Chamber of Commerce Quietly Supports a United Government Led by Democrats
by Thomas Neuburger
One of the more underappreciated pieces of news in a week that exploded with news — leak of Trump's taxes, the presidential debate, the presidential disease — was this, that a long-time strategist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has resigned over the Chamber's decision to back 23 vulnerable House Democrats and to reduce financial support for Republican senatorial candidates.
From Politico:
Chamber of Commerce and top political strategist part ways amid turmoil
Scott Reed, who had been with the business organization for most of the past decade, said it was shifting toward Democrats.
Scott Reed, the longtime top political strategist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said Tuesday that he left the organization after a political shift at the business lobbying powerhouse.
The move comes amid mounting fears among Republicans — including many within the organization — that the traditionally conservative Chamber is moving to the left after endorsing roughly two dozen freshman House Democrats for reelection this year.
Reed explained his departure (the Chamber said he was "fired for cause") this
way: "I can no longer be part of this institution as it moves left."
Putting aside the dispute over whether Reed left or was fired, there are two
explanations for what the Chamber is doing, and they're not the same. Reed says
he departed because the Chamber "moved left." The Politico slugline writer says
more simply that the Chamber was "shifting toward Democrats."
Needless to say, "moving left" is
not the same
as "supporting Democrats."
Ryan Grim,
writing
at The Intercept, calls the Chamber's transformation a "slow migration of the
elite wing of the Republican Party into the Democratic fold." This seems a much
better explanation.
Hedging Their Bets or Trying to Influence the Outcome?
As Rising's Saagar Enjeti noted in the video above, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which spends $100 million per year, is the largest lobbyist by far in the United States, doling out 30% more money than its nearest competitor.
In the past, all or almost all of that money went to Republicans — 93%, for
example, in 2010. This year the Chamber is not only supporting many more
Democrats; it's supporting Democrats in a way that will make a difference in the
partisan makeup of Congress. While the Chamber also supports House Republicans,
the 29 House freshmen it is backing "are running in some of the most competitive
races in the country, including 14 in districts won by President Donald Trump in
2016"
according
to CNN.
On the Senate side, the Chamber has greatly reduced its spending on vulnerable
Republicans, including Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Politico notes that Reed's
decision to resign "was linked to the Chamber’s unwillingness to spend
significant money on Senate races in the closing days of the election" and adds
that Ms. Collins is receiving "far less money in 2020 than ... in 2014, when
[the Chamber] put tens of millions of dollars behind GOP Senate candidates."
Politico has Reed saying the Chamber is "hedging its bets." Voices on the
libertarian right are much more virulent, calling this a "betrayal" and
abandonment of "free market principles." At the same time Republican leaders see the Chamber as, in House
minority leader Kevin McCarthy's
words, "part of this socialist agenda that is driving this country out, and ...
fighting the president."
Those are angry, empty words. Biden to Trump at the first debate: "I am not a
socialist." Progressives to world: "It's true. He's not. He's a moderate
Republican."
Three Conclusions
From all this I think we can draw three conclusions, each leading to a different
electoral thought.
First, that Ryan Grim is right when he says
the elite wing of the Republican Party is being folded into the Democratic
Party
— not just in theory, but in practice, in dollars, as well. It's clear that
the Chamber and those who give it their money have made the calculation, at
least for this presidential cycle, that their interests will be genuinely
served by a Biden White House and a unified Democratic
Congress.
In other words, they want a
united government controlled by the Democratic Party. They know Trump
is going to lose (Trump was scheduled to lose even before the recent Covid
incident), and they're working to both maintain a Democratic House majority
and to sabotage the current Republican Senate majority.
There's really no other way to read this news.
Second, as stated above, the Chamber of Commerce and the big-league donors
who support it know that a
Biden White House and Democratic Congress will further their interest far
more than a Trump-led divided or Republican government.
