I don’t usually watch Morning Joe because I’m on the west coast and it’s on very early for me. But the segment above has been circulating today and I thought it was worth sharing. It’s about the polling — specifically how the political press goes nuts over every bit of bad news for Biden in every NYT poll when others are showing a tighter race. For all we know, the NY Times poll is entirely right and the others are all wrong. It’s certainly possible. It’s a good poll with experienced and qualified analysts. But the rush to assume that even when there are other legitimate polls that suggest otherwise is a problem because it’s helping to set Trump up to challenge the results of the election if it doesn’t go his way. If the country is programmed to believe that Trump is way ahead in the polls and Biden is in much deeper trouble than he is after months of this kind of press coverage, his people (and probably others) will be predisposed to believe Trump’s lies about a rigged election.
Uncategorized
Whatevs??? From The Washington Post, “US inflation eased last month in first slowdown of 2024” – Led by lower food and auto prices, inflation in the United States cooled slightly last month after three elevated readings, likely offering a tentative sigh of relief for officials at the Federal Reserve as well as President Joe Biden’s re-election team. Consumer prices rose 0.3% from March to April, the Labor Department said Wednesday, down slightly from 0.4% the previous month. Measured year-over-year, inflation ticked down from 3.5% to 3.4%. And a gauge of underlying inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy costs, reached its lowest level in three years….. ……Wednesday’s report provides a dose of reassurance that the pace of price increases may be resuming its slowdown. While the latest figures show inflation still well above the Fed’s 2% target, it’s the first time this year that the year-over-year figure has declined. And price increases cooled in some service industries, such as hotels, health care and auto repairs, that had previously kept inflation elevated.
It’s nervous laughter, but laughter it is. Even the faithful just aren’t that into her anymore: In the past, Family Research Council, founded in 1983 by Focus on the Family, and Concerned Women for America, founded in 1978 by the late Beverly LaHaye, both endorsed Greene 100% and applauded her for her work opposing LGBTQ rights and other issues. Now, both groups are criticizing Greene’s latest “bizarre conundrum”: the effort to take down House Speaker Mike Johnson, who has a long association with their movement. “Stop the madness,” said FRC President Tony Perkins in the organization’s The Washington Stand, which says it provides “news and commentary from a biblical worldview.” “I thought the goal of government was to work for the people — not just take political pot shots at the other party,” said Perkins, who has mentored Johnson for decades.
The Supremes are more than doing their part I noted last week that Bolts magazine was featuring a reader Q&A with an election law expert and they have published some of them today. It’s quite interesting even if a little bit depressing. But we’re used to that when it comes to this subject. Here’s one example: What’s the most underrated case where this court weakened voting rights, but that we just don’t talk about enough? — Anonymous There are two cases that hardly anyone has heard of but that have had a major impact on the way the Supreme Court treats the constitutional right to vote: Anderson v. Celebrezze, in 1983, and Burdick v. Takushi, in 1992. Anderson dealt with the desire of an independent candidate to gain ballot access after a state’s deadline for turning in enough signatures. Burdick was about an individual’s attempt to write-in a candidate instead of choosing one of the candidates listed on the ballot.
Beatlefan Executive Editor Al Sussman offers a counterpoint to some fans who’ve been whining about various aspects of the reissue of “Let It Be.” Here’s his more evenhanded impression of the 1970 film’s restoration. … Well, I watched the … Continue reading
Who do we wish to be? In conversation at The Ink, Eddie Glaude, Jr., Princeton professor of African American studies, ponders, in essence, “Who do we take ourselves to be?” in the wake of 50 years of Reaganism, Thatcherism, neoliberalism. That framework is collapsing. What kind of society have we created? Madison and others insisted on the importance of character, that we had to be certain kinds of persons in order for democracy to work. And this 50-year run has exacerbated some of the distortions in what makes us who we are. We’ve always dealt with the dangerous and disfiguring effects of white supremacy, of patriarchy, of class ideology. But over the last 50 years, they’ve congealed in a particular sort of way. For democracy to work, we have to admit that we have to become better people. If we are the leaders that we’ve been looking for, then we have to become better people. And if we’re going to be better people, we have to build a more just world, because the world as it’s currently organized actually distorts our sense of self, our relationship with each other.
“Why Hannibal Lecter?” And has a thing for “the late, great Hannibal Lecter,” a “wonderful man.” What a catch! Cohen will be back to testify before this goes live, so I’m bailing. Enjoy. ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● For The Win, 5th Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free countywide GOTV planning guide at ForTheWin.us.
The Bulwark is featuring a fascinating piece today about Trump and fascism, a very urgent topic: IN THE INITIAL, HEADY DAYS after Joe Biden’s 2020 victory over Donald Trump, many public commentators played down Trump’s threats of not leaving the White House quietly, with some outright dismissing concerns about his electoral lies. Others, though, saw Trump for exactly who he was—and his actions for exactly what they were, even from the outset. One of those discerning voices was Federico Finchelstein, a professor at the New School who studies the history and dissemination of fascism. Just a few days into Trump’s refusal to concede, Finchelstein authored an op-ed in the Washington Post linking Trump directly to a series of previous authoritarians who clung to power, helping introduce Americans to the term auto-golpe (self-coup). It was one of the most prescient pieces of analysis of America’s post-election troubles—vindicated especially on January 6th, when Trump helped sic insurrectionists set on violently overturning the election results.
James Fallows has a fascinating analysis of that weird rally last Saturday: Among Donald Trump’s virtues is that he does not drink. That is useful to remember in considering his current speaking style. On Saturday night Deb and I sat through the nearly two-hour entirety of his rally performance at Wildwood, on the Jersey shore, as televised by Fox. The whole thing is archived here, courtesy of Right Side Broadcasting. To me this version of Trump sounded genuinely different from the crowd-pleasing showman who rode televised rallies to success (and big audiences for the cable outlets) in 2015 and 2016. Maybe it’s just that his material is now so familiar and tired. Maybe it’s that Trump has nearly exhausted the “what will he say next??” Evel Knievel-style suspense and excitement of his live shows. Maybe it’s that he goes on at such length. Whatever: the result is less “outrageous” than … boring. It could also be that there is something more visibly wrong with him.
Trump has brought his surrogates to the trial to violate his gag order for him: He went into the courtroom along with Byron Donalds, Doug Burgham and Vivek Ramaswamy. They stayed for about 45 minutes and then emerged and gave press conferences spouting all the crapola Trump isn’t allowed to say due to his gag orders. Unbelievable: