288 Comments
User's avatar
John Joss's avatar

McCain had what, seemingly, no GOP lawmaker has today: a pair of big ones, a spine, core beliefs in integrity, truth-telling, and the courage to make it all evident, without apology.

How we miss him--all of us, regardless of political persuasion.

Expand full comment
Larry Bushard's avatar

None of us are perfect and that includes John McCain. Having said that, he grabbed the mike from a lady and told her in no uncertain terms that Barack Obama was indeed an American and a respectable one as well. He also famously defeated Dump’s attempt to end Obamacare. You have to admire him for those things and some others.

Expand full comment
Terry Mc Kenna's avatar

And he also as a POW refused to allow special treatment of himself - so early release.

So no one is perfect and I did not vote for him but he was moral and courageous.

Expand full comment
Itsy Bitsy Spider's avatar

We do not need to keep saying he wasn’t perfect. He was a good and honest and fair human being. Period. A legacy any would be proud of.

What do you think he would be saying about Trump’s detention centers?? I think I know🤬. I would like to see the Senate have a big Bumper Sticker that says “What Would John McCain Do?” Hah!

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar

These are exactly the events I remember about McCain as a show of his mettle.

Expand full comment
Jobu's avatar

I have a love-hate relationship with McCain. For all the principled stands he took, two stand out to me that undermine the admirable positions he took.

1) He chose Palin as his running mate and institutionalized the kooks taking root in the GOP.

2) In 2016, even though he clearly did not like Trump, the Republican nominee, he always said, without hesitation, that he would support the Republican nominee for president.

These two points alone tip me more negative towards him and his legacy.

Expand full comment
Itsy Bitsy Spider's avatar

Those were the days of normal party loyalty. He could not have foreseen the complete tool for Project 2025 that Trump would become. We knew he was bad, but even we did not envision this heinous coagulation of authoritarianism and the worst parts of religion.

The only thing I can lay at his feet is Palin. She was a “palin” thing of what was to come even though she could see Russia from….

Palin was good on SNL. Oh, that was TF, the best part of her.😂

Expand full comment
Jobu's avatar

I hear what you’re saying and still think that if his principles were truly that lofty, he wouldn’t have towed the party line.

Expand full comment
Itsy Bitsy Spider's avatar

Fair comment.😌

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

At this point in my life...I'll take a morally founded rapscallion like John McCain over a cosplay power pandering Christian like Mike Johnson.

Our country was founded more on the former than the latter.

Expand full comment
Kentuckistan's avatar

rapscallion....I like it

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

Better than mine: hypocrite pretending to be a Christian!

Expand full comment
Steven Insertname's avatar

I just shorten that to "evangelical".

Expand full comment
Dave's avatar

I shorten that to CINO just to cover everyone

Expand full comment
Itsy Bitsy Spider's avatar

Otherwise known as Cheap Trick!

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

While your itemizing all the "things" McCain had that "no GOP lawmaker has today" is absolutely on point, I think it is only fair to suggest that "no GOP lawmaker has EVEN ONE OF THEM today".

Expand full comment
John Joss's avatar

Excellent, David. Thanks for the clarification.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

You're welcome.

Expand full comment
Colleen Kochivar-Baker's avatar

It's hard for me to imagine any of our current R's doing what John McCain did in refusing to cash in on his Naval nepo baby status to get out of his POW camp. This group of R's is far more vested in putting people into camps.

Expand full comment
John Joss's avatar

Colleen, his bravery in Hanoi is almost beyond belief. He's a hero to me (not too difficult, I was an aviator in the Royal Navy long ago).

Expand full comment
CW Stanford's avatar

Just remember what the draft-dodger Trump said about McCain in the POW camps and wonder, truly, how any patriot could have voted for him.

Expand full comment
Owlette's avatar

In fact, wenn I heard this insult, I was sure Dumpf's political career was over... that the o so patriotic, service-member-honoring GOP would send him into the desert...

when this didn't happen, I sensed the traditional Republican Party was dead!

Expand full comment
Timothy M Dwyer's avatar

A small comment: few enough of those that currently call themselves “Republican”, bothered with putting on a uniform to serve their country- though many now are getting measured for tailor perfect brown shirts

Expand full comment
Colleen Kochivar-Baker's avatar

No kidding. ICE is really the state sanctioned masked MAGA militia. In the old days it would be the KKK. They just updated their costumes.

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar

No kidding. I didn't always agree with John McCain, but I always respected him. That's not something I can say for just about any current member of the GOP.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

I keep maintaining that there is no GOP any more; it is the POT (Party of ....).

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar

True dat. The GOP is dead, eaten by the MAGA mind virus.

Expand full comment
Dave's avatar

I've always thought of MAGA as RINO's. I want to say the Republican party exists but it's hiding in the shadows too chicken to come out and do what's needed.

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar

Not in the shadows, not any more. This is more like when a corporation purchases a competitor and the competitor disappears, it ceases to exist other than in the historical records.

Expand full comment
Dave's avatar

I have been in that position a few times in my life and actually this is a well-put example. Nice job.

Expand full comment
VStanhope's avatar

I 100 percent agree! I roll my eyes every time I hear someone refer to them as "Conservatives."

Not!

Expand full comment
Mary Kaiser's avatar

I actually voted for him for president in the primary. Didn't agree with him about most issues, I knew that he had integrity and a moral code.

Expand full comment
Steven Insertname's avatar

I've been a "Never Republican" voter since the '80s (which is when I got old enough to do so), but I would have given serious thought to voting for McCain, if given the opportunity -- until he picked Sarah Palin as his running mate.

My folks are lifelong Rs, but they wrote in McCain in 2016, which made me proud. I think they even voted for Kamala last cycle. They're learning! lol

Expand full comment
John Joss's avatar

Amen to the strange Palin selection, Steven. But she may have been forced on him through party machinations. Will we ever know?

Expand full comment
Tanya Pavlica's avatar

I don't know if it's true or not, but I've heard he really wanted to pick Joe Lieberman and run a bipartisan ticket. Not sure if that would have helped or hurt but Palin was a truly awful choice.

Expand full comment
Steven Insertname's avatar

Yea, I remember talk of that happening, and I might have voted for them in that case. I was pretty cheesed off at Obama at that point.

Expand full comment
Tanya Pavlica's avatar

I think when we lament the loss of John McCain, what we are really mourning is the death of decency on that side of the aisle.

Expand full comment
John Joss's avatar

Yes, Tanya, and it's profoundly shocking, inexplicable despite all the attempts to explain it.

