Cromwell

A few of Trump’s prominent supporters have dispensed with the transparently bogus fraud narrative and are calling for the man on golf cart to declare martial law and nullify the results of the election. How could this be justified?

In the end, there are only two sources of sovereignty: the people and God. The argument here clearly is that God made Trump president; the American people have no right to thwart His will through something as meaningless as an election.

Stop laughing. It worked for Louis XIV–why not Trump? They even have the same taste in furnishings!

It’s fair to assume that a number of prominent Republicans who want to take the GOP in a different direction plan to run in 2024. These include Larry Hogan (making the GOP decent and respectable again) and Rick Scott (cut federal spending, regardless of the public costs). But what about the Trump wannabes? Who could run, and how would they distinguish themselves from the competition?

Here is a list, with their respective “qualifications:”

1. DON JR.: Obviously, not as long as Dad is in the picture. If you’re looking for Trumpy genes and the ability to own the libs, he’s your guy. Otherwise, there is no reason to vote for him. He has no experience running anything in government, and he can’t even argue that he built a successful business from nothing.
2. RON DESANTIS: As the governor of a large state, he has some real qualifications for higher office. He isn’t as bad as Rick Scott. That said, he botched the pandemic, and he barely got elected in the first place. He also doesn’t own the libs with the panache of his role model.
3. MIKE POMPEO: He’s certainly Trumpy enough, but he doesn’t bring anything special to the table other than the ability to abuse journalists who ask him hard questions. Trump’s loss in 2020 does him a lot of damage.
4. MIKE PENCE: Known only for his ability to lick Trump’s boots. His sanctimonious demeanor won’t wear well with an electorate that wants to kick liberal butt.
5. JOSH HAWLEY: Well-qualified and has a shtick: national conservatism. Think of a less corrupt Trump with better connections in the religious community and an idea that could wear well in the future. He apparently claims he’s not running, but I don’t believe him.
6. TOM COTTON: Trump with an authoritarian twist. Trump talked about shooting protesters; Cotton would do it. Unlike Hawley, he would suck up to rich people, and they would love him.

If Trump doesn’t run, my money’s on Cotton, who would position himself as a supporter of the Orban Option. At that point, stuff really starts hitting the fan.

A number of left-leaning commentators, most notably on Politico, are trying to reassure us that there will be no Trump comeback in 2024. There are two reasons given for this: there is no precedent in anyone’s memory for a former president maintaining any meaningful level of influence; and the GOP will want to move on from a proven loser with unsavory, undemocratic views. Joe McCarthy and George Wallace disappeared from the national stage; he will, too. Are they right?

Maybe, but I’m not as confident as they are. Trump has a hold on the reactionary base unlike any other, as evidenced by his vote total, even though he lost. The MSM are Trump co-dependents; keeping him alive and relevant would be good for business. The country is more polarized than it has been since the sixties–the 1860s. And, of course, he has every reason to keep his options open, as I’ve noted in several previous posts.

Trump’s age and health may keep him from running when it is all said and done. Given the complete lack of courage and principle shown by virtually all of his potential opponents, however, the possibility of a primary challenge is unlikely to deter him. I can’t imagine anyone other than a CD governor taking him on, and I can’t see him losing to someone on the extreme left of his party. His legal problems will not influence his admirers in the slightest. In short, if he is ready, willing, and able to run when 2023 rolls around, he will be the frontrunner by a large margin.

Trump being who he is, he can’t help using a preemptive fraud narrative to protect himself from being perceived as a loser in case things don’t go his way. He did it in the 2016 primaries; he did it again in the general election; and, of course, he’s doing it now, and thereby doing lasting damage to the health of our political system. Not that he cares.

But what will he say in 2024? What is the point of voting for him if the system is rigged to defeat him? That will surely be a problem for him, on its face.

