Cohen is specifically referring to foreign policy when he says it won't be that bad, not domestic policy, where Trump will "tamper with civil liberties, or undermine institutions, or sow so much bitterness and acrimony that the United States will face years of worsening partisan strife and violence". And he acknowledges domestic policy is the graver threat. As to the foreign policy threat, Cohen says it, "may not be a riot of alliance-shattering isolationism, bellicose warmongering, or catastrophically stupid diplomacy" and then gives his reasons why.
The first is the GOP platform. I did not know it promises "to reinforce American alliances, particularly, but not exclusively, in the Indo-Pacific; support for Israel; and protection of U.S. infrastructure against 'malign influences of Countries that stand against us around the World'". He acknowledges that it is boilerplate, "but it is not an isolationist pronunciamento".
More reasons follow. I don't have time to read and summarize the whole thing. I just wanted to note that when those despicable Dems say it won't be that bad, they aren't talking foreign policy. Domestically is IS going to be bad and those Dems are either in denial or cowards.
@SandyG, you are one of the many reasons the comments on the Bulwark site are just different. Well said, I read it, but maybe not as closely as you did (I am still catching up from vacay). Either way, well said.
Cohen is specifically referring to foreign policy when he says it won't be that bad, not domestic policy, where Trump will "tamper with civil liberties, or undermine institutions, or sow so much bitterness and acrimony that the United States will face years of worsening partisan strife and violence". And he acknowledges domestic policy is the graver threat. As to the foreign policy threat, Cohen says it, "may not be a riot of alliance-shattering isolationism, bellicose warmongering, or catastrophically stupid diplomacy" and then gives his reasons why.
The first is the GOP platform. I did not know it promises "to reinforce American alliances, particularly, but not exclusively, in the Indo-Pacific; support for Israel; and protection of U.S. infrastructure against 'malign influences of Countries that stand against us around the World'". He acknowledges that it is boilerplate, "but it is not an isolationist pronunciamento".
More reasons follow. I don't have time to read and summarize the whole thing. I just wanted to note that when those despicable Dems say it won't be that bad, they aren't talking foreign policy. Domestically is IS going to be bad and those Dems are either in denial or cowards.
I guess the "half a loaf" of maintaining our alliances in the Indo-Pacific is an improvement..
This is probaly the influence of Musk, Thiel, and other tech-bros wanting to keep their supplies of microchips, batteries, and cheap labor flowing
Could be.
@SandyG, you are one of the many reasons the comments on the Bulwark site are just different. Well said, I read it, but maybe not as closely as you did (I am still catching up from vacay). Either way, well said.
Thank you, John. I'm a retired history teaacher and I love to write. This is the place for that.