"The Earliest Neoconservative"

"Banfield did not abandon altogether the possibility of policy interventions, although it’s true he thought policymakers' room to maneuver was severely constrained. Likewise, Kristol remarked in his 1985 retrospective that 'the failure (or at least non-success) of so much of social policy in the past twenty years can be exaggerated. Not every program failed and there are a few important ones that represent positive achievements.' Indeed, 'The Public Interest has always emphasized the modestly positive along with the skeptical.' Yet on the right writ large there has been a clear decline from skepticism toward nihilism—toward a belief that policy interventions fail so often and character is so intractable that it is almost never worth it to attempt to solve social problems through policy."

Joshua Tait at The Bulwark recalls political scientist Edward C. Banfield.

And David Klion at The Nation looks at varying definitions of "neoconservatism."

"If the Turmoil Continues, History Suggests That It Will Be Another Significant Burden on Biden's Fight for a Second Term"

"Most media retrospectives of the 1960s celebrate the marchers, the protests, the peace signs along with the compulsory Buffalo Springfield lyrics ('There's something happening here/ But what it is ain't exactly clear'). The reality is those upheavals were an enormous in-kind contribution to the political fortunes of the right. And if history comes even close to repeating itself, then the latest episode will redound to Donald Trump's benefit."

Jeff Greenfield at Politico warns that the current student protests may lead to voter backlash.

Jill Filipovic at Slate writes that "the actual violence that has now played out at some protests makes clear that there is indeed a difference between emotional harms and physical ones."

And Frank Furedi at Spiked argues that the protests have been products of "safetyism" and "therapy culture."

"The Challenge Was to Appeal to Both Wings of the California Republicans"

"Johnson, who had a 'Yosemite Sam' temperament, refused all such entreaties, stating in a telegram to Hughes' campaign manager that 'the men surrounding Mr. Hughes in California and who have been in charge of his tour, are much more interested in my defeat than in Mr. Hughes' election.' As far as Johnson was concerned, Hughes had thrown in his lot with the conservatives; there would be no rapprochement. And that meant Johnson and his California progressives would not lift a finger to help Hughes carry the state in November."

In Politico, Jeff Greenfield looks back to the 1916 presidential election.

"Ultimately, Too Many Otherwise Persuadable Voters Have Become Convinced That Democrats Neither Understand Nor Reflect Their Values"

"In the most provocative segment of the entire book, Orwell also cites 'the horrible, the really disquieting prevalence of cranks wherever Socialists are gathered together. One sometimes gets the impression that the mere words "Socialism" and "Communism" draw toward them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, "Nature Cure" quack, pacifist, and feminist in England.' And he notes the prospectus for a summer Socialist school in which attendees are asked if they prefer a vegetarian diet."

Jeff Greenfield at Politico writes about "How Orwell Diagnosed Democrats' Culture War Problem Decades Ago."

And Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot offer to "Fix the Democratic Brand."

"Culture Trumps Policy"

"Right now, the mainstream of the national Democratic Party is still overwhelmingly focused on policy, not culture. They're trying to govern, which is the job they were elected to do. But at some point they'll need to start campaigning again, and if Democrats believe that the passage of an infrastructure program and a large social spending bill will provide the ammunition to repel a new GOP-launched culture war, they are deluding themselves. If you weigh the concerns of parents with their kids' education against a subsidy for electric cars, or a better rail system some years down the line, the scales will tip pretty heavily to one side."

Jeff Greenfield at Politico reacts the Virginia gubernatorial election.

As does Charles Sykes.

As does Andrew Sullivan at The Weekly Dish.

As does Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot.

"The Only Plausible Road to Winning Their Major Policy Goals Is… to Win by Winning"

"It wasn't supposed to happen this way, with the Democrats relying on wishful thinking and vague threats to fulfill their biggest campaign promises. Didn't Joe Biden win the Presidency with a 7 million vote popular majority? Didn't Democrats win both houses of Congress? If there's anything more unnerving and disheartening than the Republican Party's shredding of core democratic and republican principles over the past several years, it's how so many of the Democrats' attempts to fight back are grounded in delusion or futility."

Jeff Greenfield at Politico has advice for Democrats.

And Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot writes that social democracy "is a longer-term project that will require more reforms, more successful elections and broader majorities than the Democrats currently command."

"Three Scenarios Present Themselves"

"But another strain of conservatism can be found at the other end of the reality-to-fantasy axis: the conspiracy-obsessed, anti-establishment, almost nihilistic populism that traced back to Sen. Joseph McCarthy's anti-communist crusade in the early 1950s and has extended from the John Birch Society and the Tea Party movement all the way to Pizzagate and QAnon. Many of its believers form a major part of Trump's base, and he has traveled farther down that populist axis into fantasy than any president before. The fate of the Republican Party depends on how many of the 73 million Americans who voted for him will go on that journey with him."

Geoffrey Kabaservice at Persuasion sees a "three-way split" in the Republican Party's near future.

And Jeff Greenfield at Politico worries about how Republicans will act in a future close election.

"The Most Appealing Message From a Candidate Was Neither an Authoritarian Crackdown nor Universal Tolerance for Protesters"

"He took some heat for this. The New York Times editorial board chastised him for moving to the right. Ronald Reagan and Nixon each noted that he was sounding more like them (although their speeches somehow left out the part where RFK talked about endemic poverty and a massive jobs program). But reporters began to notice an odd phenomenon: The same audiences who spoke about cracking down on demonstrators and who expressed admiration for Wallace also said they were considering voting for Kennedy.
"Why? Because, the answer came back, 'He’s tough. He put crooks in jail.'"

Jeff Greenfield at Politico writes about "Robert Kennedy's Lesson on Political Violence That Joe Biden Needs to Learn."

Don't Call It a Comeback

"What history teaches—over and over again, even to the class of pundits that believes it is genetically endowed with the ability to foretell the future—is that presidential campaigns are too few (and idiosyncratic) to generate general rules. Is it tough for front-runners to recover from early shocks? Yes. Can it be done? Yes. If that's too tentative for you, take up a more scientifically precise form of work—like gaming the stock market."

Jeff Greenfield in Slate points to examples of candidate comebacks during the primary campaigns of 1976, 1984, and 2000.