Friday Talking Points (490) -- Full Court Press

[ChrisWeigant]

Liberals had a very bad week at the Supreme Court last week. There's no denying it. Almost all of the final decisions of the year went against them, and that was before the news of Justice Anthony Kennedy's impending retirement hit Washington like a bombshell. Fears that President Donald Trump will pick an ultra-conservative to replace him mean that bedrock decisions such as Roe v. Wade are now hanging in the balance. Democrats are vowing to fight hard against the next justice's confirmation, but this is quite likely a fight they are going to lose.

Mitch McConnell's naked hypocrisy is on full display in the middle of this fight. McConnell once swore fealty to the notion that the voters should weigh in on such an important manner (when Obama was in the Oval Office), but now he's singing a different tune, swearing he will act so hastily that the voters will not be able to weigh in on the matter. And since he abolished the filibuster for Supreme Court justices, the Republicans could indeed confirm someone before November -- or, at the very least, before January (even if the Democrats pull off a miracle and take back control of the Senate, the new Congress won't be seated until after the first of the year, leaving the lame duck Senate two final months to act).

There are a handful of senators whose votes are not certain, from both sides of the aisle. The importance of abortion rights makes this an even higher profile decision than is normal for a Supreme Court appointment. On the Republican side are two women who support Roe v. Wade as settled law: Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. There are also a handful of GOP senators who are stepping down and therefore do not have to fear the wrath of the voters. Someone like Jeff Flake could decide to end his Senate career by denying Trump a second pick, but this is less likely than Collins or Murkowski deciding to vote no.

On the Democratic side are all the senators from states that Trump won who are up for re-election this year. Some of them voted for Neil Gorsuch's confirmation, meaning they might be persuaded to vote with Trump this time around as well. The fact that this vote will likely take place right before the election must weigh heavy on their minds, to put it mildly.

The partisan divide in the Senate hangs on a knife edge, currently. While the GOP has a nominal 51-49 advantage, in practical terms this is only a 50-49 lead, since John McCain is physically unable to travel to Washington to cast his vote. With a 50-49 split, Republicans can't lose a single vote, unless they pick up a corresponding aisle-jumper from the Democrats.

This all sets up a historically epic confirmation battle. But, just to be realistic here, it is a battle that Trump is quite likely to win in the Senate. How it will play out in the wider political arena is yet to be known, though. Abortion was already a white-hot wedge issue, and this is only going to turn up the heat. It will motivate voters on both sides of the issue, quite likely, meaning the big question is which side it might motivate more. This is all going to play out, all summer long. As we wrote earlier this week, perhaps this will be the issue that teaches Democrats to value Supreme Court picks as a motivating force in presidential elections as much as Republican voters already do.

In non-court news, Republicans this week proved once again that they are the party of: "Government doesn't work -- elect us and we'll prove it!" For a second time in as many weeks, a Republican-written immigration bill (the misnamed "compromise" bill) went down in flames, with only 121 Republicans voting for it. Every Democrat voted against it, which is no surprise since they were completely locked out of the process of drafting it. Paul Ryan, to the end, is going to stay faithful to the "Child Molester's Rule" (formerly known as the "Hastert Rule" ) by only bringing up partisan legislation which will fail rather than working with Democrats to create legislation that can pass.

In Ryan's home state, Harley-Davidson announced that, due to the Trump trade war tariffs, it would be moving production out of the United States. This will allow them to avoid both the U.S. tariff on steel and aluminum as well as the European tariff on motorcycles. Trump, upon hearing this news, went ballistic. According to him, to be a patriotic American company means supporting Trump in everything he does, even when it slams the company's bottom line. What Trump failed to mention (of course) is that most Trump brand products are also made overseas. Why he gets such a gigantic pass on this inconvenient fact from his supporters remains a mystery. After all, if it's good enough for Trump ties and Ivanka's stuff to be made overseas, why not Harleys?

Buried in the petulance from Trump over Harley-Davidson was this other factoid from the heartland:

Mid-Continent Nail of Poplar Bluff, Mo., the largest U.S. nail manufacturer, cut 60 jobs on June 15 and plans to lay off an additional 200 workers in a few days, citing plummeting sales following the imposition of Trump's tariffs on metals. The company said it may not survive past Labor Day if it doesn't get relief from the tariffs.

Steel prices in America have gone up, meaning Chinese nail manufacturers can undercut American ones. This is basic trade war economics, folks. Even Republicans are beginning to push back on Trump's trade war. Today, Canada announced it will be levying tariffs on ketchup, which was aimed squarely at Heinz. Last week, Pat Toomey tried to explain the facts of life to the Trump administration, to no avail:

Republican Sen. Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, where Kraft Heinz is based, told U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross at a Senate hearing last week that he's worried about the effect of the Canadian tariff on the company's U.S. ketchup production in Fremont, Ohio.

"The solution for them to be able to continue to sell their product in Canada would be to shut down their U.S. factory and move it to Canada," Toomey said. Ross didn't respond.

But, of course, according to Trump, "trade wars are easy!"

In other news of outright delusion from Trump administration officials, Larry Kudlow just claimed that the federal deficit is "coming down rapidly." This is not actually true (the deficit is expanding rapidly under Trump's agenda), but that doesn't keep Kudlow from believing it. Kudlow is Trump's top economic advisor, it bears mentioning.

The first of Paul Manafort's criminal cases will be moving forward, after a judge in Virginia overruled an effort by Manafort's lawyers to toss the case out. This case could actually take place before the midterms, so it will be politically charged from beginning to end.

Let's see, what else is going on? A bill has been introduced in the House which would pave the way for Puerto Rico to become the 51st state. It is already supported by 14 Democrats and 20 Republicans, which is a good initial indication of bipartisanship, but its chances for passage are anything but certain.

The Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party had a good primary night on Tuesday, from one exceptional race in New York (more on that in a moment) to two other significant victories. In Maryland, former head of the N.A.A.C.P. Ben Jealous won the nomination in the governor's race, and in Colorado Representative Jared Polis was likewise nominated for his gubernatorial race. Voters in Oklahoma (!) approved medical marijuana, as well.

We'll end for now on the most bizarre story of the week. Senator Joe Manchin broke at least one of Senator Claire McCaskill's ribs this week, but the story actually has a happy ending. They were both attending a lunch when McCaskill started choking on her food. Manchin successfully performed the Heimlich maneuver on her, but one possible side effect is always a cracked rib or two. McCaskill apparently didn't realize this had happened, and Manchin was unaware of it until informed later. McCaskill is back on her re-election campaign trail, but she is telling supporters that for now she must refuse their offers of hugs, for medical reasons. So while the story's headline could have been: "One Senator Breaks Bones Of Another," it was actually good news all around.





This one was pretty easy, this week. The Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 28-year-old Latina who comfortably beat the fourth-ranking Democrat in the House this week in a New York primary election. An old white guy got beat by an energetic young woman of color, and his overwhelming money advantage didn't help him one bit. Her reaction to being announced the winner on election night (which was caught on camera) is astonishment so genuine that is downright heartwarming to watch.

This should give other senior (in two senses of the word) Democratic leaders pause for thought. However, Nancy Pelosi seemed a bit dismissive of Ocasio-Cortez, commenting that it was just "one district."

In an interview after her victory, Ocasio-Cortez responded:

Yeah, well, you know, I think that we're in the middle of a movement in this country. I feel this movement, but that movement is going to happen from the bottom up. That movement is going to come from voters. There are a lot of really exciting races with extremely similar dynamics as mine. It's not just one district.

. . .

I do think that we do need to elect a generation of new people to Congress in both parties. Some of the issues that we even have today may have to do with some of the calcified structures and relationships.... In certain seats where it's appropriate, I think a new leaf can actually mean a lot of opportunity for the party and our future. This is about diversity as well. We have to have a diversity of age represented in Congress, too.