The bottom line is that he and his followers don’t really believe in the ridiculous conspiracy theories they have been spouting for the last few months. They do, however, believe that the political, social, cultural, and economic systems are biased against people like them; that is the essence of being a reactionary. That is what they really mean by a rigged election, why they embrace nonsensical theories with no factual support, and why tens of millions of people will come out and vote for him if he runs in 2024.

“Don’t mess with Texas,” they say. We were a sovereign state at one point. We have the biggest and best of everything. Our people are tough. Don’t try to tell us what to do, or else!

It appears that Texas has now taken this slogan to a whole new plane. Now the state has the right to tell all of the other states what to do! Texas is the United States! The rest of us are just subjects!

Absurd? That is the conclusion you draw from their ridiculous litigation.

There are two looming deadlines that may well dominate the public discussion during the last half of the Biden administration: the Medicare Trust Fund is projected to become insolvent in 2024 as the result of the pandemic and chronic funding problems; and the individual Trump tax cuts expire in 2025. How will they play out?

Both provide opportunities for Biden to divide the GOP and accomplish important goals. In the case of Medicare, his response certainly will be to raise the earnings limit on the FICA tax, which will require McConnell to choose between two of his most important constituencies–the elderly and wealthy businessmen. Biden will also undoubtedly propose making the tax cuts permanent except for highest earners; McConnell will have to give up something really important if he wants to protect his donors from significant tax increases.

We’re going to endure at least two years in which the GOP Senate possesses most of the leverage. This will be the exception. Enjoy it.

Trump cared a lot about investors, but in the end, they weren’t that impressed with him. There has been no market collapse since it became clear that he lost the election. The money men have moved on. They’re happy with divided government and an end to Trump’s capriciousness.

Since Trump is openly taking names on the legitimacy issue, it possible that he would retaliate against business in 2024 by supporting some version of national conservatism? I doubt it, for the following reasons:

1. Trump doesn’t believe in much except his own overriding awesomeness, but his affinity for orthodox tax cut and deregulation Republican economics appears to be genuine.
2. Embracing national conservatism would mean implicitly admitting he was wrong the first time around. Trump doesn’t do that.
3. The legitimacy issue will have died down by 2024.
4. He needs support from the donor class to win. The base alone can’t get him elected.

It goes something like this:

1. Hardworking white Christian men like me made America the greatest and most powerful country on the planet.
2. As a result, we have established the right to rule this country in every possible way–economically, politically, and socially—-in perpetuity.
3. Our primacy is under threat as a result of demographic change and an evolving economy which puts more value on education than our strength and skills.
4. This development is promoted by an overeducated elite which includes the MSM, Hollywood, big business, and the judiciary. They use undeserving minorities as their electoral shock troops to win elections and keep us down.
5. We are entitled to do whatever it takes to stay in power, because the alternative could be cultural or even physical annihilation. If that means using violence (or at least the threat of it), overthrowing the establishment, and changing the political system to perpetuate minority rule, so be it.

Parts of this are true. #3 definitely is. You can make a case for #4, even though it ignores the existence of a very large and undisturbed cultural safe space for reactionaries. It is also true that white Christian men played a disproportionately large role in the creation of America, as it exists today. However:

1. White Christians were hardly viewed as a monolithic entity throughout our history, as the Italians and Irish would be happy to tell you. Concerns about alien cultures are old wine in new bottles.
2. American culture has constantly evolved over time, and has been profoundly influenced by people of color. Today’s America would be unrecognizable but for their contributions.
3. Even if you don’t accept everything the authors of the 1619 Project say, you have to admit that the record of white Christians in this country has been a mixed bag.
4. Nothing in the past, or in the Constitution, provides an entitlement for white Christian men to maintain a perpetual right to primacy in this country.
5. There is no plausible evidence which suggests that white Christians are heading for the gas chambers, or at least for irrelevance. This is pure projection on their part.
6. The reactionary “solution” is illiberal democracy at best, and outright fascism at worst.

