F Trump, Eh?

Yes, that headline is a little on the crude side. However, Canadians are both very polite and very angry right now. We thought about it all day long, and decided that headline best captured the dynamics of the situation.

As expected, Canada's Liberal Party, along with its leader PM Mark Carney, had a very good day in yesterday's federal elections. As of 2:00 a.m. PT, the breakdown of the ridings is as follows:

Party	Won	Ahead	Total
Liberal	155	13	168
Conservative	133	11	144
Bloc Québécois	21	2	23
New Democratic Party	5	2	7
Green Party of Canada	1	0	1

An outright majority requires 172 seats. At the moment, the Liberals don't seem like they're quite going to make it, though it looks like they'll be able to form a government in partnership with just one of the minority parties, presumably the NDP. The current government is made up of 151 Liberals along with 24 members of the NDP and 2 Greens. In the new government, the Liberals will thus be an even more senior partner than they were previously, largely as a result of having taken seats from the NDP.

The Conservatives' results were mixed, but will largely leave Party members unhappy. In the current Parliament, the Tories have 120 seats, so they are going to improve on that, largely at the expense of opposition partners Bloc Québécois. And the Party is going to take roughly 41.5% of the vote, which is better than the 39.6% in 2011 that allowed the Conservatives to claim their most recent majority. However, these successes are pretty small consolation, as Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre did not win the big job, despite that outcome appearing inevitable just a few months ago. Further, Poilievre is in danger of losing his own seat, representing Carleton. With roughly 95% reporting, Liberal candidate Bruce Fanjoy has 50% of the vote, as compared to 47% for Poilievre.

And Poilievre isn't the only party leader to have a bad night. The left-wing NDP lost "official party" status, which means they lose certain federal funding, as well as the guaranteed right to ask questions during the prime minister's question time. And NDP leader Jagmeet Singh not only watched many of his colleagues get tossed out on their rears, he himself finished a distant third in his riding, Burnaby Central. Singh is a victim of both the electoral shift, as well as redistricting that made his riding less lefty.

Of course, the leader who got the biggest poke in the eye isn't even Canadian. That would be one Donald John Trump, whose tariffs and strange, stupid threats to annex the Great White North remade yesterday's election. As Canadians prepared to head to the polls, Trump sent this out on his strange, stupid social media platform:

Good luck to the Great people of Canada. Elect the man who has the strength and wisdom to cut your taxes in half, increase your military power, for free, to the highest level in the World, have your Car, Steel, Aluminum, Lumber, Energy, and all other businesses, QUADRUPLE in size, WITH ZERO TARIFFS OR TAXES, if Canada becomes the cherished 51st. State of the United States of America. No more artificially drawn line from many years ago. Look how beautiful this land mass would be. Free access with NO BORDER. ALL POSITIVES WITH NO NEGATIVES. IT WAS MEANT TO BE! America can no longer subsidize Canada with the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars a year that we have been spending in the past. It makes no sense unless Canada is a State!

Is he tone deaf? Clueless? Does he think this makes him look strong for the MAGA base? Carney and the Liberals couldn't have asked for more of an assist than this—you know, just in case Canadian voters needed a reminder of what they are so angry about.

While we were thinking about our headline yesterday, we were also trying to think of any case where the leader of one country had such a profound impact on the elections in another country. But for Adolf Hitler, Franklin D. Roosevelt would not have stood for a third term in 1940, so there's that. But for Ho Chi Minh, Lyndon B. Johnson would likely have run again, and won, in 1968. However, in those two examples, Hitler's and Ho's impacts were supplemented by global trends (the response to World War I/the Great Depression in one case, and the Cold War in another), and besides, it took years for their impacts to manifest. By contrast, Trump conjured Canadian anger out of thin air, and he did it in less than 100 days. There are probably a few precedents for that, across all the nations of the world, and all the millennia, but they must be pretty rare.

An interesting question is what the result would have been yesterday if Justin Trudeau had not resigned as PM back in March. The Conservatives invested all their energies in tearing him down, and struggled to recalibrate when he suddenly stepped down. Were he still the PM, a lot of Canadian voters would have been compelled to decide who they dislike more—Trudeau or Trump. We would guess that resentment of Trump would still have carried the day, but that's just a guess. And because Trudeau took one for the team, and fell on his sword, we will never know. In any case, barring very surprising developments, Trump will now face a Liberal, largely hostile administration in Canada for the rest of his term. (Z)

The Crazypants Deportations Are Continuing

Over the weekend, noting that the Trump administration had backed down on its program of trying to deport many foreign exchange students, we speculated that the White House was responding to the grim polling numbers, which have Trump under water on immigration, despite that being his signature (and strongest) issue. We imagined this might be motivating the administration to tone down its most extreme deportation plans.

Maybe we were wrong about that. Over the weekend came the alarming news that immigration officials have deported as many as three U.S. citizen children, one of whom has stage 4 cancer and needs access to critical treatment and medication. All of them were with their mothers, who had appeared for routine immigration check-ins, when they were arrested and immediately prepped for deportation. They were denied access to counsel and denied the ability to place their children with other family members or guardians so the children could remain in the U.S.

On April 25, a federal judge in Louisiana, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, ordered the Trump administration to appear on May 16 "in the interest of dispelling our strong suspicion that the government just deported a U.S. citizen with no meaningful process." The government had put one of the women, and her two children, ages 2 and 11, on a plane even while they were trying to get into court. The father tried to ensure that his citizen daughter was not also deported; instead, ICE threatened to deport him, too. Doughty even tried to reach the woman by phone during the flight only to be told by ICE that she had already been released in Honduras. It is clear that Trump officials are going to great lengths to prevent their targets from exercising any of their due process rights. In this environment, U.S. citizens will inevitably also be picked up and shipped out.

To be sure, this is not the first time U.S. citizens have been deported in an administration's rush to kick as many people out of the country as quickly as possible. Under George W. Bush, deportations escalated rapidly and many U.S. citizens were caught in the dragnet. The raids continued under Barack Obama and so did the mistakes. In fact, a Northwestern University professor reviewed 8,000 cases and determined that 1% involved U.S. citizens. One of the most egregious examples is one cited by Judge Doughty in his order, wherein the government deported a mentally disabled U.S. citizen to Mexico despite clear evidence that he was born in North Carolina. In that case, Lyttle v. United States, he sued not only the U.S. but also the individual ICE agents who had violated his rights—and he won. Doughty cited this case, which held that "Any ICE officer with this responsibility would know it is illegal and unconstitutional to deport, detain for deportation, or recommend deportation of a U.S. citizen." The ICE agents' knowledge of their illegal conduct is critical here because that is the test for qualified immunity. In Lyttle, the Court found that the agents' actions in light of the clear constitutional rights involved meant that they were not entitled to qualified immunity and could be held liable for violations of the Fourth and Fifth amendments.

This is going to be important here because not only are Trump administration officials condoning this conduct, despite court orders requiring due process, and other legal constraints up to and including the text of the Constitution, they are instructing agents to violate the law. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo on March 14 telling ICE agents that they can ignore the Constitution when it's inconvenient to follow it. She is explicitly greenlighting breaking into people's homes without a warrant if federal agents suspect a gang member is inside. The memo tells agents: "Given the dynamic nature of enforcement operations, officers in the field are authorized to apprehend aliens upon a reasonable belief that the alien meets all four requirements to be validated as an Alien Enemy. This authority includes entering an Alien Enemy's residence to make an AEA apprehension where circumstances render it impracticable to first obtain a signed Notice and Warrant of Apprehension and Removal." The memo goes on to say that the agent's determination that a person is an "alien enemy" is not reviewable by a court. Yes, that's right. Bondi decided that an ICE agent is judge, jury and executioner—due process is so 20th century.

Despite the Supreme Court's clear directive that due process is very much alive and well and applies to everyone, this memo has not been rescinded. And based on these most recent cases, it seems it's still in full force and effect. But agents who are carrying out these unlawful orders should be aware that they can be held personally liable for violations of the Fourth and Fifth amendments. The Bivens case established that individual federal agents can be sued directly under the Constitution if Congress hasn't acted to provide another remedy. And as explained above, it's unlikely these ICE officers would be entitled to qualified immunity given the deliberate and egregious nature of the violations. The United States government can also be sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for torts committed by people working on behalf of the U.S. In fact, SCOTUS is hearing oral arguments on Tuesday in a case under the FTCA brought by a Georgia couple whose home was raided by the FBI by mistake—the actual house for which the FBI had a warrant was a few blocks away but the agents didn't bother to confirm they were at the right address, like by looking at the number on the outside of the house. These screwups by the government in such high-profile fashion, along with its deliberate disregard for anyone's rights and refusal to change course or correct actions they admit were mistakes, will only confirm the public's perception that these people have no idea what they are doing, they are corrupt and dangerous, and that people are getting hurt and will continue to get hurt as long as they are in power. Look for those poll numbers to keep plummeting. (L)

100 Days, Billy Joel-Style

Today is Day #100. We've already written about how things are not going well, both in a general sense and in terms of polling. We thought that we'd approach the matter from very different angle today, with this Trump-centric send-up of Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start the Fire," courtesy of reader J.L. in Los Angeles.

J.L. explains: "I worked very hard on this, and I couldn't have done it without the daily blogs of E-V.com documenting all of the shenanigans of this inept, corrupt, and corrosive presidential administration. Let us never forget (as much as we so desperately want to)..."

Should you prefer to read the lyrics:

Trump won. Harris lost. Now our country pays the cost. Here's the sh** that's taken place with Trump v2.0. Trump coin, NFTs, Grifting money digit'ly, Inauguration moved inside. Elon Musk shows Nazi Pride. XOs start to fly. GOP hates DEI. Two genders, golden age, Leave W.H.O. This is only day one. DOGE is coming, better run! Purge the websites! Change the maps! Fourteenth Amendment good-bye! Trump is a dumpster fire. He's a total douchebag... and a chronic liar. Trump is a dumpster fire. He plays golf on weekends... with his billionaire friends. Pardon insurrectionists. Buyout offer is a trick. Elon e-mail sent at night: Justify your jobs. Donald Trump is watching sports. Fetterman is wearing shorts. Wildfires, Frozen funds, U.S.A.I.D. Panama, Greenland Pissing off Canadians, Egg prices, Pam Bondi, Prosecute Trump's foes. Hegseth DUI Tulsi Gabbard—Russian Spy? Senators approved them all... really makes your skin crawl! Trump is a dumpster fire. He craves total power, and the future's sour. Trump is a dumpster fire. He'll turn all of Gaza into East Trump Plaza. No pennies, Elon's son, Kash Patel, Linda McMahon, Measles outbreak, RFK won't vaccinate. Immigration gold card, herding cats is really hard. Putin is an awesome guy. Ukraine must apologize! (Uh, oh.) Donald speaks on Congress floor, Lies for hours, maybe more. Law firms need to pay, or Trump will make them go away.

U.S. loses NATO's trust. Signal chat is blowing up. Donald Trump defies the law. Elon's got a chainsaw! Trump is a dumpster fire. A convicted felon... and his brain's a melon. Trump is a dumpster fire. Elon's having stress and so Trump bought a Tesla. Cory Booker, Cheeseheads, Colleges get Trump threats. Tariffs off, tariffs on, Liberation Day! Meltdown hitting Wall Street, bond prices in retreat, Trump tweets, Dow jumps! Insider trading just pumps. Investors on the losing side, this is such a bumpy ride. My IRA is blown away! What else do I have to pay??? Trump is a dumpster fire. He's a stable genius with a tiny penis. Trump is a dumpster fire. MAGAs kiss his ring because he's now their king. Shutting down the D.o.E. , Gut Social Security, Disappearing immigrants, Harvard takes a stand! Lyin' Leavitt has the spin... trust in Trump because he'll win. Garcia's in El Salvador. Putin's army's still at war. Hands Off protests, Trump's annoyed. Pete Hegseth is paranoid. Supreme Court Health Report Judges' tempers getting short Approval ratings dropping fast, All the people he's harassed, Every job is done half-assed. How long is he gonna last??!? Trump is a dumpster fire. Even though he's infirm... he still wants a third term. Trump is a dumpster fire. But when he is gone... will we all live on and on and on and on and on and on? Trump is a dumpster fire. I was so dejected when he got elected. Trump is a dumpster fire. There's no way to teach him... could we please impeach him? Trump is a dumpster fire. He's an angry despot... and we need a respite. Trump is a dumpster fire. He's laid the foundation to destroy our nation. Trump is dumpster fire. This song's still not ending, and he keeps offending. Trump is dumpster fire. He is so nightmarish... so please like and share this.

Thanks, J.L.! (Z)

Donald Trump Is Hurting the Republican Party

We concede, that headline is not exactly "breaking news." Nonetheless, Donald Trump continues to find new and inventive ways to harm Republican politicians as he serves his own needs and his own ego. The latest is his talk about running for and/or serving a third term in 2028.

We had an item last week about the Trump 2028 merch that the Trump family is now hawking to the rubes their supporters. A few readers wrote in to suggest that maybe the Trump in question is Donald Jr. or Eric. We considered that possibility, but then looked at the full range of products being sold (which we did not link to, for obvious reasons). Some of the worthless crap stuff being sold, in addition to bearing the Trump 2028 "logo," also includes the tagline "Change the Rules!" So, it's definitely Donald Sr. who is being referenced. Besides, Senior would never, ever abide by a situation where Junior, or Eric, was more powerful than him.

Given the tagline, it would appear that Trump's approach to a third term—assuming he is serious—is to try to secure passage of a Constitutional amendment lifting the current 2-term limit. That, of course, is not going to happen. Beyond the fact that not a single Democrat in the House or Senate would vote for it (thus killing a proposed amendment right there), Trump won 31 states in 2024. Even if all of them supported an amendment, he would still need the backing of state legislatures in seven states among California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. Again, not happening.

We concede that Trump could be laying the groundwork for a more nefarious power play. "Well, since the Democrats won't work with me to amend the Constitution—Very unfair!—I've decided I am not going to leave office on January 20, 2029." Or he could attempt an end-run around the Twenty-Second Amendment, getting elected as VP. Or, this whole Trump 2028 merch thing could just be about triggering the libs, or amusing himself with a little flex of his muscles.

Plan B (a Vance/Trump ticket) has two potential problems. First, the Twelfth Amendment states that someone not eligible to be president, say a 33-year-old, is also not eligible to be vice president. But the Twenty-Second Amendment doesn't actually say Trump is ineligible to be president, just ineligible to be elected president. SCOTUS would have to decide this one. Second, suppose Vance double-crossed Trump and refused to resign on Jan. 20, 2029, as planned?

Plan C, the only sure-fire legal way for Trump to get a third term, would require all the stars to align. First, on Jan. 3, 2029, a Republican House would have to elect Trump as speaker. Second, a ticket like Ivanka/Junior would have to be elected president/vice president in 2028, with both resigning on Jan. 20, 2029, paving the way for the speaker to succeed to the presidency. But would the many women who want to see a female president really vote for Ivanka, especially if they know the whole thing is a sham?

Whatever is going on, it effectively freezes the Republicans' 2028 presidential nominating process. The Democrats are already getting going (hence our series of candidate profiles), and they will get going in earnest once Election Day 2026 has come and gone. But as long as Trump is a "presidential candidate," no other Republican can jump in, really, without implicitly challenging the throne and aggravating the MAGA base. The GOP would be better off if Trump would state, unequivocally, that he's not running in 2028, and any statements to the contrary were just idle talk. The problem for the Party is that maintaining the impression that he is running feeds Trump's ego, fills his wallet due to the Trump 2028 merch, and also gives him a little extra political capital since he's vaguely not a lame duck as long as he keeps open the possibility of a third term. So, he's not likely to drop this charade for a very long time. (Z)

Democratic Presidential Candidate of the Week, #36: Jon Stewart

Here are the candidates we've profiled so far:

40. Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ)
41. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
42. Al Franken
43. Jon Tester

And now, it's our second Jon in a row:

• Full Name: Jon Stewart (but see below)
  
  
• Age on January 20, 2029: 66
  
  
• Background: Stewart is the child of immigrants, having been born to parents who came to the U.S. from Eastern Europe (Poland and Ukraine, specifically). He has said, on numerous occasions, that the things that were most formative for him growing up were the frequent antisemitism he experienced, and watching the waning stages of the Vietnam War, which give him a healthy skepticism when it comes to believing what government officials are saying.
  
