State and local governmental agencies are suffering from what is largely a self-inflicted economic wound. And the residents of Kentucky are victims of that assault.
Because of the shutdown orders issued by Gov. Andy Beshear, people are starving for income. Businesses have been closed and people have been put out of work. Because of the unemployment situation, individuals are seeing their budgets stretched farther than they can afford. The slow reopening means that employees aren't back to earning their full pre-shutdown wages, and the well-documented problems with the unemployment system have resulted in many Kentuckians not getting their benefits.
With personal budgets in crisis, now is absolutely the worst time for any public agency to consider a tax increase. The populace is already overtaxed, and adding to their tax burden at a time when they're having trouble paying their living expenses is the epitome of ridiculousness.
But no one ever accused those public officials elected in Jefferson County of having a lot of common sense. In late May, in the midst of the economic meltdown from which we still haven't recovered, the Jefferson County Board of Education passed a huge property tax increase.
This is the height of irresponsibility. At a time when people are having trouble paying for their food, their utilities, their vehicles, and their housing, the Jefferson County school board saddled Louisvillians with a tax increase of nearly 10 percent.
Tax cuts, not tax hikes, should be on the agenda for every public agency with taxing authority. This applies at all times, but especially so now. The best method to help people rebound from this economic crisis is to let them keep more of their own money to spend on necessities. The easiest way to put money in peoples' pockets is to never take it out of their pockets in the first place.
Thankfully, not all Jefferson Countians are bereft of common sense. Since tax increases above 4 percent are subject to voter recall, there's an effort underway to put that recall proposal on the ballot this fall. A group of patriotic folks have created a Web site that outlines the reasons this tax increase is a bad idea, and it contains an online petition to get the matter placed on the ballot.
Tax recall petitions face an uphill battle in the best of times. A certain percentage of voters within the taxing district have to sign the petition, and you have to live within that district's jurisdiction to be eligible to sign. I participated in two recall petitions in my small rural county a few years ago, and we beat back ill-advised tax increases foisted upon us by our school district. It was a struggle to get the required number of verified signatures in a county of 7,000; imagine the task in the state's most populous county.
That the Jefferson County school board would pursue such a large tax increase with economic conditions the way they are is nearly unfathomable. Then again, the Jefferson County education community was the loudest voice against efforts to save teachers' pensions undertaken by former Gov. Matt Bevin, with their opposition to his re-election playing a key role in his defeat. And at least one Louisville education beat reporter is beating the drum in opposition to the recall effort via her Twitter feed. So it's a stretch to expect any whiff of intelligence or common sense with them.
If you know someone who lives in Louisville, share the recall link -- https://nojcpstaxhike1.com/ -- with them and encourage them to sign the petition and spread the word. Let it be known that asking a financially burdened citizenry to pay more in taxes when they're struggling to pay their bills is beyond reprehensible.
Monday, June 15, 2020
Sunday, June 14, 2020
McGrath's nightmare is McConnell's dream (or, please don't throw us in that briar patch!)
Last week was a terrible one for Amy McGrath, the frontrunner for the Democrat Senate race in Kentucky.
On Tuesday, one of her opponents, State Rep. Charles Booker, received endorsements from Sen. Bernie Sanders and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and the editorial nod from the Lexington Herald-Leader. Two days later, Booker was endorsed by his hometown Courier-Journal in Louisville.
There's a reason Kentucky Republican operatives and Sen. Mitch McConnell campaign staffers greeted the avalanche of bad news for McGrath with glee.
Despite what some of her detractors say, McGrath is extremely liberal. She's certainly not a Trump supporter, as her opponents are claiming she is. But Booker and the other leading contender, Mike Broihier, are farther to the left than is McGrath. They're out of touch with the average Kentuckian.
And there's nothing that McConnell and the GOP would like more than for one of them to knock McGrath off and be McConnell's opponent this fall.
You have to think that the McConnell camp is looking at this surge of momentum for Booker at McGrath's expense and are doing their best Brer Rabbit imitation.
You know... this.
Despite what Booker's supporters may think, McGrath represents the best chance the Democrats have to defeat McConnell. Booker, and Broihier for that matter, are far too liberal for the average Kentucky voters. Booker will appeal to a certain constituency from his hometown -- indeed, he's used the current racial unrest to his full advantage to rally his core supporters -- but his ultra-leftist stances will hurt him in the rest of the state. There's really no difference between Broihier and Booker in terms of policy, but Booker's been out in front at various protests.
