Wednesday Open Thread [8.5.15]

Tomorrow will be the 50th anniversary of the passage of the original Voting Rights act, in 1965. In an event tomorrow that will feature Rep. John Lewis, a civil rights hero from that era, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, President Obama will call for the restoration of the Voting Rights Act on its 50th anniversary Thursday.

The event will allow Obama to draw a sharp contrast with Republicans, many of whom argue some provisions of the 1965 law went too far. It will take place on the same day as the first GOP presidential primary debate. Asked about the timing of the event, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said that “one person’s irony is another person’s serendipity.”

“Maybe there will be an opportunity for Republican candidates to discuss the right for every American to cast a vote,” he added.

The sarcasm is brilliant.

Netflix has given its employees expanded and paid maternity and paternity leave. Kudos to them, but it really should be a federal law across the board.

Politico: “So if you’re trying to figure out why Donald Trump has so far left the political class in a state of stunned disbelief, it might be wise not to abandon every assumption about politics, but to ask a different question: When and why do voters behave in ways that seem to break the rules? When are bedrock assumptions about campaigns rendered at least temporarily inoperative? In this context, poll numbers taken months before an election don’t count; while they can measure a public mood, the choice of a candidate is something like a customer in a store trying on hats. The more telling question is: When do voters actually cast their ballots in ways that upend core premises?”

This Politico article goes on to say that when unscripted un-labelable candidates not of the two party mold run, like Jesse Ventura in Minnesota in 1998, they tend to win because they bring out the non-disaffected-voter. The problem with thinking that applies to Trump is this: Donald Trump is running as a teabagger Republican.

According to the latest Monmouth University poll I cited to yesterday, Donald Trump has reversed his favorability numbers among Republicans, but in so doing, he has tanked them among all other humans and other living things. For example, in June, he had a 55% unfavorable rating among GOP voters, and a 20% favorability rating. Now, that is nearly reversed. He now has a 52% favorability rating and a 35% unfavorability rating among GOP voters.

Among registered voters at large though, Trump favorability numbers are like his June GOP numbers: 27% view Trump favorably, but 59% view him unfavorably.

I mentioned yesterday that congressional happenings this fall will be most unpleasant. This Alexander Bolton article in the Hill reveals that it will not be unpleasant for us liberals and Democrats, but for teabagging Republicans. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell fully intends to capitulate to the Obama Administration on almost every issue.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday said he would begin negotiations with Democrats to prevent a government shutdown in September. The majority leader vowed there would not be another shutdown on his watch — but it could be difficult to avoid, given the long list of thorny issues he will have to tackle this fall.

The article talks a lot about how McConnell will prefer short term measures that will punt the issues down the road, and he will also prefer taking up each issue individually, because he believes the President has more leverage when big issues get all balled together in a big bill. For example, the effort to defund Planned Parenthood will be a single bill rather than an amendment to something on the budget. But that means, in the Senate, it will be filibustered. So that is going to piss off the conservatives. Which means they will revolt, both in the House and the Senate.

Grab the popcorn.

Katrina vanden Heuvel previews tomorrow’s Republican debate and offers up a list of topics and questions:

Nervous Republican officials can take some solace that the debate is moderated by three Fox News stalwarts. They are unlikely to dwell on the irresistible questions raised by the absurdities that Republican candidates have offered up in the last months. Fox News anchors will no doubt try to get candidates to vent their venom on Hillary Clinton and President Obama rather than on each other. Candidates will have one minute to answer questions, time only for expressing an attitude, not a policy. […] But my advice — neither solicited nor likely to be followed — would be to pose questions that explore the yawning divide between these candidates and the vast majority of Americans. For example:

Inequality and stagnant wages: This is a central concern of Americans. The minimum wage today is $7.25 an hour, far below the poverty wage for a family of four. Cities and states across the country are acting to lift it. In 2014, voters in four red states — South Dakota, Nebraska, Arkansas and Alaska — passed referendums to hike their minimum wages. Seventy percent of Americans agree. Obama and all Democratic presidential candidates support raising the national minimum wage. Yet, Republican leaders in the House and Senate won’t even let it come to a vote in Congress. Wisconsin’s Walker has called the minimum wage a “lame idea” that he does not believe “serves a purpose.” A question on the minimum wage would be enlightening.[…]

What’s the matter with Kansas?: Republicans have argued for decades that lower taxes, less government spending and less regulation would boost the economy. In Kansas, Republican Gov. Sam Brownback championed that program, promising that zeroing out taxes on most businesses, cutting top rates and slashing spending would generate growth, jobs and revenue. The result has been deficits as far as the eye can see, with Republicans in the state legislature now scrambling for ways to raise taxes. The candidates should be asked what’s the matter with Kansas — and how that has informed their agenda.

Fair taxes: Most Americans are bothered by the sense that the rich and corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes. Obama has urged passage of the Buffett Rule that no millionaire should pay a lower tax rate than his or her secretary. Would these candidates be willing to raise taxes on the wealthy? Would they support a minimum tax on corporations like GE that often end up paying nothing in taxes while earning billions in profits? Would they act to shut down tax havens and tax multinationals at the same rate as domestic businesses?

Jay Bookman at The Atlanta Journal Constitution writes about Trump’s lack of complexity or detail:

There are a lot of theories, but personally, I think it’s because he shows such total disdain for complexity. In the Trumpian worldview, the solution to every problem has just two components: First, you choose the outcome that you prefer — usually of the “I win, you lose” variety” — then you apply the will needed to create that outcome. That’s it, period, next problem please. And while every politician is guilty of that to a degree, none approaches the shamelessness of Trump.

That’s how he will make America great again. That’s how he will solve the Middle East. That’s how he will halt illegal immigration AND get a majority of the Hispanic vote in the process. Watch him in interviews, and he steadfastly refuses to be drawn into discussion of details and consequences, because details and consequences are where things get complicated. Talk of details and consequences is for losers. He talks results, not process. (See Gordian knot, Alexander).

For many voters, that worldview is highly appealing. […] But here’s the irony of it all: Republicans supporting Trump as a protest against the do-nothing GOP establishment are playing into the establishment’s hands and making it more likely that the establishment’s favored candidate, Jeb Bush, will be the party’s nominee.

Fascist theocrat Mike Huckabee would deploy federal troops across this land to stop abortions, which of course is unconstitutional and illegal on two levels: 1) women have a constitutional right to have an abortion and 2) deploying federal troops to enforce domestic policies is illegal under the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. To deploy troops to violate constitutional rights would result in a violent insurrection that should result in the overthrow of the Huckabee Administration (chills when I just wrote that). Luckily, we will never have to live through this scenario.

“If you look at the whole Republican Party, from libertarians to evangelicals to the Tea Party, you have a group of people who’ve been lied to for 35 years.”

— Former RNC Chairman Michael Steele, quoted by Bloomberg, explaining that this anger has resulted in the rise of Donald Trump.

Lied to by whom? Ronald Reagan? You mean he is not a saint after all? You mean he raised taxes and did nothing to end abortion?