Author: wrongologist

About That Debate

The Daily Escape:

Rainstorm, Blue Ridge Mountains, Blue Ridge Parkway, NC – June 2024 photo by David R. Robinson

It’s a new day and we’re trying to pick up the pieces after what happened in last night’s debate between Trump and Biden. Here’s a recap by Rick Wilson, Lincoln Project co-founder:

“It’s late June, and Joe Biden went on stage with a felon who tore down America, told 500 sundry lies, bragged about ending Roe v. Wade, defended January 6th, denied having sex with a porn star, and promised to betray Ukraine. And Joe Biden had a bad, bad night.”

Biden stumbled over his words, and Trump’s barrage of lies went unchecked. On Twitter and on cable news, the political pundit class had a collective freakout. From political journalist John Nichols:

“CNN is illustrating how a ‘debate’ when the moderators reject the basic responsibility of fact-checking in real time, and refuse to challenge blatantly false statements, is not a debate. It’s…chaos where lies are given equal footing with the truth.”

When Wrongo heard that CNN wouldn’t be doing any real time fact-checking on Thursday afternoon, it was clear how the debate would go. Only now, the Democrats and Biden can’t tell people they didn’t see what they saw.

A lot of media people are SHOCKED at Biden’s performance. Dem consultants see that there is blood in the water and the sharks are circling. So many senior Dems are saying that Biden should step aside. The options are pretty simple:

  1. Convince Biden to drop out of the race.
  2. Stick with Biden and hope his debate performance doesn’t turn many voters away.

There are LOTS of Dems who want option #1. But it will be impossible to get Biden to drop out if he doesn’t want to do it. And there are NO signs that he wants to it.

Any plan to ease Biden out would likely require the involvement of Jill Biden and Barack Obama, along with assembling a pre-fab, pre-convention ticket acceptable to the Party’s delegates.

Otherwise, it would be a free-for-all. Even with Biden and Obama’s backing, that’s a huge undertaking with a 10 out of 10 degree of difficulty. It also entails massive risk with the convention delegates, the public, along with the challenges of spinning up a presidential campaign from a standing start. No Democrat on the sidelines today has the national organization in place to make a credible presidential run. They would have to take over the Biden campaign’s assets and move on from there.

Get a grip: One candidate on the stage lied from start to finish. And no one is suggesting that he drop out.

The media has been on the verge of burying Biden because of his age for months. That was never more true than on CNN on Thursday night, where their coifed pundit-moderators ignored the elephants in the room – that one of the two men standing at the podiums was a convicted felon, the leader of a coup attempt, an alleged thief of national security documents, who was earlier this year found liable in a civil court for rape, and has promised to usher in a vengeful authoritarian regime if he returns to office.

Instead, they launched the debate with their usual dead horse: the deficit and taxes. More from Wilson:

“History is replete with bad debate performances: Clinton’s first outing in 1992, George W. Bush’s Boston groaner (I was there, and it was awful), and Obama’s first showing against John McCain. Debates matter until they don’t, but they matter most to the chattering and online classes.”

All of those debaters won the presidency.

Biden is still overwhelmingly likely to run for reelection; he’s still is in a position to be re-elected. Biden, even diminished, is more right than wrong, that at this point he represents the Party’s best chance to keep Trump out of the Oval Office.

Biden did the best he could with an opponent who is unconstrained by the truth and moderators perfectly willing to allow Trump to lie. Unfortunately while Biden started weak, he finished stronger, while Trump started strong, he finished weak.

But Wrongo assumes that many people stopped watching after the first break.

So while some Democrats are in a panic about Joe Biden’s debate performance, we need to get a clue and check in with reality. It was probable that Biden was unwell and fatigued. Imagine how well you’d perform under the same conditions, regardless of your age.

Swallow your panic and get to work, doing whatever you can. Because for many Americans, this is personal. Your guy had a bad night. But the sun is out today. Move forward. Stop being afraid of your own shadow. We’re running against an insurrectionist and a felon. Biden is old. Stop being afraid of it.

We’re having our Saturday Soother on Friday this week, for the obvious reason that it’s necessary. On the Fields of Wrong, a very large tree fell across the long driveway of two of our neighbors. It says a lot that five or so of the men in the neighborhood worked together over two days to reopen the road. It did require borrowed and rented capital equipment: a scoop loader, a tractor and a wood chipper.

It’s going to be a cooler and drier Friday and Saturday in Connecticut. So let’s grab a seat in the shade and do our best not to think about the Supreme Court’s continuing efforts to end democracy as we used to know it. Try instead to take a few moments to gather ourselves for the slings and arrows of the week to come.

Start by listening to “Uncle John’s Band” by the Grateful Dead. It started appearing in their concerts in1969. The band recorded it for their 1970 album “Workingman’s Dead”. It was written by guitarist Jerry Garcia and lyricist Robert Hunter. The tune was played more than 330 times by the Dead and the lyrics seem to Wrongo to be valuable today:

Sample Lyrics:

Well, the first days are the hardest days
Don’t you worry anymore
‘Cause when life looks like Easy Street
There is danger at your door
Think this through with me
Let me know your mind
Woah, oh, what I want to know
Is are you kind?

Goddamn, well, I declare
Have you seen the like?
Their walls are built of cannonballs
Their motto is “don’t tread on me”

Come hear Uncle John’s band
Playing to the tide
Come with me, or go alone
He’s come to take his children home

Facebooklinkedinrss

Immigration Policy And The Debate

The Daily Escape:

Rustic barn at sunset, Sherman, CT – June 2024 photo by Dave King Photography

Tonight’s presidential debate is sure to include words and misinformation about US immigration, along with heaps of emotion. Trump and the GOP have made their opposition to immigration a defining political message. If he’s elected again, he wants to round up millions of the undocumented, then detain and deport them. Comments about “s**thole countries,” and nations sending “rapists” and “murderers” to the border were hallmarks of Trump’s first term. He’s built on that this time around.

Biden OTOH, has taken two executive actions on immigration recently. First, it was restricting the number of migrants who can request asylum in a given day. And then he announced a new measure to shield unauthorized immigrants who are married to US citizens from deportation.

Biden’s moves offer something for voters who think border enforcement is too lenient as well as for those who support helping immigrants who live in the US illegally. Since Biden took office, he’s used a mix of policies to restrict illegal immigration and offer help to people already in the country.

Republicans say Biden’s border policies have made the southern border like Swiss cheese. Republicans think of immigration as a problem of enforcement and domestic security (or at least the great political hay they can make of harping about enforcement and security).

We all know that despite the theater, America’s immigration system needs reform in areas including refugee status, skilled-worker visas, and new immigration quotas that have been out of date for decades.

What’s little known is that while the surge of illegal migration has soaked up America’s and the Department of Homeland Security’s attention and resources, The Economist says that legal immigration has rebounded.

Under Trump, we had the longest continuous decline in new green cards issued since the 1990s. The number of refugees admitted annually fell to its lowest level in the resettlement program’s history. Denial rates for skilled-worker visas rocketed. Later, the Covid pandemic closed consulates abroad.

But legal migration is on the rise again. Nearly 1.2 million green cards were issued in the FY 2023, a 68% increase from 2020. The government is projected to resettle at least 90,000 refugees in 2024, far more than the 11,000 or so settled during the pandemic.

Non-immigrant visas, the kind that temporary workers and students get, have also grown. The H-1B lottery system, which allots visas to high-skilled, mostly tech, workers, is a lottery in which hundreds of thousands of applicants compete for just 85,000 spots. Many workers apply several times in the hope of improving their chances of being selected.

Although more students are coming to study in America, many more are also being denied visas. The same factors encouraging border crossings ̶   a hot labor market, violence and instability at home, and a more welcoming administration ̶   are convincing young people abroad to try to get their education in America.

What has all this meant for the workforce? At its peak in 2021, the US had a shortfall of foreign-born workers of about two million people. That’s now disappeared, partly due to the people who came across the southern border and found work. But there also has been a rebound of college-educated legal migrants. Here’s a chart from The Economist:

Today, the US has returned to the trend line of the 2010’s for foreign-born workforce. Importantly, about 45% of recent immigrants have a college degree, compared with 38% of native-born Americans and 33% of those who arrived in the 1990s.

All of this is in spite of the creaky immigration system itself. Congress has repeatedly failed to create new legal pathways for migrants, to increase caps for limited visas and to make the system more responsive to the needs of America’s economy.

The result is a monumental backlog for handling asylum cases at the southern border, and for processing legal immigrants and green card applicants. This means it takes years to adjudicate an asylum claim in the US, and it means long waiting times at our overseas consulates.

Importantly, Americans do not share the Republican view of not allowing immigration reform. While most Americans support more deportations and the border wall, they approve of immigration overall. Some 61% of registered voters surveyed by Pew in April maintain that America’s openness to people from elsewhere is essential to its national character.

But it’s an election year. So it’s doubtful that any of these facts will be on display at the debate. And as Hillary Clinton said in the NYT:

“It is a waste of time to try to refute…Trump’s arguments like in a normal debate. It’s nearly impossible to identify what his arguments even are. He starts with nonsense and then digresses into blather. This has gotten only worse in the years since we debated. I was not surprised that after a recent meeting, several chief executives said that Mr. Trump, as one journalist described it, ‘could not keep a straight thought’ and was ‘all over the map.’”

What’s the best we can hope for from the debate? That CNN’s moderators rise above the usual script, that they avoid normalizing the crackpot who’s using his nonsense, deceit and lies to be seen as equal to his opponent. If they check the crackpot, there’s a chance that the debate won’t be a train wreck caused by what we’ve come to see as “poor moderation.”

Will CNN check the crackpot, or will we be forced to again thread our way through the cacophony?

Facebooklinkedinrss

Trump’s Running Mate

The Daily Escape:

Columbia River Gorge with Crown Point center right, WA – June 2024 photo by David Leahy Photography

Should we care who Trump selects as his running mate? NBC News now indicates the short list has been reduced to North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, Ohio Senator JD Vance, and Florida Senator Marco Rubio. And Trump says he’s made the decision on who will be his next VP.

That seems to mean that New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik and South Carolina Senator Tim Scott haven’t made the cut.

Sen. Rubio has made the cut, but faces a Constitutional issue, as it’s Constitutionally impermissible for Trump and Rubio to form a ticket if they are both residents of the same state (in their case, Florida). NBC News says that the campaign recognizes the hurdle this presents, but is of two minds about it. On the one hand, it quotes a Florida Republican operative saying:

“…if the residency thing was not an issue, I’m fairly certain Marco would be the guy.”

On the other hand, a source who has spoken with Trump about the running mate search is quoted as saying:

“…the residency factor is an issue that is easy to fix as long as Rubio relocates.”

This raises an interesting question about the residency requirements for a US Senator. It turns out that they must be a resident of the state they seek to represent at the time of the election, but not necessarily thereafter. So Rubio could move away from Florida without having to surrender his Senate seat. But he would have to re-establish Florida residency to seek a new term as Senator.

If he were the selected VP, whatever effort he made to establish residency in a new state between now and November would certainly be challenged in court. But who knows if the Supreme Court would: a) hear the case; or b) decide in Rubio’s favor?

One reason Wrongo hasn’t given much thought to who Trump will choose is that it’s unlikely to make that much of a difference. The contest isn’t between VP Kamala Harris and one of these three Trump boys. It’s going to be a yes or no vote on Trump.

Usually the VP selection helps the presidential candidate in his/her home state. In the case of Rubio and Vance, they’d potentially help, but Trump is already heavily favored to win in both Florida and Ohio. And if he needs a boost from Bergum to win in North Dakota, he’s done before the race begins.

Rubio might provide Trump a boost with certain Latinos. The base will love Vance and they’ll tolerate Burgum. So the choice probably comes down to who is more likely to break laws if Trump asks them to.

None of these candidates should strike fear in the heart of the Biden campaign. Vance would be the worst simply because choosing him doubles down on white nationalism. Rubio has dealt in a serious way with the agencies of the executive branch for long enough that he could serve as a fill-in president without falling on his face. Maybe the same is true of Burgum, who has relevant executive experience from running North Dakota.

Time to wake up America! The presidential election is ramping up, just when you would prefer to go on vacation! Sadly, Biden needs whatever you can do to help turn out voters, and to help in swing states in particular.

To help you wake up, watch and listen to Willow Smith and her group perform “Symptom of Life” for NPR’s Tiny Desk Concert. She’s the daughter of Will Smith, but she’s got enough talent that you’re going to forget about her family tree.

And yes, you’re counting meters in seven here. The tune alternates between a 7/4 verse and a 4/4 chorus, while sounding fresh and natural:

The concert is nearly 20 minutes long. Wrongo picked the first tune, but you can listen to all of them or a few if they tickle you fancy. Pop music could sound a bit like jazz in a few years.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Cartoons Of The Week – June 23, 2024

Wrongo was asked if he thought the presidential debate would be watched by many Americans. Here’s a report by CivicScience about the expected viewer demographics that show many will be tuning in:

“Exclusive data from CivicScience reveal that just over 4-in-10 US adults plan to watch or listen to some or all of the debate as it broadcasts live on CNN next week, with an additional 12% intending to catch the debate after it airs. That brings total intended viewership to just over half of the population. The other half is split between those who will be following coverage of the event in the news and those who don’t plan to follow the debate at all.”

Here’s CivicScience’s chart:

Note that there is zero data above for Independents or moderates. More from CivicScience:

  • Consumers who prefer to watch CNN for national news are the most likely to follow the debate live (59%), although Fox News viewers are not far behind (56%).
  • Wealthier earners ($100K or more yearly) are significantly more likely than lower-income earners ($50K or less yearly) to watch the live debate or follow the debate at all.
  • Americans who are concerned about inflation are twice as likely to tune into the live debate compared to those who are not concerned, ranking as the top election issue voters are following.

Less than a third of undecided voters (particularly younger ones) plan to watch the debate live, while a larger share will rely on social media clips and news coverage afterward. All that means is their perspective on the debate will be shaped by the people and outlets who curate their news for them. That’s the nature of politics today.

Younger audiences (under 35) are more likely than older adults to have cut the cord on cable for streaming, so they are the least likely (by a narrow margin) to watch the debate live. In fact, the percentage of the under-35 crowd who will watch or listen to the debate after it airs, or just plan to follow news about it instead, outnumbers those who plan to watch it live (see red dotted line box:

On to cartoons. Debate preview:

Should the GOP maybe reconsider their Biden attacks?

Two sides of the same political coin:

Supremes go off the deep end:

A mind is a terrible thing to waste:

The Olympics are coming. This might happen:

Remember what the words really mean:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Scattered Thoughts On Saturday

The Daily Escape:

Lupine, Crested Butte, CO – June 2024 photo by Lucian Manthey Photography

We  just experienced Wrongo’s least favorite day of the year, the summer solstice. Now, the days grow shorter until December, and Wrongo will soon begin to mourn the loss of daylight. Adding to that, there’s the first presidential debate next Thursday, in which each candidate will try to make the election about which of the two of them is worse for the country.

We’re now entering the reality phase of the campaign. Over the next 10 weeks we will have 2 debates, the Trump sentencing, and the two presidential nominating conventions. Voters are beginning to check in now on how things are going. Wrongo expects that these unusually early presidential debates will draw large audiences that include a substantial swath of Americans who haven’t yet thought much about who to vote for in the upcoming election.

This is a group who can be significantly influenced by Biden’s performance.

Another thing for voters to note is that one donor, Timothy Mellon, heir to Andrew Mellon’s banking fortune, gave $50 million to the Trump campaign the day after Trump was found guilty of fraud in NY. Mellon had previously donated $25 million to super PACs for both RFK Jr. and Trump! That should prove to you that RFK Jr. is simply a stalking horse for the Trump campaign.

And think about what we had heard in the days after Trump was convicted: The media reported that Trump raised $52.8 million in the 24 hours after his guilty verdicts. But we now know that $50 million came from a single donor, meaning that Trump raised only $2.8 million from others in those early hours after the verdicts.

It’s hard to imagine that RFK Jr.’s candidacy would have be viable except for Mellon’s $25 million donation. In a sense, a single donor is keeping RFK Jr.’s campaign afloat. If anyone believed that RFK Jr. was a legitimate candidate, it is difficult to continue thinking that now after the revelation of Mellon’s funding.

Turning to the Supreme Court’s parsimonious trickle of decisions, on Friday, they upheld a gun control law intended to protect domestic violence victims. From Mark Sherman of the AP:

“The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal gun control law that is intended to protect victims of domestic violence…Justice Clarence Thomas, the author of the 2022 ruling, dissented….”

More from Mike Pesoli:

“In their first Second Amendment case since they expanded gun rights in 2022, the justices ruled 8-1 in favor of a 1994 ban on firearms for people under restraining orders to stay away from their spouses or partners.”

Michael J. Stern had the most appropriate comment:

“Of course Clarence Thomas wrote a dissent saying he supports the rights of domestic abusers to possess guns. The man is evil to the core.”

That’s enough to think about as we start the weekend. It’s time for our Saturday Soother, when we try mightily to leave the cascade of news behind and center ourselves for another rock ‘em sock ‘em week to come. Here at the Mansion of Wrong, we have two sets of guests visiting. One from Australia and the other from Pennsylvania. It has been sunny and very hot in Connecticut, but we’ve been able to get in some yard work in the early mornings, before it turns into heat stroke weather.

Let’s take a moment to remember the career of Donald Sutherland. At the risk of sounding like an old mossback, Sutherland was part of that heyday of films that relied on actors and stories instead of special effects. Catch some to the retrospectives that are sure to be televised in the coming days.

Now, brew up a mug of Comfort Zone Coffee from Sacramento’s Camellia Coffee Roasters, said to have flavors of semi-sweet chocolate and almonds ($18/12 oz.). Then grab a seat in an air-conditioned space, and watch and listen to “Nuages” (Clouds) from the “Nocturnes” by Claude Debussy.

Here it is performed by the Cleveland Orchestra, conducted by Pierre Boulez in 1993. The first complete performance of the Nocturnes was in Paris on 27 October 1901. There are three movements – “Nuages” (Clouds), “Fêtes” (Festivals), “Sirènes” (Sirens) and each presents a uniquely scored sound world. “Nuages” is the only cloudscape in Debussy’s music. Watch it and relax:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Those Remaining Supreme Court Decisions

The Daily Escape:

Dinghies and roses, Kennebunkport, ME – June 2024 photo by Eric Storm Photo

Glad to be back! Wrongo and Ms. Right spent a long weekend with family in Napa, CA.

This week should see many more decisions announced by the Supreme Court. The National Review has the remaining lineup:

“There should be 21 opinions remaining because there are 23 cases left, including two pairs (the Chevron challenges and the Florida and Texas social-media laws) that are consolidated and likely to be decided together. We will likely get at least five or six opinions this week, maybe as many as nine. The Court will need to schedule more opinion days next week, probably at least three of them if it intends to wrap up the term by the end of the week; otherwise, it could spill over to July 1 or 2.”

And NR’s Dan McLaughlin gives us a scorecard of which justices have written this term’s opinions:

“…Justice Sonia Sotomayor has thus far published seven opinions representing the decision of the Court, and Justice Clarence Thomas six; it will be surprising if we get more from Thomas and more surprising if we get more from Sotomayor. By contrast, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch have each published just two opinions with the decision of the Court, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett three; they will likely have more….There’s only one case left from…November — Rahimi, the Second Amendment case — and the likeliest author of that opinion is either Roberts or Elena Kagan, neither of whom have published an opinion for the Court from the cases argued in that sitting.”

So much for analyzing the lineup. The real issue remaining is what the Supremes are going to do with the presidential immunity case, Trump v. United States. It’s taken so long to hear from the Court on this that many are suspicious. From Leah Litman at the NYT: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“For those looking for the hidden hand of politics in what the Supreme Court does, there’s plenty of reason for suspicion on Donald Trump’s as-yet-decided immunity case given its urgency. There are, of course, explanations that have nothing to do with politics for why a ruling still hasn’t been issued. But the reasons to think something is rotten at the court are impossible to ignore.”

Litman reminds us of the history of the case:

“On Feb. 28, the justices agreed to hear…Trump’s claim that he is immune from prosecution on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election. The court scheduled oral arguments in the case for the end of April. That eight-week interval is much quicker than the ordinary Supreme Court briefing process, which usually extends for at least 10 weeks. But it’s considerably more drawn out than the schedule the court established earlier this year on a challenge from Colorado after that state took Mr. Trump off its presidential primary ballot. The court agreed to hear arguments on the case a mere month after accepting it and issued its decision less than a month after the argument. Mr. Trump prevailed, 9-0.”

Now nearly two months have passed since the immunity case was argued , long enough to remove the possibility of either the stolen documents case or the Jan. 6 case even being started before the November election. More from Litman:

“…indeed, at this point, even if the court rules that Mr. Trump has limited or no immunity, it is unlikely a verdict will be delivered before the election.”

FYI, the Nixon tapes case was decided 16 days after oral argument. Michael Podhorzer calls the decision delay election interference:

“By shielding Donald Trump from standing trial before a jury in two of his felony cases, Trump’s three appointments to the Supreme Court, along with the even more MAGA Justices Alito and Thomas and Judge Aileen Cannon, have already irreparably interfered in the 2024 election.”

But, according to Podhorzer, the Supreme Court’s actions have actually been worse than that:

“At no point since World War II has there been a 5-4 partisan ruling to make elections more democratic – not to expand voting rights, limit campaign finance, or constrain gerrymandering.”

He also reminds us that the problem started with Bush v. Gore:

“Beginning with Bush v. Gore, on at least a dozen occasions, SCOTUS has radically altered election law on a partisan 5-4 or 6-3 basis – often overriding bipartisan legislation enacted by Congress, and often relying on spurious facts or questions not even presented in the cases.”

Podhorzer includes the following graph showing the number of important election-related rulings each Court made, broken down by the ideology of the justices. The dark blue represents liberal consensus rulings; the dark red represents conservative rulings where the majority consisted only of Republican nominees:

Podhorzer closes with a very interesting analysis of how the Court has been hijacked by the Federalist Society and the Conservative Right, such that recent appointments to the Supreme Court have not reflected the demographics of the nation: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are the only five of the 116 justices to serve on the Supreme Court to have been confirmed by senators representing less than one half of the US population. Only John Roberts among current GOP justices was confirmed by senators representing a clear majority of Americans.”

More: (emphasis by Wrongo)

“Furthermore, of all the justices to serve in the last century and a half, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett are the only ones to have been named by a president who did not win the popular vote.”

This is the tyranny of the minority, and yet another reason why the November election is so important: It’s likely that the next president will appoint at least two new justices.

And our way out of the currently tipped scales of justice by the growing corrupt autocratic cabal at the Supreme Court begins with Democratic voters understanding the stakes when they go to the polls.

Otherwise, we’re sleepwalking toward authoritarianism.

Facebooklinkedinrss

We Can’t Sit Back. We Must Become Activists

The Daily Escape:

Doll House, Bears Ears National Monument, UT – June 2024 photo by Robert Villegas

Over the weekend, Wrongo and Ms. Right along with friends of the blog Gloria R., Pat M. and David P. saw the play “Suffs” on Broadway, NYC.

The plot is that it’s 1913 and the women’s movement is trying to get women the right to vote. They are organized by the suffragists, not suffragettes (they call themselves “Suffs”). “Suffs” traces their heroic and occasionally dangerous campaign from 1913 through ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920. There’s a schism in the movement between the conservative old-line establishment Suffs, and a youthful breakaway group who want to emulate a similar movement in England, led in the US by Alice Paul who briefly spent time in the UK.

Paul and her group confront then-president Woodrow Wilson, who, after jailing the Paul group and allowing them to nearly die in a hunger strike, eventually tumbles to supporting the Suffs’ cause.

So much has changed since the passing of the 19th Amendment over a century ago, and yet this musical reminds us that we sometimes need to look back, in order to march into the future.

It was a sold out crowd. The audience was enthusiastic, and predominantly women. “Suffs” is a fantastic show that should be seen by anyone who loves Broadway, loves musicals, and needs a breath of hope in this bleak world. Like “Hamilton“, it invites us to learn something about the history of America. It’s a good show and it’s good for the world. Wrongo was emotional, remembering his time as an activist in the Civil Rights movement.

The show sets the stage early with the song, “Find A Way”:

How will we do it when it’s never been done?
How will we find the way where there isn’t one?

“Suffs” also makes us think about where we are today in America, along with what we can do to make it better. My lunch with the Broadway friends underlined that Democrats think it’s a scary time. Dan Pfeiffer wrote about how “Democrats are in a full-blown freakout over Biden”. Wrongo was the only one at lunch who thought that Biden has an excellent chance of winning in November. To paraphrase a line in the New Yorker by Lore Segal:

“The current situation is like two Democrats who are fighting a duel. On the count of ten, they turn and each shoots themselves in the foot”.

More from Pfeiffer:

“People are right to worry. This race is closer than it should be and the stakes could not be higher. It’s shocking that, after everything, Donald Trump is welcome in public let alone on the doorstep of returning to the White House. However, the level of defeatism among so many Democrats is unwarranted.”

Pfeiffer includes an interesting chart that shows detail from the NYT/Siena poll after the Trump verdict. In summary, people who voted previously, back Biden while Trump leads with the folks who vote less often, pay less attention to the news, and engage less frequently with politics:

Pfeiffer concludes by saying: (brackets by Wrongo)

“It is a challenge [for Biden] to tell his story and focus voters on the dangers of Trump. The presence of third party candidates and the divisions within the Democratic Party over Gaza make matters worse.”

Can you imagine how freaked out Democrats would be if our nominee had just been convicted of 34 crimes, found liable for sexual assault, had his business found guilty of financial fraud, favored banning abortion, and was on the unpopular side of almost every issue? Dems might say to voters:

Voter: “How is the game going?”

Dem Party: “We forfeited.”

Voter: “What! Why?”

Dem Party: “We were down two points at the start of the 4th quarter.”

So the question is, like it was for the Suffs, can we find a way where there isn’t one?

The answer is we can, if we really try. Wrongo thinks we have to become activists, not Party members. We need to be “warriors for democracy” or “freedom fighters” in service of defeating Trump and all MAGA candidates in November. From Simon Rosenberg:

“The Choice, The Contrast, Joe Biden Is A Good President – I’ve been thinking a lot this weekend about something I wrote to you about the other day – the idea of establishing a clear contrast in the election. It’s something I’ve been referring to as “the choice.” Central to my theory of 2024 is that regardless of where polling is today once the Biden campaign was able to bring “the choice” to voters in the battlegrounds Biden would gain and we would win…”

The new CBS/YouGov poll from last week confirms that making the election a referendum on Trump would be supported by Biden voters. Opposing Trump as a main motivation for voting for Biden has moved up by 7 points in the past 3 months:

In the same poll, Biden leads Trump among independent voters by two percentage points — 50% to 48%. It’s well within the margin of error, but importantly, it amounts to a 17 point swing for Biden in June compared to March’s polling.

Another thing Rosenberg points out is that polls around the world have been overestimating support for conservative candidates. The underperformance by Republicans in polls we’ve seen in the US also showed up in the European elections this weekend. Here’s The Economist: (Brackets by Wrongo)

“Consider the numbers. Ms. Le Pen’s [France] result is down on 2014, the previous European election. So is the Austrian Freedom Party and, more drastically, the Danish People’s Party and the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands…. Alternative for Germany [AFD] also disappointed…on 10.8% it only modestly increased its support from 2014 and did less well than in the 2017 Bundestag election. The Lega [Italy] has made big gains, but it too seems to have done worse than was generally expected…”

The polls were off in India too, by a lot. Narendra Modi’s polls said his Right-wing party would sweep back into power, but they barely held on, and needed to share power in order to form a new government.

One of Wrongo’s lunch companions brought up David Sedaris’s quote in the New Yorker about the “Choice”:

“To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. ‘Can I interest you in the chicken?’ she asks. ‘Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?’

To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.”

Wrongo often talks about Biden needing better messaging. He should for example, say what Mitt Romney keeps saying:

“I don’t want my President to be someone who committed sexual assault…”

Or fraud. How can Trump be seen as a “winner” or a strong leader when he’s a rapist, a fraudster, a traitor, and a felon? We’re just beginning to see the negative impact of the guilty verdict. And “rapist, fraudster, traitor, felon” will take away from Trump’s preferred framing that he’s strong and Biden is weak. Biden is 81 and Trump turns 78 this week. This isn’t about age — it’s about their records.

But, we can’t sit on our hands. We have to become activists. Few of the Suffs women believed what they did as individuals would make a difference.

Few of the Vietnam activists believed they would bring about change.

And the activists of the Civil Rights movement knew how it was nearly impossible to win the vote, right up until the time they did win it.

Facebooklinkedinrss

Cartoons Of The Week – June 9, 2024

(There will not be a Monday Wake-up Call column this week)

The WaPo wrote about a recently-retired DC Circuit judge David Tatel, who had some harsh words for the current justices on the Supreme Court. Tatel says that he stepped down from the US Court of Appeals in January in part because he was tired of having his work reviewed:

“….by a Supreme Court that seemed to hold in such low regard the principles to which I’ve dedicated my life….It was one thing to follow rulings I believed were wrong when they resulted from a judicial process I respected. It was quite another to be bound by the decisions of an institution I barely recognized.”

More:

“Tatel’s commentary is notable because he only recently left the bench, and because he prided himself on judicial restraint and for his friendships with judges nominated by Republican presidents while serving on the influential federal appeals court in DC.”

The majority of the justices on this Court have lost most, if not all, of their credibility. When you take money from vested interests with issues before the court, fly partisan flags on your homes and blame it on your wife, or when you state you will not overturn judicial precedent in your confirmation hearings, and then turn around and do just that – that is when you lose all credibility.

On to cartoons. It is difficult to know which is more stunning, the hypocrisy or the ignorance:

But let’s cast a vote for hypocrisy:

And still more hypocrisy:

Must keep our priorities in order:

If only:

Few of the WWII vets remain:

We may never again see this kind of heroism or putting country above self:

Facebooklinkedinrss

Can You Sell Just Five Percent Of Your Soul To Satan?

The Daily Escape:

Sunrise, Duck, NC – June 2024 photo by Nate Waddell

This should be a trivial story, except it isn’t. The WaPo reported this week that two former law enforcement officers who defended the US Capitol from rioters on Jan. 6 were jeered on Wednesday by state GOP lawmakers during a visit to the Pennsylvania’s House of Representatives:

“Former US Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and former sergeant Aquilino Gonell were introduced on the floor Wednesday as “heroes” by House Speaker Joanna McClinton (D) for having “bravely defended democracy in the United States Capitol against rioters and insurrection on January 6. As the two men — both of whom were injured by rioters on Jan. 6 — were introduced, the House floor descended into chaos. According to Democratic lawmakers, several GOP lawmakers hissed and booed, with a number of Republicans walking out of the chamber in protest.”

In this specific instance of MAGA misbehavior, two things are significant. First, the Pennsylvania House has 203 members split between 102 Democrats and 101 Republicans. This is very similar to the polarizing political split in the US House. Second, MAGAs acting out underscores just how polarizing the Jan. 6 insurrection has become with Republicans.

Once again, we’re seeing that MAGA Republican politicians support very few of the historical guardrails of our politics. Wrongo used to think that most Republicans were sincere in their beliefs in a certain moral standard; in fiscal responsibility, in honoring those who served in the military, and respecting police officers and other authority. But over time, every one of those supposed standards has been trampled, and while Trump has been the single biggest perpetrator, all of today’s the loudmouth grifters on the Right also share in this ignominy. It’s doubtful that any argument they make is in good faith.

The irony is that the MAGA Republicans readily abandoned their long-standing heritage of freedom, of democratic rule, of the fundamentals of law dating from the Magna Carta, and of British common law. They’ve replaced it all with the Ethos of Trump. Their patriotism, like Trump’s business prowess, is a sham. Its disposable if political advantage is on the line. See Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-AL) opinions on Ukraine if you doubt this.

And commitment to the principle of equal justice under law? That has been replaced with the saying: “For my friends, everything, for my enemies, the law.”

It’s nothing short of amazing how otherwise principled Republican politicians have flocked to Trump’s side. Their moves started slowly, but picked up steam during his presidency. Now they’re fully espousing whatever Trump says. And since his conviction in NY for fraud, it seems revenge is what’s driving them. Their willingness to shrug off a jury’s ruling and characterize it as illegitimate isn’t a new demonstration of their disregard for the rule of law. We’ve already seen this disregard in two impeachment trials, and in their disavowing any importance to the Jan. 6 attempted insurrection.

The MAGA movement has become a full-blown fascist enterprise before our eyes. The response we’re seeing to Trump’s conviction is bringing it more out in the open. Despite all of Trump’s bankruptcies, his greatest achievement in bankruptcy is in his completing  the moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party. But Republicans still hope to re-elect their convicted leader to the White House. Now a felon, Trump cannot possess a gun, but they want to hand him the US military and nuclear arsenal.

Republicans ought to know that there’s no such thing as selling five percent of your soul to Satan. More likely, the Devil is in a Rent-to-Own relationship with the GOP.

Some decent news for your Saturday. Post the Trump verdict, the NYT resurveyed the participants in its last poll of 2,000 people. They found a perceptible shift toward Biden. It was only a couple of points but what’s meaningful about it is who shifted. Nate Cohn wrote:

“Perhaps not surprisingly, the swings were relatively pronounced among young, nonwhite, less engaged and low-turnout voters. In fact, 20% of Mr. Trump’s previous supporters who are Black now say they back Mr. Biden.”

Overall, Mr. Trump retained 93% of voters who told the NYT that they backed him in a previous survey. But in a close election, losing 7% of your supporters could be decisive. More:

“A potentially crucial sliver of Mr. Trump’s former supporters — 3% — now told us they’ll back Mr. Biden, while another 4% say they’re now undecided.”

Also, Trump only leads Biden by 4 points in Florida in the latest poll of the state by Fox News:

Biden is just outside the margin of error, but both of them have slipped slightly since the 2020 election. It should give some faint hope to Democrats, since Florida also has a November ballot initiative that would restore abortion rights. If the Florida initiative passes, abortion will be legalized up to 24 weeks. If it gets anywhere near the 60% required to become law, Biden has a chance in Florida. Trump doesn’t have a path to 270 electoral votes without Florida!

All we have to do is vote.

As usual, we’re heading into the weekend with mostly bad and a smattering of good news. It’s now time for our Saturday Soother, where we unplug from the social media that’s trying to murder our brains, and instead, spend a few moments of relaxation. Here on the Fields of Wrong, we’re attempting to turn a ½ acre patch of our lawn into a meadow that will attract pollinators. So far, the grass is very tall, and there are occasional flowers in bloom. Wrongo planted a few more this week, disturbing the bluebirds in one of our nest boxes in the process.

It’s going to be sunny and warm in the Northeast, so grab a seat under a tree. Now, watch and listen to the late, great Jeff Beck perform “Nessun Dorma”, on the Fender guitar. It’s the wildly popular aria from Puccini’s opera “Turandot” played here at the Crossroads Blues festival in February 2010. Beck also performed “Nessun Dorma” on many other stages. Beck died in January 2023. At the time, a fellow musician said…”If you haven’t heard this version of Nessun Dorma you need to because it can move you to tears.” Strongly recommended:

Facebooklinkedinrss

The Pro-Abortion Political Movement

The Daily Escape:

Artichoke blossom, Imperial County, CA – June 2024 photo by Paulette Donnellon

The repealing of Roe v. Wade via the Dobbs decision has helped create a dynamic new political movement: A revolt of millions of Americans (predominantly women) who think government has no business inserting itself into a woman’s personal decisions. This is going to be an important factor in the 2024 elections as it was in 2022.

The Economist says that only:

“….ten thousand women eligible to vote in this November’s elections were born before women won the right to vote. In the century since then, American women have steadily accumulated rights. In the 1960s the contraceptive pill let women choose how many children they had. In the 1970s no-fault divorce laws and Roe v Wade gave women more choices that had been denied to their mothers. This progress seemed irreversible, and was often taken for granted.”

Then it was time for the Trump-appointed Conservative Supreme Court majority to do what it had been hired to do: Overturn a woman’s right to an abortion. More from The Economist:

“A third of American women aged 15-49 now live in states where abortion is either illegal or impossibly restricted.”

These people are leading the biggest voter rebellion since the Tea Party movement in 2009.

Surprisingly, the number of abortions in the US has risen slightly since the Court’s decision, mostly due to the availability of the drug Mifepristone, which can be prescribed by mail. Medication abortions now account for about 63 percent of pregnancy terminations nationwide. The legality of Mifepristone is also currently under review by the same six Conservative justices. That decision could come down as early as today, and certainly by early July.

What a country! Americans have grown used to the idea that every spring, we wait for 9 unelected government officials with lifetime jobs to tell us what kind of country we’re going to live in. Elections should serve this purpose, and we the people should be doing the telling.

But that revolution remains in our future. What is part of our present is an attempt by House Democrats to force a vote on codifying the right to birth control access nationwide. From the NYT: (brackets by Wrongo):

“The [Democrat’s] maneuver, through a procedural move known as a discharge petition, is all but certain to fail for lack of Republican support, but that is by design. It is part of a broad election-year push by Democrats to highlight Republicans’ record of opposing abortion rights and other reproductive health choices that voters fear will be stripped away following the fall of Roe v. Wade.”

The Senate Democrats also plan to force a vote on an identical contraceptive access bill, which once again, Republicans are expected to block. This coordinated push shows that Democrats regard access to abortion and contraception options as a key issue that will show a contrast with Republicans this fall.

We’ve seen that the Dobbs decision caused an immediate political reaction. Six states have held referendums on abortion, and in all six, the abortion rights side prevailed. A potential problem for anti-abortion Republicans is that referendums to legalize abortion could be on the ballot in up to 16 more states.

Abortion rights campaigners already have enough signatures to get on the ballot in a few states, including Florida. That state is crucial because it was the abortion destination for many women in the South until May 1st, when it outlawed most abortions after six weeks. If the Florida initiative passes, abortion will be legalized up to the point of viability, roughly 24 weeks. Democrats vainly hope the issue has put Florida in play in the presidential election, although it must pass by 60% to become law. It can easily impact the elections in Arizona and other states. More:

“In only two of the six states that have held referendums, California and Vermont, did the abortion-rights side get such a large share. When Michigan held its referendum in 2022, 57% voted in favor of protecting abortion even though 63% broadly supported the procedure, a rate similar to Floridians.”

That means we’re in the middle of a vast political battle that parallels the presidential battle. Outside groups are pouring tens of millions of dollars into competitive House districts to amplify the message. The main super PAC supporting House Democrats last month announced a new $100 million fund focusing on abortion rights in swing districts.

And the group Americans for Contraception plans to spend more than $7 million on television and digital ads, targeting Republicans in the Senate who vote against the bill and House members who do not sign the petition.

A few voters could be pulled away from the Republicans. More from The Economist: (emphasis by Wrongo):

“The midterm elections in 2022 hinted at that….Although only 14% of registered Republican voters were upset about the Dobbs ruling, a quarter of that group voted for a Democrat in their House district…. Republicans and independents who saw abortion as an important issue were more likely to vote for Democrats in 2022 than two years earlier.”

That equals 3.5% of Republicans, and may be among the reasons a predicted “red wave” lifting Republican candidates failed to appear in 2022.

Republicans are in a bind on reproductive rights. They can’t reconcile their Party’s hard-line policies on women’s health and they’re out of step with the vast majority of the country. Despite that, they continue to try to tuck anti-abortion policies into pending legislation.

However the 2024 elections pan out, the anti-Dobbs movement represents something different in US politics. Unlike the Republicans, it isn’t a group of keyboard warriors vying for attention or grift online. Instead it’s people giving up their weekends and evenings to try to persuade their neighbors about an idea they hold deeply.

And it isn’t simply a political cause about a single issue. It’s many issues: The right to live, the right to privacy for medical procedures, the right to not be forced by the state to undergo unnecessary physical or mental injury.

Like most successful revolutions, it’s participatory and local. It is how democracy in America was designed to work. Help it succeed in November!

Facebooklinkedinrss