Kentuckians by and large don't support socialized medicine -- call it Medicare for all, single-payer, universal healthcare, or whatever you want -- nor a universal basic income. Yes, there's an entitlement mentality present among certain populations, but the majority of Kentuckians have a strong work ethic. They want to earn their keep and not have the government give it to them. And the Green New Deal would further damage the energy industry that's already reeling, especially since there's still plenty of coal (some estimates place the state's reserves at 150 years), and fracking for gas and oil hasn't even been explored yet in the state.
The chief knock on McGrath seems to be that she fits the mold of every Democrat that's run against McConnell and failed to unseat him, so it's time to try something different. At a time when Kentucky is trending more and more conservative, and Republicans aren't that far away from taking a majority in voter registrations for the first time, the idea that Democrats think they can win with a candidate from the extreme left seems to be fueled by a bad batch of hallucinatory drugs. Why would you think you could win an election with an extreme liberal in a state that's going in the opposite direction?
Of course, McConnell has to win renomination first, and he does face a primary. He's being challenged from the right by former state Rep. Wesley Morgan, but the overwhelming odds are that McConnell will win and be on the ballot this fall.
It's obvious that the McConnell camp regards McGrath as its biggest threat. His campaign ads have ignored the primary and have gone directly after McGrath. That's in contrast to six years ago, when he was running ads against his top intra-party challenger. Matt Bevin. This time around, McConnell has all but ignored the primary to get an early start on the general election.
Current polling indicates that despite the endorsements and some seeming momentum for Booker, he still trails McGrath with only a couple of weeks to make up the difference. And those endorsements likely won't mean much to Kentucky voters. Neither Bernie nor AOC are particularly popular in Kentucky, even among Democrats, and they will certainly turn voters off this fall if their candidate is the nominee. Sanders did overperform in the 2016 presidential primary, but that's only because he received votes due to the backlash from Hillary Clinton's comments about putting coal miners out of work. And newspaper endorsements don't carry much weight among the populace. The ultra-leftists among Kentucky Democrats might cheer the support from Bernie and AOC, but those endorsements will be a huge liability for Booker should he somehow manage to be the nominee.
If "Team Mitch" wasn't worried about McGrath's chances, its leading voices wouldn't have been cheering the Booker endorsements. If they really believe Booker to be a true threat, they wouldn't be applauding these developments. They would have stayed silent instead of taunting McGrath.
You have to think that the McConnell campaign is salivating at the thoughts of Booker being their opponent this fall. This state has not produced a more shrewd politician than Mitch McConnell. If he's happy about bad news for McGrath, there's certainly a message being sent.
Friday, June 12, 2020
A streak in jeopardy -- Kentucky's primary voting rules put my participation in danger
One of the things of which I'm most proud in my life is my voting record. I have voted in every election for which I've been eligible with one exception. That came during my college years in either 1982 or 1983 (I'm not for sure which year). I was home in May between the spring semester and the summer session, we decided to take an impromptu family trip, and it was too late for me to request an absentee ballot. That's the only election I've ever missed.
I turned 18 in December of 1979, so my first vote came in the 1980 primary election. I voted absentee when I was away at college, and at my local polling place during every other election except one. I even briefly changed my registration to Rowan County when I was in college to vote in a special election in Morehead that was of personal interest. That's how important the electoral process is to me.
Voting was a big deal in my family. My brother and I always accompanied our parents to the polling place just a couple of miles out the road. I usually went into the voting booth with my dad, and my brother went in with our mom. I would turn the knob to close the curtain, pull the levers my dad indicated on the machine that was taller than I was, then turn the knob to cast the vote and open the curtain back up. Voting was instilled in me at an early age as my civic duty.
But this year I fear my streak could be in jeopardy, thanks to decisions made by Kentucky's governor, secretary of state, and Board of Elections. As a response to the coronavirus situation, the state has implemented guidelines for this year's primary election that run counter to the way I prefer elections to be administered.
I'm a firm believer that elections should be generally be conducted in person and on one designated day, with participation limited to those legally entitled to vote. Twelve hours on Election Day is plenty of time for anyone who wants to vote to be able to do so. Absentee balloting should be restricted to those who will be out of the county on Election Day, and mail-in votes should be allowed only for those physically unable to go to the polls.
