the present , and it is only by the past that we are able properly to discern the future , ” he said .
That tiny abolitionist school was Hillsdale College , my alma mater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harvard.
” At its heart Hillsdale is simply a liberal arts college , but its alumni pepper the Trump administration and its various lecture programs , online courses , and D.C. outpost serve as intellectual training ground for the conservative movement .
So when hundreds of Hillsdale alumni signed petitions in June asking the college to condemn historical injustices against black people in response to the George Floyd protests , the school was at a crossroads .
Would the college that sent more of its sons to fight for the Union than any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the descendants of slaves ?
Or would it reiterate , as it had in the past , “ the danger of the Black Lives Matters movement ” ?
“ The College is told that it garners no honor now for its abolitionist past—or that it fails to live up to that past—but instead it must issue statements today .
Statements about what ?
” read an open letter from leaders of the college , republished in the Wall Street Journal .
“ It must issue statements about the brutal and deadly evil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differently because of the color of their skin .
That is , it must issue statements about the very things that moved the abolitionists whom the College has ever invoked.
” But Hillsdale , like all of America , ought to heed Douglass ’ s advice and take a good , hard look at its past .
It must lament the evil and treasure the good .
The college has more than abolitionists in its past—like many other institutions , it has a history of tangled , unexamined , internally competing racial views @ @ @ @ @ @ @ join the national reckoning on race .
Hillsdale was founded by abolitionist Baptists in 1844 .
It was the first college in the nation to prohibit discrimination based on race , sex , or religion in its charter .
It fought efforts to segregate its ROTC unit in World War I .
Its 1955 football team refused to play in a bowl game that barred its black players from the field .
But Hillsdale was not exempt from the racism that permeated educational institutions in the 20th century .
Hillsdale sat out the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the preeminent chronicler of the college ’ s history , Arlan Gilbert .
The student newspaper , the Collegian , voiced some support of black protesters in the 1960s but was mostly mum on the topic .
It did , however , reprint in 1960 an editorial that ran in the Duke student paper : “ We would question the appropriateness of protesting against a Southern .
.
.
custom by applying pressure on a private business establishment , ” it read .
“ While we are for desegregation , we realize that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ easy solution is possible.
” The college then found a president who would use apathy toward civil rights legislation to make it famous .
When George Roche III became president of Hillsdale in 1971 at age 35 , he was fresh from the libertarian Foundation for Economic Education , which in the previous decade had issued a steady stream of anti-civil-rights commentary of the type that animated the GOP ’ s “ Southern strategy.
” FEE authors defended private businesses ’ right to discriminate against blacks , criticized the Supreme Court ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argued for a “ hands-off ” response to South African apartheid , and saw the civil rights movement primarily as a massive expansion of federal power .
Roche echoed these arguments .
“ The racial problem is still with us ( as are innumerable other problems as well ) but it ill-behooves us to destroy the American tradition of federalism in the course of attempted ‘ solutions ’ to our problems , ” he wrote in 1967 .
The future president of an abolitionist college also questioned whether the Civil War was necessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do-gooders ” who pressured the United States into war but did not lead on the battlefield and wondering whether “ the free market might have averted the Civil War.
” National Review founder William F. Buckley Jr. , a longtime friend of Hillsdale , was on hand to celebrate Roche ’ s appointment as president .
Buckley in 1957 supported gradual , voluntary change from Jim Crow , because whites were “ the advanced race ” —a stance he later disavowed .
Roche made a name for Hillsdale .
When in 1972 the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ track students by their race for the purposes of implementing anti-discrimination law , Roche led the college both to refuse race statistics and to cement its refusal of federal funds .
He then trumpeted those refusals around the nation to win conservative praise and donors .
In 1973 , under Roche ’ s leadership , one of the first editions of the college ’ s widely circulated digest of speeches , Imprimis , defended minority white rule of Zimbabwe and private discrimination .
Imprimis also printed a response from the country ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who wrote of the “ backward races ” and the “ more sophisticated European and Asian races.
” The college continued to keep odious company .
Segregationist James Kilpatrick , racist Sen. Strom Thurmond , and racist Jared Taylor , the editor of the white supremacist American Renaissance magazine , spoke at Hillsdale seminars in the following decades .
Taylor argued in a college-sponsored lecture that minorities were genetically inferior and more suited to manual labor .
Roche ’ s statement at the time did not specifically condemn the talk : “ For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treating individuals on the basis of their own merit and anything that moves from that direction is not keeping with our mission.
” The college still sells copies of Taylor ’ s lecture in its “ Freedom Library Catalog.
” Though many Hillsdale professors are fiercely pro-Union , an odd strain of Lost Cause romanticism lingered at Hillsdale .
In 2008 , the Hillsdale-published reader for its required American history course included writings by Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr. but also introduced an 1891 essay by Confederate apologist Basil Gildersleeve by praising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the South had “ universal validity.
” Gildersleeve argued that the South had fought for states ’ rights and “ the cause of civil liberty , ” not to defend slavery ; the introduction was signed by a historian who also edited the neo-Confederate magazine Southern Partisan .
In recent years the college has done little to voice sympathy for black Americans protesting police brutality .
Imprimis , with more than 5 million subscribers , regularly points to black culture and black-on-black crime as the root causes of any ill treatment from police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diversity .
Hillsdale as an institution does not endorse the racist alt-right and its hatred .
The college ’ s current president , Larry Arnn , is no Roche ; he loves Hillsdale ’ s abolitionist legacy , can recite Douglass and Lincoln by heart , and demonstrates his personal care for students of color .
In 2016 he led the school to launch the Frederick Douglass scholarships , offering tuition , room and board to first-generation college students from disadvantaged school districts .
But the college has chosen to publicize voices that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example , the college ’ s D.C. center last year hosted an excellent symposium with a Howard University scholar on black classical education .
Her presentation did not make into Imprimis , but a speech defending John C. Calhoun and Confederate monuments did .
Meanwhile , Hillsdale ’ s colorblindness has made it blind .
The college continues to keep no records of students ’ race and awards no financial aid on that basis .
But in the 2018-2019 academic year , for example , it did offer four different scholarships to students @ @ @ @ @ @ @ descent and many more that gave preference to students from predominantly white areas .
It also had a handful of scholarships for international students—from China , for example—and Hispanic students .
It had none that explicitly gave preference to black Americans .
What has all this meant for black students at Hillsdale ?
Hillsdale ’ s graduates are now nearly all white .
Many American universities struggle to attract and retain students of color .
But Hillsdale has given itself a special challenge and has not done enough to solve it .
Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the college , once critiqued conservatives ’ attitude toward race as “ indifference.
” He could say the same of Hillsdale .
Since the 1980s Hillsdale ’ s black students at any given time have been able to count their total number on two hands , or some years even one .
Roche told the Chicago Reader in 1996 that the school was being “ outbid ” for black students .
It wasn ’ t always this way .
Thirty-one black students attended Hillsdale as it was beginning to parade its federal-tie-cutting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population than at many other Michigan schools at the time .
The campus Blacks United club had a house , staged events for Black History Month and produced a play about Malcolm X ’ s life .
By the mid-1980s , it disappeared from Hillsdale ’ s yearbooks .
Black students in the following decades gave mixed reviews of the school to the Collegian , while recounting a few chilling incidents .
In 1991 , the same year a Confederate flag hung in the first-floor window of one men ’ s dorm , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poster on their door .
After someone tore it down , they put up a picture of Malcolm X , only to find later the words “ N—S GO HOME ” scrawled on their door .
They reported the incident to an administrator , who “ in turn told them not to hang anymore posters of black leaders on their door , because it ‘ invites racism , ’ ” the Collegian wrote .
The experiences of recent black alumni have varied .
Of the ten black former Hillsdale students I interviewed for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experiences at the school .
“ Some might see a lack of diversity and say , ‘ Wait there ’ s a problem , ’ but for me I never really had an issue , ” said Joseph Nchia , class of 2017 .
“ It ’ s just one of those things.
” Kayla Fletcher , class of 2014 , loved Hillsdale and was drawn to the school because it does not consider race in admissions .
“ If I got into a school like Hillsdale , it was just because I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school like Hillsdale , ” she said .
“ That ’ s what mattered to me.
” Others describe a painful four years .
Christian Campbell , class of 2010 , stayed at Hillsdale for financial reasons but grew tired of the constant stares and questions from fellow students about what sport he played , if he could dance and rap , whether they could touch his hair .
“ The stupidity and ignorance just got me , ” he said .
Some chose to transfer out .
Thad Wilson attended Hillsdale in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primarily because of finances but also because of race .
While a coach and two professors were kind , he said , one classmate asked him pointed racial questions constantly , such as : “ You like fried chicken , right ?
” “ Not having the ability to really see a black person who was in the same shoes I was in was difficult , ” he said .
For most of the students I spoke to , Hillsdale was a mixed bag of friends and classes they loved and experiences they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , class of 2017 , loves Hillsdale but recalled two different students calling her a “ Negress ” or “ n—-r ” on multiple occasions .
While Hillsdale gave her a good liberal arts education , she said , it rarely discussed the black experience in America .
“ Hillsdale has done its populace a disservice by taking itself out of the conversation , ” Shabazz said .
“ You can ’ t pat yourself on the back for who you used to be.
” Shabazz ’ s fellow alumni should look hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race .
We should question why we have a student body so white that many of the black students feel out of place .
And we should think about how the school can show all its students that the good , the true , the beautiful belong to them , and that they belong at the school .
Hillsdale wishes to critique illiberalism on the left , but it will lack the moral authority to do so without critiquing illiberalism and racism on the right .
The college ’ s liberal values should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight to defend Frederick Douglass ’ s vision for America .
In the months before his second visit to Hillsdale , Douglass toured the South and witnessed how Reconstruction had failed former slaves .
He hoped that his country would change ; he hoped that his party , the Republican party , would lead that change .
“ The national honor—the redemption of our national pledge to the freedmen , the supremacy of the Constitution in the fullness of its spirit and in the completeness of its letter over all the states of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than all others .
It touches the soul of the nation , ” Douglass said in a speech that year .
“ I simply say to the Republican party : Those things ye ought to have done and not to have left the others undone , and the present is the time to enforce this lesson.
” With that last sentence Douglass borrowed from Jesus , and likewise Hillsdale should heed the “ weightier matters of the law : justice and mercy and faithfulness.
” The college has a chance to change for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the better , to be better than the whims of the right wing rather than tethered to them .
If it does not , many of its alumni will have run out of faith , just as Douglass warned he might with the GOP : “ If it fails to do all this , I for one shall welcome the bolt which shall scatter it into a thousand fragments .
”

In September 1888, an aged Frederick Douglass made his second visit to a tiny abolitionist college in rural southern Michigan. He spoke on the looming presidential election, and his words have uncanny relevance today.
“In a Presidential canvass three things are always in order: First, we have to consider the character of the candidate,” he said in a typed version of the address that matches descriptions of the ones he gave at the college and elsewhere on that speaking tour. “A man in the presidential chair should stand for something more than a lucky and successful politician. He should be one among millions—a model man; one to whom the sons of after-coming generations can be referred as an example to them.”
Douglass went on to argue that voters should also consider the past actions of political parties when deciding how to cast their ballots. “The past is parent to the present, and it is only by the past that we are able properly to discern the future,” he said.
That tiny abolitionist school was Hillsdale College, my alma mater, now sometimes dubbed the “conservative Harvard.” At its heart Hillsdale is simply a liberal arts college, but its alumni pepper the Trump administration and its various lecture programs, online courses, and D.C. outpost serve as intellectual training ground for the conservative movement.
So when hundreds of Hillsdale alumni signed petitions in June asking the college to condemn historical injustices against black people in response to the George Floyd protests, the school was at a crossroads. Would the college that sent more of its sons to fight for the Union than any other Michigan school vocally oppose state violence against the descendants of slaves? Or would it reiterate, as it had in the past, “the danger of the Black Lives Matters movement”?
Hillsdale chose to be evasive.
“The College is told that it garners no honor now for its abolitionist past—or that it fails to live up to that past—but instead it must issue statements today. Statements about what?” read an open letter from leaders of the college, republished in the Wall Street Journal. “It must issue statements about the brutal and deadly evil of hating other people and/or treating them differently because of the color of their skin. That is, it must issue statements about the very things that moved the abolitionists whom the College has ever invoked.”
But Hillsdale, like all of America, ought to heed Douglass’s advice and take a good, hard look at its past. It must lament the evil and treasure the good. The college has more than abolitionists in its past—like many other institutions, it has a history of tangled, unexamined, internally competing racial views. Hillsdale has plenty of reasons to join the national reckoning on race.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Hillsdale was founded by abolitionist Baptists in 1844. It was the first college in the nation to prohibit discrimination based on race, sex, or religion in its charter. It fought efforts to segregate its ROTC unit in World War I. Its 1955 football team refused to play in a bowl game that barred its black players from the field.
But Hillsdale was not exempt from the racism that permeated educational institutions in the 20th century.
Hillsdale sat out the civil rights movement, as noted by the preeminent chronicler of the college’s history, Arlan Gilbert. The student newspaper, the Collegian, voiced some support of black protesters in the 1960s but was mostly mum on the topic. It did, however, reprint in 1960 an editorial that ran in the Duke student paper: “We would question the appropriateness of protesting against a Southern . . . custom by applying pressure on a private business establishment,” it read. “While we are for desegregation, we realize that the problem is complex and that no easy solution is possible.”
The college then found a president who would use apathy toward civil rights legislation to make it famous. When George Roche III became president of Hillsdale in 1971 at age 35, he was fresh from the libertarian Foundation for Economic Education, which in the previous decade had issued a steady stream of anti-civil-rights commentary of the type that animated the GOP’s “Southern strategy.” FEE authors defended private businesses’ right to discriminate against blacks, criticized the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education ruling, argued for a “hands-off” response to South African apartheid, and saw the civil rights movement primarily as a massive expansion of federal power. Roche echoed these arguments.
“The racial problem is still with us (as are innumerable other problems as well) but it ill-behooves us to destroy the American tradition of federalism in the course of attempted ‘solutions’ to our problems,” he wrote in 1967.
The future president of an abolitionist college also questioned whether the Civil War was necessary to end slavery, calling abolitionists “do-gooders” who pressured the United States into war but did not lead on the battlefield and wondering whether “the free market might have averted the Civil War.”
National Review founder William F. Buckley Jr., a longtime friend of Hillsdale, was on hand to celebrate Roche’s appointment as president. Buckley in 1957 supported gradual, voluntary change from Jim Crow, because whites were “the advanced race”—a stance he later disavowed.
Roche made a name for Hillsdale. When in 1972 the federal government began to require colleges to track students by their race for the purposes of implementing anti-discrimination law, Roche led the college both to refuse race statistics and to cement its refusal of federal funds. He then trumpeted those refusals around the nation to win conservative praise and donors.
In 1973, under Roche’s leadership, one of the first editions of the college’s widely circulated digest of speeches, Imprimis, defended minority white rule of Zimbabwe and private discrimination. Imprimis also printed a response from the country’s white prime minister, Ian Smith, who wrote of the “backward races” and the “more sophisticated European and Asian races.”
The college continued to keep odious company. Segregationist James Kilpatrick, racist Sen. Strom Thurmond, and racist Jared Taylor, the editor of the white supremacist American Renaissance magazine, spoke at Hillsdale seminars in the following decades. Taylor argued in a college-sponsored lecture that minorities were genetically inferior and more suited to manual labor. Roche’s statement at the time did not specifically condemn the talk: “For 150 years we have prided ourselves on treating individuals on the basis of their own merit and anything that moves from that direction is not keeping with our mission.” The college still sells copies of Taylor’s lecture in its “Freedom Library Catalog.”
Though many Hillsdale professors are fiercely pro-Union, an odd strain of Lost Cause romanticism lingered at Hillsdale. In 2008, the Hillsdale-published reader for its required American history course included writings by Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr. but also introduced an 1891 essay by Confederate apologist Basil Gildersleeve by praising him and saying that his view of the South had “universal validity.” Gildersleeve argued that the South had fought for states’ rights and “the cause of civil liberty,” not to defend slavery; the introduction was signed by a historian who also edited the neo-Confederate magazine Southern Partisan.
In recent years the college has done little to voice sympathy for black Americans protesting police brutality. Imprimis, with more than 5 million subscribers, regularly points to black culture and black-on-black crime as the root causes of any ill treatment from police. For years Hillsdale speakers have pooh-poohed diversity.
Hillsdale as an institution does not endorse the racist alt-right and its hatred. The college’s current president, Larry Arnn, is no Roche; he loves Hillsdale’s abolitionist legacy, can recite Douglass and Lincoln by heart, and demonstrates his personal care for students of color. In 2016 he led the school to launch the Frederick Douglass scholarships, offering tuition, room and board to first-generation college students from disadvantaged school districts.
But the college has chosen to publicize voices that make the alt-right feel comfortable. For example, the college’s D.C. center last year hosted an excellent symposium with a Howard University scholar on black classical education. Her presentation did not make it into Imprimis, but a speech defending John C. Calhoun and Confederate monuments did.
Meanwhile, Hillsdale’s colorblindness has made it blind. The college continues to keep no records of students’ race and awards no financial aid on that basis. But in the 2018-2019 academic year, for example, it did offer four different scholarships to students of Norwegian, Lithuanian, or Polish descent and many more that gave preference to students from predominantly white areas. It also had a handful of scholarships for international students—from China, for example—and Hispanic students. It had none that explicitly gave preference to black Americans.
What has all this meant for black students at Hillsdale?
Hillsdale’s graduates are now nearly all white. Many American universities struggle to attract and retain students of color. But Hillsdale has given itself a special challenge and has not done enough to solve it. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, a friend of the college, once critiqued conservatives’ attitude toward race as “indifference.” He could say the same of Hillsdale.
Since the 1980s Hillsdale’s black students at any given time have been able to count their total number on two hands, or some years even one. Roche told the Chicago Reader in 1996 that the school was being “outbid” for black students.
It wasn’t always this way. Thirty-one black students attended Hillsdale as it was beginning to parade its federal-tie-cutting in 1976—a larger slice of the student population than at many other Michigan schools at the time. The campus Blacks United club had a house, staged events for Black History Month and produced a play about Malcolm X’s life. By the mid-1980s, it disappeared from Hillsdale’s yearbooks.
Black students in the following decades gave mixed reviews of the school to the Collegian, while recounting a few chilling incidents. In 1991, the same year a Confederate flag hung in the first-floor window of one men’s dorm, two black students hung a Nelson Mandela poster on their door. After someone tore it down, they put up a picture of Malcolm X, only to find later the words “N—S GO HOME” scrawled on their door. They reported the incident to an administrator, who “in turn told them not to hang anymore posters of black leaders on their door, because it ‘invites racism,’” the Collegian wrote.
The experiences of recent black alumni have varied. Of the ten black former Hillsdale students I interviewed for this article, three had completely positive experiences at the school. “Some might see a lack of diversity and say, ‘Wait there’s a problem,’ but for me I never really had an issue,” said Joseph Nchia, class of 2017. “It’s just one of those things.”
Kayla Fletcher, class of 2014, loved Hillsdale and was drawn to the school because it does not consider race in admissions. “If I got into a school like Hillsdale, it was just because I was good enough to get into a school like Hillsdale,” she said. “That’s what mattered to me.”
Others describe a painful four years. Christian Campbell, class of 2010, stayed at Hillsdale for financial reasons but grew tired of the constant stares and questions from fellow students about what sport he played, if he could dance and rap, whether they could touch his hair. “The stupidity and ignorance just got me,” he said.
Some chose to transfer out. Thad Wilson attended Hillsdale in 2006 but left the following year, primarily because of finances but also because of race. While a coach and two professors were kind, he said, one classmate asked him pointed racial questions constantly, such as: “You like fried chicken, right?”
“Not having the ability to really see a black person who was in the same shoes I was in was difficult,” he said.
For most of the students I spoke to, Hillsdale was a mixed bag of friends and classes they loved and experiences they wished had been better. Keyona Shabazz, class of 2017, loves Hillsdale but recalled two different students calling her a “Negress” or “n—-r” on multiple occasions. While Hillsdale gave her a good liberal arts education, she said, it rarely discussed the black experience in America.
“Hillsdale has done its populace a disservice by taking itself out of the conversation,” Shabazz said. “You can’t pat yourself on the back for who you used to be.”
Shabazz’s fellow alumni should look hard at the school’s indifference to race. We should question why we have a student body so white that many of the black students feel out of place. And we should think about how the school can show all its students that the good, the true, the beautiful belong to them, and that they belong at the school.
Hillsdale wishes to critique illiberalism on the left, but it will lack the moral authority to do so without critiquing illiberalism and racism on the right. The college’s liberal values should put it at the forefront of the fight to defend Frederick Douglass’s vision for America. In the months before his second visit to Hillsdale, Douglass toured the South and witnessed how Reconstruction had failed former slaves. He hoped that his country would change; he hoped that his party, the Republican party, would lead that change.
“The national honor—the redemption of our national pledge to the freedmen, the supremacy of the Constitution in the fullness of its spirit and in the completeness of its letter over all the states of the Union alike—is an incomparably greater interest than all others. It touches the soul of the nation,” Douglass said in a speech that year. “I simply say to the Republican party: Those things ye ought to have done and not to have left the others undone, and the present is the time to enforce this lesson.”
With that last sentence Douglass borrowed from Jesus, and likewise Hillsdale should heed the “weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness.” The college has a chance to change for the better, to change America for the better, to be better than the whims of the right wing rather than tethered to them. If it does not, many of its alumni will have run out of faith, just as Douglass warned he might with the GOP: “If it fails to do all this, I for one shall welcome the bolt which shall scatter it into a thousand fragments.”


thebulwark--2020-07-24--Biden’s VP Pick: The Case for Competence

Every day , the Biden campaign leans in to a series of contrasts with Donald Trump : community versus chaos , empathy versus ego , maturity versus “ person woman man camera TV.
” There is another , bigger contrast underlying all the others : competence versus ineptitude .
Comparing America ’ s COVID-19 death toll with other advanced countries ’ is a regular reminder of what happens when the head of the federal government is incompetent .
No one knows better than Biden that it didn ’ t have to be this way .
Under the Obama administration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a global economic crisis and a global pandemic was a model for the world .
Our policies weren ’ t perfect , but the United States stopped the spread ( of both the Ebola virus and the financial meltdown ) and came roaring back .
When Biden ran the administration ’ s oversight of stimulus spending in 2009 , fewer than 0.2 percent of the grants , loans , and contracts were suspected of waste and fraud , and congressional investigators found no evidence of malfeasance or favoritism .
Millions of jobs were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chief of staff , Ron Klain , was appointed “ Ebola czar ” in 2014 , America broke the back of the outbreak in Africa with only 11 confirmed cases reaching our shores .
And as Biden considers whom to choose as his running mate , competence should be the most important qualification .
Historians differ on the political benefit of vice presidential nominees .
What seems clear is that running mates generate more risk than reward .
In the modern era , from Ferraro to Quayle to Palin , every time a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might reshape the race—at best , it failed to deliver ; at worst , it hurt the ticket .
So the first rule of VP selection should be : Do no harm .
The second rule of VP selection should be : Pick the person you believe will be your best partner and , potentially , your best successor .
The vice presidency is still the surest route to the Oval Office .
Almost one-third of vice presidents have gone on to become president , one way or another .
And even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running the country , the office has been transformed from the time Franklin Roosevelt ’ s number two said it wasn ’ t worth “ a pitcher of warm piss.
” Ever since Jimmy Carter gave Walter Mondale an office in the West Wing , the vice president has ( usually ) been the second most powerful official in an administration .
Fortunately for Biden , two possible running mates pass those tests : Representative Karen Bass of California and Governor Gina Raimondo of Rhode Island .
Neither of these women appears to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deserve the most serious consideration .
First , let ’ s take Bass .
Like Biden , she is a master legislator .
As speaker of the California Assembly—the first Black female leader of any legislative body in America—she won a Profile In Courage award for facing down political pressure and striking a deal with a Republican governor to address one of the worst budget crises in state history .
Once in Congress , she founded the caucus on foster youth and won bipartisan support for a child welfare bill signed by President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ murder , Bass united varied factions of Democrats behind a police-reform bill that bans chokeholds , changes qualified immunity , and mandates bias training—but avoids traps like defunding the police .
Bass is a committed progressive , but she ’ s also respected by Republicans , and revered by Democratic leaders , including Nancy Pelosi and Jim Clyburn , who have recommended her to Biden .
At 66 , with no national profile , Bass isn ’ t likely to treat the Biden administration as a platform for her own presidential campaign .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ policymaker and consensus-builder , in stark contrast to the status quo .
And then there ’ s Gina Raimondo , who might just be the best governor in America .
Raimondo ’ s career is a testament to the old fashioned idea that , with the right leadership , good policy is the best politics .
Having watched her working-class dad lose his job when Rhode Island ’ s Bulova watch factory moved to China , Raimondo ran for office to bring economic opportunity back to her state .
What she encountered was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and eating away at other public services .
Despite conventional wisdom that said pension reform was impossible—and political suicide to attempt—Raimondo built a coalition , passed her plan , and saved the system .
She then won a tough Democratic primary for governor and the general election .
Twice .
On COVID-19 , Raimondo ’ s leadership was similar : Do the right thing now , worry about the politics later .
She emulated South Korea and New Zealand , made tough decisions to shut down parts of the economy , scaled up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message to “ wear your damn masks , ” and wrestled the virus to the ground .
Today , Rhode Island ’ s curve has flattened—and restaurants , beaches , day-care centers , even movie theaters are reopening .
Despite myriad critics at the outset , two-thirds of the state supports Raimondo ’ s approach , which is the polar opposite of this president ’ s .
The press focuses on Trump ’ s Twitter tantrums and norm-breaking , but when it comes to driving voter behavior , competence is Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats recognize that we can ’ t go on like this .
Picking either Bass or Raimondo doubles down on Biden ’ s argument that what the presidency needs—just as much as decency and dignity—is knowledge and know-how .

Every day, the Biden campaign leans in to a series of contrasts with Donald Trump: community versus chaos, empathy versus ego, maturity versus “person woman man camera TV.”
There is another, bigger contrast underlying all the others: competence versus ineptitude.
Comparing America’s COVID-19 death toll with other advanced countries’ is a regular reminder of what happens when the head of the federal government is incompetent.
No one knows better than Biden that it didn’t have to be this way. Under the Obama administration, the government’s response both to a global economic crisis and a global pandemic was a model for the world. Our policies weren’t perfect, but the United States stopped the spread (of both the Ebola virus and the financial meltdown) and came roaring back.
When Biden ran the administration’s oversight of stimulus spending in 2009, fewer than 0.2 percent of the grants, loans, and contracts were suspected of waste and fraud, and congressional investigators found no evidence of malfeasance or favoritism. Millions of jobs were saved.
When Biden’s former chief of staff, Ron Klain, was appointed “Ebola czar” in 2014, America broke the back of the outbreak in Africa with only 11 confirmed cases reaching our shores.
The difference isn’t just ideology; it’s competence.
And as Biden considers whom to choose as his running mate, competence should be the most important qualification.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Historians differ on the political benefit of vice presidential nominees. What seems clear is that running mates generate more risk than reward. In the modern era, from Ferraro to Quayle to Palin, every time a presidential nominee hoped a Hail Mary pick might reshape the race—at best, it failed to deliver; at worst, it hurt the ticket.
So the first rule of VP selection should be: Do no harm.
The second rule of VP selection should be: Pick the person you believe will be your best partner and, potentially, your best successor. The vice presidency is still the surest route to the Oval Office. Almost one-third of vice presidents have gone on to become president, one way or another.
And even if the VP doesn’t wind up running the country, the office has been transformed from the time Franklin Roosevelt’s number two said it wasn’t worth “a pitcher of warm piss.” Ever since Jimmy Carter gave Walter Mondale an office in the West Wing, the vice president has (usually) been the second most powerful official in an administration.
Fortunately for Biden, two possible running mates pass those tests: Representative Karen Bass of California and Governor Gina Raimondo of Rhode Island. Neither of these women appears to be the frontrunner today, but both deserve the most serious consideration.
First, let’s take Bass. Like Biden, she is a master legislator. As speaker of the California Assembly—the first Black female leader of any legislative body in America—she won a Profile In Courage award for facing down political pressure and striking a deal with a Republican governor to address one of the worst budget crises in state history.
Once in Congress, she founded the caucus on foster youth and won bipartisan support for a child welfare bill signed by President Trump.
Following George Floyd’s murder, Bass united varied factions of Democrats behind a police-reform bill that bans chokeholds, changes qualified immunity, and mandates bias training—but avoids traps like defunding the police.
Bass is a committed progressive, but she’s also respected by Republicans, and revered by Democratic leaders, including Nancy Pelosi and Jim Clyburn, who have recommended her to Biden. At 66, with no national profile, Bass isn’t likely to treat the Biden administration as a platform for her own presidential campaign.
She would continue to be an effective policymaker and consensus-builder, in stark contrast to the status quo.
And then there’s Gina Raimondo, who might just be the best governor in America.
Raimondo’s career is a testament to the old fashioned idea that, with the right leadership, good policy is the best politics. Having watched her working-class dad lose his job when Rhode Island’s Bulova watch factory moved to China, Raimondo ran for office to bring economic opportunity back to her state. What she encountered was a pension system less than half funded and eating away at other public services.
Despite conventional wisdom that said pension reform was impossible—and political suicide to attempt—Raimondo built a coalition, passed her plan, and saved the system. She then won a tough Democratic primary for governor and the general election. Twice.
On COVID-19, Raimondo’s leadership was similar: Do the right thing now, worry about the politics later. She emulated South Korea and New Zealand, made tough decisions to shut down parts of the economy, scaled up testing and tracing, sent an unequivocal message to “wear your damn masks,” and wrestled the virus to the ground. Today, Rhode Island’s curve has flattened—and restaurants, beaches, day-care centers, even movie theaters are reopening. Despite myriad critics at the outset, two-thirds of the state supports Raimondo’s approach, which is the polar opposite of this president’s.
The press focuses on Trump’s Twitter tantrums and norm-breaking, but when it comes to driving voter behavior, competence is Trump’s kryptonite. Even Americans ideologically uncomfortable with Democrats recognize that we can’t go on like this.
Picking either Bass or Raimondo doubles down on Biden’s argument that what the presidency needs—just as much as decency and dignity—is knowledge and know-how.


thebulwark--2020-07-24--Should Bill Barr Be Disbarred?

Should Bill Barr Be Disbarred?

Attorney General William Barr ’ s tenure in office has been as tumultuous as any in American history .
During his time as AG , Barr has politicized the Justice Department , acted as if he represented the interests of the president rather than the United States , and made a series of decisions that have undermined the morale of DOJ lawyers .
What has been missing amid all that criticism is an assessment of Barr ’ s conduct as a lawyer and whether it meets his profession ’ s ethical standards .
On Wednesday a group of distinguished members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that question by alleging that the attorney general has committed a series of serious violations of his ethical obligations as a lawyer .
That the attorney general must be an exemplary lawyer is highlighted in the Judiciary Act of 1789 , which created that position , and by subsequent codifications of the attorney general ’ s duties .
The Judiciary Act called for the appointment of a person “ learned in the law , to act as attorney general for the United States.
” Among the office ’ s special responsibilities are that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States , or when requested by the heads of any of the departments.
” At the time of Barr ’ s appointment , many thought he would be well suited for the role .
He seemed to be a paragon of legal virtue , a lawyer ’ s lawyer , and someone who would respect the highest ideals of the legal profession .
His supporters thought he would be , what Yale law professor Anthony Kronman has called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person of good character who is widely respected for his or her nuanced judgments about complex problems and for being devoted to the public good .
After the chaotic terms of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his interim successor , the spectacularly unqualified Matthew Whitaker , Barr ’ s supporters highlighted his stellar legal credentials and claimed that he would take his place among those AGs who eschewed a partisan , political role and were exemplary lawyers .
They hoped he would follow in the footsteps of attorneys general like Calvin Coolidge ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Edward Levi , who served under President Gerald Ford .
Both of them came to office in the wake of scandals .
Stone took office after the Teapot Dome scandaland Levi after Watergate .
Both were among the best and most respected lawyers of their time .
That Barr has disappointed those expectations is made clear in this week ’ s complaint , which was signed by 27 lawyers and teachers of legal ethics , four of whom are past District of Columbia Bar presidents .
It offers a tightly argued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chapter and verse from D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct , Disciplinary Rules , and applicable law .
While it is written by lawyers for an audience of lawyers , it is an important reminder that we can and should expect more from legal professionals than what Barr has done .
The complaint notes that subjecting all lawyers to stringent ethical standards is necessary “ To enable the American people to have confidence in the fairness , justice and impartiality of the legal system and enable clients to have confidence in their lawyers.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dishonesty , deceit , misrepresentation , or serious interference with the administration of justice ” and that lawyers must “ zealously represent the lawyer ’ s own client ’ s interests—not a third party ’ s interests or the lawyer ’ s own personal interest.
” And because lawyers swear to support the laws and Constitution , “ violations of that oath can be sanctioned ” under the District ’ s disciplinary rules .
The complaint says that Barr has repeatedly violated lawyers ’ ethical obligations .
It alleges that he has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeded the impartial administration of justice , and that he has failed to zealously represent his real client , the people of the United States .
It calls out Barr for his misrepresentation of the Mueller Report and for “ half-truth , mischaracterization , and deceptive concealment of facts ” in his criticism of an inspector general report on the Russia probe .
Such conduct is incompatible with the lawyers ’ ethical obligation to deal honestly .
The complaint also claims that the attorney general violated the D.C. Bar ’ s rules when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FBI officials ’ decisions regarding the Russia probe and to suggest that they could be prosecuted .
It calls Barr ’ s statements an example of an effort to influence potential criminal proceedings .
And it notes that “ It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to : .
.
.
[ e ] ngage in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice.
” The complaint is especially harsh in criticizing Barr for his complicity in the dispersal of peaceful protestors at Lafayette Square on June 1 .
Here again it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not political , matter .
Of course , we shouldn ’ t expect a speedy—or even any—resolution to this complaint .
Bar disciplinary proceedings are notoriously slow , secret , and not very effective in creating accountability in the legal profession .
If Bill Barr decides to some day return to private legal practice , he is unlikely to be impeded .
Nonetheless , by highlighting Barr ’ s failings as a lawyer the complaint filed with the D.C. Bar has done a real service both to the legal profession and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about what the legal profession can and should be , and of lawyers ’ crucial role in a society committed to the rule of law .
Talking to a group of law graduates about their future work , Professor Bruce Ackerman got it right when he said that the legal profession is not just a line of work .
It is , he noted , a “ calling ” which requires “ the highest exercise of your higher selves.
” Unfortunately , this is a lesson Attorney General Barr seems to have forgotten @

Attorney General William Barr’s tenure in office has been as tumultuous as any in American history. During his time as AG, Barr has politicized the Justice Department, acted as if he represented the interests of the president rather than the United States, and made a series of decisions that have undermined the morale of DOJ lawyers.
What has been missing amid all that criticism is an assessment of Barr’s conduct as a lawyer and whether it meets his profession’s ethical standards.
On Wednesday a group of distinguished members of the District of Columbia Bar forced that question by alleging that the attorney general has committed a series of serious violations of his ethical obligations as a lawyer.
That the attorney general must be an exemplary lawyer is highlighted in the Judiciary Act of 1789, which created that position, and by subsequent codifications of the attorney general’s duties.
The Judiciary Act called for the appointment of a person “learned in the law, to act as attorney general for the United States.” Among the office’s special responsibilities are that the attorney general shall “give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States, or when requested by the heads of any of the departments.”
At the time of Barr’s appointment, many thought he would be well suited for the role. He seemed to be a paragon of legal virtue, a lawyer’s lawyer, and someone who would respect the highest ideals of the legal profession.
His supporters thought he would be, what Yale law professor Anthony Kronman has called, a “lawyer-statesman”: A person of good character who is widely respected for his or her nuanced judgments about complex problems and for being devoted to the public good.
If only.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
After the chaotic terms of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his interim successor, the spectacularly unqualified Matthew Whitaker, Barr’s supporters highlighted his stellar legal credentials and claimed that he would take his place among those AGs who eschewed a partisan, political role and were exemplary lawyers.
They hoped he would follow in the footsteps of attorneys general like Calvin Coolidge’s attorney general, Harlan Fiske Stone, and Edward Levi, who served under President Gerald Ford. Both of them came to office in the wake of scandals. Stone took office after the Teapot Dome scandal and Levi after Watergate. Both were among the best and most respected lawyers of their time.
That Barr has disappointed those expectations is made clear in this week’s complaint, which was signed by 27 lawyers and teachers of legal ethics, four of whom are past District of Columbia Bar presidents.
It offers a tightly argued indictment of the attorney general, citing chapter and verse from D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct, Disciplinary Rules, and applicable law. While it is written by lawyers for an audience of lawyers, it is an important reminder that we can and should expect more from legal professionals than what Barr has done.
The complaint notes that subjecting all lawyers to stringent ethical standards is necessary “To enable the American people to have confidence in the fairness, justice and impartiality of the legal system and enable clients to have confidence in their lawyers.”
It suggests that lawyers must “avoid dishonesty, deceit, misrepresentation, or serious interference with the administration of justice” and that lawyers must “zealously represent the lawyer’s own client’s interests—not a third party’s interests or the lawyer’s own personal interest.”
And because lawyers swear to support the laws and Constitution, “violations of that oath can be sanctioned” under the District’s disciplinary rules.
The complaint says that Barr has repeatedly violated lawyers’ ethical obligations. It alleges that he has been dishonest and deceitful, that he has impeded the impartial administration of justice, and that he has failed to zealously represent his real client, the people of the United States.
It calls out Barr for his misrepresentation of the Mueller Report and for “half-truth, mischaracterization, and deceptive concealment of facts” in his criticism of an inspector general report on the Russia probe. Such conduct is incompatible with the lawyers’ ethical obligation to deal honestly.
The complaint also claims that the attorney general violated the D.C. Bar’s rules when he went on television to criticize former FBI officials’ decisions regarding the Russia probe and to suggest that they could be prosecuted. It calls Barr’s statements an example of an effort to influence potential criminal proceedings.
And it notes that “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: . . . [e]ngage in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice.”
The complaint is especially harsh in criticizing Barr for his complicity in the dispersal of peaceful protestors at Lafayette Square on June 1. Here again it suggests that the failure was a professional, not political, matter.
On that occasion Barr
violated his D.C. Bar ethical obligation to avoid conflicts of interest. The personal interest of a “third party”—President Trump—was diametrically opposed to that of Mr. Barr’s “client”—the United States.
Of course, we shouldn’t expect a speedy—or even any—resolution to this complaint. Bar disciplinary proceedings are notoriously slow, secret, and not very effective in creating accountability in the legal profession. If Bill Barr decides to some day return to private legal practice, he is unlikely to be impeded.
Nonetheless, by highlighting Barr’s failings as a lawyer the complaint filed with the D.C. Bar has done a real service both to the legal profession and the country. It is an important statement about what the legal profession can and should be, and of lawyers’ crucial role in a society committed to the rule of law.
Talking to a group of law graduates about their future work, Professor Bruce Ackerman got it right when he said that the legal profession is not just a line of work. It is, he noted, a “calling” which requires “the highest exercise of your higher selves.”
Unfortunately, this is a lesson Attorney General Barr seems to have forgotten.


thebulwark--2020-07-24--Why Can’t Trump Land a Punch?

Why Can’t Trump Land a Punch?

In 2015 , Trump crushed an entire political dynasty with two words : “ low energy.
” But Jeb wasn ’ t the only recipient of a truly destructive nickname .
Trump was the king of the takedown .
In the Republican primary , Trump eviscerated his enemies with a single tweet or a mean nickname , impaling the other two heavyweight contenders with one adjective each— “ Liddle Marco ” and “ Lyin ’ Ted.
” Trump ’ s nicknames no longer shape the news cycle .
Trump ’ s Twitter account no longer drives the narrative .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported as fact , even on Fox News .
( Well , with some obvious exceptions . )
In 2015 , the American political world had never been confronted by a politician so deeply untethered to the truth .
Trump lied the same way normal people breathe .
Whether it was about his finances , or his health , or “ watching Shark Week ” with a porn star .
( Best euphemism ever ? )
Trump literally paid actors to come to his announcement that he was running for president and pretend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what would have happened to any other Republican presidential candidate in the history of Republican presidential candidates if they had gotten caught paying a crowd to show up for their launch ?
And Trump ’ s super power wasn ’ t just his shamelessness in lying about himself—he was willing to lie about what he wanted to do as president .
Presidential candidates are always promising crazy stuff that has no way of passing into law .
But there has always been a line .
Like , if you were running for president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end poverty ” or “ fit your entire tax return on a postcard.
” And sure , everyone knew that you weren ’ t going to really do those things because the problems were complex and legislating is hard and blah , blah , blah .
But at least , in a perfect world , these goals were theoretically possible .
No one was ever willing to say , “ Vote for me and we ’ ll change the universal gravitational constant.
” Or , “ I pledge that together , we can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of was .
He promised not only to build an unbroken physical wall stretching across America ’ s entire southern border—itself an exercise in magical thinking—but that Mexico would pay for this contraption .
He would have had a better chance with the alicorns .
I hear InGen is doing amazing work these days .
Democrats didn ’ t know what to do with someone who lied like Trump .
And the media found themselves totally at sea because there was no handbook in America for a free press covering an aspiring autocrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and institutions change , too .
Donald Trump is no longer an outsider promising to blow things up .
He ’ s the guy in charge and he blew things up real good .
Promises made , promises kept !
Because of Trump ’ s administration , the United States has endured ( so far ) the equivalent death toll of 47 September 11 ’ s .
The unemployment rate is double digits , and many of us can not safely leave our homes .
Weirdly enough , people now seem to view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more bug than feature .
Go figure .
Trump has other problems , too .
For instance , everything Trump accuses Biden of doing , he does himself , only worse .
So when Trump World tried to shop the idea that Biden was creepy with women , all it really did was remind people that Trump has more than two dozen sexual assault allegations on his rap sheet .
When Trump World pushed the idea that Hunter Biden was somehow corrupt , you couldn ’ t help but think about Jivanka and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family has been siphoning cash out of the public coffers .
Trump World tried painting Joe as doddering and old at the same time that the president was rambling through daily press conferences and struggling to walk down a ramp .
This is the problem with projection : Once people get wise to the pathology , then every boomerang you throw at your opponent comes back and pops you in the nose .
But ultimately , Trump ’ s biggest problem is himself .
Donald Trump has been president for 3 years and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an outsider and the country is not better off than it was in 2016 .
Unemployment is at 11 percent .
Numerous countries have closed their borders to America ( including , this past weekend , the Bahamas ) .
And Trump still has no plan to slow the spread of coronavirus .
In 2015 Trump was able to make the case that he was a changemaker .
He could say , as he did to African Americans , “ what do you have to lose ?
” But in mid-2020 , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how much they ’ ve lost and are keenly aware of how much they still could lose .

In 2015, Trump crushed an entire political dynasty with two words: “low energy.” But Jeb wasn’t the only recipient of a truly destructive nickname. Trump was the king of the takedown. In the Republican primary, Trump eviscerated his enemies with a single tweet or a mean nickname, impaling the other two heavyweight contenders with one adjective each—“Liddle Marco” and “Lyin’ Ted.”
What a difference four years makes.
Trump’s nicknames no longer shape the news cycle. Trump’s Twitter account no longer drives the narrative. And Trump’s lies are no longer reported as fact, even on Fox News. (Well, with some obvious exceptions.)
What happened?
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
In 2015, the American political world had never been confronted by a politician so deeply untethered to the truth. Trump lied the same way normal people breathe. Whether it was about his finances, or his health, or “watching Shark Week” with a porn star. (Best euphemism ever?)
Trump literally paid actors to come to his announcement that he was running for president and pretend to be supporters!
Can you imagine what would have happened to any other Republican presidential candidate in the history of Republican presidential candidates if they had gotten caught paying a crowd to show up for their launch?
John Huntsman: Dead.
Bob Dole: Dead.
Phil Gramm: Triple dog dead.
And Trump’s super power wasn’t just his shamelessness in lying about himself—he was willing to lie about what he wanted to do as president.
Presidential candidates are always promising crazy stuff that has no way of passing into law.
But there has always been a line. Like, if you were running for president you could promise that you would “end poverty” or “fit your entire tax return on a postcard.” And sure, everyone knew that you weren’t going to really do those things because the problems were complex and legislating is hard and blah, blah, blah. But at least, in a perfect world, these goals were theoretically possible.
No one was ever willing to say, “Vote for me and we’ll change the universal gravitational constant.” Or, “I pledge that together, we can make alicorns real.”
But Trump kind of was. He promised not only to build an unbroken physical wall stretching across America’s entire southern border—itself an exercise in magical thinking—but that Mexico would pay for this contraption.
He would have had a better chance with the alicorns. I hear InGen is doing amazing work these days.
Democrats didn’t know what to do with someone who lied like Trump. And the media found themselves totally at sea because there was no handbook in America for a free press covering an aspiring autocrat.
But things change. And people and institutions change, too. Donald Trump is no longer an outsider promising to blow things up. He’s the guy in charge and he blew things up real good. Promises made, promises kept!
Because of Trump’s administration, the United States has endured (so far) the equivalent death toll of 47 September 11’s. The unemployment rate is double digits, and many of us cannot safely leave our homes. Weirdly enough, people now seem to view “blowing it all up” as more bug than feature. Go figure.
Trump has other problems, too.
For instance, everything Trump accuses Biden of doing, he does himself, only worse. So when Trump World tried to shop the idea that Biden was creepy with women, all it really did was remind people that Trump has more than two dozen sexual assault allegations on his rap sheet.
When Trump World pushed the idea that Hunter Biden was somehow corrupt, you couldn’t help but think about Jivanka and DJTJ and all the ways the Trump family has been siphoning cash out of the public coffers.
Trump World tried painting Joe as doddering and old at the same time that the president was rambling through daily press conferences and struggling to walk down a ramp.
This is the problem with projection: Once people get wise to the pathology, then every boomerang you throw at your opponent comes back and pops you in the nose.
But ultimately, Trump’s biggest problem is himself.
Donald Trump has been president for 3 years and 186 days. He is no longer an outsider and the country is not better off than it was in 2016.
Unemployment is at 11 percent. Numerous countries have closed their borders to America (including, this past weekend, the Bahamas). And Trump still has no plan to slow the spread of coronavirus.
In 2015 Trump was able to make the case that he was a changemaker. He could say, as he did to African Americans, “what do you have to lose?”
But in mid-2020, the problem is that Americans can see exactly how much they’ve lost and are keenly aware of how much they still could lose.
And it’s a lot.


thebulwark--2020-07-24--Trump’s Magical Thinking Runs Into Reality, Again

President Trump is making history again .
Not the kind of monumental , glorified achievements he envisions , though .
This time he ’ s become the first president in modern history to foul up not one , but two of his own conventions .
In the same summer .
You may recall that beginning last spring the Democrats approached the idea of holding their convention quite cautiously .
First they delayed it and then , almost immediately , they began planning to make it virtual because of concerns about the wisdom of holding a mass gathering in an enclosed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also recall that in early June , Trump pulled the Republican convention out of North Carolina because the governor would not guarantee that the event could be held at full capacity because of the need for social distancing in the midst of a pandemic .
Trump did not like this .
Not one bit .
He told North Carolina Governor Rory Cooper , “ Since the day I came down the escalator , I ’ ve never had an empty seat and I find the biggest stadiums .
I don ’ t want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 50 percent empty.
” ( Insert Sad Trombone gif . )
And you may finally recall that Trump then took his convention to Jacksonville , where his Mini-Me , Ron DeSantis , promised that the state would “ showcase [ its ] energy , facilities , entrepreneurship and commitment to bring together the delegates of the Republican Party at a historic time in our nation ’ s history.
” I mean , really , who could have possibly known that packing thousands of people indoors , not just in an arena @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and taxis was never going to work ?
Our Great President may understand the science behind the coronavirus better than anyone , but he ’ s not a fortune teller .
Stop being so unfair .
Anyway , if this all feels like deja vu , then you ’ re probably thinking about this moment : That was on March 24 .
Here is how ridiculous that statement was : The country was never going to “ re-open ” by Easter any more than someone was going to host a massive political convention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump does .
He and his enablers in the media used the ridiculous Easter Miracle prediction as a cudgel to beat on people who were trying to take public health seriously and stop the spread of the virus .
Right up until the moment that reality positively forced them to concede that they were being fatuous .
And that ’ s what Trump and his enablers did with the conventions , too .
“ They are having what they call a virtual convention and I call a webinar , ” Duval County GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago .
“ It will be Joe Biden in his basement conducting a webinar.
” Well , look who is testing their Wi-Fi connection now .
There ’ s one more similarity , of course .
Because when Trump and his people construct their alternate realities , it ’ s other people who always end up footing the bill .
With the coronavirus , we ’ re closing in on 145,000 Americans who paid for Trump ’ s magical thinking with their lives .
In regards to the two aborted conventions , thankfully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Just the planning costs and debts incurred by local municipalities and businesses to hold events that everyone knew—or should have known—were never going to happen .
Welcome to the basement .

President Trump is making history again. Not the kind of monumental, glorified achievements he envisions, though. This time he’s become the first president in modern history to foul up not one, but two of his own conventions. In the same summer.
That’s gotta be a record.
You may recall that beginning last spring the Democrats approached the idea of holding their convention quite cautiously. First they delayed it and then, almost immediately, they began planning to make it virtual because of concerns about the wisdom of holding a mass gathering in an enclosed space during a pandemic.
Trump and MAGA world mocked this cautious approach.
Joe Biden wanted the date for the Democrat National Convention moved to a later time period. Now he wants a “Virtual” Convention, one where he doesn’t have to show up. Gee, I wonder why? Also, what ever happened to that phone call he told the Fake News he wanted to make to me? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 6, 2020
You may also recall that in early June, Trump pulled the Republican convention out of North Carolina because the governor would not guarantee that the event could be held at full capacity because of the need for social distancing in the midst of a pandemic.
Trump did not like this. Not one bit. He told North Carolina Governor Rory Cooper, “Since the day I came down the escalator, I’ve never had an empty seat and I find the biggest stadiums. I don’t want to be sitting in a place that’s 50 percent empty.” (Insert Sad Trombone gif.)
And you may finally recall that Trump then took his convention to Jacksonville, where his Mini-Me, Ron DeSantis, promised that the state would “showcase [its] energy, facilities, entrepreneurship and commitment to bring together the delegates of the Republican Party at a historic time in our nation’s history.”
I mean, really, who could have possibly known that packing thousands of people indoors, not just in an arena, but in restaurants, hotels, and taxis was never going to work? Our Great President may understand the science behind the coronavirus better than anyone, but he’s not a fortune teller. Stop being so unfair.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Anyway, if this all feels like deja vu, then you’re probably thinking about this moment:
Trump: Goal is to re-open economy by Easter
Watch this video on YouTube
That was on March 24. Here is how ridiculous that statement was:
The country was never going to “re-open” by Easter any more than someone was going to host a massive political convention this summer.
But this is what Trump does. He and his enablers in the media used the ridiculous Easter Miracle prediction as a cudgel to beat on people who were trying to take public health seriously and stop the spread of the virus. Right up until the moment that reality positively forced them to concede that they were being fatuous.
And that’s what Trump and his enablers did with the conventions, too. “They are having what they call a virtual convention and I call a webinar,” Duval County GOP chairman Dean Black said exactly one month ago. “It will be Joe Biden in his basement conducting a webinar.”
Well, look who is testing their Wi-Fi connection now.
There’s one more similarity, of course. Because when Trump and his people construct their alternate realities, it’s other people who always end up footing the bill. With the coronavirus, we’re closing in on 145,000 Americans who paid for Trump’s magical thinking with their lives. In regards to the two aborted conventions, thankfully, the price has been less steep: Just the planning costs and debts incurred by local municipalities and businesses to hold events that everyone knew—or should have known—were never going to happen.
Welcome to the basement.


thebulwark--2020-07-27--The Wear Masks So Your City Can See ‘Tenet’ Challenge

Big news in the world of movies , as Warner Bros. has announced ( yet another ) release date for Tenet , Christopher Nolan ’ s massive tentpole extravaganza that could just save movie theaters as we know them .
According to the Hollywood Reporter and the rest of the trades , the film is set to open August 26 and the following days in some 70 territories around the world .
After Labor Day , it ’ ll open in a handful of cities in the United States .
Which cities ?
WHO KNOWS !
This is the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Without new product , the movie theaters are going to go bust .
They simply can ’ t float along for the next year while we wait for a vaccine that might never come .
And without theaters , movie studios can ’ t make the money they need to create $ 200 million tentpole features .
( Whether or not the unaffordability of the $ 200M tentpole might be a good thing is another question entirely , and one we may address at some further date . )
So , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studios should ’ ve been doing from the beginning : figure out where movies can be released without risking a massive health crisis and releasing them there .
There are a bunch of fascinating little tidbits about this whole situation—the scrapping of what has become the de rigueur global day-and-date release strategy designed to cut down on piracy and keep a lid on spoilers ; the fact that China , the world ’ s second-biggest market , might be out of play given that country ’ s crackdown on films over two hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who need something , anything to play in order to bring people back to the movies—but what I ’ d really like to know is this : How will Warner Bros. decide which U.S. cities are safe enough to show the movie ?
Are they going to be looking at declining death rates ?
Declining hospitalization rates ?
Declining positive test rates ?
Declining numbers of positive tests , period ?
Increasing ICU capacity ?
Some combination thereof ?
The big question for the movie studio is a pretty simple one : What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep in mind when you ’ re risking headlines like “ Tenet Screening Coronavirus Hotspot ; New Christopher Nolan Movie Linked to 78 Cases ” ?
Because the question isn ’ t so much which locales have opened their theaters and which haven ’ t ; anyone trusting localities and their citizens to open smartly and safely hasn ’ t really been paying attention .
It is , rather , a function of crunching the numbers and figuring out where numbers are on the decline—where you ’ re most likely to see people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is sad that America is losing its primacy in the movie-theater-release game , at least temporarily .
One day we shall be first in line again .
But perhaps this is just the incentive we need to get people to finally do the responsible thing and mask up when you ’ re indoors .
Don ’ t do it for grandma .
Don ’ t do it for the person with preexisting conditions or other vulnerable communities .
Do it for yourself .
Do it so the numbers will start to wane .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Do it so you can see Tenet in glorious IMAX .
Let ’ s get the Wear Your Masks So Your City Can See Tenet Challenge started , people .
Because if you folks don ’ t get your shit together I ’ m going to be incredibly annoyed when I have to fly to Turkey to see this thing .

Big news in the world of movies, as Warner Bros. has announced (yet another) release date for Tenet, Christopher Nolan’s massive tentpole extravaganza that could just save movie theaters as we know them.
According to the Hollywood Reporter and the rest of the trades, the film is set to open August 26 and the following days in some 70 territories around the world. After Labor Day, it’ll open in a handful of cities in the United States. Which cities? WHO KNOWS!
This is the only rational thing for distributors and exhibitors alike. Without new product, the movie theaters are going to go bust. They simply can’t float along for the next year while we wait for a vaccine that might never come. And without theaters, movie studios can’t make the money they need to create $200 million tentpole features. (Whether or not the unaffordability of the $200M tentpole might be a good thing is another question entirely, and one we may address at some further date.) So, the studios are going to do what the studios should’ve been doing from the beginning: figure out where movies can be released without risking a massive health crisis and releasing them there.
There are a bunch of fascinating little tidbits about this whole situation—the scrapping of what has become the de rigueur global day-and-date release strategy designed to cut down on piracy and keep a lid on spoilers; the fact that China, the world’s second-biggest market, might be out of play given that country’s crackdown on films over two hours; the obvious desperation of theater owners who need something, anything to play in order to bring people back to the movies—but what I’d really like to know is this: How will Warner Bros. decide which U.S. cities are safe enough to show the movie?
Are they going to be looking at declining death rates? Declining hospitalization rates? Declining positive test rates? Declining numbers of positive tests, period? Increasing ICU capacity? Some combination thereof? The big question for the movie studio is a pretty simple one: What sort of factors do you have to keep in mind when you’re risking headlines like “Tenet Screening Coronavirus Hotspot; New Christopher Nolan Movie Linked to 78 Cases”? Because the question isn’t so much which locales have opened their theaters and which haven’t; anyone trusting localities and their citizens to open smartly and safely hasn’t really been paying attention. It is, rather, a function of crunching the numbers and figuring out where numbers are on the decline—where you’re most likely to see people distancing out and masking up.
It is sad that America is losing its primacy in the movie-theater-release game, at least temporarily. One day we shall be first in line again. But perhaps this is just the incentive we need to get people to finally do the responsible thing and mask up when you’re indoors. Don’t do it for grandma. Don’t do it for the person with preexisting conditions or other vulnerable communities.
Do it for yourself. Do it so the numbers will start to wane. Do it so the caseloads decrease city-by-city. Do it so you can see Tenet in glorious IMAX. Let’s get the Wear Your Masks So Your City Can See Tenet Challenge started, people.
Because if you folks don’t get your shit together I’m going to be incredibly annoyed when I have to fly to Turkey to see this thing.