Monday, November 11, 2024

Tomorrow And Tomorrow And Tomorrow Creeps (Part VI): Staring Down The Trump Restoration (UPDATED: 11/12/24)


<That ship has sailed...so much for that idea, eh?:
Campaign mailer that arrived late in our mailbox>

For of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest are these: “It might have been!”
<John Greenleaf Whittier>

<i.>
In the end, all our best intentions, dearest dreams, and highest hopes were not nearly enough. The coming of Kamala Harris, and the various hopeful milestones that it represented -- first Black, first female, first South Asian President -- crashed and burned against the rocks of the same rancorous misogyny that swallowed up Hillary Clinton's hopes in 2016. White woman, or Black, millions of Americans are simply unwilling to envision such a person leading them.

Eight years on, the glass ceiling that broke millions of women's hearts remains, as immovable and unbreakable as ever. Only this time around, top advisor Cedric Richmond found himself pressed into the role that John Podesta occupied in 2016, as the bearer of bad tidings, roughly along these lines:

Candidate Harris will not address you tonight. Whatever happens, we left it all on the field. We will fight to ensure that every vote is counted, and we'll see you tomorrow morning. And so on, and so forth. It's a ritual that Democrats have come to know well -- 
the grizzled sage, left to preside over the Viking funeral. 

For those who hoped against hope, there's no sugarcoating the results, as the various rationales behind them rapidly evaporated. First-time voters? Late deciders? They broke mostly for Trump. That eleventh hour poll, the one showing Harris with a three-point lead in Iowa, a state she didn't even bother to visit? Trump won it overwhelmingly, for the third time, by 13 points.

The high decibel apocalyptic aura of Harris's last couple weeks of campaigning, anchored around the nightmares of further abortion restrictions, and the hollowing out of democracy? Voters mostly shrugged it off, apparently satisfied with Trump's promise not to pursue either of them -- at least, not right away, it seems.

Cruelty won, as did all the "isms," ageism, racism, and sexism. So did sedition, since-the various legal cases involving Donald Trump are melting
 away as we speak. So will those of his wildest-eyed disciples who smeared feces on walls, crushed police officers in doors, and bayed for the blood of all who opposed their fight to undo Joe Biden's electoral victory on January 6th, 2021. Thanks to Trump's black-robed enablers, and the foot dragging of Attorney General Merrick Garland, The Great Ditherer, the drive to hold conspirators large and small accountable will dry up and blow away, as if the attempted coup had never happened.

The bully boys have wasted no time asserting themselves. The morning after the election, on November 6th, Black folk in some 21 states -- including local political leaders in my area -- got blasted with racist texts cheering on their second enslavement. Moments like these serve as a rejoinder, for those who still cling to the idea, "This isn't who we are" -- Alas, no. On this evidence, this is very much who we are, and always have been.


<Snapshot of what might have been: 
Late campaign mailer, Harris-Walz, Take II>

<ii>
So what went wrong, exactly? By all rights, it shouldn't have even been close. In Trump, the Republicans were again banking on a nominee so endlessly aggrieved, so obviously unhinged, and so obviously consumed by the endless need for attention and wealth -- with immediate retaliation prescribed for those who would deny either of those things. Still, unlike in 2020, Trump actually won the popular vote this time, which is a notable achievement, at least on paper.

Harris's candidacy boasted some major positives, starting with the lack of baggage that dogged Clinton's 2016 run. You also had a Democratic nominee 18 years younger than her rival, brimming with superior energy, and smarts -- as her only debate with Trump showed -- and better positioned than her boss to argue for core issues like abortion rights. How could she miss?

Well, as the wags joke, "The biggest party is the Stay-At-Home Party, or, the Couch Party." It's easy to see why, when we compare Harris's totals, as they stand now (70.4 million votes) with Biden's 2020 victory (81.3 million), which means that she garnered 10.9 million fewer than her predecessor. It's hard to imagine anyone succeeding, with such anemic numbers. In contrast, Trump's current estimated total of 74.3 million represents a modest improvement over his 2020 showing (72.4 million).

Put another way, "Trump didn't win a popular vote majority this time because 1-1.5 million Biden voters flipped to him. He won it because over 7 million Biden voters stayed home this time" (Down With Tyranny). So why did they? As we all know by now, exit polls showed the economy as the top issue. Although Harris
threw out various ideas for taming runaway food and housing costs -- notably, cracking down on the rampant price gouging that's driving so much  current misery -- she offered precious few details for how she'd go about it.

