Main page    Jul. 21

Pres map
Previous | Next | Senate page

New polls: (None)
Dem pickups: (None)
GOP pickups: AZ GA ME MI NV NH PA

Sunday Mailbag

A week like this one guarantees that we'll get an avalanche of e-mails. It also guarantees that we'll get some particularly caustic complaints.

Politics: Assassination Attempt, the Politics

D.A.Y. in Troy, MI, writes: This week has told me Donald Trump is worried. Everything has been going his and the Republicans' way for the past three weeks, but he is stuck at 45% in the polls, like he always is. It is quite possible everyone thinking about voting for Trump is saying so to the pollsters, who are oversampling Republicans out of fear of not catching the "shy Trump" voters. The Republicans are at their ceiling and the Democrats are at their floor, and will overtake the GOP once they have righted the ship.

There are three events that have convinced me Trump is not as confident as he acts in public.

The first is the gross overselling of the assassination attempt. Trump did not need the bandage over his ear on Sunday. What reports we have suggest he was not seriously injured (just a lot of blood) and the bandage is there to hide that his ear is fine. Had his ear been seriously disfigured, Trump—being the showman he is—would have it on full display to show what he has sacrificed for this country.

He is also spinning enough yarn to make a cardigan for Godzilla (with enough left over for matching mittens). His description of being "hit hard" with something that "could only be a bullet" does not sit right with how being shot works. You do not "feel" being shot because it happens so fast. If the bullet passes through, some people might not even know they were shot until they see they are bleeding. Either he got hit by something much slower (like shrapnel, as the bullets struck objects on or around the stage and injured people near him) or he is just lying for the MAGA masses.

There is a little connective tissue between the first and second act. When it came out that Joe Biden had attempted to contact the widow of the man who died at the rally while Trump has made no contact, Trump's team said he could not call her due to the injury to his ear. They seemed to forget Trump has two ears.

They also seemed to forget that he had called Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Trump asked him to drop out and bestow an endorsement. However, the call was recorded and "leaked" online. The Republicans have spent a lot of time and money propping up Kennedy's candidacy in the hopes of pulling away votes from Biden. Trump apparently believes (does he have data?) RFK is pulling more votes from him, and enough that it could cost him the election.

Finally, the Fed is looking to cut interest rates—if not at the end of this month, then in September. They have come out to say they will not be waiting for inflation to reach 2%, since there is some inertia to inflation numbers. Trump's response was to beg the Fed to not lower interest rates before the election. While lowering the rates would not have an actual impact, it would have a psychological impact on voters in believing we were over the inflation hump and Biden had succeeded in soft landing the economy.

Trump is not behaving like a candidate who believes he has this in the bag. He is behaving like someone who knows he has peaked and his opponent (whoever it is) can easily pass him.


R.L.D. in Sundance, WY, writes: The distance from shooter to target was just under 150 yards. With as many bullets as were flying by, the size of the target, the amount of time the target just stood there figuring out what happened, and especially the amount of time available to spend aiming, Trump is lucky to be alive. On the rifle range, 150 yards are among the easy targets. This is one reason why I'm skeptical about the ability of an armed populace to decrease crime in the U.S.

I get why people are jumping to the conclusion that "Trump just won the election" but I don't buy it. Nobody with any brains is going to say "Oh! Well, I guess I'm going to dump Biden and vote Trump now." And the people without brains mostly support Trump already. Yes, it'll "energize the base" but they're already pretty reliable voters and more importantly, "the base" is and has been too small. Political parties are like pyramids in that, the broader the base, the higher you can reach. The base hasn't been broad enough to reach as high as the White House for quite some time. The only reason we've had any Republican presidents this century is because the GOP built their base on top of the Electoral College. Eventually, the GOP will realize that driving away all the moderates for nothing other than "energizing the base" was a huge mistake. Whether they figure it out in time to avoid getting Whigged, I can't say.


J.E. in Gilbertsville, PA, writes: I can't speak to the political climate in Arizona or Georgia or anyplace else in the country, but I can speak to the climate in eastern Pennsylvania. And given that the assassination attempt occurred in the Keystone State (albeit the western part), perhaps I can give everyone a clear glimpse into why this shooting happened here.

For one, Pennsylvania has a strong gun culture. The kids get the first day of hunting season off from school. Republicans have guns, Democrats have guns. They're everywhere.

My second point can be made most clearly by reflecting backward on the responses to the shooting this weekend:

Pennsylvanians are well aware that the fate of this election rests in big part on their shoulders. They worry constantly that if Trump wins, it will be the last election we'll ever have. We can argue all day long about whether it is right to wish for the assassination of a former president. But it will do no good to lecture or shame those who are disappointed, anymore than it helps to call Trump supporters "deplorables."

I don't know how we fix that this is where we are now. All I know is, the Trump supporters and the Biden supporters, in Pennsylvania at least, live in very, very different countries. I'm not even sure this can be fixed.


R.G.N. in Seattle, WA, writes: At least one Republican politician is comparing Trump's walking away from the podium while shaking his fist to Ronald Reagan joking about forgetting to duck and walking into the hospital (where he did finally collapse). At this point, I am not sure if it has been determined if a bullet or a piece of shrapnel injured Trump's ear, but I was a corpsman in Vietnam and saw a lot of bullet injuries and I can tell you that when you first receive a minor bullet or shrapnel wound, it generally takes awhile to realize you have been injured. There isn't a lot of blood flow into the ear and the top is mostly cartilage. That is why there wasn't much blood. Absolutely no one bleeds to death from an injury to the upper ear.

Reagan was shot in the chest at point blank range. It is amazing that he survived. He must have been in great pain by the time he reached the hospital. That is a true display of courage. I don't fault Trump for ducking when he realized what had happened, but his gestures of defiance occurred after he heard the report that the shooter was down. At that time, he kept batting agents trying to protect him out of the way, so the cameras could see him raising his fist and shaking it. That was a display of showmanship, not courage. I can't fault him for that, but comparing his bravery to Reagan's or that of Teddy Roosevelt after being shot is really a joke. I m happy he wasn't seriously injured, but a profile in courage it was not.


J.P. in Horsham, PA, writes: In the third Harry Potter book, the titular hero's nemesis, Draco Malfoy, sustains an injury mishandling a magical animal called a hippogriff. Although he gets patched up quickly and efficiently, on multiple occasions he goes on to exploit his injury to garner sympathy and to gain an undeserved advantage over Harry and other students (including embellishing the story of the injury to the point that he would claim to have barely survived the encounter).

Almost immediately after the shooting last week, I felt as though Donald Trump would do pretty much the same thing.

Judging by his appearance on the first day of the RNC wearing what appeared to be an unopened sanitary napkin on his ear, and the first 15 minutes of his acceptance speech on the last day, my prediction was pretty much spot on. And that's not even counting the fact that some of his most fervent defenders on social media claim that he was shot in the face.

Whatever the shooter's motive, Trump didn't deserve to be shot at. But he also doesn't deserve any adulation or respect for the way he has handled the aftermath.

(V) & (Z) respond: Is there really any question the entire Trump family would be sorted into Slytherin if they attended Hogwarts?


D.R. in Slippery Rock, PA, writes: Say what you want, Donald Trump is a genius when it comes to visual messaging on TV. How ironic that his raised fist is the Black Power salute from Gold medalist Tommie Smith and bronze medalist John Carlos on the podium after the 200 meter race at the 1968 Summer Olympics. Of course, MAGA doesn't do irony.


A.D. in Lewisville, TX, writes: It's both crazy and blindingly optimistic of you to predict that the assassination attempt won't have a major impact on the race. Trump won the race yesterday, and it is now over. The rest of the election calendar is a formality. Thirty seconds in Butler, Pennsylvania did more for the outcome of this race than anything either campaign has done this year. It dwarfs the debate. The fist pump photo is arguably the most powerful of any photograph taken this decade, and the photographer is guaranteed to win a Pulitzer.

This is not a knee-jerk outburst of emotion following the event. You'll see this play out in the weeks to come, and although some Democrats will blame the landslide loss on failing to replace Biden on the ticket, it wouldn't have mattered at all.

Democrats should be screaming that after Robert F. Kennedy was shot, he repeated "Is everyone okay?", and after Trump was shot he repeated "where's my shoes?", but of course they won't. They'll let the GOP shape the story, as they always do, and Trump will cement himself as the American Martyr.

(V) & (Z) respond: Note that this e-mail was received July 14.


C.F. in Waltham, MA, writes: I was very impressed with the fact that both of you predicted accurately that there would be little or no movement in the polls after the assassination attempt, when everyone (including me) was expecting Trump to get a big boost. I wonder how others perceived what happened, but my perception was this:

My immediate reaction was that after such a horrendous act, Trump came up with his fist held high saying "fight!" This felt like a terrible reaction, because it showed that all Trump wanted was to encourage EVEN MORE violence. I did not see it as heroic at all, quite the opposite. After seeing discussions about how security should not have let Trump expose himself more, I saw that they did not have a choice—Trump decided to stick his head and fist up to show off. This made me see Trump as incredibly stupid to give the shooter a second chance to shoot his hand off or finish him off.

The polls showed that not everyone thought he was super strong or heroic, though the pundits seemed to believe it would be a universal reaction. I'm sure the MAGA faithful saw it that way, but apparently not everyone did.

(V) & (Z) respond: Note that this e-mail was received July 18.

Politics: Assassination Attempt, the Nuts and Bolts

D.M. in McLean, VA, writes: The story of being a witness to a shooting that (Z) described does a great job of illustrating how, for someone without training in a particular situation, there is a lag between what you see, what you comprehend, and what you do with that comprehension. People don't usually act instantaneously, as their brain is still piecing the information together. It is like the falling whale monologue in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The whale sees something for the first time and then has to come up with a context (or even a name) for it. At least (Z)'s reaction wasn't the same as the bowl of petunias.


J.C.M. in Austin, TX, writes: I was reading through "...Or about the Assassination Attempt" and, as a 22-year-old from Texas, I believe I have some insight into why there is so much coverage about the Demolition Ranch patch the shooter had. Demolition Ranch presents themselves as an apolitical channel, but in my experience it is one of the biggest gateway entrances into the world of alt-right politics. A cursory look through the channel's merchandise store will tell you much about what is being left unspoken in the videos. The "Make Politicians Afraid Again" hat stands out the most in my opinion, and while I have not gone too far down the rabbit holes available, I know that my (many) deeply conservative acquaintances from high school watch his videos regularly, and was one of the first channels they passed around at school.

(V) & (Z) respond: The merchandise store is here, but the owners pulled a bunch of items, including the hat referred to by J.C.M., this week. You can still find screen captures online, though:

It is styled like the red MAGA hats, and says 'Make Politicians Afraid Again'


T.P. in Sacramento, CA, writes: As the resident "gun guy" in my group of friends, I find myself being bombarded by questions about every shooting and this is no different. I have gotten a lot of questions about Demolition Ranch and I'll let you and your readers know what I know about that YouTube channel. They are perhaps the most apolitical Guntubers out there—while they, like pretty much all Guntubers, do support the Second Amendment they shy away from other political commentary (unlike some other Guntubers, some who have pretty far-right political aspirations and recently ran for the House). I honestly don't know why the shooter was wearing that shirt; maybe he was just a fan who happened to pick that shirt out. To be honest, I feel badly for the guys at Demo Ranch; they just have a YouTube channel where they shoot stuff and look at cool firearms while trying to stay mostly non political in this day in age, and the action of one Jackass ruined it for them.

I also want to add that the hyperfixation on the AR-15 is just a smokescreen. AR-15s are just semi-automatic rifles that were designed in the 60s by Eugene Stoner to take advantage of the then new technology of Computer Numerical Controlled Machining, and now that CNC milling machines are common, this design has become very popular for its ease of manufacture. You can 3-D print the lower receiver for one of these firearms on a very inexpensive 3-D printer.


T.C. in Columbia, MO, writes: You wrote: "There's a very good BBC video that painstakingly shows that the distance [from the shooter to Trump] was 132.85 meters. Unfortunately, there is no known way to translate that into yards, which is the measure that God intended for people to use. So, the BBC's estimate will unfortunately be meaningless to all of our American readers."

32 meters is about 35 yards. That works out to 145.3 yards. Nearly 1.5 American football fields (not to be confused with football pitches).

(V) & (Z) respond: We got many e-mails from readers explaining how it actually is possible to convert yards to meters. Do readers REALLY think that: (1) not only are we ignorant of that fact, but (2) we think that God favors one system of measurement over another? C'mon, folks.

Politics: The Republican National Convention

D.S. in Palo Alto, CA, writes: Surely you know that much, if not most, of Trump's acceptance speech was lifted directly from the stump yammering he does at his rallies, varying only a little if at all from one to the next, except perhaps in the order of the bits. Somehow, this doesn't seem to bother many—if any—of the faithful who attend the cult meetings, although many have been seen leaving early... one too few on Saturday, unfortunately. I hope the five undecided voters who actually watched the speech did not react positively to it.

(V) & (Z) respond: We know. It's actually pretty easy to figure out what was "the acceptance speech" and what was "the standard Trump rally stuff" because the Trump campaign released a transcript of the speech before he took the stage. The stuff that is not in the transcript (most of the last 50 minutes) is the rally stuff.


K.R. in Austin, TX, writes: It's interesting that Trump gives such long speeches. It's yet another way he's like Hitler.


D.E. in Atlanta, GA, writes: I just watched the Eric Trump speech, then the Trump intro video followed by the Kid Rock "performance," and I can't unsee it. I'm going to have to pay good money to get an ophthalmologist to fix this. The people that attended the Bund rally at Madison Square Garden in 1939 had more self-respect than this Salem's Lot (sorry Mr. King).

I try to give almost everyone the benefit of the doubt, but this was utterly bizarre. I had avoided watching this 4-day cult show for a reason. The previous days cannot have been nearly as strange or ridiculous as this cavalcade of crazy.

As if my brain decided to not let me endure this any longer, I randomly started humming, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life."


P.C. in Stony Brook, NY, writes: I have deep admiration for Sean O'Brien's leadership since he became President of the Teamsters. His unapologetic advocacy for workers' rights has done wonders for his membership.

However, his ill-advised foray into "bothsidesism" has left me scratching my head in amazement. He seems to be determined to lend legitimacy to the very anti-union Party of Trump. How a hitherto adept and skilful tactician could blunder in such a feckless and naive way is astounding.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer—the German Lutheran pastor who became part of the Resistance and was later hanged on Hitler's direct orders—recognized early the dangers posed by National Socialism. He famously refused to buy into the idea that National Socialism was the protector of "traditional German family values," as opposed to the "moral corruption of liberalism." (Sounds familiar, eh?)

Many of Germany's religious leaders accepted the National Socialist propaganda, and bent the knee to Hitler and his party. Bonhoeffer was forthright in his condemnation of such acquiescence, saying "When you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction."

With all respect to Mr. O'Brien, I am afraid he has boarded the wrong train.


W.V. in San Jacinto, CA, writes: Much to-do was made last week when Teamsters president Sean O'Brien spoke at the RNC and lambasted big corporations to the same people whose fundamental economic principle is to do whatever big business wants them to do. Additionally, several pieces were made of how J.D. Vance solidifies the economic populist/isolationist message that was once antithetical to the free trade/national security folks that once seemed to dwell squarely in the Republican tent.

What is happening here? The Republican platform has no real message or policy solutions to the problems that plague us. Their immigration policy (mass deportations) isn't realistic. Their solution to inflation (tariffs) cause more inflation. Their solution to the deficit (tax cuts) causes more deficit. They repel expertise, experience and reject civil service reforms from as far back as the Arthur administration. So why are they leading? Their entire platform is Trump; or, more specifically, "Trump strong, Biden weak." They don't have answers, they just point out problems. Without a culture war they would have nothing to talk about. Their campaign is all about the Messenger. The message is, at best, 3-4 words long and easy to chant in a crowd.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden is pumping out well-reasoned arguments about immigration reform, court reform, student loan forgiveness, NATO deterrence, etc. The message is all about thoughtful policy, meaningful change, moderated progress. Biden is all about Message.

For people who aren't paying attention to politics, the messenger is winning. It rewards emotion, gut, feeling, while Biden's campaign rewards reasoned analysis and reluctant compromise on progressive goals. Which one do you think sells in an era of 18-second attention spans?

Unless Democrats can find a messenger who can make the argument to vote for their policy, they are going to lose this fall. When John Adams wrote about "hearts and minds" of the Revolution, he attributed first a change in sentiment, then mindful action. Ethos and pathos are crushing logos.


M.M. in San Diego, CA, writes: That political conventions are still televised is just an artifact from yesteryear when conventions actually chose the candidate, in the time before nearly universal primaries. Today, conventions are a big party for the delegates to get them juiced up for get out the vote efforts, the last slog until the election. The delegates are all chosen by their fellow activists from their local county party, and it's considered an honor, and a reward for their work on behalf of the party and downballot candidates. Delegates often run for local city and county offices, or they work as staff on others' campaigns, or are on the county party's steering committee. These are the folks that are chosen to staff legislators' offices once they win. So, no, not good television viewing, but the delegates are having the time of their lives.


D.E. in Lancaster, PA, writes: Please let S.B. in Los Angeles know that the screaming sheep made me laugh so hard I couldn't breathe. Regrettably, I could only listen to a minute of the sheep screaming before turning it off—I am somewhat irrationally partial to breathing. As I read your rundown of the last night of the GOP convention, I had to scroll down, but accidentally tripped the video and the sheep started screaming again, and I again couldn't breathe. It's all so very meta, since one of Hannibal Lecter's famous quotes is "You still wake up sometimes, don't you? You wake up in the dark and hear the screaming of the lambs." I too wake up in the dark, but it's usually a nightmare about Trump. And yes sadly, I am having them. They're not pleasant!


D.K. in Madison, WI, writes: I had to slow both the paint drying and the grass growing down to half speed before I could keep up with the action.

(V) & (Z) respond: And they were still, what, twice as stimulating as the RNC?


A.L. in Villigen, Switzerland, writes: The video of paint drying is fake!

I've watched it, and at 3:43:53, the video loops! There is one moving blob of paint that then jumps back to the original position. That, of course, really makes it a perfect analogy for the RNC national convention.


D.P. in Jacksonville, FL, writes: It's funny that the MAGA crowd didn't want to wear masks during COVID for fear of looking stupid, but now they'll tape a bandage over one ear in support (of their Dear Felonious Leader).


L.S.-H. in Naarden, The Netherlands, writes: You wrote that, at the RNC, "there were constant references to his heroism on that day [of attempted assassination], not to mention people wearing ear bandages that mirror the former president's." OMG. If this is not irrefutable proof that Trump's followers are in a cult, I don't know what is.

Politics: J.D. Vance (and Other Tech Bros)

F.C. in Sequim, WA, writes: Those magical words that turn a swing voter into a blue voter? President Vance!


E.W. in Silver Spring, MD, writes: I think you may be missing the constituency Donald Trump is trying to appeal to with J.D. Vance: millennials. While it's very unlikely that he will capture that age group for Trump, Vance might be able to mitigate the damage without aggravating the GOP base.


R.G. in St. Louis, MO, writes: Don't be fooled for one second, Donald Trump didn't pick J.D. Vance as his VP nominee.

Peter Thiel and Elon Musk demanded that Vance be Trump's VP nominee in exchange for their sudden massive monetary contributions to his campaign.


P.C. in Yandina Creek, QLD, Australia, writes: One of the talking heads on TV suggested that Peter Thiel's backing of J.D. Vance and Elon Musk's heavy investment in Donald Trump is a down payment on control of the future of AI regulation. The transactional nature of Trump suggests this could well be true.


T.M. in Grenoble, France, writes: I'd like to contribute a little insight into what may be going on with Elon Musk and his anti-trans views, especially in relation to schools. I remember having read about him being estranged from one of his children who happens to be transgender. When I looked it up again to be sure, I found this article reporting, in part, how he blames her (nee his) progressive private school and their woke mindset. So, I think that certainly explains at least part of his lurch to the right.

Politics: Trump Policies

J.M. in Norco, CA, writes: You have noted several times, including this week, that one of The Former Guy's most consistent pledges "is a promise to end taxes on tips." That sounds like a grand and generous gesture to low-wage workers in the service sector, doesn't it? Indeed, it does sound like that, and in the very short term, it likely does give a lift to those hard workers who can use it. But as you note: "most of them (80%+) don't earn enough to pay federal income tax." So, yes, the deduction for federal income tax that would otherwise be withheld—and the refund that the worker would later receive when they file their IRS return—would be eliminated.

But the unspoken part is that this is a huge gift to the employer, who would no longer have to pay their share—7.65% on these tips—to fund this employee's future Social Security and Medicare benefits! Yes, the employee is "spared" the burden of paying the other half, and this immediate extra cash undoubtedly helps. But Social Security and Medicare have long been considered among the country's most popular and successful programs. They are good for both the individual and society, and cutting this joint investment today would be foolish. Shocking, I know.


M.M. in San Jose, CA, writes: The Federal minimum tipped wage of $2.13/hr is often cited. I have seen references to it being paid to those who don't get tips, such as dishwashers and cooks. What is often overlooked is that the employer is required to provide additional pay so that, when tips are counted, the employee earns at least $7.25/hr. That said, I can imagine that it doesn't always happen.

The reason tax on tips has become an issue is the shift to non-cash payments (e.g. credit cards) for payments where a tip is expected. This provides a paper trail and makes it hard to avoid paying taxes on tip income. Of course, it doesn't always accrue to the person providing the service (see Lyft, which passed NONE of the tips to its drivers until it lost a lawsuit). I always tip in cash, even if I pay the bill with a credit card. I always click "no tip" on the credit card screen.


G.W. in Oxnard, CA, writes: You wrote:

Iron Dome: One of the few specific policy proposals that Trump DID unveil was his plan to build an Iron Dome... for the United States. If he has proposed that before, we're not aware of it. What we do know is that St. Ronnie of Reagan, who was a considerably more skillful politician, proposed the same thing. "Star Wars" didn't go anywhere, and we doubt that Iron Dome USA would go anywhere, either.

The ambitious Strategic Defense Initiative of the Reagan administration did not yield an invulnerable shield that would make global thermonuclear war impossible, but it did spawn missile defense programs that are real and do afford protection for some threats both in the U.S. and our interests abroad. You may be aware that Iran fired multiple ballistic missiles at Israel. The U.S. Aegis ship systems fired missile interceptors and destroyed several of those ballistic missiles before they reached their targets. There are land-based Aegis systems to defend Europe from Iranian ballistic missiles. The Aegis ships can defend various places in the world from rogue nation action. Japan and Hawaii are defended from North Korea by these systems. Ground-based interceptors in Alaska defend the U.S. from possible North Korea attack. The U.S. has the equivalent of the Iron Dome and the development of the Iron Dome benefited greatly from the development of U.S. system.

So, it is not that we want an Iron Dome, it is the Israelis saw what we were doing on ballistic missile defense and they wanted a version, which is the Iron Dome. In short, Trump promised to create something that already exists, and you doubt that a proposal to do something that exists will go anywhere, so you are right and wrong at the same time.

Politics: BidenWatch 2024

B.C. in Walpole, ME, writes: You wrote, of the Joe Biden interview with Lester Holt: "[Biden] observed that, in his view, the media is not doing enough to be critical of Trump and Trumpism. Holt was not pleased by that."

I was astounded at the way Holt went after Biden for inciting violence with his rhetoric, which Trump has been doing daily for the last 9 years, including the Jan. 6 insurrection. I would very much like someone to find out just how much and how often Holt has gone after Trump for the same thing. Right now, we have two candidates running: the one who can be held responsible for anything he says or does—or doesn't say or doesn't do, or didn't do or say well enough, or anything else that has happened—and the other candidate who cannot be held responsible for anything ever, past, present or future, no matter how clear and compelling the evidence.


R.M. in Bryan, TX, writes: It is reported that when told by the American artist Benjamin West that Washington was going to give up power voluntarily, King George III of England said "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world."

This may be a source of encouragement and comfort to Joe Biden if things come to that and it is managed well.


D.A.Y. in Troy, MI, writes: I fear that Joe Biden will be forced out over money. The big donors are not just closing off the spigot for his campaign, but the congressional campaigns. The Democrats are beginning to miss fundraising goals, and the Republicans are starting to rake in the funds. If there is a better example of how Citizens United has poisoned our political process, I do not see it.

And I am seeing the time fast approaching for him to step aside. Biden's latest statements declared he would continue to campaign to defeat Donald Trump. Note this is not necessarily the same as running for president. The President can step aside and still campaign to defeat Trump on behalf of the new nominee. I do not think he allowed this distinction on accident.

However, I think Biden needs to make a statement that "If not me, it's Harris—no ifs, ands, or buts." There is a worry those trying to force Biden out also want to bypass Harris because they do not want a woman of color at the top of the ticket. Biden needs to put his foot down that this will not stand. Besides, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) and most of their other dream candidates are not running this year. They know bloodying each other in an open convention would end their political careers, so they intend to keep their powder dry for 2028 (assuming we still have presidential elections).

Whatever happens will come soon. I believe this coming week, before the Olympics open, this matter will be put to bed one way or another. Buckle up.


J.A. in Manchester, NH, writes: When I was a young undergraduate, one of my first poli sci professors told us something basic, simple, and unwaveringly true: You don't win an election without money. I'm not saying a candidate with a shoestring campaign budget CAN'T win, particularly in an era where free social media is widely available. But it's a steep hill (to say the least).

Which brings us to the latest bad news for the Biden reelection bid: Jefferey Katzenberg has pretty much pulled the financing, and that is a blow from which Biden will unlikely recover. So, how will history remember Biden? I think if Biden drops now, he will likely be remembered as a transformative figure who put American democracy and the health of millions above his own self-interest. And, in the end, he sacrificed his re-election to ensure an authoritarian would-be dictator could not regain power. If he stays in, he loses. And (if the new regime even allows history to be written) he'll be remembered as someone who was too selfish and, as unfair as it will be, too old to realize his time was over.

Brutal? Sure. Unfair? Maybe. Unfortunately, it's also accurate. Make no mistake: If I was offered a choice between voting for His Bigliness or facing a firing squad, I'd say, "gimme my blindfold and last cigarette and eff off." But I just do not see how Biden recovers in the 17 weeks or so until Election Day.

And I think the best candidate to replace him is Gavin Newsom. He's young, energetic, and had 2 terms as governor of a state with nearly 40 million people and a massive economy. But that has to happen NOW.


L.E. in Putnam County, NY, writes: Whatever my differences with Joe Biden, I am resolutely determined to vote for him in November—even if my vote turns out to have to be a write-in, and even if he personally calls me to ask me to vote for a replacement nominee.

Yes, it was painful to see him freeze, fumble, and babble at the debate, but incoherent babble is Donald Trump's norm, while Biden has not had as bad a day since. That many Democrats have been complicit in allowing negative reaction to that bad day to snowball, thereby validating Trump's charges on Biden's mental state that we need to be united in discrediting, is handing Trump a win before votes are cast and ignores the months of potential for Trump to self-destruct. Just being a replacement nominee weakens any replacement nominee when we can not afford to be weakened.

Anyone pushing Biden out of the race should look no further than the mirror in allocating blame for a potential Trump win in November. The strategic planning represented by kneecapping Democratic fundraising to force a change of horses in mid-stream cannot be supported.


B.D. in St. Agatha, ON, Canada, writes: Given that the factors driving climate change should have been addressed decades ago, I am struck by the fact that the last chance we have realistically to address this at all is being squandered because two old men decided to have a pissing contest. I drift in and out of despair, as I see Biden dither and stall.

Politics: What Should the Democrats Do?

J.F. in Sloatsburg, NY, writes: D.G. in Fairfax asked whether Joe Biden should resign, in addition to dropping out of the race. Your answer addressed one of the major reasons that he should not—that Kamala Harris needs to be able to focus on campaigning full-time. There are three other major reasons for Biden to remain in office. All of them stem from the fact that Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) will not allow a Harris VP candidate to come to a vote in the House:

  1. There are roughly 40 judicial seats where there is either a candidate currently before the Senate or Senate Judiciary, or where a nominee could easily be named, vetted, and voted on prior to the end of the year. Sen. Joe Manchin (I-Coal) has stated that he will not vote for any judicial candidate who does not receive Republican votes, and has stuck to this. As a result, most or all of these seats would not be filled, as there would be no tiebreaker in the Senate. This would be 40 seats that Trump could fill immediately, if he wins, or that could likely be held open until 2027 if Harris wins (as Republicans have some shot at controlling the Senate next year in that case).