Well said. Ocasio-Cortez ran a brilliant campaign, which began with a brilliant introductory campaign video. In it, she predicted victory in the face of a tough imbalance, saying of her opponent: "He has the money, but we have the people." That is a recipe that can work, as she just proved this Tuesday, even against a man who was being spoken of as a possible replacement for Pelosi (if she couldn't get enough support to be speaker again).

Joe Crowley didn't help his own cause by apparently phoning in his campaign. He didn't even show up for a debate with Ocasio-Cortez, which indicates a certain level of disdain for the voters in his district. Ocasio-Cortez ran as an unabashed Democratic Socialist, and based her campaign on an agenda Bernie Sanders could have written: Medicare for all, free college tuition, and a federal jobs guarantee.

She took on Crowley because he was "a corporate Democrat" who wallowed in PAC money. He voted for the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the Iraq war, and for a bill that created a bankruptcy board for Puerto Rico's debt. Ocasio-Cortez tweeted how that last one was personal to her: "My grandfather died in the storm. Your acts shut schools and starved public services when we needed them the most."

Ocasio-Cortez ran a flawless campaign, from her excellent introductory ad to her campaign posters and buttons to her tireless efforts to pound the pavement and turn out the voters. She was outspent by a factor of more than 10-to-1, and she still won with a comfortable margin.

Speaking of margins, 78 percent of the NY-14 district she's running in voted for Hillary Clinton. Clinton beat Trump here by 58 points. In other words, the general election is going to be just a formality. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is going to be sworn in as a member of the House next January. And she's only 28 years old. This week, she is also -- easily -- our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.

{As a rule, we do not link to campaign sites, so you'll have to do your own search for contact information for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, if you'd like to congratulate her.}





This week, the question of how much is too much in pushing back on the Trump administration loomed large in Washington. This is mostly one of those inside-the-Beltway things, where pundits all simultaneously clutch at their pearls and try not to swoon at something they feel is unseemly.

What set the collective set of the vapors off was a restaurant owner in Virginia who politely told Sarah Huckabee Sanders that she wasn't welcome to eat there. This set off a frenzy of reaction from both Huckabee Sanders and the rest of the Trump administration, which fell rather flat.

To put it simply, when you and the man who leads you continually wallow in the mudslinging with joy and abandon, then this absolutely precludes you from any attempt at taking a moral high road. This is why the first lady's anti-cyberbullying campaign is such a tasteless joke. As many comedians have pointed out, the pertinent question to ask Melania is: "Have you met your husband?" Likewise, the attempt by Huckabee Sanders to get up on her high horse over the incident is simply not believable or credible. Because Trump has already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt where he stands on civil discourse, politeness, and tolerance for others' political beliefs. As if to drive this point home, Sarah's father Mike Huckabee sent a vicious tweet out this week aimed at Nancy Pelosi. So it's pretty tough for Sarah to argue for civility when her own dad is out there being such a bad example. To say nothing of Trump, for that matter.

But what really lit the fire was Representative Maxine Waters, who responded forcefully to the story, exhorting her followers:

The American people have put up with this president long enough. What more do we need to see? What more lies do we need to hear? If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them!

In a later interview, Waters clarified her remarks:

{Trump} loves the strongmen and the dictators of the world because he wants to be just like them. He wants to run the country like them. And I want to tell you, for these members of his Cabinet who remain and try to defend him, they're not going to be able to go to a restaurant, to be able to stop at a gas station, to be able to shop at a department store. The people are going to turn on them, they're going to protest, they're going to absolutely harass them until they tell the president: "No, I can't hang with you."

Now, to be absolutely clear, Waters' statements can be read as nothing more than a vigorous application of everyone's First Amendment rights, both to free speech and to let their government know what they think. But her statements, especially the first one, can also be read another way, if you read "push back on them" as literal. This crosses over from free speech to physical intimidation, which no politician should ever espouse.

People are getting gunned down on a regular basis in this country. The most recent example was the cold-blooded murder of five journalists in Annapolis, Maryland. Resisting the Trump administration is everyone's right (some would say duty), but there should be a very bright line that is never crossed in this resistance. By week's end, the story took an even uglier turn, as Waters was forced to cancel events due to plausible death threats being made against her.

We have no idea what Maxine Waters initially meant by her comment, as we do not possess the ability to read minds. But this is not a time for ambiguity. As a politician, Waters knows her words have weight. What she said gave the other side of the political divide an opportunity to point fingers and accuse Democrats of supporting anarchic violence (while their own side is issuing death threats to Waters, mind you). For leaving herself open to such accusations by a poor choice of words (or, even worse, by advocating physical violence), Maxine Waters has to be considered the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week.

We do understand that it's tough to take all the outrageous actions by the Trump administration lying down. We personally aren't calling for politeness above all, and we fully agree with the sentiments in our final talking point this week. But there still should remain that hard, bright line which political discourse should never cross.


{Contact Representative Maxine Waters on her House contact page, to let her know what you think of her actions.}




Volume 490 (6/29/18)

OK, a mixed bunch this week. As promised, we end with an excellent (and extended) excerpt in response to all the impoliteness this week. We begin on a positive note as well. So with no further ado, here are this week's talking points for your consumption.



Money isn't always everything

We're going to start out on a very positive note.

"Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez just proved once again that money isn't always everything in politics. On a shoestring budget, she just defeated a 20-year veteran of the Democratic Party machine, even though he spent a pile of dough in his effort to win the primary race. This is good news for everyone who cares about representational government representing actual voters rather than just deep-pocket donors and super PACs. If it can happen to the fourth-highest-ranking member of the Democratic House caucus, then it can happen to any Democrat, anywhere. Democrats who care more about raising money than their own constituents have now been put on notice. The voters are not in a politics-as-usual mood this year. They want people who look like them and will fight for them. No matter how much campaign cash they've raised."



High road not available, sorry

It is to laugh, no?

"Donald Trump's administration is laughably trying to take some sort of moral high road, claiming that those unruly Democrats are exceeding the bounds of propriety. I will pause here, so everyone can pick themselves up from rolling around laughing on the floor. Donald Trump in his very first appearance as a candidate, called Mexicans 'rapists,' and the list of slime and sleaze that has come out of his mouth and off his Twitter fingers since then is simply too long to review here. Just look at how he's treated John McCain, and that tells you pretty much everything you need to know. Any member of Trump's administration who attempts to take the moral high road on any issue whatsoever involving politeness should be confronted by a giant road works sign saying: 'This route closed to you -- turn around and go back to the swamp road instead.'"



Trump lies about soldiers' remains

Following up on that previous thought....

"Donald Trump is now telling lies about dead American soldiers' remains. He has stated that 200 bodies have come back from North Korea, but in fact none have so far. Now just for one tiny moment imagine what Republicans would have said if Barack Obama had made such an obvious misstatement. They would have hit the roof, wrapped themselves tightly in the flag, and denounced Obama for 'disrespecting American heroes.' And that's just the nicest thing they would have said, when you think about it. However, when Trump lies about brave soldiers' remains being repatriated, what do we hear from Republicans? Absolute silence. Nada. Disrespecting dead soldiers' families is now par for the course for Trump and all his enablers, folks. There's no other way to put it."



Not who we are

The chaos continues at the border, in the jails, and in the courts.

"A federal judge ruled this week that all children ripped from their parents' arms at the border and jailed thousands of miles away must be reunited with their families. Of course, he wouldn't have had to rule on this if the Trump administration hadn't singlehandedly created the crisis in the first place. The judge also wouldn't have had to rule if the Trump administration had actually reunited all the families. At the end of last week, we were told that over 500 children had been reunited with their parents. Since that time, we have not heard a peep about the other thousands of children. Rather than increasing the number on a daily basis while families were reunited, the Trump administration has apparently gone nowhere all week long. Hence, the court ruling. Trump himself is annoyed by the whole 'due process' thing, and is unconstitutionally calling for people to be removed from America without any court proceedings at all. Also revealed this week was that children down to the age of three years old are being tried in courtrooms without their parents being there. This is beyond Orwellian, it has crossed over into Kafkaesque territory. It needs to be said by everyone who is disgusted by the actions of the Trump administration -- this is not who we are, as Americans. Please stop this inhumane policy being carried out in all our names -- now!"



