Trump Is Mentally Unbalanced-- Where Are His Doctors When He And The Country Desperately Need Them?

 

Before moving to L.A., I had lived in New York, Amsterdam and San Francisco. In L.A. I discovered something unique to this city. People ask you to invest in their films. It's insane because "invest" is the wrong word. It means you give them money for the film and then you write it off as a tax loss. I avoided that ugly world for the whole time I lived here. Then I got cancer. The doctor takes care of fighting the cancer. The patient takes care of fighting the side-effects. One of the side effects, it turns out, is that you become extremely impaired in every day, including mentally. Some unscrupulous hustler/movie producer figured out I was suffering from the side effects and tricked me-- easy in my state of mind-- into investing a very large sum of money in his absurd film, Cold Moon. I'm listed as a producer. Needless to say, I lost all the money. Lesson: Don't make important decisions when you're on strong drugs.

Guess who's on very, very strong drugs after his treatment in the hospital for COVID? Hint: Donald Jr, Thinks Sr. is acting insane. Gabe Sherman on Monday: "Trump's erratic and reckless behavior in the last 24 hours has opened a rift in the Trump family over how to rein in the out-of-control president, according to two Republicans briefed on the family conversations. Sources said Donald Trump Jr. is deeply upset by his father’s decision to drive around Walter Reed National Military Medical Center last night with members of the Secret Service while he was infected with COVID-19. 'Don Jr. thinks Trump is acting crazy,' one of the sources told me. The stunt outraged medical experts, including an attending physician at Walter Reed. According to sources, Don Jr. has told friends that he tried lobbying Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump, and Jared Kushner to convince the president that he needs to stop acting unstable. 'Don Jr. has said he wants to stage an intervention, but Jared and Ivanka keep telling Trump how great he’s doing,' a source said. Don Jr. is said to be reluctant to confront his father alone. 'Don said, I’m not going to be the only one to tell him he’s acting crazy,' the source added. One area where the family seems united is over the president’s manic tweeting early Monday morning. After Trump sent out more than a dozen all-caps tweets, the Trump children told people they want Trump to stop. 'They’re all worried. They’ve tried to get him to stop tweeting,' a source close to the family told me. The Trump family’s private concern about Trump’s behavior could raise questions about his fitness for office. Trump has been prescribed drugs that medical experts say can seriously impair his cognitive function. Last night the New York Times reported that steroids, which Trump is reportedly taking, specifically dexamethasone, are known to 'affect mood, causing euphoria or a general happiness.'"

Uh... yeah... to put it mildly. The state Trump is in now is what the 25th Amendment was passed for. And the insane tweeting has only accelerated. Yesterday Michelle Goldberg tweeted that Señor Trumpanzee's "Twitter feed is always nuts but right now it really seems like he’s suffering some sort of psychological implosion." Well, yes, he clearly is. Earlier, Wisconsin Republican icon Charlie Sykes tweeted "Trump’s Twitter feed is extra-deranged tonight." That super-derangement spilled over into the next day, when the whole country-- world-- could watch Trump falling apart mentally and emotionally. He should be aware from electronics and in the care of physicians-- and I have nothing against osteopaths at all.

What if he decides to order the U.S. military to attack someone? Who's going to stand up to him? Certainly not Republicans! When he ordered them to break off negotiations with Democrats on the desperate needed pandemic relief package that he has held up, McConnell and McCarthy both said, "Yes, Your Highness," screwing over the country-- and their own constituents. "Trump pulled the plug on ongoing bipartisan coronavirus relief talks in an abrupt move that jolted Wall Street and surprised lawmakers of both parties," reported the Wall Street Journal but hours later called on Congress to approve a bill providing another direct check to many Americans." Hours later he was tweeting that Congress must pass the package IMMEDIATELY. The Washington Post: "First, he says he won’t pursue a package until after election. Then he demands Congress immediately pass bills." No one knows what to make of his erratic behavior-- other than scholars of King George III and fans of Hamilton.

And... Judd Legum who's Wednesday morning newsletter was devoted to a close look into Trump's Drugs. He wasn't treated by a quack he's been pushing, Stella Emmanuel, and he didn't take hydroxychloroquine, Legum wrote about what he did take:

• Regeneron's antibody cocktail, a promising experimental drug that has been made available to fewer than ten people outside of clinical trials.
• Remdesivir, a drug administered by IV that was found to shorten hospital stays for patients with serious cases of COVID-19.
• Dexamethasone, a steroid that was found to increase survival for patients with severe cases of COVID-19 and require supplemental oxygen.

Legum pointed out that "hydroxychloroquine is not an effective treatment for COVID-19 [and that] Trump foisted an unproven and potentially dangerous treatment on the American public for months. But when his own health was on the line, Trump unwilling to follow his own advice." (No one know if he drank any bleach or shoved a UV light up his ass, though.)

Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence, hydroxychloroquine boosters are disappointed that Trump has abandoned the drug. Dr. Emmanuel, the conspiracy theorist that Trump promoted in May, said whoever convinced Trump to stop taking hydroxychloroquine should be "punched in the face."

She offered to prescribe hydroxychloroquine to White House staffers.

Steve Jalsevac, a hydroxychloroquine fan who co-founded the far-right website LifeSite News, urged readers to "contact the White House to ask why the president and Melania are not immediately being given this well-proven-in-practice medication protocol for COVID infection.”

Others, like former White House staffer Sebastian Gorka, were in denial. "I’m sure he’s taking his hydroxy this morning just like I did this morning," Gorka said. 

Most people who have heard of Mona Charen, I suspect, know her as an outspoken, partisan and very conservative Republican. She's written 3 books and you can figure out from the titles, who she is: Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got it Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First (2003), Do-Gooders: How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help (and the Rest of Us) (2005) and Sex Matters: How Modern Feminism Lost Touch with Science, Love, and Common Sense (2018). She worked as a speechwriter in the Reagan White House and for Jack Kemp. I gather she's not supporting the fascist candidate next month but the institutional conservative: Joe Biden. About a month ago she wrote The Coming Biden Landslide for the #NeverTrump site, The Bulwark. In her mind, Biden is the Republican saint, Ronald Reagan, and Trump is 2020's Jimmy Carter, detested by Republicans to this day.

Yesterday another Bulwarker, #NeverTrump Republican Tim Miller, wrote that when he looks at Trump’s "Twitter-centric negotiation over the possibility of a second COVID-19 stimulus package in the past 24 hours, I just gotta say, I think he might be fouling this up. He is the Great Negotiator. He 'wrote' a whole book on the subject, you may have heard of it. And here I am, a liberal arts major. A person who did not not go to Wharton Business School while pretending that I did... But speaking as a novice, this stimulus negotiation looks like an epic self-own on par with bankrupting a casino or selling steaks in a home electronics store. For those who aren’t juiced up on steroids or slamming dexamethasone, it might be hard to keep up...

For the last few months, Democrats and Republicans have been-- slowly, distractedly-- fighting over the details of a supplemental COVID stimulus package that would address the severe economic hardships brought upon many families and businesses by the pandemic. On Tuesday, the president, who had been largely absent from these discussions previously, crashed through the wall like the Kool-Aid Man in an attempt to demonstrate his mediation prowess.

First, around 2:30 p.m., he executed one of his patented gambits straight out of Art of the Deal:

The “economic populist” timed this power move on the heels of a conversation with Austerity-for-Thee Cocaine Mitch, blindsiding his own advisers (element of surprise!) in a series of tweets announcing that he will end negotiations on the stimulus package until after the election. As part of the tweetstorm, he also kindly ensured that people are aware that Nancy Pelosi wanted to pass a munificent $2.4 trillion in aid for people still struggling through a once-in-a-century pandemic.

Here-- within half an hour after his tweeting began-- is how the stock market responded to his announcement:

So, as an opening bid, it left a little bit to be desired, I would say. Jonathan Chait, another non-businessman mind you, called it “the worst political blunder in history.” A tad dramatic maybe, but not a great sign.

Regardless, it seemed like the dire reaction in the markets left Trump in a bad negotiating position vis-à-vis Speaker Pelosi-- and she agreed, firing off a single tweet about how the president’s ploy exposed his heartlessness.

This sense was confirmed five hours later when the president took a new/old tack, recanting his earlier contention that Pelosi’s offer was overly generous and adding a dollop of his trademark schoolyard misogyny:

With balance restored to the negotiating table, you might think he would wait to see how Pelosi would respond.

Not this president.

No he needed to further demonstrate his position as the alpha.

So in between IVs, presumably during commercial breaks from the shows, possibly wearing his preferred nightgown, he began to unleash a torrent of tweets negotiating against himself like a person suffering from a bout of psychosis due to a corticosteroid therapy.

First he did a complete 180 on his earlier position that Congress should pass no stimulus legislation, retweeting a news story about the Federal Reserve chair that implied Congress should spend even more!

Then he retweeted the esteemed Paul Sperry of Investor’s Business Daily-- not once, not twice, but twenty-two separate times-- on matters ranging from #Obamagate to the “disgraceful” moderator of the debate that Trump totally won to a not-all-that-veiled attack on Joe Biden for being concerned about health care when his wife and child died in a tragic car accident.

Trump followed that up with eight retweets of Fox News analyst Gregg Jarrett, calling for the jailing of his former opponent Hillary Clinton and disparaging Speaker Pelosi’s looks.

He then tweeted a meme depicting the late Chris Farley—in character as the thrice-divorced homeless motivational speaker Matt Foley from the classic SNL sketch-- berating Attorney General Bill Barr for not arresting enough political opponents.

It’s unclear to me if any of these missives were part of the gamesmanship of the ongoing negotiations but I wanted to make sure that everyone had a clear picture of the state of play.

Around 10 p.m., on day five (we think) of the experimental drug regimen he is taking for combating the coronavirus, the president then launched back into the stimulus negotiations that at this stage are taking place only between himself and his earlier tweets.

No longer wanting to walk away completely, the president demanded that Congress pass two pieces of standalone legislation, the first bailing out the airline industry, the second sending a round of $1,200 stimulus checks out to our “great people.”
In the final tweet at the time of writing, he tagged Nancy Pelosi-- whose visage he had insulted hours earlier and who has been silent as he dickered for hours-- presumably in an attempt to reopen the line of communication with his counterparty.

Whew.

Given that I have never been “in a boardroom” for a high-stakes parley like this and that I cannot take the full measure of Donald Trump since he spent the day hiding from the cameras as the novel coronavirus infection consumed him, I can only turn to a celebrity negotiator for his expert analysis on what transpired:

"The worst thing you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it. That makes the other guy smell blood, and then you’re dead."
—Donald J. Trump.

Hard to argue with that.

President Super-Spreader Does Nevada

Trump's hate rally in Henderson, Nevada Sunday night was another super-spreader event in a state struggling with a dangerous second spike. Yesterday, Nevada reported another 277 cases of COVID-19, bringing the state's total to 73,814, a terrible 23,964 cases per million Nevadans, the 11th worst in the country. The Real Clear Politics polling average shows Trump losing Nevada by 6 points-- Biden 46.5% to Trump 40.5%. Hillary-- having run up a big margin in Clark County (Las Vegas) and having won Washoe County (Reno) narrowly-- beat Trump in the Silver State 539,260 (47.9%) to 512,058 (45.5%).

Sunday night, Governor Sisolak (D) was not at the rally. He was on Twitter letting Nevadans know what a selfish and reckless move Trump's packed, largely maskless rally was.

