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.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4436481,00.html
“Democrats who say they are concerned with how the world views the nation have formed a group to run television ads and campaign against Bush. Advisers to the group, Safer Together 04, include former Clinton national security adviser Anthony Lake.
The group will run a TV ad starting Friday initially on cable channels in Washington, D.C., before expanding to battleground states next week. The ad, to air during the Olympics, features a lifelong Republican who says he won’t vote for Bush again. It counters an Olympics-themed ad Bush is running”
Its obviously beginning to happen. People are banding together is cells and are doing cooperative things to make this system work.
The scientists have also banded and are asking for a meeting with both Bush and Kerry. Kerry says he is ready. Bush’ team is yet to comment.
This is the best approach towards making things happen for November. Now, each cell and target a different message and a different sector of the electorate and yet, each cell’s message will cross fertilise because each segment of the electorate has multiple interests.
If this trend picks up momentum and is joined by the efforts from the 527s and the DEMs and the Kerry campaign, then the coming months will be full of great things. You can also bet that things will get so nasty that we might have to turn off the TV when the kids are around. Lies will flow like a stream after a torrent of rain and it will all add to the excitement.
In truth and in fact, if the cell concept of the Kerry supporters gets a roller coaster effect, then the republicans will have to rally their troopers quickly and get a response in place… and it just might be late.
I still think that the process must continue and that the rank and file still need to ensure that they chat a bit with the neighbours and the aunts and uncles and make sure that everyone gets a ride to a booth… there is must that can be done.. and I am sure that the rank and file will get even busier in the coming weeks.
I am enjoying the fact that there are a number of small groups (cells) who are carrying the message and refuting the Bush claims.
Cheers
heroditus, I wonder that, too. Another poll in Ohio has Kerry up 2 among likely voters, just like Gallup.
heroditus, I wonder that, too. Another poll in Ohio has Kerry up 2 among likely voters, just like Gallup.
Economist weekly poll out (Aug 16-18):
Kerry over Bush 48-41 in 3-way race.
See:
http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/YouGovG.pdf
Also, Bush has broken another barrier, down to 39% approval. If that holds, he’s sunk.
I would appreciate it if someone would discuss the credibility (or lack of it) of Strategic Vision polls. This is an out and out Republican outfit which has started deluging the world with its polls in the past month or so. It seems to me quite likely that it is just another arm of the Bush re-election campaign which has been assigned the task of making it look like he is not sinking like a rock. It bothers me that so many blogs seem to give it credibility. On Ohio, for example there are a number of other polls just out which show Kerry with a lead – in the case of Gallup a 10 point lead among registered voters. I think people should consider whether or not they want to give Strategic Vision any credibility and any publicity. I think it is a fraud.