Expand full comment
Tanya Pavlica's avatar

Truly. Last summer there was a story that Kamala told about what it was like working with John in the Senate, I forget where or why, and his daughter went absolutely nuclear accusing "the left" of trying to use his memory and twist him into something he wasn't and I just felt profoundly sad for her.

As a fellow veteran I felt a lot of pride seeing him do what was right. A lot of liberals loved John McCain for his principles if not for his politics. The fact that she saw what was meant to be a compliment as some sort of political attack just really says a lot about how much things have changed.

Expand full comment
ABT's avatar

I don’t think I would have liked him in real life due to reports of his interactions with women but I do appreciate what he said in that one Obama election appearance and his vote against ACA repeal. I can only imagine what he endured as a POW and the lifelong impact of his torture.

There were many interviews and sound bites where I did not respect his positions or his demeanor at all.

I don’t know how moral or honest he was. His close associates and family do. I only know what I saw of him in office. Mixed bag. (And…how to reconcile his friendship with Graham?)

All said, I’d take him any day over any of the MAGA Republicans in office and in the wings.

Expand full comment
Ian's avatar

Remember before Trump Graham was a centrist Republican in a very similar mold to McCain. That guys was friends with him, not this sniveling boot licker he's become

Expand full comment
SandyG's avatar

Well put.

Expand full comment
VStanhope's avatar

I always hold on to John McCain (and his legacy) as a constant reminder (to myself) that one should look at politics at, say, the 10K-foot level, the 20K-foot level, etc. I.e., at the 10K-foot level, he could be a mean SOB. When working on the Hill, he could be the meanest and most demeaning to witnesses (especially flag officers coming in for annual, so-called "posture hearings"). But higher up, I have nothing but respect for him as a US Senator and former naval aviator/POW. Just goes to show you (me) that you have to adjust your altitude to develop informed opinions.

This seems so quaint these days, I know. I try not to dwell at the 10K-foot level because I'll go batshit crazy(ier) if I do. lol

The saying, "You don't know what'cha got 'til it's gone" comes to mind.

Expand full comment
Rick's avatar

But, like Trump, he did have a sychophantic fan boy riding on his coattails. Hi Lindsey!

Expand full comment
Deutschmeister's avatar

"Perhaps the most hopeful is that it’s clear the Trump presidency is unpopular, and is becoming more so. Several recent polls show Donald Trump with a job approval rating among the American people down around 40 percent. A new poll released yesterday by UMass Amherst has Trump at 38 percent approval, 58 percent disapproval—down from 44 percent approval, 53 percent disapproval three months ago."

Well, yeah. I mean no sarcasm toward the author. Rather I note how obvious it should be if people apply one simple litmus test to the issue: how has he made our lives better?

Paraphrasing Reagan, are you better off than you were six months ago? Have the administration's actions primarily against people and things been an adequate substitute for being for something? How has targeting migrants who pick your fruits and vegetables, clean your rooms, and put a roof on your house on a hot summer day improved your quality of life? How has that end-inflation-on-Day-One promise worked out for your pocketbook? Is that Russia-Ukraine thing done already? Has his Sharpie magically changed your daily reality? Has his renaming bodies of water led to more and better jobs for us? Are those tariffs saving you any cash at the grocery store? Does the Epstein connection make you feel more confidence that your President is a stand-up, honorable guy with nothing to hide? And on and on and on.

At some point it just becomes obvious that a circus, no matter how often you call it serious theater, really is a circus. And at some point what you see with your own eyes otherwise, day after day, begins to erode the propaganda spin that someone is trying too hard to force-feed you to believe. The hacks tell us gleefully that we have another 3.5 years of this to go. Most of the rest of us already are saying "Mommy, make it stop" and otherwise seeing that if you put a bunch of incompetent people into positions where they do not belong, eventually they will be exposed as incompetent and their work will be seen as lacking. That's how gravity works, and no one is exempt from that fundamental life force. Expect the evidence of that to keep accruing. For another 3.5 years. Gee, who knew? And, again, if only they had been warned.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

Keep posting, D-man! LOL...your analogy about the circus being a circus and not serious theater invoked in me an image a serious miniseries like "Downtown Abbey" having the same serious actors playing their same serious roles and delivering their same serious lines like before but for them all to be dressed as clowns sporting clown wigs and make-up. The very serious head butler, after having delivered a very serious speech, sits down in front of his servants' team only to discover that someone has slipped a whoopee cushion on his seat.

Seriously (pun intended), it truly is exactly as you aptly described...people cosplaying their administration positions while working 24/7 trying please the head clown and them thinking that they're fooling the country while doing so.

They are fooling about a 1/3 of the country but I think (more like hope) that this number is declining fast.

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar
Aug 5Edited

I was discussing our current state of affairs with a former CEO I worked with. He now heads up a company with manufacturing in Mexico, which was moved from China to manage tariffs, but also to shorten supply chains. It's a massive investment (many tens of millions of dollars). Needless to say, the tariffs have been a major thorn in his side. What's keeping him going, he says, is his belief that American's will, ultimately, "do the right thing" and choose to be "fair".

I've been less optimistic. Though I do--fundamentally--believe in Americans to be on the right side of history generally, it's entirely possible we take a detour into the wilderness. I see a lot of apathy from the soft middle of voters. That said, walking through Target the other day, I saw gaps on the shelves, spaces not filled with goods. While I'm fine with doing with less, I cannot imagine that this will inspire much confidence in your typical suburbanite.

Let's revisit how we're doing in 90 days, 120 days, 180 days...things are going, to borrow McCain's phraseology, from black to blacker. Those soft Trump voters are going to finally feel the pain of their choices and they're not going to like it.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

I love this real world feedback. I would summarize your description of the CEO dilemma as..."hope is not a plan" but hope is all we have because Trump doesn't really have any plans.

Expand full comment
Brent_in_FL's avatar

Unfortunately, for a vocal and not insignificant minority, the line from 1984 rings true:

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

"Of course I'm better off now. Targeting immigrants frees up jobs for Americans that look like me. Inflation is much better now than it was under Biden. Why shouldn't it be 'Gulf of America'? My grocery bill has never been this low.

"We have always been at war with Eastasia."

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

The Peter Principle; never has that been more evident than today. And it will get worse.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

Shix...many of these folks are 5 rungs above where the Peter Principle had them peaking out.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

True. The Peter Principle promotes to incompetence. These people are dangerous loose cannons.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

Pete Hegseth is who comes to mind for me. The guy wasn't going to be promoted to O-5 as an infantry guy...and now is in charge of Admirals & Generals. His skillset, experience and talent were miles below what's needed for that job.

