Skip to content

Month: October 2022

A bit of common sense analysis

What is the panic about pandemic learning loss actually about?

David Wallace Wells :

There are some legitimate reasons for concern. The testing declines are real and significant, returning national performance in math and reading to levels last seen a couple of decades ago, and imposing the largest and more worrying setbacks on the most vulnerable students. At the nationwide level, educational gains are exceedingly hard to come by, which means even modest setbacks are worrying, too. There are, as always, good reasons to ask what can be done to address learning shortfalls, and how to best support teachers and schools in addressing them — particularly as billions in federal funding to counter learning loss awaits distribution.

But when I look at the data in detail, I just don’t see the signs of catastrophe that so many others seem to. I’m inclined to see that data as, at least, a glass half full, if not quite a best-case scenario. That’s because the declines, all told, strike me as relatively small, given the context: a brutal pandemic that terrified the country and killed more than a million of its citizens, upending nearly every aspect of our lives along the way.

The panic of parents and policymakers is both unsurprising and, to a degree, productive: As we approach the three-year anniversary of the beginning of the pandemic, we should be thinking about what went right, and what went wrong, with school closures and other mitigation policies. But in doing so let’s try not to forget the scale of the impact or the context in which it happened.

As a country, prompted in part by midterm elections, we are now doing some of that reckoning — mostly in a one-sided way, with Republicans running on the Covid excesses of liberals and Democrats mostly trying to avoid the subject. But it isn’t just partisanship skewing things. We are talking a lot more about possible policy overreach — on school closures, on mask mandates — than we are about how brutal and disorienting the pandemic actually was. And we aren’t doing that in a world in which the whole thing turned out to be no big deal, or some false alarm panic that made initial precautions seem absurd and retrospective policy questions abstract. We’re doing it in a world in which a million Americans died — and we’re judging choices made before vaccines and Paxlovid and widespread natural immunity, when the risk of death was 10 times higher, by the much more laissez-faire standards we settled on much later.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

Could we have managed the first year of the pandemic more strategically, doing more to protect the vulnerable and prioritize essential functions like schools? Almost certainly. (Personally, I would’ve liked to have seen schools open nationwide in fall 2020, with additional focus on rapid testing and improved ventilation.) Do we know how well each mitigation measure suppressed spread and saved lives? Not as clearly as we might like if we were trying to strategize a plan for future pandemics, and we may well be less universally restrictive if given another chance. But however open these questions may seem to you today, they were first asked not in the context of endemic Covid but of mass death and illness, uncertainty and anxiety and social disarray.

In that context, how did the kids fare? Last month, I wrote about early learning loss data from the National Assessment for Educational Progress tests, which showed, that for the country’s 9-year-olds, average test scores for math fell to 234 (out of 500) in 2022, down from 241 in 2020. For reading the scores fell to 215 in 2022 from 220 in 2020. These declines represented a setback of a couple of decades, since the average math score had been 232 in 1999 and the average reading score had been 216 in 2004. The scores varied from student to student and district to district, but nationally the effect did not resemble the cancellation of school. It was the equivalent of taking the nation’s schoolchildren, putting them in a time machine, and sending them off to be educated sometime around the year 2000.

This week, N.A.E.P. released new data covering 450,000 fourth and eighth graders, generating a new round of handwringing. (The Washington Post called it “a generational emergency.”) But the new data only confirms the same story.

For fourth graders, national performance in math fell from 241 in 2019 to an average of 236 in 2022 (close to what it had been in 2005). In reading, average scores by fourth graders fell to 217 in 2022 from 220 in 2019, more or less matching the average performance of 219 by fourth graders from 2005. For eighth graders, the average reading score in 2022 was 260, down from 263 in 2019. In math, the decline was a bit bigger, falling to an average of 274 in 2022 from 282 in 2019, erasing a couple of decades of gains and matching the scores achieved in 2000, when the national average was 273.

All told, at least as judged by test scores, the effect of extensive and perhaps excessive disruption to schooling was to return the country as a whole to the levels of educational achievement of the No Child Left Behind years.

State by state, it is hard to draw a line between school closures and learning loss, since some states that stayed closed longest fared best, and vice versa. Earlier research showed a clearer relationship between school closures and learning loss at the district level, but at a news conference announcing the latest N.A.E.P. report, the commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics said, “There’s nothing in this data that tells us there is a measurable difference in the performance between states and districts based solely on how long schools were closed.”

