Cromwell

How can reactionary politicians such as J.D. maintain good relations with both the techno-aristocracy and with the base? By constantly bashing the barons in public, while quietly opposing any meaningful effort by the government to regulate them.

Like the bankers during the Great Recession, the barons are notoriously touchy, so this tactic might not be completely successful. Most of them would probably buy into it if they understood the public jawboning as part of a dirty bargain, however. Self-interest trumps image most of the time, if not all of it, and some of the barons might even enjoy being portrayed as Bond villains. One in particular comes to mind.

Mike Johnson and J.D. have plenty in common. Both are prominent and ambitious Republican politicians with strong ties to the religious right. Both are therefore highly visible proponents of the Godly Society. And both of them have jobs which require them to maintain good relations with all of the factions of the GOP even when they have wildly different objectives.

Johnson has followed the Trumpian lead and is advocating for deregulation of AI in order to keep the tech barons and their CL supporters in line even though that position is difficult to reconcile with his otherwise reactionary views. J.D. hasn’t said much on the subject recently, but the comments he has made suggest he has made the same choice. If so, it may cost him dearly in the long run; the base has no love for the barons.

Donald Trump says concerns about AI and data centers are a HOAX. Steve Bannon, one of his most important acolytes, begs to differ. Trump has been unusually tone-deaf to the base on both AI issues and the Iran war over the last several months. Could the base peel away?

Trump and J.D. are going to have serious problems maintaining complete control over the base as long as AI and the war have the attention of the public. At some point, however, the war will end, and J.D. has consistently fought to keep the base united by focusing its attention on the danger presented by the left.

I think it depends on whether J.D. gets a serious challenge from a fellow reactionary during the campaign. If he does, it may become impossible to paper over the differences of opinion within the base. If not, the base will have nowhere else to go, and the blue team will have to hope its members just stay home in 2028.

As I’ve noted before, Trump is the Johnny Rocco of American politics–he always wants more. Specifically, more wealth and more power, both for himself and for the nation. He frequently brags about how he is making America rich. You can certainly argue that he has failed miserably in his objective, but there is little reason to doubt that most Americans agree with the objective itself.

J.D. is different. The Godly Society has more white children, but fewer working women and less wealth. It values social stability and morality over the acquisition of consumer goods.

Since Trump’s attempts to reconcile the two goals through the use of tariffs and mass deportations have already failed, J.D. will have to make a decision when he campaigns in 2028. Does he really have the nerve to demand that Americans learn to live with less? I have my doubts.

On the GOP midterm convention.

It didn’t get lots of attention.

First Trump and then Vance

Took a hard right-wing stance

But Iran and inflation weren’t mentioned.

As I’ve noted before, Rick Scott really, really, really hates government. He wants to torture it before he drowns it in the proverbial bathtub. He despises unproductive people, too. As with Mr. Scrooge, you have to believe he wishes we would just die and decrease the surplus population. At best, we should be securitized and sold off to unsuspecting European investors.

The Social Security cliff is in sight. Selling Social Security cuts to elderly Floridians who are completely dependent on the program for a living will be about as popular as selling Hitler to Jews. And yet, Scott will have to try if he is to remain true to his odious principles.

It should be fun to watch.

In 2017, I posted a set piece based on “Richard III” in which the Trump cabinet pledges allegiance to the omnipotent and omniscient president. When Mattis doesn’t show enough deference to the great man, he is summarily executed, and his head is put on a stick.

With Trump, satire can be prophecy. He demanded that all present pledge allegiance to his awesome self at last week’s pseudo-convention. I’m sure most of them did it, too.

If and when Pete Hegseth starts requiring all members of the military to swear allegiance to Trump personally instead of to the Constitution, you will know the process of turning them into a right-wing militia is nearly complete.

David French says the War on Terror was a success. He ties it to his experience in the Iraq War, which he continues to believe was justified. Is he right?

Mostly no. It is true, as he says, that Islamic terrorism is no longer the problem that it was a decade or so ago, and that the success of American troops in fighting IS contributed to that victory. As I noted at the time, however, history shows us that terrorism is a spasm that disappears when it fails to bring about meaningful positive change. It didn’t work for anarchists in the late 19th and early 20th century for the same reason that it didn’t work for IS.

As for Iraq, prior to the war, it was a brutal and somewhat unpredictable Sunni dictatorship that nonetheless was a reliable check on the ambitions of the ayatollahs in Iran and did not support terrorism. French tells the story from the middle of the book, not the beginning; the Bush invasion caused the Sunni backlash that resulted in the creation and spread of IS. In other words, the American military was both the arsonist and the fireman in Iraq.

In the long run, the invasion may well have improved the lives of Iraqi Shiites to some extent. It also turned Iraq into, for the most part, an Iranian client state. That totally predictable outcome was hardly a success for American foreign policy.

Trump says he wants the midterms to be a referendum on him. Of course he does! He thinks everything is about him.

Everyone to the left of MAGA should give him what he wants. The outcome will surprise him.

Pete Hegseth has come to the Oval Office to talk about life and times.

T: Heggy! It’s the 25th anniversary of 9/11. What are you doing to commemorate the event?

H: Well, first of all, I’m firing a bunch of generals and replacing them with competent white men. It’s all part of the war on DEI.

T: Excellent!

H: You know even better than I that only conservative white Christian men are fit to lead this country. They’re the only ones who are truly competent. Everyone else is a DEI baby. They have to go.

T: Right. Anything else?

H: We’re all thanking Jesus for sparing you on 9/11. Your heroism on that day was inspiring. I don’t think the country would have survived without you.

T: That’s true. The fake news just doesn’t get it. In light of the occasion, what are you doing to fight the real terrorist threat?

H: You mean, the radical Marxist Democrats?

T: Exactly!

H: They’re the real threat now. We crushed all of the foreigners. They call you “Sir.”

T: So what are you doing to save America from the left?

H: Working every day to change the culture. The military needs to know you’re the boss, and all that stuff about the Constitution is eyewash. They will obey your orders without question. Even if you tell them to shoot unarmed protesters and arrest opposition politicians.

T: Excellent! There are people out there who say that you’re incompetent, because you were lax about secrets, replaced good leaders with suck-ups, and failed to win the war in Iran. They just don’t understand what the real mission is here.

H: Absolutely! And don’t worry about Iran. It’s under control. We’ll win in the end, because you’re a winner. Everything you touch always turns out OK. It’s God’s will.

T: A man after my own heart. You even sound like me. Now go out and fire those DEI babies!

A post on a Florida local TV web site tells us something that was utterly predictable: the deportation of Haitians is resulting in a loss of staff and a serious decline in conditions in Florida nursing homes and ALFs. There is no plan on the part of Florida or federal politicians to do anything about it.

If you’re an elderly Floridian or someone with parents in an ALF, and you voted for Trump, the relevant line is from Billy Joel’s “Big Shot:” “Go on and cry in your coffee, but don’t come bitching to me.” This is what you voted for, so learn to live with it.

In Trump’s world, anyone who can’t be intimidated can be bought. As a result, he loves promising taxpayers large checks with his name on them. You will recall that he was screaming for stimulus just before the 2020 election. He suggested that Americans would get a share of the supposedly massive savings generated by DOGE. He talked about sending checks to compensate for tariffs. Last night, he promised a “Trump Dividend” of $5,000 per adult citizen if the GOP maintains control of both houses of Congress. Should we take this latest promise seriously?

No, for two reasons. First of all, cutting revenues by over $1 trillion at a time when the deficit, interest rates, and inflation are unacceptably high is not exactly a great idea. Second, no one was watching his speech last night except the people in the room, so the average American voter isn’t going to be moved by it.

Oh, darn.

Plenty of GOP politicians are afraid that Trump will make the midterm convention about himself. After all, he isn’t on the ballot, and they are, so logically, they should be the stars of the show.

One thing we can say for certain: Trump believes everything is about him. He has even reportedly concocted a new story in which he was a prominent victim and a hero of 9/11. Why in the world would the convention be any different?

A developer wants to build a new data center in your community. What should you think?

Based on my review of the literature, here are the pros and cons:

1. WATER IMPACTS: The most modern data centers are not really prolific users of water. These concerns are overblown.
2. NOISE: They do create levels of noise that are somewhat incompatible with rural environments.
3. ELECTRICITY BILLS: It depends. Are the developers providing their own power? If not, what is the state of the grid, and how do the developers plan to offset their impacts? Can you trust the local utility company to protect your interests, or is it solely concerned with maximizing its profits? The answers to these questions will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
4. SCALE: These projects are absolutely massive. They don’t typically fit in industrial parks, so they have to go in rural areas. Their scale will be inconsistent with the character of your community.
5. JOBS: The data center will create a small number of permanent jobs. The big impact will be a temporary one to the construction industry. If your community has lots of underemployed trade workers, this project will be of great benefit to them. If it doesn’t, you may find that more valuable developments will be delayed if the data center is built.
6. TAX REVENUES: The data center will increase your tax base, probably significantly, unless your state or local government has agreed to subsidize it.

The bottom line here is that each community is different, and the balance between undesirable impacts and economic benefits will vary from area to area. As a general rule, however, it is a mistake to either subsidize the data center or rely on the utility company to keep your bills down. Make sure to read the fine print on electricity costs before you make up your mind.

Trump enjoys trolling the left, and the base loves him for it. The renaming of Lake Ontario and the posts about “New America” are classic examples of the tactic. The left splutters with rage, and MAGA cheers at its impotence.

The dark side to this kind of trolling is that it exposes Trump as a wannabe autocrat who has absolutely no interest in reaching out to the millions of Americans who don’t support him. If public opinion genuinely is of no concern to him, what is preventing him from going full throttle with despotism? Not John Roberts–that’s for sure.