Expand full comment
Mingo's avatar

Yes, please make it stop because my life isn't getting better or anyone else's I know. We're in stasis. Don't forget that the bunch of incompetent people placed into positions they're not qualified for, don't have immunity either. Let gravity do it's job with some help from those of us that believe in the rule of law. Taco Don won't make it another 3.5 years. He's circling the drain and you can see it every day with his physical appearance. Don't get me started on his mental decline.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

You have NO idea how much I hope what you're saying is true about Trump circling the drain.

He's had so many escapes from my predictions of doom that I don't predict his demise any more....even though I wish for it. :-)

Expand full comment
David White's avatar

We all secretly hope that his time is up soon. Yet, do you sincerely believe that the madness stops with Vance?

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

I sincerely believe that almost every one of my predictions have been wrong about Trump/MAGA.

Losing Trump would be a major blow because the vacuum would result in a very violent response of a bunch of MAGAs claiming they are the heir apparent. I do NOT believe that the MAGAs would accept JDV as the permanent replacement.

Trump's dominance has been key in both the GOP's demise and their survival. He prevented their internal squabbles by stomping on anyone not in lock-step with him, but like with all authoritarian leaders...there's rarely a back-up plan because they are too paranoid to have a 2nd in command for reals.

SO...the madness continues but peters out and folds due to lack of cohesiveness. That being said...this might lead to a Trump acolyte who is far smarter than Trump coming out of nowhere in about 5-10 years and that scares the shix out of me. Trump being a moron and constantly stepping on his own plans has helped him be held in check for the past decade.

Expand full comment
David White's avatar

I know how you feel about making bets against yourself that you hope to lose. Following on with your speculations on life post Trump. The rank and file may not trust JD but when the time comes they fall in line. The issue will be who among the ambitious MAGA’s will bid to follow. Let’s try the monarchical model and say Junior. My head already hurts.

Expand full comment
Reagan Bush Republican's avatar

Vance will be the nominee in 2028, and if the JD Vance from the VP debate in 2024 shows up, he very well could win that election. He pretty much wiped the floor with Tim Walz, and looked far kinder and gentler than Trump in doing it. He will likely be the favorite in the GE. A lot of us establishment GOP, many of whom, like me, sat out the 2024 election, or clipped an industrial strength clothespin on their noses for the third time, are starving for at least a semi-normie republican we can vote for, after a decade of Trump.

That said, GHW Bush got elected after Reagan. He was in some ways a better president,...and four years later the "base" turned on him and he was out. Vance will be a major disappointment to MAGA no matter what he accomplishes, simply by not being Donald Trump. Also, I don't think any of the potential MAGA heirs that can be nominated/elected are anywhere near the true-believers that Trump is. Vance pretty much called Trump what he is before his "MAGA conversion" to become VP. Rubio is not a real MAGA, no matter how much vomit he is forced to swallow in his mouth. Vivek? Abbott? Only DeSantis is a real MAGA with any profile, and I believe he is nationally unelectable because he is about as likeable and charismatic as a rattlesnake.

And please don't say "Don Junior". That guy is beyond a clown, and he's about as entertaining as a glass of milk. MAGA would lose interest in him in minutes. No, it will be Vance in 2028, barring some unforeseen scandal.

The only saving grace to our MAGA madness is that Trump is old, mortal, and not replicable. As a result, despite a horrifically damaged brand and zero guiding principles (that regular people don't cringe at), there will almost certainly be a Democrat president by 2032.

Expand full comment
Mingo's avatar

Just reported from Meidas Touch. Taco Don was wandering the roof of the White House. Waving his hands and declaring he can spend his money anyway he likes. I take it he didn't like the criticism of the ballroom idea.

Expand full comment
Kathy Kelly's avatar

I wish that people would ask themselves if they're better off. But, somehow, the diehard Trumpers are so certain that Harris would have been worse, they ignore what is right in front of them.

Expand full comment
Jessica Elsener יסכה's avatar

Thank you morning shots crew.

I truly look forward to reading you.

Expand full comment
Jessica Elsener יסכה's avatar

Also, I was not able to make the Town Hall here in Lincoln. They played it on our public network that will probably be gone soon thsnks to budget cuts Mike Flood was absolutely decimated by the crowd.

It did NOT go well for him.

Boos and jeers, and his answers were hideous.

He held a telephone call in "town hall" last week, and they were able to make sure he got no pushback on any answers, and made sure he only got softball questions.

We Nebraskans are sending our best to town halls, but not to town halls.

Excited already to vote for Dan Osborn.

Expand full comment
Benjamin Parker's avatar

Please please please tell us much more about what the phone town hall was like and other details you remember from the in-person one!

Expand full comment
Jessica Elsener יסכה's avatar

Hi Benjamin, good morning, thanks for all your hard work.

Last week on Tuesday evening I believe, I got a phone call from a 402 number, generally a NE area code. I answered and it was a strange pre-recorded message that Mike Flood was having a "Tele-Town hall" and to stay on the line to participate.

I knew there was a live town hall this week.

So I stayed on the line.

Of course, I was aptly enough, reading a Bulwark article while I waited. As soon as it started, it definitely smelled like "the fix was in". The announcer/moderator/Flood hype man, in between call in questions, would ask very pointed questions of Flood. "How would you describe the amazing benefits the Big Beautiful Bill is bringing to Nebraskans." Then Flood would give a very propaganda answer. Then with callers, they were being heavily screened. Every concern brought up was about health care, or concerns about costs. Flood would basically answer that the BBB was going to pay for all these additional hospitals, and he claims to be the one to secure these supposed millions for Nebraska hospitals. I listened to several callers, and several segments in between with the softball questions from the announcer guy. It was a slog of sorts, and it served as Floods avenue to praise Tarrifs, the BBB, and the president.

The Shit show from last nights in person Town Hall can be watched in its entirety here https://www.youtube.com/live/VXP6NhEhznQ?si=QZ7WlDuX08DgqVf1

People here in Lincoln are mad.

I have been a registered independent since probably 2010 or so. But Lincoln is one of the two "blue dots" here, Omaha being the bigger dot.

Expand full comment
JM's avatar

Thank you for the information.

Expand full comment
Nibbles McDaniel's avatar

Agreed!

Expand full comment
Kate Fall's avatar

All the good people are on our side! I sure hope that's enough people.

Now, I don't want to be one of those people who complains that you didn't cover my pet issue. There's a lot of news out there, holy moley. However, I've been hearing lots of things about Trump making racist and eugenicist remarks in the interview yesterday and I don't know what to believe. I am really doubting everything in the media these days and rely on the Bulwark to tell me what really happened. Did something like that really happen?

