If you didn’t spend your Friday night watching Serena Williams at the Open, you erred.
Nice to have an emotional event that united.
****
If you want to help support my work on Wide World News, you can become voluntary contributor or voluntary paid subscriber now.
Either options works.
Choose the one that fits your lifestyle!
To become a contributor, you can kick in using one of the following methods:
* Buy me a cocktail (at K Street prices….), tax and server tip included, by clicking here.
* Buy me a cup of coffee (or a week’s worth) by clicking here.
* Check. Send a simple email to markhalperintalk@gmail.com and ask where you can send a check.
• PayPal. markhalperinnyc@gmail.com
• Venmo. Mark-Halperin-4 (telephone number ends in x3226)
• Zelle. markhalperinnyc@gmail.com
To become a voluntary paying subscriber at fixed rates, click here:
Wide World of News has no ads, sponsors, investors, staff, or corporate backers.
The only support is from readers like you!!!!
Thank you.
****
In the two days since President Biden’s Philadelphia speech, I’ve been struck by the asymmetry in reactions from the Bluelands and Redlands, including from pundits, politicians, and Wide World of News readers.
The Blue reaction to the address has been muted or pro forma.
The Red reaction has been decidedly more intense and vehement.
The denizens of the Redlands are outraged, indignant, and fired up over Joe Biden’s words, with a white hot/Red hot furor that has rarely been on display in such a concentrated manner since Mr. Biden took office.
To choose just one example:
I’ve got readers spanning the political spectrum from whom I hear frequently – and what has stood out since Thursday night is the offended and affronted reaction many have expressed from the right.
This despite, as the New York Times points out, we are talking about a group whose tender mercies now on display have ignored a lot of shoe-on-the-other-foot moments since 2015:
The Republicans’ reaction to Mr. Biden’s speech was remarkable. For years, they stood quietly by as Mr. Trump vilified and demonized anyone who disagreed with him — encouraging supporters to beat up protesters; demanding that his rivals be arrested; accusing critics of treason and even murder; calling opponents “fascists”; and retweeting a supporter saying “the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat.” But they rose up as one on Thursday night and Friday to complain that Mr. Biden was the one being divisive.
If I had to guess, right now, based on the instincts and experience I have built up from covering America for several decades, I would say that Biden speech will be a net plus in the midterms for the Republicans. And it sure as heck won’t help the president or the Democrats in terms of governing.
Tonight’s Trump speech at a rally in Pennsylvania now takes on deeper meaning. If Joe Biden’s predecessor gives remarks similar to what he did a few weeks ago, focusing on the future, on the Biden record, and on the issues on which Republicans are stronger with independent voters than the Democrats are (all issues that also fire up the Red base), the apparent errors embedded in the Biden speech will be magnified. (That’s a big if; Trump could ad lib and mess the whole thing up for himself, his party, and, in a separate way, the nation.)
The great challenge of our time remains how the country, led by our current president, can bring back into the American Community those Trump supporters (including elected officials) who can be made to acknowledge in their heads and hearts what has actually happened in the last seven years – and then through their changed behavior and words repudiate those words and actions of Donald Trump that are inconsistent with truth, justice, and the American way.
Much of the indictment presented by Joe Biden on Thursday was both true and important, of course. Again, per the New York Times:
When it comes to democracy in America, there is no real equivalence, of course. The elder Mr. Trump sought to use the power of his office to overturn a democratic election, pressuring state and local officials, the Justice Department, members of Congress and his own vice president to disregard the will of the people to keep him in office. When that did not work, he riled up a crowd that stormed the Capitol, disrupting the counting of Electoral College votes and threatening to execute those standing in Mr. Trump’s way.
But the overall impact of the way Mr. Biden framed and delivered his speech had, painfully and ironically, the exact opposite effect that was needed when it comes to bringing this large group of our American citizens back into the fold, to pull them away from the dark centrifugal force of Trumpism and Trump.
If Mr. Biden’s goal was simply to rev up “his” voters for the midterms, even there my gut is he fell short, in the sense that his words are revving up the other side more.
It’s one thing for the Wall Street Journal ed board and Henry Olsen to see the peril in all this, but read the wise words of the left-of-center-but-not-blind-or-deaf Washington Post ed board:
The difficult, perhaps insurmountable, challenge that Mr. Biden confronted — just eight weeks before midterm elections that will determine the future course of his presidency — was how to convey the message of defending democracy in a way that summons patriotism rather than partisanship. Here, as much as we agree with the president about the urgency of the issue, is where he fell short, too often sounding more like a Democrat than a democrat. You don’t persuade people by scolding or demeaning them, but that’s how the president’s speech landed for many conservatives of goodwill.
Mr. Biden was wrong to conflate upholding the rule of law with his own partisan agenda, which he called “the work of democracy.” You can be for democracy but against the president’s policy proposals to use government to lower prescription-drug prices and combat climate change. “MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards, backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love,” Mr. Biden proclaimed. But many conservatives — not just “MAGA forces” — agree with the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. It was disappointing that Mr. Biden chose to omit that the infrastructure, gun-control and burn-pits legislation he praised had passed with Republican votes. Pointing this out would actually have strengthened his effort to draw a contrast between “MAGA Republicans” and “mainstream Republicans.”
Maybe I’m wrong, but what if Joe Biden had said something more like this:
****
My fellow Americans,
As many have noticed, I somehow have turned into an elderly gentlemen. I have gotten to this place through fifty years plus of service. The people have put me here. They could have thrown me out at several instances along the way, but so far they haven’t.
My first race, against Cal Boggs was close. He was favored to win, but I beat him. 3,162 votes separated us. Cal and his supporters may have felt cheated, and I’m sure they checked with the Delaware Secretary of State to see that everything was on the up and up. But the system held, and here I am.
My most recent race, against Donald Trump, was also close. Close enough that in the passions of our time, many of you were convinced I lost, your man won, and that you were cheated out of a country to be made over in his vision – and yours.
These feelings, sincerely held by millions of American, brought our country to January 6th, and the attack on the Congress, there to certify my election. What a nightmare for you to lose what you so wanted and thought you had. What a nightmare for the country that we are still in such hot dispute over that election.
We all are living the same nightmare.
A nightmare made worse by the reality that many of my fellow Democrats have after several other recent presidential elections disputed the results of Republican victories, undermining the very core value that inspired me to give this speech.
It is this I am here to address tonight. How can I do this? We are time-traveled back to the nightmare of 1860. What can this old Democrat say, satisfying in any way to both sides in this shared nightmare?
I thought about Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican. He emancipated the slaves, and led the nation in our great civil war. But he was no liberal. He was deeply a conservative, with values no different than the greatest conservative leaders of today. He was all for preservation at all costs. Nothing is more conservative than that.
The years leading up to the war were complicated. All efforts were taken to avoid war. Lincoln personally thought slavery evil, but was never an abolitionist. He used them to win elections, sympathetic to their view of slavery as evil, but not sympathetic to their wanting to overthrow it everywhere. Years before the famous Lincoln Douglas debates for the presidency, he ran against Douglas for the Senate in Illinois, in a race then not decided by the people, but by the state legislature. He gave a speech in Peoria, attacking the Douglas position supporting and enabling the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. It was the contentious issue of its day, and passions ran high. Here is the preamble to the speech:
The repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and the propriety of its restoration, constitute the subject of what I am about to say.
As I desire to present my own connected view of this subject, my remarks will not be, specifically, an answer to Judge Douglas; yet, as I proceed, the main points he has presented will arise, and will receive such respectful attention as I may be able to give them.
I wish further to say, that I do not propose to question the patriotism, or to assail the motives of any man, or class of men; but rather to strictly confine myself to the naked merits of the question.
I also wish to be no less than National in all the positions I may take; and whenever I take ground which others have thought, or may think, narrow, sectional, and dangerous to the Union, I hope to give a reason, which will appear sufficient, at least to some, why I think differently.
And, as this subject is no other, than part and parcel of the larger general question of domestic slavery, I wish to MAKE and to KEEP the distinction between the EXISTING institution, and the EXTENSION of it, so broad, and so clear, that no honest man can misunderstand me, and no dishonest one, successfully misrepresent me.”
I take the full spirit of Lincoln’s preamble to heart here.
My subject tonight is the split between those who feel I stole the election and those who feel I won the election.
I do not question the patriotism of those of you who voted for Mr. Trump. I do not question the motives of those of you who invaded the Capitol and attempted to end the certification of the election. I do condemn the violence, however.
Furthermore, I cannot claim to know the heart and mind of Mr. Trump. I cannot judge his motives. I can only judge his action in insisting he won and I lost.
He claimed powerfully, insistently, and by all means available to him that the election was rigged and stolen.
None of his close supporters on his White House staff believed this. His Attorney General, with full access to the resources of the Department of Justice and FB,I did not believe this.
The courts of the land, including numerous judges he nominated, did not believe this.
To the extent I have facts to present to you, those are the facts as I see them.
In saying what follows from those facts, I will be speaking truth to power. For you, the American people, regardless of whom you voted for in 2020, are the power in this country. I serve you, I do not rule over you. It is not easy to speak truth to power. There are consequences, and not always happy ones. But as you are the rulers, I owe you the truth insofar as I see it.
1. The processes of Constitutional law we have in this country to settle our differences have been very carefully followed in the matter of who won the last election.
2. If the processes of our Constitution had been rebuked, and the events of January 6th had succeeded in continuing Mr. Trump in power, the Constitution would have been rendered null and void.
3. In that case, Mr. Trump would not have just continued to govern the United States of America, picking up where he had left off at the end of his term. The United States would have been ended, and we would have had to reconstitute a new nation, with a new order somehow to be decided.
4. To be blunt, had the events of January 6 succeeded, we would have been in a real Civil War.
There is no middle ground available to us in this matter. We either accept the results of elections through our judicial and administrative processes, or we undertake the task of revolution through war.
To continue my honesty, I believe many of you do wish a revolution. And do so sincerely. You do not like at all the current governance of the country. You are upset with our Southern border and lax immigration policies in general. You are upset with the persistent liberalization of the culture, especially with its political correctness, its gender politics, and your feeling of being hectored day and night over your private thoughts and feelings about people who may be different from yourself and who may genuinely offend you.
I actually understand how you feel. We are a nation with too many people who are too inclined to lecture too many of us on how we should feel and behave. And worse, we have many politicians of both parties who too ready use these feelings as leverage for their own political ends. I can understand for many of us the sense that hey, enough is enough already.
With all of that said, here is what I deeply believe, and would not compromise my own north star of judgement on:
All people should be treated equally under the law.
All people qualified should be encouraged and allowed to vote. We must stop gaming the system, both by the gerrymander and by voter restriction laws. I should never have used the phrase “Jim Crow on steroids.” That was hyperbole for political gain, factually wrong, and divisive in the very way a president should never be.
The votes of the people must determine outcomes, not the judgments of election officials or state legislatures.
There should be no violence in our streets, no matter how passionate the cause. Too often, my party – and I – have remained silent in the last seven years when there has been destruction of property and life by those on the left.
We must secure our Southern border. I say this unconditionally. And I acknowledge my administration’s failure on that front so far.
Congress should pass a Federal law securing the right to privacy, including reasonable abortion access, in a manner that respects the views of the tens of millions of Americans who, like me, are uncomfortable, to say the least, with the realities of abortion.
As to all the rest, I am happy to have a full give and take, to see what we can work out.
Of my policies so far:
Domestically:
1. Rebuilding our infrastructure and fighting climate change is a huge step forward. I think the Republicans who voted for the former and I will continue to seek more bipartisan support for the latter.
2. Covid, both in supply chain disruption and the Federal spending to forestall its impact has been more inflationary than I anticipated. And the restrictions imposed by the Federal government and many states to deal with the pandemic have far too often been far too burdensome. Dr. Fauci, a dedicated public servant and great guy, has far too often said things imprecisely and far too often been in the limelight. I get why that bothers a lot of folks.
3. I support the Federal Reserve’s attempts subdue even at the risk of recession. It will likely take some time for this to happen. I am committed to no unnecessary spending, and to all other measures to reduce inflation and the deficit.
Internationally:
1. In hindsight, for sure I could have done much better in removing us from Afghanistan, but even accepting as my responsibilities the terrible consequences of my haste, I am certain it was the right decision to get our forces out of there, however poorly executed.
2. Our efforts in stopping Putin have been central not only to thwarting Russia, but in establishing some common sense in China regarding Taiwan and their too aggressive posture in general. Having the nation behind me here has been most gratifying and important.
One more thing.
The spending by my party to help candidates supportive of the Trump agenda win Republican primaries this year – spending happening right now in New Hampshire – has been tactically brilliant, misguided, and evil. Democrats should not have done that and I should have denounced it publicly, and privately, as the leader of my party, demanded it stop. History will not look kindly on this tactic. I apologize to all of you for letting that occur.
Well, my fellow Americans, that is my piece.
In closing, let me just say this one more time:
The country must choose between remaining a constitutional democracy under the current Constitution by stopping our ongoing fight over who won the last election, or face Civil War.
This is not my choice to make. It is yours.
I hope I’ve made it clear which side I am on.
I’m on the side of ALL of the American people who believe in our core values, including those who voted for Donald Trump in 2020.
May God bless the United States of America, and may God protect our troops.
****
ESSENTIAL READING
The continuing tensions, in various pair combos, between Donald Trump, Peter Thiel, Mitch McConnell, and Rick Scott, are going from epic to potentially determinative regarding Senate control.
Even if I turned all of Wide World of News over to chronicling these battles I could not do the topic justice.
But I will do my best going forward.
* The New York Times on Mitch Agonistes.
* The Associated Press on Donald Trump visiting the Land of Oz.