A New Hat For America

By Jim McCraw

While it is maddening to know that President-elect Biden couldn’t get a really good start on 2021 between President Trump’s recalcitrance and COVID-19, there will eventually be a Biden administration, and it will be in trouble up to its hips from Day One.

Herewith, a suggestion for Biden/Harris I believe is important, and eminently doable. As Congress fights over both short- and long-term follow-up bills to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES), which ends the day after Christmas, I think it might be time for something as ambitious (though relatively easy, considering the big funding levels already proposed) and quick to do as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), circa 1933. Let’s call the new one the American Reconstruction Corps (ARC).

Lord knows there are plenty of skilled and unskilled people out of work. And there are plenty of American infrastructure projects, largely ignored by the previous administration, that need doing.

Biden is not FDR, and we do not have a modern Robert Moses, the mid-20^th Century “master builder” of New York, Long Island, Rochester and Westchester counties (it’s certainly not Donald J. Trump).

We are not Frank Lloyd Wright, the Ford Motor Company Whiz Kids, nor the first seven astronauts. We are just Americans who recognize a need to get a lot of things done by a mass of people willing to work. There has got to be a way to do this.

With widespread distribution of COVID-19 vaccines likely coming with warmer weather next summer, why couldn’t we dispatch squadrons of out-of-work Americans to do road, tunnel and bridge repairs that have been waiting years for funding and final approvals? And not just men, which is how the original CCC operated. Skilled and unskilled women need work, too. At, say, $20 per hour.

Why not send platoons of the willing into every one of the national parks to do repairs and cleaning?

While the original CCC troops had uniforms, meals and housing, I humbly suggest self-provided work clothing, bring-your-own meals, work near home, and ARC baseball caps in red, white and blue.

There will be periodic need for FEMA supplies and equipment after summer storms, so why not divert some FEMA funding, vehicles and materiel to help Americans fix the things that are already broken?

Yes, men and women working and sweating in close quarters for eight-hour days may be problematic from a health standpoint, but with masks, distancing and frequent washing and spraying, I think it could work. Let’s get some guys from Amazon, Apple, AT&T, Ford, Google and Tesla to volunteer, put them in a room and see if they can figure this out while Biden and Harris get on with the rest of the recovery.

—–

Culture Wars Go to College

By Todd Lassa

A bit like an NCAA football rivalry, the Culture Wars have stumbled onto the battlefield of the college and university alumni of presidential candidates’ staff and cabinet. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., fired an early shot as the former vice president began announcing his choices to staff the White House. Rubio expressed concern about people who received degrees from Ivy League schools, presumably in an effort to appeal to the Trump wing, as one of Trump’s biggest demographic constituencies consisted of non-college educated white males.*

Then the Biden transition team launched a trial balloon, or canary in the Senate coalmine if you will with Neera Tanden, the president of the Center for American Progress, nominated to become director of the Office of Management and Budget. Tanden was a longtime confidant of Hillary Clinton tipped to potentially be her chief of staff, background that has drawn some opposition from supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who believe she helped torpedo his 2016 Democratic nomination bid. When Trump won instead, she took to Twitter with the “#Resistance” hashtag. Since Biden announced his intention to nominate her, she has deleted more than 1,000 tweets from over the last four years, according to the New York Post.

Her tweets’ alleged nastiness has drawn the ire of Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham and Texas Sen. John Cornyn, both Republicans, though one might presume that as far as Rubio is concerned, she won’t be among the “polite & orderly caretakers” of the nation’s decline.

What’s more, Tanden has a law degree from Yale.

The other intended cabinet are mostly ivy leaguers. They include Ron Klain (chief of staff; Georgetown University and Harvard Law), Janet Yellen (Treasury; Pembroke College of Brown University and Yale), Antony Blinken (State; Harvard and Columbia), John Kerry (special envoy for climate; Yale, though he had “low grades”), Alejandro Mayorkas (Homeland Security; University of California-Berkeley and Loyola Law), Linda Thomas-Greenfield (United Nations ambassador; Louisiana State and University of Wisconsin-Madison, a “public ivy”) and Jake Sullivan (national security advisor; Yale). [Hat tip to Wikipedia and New York magazine’s Intelligencer.]

