Sunday Mailbag

And, after a week off, the mailbag is back.

Politics: This Week in TrumpWorld

S.D. in York, England, UK, writes: As an academic at a U.K. university, I can provide a tiny bit of end-game context to the ongoing immigration-visa news in the U.S. right now.

What is playing out with foreign immigrant status in the United States is a "game" the U.K. just played. So we know the British outcome: horrific declines in applications from foreign students, leading to a decline in revenue for the university itself. All resulting in financial default for essentially every U.K. university. (My university made voluntary and involuntary academic redundancies of 14% these last three years, for context.)

We cannot kid ourselves about the impacts of what I would call "the ongoing legal immigrant war." In the U.S., universities will go into financial crisis. It is now certain. Nearly every college and university in the U.S. will be in horrific financial crisis because of a decline in foreign undergraduate students enrolling.

We can reasonably assume that no state legislature will have finances to bail out their given state university(s) at a status quo level. So, all will go into "technical" financial default in the next 2 years, at one level or another.

Again, this is the reason, at an absolute level, that 100% of U.K. universities are in financial crisis. (For American readers, this is more than just "BREXIT"; there was a mismanagement of university finances in the U.K. over these last 5 years that has a lot of blame-points, a lot of fingers in huge number of "all directions." My mini-politics for this: the U.K. universities themselves hold some blame here.)

Not grant collapses from DOGE, but rather the lack of foreign students applying to begin with, this will crush the American colleges/universities financially over the next few years. It will be horrific. All university finances have a business model based on "generous" foreign student incomes to the university at a given supply rate. Removing that bit of the financial model is crippling.

Our previous government in the U.K. broke our universities' business model. Well, your current government just broke yours!

And NONE of this is about "woke" or "crime."

(V) & (Z) respond: For those readers who are not in academia, note that foreign exchange students often pay vastly more tuition, particularly at state schools, since they do not qualify for in-state rates.

---

J.H. in Boston, MA, writes: You're right (and The Atlantic is wrong) that the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case will probably not be the moment that Trump decides to willfully ignore the courts. But you are right for the wrong reasons. It's not because Garcia is just one person and not worth going to the mats over. It's because the new SCOTUS guidelines are so flaccid (a fact which you pointed out, but failed to note the consequences of) that Trump admin only has to share with the courts what steps it took to "facilitate." They can just tell the courts "yeah we asked El Salvador where he is and they said IDK and there's nothing more we can do. Sorry!" Apparently this will be enough to satisfy the Supremes. There's no reason to defy the courts and also no reason to bring back Garcia, who may already be dead.

---

J.H. in Bloomfield Township, MI, writes: I recently visited Charlottesville, VA, with family. While there, we visited Monticello. Part of the tour included a soliloquy by a Thomas Jefferson impersonator. During the question and answer session at the end, I thought I might have some fun (in part because there was no way to gauge the temperature of the audience). Using what I have learned by reading Electoral-Vote.com and recommended readings, I asked Jefferson what he thought of the Alien and Sedition Acts. He thundered: "They are unconstitutional! They are designed to keep only one party in power! Imagine, you can be imprisoned without having committed a crime! Imagine, you can be imprisoned for criticizing the government! They are a violation of our freedom of speech and assembly! They are an abomination!" There was a moment of silence, but no murmurs of dissent. After the tour ended, a person tapped my arm and said with a smile, "Nice question." At least some in the audience caught the modern-day parallel.

---

J.K. in Freehold, NJ, writes: Your answer regarding the "unfillable hole" in TCF stated that he is probably not willing to kill in his unending quest for all manner of damage. But his canceling of funding of medical research is indeed killing people.

Otherwise, it's a great observation.

---

D.H. in Boston, MA, writes: I've been concerned about how much science and health research is getting cut at the federal level, so I e-mailed my state representative to suggest that I'd be willing to see a tax increase if Massachusetts increased its budget to fund more research. (Readers may not be aware, but there are a couple institutions doing worthwhile research in our state.) She replied to say I'm not the only one suggesting it and it's getting serious consideration in the legislature. It's ridiculous that research is getting cut in the name of reducing the deficit when it makes up so little of the federal budget, but the flip side is that the money involved is small enough that states should be able to pick up their share of it (if they want) without a lot of pain.

---

J.V. in Minneapolis, MN, writes: The people trying to kill pronouns in your e-mail signature as a social norm also thought that whatever the heck THIS is would catch on:

They might not be the best judge or what is normal or acceptable in western society. It's probably why we don't look to septuagenarians for advice on social trends.

---

A.S. (he/him) in Fairfax, VA, writes: Adding pronouns in e-mail signatures is one of the most helpful things in a virtual work environment. "Pat" isn't the only ambiguous name out there. I accidentally misgender a number of colleagues simply because I don't recognize their names (or I go with the consensus gender for the name, only to be wrong).

I'm grateful for people that are comfortable sharing their pronouns not just because it is more inclusive, but also because it keeps me from embarrassing myself!

Politics: The Trade War, General Comments

A.P. in Bloomington, IN, writes: What your analysis of the effect of Trump tariffs leaves out is that the rest of the world is not at war with each other. They will shift their trade with the U.S. to each other. They will take up the benefits of demand by still trading in a free trade environment between Europe, Asia, and the rest of the Americas.

---

K.R. in Austin, TX, writes: Donald Trump brags about how his friend, Charles Schwab, made $2.5 billion on the stock market swing. Does that support the idea that he's manipulating the markets to help his friends? We report, you decide.

---

K.H. in Golden, CO, writes: In your answer to M.S. in Houston about the possibility that tRump might have been manipulating the markets, you wrote: "There's no clear evidence this happened, mind you, other than Occam's Razor—it's a simpler, cleaner explanation than the one being offered by the administration." I cannot gainsay your answer. But I tend to think Hanlon's razor is more apropos to the moment: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Or one could adjust it to: incompetence or pigheadedness... your choice of characterization for the walking id that is tRump. We'll surely never know one way or the other.

---

A.P. in Annandale, VA, writes: In connection with the question from J.O. in Raleigh about how tariffs are collected: A recent article in The Washington Post described the plight of the owner of a shoe company who imports all of her stock and the distributes it to retailers. In the body of the article it was stated that the U.S. Treasury (or whatever agency collects tariffs; I don't know if the Customs Service still exists) has her bank account number and automatically deducts the tariffs from her account. That will create a huge unanticipated cash flow problem for her because she won't be paid by her customers for weeks, even if they don't cancel their orders because she has had to increase her prices. Presumably she's not unique. So not only is the assessment and recording of tariffs computerized/automated, so is the collection.

---

C.F. in Waltham, MA, writes: If you know anyone who still believes China pays tariffs (because Trump keeps repeating that lie), maybe this video will convince them that it is NOT how tariffs work:

Deprogramming brainwashed people always seems to start with seeing through a single lie with emotional impact.

Also, in response to the question from J.K. in New York City, China already does not care about copyrights or patents, other than the government giving lip service and a veneer of some enforcement. (V) and (Z) are right that they will not change their outward lip service on that, but, really, nobody cares about what they do as long as we still make big profits partnering with them.

Worse than violating just patents, a short look through AliExpress or Ebay will show you many instances of complete designs of expensive and patented goods they manufacture sold directly from their factories for less than half the price (including shipping). And a short check on video game systems they sell, often with 100,000 older video games and 50+ console emulators that can be ordered from Amazon, Ebay, and AliExpress, show the contempt they have for copyright laws and our reaction to it.

Lastly, as you wrote, patents are full public disclosures of inventions and are required to show enough detail for someone to build the patented item after it expires. However, I'd recommend people use patents.google.com to search for patents and download them for free if they really want to read them.

Politics: The Trade War, Dark Humor

S.T in Worcestershire, England, UK, writes: A rather charming extract from William Keegan's Observer column:

Finally: a little light relief. Martin Bell, the former BBC international correspondent and independent MP, has sent me this clerihew:

His tariffs were imposed on every nation
Regardless of their size and population
His people sang a plaintive song
"The penguins have abused us for too long."

---

M.C. in Newton, MA, writes: In your item "Trade War: Bond Markets Were Apparently the Canary in the Coal Mine," you mentioned that "[Secretary of the Treasury Scott] Bessent doesn't even speak Penguin."

Sounds like we need to send in Homer Simpson as a special negotiator:

---

E.G. in Boulder, CO, writes: My wife made the following observation: Trump voters were worried about egg prices, and now their nest eggs are disappearing. Their ignorance is incomprehensible.

---

W.R. In Henderson, NC, writes: Senior Trump advisor Stephen Miller posted on eX-Twitter after Trump paused the tariffs: "You have been watching the greatest economic master strategy from an American president in history."

I'm now convinced the Millers have a platonic relationship. I mean, who could kiss Stephen's lips knowing where they've been for 16 hours each day!

---

P.R. in Kirksville, MO, writes: I don't know if the National Review is on your radar, but I just found this: "Trump's Cartoon Physics Takes America off the Cliff."

It's one of the funniest things I've read about the tariffs all week—Donald Trump as Wile E. Coyote. Here is the key passage:

So it is with President Donald Trump who—convinced of his own superior intellect—has crowbarred open a newly delivered crate of ACME Trade Policy, unboxed Peter Navarro circa 1996, and strapped on his goggles and rocket shoes to catch that elusive, slippery trade deficit once and for all.

Read the whole thing. In a world that looks increasingly bleak, it's a good laugh.

I'm only sorry that you didn't think of this first—it's exactly something that you (probably Z) would write.

Politics: Boycotts

D.H. in Boston, MA, writes: In your answer to D.H. in Portland about what they could boycott from red states, you didn't mention fossil fuels, which are produced in disproportionately large amounts by red states and are a pretty big "export" to most blue states. If you drive a car powered by gasoline and can buy an EV to replace it, do so. If your home is heated by gas or oil in the winter and you can afford to replace the furnace with heat pumps, do that. If you can put up solar panels to help run your HVAC, do that, too. But even if you get your electricity from the grid, EVs and heat pumps are more efficient than their fossil-fuel-powered counterparts, so will use less fuel burned in power plants. And as the grid is powered more and more by renewable energy, we will hopefully use less and less of the oil and gas produced by red states.

---

P.K. in Marshalltown, IA, writes: As a person of Irish heritage, I am very familiar with the origin and application of the term "boycott." I read the list from Daily Kos you shared Saturday. As I enjoy pop (and it IS pop, not soda), I am not going to deprive myself of a bottle of Diet Pepsi or Diet Dr. Pepper. Not gonna. As I read further, I saw on the list a company that manufactures disco balls. As a hater of disco from the time of my youth fifty years back, I can fully support that boycott:

Politics: Tesla

J.E. in San Jose, CA, writes: You mentioned the million Cybertruck preorders. That is one way to look at it. Several years ago, you could reserve one with a $100 refundable deposit. You could have counted me among them. I eventually replaced my 20-year-old 2 two years ago with something else, and I got my deposit back earlier this year. Funnily enough, I had honestly forgotten about it until they started emailing me that I was "eligible" to claim my Cybertruck. Thanks for the reminder, jerks!

---

F.H. in Pacific Grove, CA, writes: I wasn't going to say anything, since I despise Elon Musk as much as anyone (except perhaps his babymamas and offspring) possibly can, so a little spillover into Tesla is understandable.

But you wrote "...what was once cutting-edge tech is now long-in-the-tooth tech, and in cars that, even at the height of their popularity, were rather well known for manufacturing defects." And you also wrote: "...people who want to buy an electric car have more choices and don't have to buy a Tesla. And some of the new entrants are better than Teslas. For example, the Chinese company BYD has a new charging system that is almost as fast as filling a gas tank. Tesla has nothing like that and with nobody minding the store at Tesla, it is only going to fall further behind competitors."

People may have the impression that Tesla is "rather well known for manufacturing defects," but (at least until the Cybertruck), that's largely due to a decade of clickbait articles. In the U.S., there are an average of 215,000 car fires every year. The vast majority of them are never reported on. When they are, the headlines are "Vehicle Fire." However every single fire involving a Tesla (less than 20/year on average) gets big media coverage, and the headlines are "Tesla Fire." Likewise, most of the "defects" widely reported with Model 3s and Model Ys were cosmetic (largely panel gaps) - nothing that would leave you stranded by the side of the road or unable to go to work. So its poor-quality reputation is somewhere between overblown and undeserved (again, excluding the Cybertruck monstrosity).

Next, you suggest that "some of the new entrants are better than Teslas." That's a pretty broad statement. Is a Lamborghini Huracán "better" than a Honda Civic? Not when you consider the cost/mile over the lifetime of the car, or how many people can fit in it. Many electric cars have some advantages over Teslas, but I would argue that Teslas remain the best EV overall, when you consider their pricing, charging speed, the Supercharger network (which is so dense it eliminates range anxiety in all but the most remote places), the range, the features, the number of service centers that understand EVs and have parts available, and the proven track record (clickbait articles notwithstanding). I can't see driving cross-country in any EV but a Tesla (though the $125k Porsche Taycan gets you from coast to coast a little faster, even if it's only 79% as efficient as a $42.5k Tesla Model 3). I regularly drive 630 miles between Ivins, UT, and Pacific Grove, CA, in 10.5 hours, including the two charging stops, in my 2024 Model 3. At both stops, the car is ready to go before I've finished my breakfast/lunch.

Finally, Tesla is a company with 125,000 employees, only one of whom is the part time/absentee Elon Musk. I suspect the majority of those employees would be delighted to see Musk disappear from their company, DOGE, and/or the planet. Even before his fascist right turn, he was an unpredictable agent of chaos, like when he impulsively laid off the vast majority of the Supercharger team last year, only to rehire them when he realized that wasn't such a good idea. (Good practice for his upcoming DOGE gig). Or when he decided the Cybertruck was a great idea. At this point Tesla would be much better off without Elon Musk. It's full of fantastic engineers and employees who will work just as well (while breathing easier) without him.

I would argue that, like vandalizing Teslas and Tesla showrooms/service centers, denigrating the cars or the company does nothing to stop, slow. or even slightly affect Elon Musk, particularly compared to the damage it does to a decent American car brand and all the employees and owners who bought them for all the right reasons and simply don't deserve all this hate. (Although I suppose it does help that guy in Hawaii making over $100,000/mo selling anti-Elon stickers to Tesla owners.)

---

M.N. in Lake Ann, MI, writes: Count me in as a now rueful Tesla owner. I wanted an all-electric car for environmental reasons, and bought my Model Y more because of the charging network in my local and desired travel areas, than because of the car itself. In many of the areas that I choose to travel, the only chargers are the Tesla ones, and back when I bought mine, there were no adapters or options for charging a non-Tesla at a Tesla charger. Surprisingly, even though my car was a pandemic version, I managed to get a not very lemony one. I have had two issues in the 4½ years I've owned it, both of which were minor and repaired for free, and in one instance, resulted in a major upgrade to the headlights of the car. Contrast that with the four issues in 3 years I had with my last gas car, that I had to pay to repair.

I don't at all dispute the "long in the tooth" tech, but there are some features the Tesla has that I use regularly and that I have not been able to find in alternate options. That all said, I'd cheerfully send my car through the shredder if I were in a position to do so. The car is paid off, but as a Federal worker, my future income is in doubt, plus the economy is tanking, so it seems silly to take on a new car loan at this time for a car that still works just fine, and that won't get much in trade-in value. I do worry about things like repairs, parts, and charging after Tesla declares bankruptcy/closes up for good, but I can only hope that charging, at least, gets taken over by a reliable alternate entity. In the meantime, I added paint protection film in case of vandalism, and re-badged my car with something I think some folks here might appreciate:

I find it a bit funny that when I first got the car, I worried about road rage from the right, and now I worry about road rage from the left.

Politics: (Not So) Sweet Karoline

A.B. in Delray Beach, FL, writes: As much as Ku Klux Karoline conveys so much of the bad intent of this administration, it falls short of properly expressing what a blatant and outright liar White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is in her own right. In order to capture the true spirit of deception painted by her press conferences, I think we need to revert back to a true original to properly illustrate the point. For this reason, I hereby submit the name Baghdad Barbie.

---

G.L. in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, writes: Right from almost the first day I've thought of her as Propaganda Barbie.

---

J.D. in Akron, OH, writes: Pravda Barbie

---

J.H. in The Woodlands, TX, writes: Komrade Karoline

---

I.R. in Zurich, Switzerland, writes: Fake-it-or-Leavitt

---

M.C. in Newton, MA, writes: I think Ku Klux Karoline might be a little much, but why not take one of her boss's old nicknames (but with the benefit of alliteration this time) and dub her Lyin' Leavitt?

---

K.B. in Denver, CO, writes: In a tip of the hat to legendary musical genius Brian Wilson (and the Beach Boys, of course), how about "Karoline, No"?

---

P.H. in Jersey City, NJ, writes: Eva Braun

Politics: Comedy

D.E. in Lancaster, PA, writes: This is not the letter I imagined myself writing this week, but it is what it is. Earlier this week, I watched a clip of comedian Bill Maher describing his dinner with Donald Trump.

After viewing, I felt compelled to say that I found his description of the event at best naive and at worst self-aggrandizing and disingenuous.

Let me start off by saying that I used to be a fan of Maher's and that I enjoyed his shows very much. My first disillusionment with Maher came when a friend, a moderate female Republican, related an encounter with Maher in an elevator in a hotel. She described him as short, excessively hairy, oily and with a rank odor about him. I wasn't there so I can only recount her report that he was very, very pushy and, a direct quote here, "He thought he was God's gift to women!" Now, this was the early 2000s, way before #MeToo, and my friend was not one to take particular offense in those areas but still I came away thinking, "Ick."

The next moment of disillusionment came with the release of his film Religilous. As a child, I experienced a pretty traumatic event brought on by strict fundamentalists, so I looked forward to seeing Maher take down religious hypocrites. Instead, on viewing the film, I found that Maher was deferential to those religious figures in positions of power but downright mercilessly cruel those who were not and who seemed to have a deep sincere faith. Since then, Maher has become a very demanding proponent of his atheism and filled with vitriolic contempt for those who do not feel similarly.

Let me just say, if it works for Bill, then more power to him and for all I know he might be right; but I would never dream of imposing what works for how I relate to the universe on others unbidden, nor would I condemn or degrade someone who thought differently. I only draw the line at those who act hypocritically or who seek to impose their views on others. As I said, I have experienced religious intolerance by those who were damn sure they and only they had the supreme knowledge of Right, and the way Maher talks about people who aren't atheists sounds the exact same as the Christian Bible Thumping Fundamentalists. Couple this with his obvious flirtations with Ann Coulter, his friendship with Kid Rock, and his refusal to not smoke pot while interviewing recovering addict Steve-O, and it made me stop watching his show, which became less and less about presenting different viewpoints and more about Maher masturbating in a circle of mirrors while declaring how incredibly clever he was. That said, if that works for him, no skin off my teeth. Still, I was curious to hear about his dinner with Trump.

Before I get to that, I have to lay some more groundwork. First off, as a private citizen, Bill Maher has every right to have dinner with the president. I know for some people on both sides of the political fence there is still an awe for the presidency. Where I start having qualms is when Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) makes a public trip to Mar-a-Lago at a time when so many individuals were going there to bend the knee and kiss his Royal Highness' tush. I'm not saying that I don't want my Democratic leaders to try to find working ground with the Trump White House, but it's a matter of optics and a matter of a private individual vs. a public leader. Maher is a private individual; there are no consequences or appearances of meaningful endorsement by his going. Perhaps Maher sincerely believed that his going to this dinner might do some good, but call me cynical when I say he was probably looking more for the publicity.

It is no secret that I abhor everything about Trump and that I hope I live to see the day when his name is as disgraced as that of Benedict Arnold. In my loathing of this man, I have found myself having read a great deal about him. A story about him that I have run into quite frequently is that Trump is very generous to valets, waitresses, bellboys and maids, often slipping a fifty or hundred dollar bill personally in their hands. I found that hard to square in my mind with the cruel and capricious monster I unfortunately see daily. I am under no delusion that Trump demands complete perfect and abject subservience from those service workers in order to garner that generous tip. To me, at first, it struck me as unusually self reflective and appreciative of Trump to those who work hard for him, when many times the very rich are miserly with their tips. It wasn't until one day I read the first stanza of William Blake's The Human Abstract, that I saw Trump's actions in a different light:

Pity would be no more
If we did not make someone poor;
And Mercy no more could be
If all were as happy as we.

I realized then that given what we have seen of Trump's behavior that the more likely explanation that Trump deploys his generosity to those he sees as beneath him as a way to self-aggrandizement. It's not charity or generosity but rather a way to exert power.

And now, on to Maher's so called "Book Report" about his dinner with Donald Trump. He loses me almost immediately when he deploys a cheap straw-man attack by stating that those who didn't agree with him dining with Trump are just haters, which makes Maher a sane centrist. This got a round of applause, which Maher smugly preened in. Again, let me say that I am fine if Bill Maher wants to have dinner with Trump. I, on the other hand, could not stomach in any way to socialize with a man who revels in cruelty; who puts kids in cages; who falsely imprisons someone due to a clerical error and can't get off his ass to try to make things right; who invited a mob to try to overthrow our government; who is an adjudicated sexual assaulter and convicted felon; who demonizes people who just want to live their lives as honestly as they can; who delights in making other people who he perceives as the enemy suffer; and who thinks that Nazis and White Supremacists are good people too! If Maher can live with that then that's on him, and if my hating the actions that define Trump means I can't be in Maher's super cool clique of sane centrists, then I will most certainly survive the exclusion. If Trump were just some other rich arrogant a**hole, then the most I could muster up for him is just scorn. I know this is a quote from a religious text, and while Maher would certainly hate that fact, the sentiment is still important, that a tree is known by its fruit. Strange and poisonous are Trump's fruits, with blood on the leaves and blood on the roots.