I'm opposed to voting by mail on the premise that it makes it easier for voter fraud, specifically vote buying and selling, to occur. The time-honored way in Kentucky to buy votes was to do so via the use of absentee paper ballots. The buyer could easily verify if the seller voted the way they promised by being present with them when they marked their ballot. Kentucky made drastic cuts in vote buying when voting booths were put into use for absentee balloting, with paper ballots reserved only for those who would be out of the county during the entire absentee balloting period, or those who had physical ailments that prevented them from leaving home to go vote.
I'm also opposed to the use of paper ballots. Other than the times I voted absentee by mail when I was in college, I have never used a paper ballot. I have always voted via machine, first on those tall mechanical beasts of my childhood that actually had the retractable curtains surrounding them, then on various models of computerized touchscreen machines. Paper ballots provide too many possibilities for fraud, either from people stuffing the ballot boxes, or by ballots being stolen.
Finally, I'm against the concept of early voting. Too many things can happen between the advent of the voting period and the actual Election Day. Kentucky has already started its emergency early voting process, and a number of ballots had already been cast in the U.S. Senate race prior to the endorsements of Charles Booker by Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Courier-Journal, and the Lexington Herald-Leader. No doubt there will be plenty of other developments in the race prior to the June 23 election.
Sadly, all three of these bad ideas are being put into practice for the Kentucky primary election, along with a strict limitation in the number of open voting locations that is dissuading voters from going to the polls on Election Day and instead utilizing some combination of early voting and vote-by-mail, or both.
In my own county, only one voting location will be open for the entire county. There will be two machines at that location, and both of them will be supplied by the state. They will use paper ballots. The county will not be using the computerized touchscreen voting machines it already owns. Voters are being urged to apply for absentee ballots, and to complete them at home and either mail them in or drop them off at the county clerk's office. Alternately early voting at the clerk's office is being allowed, but by appointment. The state is making it intentionally difficult to vote in the normal manner.
I'm in a quandary. My intent is to vote in person on Election Day, even though I'll be forced to use a paper ballot. I do not want to legitimize a faulty procedure with which I disagree by participating in it. I'm healthy and I'll be home on Election Day. Even though my mind is pretty much made up as to how I'll vote, I want to wait to make up my mind in case there are late revelations about the candidates that could sway me against my choices or in favor of someone else, so I don't want to vote in advance of Election Day. There's no good reason for me to participate in a process that is an open invitation for fraud.
But what happens if I get to the polling place and there's a very lengthy line? I have no desire to stand and wait for a long time, especially if there's a mandatory mask requirement (I'm not wearing a mask anywhere except when I go to my office, and that's only because it's required; I haven't worn one anywhere else and I don't plan to.) I'd hate to arrive on Election Day, see a line that exceeds the length of my patience, and then turn around and go home (and forego the four hours of paid leave I will get for voting that day).
This is an important election. My district has an open Kentucky House of Representatives seat, and a longtime friend of mine is one of the candidates for the Republican nomination. The state may claim it's making it easier to vote, but that's not the case with me. They're pushing me into a process that runs counter to my principles in a number of ways.
It's frustrating. Kentucky's new secretary of state, Michael Adams, ran his campaign on the slogan "easy to vote, hard to cheat," primarily by pushing for stronger voter identification laws in Kentucky. But he's either forgotten, or is conveniently ignoring, Kentucky's sordid history of vote buying by approving and promoting a system that uses paper ballots and allows voting by mail.
This response to the coronavirus is overblown, as have been most of the state's actions the past few months. The state had already postponed the primary election by a month. It would have been more than sufficient to reduce the number of polling places in each county by half or by two-thirds, making sure the same number of voting machines was available as usual countywide, and using the traditional absentee balloting process. That would have cut down on the risk of illness for precinct workers and voters alike. It would have preserved the best aspects of the traditional voting process, which serves Kentuckians just fine, without introducing an increased possibility of fraud.
The only bright spot is that since there are federal races on the ballot this year, vote fraud becomes a federal offense rather than a state offense. The recent vote buying prosecutions in Kentucky have occurred in federal court, where convictions are more likely and punishments are harsher. If some sort of shenanigans do come into play, they'll be dealt with.
The state isn't communicating to the county clerks very well about what will happen this fall. My own county clerk is unsure about whether or not we'll go back to our usual touchscreen machines, which is her desire, or if the state will insist on using the paper ballots. The November election date is set by federal decree, and the state can't change it or push it back. And who knows if the governor will still be using the excuse of a viral emergency to impose his dictates upon the people? We already have organizations canceling events well into the fall. Who knows if the fall election will be a normal situation, or if we'll still be operating under the emergency provisions under which the primary is being conducted? And with the amount of pushback against the primary voting process that Republicans are giving, and with the pressure that President Trump is exerting against widespread mail-in voting, will Adams allow another altered election process?
I hope things go smoothly on Tuesday, May 23. I hope I can arrive at my county's single polling place, get access to one of the two voting machines quickly, and know the names of the winning candidates later that evening. But I'm fearful that something will happen and my long streak of election participation, dating back to that spring in the early 1980s, will be snapped.
I turned 18 in December of 1979, so my first vote came in the 1980 primary election. I voted absentee when I was away at college, and at my local polling place during every other election except one. I even briefly changed my registration to Rowan County when I was in college to vote in a special election in Morehead that was of personal interest. That's how important the electoral process is to me.
Voting was a big deal in my family. My brother and I always accompanied our parents to the polling place just a couple of miles out the road. I usually went into the voting booth with my dad, and my brother went in with our mom. I would turn the knob to close the curtain, pull the levers my dad indicated on the machine that was taller than I was, then turn the knob to cast the vote and open the curtain back up. Voting was instilled in me at an early age as my civic duty.
But this year I fear my streak could be in jeopardy, thanks to decisions made by Kentucky's governor, secretary of state, and Board of Elections. As a response to the coronavirus situation, the state has implemented guidelines for this year's primary election that run counter to the way I prefer elections to be administered.
I'm a firm believer that elections should be generally be conducted in person and on one designated day, with participation limited to those legally entitled to vote. Twelve hours on Election Day is plenty of time for anyone who wants to vote to be able to do so. Absentee balloting should be restricted to those who will be out of the county on Election Day, and mail-in votes should be allowed only for those physically unable to go to the polls.
I'm opposed to voting by mail on the premise that it makes it easier for voter fraud, specifically vote buying and selling, to occur. The time-honored way in Kentucky to buy votes was to do so via the use of absentee paper ballots. The buyer could easily verify if the seller voted the way they promised by being present with them when they marked their ballot. Kentucky made drastic cuts in vote buying when voting booths were put into use for absentee balloting, with paper ballots reserved only for those who would be out of the county during the entire absentee balloting period, or those who had physical ailments that prevented them from leaving home to go vote.
I'm also opposed to the use of paper ballots. Other than the times I voted absentee by mail when I was in college, I have never used a paper ballot. I have always voted via machine, first on those tall mechanical beasts of my childhood that actually had the retractable curtains surrounding them, then on various models of computerized touchscreen machines. Paper ballots provide too many possibilities for fraud, either from people stuffing the ballot boxes, or by ballots being stolen.
Finally, I'm against the concept of early voting. Too many things can happen between the advent of the voting period and the actual Election Day. Kentucky has already started its emergency early voting process, and a number of ballots had already been cast in the U.S. Senate race prior to the endorsements of Charles Booker by Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Courier-Journal, and the Lexington Herald-Leader. No doubt there will be plenty of other developments in the race prior to the June 23 election.
Sadly, all three of these bad ideas are being put into practice for the Kentucky primary election, along with a strict limitation in the number of open voting locations that is dissuading voters from going to the polls on Election Day and instead utilizing some combination of early voting and vote-by-mail, or both.
In my own county, only one voting location will be open for the entire county. There will be two machines at that location, and both of them will be supplied by the state. They will use paper ballots. The county will not be using the computerized touchscreen voting machines it already owns. Voters are being urged to apply for absentee ballots, and to complete them at home and either mail them in or drop them off at the county clerk's office. Alternately early voting at the clerk's office is being allowed, but by appointment. The state is making it intentionally difficult to vote in the normal manner.
I'm in a quandary. My intent is to vote in person on Election Day, even though I'll be forced to use a paper ballot. I do not want to legitimize a faulty procedure with which I disagree by participating in it. I'm healthy and I'll be home on Election Day. Even though my mind is pretty much made up as to how I'll vote, I want to wait to make up my mind in case there are late revelations about the candidates that could sway me against my choices or in favor of someone else, so I don't want to vote in advance of Election Day. There's no good reason for me to participate in a process that is an open invitation for fraud.
But what happens if I get to the polling place and there's a very lengthy line? I have no desire to stand and wait for a long time, especially if there's a mandatory mask requirement (I'm not wearing a mask anywhere except when I go to my office, and that's only because it's required; I haven't worn one anywhere else and I don't plan to.) I'd hate to arrive on Election Day, see a line that exceeds the length of my patience, and then turn around and go home (and forego the four hours of paid leave I will get for voting that day).
This is an important election. My district has an open Kentucky House of Representatives seat, and a longtime friend of mine is one of the candidates for the Republican nomination. The state may claim it's making it easier to vote, but that's not the case with me. They're pushing me into a process that runs counter to my principles in a number of ways.
It's frustrating. Kentucky's new secretary of state, Michael Adams, ran his campaign on the slogan "easy to vote, hard to cheat," primarily by pushing for stronger voter identification laws in Kentucky. But he's either forgotten, or is conveniently ignoring, Kentucky's sordid history of vote buying by approving and promoting a system that uses paper ballots and allows voting by mail.
This response to the coronavirus is overblown, as have been most of the state's actions the past few months. The state had already postponed the primary election by a month. It would have been more than sufficient to reduce the number of polling places in each county by half or by two-thirds, making sure the same number of voting machines was available as usual countywide, and using the traditional absentee balloting process. That would have cut down on the risk of illness for precinct workers and voters alike. It would have preserved the best aspects of the traditional voting process, which serves Kentuckians just fine, without introducing an increased possibility of fraud.
The only bright spot is that since there are federal races on the ballot this year, vote fraud becomes a federal offense rather than a state offense. The recent vote buying prosecutions in Kentucky have occurred in federal court, where convictions are more likely and punishments are harsher. If some sort of shenanigans do come into play, they'll be dealt with.
The state isn't communicating to the county clerks very well about what will happen this fall. My own county clerk is unsure about whether or not we'll go back to our usual touchscreen machines, which is her desire, or if the state will insist on using the paper ballots. The November election date is set by federal decree, and the state can't change it or push it back. And who knows if the governor will still be using the excuse of a viral emergency to impose his dictates upon the people? We already have organizations canceling events well into the fall. Who knows if the fall election will be a normal situation, or if we'll still be operating under the emergency provisions under which the primary is being conducted? And with the amount of pushback against the primary voting process that Republicans are giving, and with the pressure that President Trump is exerting against widespread mail-in voting, will Adams allow another altered election process?
I hope things go smoothly on Tuesday, May 23. I hope I can arrive at my county's single polling place, get access to one of the two voting machines quickly, and know the names of the winning candidates later that evening. But I'm fearful that something will happen and my long streak of election participation, dating back to that spring in the early 1980s, will be snapped.
Thursday, June 11, 2020
Honestly? Abe would be scratching his head over this
If you follow politics, by now you have to be aware of something called "The Lincoln Project." This is a group of RINO "Never Trump" Republicans who'd rather give America over to the liberals and Joe Biden than see Donald Trump be re-elected president. Its leader and most visible face is George Conway, one of the most vocal "Never Trumpers" who happens to be married to one of Trump's closest advisers, Kellyanne Conway. (The two of them probably have dinnertime discussions that would make the dialogue between Mary Matalin and James Carville seem tame by comparison.)
The "Never Trump" movement had quite a few defectors between the 2016 GOP presidential nomination process and now. It originated as a curious mixture of conservative tea party types and liberal-to-moderate establishment RINOs who saw Trump as being both a conservative and a moderate, while at the same time being neither. Trump was a populist, a former Democrat with a liberal past, and he drew support from both wings of the party, although the establishment remained weary of him because his presence was a threat to their entrenched existence. But gradually, many of those who had opposed Trump came around to stand in his corner -- if not solidly, then at least on many issues and especially when the Democrats opposed him. This includes presidential rival Ted Cruz, frequent critic and John McCain disciple Lindsey Graham, and a certain former newspaper editor turned PR person and aspiring political blogger from the Kentucky River valley.
