Month: July 2022

Rich Lowry, the quintessential anti-anti-Trumper, continues to try to persuade us that DeSantis is a normal Republican who should be embraced by the left as a much better alternative than Trump. Does he have a case?

Here are my thoughts on the matter:

1. Lowry’s statements about DeSantis and the virus are, to be charitable, incomplete. DeSantis didn’t simply insist on opening up Florida early in the process; he imposed his will on school boards, local governments, and businesses to prohibit mask and vaccine mandates regardless of the circumstances. He then questioned the value of the vaccine, endorsed the use of sketchy alternative treatments for the virus, and refused to say if he had been boosted. His latest gambit was to try to prevent small children from getting the FDA-approved vaccine on the basis that he, a politician playing a doctor, did not approve of this use of the vaccine. In short, DeSantis wasn’t just a freedom fighter, prioritizing the economy over public health; he actively hindered the battle against the virus based on nothing but his own values and self-interest.
2. When you look at DeSantis’ “accomplishments,” the common thread holding them together is the use of state power to roll back the constitutional rights of groups he dislikes. These include: voting (gerrymandering, the treatment of former felons, and limiting “fraud”); the right to assemble (criminal liability for peaceful demonstrators); free speech (“Don’t Say Gay,” the Disney retaliation bill, the “Stop Woke” bill, the social media bill, and efforts to keep UF professors from testifying against the state); and, of course, abortion.
3. The Hungarian Candidate’s active use of state power to stifle dissent was an innovation. Even Trump didn’t do that; he simply attacked people who opposed him on Twitter, which isn’t the same thing at all.

Using government to limit constitutional rights wasn’t mainstream GOP thought until DeSantis went to work. There is no reason to believe he wouldn’t continue those efforts, only on a vastly larger scale, if he is elected president in 2024. If he is just a “normal” Republican today, it is because he dragged the party in that dangerous direction.

The bottom line is that choosing between Trump and DeSantis, for the left, is like choosing between a mad Roman emperor–an American Caligula–or Viktor Orban. That decision is up to the GOP, not us, notwithstanding what Lowry seems to think. God help us either way.

Steve Bannon and his acolytes say they want to “burn it down.” Since Bannon is a wealthy man with lots to lose, you could easily question both the wisdom and the sincerity behind the slogan, but we’ll take him at his word. Which candidate should he support—Trump or DeSantis?

Bannon knows Trump’s weaknesses all too well. He knows that Trump is all about himself, not any kind of ideology. He is perfectly aware that Trump can be distracted by shiny objects. And yet, some of Trump’s weaknesses–particularly his narcissism and his vengefulness–give him an edge that is unique within the GOP. He has no limits. As I’ve said before, he would be perfectly content to turn half of America into an ash heap if he can be recognized as the man by the other half. He is undoubtedly capable of burning it down just to satisfy his psyche.

DeSantis, on the other hand, has a normal pedigree for an American politician. Yes, he would spend half of his waking hours telling blue Americans that he hates them and that they should die, because Trump made that part of the GOP job description. He would do his best to stifle dissent, promote white Christian nationalism, and guarantee that the GOP remains in power forever, even as a minority party. But, in the end, he is more likely to erode liberal democracy than to overthrow it. “Rot the foundations” isn’t as catchy as “burn it down.”

And so, for all of his difficult history with the man, Bannon will stick with Trump as his best alternative.

Biden’s greatest diplomatic achievement has been to create a loose, but tightening, series of alliances to contain China. Trump, as we know, tends to reject the work of anyone who comes before him. The question, then, is whether Trump would revert back to form and treat our allies as parasites whose only objective is to steal American jobs. By doing so, he would surrender the greatest advantage we have relative to the Chinese.

There would be enormous pressure from the GOP leadership to stay the course, but he might well ignore it. I make no predictions on that score.

While political violence was endemic in Japan prior to World War II, the country has been remarkably peaceful ever since. Guns are rare, and gun deaths are even more rare. If you were to predict the location of an assassination in 2022, therefore, Japan is about the last place you would pick.

America, on the other hand, is awash in guns. The right practically worships them. Worse, its leaders are openly embracing the notion that liberals are the enemy and must be crushed by all means necessary. The left, on the other hand, still believes in a system that is increasingly stacked against it, but that is bound to change as it gets more frustrated. Political violence in this country, as a result, is practically inevitable.

In my opinion, it is more likely than not that some politically significant figure will be a target of gun violence in the next year or so. It may be a cultural, religious, legal, or business leader rather than a politician per se, but the attack will have serious ramifications. What happens after that is anyone’s guess.

On the British PM they call BoJo.

His party advised him to go-go.

While he tried to fight on

His support was all gone.

It seems lying is really a no-no.

At long last, BoJo will go! It isn’t because he consistently lies to Parliament and the nation; that’s just accepted as part of his personality. It’s because his party has concluded that he has become a huge electoral liability. The combination of the horrible polls, the lost by-elections, and the departure of prominent ministers constituted a tipping point from which he could not recover.

Donald Trump would never have become the leader of the GOP in a parliamentary system; his strength lies with the base, not the establishment. That said, the question arises: if Cipollone confirms Hutchinson’s testimony about Trump’s behavior on and about January 6, will that be a tipping point for the GOP? Will it give anyone with a legitimate chance to win the nerve to challenge Trump for the nomination?

The likely answer is no; the base has been trained to believe that anything negative that anyone, regardless of how prominent, honorable, and reliable he is, says about Trump is fake news. The establishment will continue to blast him in private and defend him in public for fear of alienating the base and losing power.

Trump doesn’t usually like to get too far in front of the base, but there is one exception: Russia. He really, really admires Vladimir Putin. And so, assuming the Ukraine conflict is still going on in some form, you can expect him to change sides and try to impose an unfavorable peace–possibly even surrender–on the Ukrainians. He would justify this to the base and the rest of the nation by arguing that it would reduce oil prices and help us contain China, the real enemy.

Given the genuine strength of pro-Ukrainian feeling within the GOP, would he get away with this? History says yes. Nobody–not even the ultra-hawkish Lindsey Graham–was willing to stand up to him the first time around, so why would it be any different now?

There are three reasons why gas prices are so much higher than they were a year ago. First, the strong and unexpectedly rapid recovery has boosted demand. Second, the Ukraine war has impacted supply. Finally, supply has also been reduced by a lack of investment in refinery capacity and new drilling, which in turn has been caused by perfectly reasonable doubt that putting money into a product that is supposed to be phased out ASAP makes economic sense.

Biden obviously has no regrets about the speed and magnitude of the recovery, which may now be faltering, in any event. He can’t do anything about the war unless he’s willing to sell out the Ukrainians, which he isn’t. That leaves the investment problem. Can the government help with that?

Yes, if the will exists. Gasoline is a transitional fuel. We’re going to need it for the next several years. Since the private sector has little incentive to invest in additional capacity for use for such a limited period of time, the government can either provide guarantees and subsidies to the private sector to increase capacity and keep prices low on an interim basis, or stand back and tolerate high prices until the transition is complete.

Both approaches would work, in different ways. It will come down to politics, as usual.

A column in yesterday’s NYT introduced me to an extreme right-wing ideology called Seven Mountains Dominionism, which holds that white American Christians are entitled to rule America by divine right, and must do whatever is necessary to gain control of every aspect of American society, including the media, the educational system, and government. According to the column, these ideas, like the “Great Replacement Theory,” are becoming increasingly mainstream in the GOP.

While I was reading this, I was contemplating an article in Politico which described the ferocious ongoing battle between J.K. Rowling and some trans activists about trans rights, and wondering what planet these people live on. This is the kind of vacuous dispute which divides and discredits the left and provides fuel for the far right. It will make the victory of the Seven Mountains people much more likely.

Do you hear the strains of “Tomorrow Belongs to Me” in the background?

The purpose of Orbanization is the acquisition of permanent political power and the liquidation of effective and meaningful dissent through the following means: extreme gerrymandering; the identification and vilification of straw man enemies, both at home and abroad; opportunistic corruption; the politicization of administration, the legal system, and law enforcement; and the elimination of opposition media through acquisition and harassment. The GOP as a whole is taking care of the gerrymandering part, with some assistance from a friendly Supreme Court; Trump’s first term featured all of the other elements except the elimination of opposition media.

Since Trump has no interest in policy, Orbanization is likely to be the focal point of a second term. The real questions here are:

1. How open will he be about his desire to destroy liberal democracy during the campaign?
2. Will his lesser vices–laziness, vanity, and an inability to focus–inhibit his ability to effectively Orbanize America?

I don’t know the answers to those questions for certain, but my best guesses are that he will be very open about his disdain for constitutional government, since the base agrees with him on that point, and that the extreme right-wingers around him will keep the project on track this time.

I will give you a break from pessimism and suggest a plausible scenario for the GOP in 2023-4. Liz Cheney runs for president, not because she thinks she can win, but because she believes she can take down Trump. And she does. She turns him into a mass of quivering jelly during a series of debates. Trump’s approval ratings plunge, and several other GOP candidates jump into the race. American politics become slightly more normal.

Sounds a bit like a GOP version of McCarthy in 1968, no?

Let’s face it: I don’t know if inflation will be a real problem in 2024, and neither do you. Trump undoubtedly hopes it is, because it will give him a large stick with which to beat the Democrats. If it is, however, it will also betray the vacuousness of his economic thought, and those of his fellow Republicans.

The logical solution to excess demand is enforced austerity. Trump doesn’t do austerity; he’s a populist, after all. It is highly unlikely that he will embrace his inner Rick Scott, if one even exists. Instead, he will call for more tax cuts, which would only make things worse, because that’s what Republicans do. In addition, if the Ukraine war is still going on, he would probably argue that changing sides and aiding Putin would reduce gas prices. More on that in a later post.

For virtually my entire adult life, there was always at least one swing justice on the Supreme Court. First, it was Justice Powell, and then it was Kennedy. They gave both sides hope that the system could be made to work in their favor. The reasonable possibility of success gave the system legitimacy.

That is no longer true. There are no swing justices on the current Court. Roberts and Kavanaugh are on the same train, with the same ultimate destination, as the other four reactionaries; the difference is that they occasionally believe the train needs to slow down a bit to maintain public support for the Court.

So how will the left react when it realizes it can’t win culture war cases? First, with sullen acceptance; later, by proposing significant constitutional change and by refusing to comply with obnoxious federal court orders. It’s just a matter of time.

Unlike most of his supporters, Trump is highly conflicted on the issue of abortion. On the one hand, his sexual history speaks for itself, and he clearly thinks that prohibiting abortion will cost him votes among suburban women. On the other hand, his Supreme Court justices made Dobbs possible. No one is more responsible for the current state of affairs than he is.

Trump’s desire to stay in lockstep with his base will prevail over any other considerations, his vanity excepted. If he wins, and the GOP has a majority in both houses of Congress, it is highly likely that we will see a national abortion bill speeding through the system, and that he will sign it. Would he make any efforts to tone it down? Quite possibly, but they will be quiet and behind the scenes.

Putin may be all-powerful in the political sphere in Russia, but even he can’t control the sun and the wind. Neither can MBS. As a result, there is no necessary conflict between American efforts to fight climate change and reach energy independence.

The Ukraine war has given this old issue new urgency. While the private sector has made progress on its own, it could use some help in funding innovation and the infrastructure for electric cars. Unfortunately, due to the GOP and its cult of self-reliance, none is likely to be coming at the federal level.

California can’t do anything about the use of fossil fuels in power plants in Texas, but it has a large say in the kind of cars we buy and drive. If the state uses its regulatory power to push the car companies to move faster, and some of its budgetary surplus to fund a system of charging stations, that will serve as a powerful example to the rest of the country, and will change the economics of electric car ownership. Let’s hope they do it.

Happy Independence Day!