In New York City, the nation’s largest school district, schools reopened in September 2020. There, average scores for reading fell by about a point for fourth graders and improved by about a point for eighth graders; in math, fourth-grade scores fell by nine points (statewide scores fell by 12) and eighth-grade scores fell by four points (statewide scores fell by six). In Los Angeles, the second-largest district, schools stayed closed through January 2021. There, average scores actually improved in fourth-grade reading, eighth-grade math and eighth-grade reading, where they improved by a robust nine points (to 257 from 248). Scores fell only in fourth-grade math (to 220 from 224).

In a vacuum, the pandemic declines look like bad news, if at a relatively small scale. But none of this happened in a vacuum. I’ve mentioned the million deaths not to fearmonger about how much higher those numbers might have been without school closures — the scale of that impact is, I believe, an open question — but just to point out the enormous and widespread human impact of the disease itself. And that impact was much larger than measured simply by mortality. More than 3.5 million Americans were hospitalized, according to one estimate, and probably at least as many suffered from long Covid. In the spring of 2020, the country’s unemployment rate exploded, jumping to nearly 15 percent from about 4 percent; for a brief period in April, six million new jobless claims were filed each week. In a single quarter, U.S. GDP fell by 9 percent. Murder rates grew by 30 percent; deadly car crashes spiked, too. Overdose deaths rose 30 percent in 2020 and 15 percent in 2021. According to some research, rates of depression tripled in the United States when the pandemic first hit. Some 600,000 teachers left the profession.

This is the world in which American students — most of them learning remotely for many months, many of them for close to a year, and some for longer — fell off by a handful of points, on their reading and math exams, compared with their prepandemic peers.

“The sudden onset of the pandemic has been the most catastrophic event in recent American history, making the expectation that there would not be something called ‘learning loss’ bizarre,” Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor wrote recently in The New Yorker. “The idea that life would simply churn on in the same way it always has only underscores the extent to which there have been two distinct experiences of the pandemic,” she went on, emphasizing how much harder the pandemic was for the poor and marginalized to navigate, compared with those for whom its secondary effects were buffeted by wealth.

International comparisons offer another bit of context for test score declines. In England, schools closed in the spring of 2020, opening again in some places in early summer and across the country in the fall (with an Omicron interruption of about a month that winter of 2021). In retrospect, that would have been a plausible but relatively aggressive school reopening approach in the United States, where many schools stayed remote well into the 2020-2021 school year. It also resulted in a drop of six percentage points in proficiency scores, roughly comparable to the American experience. In other words, in England, with a close-to-optimal school reopening, they fared no better.

In the Netherlands, where schools were even less disrupted than in Britain, student performance fell by three percentage points — a bit better, but still below the standards set in prepandemic years. At the most extreme end of the spectrum, there is Sweden, which did not close schools at all, and which, some reporting has suggested, experienced no such declines. But the country also suspended its testing program, which means the data on which such claims might be based is pretty shaky.

The American data, by contrast, is quite strong, and the picture is clear: Almost everywhere, there have been declines, generally modest. And yet rhetoric about the costs of school closure appears to be only intensifying — with the secretary of education calling the test scores “appalling and unacceptable,” for instance, adding that our response to the declines will determine “our nation’s standing in the world.”

Perhaps it makes sense that in this period of reflection, schools would become such a hotly debated pandemic touchstone. Schools are hugely important, educational gains exceedingly hard to come by, and the setbacks are both real and large enough to justify plenty of genuine concern. Schools are also among the civic institutions Americans are most engaged with and involved in, which means that — unlike the running of hospitals, say, or pandemic policy in the military — the question of school closure felt much more immediate to many more people, including those whose lives were otherwise relatively untouched by pandemic disruption.

School closures also had costs that went well beyond test scores — the social and emotional costs of isolation for children and the additional impact on many parents — and those scores are perhaps one way of talking generally about that larger burden. Like crime, school performance is a perennial and widespread source of American anxiety, and earlier conflicts — between reformers and teachers’ unions, between parents and local bureaucracies — offered a kind of road map for fights over pandemic policy. Those concerned about social inequalities could see easily and clearly, beginning in the fall of 2020, just how differently the matter of reopening was being handled by private schools, public schools in wealthy places and public schools in poor places — and be rightfully outraged by divergence.

