Skip to content

Month: May 2022

And about that leak

The wingnuts are pretending to be outraged because they are afraid of the political implications of the decision

The Republicans are having a fit about this Supreme Court draft decision overturning Roe. Needless to say, it’s not about the decision itself. It’s about the leak. You’d think there would be dancing in the streets but no. They’re freaking out.

It sounds like they might be a bit concerned about the political ramifications of this decision:

Yeah, whatever. I still can’t see why it makes any difference if we find out this decision now or in June but whatever.

Anyway, as you listen to endless riffing about this being an unprecedented break with Supreme Court norms, think about this:

It’s remarkable, the leak of what appears to be an initial draft majority opinion. SCOTUS generally has kept its secrets and has kept confidential its internal processes and deliberations.

But the Court does occasionally leak, and it has leaked before about Roe v. Wade.

Its recorded history of leaks dates back to mid-19th century. Some leaks have commented on a decision after its release. Others have provided accounts of personal relationships/conflicts among the justices. And, yes, some opinions have leaked before release.

Consider the 1852 case Pennsylvania v. Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Company. Ten days before the Court handed down its decision, the New York Tribune reported the outcome.

Two years later, the bridge case returned to the Court, and again the Tribune scooped the justices before they made their decision public. Later that year, the Tribune published a running account of the deliberations in Dred Scott.

Historians have speculated that these leaks came from Justice John McLean, who authored the first bridge opinion before dissenting in the second one, as well as Dred Scott.

More recently, in 1968, New York Times reporter Fred Graham wrote a story about Justice Fortas’s extrajudicial activities to support the Vietnam War, after a law clerk leaked the details to Graham.

The 1970s brought a wave of leaks. First, Justice Douglas in June 1972 wrote a memo to his colleagues about Roe v. Wade. Somehow, it reached the Washington Post, which published a story about the memo and the Court’s inner deliberations.

Then, Time magazine published a story about Roe v. Wade before the court announced it, reporting the outcome and the vote. Infuriated, Burger demanded a meeting with Time’s editors, chastising them for scooping the court.

The chief justice believed a law clerk was to blame, so he ordered all clerks not to speak to reporters. This resulted in what became known as the “20-second rule”: Any clerk caught talking to a reporter would be fired within 20 seconds.

In 1977, NPR penetrated the justices’ conference by reporting that they had voted 5-3 not to review the convictions of three defendants in the Watergate cover-up cases.

The story, obtained by Nina Totenberg and confirmed by the New York Times, also reported that Burger had delayed the announcement of that decision so he could try to recruit the fourth vote necessary to review the convictions.

A couple years later, Burger was still fighting leaks. In 1979, he reassigned a typesetter at the Court’s printing office after concluding that the typesetter had leaked nonpublic information to ABC correspondent Tim O’Brien.

Not long before, O’Brien had reported in advance the outcome of a case involving the right of courts to question reporters about their thoughts during the editorial process. O’Brien then broke another story in 1986, when he scooped the justices on a decision re: budget balancing.

O’Brien reported that on a particular day the Court would strike down a key part of a law. He was right about the outcome but not the day. Years later, a UPI reporter said Burger intentionally delayed the decision: “Burger was ticked off and just wanted to stick it to…O’Brien.”

Other leaks have been more retrospective. In 2004, for example, a group of law clerks from the 2000 term leaked to Vanity Fair the details of the secret deliberations in Bush v. Gore.

And then, of course, there are the books: The Brethren, by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong; Closed Chambers, by Edward Lazarus; Sorcerers’ Apprentices, by Artemus Ward and David Weiden; Supreme Conflict, by Jan Crawford; The Nine, by Jeffrey Toobin. Etc.

Relying on sources inside the Court, each book in its own way pulls back the curtain and invites you to explore life, politics, and conflict at the Court.

Even more recently, CBS’s Jan Crawford reported in 2012 that Chief Justice Roberts voted to strike down the heart of the Affordable Care Act before changing his mind and siding with the court’s liberal bloc.

All of which is to say: Supreme Court leaks are rare and remarkable, but they are not unprecedented. I’ve done some research on this, and I’m just sharing for anyone who might be interested in this wider context. /end

Originally tweeted by Jonathan Peters (@jonathanwpeters) on May 3, 2022.

Roe Is Done

And it’s just the beginning

Politico broke this blockbuster story tonight:

The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.

