Sunday, November 08, 2020

Why top Republicans fear being 'cornered." And what will the 'Don' do now?

 

"Happy Days Are Here Again,

The skies above are clear again

Let us raise a glass of cheer again.

Happy Days Are Here Again!"


And another classic version of this anthem of the Greatest Generation, circa 1933, who went on to overcome the First Depression, crushed Hitler, repeatedly saved China, contained Stalinism, built universities and infrastructure, took us to the moon, began overcoming injustice and created the world's greatest era of peace and progress... and who adored Franklin Delano Roosevelt.


Play it. And thank you Philadelphia and the spirit of Ben Franklin.


And has anyone else out there noticed that the flag of the Restored United States, from The Postman, is being circulated as an image-meme that's so very apropos of right now?


Still, lest we forget... 100 most cringe-worthy moments from the ending 'presidency,' any one of which would have made nuclear steam vent from the ears of Foxites, if Obama had done it. Any one. And I remain willing to offer substantial Wager Stakes over any ten (randomly chosen) of Trump's 30,000+ registered lies. (The wager gambit really works; they run!)


== What will happen next? ==


Okay, I only have one of the best predictive records on the planet... which means you'd be a fool to bet your life or house on any one thing I say! Still, some glimmers in my crystal ball:


First, nearer term...  Some prominent republicans are backing Trump's lie-fulminations - without providing a scintilla of evidence - of electoral cheating by democrats (while there's huge amounts of cheating by his side, bet me on it.) In effect, jerks like Kevin McCarthy are calling for hot civil war. Any moment there may be a McVeigh copycat... or one that's stymied by an FBI sting.


Meanwhile, other Republicans are sounding surprisingly reasonable. There's one cynical reason why some top goppers are trying to quell the rage, instead of inciting.The powers behind the GOP may shrug off loss of the presidency, because they have the Senate and the Court, and now they can jettison their clown-liability, safe from liberal legislation. Also, they know the country is actually governed far better under democrats and hence their investments will do well, while McConnell's Senate majority prevents actual action. We'll see. Only...


Some Electoral College scenarios. First expect attacks on the counts in GA and PA, not just because the Biden margins weren't huge (a legitimate reason for recounts) but especially since with both of them Joe gets 306 EVs, two more than Trump had in 2016 - and we can’t have that! Oh, he will fight like hell so Stacey Abrams doesn't whip him. (She's likely the next DNC chair... and what will the splitter yowl, then?)


- Ponder further. Even without PA and Georgia but with NV&AZ, Joe still wins with exactly 270. Alas, nail-biting then resumes, since would only take one faithless elector to throw the election to the House. I'll only believe the win when there's more of a margin than that! Only...


... only in fact I have to wonder if Old Two Scoops's current tantrums might cause the reverse… a number of Trump electors saying “enough” and switching. But to whom? To Biden in a bid to join a winning team? Unlikely. My best guess would be Paul Ryan, the annointed once and future prince-in-waiting. Note this may happen even - especially - if Biden crests 306.


- What will Trump himself do, the next two months? See some speculations at the end of this screed. Including the worst case.

 

- Again, do not fall for 'splitter' crap about a war between Democrats! Seriously, we are embarking on a journey of political (like physical) therapy from devastating injury. And so, the very first thing you should do is get to know some facts about past performance by coalitions of left and center democrats, especially how well they have negotiated and governed together in states like WA, OR and CA. Do not swallow the bullshit, Fox-Kremlin-generated story of a war between factions! They negotiate very well within blue state governments and Pelosi's 111th Congress did pretty good, all considered. Try learning more about all that than simplistic Facebook memes! You are better than that. We all need to be.

 

== Things Pelosi and Biden can do before January! ==

 

You know me. I will inveigh the next few months with dozens of proposals. I've done it many times. (See the extensive series of suggestions I published in 2008, the last time hope prevailed over treason; and yes, several would have armored us against Trumpism.) Alas, if history is any judge, I'll do it uselessly. 

 

But starting with the period up to January 20, let's be clear. President Elect Joe Biden (I feel shivers, just typing that!) has to follow law and tradition and not interfere with the current government of the United States. Even if Trump's tantrums turn dangerous, dealing with that is a task for the civil servants who have kept us safe for four years, and -- in-extremis -- Vice President Pence plus Congress. Joe Biden is a private citizen till January 20. (And one small reform would be to pull that back, by law, to January 5 or so.)  Biden will work hard on transition so his administration hits the ground running... even at Ludicrous Speed! But until inauguration, actual action is in Pelosi's hands.

 

So. Top of the list that I'll offer maybe next week? There are bills Speaker Pelosi can put forward right away that might even pass against the raving objections of Mitch McConnell! Bills that would be political suicide for many GOP Senators to oppose! Especially the two senators who face run-off elections in GeorgiaThere's actually a long list of such bills that - while much less than what liberals want - would corner the corrupt McConnellocracy with lose-lose choices.  Among these:

 

- A COVID relief bill? Sure, try that. Though I doubt Mitch would face defections there.

 

- How about a bill to immediately give medicare coverage to all CHILDREN, a move so guaranteed of parental enthusiasm that anyone opposing it would face toasting. Demand those Georgia senators decide now, risking ire from either those parents or Moscow Mitch.

 

- Imagine a bill putting new limits on Presidential powers -- including Biden's! It must be done anyway - incredible failure modes were revealed by a madman predecessor. Most of these Biden won't oppose! Like reasonable limits on war powers, or establishing procedures to rule on emoluments violations.

 

How about making it clear that Secret Service agents aren't personal servants! 