But I think, alongside those explanations, there’s something else: Americans as a whole are not exactly happy with how those two years went, and the pandemic has left almost all of us with some excess of rage and frustration. Early on, that was channeled into partisanship, with liberals blaming President Donald Trump for the pandemic itself and conservatives blaming liberals for pandemic restrictions. But the lines of Covid partisanship are much muddier now — a few years on, there’s a Democrat in the White House, and a growing recognition that, while policy matters and political leadership have surely failed the country, the virus was going to wreak some amount of havoc regardless.

But that idea remains uncomfortable for many, that the pandemic was not just a policy failure or political choice but a generational and global public-health trauma against which very few of our peer countries fared very well either. And yet even as it grows harder to pin responsibility on one party or one president, we want to pin it somewhere, on some human or humans or human institution, if only to tell ourselves that if we make the right choices we will never have to live through all that again. As a country, we burden our schools with an almost impossible set of responsibilities — undoing racial disparities, for instance, or closing yawning income gaps. It makes sense that we’ve piled additional frustration and rage on them, wanting to believe schools could have navigated the pandemic smoothly, too. But to judge by the test scores, at least, they came remarkably close.

No good deed

Goes undemagogued

This piece from Paul Waldman shows that ungrateful rural voters still get government help when Democrats are in office (and nothing when Republicans are in office.) The incentives are so messed up…

There’s a story Republicans tell about the politics of rural America, one aimed at both rural people and the rest of us. It goes like this: Those coastal urban elitist Democrats look down their noses at you, but the GOP has got your back. They hate you; we love you. They ignore you; we’re working for you. Whatever you do, don’t even think about voting for a Democrat.

And for the most part, they don’t. Donald Trump won 71 percent of White rural votes in 2020, a significant improvement over the 62 percent he got in 2016.

That story pervades our discussion of the rural-urban divide in U.S. politics. But it’s fundamentally false. The reality is complex, but one thing you absolutely cannot say is that Democrats don’t try to help rural America. In fact, they probably work harder at it than Republicans do.

Let’s talk about just one area that has been of particular interest to Democrats, and to rural people themselves: high-speed internet access, a problem that’s addressed by hundreds of millions of dollars in funding that the Biden administration announced this week.

The problem is straightforward: The less dense an area is, the harder it is for private companies to make a profit providing internet service. Laying a mile of fiber-optic cable to reach a hundred apartment buildings is a lot more efficient than laying a mile of cable to reach one family farm.

So you need government to fill the gaps. That’s because the lack of high-speed service makes it harder to start and sustain many kinds of businesses, have schools access the information students need, and allow people many of the basic pleasures of modern life, like rewatching all six seasons of “Peaky Blinders.”

The Biden administration has now rolled out $759 million in new grants and loans for building rural broadband. This money comes from the infrastructure bill, but the other big spending bills President Biden signed, the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act, also had a wealth of money and programs specifically targeted to rural areas.

While those programs cover a variety of needs, broadband is particularly visible. The administration is using the money to fund rural broadband projects from Alaska to Michigan to Minnesota to Oregon. And of course, when that federal money provided by Democrats over the objection of Republicans comes to red states, Republican officials rush to take credit for it.

This isn’t new or unusual. Every Democratic presidential campaign puts out a plan for rural America. The Biden administration created the Rural Partners Network to coordinate executive branch initiatives affecting rural Americans. Every big spending bill Democrats write makes sure to direct money to address the needs of rural areas.

Liberals sometimes say rural dwellers have been fooled into voting Republican — and therefore against their economic interests — based on social issues such as abortion and LGBTQ rights. That’s not the argument I’m making here. It’s legitimate to put those issues first if they’re what you care about the most. If you live in rural Kansas and your opposition to abortion is profoundly important to you, it would be unreasonable to expect you to support the pro-abortion-rights party, even if it brought broadband to your town.

But it would be wrong to ignore the extremely hard work Democrats do to improve the lives of rural Americans, even as they won’t win most of their votes. We could argue about the value of different programs or economic policies in such areas, but you can’t say Democrats aren’t trying.

That’s all the more notable because Democrats are in fact a primarily urban and suburban party. Even if they don’t campaignin rural areas as much as they should, when it comes to governing, they do just about everything they can to help rural America.

This doesn’t work politically partly because of cultural issues, but also because of the power of the story of liberal disdain for rural folks. “We pretty much own rural and small-town America,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said earlier this year. Not only is he right, but Republicans know they don’t have to do much of anything to maintain that support.

Rural voters care more about the culture war than anything else — trans-athletes, Dr Suess, kitty litter in classrooms, you know, the really important stuff. They don’t even really care about inflation, despite all the handwringing. They are obsessed with owning the libs and the “you know whats” and that’s what drives them.

“We’re not so innocent’

And so what, amirite?

This piece in the NY Times about the Saudi Arabian sponsored LIV golf tour is a fascinating account of global power and greed. The Saudis are using their tour to whitewash their image with the help of some very greedy golfers and the help of one extremely powerful American politician. Some members of the PGA, led by Tiger Woods are fighting back, and as for now, they still have the upper hand with all the lucrative media and the big tournaments.

If the organizers of the sport’s elite tournaments, some of whom have criticized the new circuit, bar even some of the scores of LIV golfers from the British Open, the Masters, the P.G.A. Championship and the U.S. Open starting next year, the upstart will have to find a way to diminish the siren songs of the green jacket and the claret jug. If LIV continues without a television deal, it will be starved of access to potentially millions of fans. And the PGA Tour can still depict the series as a brutal regime’s project to look better on the global stage.

That perception, more than anything else, has been one of the tour’s most powerful public relations tools so far, and it may long temper the flow of corporate sponsorship dollars through and around the LIV world.

Worries about Saudi influence, though, have not deterred former President Donald J. Trump from offering vocal support for the series, keeping the circuit with a powerful ally and clear access to at least some good courses. The site of the team championship, run by the Trumps for years, was a PGA Tour mainstay for decades, and Trump courses are expected to be fixtures of LIV’s 2023 season.

Trump, in a brief interview with The New York Times as he left the 18th hole near Miami on Thursday, said he had not entertained any second thoughts about his family-controlled golf courses hosting LIV events. Although Trump’s family has not disclosed how much it is earning from LIV tournaments, the former president suggested that his conversations with Saudi officials had persuaded him that the kingdom’s embrace of golf was “very important to them” and that “they’re putting a lot of effort into it and a lot of money into it.”

As president, Trump publicly resisted American intelligence agencies when they concluded that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had authorized the 2018 murder of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. Asked on Thursday about Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, Trump said, “We have human rights issues in this country, too.”

Earlier in the afternoon, though, Trump had been eager to criticize the PGA Tour and to extol the virtues of LIV leaders.

“They should have embraced instead of fighting,” he said of the PGA Tour after he played the 17th hole during a pro-am event. “You’re not going to beat these people. These people have great spirit, they’re phenomenal people and they have unlimited money — unlimited.”

Half this country wants this man to be president again. And they really believe that will defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic. It’s mind-boggling.

He. Will. Not. He is personally in the pocket of foreign tyrants who have his number. And he likes it. Keep this in mind as the Republicans spend the next two years screaming about how Joe Biden sold out the country to Ukraine to make money when his son worked for a Ukrainian gas company.

Our new Social Media Overlord

Already showing his true colors

The story said that Paul Pelosi was actually attacked in a drunken gay pick-up scene. The new owner of Twitter, in the name of free speech, tweeted it out on his new plaything yesterday.

Disinformation is one of the greatest threats we face. And we have a rich wingnut weirdo conspiracy theorists running one of the largest platforms. Oy…

Here’s Matthew Gertz of media Matters:

1. By week’s end, a sizable percentage of the GOP base will believe an absurd conspiracy theory positing that Paul Pelosi was assaulted by his leftist gay lover.

Allow me to explain.

2. Over decades, the right built a parallel media ecosystem featuring:

A) Numerous outlets that generate conspiracy theories
B) Food-chain mechanisms for their distribution
C) An audience that demands them
D) Minimal internal guardrails
E) Barriers against outside media.

3. Police say the guy who broke into the Pelosi home and assaulted Paul Pelosi was targeting Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The assailant’s recent online footprint is a hodgepodge of recent right-wing conspiracy theories.

This is very bad for the right because those conspiracy theories are either trumpeted or excused at the highest levels of the right-wing media and GOP. They needed to come up with something else, fast.

5. The right’s conspiracy theorists went to work. They operate by putting existing facts – particularly ones from early in a story, when initial reports are often wrong – in new dubious contexts through wild logical jumps. In this case, they draw on two pieces of info.

6. A) An initial, subsequently retracted local news report that the assailant was in his underwear when police arrived.

7. And B) Pelosi was able to trick the invader, call 911 from the bathroom, and, while speaking to the dispatcher “in code” to avoid suspicion, the dispatcher said he referred to the home invader at one point in that call as a “friend.”

