spaceghoti

joined 2 years ago
 

In April, Société Générale economist Albert Edwards released a scathing note saying he hadn’t seen anything like the current levels of corporate greed in his four decades working in finance. He said companies were using the war in Ukraine as an excuse to hike prices in search of profits.

“The end of Greedflation must surely come. Otherwise, we may be looking at the end of capitalism,” Edwards wrote. “This is a big issue for policymakers that simply cannot be ignored any longer.”

 

For all of Donald Trump’s rhetorical innovations, personality quirks, and alleged criminal malfeasance, what has made him truly unique as a political figure is how much he has merged fan culture with American politics. It’s not unusual for Americans to idolize presidents—Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama are still actively revered by many—but no other president has inspired the same level of merchandise lines or themed car flags. A MAGA bumper sticker often isn’t simply a statement of loyalty; it’s a cultural signifier of community much like the dancing bear bumper sticker is for a Grateful Dead fan.

Nowhere is this more clear than at Trump’s rallies. He’s turned his campaign events into something that has more in common with a Bruce Springsteen concert than a Harry Truman whistle-stop tour.

 

Many of Trump’s proposals for his second term are surprisingly extreme, draconian, and weird, even for him. Here’s a running list of his most unhinged plans.

 

All 10 of the largest U.S. meat and dairy companies have lobbied against environmental and climate policies, resisting climate regulations, including rules on greenhouse gases and emissions reporting. This is according to a study by New York University, which examined the political influence of the 10 largest meat and dairy companies in the United States.

 

Close watchers of the MAGA movement have been chronicling the alarming escalation of both violent intimidation and overt white supremacy in recent weeks. Donald Trump, of course, now begs his followers on a nearly daily basis to murder his perceived enemies. But the rhetoric is spiraling, with people like Fox News host Greg Gutfeld openly calling for civil war. Meanwhile, Christopher Rufo — a right hand man for Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla. — recently hosted a forum that pushed establishment Republicans to build a “bridge” to the so-called "dissident right," including some open white nationalists. He may get his wish, as one of the top contenders for Speaker of the House, Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., described himself as "David Duke without the baggage."

The radicalism of the right is growing as the GOP careens swiftly towards nominating Trump as their presidential candidate, despite his 91 felony indictments in four jurisdictions. But, as anyone who has studied cults can tell you, they never limit their escalations to violence or hateful ideologies. There's almost always a weird sexual component, as cult leaders come up with ever stranger rules and regulations to control the sexual expression of their followers.

The MAGA movement is no different. The cult-like following of Trump always had an unsettling mix of incel-inflected misogyny, coupled with a homophobia that is somehow also homoerotic. But it's been rapidly getting worse in recent months. Even more frightening is how determined they are to inflict their sexual hang-ups on the rest of the country.

Gutfeld, who claims to be a "comedian," has long positioned himself on Fox News as an everyman character. He's meant to make audiences feel that normal people can be Republicans, and not just Bible-hugging weirdoes or camo-clad militia nuts. But, as his civil war rant makes clear, lately he's been channeling a more David Koresh-esque vibe, and invariably that comes with some sexual weirdness.

Last week, Gutfeld hosted a far-right figure named Hotep Jesus, who is known primarily for being an apologist for white supremacists and anti-semites. Hotep Jesus, whose real name is Bryan Sharpe, was on the show to promote a "dating" blog that is, in actuality, propaganda for domestic abuse. As Media Matters chronicled, Sharpe regards it as a form of adultery if women are "allowed" to work or vote. "Imagine guts, sweat, and tears shed only to watch your woman get dolled up only to prance around another man’s office while he gives her marching orders," Sharpe writes, claiming, "Women WANT to give up control of their life," and that they only vote, work, or otherwise make decisions because of "the pressure of modern society."

This wasn't a one-off, either. Gutfeld recently joined the chorus of right wing voices defending Russell Brand, after the British "comedian" was accused by multiple women of sexual violence and rape. Gutfeld applauded a teacher who got arrested for having sex with a 16-year-old student. And he claimed men only cry because of "substances in the water that reduce testosterone."