It's easy to see why the establishment dislikes Trump. As an outsider, he challenges their hegemony and their authority. The establishment is the swamp that Trump wants to drain. Trump isn't a politician. He didn't come up through the normal channels. He isn't beholden to the political power structure. Despite his wealth, he brings a common man's approach to governing. He speaks his mind. He doesn't abide by traditions or conventions. And the establishment is extremely wedded to traditions and conventions, at the expense of policy and getting things done. To the establishment, it's not that the end justifies the means, the means are the end. Procedure is the most important thing, not the results.
So while it's easy to see why the Lincoln Project is after Trump -- although, again, why they'd sacrifice America on the altar of the corrupt, senile, and liberal Joe Biden is a puzzler -- their entry into Kentucky politics is a real head-scratcher.
The Lincoln Project has come after Mitch McConnell. This defies all reason. McConnell embodies the establishment that the Lincoln Project represents. He values procedure above all else. He's stood in the way of the tea party movement at every opportunity. He'd rather strike a deal with Democrats to raise taxes and increase spending than to shut down the government to force cuts. He's a stickler for traditions and rules. His trademark is reserved, measured public comment. In short, he's pretty much everything Trump is not.
Why, then, would the Lincoln Project interject itself into Kentucky's Senate race? The only possible reason, and one that the participants have mentioned, is that McConnell didn't allow the partisan impeachment of Trump to succeed. But that act was common sense. No Republican Senate leader with any sense of decency would have allowed that politically motivated circus to come to the final act. McConnell recognized it for the attempted coup that it was, and took the appropriate steps to impede it. It's the only logical conclusion that can be drawn, since McConnell and the Lincoln Project have so much in common otherwise. Many regard McConnell as a Trump enabler, but the majority leader and the president have serious differences on a number of policy positions -- the aforementioned government shutdown being key; Trump urged it on while McConnell pledged it would not happen.
What's the Lincoln Project's ultimate goal in Kentucky? They're certainly not going to support Wesley Morgan in the Senate race. McConnell's chief challenger in the GOP primary, a business owner and former state representative from nearby Madison County, is an outspoken Trump supporter. If they hate Trump, they're certainly not going to back Morgan. It would appear, then, that they're positioning themselves for the general election this fall.
If these are the loyal Republicans that they claim to be, then their actions belie that statement. They couldn't actually want to see Amy McGrath, Charles Booker, or Mike Broihier elected to the Senate, could they? That would spit in the face of their professed Republican values. So far, they've released an ad attacking McConnell for his wealth he's accumulated since he was elected in 1984 (hint: he married into it) and authored an opinion piece for the Courier-Journal. Whether they will remain involved in the Senate race this spring or this fall remains to be seen.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is real. There are Republicans out there who would rather see liberal Democrats take control of the country than having a president in office that is in agreement with their policies and beliefs more often than not. They're making the perfect the enemy of the good. As for me, I supported Ted Cruz in the 2016 presidential nominating process. I voted for him in the Kentucky caucus. I still think he would be a better president than Trump. And I hope he is elected president someday. But I'm certainly not going to let that wish override the reality that if you're a Republican or a conservative, Trump is infinitely preferable to Biden or any Democrat. That a group that claims to be Republicans would surrender the country to liberals who ideologically oppose everything they profess to stand for is unfathomable. But that's the extent to which they'll go because Trump has disturbed their comfortable little establishment nest and ruffled their feathers.
Ol' "Honest Abe" would be scratching his head over this. No one can know how Lincoln would have perceived Trump, but the only Kentucky native ever to have been elected president is no doubt the Bluegrass State's most influential politician. And McConnell -- love him or loathe him, and I've loathed him for a decade and a half -- may not be a native Kentuckian, but he's spent most of his life as a resident, and he has to be regarded as the state's second-most influential political figure. So he and Lincoln have that in common. And you have to think the 16th president would appreciate that accomplishment.
The "Never Trump" movement had quite a few defectors between the 2016 GOP presidential nomination process and now. It originated as a curious mixture of conservative tea party types and liberal-to-moderate establishment RINOs who saw Trump as being both a conservative and a moderate, while at the same time being neither. Trump was a populist, a former Democrat with a liberal past, and he drew support from both wings of the party, although the establishment remained weary of him because his presence was a threat to their entrenched existence. But gradually, many of those who had opposed Trump came around to stand in his corner -- if not solidly, then at least on many issues and especially when the Democrats opposed him. This includes presidential rival Ted Cruz, frequent critic and John McCain disciple Lindsey Graham, and a certain former newspaper editor turned PR person and aspiring political blogger from the Kentucky River valley.
It's easy to see why the establishment dislikes Trump. As an outsider, he challenges their hegemony and their authority. The establishment is the swamp that Trump wants to drain. Trump isn't a politician. He didn't come up through the normal channels. He isn't beholden to the political power structure. Despite his wealth, he brings a common man's approach to governing. He speaks his mind. He doesn't abide by traditions or conventions. And the establishment is extremely wedded to traditions and conventions, at the expense of policy and getting things done. To the establishment, it's not that the end justifies the means, the means are the end. Procedure is the most important thing, not the results.
So while it's easy to see why the Lincoln Project is after Trump -- although, again, why they'd sacrifice America on the altar of the corrupt, senile, and liberal Joe Biden is a puzzler -- their entry into Kentucky politics is a real head-scratcher.
The Lincoln Project has come after Mitch McConnell. This defies all reason. McConnell embodies the establishment that the Lincoln Project represents. He values procedure above all else. He's stood in the way of the tea party movement at every opportunity. He'd rather strike a deal with Democrats to raise taxes and increase spending than to shut down the government to force cuts. He's a stickler for traditions and rules. His trademark is reserved, measured public comment. In short, he's pretty much everything Trump is not.
Why, then, would the Lincoln Project interject itself into Kentucky's Senate race? The only possible reason, and one that the participants have mentioned, is that McConnell didn't allow the partisan impeachment of Trump to succeed. But that act was common sense. No Republican Senate leader with any sense of decency would have allowed that politically motivated circus to come to the final act. McConnell recognized it for the attempted coup that it was, and took the appropriate steps to impede it. It's the only logical conclusion that can be drawn, since McConnell and the Lincoln Project have so much in common otherwise. Many regard McConnell as a Trump enabler, but the majority leader and the president have serious differences on a number of policy positions -- the aforementioned government shutdown being key; Trump urged it on while McConnell pledged it would not happen.
What's the Lincoln Project's ultimate goal in Kentucky? They're certainly not going to support Wesley Morgan in the Senate race. McConnell's chief challenger in the GOP primary, a business owner and former state representative from nearby Madison County, is an outspoken Trump supporter. If they hate Trump, they're certainly not going to back Morgan. It would appear, then, that they're positioning themselves for the general election this fall.
If these are the loyal Republicans that they claim to be, then their actions belie that statement. They couldn't actually want to see Amy McGrath, Charles Booker, or Mike Broihier elected to the Senate, could they? That would spit in the face of their professed Republican values. So far, they've released an ad attacking McConnell for his wealth he's accumulated since he was elected in 1984 (hint: he married into it) and authored an opinion piece for the Courier-Journal. Whether they will remain involved in the Senate race this spring or this fall remains to be seen.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is real. There are Republicans out there who would rather see liberal Democrats take control of the country than having a president in office that is in agreement with their policies and beliefs more often than not. They're making the perfect the enemy of the good. As for me, I supported Ted Cruz in the 2016 presidential nominating process. I voted for him in the Kentucky caucus. I still think he would be a better president than Trump. And I hope he is elected president someday. But I'm certainly not going to let that wish override the reality that if you're a Republican or a conservative, Trump is infinitely preferable to Biden or any Democrat. That a group that claims to be Republicans would surrender the country to liberals who ideologically oppose everything they profess to stand for is unfathomable. But that's the extent to which they'll go because Trump has disturbed their comfortable little establishment nest and ruffled their feathers.
Ol' "Honest Abe" would be scratching his head over this. No one can know how Lincoln would have perceived Trump, but the only Kentucky native ever to have been elected president is no doubt the Bluegrass State's most influential politician. And McConnell -- love him or loathe him, and I've loathed him for a decade and a half -- may not be a native Kentuckian, but he's spent most of his life as a resident, and he has to be regarded as the state's second-most influential political figure. So he and Lincoln have that in common. And you have to think the 16th president would appreciate that accomplishment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)