No Voter Left Behind

To add to the points in my November 13 post - I want to be very clear that I'm not saying that the anti-Trump opposition should not be defending those Trump seeks to scapegoat - very much the opposite.  But the fact that it feels like such a black and white issue, and provokes such a visceral response from people revulsed by this Trumpian attitude, is what's got my spider sense tingling.  The topsy-turvy, alternate reality feel of this election makes me think that we all need to be examining our basic assumptions, even our most righteous feelings.  To be deliberately provocative, why is Trump's scapegoating of immigrants more outrageous than the way both Republicans and Democrats have both, in their own ways, written off the working class over the past generation?  

Here's where I'm coming from: the progressive position starting now needs to be, not to write off everyone who voted for Trump as irredeemable, beyond the pale, but to understand how desperate so many people must have been to vote for Trump.  Many Trump voters would benefit from a truly progressive economic agenda; many of these people voted from Obama before; they need to be listened to, and convinced by actual policies that would help them.

I know, I know.  Hillary Clinton proposed some of those policies.  Hillary Clinton got more votes.  Hillary Clinton should have won.  I get that.  I keep saying these things, too (and Joan Walsh has a good reminder here of the fact that, yes, Hillary Clinton did have real, substantial plans to help the working and middle classes).  But those economic policies and more need to be at the center of the Democrats' agenda and talking points.  Trump was able to steal the Democrats' thunder on the economy because the Democrats didn't even offer thunder, they offered something palliative and helpful but hardly equal to the storm of despair that's hit so much of the country.  Stronger stuff is needed.

 

Abannon Ship!

So it seems Congressional Republicans aren't going to say anything bad about the Donald's choice for chief advisor, Steve Bannon, despite the fact that Bannon was editor of a website known as a hub for racist, anti-Semitic, and misogynistic political movements.  They've clearly received talking points that emphasize his naval service and time as a Goldman Sachs employee, as if these pieces of his curriculum vitae somehow negate or absolve him of the abhorrent far right associations.  I say the fact that he's well-educated and has served his country make things far, far more damning for him.  This guy has no excuse for what we might call ignorant or benighted positions - he's simply an intellectual racist.  You say we should give him a break because he was a Naval officer?  I say he dishonors the uniform by his rancid, un-American politics.  This guy doesn't belong in government employ, let alone the White House.  The Republicans have bit into a real shit sandwich here.  This one's going to haunt them as long as Bannon's around the White House, and rightly so.

Why Obama Was Right Not to Tell Trump, "I'll See You in Hell!" or Some Such

I highly recommend this Morning Joe episode featuring Michael Moore, who's been quick off the mark to offer a way forward for the Trump opposition movement.  I'll get to Moore's commentary in another post, but I quickly wanted to note this MJ discussion because it clarified for me something I had been fretting over the other day - Obama's wishing Trump well and talking about how if Trump succeeds, America succeeds.  Since then, I've read people criticizing both Obama and Hillary for their comments about giving Trump a chance.  Michael Moore points out that this is indeed what Obama and Hillary must say, given their positions as elected president on the one hand, and presidential nominee on the other; they cannot say otherwise.  Such rhetoric is part of the peaceful transition of power that both Obama and Hillary also both mention.  Moore goes on to say that while those two have to say such things, the rest of us are under no such obligation, and in fact should exercise our full rights as citizens in a democracy.  I also think it's pretty clear that Obama and Hillary were blindingly aware of the subtext of their remarks - that they had raised the possibility that Trump himself had never committed to accepting the election results were they not in his favor.  In this pretty obvious context, their remarks were far more pointed than critics give them credit for.  Besides, what's the alternative - for Hillary Clinton to tell everyone to fight Trump tooth and nail, not to give him a chance, not to allow him to try to unify the American people?  How would that have gone over?  I think Hillary and Obama both give Americans more credit than that.  We recognize that these are necessary remarks, and the painful circumstances for both under which they speak them.  

 

        

Navigating this Dangerous Moment

In the past 48 hours, as the initial collective shock of his election has begun wearing off, a momentous opposition to Donald Trump has begun to coalesce.  There may be plenty of articles about the Democratic Party in disarray, but I am seeing far more signs of an immense progressive movement symbolically strapping on its boxing gloves and getting back in the ring after a knockout was prematurely called.  A lot of this initial energy seems driven by the way Trump, based on his campaign behavior and rhetoric, symbolizes and portends an anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBQT wave.  Already we are seeing signs that these fears are being realized, as incidents reflective of these sentiments are being reported around the country, which in turn is going to further feed the anti-Trump momentum -- as well it should.

But here is some cautionary advice I'd like to offer at this early point.  First, the fact that there is some subset of the population whose latent anti-Americanism (for this is what you call behavior that is antithetical to American norms of civility and mutual respect) has been emboldened by Trump's election means that we are entering a troubling new phase of American politics and society.  It is not too much to say that a more widespread movement to demonize minority groups in the U.S., particularly Latinos, African-Americans, and immigrants, in the name of rescuing the American economy from moochers, job-stealers, etc., is becoming more and more a real possibility, in large part because Trump has legitimized these attitudes by endorsing them as a major party candidate.  I can think of few more dangerous possibilities in American politics than this development: it would (further) split us along racial lines, commit the unpardonable sin of scapegoating fellow victims of our dire economic situation as its causes, divide those who ultimately have economic common cause (e.g., working-class whites and working-class African-Americans), and distract everyone from the underlying issue - an economic system that has evolved to serve the needs of only its uppermost reaches.  Whether it's an active part of Trump's strategy at this point, or more in the way of a toxic byproduct of his campaign, it needs to be confronted unambiguously and head-on.

The danger is this: to attack Trump over catalyzing these reactionary developments, but in a way that fails to also acknowledge the predominant reasons he won this election - that he validated the real economic hardship affecting great swathes of our country and promised (if only vaguely) to do something about it - runs the risk of playing into Trump's hands.  By appearing to validate an anti-American mentality by seeming to dismiss rock-solid voter concerns, or by seeming to subordinate these economic concerns to the rights of easily-denigrated Others, a response that solely emphasizes a defense of the vulnerable could end up seeming to prove these noxious people's point.  Short version: If most Trump voters supported Trump because he promised to improve the economy, and the opposition to Trump does not acknowledge those underlying economic fears, and simply reduces those voters to racist caricatures, then it runs the risk not just of failing, but of feeding into the cycle of resentment and scapegoating.  A few additional points to throw in here: a lot of people who voted for Obama voted for Trump this time; not every Trump voter is a racist; and there is a huge difference for the health of our society between someone having latent racist or misogynist attitudes, and someone who feels emboldened to openly denigrate or attack minority groups or women.  

A specific point of danger - there is a deep and unsettling primal cunning in the right's targeting of undocumented immigrants, in that they are not citizens and are indeed in this country illegally.  While defending these people from harassment and family-shattering deportation is in accordance with humane, liberal values, we have to acknowledge the political risk involved.  There is some degree of truth to the Trumpian notion that illegal immigrants have taken American jobs, and for an anti-Trump movement to seem to care more about non-citizens' rights than the rights of American citizens to be gainfully employed is dangerous territory.  Rightly or wrongly, we are on firmer ground defending the rights of American citizens than defending those who are not.

So my recommendation at this point is to engage in a sort of political ju-jitsu, along the following lines: to the degree that Donald Trump proceeds in a way that promotes economic equality (whether through increased infrastructure spending or renegotiated, fairer trade deals), Democrats should push for more, and point to any shortcomings as evidence that the Republican Party is still beholden to the 1%, even if Donald Trump is making a feeble show of pretending otherwise.  And to the degree that Donald Trump spends his energy on anything other than promoting a fairer economic system, Democrats must hammer him mercilessly as abandoning the wishes of all those who voted for him.  If Donald Trump continues to demonize minority or other vulnerable groups, he needs to be called out for distracting the American people from the real economic challenges we have.  To circle back to my point in the paragraph above - criticism of un-American values needs to be constantly linked with how these un-American values are just a way to distract us from the grotesque economic injustice tearing apart and tearing down our country.  Just as Trump seeks to divide and conquer, the pro-democracy response needs at all times to be holistic and focused like a laser on the ultimate cause of our woes - our unfair economic system.

