Tag Archive: 2024 Election

Will Republicans join the resistance?

Would Republicans do this?

After the 2024 election debacle and the prospect of an anti-American dictatorship, Democrats are trying to figure out ways that they can peacefully resist, indeed survive, the next four years. For example, many Democrats have dumped their Twitter (now X) accounts since the election, as platform owner Elon Musk lurched to the right, helped Donald Trump, and appears to have landed a cozy spot in the next administration. Others are talking about purchasing items that are manufactured overseas, such as appliances, computers, clothing and cars, now to avoid the planned Trump tariffs that everyone knows will raise prices and increase inflation. Plenty of discussions reportedly are taking place among Democrats regarding other steps they can adopt, including boycotts, protests, organizing, communicating better, lobbying their members of Congress, advancing their agenda in blue states, filing lawsuits, and more.

But the really interesting question is going to be whether Republicans join Democrats and independents in acts of resistance against some of Trump’s agenda. While that may sound crazy given the full (sometimes violent) support of the MAGA base, there are many Republicans who may have an interest in keeping things more normal than the radical changes that Trump and his team plan for 2025 and beyond, as reflected in Project 2025. This includes, for example:

–Corporate owners and executives who do not want Trump’s tariffs raising their costs, which they would have to pass on to customers.

–Farm and other business owners who don’t want their cheap labor to be deported.

–Drug company owners and executives who are unhappy about COVID vaccines and other pharmaceutical products being disfavored, or maybe even banned, if Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. becomes Secretary of Health and Human Services.

–Workers, owners and executives in the rapidly growing renewable energy field (solar power, wind power, etc.), who may be less than thrilled about the likelihood of severe cutbacks to government promotion and assistance to those industries, such as that found in President Joe Biden‘s Inflation Reduction Act.

Now, it may be too much to ask that such Republicans would actually join Democrats in some formal or powerful resistance to Trump administration policies. But one can easily see Republican pushback in ways they know how to do, such as lawsuits, lobbying, or other behind-the-scenes efforts. It would not be surprising, therefore, if the most extreme parts of the planned Trump agenda end up in choppy waters, subject at least to delays.

Photo by Vince, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/J1bMmW

Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency with Elon Musk — failure or fearful?

Disciplined enough to run the federal government?

Earlier this week, Donald Trump announced that he would create a new Department of Government Efficiency when he gets into the White House next year. Trump stated that this agency would be led by Elon Musk and businessman turned Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. First of all, it seems comically ironic that (a) an entire new government department would be created to show how to make government more efficient, and (b) it would need to be headed by two people instead of one. So much for Republicans claiming for decades that they are “the party of smaller government.”

Along with that funny part, if it were to be a true Cabinet-level department (Defense, Education, Justice, etc.), or a federal agency (Federal Communications Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, etc.), generally this Department of Government Efficiency would need to be created and funded by Congress. That could take a long time, and run into many objections and amendments. So more likely, it would be an “Office” or some other Executive Branch or White House creation well below the Cabinet Department level.

If that happens, some folks might not take this office seriously. However, a quick look at a similar office from a few decades ago might indicate that a Government Efficiency Office, Agency or Board could have real power and do real damage. Specifically, in 1989, President George H.W. Bush created the Council on Competitiveness, and put Vice President Dan Quayle in charge of it. This innocuous-sounding Council was described as having “responsibility for reducing the regulatory burden on the economy.”  Essentially it was a White House back door for Republican corporate executives and lobbyists to come in with deregulatory wish lists, from environmental rules to health and safety rules and more.

The council worked closely with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget to carry out OMB’s regulatory review and the development of the regulatory program.

Not every destructive government action requires Congress to legislate. A lot of good or bad can be done in the process to implement, or repeal, rules and regulations that govern much of our lives. It is no secret that the incoming Trump administration seeks to repeal all kinds of regulations that Americans rely on for their safety and security, in areas such as the environment, transportation, workplace health and safety, food and drug safety, etc. Corporations obviously want such regulatory unburdening to reduce their costs and increase their profits. It’s a good bet that, as with the previous Council on Competitiveness, such corporate deregulation would be the principal function of the new “Department of Government Efficiency.” And if legislation is further required to allow companies to run amok, our Congress is about to be fully majority Republican, and no doubt will be standing by to serve their corporate overlords.

Perhaps the best we can hope for is that this new proposed government office fails to deliver due to the egos, incompetence and inattention of those in charge.

Photo by Steve Jurvetson, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/xlJwF8

 

Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are leaving it all on the field

One way to support the Harris/Walz ticket

Since Minnesota Governor and Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Tim Walz was a football coach, he knows the expression “leaving it all on the field,” which means, essentially, making such a complete effort that, whether you win or lose, there will be no regrets or second-guessing about what else could have been done. That kind of effort also naturally leads to more wins than losses. And that is precisely what Walz and Vice President Kamala Harris are doing in their shortened, stunning campaign for the presidential election of 2024. Indeed, at a rally yesterday in Madison, WI, Walz began with a similar sports analogy:

When the stakes are the highest, winners are the ones that step up. And that’s exactly what we’re going to do. You play all the way through to that final whistle, and that’s the exact energy that Kamala Harris and I are bringing to these final 14 days.

And then, sure enough, at the end of his speech, Walz said it:

We’re gonna leave it all on the field.

Walz’s appearance in Madison is part of a whirlwind of media appearances, interviews, rallies and other events by him, Harris, and surrogate heavy hitters including President Barack Obama (who appeared with Walz in Madison), Michelle Obama, President Bill Clinton, and others. The whirlwind has taken Harris and/or Walz to The View, The Howard Stern Show, the popular Call Her Daddy podcast, 60 Minutes, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Charlamagne Tha God‘s radio program from Detroit, and more. Even Republicans such as former Rep. Liz Cheney are campaigning with and endorsing Vice President Harris.

Did Kamala Harris just top her “Freedom” theme?

Vice President Kamala Harris

During their abbreviated presidential campaign, Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, have used the “freedom” theme very effectively. In particular, they built on the prior work of President Joe Biden and other leading Democrats, and took “freedom” away from the Republicans. Harris, Walz and other Democrats thus have applied “freedom” to government interference in reproductive rights, gun violence against children in schools, voting rights, and more. The theme worked so well that we didn’t think it could be topped.

But now, weeks before the 2024 elections, Vice President Harris has been leveling a new attack against her opponent, Donald Trump, and it may be even more effective than the “freedom” theme. As was the case with “freedom,” this new attack goes right at a point that Republicans, specifically Donald Trump, have been making for years.

Women of Star Trek for Kamala Harris hold fun and successful Zoom call

Jeri Ryan, Star Trek actress and Democratic activist

Last night, another breakout group of Kamala Harris supporters, this time the Women of Trek for Kamala, held a successful Zoom call that was and is available for viewing here on YouTube. As the title indicates, it was hosted by actresses from the many Star Trek TV series and movies, including Jeri Ryan, Michelle Hurd, Denise Crosby, Stacey Abrams (who also doubled as a Georgia state representative and is a Democratic Party leader), and others.

The Women of Trek call follows a number of similar such calls that have taken place since Harris became the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, including White Dudes for Harris, Cat Ladies for Harris, Deadheads for Harris, and more. These celebrity-studded calls have raised millions of dollars for the Kamala Harris/Tim Walz campaign; have had up to hundreds of thousands of participants; have raised awareness on many issues important to Democratic voters (abortion, climate change, gun violence, healthcare, job creation, small business support, etc.); and have urged voters to register and get out the vote. Importantly, the calls have brought together large numbers of Democrats into smaller communities of special interest to them.

Consistent with the Democratic Party’s inclusiveness, the call also included a prominent man, U.S. Senator Cory Booker. Of course, men (and people who identify anywhere on the gender spectrum) were welcome to register as participants on the call as well.

As a number of the guests on the Harris call mentioned, with just over 30 days until the election, the time for voters to take action is now. That includes everything from voting early where possible; donating to the candidates or party; making phone calls from home or at organized phone banks, sending texts or postcards, knocking on doors (whichever of these actions one feels comfortable and safe doing); and trying to convince friends, colleagues and loved ones to come out and vote for the excellent Democratic candidates.

Photo by Gwydion M Williams, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/i3k9g8

Florida’s low-information voters

Not “The Sunshine State” of knowledge

Three recent conversations that took place with Floridians offer a sampling of that state’s pool of low-information voters:

The first conversation, in a retail store, involved a customer and an employee. The employee had just said that he was about to pick up a Boar’s Head sandwich for lunch:

Customer: “Haven’t you been reading the news?”
Employee: “No, I don’t give a sh*t about the news.”
Customer: “You should. There’s a deadly Listeria outbreak involving their meats!”
Employee: “I don’t care. If it’s my time to go, it’s my time to go.”

 

The second conversation involved a salesman and a customer at another retail outlet, and went like this:

Salesman: “The price of food and everything else is so high. I’ve been cooking at home instead of buying prepared foods.”
Customer: “At least the price of gas has come down a lot lately.”
Salesman: “Oh I don’t care about gas prices.”

Here, what we have goes beyond low information and into Republican narratives that never let facts get in the way. The idea that someone (who admits he drives a lot) would care about the price of food but not the price of gas, as if his money to pay for these did not all have to come from the same pile, is preposterous.

 

The third conversation was similar to the second one. It took place in an office, between the same customer as in the second conversation, and the office technician:

Technician: “Oh, you know, the price of everything is so high right now.”
Customer: “Well, at least gas prices have come down.”
Technician: “That’s because we have an election coming.”

Here, the technician is advancing another right wing trope, that somehow the oil companies would lower gasoline prices before the election to help President Joe Biden and the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris. As if (1) the oil companies somehow favor the Democrats, who are promoting renewable energy and electric vehicles, instead of the Republicans, who are in the pocket of the oil and fossil fuel industries; (b) the price of oil and gasoline is not the result of supply and demand; and (c) the oil companies and gas stations do not charge as much as possible to maximize their profits.

This, folks, is why the 2024 presidential election is close.

Photo by Jason Howie, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/FQUaYt

 

Donald Trump is running Bob Dole’s campaign from 1996

Bob Dole, seated in wheelchair

Besides their obvious policy differences, one of the most striking contrasts between the presidential campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Governor Tim Walz on one hand, and Donald Trump and J.D. Vance on the other hand, is the difference in tone. Specifically, Harris and Walz are running a campaign full of joy and positivity, to the point where Republicans are trying (desperately, and unsuccessfully) to make fun of Harris for — get this — smiling and laughing. Trump and Vance instead are going with false doom and gloom.

These difference were apparent in last Tuesday’s presidential debate between Harris and Trump. In her very first answer (regarding the economy), Harris set the tone for her approach, stating, “I believe in the ambition, the aspirations, the dreams of the American people.” Accordingly, Harris outlined her plans for what she called an “opportunity economy,” including tax cuts to young families with children and to small start-up businesses. Harris often says that, her whole career, she has worked “for the people.”

In contrast, Trump began by lying that “we’ve had a terrible economy,” and then launched into his theme of the night, fear-mongering about immigrants. According to Trump, “Our country is being lost. We’re a failing nation.” Likewise, Trump said:

[W]e have millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, from mental institutions and insane asylums. And they’re coming in and they’re taking jobs that are occupied right now by African Americans and Hispanics and also unions. Unions are going to be affected very soon. And you see what’s happening.

And this time, bizarrely, Trump launched a new attack against immigrants:

In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.

Not coincidentally, most reviews and polls from across the political spectrum indicated that Harris trounced Trump in the debate.

The Trump – Harris presidential debate expectations game

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump to appear together

Vice President Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are holding their first presidential debate tomorrow night on ABC. A number of Democrats are saying that Harris will “wipe the floor” with Trump. Likewise, The New York Times recently published an article entitled “Fear of a ‘mean, bully Trump’ showing up at Harris debate has his advisers on edge.” That is a mistake for a couple of reasons.

First, the proper way to play the debate expectations game is to play down your candidate’s abilities and chances, and play up those of your opponent. Similar to what many sales people will tell you, it’s better to under promise and over deliver than to do the opposite.

Second, while Trump has been increasingly rambling and incoherent at speeches and rallies, there is little wrong with his debate record. In 2016, Trump cleared a large Republican primary field, in large part by dominating the debates, and went on to beat Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College. In 2024, just over six weeks ago, Trump debated President Joe Biden, and the result was Biden leaving the presidential race. Trump’s tactics, which include interruptions, intimidation, lies, childish outbursts, and other breaches of tradition and decorum, arguably work well for him. Indeed, the framing of the above-cited New York Times article raises legitimate questions of whether the paper is trying to game the debate in favor of Trump in advance by lowering expectations for him.

On the flip side, Harris was knocked out of the 2020 Democratic Party primaries early on after several debates. Thus it’s fair to say that those debates did not make her the standout or catapult her into the lead. One could therefore argue that Trump has the debate advantage over Harris.

At best, predicting what will happen in a presidential debate is too speculative. As in war, we really don’t know ahead of time how it might turn out.

Photo by FolsomNatural, used under Creative Commons license. https://is.gd/HBzHpl

Kamala Harris is giving Donald Trump woman problems

Vice President Kamala Harris, engaging as always

After running scared for days, Donald Trump reportedly has agreed to the September 10 presidential debate against Vice President Kamala Harris in which Trump had previously agreed to participate against President Joe Biden. Trump’s initial reluctance to debate Harris is the latest indication that Trump does not know how to run against her. A large part of Trump’s problem is that Harris is a woman, and indeed, a very powerful, tough and accomplished woman.

As most people know, Trump was confident that he would beat Biden, who was showing signs of age when trying to campaign in addition to his very hectic presidential responsibilities, which include working hard to get Israel and Hamas to agree to a cease-fire in Gaza. Biden’s popularity was also low, despite achieving more in one term (rescuing America from the depths of the COVID pandemic, saving the economy from the Trump Recession, etc.) than any president in recent memory.

With Kamala Harris replacing Joe Biden, Trump is stuck

Vice President Kamala Harris and President Joe Biden

Donald Trump has had a bad month. Ever since July 21, when President Joe Biden announced that he would not seek re-election and that he was endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris for the Democratic Party presidential nomination, Trump has been flummoxed at every turn, and is losing support.

For most of this year, it was the other way around. President Biden received negative coverage from the “news” media, even after many successes. Biden was singled out as “old,” even though Trump is nearly the same age. Trump was leading in most polls, especially in the “battleground” or “swing” states — Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina and Wisconsin — where most analysts think the election will be decided.

Then came the first Trump/Biden presidential debate on June 27. Biden, after criss-crossing the western hemisphere from Normandy to Hollywood, having been over-prepared by his staff, and with a cold (followed by a COVID diagnosis), had a rough night. Republicans and the press pounced, Democrats panicked, and the “Biden is old” meme sunk in. After several weeks of one prominent Democrat after another saying that Biden should drop out of the campaign, the President finally did.

Since then, however, the 2024 election has been upended. Harris has been crushing Trump in fundraising, voter enthusiasm,  crowds, and endorsements by big unions and others. Harris’s choice of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her running mate has also added tremendous energy to the Democratic ticket. Walz has proven to be immensely popular and is one of the most dynamic running mates in recent memory. Walz’s resume as farmer, teacher (and union member), winning football coach, Army National Guard veteran, Congressman and Governor, as well as his plain-spoken, decent manner, are motivating the Democratic base and attracting Midwestern voters and others who might not usually be part of the base.