More stories

  • in

    There’s rage at this Roe v Wade mess – and those on the left who didn’t see it coming | Emma Brockes

    There’s rage at this Roe v Wade mess – and those on the left who didn’t see it comingEmma BrockesFrom anti-Hillary Democrats to Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who clung on at Supreme Court, unlikely targets are being identified for blame After the initial shock, the blame. On Monday, when news broke of the leaked US supreme court draft opinion overturning Roe v Wade, millions of horrified Americans sought emotional release. “I am angry,” said Elizabeth Warren, voice shaking, leading a pack of reporters straight over a flowerbed outside the supreme court. Her face ignited with rage as she reminded them that 69% of Americans are against overturning the abortion legislation. “The Republicans have been working towards this day for decades,” she said. In the background, a man shouted, “You want to dismember children in the womb!”For many of us, that man – the you-want-to-kill-babies guy – and his ilk were not the first target for righteous abuse. It’s hard, in moments of duress, to get much satisfaction from reiterating an existing and long-held revulsion, particularly when its subject is beyond reasonable reach. When considering the rightwing architects of this moment, there was no “what if” in attendance; all the what ifs belonged to the left. Political purists who in 2016 urged Democrats to avoid voting for Hillary Clinton (hi, Susan Sarandon) were the first in line, and social media echoed to the sound of, “We told you this would happen.”Biden condemns efforts of extremist ‘Maga crowd’ to overturn Roe v Wade abortion protections – as it happenedRead moreSacrificing the good in pursuit of the better and winding up with the absolute worst – a dynamic as familiar to British as to American leftwing politics – was, in this moment of horror, a more enraging consideration than flat hatred of the right. From revived outrage at the Bernie bros, it was a quick descent into rage against various champions of the left. “You know who I blame for this?” said a friend. “Ruth Bader Ginsburg.” The late supreme court justice’s vanity in hanging on to her seat, her overconfidence that Clinton would win, her refusal to listen to warnings from the Obama White House that, should the unthinkable happen and the Republicans regain the presidency, the first casualty would be Roe v Wade – her fundamental enjoyment, one assumed, of being RBG when she could have ceded her seat to an Obama appointee – twisted us up into pretzels. I love Ginsburg, so all this had about it the extra and extremely female zing of self-harm.Oh, and Clinton wasn’t off the hook either. “If she’d bothered to campaign in Michigan,” said another friend sourly, “none of this would’ve happened.” All the terrible, bad-tempered fights of that election flew back up into the air, like a water column after a bomb. The only Republican who came in for similar ire was that idiot Susan Collins, senator from Maine, a supporter of abortion rights who had nonetheless voted in line with her party to confirm both Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the supreme court. Both had assured her, she said at the time, that they wouldn’t go after Roe v Wade. Shocked! Shocked, she was, this week to discover these were not men of their word.Of course, all this fury was mere displacement for the fundamental truth that rightwing forces were smarter, more organised, disciplined and talented in prosecuting a digestible narrative – “don’t kill babies” – than the fractured and dissembling left. Progressives tried to rally towards concrete solutions. There were things to be done – in the first instance, register to vote. (After less than a year of citizenship, I hadn’t. This weekend, I will). There was the call for fundraising. Celebrities started throwing around $10,000 matching donations to anyone giving to local abortion funds.And both Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders, as well as senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer, hyped the necessity of codifying Roe v Wade in Congress, a move backed by President Biden that would enshrine the right to abortion in federal law irrespective of actions taken by the supreme court. It sounds good, and has the advantage of generating political action. But it is also a long shot, a case of last-resort measures, and too little too late. Earlier this year, Democrats tried to codify Roe, and while it passed the House it failed in the Senate, overcome by a filibuster. (Then “we must end the filibuster”, tweeted Sanders. None of this can happen quickly, if at all.)The fact is that if, as Warren said, the Republicans had been planning this moment for decades, rigging composition of the supreme court with precisely this endgame in mind, there was, irrespective of the scale of public outrage, no immediate way to turn back. In this first week of shock, before anger might become effectively organised, there was only the tiny compensation of the blame spiral.
    Emma Brockes is a Guardian columnist
    TopicsRoe v WadeOpinionAbortionElizabeth WarrenUS politicsUS supreme courtLaw (US)WomencommentReuse this content More

  • in

    I warned national guard of possible coup, Trump defense secretary says

    I warned national guard of possible coup, Trump defense secretary saysMark Esper writes in new memoir of how worried he was that Trump would try to use US military to hold on to power A week before election day 2020, the US secretary of defense was so worried that Donald Trump would seek to involve the military in the election in an attempt to hold on to power, he told the general commanding the US national guard to notify him of any communication from anyone at all at the White House.Trump called top aides including Pence ‘losers’ as 2020 protests raged, book saysRead more“Without being too explicit,” Mark Esper writes in a new memoir, “my message was clear: the US military was not going to get involved in the election, no matter who directed it. I would intercede.”Such an intercession, Esper writes, would involve trying to persuade Trump not to use the military to hold on to power, then if necessary Esper would resign, appeal to Republicans in Congress and hold a press conference to appeal to the American people directly.Esper thought Trump might order actions such as seizing ballot boxes in key states. Ultimately, Trump did not attempt to use the military to influence the election, which he lost to Joe Biden. He did seek to overturn the result by other means.Esper was fired by Trump on 9 November 2020, six days after the election.He details the extraordinary steps he felt compelled to take before that in a new book, A Sacred Oath: Memoirs of a Defense Secretary in Extraordinary Times, which will be published next week. The Guardian obtained a copy.Esper devotes considerable space to his work with Gen Mark Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, to stymie Trump’s attempts to use the military for political purposes, either in military strikes against Iran or in Syria – or even Mexico – or at home, by invoking the Insurrection Act against protesters for racial justice.Trump’s request that such protesters be shot in the legs, and Esper’s account of his resistance to it, has been reported elsewhere. The protests died down but Esper says the two most senior Pentagon figures remained concerned Trump could seek to use the military domestically, to tilt power his way.Esper describes a meeting at the Pentagon with Milley and the national guard chief, Gen Daniel Hokanson, on 30 October, “the last Friday before the election”.The “ostensible purpose of the meeting”, Esper says, given it was visible to anyone who could see his calendar, was an update on national guard military police units placed on alert to placate Trump during the protests for racial justice.But with regard to the election, Esper says, “this was a serious moment”.He says he told Gen Hokanson: “If at any point in the coming days – before, during or after the election – you get a call from anyone at the White House, take it, acknowledge the message, and call me immediately. The same rule applies if you hear of any TAGS [national guard state adjutant generals] or governors getting a similar call.”Esper says he also asked Hokanson “to figure out a discreet way to get this last part out, which he said he would”.Esper writes that as the only civilian between the president and the military, he was concerned the White House might “try to circumvent me to do something inappropriate” and “wanted to be ready for anything”.“The whole point of my game plan – the reason that I had taken so much crap over the last several months – was to be in this position, at this moment, to act. The essence of democracy was free and fair elections, followed by the peaceful transition of power.”Milley, he writes, told him he and the other joint chiefs would “resign if pressed to break their oath” and involve the military in the election. Esper says he did not want to allow the generals “to be put in such a compromising position, especially if a presidential order was legal but grossly wrong or inappropriate.“… If such an order came from the White House, my immediate recourse would be to demand a meeting with the president. I would want to hear and understand the directive straight from him, to offer alternative solutions if such were possible, and to voice my opposition face-to-face if he was unyielding. If I was unsuccessful I would be forced to resign on the spot in protest. But that wouldn’t be the end of the line for me.”Esper writes that he would have called senior Republicans on Capitol Hill to ask them to intercede with Trump, then staged a press conference “where I informed the country about all that had transpired and continued to unfold.Trump the hero for anti-abortion movement after bending supreme court his wayRead more“I would present my best case and make an appeal to the American people, their elected leaders in Congress, and the institutions of government to intervene. The point would be to buy time and put pressure on the president to stand down.”As Esper writes, election day, 3 November, “came and went without any incident involving the armed forces. Thank God.” He says he was relieved that though the contest was not called until the following weekend, Biden’s lead was clear.Esper also says he “never imagined” what came next: Trump’s attempt to overturn the election through lies about electoral fraud and coordination with Republicans in Congress and other rightwing groups and advisers, culminating on 6 January 2021 in the storming of the US Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.The attack on the Capitol has been linked to seven deaths and has led to more than 800 charges. But it failed to stop certification of Biden’s win. Having been fired after the election, Esper watched the attack on TV.TopicsBooksDonald TrumpUS militaryUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Is Biden willing to go against the supreme court to save Roe v Wade? Politics Weekly America – podcast

    According to a draft majority opinion published by Politico this week, the US supreme court has voted to overturn Roe v Wade in the clearest sign yet that the constitutional right to abortion will probably be taken away from millions of Americans very soon.
    This week, Jonathan Freedland speaks to Moira Donegan about what it will take to stop the majority conservative bench, whether Democrats are willing to pull rank, and if they don’t, whether it is even accurate to call the US the land of the free

    How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know

    To enter our prize draw, Worthy Winners, nominate someone who you think deserves to win one of 10 pairs of tickets to this year’s Glastonbury festival. Entrants and nominees must be 18 and UK residents. Listen to Thursday’s episode of Today in Focus on abortion rights Sign up to First Edition for free at theguardian.com/firstedition Send your questions and feedback to [email protected] Help support the Guardian by going to gu.com/supportpodcasts More

  • in

    Trump called top aides including Pence ‘losers’ as 2020 protests raged, book says

    Trump called top aides including Pence ‘losers’ as 2020 protests raged, book saysMemoir from ex-defense chief Mark Esper details extraordinary outburst in Oval Office in which president seethed at advisers In the heated summer of 2020, thwarted in his desire for a violent crackdown on protesters for racial justice, Donald Trump raged that senior advisers including his vice-president, Mike Pence, were “losers”.Trump’s second defense secretary, Mark Esper, details the extraordinary Oval Office outburst in a new book. A Sacred Oath: Memoirs of a Defense Secretary in Extraordinary Times, will be published next week. The Guardian obtained a copy.Trump the hero for anti-abortion movement after bending supreme court his wayRead moreEsper’s account of an extraordinary presidential question in the same meeting – “Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something” – has already been reported.But the former defense secretary’s full account of the meeting, which happened as Washington and other US cities were convulsed by protests inspired by the police murder of George Floyd in late May 2020, is equally remarkable.Esper’s account of Gen Mark Milley’s attempts to explain to Trump the role of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff echoes others, including by the reporter Michael Bender in a book published last year and by William Barr, Trump’s second attorney general, who was present.Like Barr in his own memoir, the former secretary of defense does not stint when describing what he says Trump said when he was told Milley had no command authority over active duty or national guard forces the president wanted to deploy against protesters.“‘You are losers!’ the president railed. ‘You are all fucking losers!’“This wasn’t the first time I had heard him use this language, but not with this much anger, and never directed at people in a room with him, let alone toward Barr, Milley and me.”Esper expands on Barr’s account of what the then-attorney general called a “tantrum”, saying Pence was also a target.“He repeated the foul insults again, this time directing his venom at the vice-president as well, who sat quietly, stone-faced, in the chair at the far end of the semi-circle closest to the Rose Garden. I never saw him yell at the vice-president before, so this really caught my attention.”Pence was a loyal vice-president to Trump until 6 January 2021, the day of the deadly Capitol riot, when he refused to attempt to block certification of Joe Biden’s election victory. Like Trump, Pence is now eyeing a run for the presidency in 2024.Esper also writes that “Trump shouted, ‘None of you have any backbone to stand up to the violence,’ and suggested we were fine with people ‘burning down our cities’.”The former defense secretary then details the question about whether protesters could be shot.Esper, who presents himself throughout his book as one of a group of aides who resisted the wilder impulses of Trump and his acolytes, says Trump did not order the shooting of protesters but was instead “waiting, it seemed, for one of us to yield and simply agree”.That, Esper writes, “wasn’t going to happen”.TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsRepublicansMike PencenewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Schumer announces Senate abortion rights vote: ‘America will be watching’ – as it happened

    US politics liveUS politicsSchumer announces Senate abortion rights vote: ‘America will be watching’ – as it happened
    Measure has next to no chance of passing in divided chamber
    Biden names Karine Jean-Pierre new White House press secretary
    Supreme court justice Alito bails on senior judges’ conference
    ‘Do something’: Democrats struggle to rise to abortion challenge
    Russia-Ukraine war – latest updates
    Sign up to receive First Thing – our daily briefing by email
     Updated 1h agoRichard LuscombeThu 5 May 2022 16.14 EDTFirst published on Thu 5 May 2022 09.26 EDT Show key events onlyLive feedShow key events onlyFrom More

  • in

    After victory in the US, now the far right is coming for abortion laws in Europe | Sian Norris

    After victory in the US, now the far right is coming for abortion laws in EuropeSian NorrisThe attack on Roe v Wade has roots in well-funded organisations whose tentacles have spread across the Atlantic For those of us who have been watching the assault against abortion in the US for years, this week’s leaked supreme court draft opinion – which could pave the way for an overturning of Roe v Wade – came as no surprise.Roe v Wade protects the right to an abortion in the US up to the point a foetus can survive outside the womb, and the religious and far-right have been gunning for it since it was introduced in 1973. Evangelical ideologues, far-right actors and radical-right billionaires have organised to undermine women’s right to safe, legal abortions through a combination of violence against clinics and doctors, dark money and political influence.‘Unnecessary suffering and death’: doctors fear for patients’ lives in a post-Roe worldRead moreSo, how did the US get here?After years of legal assaults that restricted abortion access and targeted clinics in Republican states; years of disinformation spread by “crisis pregnancy centres”, where women are persuaded to not have abortions; and years of burdensome demands on women to endure ultrasounds, gain parental consent and put up with counselling in order to have a termination, Trump’s election opened the door for abortion rights to end in the US.Ultimately, it required courts, not politicians, to end abortion. That’s where the Federalist Society comes in. Headed by Leonard Leo, the legal organisation supported anti-abortion lawmakers across the US into positions of influence where they could draft laws to ban abortion after 15 weeks … 12 weeks … six weeks … and completely. The end goal was for anti-abortion states to try to implement one of these laws, where it would be challenged again and again until it reached the supreme court.To do that, the anti-abortion movement needed supreme court justices who would enact its agenda. They got their way with the help of the leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, who blocked President Obama from nominating a supreme court judge, leaving the field open for Trump to promote the anti-abortion Neil Gorsuch. After that came two more Trump-appointed justices: Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.That was the judicial assault on abortion rights. But that assault could only happen with the help of money … and lots of it. Luckily for the anti-abortion movement, there are plenty of wealthy foundations keen to fund the cause. They include the DeVos, Prince, and the Templeton Foundation, which have helped to support organisations such as the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Heritage Foundation and Focus on the Family.Backed by billionaire funding, organisations such as the ADF took the fight against abortion rights to the courts – helping to secure a ban on buffer zones and so-called “partial birth abortion”, and supporting the notorious Hobby Lobby case, which stated that employers should not have to cover birth control on employees’ healthcare plans if it was against the owner’s religious beliefs.These organisations and their billionaire backers have transatlantic reach. Take the DeVos and Koch Foundation-supported Heritage Foundation, which has welcomed a range of Conservative MPs to discuss free speech – including Oliver Dowden, Priti Patel and Liam Fox. It was announced on the day of the supreme court leak that Lord David Frost would soon be addressing the organisation.Then there’s the ADF, which spent $23.3m in Europe between 2008 and 2019, when its European arm’s youth conference played host to the Conservative MP Fiona Bruce.ADF International intervened in Belfast’s notorious “gay cake” case and is allied with organisations that lobbied to further restrict abortion in Poland. The US anti-abortion legal organisation, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a second religious freedom organisation that takes on legal cases to challenge abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, has also operated in Europe. Set up by the Republican Pat Robertson, who famously accused feminism of turning women into lesbians, ACLJ’s chief counsel is a former Trump defence attorney, Jay Sekulow. ACLJ spent $15.7m in Europe from 2008-2019.So far you can see how big money, the judiciary and religious freedom movements have come together in the US and Europe. But there’s another active force that has pushed us towards the end of Roe: the far right.Across the far-right infosphere, men discuss the need to ban abortion in order to reverse what they term the “great replacement” – a conspiracy theory that posits white people are being “replaced” by migration from the global south, and that, in the US in particular, this replacement is aided by feminists repressing the white birthrate via abortion.Conspiracy theories such as the “great replacement” sound extreme. But when it comes to the US abortion row, such views are mainstream. Take this quote from the former Republican congressman Steve King, who represented Iowa between 2003-2021. He claimed “the US subtracts from its population a million of our babies in the form of abortion. We add to our population approximately 1.8 million of ‘somebody else’s babies’ who are raised in another culture before they get to us.” Far-right theories circulate globally – that’s why people outside the US shouldn’t just act in solidarity with American women at this time, but prepare to stand up against the possible erosion of their own hard-won rights.
    Sian Norris is the chief social and European affairs reporter at Byline Times. She is writing a book about the far-right attack on productive rights called Bodies Under Siege
    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 300 words to be considered for publication, email it to us at [email protected] v WadeOpinionAbortionUS supreme courtWomenHealthUS politicsLaw (US)commentReuse this content More

  • in

    Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracy | The fight to vote

    Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracyThe most important primary in the US might be the Georgia secretary of state race, where Brad Raffensperger is in a tough re-election battle after standing up to Trump Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardian’s Fight to vote newsletterHello, and Happy Thursday,I’m writing from Atlanta, where I’m spending this week reporting on the Republican primary for secretary of state.This race is perhaps the most important primary happening in America this year. Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s incumbent secretary of state, is in a really tough re-election battle after memorably standing up to Donald Trump in 2020 and refusing his request to “find 11,780 votes” to overturn the election 2020 results. The former president is backing Jody Hice, a conservative congressman who has embraced the myth the election was stolen in a bid to oust Raffensperger.It’s the first major test we’re seeing this year of whether a Republican who defends democracy can withstand the wrath of his own party. It’s also a major test for democracy both in Georgia and the US – one of several closely watched races this year in which candidates who have expressed willingness to overturn an election are seeking to be the chief election officials in their state.I spent Monday morning in a conference room at the headquarters of Georgia Public Broadcasting, watching a live stream of Raffensperger, Hice and two other candidates – David Belle Isle and TJ Hudson – debate downstairs (reporters were not allowed in the room). Nearly the entire hour was about the 2020 election, with the other three candidates repeating baseless and debunked claims of fraud. The first question Hice was asked was why voters should trust his judgment if he continues to believe the election was stolen. He dodged.“The big lie in all of this is that there were no problems in this last election. This last election was filled with problems,” Hice said. “Election security must be protected and Brad Raffensperger let that ball majorly fall.”Afterwards, I asked Hice something I’ve been asking almost everyone I meet who believes the 2020 election was stolen: is there anything he could see that could convince him that it was accurate. The election results in Georgia have been confirmed through multiple audits and recounts.“Not at this point, there’s nothing,” he said, going on to reference an allegation of illegal ballot harvesting from a conservative group that Raffensperger’s office is currently investigating. “This election was just overwhelmed with fraudulent activity. There’s nothing that can change my opinion of that.”I also asked Hice if he thought Trump’s call to Raffensperger was appropriate. If he was elected, what would he do if a president from his own party called him up and asked him to find votes for him?“Absolutely, there was nothing wrong with that request,” Hice said. “He was not saying go out and ‘find illegal ballots for me’. He was saying look at all the fraud that’s out here. Do your job. Make sure we have legal ballots that are cast, legal ballots that are counted, and had Brad done so, I believe the outcome would have been different.”But the January 2021 call from Trump to Raffensperger was not just a generalized call to investigate suspicious activity. As Trump and his team listed what they saw as irregularities, Raffensperger and his staff said that they were either investigating them or had debunked them. Trump made it clear that he wanted the outcome to be a reversal of the election results. “All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have because we won the state,” he said.During the debate, Raffensperger pushed back on Hice by repeatedly describing him as a liar while also trying to burnish his own conservative credentials. He repeatedly touted his focus on preventing non-citizen voting – which is virtually non-existent. He said he would be in favor of getting rid of a federal prohibition on giant voter removals within 90 days of an election. And he said he supported getting rid of no-excuse mail-in voting in Georgia. In any other race, all of those would be controversial positions on their own. During the debate on Monday, they seemed moderate in comparison with those of Hice, who refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the 2020 election.At one point during the debate, Raffensperger, a former engineer who is soft-spoken and sometimes speaks awkwardly, seemed exasperated. He detailed how his office had played a kind of Whac-A-Mole after the 2020 election, debunking claims about felon voting, underage voting and dead people voting.“The real problem that you have gets down to basic honesty,” he said. “It gets down to, it was actual, total, disinformation, misinformation, outright lying. And there’s not much I can do about that, because Jody Hice has been running from one rumor to another for the last 18 months. And how can you have confidence when people that should be holding a responsible position as a sitting congressman should be telling the truth.”Also worth watching …
    Georgia’s department of driver services quietly eliminated automatic voter registration on its website, but has since restored it.
    A decision striking down New York’s congressional map is a major blow to Democratic efforts to keep control of the US House this year
    Mississippi’s governor vetoed a bill that would make it moderately easier for people with felony convictions to get their voting rights back.
    TopicsGeorgiaFight to voteRepublicansUS politicsUS voting rightsfeaturesReuse this content More

  • in

    The Ohio primary shows that Trump still has a tight hold on the Republican party | Lloyd Green

    The Ohio primary shows that Trump still has a tight hold on the Republican partyLloyd GreenJD Vance once pondered if Trump was the next Hitler. Then he kissed Trump’s ring – and has been rewarded with the Ohio Republican Senate nomination On Tuesday, JD Vance won Ohio’s Republican nomination for US Senate. After lagging in the polls for months, Vance hit the tape first after garnering Donald Trump’s endorsement. Although Vance received under a third of votes cast, more than half of Buckeye state Republicans voted for a candidate who made his personal devotion to Trump a political cornerstone. The Republican party still belongs to 45th president.By contrast, Matt Dolan, a state senator whose family owns the Cleveland Guardians, the area’s Major League Baseball team, finished third with less than a quarter of the vote. Dolan publicly accepted the outcome of the 2020 election. He is the latest in a series of cautionary tales.In snagging Trump’s backing, Vance reset the template for winning his favor. You don’t need to have loved Trump forever. Bending the knee in the moment may be sufficient – as long as you have the right mix of attitude, backers and lies.Regardless, groveling is key. An ex-marine and a Yale Law School graduate, Vance now contends that the 2020 election was rigged. It wasn’t always like that. Once upon a time, Vance lauded Ohio’s voting procedures.Likewise, Vance has taken to trashing Joe Biden as something less than a legitimate president. Biden is a “crazy fake president who will buy energy from Putin and the scumbags of Venezuela but won’t buy it from middle-class Ohioans”. As for Trump’s past embrace of Russia’s strongman and war criminal, crickets.In the run-up to the primary, Vance hung out with Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz. Pressed on Greene’s recent attendance at a white nationalist conference, Vance offered his full-throated support. She is “my friend and did nothing wrong”, he declared. Being “in” with the Republican party’s extremes helps more than it hurts.As for campaign cash, Vance, a venture capitalist, enjoyed a financial edge supplied by Peter Thiel, the founder of Palantir and Vance’s business partner. By the numbers, Thiel donated at least $13.5m to a Super Pac that had Vance’s back. Thiel also served as a conduit to Trump world.In 2009, the German-born Thiel questioned the wisdom of expanding the right to vote to women and minorities. “Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women – two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians – have rendered the notion of ‘capitalist democracy’ into an oxymoron,” he wrote.There is also the matter of owning the libs. Last summer, Vance made clear that some Americans were more equal than others, and that he was unperturbed by Republican efforts at voter suppression.Instead, he embraced the politics of natalism. “Let’s give votes to all children in this country, but let’s give control over those votes to the parents of the children,” Vance announced.“Yes,” he answered, when asked whether that meant that non-parents would get a smaller say in how and where the US goes next. If the mainstream media took exception to Vance’s views, it was their problem. Not his.To be sure, Vance didn’t always groove to Trump. Vance nursed plenty of reservations about the one-time reality show host back in 2016. Six years ago, Vance oscillated between comparing Trump to the Führer and the only person to resign the American presidency.“I go back and forth between thinking Trump might be a cynical asshole like Nixon who wouldn’t be that bad (and might even prove useful) or that he might be America’s Hitler,” Vance texted his former roommate. “How’s that for discouraging?”Fortunately for Vance, Trump let bygones be bygones. “He’s a guy that said some bad shit about me. He did. He did. But you know what? Every one of the others did also,” Trump told a rally in late April.“In fact, if I went by that standard, I don’t think I would have ever endorsed anybody in the country … Ultimately, I put that aside.”Come the fall, Vance will square off against Representative Tim Ryan. On Tuesday, Ryan resoundingly won the Democratic primary with about 70% of the vote. In 2019, Ryan announced his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. His candidacy lasted less than seven months.Vance’s win may also be a harbinger of what comes next. If past is prelude, bet on the TV doctor Mehmet Oz to capture the Republican nomination for senator in Pennsylvania’s 17 May primary.Like Vance, Oz snared Trump’s endorsement – and, like Trump, Oz is a celebrity. “He has lived with us through the screen and has always been popular, respected and smart,” Trump said in a written endorsement.David McCormick, Oz’s nearest opponent, served as the CEO of Bridgewater, a major hedge fund, and in the treasury department under George W Bush. His wife, Dina Powell, worked in the Trump White House. But for Trump and his minions it is sizzle that matters. One thing is certain: Trump and Vance have it.
    Lloyd Green is an attorney in New York. He was opposition research counsel to George HW Bush’s 1988 campaign and served in the Department of Justice from 1990 to 1992
    TopicsUS politicsOpinionDonald TrumpPeter ThielRepublicansOhiocommentReuse this content More