Skip to content

Month: October 2018

Dearest NY Times by tristero

Dearest NY Times 

by tristero

Dearest NY Times,

First, props for doing some things right.

In the print edition, your main page 1 headline reads, “Trump Escalates Use of Migrants as Election Ploy.” The online edition is even more inclusive: “Trump and G.O.P. Candidates Escalate Race and Fear as Election Ploys” And you follow it up with your lead editorial title: “Donald Trump Is Lyin’ Up a Storm.” Thank you very much for telling the truth and telling it plainly.

But then — sigh — we get an oh so Thoughtful and Very Serious ™ op-ed by longtime partisan Republican operative James Baker on the “hard choices” the US faces now that the Saudis have taken to torturing and dismembering journalists. The op-ed ends with this description of Baker:

James A. Baker III, the 61st secretary of state, is a senior partner in the law firm Baker Botts, which has an affiliation with lawyers practicing in Saudi Arabia and represented members of the Saudi royal family in the aftermath of Sept. 11. Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil company, is a contributor to the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy’s Center for Energy Studies.

And I have to ask: Is publishing a free advertorial by a highly paid Saudi apologist your idea of “both-siding” the publishing of a heart-rending essay by Khashoggi’s fiancé? Disclosing an utterly egregious conflict of interest does not make it go away. It merely calls into question the ethical judgment of those publishing the op-ed in the first place.

Seriously, how can you debase yourself like that?

Love,

tristero

Keep yer guvmint hands off my Obamacare by @BloggersRUs

Keep yer guvmint hands off my Obamacare
by Tom Sullivan

Passage of the Affordable Care Act represented a breakthrough in moving the U.S. towards a health care system more for patients than insurance company profits. (There is a long way to go.) Republican efforts to undo Barack Obama’s signature legislation they themselves named Obamacare have not simply been unsuccessful, Republicans find themselves backtracking ahead of mid-term elections. Voters do not want to go back to denial of coverage for preexisting conditions.

CNN reports:

After confidently attacking the law in four consecutive elections, Republicans for the first time this year are playing defense. They are especially struggling to defend the provisions in the House-passed repeal bill, and a separate lawsuit by attorneys general and governors from 20 Republican states, to unravel the law’s requirement that insurers provide coverage, with no surcharge, to patients with preexisting health conditions. Over half of all Democratic ads in House and Senate races over roughly the past month have dealt with some aspect of the health care debate, far more than in the past, according to ad tracking by the Wesleyan Media Project. “Health care is the defining issue of the election,” Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist who is consulting for several liberal groups on the issue, including Protect Our Care, says flatly.

Demonizing an unknown government program before the fact is one thing. Repealing it once it takes root verges on impossible. Weekly Standard founder Bill Kristol knows that well:

“Whichever party is on the offense on health care, is trying to change the status quo, is running a risk, because people for all their general dissatisfaction with the system, they are mostly reasonably content with their health care, and very nervous about it getting worse,” Kristol says. The Republican effort to repeal or retrench the ACA has already extended much longer than the struggle over any other modern safety net program. After Franklin Roosevelt signed Social Security into law in 1935, for instance, Alf Landon, the Republican presidential nominee in 1936, ran on repealing the law. But after Landon won only two states, Wendell Willkie, the GOP presidential nominee in 1940, ran on expanding Social Security. Although Congressional Republicans continued some rearguard actions against the law through the 1940s, the party never again proposed complete repeal.

Medicare and Medicaid rooted even faster. Lyndon Johnson passed health care support for the elderly and the poor in 1965. By the 1968 elections, neither Richard Nixon nor a significant number of Republicans ran on repealing them, although the party has tried to weaken or restructure them, Ronald Brownstein explains.

“The party of message discipline” simultaneously claims to support the popular coverage for preexisting conditions, tried to eliminate premium limits for people with them, wants to allow states to offer “skimpier, cheaper ‘short-term’ health insurance plans,” and wants Obamacare declared null and void:

The Texas attorney general and 19 other Republican state attorneys general are arguing in federal court that since the GOP’s tax law effectively repealed Obamacare’s mandate that all people buy insurance, it is now unconstitutional. The AGs further argue that if the mandate is unconstitutional then all of Obamacare — including the popular protections — are also unlawful.