The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

Deliberations on controversial cases have in the past been fluid. Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading, sometimes until just days before a decision is unveiled. The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months.

The immediate impact of the ruling as drafted in February would be to end a half-century guarantee of federal constitutional protection of abortion rights and allow each state to decide whether to restrict or ban abortion. It’s unclear if there have been subsequent changes to the draft.

Click on the link for the whole horrible thing.

Using this logic, they will be overturning Obergefell, Griswald, Loving — anything they choose.

I feel like it’s election night 2016. In fact, the main reason I felt as I did on election night 2016 is because I knew this day was inevitable. Trump got 3 Justices. He and McConnell stole the court and destroyed the country.

Birds of a feather grope together

Gropers FTW

He only backs the best:

Former president Donald Trump on Sunday made a closing pitch for a Republican gubernatorial candidate who has been accused of sexually assaulting multiple women, stepping deeper into a primary that has divided Republicans in this staunchly conservative state.

Trump appeared at a rally in Greenwood with Charles Herbster, a businessman who has advised the former president on agricultural policy and has donated to his campaigns. The visit came after a recent Nebraska Examiner report in which eight women, including a state senator speaking on the record, accused Herbster of touching them inappropriately. Last week, another one of the eight women alleged on the record that Herbster had groped her. He has denied the accusations.

According to state Sen. Julie Slama (R), Herbster reached up her skirt without her consent and touched her inappropriately as she walked by during a local Republican fundraiser in a crowded ballroom in 2019. Elizabeth Todsen, a former aide to a state senator, said Herbster grabbed her buttocks after stopping to greet her table at the same event. Multiple women told the Examiner that Herbster touched them inappropriately when they greeted him or posed for a photo.

Both Trump and Herbster sought to dismiss the allegations on Sunday, taking a defiant posture without discussing the accusations in specific terms. The former president called Herbster a “very good man” who had been “maligned.” Trump said Herbster was “innocent” of what he called “despicable charges.”

“I defend people when I know they’re good,” Trump said. “A lot of people, they look at you and say: You don’t have to do it, sir. I defend my friends.”

The former president invited Herbster onstage during his remarks. The gubernatorial candidate used his time to talk about being one of Trump’s earliest supporters in 2016.

Trump, who has faced and denied multiple allegations ranging from sexual harassment to rape, has backed other candidates who have been accused of sexual misconduct or domestic violence and denied the allegations.Advertisement

They include Herschel Walker, a U.S. Senate candidate in Georgia who has been accused of threatening the lives of two women, as well as Sean Parnell, who ended his U.S. Senate campaign in Pennsylvania last year amid domestic abuse allegations, and Roy Moore, a 2017 candidate for U.S. Senate in Alabama who was accused by two women of initiating unwanted sexual encounters when Moore was in his 30s and they were 16 and 14.

Speaking onstage before Trump spoke, Herbster briefly and obliquely addressed the allegations, saying that the “political establishment” didn’t want him to win. “They are trying to scare me out of this race and it’s not going to happen,” Herbster said. “We are going to take back Nebraska.”

Trump isn’t the only one to defend this man:

He’s a real winner:

I guess it’s obvious why Trump is supporting him. He’s a pussy grabbing, bigot. What’s not to like?

Yes, they’re coming for your bodily autonomy

The anti-abortion zealots are very, very excited

The Washington Post reports:

Leading antiabortion groups and their allies in Congress have been meeting behind the scenes to plan a national strategy that would kick in if the Supreme Court rolls back abortion rights this summer, including a push for a strict nationwide ban on the procedure if Republicans retake power in Washington.

The effort, activists say, is designed to bringa fight that has been playing out largely in the courts and state legislatures to the national political stage — rallying conservatives around the issue in the midterms and pressuring potential 2024 GOP presidential candidates to take a stand.

The discussions reflect what activists describe asan emerging consensus in some corners of the antiabortion movement to push for hard-line measures that will truly end a practice they see as murder while rejecting any proposals seen as half-measures.Advertisement

Activists say their confidence stems from progress on two fronts: At the Supreme Court, a conservative majority appears ready to weaken or overturn the Roe v. Wade decision that has protected abortion rights for nearly 50 years. And activists argue that in Texas, Republicans have paid no apparent political price for banning abortion after cardiac activity is detected, around six weeks of pregnancy.