Although it's natural for politicos to indulge in some rhetorical foggery -- to allow sufficient maneuvering room, if they do get elected -- Harris's tightly-scripted presentation left voters largely unmoved, it seems. Like 
Hillary Clinton had done before her, Harris kept the relevant cards close to her chest. Stick with me, she suggested, and the ride will be great. You'll just have to see how I manage it.

All of which might have passed muster in a different era, except for one fatal flaw -- a refusal to acknowledge how voters felt. On that score, Team Harris's assertions barely differed from those of Team Biden (2024), or Team Clinton (2016): C'mon, folks, what are you moaning about? The stock market's never been higher! Unemployment's never been lower! Wages have never risen higher! 

For all of Harris's promises about creating an "opportunity economy," what's striking about America today is how uphill that idea feels. With inequality at rampant levels, how far can anybody move up the ladder, let alone keep heads above water? Any number of statistics will drive home the point, as you can see from Bernie Sanders's blistering statement (see below): "While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry, and want change. And they're right. Today, while the very rich are doing phenomenally well, 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, and we have more income and wealth inequality than ever before."

Indeed, pressed by "The View" as to what she might have done differently over the last four years, Harris responded, "There's not a thing that comes to mind." Not surprisingly, Trump seized on that line for his final attack ads, a rhetorical grenade that hit its mark, more than not. The tepidness in some of her proposals -- such as returning corporate taxes to pre-Trump levels of 28 percent, before his signature bill cut them to 21 percent -- undermined Harris's posture as the candidate of change.

Some commentators attribute Harris's skittishness to the influence of her well-connected brother-in-law, Uber's vice president and chief legal officer, Tony West, who apparently urged her to go easy on Big Business (see below). Ugly as it is, and sounds, the story crystallizes the Democratic Party's biggest problem. For the Boomer normies who run the party, flipping the script on most major issues -- whether it's the cost of living, or the slaughter in Gaza -- is simply a bridge too far.


But you can only keep saying, "Eat your spinach, we'll let you know when you can finally have bacon," for so long. And, unless Democrats can offer a more compelling answer -- or, at least, push out the normies who gifted us with this debacle -- their slog back from the wilderness will be lengthy, painful, and complicated.


<"Bjelke Blues": Front cover art>

<iii.>
On to our next question. As Trump and his minions retake center stage, what might they actually do, and how will it affect us? Though comparisons with Weimar-era Germany seem obvious, which we've explored here, the repressive model of Johannes "Joh" Bjelke-Petersen, the notoriously iron-fisted Premier of Queensland, Australia, offers a closer template for how an illiberal America under Trump might actually look.

For those who don't know his story, Bjelke-Petersen ruled Queensland from 1968 to 1987, largely by creative gerrymandering, and total control of the institutions that mattered, including the police, and the bureaucracy -- to impose his blunt force style of governance over every aspect of life. In that regard, this blog post by Edwina Shaw, author/compiler of Bjelke Blues -- a retrospective essay collection -- is illustrative:

"For almost 20 years he stayed in power, despite receiving only 20% or so of the vote through a notorious gerrymander. He drew electoral boundaries around left-leaning areas in wiggly jigsaw-patterns around the state. Funding went first to areas that voted for his party, then to the other members of his right-wing coalition, leaving next to nothing for Left wing Labor electorates. He used the police force as his own personal army giving them unprecedented powers to enter properties under the infamous Health Act. Bjelke used taxpayers’ money to fund his personal vendettas through the law courts. He once sued every member of the opposition party for defamation. Heard enough yet?

"And through all of this obvious corruption – I won’t go into the rape of the environment, jobs for mates, and the police and government corruption that eventually brought about his downfall – through all of this, he appeared on television every night with his peanut-shaped head and blotchy skin, smiling crookedly, bewildering and amusing journalists with his own special brand of obfuscating banter. Remind you of anyone in power now? ‘Don’t you worry about that!’"

As you might imagine, Bjelke-Petersen's brutal, hard-charging leadership took a considerable toll, starting with the exodus of a good chunk of Queensland's best and brightest, who didn't see themselves faring well in a climate where any public gatherings of three or more people were automatically illegal, The Stranglers' experience of this atmosphere when they toured Australia inspired one of their best-known songs, "Nuclear Device (The Wizard Of Aus)," which reached #36 UK as a single, in October 1979  (for the video, see the link below).

Outside of his Queensland fiefdom, "The HIllbilly Dictator" -- as Bjelke-Petersen's detractors dubbed him -- was viewed largely as an unflattering hangover from a different era, Shaw observes: "
In Australia’s other states and in other countries too, Joh was seen as a laughable buffoon, a joke. But life under Joh was no laughing matter." Eventually, December 1987, Bjelke-Petersen abruptly quit his post, amid accusations of police corruption and cronyism that made it politically unviable for him to continue.

The fallout dashed Bjelke-Petersen's plans for stepping down in 1988, to mark the twentieth anniversary of his ascent to power. But further efforts to hold him accountable foundered, 
amid the usual technicalities (see the Wikipedia entry below), allowing Bjelke-Petersen to live out a low-key retirement. One of the last times that Joh made headlines came in 2003, when he unsuccessfully sued the Queensland government for $338 million, alleging loss of income, due to government persecution. Sound familiar? It should.

Like all bad actors, Bjelke-Petersen lived and breathed for an ungodly stretch of time, dying at age 94, in 2005 -- earning a full state funeral, despite his notoriety, although 2,000 demonstrators turned up in Queensland's capital (Brisbane) to provide an appropriate counter-perspective. As our whistle stop tour here suggests, not all autocracies emerge through violent military coups, or counterrevolutions. Sometimes, the co-opting of major institutions, coupled with creative abuses of power, produces the same effect.


<Like January 6th never happened 
(...Once the pardons kick in):
Late campaign mailer, Harris-Walz, Take III>

<iv.>
Getting his trifecta of complete governmental control, as he did in 2016, will give Trump all the relevant tools he needs to push America down a Bjelke-style path, starting with the proverbial "phone and pen." We can count on Trump to fire off a blizzard of executive orders that further his various obsessions, like his hatred of electric cars, for example. 

And that's before we contemplate the specter of a Trump-dominated Congress, enabled by the Extreme (Supreme) Court -- the same one, let's not forget, that crafted a sweeping immunity right for him, out of thin air -- poised to make the far right's wish list come true. Reports suggest that the first priority is permanently locking down those 2017 tax cuts, with corporate taxes falling to 15 percent.

As critics note, this orgy of tax slashing could add $8 trillion to the national debt, and accelerate Social Security's insolvency by three years -- since Trump wants to exempt it from the taxes that fund it. How his party addresses such inconvenient facts, we haven't heard, but their carefree approach certainly puts social programs at risk. After all, you have to make up those windfalls for billionaires somewhere, and who wants them camping out in the cold and snow?

Or maybe Trump and his allies will take the more straightforward route, such as converting Medicare and Medicaid into block grants -- another long-standing far right priority -- or try to hollow out the Affordable Care Act, by stripping away its more popular elements, such as protections for pre-existing conditions.

Other reports suggest that resuming the GOP's court capture project will take priority in the new year. This makes sense, since the longest-serving Extreme Supremes -- Sam Alito, and Clarence Thomas, at 74 and 76, respectively, will face pressure to retire, and make room for younger, more toxic versions of themselves, who can wreak havoc with a gavel for decades. Someone like Aileen Cannon, perhaps, whose sinking of Trump's classified documents case has put her on the fast track for the promotion.

This, despite the passage of abortion rights measures in seven out of 10 states, including two (AZ, MO) that overturned existing restrictions, and one (FL) that failed, because it fell short of a Republican-imposed 60% threshold. No matter: as Joh himself said, when pressed about the subject of human rights, he responded, "What's the ordinary man on the street got to do with it?" It's a quote that would likely have earned Trump's full-throated approval, had he been made aware of it.


<"And Now (A Word From Our Sponsor): Thanks, Woody..."
Take I/The Reckoner>


<v.>
We turn to the last, most pressing question, what do we do now, and how should we respond? First and foremost: before we plan the relevant marches, and roll out the pink pussy hats once more, we need new leadership, and should not rest, until we finally get it. The aging affluent overclass that runs the Democratic Party needs to step down, because their credibility is now in tatters.

Yes, Biden should likely have exited the stage earlier -- preferably, at the start of 202. But honestly, it's high time for the next generation -- the Ro Khannas, Pramila Jayapals, Jamie Raskins, and the Adam Schiffs, and so on -- to take the reins, and inject some fresh ideas into the conversation. The sooner, the better.

Second: For all the chatter about the Democratic "ground game," what's striking -- and disturbing -- is how short it fell of its promised results. Someone needs to see why so many core voters stayed home, considering how much emphasis Team Harris placed on the stakes of this election. Most likely, they're only hearing from the door knockers at election time, but it's harder to win people over, if you don't show more skin in the game.

Third: Overtones matter in messaging, and the wrong ones will trigger a rush to the exits. I cringed when former President Obama scolded young Black men for their reluctance to embrace Harris's candidacy; winced, when Biden blasted Trump voters as "garbage"; and groaned at the usual barrage of celebrity endorsements - from Lady Gaga to Oprah, Taylor Swift, and beyond -- all of which singularly failed to connect. Word to the Whoopis of the world: next time, just cut the check, and leave the spotlight shining where it belongs, on the nominee.

Fourth: The wrong priorities can be fatal. It's hard to overstate the oddity of Harris campaigning with the likes of Liz Cheney, whose notorious father played wingman in handing his boss, George, the disputed 2000 presidential election. Progressives recoiled, and for good reason. If saving democracy is such a major part of the message, why share a podium with the Cheneys? What's more, it's perilous to start depending on allies whose interests barely align with yours. It's a dangerous strategy, and certainly not a guarantee of political longevity. Or relevance.

Last, and most important: As tough as the results feels, there's nowhere to go, but up. For Democrats, it should mean going back to basics, starting with the sweeping economic reform message that worked n the 1930s. The plain fact is, without weeping reforms, all this blather about creating an "opportunity economy" will amount to just so much empty hot air, as guest poster Patrick Toomey notes on Down With Tyranny: 

"I was hoping that a Trump defeat would lead to GOP rounds of recrimination. Instead, we’re now seeing that with the Dems, including the tired tripe that the party is 'too liberal' and must move to a mythical 'center.' Few seem to be addressing economic class issues— the elephant in the room that the party mandarins and their on-air and on-line enablers invariably ignore." And, from the same post, I'll leave the last word to author/commentator Tom Frank, former editor of The Baffler, who sums it up better than I ever could:

"I have been writing about these things for 20 years, and I have begun to doubt that any combination of financial disaster or electoral chastisement will ever turn on the lightbulb for the liberals. I fear that ’90s-style centrism will march on, by a sociological force of its own, until the parties have entirely switched their social positions and the world is given over to Trumpism.

"Can anything reverse it? Only a resolute determination by the Democratic Party to rededicate itself to the majoritarian vision of old: a Great Society of broad, inclusive prosperity. This means universal health care and a higher minimum wage. It means robust financial regulation and antitrust enforcement. It means unions and a welfare state and higher taxes on billionaires, even the cool ones. It means, above all, liberalism as a social movement, as a coming-together of ordinary people — not a series of top-down reforms by well-meaning professionals.

"That seems a long way away today. But the alternative is — what? To blame the voters? To scold the world for failing to see how noble we are? No. It will take the opposite sentiment — solidarity — to turn the world right-side up again."

Now, that's a sentiment we can all get behind. Onward and upward, for there is much work to be done. --The Reckoner

PS Incidentally, I'm still getting fundraising emails from the Harris campaign, these ones tied to the handful of national races that have yet to be called: "
We must stay engaged for the sake of freedom, justice, and the future that we all know we can build together. The outcomes of these elections may well have an impact on our ability to hold the incoming administration accountable -- so let’s give this everything we’ve got."

True enough. But something tells me that someone else will have to be the face of whatever resistance emerges. Simply because, based on this evidence, the current political class is well past its sell-by date.

Oh, and as for the Inaugural? Maybe they should run a laugh track behind it, particularly when they get to the "protect against enemies, foreign and domestic" part. It will make a fitting soundtrack for our return to the dark side.

Links To Go: Hurry, Hurry (Joh's Ghost
Is Bellying Up To The Bar):

AOL: What Trump's Second Term


Deccan Herald: International New York Times:
Harris Had A Wall Street-Approved Economic Pitch: It Fell Flat:
https://www.deccanherald.com/world/harris-had-a-wall-street-approved-economic-pitch-it-fell-flat-3269832


Joh Bjelke-Petersen: Wikipedia.com Entry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joh_Bjelke-Petersen

[Well worth the read, packed with plenty of fascinating detail]




Tuesday, November 5, 2024

One Picture, A Thousand Words (Take IV): Some Last Blasts From The Home Stretch

 <Kamala Harris Continues Making Her Case...>



<A Harris flyer with a specific mission, namely, give the last-minute voters whatever nudge they still need, to get to the polls -- and, of course, cast their ballot for her. All the necessary details are right upfront (above), with the final kicker of encouragement on the back (below).

As strange as it sounds, there are still people out there who haven't committed themselves either way, as they wrestle with the various issues preoccupying them -- the cost of living, the slaughter in Gaza, whether Harris can muster the necessary juice to capitalize on her campaign promises, and so on.

As one comic (whose name escapes me) said, on "The Daily Show," "What could there possibly left to find out about these people, how they stack the inside of a dishwasher?" But I honestly wouldn't dog people who identify that way -- when it comes to politics, we all have varying levels of comfort, and/or discomfort. Everyone has to decide what level they can live with, in their mind.>


====================================================================================================================================================

<Michigan Supreme Court, Reproductive Rights>


<Nowhere has the Democratic ground game seemingly invested more effort on any issue than -- surprise, surprise -- abortion, which paid such dividends in the 2022 midterms after the infamous Dobbs decision. 

