"And They Must See This as Not Three Fights but One"

"Thus will changing the paradigm be the work of many years. Can the Democrats, and the people in their orbit, do it? I think they can. They have popular policies, but they have to remove those policies from their silos and connect them to values and offer people a vision for themselves as individuals and for society at large, a vision that stirs people's souls as Americans. They have to connect their economic ideas to ideals that Americans cherish—democracy and freedom. You can't get much more American than democracy and freedom. They are core to our national project. And they are not separate from economic justice. They are inseparable. It is up to the Democrats to defend all three."

In 2022, The New Republic ran an excerpt from Michael Tomansky's The Middle Out: The Rise of Progressive Economics and a Return to Shared Prosperity.

"So Why Is American Economic Confidence at Its Lowest Point in More Than a Decade?"

"The answer lies in a mix of economic reality and human psychology. On the reality side, Americans are not at all pleased with the high cost of living, particularly for the 'hard' goods and services in modern life, including housing, energy, health care, childcare, education, household goods, and things such as car payments, insurance, and maintenance. Even with decent wages and income and prospective tax cuts, working- and middle-class families do not feel particularly solid when they open their banking apps. A middle-class life that once seemed attainable and sustainable seems out of reach to many younger people and increasingly precarious for more established older Americans. Cheap televisions, ubiquitous phones, endless entertainment, and fast internet won't make up for people's inability to pay their health care premiums or save enough for a down payment on a home or retirement."

John Halpin at The Liberal Patriot argues that "the ideological faction or leader who figures out this economic reality first—and responds genuinely and empathetically to Americans' psychological worries about their finances—will be well positioned for success, at least temporarily."

"Scientific and Public Health Success Has Provoked an Anti-Intellectual and Antisocial Backlash"

"Americans have become more individualistic, more conspiracy-minded, and less committed to collective social effort. This new social Darwinism helped elect Donald Trump—and now it's being put into practice by RFK Jr. and Elon Musk."

Jeet Heer at The Nation looks at America five years after the beginning of the Covid pandemic.

"If the Forces of Science and Health Are to Stage a Comeback, It's Important to Understand Why Those Forces Have Gone into Eclipse"

"We live in an impersonal universe, indifferent to our hopes and wishes, subject to extreme randomness. We don't like this at all. We crave satisfying explanations. We want to believe that somebody is in control, even if it's somebody we don't like. At least that way, we can blame bad events on bad people. This is the eternal appeal of conspiracy theories. How did this happen? Somebody must have done it—but who? And why?"

David Frum at The Atlantic explains "Why the Covid Deniers Won."

And he adds that "[t]o rename the Gulf of Mexico the 'Gulf of America' is to reconceptualize the United States not as a sending point, but as a receiving point; no longer a country that stamps itself upon history, but a country upon which history is stamped."

"Now It's Your Turn to Stand Guard"

"And my eternal thanks to you, the American people. After 50 years of public service, I give you my word, I still believe in the idea for which this nation stands, a nation where the strengths of our institutions and the character of our people matter and must endure."

President Joe Biden gives his farewell address.

And David Greenberg at Politico assesses Biden's presidency, while Jeet Heer at The Nation writes that, regarding foreign policy, an issue with Biden's "military Keynesianism is that, over time, the militarism devours the Keynesianism."

Götterdämmerung

"I know Trump voters told pollsters that it was all about the economy, and maybe it was. Eggs and milk are higher. I'm not disputing that, but people like me thought our fellow Americans recognized that the cause of that inflation, and which the Trump administration initiated and the Biden administration continued, kept the economy afloat, and that President Biden steered the nation towards the soft recovery every economist believed was impossible. People like me were wrong."

Michael Ian Black at The Daily Beast reacts to Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 presidential election.

As do David Frum and Spencer Kornhaber at The Atlantic.

As do John F. Harris, Steven Waldman, and other writers at Politico.

As do Mona Charen and Scott Conway at The Bulwark.

As do Robert Kuttner and David Dayen at The American Prospect.

As do Ed Kilgore and Jonathan Chait at New York.

As do Timothy Noah, Kate Aronoff, Greg Sargent, Jonathan Zimmerman, Eric Schmeltzer, and Michael Tomasky at The New Republic.

As does Sophie Clark at Newsweek.

As does Sam Wolfson (in an interview with Richard Reeves), Ben Davis, and John Harris at The Guardian.

As does Ashleigh Fields (in an interview with Sen. John Fetterman) at The Hill.

As do Paul Rosenberg and Jim Sleeper at Salon.

As do John West and Kara Dapena at The Wall Street Journal.

As do Jeet Heer and Joan Walsh at The Nation.

As does David Brooks of The New York Times.

As do John Halpin and Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot (who earlier argued that "the progressive moment is well and truly over").

And in subsequent week, reactions continue from:

James K. Galbraith, Jeet Heer, and Neil Kraus and Jon Shelton at The Nation.

Chauncey DeVega at Salon.

Jesse Ferguson and Austin Sarat at The Hill.

Jared Abbott, Dustin Guastella, and Sean Mason at Jacobin.

Conor Friedersdorf, Jon Favreau, Annie Lowrey, Ed Kilgore, and Jonathan Chait at The Atlantic.

Andrew Prokop at Vox.

Walter Russell Mead at Tablet.

Bharat Ramamurti at The Bully Pulpit blog.

And Michael Bahraeen, Juan David Rojas, Justin Vassallo, and Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot.

"Taking a Race That Democrats Were Going to Lose and Making It Winnable"

"If Harris loses, pundits will focus on a number of decisions: her choice of running mate, her reluctance to break with Biden, her muddled message to young and Arab American voters disgusted by her administration's support for Israel's destructive war in the Middle East, her overcautious approach to both messaging and policy. But the fact remains that Harris gave Democrats a chance they did not have before. That is an accomplishment in and of itself, no matter the outcome of the election."

Alex Shephard praises Kamala Harris at The New Republic.

"Trump's Economic Plans Would Be Disastrous on a Grand Scale"

"Obama came into office in January 2009, amid a global financial collapse and recession. He did notch seventy-five straight months of job growth. Trump did sign a tax law that mostly helped corporations and the rich get richer. (He even bragged about it in those terms at Mar-a-Lago, telling wealthy friends that 'You all just got a lot richer.') That law added $1.9 trillion to the federal debt. And if Trump wins, the cycle will repeat, this time with President Joe Biden overseeing the handoff."

Jill Lawrence at The Bulwark writes, "Trump Wants to 'Fix' Our Booming Economy. Don't Let Him Near It."

"The Former President's Tax Plan Is a Shell Game"

"What is Trump doing to seduce America’s working class? Is he promising to revive the labor movement? Proposing higher taxes on the rich? Endorsing a higher minimum wage? Fat chance."

Timothy Noah at The New Republic writes that "Trump's Pitch to Working-Class Voters Is a Scam."

And Will Saletin at The Bulwark states that "Trump and Vance Are Hypocrites About Political Violence."

"Voters Are Hungry for a Candidate That Will Deliver Meaningful, Material Change to Their Lives"

"By embracing bold ideas that address the day-to-day crises facing America’s working families, Harris can not only win the White House, but create a Democratic party that is responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans."

Bernie Sanders at The Guardian presents policies for Kamala Harris to adopt.

While Timothy Noah at The New Republic advises Harris to embrace "the Biden administration's excellent record on economic policy (which to a great extent is also her own)."

"May None but Honest and Wise Men Ever Rule Under This Roof"

"Mr. Jefferson, though too revolutionary in his notions, is yet a lover of liberty and will be desirous of something like orderly Government—Mr. Burr loves nothing but himself—thinks of nothing but his own aggrandizement—and will be content with nothing short of permanent power. . . in his own hands."

At The Bulwark, Mona Charen compares Donald Trump to Aaron Burr.

And Gabriel Schoenfeld describes Trump as "the single largest and most effective purveyor of fake news in the country."

"Simply by Virtue of Who She Is, She's Already Doing That"

"Republicans plainly hope they can link Harris to all that vexed them in Biden's record—real, exaggerated, and imagined. But the tone and spirit of Harris's campaign has marked such a sharp break with Biden, as does her age, gender, and race, that that link may be harder to make than Republicans hope. The slogan 'We're not going back' refers not just to the antediluvian strictures that Republicans want to impose on American freedoms and Enlightenment values, and not just to the slanders and lies in which Trump daily trafficked, but also to what many Americans viewed as an unwatchable cage match of two out-of-shape relics. Though she and the Democrats are profoundly indebted to Biden for his crucial role in creating that center-left synergy that unifies the Democrats and underpins her campaign, Harris can still run on Biden's policies and yet stand for a break from both Trump and Biden rather than a continuation of Biden and his works.

Harold Meyerson at The American Prospect reacts to Kamala Harris's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention.

"The Old Man Who Saved American Democracy. Twice."

"This is the story of a nation grateful to a president not just for his accomplishments, but for his sacrifice. For his ability to understand that he was dispensable."

Jonathan V. Last at The Bulwark reacts to President Biden's speech at the Democratic National Convention.

While Robert L. Borosage at The Nation writes that the convention is "Waving Goodbye to the Neoliberal Democratic Party."

"Biden's July 24 rebuked Trump's January 6"

"Biden's act of renunciation gives power to his words of denunciation. By demonstrating that he cared about something higher than personal ambition, the president became more credible when he accused his chief opponent of caring for nothing other than personal ambition. By surrendering the power that he'd once hoped to keep, Biden condemned by contrast the predecessor who clung to the power he'd lost."

David Frum at The Atlantic compares Joe Biden to Cinncinatus and Donald Trump to Catiline.

"The Label Now Seems Not Just Acceptable but Necessary"

"Like Hitler, among the first political leaders to master radio, Trump mastered electronic media like Twitter and won the support of America's largest television chain, Fox News. Like the fascist leaders Trump understood the deep disaffection of parts of society for traditional leaders and institutions, and he knew how to exploit a widespread fear of national division and decline. Like Hitler and Mussolini he knew how to pose as the only effective bulwark against an advancing Left, all the more fearful because it took on cultural forms unfamiliar to provincial rural America—feminism, Black Power, gay rights."

In a 2021 Newsweek article, Robert O. Paxton calls Donald Trump a fascist.

As does Will Saletan in The Bulwark.

And at The Bulwark, Gabriel Schoenfeld writes, "After all, it is Trump himself—and figures close to him—who for years now have been stoking the flames of discord in fascist-lite mode."

"'So if Joe Hadn't Stolen Your Speech, He Wouldn't Be President'"

"I'm strengthened naturally by what he's managed to do in these years in which he’s been in the presidency, in taking courageous, imaginative and very constructive action to combat deindustrialization, to improve the U.S. trade position, to provide wider opportunities for people, to enhance justice. If people look back over the last three or four years at economic performance and standing in the world, they'll have to give Joe Biden a hell of a lot of credit because he's earned it. So I've got confidence in Joe, and I'm sure he can continue to provide very good, outstanding leadership over the years to come." 

At Politico, Ben Jacobs talks with Neil Kinnock.

"He Misled the Public, Mismanaged the Crisis, and Missed Chances to Save Lives"

"These are unserious people in thrall to a sociopathic clown. Trump's greatest test came in the final year of his presidency when the nation faced a true emergency and he failed spectacularly. The U.S. death rate from COVID far exceeded that of peer nations. That was not due to excessive lockdowns or masking. It was due to incompetence in the White House."

Mona Charen at The Bulwark calls for "a great remembering" of Donald Trump's actions in 2020.

As does Timothy Noah at The New Republic.

And at Salon, Heather Digby Parton remembers Trump's whole term.

"It's a Golden Opportunity"

"The new centrism, as it has developed so far, provides clear indicators of the current policy sweet spot among American voters: they want to live better and feel safer and are pragmatically open to policies that could directly address these needs. They do not have an ideological litmus test for these policies, nor a definite view of how large or small government should be. Given the dysfunction and incoherence of today's Trumpified Republican Party would this not be an opportunity to steal a march on their rivals and (dare I say it?) give the people what they actually want?"

Ruy Teixeira at The Liberal Patriot argues that "Democrats Should Embrace the 'New Centrism.'"

The End of Reaganomics

"The old Washington Consensus was built on the premise that if leaders got the economics right, then politics would follow. Cheap consumer goods would keep voters happy at home, trade ties between nations would destroy the incentive to wage war, and the desire to compete in global markets would encourage authoritarian regimes to liberalize. Reality has not been kind to those predictions. Free trade upended American politics, helping to elect a spiteful kleptocrat initially opposed by his own party. The immense wealth Russia amassed by selling oil and gas to Europe may have actually emboldened it to invade Ukraine. Access to global markets didn't stop China from doubling down on its authoritarian political model."

Rogé Karma at The Atlantic proclaims that "[t]hese are the terms on which the debate is now being waged: not whether to restrict free trade, but where, how, and how much."

"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."