Not Taking Chances
Jackson Lamb: “Handcuffs won’t be necessary, come on.
Emma Flyte: “I’d rather not take any chances with a man who looks like he gropes people on buses.”
— Slow Horses
As Trump took the Labor Day weekend off the break was one that was shared by most of us who were able to better focus on our grilling technique. The political winds have shifted since President Biden decided to forego a second term. There can be little doubt as to Biden’s intent in choosing to work out his only term of office, one that in many ways has been remarkably consequential. Whether one chooses to believe Biden or not, the decision was not one he made lightly— or one he has embraced as necessary. As in 2020, the politics of the non-MAGA majority in America has focused on keeping Donald Trump from power.
So, Biden made the cold calculation, undoubtedly helped along by unasked-for advice from friends and associates that stung, to give the nation its best chance to defeat Trump-- again. Biden has said on many occasions that 2020 was different from most election years. Defeating Trump became an existential issue that went far beyond party politics. For the former Vice President and longtime Democratic stalwart, Trump’s reaction to the riot in Charlottesville in which Trump equated the thugs on the right with peaceful demonstrators was the last straw. Biden saw his candidacy as a bridge to a future that had eliminated Donald Trump as a viable choice as leader:
Part of the bench...
“Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else. There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.”
Biden, newly confident since an unexpected landslide in the South Carolina primary and a convincing sweep of almost all the states from Virginia to Texas that voted on Super Tuesday – with Sanders picking up Colorado, Utah and California – appeared buoyed.
“Senator Sanders likes to say: ‘We’re only going to beat Donald Trump by generating excitement and turning out more voters.’ Well guess what? On Super Tuesday we turned out 70% more voters … and in South Carolina we turned out 22% more voters,” Biden said, eliciting chants from the elated crowd of “Let’s go Joe!”
“He’s right,” the moderate Biden added, but indicated those present. “We are going to turn out the Democratic party.”
—bbc.com
As Biden was speaking future Democratic leaders Corey Booker and Kamala Harris shared the stage with him that night. Biden and his party were right. They would win the election and build that bridge to the future.
the GOP bench
In June, Biden kept his promise. More importantly, the Democratic Party has as well. Promoting the next generation of leadership for a party is a selfless pursuit. It is not easy for the old guard to give up power to retain it. Ask Nancy Pelosi, ask Joe Biden just how difficult that is. The Democratic backbench is rich with leaders who represent the future not just of Democrats but of the nation. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are beneficiaries of Biden’s largesse and so is the nation. In better times, Republicans would be on a similar path.
The MAGA movement has done more than give us a decade of regressive governing and a path to the past, it may have eliminated the viability of the right’s next generation of leadership for the foreseeable future. The Republican “young lions” (Cheney, Flake, Kinzinger, e.g.) have either been drummed out of the party by Donald Trump and his supporters or have been compromised by the MAGA orthodoxy whose mantle has proved difficult to pass on. Trump is preparing no one to succeed him and it can be argued that succession is a foreign concept to the narcissistic Mr. Trump. What happens after Trump leaves the stage or the planet is up for grabs, but it doesn’t look pretty. Here is how The Brookings Institute sums up the Republican quandary:
Nonetheless, a substantial number of Republican candidates stay away from MAGA and Trump and pursue what look like more moderate campaigns. They won 35% of their races in Texas and 67% in Mississippi. So, what do we know so far? There are “normies” out there, but their numbers are not big. Depending on the measure used, between about 20% and 40% of the party is at least somewhat uncomfortable with MAGA and Trump—though the percentage who actively oppose Trump and will stay home or vote for Biden in November is probably much smaller. If you are a glass half full person you conclude that this is a decent base from which to reconstruct a post-Trump party. If you are a glass half empty person you are resigned to a political party shaped by Trump whether he is around or not. Either could be right.
— brookings.edu,“Will the Republican Party return to normal?” by Elaine Kamarck and Anna Heetderks
Either the post-Trump party rebuilds on the backs of the 20-40% who have strayed from MAGA or will MAGA-on satisfied with winning red-state assured victories and putting aside any hope for a national significance while waiting for another authoritarian rescuer. Brookings notes that Trump supporters are just as hateful of Republican politicians who have opposed Trump as they are of Democrats. The article quoted above was posted on May 1, 2024, and notes that among the party apostates, “normies” as they are called in never-Trump parlance, there exists a party-in-exile waiting for the spell to break— hopeful for a return to power within the party someday. The authors note that the party has a lack of unspoiled candidates waiting in the wings. In the short term leaders who knelt before Trump are as endangered as those who opposed them as the GOP circular firing squad takes aim. The details will soon be debatable and the fate of the nation is at stake. Harris’s debate performance next week becomes crucial. Despite the political turn after Biden stepped aside, this race is close— too close. While many Democrats look at the debate as an opportunity for her prosecutorial acumen, the debate as designed leaves little room for tactical moves. There is one thing, however, that I believe Harris can do that will reset the debate from a glorified dual press conference that allows Trump to squirm through issues using lies and distractions. Harris can take control of the debate by taking away the only tactic Trump has mastered.
precluding his lies
The margins of victory in November will go a long way in determining the political outlook for both parties. A narrow Trump or Harris win which seems likely at the moment portends a very different America. Control of Congress along with either presidential outcome can deepen or ease our national nightmare. The upcoming debate is essential to a Democratic sweep. How well Harris performs will either build the momentum now surrounding her candidacy or temper it and create the battle most are predicting. If she listens to the advice of many critics who see this as a match of tactical skills, I fear we are doomed to the outcome these same critics are counting on. It is a self-fulfilling wish that the race remains within the margins of error so that their storylines prevail. A close election and divided government is a “safe” prediction that can be cobbled with some wry allusions to points in the campaign that were indicative of the end.
I hear them talk about the need for Harris to rile up Trump so that he will show his true self, his pettiness, his lack of knowledge, and ultimately, his temper. Poking the bear as debate strategy may be entertaining especially for Trump haters, but it is equally tiresome and self-destructive to the debater who has to invest time and effort in peeling away his lies and hypocrisies. The truth is Trump has a playbook that has become part and parcel of himself. We have all seen it, heard it, and reacted to it many times. Asking Trump to be anything but himself is a fool’s errand.
By the same token, Kamala is a prosecutor and all her training and all her experiences in a courtroom argue against bear poking. An erratic Trump is a given, poking at him may yield unexpected results. “Never ask a question you don’t have an answer to” may be advice given to a young lawyer to stress the importance of preparation but Harris will no doubt be prepared. Her focus should be on precluding his arguments before they are made because we have all heard them before and they are unlikely to change.
Think of the opening arguments made on your favorite TV legal drama, when the attorney tells the jury what they could expect as arguments against his or her case. By exposing in advance the lies and hypocrisies, Trump is sure to “weave” into his rambling responses to the network moderator. Harris then removes the wind from his bombast. A suggested Harris response in rebuttal to Trump’s first response that includes a lie or distortion. She has 2 minutes, but her response has to be rapier sharp:
“Mr. Trump has typically told lies about me— you have undoubtedly heard them. He has said I am not bright, that I was soft on crime when I served as DA and Attorney General. He will lie about our administration— lie about crime, both his own and the crime rates under Joe Biden, he lies about the election, and call insurrectionists ‘hostages’. I was taught at my Mother’s knee not to lie. As famous American essayist Susan Sontag once noted, “sanity is a cozy lie… For Donald Trump his sanity, such as it is, requires lies both cozy and broad.”
She could suggest a tasting menu of Trump lies, both personal and political, but the one she should conclude with is the one most women would find most objectionable and one the ABC commentators should be forced to ask Trump to respond to:
...”And finally, he reposted a vile and scandalous statement on his social media outlet suggesting I didn’t earn my way here but instead “slept my way” to the top. My reputation is not his to smear and I will never forgive anyone who would try to taint it with a casual reference. In this debate, I stand by mine...
Trump has always relied on his ability to disrupt an argument by distraction— that is all his lies are, in the end. By precluding the worst of them it will defuse the rest of them as well. Instead of Harris being the fact-checker on the stage, or relying on the network to intervene and clarify, the distraction will be hers as Harris stands and waits. She knows why he lies and she is aware of that voice within him calling him a coward.
From that point on his lies become another example confirming her accusation. No need for lengthy responses, just some pithy wit:
“And there’s another one,” she mocks. “Next question.”
