Just a quick note to say I appreciated (and understood) the "all his works and empty promises" reference Tim made. Such an evocative turn of phrase, innit?
I thought Harris would be a competent candidate. A good second-string quarterback. Good enough that with strong support and some luck , she could beat Trump. I wasn't expecting an excellent candidate, one who would run a disciplined, almost flawless campaign. (Yes, "almost". Who ran the last perfect campaign?) Her ability to keep on task and run her own campaign, not the one other people - including me - would have preferred, has worked well. And the skill and temperament she has displayed are exactly what she will need dealing our country's enemies, including Xi and Putin and the fossil fuel lobby.
She will disappoint me in office. If I were elected President, I would disappoint me. To paraphrase a famous general, "No platform survives first contact with Congress." But I anticipate that she will disappoint me less than all the other people I've voted for.
... "I wasn’t merely comfortable with my vote for her. I’ve got to say that I was proud to be a Harris voter." Bill and all the team at The Bulwark, you're a class act. Consequently, I've got to say I am proud to be a Bulwark subscriber. Thanks for everything.
Honestly, how is Fox airtime NOT considered as an in-kind campaign contribution?? I mean as these chyron titles show, it is literally pro Trump propaganda?? I honestly don’t get how the FCC or the FEC allows this?? Can someone please explain?
If Biden was speaking out loud, there was no gaffe. There is no discernible difference between supporters and supporters' (or supporter's for that matter).
Almost forgot....if you missed Tim Miller interviewing Robert Draper yesterday about Kamala Harris...you missed something very informative and special. It's a very up close and personal discussion from a guy who knows her very well. It was chockful of things I didn't know about her both growing up and her challenges as VP, etc.
One party desperately seeks to bring a revolution to overthrow the old order and institutions in order to save them. Kind of like destroying the village in order to save it, I guess?
They do not want to see this as a revolution, even though it is one. Bannon, at least, understands that it is a revolution (which is one of the things that makes him dangerous).
One party desperately needs to create a revolution in order to preserve the core of what Amrican is supposed to and should stand for--but probably won't.
Which means we are going to be going through this same charade again and again and again for the next several election cycles, regardless of whether Trump is alive or dead or a dementia patient in a ward somewhere or (very unlikely) in jail.
The fact that we are almost certainly going to have a fight over the validation of the election if Harris wins (and we might not win that validation fight) means that out institutions HAVE failed.
The fact that a substantial number of people will not accept the outcome of such an election, regardless, means that out culture HAS failed.
There is a lot of work that needs to be done, but I do not actually see too many people willing to do that work--especially where it counts (the political and cultural leadership).
It is very very hard to change the course of a culture in a conscious and directed way. It requires either an existential crisis (that is recognized as such) that creates an emergency that a small group of people seize control of (and the masses acquiesce to either through agreement or fear or desperation) or it requires a general recognition and determination to change (and agreement on what that change should be.
The second is so rare that I am not sure an example exists.
In 1902 Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov wrote an essay titled, "What is to Be Done?" His thesis was that revolution requires what he termed a "vanguard party." A group of dedicated revolutionaries willing to do what is required to bring change. This was required because the people weren't going to create a revolution.
Lenin was right, in a sense, but also wrong. His vanguard DID create and carry through a revolution (in the right environment for it), but ultimately failed because the object of the revolution was not actually rachable and the vanguard did what vanguards ofte do, which is cement their position atop things and then work hard to keep it (while murdering each other and tens of millions of people).
I see the fruit of these poisoned seeds in the MAGA movement. I am sure that Bannon, at least, has read his Lenin. That movement will be, in the end, even less successful than the Bo;sheviks.
(BTW, do not confuse the content/rhetoric of the revolution with the form and means).
What is desperately needed is the right kind of strong leadership, based upon a strong, positive vision. We need a clear and powerful and substantive expression of that vision that is both aspirational and inspirational. leadership that leads because of vision and passion and not the desire to lead or to have or keep authority.
And we do not have that. We have bits and pieces of that, but it has not come together. It may not come together. I am not sure our culture is capable of producing that--or of allowing belief in such leadership... but the BAD example of MAGA gives me hope that there is the possibility of good example.
One party desperately seeks to bring a revolution to OVERTHROW THE OLD ORDER AND INSTITUTIONS in order to save them. Kind of like destroying the village in order to save it, I guess?
“REPORT CHEATING TO AUTHORITIES. Law Enforcement must act, NOW!”
I write to report cheating by the Republican majority of the U.S. Supreme Court. Today they expunged *suspected* ineligible voters from the Virginia registration rolls 6 days before an election, in violation of federal election law and without due process.
To which law enforcement authority should I report this violation?
Sadly, they seem to be untouchable. They are the last word, until Congress does something about it. We know some of them are corrupt, and if they were anyone else they would have been disbarred.
Yhose who vote for a president who lies, cheats, steals, rapes, takes bankruptcies yet staýs rich, opposes the antifa (anti-fascists) doesn't pay taxes or what he owes, loves those who broke Into the Capitol, was a pandemic superspreader, and accuses his competition of prostituting underaged kids when he was a long time friend of Jeffrey Epstein, who had a worldwide rin̈g, are either criminals themselves or are stupid beyond belief.
Surely there must be enough real men, and brave women, and reasonably intelligent and decent voters to make Kamala Harris win by a landslide.
Then let's try to help her improve our justice system in badly needed ways so that our precious freedoms will never again be in such jeopardy.
If you're offended by the Biden gaffe, don't vote for Biden.
If you're offended by the Biden gaffe, you should be even more offended by the guy who has often called his political opponents "vermin, animals, scum, garbage, evil, sick, demonic, the enemies within," and definitely don't vote for that guy.
Also: the people who think it's funny when other people are called "garbage" merely for reasons of ethnicity have no moral ground to take offense if someone does put the label on them.
Just a quick note to say I appreciated (and understood) the "all his works and empty promises" reference Tim made. Such an evocative turn of phrase, innit?
I thought Harris would be a competent candidate. A good second-string quarterback. Good enough that with strong support and some luck , she could beat Trump. I wasn't expecting an excellent candidate, one who would run a disciplined, almost flawless campaign. (Yes, "almost". Who ran the last perfect campaign?) Her ability to keep on task and run her own campaign, not the one other people - including me - would have preferred, has worked well. And the skill and temperament she has displayed are exactly what she will need dealing our country's enemies, including Xi and Putin and the fossil fuel lobby.
She will disappoint me in office. If I were elected President, I would disappoint me. To paraphrase a famous general, "No platform survives first contact with Congress." But I anticipate that she will disappoint me less than all the other people I've voted for.
... "I wasn’t merely comfortable with my vote for her. I’ve got to say that I was proud to be a Harris voter." Bill and all the team at The Bulwark, you're a class act. Consequently, I've got to say I am proud to be a Bulwark subscriber. Thanks for everything.
I know this is shallow. Bannon spent four months in prison, most prisoners leave more svelte?
Yep. Steve Bannon is back. Deloused (for now) and ready to rumble.
And I just have to throw this in here....
What is love?
Oh, baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me, no more
Oh, baby, don't hurt me
Don't hurt me, no more
"Love means never having to say you're sorry." (If you're old enough to remember that groaner.)
The truth of her statement was irrelevant.
The impact of her statement was substantial. It was a bad misstep.
To what statement are you referring??
Honestly, how is Fox airtime NOT considered as an in-kind campaign contribution?? I mean as these chyron titles show, it is literally pro Trump propaganda?? I honestly don’t get how the FCC or the FEC allows this?? Can someone please explain?
If Biden was speaking out loud, there was no gaffe. There is no discernible difference between supporters and supporters' (or supporter's for that matter).
Almost forgot....if you missed Tim Miller interviewing Robert Draper yesterday about Kamala Harris...you missed something very informative and special. It's a very up close and personal discussion from a guy who knows her very well. It was chockful of things I didn't know about her both growing up and her challenges as VP, etc.
One party desperately seeks to bring a revolution to overthrow the old order and institutions in order to save them. Kind of like destroying the village in order to save it, I guess?
They do not want to see this as a revolution, even though it is one. Bannon, at least, understands that it is a revolution (which is one of the things that makes him dangerous).
One party desperately needs to create a revolution in order to preserve the core of what Amrican is supposed to and should stand for--but probably won't.
Which means we are going to be going through this same charade again and again and again for the next several election cycles, regardless of whether Trump is alive or dead or a dementia patient in a ward somewhere or (very unlikely) in jail.
The fact that we are almost certainly going to have a fight over the validation of the election if Harris wins (and we might not win that validation fight) means that out institutions HAVE failed.
The fact that a substantial number of people will not accept the outcome of such an election, regardless, means that out culture HAS failed.
There is a lot of work that needs to be done, but I do not actually see too many people willing to do that work--especially where it counts (the political and cultural leadership).
It is very very hard to change the course of a culture in a conscious and directed way. It requires either an existential crisis (that is recognized as such) that creates an emergency that a small group of people seize control of (and the masses acquiesce to either through agreement or fear or desperation) or it requires a general recognition and determination to change (and agreement on what that change should be.
The second is so rare that I am not sure an example exists.
In 1902 Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov wrote an essay titled, "What is to Be Done?" His thesis was that revolution requires what he termed a "vanguard party." A group of dedicated revolutionaries willing to do what is required to bring change. This was required because the people weren't going to create a revolution.
Lenin was right, in a sense, but also wrong. His vanguard DID create and carry through a revolution (in the right environment for it), but ultimately failed because the object of the revolution was not actually rachable and the vanguard did what vanguards ofte do, which is cement their position atop things and then work hard to keep it (while murdering each other and tens of millions of people).
I see the fruit of these poisoned seeds in the MAGA movement. I am sure that Bannon, at least, has read his Lenin. That movement will be, in the end, even less successful than the Bo;sheviks.
(BTW, do not confuse the content/rhetoric of the revolution with the form and means).
What is desperately needed is the right kind of strong leadership, based upon a strong, positive vision. We need a clear and powerful and substantive expression of that vision that is both aspirational and inspirational. leadership that leads because of vision and passion and not the desire to lead or to have or keep authority.
And we do not have that. We have bits and pieces of that, but it has not come together. It may not come together. I am not sure our culture is capable of producing that--or of allowing belief in such leadership... but the BAD example of MAGA gives me hope that there is the possibility of good example.
But we may need desperate times to get that.
MAGA is not interested in saving our institutions.
One party desperately seeks to bring a revolution to OVERTHROW THE OLD ORDER AND INSTITUTIONS in order to save them. Kind of like destroying the village in order to save it, I guess?
I'll repeat myself. MAGA is not the least bit interested in saving our old order or institutions. They want to replace them with Project 2025.
Is that title a Whitesnake reference?
I don't think Trump knows what love feels like. That might be a big part of the problem.
I think Tina Turner sang Trump's theme song: "What's Love Got to Do with It?"
“REPORT CHEATING TO AUTHORITIES. Law Enforcement must act, NOW!”
I write to report cheating by the Republican majority of the U.S. Supreme Court. Today they expunged *suspected* ineligible voters from the Virginia registration rolls 6 days before an election, in violation of federal election law and without due process.
To which law enforcement authority should I report this violation?
SCOTUS is sometimes pretty blatant in elevating politics above the rule of law.
Sadly, they seem to be untouchable. They are the last word, until Congress does something about it. We know some of them are corrupt, and if they were anyone else they would have been disbarred.
Yhose who vote for a president who lies, cheats, steals, rapes, takes bankruptcies yet staýs rich, opposes the antifa (anti-fascists) doesn't pay taxes or what he owes, loves those who broke Into the Capitol, was a pandemic superspreader, and accuses his competition of prostituting underaged kids when he was a long time friend of Jeffrey Epstein, who had a worldwide rin̈g, are either criminals themselves or are stupid beyond belief.
Surely there must be enough real men, and brave women, and reasonably intelligent and decent voters to make Kamala Harris win by a landslide.
Then let's try to help her improve our justice system in badly needed ways so that our precious freedoms will never again be in such jeopardy.
If you're offended by the Biden gaffe, don't vote for Biden.
If you're offended by the Biden gaffe, you should be even more offended by the guy who has often called his political opponents "vermin, animals, scum, garbage, evil, sick, demonic, the enemies within," and definitely don't vote for that guy.
Also: the people who think it's funny when other people are called "garbage" merely for reasons of ethnicity have no moral ground to take offense if someone does put the label on them.