Though we're entering a period of great danger for American values, make no mistake that Trump, the Republican Party, and the forces of the right have put themselves in even greater danger - of being consigned to political oblivion as the great majority of Americans stand up for justice and equality.  Trump is a deeply flawed and fragile vessel for these ugly waves of white supremacism and anti-Americanism, and a dubious champion of policies that would create real wealth for all.  We need to be playing the long game here, and use Trump's manifold vulnerabilities to delegitimize the Republicans as a political party, even as we work to democratize the Democrats and wrench them free of corporate dollars and corporate agendas. 

 

 

 

 

 

No Tradition Left Unsullied

I know this is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things, but the idea that Donald Trump doesn't want to live in the White House full time feels like such an insult to the office of the Presidency that I literally can't wrap my mind around it. Also, my favorite line from this NYT article: "Mr. Trump’s advisers hold out the possibility that the president-elect may spend more time in the White House as he grows less overwhelmed and more comfortable in the job." No further comment necessary.  Feel like we're entering the black comedy phase of this thing, which I'm sure will be succeeded by unfunny clusterfuck sooner or later, but to be honest it feels good to be laughing again.

The article includes a few charitable comments, such as "Hanging on to the familiar for presidents-elect and their families is not unusual," and going on to cite the Obamas' having to decide whether to move their children mid-school year.  It also notes that many Congressmen return home during the week.  But there's no example here of a previous president not wanting to live in the White House, and as for the Congressmen, well, give me a break.  Congressmen represent their districts, and of course need to return home.  The president is the president of the whole United States.

I am also seeing stories about how totally shocked Trump was at his own election. Welcome to the club, m-er f-er! Could it actually be that Trump was experiencing the same vertiginous horror that the rest of us were that dark Tuesday eve, for parallel but obviously very different reasons? Good god. Will the strangeness of this election ever stop?

Grace Under Pressure Cooker

President Obama's post-election graciousness to his successor is a model for how to promote a democratic transition of power, and a sign of a paradox that many of us are feeling right now.  Obama tells us that he wishes success for Donald Trump, because if Trump succeeds, America succeeds.  Abstractly it's a notion that's hard to disagree with, but it's also dependent on certain assumptions about what an American president will work to accomplish - it all depends mightily on the definition of "succeed."  Obama's sentiment clashed so strongly with what I hope for the Trump presidency that his words have been bouncing around my head the last few days.  Any number of items on Trump's agenda would count not as America succeeding, but of America failing: banning immigrants from Muslim nations, breaking up countless families as millions of illegal immigrants are deported, turning NATO into a pay-to-play alliance, abandoning efforts to thwart global warming.  I suppose no one believes Obama really wants Donald Trump to succeed, but I find myself wanting to believe in the sheer civility of his saying it.  Or maybe Obama was talking broadly and optimistically, out of faith that even Trump might find his way to understanding what really makes this country great, and what really could make it better.  It sounds like Obama did make a pitch around preserving some parts of Obamacare during his meeting with the president-elect, so I suspect he's also hoping to inject some small amount of example and influence into Trump's bloodstream while he can.

The Dream State

I'm finding it tricky to balance giving myself time and mental space to mourn this defeat with my impulse to start thinking about how to respond.  The first is a necessity, and I don't think I'll be able to think as clearly as I need to until it happens.  So forgive any fragmentation or randomness in what follows; like many of you, I'm still reeling.

My first Pollyann-ish impulse is to say that there's comfort in knowing that so many people are feeling as down as me - but isn't there also something disorienting about the collective sense of helplessness?  It is as if we were all just in a car crash, and are still too disoriented to help anyone else from the accident.

Obviously a big part of this is the sheer unexpectedness of the Trump win.  We are so used to the polls being right and to the basic fact that true surprises are few and far between in our politics.  And of course we have had plenty of time to get scared about what a Trump win would entail.  

I have a sense of having passed through some invisible portal into a cartoonish upside-down universe where the usual physical rules no longer apply.  This is not a great place from which to fashion a response to what is most definitely a contest in our regular old world.  For me, and I suspect for many others, one of the most important steps will be to fully accept and internalize this awful reality in order to combat it.

 

#majorityrules

Like many millions of people today, I'm suffering the emotional effects of the whipsaw upending of expectations that has turned a greyish political future into something that seems ominous and tormenting.  Watching the results at a public venue last night, my initial exultation as I settled in for what I thought would be a tense but victorious romp by Hillary Clinton turned into a wholly unexpected sensation: that of being a rat caught in a maze designed by a sadist, moving east to west in search of a diminishing path of electoral votes that never materialized, switching desperately between the projected newscast and my smart phone, drilling down to county levels, searching for those urban votes that would turn this thing around, in my rodential stupor believing I was somehow still in control of my fate that night, until finally I was stared into a metaphorical and literal wall of red, having the random and inaccurate thought that I was staring into the eye of Sauron (I now realize whose bloodshot eye I was really seeing).

In the end, it was the slipping of Pennsylvania into the Trump column that was my personal reckoning point.  It was a small comfort in that instant that Hillary was looking increasingly likely to win the popular vote, although my satisfaction in that fact, and its importance to our efforts to regroup and dig out of this hole, has grown and will surely grow more in the coming days and weeks, even as it's also a deeply frustrating fact.

In many ways, my formative adult political experience was the Florida recount in 2000.  Even more than the impeachment of Bill Clinton, the recount was a wake-up call that we're engaged in a generations-long, take-no-prisoners struggle over the kind of country we will be.  That progressives allowed that disturbing election to go by without any serious effort to amend the Constitution to abolish the electoral college is one of the bitter legacy we're all swishing around in our mouths today.   Apart from the unfathomable incompetence of George W. Bush, the next eight years were all about catering to the 1% and unleashing pointless, unwinnable wars that have unleashed cycles of violence in the Middle East.   When the bottom fell out, it took a Democratic Party still somewhat rooted in a vision of an activist government that can act on behalf of the majority and the less powerful to stop us from plunging into the abyss of a new Great Depression.

We're at another recount moment.  The first order of business, as I see it, is to make sure that we point out at every opportunity how Donald Trump's election makes a mockery of our majority rules election system.  Pretty ironic that Donald Trump spent the run-up to the election claiming that the system is rigged, only to be the beneficiary of the antiquated and undemocratic electoral college.  You can already seen how his victory is largely being framed as a repudiation of Hillary Clinton, and of the Obama years.  This is hogwash.  A majority of the American population voted for Hillary Clinton.  Let that sink in for a moment.  A majority.  A majority of the population wanted to continue the general policies of the Obama years.  That this squeaker of a victory can or should be used to yank America to the hard right is a joke of the grimmest kind.  We let this happen in 2000, and have been paying the price ever since.  It needs to be resisted and called out from the start.  We can't let Trump pull a George W. Bush and try to fashion a mandate out of whole cloth.

 

 

 

 

Reckonin' Time

So, OK, yeah, I didn't really take out Hot Screen: Politics for a spin during the craziest election season of the last however many years.  What what?  Was it the pressure?  Was I overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of the madness?  Or was I simply busy with other things?  We will leave those questions to future historians to sort through, debate, and perhaps enter into awkward hand-to-hand combat over (combat as awkward as that final clause, hey!, the shivs clutched in their soft professorial hands, as they warily circle each other in the staff room florescence, the batshit demands of honor requiring that blood be drawn and a victor declared; damn these new rules of tenure in America circa 2042, designed to take the spring out of the step of those pointy-headed intellectuals, promulgated by the Don Jr.-Ivanka regency that has followed the Donald's three and a half terms. . . but I digress).

Here's my first crumb of comfort that I haven't missed all the action: it may have been a wild ride up to now, but I'm predicting the truly bonkers shit has only just begun.  By "truly bonkers shit," I'm thinking, among other things, of the unparalleled obstruction that the Republican Party will be throwing at President Clinton from T-minus however many days before her actual inauguration.  There's already also sorts of hot(!) talk about denying Hillary the appointment of a Supreme Court justice; more proof, as if any were needed, that the right wing has transformed into true radicalism.  I remain aghast at the racist vote-suppression laws passed in North Carolina and other states, and it looks like I'm not the only one.  As others cannier than I have observed, Republicans have drifted into being the white supremacist party, not a pretty state of affairs for our country by a long shot, but also not a tenable one for the Republicans.  My working theory is that the GOP is as brittle as it is bitter at this point, and one of the main tasks of Democrats and progressives over the next few years is to develop a strategy that accelerates Republican erosion, whether by calling out the undemocratic spirit that currently animates much of the party, or by implementing policies that help those left behind by the current economy (which by my reckoning comprises the majority of our population, but particularly the poor and working class). 

 

 

 

Trump as the Best Argument Yet for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons

So is Donald Trump the best argument yet for the abolition of nuclear weapons, or what?  In a little more than a month, there's a small but real possibility that a man who can't keep his finger off the tweet send button will have the very real ability to deploy genocidal weapons at his sole discretion.  This absolute power over the fate of life on earth has always been incompatible with the most basic notions of democracy, not to mention bedrock ideas of a common humanity incompatible with mass murder as a matter of state policy.  But it's always been much more than a remote possibility that someone of mental or temperamental instability would be elected president.

And let's not deceive ourselves - we've already been here.  Richard Nixon slunk into such belligerent despondency in his final White House days that aides made sure he wouldn't be able to make unilateral decisions to use nuclear weapons.  Ronald Reagan suffered from Alzheimer's during his final years in office.  

So, sure, this is yet another argument against Trump (as if we really needed anymore!), but it may be the most decisive in some ways.  But as it turns out that the Pentagon is making plans for upgrading the U.S. nuclear arsenal, including smaller-scale weapons that could lure policymakers into considering their tactical usefulness, as opposed to deterrent value, it's important to remember that the basic problem is that these weapons exist in the first place. 

Another twist, though - we may have most to fear from the proverbial madmen - but what to think of all the rational minds seeking to perpetuate our ultimately immoral and destabilizing nuclear weaponry?  

 

Ragin' Invasion

Let's start in a place of optimism.  Michael Moore's new documentary, Where to Invade Next, arrives as a cheering, inspiring tonic in the midst of this dark and perilous election season.   I think we all need a reminder that there's life outside America's borders: and not just life, but entire countries that take seriously the quest for human dignity, equality, and justice.  Moore's picking the creme de la creme of social and educational programs from other nations provides a utopian smorgasbord for the tired and weary among us; lo and behold, progress looks a whole lot like common sense and remembering that whole thing about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  What elevates this film are the many interviews with all these durn foreigners who blather sincerely on about the essential need for decent vacation time, helping kids learn without standardized testing, treating workers fairly, and the like.  I defy anyone to say that our present state of affairs is some sort of amazing crescendo of human and economic development:  the working class dispossessed and getting poorer, the middle class grown more desperate as its ranks thin by the day, the upper classes not giving a shit as usual.  Time to remember that free education and health care for all are basic rights, starting points to a better society.  Time to remember that democracy doesn't end when you get to your job; I don't think any of us ever agreed to check our citizenship at the company door.