Quick Takes (v76): Old Guard v. Newcomers

Why are people like me so sick and tired of 'politics as usual,' you ask? There are so many reasons, including the one illustrated below.

Connecticut Democrats are being asked, by a millionaire septuagenarian, to vote him through the party primary and let him fight it out in the general election for a 15th term in Congress. 

Why? Because he's been around long enough to be a committee chairman if the Dems manage to not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in November, and actually win the House in the midterms.

Calls for generational change in Connecticut
Connecticut Democrat John B. Larson has been in the House of Representatives for 14 terms. He would like at least two more years, but the race to replace him has become the latest test of the left’s desire for generational change.

Larson faces three challengers today — former Hartford mayor Luke Bronin, Hartford school board member Ruth Fortune and state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest — but Bronin is seen as the candidate with the best chance to upset Larson, who turned 78 last month.

Larson is staking his reelection campaign on his seniority, arguing that it would be foolish for voters to throw away the power that comes with age in the nation’s seniority-driven political system. “If you’re coming to Congress for the first time, you start at the bottom and work your way up,” Larson said this month. “But if you have the opportunity to send someone who’s going to be a chairman, that means your voice in your district is amplified.”

Just imagine how different things could be if people didn't just assume that because they've 'been there, done that' for a long time, they're the better choice to represent their constituents.

Just imagine how different things could be if bright newcomers with ideas that are supported by thousands in their district and millions in their party weren't forced to 'wait their turn' to get the opportunity to make a difference. 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a perfect example of this; she lost a vote to become the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee to an eight-term gentleman from Virginia, Rep. Gerry Connolly, "who has got experience, who is seasoned, who can be trusted, who has a record of productivity," he said after the vote.

Would AOC have been the perfect choice for ranking member? Maybe not. Would giving her the chance have been a mistake? I doubt it. But how long will she or others have to wait to get the experience, become seasoned and trusted, before they get a chance to prove themselves? 

Just imagine how different things could be if everyone who was chosen to serve placed their constituents first, rather than party leadership (or worse, the head of another coequal branch of government), and fought for the things that their district needs, whether it's health insurance, clean water, a chip factory, replacement of aging infrastructure, or brand new infrastructure like rural hospitals and elder care facilities, a modernized airport, data center or yes, even an ICE detention facility, if that's what the people want.

Everyone young or new is not automatically better; everyone old is not automatically worse - this is not about age. Rather, it's about how things change outside the halls and walls of where our elected officials spend their time - on our dime - and how hard it is to get those changes recognized inside those halls and walls. 

There has to be a better way; term limits are a start, of course, but it runs deeper than that, doesn't it? Chime in!

A Day Without Capitalism

 Wth the rise of 'progressive' candidates who are running against - and often defeating - 'traditional' democrats, I think we need to have a conversation about how candidates label themselves, how they're labeled by the media, and how to talk about their ideas for governing.

Here are a few of the up-and-comers who won seats, or won primaries and will battle it out in November's election. And here's your quiz question: which (if any) of the winning candidates named below are actually members of the Democratic Socialists of America?

• NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who won just over 50% of the vote in defeating so-called 'Independent' Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa. 

• Darializa Avila Chevalier (also known as DAC) defeated five-term incumbent Adriano Espaillat in the primary for the NY-13 Congressional district. 

• Brad Lander defeated two-term incumbent Dan Goldman in the primary for the NY-10 Congressional district. 

• Janeese Lewis George won the Democratic primary for mayor of Washington, DC. 

• Nithya Raman was one of the two Democrats advancing to the general election in the race for mayor of Los Angeles. Karen Bass, the incumbent mayor, is the other.

• Dr. Abdul El-Sayed won the Democratic primary for US Senate in Michigan, defeating Rep. Haley Stevens 48.5% to 47.5%. 

• Melat Kiros defeated Rep. Diana DeGette in a primary for Colorado's 1st district. DeGette was first elected to the seat in 1997. 

Given the recent successes of DSA members, democratic socialists, and progressive Democrats, I thought it was important to share this narrative, part of the DSA Program. It's an interesting place to kick off a review of the DSA and its platform.

Imagine taking a day off from work in a future without capitalism.

It might not feel as badly needed as it does now. You enjoy your work; it’s interesting to you, and you’re well trained for it. You work as much as you are able and no more than needed, and you would control your own labor and see it going to good use. It's not just a job to pay the bills.

Speaking of bills; you don't really have them anymore.

You have no debt. You don’t need health insurance. You don’t pay a mortgage or have a landlord, because comfortable housing is a human right. Your retirement is publicly funded. Food, education, energy, medicine, and transportation aren’t for-profit businesses; they are common goods and utilities.

OK, enough about bills. What do you do on your day off? Maybe in the morning, you walk your kids to school, run errands, or go to a doctor’s appointment. In the afternoon, you might play a sport, practice a new skill, read, plan a trip. In the evening, you could meet up with friends or family and eat together, maybe go to the movies or down to the park.

These are all familiar, everyday activities. A socialist day off could be like any good day now. But what if you were free to spend your time how you like without worrying about cost or dreading going back to work? What if you didn’t have to think about paying rent or loans at the end of the month, or saving for college, or affording groceries?

It’s been said that it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism. But just because it isn’t easy to imagine now doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to make it happen.

Workers deserve more.

Do workers, or does anyone, "deserve" a day without bills, no landlord or mortgage, without needing health insurance, with a publicly funded retirement? 

Is it just me lacking an imagination, or is this 'day without capitalism' something that we should be striving to make happen? Chime in on any of these candidates/races; on the DSA generally; on the challenges facing the Democrats heading into the midterms and beyond, , or anything else that strikes your fancy.

=============

And, as best as I can tell from researching and asking AI,  here are the answers to the quiz at the top of the post:

• NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani is a member of the DSA

• Darializa Avila Chevalier is a member of the DSA and the Democratic Party.

• Brad Lander is not currently a member of the DSA, but he was once; he left following the October 7th attack on Israelis, according to published reports.

• Janeese Lewis George self-describes as a democratic socialist, and was endorsed by the DSA, but does not appear to be a member of the DSA.

• Nithya Raman is a member of the DSA and the Democratic Party. Karen Bass, the incumbent mayor, is not a socialist or a member of the DSA.

• Dr. Abdul El-Sayed is not a member of the DSA and says he believes in 'regulated' capitalism, not socialism. 

• Melat Kiros is a member of the DSA.

How'd you do?

Sunday School 8/2/26

With all of the focus on the Democratic Socialists competing in Democratic primaries across the country, I thought I'd spend time with the OG DS, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who chatted with Kristen Welker in NBC's Meet the Press classroom yesterday. While some of Welker's questions were long, almost all of Sanders' answers were, so be prepared.  

Welker started by referencing a new poll showing that "one third of Democratic-leaning voters now identify as Democratic Socialists (DS)," and noted that, "quite frankly," DS candidates have been winning their primaries. And she asked Sanders if he was confident they could win in purple states. I'm going to try and break up his 470-odd word response into sections so you can catch your breath reading it.

Well, I am, but I’m mostly confident that the American people know that our country today is moving in a very, very bad direction at a time when we have more income and wealth inequality than we’ve ever had in the history of America. What’s going on now makes the Gilded Age of Rockefeller look like an egalitarian utopia. What’s going on now is that millions of our people, right now, in the richest country on Earth, they’re struggling to put food on the table, pay for health care, pay for their rent, pay for their mortgage.

You got half of all the workers who have nothing in savings as they face retirement. Or you’re facing seeing kids unable to afford to go to college in the richest country in the history of the world. So people all over America are looking around, they’re saying, “Hey, wait a minute. The very richest people are becoming richer. Elon Musk himself, one man, owns more wealth by far than the bottom half of American households. What in God’s name is going on?”

And people look at the Republican leadership and Donald Trump, and they say, “You know, this guy’s worried about a Reflecting Pool. I can’t afford my retirement. He’s starting a war in Iran, costing us huge amounts of money, killing innocent people. 18 American servicemen are dead. What are they doing?”

And then you look at the Democratic Party leadership, which also gets their money, like the Republicans, from very wealthy people, and people are saying, “Is the Democratic leadership representing ordinary Americans?” And I think people look at the Republicans, they say, “No, they’re out of touch,” look at the Democratic leadership, say, “No, they’re out of touch.

We need a government, a radical idea, that works for all people and not just for wealthy campaign contributors.” And that’s why, from New York City with (Zoran) Mamdani, and in Colorado, and in California, and in Montana, and I think you’re going to see it in Michigan, people are saying, “Enough is enough. You know, let’s get a government that represents all of us.”

And I’ve got to tell you something, Kristen, that part of the exasperation that the American people are feeling, it’s not just an economy which is rigged. They’re looking at a corrupt — underlying corrupt campaign finance system. And what you’re seeing in Michigan right now is AIPAC, other billionaire-funded super PACs, putting tens and tens of millions of dollars against Abdul El-Sayed. In Minnesota against Peggy Flanagan, same thing.

So we’ve got billionaires buying elections, government working for the billionaires, and ordinary people saying, “We want change.” And that is why progressives, democratic socialists, are doing so well all over this country. They’ve got an agenda that speaks to the needs of working families. They’re prepared to stand up to the oligarchs.

Since Sanders mentioned Michigan, she wondered how confident he was that his endorsed candidate, Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, could "pull out a victory" in Tuesday's primary against the establishment candidate, Congresswoman Haley Stevens.

Look, he has taken on –I’ve never - you know, I’m not a political scientist. I cannot recall where a major candidate was outspent so much by super PACs. I mean, they’re spending tens and tens of millions of dollars against him. The polling recently looks good, but polls don’t win elections, people do. So I would hope that, in Michigan and later next week in Minnesota, people understand the importance of this election. What’s it about?

It’s not just whether Abdul can win or not, beat Haley Stevens. The question is whether or not we live in a democratic society where a candidate fighting for working people can take on tens and tens of millions of dollars of AIPAC money, special interest money. And I hope very much that Abdul is - and I’ll tell you why, and a kind of selfish reason. Everybody in America understands that our current health care system is totally broken. We’re spending unbelievable amounts of money, twice as much per capita as the people of any other country. 85 million uninsured, underinsured. Prices way high.

Dr. El-Sayed is somebody I need in the Senate as he fights for Medicare for All. He’s a doctor. He has seen the broken health care system. We need him to make sure that every man, woman, and child in this country has health care as a human right, as is the case in every other major country on Earth.

Welker noted that Sen. Gary Peters, whose seat is up for grabs, has backed Stevens to replace him, saying

You have to have a candidate who understands that winning a general election doesn’t mean just turning out Democrats. You also have to appeal to a broader cross-section of your state, and Michigan is a true purple state.

To Sanders, she posted this question: "What do you think Dr. El-Sayed will have to do in order to turn out moderates and independents to win a general election if he does win on Tuesday?" In a nutshell, Sanders explained El-Sayed can win because working-class Republicans are in the same boat as all working-class people, and they know the system is broken.

You are struggling to figure out how you’re going to retire with dignity. You understand that the current campaign finance system is broken. You understand that workers need decent wages, and El-Sayed is fighting for a livable minimum wage. And by the way, if you’re a Republican, you know maybe we should be investing our money into Michigan, into Vermont, into America rather than giving the extremist government of Netanyahu and Israel tens of billions of dollars to continue their atrocities against the Palestinian people - I think if you’re a working-class - ok - if you’re a working-class Republican in Michigan, I think you’re going to listen to what El-Sayed says. You’re gonna - and I think many of them will end up voting for him. Independents as well, of course.

Welker asked if El-Sayed should "speak with the same clarity" as Sanders has on the issue of Israel as a Jewish State. El-Sayed has said he "often struggles with the question of whether Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state.”  Here's the non-answer:

Look, I think right now the immediate issue of the moment is whether or not we continue to put tens of billions of dollars into the extremist Netanyahu government, which has killed 75,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, wounded 150,000, destroyed their infrastructure. And what the American people are saying overwhelmingly, Democrats, many independents - the majority of independents, and many Republicans, especially younger Republicans, “We’ve got better things to do with our money than to continue to fund the military of Israel.”

They talked a bit about the Maine primary, where Troy Jackson was chosen to replace Graham Platner after widely-reported scandals. Sanders knows Jackson; he'd endorse him if he was asked, and said "I look forward to working with him in the US Senate." And, on comments from Sen. John Fetterman (Kinda D- PA) about Sanders supporting Platner, Sanders suggested that Fetterman "was reflecting the views of about 19% of the Democrats" in PA and is "way out of touch with the people of America."  And, when she asked if he had any regrets about endorsing Platner, he turned to his standard lines:

I’ll tell you, you know, I think right now we’re looking at a campaign in Michigan, we’re looking at a campaign in Minnesota. The people of this country right now are sick and tired of establishment politics and establishment policies. They want change and I and other progressives are going to do everything that we can to bring about those changes.

Finally, they talked about who could carry the progressive banner into the next presidential race, which will be the first without him since 2016.

Kristen there are — one of the untold secrets in Washington is in the U.S. House of Representatives, for example, you have many, many really strong progressives. Many of them are young. Many of them are women. Many of them are people of color. And we have elected many of them. And I think as a result of this election cycle, you’re going to see a lot more coming to Washington. I think as a nation, and by the way, with all due respect, the media spends too much time worrying about who’s going to be a president in two and a half years.

Right now, we have enormous problems facing this country. We’re looking at heat waves all over the world. You’ve got climate change. We’re looking at the big tech oligarchs pushing AI and robotics down our throat. Congress is doing very little to protect working people in that. We’re looking at massive levels of income and wealth inequality, a corrupt campaign finance system. My suggestion is, as a country, as a Congress, as media, let’s focus on the important issues facing working people. Two and a half years from now is a long time to a presidential election. I’m sure it will unfold itself.

I had hoped there'd be more questions about the Democratic Socialists of America platform, and to what extent the DS candidates support the platform. We'll have to wait to see if any of them win in November before anyone starts asking about that. 

For his part, Sanders was Sanders - his answers, in my opinion, were entirely predictable. What do you think?

Sunday School 7/26/26

For your Sunday School lesson this week, I spent time in CNN's State of the Union classroom, which was in a New York State of mind.

First up for host Dana Bash was House Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY). Bash noted the Dems are launching something called '100 Days Out Weekend of Action,' a sprint to the midterms, by hosting over 400 events across the country. At the same time, they have to figure out how to regain the majority either through the center or through the "activist left." Noting the latter group wants to "defund the police, abolish ICE, aid to Israel, open borders," she asked Jeffries if he was planning on moving on any of those issues if they win in November. 

Rather than answer her question, he said the Ds would focus on what unites them, and that's "a focus on fighting for an affordable America" because "life in this country is far too expensive," and that's something the whole party agrees on.

Too many people are working hard, they're playing by the rules, but they can't thrive and they can barely survive, not enough food on the table, not enough gas in the tank, unable to actually regularly and consistently afford to pay the rent or pay the mortgage. We want to drive down the cost of groceries, drive down and lower the cost of gasoline, drive down the cost of housing, and also make sure that health care is affordable for every single American. 

Bash tried again, asking whether the party's policy proposals will "be in line with" what some recent progressive winners want, or if they'll move towards "the moderate area" if they win the swing states.  Again, rather than answering the question, he chose bumper stickers: push back against the "one big ugly bill" and its Medicaid cuts, extend the Affordable Care Act subsidies, stop the "reckless and costly war of choice," and stop Trump's tariffs.

After two non-answers, Bash took a more direct approach, noting Jeffries has reportedly "clashed" with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who's campaigning for progressives, even those challenging incumbents, "including members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC)." She asked if Sanders and others are making it harder for the Ds to win, and if that's what led to the clash. 

Jeffries said it wasn't a clash so much as a "candid conversation" with Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY), chair of the CBC PAC, and it was about a single North Carolina primary. He added that he thinks Sanders and House and Senate Dems "understand the stakes" - taking control of Congress,

so we can end this MAGA extremism that has been unleashed on the American people that is actively hurting hardworking American taxpayers, and actually commit to making life more affordable for the American people.

She gave him one last chance to explain how he'll handle the progressives; according to him, "not a single person" among the incoming members has raised any of the issues Bash mentioned, other than how Dems are pushing back against the administration's immigration policies, including ICE.

The last question was about New Jersey's non-citizen voting disclosure; Bash, noting that Dems say this "doesn't happen," wondered if the discovery causes a problem for the Dems.

I think that I continue to have confidence in state and local authorities in making sure that there's going to be a free and fair election in November, and, if modest or minor challenges emerge, such as the one that was disclosed voluntarily by the authorities in New Jersey, that it is immediately corrected. And that's what I expect will continue to happen. 

And then? Back to the bumper stickers: Trump and the Rs and voter suppression, their failure to lower prices, the war, skyrocketing gas prices, and Medicaid cuts, before saying this:

They have nothing to run on. We're going to run on fighting for an affordable America.

The next New Yorker in the classroom was Border Czar Tom Homan; he's a North Country native who maintains a home in Sackets Harbor, where protestors have made their views on ICE known.

Bash led with asking if he knows "specifically" what's going on with the ICE officers who were involved in the shootings in Texas and Maine, and whether they'd been reassigned or placed on leave. Homan said he hadn't been involved in the investigations and didn't know the officers' status, but said that the policy is that they'd be put on leave during the investigation. Bash seemed surprised that, "as border czar involved in this," he didn't know for sure what had happened to the agents. He made it clear that ICE reports to Markwayne Mullin, and said

I've said from day one I won't comment on an investigation, but I can tell you I haven't specifically tracked these cases, but I can tell you, per policy, they're usually put on administrative leave pending the investigation, pending sworn statements, internal affairs interviews and the entire investigation. They usually will not be put back on duty until the investigation is over and either have been cleared or, if they've got problems, then they may not go back at all.

That last comment opened the door for Bash to bring up the domestic violence allegations against the officer in Maine (which the officer has denied). According to court documents, one of his ex-wives said that "she experienced severe domestic violence in her marriage and that he always displayed violent behavior, and even that, if anything ever happened to her, he'd be the one to look at." She wondered whether someone "with those issues" should be an ICE agent. 

No, if those of those are facts, he -- I don't think he should ever have cleared vetting. When they hire somebody, they put them through a vetting process and look at all that stuff. So, I know, based on that information -- that's part of the ongoing investigation... -- did the vetting process fail? Was that information not available? Did they not know? So, there's a separate administrative investigation on what happened here.... But the vetting process, I -- if that was factual, he would have an almost impossible time to pass vetting.

Homan said all ICE employees (some 30,000 of them) go through vetting and "this is a kind of a rare instance." And this is just one aspect of the ongoing review.

So, the training is under review. I know this specific case, as far as the vetting, is under review by the internal affairs section. So we will see where it lies. But, certainly, if this person had that type of history, it would have been a vetting issue, and it should have been brought to the attention of those who makes those decisions.

That led to Bash questioning the training, as she did the vetting, pointing to the race to "find as many undocumented immigrants as possible to deport." Homan disagreed with that premise, noting that every law enforcement agency reassesses training protocols and makes changes as needed; he even did that when he was the ICE director. And, he pointed to what Todd Lyons, ICE director last year, told Congress - that while training has changed, the amount of training did not.

They just stopped the duplication. Now it's being reviewed and... look, can we add additional training?  I think Markwayne Mullin made the decision, well, let's do a temporary pause and make sure we -- the officers have what they need to be safe and do the most safe, secure arrests possible. And that review was done pretty quickly.  

Yeah, that 'pause' is a thing, right? Here's Bash:

...during what ended up being a very brief pause, like a day, the homeland security secretary, Markwayne Mullin, said that vehicle stops would be paused, and then the president very quickly overturned that directive. But while the pause was in place, you did say it was done for the safety of the officers and whether something could have been done... my question for you is, how is it possible that all of that got accomplished in just the one day that the pause existed?

Homan pointed to some immediate changes, including at least one officer with a body camera to record all stops, and a journeyman agent assigned to them, as well. 

... (Acting ICE director) David Venturella sent an instruction out that he wants at least one body camera on those vehicle stops, so we have everything on video. So, whether the officer did something right or did something wrong, whether the alien did something right or wrong, it's on video. And I'm a big supporter of video cameras. I'm a big supporter, because I want the American people to see what that officer saw when he took whatever action they took.

Frankly, everyone wants that - the public has wanted that for months. 

Moving on to the panel discussion, we've got three more New Yorkers in the game: Congressmen Tom Suozzi (D), who represents part of the North Shore of Long Island and Mike Lawler (R), who represents folks in Rockland and Putnam Counties, and Syracuse native Maya Willey, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. GOP analyst Alyssa Farah Griffin, a native Californian, was also in the mix.

Bash, herself a native New Yorker, opened with a clip from Trump's hour-long rally/WHCA dinner speech.

What do we do here? Is this supposed to be fun? I hate some people. I shouldn't say this. I'm president. I'm not supposed to hate. I'm supposed to love everybody. Sloppy Chris Christie, one of the sloppiest human beings you will ever meet.

Ilhan Omar, one of my favorites. She ought to get the hell out of our country. She shouldn't be here. She shouldn't be in our country. You can't call J.B. Pritzker a fat pig, please.

Briefly, here's what the panel thought:

• Fara Griffin: Listen, he bombed, but the most offensive thing about it was that it wasn't funny...   and President Trump, by the way, can be funny... That did not show up...  I asked myself at the end of what felt like 90 minutes we will never get back of our lives, what was the point of that? It didn't unify him with the press, it didn't ingratiate him more, and he didn't really seem to have any goal. We're talking about Czech crystal, and then we're insulting, kind of going through the greatest hits... I'm not sure why he was there, to be honest. 

• Suozzi: It was just mean. I thought it was just mean-spirited. It wasn't funny. It's supposed to be an entertaining, fun night, and it was just, I thought, mean-spirited.

• Lawler: ... I think it was important for the president to go... from that standpoint, it was a positive... I think he could have been a lot funnier... Frankly, some of the stuff that is said on CNN about the president in real time is a lot harsher than anything he threw on Friday night... I definitely think the president could have brought a little more levity to it than he did

• Willey: Unfunny, mean, all of the above...  one of the points of (the dinner) is to celebrate the First Amendment and free speech... we saw not only a refusal to allow any political satire, in the form of having a comedian there. We also saw a president attacking journalists because they won awards on topics that he didn't like...

Shifting gears to the midterms and a CBS/YouGov poll showing that 78% said the administration is not focusing enough on lowering prices, Lawler was up first; he touted his own record of focusing "almost exclusively" on affordability, including pushing the SALT limit increase and the bipartisan housing bill (enacted by 'executive indifference'), and noted

...it was a Republican House, a Republican Senate, and a Republican White House that worked together to get it done. It was bipartisan. There were a number of Democrat initiatives in there as well. But this will actually increase supply, lower prices, create greater access to capital. These are the things the American people want us to focus on, and that's what I have been focused on.

Suozzi, on the other hand, reminded Lawler that they were both at the Inauguration last January, when we were all promised prices would come down fast. And he pointed to "five specific points directly related to this administration that are raising prices."  (I count four, but who's counting?)

Everybody knows the tariffs increase people's prices, make your food more expensive every day, make your business more expensive. Everybody knows that the war is causing an increase of gas prices at the gas pump. Everybody knows this is the biggest deficit in the history of the United States of America, which causes upward pressure on interest rates, make it impossible to buy a house, to lease a car, to pay for your credit card. Everybody knows that they have cut health care premium tax credits. You and I worked together to try and save the premium tax credits...

Farah Griffin said the Rs are looking to the White House to "please get this president on message" about bringing down prices, but there's "not a great story to tell right now."

With the Iran war going -- continuing to go on, gas prices are not coming down the way that we hoped they would. The ongoing tariff regime, which we seem to announce more tariffs day in and day out, Mexico, Canada, what is next? And this is -- this is where you have got to have sound advisers around him. I imagine Susie Wiles is in his ear saying, 'you have got to get on message ahead of these midterms,' because to -- if you're the president, investigations come, accountability comes if you lose the House and potentially the Senate.

She also said they missed the boat and he should have held a big event for the housing bill, saying

... he completely missed the opportunity there. It's remarkable the inability to see what the American people voted for him to do and then deliver on it.

Willey gets the last word, noting that the messaging is not enough, and furthermore, 

... the truth is, these are self-inflicted wounds. These are not natural occurrences in high prices. These are the creation of decisions this administration has made, the Iran war being a really big and obvious one lost on no one.

And that's a wrap. Did you learn anything? Did the New Yorkers represent the state well? Drop a comment!

The Journal of Unpopular Opinions (Chapter 4)

When a president, congressman, senator, governor, state legislator, or anyone else tells you that the only way they can ‘protect you from the other side’ or ‘continue serving you to the best of their abilities’ is to treat you as if you haven’t got an independent thought in your head, run screaming from the room.

*****     *****     *****     *****     

Off-cycle Congressional redistricting by Republicans, like that done (so far) in Texas, North Carolina, Ohio, and soon Indiana, which will tackle it starting Monday, has nothing to do with what voters want and everything to do with what the politicians want: to protect their longevity by caving to a president who clearly knows he is as unpopular as we the people believe he is.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for similar redistricting efforts by the Democrats, such as those under consideration in Maryland, Illinois, and New York (so far). Some consider these noble efforts, from a 'we can't let them rig the election' or whatever the logic is, but I disagree. It's a shameless attempt to grab power, to protect their longevity, and to cheat the system, which is exactly what the Ds claim the Rs are doing.  

California's goal is the same, but the process is different, so I dislike it slightly less than I do the blatant stuff being done elsewhere. The Golden State has an independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, so the legislature needs voter approval to bypass that group and institute its own maps - and I hope voters reject the Prop 50 ballot initiative. 

Why?  Because we should be demanding the right to choose our politicians, rather than letting them choose us. We should never give a politician our vote simply because we share a party affiliation. We should be making them work for every vote they want and earn every vote they get. 

And we should never stand for them giving in to the narcissistic, panicked demands and threats of the person at the top of their party, no matter how high the throne upon which that person sits.

For too long, we have acted as if the term ‘voting rights’ only applies to ensuring access to voting.  For years, we have sat by, watching the people who have been trusted to represent us:

• make it harder for us to vote by taking away options like early voting, mail-in ballots, and other changes, and by implementing ridiculous rules that directly and negatively impact women, the elderly, and economically disadvantaged voters, because 'those people' are more likely to vote against a certain party;

• constantly bang the drum about all kinds of voter fraud, ignoring years of evidence that there is negligible impact from the extremely limited fraud that occurs, and complaining that elections they don't are rigged, and threatening states, which have constitutional control over their voting rules, with all kinds of retribution if they don't change their ways to diminish or exclude certain voters;

• allow our voices to be overshadowed and overwhelmed by the tens of millions of dollars politicians of both parties receive from corporations, political parties, unions, lobbyists, PACs, and super-rich donors, in return for who knows what legislative promises; and

• blatantly look away from - heck, they run away from - our legitimate concerns about the direction of our country, their policies, and their ineffectiveness.

And here we are today, 

• letting them disrespect us even more by rearranging us into districts they assume will give them an advantage; 

• letting them assume we’re nothing but sheep that will vote for a party rather than for our issues and interests; and 

• letting them assume they no longer have to work for our votes.  

You know what they say about people who assume, right? That old line about 'making an ass...'?

Don’t let them get away with it.

• If your state asks you to vote for off-cycle redistricting, vote no.

• If your state just goes ahead and redistricts off-cycle, let the folks who represent you know that you’re unhappy about it, and that you’ll vote against them at the earliest opportunity. And then, do exactly that.

• And if they’re not talking about it, or have decided not to play the game, thank them – and remind them that they still have to work for – and earn – your vote, every single election.

It's time we fully use our voting rights - and there's no better time to start than this Tuesday, Election Day. 

Breaking Fake News Update (v11)

 Fake News Broke on August 19, 2025!

This was fun fake news to cook up, for sure: toss in a little bit of DOGE (remember DOGE? Where are our DOGE checks, by the way?), a teaspoon or so of crime (who doesn't love to talk about crime?), a cup or two of election fraud (every MAGA Republican has lived through a fraudulent election - just ask one), a heaping tablespoon of a geriatric Democratic demon, a dash of American warfighters (!!!), and a pinch of accounting, and you've got a blue-ribbon recipe, for sure!

And yes, FOTUS did say when *he* votes, he gets asked for his license plate - that part is not a figment of my imagination.

As always, when fake news is breaking, we'll be shaking things up and keeping you informed.

Breaking Fake News Update (v7)

Fake News Broke on August 12, 2025! 

This fake news broke as FOTUS made a deal - a great deal, he's the greatest deal maker in the history of deals, after all - without any announced plans of where the money will go or how it will be used. This follows a similar deal where "he" says he controls a 'golden share' of US Steel, as part of the company's sale to Japan's Nippon Steel. 

And of course, it allows for some Mamdani fun, as FOTUS is greatly disturbed by New Yorkers rejecting Andrew Cuomo. You remember him, right? The COVID-era nursing home scandal, the sexual harassment scandal, and the biggest scandal of all, the Mario Cuomo Bridge?  While Cuomo and FOTUS have butted heads over the years, the devil you know is better than the one you don't, or something like that.

The full weight of the weaponizers in the administration will be brought down on Mandami - DOJ, Homeland Security, and more - including a potential citizenship revocation. That last part? That's not my fake news, that's the real deal, they say. This is one we'll keep an eye on, the Democrats will keep an eye on, the MAGAs will keep an eye on - and you should, too.

We will post more fake news as it breaks.

Breaking Fake News Update (v6)

Fake News Broke (Again) on August 11, 2025! 

This fake news broke as FOTUS's efforts to gain more control over the House of His Personal Representatives struggled in Texas as pesky Democrats left the Lone-Star-reviewed state and headed north to blue states to avoid having to participate in the mid-cycle redistricting shenanigans. This one pretty much wrote itself.

The Dems eventually returned to Austin, where they had to get permission (and a police escort) to leave the legislative chamber, for God's sake, and voted against the power grab. Needless to say, the MAGA Republicans had their way, the maps were approved, and Gov. Gregg Abbott signed the bill. 

We will continue to share fake news as it breaks.

Wondering on Wednesday 5/1/24

 

Ready... Set... Wonder!

During last month's discussion on foreign aid bills, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R- Burning Down the House) offered an amendment to the Ukraine bill requiring any Republican who voted for the aid package to conscript into the Ukrainian military. No similar requirements for aid to Israel and Taiwan were put forward. I can't help wondering why the bills weren't treated the same. 

Some people pretend Greene is Putin's representative to the House, so we shouldn't be surprised that she'd stick it to Ukraine. Others think we're not responsible for defending Europe, but we are responsible for Israel's defense, no matter the cost. These arguments are symptomatic of the degradation of our policy debates over the past few years, leaving me to wonder what it'll take to get us back to realistic discussions.

Greene also said that, instead of giving aid to Ukraine, we should focus on our 'America First economy.' Hearing that, I had to wonder if she even knew what was in the bill, or if she'd read any articles on how our aid to Ukraine works. She must know that as much as $68B of the $113B that Congress has approved for Ukraine  "is destined to be invested here at home."

U.S. support for Ukraine thus offers a once-in-a-generation opportunity to sustain a demand signal to address long-standing weaknesses in U.S. DIB systems generally and ordnance and missile production specifically.

Yep - we send our stockpiled, outdated stuff to Ukraine, and we replenish our stockpiles with newer American-made stuff. If that's not an America First policy, I wonder what would be. I also wonder if Marge ever has a clue, if she's this clueless on our Ukraine aid.

Sticking with Marge for a minute longer, she's announced she'll move to oust Speaker Mike Johnson next week, even as the Dem leadership announced they'll vote table any such motion. Most House Republicans don't want her to move ahead; the RNC doesn't want her to; and even Donald Trump doesn't want her to, and yet, she's going to do it anyway. Is anyone wondering with me what the heck she's trying to accomplish?

Speaking of accomplishments, we know one thing the House GOP would rather be doing than sitting through Greene's antics: "going on the offense by attacking Democrats for insufficiently condemning pro-Palestinian protests on campuses" around the country. 

We've all seen the antisemitic signs and heard the chants at the protests; we'll continue seeing and hearing them, even if they're not the focus of the protests. I condemn anti-Semitism and the October attack on Israel; at the same time, I would love to see a ceasefire, to see Gaza flooded with humanitarian aid, to see an end to the indiscriminate killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians, and to see a way forward. To me, those are pro-human positions, not pro-Palestine or antisemitic ones. 

But I wonder why we have to see and hear more about the antisemitic actions of a few protesters than we do about the many; members of Jewish Voices for Peace arrested for holding a Passover Seder/protest outside Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's house, for example. Or about Jews and Palestinians standing shoulder-to-shoulder, protesting inhumanity together, or about negotiations over divestment issues, especially successful ones. 

And I can't help wondering why two NY Representatives feel anti-Semitism monitors are needed on college campuses. Republican Mike Lawler, one of the two, said, "If colleges will not step up to protect their students, Congress must act."

I'll tip my hat to whoever named the bill - it's a gem: the College Oversight and Legal Updates Mandating Bias Investigations and Accountability, or the COLUMBIA Act.  The bill would give the Department of Education authority to appoint monitors, paid for by the schools, who would "be required to release quarterly, publicly available reports that show what the school is doing to combat anti-Semitism." 

The legislators cite Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as the basis for their bill; I have to wonder how giving one type of discrimination special status fits in with the intent of our civil rights legislation? If we're going to withhold federal funding from colleges and universities, shouldn't it be done in the name of protecting everyone from discrimination? 

As I was preparing to publish tonight's post, news broke that the House passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act. Sponsored by Rep. Lawler, with over 60 co-sponsors, the bill 

would require the Department of Education to use definitions of antisemitism proposed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) when enforcing anti-discrimination laws.

Other bills dealing with antisemitism are also in the works, according to news reports; we'll see if any of them come to fruition. 

In the meantime, I wonder how people feel about the statements below. Feel free to chime in, if you like.

• "We already have enough laws against discrimination. We need to enforce those laws; we don't need to create new ones."
• "All Lives Matter - why are they demanding we pay attention only to them?"

What's on your wondering minds tonight?

Sunday School 2/25/24

Your Sunday School for this week starts with Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) who talked with Martha Raddatz in the This Week classroom. 

Their conversation started with the activist Alabama court ruling that frozen embryos are people, too. That ruling has caused some IVF facilities in the state to suspend services as they try to figure out what the risks are, and whether they can continue offering services. 

We've seen this before, of course, when abortion clinics closed in many states as providers simply aren't willing to take the chance of facing criminal charges for treating their patients.

Duckworth wasn't surprised by the ruling - it's more than that. She's been afraid of this - and talking about it - since 2018.

I said if Neil Gorsuch gets put on the Supreme Court, if Amy Coney Barrett gets put on the Supreme Court, we're going to have an erosion of Roe v. Wade, and even back in 2018, I said, IVF is next. They said they're coming for IVF. So, unfortunately, I wasn’t surprised. I’m devastated for those families that are trying to start families, but I was not at all surprised.

Raddatz noted the decision doesn't overtly ban IVF, but Duckworth, speaking from experience, said that by ruling a fertilized egg is a child, it puts the treatment in jeopardy. Both of her daughters were conceived via IVF; three of the five fertilized eggs were nonviable. With her consent, her doctor destroyed them, and under the Alabama ruling, 

that would be considered potentially manslaughter or murder. Basically, Republicans have put the rights of a fertilized egg over the rights of the woman, and that is not something that I think the American people agree with.

Duckworth has introduced a bill "multiple times and in multiple congresses", most recently last month, that would protect access to IVF nationwide. Raddatz noted that the Republican Senate campaign team "is instructing their candidates to, quote, clearly and concisely reject efforts by the government to restrict IVF," and wondered if there'd be enough support now to pass the bill.

It's been crickets since the Alabama ruling. And let's make it clear. Republicans will say whatever they need to say to try to cover themselves on this, but they have been clear and Donald Trump has been the guy leading this effort to eliminate women's reproductive rights and reproductive choice...not a single Republican has reached out to me on the bill... let's see if they vote for it when we bring it to the floor.

She said the Dems will run on this. And speaking of running, Raddatz brought up Trump's 20-point win in the South Carolina primary. Duckworth, who's a co-chair of the Biden/Harris campaign, said it doesn't really change things.

I think what we talk about, again, is that Donald Trump has been very clear about what he's doing. He's not running for president for the American people. He's not running for president to take care of working families. He's running for president for himself. That's all he cares about every single day. President Biden, in contrast, gets up every day and works hard to protect the American people and works hard to make sure he delivers for working families across this country. The choice is very clear and we just need to continue to hammer home that message.

She agreed with Raddatz that exit polls do give them pause (veterans voting for Trump, for example, after his ridiculously insulting "where's her husband?" stuff), but then, Duckworth said, that's not new. And she reiterated that Trump has

shown us over time who he is, and he's a guy who cares about no one but himself. You know, I have often thought when I go into work with my colleagues, and I assumed they loved America as much as I love America, that we just look at the problem from different perspectives, but we can come to a compromise. Donald Trump cares about one thing, Donald Trump. 

I think most of them think that - or, maybe they used to think that, pre-MAGA. 

Down the hall in the Face the Nation classroom, Margaret Brennan talked with Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI); their first topic was this Tuesday's primary and how the state's large Arab/Muslim population might impact the voting.

Brennan said there's a "protest effort underway to vote uncommitted" to let President Biden know they're unhappy about what's happening in Gaza, and she asked if this could damage Biden. Dingell explained there are actually two protests.

One is an 'abandon Biden' campaign, but the other, the major campaign that has made over 100,000 calls – we'll see how many people vote on Tuesday – (is) trying to make sure the president hears them.

Their concerns? Family in Gaza; family members they have lost (20 or more, in some families); the lack of food, medicine, and water (the salt water they're drinking is almost gone); and more.

I don't sleep at night... The sanitary conditions on the ground, there's – I mean, one woman, the aunt of somebody, goes to the bathroom once a day. There – a month ago, there was one toilet for every 220 people, one shower for every 15,000 people. It's a nightmare. And they're scared for their families and they're worried.

A cease-fire is needed, and "when we get a cease-fire...then we sit down... and talk." Until then it's personal, not political. Brennan said she understood that, but at the same time, she noted that Benjamin Netanyahu said "that he is going into Southern Gaza whether President Biden likes it or not," and she wondered if Dingell thinks we're "doing enough to get Americans or families of Americans out of harm's way."

Dingell noted that we don't know what's happening in the various negotiations that are going on, with involvement from the CIA, the National Security Council, and others, including the president.

People need to understand that – what is going on in Rafah right now. The population of Gaza is approximately 2.2 million people; 1.5 million of them have been forced into Rafah... you know, we can argue about the numbers. Nobody denies that 12,000 children have already died... Doctors Without Borders have talked about 1,000 children who have lost limbs, the number of children that don't have families. It would be outrageous for further innocent civilians to be killed. I know that the White House is working very closely with a number of other countries to make it clear that we cannot continue this loss of life.

She's been assured by the White House that "the president is very engaged in delivering very direct messages," and that "in private conversations...he's working towards a temporary cease-fire."

Brennan asked if it was "a mistake" for Biden to not meet with anyone from the Arab/Muslim community. Dingell believes "he is going to need to do that" and that "this community is pretty angry right now." She said she gets protested, even though she's one of the folks who has been "the most empathetic and has been working this issue very hard." Biden did send people out, and

they developed relationships or connected with people that from both sides I've heard that they've got ongoing conversations. And that's got to continue.

And Dingell explained that Michigan's a purple state, and "It's been a purple state as long as I've been doing presidential elections." The Israel-Gaza war is a "very important issue here" but there'll be other ones too. Dingell fought to have Michigan be an early primary state for things like this.

I want to be talking about this issue now, in February -because it will matter in November - and not on October 15th, which has happened too many times in previously presidential elections, that issues that matter in November aren't talked about early.

Touching on the Alabama decision, Brennan asked "Is the concern about reproductive health care access enough to cancel out these negative headwinds?" Dingell noted the state's "unprecedented turnout two years ago" when abortion was on the ballot, and said they've got work to do again this year.

We've got to get young people, we've got to get women, and we've got to go into union halls. And it's great that we've got the union presidents and the union organizations endorsing, but we've got to go in those union halls and draw the comparison, remind people about what Donald Trump did and didn't do, he talked, didn't deliver, and about what Joe Biden has delivered on.

Dingell sees this issue as similarly motivating for voters. especially women who might have thought they were safe and their rights were protected

and now we've seen what the Alabama court has done in terms of IVF... I think a lot of women are going to be very emotional about their women's health decisions should be made between them, their doctor, their faith, and their family, and the federal government's got no business in it. Or state government.

I can't argue with her on that.

See you around campus.

Quick Takes (v72): The Three Cs

He's important, he's influential, and he'd never been in a Sunday School classroom until his taped interview with Jon Karl aired on This Week. 

'He' is Charlamagne tha God; it was in his interview in 2020 that brought us this comment from then-candidate Joe Biden: 

Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.

Karl started with a quote from his guest, who said the 2024 campaign is "a race between the cowards, the crooks, and the couch." Here's how he defines those three Cs.

...the crooks are the Republicans. The cowards are the Democrats, because they don't fight hard enough on anything. And, you know, the couch is voter apathy. And, you know, that's -- that's who everybody is up against in 2024. 

He doesn't know if anyone benefits from the couch winning, but that's what it feels like will happen; even his audience isn't energetic. He said "nobody wants to see the rematch" between Biden and Trump, and that's why he feels the couch will win.

He also said it's "mind-boggling" to him that people aren't even taking January 6th seriously. He said, "Everybody's acting like it was just a bunch of people, you know, wilding at spring break, you know, down in Florida." 

Karl pointed out that President Biden talks about that all the time, and wondered why it isn't resonating. Charlamagne was blunt: "... there's nothing about...Joe Biden that makes you want to listen to him." He said Biden needs to be leaning on others, like Vice President Kamala Harris ("way more charismatic than him"), California's Gavin Newsom, and Pennsylvania's Josh Shapiro.

And he should just be, I guess, if you want to call it the brains of the operation behind the scenes... Like, that sounds crazy that we're saying that about a president of the United States of America, but he, he has no 'main character energy' at all. None.

And when he compares Biden to Trump, who's nearly as old, the latter seems "a lot more youthful...  like he has a lot more energy."

And I always say this about him: Donald Trump seems more sincere about his lies than Joe Biden does about his truth.

Ouch. If you're part of the Biden campaign, you've got a tough row to hoe with that, I think.

Charlamagne endorsed the Biden/Harris ticket in 2020, mostly because of Harris, and Karl asked if she had met expectations. Another blunt response: she hasn't - but he doesn't think "it's too late for her to pivot." Her problem is that the VP is supposed to speak on behalf of the president, that's it.

But I think, man, we're in a new, a new era, right? Like, like for new jack problems, we need new jack solutions. And she serves a unique purpose, right? Because she is the first woman of color in that position.

Thinking about then-Senator Harris 'prosecuting' witnesses in hearings, Charlamagne said

I want to see her prosecute the case against Donald Trump in this country. I feel like she could go out there and really let the American people, you know, know what's going on. I'd like to see her going on outlets like Fox News. I'd like to see her going in there and mixing it up.

Does he hear from the administration when he's critical of Biden? That's a yes, and he thinks "that's the stupidest (EXPLETIVE DELETED) ever," because he thinks we all should be able to criticize elected officials, especially given what we're up against.  

So what I'm saying to them is, where is the sense of urgency? You can't keep saying that there's a threat to democracy, and democracy as we know it is going to be, be gone, but not act like it.

He also has a problem with the Dems "demonizing" their opponent, saying "Since I've been alive, whoever the Republican presidential candidate has been, they've demonized." 

And now that there's an actual legitimate threat right there in our faces, they're like, they're like the party who cried wolf. Nobody believes them.

He says it's "scary" that he doesn't know who will win. With the insurrection, and Roe being overturned, when you look at it, "it really shouldn't be close, right?" But the polls say Biden would lose to Trump in the general election.

That's where these conversations are coming from, where they're like, you, you might need to step aside and put somebody else in there. Because you know, my fear is that the election is going to be close, right?

He's not going to endorse anyone, Charlamagne said, but he will tell his listeners what he's seeing including this:

For years, they've told us that, you know, these people are threats to democracy. This person is absolutely a threat to democracy.

He'll continue to "speak the truth" about Dems, too. If he lies about Biden, why should anyone believe him when he tells the truth about Trump? He added

... I hate to say this, but why do we keep having to say this: pick your poison. One poison might send you to the hospital for a couple of days. Other ones will absolutely kill you. 

I don't take issue with what Charlamagne said, just as I didn't with what Jon Stewart said. I'd love to hear what you think - drop a comment, if you like.

Sunday School 2/18/24

I visited three classrooms Sunday to hear what the Democrats were saying, starting with the This Week classroom, where Jon Karl talked with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. 

Karl asked, "What worries you about... a Biden-Trump rematch?" In part, the gov said

this election really is about all of us and whether or not we’re going to rise up and use our voices and ultimately our vote to protect our fundamental freedoms, to scream out for the kind of country that we want, to protect this 247-year experience that began right here... 

Regarding the tight polls in PA, Shapiro correctly noted that the campaign hasn't really started yet, and polls have frequently been wrong in his state. Echoing Jon Stewart, he added

And I would say to folks who are worried about the numbers, stop worrying and start working. 

He gave several examples of how Pennsylvanians "voted for freedom and against extremism," over the past few years, and promised that he'd "do everything in my political power" to make the case against Trump and for Biden.  

Karl mentioned Ezra Klein commenting in the NY Times that Biden should bow out of the race and let the delegates choose the nominee. 

I think Biden, as painful as this is, should find a way (of) stepping down as a hero, that the party should help him find his way to do that, to being the thing he said he would be in 2020, a bridge to the next generation of Democrats... Retirement can be, often is, a trauma. But losing to Donald Trump would be far worse."

Shapiro agrees with Klein that "the stakes could not be higher," but said Biden'll be the guy, and he'll have Shapiro's support.

...we’ve got to go out and make that case. The president, the vice president and those of us who are privileged who support him and have a front-row seat to this, we've got to go out and do this important work now.  

He said we all are "going to have to stand up and be counted" on whether America will continue "to be a voice of freedom and democracy..." and he's confident voters,

 ...just as they did in 2020, they will rise up; they will demand more; they will seek justice; and they will look to defend freedom in this nation, and they will reject Donald Trump.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) was in the Meet the Press classroom with Kristen Welker, who asked if the Senate Intelligence Committee was going to call Robert Hur to testify. Klobuchar suggested in the upper chamber, they have "many other things" they need to do, legislating tech and dealing with fentanyl among them. 

She also said it would be "up to the president and his lawyers," to address Hur's comments about Biden, but said she's been with him, talking about both domestic and international issues, and she said "he was focused. His recall was good." Her colleagues have said had similar experiences, she said.

...I think that we've got to evaluate what's happening right now by, one, what he has done... and focus on what matters to the American people and compare what he is doing to what we've got as the alternative on the Republican side, which is Donald Trump who is nothing but standing up week by week for chaos.

Welker mentioned growing chatter from Dems about Biden's ability to win a second term, and like Karl, she picked something from Klein's column.

He is not up for this. He is not the campaigner he was even five years ago. The way he moves, the energy in his voice. The Democrats denying decline are only fooling themselves.

Klobuchar disagreed; she listed several Dem wins, none of which really rebutted Klein's point. And, she added,

Time and time again the American people have stood with the policies and the work of Joe Biden because they do not want to go back to the chaos and madness of Donald Trump.

Welker said that "the vast majority of Americans say they are not feeling it" on Biden's handling of the economy, and asked whether it was time for Biden to hang it up. 

Again, I'm a believer in President Biden because I believe he is a good moral person that has the backs of the people of this country... I am proud to be supporting Joe Biden for president.

Welker pushed back about voters not feeling it, and after listing more policy wins, Klobuchar said

He is not running, as the president has said, against the almighty. He is running against Donald Trump. And time and time again, the voters have made clear where they stand on Donald Trump.

Given the choice, moderates and independent voters will go for "someone who believes in democracy" and fights against the Putins of the world, 

as opposed to Donald Trump, who literally a week ago said that Vladimir Putin should be able to do whatever the hell he wants... 

My last stop? The Face the Nation classroom where Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) spoke with Robert Costa. Noting the Congressman was "optimistic" about Biden's re-election campaign, Costa asked, "What keeps you up at night, politically? "

Clyburn said "the misinformation efforts that are underway throughout this campaign" keep him "wide awake."

I've heard so much from people sharing with me things that just aren't true. So much from people who seem to feel that everything they see or hear via the internet has some substance to them. And so that's the thing that keeps me up, whether or not we're going to have a campaign for the presidency free of all of these interruptions and all of the misinformation.

When prompted, he mentioned the AI robocalls in New Hampshire and said similar shenanigans are happening in his state; for example, Dems are being invited to participate in the GOP primary, and folks "saying things over the air that just aren't true." 

Costa switched gears, asking if the administration's support of Israel's war with Hamas could dampen turnout "among young voters and others," Clyburn expressed concern about Israel/Hamas, and Russia/Ukraine, too. People are looking for someone

who can lead us through this stuff. And nobody is better equipped to do that than Joe Biden. He – has the experience. He has the wisdom. He has the demeanor. He has the relationships. He has what it takes to get this country to where it needs to be and to maintain the relationships we need to have with our allies around the world. That you're not going to find on the other side of the aisle.

He's shared his personal thoughts about Netanyahu with Biden, he said, and interestingly, I thought, Clyburn added that while Biden doesn't share all his thoughts publicly

...I know this, he feels about the way I feel when it comes to Netanyahu... his leadership has not been good for Israel. We stand firmly with the people of Israel. But I've always had a real problem with Netanyahu, and that continues to be today.

Costa, the former newspaper guy, did something remarkable - he asked a follow-up question! Two of them!

Costa: You say you have a problem with Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, and you say you've spoken to the president privately about this. Does he have a problem with Netanyahu?

Clyburn: I've shared with the president what my feelings are about Netanyahu. He is going to develop his own feelings about that. He hasn't told me exactly what –

Costa: But does he agree or disagree with your assessment, Congressman?

Clyburn: Well, he's accepted my assessment. I have not asked him whether or not he agreed with me. In fact, I just let him know, 'This is the way I feel. I'm not running the country. You do what you feel is in the best interest of the country.'

Last two questions. First, in 2020, Biden pledged to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court; he got Clyburn's endorsement in return. Is there a pledge this time around, too?

He should continue to manage the country the way he's managing it... I would say to him, keep doing what you're doing.

And finally, 83-year-old Clyburn is running for re-election in November. Costa wondered how 81-year-old Biden should handle the age question as the campaign progresses. The answer? talk about his experience and wisdom, and maintain connections with people.

Clyburn's going to be visiting New York, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia, he said, 

carrying the president's message of experience, of a steady hand, of maintaining our trek toward a more perfect union, doing the things that are necessary to maintain our relationships around the world and move this country forward on behalf of all.

He closed by telling Costa he's "fond of saying, this is a great country, in no need of being made great. We've just got to figure out ways to make this country's greatness accessible and affordable for all of our citizens. And Joe Biden is doing that. And we have got to stay focused on that."

Out of the mouths of octogenarians, or something.  

See you around campus.