The jokey tone of some of this is there to insulate it from criticism, but Gutfeld isn't joking. The party of Donald "Grab 'Em By The Pussy" Trump shows no limits in normalizing extremely toxic masculinity and sexual violence. That much is evident in new court filings in the first big test case for the abortion "bounty hunter" law in Texas. The author of the law, former Texas solicitor general Jonathan Mitchell, has so far shown no shame that his client — who is suing his ex-wife's friends for helping her abort a pregnancy — displays a long history of abusive, controlling behavior. Mitchell shrugged off reports that his client, Marcus Silva, tried to prevent his wife from working and called her names like "slut" and "whore" in front of her coworkers.

So it's unlikely that Mitchell will mind a new filing providing evidence that Silva threatened to upload sexually explicit videos of his ex-wife, unless she returned home to clean and do laundry for him. Or that he used blackmail methods in an attempt to rape her, saying he would drop the lawsuit if she had sex with him. The document had a transcript of Silva, this latest "hero" of the anti-abortion movement, telling his ex, "You’re just gonna have your fcking life destroyed in every fcking way that you can imagine to where you want to blow your f*cking brains out."

It's not surprising that Mitchell would be fine with this treatment of women. As he argued to the Supreme Court in 2021, women have it coming by not "refraining from sexual intercourse." But now, of course, Mitchell is working for a man whose goal is to force his ex-wife to have sex with him.

One would think, after the political backlash to the overturn of Roe v. Wade, Republicans would not be so eager to advertise how the anti-choice movement is about controlling women and not "life." But, as David Kirkpatrick of the New Yorker writes, the head of Alliance Defending Freedom, the biggest conservative legal group in the country, was open about how the goal is to destroy access to contraception. "It may be that the day will come when people say the birth-control pill was a mistake," Alan Sears explained.

What's notable is this extremism isn't just relegated to the world of fundamentalist Christianity. The more secular and more proudly fascist right — which is increasingly cossetted and promoted by the tech billionaire world of Elon Musk and his buddies — has been aggressively promoting pseudo-scientific arguments in favor of extreme curtailing of sexual freedom.

The most prominent example is Costin Alamariu, a self-declared fascist who has become an "intellectual" darling on the right for putting a faux-intellectual gloss on some of the most evil impulses of the MAGA movement. He's been blogging for a long time under the name "Bronze Age Pervert," which makes him sound fun, but of course, he's anything but. His book, "Selective Breeding and the Birth of Philosophy," has become an Amazon bestseller because he's promoted by the grossest people on the internet. He proposes strict control over human "breeding" on the facetious grounds that it's necessary for the betterment of humanity, which he mostly understands in extremely racist terms. In his newsletter, John Ganz quotes Alamariu's writing:

I make the case in this introduction that this same matter of selective breeding, whether sexual selection, or various societies' management of marriage and reproduction, constitutes the most important part of morality, legislation, or of the "lawgiver's art," and that a sharp awareness of this reality is what led, again, to the discovery of the standard of nature and the subsequent birth of philosophy.

As Graeme Wood at the Atlantic pointed out, on his blog, Alamariu dispenses with the faux-academic language for an earthier version of the same arguments. "He considers American cities a 'wasteland' run by Jews and Black people, though the words he uses to denote these groups are considerably less genteel than these," he writes. Christopher Rufo has publicly praised Alamariu.

The sexual weirdness of the MAGA movement is deeply intertwined with the racism and the violence. Alamariu's writings are just saying the quiet part out loud: Sexual control, especially of women, is largely fueled by notions about "breeding" future generations, especially to look a certain way that racists want them to. Normalizing violence against women is part of that scheme, since, as fascists long have understood, women often don't go along voluntarily.

Because this is so weird, it's tempting to ignore it as the chattering of a fringe group of men are still mad they didn't get laid in college. But that would be a mistake, and not just because some of those men have become wildly powerful:

As the Dobbs decision by the Supreme Court shows, Republicans are never content to keep their massive sexual issues to themselves. They are determined to make everyone else suffer, not only by rolling back reproductive rights but by aggressively normalizing sexual and domestic violence. The throughline here is a belief that women aren't full human beings, but a sexual resource to be put under male control, by violence if necessary. It's a view they're getting increasingly less coy about publicly sharing.

 

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat viewed as a national leader in voting rights, has received 67 death threats and over 900 threats of online abuse within just three weeks, according to a system used by her office that tracks harassment and threats against election workers.

In 2020, Griswold's office launched a "rapid response" election security unit, a team of election security experts tasked with protecting Colorado's elections from cyber-attacks, foreign interference and disinformation campaigns. A year later, her office set up a tracker to monitor the growing number of threats against election workers.

Griswold told Salon that "if anybody understands" what election workers around the country "are going through, it's me." She continued, "Everything that we have done for my security, we have had to fight tooth and nail for. State and federal governments have largely abandoned election workers. I understand what these county clerks are going through and I'll do anything I possibly can to ease their burden and make sure that they feel safe and supported."

Election workers in many states and counties are leaving their jobs in large numbers due to an increase of harassment and threats, the proliferation of conspiracy theories and heightened workloads, according to a new report released this week by Issue One, democracy-focused nonprofit group.

The group's research focused on 11 states in the American West and found that roughly 40% of counties in those states have had a new chief local election official since the 2020 presidential election. In four states, that number exceeds 50%.

These turnover rates, experts say, pose a distinct threat to American democracy, since election administrators with decades of knowledge and experience are leaving their roles and being replaced by individuals with vastly less experience not long before a pivotal presidential election that is likely to see near-record voter turnout.

"Election workers across the country are dedicated to keeping our democratic processes secure, fair and safe," Michael Beckel, research director at Issue One, told Salon. "When experienced election officials leave their positions, they take with them years of institutional knowledge and expertise. Our leaders have an obligation to protect our nation's election workers and make sure they have what they need to keep our elections strong."

According to Griswold, Republicans allied with Donald Trump's MAGA movement are doing everything they can to "destabilize" elections and convince local election officials to quit, up to and including harassing workers and threatening them with violence.

"There is a coordinated national effort to undermine American elections," Griswold said, pointing to the example of Trump supporters showing up to county clerk's offices in 2021 and threatening them if they didn't provide access to voting equipment.

The turnover rate among local election officials since 2020 is far higher than it was previously, particularly in battleground states where local election officials have faced a heightened level of death threats and harassment, the Issue One report found.

Making matters worse, the report found, new election officials are grappling with a shortage of resources to staff other vital roles essential to ensure that elections run smoothly.

More than 160 chief local election officials have departed from their roles since November 2020 within the 11 Western states tracked by Issue One tracked. Those 11 states includes two perennial battleground states and a mix of Democratic-leaning and Republican-leaning states, where elections are typically managed at the county level by a single official.

As these threats have surged and election officials have left their positions in droves, Griswold said, not enough has been done to safeguard the integrity of the electoral process.

"State and federal governments have abandoned our quest to safeguard democracy, to a large extent," Griswold said. "With that said, people in my office — we are very scrappy and dedicated, and we're going to get the job done."

"State and federal governments have abandoned our quest to safeguard democracy, to a large extent," said Jena Griswold. "That said, people in my office are scrappy and dedicated. We're going to get the job done."

Griswold said she has implemented specific measures to address likely issues ahead of next year's elections. She has expanded her team to offer direct support to Colorado's counties and, within the past year, has contracted with former election officials to increase much greater on-the-ground presence.

She has also spearheaded changes in the Colorado state legislature, such as criminalizing retaliation against election workers and providing a process to shield their personal information and to make "doxxing" — or revealing a person's home address and phone number without their consent — a punishable offense.

Colorado has also enacted a law prohibiting the "open carry" of firearms close to drop boxes, voting centers and areas where ballots are being processed, in an effort to ensure that election workers are not intimidated by armed individuals. Her team has also prepared for hypothetical "disaster scenarios," including such potential instances as a "deepfake" video showing Griswold spreading false information.

"We've overcome a lot of challenges with a great outcome," Griswold said, "including armed men filming people at drop boxes to county clerks that breach their own security trying to prove the Big Lie. "There has been massive disinformation, and we continue to have incredibly well-run elections. I think 2024 will be no different."

The Brennan Center released a poll in April that surveyed local election officials and found that 12% of workers were new to their jobs since the 2020 election, and that 11% said they were likely to leave their jobs before the 2024 election.

Nearly one in three election officials have been harassed, abused or threatened because of their jobs, the survey found, and more than one in five are concerned about being physically assaulted on the job during future elections. Nearly half the respondents expressed concern for the safety of other election officials and workers.

The Justice Department under Attorney General Merrick Garland has created a task force on election threats, but so far it has been quiet. Just 14 cases have been prosecuted involving threats against election officials and workers, leading to nine convictions, according to an August press release.

For many years, local election officials were relatively anonymous figures, working behind the scenes with little controversy to ensure the integrity of democratic processes.

But the spotlight was turned on many of them unexpectedly during the 2020 presidential election, largely due to a coordinated disinformation campaign led by then-President Donald Trump and his supporters. Most officials say the surge in harassment and threats came as a direct result, prompting numerous officials to retire or resign.

Even in solidly Republican Utah County, "People came out of the woodwork to spout, parrot and share these national election-denying conspiracies."

Josh Daniels is a former county clerk of Utah County, the second-largest county in its namesake state. He says he faced this dilemma personally. He initially joined the county's election team in 2019 as chief deputy after being recruited by a friend who had been elected clerk.

Then the 2020 presidential election happened.

"People came out of the woodwork in our community to spout, parrot and share these sorts of national election-denying conspiracies," Daniels said. "It became quite exhausting," Daniels said.

His office was inundated with phone calls from individuals accusing election officials of being untrustworthy. They were subjected to what he called "Cyber Ninja-style audits," similar to the one conducted in Arizona's Maricopa County.

Daniels was forced to spend many hours in public meetings with "angry" individuals who made baseless allegations drawn from internet conspiracy theories.

Utah County is predominantly white and predominantly Republican. Donald Trump won nearly two-thirds of the vote there in 2020. Nonetheless, Daniels said, the "political dynamic" of the community changed in the wake of that election, thanks to a "loud faction" of the community that spread distrust about how the election had been conducted.

"We didn't get a lot of help from other political leaders in our community," Daniels said. Instead, some "would almost accelerate" the tension, creating "forums for more of these concerns to be shared and create further political chaos."

Daniels decided not to seek re-election in 2022, but he says the conspiracy theories and threats against election workers have continued.

In Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah — the four states with the highest turnover rates among election officials — Issue One's research found that twice as many local election officials had left their positions than had done so in Washington and Idaho.

Among the 161 counties in Western states that have new chief local election officials since November 2020, the report notes a significant decline in the average years of experience held by these officials, going from a previous figure of about eight years to roughly one year. The "brain drain associated with this exodus is real," the report finds, calculating that departing election officials in those counties have taken with them more than 1,800 years of combined experience.

 

This weekend, Neil Cavuto of Fox News asked former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley what should have been an easy question about the ongoing UAW strike. Donald Trump had already made it clear how to respond from the right: Say something vaguely supportive about autoworkers, then pivot to claiming the Biden administration will send all their jobs to China by pushing electric vehicles. Instead, Haley portrayed workers in the largest industry in Michigan—a key battleground state that Trump won in 2016—as greedy and ungrateful.

“It tells you that when you have the most pro-union president and he touts that he is emboldening the unions, this is what you get,” Haley replied. “The union is asking for a 40 percent raise; the companies have come back with a 20 percent raise. I think any of the taxpayers would love to have a 20 percent raise and think that’s great.”

Ford, GM, and Stellantis’ offer to increase pay by about 20 percent is less impressive after taking into account that it would happen over four years. The proposal comes after the Big Three made roughly $250 billion in profits over the past decade, increased CEO pay by 40 percent, and booked an additional $21 billion of profit in the first half of this year. Inflation has eroded wage gains UAW members made in their last contract, but the companies have refused to restore the cost-of-living adjustments that workers gave up to help the Big Three survive bankruptcy and the Great Recession. The taxpayers who make Ford’s vehicles would likely envy the 1 percent effective federal income tax rate the company paid in 2021.

Haley, who as governor in 2014 said she didn’t want unions in South Carolina because “we don’t want to taint the water,” didn’t stop there. “I was a union buster,” she told Cavuto. “I didn’t want to bring in companies that were unionized simply because I didn’t want to have that change the environment in our state. We very much watched out for workers, but the way that we watched out for workers was we didn’t encourage middlemen between companies and their workers.”

Cavuto found himself in the unusual position of having to push back against a Fox News guest for being too anti-labor. “It’s very tough language governor,” he said, stuttering as he tried to process what he’d just heard. “I’m just wondering how union workers who are hearing you now might feel about that.” He reminded Haley that Ronald Reagan had done well with union members.

The original “Reagan Democrats” were in Macomb County, Michigan. Many of them were autoworkers. In 2016, Trump flipped Macomb—defeating Hillary Clinton by nearly 50,000 votes four years after Barack Obama carried the county by more than 15,000 votes. Without Macomb, Clinton would have won the state. In 2020, exit polls showed 40 percent of people in union households voting for Trump. For context, 41 percent of self-identified independents—a group no politician goes out of their way to insult—backed the former president. Trump knows what he’s doing by traveling to Michigan next week to speak to current and former union members.

More impressively, Haley has managed to be only the second-most anti-union presidential candidate from South Carolina. At a campaign event on Monday, Sen. Tim Scott got his own question about the strike. “I think Ronald Reagan gave us a great example when federal employees decided they were going to strike,” Scott explained in an apparent reference to the 1981 strike by air traffic controllers. “He said, ‘You strike, you’re fired.’ Simple concept to me. To the extent that we can use that once again, absolutely.” (Reagan fired more than 11,000 members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization, even though he’d vowed to help them while successfully seeking their union’s endorsement during the 1980 campaign.)

Tim Scott on UAW strike:

“I think Ronald Reagan gave us a great example when federal employees decided they were gonna strike. You strike, you're fired. Simple concept to me.” pic.twitter.com/ke4hzSOTnp

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) September 19, 2023

It is illegal to fire private-sector workers who are exercising their labor rights by going on strike. Nevertheless, it is helpful to know that Scott believes they should be fired. Not surprisingly, given the posture of its current and former elected officials, South Carolina has the lowest unionization rate in the country at 1.7 percent. That rate is about a sixth of the national average and well below other states in the South. As Haley can attest, union busting often works.

Trump’s speech in Detroit will happen at the same time as the second GOP debate. It sets up the possibility that Trump will be proclaiming his hollow support for striking autoworkers at the same time his distant rivals are boasting about being union busters. Appropriately enough, as Trump speaks in Detroit, the rest of the field will be assembled in California at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

 

It already didn’t look great for Lauren Boebert when she got kicked out of a Denver theater for being disruptive during a performance of the Beetlejuice musical — or when video emerged of the voluble Republican congresswoman being escorted out of the theater. But that was hardly the end of this saga. A second video showed Boebert vaping in front of a pregnant woman, who claimed that the lawmaker refused to stop doing so when asked. The story really went nuclear when a third surveillance video leaked, showing that Boebert and her date were getting awfully comfortable with each other during the show.

Unfortunately for Boebert’s campaign to rebrand as a normal lawmaker, more juicy details keep coming out. Boebert — who has condemned drag shows in the past — was co-groping at Beetlejuice with an Aspen bar owner whose establishment hosts drag shows and participates in an event called Aspen Gay Ski Week. “I learned to check party affiliations before you go on a date,” Boebert told TMZ, although the pair have been reportedly seeing each other for months now.

In an interview with OAN, Boebert, who has been arrested four times, said that she is “very known for having an animated personality.” But the private incident in public is having a big impact on her professional life, distracting from her effort to impeach President Biden. Days after the incident, she was removed from the list of speakers for the Texas Youth Summit later this month.

At least she has her defenders. In a long Facebook post published Monday, Boebert’s ex-husband, Jayson, said he shared the blame for the incident, claiming that his acts of cheating “broke her down.” While it’s odd to have your recent ex-husband come to your defense for getting handsy in public, Jayson Boebert is something of an expert in this realm, having once been arrested for exposing himself to a teenager at a bowling alley.

 

Over the last few days as most of the media was blathering on about Joe Biden's "bad week," Donald Trump was stepping up his campaign and appearing at various venues saying things and behaving in ways that should have made journalists' ears perk up, wondering if he's lost more than a step. He was wildly dishonest and incredibly self-destructive — even for him.

It started with an interview with Megyn Kelly for her Sirius XM show last Thursday, the first since shortly after Trump crudely insulted her back in 2015 during the first presidential primary debate. Trump seemed to expect a friendly, Fox-like, interview and she gave him plenty of softballs and expressed her agreement with much of his nonsense. But she did ask some probing questions about his legal troubles and once again he more or less confessed to his crimes. He must have said the words "Presidential Records Act" a dozen times, reiterating over and over that he had every right to take any document he chose. And he slipped up continuously, providing the prosecution plenty of fodder:

When the special prosecutor presents this case to the jury they will be told exactly what is supposed to happen with classified documents and they will understand how utterly ridiculous it would be for a president to secretly declassify documents and not tell anyone that they've been declassified.