Biden will be the first non-Ivy grad to take the White House since Ronald Reagan in 1980 and ’84. He attended the University of Delaware and Syracuse University for law. Trump is an Ivy League grad with an economics degree from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Reagan? Eureka College. According to Lou Cannon writing in a piece for the UVA Miller Center (https://millercenter.org/president/reagan/life-before-the-presidency) “He majored in economics but was an indifferent student, graduating with a "C" average in 1932.”

Sounds like Rubio’s kind of guy.

*It should be noted that Rubio (along with Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson) is considered a lead Republican candidate for president in 2024, assuming the party remains centered on its Trump populist wing and that no members of the outgoing president’s family—Don Jr., Eric, Ivanka, and son-in-law Jared Kushner—announce they’re running (which could explain the rumored pre-emptive pardons). To say nothing of Trump himself announcing another run in ’24 (which could also explain the rumored self-pardon).

Please address comments to editors@thehustings.news

—–

Can Biden Work with The Squad and Centrist Republicans?

By Todd Lassa

As moderates and traditionalists continue to wrestle the Republican Party from the hands of President Trump and his most faithful populist followers, the Democratic Party is mirroring its cross-aisle rivals with a similar struggle. President-elect Joe Biden and his transition team, though hobbled by Trump’s aversion to conceding the election, are working hard to take the middle road and avoid concessions to The Squad led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., as well as voters who would rather have voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., as the Democratic Party’s nominee.

Democrats this election season have been uncharacteristically low-key compared with the GOP about infighting between centrists and their respective hardline wings. Biden’s record 79-million-plus votes Nov. 3 certainly includes both an unknown number of centrist Republicans who never would have voted for Sanders, or for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), for that matter, as well as young Democrats who would have preferred Sanders.

But the 2020 “Blue Wave” never happened. Biden must govern from the White House with Republicans increasing their minority in the House of Representatives by at least six seats and with Senate leadership depending on Georgia’s special January runoff elections for both of its seats. Democratic candidates must win both runoffs for a 50-50 count in the Senate, with Vice President-elect Kamala Harris to serve as the tie-breaker. Even if that long-shot happens, Biden will face a recalcitrant Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who infamously vowed 12 years ago to make Barack Obama a one-term president and will undoubtedly lead his fellow Republican senators in key filibusters.

Already, Capitol Hills pundits are talking about how Biden will have to rule by executive order, where he can, to reverse some of the policies that Trump is rushing to implement in his waning time as president, including efforts to begin the final process of leasing parts of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil companies.

The future of the fossil fuel industry and potential for alternatives to gain prominence is central to both sides, of course, including traditional pro-business Republicans and Democrats like Ocasio-Cortez, who with Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., unveiled the Green New Deal shortly after she took office in early 2019.

At presstime, President-elect Biden’s cabinet picks were beginning to emerge and they are largely considered centrists. Anthony Blinken will be nominated for secretary of state according to Bloomberg, Linda Greenfield-Thomas will be tapped for United Nations ambassador and Jake Sullivan, former aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, will be national security advisor. The Biden transition team already has confirmed that longtime advisor Ron Klain will be the 46^th president’s chief of staff.

Please address comments to editors@thehustings.news

—–

Whither the Democrats? The Answer Doesn’t Matter

By Stephen Macaulay

The question of what does the Democratic Party do now is a rather premature one, I think, as Trump has yet (as of this writing) to admit that he didn’t win another landslide.

But let’s face it: Pundits have to write about something political because we like to think that nature abhors a vacuum of pithy observations.

The question is one that breaks down this way: Who runs the show? It would seem that the obvious answer to that is Joe Biden, based on his proclamation during the first debate with Trump: “I am the Democratic Party right now.” A centrist. An institutionalist. A regular Joe.

But then there is the counter to that, one that has it that the more progressive wing of the Party ought to take flight and lead efforts to create what they presume is a more equitable society, not one that gives, as the slogan has it with surprising accuracy, “tax breaks to the rich.”

This would include the likes of Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist, and the members of The Squad—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.) —who aren’t going to take any guff from anyone. Biden, presumably, included.

That there was no “Blue Wave” is generally attributed to the idea that “Defund the Police” and the word socialism played so broadly in the campaign runup.

What I find to be rather remarkable is that for presumably being the party of smart, pointy-headed people (or so it is widely presumed in many places across the country, both rural and otherwise), a party where there are top-notch marketers and professorial linguists, the Democrats surely do a—dare I say?—crappy job when it comes to language. (Trump has used more extreme language, so I am hopeful this passes muster at The Hustings.)

Consider “Defund the Police.” That is a scary thought for many urbanites and suburbanites, especially the latter, who are afraid that there are going to be marauders coming into their cul de sacs.

The term is the audible version of “bad optics.”

Why isn’t there some clever Democrat who comes up with an explanation that people might be able to understand? Like the Nathan Fillion TV show “Castle”, where a mystery writer partners with an NYPD detective and manages to solve cases. In the case of “Defund the Police,” it could be on calls where there are undoubtedly mental health issues, joining the police might be a mental health professional. The funding is shifted.

Seem like a stupid example? Maybe. But it is something that regular people can understand. Regardless of party affiliation. (“Hey, Dot, did you hear they’re pulling a ‘Castle’ at the police department? Now they’re getting somewhere.”)

As for the socialist* charge: Let’s face it, there are a whole lot of Boomers who might fondly remember their days in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s when they knew of people in the SDS but who have now 401Ks that they’re concerned with and the notion of wealth distribution is something that is now anathema to them. Given that there are Democrats who openly self-define as socialist, this is going to be a tough one to shift.

But here’s the thing: none of this may matter. If McConnell maintains control of the Senate, there is going to be very little happening that isn’t caused by executive order.

After all, as Biden might say (though in English): l'état c'est moi.

*One of the missed opportunities that the Democrats had was to brand Trump a “Stalinist.” Seriously. Stalin created a cult of personality. Check. Stalin wanted to concentrate power within the state, including the separation from other countries. Check.Stalin called those who weren’t with him “enemies of the people.” Check. Stalin purged high-ranking officials who didn’t hew to his line. Check. And there are several more examples. This is not to say that the real Donald Trump is a murderous thug who was responsible for the deaths of millions as Stalin was (although when history is written, there are going to be numbers of deaths from COVID-19 that will be ascribed to Trump’s behavior). It is to say that in a world that seems to be defined by unreality (“The election was rigged!”), simple labels can have consequences.

—–

Still No Concession from Trump

By Nic Woods

Some important members of the Trump administration – including Donald J. Trump himself – are in denial over last week’s election result and so America must suffer the consequences of rejecting four more years of him.

In just one 24-hour post-election news cycle the week after former Vice President Biden was declared winner:

• News organizations had to cover not one, but two, press conferences where ranking administration officials acted like an election never happened, much less that their boss lost.

• Attorney General William Barr handed to Justice department prosecutors the authority to investigate claims of voter fraud.

• Emily Murphy, head of the General Services Administration, refused to sign papers to release to Biden $6.3 million of $10 million set aside for his transition because it’s unclear to her who had won.

•Federal agencies have been told to proceed with Trump’s fiscal 2022 budget.

•Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper and demoted Federal Energy Regulatory Committee Chairman Neil Chatterjee in a spree of administration figures deemed not sufficiently loyal.

•Installed Mike Ellis as general counsel to the National Security Agency, making him more difficult to fire (except Trump may not remember issuing an executive order that would, in fact, make him easier to fire).

There are many more examples that seem like random individual meltdowns, but they all matter – they are as complex a power play the Trump administration can muster in its three-pronged strategy, along with fighting math in the courts and working up the base with baseless claims of voter fraud.

This strategy – using the war on election math to hinder Biden’s transition as much as bureaucratically possible – is what is left if the other two don’t work and it offers valuable insight into the administration and what they really think of their opponent, Joe Biden.

About this time four years ago. Chris Christie, then the governor of New Jersey and a late-to-the-bandwagon Trump supporter, volunteered for the thankless task of heading the transition team of the newly elected Donald J. Trump.

It was an offer Trump initially rejected because, according to Michael Lewis, author of “The Fifth Risk,” which talks about the missed opportunities of Trump’s own transition, “why did anyone need to plan anything before he actually became president?”

Well, Christie said, it was required.

The Presidential Transition Act, which Congress first passed in 1963 and has been amended four times -- as recently as 2019 – to “recognize the increasing complexities of presidential transitions” was passed to ease and promote the orderly transfer of power because “any disruption occasioned by the transfer of executive power could produce results detrimental to the safety and well-being of the United States and its people.”

The act has key national security implications as well that involve background checks for the high-level members of the new administration so they could be done by the inauguration. The president-elect, under the act, is required to be given a classified summary as soon as possible after the election on national security threats, covert military operations and pending decisions on possible uses of military force.

So yes, the transition is a big deal and while Trump didn’t know that four years ago, he knows it enough now to try to impede Biden’s administration by pretending there remains some way the courts can shake out a few votes that Joe Biden will just give up and leave. And, if Biden’s stubborn enough to stay, well, he’ll be behind the eight-ball, won’t get anything accomplished and half the country will be against him.

But Biden isn’t some outsider who doesn’t know how Washington works. He’s spent 36 years in the Senate and ran for president one time more than Trump has. He has connections, including Trump’s predecessor, many of whom are experts in their field.

Unlike Trump four years ago, Biden knows the act and what he should be getting from it. Biden will listen to the experts, though they are being purged from the Trump administration at a rapid rate.

Joe Biden also has the resources and knowledge base to still have a functional government and a peaceful transfer of power the third week of January, regardless of what Trump does.

Please address your comments to editors@thehustings.news

—–

Why Just Two?

By Stephen Macaulay

A friend of mine said to me yesterday that he’d cast his ballot some weeks earlier. He said, “I didn’t vote for either of those two. As the father of a daughter I couldn’t vote for Trump. As the owner of a small business I couldn’t vote for Biden.”

He voted for Jo Jorgensen, Libertarian candidate for president. Not that he had any illusion that she would win. He just wanted to participate in our democracy.

He told me that this is the second presidential cycle he’s done that.

Mind you he is a well-educated owner of a profitable, family-owned business. Twenty years ago he might have been a Democrat. Now that he is in his 50s, I would have guessed Republican.

His position isn’t exactly “a pox on both of your houses.”

It is more of “I can’t see how either of these people is going to help me.”

As we wait for the results, there is undoubted feeling of rancor among both sides.

Many Trump supporters undoubtedly think that Biden supporters are a bunch of latte-sipping snowflakes who don’t understand the meaning of the word freedom.

And on the Biden side they’re seeing a gang of overweight patrons of outlet malls.

Neither is correct.

Both sides are Americans. Both sides are participating in the electoral process. Both sides think their guy is the right one for the country.

One side is going to be pissed when the last ballot has been counted. Or the last lawsuit settled.

If one wins with the majority of the popular vote but loses the Electoral College, there will be an outcry to abolish that mechanism. Undoubtedly there will be some action.

But is that enough?

Why is it that people like Jo Jorgensen don’t have a snowball’s chance?

Why is it that there are just two parties that seem to matter?

Maybe instead of just going for direct voting there should be more adjustments made to the system as it exists.

Perhaps we should take a page from the British system, which has campaigns running for four weeks. People and parties that are less well-funded than the Republicans and Democrats would not be at the huge disadvantage that they are now. While some would say that the wealthy candidate would just pour it on for those 30 or so days, let’s look at it this way: If you have a glass that you fill with water, at some point it is full and no matter how much more you put in it there won’t be more. Arguably the same could be said for political ads.

You won’t be happy today.

I won’t be happy today.

But do you know who won’t be unhappy?

My friend who voted Libertarian.

Macaulay is The Hustings’ pundit-at-large.

—–

In the Opera of Presidential Elections, No Need for Third Parties

By Bryan Williams

It has been eight days since the election and it appears most of the media and country have accepted that Joseph Robinette Biden will be our 46th president. However, Arizona and a few other states are still counting, and recounts are inevitable either by law or by the Trump campaign’s request. The plump lady hasn’t sung yet, if you ask me. There was no political violence after the election as feared, and the nearly 72 million Americans who voted for President Trump peacefully heard the results and have so far doggedly remained steadfast with a glimmer of hope that Trump will win.

And yet, I sympathize with the center column writer. In 2016 I was dubious of both candidates Clinton and Trump and voted for a third party. Even I, a grizzled Republican vet, bought into the media narrative that Trump would be a disaster as president, so I made a protest vote. I was a bit scared of what Trump meant for our country’s future, but the past four years has been a surprise. Like many, I don’t care for the president’s more acidic behaviors, but for the most part the Trump presidency has been just fine for America and has not led to her ruin. I feel like America won’t be ruined either if or when Biden is certified as the winner, and not just because it looks as if the GOP will keep the Senate. I have more faith than that in the American people and believe one-party rule would be our own worst enemy – just look at California.

Elections, even those not held during an unprecedented global pandemic and with nearly universal mail-in balloting, take time. Give the poll workers time. Give the lawyers some time. Give the judges some time. We live in an age that is ever more used to instantaneous results and gratification. We have to get this election right, and as Sen. Mitch McConnell said, President Trump is well within his rights to challenge everything he legally can.

So let’s wait to hear the singing from the plump lady, shall we? Remember whatever the outcome, we all appeal to the better angels of our nature and act as responsible, dignified American voters. We will get up the next day and go to work and love and care for our children. And we will hope. Hope the best for America no matter who is elected president. I won’t be unhappy either. But I am willing to wait for that singing.

Williams is a mental health professional and former Republican party official in California.

-30-

Conservatism Will Always Find a Place in America

By Andrew Boyd

For any of you that have read my previous missives, first, God bless you; second, you’ll know I’m a big fan of metaphors. So, when my esteemed editor emailed me requesting a column themed ‘Ragnarök’ I was gleeful, recognizing immediately what an apt framework it provided to discuss the phenomenon that is Trump and today’s body politic.

To my way of thinking, Trump was the inevitable, final and desperate gambit by a plurality of Americans who believed, right or wrong, that their economic futures were being sacrificed by preening, global elites in the name of a cause unknown, probably greed. The folks in flyover country were tired of being talked down to and dismissed by the establishment writ large, and so they crowned the beast, the vulgarian, the fire-breathing monster and said, “burn it all down.”

Four years later, they’ve returned to the ballot box with, notably, a more racially, politically and socially diverse coalition of voters to say the job is not yet done. And they’re bolstered by an increasingly unhinged left that can’t imagine theirs is not the only right and righteous idea for how to run a society. And while conservatives may yet lose the presidency, I think the broader election outcomes speak to a war that has just begun. You’re already beginning to hear from more centrists Democrats the notion that perhaps their party has lost the plot, that maybe the working assumption, that nearly half your fellow Americans are racist, homophobic, xenophobic trolls, isn’t a very strong foundation on which to build a sustainable political movement.

Perhaps, instead, it’s possible, just possible, that conservatives are people, too, with a different but still important and viable point of view; people who simple can’t accept the operative premise of the radical left that America is the America of the 1619 Project, the America of unbridled institutional racism. Or that caring, compassionate citizens can still struggle with the idea of a federal government takeover of healthcare, or federally funded abortions up to the moment of birth. Maybe they are rightly distrustful of an unaccountable bureaucracy and unbridled state power, and that terrible, awful, no good idea that words are violence and where that inevitably leads.

Conservatism, after all, is not a place it’s a people; and if the land we love no longer wants us, then we’ll make a new land in which to live free and accountable to one another as sovereign and precious souls. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but only time will tell.

Blessings to all.

Boyd is a public relations and communications professional with 30-years experience. He lives with his wife and three daughters in Charlotte, N.C.

—–

Coal, Jobs & Cronies

By Stephen Macaulay

In 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump was barnstorming with a message about coal.

“Clean coal,” he called it. Which, as is sometimes said, “isn’t a thing,” but we will let that go.

Trump would proclaim: “We’re going to get those miners back to work . . . the miners of West Virginia and Pennsylvania . . . Ohio and all over are going to start to work again, believe me.”

“We’re going to have an amazing mining business.”

They believed him. Trump won West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. And how did those miners do? According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in November 2016 there were 50,400 people employed in the U.S. coal industry.

How did he do? How many of those people did he get back to “an amazing mining business?”

In September 2020, the number of people involved in the coal-mining industry is 44,500.

Note that this is not a COVID-19 phenomenon. Coal jobs have been on a decline throughout the Trump presidency. What’s more, in October 2019, Murray Energy, the “country’s largest privately held coal miner” filed for Chapter 11 in October 2019, according to NS Energy, which covers the coal industry among other energy-related subjects. It became “the eighth U.S. coal producer to file for bankruptcy in the past year.”

NS Energy noted that company owner Bob Murray “has long advocated for government support for his industry and was a strong critic of the country’s former president Barack Obama, whose time in office he described as ‘eight years of pure hell.’”

“The coal tycoon has long been a supporter of President Donald Trump, and is believed to have played a major role in the reshaping of environmental policies over the past three years… .”

One might change the verb in that statement to “dismantling.”

Still, that did not seem to work out so well. According to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, renewables, which it defines as “utility-scale solar, wind and hydropower,” is increasingly important. “Renewables have now generated more electricity than coal on 131 days in 2020 — more than three times the 2019 results and with some 80 days left in the year.”

IEEFA concludes, “the data show coal power’s economic viability continuing to shrink … .”

Working people need to take his claims about coal into account when he talks about the jobs he has created and will create. Trump undoubtedly created more wealth for his cronies than for the stalwart men and women who once worked the mines can ever imagine.

—–

Coal Miners are the Blue Collar Superdelegates that Still Support Trump

By Bryan Williams

How many years have we been hearing about “green jobs” that will employ blue-collar workers in obsolete smokestack industries, and how they will transform the American economy while curing the climate “emergency”?

Every election cycle, politicians say they will help foster more green jobs, which usually involves spending billions. This time, it’s $2 trillion if Democratic candidate Joe Biden gets to implement his plan. Four years ago, Hillary Clinton even went so far as to promise she would “destroy” the coal industry and then help the miners find training or new employment.

How did she expect this to play out in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and other blue-collar job states, such as Michigan and Wisconsin? She practically handed that to Donald J. Trump, who shrewdly swooped in to rescue the coal miners.

There were about 90,000 coal miners in the US, according to The Guardian (U.K.), and about half that – about 45,000 – currently.

Why all the hubbub over so few workers? I think it comes down to this – coal miners are superdelegates for all blue-collar workers.

Since I started paying attention to politics in the early 2000s, I have heard politicians of all stripes make claims that we must transition our economy and provide training for workers in obsolete blue-collar jobs. Twenty years later, what have we got?

I’m sure there are success stories of coal miners who have transitioned to green jobs. But for nearly a generation, politicians have told these workers, “I have a plan for you. It will take away your job. There might be some money to retrain you and then you might get a new job after.” That rings pretty hollow and is disingenuous.

Along comes populist Trump in the 2016 presidential race, promising to save blue-collar jobs and revitalize American manufacturing. Since his inauguration he has done quite a few things that many other presidents and elected officials have not.

Has he been successful? Not in the case of the coal industry. The market has helped kill coal, but so have government policies. I have a cousin who used to work at a coal plant here in California. The company had invested millions in clean coal technology to burn the fuel with minimal pollutants. The plant’s officials tried for years to get Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and then Gov. Jerry Brown to take a tour and see how their stringent environmental policies weren’t necessary. Neither governor would even send a representative, and my cousin finally moved to Texas to find work. How many coal miner families can relocate? The political abandonment was felt – my cousin felt it deeply as well, I’m sure, by coal miners and their families in Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

Trump may not have been successful in bringing back those obsolete jobs, but what’s more important, I think, to those coal miners is they finally feel like someone powerful has their back.

They will vote for him again.

—–

Incumbent Trump is Set to Pull Out a Second Upset

By Bryan Williams

Predictions can be a wily business. Some tout that they have never been wrong since Dewey vs. Truman (and go on to be right), and some make grandiose claims and flame out. Others stick to a version of, “It’s the economy, stupid,” and base their prediction off what Wall Street investors think/say/invest in. Here is my first ever presidential prediction: Donald Trump will eke out a slim win (again) and get four more years. Here’s why:

Since 1952, political “outsiders” or candidates who are younger than their opponent have had advantage in key races. World War II general and war hero Dwight D. Eisenhower had far less political experience than Democrat Adlai Stevenson, yet beat him by a landslide, twice. Reagan had less political experience than Mondale, Clinton had less experience and was younger than Bush 41 while Bush 43 had less experience than either Gore or Kerry, and Obama had way less experience than McCain and is younger than Romney. Trump had no formal political experience and beat Clinton, and often compares his 45 or so months in the Oval Office to Biden’s 47 years Inside the Beltway.

Advantage, Trump.

Enthusiasm level: Who’s excited about Joe Biden? His supporters’ excitement appears to be, he’s “not Trump.” Will this equate to black and Latino voters turning out in big numbers for Biden? I am dubious. Trump voter’s enthusiasm level is also higher than Biden’s, according to David Sirota in the left-leaning online magazine Jacobin, citing a September Fox News poll that gives the president an 11-point margin in this category. Advantage: Trump.

Vote shaming: This is the common occurrence of people feeling their support of a candidate is shamed by popular opinion, as fueled by news and social media platforms. It’s safe to say that there are a lot of people afraid to admit they plan to vote for Trump. Many of those who like Trump will let their voices be heard at the ballot box. These are the voters Richard Nixon called “the silent majority.” Advantage: Trump.

While Trump had an obvious and clear electoral college victory by midnight Eastern time – 9 p.m. my time four years ago – pundits this year are predicting there will be no clear winner before Nov. 4, and perhaps not until much later. This is where the “Two Vs,” Valencia County, New Mexico, and Vigo County, Indiana, will come in handy. As small-population rural counties, their numbers should be counted not long after the polls close on Nov. 3. Vigo County has chosen the president all but twice since 1888, and Valencia County has been perfect since 1952. Keep your eye on Valencia and Vigo. I predict they will lead the nation to four more years for Trump.

But it’s gonna be close, folks.

—–

To Lead or Not to Lead: Do We Need a Mask Mandate to Fight the Pandemic?

By Todd Lassa

Until either Donald J. Trump or Joe Biden pulls a political rabbit with bigger teeth out of his hat, this election season’s October Surprise, so far, has been news that the president contracted the virus that causes COVID-19 around the time of the first, and probably only, debate between the incumbent and his Democratic challenger.

Yes, it’s always about the economy, stupid, but as the Trump administration shifts on efforts to enact another federal aid package for corporations, individuals, and state and local governments in time for the Nov. 3 election, the future of our economy, especially over the next year or two, remains closely tied to the global health crisis.

A second economic relief package appears to be in limbo, for now, as Senate Judiciary Committee hearings over the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the US Supreme Court takes political precedent over whatever the status of negotiations between Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Amid it all, wearing masks in public and the question of how and when to re-open the economy to save what’s left of the restaurant, tavern, airline, and shopping mall industries remain the two related, underlying issues behind next month’s elections. These issues drill to the core of our nation’s much-discussed widened political gulf. Each side sees the other’s position on these issues as evidence of ruthless authoritarianism.

But while our pundits to left and right appear irresolvably far apart, and while this center column strives to be as objective on such matters as possible, it is a relief that Stephen Macaulay and Bryan Williams see eye-to-eye on one important fact – wearing masks in public should not be a political issue. They agree that It is good citizenship and an important weapon in fighting the pandemic.

Please email your comments to editors@thehustings.news

—–

It’s Not the Masks We Reject; It’s the Mandate

By Bryan Williams

Joe Biden is running on a promise to America that he would protect us better from COVID-19 than Trump and his team. He has even gone so far as to say he would implement a national mask mandate. If the past 7 months has shown us anything it’s that Americans really don’t like being told what to do. But we’ve known that forever anyway - I mean a bunch of dudes threw perfectly good tea into Boston Harbor in the 1700s because they didn’t like King George telling them what to do.

We can go back and forth all day, split hairs over when a travel ban from China was put in place until we’re blue in the face, or whether or not President Trump wearing a mask would have made a big difference in the number of deaths related to COVID-19. I have never really given much credence to any of the above, and just go with what I know from my little corner of the world, and yes, I know this is anecdotal.

At the height of the pandemic, I worked in a mental health crisis clinic. We had no employer-provided masks for weeks and the layout of our building made it so social distancing was simply not possible. We also had no limit to the number of people we could admit. Patients we admitted were anyone from anywhere, most of them users of substances that inhaled, ingested, or intravenously injected those illicit substances with other people most assuredly in distances less than 6 feet, and many of them homeless. No one at my clinic in March through May 2020 contracted COVID-19 (my last day there was in May).

Then, in June, my family and I visited my parents (in their 60s) and grandparents (83 and 82) in Northern Nevada. All of us have used our common sense during the pandemic: we’ve worn masks everywhere we go, we socially distance ourselves as much as possible, and we limit our contact with others. Not a single one of us has contracted the coronavirus, and I think it’s because of my family’s common sense, prudence, and overall good health (we don’t smoke, vape or drink alcohol in excess, and we’re not morbidly obese).

What’s my point? I don’t think political leadership has a lot to do with whether or not people begin wearing masks or socially distance themselves more. Now I now work in a hospital, and I am around doctors all day. I cannot begin to tell you how many of them “wear” their mask with their nose still protruding in naked glory. These are men and women that should know better! Joe Biden mandating mask wearing won’t make these doctors pull their mask up over their nose. That old American chestnut -- personal responsibility -- still holds. Please wear a mask, and don’t party, okay? I just don’t want Joe Biden to tell me what to do. Donald J. Trump gets that.

Williams is a mental health professional in California and a former Republican party official.

Please email your comments to editors@thehustings.news

—–

Pundits on the Left Are Split on the Need for Another Debate

Liberal pundits’ comments …

Record numbers of early voters have already placed ballots. Minds are not being changed. Heels are dug. Further debate evenings are fodder for more reality TV: people have had enough of supporting the networks in the last four years. Advertising stands to lose the most by canceling all debates going forward. Late-to-work election teams are all focused on ballot education, and bracing voters for a probable drawn out result season -- an entirely new version of reality TV.

--Michelle Naranjo

If the Commission on Presidential Debates cancelled the remaining two presidential debates, the majority of Americans would not be phased out and it would do nothing to change the Nov. 3 result. America is a country in crisis right now and most voters are focused on one thing: surviving the crisis. Not just the public health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, but also the crisis surrounding racial justice that is facing the millions of members of the Black community, the climate change crisis that’s facing the planet and is currently causing disaster-level weather events around the nation, and the economic crisis facing the millions of unemployed Americans that are struggling to pay rent and are facing eviction. Donald J. Trump and Mike Pence showed us everything we needed to see in the first two debates. They offered no substantive or meaningful answers to any of the questions, no specific plans or proposals for addressing these crises, constant lies and misinformation, a refusal to condemn white supremacy, and a refusal to show any serious remorse, or take any personal accountability or ownership, for the administration’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unless Donald Trump intends to correct these blunders and outright failures in a future debate, they aren’t worth being had.

--Chase Wheaton

Do we need another debate? That very question presupposes that we had one. We didn’t. What we did was have an embarrassing spectacle of the President of the United States behaving like a petulant, churlish, loud individual and his opponent, a former Vice President of the United States trying to talk over the President and calling him a “clown.” Neither individual would make it out of a high school debate without being removed. Biden was ready to do it again, virtually. Trump wanted no part of it. A claim is that Biden would be “fed” the answers. If you look at the transcripts of the last “debate” you’d see that Trump needed an answer. Or many. His answers were logorrheic covfefe. Trump said he believes that the moderator would cut him off. And that would be bad, why? Forget the side show. It can do nothing but further make people—the world over—shake their head in sad disbelief that this is what the presidency has come to.

--Stephen Macaulay

Please address comments to editors@thehustings.news

——

Our Pundits Debate Whether There Should be Another Presidential Debate

The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) has officially called off the Oct. 15 debate between Donald J. Trump and Democratic candidate Joe Biden, originally set to take place in Miami. After Trump was diagnosed with the coronavirus, spent last weekend at Walter Reed Medical Center and then declared his victory over COVID-19 from the Truman Balcony of the White House, the CPD said it would hold a virtual debate in place of the live event. The president declined, claiming the former vice president and U.S. senator would take answer prompts off-camera, from where such action could not be detected.

The Biden campaign accepted the CPD’s change, but Trump announced he instead would hold one of his famous public rallies in Miami.

With the CPD’s full cancelation of the Oct. 15 debate, that leaves the possibility Trump and Biden will meet for only a second time, after their Sept. 30 debate, on Oct. 22 in Nashville, Tennessee – if at all. Meanwhile, the president spoke to a crowd of supporters Saturday from a stand on the South Lawn of the White House.

The supporters wore masks, by and large, NPR reports, but generally were not socially distancing. “I know you were praying,” Trump said of his weekend at Walter Reed, “and I was watching down on all those people.”

Before the CPD’s cancelation of the Oct. 15 debate, The Hustings asked editors and contributing pundits for their opinions on whether two more debates were necessary, considering public reaction to the presidential shout-fest already in the books, and the vice-presidential debate Oct. 7 that appears to have not advanced understanding of either the Trump/Pence or the Biden/Harris platforms.

From the center, The Hustings Deputy Editor Nic Woods says “I wish they’d do one more just so we can gauge an average of the two performances.” She doesn’t expect the president’s performance would be any different than in the first debate, she says, and “a performance improvement would involve intense preparation that’s literally dangerous at the moment he should be in quarantine.”

Contributing Editor Charles Dervarics agrees. “Call me old school, but I think debates are still useful. To the general public that may tune in and out of a presidential campaign, they offer a rare chance to see (relatively) unfiltered candidates responding to questions they did not see in advance.

“The main problem right now is the format, specifically the single moderator. Having questioners outnumber the two candidates might be a start. Then allow follow-ups so reporters can press their case to those who deliberately ignore a question. Shutting off the mic once candidates go 10 seconds too long might be good, too.”

Please address your comments to editors@thehustings.news

—–