If the Chamber is right, progressives looking to "move Biden left" after the
election, have their work cut out for them. The only "moving left" the
administration will do is on identity issues. On issues involving money, it
will "move left" only at the margins and for show.
For example, will Biden ban fracking?
Of course not; there are too many big-donor dollars (and banking dollars) involved in that
industry. For all his recent words, Biden seeks a "middle ground" on climate issues. It's easy to promise
carbon-free power by 2035," fifteen years into a future in which he'll be dead.
Finally,
Biden will almost certainly be the next president.
I mentioned a "Trump-led government" above for a reason. Earlier I wrote ("Civil War? What Civil War?") that almost everyone in the establishment regardless of party, from the
military to the national security apparatus to the media to, now, the Chamber
of Commerce, opposes a return of Donald Trump to the White House. While the Chamber's not working directly against him — that would be a bridge too far —
they're not help out; in fact, they're working to give him a Congress he can't
work with.
The truth is this: Donald Trump is such a terrible, unpredictable and embarrassing steward of the American
hegemony project that no one with Establishment power wants to see him back.
#NeverTrumpers are just a tip of the Republican side of that iceberg. This
"betrayal" by the Chamber of Commerce, one of the Republican Party's most
stalwart and reliable supporters, strongly supports that
contention.
If this is true, it means I will be proved right in predicting the outcome of
the coming election as follows:
- If Trump wins big, Trump's in.
- If Biden wins big, Biden's in.
- If Trump is ahead in a squeaker and it goes to the courts, the Roberts Court will give the win to Biden unless there's no defensible way not to give it to Trump.
- If Biden is ahead in a squeaker and it goes to the courts, Biden will be handed the White House.
If you're worried about the 2000 election and you fear a Republican Court will back a Republican candidate, consider that George Bush was also the Establishment candidate. This time, the Establishment candidate is the Democrat.
Even if Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed this year, will she really want to oppose John Roberts in her first Supreme Court opinion ever, Roberts who will lead the institution she'll serve for the next 30 years of her life? If course not; there will be plenty of time for Amy Coney Barrett to screw the country later. Roberts will win the discussion, if he wants to, this time around.
Again, Trump is not the candidate of the oligarchy, of the small clutch of people who actually run the country. Biden is. In any close outcome, he has the edge. Biden will be the next president unless Trump wins by a significant margin — or dies and the rest of the country, including the Chamber of Commerce, falls suddenly in love with Mike Pence.
Labels: 2020 Election, Chamber of Commerce, Gaius Publius, Joe Biden, Ryan Grim, Thomas Neuburger
3 Comments:
There is no longer any excuse to not know who the Democrats really work for - and it isn't YOU!
That the Democrats still exist as a party is so that when the Republicans piss off the Big Money they have somewhere else to go.
It is LONG past time for the voters to have that same option as well.
agreed, 10:17.
This sounds a lot like Thomas talking himself into not worrying so much about the outcome... fixed, gooned or otherwise.
... um... he's counting on the supreme court(?!?!?)
Color me skeptical. ACB will owe her lifetime appointment (to gleefully ratfuck women, gays and leftys in general) to der fuhrer and Moscow's bitch and the senate Nazis who always do as they are told. If Roberts goes with the money (a reasonable inference, BTW), that simply reduces the vote to that same ole 5-4... and it won't be for biden no matter how close it is.
However, all this is really moot. And Thomas said so, quite correctly:
"The only "moving left" the administration will do is on identity issues. On issues involving money, it will "move left" only at the margins and for show."
Except I doubt there could be much 'moving left' on ID issues either. Like obamanation (on marriage equality and pot), he and the democraps will stand pat (do nothing... sound familiar?) until the populace or courts implement change piecemeal. Doing anything on ID issues is anathema to a party full of pussies who are far too afraid of upsetting one single moderate Nazi voter to ever do the right thing.
So... the bottom line here, no matter who fails to lose our last election, we're fucked!
Sorry, 10:17, I think you said this but more succinctly.
No worries, my friend.
Post a Comment
<< Home