Over the weekend he spoke at the Christian right "Pray, Vote, Stand" summit in Washington and mocked President Biden mercilessly over his alleged mental unfitness and then said this:

The spooky background music and his bizarre delivery made that downright chilling. He also said:

Any normal person would have just corrected himself for misspeaking but he can never admit he did anything wrong so instead he twisted himself into a verbal pretzel that had it been delivered by Joe Biden would have resulted in a national call to check him into a nursing home immediately.

He later appeared at the Concerned Women for America conference and was a little bit sharper but repeated nonsense such as his silly claim that you need ID to buy a loaf of bread, another sign that he simply cannot retain information. He has certainly heard by now that this is silly and could easily substitute something like "you have to have ID to travel on an airplane" to make his point but he can't do that. Once he gets something like "low flow showers" or "windmills cause cancer" in his head there's no getting it out. That's not normal.

The final segment of his week-end odyssey was the highly anticipated interview on "Meet the Press" which was filmed earlier in the week. To say it was infuriating would be an understatement. As he always does, he ran circles around the show's new host, Kristen Welker, and basically made a mockery of American democracy by demonstrating that an incoherent con artist is going to be the Republican nominee for president — again.

For every viewer who saw that he was completely unfit to be president there is another who got lost in the overwhelming rush of words, or what's known to rhetoricians as "the Gish Gallop," a tactic designed to "defeat one's opponent by burying them in a torrent of incorrect, irrelevant, or idiotic arguments."

And he once again showed he is completely oblivious to the legal damage he is doing to himself every time he agrees to answer questions about his cases. Here he confesses that he only listened to lawyers who told him what his own "instincts" told him was true. When pressed he says that the decision about whether the election was rigged was his alone, although he dances away from Welker's question about whether he was "calling the shots."

Watching these events is intensely frustrating and I think it's even more difficult to watch now than before. Trump is no longer a first-time candidate taking the political press by surprise. Neither is he the president whose office confers such immense power that even a dolt like Trump is automatically given more deference than he deserves. Today he is just another candidate for president and he doesn't deserve to be treated with any more respect than any of the others. In fact, he deserves less since he is a criminal defendant in four different cases and was recently found liable for sexual assault to the tune of $5 million.

The man sat in all the interviews and appearances and made it crystal clear that he believes he is above the law. In fact, with his endless blathering about how he can do whatever he wants with classified documents, he makes it clear that he believes he is the law. And yet, the befuddled yet eager media is treating Donald Trump with the same consideration they always did, before they knew how disordered and his mind was and what a danger he is to American democracy and the rule of law.

I had thought after the widely criticized CNN Trump town hall everyone understood that you simply cannot allow Trump to ramble incoherently to cover for his unwillingness to answer the questions. They have to find another way to cover him. And yet there he was this weekend on "Meet The Press" doing exactly that. And in spite of the interview being pre-taped, they aired it as if it was live and only put a fact-check on their website after the fact. For every viewer who saw that he was completely unfit to be president there is another who got lost in the overwhelming rush of words, or what's known to rhetoricians as "the Gish Gallop," a tactic designed to "defeat one's opponent by burying them in a torrent of incorrect, irrelevant, or idiotic arguments." That's what Trump does, however unconsciously, and the media aids and abets him by treating him as if he's just another politician.

The Guardian's Margaret Sullivan wrote about this problem last week:

Trump is covered mostly as an entertaining sideshow – his mugshot! His latest insults! – not a perilous threat to democracy, despite four indictments and 91 charges against him, and despite his own clear statements that his re-election would bring extreme anti-democratic results; he would replace public servants with the cronies who'll do his bidding. "We will look back on this and wish more people had understood that Biden is our bulwark of democratic freedoms and the alternative is worse than most Americans can imagine," commented Ruth Ben-Ghiat, author of Strongmen, and an expert in authoritarian regimes.

She says the solution for journalists is simpler than we think:

Remember at all times what our core mission is: to communicate truthfully, keeping top of mind that we have a public service mission to inform the electorate and hold powerful people to account. If that's our north star, as it should be, every editorial judgment will reflect that. Headlines will include context, not just deliver political messaging. Overall politics coverage will reflect "not the odds, but the stakes", as NYU's Jay Rosen elegantly put it. Lies and liars won't get a platform and a megaphone.

I wish I had more confidence that this would happen. At this point, I think we just have to fervently hope that there are enough people in this country who can see through that cacophony of BS and vote as if their future depends upon him never holding office again — because it does.

 

The Beltway press' longing for a stern-but-loving Republican daddy, who will bring our naughty nation in line, has always had an erotic tinge to it. In a widely shared Atlantic piece, drawn from his upcoming biography of Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, McKay Coppins allowed the subtext to edge alarmingly close to the text. "[O]ne can't help but become a little suspicious of his handsomeness," Coppins gushes. "The jowl-free jawline. The all-seasons tan. The just-so gray at the temples of that thick black coif."

It seems Georgia politician Stacey Abrams isn't the only one moonlighting as a steamy romance author. I rolled my eyes throughout Coppins' piece, except for the parts where Romney dropped the daddy act to share bitchy gossip about his fellow senators. But, as far as mainstream pundits are concerned, Romney can totally get it. Coppins' article was released simultaneously with Romney's announcement that he's retiring from the Senate, and the reception Romney got was fawning.

"Romney bows out, leaving a legacy that would make his father proud," read the Washington Post headline of a Karen Tumulty column. She went so far as to credit Romney with "paving the way for national health-care reform," ignoring the fact that Romney ran for president in 2012 on a promise to repeal Obamacare. Tumulty's take was typical, as the press drowned Romney in words like "noble," "principled," and "courageous." The hosannas on the "liberal" MSNBC grew to deafening levels.

All of this adulation is due mainly to the fact that Romney is the rare Republican holding elected office who is willing to state the obvious: That Donald Trump is a monster and a criminal who has no business in elected office.

But the problem with all of this Romney love is not that I personally feel sexually harassed by it. It's that it fails to account for how Romney and other "traditional" Republicans are responsible for the rise of Trump and the MAGA movement. And not just because Romney and his ilk were only too happy to play along with Trump, even as he was pushing the racist "birther" conspiracy theory during the 2012 election cycle. It's because they spent decades married to policy views that range from wildly unpopular to bat guano terrible, making it easy for a demagogue to come in with a platform of "who cares about policy, let's just be super-racist."

Romney obviously disagrees, praising himself for supposedly being the sober-minded policy guy:

But he won't acknowledge that the rampant policy failures of Republicans are why the party has no path forward, except to become a fascist cult focused on settling imaginary scores. So let's review some of the greatest hits of the pre-Trump era of traditional Republican "ideas."

All this adulation is due mainly to the fact that Romney is the rare Republican holding elected office who is willing to state the obvious: That Donald Trump is a monster and a criminal who has no business in elected office.

Cutting taxes for the rich: This has been the number one Republican priority for decades, even though the first George Bush admitted it was "voodoo economics." After decades of rising income inequality, no one believes the money will "trickle down" to everyone else. It has no real support outside of the wealthy people who benefit. Eight in 10 Americans disapprove of this policy. Even 43% of Republican voters don't like it.

"Family values." It's not just that most Americans now support abortion rights and same-sex marriage. People are souring on the religious right and even abandoning religion altogether in record numbers.

Invading Iraq: I won't belabor how terrible this was. I will just remind readers that it was the signature "achievement" of the last Republican president before Trump.

Health care: As far as I can tell, the GOP view of health care policy amounts to, "Have you considered just dying?" As with many issues, their own voters reject the party's views, and will routinely vote to give themselves Medicaid even as party leaders try to stop them.

Climate change denialism. Not talked about much in the press, but there's good reason to believe that decades of flat-out denying basic scientific facts did serious damage to the GOP in the eyes of younger voters. Trump may be a gold medal-level Olympian in the sport of lying, but he is building on a legacy of Republicans who would lie about the existence of gravity, if it pleases their corporate masters.

One could go on forever, but the bigger picture is this: On policy, Republicans simply have nothing to offer. They won't improve people's lives or fix existing problems. They only survived as long as they did because of gerrymandering and a tilted electoral map, backed by an unbelievable amount of money spent on right-wing propaganda like Fox News.

Trump understands the power of cynicism in politics all too well, and so was able to exploit this situation. He just sidestepped the policy issue altogether and instead offered something different: Naked hatred. Bigotry. Exciting conspiracy theories. And, crucially, a desire to destroy democracy altogether. After all, debating policy only matters if you're trying to persuade people. If your goal is to crush them under your boot, there is no need to worry overmuch if they like your policies or not.

Again, Trump wouldn't have gone this far without traditional Republicans like Romney laying the groundwork for decades. Republicans have long known that their policy views are unpopular and won't win them elections, and so they've increasingly looked for ways to get power through cheating. Mainly, that was by passing laws that restricted voting access for people of color and young people, who tend to lean more Democratic. Romney is one of the guilty parties in this, even going so far as to compare President Joe Biden's efforts to protect voting rights with Trump's lies about the 2020 election.

Romney whined that voting rights advocates accuse their opponents of having "racist inclinations." But what matters here is not what is in anyone's heart. It's totally possible, likely even, that many Republicans back voter suppression not because they hate Black people, but because they hate losing elections. But the effect of these laws and this rhetoric is the same: It implanted and reinforced the idea, with Republican voters, that there is something tawdry and illegitimate about Black people voting. Trump exploited that sensibility with his Big Lie, which rested on accusations that votes from racially diverse cities are necessarily "frauds."

There were many opportunities over the years for Republicans to forge another path. They could have moderated their views on social issues. They could have gone the route of Richard Nixon, conceding that environmental concerns should trump a mindless anti-regulatory stance. They could have raised taxes on the rich with the pro-capitalist argument that it increases business investment. Considering that they still got nearly half of the votes with their unpopular policies, they really didn't have to change much at all to be successful. Just be slightly less terrible on some issue, any issue.

But they didn't do that and increasingly had nothing positive to offer to voters. That opened the door for an authoritarian demagogue, who built his power not on policy ideas, but on a promise he would hurt all the folks that conservative white people don't like. Romney doesn't deserve an ounce of credit. He may be unhappy with what his own failure of imagination helped usher in, but ultimately, this is still largely the fault of him and other "traditional" Republicans.

 

When Gallup pollsters asked voters just before Labor Day which side of the dispute between the UAW and the Big Three they sympathized with, 75 percent said they were with the union. Just 19 percent lined up with the corporations. A Morning Consult survey conducted last week found 2-1 support for the UAW, and noted that even the union’s boldest proposals—such as the demand for a 32-hour workweek—attracted significantly more support than opposition.

That’s a big deal. It confirms data showing that the general popularity of unions is rising, and that the American people have come to believe that unions benefit both their members and those who aren’t in unions, that labor organizations improve the standing of unionized companies, and that strong unions are good for the US economy. Indeed, on that last measure, Gallup found: “A record-high 61 percent say unions help rather than hurt the U.S. economy, eclipsing the prior high from 1999 by six points.”

Importantly, these numbers also tell us that when unions make big demands, and when they aggressively advance those demands in order to counter corporate spin (as the UAW has done with a savvy social media campaign and unity-building op-eds written by Fain with allies such as US Representative Ro Khanna), the American people will recognize organized labor’s “asks” as fair and necessary.

That’s a point Senator Bernie Sanders made when he argued in a statement ahead of the UAW strike: “Despite what you might hear in the corporate media, what the UAW is fighting for is not radical. It is the reasonable demand that autoworkers, who have made enormous sacrifices over the past 40 years, finally receive a fair share of the enormous profits their labor has generated.”

Media outlets and politicians—not just anti-labor Republican zealots such as former Wisconsin governor Scott Walker but also new Democratic centrists who have sought to align their party more closely with Wall Street and corporate interests—have for years tried to tell us that unions are relics of the past. A 1991 Harvard Business Review article spelled out the pro-business line with an argument that knowing managers “believed that the rules of the economic game have changed.” The article continued:

Competition is global, technological innovation continuous, the work force increasingly professional. In such an economic environment, unions are ill-suited to meeting the needs of either workers or companies. At best, they are an irrelevance—a leftover from a previous industrial era. At worst, they are an obstacle to making companies and countries competitive. Little wonder, then, that unions are on the wane.

That sentiment took hold over the ensuing decades and infected media coverage of labor disputes, even as unions grew in popularity. So it comes as no surprise that during the current negotiations, Fain found it necessary to deconstruct media coverage, placing an emphasis on the fact that car prices have soared not because of workers’ pay demands but because of record profiteering by the auto companies. “You don’t hear the media wringing their hands over how Big 3 profits are driving up the cost of cars. You don’t see big splashy nightly-news segments on how consumers will be impacted by companies choosing to spend billions on executive salaries, stock buybacks and special dividends,” said Fain. “No, you only hear these concerns when the working class stands up and demands a fair share of the value we produce.”

view more: next ›