Or passing rules ending the travesty of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel 'advising' that sitting presidents cannot be sued or indicted or even investigated! Instead, ensure that Presidents can be "slow-indicted" or "slow-sued" without destroying their ability to perform vital functions, and above all they are not totally immune? Would GOP senators dare not to defect, break ranks, to hem in Joe Biden with such rules? 

 

And with Biden consenting to them, won't this make dems look like non-partisan reformers? And would that also not put those two GA senators (and Murkowski) on the spot, at just the moment we want them to squirm?

 

Oh there are many of these reforms that don't have to wait for inauguration! Because they'll either get Senate defections to pass and get Trump's grudging assent... or make them look very, very bad and Democrats very good.

 

== So, what'll Donnie do now? ==


The short answer is "I don't much care what he does!" The civil servants and intel/FBI/military officers etc. who have kept this disease contained and minimized the harm for four years would not have survived concerted attack in a second Trump term. So, they saved us... and now we just saved them. Yay, us.  I figure they'll manage another two months.


Still what'll old Two Scoops do do till the end, beyond raving and flouncing, chewing carpet and shaming himself? Author Rob Sawyer asserts: My guess: within a week, Trump will have left the White House for good, relocating to Mar-a-Lago. And he’ll never make a concession speech.”


Bets? He loves saluting Marines and powerful men and beautiful women calling him sir. And he still has to poison the Resolute Desk.


What will drive him out is when civil servants realize he can no longer get wheels turning in time to actually fire them, at which point they simply ignore him. And soon his political appointees will drift away with armsfulla White House schwag and stationery.


So what happens when he commands a junket and Airforce One and Marine One develop 'engine troubles' so he can't use them as toys? And when the Secret Service stiffs overcharges from TrumpOrg and stops paying for use of golf carts? When staffers turn their backs and wander away from his tantrums...


...that's when he might go Mar-a-Lago for good. That is… until other troubles make him flee to the Black Sea dacha Vlad promised him.


The safest bet? Over the longer run, always bet on DT's egotism. If he stays out of jail or exile, he'll start a TV channel and rebuild his fortunes by selling tickets to rallies that feature bands and raging speech raves... Rant n' Roll!  In which case, he may very well try to establish a new MAGAt party all his own. Do.


On the other hand... the instant a golf guest greets him with an "L" sign on the forehead, he'll head back to the White House with matches and lighter fluid.


== Next Time... many things including... Kamala! ==


 

67 comments:

duncan cairncross said...

Moscow!

The Orange Cockwomble will decamp to Moscow and set himself up as "President in Exile"

Putin knows damn fine that he will never get the $Billion(s) he is owed so he will settle for having a perpetual irritance to the USA parked in one of his Dacha

Zepp Jamieson said...

Well, Doctor, I've been saying right along that we will work together to get Biden into office and Trump out, and it's worked out well. But once the new Congress is sworn in, and Biden finishes fumigating the White House and moves in, then expect strong pressure from the left on such things as universal health care, a decent national living wage, a green new deal, and various other items. We aren't enemies, or even opponents; we just have different priorities and we're both willing to struggle over those priorities.
One immediate concern is the matter of the rotting corpse of the Trump administration. I want Trump and his cronies to stand trial for their deeds, and if fairly and openly found guilty, punished to the fullest extent of the law. One of the worst undermining mistakes Pelosi and Obama made in the early days of his administration was letting Bush and his crowd walk away from their crimes. It may have meant to be a gesture of reconciliation, but it merely looked weak, and emboldened the Republicans for larger and nastier crimes and misdeeds. They need to learn that law and justice apply to them, too.

Larry Hart said...

Dr Brin in the main post:

Play it. And thank you Philadelphia and the spirit of Ben Franklin.



"They're dancing in Chicago,
Philadelphia, P.A.,
In the Motor City,
..."


* * *

reason in the previous comments:

What if Trump and Guiliani are in a sort of prisoner's dilemma, where they are both blackmailing each other.


That just might be true!

* * *

Zepp Jamieson:

One immediate concern is the matter of the rotting corpse of the Trump administration. I want Trump and his cronies to stand trial for their deeds, and if fairly and openly found guilty, punished to the fullest extent of the law. One of the worst undermining mistakes Pelosi and Obama made in the early days of his administration was letting Bush and his crowd walk away from their crimes.


While I want the obvious crimes of Trump and company to be fully prosecuted, I also worry about the same thing President Obama did--that the precedent would lead to prosecutions of outgoing administrations whenever the party flips. Think of how the Republicans have itched for "revenge" for Nixon, or for Robert Bork for that matter. It could be one more step toward banana republicanism, irrespective of whether charges are actually warranted. As to that last part, remember too that something like 45% of Americans apparently believe that this latest election was stolen.

In that sense, I consider Trump fleeing the country (in disgrace) and living permanently in exile to be possibly the best outcome.

Larry Hart said...

Dr Brin, and apologies for not catching this before my previous post:

- Ponder further. Even without PA and Georgia but with NV&AZ, Joe still wins with exactly 270. Alas, nail-biting then resumes, since would only take one faithless elector to throw the election to the House. I'll only believe the win when there's more of a margin than that! Only...

... only in fact I have to wonder if Old Two Scoops's current tantrums might cause the reverse… a number of Trump electors saying “enough” and switching. But to whom? To Biden in a bid to join a winning team? Unlikely. My best guess would be Paul Ryan, the annointed once and future prince-in-waiting.


If a faithless elector can be bribed or threatened into dropping Biden's total from 270 down to 269, it doesn't help if other faithless electors drop Trump's total. The electoral vote isn't "first past the post". If neither candidate has 270 votes, it goes to the House. Thus we have to hope and pray that either Pennsylvania or Georgia stays in the Dem column. Georgia is an unlikely Dem pickup, and if I'm not mistaken, there are still military ballots outstanding which might flip it back to Trump. And Pennsylvania is the state most likely to be dragged out in court because of the conflict between the state supreme court and the USsc.

I swear the news media is loving this continued nail-biter scenario, and they may conspire to make sure elections are like this from now on.

CP said...

I'll repeat something that I mentioned some months ago:

A self pardon would probably be a step to far for the supreme court. So, his best recourse, legally, would probably be to get together with Pence and Roberts, sign pardons of Pence (and anyone else still in his good graces) for "anything and everything," sign a letter of resignation, have Roberts swear in Pence as "president for a month" then have Pence sign a pardon of Trump (and, later, anyone that Trump forgot) for "anything and everything." There's no way that alternative could be questioned under the constitution and it leaves them "free and clear" regarding federal charges. They'd still have to face state charges and civil suits. But, most of the former are in New York and he's officially moved to Florida where the state administration is sympathetic. With that aid and unlimited lawyers he can probably stay out of jail for years. If, in the end, that strategy fails he can still abscond to a country of his choice that lacks an extradition treaty with the US.

Of course, it would be perceived as an act of betrayal/cowardice by some of his supporters and an admission of guilt by others. And, it would amount to an implicit concession (which is something I'm not sure he's capable of...).

However, all in all, I hope he does take that off-ramp. It would cost him some followers weakening his movement going forward (though most would manage to rationalize it...). And, it would spare the Biden administration from having to make decisions regarding federal prosecutions. Instead, they could just concentrate on non-criminal investigations to "clarify the record"...

Attani said...

Is Trump smart enough and emotionally mature enough to go to Russia?

duncan cairncross said...

The prosecutors involved (like NY) need to make it very clear that Trump will be charged with massive crimes as soon as he leaves office

THAT should be enough to scare the toddler in chief to flee to Russia

reason said...

If Trump decamps, my bet would UAE.

Rud Merriam said...

A way for Biden to change the Senate is to find a couple GOP Senators who would like jobs in his Administration. Sec of Energy might be one nice slot. There might even be a couple who'd be interested in doing a good job since it gets them out of the firing line.

They have to be from states with Dem Governors who have the power to appoint Dem replacements.

George Carty said...

CP:

Paradoxically, the corona virus may be the reason Republican losses didn't extend down-ballot. I recall studies in which just reading about death (so they were "thinking about mortality") shifted people's positions significantly to the right on surveys. Also, temporary increases in religiosity correlate, historically, with pandemics. That background mood may have saved the Republicans down-ballot while costing Trump the presidency since his mismanagement and lack of empathy made the pandemic worse. Without it, the results might well have been reversed: Trump winning reelection while the Democrats won broadly down-ballot.

I suspect that the GOP may also have gained from economically precarious voters who saw the Democrats as the Lockdown Party.

US Democrats tend to want the US to be more like Europe, and I expect they'd have walked the election had it been 4 months earlier, when it looked like Europe's lockdowns had worked. As it is now though, Europe's attempts to reopen in the summer resulted in a resurgence of the virus and many European countries are now in lockdown again, and this will have seriously undermined Democratic claims that Trump was uniquely ill-suited to handling the pandemic.

All of the real success stories of Covid seem to be located in the Asia/Pacific region: some argue that this is because people in that part of the world already had partial immunity, while others argue that it is because the highly conformist cultures of East Asia are inherently better equipped to deal with pandemics (plus most of those countries will have been traumatised by SARS and/or MERS in a way that Western countries didn't: it was MERS in 2015 that triggered South Korea to turn itself into a virtual panopticon).

China defeated the virus by a means impossible in the West: they incarcerated in quarantine facilities anyone who tested positive or showed suspicious symptoms along with their contacts. If tried in the US that would immediately result in a hot civil war, as millions of paranoid gun nuts saw the "FEMA concentration camps" springing into action.

And the other Asia/Pacific success stories (including the ones of Western cultural heritage: Australia and New Zealand) were only able to make it work by requiring all foreign visitors to quarantine for two weeks: which in practice meant a near-total shutdown of foreign travel, as very few visitors have two weeks to spare in that manner. While Japan had its "sakoku" era under the Tokugawa shogunate, and Korea was also traditionally a hermit kingdom (described as "swaegug" which looks like it could be cognate with "sakoku" in Japanese) this kind of isolationism is alien to the Western mentality.

Der Oger said...

@Larry Hart: "While I want the obvious crimes of Trump and company to be fully prosecuted, I also worry about the same thing President Obama did--that the precedent would lead to prosecutions of outgoing administrations whenever the party flips."

I'd say that it is an absolute necessity that they stand trial. Letting them go would set the wrong signal - that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with his criminal behavior, that there are no consequences for attempting to destroy democracy and installing a fascist regime. At least, there should be a thorough, transparent investigation and the "Truth and Peace Commission" suggested by Dr. Brin.

Also, I might point out, that the treatment immigrants had to endure would constitute as a Crime Against Humanity over here, and many would face harsh sentences.

Of course, tensions might rise. It might polarize the society further ... but then again, to use the healing metaphor, cancer cannot be healed by prayers and rose water.

On the other hand, Biden could use the fear of prosecution to advance political goals. He could send an (indirect) message to McConnell that he might not support investigations to the fullest extent ... if certain key progressive legislations provided by the House are supported by him. If not ... we see each other at Nuremberg.

