Cromwell

DeSantis has never expressed any meaningful opinions on American foreign policy. All we know about his ideas on taxing and spending is that he has not been a budget cutter. He really isn’t a national figure. And yet, he is the second choice of GOP voters, behind only Trump. Why?

Because the one thing the Fox News crowd knows about him is that he consistently harnesses the power of the government to roll back the rights of people on the left. This is owning the libs to an unprecedented degree. That’s what reactionaries really want–not tax cuts and deregulation for businesses, particularly, but not exclusively, of the woke variety.

Presumably hoping to capitalize on Johnson’s extreme unpopularity, Nicola Sturgeon has announced that a new referendum will be held in October 2023. The moment has already passed, however. Boris will be leaving, and it is unlikely that his successor will raise as much ire in Scotland as he does.

The bottom line is that the two major parties both oppose Scottish independence, and that the ghost of the unauthorized Catalan referendum still haunts the cause. The only realistic way a second binding referendum takes place is if the SNP holds the balance of power between Labour and the Conservatives. When will that happen? Nobody knows, but it worked for the Irish, so be patient.

Let’s assume Trump looks at the polls and decides not to run in 2024. Are there any GOP alternatives that are better than DeSantis?

The choices are not inspiring. Tom Cotton, to his credit, never embraced the January 6 rioters, and I haven’t seen any evidence that he wants to turn America into a theocracy. On the other hand, he would cut taxes for rich people, shoot protesters, and start wars at the drop of a hat. Josh Hawley has some interesting populist thoughts about taxing and spending, but he did embrace the rioters, and he does want to turn America into a theocracy. Rick Scott wants to destroy the welfare state. Nikki Haley would never survive the primaries. Mike Pence is about as exciting as spoiled milk. And Ted Cruz–don’t even go there.

The only potential candidate who brings even a glimmer of hope is Rubio, who is basically a decent, intelligent guy who consistently lets his ambition get in front of his principles. That he is our best option tells you all you need to know about the current state of the GOP.

The thing about Brexit is, you have to have a border between the UK and the EU somewhere. If you put it in the English Channel, you effectively push the Republic of Ireland out of the EU without its consent. If you put it on the border between Northern Ireland and the ROI, you drive up the cost of doing business between the two and make political cooperation between them more difficult. If you put it in the Irish Sea, you imply that residents of Northern Ireland aren’t really part of the UK, and that Northern Ireland is destined to be reunited with the ROI, regardless of the wishes of the Protestant majority. It’s a mess.

The EU will never, and should never, agree to the border in the English Channel. The British government, having agreed to the Irish Sea border in order to get the deal through, now wants to renege on it. That leaves the land border as the most plausible alternative. When it is all said and done, that’s where it will go, notwithstanding the down sides for everyone.

I don’t live in the UK, so I’m not familiar enough with the candidates to pick a likely winner. I can, however, make a prediction as to how the battle will be won.

The Conservative Party, as it exists today, is a coalition of two groups with fundamentally incompatible ideas about what the government should be doing. One of these groups wants a small, agile central government that cuts taxes and regulations, signs trade agreements, and focuses on economic growth. The other believes in a robust welfare state (particularly for the elderly), protectionism, traditional values, and limits on immigration. It wants a return to the glorious past, not a trip to the future.

The way to reconcile these two groups is to separate style from substance. Donald Trump was an expert at this. The new leader will speak loudly and constantly about culture war issues–in particular, hitting themes about British patriotism and the forgotten people in small towns outside of London–while actually governing as a tax cutting liberal. That’s the only way to keep the band together.

My fellow real Americans:

It is traditional for the incoming president to attempt to heal the wounds of the campaign and unify the country. Lincoln did it, even during the Civil War. Obama and Biden did it. Heck, even George W. Bush did it.

But that’s not how I roll. I don’t believe in that unity crap. And so, I’m going to speak directly to my opponents here.

Real America hates you, because you prosper while they struggle. God hates you, because you don’t believe in him. And I hate you. You aren’t real Americans. You’re European socialists living in the wrong country.

I’m not going to be your president. In fact, I’m going to do everything in my power to make your lives miserable. I’m going to roll back your constitutional rights. I’m going to raise your taxes. I’m going to cut your benefits. Most of all, I’m going to shut you up. You can kiss your right to disagree with me good-bye.

And if you think you can fight back and win, think again. The Supreme Court belongs to me. The electoral system is biased in my favor. And my side has all the guns. You might have the money, but when money does battle with guns, guns win.

So get ready to grin and bear it, or ship out! I’m sure there are lots of godless socialist countries that would be happy to take you in.

Thank you, and God bless real America.

I’ll start with a question: how many trans people have you known in your life? I bet you can count them on your hands. And yet, trans activists seem to be in the middle of every culture war debate about sexuality. They are driving the train, and the rest of us are just along for the ride.

Trans activists take the position that what average people call “normal” is simply “binary”–one choice among many that are also equally valid. The right completely and emphatically rejects this argument and uses it opportunistically as a stick with which to beat the entirety of the left. Many impeccably liberal women also reject the argument, but insist that trans people should not be discriminated against by the state. For their pains, they are called TERFs by the activists, and treated on social media as if they were Nazis. The treatment of trans people is thus a perfect wedge issue for the right.

The activists need to understand that they do not represent anything like a majority on the left, and are unlikely to do so for the foreseeable future. They need, and should be grateful for, the political assistance of the people they call TERFs. If they go too far in dividing the left, they are looking at life under Trump or DeSantis.

Boris Johnson will always be linked to Brexit, a process which is increasingly looking more like Dunkirk than Agincourt. That subject is too complex to be addressed in today’s post. Leaving Brexit aside, how will Johnson be remembered in the future? What issues does he leave for his successors to clean up?

Here are the top three items:

1. BREAKING THE NORMS: Like Trump, it just became accepted that BoJo was self-indulgent, had little patience with legal norms, and had an on-again, off-again relationship with the truth. That part of his legacy will not be repeated. British politics will return to normal after he leaves.
2. CULTURE WARS: British politics historically were based more on class than race, mostly because the country was ethnically homogeneous. BoJo’s great revelation was that British society had changed, and that you could win an election based mostly on identity politics; in the end, that was what Brexit was all about. Today’s Conservative Party is an unwieldy coalition of older, socially conservative people in small, stagnant towns (mostly in the north) and affluent businessmen in the south; what the two groups have in common is their antipathy for young, cosmopolitan, socially liberal Londoners. Finding a way to keep the coalition together will be the first task for Johnson’s successor as party leader.
3. LEVELING UP: What does this mean in practice? Boris had no idea. His successor will have to find a way to define it and implement it in the face of increasing fiscal constraints, which will be no mean task.

Who is likely to follow Boris? Tune in tomorrow.

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?