It's easy and often cathartic to attack someone else's policy-based beliefs in slanted, sophomoric terms in the name of ideological purity. I do it myself in weak moments. It shouldn't be hard, though, to appreciate courage like Liz Cheney's at moments in our history like the present one. There are principles that transcend the traditional liberal/conservative divide, and it will always be inspiring when true patriots stand up against their usual allies at high cost when the moment calls for it.
Yeah, sure Liz has courage, courage to support child separation, the Muslim ban, the repel of ACA too many times, three activist SCOTUS assholes, union busting, her dad while he shred the US standing is the world, torture etc etc etc. but yeah she's an American hero. What a way to try and win an election, how fall have we fallen.
Heroism is an act, not the sum of a political philosophy. I really don't care what what the views are of a person who runs into a building burning to rescue someone. But yes, we are in dire straits.
Liz will not ever change her political views, she is only trying to save democracy in our country. Should we not try to do anything that could attract more voters Nov 5?
Folks, pls join me in reaching out to moderate voters. Here's an action step!
It worries me that many people are over-confident that Kamala will win. Polls are inaccurate. In 2016 we were confident Hillary would win, but because 40 million registered Democrats did not vote, Trump won. We cannot be complacent!
We need millions of low-propensity Democrats (a polite term for not motivated to vote), Independents, and undecideds to vote for Kamala. There are also some Republicans who are disgusted with Trump but they don’t want to “become a Democrat” – we need to inform them that voting Blue is in their best interests. WE CANNOT WIN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE WITHOUT MILLIONS OF THEIR VOTES.
Two wonderful organizations Galvanize Action - https://www.galvanizeaction.org/ - and One For All are expert in crafting campaign messages to motivate people to vote Blue. They reach out to moderate women who admire Kamala but are married to Trumpers – giving them a nudge to follow their own common sense and vote for Kamala. Their messages are tried and true - created by veteran campaign experts, social psychologists, and data scientists, and are constantly tested and refined.
At least Liz and her dad have some courage. The rest seem to be fearful of the insane cult coming after them! Do you get death threats? I’d bet you do! Thanks for your intestinal fortitude!
How in the hell do the lunatics of “space lasers, dems causing hurricanes, pets being cooked by Haitians, death by electrocution vs. being eaten by a shark, low water pressure, drill baby drill, Putin love, dictator on day one, etc etc etc.”…be projected to get damn near 50% of ‘Merica’s votes??? This is scary, and bleeping insane! A nation of stupidity & bigotry.
I think Fox News & Rupert Murdock deserve much of the credit for tapping into this vein of ugliness & exploiting it. Heaven help us all.
I love Mitt Romney but he’s really disappointing right now. I know he has it in him to endorse Harris and bring his gravitas to the fight. Same with John Kelly. He knows what Trump is. Kelly fought for his country and lost his son to that fight. I don’t understand how this election is harder than the other things he’s endured for his nation.
One was with her speech itself. It turned out, however, that it was an excellent speech. She delivered it very well. A bit of humor with the John Adams quote, and a slight tear in her eye with the audience reaction.
Another was how the audience would react. It wasn't that I was concerned about them being outwardly rude. Rather, that they would simply cheer because it was anti-Trump, which I felt would be disrespectful. I was very happy with the "thank you Liz" chant. I felt that showed that the audience respected her courage, and integrity, when standing up to Trump in the Jan 6 investigation. It also showed an acknowledgement for, and respect of, the fact that there are political differences between her and the audience, but that she was there to do the right thing for the country.
The third concern was with if Harris' would respond with a speech where Liz would have to be standing next to Harris while, appearing to show support for, giving a speech on policies that Liz might not agree with. But that didn't happen. Harris gave Liz cover by showing support for a time when we can return to two parties passionately competing on policies. While the only policy issue Harris talked about was on Ukraine, something that Liz will be in complete agreement with.
I thought the whole thing was excellent. (if only I could say the same about Walz in the debate).
Agree with all save for your last sentence. I think Walz did fine against a slick venture capitalist lawyer who has gone from "Trump is Hitler" to "Trump is the savior (of me and my friends)" to "lying is fine if I do it". And Walz exposed Vance for what he is in the last few minutes of the "debate". And most of the articles I've seen think the same.
He left some of Vance's lies unchallenged. In particular that Trump saved the ACA. I would have also liked for Walz to have reminded Vane of his previous statements supporting an abortion ban. Had he done those two things, I think it would have blocked Vance's effort to seem like a reasonable person.
Tim Walz was not the smiling, waving person we knew when he was chosen, and at the beginning he was looking at his notes. But he came on strong against the constant lies of Trump/Vance.
This is the first and only Bulwark content I've seen/read in a week. I've been careful since subscribing not to include very many details about myself b/c I'm pretty private and don't want an online presence (don't do social media at all); but decided to say tonight that I live 30 min. from Asheville and so have had other things on my mind. Our little neighborhood incredibly had no damage; we're beyond fortunate. But the surrounding devastation is incomprehensible, and lots of us are feeling pretty emotional. It's one thing to see it on the news, but another to drive for miles and see it first hand.
Tim, when I read, "As long as I live I will never fully comprehend it," I kinda lost it. I've barely thought about politics for the last week; and to have my first read include these words of yours reminds me once again of how validating this incredible Bulwark community has been for me thru these troubled times, and how time and time again I've been reminded how not alone I am in my confusion, disillusionment, etc.
The plan is to open Dem HQ here again next week, and get back to campaigning. We know people are counting on NC to help keep Trump out of office, and feel a duty to do what we can; but I have to say it does feel inappropriate when so many people here have lost everything. Recovery will take years, and I shudder to think how much worse it will be if Trump and/or Robinson get elected.
I'm not writing directly to Tim's article, but want to make a suggestion to the Bulwark staff, and hope they read our comments.
1. I get an email from Democrats asking for money about every 5 minutes, I'm not exaggerating. And I am happy to make my modest contributions (I'm not Elon, but a million of us are). But the question is where would my money most help general election efforts? To Elissa Slotkin, Colin Allred, Tammy Baldwin, what would be best? It would be super-useful if the Bulwark helped us with such questions. Otherwise, I have no idea who most needs my support. If the Bulwark doesn't and can't do this, can you guys point to anyone who reliably does this? We need to win, let's get organized.
2. The Bulwark should also make clear where we make general suggestions such as this, ie, have a system in place that allows us to empower practical election strategies.
I ignore all the ones from CA (heck, it's blue where I am), and places that have lots of rich folks that can give. But I have given to Tester, the Montana farmer running against a rich carpetbagger who doesn't know one end of a horse from another unless he's betting on it. What annoys me the most are the doomsday one from the national or state parties. I only give to the candidate, not the state or national party.
You should read Robert Hubbell's daily newsletter. In addition to the gorgeous pictures of the universe he takes, and serious thinking articles, he has links to groups that fit your #2 point. https://roberthubbell.substack.com/
Thank YOU Tim! This is a beautifully written piece. I read it to my husband as we were driving from the Santa Barbara area up 101 through the beautiful brown, old oak-dotted hills of central California to our home in the Santa Cruz area, and we both got choked up.
Thank YOU Tim! This is a beautifully written piece. I read it to my husband as we were driving from the Santa Barbara area up 101 through the beautiful brown, old oak-dotted hills of central California to our home in the Santa Cruz area, and we both got choked up.
Many years ago, I attended the Easter Vigil at a monastery. At the service, the abbot spoke about the women who went in the early hours before dawn to the grave of Jesus. He painted a picture of devoted and determined women on what they thought was their last service to the one they loved. In the coffee hour afterwards, one of the monks kept exclaiming, “Those women! Those women!” Kamala and Liz stand in that line: those women!
1) It’s hard for me to imagine voting for Liz Cheney if there were even a moderately reasonable Democratic opposition candidate in the election. But I so admire her for putting her money where her mouth is. Unlike so many others, she didn’t flinch or equivocate or try to spin her disgust with Trump into anything other than full-throated support for Harris. Unlike people like McConnell, she didn’t ask anyone else to do the fighting for her. And, most of all, she didn’t hide behind the “I can’t vote for Trump because he’s just the most awful and dangerous person ever, but I can’t vote for Harris either because she has a few policy positions that I don’t completely agree with” dodge. People saying that don’t seem to realize that the second part of that excuse tends to diminish the first part of that excuse. If Trump is as awful and dangerous as they say, there aren’t any policy positions that should prevent support for the “not awful and dangerous” candidate, no matter who it is.
This is also why I admire the Bulwark crew. They also put their money where their mouth is.
2) “One thing notably not on that resume: expertise in disaster relief and preparedness” – True enough, but remember that Bush (43) appointed Michael Brown who also had zero “expertise in disaster relief and preparedness”. How did that work out?
So Bush (43) gave us Michael Brown, but he won’t give us an endorsement of Harris. That makes him 0-for-2.
For the life of me, I can’t understand the reasoning of people like Romney or Christie. Do they really think that the GOP base will come crawling back to them if Trump loses? Don’t they realize that, should Trump lose, the GOP base will blame them (right after they get through blaming Dominion, Italian space lasers, the media, illegal aliens voting, and demonic Democrats) because they wouldn’t ride the Trump train? Because you know that Trump won’t take any blame and you know that his cult will follow whatever he says and you know he’ll blame them. They won’t be heroes, they’ll be goats.
And what’s worse is if their inaction contributes to Trump winning. Then they’ll be worse than whatever is worse than goats. And that will apply not just to them, but to the whole country.
I have SO much respect for Liz Cheney.
These two women are going to get it done.
It's easy and often cathartic to attack someone else's policy-based beliefs in slanted, sophomoric terms in the name of ideological purity. I do it myself in weak moments. It shouldn't be hard, though, to appreciate courage like Liz Cheney's at moments in our history like the present one. There are principles that transcend the traditional liberal/conservative divide, and it will always be inspiring when true patriots stand up against their usual allies at high cost when the moment calls for it.
Yeah, sure Liz has courage, courage to support child separation, the Muslim ban, the repel of ACA too many times, three activist SCOTUS assholes, union busting, her dad while he shred the US standing is the world, torture etc etc etc. but yeah she's an American hero. What a way to try and win an election, how fall have we fallen.
Heroism is an act, not the sum of a political philosophy. I really don't care what what the views are of a person who runs into a building burning to rescue someone. But yes, we are in dire straits.
Liz will not ever change her political views, she is only trying to save democracy in our country. Should we not try to do anything that could attract more voters Nov 5?
Folks, pls join me in reaching out to moderate voters. Here's an action step!
It worries me that many people are over-confident that Kamala will win. Polls are inaccurate. In 2016 we were confident Hillary would win, but because 40 million registered Democrats did not vote, Trump won. We cannot be complacent!
We need millions of low-propensity Democrats (a polite term for not motivated to vote), Independents, and undecideds to vote for Kamala. There are also some Republicans who are disgusted with Trump but they don’t want to “become a Democrat” – we need to inform them that voting Blue is in their best interests. WE CANNOT WIN THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE WITHOUT MILLIONS OF THEIR VOTES.
Two wonderful organizations Galvanize Action - https://www.galvanizeaction.org/ - and One For All are expert in crafting campaign messages to motivate people to vote Blue. They reach out to moderate women who admire Kamala but are married to Trumpers – giving them a nudge to follow their own common sense and vote for Kamala. Their messages are tried and true - created by veteran campaign experts, social psychologists, and data scientists, and are constantly tested and refined.
Their next ZOOM is Thursday, October 10 - 8:30 a.m. PT/11:30 a.m. ET - will feature Hillary Rodham Clinton. Sign up here! https://secure.everyaction.com/MJ8_wId9nEOoGW_tXxl90g2?emci=0be3f83f-2381-ef11-8474-6045bda8aae9&emdi=1a268ac0-a581-ef11-8474-6045bda8aae9&ceid=8358425
Thank you, Jan. This sounds terrific and I will check it out.
At least Liz and her dad have some courage. The rest seem to be fearful of the insane cult coming after them! Do you get death threats? I’d bet you do! Thanks for your intestinal fortitude!
How in the hell do the lunatics of “space lasers, dems causing hurricanes, pets being cooked by Haitians, death by electrocution vs. being eaten by a shark, low water pressure, drill baby drill, Putin love, dictator on day one, etc etc etc.”…be projected to get damn near 50% of ‘Merica’s votes??? This is scary, and bleeping insane! A nation of stupidity & bigotry.
I think Fox News & Rupert Murdock deserve much of the credit for tapping into this vein of ugliness & exploiting it. Heaven help us all.
I love Mitt Romney but he’s really disappointing right now. I know he has it in him to endorse Harris and bring his gravitas to the fight. Same with John Kelly. He knows what Trump is. Kelly fought for his country and lost his son to that fight. I don’t understand how this election is harder than the other things he’s endured for his nation.
Romney is the only Republican to vote to impeach trump twice. Clearly, he continues to do what he thinks is right, but maybe his strategy is wrong.
Not appreciating your little ditty about the men from citifield. We at amfam field watched in horror as defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory.
I had a few concerns going into her speech.
One was with her speech itself. It turned out, however, that it was an excellent speech. She delivered it very well. A bit of humor with the John Adams quote, and a slight tear in her eye with the audience reaction.
Another was how the audience would react. It wasn't that I was concerned about them being outwardly rude. Rather, that they would simply cheer because it was anti-Trump, which I felt would be disrespectful. I was very happy with the "thank you Liz" chant. I felt that showed that the audience respected her courage, and integrity, when standing up to Trump in the Jan 6 investigation. It also showed an acknowledgement for, and respect of, the fact that there are political differences between her and the audience, but that she was there to do the right thing for the country.
The third concern was with if Harris' would respond with a speech where Liz would have to be standing next to Harris while, appearing to show support for, giving a speech on policies that Liz might not agree with. But that didn't happen. Harris gave Liz cover by showing support for a time when we can return to two parties passionately competing on policies. While the only policy issue Harris talked about was on Ukraine, something that Liz will be in complete agreement with.
I thought the whole thing was excellent. (if only I could say the same about Walz in the debate).
Agree with all save for your last sentence. I think Walz did fine against a slick venture capitalist lawyer who has gone from "Trump is Hitler" to "Trump is the savior (of me and my friends)" to "lying is fine if I do it". And Walz exposed Vance for what he is in the last few minutes of the "debate". And most of the articles I've seen think the same.
He left some of Vance's lies unchallenged. In particular that Trump saved the ACA. I would have also liked for Walz to have reminded Vane of his previous statements supporting an abortion ban. Had he done those two things, I think it would have blocked Vance's effort to seem like a reasonable person.
Tim Walz was not the smiling, waving person we knew when he was chosen, and at the beginning he was looking at his notes. But he came on strong against the constant lies of Trump/Vance.
This is the first and only Bulwark content I've seen/read in a week. I've been careful since subscribing not to include very many details about myself b/c I'm pretty private and don't want an online presence (don't do social media at all); but decided to say tonight that I live 30 min. from Asheville and so have had other things on my mind. Our little neighborhood incredibly had no damage; we're beyond fortunate. But the surrounding devastation is incomprehensible, and lots of us are feeling pretty emotional. It's one thing to see it on the news, but another to drive for miles and see it first hand.
Tim, when I read, "As long as I live I will never fully comprehend it," I kinda lost it. I've barely thought about politics for the last week; and to have my first read include these words of yours reminds me once again of how validating this incredible Bulwark community has been for me thru these troubled times, and how time and time again I've been reminded how not alone I am in my confusion, disillusionment, etc.
The plan is to open Dem HQ here again next week, and get back to campaigning. We know people are counting on NC to help keep Trump out of office, and feel a duty to do what we can; but I have to say it does feel inappropriate when so many people here have lost everything. Recovery will take years, and I shudder to think how much worse it will be if Trump and/or Robinson get elected.
P.S. These lines REALLY made me cry: "Two women standing in the breach to protect the country from the men trying to tear it apart.
Two women alone, standing together for all of us."
Pure brilliance. Thank you so much, Tim.
I'm not writing directly to Tim's article, but want to make a suggestion to the Bulwark staff, and hope they read our comments.
1. I get an email from Democrats asking for money about every 5 minutes, I'm not exaggerating. And I am happy to make my modest contributions (I'm not Elon, but a million of us are). But the question is where would my money most help general election efforts? To Elissa Slotkin, Colin Allred, Tammy Baldwin, what would be best? It would be super-useful if the Bulwark helped us with such questions. Otherwise, I have no idea who most needs my support. If the Bulwark doesn't and can't do this, can you guys point to anyone who reliably does this? We need to win, let's get organized.
2. The Bulwark should also make clear where we make general suggestions such as this, ie, have a system in place that allows us to empower practical election strategies.
This! We must be on the same email lists.
I ignore all the ones from CA (heck, it's blue where I am), and places that have lots of rich folks that can give. But I have given to Tester, the Montana farmer running against a rich carpetbagger who doesn't know one end of a horse from another unless he's betting on it. What annoys me the most are the doomsday one from the national or state parties. I only give to the candidate, not the state or national party.
You should read Robert Hubbell's daily newsletter. In addition to the gorgeous pictures of the universe he takes, and serious thinking articles, he has links to groups that fit your #2 point. https://roberthubbell.substack.com/
Thanks, Eva, I will look into Hubbell's newsletter.
Thank YOU Tim! This is a beautifully written piece. I read it to my husband as we were driving from the Santa Barbara area up 101 through the beautiful brown, old oak-dotted hills of central California to our home in the Santa Cruz area, and we both got choked up.
Thank YOU Tim! This is a beautifully written piece. I read it to my husband as we were driving from the Santa Barbara area up 101 through the beautiful brown, old oak-dotted hills of central California to our home in the Santa Cruz area, and we both got choked up.
Beautiful! Godspeed, Judy. I read it to MY husband too - while sitting in our kitchen in Marietta, GA.
Many years ago, I attended the Easter Vigil at a monastery. At the service, the abbot spoke about the women who went in the early hours before dawn to the grave of Jesus. He painted a picture of devoted and determined women on what they thought was their last service to the one they loved. In the coffee hour afterwards, one of the monks kept exclaiming, “Those women! Those women!” Kamala and Liz stand in that line: those women!
Losing Liz from her seat is tough. Al Franken, too - miss him much.
And a great equivalence of the stupidity of ideology as a basis of evaluating people.
A few comments...
1) It’s hard for me to imagine voting for Liz Cheney if there were even a moderately reasonable Democratic opposition candidate in the election. But I so admire her for putting her money where her mouth is. Unlike so many others, she didn’t flinch or equivocate or try to spin her disgust with Trump into anything other than full-throated support for Harris. Unlike people like McConnell, she didn’t ask anyone else to do the fighting for her. And, most of all, she didn’t hide behind the “I can’t vote for Trump because he’s just the most awful and dangerous person ever, but I can’t vote for Harris either because she has a few policy positions that I don’t completely agree with” dodge. People saying that don’t seem to realize that the second part of that excuse tends to diminish the first part of that excuse. If Trump is as awful and dangerous as they say, there aren’t any policy positions that should prevent support for the “not awful and dangerous” candidate, no matter who it is.
This is also why I admire the Bulwark crew. They also put their money where their mouth is.
2) “One thing notably not on that resume: expertise in disaster relief and preparedness” – True enough, but remember that Bush (43) appointed Michael Brown who also had zero “expertise in disaster relief and preparedness”. How did that work out?
So Bush (43) gave us Michael Brown, but he won’t give us an endorsement of Harris. That makes him 0-for-2.
For the life of me, I can’t understand the reasoning of people like Romney or Christie. Do they really think that the GOP base will come crawling back to them if Trump loses? Don’t they realize that, should Trump lose, the GOP base will blame them (right after they get through blaming Dominion, Italian space lasers, the media, illegal aliens voting, and demonic Democrats) because they wouldn’t ride the Trump train? Because you know that Trump won’t take any blame and you know that his cult will follow whatever he says and you know he’ll blame them. They won’t be heroes, they’ll be goats.
And what’s worse is if their inaction contributes to Trump winning. Then they’ll be worse than whatever is worse than goats. And that will apply not just to them, but to the whole country.