Sunday School 8/30/20

Let's meander around the classrooms, shall we?

First up: Highlights of the conversation between Dana Bash and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Trump, via WI), on CNN's State of the Union.

Bash asked whether Johnson's "comfortable with the president appearing to inflame tensions" instead of calling for calm, let's look at his entire response:

Listen, I have been urging calm across the board, particularly in light of what happened here in Kenosha. But, as I said in the opening statement, when we had acting Secretary Wolf before my committee, when you encourage disdain for the police, you encourage criminals. When you do little or nothing to stop rioting, you encourage anarchy. So, when you're encouraging criminals and anarchy, people's lives are lost. You have more and more destruction, more and more violence. So, what we need to do is, we need to get control of the situation. And until we -- until we do, we're going to have more violence, we're going to have, unfortunately, potentially more loss of life. So, we need to get control of the situation. We need to encourage calm. 

And here's something else we need to do. We need to figure out what we do all agree on. And we share the same goal. We all want a safe, prosperous and secure America in states and communities. Let's concentrate on those areas of agreement, because that's how we achieve the unity everybody says they want.

Not hearing him mention the president, Bash tried again. Appreciating Johnson saying that "everybody should be calm," but reiterated the president's "agitating and actively encouraging his supporters." and wondered if that was what Johnson wanted to see from the president.

But, Dana, there are people -- there are people agitating all over the place. And what we need to do is get control of the situation.

Again, Bash reminded him she's talking about the President of the United States. Again, he didn't answer, instead talking about Wisconsin officials. So, Bash gave him one last chance, asking, "OK. So, given what you're saying, would you prefer that the president not tweet agitating comments and agitating ideas on his Twitter feed?

Well, that's how you -- that's how you are typifying it. What we need to do is, we need to encourage an end to the violence and the rioting.

Bash allowed as how there's really no other way to see it. And when Johnson again talked about the governor, Bash said AGAIN, "I'm talking about the president."

No, what the president did was, he offered to surge manpower resources, so the violence could end. The governor did not accept that that day. That night, tragically, two people lost their lives because citizens took matters into their own hands. I'm not for vigilantism. I'm not sure that's what was happening. People felt, because the governor and local -- local officials were looking for help. The governor did not accept the help. And so, there was not the resolve to end the rioting. And so, people took matters into their own hands. And that's what ended up happening. People die.

About those people dying? This exchange is absurd, it really is.

RJ: It is a tragedy. DB:  Do you -- do you condemn that? RJ: It is a tragedy. DB: Do you condemn it? RJ:  It is a tragedy. It is -- it's a tragedy. DB: It is a tragedy, but do you condemn it?  RJ:  The entire situation is a tragedy. Listen, I don't want to see any loss of life. It is a tragedy. And the way you prevent these tragedies is, you support law enforcement... you calm the situation. DB: A tragedy could be a car accident or something happening that is not based on fault. Do you condemn this? RJ:  You don't allow peaceful protest to turn siege -- into siege. Listen, I don't want to see anybody lose their life. I don't want to see the violence continue. I don't want to see businesses burned down. I don't want to see economic destruction. I condemn it all.

Honestly, I would have asked a simple question: "Senator, do you have any intention of answering the questions I'm asking? Because if you do, let's move ahead, and if you're only here to get your talking points across, you can send them in writing and we'll take a look at them."

They kept going, but I headed to the door  and turned down the hall to the right to the Fox News Sunday classroom, where Chris Wallace and Kate Bedingfield, deputy campaign manager for the Biden/Harris team, were chatting. The president's daughter-in-law Lara was on the show, but she got enough attention last week during the convention (and of course in her pre-speech makeup session, helped out by brush-holder Eric). 

Before answering Wallace's first question, about where Biden's going and what his message will be, Bedingfield wanted to address a couple of lies from Lara Trump.

First of all, she said that Vice President Biden had -- did not quickly condemn the violence around these protests. That's absolutely not true. He came out right after George Floyd was killed back in May and said there's no place for violence. He said it forcefully again this week. So that's simply not true.

But the other thing we heard her say is, you know, don't listen to what Donald Trump has said. Well, a president's words matter. They matter. Part of the reason that we are in these state of chaos that we're in, in this country is because Donald Trump has failed to lead on the coronavirus, he failed to take it seriously from the outset, and he's failed to be a uniter, he's failed to lead, as we've been grappling with this moment of racial injustice in this country.

She didn't share any details on Biden's travel plans, but did say details will be coming, and that his message will be the same as it's been all along

which is calling together people, uniting the country, leading, encouraging people to take on this moment with a sense of purpose... He's been doing that. He's been leading. It's exactly the opposite of what we've seen seeing from Trump, who's been trying to incite violence this entire summer.

Wallace jumped on that one, saying "The president is inciting violence?"

You saw Donald Trump go to New Hampshire on Friday and say, you know, protestors my ass. He's had every opportunity to speak as a leader to this nation that is hurting, to speak to people who are struggling, who are trying to rightly seek justice in this moment, but also who are looking around and who are afraid, who see chaos, who see an incredibly unsettled time. And -- 

Wallace said, "OK, but answer my question - you said incite violence."

Absolutely. He has. He has encouraged his supporters to go out, to be aggressive. You heard -- you were just discussing with Lara Trump, Kellyanne Conway said it unapologetically, it is better for this president if there is more anarchy, more violence, more chaos. He has, at every opportunity, tried to fan the flames here and we are -- and that is the reason we are living in Donald Trump's America. You know, he is trying to make this argument -- he is trying to make an argument about Joe Biden's America, pointing to things that are happening in Donald Trump's America.

Back to the original question, Bedingfield said that Biden saying he'd follow the science and then announcing visits to several swing states "are not mutually exclusive." 

From the outset, we have followed the science, we have followed the public health guidelines, we have held social distant, responsible events with people wearing masks, with people taking the proper precarious. You know, obviously, it is a very clear contrast --

Wallace pressed again, and Bedingfield said he was being "disingenuous" and that "following the science" includes holding socially distant, responsible events.

You know, people across this country have been sharing sacrifice since the virus spiraled out of control this spring. They have been not attending family events. They have, you know, not been attending weddings. The American people have really banded together and shared sacrifice to move us forward through this crisis. And we, as a campaign, have also chosen to behave responsibly. You don't see that for -- you don't see that from the Trump campaign. You certainly didn't see it last week on the South Lawn of the White House.

Wallace moved on, sharing a clip from the David Muir section of the ABC interview with the VP and his VP, the part when Muir asked about a potential spike during a Biden presidency, and here's how it played out.

Biden: I would be prepared to do whatever it takes to save lives, because we cannot get the country moving until we control the virus.

Muir:  So if the scientists say, shut it down? Biden: I would shut it down. I would listen to the scientists. 

With that lead-in, here was the question: "No, no leading scientist that I've seen is talking about shutting down the country again. So why would the vice president even raise that possibility?"

Bedingfield didn't give the right answer, which is "Joe Biden didn't raise the issue, David Muir did. Biden answered the question honestly, which I appreciate is something most reporters and pundits aren't all that familiar with." Instead, she chose not to answer the question, and instead talked about Trump.

Well, let's ask ourselves why we're in a situation where we would have to, Chris, because Donald Trump has failed to contain this virus. From the outset, Trump could have put in place a coordinated, aggressive federal effort. He could have put in place a supply commander to make sure that nurses and people on the front lines were getting -- 

Wallace tried again, saying the question he's asking is not about trump, it's "why is Joe Biden talking about shutting down the country again?" And Bedingfield failed, again. 

KB: But it is about Trump's response, Chris, because why are we here? Why are we in a position where we -- where we have to --

CW: No, I -- that isn't the question I'm asking. I'm asking, why would he talk about -- why would the -- why could the vice president talk about shutting down the economy again? 

Bedingfield went on at length about the failings of Trump on the pandemic - again, the wrong answer. Biden needs better people on his team, I'm thinking.

Wallace moved back to violence, noting that Biden had a 20-point deficit in a WaPo poll, where 42% of white suburban voters said Biden would make them less safe from crime, compared to only 22% who said he'd make them more safe.

Bedingfield didn't have an answer. She gave one, but she didn't have one, other than  what people are feeling and what they're seeing are Trump's America, Trump's failed leadership, and that Biden will

continue to lead. He is going to continue to work to bring us together. He's going to put forward meaningful plans that address the underlying issues here... plans that tackle systemic economic inequality in our society -- plans that will bring back jobs, plans that will create jobs, and plans that will get the virus under control, which is the single most important thing that we have to do in order to get our economy back on track. 

That those plans are going to make Biden "a very progressive president if he, in fact, implements what has been written," and about which President Obama said, "If you look at Joe Biden's goals and Bernie Sanders' goals, they're not that different from a 40,000 foot level" had Wallace wondering, but Bedingfield tried to allay his fears, pointing out that Biden has worked with Republicans, with independents, and with progressive Democrats.  He's done it his entire career, and will do it as president, too.

For this week's Extra Credit, we'll hear from some unlikely suspects. Tune in for that, and please, wear your mask, and stay away from parties, or we'll never get out of this online learning stuff. 

See you around the virtual campus.