What about those Trump ties?

Things aren't going according to Trump's plan, trade-wise.

"When a company is hit with tariffs going and coming, then the obvious answer for them is to move production to where neither tariff applies. This is precisely what Harley-Davidson decided to do this week, since they are now paying for Trump steel and aluminum tariffs as well as their motorcycles being hit with a tariff entering the European market. So they're going to make their bikes elsewhere, which avoids both problems. Donald Trump was apoplectic upon hearing this news, because he sees it as some sort of personal betrayal. He's now leading the effort to get Harley customers to walk away from the company, which is an extraordinary position for a president to take. But what I wonder is why he gets such a free pass on the stuff Trump and his family sell? I mean, both Trump and Ivanka have factories in China and elsewhere turning out their ties and clothing. Why is Trump allowed to make his stuff in foreign countries while calling on other companies to keep their factories here at home? Trump is finding out that trade wars are nowhere near as easy to win as he had thought, and it will likely cost a whole bunch more American jobs before he fully faces up to the mess he's made."



Oklahoma, OK!

Stephen Colbert coined the term "Tokelahoma" this week. That's all the intro this one really needs.

"Oklahoma just voted to legalize medical marijuana use in the state, becoming the 30th state to do so to date. Oklahoma is about as deep red a state as can be imagined, but even there the voters are sick and tired of the destruction caused by the War On Weed. Marijuana reform activists are now considering a ballot measure which would legalize recreational use as well. In Oklahoma, for Pete's sake! Someone alert Merle Haggard, because the lyrics of 'Okie From Muskogee' are going to need a rewrite. The song famously begins: 'We don't smoke marijuana in Muskogee,' but that obviously isn't going to be true for much longer...."



Don't get mired in paralysis by analysis

Our final talking point is an extended excerpt from an excellent article in the Washington Post by Eugene Robinson. In it, he pushes back on the pearl-clutching over Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Maxine Waters, and all the rest of it. The entire article is well worth reading, but the following stood out as the right way to thread the needle between outrage and inciting violence:

Let me get this straight. President Trump and his associates treat politics like a back-alley knife fight but his critics are supposed to pretend it's a garden party? I don't think so.

Those who see the Trump administration as an abomination have many things to spend their time worrying about -- most urgently, turning out a massive anti-Trump vote in the November elections that give Democrats control of one or both houses of Congress. Whether the resistance behaves less than graciously to Trump and his accomplices -- including his water-carriers in Congress -- is far down the list.

I'm not advocating rudeness for rudeness sake or a blanket policy of denying Trump aides their supper, as happened recently to press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. But folks, get a grip. Stop all the hyperventilation and self-flagellation about how the Red Hen incident, and any further instances of incivility, could doom prospects for a "blue wave" in November and perhaps even reelect Trump in 2020. Banish any thought of turning the other cheek in the coming fight over Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's replacement on the Supreme Court. Don't get mired in paralysis by analysis.

. . .

A political strategy based on the idea that being unfailingly polite will somehow lull Trump supporters into a non-voting stupor is ridiculous. Trump is already out there holding rallies, whipping crowds into a frenzy of victimhood. Two years later, he's still railing against Hillary Clinton and calling for her to be locked up. Two years later, true believers still chant and cheer.

The assumption must be that Trump's most loyal followers will indeed vote in November. Democrats need to understand that walking on eggshells -- being unfailingly nice, declining to call out racism masquerading as economic anxiety, never uttering the word "impeachment" -- isn't going to make the people at those rallies like them.

What Democrats need to do is boost their normally anemic midterm turnout, and that means channeling the anti-Trump fervor we've seen in massive nationwide demonstrations against racism and in favor of women's rights, sensible gun control and compassionate immigration policy. Millions of voters are ready and willing to fight for an inclusive, forward-looking vision of America. Democrats have to show they are ready and willing to lead the battle.

Chris Weigant blogs at: ChrisWeigant.com
Follow Chris on Twitter: ChrisWeigant
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank