More stories

  • in

    Amid talk of civil war, America is already split – Trump Nation has seceded | Robert Reich

    What is America really fighting over in the upcoming election? Not any particular issue. Not even Democrats versus Republicans. The central fight is over Donald J Trump.Before Trump, most Americans weren’t especially passionate about politics. But Trump’s MO has been to force people to become passionate about him – to take fierce sides for or against. And he considers himself president only of the former, whom he calls “my people”.Trump came to office with no agenda except to feed his monstrous ego. He has never fueled his base. His base has fueled him. Its adoration sustains him.So does the antipathy of his detractors. Presidents usually try to appease their critics. Trump has gone out of his way to offend them. “I do bring rage out,” he unapologetically told Bob Woodward in 2016.In this way, he has turned America into a gargantuan projection of his own pathological narcissism.To Trump and his core enablers and supporters, the laws of Trump Nation authorize him to do whatever he wantsHis entire re-election platform is found in his use of the pronouns “we” and “them”. “We” are people who love him, Trump Nation. “They” hate him.In late August, near the end of a somnolent address on the South Lawn of the White House, accepting the Republican nomination, Trump extemporized: “The fact is, we’re here – and they’re not.” It drew a standing ovation.At a recent White House news conference, a CNN correspondent asked if Trump condemned the behavior of his supporters in Portland, Oregon. In response, he charged: “Your supporters, and they are your supporters indeed, shot a young gentleman.”In Trump’s eyes, CNN exists in a different country: Anti-Trump Nation.So do the putative rioters and looters of “Biden’s America”. So do the inhabitants of blue states whose state and local tax deductions Trump eliminated. So do those who live in the “Democrat cities”, as he calls them, whose funding he’s trying to cut.California is a big part of Anti-Trump Nation. He wanted to reject its request for aid to battle wildfires “because he was so rageful that people in the state of California didn’t support him”, said former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor.New York is the capital of Anti-Trump Nation, which probably contributed to Trump “playing down” the threat of Covid-19 last March, when its virulence seemed largely confined to that metropolis. Even now, Trump claims the US rate of Covid-19 deaths would be low “if you take the blue states out”. That’s untrue, but it’s not the point. For Trump, blue states don’t count because they’re Anti-Trump Nation.To Trump and his core enablers and supporters, the laws of Trump Nation authorize him to do whatever he wants. Anti-Trump Nation’s laws constrain him, but they’re illegitimate because they are made and enforced by the people who reject him.If he loses the election, Trump will not accept the result because it would be the product of Anti-Trump NationSo Trump’s call to the president of Ukraine seeking help with the election was “perfect”. It was fine for Russia to side with him in 2016, and it’s fine for it to do so again. And of course the justice department, postal service and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention should help him win re-election. They’re all aiding Trump Nation.By a similar twisted logic, Anti-Trump Nation is dangerous. Hence, says Trump, the armed teenager who killed two in Kenosha, Wisconsin, acted in “self-defense”, yet the suspected killer of a rightwinger in Portland deserved the “retribution” he got when federal marshals killed him.It follows that if he loses the election, Trump will not accept the result because it would be the product of Anti-Trump Nation, and Trump isn’t the president of people who would vote against him. As he recently claimed, “The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the election is rigged.”In the warped minds of Trump and his acolytes, this could lead to civil war. Just this week he refused to commit to a peaceful transition of power. His consigliere Roger Stone urges him to declare “martial law” if he loses. Michael Caputo, assistant secretary of public affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, warns “the shooting will begin” when Trump refuses to go.Civil war is unlikely, but the weeks and perhaps months after election day will surely be fraught. Even if Trump is ultimately forced to relinquish power, his core adherents will continue to view him as their leader. If he retains power, many if not most Americans will consider his presidency illegitimate.So whatever happens, Trump’s megalomaniacal ego will prevail. America will have come apart over him, and Trump Nation will have seceded from Anti-Trump Nation. More

  • in

    Who is Amy Coney Barrett? Trump's anti-abortion supreme court nominee

    Subject to confirmation by the Senate, Amy Coney Barrett will be the youngest justice on the US supreme court, a position from which she will be set to influence American life for decades yet to come.Donald Trump’s nomination of the 48-year-old comes two years after her name surfaced as a possible replacement for the retiring Anthony Kennedy, whose seat was ultimately filled by Brett Kavanaugh after contentious confirmation hearings.Republicans want Barrett confirmed before the presidential election, on 3 November. Democrats lack the power to block her but the process is likely to be no less contentious than that which Kavanaugh survived.To the fore is Barrett’s religious faith, prominently her association with People of Praise, a charismatic Christian group with what is described as an authoritarian internal structure.Arguments from both political factions have been publicly rehearsed: will Barrett’s religious convictions affect her performance as a supreme court justice, or should they have nothing to do with determining her fitness for such an important role?Conservatives argue public questions about religious beliefs should be excluded. Liberals suggest Barrett’s beliefs could overshadow her ability to administer unconflicted jurisprudence on issues such as abortion and contraception, thereby threatening foundational values of religious liberty.Barrett clerked for the late conservative justice Antonin Scalia, who argued that there is no constitutional right to abortion. The gravest threat Barrett poses, according to many on the left, is to Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that ensured abortion rights.In 2017, Trump nominated the Louisiana native and Notre Dame Law School graduate to the Chicago-based seventh US circuit court of appeals.Answering a White House questionnaire, the mother of seven – who adopted two children from Haiti – said she admired justice Elena Kagan, an Obama-appointed abortion rights supporter, for bringing “the knowledge and skill she acquired as an academic to the practical resolution of disputes”.But during her confirmation hearing, Democratic senator Dianne Feinstein memorably said Barrett had “a long history of believing that your religious beliefs should prevail” and added”: “The dogma lives loudly in you.”Barrett has said she is a “faithful Catholic” but her religious beliefs do not “bear in the discharge of my duties as a judge”. She has also said legal careers ought not to be seen as means of gaining satisfaction, prestige or money, but rather “as a means to the end of serving God”.People of Praise, the group to which Barrett belongs, emerged out of the revivalist movement of the 1960s, which blended Catholicism and Protestant Pentecostalism. Founded in South Bend, Indiana, in 1971 and with 1,700 members, the group describes itself as a community that “support[s] each other financially and materially and spiritually”.“Our covenant is neither an oath nor a vow, but it is an important personal commitment,” it says on its website. “Members should always follow their consciences, as formed by the light of reason, and by the experience and the teachings of their churches.”There’s nothing particularly extreme about People of Praise – other than women are not given senior positionsWilliam CashOn Saturday William Cash, chairman of the Catholic Herald, told the Guardian members of People of Praise were on “the conservative side of the church and are unlikely to be the sort of progressives who are fanatical about Pope Francis”.“There’s nothing particularly extreme about People of Praise – other than it is very hierarchical and women are not given senior positions,” he said.The former reporter saw questions about Barrett’s Catholicism and the supreme court in the context of the White House race.“Not only is Biden Catholic, albeit in a very liberal way that will alienate many ‘trads’,” Cash said, “but Melania Trump is also a practicing Catholic and has even had a private audience with Pope Francis in Rome, describing it as one of the most important moments of her life. So Melania, Amy Coney Barrett and Biden are from opposite poles of the US Catholic planet.”Former members of People of Praise and religious scholars have described an organization that appears to dominate some members’ everyday lives, in which so-called “heads”, or spiritual advisers, oversee major decisions. Married women count their husbands as their “heads” and members are expected to tithe 5% of their income to the organization.According to a former member, Adrian Reimers, “all one’s decisions and dealings become the concern of one’s ‘head’, and in turn potentially become known to the leadership”.Heidi Schlumpf, a national correspondent for National Catholic Reporter, called the group’s level of secrecy “concerning”.Trump may sense in Barrett’s nomination a last chance to energise religious conservatives in his race for re-election. The president met evangelical leaders at the White House before introducing Barrett to the press.In 2012, as a professor at Notre Dame, Barrett signed a letter attacking a provision of the Affordable Care Act, the healthcare reform known as Obamacare, that forced insurance companies to offer coverage for contraception, a facet of the law later modified for religious institutions.Republican attempts to bring down the ACA have repeatedly fallen short. If Barrett is confirmed before the November election, one of her first cases shortly after it could determine its fate. More

  • in

    'Scranton v Park Avenue' is Biden's best campaign issue – not the supreme court | Bhaskar Sunkara

    With the death of the US supreme court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last Friday, the stakes of November’s election are more obvious than ever. If Trump retains control of the presidency, most likely through a win in the electoral college but loss in the popular vote, that will cement minority Republican rule for a generation. Abortion rights, healthcare legislation, labor protections and voting rights will all be directly impacted.Democratic partisans are acutely aware of this fact. ActBlue, the party’s most important fundraiser, raised more than $100m from 1.5 million individuals since Ginsburg’s passing. For some, like the New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin, Ginsburg’s death means that Democrats need to ratchet up their rhetoric about the courts and foreground their plans for significant institutional reform. If Democrats can take the Senate, Toobin suggests, then the filibuster must be abolished, Washington DC and Puerto Rico granted statehood, the number of lower-court federal judges expanded, and the supreme court be packed with three more judges. On the latter point, at least, the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, agrees, saying that “everything is on the table”.Many of the same commentators and strategists getting on board with plans like court-packing think that Biden should be trying to appeal to moderate Republican suburban voters. But there is an unacknowledged tension here: Ginsburg’s passing will likely limit defections from the small cadre of Republicans who find Trump distasteful enough to contemplate a Biden vote. Many of these voters may think a conservative court is worth the embarrassment of being associated with another Trump term.The problem with treating the election as a referendum on the supreme court is that, as Anne Applebaum recently argued, it “organizes the electorate along two fronts of a culture war, and forces people to make stark ideological choices. Instead of focusing voters on the president’s failure to control Covid-19 or the consequent economic collapse, the culture war makes voters think only of their deepest tribal identities.” But whether Applebaum wants it to be the case or not, the courts will be the forefront of the minds of many regular voters. Recent events, then, should call into question the entire Biden premise of building a campaign around current or former Republican voters in affluent suburbs.Another strategy – instead of chasing suburban voters uncomfortable with Trump’s conduct – is to offer bread-and-butter issues to lower propensity young and working-class voters, who Bernie Sanders had tried to mobilize in his primary run to varying levels of success. (Perhaps easier accomplished in a general election rather than in closed party primaries.) While the culture war might divide much of the existing electorate, this new electorate can be potentially reached through appeals for widely popular progressive policies such as universal healthcare and a federal jobs program. In a time where millions of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck – and many are experiencing unemployment and an uncertain future – offering more security and support is a message that can win an election.Though they obviously overlap, the 64% of Americans who think the rich should pay more in taxes to support public programs are a firmer basis to build a political coalition than the quarter of Americans who identify as “liberal”, or, for that matter, the probably tiny number of former Trump voters who can be won over to Biden by outrage at the president’s behavior. Rather than talking about “packing the courts”, Biden would be wise to appear credible on this bread-and-butter agenda and then use his mandate to “do whatever it takes” in the way of structural reform to accomplish it.The former vice-president has been making some populist noises lately, such as when he recently framed the election as a choice between the interests of “Scranton” and “Park Avenue.” (This sparked the ire of the liberal MSNBC crowd, who, in an incredible encapsulation of their own irrelevance and privilege, attacked Biden’s framing for being divisive and Trump-like.) But he’s not always consistent in this messaging.There is still time for Biden to embrace a populist message more resolutely, and speak to the millions of Americans looking for a strong, progressive leader who can help them weather this economic storm – much like FDR did during the Great Depression. The question isn’t whether Biden should pursue this path, but whether he will – and whether people should believe him if he finally does. More

  • in

    Donald Trump jokes about staying in power for '12 more years' at Atlanta rally – video

    Play Video

    1:10

    Donald Trump made light of fears he will not accept the result of the election if he loses to Joe Biden in November. ‘Will we be president in 10 years?’ he asked, before claiming he was joking.
    ‘You know, you can’t joke,’ he told supporters in Atlanta. ‘[The media] always cut it before the laugh so they think he’s serious.’
    The crowd then chanted ’12 more years!’ to laughter from the president.
    Top Republicans dismiss Trump’s refusal to commit to peaceful transfer
    Donald in Blunderland: Trump won’t commit to peaceful power transfer at surreal press briefing
    US politics live

    Topics

    Donald Trump

    US elections 2020

    US politics More