In Da House: Greene's Machinations Likely to Fall Flat

Boy howdy was there a lot of news yesterday. As you can see above, we have 13 items today. It could easily have been two or three times that; we only got it that low by combining similar stories. We're going to start with some of the machinations going on in the U.S. House of Representatives.

For those who have been eagerly (or not-so-eagerly) awaiting the impeachment of Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, the moment will soon be at hand. On April 10, shortly after the House returns from a 2-week break, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) will deliver the articles of impeachment to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

Johnson also announced which members will serve as impeachment managers; the list of 10 includes Reps. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Clay Higgins (R-LA) and... Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA). Those are three of the biggest show horses in the House. They engage in so many stunts that each of them should change their name to Evel(ine) Knievel. Is Johnson trying to maximize the circus-like aspect of this thing? Is he trying to mollify the Freedom Caucus by including some of their members? Is he trying to let the FCers hang themselves by giving them the rope with which to do it? Could be any or all of these. In any case, the trial isn't going to last long; Schumer says it will commence the morning of April 11, and it's a pretty good guess it won't last too many days after that. In fact, it may not last too many hours. Or too many minutes.

Meanwhile, speaking of the relationship between Greene and Johnson, she apparently plans to press her motion to vacate, up to and including making it a privileged motion (which would then require the House to take up the matter within 2 days). If Greene does move ahead, she could end up regretting it. Johnson would almost certainly need Democratic votes to keep his job, and some Democrats are increasingly comfortable with the idea of trading those votes in exchange for passing the Ukraine funding bill.

There's also one other bit of news worth mentioning, from the Democratic side of the aisle. Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) is going to introduce a bill called the Guarding United States Against Reckless Disclosures (GUARD) Act, which would prohibit the president, vice president, members of Congress and federal candidates from viewing classified information if they have been charged with certain crimes, like obstructing an official proceeding, unlawfully retaining classified defense information, or acting as a foreign agent.

You'll have to figure out for yourself which current presidential candidate and which current senator from Sherrill's home state that she might have in mind here. Since this would seem to be a commonsense measure, it should have a good chance of becoming law. However, since it quite obviously targets a man who thinks nothing of siccing his followers on any Republican who dares cast a vote contrary to his interests, we have to assume it's dead in the water. (Z)

Southern Politics: Same Old Song and Dance

In the South, politicians often behave in ways that are both shady and self-interested. There were several stories along those lines this week.

To start, our great national nightmare in Florida is over, as the Mouse and the louse are no longer on the outs. Since Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) took steps to punish Disney nearly 2 years ago for pushing back against his anti-LGBTQ stance, lawsuits have been flying back and forth, with each side trying to demonstrate that they have the most muscle. As of this week, the lawsuits have been dropped and the two sides have agreed to resolve their differences amicably and out of court. Nobody is saying exactly what that means, but one has to assume that Disney is going to regain control of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. What caused DeSantis to decide he was no longer interested in fighting Disney wokeness? Could it possibly be that he's not running for president anymore, and that there's no further value in such political stunts? Mayyyyyybe...

Heading over to Kentucky, the Republican-controlled state legislature is clearly nervous that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's (R-KY) announcement that he will cede power once the current session of Congress comes to an end is prelude to his leaving the Senate prematurely (either through resignation or death). The current governor of the state is Democrat Andy Beshear. Should McConnell's seat come open, Beshear would pick a replacement from a list of three candidates selected by the Kentucky GOP.

Actually, that's what would have happened up until yesterday afternoon. The "three candidates" rule was put in place when Beshear was first elected, to stop him from back-dooring a Democrat into the Senate, should the opportunity arise. However, the legislature has now decided they don't want him to have ANY input at all, even if it's just to choose a Republican replacement. So, by a veto-proof majority, both chambers passed a bill that entirely removes the governor from the process.

Under the new law, which Beshear presumably won't sign, but WILL have rammed down his throat by a veto override, a replacement senator would be chosen by a special election. This would mean that the people of Kentucky would be underrepresented in the Senate for some period of time, likely several months. It would also mean that in a closely divided Senate, the position of the Republican Conference could be seriously weakened, up to and including losing the majority for a period of time. But hey, at least the centrist Democratic governor won't be involved in the process of picking a replacement who was preapproved by the state Republican Party.

