447 Comments

I thought " STUPID" was confined to the contestents in this EPIC BATTLE---guess not! now it's for ALL of us to solve , and that's not easy. do we give up on democracy ? or do we SUBMIT to d. j "trump. THE HUMP! I know where my money would go ---and it's NOT d. j. "trump" the HUMP! . THEY BOTH HAVE THEIR PROBLEMS , but at least President J.Biden knows what State and City he's in, as well as who he is and knows what he wants to say------can't say that for the OTHER GUY CAN WE? (he can't even get the names right) as this a choice we must make I say we--- MUST START OVER and I mean BOTH PARTIES-------enough said ???

Expand full comment

One unifying theme for all of the people seeking the Republican nomination is that they're climate crisis minimizers who oppose acting now in favor of future nuclear and carbon capture somewhere down the road. Except for Vivek, who wouldn't even go that far. Which essentially means they would do nothing. That and other damage to the environment - loss of topsoil, acidification of the oceans, exhaustion of aquifers, etc. - is existential for the human race. But for Republicans it's a non-issue and critiques of the people on stage don't even mention it.

Expand full comment

No one goes there, but here's a question: does Ramaswamy think his Brahmin caste permits abuse of an Indian female?

Expand full comment

I can't understand why you guys can't plainly see that Nikki Haley won by a long shot. I believe she could beat Trump and Biden.

Expand full comment

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy, that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

J.K. Galbraith

Expand full comment

For anyone who hasn't figured it out yet. There is no conservative party. Trump has detached the Republican Party from anything resembling ideological conservatism.

Today, being a "conservative" simply means being against whatever the other tribe (the libs) wants. There are no fixed principles involved.

Trump has redefined conservatism to mean whatever he wants is what conservatism is.

Expand full comment

Why did I inherently know that Scott's girlfriend was a blonde white woman before I even clicked on that link?

Expand full comment

this reeks of not so subtle stereotyping.

Expand full comment

Is there any other kind of partner for a black Republican politician? (Yes. Some including Wesley Hunt and Byron Donalds are married to brunette white women.)

It raises questions about the psychology of the politicians and their mostly white supporters. There was, of course, a long time when a black man being romantically connected to a white woman would not win him favor with conservative white people. To say the least. But it's clearly different now, at least for public figures.

Expand full comment

Charlie - time for another round of Deplorables of the Week. My nominations include Rosanne Barr, Ramaswamy and MAGA Mike.

Expand full comment
founding

So, y'all aren't going to believe me, but I swear what I'm about to share is 100% true.

My husband overheard this exchange in the gym today:

"Did you watch that debate last night?"

"No, I missed it."

"I don't know who that Haley thinks she is. She was the worst Secretary of State in history, and she's going to tell everyone how to handle Israel? After that debacle in Benghazi? Forget about it!"

"Oh, I know, that was such a mess. She was terrible!"

Was he in a gym in the middle of nowhere? No. He was maybe ten miles outside of NYC.

So. I think we might be overestimating the average voter.

Expand full comment

/facepalm

/sob

Expand full comment

I think Haley showed a lot of ladylike restraint by only calling that creepy little scoundrel scum. He comes across as a younger, more articulate, healthier looking epigone of Trump – the same bluster, the same rudeness, the same sort of populist pronouncements that he may or may not really believe, and the same appeal to ticked off ignorance. He is not dangerous like Trump since his candidacy is going nowhere, but the fact that he polls well enough to make yesterday’s debate is disturbing. Pence, Hutchinson, Burgum, and Scott come across as nice guys with solid experience and conservative opinions that should sell in a conservative party. Yet three of them are gone, and the one left is on his way out, while Ramaswamy hangs in there. You have to hope it’s some sort of misunderstanding and not indicative of what the voters really want, but you might not want to take that hope to the bank.

Expand full comment

Except for a few moments from Haley & Christie, these candidates all seem to think that they are running against Biden. Why can't they understand that they have NOTHING to lose, and go after their actual opponent, Trump, for his dozens of transgressions, many of which were illegal and/or unpatriotic. Are they all just waiting & hoping that Trump goes to the pen, or that his extraordinary ignorance transmutes into a clinically provable dementia? Their fear is palpable.

Expand full comment

What they fear is alienating tfg's base. They know they have no future in republican politics if they piss them all off.

Expand full comment

A Vivek win would be great for Canada. They’d get a big shiny wall to keep the MAGA out.

Expand full comment

But would they make us in the States pay for it?

Expand full comment

It'll be our gift to them!

Expand full comment
Nov 9, 2023·edited Nov 9, 2023

Yes, just like the 51 miles of new wall that Mexico made us pay for.

Expand full comment

Thanks to Linda Chavez for the clear-eyed review of the Biden Administration's new policy on refugees from Venezuela.

I'm the opposite of an Open Borders advocate. I'd be totally supportive of a crackdown on economic migrants and citizens of failed and failing states trying to cut the legal immigration line by jumping the border or overstaying a visa, including speedy adjudication and deportations of those making specious asylum claims. However, Venezuelans, Cubans, and Nicaraguans meet the black-letter law definition of refugees in the Refugee Convention -- a person who, by reason of a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to return to it." These people are entitled by US and international law to an asylum hearing. They should not be sent back to the control of the dictator from whom they fled, no matter how much oil he currently controls, or how many promises he makes to improve his behavior in the future. We know exactly what Nicolás Maduro's promises are worth.

Expand full comment

Remember also that prior to 1965 the US was open borders to the entire Western Hemisphere. The US might have lost WW2 had it not been for the huge number of workers from Mexico who took the jobs that were held by the US citizens who served in the military. We have never been sufficiently appreciative of this.

Expand full comment

Actually, ANYONE asking is entitled to an asylum hearing. But from the other countries where the current waves of migrants originate, most don't fit the categories that qualify you for asylum.

In a sane world we would hire more immigration judges. We do not live in such a world.

Expand full comment

There are plenty of countries whose citizens an immigration officer is in a position to know don't qualify for asylum. Those cases shouldn't need to go before an immigration judge, and the law should change to reflect that. And I agree that we need a lot more immigration judges to deal with the real cases and the close cases.

Expand full comment

An even better thing would be a safe third country requirement. We have one with Canada. We do not have one with Mexico. Most of the migrants would be better off on Mexico, where most people speak Spanish, and which has a lower unemployment rate than the US, a much lower cost of living, and universal healthcare. Mexico also has a tradition of treating asylum. (Trotsky most famously.)

But Mexico has to agree. Biden tried to implement this unilaterally and a federal judge (correctly) ruled against him.

Expand full comment

I would like to see that, too. I can understand if Mexico chooses not to accept that agreement, but if they do, they should at least agree to stop allowing non-citizens to transit their country in order to attempt to enter ours illegally.

Expand full comment
Nov 10, 2023·edited Nov 10, 2023

You think that Mexico wants a lot of illegal entrants? It can't control the flood across it's southern border. It can't even control the many US Citizens who are living without visas in Mexico!

Free movement of US, Canadian, and Mexican citizens across the borders should have been a part of USMCA. Just like the EU.

Expand full comment

I think that we could help fund them. And on your last point, we just disagree.

Expand full comment

Charlie, I like your 1 for the majority of the debaters. Jury

is still out on Christie & Haley,

only due for their defense of

Ukraine 🇺🇦.

Expand full comment

Love Charlie and the team, and all the guests on Bulwark podcasts. Keep up the good work. Your are helping convince me I'm not the crazy one!

Expand full comment

Thank you for confirming I had better uses for my time last night.

Is Scott still pulling in campaign contributions? If so, why? Lots of rich political fools and their money begging to be parted? Of those, too misogynistic to contemplate Haley?

Expand full comment

I'd like to ask Tim Scott about what happens to those of us who are not Christian or heaven forbid non-believers? Do we get sent to Guantanamo?

Expand full comment