  2. The lack of a VP puts Mike Johnson a heartbeat away from the presidency. Should something happen to Harris, he becomes president. Further, if Harris is incapacitated, then the executive is largely decapitated, which would be problematic given both world and domestic events at present.

  3. The VP normally presides over the electoral count. In the absence of a vice president, the president pro tempore of the Senate takes on the role. If the Republicans control the Senate next year, that would put their candidate for president pro tempore in charge of the count. We know that there was some expectation of Mike Pence not showing up on January 6th, and even with the rule changes, this would create many opportunities to sow chaos.

R.H. in Macungie, PA, writes: I hope that if Joe Biden drops out, the party can coalesce around Kamala Harris, but if they don't, I hope whatever process they use involves ranked choice so that it's one vote and done. This is a perfect opportunity to showcase ranked choice's benefits.


M.G. in Baltimore, MD, writes: As a lifelong Democrat, the situation with Joe Biden is distressing, particularly after he rescued the country from the disastrous Donald Trump regime and had one of the most productive terms as president since Jimmy Carter. From a personal perspective, I have accepted the fact that he is going to lose the election if he stays on as the nominee, because it was obvious after the debate that the media was never going to let it go. Now if we're going to do something as drastic as jettisoning a nominee—who, as is not often pointed out, was elected as the nominee in the primaries—then the replacement had better be someone who is actually going to win, not a spare who essentially performs the same as Biden within the margin of error. I'm all for replacing Joe, but doing it with Kamala is a waste of effort, energy, and reputation.


J.B. in Bend, OR, writes: Assuming Joe Biden steps down, his replacement is going to be Kamala Harris. I don't see how she could not be, even with an open convention. She would have to make a big mistake like using the n-word or saying something crazy.

Assuming it's Harris, the interesting question is: Who would be the VP?

We can eliminate a few categories immediately: can't be a woman, can't be Black, can't be gay. An all-woman ticket or an all-Black ticket would not be popular and a gay VP is going to be just too soon for a lot of people.

That leaves us with Gavin Newsom, Gov. Josh Shapiro (D-PA), or some dark horse (which, by definition, isn't a favorite).

Newsom probably would not want to be VP because he wants to be President. If he's the VP, then he's stuck in that spot for 8 years, and after 12 years of a Democrat in the White House, people probably would want to change just because that's what they do.

As to Shapiro, the only knock on him is that he's Jewish, but no one other than die-hard MAGAs would care about that.

So my prediction is Harris gets the nomination and Shapiro is her VP.


J.G. in Dallas, PA, writes: I get very apprehensive every time that I see Josh Shapiro's name included in the list of Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, etc.

We just elected this guy! Can we please keep him for a little bit?

At least long enough to let him get the recreational marijuana industry in Pennsylvania up and running. He's is probably about a year or two away from pulling it off.

Then D.C. can have him.


D.F. in Norcross, CA, writes: In your answer to the question from E.W. in Skaneateles, you wrote: "[Kamala] Harris would presumably need to be balanced with a 'safe' running mate, which means a moderate, inoffensive white guy. That sounds like a description of Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) or Govs. Josh Shapiro (D-PA) or Andy Beshear (D-KY) to us."

It also sounds to me like Gov. Roy Cooper (D-NC), especially since he's term-limited and his current term ends in January.

About the only drawback I can think of would be if the hypothetical Harris-Cooper ticket were to win, and current AG Josh Stein (D-NC) were to defeat lunatic Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson (R-NC). I know a lot of officeholders who win an election either as President or VP resign their current office so as to aid in the transition. That would be less than optimal for Stein, since Robinson would immediately succeed Cooper as Governor, and who knows how much damage he could do (especially with a Republican state House and Senate), even in only a month.


J.E. in Whidbey Island, WA, writes: I'm not sure choosing "a moderate, inoffensive white guy" is necessarily a winning approach in the MAGA era. Just ask Vice President Tim Kaine.

Politics: The Polls

L.S.-H. in Naarden, The Netherlands, writes: Nice pissing contest going on between Nate Silver and Allan Lichtman:

Nate Silver mocks Allan Lichtman's prediction system, and eX-Twitter user Angry Staffer responds: '@AllanLichtman has predicted all but one of the last 14 races. You aren't even batting .500 Maybe sit this one out.


S.P. in Fort Worth, TX, writes: Your commentary on the presidential polls item today (July 18) pretty much summed up for me why Joe Biden should stay in the race. Besides the fact that switching mid-campaign has generally not worked in a presidential race, there is a disconnect between Joe Biden's popularity and the electorate. As has been pointed out many times to date, the Democrats have outperformed the polls the last couple of cycles. It therefore boggles the mind that a voter would go to the polls, vote for the Democratic candidate for Senate, but then somehow NOT vote for Joe Biden as long as they are there. They sure as hell don't want to see Trump elected. And I don't think these same individuals would be inclined to vote for the guy who barbecues dogs.

In years past the fear was one of depressed turnout. And, but for Donald J. Trump, that would be a legitimate concern.

The Democratic electorate didn't prefer Joe Biden in 2020 (I know I didn't). The Democratic electorate doesn't prefer Joe Biden in 2024 (ditto). He has never excited Democratic voters. But at the end of the day, I believe many of those voters are going to go to the polls and pull the blue lever regardless of whether the candidate is Biden, Kamala Harris, or a pimento cheese sandwich.


R.M. in Strong City, KS, writes: As usual, I looked at your "Today's Presidential Polls" (7/16), then walked into my yard, pushed my arms into the air, and begged, begged, for aliens to come and take me off this planet.

The ONLY think keeping me from losing my mind is the fact that all the Red Wave polling proved way wrong in 2022.


M.S. In Harrisonburg, VA, writes: You may have already noticed this, but the same VCU poll that has Trump up 3 points up on President Biden in Virginia, has Senator Tim Kaine (D) up by double digits on his Republican opponent. While the poll certainly shows a lack of enthusiasm for Biden and isn't good news, it's unlikely that a majority of those Kaine voters will vote for Trump when push comes to shove. That's not to say this isn't a problem for Biden, but this poll may not be as dire as it originally appears.

Politics: It's Very Unfair

L.Y. in Scranton, PA, writes: After watching things for the last few weeks, it seems like we have reached a point where the naysayers both from within and without the Democratic Party about Biden have torpedoed him. How does he recover if he doesn't drop out? Nobody "ages in reverse," clickbait ads on tabloid websites to the contrary. In a world of perfectly sober-minded and rational people, Biden's infirmities or lack thereof would be of no consequence, and Trump would get like 10% of the popular vote to Biden's 90%. But at some point the noise itself becomes substance, for voting purposes, and it now seems like the Republicans are supporting Trump and the Democrats are opposing Biden. I don't think Biden needs to take a pass on running again, but I think the Democratic Party needs him to take a pass in order to not hand the Republicans a trifecta of doom for the next two years.

Not a single vote has been cast yet, but the Democrats seem to have remarkably conceded the entire election at all levels and fallen into a depression predicated on our own worst fears and anxieties. We need to snap the f*** out of it and take charge of the situation. We Democrats are our own worst enemy, sometimes.


L.L. in Coos Bay, OR, writes: It seems like we've come to the point where the only criterion for president of the United States is how well he/she performs in front of a camera. Sad.


H.R. in Cudahy, WI, writes: Regarding your comments about President Biden's COVID case: COVID policy evolves with the virus's evolution, and more importantly, the evolution of our collective immunity. The CDC no longer recommends any particular amount of time after infection to isolate, so the President can indeed go back to normal activity when he's feeling up to it, without fear of endangering anyone else. As his symptoms are reportedly mild, it's not a great excuse for him to drop out of the race, but I would guess that the stress levels he must be experiencing probably made him more vulnerable to a respiratory virus infection of any kind. At his age, it's not unreasonable to say that he's not willing to endure the stress any longer, as it can wear down his (and anyone's) health.

(V) & (Z) respond: We are aware of the CDC guidelines, but we are also aware that voters reach unfounded conclusions based on old information (or on misinformation) all the time.


J.L. in Orangevale, CA, writes: From 7/15 blog: Biden was reading it from a teleprompter and still mashed his words and mangled his sentences.

Do you know nothing about stuttering? Check the ASHA website for elucidation and perhaps perspective to your glib interpretation of what you see.

(V) & (Z) respond: Similarly, we are well aware of the dynamics of stuttering, and have written many times that people are improperly interpreting a stutter as a sign of dementia. Nonetheless, many voters are not well-informed, or are not willing to make allowance for a candidate's personal challenges.

Complaints Department

J.S. in Houston, TX, writes: For years I've read your daily blog to get a sense of opposition beliefs and news. But I've seen how you've dehumanized and demonized Trump and half the country with childish and mocking language that has escalated over time.

You caused this. You and everyone else who have constantly speculated about Trump "ending democracy" and all the other hyperbole.

Also, your weak attempt to preempt and defend against that claiming it's Trump who promotes violence falls flat. When CNN tried that ,Wolf Blitzer was asked a simple question in response: "Who's in the hospital?" At the very least you must now admit you are "no better" than the people you have been criticizing, by your own standards.

Your comments today were particularly heinous and disgusting mere hours after the violence, have you no shame or decency? I will no longer read your site.

I am praying for our country, and I am praying that depraved people like you find a sense of morals and decency and stop hawking fear and peddling hate.


E.J. in New York City, NY, writes: Dang Votemaster, your post about the Trump assassination attempt is ruthless. Have you no heart whatsoever? My goodness.

I respect your math and analysis, but I've lost respect for you as a human being.

And no, your post is not something a grown-up would have written.

Grow up.

(V) & (Z) respond: Note that it was (Z) who wrote that post and not (V). Also, your e-mail is a comment, not a correction.


D.R. in Rahway, NJ, writes: What is with your Biden coverage? Nineteen Democrats, only four are women and all of them are white. Did you not watch his Detroit rally where the ground was fired up and chanting "Don't you quit" and "We got your back"? Those were also Black voters there but I guess those two things, "Black" and "voters," don't count to you? Do rich donors and white Congressmen in safe blue districts only matter? Or because he was using teleprompter, it doesn't count? Are you guys gonna rate all his speeches and handwringing over them until November? It's already getting painfully old with the media, so I hope it doesn't become the norm here.

Furthermore, the very next item you remark how the race has been remarkably stable, so what's the point of this site even covering this pointless charade? Just so we can watch the goalposts move in real time? Why are Democrats held to this impossible standard and now why is Biden held to this ridiculous made-up standard out of nowhere? Joe is not the one with a problem. He's going to be the nominee.

I'd rate the coverage of your site the past 6 months a 3/10, obviously you two aren't as sharp as you were when you were younger and the cheese has slipped off both your crackers. It might be time to step aside for someone younger and someone who has a better chance commenting where their audience is.


Unknown, writes: Appalachia-residents-turned-writers?

Ah, yes, the white male who can likely trace his ancestors back generations does not represent Appalachia but the "queer first generation immigrant" is the vox populi.

