topical.day

Maybe The American Experiment Isn’t Dead Yet

Having live-tweeted yesterday’s CNBC interview with Elizabeth Warren, Donald Trump decided it was his turn for the guest chair this morning. The president appeared on Squawk Box, during which he reasserted his fever dream belief that the jobs numbers were “rigged” and outlined why he believes banks were discriminating against him. There were not enough tiny violins in the background to do it justice. And if you didn’t feel bad enough for our beleaguered president, he gave you a bit more to sob over: He said he probably won’t run for president again, even though he’d like to (though is not allowed to). Happy Tuesday.

The North Portico of the White House is seen at sunrise (Photo by Oliver Contreras/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Toward Darkness or Dawn

by William Kristol

I have been, and I think will always be, a John McCain guy. And as regular readers of this newsletter know, I’ve always been particularly fond of one of McCain’s favorite quips, characteristically wry and witty, if a bit distressing: “It’s always darkest . . . before it turns pitch black.”

But I have also been, and I suppose will always be, something of a traditionalist. If you’re a traditionalist, you have to respect something that’s been alive and well for an awful long time. The proverb that McCain’s playing off of goes back all the way to 1650, to the prolific English clergyman Thomas Fuller, who wrote, “It is always darkest just before the day dawneth.”

So who’s right, the stoic senator or the Christian cleric?

Who knows? But, in a way, the Trump presidency is putting this question to the test.

The answer partially depends on what we all do. If you want to join a community of people dedicated to being the kinds of citizens our country needs, become a Bulwark+ member.

On the one hand, the first couple hundred days of this presidency have featured truly striking and dramatic advances by the forces of authoritarianism. The dangers to our free political institutions are clear, present, and increasing in strength. The situation is grim. One fears that “American exceptionalism” will culminate in an exceptional demonstration of a nation frittering away the privileges of freedom in as feckless a way as possible.

On the other hand, while authoritarianism is winning right now, and night is more visible on the horizon than dawn—there are countervailing forces.

Perhaps the most hopeful is that it’s clear the Trump presidency is unpopular, and is becoming more so. Several recent polls show Donald Trump with a job approval rating among the American people down around 40 percent. A new poll released yesterday by UMass Amherst has Trump at 38 percent approval, 58 percent disapproval—down from 44 percent approval, 53 percent disapproval three months ago.

What’s more, Trump’s weakest issues seem likely to be among the topics that remain front and center for voters, at least for the foreseeable future. He is at 18 percent approval, 70 percent disapproval on his handling of the Epstein matter. He’s also at 31 percent approval, 63 percent disapproval, on the issue of tariffs and on that of inflation—our old friend from the Biden presidency which may well bedevil Trump, too.

So a month of August in which Epstein stays in the news and in which that inflation doesn’t recede shouldn’t be good for Trump.

Speaking of August, the August congressional recess doesn’t seem to be off to an auspicious start for Trump and his supporters. Take a look at the clips of yesterday’s town hall in Lincoln, Nebraska, held by Republican Rep. Mike Flood. The forum was packed, tumultuous, and hostile to the Republican incumbent. Rep. Flood ended up telling his constituents that he disapproved of President Trump’s firing of the chief of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and assuring them that he would certainly vote to release the Epstein files in September, when Congress returns. Even then, they weren’t pleased.

So September could be a little more problematic on the Hill for Trump than were the first six months of his presidency. And that’s taking place right as a government shutdown comes into focus.

Meanwhile, a couple Republican congressmen from swing districts in California and New York are at least pretending to oppose the mid-decade redistricting and gerrymandering occurring at Trump’s behest in Texas. They’re worried about what the Democratic governors and state legislators in their states might do in response. Perhaps Democrats’ increased willingness to fight is having some effect. And it’s also worth noting that Democrats, for all their disarray and damage to their “brand,” are a few points ahead in recent polling on the generic congressional ballot.

Make no mistake: In the race between those working to damage our republic and those trying to resist, the damagers are in the lead. But the resisters are rallying a bit. Not yet enough, to be sure. But perhaps they’re on a trajectory that will ultimately vindicate Thomas Fuller—and that would make John McCain proud.

Share

AROUND THE BULWARK

Quick Hits

BROWN, BUT NOT OUT: Readers of yesterday’s Morning Shots will recall that longtime Republican strategist Mike Murphy suggested that Kentucky’s popular Democratic governor, Andy Beshear, forgo a presidential run and instead contest the Senate seat being vacated by Mitch McConnell. In a year that’s expected to be good for Democrats, the right kind of candidate could, Murphy argued, win even a deeply red state.

Well, another former statewide-election-winning Ohio-valley Democrat was apparently thinking the same thing. Sherrod Brown, who represented Ohio in the Senate from 2007 to earlier this year, is interviewing campaign managers ahead of a race to reclaim his old seat, according to Axios. (Technically, it wouldn’t be his old seat—that one is held by Sen. Bernie Moreno. It would be the one vacated by Vice President JD Vance and currently held by Jon Husted. Details, details.)

On the one hand, Brown is exactly the type of candidate Murphy was talking about: A little old-fashioned, completely untarnished by coastal “woke,” and straight, white, and male.

On the other hand, Brown is exactly the kind of candidate the Democrats say they’re trying to move away from—i.e., he’s old. He won his first political race in 1974 and his first statewide race in 1982. He’s 72 and the very definition of a career politician. Then again, this is an increasingly red Ohio and none of this will likely (LIKELY!) matter.

ANYTHING YOU CAN DO, I CAN DO BETTER: Texas Republicans last week began following Donald Trump’s request to begin a rare, off-cycle redistricting process in an attempt to limit Republican losses in next year’s midterms. Now, California Democrats are responding in tit-for-tat fashion.

Politico reports:

Democrats in the House and the state Legislature are coalescing around a plan to draw a half-dozen Republican incumbents into oblivion—and persuade California voters to approve the new congressional maps before next year’s midterms. Party leaders are closely tracking the dual-track developments in which lawmakers in Texas and California are moving, in partisan parallel, to shore up their respective party’s House majorities.

California, unlike Texas, uses an independent commission to draw its district maps, so lawmakers in Sacramento would have to undo that reform before redrawing the lines themselves. The political salience of that move depends on how Democrats pitch it:

A survey conducted by Newsom pollster David Binder found that 52 percent of California voters would approve of state lawmakers redrawing its congressional district lines if Texas Republicans pulled off a similar gambit.

The measure becomes more popular if the fight becomes more overtly partisan; 60 percent of voters back “rejecting Trump’s power grab.” Roughly eight in 10 Democrats and six in 10 independents are in favor of the effort . . .

Could it be that the mutually assured redistricting results in a slight Democratic advantage when all is said and done? Errr… probably not. We presume that if California moves forward that a few other Republican states (Missouri, maybe Florida) will follow. Politics at its finest.

F*** YOU, TAKE MY MONEY: For seven years, Elon Musk and Tesla have been trudging through a lawsuit brought by shareholders seeking to block the car maker’s board of directors from awarding Musk a $56 billion bonus, the largest in American history. In February 2024, the judge in the case blocked the bonus, ruling that the board that awarded it was excessively subservient to Musk and that the gargantuan amount defied any business logic. She reaffirmed that ruling in December.

Well, the current board certainly isn’t deterred. The Financial Times reports:

Tesla’s board has approved the award of 96mn shares worth about $30bn to Elon Musk . . . “Retaining Elon is more important than ever before,” the company said in a letter to shareholders. “We are confident that this award will incentivise Elon to remain at Tesla . . . energising and focusing [him] to propel Tesla into its next era of growth”.

Since the December ruling, Tesla stock is down more than 13 percent. In the first quarter of this year, sales were down 9 percent compared to the previous year. In the second quarter, they were down 16 percent.

Would that we all could earn such bonuses for such performance.

Share

Cheap Shots

Read More Stories