Really enjoyed your column today. Like you, I am more than concerned about the choice we have, and I am afraid of what will happen come Election Day no matter who is elected. I do not recall ever fearing the results of our votes no matter who is elected ….. but this year certainly feels different.
It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. The result will be dependent on several factors; one being the percentage of trigger-happy Trumpers who are fully cached with ammo, weapons and protective gear and fantasize saving Amerika from the libs. Hopefully it is miniscule. What we should fear is the cascading effect that occurs when death and destruction amongst our neighbors become real. Foreign operatives have been preening us for this for years. All you have to do is read "Love They Neighbor: A Story of War", by Peter Mass to see how a country can devolve into horrific conflict in a matter of weeks.
Thanks Nick. I was a terrible student in Jay Engel's English class, but one bit of wisdom he imparted has stayed with me since third form: "People will judge you by how you write!"
"a mediocre politician with better policies and far superior people around her."
Your statement posits 2 arguments that I find questionable: does she have "better policies"? Really? 79% of Americans think the country is heading in the wrong direction. Is that an indication of better policies? I think not. If the Democrats had "better policies", over 3/4 of the people would agree with her, not be looking to change course.
Is she surrounded by "better people"? From where I'm sitting, doubtful. Alejandro Mayorkas? Antony Blinken? Pete Buttigieg? Tim Walz? Do we really have to put up with these incompetent ninnies into a potential Harris administration? Ye Gods. I have no idea who would serve in a Trump administration. Neither do you. My crystal ball is on the fritz. Anyone is better than some of the folks making policy nowadays.
Believe me, I'm not happy about my choice in 19 days. The only thing I can say is that I have lived through 4 years of Donald Trump. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall him sending the military after political enemies. (KH predicted that in an interview with Bret Baier tonight). I had a friend who predicted "jack boot thugs marching through the streets" after Trump won in 2016.. Again--don't recall that happening. What I do recall is being able to easily afford eggs, bacon, and gas, and inflation at 1.4%. Kind of miss that.
I think we're at the point in the process where these politicians attempt to scare the bejeezus out of the electorate. All it does is fire up their respective bases. Did you watch the interview? She was cranky. She was evasive. She couldn't/wouldn't answer questions. I don't know. She's going down in flames.
I will respond to your concerns one paragraph at a time:
1) Where did you get the 79% figure? The highest I have seen was 64% in the most recent RCP average. I tend to take right-track/wrong-track polls with a grain of saltanyway, because they tend to be even more subjective than conventional polls asking for candidate preference.
But most importantly -- and I can't emphasize this enough -- I do not decide which candidate to vote for based on opinion polls. I'm pretty sure you don't either.
2) I see nothing wrong with the Biden cabinet officials you listed. You might not like the policies they are carrying out for their boss, but they are hardly "incompetent ninnies." My point about likely Trump cabinet appointees is based on the fact that so many who served in his first term have not only said they will not serve in a second Trump term, but in many cases have concluded he is not even fit to serve as president, including even his own once-loyal vice president. Perhaps this will refresh your memory:
3) You're right that during his first term Trump never sent the military after his political enemies. But he has said he would do it in his second term. So Kamala Harris did not "predict" Trump would do so in the Baier interview. She merely repeated Trump's own thoughts expressed in a previous Fox interview.
4) I understand that you and I did not like the inflationary pressures after the pandemic finally receded. The bipartisan collection of economists I cited in the column have concluded that Trump's proposals would bring back inflation and worsen the debt and deficit numbers, far more so than Harris' proposals. Fiscal responsibility is something conservatives used to care about. If you "miss" the days of low inflation during Trump's first term, you will miss them even more during his second.
On a personal note, I am grateful for the booming stock market of the last few years. The equities portion of my retirement plan grew tremendously -- so much so that I was able to convert the stocks into a lifetime annuity with a guaranteed income based on the higher values that happened during Biden's watch -- which means we are more comfortable in our retirement than we expected. Since we are not rich, this was important to us.
I have a conservative friend just down the road from me who once ran for statewide office and is a longtime Republican. For the first time in 45 years, he will be voting -- albeit reluctantly -- for a Democrat for president.
1. Source for my data: "A substantial majority (79%) say the country is off on the wrong track, while 21% say it is headed in the right direction. Trend data for this question are not available." Marquette Law School Poll https://law.marquette.edu/poll/ About 3/4 of the way down.
I don't vote based on what other people think, but I do think it's revealing that I'm not the only one who feels the country is going off the rails.
2. I respect your point about the cabinet officials, and you're right, they are just carrying out their boss' wishes--at least as far as we know. After all, there hadn't been a Cabinet meeting since last October and Dr. Jill--the Edith Wilson of the Biden administration--ran the last one a few weeks ago. I do not respect the lackeys I mentioned, however, especially self-described knucklehead Tim Walz.
I'm very familiar with the list of former Trump insiders, many of whom now support Kamala. Listen, I think Trump is a narcissistic blow hard. Unfortunately, I like his policies more than I do Kamala's--at least what I can suss out about what she's going to do. What I do know that she wants to do is give $25,000 to new home owners, money to black entrepreneurs (unconstitutional), and in an ironic twist (after incarcerating record numbers of black men), legalizing pot. But let's face it--that's a pretty long list of pissed off people. I don't know what else to say about this. I have expressed that I am not happy about this election, repeatedly. Everyone has to make a choice, and with no joy in my heart, I'm going in the opposite direction. (*sigh*)
3. I did not hear Trump say that he's going to send the military after political enemies. Ho hum. I do not take everything he says literally. It strikes me that too much of what he says is hyperbolic bullshit. The business about tariffs, for example. I listened to the Bloomberg interview from the Chicago Economic Club. What Trump said was that he would threaten to impose a tariff, not that it would happen as a matter of course. The threatened tariff is a bargaining maneuver. Reaction to the tariff discussion has been interesting. I honestly don't think people listen carefully to what he says. Of course, he says so much, it's hard to keep up.
I would contrast this issue to one that has already happened--lawfare. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump has been targeted for criminal prosecution. The Letitia James farce is the most egregious.
4. Historically, the stock market has always performed better under Democrat presidents than Republican ones. Yes to the growth of our stock and other holdings portfolios! It's just too bad that when I go to spend it, my new-found money doesn't buy as much. I'm happy for you and your family that you have found a good growth solution through an annuity. I asked my husband about it, and he said we have one, and started to explain until my eyes glazed over. I guess, all things considered, it's fortunate that you converted some of your stock holdings before Kamala assumes office--after all, she has floated the notion of taxing unrealized capital gains.
I don't put a whole bunch of "stock" into what economic experts predict. I remember Paul Krugman (NYT Economics guru) famously forecasting that the stock market would crash if Trump won in 2016. Well that didn't happen. I think economists are just as politically motivated as any other class of well-educated elites, and have an axe to grind.
What do you think about the notion--expressed the other day in the NYT--that this election is more about class than race or gender? I think there's something to it.
To be clear, over the course of my adulthood, I have probably voted for more Republicans than Democrats. I daresay I have voted for more Republicans than Donald Trump, who was a strongly pro-choice liberal Democrat/independent for his adult life until 15 years ago when he discovered the mass racist appeal of suggesting Barack Obama was born in Kenya.
Trump might have framed his tariff proposal the way you just did, but elsewhere he has not equivocated at all. He has said he would impose the tariffs himself, which he cannot do unless the imports pose a threat to national security (they would require congressional approval). That's one of the problems with Trump. Good leaders don't keep their constituents guessing as to whether they are speaking "literally" or figuratively. As you surely know from your days as an educator, clarity and brevity are the essence of good communication. Trump has failed that test hundreds of times.
BTW I don't consider Paul Krugman an "expert" in the way we normally use that word. He won that Nobel Prize not for his brilliance as an economist but for his columns in the NYT, which are highly political and fiercely partisan. Shame on the Nobel Committee. And yes, you are correct that experts can be wrong (keeping schools closed for months on end during the pandemic comes to mind), but they are right far more often than not.
As to your last point, these presidential elections are almost always more about class than anything else: Nixon and his "silent majority"; the working-class Reagan Democrats; Bill Clinton's "Middle Class Bill of Rights;" Trump's protectionism and "the forgotten American" rhetoric of JD Vance. We have the largest middle class in the world, so those iconic symbols can be powerful forces in capturing the votes of that crucial voting block.
PS In the column, I mentioned Harris' proposal to tax unrealized capital gains and agree that it is a terrible idea. Harris supporter Mark Cuban is convinced she can be talked out of it, and so am I.
"Good leaders don't keep their constituents guessing as to whether they are speaking "literally" or figuratively. " And that's why Trump's appeal is an enigma wrapped in a mystery. I didn't say I liked that one needs a Trump-decoder ring to know what he means, my point is--who the hell knows what he means or what he'll do? I think he likes that unpredictability. It's not the same as lying, but it's darn close.
I think/sense that the mood of the electorate is shifting, and not in Kamala's direction. It has nothing to do with her being a woman or a woman of color. She is an inadequate retail politician. She's never been popular throughout her tenure as VP, and her staff keeping her away from difficult interviews hasn't helped. My chief complaint about her has always been that in her own way, she is a poor communicator. She doesn't answer questions. She does what you mentioned a few weeks ago: she doesn't answer the question asked, she answers what she wanted the question to be. I get that you want to skewer your opponent at every opportunity, but sometimes you have to put your big girl panties on and take responsibility for what you've done.
I fear she will lose. I've told many people that. If that happens, I also fear that Trump will not make it through his term. Like Biden, he is very old and is losing his mind. On Jan. 20, 2025, Trump will be even older than Biden was four years earlier. Either Trump will die or the 25th Amendment will have to be invoked. I know, this is grim stuff, but my gut tells me it will happen. Then it's hello, President Vance (a.k.a. Trump with a brain).
Trump has said that he would be a dictator for a day. I shudder to think of what mayhem he could unleash in one day, including pardons for Jan 6 rioters.
Really enjoyed your column today. Like you, I am more than concerned about the choice we have, and I am afraid of what will happen come Election Day no matter who is elected. I do not recall ever fearing the results of our votes no matter who is elected ….. but this year certainly feels different.
If Trump loses, the likelihood of violence is great. He has already set it up: "If I lose, it will be because 'those people' cheated you!"
It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. The result will be dependent on several factors; one being the percentage of trigger-happy Trumpers who are fully cached with ammo, weapons and protective gear and fantasize saving Amerika from the libs. Hopefully it is miniscule. What we should fear is the cascading effect that occurs when death and destruction amongst our neighbors become real. Foreign operatives have been preening us for this for years. All you have to do is read "Love They Neighbor: A Story of War", by Peter Mass to see how a country can devolve into horrific conflict in a matter of weeks.
Yes, and Russia, China and Iran are already trying mightily to interfere in the election.
Your last paragraphs about the Court are frightening!
Courts should not be in the business of reversing rights previously granted. That will be Trump's lasting legacy.
Excellent, Terry. Thank you.
Thanks Nick. I was a terrible student in Jay Engel's English class, but one bit of wisdom he imparted has stayed with me since third form: "People will judge you by how you write!"
"a mediocre politician with better policies and far superior people around her."
Your statement posits 2 arguments that I find questionable: does she have "better policies"? Really? 79% of Americans think the country is heading in the wrong direction. Is that an indication of better policies? I think not. If the Democrats had "better policies", over 3/4 of the people would agree with her, not be looking to change course.
Is she surrounded by "better people"? From where I'm sitting, doubtful. Alejandro Mayorkas? Antony Blinken? Pete Buttigieg? Tim Walz? Do we really have to put up with these incompetent ninnies into a potential Harris administration? Ye Gods. I have no idea who would serve in a Trump administration. Neither do you. My crystal ball is on the fritz. Anyone is better than some of the folks making policy nowadays.
Believe me, I'm not happy about my choice in 19 days. The only thing I can say is that I have lived through 4 years of Donald Trump. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall him sending the military after political enemies. (KH predicted that in an interview with Bret Baier tonight). I had a friend who predicted "jack boot thugs marching through the streets" after Trump won in 2016.. Again--don't recall that happening. What I do recall is being able to easily afford eggs, bacon, and gas, and inflation at 1.4%. Kind of miss that.
I think we're at the point in the process where these politicians attempt to scare the bejeezus out of the electorate. All it does is fire up their respective bases. Did you watch the interview? She was cranky. She was evasive. She couldn't/wouldn't answer questions. I don't know. She's going down in flames.
Hi Sharon,
Thanks for reading.
I will respond to your concerns one paragraph at a time:
1) Where did you get the 79% figure? The highest I have seen was 64% in the most recent RCP average. I tend to take right-track/wrong-track polls with a grain of saltanyway, because they tend to be even more subjective than conventional polls asking for candidate preference.
But most importantly -- and I can't emphasize this enough -- I do not decide which candidate to vote for based on opinion polls. I'm pretty sure you don't either.
2) I see nothing wrong with the Biden cabinet officials you listed. You might not like the policies they are carrying out for their boss, but they are hardly "incompetent ninnies." My point about likely Trump cabinet appointees is based on the fact that so many who served in his first term have not only said they will not serve in a second Trump term, but in many cases have concluded he is not even fit to serve as president, including even his own once-loyal vice president. Perhaps this will refresh your memory:
Pence, Barr, Bolton, McMaster, Esper, Mattis, Kelly, Milley, Coats, Mulvaney, Griffin, Grisham.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-administration-endorsements-mike-pence-b2514445.html
3) You're right that during his first term Trump never sent the military after his political enemies. But he has said he would do it in his second term. So Kamala Harris did not "predict" Trump would do so in the Baier interview. She merely repeated Trump's own thoughts expressed in a previous Fox interview.
4) I understand that you and I did not like the inflationary pressures after the pandemic finally receded. The bipartisan collection of economists I cited in the column have concluded that Trump's proposals would bring back inflation and worsen the debt and deficit numbers, far more so than Harris' proposals. Fiscal responsibility is something conservatives used to care about. If you "miss" the days of low inflation during Trump's first term, you will miss them even more during his second.
On a personal note, I am grateful for the booming stock market of the last few years. The equities portion of my retirement plan grew tremendously -- so much so that I was able to convert the stocks into a lifetime annuity with a guaranteed income based on the higher values that happened during Biden's watch -- which means we are more comfortable in our retirement than we expected. Since we are not rich, this was important to us.
I have a conservative friend just down the road from me who once ran for statewide office and is a longtime Republican. For the first time in 45 years, he will be voting -- albeit reluctantly -- for a Democrat for president.
1. Source for my data: "A substantial majority (79%) say the country is off on the wrong track, while 21% say it is headed in the right direction. Trend data for this question are not available." Marquette Law School Poll https://law.marquette.edu/poll/ About 3/4 of the way down.
I don't vote based on what other people think, but I do think it's revealing that I'm not the only one who feels the country is going off the rails.
2. I respect your point about the cabinet officials, and you're right, they are just carrying out their boss' wishes--at least as far as we know. After all, there hadn't been a Cabinet meeting since last October and Dr. Jill--the Edith Wilson of the Biden administration--ran the last one a few weeks ago. I do not respect the lackeys I mentioned, however, especially self-described knucklehead Tim Walz.
I'm very familiar with the list of former Trump insiders, many of whom now support Kamala. Listen, I think Trump is a narcissistic blow hard. Unfortunately, I like his policies more than I do Kamala's--at least what I can suss out about what she's going to do. What I do know that she wants to do is give $25,000 to new home owners, money to black entrepreneurs (unconstitutional), and in an ironic twist (after incarcerating record numbers of black men), legalizing pot. But let's face it--that's a pretty long list of pissed off people. I don't know what else to say about this. I have expressed that I am not happy about this election, repeatedly. Everyone has to make a choice, and with no joy in my heart, I'm going in the opposite direction. (*sigh*)
3. I did not hear Trump say that he's going to send the military after political enemies. Ho hum. I do not take everything he says literally. It strikes me that too much of what he says is hyperbolic bullshit. The business about tariffs, for example. I listened to the Bloomberg interview from the Chicago Economic Club. What Trump said was that he would threaten to impose a tariff, not that it would happen as a matter of course. The threatened tariff is a bargaining maneuver. Reaction to the tariff discussion has been interesting. I honestly don't think people listen carefully to what he says. Of course, he says so much, it's hard to keep up.
I would contrast this issue to one that has already happened--lawfare. There is no doubt in my mind that Trump has been targeted for criminal prosecution. The Letitia James farce is the most egregious.
4. Historically, the stock market has always performed better under Democrat presidents than Republican ones. Yes to the growth of our stock and other holdings portfolios! It's just too bad that when I go to spend it, my new-found money doesn't buy as much. I'm happy for you and your family that you have found a good growth solution through an annuity. I asked my husband about it, and he said we have one, and started to explain until my eyes glazed over. I guess, all things considered, it's fortunate that you converted some of your stock holdings before Kamala assumes office--after all, she has floated the notion of taxing unrealized capital gains.
I don't put a whole bunch of "stock" into what economic experts predict. I remember Paul Krugman (NYT Economics guru) famously forecasting that the stock market would crash if Trump won in 2016. Well that didn't happen. I think economists are just as politically motivated as any other class of well-educated elites, and have an axe to grind.
What do you think about the notion--expressed the other day in the NYT--that this election is more about class than race or gender? I think there's something to it.
To be clear, over the course of my adulthood, I have probably voted for more Republicans than Democrats. I daresay I have voted for more Republicans than Donald Trump, who was a strongly pro-choice liberal Democrat/independent for his adult life until 15 years ago when he discovered the mass racist appeal of suggesting Barack Obama was born in Kenya.
Trump might have framed his tariff proposal the way you just did, but elsewhere he has not equivocated at all. He has said he would impose the tariffs himself, which he cannot do unless the imports pose a threat to national security (they would require congressional approval). That's one of the problems with Trump. Good leaders don't keep their constituents guessing as to whether they are speaking "literally" or figuratively. As you surely know from your days as an educator, clarity and brevity are the essence of good communication. Trump has failed that test hundreds of times.
BTW I don't consider Paul Krugman an "expert" in the way we normally use that word. He won that Nobel Prize not for his brilliance as an economist but for his columns in the NYT, which are highly political and fiercely partisan. Shame on the Nobel Committee. And yes, you are correct that experts can be wrong (keeping schools closed for months on end during the pandemic comes to mind), but they are right far more often than not.
As to your last point, these presidential elections are almost always more about class than anything else: Nixon and his "silent majority"; the working-class Reagan Democrats; Bill Clinton's "Middle Class Bill of Rights;" Trump's protectionism and "the forgotten American" rhetoric of JD Vance. We have the largest middle class in the world, so those iconic symbols can be powerful forces in capturing the votes of that crucial voting block.
PS In the column, I mentioned Harris' proposal to tax unrealized capital gains and agree that it is a terrible idea. Harris supporter Mark Cuban is convinced she can be talked out of it, and so am I.
"Good leaders don't keep their constituents guessing as to whether they are speaking "literally" or figuratively. " And that's why Trump's appeal is an enigma wrapped in a mystery. I didn't say I liked that one needs a Trump-decoder ring to know what he means, my point is--who the hell knows what he means or what he'll do? I think he likes that unpredictability. It's not the same as lying, but it's darn close.
I think/sense that the mood of the electorate is shifting, and not in Kamala's direction. It has nothing to do with her being a woman or a woman of color. She is an inadequate retail politician. She's never been popular throughout her tenure as VP, and her staff keeping her away from difficult interviews hasn't helped. My chief complaint about her has always been that in her own way, she is a poor communicator. She doesn't answer questions. She does what you mentioned a few weeks ago: she doesn't answer the question asked, she answers what she wanted the question to be. I get that you want to skewer your opponent at every opportunity, but sometimes you have to put your big girl panties on and take responsibility for what you've done.
I fear she will lose. I've told many people that. If that happens, I also fear that Trump will not make it through his term. Like Biden, he is very old and is losing his mind. On Jan. 20, 2025, Trump will be even older than Biden was four years earlier. Either Trump will die or the 25th Amendment will have to be invoked. I know, this is grim stuff, but my gut tells me it will happen. Then it's hello, President Vance (a.k.a. Trump with a brain).
Trump has said that he would be a dictator for a day. I shudder to think of what mayhem he could unleash in one day, including pardons for Jan 6 rioters.
To say nothing of his promise to use the military to put down his political adversaries.