The lawsuit has puts many Republican candidates in a bind as their states actively attempt to repeal the preexisting conditions in court while they try to convince voters of their desire to uphold those same protections.

“Republicans have never lacked for chutzpah, which is what it takes to file a lawsuit intended to take away protections for preexisting conditions, and then run a soft-focus ad about how committed you are to protecting those with preexisting conditions,” Paul Waldman wrote last month in the Washington Post.

Meantime, the Kaiser Family Foundation reports health care as one voters’ top two issues along with government corruption:


The Party of Trump would rather frighten its cultists with foreign women and children just ahead of Halloween.

* * * * * * * * *

For The Win 2018 is ready for download. Request a copy of my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.

An army of mothers and their babies

An army of mothers and their babies

by digby

Better “lock them up!” … or worse.

Ed Kilgore writes about “The Turner Diaries” for the Trump era:

Last week Donald Trump launched a tweetstorm over the gradual approach to the U.S. border of a “caravan” of Central Americans (a few thousand people at the most):

I am watching the Democrat Party led (because they want Open Borders and existing weak laws) assault on our country by Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, whose leaders are doing little to stop this large flow of people, INCLUDING MANY CRIMINALS, from entering Mexico to U.S….. 

….In addition to stopping all payments to these countries, which seem to have almost no control over their population, I must, in the strongest of terms, ask Mexico to stop this onslaught – and if unable to do so I will call up the U.S. Military and CLOSE OUR SOUTHERN BORDER!.. 

….The assault on our country at our Southern Border, including the Criminal elements and DRUGS pouring in, is far more important to me, as President, than Trade or the USMCA. Hopefully Mexico will stop this onslaught at their Northern Border. All Democrats fault for weak laws!

Partisan politics aside, this whole meme involving a possible military response to refugees besieging the United States reminded me of something … and it finally hit me: It was pretty close to the central premise of The Camp of the Saints, Jean Raspail’s racist French novel of the 1970s that nativists have recently revived as offering a literary warning that the West’s self-destructive liberalism is betraying white people into the hands of their Third World enemies. Here is HuffPost’s brief summary of the book, which I happened to have read shortly after its publication in English in 1975:

The plot of The Camp of the Saints follows a poor Indian demagogue, named “the turd-eater” because he literally eats shit, and the deformed, apparently psychic child who sits on his shoulders. Together, they lead an “armada” of 800,000 impoverished Indians sailing to France. Dithering European politicians, bureaucrats and religious leaders, including a liberal pope from Latin America, debate whether to let the ships land and accept the Indians or to do the right thing — in the book’s vision — by recognizing the threat the migrants pose and killing them all. 

The non-white people of Earth, meanwhile, wait silently for the Indians to reach shore. The landing will be the signal for them to rise up everywhere and overthrow white Western society.

The French government eventually gives the order to repel the armada by force, but by then the military has lost the will to fight. Troops battle among themselves as the Indians stream on shore, trampling to death the left-wing radicals who came to welcome them. Poor black and brown people literally overrun Western civilization.

Members of the latter-day anti-immigration movement and the alt-right alike have adopted the book as a sort of bible, as Sarah Jones noted earlier this year:

The Camp of the Saints is a veritable fixture on alt-right forums across the internet. It stars in Stormfront threads and appears on reading lists disseminated on 8chan’s /pol/ board. At VDARE, white nationalist writer Chris Roberts compared it to George Orwell’s 1984. The Camp of the Saints appears frequently on Reddit, in r/Europe and r/New_Right and r/DarkEnlightenment and r/The_Donald, where eager Trump fans even launched a live reading series. Matthew Heimbach, founder of the Traditionalist Worker’s Party, recommends the novel to his followers; so does Jared Taylor, founder of American Renaissance, which bills itself as “the internet’s premier race-realist site.”

But more respectable people with access to real political power view the book as foundational, too. These include most notably former Breitbart chairman and presidential counselor Stephen Bannon:

“It’s been almost a Camp of the Saints-type invasion into Central and then Western and Northern Europe,” he said in October 2015.

“The whole thing in Europe is all about immigration,” he said in January 2016. “It’s a global issue today — this kind of global Camp of the Saints.”

“It’s not a migration,” he said later that January. “It’s really an invasion. I call it the Camp of the Saints.”


“When we first started talking about this a year ago,” he said in April 2016, “we called it the Camp of the Saints. … I mean, this is Camp of the Saints, isn’t it?”

Shortly before the 2016 presidential contest began, Bannon’s young Breitbart protege Julia Hahn, who is still serves in the Trump White House, penned a long tribute to the book’s prophetic nature, noting Pope Francis’s advent as a migrant-loving Latin American pontiff; comparing Marco Rubio to Raspail’s great villain, the French traitor Albert Durfort; and accusing media elites of failing to warn Americans and Europeans of their imminent demise.

Nativist congressman Steve King touted the book in an Iowa radio interview last year as a sort of cultural antidote, as Slate reported:

Mickelson: If we don’t raise godly children to take our place … that vacuum will be filled by whatever washes up on our shore and makes a claim on our territory. Civilization has to be on purpose. Isn’t that correct, Congressman King? 

King: It has to be on purpose and I would recommend a book to your listeners, and the title of it is The Camp of the Saints. And it’s written by a Frenchman, Jean—J-E-A-N—Raspail—R-A-S-P-A-I-L.

Even some conservatives who are repelled by the racism and brutality of Camp of the Saints believe it raises questions that must be asked, as Rod Dreher observes today, after he, too, recognized the “caravan” as an analogue:

The book is a kind of alt-right pornography, and I found it frequently repulsive to read. Yet looking at that migrant caravan heading north, that “numberless disinherited people of the South” who like a tidal wave, are marching north toward our fortunate country’s wide-gaping frontier — it’s impossible not to think about Raspail’s ugly prophetic work.

How far, ultimately, are the United States and Europe willing to go to control their own borders in the face of people who believe they have nothing to lose by trying to cross the frontier? And: at what point do most of us cease to believe that we have anything worth defending — and a majority of us come to believe that those numberless disinherited people from the South are “a kind of solution” to our terminal malaise?

Obviously, the fact that the “caravan” and the lurid way in which Trump is describing it resembles the migrant flotilla Raspail wrote about does not mean the novel’s apocalyptic clash on the shores of France will be brought to life on the Rio Grande. And perhaps Trump’s pledge to use the military to repel migrants is just another base-energizing gesture to conflate immigration with terrorism, or to pretend migrants are thoroughly marbled with ISIS members and other purveyors of violence.

But at some point, we have to take people seriously when they treat migrants as an existential threat to civilization, and the use of force against them as a sad but necessary measure of self-defense. Yes, it requires an unusual combination of paranoia and racism to view a few thousand poor people fleeing violence as justifying a panic. But the president of the United States has no compunctions about it:

I had never heard of this book until a couple of years ago. It’s absurd. I can’t believe anyone could take it seriously.

But they want to wallow in this lurid racism. They love it.

.

More good cop, bad cop?

More good cop, bad cop?

By digby

I mean, really?:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) doubled down on his condemnation of Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman Sunday, recalling his past admiration for the leader by whom he now feels played in light of the killing of Jamal Khashoggi.

“MBS talks about reforming the country in a way that I liked,” Graham told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo. “I never felt more used in my life. I introduced him when he was in Washington.”

The senator has taken a particularly strong stance against the prince in recent days, condemning him for Khashoggi’s death which occurred after the journalist entered the Saudi consulate in Turkey earlier this month. While President Donald Trump has accepted Saudi Arabia’s unfounded explanation that Khashoggi was killed during a fist fight, Graham wants action.

“I find it impossible to believe that the crown prince was not involved, so go after him and his inner circle,” he suggested. “Save the alliance. I don’t mind military sales but I cannot do business with the current leadership. MBS — he’s done to me.”

Graham, like certain other lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, hasn’t minced words with regard to the leader, who he’s convinced “is responsible for killing Mr. Khashoggi in the most brutal way.”

“I think his behavior is way outside civilized norms, and I will never go back as long as he’s there,” the senator said.

This seems dramatic even for Huckleberry. I still think they are playing some sort of role in all this. Lindsay’s a diva but this is over the top.

A useful primer on the caravan

A useful primer on the caravan

by digby

America’s Voices sent this out in response to Trump’s hysteria about “MS-13 and middle east”  in  the caravan and all the other “bad people” he’s protecting us from:

As President Trump stokes fears and tries to whip up a frenzy over border security, immigration and a caravan of Central Americans seeking safety and opportunity, here is our take:

Trump wants to exploit this issue, not solve it. 

Trump’s frenzy over the issue is ugly, cynical and primarily motivated by his desire to hang onto unchecked political power. Yes, he wants to spur turnout by his base, but more importantly, he wants to block out the focus on the issue that matters the most to voters — healthcare. He knows that if voters focus on what they want, it’s not even close. Of course, we’ve seen homestretch fear-mongering over immigrants before. In Virginia’s 2017 governors race, Republican Ed Gillespie stoked fear of immigrants as his closing argument, and ended up losing by 9 percentage points. But that isn’t stopping Trump and the GOP from going back to the well.

Trump and the GOP have been in power for two years; this is their mess and they have failed. 

Republicans control the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court. Yet, Trump is blaming Democrats for the Republican failure to deal with this challenge in an intelligent and serious manner. In fact, over the past two years, Trump and his immigration advisor Stephen Miller made sure to blow up every serious effort to enact bipartisan immigration legislation. Instead, the centerpiece of Trump’s border policy has been to rip thousands of toddlers from their parents — a practice both immoral and ineffective. Now the Trump administration is gearing up to restart this dehumanizing and cruel policy.

There is a more humane and effective policy approach than the cruel and chaotic Trump approach.

A responsible, humane and effective approach to the multi-dimensional challenge of migration from Central America would do the following: 1) slow the out-migration from Central America by working with governments and civil society to give vulnerable residents a reason to stay home; 2) initiate a multilateral approach to protecting, screening and resettling refugees, including working with the UNHCR; and 3) state clearly that it is a strength when America stands as a beacon of hope and a country that recognizes the humanity of vulnerable people fleeing violence. Trump and his team done have done just opposite: 1) ending policies such as the Obama Administration’s push to facilitate refugee applications from within countries of origin; 2) alienating and bullying regional allies while ignoring the UNHCR; and 3) separating families with breathless cruelty and no plans for reunification and gutting asylum rules and deny access to a fair process on what amounts to life-or-death refugee claims.

The following is a statement from Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice:

Harry Truman famously said ‘the buck stops here.’ Trump tweets, blusters and blames. FDR said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Trump says the main thing we have to fear are refugees. JFK called America a nation of immigrants. Trump calls on America to hate immigrants.

With respect to the policy challenge before us now, he doesn’t get it. He thinks migration from Central America is a problem that starts and ends at the U.S.-Mexico border. He thinks bluster is a strategy. And he is failing miserably.

Of course, like everything with Trump, this is about politics. He’s cynically exploiting the caravan in hopes of whipping up fears over immigrants to distract voters from the GOP’s real record on healthcare.

The majority of Americans embrace immigrants and want leaders to bring us together and solve problems, rather than blame others. The majority of Americans dislike the divisiveness Trump relishes. Election Day is an opportunity for that majority to be heard.

It’s the old “they’re comin’ ta git ya, run for your lives!!!!” gambit. Childish boogeyman stories from the President of the United States.

.

Baby Trump is getting ready for a yuge tantrum

Baby Trump is getting ready for a yuge tantrum

by digby

Donald Trump is best known for bragging, lying, taking credit for others’ successes and blaming others for his failures. He is, in short, a spoiled child.

Get ready for a real tantrum and whine fest if the Democrats win next month:

At his rallies, President Donald Trump argues that the midterm elections are about one person — Donald Trump. “Get out in 2018,” Trump told a crowd in Missouri last month, “because you’re voting for me!”

Privately, the president says the exact opposite.

You have to love that he knows he can get away with this with his blind followers:

According to two people familiar with the conversations, Trump is distancing himself from a potential Republican thumping on Election Day. He’s telling confidants that he doesn’t see the midterms as a referendum on himself, describing his 2020 reelection bid as “the real election.” And he says that he holds House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell responsible for protecting their majorities in Congress.

According to one person with knowledge of these talks, Trump has said of Ryan and McConnell: “These are their elections … and if they screw it up, it’s not my fault.”

Other sources said Trump is sure to lash out at perhaps his favorite bogeyman of all — the media — for allegedly opposing him.

It’s not all pre-emptive finger-pointing: Trump expresses greater confidence than most pundits about his party’s chances of maintaining its House majority and expanding its control of the Senate. And he credits McConnell for motivating GOP voters by holding the line on Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation.

But in the event of an electoral blowout, Trump is poised to shift the blame a mile down Pennsylvania Avenue.

“Look for the White House to say something like, ‘Paul Ryan chose to be a lame-duck speaker instead of leaving, which cost Congress the chance to do several things before November,’” said an aide to one GOP member who speaks with the president often.

A Democratic wave would be especially awkward for a president whose brand is success, and who boasts that his record in office is unmatched by any of his modern predecessors.

Already, hints of a distancing strategy have started to creep into Trump’s public comments, even as he continues to crow at rallies that the midterms are a “referendum” on his first two years in office. Trump told The Associated Press recently that some of his supporters have said to him, “I will never ever go and vote in the midterms because you’re not running.”

Inside the White House, aides are resigned to the fact that Trump — as he has often done — will follow his gut on how to message any Democratic takeover of the House on Nov. 6. Those around Trump are anticipating lots of unfiltered, early-morning tweets casting blame on everyone but the president.

“It would be a lot of shooting from the hip in early morning Twitter,” said a well-placed Republican source, who added that the White House seems to lack clear plans for post-election messaging.

If the Democrats win, I think it’s important for people to make it crystal clear that Trump and the GOP’s sycophancy and complicity is the reason they lost.

The presidential race starts the minute this one is over. (Ugh) And if Democrats have the House and/or the Senate, Trump is going to start running against them hard. They have nothing to lose by going right back at both the GOP and their Dear Leader. They are the same target, no difference, it’s been proven.

.

It’s time to put Nunes and the boys out of business

It’s time to put Nunes and the boys out of business

by digby

You’ve got to love that headline. It says everything about this GOP congress and its complicity in the Russian hacking of the presidential campaign and the cover-up by the administration and the Republican Party. I have screen capped it for posterity.

Yes, yes it is.

Let’s be clear. The idea that there ever needed to be an investigation into the Russia investigation was always a
partisan propaganda ploy by Trump’s accomplices in the House to deflect and cover for their leader and a tactic to pressure the DOJ and make them second-guess themselves and go easy on Trump. It has actually been somewhat successful in that regard although we don’t know its effect on the Mueller investigation since they’ve been very quiet with respect to the Trump involvement in the scheme. For all we know they will exonerate him…

But, yes, if they lose the House the “investigation” into the investigation will end. And if we are lucky, the congressional investigation into the actual crimes will finally begin.

.

Florida’s Andrew Gillum says “let’s bring it home”

Florida’s Andrew Gillum says “let’s bring it home”

by digby

Works for me. But the elderly, conservative white Trump voters in Florida are having none of that. He’s got them terrified:

President Donald Trump’s loyalists here at Florida’s premier retirement community fear Andrew Gillum.

It has nothing to do with his race, they insist, when asked about the 39-year-old Democrat who could become the state’s first African-American governor. Instead, The Villages’ deeply conservative residents are convinced a Gillum victory would trigger an era of high crime, higher taxes and moral failing.

“He’ll kill everything that’s good about Florida,” says Talmadge Strickland, a 66-year-old retired firefighter wearing a “Trump 2020″ baseball cap at a rally for Gillum’s opponent. “He will hurt us; he will physically hurt us with his socialist mentality.”

He will “physically hurt them.” That says it all …

But they aren’t the only people in Florida:

Backed by the fortune of Democratic billionaires Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg, Florida’s young people are fighting to be heard.

Those rallying behind Gillum in recent days include 16-year-old Sari Kaufman, a Parkland survivor who spent Sunday canvassing for the Democratic gubernatorial candidate.

In an interview, Kaufman suggested young people are more excited about Gillum than Nelson, particularly because of Gillum’s status as a younger candidate running statewide for the first time.

“If he is successful and other candidates are successful, it will mean that my fellow classmates didn’t die in vain,” Kaufman said.

African-American leaders are also working to reverse their community’s typical drop-off in midterm elections. NAACP President Derrick Johnson said his organization is “microfocused” on boosting black turnout this fall. A statewide canvassing effort is underway across Florida, where organizers hope to bump black turnout by at least 5 percent from four years ago.

It was easy to find evidence of Gillum’s influence among so-called low-propensity voters in recent days, as activists from more than a half dozen competing groups scoured the state to ensure they cast ballots.

Anne Fazio, a 19-year-old Jacksonville student, was among thousands of people contacted at home over the weekend by the Koch-backed Americans For Prosperity’s massive door-knocking push. Standing at her front door, she didn’t hesitate when a conservative volunteer asked whether she was going to vote.

“I’m voting for Andrew Gillum,” Fazio said, praising his support for gun control and expanding Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands of low-income residents.

Asked by the AP whether she would support Nelson, she said: “I think I’ll probably vote for him — he’s a Democrat, right?”

DeSantis is just counting on the armed Trump cult to run hysterically to the polls to keep the black man from physically hurting them.

The Republican DeSantis is making little effort to expand his coalition as he embraces Trump and his policies in a state the president carried by 1 point.

DeSantis vowed during Sunday’s debate to work closely with the Trump administration, while noting that Gillum has called for Trump’s impeachment. “You’ve got to be able to work with the administration,” DeSantis declared.

He also dismissed Parkland students’ calls for stronger efforts to reduce gun violence when asked about his opposition to modest gun control measures passed by Florida’s Republican-led legislature in the wake of the Parkland shooting.

I don’t know how it’s going to come out. But Gillum certainly won the debate on CNN last night.

And apparently, Mother Nature is one of those angry women. Hurricane Michael hit in almost all Republican areas. Those Trump voters are a little bit distracted at the moment. And Trump hasn’t exactly been attentive. He spent the day after the hurricane hanging out with Kanye West exchanging gibberish.

It would be very nice to have this populous state in the hands of Democratic administration. When Republicans hold power there they have a bad habit of stealing elections.

.

Misplaced tears for Mitch McConnell

Misplaced tears for Mitch McConnell
by digby

My Salon column this morning:

The news media has been rightfully up in arms about the president of the United States participating in a cover-up of the murder of a journalist and Washington Post columnist. And they’ve been equally critical of President Trump’s comments last week at a rally in Montana, where he applauded a GOP congressman for body-slamming a reporter because he asked a question. Likewise, the media has understandably protested the Secret Service telling an accredited journalist that he was not allowed to ask Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner questions on an airplane.

This is, after all, a country with a Bill of Rights that protects freedom of the press. All right thinking people are supportive of their position on these issues. Between all that and the constant demeaning of the media by the president, it’s clear that this administration is using the power of the government and the president’s bully pulpit to threaten the press, and not just in a metaphorical sense. All of the above examples demonstrate a threat of physical violence.

People who understand human rights also understand the role the free press plays in securing those rights. Anyone who cares about liberty and justice can see that this crusade to protect powerful government officials from accountability by muzzling the media is a danger to us all.

Over the past few months, we’ve gone round and round about “civility” — who’s got it, who doesn’t, who’s to blame for losing it. The truth is that this country’s always been politically unruly and sometimes even violent. It’s not in the least bit unusual for citizens to confront their representatives, sometimes rudely and obnoxiously. Just in the past two decades, from Code Pink interrupting and protesting in every Iraq war hearing to the Tea Party spitting on congressmen and screaming in their faces over the health care bill, people from all sides of the political divide have been getting up in their elected leaders’ faces. Until recently, this was seen as a normal part of our raucous political life in turbulent times.

This past weekend, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was yelled at in a Louisville restaurant while sitting with his wife, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao. A man approached their table and angrily told they should leave the country. When other patrons spoke up and told him to leave them alone he shouted, “They’re coming for Social Security!” (This happens to be true. McConnell told CNBC just last week that the only solution for the massive deficit caused by his massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy is to cut “entitlements.”)

There have been several similar incidents. Protesters and constituents have approached Sen. Ted Cruz and his wife, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen in public places, giving them hell over policies and practices.

Of all the people in our public life to get angry about this, the last you’d expect would be members of the media, who are being demonized by the president and these very same politicians. But some of them are quite upset and have taken to social media to scold citizens for addressing their leaders in this way:

These are all fine reporters but they are on the wrong track. The same First Amendment that protects them from the authoritarian impulses of a politician like Donald Trump also protects these citizens’ free speech and right to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

Not all journalists agreed with this sentiment. Wesley Lowrey of the Washington Post came back with this sharp rebuke:

And journalist Connie Shultz, who also happens to be married to Senator Sherrod Brown, weighed in with a typically wise and decent comment:

Public officials whining about having to deal with angry citizens is unseemly and journalists should not protect them from it. As Shultz says, it’s part of the job. In fact, it’s a constitutional duty.

Of course, these Republicans might have an easier time of it if they would stop ducking their constituents and hold town halls and other events. But they’ve cut way back on that part of their job because they don’t want to face “gotcha” questions. McConnell himself had a hissy fit over rape survivors confronting senators in the Capitol during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, complaining on the floor of the Senate, “I don’t care how many members they chase, how many people they harass here in the halls, I want to make one thing perfectly clear: We will not be intimidated by these people.”

Apparently, at least some elected Republicans believe they shouldn’t have to answer to citizens at all. That’s part of what’s making people so angry. The fact is that Republicans all over the country are suppressing the votes of American citizens. We see it, it’s obvious; they aren’t really trying to hide it.

We are also living with a system in which a majority of citizens are routinely being relegated to minority status through anachronistic democratic “systems” like the Electoral College, which denied the White House to the winner of the popular vote winner the White House twice within 16 years. (There was only one clear-cut example in the previous 220). As the Washington Post’s Paul Waldman has pointed out, in the last three U.S. Senate elections “there were 15 million more votes cast for Democrats than for Republicans,” but the GOP still holds a Senate majority and therefore also control of the judiciary. For Democrats to win a House majority this year, they can’t just get 51 percent of the vote; most experts believe they have to win by 7 or 8 points just to overcome the effects of Republican gerrymandering.

One might feel differently about this if Republicans made even the slightest gesture to the majority, acknowledging that their power is not derived from a popular mandate. But they don’t. They ram through all legislation on a party-line vote, telling the opposition to like it or lump it.

Even setting aside the odious presidency of Donald Trump, people have legitimate grievances. And their supposed leaders are ignoring them.

On the same weekend that McConnell was accosted in Louisville, a woman in another restaurant in Lovettsville, Virginia, began screaming obscenities at another woman and her family, which included a 7-year-old daughter, for having the nerve to speak Spanish in her presence:

This kind of thing happens a lot. People speaking Spanish in restaurants, whether employeesor customers, are routinely harangued by right-wingers. (I don’t have to mention all the white people who call the cops on black people for no reason, do I? Or the Trump supporters who run around screaming in people’s faces?)

No doubt it’s unpleasant for pampered Republican political leaders to be accosted in restaurants by their unruly constituents. But maybe it will give them a little empathy for what it’s like to be nonwhite in Donald Trump’s America these days. If nothing else, it would be nice if the political media understood that the people who are creating this toxic atmosphere in the first place are the last people to deserve our pity.

‘Showing up is 80 percent of life.’ by @BloggersRUs

‘Showing up is 80 percent of life.’
by Tom Sullivan

Early voting is underway in North Carolina. Because the NCGOP enjoys jiggering with the next election to keep voters confused after every time it loses a key race, the 2018 election has its own set of confusing features. Voting started on a Wednesday instead of a Thursday. Republicans insisted polls remains open for more hours each day, meaning budgeting for fewer early voting sites. (The extra hours added in the early morning and evening are dead.) Republicans lost a key supreme court seat in 2016 when court races were officially nonpartisan. This year, lo and behold, they are not. There are six constitutional amendments on this year’s ballot. They are the legislative equivalent of clickbait.

As we pored over the daily returns Saturday, a colleague displayed a graph comparing the state’s voting age population against voting participation so far. The image was stark (similar to the population graph above). Younger people have the numbers. Older people do the voting. The population curve skews heavily left (younger). The voter participation curve skews right (older).

Michelle I. Gao writes in the Harvard Crimson that the fuss over Taylor Swift encouraging young people to “vote based on who most closely represents your values” is misplaced:

Voting is not very exciting. There may be a few interesting swing districts or states, in which the act of voting for a revolutionary candidate would truly be exciting. But most of us cannot participate in those races. For most of us who live in places that lean one way or another, race outcomes are essentially predetermined, and the act of voting itself does not matter much. I confess that I simply expect the gears of democracy to keep turning, regardless of my own civic participation — elections will be held, voters will vote, losers will give up power, and winners will rise in their place.

This is not to say that voting is stupid — on the contrary. Voting may feel mundane, but that voting can feel mundane is the real privilege. People had to fight for this right hundreds of years ago. Women had to fight just a hundred years ago. It is shortsighted and selfish of us not to vote, holding out for something as fickle as excitement.

Not voting is like seeing a $20 bill lying in the gutter and not picking it up. Younger voters have the numbers to make the changes they want to see in this country. They have the power. But they need reach out, take it, and use it. If for no other reason than so many of their elders want them not to.

This year more than any recent election, the mechanisms of voter suppression are more visible than ever. Right out in the open, like posting cops in armbands outside polling places in minority neighborhoods. The Republican president is in on it.

Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chairman in 2005, apologized to the NAACP for the GOP’s “southern strategy” of heightening racial divisions in the South to its electoral advantage. But the party never abandoned it.

In his infamous 1981 “n*gger, n*gger, n*gger” interview, GOP strategist Lee Atwater confidently declared his would be “the first generation of Southerners that won’t be prejudiced.” A couple of generations later, his party has dropped the pretense of dog whistles and taken up vote suppression efforts more sophisticated, more widespread, and more surgically precise than cops in armbands.

Brian Kemp’s voter purges and “exact match” roadblocks to voting in Georgia suggest Atwater’s classic quote has been rewritten:

You start out under Jim Crow with poll taxes and “literacy tests.” By 1968, you can’t do that—that hurts you, illegal. So you say stuff like, uh, voter fraud, photo ID, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about voter roll purges, and all these things you’re talking about are totally administrative things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “Exact match,” is much more abstract than even the ID thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than poll taxes and “literacy tests.”

If we don’t show up to play, we forfeit. Young voters and minority voters have the power if they will pick it up and use it.

* * * * * * * * *

For The Win 2018 is ready for download. Request a copy of my county-level election mechanics primer at tom.bluecentury at gmail.