The irony is likely lost on you, I'm sure. The fact is, it is you and the Jewish media and their partners in the Western governments that are attempting to erase us. You do precisely what you accuse others of, a tactic as old as politics itself.

I'm completely sure you would certainly welcome a world in which the likes of Avashia are the majority in Appalachia and the pesky whites are done away with (look at the U.K., where your brethren are attempting to memory-hole and gaslight the entire nation into thinking it was never a white nation), but the reality is that we are still the majority here, for now. What's even more astonishing is the cognitive dissonance it takes to know full and well what the voting pattern is for the area in discussion and yet at the same time have the gall to claim that anyone like Neema Avashia comes close to representing the people or having any sort of relevance.

Isn't it odd? Africa seems to be for Africa. Asia seems to be for Asians. The Middle East for Middle Easterners. Europe, Australia, Canada, and USA? For the world.

We will win. We will never stop documenting your lunacy, hypocrisy and baseness. You will lose, one day. The most you can do is delay the inevitable. Never forget this.

(V) & (Z) respond: We would like to congratulate you on figuring out that we are in cahoots with the Jewish media (those meetings were supposed to be secret!), but you bravely chose not to use your name or location when you sent your e-mail.

Gallimaufry: Bad Songs Edition

B.C. in Walpole, ME, writes: You really threw down the gauntlet when you named Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA" as the worst song ever written. I suspect that you will change your tune when, five months from now, you hear Brenda Lee's "Jingle Bell Rock," and you find yourself in fetal position begging to hear anything else, anything, up to and including "Holly, Jolly Christmas" or "Dominick the Donkey." Let's face it: We're going to have to have separate categories of Worst Song Ever Written: patriotic, christmas, novelty, love, pretentious rock, rap/hip-hop, heavy metal, punk, country (Conway Twitty: "But I could see right through/Her tight fittin' jeans...")

I'm trying to avoid taking you to task for citing Starship's "We Built This City," a truly execrable song named worst by Rolling Stone magazine, those wonderful folks who produced the "500 Greatest Guitarists of All Time," a list notable for the greatest guitarists of all time that they left off the list, the not-the-greatest guitarists that they included in the list, the utterly indefensible ranking of those guitarists, and the fact that the judges who created the list managed to put most of the judges on the list, and in higher positions than they deserved (well, those that did deserve a place at all).

No, I want instead to celebrate some of the music greats who have left us in recent years. I hardly need remind you of the passing in September, 2023 of Francesco Migliacci, author of the song we know as "Volare." Who among us can truly say he doesn't wake up in the morning wanting to sing that song? The same year, in June, we lost Astrud Gilberto, of the Bossa Nova great "The Girl from Ipanema"; she sang the girl-watching song with such amazing dispassion that when you got to the part where the Girl walks by and all the men sigh, she sings "aahhh!" in a way that sounds more like the men on the beach are saying, "hmmmm," without looking up from the Tom Clancy novels they're reading. And yet, somehow, it works; it's right.

On May 6 this year, we lost Wayland Holyfield, author of the immortal lines "There's no place that I'd rather be than right here/With my Red Neck, White Socks, and Blue Ribbon Beer." We have not yet lost Loudon Wainwright III, author of "Dead Skunk in the Middle of the Road," but we did lose the skunk who selflessly gave his life so that we could have that song, which we would much rather listen to than "Jingle Bell Rock" or "God Bless the USA."


A.G. in Scranton, PA, writes: As for bad songs, those worse than "Proud to be an American": "Try That in a Small Town," "Where Were You? (When the World Stopped Turning)," anything by Kanye, pretty much anything by Flo Rida, everything by The January Sixth Choir, "Hold On My Heart" by Phil Collins, "Livin' La Vida Loca" by Ricky Martin, nothing by Tay Tay, nor anything by Ram Jam (did they have another song?), but nearly all things by Justin Bieber, Ke$ha, and pretty much anything from the disco era.

And, no, for you oddballs who think Laura Branigan's "Gloria" is a little too disco sounding...it's not. It's effing great and she was fabulous, okay?

So that's that.

Though not a perfect way to say "you liberal snowflakes all want to be so super special," I think it fair to note that Detective Lieutenant Frank Drebin of Police Squad did kill six actors, good ones, when he saw five weird men in togas stabbing a stranger in plain view of a hundred spectators and did as all brave Police Squad members would do and shot them. So, though a Shakespeare in the Park production being massacred by the man who shoved O.J. Simpson down the steps of a baseball stadium is not entirely alike to the Elizabethan drive-by shooting, it does serve to prove you're not so damned special.


C.B. in Melbourne, VIC, Australia, writes: "I Can Hear The Grass Grow" by the Blues Magoos. Say no more!


M.B.T. in Bay Village, OH, writes: How can a song with the first line "I'm proud to be unAmerican" pretend to be patriotic?

(V) & (Z) respond: It is a pretty good example of a mondegreen. Now, 'scuse me while I kiss this guy.


T.L. in Bloomington, IL, writes: You wrote that Woody Guthrie's "This Land is Your Land" could have been a better choice of a patriotic song than Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA" for the convention.

In truth, "This Land is Your Land" is a song about social justice, not patriotism.

(V) & (Z) respond: We know well the song's lyrics, and the man who wrote it (ahem, "This machine kills fascists.") A song that raises questions and invites reflection about what America means is more patriotic, in our view, than something empty and unthinking like the Lee Greenwood song. Put another way, if you played the Guthrie song and the Greenwood song for Thomas Jefferson, primary author of the Declaration of Independence, and James Madison, primary author of the Constitution, we are very confident which song they would prefer.

Final Words

E.B. in Baltimore, MD, writes: Joan Crawford: "Dammit, don't you dare ask God to help me."

If you have suggestions for this feature, please send them along.
Previous | Next

Main page for smartphones

Main page for tablets and computers

Web Analytics Made Easy - StatCounter