“This is a whole new ballgame,” Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life Action, one of the country’s biggest antiabortion groups, said in an interview. “The 50 years of standing at the Supreme Court’s door waiting for something to happen is over.”Advertisement

A group of Republican senators has discussed at multiple meetings the possibility of banning abortion at around six weeks, said Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, who was in attendance and said he would support the legislation. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) will introduce the legislation in the Senate, according to an antiabortion advocate with knowledge of the discussions who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal strategy. Ernst did not respond to a request for comment.

One top advocate, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the antiabortion group Susan B. Anthony List, has spoken privately with 10 possible Republican presidential contenders, including former president Donald Trump, to talk through national antiabortion strategy. Most of them, she said in an interview, assured her they would be supportive of a national ban and would be eager to make that policy a centerpiece of a presidential campaign.

And Students for Life Action, along with nine other prominent antiabortion groups, plans to send a letter to every Republican member of Congress on Monday pushing them to embrace a “heartbeat bill.” The letter, which the group shared with The Washington Post, argues that a national 15-week ban would not go far enough.Advertisement

“If we are not focusing on limiting early abortions, we are not really addressing the violence of abortion at all,” Hawkins writes.

A nationwide abortion ban would be extraordinarily difficult to pass, particularly given the need for 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster under current rules. Such a measure would encounter resistancefrom nearly all Democrats in addition to a handful of Republicans, who might raise questions about its constitutionality. The Senate is split 50-50, but with a handful of competitive races this year, neither party is expected to attain a filibuster-proof majority.

A strict national ban is also likely to be impossible without anantiabortion Republican president willing to sign it.

Moreover, picking such a fight could ignite liberal activists who would be energized to push back against the prospect of abortion being banned not just in red-state America but Democratic bastions from California to New York. The early years of the Trump administration prompted huge protests, starting with the first Women’s March the day after Trump’s inauguration in 2017 — though it remains unclear whether a rollback of Roe would reignite that energy.Advertisement

The possibility of a nationwide ban is “terrifying,” said Kelley Robinson, executive director of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, adding that the proposal would be a major motivator for Democrats in the midterm elections.

“By them saying out loud that their goal is to push a nationwide abortion ban, it makes it clear that we have to elect more pro-reproductive health champions on the national level and in the states,” she said.

I keep hearing that the Supreme Court’s decisions — which everyone assumes will be bad, we just don’t know how bad — is going to be a catalyst for opposition to form. I hope so, but there’s a feeling of impotence around the whole thing now that he high Court is packed with zealots. The way forward is not well defined.

I also think this is a problem:

When SCOTUS overturns Roe in June and allows states the ban the procedure, it will create a huge mess: for healthcare, for interstate travel, for criminal law, and for privacy rights. But that mess might not last long, since we may soon see a national ban.

I can’t tell you how many women I’ve talked to who ask “But New York will be fine, right?” Probably not! Because a.) Clinics will be overwhelmed with patients from out of state, making care harder to get for locals, and b.) A national ban is coming sooner than you expect.

This article talks about a possible legislative avenue for a national ban, but Congress isn’t the only avenue that anti-choices have for curtailing women’s rights. Like a lot of right wing policy priorities, a national abortion ban could also be enacted through the courts.

Originally tweeted by Moira Donegan (@MoiraDonegan) on May 2, 2022.

That’s the problem. And I don’t think this high court majority gives a damn about national public sentiment. They are ideologues.

Still, one would hope that if they do their worst, we will see people take to the streets. This will be the most antediluvian, throwback policy among any advanced nation.

Waaaaaah!

Trump 2.0 haz a sad

Trevor Noah is not reviled by the American People. But other than his cult of Trump worshipers, they aren’t really all that enamored of nasty little twits. Trump can get away with that kind of petulant whining is Donald Trump.I’m not sure it works so well for him.

Also practicing his foreign policy rhetoric in anticipation of his 2024 run:

It’s only a matter of time before he starts talking about the size of his penis.

Trump’s favorite quack on the hot seat

Ronny Jackson and the Oath Keepers

The January 6th Committee wants to talk to members of congress who were helping to organize the coup. They have asked Dr. Ronny Jackson to appear because of this:

Ok. Jackson said before that he doesn’t know any Oath Keepers. They sure seem to know him.

Here’s Jackson’s reply today:

He does not make any sense. These people clearly know where he is. And for some reason they thought he had “critical data to protect.”

Come on.

Is there hope?

Maybe …

She has a doctorate from Pat Robertsons’ Regent University, by the way.

