Looks like Dave Brooks REALLY likes the crease in Cigar Store's pantsuits. Dave knows full well that she'd be a REALLY horrible president with REALLY horrible policies.
For many, supporting Warren is too high a price to pay, even for ousting Trump. “There is no universe where I will ever vote for Donald Trump, and there is no universe where I could ever vote for Elizabeth Warren,” Jennifer Horn, a former chairwoman of the New Hampshire G.O.P., told The Washington Examiner.
Why is that, Jen?
First, there are Warren’s policies. On trade, she’s a protectionist. Her 10-year, $34 trillion health care plan isn’t paid for. Her student debt cancellation plan is a handout to the upper middle class. Her campaign seems to not acknowledge the inevitable trade-off between economic growth and high spending, high taxes and high regulation.
That can't be good. Anything else?
Second, she’s one of the few Democrats who could actually lose. As Yascha Mounk notes in The Atlantic, Democrats won in 2018 because they won back a lot of nonpartisan suburban office park workers who found moderates they could vote for. When you remind independents of Democratic support for abolishing private health insurance and decriminalizing unauthorized border crossing — two key Warren policies — they become six percentage points less likely to vote for the Democrats. Trump will tell voters: You may despise me, but she’ll destroy the economy.
Which is probably right.
Third, a Warren presidency would be deeply polarizing and probably unsuccessful. Warren’s policy ideas would make any progressive-moderate coalition impossible. She’d try to govern with her 40 percent partisan base, just as Trump has, which is no way to pass big legislation.
Like, oh, I don't know, moving America's embassy in Israel to Jerusalem? Because that's what basically changed my mind about Trump. Interesting experience, having American politicians who actually do stuff, who actually accomplish things now and then, rather than relentlessly doing nothing other than talking about doing stuff and accomplishing things now and then.
Maybe.
I'm funny that way. But this is where the "And yet" goes.
And yet, if it comes to Trump vs. Warren in a general election, the only plausible choice is to support Warren. Over the past month Donald Trump has given us fresh reminders of the unique and exceptional ways he corrupts American life.
Dave? You just now gave us a laundry list of reasons why Cigar Store would be the most horrible president the United States has ever had yet we still have to vote for her because the Orange Guy "has given us fresh reminders of the unique and exceptional ways he corrupts American life," except that you won't say what any of those "unique and exceptional ways" are.
You’re either part of removing that corruption or you are not. When your nation’s political system is in danger, staying home and not voting is not a responsible option.
Does anybody besides me read that as anything other than complete and unadulterated scorn for the American electorate? For all practical purposes, Dave seems to suggest that American political life is "corrupt" because Donald Trump won in 2016 and for no other plausible reason.
And why did Trump win in 2016, Dave? Because conservative Americans stopped listening to "conservative" GOP cognoscenti like Jonah Goldberg, Dave French, Max Boot, Jenny Rubin, Charming Billy or Dave Brooks, who'd vouchsafed them John McCain and Mitt Romney in successive presidential elections, and opted for someone who could actually...you know...
Win?
Just tossing it out there, Dave.
For many, supporting Warren is too high a price to pay, even for ousting Trump. “There is no universe where I will ever vote for Donald Trump, and there is no universe where I could ever vote for Elizabeth Warren,” Jennifer Horn, a former chairwoman of the New Hampshire G.O.P., told The Washington Examiner.
Why is that, Jen?
First, there are Warren’s policies. On trade, she’s a protectionist. Her 10-year, $34 trillion health care plan isn’t paid for. Her student debt cancellation plan is a handout to the upper middle class. Her campaign seems to not acknowledge the inevitable trade-off between economic growth and high spending, high taxes and high regulation.
That can't be good. Anything else?
Second, she’s one of the few Democrats who could actually lose. As Yascha Mounk notes in The Atlantic, Democrats won in 2018 because they won back a lot of nonpartisan suburban office park workers who found moderates they could vote for. When you remind independents of Democratic support for abolishing private health insurance and decriminalizing unauthorized border crossing — two key Warren policies — they become six percentage points less likely to vote for the Democrats. Trump will tell voters: You may despise me, but she’ll destroy the economy.
Which is probably right.
Third, a Warren presidency would be deeply polarizing and probably unsuccessful. Warren’s policy ideas would make any progressive-moderate coalition impossible. She’d try to govern with her 40 percent partisan base, just as Trump has, which is no way to pass big legislation.
Like, oh, I don't know, moving America's embassy in Israel to Jerusalem? Because that's what basically changed my mind about Trump. Interesting experience, having American politicians who actually do stuff, who actually accomplish things now and then, rather than relentlessly doing nothing other than talking about doing stuff and accomplishing things now and then.
Maybe.
I'm funny that way. But this is where the "And yet" goes.
And yet, if it comes to Trump vs. Warren in a general election, the only plausible choice is to support Warren. Over the past month Donald Trump has given us fresh reminders of the unique and exceptional ways he corrupts American life.
Dave? You just now gave us a laundry list of reasons why Cigar Store would be the most horrible president the United States has ever had yet we still have to vote for her because the Orange Guy "has given us fresh reminders of the unique and exceptional ways he corrupts American life," except that you won't say what any of those "unique and exceptional ways" are.
You’re either part of removing that corruption or you are not. When your nation’s political system is in danger, staying home and not voting is not a responsible option.
Does anybody besides me read that as anything other than complete and unadulterated scorn for the American electorate? For all practical purposes, Dave seems to suggest that American political life is "corrupt" because Donald Trump won in 2016 and for no other plausible reason.
And why did Trump win in 2016, Dave? Because conservative Americans stopped listening to "conservative" GOP cognoscenti like Jonah Goldberg, Dave French, Max Boot, Jenny Rubin, Charming Billy or Dave Brooks, who'd vouchsafed them John McCain and Mitt Romney in successive presidential elections, and opted for someone who could actually...you know...
Win?
Just tossing it out there, Dave.
11 comments:
"except that you won't say what any of those "unique and exceptional ways" are."
Sure he does:
"Last week, Trump all but greenlighted the ethnic cleansing of Kurds without an ounce of remorse. He normalizes dishonesty and valorizes cruelty. His letter to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reminds us yet again that we have a president whose professional competence is at kindergarten level. Once a nation has lost its heart, mind and soul, it is very hard to get these things back.
Furthermore, Trump is an unprecedented threat to democratic institutions. Over the past few years, I’ve thought the progressive fears of incipient American fascism were vastly overblown. But, especially over the past month, Trump has worked overtime to validate those fears and to raise the horrifying specter of what he’ll be like if he is given a second term and is vindicated, unhinged and unwell.
In their book “How Democracies Die,” Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt argue that authoritarians undermine democracy in several ways. They reject the democratic rules of the game, the unwritten norms we rely upon to make the political system work. They deny the legitimacy of their political opponents, using extreme language to deny them standing as co-citizens. They tolerate or even encourage violence, threatening to take legal action against critics in rival parties.
Trump has been guilty of all three sins, and given a second term he will feel free to stomp where up until now he has merely tread."
Brooks obviously can't enumerate all the ways Trump corrupts American life in one short op-ed piece, but he does point anyone with eyes to see in the right direction.
--"has given us fresh reminders of the unique and exceptional ways he corrupts American life," except that you won't say what any of those "unique and exceptional ways" are.--
Exactly. Throw in some f-bombs and Brook's Trump comments are indistinguishable from a Robert DeNiro talk-show appearance.
You're back!! Good to see you again! I've really missed your commentary during the Trump years and was hoping you were still around.
Then let Brooksie name two, three, four specific examples, or however many he cares to. He doesn't have to list them all. But I'll be honest with you, right now, I'm going to need one hell of a lot more than Brooksie's word for it that yeah, things are really, really bad, things have never been this bad and stuff.
So until Brooksie or any of the rest of the Never Trump diehards like Jenny or Charming Billy or whoever do that, I'm not going to read "America's been corrupted" as anything other than "The idiots have stopped taking instruction from their obvious betters."
Brooks obviously can't enumerate all the ways Trump corrupts American life in one short op-ed piece, but he does point anyone with eyes to see in the right direction.
I can't figure out if your comment is a put-on or not.
John Podhoretz was enraged that the patrons of The Weekly Standard pulled the plug on the publication, as if they had an obligation to provide salaries to people like ...John Podhoretz (whose donors haven't pulled the plug on him...yet). One thing to remember is that David Brooks, Ross Douthat, David Frum, Conor Friedersdorf, George Will, Jennifer Rubin, S.E. Cupp, Matt K. Lewis, and The Bulwark crew have patrons as well (just not patrons who are interested in promoting starboard thought and policy). Their job, whether they like it or not, is to provide emotional validation for the people who employ them (and to those of their publications' readership who actually look at their work). IOW, shills.
Funny how Trump is guilty of "sins", but none of them are an actual prosecutable crimes. As St. Thomas More would say, "Then God can arrest him." You know your side is in trouble when your only interesting candidate is a New Age witch from Cali* and Alan "name the statute" Dershowitz is the only adult in the room.
Scott W, Who's the "New Age witch from Cali*?" It's not Warren.
Marian Williamson
"Anonymous," at 5:36 this morning, you really can't see that what you accuse Trump of doing is what, in fact, his opponents are doing? I don't need my eyes opened; you, and David Brooks, do.
Post a Comment