  Stewart attended, and graduated from, the College of William & Mary. He was an indifferent student, and devoted most of his energies to soccer, starting for the university's varsity team for 3 years. Somewhat aimless after graduation, Stewart tried his hand at a variety of jobs, from low-level government bureaucrat to puppeteer to caterer to soccer coach. The job that did more than any other to set him on his course in life was bartending at the famous (but now closed) City Gardens nightclub in Trenton, NJ. From this, Stewart learned that there were others who shared his general outlook/aesthetic and also that he could make people laugh.
  
  In 1987, Stewart commenced his entertainment career as a stand-up comic. For his very first gig, he chose The Bitter End, since that is where Woody Allen had HIS first gig. Stewart quickly became one of the most popular comics in New York City and found regular work as both a performer and a writer for various comedic TV shows. However, when network executives looked at him, what they really saw was "host." Stewart was a finalist to replace David Letterman in 1992, and was given his own show, The Jon Stewart Show, in 1993.
  
  The Jon Stewart Show lasted for 2 years, and thereafter, Stewart pursued different avenues, including hosting or guest hosting several other shows, returning to stand-up, and appearing in movies. In 1999, he finally landed the gig he was made for, taking over Comedy Central's The Daily Show and serving as its full-time host for the next 16 years. In that capacity, Stewart not only found wealth and fame, but also earned more than a dozen Emmys, along with three Peabody Awards. He and his staff also collaborated on several books, most notably America (The Book): A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction (2004) and Earth (The Book): A Visitor's Guide to the Human Race (2010). Both were bestsellers, and the audiobook version of each of them earned a Grammy for Stewart.
  
  
• Political Experience: Stewart has no political experience, of course. However, he has used his platform to successfully lobby Congress to pass various pieces of legislation (see below). He also conceived of, and hosted, the Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear in 2010, which drew more than 200,000 people. In other words, Stewart has little experience inside the halls of power, but he has pretty extensive experience with activism and community organizing.
  
  
• Signature Issue(s): Veterans and first responders. Stewart may be a liberal, but he's embraced an issue that is traditionally a conservative cause in advocating for those who put their lives on the line to keep the U.S. safe. In fact, you might reasonably conclude that he actually means it, while other partisans are just blowing hot air. For example, by lobbying (and testifying before) Congress, Stewart played a key role in securing passage of the Honoring our PACT Act of 2022, which allocated almost $800 billion for veterans exposed to toxic substances during their military service. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Josh Hawley (R-MO), who both fancy themselves 2028 presidential contenders, and both present themselves as pro-veteran, voted against the bill.
  
  
• What Would His Pitch Be?: "I can speak the language of modern politics AND I get things done."
  
  
• Instructive Quote: "If you don't stick to your values when they're being tested, they're not values, they're hobbies."
  
  
• Completely Trivial Fact: Stewart's birth name was Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz; he dropped the surname (and eventually changed the spelling of "Stuart") due to a poor relationship with his father. If he were to be elected president, he would be continuing a proud tradition of chief executives known by something other than their birth names, among them Hiram Ulysses Grant, Stephen Grover Cleveland, Thomas Woodrow Wilson, David Dwight Eisenhower, Leslie Lynch King Jr. (Gerald Ford), James Earl Carter (Jimmy Carter), and William Jefferson Blythe III (Bill Clinton).
  
  
• Recent News: Stewart, who has returned to the Daily Show anchor desk once a week, has been in something of a war of words with Elon Musk. After much criticism of DOGE from Stewart, Musk took exception, and said he wanted to appear on The Daily Show to explain the work he's been doing. And he required that the appearance air "unedited." Maybe the South African thought that was a dealbreaker, but if so, he was very wrong, because Stewart immediately accepted those terms. It's been about a month, and Musk has "ghosted" Stewart, and refuses to answer phone calls or address questions about his promised appearance.
  
  
• Strengths for the Democratic Primaries: (1) Remember those candidates' debates, with a dozen people on stage? Well, if there's anyone who can cut through that kind of noise, it's Stewart; (2) By virtue of his day job, Stewart has a constituency among younger voters; (3) Stewart is capable of making the Pete Buttigieg move, and going into the lion's den that is Fox. That could be a useful skill.
  
  
• Weaknesses for the Democratic Primaries: (1) Stewart is an Israel-skeptical Jew—we don't know how that would play right now, and we definitely don't know how it would play in 2028; (2) While Republicans clearly have much tolerance for politicians who have no experience and will "learn on the job;" we tend to think Democrats have much less tolerance for this; (3) Anyone who has hosted TV shows and podcasts for more than two decades has left a treasure trove of potential material for oppo researchers to comb through and utilize.
  
  
• Polls: Occasionally a pollster tosses Stewart's name in there, if the pollster is asking about a pretty long list of candidates. In those cases, Stewart polls at around 2%-3%. That's pretty low, but it's better than the other celebrity "candidate," Stephen A. Smith.
  
  
• How Does the Readership Feel?: We asked readers for their thoughts on Stewart running for president; here are some of those responses:
  
  
  • K.T. in Oakdale, CA: I've written in a few times about Jon Stewart. I think he is by far the best, and possibly the only Democrat currently discussed, that can win over Democrats of all ages while also satisfying the public's current craving for "authenticity".
    
    Jon Stewart has a couple of unique advantages that other high profile Democrats don't. He immediately has credibility in shedding the "woke" label that has plagued Democrats; no one has this inherent advantage more than comedians. The podcast world loves Jon. Joe Rogan praises him constantly. Lex Fridman brings Jon up in many interviews, most recently with Dave Smith (another right-winger popular in that space at the moment), where they both commented on his authenticity and was the only one they could name among Democrats who could win in today's political climate.
    
    Beyond that, he is a first-rate debater and communicator. His interview with state Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-OK) on gun control is one of the most brutal dismantlings of a political position I've ever seen, and he did it in a way where you can visibly see how much Jon cared; he was shaking with emotion towards the end. Jon clearly cares about people and it shows.
    
    Much has been made about Democrats' inability to have a "Sister Souljah" moment, where they are willing to risk consequences and criticize their own. What did Jon do with his very first episode back on The Daily Show? Trash Democrats for being blind to Joe Biden's drawbacks, at a time where it was unpopular to do so, sparking Democrats to call him things like a "both-sidesist fraud." Jon then used his next episode to respond directly to that left-wing criticism, where he stated "Sorry for saying out loud what I saw with my eyes and then brain". He's had many moments like this, such as telling the Cheneys to "Fu** off" when Democrats were trying to court that Republican bloc, or even by defending Tony Hinchcliffe after the Republican convention.
    
    And of course, Jon is famous for his speech to Congress regarding the 9/11 first responders healthcare bill. This was one of the most powerful speeches I've ever seen in real life. And it speaks to Jon's ability to persuade (look at Mike Johnson's face during the testimony!) and perhaps implement a bully pulpit as president if he had to. Actions like this are what Democrats need to win over firefighters and cops who should be natural allies with the party that supports unions, but may have veered too far left in recent times. I sometimes use my Monday poker game at the local fire department as a glimpse into the minds of that voting bloc, since I am the only non-right-winger there. And Jon is the only one they ever talk about fondly.
    
    Drawbacks? Well, he's Jewish, which has historically been a non-starter. It remains to be seen if that can be overcome; if Stewart doesn't run, then Gov. Josh Shapiro (D-PA) will certainly put that to the test. Jon's other drawback? The pendulum seems to be swinging regarding trans rights, and Jon has what the right would portray as the most extreme position; he has advocated for children to be allowed to transition (most publicly in his interview with Arkansas AG Leslie Rutledge, R). This would be the line of attack against him all day, every day. It would be truly ugly to watch. His best counter would be that he said this because he doesn't believe the government should be involved in that decision, which is a more palatable position than outright advocacy.
    
    I think he could overcome his drawbacks and win a landslide election, especially if he ends up against someone like J.D. Vance or Ron DeSantis. I think his coattails could bring a pretty powerful trifecta in that kind of matchup, where authenticity would favor the Democratic candidate.
    
    
  • S.P. in Harrisburg, PA: Jon Stewart made a career of making jokes of news. If he ran for president, he would make a joke of a candidate.
    
    
  • G.C. in Conover, WI: I hope Jon runs. He has empathy and is smart as hell. And he doesn't let B.S. go without calling it out. I hope he runs just so he can debate whomever the Republicans put forward and so his truth-calling-out gets airtime with more mainstream Americans. He gets veteran issues, economic disparity, the environment, and gender issues. Then, when he wins, he can install his writing and research team as his staff. He is doing a solid for the country by doing his show again, but some of our most capable truth-speakers need to RUN and counter Trumpism to move beyond. Oh, and I hope he names Stephen Colbert as his running mate and John Oliver as his chief of staff or press secretary.
    
    
  • A.F. in Boston, MA: In words that will surely be echoed by much of the readership, Jon Stewart would make a fantastic president, but would never be elected. He is genuine: genuinely smart, genuinely caring, and genuinely knowledgeable. His tireless work for healthcare for 9/11 first responders is (or should be) legendary. It likely gives him more legislative bona fides than many other Democratic hopefuls.
    
    However, Jon Stewart's years of comedic work leave a lot of material for misrepresentation and character assassination (See: Franken, Al). Just as Fox has been a useful foil for Stewart, Stewart has been a foil and straw man for Fox. They'd have a field day with the hours upon hours of footage provided by his tenure on The Daily Show. Lastly, his Jewish heritage and name change are already whispered about in the seedy extremist corners of the Internet. As a candidate for president, that would be dragged into the mainstream and repeated on bullhorns for months.
    
    I'd love to see it, but I am confident that: (1) Stewart would give the Full Sherman™ and (2) it would be a disaster of a campaign because half of the electorate can't take a joke.
    
    
  • G.K. in Blue Island, IL: I have so much respect for Jon Stewart as a truth-teller with keen insights into power dynamics and cultural issues that I want to keep him outside the bubble of Washington politics. If he were ever to be drafted into a national candidacy, I feel like he'd die a thousand deaths having to keep his trap shut or edit his comments "for the sake of [the party, his running mate, winning an election, etc.]". Like I said, I respect him too much to wish that upon him.
    
    
  • K.R. in Austin, TX: Volodymyr Zelenskyy was a comedian who became a successful president of a country. Maybe Jon Stewart could do the same. Hopefully, it wouldn't end up in a Russian invasion.
    
    
  • J.L. in Glastonbury, CT: Jon Stewart is the left's answer to Donald Trump. He's a master of communication and sneering righteous indignation, and that is exactly what the American swing voter is looking for these days. A Jon Stewart candidacy would have been absurd pre-Trump. But now? There's nothing about him that would cause Trump-haters to withhold their vote. His ability to paint MAGA and Trump as a clown car of a**holes is unrivaled. As a man, his existence doesn't trigger sexist hate like Hilary Clinton, Kamala Harris, AOC, Liz Warren, and Rachel Maddow do. Low-engagement voters can digest his soundbites and drink his Kool-Aid. I hope he throws his hat in the ring, because I think he could win. In debates, he would do to Democratic politicians the same thing Trump did to the Republican politicians in 2016—make them play the part of status quo. High-engagement progressives have their favorite politicians, but this is no longer a politician's game and high-engagement progressives are already locked in for any Democratic candidate. It's the media, stupid.
    
    
  • J.B. in Bozeman, MT: Stewart would do well with educated elder millennials who came of age when The Daily Show was in its prime. However I'm not sure how popular he is with other demographics the Democratic Party needs. And after the incompetence of the current administration, I wonder if the general electorate will be in the mood for another celebrity without actual elected experience? His work with 9/11 first responders bill and other advocacy is admirable, though, and being an outsider may still be a valuable selling point. But like last week's Jon, Mr. Stewart is probably a bit too old.
    
    
  • A.G. in Scranton, PA: If they made a movie about Jon Stewart becoming President, it would be like Man of the Year, only with someone who actually can make people laugh: Mensch of the Year, Jon Stewart.
    
    The only three strikes against him in America are the letters J, E, and W.
  
  
• The Bottom Line: This might be the first candidate we've profiled where we can squint our eyes and maybe see it happening. It's not likely that Stewart will run, but it's not inconceivable. Certainly, stranger things have happened.

Next week, it's #35, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). If readers have comments about Murphy running for president in 2028, please send them to comments@electoral-vote.com.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger