Mad King Watch (Take XVIII): A Republic, If We Can Restore It (Reclaiming Our Mojo On America's 250th Birthday)

 

<"Consequences Coming:
Course Correction, Take I"/The Reckoner>

<i.>

The revolution will not be televised, but on Tuesday, landed where it counts the most – at the ballot box. In Colorado, Democratic primary voters rebuked the party establishment's choice – Congresswoman Diana DeGette, who'd been in place since 1996. Melat Kiros, 29, a self-described democratic socialist, won by double-digit margins. Kiros garnered 58,337 votes (49.3%), followed by DeGette, with 51,459 (43.5%), and businesswoman Wanda James (8,505 votes, or 7.2%).

Though it attracted the most attention, DeGette's upset wasn't the only one on Tuesday's menu, as two other Democratic progressives also made waves. In the Eighth Congressional District, Manny Rutinel advanced to the November election over incumbent Shannon Bird, 40,339-22,792.

In the Governor's race, Attorney General Phil Weiser beat centrist Senator Michael Bennet by a 365,254-297.579 margin (55.1-44.9%). Both were vying to succeed the term-limited incumbent, Jared Polis, who earned himself widespread infamy in pardoning election denying clerk, Tina Peters (having served barely a quarter of her nine-year sentence). Democratic Senator John Hickenlooper did successfully fend off a challenge from his progressive challenger, Julie Gonzales (469,564-418,066), in one of the night's lone bright spots for centrist politicians.

The news followed an equally stunning showing last month in New York City, in which Mayor Zohran Mamdani saw all three of his endorsed candidates win their races. Two incumbents – including the Democratic Hispanic Caucus's chair – were among the losers. These results follow last spring's series of upsets, including Graham Platner's victory in Maine.

Prominent centrists – who really should be called Corporate Moderates, for reasons we'll revisit shortly – reacted as they usually do, with a mixture of bravado and denial. WelcomePAC co-founder Liam Kerr's comments in Politico typify this muddled thinking: “We love the statistic that [progressives have] never flipped any seats. We love to say, ‘look at the polling. But we haven’t been scared enough. We’ve been high on our own supply of data while they’ve been organizing.”

The unintentional irony of Kerr's last comment highlights the denial at the heart of Democratic normie thinking – which implies that their critics will just fade away, if they hear, "We're trying," or, "We're working on it," often enough. As DeGette discovered on Tuesday, it's a defense that's wearing increasingly thin with voters struggling to afford necessities like food, gas, and rent.

It's a moment that screams out for the punchline from Bob Dylan's '60s classic, “Ballad of a Thin Man”: “But there's something happening here, and you don't know what it is, do you – Mr. Jones?”

<"Happy 250th, Sucker...
You're In Too Deep"/The Reckoner>

<ii.>

For progressives – indeed, for any voter who still harbors some measure of the hopes and dreams that our Founding Fathers entertained, once they'd defeated their British colonizers – felt like a sorely-needed balm of relief, as the reactionary-stacked Supreme Court – or, the Extreme Court, or the Supremacy Cour, as we prefer to call it – continued dismantling major pieces of the republic that Ben Franklin audibly hoped to keep.

Still, it's worth noting that the six reactionaries – led by Chief Justice John Roberts – took a somewhat more strategic approach, compared to the infamous 2024 presidential immunity ruling that evoked so much public outrage. Mindful, perhaps, of avoiding a similar outcome, the reactionary bloc threw out some bones.

In the biggest surprise, the court upheld, 5-4, a five-day grace period for mail-in ballots in Mississippi, for instance. The notion of birthright citizenship also survived, 6-3. Yet the margin against the Trump executive order banning birthright citizenship isn't as lopsided as it appears; Justice Brett Kavanaugh partially dissented, though he joined the majority – agreeing that the order flouted federal law, which Congress could correct, if it wished. Whatever interests Kavanaugh claims to serve, the people's don't rank among them.

Otherwise, the court remained its predictably nasty, brutish self. As we've noted in previous postings, the reactionary bloc handed 6-3 wins to Trump on two immigration cases – and, by a similar margin, upheld Democratic FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter's firing, despite a lack of any direct cause. In doing so, the court flushed a 90-year precedent against the practice – freeing the Trump regime to fire whomever it wants, however it wants, whenever it wants.

The court's actions lay waste to the separation of powers, because it's hard to imagine that our new nation yearned to repeat the monarchist abuses of power, once it shook them off. The 5-4 ruling that allowed Federal Reserve Board Commissioner Lisa Cook to remain there simply reflects the Robed Rogues's calculating streak. Allowing her firing to stand would have aroused the markets, who would have not tolerated it. Messing with the Fed might arouse Wall Street's animosity -- and, by extension, that of the billionaires who spent so heavily to elevate Roberts and his clique.

Clearly, this court respects privilege and money, far more than individual rights – a depressing conclusion to draw, indeed, as we reach our 250^th birthday. But it's hard to imagine how many, who have struggled for so long, without anyone coming to their rescue, would actually feel that way.

Never has the American Dream felt so gutted, so hollowed out, and so unattainable -- and never has the need for changing this unholy status quo felt so urgent, as it does now, if our democracy is to survive. It's as simple, and existential, as that.

<Tired of hearing the same old broken record...

"A Tale Of Two Expectations, 2026 Style..."/The Reckoner>

<iii.>

DeGette's upset produced a raft of predictable headlines, such as the question that Colorado Public Radio posted: “What just happened to Diana DeGette?” A better one might sound like this, in light of our Dylan quote: why didn't Mr. Jones -- or Ms. Jones, in this case -- read the room more adeptly?

There were ample warning signs that DeGette failed to heed, starting with the Denver County party assembly, where Kiros soundly defeated her by a 67-33% margin in a preliminary delegate preference poll. The situation created a major embarrassment for DeGette before her primary campaign even started, since candidates needed at least 30% to grace the ballot.

As telling as that figure seemed, it failed to register with the legacy media. Yes, the Colorado Sun opined, DeGette's lukewarm showing belied her veteran status – but  meant nothing, since “the assembly process is not representative of the broader electorate.” Westword waxed no less optimistic, noting that many candidates who failed to woo the delegates had went on to win their primaries.

The bitterest irony of DeGette's loss is that, for decades, she was widely seen as her delegation's most progressive member, based on her support of ideas like Medicare For All. And how could her district even part with someone who'd served as one of the House managers of Donald Trump's second impeachment trial?

Yet DeGette struggled to explain her willingness to accept money from Super PACs – including the $1.3 million that poured in, to shore up her campaign – and inability to break from decades of supporting Israel, whose brutal occupation of the Gaza Strip has created such a major fissure within the party.

DeGette's estimated $2.84 million net worth – much of it coming from investments in stocks and mutual funds, per the OpenSecrets site, which tracks such things – also cut a starkly unfavorable contrast to Kiros, who'd been working as a barista. That job became a necessity, after Kiros's law firm fired her, simply for defending student protests against the occupation on her Substack page.

But DeGette's pleas to stick with a woman whose daughters had “never known a time when their mom was not in elected office," as she noted -- in a telling aside from her concession statement -- fell on deaf ears. “Continuity” isn't a word that voters care to hear, especially when they're seeing their own lives get worse, while the status quo remains stubbornly intact, as Kiros observed:

“You solve homelessness by giving people housing, you solve hunger by giving people food, you solve healthcare by going to a single-payer system. We know these things already, and yet nothing changes, ever — and it’s because, despite the fact the vast majority of Americans agree on the solutions for all of these issues, there’s too much money in our politics.”

Kiros's comments for Colorado Newsline (see link below) mirrored those of disillusioned volunteers like Iranian-American Roddy Salimi, 25, whose own remarks simmer with a moral clarity that establishment Democrats no longer seem able to muster: "Last year, my home country of Iran was attacked by the very nation that funded that (2020) campaign, using weapons the representative I interned for voted to send. I felt betrayed.”

<Michigan Democratic Senate Primary Flyer:

Abdul El-Sayed makes the case 

against the establishment>

<iv.>

With recent trends turning against them, the Corporate Moderates – and their Washington, D.C. allies, as well as the legacy media – are resurrecting a familiar  argument: any use of the s-word (“socialism”) is too risky, because it might alienate those ever-elusive swing voters, and Republican soccer moms, or something along those lines. The activist left can't be trusted, because its denizens are starry-eyed space cadets, incapable of governing effectively, or – to coin their chosen phrase – “solve problems.”

This line of attack is the keynote theme of the Politico piece -- which reads, in part, like a Corporate Moderate press release -- as we see in these comments from Phil Gardner, of Blue Dog Action:

“The reason they do that is because it works,” Gardner said of GOP efforts to tie moderates to progressives. “Candidates running in these competitive seats should not rely on just anti-Trump sentiment or the Democratic brand, because you’re basically putting your destiny in the hands of forces far outside your control.”

It's an odd argument, when we consider what the Republican Party has become – an anti-democratic, authoritarian personality cult, driven by the whims of one man (Donald Trump) who's bullied companies into “partnering” with his regime – and egged on his underlings to aggressively pursue his real or imagined enemies. Sounds like quintessential Stalinism, doesn't it? If not, what does?

Some centrist faces, like Gavin Newsom, are running for cover– as he's shown, in backing off California's wealth tax proposal. Never mind that it's designed as a one-time fix that would raise $40 to $100 billion, depending on the estimate. San Francisco Mayor Dan Lurie pulled a similar stunt, in leading the charge against a corporate tax on the CEOs who've hollowed out his city, as Robert Reich noted, in a Facebook post last month. The measure lost narrowly.

“This has to change,” Reich urges. “Unless Democrats stand up to the oligarchs now running this nation, there won’t be any alternative to Trump Republicanism in the future, or any reason for a Democratic Party.”

That circle gets even tougher to square, when you consider a few relevant statistics that Heather Cox Richardson cites in a Facebook post of her own.

According to CBS News, the wealthiest 1 percent own 31.7% of all US wealth, the highest share they've enjoyed since 1989, when the Fed first began tracking household wealth, in 1989. “That means the wealthiest 1% held roughly as much in assets as the bottom 90% of Americans combined: about $55 trillion,” she reported.

A Brennan Center survey released last month showed that 92% of Americans worry about government corruption, a figure that cuts across all party lines; 79% support a constitutional amendment to restore spending limits for elections; 66% think the government should ensure that all Americans have a right to healthcare, versus 33% who oppose the idea.

“People are really unhappy,” sighs former Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), who's running to regain the seat that J.D. Vance vacated to become Vice president. “They believe the system's rigged. They see corporations making more and more money,…corporate executives taking more and more of those dollars for themselves, stock buybacks, bonuses, compensation of all kinds. They know they're working harder than ever…and they know that…more money's going out than coming in.”

<National Republican Senate Committee attack ad:
Will Corporate Moderates and their allies follow suit?
El-Sayed campaign email>

<v.>

So what do we make of all these events? For the short run, at least, the Corporate Moderates show no signs of “getting the memo” – as we see in Michigan's Democratic Senate primary, where millions are flooding in, to squelch progressive Dr. Abdul el-Sayed, who's holding a narrow lead over its preferred candidate, Haley Stevens. (The field also includes State Senator Mallory McMorrow, whose support remains mired in single digits.)

What makes Stevens so unappealing, besides her robotic speaking style, and allergy to public events? Essentially, all the corporate PAC loot that she's hoovered up for her campaign, including $5.5 million from the widely-hated Israeli lobbying arm, AIPAC.

Her donor list reads like a Who's Who of Fortune 500 power brokers, whether it's the defense (General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, Raytheon), finance and healthcare (Blue Cross Blue Shield, JPMorgan Chase, Quickens Loans), or tech sectors (Facebook, Google, Microsoft), take your pick. 

It's the kind of list that begs the question, “Why are all these players involved, and what do they expect from their investment?” – one that Stevens naturally ducked, when it surfaced during the candidates' only joint appearance, at their recent public debate on Mackinac Island. Time will tell if more follow, though we doubt that Stevens will want to repeat the experience.

Centrists would do well to heed the likes of Bennet, whose comments in Colorado Newsline show him as much more astute than his peers: “People my kids’ age hate the parties,” Bennet said during a June 4 debate. “They don’t believe that they’re standing for them.”

And anyone who's felt the squeeze of jacked-up rents after the private equity vultures discovered them, would agree with these remarks, coming at a housing forum, where Bennet and Weiser appeared: 

“The reality is that people of my generation, and Phil’s generation, have benefited from a ridiculous increase in our asset prices, and we have rolled up the carpet on everybody else,” Bennet said. “You see the massive intervention … to inflate the stock market, to inflate the assets of people living in the wealthiest neighborhoods, in the largest houses in Colorado — very clearly to the detriment of the people who work in our restaurants, who work in our schools, who serve in our police department and our firefighters.”

Those who prefer a slightly more direct summary will appreciate these words from Chanae Jackson, spotted on Facebook: "The same Democratic Party that swore up and down they were the last line of defense against fascism... drew their actual line in the sand at SOCIALISM?

"Not authoritarianism. Not concentration camps. Not the gutting of the Voting Rights Act. Not children in cages. Not Jan.6. Not Project 2025 being implemented in real time. Not actual Genocide."

Jackson's comments followed the Mamdani sweep in New York's primary, where he cuts to the heart of the matter. "There was never enough money for YOU," he writes. "That's not a fiscal position. That's a choice. And certain Democrats have been making that choice right alongside Republicans while calling themselves your allies.

"They don't fear fascism threatening democracy. They fear socialism threatening their access to the bag. Your tax dollars have been their personal piggy bank of these greedy bastards for decades and Mamdani is blowing the whole operation wide open."

<"Consequences Coming:

Course Correction, Take II"/The Reckoner>

<Coda>

This is the elephant in the room that refuses to go away, because it's true. For decades, establishment Democrats have kept voters captive to their donors' whims. The nature of the pitch depends on whatever political dilemma confronts Corporate Moderates at any given moment, whether it's basic bribery ("Vote for Blowhard, and we'll make sure you get your tax credit"), cynical resignation ("You  go along to get along"), or calculation dressed up as empathy ("These things take time; we share your disappointment").

Small wonder, then, that Reich wonders if the Democrats are up to their old tricks, rather than the hell that must be raised: "Instead of being class warriors, many Democratic politicians are class worriers. They openly worry that inequalities of income, wealth, and opportunity are out of control — but they won’t fight for what must be done."

Obviously, much depends on how well we survive the Trump regime's blatant attempts to rig the midterms. But even if we do, the Democratic Party must offer an affirmative, transformative vision of the future -- because its voters are yearning so fervently for it, and also, because it cannot continue simply as the anti-Trump party.

Opposing the Orange Man as an end in itself will only go so far, particularly when he departs from the political scene. The clearest place to start is this fall, when Democrats -- whatever majorities they win, or lose -- should revisit who's best equipped to lead them. If Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and his House counterpart, Hakeem Jeffries, are still viable leaders, let them prove it once more to their respective conferences. 

If not, then Democrats should also revisit mid-level positions. It's puzzling, and downright scandalous, to see the rock star likes of AOC leapfrogged for committee chairmanships -- as we saw in the notorious case of the late Gerry Connolly, who clawed his way to Ranking Member of the House Oversight Committee, only to resign four months later, citing a recurrence of the throat cancer that eventually claimed his life. (Indeed, he died in May 2025, only a month after announcing that he was retiring.)

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi worked the phones on Connolly's behalf from her hospital bed -- ironically, due to suffering a broken hip after a fall (see link below). If that's not a clear metaphor for generational change, what is?

But these are only intermediate steps, and no matter how they go, the Democratic Party must refocus on the art of the tangible. The "pick and shovel" politicking that President Biden pursued so ardently, via his signature infrastructure bills, did not yield the returns that he anticipated. 

When you can't afford the food on your plate, it's difficult to cheer the completion of a new bridge in your town.  If Democrats really want to reclaim their mojo, this is the place to start. If nothing else, expanding a progressive presence in Congress will force Democrats to reclaim their moral clarity -- an especially pressing priority, given the Trump regime's wrecking ball approach to governance, and the Corporate Moderates' singular failure to meaningfully confront it. 

Doing so will require a return to the notion that some red lines should never be crossed. The notion of Congressmen and Senators trading stocks like baseball cards is either a good idea, or it's not. The same observation can be offered on any number of issues, whether it's the infrastructure-gobbling potential of data centers, or the need for expanding the Extreme Court.

None of these things will come easily; they are neither cheap, nor expedient, but they are painfully necessary.  But they must be the first order of business, as we close the books on our 250th anniversary, amid a fog of social and class resentments not seen since the depths of the Great Depression.

"We have in it our power to begin the world over again," as Thomas Paine observed in his famous 1776 pamphlet, Common Sense. "A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand, and a race of men, perhaps as numerous as all Europe contains, are to receive their portion of freedom from the events of a few months."

Or, perhaps, we might go with the blunter update, as Jackson voices it: "Stay mad. Stay clear. And stop letting people who benefit from your suffering tell you what kind of help you're allowed to ask for." 

Or, once again, to coin a phrase from that '79 Secret Affair song: "This is the time, time for action -- time -- to -- be -- seen!"

However we take this medicine is up to us. But if we want to save our democracy from the slippery slope -- and hope to carve a path out of our present darkness, and are truly serious about reclaiming the ideals that our Founders envisioned, so long ago -- nothing less will do. --The Reckoner

Links To Go (Hurry, Hurry, Before The Autocrats
Shove Their Thumbs On The Scale):

Colorado Newsline: How Democratic Socialist
Melat Kiros Stunned Colorado Politics...:
https://coloradonewsline.com/2026/07/02/how-melat-kiros-stunned-colorado-politics/

Denverite: DeGette Concedes, 
There's Little Room For Politicians Like Her:
https://denverite.com/2026/07/01/diana-degette-concedes-melat-kiros/

Jezebel With Splinter:
75-Year-Old Democrat Who Beat AOC For Key Role Resigns...:
https://www.jezebel.com/75-year-old-democrat-who-beat-aoc-for-key-role-resigns-after-4-months

Politico: Centrist Democrats Are Freaking Out...:
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/25/progressive-moderate-democratic-party-battlegrounds-00975000

The Hill:
Demcoratic Socialists Are On The Rise:
Are The Pitchforks Finally Coming Out?:
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/5943153-democratic-socialism-rise-popularity/

Time For Action: Comment By Thursday (7/2) Against Mail-In Voting Restrictions

 

<"Hear me, O Lord, as I continue my never-ending campaign of bullying all those who dare to defy me..." (aclu.org)>

<i.>

Continuing our latest postings, here is another "Time For Action," to prevent the Bully-In-Chief from imposing himself on the rest of us. This time, the issue concerns the so-called executive order, signed last March, that attempts to strong-arm states from allowing absentee or mail-in voting -- unless they provide the Trump regime with lists of eligible voters.

There's lots of concerning ideas buried within that proposal, starting with the obvious one -- states run elections, according to the Constitution, which doesn't give the President any specific powers over them. That's before we get other pressing little issues, including the misuse of the U.S. Postal Service for political purposes, and the notion of making lists -- hmm, Trump's always made no bones about his desire for unlimited power. Why would he want to make mile-long lists of people?

Well...perhaps I can hazard a guess. Making lists and keeping tabs is a time-honored reflex of autocracies large and small, and whatever their stated purpose, anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows this much -- that just can't be good, right? Certainly not for those on the receiving end.

The good news is that federal judges are consistently rejecting the Trump regime's legal and administrative strong-arming. And, wonder of wonders, the US Supreme Court landed 5-4 against Trump's attempt to overturn a five-day grace period for mail-in ballots in Mississippi, of all places (see links below). Will wonders never cease?

At any rate, the critical point here is the information contained below, posted by Indivisible. We can weigh in against the idea, via email, for which the deadline is 5 p.m. Thursday, July 2. Here are the details:

"The Trump administration is trying to make it more difficult to vote by limiting access to mail-in ballots.

"We have until Thursday, July 2, at 5 p.m., to push back by submitting comments against the restrictions.

"We’re sharing more details on the proposed rules and guidelines for submitting comments in opposition below — we hope you’ll join us in making it clear that Michiganders are ready to defend the right to vote!

"Trump issued an Executive Order March 31 2026 to eliminate mail in and absentee ballots for federal elections nationwide in states that do not provide the federal government their voting rolls.

"HOW? He would do this by prohibiting the USPS from mailing ballots to any person in any state that is not on his federally created voter enrollment list. In fact, The USPS has begun a rules process to do this and is seeking comments by 5pm July 2, 2026 before implementing.

"This, of course, is illegal. The constitution clearly gives states the power to regulate elections. While this will most likely be struck down by multiple courts, the matter may not work through the judicial system until after the November election. That could mean this election could take place without absentee mail in ballots.

"Eliminating absentee and mail voting will most certainly suppress the vote, cause chaos, and cast doubt on election integrity. The good news is that we still have time to oppose this rule -- until July 2 -- by making your voice heard to the USPS Federal registry (PCFederalRegister@usps.gov).

"What should you do?

"ASAP: draft an email to PCFederalRegister@usps.gov, enter on subject line MAIL BALLOTS, and write your comments of opposition. These do not need to be lengthy...The goal is VOLUME of comments, as your voice will be considered by the courts and USPS in their decision. If this rule is allowed to go through it will have a profound effect on turnout and outcomes.

"We can stop this now. This matter is urgent.

"Please share with everyone you know on all media formats."

<ii.>

There you have it, then. I eliminated the language concerning "talking points below," because I couldn't find any evidence of them. However, we trust that, via the magic of the Internet, you can do sufficient finger-walking research to unearth them. Or find any number of news articles, perhaps, to support whatever comments you plan to make. Joyce Vance also offers an in-depth deep dive on her Substack (see link below), for those who want the nitty-gritty detail.

As I've mentioned, there ample reasons to oppose this Trumpist power grab -- pulled like a magician does with his scarves, from a seemingly bottomless black bag of bile, ill will, and aggrievement. Where today's Supreme Court outcome takes us, time will tell. Trump has ramped up calls to pass his so-called SAVE Act -- whose key language ties voting rights to citizenship -- though even his most craven Senate enablers doubt it can pass before the November midterm elections.

Nor do they seem inclined to dumping the filibuster, so they can pass SAVE by a hyper-slim majority, as Trump demands -- since one day, that shoe will go on the other foot, as several longtime Senate veterans on their side have already pointed out. And that shoe may drop in favor of Washington, DC statehood, Medicare For All, or any number of standard issue far-right nightmares. 

The flipside of this debate may well mean the return of Trump's masked paramilitary army to the polls, as allies like Steve Bannon have suggested. Or perhaps they'll be deputized to make balloting as physically draining as possible -- as we saw in Stacey Abrams' unsuccessful 2018 bid for Georgia governor, where six-hour waits were commonplace. It goes without saying that those same expectations may hold true again (as in, don't put anything past them).

That being said, I see little point in endless speculating about what "Trump might do," as it's fairly obvious he'll do his best to disrupt the proceedings -- since he may end up losing both houses of Congress, amid ongoing voter rage against his' abuses of power, economic mismanagement, and a war in Iran that seems no closer to ending than it did in February, when he and his Israeli cohort, Benjamin Netanyahu, unleashed it.

If there's one thing Trump understands well, beyond the power of money and celebrity, it's that rage crosses every possible party line. Poll after poll shows him underwater with all the key groups who restored him to power in 2024 -- young Black and Latino voters, independents, suburban women -- and, by all accounts, have had more than enough.

Of course, the hardline MAGA base remains solidly in his camp, a phenomenon powered by groups like evangelicals (of whom 58 percent voice support for "most" or "all of his policies," the Pew Center reported in January). However, as Republicans have seen -- notably, in the 2022 midterms, when the oft-predicted Red Wave fizzled to a Red Ripple - it's tough to win elections solely by turning out those who already agree with you. 

Time enough...

<iii.>

This is the scenario that keeps Trump's inner circle awake at nights. Having alienated most of those who gave him another look is not a good look, so to speak, at the political box office. 

There's also the ironclad rule that second-term Presidents suffer major losses in midterm elections -- the so-called "six-year itch" that political scientists have documented, when supporters and party officials begin looking past the incumbent, toward their own futures (and their own survival, in cases like the second Trump term, where chaos is the norm).

Major examples of the "itch" include LBJ's epic 1966 wipeout, as he struggled with the Vietnam War (47 House, and three Senate seats, lost); Gerald Ford, in 1974, fresh from the Watergate scandal that forced his boss, Richard Nixon, to resign (48 House, eight Senate seats); George W. Bush, coming off his own epic wars (Afghanistan, Iran), in 2006 (30 House, six Senate seats); and Barack Obama, in 2014, grappling with Republican opposition against the Affordable Care Act (13 House, nine Senate seats).

For Trump, the stakes are certainly as existential as an outlier result -- in which he somehow bucks the trend by gaining seats, or fends off a total wipeout -- might seem to his opposition. If he loses both houses, it essentially marks the end of his maximalist Presidency -- at least, as he's known and understood it.

One of the more obvious consequences will be a tidal wave of Democrat-led hearings, investigations, and various other maneuvers -- all aimed at holding him accountable, somehow, or even launching a third impeachment attempt against him. Or, if that looks unfeasible, they might settle for any number of his "junk drawer" Cabinet secretaries, or the more extreme Supreme Court Justices. The possibilities are endless.

For that six-year itch...

As several leading Democratic Senators have noted, the quality of Trump's nominees will "have to go up immediately"; anyone fitting the previous pattern that has been the norm (freaks, plutocrats, suckups) would find their confirmation prospects looking decidedly dicey.

Even an emboldened Democratic majority holding only one house of Congress could make the remainder of Trump's restoration miserable. At a minimum, it would halt implementation of further Project 2025 items, and force Republicans to rethink what they can pull over, legislative-wise. The old calculus of razor-thin House votes and Senate tiebreakers would no longer apply, forcing new political calculations.

While researching this post, I came across an excerpt from the aptly-titled Second Term Blues: How George W. Bush Has Governed (2007), by John C. Fortier, and Norman Ornstein. Obviously, it's dated now, but the introduction -- excerpted on the Brookings Institution's website -- holds plenty of relevant kernels for today's audience, like this one: "With the exception of FDR, every second-term president since the Civil War has faced a Congress with at least one chamber controlled by the other party. In a second term, let the investigations begin."

And the opening statement, though more general in tone, seems especially relevant nowadays, doesn't it: "Second terms have not been good to American presidents. They often are characterized by hubris, burnout, a paucity of new or bold ideas and are plagued by scandal, party infighting, lack of legislative success, and loss of seats in the midterm election."

... to kick in?

Undoubtedly, Trump hasn't read the book, but if his aides have come across it, I'm sure those quotes loom large in their minds -- and may well inspire some type of exaggerated response from their Dear Leader.

What will it look like? Time will tell, soon enough. All we can do is gear up for the long, hard pull ahead -- the work that must be done, to reclaim our democracy from Trump's movement, and the tech bros who continue to coddle it. Taking every opportunity is only the first step, but that's how it begins.

If the past teaches anything, it's to grab your chances while you can, and make the most of them. After all... Look at how it worked out for our current Commander-in-Chief. --The Reckoner

Links To Go: Hurry, Hurry (Get Your Ballots Early:
Beat The Voter Suppression Rush)

Civil Discourse With Joyce Vance:
The Executive Order To Restrict Vote By Mail:
https://joycevance.substack.com/p/the-executive-order-to-restrict-vote

NPR: A Federal Judge In Boston 

Blocks Key Parts Of Trump's Order...:
https://www.npr.org/2026/06/25/nx-s1-5844576/trump-mail-in-voting-order

NPR: The Supreme Court Upholds

Grace Periods For Mail-In Ballots:
https://www.npr.org/2026/06/29/nx-s1-5815312/supreme-court-mail-ballot-grace-period-ruling

The Brookings Institution:
Second Term Blues (Excerpt):
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/secondtermblues_chapter.pdf

...As July Fourth Approaches (We've Never Felt Gloomier): A Handy Visual Reminder

 

<New York Federal Reserve Bank>

Suggested Soundtrack: "Freeze" (The Models), 1977

Last week will likely go down as the single most horrific one of the Trump Restoration. On Tuesday (6/23), we saw a man sentenced to 30 years for moving a box of anarchist-related 'zines after a protest, with equally imposing terms handed to his cohorts (30-100 years), all stemming from actions criticizing the Trump regime.

On Wednesday and Thursday (6/24-25), we watched a handful of Republicans abruptly reverse their stands on a largely symbolic war powers resolution, and continue kowtowing to the Orange Bully, because -- well, he might find some way to hurt them. And they don't have any other ideas, except to continue indulging his every whim, even if reduces the country to a smoking dumpster fire.

Also, on Thursday (6/25), we witnessed the Extreme Court, or the Supremacy Court (a far more accurate term than its present moniker, the Supreme Court), hand the Trump regime two major immigration victories. In one case, the court ruled that agents can physically turn back asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border, even if that person -- as Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted, in her blistering, 35-page dissent -- arrives at a station with adequate resources to review their claim, or strongly fear that they'll be persecuted, or killed, after their enforced return.

The other case allows the Trump regime to end Temporary Protected Status for Haitians and Syrians fleeing murderous conditions in their countries. (Both remain on State Department lists warning Americans "not to travel there for any reason due to ongoing danger," as Politico reports). More than a million people face potential deportation, unless they find some other means of gaining legal status.

Perhaps the regime will look at scrubbing the famous closing words inscribed on the Statute of Liberty ("I lift my lamp beside the golden door"), now that it's effectively slammed shut. Both decisions played out along the predictable 6-3 divide, which inspired starkly differing responses. The six right-wing Justices blandly asserted mere technical grounds for their reasoning, while Justice Elena Kagan's dissent included every major recent example of Trump's racial invective -- from his infamous "shithole countries" comment, to his henchman Vance's 2024 campaign lie about Haitians cannibalizing cats and dogs.

Kagan's actions undoubtedly reflected a desire to draw a contrast between the majority's assertions, and the racial hostility emboldened by the likes of Trump, Vance, and their fan club, who didn't waste any time baring their fangs -- such as rightist commentator Megyn Kelly ("We don't care if you're offended. Get out. Go home. Go back to f#cking Haiti."), or Katie Miller, the equally vile other half of Trump's odious chief aide, Stephen Miller ("Great news for the dogs and cats of Springfield [Ohio]").

Equally striking is the posture of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who adopted two Haitian children, and never misses a photo op with them. By joining the majority opinion, she consigns some 350,000 of their countrymen and women to uncertain fates, at best -- or certain death, at worst. It's the type of compartmentalized thinking that's reminiscent of Revolutionary War-era slave holders -- including many of the Founders -- who happily freed people whom they felt warmly about, or considered exceptional workers, while leaving others forever trapped in servitude.

We also noticed, as the week finally ended, the groundswell of outrage surrounding the US "Justice" Department's unsettling memo, suggesting that states no longer need to follow the so-called Olmstead precedent -- in which a different Supreme Court, in a different era, upheld the rights of persons with disabilities to live independently, in their own communities (1999).

The memo's emergence coincides with the Texas v. Kennedy lawsuit, in which six states (AK, FL, LA, MO, MT, TX) are challenging Section 504, an important cornerstone of disability rights. Briefly, it bars treating people differently, due to their disability; requires including them in programs, and make reasonable accommodations, if requested and, most importantly, mandates that communities offer programs and services beyond mere custodial environments, like institutions (emphasis: ours).

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect these dots, should this latest make-believe case catch the Extreme Court's ear -- presumably, so its six enablers can rubber stamp this latest ghastly idea, one driven by the Olmstead memo's author (see link below). Of course, upending Olmstead is an idea that figures prominently in Project 2025, The Handbook From Hell, a status that needs no further elaboration.

You can read the links below -- which will undoubtedly invoke varying states of angst, depression, and rage, if not a fresh injection of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) -- and draw the appropriate conclusions.

Suffice to say that we find ourselves in an existential struggle for our lives, along with basic civil rights, human decency, and sanity -- to a degree that seemed unimaginable, in previous times. It's the reason, undoubtedly, for the attitudes captured in the latest survey posted by the Federal Reserve of New York (above), one of many entities tasked with tracking the public mood.

What's noteworthy are the two "bookend" statistics, as we'll call them. As of May 2026, 43.6% of the participants reported being worse off financially than a year ago, or double pre-pandemic-era levels, as you'll see (20% or below). Additionally, 36% expect to be significantly worse off next year, a mark that's also twice pre-pandemic levels.

So much for the idea of prices going down on "day one," as the Orange Bully phrased it, but rocketing inflation -- coupled with go-go finance that only enriches Trump, Musk, Bezos, and their allies, plus lack of purchasing power, strangled by decades of flat wages -- aren't the only reasons for all the collective gloom that we're feeling.

Call it a general sentiment that someone else rigged the game, before we ever showed up; that naked feral capitalism, in all its untamed, and unabashed selfishness, yields a zero-sum game for our standards of living, such as they are; that an imperial, fanatical, and downright monarchial mindset, as we see in the Olmstead memo, has seized the imagination of the ruling classes.

Call it any or all of these things, as you wish. But make no mistake, take no comfort from the perfunctory assurances that they're already dangling out to deceive us ("It's just temporary"; "It's only a memo, not a law"; "It won't really affect you"), before they slam down the hammer, yet again. We know what they're doing, why they're doing it, and what they're all about. 

Needless to say, it's all extremely taxing. It's difficult to live with the feeling of another shoe, always ready to drop; in some ways, the current feels like the climax Werner Herzog's film, Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979, when (spoiler alert) Count Dracula succeeds in spreading the plague, and van Helsing ends up being arrested for his murder by the hero, Jonathan Harker -- now unmasked as a vampire.

There was ample reason during the Revolutionary War for Thomas Paine to declare, "These are the times that try men's souls," and last week fully fit that particular bill. That being said, what's worth fighting is also worth waiting for. However slowly the winds of change may blow, at some point, they do shift -- leaving open another window of opportunity. Our job is to be ready, when it finally arrives -- hopefully sooner, rather than later. --The Reckoner

Links To Go (Ring The Bell Anew,
And Raise The Spirit Of Paul Revere):

Associated Press: Senate Republicans
Reject War Powers Resolution...:
https://apnews.com/article/senate-republicans-trump-vote-reject-war-powers-0f1fa8189c275188a71ed02cc8c3270d

Civil Discourse: This Disappointing Term Of Court:
https://joycevance.substack.com/p/this-disappointing-term-of-court

CNN: Supreme Court Gives Trump
Major Wins On Two Immigration Cases:
https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/25/politics/live-news/supreme-court-issues-opinions

Common Dreams: "Criminalizing Dissent":

Alarm Grows Over Extreme Sentences...:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/prairieland-backlash

Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund:
Texas v. Kennedy: What It Is...:
https://dredf.org/protect-504/

Disability Belongs:
States Continue Legal Attack On Section 504:
https://www.disabilitybelongs.org/2026/04/texas-v-kennedy-action-update/

Politico: Supreme Court Allows Trump
To End Temporary Protections...:
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/25/supreme-court-temporary-protected-status-ruling-00975658

The Independent:
Trump Aide Stephen Miller's Wife Resurfaces Claim...:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/katie-miller-tps-ohio-hatians-trump-b3003364.html

The Models: Freeze

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqZvxLiaLJ8&list=RDxqZvxLiaLJ8&start_radio=1

The Models: Punk 77 Page:

https://punk77.co.uk/band/the-models/

You want to draw a line 

between right and wrong

This revolution's been going too long
You think they're gonna let you play

You better think again, 

Hear what they say, because...

I'm talking about a freeze

I said, I'm talking about a freeze,

Yeah, get down on your knees...

I'm talking about a freeze

They're putting on the squeeze

I'm talking about a freeze, oh, yeah...

<The Models: "Freeze," 1977>

Know Your Rights In ICE Encounters: A Handy Visual Reminder

 

Thinking the unthinkable is part and parcel of the Trump era. Hardly surprising, then, to come across this flyer at the local library, stacked alongside all the other usual fare -- the free community papers, health programs, holiday parades, and so on. No comments not explanations needed, nor required. It's readily available online, but one more outlet surely can't hurt, right?

Especially when we consider one other important point. While the flounder-lipped Kristi Noem, and her oily boy toy, Corey Lewandowski, they of the Department of Homeland Security, and its sister agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) -- the infamous agency they ran like a medieval fiefdom, continues to go about its business. Gone are the horrific images of masked goons combing the streets for prey, egged on by their now-retired, green fatigue-clad henchman, Greg Bovino -- for the moment., at least. 

The faces of the Trump regime's xenophobic crackdown efforts are off the radar, which doesn't hold true for their targets. Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, one of countless innocents snatched off the streets, faces appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, as the price of avoiding rearrest.

Khalil's counterpart, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, won a major legal victory this weekend, after a federal judge tossed out human smuggling charges against him, on grounds of vindictive prosecution -- since he too is challenging the federal government's attempts to deport him. The feds, of course, are appealing the judge's action, which they're blasting as "naked judicial activism" -- an odd twist of phrase for the maximalist-minded master they serve, who openly flaunts his abuses of power at every turn.

The overall volume of arrests averages 900 to 1,000 per day nationwide, well short of the 3,000 figure so desired by Trump's key henchman, Stephen Miller -- but enough to underscore the regime's ongoing attempt to impose its will, however it can, wherever it can. About half occur in custodial situations -- inmates already sitting in local, state or federal lockups -- with the remainder spread out over at-large roundups, or immigration status check-ins at ICE field offices.

These trends point at the resolve of Noem's successor, Markwayne Mullin, to take ICE off the front pages, in favor of a lower-key, more targeted approach. It doesn't make him a candidate for sainthood. Neither does it suggest that Mulli's in danger of finding his softer, fluffier side -- let alone his cohort, David Venturella, the former GEO prison executive tapped as acting director of DHS's sister agency, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

Just what we need to restore public confidence, right? The face of a for-profit prison company, who also showered Trump's 2024 campaign with fountains of cash. Still, on that subject, one other piece of unfinished business is worth noting -- and that's the fate of ICE's plan to warehouse all its unfortunate fish, figuratively and literally, into massive holding pens, modeled along Amazon's lines.

But Noem's grand vision remains on hold, per Mullin's orders, as he works out what portions of it -- if any -- should go forward. That's because activists have found a potent new tool to slow the Trump regime's plans to rebrand communities into major deportation hubs, as the New York Times reports (see link below) -- the environmental review.

For example, a federal judge has blocked ICE's plans to retrofit a warehouse in Williamsport, MD, into a holding pen capable of housing 500 to 1,500 detainees. U.S. District Judge Brendan Hurson held that ICE hadn't fully considered key requirements of the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) -- which mandates a closer look at the "potential environmental impact of significant federal actions," the Times reported.

If the possibility exists, however remotely, a more rigorous review is then required -- which typically takes months to complete. What seems like politically expedient red raw meat in 2026 may well give off a fouler odor, once the winds start blowing, whether this fall, or in 2028 -- as communities start pushing back, and force the cancellation or sidelining of such ghastly projects.

A judge in Michigan canceled a similar preliminary injunction that would have temporarily halted similar retrofitting plans for a warehouse in Romulus, Bloomberg Law reports. The lawsuit in that case alleges that one sewer line isn't nearly enough for 500 projected detainees, for a building that's sitting on top of a floodplain. Similar pushbacks are proceeding in Arizona and New Jersey, raising headaches that authorities might well have avoided, as Hurson stated, in his ruling:

“Had D.H.S. done so, it likely would have found that the rapid transformation of a cargo-processing facility with four toilets and two water fountains into a temporary residence and workplace for hundreds, if not thousands, would jeopardize the health and safety of the surrounding ecosystem in myriad ways, most notably through the likely overtaxing of the sewer system."

Most interestingly of all, the fate of "Alligator Alcatraz" -- the brain(?)child of Florida's infamous governing bully, Ron DeSantis -- appears questionable, too. Environmental groups there assert that state and federal reimbursement of construction costs amounts to a "significant federal action," one that warrants NEPA review.

Time will tell how that battle plays out, though for his part, acting DHS head Todd Lyons claimed that the plans are actually beneficial -- allowing the government to control the space, instead of relying on private contractors. "It's actually retrofitted to become a detention facility, one that we'll actually be proud of, one that would have actually have standards," Lyons told Congress.

Then again, when we consider the bigger picture -- from how many have already died in these holding pens, to persistent allegations of physical and sexual assault, substandard sanitation, and total disregard for detainees' rights, including access to lawyers -- Lyons's breezily self-assured statements seem totally divorced from the cold, hard reality of what's happening on the ground.

But it's a feeling that we've all gotten to know too well, as Mullin reportedly plots to rebrand his wife, Christie, as a "special government employee" -- just like Noem did, for Lewandowski -- to the tune of a cool $130,000 per year. What Ms. Mullin might actually do is naturally opaque, though it's easy to see her working on some Donna Reed-style puffery to somehow burnish ICE's brutal public face. The possibilities are endless, starting with the obvious one:

ICE Corrections:

Detention Centers
To Die For.

Or how about something that plays to Trump's prior public incarnation, as New York City's grand master of construction, even if that seems a lifetime away now:

Building Your Surveillance State,
One Warehouse At A Time

Or maybe a blacker, bare-knuckled style humor is called for here, one that's more in keeping with the mission:

ICE Detention:

Where Revenge Is Always 

A Dish Served Cold!

You get the gist. The issue hasn't gone away, just off the front pages -- which is all the more reason to keep the pressure on, and shine an unforgiving light on Mullin's excesses, and those of his fellow overdogs...even as millions upon millions of unfortunates sleep on the sidewalks, or on the back seats of their cars, wondering when this uniquely ill-starred era of feral capitalist madness is ever going to end. We owe them every effort to ensure that day comes sooner, rather than later. -- The Reckoner

Links To Go Go (Drive A Bit Faster Past 

Your Friendly Neighborhood Warehouse):

Bloomberg Law: ICE Changes
Environmental Review Plan For Detention Centers:

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/ice-changes-environmental-review-plan-for-detention-centers

New York Times: ICE Plan Faces Delay
Over Lack Of Environmental Reviews:

https://archive.ph/oqZBx

The New Republic:

DHS Secretary Tries To Get His Wife Cushy Job:
https://newrepublic.com/post/211006/dhs-secretary-mullin-wife-special-government-employee-job

The Week: Five Brutal Cartoons About "Alligator Alcatraz":
https://theweek.com/cartoons/editorial-cartoons-alligator-alcatraz

"It is time to replace this country's abusive and punitive immigration detention system... They throw away money that could be redirected to programs that benefit us all."
<American Civil Liberties Union, Florida,
American Friends Service Committee>

"There’s absolutely no reason for detention centers to hold people for extended periods of time, other than to fund the prison industry complex and waste taxpayer dollars."
<Representative Andre Carson, Facebook>

"It is detaining people first and sorting out legality later.
"It is expanding executive power while narrowing public oversight.

"It is treating constitutional limits as obstacles rather than obligations."

<ACLU of Pennsylvania, Facebook>