NBC reported that there were thousands of people packed indoors and violating state pandemic laws. "Henderson authorities said in a statement late Sunday that officials warned the event organizer in writing and verbally that they must obey the governor's directives, which include not gathering in groups larger than 50 people, wearing face coverings and social distancing. In response to criticism the campaign received for holding the indoor rally, Tim Murtaugh, the Trump campaign 2020 communications director, said in a statement, 'If you can join tens of thousands of people protesting in the streets, gamble in a casino, or burn down small businesses in riots, you can gather peacefully under the 1st Amendment to hear from the president of the United States.' The president had also held a rally on Saturday on the tarmac of Nevada’s Minden-Tahoe Airport where most people were not wearing masks or practicing social distancing. Reacting to the rally Sunday night, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) tweeted that the president is 'deliberately killing people.' Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) tweeted Monday, "Trump is using his position of power to spread COVID-19. People died after his last indoor rally.'"

And not wasn't on Democrats who were outraged by COVID-Mary's rallies. NBC reported that "Ari Fleischer, White House press secretary to President George W. Bush, tweeted Monday, 'Indoor rallies are irresponsible. Covid-19 is real and this was a bad idea.' The anti-Trump group of Republicans called The Lincoln Project tweeted, 'Thinking about how Donald Trump knew that coronavirus was airborne and deadly, and still chose to have an indoor rally.'"

Former Jeb Bush Communications Director, Tim Miller, who now writes for the conservative Bulwark labeled the rally in Henderson reckless, atrocious and deceitful, noting that "the spittle was flying [and] so were the lies." He downgraded the event from super-spreader to mini-spreader because so few people turned out, noting it "was Trump’s first indoor rally since the Tulsa disaster that cost Brad Parscale his job and after which Herman Cain lost his life. This latest public-health monstrosity came on the heels of the president, at a separate maskless gathering earlier in the weekend, mocking his opponent Joe Biden for having followed responsible social-distancing protocols."

For those who have been beaten down by the Trumpian disaster porn, rallies such as this don’t really make a mark any longer. The cable networks and even the three C-SPANs landed on the BORRRRING side of the ledger: None of them chose to air the event. And for political junkies and Trump-watchers, these rallies increasingly have the feel of a boring nostalgia act with a lead singer halfheartedly crooning his old hits. And there’s something to be said for that.

But it is important to take a moment to shake yourself free from the blunting effect of the orange Trumpian film that has subsumed our daily lives (and here in northern California, our atmosphere). Seen with fresh eyes, the Henderson rally was truly a shocking and unimaginably wheels-off undertaking given that it came amid a pandemic that is still killing a thousand Americans a day and with wildfires making much of the West Coast uninhabitable.

And so over the course of the president’s interminable harangue, I began to jot down the moments that stood out, beginning with his foray into the insane #Obamagate conspiracy. As Trump began a side-bar about Obama supposedly being caught spying on him, he eyed an attendee who was beginning a “Lock Him Up” chant. He then egged on the overwhelmingly unmasked crowd into a frenzy in which they projected airborne spittle throughout the building in an attempt to will to life the fantasy that their wannabe strongman president might jail his predecessor, the first black president, for an imaginary crime.

This was not the only coronavirus projectile laden with racial invective emitted by the attendees. Following the removal of a protester-- presumably a Black Lives Matter activist, although it wasn’t clear from the video-- the crowd began bellowing that oh-so-clever parlay: All Lives Matter. All Lives Matter.

(At this point it should be noted that the CDC recommends a good way to lessen your coronavirus risk is to avoid gatherings with singing or shouting. If you are going to be in such a location, they recommend a mask.)

In addition to basking in the two racist chants, the president said that his opponent is a Communist (“c-word”) who would eliminate the suburbs and allow anarchists to burn down Hispanic businesses. He fabricated a charge about the Democratic governor of Nevada tampering with ballots, declared that football is “boring as hell,” made fun of Chris Cuomo’s ratings, “joked” about running for a third term, and said flag burners should go to jail for one year. He shouted “I love the Hispanics,” lied about what was said at the DNC, reintroduced the bigoted dog-whistle use of and exaggerated emphasis on the middle name of Barack Hussein Obama (which he had told Bob Woodward he only does in private), said that NASA was almost closed before he got into office and had grass growing on the runways (?), and he once again implied support for extrajudicial killings by U.S. marshals. The only time he acknowledged that his campaign event was running afoul of state regs was when he ambiguously implied that he would help attendees if the governor comes after them. He never recommended that the attendees take any health precautions, despite the advance team building in a nice six-foot bubble between him and his fans.

...Everything about it was fucking appalling.

In fact it was so appalling that it would stand out as the single most appalling and reckless political event hosted by any presidential nominee in my lifetime before yesterday by a long shot, if you just didn’t count anything else that Donald Trump did.

And that’s the problem. Somewhere along the way he removed many people’s ability to be appalled. We have become numbed. Too many regional news outlets either won’t cover the event at all or will have headlines like “Donald Trump Makes Appeal to Hispanics At Nevada Rally.” The national Democrats will let Gov. Sisolak get in his licks, but otherwise move onto something else.

Just because we have become immune to his behavior doesn’t mean it should be treated as if it is one side of a two-sided coin. Just because he lies so cavalierly doesn’t mean he should be allowed to get away with it. Just because his oh-so-unsubtle race-baiting is part and parcel of his presidency doesn’t mean we should just let All Lives Matter chants pass by the wayside. Just because we have become bored by our #takes and have run out of new and clever angles for analyzing our malign president doesn’t mean we should say nothing at all.

All the president’s grotesqueries matter. This is just the latest.

Amanda Carpenter is another #NeverTrump Republican-- former communications director for Ted Cruz and speechwriter for neo-Nazi Jim DeMint-- and she was more interested in obsessing over how so many Republican elites are abandoning Trump. Her Bulwark column Monday was all about "the breaking points for these various White House staffers, cabinet secretaries, political advisers, and others-- the moment when each decided he or she just couldn’t stick with Trump anymore. Because we can learn a lot about Trump and the overall effect he is having on our country by studying what made these individuals-- from revered military leaders to Trump’s sleazy surrogates-- finally snap." Let's look at one example-- "Mad Dog."

Of the men and women who have served Trump and gone on to publicly speak against him, perhaps no one’s words carry more weight than Trump’s former defense secretary James Mattis. Theoretically, the “warrior monk” General “Mad Dog” Mattis, a retired four-star Marine Corps general, who once led Central Command, should have been a good fit inside the Trump administration.

But Trump is a reckless force that not even a military general with 40 years experience could counsel. Mattis walked out on Trump in December 2018 when the president ignored his advice and abruptly pulled troops out of the Middle East. Mattis is quoted in Bob Woodward’s new book, Rage, as saying, “When I was basically directed to do something that I thought went beyond stupid to felony stupid, strategically jeopardizing our place in the world and everything else, that’s when I quit.”

That’s not the only deep disagreement he’s had with the president, though. When Trump used military force to disperse protesters in Washington, D.C.’s Lafayette Square, Mattis took the rare step of issuing a public statement on the matter, putting it in no uncertain terms that Trump has crossed an intolerable line.

Mattis said he was “angry and appalled” at the president’s actions, and “We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society.” He went on, “We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square. We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.” Then he called for the adoption of a “new path” that could only be interpreted as one leading away from Trump.

Carpenter concluded by noting that "Trump pushes people to take unethical, dangerous, and even criminal actions for his benefit. That’s just who Trump is. He tries to corrupt those around him. This is why-- in addition to the desire to sell books-- so many people have been coming out in recent weeks to explain their disenchantment with Trump. They know that if he gets a second term, he will keep corrupting America, too."

Strong People Can Vote Against Trump Without Forcing Themselves To Wear Blinders About Who Joe Biden Is

Slimeball by Nancy Ohanian

In the early days of DWT, Paul Lakasiak occasionally graced this blog with guest posts. They were always among my favorite contributions. Paul was back yesterday with a response to a post-- Is The Tent So Big That The Party Has Become Meaningless As Anything MoreThan A Vehicle To Save The Country From Trump?. "The answer to your question is 'yes'," he wrote in the comment section. "And the Democratic Party is getting worse, not better."

Watching the convention over the first three days, I was actually working up some enthusiasm for helping the Dems win big in November. Then I saw the news that Pelosi had endorsed Joey With the Good Hair over reliable, principled progressive (and INCUMBENT) Ed Markey. And now I'm outraged.

I'll still crawl through broken glass laced with tetanus laden rusty tacks and fire ants to vote against Donald Trump in November. But don't ask me to tell anyone that things will get better with Democrats like Nancy Pelosi in charge of the House -- because all I can say is that, under Biden, things won't be as bad as under Trump.

And I suspect that this viewpoint will be shared extensively among real progressives. They know that the democratic party is completely corrupt-- and that Pelosi is thoroughly worthless. And we're most likely to see repeat of 2010 in another two years, as Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer betray the American people in favor of their corporate sponsors.

Biden's acceptance speech Thursday night was excellent. Whoever wrote it with him deserves a lot of praise. Biden delivered it very, very well too. I'm a big admirer of John Pavlovitz and share his thoughts here at DWT frequently. I've never disagreed with him-- until his post yesterday: Joe Biden Is Not The Lesser of Two Evils. Obviously, anyone could agree with his observation that "The only people still defending [Trump] are brainwashed Evangelicals, looney conspiracy theorists, and abject racists. The raking light of history is recording all of it, whether these people like it or not. The human rights violations and the assaults on our Constitution and the attacks on our institutions and the rampant criminality cannot be denied or explained away or buried in fake Fox News headlines." It's his next line, though, that merits some debate: "Joe Biden is not the lesser of two evils, because he is not evil by any measure."

For someone like myself, who doesn't vote for evil, whether it is lesser or not, that's an important assertion, and one I entirely disagree with. Politically-speaking, Biden is profoundly evil. Unlike Paul Lukasiac, let alone John Pavlovitz, I'm not even going to vote for him. On a relative basis of evil, he pales next to Trump. Trump's evil isn't normal political evil... Trump's evil comes from the bowels of hell and I pray that selfless and courageous Secret Service agents spend time meditating on a Satwant Singh and Beant Singh solution to what plagues our country and is bringing it to its knees.




I respect people who look at Trump and Biden and conclude that Trump is so much worse that they will... "crawl through broken glass laced with tetanus laden rusty tacks and fire ants to vote" against Trump in November. I haven interest in trying to persuade anyone to not vote against Trump and do what I can to remind everyone I know-- and readers of this blog-- that Satan has a servant in the White House.

But that doesn't change how I see the Joe Biden I've gotten to know since the mid-1970s, when he only had one issue he ran on as a newly-minted Democrat: racism. His campaign was based on dog-whistles vowing to protect white suburban voters from the horrors of integration. And once he got to the Senate, he was in a constant battle for the position of that body's worst Democrat, consciously-- no, literally, consciously-- fighting to present himself as a conservative. Like I said, I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from voting against Trump and I spent the last year talking about Biden's shortcomings. That said, this kind of drivel is not something I'm buying into, no matter the source:

He is a profoundly decent man: a man of faith, a man of compassion; a man who is willing to listen to different viewpoints, capable of evolving, and able to admit his mistakes. He is a man who loves deeply, mourns greatly, and gives fully. He is a man with actual meaningful, healthy relationships with other human beings. He is a humble man who sees others as more important than himself.

Biden is a corrupt conservative and he will head a corrupt conservative administration. Mainstream Republicans love him and they will love him more. He may even achieve their biggest goal-- and his own-- wrecking Social Security with some kind of bogus Grand Compromise he's been working on for his whole miserable career. Is he still better than Trump. Of course. One would be hard-pressed to see Trump as anything less than demonic. Biden is, admittedly, a "flawed human," as Pavlovitz put it. The Democratic Party is also very flawed, very, very, very flawed. There are no Republicans in Congress worth re-electing, not even one. The Democrats have many decent members of Congress-- certainly not a majority-- most congressional Democrats should be defeated-- but there are dozens and dozens of good ones too. Something to build on. The GOP? Needs to start over from scratch.

Pavlovitz is no dummy and only an imbecile would dismiss his thoughts. "It’s one thing to be a good-hearted but flawed human being who sometimes says something stupid or occasionally has an error in judgment or simply gets it wrong," he wrote. "Most of us fall under that category. We’re not any kind of evil, we’re just imperfect , emotional people, and so we fail and fall-- sometimes slightly and sometimes spectacularly. That’s who Joe Biden is. He is one of us. He is human. We need more human these days." How can anyone disagree with that? Especially when he offers the contrast: "It’s something else entirely to be an inherently malevolent creature: to be incapable of empathy, defiantly unwilling to admit mistakes; to wake up every day intending to do harm and feeling no remorse for it. If the word evil can apply to anyone, it’s the current President. He lacks a single noble impulse. Even his supporters know that."

Pavlovitz says he "would much rather be led by a well-intentioned human who sometimes misses the mark, than a purposefully cruel sociopath who has no concern for other people’s pain. False equivalencies are irresponsible here. These are fundamentally different people in every important way one can measure such things."

He should vote for Biden. He's going to. Most voters are going to. Nearly everyone I know and respect is going to. All my relatives-- except one seriously deranged one-- are voting for Biden. All my friends are voting for Biden. I am fairly certain that even my partners at Blue America are voting for Biden. I hope that on November 4th, I'll be thanking God for having defeated Satan the day before. And when Biden starts being Biden, I'll be interested to see how long it takes Pavlovitz to rethink his thoughts on relativity. For example, is Austerity evil? Not as evil as Trumpism, but... well, maybe I'm wrong and that nearly 50 years of Bidenism is suddenly going to change. But I doubt it.

One man pulls us toward unity, the other stokes division. 
One man speaks to our collective better angels, the other to the worst of who we are.
One man is burdened to inspire, the other compelled to engender fear.
One man is continually turned outward and the other is fully self-absorbed.
One man expresses his love for America, the other vilifies over half of it.

Stop telling me the choice isn’t clear.

I’m not voting for Joe Biden begrudgingly.

I’m not holding my nose or halfheartedly standing behind his campaign, and I’m not supporting him simply because he’s opposing Donald Trump.
I'm voting for Joe Biden because I know that he won’t deny the existence of a pandemic.
He won’t blame viruses on Republicans.
He won’t silence medical experts.
He won’t reject Science.
He won’t allow tens of thousands of Americans to die in order to protect his ego.
He won’t tweet demeaning nicknames for his opponents.
He won’t validate nonsensical conspiracies.
He won’t shout over female reporters.
He won’t shut down social media apps when teenagers hurt his feelings.
He won’t dismantle the Postal Service in order to deny Americans their essential liberties.
He won’t make fun of people with disabilities.
He won’t call racists fine people.
And on and on and on.

Republicans for Biden feel a lot like Pavlovitz. Below, on the Bulwark podcast-- a #NeverTrump outlet for conservatives-- two staunch conservative Republicans, Charlie Sykes and Tim Miller, had a discussion of the Democratic Convention. Tim Miller, a former RNC spokesman and Jeb Bush Communications Director, said "I wanted to share one thing that we discussed after the show was over. Both of us we were caught off guard by how emotionally attached we were last night to this candidacy. We had sort of expected to feel this reluctant, begrudging support for the Democratic nominee, to have been left in a tough spot between one normal bad choice and one existentially bad one. But that isn’t what happened. Joe Biden has me energized. And frankly, that he has both Charlie and I reflecting on whether maybe in the past we were just…in the wrong…"


In his wrap-up of the Democratic Convention for Politico yesterday, Ryan Lizza wrote that "Much of the week was spent by Democrats balancing praising Biden for his empathy and character and attacking Trump for-- well, just about everything. What was missing from the big speeches-- with the notable exception of Bernie Sanders-- was a clear articulation of the specific policies Biden would pursue to combat the pandemic and recession. Biden filled in those gaps clearly. He discussed, with some specificity, infrastructure, education, health care, climate change, and tax policy. He gave a detailed list of actions he would take to stop the spread of Covid-19. Overall this was a nimble speech that responded to the dramatically changed circumstances of the last few months, when Biden transformed from being the leader of a faction within his party to the leader of the most diverse electoral coalition in modern politics. In that span, the pre-existing crises he knew he would face as president-- climate change, the diminished standing of America in the world-- were shoved aside by three additional and equally urgent crises."

This morning, a trusted progressive leader in Congress suggested that if I could try to "take it easy on Joe until after the election that would be great-- have to beat the Nazis before we can worry about USSR (to torture an imperfect analogy)." I get it... and believe it or not, I have been "taking it easy" on Joe... relatively speaking.

Most Americans Are Ready-- Eager-- To Vomit On Trump's Grave

Some of the best members of Congress are freshmen who were elected in 2018-- AOC (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), Rashida Tlaib (MI), Ayanna Pressley (MA), Andy Levin (MI), Joe Neguse (CO), Chuy Garcia (IL), Veronica Escobar (TX), Sylvia Garcia, Debra Haaland. Those 10 are the only freshmen whose voting records have earned them "A" grades from ProgressivePunch.

Last cycle, Democrats netted 41 House seats but none of those 10 listed above are included in that count. Each of them won a blue seat that had already been occupied by a Democrat. And, with the exception of Andy Levin's suburban Oakland and Macomb counties district, each is overwhelmingly urban. The story of the media emphasizes about the 2018 election is that the action was flipping suburban districts from red to blue. Unfortunately pretty much all of those Democrats in flipped suburban districts turned out to be conservatives or, at best, "moderates." They're not for-- or not willing to go out on a perceived limb for-- peace, economic equality, real reform or anything else that drove voters to the polls for in 2018.

Most disappointing of all are the 9 freshmen who joined the right-wing, corporately-funded Blue Dogs-- Joe Cunningham (SC), Jared Golden (ME), Kendra Horn (OK), Ben McAdams (UT), Max Rose (NY), Anthony Brindisi (NY), Mikie Sherrill (NJ), Abigail Spanberger (VA) and Xochitl Torres Small (NM). Each has a record rated "F" by Progressive Punch. They represent a combination of urban, suburban and rural districts. And they are hardly the only freshmen with "F"-rated voting records. These are the members of the class of 2018 who did NOT earn "A" ratings:

• Mary Gay Scanlon (PA-05)- B (suburban)
• Madeleine Dean (PA-04)- B (suburban)
• Jahana Hayes (CT-05)- B (suburban)
• Donna Shalala (FL-27)- C
• Mike Levin (CA-49)- C (suburban)
• Sean Casten (IL-06)- C (suburban)
• Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (FL-26)- C
• Chris Pappas (NH-01)- C
• Greg Stanton (AZ-09)- D
• David Trone (MD-06)- D (suburban)
• Jennifer Wexton (VA-10)- F (suburban)
• Steven Horsford (NV-04)- F (suburban)
• Tom Malinowski (NJ-07)- F (suburban)
• Lizzie Fletcher (TX-07)- F (suburban)
• Dean Phillips (MN-03)- F (suburban)
• Haley Stevens (MI-11)- F (suburban)
• Colin Allred (TX-32)- F (suburban)
• Kim Schrier (WA-08)- F (suburban)
• Gil Cisneros (CA-39)- F (suburban)
• Lauren Underwood (IL-14)- F (suburban)
• Sharice Davids (KS-03)- F
• Harley Rouda (CA-48)- F (suburban)
• T.J. Cox (CA-21)- F
• Susan Wild (PA-07)- F (suburban)
• Josh Harder (CA-10)- F (suburban)
• Susie Lee (NV-03)- F (suburban)
• Lucy McBath (GA-06)- F (suburban)
• Antonio Delgado (NY-19)- F (suburban)
• Chrissy Houlahan (PA-06)- F (suburban)
• Andy Kim (NJ-03)- F (suburban)
• Katie Porter (CA-45)- F (suburban)
• Max Rose (NY-11)- F
• Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11)- F (suburban)
• Angie Craig (MN-02)- F (suburban)

[all the members below this line vote more frequently-- like below 50%-- against progressive substantive roll calls than for them]

• Elissa Slotkin (MI-08)- F (suburban)
• Xochitl Torres Small (NM-02)- F
• Abby Finkenauer (IA-01)- F
• Elaine Luria (VA-02)- F
• Cindy Axne (IA-03)- F
• Jared Golden (ME-02)- F
• Ben McAdams (UT-04)- F (suburban)
• Kendra Horn (OK-05)- F
• Abigail Spanberger (VA-07)- F (suburban)
• Anthony Brindisi (NY-22)- F
• Joe Cunningham (SC-01)- F

Trump's niece, Mary Trump, recounted in her book, Too Much And Never Enough, how Trump paid someone to take his SATs so he could get into college, a fairly easy college to get into. She also noted that "Honest work was never demanded of him, and no matter how badly he failed, he was rewarded in ways that are almost unfathomable. He continues to be protected from his own disasters in the White House." Some low-achievers-- say in Mississippi or Wyoming-- might think that was a smart move. Well-educated college graduates in the suburbs are not likely react the same way and that anecdote isn't likely to endear Trump to them.

Ron Brownstein's a good reporter with interesting insights but when he writes about electoral politics, it's a Democrat vs Republican thing, not a progressive vs reactionary thing or a reformer vs corrupt sack-of-shit thing. And his CNN.com post yesterday was all about how the massive anti-Trump wave is headed towards more suburban districts held by Republicans that remained after the 2018 wave. He sees it as well-educated votes in the 'burbs turning against the Trump and his congressional enablers. He wrote that "In 2018, a suburban revolt against Trump powered Democrats to sweeping gains in white-collar House districts from coast to coast. The backlash left the GOP holding only about one-fourth of all House districts that have more college graduates than the national average, down from more than two-fifths before the election... Now, recent national and district-level polls signal that many of the well-educated voters souring on Trump are also displaying more resistance to Republican congressional candidates than in 2018-- potentially much more. That movement could frustrate GOP hopes of dislodging many of the first-term House Democrats who captured previously Republican suburban seats in 2018. It also means Democrats see further opportunities in white-collar House districts-- from Pennsylvania and Georgia to Indiana and especially Texas-- where the GOP held off the 2018 suburban tide, often only by narrow margins."

"The suburban exodus has continued, and my gut is as long as Trump is identified as the leader of the party, that continues," says former Republican Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, who served as chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Even if Trump's strength outside the metro areas allows the GOP to recapture some of the non-urban seats Democrats won last time, Davis warns, further suburban losses could still leave the party in a deeper hole after November.

"You can't afford that," says Davis... "[Suburbia] was the base of the Republican Party just a decade and a half ago. And there just aren't enough rural voters to make up for those kind of losses. It means for the Republicans that instead of picking up seats in the House, that the bleeding could continue."

...Public polling this spring consistently showed Trump and the GOP facing grim numbers with well-educated voters. National surveys released in the past few weeks by Monmouth University, the Pew Research Center and CNN all showed Trump's approval rating among White voters with at least a four-year college education sinking to 33% or less, with at least 64% disapproving.

By comparison, even during the 2018 Democratic sweep, exit polls found that 38% of college-educated White voters approved of Trump's job performance, according to results provided by Edison Research, which conducts the exit polls for a consortium of news organizations that includes CNN.

That decline contrasted with Trump's showing among minorities in the new CNN and Monmouth polls, which found the President's approval rating with voters of color was almost exactly the same as in the 2018 exit poll, just over 1-in-4 in each case.

...The Monmouth and CNN polls and a national New York Times/Siena College survey all found Biden leading Trump among well-educated White voters by about 30 percentage points, a much bigger advantage than any data source on the 2016 results recorded for Clinton. (The exit polls showed Trump narrowly carrying those college-plus White voters.)

Critically, some of the recent public surveys found that weakness trickling down to GOP congressional candidates. In last week's Monmouth survey, college-educated White voters preferred Democrats over Republicans in House races by a resounding 59% to 36%.

If that disparity held through November, it would represent a huge deterioration for Republicans since 2018, when the exit polls showed Democratic House candidates nationwide carrying those voters by 8 percentage points, about one-third as much. (That came after the exit polls made a methodology change that analysts believe provided a more accurate estimate of the vote among college- and non-college Whites than in previous years.)

Even the more modest swing among well-educated voters that exit polls recorded in 2018 was sufficient to fundamentally reconfigure the House battlefield. The Democratic wave that year crested highest in well-educated and often racially diverse urban and suburban districts. Before that election, Republicans held 43% of the House districts where the share of people 25 and older with at least a four-year college degree exceeded the national average, according to a CNN analysis of the 2018 results.

But now Republicans hold only 23% of such seats, according to a new analysis of results from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey conducted by CNN senior visual editor Janie Boschma. In all, Democrats control 135 of the House districts with higher-than-average college education levels, while Republicans hold just 41. (Those numbers reflect the new district lines drawn under court order in Pennsylvania, but not the new lines that state courts have approved in North Carolina.)

Many of the top Democratic House targets for November are within those remaining 41 Republican districts with more college graduates than average, including incumbent Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick in Pennsylvania, Ann Wagner in Missouri, Chip Roy in Austin, Don Bacon in Nebraska, David Schweikert in Arizona and Steve Chabot in Ohio, as well as opportunities in open seats around Indianapolis, Atlanta, Houston, Dallas and Raleigh, North Carolina. Several more potentially vulnerable GOP seats (including those held by incumbent Reps. Rodney Davis in Illinois, John Katko in New York and Scott Perry in Pennsylvania) come in just below the average education line.

The flip side is also true: Many of the Democrats elected in 2018 who Republicans most hope to oust hold seats in districts with many more college graduates than average, including Reps. Lizzie Fletcher and Colin Allred in Texas, Sharice Davids in Kansas, Elissa Slotkin and Haley Stevens in Michigan, Lucy McBath in Georgia, Abigail Spanberger in Virginia, Tom Malinowski in New Jersey and all the newly elected Democrats from Orange County, California.

In 2016, when exit polls showed Trump running more competitively among college-educated White voters, he won many of the white-collar districts on both lists. With far fewer voters than in earlier generations splitting their tickets between presidential and House candidates, the outcome in many of them may be tipped by whether he does so again.

Perhaps the best test of Trump's standing in white-collar districts will come in Texas, which Republicans have dominated since the early 1990s. Even in 2016, the state was only marginally competitive, with Trump beating Clinton there by 9 percentage points or nearly 800,000 votes. But in 2018, Democratic Senate candidate Beto O'Rourke rode a surge of support in Texas' big metropolitan areas-- he won its five largest counties by about six times as much as Barack Obama did in 2012-- to hold Republican Sen. Ted Cruz to a victory of only about 2.5 percentage points. Democrats rode O'Rourke's strong performance to sweeping gains in state legislative and local elections across urban and suburban areas, as well as the election of Fletcher and Allred.

"In Texas, the Democrats performed about as well in the suburbs in 2018 as they've done in 20 or 25 years," says Matt Mackowiak, a Republican consultant and GOP chair in Travis County (Austin).

Trump's increasingly polarizing strategy for reelection helps explain why many strategists in both parties believe it will be difficult for as many House candidates as in the past to win in districts that vote for the other party in the presidential contest. That may help Republican challengers against Democratic incumbents in blue-collar and rural districts where Trump has been stronger, such as Reps. Collin Peterson in Minnesota, Jared Golden in Maine and Abby Finkenauer in Iowa. But it looms as a huge challenge for the GOP in these suburban areas.

Carlos Curbelo, a former GOP representative who lost his urban Miami district during the 2018 Democratic sweep, agrees it will be tough for the party's candidates to escape the undertow if Trump doesn't improve his position in those places.

"It's almost impossible," he says. "All candidates [are] encouraged to run their own races and maneuver however it is they need to in order to win. But with this heavy overlay, it's very difficult. The space in which to maneuver is very tight."

Like the NRCC's Salera, GOP consultant Mackowiak says he believes Trump will perform better in these suburban districts than the party did in 2018. While Mackowiak believes that "if it's a referendum on Trump he's going to get killed in the suburbs," he maintains the President can win back previously red-leaning college-educated voters by tying Biden and Democratic House candidates to liberal ideas such as the Green New Deal and single-payer health care that might advance under unified Democratic control of government.

Still, Mackowiak acknowledges that if 2020 produces an electoral divide in Texas similar to the one in the 2018 Senate race-- with Trump holding the state by maximizing rural turnout while suffering huge losses in the big metro areas-- it will "be a category five political hurricane" for local Republicans.

"The state House will be gone," he said. "We will lose three or four congressional seats. That's an unthinkable scenario."

Yet many observers in both parties believe that's exactly what the November election may produce in virtually every state: a widening trench between the preponderantly White small-town and rural areas that remain bonded to Trump and a deepening recoil from him in the diverse and well-educated urban and suburban population centers.

Trump may be comfortable with that trade since he is trying only to finesse one more Electoral College victory even if he loses the popular vote again. But many Republicans say Trump's vision of squeezing bigger margins out of shrinking places at the cost of generating more resistance in communities that are growing is a losing long-term trajectory for the party. Nowhere is that more true than in the battle for control of the US House.

"It's a strategy that is divorced from the reality of the country," says Curbelo. "And there are Republican leaders in both chambers who are aware of this. This is not an important [consideration in] the President's strategy because in his team's mind they only have to win one more election. But for everyone else it's a longer-term game. A lot of Republicans have been willing to be shortsighted and taken what they can get from the Trump era. But ultimately they know this is not the future of the party."

"Shooting rubber bullet grenades at protesting priests. Catastrophically botching the pandemic response, resulting in a public health and economic calamity. Tweeting 'white power' memes. Ranting in front of empty arenas about how he navigated a 'slippery ramp.' Being MIA while his Russian benefactors put out a hit on American soldiers in Afghanistan. The last 3 months have been a political dumpster fire, for President Trump," wrote Tim Miller at Rolling Stone this week, "and the flames have engulfed Republicans up and down the ballot." Miller, a #NeverTrump Republican, spoke with 9 GOP political operatives to find out how they perceive Trump's performance impacting their candidates. "Are there discussions," he asked, "about either storming the cockpit or gently trying to #WalkAway from Trump? And finally, why in the hell aren’t they more pissed at this incompetent asshole who is fucking up their life?"

What I found in their answers was one part Stockholm Syndrome, one part survival instinct. They all may not love the president, but most share his loathing for his enemies on the left, in the media, and the apostate Never Trump Republicans with a passion that engenders an alliance with the president, if not a kinship. And even among those who don’t share the tribalistic hatreds, they perceive a political reality driven by base voters and the president’s shitposting that simply does not allow for dissent.

As one put it: “There are two options, you can be on this hell ship or you can be in the water drowning.”

So I give you the view from the U.S.S Hellship, first the political state of play, and then the psychological.

The Politics
The impact of Trump’s disastrous 3 months on down ballot candidates was best summed up in the first text message I got back.

“Could you use a poop emoji for my comments?”

The assessment was excreta across the board.

• “Every shred of evidence points to a likely ass kicking in the fall.”
• “Well it’s as bad as it gets right now.”
• “Right now most campaigns are thanking baby jesus every day the election isn’t held today.”
• “I’ve got Trump down in Texas. [Republican Senator Steve] Daines down in Montana.”
• “It’s certainly better than public polling, but it’s not good.”
• “I told very high ranking people in the Trump Administration that it hasn’t been like this since October of 06”-- when President Bush’s numbers were tanking over fallout from the Iraq War, Katrina, and the Mark Foley scandal.

But in 2006, Republican candidates could strategically distance themselves from an unpopular president without facing a mutiny within the ranks. That won’t work in 2020, as-- though Trump’s numbers are plummeting with some demos-- they are solidifying or improving among his core support demographic. Which makes running afoul of Trump fatal in the eyes of these strategists.

“There are practical realities-- we ran a bunch of red district primaries, and it would come back that the number one issue for 80+% of Republican primary voters was loyalty to Donald Trump. I’m not making that number up,” a respondent told me.

Several consultants pointed to the situation that Sen. John Cornyn faces in Texas to illustrate the problem. They indicated that internal polling shows Trump either tied or very slightly ahead in the Lone Star State. One said Cornyn should be feeling very lucky that Beto O’Rourke ran for president, rather than tacking slightly center and spending $90 million on a campaign to unseat the incumbent senator. Another said Cornyn’s “quietly in trouble.”

But rather than addressing this by creating some strategic separation from Trump to solidify the historically conservative Dallas and Houston suburbs where Trump is bleeding out, Cornyn has become a Mr. Trump fan girl, echoing his virus denial and defending the attack on nonviolent protestors in Lafayette Square.

Why? According to one: “You have 25% of the state is rural and Trump gets like Saddam Hussein level numbers here. 87% in 25% of the state… Cornyn gets 69. And so Cornyn can’t find a place to break from because he could really put that in jeopardy.”

And thus the polarizing nature of Trump makes it impossible for Cornyn to make a move that helps him in the swingy suburbs without risking the floor falling out from under him in West Texas.

This same calculus pervades no matter the race, no matter the district, no matter the geography: The operatives insist that the pro-Trump zealotry the president’s supporters demand makes it far more difficult for candidates to win over anyone else.

A consultant who advises a challenger in a swing house seat that Hillary Clinton carried, for example, indicated that they thought they had less ability to distance from Trump than those who are in safer, more MAGAfied districts. “No dissent is tolerated [with the base],” and “If my candidate is going to win, it’s going to be by 1 or 2 percent they can’t afford to lose any votes [on the pro-Trump flank].”

In fact some candidates in competitive house seats are going the other direction because of what it takes to win a primary. A different consultant said: “My candidate didn’t vote for Trump. But we’re running ads right now about being a big Trump supporter,” because in that district “drap[ing] yourself in Trump is still a good decision.”

This view is so widespread that when asked, all of the consultants but two said they haven’t even had a conversation about the possibility of distancing from Trump with any of their candidates or campaign teams. Another put it this way: “The idea of distancing, if it’s discussed, it’s discussed very quietly, it’s discussed one-on-one. You wouldn’t talk about it on a conference call…maybe someone would, but let’s just say it hasn’t happened yet and I’m on a lot of those calls.”

Sit with that for a second. The idea of separating from Trump is so verboten in GOP circles that the best consultants won’t even talk about talking about doing it in mixed company, for fear of being stigmatized, and thus losing potential client work on other campaigns.