Der Oger said...

And in other news:

BionTech and Pfizer just announced having developed a vaccine that provides a 90% protection against Covid-19.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/09/health/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-effective/index.html



Darrell E said...

Larry Hart said...

"While I want the obvious crimes of Trump and company to be fully prosecuted, I also worry about the same thing President Obama did--that the precedent would lead to prosecutions of outgoing administrations whenever the party flips. Think of how the Republicans have itched for "revenge" for Nixon, or for Robert Bork for that matter. It could be one more step toward banana republicanism, irrespective of whether charges are actually warranted."

Setting a precedent of prosecuting presidents and other high level administration probably is a valid worry. However, letting these people off free regardless of how badly they've behaved is, I think, and equally dangerous precedent. When there are no consequences things always get worse as time goes on. Just as we've seen over the past 25+ years here in the US, until we are closer to losing any pretense of an enlightened democratic republic than we've ever been.

So, prosecute, don't prosecute, both options suck. Both, IMO, can lead in the same, bad, direction. But it seems to me that it is very important, perhaps vital, to dig up all the dirt and expose it. How to do that in a way that doesn't lead to a dishonest tit for tat, I don't know. The RP has already been relentlessly pursuing bogus investigations of DP presidents and high level administration for decades. I'm sure they could increase their antics given the proper provocation.

Larry Hart said...

A real dilemma...

https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2020/Pres/Maps/Nov09.html#item-7

On the other hand, Biden knows that creating a precedent that each new president gets to prosecute the previous one would not be good for democracy. That said, letting a president get away with breaking the law isn't great for democracy either. It will be a tough call for him.

Bill_in_the Middle said...

Chris Ladd had a thoughtful essay on his Political Orphans blog yesterday concerning a possible path forward by the Democrats and easing the gridlock that a GOP Senate is likely to implement. The essay is "Democrats Should Weaponize Federalism" and the link is: https://www.politicalorphans.com/democrats-should-weaponize-federalism/

Larry Hart said...

Der Oger:

Of course, tensions might rise. It might polarize the society further ... but then again, to use the healing metaphor, cancer cannot be healed by prayers and rose water.


You obviously don't live in America. :)


BionTech and Pfizer just announced having developed a vaccine that provides a 90% protection against Covid-19.


And it had nothing to do with Trump's "Warp Speed" initiative.

By the way, happy "Tear Down This Wall" day, or whatever it's actually called over there. Hopefully, we can do the same over here soon. The wall on the southern border and the one around the White House.

Larry Hart said...

@Bill_in_the Middle,

Heh! That Political Orphans post doesn't pull punches, does it?

...
There’s a little-noted firewall protecting Republican politicians from the consequences of their rhetoric. Embedded protections at the federal level mean red-state voters never feel the full consequences of electing idiots. No one pays for the stupidity of Republican economic policy because Congressional stalemate and the Federal bureaucracy block Republicans from creating the dystopia of their dreams.
...

David Brin said...

Rud & others were thinking judo! Here's a coming post from me: How to get your cabinet choices confirmed while undermining the Trump Doctrine of using “acting” officials. On Daily Kos, a fellow named “Daddy Bartholomew” proposed a way for Joe to judo Moscow Mitch into letting the Senate confirm cabinet nominees. It’s terrifically simple. Biden should put forward TWO slates. The first would consist of agency and department heads he wants to see confirmed - consisting of a broadly diverse array of highly competent, honest, decent (hence non-Trumpian) folks, including some best-elements from sane American conservatism. The second, separate slate would consist of acting officers, all of them similarly honest and competent… but chosen to be offensive to deep-red mania!
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/11/7/1993708/-So-McConnell-won-t-give-proper-consideration-to-Biden-s-cabinet-picks-eh?utm_campaign=trending

“For instance, I suspect Al Gore would be willing to be Acting Director of the EPA for awhile. I wonder if Robert Mueller would be willing to be Acting Attorney General? Might Hillary Clinton be willing to be Acting Secretary of State? Barrack Obama as Acting Director of National Intelligence? I kind of like Diane Ravitch as Acting Secretary of Education, Paul Krugman as Acting Secretary of Treasury, Anthony Fauci as Acting Secretary of Health and Human Services (although he is probably critically needed in the current Covid battles), Alexander Vindeman as Acting Secretary of Defense…”

Republicans have both openly and implicitly accepted the Trump Doctrine, utterly abandoning in principle and effect the right of the Senate to give advice and consent to acting officials. If they want that power back, fine! Then act on the formal nominees promptly, to replace the acting heads you dislike. This might strike some as not going high when they go low. Tough! It would strike millions - including many MAGAs - as being both hilariously and surgically effective.

Bartholomew concludes “The trick is to find people who are not currently filling critical needs, would do a superlative job, and would force McConnell to allow Biden to fill his posts quickly with the (more consensus-acceptable) people he wants. And if nothing else, it would be delicious fun.”

Zepp Jamieson said...

My wife had the same idea of Bartholomew. Vicious, nasty, depraved. I like the way you think.
Seriously, I think that's a terrific idea!
Been doing on wager thing on FB with Trumpkins howling about stolen votes and dead voters and all that. It's very efficient. Right wingers run away when you offer to bet money on their assertions.

Robert said...

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla called the Covid-19 vaccine "the greatest medical advance" in the world's last hundred years

Has he forgotten polio? Measles? Penicillin?

Der Oger said...

Larry Hart: "And it had nothing to do with Trump's "Warp Speed" initiative."

Biontech took money (about 445 Million $) - not from the White House, but from the German Federal government. They dubbed their Project "Lightspeed".

