The Carpentariat

"Staggering" is right

From Cook Political Report's House specialist:

Staggering: if every uncalled race breaks as I expect, House Dems' class of 61 freshmen would include *35* women & just 19 white men. By contrast, Republicans' class of 31 would include 29 white men & just *one* woman.

— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) November 10, 2018

And from Hullabaloo, a powerful, Wasserman-confirming visual:

An aside:

As if you can't tell from the sidebar, I'm for Joe Biden in 2020. And yet I freely if not grudgingly concede the flaw in my support: The Democratic Party has largely become the party of women, by women — and therefore, one could forcefully argue, the party deserves a woman presidential nominee in 2020.

Nevertheless, I'm staying with Biden for pragmatic reasons, the principle one of which is: Biden can beat Trump.

 

We can't say we didn't … know?

Vanity Fair's Gabriel Sherman offers more insider quotes that are suggestive — as many see it, including me — of Trump's coming crackup.

***

"This is a level of insanity I’ve never seen before," one former West Wing staffer told me.

"He’s under a tremendous amount of mental stress," one prominent Republican close to him told me.

"He was furious about the [election] narrative. He said, 'Look, I went to all these states and now people are saying Trump lost the election,'" the Republican who spoke with him recalled.

"This is a matter of the president now being on his own without any countervailing force whatsoever," a person close to Trump said. "It’s just 100 percent Donald Trump doing what Donald Trump wants."

"He was worried his hair was going to get messed up in the rain [if he attended the war memorial service in France]," the source said. "[John] Bolton and everyone was telling him this was a big mistake." A former administration official said Trump hates being outside in wet conditions. "What I honestly think? He woke up and said, 'It’s pouring rain. This is a joke and I’m not doing this.'"

"The president called [WH Counselor] Johnny DeStefano today and said, 'Get the bitch [Deputy National Security Adviser Mira Ricardel] out of here or you’re gone,'" a source briefed on the conversation recalled.

***

In a mental competence hearing, the defense would argue that the above observations are merely reflective of any high-ranking executive "under a tremendous amount" of stress. And in a court of law looking only at objective, admissible facts, such an argument would work.

But on a subjective level — valid in the arena of public opinion — we emphatically suspect that Trump is a frighteningly unstable cluster of racked nerves stretched to the breaking point; that he is a clear and present danger to the welfare of the U.S., as well as the world; that he's a catastrophic flameout waiting to happen.

Knowing that was the case, future generations will ask, "Why didn't they stop him?"

 

The good cop/bad cop team of Pence/Trump

Moments ago, on MSNBC, I caught the peerlessly unctuous Mike Pence being interviewed about the special counsel's investigation. Here's what Mike had to say: "This administration has fully cooperated with the Mueller probe," but "we'll continue to focus on what matters most to the American people."

Mike, here, also this morning, is what your boss — Trump, of the Trump administration — had to say, which appears a trifle dissimilar to what you had to say: 

The inner workings of the Mueller investigation are a total mess. They have found no collusion and have gone absolutely nuts. They are screaming and shouting at people, horribly threatening them to come up with the answers they want. They are a disgrace to our Nation and don’t...

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 15, 2018

....care how many lives the ruin. These are Angry People, including the highly conflicted Bob Mueller, who worked for Obama for 8 years. They won’t even look at all of the bad acts and crimes on the other side. A TOTAL WITCH HUNT LIKE NO OTHER IN AMERICAN HISTORY!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 15, 2018

Universities will someday study what highly conflicted (and NOT Senate approved) Bob Mueller and his gang of Democrat thugs have done to destroy people. Why is he protecting Crooked Hillary, Comey, McCabe, Lisa Page & her lover, Peter S, and all of his friends on the other side?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 15, 2018

The only “Collusion” is that of the Democrats with Russia and many others. Why didn’t the FBI take the Server from the DNC? They still don’t have it. Check out how biased Facebook, Google and Twitter are in favor of the Democrats. That’s the real Collusion!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 15, 2018

Detesting Trump, Americans want to keep him

It has been two years. If this country was just scarcely aware of Trump's ghastly personality and mammoth incompetence in 2016, it sure isn't now. Trump is Trump. That horror of a little man in the White House is unchanging, immutable, impervious to good advice and an open vessel for atrocious suggestions. Trump is Trump, in all his grotesqueness. So, is there any conceivable prospect of an increased percentage in "Should be re-elected"?

"It’s interesting that the number of Americans who feel Trump deserves re-election is actually smaller than the number who give him a positive job rating [43%]," said the director of Monmouth's polling, which earns an A+ in Nate Silver's rankings. "It seems that some Americans are okay with Trump as president now but feel that four years might be enough," he added.

It also seems (to hear the Dems tell it) that the danger of an impetuous Democratic impeachment has passed. But to whatever pro-impeachment sentiment remains — Monmouth has it at 36% — let the above be instructive. The country is simply not in the mood for that agonizing political procedure; Trump as president, God knows, is agonizing enough.

The more imminent danger is that some Democratic pols — especially those running for the White House — will let themselves be pushed into favoring impeachment by the core of that 36%: the activist base. Much like the right's hard core, the activist left rarely seems to grasp the upshot of majority opinion — and the electoral implications thereof.

With presidential primaries bearing down, one can easily imagine Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren or certainly Bernie Sanders pitching in with the activist base and advocating immediate impeachment on general grounds — thus splitting the party.

On the other hand, perhaps they'll keep their heads come January, and the next year as well. After all, they're reasonable, levelheaded, circumspect Democrats — every one of them. Right? Right?

 

The REAL JESUS, according to Paul, Mitch, and Donald

A reader forwarded this — the video is a mere three minutes — and it simply must be shared. Debatable is whether it's a parody.

 

wwYd? (What would YOU do?)

Reports — this makes how many times? — the Associated Press:

"Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg declared lifetime allegiance to the Democratic Party on Tuesday and outlined an aggressive timeline for deciding whether to run for president."

Said Bloomberg: "Thanksgiving, Christmas and then maybe a few weeks into January — that’s when you really gotta sit down, talk to your advisers and say, 'Look, do I have a chance?' I think I know why I would want to run. I think I know what I think this country should do and what I would do."

I know precisely what I'd do.

I would travel the globe and apologize lavishly for Donald Trump.

"We're really, really sorry, ladies and gentlemen, meine Damen und Herren, Mesdames et Messieurs. But we didn't expect that psychotic windbag any more than you did. Anyway, we're sorry. Really. But now let us pretend that he never happened, and get on with world stability and some measure, again, of U.S. leadership — assuming you haven't completely dismissed it by now."

 

Political karma

Don't you just love stories like this?

Shortly after [Heidi] Heitkamp first won her seat in 2012, carried to a narrow victory by Native American voters, GOP lawmakers in North Dakota retaliated by passing a voter ID bill making it almost impossible for Native Americans on tribal lands to vote. The law required them to use an ID card bearing a residential street address — even though most people in tribal communities do not have a street address….

Immediately after the Supreme Court let the law take effect, furious Democratic activists all over the country crowdfunded a massive effort to get street addresses and updated ID cards for Native Americans in the state. The effort was so successful that on Election Day, Native turnout was actually higher than 2012 in several places.... Angry Native voters flipped at least three red seats blue, including state House Majority Leader Al Carlson.

In the most poetic justice of the night, Randy Boehning, a GOP state representative in Fargo who sponsored the Native American disenfranchisement law in the first place, was unseated by Democrat Ruth Anna Buffalo — a Native American.

 

The ultimate fright of Trump's "unraveling"

The prospect of Trump's greater instability, more intense emotional weakness and increasing psychic shutdowns seems highly improbable, in view of his monumental, two-year inner turmoil. But, according to yesterday's L.A. Times and Washington Post articles, he is headed for an even more monumental crackup — or so it's implied.

There has always been something very wrong with Donald J. Trump. However "according to multiple administration sources," reports the L.A. Times, he "has retreated into a cocoon of bitterness and resentment" — a condition reminiscent of an October incident in which a Yale psychiatrist received a call from two administration officials "because the president was behaving in  a manner that 'scared' them, and they believed he was 'unraveling.'" Those closest to him know there is something frighteningly wrong with Donald J. Trump.

The Times has a White House official saying "He’s furious. Most staffers are trying to avoid him." This official "painted a picture of a brooding president 'trying to decide who to blame' for Republicans’ election losses, even as he publicly and implausibly continues to claim victory."

As Walt Whitman might snarl ironically, Trump contains multitudes. He's stressed that the Democratic House will pry into his tax returns, and that Special Counsel Robert Mueller will soon be handing down numerous indictments. He "has been increasingly absent in recent days," writes the Times, "except on Twitter." He has nixed itineraries and sent cabinet members and administration officials to relieve him (on Veterans Day, he failed to even lay the traditional wreath at Arlington Cemetery's Tomb of the Unknown Soldier); and in deliberately missing planned events he has further alienated European, Latin American and Asian officials.

The Washington Post similarly reports a WH official saying of Trump, "This is a week where things could get really dicey." He's angry, almost unbelievably, that his chief of staff and deputy chief of staff neglected to warn him that skipping the WWI memorial in France might pose a public-relations problem. He's angry at Democratic victories in the midterms. He's angry at Emmanuel Macron for delivering an anti-nationalism speech. He's angry at Theresa May because of her positions on "Iran, trade and Brexit." And he's angry at the Matthew Whitaker coverage.

In a separate WaPo story, presidential historian Allan Lichtman observes: "I generally see a progression on the part of the president to becoming more reckless" and say "outlandish things without regard to the consequences."

As long as Trump stays with just speaking recklessly and saying more outlandish things, the world is probably safe from his malevolent moods and bad humor. What frightens is that he might move beyond words, especially as his approval numbers sink — again — and go directly to what military analysts euphemistically call "kinetic action."

 

Trumpian "normality": Staff extortion and First Lady revenge

From Bloomberg News, hilarity:

"It is the position of the Office of the First Lady that she" — the deputy national security adviser, Mira Ricardel — "no longer deserves the honor of serving in this White House," said Melania Trump’s spokeswoman, Stephanie Grisham.

"[Ricardel] drew the first lady’s wrath," reports Bloomberg, "after threatening to withhold National Security Council resources during Melania Trump’s trip to Africa last month unless Ricardel was included in her entourage."

It was once common to read of First Ladies Mary Lincoln or Eleanor Roosevelt or Nancy Reagan or Hillary Clinton opposing the presence of some presidential appointee or cabinet member. But to issue a press release calling for the appointee's dismissal? Only in Trumpworld — that seething, bubbling turf of paranoid psychosis — would a First Lady come right out and demand it.

This administration is less a reflection of American politics than a fascinating study in abnormal psychology.

 

A graph every Trumpeteer should see (but never will)

This graph shows at a glance the reality of Republicans' presumed capital-investment tax cut of $1.5 trillion:

Nearly the entire sum instead devolved into corporate-stock buybacks, shareholder dividends and "small," one-time employee bonuses (roughly $225 on average).

Otherwise it has resulted in a loss of corporate jobs; a slower rate of wage growth than last year's; a drop in GDP highs from President Obama's of 4.7%, 4.9% and 5.1%; and a 145% increase in the federal deficit this year.

And that, in sum, is a Republican economy.

It also confirms the one thing that Donald Trump actually got right, in 2004 — telling CNN, "I’ve been around for a long time and it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans."

 

The Republican bind that kills

Jennifer Rubin offers what at first might seem like reasonable advice:

"[Colorado's Sen. Cory] Gardner and fellow Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine (where a Democratic governor was elected), Thom Tillis of North Carolina (where Democrats picked up both House and state legislative seats), Joni Ernst of Iowa (where Democrats flipped House seats) and even John Cornyn of Texas (where Beto O’Rourke came within three points of winning and multiple House seats flipped) might want to keep a few things in mind if they want to hang onto their seats….

"First, don’t go along with, parrot or condone Trump’s anti-democratic, hateful, untrue and destructive comments"; "don't agonize] over a vote, only to vote with the president"; "[and] Third, they are not the administration’s defense counsel at hearings."

Rubin offers this advice because, as she argues, voting blocs are realigning: "women, college-educated, young and suburban voters have woken up and screamed 'Enough!'" Hence Republican pols had "better stop acting like Trump lap dogs."

As noted, Rubin's might seem like sound advice. It is not.

In a sane party, it would be. Republicans would be running from the president's lying, hateful, unAmerican remarks and behavior. But in the party of Trumpism, insanity reigns sovereign, thus Rubin's advice merely underscores why Republican incumbents can't smartly break from the evil little man in the White House.

They'd get clobbered in the next primary if they did.

They know that women, the college-educated, the young and suburban voters have turned against the bigoted, misogynistic, anti-intellectual GOP. But what's an intelligent Republican pol to do if he or she wishes to stay in office? Well, first up, he or she must win his or her party's nomination. And that means coddling the party's prehensile mouth-breathers. GOP pols have no choice; the party's racist, rights-denying, nonfrontal-lobed primates are setting the rules of the game — and the rules demand coddling them. Simple as that.

So, what Rubin's column actually does is underscore the Republican Party's fate — which ranges from the bleak to the existentially annihilated.

 

Another cabinet member to be canned

The Washington Post:

"Trump has berated her during Cabinet meetings, belittled her to other White House staff and tagged her months ago as a 'Bushie,' a reference to her previous service under President George W. Bush and meant to cast suspicion on her loyalty."

The "her" is Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen. But as the Post reports, her moniker will soon be former secretary of homeland security. Why? Because she respects "the laws and regulations that prevent the government from drastically curtailing immigration or closing the border with Mexico, as Trump has suggested." Thus "the president has grown impatient and frustrated."

Would-be authoritarians don't like being told about laws and regulations that cause wet-dream-interruptus.

Although the timing of Nielsen's firing has not been set, the Post adds that she "has been reluctant to leave the administration before reaching the one-year mark as secretary on Dec. 6."

But having learned far more than we ever wanted to know about her vindictive boss, we can assume he'll sack her on Dec. 5.

 

Nancy Pelosi and the beauty of default

None of us is indispensable, but some of us are just better at our jobs than others.

Thus spoke Nancy Pelosi to CNN's Dana Bash. She proved her premise by adding, "I have a broad base of support in the country, financially, politically, and otherwise, which is valuable to our caucus."

She appears set to be House speaker again because of another valid premise, spoken by Maryland's Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin: "You can’t beat somebody with nobody." And that's precisely what the anti-Pelosi faction has: nobody.

Reports Politico: "The House Democratic rebels trying to keep Nancy Pelosi from becoming speaker have a big problem: They can't seem to find someone to run against her."

The mostly purple-district Dems in the seemingly futile search for a somebody will have an even bigger problem in 2020, when they're skewered by Republican opponents for "failing" to live up to their implied vow of a non-Pelosi House. The fact that these Dems had no option won't trouble their Trumpian opponents at all, for they live in a fantasy, counterfactual world of nothing but attack.

For now, though, let us let Congressman Ed Perlmutter amuse us with some anti-Pelosi anti-logic, as he takes on Ruskin's maxim: "The idea that you can’t beat somebody with nobody isn’t true when you have a minimum threshold to meet." That's true as far as it goes. But it ignores that Democrats will have to have a speaker.

What is Perlmutter's answer to this? "We have a lot of great, diverse candidates from all across the caucus who would be fantastic as our next speaker. They just need the opportunity to rise up and step forward."

Therein lies the amusement; the ironic punchline being that every House Dem does have the opportunity to rise up and step forward. The "big problem" for House rebels, as Politico puts it — or rather the point — is that none is doing so.

So it looks as though Pelosi will regain the speakership by default. For as Politico further reports, there are not — as the matter stands, anyway — enough rebellious votes to doom her.

 

Sherrod Brown may join the pack

"Sen. Sherrod Brown is weighing a run for president," reports Cleveland's Plain Dealer, saying "he's heard from an 'overwhelming' number of people" who've encouraged him to run.

His campaign theme? The "worker empowerment that he espoused in this year's re-election should be a blueprint for the national Democrats to win back the White House in 2020."

Said the newly elected senator: "For a progressive to win a state Donald Trump carried by almost double digits by a pretty big margin tells me you can be a progressive, you can stand up for women's rights, gay rights and civil rights, and not compromise on these core values and still win in a state that Trump won decisively."

I'm delighted that Sen. Brown stands up for women's rights, gay rights and civil rights. It's his position on trade that disturbs. In a 2017 Senate debate, Brown repeated that "These trade agreements clearly have sold out the middle class. Ten years ago, we had a $1 billion trade deficit with China on auto parts. Today it's $10 billion."

Again with the trade-deficit figures, which is a favorite Trump ploy. In fact they can mean rather little when it comes to gauging a nation's economic health. And the verdict has long been in: America's trade agreements have benefited the middle class more than they have hurt. Indeed the Democratic Party's bluest districts rely on exports, which have made those districts among the highest paid in the country.

Brown has been politically successful in Ohio because of the state's traditional industrial and manufacturing base. But if he tries to sell his anti-trade theme elsewhere, he'll only be throwing a wrench in his own works.

 

Florida, and Trump - a Big Lying born loser

The Florida Election should be called in favor of Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis in that large numbers of new ballots showed up out of nowhere, and many ballots are missing or forged. An honest vote count is no longer possible-ballots massively infected. Must go with Election Night!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 12, 2018

Trump's evidence that "many" of Florida's ballots are "missing or forged." that they're "massively infected"? None, not a whit. His allegation is just another Big Lie.

"Florida officials conducted recounts in three statewide races amid accusations of fraud by Republicans," reports the Washington Post, "but no evidence of criminal conduct, according to the  Florida secretary of state’s office, which is led by a Scott appointee." What's more, "The recounts are happening in accordance with Florida law."

Yesterday, on NPR's "All Things Considered," I heard one reporter exclaim (my paraphrase from memory, but close): "It's as though Trump has never seen an election before." The reporter went on to note, as does the Post, that huge numbers of overseas and military ballots have yet to be counted.

With almost equal demagogic ease, Gov. Rick Scott joined Trump in propagating the Big Lie, accusing incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson of "fraud, to try to win this election." Later, Scott added that Nelson is "just here to steal this election."

On Trump's part, what's in play is nothing more than a preemptive strike at his upcoming loss in 2020. He pulled the same stunt in 2016 when it looked certain that he would lose; he claimed that his opponent's victory would be possible only through voter fraud. Pace quite a few pundits proclaiming that the president's chance of a 2020 victory is more likely than not, Trump again understands, deep inside, that he's a born loser. So he needs an excuse.

His recent remarks about Florida's elections are merely a preview.

 

And, what a surprise!

An inevitable, above-the-fold report, from the NY Times:

"North Korea is moving ahead with its ballistic missile program at 16 hidden bases that have been identified in new commercial satellite images, a network long known to American intelligence agencies but left undiscussed as President Trump claims to have neutralized the North’s nuclear threat….

"The satellite images suggest that the North has been engaged in a great deception…. [And] the existence of the ballistic missile bases, which North Korea has never acknowledged, contradicts Mr. Trump’s assertion that his landmark diplomacy is leading to the elimination of [North Korea's] nuclear and missile program."

In simpler, more direct, and the most honest words: What a dunce.

 

Say two strategists, Get ready for Hillary 4.0

Mark Penn, senior adviser to the Clintons, and Andrew Stein, president of the New York City Council, have written a Wall Street Journal op-ed that is certain to rattle both Democratic leaders and the rank and file. I have distilled the Penn-Stein piece to its essence.

Get ready for Hillary Clinton 4.0….

[In 2008] Clinton held fast to centrist positions that would have assured her victory in the general election. But progressive leaders and donors abandoned [Hillary 2.0, with 1.0 having been a progressive] for the antiwar Mr. Obama…. It was during [her time as secretary of state] that the more liberal Hillary 3.0 emerged…. She entered the 2016 primary as a progressive ... [and then went further left, with Bernie Sanders bearing down]…. But Mrs. Clinton’s transformation during the primaries, especially on social and cultural issues, cost her an easy win against Donald Trump….

She has had two years to go over what she did wrong and how to take him on again…. She will … [run] on the #MeToo movement, universal health care and gun control….

The generation of Democrats who have been waiting to take over the party from the Clintons will be fuming that she is back and stealing their show. But they revealed themselves to be bungling amateurs in the Brett Kavanaugh nomination fight, with their laughable Spartacus moments. She will trounce them … [and] Joe Biden will never be able to take her on.

Unstated is why Biden will be unable to take her on. But more important, perhaps, is the last word of this Penn and Stein passage: "Clinton will "mobiliz[e] the army of professional women behind her, leveraging her social networks, and raking in donations."

The big money has witnessed two Clinton losses and we're looking at three decades of Clinton fatigue. Will it risk a third loss in yet another, tiring round of ever-changing Clintonism? Plus, competing against farther-left Hillary for progressive cash will be that rowdy horde of "rising Democratic stars," as Penn-Stein concede.

The bigger money, it would seem, will invest in center-leftism. It just dominated the midterm elections and thus would appear set to again dominate in the 2020 campaigns. Biden, then — if he gets serious enough early enough; and that, admittedly, is a big if — would be the natural repository for greater center-left cash.

Hillary 4.0 is but another twist, another turn in her almost fanatical pursuit of the White House. And it's at least one twist too many.

 

A misleading headline, confirming a political "myth" about women

Rarely have I read a more bogus headline than that of the NY Times' "gender editor," Susan Chira's, titled "There’s No Nice Lady Caucus in Congress: With 100-plus women heading to the House, let’s examine some myths." She states her thesis upfront:

"The 116th Congress will have a record number of women. So that means more women will bring their vaunted ability to compromise and work across the aisle. Right? No, as it turns out, women are no more immune to the forces intensifying partisanship than men. That’s what political scientists have found."

Yet "intensifying partisanship" can differ vastly from women's "ability to compromise and work across the aisle" — the former is chiefly characterized by the author as merely the "co-sponsor[ship of] bills with members of the opposite party" — which Chira herself rather proudly, it would seem, highlights later in her column. What she relates is a startling contradiction of her own thesis:

"Of 83 women interviewed by the political scientist Kelly Dittmar and her co-authors for a recent book on women in Congress, 'A Seat at the Table,' many said that they focused on getting things done — and that building personal ties can help them try to find some aspect of policy they can collaborate on. So even if the overall number of bipartisan bills isn’t different for women than for men [i.e., the aforementioned 'intensifying partisanship'}, they do feel as though collaboration matters."

So women, it turns out, are more focused than men on "getting things done" through "compromise" and "building personal ties," because for them, "collaboration matters." That assessment is likely the most salient of "myths" about women legislators — their keener ability to work together, versus men's more aggressive, independent style — that Chira purportedly set out to disprove, but then turned around and featured the mass illusion as substantially unmythical; indeed, as a sign of women's superiority in legislative affairs.

I steadfastly agree with one of Chira's political scientists, one who supposedly was to have helped invalidate the silly, "gendered" humbug about women's supremacy. Said the University of Virginia's Jennifer Lawless, "We’re still partisan — just better."

 

Europe is "praying that Trump is a one-term president"

Presidential ignorance abounds.

"[Trump's] seeming indifference to European sensibilities was reinforced by a report in Le Monde," writes the Washington Post, "that in a meeting with the leaders of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania earlier this year, Mr. Trump confused the Baltic states for Balkan states and blamed them for the war in Yugoslavia in the 1990s."

Our embarrassment also abounds.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made it, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel made it, as did French President Emmanuel Macron. White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph Dunford Jr., also made it yesterday to the ceremony honoring the thousands of Americans, buried at the Aisne Marne American Cemetery, who lost their lives in defense of France at the Battle of Belleau Wood.

But Trump, blaming the weather, didn't make it.

"I helped plan all of President Obama’s trips for 8 years," tweeted former deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes. "There is always a rain option. Always," he added. Kelly Magsamen, who served in the National Security Council, the Defense and State Departments under Trump's two predecessors, tweeted: "Real low energy, @realDonaldTrump to not bother to honor the sacrifice of American soldiers in WWI due to some rain. Somehow everyone else was able to do so today. Obama never had this problem."

Also joining the Trump-anguished tweet party was Winston Churchill's grandson, Nicholas Soames, a Conservative MP: "They died with their face to the foe and that pathetic inadequate @realDonaldTrump couldn’t even defy the weather to pay his respects to The Fallen."

The embarrassing, offensive ignorance of Donald J. Trump could not come at a worse time. On this 100th anniversary of the First World War's armistice, Europe is unraveling under pressures similarly faced by its prewar governments: rising nationalism and the scourge of ethnic hostilities. "The fringes are radicalizing," notes the Times. Extremist Trumpian populists are in charge in Hungary, Poland, and Italy — and even in Germany, "the far right has become the main voice of opposition in Parliament, mocking the mainstream media as 'Lügenpresse,' or lying press — a term that was first used by the Nazis in the 1920s before their ascent to power." (Leave it to the Germans to make a one-word noun out of "fake news.")

After the Second World War — an extension of the First, it is now generally acknowledged — much of the ravaged continent came together to form the European Union; a single market and, in time, a single currency, intended to forever suppress the twin evils of nationalism and ethnic divisions. A spiritual leader behind Europe's integration was NATO's first commander, Dwight Eisenhower, who in 1951 called for "the formation of the United States of Western Continental Europe." With this essentially completed over the next few decades, every U.S. president throughout — excepting the bad times of the Iraq war and George W. Bush — was Europe's best friend.

And now comes Donald Trump. In just two short years he has managed to wreck America's reputation for global leadership and turn Europe into an economic foe and otherwise resolute adversary. Said former Obama advisor Charles Kupchan to the Times: "Trump might be able to retain decent working relationships with populist governments in Italy, Poland, and Hungary. But the rest of Europe is resigned to running out the clock, hoping and praying that Trump is a one-term president."

Europe isn't alone. He's our embarrassment; he's our ignorant, would-be Viktor Orbán; he's a disrespectful bully toward those who once respected and loved the United States. And as far as we're concerned, Trump as even a one-(full)-term president is too much.

 

They just don't learn 'em like this no more

Below is my daughter, Ellie, in a women's restroom at her university's English Department. Please don't ask what possessed a friend to take a photo in such a place, because I haven't the vaguest idea.

Yet, the photo is instructive. You may be able to see, faintly, the letters "u-m-p" over her left shoulder — which, my daughter informed me, complete the brilliant epithet, "Fuck Trump." I remind you, these splendidly imaginative words were composed by some thoughtful student at the English department.

Couldn't we at least have gotten a limerick? Maybe ...

There was a young lady named Stumpf,
who was downcast for she had fucked Trump:
"If only I had then knowed,
"that he was such a limp toad,
"because now I will never again hump."

Well, not much better, I guess.