Maher pushes the narrative that Trump is not the crazed madman behind closed doors, that he can smile and laugh at himself. I'll skip the most obvious example and just note that it has been observed by those who knew them that on initial meetings, Charles Manson and Jeffrey Dahmer could be very charming and affable. That doesn't mean I should want to sit down to dinner with them, especially if Dahmer was cooking. As any student of literature and film can tell you, the best villains are the complex ones that don't see themselves as a mustache-twirling bad guy. I have no doubt that Trump views himself as the Hero of his story. I also know that every sociopath can turn on the charm when it suits their needs. What I find naive or disingenuous about Maher's monologue—and remember, in every super hero movie, it's the villains who monologue—is that it does not appear that he has considered that Trump, whose every public move has been transactional, might be trying to get something from Maher. Maher, in his arrogance, assumes that Trump wants to convert him to MAGA world. I hate to break it to Bill, but Trump doesn't give a sh** if you're a MAGA cultist or not. Trump is looking for the PR, the same as Maher. What I find incredible is that Maher finds it so easy to see Trump as a nice guy who is just pretending to be a lunatic, but is not be able to contemplate the possibility that Trump might just be a madman playing nice when it suits him.

The most telling moment for me though is when Maher relates that he told Trump that the people are frightened of him. I take that statement with a grain of salt, because I personally don't think Maher has the stones to actually say that to Trump, but here's the kicker: Maher can remember what he said but not Trump's reply. That's the crux of the matter right there. Maher has delivered his line that lets him play the hero, but can't be bothered to remember the response because what Trump said is unimportant to Maher pronouncing his Words of Wisdom and the applause they bring. No wonder this was such a pleasant dinner for both Trump and Maher, as the two men are more alike than not. Oh, they have their policy differences, but both are egotistical and self-absorbed to the extreme. Both see themselves as the One True Source of All Wisdom and Truth and think that everyone who disagrees is stupid, scummy or insane. The difference is that if Bill Maher wants to delude himself, then that's on him, and him alone. On the other hand, Trump is in a position of power, where every bad impulse and deceitful wiles brings real world pain and suffering to real people. I will suffer Maher's arrogance and deceitful arguments, but I refuse to condone Trump's malevolence and cruelty. It's not about hate, it's about ethics. If that makes me a hater in Maher's eyes, well, I can certainly live with that.

---

K.K. in St. Louis, MO, writes: Regarding your comments on the funniest politicians, you are remiss in not listing Bob Dole.

---

M.D.H. in Coralville, IA, writes: My absolute favorite Ronald Reagan quip was when he was about to have emergency surgery from his gunshot wound, and he asked the doctors whether they were Republicans or Democrats. One of the surgeons had the perfect reply: "Mr. President, today we are all Republicans."

Dwight D. Eisenhower wasn't exactly famous for his humor, but he came up with a great line when a reporter asked him the most important thing Richard Nixon (whom Ike disliked) had done as VP: "If you give me a week, I might think of something."

---

R.H.M. in North Haven, CT, writes: If you are going to cheat and include people who ran for office for entertainment purposes, then you need to give an honorable mention to the late great Pat Paulsen, a regular candidate for President: "I've upped my game. Now up yours!"

---

C.J. in Redondo Beach, CA, writes: Any list of funniest politicians is invalid without Speaker Thomas Bracket Reed. He had numerous laugh-out-loud (for me anyway) humdingers. Speakers aren't often recalled the same way presidents are, but his humor should have kept his memory alive. Tough to pick out my favorite line of his, but I'll think I'll go with the time he was asked if he could potentially be nominated for president by the GOP, "They might do worse... and I think they will."

Also easily could include Congressman Thaddeus Stevens. His insults were legendary. My favorite is: "You must be a bastard, for I knew your mother's husband and he was a gentleman and an honest man!"

All Politics Is Local

S.O.F. in New York City, NY, writes: You keep mentioning Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's history of beating old, white Democrats in primaries in reference to her 2018 run against Joseph Crowley. As someone that lived through that cycle, I think you are missing the dynamics of that race. AOC was all over TV, YouTube, etc., while Crowley didn't even show up. Turnout was really low (29,778 out of 235,745 registered Democrats; less than 12%!). Her performance tracks well with progressive performance since 2016. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), for instance, did really well in poorly attended primary elections, such as caucuses, and got trounced in higher turnout elections.

The other dynamic working against her is the fact that voters essentially lie about wanting a fresh face. In the lead-up to an election, its fashionable to pine for someone young and new and exciting, but a rigorous look a the results coming from the ballot box tends to show everyone really just wants the old, boring incumbent. Contemporary progressives like AOC are working with a really low ceiling. Channeling Theodore and Franklin Delano Roosevelt is not really possible, even in a blue state like New York, for anyone who has ever lovingly used the words "Socialist" and "Latinx" in a sentence. If the New York U.S. Senate primary race is a safe space to review these dynamics, that's fine. But it would be nice to not have to relearn this lesson anymore.

---

K.C. in Los Angeles, CA, writes: I live in the district represented by Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA), and I can tell you that it will be much, much harder than young Jake Rakov thinks to unseat his former boss in a Democratic primary.

Are young Democratic voters ready to burn down the mansion, with all the old, conciliatory members of Congress still squatting inside it? Absolutely. But they fail to recognize that elected officials like Brad Sherman know a thing or two about winning elections. They see an old, rather strange congressman who is neither innovative nor accomplished when it comes to moving the needle in Washington. But his voters see a representative who knows how to get filthy to win an election (just ask former Rep. Howard Berman), and who focuses almost entirely on constituent services, like helping people get their passports renewed at the last minute after they fail to initiate the process with sufficient lead time. Most of the people in Brad Sherman's affluent L.A. district aren't looking to burn down the mansion... what they'd really like is for things to "get back to normal," and even though that's very unlikely to happen, it's even less likely that they'll vote out their longstanding congressman just because they really, really hate Donald Trump.

I'm sure that a few of these attempts to primary longstanding Democrats on Capitol Hill will meet with success, as this is definitely the type of tempestuous political environment where it can happen. Perhaps AOC will actually find enough votes outside of New York City to do to Chuck Schumer what she did to Joe Crowley. But doing it to Crowley was way, way easier, given the demographics of that district versus the demographics of the entire state of New York. As for the attempts to unseat people like Brad Sherman and Nancy Pelosi, we need to pump the brakes until there's evidence that the old-timers have suddenly forgotten how to do the things that win elections.

---

J.D. in Concord, NH, writes: I read your this week's item about the U.S. Senate race in New Hampshire, and I have a few on the ground observations.

First, you listed four reasons why Chris Sununu might have chosen to sit out the race. The reason you forgot was, to me, the most obvious: Donald Trump has become so toxic in New Hampshire, in just the last few months, that Sununu thinks the Republicans will be wiped out up and down the state ballot in 2026. Frankly, I think that is correct; historically, the state can swing big from one party to the other, and we're overdue for a throw-the-bums-out election.

Second, you asserted that Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R) is a shoo-in for reelection if she runs. I'm not too sure that is accurate. After multiple rounds of state employee layoffs, a huge round of budget cuts that could lead to the elimination of entire state departments, a strange fixation directed against "pronouns" and trans children, and creating her very own NH COGE (Committee on Government Efficiency) as one of her very first acts, people here are pretty pissed. There are many strong potential challengers who could beat Ayotte, including Cinde Warmington, a former Executive Councilor, and, interestingly, Jonathan Kiper a previous gubernatorial candidate who owns a local restaurant and showed some real promise during his first campaign.

And yes, the NH COGE is just as obnoxious as you're imagining it to be...

Just for fun I want to add one local note: One of the biggest political debates in New Hampshire right now is whether to eliminate the requirement for all vehicles to get two mandatory annual inspections (safety and emissions). The successful vote in favor of abolition was bipartisan, with libertarian-minded legislators of both parties voting in favor and good-government-type legislators favoring the status quo.

I consider myself to be a good-government Democrat, but I agree with abolishing these required inspections. While these inspections may, very occasionally, catch a genuine mechanical issue, they are both expensive and onerous. Specifically, vehicle repair shops often use these "inspections" as a form of extortion. "Unfortunately, if you don't make these $3,000 in repairs with us right now, we'll fail your car and you wont have transportation... wouldn't that be sad? But don't worry, we can sign you up for a store credit card!" To demonstrate this, 100% of the individuals speaking against the vehicle inspection abolition bill during a recent public hearing represented local repair shops. Gotta love the uniqueness of the Granite State's local issues!

---

B.C. in Halethorpe, MD, writes: I object to use of the word "stole" for Scott Brown's 2010 upset over Martha Coakley following the death of Ted Kennedy.

Yes, you have accurately explained that special elections tend to be wonky and clearly he was knocked off during the first normal general election, such that he's a historical footnote as a Northern Doug Jones. But I still think writing him, or that situation, off is dangerous for a site that takes democracy so seriously:

I'm not from the Bay State, but have many relatives and friends there across the political spectrum. The consensus is that Brown won by hustling to shake as many hands as possible amid the New England winter, compared to Martha Coakley dragging her feet during the biggest race of her career.

Brown ranked high in what we now call "candidate quality." He came off as very centrist and independent-minded but was still unapologetic about being a loyal Republican and against Obamacare. Probably at least a few usual-Democrat voters may have liked the combination.

Martha Coakley may be the more important historical footnote: The last 15 years have taught us that Republicans in red states can afford to phone it in and have closets full of skeletons, and the Republican base almost always turns out and almost always vote straight-ticket. When Democrats take a race for granted, even in Massachusetts, they are risking a forfeiture. Fair or not, that is the present landscape.

The Democrats were filibuster-proof until Kennedy died: they have never been close to it since then. Elections have consequences. Unless the Democrats treat every opponent as a possible 2010 Scott Brown and all their own candidates as a possible Coakley, they will continue to lose to Trump's lackeys without ever understanding why.

---

D.E. in Ashburn, VA, writes: Like (V), I was not impressed with Wiley Nickel's (D) campaign launch ad, as he tries to unseat Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC). Nor with the interview he did on MSNBC shortly after launching. In fact, he evoked in me the same feeling that Terry McAuliffe did when he ran for governor of Virginia. That is, a Democratic candidate so unconvincing that he could lose in an election that should be easy to win. Candidate quality matters on both sides.

---

M.K. in Ewing, NJ, writes: Respectfully, I would never say Minnesota is purple. The last time it went Republican in a presidential election was for Richard Nixon in 1972.

Yes, I can understand that within the state, Republican and Democratic people get elected, but I'm not sure that makes a state purple. I live in New Jersey. Chris Christie was elected two terms as governor, as was Christie Todd Whitman in the 90's. Has New Jersey ever been considered a purple state during this time?

Let's Go to the Movies...

S.S. in Athens, OH, writes: Your discussion of Citizen Kane and the I Love Lucy problem reminds me of the comment a friend once made, that they didn't like Hitchcock films because they were "full of clichés."

---

J.T. in San Bernardino, CA, writes: I would add to your excellent assessment of Citizen Kane's enduring popularity that it inspired a generation of filmmakers who were fascinated not just by its bold subject matter and storytelling decision but by its considerable technical accomplishments.

The "New Hollywood" generation that would change U.S. cinema in the 70s (Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, etc.) were obsessed with the ways that, technically speaking, Citizen Kane (and other Welles films) did things with the camera no other classical Hollywood film was doing. The influence of Welles's virtuoso crane shots, the extremely long duration takes with no cuts, the use of deep focus and staging a scene in layers rather than resorting to traditional editing techniques are palpable in 1970s films. Jaws, for example, is filled with Wellesian shots (the shot on the ferry where the Mayor and the town fathers try to intimidate Chief Brody, for example, is pure Citizen Kane). Long-takes and deep focus are kind of cliché now, but they weren't always.

These technical things, I would argue, are why you still see Kane at or near the top of things like the BFI Sight and Sound Poll. Welles was unappreciated by his own generation, but changed U.S. cinema through the generation that came after him.

---

J.M. in Portland, OR, writes: You put Cary Grant in with Jimmy Stewart and Tom Hanks as actors who can play "everyman" roles. Really? I'm sure you're thinking of the Hitchcock movies but I'm sorry, that man was just too freakin' handsome and way too cool to be considered an everyman.

---

P.L. in St. Louis, MO, writes: My friend and I try to watch a movie every Sunday night, usually something we've not seen before. Recently, we ended up watching Joe Versus the Volcano. I grew up during the evolution of Tom Hanks from comedic actor to dramatic actor, and this is a somewhat-of-an-in-between platypus (1990, so makes sense). The movie's pace is very off-putting, and having Abe Vigoda as the Pacific Islander chief is... interesting. But I really thought Hanks displayed some excellent acting chops (along with Meg Ryan in her THREE roles!)... I forgot he was Tom Hanks right away, which I think is a mark of a serious actor.

---

P.M. in Port Angeles, WA, writes: I have enjoyed Val Kilmer's films, particularly Real Genius and Top Secret. Those early works were both poignant and funny. There is another movie to his credit that I found particularly moving: Thunderheart, and not simply for Graham Greene's character and performance. It dealt with an incident that many want to pretend never happened, both in the past and in the present time of the movie.

...And the Documentaries

B.R. in Berwyn, PA, writes: Really enjoyed your list of must-see documentaries—thoughtful and wide-ranging.

One film I think belongs on it is And the Band Played On (1993). Few films have stayed with me like this one. I was raised in India to believe homosexuality was a sin, and when the AIDS crisis began, I was more indifferent than outraged. The suffering felt distant, abstract—until this film.

What moved me most was the cold, deliberate indifference of the Reagan and Bush administrations—the way they deliberately looked away while an entire community was dying. The scientific turf wars only sharpened the sense of human cost. I watched the film more than once, and over time, what started as discomfort turned into a slow-burning fury. That eventually pushed me to act. I became an LGBTQ+ champion at a Big Four firm—something I never imagined for myself.

I share this because I believe that the best documentaries don't just inform. They transform. This one did exactly that.

---

R.P. in Alexandria, NY, writes: I'm not sure if there were any ground-breaking new innovations in the making of the documentary Unprecedented: The 2000 Presidential Election (2002), but the content, about the theft of the 2000 presidential election in Florida, is devastating. Its impact also might not be as great because of not having been seen as much as the others you mentioned, but the methodical, step-by-step laying-out of the case that the election was rigged is sobering, especially regarding the Supreme Court ruling that shut down the recount in Florida. The narration by Danny Glover and brief analyses by a young Jake Tapper hit home. And finally, the footage of manipulation of results on a touchscreen voting machine is chilling.

---

D.E. in Lancaster, PA, writes: I would like to add a couple more examples to your great list of Documentaries:

The Up series (1964-2019) by Michael Apted, where he filmed 14 British children age 7 and then revisited the same children every 7 years. This longitudinal study is about as succinct depiction of modern life available. Most haunting for me was Neil, who starts out a funny, full-of-life child but who, by the next film, is nervous and withdrawn. He spends his 20's homeless but by his 30's enters politics. Obviously something substantial happened in this person's life, but like people you run into everyday, you never find out what. Equally heartrending is in the later films, you find out one of the kids, and it's not hard to still think of them that way, has died.

Cosmos (1980-81) by Carl Sagan. I have expressed my admiration for this wonderful series before. I still say that no other documentary has encompassed so much and with so much poetry. Sagan not only covers the entire universe, but the history of scientific thought, music and the arts, philosophy, political commentary, poignant biographies of historical scientists all while filling the viewer with a sense of the numinous and the wonder of life.

Baraka (1992) by Ron Fricken, the spiritual follow up of Koyaanisqatsi. It is a visual feast of life on our planet. It's also the film equivalent of word association where you provide the narrative and raise the questions.

My Octopus Teacher (2020), a recent work about a filmmaker who takes up free diving in the chilly waters off of South Africa and becomes fascinated with a young octopus and vice versa. I cried my eyes out watching this one, but beyond the sentimentality, it gives you hope that maybe humanity might just be able to rise to the occasion if we every meet intelligent extraterrestrial life.

---

M.S. in Canton, NY, writes: In your answer about important documentaries, I was surprised that you did not mention any of the work of Frederick Wiseman. I saw High School (1968) way back in the day (well, when I was in high school), and it has stayed with me ever since. Although it unquestionably staked out a very particular point of view on its subject, I thought it did a remarkable job of capturing the day-to-day reality of the American public high school at the time.

---

L.B. in Savannah, GA, writes: I mostly agreed with your list, having seen almost everything on it except Hearts and Minds and Hoop Dreams. I'm definitely going to check those out. But I have to take issue with Super Size Me. Yes, my family stopped eating at McDonalds for a year after we saw it. But since then, I've learned that Morgan Spurlock's medical issues had less to do with eating McDonalds fries than the prodigious amounts of alcohol he was consuming. And then there's that one scene with the overweight teenage girl and her mother, where she tells Jared Fogle that while she'd love to eat healthy food like Subway, she just can't afford it. Spurlock doesn't have much to say about that.

You did leave one outstanding documentary off your list: Chris Rock's Good Hair (2009). A good documentary should expose you to something you didn't know existed, and despite having dated several Black women, I had no idea what was involved in taking care of their hair, or what hair represented in that culture. Aside from that, it's also a very well-made documentary, striking the perfect balance between real-life examples and expert talking heads.

---

P.O. in New York City, NY, writes: Regarding the pick of Super-Size Me—I saw this when it came out and enjoyed it and found it impactful, like many of its viewers. I also liked a lot of Morgan Spurlock's later work (a lot of his TV work, like the Simpsons 20th anniversary special, was very funny). I do think the revelations that have come out since about Spurlock warrant its removal from the list, despite its impact. Much of the premise—that the McDonald's meals were causing ill health for Spurlock—was likely due to his alcoholism at the time. The later revelations about his sexual misconduct don't help either.

---

J.D.M. in Cottonwood Shores, TX, writes: I love that you listed Koyaanisqatsi in your list of top documentaries. It is very high on my list too... like number one, because it is one of a kind! The title is a Hopi word that means "life out of balance." It is 99% images and music and needs no words to beautifully make it's point that industrialization has us living lives out of balance with natural rhythms. And you are spot on with the observation that it is mind-altering all by itself.

---

P.J.T. in Raton, NM, writes: Your list of the top 15 documentaries was well-considered and defensible. I was, however, genuinely surprised by the omission of three unforgettable films that should (in my opinion) certainly have made the cut: Shoah (1985), Joseph Campbell and the Power of Myth (1988) and When We Were Kings (1996).

Although clocking in at a formidable nine hours, Shoah was not only riveting but emotionally shattering—as an old, bearded fellow seldom inclined to weeping, Shoah had me in tears throughout, I was shattered and shaken. For a documentary about the Holocaust, Shoah succeeded in ways most films wouldn't even explore. The Power of Myth, a series of six interviews by Bill Moyers with the eloquent and engaging Joseph Campbell, filmed shortly before the professor's death and beautifully illustrated, provided a startlingly even-handed survey of the world's sacred narratives ("myths"), exploring universal existential themes through a variations on a theme framework. No film has done so much to undercut religious prejudice. When We Were Kings, which provided not only the fight itself, but the cultural context of the "Rumble in the Jungle" (Muhammad Ali vs. George Foreman) is a study in the heroism of an unlikely outcome. It is painful to watch "the Greatest" being pummeled in round after round, and astonishing that it ended so abruptly, when Ali's unlikely rope-a-dope strategy bore its fruit.

---

T.J.R. in Metuchen, NJ, writes: How could you not include Harlan County, USA (1976), Gimme Shelter (1970) and Woodstock (1970)? I'd also have to add The Witness (2015), about the Kitty Genovese murder. As revelatory and scarring a piece of work as I have ever seen.

---

J.T. in San Bernardino, CA, writes: I think readers of the site who want to understand U.S. politics and history through documentary film should also add Harlan County, USA to their list.

In telling the story of the 1973 Brookside miner's strike, it offers a pretty good look into the last gasps of labor consciousness and solidarity in the United States, while also casting serious doubt on the idea of the United States as the "land of the free." When I screen the film in classes, students are also routinely shocked at the level of abject poverty in Appalachia during this time, which they invariably compare to the "third world." I haven't taught it in a class for several years but I feel like it would open up some pretty interesting conversations about the contemporary politics of Appalachia.

Not for nothing, while Katherine Bigelow was the first woman to win the Oscar for Best Director, with Harlan County, Barbara Kopple was the first woman to win an Oscar for directing a film.

---

R.P.E.H. in London, England, United Kingdom, writes: I'd like to add three British documentary series to your list: (1) The World at War (1973-74), an epic, 26-part series about World War II, from causes to consequences; (2) The Ascent of Man (1973), very roughly, the story of human society's advancement from a scientific viewpoint and (3) Civilisation (1969), very roughly, the story of human society's advancement from an artistic viewpoint.

All of these are showing their age, but then, they are all over 50 years old. In particular, The World at War makes almost no mention of cryptography, because the important details were still tightly classified when the series was made.

The latter two series were commissioned by David Attenborough when he was controller of BBC 2. The fact he is still making superb documentaries like Planet Earth 40-50 years later is one of the reasons he's often nominated as the Greatest Living Briton.

Gallimaufry

T.B. in Leon County, FL, writes: You wrote: "One time, (Z) departed at 3:00 p.m. for a game at Dodger Stadium (around 7 miles away). He made it with about 30 seconds to spare before the first pitch was thrown at 7:05 p.m." Ever think that walking is faster than driving? Even I can walk 3 miles an hour.

(V) & (Z) respond: Dodger Stadium is at the top of a hill, and is quite difficult to reach on foot. (Z) once walked to the stadium from Union Station (about a mile away, as the crow flies), and it took close to an hour. Given that they often charge $50 for parking, that might just be by design. Plus, you do have to get home afterwards.

---

J.D. in Greensboro, NC, writes: When I was a kid, one of our favorite treats was cinnamon toast, which was basically toast with butter and either brown or white sugar generously heaped on said toast with a little sprinkling of cinnamon. I can still remember the mouth feel of it. Truly decadent.

So, chocolate sprinkles on bread? Pikers!

Final Words

E.O. in Santa Ana, CA, writes: The last words of actor Maurice Barrymore are eerily appropriate, even if he meant them in a different way that would apply right now: "Our trade falls heavily upon these feeble folk."

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

---

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

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

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger