Having closely watched congressional developments over the last few weeks, I’ve concluded that one much-discussed Democratic tactic for dealing with Trump 2.0 is probably mistaken, as I explained at New York:
No one is going to rank Mike Johnson among the great arm-twisting Speakers of the House, like Henry Clay, Tom Reed, Sam Rayburn, or even Nancy Pelosi. Indeed, he still resembles Winston Churchill’s description of Clement Atlee as “a modest man with much to be modest about.”
But nonetheless, in the space of two weeks, Johnson has managed to get two huge and highly controversial measures through the closely divided House: a budget resolution that sets the stage for enactment of Donald Trump’s entire legislative agenda in one bill, then an appropriations bill keeping the federal government operating until the end of September while preserving the highly contested power of Trump and his agents to cut and spend wherever they like.
Despite all the talk of divisions between the hard-core fiscal extremists of the House Freedom Caucus and swing-district “moderate” Republicans, Johnson lost just one member — the anti-spending fanatic and lone wolf Thomas Massie of Kentucky — from the ranks of House Republicans on both votes. As a result, he needed not even a whiff of compromise with House Democrats (only one of them, the very Trump-friendly Jared Golden of Maine, voted for one of the measures, the appropriations bill).
Now there are a host of factors that made this impressive achievement possible. The budget-resolution vote was, as Johnson kept pointing out to recalcitrant House Republicans, a blueprint for massive domestic-spending cuts, not the cuts themselves. Its language was general and vague enough to give Republicans plausible deniability. And even more deviously, the appropriations measure was made brief and unspecific in order to give Elon Musk and Russ Vought the maximum leeway to whack spending and personnel to levels far below what the bill provided (J.D. Vance told House Republicans right before the vote that the administration reserved the right to ignore the spending the bill mandated entirely, which pleased the government-hating HFC folk immensely). And most important, on both bills Johnson was able to rely on personal lobbying from key members of the administration, most notably the president himself, who had made it clear any congressional Republican who rebelled might soon be looking down the barrel of a Musk-financed MAGA primary opponent. Without question, much of the credit Johnson is due for pulling off these votes should go to his White House boss, whose wish is his command.
But the lesson Democrats should take from these events is that they cannot just lie in the weeds and expect the congressional GOP to self-destruct owing to its many divisions and rivalries. In a controversial New York Times op-ed last month, Democratic strategist James Carville argued Democrats should “play dead” in order to keep a spotlight on Republican responsibility for the chaos in Washington, D.C., which might soon extend to Congress:
“Let the Republicans push for their tax cuts, their Medicaid cuts, their food stamp cuts. Give them all the rope they need. Then let dysfunction paralyze their House caucus and rupture their tiny majority. Let them reveal themselves as incapable of governing and, at the right moment, start making a coordinated, consistent argument about the need to protect Medicare, Medicaid, worker benefits and middle-class pocketbooks. Let the Republicans crumble, let the American people see it, and wait until they need us to offer our support.”
Now to be clear, Congressional GOP dysfunction could yet break out; House and Senate Republicans have struggled constantly to stay on the same page on budget strategy, the depth of domestic-spending cuts, and the extent of tax cuts. But as the two big votes in the House show, their three superpowers are (1) Trump’s death grip on them all, (2) the willingness of Musk and Vought and Trump himself to take the heat for unpopular policies, and (3) a capacity for lying shamelessly about what they are doing and what it will cost. Yes, ultimately, congressional Republicans will face voters in November 2026. But any fear of these elections is mitigated by the realization that thanks to the landscape of midterm races, probably nothing they can do will save control of the House or forfeit control of the Senate. So Republicans have a lot of incentives to follow Trump in a high-speed smash-and-grab operation that devastates the public sector, awards their billionaire friends with tax cuts, and wherever possible salts the earth to make a revival of good government as difficult as possible. Democrats have few ways to stop this nihilistic locomotive. But they may be fooling themselves if they assume it’s going off the rails without their active involvement.
Well, I won’t be satisfied unless his numbers go back up to the 92% he registered just after 911.
So How to do it. Well, he should lead the whole Republican Convention down to the Hole at Ground Zero, prostrate themselves on the cold ground, and beg forgiveness (Fundi Style) for his failure to take care of his responsibilities after the August 6th warning from the CIA memo. If they beat their breasts long and loud enough, sing lots of songs about how they’ve been forgiven and made whole and all that, raise their arms to the heavens — and then produce bin Laden and burn him at the stake down in the hole — I think that would turn the trick on jacking up their numbers again.
Rove should make sure he acquires a really grand pipe organ for this scene, plus lots of red and orange lights for a massive light show. We are taling about the lord really speaking through the mouths of the Republican Party here, and it’s got to have massive production values.
Don’t!! Don’t you raise those debate expectations again! That was the single most stupid thing the Gore campaign did in 2000: They practically declared their candidate Plato reborn. And then Gore gave his ghastly performance. I still believe he lost it right there, within 1 1/2 hours on October 3rd 2000. (“Can I have the last question?”) He recovered until election day, but as we all know it wasn’t enough.
So please, please let’s all presume Kerry will be a stiff, boring, sad figure, no match for this amiable, charming chap that is the President. Shall we?
Bounce!!!!…. me thinks that this elections aint about bounce. Dont be too surprised if the market isnt too concerned with what Bush has to say.
Lets face it, what can he say? what can say that he has not yet said? If Bush brought new policies to the table, who would believe him?
I think that those who are going to vite for Bush have alrewady been counted. In this regard, I would be surprised to see any significant bounce.
If significant bounce does occur, it would be an indictment on the peoples of america. My mom have ofter said that I should never let the same dog bite me twice. How many times would we allow Bush to promise and never deliver? How many times would we allow him to speak in abstracts with nothing definitive to say? How many times would we allow him to spew rhetoric with a smirk?
I am keen to hear his proposals for his next term in office. I am not even interested in hearing how to plans to handle the iraq situation, or Iran or north Korea. I dont want to hear anything about foregn affairs or any such subject. I just want to hear these great and glowing and powerful proposals to heal America and get the economy on a proper footing.
His current proposals have the economy going like a car with a shaky spark plug. One minute its going, next its chugging along, next its smoking.. you just cant ever sit back, relax and enjoy the ride. So I am waiting and listening with both ears to hear his new plans for 2005 and beyond. I know it will be a plethora of jokes and lies.
I agree that his jab at Kerry did place Kerry between a rock and hard place but I thought to myself that kerry handled that issue many times before and hence it wasnt worth the energy. However, I hope kerry will learn something from Bush’ ploy and that is… “Set the Agenda”. That exactly what Bush is attempting to do. He is seeking to keep Kerry defending and hence never having a chance to attack and make Bush defend.
Its not rocket science, so I hope his handlers recognise the ploy and do everything to diffuse it. Personally, Bush has enough on his plate for Kerry to keep attacking, literally everyday. I dont think he is doing it tho.. but if he thinks that he needs to, he has enough issues on which to push Bush back on the defensive.
In any event, I hope that Kerry never allows this to happen again in this season. I hope that the simply pushes Bush all the way back to Texas..
Cheers
If Bush gets less than a 15 point bounce he’s dead. Typically, the bounce fritters away in a week or two anyway, and then we’re into debates. Even taking into account the lowered expectations for Bush’s performance, I’m still thinking he won’t unravel, but Kerry will be very impressive. The rest of the bounce will turn take a nose dive and Kerry will be going into the election in very good shape.
Bush should get AT LEAST a 15 point bounce coming out of the Republican Convention. After the convention it will obviously become clear that George Bush’s outstanding leadership should be apparent to most americans. If he doen’t get this bounce which is of course the usual it will mean he is in trouble. (Fellow Dems, I am of course kidding).
Allow me to be the first to predict that George Bush will get a 15% bounce from the Republican National Convention. This is based on historical data involving incumbent Republican presidents who did not win the popular vote in their first election for president. If he does not get the historically predicted 15% bounce, consider the convention a failure for all involved.
I have to agree that responding to Bush’s “question” wasn’t strategically a good idea. Effectively, Kerry validated Bush’s decision to go to war, removing one of the major potential criticisms of the administration. But dodging a question that the Bush campaign would have continued to ask – and more importantly continued to point out that Kerry wasn’t answering would have been just as bad, if not worse.
Maybe we misunderstood, and he really said “we’ve turned to the coroner…”
the question is… where on earth is the corner… any reasons why kerry responded to Bush’s question on Iraq? I thought he had given that response many moons ago… why did he allow Bush to lead him into that question?
Is anyone thinking that Kerry is getting ahead of Bush too fast? Does anyone think that he might soon find his peek and then start to tumble back down the other side?
Cheers
Of course we have the convention comming up with a week of listening how great the economy is and getting better. His choir got quite a jolt last week with the news from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. I think Georgie is taking a page from Herbert Hoover who promised a “Chicken in Every Pot” just before the depressiion of the 30’s. “Vote For Me Everything Is Just Around The Corner”.
All the Kings horses and all the Kings men can’t seem to put “Humpty Dumpty” together . Most of the news media have become shills for GW. Maybe the electorat isn’t so dumb after all.
The website 2.004K.com lists national and state polls. Of the most recent 32 polls listed, Bush leads in two, one (Arkansas) is a tie, and Kerry leads in the other 29. Moreover, the two in which Bush led (one poll each in Florida and Ohio) have since been supersed by polls which show Kerry leading in both states.