Previous | Next | Senate page | Menu
New polls: (None)
Dem pickups: (None)
GOP pickups: GA PA
We intended to have both questions and letters today, but some tech issues forced us to choose one or the other. We went with letters, because a much greater percentage of those are time-sensitive.
Also, in response to feedback, we're going to do a Compliments Department this week, rather than Complaints. We'll have more complaints next week.
Finally, if you're still working out the Friday headline theme for this week, we'll note that you might THINK we included Canada in the theme, but if you look carefully, you'll see we avoided doing so (phew!).
Sunday Mailbag
Politics: The Presidential Race
N.S. in Fayetteville, NY, writes: I would like to propose a way-too-early "Schadenfreude of the Year" nomination to the State of Ohio Republican Party. While Kamala Harris has certainly proven that she is the right candidate, I can't help but wonder if the need to get on the Ohio ballot helped the Democratic Party coalesce faster than they would have otherwise. That unity enabled her to come out swinging against Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, and tack harder to the center than would have been possible otherwise.
A.Q. in Ithaca, NY, writes: Regarding how many states the polls were saying that Republicans were going to flip, you wrote, "On June 26, it was as high as seven." On July 19 it was as high as eight!
R.V. in Pittsburgh, PA, writes: I just watched the Kamala Harris event in Atlanta. Wow, what energy and excitement! Started off with Megan Thee Stallion (ok, I knew her since she was on Saturday Night Live this past season), then the main event, the candidate herself. The event truly resembled an Obama 2008 rally.
I like Biden and would have voted for him, but I don't think he was going to win, and his opponent is too dangerous to chance. If Biden would have stayed in, he would have become the teacher in Ferris Buehler's Day Off: "What is the Smoot-Hawley Act... anyone, anyone, anyone?" Every time Biden took the stage, whether in the White House, Capitol, or campaign event, I would go into ventricular tachycardia just worrying if he was going to fall down, say something off, etc. It was becoming a terrifying experience. He instilled no confidence.
The energy around Harris is no fluke. She is rising in the polls, the fundraising has been outstanding (I donated to her), people are volunteering, people are showing up in big numbers to Zoom calls. Her first big decision will be the VP choice, and as long as she doesn't choose The Hawk Tuah Girl (that is probably the first reference to Hawk Tuah girl on Electoral-Vote.com, I bet!), Conor McGregor, or Stormy Daniels, this momentum should continue.
And think about this: Donald Trump was nearly assassinated a couple weeks ago and he had a somewhat successful RNC last week, and he STILL can't crack a 50% favorability, and he probably NEVER will This is Kamala's race to lose.
J.D.Z. in St. Paul, MN, writes: I snapped this photo while in Hudson, Wisconsin:
This speaks to enthusiasm for Harris—the homeowner didn't wait for new signs to be printed, they just made their own.
M.L. in West Hartford, CT, writes: You wrote: "An interesting question is: "Is J.D. Vance helping Trump in the former's home state?" The most recent Ohio poll before today is the Marist poll of June 3-6, where Trump was ahead by 7 points. Now he is ahead by 10 points. So maybe—just maybe—veeps can help the ticket by a couple of points in their home states."
This comparison is only relevant if no other factors have changed since the poll of June 3-6 except for Vance being added to the ticket. Hmm... what else might have changed... oh, I know! President Biden dropped out and Kamala Harris became the presumptive Democratic nominee! How silly of me.
Given this momentous and historic change to the Democratic ticket, the poll from June 3-6 is not terribly helpful. It is quite possible, maybe even likely, that the reason for the difference in the two polls (other than random variation, which is actually the most likely cause) is this: It would make sense that Harris might run a few points behind Biden among working-class white voters (particularly men), of whom there are a lot in Ohio. J.D. Vance likely has very little to do with it.
P.D.N. in La Mesa, CA, writes: I believe that when the story of the 2024 election is told, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will be at the center of everything. She had the polling data, she knew all the players, she knew the Democrats in Hollywood and Silicon Valley with the big money, and she knew all the Democratic politicians. As The New York Times pointed out, she was never going to allow the Republicans to overturn her signature legislative legacy of the Affordable Care Act. She's smart, savvy, ruthless, and she can count. She would prevail upon Joe Biden to withdraw but she was never going to stymie Kamala Harris, who represents the women of America, especially Black women, and the rising younger generation. At politics, Nancy Pelosi has shown herself to be better than anybody since Lyndon B. Johnson, and he ranks with the best all-time.
C.W. in Carlsbad, CA, writes: I had this vision of Joe Biden as the aging superhero in the final battle of good vs. evil, and he suddenly discovered the power he had all along: the power of WE.
It's exactly the opposite of TFG's "Only I can fix it" statement. It's the realization that when it's WE that have to fix things, ME isn't necessary.
That suit looks good on you, Joe.
M.H. in Santa Monica, CA, writes: Back in May, you published my letter setting forth 10 ways in politics and pop culture that 2024 is eerily a replay of 1968. Now there are four more items to add to that list:
- The incumbent Democratic President pulled out of the race for the nomination ahead of the August Democratic Convention in Chicago. Before LBJ, now Biden.
- The Democratic nominee for President did not compete in a single primary and is the incumbent VP. Before Humphrey, now Harris.
- There was an assassination attempt on a major presidential candidate. Before RFK, now Trump.
- The Republican VP nominee has an adversarial relationship with the media. Before Agnew, now Vance.
Let's do the Time Warp again.
Politics: Black Unlike Me
D.B. in Kirkland, WA, writes: I agree with your assessment of Donald Trump's appearance at the NABJ convention. He was not there to impress his base. My take is that he went there with his usual inflated-ego thinking that he'd be able to "charm" the Black journalists into saying nice things about him.
The fact that it went badly so quickly was not according to his plan (although any skilled politician should have anticipated the questions and had prepared answers), but rather it was because we witnessed Trump's usual true self—a petulant racist and misogynist. When challenged with difficult questions, he fell back to his usual pattern of attacking the interviewer and questioning Kamala Harris's race.
Everyone should know by now that Trump is (as Rex Tillerson put it) a fu**ing moron and is incapable of playing 3-D chess.
D.W. in Evans City, PA, writes: I am continually amazed by some people's determination to find hidden reason or logic in the things Donald Trump does. Reason and logic do not exist in Trumpland. The reason he keeps doing the things he does is twofold. First, he undoubtedly has all sorts of undiagnosed and certainly untreated mental illnesses. Second, he is a moron. To put it even more succinctly, the reason Donald Trump says and does stupid things is BECAUSE HE IS STUPID. I understand how it can be difficult to believe someone can be as dumb as he has demonstrated himself to be, but it is nonetheless true. Who else could take the large fortune bequeathed to him by his father and turn it into bankruptcy? And then go bankrupt again. And again. And again. Who else would lose a lawsuit and have a multimillion dollar judgment entered against him and then go directly to the courthouse steps and say exactly the same things, resulting in a much larger penalty? Other examples are as numerous as they are varied.
Note that I am not saying he should be underestimated. His relentless, all-consuming drive to benefit himself regardless of the harm to literally everyone and everything else should always be in the forefront of our thoughts. I am simply saying we should stop acting like he is playing seven dimensional chess. He is not. He isn't playing chess at all. We all need to stop acting like he is.
J.P. in Glenside, PA, writes: Your comments on the NABJ fiasco for Trump were completely on the mark. That room was full of Black community influencers i.e. journalists and Trump's performance was an epic fail. It was an opportunity for Trump and the campaign to work on coalition-building for Election Day with a key minority group that votes blue. Trump's reversion to calling a questioner/moderator/journalist "nasty" is typical for him when confronted with uncomfortable truths. It was precisely what he did at the CNN town hall just 24 hours after he had lost the E. Jean Carroll case (and we all know what happened at the second defamation trial). A useful way to look at his performance at NABJ is the acronym DARVO:
DARVO (an acronym for "deny, attack, and reverse victim & offender") is a reaction that perpetrators of wrongdoing, such as sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior. Some researchers indicate that it is a common manipulation strategy of psychological abusersI think that characterizes his response to the first questioner pretty well. It was all downhill for him from there. The audience was not impressed.
R.M. in Williamstown, WV, writes: I watched most of Donald Trump's appearance before the NABJ, and have to agree that it started out badly for him, and went downhill from there. However, something I've noticed about him for quite some time is that when he is feeling challenged, or under stress, he starts doing what I call playing the Air Accordion—moving his hands back and forth as if he were playing an accordion. And during that interview, you could tell he was REALLY annoyed. He could have been playing "Lady of Spain."
C.Z. in Sacramento, CA, writes: Now the pot (belly) Republican running for president is calling the Democratic kettle (Kamala) not quite Black enough? When Trump accused Kamala Harris of not really being Black, he was, as usual, projecting onto her what he and his own family have actually done. Trump's grandfather, Friederich Drumpf, left Germany to avoid the draft (sound familiar)? He made his money in the U.S. by opening brothels in Seattle and the Yukon on land that he didn't actually own. He died of Influenza in the 1918 pandemic. His son Frederick, Don the Conman's father, was born in New York, but was a Nazi sympathizer. When the Nazis lost World War II, Frederick Drumpf changed his name to Fred Trump. Although he was 100% German, he pretended to be Swedish, so that he could sell homes and rent apartments to the many Jewish customers in New York. Don the Conman continued the Swedish charade until the late 1980's. Hmmm... It seems like someone on the Democrats' side should mention this...
P.S. I'm part German myself, so this is not a criticism of those of German ancestry. It's just the truth, something that Don the Conman (soon to become Don the Convict, I hope) is allergic to.
M.S. in Pittsburgh, PA, writes: Trump was always white. I didn't know he was orange until a number of years ago when he happened to turn orange. So I don't know, is he white or is he orange?
(V) & (Z) respond: Don't you know that orange is the new white?
M.M. in Leonardtown, MD, writes: So if biracialism does not exist, are J.D. Vance's kids white or couch?
J.L. in Los Angeles, CA, writes:
Politics: No 3-D Chess Here, Either
D.E. in Lancaster, PA, writes: I have a few rebuttals to your piece on Thomas Edsall's op-ed arguing that, with J.D. Vance, Donald Trump is trying to unite the left and right.
First off, I think this writer gives way too much credence to the idea that Trump is a calculating political thinker and planner. Trump operates on purely gut-level instinct and any semblance of political theory is just happenstance resulting from Trump's continual barrage of self promotion and aggrandizement. I would bet dollars to donuts that Trump's pick of Vance as his running mate was based solely on Vance's ability to humiliate himself and be the best brown-noser of them all. I would add that, to a personality like Trump, there is more "satisfaction" in getting a person who disliked you and saw you for what you are to completely abase themselves to gain your favor. Trump will derive much more joy in seeing how far he can drive Vance into subjugation than from the perpetual groveling of Stephen Miller or Steve Bannon. It's why Trump will hang out with a today like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) but hate Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY). The only other consideration that could have flitted through Trump's mind about picking Vance is whether he could get a discount on campaign signs, since all he was doing was changing a "P-E" for a "V-A."
Second, and more importantly, is this: The idea that hiding the oligarchic tendencies of the GOP behind populist causes is something Trump has created with his pick of Vance is the biggest piece of nonsense written in recent memory. Can anyone tell me of a time since St. Ronnie of Reagan that a Republican has run on creating tax breaks for the millionaires and billionaires? The modern GOP has always hidden their habit of looking out for the ultra-wealthy behind a facade of "what's best for the middle class," no matter that the tax break for a middle-class person, and those of all their within-walking-distance neighbors, won't come anywhere near equally the tax cut for one millionaire at the lower end of the scale. Populism has always had one foot planted in Nationalism and the other foot in longing for the good ol' days that are forever gone. This has been Fox News and the GOP's stock-in-trade for years. There is nothing new here in MAGA world, all that changes is the extent to which they are willing to lie to cover up their real intent.
But more to the point, why would Trump need Vance to express this populism, considering how well Trump already does it? I'm going to paraphrase what some people who voted for Trump in past elections said: They believe that only Trump can break up the deadlock in D.C. and only Trump can help the middle class out, because he is so insanely rich (first huge misconception) and because he is not looking to make himself richer (second huge misconception) he will look out for working class Americans and break up Washington because he has nothing to be gained (third huge misconception) unlike career politicians, who are constantly looking to feather their nests. Trump's vast wealth puts him above corruption (fourth and biggest misconception). Vance is the career politician, in MAGA eyes, only looking to increase his paltry wealth. Vance will never be seen as the working man's savior, especially by MAGA. Yes, some will support him, but only because he has played the part of a lickspittle to Trump.
I would also like to add a theory that I'm borrowing from the writer Robert Graves. In his I, Claudius novels, the second Roman Emperor, Tiberius, picked his successor, Caligula, because he knew his reign would make Tiberius' bloody rule look like a golden era when compared with what he thought Caligula's would be. Something similar is going on here with Trump. Not only is Vance meant to be a reminder of the control Trump has on the Republican party, but no despot will ever pick as a second in command someone that comes anywhere near his prowess. Trump never, ever wants to be eclipsed by Vance and in that political guy instinct, I think Trump can sleep at night with little fear of that happening.
The New York Times really, really needs to publish their op-ed writers with less frequency, because only the need to meet ever churning deadlines could be the rationale for writing such nonsense as what Edsall put out there. The need to produce pieces on a regular basis is bringing out articles of the biggest stupidity and nonsense in the Times' never-ending quest to understand Trump and to make him out as something special. This piece was as well thought out as most of, if not all, of Trump's political decisions.
Politics: The Debate
M.R. in New Brighton, MN, writes: Regarding Donald Trump's latest debate proposal, here's another possible response that Kamala Harris could use: "I see that Fox News is organizing an event for Donald at an arena chock full with his supporters and that ... I'm invited. Now, why would I want to be at one of his campaign rallies?"
F.D. in Albuquerque, New Mexico, writes: I think that Kamala Harris should stick to her guns and do the scheduled "debate" with ABC, with or without Trump. Perhaps they could replace Trump with a crowing rooster at the podium just for emphasis. Or instead, ask pointed questions of a vacant Trump podium and play recorded clips of his most embarrassing quips.
M.B. in Menlo Park, CA, writes: Taylor Swift finishes the European leg of her Eras Tour on August 20, which would permit her to fly to Chicago and perform at the last night of the Democratic National Convention on August 22. If Donald Trump is still continuing to refuse to debate Kamala Harris on ABC, Taylor should rework the lyrics to her song "Who's Afraid of Little Old Me?" into a "Kamala's Version." That version would, of course, keep the existing song's reply to that question: "You should be."
D.S. in Palo Alto, CA, writes: The jury in the defamation suit did not conclude that Trump had raped the victim, but the judge said that this was true only because of the state of New York's definition of the term "rape," and because the victim could not be sure what it was that penetrated her. By most common definitions, the judge himself said it was definitely rape.
Politics: The Prisoner Swap
J.J. in Johnstown, PA, writes: While I don't know if your thinking that the prisoner exchange will not play a big role in the presidential election is correct or not, you did fail to mention something: Kamala Harris did play a large role in the negotiations.
In my opinion, this is a major foreign policy win for her. It shows that while Donald Trump may have "written" The Art of The Deal, Kamala Harris knows the art of the deal.
T.H. in Montclair, NJ, writes: While I agree with most of your assessment about the prisoner swap, I am pretty sure that its success had nothing to do with the Biden/Harris ticket exchange. If the "complexity" of this arrangement is only half as complicated as all sides describe it, it would still have taken much longer to take shape than the 10 days since Joe Biden dropped out. Vladimir Putin surely did not "decide" to start negotiations on Monday, July 22.
L.W. in Concord, MA, writes: I think there's a reason, in addition to those you listed, why Vladimir Putin agreed to do the prisoner exchange now instead of waiting to see if his close friend Donald Trump wins in November. The thing Putin wanted most was the return of his pet assassin—who was in the custody of Germany, not the United States. It's extremely unlikely, if not totally out of the question, that Germany would be as cooperative with President Trump as it was willing to be with President Biden (or, perhaps, would be willing to be with President Harris). The fact that doing the exchange now made his buddy Donald look foolish, which I believe it did, didn't matter at all to Vlad. Doing it now got it done; postponing it until after the November election put things at risk. In U.S. political terms, I think it's very hard to view this prisoner exchange as anything other than a positive for Biden and Harris, and a negative for Trump.
J.C. in Binan, Laguna, Philippines, writes: The thing missing from this prisoner swap, glaringly missing, is Marc Fogel. He's in his 60s, worked at the Anglo-American International School in Moscow before it was forced to close (my co-teacher last year was a friend of his), and was caught with a small amount of prescription marijuana for his debilitating back pain. Britney Griner was arrested for the same infraction, but she was exchanged after 10 months, after Fogel had already been detained for 14 months. He has now been there for 3 years, and is grossly mistreated, and in a great deal of pain.
His family feels that the Biden administration is not working to help release Fogel, and there has indeed been a great deal of silence on this from the White House. So much that his mother, who is in her 90s met, with The Felon Guy to ask him to advocate for her son. She was actually due to get on stage with him, and was in the row right behind him... when shots rang out.
Politics: The Supreme Court
R.E.M. in Brooklyn, NY, writes: I think effective term reform could be achieved solely through congressional legislation (assuming a trifecta and no filibuster) in just two steps. First, as you noted, Congress can abolish all Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction by legislation. Second, Congress can create a National Court of Appeals of however many judges deemed appropriate, in staggered terms (14 years for seven, 18 for nine, 22 for eleven, etc.), which would hold ultimate federal appellate authority. All the judges would be confirmed Court of Appeals judges, reconfirmed by the Senate, and returned to their Circuits at the end of their terms. As with the Senate in 1789, the first cohort would be explicitly designated as holding the 2-year seat, the 4-year seat, etc. Perhaps allow renomination for anyone who serves less than half of a full term, as with presidents under the Twenty-Second Amendment.
So we'd still be stuck with Clarence Thomas, Samuels Alito, etc., but they'd be limited to deciding water-rights cases between Colorado and Arizona, and whether the Statue of Liberty is in New York or New Jersey. It would eliminate, or nearly so, all of the mischief they like to make.
M.J.B. in Chicago, IL, writes: I've had Type 1 diabetes for 40 years—not quite as long as Sonia Sotomayor, but long enough.
Type 1 diabetes is inherently severe, as managing the pathology requires juggling a large number of inputs, food, insulin, stress, activity, Jupiter, etc. Insulin can kill you fairly quickly if any element is a bit off.
I agree that someone who is 70 is well-deserving of retirement, particularly after a long and successful career, at least until being stymied by the current, corrupt court. Hopefully, the President will be emboldened by frosting his former opponent's flakes, so to speak, and take measures to extirpate corruption from the court. Sonia Sotomayor's medical conditions of any sort are protected, as they should be, by the ADA and aren't relevant.
Politics: Disability Advocacy
S.F. in Chatham, NJ, writes: I read with interest your response to D.F. in New Orleans about which presidential candidate would be better for people with disabilities. As the parent of a teenager with significant physical disabilities and some developmental issues, I believe I can speak to this. Having a child who uses a wheelchair and requires many accommodations in school has forced my spouse and me to become educated about disability and politics so that we can be good advocates. Across the board, the Democrats are stronger on disability. Some examples:
- Health-care: The Affordable Care Act has been game-changing for people with short- or long-term disabilities, most notably preventing denial of coverage due to pre-existing conditions. While they haven't been successful yet, Republicans would love to gut or eliminate the ACA, and Project 2025 includes that goal.
- Handicapped Accessibility: Although the ADA is over 34 years old, it has never included a true enforcement mechanism. Thousands of public and private sites across the country remain inaccessible. The primary way to achieve compliance has been filing lawsuits to force businesses or governments to become accessible. Of course, Republicans call these lawsuits frivolous, and have tried to impose limits (see H.R. 620, passed in 2018 by the Republican House, to put the burden of proof on ADA compliance to the disabled person). In December 2023, the Supreme Court vacated a closely watched case on ADA access in hotels, leaving the future of such cases uncertain. Rest assured that, with a Republican trifecta, key provisions of the ADA could be weakened.
- Public Education: After the ADA was passed, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was put into place to guarantee equal access in public schools. This is overseen by the U.S. Department of Education, and while there is great variation among the states, federal rules at least set minimum standards. Project 2025 would eliminate the Department of Education (and presumably many of its protections), and generally, Republicans have supported private and charter schools that are not subject to the same provisions of the IDEA.
- Medical Research: Many disabilities are caused by rare genetic diseases, and gene therapy offers great promise to treating, and even curing, these conditions. Republicans have been less supportive of federal funding for research, and some religious conservatives oppose genetic technologies that would alter a person's DNA.
Beyond these examples, just the way that Donald Trump talks about disability is telling. For many of us, his mocking of a disabled reporter in 2015 should have been disqualifying. More recently, Trump's nephew Fred has revealed troubling things that he allegedly said about Fred's severely handicapped son, including that some disabled people "should just die." To me, there is no question which presidential candidate would be better for the disabled community.
Politics: On Weirdness...
C.K. in Jacksonville, FL, writes: I am very happy that Gov. Tim Walz (DFL-MN) got "weird" as a word to describe Donald Trump and MAGA into the lexicon. Right after the 1/6 insurrection, Nancy Pelosi did an interview where she used "unhinged" to describe Trump's behavior. Then everyone was saying "unhinged." "Unhinged" makes me cringe because it was a "weird" word for circumstances that warranted a host of curse words (except curse words violate the Michelle Obama Doctrine, "When they go low, we aim high!"). "Unhinged" is like saying a school shooting was "disruptive" or 9/11 was "inconvenient." "Unhinged" has no emotional power. Who made it through middle school without being called "weird" as a part of a friend/puppy-love rejection? "Weird" hurts. It is emotional. No one wanted to be "weird" or "uncool." I think it's a word that is strong, but not a go-low curse word. "Unhinged" is out and "weird" is in!
D.T. in Columbus, OH, writes: I disagree with your assessment that the Harris campaign will probably stop using "weird" as an insult. If anything, I expect they will double down on it, and encourage people to direct similar criticism towards Donald Trump's supporters.
Calling someone "weird" is just such a weak insult. But that's kind of the point... it is infantilizing. It's an insult that conveys "You aren't even worth the effort of me breaking out the big guns."
Authoritarian personalities are all about being respected and/or feared. They can handle angry or serious criticism. Hell, one of the core tenets of Trumpism is "owning the libs." These a**holes love the attention they get from being "under attack."
What the Harris campaign is doing is subjecting Trumpism to RIDICULE, rather than outrage. They are not at all prepared for that sort of attack. It turns out, authoritarians are super uncomfortable when they realize people are laughing at them.
Authoritarian cults care about projecting strength. Criticizing them as "dangerous," "cruel," or "hateful" is not effective. In their warped worldview, those are POSITIVE qualities. But calling them "weird" weakens them, because it is a charge that cannot really be refuted with their usual faux-masculinity. For the longest time, Democrats have (foolishly) embraced the mentality of "When they go low, we go high." Much like the Paradox of Tolerance, this asymmetric civility has allowed fascism to thrive on the right. It is about time the Democrats started to push back. If you want to drive the fascists out of the public discourse, don't try to argue with them. Just relentlessly mock them. I know this feels counterintuitive, because these people genuinely ARE dangerous.
But they are also really fu**ing weird. Don't stop reminding them of that.
T.J.R. in Metuchen, NJ, writes: You quoted Thomas Friedman: "I cannot think of a sillier, more playground, more foolish and more counterproductive political taunt for Democrats to seize on than calling Trump and his supporters 'weird.'"
Friedman misses the point by a mile. The Democrats aren't calling Donald Trump's supporters weird. They are calling him and J.D. Vance weird.
Also, how does Friedman expect the Democrats to win? By waging a chivalric, Marquess of Queensberry rules contest? How ivory tower is that? I'm not saying we should get down and dirty (We're not good at that.). But weird/creepy should be in our arsenal.
S.N. in Charlotte, NC, writes: Totally in agreement in disagreeing with Friedman. The "weird" thing is really landing with younger/first-time presidential election voters. My kids are popping out of their rooms to talk politics and the "weird" thing resonated with them. It cuts these weirdos down to size, like it should. It's not overly bombastic or crazy-talk like Trump wields against his opponents (or former compadres once he's thrown them under the bus). It's simple, effective, and true. BOOM.
E.B. in Seattle, WA, writes: I think calling Donald Trump and J.D. Vance "weird" was a stroke of genius by Kamala Harris' campaign, for all of the reasons you cited, plus some more:
- It's easy to understand and hard to rebut.
- It's easy to meme (see all of the memes this week with Trumpers in diapers or bowing before the golden Trump statue).
- It's easy for surrogates and supporters to pick up and run with after the campaign mentions it once or twice.
- It encourages people to laugh at Trump. Like all bullies, he hates that but can't admit it without looking weak.
T.C. in Denver, CO, writes: I am not on board with the idea of "weird" as a pejorative. Al Yankovic is weird. Marsupials are weird. Gene Deitch-era "Tom and Jerry" is weird. I always thought of "weird" as good, or at least benign. The modern Republican Party is not weird. They are a MENACE.
D.F. in Ann Arbor, MI, writes: I was reading your item on "weird," and it just occurred to me that there is yet another connotation of WEIRD that, except for the D, fits: Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic.
B.C. in Walpole, ME, offended, writes: Your lousy website included this choice piece of tripe today: "Vance clearly knows this, and grew a beard to obscure some of his less appealing features. Maybe it was an improvement, but it also means he looks sinister. There is a reason that the last time the U.S. elected a bearded president was 130 years ago."
Frankly, I find Vance's beard to be his one appealing feature. I'm glad to see a political leader who abhors and obviates the unmanly, uncivilized, unchristian, unhygienic practice of daily scraping one's face with a sharp rock. When my Southern grandmother looked at my newly grown beauty, she remarked, "I can't trust a man who hides his face behind a beard." I rapidly retorted, "Abraham Lincoln," silencing her. To drive my point home, I continued, "Jesus Christ." And with no intention of being cruel, I completed my victory by adding, "Robert E. Lee." She never mentioned it again. And I think perhaps not mentioning J.D. Vance's lovely beard might be a good move for you and your so-called website.
R.H. in San Antonio, TX, writes: Google "Santorum" to see what just happened to J.D. Vance.
Politics, properly played, is a blood sport.
Well played, whoever thought to Santorumize J.D. Vance, well-played...
Politics: ...and Cat Ladies
M.M. in San Diego, CA, writes: As soon as I read the J.D. Vance had called Kamala Harris miserable because she is a childless cat lady, I knew he had just given the grassroots endless fodder. That day, I could only find one shirt with the childless cat lady reference on Etsy, while Amazon had nothing. Now, Amazon has an overwhelming number of designs. I wore my shirt yesterday for the first time and received terrific responses, invariably from older women—you know, the ones who are consistent voters. Thanks so much for the campaign gift, J.D.!
C.Z. in Sacramento, CA, writes: This is what they're wearing in Seattle:
S.C-M. in Scottsdale, AZ, writes: Sorry that Flash and Otto did not approve of super cat lady. She pointed out we have also been the human caregivers for four dachshunds over the years and they got along fine with our various cats.
(V) & (Z) respond: The stagg dachshunds withdraw their complaint.
Politics: What's in a Word?
A.A.S. in Cary, NC, writes: My vote for adjective for the current president is "Bidenish." Rolls off the tongue so nicely.
J.R. in Harrogate, England, UK, writes: Oxford's English Dictionary says NO. "Trumpian" is NOT a word.
A**hat, however, is listed as a possible alternative.
M.S. in Pittsburgh, PA, writes: I believe L.H. in Chicago has it right about Donald Trump and "asylum". Growing up in New York a few years later than TFG (I'm in my mid-60's), I (and all my friends) knew of places like Creedmoor and Pilgrim State, to say nothing of Beekman Downtown's Psych Ward. I'm sure my parents told my brother or I to stop acting crazy or we'd end up in an asylum. I'm sure TFG heard that too before he was shipped off to New York Military Academy (where he may have added Hudson River State Hospital in Poughkeepsie to his lexicon).
All Politics Is Local
R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: I've been getting text after text from Reid Rasner, a challenger to Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) in this month's primary. They have these pre-packaged memes of how Rasner is such a Trump fanboy and how he wouldn't ever support Liz Cheney, or how he supports our energy sector here in the state, along with closing the border.
I always respond to such e-mails and ask questions about specifics on what they would do for their pet issues, or how willing they would be to support my pet issue (homelessness). And every time,, they unsubscribe me. But the message that tells me I've been unsubscribed tells me exactly how I can resubscribe myself, so I do and keep on bugging them about their positions or mine. The best one so far though, is today's plea: "Are you tired of politicians who don't listen?" It goes on about how Barrasso endorsed Cheney even after she voted to impeach Trump and how Rasner is all in on Trump. So I told them "Yes! It seems like every time I get one of these things from the Rasner campaign, I NEVER get any response to my questions. It's frustrating as HELL!" I then went on to describe how Barrasso's office always responds and seems to even write new responses rather than just forward a canned response. And they unsubscribed me! The last thing I asked was if they were going to confirm that Rasner was worse than Barrasso at listening and they immediately did! Hilarious!
As to the upcoming primary and predicting its outcome, I'm not going out on any limb. Yes, Barrasso is a sitting senator, Rasner is a putz that can't seem to do anything but preach to the choir, and his campaign can't even see an obvious trap like that. But people around here really do not like Liz Cheney, and though she's long gone, she's become an avatar of RINOs and "the deep state" in public discourse. Supporting Cheney could be a serious problem. So I could definitely see this going either way. Nobody's campaign is advertising on any of our streaming services and we can't pick up broadcast TV, so I don't have a good feel for how the race might be going. I guess we'll see in about 3 weeks.
A.G. in Scranton, PA, writes: The tone has shifted in the Commonwealth, 180 degrees from where we were before the President dropped out.
The Republicans I live and work with, as they do whenever they are losing and know it, suddenly don't want to talk ALL THE DAMN TIME about politics.
Now we're back to, "I'm not really paying all that much attention to it."
Funny how that works, no?
CrowdStrike(s Out)
R.S. in Manassas, VA, writes: You are absolutely right about the potential disaster no one is talking about. I was with my family waiting to board a flight out of Sacramento when the CrowdStrike update hit. The airline had to use manual procedures to get us boarded. We pushed off from the gate and then had to wait to taxi to the runway because they had to send weight distribution data to Chicago instead of processing it locally.
It was clear there was something going on and my son-in-law told me to search for CrowdStrike update. I did and I quickly learned what was going on. I remember saying "I hope this is incompetence, because if it's a hack we are screwed." I was worried because I had read that the affected machines would not reboot and no one knew why yet. CrowdStrike has admitted there was "a bug" in their (non-existent) testing and distribution process. They also say they have fixed the bug and will also be using limited releases with back-out plans instead of blasting an update to everyone, so there is hope that the next security incident won't be as widespread.
Incidentally, when we asked United for reimbursement, this was their exact response: "I researched the details of your flight and because the flight UA2132, scheduled for July 18, 2024, was delayed due to ATC-5G cell tower interference (Uncontrollable) not due to the CrowdStrike, it is not eligible for compensation."
The delay was a little over 15 hours and we were taxiing to the runway when the pilot told us "United has grounded all flights due to the computer problems" and went back to the gate so we could collect our luggage. I'm still trying to convince myself that it was a stupid human and not an AI bot that crafted the response.
S.C-M. in Scottsdale, AZ, writes: I am a retired Computer Scientist with extensive computer and network experience. The CrowdStrike meltdown reminded me of the AT&T Frame Relay network outage in the early 2000s. Basically, it was the same issue of a bad update taking down the frame relay switches.
The real problem here is the monoculture of large swaths of the Internet. I noticed Linux servers were not affected—only Windows servers. Clearly, the CrowdStrike code was deeply embedded in the Windows OS, if it caused the OS to crash. Of course, the same thing could happen to Linux servers, because of the modular design of Linux, where a lot of critical services run in privileged mode. It is too bad the message of Minix did not catch on, where privileged code is at a minimum and has a better chance of being bug-free. In that design, the worst that happens is the unprivileged code fails, but does not take the rest of the system down with it.
CrowdStrike could have also avoided at least some of the problems by phasing the updates over a period of time and seeing the problem affect only a smaller number of servers. I suspect the updated code was either installed automatically or system administrators got a notice from CrowdStrike that a new codebase was available and they just willy-nilly installed it without any testing.
Compliments Department
D.F. in Norcross, GA, writes: The letter from D.C. in New York City really hit home. I've shared D.C.'s (and likely a lot of other folks') sense of despair ever since the debate about a month ago.
The only difference was that I felt like I had to keep reading your site every day because you guys give as objective analyses of current political events as I can find. As depressing as things have seemed, I felt like I couldn't shut my eyes (or mind) to what was happening.
That said, it seems both of us were wrong—you that President Biden would likely stay in the race, and me that if the President did drop out, there was no way the Democrats could unite behind a candidate (which, I was convinced should only be Vice President Harris) without a messy internal fight. Like you, I was having visions of video I've seen of the 1968 DNC, also in Chicago. And yet somehow, against all odds, the party is about as united as I can remember.
As you constantly remind your readers, a week is a lifetime in politics, and we have about 13 more lifetimes between now and the election.
But for the first time since the disastrous debate, I actually have some hope. And I'm looking forward to following these next 13 lifetimes with you guys, along the rest of your readers.
Buckle up. It's going to be one hell of a ride.
B.C. in Walpole, ME, writes: You wrote: "Vance turned out to have more baggage than Terminal C at LaGuardia."
Oh, thank you. Made my day.
T.F. in Albion, IN, writes: Donald Trump is the textbook definition of a "pervert," so any criticism you may receive for your use of that term is, well, perverted. Thank you for calling him what he is, and for 20 years of insightful and entertaining commentary.
T.S. in Bainbridge Island, WA, writes: In response to K.H. in Maryville acknowledging the yeomen's work you two have both been doing, and will be doing, in the run up to this historic election, I believe the following video clip captures our collective sentiments:
Everybody's Homeboy
J.G. in Chantilly, VA, writes: Thanks so much for recognizing Fr. Greg Boyle (G-Dog, as he's known by his friends). I had the privilege of meeting him a few years ago while working on youth-at-risk activities in Central America. I keep a quote from Fr. Greg on my desktop to get me through the day:
You go from here to stand with the demonized, so that the demonizing will stop. And you stand with the disposable, so that the day will come when we stop throwing people away. And you stand with those whose dignity has been denied. And you stand with those whose burdens are more than they can bear. And you stand with the poor, and the powerless and the voiceless. Make those voices heard.That is the essence of the true Christian message.
A.S. in Renton, WA, writes: Thank you for writing about Homeboy Industries. The name rang a bell. I confirmed that's where my offspring has been going to get their face tattoos removed for free. They report that everyone there—even the other people in the waiting room—has gone out of their way to be kind. I've been grateful—even moreso now, reading about its history and Fr. Boyle. It's reassuring to have independent confirmation that my child is in good hands.
S.B. in Los Altos Hills, CA, writes: You may want to share this link with your readers. Fr. Boyle proves to be an excellent speaker, talking about Homeboy Industries:
Canadian Capers
D.J.M. in Salmon Arm, BC, Canada, writes: With respect to "This Week in Schadenfreude: Canadians Caught Red-Handed": WE ARE SORRY (seriously).
However, we would never collect intel on northern USA cities. Honestly, we would never do that... no, really... I'm not lying... we don't do that sort of thing... I promise... STOP LOOKING UP!
M.F. in Burlington, ON, Canada, writes: Knowing your great suspicion of us Canadians, and given the current placement of our Montreal sleeper agent atop the Democratic ticket, I thought I'd share this:
On day six of the Creation, God announced to his archangel underlings: "Today we're creating a place called Canada. Pull out all the stops. Give it beautiful mountains, lakes, plains, forests and sandy beaches. Underground, give it oil, gold, etc. Oh, and plenty of fish and wildlife.
"Sir," interjected an archangel, "Aren't you being overly generous to these Canadians?"
"Don't worry, I'll balance it out," said God. "Wait till you see the neighbors I'm giving them.'Just sayin'.
J.R. in Ottawa, ON, Canada, writes: The new slogan of the Harris campaign is rather reminiscent of an ad campaign for eggs in Canada a couple of years ago: "Eggs for dinner isn't weird."
(V) & (Z) respond: The presumptive nominee inadvertently reveals where her true loyalties lie.
Gallimaufry
A.B. in Wendell, NC, writes: I disagree with D.A in Brooklyn concerning Mary Trump. As a Ravenclaw myself, I am used to my House getting no real respect. But Mary belongs with us in Ravenclaw, because we are wickedly smart folks, Mary is more like that. Like the rest of us in Ravenclaw, Mary fights with words and logic, not with swords. Or basilisk fangs. Our words and logic are deadlier than basilisk venom. Mary Trump most definitely belongs in Ravenclaw.
L.S. in Richland, WA, writes: Only 12 parsecs to put together last week's mailbag? Surely it must have taken several light-years.
A.P. in Kitchener, ON, Canada, writes: I am glad you are able to write while traveling in hyperspace, I always find it makes me a bit seasick.
(V) & (Z) respond: Don't you mean spacesick?
M.C. in Newton, MA, writes: In the item on the "agreement" to debate, you wrote: "What if we said that (V) and (Z) had agreed to purchase eX-Twitter from Elon Musk for $1?"
I'd advise you to consider purchasing a scratch ticket instead.
(V) & (Z) respond: Yes, we wrote that knowing we'd be overpaying.
J.W. in Newton, MA, writes: Let me add one more good use for The New York Post. As a person with a deep hatred of the New York Yankees, I find great joy in reading the pants-wetting temper tantrums generated by their writers when the Yanks are flailing. I only read the free stories, of course.
S.N. in Charlotte, NC, writes: Since 1991 (and probably before that), when Public Enemy released "A Letter To The New York Post, we've known it was trash.
B.W. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: You wrote: "What families have 400 children? Maybe Genghis Khan's family, but beyond him..."
According to a childhood misheard lyric, Kenny Rogers and his partner Lucille did (plus a crop in the field).
C.K.S. in Berkeley, CA, writes: I have been told that Franz Liszt may have sired as many as 400 children. I'm apparently one of his descendants.
W.S. in Austin, TX, writes: You wrote: "What families have 400 children? Maybe Genghis Khan's family, but beyond him..."
How did you forget Herschel Walker?
Final Words
B.M. in Chicago, IL, writes: Being prepped for surgery from which he would not recover, drummer Buddy Rich was asked by a nurse, "Is there anything you can't take?" "Yeah," said Rich. "Country music."
If you have suggestions for this feature, please send them along.
Previous | Next
Main page for smartphones
Main page for tablets and computers