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-10-29/paul-pelosi-attacker-police-hammer-nancy-pelosi-san-francisco

8. The right’s conspiracy theorists put those two pieces together, threw in some wild and baseless speculation, and came up with the theory that Pelosi was the victim of a gay lover’s quarrel.

9. That filtered up through low-level RW influencers to… the owner of this site, who is celebrated on the right and has now blasted to everywhere.

10. The site Musk pushed out is not remotely credible, but it reaches a conclusion that is extremely convenient for the right, and that's good enough.

11. Meanwhile, the right has come up with nonsensical explanations for why the assailant’s internet footprint was a forgery and he’s actually a leftist. They cannot accept the reality without taking on responsibility. So they find an alternate explanation.

12. The right-wing press has spent decades building a huge audience for these sorts of convenient conspiracy theories. And their regular denunciations of the mainstream press built a bubble to keep out reality – only the right’s commentators can be trusted.

13. As for those trusted commentators – there are no powerful actors within that bubble who knock down those conspiracy theories. That’s how you end up with Fox hosts pushing QAnon talking points and scoffing at its extremism.

https://www.mediamatters.org/qanon-conspiracy-theory/definitive-guide-fox-news-treatment-qanon-conspiracy-theory

14. So what happens next? I’d expect to see GOP lawmakers and prominent Fox hosts at least winking at the Pelosi conspiracy theory. Someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Tucker Carlson might even go all-in, probably with a “why don’t they want us asking questions” frame.

15. Credible news outlets will point out that this is all nonsense. But thanks to the right-wing media bubble, their facts won’t make it to the people inclined to believe it. And so this will become the explanation for the Pelosi attack for a sizable chunk of the GOP.

16. There's not much that can be done for the people who will buy into this.

But what can be done is punishing Musk for his role in the fiasco.

Originally tweeted by Matthew Gertz (@MattGertz) on October 30, 2022.

Only if things are otherwise perfect

will Americans care about democracy

That’s what it looks like, anyway:

Most Americans consistently say in polls that they believe that President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats have mismanaged crime, the border, and, above all, the economy and inflation. But roughly as many Americans say that they view the modern Republican Party as a threat to their rights, their values, or to democracy itself.

Based on Biden’s first two years in office, surveys show that most Americans are reluctant to continue following the policy path he has laid out. But polls also show no enthusiasm for returning to the programs, priorities, and daily chaos of Donald Trump’s presidency. In an NBC national survey released last weekend, half of registered voters said they disagreed with most of what Biden and congressional Democrats want to do, but more than that said the same about congressional Republicans and Trump. About half of all voters said they had little, or no, confidence in either party to improve the economy, according to another recent national survey from CNBC.

It remains likely that two negatives will still yield a positive result for Republicans. Most voters with little faith in both sides may ultimately decide simply to give a chance to the party that’s not in charge now, Jay Campbell, a Democratic pollster who helps conduct the CNBC survey, told me. That would provide a late boost to the GOP, particularly in House races, where the individual candidates are less well known. But even if that dynamic develops, Campbell said, the Democrats’ ability to hold so much of their coalition over concerns about the broader Republican agenda has reduced the odds that the GOP can generate the kind of decisive midterm gains enjoyed by Democrats in 2018 and 2006, or Republicans in 2010 and 1994.

If Republicans make only modest gains this fall, it will be a clear warning that the party, as currently defined by Trump’s imprint, faces a hard ceiling on its potential support. But even a small Republican gain would send Democrats an equal warning that concerns about the GOP’s values and commitment to democracy may not be sufficient to deny them the White House in 2024. “If I was advising the Biden administration, I would say this is the No. 1 priority: Fix the fundamentals,” John Sides, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University and a co-author of a new book on the 2020 presidential election, The Bitter End, told me. “The biggest priority is inflation, and everything else is secondary.”

Contrary to the inspiring hope and change messages of Barack Obama yesterday, who gave a couple of excellent, barn burning speeches yesterday, if this holds up it will be because all the beltway wags were right that people only care about money. Not even jobs, jobs, jobs can trump that — obviously since we have the lowest unemployment since the 1960s.

I fear that the lesson Democrats will take from this will be that they can never win any elections on anything but money because that’s what people truly care about above all else and nothing else matters. If Republicans win it will be because they believe that crime, immigration and general fear mongering are the only things the American people care about. Gee, I wonder where that’s all going to end?

So let’s just ditch all the freedom and democracy talk completely, shall we? Nobody gives a shit, not even when one party storms the capitol to try to kill the Vice President and Speaker of the House. Gas prices are higher than they were during the pandemic when nobody was driving and that is the nightmare no American will abide. Abortion rights have been gutted? Well, that’s a shame, but the Halloween candy I bought was more expensive this year. Democracy is nice, but I hear crime is out of control because Mexican immigrants are raping and killing everybody in sight so maybe it isn’t so important.

I’m sorry I sound cynical. But I am. This weekend yet another right wing nutjob broke into Speaker Pelosi’s house to kill her with a hammer and assaulted her 82 year old husband instead. Extremists are all over the country saying they plan to have only Trump voters count votes in the future because they refuse to admit they can ever lose and armed “poll watchers” are intimidating people trying to drop their ballots off in drop boxes. Down in Florida the Governor arrested people on dubious charges of voter fraud and managed to scare off legitimate voters — their plan all along. And inflation is all people care about? OK. But that happened before in a certain European country a while back and it didn’t end well for the 75 million people who died as a result and the countries reduced to rubble.

Now is not the time to stage protest votes over pocket book concerns. This isn’t really about democracy. Fascism is staring us in the face.

Toss-up or double-negative election?

What you do through Nov. 8 will decide

Photo by Keith Allison from Owings Mills, USA. (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Half of registered voters are dissatisfied with Democrats, polls say. Meaning half (more than half, actually) are dissatisfied with Republicans, and hold “no enthusiasm for returning to the programs, priorities, and daily chaos of Donald Trump’s presidency,” writes Ron Brownstein in The Atlantic:

If Republicans make only modest gains this fall, it will be a clear warning that the party, as currently defined by Trump’s imprint, faces a hard ceiling on its potential support. But even a small Republican gain would send Democrats an equal warning that concerns about the GOP’s values and commitment to democracy may not be sufficient to deny them the White House in 2024. “If I was advising the Biden administration, I would say this is the No. 1 priority: Fix the fundamentals,” John Sides, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University and a co-author of a new book on the 2020 presidential election, The Bitter End, told me. “The biggest priority is inflation, and everything else is secondary.”

But until Nov. 8, it’s turnout, Democrats. Brownstein adds, “[F]or all the doubts Americans are expressing about their performance, there is no evidence of rising confidence in Republicans.”

Despite the challenges, Democrats remain competitive in places tradition says they shouldn’t. The key factor is this:

You can’t win if you don’t show up to play.

Obama: Resist cynicism

No matter who we are or where we come from

Two presidents back, the U.S. had a man in the Oval Office with no lineup of reactionary allies under criminal investigation. He did not cheat on his wife. Or his taxes. (No, really.) He left office after eight years without himself being under criminal investigation and without instigating a violent attack on the Capitol, undermining the Constitution, or stealing state secrets. His presidency was not everything I might have dreamed, but he did leave the country better off than he found it.

At one point, however, he did have an anger translator. In a series of campaign stops for Democratic candidates on Saturday, Barack Obama did not need one.

Obama has plenty to be angry about. And plenty of anti-American madmen and madwomen among his successor’s cult deserving of it. No longer bound by the strictures of the most powerful political office in the world, Obama cut loose.

The man has a gift, not a grift. Plus, comic timing and a sense of humor.

But this former president was hopscotching across the country not to vilify minorities, the press and political adversaries. Nor to feed a pitiable, bottomless need for adulation. Obama was campaigning to testify to what is at stake in the fall elections for ordinary Americans if Republicans more interested in ruling than governing wrest control of state houses and houses of Congress.

https://twitter.com/AnandWrites/status/1586617926601220096?s=20&t=p7sH6WSlbzGlLeRBvczWAA

Democracy is at stake in this election. But it is not most people’s most immediate concern. Not for people struggling to fill their gas tanks and to pay their heating and doctor bills and to feed their families. People who work for a living ought to make a living. Obama melded together those concerns with women’s reproductive freedom and upholding representative democracy. They are not separate issues.

Republicans are more interested in misusing power to oppress their enemies. Democrats are more interested in expanding freedom so everyone’s life here gets better [timestamp 1:11:34]:

I know these are tough times, but we’ve been through time before. The important thing is to resist the temptation just to throw our hands up and turn inward, to see politics as a zero-sum game where rules are made to be broken — the only way for people like Us to win is for people like Them to lose — to sink into cynicism.

You know, even in our darkest moments … this country has seen darker moments before. Underneath it all, I believe we’ve had more in common than our politics and our politicians suggest. Even when times are tough, I believe what unites us can be stronger than what divides us.

There have always been certain values that bind us together as citizens no matter who we are or where we come from or what we look like or who we love. We think about our kids, and we think about working hard, and we think about being honest and being fair. Homespun values.

And it doesn’t matter whether you’re on the farm somewhere, or you’re in the inner city, people have a sense of that. It doesn’t matter what your last name is. That’s the promise of America. That’s who we at least want to be. And in this election, you have a chance to do that, to make America live up to what we hope it can be.

I’m guilty of being a bit of a fanboy for my friend Anat Shenker-Osorio. She’s pushed for a decade or more to get Democrats to speak American — more like what you just read — instead of with the prefab rhetoric Beltway consultants think reaches people because their messages make sense to them. Democrats are finally, finally beginning to listen.

Let’s hope Obama’s influence is enough to help Democrats hold the line a little more than a week from now. We don’t need this dark moment to get any darker.

The man in the red vest shows his true colors

It’s red for a reason

So-called Virginia moderate Glenn Youngkin betrayed his true nasty MAGA self yesterday and otherwise during this campaign. He’s fully bought in on Trumpism. Karen Tumulty who has previously held out hope that he could be a harbinger of slightly less awful post-Trump Republican politics has had enough. After yesterday, she realizes there is no hope:

I’d like to take this opportunity to retract the nice things I said about Glenn Youngkin a few months ago.

In July, I wrote a column when reports began to surface that Virginia’s Republican governor, a fresh and sunny political newcomer with proven bipartisan appeal, was already thinking about running for president.

At the time, I expressed hope that Youngkin — or someone like him — would seek the GOP nomination in 2024. His stunning 2021 victory in blue-ish Virginia showed that there might still be room in the Republican Party for a different model of politician, one who could run as a unifying alternative to Donald Trump’s venomous brand.

Optimist that I am, I still hope that a tribune of sanity will emerge in the Republican Party. But the everydad in the fleece vest probably isn’t that guy. When a situation this week called for expressing a modicum of human decency, Youngkin — who frequently talks about his religious values — showed he could rival the former president at diving for the gutter.

As news was breaking Friday about the horrific attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, by an intruder in their San Francisco home, Youngkin happened to be campaigning in Stafford, Va., for Yesli Vega, the Republican running in a very tight race against Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger.

“Speaker Pelosi’s husband, they had a break-in last night in their house, and he was assaulted. There’s no room for violence anywhere,” Youngkin said.

Alas, he didn’t stop there.

“But we’re going to send her back to be with him in California,” the governor said. As the crowd cheered, Youngkin doubled down: “That’s what we’re going to go do. That’s what we’re going to go do.”

Set aside the fact that his joke, if that’s what you can call it, showed a lack of understanding of basic civics and geography. Pelosi is in Washington because she has been elected for the past 35 years by the voters of California. This has nothing to do with anybody in Virginia.

What made Youngkin’s riff not only tasteless but also dangerous is that he was not referring to some random act of “violence anywhere.” The attack on Paul Pelosi was a direct product of the toxic political culture — a culture that the governor was helping to cultivate for what he apparently sees as a political opportunity.

Evidence now indicates that the assailant who beat Pelosi with a hammer, sending the 82-year-old to the hospital with a skull fracture and serious injuries to his arm and hands, had broken into the Pelosi home because he was looking for the speaker herself. Nancy Pelosi has been demonized for years by Republicans, including in countless GOP campaign ads. The attacker’s reported shouts of “Where is Nancy?” were a chilling echo of the Jan. 6, 2021, rioters’ cries as they tried to hunt her down in the corridors of the Capitol.

Being a jerk about Pelosi is not the only Youngkin action of late that betrays who he really is and what he is willing to do in service of his ambition. During his campaign for governor, he managed a tricky balancing act on the election denialism that has gripped his party. He promised to put “election integrity” at the top of his priorities in office — indulging the lie that fraud is rampant — but also acknowledged Joe Biden’s 2020 victory and called the Jan. 6 insurrection “a real blight on our democracy.” And, notably, he kept Trump at a distance.

But more recently, Youngkin is being seen with the worst people in his party. A little over a week ago, he stumped in Arizona for GOP gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake, one of the loudest of those 2020 deniers and someone who has refused to say whether she will accept the results of this year’s election. He called her “awesome,” and she declared him a “total rock star.”

Asked on CNN about his plans to campaign with Lake, Youngkin replied: “I think that the Republican Party has to be a party where we are not shunning people and excluding them, because we don’t agree on everything.” In other words, Youngkin thinks it’s fine to undermine democracy in the cause of lower taxes and school choice.

The governor remains popular in Virginia, with a recent poll showing his approval at 55 percent and most of his constituents saying the state is moving in the right direction. But the commonwealth limits its governors to one consecutive term, which means, come 2024, he will be looking for a new job.

No apologies will be forthcoming:

Old Glenn of the red fleece vest (which he never seems to take off) can run for president all he wants. He won’t win, no matter how much he kisses up to Trump and his flock. He’s really running for VP but I can’t see how he brings anything to the table. Trump has a whole slew of courtiers seeking his favor and he can’t compete with the likes of Kristi Noem and Kari Lake.

Don’t blame them

After all, they didn’t run advertisements implicitly threatening political rivals with hammers …

Coming soon: “It’s outrageous that anybody would hold me responsible for this heinous act just because I starred in a campaign ad firing hundreds of rounds from a machine gun at a photo of Nancy Pelosi.”

Candidate for US Senate in Arizona.

Former governor of Missouri.

Member US House of Representatives

Speakers, 2020 national political convention

Member, US House of Representatives

Governor of a state

Governor of a state

Member, US House of Representatives

Defeated candidate US Senate

Originally tweeted by David Frum (@davidfrum) on October 28, 2022.

Sore loser strikes again

He never stops whining

For most people this would be considered a very stupid move. Publicly chastising a jude who is overseeing your case makes little sense. First this is all about delay so that he can argue it’s all a political weapon against a presidential candidate. He thinks he can appeal the case if he loses and use this judge’s alleged bias and, if necessary, get his handpicked federal judges to step in. And in the end, he believes he can always deploy his army of gun-toting, sore-lose malcontents on his behalf.

Still, you’d think his followers would get tired of hearing this on a broken record. It’s wearying:

Donald Trump is lashing out at the judge handling the New York attorney general’s fraud lawsuit against him and his company, calling him “vicious, biased, and mean” in a social media post just days before the case’s first court hearing.

The former president, who has been on the losing side of Judge Arthur Engoron’s rulings in the past, coupled Friday’s criticism with complaints that — as a politician — he shouldn’t be forced to deal with legal action until after the midterm elections on Nov. 8.

In a separate case, opening statements are set for Monday in the Trump Organization’s criminal tax fraud trial following the completion of jury selection on Friday.

Trump, who has been laying groundwork for a possible comeback run for president in 2024, grumbled in a post on his Truth Social platform about having to deal with simultaneous court action on the eve of an election that could put Republicans back in control of one or both houses of Congress.

“In breaking with a long standing and powerful tradition where cases involving politicos are not to be brought or tried just prior to, or during, a major Election (the Midterms), I have THREE, all run and inspired by Democrats, who absolutely refused to move the date,” Trump wrote. “They demanded it be now. So much for tradition and unwritten rules and laws!!!”

There are currently three active cases involving Trump or the Trump Organization in New York courts.

The company’s criminal tax fraud trial, which involves allegations that senior executives received off-the-books compensation, could last into December. Six alternate jurors were picked Friday to complete the panel needed for the trial.

On Monday, jury selection is scheduled to begin in the Bronx in a civil lawsuit brought by protesters who say they were roughed up by Trump’s security guards.

Trump’s outburst about Engoron came in the third case, a civil lawsuit filed by Attorney General Letitia James, after an administrative judge refused Tuesday to have the matter reassigned to another judge.

Engoron, a Democrat, repeatedly had ruled against Trump in disputes over subpoenas, holding him in contempt and fining him $110,000 for being slow to turn over documents and forcing him to sit for a deposition — testimony in which Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination more than 400 times.

The idea that he thinks he shouldn’t be pursued while an election is going on is amazing, even for him. He’s a civilian, he’s not on any ballot. He thinks he can declassify every classified document in the US government if it merely crosses his mind so does he also think that he’s exempt from the law just because he’s thinking about running in the future? I guess so.