Previous | Next | Senate page
New polls: (None)
Dem pickups: (None)
GOP pickups: (None)
Threading the Needle?
We don't entirely know what left-wingers want out of a social media platform. We are a bit more clear on what right-wingers want, though. Basically, it comes down to two things: (1) to be able to say what they want, no matter how problematic, offensive, or factually incorrect, and (2) to make sure that non-right-wingers are exposed to such statements.
As it turns out, it is moderately possible to accomplish one of these things, but it's not especially viable to do both. Platforms that allow unfettered far-right speech, from Truth Social to Gab to Parler, turn into far-right echo chambers. Platforms that limit far-right speech, even a little bit (e.g., Facebook), outrage the right-wingers. Platforms that migrate from category #2 to category #1 (e.g., Twitter under the ownership of Elon Musk) drive many non-right-wing users away.
Although the term is rarely used anymore, the descriptor for what happens at sites like Twitter is "microblogging." Thus far, that platform is the only microblogging site to truly reach a broad audience (hundreds of millions of users, as opposed to just millions for Truth Social, et al.). It is possible that the monopoly is about to become a duopoly, however, as Meta has just launched its own microblogging product, called Threads.
Consistent with its being a new product, Threads is a work in progress. It is similar enough to Twitter that Elon Musk is threatening to sue Mark Zuckerberg (even if their planned cage match is not likely to happen, inasmuch as Zuckerberg would beat the tar out of Musk). In some very important ways, however, Threads is different from Twitter. Most obviously, users have no real control over the content they see. Whereas Twitter users self-curate, at least partly, by deciding what accounts to follow, Threads' content is currently controlled entirely by algorithms. Maybe that will change, maybe it won't; as the platform currently operates, it's not a particularly efficient way for a person (such as a politician) to communicate with the people they want to reach (such as their followers).
That said, Threads has significant advantages that other startup microblogging platforms do not/did not have. Most importantly, it comes from the same company that owns Facebook and Instagram, and it is integrated with those platforms. None of the other wannabe microblogging platforms have attracted more than 10 million U.S. users; Threads reportedly has over 50 million U.S. users already (in less than 48 hours), and Zuckerberg hopes that there will eventually be over 1 billion users worldwide.
We can see several possible outcomes here:
- Threads will fail and be canceled, providing something close to a final answer to the question: "Can there be two
major microblogging sites?"
- Threads will succeed, but as a niche product, along the lines of Rumble or Twitch
- Threads will succeed, but as "yet another" social media platform that public figures and companies have to sign up
for
- Threads will succeed, and will become the left-wing Twitter
It is the fourth possibility that causes us to run this item. Just about everything else in American culture has been affected by the polarization of politics, and since Elon Musk took over Twitter, that site has veered sharply toward being a platform primarily for right-wingers. Obviously, even when it stood (largely) alone, Twitter often allowed for the seeds of division to be sown. Would it be better or worse to have two competing microblogging platforms, one lefty and one righty, and each of them helping to thicken the respective factions' bubbles, à la Fox and MSNBC? We may soon find out. (Z)
Been Caught Stealing
Neither Donald Trump nor his (alleged) accomplice, Walt Nauta, was 5 years old when they (allegedly) pilfered classified documents. But beyond that discrepancy, the song by Jane's Addiction that we're using for the headline could practically be renamed "The Ballad of Donald Trump":
I've been caught stealing
Once when I was 5
I enjoy stealing
It's just as simple as that
Well, it's just a simple fact
When I want something,
I don't want to pay for it
I walk right through the door
Walk right through the door
Hey all right!
If I get by, it's mine
Mine all mine!
True, Perry Farrell penned that tune in 1990, well before The Donald entered politics. However, Trump was already a well-known shady dealer by then, as evidenced by the Trump roman à clef Biff Tannen in the 1989 film Back to the Future, Part II. Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) would probably agree with us that the song might have been inspired by Trump, albeit for different reasons (the video shows a lot of men crossdressing as women).
More on DeSantis, and his current anti-LGBTQ jag, below. For now, we will note that Nauta has found himself an attorney, and yesterday he officially entered a plea of not guilty. That is not especially instructive at this point; if Nauta plans to fight the charges, or if he's ultimately going to cop a plea and turn on Trump, he'd plead as he did. You don't switch your plea to guilty until a deal with the feds is signed, sealed and delivered.
As to Trump, he is apparently raking it in on the fundraising front. Q2 ended last week, and so it's time for the various campaigns and PACs to file their quarterly reports. According to a press release from Team Trump, the former president brought in $35 million in the last 3 months, which is nearly double the $18.8 million he collected in Q1. The obvious explanation for this is that Trump's supporters are responding to his two indictments, and his begging for money to cover his legal fees.
DeSantis, who is Trump's (supposed) main rival for the Republican nomination, also had a brisk quarter, collecting $20 million in donations. In an effort to spin this into a major accomplishment, the Governor's campaign sent out a press release declaring that to be the "largest first-quarter filing from any non-incumbent Republican candidate in more than a decade." We assume it's also the largest first-quarter filing from any Southern governor running for president in a non-leap year while the moon is in Pisces and the entire AL East has a win percentage above .500.
Take these numbers with a few grains of salt for now, since the quarterly reports haven't yet been published to the FEC's website. Recall that a candidate can spend money in order to raise money, and that they often do so in very inefficient ways. Trump's campaign, for its part, might have decided the time was ripe to increase the marketing budget, either because the indictments created an opportunity or because they wanted to create the impression that the base remains behind the former president. DeSantis almost certainly pumped big bucks into his fundraising operation so that he could have a big figure to report. If the candidates spent tens of millions in order to "raise" $35 million/$20 million, that's rather less impressive than if they spent a couple of million. We'll check back once the reports are in, assuming that the campaigns' investments in raising cash can be discerned (sometimes they can, sometimes not). (Z)
Say It with Us: Trump Is Going to Get a Political Rival Killed
Given that we write about politics on a daily basis, we are well aware that Donald Trump has thoroughly inured the country, and the world, to shockingly problematic behavior. With that said, we are surprised that this is not bigger news. As you may or may not have heard, the former president publicized the (possible) address of his even more former predecessor, causing a particularly deranged Trumper to try to make an assassination attempt.
The would-be assassin is named Taylor Taranto, and as you can see in the 26-page indictment filed against him, he has a long history of combining both violence and lunacy. He participated in the 1/6 insurrection, as you might guess. He's also threatened the life of Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), up to and including showing up at Raskin's kids' school, he's bragged of plans to invade the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and he's made threatening phone calls to the office of Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). Taranto has also been banned from the set-aside-for-protesters "Freedom Corner," outside the Capitol, for his abusive behavior toward other protesters. And, of course, he's got several social media accounts that he uses to post absolutely unhinged ALL CAPS rants and raves.
How does Trump enter into this, other than generally encouraging this kind of problematic behavior? Let's directly quote the Taranto indictment:
On June 29, 2023, Former President Donald Trump posted what he claimed was the address of Former President Barack Obama on the social media platform Truth Social.
The reason we post that directly is that Trump's reason for making these posts is not clear to us. The former president sent out a total of four messages; you can see the one that had the actual address here (with the address blurred out, of course). However, nobody seems to have published the full set of four messages (for obvious reasons), and so it's not clear exactly how or why Trump highlighted the inclusion of Obama's identifying information. The indictment does not give details beyond the general statement above, and all the news coverage, such as it is, just repeats the DoJ's verbiage.
What can be said with certainty, however, is that: (1) Trump was, at very least, reckless and (2) once it became clear that the information was potentially putting Obama at risk, Trump did not remove the post from his account. It is also well within the realm of possibility that Trump wanted Obama to be threatened. And certainly, that is what happened. Taranto showed up in the general neighborhood indicated by the address. Nobody is saying if the address was actually correct, once again, for obvious reasons. Our guess is that it was; in any case, it was close enough that the would-be assassin entered into an area that was under the protection of the United States Secret Service. Taranto was trying to live-stream the assassination attempt, but once he realized the feds were onto him, he fled. As it turns out, the U.S.S.S. is way better at this than a random crackpot is, and so they nabbed the perp. The government had already been trying to arrest Taranto, but had not had success because he is apparently homeless. So, by blundering into an area being monitored by law enforcement, he did the feds a favor.
The conclusion here is in the headline: Trump's rhetoric and his reckless behavior are going to get one of his rivals killed one of these days. It's as simple as that. And that is on top of any foreign assets who might already have been killed due to the former president's handling of classified information. (Z)
All the Way with the Anti-Gay
We had an item earlier this week about Ron DeSantis' new campaign ad, in which he tries to paint Donald Trump as a "woke" LGBTQ advocate, while presenting himself as a fierce anti-LGBTQ crusader. If you haven't seen the ad already, you really should take a look. We wish we could find a copy that's not posted to Twitter, but apparently it's been banned by social media platforms not owned by Elon Musk.
We have seen a lot of campaign ads, and this one might well be the most bizarre we've ever seen. For those who don't care to watch, the first half (roughly) uses several video clips and statements, mostly taken out of context, to frame Trump as a modern-day Harvey Milk. That part is backed with cheesy electronic/disco music, which is historically correct, at least, since disco emerged from the LGBTQ community (and the Black community).
The second half of the ad, meanwhile, utilizes music of the sort that you'd use for the climactic scene of a gladiator movie. That serves as accompaniment to a jarring juxtaposition of clips and images, including: (1) a bunch of headlines reporting on DeSantis' anti-LGBTQ "accomplishments," (2) noted homophobe and transphobe Matt Walsh ranting and raving about... something, (3) clips from various movies, including Patrick Bateman from American Psycho and Tommy Shelby from Peaky Blinders, (4) images underscoring DeSantis' alleged manliness and toughness, and (5) a few beefcake photos of bodybuilders. Seriously; take a look at the image at 1:11. We'd understand if it was DeSantis' head grafted onto a "ripped" body, but it's not. It's just a very fit bodybuilder, inserted in between a drawing of the Governor as a werewolf and a clip of him dressed up as a fighter pilot. We just don't understand what is going on there. Also, does DeSantis' campaign know that, in American Psycho, Bateman is a literal serial killer? One who presents a polished public face, but chops numerous women into pieces in private?
Actually, we assume they do know that, since the obvious point of the ad is to appeal to male grievance, at least as DeSantis understands it. He's going after the incel crowd, along with other men who are confused, frightened and angry about changes in gender roles and gender rules over the past several generations. The ostensible message is that Trump may have a "manly" image, but he's actually part of "the problem." On the other hand, DeSantis allegedly "gets it," as he realizes how sick and twisted LGBTQ people (especially T people) are, and—as a hyper-masculine fellow—he also apparently knows how to destroy his enemies and how to "handle" women.
Put another way, it's just another exhibit for the "Ron DeSantis doesn't get it" file. The ad is reprehensible, of course, but we also struggle to see how it helps him politically. Trumpers, even when presented with direct evidence of behavior from Trump that they do not like, are very, very good at finding ways to ignore that behavior. We very seriously doubt that any of them are going to be won over by such an obviously dishonest presentation, especially since Trump also has plenty of anti-LGBTQ stuff on his record. Meanwhile, many non-incel Republicans have loudly condemned the ad, along with DeSantis' new anti-LGBTQ edge.
What we have, then, is an ad that is not going to win DeSantis many voters, but is certainly going to lose him some. Last we checked, that's not what ads are supposed to do. And this is just in the primaries; if DeSantis were to somehow become the GOP nominee, the Democrats would have a field day reminding people of his various ads and statements. Given the blowback, the wise course of action would seemingly be to back off, and to come up with some sort of excuse, like "My staff put that out there, and once I saw it I ordered it taken down." That would not be true, but it would allow him to back off. Of course, DeSantis and his campaign are never, ever wrong, and never, ever make mistakes. So, he has predictably doubled down on this line of attack, accusing Trump of being "a pioneer in injecting gender ideology into the mainstream." C'mon, Ron. Is there anyone who is going to buy that?
Also, as a side note, you can probably guess that DeSantis' campaign did not get permission to use the movie clips they used. After all, laws are for other people, not the Governor. The owners of those copyrights could sue, but that would likely mean spending a lot of money for a limited recovery, while also giving DeSantis a lot more opportunity to do anti-woke/anti-Hollywood posturing. So, those lawsuits are not likely to be coming down the pike. That said, the creators of Peaky Blinders put out a statement expressing their unhappiness with the misuse of their intellectual property. And this isn't the first time this has happened. Not long ago, the DeSantis campaign used the Disney signature font without permission. In that case, a lawsuit may very well come to pass, as the Mouse does not mess around when it comes to intellectual property.
The bottom line is that DeSantis continues to show himself to be a clumsy, ham-fisted, ineffectual campaigner. At the same time, he also continues to remind us that he's a frightening and dangerous man. Is there any group he will not scapegoat, if he thinks it will aid his rise to power? Is there any law he won't break, as long as he thinks he can get away with it? Is there any circumstance where he will change his mind, when presented with evidence that he erred? It certainly looks like the answer to all three questions is "no," and if so, well, that bodes ill for a hypothetical DeSantis presidency. (Z)
Today's Report from Kookville
As we noted, a little over a week ago, the Freedom Caucus apparently wants to evict the person who may be its most famous (and infamous) member, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA). The ultimate problem here is that she's formed an alliance with Kevin McCarthy, who is the enemy as far as the Caucus is concerned. And the proximate problem is that, having developed an acrimonious relationship with Freedom Caucuser Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), Greene referred to Boebert as a "bitch" on the floor of the House.
Apparently, the planned-for vote has been held, and Greene has been ejected. We say "apparently" because the clown show that is the Freedom Circus... er, Caucus, is not in agreement about what happened. Some say Greene was voted out, others say she wasn't, and still others say the vote happened but it was a sham. The only thing that is certain is that the ringmaster... er, the chair of the Caucus, Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), has not officially told Greene she's out. The Georgian is apparently avoiding Perry, and once she gets the official word (assuming she does), she does not figure to take this lying down. So, expect at least one or two more episodes in this particular soap opera.
We don't care too much about the sniping taking place among the members of the looniest faction in Congress, except to the extent that it affects the electoral prospects of particular individuals. In the case of Greene, assuming she is indeed given the (jack)boot by the Caucus, we have absolutely no idea how that will change her electoral calculus. Her district, GA-14, is ultra-red, at R+22. So she's not going to get knocked off by a Democrat, especially since "she just wasn't nutty enough for the Freedom Caucus" is not exactly going to resonate with independent/moderate Republican voters. On the other hand, "she just wasn't nutty enough for the Freedom Caucus," perhaps worded a little differently, could be an effective line of attack for a primary challenger from the right. We'll see.
Meanwhile, as Greene licks her wounds, she will surely be gladdened by a bit of bad news for her now-rival Boebert. Adam Frisch, the Democrat who nearly knocked off Boebert in 2022, and who will be back for another go in 2024, announced a fundraising take of $2.6 million in Q2. That is a massive haul for a House candidate, particularly more than a year before the election. And it was nearly all from small donors; 81,000 of them who chipped in an average of $32. As we note above, it's possible that Frisch spent millions to make millions, but that is far less common for non-incumbents (who don't have a fat bankroll to invest in raising more bankroll). Much more likely, especially since those donations came from all 50 states, is that ActBlue has allowed Frisch to benefit from the desire of many voters to poke Boebert/the Freedom Caucus in the eye. In any case, CO-03 is going to be one of 2024's most closely watched (and most expensive) House races. (Z)
This Week in Schadenfreude: (Hate) Crime Doesn't Pay
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Proud Boys are a**holes. They are also thugs who perpetrate violence and criminal acts in service of... whatever the hell it is they are trying to accomplish. And this week, they learned that while hate crime doesn't pay, hate criminals most certainly do.
At issue is an attack, by members of the group, against the nearly 200-year-old Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church of Washington, DC. The Boys insist on their right to fly Nazi flags and similar garbage (which is most certainly their privilege, per the First Amendment), but they don't feel others have the same right. So, they invaded the grounds of the Church and destroyed a Black Lives Matter sign.
Before the members participated in the assault, they neglected to review certain relevant statutes. Maybe the problem is that they do not know how to read. Whatever the case may be, it turns out that attacking a church like that and destroying a sign like that is a violation of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, as well as the rather more recent D.C. Bias-Related Crime Act of 1989. Unfortunately for the Proud Boys, the members of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law most certainly have read those laws. So has D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal E. Kravitz. And earlier this week, the Judge ordered that the Proud Boys pay a little over $1 million to the church. "The record is replete with evidence that all of the defendants acted with an evil, discriminatory motive based on race and with deliberate violence and a willful disregard for the rights of the church and its congregants," observed the Judge in his ruling.
Truth be told, it doesn't even matter that Kravitz knows the relevant laws, since the Proud Boys did not bother to show up and defend themselves in court. So, that means they lost by default. It also means they won't be able to appeal. It's not terribly likely that the judgment will be paid, but it also means that the organization won't be able to take in donations without risk of having those funds seized. Also, if any of the individual members who participated in the raid have any assets (not likely), they could lose them. And even if the plaintiffs never get a dime, they've now got it in the legal record (and in countless newspapers) that the Proud Boys are nothing more than a bunch of hateful bigots. There's certainly some schadenfreude in that. (Z)
This Week in Freudenfreude: People Can Change
And now, the counterpoint to the previous item. Daryl Davis is pretty well known as a musician, having played with such luminaries as Chuck Berry, B.B. King and Jerry Lee Lewis. However, he's even better known for his civil rights activism, so much so that he was the subject of a documentary, Accidental Courtesy: Daryl Davis, Race and America.
There are lots of civil rights activists, of course, and a fair number of them have been the subject of one or more documentaries. However, Davis' approach to the issue is somewhat unorthodox. Rather than lobbying for legislation, or trying to change hearts and minds on a broad scale, he prefers a laser-focused approach. More specifically, he befriends members of the Ku Klux Klan and works to slowly but surely convince them of the error of their ways.
Needless to say, this is slow and painstaking work. Davis believes he has persuaded more than 200 klansmen to turn the page; he's also been given the robes of at least two dozen KKK members as a token of appreciation for opening their eyes. In addition to his one-on-one work, he also lectures around the country, helping to teach audiences how to reach those who seem unreachable.
It's not a secret that the best (though certainly not guaranteed) means of helping people to overcome prejudices like these is for them to get to know a member of the hated outgroup. It's one thing when Black people or Mexican immigrants or Jews are a nameless, faceless monolith. It's another thing entirely when they start to be individuals with a name and a face and palpable humanity.
As it turns out—and this is now supported by a large academic literature—the techniques used by Davis work particularly well when it comes to anti-LGBTQ prejudice. And that brings us to the story of Justin Nash, who was in the news this week, and who is the primary inspiration for this item. For 40 or so of his years, Nash internalized the anti-LGBTQ messaging of the leaders of his evangelical church. He was no Proud Boy, to be sure, but he was certainly no friend to the LGBTQ community, either.
Over time, between conversations with his son, and with a couple of gay coworkers, Nash began to think that maybe his church did not have the right of it when it came to the evils of homosexuality. So, he re-read his Bible and reached his own conclusions. He also felt badly about a few moments from his past, such as his not-so-friendly behavior towards a high school classmate who came out of the closet.
This past week, Nash was visiting relatives in Denver. And on his arrival in the Mile High City, he happened to learn that Denver's pride parade was scheduled for the next day. Nash decided this was a stellar opportunity to make amends, and so... well, let's just show you the picture that made him into a meme:
According to Nash's count, 76 marchers took him up on his offer.
We often get questions and letters about what is going to happen with the hateful elements in modern American politics, and whether or not the anger and resentment will eventually dissipate. We're not Pollyannas, and so we must concede that many of these folks surely will take (or already have taken) their resentments to the grave. But not all of them will; as the stories of Daryl Davis and Justin Nash demonstrate, in different ways, people can change under the right circumstances.
Have a good weekend, all. (Z)
Previous | Next
Main page for smartphones
Main page for tablets and computers