Month: July 2019

It finally happened. AOC accused Nancy Pelosi of being a bigot. It was inevitable, I suppose.

The essence of the problem is that the two have different agendas. Pelosi is principally concerned with running the government in a moderate and predictable way for the benefit of the American people and with defeating Republicans in elections. AOC and the rest of the Squad want to convert the Democratic Party to their democratic socialist platform. Winning elections and keeping Republicans out of power is a lower priority, certainly in the short run, and possibly forever.

If AOC and her friends get their way, the small tent Democratic Party will reign unchallenged in a handful of large urban areas, and lose everywhere else. I agree with Pelosi; until the Squad can prove that it has a truly national following, and can win elections in red and purple districts, its agenda can and should be disregarded.

The MSM are making a much bigger deal over the USWNT’s World Cup victory than they did in 2015. The reason can be described in two words: Donald Trump.

Think about it–the women’s team is a perfect blue icon. Soccer, not football! Women, not men! Some of them are even lesbians! What could be more PC than that!

There is only one thing to add: Megan Rapinoe would make a much more compelling Democratic candidate than several of the people who were on the stage a few weeks ago.

If there is one thing that Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Donald Trump agree on, it is that 2016 was a watershed election for this country. Peasants with pitchforks stormed the ballot box demanding dramatic changes in a rigged system. The result was a president who constantly throws cultural red meat to his white nationalist base and believes he can win in 2020 without making any effort to appeal to the center. Warren and Sanders, for their part, think the system is more rigged than ever, and that the key to success in 2020 is the mobilization of the blue base for what they view as real change; they have also written off the center.

They’re all wrong. Trump won the GOP nomination because he was unopposed in his lane, and his principal rivals were not. Even running against her own historic unpopularity, the constant references to her e-mail pseudo-scandal, and the understandable desire for change after eight years of Obama, Hillary Clinton still won the popular vote, and would have won the election but for the efforts of Jill Stein. That doesn’t amount to an overwhelming public demand for a revolution, which was subsequently confirmed by the outcome of the midterms.

Trump can’t win in 2020 without the votes from people in the right-center who can’t stand him. Will the Democrats try to win those people over, or push them away by promising a PC paradise which identifies them as racial and capitalist oppressors? That is the real question that will be decided over the next 16 months.

That would be Mayor Pete, and coming from me, it’s not an insult. Like Macron, Mayor Pete is a supremely logical technocrat. He processes information quickly and gives clear and thoughtful answers to questions. His appeal to pundits and wonks makes perfect sense.

That said, I have three major concerns about him as a presidential candidate, none of which has anything to do with his sexual orientation, which is likely to be a factor only for people who would never vote for him, anyway:

1. He’s minimally qualified for the job, at best, based on his age and work experience;
2. I’m not sure America is really ready for a technocrat as president. This is the country that elected Trump, after all; and
3. Most importantly, he doesn’t project strength and authority on stage. This is partly, but not completely, due to his height; Harris manages to do it, and she is shorter than he is.

The best American analogy in recent history, in my opinion, is Michael Dukakis. How did that turn out?

His candidacy won’t survive Super Tuesday.

Cory Booker should be a first-tier candidate. He’s clearly qualified for the job. He’s bright and articulate. He has a signature policy proposal that has plenty of merit. He has an interesting biography. He has a commanding presence, and looks good in a suit. He’s broadly acceptable to the entire party, and he doesn’t scare white people. What’s not to like?

Three things:

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT: The second African-American president doesn’t have the same sizzle as the first gay or female president.

RIGHT MAN, WRONG TIME: Party activists appear to want someone who will kick Trump’s butt around the stage, not someone who talks about love and unity.

BABY BONDS AREN’T WORKING: His signature proposal probably wouldn’t get through the Senate, and if it did, it would take decades to provide any real help to anyone. African-Americans are looking for relief in the short run, not in 2040.

Booker’s case isn’t hopeless, but realistically, he needs the realo candidates in front of him to falter, starting with Biden. Look for him to ramp up the attacks on Biden in the near future.

Unlike Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren doesn’t talk about the “revolution,” probably because it sounds too Marxist and scares off the old people. Like Bernie, however, Warren needs some sort of dramatic change to get her innumerable plans through the system. What should she call it, since the “revolution” is out of bounds?

How about the “Reformation?”

Imagine that you are an owner of a fast food restaurant, and you are now facing a $15 per hour minimum wage. You have the following choices: (a) cut your number of employees and hope your consumers will tolerate the corresponding reduction in your level of service; (b) reduce your staffing level through automation; (c) raise prices; or (d) accept a significantly lower level of profits. What do you do?

Probably some of all of them. Each individual case will be different. There will be job losses, but we don’t know how many, or how the trade-off will work. In addition, across-the-board price increases will fuel inflation, which could cause the Fed to raise interest rates, which will mean a reduction in growth. Finally, it is the moral obligation of all of society, not just fast food consumers or business owners, to provide workers with a reasonable standard of living.

The minimum wage is a convoluted attempt to redistribute wealth that will fail in many, and possibly most, instances. Compare that to increases in the EITC, which won’t result in higher prices, won’t drive up the cost of labor, and will more effectively redistribute wealth. Doesn’t that approach make more sense?

Let’s face it: minimum wage increases make for good politics, because they create the illusion that what amount to privatized welfare payments have been earned through work. In all other respects, they are bad policy.

The incumbent Republican president was a social conservative who repeatedly threw red meat to his base. Lacking respect for the truth and the rule of law, he was distrusted by the left and some genuine conservatives alike. He successfully pressured the Fed to lower interest rates. His relationship with the press was fraught, to say the least. He was a uniquely divisive figure, loved by some, hated by more.

The Democrats responded by nominating a candidate who was well to the left of the political mainstream. They were crushed in the ensuing election, as you might expect.

Is it 1972 or 2020? We’ll know soon enough.

Everyone knows how Donald Trump negotiates at this point. He takes extreme positions; he creates as much leverage as possible through threats of nuclear war, tariffs, and sanctions; and he waits for his opponent to surrender. If that doesn’t work, he takes whatever he can get and spins it as a “win.”

Most world leaders have concluded the best way to deal with him is to collaborate with him on the illusion of an American “win.” Presumably for domestic political reasons, the Iranian leadership is refusing to play that game. In fact, they are engaging in Trumpian tactics of their own by escalating. They apparently believe that the combination of pressure from other countries and Trump’s own lack of enthusiasm for war will ultimately cause the US to back down.

Don’t bet on it. Remember, Trump is surrounded by people who want war, and he isn’t going to accept humiliation on this or any issue. The Iranians, in my opinion, are making a serious mistake.

The supreme leadership of Iran

Doesn’t seem to possess a good plan.

They’re pushing Trump back.

That invites an attack.

‘Cause he’s desperate to prove he’s the man.

Washington was austere, reserved, and famously upright. Hamilton was a brilliant, visionary immigrant. Jefferson was a stylish intellectual with impeccable taste. Madison was modest, bookish, and methodical.

Trump, obviously, is none of those things. So which of the Founders does he least resemble? It’s a close call, but the winner is . . . Washington, by a nose over Madison.

When the NYT asked Bernie if America should have any billionaires, I expected him to respond with a simple and gruff “No.”. In point of fact, his answer was more nuanced than that. It sounded a lot like Warren’s.

I don’t think we should read too much into that, but I feel compelled to give credit when it is due.

In what does Donald Trump passionately and unequivocally believe? I came up with five things: himself; power; wealth; celebrity; and golf. Everything else, including his family, his party, the country, and the Constitution, is negotiable.

Is it any wonder his opponents despise him so much?

I attended a small town July 4 celebration yesterday. It was brash, ramshackle, spontaneous, and loud. It featured a band playing classic rock songs, kids throwing candy to the crowd, and lots of vehicles operating as mobile billboards, but no tanks. It was quintessentially American.

I couldn’t help wondering what a Chinese person would have made of it. God bless America, indeed.

There are two answers to that question. There always have been.

One response revolves around politics. If you accept the principles of limited constitutional government, you agree to follow the law, you don’t oppress your neighbor, and you don’t expect too many handouts, you can be an American. That’s all it takes.

The second response is predominantly cultural. The most important component is the use of English, but you have to listen to the right music, go to an acceptable church, watch the right sports, and so on. And, of course, there is a racial component, too. Anyone who doesn’t meet these standards, even if they were born here, isn’t a real American.

The second group is currently running the country on all but economic issues. Our job is to bring back the first crowd.

Have a happy 4th!