Here’s her fellow Georgian:

The light dawns:

President Joe Biden and his team are hoping to spend the spring and summer months drawing sharp distinctions with Republicans, one in particular. They still plan to push forth revived pieces of stalled agenda. But they’re also eagerly awaiting potentially explosive findings from the Jan. 6 select committee and hope those discoveries can inflame a battle brewing within the GOP over former Trump’s legacy and power.

Biden, who has tried to pivot back toward domestic matters while also tending to the war in Ukraine, gave a hint of the upcoming strategy on his recent West Coast swing, in which he blasted the GOP for falling under the control of far-right extremists.

“This ain’t your father’s Republican Party,” said Biden, who declared it “the MAGA party now” and that Republicans now “are afraid to act correctly, because they know they’ll be primaried” if they don’t toe the line set by Trump and his acolytes.

Lot’s of anonymous complaints about how the White House failed to offer a straight forward message, the DNC isn’t doing its job, the usual. And they note that Biden’s numbers are low (but apparently are improving) and inflation, gas prices, yadda, yadda, yadda.

But:

But the White House has renewed hope that it could change the conversation.

Biden aides have been delighted to watch growing division within the GOP, as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has fended off bitterness within the ranks after a series of revelations about his critical words for Trump and right-wing caucus members after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. Additionally, there is growing hope that the House committee investigating the insurrection may produce damaging findings against Trump and other key Republicans. The committee plans to begin holding prime-time hearings this June.

Biden advisers have also tried to game out this week the possibility of one particular October surprise. Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter raised the chance that Trump could be reinstated to the social media platform, where he had more than 80 million followers before being banned in the wake of the Jan. 6 riot. Musk has said he would allow Trump to return, and while the ex-president has claimed he doesn’t want back on, the White House does not believe him.

The consensus among Biden aides about Trump’s possible return: it could cut both ways. While the former president would eat up an extraordinary amount of political oxygen, it’s also possible that he would push the Big Lie or feud with fellow Republicans and damage the GOP’s otherwise strong chances of regaining at least one house of Congress. The more the election becomes about Trump, the better the Democrats’ chances become, many in Biden’s orbit believe.

Some Democrats feel the White House has been too reactive to crises and unwilling to go on the offense. For his part, the president has been reluctant to bash Republicans often, still believing that bipartisan deals can be made. But he has ramped up the attacks of late, including on Thursday when he laced into National Republican Senatorial Committee chair Rick Scott’s tax plan for hurting the middle class and small businesses.

“He grew up in the Senate when there was some bipartisanship, he was hoping to bring that same approach to the White House,” said Adrienne Elrod, a senior aide on Biden’s transition team and aide to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. “But the unfortunate reality is that this is not a bipartisan world anymore. The only way we are going to be able to make our case as Democrats and sell our agenda is to draw contrasts with Republicans and show the country how awful they are.”

The White House also was heartened by a development across the Atlantic that strong campaign contrasts could compel voters to reward incumbent parties — even if they’re not enamored with the job those parties are doing.

After carefully watching French President Emmanuel Macron’s reelection over far-right candidate Marie Le Pen, the White House will aim to more directly place the Republican Party in Trump’s shadow. Macron’s surprisingly comfortable victory was not just hailed vital to keeping Europe intact but it also was treated as positive reinforcement for Biden’s own domestic future, according to two senior officials not authorized to speak publicly about private deliberations.

May I just offer my own words here:

Axios’ report:

Democrats are starting to fight back against the bludgeoning they’ve taken since the Republicans seized on socially charged issues to help win this fall’s midterms.

 Recent research has shown the barrage of “culture war” messaging — on everything from critical race theory to bashing LGBTQ communities — is working, and Democrats now realize they can’t ignore it any longer. They want to make 2022 a referendum on MAGA nation and its agenda.

President Biden himself got more aggressive while traveling to Ohio last Wednesday to honor 2022’s Teacher of the Year: a history instructor who teaches courses about oppression and Black history.

“Today, there are too many politicians trying to score political points trying to ban books — even math books. I mean, did you ever think … that when you’d be teaching, you’d be worrying about book burnings and banning books? All because it doesn’t fit somebody’s political agenda,” the president said.

“We ought to stop making them a target of the culture wars.”

The American Federation of Teachers — along with 214 other parent groups, student groups, and unions — is also placing ads in more than a dozen newspapers, including the New York Times, across 13 key states this week to coincide with Teacher Appreciation Week, Axios has learned.

“We’re saying we are grateful, your work matters and you need support to help our kids recover — not attacks from political extremists who make your job harder,” AFT president Randi Weingarten told Axios.

Fox News has talked about what’s being taught in schools over 1,000 times since January 2021, per the Washington Post.

 Democrats have often shied away from the emotional appeal of such issues — even with abortion rights — frequently dismissing Republican attacks as unworthy of a response.

No longer.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) told Axios: “There’s a lot of us that are extremely frustrated with Republicans for doing this but also want our colleagues to be comfortable enough to stand up and defend our values rather than running to some other message or running away from it.”

“I think that’s starting to happen,” said Jayapal, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) said: “It is very clear that the other side is going to continue to sort of fear-monger as a way to drum up support. For some [voters] that works, but I think pushing back works too.”

Until last week, Democrats felt they didn’t have a clear, firebrand example for how to successfully push back on these attacks — even though the party’s leaders control the White House and both chambers of Congress.

Now, they believe they have at least one: little-known Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow.

The lawmaker from a blue-collar state gave a now-viral floor speech in Lansing rebuking a Republican colleague for labeling her a “groomer” over her support of LGBTQ kids’ rights.

Every Democratic House member interviewed by Axios amid this reporting independently mentioned McMorrow and the backbone and passion she displayed.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) compared the virality of the speech to that of Barack Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, telling Axios it was the “perfect call-out to the attacks on what McMorrow dubbed ‘marginalized people.'”

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), a candidate for the U.S. Senate, said: “I think you absolutely need to have that kind of tone, that kind of attitude on these issues. These guys are punching down. … I think you’ve got to hit back. You’ve got to hit back hard.”

I know Tim Ryan’s brand is to call out the Republicans on the floor. But it’s still telling that he’s a moderate politician who has to appeal to the “working class” salt-o-the-earth voters in Ohio and he’s not insisting that they have to talk about kitchen able issues. He must believe that negative partisanship can work there.

McMorrow herself told MSNBC last week: “I hope that there are a lot more people like me, who see what I did and say, ‘We have to stand up and fight back.’ Because this strategy is not going away.”

 With inflation sweeping the nation, the war in Ukraine dominating headlines and slow-moving legislation in Congress, some Democrats feel like they’re in limbo.

Biden’s poor approval ratings have made them want to go on the offensive, but rather than talk about what they’ve done, they’re increasingly targeting the GOP for siding with Donald Trump and backing his rhetoric.

Rahna Epting, executive director of MoveOn, told Axios: “It’s very clear to me this needs to be a referendum on today’s Republican Party, which has embraced [Make America Great Again].”

“It’s about all of us versus MAGA. I’m not just talking about Trump, but the disease within the GOP that has taken over,” Epting continued.

Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic National Campaign Committee, warned of the Republicans’ “alarmingly potent” tactics in February.

Maloney, a member of the LGBTQ community, told Axios that Republicans have become “openly homophobic and hateful in some of their rhetoric, and we don’t need to be shy at all.”

Axios then helps Republicans spread their lies, of course::

“Democrats are pushing defund the police, irreversible transition surgery for minors, critical race theory and taxpayer-funded abortion,” said Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), chair of the conservative Republican Study Committee.

“Americans overwhelmingly reject this insanity. That’s why, so far, their policies have been far more aggressive than their public-messaging. The more upfront and honest Democrats are about their radical and anti-American cultural agenda, the better.”

Whatever. I say “bring it.” Here’s a little bit of evidence that the Republicans may have overreached — if Democrats make clear what they are doing:

Math textbooks axed for their treatment of race; a viral Twitter account directing ire at LGBTQ teachers; a state law forbidding classroom discussion of sexual identity in younger grades; a board book for babies targeted as “pornographic.” Lately it seems there’s a new controversy erupting every day over how race, gender or history are tackled in public school classrooms.

But for most parents, these concerns seem to be far from top of mind. That’s according to a new national poll by NPR and Ipsos. By wide margins – and regardless of their political affiliation – parents express satisfaction with their children’s schools and what is being taught in them.

And …

A bipartisan majority of U.S. adults oppose laws that go after companies for their political positions and the politicians who support them, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll found, indicating efforts by Florida lawmakers and Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to target Disney for the company’s opposition Florida’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law, are likely broadly unpopular—including even among many Republicans.

Republican candidates are falling all over themselves to see who can be the most aggressive culture warrior in the race. In order to win their primaries they are having to sign on to the craziest wingnut ideas in order to win over the Trump cult.

It’s an uphill climb for Democrats but the doom and gloom of the last couple of months is uncalled for. There is a huge opening if they will just walk through it.

By the way:

Let’s hope they follow through. It’s our only hope.

Trump had only one real achievement

Now he and the GOP are repudiating it

When Donald Trump ran for president in 2016, he was seen as a “populist” right-wing politician railing about free trade and immigration to push an isolationist worldview, all of which was out of step with what we knew as the modern conservative movement up to that moment. Sure there had been a rump group of paleoconservatives, like Pat Buchanan, who had staged a couple of fringe presidential campaigns in prior decades. The independent candidacy of millionaire Ross Perot had raised some of the same issues and appealed to many of the same voter concerns. But it was Trump whose TV celebrity and flamboyant personality managed to take those ideas straight into the mainstream of the Republican Party.

Trump’s populism was (and is) extremely shallow, however.

His “tariff policy” was based upon some crude anti-foreigner impressions he had from the 1980s when he saw Japanese cars coming off the dock in Long Beach harbor. He never understood that it was actually the American consumer who paid the tariffs with which he thought he was punishing foreign manufacturers.

By contrast, his anti-immigrant screeds rarely touched on economics, which had always been the excuse the right had raised to excuse their xenophobia. Trump instead said from the beginning that the problem was that immigrants were either all criminals rampaging through the United States or terrorists bent on killing as many Americans as possible. He didn’t even try to couch his hate with the usual “stealing our jobs” rhetoric.

All in all, despite the constant bragging about his allegedly monumental achievements in office his administration was really nothing more than lots of drama, one scandal after another, and very few accomplishments.

The America First agenda Trump touted was simply a way for him to excuse browbeating allies while sucking up to tyrants. That happened mostly because he really didn’t understand anything about world affairs in the first place, so he blustered his way around the world chasing wealthy oil sheiks and succumbing to ostentatious flattery while alienating anyone he sensed could see through his ignorant posturing.

In the end, Trump basically accomplished nothing and simply reaped the rewards of an economic recovery long in the making. His promises to create a better health care plan (“it will be so easy”) never came to fruition and his pledge to protect Social Security and Medicare was never challenged. His biggest legislative accomplishment was the massive tax cut bill for the rich, rammed through by the GOP majority in 2017, the establishment GOP Holy Grail. Meanwhile he increased military funding, an odd achievement for a supposed isolationist.

Trump proposed 10 pieces of legislation he planned to pass in the first 100 days. They included a proposed Restoring Community Safety Act, End Illegal Immigration Act, Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act, Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act, School Choice and Education Opportunity Act, American Energy and Infrastructure Act and the End the Offshoring Act. Other than the tax cuts and the military spending increases, none of that ever happened.

All in all, despite the constant bragging about his allegedly monumental achievements in office his administration was really nothing more than lots of drama, one scandal after another, and very few accomplishments. He didn’t even get that stupid wall built. And if he was supposed to be the guy who pushed the GOP in a new policy direction, one that was more attuned to working people and less to the elites, he sure didn’t have a lot to show for it.

But there was one exception that I haven’t mentioned.

Trump signed a piece of bipartisan legislation in 2018 that was truly out of character for him personally and a jarring departure from standard GOP policy: the First Step Act, a criminal justice reform bill. It was actually a very good bill, probably the best thing he did as president. The First Step Act shortened mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenses. It eased the “three-strike rule” from life to 25 years. And it gave judges more discretion when dealing with nonviolent drug offenses. It also improved prison conditions, required federal prisons to create programs to reduce recidivism, ban the shackling of pregnant women (I can’t believe I’m writing that in 2022) and expanded the use of credits for good behavior. It was a start on a vitally necessary movement to reduce mass incarceration in America.

It had been in the works for a long time with bipartisan support but was blocked by Republican senators including Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Jeff Sessions of Alabama. The Trump White House actually picked up the ball and shepherded it through a difficult legislative process culminating in then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, under pressure from the Koch Brothers and Kentucky constituents, using some parliamentary wizardry to get the bill past Cotton. It was passed.

Trump’s best piece of legislation was passed because they brought in an attractive reality TV star to talk him into it.

I can’t think of any other process that worked as normally as that one during the entire administration and it was largely thanks to Jared Kushner and … Kim Kardashian.

According to a CNN report at the time, this really was Kushner’s baby and Trump was always on the fence, worried about another Willie Horton embarrassing him although he did believe it could buy him some support from Black voters in 2020. Kardashian convinced him that he would be remembered for pardoning Alice Marie Johnson, a 63-year-old woman who had been serving a life sentence for money laundering and a nonviolent drug offense, and Trump relented, agreeing to sign the bill.

That’s right. Trump’s best piece of legislation was passed because they brought in an attractive reality TV star to talk him into it.

But it will come as no surprise to learn that Trump quickly soured on the whole concept and other Republicans are backing away from it as well. According to Politico, a spike in crime has the GOP right back in its 1980s “tough on crime” mindset.

On Capitol Hill, Republicans made stiffer criminal sentencing a main focus during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Discussions of rising crime are a daily focus on Fox News. And out on the campaign trail, GOP candidates are running ads demonizing Democrats for not doing enough to support police.

Trump is leading the charge. But then he has a history doesn’t he?

https://twitter.com/scottbix/status/962352937270956033?s=20&t=CbenErCmeBc3ymAFRvrdOA

The man who wrote that grotesque statement signing the First Step Act 30 years later was one of the few astonishing-in-a-good-way moments of his otherwise misbegotten presidency. So naturally, he and his party are repudiating it. Incarcerating Black people is just too fundamental to right-wing ideology. They can’t give it up. 

Salon

“They brushed us off”

Upper management wanted to replicate her success without changing how it thinks

Chloe Maxmin & Canyon Woodward (2018), via Medium.

Hoo boy. The post down below was already in the pipeline when this column in the New York Times popped up. Like the tagline on my email, the message is, You can’t win if you don’t show up to play.

Canyon Woodward cut his political teeth as a Bernie Sanders regional director in Upstate South Carolina. He ran field operations for a rural North Carolina state senate race just west of here. He and Chloe Maxmin have had more success running her rural campaigns for Maine state senate:

As a 25-year-old climate activist with unabashedly progressive politics, Chloe was an unlikely choice to be competitive — let alone win — in a conservative district that falls mostly within the bounds of a rural Maine county that has the oldest population in the state. But in 2018, she won a State House seat there with almost 53 percent of the vote. Two years later, she ran for State Senate, challenging the highest-ranking Republican in state office, the Senate minority leader. And again, in one of the most rural districts in the state, voters chose the young, first-term Democrat who sponsored one of the first Green New Deal policies to pass a state legislature.

That’s not supposed to happen. And yet. “Democrats have to change the way they think …”

Democratic campaigns often seem to revolve around white papers and wonky policy. In our experience, politicians lose rural people when they regurgitate politically triangulated lines and talk about the vagaries of policy. Rural folks vote on what rings true and personal to them: Can this person be trusted? Is he authentic?

I put that somewhat more colloquially as “I wouldn’t trust anyone my dog doesn’t like.”

A campaign with heart

Maxmin and Woodward continue:

In our two campaigns, we turned down the party consultants and created our own canvassing universe — the targeted list of voters whom we talk to during the election season. In 2020, this universe was four times larger than what the state party recommended. It included thousands of Republicans and independents who had (literally) never been contacted by a Democratic campaign in their entire time voting.

Our campaign signs? Hand-painted or made of scavenged wood pallets by volunteers, with images of loons, canoes and other hallmarks of the Maine countryside. Into the trash went consultant-created mailers. Instead, we designed and carried out our own direct mail program for half the price of what the party consultants wanted to charge while reaching 20 percent more voters.

When they succeeded, party upper management wanted to replicate their approach with other races. In a one-size-fits-all manner, naturally. Controlled from the top. Instead of outreach to the transpartisan swath of voters Maxmin’s team nurtured, the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee told other campaigns to limit calls to “people over 60 who were likely Democratic voters.” Maxmin and Woodward tried to get them to reconsider. “They brushed us off.”

It was far from the only time party leaders told us they knew better than we did. In the final stretch of the 2018 campaign, they insisted that as part of their turnout effort they would send their people to conservative households that had told us Chloe was the only Democrat they would support. We were terrified that volunteers reciting a generic script, pushing folks to vote for Democrats up and down the ticket, would alienate the disaffected Republican voters whom we had worked so hard to persuade to vote for Chloe.

We begged the party officials to reconsider. They refused. It wasn’t until the afternoon of Election Day that they backed down, telling us they were unable to mobilize enough volunteers to send down the back roads to the district. That experience only reinforced our belief that candidates should be able to control the resources that the party puts into districts, so that they can iterate and improve on the one-size-fits-all strategies that the Democrats tend to employ.

Days ahead of Heath Shuler flipping NC-11 in 2006, a Democratic consultant high up in the food chain offered to spend last-minute party money on our race despite the fact that we didn’t know what else to spend it on. Perhaps a round of robocalls, he suggested. The field director and I practically shouted “No!” into our phones. That was 16 years ago.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 4th Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

Democratic thinking is medieval

An imperfect understanding of where wins come from

Still image from Moneyball (2011).

We’ve talked about the Campaign Industrial Complex; about idealistic volunteers who slowly morph into political frat brothers; about how money drives insiders like passion drives amateurs, about dues “owed” by congressmembers; about the Rolodex test; about how much “old-boyism” there is in party politics; and about how progressives are better at Monday-morning quarterbacking than at positioning themselves to take advantage of opportunities.

A quote from Moneyball (2011) about baseball thinking being medieval came to mind over the weekend. Because it also applies to Democratic politics. I don’t know why it took so long for the connection to resurface. For those who don’t know the film, Den of Geek provided the premise:

Oakland Athletics general manager Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) has a problem. He’s got to replace three star players on the baseball team he runs. Compounding the problem of finding new stars is the fact that teams like the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on players, while Oakland has one of the lowest payrolls in its sport. When the playing field is inherently unlevel, the only way to find success is to change the game.

“An imperfect understanding of where runs come from…. Baseball thinking is medieval.”

“The problem we’re trying to solve is that there are rich teams, and there are poor teams. Then there’s 50 feet of crap. And then there’s us,” Beane says. “We got to think differently.” The old-boys club advising Beane want none of it.

“Us” is much of the Democratic Party’s infrastructure, or lack of it, in rural places and in red states Democrats have long abandoned as bad bets. There’s no money to invest there even if they wanted to, although groups like Movement Labs are trying. Democratic electeds are under 50 feet of crap in state legislatures, and where Democrats are willing to compete, they have to pad their win margins to compensate for Republican gerrymandering and packed courts.

“Adapt or die,” says Beane.

While the smart guys focus on strategy, on message, on policy, on tech tools, on attractive candidates and “competitive” races — conventional wisdom — I teach county election mechanics and logistics. For The Win is for teaching those undervalued, under-resourced, overlooked party teams in small, red-county markets how to perform for their candidates like the big leagues. On little-league money.

Every presidential election people otherwise uninvolved phone in to volunteer to give voters rides to the polls. I try to steer them into something else. Giving voters rides is a shrinking part of get-out-the-vote (GOTV) operations. Their thinking (and much Democratic Party training) dates from a time when elections were a one-day, 14-hour marathon where block captains have a single day to get their people voted. In 44 states with weeks of early, in-person and mail-in voting that hasn’t been the model for decades. Two-thirds or more of the vote is cast before Election Day where I live.

Yet party GOTV training is still built around precincts when the county party should be coordinating get-out-the-vote activities among multiple early voting sites and multiple candidates weeks in advance of that Tuesday in November. Precinct captains are not set up for that. State parties don’t train for it. We’ve got to think differently.

Right now I’m trying to interest multiple state parties in an overlooked voter registration tactic that could give Democrats the edge they need in 2022 in district and local elections in over two dozen states, and cost less. But it’s different. It’s untested. It’s not the way the old-boys have always done things. The republic itself is on the line this year, state executive directors. Do you like winning? > tpostsully at gmail dot com

Innovation is not only suspect because it means stepping outside people’s comfort zone.

At the end of Moneyball, the new Boston Red Sox owner observes that Beane’s team with its puny, $41 million budget won just as many ball games as the New York Yankees did with $120 million. “Any GM that doesn’t tear down their team and rebuild it using your model is gonna be a dinosaur.”

But that $80 million savings is a lot of people’s paychecks, their cars, and their condos. They don’t want to change. Even in state capitols where campaign money is a fraction of that.

John Henry (to Billy): This is threatening not just a way of doing business. In their minds, it’s threatening the game. Really, what it’s threatening is their livelihood, their jobs. It’s threatening the way they do things. And every time that happens, whether it’s the government, a way of doing business, whatever, the people who are holding the reins — they have their hands on the switch — they go batshit crazy.

Right now, batshit crazy might be an improvement over same old same old.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 4th Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.