And finally, over in South Carolina, politicians have once again won a victory when it comes to suppressing the rights of Black people—which is practically the official state sport. The current 5R, 1D map is an illegal racial gerrymander, per a ruling from a panel made up of three federal judges. However, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the decision, agreed to hear the case, and then... has not made any further progress.

We are not clear how the Supremes decide which questions require immediate attention, and which can be allowed to twist in the wind. One would think this would be a priority matter, since it affects the representation of literally hundreds of thousands of people. In any event, due to the lack of action, the very same three-judge panel said that the state would be allowed to use the illegal maps for another cycle, since there is no time remaining to wait for SCOTUS to take care of business.

The primary district in question is SC-01, currently represented by Nancy Mace (R). Given her various bits of obnoxious behavior, she could still be in danger, along the lines of a Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) or a Madison Cawthorn. However, now that she doesn't have to worry about her district becoming much less white, Mace is probably safe. So, the members of the House will likely have the pleasure of her company for at least 2 more years. Undoubtedly, they are thrilled. (Z)

Election Crimes Have Consequences: The Jig Is up for Eastman, Pritchard

Donald Trump may still be waiting to see if he will pay a price for his election-related shenanigans. At least two of his supporters aren't quite so lucky, as the hammer was brought down upon them yesterday.

First up is John Eastman, one of the lawyers at the center of the scheme to steal the 2020 election. On Wednesday, a judge ruled that he should be disbarred, while also suggesting criminal prosecution would probably be appropriate. That latter suggestion was meant to apply to California, where Eastman is licensed, although it's also implicitly a suggestion that if and when he gets nailed in Georgia and/or Washington, he'll deserve it.

Eastman is going to appeal, of course, and there are theoretically two more layers of the California judicial system to which he can plead his case before his disbarment is official. That said, he hasn't got much of a defense here. Further, until he appeals AND wins, his law license is suspended. So, as of yesterday, he cannot practice in California. And the odds are that status will become permanent. Of course, his law license wouldn't do him much good anyhow, if he ends up in a Georgia hoosegow for much of the remainder of his days.

Meanwhile, Brian Pritchard, who is first vice chairman of the Georgia GOP, and is also a right-wing radio host, is more of a garden-variety crook. He was convicted of check forgery in Pennsylvania back in 1996. Under Georgia law, felons cannot vote until they have fully paid for their crimes (i.e., prison sentence, probation, any fines, etc.). Pritchard ignored this rule, and voted in nine different elections where he was not entitled to do so, while at the same time using his radio show to lament all the illegal votes being cast in Georgia. Partisan hack, heal thyself?

In court, Pritchard's argument was that he did not realize that his probation had been extended, and so didn't know he was breaking the rules. Judge Lisa Boggs didn't buy it, and she levied a $5,000 fine and ordered a reprimand from the State Election Board. Many Republicans want Pritchard to step down from his position in the Georgia GOP, since the only job available to Republicans who don't honor election law is President of the United States. He says he won't do it, though. (Z)

Advantage, Republicans: This Time, the GOP Wins the Redistricting Battle

As readers of this site know, states used to re-draw district maps once per decade, once they had the latest census information. Those days, of course, are long gone, and it's become fairly common to have two or three re-draws per census cycle. There have already been close to a dozen of them since the 2022 election, for various reasons, although we are nearing the time when the current cycle will have to "lock" because of candidate filing deadlines. And, as Politico's Zach Montellaro notes, the GOP looks to have come out slightly ahead in this round of re-draws.

It's not too hard to figure out what happened here. Going into 2024, there was much hope among Democrats that they could flip 5-10 seats just by winning the re-drawing battle. However, Wisconsin Democrats were ultimately barred from re-drawing their maps, while New York Democrats were quite timid in redrawing theirs, with the result that only a couple of seats there were shifted in favor of the blue team. Democrats might pick up more than that, but they'll have to do it with politics and not with mapmaking tools.

Meanwhile, North Carolina is less populous than New York, but was allowed to go all-in on a Republican gerrymander, which will probably net 3 or 4 seats for the red team. The Democrats will gain a seat in Alabama and one in Louisiana due to rulings about racial gerrymanders, but Republicans managed to stymie similar rulings in Georgia and South Carolina (see above). Add up all the pluses and minuses across the country, and the battle of the maps ends up favoring the GOP by a seat or two. That's not much, but it's way better than being down 5-10 seats.

As long as we are on the subject, the GOP also won a smaller victory in Pennsylvania this week. Recall that there has been much squabbling about a Pennsylvania state law that requires a date be written on the outer envelope used for mail-in ballots. The law is ultimately kind of dumb, since the date written on the envelope is actually immaterial to the process. You know how they figure out if the ballot was cast in time? Since ballots have to be received by Election Day, they just look on Election Day to see if they have it. That's pretty good proof that a person cast their ballot on time, even if the envelope says July 4, 1776; October 21, 1955; April 5, 2063; In the Year 2525; or even if it has no date at all.

Previously, a federal court had ruled that ballots cannot be discarded simply due to a wrong/missing date. On Wednesday, however, a panel from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision by a vote of 2-1. It will head to the U.S. Supreme Court next, but who knows if they will take it, or how quickly they will rule, if they do. For the moment, one has to assume that the new state of affairs will remain in place for this year's election. Since Democrats are disproportionately likely to vote by mail, the disqualification rule is going to nullify more Democratic than Republican votes. We're probably talking a gain of a few thousand votes statewide for the GOP, but if things are really close, well... (Z)

Republicans Are Losing Ground on Abortion

Fox's "news" operation is suspect, but their polling is OK because it is done by Beacon (D) and Shaw (R) working together. And certainly it's not skewed in the Democrats' favor. So, it's fair to take seriously the new Fox poll that says 59% of Americans think abortion should be legal in all or most cases, 65% favor a law guaranteeing access to abortion nationwide and 68% think access to mifepristone and other abortifacients should be legal. These numbers are all up 15-20 points from April 2022.

This is not good news for the Republican Party, and the crosstabs make it worse. In essence, the sky-high support for abortion among Democrats (90%+) is balanced out by the lukewarm support among Republicans (mid-40s or so). However, independents favor these various abortion-related questions in almost exactly the same percentages as the topline numbers. In other words, for every three independent voters who conclude abortion is their decisive issue, two are on the side of the Democrats. This is not good for the GOP, and in particular for its presidential candidate, who cannot win without a big chunk of independent votes.

Meanwhile, the Republican response to this particular problem has certainly been interesting to watch. The predominant strategy appears to be "all in." In other words, Republican strategists and operatives seem to have concluded that there's no actual middle ground here, and all they can really do is get the base really, really fired up, in hopes that they will show up to the polls in droves in November. So, for example, as law school professors Reva Siegel (Yale) and Mary Ziegler (UC Davis), writing for Slate, point out, anti-choice forces are becoming much more open about expressing their desire for a nationwide ban of all abortions in all cases. Or, to take another example, the South Carolina legislature is considering a bill that would require insurance companies to make life insurance available to embryos.

There are some Republicans who still think it's possible to thread the needle here. For example, Patrick T. Brown is one of CNN's resident "reasonable conservatives." He's actually extremely partisan, but the shtick is that he's fair-minded. Anyhow, he just wrote an op-ed that argues, in effect, that the Republican position on abortion would be more attractive if Republican politicians just did a better job of explaining their views to voters. Uh, huh.

As a purely tactical matter, we think the all-in Republicans have the right of it. That is to say, no matter what Brown and others of his ilk think, there is no middle path here, and there are no words that can convince people who think abortion should be legal that it's not so bad to make it illegal. So, if you're going to hitch your political party to a very unpopular position (see the poll results above), then you really better do everything you can to get the minority that agrees with you to the polls. (Z)

Shanahan: Open Mouth, Insert Foot

It hasn't even been a half-Scaramucci since Nicole Shanahan was named Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s running mate. However, she's already learning that the presidential microscope is very big and very powerful, even for third-party would-be-spoiler VP candidates.

The particular issue on which the microscope has focused is Shanahan's views on IVF. That is, as you may have heard, something of a hot-button issue right now. And based on many past statements, she is somewhere between "just asking questions" and "openly hostile to IVF." She has described the procedure as "one of the biggest lies that's being told about women's health today" and said that "I believe IVF is sold irresponsibly, and in my own experience with natural childbirth has led me to understand that the fertility industry is deeply flawed."

What does Shanahan propose as an alternative to IVF, for those who need assistance conceiving? You're not going to believe us when we tell you, so we'll just give it to you in her own words: "I'm not sure that there has been a really thorough mitochondrial respiration study on the effects of 2 hours of morning sunlight on reproductive health. I would love to fund something like that." Yes, undoubtedly the issue for people who are having trouble conceiving is their lack of a good tan.

We do not propose to be experts on IVF, but we can say two things here. First, Shanahan is no more expert than we are, and it's a shame that her wealth has afforded her a platform, while also persuading her she's entitled to hold forth on important subjects she's not qualified to speak about. Second, even if one has legitimate concerns about IVF, there are appropriate ways to express that and not-so-appropriate ways. Shanahan chose the latter, we would say.

Put another way, we suspect that the roughly 2% of American parents who turned to IVF are going to be none-too-pleased to hear that Shanahan thinks they were snowed by the In Vitro-Industrial Complex. It's another reason to think that as the Kennedy-Shanahan ticket becomes more familiar to the voting public, the fewer voters (and the fewer Democratic voters, in particular) there will be who are willing to support the duo. (Z)

Advantage, Biden: Big Score from New York Fundraiser

We took note of two bits of positive news for the Republican Party heading into the 2024 elections (see above). So, how about two bits of positive news for Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden?

First, Biden has an advantage that Republican rival Donald Trump does not: His predecessors. That is to say, there are two living Democratic ex-presidents who are good campaigners, and who are happy to hit the campaign trail for the current president, as needed. That would be Barack Obama and Bill Clinton (Jimmy Carter, of course, is not physically able to join them on the hustings). By contrast, there is only one living Republican ex-president other than the current presumptive presidential nominee, and George W. Bush is a mediocre campaigner who is not popular with voters. Oh, and he and Trump also hate each other.

Exactly how much is that advantage worth to Biden? At very least, in Obama and Clinton he has access to two of the shrewdest political strategists of the last half-century (and indeed, Biden is in regular contact with Obama, in particular, for campaign advice).

On top of that, Team Biden put on an object lesson in the value of a little star power last night in New York. The three Democrats made a joint appearance at Radio City Music Hall, supported by a gaggle of celebrities (e.g., Lizzo, Lea Michele, Ben Platt, etc.) meant to appeal to the kiddies. The event, which attracted more than 5,000 people paying anywhere from $225 to $500,000 a head, raised a staggering $26 million for the Biden campaign and the Democratic Party. That is the highest tally ever for a single-day fundraiser. Donald Trump happened to be in town, as well, but was not in attendance, for some reason. Too bad, they probably would have let him set up a table in the back to hawk some Bibles.

The second bit of good news for Biden (admittedly, it is a backhanded compliment of a sort) is a new poll from AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. Since we all know that a huge percentage of the electorate is not enthused about Biden OR Trump, the pollster decided to ask a slightly different question, namely "How fearful will you be if the other party's candidate wins?" While 49% of Republicans are fearful of a second Biden term, a sizable 66% of Democrats are fearful of a second Trump term.

In an ideal world, a party would prefer that people get to the polls to vote FOR its presidential candidate. But, in the end, a vote AGAINST the other party's presidential candidate counts just as much. If more Democrats fear a Trump presidency, then theoretically more of them will put aside their lack of enthusiasm for their party's candidate and get to the polls to vote. And once they are there, well, other Democratic candidates will get to come along for the ride. And so it is another tea leaf that suggests that the decisive factor in 2024 could, once again, be the anti-Trump vote. (Z)

More on the U.N.'s Israel Resolution

Now that we've had some good news for Joe Biden, let's move on to a real headache for him, namely the situation in Israel. Earlier this week, when we wrote about the cease-fire resolution that passed the U.N. Security Council 14-0 with the U.S. abstaining, we were unable to read the text because of a programming error on the U.N.'s website. We also didn't know if Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu was reacting appropriately to the resolution in canceling planned meetings at the White House, or if he was overreacting.

Now, we have a definite answer to the first issue, and a pretty good answer to the second. The text of the resolution has been posted to many websites (such as this one), so it's not necessary to rely on the U.N. to be able to read it. It's pretty short, so you might consider clicking through, but the executive summary is that it's remarkably mild. Mainly, it calls for a ceasefire during the month of Ramadan with an eye toward a permanent ceasefire, demands that Hamas release any remaining hostages, and insists that humanitarian aid be allowed to flow freely. Only the first of those three provisions is at all controversial, right?

Now that we see the text, we are strongly inclined to the view that Netanyahu was the one who was in the wrong. Of course, we are far from being experts in diplomacy, particularly U.S.-Israel diplomacy. Haaretz, the Israeli daily newspaper, whose authors are far more expert than we are, sees things similarly. Consider this piece from Alon Pinkas, which begins like this:

Monday's UN Security Council resolution "demanding" an immediate cease-fire—adopted by 14 members, with the United States abstaining—puts Israel on a collision course with both the UNSC and, particularly, the Americans.

No one should be surprised by this. We have repeatedly written since last November that this would happen, and the U.S. warned Israel incessantly it was in the cards. Israel ignored the threats and is now disingenuously pretending to be surprised and shocked.

When you ignore U.S. requests, dismiss a president's advice, inundate the secretary of state with endless spin, casually deride American plans, exhibit defiance and intransigence by refusing to present a credible and coherent vision for postwar Gaza, and actively pursue an open confrontation with the administration—there's a price to pay.

Since we don't really know Pinkas' work, it's possible he's in the bag for the far left, an Israeli version of Cenk Uygur or Markos Moulitsas. But we don't think so, since he's got extensive government and media experience, and since we read many other pieces from Israeli media outlets saying this same basic thing.

Indeed, it's pretty clear to us, even as non-experts, that Netanyahu's leadership of the Israeli war effort is much more about politics than it is about what might be best for his people. He's highly dependent on a far-right faction in the Knesset, and he's also likely to get booted out of office (and to face his long-lingering criminal charges) once this war ends. Both of these things incentivize the PM to keep the conflict going, not to find a way to bring about a temporary or permanent peace.

Of course, none of this is helping Joe Biden politically, as he cautiously plays his hand. After the U.N. resolution was passed, the President was lambasted by a whole bunch of pro-Israel Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Their argument is that the resolution emboldens Hamas because it does not condemn the organization, and instead just says the hostages should be released. This appears nitpicky to us; a case of finding something to gripe about in order to keep the voters at home happy. We do not think anyone is going to find Hamas to be an upstanding organization, right up until they read some critical comments by the U.N. Security Council. Anyone inclined to think that Hamas is worthy of condemnation has already reached that conclusion themselves.

Adding to Biden's woes, yesterday, a now-former State Department official, Annelle Sheline, got a fair bit of attention for resigning her job and penning a scorching op-ed in which she explains that she quit in protest of Biden's approach to Israel. She says that many of her colleagues are in agreement with her, although of course you have to take her word for that.

Undoubtedly, Sheline is a person of conscience and she did what she thought was the right thing. However, it is also the case that Biden is not going to change his Israel policy because of the resignation of one low-level State Department employee. Also, the resident Civil War historian can't help but see such things through the lens of that conflict. There were many people in 1861 and 1862 who wanted IMMEDIATE action on slavery. However, if Abraham Lincoln had moved too far, too fast, he risked a backlash that could have ruined the Union War effort, leading to the perpetuation of slavery for much longer than it actually survived. Is the war in Gaza a situation where a cautious approach is essential? Certainly, Biden thinks so, while the rest of us are going to find out if he's right in the next 6 months or so. (Z)

The Trump Bible: Preaching to the Choir?

With the item above, we knew there was more to the U.N. resolution story than was apparent at first glance, even if we didn't know exactly what that "more" was. Now, we have a clearer picture.

On the other hand, when we wrote about Donald Trump's new $59.99 Bible, we missed something very obvious that several readers wrote in to point out. If he can take a few hundred thousand rubes for sixty bucks of their hard-earned lucre, then great. But the real scam is that it will theoretically allow churches to funnel large amounts of money to Trump without running afoul of federal laws about campaign contributions and/or non-profit status.

Of course, for this to work, the churches have to be on board. Thus far, it does not appear to be going well. Trump's new business partner, Lee Greenwood, has been making the rounds to respond to the very loud, very broad criticism of the project. His theory is that it's just leftists who hate Trump. Could be, but CNN talked to a number of Christian pastors who are none-too-comfortable about the project. Maybe they are just Trump-hating leftists, too, or maybe a Trump-backed Bible, complete with patriotic texts and verbiage that sounds a lot like theocracy, is just a bit too on point. It could be that the Trump Bible will be joining Trump Vodka, Trump Steaks and Trump Airlines on the scrap heap. (Z)

Joe Lieberman Has Passed Away

Joe Lieberman, who served four terms as U.S. Senator from Connecticut, was Al Gore's running mate in 2000, and was John McCain's preferred choice for running mate in 2008, died on Wednesday at the age of 82.

Lieberman's Senate career was long and largely successful. He was well-liked by his colleagues, was good at reaching across the aisle back when that was still a viable strategy, and was a key backer of several pieces of notable legislation, like the bills that created the Department of Homeland Security and that repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." He also once famously broke his "no working on the sabbath" rule, walking 5 miles to the Capitol to cast the deciding vote that saved Medicaid from being cut by Republicans.

That said, even people who study political history for a living don't have all that much head space for the career details of individual members of Congress, even those who had very successful careers. So, if Lieberman is remembered in half a century, it will almost certainly be for his status as the first Jewish person to appear on a major party's presidential ticket (the first Jewish person to appear on ANY ticket was 1972 Libertarian VP nominee Tonie Nathan, who also became the first Jew to receive an electoral vote, thanks to faithless GOP elector Roger MacBride).

Mind you, there is no guarantee that Lieberman will make an impression on the history books for this reason. After all, everyone knows what the VP job is (or isn't) worth, and when you consider the many and varied glass ceilings that have been broken, well, it's a semi-lengthy list. To illustrate, here's a brief pop quiz:

1. Who is the first VP nominee who was Black?
2. Who is the first major-party VP nominee who was Black?
3. Who is the first VP nominee who was a woman?
4. Who is the first major-party VP nominee who was a woman?
5. Who is the first VP nominee who was Native American?
6. Who is the first major-party VP nominee who was Native American?
7. Who is the first VP nominee who was Asian?
8. Who is the first major-party VP nominee who was Asian?
9. Who is the first VP nominee who was Latino/a?
10. Who is the first major-party VP nominee who was Latino/a?

Answers below. We suspect most readers will get around half of them right, showing that some broken glass ceilings are better remembered than others.

In any case, while Lieberman was an outstanding Senator in some ways, he was also controversial, particularly during the final chapters of his career. Throughout his time in the Senate, he was hawkish, but that shifted into overdrive after the 9/11 attacks. Not only did he help create DHS, he also backed the PATRIOT Act, and he was a major supporter of the use of force in Iraq, helping to steer that measure through the Senate. Invading Iraq was a fairly mainstream Democratic position in the early 2000s, but it's not today.

Lieberman is also closely tied to two acts that many Democrats consider to be betrayals of the Party's principles. First, he refused to vote for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) unless the public option was removed. He got what he wanted and to this day, of course, there is no government-run healthcare plan that's available to everyone. Lieberman's official reason for his intransigence was that "even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line." Is that the whole story? Well, as noted, Lieberman represented Connecticut, which is where the city of Hartford is located. Hartford is known as the "Insurance Capital of the World" because it is headquarters to so many insurance companies. Those would be the same insurance companies that would have to compete with a government-run insurance plan. Might that have entered into the then-Senator's thinking? We report, you decide.

The final act of Lieberman's career is also the second big, black mark against him as far as many Democrats are concerned. Having fallen well out of step with the Party, Lieberman took a leading role in founding the No Labels organization. Obviously, that story is still being written, but if somehow the group finally comes up with a candidate, and if that candidate somehow makes the difference between Joe Biden winning and losing the election, then you can make a pretty good guess that the names "Ralph Nader" and "Joe Lieberman" are going to appear next to each other for a very long time.

If you wanted to sum it up, Lieberman was essentially the Democratic version of his longtime friend McCain: long-serving senator, popular with colleagues, war hawk, bucked his Party on healthcare, ended his life alienated from that Party. As they say, people contain multitudes. (Z)

I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Bitter Sweet Symphony

Here's the solution to last week's headline theme, courtesy of reader F.W. in Franklin, WV:

All of the headlines contain a word whose definition describes a group of people.

• Trump Legal News: Some Assembly Required: A group of people gathered together in one place for a common purpose
  
  
• Senate: Good, Bad and Ugly News for the Democratic Caucus: A conference of members of a legislative body who belong to a particular party or faction.
  
  
• Newsom: A Demonstration of His Political Clout?: A public meeting or march protesting against something or expressing views on a political issue.
  
  
• Election Interference: Russia's Got a New Form of Rabble-Rousing: A disorderly crowd; a mob
  
  
• I Read the News Today, Oh Boy: Conspiracy: A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful
  
  
• This Week in Schadenfreude: Moreno a Part of the Rainbow Tribe: A social division in a traditional society consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic, religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically having a recognized leader.
  
  
• This Week in Freudenfreude: Send in the Choir: An organized group of singers, typically one that takes part in church services or performs regularly in public.

We gave the hint that even USC Alumni could solve this one; several readers rightly wrote in to point out that we are assuming, very possibly wrongly, that more than one person has graduated that institution. Fair point; we apologize for the poor writing. Just because there are lots of Trojan lambskins doesn't mean there are lots of Trojan sheepskins.

Here are the first 30 readers who got it right:

1. N.H. in London, England, UK
2. M.B. in Albany, NY
3. A.P. in Kitchener, ON, Canada
4. C.H. in Atlanta, GA
5. J.N. in Zionsville, IN
6. D.D. in Carversville, PA
7. G.W. in Avon, CT
8. J.A. in Brisbane, QLD, Australia
9. J.D.W in Baltimore, MD
10. P.D. in La Mesa, CA
11. D.L. in Springfield, IL
12. B.M. in Chico, CA
13. J.A.B. in Marbury, MD
14. W.L. in Springfield, MO
15. B.D. in Marietta, GA
16. R.C. in Eagleville, PA.
17. M.S. in Canton, NY
18. M.Z. in Sharon, MA
19. M.W. in Frederick, MD
20. F.W. in Franklin
21. G.D. in Munich, Germany
22. J.S. in Germantown, OH
23. N.S. in Chicago, IL
24. M.R. in Concord, MA
25. M.L. in West Hartford, CT
26. J.B. in Waukee, IA
27. A.H. in Espoo, Finland
28. E.S. in Cincinnati, OH
29. D.B. in Pittsboro, NC
30. L.B. in London, England, UK

We've got our own British invasion going on here.

As to this week's puzzle, it's in the category of Arts & Literature, it relies on just one word per headline, and a hint is that if you can't figure it out, don't beat yourself up. Note that, per our policy of not making a game out of certain kinds of stories, the headlines for the items on abortion, Israel and the death of Joe Lieberman are NOT a part of this one.

If you have a guess, send it to comments@electoral-vote.com with the subject line "March 29 Headlines." (Z)

This Week in Schadenfreude: The World's Stupidest Slur

Does it hurt to be this damn dumb? We don't know, because no matter how many times we may have erred in a lecture or a colloquium presentation or a blog posting, we're pretty sure we never popped off with something as stupid and half-cocked at this.

This week's subject of infamy is state Rep. Matt Maddock (R-MI). Somehow, he either took or received photos of buses waiting at Wayne County Airport, which serves the Detroit area. And he promptly got on eX-Twitter to provide his "analysis":

In case you are wondering, Pete Hoekstra is the new chair of the Michigan Republican Party, having just replaced the whackadoodle Kristina Karamo.

What was actually going on? It was definitely not an immigrant caravan. Here's Maddock's colleague, state Rep. Mallory McMorrow (D-MI), with an explanation:

McMorrow is the representative who achieved fame for her speech defending herself against charges of being a "groomer," which went viral.

If Maddock, or whoever took the pictures, had bothered to wait and watch while the plane travelers disembarked, it would have been obvious that this could not possibly have been Mexican immigrants. First, inasmuch as these folks are a basketball team, a disproportionate number are well north of 6 feet tall. Second, for those who do not follow sports, Gonzaga is a rural, Catholic university. Its basketball team is rather well known, demographically, for having an unusually high percentage of... well, let's say, Maddock's kind of people. Nonetheless, even after his error was pointed out, the Representative refused to believe it. For example:

And again:

Does Maddock actually think "commie" is spelled like that? Or is he trying to imply that his detractors are also racists (i.e., "KKK" plus "Commie")?

It is at least possible that the Representative put one over on us all, and that he did this just to get some attention. If so, then it sorta worked, since 99%+ of the people reading this never heard of him before yesterday. That said, he is the absolute butt of the joke across Michigan and across the country. So, he's really putting to the test the old aphorism that there's no such thing as bad publicity. (Z)

This Week in Freudenfreude: Green Energy on the March

Yesterday, we had an item about how Big Oil is reconciling itself to the advent of green energy, preferring to ride that wave rather than to be washed out by it. Today, let's follow up with a piece on coal. Specifically, the state of Pennsylvania used to be coal country, at a level that puts modern-day West Virginia or Wyoming or Kentucky to shame.

There is still some coal production in the Keystone State, of course, but it's a dying commodity. There is perhaps no bigger reminder of that fact than the fate of the coal-powered Homer City Generating Station, located a little bit east of Pittsburgh. Going online in 1969, the plant was the largest coal-burning facility in the state, capable of generating up to 1,888 megawatts of energy. As late as 2005, it was still operating at 80% capacity, but by 2022 it was down to less than 20%. Up against energy sources that were both cheaper and cleaner, the coal plant just couldn't keep going. And so, it closed its doors in mid-2023.

Now the land occupied by the plant, along with the coal fields that supplied it, will find new life... as Pennsylvania's largest solar plant. Backed by an eight-figure grant from the Inflation Reduction Act, Swift Current Energy (SCE) plans to build the Mineral Basin Solar Project. Once it's online, the plant will generate 402 MW of clean energy, enough to power 75,000 homes. Thereafter, SCE plans to expand the operation to the immediate vicinity, reaching a capacity of 1,000 MW within 5 years. As part of the plan, the company says it will invest $20 million in training for young Pennsylvanians who want to upskill, right-skill, and reskill. So, in addition to being eco-friendly, it will also be an economic boon to the region. Are you taking notes, Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV)?

Stories like this give hope that public-private cooperation just might allow mankind to respond to the problem of climate change before it's too late.

Have a good weekend, all! (Z)

---

1. Frederick Douglass, Equal Rights Party, 1872
2. Kamala Harris, Democratic Party, 2020
3. Marietta Stow, Equal Rights Party, 1884
4. Geraldine Ferraro, Democratic Party, 1984
5. Charles Curtis, Republican Party, 1928
6. Curtis
7. Harris
8. Harris
9. Peter Camejo, independent, 2004
10. There has not been one.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up in school, at work, etc., please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend or share some other way.

---The Votemaster and Zenger