The pundits, as they often do, seem dismissive of a repeat, but the comments that I've read -- of articles focusing on uncommitted and undecided voters -- lead me to think otherwise.

After all, images of Republican-leaning women getting just as queasy as their Democratic counterparts about the idea of an America committing itself to forced birth don't seem that much of a stretch, right? In any event, this mailer showcases Harris's efforts to link herself with reproductive rights, via Michigan's Supreme Court candidates who embrace them, while throwing plenty of shade on their counterparts (O'Grady, Fink).>


====================================================================================================================================================


<Example of another mailer, this one making a more explicit connection between the Republican nominees for the Michigan Supreme Court, and their counterparts on the national stage (Mike Rogers, Donald Trump). The implication here is obvious ("They're all on the same team, so -- AVOID!")>



====================================================================================================================================================


<State Representative (38th District):
One Positive, One Negative Snapshot>



<Example of a more upbeat flyer from Democratic State Representative Joey Andrews, complete with the obligatory family shot (above), followed by a quick rundown of his more relevant policy stances on the rear (below). What a contrast this effort makes from the one that follows, as you'll see...>


====================================================================================================================================================


<Once again, this mailer hammers Andrews's Republic opponent, South Haven area money manager Kevin Whiteford, for taking an overly punitive stance against abortion, and -- as the other bullet points suggest -- a bit too much enthusiasm for other aspects of his party's program. Add a photo made to look distinctly unflattering, and you're good to go, or so it seems. Another snapshot of how national issues find expression at the down ballot level.>



====================================================================================================================================================

<Jill Stein Returns For An Encore>


<For all the fuss made over third party candidates this year, it seems fair to say they haven't made much noise, presumably due to so many locking in with the major party nominees (Harris, Trump), and a conscious desire, perhaps, to avoid the fallout of 2016 -- when some blamed Stein, the Green Party's nominee, for helping to siphon enough votes from Hillary Clinton, enabling Trump to slither across the finish line.

This time around, like her cohorts (Cornel West, Oliver Chase), Stein's return is playing out to a more muted response, while RFK Jr. is faring slightly better, due to his full-throated support of Trump (having dropped out, where else could he go, right?).

How much drawing power Stein still commands remains to be seen, but this mailer clearly shows where she expects to try and find an opening, taking dead aim at Harris's stance on Gaza.

This being the only one I've seen from her, it's fair to say that Stein is running a shoestring campaign -- well, maybe more like a shoelace, perhaps -- so give her points for trying, I suppose. I have yet to see mailers from Chase, West, or any of the other third party upstarts.>



<Coda: Randall Terry, Eyebrow Raiser>
Now that the big day has arrived, I felt tempted to write some type of suitably apocalyptic, seemingly all-encompassing editorial, most likely as an addition to our "Tomorrow And Tomorrow And Tomorrow" creeps series, but ended up ditching the idea, for the usual boring reasons.

First of all, considering all the angst over the darkness of a potential Trump restoration, anything I'd say would seem repetitive, and not terribly useful. It's not like there's an 
upside to the potential imposition of a Trump police state, right? That is, unless you count numbered uniforms and the lack of needing any to-do lists -- because those will come straight from the Dear Leader, right?

Second, you can only outrun so much, handicap so much, and futureproof so much. Although it's natural for the commentariat to draw whatever parallels it can, between the latest race and the last one, every election ends up differing -- sometimes, in small ways, other times, with a more significant twist. At times, there's no rhyme or reason (for further reference, see "How Is It This Close?", below).

As a friend of mine pointed out recently, even if Trump and his shock troops attempt another all-out assault on the Capitol, "there's plenty of people doing time in prison because of it, (over the January 6, 2021 attempt), and the cops and the military will be ready for it." True enough, I agreed; I think it's more likely that Trump's legal team tries to send some sort of made-up case to the Extreme Court (excuse me, the Supreme Court).

After all, they've already carved a potential glide path for him to dictatorship, out of thin air; what's a little constitutional origami among friends, right? Especially when Trump appointed three of them. Or maybe, just maybe, the pollsters are wrong, and Harris's showing will prove strong enough, that the Extreme Supremes sit by their phones, waiting for the call that never comes. We'll see soon enough.

Lastly, though, is the notion thar real life apocalypses are way scarier than anything we could ever second guess, or conjure up. I got a reminder Sunday night, as I sat here, pecking away, when a voiceover cut in, after the 10 o'clock news. I'm paraphrasing from memory, but it sounded something like this:

"The following presentation contains extremely graphic images. Viewer discretion is advised. WXYZ is obliged to give air time, to whatever candidates request it, and takes no control over their content. The following views aired do not reflect those of management, or staff, at WXYZ."


For those reading between the lines, the inference isn't hard to miss: It's a political ad, okay? This wasn't our idea, either, so don't flood the station with calls, if you toss your cookies, or get really upset. Whatever happens, don't blame us. Before I could ponder the point any further, the political ad flickered to life, flashing image after image of dead, mangled babies, each one seemingly more twisted and misshapen than the last.

Constitution Party candidate Randall Terry was making his case for a presidential promotion with all the subtlety of a brick upside the head -- though I imagine he lobbed a few, during his '90s heyday as the leader of Operation Rescue, as it carried out its relentless intimidation campaign against abortion clinics, doctors, and women nationwide. 

Terry's face flickered into view amid all these disturbing images -- shaggier and hairier than I remembered, from his '90s heyday, yet brimming with all the determination that only the truly unhinged can muster, as he gravely intoned: "This is the last bastion of free speech. The only place that you can still have free speech is on a licensed station as a qualified federal candidate."

Then, he went right into his pitch: "A vote for Kamala is a vote for continuing the apocalypse against these babies." And so on, and so forth, wash, rinse, repeat. Nothing that we haven't already heard before, but will undoubtedly some disturb some, just the same (see the WTHR link below, to find out how you can weigh in on the ad).

Seeing Terry's ad reminded me, though, that for all the relentless gazing directed toward Trump, there's always a fresh nightmare lurking around the corner, ready to take his place. At some point, Trump will eventually, finally, mercifully, fade from the public square. For the two major parties, it's an outcome that will undoubtedly scramble the script - yet, as the likes of Terry make amply clear, there's always someone who may leave us wishing, "Hey, remember when Donald Trump was all we had to worry about? Boy, those sure were the good old days."

For me, the biggest takeaway of this particular election cycle comes down to one major realization. We've all heard the oft-quoted cliche, "We have met the enemy, and he is us." That same verdict, it's safe to say, goes double for our allies, though.

As I've told people, over and over and over again, throughout this campaign season, Batman, Superman, and James Bond aren't coming to our rescue, to make things right. Only we can save us, from us, even if that doesn't happen to be the advice we want to hear. Like it or not, a refusal to do the required heavy lifting isn't optional, if we really want a functioning democracy. And keep it in sound condition, too.

In the end, we are only as good as the vigilance we exercise -- and if we rise to the occasion, there's no telling what we can do. If we check it at the door? Then we have no one else to blame but ourselves, for whatever chaos that such a dereliction of duty unleashes. Let us hope, after today, that it does not become the epitaph that eternally defines us. --The Reckoner

Links To Go (Hurry. Hurry, 
Before All Those Fake Electors Scramble Your Brain):

The Atlantic: How Is It This Close?:
https://archive.ph/Dk6qT 
(Read the other relevant pieces on the page, too, for additional context)

The Guardian: Nostalgic Trump Wheels Out The Hits:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/05/donald-trump-us-election-2024-last-day-campaign

The Verge: Why You're Seeing Those Gross Political Ads:
https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/30/24283757/world-series-political-ads-anti-trans-abortion-dodgers-yankees

WTHR: WTHR Is Legally Required To Air Graphic Ad:
https://www.wthr.com/article/news/politics/elections/decision-2024/wthr-is-legally-required-to-air-graphic-ad-purchased-by-presidential-candidate-randall-terry-anti-abortion-advertisement/531-0ebf997d-eab6-4126-bc64-4b43f3aee910

Sunday, October 27, 2024

Life's Little Injustices (Take XXV): Hey, If "Nobody Wants To Work," Why Are The Lines So Long?

 

<"My name is Grace Slick, and I'm a tad dissatisfied
with the state of America today...":
Welcome To The Wrecking Ball!, inner gatefold sleeve>


Lines -- long, long, long lines...
Lines -- long, long, long lines...

Pushing in, shoving in, butting in -- cutting up some lines...

Lines for the rat race, you get wasted
All these traces, lines on your faces...

Breadlines, bloodlines,
Standing in the back of unemployment lines...


<Grace Slick, "Lines"
Welcome To The Wrecking Ball! (1981)>


Old records pop into your head at the funniest moments. The above citations came to mind
while the Squawker and I endured one of modern life's grisliest rituals, namely, the weekly grocery store outing that you know exists to Hoover as much money as possible out of your pockets. It's basically like visiting that ninth circle of Hell, only without the medieval woodcuts to dazzle your eyes.

For those who don't know, Welcome To The Wrecking Ball! (1981) marked Grace Slick's third solo outing, before she returned to her Jefferson Starship day job, so to speak. It came as a surprise to people, amounting to an about face from Dreams (1980), its moodier, orchestral-driven, ballad-oriented predecessor/

I'm suspecting that the contrast was intentional, with crunchy power chording carrying the day on Wrecking Ball!, whose key players
 (producer Ron Frangipane, engineer Ed Sprigg, and guitarist Scott Zito). Although it's somewhat favorable, I take issue with Allmusic Guide's characterization of Wrecking Ball! as Slick sounding like "she's fronting Genesis vocally while the band dwells on hard rock."

Actually, the results sounded closer to much of the AOR hard rock of the era, down to the token moody ballad ("Shooting Star"). The results peaked at #48 in Billboard, so somebody liked it, right? Still, with Grace Slick working the mic, the results will sound a notch or two above what the Foreigners and Journeys were doing back then. "Lines," though, is the real gem here -- essentially, Grace free associating whatever connotations of the word pop into her head, most of them negative (surprise, surprise, right?).

All I know is, the song made my best friend in high school and I laugh our asses off at the audacity of the whole thing. For two teenage boys, Welcome To The Wrecking Ball! served its purpose - provide an enjoyable way of passing a Thursday afternoon, waiting to see what the weekend would bring. What I wouldn't give back to go there, considering how fucked up so much of our world seems today, eh?

And, while it probably won't win any positions on those All-Time Greatest Album lists, it does what it says on the tin, as they say in the UK. Sometimes, that's enough. At any rate...

...something else stuck with me on this particular shopping trip, which came right at the end. As the Squawker and I pulled our carts into the checkout lanes -- of which there were just three, with cashier and one bagger apiece to work them. The self-service machines were humming, jammed with the legions of people using them, which is why we glided past them, though that wasn't the only reason, as I'll explain shortly.

What struck me were these long and winding lines, created by the simple act of sticking as few people behind the counter and the cash register to work. At least Squawker and I could sit down, but I saw a lot of visibly irritated people shifting from foot to foot, as they rolled their eyes, and looked straight ahead, waiting for that ninth circle to end.

Grocery stores, in particular, seem to really enjoy pulling this scam. Big box or small one, it doesn't seem to matter, because I see this phenomenon everywhere I go, with the inevitable long faces and weary sighs of resignation providing the perfect counterpoint. What else is new, right? So many businesses, I swear, have adopted "Customers are cattle" as their new working motto.

And yet -- and yet -- over and over again, the captains of industry continue their lament: "Nobody wants to work." It's repeated like some perverse variation on the Rosary, as if one more mumble of the relevant Scripture might finally change the game.

So, I'll serve up a few questions, for the sake of public service, which go something like this:

If nobody wants to work, why are the lines always so perennially long, and why are we still stuck with so many of them? And why are we being herded into them, even now?

And for those do end up working -- or "wanting to" schlep the cash register for that minimum wage, in RichPeopleSpeak -- why do I see so many of them walking to work? I bring this up, because Matthew's, our local grocery store, is only two miles down the road from our complex. Driving past there, on any given day, I see many of those who man the registers heading there, on foot, dressed for work. 

So, let me repeat the question, for the overdogs who somehow missed it -- can we finally, simply, and realistically admit, that one job is nowhere near enough to pay the bills anymore? Because however many hours they're getting, it's clearly not enough to afford a car, right?

And, last but not least: who decided this was AOK, and why do we continue putting up with it? As the saying goes: answers on a postcard, please. The sooner, the better, because the picture's not getting any prettier. --The Reckoner



One Picture, 1,000 Words (Take III): Harris And Trump Trade Punches, Counterpunches


<Example of Harris-Walz campaign's Spanish language outreach, though this flyer is actually the title one of this four-page effort, as you'll see below...>


<Pages two and three spell out the nitty-gritty of this mailer, which is probably among the more elaborately-crafted ones that we've seen crossing our mailbox...>



<...And, last but not least, a Spanish language 
dunking on Project 2025, and Trump's links to it -- 
just in case anyone's missed the message>



<Apologies in advance for the quality, but the main point of interest here lies in the headline -- as in, the same veterans he called "losers" and "suckers," presumably (per his former Chief of Staff, John Kelly)?>



<Rear page of above Trump campaign mailer, targeting what his campaign perceives as a weak spot on veterans' issues...>




<Two different Trump mailers targeting Harris's ties to the Biden administration, attempting to cement her association with the cost of living issues that have soured perceptions toward the White House -- and, indeed, most likely played a role in hounding the President out of the 2024 race...>



<Another example of a Trump mailer, this one taking a more positive tack in emphasizing his belief that, whatever else people say about him, he had a hand in the positive aspects they remember. Cynics say that he's trying to take credit for the groundwork laid by his predecessor, Barack Obama. We'll know soon whose view will carry the day. --The Reckoner>

Sunday, October 20, 2024

One Picture, 1,000 Words (Take II): The Slotkin-Rogers Senate Slugfest

 






Continuing with our current theme, here are some flyers and mailers from the U.S. Senate slugfest between Democratic Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin, and her Republican counterpart, Mike Rogers. In many ways, this race typifies what we're seeing nationally. Both are among the more notable faces of Michigan's Congressional delegation, looking to move up into the bigger job that opened, when veteran Debbie Stabenow ruled out running for a fourth term.

Since 2019, Slotkin has represented a district, variously numbered as the Seventh and Eighth, that stretches from Lansing, to Detroit's outer north suburbs. In contrast, Rogers served the Eighth Congressional District from 2001 to 2015, notably as chairman of the U.S. Permanent Committee on Intelligence (2011-15). Since then, he's put his credentials as a former law enforcement officer to good use, as a national security commentator on CNN, and executive producer of the network's program, "Declassified: Untold Stories Of America's Spies."

Unlike his more flamboyant former colleagues, Rogers isn't a screaming bomb thrower, nor a partisan performance artist. His lower-key style simply doesn't inspire the same animosity or pure gut level disgust as Scott Perry's election denying antics do. Yet Rogers's attack approach seems wearily familiar -- blame Democrats, in general, and their nominee Kamala Harris, in particular, for everything major and minor.

Cost of living going up? All roads lead back to Wilmington. Is the road closure that bottlenecks your complex taking weeks longer to unravel? Team Harris is leaning on those orange barrel guys. Got dinged by 50 cents, for an overdue library book? One call to the front desk sealed your fate. You get the idea.

The only problem, of course, with all this finger-pointing is that it doesn't offer any new insight, unless it's to suggest that Trump didn't get enough to work the magic tricks that eluded the adults in the room. And that's the basic problem with people like Rogers, who seems reasonably intelligent, but nevertheless, voted with Trump 95 to 100% on the time (FiveThirtyEight). 

It's a factoid that raises a reasonable concern, should we end up stuck with a Trump restoration. Slotkin has taken her share of knocks from progressives, which hasn't hurt her at the electoral box office. So far, polls show her clinging to a narrow lead (3-3.5%), a marked contrast from the picture painted in this recent Politi.com story:
https://www.deadlinedetroit.com/articles/32405/politico_internal_republican_poll_shows_slotkin_with_sizable_lead_over_rogers_in_michigan_senate_race

If the story is accurate, and Slotkin really has opened up a wider lead against Rogers, it might explain the flood of literature we're seeing from him lately. Carpetbombing your mailbox doesn't seem like the sign of a candidate who's on a winning track, but maybe Rogers is trying to make up for lost ground and time, having lagged consistently in fundraising throughout the race. (Current figures show war chests of $80 and $62 million for Slotkin and Rogers, respectively.)

At any rate, here are some relevant images from the flyers and mailers we have seen, with relevant comments, as needed. With just over a couple weeks left till Election Day, the frenzied carpetbombing of all those mass mailings is likely to only heat up -- as ever, we'll present the most notable ones that catch our eye. And yours, too, perhaps. --The Reckoner

===========================================================================================================================


<An atypically sunny, positive ad from the Rogers camp, serving as a reminder of what candidates --- particularly incumbents -- used to do, before the "ready, aim, splat!" approach took hold as the go-to campaigning mode nationwide...>

==========================================================================================================================


<I don't see my overdue library book nor clogged local road among the list of failings enumerated here, but give Mr. Rogers time -- I'm sure that he'll lob one, soon enough, to a mailbox near you...>

==========================================================================================================================


<Back to Mike Rogers Playbook 101: Vote for those, like him, who marched in lockstep with the "Swamp Drainer." That should fix everything that ails us, right? 

The verbiage here ('big spending Democrats...like Slotkin") makes us wonder if there's some fill-in-the-blank computer program, deep in the dark heart of the Republican National Committee, that helps candidates whip out these sorts of mailers -- like some twisted political game of Mad Libs, isn't it?>

==========================================================================================================================


So far, the only Slotkin mailer that's crossed our threshold (maybe our fellow tenants have pitched theirs), aimed from the other side of the equation, with a knock against Republican hegemony firmly in the crosshairs ("We deserve to buy a home, build wealth, and start a family, just like every generation has been able to do before now").