Curevac (the company Trump wanted to buy back in March, but was thwarted by the federal government, the EU commission and at least one German technoligarch) is somewhat behind, but talks about making good progress.

scidata said...

Scared, frantic trogs careen in panic from fascism to nihilism to utter surrender. End-of-days Gantrys and psychopaths wail and flail. Projection floods the media.


Meanwhile, Crew Dragon, Starship, and JWST prepare for launch. Laboratories calmly announce 90% effective COVID vaccines. And brave Johnny hits the coding books.


Happiness is knowing which side you're on. Contentment is knowing why and being able to explain it rationally.



matthew said...

I'd like to point out that the battle in Georgia is far from over. Both Perdue and Loeffler made big stock trades on insider COVID information. Both of them are remarkably unpopular in the state. And we have the secret weapon known as Stacy Abrams on the ground as well. Send money, stat!

As to the discussion of not prosecuting the voluminous crimes of the Trump administration and GOP? Hell no! HELL NO!

Prosecuting is good political strategy. It is popular and it paints the GOP *very* badly. It forces them to stay on defense. It forces them to commit *more* crime to try and cover it up. SCOTUS judges have the potential to fall. Republican Senators have the potential to fall.

Prosecution shows the nation that the Dems respect the rule of law, and that is should be applied evenly to all.

Prosecution is exactly the right move.

Plus, it gives leverage if leverage is needed. Ongoing prosecution of a couple of hundred high-level GOPpers is a hell of a bargaining chip for the needed reforms to ensure that the next time the GOP wins we don't end up worse than this time.

Please, for once, can't the Dems to the right thing and step up to the knife fight?

David Brin said...

There is a way to prosecute the worst Trumpite criminals without triggering assumptions of political vendetta. Create a federal grand jury that's especially vetted to be representative across the country, including non-fanatic, ex military Republicans. Create SEVERAL and have them 'check each other's work."

Alfred Differ said...

Biden could safely point out that State-level cases are further along, so in the early days he will direct the DoJ to be supportive of their efforts if requested. At the same time, once his new AG gets to look at Mueller's team's work, they can push that stuff through.

What gets 'reviewed' is the set of possible cases SDNY pushed or might have pushed had they been allowed to do so. Asking SDNY to present that material would be done on inauguration day, but time should be given so SDNY isn't rushed or forced to give the appearance that they were prepping while Barr was still their boss.

TCB said...

I have contributed $50 to Stacey Abrams' organization Fair Fight and $25 each to the senate candidates Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock.

TCB said...

From Dr. Brin's comment above:

I wonder if Robert Mueller would be willing to be Acting Attorney General?

Not only fuck no, but fuck to the power of hell no! Unlike Dr. Fauci, Mueller could have done a much better job. There are better options. Better options who are not Republicans. Biden doesn't need to fill his cabinet with Berniecrats, but no. more. Republicans.

David Brin said...

Thanks TCB. Georgia’s spectacularly horrible two Republican Senators, who proudly claim politics “like Attila the Hun,” are now in blind panic after being forced into a January 6 runoff to decide control of the US Senate. Prepare for the most expensive and filthiest race in US history. Only today both joined in hurling venom at the Georgia elections commissioner and the Secretary of State (SoS) - both Republicans - for their failings leading to near ties in the first round.

To be clear, the SoS in almost any red state is almost surely the most corrupt official, hired (as was Postmaster DeJoie) to do one job, cheat like mad for the GOP. This fulmination by Loeffler & Perdue might be viewed as punishment for failure… or else a sign that the state party slipped up, letting honest people in to do honest jobs. Either way, this panic rage may be counter-productive.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/09/loeffler-perdue-georgia-secretary-state-resign-435484

I’ll be offering soon some judo moves that the Dems could do right now to help sway this situation, cornering Loeffler and Perdue in a lose-lose position.

But till then, well, we still haven’t had our Appomattox and probably won’t for months or years, so we’re still needed on the lines! I have contributed $100 to Stacey Abrams' organization Fair Fight and $25 each to the senate candidates Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock.

https://fairfight.com
https://secure.actblue.com/donate/jon-ossoff-1
https://secure.actblue.com/donate/warnock-for-georgia-1

David Brin said...

PS if you set up an ActBlue account once, you can use it for any cause or campaign they cover.

Acacia H. said...

How odd. I'd posted earlier but it's not appeared either in back comments here, or in the previous blog post (I just checked). I think your Spam Blocker and releaser is eating posts, Dr. Brin.

Acacia

TCB said...

PS if you set up an ActBlue account once, you can use it for any cause or campaign they cover.

Looking at the reply emails, it looks like that's exactly how they handled mine after I did the Fair Fight contribution. The next two were not much more than one click.

David Brin said...

Acacia I just approved three and just two showed up here.

Acacia H. said...

It's definitely hungry. Folks might want to save copies of what they want to post here, just in case the spam blocker eats stuff. ^^;;

------------

My flatmate and I had a discussion concerning whether or not Federal Elected Officials should be required to pass a cognitive and basic reading/math tests. They argue that this is the best way to prevent another Trump. I argue that this risks a two-tier system of tests where minorities are given hard tests and old white men given a second-grade exam.

What are your thoughts on this?

Acacia

Tim H. said...

Given a "Weaponized Federalism", how long would working class voters retain the right in red states, regardless of ethnicity? Entertaining as this is, I suspect it would mainly knock larger holes in the ship of state.

David Brin said...

One cheat scenario bruited about has been for Republican legislature to over-rule the voters' will and simply declare their own slate of Trump supporting electors. This article avows that it might conceivably happen at some point, but it's too later after Election Day.

https://www.justsecurity.org/73274/no-state-legislatures-cannot-overrule-the-popular-vote/?fbclid=IwAR3A6hx5rGO2cVjxtlDEJzXioGlk3-vn8ik45bboIxO4pQiq0lILisoXzWI

David Brin said...

Acacia, far better to have em face-off in televised challenges.

Acacia H. said...

And your thoughts as to why this is so? I mean, Trump has shown that televised challenges doesn't always work. Clinton was far smarter and knew what she was talking about. But Trump still won in his election. People decided a dunce would be better as President than a smart woman.

Acacia

Alfred Differ said...

Acacia,

Must as it appeals to me, a test for candidates to pass before they can be on a ballot will get used much like a poll tax did. Can't have THEM on the ballot, therefore the test will be biased.

It's an old observation that IQ tests are better at detecting cultural educational expectations than they are at measuring intelligence. It's like those old calipers that measured the size of your skull, but were marked in IQ units. Big heads are smart people right? Works until you encounter people with big heads who are really stupid.

I can think of a half dozen ways to bias ballot entry tests without breaking a sweat. What I can't do is think of a bullet proof way to word requirements such that they prevent it... except for one very simple way. Let a lot of people look at the person and decide. Essentially, take advantage of the "We know it when we see it" effect. Might as well put them on the ballot if you do that, though.



The OLDEST defense against idiots on ballots was our 'Party Boss' system. The Boss knew an idiot when he saw them.* Sure. Lots of opportunity for corruption in that approach, so we shifted to primary elections to spread the number of decision makers. THAT isn't working as well as we hoped. Joe Citizen isn't performing the same function as the Boss. Joe Citizen really can't. That was the whole POINT of having a Boss.

* There IS a perfectly good reason why Kamala Harris got to know Willie Brown.

duncan cairncross said...

Hi Acacia
I like the Chinese approach - you have to jump though some loops to be able to be nominated

Basically if you don't go to the various disasters and help out then you are not eligible to be nominated
And there is a dedicated phone line for people to "dob in" politicians and party members who appear to be living "above their income"

David Brin said...

Televised side by side medical/ psych/ knowledge tests

Alfred Differ said...

Knowledge tests?

Challenging. I don't expect my politicians to be deeply knowledgeable about much. They have to be pretty decent and teaming up with those who are instead.

I dunno.

There's also the issue that someone CAN be knowledgeable and still stumble with something like "What's an Aleppo?"

We know knowledgeable people when we see them, right? Well... not so much I think. A lot of that is belief on the part of the listener. A lot.

I dunno.

Much as I hate to admit it, the Party Boss system solved this problem... at a helluva price.

Der Oger said...

Dr. Brin: "Televised side by side medical/ psych/ knowledge tests"

Yes, plus a live action scenario dealing with a simulated situation or crisis. Make a game show of it.


@Weaponized Federalism: While I find the idea enticing, it might lead to a stabilization of the conservative electorate (and thus, to a deepening of the split).

Two examples:
a) During the first decades of the Reunion, Germany's new federal states suffered a high loss of young (below 40) and well-educated people to the western federal states.
The older Population (40+ years old) is in the majority in many counties. All eastern federal states have a higher turnout for far-right parties (making it the "South" of Germany, so to speak).
b) There is a massive brain drain in many newer EU countries, especially the healthcare sector. In Poland and Hungary, the situation is exacerbated by illiberal governments, though the main share of immigrants is from Romania (as of 2019).
These people will lack in the electorate of the respective country, thus, they lean conservative.

Darrell E said...

Alfred Differ said...
"Acacia,

I can think of a half dozen ways to bias ballot entry tests without breaking a sweat. What I can't do is think of a bullet proof way to word requirements such that they prevent it... except for one very simple way. Let a lot of people look at the person and decide. Essentially, take advantage of the "We know it when we see it" effect. Might as well put them on the ballot if you do that, though.
"

I tend to agree with you that ballot entry tests are fraught with danger, but the "We know it when we see it" effect? Seems to me it is even more flawed. That got us Trump. Just shy of 50% of voters don't know it when they see it when it comes to Trump. And that inability of many people to reliably assess the character of others has led to the rise of many horrible leaders.

Larry Hart said...

Sarcastic columnist Rex Hupke states the obvious...

https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/rex-huppke/ct-trump-biden-election-votes-empathy-liberals-transition-huppke-20201109-rv3f6tb73ndgjp4bdiac3zwlly-story.html

If one thing’s clear in the wake of President-elect Joe Biden’s presumptive victory over President Donald Trump, it’s that liberals like me need to reach out to people who spent the past four years dehumanizing us and show empathy.

Immediately.
...
After all, I can count on no hands the zero times over the past four years Trump supporters reached out to me in an attempt to bridge the political divide between us. And thank goodness for that, as it might have torn them away from tweeting “HAH! TRIGGERED!” at liberals who were feeling truly hurt by or worried about the actions of the Trump administration.
...
After the 2016 election, when Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million but still won the Electoral College, we were told it was the duty of all liberals to better understand the forgotten men and women who supported Trump.

Now, four years later, the 75.5 million Americans who rejected Donald Trump must again step forward and work to better understand the majority 71 million Americans who embraced him.

Because that’s how math, and the rules of Republican fairness, works.

Robert said...

My flatmate and I had a discussion concerning whether or not Federal Elected Officials should be required to pass a cognitive and basic reading/math tests. They argue that this is the best way to prevent another Trump. I argue that this risks a two-tier system of tests where minorities are given hard tests and old white men given a second-grade exam.

I think you're being too obvious. The test could easily be the same for both, as long as it was continually tweaked so that minorities did poorly, by the inclusion of items that assumed a certain cultural background. Look at the SAT as an example, where every time minority scores approach white scores the test is modified and minority scores drop again.

(Personally I think the SAT sucks as an assessment of academic knowledge/skills. A former colleague used to take it in subjects he didn't know, in languages he didn't understand, and still regularly scored over 60%. When 2/3 of the marks for a test come from 'test-taking skills' then the test is mostly about them and not what it it purportedly testing.)

Jon S. said...

Matthew, I don't know that I'd call Abrams a "secret" weapon. She's a powerful weapon, to be sure, and has shown that absent someone (probably) abusing his office as Secretary of State to rig the vote to elect himself Governor she almost certainly would be sitting in that office now. If anyone can lead an effort that brings these two runoffs to a successful conclusion, she can.

----

There's one problem with your commission suggestions, Dr. Brin - you seem to assume that because you're putting people who call themselves Republicans on those panels, that will garner some measure of respect from the right wing. However, I think they've amply demonstrated that they'll just call such patriots "RINOs" and proceed to treat them exactly the same way they'd treat a panel appointed by Bernie himself.

I mean, the basic concept isn't bad, just don't keep expecting instant buy-in from the shambling corpse of the Republican Party that currently holds power.

Atomsmith said...

Amendment idea: Every president must stand trial at the end of their term, where they will face criminal liability for breach of public trust, from some sort of unassailably diverse panel like what Dr. Brin describes above.

Too Dystopian? It would certainly scare away those who were in it for the wrong reasons!

Also, adherents of unitary executive "theory" would need to concentrate not only the entire power of the Executive Branch in the single executive, but the complete legal liability as well. (I mean, they would need to in order to remain consistent, which is not always valued.)

TCB said...

I am ABSOLUTELY convinced that we need tests for anyone who wants to be in charge of anything important (that includes politicians, top military brass, and CEO's too!)

Not IQ tests. No. They all need to pass Hare psychopathy tests, or whatever improvement comes along. Benedict Donald would surely have failed. Hitler would fail. Much as I can't stand them, Reagan and the Bushes would probably pass... probably.

Naturally, the weak point of such a system would then be the honesty of the test admins, who must also have passed the test, and then, I'd suggest, been randomly selected from a large candidate pool.

Now comes the kicker: I suspect, but cannot prove, that if a worldwide popular movement instituted this system in every nation, we could actually, really abolish war.

In fact, I do not think any other way exists.

I am further convinced that a worldwide popular movement

scidata said...

Two of the most powerful/frightening/fraught words in criminal law:
"Accessory to"

Larry Hart said...

TCB:

I am further convinced that a worldwide popular movement


"He must have died while writing it." :)

* * *

Atomsmith:

Also, adherents of unitary executive "theory" would need to concentrate not only the entire power of the Executive Branch in the single executive, but the complete legal liability as well.


I've thought for a while that we need separate national debts for Democrats and Republicans. That is, Republicans don't get to run up the debt and then claim that Democrats are broke when they get into power. The accounts should be separate.

I fully realize that I haven't begun to explain how this would actually work.

TCB said...

Musta got distracted, judging by that last sentence frag above. Most likely I backtracked to edit a previous sentence and overlooked that last bit.

Larry Hart said...

Needing no further comment...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/10/opinion/trump-election-concede.html

...
epublicans have been working tirelessly to make voting harder for many years, and especially this year, for precisely this reason. They knew that Mr. Trump was unpopular and that Mr. Biden would probably win if more people voted. When voter suppression failed, they had only two options: accept their fate like serious and responsible people do, or claim that any loss they suffered was by definition the result of fraud.

Once again, they picked door number two. This is the problem with getting comfortable with the perks of minority rule, as Republicans have over the past several decades. It’s not just that you can ignore what most Americans want. It’s that you genuinely believe that there’s no way your opponent can win — much less by an absolute majority — without cheating.

That attitude is fatal to a democracy, the survival of which depends, above all, on the loser accepting the results. The Democrats, along with most of the rest of the world, understand this. One party alone is responsible for dragging the nation to this perilous place.

Alfred Differ said...

Darrell E,

That got us Trump.

I respectfully disagree. The EC got us Trump. The popular vote was quite strong against him. In some states, staggeringly against him. We made up for the others, but it doesn't count in the EC. As the Framers intended I might add.

"We know it when we see it" does NOT keep us from being non-rational actors. A corrupt Boss is more likely to be rational than we are. That's sorta the point with corruption. WE make our choices based more on emotion than reason and it is VERY hard to dislodge the metaphoric frames we use to give meaning to evidence.

The real problem with televised tests lies with us... not the candidates. Frames can't be negated. Nixon said he was not a crook, but when he did we heard 'I am a crook.' We knew damn well he was. Trump is too, but that obviously doesn't discourage 70 million voters.

A Party Boss would know what to do though. Kick the fool out and threaten to stop bribes so people avoid him. If that didn't work, bury him out back. If that didn't work, find him some harmless job out of sight. MOST important, don't let him get on stage. It was a failure of a NY GOP Boss that allowed Teddy Roosevelt in. TR had money to get around early hurdles, but he was correctly recognized by the GOP folks for the threat he was to them.

Alfred Differ said...

TCB,

I'm supportive, but I don't think that will work as you imagine. The blunt truth is that we do not agree on what qualifies as pathological.

For example, I'm fairly certain that religious belief opens the door to a particular monster most visible among monotheists who imagine a God capable of/responsible for everything. In the limit, a good responsible for more and more lifts from our shoulders the consequences of our moral choices. Scholars will point out that this isn't true among believers highly educated in their faiths, but most believers aren't taught to that level. Most don't even try. Their metaphoric frames learned in grade school are good enough.

I'm also fairly certain I won't convince the vast majority of humanity that I'm right and such people really shouldn't be installed as powerful leaders. Lower levels might be relatively safe, but they'll attract attention if visible to the public.

duncan cairncross said...

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2020/11/its-not-a-coup-yet/

Pentagon finally confirms near total decapitation of civilian leadership in the last 24 hours. Secretary of Defense Esper fired Monday, the top Pentagon Policy official, top Defense Department intelligence official, and chief of staff to the Defense Secretary all out today

Der Oger said...

@Alfred Differ:"The EC got us Trump."

Among a multitude of other reasons, I assume.

He is the symptom, not the disease.

Darrell E said...

Alfred Differ said...
"Darrell E,

"That got us Trump."

I respectfully disagree. The EC got us Trump. The popular vote was quite strong against him. In some states, staggeringly against him.
"

Strongly against Trump is not what comes to mind when I think of the 2016 election results. That 2.1 % fewer people voted for Trump than the other choice doesn't indicate to me that people are any good at "knowing it when they see it." If people were any good at knowing it when they see it Trump would never have become the RP candidate in the first place, and if he somehow did anyway the popular vote would not have been close enough for an EC win to happen.

A significant percentage of the population are susceptible to being conned. Especially when other things, like peer pressure and ideological commitment, are also strong factors. In this it appears I am more pessimistic than you.

Of course, then there's the people that pretty clearly saw Trump for what he was and voted for him anyway, or even because of that. I don't know how many of those there are, but I know there are some. They know it when they see it and they like it. So maybe you are right after all.

TCB said...

@ Alfred Differ, re: the religious exception: The only good news on that front is that more and more people seem to be tired of religion. I read that 3/4 of evangelical Christians vote for Trump in 2020; they are all in on fanaticism. But they were not numerous enough to win...

Also, a feature of the sort of testing I advocate is that it can't be 100% accurate, and it doesn't need to be. If it thins the sociopaths enough to prevent their assembly into mutually supporting cliques in power, that's good enough. Also, passing the test once and then misbehaving ought to put a politician on probation and re-testing. The important thing is the few bad apples who get past the first sieve will be surrounded, outnumbered, and neutralized in their actions by honest people.

Lastly, one of the great disillusionments of my life is that I generally can't convince other people that water is wet, unless they are already inclined to agree. I guess this is just one of those "life sucks and then you die" things.

Larry Hart said...

TCB:

one of the great disillusionments of my life is that I generally can't convince other people that water is wet, unless they are already inclined to agree. I guess this is just one of those "life sucks and then you die" things.


The good thing is that reality is not subject to a vote. It doesn't matter whether you can convince them or not. Water is wet.

George Orwell said essentially that those who won't recognize reality will run into it sooner or later, usually on a battlefield. That's a paraphrase, but pretty close to his actual words. And I've been saying all week that the Mitch McConnells and Sean Hannitys and Mike Pompeos of the world who are apparently trying to will into existence a reality in which Trump won the election are about to run into reality, on a battlefield if not before that.

scidata said...

Biden should simply pull a Lincoln and start throwing around some names from the other party as potential selections. Two can play at ring kissing game.

matthew said...

All this discussion about testing candidates misses the real test - the fourth estate. Media are supposed to do the vetting / digging / reporting. They are enshrined in our constitution for this reason, among many others.

But media failed *horribly* with Trump and continue to fail horribly with his corrupt GOP. I canceled my NY Times subscription before the 2016 election in disgust at their toadying coverage of him and the GOP. The news rooms at *every* US major need to be cleaned out in a very big way. Access journalism, both-sides-ism, and out and out corporate sleaze, every one of them. Yes, all of them.

The failure of the fourth estate is the largest failure of our time.

TCB said...

Matthew, the failure of the fourth estate is the triumph of capitalist monopolization. The founders of this country would have gone into a rage at the idea of fewer than ten incredibly wealthy owners controlling all major media. And nowadays we face the specter of fascism, which is ultimately capitalism's response to the threat of popular reform or revolution. The media moguls will choose tyranny rather than have their empires broken up.

Acacia H. said...

@metthew - the problem isn't with the fourth estate, exactly. It's with the consolidation of mass media under the wallet of a select few billionaires and corporations. And there is a solution to this which would easily allow for the news media to lose its corporatist habit: require all news media organizations to become nonprofit organizations. If the "news" is not nonprofit, it doesn't get press badges or the like. It doesn't get 1st Amendment protection.

News organizations operate under an unhealthy system of needing greater and greater profits for each year. That means increased viewership or readership. Eliminating the profit aspect instead makes it so that the news can focus on the news instead of sensationalism to draw in readers and viewers. And that will fix most of what ails the news these days.

Acacia

Terry W said...

There's a broken link on your "100" moments list.

My Dreamwidth poll has a lot of options for where Trump might be during the inauguration ceremony in 2021. My favorite is still that he'll have escaped to Russia (or a few other countries) for asylum.

TCB said...

Acacia, economic growth year after year, without end, is not even theoretically possible!

A physicist tries to explain this to an economist.

David Brin said...

onward
onward

Bob said...

I tend not to get involved in political discussions, but DANG! You described Episiarchs long before one was elected to power... He really seems to be denying the very physical fabric of the universe itself and attempting to bend it to his will. 0.o