683 Comments

It's so dispiriting that a cynical hack like Ailene Cannon could have the power, all by herself, to protect a clearly criminal ex-president from accountability and smooth his way back into power.

She certainly knows that her patron committed crimes and endangered national security, but getting him off the hook has been her sole concern. She surely knows that her conniving has been obvious, but she doesn't care, because she can expect a rich reward from her amoral patron or from some other cynical powers in MAGA-land.

She exemplifies the ethical bankruptcy at the heart of Trumpism, and sadly it appears to be advantageous.

Rank-and-file MAGAs scoffed at "Muh principles" from the early days of Trumpism. Today I saw someone gloat that Mitt Romney with all his principles didn't become president, so what good are principles then?

Elite Trumpites have basically the same attitude, no matter how much they purport to be defending moral values. They made many ethical compromises to embrace Trump, and they despise their former allies who did not. But right now, abandoning ethics appears to be a winning formula.

Expand full comment

I agree with Bill. We're in a "burn the boats" moment. We don't have a choice but to defeat MAGA. My grandchildren lives are on the line. I'm riding with whoever the democratic nominee is. At this point, it doesn't matter. If we have to drag a comatose Joe Biden across the line then that is what we will do. Thanks!

Expand full comment

While putting the leftovers from the big pot into a smaller covered dish, and refrigerate it, I suddenly realized why I get ticked off about the arguments against Biden. The reason is simple. People are SO obsessed (much to the media's enjoyment) about HIS faults, HIS vulnerabilities, HIS gaffes that they are completely ignoring the mountains of faults, lies, gaffes, outright inanities and vulnerabilities of Donald J Trump. It's like they are running AGAINST Joe Biden and not against Trump. So, we had 2 weeks of dishing Biden on the debate, and completely missing EVERY SINGLE thing Trump fluffed, lied, failed and said on his part. How about we concentrate all that ENERGY and start running against Trump instead of Joe Biden? We're going to hear about his and Vance's monstrous plans to destroy our country this week. Start focusing on HIM and figuratively bury HIM in the media. Every time they start on Biden, turn it around and make it about Trump. Maybe that's what the country wants and needs to hear.

Expand full comment

"Perhaps they should move to secure the best standard-bearer possible for a very important election. Perhaps they should seek to win instead of being resigned to losing." Exactly, depressed Dems seem ready to go down with the ship. They should be scrambled to get a new captain, as it were, and save the ship -- and the republic.

Expand full comment

How about we support the captain instead?

Expand full comment

If he could win, it would be great to stick with him. But he is about to take us down with him, and the situation is too perilous to let that happen.

Expand full comment

NOBODY can ever know who will win or lose.

Joe Biden is the nominee 1. the primary voters decided to elect him and 2. to do anything else at this point will result in the biggest fiasco and clown show in Democratic history, heck, any political history.

So, Joe is too old! So is Trump, and Joe is the best president in decades. Joe is senile. Really? Trump said he's a stable genius; he says he knows more about medicine than the doctors, more about the military than the generals, more about the Constitution while saying he didn't take an oath to support it. Those are the ravings of a lunatic. I could go on. I cannot in my long life (I'm 72 now) believe that I have seen the voted favorite of Ds (or Rs for that matter) vilified by his own party weeks before the election because of some perceived fault that THE OTHER GUY has exhibited far more than he has. It's like Joe is running against his own party. What the hell is wrong with Ds? You'd throw away a proven excellent president because you THINK he's not the your version of the PERFECT candidate. If Joe doesn't win the election, it will be because the Ds decided he can't win. You say the voters won't elect him. No, they won't elect him because of the comments I see daily - he's old, he's senile, he's slow, etc., etc., etc. If Biden loses, it's on everyone who's decided he's not fit office for whatever reason and that's the only thing the voting public hears from his party.

Expand full comment

Some more evidence that support for Biden is waning.

VCU poll shows Trump ahead in Virginia as support for Biden wanes

The poll shows Sen. Tim Kaine (D) leading GOP rival Hung Cao by double digits and approval down for Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), suggesting the problem is Biden..

Expand full comment

Biden Faces Challenges in Two Must-Win States, Times/Siena Polls Find

The polls, taken before the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, found President Biden trailing Mr. Trump in Pennsylvania and slightly ahead in Virginia.

Even if Biden were ahead in polls, do you really think he is the best candidate the Democrats have to lead the country for four years?

Expand full comment

I do not. There is a great candidate, Kamala Harris, who we also elected and who could step right into the candidacy

Expand full comment

I’d be willing to at least consider riding with him if he were up (take the safe play). I’ve been convinced since the debate that dropping him would flip the news script from now till the election and put Dems back on offense.

But being close in states that can’t be close (VA, NH) and systematically down in Pennsylvania makes me think the Dems have to go another way or hope for some crazy lucky event which have broken against them the last few months

Expand full comment

I’m a new Bulwark+ member. My wife & I are probably the only Democrats in Texas that don’t live in Austin. Just an observation: when I say “liberalism,” all of my neighbors hear *woke*. I realize it’s a simple terminology issue, but much of rural Texas is just that- simple. I wish there was better nomenclature for the same idea. Any suggestions?

Expand full comment

If they are more intellectual I say “lower case l liberal” (Bill Maher uses this to distinguish between old school liberals and newer anti-liberal woke far left).

If they just associate that word you could try rationalist or humanitarian.

Expand full comment

Guess it's official: "BREAKING NEWS Donald Trump selected J.D. Vance, the Ohio senator and “Hillbilly Elegy” author, to be his running mate. Monday, July 15, 2024 3:11 PM ET A political newcomer and onetime Trump critic, Vance is an ambitious, telegenic ideologue who relishes the spotlight and has already shown he can energize donors."

Personally, I think Trump had better watch his back.

Expand full comment

Exactly what I thought. Also, that Vance better have a long, long spoon. What a pair! They deserve each other.

Expand full comment

I don't know what polls you read.. The polls I read show that 80 percent of Americans think Biden is too old to be president. The polls I read show that new states are now in play and that Biden is behind in all the key states except Wisconsin. Two leading Black congressmen--Clyburn and Jeffries--have strongly hinted that Biden should reconsider. Biden's remarks that he has to "finish the job" betray colossal arrogance.

Expand full comment

This article is still very concerning. I read it when it first came out because I was confused why the percentages only dropped a few points on the predictor post debate. It doesn’t really show how the same data would converge if this holds up for 3 more months.

If the same dynamic were to hold would it be Biden 35% to win or Biden 20% to win. All it does is aptly describe polling error trends so far out from the election.

Expand full comment

If I remember, the polls had Hilary winning. She didn't. My hope and belief is that as the election nears, and Ds do their job highlighting what Biden's done and what Trump plans to do, especially now that he's picked a dangerous intelligent VP, people will wake up.

Expand full comment

I hope so too. But 538 had Trump at 30% chance to win in 2016 (everywhere else had him less than 2%) precisely because of a dynamic that a polling error to him in Midwest states could carry over.

The reality is if these polls hold till the election Joe Biden won't be able to win. He needs to get back to where he was pre-debate nationally and then add at least a couple points just to have a decent chance of defying the odds. That is highly unlikely to happen. Right now in poker terms the flop hit Trump big and Biden at this point has at best a backdoor runner straight and flush draw. If the turn comes wrong he's drawing dead. Even if it comes right he still needs to river a victory.

Expand full comment

If the polls are anything like the ones I've gotten, they less than useless and mean nothing. I've seen nothing that changes that.

Expand full comment

They've never been useless before. Sure you can have an occasional Democratic or Republican push poll or you can have an outlier but if anything they bias against the Democrats in the last two presidential elections. If the polls hold even close to what they are it will be 2012 again at best with zero chance of Joe Biden winning. That's just fact not conjecture. If somehow Joe Biden were to turn around his polls in Pennsylvania and get lucky and edge out Michigan and Wisconsin he has a chance. But the map is horrific for him far worse than last time. He won't even try to compete in multiple states he won last time.

Expand full comment

Of course “violence is not the answer”.

Geez Louise, every normal person understands that.

I vociferously reject republicans, “reporters”, or any other person attempting to group America’s plentiful supply of maladjusted, crazed, irresponsible, self centered jerks with easy access to weapons of war into league with Democrats, Left side Independents or whatever pop the right wing has decided is against their politics.

Expand full comment

How is it that despite a shooting just happening, that Trump was allowed to tell the Secret Service agents "Wait, wait" and then pump his fist three times for his deplorable followers?

Expand full comment

After today's "world according to William" scolding of the Democratic party, I thought that William Kristol was likely a Republican during much of the ascendency of "the party who gave us Trump" and the current hegemony of far right lunies in the federal courts (see SCOTUS immunity decision and Judge Cannon's dismissal of the Stolen documents case, signaled so indelicately by Clarence Thomas in said immunity ruling). An internet search for "William Kristol alito" yielded this gem from MSNBC. "Kristol floats Justice Alito for 2016 GOP nomination". That's for president folks.

After discussing the already broad field of 17 GOP presidential contenders, the article goes on to say...

"Don't worry, Kristol, one of the Beltway's highest-profile media Republicans, has some suggestions.

Kristol apparently has his eye on former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), retired Gen. Jack Keane, and, in all seriousness, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.

"It may seem odd to suggest that the solution to an already unprecedentedly large field is to expand it further," the Weekly Standard's editor writes. "But politics is full of oddities."

And so are Bill Kristol columns.

I should mention for those unfamiliar with Kristol that, even among Beltway pundits, he's widely recognized for being wrong, about everything, all of the time. Even some conservatives joke about betting the house on the opposite of anything Kristol predicts. (Consider his recent track record on Trump, for example.)"

OK, back to my thoughts now. I'm trying President Jim Jordan on for size and trying to fathom how in the world we would be better off than President Donald Trump. I can't.

The article does suggest that maybe William could better utilize his time to get Paul Ryan to put country over party and actually vote for Biden or any other Democrat rather than writing in a Republican. How many people could Paul Ryan personally convince to do likewise?

Perhaps he could call up all the Republicans who have said they can't endorse Trump but can't vote for Biden because (name your inanity) and explain to them that in coming up with a random inane reason for not voting for Biden they are indeed endorsing Trump or at minimum the lame ass "anyone is better than Biden (or a Democrat)" punt.

Which gets me to President Samual Alito! I feel pretty confident that Alito is a Christian nationalist.

Convince me otherwise "World according to William". Explain to us why the growth of Christian nationalism is such a danger to this country and how Trump will give them the run of the halls of the White House if elected.

Unfortunately, I paid for an annual subscription so I will be around for a few months longer. Yet I have now adopted a rule to only pay monthly for substack subscriptions. I call it the Bumptious Bill rule. :) I have hopefully the not so inane hope that "world according to William" can be nudged in a more productive direction.

Expand full comment

Back in January, Bill's group, defending democracy or some such - google his Wikipedia page - was pushing for Nikki who has always been a wannabe Trump. After Nikki folded or genuflected before the King, he ends up here. Honestly do not know why he was picked for Bulwark. One other oddity - a whole bunch of new names showing up in the comments, and apologies to thinking newcomers, suddenly pushing "Biden has to go for an unknown, unnamed candidate." I'm not to the point of unsubscribing, but I beginning to think Bulwark needs to answer the question of why Bill Kristol is here. To support Ds or to support Rs who aren't Trump and don't want Ds to win.

Expand full comment

Thanks for your thoughts Eva! Thanks also for your link to Seth Abramson substack. Everyone should read it! I believe that subverting the courts is one of the hallmarks of dictators and our courts are dangerous!

For more on the courts see

https://www.weekendreading.net/p/tipping-the-scales-the-maga-justices?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=808381&post_id=145796416&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=nblx&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment

Some think-tank types on the right were saying that since the system we have wasn't giving them the outcomes they preferred, it might be necessary to upend the system and replace it with one that they control. That is the thinking behind the "Second American Revolution" idea.

Those people likely recognized Trump as an ignoramus with no clear policy views of his own - just a set of prejudices that aligned with their own (e.g., "they're poisoning the blood of our nation'). And they recognized his indifference to rules and norms as a useful weapon -- a sledgehammer against the system.

As soon as any part of the system raised objections to his flouting of norms and rules, Trumpites vociferously complained that he was being persecuted by a corrupt system. The more he flouted rules and people called attention to it, the more grist for the mils of MAGA conspiracy-mongering about a corrupt Deep State that was out to get their hero just because he's such a great patriot.

Trump's brazen amorality has worked to the benefit of all those who had come to see our governing system as inimical to their designs.

Expand full comment

Okay, this isn't good: https://www.politicususa.com/2024/07/15/trump-j-d-vance-vp.html

Looks like the Orange Snake doesn't want a vanilla as VP, but a Goebbels.

Expand full comment

I agree Joe B needs to retire having given us a very good Presidency. Beyond that, we would prefer a strong, younger Centrist Candidate who would bring in a new Administration. WAPO article about Joe and Bernie w/AOC making a deal to go more Progressive is not a good sign.

On the Trump shooter so many things seem quite odd. The gun the shooter used was not made for accuracy at 430 ft. The young man himself, at first glance, doesn’t appear to be a “Terrorist.” And when have the Secret Service left a building with a sight line to the podium unguarded? Was this some kind of dare or did the young shooter think he was saving someone from retribution???

Expand full comment

A classmate said that he had a very poor aim when he did shooting in school.

Expand full comment

Wow! A president needs to retire after having a great presidency in favor of someone untested, unknown and penniless. So, who's your miracle candidate?

Expand full comment

Has anyone thought that this assassination attempt was in fact orchestrated by Trump and his team? This whole affair seems rather strange. Committed by an individual who seems to have had little involvement in radical politics of any kind? A shot through the ear from the side, where it should have gone through the head? And people injured in the crowd who were nowhere near the podium? None of this makes sense? I hate to sound like a conspiracist, but.......just think of how this is being judged? The fact that it is strengthening Trump's hold on the election and holding Democrats responsible for the very rhetoric that has been, and is, the foundation of Trump/MAGA Republicanism!

Expand full comment

There are some aspects of this that I will feel better if/when we have more details on. But I think it's important -- like in any crisis -- not to speculate out ahead of the investigation.

Even if, worst case scenario, this did turn out to be true and (even more unlikely) it was successfully covered up long-term, there would be better places for us to put our energy and focus.

The reason people running a crisis response always say so sternly "don't speculate" is because it's extremely tempting. But it tends to unleash way more trouble than it solves.

Expand full comment

Yup. I've had the same thought, mentioned below/up depending how you read the comments. :-)

One thing that really struck were the pictures just after the shots. Trump surrounded by agents, held upright with his head clearly visible. And even more insane if they were protecting him. A full on shot of him, white shirt, chest fully exposed, agents holding his back and legs, but not standing in front of him. Did they assume the shooter came from behind? Even so, really stupid - and if it were a movie, that's exactly what I'd say. Not to mention, people, before anyone knew if the shooter was stopped, standing in of white-shirted man with exposed chest shot, taking pictures and standing themselves. Why?

Really, really sorry one man was killed and others hurt. But way too many stupid things happened before (supposedly several security people actually saw the shooter and ran) and after.

Expand full comment
author

Absolutely not. Don't go there.

Expand full comment

With all due respect, JVL, if there hadn't been people killed and hurt who had nothing to do with Trump, given Trump's record of lying, his stunts (calling reporters/others, pretending to be someone else, and telling them lies) to get publicity, the holes in what happened - it all looked so amateurish, especially how the security around Trump had acted. If there hadn't been other victims that need to be mourned and their families supported, and I'm including the family of the demented shooter . . . If I could see all the holes in what happened, I'm sure others far more expert than I are also seeing them. Questions need to be answered. And I very much doubt the people around Trump will give truthful answers.

Thanks to Trump's behavior in the past, his lies, his stunts, who he is, I have no doubts he'd be capable of pulling a fake assassination stunt. Just like his hero Hitler. Or Stalin. Or Kim. Whatever works.

Expand full comment