Cromwell

The confluence of toxic masculinity and reactionary ideas in normal times is a guy in a black pickup truck with a Trump sticker deliberately cutting you off and blowing exhaust in your face. We’ve all been through it. It’s incredibly annoying, yes, and you may fantasize about blowing the guy away, but he’s no real danger to the public, and you don’t do anything.

The same guy in a pandemic is demanding his allegedly God-given right to be free of reasonable restrictions on movement. He doesn’t give a damn if he infects the rest of the world; the only thing that matters to him is his own personal freedom. He’s a genuine threat to public health. There is no serious political philosophy that justifies this kind of behavior under current conditions.

No one has greater respect for individual rights than I do, and few people have less regard for social media lynch mobs, but there is a legitimate place for shaming under these circumstances. Just use it reasonably, and with restraint.

Just one day after releasing a reasonably sober, if horribly incomplete, blueprint for the reopening of the country, Trump returned to form and encouraged residents of three states with Democratic governors to defy stay-at-home orders. This was completely predictable, if totally irresponsible, and is part of a plan to deflect blame by changing the subject from public health and economic hardship to individual freedom.

So how should blue states respond to premature demands to reopen? Here are some principles:

1. IGNORE THE NOISE AND DO WHAT’S RIGHT: Some noisy people are going to criticize you no matter what you do and how it turns out, so you might as well do the right thing and hope for the best.

2. USE OBJECTIVE PUBLIC HEALTH STANDARDS FOR REOPENING: That will cut down on complaints about arbitrary decisionmaking.

3. DON’T OVERREACH: Don’t create arbitrary distinctions among businesses, and don’t prohibit the use of large public outdoor spaces, just to name two things.

4. ERR ON THE SIDE OF TRANSPARENCY AND TOO MUCH INFORMATION: The public will be generally supportive if they understand what you’re doing and why.

5. DON’T OVERREACT TO A FEW RIGHT-WING NUTS: No elaboration is needed.

There is a long history of Russian tsars absenting themselves during hard times and letting their subordinates take the blame. Vladimir Putin apparently is no different. He’s absenting himself from the spotlight and letting lower officials take the heat for unpopular measures; when the virus is gone, however, he will undoubtedly take the credit for it.

Kind of sounds like Trump, doesn’t it? Except that Trump’s lust for publicity is too great for that. He can’t stand having anyone else be the center of attention. His press briefings tie him to the crisis in ways that he will regret in November. For better or worse, this is his pandemic and depression, because he demands that everything be about him.

He would have been wiser to pay more attention to his hero. Once again, it is his weaknesses, not any underappreciated strengths, that may be the country’s salvation in the long run.

Imagine that you are in a state which no longer has meaningful and enforceable restrictions on social distancing. The number of cases and deaths has fallen substantially over a period of weeks, but there is no vaccine, and universal testing is a distant dream. Would you:

1. Attend an athletic event, a concert, or a theatrical performance?

2. Go to a restaurant, even if its capacity is reduced?

3. Fly anywhere?

4. Use any kind of public transportation?

5. Go back to work in an office or manufacturing plant where management does not strictly enforce its own distancing and cleaning rules?

6. Shop in any store that does not enforce distancing, even if it is no longer legally required?

I suspect most people would respond negatively to the majority, and perhaps all, of these questions. If I’m right, it simply illustrates that the critical issue in the economic recovery is consumer and worker confidence, not regulations, and that confidence will not return until it is generally accepted that you can engage in standard economic activity without running the risk of catching the virus. That, in turn, cannot be done without a rigorous regime of testing. Why that part of the equation is not receiving the attention it deserves is a mystery to me.

Realistically, the private sector is probably our best hope here. Businesses will have every incentive to build confidence among their workers and consumers. They have the ability to enforce their own testing, cleaning, and distancing rules, even if the government doesn’t. Those that do will have the best chance of survival, regardless of what Trump and the governors decide.

You’re a major figure on Wall Street, and the Trump campaign comes to your door asking for a contribution. What do you do?

You appreciate the tax cuts, deregulation, and kind words from the president, of course, but you have major concerns about his tariffs and his erratic, autocratic behavior. You were concerned all along that he didn’t have what it takes to deal with a crisis. Recent events have confirmed that your fears were justified.

If Sanders were the nominee, this would still be a no-brainer, but he isn’t. Biden obviously isn’t a socialist, except to the extent that anyone in the White House at this point has to support enormous amounts of additional federal spending to deal with the fallout from the virus. The Trump campaign’s argument about socialism consequently falls on deaf ears.

And so, the answer to the question is, you demand more tax cuts for rich people and corporations as a condition precedent to a large campaign contribution. That is why, in spite of the arguments made by “national conservatives,” you are likely to see regressive tax cuts at the top of the agenda if Trump wins a second term.

You can call me Sebastian. Yeah, like the guy in all of those old paintings.

My family has lived in this small town for nearly a hundred years. My daddy, his daddy, and his daddy before that. We’ve all managed to make a living here. We sure weren’t rich, but we weren’t poor either. We stood on our feet and never, ever asked for any government welfare. I’m proud of that.

Over the last 30 years or so, life has gotten harder. It’s tough to make a living these days, with the Chinese and all. And the thing is, the government doesn’t care about people like me. They only care about illegal immigrants and gays and blacks and other people who want to pick my pocket and get cuts in line. Then they call me a bigot and say I have “white privilege.” Right! All I do is work hard and pay the bills for everyone else! What kind of privilege is that?

Trump? Hell, I know he isn’t perfect. Sometimes I just want to jump through the screen and tell him to shut up. But the thing is–he’s on my side! He knows who the enemy is. He’s trying his best to shake things up and help people like me. Maybe he doesn’t always succeed, but at least he’s trying. That’s more than anyone else in Washington is doing.

Would I risk my life for him and go to restaurants and bars with the virus still going? Damn right! I’m not doing it for him; I’m doing it for myself and my kids and grandchildren. I don’t want them growing up in a world where white Christians aren’t respected. Trump is the only thing between us and that world. We have to do what we can to help him out.

It’s July. The stay-at-home orders have been lifted, but deaths from the virus are continuing, unemployment is over ten percent, and consumer confidence is very low. Millions of small businesses have disappeared. The hospitality industry is fighting for survival. There is no rocket fuel in the recovery. Things are looking bad for November.

This is a moment made for the used car dealer in chief. He runs around the country like a madman, insisting that America is back (due to him, of course) and that renewed prosperity is just around the corner. The implicit–or, in some cases, explicit–message to red Americans is to risk their health and their lives for the sake of the economy and his re-election. After all, if the Democrats win, the country will be run by illegal immigrants, women, and gays, and we can’t have that, can we?

In some red communities, this actually works. Mostly, it doesn’t. In any event, red America, which represents a relatively small part of the overall economy, can’t bring the country back by itself. Unemployment is still in double digits in November. Only a miracle, or vote suppression on a massive scale, can save him now.

Trump is angry with the WHO for sucking up to the Chinese instead of taking a harder line and demanding more transparency. Anyone else would have a reasonable point, but Trump also consistently sucks up to the Chinese leadership, and refuses to accommodate American business and political leaders who don’t suck up to him.

Just another instance of the pot calling the kettle black.

Congressional Democrats and Republicans typically “compromise” on spending issues by satisfying both sides and increasing the deficit. With that in mind, why is the GOP balking at providing needed funds for hospitals and state and local governments, particularly since it is delaying additional payments to their PBP constituents?

Frankly, I’m at a loss to explain the hostility to hospitals under the current circumstances, but the state and local government part is obvious. A large portion of the GOP basically hates government–even state and local governments it controls–and views the imposition of furloughs and salary cuts on public employees as a positive development. It’s their way of getting back at the deep state, I suppose.

It won’t work in the end, because even GOP voters demand a decent level of local services, and aid to state and local governments was one of the most cost-effective ways of saving jobs in 2009. For now, however, everyone suffers unnecessarily.

To James I, it was simply a matter of logic: a divine right ruler was not subject to English law. Sovereignty granted by God could not be limited by tradition, property rights, or Parliament; his actions were subject only to the judgment of the Almighty. If he abided by the law, it was purely a matter of grace that could be reversed at any time. He actually did respect English law and traditions in practice, but his pronouncements on the issue naturally made his subjects nervous.

In a somewhat similar vein, Donald Trump’s absurd statements about his authority to re-open businesses in the states are mostly white noise. Trump craves attention, adulation, and votes more than raw power. His idea of federalism involves him getting the credit and looking like a leader; state governments do the real work and take all of the blame. Appalling as this is, it’s more alarming on paper than it is in the real world.

Where is the DOJ on this? I’m dying to hear from Bill Barr. Does his theory of executive power go this far? Where would he find support in the Constitution for it? Would he dare cross his master and disagree in public? Inquiring minds want to know.

Aye-aye, Captain Bligh!

Biden didn’t win the nomination by running a great campaign; in fact, he won several states without really campaigning at all. He ultimately prevailed because African-Americans trusted him after years of service, because the majority of the electorate thought socialism was a losing bet, and because Warren was uniquely vulnerable to an identity-based campaign. That’s not going to be enough in November.

Biden is going to need plenty of help from surrogates in the general election. How should he do that? Here are my suggestions:

1. Secretary of Uplift: Barack Obama. No one in my lifetime has provided inspiration like Obama. No one is even close. The GOP has nothing like him.

2. Negative Campaigning: Elizabeth Warren. Warren lost primarily because the voters understood that everything about her fed Trump’s narrative about over-educated elites. That aside, Warren has a unique ability to find and go for the jugular. Give her plenty of money and let her run.

3. Minority Outreach: Kamala Harris. Biden needs someone to pay his debt to African-Americans and bring excitement to his campaign. Harris will do the trick quite nicely as the junior member of the ticket.

Barack Obama didn’t play a particularly important role in Clinton’s campaign because she seemed to have things under control, he didn’t want to outshine her, and he had a country to run. He kept mostly quiet during Trump’s first three years, because Bush did it for him, and he didn’t want to be divisive. He didn’t take sides during the 2020 primaries, because he knew he was needed as a unifying figure at the end, regardless of who won. But all that is gone now, and it’s all hands on deck.

Biden needs him; the Democratic Party needs him; the nation needs him. We need his intellect, his integrity, and his ability to uplift. We need him to protect his legacy from a vandal who is determined to destroy it. More than anything else, we need him to help save the country from becoming the illiberal state that could well be our future if Trump, in spite of everything, wins a third term.

He’ll be there. I’m sure of it.

Trump has apparently taken the position that he has the sole power to determine when the various social distancing schemes imposed by the states can be relaxed. This is consistent with his skewed concept of federalism: he gets the fun parts, and state and local governments are stuck with the pain.

I have to assume that he thinks that the commerce clause prevails over traditional state police powers, even during a pandemic, and even when the federal government disclaimed any interest in creating the regulations in question. That line of reasoning sounds questionable, at best. If push comes to shove and the issue is litigated, however, the Democrats’ interests would actually be best served by a Trump victory, because the commerce clause is their legal weapon of choice to expand federal power, and the right has done its best to limit its use in the recent relevant past.

Don’t think Mitch McConnell doesn’t know that. He’ll be begging Trump not to make the argument. Will the man on golf cart listen to him? As he likes to say, we’ll see.

Many years ago, I had to deal with a bureaucrat whose analyses were almost invariably wrong. My rule of thumb with him was that there was a presumption of incorrectness attached to everything he said and did.

Why does that come to mind when I see that Larry Kudlow is going to be on the council that makes recommendations on when to reopen the country?