Also, my Governor is coming out swinging. New York is a hard state to get to move in tandem, but we do like to think of ourselves as Bugs Bunny. We don't swing first, but if this means war ...

Expand full comment
drosophilist's avatar

“All the good people are on our side! I sure hope that’s enough people.”

/insert obligatory Adlai Stevenson quote here

Expand full comment
M. Trosino's avatar

"I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them."

Expand full comment
Claire CN's avatar

I continue to be both bemused and amused that I find myself loving Bill Kristol. But I am. Today’s piece is nothing groundbreaking. There’s nothing in here to shatter the world. But it’s a gentle reminder that our hope is in us. And that there remains some hope. Oh, and a reference to the 1600’s. Because, well, of course there is, this Is Bill Kristol, afterall.

Thank you for your daily shot!

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

"So a month of August in which Epstein stays in the news and in which that inflation doesn’t recede shouldn’t be good for Trump."

As many Bulwarkians know and have been saying since Blondi's statements that there is no there there, which, in retrospect, seem have been designed to get her fired, we need to keep hanging the EPSTEIN FILES around his neck until it chokes him.

Do not be distracted by any of his statements of how hard he is working for the American people, how unfair it is that he can't run again (watching how he walks, I would really like to see him "run"), or how bad the inflation is that Joe left him, or that a Deep State bureaucrat phonied the numbers about to make poor little Donnie look bad, that it is untrue that inflation is that bad (despite what your wallet says) and this is the Golden Age (or it is just around the corner; give him a bit more time).

And, at every opportunity, we need to not only be demanding the files, but also to know what Ms. Maxwell told Todd Blanche that got her that cushy new prison. "If she said you had nothing to do with all that bad stuff in the files, why not let us see the files for ourselves; it can't hurt you."

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar

I was just thinking this morning that I'd not heard much about Epstein in recent days...they were talking about Bondi going after Obama this morning. Need to keep Epstein on the front burner.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Weather permitting, I am carrying what is below as my weekly protest sign on Thursday.

THE FELON AS

MARIE-ANTOINETTE:

"EPSTEIN FILES?

MAGA WANTS WHAT?

LET THEM PLAY GOLF"

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

You know, thinking about it, I really like the catchiness of the fund's name:

Bulwarkians' Billboards.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Of course, even though it would be a clear derivation, we should ask for Sarah's OK as publisher, or someone at the upper eschelon.

Expand full comment
Alondra's avatar

A summary of Epstein affair:

2005 An investigation into Epstein is opened in Palm Beach, FL when the parents of a 14 yo girl tell police their daughter has received money for a message given to Epstein.

2006 Grand jury indicts Epstein on solicitation of prostitution charges. Case is referred to FBI

May, 2007 US assistant AG drafts indictment for 60 felony charges against Epstein

July 2007 Epstein attorneys meet with Alex Acosta US Attorney for Southern District of FL. Eptsein charged with 2 counts of solicitation of prostitution. Investigation is ended and grants of immunity and non prosecution to 4 coconspirators and any other potential conspirators. Eptsein's victims are not informed of the agreement, contrary to the Crime Victims Rights Act.

June 2008 Epstein pleads guilty, to 2 counts receives 18 months minimum security, later granted work release

July 2008 Epstein victim Jane Doe brings suit alleging victim's rights violated

2009 Court makes non prosecution agreement public

2010 Multiple civil suits brought by Epstein victims settled.

2015 Epstein victim Virginia Roberts Ghiuffre brings suit against Maxwell for calling her a liar after she said Maxwell conspired to exploit her for sexual purposes

2017 Suit brought by Ghiuffre against Maxwell settled

July 2019 Epstein indicted in NY on sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy

August 2019 Epstein dies by suicide

2020 Maxwell charged in NY with conspiring to sexually abuse minors, enticement of a minor to engage in illegals acts, transportation of a minor to engage in illegal sex acts, perjury

2021 Maxwell found guilty by jury

2022 Maxwell's appeal in the basis of the the 2007 non-prosecution agreement denied; Second Circuit NY finds agreement did not extend to NY

There are estimated to be more than 1000 victims of Epstein and Maxwell. Teenage girls were flown throughout the world by Epstein and Maxwell. Epstein had a well thought out philosophy justifying his compulsive sexual abuse of minor girls. Epstein relied on Maxwell to provide victims. Maxwell described herself as 'mother hen' to the girls she trafficked. Epstein and Maxwell sometimes jointly performed sexual acts with victims. Many of the victims came from troubled homes, and were promised by Epstein and Maxwell education, jobs and caring attention. Epstein harassed and threatened any victims who came forward; some were frightened for their lives, all were frightened.

Why was Maxwell moved to a 'prison' that offers sports, anti-aging routines, a full gym, puppies?

1000 girls. Virginia Roberts Ghiuffre died by suicide. Internationally trafficked.

Keep it alive.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Thank you very much for the thorough, factual synopsis. I'd bet Alex Acosta insisted his name, as "prosecuting" attorney, be added to the immunity list before agreeing to it. And after the 2nd Circuit's ruling, has not set foot in New York.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

Put it on a billboard in 50 states. I know, broken record. Can’t help myself.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Find the billboards, I'll add to a fund for the use...in addition to not charging a royalty for the phrase's use😉.

Expand full comment
OJVV's avatar

Yes!

Expand full comment
Mary's avatar

I have a lot of respect for McCain. He was what we hope for in politicians.

When he picked Sarah Palin he lost my support. He would have been the only Republican I could have voted for (without vomiting) in the last 30 years.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

I don't blame John that much. He was in a bad very bad situation( politically) in that he had to do something to shake things up. He wanted Joe Lieberman as his running mate ( a Dem and later independent) Kudos to him for that. Republicans would have hated him for that. Steve Schmidt (who I like) advised McCain to go with Palin. Rest is history. By the way, I have always maintained that Palin was Trump before Trump.

Expand full comment
Mary's avatar

Absolutely 💯 to your final sentence. Palin made stupid acceptable on a level unseen before her.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

And just think the Republican party really shunned her around 2010, 2012! It simply boggles my mind they now totally are all in on him. Even during his first term, the party didn't accept him. Even FOX! The switch really turned after 1/6 and McCarthy going down to Mara Lago to rehabilitate him.

Expand full comment
Mary's avatar

Dave, all due respect, that seems a bit revisionist. FOX was always all in. They had the random host gently push back, but there was never any real opposition to him. They have been an arm of the Republican Party since Roger Ailes created them. They may not have agreed with Trump on everything but they were never going to make an honest argument.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

I am talking about the very beginning when they were skeptical of Trumpster. But it didn't to long before they got on the Trump train and they saw his popularity go up with base voters. FOX was certainly ahead of the party elites in that manner.

Expand full comment
Linda Oliver's avatar

Palin was John the Baptist for Trump; a forerunner. And she’s why I have no respect for Steve Schmidt, who’s the one who pressed her onto McCain, no matter how Never Trump he is.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

That was no vetting there. He has really regretted that decision, no doubt!

Expand full comment
M. Trosino's avatar

And now we have Nancy Mace claiming to be "Trump in heels"...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/rep-nancy-mace-kicks-off-south-carolina-gop-gubernatorial-bid-she-says-she-s-trump-in-high-heels/ar-AA1JS9

(Kind of hard to unsee that particular visual; I wonder if she got it from the Steele Dossier?)

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

Wasn't that Nikki Haley's claim: high heels that could give a swift kick? I always thought that would be awfully tough!

Expand full comment
JF's avatar

I remember thinking to myself, “I hope McCain gives us an apology for picking Palin before he dies”. I’m having a vague memory that he did apologize, towards the end of his life.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

I think he apologized for not having picked Joe Lieberman which is essentially the same thing, but more focused on having dissed a very loyal political ally.

Expand full comment
JF's avatar

That sounds right. I haven’t thought of Joe Lieberman in a long time. To me, Lieberman is another example of a lack luster politician who inserted a wrench into positive legislation, but I can’t recall the specifics . . . Did he scuttle some healthcare proposal? There’s a club of legislators who seem disruptive just for the attention; Kirsten Sinema was another.

Expand full comment
Mary's avatar

Yea, there are more than a few in that club. I would argue that Kirsten Sinema is in a class of her own!

Expand full comment
Rosemary Orlandi's avatar

She and Joe manshit !

Expand full comment
Kotzsu's avatar

RE: "BROWN, BUT NOT OUT"

I'm not knocking name ID, it's well known that's a big advantage. Bullwark readers are politico sickos who have deep familiarity with the minutia of American politics, whereas median voters respond well to, "Hey, I like that Sherrod Brown guy!" So we probably respond not as well as the average Ohioan.

But I think what will be more important than anything is anti-status-quo, anti-establishment, damn-the-torpedoes messaging and energy. A modern recreation of the Progressive era at the turn of the century, or the New Deal in the Depression, or the Civil Rights movement in the 60s and 70s. It's time for huge changes. People should be running on packing the supreme court, passing constitutional amendments to fix our system, big stuff. Bold stuff. Even for traditionalists like Bill, we need bold action just to maintain traditional institutions. They'll die with nothing short of radical efforts to preserve them.

Do not, under any circumstances, try to run on "Bidenomics is working," or a bunch of narrowly-targeted, means-tested, identity-politics-oriented technocrat hullabaloo. Invoke Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK, and LBJ.

Expand full comment
Benjamin Parker's avatar

I generally agree with this. I think the comparison to the progressive reforms after the Gilded Age are apt. But I also worry, because that's a lot of what Obama tried to do during his term. He promised the moon, he ran on hope and optimism and unlimited potential, he vowed to "fundamentally transform the United States." And then he . . . didn't. Or couldn't.

I don't think that had a great effect on either party. I think it disillusioned a lot of the kind of Democrats who now think that anything less than a Sandersian revolution isn't worth talking about. I also think it's one of the reasons for the large swing of the Obama-Trump voters we all paid so much attention to c. 2017-2018. I have no concrete evidence for this--maybe my intuition is wrong!

But the risk when you promise massive changes—as Trump is finding out now—is that eventually you might have to deliver.

Expand full comment
max skinner's avatar

"But the risk when you promise massive changes—as Trump is finding out now—is that eventually you might have to deliver." This bears repeating. People think they want sweeping change but such change is uncomfortable and its result are uncertain. People easily turn on those who promise it but cannot deliver it in a way that makes everyone happy.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

Hope, optimism and unlimited potential were not policies. ACA was huge but it had to be defended in the courts for 10 years. Dems liked the idea of a 'no voting record' and gives a great speech guy to further their nominee.

Dems have paid for that with their candidates ever since.

Expand full comment
Fake American's avatar

I think the difference is Obama promised to fight for big changes but then surrendered the goals themselves without negotiation just because the Republicans signaled their displeasure. He surrendered in advance. Compromise is generally laudable but you don't do it with yourself first in order to curry favor with the other party.

I'm sure there are people that will only accept the whole moon but I think most would accept a party and a President that reliably aims for the moon and shows they are willing to place shooting for it above any other priority (barring what used to be and should be bedrock priorities like retaining liberalism and a fair democracy).

Expand full comment
Martha Donnelly's avatar

I agree completely to the need for big progressive initiatives. I think people are finally beginning to see that we are approaching, if not already in, a new Gilded Age. I know that is what Trump and the other uber-rich oligarchs want, and they are not trying to hide it. We are also rolling back civil rights protections at an alarming rate, and suppressing the vote. We need to have politicians who are proposing BIG changes -- no more trying to get back to the status quo. That's not going to cut it.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

"Bidenomics" was working until the people put trump in charge.

Expand full comment
Kotzsu's avatar

I wasn't surprised by the BLS revising down hiring numbers the past two months, but what did surprise me was pundit and elite discourse that the economy was, "fine," when if you were looking for work in this economy or you knew someone who was, you know it was awful. Housing prices are wacky right now. There's inflationary pressure on groceries. The economy sucks.

What also surprised me is the admission by our leaders and chatterers that, "Oh, I guess it isn't another vibecession where the people don't understand how good things are," but without the self-awareness and humility to realize the mistake or how it was made. People have been saying the economy feels bad for months, but leaders and commentators are overly reliant on metrics and measurements to figure out "what the economy is doing."

This is what I mean: The map is not the territory. Ceci n'est pas une pipe.

So too: GDP is not the economy. BLS labor data is not the economy. The stock market is not the economy. These are only measurements of something we call the economy.

If you have a yard stick, you can measure the length of something, or if you have a thermometer, you can measure the temperature of something. But you can't measure, say, the specific gravity of a liquid with those tools. You can either admit you don't have the data, or get the right tool, or whatever. But you sure as shit can't say, "You're wrong about the specific gravity of the liquid because this string of yard is two feet long and it's 76 degrees outside."

People were hurting under inflation post pandemic. Was it worse elsewhere? Sure. Was it the result of pandemic factors? Sure. Did the Biden camp message appropriately around this set of realities? No, no, no, they did not.

"Bidenomics is working," is the whole thrust of why they lost. You can't tell people how they feel. You have to meet them where they feel. "Hey, we understand that inflation is hurting, and this is why it's going to get better and what we're doing about it." But they refused for too long to admit that people were hurting in the economy because they mistook the map for the territory, they fell for the treachery of images. This undermines trust in them, and feeds into the anti-elite messaging that sounds pretty reasonable when the economy feels like shit and you have people bragging about GDP growth and estimations of employment.

Expand full comment
Jennifer's avatar

Total disagree. The economy was working when Biden left office. Inflation was leveling; unemployment was stable. If it was inflation trump's campaign wouldn't have put out millions of dollars of anti-trans ads or talked about 'eating dogs and cats'. They knew the trigger words to get the votes. He was going to fix everything on day one.

To say it was 'messaging' is disingenuous.

Expand full comment
Kotzsu's avatar

I guess we'll see what happens, but my guess is there won't be very many candidates running pro-Biden-ism or pro-Biden policies in 2026 or 2028.

I think the anti-trans ads and anti-migrant ads are serving a different purpose from distraction, I would say we would be underestimating that messaging if we think it's only distraction. Trumpists were working to foment fascist sentiment and populist rage, which is a leg of the political stool for them, along with normies who think Trump somehow is good at business (we know he is not) and government should be run as a business (we know it shouldn't), and cynical chamber of commerce folks who just want tax cuts at all costs but are clear eyed that Trump is otherwise inept.

Trumpism as a political project derives a lot of strength from feeding red meat to the John Birch society reactionaries, white supremacists, the Nick Fuentes groypers, the Curtis Yarvin neo-monarchists, the Peter Thiel / Elon Musk techno-feudalists, and so on. Those folks don't support Trump because of inflation; they support Trump because they are the 'volk' and they want the government to use power to enact cruelty on their perceived enemies and to elevate 'true' Americans to positions which enshrine their desired cultural status over others.

Expand full comment
Sumi Ink 🇨🇦's avatar

Biden was a good policymaker but a lousy communicator. Of course candidates aren't going to run on "Bidenomics" anytime soon, if ever, because his administration failed so badly at communicating the benefits of what he was doing. Media bias against him that minimized the good and amplified the bad did him no favors either. But his economic policies were having a positive effect, as Jennifer has pointed out. Especially when you compare it to the effects of what Trump is doing today.

Expand full comment
Kotzsu's avatar

I agree with all of this, and I guess with Jennifer's main point, which I should say since I've been only responding to the parts that I disagreed on :)

Mainly, I'm worried that the anti-Trump coalition hasn't learned this lesson yet. We can't tell people how to feel. It's not that persuasion doesn't work, you just can't tell people things are fine stop worrying, that doesn't seem to work well, for either Biden or Trump.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

Felon Trump’s message was disingenuous. MSM fluffed it.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

If the media of your choice keeps under reporting how inflation is dropping how are people supposed to know? WAPO, NYT, and other real news outlets always did this. I read these every day. You are correct that how you feel has more to do with your voting, but here’s the thing with messaging; people were asked how the economy was doing and said it was very bad under Biden, then they were asked about their economic health, and said they were doing very good. This is impossible!

Expand full comment
Arun's avatar

I thought one of their big bills was "The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022"?

Expand full comment
Michael's avatar

I think Dems may need to co-opt the immigration issue as well. Offer concrete immigration reforms that are humane and include a clear path to citizenship. This is one strategy Eisenhower used during the Red Scare to disarm McCarthy and the hard right conspiracy theorists of that era.

Expand full comment
Carole Langston's avatar

I miss politians like McCain. 🍊 A$$ continues to blather. I will never apologize for my mantra, " His brain is squirming like a toad." Thanks BK

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

Re: The Ballroom. 90,000 sq. ft. is about two acres and if square is 100 yards on a side. Go to Google Earth and construct a two-acre polygon over the White House grounds. Wow.

Expand full comment
Mary Kaiser's avatar

The entire White House complex is 18 acres, the title of a book by Nicole Wallace. So 2 acres is 1/9 of the total area. The rose garden was paved since thoes 9 inch high heels worn by female staff were getting caught in the grass.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

Without doing the math, my guess is the ballroom is about 3 times the size of the White House. Now I will go by your suggestion ,Tom.

Expand full comment
Ann T's avatar

Info I saw says the the White House is 55,000 square feet, and I assume that's both floors, so I think you're right in your estimate. 90,000 square feet is absolutely massive for a ballroom. I looked up the Maralago ballroom and it's around 20,000 square feet. It's going to be so gross, and empty most of the time

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

Well I guess I'll amend it to two times the size! I have seen the White House up close, It looks to me like they will have to do a lot of tearing down on the east side.

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

Which reduces the 55k sq. ft. WH current size.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

I just looked at the AI generated look of the ballroom attached to the east wing. As bad as that looks, it appears that AI rendering downsides the look by a ton!

Expand full comment
Lily who reads The Bulwark's avatar

The only polling question that matters is the one that asks “if the election were held today, would you vote the same way?”

The vast majority of Trump voters say they would. Same with Harris. 86% and 92%, respectively.

It does not matter if his voters disapprove of the job he’s doing or hate his policies. Those people love Trump as a person and will never blame him or hold him accountable for his failures. As Sarah says, Trump can’t fail, he can only be failed.

However…

5% of Trump voters would vote for Harris. 9% wouldn’t vote at all or would vote third party.

For Harris, only 1% of voters would switch to Trump, and 7% stay home or vote third party.

So already it becomes evident that if even half these people are telling the truth, not only would Harris win, but she would win by a very comfortable margin.

But the biggest insight comes from those who voted third party or stayed home. Of those who voted third party, only 5% would vote for Trump. A full 19% would vote for Harris. Of the ones who didn’t vote, 36% would vote for Harris. Only 22% would vote for Trump.

Obviously the fact that Harris would win in a landslide now doesn’t help us, but it does tell us who is worth pursuing: the people who didn’t vote are the single biggest voting bloc with the biggest shift towards democrats. The Trump voters who would switch their vote will probably grow in number organically without democrats needing to do much. By next year, that number might be 7-8% without any effort on the part of democrats, solely because the pain of a Trump presidency is about to land.

The third party voters are also worth persuading, but not at the expense of the non-voters.

If we want to get through the darkness and see the dawn again, democrats need to fire up the non-voters. The only thing to do with MAGA voters is hope they’ll feel too discouraged from turning out. In other words, we need to make a change in who comprises the non-voters.

Expand full comment
Carol S.'s avatar

I will never understand how anyone could "love Trump as a person," unless they are themselves dishonorable and sociopathic.

Expand full comment
Gopo Gossum's avatar

He encourages us to be our worst selves and to feel proud of it.

Expand full comment
Lily who reads The Bulwark's avatar

I sort of understood how it could happen in 2016. I found him absolutely grotesque, but listening to his rallies in the rust belt, I could see how he made those people feel heard and understood, like the bully who bullies the bullies.

But now? I don’t understand how it could still be the case today. The only explanation is that it’s a cult. Trump brings out the absolute worst in people, and that is what bonds them to him.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

As I have said before, watch two numbers: 38% and falling and 83. (Trumps age at terms end)

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

The numbers I'd like to know are his blood pressure and his IQ (although I do not know if "0" is a number).

Expand full comment
Lewis Grotelueschen's avatar

Circumference of ankles . . .

But with JD waiting in the wings, have to be careful what I wish for.

Also, many people are saying his IQ is down 1500%.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Just knowing the numbers in and of itself is not dangerous. And it gives us another body part to watch than his bleached blond, combed-over top appendage.

Expand full comment
Sumi Ink 🇨🇦's avatar

JD is weak. No popularity, no charisma, no personality cult. Threats to be primaried by a President Vance can be laughed at rather than feared. He's still evil and dangerous, but there's a reason all of Trump's underlings are weak. He won't tolerate the presence of a strong successor.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

There is a reason Trumpster had Ronny Jackson and Bornstein as his doctors. BP is probably 180 over 120 (with medication) on a 5' 11" 260 lb frame.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

I thought he was taller than that, 6' 3" or so.... Or has the terrible pressure of the office worn him down that much? And are you confident of the 260? I'd have bought closer to 300, or are you deducting based upon a visual estimation? That can be very misleading, with male corsets and all....

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

It is kind of hard to be 6'3' when you are the same height as the Obamas (5' 11"). He could be heavier. There is a reason he always wears that oversized suit. Ever seen him on a golf course wearing his white golf shirt? He looks like a half filled sagging water balloon.

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

I saw a photo of him, taken possibly a few years ago, in white shorts, a white golf shirt, MAGA hat apparently getting into his (undoubtedly steel-reinforced) golf cart, from the least flattering angle, showing his left haunch (the more descriptive word I leave to your imagination) in a raised position as he worked on getting into and sitting down on that poor, maltreated cart. That is one of the reasons I raised the ante on weight.

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

Just the other day, he had Lawrence Taylor in the White House standing next him. Taylor is 6' 4" and a good 4 or 5" taller. By the way, I think Bryson DeChambeau was right behind Trumpster. I think a lot less B D now. And I didn't think all that highly of him before. By the way, Jack Nicklaus is a supporter, AAAAAAHHH! ( imagine JVL's maddening, screaming face)

Expand full comment
Paul K. Ogden's avatar

I think he's actually lost weight. It's been suggested he's on Ozempic.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

His doctor in 2024 gave his weight and said his height was 6’2”. Pretty amazing, his weight was lower this year - forgot the 2024 number, but now his height grew one inch. But that is Felon Trump for you!

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Yep, if you can't grow it yourself, buy someone who will swear you did.

Expand full comment
Ronald Stack's avatar

It would be the most bizarre and whiplash-inducing plot twist if the Epstein business is the one thing that stops Trump from destroying American democracy. But I can't think of anything else that has a chance. He's captured the Executive, Congress and the courts, and is well on his way to ruining our vaunted universities and research labs. He has the economy dangling by a thread. His foreign policy is both corrupt and cruel. He has opened the doors to blatant racism and antisemitism, and is even rehabilitating the Confederacy. No one seems able or really all that willing to stop him. So, I'm not optimistic.

Expand full comment
Jerry Norman's avatar

We are in Day Ten of the COUNTDOWN to Aug 15, when DOJ has been told (authorized by "Rule of Five") to release the victim files naming Epstein and THE OTHERS involved. One of the Epstein Survivors (Jess Michaels) talked last week to Katie Couric about what she'd told the FBI years ago. Survivor Michaels said a "Christine" was involved in grooming her, pretending to be a friend lining up a job interview. Michaels said she realized later that Christine worked for Epstein for enough years, timing right to make her the predecessor to Ghislaine Maxwell.

What if If Bondi refuses that instruction to deliver by Aug. 15? It came from a special five (Schumer backing the ones from the Senate's Homeland Committee in Congress). That violation of her oaths would be grounds for an extreme reaction.

Expand full comment
Carol S.'s avatar

This DOJ will never release anything that implicates Trump. Never.

Michael Wolff still has sources in the White House, and they've told him that Trump calls Bondi multiple times a day. MAGA-world would claim it shows how serious Trump is about restoring integrity to the DOJ and undoing all the "weaponization" and "politicizing" that infected it when Merrick Garland was dragging his feet on investigating Trump's crimes.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

Of course, the sources should tell what exactly did he say. Something like, “Don’t tell them anything. Don’t release anything.”

Expand full comment
Jerry Norman's avatar

Carol S, Complying is not optional, but required if a certain federal law is followed (Section 2954, enacted May, 1928). Nicknamed “Rule of Five”, it COMPELS the executive branch to produce documents, if requested by a particular five people, on a particular committee. The needed letter was written the end of this July, by the required 5. It gives a hand-over date of Aug 15. The five are from the "Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs".

Existence of the special law was reported first by Kaia Hubbard, reporter for CBS News stationed in DC:

https://www.CBSNews.com/news/senate-democrats-seek-to-force-jeffrey-epstein-files-release-rule-of-five-law/

Section 2954's wording was found at a university law library. The key committee must deal with "Government Affairs", one such in the US senate (another in the house):

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/2954

.COMMENTS--1) It's not just Democrats. Republican house rep MTG, from Georgia, long wanting the Epstein stuff dealt with, recently complained about misogyny among her fellow Republicans, threatening to leave the party

2) I'm not a lawyer. It looks to my naive head like the name of the compelling committee has changed over time (Committee on Govt Affairs after 1994, Committee of Govt Operations after 1952, Expenditures Committee before that).

Those Committee name changes maybe prevented people from noticing it earlier.

Expand full comment
Jerry Norman's avatar

What happens if they don't comply by Aug 15? Joe Perticone says (in recent post at Bulwark) they go to court. THEN IT IS IN THE NEWS, REPEATEDLY

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

Funny how Felon Trump talks about Al Capone. Capone was the head of a huge Mafia extortion, drug and prostitution gang. He was brutal and feared. The Feds couldn’t do anything to bring him to Justice, but the IRS did. Got him for tax evasion and sent him away for two years, during that time, his syphilis became incurable, and he soon died after his release; a very horrible way to die.

Seems like this much feared autocrat of today may be brought down because of sex.

Expand full comment
Jeff the Original's avatar

Karma very much agrees with you...

Expand full comment
TomD's avatar

University of Nebraska Lincoln is in Flood's district, but yeah, they're pissed.

Expand full comment
Jessica Elsener יסכה's avatar

UNL Staff and Faculty are starting to see layoffs all over. Of course it's the staff, the dining hall workers, the janitorial staff, all the folks who have worked there 20-30 years with few raises, and hard work by the way, those folks are either getting layoffs or their reward for being dedicated employees, get to do 3 jobs for the same pay they got for 1

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

What ! You mean no 29 billion dollar bonuses for these folks like Elon?

Expand full comment
David Court's avatar

Nice, 🥂 but I almost got whiplash! 👍😏

Expand full comment
Dave Yell's avatar

Nothing like snarkastic ridicule to ease our pain somewhat.

Expand full comment
Oldandintheway's avatar

It took many people about two or even three months to realize how crazed and sadistic the MAGA/Project 2025 people are. People were in shock when Trump won, but they weren’t prepared for the MAGA folks to not care about anything or anyone but their own very narrow, short-term self interest. But DOGE, ICE, Tariffs-yes-no-yes, and watching all of the totally unqualified and worse people get confirmed by one or two votes began to wake people up. However, the Supreme Court remains MAGA. They are the ones who allowed it go continue after January 6.

Then the Epstein involvement came to the fore and that tripled the chaos. People are finally realizing that maybe pedophilia is a bridge too far.

Will Texas legislature take the bold step of distorting our elections forever? California, New York, and Illinois seem ready to respond. I don't see any way they can back down. Computerized fascism or the end of the union?

Expand full comment
M. Trosino's avatar

Of course Texas will do that. Abbott et al are all in on Donald Trump's and the GOP's neo-fascist project and will try anything, do anything to keep it going and preserve it.

Expand full comment
Paul K. Ogden's avatar

Actually, Texas redistricting could well backfire. People don't understand redistricting. The strategy of the majority party is you draw a number of close but safe seats that the majority will by a solid margin (think 60-40), then you concentrate the minority party's vote in fewer districts that they win by landslides (think 80-20). You can create more majority party districts if you're willing to narrow the margins (think 55-45), but that makes those districts competitive. The incumbent majority party members will now have to spend money to defend their seats. Second problem is that when the inevitable down election comes, you don't have the electoral cushion you need to survive. So in 55-45 districts, when there is a down election, the majority party loses scores of seats instead of just a handful. 2026 is going to be a down election for Republicans, almost certainly. Bottom line, if it was in the Texas Republicans' best interests to do what Trump is suggesting, they would have done it long ago.

Expand full comment
CW Stanford's avatar

One problem: Texas has also mastered voter suppression. I am going to support the California Legislature on this one, even as I once firmly supported the independent commission. This is not about California governance, this one is about the future of the entire country.

Expand full comment
Paul K. Ogden's avatar

What "voter suppression?" So much of the Dems claims of "voter suppression" are, in the words of a former President, "malarky." GA and Stacey "I Didn't Lose" Abrams" is Exhibit A of that.

Democrats need to stop claiming everything is voter suppression. They lose credibility when they do that. There is nothing wrong with asking someone for photo ID to vote, for example. And there is zero evidence that it's led to less turnout.

Expand full comment
Harley "Griff" Lofton's avatar

Many people are saying that JD Vance (and his monied supporters) and the Project 2025 people (having accomplished about 80% of their goals) is being positioned for a coup. Trump has fulfilled his purpose and now is becoming a liability.

If this happens I would believe is is always darkest just before it goes pitch black.

Expand full comment
Jerry Norman's avatar

Sherrod Brown of Ohio was very popular, often re-elected in Ohio. There is talk of him running for Vance's old seat, shutting out the Republican who replaced Vance. If that happens, Vance's Ohio fan club may be weakened.

Also, Vance does not have the TV show advantage of his master. The show give the illusion of business competence to someone who had six casino bankruptcies.

Expand full comment
Eva Seifert's avatar

Naw, he only bankrupted 3 casinos; the others were something else. But before 2016, every other business he started, save for marketing the name he made with that f*g TV show, has failed. Though his name didn't help one of our local Indian casinos when they signed a contract with him to manage their casino. They ended up getting rid of him after a few years, and are doing great since then.

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

He had his name on a hotel in Panama. After his first election, the management pulled his name off the building, and cancelled his contract. Maybe that’s why he wants to take over the Canal. To put his name back up there.

Expand full comment
Jeanne Golliher's avatar

Whether Sherrod Brown decides to run for Senate or for governor against Vivek Ramaswamy, he will have my vote. The challenge in Ohio is that the economic and intellectual power centers of the state (Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Dayton, Akron, Toledo and Athens) are deep blue, where some districts vote over 90% Democrat, however the 9 counties that comprise those 7 Metro areas are outnumbered by 79 counties that are rural, Appalachian or hollowed-out industrial centers. It is a very tough electoral situation for any Democrat, even a tried-and-true honorable champion of labor like Sherrod Brown. The positive thing for the Governor's race is that many of the John Kasich style Republican corporate types are waking up to the reality that the state house policies that have passed under Governor Mike Dewine, (in some cases over his veto), are driving out the workforce of the future, so I think many of those types would vote for Sherrod if he were to run for governor. 50% of the population lives in 10 urban counties, so if he could attract some of the old time Republicans he could win. I expect that Trump and Vance will stump for Ramaswamy, so I'm not not hopeful that the MAGA voters will stay home. A radical Progressive candidate cannot win a Statewide election in Ohio. They have won in blue county local elections, but statewide, you have to be able to attract Independents and disgruntled Republican "normies".

Expand full comment
Katherine B Barz's avatar

In this case, I would say the light at the end of the tunnel is an on coming train!

Expand full comment
Carol S.'s avatar

A lot of people behind Trump are smart enough to know that he's a moron, but they've found it expedient to insist that he is uncommonly wise. Evidently, his amorality doesn't trouble them at all. As soon as they think it's feasible to replace him with a smarter sociopath, they'll do it.

Expand full comment