Wednesday, April 15, 2026

VIVEK RAMASWAMY MIGHT LOSE THE OHIO GOVERNOR'S RACE AND THE NEW YORK TIMES SEEMS AFRAID TO SAY WHY

This morning, The New York Times published a story about Vivek Ramaswamy's campaign to become governor of Ohio, which might not succeed, despite Ramaswamy's many advantages.
Almost a year before the May 5 Republican primary, Vivek Ramaswamy, the loquacious billionaire entrepreneur and former presidential candidate, had almost completely cleared the field contending to become Ohio’s next governor. That alone made him the favorite, since a Democrat has not held the office for 15 years.

He has been endorsed by trade unions, farm associations, dozens of county sheriffs and President Trump. He has visited every county in the state, often feted as a celebrity by local Republican leaders. Perhaps most formidably, his campaign and the super PAC backing him have amassed nearly $40 million — a record-breaking sum that does not include the many millions he’s ready to spend from his own pockets.

The only matter remaining is whether a majority of Ohioans will vote for him.
Ohio is a state that has voted for Donald Trump three times. In 2024, Trump won the state by double digits. The current governor, Mike DeWine, won reelection in 2022 by 25 points. So why is Ramaswamy struggling against his likely Democratic oppponent, Amy Acton?


The Times has a few theories:
Perhaps Mr. Ramaswamy’s showing in the polls is simply a function of the current national mood, as rising costs, economic uncertainty and an unpopular war drag down the popularity of the president and his party.

Or perhaps Mr. Ramaswamy, 40, is facing a challenge he faced in his campaign for the presidency in 2024: that his fast-talking self-assurance just rubs some people the wrong way.
And ...? Could some other factor be involved?

This is a 27-paragraph story. Only starting in paragraph 23 are we told this about a primary opponent with the rather on-the-nose name Casey Putsch:
Mr. Putsch rails against data centers, “billionaire tech bros” and foreigners, Indians in particular, who are granted H-1B visas for high-skilled jobs in Ohio. Mr. Ramaswamy, Mr. Putsch said to his supporters, “is a globalist Trojan horse.”

Mr. Ramaswamy has said he does not think that anti-Indian bias will be much of a factor in his race....
In other words, there's barely a mention in this story of the possibility that Ramaswamy is struggling to close the sale because his ancestry isn't European and his religion isn't Christian. Okay, there's also this:
John Adams, a retired pastor in Erie County who is active in local Republican politics, said that people were still learning about Mr. Ramaswamy. Most everyone knew him as a figure in Mr. Trump’s orbit, but many didn’t know he had grown up in Cincinnati.

“For some folks, I hear them say, ‘Well, he’s an outsider, we really don’t know him very well,’” he said.
Ramaswamy didn't just grow up in Cincinnati -- he was born there. But his parents are Indian immigrants and he's Hindu. Surely that has at least some influence on some voters.

I read this story a day after reading Josh Kovensky's report at Talking Points Memo on Frisco, Texas, a thriving and rapidly expanding city of a quarter million people that's now the focus of right-wingers who fear a "Great Replacement" because of the number of Indians who live there.
But for a coterie of area activists and influencers, the influx of Indians — some on H-1B work visas, others citizens of Indian descent — is a real-life example of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory. Under that idea, elites are replacing white Americans — sometimes referred to by right-wing activists as “Heritage Americans” — with nonwhite foreigners in a bid to gain political power. That narrative about Frisco has been magnified in recent days by national political figures. Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX), who represents a district near Frisco, cited the city’s demographic changes during a recent podcast appearance to demand an end to the H-1B worker visa program.

“We’ve got communities like Frisco that have been totally transformed, whether it’s Islamic immigration or immigration from anywhere else in Asia,” Gill said. “I don’t want to hear Muslim calls to prayer in my community. I do not want the caste system socially in the schools that my kids are going to because we’ve had so many people come to the United States who are not assimilating into American culture.”
That would be this Brandon Gill:


(Gill says these things despite the fact that he's married to the daughter of Dinesh D'Souza, a right-winger of Indian descent.)

Kovensky tells us that Steve Bannon is in on the hatemongering, unsurprisingly:
Others, like former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, have trained a spotlight on Indians in the city in recent weeks, using a video by political activist Tyler Oliveira depicting Indians in the city to call for “a moratorium of at least 10 years on all immigration” and a “special deal” for American citizens.
Thanks to the flattening effects of the media, I don't imagine there's a huge difference between Texas Republicans and Ohio Republicans on this subject. Ramaswamy is neither an immigrant nor a Muslim, but it seems highly unlikely that most Ohio voters know that. They look at him and see a brown person. I'm sure that's an immediate dealbreaker for quite a few of them.

The campaign against Indians in Frisco takes advantage of the fact that right-wingers will believe anything about people they hate or fear:
One [video], titled “The Muslim and Indian Takeover of Texas” by TPUSA contributor Savanah Hernandez, featured Sara Gonzales recounting an email she received from someone near Frisco describing an Indian couple supposedly inviting a cow into their home before exulting over its urine and feces.
Oh yeah, I'm totally sure that happened.

In 2022, Pew reported that 45% of Americans say that the United States should be a Christian nation. That includes 67% of Republicans and Republican leaners. In this group, 76% believe that the Founders intended the U.S. to be a Christian nation.

So I think is more of a factor in Ramaswamy's struggles than the Times is letting on.

Tuesday, April 14, 2026

DID THE NEW YORK TIMES ED BOARD JUST SAY DEMOCRATS SHOULD RUN ON BERNIENOMICS?

The editorial board of The New York Times responds to the victory of Peter Magyar's Tisza Party in Hungary by telling us that Democrats should take notes:
Hungary is obviously a very different country from the United States. But Mr. Orban’s rise and his use of power were long models for Mr. Trump. Now, Mr. Orban’s demise can be a model for the Democratic Party and any other party that is trying to defeat an authoritarian right-wing threat.
How exactly?
First, [Magyar] focused on the bread-and-butter issues that often guide the decisions of swing voters, and not just in Hungary.
And what did he propose?
The campaign platform of the party Mr. Magyar leads, Tisza, was titled “Foundations of a Functional and Humane Hungary.” It criticized the inefficiency of government services. Its agenda included tax cuts for working-class families, expanded health care, increased pensions, larger child benefits and a pay increase for support staff members at schools. It said it would help pay for these programs through both a wealth tax on the very rich and the recovery of European Union transfer payments reduced because of Mr. Orban’s anti-democratic policies.
Yes, you read that correctly: An overseas politician endorsed a wealth tax on billionaires and the ed board of The New York Times said "Bravo!"

What else?
Crucially, Mr. Magyar made corruption a core campaign issue....

On the campaign trail, he linked Mr. Orban’s corruption to Hungarians’ frustration with their stagnant living standards. In his victory speech on Sunday night, Mr. Magyar promised a country where citizens could rely on their government to help provide good medical care, a decent family life and a dignified retirement. What should matter, he said, was not political connections but the kind of person somebody was.
So you're saying that Magyar denounced oligarchy? You mean, like these guys?


Obviously, this can't be mainstream political commentary without a swipe at the left. It's a familiar one:
The second lesson may be harder for Democrats — and center-left parties in Europe — to absorb. Mr. Magyar, who identifies as center right, won partly by avoiding the social progressivism that dominates elite left-leaning circles and alienates many voters. He ran as an economic progressive and a cultural moderate if not conservative.
And what are some of the things he said and did that the dogmatic lefties in America's Democratic Party won't do?
He used patriotic symbols like the flag....
Have you seen the invocations of the flag, the Statue of Liberty, and the Constitution at No Kings rallies?
He campaigned in rural areas that Mr. Orban’s previous challengers had overlooked.
Many Democratic politicians don't do this, but do any Democrats object to it? Hell, even Chuck Schumer visits every county in New York State annually, even the red ones.
He declined to attend a Pride march in Budapest, making it harder for Mr. Orban to paint him as captive to L.G.B.T.Q. activists.
Okay, now we're talking: The Times ed board wants us to understand that Magyar's party won in part by throwing LGBTQ people under the bus. But some 2028 Democratic aspirants are already throwing trans people under the bus, and it's not helping them break from the pack. Note that J.D. Vance beat Gavin Newsom in a recent UMass-Lowell/YouGov poll.
On immigration, which has shaped recent elections around the world, Mr. Magyar called for even tighter restrictions than the Orban had government imposed. He said he would keep a border fence, repeal a guest-worker program and allow no guest workers from outside the European Union.
This is a tougher one. Polls show that Americans don't like the heavy-handed and brutal way Trump is handling immigration, but they're in favor of at least some deportations. I think Democrats could start reframing the issue by saying that Americans want immigrant criminals prioritized for deportation, and the Trump administration has prioritized the most law-abiding immigrants, because it's easier and less dangerous to round them up. Democrats can also talk about an immigration system that prioritizes the rule of law rather than warfare in the streets.

The implication of this editorial is that Democrats lost in 2024 because they didn't campaign this way. But to a large extent they did. Kamala Harris didn't campaign on social issues. Democrats had supported an immigration reform bill that accepted many of the GOP's ideas. And it didn't help.

But in the area of economics, Democrats campaigned on incremental change. Would a platform of serious economic populism have changed the outcome?

The Times ed board seems to be implying as much. Okay, fine -- let's try that.

Monday, April 13, 2026

NO, THAT TRUMP-AS-JESUS POST ISN'T CAUSING THE BASE TO TURN ON HIM (updated)

Last night, President Trump wrote a Truth Social screed denouncing Pope Leo, who has now joined the many others living rent-free in Trump's head because he's criticized the war in Iran and has chosen to spend this Fourth of July greeting immigrants on an Italian island after turning down an invitation to attend Trump's own vainglorious Independence Day festivities, while also spreading word that he might avoid the United States altogether while Trump is president.

The New York Times summarizes Trump's post:
“Leo should be thankful because, as everyone knows, he was a shocking surprise,” Mr. Trump wrote in a lengthy social media post on Sunday night. “He wasn’t on any list to be Pope, and was only put there by the Church because he was an American, and they thought that would be the best way to deal with President Donald J. Trump. If I wasn’t in the White House, Leo wouldn’t be in the Vatican.”

When he sent the post, the president was fresh off a weekend of attending a mixed martial arts fight in Miami and spending time with supporters at his golf club after negotiations with Iran had failed. He criticized Leo as “weak on crime” — an insult he usually reserves for Democratic mayors — and “terrible for foreign policy.” He said that he much preferred the pope’s brother Louis because of his support for the MAGA movement — “He gets it!” Mr. Trump wrote. The president also accused the pope of “catering to the radical left” and then offered a piece of advice, to “focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician.”
This story has left much of the liberal social media community angry at the Times, for some reason.

Pro-Trump media bias: frame world events as a reality show with Trump as protagonist. As @larryglickman.bsky.social explains, it’s absurd to cast the Pope saying war is bad as a “punch” Trump is responding to. But also, he didn’t take any action. He just said words nonsensically insulting the Pope.

[image or embed]

— Nicholas Grossman (@nicholasgrossman.bsky.social) April 13, 2026 at 8:08 AM

It's not a counterpunch, guys. The pope didn't throw a punch. www.nytimes.com/2026/04/12/u...

[image or embed]

— Will Saletan (@saletan.bsky.social) April 13, 2026 at 7:52 AM

No, "counterpunch" is fine. As I noted above, Leo threw a punch. In fact, he threw several punches. And good for him. It's clear from Trump's howls of pain that the punches landed.

Trump followed that Truth Social post with a bit of blasphemy.

The Washington Post claims that this post is getting Trump in trouble with his Christian allies:
... the image evoking Jesus drew swift criticism from some evangelical Christians and conservative Catholics who have otherwise expressed near constant support for Trump’s decisions.
So he's losing right-wing Evangelicals and Catholics? Nahhh. He's losing right-wing Christian commentators, just the way he lost some right-wing commentators (Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones) by going into Iran.

So, sure, some prominent commentators with seven-figure X followings are angry at Trump:
Michael Knowles, [a] conservative Catholic podcaster aligned with Trump, said online it “behooves the President both spiritually and politically to delete the picture, no matter the intent.”

Riley Gaines, a conservative podcaster, former collegiate swimmer and prominent critic of transgender participation in women’s sports who spoke at Trump rallies and was recently a guest at the White House, also criticized the post. “I cannot understand why he’d post this. Is he looking for a response? Does he actually think this? Either way, two things are true,” Gaines wrote on X, continuing to say that “a little humility would serve him well” and “God shall not be mocked” — a reference to scripture.
But what were the responses to these tweets? Most look like these responses to Knowles:



And in response to Gaines:


There are replies that are critical of Trump, but it's all but certain that the vast majority of Trump supporters will just mentally rewrite their standards about what's acceptable to include this image. They'll shrug this off the way they shrug off everything else Trump does that violates their beliefs.

*****

UPDATE: He took it down.
“I did post it. I thought it was me as a doctor,” Trump told reporters at the White House, denying claims he was meant to appear as Jesus.

“It was supposed to be me as a doctor, making people better,” he said.
He took down the Obamas-as-apes post a few weeks ago, but the post didn't cause his base to turn on him, and this won't either.

*****

UPDATE: Trump insulted Riley Gaines:
Trump ... gave a phone interview to CBS News correspondent Norah O’Donnell in which he was asked whether the objection raised by Gaines, a prominent voice in his administration’s efforts to ban transgender competitors from women’s sports, had influenced his decision to hit delete.

“I didn’t listen to Riley Gaines,” the president answered. “I’m not a big fan of Riley, actually.”
And now she's staying in the MAGA tent.


Sunday, April 12, 2026

PEOPLE ARE UPSET WHEN STUFF COSTS MORE THAN IT DID A FEW YEARS AGO, ECONOMISTS LEARN TO THEIR AMAZEMENT

G. Elliott Morris has just published a post under the headline "The Mystery Variable That Explains Stubbornly Low Consumer Sentiment." Morris notes that consumer sentiment is remarkably negative right now.
The University of Michigan has been measuring consumer sentiment since 1952. On Thursday, economist Justin Wolfers flagged that the April reading came in at 47.6 — the lowest in the survey’s 74-year history. That index value is lower than for the depths of the 2008 financial crisis, the worst of the post-COVID inflation surge, the 2022-23 inflation spike, and any point during the stagflation of the early 1980s.
Why would that be? As in the last year or so of the Biden administration, many people think it must be vibes.
There’s a theory popular in certain corners of the very online left that consumer sentiment is inexplicably low right now because of the way the news media is covering the economy. The theory points out that in most of 2024 and 2025 the labor market was doing fine by historical standards, but people still rated the economy poorly. The sentiment numbers, per this view, are a product of news and social media amplifying bad economic stories and data and dragging down the national mood.
Morris sees a possible reason -- a "mystery variable" that economists apparently would never think of looking at when they're trying to figure out why normal people think the economy sucks.
... look at the following chart from the Michigan survey itself. It tracks the share of consumers who cite high prices as the reason they are personally struggling financially.


Before 2021, this number hovered near zero percent. Empirically speaking prices were a non-factor in how people viewed the state of the economy.

Then, everything changed. The share of adults citing high prices asa sources of anxiety went exponential during the 2021-22 inflation spike and never came back down. It’s now above 50%, likely because of the gas prices spike from the war in Iran.

This trend actually looks similar to a chart of cumulative change in food prices since 2014:


And the price of shelter:


... inflation dropping from 8% to 3% reflects a “cooling off” of the economy, but evidently people still mostly just see high prices for things and get upset about that. And fair enough!
I don't want to sound like a right-wing basher of experts, but what the hell is wrong with mainstream economists if it never occurs to them that people feel economic anxiety when prices go up and stay up, especially when they (justifiably) believe their incomes aren't keeping pace?

As an Axios story notes:
Since January 2021, consumer prices have climbed a cumulative 26%.

... Even as price pressures build, job prospects have started looking worse.

The rate at which companies have hired new workers fell in February to match the lowest levels of the pandemic, and the last time it was lower was in 2010....

Wages are no longer rising as they did earlier in the inflationary surge. Average hourly earnings were up 3.5% for the year ended in March, compared with 5.9% in 2022.
And ordinary people are upset? Who could have guessed!

I need to add one more factor that isn't taken into account in these posts: high credit card interest rates. Bankrate reports:
The average credit card interest rate is 19.58%, down from a record-high 20.79% set on Aug. 14, 2024.
But 19.58% is extremely high when average hourly earnings are rising 3.5% a year.

And what are the consequences of this? Here's what Bankrate said in January, before the Iran war jacked up the price of gasoline:
Sixty-one percent of Americans with card debt have been in debt for at least a year — up from 53% in late 2024.

... Forty-seven percent of credit cardholders report having a credit card balance. About 1 in 5 (22%) debtors don’t think they’ll ever pay it off.

... Among credit card debtors, 41% say their debt comes primarily from emergency/unexpected expense(s), including medical bills (12%), car repairs (8%), home repairs (8%) and other emergency or unexpected expenses (13%). Thirty-three percent, up from 28% in 2024 and 26% in 2023, cite day-to-day expenses such as groceries, childcare and utilities.
Americans are drowning in debt -- and then they go to the supermarket and the gas station and prices are still high or rising. And they're upset.

If this is baffling to mainstream economists -- if the usual data points they assess in order to understand consumer sentiment leave them baffled by the current low numbers -- then they need to assess different data points. It should be obvious now which data points they should be looking at.

Saturday, April 11, 2026

J.D. VANCE IS COUNTING ON THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA TO HELP ELECT HIM PRESIDENT

As you know if you're a regular reader, I believe that J.D. Vance has a good chance of winning the 2028 presidential election. I don't expect American voters to like Donald Trump any more then than they do now, but I think the conventional wisdom in non-Republican America will be that Vance is different. I wrote this in February:
... mainstream outlets may very well portray J.D. Vance ... as a thoughtful, soft-spoken Republican who wants to move the GOP away from its worst instincts....

We'll get insipid, soft-focus profiles of Vance, and he'll be portrayed as a turn of the page after Trump -- more so than loudmouths like Gavin Newsom and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee.
That's not exactly what we're seeing in the mainstream press as Vance heads to Pakistan for peace talks with Iran, but there sure is a lot of respectful coverage:
* New York Times: Vance Faces a High-Profile Test of His Negotiating Skills With Iran Talks

* Washington Post: Vance, Who Wasn’t Keen on Iran War, Now Tasked with Trying to End It

* Wall Street Journal: How Vance Became the Point Man to End a War He Didn’t Want
The American Prospect's Ryan Cooper sees something sinister in the Times story:

the NYT political desk is facing facts: their boy Trump is in a terminal political spiral and it's time to start polishing the next right-wing turd

[image or embed]

— ryan cooper (@ryanlcooper.com) April 10, 2026 at 10:29 AM

But is this coming from the Times (and the Post and Journal), or is Vance courting the mainstream press in advance of 2028? I suspect that he's pursuing these stories as much as these papers are pursuing him.

Each of these stories portrays Vance as a sort of Schrodinger's cat, someone who's both on the Trump train and off it. From the Post:
Six weeks after President Donald Trump started a war in Iran that has proved difficult to end, he has turned to a new approach in negotiations: Putting front and center his vice president, JD Vance, whose reputation happens to be as the administration’s foremost war skeptic.

The peace talks mark Vance’s highest-profile assignment in the 14 months the administration has been in office. Vance has been a constant presence in war strategy meetings, White House officials say, and has spent much of the past week working the phones with negotiators. But the admitted “skeptic of foreign military interventions” had previously played a supporting role in Middle East affairs, behind Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner.
Every story seems designed to appeal to voters regardless of what they think of Trump and his war. From the Journal:
A close friend of Vance who spoke with him recently said he described feeling like he was sometimes walking on eggshells around Trump because of his antiwar views. A Vance spokesman disputed that Vance had said that. “He’s walking on so many eggshells that he’s on his way to Pakistan at the president’s request to lead negotiations,” the spokesman said.
Vance and his team understand that Republicans win presidential elections by holding on to the rabid base while deluding moderate voters into believing that they're middle-of-the-road, too. It worked for George W. Bush in 2000, and it even worked for Trump in 2016 and 2024. (Remember Maureen Dowd's April 2016 column "Donald the Dove, Hillary the Hawk"? Remember how Trump bamboozled many Americans -- and many pundits -- into believing that he'd be a champion for Medicare and Social Security, and was a moderate on abortion?)

I'm certain that Vance operatives worked to get these stories into print. Mostly, these stories are selling Vance to elite-media consumers, without alienating MAGA yahoos. From the Times:
Mr. Vance’s allies say his presence adds formality and heft to negotiations led by Mr. Witkoff and Mr. Kushner, whose fast-paced work is often conducted through constant phone calls back to Washington, and by writing, editing and circulating flurries of proposals. Mr. Vance is also joining a pair of negotiators who had failed to avert the war in the first place during an initial round of talks.
Message to upmarket, well-educated suburban readers: Vance isn't an ignorant blowhard like Trump, nor is he out of his depth like Kushner and Witkoff -- he's a smart, serious guy whose presence conveys formality and heft! Message to MAGA: Trump added Vance to the team because Trump is a dealmaking genius, and he knows that Vance is precisely the extra ingredient this negotiation needs.

I think the 2028 GOP primaries will come down to Vance and Marco Rubio, even though I think MAGA would prefer someone who resembles Trump. I don't see any sign that a Trumpish candidate will emerge: Donald Trump Jr. seems committed to profiting off his father's name. Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens seem much more comfortable (and well remunerated) as gadfly podcasters than as politicians. I could imagine a presidential run from either Nick Fuentes or James Fishbeck, the bigoted Florida gubernatorial candidate who's popular among groyper youth, but both will be under the age of 35 in 2028, and thus ineligible to run.

So I think it will be a dull primary season and Vance will win, mostly because his dog whistles will connect with extremist voters, whether he's defending racist group chats or insulting women.

And then he'll seem to pivot to the center, with the mainstream media's help.

Friday, April 10, 2026

TRUMP RETREATS INTO THE RIGHT-WING BUBBLE

If you're looking for a post about Melania Trump's prepared statement on Jeffrey Epstein, just go read Emptywheel, who thinks the First Lady is afraid of Amanda Ungaro, the Brazilian ex-girlfriend of Paolo Zampolli. Zampolli is a former modeling agent and Jeffrey Epstein pal who is now the United States Special Representative for Global Partnerships. The New York Times reported a couple of weeks ago that Zampolli pulled strings to get Ungaro deported, in the hope of getting custody of their teenage son. Ungaro has now threatened legal action against the Trumps.

Melania spoke yesterday either for that reason or because she expects some damaging journalism to drop soon. I think she might be afraid of the forthcoming Maggie Haberman/Jonathan Swan book because that book was the source of a recent New York Times story on how Trump made the decision to go to war. I'd be surprised if any other excerpts from the book appear soon, because it won't be published until June 23. But this might be on Melania's mind.

Melania is talking about Epstein while her husband is fully retreating, at least for the moment, into the right-wing bubble. The most obvious sign of his retreat is a rant he posted on Truth Social yesterday afternoon:


Normal people don't care that Trump thinks Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and Alex Jones are "low IQ." Normal people don't care about these right-wing media figures at all. But Trump's base cares deeply. These are titanic figures in the pathetic world of by the right-wing voters who, regrettably, control American politics.

These voters also hate immigrants and regard immigration as the most important issue ever, apart from the economy, and they agree with Trump that if one Haitian immigrant kills someone, then all Haitian immigrants should be forced to leave. The Guardian reports:
Besieged by questions about his war on Iran and his wife’s statement on Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump tried to shift the national conversation back to his immigration crackdown by posting a graphic, distressing video of a woman in Florida being killed last week by a man he described as an illegal immigrant from Haiti.

The video, taken by a surveillance camera outside a Fort Myers gas station, showed a man identified by authorities as a Haitian immigrant using a hammer to bludgeon to death the woman, who was reportedly a clerk at the gas station.
Substacker Pablo Manriquez notes that the victim was also an immigrant, a Bangladeshi named Nilufar Easmin.

I'm especially offended by the Trumpist core message on immigration -- that everyone in a particular ethnic group deserves to be deported if one member of that group does something pathological -- because I'm Sicilian-American on my father's side. When you say that people sharing an ethnicity with criminals don't belong here, you're saying that I shouldn't be here. You're saying my father shouldn't have been here and his Sicilian immigrant parents shouldn't have been allowed in.

The Sicilian Mafia has committed many crimes in America over the years. Is that my grandparents' fault? Is it my father's fault? Is it my fault?

None of us were criminals -- in fact, my father was a victim, roughed up by loansharks when he couldn't pay back money he'd borrowed. He was an honest truck driver who'd fought in World War II. His brother died in that war.

Trump believes in collective guilt, at least for non-white people. So does his base, which includes millions of voters. But I want to believe that most Americans don't.

And finally, there's this:
The Trump administration is finalizing a report that casts the Biden Justice Department as anti-Christian over its enforcement of laws protecting abortion clinics and enforcement of Covid regulations, among other issues, according to details of the report viewed by NBC News.
Only in the Republican bubble are six-year-old COVID restrictions still a burning issue, and only in that bubble is access to abortion regarded as abhorrent.

Add this to the administration's desperation to save fellow fascist Viktor Orban from electoral defeat in Hungary and you see an presidency that has no perspective on what Americans outside the right-wing bubble care about. It's still sometimes said that Trump has no strong political views, but he's clearly been Fox-pilled for at least fifteen years, and he'd clearly like to live in a world where everyone else is as Fox-pilled as he is. If only we could remove him from office so he could get his wish.

Thursday, April 09, 2026

J.D. VANCE IS SO SEXIST THAT HE'S EVEN SEXIST WHEN TALKING ABOUT IRAN'S URANIUM

J.D. Vance traveled to Hungary to shore up the campaign of fellow fascist Viktor Orban. While there, he answered questions on the tarmac about the ceasefire in the Iran war, and he said something peculiar:
The vice president ... mentioned that Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of the Iranian Parliament, noted that his country’s 10-point proposal to end the war included “Iran’s right to enrichment.”

“I thought to myself, you know what? My wife has the right to skydive, but she doesn’t jump out of an airplane because she and I have an agreement that she’s not going to do that because I don’t want my wife jumping out of an airplane,” Vance said in reaction to Ghalibaf’s comment.
What?

This is a bizarre analogy, but it would be more or less unremarkable if there weren't that I-am-the-master-of-my-domain twist at the end. Usha Vance, mother of three (and one on the way), doesn't skydive because her husband doesn't want her to? He makes that decision? Even if these weren't carefully chosen words, why did his brain immediately go to the idea that this is primarily his choice?

Donald Trump's treatment of women reflects the fact that he's an amoral monster -- a sexual assailant and a man who demeans every female reporter who asks him a tough question -- but while he gave us the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade, it's his underlings who advocate broad-spectrum sexism. Pete Hegseth wants to purge women from the upper ranks of the Pentagon just as he wants to purge people of color. And Vance -- well, you remember this 2021 pronouncement:
We are effectively run in this country, via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too. And it’s just a basic fact if you look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC—the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children. And how does it make any sense that we’ve turned our country over to people who don’t really have a direct stake in it?
And this:
In 2021, he told a Christian group, “So many of the leaders of the left, and I hate to be so personal about this, but they’re people without kids, trying to brainwash the minds of our children.” Did he really “hate to be so personal”? Come on. The comments were directed at Randi Weingarten, the leader of the powerful American Federation of Teachers. Weingarten, he added, “doesn’t have a single child. If she wants to brainwash and destroy the mind of children, she should have some of her own and leave ours the hell alone.”

Weingarten is the stepmother to her wife’s adult kids....
This was back when Vance was speaking in favor of a system that would give extra votes to families: an additional vote for each child, controlled by the parents. Vance could have dispassionately advocated this cockamamie scheme, which would advantage Republicans by diminishing the votes of those pesky childless women, who tend to be strongly Democratic. But he made it personal, because, presumably, these women (and Buttigieg) repulse him.

Vance is a manosphere dude in the Executive Branch, a man who, like his boss, thinks women deserve humiliation for failing to breed men's children. This attitude peeks out even when he's talking about enriched uranium: The mother of my children isn't jumping out of any airplanes!

If Vance wins the presidency in 2028, I think we'll see a national abortion ban. Trump, who's probably been the reason for a few abortions in his life, regards a full ban as a political third rail. Vance might also -- but I think his contempt for women will override any political considerations. I hope we never find out.

Wednesday, April 08, 2026

NOW WHAT WILL HE SCREW UP?

Is the Iran war over? I don't know. I think President Trump might take any deal he can get now, because the Iranian regime's refusal to kneel was making him look bad, but I think we could still arrive at an impasse soon, because the two sides' demands are incompatible. And if all this really is over, or will be over soon that increases my anxiety.

For the past five weeks, we've at least known the main arena where Trump was going to do horrible, ill-advised things. Sure, he was doing other terrible stuff, but Iran was his main focus.

Now what?

Trump is an addict who needs a stronger and stronger dose of edgelordism to satisfy his cravings. He's also an old TV guy who thinks every week is sweeps week, so he wants to devise special stunt programming to keep the audience engaged.

If, in the near future, he's not getting all this from Iran, he'll need to get it somewhere. I know he plans to overthrow the Cuban government, but, sadly, that will probably go more smoothly than the Iran war has. So his need to do something truly horrifying, ill-conceived, and transgressive, something that offends even some of his allies and that he he gets away with by the skin of his teeth, will persist until he satisfies it.

That's why I worry about the elections. Last night we saw again that Democrats are exceeding all expectations in off-year elections.


Democrats won a judicial election in Wisconsin -- a state Trump won -- by nearly 20 points, while also winning the mayor's race in Republican-leaning Waukesha.

I have never seen this much #blue in the state of #Wisconsin Sheboygan (blue collar, #manufacturing Trump +16) is blue The biggest swing was Crawford county, #rural on #Minnesota border- Trump +14 to Taylor (Dem) +22 - a 36 point swing left I think white working class is not buying it anymore

[image or embed]

— Soumya Rangarajan, MD, MPP (@soumya-goblue.medsky.social) April 7, 2026 at 11:23 PM

So I think he's coming for the elections. But he might just as easily find another place to transgress. He mentioned Greenland in Monday's press conference, so I don't think that's a dead issue.

He needs this amount of policy madness. I don't think he'll be satisfied with less now.


*****

I was surprised to see that nearly all of the most-liked comments in response to this Fox News ceasefire story were negative:
I can honestly say that I’ve never been more disappointed in this administration. This changes nothing. I realize I know zero about what is taking place through back channels. But unless this results in both 100% surrender of nuclear materials and 100% surrender of the IRGC and a relinquishment of power, this has all been for nothing. We’re now bargaining over the Straight of Hormuz? That was a forgone collateral damage we knew would happen before we even started this. The IRGC puts civilians around their power facilities, NATO threatens war crimes and we fold like origami. Now who looks like the paper tiger? I thought so much better of this administration.

****

If Iran gets to keep its 60% enriched uranium, then that means that Trump choked and the Iranians won. So disappointed in you right now Prez. So disappointed.

****

The regime is still in place. There has been no change. Trump is negotiating his surrender. Iran will be a problem once again in the future. Doesn't matter what deal is made. China and Russia will see to it.

****

As part of the plan, the US has in principle agreed to lift all primary and secondary sanctions against Iran. It has also agreed to accept Iran’s nuclear enrichment and recognize its continued control over the Strait of Hormuz. What did Trump's war accomplish

****

Trump got suckered, Iran is playing him like a fiddle, and the US is looking the fool for it.

****

I voted for Trump - Twice. He blew this one big time. Iran called Trump's bluff, he folded. There is no negotiating with Iran. He also blew Greenland.

****

Art of the deal:
1) Take something that was already working well
2) Do something to screw it up
3) Whine about it, threaten military actions, and tariffs
4) Negotiate a deal that was worse than where we started at step 1
5) Claim victory
6) Enjoy adulation from not so smart MAGA

****

Alright, who wants to bet Iran will put out a statement in the next 12 hours that they had no idea about this agreement?

****

I am really sick of Trump and his "lets make a deal" vision on every world problem. Mostly hes not solving anything and just stirring crap up for nothing. Tonights latest two week extension is typical Iranian stalling. Everybody saw it coming. So disappointed and tired of Trump.

****

I’m a Trumper but boy what a stupid move 🤦‍♀️

****

Delay has always been in the Iranian playbook and we always fall for it.

****

Everyone knew Trump would back down. Whether a republican or democrat you just knew. Trump talks big on everything then backs down. He just wants attention. Destroy civilization??? Give me a break. Is there no one who will stand up to this idiot?? And you talk about Biden losing his mind. Trump sure as hell is no better. Neither one should be president. We need leaders not over the hill lunatics.

****

Every reason that Trump gave for starting the Trump War still exists:
-Iran still has missiles and drones, and the means to make more.
-Iran can reconstitute its nuclear program
-The Iranian regime is still in place, just more radical than before since the Revolutionary Guard is in control now.
-Iran is still killing its people.
--- Now it's the closing of the strait that's the biggest problem, which was NOT a problem before the start of the war.

The military has done an outstanding job on the military piece of the war. CinC Trump has FAILED on the political piece of the Trump War.

****

Mr. President, you may think you're jerking the Iranians around, being tough and making the deal, but the flip flops, and back and forth silliness not only jerks them around it jerks the American people around, specifically the US military families. Unbelievable. And so much for ending the endless wars.

****

Why does he keep caving to these terrorists? They keep playing him like a fiddle. I’m beginning to lose respect for him.

****

And this solves nothing. Acting like a lunatic for 48 hours and then magically cooking up a ceasefire does not provide anyone with a stable, solid solution. That might assuage the stock market for a few days, we might see a nominal drop in oil prices but we need stable; secure leadership for there to be a long term correction to the damage already done.

****

That's it! I've been a loyal Trump supporter for years. OG proud MAGA man. Even handsomely donated to Stop the Steal. But this lack of follow through leads me to believe he's full of bunk. Should have voted for Nikki Haley.

****

Careful, Mr. President. Don’t believe what they’re telling you. There are fewer honest Iranians than there are moderate Democrats.

****

Until Iran reopens the strait, nothing is certain. Trump may be negotiating with himself again
I'm not cherry-picking these. They're nineteen of the twenty most-liked comments. There's one pro-Trump comment in this group:
I know you TACO texters think you are cute but this is a good thing, both for the safety of our military and the lives of potentially innocent people in Iran. Everyone should be rejoicing in this announcement and hope and pray it leads to a permanent cease fire and a permanent non-nuclear Iran. Maybe we can all stop and pray for freedom for the Iranian people and the families of the tens of thousands of lives lost to their brutality.
Even this is more hopeful than triumphant.

I hope this is representative of at least one portion of Trump's base. If so, he's not fooling as many people as he used to.

Tuesday, April 07, 2026

DONALD TRUMP PLANS WAR CRIMES AND LONGS FOR PURITY

Yesterday I wrote about President Trump's late-night Truth Social posts of a video showing veiled, presumably Somali women at the Mall of America.

Donald Trump just posted a video of Somali people enjoying the Mall of America to the soundtrack of “Mad World” because he is a bigoted POS

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) April 6, 2026 at 12:35 AM

That's obviously Trump's idea of a dystopian hellscape. But a few hours before that, Trump gave us another glimpse into his own nightmares, re-posting this tweet of a woman washing her bedding with fire hydrant water at what I assume is a homeless encampment in Los Angeles.


Then yesterday afternoon -- as he pondered whether to commit war crimes by destroying critical civilian infrastructure in Iran -- Trump gave us the flip side of his nightmares, with two posts of colorized footage from the past:


The message of these videos, and the L.A. and Mall of America videos, is obvious: In a bygone era, our cities were utopias where well-dressed white people strolled peacefully, and there wasn't a black or brown or Muslim or poor person in sight. This is an idea that right-wingers find captivating -- and plausible, so much so that the right-wing actor Kevin Sorbo recently humilated himself by tweeting this:


Those of us who lived in the city in the 1970s could have told Sorbo that New York in that era was broke, crumbling, and crime-ridden. It's richer and safer now. There were 1,645 homicides in the city in 1975. There were only 305 last year.

You might have seen that Kevin Sorbo tweet. What you probably don't know is that a day before he posted it, American AF, aka @iAnonPatriot -- the same right-wing tweeter whose Mall of America tweet was picked up by Trump -- posted the New York City clip Sorbo used, but with an explicitly anti-Muslim message.


Right-wingers look at the world and see only utopias and hellscapes. A utopia is a place where everybody looks and thinks like them. A hellscape is any environment where some people aren't exactly like them, or do things they don't like -- wear clothes they disapprove of, practice a religion they don't practice, cope with adversity in a way they find unsightly.

This is why right-wingers love AI slop. AI can create images in which enemies are vanquished brutes, Donald Trump is a young, muscular conqueror, and Jesus looks on and approves. Everything in an AI image is exactly the way the creator wants it to be. That's how right-wingers think the world should work -- and could work.

Those of us who lean left and live in cities know that our environment is flawed. We see the flaws every day. We also see the good things. Sometimes we love the balance and sometimes we hate it, but we don't think a place has to be perfect to be good.

We don't like the way our right-wing fellow citizens vote, but we favor government policies that would help them, too, like universal health coverage. Right-wingers, by contrast, look at us and think:


Trump's warning to Iran right now sound like a variant on that: Imagine no Iran.

God help us.

[image or embed]

— Marisa Kabas (@marisakabas.bsky.social) April 7, 2026 at 8:14 AM

Trump thinks that if he bombs Iran back to the Stone Age, the Persian equivalent of the Paris and New York videos above might magically emerge.

At least he's not promising to build Trump Tehran, complete with a gold statue of himself.



Did I say that right-wingers believe that everything is either a hellscape or (their idea of) a utopia? That's what I mean.

Monday, April 06, 2026

I THINK ILHAN OMAR OCCUPIES MORE REAL ESTATE IN TRUMP'S BRAIN THAN BARACK OBAMA

While we wait to see whether the next phase of the Iran war will be a ceasefire, a massive series of war crimes committed on President Trump's orders, or Trump chickening out on those war crimes because investors and his Gulf pals don't want much more infrastructure damaged, let's look at one of Trump's Truth Social posts from last night's posting spree:

Donald Trump just posted a video of Somali people enjoying the Mall of America to the soundtrack of “Mad World” because he is a bigoted POS

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) April 6, 2026 at 12:35 AM

I say "one of" his posts, but he actually posted this twice last night -- once with no text and once with the text that originally accompanied the video. That was in a three-month-old X post from an influencer called American AF (@iAnonPatriot), a bigot whose followers include Donald Trump Jr., Lauren Boebert, Megyn Kelly, and Mike Flynn. Here's that original tweet, which offers no evidence for its main claim:


Trump's decision to post this has been ascribed to garden-variety racism, but note that he's not showing us Black people in typical American clothes. Trump assumes that the veiled Black women he sees here are Somali. The fact that there are veiled Somali women anywhere in America makes Trump crazy. One veiled Black woman from Africa especially infuriates him: Minneapolis congresswoman Ilhan Omar.

Trump hates Omar so much that he mentions her in social media posts that have nothing to do with her. Here's a message he's posted four times this year, as part of his campaign to oust Greg Goode, a Republican state senator from Indiana who has resisted Trump's call for mid-decade congressional redistricting in his state.


I think Omar sets off a toxic bigotry chain reaction in Trump's brain. On the one hand, she dresses in a way that conceals her hair and skin, which, to Trump, suggests not only disgusting non-European foreignness but also lack of sexual access. (Trump believes women should attempt to live up to male standards of beauty and be sexually accessible, although I suspect that he finds nearly all Black women unattractive.) On the other hand, this traditionally dressed Black woman takes no shit from Trump and pushes back whenever he or any other right-winger attacks her. This plays into a common stereotype amnog white male racists, especially those from the urban North: that Black women are mouthy and rude. (Womnen are supposed to be accommodating and deferential to men, you see. And they should smile more!)

I believe that Minneapolis experienced the worst of ICE because Trump is fixated on Ilhan Omar, a woman whose very existence (and persistence) he finds utterly intolerable. In recent years, I think Omar's rent-free presence in Trump's head has made him angrier than Barack Obama's, and that's saying a lot.

Sunday, April 05, 2026

THAT TRUTH SOCIAL POST WAS WHAT TRUMP'S BASE VOTED FOR

Yes, it's real. You can go here to see it at Truth Social.


People I respect are arguing on social media that this doesn't seem like a post Trump wrote himself. I disagree. I think it's Trump's genuine voice. Remember the golf course video after the 2024 debate with President Biden, a leak I'm sure came from Trump's own team?


“How did I do with the debate the other night?” Trump asks a small group of people. When told he did “fantastic” and “amazing,” Trump continues, referring to Biden, “Look at that old, broken-down pile of c***. It’s a bad guy.”

Trump then goes on to claim that Biden has “just quit” the presidential race, which he says means that he will take on Vice President Kamala Harris in the election instead.

“I think she’s gonna be better,” he says, seemingly referring to his ability to beat her as an opponent. “She’s so bad. She’s so pathetic. She’s just so f***ing bad.”
Bob Woodward and co-author Robert Costa told us in their 2021 book, Peril, that Trump likes the F-word.
President Donald Trump exploded at then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper, yelling, "I don't give a fuck about your fucking transcript" after Esper threw cold water on his desire to quell protests with military force, according to a new book.
And in October of last year, Axios reported that Trump used the word as part of an effort to sell a possible peace deal with Hamas to Benjamin Netanyahu.
When Hamas came back with a "yes, but" to President Trump's Gaza peace proposal on Friday, Trump called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss what he saw as good news.

Netanyahu felt differently. "Bibi told Trump this is nothing to celebrate, and that it doesn't mean anything," a U.S. official with knowledge of the call told Axios.

Trump fired back: "I don't know why you're always so f***ing negative. This is a win. Take it."
So this is how Trump talks.

Now, who's his target audience? I think it's Americans as much as Iranians. Trump knows he got bad reviews for his April Fool's Day speech on Iran. It was scripted and subdued, and nobody liked it. Some even called it "low energy." So this is the opposite.

Is this what his base likes? Take a look at the response to the golf course video in the tweet above, which is from a co-owner of the right-wing Babylon Bee.
You couldn’t leak a more flattering video of Trump if you tried.
The Truth Social post is the lead story at Breitbart. Breitbart's story begins:
Blunt, unambiguous and straight to the point. That was President Donald Trump on Sunday morning as he warned Iran of the perils that lie ahead if it fails to open the Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday.
I assume the post was teed up when it wasn't clear whether the mission to rescue the second of two downed U.S. pilots in Iran would be a success (it was). Trump wanted to be ready to change the subject if necessary. (Bizarrely, he's succeeded in changing the subject from a successful rescue mission to his temperament.) The post might also have been an effort to banish reporting on Trump health rumors from the headlines. (The White House denies that Trump had a medical emergency yesterday that required him to be transported to Walter Reed.)

Greg Sargent says:
This open threat of war crimes is pure sociopathic bloodlust and sadism but it's also another sign that he's failing and that he's in a fury about it.
He's threatening war crimes because he's failing. War crimes are how he intends to redeem himself. (No one whose opinion he respects or whose support he wants believes that there's anything wrong with committing war crimes against enemy Muslims.)

A Wall Street Journal story makes clear that he's eager to commit war crimes:
Top aides have privately made the case to President Trump in recent days that Iran’s power-generating facilities and bridges are legitimate military targets because destroying them could cripple the country’s missile and nuclear programs, officials say.

Trump embraced the rationale, sharply questioned by legal experts and human-rights groups, in a nationwide address Wednesday when he vowed to bomb Iran “back to the stone ages.”
If he holds back, it'll only be because allies in the region talk him out of it...
Trump’s threat to strike Iran’s power plants has alarmed some Gulf state partners who fear that it could spur Tehran to lash out at their energy infrastructure....

The fear of a spiraling series of tit-for-tat strikes on Middle East energy facilities isn’t a hypothetical concern. When Israel struck a major Iranian gas field last month, Iran responded by striking a major Qatar natural-gas field. And Kuwait on Friday accused Iran of attacking a major desalination plant.
... or because the markets react with panic on Monday (which may or may not happen).

But for now, Trump is the president his base voted for. Nobody in the base cares that he profaned a major Christian holiday. They think it's awesome. They regard this -- both the trash talk and the threatened brutality -- as a form of muscular Christianity.

Saturday, April 04, 2026

WHY TRUMP ASSUMED IRAN DIDN'T HAVE AGENCY

In a New York Times conversation, Jamelle Bouie and David French discuss a fact Donald Trump doesn't seem able to grasp: that in a conflict, the enemy can fight back. Below I'll try to explain why Trump believes this.

Bouie says:
It’s very strange. I guess I’ve never really seen anything like it in American politics. Just an administration, a set of people, who have no real ability to just conceptualize what their political opponents, or their foreign enemies, might want to do of their own accord. It’s like they really do not believe that other people have independent action.
French says:
One of the reasons they look at the Venezuela situation, and they keep going back to that, is that it’s probably their most successful version of this, that Venezuelan intervention. But you go again and again, and you see the same pattern: “We have to pummel people harder.” And that works with Republican members of Congress, for example, but it doesn’t tend to work with other sovereign nations. Other sovereign nations don’t like to be pummeled. And so, what they’ll do is they’ll find a way to stop or prevent the pummeling, and it’s not always the way you want.

So, for example, if you’re trying to torment Canada, well, you can’t go crying if Canada says, “We’re going to forge a closer economic relationship with China and Europe than with the U.S., because we have self-preservation interests.” No. They keep thinking, if we pummel, then we’ll achieve the results that we want, when sometimes pummeling has the exact opposite effect. What it typically does is alienate people at scale.
I agree that Trump thought he could simply hit Iran as hard as possible and force a surrender, which is how he saw his assault on Venezuela. But "Use overwhelming force and you'll win" has been a successful strategy throughout his political career, at least until recently.

Remember that Trump was a success as a real estate developer, but was a failure after that. Then he had a mixed record as a famous person slapping his name on products. Then he became a TV star and had a show that was a hit, but after a few years it was less and less of a hit.

Politics is the only area in which Trump has failed (he always fails) and then returned to the top of the heap. Which doesn't speak well for politics. There's something wrong with any field that would allow Trump to dominate it twice.

Trump overwhelmed his enemies in 2015 and 2016. His primary opponents were too polite to get into the bare-knuckle brawl that might have beaten him, or to fight him strategically (for instance, with campaign withdrawals that might have cleared the field for a strong opponent). Also, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing media had pushed a coarse, pro-wrestling view of politics for so many years that Republican primary voters were eager for a hatemongering brawler.

Trump's general-election opponent had been pummeled by both the right-wing and mainstream media for years. That's why he was able to win an Electoral College victory.

Trump survived the Mueller report and an impeachment the same way he won the election: He was loud and crude, and the right-wing press defended him more forcefully than the Democratic Party and the rest of the media attacked him.

He lost the 2020 election, though the margins in the swing states were close. He was impeached again and he survived a second time. And then he was given room to mount a comeback. The legal cases against him were built too slowly. His 2024 primary opponents weren't able to kick him when he was down. He defeated a weakened Democratic Party.

To sum up: The political system never gave Trump the thrashing he deserved. Democrats and Republican critics fought too politely. The non-GOP media thought he was the true voice of the Volk and was far more willing to punch "wokeness" than Trump.

So Trump got used to the idea that the enemy doesn't have agency because for years his enemies did a piss-poor job of using their agency.

Until Chris Van Hollen pushed back on the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Until Canada put its elbows up with regard to tariffs and "51st state" talk. Until Greenland and Denmark pushed back on annexation. Until anti-ICE protesters pushed back in Minneapolis and elsewhere.

But there were still enemies who chose not to use their agency: big law firms, elite universities, members of Congress in both parties, Democratic consultants, op-ed writers who still obsessed over "wokeness" while demanding that Democrats throw trans people under the bus.

Trump thought they were the rule and the few determined resisters were the exception. He still thought he could work his will pretty much anywhere in the world he pleased. And now we're in a quagmire in Iran.