Steve Mnuchin has a typical Keynesian rationale for focusing on payments to everyone, instead of small businesses and the unemployed: sending checks to taxpayers will pump money into the economy, which will create jobs, which will benefit everyone. Is he right?

No, because this isn’t a typical recession. Americans in lockdown aren’t going to spend money in restaurants; they will either save it or send it to Amazon. Neither response does anything to help local small businesses or the unemployed, unless they want to change jobs and drive for Jeff Bezos. Republicans and Democrats alike should agree that making Amazon and Walmart even bigger and driving up asset prices to an even higher level isn’t a proper solution to a temporary problem.

Fox, on balance, has allied itself with the non-denialist reactionaries. That has predictably enraged Trump, who for the last few months has been touting much smaller news outlets as a more suitable alternative. It is fairly likely that he will wind up hosting a show on one of these networks after he leaves office. Will he patch things up with Fox if he runs in 2024?

Yes, because the two need each other. From Trump’s perspective, the illegitimacy issue that currently divides them will have faded after the midterm elections, and he will need more friendly eyeballs than the Fox alternatives can provide. For Fox, he has been a meal ticket for several years; why would they turn on him in 2024?

About six weeks ago, you could have made a reasonable case that Mitch McConnell was right about the stimulus. Unemployment had fallen below 7 percent, and the economy was clearly recovering. Another large bill was unnecessary.

Today, with the virus spreading throughout the country (no geographic areas excluded) and grim winter lockdowns looming, the situation is different. We are clearly looking at six months or more of unusually high unemployment and slow recovery. The vaccine will ultimately put an end to this situation, but for now, help is definitely needed.

There is no dispute at this point about assistance for crippled small businesses and a reasonable level of federal help for the unemployed. A general stimulus payment would probably just be saved, and would be wasteful, as the national savings rate is already unusually high. The remaining issues involve state and local government assistance and liability protection for businesses.

As to the latter, I have no great philosophical objection; it depends on how the language is written. If the idea is just to give capital another cudgel against labor, I’m opposed. As to state and local government assistance, history tells us that it is one of the most cost-effective forms of stimulus imaginable; it maintains essential services in both red and blue states, while preventing inevitable salary cuts and layoffs that will dampen the recovery.

McConnell needs to get over his phobia about helping blue states–the ones that subsidize his state every day–immediately. Perhaps a little prodding from red state governors who are going to feel the economic and political pain of service cuts and layoffs would help.

When Trump leaves office in January, he will be facing an avalanche of legal problems, including civil suits, potential criminal charges in New York, and a variety of investigations initiated by the House of Representatives. What impact, if any, will that have on his potential candidacy?

Not as much as you might expect. If there is one thing we learned from his four years in office, it is that his trusty base couldn’t care less about allegations of misconduct; they just view it as another form of disruption, and thus a promise kept. Furthermore, we know that the allegiance of his base alone is enough to win him the nomination, if not a general election. In short, nothing that comes out of any investigation over the next few years is going to cost him the nomination, if he wants it, unless he winds up doing time in New York, which is unlikely.

The more pressing question is whether his physical and mental health will permit him to run at an even more advanced age. On that point, I make no predictions.

(It’s January 20, 2021. Trump is in the White House bunker with Rudy, Mike Pence, and Mike Pompeo. Melania and Barron have long since departed for Mar-a-Lago. Barr deserted the sinking ship a few days ago, to the disdain of the true believers.

There is a loaded gun on the table. Is it foreshadowing? Of course it is!)

TRUMP: I just don’t understand. Where did we go wrong?

RUDY: Maybe we should have worn masks and pretended to care about stopping the virus.

TRUMP: I hear you, but I just couldn’t do that. My brand is being strong. My father told me always to be strong. Masks are for wimps. I don’t think that was it.

POMPEO: Maybe you should have made more of an effort to feel the people’s pain.

TRUMP: What about my pain? The MSM are always banging on about the virus and dead people. What about me? My pain is much greater than theirs!

PENCE: The problem was that the American people didn’t deserve you. You made America great again, and this is your thanks for it? It’s an outrage!

TRUMP: Yeah, I think that’s it. I think they just got tired of winning so much, and wanted something different.

(An aide bursts through the door)

AIDE: The Bidenistas have reached the White House gate!

TRUMP: How long can you keep them out?

AIDE: Just a few minutes more! (He leaves)

TRUMP: We have to do something! Rudy, go over to the Supreme Court and file something! Amy Coney Barrett will save us! She owes me!

RUDY: It’s too late, boss. The Supremes won’t intervene. Anyway, I can’t even get there at this point.

TRUMP: M & M, any ideas?

POMPEO: You can always retreat to Florida and start working on your comeback. It worked for Nixon. And for Napoleon–sort of.

TRUMP: But I can’t do that. I’d be admitting that I was a loser! I can’t live with that! And the public might ignore my tweets! It’s BAD! It’s more than anyone can bear!

PENCE: I guess that leaves you with just one option. (He points to the gun)

TRUMP: Yeah, I guess you’re right. You’re coming with me, of course. Who wants to go first?

RUDY: I’ll go first. I don’t have any future. I even have the virus. There’s nothing left to lose. (He picks up the gun and blows his brains out)

TRUMP: M & M?

POMPEO: I don’t want to do it. I still have a future. I can run in 2024.

TRUMP: No, you can’t. You’re completely tied to me. You can’t tweet and own the libs the way I do. No one would take you seriously.

POMPEO: You’re probably right. (He shoots himself)

TRUMP: Mike, I guess you’re next.

PENCE: Anything in the service of you and my Lord. (BANG!)

(The aide bursts in again)

AIDE: They’re inside! They’re taking down your pictures and putting up Biden photos! The Andrew Jackson portrait has been removed! Dr. Jill is measuring the curtains in the Oval Office!

TRUMP: It’s time for me to go. (He blows his brains out, and the country is saved for another four years).

A few weeks ago, I predicted that we would see two GOP civil wars after the election: one between Reactionaries who grudgingly accepted the results and those who didn’t; and one between PBPs and Reactionaries as a whole. Where do they stand?

The internal Reactionary battle is in full swing, and may cost the GOP the two Senate seats in Georgia; after all, what’s the point in voting if the system is already rigged? Even Governor Kemp (a/k/a, “The Dumbest Man in America), who tried so desperately to play for Trump’s favor, is now viewed as a Judas by the true believers. The conflict between the two groups isn’t likely to go away anytime soon, as Trump never forgets a slight.

Think of the scene in “Life of Brian” with the “Judean Peoples’ Front” and the “People’s Front of Judea” and you have some idea of what to expect.

The PBPs have succeeded in staying out of the fray thus far by refusing to admit that Biden has prevailed, but that will change as soon as the Electoral College votes are counted. At that point, they will move on. The base will never forgive them for it.

So who would have the nerve and the resources to take on the man on golf cart in 2024? Without listing names, here are some ideological niches that could be filled in a primary battle:

1. A CD, calling for the GOP to become a responsible center right party again;
2. A CL or PBP, emphasizing the need to cut federal spending;
3. A National Conservative (i.e., a Reactionary with a populist economic plan); or
4. A Reactionary who believes that a candidate with a little more finesse, a lot less corruption, more of a firm sense of direction, and two slower Twitter thumbs would have more success in a general election than Trump did. Call him Trump at 90 percent.

What are the prospects for these people? One or more CDs would undoubtedly run, but a CD can’t win in today’s Republican Party, which is now dominated by Reactionaries. Cutting spending resonates with Reactionaries only if its impacts are limited to minorities, which is unrealistic. National Conservatives will be fought tooth and nail by the donor class. That leaves #4 as the most plausible possibility, depending on what happens to Trump in the next four years. I will discuss that in a post tomorrow.