Thursday Open Thread [8.27.15]

Jeet Heer at the New Republic says Donald Trump is not a populist, he is the voice of aggrieved privilege…

….of those who already are doing well but feel threatened by social change from below, whether in the form of Hispanic immigrants or uppity women (hence the loud applause he got at the first GOP debate when he derided “political correctness”). Far from being a defender of the little people against the elites, Trump plays to the anxiety of those who fear that their status is being challenged by people they regard as their social inferiors. That’s why the word “loser” is such a big part of his vocabulary.

Trump is not the first authoritarian bigot to be mislabeled a populist. In truth, the term almost always gets misused to describe movements that are all about persevering (and enhancing) hierarchy, not about creating a more egalitarian society. Populism has been misused to describe Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist crusade, the John Birch Society, and David Duke’s white nationalism, among others. […]

What’s true of McCarthyism is also true of subsequent movements and figures like the John Birch Society, David Duke, Sarah Palin, the Tea Party movement and Donald Trump. As Chip Berlet and Matthew N. Lyons noted in their 2000 book Right Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort, the Birch Society uses “populist rhetoric” but “Birchites distrust the idea of the sovereignty of the people and stress that the United States is a republic, not a democracy… Birchites want to replace the ‘bad’ elites with ‘good’ elites–presumably their allies.” Among the big backers of the Birch Society were the Koch family, who later underwrote the Tea Party movement. Members of the Tea Party, often described as populist, tend to be wealthier and better educated than most Americans, as well as being predominately white.

The word populist causes too much confusion when used to describe movements like McCarthyism, the Tea Party, or Trumpism. These are not mass movements of the people hoping to make a more democratic society. Rather they are political factions of authoritarian bigotry, backed by the rich, and designed to protect aggrieved privilege. Trump is best described not as a populist but as an authoritarian bigot, a quality best seen in his callous response to the news that two men evoked his name when they beat up a homeless Mexican man. “I will say that people who are following me are very passionate,” he said. “They love this country and they want this country to be great again.”

Quentin Tarantino really likes President Obama:

You supported Obama. How do you think he’s done?

I think he’s fantastic. He’s my favorite president, hands down, of my lifetime. He’s been awesome this past year. Especially the rapid, one-after-another-after-another-after-another aspect of it. It’s almost like take no prisoners. His he-doesn’t-give-a-shit attitude has just been so cool. Everyone always talks about these lame-duck presidents. I’ve never seen anybody end with this kind of ending. All the people who supported him along the way that questioned this or that and the other? All of their questions are being answered now.

Kevin Drum at Mother Jones has laid out the President’s lame-duck accomplishment over the past year. It’s an impressive list.

Normalized relations with Cuba.
Signed a climate deal with China.
Issued new EPA ozone rules.
Successfully argued in favor of same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court.
Put in place economic sanctions on Russia that have Vladimir Putin reeling.
Pressured the FCC to approve net neutrality rules.
Issued new EPA coal regulations.
Issued an executive order on immigration.
Got fast-track authority for the Trans-Pacific Partnership and seems poised to pass it.
Signed a nuclear deal with Iran and appears on track to get it passed.
Won yet another Supreme Court case keeping Obamacare intact.
Issued new rules that increase the number of “managers” who qualify for overtime pay.

I highlighted the Fast Track/TPP deal because, while an accomplishment, it is not necessarily a liberal/Democratic/progressive one. Regardless, Greg Sargent says most of these moves have been embraced by Hillary, which puts the Republicans in a bind:

“What’s particularly striking is how many of these major moves have been embraced by likely Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and have been opposed by the 2016 GOP presidential candidates. That’s partly because Clinton is reconstituting the Obama coalition of millennials, minorities, and socially liberal, college educated whites, who are more likely to support (and care about) action to combat climate change, immigration reform, relaxing relations with Cuba, active government to expand health coverage, and so forth. It’s also partly because the Clinton camp genuinely sees these issue contrasts as useful to the broader mission of painting the GOP as trapped in the past. It’s possible the Clinton team thinks it can pull off a balancing act in which she signals she’d take the presidency in her own direction while vowing to make progress on Obama’s major initiatives and excoriating Republicans for wanting to re-litigate them and roll them back.

I thought this was funny:

NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–REPUBLICAN PRIMARY—Quinnipiac: Trump 28, Carson 12, Bush 7, Rubio 7, Cruz 7, Walker 6, Fiorina 5, Kasich 5, Huckabee 3, Paul 2, Christie 4, Perry 1, Santorum 1, Jindal 0, Graham 0
NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY—Quinnipiac: Clinton 45, Sanders 22, Biden 18, O’Malley 1, Webb 1, Chafee 0
NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–CLINTON VS. GOP–Quinnipiac:

Clinton 45, Trump 41
Clinton 42, Bush 40
Clinton 44, Rubio 43

NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–BIDEN VS. GOP–Quinnipiac:

Biden 48, Trump 40
Biden 45, Bush 39
Biden 44, Rubio 41

NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–SANDERS VS. GOP–Quinnipiac:

Sanders 44, Trump 41
Sanders 43, Bush 39
Rubio 41, Sanders 40

NATIONAL–PRESIDENT–DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY—Rasmussen: Clinton 50, Sanders 24, O’Malley 2, Webb 2, Chafee 2
NEW HAMPSHIRE–PRESIDENT–CLINTON VS. GOP–PPP:

Clinton 45, Fiorina 42
Clinton 49, Cruz 38
Clinton 46, Bush 39
Clinton 46, Trump 44
Clinton 47, Rubio 39
Kasich 43, Clinton 41

Washington Post: “The 2016 campaign is merely the latest manifestation of decades of discord between Trump and the Bush family. Since the gilded 1980s, when Trump and George H.W. Bush rose as forces in their respective spheres, the relationship between Trump and the Bushes has been a melodrama — veering between displays of public affection and acerbic insults.”

“At the core, there are clashes of style, manner and class between the Bushes — a patrician clan of presidents, governors and financiers who have pulled the levers of power for generations — and Trump, a hustling New York City deal-maker who turned his father’s outer borough real-estate portfolio into a gold-plated empire.”

So Republicans say President Obama wrecked the economy. Yeah…

The U.S. economy grew at a faster 3.7% annual pace in the second quarter, up from the initial estimate of growth at a 2.3% clip, the Commerce Department said Thursday. Economists polled by MarketWatch predicted gross domestic product would be revised up to 3.3%, but business investment was stronger than expected.

Greg Sargent:

So here’s a friendly reminder: this whole Trump mess probably could have been avoided. If Republicans had simply held votes on immigration reform in 2013 or in early 2014, it probably would have passed. That likely would have made it harder for Trump-ism to take hold to the degree it has so far.

Before you ridicule me for suggesting that Republicans would be better off today if they had simply done what I wanted them to do — pass immigration reform — please recall that GOP leaders themselves said at the time that they wanted to pass immigration reform. Even reform that included a path to legalization for the 11 million.