thebulwark--2020-10-01--The “Very Fine People” President

The “Very Fine People” President

Among many appalling moments in Tuesday night ’ s debate , Donald Trump repeated his Charlottesville “ very fine people ” technique , once again shying away from condemning white nationalists .
Challenged point-blank to condemn violent and white nationalist groups , Trump instead told them to “ stand by ” because “ somebody ’ s got ta do something about Antifa and the left.
” This was immediately taken as an endorsement by leaders of the Proud Boys militia , who proclaimed it a green light to “ go f— them up.
” “ President Trump told the proud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deal with ANTIFA…well sir !
we ’ re ready.
” So everybody gets the message .
South Carolina Senator Tim Scott , like many Republican politicians , is still pretending he doesn ’ t : “ I think he misspoke , I think he should correct it.
” But Scott also had the good sense to add , “ If he doesn ’ t correct it , I guess he didn ’ t misspeak.
” How many times does America have to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt on this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ template as his remarks about the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville in 2017 : He says he is going to denounce white nationalists—and then somehow manages to do the opposite .
Back then , Trump ’ s technique involved first condemning white nationalists “ totally ” —and then carving out a giant exception .
Trump said he was against white nationalists , except for this one group of “ very fine people , ” the people from “ the night before “ —who were white nationalists , the guys with tiki torches screaming about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aspect of Donald Trump ’ s style of talking and the key to the doublethink he induces in his supporters .
He throws out so many contradictory statements that you can always find something he said somewhere that supports whatever interpretation is required to defend him .
You can also find another quote to support the opposite interpretation .
And you can switch back and forth between these two positions as needed to support the ever-shifting party line .
Yet if you speak a truth and a lie at the same time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the truth .
You get the blame for debasing the truth .
Similarly , if Trump says that he condemns white nationalists , then praises them , that just makes the praise stand out all the more .
Trump returned to the same style of equivocation in Tuesday ’ s debate .
When asked specifically to tell violent right-wing groups and white nationalists to “ stand down , ” he instead told them to “ stand back and stand by.
” In context , Trump ’ s line is even worse .
Let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporters always ask us to do and go to the transcript .
What they usually mean by that is that you are supposed to pay attention only to the parts of the transcript they like and ignore everything else .
Instead , let ’ s read the whole thing .
Moderator : You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out Antifa and other left-wing extremist groups .
But are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we ’ ve seen in Portland .
President Trump : Sure , I ’ m willing to do that .
Moderator : Are you prepared specifically to do it .
President Trump : I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing not from the right wing .
Moderator : But what are you saying ?
President Trump : I ’ m willing to do anything .
I want to see peace .
Moderator : Well , do it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Say it .
Do it .
Say it .
President Trump : What do you want to call them ?
Give me a name , give me a name , go ahead , who do you want me to condemn ?
President Trump : Proud Boys , stand back and stand by .
But I ’ ll tell you what , somebody ’ s got to do something about Antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem this is a left-wing .
So first Trump issues a meaninglessly vague @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do anything.
” When asked to make it specific , he plays dumb , asking somebody else to furnish the target he is meant to disavow .
Again , he has been president for nearly four years .
It has been more than three years since the neo-Nazis descended on Charlottesville .
Antifa has been skirmishing with the Proud Boys in Portland for more than a year .
Trump has access to FBI briefings on violent political groups in this country , and he certainly reads the press and watches the news .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his own a specific target to condemn speaks volumes .
But then Biden furnishes him with the Proud Boys .
The Proud Boys were founded as a kind of club or fraternal organization devoted to opposing Political Correctness .
They quickly slid into sympathy—at the very least—for white nationalism , and their primary means of opposing what they see as Political Correctness is brawling in the streets .
So they definitely fit the moderator ’ s criterion of a “ right-wing militia , ” and they are especially relevant to a discussion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the right ’ s mirror image of Antifa .
What did Trump say to the Proud Boys ?
The phrase “ stand down ” was still hanging there in the air , from seconds earlier , but he didn ’ t use that .
He used “ stand by , ” which indicates waiting in a position of readiness .
And then he went on immediately to give a purpose to be ready for : to “ do something about Antifa and the left.
” Did Trump really mean this ?
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything else .
If Trump had intended to issue a forthright condemnation of violent right-wing groups , if he had prepared to do so , he would have said something very different .
He has a small army of speechwriters and political advisors and spent at least some time rehearsing his debate points .
And this is not a man who usually has difficulty letting us know when he disapproves of someone .
Yet somehow this easily anticipated issue was not important enough to bother with .
We can speculate about the reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on this .
Trump supporter Rick Santorum—in the most backhanded defense of Trump I ’ ve ever seen—attributed it to megalomania : Trump doesn ’ t like to “ say something bad about people who support him.
” Another possibility is that Trump has had his thinking influenced by his close advisor Stephen Miller , who has a known affinity for white nationalist websites such as VDARE .
Either reason takes us into dangerous territory , because President Trump spent the last five to ten minutes of the debate declaring mail-in ballots to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reject the results of November ’ s election .
Such a maneuver could set the country up for months of chaos .
And he had—only a few minutes before—told right-wing militias to “ stand by ” to “ do something about the left.
” Trump ’ s unwillingness to condemn racists and right-wing zealots three years ago in Charlottesville has turned into a persistent pattern—and it is now revealed as part of a larger agenda that marks the ambitions of an aspiring tyrant .
Will he get away with it ?
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s debate , you would be foolish not to fear that he ’ s going to try .

Among many appalling moments in Tuesday night’s debate, Donald Trump repeated his Charlottesville “very fine people” technique, once again shying away from condemning white nationalists.
Challenged point-blank to condemn violent and white nationalist groups, Trump instead told them to “stand by” because “somebody’s gotta do something about Antifa and the left.”
This was immediately taken as an endorsement by leaders of the Proud Boys militia, who proclaimed it a green light to “go f— them up.” “President Trump told the proud boys to stand by because someone needs to deal with ANTIFA…well sir! we’re ready.”
They’re already selling the T-shirts.
So everybody gets the message.
South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, like many Republican politicians, is still pretending he doesn’t: “I think he misspoke, I think he should correct it.” But Scott also had the good sense to add, “If he doesn’t correct it, I guess he didn’t misspeak.”
How many times does America have to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt on this?
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…
Trump used pretty much the same template as his remarks about the neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville in 2017: He says he is going to denounce white nationalists—and then somehow manages to do the opposite.
Back then, Trump’s technique involved first condemning white nationalists “totally”—and then carving out a giant exception. Trump said he was against white nationalists, except for this one group of “very fine people,” the people from “the night before“—who were white nationalists, the guys with tiki torches screaming about the Jews.
This is a distinctive aspect of Donald Trump’s style of talking and the key to the doublethink he induces in his supporters. He throws out so many contradictory statements that you can always find something he said somewhere that supports whatever interpretation is required to defend him. You can also find another quote to support the opposite interpretation. And you can switch back and forth between these two positions as needed to support the ever-shifting party line.
Yet if you speak a truth and a lie at the same time, you don’t get credit for the truth. You get the blame for debasing the truth. Similarly, if Trump says that he condemns white nationalists, then praises them, that just makes the praise stand out all the more.
Trump returned to the same style of equivocation in Tuesday’s debate. When asked specifically to tell violent right-wing groups and white nationalists to “stand down,” he instead told them to “stand back and stand by.”
In context, Trump’s line is even worse. Let’s do what Trump’s supporters always ask us to do and go to the transcript. What they usually mean by that is that you are supposed to pay attention only to the parts of the transcript they like and ignore everything else. Instead, let’s read the whole thing.
Moderator: You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out Antifa and other left-wing extremist groups. But are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we’ve seen in Portland. President Trump: Sure, I’m willing to do that. Moderator: Are you prepared specifically to do it. President Trump: I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing not from the right wing. Moderator: But what are you saying? President Trump: I’m willing to do anything. I want to see peace. Moderator: Well, do it, sir. Vice President Joe Biden: Say it. Do it. Say it. President Trump: What do you want to call them? Give me a name, give me a name, go ahead, who do you want me to condemn? Moderator: White supremacists and right-wing militia. Vice President Biden: Proud Boys. President Trump: Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem this is a left-wing.
So first Trump issues a meaninglessly vague assurance that he is “willing to do anything.” When asked to make it specific, he plays dumb, asking somebody else to furnish the target he is meant to disavow. Again, he has been president for nearly four years. It has been more than three years since the neo-Nazis descended on Charlottesville. Antifa has been skirmishing with the Proud Boys in Portland for more than a year. Trump has access to FBI briefings on violent political groups in this country, and he certainly reads the press and watches the news. The idea that he cannot furnish on his own a specific target to condemn speaks volumes.
But then Biden furnishes him with the Proud Boys. The Proud Boys were founded as a kind of club or fraternal organization devoted to opposing Political Correctness. They quickly slid into sympathy—at the very least—for white nationalism, and their primary means of opposing what they see as Political Correctness is brawling in the streets. So they definitely fit the moderator’s criterion of a “right-wing militia,” and they are especially relevant to a discussion of Portland, where they have been the right’s mirror image of Antifa.
What did Trump say to the Proud Boys? The phrase “stand down” was still hanging there in the air, from seconds earlier, but he didn’t use that. He used “stand by,” which indicates waiting in a position of readiness. And then he went on immediately to give a purpose to be ready for: to “do something about Antifa and the left.”
Did Trump really mean this? It is not reasonable to claim that he meant anything else.
If Trump had intended to issue a forthright condemnation of violent right-wing groups, if he had prepared to do so, he would have said something very different. He has a small army of speechwriters and political advisors and spent at least some time rehearsing his debate points. And this is not a man who usually has difficulty letting us know when he disapproves of someone. Yet somehow this easily anticipated issue was not important enough to bother with.
We can speculate about the reason for Trump’s weird mental block on this. Trump supporter Rick Santorum—in the most backhanded defense of Trump I’ve ever seen—attributed it to megalomania: Trump doesn’t like to “say something bad about people who support him.” Another possibility is that Trump has had his thinking influenced by his close advisor Stephen Miller, who has a known affinity for white nationalist websites such as VDARE.
Either reason takes us into dangerous territory, because President Trump spent the last five to ten minutes of the debate declaring mail-in ballots to be inherently fraudulent and laying the predicate to reject the results of November’s election. Such a maneuver could set the country up for months of chaos. And he had—only a few minutes before—told right-wing militias to “stand by” to “do something about the left.”
Trump’s unwillingness to condemn racists and right-wing zealots three years ago in Charlottesville has turned into a persistent pattern—and it is now revealed as part of a larger agenda that marks the ambitions of an aspiring tyrant.
Will he get away with it? I doubt it. But after Tuesday’s debate, you would be foolish not to fear that he’s going to try.


thebulwark--2020-10-02--The Virus Comes For Trump: Now What?

The Virus Comes For Trump: Now What?

Many days during the Trump presidency have felt like a year while some years have felt like a day .
It ’ s disorienting , all-consuming .
Then tonight came like a lightning flash .
I had just finished running down the events for Brian Williams : • The president ’ s day was embroiled with fallout from his refusal to speak with any moral clarity about his white supremacist supporters ( or staff , for that matter ) .
• Audio of his wife talking callously about the border separation leaked from her own friend and top aide .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and top campaign surrogate was revealed to have settled a massive sexual-harassment suit .
• His former campaign manager confided in friends that he is under federal investigation and despondent .
• His closest staffer contracted COVID-19 and was pictured mingling with the top White House aides without a mask , because after all in this White House looking strong is more important than being safe .
This all felt massive , chaotic .
The historic tax-return leak and SCOTUS fight barely merited a mention in the day ’ s news as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just short of 10 p.m. Pacific time—right before I had planned to shut it down for the night—my phone began to buzz .
All of this chaos was a mere preview to what is to come .
The president of the United States had contracted COVID-19 .
The virus that President Trump dismissed as “ under control ” in January .
Would go away “ with the heat ” in April .
A president who has flirted with disaster , with bankruptcy , with humiliation his entire life but overcome it thanks to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ otherworldly ability to bullshit met a virus that was not susceptible to his con .
For nine months the coronavirus has been ravaging the country , leaving death and destruction in its wake .
But President Trump was congenitally incapable of acknowledging this reality .
He refused to accept that this could be happening to him .
So he did the only thing he ’ s ever been good at .
He tried to make it not true through spin and deceit .
He tried to con the country the same way he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chumps who signed up for Trump University and the viewers of the Apprentice and the poor suckers who voted for him because they thought he was a guy who actually gave a fuck about them .
But a virus can ’ t be conned .
It can only be managed .
Donald Trump is no manager .
You would have thought this might have sunk in with him .
When Dr. Birx or Dr. Fauci tried to tell him what was happening .
When the virus didn ’ t go away with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exceeded his lowball predictions .
When we became the country with the most deaths in the world .
When Herman Cain died after attending one of his rallies .
But it never did .
He went to a damn indoor fundraiser with his own supporters today after knowing that he was exposed to the virus .
He didn ’ t accept the reality of the virus enough even to manage his own behavior , let alone the rest of the country .
Donald Trump didn ’ t care one particulate about the 200,000+ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He never gave 99.9 percent of them a second thought .
It didn ’ t matter to him whether any of them lived or died .
All he cared about was whether in the face of the pandemic he could make himself look good .
Such callous disregard meant that if people died but the stock market was going up and college kids were still playing football and the pictures of him at superspreader rallies made him seem strong then that was just fine with him .
Until October 1 , Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with bullshit just like he ’ d always done .
Pull another one over on the marks .
Well now he has been made to care .
And to be honest , I ’ m not sure exactly what happens from here .
I guess I know one thing .
I know that he will spend a lot of time in quarantine watching cable news and live-tweeting—so in that sense his “ management ” of this virus won ’ t be much different than it was before .
But beyond that we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not sure whether his pathological need to seem strong will make him pretend like this isn ’ t a big deal—as his former doctor-turned-hack-politician tried to spin this evening—or whether his germophobia will turn him into Howard Hughes .
I ’ m not sure if there will be any more debates .
( The next Trump-Biden debate was scheduled for October 15 , and the recommended quarantine time for someone who tests positive for COVID-19 is fourteen days . )
I ’ m not sure exactly what impact the wildest October surprise in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But here ’ s what I hope will happen .
I hope that the virus ’ s impact on the president and the first lady is mild and that they have a speedy recovery .
And then I hope the American people hand him the debasing landslide defeat that he deserves .
Then we might all have a chance to heal .

Many days during the Trump presidency have felt like a year while some years have felt like a day. It’s disorienting, all-consuming. Then tonight came like a lightning flash. I had just finished running down the events for Brian Williams:
The president’s day was embroiled with fallout from his refusal to speak with any moral clarity about his white supremacist supporters (or staff, for that matter).
Audio of his wife talking callously about the border separation leaked from her own friend and top aide.
His adult son’s girlfriend and top campaign surrogate was revealed to have settled a massive sexual-harassment suit.
His former campaign manager confided in friends that he is under federal investigation and despondent.
His closest staffer contracted COVID-19 and was pictured mingling with the top White House aides without a mask, because after all in this White House looking strong is more important than being safe.
This all felt massive, chaotic. The historic tax-return leak and SCOTUS fight barely merited a mention in the day’s news as the cascading scandals unfolded.
Then, at just short of 10 p.m. Pacific time—right before I had planned to shut it down for the night—my phone began to buzz. All of this chaos was a mere preview to what is to come. The president of the United States had contracted COVID-19.
The virus that President Trump dismissed as “under control” in January.
“Shut down” in February.
“Stopped” in March.
Would go away “with the heat” in April.
Back to normal by Easter.
“Really rocking” by July.
Dealing with it til August.
Mocking the safety protocols in September.
Quarantined, COVID-19 positive in October.
A president who has flirted with disaster, with bankruptcy, with humiliation his entire life but overcome it thanks to his privilege, his shamelessness, his otherworldly ability to bullshit met a virus that was not susceptible to his con.
For nine months the coronavirus has been ravaging the country, leaving death and destruction in its wake. But President Trump was congenitally incapable of acknowledging this reality. He refused to accept that this could be happening to him.
So he did the only thing he’s ever been good at. He tried to make it not true through spin and deceit. He tried to con the country the same way he conned the creditors in Atlantic City and the chumps who signed up for Trump University and the viewers of the Apprentice and the poor suckers who voted for him because they thought he was a guy who actually gave a fuck about them.
But a virus can’t be conned. It can only be managed. Donald Trump is no manager.
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…
You would have thought this might have sunk in with him. When Dr. Birx or Dr. Fauci tried to tell him what was happening. When the virus didn’t go away with the heat. When the death count exceeded his lowball predictions. When we became the country with the most deaths in the world. When Herman Cain died after attending one of his rallies.
But it never did.
He went to a damn indoor fundraiser with his own supporters today after knowing that he was exposed to the virus. He didn’t accept the reality of the virus enough even to manage his own behavior, let alone the rest of the country.
Donald Trump didn’t care one particulate about the 200,000+ Americans we have lost to the virus. He never gave 99.9 percent of them a second thought. It didn’t matter to him whether any of them lived or died.
All he cared about was whether in the face of the pandemic he could make himself look good. Such callous disregard meant that if people died but the stock market was going up and college kids were still playing football and the pictures of him at superspreader rallies made him seem strong then that was just fine with him.
Until October 1, Donald Trump thought he could beat the virus with bullshit just like he’d always done. Pull another one over on the marks.
Well now he has been made to care.
And to be honest, I’m not sure exactly what happens from here.
I guess I know one thing. I know that he will spend a lot of time in quarantine watching cable news and live-tweeting—so in that sense his “management” of this virus won’t be much different than it was before.
But beyond that we are in uncharted territory.
I’m not sure whether his pathological need to seem strong will make him pretend like this isn’t a big deal—as his former doctor-turned-hack-politician tried to spin this evening—or whether his germophobia will turn him into Howard Hughes. I’m not sure if there will be any more debates. (The next Trump-Biden debate was scheduled for October 15, and the recommended quarantine time for someone who tests positive for COVID-19 is fourteen days.) I’m not sure exactly what impact the wildest October surprise in history will have on the polls.
But here’s what I hope will happen.
I hope that the virus’s impact on the president and the first lady is mild and that they have a speedy recovery. And then I hope the American people hand him the debasing landslide defeat that he deserves.
Then we might all have a chance to heal.


thebulwark--2020-10-02--Trump’s Diagnosis and the Election

Trump’s Diagnosis and the Election

Early Friday morning , karma called on the White House : Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump were struck by the most implacable enemy stalking his presidency—COVID-19 .
It is too early to understand much of what this means for the presidential campaign season and the election one month away .
But—absent tragedy striking one of the candidates or the arrival some other grave ‘ unknown unknown ’ —some things are already clear .
While Trump will posture as too hearty for a mere pandemic to subdue , the virus has mercilessly illuminated his contempt for science , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the safety of others .
It has devalued whatever dubious claims he makes regarding an imminent vaccine .
It has illuminated the economic realities that have driven a fresh round of layoffs .
No doubt mercifully , Melania ’ s illness will overshadow the release of the profanity-laced recording wherein she mocks those concerned about the cruelty of family separation and complains about decorating the White House for Christmas .
But the Trumps ’ COVID diagnosis elevates Joe Biden ’ s warnings about the persistence of the virus , and his insistence on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health measures Trump slights .
And the first couple ’ s shared malady indelibly imprints Trump ’ s flailing campaign with the stamp of a deadly disease that has redefined life for Americans at large .
Among the remaining imponderables is the impact on three major stories where , nonetheless , it is hard to perceive an advantage for Trump .
First , Trump ’ s contagion largely obscures the welcome change of subject afforded him by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg—while creating some doubt about the timetable on which he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So far , Senate Democrats have wisely resisted calls to effectively alienate swing voters by showboating for the progressive left and attacking Barrett , instead focusing on Barrett ’ s potential to help Supreme Court conservatives abrogate the Affordable Care Act .
Moreover , the revelation that Barrett , when she was a law professor in 2006 , signed an advertisement decrying abortion elevates that issue among suburban women without requiring Democrats to raise the potentially incendiary issue of how the judge ’ s Catholic faith affects her judicial worldview .
Second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on whether further presidential debates will actually occur .
The next is scheduled for September 15—roughly the end of the fourteen-day period standard for COVID quarantine .
No doubt Trump will now do everything he can to make it to the debate—displaying his indomitability will become a political and personal imperative .
But that complicates his initial insistence that he will resist changes in the debate rules caused by his obnoxious performance during the first encounter .
It will be far more difficult for him not to show up—regardless of the format .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a town hall in which voters question the candidates , plays to his strengths and limits Trump ’ s ability to shout down his interrogators .
Mercifully , actual issues may take center stage ; while Trump excels at insults , he stints on substance .
An extended discussion of healthcare—as but one example—is something Trump should want to avoid like , well , COVID-19 .
Biden won the first debate , Trump ’ s best chance to diminish him .
Biden ’ s job in further debates is the same as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : to shake off the mud from that debate and present a positive vision of his presidency .
That , for Biden , is congenial ground : to close the deal with voters , he must be his best self .
Voters already know exactly who Trump is .
Finally , Trump ’ s illness will necessarily affect the conduct of the campaign .
Because of his health and his prior irresponsibility in spurning public-health measures , he can not now do what he likes most—stage raucous rallies that contrast with Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic .
Whether or not Biden curtails his appearances , at least for a time the decorum of courtesy toward a sick opponent will cast him as the statesman while an increasingly desperate Trump indulges , as he inevitably will , in demagoguery and vilification .
With one month to go , certain fundamentals are pretty well baked into the race .
Democrats harbor the superstitious fear that , as happened with Hillary Clinton , Trump will call upon hidden reservoirs of strength to squeak out an Electoral College win .
But this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that year , I wrote an extensive analysis for the Huffington Post outlining what would have to happen for Trump to defy conventional wisdom and defeat Clinton .
The comparison is instructive .
First , Trump would have to harvest a massive turnout among whites without a college degree .
Second , he would need to capitalize on an intensity of support that far outstripped Clinton ’ s .
Third , Clinton ’ s relative weakness among the Obama coalition—particularly minorities and the young—must limit her vote .
Fourth , the tripwire of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remarks about “ deplorables ” —must galvanize voters who felt themselves demeaned .
Fifth , third parties must leach more support in crucial states from Clinton than Trump .
Finally , doubts about Clinton ’ s character—captured by the email issue—must outstrip aversion to Trump .
Should that all that happen , I concluded , Trump could carry Florida , Ohio , North Carolina , and Pennsylvania , thereby carrying the Electoral College .
All those things did happen , and more—fatally abetted by James Comey .
But Biden is doing better than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is different—but also because too many Americans came to know Trump all too well .
Trump is no longer a human Powerball ticket—a gamble among voters desperate for change—but a president known to be devoid of competence or character .
Nor is Joe Biden a caricature of elitism ; he ’ s Middle Class Joe .
While Biden is polling slightly worse than Clinton among blacks and Hispanics , the vast majority who dislike Trump are more likely to turn out .
And Biden has slashed Trump ’ s support among a much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whites , while winning the college-educated whites that Clinton lost .
He ’ s buoyed by a unified party that despises Trump and he is not bedeviled by another Jill Stein .
All of that accounts for the remarkable stability of Biden ’ s lead in battleground states .
In panic , Trump is marinating America in an increasingly overt racism that suburban voters find more and more distasteful .
Trump ’ s perverse hope of racial disorder , his last chance of reclaiming nervous whites , bespeaks how debased his political prospects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump is left with hijacking democracy by throwing out mail-in ballots ; frightening minority voters away from the polls , and enlisting the courts in shortcutting vote counts .
But his refusal to honor a peaceful transition places him beyond the pale of those otherwise persuadable voters who still honor democracy .
In the end , Trump may preempt his own efforts to steal the election by inspiring a margin for Biden which is beyond theft .
That is America ’ s ultimate hope .
Absent the darkest of miracles and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come to fruition .

Early Friday morning, karma called on the White House: Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump were struck by the most implacable enemy stalking his presidency—COVID-19.
It is too early to understand much of what this means for the presidential campaign season and the election one month away. But—absent tragedy striking one of the candidates or the arrival some other grave ‘unknown unknown’—some things are already clear.
While Trump will posture as too hearty for a mere pandemic to subdue, the virus has mercilessly illuminated his contempt for science, his macho pretensions, and his indifference to the safety of others. It has devalued whatever dubious claims he makes regarding an imminent vaccine. It has illuminated the economic realities that have driven a fresh round of layoffs.
No doubt mercifully, Melania’s illness will overshadow the release of the profanity-laced recording wherein she mocks those concerned about the cruelty of family separation and complains about decorating the White House for Christmas. But the Trumps’ COVID diagnosis elevates Joe Biden’s warnings about the persistence of the virus, and his insistence on protecting others and himself by honoring the public health measures Trump slights. And the first couple’s shared malady indelibly imprints Trump’s flailing campaign with the stamp of a deadly disease that has redefined life for Americans at large.
Among the remaining imponderables is the impact on three major stories where, nonetheless, it is hard to perceive an advantage for Trump.
First, Trump’s contagion largely obscures the welcome change of subject afforded him by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg—while creating some doubt about the timetable on which he proposes to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett. So far, Senate Democrats have wisely resisted calls to effectively alienate swing voters by showboating for the progressive left and attacking Barrett, instead focusing on Barrett’s potential to help Supreme Court conservatives abrogate the Affordable Care Act. Moreover, the revelation that Barrett, when she was a law professor in 2006, signed an advertisement decrying abortion elevates that issue among suburban women without requiring Democrats to raise the potentially incendiary issue of how the judge’s Catholic faith affects her judicial worldview.
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…
Second, Trump’s health casts doubt on whether further presidential debates will actually occur. The next is scheduled for October 15—roughly the end of the fourteen-day period standard for COVID quarantine. No doubt Trump will now do everything he can to make it to the debate—displaying his indomitability will become a political and personal imperative.
But that complicates his initial insistence that he will resist changes in the debate rules caused by his obnoxious performance during the first encounter. It will be far more difficult for him not to show up—regardless of the format.
Biden surely will. The second debate, a town hall in which voters question the candidates, plays to his strengths and limits Trump’s ability to shout down his interrogators. Mercifully, actual issues may take center stage; while Trump excels at insults, he stints on substance. An extended discussion of healthcare—as but one example—is something Trump should want to avoid like, well, COVID-19.
Biden won the first debate, Trump’s best chance to diminish him. Biden’s job in further debates is the same as on the campaign trail and in advertising: to shake off the mud from that debate and present a positive vision of his presidency. That, for Biden, is congenial ground: to close the deal with voters, he must be his best self. Voters already know exactly who Trump is.
Finally, Trump’s illness will necessarily affect the conduct of the campaign. Because of his health and his prior irresponsibility in spurning public-health measures, he cannot now do what he likes most—stage raucous rallies that contrast with Biden’s restrained approach to campaigning during a pandemic. Whether or not Biden curtails his appearances, at least for a time the decorum of courtesy toward a sick opponent will cast him as the statesman while an increasingly desperate Trump indulges, as he inevitably will, in demagoguery and vilification.
With one month to go, certain fundamentals are pretty well baked into the race. Democrats harbor the superstitious fear that, as happened with Hillary Clinton, Trump will call upon hidden reservoirs of strength to squeak out an Electoral College win. But this is not 2016.
In September of that year, I wrote an extensive analysis for the Huffington Post outlining what would have to happen for Trump to defy conventional wisdom and defeat Clinton. The comparison is instructive.
First, Trump would have to harvest a massive turnout among whites without a college degree. Second, he would need to capitalize on an intensity of support that far outstripped Clinton’s. Third, Clinton’s relative weakness among the Obama coalition—particularly minorities and the young—must limit her vote.
Fourth, the tripwire of cultural condescension—captured by Clinton’s unfortunate remarks about “deplorables”—must galvanize voters who felt themselves demeaned. Fifth, third parties must leach more support in crucial states from Clinton than Trump. Finally, doubts about Clinton’s character—captured by the email issue—must outstrip aversion to Trump.
Should that all that happen, I concluded, Trump could carry Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, thereby carrying the Electoral College. All those things did happen, and more—fatally abetted by James Comey. But Biden is doing better than Clinton, in great measure because he is different—but also because too many Americans came to know Trump all too well.
Trump is no longer a human Powerball ticket—a gamble among voters desperate for change—but a president known to be devoid of competence or character. Nor is Joe Biden a caricature of elitism; he’s Middle Class Joe.
While Biden is polling slightly worse than Clinton among blacks and Hispanics, the vast majority who dislike Trump are more likely to turn out. And Biden has slashed Trump’s support among a much bigger portion of the electorate, non-college-educated whites, while winning the college-educated whites that Clinton lost. He’s buoyed by a unified party that despises Trump and he is not bedeviled by another Jill Stein. All of that accounts for the remarkable stability of Biden’s lead in battleground states.
In panic, Trump is marinating America in an increasingly overt racism that suburban voters find more and more distasteful. Trump’s perverse hope of racial disorder, his last chance of reclaiming nervous whites, bespeaks how debased his political prospects have become.
Absent such a cataclysm, Trump is left with hijacking democracy by throwing out mail-in ballots; frightening minority voters away from the polls, and enlisting the courts in shortcutting vote counts. But his refusal to honor a peaceful transition places him beyond the pale of those otherwise persuadable voters who still honor democracy.
In the end, Trump may preempt his own efforts to steal the election by inspiring a margin for Biden which is beyond theft. That is America’s ultimate hope. Absent the darkest of miracles and the blackest of swans, it may well come to fruition.


Trump Caused This

With more than 208,000 Americans dead from the novel coronavirus , it was already apparent that Donald Trump had failed the country .
With his positive diagnosis , it ’ s now clear that he even failed himself .
See this with clear eyes : Our nation ’ s commander-in-chief is presently in isolation by way of his incompetence , paranoia , and denialism .
This is not an accident .
Unlike untold numbers of Americans , such as medical workers and first responders , who have contracted the deadly virus despite taking precautious , President Trump ignored science and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fate .
Trump and his White House staff have ignored the most basic public health best practices : Masking .
Social distancing .
Avoiding crowds .
The president has held indoor rallies .
He has gathered masses of people on the White House lawn , multiple times .
He has mocked people wearing masks in order to avoid unknowingly spreading the virus .
He badgered states to “ open up ” despite not having contained the coronavirus .
President Trump didn ’ t unwittingly contract coronavirus .
He courted it .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , followed his lead .
They similarly held indoor events .
They posted pictures to social media of themselves maskless , in crowds , as if to prove their defiance of basic science .
To say President Trump “ failed ” in his job to protect America isn ’ t quite right .
Because he didn ’ t even try .
What he did , instead , was focus on his reelection campaign to the exclusion of all else .
People pleaded with him for months to take the virus seriously , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public about it .
He mocked those who were concerned by its progress .
And he tried to pressure others—both within his administration and leaders at the state level—to do the same .
Donald Trump is the reason our country has been plunged into economic , medical , and institutional chaos .
And here it is important to make a distinction : Because unlike so many others , Donald Trump is not a victim of the coronavirus .
He brought it on himself .
As he sits in isolation , facing the ramifications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hesitate to speak this basic truth .
Of course , everyone wishes Trump , his wife Melania , and other Trump staffers who have coronavirus well .
We ’ ll hold them in our prayers .
But , the country shouldn ’ t be in this situation .
And we wouldn ’ t be , if it weren ’ t for Donald Trump .

With more than 208,000 Americans dead from the novel coronavirus, it was already apparent that Donald Trump had failed the country. With his positive diagnosis, it’s now clear that he even failed himself. See this with clear eyes: Our nation’s commander-in-chief is presently in isolation by way of his incompetence, paranoia, and denialism.
This is not an accident. Unlike untold numbers of Americans, such as medical workers and first responders, who have contracted the deadly virus despite taking precautious, President Trump ignored science and prudence and commonsense. He taunted medical fate. Trump and his White House staff have ignored the most basic public health best practices: Masking. Social distancing. Avoiding crowds.
The president has held indoor rallies. He has gathered masses of people on the White House lawn, multiple times. He has mocked people wearing masks in order to avoid unknowingly spreading the virus. He badgered states to “open up” despite not having contained the coronavirus.
President Trump didn’t unwittingly contract coronavirus. He courted it. And, Republicans, eager to demonstrate their loyalty, followed his lead. They similarly held indoor events. They posted pictures to social media of themselves maskless, in crowds, as if to prove their defiance of basic science.
To say President Trump “failed” in his job to protect America isn’t quite right. Because he didn’t even try. What he did, instead, was focus on his reelection campaign to the exclusion of all else. People pleaded with him for months to take the virus seriously, and he refused. He lied to the public about it. He mocked those who were concerned by its progress. And he tried to pressure others—both within his administration and leaders at the state level—to do the same.
Donald Trump is the reason our country has been plunged into economic, medical, and institutional chaos.
And here it is important to make a distinction: Because unlike so many others, Donald Trump is not a victim of the coronavirus. He brought it on himself.
As he sits in isolation, facing the ramifications of his behavior, no one should hesitate to speak this basic truth.
Of course, everyone wishes Trump, his wife Melania, and other Trump staffers who have coronavirus well. We’ll hold them in our prayers. But, the country shouldn’t be in this situation.
And we wouldn’t be, if it weren’t for Donald Trump.


thebulwark--2020-10-02--The Clock Is Ticking for Mattis and Kelly to Speak Out

A question percolating in political circles : As the 2020 election draws nearer , as the hour grows late , should General James Mattis and General John Kelly speak out about Donald Trump ’ s unfitness for the presidency ?
In thinking about this question , let ’ s start by noting that to phrase it in that way—calling Mattis and Kelly “ generals ” —is already a concession , a green light for them to remain in the comfortable quiet zone they have been in .
They apparently want to avoid speaking out more than they already have about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The question of whether retired generals should criticize a sitting president is a complicated one .
First , there are some legal matters—regulations forbidding “ contemptuous words ” about certain government officials .
But of course , there is no need to speak contemptuously when offering candid criticism .
Second , beyond the law there are the norms of civil-military relations , which hold that active-duty members of the armed forces do not speak out to undermine the civilian commander in chief , and that even retired military officers ought to do so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. military is to no small extent the result of its members largely staying out of partisan politics .
As important as this norm is , it has been regularly breached when much less was at stake .
Retired senior officers regularly endorse candidates , and retired generals nowadays appear on cable TV criticizing sitting presidents—trends that should trouble us .
More to the point , that norm doesn ’ t apply to Mr. Mattis and Mr. Kelly .
They both served as civilians in the Trump administration , Mattis as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secretary of homeland security and then the White House chief of staff .
In fact , in Mattis ’ s case , because the National Security Act of 1947 doesn ’ t allow members of the military or officers retired within the past seven years to serve as the secretary of defense , Congress had to pass a special bill—which President Obama signed into law—to allow Mattis to become the secretary .
That is , Congress effectively declared him a civilian .
So the keep-your-lips-zipped norm for retired officers just isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the norm did apply , Mattis and Kelly would still be obligated to speak out—according to themselves and to common sense .
In his June statement in the Atlantic , Mattis said that “ We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution ” —a statement that , in context , is a clear reference to the president .
John Kelly , meanwhile , said in a 2019 interview nine months after he left the White House that he had feared that Trump would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement .
If you believe that a president is so reckless , unfit , and lawless that he will get himself impeached , and are proven right , that strongly suggests that you believe that president is likely a threat to the republic and should lose his job .
Even if the civil-military relations norms were strictly applied , why are Mattis and Kelly not doing more to stand up for the Constitution ?
The limited public remarks they have each given strongly imply that they believe Trump to be a threat to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ support and defend ” against “ all enemies , foreign and domestic.
” Besides , the norms relating to officers ( both serving and retired ) criticizing the sitting commander-in-chief , as important as they are , are still norms within the republic as a whole .
What ’ s the point of saving a wall from fire at the cost of letting the entire house burn to the ground ?
Trump is threat to our constitutional system—his recent remarks about not conceding the election prove that—and norms that fundamentally exist to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contorted to protect those who intend to harm it .
Mattis and Kelly have shown physical courage on the battlefield .
Will they now show their moral courage—as Miles Taylor , Elizabeth Neumann , Olivia Troye , and others have—to do what is right in defense of the republic ?

A question percolating in political circles: As the 2020 election draws nearer, as the hour grows late, should General James Mattis and General John Kelly speak out about Donald Trump’s unfitness for the presidency?
In thinking about this question, let’s start by noting that to phrase it in that way—calling Mattis and Kelly “generals”—is already a concession, a green light for them to remain in the comfortable quiet zone they have been in. They apparently want to avoid speaking out more than they already have about Trump while he remains in office.
The question of whether retired generals should criticize a sitting president is a complicated one. First, there are some legal matters—regulations forbidding “contemptuous words” about certain government officials. But of course, there is no need to speak contemptuously when offering candid criticism.
Second, beyond the law there are the norms of civil-military relations, which hold that active-duty members of the armed forces do not speak out to undermine the civilian commander in chief, and that even retired military officers ought to do so with caution. The unique popularity of the U.S. military is to no small extent the result of its members largely staying out of partisan politics. As important as this norm is, it has been regularly breached when much less was at stake. Retired senior officers regularly endorse candidates, and retired generals nowadays appear on cable TV criticizing sitting presidents—trends that should trouble us.
More to the point, that norm doesn’t apply to Mr. Mattis and Mr. Kelly. They both served as civilians in the Trump administration, Mattis as the secretary of defense, Kelly as the secretary of homeland security and then the White House chief of staff. In fact, in Mattis’s case, because the National Security Act of 1947 doesn’t allow members of the military or officers retired within the past seven years to serve as the secretary of defense, Congress had to pass a special bill—which President Obama signed into law—to allow Mattis to become the secretary. That is, Congress effectively declared him a civilian.
So the keep-your-lips-zipped norm for retired officers just isn’t relevant.
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…
All that said, even if the norm did apply, Mattis and Kelly would still be obligated to speak out—according to themselves and to common sense.
In his June statement in the Atlantic, Mattis said that “We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution”—a statement that, in context, is a clear reference to the president. John Kelly, meanwhile, said in a 2019 interview nine months after he left the White House that he had feared that Trump would get himself impeached if he left—a prophetic statement. If you believe that a president is so reckless, unfit, and lawless that he will get himself impeached, and are proven right, that strongly suggests that you believe that president is likely a threat to the republic and should lose his job.
Even if the civil-military relations norms were strictly applied, why are Mattis and Kelly not doing more to stand up for the Constitution? The limited public remarks they have each given strongly imply that they believe Trump to be a threat to the Constitution that they swore oaths to “support and defend” against “all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Besides, the norms relating to officers (both serving and retired) criticizing the sitting commander-in-chief, as important as they are, are still norms within the republic as a whole. What’s the point of saving a wall from fire at the cost of letting the entire house burn to the ground? Trump is threat to our constitutional system—his recent remarks about not conceding the election prove that—and norms that fundamentally exist to protect that system shouldn’t be contorted to protect those who intend to harm it.
Mattis and Kelly have shown physical courage on the battlefield. Will they now show their moral courage—as Miles Taylor, Elizabeth Neumann, Olivia Troye, and others have—to do what is right in defense of the republic?


thebulwark--2020-10-02--What Trump Said and What the Proud Boys Heard

When future historians try to decipher what happened in the 2020 presidential election , they will cast their gaze upon two unforced errors that , as we examine it now , could cost Donald Trump the second term he so desires .
Both occurred within a week of each other , and both point to Trump ’ s unraveling mental state .
They are harbingers of doom .
Hopefully enough Americans are still in possession of their cognitive abilities to recognize and avert the doom .
When I asked President Trump last week , he would not commit to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election .
And this week , he would not denounce white supremacy when asked to do so in a debate .
Both questions could have been easily answered by any middle schooler who has taken a civics class—or indeed any rational human being with a modicum of understanding of how our government and society work .
Trump apparently is neither rational nor capable of passing an eighth-grade American history test .
Both of these unforced errors took place live on a national stage in front of television cameras .
The first occurred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the second on the dais in Cleveland during a presidential debate that our future historians will find filed away under the title of “ Worst Ever.
” In the case of his first unforced error , Trump apologists say I confused him when I asked , “ Win , lose , or draw in this election , will you commit here today for a peaceful transferal of power after the election ?
” Those of us who have our frontal lobes know that Trump fumbled the answer because he simply can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He doesn ’ t even want to count all the votes—only the votes that count for him .
And he certainly doesn ’ t want to give up the White House .
But the second question is even more problematic for Trump .
Not only did the president ’ s statement—which specifically addressed the Proud Boys—encourage them , it can be said the president helped to brand them by writing their new slogan : “ Stand Back and Stand By.
” The day after this gaffe the president tried to walk back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where he said , “ They have to stand down .
.
.
let law enforcement do the work .
Now Antifa is a real problem .
.
.
” This time , Trump ’ s apologists , including campaign spokesman Hogan Gidley , claimed the president actually had condemned white supremacy during the debate , and of course again on the South Lawn .
But Gidley and the Trump administration are missing an important point .
Even if what they say is true , and it isn ’ t , the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everywhere , including the controversial Proud Boys ( who have ties to Roger Stone ) did not see Trump ’ s declaration in the debate as condemnation .
They took it as affirmation .
That ’ s the trouble .
Whatever he meant , the terrorists heard loud and clear “ Saddle up .
We ’ re about to ride.
” And even when he finally condemned the Proud Boys on Sean Hannity ’ s show on Thursday night—fully two days after the debate—the group ’ s leader took the news with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be called… The CondemnedBoys !
!
!
” ) This is what happens when you cozy up to extremists simply because they like you .
Trump has similar problems with QAnon conspiracy theorists because he also said in the Brady Briefing Room that he has no problem with them—because they like him .
But Trump knows he needs to cobble together a coalition to get re-elected and apparently he ’ s down to terrorists , extremists , and loudmouth cousins who drink too much at a neighborhood barbecue and have to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is why Trump encourages the fringe elements of society and elevates them to importance .
It is why he retweets reprobates and cartoon villains .
They profess their love for him and he gives them shelter from the storm and the attention they crave .
In some cases he doesn ’ t even know or care what they stand for .
He can stoop to embrace them as long as they bring attention and votes .
The members of the Flat Earth Society , climate change deniers , those who think George Soros @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ogles volcano virgins ( apologies to G.B .
Trudeau ) are welcome under Trump ’ s crooked tent .
Turning up the volume on the factually and scientifically challenged lummoxes who still drag their knuckles through their self-made mental swamps only has the rest of us wondering if we ’ re in some modern version of the Middle Ages .
If we are , and if we ’ re lucky , then perhaps the November election will be looked upon by future historians as the beginning of a new Age of Enlightenment .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ will have to try and unravel how it is as a culture we ’ ve come to deny science , math , and facts in favor of a clownish narrative that benefits only the idly rich .
So yes , future historians will have a lot to deal with , but right now it ’ s our job to make sure they have a job and our culture doesn ’ t disappear in the sands of time like the fallen Roman Empire .

When future historians try to decipher what happened in the 2020 presidential election, they will cast their gaze upon two unforced errors that, as we examine it now, could cost Donald Trump the second term he so desires.
Both occurred within a week of each other, and both point to Trump’s unraveling mental state. They are harbingers of doom. Hopefully enough Americans are still in possession of their cognitive abilities to recognize and avert the doom.
When I asked President Trump last week, he would not commit to a peaceful transfer of power should he lose the election. And this week, he would not denounce white supremacy when asked to do so in a debate.
Both questions could have been easily answered by any middle schooler who has taken a civics class—or indeed any rational human being with a modicum of understanding of how our government and society work.
Trump apparently is neither rational nor capable of passing an eighth-grade American history test.
Both of these unforced errors took place live on a national stage in front of television cameras.
The first occurred in the White House Brady Briefing Room, the second on the dais in Cleveland during a presidential debate that our future historians will find filed away under the title of “Worst Ever.”
In the case of his first unforced error, Trump apologists say I confused him when I asked, “Win, lose, or draw in this election, will you commit here today for a peaceful transferal of power after the election?” Those of us who have our frontal lobes know that Trump fumbled the answer because he simply cannot commit to a peaceful transfer of power. He doesn’t even want to count all the votes—only the votes that count for him. And he certainly doesn’t want to give up the White House.
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…
But the second question is even more problematic for Trump. Not only did the president’s statement—which specifically addressed the Proud Boys—encourage them, it can be said the president helped to brand them by writing their new slogan: “Stand Back and Stand By.”
The day after this gaffe the president tried to walk back his statement at a South Lawn departure where he said, “They have to stand down . . . let law enforcement do the work. Now Antifa is a real problem . . .”
This time, Trump’s apologists, including campaign spokesman Hogan Gidley, claimed the president actually had condemned white supremacy during the debate, and of course again on the South Lawn. But Gidley and the Trump administration are missing an important point.
Even if what they say is true, and it isn’t, the Trump camp has to acknowledge that white supremacists everywhere, including the controversial Proud Boys (who have ties to Roger Stone) did not see Trump’s declaration in the debate as condemnation. They took it as affirmation. That’s the trouble. Whatever he meant, the terrorists heard loud and clear “Saddle up. We’re about to ride.”
And even when he finally condemned the Proud Boys on Sean Hannity’s show on Thursday night—fully two days after the debate—the group’s leader took the news with a wink. (“We are now to be called… The CondemnedBoys!!!”)
This is what happens when you cozy up to extremists simply because they like you. Trump has similar problems with QAnon conspiracy theorists because he also said in the Brady Briefing Room that he has no problem with them—because they like him.
But Trump knows he needs to cobble together a coalition to get re-elected and apparently he’s down to terrorists, extremists, and loudmouth cousins who drink too much at a neighborhood barbecue and have to be driven home in an Uber.
This is why Trump encourages the fringe elements of society and elevates them to importance. It is why he retweets reprobates and cartoon villains. They profess their love for him and he gives them shelter from the storm and the attention they crave. In some cases he doesn’t even know or care what they stand for. He can stoop to embrace them as long as they bring attention and votes.
The members of the Flat Earth Society, climate change deniers, those who think George Soros drinks the blood of the young and ogles volcano virgins (apologies to G.B. Trudeau) are welcome under Trump’s crooked tent.
Turning up the volume on the factually and scientifically challenged lummoxes who still drag their knuckles through their self-made mental swamps only has the rest of us wondering if we’re in some modern version of the Middle Ages.
If we are, and if we’re lucky, then perhaps the November election will be looked upon by future historians as the beginning of a new Age of Enlightenment. Whatever happens, in the future historians will have to try and unravel how it is as a culture we’ve come to deny science, math, and facts in favor of a clownish narrative that benefits only the idly rich.
So yes, future historians will have a lot to deal with, but right now it’s our job to make sure they have a job and our culture doesn’t disappear in the sands of time like the fallen Roman Empire.


thebulwark--2020-10-02--Why RBG as Icon Should Bother Everyone

Why RBG as Icon Should Bother Everyone

In the aftermath of Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s death , two images of mourners helped me understand how we got into our precarious predicament—and why extricating our polity won ’ t be easy .
The first was a video of RBG ’ s trainer doing pushups next to her casket as she lay in state , video of which went viral on Twitter .
With this video came wistful sighs highlighting her claim that he was the most important person in her life , a joke that feeds into the bifurcated idea of RBG that made her so appealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t just a wizened , and wise , tiny little intellectual slapping people down from the bench ; she ’ s also a badass , pumping iron and running laps , Ah-nuld in miniature , a physical and intellectual force .
It ’ s this amusing contradiction that helped launch RBG into meme-dom .
From books and t-shirts celebrating the “ Notorious RBG ” to Kate McKinnon ’ s hilarious treatment of the aged justice on Saturday Night Live , Ruth Bader Ginsburg transcended her status as a Supreme Court justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Her status as an icon that may have ended up being her , and the Democratic party ’ s , undoing in this whole affair .
She seems to have bought into her own mythology , apparently believing the perfect sendoff would come by being replaced by the first woman president : Hillary Clinton .
After her passing , Barack Obama apparatchiks waited a respectful amount of time before kibitzing with the New York Times about how it definitely was not former president Obama ’ s fault she died while Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lunch to convince her to step down while Democrats controlled the presidency and the Senate .
That way , they could replace the elderly cancer survivor with little muss or fuss .
Unfortunately , RBG had bought into her own myth by this point .
“ She made it clear in several interviews that she had no intention to retire ; widowed in 2010 , she was devoted to her work , determined to have a voice and appreciated the platform her celebrity offered her as an icon liberals liked to call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Susan Dominus and Charlie Savage reported in the Times .
Icons can only exist if they have a church to sanctify them , however , and that brings me to the second image that can help us understand how , exactly , we got here .
It ’ s a pretty simple photo—in a film , we might think of it as a medium establishing shot—of five women .
Four of them have their hands against a door and we are informed that they are praying .
The fifth lays on the ground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dearly departed .
The door these women are laying their hands upon in prayer is the Supreme Court ’ s .
Their supplications are offered up in the hope that Amy Coney Barrett will be confirmed by the Senate before the 2020 election comes to a close .
The wailing woman is a mourner of the Notorious RBG , recently departed saint of the Court .
When future historians discuss the tumultuous period of the late American republic in their graduate seminars , I hope a whole class is devoted to this image @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so many unstated-but-obvious positions loaded into this one silent frame .
The first being that we have imparted far too much importance to the Supreme Court .
Its status as ultimate arbiter over what the Constitution allows and doesn ’ t allow gives the nine unelected lifetime appointees an undue amount of power that always strikes those out of power as unseemly and those in power as obviously just—infallible , in fact .
In so doing , the Court has fundamentally short-circuited the democratic process by removing too many issues from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election into a proxy battle over who will dominate two full branches of government rather than one .
And those are the only two branches that really matter anymore , given congressional deadlock .
Senate rules combined with House districts designed to make seats safe for one party or the other thus ensuring polarizing primaries have rendered Congress sclerotic .
The Supreme Court acts as a sort of superlegislature now , its pronouncements expected to be treated as the word of God in our fractured political landscape .
As such , it makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ACB pray at the Temple of Justice next to the mourners of the Notorious RBG , pop icon .
This isn ’ t a political struggle so much as a religious one , a fight over who gets to control the true church of the state .
And religious quarrels are never settled cleanly .

In the aftermath of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, two images of mourners helped me understand how we got into our precarious predicament—and why extricating our polity won’t be easy.
The first was a video of RBG’s trainer doing pushups next to her casket as she lay in state, video of which went viral on Twitter.
Push ups for RBG pic.twitter.com/IC2pxlx97G — Graham MacGillivray (@GWMacGillivray) September 25, 2020
With this video came wistful sighs highlighting her claim that he was the most important person in her life, a joke that feeds into the bifurcated idea of RBG that made her so appealing to the irony-soaked Internet set. She wasn’t just a wizened, and wise, tiny little intellectual slapping people down from the bench; she’s also a badass, pumping iron and running laps, Ah-nuld in miniature, a physical and intellectual force.
It’s this amusing contradiction that helped launch RBG into meme-dom. From books and t-shirts celebrating the “Notorious RBG” to Kate McKinnon’s hilarious treatment of the aged justice on Saturday Night Live, Ruth Bader Ginsburg transcended her status as a Supreme Court justice and became something more: an icon.
Her status as an icon that may have ended up being her, and the Democratic party’s, undoing in this whole affair. She seems to have bought into her own mythology, apparently believing the perfect sendoff would come by being replaced by the first woman president: Hillary Clinton.
Oops.
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 her passing, Barack Obama apparatchiks waited a respectful amount of time before kibitzing with the New York Times about how it definitely was not former president Obama’s fault she died while Trump is in office; the then-president tried during a lunch to convince her to step down while Democrats controlled the presidency and the Senate. That way, they could replace the elderly cancer survivor with little muss or fuss. Unfortunately, RBG had bought into her own myth by this point.
“She made it clear in several interviews that she had no intention to retire; widowed in 2010, she was devoted to her work, determined to have a voice and appreciated the platform her celebrity offered her as an icon liberals liked to call the ‘Notorious R.B.G.,’” Susan Dominus and Charlie Savage reported in the Times.
Icons can only exist if they have a church to sanctify them, however, and that brings me to the second image that can help us understand how, exactly, we got here. It’s a pretty simple photo—in a film, we might think of it as a medium establishing shot—of five women. Four of them have their hands against a door and we are informed that they are praying. The fifth lays on the ground, wailing tears of agony about the dearly departed.
The door these women are laying their hands upon in prayer is the Supreme Court’s. Their supplications are offered up in the hope that Amy Coney Barrett will be confirmed by the Senate before the 2020 election comes to a close. The wailing woman is a mourner of the Notorious RBG, recently departed saint of the Court.
Conservative women, who support Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court, pray while touching the doors of the Court as Jacquelyn Booth cries on the ground, mourning the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. pic.twitter.com/5uTjnklLVP — Erin Schaff (@erinschaff) September 26, 2020
When future historians discuss the tumultuous period of the late American republic in their graduate seminars, I hope a whole class is devoted to this image. There is so much to unpack, so many unstated-but-obvious positions loaded into this one silent frame.
The first being that we have imparted far too much importance to the Supreme Court. Its status as ultimate arbiter over what the Constitution allows and doesn’t allow gives the nine unelected lifetime appointees an undue amount of power that always strikes those out of power as unseemly and those in power as obviously just—infallible, in fact. In so doing, the Court has fundamentally short-circuited the democratic process by removing too many issues from the public debate altogether and turned every presidential election into a proxy battle over who will dominate two full branches of government rather than one.
And those are the only two branches that really matter anymore, given congressional deadlock. Senate rules combined with House districts designed to make seats safe for one party or the other thus ensuring polarizing primaries have rendered Congress sclerotic. The Supreme Court acts as a sort of superlegislature now, its pronouncements expected to be treated as the word of God in our fractured political landscape.
As such, it makes perfect sense that devotees of the Glorious ACB pray at the Temple of Justice next to the mourners of the Notorious RBG, pop icon. This isn’t a political struggle so much as a religious one, a fight over who gets to control the true church of the state.
And religious quarrels are never settled cleanly.