Andrew’s back this morning from a week’s vacation in northern Michigan—what’d he miss? Happy Monday. Violence Isn’t the Answer—Andrew Egger What to say that hasn’t already been said about Saturday’s attempted assassination of Donald Trump—an evil attack that left two rallygoers critically injured and one dead? And how in particular should we respond—those of us who did and do see Trump as an urgent threat to our liberal order and consider defeating him to be America’s most urgent political priority? The going line in Republican circles today—although, remarkably, not from Trump himself so far—is that making the case against Trump bloodies the hands of Trump’s critics. “The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs,” Sen. J.D. Vance tweeted. “That rhetoric led directly to President Trump’s attempted assassination.” Others have argued that widespread horror at the attack among Trump’s critics proves they were disingenuous all along: “If Trump is really an evil super villain dictator who wants to destroy our system of government or whatever then assassinating him would be morally justified,” the conservative writer Matt Walsh argued. “But they don’t want to justify this, which means they’re confessing that everything they said about him for ten years was nonsense.” It’s tempting merely to laugh all this off, to point to its unbelievable disingenuousness. It’s Trump’s critics who have turned up the rhetorical temperature in America? Here was Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s response to the attack: “The Democrats are the party of pedophiles, murdering the innocent unborn, violence, and bloody, meaningless, endless wars . . . The Democrat party is flat out evil, and yesterday they tried to murder President Trump.” It’s Trump’s critics who have embraced and excused political violence in America? On the site today, Gabriel Schoenfeld rolls back the tape:
Walsh’s point, however, is worth responding to explicitly. Why is it not, as he claims, a contradiction for Trump’s fiercest critics to despise the notion of assassinating him? Because while Trump’s embrace of political violence, alleged criminal behavior, and attempts to short-circuit our elections present a grave threat to the liberal order, they are not the only threat against it. If the people can’t choose their own leaders under the law in fair elections, what’s left to protect? —Andrew Egger Should the Democrats Blink?—William Kristol At the end of last week, I participated in an excellent conference on “Liberalism for the 21st Century.” The panel discussions were intelligent and forward-looking. The discussions in the hallways were lively and stimulating. It was an altogether encouraging couple of days. I mention this because of the contrast between this upbeat gathering of liberals (in the broad sense) and the downbeat, not to say beaten down, members of the Democratic party. It is this party, after all, to whom has fallen the rather important task of defending liberal democracy in the United States. Are they up to it? This weekend was not reassuring. Item one: A “senior House Democrat” told Axios yesterday that “We’ve all resigned ourselves to a second Trump presidency.” He said this at a moment when, despite Joe Biden’s awful debate, the presidential race is still pretty close. Trump remains under 50 percent in the polls. Most Americans have an unfavorable view of Trump. He was, let’s not forget, the first president in almost three decades to lose a reelection bid, in 2020. Yes, Trump’s a capable and clever demagogue. But he can be defeated. And it’s important that he be! Perhaps Democratic politicians resigned to a second Trump term should not just be resigned but resign, and let others step forward who are willing to exert themselves to defeat Trump at the ballot box in November. Item two. It is increasingly obvious, however, that Trump is less likely to be defeated by Biden than by any next-generation Democrat. So maybe those “senior” Democrats should spend less time being resigned and more time stepping up to persuade and pressure Biden to step aside. We saw President Biden’s virtues on display this weekend. He’s a public-spirited and responsible leader. It’s good that he’s president. But let’s not kid ourselves: The only people happy with his performances these days are the ones grading him on a curve of “better than the worst debate performance ever.” And you couldn’t watch him this weekend without thinking that it is not reasonable to ask the American public to believe he can do this job for four more years. Take a look, by the way, at Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro speaking extemporaneously yesterday to mourn the attack on Trump and honor the fallen. Who can watch that and seriously think Biden is the best Democrat to take us forward in November? In light of the terrible assassination attempt, it was understandable and proper for Democrats to suspend political hostilities last weekend. But the weekend’s over. Are Democrats simply going to continue to sit back and not answer the appalling slanders of prominent Republicans? Andrew noted above that Senator J.D. Vance, on the short list to be Trump’s vice presidential pick, said that the Biden campaign’s “rhetoric led directly to President Trump’s attempted assassination.” Vance had no evidence this was true when he said it. There is still no evidence that this is true. Perhaps Democrats should call out the lie? Perhaps they should denounce this slander? Perhaps they could even point out that it’s Republicans like Vance who think it’s great that disturbed 20-year olds have easy access to powerful weapons? Perhaps they could note, as Gabe Schoenfeld does, the unquestionably true fact that it is the Republican presidential nominee and his followers who have embraced the rhetoric of hatred and violence over the last nine years? A Democrat from another era, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, used to quote a French rhyme from a 19th century song:
Perhaps Democrats should fight back when they are slandered and defamed. Perhaps they should move to secure the best standard-bearer possible for a very important election. Perhaps they should seek to win instead of being resigned to losing. Just a thought from an ex-Republican who’d prefer to see liberal democracy survive and flourish, here and around the world. —William Kristol Quick Hits: Opposite Ends of a BulletIn the Atlantic, David Frum brings the heat:
You’re a free subscriber to Bulwark+. For unfettered access to all our newsletters and ad-free and member-only podcasts, become a paying subscriber. Did you know? You can update your newsletter preferences as often as you like. To update the list of newsletter or alerts you received from The Bulwark, click here. |