Glad to see there is at least one journalist on the NYT who understands the threat Corbyn (and the Stalinists that surrounded the poor deluded fool) posed to the UK.
Thatcher and Regan killed off anti democratic socialism in the UK/US, but Johnson has driven a stake through its heart, just to make sure.
92
Anyone who casts a vote for Donald Trump in 2020 should be deeply ashamed, irrespective of party affiliation or political sentiment.
He has demeaned the office of the president and the constitution of the United States. That is fact, not fake news.
He is a liar, a bigot, ill-informed, petty, and vindictive. He calls good, honest people "scum" and his political opponents demeaning names. That, too, is fact.
If you, Trump voter, see all this and still support him, you have a disgusting moral compass.
Never forget, Hitler turned around a country and got its economy revving. To do this he had to trample on its laws and institutions. He labeled entire groups of people "scum." He lied to his fellow countrymen and to the world.
How did that end up?
66
And the Labor Party has ignored the smattering of anti-semitism on the left.
14
Thank goodness Brett Stephen’s editorial made it through the Nytimes ideological purity test. As a never Trumper, the blatant hyper progressive bias by the Times and other left media outlets, the Democrats love affair with radical progressive policies is giving Trump the foundation for reelection. When Mike Bloomberg jumped in, the Nytimes immediately went on the offensive against him. Capitalism is now the original sin and being white, male and (Legitimately) successful unforgivable and disqualifying. The other day I was with a very successful female executive who felt comfortable at a business dinner declare to me and others that there is no way she would vote for “another old white male”. I cannot image her response, I had said, “ I would never vote for a [fill in the blank] woman, black, gay, Asian... “ yet the enlightened and empowered far left is emboldened. Warren and Sanders are portrayed as warriors of the 99% of unassailable character, experience, with brilliant policies instead of ivory tower liberals with policies which will bankrupt and destroy the culture of America. Go Biden, Go Mike, Go Klobuchar
40
The entire world is bad getting worse...I feel it is 1930 once again - when fascists are all the favor and the entire world loved them some fascism.
Too bad. I am happy and could care less. I hope the kids revolt but they will not. The machine knows how to welcome them.
4
well... they can begin by not being anti-semites. that certainly didn't auger very well for Corbin.
14
Jeremy Corbyn is a hardline communist and virulent antisemite. He would have made Stalin and Pol Pot blush. That is likely why he lost in the UK. People don't want breadlines and gulags, they want jobs and economic prosperity.
22
In all these articles that try to analyze why we are where we are with Trump and his party who put us here, these writers still fail to grasp that this is what America seems to want. An exchange of Democracy for a Dictatorship. Watch all those Trump rallies and you will see how standards of rational thought have now been replaced with sheer entertainment value. Trump tells his gang what they want to hear so they can hoop and holler like idiots at a witch burning. They are so close minded to facts and evidence that he could tell them that he just got back from golfing with Putin on Mars and they've both decided the best way to Keep America Great is to allow Putin to help Trump run America. By the way, the latter has already transpired.
20
" Voters seem comfortable with leaders whose policies defy most of the usual left-right categories, including on matters like moral character or budgetary discipline. What matters more is relatability, reliability and results. Does the candidate get people like me? Will he keep his political promises? And has he achieved something that directly and tangibly benefits me?"
...sounds a lot like Hitler's message in the 30's to me.
10
Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Kim Jung Un. Let's face it, hideous hair wins.
17
Relitigate the past? Oh really. Republican talking point slip in there, did it? Does that mean cheating...stealing an election is ok?
Sounds a lo like a Trump supporter. Find the courage to fly your true colors. Don’t do us any...favors.
11
Open or decriminalization of illegal border crossings, and free health care for illegal immigrants. You are a racist-xenophobic, if you disagree with this platform, so vote Democrat.
I know that's a bit hyperbolic, but the point is valid. When all of the top tier candidates for the Democrat party align themselves with this type of rhetoric, it makes it very easy for the Republicans to paint you as out of touch with the needs of actual Americans!
38
The US is an oligarchy run by corporate fascists, and has been for some time. Now that most of the wealth has been siphoned away from the majority of society, people are starting to see bones on its starving carcass. This is what happens when people refuse to do anything that might upset anybody, take a risk with their actions, or just plain refuse to get up off of their behinds.
The common people of the US richly deserve the abuse they are getting right now for those reasons. I have every confidence that they will huddle and bleat impotently in the face of all the problems we face - just as they have for the decades I've been around to watch them.
For my part, I hope the entire global trade system crashes and burns, that riots and civil war break out in the US and elsewhere, and that every banker, corporate officer, and 1%er gets the guillotine. It WILL happen - the timing just depends on how bad the stupid people who overpopulate our planet let it get first.
11
I believe that Trump will win reelection whoever the Democratic nominee is. That's why I left the U.S. That said, the Democrats might as well nominate someone they believe in rather than someone they think can be as centrist and non-leftist as possible. (That didn't work in 2016, did it?)
Remember, Boris Johnson wholeheartedly supports the National Health Service in the UK, which is so far to the left of "Medicare for All" that it isn't funny. Neither Elizabeth Warren nor Bernie Sanders nor any Democratic candidate favors all doctors being federal governmental employees.
The Tory Party supports socialized medicine.The Tory Party supports fighting climate change. The Tory Party is to the left of the Democratic Party.
That is how far right the "center" is in the United States, which is out of step with the world, like certain columnists are. They are so far right they they think the center is far left.
35
As an addendum to the righteous right commentary of Mr Stephens and his right-wing NYT cohorts, they should deeply consider the possibly irreversible harm that Republican Presidents, from Nixon on, have foisted on our land. MAGA with unbridled racism (the sinister Southern strategy, the not so carefully crafted racism personified by Willy Horten), reckless and feckless middle eastern wars (squandering trillions and killing hundreds of thousands of Muslims ) and not so subtle appeals to whites in the disaffected heartland. As Pete, Paul and Mary sang "Oh, when will they ever learn". Have they no shame!
10
The US would have required a 2/3rds majority to get out of a treaty of the importance of staying in the EU. They would never allow a referendum on that. This is an excellent example of the danger of referendums. Winning 51.5% of the vote is anemic. That said the UK is in for a rough go of it. Boris Johnson betrayed David Cameron and took on Brexit as his ticket to be PM. The UK was in a position in the EU where they could punch above their weight. What about the UKs economy gives them confidence that they can come remotely close to making up for the loss of the EU market place. The Democrats in the US have decided to commit hari kari in their absurd quest to impeach Trump. They have no legitimate charges against the man. Trump is a corrupt man. But the House Democrats have based their efforts on a "whistle blower" complaint concerning a Trump call to a foreign leader. It turns out the whistle blower is a pal of John Brennan. It turns out that these neo con diplomats who solemnly rebuked Trump for wanting messing around with the ethnic civil war in Ukraine being fomented by the US. Now the calls are going forth for a corporatist neo con to save the party from grass roots driven progressive campaigns. Citizens United is alive and well.
2
The title of Stephens' column says it all about his bias. It's not an "Ominous Portent" for America, it's just an Ominous Portent for DEMOCRATS. Seems to me Bret would not have a big problem with the Democrat losing.
4
Racism as a political tool of division works.
That is the real reason Boris won, and why Labor lost.
It is the real reason Trump sits in the White House, and has a good chance of being reelected. Fear usually trumps hope.
If Lincoln had let the racist, slave holding South leave the Union, America would never, ever have elected a Nixon, or Bush, or Trump, or probably Reagan as well. That is why all Republicans blow the racist dog whistle, to alert the deep South that they will do what they can to keep African Americans in their place.
As President Johnson said after signing the Civil Rights Act...
''I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come.''
Hugh
14
Finally an objective op-Ed. If more of the NYT opinions were more balanced you could sell to the other 63,000,000 Americans. Everyone is totally tired of the overly leaning left opinion. Thank you.
43
Bloomberg! Bloomberg! Bloomberg!
12
Bad analogy.
1
The Zombie liberal wing has taken over the Democratic Party. Trump is so-o-o lucky.
17
I doubt Mr. Stephen's comment that he doesn't want trump to win. His comments and outlook serve the opposite prototype.
"Don't vote progressive !" is his message. "It will lead you to the hell of four more years of trump!"
Indeed what we do need is a progressive candidate to turn our country around to once again serve the people -- to give them at least what every other industrial country has -- government sponsored health-care, free state college tuition, and a minimum wage of $15.
Mr. Stephen's abhors such a turn to the people, with the obvious concern of keeping the inordinate profits of the rich streaming into their pockets.
8
If the lesson is that you can only defeat right populism with moderation, why didn’t the Lib Dems win a 100 seats in the UK elections? Or even 20?
Someone noted on Twitter that if you could put them together, progressive parties would have won the UK election 52-48. The reverse of the referendum result! The problem is that in the UK you can’t put progressive parties together, and First Past the Post makes it more difficult for them to actually wield power: the Conservatives don’t even get a majority of the popular vote, but they get a whopping majority in parliament. The world’s oldest democracy is maybe not that democratic.
Does the Democratic Party in the US have the same problem? Look at the Electoral College and you might say yes, but then look at the 2018 elections and you might think otherwise. We had the numbers then to win.
The fact is that 2020 is going to require some gambling, one way or another. No one can foresee the outcome. Go for a moderate, some of the base stays home, maybe you lose. Go for principles, fire up the base, and you lose Brett Stephens and maybe Wisconsin.
Brett Stephens probably lives in New York, so part of me is thinking—who cares? Wisconsin is more of a problem, so this time YOU CAMPAIGN LIKE HELL IN WISCONSIN. And maybe you win.
Fortune favors the brave.
8
Bret, I don't believe, like you, that the Dems are attempting to bring Donnie down through impeachment. The Dems always knew they didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell!
The Dems, and a great many Americans have had enough with Donnie trampling all over the Constitution. It was time to stand up and be counted.... STOP!! This must not continue.
The saddest thing I've been hearing is the Repubs in office secretly loathe Donnie. It is time for them to stand up and grow a backbone! They will not get a free=pass from me or many others after Don the Con is gone!
11
I don't think British public opinion is going to win 2020 for Trump. I do think that Mr. Stephens is desperate for Dems to choose the most conservative candidate available, so he has someone to vote for.
Over the years, I've noticed our allies are often out-of-sync with the US in regards to the left leaning/right leaning nature of their elected leaders. I can't say who follows who. But we haven't seen Brexit shake out, since it hasn't gone into effect yet.
Of one thing I'm certain — if Dems are going to cater to the whims of the British voter, let's see how the British voter feels a few months after Brexit goes into effect, Scotland demands independence and the borders between Ireland and N. Ireland are closed.
6
Boris Johnson rode one big issue to victory — Brexit. Trump has no big issue, just a flagging ego that requires Jim Jordan's hyperventilation to keep it inflated.
13
Deep down in his heart of hearts in spite of everything he says to the contrary, Stephens is hoping for another 4 years of Trump.
13
As usual, Stephens perverts everything.
Johnson is not "forward looking." He embodies the nostalgic and receding promise of "Rule Britannia."
Political and moral "plasticity" are qualities to be critiqued, not lauded.
Johnson's victory is not difficult to understand. Boris comes across more like a champion of the working class than Jeremy, whose personal style is rather Etonian, just as Trump's vulgar mouth connects him to his base.
So, Bret, have you flip-flopped again on the rectitude of the impeachment proceeding? Impeachment is the just course of action, whatever the so-called political fallout.
Your parting shot at Corbyn is understandable. The man's antisemitism is of a piece with his socialism. Jews have all the money and control the world, don't you know? Never mind the tradition of the leftist Jewish intellectual household.
Your entire essay pays homage to the troubling value of political expediency.
6
Politics are not a marketing game.
Most people in the Uk and USA have lost the very sense and etymology of the word politic.
3
I’m beginning to think this is Mother Nature’s plan to rid Earth of a species that is destroying the planet. Unleash its own self-destructive tendencies to their maximal potential and let them do themselves in. Pessimistic I know, but it is a dreary day.
12
Those of you who think that Joe is your ticket to victory must have been asleep for the past few weeks. Trump has accomplished through the impeachment hearings what he hoped to accomplish with the Ukraine investigation, and that is neutering Joe Biden. He can run against crooked Joe and everyone will know exactly what he is talking about, and believe it. Pete is a loser too because blacks will never, and I mean never, turn out for him. Amy is really your only hope on the current slate. Too bad Joe Manchin did not give it a shot, as he would have won by a landslide. But, I know, he's pro second amendment, so he was not an option. And winning will not be an option for the candidate the Dems are likely to nominate.
12
You've not mentioned the British NHS which is 12% of their GDP,covers 97% of the population and is.....watch out for that word...."socialist".It is classic socialism not the democratic socialism of Sanders and Warren.Boris has just promised to "recruit 50,000 nurses,6000 more GP's,and build 40 new hospitals."He is probably lying.but that's what he said. It would be wise for Sanders and Warren to praise Boris for his support of the NHS and his promise to enlarge it.Sounds like compared to the NHS,MediCare for all would be a much more modest approach to reforming how healthcare is paid for in this country.The NHS is like Social Security....politicians better not touch it.The public needs and loves it.The only Brexit-like problem in the US is the stranglehold the small states and their backwards policies have on the rest of us.Maybe we "elitists ,representing 84% of the population, could find a way to let these states build their own roads,schools and bridges.Maybe they could even fund their own healthcare and Social Security.As a California elitist, I'm tired of paying their way.
12
Dems have the dilemma of to many candidates and really no standout. I don't see either Sanders or Warren electable. Both should stay in the Senate and push their agenda from there. After all, the Senate would ultimately have to approve it anyway. I sometime yearn for the old smokey, back room way choices of candidates were chosen. Open primaries while more democratic, doesn't consistently seem to result in winners.
6
Bloomberg is the only option for a win by the Democrats. Only a moderate who knows how to fight Trump can beat him. Biden doesn’t have a clue how to go one-on-one with Trump. Bloomberg would make mincemeat of Trump on the debating stage.
8
The answer is a Hillary Clinton - Pete Buttigieg ticket. I know that I carry the torch, but Hillary has the high moral ground in every way and Pete could do far worse than the second spot on the ticket. Both are fighters: Hillary has to be a little less nice and Pete's idea of "Medicare for those who want it" is less-threatening to and a good first step away from the status quo.
If Trump gets elected I will seriously consider offerings to the ancient Greek gods as well as leaving the country!
3
The lesson of the British elections is for conservative Democrats & moderate Republicans like Mr. Stephens. If you're determined to take down anyone slightly to your left, even at the price of selling out democracy to a con-artist, we will all get what you deserve.
2
The elites on the Left are learning what the Bolsheviks found out: THE WORKING CLASS cannot really be trusted and has to be coerced in its own interest.
8
@n1789 You are right. 10 % of the US population owns 75 % of the wealth .
For the 90 % who survive on the 25 % left it is their own interest.
Americans are so intelligent.
@jim A number of states have or are looking at free college. Parental leave and child care are available in many countries. The Nordic countries have a high tax rate yet few complain . Health care companies will never volunteer to give up excessive profits. Warren’s plans may be too far left for many but at least they are food for thought that can worked on. trump has given us a sugar high with tax cuts and low interest rates and this is a non sustainable solution for further economic advancement.
1
The Tory victory in only England looks like ending the Disunited Kingdom.
The unlikely event of a second Trump term would be similarly interesting for the not-so-united States.
The boundaries of the Quebec Act of 1744 certainly encompass a viable economic unit, south to the Ohio, west to the Mississippi. I'd hope it could join the EC in our lifetimes...
In economic reality it already has. It's just a matter of the politicians catching up.
3
Britain’s Ominous Portent for America...there fixed it for you.
1
Sorry, you’re trying to fit facts to suit your ideology.
Supporters of Biden and other establishment candidates must consider the fate of Hillary Clinton, and the results of the 2016 elections, right here, in the USA
That will be far more instructive than thinking about Jeremy Corbin, and the British election.
Btw if you really want to learn from British elections, you should first acknowledge that, in Britain, the Conservative party promised to protect socialized medicine (something that your Democrat establishment candidates seem to oppose)
3
The NYT needs to confront a real problem that comes with having Mr Stephens on its roster of columnists. His record of scorched-earth defense of Israel and tragically bigoted references to Palestinians is so pronounced that a reasonable reader must wonder if his views on the Levant do not also color his views on other matters. Two examples are Iran and Jeremy Corbyn. Can a reader really believe that this column on the recent elections in the UK is really motivated by an interest in drawing lessons from Mr Corbyn's failure a the polls? Or might the column in fact be Mr Stephens's vehicle for sticking it to a long-time defender of Palestinians' rights? It's just impossible to know. And the NYT needs to understand this, if it is going to continue to pay Mr Stephens's salary.
2
Trump supporters just want to poke the eye of liberals. They watch FOX and then blame everyone else as being a snowflake, communist or elitist. Not realizing the neat lil box of their news is manufactured just for them. How easy and convenient just to be able to watch 1 media outlet and claim ALL OTHERS are wrong and biased. Pretty lazy thinking. Hannity and Trump has your morality in a chase for an adulterer and a criminal. Trump calling other people liars is the funniest statement ever.
3
It is super easy to beat Trump in 2020. Dont promise open borders and free everything for illegals and just keep your mouth shut otherwise.
Nobody wants a revolution in this country right now, pay attention!
12
Embrace the winnable. Biden-Booker.
2
Brett is engaging in wishful thinking and trying to manipulate Democrats into serving his own interests by nominating someone he likes. Politics in the UK and US are not parallel or even similar. The US Democrats, even the left-leaning ones like Bernie Sanders have little in common with Jeremy Corbyn and the UK'S Boris Johnson doesn't even begin to approach Trump in policies, abuses of power and corruption. There's no issue in the US even remotely similar to Brexit, which is unique to the UK. Republicans like Brett Stephens claim they don't like Trump but instead of nominating someone to replace him in the Republican primary they're demanding that Democrats nominate a moderate conservative to run against him in the general election. Since when is it the Democratic Party's responsibility to provide a candidate Republicans like? Each party nominates a candidate that represents its own members' values and agenda. Anyone Brett approves of would not be representative of the Democrats.
7
Uh...Corbyn and Bernie are socialists, for crying out loud. And is it that you don’t know a lot of Brexit had to do with immigration and globalism, or you don’t know that Trump screams about immigration and globalism every day?
4
Without a doubt, Boris's victory means Trump wins with a landslide. While I personally think of Warren as heroic, she and the current slate of top contenders will have the same fate of Corbyn if any of them making it past the primaries.
Time for Bloomberg.
Mr. Bloomberg, if you are reading this, please announce that you will pick the amazing Stacey Abrams as your running mate. This is a 1941 moment for us; democrats need to unite behind someone who can win. Fellow democrats, could we please hold our hissy fits and tantrums, our fight for purity at all costs, our lack of attention to anyone except total perfection who can solve every problem and save the spotted owl in one shot - until we have overcome the virus that will surely choke us (imagine an unrestrained Trump dreaming of abolishing the constitution so he can remain king, having a Trump dynasty for our children and their children, and every republican arguing that it is the best idea since legalized robbery and slavery).
Thank you for your consideration.
6
I’ve been waiting for someone to repeat my fondest hope— that one of our Centrist candidates will ask Stacey Abrams to be Vice-President thereby creating an unbeatable ticket. Please...Mr. Bloomberg, do this now. You’ve already waited too long.
4
I see a lot of parallels between UK Brexit supporters and Trump supporters. One parallel I see is an expression of deep sorrow over the encroaching loss of a comfortable and familiar world. Globalism, the "invasion" of dark-skinned immigrants, Islam, secularism, rapid technological change, and job disruption are emotionally overwhelming and deeply saddening. Votes for Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are political protests against this new frightening world, even though many know, deep down, that things will never be the same.
4
The British voters did not dislike Labor's policies, they hated Corbyn with a passion. None of the Democrats' candidades is hated by the majority of American voters with similar intensity.
154
No Bret , if Trump wins again it is because so-called never Trumper’s like you end up voting either for him or for some third-party candidate basically allowing him to become president again. You have said you would vote in that way, you need to own him as much as anyone else.
7
There is another parallel: both Johnson and Trump were helped by Putin.
5
Nice theory, except Bernie is no "elite".
2
Brett is basically on target, but he doesn’t take it far enough. As long as Democrats keep blaming their defeat in 2016 on Russian bought ads on Facebook, they will never win the presidency. I am waiting for one New York Times Democrat or liberal to tell me that they were so influenced by ads on Facebook and other social platforms that they wanted to vote for Mrs. Clinton, but staggered into the voting booth and voted for Trump So instead they believe that the 63 million people that voted for the president, are stupid and deplorable. With that kind of attitude trumps reelection will be massive, and the house will go red on his coattails
14
The Russians clearly meddled, whatever the effects. In millions of social media ads and posts.
They didn’t need to move everybody. Just a few in the right places, which is what elected Trump.
Any chance your boy Trump is gonna move on from 2016 any time soon? Cripes, he WON amd he’s still fretting about it.
4
I agree with most of this article. As a moderate, I am very concerned. I have not yet found a Democratic candidate who I want to get behind, but know I do not support any of the 4 front runners. We are in a pickle with no encouraging sign that this is going to change. The fact that when they are not promising grand ideas that really are not realistic, they are taking pot shots at each other, is very also very discouraging. As someone who started out watching the debates, I am now not paying any attention to any of the candidates. The only thing I see happening is that they are all playing to the polls and trying to adjust their stances or proposed policies according to how the policies poll. We need a moderate to magically appear and save the country......
7
"The desire, however misplaced or ugly, to “take back” control of a country from supercilious political elites was a global phenomenon, not a local event."
That you find the voting of millions of free people for a more "nationalist" stance in foreign and domestic policy-making, rather than policy based in "globalism," to be "ugly," is quite telling.
The rise of ISIS under the Obama administration was "ugly," the unemployed masses of workers left to die in hollowed out post-industrial cities flooded with cheap Chinese fentanyl and no jobs or job training for a new world economy was "ugly."
But you cannot see this.
And until you can, the "ugly" nationalism which replaced failed globalism will remain with us.
8
@Jubilee133 Rise of Isis under Obama...replace Obama with Bush and then you'd be on to something.
2
The comparison of Corbyn with Warren and Sanders is not complete. They have yet to be smeared relentlessly with labels of anti-Semitism as Corbyn was and as they can expect to be if they get anywhere near the Democratic nomination. Among the first salvos surely to come via this column.
2
Maybe it’s time for the party leadership to caucus with all of the candidates and get behind a combination of the two strongest ones to beat Trump and do their best to avoid an avoidable crisis.
101
@Bronx Jon
That's what the party convention after (and reflecting) the primaries is for. Patience.
12
@Bronx Jon
Lots of big egos up on that stage. Nice plan though,
2
@Bronx Jon
Yeah, let the DNC and the "super"-delegates pick the Democratic candidate for 2020.
That sure worked great in 2016!
#NotMeUs #Bernie2020
10
There is one critical difference between the British and American political systems not noted by Mr. Stephens. In order to win in Britain, Mr. Johnson and his party actually had to win a majority of the votes cast in their country. As we know from 2016 and may see again in 2020, that is not a requirement for Mr. Trump under the American version of "democracy."
9
One big difference between Johnson and Trump is this: Johnson converted a great number of voters to his side whereas Trump isn't converting anybody. In fact, as the midterms showed, Trump's unpopularity drove voters to the Democrats, thus flipping the House from red to blue. And his approval rating is stuck at 40% despite a strong (on paper, at any rate) economy. The Democrats can take the White House by taking Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. And the candidate best capable of doing that is probably Joe Biden - which is why Trump attempted to smear him through Hunter Biden's connection with Burisma Holdings. True, Biden is as inspiring as a bowl of mush, but after three years of severe heartburn, bland mush might be our winning diet.
IT boils down to anybody who wants to change what needs to be changed doesn't have a chance.
1
"But we live in a moment when many things are fluid and bending"
And every single hollering newscast shreds the last shilling of context. For heaven's sake, the late New Yorker contributor George W.S. Trow, "Within the Context of No Context," 1981. I know we're infants, but let's not pretend this is new.
I can't read any more. Good night.
1
Ah Stephens. . . you certainly would love nothing more than a return to Feudalism.
Maybe its time for a rally to Joe Biden, a moderate man
1
The perfect choice for Democrats would be Hillary. She's been dropping hints that she's willing and available. She's rested, she's been tested and she's female.
2
Mere points -- by a climate-denying/xenophobe/misogynist who's "constantly inferring" that he's not a Trump-supporter -- can never connect-the-dots save for Heisenberg's waived lien on woven uncertainty.
Can you imagine if the Third Reich had assumed "nothing that signified a profound shift" insofar as limiting -- not completely wiping out -- relativists whose value-creation would someday win the very war caused by the devolved absolutists they embraced instead? Wouldn't SOME Einstein leftover have duly transcended mere "relatability, reliability, and results" -- and religion! -- in but a moment's unwavering neglect of posterity's grandly-unified greater good?
"The main job of any competent opposition is" NOT "to fight the next election, [nor] relitigate the past." But rather imagine -- like Einstein (and indeed our founders!) -- our nature's higher order whence more-perfect-union-formation can sustain MOVING FORWARD. That ALL "things ARE fluid and bending" must therefore heed relativity's unification. Otherwise, the TWO WRONGS of absolute stenosis is gonna make a THIRD REICH. Again!
Hence raise high the relativists, what a Hiroshima 2.0 will sadly be summoned to cram yet another crash-course on survival.
Democrats need to take a page from Republicans and steal their issues, play hardball
For example:
Be against illegal immigration, but go after those caught employing illegal immigrants. Throw the book at the rich exploiting cheap labor.
State you will support, by executive order if need be, any industry that unionized. Inions need to know they have a friend in the White House
Make establishing the rule of law for everyone a priority. Say you will increase funding for the SEC and the IRS to go after rich tax cheats and corporations that skirt the law.
5
“How did he do this? In four ways, each of which has parallels with Trump”
Excellent use of Quadrilateral Tessellation, BretStep.
The columnist's opinions here are so shallow. The vicissitudes of history clearly show that Americans have always been divided from the time of our founding. It is the NORMAL state not the abnormal.
Trump will win because he appeals to the common person better than any Democrat as did Obama.
2
Reading pundits, David Brooks', Maureen Dowd's and Bret Stephens' advice for the democrats would be amusing if it wasn't outrageous. Initially, it is funny that these arrogant, dressed up conservatives have the umbrage to stoop below their class and throw us some brilliant crumbs, but, then again, their advice is stupefyingly, outrageous garbage. They are justifiably scared of Trump, so they're offering us their wisdom. Why aren't they trying to penetrate the hearts and minds of the Republicans? They flirted with Trump long after his seedy, duplicitous and abusive behavior was well known. They sneered at Obama, castigated Hillary Clinton and now throw stink bombs at Sanders and Warren. What more could we ask?
3
Another load of tripe from one of the Times' resident GOP minions (who fakes hatred for his party's leader and the enablers who surround him, yet he remains a party loyalist!), salted with words of doom for the opposition party that he says has maybe one or two Republican lite candidates he can get behind so we better do what he says or we'll end up with Trump again.
2
Two “either/or” post-UK election election result questions for Democrats:
1)
Would you rather impeach Donald Trump and lose the 2020 presidential election?
Or –
Would you rather not impeach Donald Trump and win the 2020 presidential election?
2)
Would you rather kick Adam Schiff in the schiff?
Or –
The teeth?
3
Missing from this analysis is the role of disinformation and propaganda. Thanks to creation of echo chambers that drown out all real information, the majority of voters were encapsulated in a mythical world with Boris its magician.
The GOP is part of a similar enterprise built around Fox, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram. Facebook likes, manipulated Google searches, and talk radio.
2
@John♻️Brews
Is there ANY reason someone would not vote as you do other than “disinformation, propaganda, echo chambers, mythical worlds, Fox, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook likes, manipulated Google searches, and talk radio”?
2
Fear for our democracy can bring thus of us who love democracy together to face the existential threat of Donald Trump. While I could quibble with some of Bret Stephen's points it is true that we need a level headed proponent of Democracy who will not buckle under his tyrannical rants and will contrast well with his clear insanity and will will be someone who the greatest number can relate to.
I would suggest once again Amy Klobuchar. Perhaps if I say it long enough my wish will come true. She is more or less a blank slate untainted by Trump's lies which have legs if not substance. Will she win? I do not know. But she is a fighter and that is what we need.
3
I believe Corbyn's fate may apply to Warren, but not to Bernie. Discontent within the working class does seem similar in our two countries. Warren - and I believe Corbyn - never had great support from the disenfranchised worker. Both of their supports come from more affluent, educated and professional voters, compared to Bernie's. He is the only democratic candidate that has significant support from independent and non-affiliated voters (besides Tulsi and Yang), who represent most of our working class. And these voters are highly sensitive to hypocrisy.
Furthermore, it seems that rural and industrial midwestern or "swing" states will be important determinants in the general election. Bernie polls significantly better than Warren does in these states, nationwide. In my opinion, if Warren's popularity continues to slump she should consider endorsing Bernie in order to unify progressives. I'm not too optimistic about this though. Had she endorsed Bernie back in 2016, say, before the Mass. primary, we might very well have had Bernie elected instead of Trump. Alternatively, Warren campaigned hard for Hillary despite what we knew even then about Hillary's campaign practices.
Warren's current political portfolio is definitely a good one. But her life-long career as an elite academic, no matter how she tries to shape it, will not got over well with the very people she needs to have behind her. If she isn't able to get the working class in her own state....
1
Mr Stephens' failure to include Brexit amongst his 'four ways' that Boris won is so remarkable that it is hard to credit his analysis. Simply put, the Tories party and their voters have been very united in support of Brexit and he lost precious few votes on the issue; by contrast, Labour parliamentarians and traditional base were markedly split. As a result, Labour haemorrhaged support in those (significant) portions of its heartland that supported Brexit.
3
Why is it ominous & in another article populism & some lies as the reasons for Boris Johnson receiving a majority. Yet when Trudeau in Canada received his majority it was fawning adoration & a shoot in Vogue????
2
"Democrats got so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones."
YUP
10
I have profited greatly from the stock market that has risen exponentially since 2016. That does not inure me to the plight of the uber driver I speak too, the workers at my gym, the guy that sells newspapers and lottery tickets - they all do not feel this great economy. Granted it has gone on seemingly strong for the last three years, but it masks what is going on. The bill will come due. The only thing that is wrong with the dems shouting about this is the prediction of 'when' and 'if'
As for this comment by Brett "
"What matters more is relatability, reliability and results ( and when the reliability and results are not there the trumpets change their goal) .
Does the candidate get people like me? ( I will agree that trump does telegraph that - mostly division, aggrievedness, and I must say racism)
Will he keep his political promises? ( Trump clearly doesn't, but they don't care, they just change the idea of the promise they were expecting)
And has he achieved something that directly and tangibly benefits me?" ( Based on my unscientific sampling it seems that people think he has but are unable to verbalize it. Example? The tax penalty he bestowed upon NY and CA, there are still trumpists there despite the lack of benefit from tRump)
.
We dont nee perfection - we need to VOTE!
4
Bret Stephens has no grasp of what's happening outside of his bubble of smartness. He doesn't get the struggles of everyday people. He doesn't know working class Black and Brown communities. He doesn't know the condition of young adults living paycheck to paycheck, barely able to pay rent, unable to envision a future when they might be able to afford a home. Not surprisingly, this is just another uninspired push for centrist politics and it screams of Stephens' complete misunderstanding of the electorate and the dire straights of our NeoLiberal experiment.
7
Is Stephens suggesting Trump's 2020 campaign will be a rebranding of Warren's platform?
"I am a capitalist to my bones," Senator Warren has said. A phrase that Corbyn has never thought and never uttered.
The only thing Trump can lay claim to is being a failed capitalist despite his huge inheritance and corruption.
3
American politics do not present a marketplace of ideas, instead, columns like this make it out like class presidency elections. We don’t debate who’s plans are better like Warren or Pete, we debate who is more relatable (to my friend x or neighbor y) or electable to the jocks (or another swing faction with no firm principles).
Like Trump with his “Horseface” or “Pocahontas” barbs, we wonder who “looks presidential” or will reassure snow flake moderates that feel no need to vote, but just might if they like his grandfatherly vibe. There’s a lot about, “don’t play the [woman/black/whatever] card” and then, “where’d the [non-white/women] go?” We didn’t buy their stock.
After Bush, maybe Americans felt, even a new face could beat the GOP, so an inspiring candidate like Obama had a chance. Now, we’re so fearful the only “electable” candidate is the one white guy who hugged Obama tightly through two successful elections. He’s promising action on climate, and... remember Obama. And he’s winning, because Trump is scary, especially since 2016.
I’ll vote the Dems’ nominee, Biden or whoever, but this machine is broken. Trump’s GOP has made “American” about 1950’s culture, government without ethics, and policy without our Constitution. He’s got most of the voters that decided the last election. They want his feel/taxes.
We’re hearing, “get real” but the GOP is real? Like McConnell v. Obama, Trump’s luring us into a card game as the GOP sinks our ship and seizes the lifeboats.
2
Yep. Too much of our politics is frivolous, fact-free, and just plain dumb. That’s as much our problem as Trump.
1
This take ignores some important differences between the UK and the US:
- UK conservatives are united as Johnson avoided a far right split to UKIP over Brexit; US conservatives are divided between the far right MAGA dominated Republicans and Democratic party conservatives;
- Democratic party conservatives are conversely united with liberals and progressives;
- US working class is considerably more heterogeneous outside the largest cities, unlike the UK
- The US situation is not caught up on a single issue like Brexit
- It ignores the trend indicated by the 2018 and assumes it will magically be reversed
Just to name a few. In short, as example, the fact of an ultra-rightist coup in Bolivia (supported by the NYT) did not prevent a massive leftist uprising in neighboring Chile against the very type of regime with policies generally supported by the NYT
1
Seriously, Bret?
Are you seriously comparing Trump to Warren or Sanders?
Neither of them have 19 women lined up, waiting for Trump to 'get out of office' so that they can have their legal day in court and get justice for being sexually molested.
Truth?
I'm astonished that Trump was allowed to take the 'oath of Office' since he had legal cases pending.
Trump should never have been sworn in.
That he was, only means that he should have been impeached on the first day.
Really?
Warren and Sanders are comparable to Trump on anything!?!
4
Smart guys like Mr. Stephens, even those, like him, leaning to the right, think, when they support impeachment, that they're following the yellow brick road of a constitutional imperative. That's where he and his uber jesuitical constitutional scholars go way off the rails. Everyone in America who either voted for or against our black Trumpeter swan know what he is, but, bottom line, don't want him booted out so close the election because Jerry Nadler and his cohorts have worked themselves up to a championship lather. The phone call, stupid, of course, to have the whole world of petty bureaucrats listening in, ready to squeal on the Pres, but bottom line, boychicks, not the Nixon tapes. Those who are trying to push Trump out will get pushed out in turn. Not a pretty picture for the Dems.
Fool me once to ignore the implications for America when the Uk voted for Brexit in June of 2016. Fool me twice to think Hillary could beat Trump in 2016. Dems are about to be fooled for the third time in 2020 as ALL candidates are as bad as Corbyn.
1
This column is redundant. I just read the same specious duck and cover comparisons in Roger Cohen's weekly be afraid, be very afraid column. America is not the U.K., Johnson is not Trump, Corbyn is neither Sanders nor Warren, any possible similarities are superficial at best. However, it does give these pundits an opportunity to continue disparaging Sanders and Warren, one is a Socialist in name only, the other fervently embraces capitalism. Johnson, odious as he is, is to the left of both American progressives, and Corbyn even moreso but leftoid Americans have to make do with what the system spews out. The NYT might consider a quadfecta carpetbombing featuring featuring their star scare mongers, Brooks, Egan, Douthat, Cohen and Stephens all on the same day; sort of an all you can stand fest.
5
Trump is certain to be reelected. Political parties don’t lose the presidency after one term.
The real battle is whether Democrats can hold the House. Unlikely in normal circumstances. Impossible with an extreme left winger running for President
If I did not fear another 2 years of total republican control I would cheer a massive embarrassing drubbing of the Democrats. Get the stupidity out of their system. But my real wish is that they spend every penny defending the House
Bret is at it again. Telling democrats who to pick so he can stay home and not vote in November 2020.
At least you should make a commitment of voting for one of the democrats still in play before you can pretend representing moderate and independent voters. At a minimum you should commit to not vote for Trump since he is corrupting the very principal of democracy with all of his flagrant cheating and corruption including selling off US interest to the highest bidder.
Britain is not the US, nor is Sanders equivalent to Corbyn. Bernie surely would have beaten Trump in 2016. Moreover, the polls show that almost any Democratic candidate beats Trump. Trump has demonstrated he's a liar, a scammer, a "populist" front for corporations and the ultra-wealthy. Americans are getting tired of a president who destroys everything he touches--now including the the Constitution and the climate. In 2016 he lost the popular vote by 3 million. In 2020, after four years of this would-be dictator, he will do worse.
1
All these opinion columnists are trying to give friendly advice to the Democrats but the democrats fail to take sound advice and the crushing defeat of the labor party will have no bearing on the Democrats. The democrats think that they have the congressional majority and they can abuse their power and do whatever they like. The writing on the wall is crystal clear. The democrats in 2020 by their stupidity will ensure the reelection of Trump and because they wasted time on impeachment and not keeping their campaign promises they will lose their majority in congress and will allow the senate to keep its majority.
4
Impeaching a corrupt President is never a waste of time, and in the event you’d ever become interested in a nice hot cup of reality, take a look at a) the bills sitting under Mitch McConnell, b) this week’s actions from Congress.
3
@Robert from out west. You realize you speak for your self and not for the voters. Our president elected by 63 million American voters IS NOT CORRUPT OR RACIST. Hot cup of Reality is the end result and not the process. Who cares what McConnell did or did not do. What has the current congress accomplished in the end. Obstruction is the name of the game in partisan Washington. The congress obstructs the president and the senate obstructs the congress and that is allowed by our system of government. Luckily we are still a democracy and if we do not like the way either the president works or the congress works or the senate works we have a right to vote them out. Are you afraid of our democracy and the ballot box?
2
Corbyn does not belong to a leftist tradition that could be paralleled with Sanders or Warren's...for so many reasons that have to do with,mainly, political ,historical culture. Same thing on the other side, Trump and Johnson's real ( only) common "working" ground is populism, which means over stretching lies to please and comfort the poorly educated and the poor...but no conclusions should be drawn from what just occurred in the UK for the next US elections. Different people ,different circumstances, even if the big picture allows guys like Johnson and Trump to play a part they would not have been allowed to play...say...30 years ago.
Wrong and off point here Bret.
There is a huge difference between progressive democrat candidates and Corbyn and his labor party.
Stop tying to to make one = the other.
The UK elections this week was much more about a rejection of the racist, bigoted, Russia friendly Corbyn then it was a ringing endorsement of Johnson and the Torries.
Sorry.. no comparison. And I say that as a centrist who is socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
5
@Observer That may be so but they will not get their "traditional culture" back via Johnson and we will not get it back via Trump. Mythologizing and idealizing the past has never lead a country toward the future, rather it is the hallmark of fascism, that uses a false idealisation of the past to cover-up its own corruption in the present. See the beautiful article by Jean Clair about how Hitler and Mussolini used this idea of being the only ones connected to the real heritage of the past. It was used to cover up the crimes they were committing in the present.
2
This is absolute nonsense! The rural voters who have traditionally supported Labour, voted for Brexit in 2016. Boris Johnson promised to get it done and those people switched. It’s that simple. It’s not because they didn’t like what Labour was proposing or that they were too progressive. Let’s face it, Angela Merkel is to the left of Bernie Sanders. It’s only in America that what he proposes is considered radical. In Europe he’s main stream!
4
Bret, may i remind you of Trumps Republicans recent trashing at the polls in the US .
2018 Midterms Democrats take the house. 2019 Off Election , Democrats win Governors races in states where they have no business doing so. Take the Virginia house, and steal seats from Republicans in local government nationally, an example that comes to mind is Delaware County Pa, Dems now run county government , for the first time 'ever'.
All this despite your boogeyman and boogeywoman Warren and and Sanders running in the Democratic field for President. As one of my friends said over Thanksgiving dinner,' I would vote for a door knob over Trump,' it appears the majority of Americans feel the same way.
What has happened in the UK and USA is both countries have now elected a Clown for a President and a Prime Minister.
To my family and friends in Little England I say expect the Circus to come to town any day now.
Oh and 'Rue Britania '.
1
Don't worry Hillary will relent and decide to save Democrats again.
1
Sounds like you fully support Biden. Like Clement Attlee, America needs a neutral, calming leader with no drama for a while. Trump is a Rorschach test; no damn clue who sees what. Biden would be a breath of meditation; calm, slow and steady. Warren and Sanders, a footnote.
1
Part 2. Will progressives solve globalization inequalities, immigration concerns? Will they question our multilateral organizations that seem to do nothing but talk, solve few banking, Internet scamming, drug trafficking, et all problems?
Who can tell from these debates that focus on health care and toss out generalized, feel good ideas- decriminalize immigration, give everybody a little cash.
Maybe instead of complaining about China’s state-backed industries, we might (gasp) copy some of them? Making solar panels, pharmaceuticals that now cost tens of thousands of dollars per dose- in government run factories- in rural areas. Breaking up monopolies in every economic sector, now moving into real estate...
I want to hear real solutions. Break down immigration- refugees and economic opportunists need different strategies, approaches. And let’s revisit that lottery- bring it out in the open and discuss a new immigration lottery, along with other ideas. Real Solutions.
We are not Britain. We don’t have a queen, national health care, EU border, governance concerns. We have different needs, and need our own solutions. Moderation, at this point, isn’t one.
1
Way to go, Barack. Way to go, Hillary. This is your fault.
1
the woke are asleep
2
You misspelled the headline.. it should read:
"Britain's Ominous Portent For Democracy"
110
@Celeste You realize Obama was a centrist, right?
3
@Celeste
Interesting. Johnson won in a democratic election. I can only assume your version of democracy elects only the people you like.
11
@them
...and Johnson won little Little England handily.
His Tory party won 44% of the UK vote.
No combination of candidates supporting Brexit achieved 50% of the British vote.
3
If Trump wins again, it will be a triumph of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the rest with their lies and distortions of reality. Watching the entire Republican Party "see no evil, hear no evil" is frightening. Why not just hang the Russian flag over the White House now?
Somehow, it's up to the Democrats to save the country from itself? It 's up to the Democrats to nominate - per Bret Stephens - a Republican he finds acceptable - but who will run as a Democrat....because an actual Democrat who wants to give the US back to the middle class and take it away from the super rich is too far left? Mind boggling.
6
Earth to Bret: They are not listening. Keep it up though, even if they never let you near the water cooler.
2
fluffy white delightful snow with a hidden center of solid anthracite - could this be the metaphor for the softball imPEACH stone? in addition to no direct analog to Pelosi and the clockwork regularity of our national elections don't read too much into BrexitBoris'
For Democrats? How about for America? For Democracy? For the world?
Republicans better start worrying about their own hides if Trump is re-elected. The republic they take for granted is threatened by a president who is neck-deep in Russian organized crime and extortion.
5
Next up: The disintegration of the US.
4
To believe anything else other than that the socialist policies of Bernie and AOC will soon wreak havoc on the Democrats is, as they used to say, whistling past the graveyard.
4
Corbyn dared to criticize Israel and was demonized with the help of Stephens.
Saunders and Warren have dared to criticize Israel and are now in the crosshairs of Stephens.
1
I would not be surprised if the UK election results were to prompt Democratic primary voters to coalesce around a centrist candidate-- probably Biden. This would be for the best. He's an imperfect candidate to be sure, but he doesn't have to be perfect, just good enough.
In other ways also, I don't think it's bedwetting time quite yet. 2016 was a low turnout election. There was a lot of complacency among Democrats (myself included), in part due to the misleading polls. Some people stayed home or voted third party, in part because they didn't take the prospect of a Trump victory seriously.
I doubt anyone needs convincing that Trump could very well win at this point. It will not be a low turnout election. Dems can look to the 2018 midterms as a clear blueprint for how to win. Or they can nominate someone too far from the mainstream and wrest defeat from the jaws of victory.
2
I believe the true message is NOT a repudiation of liberal/progressive policies. Rather, it's that the electorate are tired of old white guys running political parties and putting up the same old tired candidates.
The Democratic Party "establishment" is the problem, not the solution. Right now, my choices are a party that is 100% corrupt and one that is 50% corrupt. Choosing to ride a dead elephant or a moribund ass is the very definition of a Hobson's Choice.
1
In passing Brexit, the British people rejected people in Brussels, who were never on the UK ballot, making rules and regulations that controlled their every day lives.
Similarly, folks in flyover country rejected people from both coasts, who they never elected, from being in a position to profoundly affect their lives. Imagine someone working in the coal industry being told that utopia was only possible if each and every one of them no longer had a job. And that, to save the globe, our industries must be strangled while the same industries in other nations could go on, business as usual. And then told, when you politically support someone who offers something more attractive, that you are a "deplorable".
Right now, some states have put an end to all vaping products, even though the health dangers so far experienced are mostly confined to illegitimate street vaping concoctions. And other jurisdictions now want to ban menthol cigarettes, preferred by many smokers, especially those in minority communities.
This is why Bloomberg will ultimately fail miserably. People are willing to take education of what is good and bad for them, but resent Big Brother making the decisions for them.
Leave me free to make a living, make a few mistakes, but let them be my own mistakes.
5
The recent British election is akin to a riot in your neighborhood due to dire conditions but on a grand scale. Smashing windows and burning businesses in your own neighborhood might be counterproductive but some (a lot apparently) feel they have nothing to lose.
Bloomberg should run as an independent Republican.
1
I’m not sure who the “Democrats” you speak of in this article actually are. Are they the left-wing media, the cable news networks, the U.S. congresspeople, the senators, pundits, or just the regular citizens like me? Because if you’re talking about people like me, you’re off base. Regular people know that the only way to get Trump out of office is to out-vote his supporters, and we don’t use primal screams. We don’t think in terms left and right wing, supercilious political elites versus the downtrodden masses. We see what Trump has said and done- to our environment, our immigrants, race relations, our elections, our standing in the world. He’s not the devil, just a very poor representation of what America is and should be. He’s not always wrong, either. Sometimes he gets it right, but when he does it’s because of instinct- not experience, contemplation or deep insight. He is changing our country into the brute America of his dreams, where strong men have a hold on their people and a country is only as good as its strength among other strongmen who rule other people. Regular Democratic voters don’t care about impeachment, oral arguments, congressional meetings, moral platitudes. We see the changes taking place and we want America to be good, to remain fair, to be free. We will vote, and with each ballot dropped in the box, we hope and pray it counts as much as all the fake news and twisted ideology we hear everyday on the news.
5
You would be forgiven for thinking that austerity-driven starvation of public services, or climate-change-induced flooding of towns across the UK would have featured on the working family's political thinking. Nope. "Get Brexit Done" - a three-word slogan, which succeeds at being both fatuous and vacuous - prove to be Britain's "MAGA" in 2019.
Of course, it certainly helps when rivals play Political Reservoir Dogs with one another.
As the author states, US Dems take heed.
4
On the other hand, Johnson's victory and the consequent demise of once Great Britain may serve as an example of the limits of a populist policy based on ultra nationalism and in-your-face buffoons. Time will tell.
3
It's so bad, that commenters here at echo central and Democrats everwhere "worry" about Trump being re-elected. A man who admitted soliciting foreign help in the next election, and who did so in the last.
Yet the economy is "wonderful?"
I grew up in the 1950's. People who got in bed with Russia went to prison, not the White House. What's wrong with everyone?
6
and of course what Stephens leaves out of his misdirection is that Britain's Labour Party has absolutely no correlation to the US's Democratic Party—none, zero, zip, nada—and never has.
to wit, from the WSJ...
U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson pledged ... to deliver billions of pounds in public spending to consolidate the Conservative Party’s once-in-a-generations gains among working class voters still hurting from the financial crisis.
Sounds more like a Clinton-Third-Way Democrat to me.
2
Why does this remind me of Trump’s swearing up and down that he never met Lev Parnas?
I've read some of the other comments and not one person mentions the climate crisis in regard to the next election. It is imperative that we election someone who will lead us out of this mess. Heck, we need to elect someone who, at minimum, is capable of understanding what we are facing. We are barreling toward a cliff. When we go over, nothing else is going to matter.
2
Being too far left has little to do with it. Corbyn's fate tells us what we all should know. Being wooden, uncharismatic, old, irritable and tired spells certain defeat (Biden, Sanders). Sounding distinctly retro, dredging up policies that fit nicely with the mindset of 1964 spells doom (Sanders, Warren). Waffling, lacking coherence, being unable to express any compelling coherent simple position (the entire Democratic field) spells losing. Putatively leading a party that really doesn't agree on much of anything -- and is more an unhappy collection than a coalition --cannot yield victory. Coming across as a policy wonk, especially an arrogant one, is the kiss of death (Clinton). Corbyn was an awful choice as leader for Labour, and couldn't possibly deliver victory. Indeed given the mess that Labour as a party is in (and has been for a decade), virtually no one could. And that's the message for Democrats. Your party is a mess, your leadership (Pelosi and Schumer) is incompetent and widely loathed, your traditional bases in the south, among Jews and with blacks are weak and fragmented, the public's trust is rock bottom. Congress is not only venal but now regarded as such, a refuge for reprobates. Very few think the presidency an exception to corruption and squalor. So, good luck, Dems, in 2024 because 2020 is decided in Republican favour. Trump and the Republicans are riding high, albeit like the UK Conservatives, for all the wrong reasons.
4
If anything unzips just how daft this rant is, it’s the bit about Nancy Pelosi’s being incompetent.
The Democratic party has adroitly painted itself into a very nasty (and lonely) corner. Impeachment, as a piece of political theater, has closed in Boston. The front men for this circus are two of the most distasteful (and, sinister) figures in Congressional politics. Jerry and Adam--you want these fellas the face of your party?
Trump is a known-known; you can be appalled by his manners and rhetoric, but he is a rock-solid firebreak against the genuinely scary impulses of the progressive hard-left. The Democrats are cruising toward a dead-heat convention--won't it be a spectacle when the super-delegates gather in a smoke-free room and pick the nominee? And will the hyperventilated partisans of Berne and Liz and Mayor Pete and good old Joe (who was the real target of the recent CIA Op) and even Mike, greet this savior with a solid turnout? Do pigs fly?
Progressives will happily keep Trump as their favorite scary monster--keeps the troops in line--but they will never unite behind a candidate of less than perfect purity. It's too, too...political! It's, it's....immoral!
Trump in a landslide. Take it to the bank.
2
It amuses me to no end that an elite New York Times writer tells readers of the nytimes what the common people feel. My family lives in NC and the answer is far simpler: Fox News and its lies. My relatives think trump will save Medicare and social security from socialism.
5
The Times seems to have a stable of so-called conservatives who seem to have nothing better to do than to tell Democrats which candidates to choose. Unsurprisingly they tend to be the ones who have carried water for those same conservatives and their Wall Street friends for decades. Frankly, I am getting tired of all this unsolicited Trojan Horse advice.
1
Democrats have run three centrists against the catastrophic GOP nominees George W. Bush and Donald Trump. They lost all three. Let's try something different than the proven failed model.
119
@saabrian Think about the last three centrist Democratic candidates. Gore lost thanks to every Supreme Court Justice voting against their judicial philosophy. Kerry lost because of a massive right wing smear, and a not particularly well run campaign. And Hillary lost for several reasons: she was the pre-ordained candidate, she was not a particularly adept campaigner i.e. nobody wanted to have a beer with her, and to some extent thanks to James Comey. Also, how do you, saabrian, explain the centrist Obama's two over-whelming victories. I'll take the intelligent, likable centrist any day of the likes of Warren and Sanders.
34
@Bob
Not hard at all to explain Obama's victories. He was the first black (actually bi-racial) candidate and it made a lot of people feel good to vote for such a man.
He was also very fortunate enough to be running against a candidate who "suspended" his campaign at the height of the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression. A candidate who actually uttered one of the most idiotic statements of any candidate in history: "Economics is not really my thing."
Hi reelection was aided by the fact that during a time of outrage against the destruction being created by corporate raiders and Fraud Street, the republicans incomprehensibly nominated a Fraud Street corporate raider.
This arrogant fool went on to utter this gem:
“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what … who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. … These are people who pay no income tax. … and so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
Trump, running as a democrat, would have defeated those inept clowns. Of course, running as a republican, he went on to defeat an even worse democratic foe than either McCain or Romney.
Obama's victories? Sometimes it is right place at right time and running against pitiful competition.
11
@Bob
Obama ran on Hope and Change. People believed his rhetoric. We got "abandon any hope of change" instead.
We were snookered, just like Trump voters.
12
Reading today’s other articles trying to analyze the British election, it was a rejection of this version of globalization that has hollowed out manufacturing and yes, allowed new EU members to compete for jobs. It was more pro-Brexit, in any form, blaming the unaccountable EU and globalization for every ill.
As I’ve argued before, this president identifies any number of problems, using them, milking them for rallies, and doing little to actually solve them. So will a moderate Biden solve them? Will progressives?
To me, moderation, compromising more and more to the right, embracing globalization, ignoring the inequality in every areas from health care (the moderate solution, the ACA, has already been gamed) to high tuition (no new taxes was accommodated with budget cuts), has gotten us where we are. Complainers, those fly-over voters...well, just retrain them, or they can move. Now, when their concerns are seen as real, suddenly these same moderates will solve the problems...but slowly, with more compromise. Pat- pat on the head, we hear you, trust us.
Globalization and trade, immigration and labor. Trump, needing a good economy (he has nothing else) is suddenly compromising on the new NAFTA deal, is caving to China. Uh, show me the jobs coming back.
The Wall. Doesn’t address the growing visa-overstays, and his push for more...legal...temp visa guest workers. E-Verify enforcement? Ha! A few show-trialesque roundups to placate the base. Real solutions? Not.
1
Politics for the author here and for the British people as well as the American culture is a behaviorist phenomenon .
No sense of causality or economic or social consequences .
Definitely very different from the European culture .
Forget what happened in Great Britain.
Here at home, Democrats and ‘progressives’ will try to convince Americans that they can improve on 3.5% unemployment and rising wages.
Good luck with that.
1
Based on Mr. Stephens' analysis I would presume that Mr. Trump won the 2016 election with a moderate platform. The ship is sinking and a middle of the road Democrat is a life boat without air.
In order to win the British Conservatives promised to put more money in the national health system. In America, just the idea of National health system considered to be extreme left. How do you can compare British with the US? In the British their Conservatives significantly more left than left-leaning Democrats. And moderate Democrats as Biden or Buttigieg would be considered as extreme conservatives, I don't see their ilk wins British election.
1
So Mr. Stephens, was the answer to support impeachment or to forgo it given that the 2020 election was being corrupted before our eyes (in addition to all the other impeachable offenses that have been committed since Trump became president that would have brought down any other president in our history). Please tell us what you recommend the party should have done.
I've heard it mentioned that there are 200 bills on Mitch McConnell's desk, passed by the house, sent to the senate that are not being acted upon. Seems to me stuff has been getting done in the house just not being acted upon in the Senate, where, (like in the upcoming impeachment trial) McConnell waits for Trump's blessing before he brings anything to the floor of the senate. So similarly he has decided, as a juror no less, Trump will not be removed from office and will design the trial so Trump and Bill Barr and president's counsel will approve.
Yes, the democrats are divided, but perhaps that is part and parcel of a democracy as opposed to marching locked goose step, eyes closed, behind our corrupt president as the republicans delight in.
Hopefully the democratic party will unite behind the eventual choice of a candidate in recognition of the danger four more years of Trump presents to humankind.
If not, I fear America will get what it's voters deserve.
2
Bret Stephens argues indirectly that the Democrats would have a better chance aeyt avoiding the nightmare scenario of reelecting Trump in 2020.
First they should emphasize economic issues instead of social issues. Here Sanders and Warren shine because they focus on achieving universal health care for Americans.
Second, they should do their homework when it comes to numbers. The population of Guatemala is 17 million and it is growing at 2% per year. Thus to just admit the INCREASE in Guatemala's population as immigrants to the US would require 340000 immigrants, just from Nicaragua. Then there is Honduras, El Salvador, Mexico, Belize, .....
Third, they should shift their positions to the center on many of the "culture war" issues.
Thus Democrats should distance themselves from the Me Too movement. The problem is that this movement has abandoned due process which is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Men are accused of crimes, subjected to public shaming, have their lives destroyed. But there are almost no trials. (Harvey Weinstein is a notable exception.) As a result it is impossible to estimate how many of the accusations might be false.
Democrats should admit what is obvious. We need to control poverty in the third world by providing access to family planning, not by encouraging immigration to the US.
Make these changes and the Democrats would almost certainly win.
Don't make them and the US creates a country even more oppressive than it is under Trump.
@Blaise Descartes
You’re asking Dems and ‘progressives’ not to be Dems and ‘progressives.’
They have no other ideas so that is not going to happen.
2
Trump also runs against a "rigged system" so that was not Labour's problem. Their problems were immigration and globalization. These policies are seen to undermine the economic position of the British working class. Foreign products and foreign workers take their jobs. They want the
state to protect them. American workers want the same thing. The Democrats bought into globalization and immigration and cannot now as blithely extricate themselves as can the Repubs who also bought in. By the way, has anyone noticed that very low unemployment here correlates with drastic reduction of immigration from Mexico and Central America?
2
Look beyond partisanship and put this election in the historical context. The election delivered a significant, if not decisive, defeat to antisemitism and the betrayal of the working and middle classes -- two ugly trends that flew in the face of WWII legacies that cost millions of lives. WWII was a world war, if you remember, ignited by empire ambitions, and ended by sending empires and dreams about empires into the dustbin of history, to the credit of millions more lives sacrificed outside the industrial west for national independence and sovereignty from empires. I should mention the old empire system's beachhead was none other than The East India Company, just to refresh the memory of TPP globalists. As a feminist and someone who once took a job in a union to help immigrant workers, I wish it were the Labour Party that received the victory on these historically significant terms. Alas, Great Britain is a monarchy still. So be it. Have a toast to this world historical moment, if you drink.
I was watching TV. They were discussing Brexit. Philip Hammond, former Chancellor of the Exchequer was explaining the result. About the future electoral contests he said, I am paraphrasing him, he said he said Red is old, Green is gold.
A great lesson for Dems.
1
Centrists are desperate to spread the narrative that Labour lost because it was "too far left" when in fact it lost due to Jeremy Corbyn's inability to lead. He allowed the anti-Semitism charges against Labour to fester and drive away supporters with vague statements and half-hearted apologies instead of a forthright statement condemning it in all its forms and pointing out that criticism of Israel is not anti-Semitic. He could have come out with a strong anti-Brexit position, thereby cutting the ground out from under the Lib Dems, and made the case to Labour's Leave constituencies that the best opportunity to make the EU a more labor-supportive and less neoliberal environment was through a Labour-led government working from within. Instead, he absurdly tried to split the baby and then scarcely talked about Brexit at all during the campaign even though that was foremost on his constiuents' minds. That left the field open to Boris Johnson, who won an absolute majority despite his party's gross mishandling of the issue.
Take a forthright stand on the compelling issues of the day and don't back away from them under pressure -- that's what wins the respect and support of electorates. That is exactly what Jeremy Corbyn didn't do, and that, not his socialist platform, is why Labour was crushed. Twelve years of "Republican-lite" vacillating by timid neoliberal centrists lost the Democrats a thousand seats over that period. More of the same will only yield a Trump second term.
3
You really think the Anglo-Saxon working class in the decimated North of England voted for Johnson over Corbyn because the latter didn’t deal well with charges of antisemitism? We need to burry this as a reason for the Tory landslide and Labour’s decimation.
1
@Carlos H
No, but they lost key constituencies around London because of that.
1
Amazing that after Hillary s loss pundits still believe that a centrist message is a more viable path to victory for Democrats in 2020. The part of Trump's message in 2016 which resonated was essentially you should be angry because there is something seriously wrotten with the status quo that no other conventional politician can fix.( Now of course his policies were the complete opposite, which none of his supporters seem to be bothered by, but that is a whole other topic). On the Democrats side, only Sanders and Warren seem to be articulating the full degree to which people were disaffected , hurting, anxious and angry, even before Trump, from the last 40 years of right wing economic policymaking(I personally think Sanders is the more effective candidate of the two but would be thrilled with either) . I m astounded how anyone still thinks that a Biden or Buttigieg tepid message of let's just go back to how things were before Trump is a winning platform for Democrats in 2020.
2
A very thoughtful article. While Sanders and Warren are decent people, unlike Corbyn, the basic comparison on policy is accurate. It's possible that Biden could represent a sort of hiatus, a calming after the tumult of the Trump years. And it's possible that the electorate will be satisfied with that. But it's a stretch. Let's hope the Dems can come up with a forward-looking slate, Bloomberg+Buttigieg?
Trump will win the 2020 election in a landslide regardless of what the Democrats do.
Here’s how Trump wins:
1. The Senate acquits Trump in the impeachment trial
2. Trump sees the acquittal as a green light to invite foreign intervention in the U.S. election
3. Trump offers a deal to China—help me win and I will give you a great trade deal and withdraw most U.S. forces from the South Pacific.
4. China’s significant electronic footprint in the United States allows it to gain a backdoor to servers, computers, routers, and perhaps the voting machines.
5. China needs to change the votes in 20 locations to give Trump the election. For example, if China changes the vote tally in Dane County, Trump wins Wisconsin.
6. Republicans embrace foreign intervention in U.S. elections since it will keep them in power.
3
The roster of candidates is a perfect stimulus programme for columnists. This enables them to produce hundreds of columns from almost every point of view in each perspective on this subject. Even in regard to the general election in UK in the sense of "Corbyns of the world unite - or better not!"
But one thing no column in the world can do:
To make it any better.
It seems problematic to draw a strong correlation between the UK election and next year’s US election. First, Corbyn is one of the most disliked politicians ever in the UK. The charges of anti-semitism leveled at him and others in Labour are very troubling. Two, Corbyn has not been the most vocal of supporters of Remain, and has been traditionally anti-EU for a long time, as well. In other words, he wasn’t such a contrasting figure on a personal level. None of the American Democrats have that level of antipathy leveled at them. The Conservatives still won less than a majority of the vote in a pluralistic system. We have, essentially, a two-party system. Clinton was extremely disliked in 2016. And she still won a clear majority of the direct vote. I am not saying the Dems have an easy shot at victory. But, the claim that the UK debacle is so reflective of the US situation is superficial at best.
1
@Matthew Richter
It is in fact reflective, but not for the facile reasons offered by Bret Stephens and other centrists desperate to restore a old status quo that was unsustainable and is never coming back. Throughout the West, voters on both the right and the left have become increasingly frustrated with ruling elites who ignore their needs and concerns (when they are not actually denigrating them) while slavishly devoting themselves to the agenda of the one per cent. They have expressed that frustration in the limited ways the electoral system allows them. That is why Brexit passed in the first place, why Trump was elected, why right wing neofascist regimes have sprung up in Italy, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, and why Trump, despite or even because of impeachment, may win a second term. The establishment and its status quo neoliberal globalism that ignores ordinary people and is fueling runaway wealth inequality is what is being rebeled against. Corbyn lost after running a campaign where he scarcely mentioned Brexit! Bernie and the progressives know that if you don't talk directly to Rust Belt voters and address their issues, they will follow the racist siren songs of the far right filling that vaccum. A centrist Democrat offering only more of the same cannot beat Trump, as data collected by the Democracy Fund's Voter Study Group makes plain: https://www.salon.com/2019/06/02/there-is-hard-data-that-shows-that-a-centrist-democrat-would-be-a-losing-candidate/
1
Bret Stephens is wrong on the assumption that this says anything about the electoral chances of leftist candidates in the US. This vote was about Brexit and about clear messaging, which the Tories had and Labour unfortunately didn't. After our Brexit moment in 2016, when Trump was elected, Britain now has its Trump moment. After a campaign blanketed with false and deceitful media coverage, the British voters rejected a party that for decades has talked the talk, but failed to walk the walk on the economic rights of working people. And yes, candidates matter. But when you fight for economic justice and respect for all, including previous referendum outcomes, you will win. Unfortunately, Labour didn't have a clear message on that.
2
"The desire, however misplaced or ugly, to “take back” control of a country from supercilious political elites was a global phenomenon, not a local event." I agree. The question is who are the supercilious political elites? First, supercilious is an understatement, greedy and corrupt is a more apt description.
Are the elites coastal liberals, civil servants, climate change activists, college professors, the media. They are if you listen to Fox News. But who is really raping America.? Who are the true elites? It's the corporate and political oligarchy made up of the corporate CEO's, lobbyists, Wall Street financiers, and their lackeys in Congress. The average guy doesn't have a chance on this, the most crooked of playing fields. Let's get it right in identifying the bad guys Mr. Stephens. You're too smart to push the Koch brother nonsense.
2
Some of this is true - there are close parallels in the political developments on both sides of the Atlantic.
But some is not, and that is the part in which Stephens is unwilling to admit, to us or to himself, what Trump and the modern GOP truly represent.
“Resentment of political elites” is a euphemism for racism and xenophobia, a desire to turn back the clock a hundred years to the time when white Christian male hegemony was unquestioned in both countries.
And the liberal fear of destruction is not for the economy. Rather, it is for our democracy itself, which is being destroyed by the Republican onslaught of voter suppression, extreme gerrymandering, a stolen Supreme Court sweat, legalized bribery, blatant obstruction of Congress and Trump’s repeated invitation to foreign countries to intervene on his behalf in our elections. We also fear Trump and BoJo’s assault on truth itself, abetted by the right-wing media and rise of social platforms.
We are seeing all of those fears come true before our eyes. Someone who has spent his career enjoying the benefits of a free press should be a lot more cognizant of and sympathetic to them. But it’s hard to admit that the side you’ve chosen isn’t the good guys.
2
I am sufficiently scared.
2
If the Democrats nominate Warren, there will be four more years of Trump, with other miscreants to follow.
2
“If impeachment — which I support as a matter of constitutional duty but fear on political grounds — winds up helping Trump get re-elected, it will be for similar reasons. That is, Democrats got so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones. The main job of any competent opposition is to fight the next election, not relitigate the past.”
Using a veiled reference to “undoing the 2016 election” is a right-wing canard, Mr. Stephens. I’ve read enough of your columns to understand and appreciate your support for impeachment—finally—but what about all your fellow Republicans, especially those in Congress? Forget the 2016 election: Does the Constitution matter a whit to them? Given a choice between “Patriot” and “Partisan,” their decision (here’s looking at you, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Jim Jordan, Matthew Gaetz—is that enough?) is starkly clear and absolutely repugnant to any decent American.
3
No Marxist U.S.A. President please... If it came down to choosing Bernie or Trump, most "Independents," America's target voting block, would choose Trump. Obviously.
4
“If impeachment — which I support as a matter of constitutional duty but fear on political grounds — “ You go on to criticize the Dems for proceeding with impeachment after you stated you “support it as a matter of constitutional duty.” How are you squaring that circle? If you were a representative would you have avoided your constitutional duty? I’m confused.
2
Sigh.
He means that he thinks it’s the right thing to so, and may very well get Trump re-elected. Especially in tandem with some of the behavior on the Left.
Corbyn, rhymes with Warren.
1
Psst. Hey, liberals. It is not often my practice to aid and abet the opposition, especially when they're making a critical mistake, but there's a simple trick to getting back working class and moderate voters---that is, if you any longer care about them---and it boils down to one word:
Immigration.
British voters are so concerned about over-immigration that they're willing to divorce you for it (Brexit, of course, but maybe in other ways, too). Even British Indian, Asian and African voters sided with conservatives on this issue. Probably because even they know that they don't want to kill the golden goose.
That's it. Here in America, you will have to proactively go out of your way, to voice in clear, absolute tones, that Democrats do not value immigrants over your own native countryman. And that especially goes for America's European-American stock---yes, Whites. You see, it isn't racist to want to protect one's own outcome.
Somehow, though, I don't think you have it in you, Democrats. But there it is...
6
Why shouldn't we consider the fate of Hillary Clinton. Seems more relevant to me.
2
Dear Bret, where to begin, There is literally no way the UK election and the current American political hemisphere . Bret you have already forgotten our Midterms and this years Off election, where the voters gave Trumps Republicans a trashing, in 2020 they will do so again.
Now to the UK.
1.To begin with Brexit there is literally nothing akin to Brexit on our horizon. No advocating for a break up of the United States into Red and Blue states 'though there is a thought'. Brexit was 'the bomb' that blew the UK apart.Its people divided like we are to a point of no return.
2. Now lets take a look at Labour and who its supporters are.Yes Labours defeat must squarely lay at the feet of the odious Jeremy Corbin.He took a nonsensical approach to Brexit 'I will decide after the Election',failed to address what were probably exaggerated accusations of Anti Semitism, and gave off an overall impression of being a bit too full of himself. He still arrogantly refuses to step down.
But Bret Labour has been bleeding voters to the Tories for years sine Thatcher actually. Like in the US the British White Working Class' have tended to vote against their own best interest for years now,and again like their American cousins their Numero Uno issue is Race, cloaked as a concern for Immigration,Brexit , or whatever, but it boils down to Race.
Like America the United Kingdom has elected a Clown as their leader ,now they await for the Circus to arrive in town.
Rue Britania.
"Democrats got so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones."
Poppycock!
Pelosi et al were extremely reluctant to engage in impeachment. They simply had no choice and said so flatly. To twist their intentions is simply dishonest.
4
Don't you mean the ominous import for ALL of us?
1
sure, but just wait till the bloomberg/warren ticket hits the booths.
Yep, the New York Times has already written the obituary for Democracy in America. Thanks, Bret.
1
OR - the U.K. never actually did ANYTHING to prosecute Cambridge Analytica which leveraged military-grade psy-ops messaging techniques to sway voter opinions over the last several years in the U.K. regarding Brexit and, of course, in the 2016 on behalf of Trump while being run by Steve Bannon, where they targeted the key swing states and managed to sway 6% of the undecided voters [and still could win the popular vote, but they didn't need to]. Also - how did Corbyn do in the polls against Johnson in the lead up to this vote? Because Sanders consistently crushed Trump in the lead up to 2016, but was, of course, undermined by the corrupt DNC, and, once again, he is crushing Trump in polling now. And yet - here we are with pundits like you at the Time and Bloomberg and the WSJ who all want to sound 'reasonable' in backing Biden on the Dem side. Hilarious.
The only issue that Bret Stevens leaves out of this essay is actually the central issue which dominates everything in the UK and the USA. It is the elephant in the room. The people of the UK and the USA generally are much more conservative on IMMIGRATION than Labor and the Democrats realize. The Core issue with Brexit for most Brits is that they want to control their own immigration, and not have the EU control immigration into the UK. In the USA most people want to have greater control over immigration into the USA. That is the foundation of Trump's base
and the reason he won most electoral college votes. That is the democratic will in the UK and the USA. Tragically, sadly Bret Stevens doesn't even mention the core issue of immigration.
3
The Democrats failed to heed what the June 2016 vote for Brexit meant and adapt the Clinton campaign accordingly. Thus they were shocked when Clinton lost and Trump won. If the Democrats fail to heed the implications of yesterday's vote in Great Britain, they will again be shocked in 2020.
An aspirational candidate will not win against Trump in 2020. Instead the Democrats must nominate someone who speaks to the values and near-term needs of the voters as the voters themselves define them, not to the values and needs the candidate thinks the voters should care about.
At the moment, a Biden/Klobuchar ticket looks most promising to defeat Trump, though the Democrats seem insistent on a course devoted to perfecting a circular firing squad while holding interviews for God.
Most folks do not remember Presidential candidates actually being chosen by a multi-ballot convention. It is possible such could occur with the Democrats this year, and that might produce a candidate not currently being given much attention or even still running, someone with a fairly clean slate. The pseudo-debates are merely the Democrats version of The Apprentice, with the spin doctors, punditocracy, and commentariat getting to feel powerful by saying, "You're fired!" or "You're hired!" A truly open convention would be genuine drama, probably giving the Democratic Party visceral credibility it currently does not have. Of course that only would work if they keep their eyes on the ball: defeating Trump.
3
The British experience is very different from the American experience in one major respect - Britain is a very small and now very overpopulated island. At the risk of splitting hairs, I would say that Britain has a population problem more than an immigration problem. I am about as ideologically pro-Europe as anyone, but unfortunately the rules of the club state that any member has the right to reside and work in any member state. Britain's population explosion has been caused partly by the fact that it is so much easier to find work there than in many other European member states where the laws of hiring and firing are simply out of step with the current business climate.
1
So liberals like Warren are in trouble? They are asking for an educational system that helps with costs, an environmental policy that looks to the future, a health care system that is not overloaded with corporate profits, increased wages for workers a more equitable tax structure and fixing a decaying infrastructure. Sounds like a plan to me. Mr. Stephens, what will the country look like in the future if these issues are left to a head in the sand presidency? You sound like so many other republicans “ i would like to give you what I have but what I have is to expensive to give to everybody “. What will the cost be when the Florida keys are under water. In health care,people are all ready transferring medical debt to credit cards. If liberals are in trouble then we all are.
@Vincent if only Warren had proposed "an educational system that helps with costs"...no, instead it's "free" college, and canceling student debt (not lowering interest on that debt, or other ideas to help), "free" child care for many, paid parental leave (who's paying?), medicare for all coming all too quickly (instead of a coming together of all sides to implement a workable universal health care system over time), some sort of cumbersome wealth tax, instead of, as you say, "a more equitable tax structure"...her initial proposals have been too far to the left even for this long time voting Democrat...I would never vote for what's-his-name, but hard to get excited about Warren either...
2
From a selfish perspective, I don’t care if Trump gets re-elected. He will continue deficit spending and tax cuts that have helped my stock portfolio. He will not dare cut Medicare or Social Security. If he kills Food Stamps and the ACA, tough luck. I don’t use those services. If he ratchets up student loans and their enforcement, it won’t be me that suffers.
That is the basic argument for Trump’s re-election. Forget about the damage I do to those who don’t have assets and need a functioning government to succeed. Just vote for you. That’s why he still has a decent chance of winning the next election, not because of Warren or Sanders and it won’t be stopped by Biden or Mayor Pete. Because no Democrat, and few Republicans can tap into the political reptile brain of Americans like Trump.
5
One has to be careful in drawing parallels between U.K.'s Labor Party and our Democrats. The utopian wing of the Democratic Party will not surrender its ideology following a Trump victory. Compromise is not what youth-driven religions do. [Note: Utopianisms are religions in so far as they ignore scientific evidence from evolutionary psychology and behavioral genetics.] I honestly don't know if the adult wing(s) of the party have the energy to form an independent party that would combine true independents with moderates from both traditional parties. Who would lead such a movement?
The great common sense of this article won’t find much traction with the vast majority of commenters here, these pages having become a vast echo chamber bereft of insight and rational debate. There are none so blind as those who cannot see. The Dems are sleep walking to their greatest Presidential defeat.
189
@JeezLouise Do not suppose that the conditions that produced this election are the same as those here in the US and so a similar result. The conditions are vastly different if you read this paper.
13
@JeezLouise
Well, I do see a little bit. First, Trump is not Johnson - he is not as smart nor strategic, just more vulgar. Secondly, the Democratic vote will not be splintered by three other political parties as Labour was in the UK. Third, as left leaning as Sanders and Warren are (unfortunately), they will both inevitably tack to the center if they should become their party's nominee, they will have no choice - and neither of them are as corrosively unpopular as Labour leader Corbyn. And lastly, Trump has never strayed outside his base. He has never made an attempt to win over any of the 55% of the American electorate who dislike him. He has had chances - the NRA, Dreamers, infrastructure. He is a minority President. And thus, vulnerable.
23
@Rick Morris - Trump is going after working class black voters right now, with a major ad campaign in black-oriented publications. It may not work, but you can't say he's not trying.
10
This looks like the beginning of the pre World War II buildup of fascism. The parties if exclusion and hatred of the "other" are winning.
Count on Bret - who seems to hate any meaningful jig leftward in our society almost exactly as much as he hates Trump - to join Mr. Cohen and many other talking heads as foretelling how 2020 will play out.
Yes, there ARE ominous similarities, but Boris DID have an "enemy" more real than "Mexican rapists" and a "goal" (Brexit) more popular and sane than "build a wall."
Yes, DJT and his team will come up with SOMEthing - most likely bogus but not entirely loony - but he'll be running on his 4 years in office. Wouldn't Michigan and Wisconsin be open to "Are you better off now?" appeals.
It's not just eggheads who agonize over the gap between the 1% and the rest of us. At some point, the middle-aged and older folks who felt threatened by immigrants and people of color ... might recognize that the man & party who wants to eliminate Obamacare and would tinker with Medicare if he had both houses of Congress ... is the GREATER of "2 evils."
It seems obvious that Donald can/will skate on flaws like sexism, racism, etc.... But a good Dem. candidate - aye, there's the rub, I admit - would have no trouble making the LIAR tag stick, and if it emerges that he's enjoyed a 2% tax rate for the last 20 years, that's political kryptonite even in Biden's hands.
It won't be easy, and "bringing around" the millions who now support EW, BS and PB to the realization that none of them can unseat Donald is even tougher, but think back 4 years - lots of smart money thought Jeb would top the ticket.
One should be careful not to read too much into the British election as portent for the US, although it is undoubtedly instructive. The fact is, as Mr. Stephens notes: "what matters more is relatability, reliability and results." It is what has always mattered—more than whether one personally trusts a candidate or finds a candidate's personal habits exemplary. Andrew Jackson proved that in 1828.
Unless today's Democratic field can produce a candidate who hitches these "3R's" to a program and vision that resonate with enough voters' priorities, then they will have learned nothing from Thursday's English lesson .
We face a much deeper conundrum, however. The promises that the Tories purport to their countrymen through BREXIT, much as the promises to re-establish a gone-by era of income opportunity that US political leadership pitch back home, simply seem impossible by any objective measure.
The world has changed too much since WWII for the West to recapture a renaissance of middle-class bliss. The re-emergence of India and China as major economic powers, the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and the ravages of climate change will introduce more unforeseen changes than our leaders can possibly address to slake our consumer-oriented anxieties.
Climate change holds the greatest yet-to-be-imagined threat economically and politically to our ways of life. It is harder, still, to imagine any political leadership that can ever effectively address it.
3
An excellent fair analysis. thank you!!
Democrats just trounced Republican candidates in November. Everywhere.
Warren & Sanders supporters are not thinking of the UK's mess for one simple reason....they have to clean up the current mess in front of them.
Republicans, are the ones who should be considering their gambit...because at the ultimate tests around the country....it's failing.
Talk is cheap.
If Warren wins the nomination and loses to Trump I will be sad. Fear will have won over reason, selfishness and greed over the common good and pride over thoughtful humility. Not sure humanity will do well under that.
The British election is an ominous portent for Republicans: put party before all else and you could end up with a nation that is a shadow of its former self. Stop tearing down the democrats and start fighting for what you believe in. (Perhaps that would be wisely regulated capitalism? The protection of basic human rights? Opportunity for all? A leader that is not corrupt?) Unless you want to live in an oligarchy.
The two-party system hard at work in the UK and the US but the difference lays between an election and keeping an impeached president and maybe even reelect him. Neither case make any sense but one is worse.
What you fear, Mr Stephens, is government “for” the people when attempted by any other means than laissez-faire, free-market capitalism ... which has already led to the incredible inequality and despair. Our current approach is proven to be broken, what is your solution if not explicit redistribution? You mock France, in a previous article, but at least it is struggling; you seem to want to give up. Scandinavians seem happy, why should our people not pursue that too?
1
One big difference between Johnson and Trump is that Johnson is not suspected of soliciting and accepting Russian help to get elected.
2
The UK election just proved one thing: the USA is not the only country where people vote against self interest, cut off their noses to spite their faces.
Brexit will make the UK a second/third-rate economy. It will turn the UK into the sovereign states of Scotland, England and a unified Ireland, perhaps no bad thing. The Union Jack will be no more, pity, and the empire is finally and completely dead.
I guess that's better than a bunch of foreign bureaucrats telling people what to call ice cream and the other nonsense Johnson and the Brexiters peddled to the gullible public about the EU.
What parallels can be drawn between the buffoonish tory leader and authentically nutsy trump is beyond me, except for the gullible public part. trump is reviled in our country. A majority want him removed so they can get a bit of relief with an honest, competent replacement if any there be in the GOP.
And please, neither Warren nor Sanders remotely resembles Corbyn whose political instincts are right up there with fungi.
2
It’s too late, Brett. Donald Trump is now a shoe-in thanks to Schiff, Nadler and Pelosi (and the IG report, too). There’s nothing and no one in the Democratic Party that can change that. In 2016 a revolution happened. The left wing press failed to cover it.
2
The irony, of course, is that no one is "taking back their country from the global elites." Although, granted, it is a spiffy slogan.
Capitalism -- so championed by the right -- is the essence of elite globalism, as the big banks and corporate cartels spread their business everywhere and meddle in the affairs of foreign countries, using the US Intelligence Agencies and Armed Forces as backup on the taxpayers' dime.
This "trickle up" economics is a neat scam.
All correct except that Bret left out the vague (when it's not explicit) anti-semitism that haunts the far left in both countries.
2
If we didn't have the Electoral College, this article would not have been written. HRC won the popular election. The people spoke.
Could it be that it was simply a case that after 3 years people were sick of the whole Brexit mess and wanted to move on? If this is the case, then the same could happen here. By next year people just might decide that 4 years of the big orange circus is enough. It could be that simple.
Whatever your view of Bret Stephens column and his analysis, please note that there is no mention of the most significant factor in deciding your upcoming 2020 election: Vladimir Putin.
Mr. Putin is perhaps the "Ghost in the Machine" of current American political life.
Just like Harry Reid’s misguided attempt to force partisan confirmations in the Senate is directly responsible for 2 conservative Supreme Court justice appointments, so will the utter shortsightedness of Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler in forcing through a partisan impeachment proceeding guarantee not only Trumps re-election but also pave the way for future frivolous impeachments and endless attempts to negate the electoral college mandate. The leadership in the party is so rudderless that you have captain Pelosi confirming Republican talking points by saying they have been trying to impeach Trump basically since he took office. The party is allowing itself to self-destruct because of Trump all the while delusionally believing they are corralling public opinion against him. And what hypocrisy! The party of civil rights and liberties condoning heinous FBI behavior. If nothing more, Trump has shown the democratically to be as bankrupt as the republicans. That’s the lesson of his presidency. And it’s one all of us should take to heart.
Know where you get your information, but Pelosi has taken quite the opposite position- she was reluctant to impeach all along and was only pushed to it by those in the Democratic Party who realized it was time. She finally caved when she realized it wasn’t just progressives in the party- moderates had finally realized something the GOP almost never gets to, at least in this current devolution: there really does come a time when one must put country before party- a strange concept and one you will refuse to see, as you evidently refuse to see Trump’s actions as impeachable when they clearly are. Even if Trump wins because of or in spite of the impeachment proceedings, I still think it was the right thing to do. I don’t believe most of the republicans believe the president’s actions were completely innocent. I get it: they are afraid of Trump, afraid they could lose Thile positions with a tweet. That being said, any true patriot who can look at the facts without wearing partisan blinders would have to come to the same conclusions.
One can critique the FBI for its dubious process in procuring the FISA warrants for Carter Page as I do, and still understand the report clearly states the IGA investigation had legitimate reason to commence. Whatever happened to nuance in American political dialogue?
I think that the lesson of his presidency is that rigging elections is good and easy to do.
Your impeachment paragraph is a little conflicted, and negates itself in the final sentence.
I think there is a group of arch capitalists in this country who would rather vote for a psychopath than a Democrat/Socialist. Protection of vast wealth is all that they care about. That wealth enables them to spend millions on vanity presidential campaigns. To give vast sums to dark money organizations which in turn fund pliable politicians. Wealth allows them to threaten any politician who strays with primaries. The influence of kleptokrats, monopolists, oligarchs, and trust fund babies run amok is destroying American democracy. Time to change that.
3
@Kent Hancock ---Good luck trying to make most Americans see that, they usually don't look any further out than the next paycheck.
1
Mr. Stephens - The Labor party lost, despite Brexits unpopularity, because Corbyn was painted as a dangerous anti-semite. There is still time for you for paint the Dems into a similar corner and ensure that Trump can get in for another 4 years.
3
Bret Stephens is not qualified to opine about Warren or Sanders anymore than he is about climate change, which he denies, but he is right about the danger of unrestricted shameless lying. FCC could lay down some rules and stop that. We could break up and regulate social media. It's not impossible, unless it is impossible to elect either Warren of Sanders. Ay, there's the rub!
This shallow, predictable attempt to conflate the British election with ours to push neo-liberal corporate conservative is deeply mistaken. Unlike Britain. we are not dealing with Brexit or suffering from the same degree of xenophobia. Here, progressives like Berni Sanders have wide support and, if anything, most of us suffer from Trump exhaustion.
1
Totally right. Buttigieg and Bloomberg are the only chances although Mayor Pete is probably better for 2024. Will the Democrats listen? Not a chance!
2
Joe Biden must be ecstatic with Boris's victory. It is beginning to bring the ever-so-woke Democrats back to reality. And while Joe is old, and slow, and corrupt, at least he can pretend not to be a socialist. My prediction, though, is that the Dems will ultimately turn their lonely hearts to Pete. Too bad: if they had chosen Amy, they could have won.
Such a false analogy between the instant British contest and our upcoming presidential race: because in Britain there exist several political parties with various platforms and goals. In the USA anno 2019 there is one party: corporatism and its money. The vestigial GOP and Democrats from the 19th century pretend to have vast gulfs of different approaches and philosophies between them. But they really are trying all the while to be each other and steal each others' support. Big money that really rules merely laughs and jeers at all of this exorbitant puppet show while they get exactly what they want from a complaisant congress.
1
AMEN
How do we find a candidate and a message that will soothe the fears of the left wing And avoid the disaster of their staying home on Election Day 2020?
I pray that one emerges even though we are at this late stage in the primary process.
Please readers reply with your message and messenger before it is too late
The first Brexit campaign was known to be interfered with in the same way the Trump election was.
There were bots and lies and foreign manipulation galore.
England and the US are institutionalizing fraud.
It's tragic and frightening.
I really hope we all climb out of this soon somehow.
What Dems, in the power positions, need to do is proper analysis. & Brit v USA is grapes to grapefruit. Fergeddit.
Or wait..., checking Guardian vote totals, Tories gained only 1.2%. Scottish votes went from Labour to Leave UK. Greens ...meh. So the loss is due... A large % (of the 7.8% Labour drop) to stay homes.
That does fit the Clinton 2016 loss. Who those Dem lean stay at homes were is a gold mine for 2020. Find what turned them off (hawk, corporate, my bet). Then the 6% who voted 3rd candidate, a big happy hunting ground. Dems need to avoid going full chicken little sky falling, REMEMBER- while the PoT (Party of Trump, there is no GOP no more) folk on The Hill love to bring up those 63 million who elected T, 71 million voted Never Trump.
Corbyn did not lose on issues, he lost on one (and the sliming of his personality), with a party split between one foot on the dock and one in the boat. The "ethnic" problem in his old districts does not much exist with us, starting with Nixon that "real Ameican crowd" has self deported in time to the PoTs.
We have no formal exit problem like the UK. And whatever the "center" really wants (med care, income, debt relief) is being clouded up in a fog of war smokescreen generated by...
the people who own the media.
How do you beat that, the big power that could get T 4 more?
The number 1 reason is that wage growth is up and unemployment is done in both countries. But that always seems to be left out of NYT articles.
1
Before comparing the US and the UK, it is useful to clarify that the UK is a democracy and the US is not. It is not even a democratic republic. If the US were a democratic republic, Hillary clinton would be president. The rejection of "supercilious political elites" by the working class on a global scale does not go to the heart of the matter. Similarly, comparing Sanders/Warren and Corbyn is as false as equating Angela Merkel to Lenin. Unlike Corbyn, I don't think Sanders or Warren intend to nationalize the Internet, utilities, telecoms and the railways! The real global issue is capitalism in its current form. The common denominator affecting working and middle classes in the developed economies is the capitalists' lack of conscience in their seeking to maximize profits through minimizing labor costs: Globalization. So, once again, "it's the economy stupid!" and in the new order multinational corporations control the world and governments scramble and compete to attract their capital. The result a world of countries with small wealthy elites controlling struggling working masses. This cannot go on, and until we adopt Rhenish capitalism, throw away Anglo-Saxon capitalism, find a system that will force corporations to behave responsibly, we will have clownish populists like Trump and Johnson making empty promises. To beat the simpletons, the Dems/Labour need to position themselves as promoters of capitalism with a conscience (not class warriors) and define what it means.
Not one mention of the most obvious 'clear and present danger' which is the existential threat caused by our abuse of the planet's climate system. It will destroy not only left and right, holy and unholy, it will destroy your grandchildren as well.
Politicians, at the moment, are the blind leading the blind.
1
In perilous times such as these, might we be comforted by the rhymes of childhood? Many of our nursery rhymes hail from our shared British past, and thus:
Humpty Trumpty wanted a wall
Humpty Trumpty had a big fall
All the red horses and
All the king's men
Couldn't put Trumpty together again
@Andrea
Lame
What fall did he have ? He played the Dems like a fiddle here. The Senate is going to exonerate him and he is going to use that to claim exoneration against another witch hunt. Along the way, Biden is going to get further smeared in what will be a circus of a “trial”.
The Dems are campaigning for him and handing him a lay up.
1
"The desire, however misplaced or ugly, to “take back” control of a country from supercilious political elites was a global phenomenon, not a local event."
Is there an American with a pulse that does not believe politicians on the left and right have been bought and sold to big corporate interests? We are a land of oligopolies. If Hillary and Bill, et al were not in thrall to big money politics I don't know what to say to convince you this is an endemic issue in politics. Throw the supercilious political elects out, however ugly.
Trump does not worry me, he will be gone one way or the other, in 4 more years at worst.
what is harder to swallow is that some 45% of the US electorate - some 60-70 MILLION supposedly decent, hardworking non-racist people - dont mind having such a person as their leader.
That, unfortunately, will not be corrected for generations, if at all.
1
@Ramesh
What you fail to see is that the GOP is a unified party where the Dems are loose coalition of identity politics based factions. Sadly they are unified behind Trump but as terrible as he is, he is not a Democrat and that’s enough.
If the Democratic faction doesn’t get THEIR candidate, they stay home.
There are way to many candidates and so much time that they can only bloody themselves up so that Trump can easily finish them off
1
Right on. But Trump has opened the door for the next demagogue - maybe a smarter one - to corral the 60 or 70 million fools and knaves. The perils of democracy?
Wrong, Stephens. This is a false-comparison. Corbyn is toxic, almost fantastical in his socialism. He has nothing to do with the American Democratic candidates who's platforms are far more reasonable and no further left than Roosevelt. You are so blinded by your adherence to you own ideology, which won't often let in any math other than the electoral, that you have confused the trees for someone else's forest.
I’ll ignore your other errors and focus only on the Hunter Biden aspect.
First, the “nagging question” is “nagging” because Republicans ascertain that it is something that appeals to the low-information voter who will see it as unfair.
Second, indeed the elder Biden’s demand that Ukraine fire the prosecutor involved a “quid pro quo.” Unfortunately for you, there is little in foreign policy that does not involve a quid pro quo. What you conveniently don’t mention is that Biden’s demand was for the firing of a CORRUPT prosecutor and was part of official US and EU policy to pressure Ukraine to combat its corruption.
By contrast, Trump’s quid pro quo was to be performed for his own personal political benefit. There’s nothing wrong with a quid pro quo per se, only its context. Biden’s was out in the open and unofficial; Trump’s was corrupt.
You see, few in these forums will fall for your red herrings.
Democrats are in a real pickle. I think a significant minority of Sen. Sanders supporters will not vote for another Democratic candidate in the general. Similarly, a significant number of moderate Democrats will not vote for Sen. Sanders (or Sen. Warren) in the general election. This just is the reality. I am a Sen. Sanders supporter. I'll vote for the eventual nominee. But if it's Biden, he'll go down for the same reasons Clinton did. Trump and the Republicans have successfully labeled Biden as a corrupt DC elite as a result of his son's poor choices and Biden's failure to say, "You know what? What my son did was shady and unethical. I told him not to do it. He did it anyway and I still love him. In that, I'm like every other parent in this country."
136
@Midwesterner I don't find any of the Democrats to be valid, and find Sander's to be a left version of Trump -- bombastic, crude, irrational and reckless with his promises.
But given all that, yours is a rare, clear-eyed description of the situation. And what you say Biden should have said is insightful and thoughtful. Biden is a good man but blinded here.
11
@Midwesterner Isn't Trump a corrupt DC elitist, handing out Government goodies to his friends? Of course he is, but the Dems won't argue that. What kind of promises have Don Jr and Eric made to foreigners and others if Trump is re-elected? Why won't the Democrats ask that question?
The Dems are guilty of political malpractice, not because of the impeachment but by the way they handled it. Why won't they call the phone call what it is, extortion? Ciclline said it is abuse of power which is worse than a crime but the average citizen understands extortion easier than abuse of power. When the Republicans call the evidence hearsay, why won't the Dems point out why it is not hearsay?
14
@Allan H. Name just one instance in which Sanders was "crude, irrational" or "reckless with his promises". You may not like his agenda, but he has a rational, clear plan for how to achieve it, and he's been transparent about it. Contrast that with Trump's "well, we'll see" and "who knew how complicated healthcare is" nonsense.
13
The election is not the issue, it is the impeachment. The impeachment will set up a very clear choice for America of what kind of country it wants to be. Trumps guilt is overwhelming, all the Republicans are doing is opening the door to fascism by allowing him to be an unchecked authoritarian dictator. If America elects Trump knowing who and what he is, Brexit will pale in comparison to what this country will become. He could make a lot of changes and none of them will look like democracy.
Isn't it obvious that Warren and Sanders are disasters waiting to happen in a 2020 general election?
Unfortunately Biden is past his prime -and Trump will indeed either destroy him or turn him into Hillary 2.0 (actually both) come November. Burisma is just inexcusable and electorally fatal even if it was legal.
Pete is too young and inexperienced and the silent middle including socially conservative African- Americans and Latinos are not going to go for two men married to each other living in the White House. Not this election anyway. Sorry but Pete is just not going to be the next Obama breaking barriers.
Amy K and Bennett might be ok but they won’t get enough traction or have enough money to close the deal.
Bloomberg would be excellent if paired with the right VP choice such as Stacey Abrams. He’s experienced, self made and a serious player. The problem here is that too many on the left have been drinking socialist Kool Aid and seem to think that any and every multi- billionaire is evil by definition. Even a quintessential philanthropist like Bloomberg, who has a proven record on gun violence, climate change, public health and education to name a few. Oh and I forgot that the left is happy to take his money when he makes huge donations like those being largely responsible for the Democrats taking the House in 2020.
Mike B. is older than what is ideal and he’s definitely not otherwise perfect. However, if the nominee is anyone else Trump will win.
2
I think you are over analyzing the situation and underestimating the effect of Jeremy Corbyn. I would posit that it was Jeremy Corbyn as the opposition choice that overwhelmingly gave the election to Boris Johnson and the conservatives.
"Trump is a formidable incumbent. To oppose him with Corbynite candidates and progressive primal screams is to ensure his re-election."
In the end it will be Ms. Warren.
She is not Corbynite, but she will lose.
While some men have been professors and even law professors (e.g. Obama), the first woman president of the US will not be a former Harvard law professor with left-wing policies.
Forewarned is forearmed, but ego "trumps" all.
2
The obsession with painting the UK election as a rejection of progressive policy is fundamentally wrong. Labour simply had too many problems and challenges plaguing their campaign for such simple analysis. Who's to say that Labour's lack of clear stance on Brexit, tolerance of anti-semitism, top-down approach to party building and management or their multitude of other problems wheren't more saliant factors in their dismal result? As far I can see, that seems at least as likely as the voters being particular hostile to socialist and progressive policy, more so when you consider how austerity is commonly accepted and how popular progressive and socialist policies are when discussed disconnected from the Labour Party.
Of course acknowledging this reality would mean acknowledging that the British election indeed cannot, at the very least presently, be seen as argument against the more progressive Democratic presidential candidates, and that seems an accommodation of reality that Bret Stephens is unwilling to make.
1
As Mr. Stephens points out, there are quite a few things for Americans to observe and learn from the British election. However, to see the results of that election as an "ominous portent" for Democrats, one would have to think that the victorious Tories (or Conservatives) in Britain are the political equivalent of the weakened and reprehensible Republican Party that exists in the USA today. They are not and never were.
1
The message of the British elections is exactly opposite to the one proposed here, and it is no surprise. The more that anyone tells Democrats to tack to the center --especially someone like Stephens-- the more wary everyone should be. Labour betrayed its working class northern constituents by talking out of two sides of its mouth: on one hand, hedging on a relation with the EU that many in the working class experienced as a capitulation to a neoliberal order, while proposing social reforms on the other. Labour seats flipped because the the party failed to give an economic message that its constituency recognized to be both genuine, and genuinely in their interests. Allow me to say that the progressive Democrats in the U.S., primary have no such problem. The more U.S. Democrats are asked to see the British elections as an allegory of their future fate if they don't back status quo candidates, the more they are being scared into a losing electoral strategy.
1
I was appalled to learn Dems are planning four more candidate debates in early 2020, on top of the “12 Candidates of Christmas” debate scheduled next week. What are they going to talk about? Talking points aimed at a minuscule part of electorate, parsing each others tax and health “plans,” occasional jabs at one another, and above all hunting for the precious favorable remarks by a few MSNBC pundits. No one cares. My friends and I are all steady Dem voters, and we are tired and discouraged by this interminable campaign in Iowa. Iowa? Where very few Dems live. Viewing the “12,” with others off stage and still running, would be satire if not so tragic for the party and country. Wish the DNC could and would end this march to oblivion, but the party of endless diversity and hearing evrry voice cannot do that. Or defeat Trump.
1
My problem with The Donald is that he's the culmination of the Republican plan to turn our Constitution upside down. Whether or not he even knows this is meaningless, and the worst parts of the plan have seen their fruition. All those justices Mitch held up during the Obama administration have now been replaced with hard Right zealots ready and primed to take away every right found through 14th amendment jurisprudence over the past century no matter who wins in 2020.
At this point in the festivities, I'm betting on another 4 years--at least--of Trump. Given his, and his party's, autocratic tendencies, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more.
1
too many cooks spoil the broth.
long ago the pack of democratic candidates should have gone into a room together and argued about their different flavors of policies and come up with a common message or at most two that could be debated.
the self promoting pack on the so called debate stage does nothing but tell us that the Democratic candidates are just a different version of Trump ... ego, my way is right, I and no one else can do it.
United we stand; divided we fall.
I'm not optimistic for the Democratic candidate in the next election. the pack still can't arrive at a common message between all of them who are variations of the same policies and views.
1
Bret, you understandably treat this election as turning upon ordinary political themes — who 'gets' me and puts a chicken in my pot?
But the issue forced upon the Democrats is the fact that this administration openly proposes an executive branch immune from ALL forms of investigation, checks and balances and accountability for corruption and self-dealing, no matter how serious. And openly toys with the idea of trump remaining in the presidency until his reign ends by natural causes.
It's not 'boys crying wolf.' We hear the wolf howling daily on Twitter.
Democrats are indeed running on economic themes: the ballyhood stock market and employment figures mask the fact that this great economy is actually not helping the majority of middle class and lower class Americans, and the Republicans are making it harder rather than better.
Maybe you might start reinforcing that truth, rather than tsk-tsking your claim that you want to see trump defeated....except that you're convinced that trump is the better candidate, while lumping all Democratic candidates into the same disparaging caricature.
2
Sanders is by far the most popular politician in the US, Corbyn, after relentless smears by the UK press is among the least popular there. Corbyn and Labour did not help their cause by having no clear stance on Brexit and inevitably the party split on remain vs. leave lines, handing the election to the Tories. Mr. Stephens analysis is an apples to oranges comparison.
4
From where, pray tell, are you getting this notion about Sanders’ popularity?
I am not buying your argument Mr. Stephens. Sanders would have beat Trump in 2016 and can win it in 2020. The bottom line is that the American people want a leader they can BELIEVE in. Corbyn was a deeply flawed candidate. The British will reap what they sow and so will America if Trump is reelected.
4
I completely agree. If the Dems run Bernie(he could’ve won last time but not this time) or Warren we’re going to be stuck with T for at least 4 more years. Biden or Bloomberg (or maybe even Mayor Pete) are the Dems best hope. Gotta run someone that’s at least palatable to the center...
5
Because the moderates did so well in the British elections?
The Democrats better get their act together and a.s.a.p. The UK lesson is clear. The Democrats better understand that their sole purpose should be to beat Trump in 2020. Forgetting their personal ideology and vanity should be foremost. They should all support the candidate most likely to beat Trump with money and rhetoric. Basically I'm directing my comment towards Sanders, Warren and Bloomberg because the other candidates are inconsequential. Democratic candidates, " Ask not what the electorate can do for you but what you do for the country ".
2
Liberals don't get conservatives. Conservatives believe in individual responsibility and solutions that actually work. It is for both reasons that they gravitate to Trump on issues like immigration and violent crime in inner cities. That isn't code for anything, not xenophobia, not racism.
10
That's why we have unaffordable healthcare, unaffordable education, unaffordable childcare even in time of booming economy.
3
Yeah, that’s what Trump exemplifies, all righty—individiual responsibility and solutions that actually work.
Good grief.
While not disagreeing in the least, there are other messages for the US contained from the outcome in the UK. Outside the partisans who embraced their daily outrage over Trump from the moment of his election, the rest of us have simply tuned out the anti-Trump cacophony as background noise, and have become inured to the constant lecturing and carping by Democratic virtuecrats.
4
Johnson polled much better in the run up to the election than Trump ever has. Corbyn wanted to nationalize a lot of the British economy. Sanders and warren only do on health care. You can't draw to close of a parallel between the British elections and the upcoming U.S. one. All of the American conservative commentators are trying to scare us into voting for a centrist that will CHANGE NOTHING, and lead to more Republican victories.
5
I am a staunch supporter of Warren and Sanders. But I will vote for whomever becomes the nominee against Trump. We must take Trump down and do so with glee.
7
And why would that be? Just purely out of hate for President Trump?
I voted for Hillary in 2016, but will vote for Trump, because he has delivered his PROMISES.
1
Let’s get real. The economy is strong. Unemployment is at record lows. The trade deals are getting done. Trump’s party is in lockstep. His base is unmovable. The Electoral College is intractable.
How in God’s name do we keep a Trump victory from being inevitable?
8
The economy would be strong with or without Trump because of the massive strength of technology, which has undergone enormous progressive transformations both within businesses and for individuals and their efficiency.
2
If the Democrats do not heed the lessons of Johnson's victory, and lead with Sanders or Warren as a Corbyn-like candidate with a commitment to restoring truth, justice, equity, inclusion and all that, Trump may easily win reelection. Obama won twice with such lofty goals, but that was before Trump changed the game.
Johnson and Trump, and the conservatives that support them on both sides of the pond, are playing politics the ancient way as blood sport. Unlike the Democrats, they are opportunistic and adaptable, value team loyalty above the individual, and do not fear going in for the kill.
As Bret writes, it's no longer about ideology or policy; it's about who is the most relatable, reliable and likely to get things done, no matter the policies, institutions and people who are destroyed in their path.
Bret is right
"Trump is a formidable opponent."
Yes! Already, his campaign slogan, indeed, probably its theme all next year, is "You may not like me but you gotta vote for me" which will ring so true if his opponent is Sanders/Warren.
OTOH, Joe Biden is remains solid in the polls, and he's just fine campaigning. He looked strong with that old farmer last week, although he needs a better answer to the Hunter question. Shouldn't be a deal breaker in November.
Pair him with Klobuchar and her Midwest Nice brand of charisma - yes, you know, the affect that connects with regular people. It doesn't hurt that she's the antithesis of Trump - knowledgeable, with a sense of humor and a fighter for the values and ideals which actually HAVE made America grea
4
Thank you Bret, your column gave me pause, but your reasoning cuts both ways. Republicans that are hopelessly propping up Trump have lost all credibility and Mitch McConnell’s admitting to work with Trump’s administration and orchestrating a trial that will acquit, regardless of the evidence will be the end of the Trump party with the next election. I expect Trump to be “our” Corbyn, repelling voters, resulting in a landslide victory and a return to decency and eventually civility.
Trump’s election was our Brexit and now it’s time to move on !
3
@Gus I wish US voters were rational as your assumption requires. Trump supporters are not interested in objective reality, let alone the truth.
Let's hope that the Democrats nominate someone who can win the blue collar swing states in the Electoral College.
1
In 2016, a centrist lost to Trump, yet this is conveniently overlooked in this article, which advocates nominating a centrist again to go up against Trump, because a leftist lost to Boris Johnson. I don't understand the logic.
7
@Patrick
You do a great disservice to all when you simply describe the 2016 Democratic candidate as a centrist. Hillary was extremely polarizing and for many people, they held their nose and voted ABH (anybody but Hillary).
The response from the Dems in the next election shouldn’t be to offer someone who will just swing the pendulum back further to left but rather someone will be a moderate and restore civility. That’s how the Dems have their best shot at getting people to abandon Trump. Offering up someone with “ revolutionary” ideas at this time is a sure fire way to defeat.
3
No more polarizing than Trump and he won. Disservice is to pretend that centrists have better chance to win based on the British election where there were no centrists at all. The victory of Conservatives is not a same thing as win of the moderate.
Stephens writes: "Does the candidate get people like me? Will he keep his political promises? And has he achieved something that directly and tangibly benefits me?"
The answer to each question above when discussing Donald Trump is a clear and unequivocal "NO." He promised better health care, an end to foreign entanglements, and a huge investment in infrastructure----and then abandoned every single promise. Those who are most directly hurt by Trump are his staunch supporters. How? Why? The only answer is that his supporters want to stick a finger in the eye of the establishment and coastal elites. That is something the Democratic candidates must be prepared to counter in a very strong, simple message.
6
It was not democracy that Socrates feared so much but ignorance. Of which we have a considerable quantity. For instance, I frequently hear that the president, any president, is responsible for the state of the economy. Only rarely is this the case and then it is only temporary and in response to a financial emergency. A classical case is the inaction of Hoover and the decisive actions of FDR. Ignorance in general is the curse of democracy and frequently leads to the rule of demagogues, like Trump.
But what is the alternative to democracy? Even an imperialist like Churchill thought it the lesser of evils. It is still the most fragile among the choices of governance. As fragile as our species chances of our species' survival to the next century.
'Moderation' as you describe is essentially to do nothing, as did Buchanan and Hoover leading to the respective disasters that followed.
5
Democrats must not run leftist candidates for President like Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis and George McGovern. The desimation of the Labor Party should also be a warning.
They must unite behind Joe Biden and any number or excellent choices for vice-president.
3
Democrats must not run leftist candidates for President like Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis and George McGovern. The desimation of the Labor Party should also be a warning.
They must unite behind Joe Biden and any number or excellent choices for vice-president.
1
@David J. Krupp
Not gonna happen.
The UK election was about Brexit and Bret Stephens' ideologically formed 'analysis' concerning Labour's platform - and a faux comparison to Sanders'/Warrens' - is unsupported factually.
But since he's not a social scientist and was hired to give the neocon spin on EVERYTHING, we should not expect more than the usual. And he did not disappoint.
8
This is an excellent argument for Democrats to review their candidate choices and strongly consider candidates from the center such as Amy Klobuchar, and Steve Bullock (who has withdrawn from the race at this time).
Our more left-leaning candidates, though correct on many issues, may be scaring a majority of independent voters with their more extremist rhetoric.
Perhaps we first need to gain control, then make carefully considered changes.
3
Immigration is the defining issue of our time. I can only hope that my fellow liberals and democratic socialists get the message and position themselves for success accordingly. We can have cheaper healthcare and education, strong alliances and fact-based decision making and reduce climate change but first we have to win the next general election. And to do that, we will need to support some of the same policies trump uses to win and provide a far less divisive alternative so voters will pick the lesser of two evils but one which is actually worlds better and any democratic candidate can do that just by taking a strong stand on immigration and cultural preservation.
4
There are a lot of things more than half of Americans don't like about liberalism. Many can be boiled down to this: Hollywood, journalists, academics and other varieties of the breed deemphasize individual responsibility and concoct solutions to social and economic problems that don't work.
12
@Roy Rogers
I am not sure that pointing out collective responsibilities and the needs for social systems that elevate people and not marginalise them is the same thing as "deemphasizing" individual responsibility.
For example, Liberal California has a much created economic dynamism than any Conservative led state. Why is there so much innovation and business creation in California ? Isn't it because better systems are in place to "free" individual to take responsibility for their future ?
Predatory capitalism allowed to freely distort markets seems to be what the GOP supports, how is that emphasizing individual responsibility ?
Individual responsibility is about the choice we make.
However what if those choices are an illusion ?
Akin to inviting people to a poker table with a dealer cheating.
"I am delighted by Corbyn’s drubbing"
....... because I work tirelessly on behalf of a certain ME country whose activity Corbyn was criticizing and there was a high risk that British foreign policy would become boldly ethical and severely constrain the unethical plans of the country I work for.
4
Guys, forget about Biden, Warren, and Sanders. They cannot inspire an electorate that resists change. Trump got noticed because he was different (unrestrained and entertaining). Obama got noticed because he was exotic (mesmerizing and handsome). Experience will not win the presidency. Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton were all experienced, but look what happened. The only candidate who seems to get attention is Pete Buttigieg. Democrats should take their chances with Buttigieg rather than assured defeat in 2020.
3
And he will inspire electorate how? By working 2 years at McKinsey? Or by being the mayor of the small town with no major accomplishment? Or his good looks will inspire the electorate?
1
@yulia we shouldn’t fall for “experience “ trap. Trump would not be president if experience were to be the criteria. I don’t know if Buttigieg will inspire and capture the imagination of people at this moment. But he seems to be the only one who may be able to do it. Otherwise he wouldn’t be a top tier candidate.
England's quest for insularity grows more ridiculous by the day!
How can a nation of political leaders so vacuous as Johnson, Corbyn, Farage, and Sturgeon hope to maintain its social infrastructure and its standing in the world?
Britain has a service, not a production economy. The primary British export is culture, not tangible products from extraction, agriculture, and manufacturing. Britain relies on ties with the European Union and the world for its food and the means to pay for it. Severing the ties Britain has built over decades is a suicidal act.
There is a silver lining to the dark cloud of Brexit. England may at last be able to shake off the burdensome welfare leeches, Scotland and Northern Ireland, in a beneficial breakup of the United Kingdom.
1
Let the fear tactics begin! Sanders and Warren are too radical! We can't have universal health care or paid family leave or....wait, the UK already has those things. There's also something we have called checks and balances; whatever vision a president has for a particular issue is moderated by the political process, Congress, etc. If you go the center, you're really just asking for more of the same. This debate, like in the UK, is simply a race to the bottom based on fear. There are other models out there doing just fine (Canada, Germany, Spain, Scandinavia, etc.). Biden, really??? To me, he's scarier than a Sanders or Warren presidency.
3
Bret, the Tory policies for social programs would be derided as communism by the GOP. Bojo campaigned on additional funding for the National Health Service. Could you imagine that in the Republican platform?
5
Britain is not the United States: progressive whites and people of color are a majority here. Our problem is the electoral college and voter suppression. The question is either a) how do you energize and thus maximize the vote, OR b) can you successfully appeal to white people who voted for Trump last time. That is the debate within the Democratic Party and NO ONE knows the answer to that question today. And we won’t know the answer to that until next November. Biden/Abrams anyone?
3
In the 2016 election, many felt both candidates were unworthy. Many threw in with the unknown, because, what do you have to lose? Us New Yorkers knew full well that Trump was a phony, and were not conned. He is not concerned with anyone else's interests but his own, which is apparent to anyone who has a nit of sense at this point. Unfortunately, there are many without a nit of sense. Unless the Democrats select a similarly unlikable candidate in 2020, Trump is toast. Be clear, the polls in swing states bear this out. His established base will not move, but others who took a chance have no desire to repeat their mistakes. Moreover, this time, the Democratic party will not be complacent and not vote because their candidate is a shoe-in, they know better. The only thing that can change this outcome is vote manipulation by foreign actors.
2
Is Bret Stephens warning Americans of the consequences of the "socialism" of Warren and Saunders or is he running interference on behalf of a certain foreign country,
because Warren and Saunders are both threats to that foreign country's colonization plans?
2
Uhm??
1
We need to keep our facts and straight. In the United States, well before Donald Trump came on the political scene, the Republican Party began waging an undeclared war on working people. That war, meant to mask a wealth gap which was growing to obscene proportions, soon included a cultural war. Anti-abortion profiteers and public Puritans, who often were private sybarites, railed that the middle-class – and, worse, the poor – were taking advantage of creative capitalists.
The Republican war planted the seed that the source of the problem was an elitist intellectual cadre in Washington, in our finest universities and in large cities on the East and West coasts. The victims were in the South and in America’s rural heartland.
Race played a big, if unspoken, role in the Republican war, and the election of Barack Obama escalated the Republican determination to up the ante
That is when Donald Trump, a brash opportunist who had become a minor celebrity in reality television and generated cash to offset some of his losses as an inept business man, stepped into the fray as a birther.
Trump, with the instinctive gifts of a grifter, grasped the resentment of simple people who felt left behind. He exploited them with an entertaining, fake populism and quickly did the dirty work for the Republican robber barons.
Now he owns the captains of industry.
The socialism of Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. or the watered-down American version of Senators Warren and Sanders are not the problem.
3
This is a cherry-picked attempt to draw meaningful parallels between Johnson and Trump.
Stephens omits key differences that can easily change the 2020 outcome he suggests.
At the micro level, the economy is nowhere near as rosy as he suggests. Too many people are living from one paycheck to the other.
We Americans have had a major dose of Trumpism and it has not been a lovely experience.
He is facing impeachment, which he knows will leave him with a permanent stain and stink. This is why he's fought it. Yes, he won't be removed from office, but the accusations will weigh heavy.
Are a majority of Americans okay with him dismissing the Constitutional impeachment process "a sham?" Do they agree that FBI directors should be pilloried, ambassadors demeaned?
Trump to a large extent has declared war on the American political and justice system as well as our diplomatic servants.
He's allied with Putin, America's most potent enemy.
That's as radical as it gets. He's actually by word and deed anti-American.
Who among the supposed unelectable Dems comes close to such toxicity?
I may be naïve but I believe enough Americans have had more than enough of Trumpism.
5
I would love to know, to understand, how Trump got to be so "formidable." What, is it the 12,500+ lies that will propel him to Mt. Rushmore? Is some of his "I'm the greatest president ever" talk beginning to stick? Are the tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations a brilliant political move?
What has he done besides talk tough on immigration, savage the environment with de-regulations, appoint swampy cabinet members, and basically degrade the leadership role of the US throughtout the world?
Gosh, these are hard accomplishments to beat, aren't they?
Yes, he bribed the stock market, which few talk about, but which he trumpets endlessly, with corporate tax cuts which juiced stock prices with earnings gains, and de-regulations. But employment gains are just on the trend line that Obama started - no better, no worse.
Boy, that's a hard record to beat!
6
Funny! I accurately predicted that Bret Stephens would inaccurately interpret the British election.
What it really shows is the power of a simple message “Get Brexit done”;versus the muddled Labor party message delivered by a leader who was unpopular with half his own party. A Labor leader who was unequivocally for “Remain” would have delivered a different result.
Mr. Stephens manages to twist everything in the lens of his conservative beliefs.
5
As a physician who has spent 20 years working in poor urban and then rural areas I think the biggest problem is language. If I talk to a patient from such an area and use a college vocabulary, throwing around medical terms to try to impress them, then first I see them turn off and if I persist they turn hostile and never come back. This was as true 20 years ago when Clinton was president as it is now. It takes extra time to do. It requires changing the words one uses. It requires turning technical terms into extended illustrative stories. I have been telling people in the bubble for years that people out here want mostly what they want but if they don't ditch their technical language they will never listen.
The reason why Bill Clinton won and Hillary Clinton lost had less to do with their political stances and more to do with the language they used. Bill knows exactly how to talk to blue collar workers and has no problem doing so. Hillary either never figured out how to or doesn't feel comfortable with using that language. I half seriously think the best way for the democrats to win is to cut Biden loose from ideological discussions and let him tell the hokiest, eye rolling stories he can think of. He at least has the skill set to talk to blue collar workers.
2
Johnson's win and Trump's win are based on two fundamental realties. First, Britain is for British, America is for Americans. Others cannot come over and take over and disrupt societies as they wish. Second, people need to live in dignity. When big corporations and rich people close their factories and move to countries with cheap labor and import their products with no impediments, it disrupts people's lives. This ruined many working class families and communities. When these things happen and go beyond a tolerable level, people react and that is what happened in Britain and America and is happening in other places, as well.
British and American people elected leaders who were willing to control large scale immigration and global unfair trade. This realignment was necessary to protect freedom, pluralism, the rule of law, human rights, a free press, independent judiciaries, breathable air, peace, decency and humanity and to avoid calamities like civil war, religious wars, and extremist ideologies. In that respect, Trump and Johnson are saviors of civil societies. But in America liberals and Never Trumpers are trying to save us from Trump by impeaching him, an act that may have the potential to backfire big time.
5
Saviors of “civil” societies? Really? Have you listened to ANY Trump utterance or considered his actual actions over the past three years?
"Democrats got so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones (next election)."
I think Stephens perceptions are largely correct, including the one I quoted just above. However, I do disagree with him when he says Democrats "forgot" about bringing Trump down by the next election.
It isn't that Democrats forgot. The Democrats have painted themselves into a corner where persuading people to vote for them instead of Trump is no longer possible. Democrats put themselves into that situation by condemning everyone who supported Trump as a bigot. By doing so, Democrats simply painted a line which no one on either side will cross regardless of the merits of the arguments and positions on the other side. Those who have been condemned as bigots cannot be persuaded to join with those who have condemned them regardless of the merits the arguments from the condemners. And those condemning them could never be persuaded to join with those condemned as bigots regardless the merits of the accused bigots' arguments.
The result is that the only thing that either side can accomplish by the election campaign is to hopefully enhance the turnout from their own side of the line.
9
@Errol
You hit one of the nails on the head here. When one side of the electorate condemns the other as white nationalist racists and then doesn’t understand why that other side won’t join them in rallying to impeach Trump they are only showing how unaware they are. Insulting people with hateful rhetoric is no way to get enough of them to vote your way.
1
Maybe we should start realizing that a Trump victory will not necessarily be a result of Democrats failure. As much as I find the man unfit to govern, the movement he represents is real and enough states, not voters by popular count, like it.
3
@Daniel B
I detect implicit disapproval by you of the electoral college structure. That would be perfectly understandable if you were from NY or CA. But since you are from IN, I am puzzled.
The genius of the founders was that they created a political structure which combined democratic and anti-democratic features in a manner that protected freedom better than either type of features by themselves.
Democracy is not freedom and it often does injustice to the minority. It is simply domination by the majority and subjugation of the minority. It generally is the least bad way to select those who will govern (in representative democracy) or the least bad way to enact the laws that we are all forced to live by (in direct democracy). But either way, the minority is always subjugated.
To protect the freedom of the minority, and to protect the minority from injustice, the founders added anti-democratic features to the Constitution so that even a single person minority is protected from the democratic majority. Those protections are primarily in the Bill of Rights (with their scope subsequently expanded by the 14th Amendment). Another anti-democratic feature was the electoral college which provides some protection to lesser populated states from exploitation by more populous states.
Indiana's population almost exactly the average and slightly above the median population of states. Therefore, the electoral college neither enhances nor detracts from Indiana's voting voice.
3
"Does it ever occur to the critics that, by constantly inferring or predicting the worst about either man, they make their less-than-worst moments look good, and their good ones seem positively great?"
Does it ever occur to Bret Stephens that not speaking truth with conviction is a sure road to perdition?
The truth is, the warnings have all come true and UK and US citizens will suffer even more consequences.
In fact, the UK is likely gone. An independent Scotland and united Ireland -- both EU members -- are just around the corner. And the health care reform they need? The Brits shouldn't hold their breaths.
Meanwhile, Trump is using our tax dollars to bribe his way to victory in 2020, caging children in inhumane conditions, throwing paper towels at hurricane relief, sowing divisions daily, making the world great for fossil fuels while our world burns, and building alliances with the cruelest men on the planet: Putin, MSM and Kim.
I do wonder if Mr. Stephens has children?
7
In reading the responses to this column, I see why the Democrats will lose again. Too many want their candidate or no one. They may agree that the most electable should be nominated, but only their favorite is electable in their eyes. Here is the most important point. ANYONE can be most electable, if the Democrats band together and vote as a block. If a Democratic win is made the single most important goal, then a platform of two decent candidates will be enough as long as EVERYONE drops their petty single issue peeves and votes. If your favorite candidate does not win, you may feel that you have lost. If trump wins, EVERYONE loses and NONE of your concerns or hopes will be addressed. NYT readers bemoan the "lockstep" in which Republicans walk with trump...but is a winning formula and is keeping them in power. The herding cats approach of Democrats is just the opposite. Why not try a winning approach?
-
Think about it. ANYONE could be most electable if everyone commits to voting for them. Don't go for perfect, go for the win!
1
This backlash against European Union. .British public voted conservative because they did not want unrestricted immigration from poorer Eastern European countries.British workers did not want their job security to be compromised by low paid Eastern immigrants . Loss of ability in to make economic decisions nationally meant exposure to laws of supply and demand in wider market of European Union. Labour lost on bread and butter issue
5
Republicans are squinting hard at the Brexit tea leaves in the hope they see something encouraging. They see the people of the Midlands and people from the heartland as the same demographic, people so desperately hoping to recapture the myth of their dominance that they’ll gladly exchange their sovereignty for the emotional rush of a Facebook post.
But I’m not so sure yet. I think the 2020 election will have a huge turnout, Republican efforts to suppress the vote notwithstanding. Trump will be impeached. And no president who’s faced impeachment has served another term as president, which is as good a reading as any that’s coming from the right this week.
I have no idea what will happens next November. Despite how hard Republicans will try to make Johnson’s victory Trump’s victory, they don’t know either. I do know that Democrats have actual ideas to make America better for all Americans while Republicans are only offering sputtering lies, cravenness, and actual crime against the country. I’ll vote to make America better. We’ll see who wins.
3
Bret Stephens has created a false parallel between the UK and the US. In the UK, the Conservatives got 43.6% of the vote, but 365 seats (56.2%) in the House of Commons because of their first-past-the-post multi-party system, which makes Gerrymandering look like look quaint by comparison. On the other hand, the Labour Party got 32.2% of the vote, the Liberal Democrats got 11.6% of the vote, and the Scottish National Party got 3.9% of the vote. That's a total of 47.7% of the vote cast in this week's election. Now, the lesson that I'd take from this is: The Democrats need to remain united after the primaries and caucuses if they want to defeat Trump. And, yes, Russian trolls, Fox propaganda, attack ads funded by dark money, and Republican lies will try to divide Democrats. That's how a minority can remain in power. So, despite the differences between Biden, Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, and other Democrats, I'd support any one of them over Trump. That's what makes a two-party system different than a first-past-the-post multi-party system. Is this academic? No, I've been knocking on doors in New Hampshire -- and I met a voter who voted for Nader in 2000 -- and learned his lesson about splitting the vote. So, the voters on this side of the post understand what is at stake. That's why drawing false parallels are downright dangerous.
1
Let’s be clear in making the comparison of Johnson and Trump for prediction of the America’s future ... at least the 2020 election outcome. Johnson was voted for by more Brits than his political opponents in his election this week; and that was not the case at all for Trump in his “election” in 2016. Johnson now is authentically considered to re-present the the British people; he is their boy (and they will have to suffer that). Trump is not America’s boy not only because of popular disapproval by Americans, but also because he demonstrates in unrelenting bullying arrogance absolutely no inkling of a calling (as in “vocation”) to public service. It’s hard to say what the Brits are thinking these days. But relative to Trump, they have in Johnson an intelligent individual they’ve put their trust in (like it or not), who doesn’t operate like a mob boss.
Sanders and Warren aren’t the only weak opposition candidates, Biden is almost equally weak. Trump isn’t as strong a candidate as Boris Johnson, but I expect the strong US economy will carry him to reelection.
3
The presidential candidates in my Democratic Party are dreadful, among them two hard-left socialists and four septuagenarians. Given the state of the economy and the absence of foreign policy disasters, I surmise that Trump will be re-elected. Impeachment will hurt him, but not much. We have, alas, used all our firepower impeaching him, knowing all along what the outcome will be. Very sad indeed.
7
Boris Johnson has renegotiated Brexit?
Not that I know of. Nor does the EU know about it.
In fact, the very next item on Mr. Johnson's schedule, is that he needs parliament to vote for the existing Brexit deal. The deal Ms. May negotiated with the EU. The deal that has failed in parliament several times.
Then Mr. Johnson needs to negotiate a trade agreement with the EU, and with the rest of the world. He promised his voters these negotiations will be easy and quick, and a 'win' for the UK. Let's see how the EU feels about that. Lets see how Donald Trump feels about a USA - UK trade agreement that's a 'win' for the UK.
But of course, if the Democrats win more elections, they may need to follow Mr. Johnson's play book. Promise voters everything they want. Answer questions about how you plan to keep those promises, with an off-topic joke, an ad-hominem attack, or not at all.
1
I think Mr. Stephens misreads Democrats on impeachment. Nancy Pelosi reluctantly agreed to move forward not to litigate the past, but because she realized that there would NOT be a fair election in 2020 if Trump were not reined in.
3
Bret is spot on. The reality is that you have two sets of entrenched voters -- those on the right who will support Trump and Republicans and make up a solid 30-35% of the electorate -- and those on the progressive left who support Sanders and Warren and advancing progressive programs no matter what. Those groups effectively cancel each other out -- except that those on the devout right likely outnumber those on the hard left.
So, the election will be won by the swing voters in the swing states. Those swing voters are not idealistically tied to either side, but I do think that the message of values and self-reliance sells, and absent a truly inspiring candidate on the left, they will trend toward someone to whom they relate -- like Trump. If Democrats want to win -- and that should be the all-consuming focus -- they need to sell personal responsibility socialism and relatability. Otherwise, we are stuck with orange menace for another 4 years.
1
First lesson: We need a candidate who has credibility. Corbyn did not. He was neither a committed remainer nor a sincere leaver. Corbyn's waffling was a master class in how not to lead.
I like Warren, but of all our potential candidates Bernie has the best record of consistency, of saying the same things for decades. No waffling here.
Much of Corbyn's socialist platform was popular, but to get people to vote for radical change they have to have confidence in the people who are offering to carry it out. Led by Corbyn, and divided by Brexit, Labour seemed unready to lead. Labour self-destructed.
Our Democratic left (me included) wants a Green New Deal. But the GND is based on the premise that the climate crisis represents a genuine existential threat. A majority of Americans believe that humans are changing the climate, but that's a long way from saying that they appreciate the severity of the threat or believe that combatting it requires more than installing a bunch of solar panels.
I believe that radical change is needed, but we haven't made the climate crisis case strongly enough to get people to put aside the culture wars and focus on adapting to a very dangerous future.
The key to Johnson's success was magnifying the fear of immigrants. In the US, a lot more people than Trump's core supporters are worried about immigration. Even if we think the fear is irrational, we need a credible response or race and immigration will keep Trump in the White House.
2
It's not just the Johnson win that should alarm Democrats. It's the
Johnson landslide.
Amy Klobachar warns about the need to reinforce the blue wall of midwest states that were reliably Democrat before Trump. Joe Biden said from the start that the most important issue is to beat Trump. How right they both are in light of the UK results.
Democrats need to keep it simple, not put forth a plethora of left-wing policies that confuse voters (who's paying for this stuff?) and too many candidates whose time has not come. Yang, Steyer, and Billionaire Bloomberg ought to drop out ASAP and put all their effort and money into supporting local candidates and a Joe/Amy ticket!
Hatred for Johnson wasn't enough to defeat a far left and deeply flawed opponent and he now has 5 years to do whatever he likes. Anyone who doesn't think it couldn't happen here isn't paying attention. Trump's 2016 election was unthinkable until it happened. The UK election is a huge red flag that 2020 could be a Trump landslide unless the Democrats stop debating and unite now to defeat him.
5
And where were moderates in the British election? We can talk about Labor defeat, but the moderates went totally extinct.
The one thing that I find deeply disingenuous is the idea that the Clinton democrats are moderates. When it comes to economics and income inequality or support of working class America nothing could be further from the truth. The professional class democrats are just as Darwinian economically as any business class conservative if not more so. It wasn’t just the 90’s Republicans that gave us the pivot to tech & finance as America’s economic saviors or globalization as the best driver of wealth creation. We keep arguing against moderates when the definition of what that means has become twisted by the same marketing dishonesty that gave us Trump. Medicare for all? How about we just remove the legal fraud and marketing manipulation that defines medical care and insurance. The ACA didn’t even try to target the cost beyond dumping the responsibility on an already overwhelmed population. Free trade, there is no such thing as “free” & the working class has paid the price for the income inequality that globalization & trade has driven. The globalization that has provided the cheap electronics and consumer goods driving overconsumption has done nothing for housing and other rising costs of living. Education as savior? Not while the professional class hoards wealth while claiming that inadequate funding has no impact on schools and education. So what is liberal, what is moderate & what is conservative is in the eye of the beholder & just as distorted as any internet meme.
6
Obviously anything can happen over the next year. The news is daily. Just because you’re required to write an article after an event that inspires conservatives and nationalists around the world right now, doesn’t mean the event translates to a Trump win in 2020. That’s naive. There are over 300 days of life to experience until then.
4
The main issue in the election was Brexit, and the main result was that Brits rejected globalization, and so did Americans (in part) by electing Trump. Somehow this part of the implications of the British election doesn't come through in the stories and opeds in the US media. If Democrats want to win, one thing they can try to offer is making international trade work for the majority, not just corporations and upper-income people. But the media are dominated by the latter, and usually oppose any change in international trade.
4
As a lifelong Democrat I can't believe that I agree with a Republican, but Stephens is right, and my party steps in it, then looks at it, and steps in it again as the Labour party just did. We did it with Hillary, and it appears we could do it again. The working class Democrats, and the urban, educated Democrats have little in common anymore, and that could be curtains for the Democratic Party - again.
4
Bret Stephens would like to see Trump go down because, like everyone else, he doesn't trust him. Trump is too unreliable and his foreign policy is equally too unreliable.
But Stephens also would like to see Warren and Saunders out of the race, precisely because they are too predictable and their foreign policy would be equally too predictable.
Warren and Saunders would bring about wholesale change to US foreign policy. Corporate and special interests would be replaced with the principles of international law and human rights.
Such change in US foreign policy would be in the interests of just about everyone on the planet, but would be an absolute disaster for the far-right leaders in Israel. Therein lies the motivation for Bret Stephens' latest "opinion piece" It follows a distinct pattern.
6
The one parallel that Bret fails to mention is exhaustion. In Britain there has been no issue other than Brexit for 3 1/2 years. People are worn out by it. What they absolutely did not want was the debate to continue. For good or ill they decided it was only fitting that Leave's most prominent advocate and perhaps the sine qua non of the Leave campaign's success should now be the one to bring it about on whatever terms can be reached. We now know Brexit will happen, and this chapter will conclude. In Britain at least the exhaustion will come to an end.
4
Britain will survive Boris Johnson and the US will survive Donald J TRump, no matter how long they legally serve in office. In other words, one term or multiple terms. Our nations are culturally and historically more similar than different.
Our political systems have evolved to survive a globally consuming war, the threat of nuclear annhilation, financial collapse, ineffective leadership at the top of our government, craven political pandering to capitalist excess, slavery based on biologically recognizable genetically inherited differences, and civil wars that attempted to tear the nation apart.
We eventually come back to our historic roots in the enlightenment where reason, social responsibility triumph over craven personal interest. At heart our systems promote humanism over the forces inside each of us to think and act only for ourselves. Remember Franklin and Elanor Roosevelt emerged from one of the worst crises in modern times. Out of them came the civil rights movement and our current effort to give women an equal voice in our world.
4
One could also look at the recent re-election of Trudeau as a harbinger of a different outcome to the next American election, Brett!
12
@Bosox rule
No, one can NOT do that. Trudeau has a Friendly, paid for Press and Still lost his Majority. That, despite the fact his opponent, Scheer, was barely distinguishable from him as far as their positions on most policy are concerned.
1
but that does fit Bretts narrative.
Stephens is absolutely right on this one. The left wing of the Democratic Party is completely out of touch with the average American. Sanders (especially) or Warren as the party's candidate would be a disaster at the poles. As a moderate liberal, I would have trouble with these two as well, though I could never support Trump. Reason, pragmatism, moderation are what is needed. Even if the left/right spectrum is different in the UK from what it is in the US, the basic truth about where the voting public is on that scale holds.
5
"The main job of any competent opposition is to fight the next election, not relitigate the past."
You do realize, don't you, that the impeachment proceedings are about Trump's attempts to cheat in the next election? Or, more accurately, those that have come to light.
12
This doesn’t matter unless all Democrats hammer this message often and always. They’ll need to deflect and deny any past criticism of trump and GOP.
They will need to be disciplined and relentless. The GOP is.
1
Democrats, with this huge field and radical candidates, are shooting themselves in the foot and they have been for months. That field and Dem leadership need to get together and focus on what candidate has the been chance against Trump in an election that may well be engineered by Russia and other foreign powers who want to keep Trump in the White House indefinitely because it is in their own best interests. Once they have a candidate, Democrats have to go on the attack against Trump loudly, persistently, and daily. Right now, in my opinion, there is no Democrat road to victory and it is highly likely that Trump will wangle a second term--if not a third and a fourth. We are in deep trouble. And we're not fighting very hard to take our country back.
5
As a centrist Democrat, I sadly watch my Party veer to the Left, just like the English Labour Party has, and my fellow Democrats finding reasons to believe that it will lead to victory in 2020. As the Romans used to say “Those whom Jupiter wants to ruin, he drives mad”. See ya in ‘24 ... depressing!
11
Johnson has not renegotiated Brexit yet.
5
@dlb
He has - but not because he was "BoJo Superman" but because of a policy change of EU leaders towards UK in september.
EU had simply realized that there is no reason to keep a country in EU any longer that never was a full member in fact - formally it is but there are hundreds of in fact untenable exceptions in countless details just in favor to UK granted to nobody else - that has been blocking the inner system of the EU all the time, that recently became a destabilizing element just by it´s increasingly shaking institutions and that will continue even more in unforeseeable future no matter who the leader is.
1
Democrats keep shooting themselves in the foot...over and over again.
First, with the help of FusionGPS and Christopher Steel, they attempted to dig up ‘Russian Collusion’ dirt on Trump that ended badly after a 2+ year and multimillion dollar investigation that proved nothing other than DNC and intelligence community malfeasance.
Next on the agenda...the Ukraine-Biden-Trump quid pro quo affair which left us with the nagging question as to why Hunter Biden was paid $50 grand per month by a Ukrainian gas company while his father was VP and Ukraine point man for the Obama administration. And why a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating that company was fired at VP Biden’s insistence...or else!...in other words, quid pro quo.
And now we have the impeachment strategy...for contempt of Congress and abuse of power. Given the above shenanigans perpetrated by the Dems et al, this really takes the cake...and they will likely lose badly in 2020.
It would appear that Dems are following the Palestinian playbook. They’re their own worst enemies.
18
@Susanna
$50k per month is chicken feed compared to the corruption in the Trump family. Whataboutism, yes, but as you were commenting on the unlikelihood of the Dems winning the 2020 election against Trump, a comparison is in order.
Fascinating how similar are the arguments of Stephens and Cohen today, using the 44% British Conservative "landslide" as a justification for attacking progressive Democrats. But if you look at many of Boris Johnson's actual campaign promises, they were hardly different from or even more "leftwing" than those of our progressive Democrats. Corbyn's problem was that he actually supports Brexit, so he couldn't make an effective campaign on that issue, while his Marxist rhetoric was aimed at an industrial working class that no longer exists. Not even Bernie is that stupid. Let us not be misled by weak comparisons made by columnists and politicians with ideological axes to grind.
12
johnson talked about expanding health care and social serviced. Brexit is going to bring more money to the NHS according to Johnson. On the issues Johnson is similar to Saunders and Waren. Brett conveniently ignores this for some reason.
4
They are ALL coming out of the woodwork to manipulate Democrats using the results of a foreign election involving wildly different subject matter.
It's unbelievable, shameless propaganda. Meanwhile, Warren and Biden are beating Trump bad in head-to-head match-ups, something Corbyn never, ever did to Johnson.
9
No, Bret - It's an ominous portent for the United States of America.
Trump is an irrational, self-absorbed non-thinker whose primary MO is to act on impulse. Given that he is backed into a corner right now, and will remain so for the rest of his term in office even if the Senate idiotically deigns to not convict him, he will continue to behave like a cornered animal and will instinctively act out accordingly. There is an unfortunate possibility that he could unleash some kind of disaster, and his inability to listen to reason and the GOP's lock-step refusal to put a leash on him, it could be more than he or the GOP bargained for. I'm not hoping for this; it's inevitable. It's what happens when a guy like Trump is allowed to do whatever he wants.
A lot can happen between now and Election Day. Don't put on your party hat and throw confetti just yet.
10
I am no expert on British politics, but, it seems to me that Johnson played it cool--in other words---appeared to be more "institutional" rather than just merely a provocateur. Trump is incapable of playing it cool---he relishes disruption for disruption sake--that is just who he is. And when he plays that role he is even more unlikeable than his normal unlikeable self. If he is not impeached--he will lose what little cool he has---each day will be a Colonel Jessup moment--you Americans can't handle the truth--I am the truth. Having said that, would agree, going too far left will not beat Trump---stay in the center, be likeable, and let Trump be Trump--that is the winning formula.
3
And if Democrats nominate Joe Biden, Pete Buttigieg, or Amy Klobuchar, Republicans will waste no time painting the nominee as a weakling at worst, or as someone who just wants the job despite a total lack of accomplishments at best.
It doesn't just take a moderate. It takes someone with charisma and a simple speaking style, who can point out that the very policies Trump touts have actually been bad for workers, and who can explain simply and directly how Democratic policies will be better for us voters in ways we can feel. It will be a lot tougher than simply rejecting Warren or Sanders.
6
Enough of the paranoia. The election is not today. Prepare properly and VOTE. As Shakespeare wrote: " The readiness is all." Do it America.
6
I hear no 'primal screams' on the Democratic candidates' side.
I hear a nasty passive aggressive tone from many commentators who use terms like 'vitriolic' about the painful 14 hour marathon run where Democrats were not speaking politically, but used all their energy to explain the fundamentally unethical behavior of the president in measured and reasonable language. The better term for the Republicans was hysterical. I watched practically the whole thing, and in the end, I had to mute Collins.
The impeachment is not a 'partisan' (Shear) issue. It is a matter of the constitution. As long as you use such lax terms, you are playing right into the hands of a party lost in hypocrisy.
6
@Maria Fitzgerald - I could not agree more with your thesis, but, alas, the distinction you make with regard to impeachment is totally lost on the Trump supporters whom I know. Were the president an honest and innocent man he would welcome the impeachment process as an opportunity to prove his innocence. Stop laughing!!!
Corbyn is mean, angry, and just plain unlikable.
Johnson is fun and witty.
Given the choice, who would anyone is his/her right mind vote for?
Trump is mean and despised by at least 48% percent of the electorate, probably more.
All the Dems need is a fun, witty, friendly face.
Now I'm really really worried.
4
I couldn’t agree more. And that’s why as the Times reported yesterday, Democrats like me are nervous. I think they’re blowing it. Hopefully they can accept that reality and make the necessary course corrections.
6
@GK
Should democrats do a repeat of 2016 we might as well take down the flag and declare the American Experiment over. Given the reality of a rapidly expanding climate disaster, it will be over for more than just our country The time for such political games has past.
1
A common feature of contemporary economies is the rising gap between the many poor and the few rich. Politicians have the difficult job of trying to appear to cater to both factions. The easy way out is to divert and distract which in the case of Trump and Johnson is by appealing to crass nationalism. Voters believe the lies just as they flock to see the crass block-buster 'special effects' movies. Reality is out. Oh for mediocrity!
2
I really don't care about Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, the Koch brothers, and the rest of gazillionaires. Many of them are unhappy people. I care about having enough to live a happy life within my means and have the government off my back. And help my family and community, not only financially but giving my time to help. Sometimes giving your time to others is the most difficult thing to give, but the most valued.
4
Why don’t we do what the slave states wanted and what Britain is headed for : break the US into Blue America and the Confederate States of America: give the slavers their preferred name back.
I live in aesthetically beautiful South Carolina and it’s best city, Charleston, but I would gladly move if we could leave the Lost Cause behind.
Sure it would be messy and complicated, but not because of the overwhelming agreement it would create. The Lost Cause crowd would scream “good riddance” and race to the polls and vote yes.
The complicated issue of the military and its bases would be hard, but maybe turning defense over to the war mongers and letting them deal with the bloated military budget would solve that. Granted they might not be willing to defend Blue America, like Trump’s abandoning NATO, but Red America wouldn’t want an attack with a country contiguous with it.
As I write this, it makes more sense......
3
do you believe in a one world culture? do you believe people in different parts of the UK share the same mores and folkways as people from Puglia, or Helmand province, or Botswana, or Calvados, or Kerala, or Onondaga County?do you believe that all these places share the same political system, currency, educational system, constitutions, state structures or religious traditions?if not then why think that UK politics are predictive for US politics? just because we may speak a similar language? give me a break.
6
Well, we’ll know more after primaries, won’t we, i. e., whether Democrats have learned from the losses they have suffered from too-far left candidates. Sanders and Warren have some good ideas, but are just plain unelectable, and Biden is just too late to the game. He could have been running for re-election instead of being mired in the polls.
But it’s still early, so there’s hope that the Dems will nominate someone who will whip the current disaster occupying the White House.
1
YES! We WILL vote against our own long term self interest just to show them that they can't tell us what to do!
(the oligarchs are laughing all the way to the bank!)
3
What happened in Britain should not be a referendum for what happens in the US. And Warren and Sanders are not the same thing as Corbyn. Neither is Trump the same thing as Johnson.
2
Also, Britain doesn’t have the electoral college issue. Let’s not forget that Trump lost the popular vote.
1
What I find so extraordinary is the unwillingness to consider the not so subtle subtleties. Both Johnson and Trump ran on regular guy, tell it like it is buffoonery. But neither would spend five minutes socializing with the working class. And since when is buffoonery charisma?
Also, job growth reflects in large part low-paying jobs, and Trump received a good, stable economy from Obama. That hardly makes Trump a financial wizard.
What happens when Brexit hits, the financial capital of the world shifts from London to Frankfurt, the Troubles resume on the Irish isle, Scotland moves for independence and the shattered UK discovers that new trading best friend US is truly an ocean away?
The only beneficiaries I see in Britain disengaging from the Continent are Xi Jinping (economically) and Putin (politically).
But I agree with this column: The Dems need a centrist to counter Trump. The talented Warren needs to wake up. As for Bernie, everyone's curmudgeonly uncle, he needs to go home. -- thegamesmenplay.com
6
@GG
Trump did not run as a regular guy. His manifold ugliness was apparent from the beginning of his campaign, as was his incompetence and dishonesty. He ran a campaign of hate. Boris is far more likeable and intelligent, even if he comes off as goofball and not terribly concerned with the veracity of his statements. Both candidates ran against opponents (yes, I know the British don't directly elect the PM, but if Labour had won a majority or a plurality that could have worked with a coalition, it was clear that Corbin would have been PM) who were among the most disliked people their party could have put forward.
I do agree with the rest of your thoughts; a centrist Dem has the best chance of winning, although that candidate may well not be Biden.
Why would the centrist fire better? How many seats centrists got in this British election?
Income inequality and a demoralized electorate reverberates across the West. Labor’s working class enclaves went for Johnson because he’s offering Brexit as the panacea for their economic unease. Labor’s Corbyn remained silent on the existential issues of the age.
In the US: Notwithstanding “full employment”, American families are not making it. Consumer credit debt is at pre 2008 levels, which means that without credit cards, people can’t make it. So what is soon-to-be-impeached Trump offering? Elimination of food stamps, jobs that don’t pay a living wage, opposition to wage increase, opposition to student debt relief, cuts to personal healthcare coverage. That’s not a positive agenda, he’ll make a case for the wall that hasn’t been built. Democrats will remind voters how he’s been taking money from the military for his phantom wall.
Democrats have great ideas for restructuring the economy
4
Stephens was the one who wrote Labour was a distant long shot to win the election and the Labour Party has become, "institutionally anti-Semitic." This was two days ago. Stephens was comparing Corbyn to Trump and Johnson to Clinton. Now with Johnson's expected victory the comparison is reversed. Needless to say, I'll take Stephens' predictions about Sanders with a grain of salt.
The problem Democrats face does not concern platform. Democrats all pretty much agree on the issues. We're mostly debating priority and degree. The problem is Trump has three significant advantages. He's an incumbent with a good economy and the electoral college is working in his favor. Incumbency alone provides a margin of advantage larger than his victory in 2016. Trump is going to be tough to beat.
That's a problem when the four main candidates alternatively suppress various critical parts of the coalition. Biden doesn't excite young voters. Buttgieg struggles with black voters. Sanders and Warren both have a hard time with white moderates (a.k.a. Anti-Trump conservatives). Sanders is going to get hit with antisemitism from the conservative right eventually too.
Where does that leave Democrats? This is a turn out election. Voters need to be excited in order to win. Maybe Iowa will resolve the excitement deficit but Trump has the advantage with or without impeachment right now. Policy has little or nothing to do with it.
3
Oh for goodness sake, "ominous"! Please, let's remember the last time we had an election on a national scale, and it wasn't 2016. It was the midterms 2018.
And what happened? The Democrats not just won the House, it was a romp. And what was their number one issue, healthcare insurance. And though they gave up a couple of seats in the Senate, the Democrats had quite a few more up for re-election. It will be just the opposite in 2020, the Republicans will have more Senators up for re-election, and some are in moderate states.
The Democrats are on the right track, stay on plan, and win the suburban voters over like 2018.
I'm optimistic, we have excellent candidates and our party platform will be tuned-in to fight for all Americans who want better healthcare, better paying jobs, and higher education that doesn't pur them in debt for decades.
5
The column is highly misleading - it leaves out three vital shape-shifting points.
1. From another source: “As many Remainers are pointing out today, the main parties that want a second referendum on Brexit—Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish National Party, the Greens, and Plaid Cymru—collectively took almost 51 percent of the popular vote, compared with just under 46 percent for the Conservatives and the Brexit Party combined. The country is as divided as ever, with a slight edge for the Remainers.”
2. It was the CONSERVATIVES not Labor in power in recent years, inflicting terrible austerity on the Midlands where Labor votes flipped and demonizing the EC for "having" to do that.
3. It was Germany's conservative government that pushed for the frantic inclusion of so many new countries after the Berlin Wall came down. WHY the rush? Those countries were on a much lower tier, so many of their more-skilled headed west, and because of English especially to the UK.
1
It is so easy to draw a parellel between UKs labor party and USAs Democratic party. Yes, both stand for the common man(and woman). But the similarity ends there. The UK is a smaller country,has an existing monarch,a much liked national health scheme,an island surrounded by water(yes,lots of it) and most of all the labor party had just one contestant . One contestant means one set of proposals and plans. To say that UK election results should be taken as an omen for democratic party's ambitions is ludicrous. The Democratic party has more than 10 active runners,each proposing plans(at times lofty)which are aligned with people's expectations. There is plenty to choose from in this buffet unlike a la carte meal in UK. So Brett and others like him should stop playing mind games and let voters decide who would be good for the country. So far,Republicans with their single mediocre candidate are losing the game because they have only a slogan MAGA and and no plan for the future.
6
British politics almost never translate to the American electorate. Boris Johnson's victory had almost nothing to do with Corbyn and everything to do with voter's belief that Johnson could get Brexit done.
And frankly, I'm getting pretty tired of conservatives and neoliberal Democrats trying to armchair quarterback the Democratic primary. Let people vote for the candidates who they feel offer the best solutions to a growing list of increasingly grave problems. Warren and Sanders are two authentic, passionate candidates who are offering real solutions to vital issues like climate change, the high price of health care, Big Pharma and Big Tech's bad faith practices, income inequality, et al. The idea that Democrats should moderate to appeal to some mythical disaffected Trump voter and/or nominate a less capable than Clinton candidate like Biden is in my view not a good plan. But people need to vote who they see fit. It's not the job of President Obama, the DNC or "never Trumper" pundits to try to steer voters in one direction or the other.
5
@MarkusA
First sentence would have been true before 2016 but you appear to have missed something. When they voted for Brexit in 2016 that portended, or foreshadowed as someone recently said, Trump's victory. So there is a relevance here. Mainstream Media tried their best to thwart Brexit and, now we know, they failed.
5
And, Mr Stephens, I would add the UK will now experience their own Trumpian moment with BoJo. We are at least 3 years ahead on them. If we are willing to wrestle the country back from those who are yearning for what Putin and some others have, including Iran, a single party, theocracy led by a theo-less dynasty, than perhaps we can lead the rest of the world away from this authoritarian virus infecting the world . Pax, jb
1
So we should be more like the UK's Liberal Democratic Party?
How'd they do again?
2
Agree on all counts. That's why Mike Bloomberg should be the Dems choice and be elected in 2020. He is a problem solver and will also deliver the Senate to Dems in 2022. Then we can make real progress as a nation.
5
I am in a position where I cannot talk to my friends or my enemies. How can people not see what you and I see?
2
Trump is going to win
Period.
Democrats simply don't have any candidate strong enough to beat him, unless some deus ex machina descends from Mt. Olympus to save our Republic.
Democrats should be concentrating on Congress where they can win, and win big.
3
"Democrats got so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones."
You should be ashamed of writing that Bret. You know darn well that Pelosi and most elected Democrats did not wish for impeachment. When the whistleblower came forth what, exactly, would you have them do? Just sit there?
4
And just throwing the bum out via the electoral process won’t work if the Crime Boss-in-Chief cheated and rigged the election (which all the actual evidence indicates tRump has done and is still doing).
2
You conveniently ignore that the British press continuously played up ridiculous, false allegations about Mr. Corbyn and kowtowed to oligarchs and racists who would willingly throw the poor under the bus if it meant lining their pockets a little more. The Tories will dismantle the NHS and many of those who voted Tory will die.
That the US press is so willing to treat Trump as anything other than what he is-- a racist, misogynistic liar who should be facing the guillotine-- is enough evidence for those of us paying attention that there is a vast conspiracy against radical change toward a gentler, more empathetic world where people do not die for want of health care, kids don't go into lunch debt, and babies aren't stolen from parents and sold to the highest bidder.
That so many seem to cheer this state of affairs just goes to show that oligarchic values of pillage and members of the chattering classes such as yourself do not have other humans in mind when you write.
1
“Does the candidate get people like me? Will he keep his political promises? And has he achieved something that directly and tangibly benefits me?
This is Trump’s calling card.”
Really? REALLY?!
I’m an honest, hardworking US citizen that doesn’t want to get continually lied to, conned, insulted and ripped off...Trump does not get me.
6
Let's see Johnsons standing with the public in 4 years.
2
First, Johnson isn't dumb or ignorant. He's uncouth. Trump is ignorant, and of his intelligence the evidence is skimpy.
Second, Johnson ran in the center, which took full advantage of Labour's move left. Trump talked about infrastructure, but he's governed like a right-wing extremist.
But Britain still should warn us. We often share political shifts. Thatcher and Reagan, Clinton and Blair, Brexit and Trump.
And Britain doesn't have an electoral college.
So Stephens is right. But even if a moderate is nominated, around 5% of Democrat voters went 3rd party last time. Please have the candidates pledge to support the nominee no matter who it is. I trust Bernie will, but fear Warren.
3
Alternatively, Corbyn had a weak, muddled message (another referendum, more delay), and Johnson had a strong, clear message. Warren's message is maybe(?) clearer than Biden's; is it clearer than Trump's? Or - another possibility - the Corbyn/Johnson vote was more about their personalities. If so, Biden probably has the advantage. (On the other hand, the GOP smear machine will portray Biden as totally corrupt because of his son's stupidity [regardless whether his son did anything corrupt], notwithstanding the cesspool that is Trump. Lincoln was probably wrong: yes, you can fool all the people all the time. )
To compare Jeremy Corbyn to Bernie Sanders is so far off base as to be ludicrous. If you watch BBC or Sky News with any regularity, you would know how ridiculous this argument is. Medicare for all is what we should have had after WWII. Fighting endless wars and building more bombs is more important to us. Our politicians are a joke, but Bernie gives me some hope.
4
Trump would beat Bernie or Warren handily. Demonizing corporate America and the wealthy is a recipe for disaster. It leaves no room for complexity. It is as mindless as the Tea Party. I detest Trump and Trumpsim as much as anyone and I long for a candidate whose view of the world will not fit on a bumper sticker. I won't be holding my breath.
2
I couldn't agree more that we Democrats need to nominate a moderate presidential candidate. Some one to restore dignity to the Oval office. Of course this moderate will do next to nothing about economic justice and no doubt our military budget will continue to eat up hundreds of billion dollars a year and any attempt to confront global warming will be modest but symbolic and people will continue to go bankrupt from medical bills and millions of children will still be living in poverty and Wall street and the banks can keep raking it in but the good news is that with a more dignified president we can feel better about ourselves. Then again there is the possibility that since none of our serious problems are really being solved another right wing Republican crypto fascist will come along and take advantage of all that dissatisfaction and will win again and then? Well of course we Democrats will nominate another moderate because thats what we do.
1
Bret, if you set your WAYBAC machine to 75 years ago, one Brit and one Yank were setting the pace. Calling the shots. They were winning. Just like today.
"First, Johnson was fortunate in his political foes." Donald Trump has been dealt a bigger, better hand. Mike Bloomberg said the same thing, last week.
"Second, Johnson was faithful to his base."
Trump is also faithful. He does not quit. He is a cross between an Eagle Scout and a Honey Badger.
"Third, Johnson was attuned to the moment." The Democrats are not in the moment. They are 3 years ago and a generation ahead. Here and now, they are not.
"Finally, Johnson has benefited from critics whose mode of analysis is that anything and everything he does is dumb, dishonest, wretched and ruinous." Remind you of anyone? If there is a politician or pundit, that can explain Trumpism, to the Democrats, that would be bad. Or, a miracle.
Winston Churchill. “You have enemies? Good. It means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” George Patton. "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser."
1
I could not agree more. Nominate Biden, Buttigieg, or Klobuchar, and let's get this done next Nov. Nominate a leftie may feel good to progressives, but do they really want 4-more years?
3
This country is so much in need of a makeover, I would love to see a concerted effort by the NYTimes's centrist and conservative columnists to outline why another four years of Trump is disastrous to our democracy, our health care, our foreign policy, our climate, our economy. Anything else doesn't cut it at this point. They should be actively fighting for a transformation in their readers' understanding of what is at stake if the GOP's corruption continues. This is what everyone should fear, not a Warren or a Sanders presidency.
2
I’m in London right now and this election has been a real eye- opener. I honestly think Labour might have won this thing if they weren’t led by Corbyn. Working class people reviled him as the man of yesteryear and a “Marxist idiot” and a “terrorist sympathizer “. Even my friends who are strongly “remain” resented the effort to overturn a democratic vote for Brexit. Most are not anti-immigrant, they just want the system better regulated and they think the huge labor supply depresses working class wages. Anyway I rarely agree with Brett but Dems really need to look at this election closely and take note.
293
@Ladyrantsalot: Germany has demonstrated that labor gets respect when it has seats on corporate boards. Corporations are not inherently hostile to labor.
15
@Ladyrantsalot
You are ranting and spinning to support your bias against the socialism of Corbyn, which is considerably different than the Democratic socialism of Sanders.
Labourites who voted for Johnson hated the EU Freedom of Movement decree, the same way working class Americans who voted for Trump have hated the floods of illegal and lesser numbers of legal immigrants who have come to the US in the past thirty plus years and depressed wages and taken jobs.
Polls show that a large majority of Americans support medicare for all, tuition free education following high school, and many other Sanders promoted programs.
The election comparison of the UK to the US is apples to oranges.
Sanders is likely to get the votes of the nine percent of Trump voters who had voted for Obama, who had campaigned on hope and change, but people lost hope, but still wanted change.
Sanders has Integrity, Bold Ideas, Vision and Courage. He is the change we need.
The US has obscene, colossal and growing inequality of opportunity, income and wealth.
When the richest .1 percent take in over 188 times the income of the bottom 90 percent.
The US has the world's highest rate of incarceration.
President Sanders 2020!
A Future To Believe In!
A Future To Believe!
21
@Ladyrantsalot I think the Brits voted for Johnson because they wanted to end the strife that has gone on for 3 years. Corbyn only offered more strife and another referendum. The lesson for Democrats is nominate someone who will be seen as the person to end the strife created by the Trump presidency. Many Republicans voters are as tired of Trump and his antics as many former Labor voters were of Brexit strife. Also please note that Johnson's first comments after winning were were about ending the strife. Not a rant about how, despite what the press said, his inauguration crowd was really the largest in history.
19
Elizabeth Warren is no Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson is no Trump!
2
Do any of our leaders care about moral or ethics? Doubtful, look at pharma and opioids, Boening and the 737 Max; could go on but will spare everyone.
2
It would be very sad for "us" to settle on a candidate who can beat Trump without having truly vigorous debates among ALL of the democratic candidates that provide an honest framework in helping the country envision a future that offers some hope and direction in uniting the country and putting us on a sustainable trajectory to shed our dependency on fossil energy and to preserve and bolster biodiversity. The stakes -- the future of life on earth -- are much higher than just defeating the worst president ever.
The UK Labour leader tried to be all things to all people. Dost he lie so low.
The US democrats need to keep in mind that the US is 80% urban. Just like the man said: “it’s the Base stupid”!
Also Election Day should be a holiday or polls should be open till midnight.
Stephens pretty much gets it right here. But there is an anti-Trump majority in this country; the problem is keeping it together. If the Democrats run a Warren or a Sanders, moderate voters will stay home or vote for Trump. If they nominate a moderate, leftists will stay home or vote Green. The Green Party in effect elected Republicans to the presidency in 2000 and 2016. Unless anti-Trumpers unite around a moderate Democrat, Trump will indeed probably win reelection.
3
Mr. Stephens is being a tad disingenuous here: he's despised Corbyn mainly because of the latter's perceived anti-Semitism and opposition to the government of Israel. There's simply no equivalent here amongst the presidential candidates on the Democratic side. He's probably right about Warren and Sanders, however: the nomination of either one of them will almost certainly hand the general election to our incumbent "president." Which is to say Biden's still the best choice for those of us who want Trump gone.
5
Perceived anti-Semitism? He was Hitler light.
1
Boris Johnson's Cons received 44% of the votes cast. A 1% increase. The major reason was the obnoxious Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Labour, who is embroiled in scandal and considered a Marxist.
Lesson to learn: Don't make an obnoxious super far-lefty the head of your party.
The Democratic candidate, whoever he or she is, will win the popular vote in 2020. If Trump is reelected it will not be because Democrats nominated the wrong candidate, it will be because the United States has the wrong constitution.
3
Biden is no doubt the best bet for Democrats. He's the highest polling. He's an old white guy like Trump. But he's not a jerk. Forget Bernie, Warren, etc.
1
It is with a mixture of amusement and, on some level, fear, that people in the USA compare the Tory victory to Donald Trump and his chances of re-election.It is NOTHING of the sort. Firstly, the UK has, at its very foundation, the NHS. A health system for all that actually works and is beloved. It’s not perfect but it’s there. Secondly, listening to Boris’ speech (which he wrote himself), he is at heart, British first and then Tory. He knew what it took for some people to vote for him. His victory speech was one of reconciliation and healing and for all in Britain. Many British people may not have wanted to leave the EU but they recognized Britain is a democracy and the delays were destroying the country. At heart British people are far more “liberal” no matter what party they belong to. Leaving the EU wasn’t the same as DT’s “Make America Great” campaign and isolating Americans from the rest of the world. It was taking control of their borders primarily. America already has that. Boris Johnson has the potential to be a great leader. Yes he is bombastic but he is smart, funny and he actually likes people. He is the complete opposite to the man running our country today. He is far more centrist and any Conservative in the USA who thinks he is like them, shows how little they know. This election was as much as to how awful Corbyn and his far left agenda as it was about Brexit. No comparison to Warren who I believe can be reasonable and appeal to the middle if she had to.
1
The fact the NYT let's Bret Stephen's continue to be so disengenous with the public is disappointing... Bret all but rooted for Boris Johnson, he us delighted right now.
Corbyn has an unclear position on Brexit. He was viewed as on the fence. That's why he lost. Being on the fence will lose 2020 too, so most Dem Candidates would be toast. The only lesson here is that Western Democracies are starving for authenticity, consistency and clear simple messages, so far Bernie is the only Democrat to offer that. Boris Johnson offered that better than Corbyn, he just ran on Brexit happening.
Also the "moderate center" has their own spineless ever shifting party called the Lib Dems and they did horribly.
Great analysis. Among the trends you see you have not listed age. All newly elected leaders seem to be under 60. I believe that is an important factor in a candidate.
The leftists, a/k/a Progressives, in the Democratic party are truly extreme.
4
This column reads like Mr Stephens's crocodile tears over the defeat suffered by a long-time defender of the rights of the Palestinian people, Mr Corbyn.
1
Dear Mr. Stephens, neither Sen. Sander or Sen. Warren are bigots...
2
Brett, Britains problem was Jeremy Corbin. Stop making this about your feelings against the Democratic Center Left.
2
It would also help to not nominate a rabid anti-semite.
3
"Finally, Johnson has benefited from critics whose mode of analysis is that anything and everything he does is dumb, dishonest, wretched and ruinous. Lately, they warn that he will bring about the end of the country itself."
*****
It takes a shocking election defeat to break through this thinking, and even then it's blamed on everyone else.
Claiming a democracy is in peril is their greatest self-indulgence of hubris yet. Funny since it is they who are trying to destroy the Executive Office -- and its Constitutionally provided rights -- by any means necessary.
3
Fool me once, shame on you (= T***p, Putin, McConnell, Stone, Manafort, K. CONway, Giuliani, Cohen, Fox News, et ad nauseam al.) Fool me twice, wave bye-bye to U.S. democracy and the habitable environment of the only known habitable planet. Your move, White folk of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania....
3
@Mr Bill,
The planet was toast long before Trump. The problem there is people and consumption.
Want to fight climate change? Oppose immigration. That will have a large and immediate impact.
1
@Willt26 Thank you for taking me seriously. I wholeheartedly agree with your first comment, but do not quite grasp the second, nor whether you are speaking with some irony there.
Hmmmmmm, might this imply that identity politics and being “woke” may not be the the path to victory?? Could it be that the “OK Boomer” rallying cry isn’t having the desired effect?? Is it possible that people over 25 may actually know something?? We’ll soon find out.
4
@stevevelo: Maybe Brexit will allow England to revert to Hobbittown.
Comparing Warren, Sanders and any other Democratic presidential candidate to Corbyn is fallacious to the tenth degree. No comparison here.
3
@Christy
The lesson for the DNC from this week's landslide victory for Boris and his conservative base is that it will happen in the US in November if you nominate someone the Mudslinger in Chief can even semi-credibly nickname "Jeremy", e.g., Jeremy Sanders, Jeremy Warren, or "Corbyn", e.g., Elizabeth Corbyn, or Bernie Corbyn, riffing on their too-left-wing-for-the-country policies, pronouncements and plans. And THAT would be gaining political help from a foreign politician who lost!
2
So what is the solution, Mr Stephens? Say that Trump is not a tyrant? That he is not committing crimes against the constitution of the United States by withholding documents, diverting funds without the approval of congress, lying to congress and the American people?
Should we Democrats stop standing for healthcare for all, for affordable university education, for laws that protect the right to vote, for funding from the uber-wealthy that would help renovate our hopelessly outmoded infrastructure?
Should we stop opposing Trump's racism and bigotry? Is that what you want us to do, Mr Stephens?
No, even if we go down to defeat to this racist criminal, we will not compromise our values and principles. We will not become the monsters that support Trump, nor will we tell the monsters who enable Trump that they're not doing anything wrong.
Principles can not be abandoned. History will praise the patriots who stand up against Trump, no matter what the outcome of the election. And those who supported this man, who enabled this man, will be excoriated by history forever.
4
@Sean: To Trump, the Constitution doesn't even exist.
Absurd. Talk about pounding a square peg into a round hole. Neither Ms. Warren or Mr. Sanders have been hounded for decades regarding charges of anti-Semitism. Neither has voiced overt support for terror organizations. I know it’s fun to make sweeping comparisons for the purposes of clicks, but there’s a big fat difference btwn Corbyn and Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren.
3
@Butch writes: " ... but there’s a big fat difference btwn Corbyn and Mr. Sanders ... "
No, there is not a big fat difference.
In a Saturday Night Live skit in 2016, Sanders character denied that he was a socialist, instead, he proudly said that the was a Democratic Socialist. By combining democrat with socialist he betrayed the Democratic Party (of which, by the way, he is not a member) by aligning it with socialists. That action is one of the stupidest things you can do in America if you want to be elected to anything outside of a college campus.
1
@MzF
You win. SNL is an impeccable source.
Mendacity has found a way reliably win. We do not have a system that is robust against the coordinated lies and treachery of concentrated power. Historians will write books debating the exact combination of neoliberal despair, emerging technology and moral decay that led to this trend but for those of us living through it we must reject the lazy analysis of parasitic pundits.
A critical time here when Trump and his team are claiming 'absolute immunity' from any prosecution against the President for any crime, past and present. Rule of Law, the Constitution are both out the window if Trump wins, replaced by a dictator, a despot in this case. Trump's team are no better than Putin's. Disagree and you are dead.
The D's have a chorus of candidates though and none have the charisma or presence of an Obama. My opinion: Bernie is there to insure that Trump wins. His followers are a 'cult' as are Trumps: My way or the highway. We don't have a 'Corbyn' racist in the bunch. And, now the only 'safe' candidate is Biden because he is not a 'scary' radical offering dreams that will not happen in the US.
The true test of our democracy is now in the hands of the Supreme Court. We will know soon whether we will survive as a democracy or become an annex of Russia.
1
Of the large field of hopefuls, only Biden of the group will beat Trump. Our capitalist society has pounded the public with the evils of socialism until the average voter equates socialism with Stalinist communism. Also, the common electorate have a penchant for voting against their best interests.
@FJG -- Biden is the problem that endangers Democrats. He is the self satisfied elite.
The votes would go to those who offer real change in the things that really offend the voters. Good jobs, good medical care, good police without abuses, good justice without discrimination, and fix immigration without cruelty.
@Mark Thomason
Most voters are poorly informed so they usually vote their 'comfort level'. Biden falls within the parameters of that comfort level--the rest do not.
Your utopian views are admirable. but unfortunately, naive
Have you been spying on my emails and social media posts?! Could not agree more with your sentiments.
Mr Stephens writes from an ideological strait-jacket while complaining of others wearing their own.
Interviews on Reuters showed Northern Labour voters distrusting Corbyn's character more than his policies. And many Labour voters supported the original Brexit referendum for reasons not entirely clear to me, probably since that story hasn't been reported much here.
What Mr Stephens does get right is that American voters want firm moral character. Perhaps, the firmest of moral character. In our politics that is usually demonstrated by political consistency.
Not all the Democratic candidates show that. I don't need to name names here for illustration. If you can't sort the consistent from the inconsistent, you haven't been paying attention.
A key need for the Democratic candidate is charisma. Charisma will create a groundswell for down-ballot races. For we who have only seen these candidates on television, charisma is veiled. It remains for early primary voters to tell us who is most charismatic. The left/center/right strait-jackets come later. And they are useless. Character and charisma will be all.
3
@Royce Wicks -- "And many Labour voters supported the original Brexit referendum for reasons not entirely clear to me"
I believe you will find their concerns were economic first, plus lifestyle "threats" that seemed reckless insults to traditional things like regional foods, and a sense that their democratic rights were threatened by centralized bureaucratic Continental power (which is how the Continent works).
The left could have addressed these things. Apparently, whatever efforts it made to do that were insufficient.
4
It's still possible to get a bad job in a good economy. But as a whole, the economy is doing very well, and as a whole wages have been rising faster than they did under Obama - these are facts.
A Trump victory will be good for the country for two reasons. First, it will continue the policies that have finally jump-started the US economy. Second, it will force the democrats to listen and adapt to the entire electorate, not just to the echo chambers of the NYT comments.
99
@Ahmad B I think if you look at GDP, wages, Employment as a bar graph without the years shown on the X axis you cannot tell when Obama left off and Trump began. That is the fact. A continuance of a trend doesn't make the receptor of the benefits from a former president a miracle worker.
99
@Ahmad B: $1 trillion per year deficit spending is quite a tab to run up to re-elect a liar and crook president of the US. How long do you expect this to hold up before the Fed has to monetize the debt with quantitative easing, which could be inflationary?
94
@Ahmad B
Here's another fact that might inconvenience you. Growth in total private sector employment over Trump''s first 34 months in office lags well behind Obama's last 34 months in office by over 1 million jobs. The GOP claims that Obama was a disaster ... what does this make Trump?
120
Even if a more moderate candidate ultimately emerges from the primary, Liz Warren will shake her fist and yell about billionaires right to the end, dragging the party left (aka down). In the process she will become the Jill Stein of 2020, handing the country to Trump while her gray haired fans in Seattle and Cambridge cheer about how she persisted.
4
The main stream media or the Establishment will never let a progressive be the nominee period.
The establishment will smear and lie just like the Corporate owned news outlets. They are corporations and have a fiduciary duty to make a profit. If Sanders or Warren get in they will pay a lot more in taxes.
The establishment is made up of the 1% that like the rigged game they set up. The take your donations which is in the billions and give it to the two or three consulting firms that they pick. I'm sure their kids don't sit on their boards . That would be just wrong right?
Trump will win and the last Super Power will break up just like the Soviet Union. Both were to corrupt to stay united.
2
I don't think the Democrats just want to take down Trump by legislative means exclusively. Trump reach for unconstitutional powers forced the Democrats hands. No matter what comes from a whitewash Senate trial they will run on the places Trump promised great things and hasn't delivered. Healthcare, shrinking deficit, rule of law, and competency.
1
Has the rule of thumb that "All politics is local" been repealed? This article seems to suggest that this is indeed the case.
Recently, a Democratic was elected governor of Kentucky. That shows why one has to understand the 'local' issues that drive one person to be elected, while another loses.
Extrapolating one countries' politics onto others puts you in dangerous territory - especially another country that is thousands of miles away from us with a very different history and situation.
2
Flyover country swallowed Reaganism and it has ruined their towns and futures. If they take a second dose of Trump, they'll get more of the same. And richly deserve the side effects.
2
So because I live in “flyover” country you will consign me and mine to an unhappy future based on a minority of people’s support for Trump? Spare us the judgment of someone from Vermont a homogenous state of well off white people. Its myopic to blame the Midwest for Reagan or to see his election out of the context of the times. Times you likely didn’t live through or understand if you did. I was 24 when Reagan became president, the industrial decline was well in place by that time and people were losing hope. Reagan like his cruder version Trump played on people’s fears and suffering while offering an optimistic vision where they would again control their future. That its all a house of cards built on lies and deceit isn’t as important as you or I would like it to be. Politicians like Reagan and Trump win as much because of the poverty of their opposition’s ideas as because of their own political instincts. Trump didn’t just win, Clinton lost. You would blame the working class for their own decline, in this your no different than the conservatives who blame the poor for being poor. Its a Darwinian view of humanity that ignores the forces beyond ordinary people’s control while benefiting from them. Trump is your fault too, and the fault of every progressive that thought you could throw the working class under the bus of globalization without consequence. Roosevelt understood working class people, the rest that followed were merely dilettantes (except Bobby Kennedy).
2
Bret, how do you propose I pay for two children’s college debt? A four day stay in the ICU? Housing that is far higher than we can afford? Do you and moderate Democrats want us to be bankrupt forever?
3
The clear answer is yes. Bankruptcy is the neoliberal social safety net that Bret has been promoting for decades. Reduce you and your family to some markings on a balance sheet and then collateralize the risk. Shame on us for voting with for the architects of such a system. Socialism is the only antidote we know of for such a perverse, toxic state.
@Sherry Your question seems to suggest that others should pay for those things...
Bret isn’t a moderate Democrat, and the housing and medical costs where I live aren’t being driven by conservatives. Their being driven by the same professional class democrats who love identity politics and social equality while competing with conservatives on driving economic inequality and crushing working class people. My adult daughter couldn’t afford to even consider putting a child through college much less two. Neither she nor I can afford the cash only quality mental health care needed for family now. Nor can anyone working service class jobs here in this very liberal college town. I’m not a moderate Democrat nor do I want “us” to be bankrupt, I do want to govern more than making a statement of liberal purity or fronting policies that have no chance of winning support beyond the true believers. If Obama couldn’t make it work how do you expect Warren or Sanders? Aspirational isn’t enough, people want real graspable solutions that recognize individual dignity and self worth. Even this old liberal recognizes the difference, make working class jobs pay a living wage and recognize the dignity of labor as well as education. Its not that hard you know. Roosevelt knew it, Bobby Kennedy did as well. Even that fraud Reagan knew to honor the working class even if in the end it was just lies and deception.
2
While I think the entire world should have access to medical care, I do believe that proposing health care for illegal immigrants shows a total disconnect and is political suicide. So I agree with you.
3
Bret Stephens - running with the hares and hunting with the hounds- since his WSJ days.
4
About that socialist agenda... For a decade it's been repeated as a kind of religious mantra that inequality is out of control; that the "system" -- that unbearable term from the '60s -- is broken; that "workers" are being shafted by capitalism; and so on and so forth. Even if the data they've been citing is correct, most of their proposed remedies would still've been bad.
Thing is, that data, as it's come under increasing scrutiny, is looking less reliable. Not that leftists would care, as they're the kind of people for whom answers come first, questions second. (That phenomenon, actually, is bipartisan -- and is a plague.) https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/11/28/economists-are-rethinking-the-numbers-on-inequality "[Economists] are wondering whether inequality has in fact risen as much as claimed -- or, by some measures, at all."
We're seeing massive amounts of motivated reasoning and confirmation bias. If Sanders is the nominee and loses, rest assured that leftists will have a defense that permits them to insist that the nomination of someone similar in 2024 would ensure victory. Then again, considering Trump's election and present unpopularity, I don't want to say that Sanders COULDN'T win -- though I don't think he would.
Sure, I want the Democrats to nominate a centrist who can win. But perhaps that's because I'm a centrist. In any case, if we don't confront socialists, that philosophy will grow; if it isn't Warren or Sanders now, in time it'll be someone worse.
1
Corbyn was simply the wrong man for the Labour Party. That is a huge lesson for us.
1
Oh, yes, this is a terrible and ominous portent for Democrats. The South wants to leave the Union, and the North insists we stay whole. Or is it possible that Brexit has no modern equivalent in American politics?
2
I see little evidence that it was Corbyn's liberalism that caused his loss. In fact, Johnson was forced to move to the left on healthcare to prevent defections. What's similar between Johnson and Trump is their populist, nationalistic, anti-immigrant, anti-foreigner attitude. That does appeal to a lot of people. But sorry, the Democrats shouldn't embrace those ideas—even if they are winning ones.
The challenge in the coming US election is that Trump will have a minimum of 40% of the vote. The Democrats, unfortunately, are a coalition of many disparate groups. It's hard to find any candidate that can unify all those groups. Worse, what excites one group tends to rebel another group. The Republicans have a very homogenous set of supporters—bigoted and greedy white people. Democrats have everyone else.
1
Trump has been able to transform our polity into a business model, not as much a legitimate business but more a crime syndicate. His is a minority government, but one that benefited from the overreach of the Obama administration, dragging people kicking and scratching toward their self interest. Still the lingering Amygdala hijack of 9/11 and the Great Recession has kept the fear, as in an invasion by Genghis Khan or Attila the Hun, foremost the minds of half of us. In a state of fear, the rational part of the brain is turned off. This happened in the middle of the last century. Short term fear has prevented long term vision and the long view is that we need a visionary not an opportunist.
1
Hey everybody, including you Bret Stephens and Roger Cohen, what's the rush? Election day is 11 months away.
How about chilling a bit and letting the primary voters weigh in -- and the opinion polls reflecting how the candidates are "resonating"?
So much anxiety being generated by the punditocracy. But that's what they get paid for, eh?
2
Donald Trump will only get re-elected to the extent that the mainstream media fear he will get re-elected and encourage Democrats to choose a vanilla candidate who can be bought out or corrupted––or one who seems so obligatory that he or she will not inspire people to get out and vote.
2
When will we hear from sociologists who reveal the facts about the online misinformation campaign that was waged relentlessly, the right leaning media pounding out misconstrued truths, the constant slandering of an opposition and Russia being at fault. This is not about socialism. This is not about your fight for a centrist opposition. This is not about ideologies. This is about uneducated ignorance and the will of those people to believe lies and vitriol, instead of wanting to find out the truth out for themselves. It's called propaganda. It's worked time and time again. This is what will get you Trump reelected. A failure to counteract that narrative will have devastating consequences across the western world.
Title is almost there. More accurate. Britain's Ominous Portent for Britain.
Don't give up that council flat just yet. The kids are gonna need it.
The world is changing at an accelerating pace.
In the not too, distant past our western democracies had a common enemy, the evil commies. We had stable economies, the best technologies, luxury cars, pensions, health care, community churches, synagogues and somewhat clear paths for our children.
Competition is now global for all. It's difficult to grasp and grasping it means having to change our enculturated biases.
One thing that has not changed- there is always some transgressive type to step in and exploit perceived weakness.
Darth Vader was a bleached blond. Who'd a thunk it?
3
You reap what you sow. We're seeing the end of progressivism as a political force. Not only in the U.S. but in the world. Trump was the 1st nail in the coffin. Brexit the 2nd nail. The current ascent of Biden is the 3rd nail. If the Dems lose in 2020 that will be the last nail. The far left & their co-dependents will be marginalized & forced out of the party once and for all. They have no one to blame but themselves. To working-class voters, Progressivism means trigger warnings, vile college protests & obnoxious academics who posture as their will on earth. They hate these people to their very core. Why shouldn't they? The far left has been mocking them for decades. You are bad for eating factory-farmed meat, owning a rifle, & driving an SUV. You are bad for speaking the language of micro-aggressions, patriarchy & cultural appropriation. The left's obsession with trivial issues like this has made them & their supporters deservedly a national laughing stock. This is politically disastrous & just plays into the hands of Fox News. And progressives still can't figure out why their ideas never get traction in this country. The voters we need to win back the Presidency, Congress, SCOTUS, the majority of governorships & state legislatures, these voters have different values. There’s no way to bridge the gap. We have to part company with the far left fanatics. The sooner the better. We need to make it clear they don't represent the Democratic Party. Otherwise, all is lost.
1
Trump is 73 and I’m declining mental and physical health.
He won’t live long enough to get through another term.
If anyone bothered to read the analysis from the UK, they’d have seen how awful Corbyn was as a candidate.
2016? Brexit? Anyone remember Cambridge Analytica or have any idea just how powerful data is? I work with it in tech communications, and it so easy to manipulate people’s emotions when you have access to their data, know their stories, and weaponize social media.
Want to change things? READ. Stop emoting and start reading about media manipulation, which is the only reason a hack like Stephens publishes as The Times.
I’m a media analyst. It’s my job to run data and craft messages to fill a rhetorical space. It doesn’t take two masters degrees in communications to figure this out.
Data is king. All these elections are based on the manipulation of data.
And Trump is still 73 and in poor mental and physical health. That data, my future MD the wife likes to point out, aren’t on his side. That wasn’t a physical he had.
Oh here we go. Cue the requiem mass for Sanders/Warren. A moment first please, before we bury them.
Jeremy Corbyn lost primarily because, when the whole country is being convulsed by a single issue, and when one party is screaming, “Leave!” you have to scream “Stay!”
That opens up a golden opportunity to explain why we should stay. That opportunity would have been to make the case for why internationalism is integral to the socialist project. Corbyn could have started with the idea that Poles have just as much of a right to a decent, happy life as the English. From there, he says that the European Union has fulfilled its most important duty. Your sons and daughters are alive and not lying dead in the battlefield. Our task then, is not to leave the European Union, but to wrest control of it from the bankers and the self-dealing elites who have perverted its sacred mission.
Of course, Corbyn couldn’t say that because the Internationale died with Trotsky. Corbyn, tragically, was too much of a nationalist to be a socialist. Boris, having no scruples at all, won because he promised the Toffs a nationalistic Singapore on the Thames. But his labor supporters want socialism, but only for Englishmen.
What happens when you try to meld Nationalism and Socialism?
Anyone remember the last time that was tried?
Centrist opportunists on this side of the big pond are relishing this chance to lecture progressives on the U.K.'s election results meaning certain doom for a left-leaning presidential candidate.
Malarkey. The U.K. outcome is about white resentment. Sure, there will be a roughly equivalent majority of whites in our country who are poised to go down the same rabbit hole. But there are about 25 percentage points standing between the waning percentage of the U.S. population that is non-Hispanic white versus the percentage in the exceptionally fair U.K.
From the perspective of people like Bret Stephens, if your campaign isn't supplicating to white resentment, you're doing it wrong. He doesn't grasp that America gets less like the U.K. by the hour. What will cost Democrats the presidential election will not be a progressive nominee, but a milquetoast centrist one who fails to ignite diverse voters and their allied urban whites.
@corvid,
When Hispanics, African-Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, Muslim Americans, Jewish Americans, people with disabilities, etc. organize it is called democracy. When white people unite in common cause it is called 'white resentment' or 'white nationalism.'
I like Sanders and Warren. I fear neither can beat Trump.
If you put in a monkey as president instead of the current occupant you will have 1-3% growth and declining unemployment regardless Bret Stephens, because we now live in the gig economy, where getting a gig job is as easy as buying junk on Amazon, which by the definition used by the Labor Department, means you are not unemployed.
Growth will always occur because our population is growing, so neither unemployment nor growth have anything to do with Trump's policies. Yet because Stephens loves a cut-taxes-on-the-wealthy presidency, he's going to warn us again about Sanders or Warren.
If this were 1932, Stephens would be sounding the alarm on FDR's potential to ruin the economy.
You're like a broken record Bret Stephens.
1
" All people can be fooled some of the time; some people can be fooled all of the time; but all people cannot be fooled all of the time. " Abraham Lincoln.
" The unexpected is the norm. " Barbara Tuchman.
The thing about socialists are that they do not learn the correct lessons, and they do not atone for their wrongs. All they are interested in is how to overthrow what they don't agree with -- usually the reality.
1
Stephens has it wrong--it's a portent for the USA, not just "democrats", and it's a bad one.
1
Labor suffered losses because Corbyn was a terrible, indecisive leader without leadership abilities. Johnson is a lying opportunist but a capable one. Unlike Trump there seems to be a degree of competence in Johnson and knowledge of the issues. He doesn't spend his days as PM sending insults on Twitter while Trump seems to do nothing but spew hatred, ridicule and stupidity on his Twitter machine.
But Democrats need to nominate a candidate who is hard working, competent, knowledgeable, and honest: all the things that Trump isn't. But to argue that Johnson's victory and Corbyn's justified loss sends a message to Democrats on how to issue position themselves is a false notion. The differences in personalities in the U.k. race explains a lot of the result and not any left-right ideological split. Labour voters went to Johnson since Corbyn was worthless while Johnson promised increased social,programs and infrastructure spending which were attractive to Labour voters.
So are there any lessons for the U.S. presidential race in the U.K. result? I don't think so. The differences are too many, and no one running in the Democratic primaries exhibits the lackluster performance of Corbyn. Smart, well-conceived, thoughtful programs with a leftist orientation can succeed, but their proponents must be competent and dedicated.
"The desire, however misplaced or ugly, to “take back” control of a country from supercilious political elites was a global phenomenon, not a local event."
I see it rather as desire to claw back the income and assets taken by the elite. They thought they were its creators, and entitled to all of it, and to everything else they could grab along the way.
It took awhile for the average voter to realize what was happening, what had happened.
The problem was not being supercilious. The problem was taking everything, leaving none of the growth or progress for anyone else to share.
We were robbed. That the robbers were also arrogant jerks was a side issue, not the driving force.
3
Good advice - adds some tension to the stew.
Today a Wisconsin judge ordered 234,000 voter registrations to be purged from the rolls.
2
...because their voter registration doesn’t comply with state law. Is it so hard for people to re-register when they move?
If the election in England just completed was the most important in a generation, I say the coming one in 2020 in America is a once in a lifetime kind of election which will decide the kind of society the so called free world will evolve into. If your prescription for society is lies, falsehoods, bigotry,lack of compassion, utter selfishness, intolerance and divisiveness the Trump Johnson partnership is your answer. If however, you still feel that we need a compassionate, caring, truthful society working for social harmony and cohesiveness you will ensure that Trump does not stay in the White House and that Johnson’s brand of politics dies by isolation from the rest of the globe. You pays your money and takes your choice!!
Johnson did not create a fake charity and steal from veterans and donors.
1
“Progressive primal screams” much like the petulant screams we hear from the right. I have no desire for either.
Progressives had not governed in the UK or USA during the half century that shaped this modern world and global economy. The Clintons, Blair’s and Obama’s have held sway: fighting or prolonging stupid ruinous wars, working for the economic agendas of big corporations and rich donors. Thru cowardice and inaction they have enriched themselves at the expense of their working and middle class bases mired in debt and stagnant wages and (this side) unaffordable healthcare.
And having abandoned ordinary Americans and Brits, the takeaway from this latest election is that we shun the Warrens and Sanders who are running to correct gross wealth inequality and instead vote for the Biden’s: proud architects of the mess we are in? Willing servants of the big banks? Opposers of healthcare reform? Supporters of student loan debt? Tepid acknowledgers of climate change? LOSERS in 2016?
Beware Greeks bearing gifts, and beware neoliberal NYT columnists bearing strategic advice for progressive voters.
Of course Biden would be preferable to Trump, but in recent years Democrats seem to have won with outlier candidates like Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama -- and they've lost with safer "sure things" like Al Gore, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.
2
"It’s the Warren-Sanders manifesto, only with £ rather than $ signs attached". Bret Stephens
Everyone has his or her take on the British Election results. But Bret Stephens' take is that "therefore the US voters would vote for Donald Trump" unless the Democrats get rid of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren!
The British already have a 'National Health Care" and other Welfare State policies for over 70 yrs! The Brexit vote is a twisted form of "Nationalism". It had nothing to do with Socialism or Capitalism. The Scottish vote for the Separatists is another example. Indeed, in Ulster an Irish nationalist has won!
Luckily, in Louisiana's bayous, Texas hinterland and even in Brooklyn, NY or anywhere in US no one but Mr. Stephens is going to vote based on the British election results! Millions of US voters have no healthcare. Thousands cross the border to buy lifesaving medicines in Canada! They and those who care about them would vote Bernie/Elizabeth Warren!
1
1. It was a Brexit election and Labour party is deeply divided over Brexit. The loses were in leave constituencies. The "red wall" was
2. Corbyn was battling a smear campaign that painted him as an anti-semite.
This column contributed to that campaign as recently as yesterday. But today the good author would like to believe that this election was not about the (false) antisemitism charges or about Brexit but instead about widely popular policies such as eliminating student debt and defending the NHS.
Or more accurately, the Ominous Portent to America
1
As a moderate republican who didn’t vote trump in 2016, there is not a single democratic I can support in 2020 ...
Keep yapping about trillion dollar giveaways and socialist pipe dreams and trump will win again.
1
Typical Brett blather. From Real Clear Politics:
Sanders vs Trump RCP average: Sanders +8.4
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-6250.html
Warren vs Trump RCP average: Warren +7.2
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_warren-6251.html
In 2016 the Democrats forgot about the Electoral College, they are not going to make that same mistake again.
If Bernie Sanders gets nominated he will clean the floor with Trump. A real populist will beat a fake one every time.
If a "centrist" gets nominated they will lose. Why vote for Republican-lite when when you can vote for the real thing?
Michael Moore is spot on when he says very few Republicans are going to see the light and vote Democratic. He is correct in saying that Democrats need to be appealing to their base in order to get them to come out to vote.
That is what we saw happen in 2018. Good thing too, otherwise we never would have found out that Trump was trying to destroy the Constitution.
The Democrats can win big but first they need to choose the right candidate (Bernie Sanders) and the right issue (Medicare for All).
Sure, the Senate is probably going to let Trump off without even a slap on the wrist but don't forget that it is BRETT'S party that is doing that.
Except in Brett's fevered brain the upcoming election has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the election in the United Kingdom.
#NotMeUS #Bernie2020
1
Wow Bret. If anything could stir the Dems to clear thinking it's this. But they're so beholden to the base...
2
This belongs with the US is Greece school of journalism that was very popular on left and right during the Greek debt crisis 6 or 8 years ago. Take a totally different set of circumstances and impose them on the US. The UK election was decided by two issues Brexit and the relative toxicity of the two party leaders (Corbyn is actually a closet leaver of the EU and has been all his political career). Labour also were split over the issue of Brexit while most of the Conservatives who are pro Europe swallowed the misgivings and signed on to the Get Brexit done message. Ironically Brexit is far from done as will become apparent. Under the Withdrawal Agreement which Johnson will now push through parliament Britain will technically leave the EU at the end of January but will actually remain a de facto member until the transition period runs out at the end of 2020. There is no way a trade agreement can be fashioned in that time so the Conservatives will be faced with requesting an extension or crashing out with serious economic consequences.
In the case of the US neither Sanders or Warren is likely to win the nomination and outside of his ~ 40% Trump is unequalled in his toxicity. Of course one can never say never but the logic here by Stephens is very shoddy.
1
I did not vote for Trump in 2016. I could not vote for Clinton knowing far too much about her. I excused myself by saying that my vote was too sacred to waste it on either of those turkeys. I still tell anyone within earshot that I would not do business with Trump but am having trouble with the thought of doing business with any of the Democratic candidates. Joe Biden seems to be the devil I know and not disgraceful as is Trump but the rest of the lineup has little appeal and the socialist aspect of Sanders and Warren seems too desperate and disparate to be a solid base to build on.
58
Respectfully, are you serious? This isn’t high school prom. Biden is bad because he keeps lying about his past positions and seems to be incoherent at least some of the time. Warren and Sanders are “desperate and disparate”? As they build grassroots campaigns that are millions of people strong? Get serious about your vote, look at the issues, decide what will actually make a material difference in your actual life. Sanders and Warren aren’t doing some socialist stuff in a vacuum; they have very different agendas and movements, you would benefit from learning the differences and might actually find solutions to the most common problems you observe in your everyday life.
64
@bellicose
Your abstinence from voting WAS a vote for Trump.
Vote in 2020 for the Democratic candidate, whoever he (she) may be!
75
@bellicose
Sanders and Warren, too desperate, huh?
The US has obscene, colossal and growing inequality of opportunity, income and wealth.
When the richest .1 percent take in over 188 times the income of the bottom 90 percent.
The US has the world's highest rate of incarceration.
Of course, Brett Stephens and others of his of his sort will spin the UK election results to match their bias.,
but it is way more complicated.
Johnson voting Labourites hate the EU Freedom of Movement decree, much the same way Trump voters hate open immigration.
Some of those US workers who voted for Trump may choose to support Sanders because he has always worked to make life better for all working people and they may have become disillusioned with Trump.
Sanders would likely get the support of the nine percent of Obama voters who voted for Trump because the desperately wanted change.
The time for that desperately needed change is NOW.
I, and many others would not vote for a Republican-lite candidate. More Trump may be necessary to get the Establishment to realize that it does not own the country, though it does have a lot of power and owns big media and may try to force a republican-lite down our throats. While that may seem to be to their advantage, protecting their beloved status quo, it will backfire.
8
An egregious error is being made when looking at the poll numbers and seeing Biden in the lead: In poll after poll, the combined numbers show Bernie and Warren voters beating Biden.......and Trump! Has no one noticed that the policy positions of these two are almost exactly the same? Add to that the fact that both are leading in the number of unique individual donors, and ask yourself: does it make sense to think that people who actually give money will vote for the candidate that donated to?
The lesson of the U.K. elections is that Labor countered an unliked and distrusted Conservative populist, with an even more disliked wacko, clueless, PC socialist. We just did about the same thing in 2016; are we so blockheaded as to insist on doing the same again?
Either Sanders or Warren will be anointed strongest progressive by the voters in the primary, and we can have every expectation that the loser will throw their full support i.e. urge their followers, to support and vote for the stronger. The polls say that that combination is a winner, don’t let lifelong conservative pundits (like Brett Stephans) sell you a bill of goods. And don’t make the mistake of British Labour and back a loser against all odds.
3
If you believe polls, Biden polls better against Trump than either one of the other two. You have to be more willful than observant to conclude from the UK election that the key takeaway for US Democrats is to run Sanders or Warren rather than a moderate
@RobtLaip
"More willful than observant" like believing the polls and pundit hype that said Hillary was a "lead-pipe" cinch to win in 2016?
Trump's rhetoric regarding race was spot-on. But the left simply can't accept that fact, and certainly have no idea how to work with it. When Hispanics illegally flooded over the border and took construction jobs in the Sunbelt, it wasn't that big of a deal. But they kept coming, and now compete on price as roofers, painters, carpenters, landscapers and dozens of other services in big and mid-sized cities, that became a problem. The liberal Democrat response? Let's make sure they have healthcare and good schools. Trump's response? Harass them in big ways and small ways so they leave. The working class Americans who support Trump prefer his logic, as they should. They cannot make a living anymore unless they are willing to sleep six to a one-bedroom apartment.
Democrats need to change their logic: the people who hire and encourage illegal immigration are, for the most part, Republicans. They want cheap workers so they can make more money. What makes these workers cheap is that they are and will remain illegal. Dems need to challenge that reality.
Another misstep is the Democrats' enthusiastic embrace of wokeness and cancel culture. Just remove "racist!" from the party vocabulary. It is insulting and demeaning and will not get peoples' votes. Trump doesn't just "get away with it," he owns it and is proud of it. Racism has been a critical part of American culture since inception. I do not agree with it, but I do not judge. Because I want to win.
1
I was awaiting articles that discussed the British election as a portent for 2020 in the US and now we have two very good ones, this one and Roger Cohen's. I am fully persuaded by these columns. With the US economy humming, Trump will be tough to beat. We're far past wondering why all these fools support this guy. The argument whether the Dems need to mobilize their base versus pick off voters in the center is done, with the latter argument having won. That's why I very reluctantly am now all in for Biden.
"The main job of any competent opposition is to fight the next election, not re litigate the past." - brilliant Bret! You just need to find that opposition. Current opposition is to busy with impeachment.
1
The only hope for the Dems is if Warren and Sanders withdraw now, but that won't happen. In their own ways, their egos are just as big as Trump's. They and those who back them surely must see that the country isn't ready for their plans. The Democrats have had three years to figure out how to muzzle Trump, and they have only empowered him -- and left the rest of us in shock. It is heartbreaking to watch the Dems' political missteps. Their actions have made Trump and his cronies stronger, meaner and more dangerous. The guy was stoppable at one point, but I fear he is not now.
2
It's not relitigating the past if a president continuously acts as though he has the right to do what he wants without consequence. Trump believed he was "exonerated" by Mueller's testimony on the 24th July, and on the 25th he phoned Zelensky.
Trump was apparently entirely correct when he asserted he could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn't lose voters. On the 25th July he asserted this again, perhaps thinking, "Yeah, I can do that, and now it's Joe Biden in my sights."
Meanwhile, the craven Republicans have been bullied into submission, and they fear reprisal at the ballot box. Civics lessons, anyone?
Corbyn did not lose because of his Socialist policies. The man got to where he did because of those policies (which, in my opinion, are antiquated and arbitrary.) He lost because the British people have accepted Brexit as a reality. The argument is over how it is going to happen. Jeremy Corbyn was clueless enough to think that they wanted the false promise of a new referendum, which people rightly saw as more confusion, more uncertainty and more time lost in pointless debates.
Labour could have won resoundingly if they had real leadership.
1. Accept Brexit as a reality, and offer a strategy of how to make it happen with least pain for the workers, farmers, businesses.
2. Make a case against the Conservatives - Brexit chaos is their mess. David Cameron and Teresa May were overconfident that people would vote NO, so they ran a lousy, complacent campaign. All while Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Nigel Farage, and others were barnstorming the land with a clown show full of lies and false promises. They then wasted two years negotiating with the EU on a shabby deal their own MPs refuse to vote for. Cast them out!
3. Make the case for Labour - Remember the glorious times of the '90s? Tony Blair, Gordon Brown managed the EU just fine and brought prosperity for everyone. We can do it again. Labour and the EU are natural allies, while Conservatives have always been anti-EU and isolationist. Labour can reach a better deal with the EU and stabilize things...
Wasted opportunity.
I wonder what kind of portent it was when we ran Hillary Clinton, the establishment candidate, and she lost to Donald Trump.
Not sure what Bret Stephens favorite fruit is. Is it cherry picking, or apples and oranges, because so often he’s awash in both. Britain is its own political animal that can’t be walked on the same leash. It’s simply a cherry to be picked to support his foregone loathing of any movement to the political left.
All of Stephens recent columns carry the same odor- trying to convince us that the carcass of western capitalism is worth resurrecting and that any democrat challenging that economic order is doomed and my the silent majority. An inconvenient paradox of this is that Trump’s entire message and moment is based on selling himself as exactly the opposite of what he is. He’s an elite who only represents the elite. He packaged himself as a champion of the white working class. The only issue in the upcoming election is whether he will be able to continue this charade. Recent elections in the USA suggest he won’t, but the election is a long way off.
1
Say what you want about Bret Stephens but people who talk about the carcass of Western capitalism are and will remain on the fringes of the US political discussion, and it would seem the UK too. Warren is an apple and Corbyn is an orange and right now everyone apart from hardcore fruit lovers can see that the world doesn’t want a lot of political fruit
We liberals have gotten this so wrong.
I am so tired of being a voice in the wilderness on this.
White working class people are so tired of having their interests overlooked. Of being called "deplorables." Of watching their standard of living drop as a consequence of globalization and third-world immigration. Of having their communities overrun by those immigrants, who take their jobs and drive down wages, who increase crime and stress their schools. Of being called racist when they oppose immigration. Of being discriminated against by racial and ethnic quotas. Of being offered social programs when what they want are good paying jobs.
Trump and Johnson are like the ward politicians of old, who stole from their working class constituents but got the potholes fixed. They are the only candidates other than Bernie Sanders who have acknowledged the genuine interests and needs of the white working class.
I've been watching this slow motion train wreck since the Clinton campaign, and see no signs whatsoever that my fellow liberals are going to catch on. We're so taken by our moral superiority that we won't listen to those whose interests we think we have in mind.
Sad, as Donald Trump would say.
1
I would add that they’re tired of having people puzzle over why they “vote against their own interests,” and discuss them as though they’re creatures being observed in a zoo
2
@RobtLaip
Exactly.
You can add a couple other parallels Bret. One, the British media has awakened to the fact that the urban Left in Britain live in a twitter bubble, not unlike the coastal and urban elites in the US. Second, British Labour and even the Liberal Democrats have a derisive view of the working class, that they are just not smart enough to understand what is good for them. The post-election comments on the BBC from some of these politicians dripped of the same disdain as Hillary's basket of deplorables.
“Does the candidate get people like me? Will he keep his political promises? And has he achieved something that directly and tangibly benefits me?”
Not only does Trump fail on all three accounts but is this indeed the criteria we use now to select our President? Does he get me!?
How about “Will the candidate do what is morally right?” “Will the candidate advance the greater needs of the country?” “Is the candidate smart and able to work with others?”
We are doomed if you are right and I am wrong.
1
The only primal screaming I’ve heard is from the GOP. Those men this week were shrill. I had to mute the Republicans for the sake of my sanity.
1
Well, I'm not going to support Warren or Sanders in the primary but I'll vote for a yellow dog over Trump. Warren may mitigate in a general campaign...
Anyway Corbyn was uniquely bad for Britain. Not sure he's a good comparison to the current Dem left.
Just as the 2016 Brexit vote foreshadowed Trump's election, Johnson's victory and its potential disastrous consequences may foreshadow the results of a Trump re-election. As much as I love England, I now believe we must hope for those disastrous consequences to occur in order for the rest of the world to witness what will happen when a lying, immoral populist seizes power. England must be a sacrificial lamb to save the rest of the free world.
It is the 2018 mid-terms, rather than the pending dissolution of the UK, that correlates with the US 2020 elections. Trump is the least popular first-term president in a century or more. He is rightly about to be impeached.There is nothing radical about Medicare for all, save for the fact that is will come 60 years or more too late. There is nothing radical about an equitable tax code or the belated shrinking of inequality.
The lies and propaganda that compel the UK to slice off its nose with a smile infect much, as Putin's reach is far, as is that of the racists and fear mongers. Still, I see the US as electing Warren for two terms. Let the healing of the nation and planet begin. And not a moment too soon.
I don’t know how many old white people like me have the self awareness to admit that the sole reason behind the support for Trump is first: the desire to coast through old age with as little disruption to our “safety net” as possible and second: the racism that has been baked into the cake since day one. The concerns of the younger folks and those of the newcomers don’t enter in to our selfish, if perhaps unconscious, considerations. The hash up created by my generation’s willingness to go along to get along has brought us to a precipice that our soon to be demise will spare us from having to plumb. How Keynesian. Hey, millennials, Yang might be onto something. Time for the cold dead fingers to loosen their grip.
Don't fear impeachment, Mr. Stephens. It was always a lose/lose scenario. When you have nothing more to lose there is no reason not to do the right thing.
No matter if we impeach or don't Trump will claim a victory - either because we failed to impeach proving his super duper supreme wonderfulness or because he is on auto-acquit from the Senate, in an illustration of Trump's murder on 5th Avenue claim, also proving his super duper wonderfulness. Might as well put in the history books that some of us tried to save democracy.
But, yes, as long as we have an electoral college set-up that assures one acre, one vote, Trump will win. He may carry the popular vote too because the Democrat voters will decide that this is the year of Bernie driving away the moderates, or a large chunk will stay away. disappointed that it's not. The Democrats are a goat rodeo right now.
Collectively, we are an ignorant, easily swayed and uniformed people. We seem to be able to do nothing to fix that, so Viva La Trump.
Stop blaming Democrats for getting "so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones."
They are not the ones who blatantly violated the constitution by obstructing investigations, intimidating and smearing witnesses.
It is Trump and Trump alone who has brought this impeachment upon himself.
Perhaps it is Trump who is playing the long con by suckering the Democrats into impeaching him. That appears to be the fantasy of timid Democrats and political operatives who view politics as a purely cynical exercise of pursuing self interest at any price. It was certainly the position of outraged Republicans who put forth the notion that it is personal animus, jealousy of the glorious economic prosperity Trump has brought us and desperation over certain electoral defeat alone that motivate the Democratic Party.
As for the "lesson" of Corbin's rejection for the Democrats--The man himself seems odious to the British electorate as a proponent of traditionally incompetent and peculiarly British post--WWII socialist governments. The Beatles, Kinks and Monty Python certainly taught the U.K. to laugh at and mistrust the hash Labor made of governing England.
The most "radical" of the current crop of Democrats are proposing common-sense and long overdue reforms to capitalism that are based on a data-set previously unavailable but made plain by economists such as Thomas Pinketty et. Al.
GOOD article by Mr. Stephens: History repeats itself, ,but seldom quite in the same way. In 2016 vote for Brexit was a forerunner of Trump's Electoral College victory, all the more so since both were protest votes against "immigration a outrance" and against the establishment. But Little Englanders, who never were for integration with the continent, have been around for generations, e.g., John Mander's series of articles for ENCOUNTER back in the early 1960's.(A GIFTED writer, Mander passed away at the precocious all too young age of 46).Boiled down to its essentials, Britons were saying in the vote for Boris Johnson that we have had enough of being told how many immigrants we must take in yearly. Let WE the voters decide.Johnson's appeal is similar to Trump's and if our vox populi is a bit depressed , down in the dumps by the likelihood of impeachment, Johnson's victory should lift his spirits. Johnson may deny it, but his role model , mutatis mutandis, is Enoch Powell, Conservative Party M.P, who half century ago predicted ghastly consequences of allowing 50,000 new comers a year into Old Blighty,in his"Rivers of Blood "speech without so much as a bye ur leave from the voters.Always wondered about Johnson's hair style, which 1 might call "les cheveux en bataille!"Is it just that way, or has he been advised by his consultants that it's a good way to be identified by the voters, and adds to his anti establishment persona!But excellent article by Stephens.
'
The middle ground, with a firm, fair, knowledgeable leader of the ticket is the best choice for the Democrats. Ms. Clinton did not lose on policy; she lost on persona. Trump knows that, which is why he has Rudy charging around Eastern Europe trying to cause a kerfluffle over Hunter Biden's suspect board work, and Joe's complicity. Whatever else is true, he has already convinced every working person in America that Joe Biden is not the working mans savior, but instead, just another conniving Washington insider. True or not, Joe Biden has been, and will be continue to be, smeared by the entire Republican media blitz. It worked on Hillary. It will work with Joe. When I look at the long list of potential candidates I see one candidate who is center left, smart, skilled, and committed to the people: Amy Klobuchar. She's a winner. Get behind her, Democrats, and start waving your flags!
People like a show, it doesn't have to be truthful. Squeeze China on Tariffs, they stop buying Ag and Pork products and everyone pays higher prices on imports. Cut fat subsidy checks to Ag producers then claim tariffs are windfall profits. Swine-flu swipes China and Dada Xi cries Uncle. Tariffs lifted in time for 2020 primary cycle and Victory is ours.
It all smacks of Barter-town, embargoes and Thunderdome, two men enter, one man leaves. Seriously, if you look at the spectators in the Movie Thunderdome and his MAGA rallies the same look on their faces.
The other shoe yet to drop....
Biden, Booker, Sanders, Warren, Trump have been actively or tacitly complicit in Pentagon Papers II scam. Where is the public outcry and where is the accountability?
Where is the steady drumbeat of outrage that Americans have been duped on Afghanistan under Bush-Obama-Trump? That includes Members of Congress in cahoots with those Administrations to hoodwink Americans.
Red-Amber-Green.
1
I vote in Michigan, a state that Sanders won in 2016. As such, my vote will likely go to Bernie Sanders in the primary. That said, when the dust settles, I will enthusiastically get behind and vote for whichever democrat is left standing.
Then again, I'm 47 years-old, and fully cognizant of the utter destruction another four years of Trump will bring our nation. I am not easily corrupted by the idiotic far-left ideology that many of the younger Sanders/Warren supporters embrace - I won't stay home if I don't get my way or if the democratic candidate doesn't pass their rigid purity test.
I just wish more Michigan voters shared this perspective. Unfortunately, I'm not convinced they do.
1
So we accuse a vote for Corbyn of being a vote for antisemitism, and then attribute his loss to leftist politics afterward. In a bid to convince the left that they shouldn't be the left in the US. I guess we have two rights? A right and a center? Is the center even the center without a left? I guess I'll let the philosophers tangle with that one.
In the meantime, I would love if someone could explain the wisdom of trying to predict our elections on the outcome of an unrelated election in another country as opposed to, oh, I don't know, say our own elections in 2016 when a centrist democrat got trounced by a populist Republican who also happened to be the most toxic candidate in recent US history.
The English election was about one thing: Brexit . . . . Americans do not understand that the average English working class bloke, with his mates and his pub and his football team, considers himself immeasurably superior in every respect to any French person or Italian. They have been told over and over that the English are the greatest people on earth and Britain is the greatest country ever . . . . The tragic irony is that Labour should logically have supported Brexit, since Mr. Corbyn would not have been able to carry out his Socialist programs (as the Greeks painfully learned) under the pro-capitalist rules of the European Union.
2
Boris Johnson won the election, he hasn't pulled off Brexit.
When our election time comes around next November, things might not be looking so rosy for him, or Trump.
1
We are going into an election for which there is no precedent. Never before has an impeached president stood for re-election. While it seems absurd that impeachment might improve Trump's chances, it's a nutty world, so who knows? Were I the candidate, though, I'd prefer not to have impeachment on my resumé.
A Democratic leap leftward is, even to this old lefty, a dangerous bet. Warren is so smart she outsmarts herself. Sanders wants to remake the world. I support most of his objectives, but mainly as long-term goals. Most people want tomorrow's world to be better and more fair, but they also want it to be familiar.
We can improve the ACA, expand Medicare (let's say, to those under age 18 and over 50 - if they want it) without harming the private insurance industry. We can increase access to higher education without making it a "free" federal meal. I have no illusions about seeing the promised land in my lifetime. Traveling the road to it, on a pace I can bear, is plenty.
A platform of fairness, decency, and yes, humility should beat an disgraced, impeached incumbent every time.
1
Any article about the Labour Party's loss in the recent election that fails to mention Corbyn'c alarming unfavorability score (-47 in recent polling) is suspect at best.
While Warren and Sanders are not socialists in the mold of Corbyn, to Americans they will look the same and surely lose.
Hopefully progressives take note and realize that half a loaf is fantastic when the alternative is burnt crust.
1
@Mad Moderate
Given the Electoral College, half a loaf won't cut it.
2
My only view of Corbyn (and Johnson) is from this side of the Atlantic. Corbyn seemed to have the charm of soggy toast, plus Labor was burdened with charges of anti Semitism. I have heard Johnson speak on the floor of Commons, he is no Trump. He has quite an aptitude for language and can use it effectively, whereas our leader twitter-talks in hyperbolic adjectives colored with self-pity. Pelosi is our masterful politician. She is orchestrating the impeachment to hold the caucus together. Impeach to hold the safe-blue-seat left and do it quickly on narrow grounds to placate the moderates. She knows it will go nowhere in the Senate but will make his majesty fume with distress. Given the short attention span of the public its benefit to Trump will be limited and there will be a new scandal soon enough
1
I assume the author missed the packed Sanders rally in Duluth, MN (on the border with WI, Iron Range country) and the rally in Fargo, ND, where many were turned away.
43% won't win a US election.
1
How can you smear Sanders and even Warren who says she is a capitalist to her bones by linking them to an even more smeared Corbyn?
The link is problematic for there is no Brexit debate in the US. In 2017 Corbyn and the Labour Party had the same manifesto and came close to winning the elections. The major difference was that Labour did not then suggest a second Brexit referendum. This is the main reason why Labour lost its strong support in the north of England.
Corbyn was also smeared by most corporate media, there was, in the words of Gideon Levy of Haaretz a "contract on Corbyn" on the part of the far right claiming to speak for Jews (Corbyn also had support from many Jews, including a London rabbi).
So a tactical blunder (talk of a second referendum) and a smear campaign similar to the Russiagate hoax in the US are key factors. In case Americans forget it, Sanders is Jewish, his family came from areas of Europe wracked by murderous antisemitism so the smears are different for him (fake Jew says a hashtag!).
The leftism of Sanders or even Corbyn is closer to FDR than to Lenin and has nothing to do with Stalinism but it is enough to smear him. Indeed the smearing of Warren is an indication that anyone slightly progressive on some issues will encounter the wrath of the powers that be.
The irony is that like FDR in the 30s Warren and Sanders are preparing to save capitalism from its own excesses whereas Trump or Johnson make the crisis even worse.
1
A confusing lesson, Mr. Krugman.
You say this is a vote against globalism and the left.
So we should nominate our moderates – but aren’t our moderates also our globalists?
It’s all about taxes. The rich don’t want to pay them, aren’t paying them. The public in Britain were told the country couldn’t afford Corbyn’s list of “free” stuff. I asked my mother “well I went to college for free why not now”? I was told “it was a different time.” People are swallowing the ridiculous argument that Corbyn’s plans were too idealistic rather than demanding rich people pay their fair share of taxes. Taking government services from the public therefore becomes like taking candy from a baby. The British public does not have the stomach to increase taxes on the rich to pay for better government services. You can expect a similar force here regarding re-election if Trump.
1
The real message lies in the British Partys' names.
You cannot call yourself "Labor" while encouraging the immigration of thousands of foreign, unskilled workers, competing with citizens for the same jobs; and driving down wages and benefits for those citizens in the process.
The Democrats don't call themselves "Labor" but they share the same delusions.
Remember "Build the Wall"?
Remind me, who said that and where is he today?
And who favors "Open Borders" and where are they today?
More importantly, where will they be next year at this time?
Ask Corbyn, he might have some first hand information on that subject.
Stephens never mentions Putin which makes him, Stephens, remarkably oblivious or remarkably afraid of the truth. Time for the GOP to face it: Putin owns Trump and Trump owns the GOP.
3
And now begins the never ending parade of op-eds from the Times comparing Sanders to Corbyn, and more warnings of "moving too far to the left". So predictable, and lazy.
I wonder if Corbyn had managed to win, if Stephens would have changed his tune and proclaim that only Sanders can beat Trump in 2020. We all know the answer to that.
1
"Does it ever occur to the critics that, by constantly inferring or predicting the worst about either man, they make their less-than-worst moments look good, and their good ones seem positively great?"
That's a great observation, well stated. But they are both nasty pieces of work. Johnson is Trump with a better vocabulary. I don't know how one is to honestly assess either's moves without lapsing into the very thing you (rightly) warn of here.
An old scare tactic, blame those who never ever been power.
1
The lesson for the DNC from this week's landslide victory for Boris and his conservative base is that it will happen in the US in November if you nominate someone the Mudslinger in Chief can even semi-credibly nickname "Jeremy", e.g., Jeremy Sanders, Jeremy Warren, or "Corbyn", e.g., Elizabeth Corbyn, or Bernie Corbyn, riffing on their too-left-wing-for-the-country policies, pronouncements and plans. And THAT would be gaining political help from a foreign politician who lost!
1
Sanders and Warren are very different candidates, at least in the eyes of most voters (who are neither democrat or republican). This viewpoint keeps getting overlooked - and general election results keep coming as a surprise. Warren would likely lose to Trump, especially electorally. While Bernie (and maybe even Tulsi Gabbard) would beat him. There's an especially big difference between these two candidates for the working class, both rural and urban (who are represented well electorally).
Who the candidates are and what they represent are far more important to most voters than are the political wares they are selling. (And this sentiment is common among many disenfranchised voters who have little motivation to participate in political phone polls.)
1
Democrats have to be aware that even if they select the right candidate for the moment they may not be able to reach a large portion of the electorate. This is what Hilary Clinton discovered after she basically K.O.'d Trump in the debates and the Access Hollywood tape confirmed that Trump was a brazen violator of currently accepted norms.
This brazenness is key to his (and Boris Johnson's) appeal. It's a signal to a part of the culture of unreconstructed male license and unruliness. And since the subliminal appeal is to ungovernable maleness, proposing expanded centralized governance could not be more mistimed
1
Clinton was not the right candidate. She was an establishment insider in an election cycle where the voters rejected the establishment class. She was a supporter of global trade deals, Wall Street, for-profit healthcare sector, the Iraq War, an architect of our intervention in Libya, and far too cozy with rich party donors and the DNC hierarchy who had sold out the base. The Clinton Foundation was emblematic of the pay-to-play profiteering that rich politicians used to leverage access to power. And worse of all, Clinton had no compelling reason to run other than it was Her Turn. Read the inside story of her campaign: Shattered. She berated her speech writers for not being able to craft a compelling narrative, one she couldn’t supply herself.
2
@Xoxarle I've said very much the same thing for at least four years. My point here is very much that she was the wrong candidate, and a large part of it was her Washington insiderness, but this was magnified by the nature of the election.
Well said; absolutely right on. The DNC needs to get the candidates in a room and announce the 2020 ticket: Biden - Kolbuchar. They need to announce that the party’s money and efforts will support this moderate ticket with the sole objective of beating Trump. He has been campaigning for three years and his current efforts are breathtaking.
There still exists the opportunity to repeat 2018, but the Democratic Party leadership better step up soon and stop this internal civil war. The party needs a full on effort to take back the Midwest, to capitalize on the women vote, to keep the Obama coalition together, and to promote a platform that addresses the needs of the middle.
4
If the sole objective is to beat trump then you can do that without me. You don’t need my vote. Good luck.
The Times comments sections lately show signs that some progressives are in a mood to turn their backs on the Democratic Party in the presidential race if the nominee is a moderate.
Some readers talk in terms of washing their hands of the whole thing and even of "teaching the centrists a lesson" by helping Trump win -- a textbook example of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
We need to remember that replacing Trump with a moderate Democrat doesn't mean getting inaction on economic justice or the climate crisis or a host of social fronts. It means getting a president who may need some pushing and pulling. In contrast, keeping Trump means continuing to get actual counter-action on all those fronts and an absolutely deaf ear to our demands.
If Democrats do bear that in mind, then the one intractable problem we face will be that our ranks include people who really belong in a revolutionary party but have chosen to try influencing the more liberal of the two major parties. Those people may well find Trump's destructive influence preferable to the reconstructive influence of a moderate, the idea being to move the country towards a useful catharsis.
The rest of us must focus entirely on the national rescue project at hand and bring cold-blooded wisdom to the task of pulling it off. That task won't end with the defeat of Donald Trump; and yet everything, but everything, begins with it.
4
If Biden has the best chance - though reason is not on his side - then so be it. Just make sure he has a strong running mate so the democratic wing of the Democratic Party is not completely turned off and there won't be lots of people knocking on doors. With Biden's baggage he's a bitter pill to swallow. As for the impeachment the Democrats did the right thing in spite of obvious political drawbacks.
3
At this point, although a centrist myself, I’m not at all convinced that Sanders or Warren would lose. Sanders is pretty effective at hammering away at simple messages, and might well win. I’d venture that “Medicare for all” sounds pretty good to a lot of people these days. Simple to say, and simple to imagine it to be want you would like it to be.
As for being nuanced, well seems to me the GOP is doing pretty well without.
3
I’m generally a left of center and anti-war guy, but being nice to people and ending violence is not a popular political position these days.
1
One thing I don't think you goet right in your opinion piece: you suggest that the Democrats should not"relitigate the past" through the impeachment process. The facts supporting the impeachment articles are current, not past. The President is obstructing Congress and he not only has, but continues presently with the help of Mr. Giuliani, to continue to abuse his office by trying to discredit his political opponent, Vice President Biden, with the assistance of persons in the Ukraine.
6
Your analysis is exactly correct. I live part time in London and happened to be here for this election. It has been stunning to watch.
Boris Johnson is not Donald Trump. He clearly wants to draw the country together with an appeal directly to those who did not vote for him or his party as he pursues all the challenges of Brexit in the next 12 months. His huge majority gives him much greater flexibility on what kind of deal he can get with the EU and makes him a far more credible negotiator with the EU. He also seems to be able to draw capable and creative people that he uses well. He knows how to listen and learn.
I hope the democratic party is watching and learning from this election. Failure to learn and act accordingly is a road to disaster.
Well said, Mr. Stephens. While I believe Sanders and Warren truly care about middle and working class Americans, I also think they are tone-deaf when it comes to how their policies - particularly on health care and immigration - are perceived by many. My fear is that their political positions will alienate the swing voters we need to elect a Democratic candidate. A Trump reelection will be devastating and could forever alter the country as we have known it. The top priority for all Democrats should be to defeat Donald Trump. Leaning too far left will likely mean four more years of the most corrupt president in the history of the United States. The Democratic Party should heed the lessons of what has occurred in Great Britain.
7
Britain is often a step ahead of us. Thatcher and Reagan; Brexit and Trump; 1940 and 1941. It could easily happen again.
2
Agreed Mr. Stephens, Read my retort to Mr Cohen in today's paper..
You cannot predict history Mr. Cohen.
Yes it can happen re Trump in 2020 but it can be easily avoided by the suicidal democrats if they nominate another identity/social engineering obsessed Neo con elect me president because I am a woman and the era of the white man is over candidate like Hillary.
She not only ticked off white men, she ticked off white women, a majority who voted against her.
The democrats proved they could do it with the miracle of the House victory in 2018.
Nominate a moderate progressive in tune with the swing state moderate voters that Hillary lost. These voters elect presidents in the electoral college.
Address issues in a moderate progressive way that Trump demagogued like immigration, wars and loss of blue collar jobs, not identity/social engineering obsession or neo con solutions like Hillary did. Rust state voters want jobs, jobs, jobs, not making SC gay wedding cake cases over that.
Learn from history or forever be condemned to repeat its worst mistakes.
PS: Speaker Pelosi was one of the last hopes ie she was against impeachment which does not command a big majority of support in swing states. She took the cool aid of the Hillary and other factions. Better to oust Trump in the election next yr., that shows at least for now Biden having a sizable lead against Trump even with a "good" economy.
2
Britain's vote may be an omen but not the way Bret Stephens posits it.
National elections in the United States are not a contest of ideas. Democrats are still coming up with policy proposals for addressing issues like health care, climate change, student debt, tax reform, gun violence, and raising the minimum wage. Democrat ideas get majority support in the polls on many of these issues. Republicans are not proposing alternative solutions; they get votes by whipping up feelings. Or do you think Republican white nationalists voted for Trump to reduce the government and balance the budget?
2
I believe it is false to say that Democrats are trying to bring Trump down. That is the FOX News and Right-Wing narrative. Yes, there are some Dems who only want him brought down but there are many more who simply want the government to be run by people who follow the rule of law and are concerned for the US. For that matter, there are many Republicans who feel the same way. This impeachment and the 2020 election is not just about equality but about the rule of law.
12
@Anthony: US courts steadfastly refuse to use language uniformly. There isn't even a ruling on what "an establishment of religion" is.
Impeachment will be completely an old news story by November 2020. Regardless of how many ads the Republicans put on TV or social media. Besides, the polls show a small majority not only support impeachment, but also support conviction. The Republicans, especially Congressman Jordon, of Ohio, seem to forget Trump lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes. The largest margin ever. Will there be crossover votes for Trump or the Democratic candidate, hopefully Biden. Will more voters who voted for Trump switch to the Democrat this November, or more voters who voted for Clinton, switch to Trump. I believe it’s the former.
@jwgibbs: Most Republican males on the two panels exhibit anger-management issues. The women too.
The unfolding disaster of the 2020 Democratic Party has only one author: The Party leadership that decided the best way to identify a presidential candidate was to give a score or more of them endless hours of free air time to raise money to support their predictably losing campaigns. Trump will win big as a result, and our country will be unrecognizable by the end of his second term.
4
@Richard: The Democratic Party has no unifying policy and doesn't even control its brand. Howard Dean was the last party chairman with a nascent national strategy.
6
didnt we just learn that virginia state house and kentucky & louisiana governor portended doom for trump? isn't it possible that each election is its own event? democrats need the best candidate, not the ones that people who have been republicans want.
in order to win.
7
Ignore details, folks. The big picture is more interesting. (I confess I haven't read Mr. Stephens' column.) I suspect that from the vantage point of several years hence, the significant thing about current events will be seen to be the parallel nature of news from Britain and the U.S. Looking at the front page of today's print edition of this newspaper, I notice that the upper half is about equally devoted to stories from both nations. I don't think it's a coincidence that this is happening as we head into the 400th anniversary year of the Mayflower Compact.
I am a diehard democrat and I agree with Bret. I love Elizabeth Warren and Bernie but I do not think they are electable in general election. Medicare for All is not a popular idea. I do not want loose my health insurance. Moreover how to pay ? Taxing the rich but how much . The Democrats can not wage war against the successful billionaires. To win, you need the independent and moderates. Most of the voters are at the center but they do not vote in primary election. The Democratic Party should learn some lesson from the election in England.
6
@ASHRAF CHOWDHURY
Progressives democratic candidates have simply shifted their divisive "identity" warfare to focus on a new group: The rich.
Democrats cannot talk about the economy and must steer clear of the working poor because this group is actually experiencing the greatest benefits (specifically, Black and Hispanic women).
So what's left? That's right. The rich.
1
@ASHRAF CHOWDHURY: The mystery to me is how the US manages to pay twice the average first world per capita rate for health care to get the worst public health of them all.
I agree about Warren and Sanders. However “culture” is a thing of the past but the deniers cling to old norms. The old white folks who long for Empire Days forget that Britain before the EU was sad, drab, and impoverished. A true welfare state. The EU, Chunnel and London’s leadership in finance changed all that. What does the UK have to offer in trade? Offshore oil made them rich - and now? Another failed Thomas Cook? Ryanair? Brits will no longer live and work in the EU. And EU members will no longer live and work in the UK. Trump’s tariffs target many British goods - whiskey, cheese, cashmere, and cars. I wish the Brits well in their divorce and their negotiations with Trump - a market for US goods that can’t be sold elsewhere.
5
True. As long as you can ensure that next election will not be rigged.
1
I read Roger Cohen's piece along these same lines last night and just reading Bret's now. But I can't help wondering (and surely others have asked this question and I look forward to reading other comments-- 242 and surely doubling today-- now), Are the issues that drove UK voters and the issues driving US voters really that similar? I still need to be convinced.
Would appreciate (and again, maybe someone's done it here among the comments) some thoughtful even scholarly evidence that demonstrates that they are.
I live in New England. I drive through towns, and small cities, where Trump signs proliferate. There are actual Trump merchandise pop up stores opening. I believe that Trump's appeal is cultural, not political. Working class people look at the Democrats and see them embracing lefty cultural issues which the white working class find threatening and disturbing. They buy Trump's lies. They vote against their own economic interests in the vain avoidance of cultural and social change. Culture always trumps (sorry to use that word) politics.
11
@Odin
"They vote against their own economic interests in the vain avoidance of cultural and social change."
******
They are voting against this mindset. Progressives are driving their own party off the cliff and American voters into the arms of the other party.
1
I don't disagree. But.....if you just stop for a second and stop looking at it from a political winners/losers calculation and start looking at it from the "if it sounds too good to be true" perspective, then it takes on a different feel. How much better can the economy get? The reality is Trump was just the replacement driver for a race car that was already leading the race. He just hit the gas pedal harder with a huge, unpaid for tax cut. Then started to hit the brakes with tariffs. Yes, the car still leads. But when the ill effects of Brexit kick in. When the economy starts to slow down (? from deficits?), what then? Cutting 700,000 off food stamps may cut the deficit, but what about the hit the farmers and producers of all that food will take as a result? Taxes won't be raised to lower the deficit, so the lower income groups will pay, widening income inequality. When you see the race car you thought was going across the finish line has gone full circle back to the starting line and you see the drivers in the really expensive race cars are all crossing the finish, then you may finally see the guy who told you money grows on trees was dead wrong. Going to the other extreme may be just as distasteful, but there are alternatives. Vote with your head, not your heart.
5
"If impeachment — which I support as a matter of constitutional duty but fear on political grounds — winds up helping Trump get re-elected, it will be for similar reasons. That is, Democrats got so wrapped up in trying to bring the president down by legal and legislative means that they forgot to bring him down by ordinary political ones. The main job of any competent opposition is to fight the next election, not relitigate the past."
The very few Republicans who claim to oppose Trump insist on misrepresenting the facts. What you've written is Trumpian/GOP disinformation.
In impeaching Trump Democrats are not relitigating the past 2016 election; they're fighting to save our country and the integrity of the upcoming 2020 election.
Trump is being impeached for using a foreign power to rig the 2020 election. He strong-armed, extorted, and bribed Ukraine into announcing a fake investigation into the Bidens based on a baseless and thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory. Trump didn't care if an investigation was actually started, just that he force Ukrainian President Zelensky into publicly lying about an investigation.
If you truly support Impeachment as a matter of constitutional duty, stop hedging your bets. Trump, a right-wing authoritarian, was caught red-handed trying to rig the upcoming election. The destruction of our entire Republic was his goal. Defending our Republic, our Constitution, and the rule of law, are not things Republicans should be dragged into defending.
18
Thank you Mr. Stephens for the words of wisdom which I hope the folks on far left can heed.
3
Sorry you got it wrong. What the U.K. already has in terms of health care education is far from reach for most Americans. Warren and Sanders are asking for basics not for fancy stuff. What we consider left in this country is center in the U.K. The starting points are very different.
(Note for Bret: neither Sanders nor Warren are anti Semitic)
6
How has Trump still maintain his base? How can his favorability amongst Republicans have grown? The answer is that the Media has told us the Dem's are trying to redo the last election since Clinton's unpopularity lost to Trump. Two years of waiting till Muller brings him down or screaming about Charlottesville have brought us to this point where we know it ends with MoscowMitch. Concentrate on winning in 2020 at every level or there are two choices. Imperial Trump rules or the next Democratic president must back door his appointments and social policies past the
Senate.
1
Stephens is correct when he says Democrats should read the UK elections with concern, but the message is not about Johnson or Corbyn as personalities but rather what they stood for and its reception by the electorate.
Neither candidate was particularly liked or likable, similar to our 2016 election and, like Trump, Johnson was surprised by the scope of his victory. The reason has to do with the fact that the message of the Left is no longer as relevant to the traditional base of the Labour (or Democrat) party.
Corbyn spoke of the traditional social services based programs similar to what Warren and Sanders are offering here along with the pledge that the cost would be borne mostly by the rich. Johnson, in turn, spoke of a UK that was last seen at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution where the UK led the world, a message as unbelievable as Corbyn's (or Warren/Sanders) plans to finance it all.
Like much of the US, the UK's economy is services based, the industrial revolution has moved on to Asia and isn't coming back. Johnson and Trump are selling hope where there is none right now.
All this was brought home to me on a recent trip to Paris where the taxi from the airport was a Toyota hybrid, while the one returning was a KIA SUV.
2
Besides the shame and fear I would feel if Trump were re-elected,
Think about this folks: the Supreme Court!
I am very progressive and support Warren or Sanders, and would be disappointed by a moderate candidate. But should that happen, and it probably will, because people are afraid, I will spend every free moment working to elect that person. Our very future depends on coming together on this.
7
Agreed!!!
2016 was all about the Supreme Court
2020 should be all about the Supreme Court
I’ve been shouting this since 2015.
1
These points are worth considering. But what the press is labelling as leftist, is nothing more than what Britain has in its national health service. And even conservatives won't overturn that.
2
There are differences between the 2 men as well. Trump has clearly committed immoral and criminal acts while in office. Johnson has not spouted anti immigrant rhetoric, locked up people seeking asylum, separated children from their parents for months on end, or defied the laws of his country. Trump has a three year track record. Johnson a little over three months in office.
The parallels do not register with voters; the differences are stark.
5
The decentralizing forces unleashed by the digital media are growing in intensity, yet everyone is being distracted by the character(s) riveting our attention
Mr. Stephens is picking up a Republican talking point when he writes, “the main job of any competent opposition is to fight the next election, not relitigate the past.” The responsibility of members of Congress before anything else is “to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
President Trump lives by the motto, “Winning is everything, and if you are not lying and cheating, you are not trying hard enough to win.” Thus, soliciting foreign meddling is our elections is acceptable behavior, even if this is antithetical to the Constitution.
Speaker Pelosi has been extremely reluctant to move to impeach President Trump, knowing that the Senate would never convict him no matter the evidence and impeachment could very will be a political liability for the Democrats.
Ultimately, Democrats came to the conclusion that for the sake of our Democracy, a President must be held to account for corrupt actions. Unfortunately, rather than be chastised by impeachment, Trump is likely to feel emboldened by the Senate’s failure to convict and engage in even more reckless behavior. It will be a sad day when the lesson learned from this sordid affair is that so long as a President’s party controls at least 1/3 or the seats in the Senate, the President is effectively above the law and may do anything he or she desires to win reelection.
4
"Britain's ominous portent for Democrats," indeed. No matter what happens in this world, Bret Stephens will use it to urge the Democratic Party to move rightward. Had Jeremy Corbyn won this week's election in Britain (a result I would not welcome, either), Stephens would call the voters' decision irresponsible and implore that the Democratic Party not to repeat their blunder.
4
Stop trumpeting unemployment figures as though they *mean* something.
A huge segment of the US is trapped in the gig-economy, or in fixed but poorly paid employment. The middle class is going down the toilet, the percentage of people in poverty is abominable, and the unabated wealth-gap -- complete with hand-wringing from billionaires who dread marginally-less-unfair taxation -- has us on track for the re-introduction of the guillotine.
Stop pretending that things are basically OK for a big segment of the population when they're actually catastrophic.
658
@JJ -- The gig economy didnt begin under Trump. He just created more jobs.
16
PL... you don’t get it. IT obviously does not effect you. YET. Employment is not high. And it is controlled. High employment would predict higher wages With employers vying for scarce labor. Wages are low and barely growing. Opposite of what is expected. Reason is, labor is now disposable, a commodity purchased when needed. GIG workers are available when demand is high. Gone when low. Corporations have achieved the second half of their goal. First half was world wide competition, globalization. With Citizens United, SCOTUS has given corporations every thing they need to dominate America. Legally. MAGA
88
@Robert Black
Yes indeed: according to the 'Statista' website, there are presently 162M 16-year-olds-and-above in the US civilian labour force, of which approx. 130M are full-time.
The *employment* rate (%age of total employment-age population) in 2000 was 64.4%; then during 2008-2010 (the 'great recession' years) this rate dropped to 58.5%. In 2016 it was back up 1%, to 59.5%...and in 2018 (the last available adjusted figure) 60.4% of this labour-force was employed..a gain of less than 1%.
Conversely, *UNemployment* stat.s refer to the %age of those actually looking for employment who've not yet found jobs. As we're constantly being told, this figure is still improving -- and it is..on an almost-straight line ever since the last post-depression peak 9.6% in 2010, via 2016's rate of 4.9% -- or roughly where it was in the late-80s.
15
Britain is DONE. Scotland will vote for Independence, Ireland will reunite. This was a Vote for slow motion euthanasia, but with plenty of pain and agony. As for the USA, ponder this : “ When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross “- Sinclair Lewis. Is there any doubt of this incredibly profound and eerily accurate statement? Trump literally wraps himself in our Flag, and panders shamelessly to the Evangelicals. It’s morally insulting and nauseating.
As for the Democratic Candidates, I’m tempted to agree with your thesis. The only Candidate that I can see that would be calm reassurance to most Voters is undoubtedly Joe Biden. He’s the political equivalent of a “ safety school “ when applying for College.
Why not a Warren/Biden or Biden/Warren Ticket ? OR, my long time choice, Biden and Stacy Abrams. It’s not quite time to panic, but it is time to stop the usual circular firing squad and get to work. The only thing that actually counts is the VOTES, and Voter Turnout. This Impeachment process will proceed, but in the end we will be back at the beginning: waiting for the VOTE.
524
@Phyliss Dalmatian
Trump didn't create the Imperial Presidency. The Republicans did - with help from the Democrats. The Washington insiders didn't anticipate an outsider wielding that power.
Sinclair Lewis was correct but so was Madison - "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
36
@Phyliss Dalmatian When the impeachment trial moves to the Senate, Hunter Biden will be all the Republicans talk about. By implication Hunter's dad will be seen as just another politician saying one thing and doing something else. Trump is the real deal when it comes to corruption and nepotism, why bother with Biden? For the good of the country Biden should pull out of the race.
16
@Phyliss Dalmatian
"The only thing that actually counts is the VOTES, and Voter Turnout."
In that case nominating Joe Biden will lead to the Democrats losing. Many in the Democratic base do not like Biden and nominating him will only lead to depressed Democratic turnout.
Hillary Clinton was also not liked by many in the Democratic base. Hillary Clinton lost because she could not get Blacks to turn out for her in the states she considered to be her "firewall".
Nominating another "centrist" candidate will ensure a Trump victory. The Democratic base wants a candidate who is going to look out for them, not the wealthy or corporations.
Most of the polls seem to find corporate Democrats who favor Biden, possibly because the people who make up the majority of the Democratic base are busy raising families and working two jobs.
The corporate Democrats are in the minority, it makes more sense to find and motivate the majority that makes up the Democratic base who favor Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.
As far as Biden's Black support, they may come out and support him in the primaries but that does not mean that they are going to come out and vote for him in the general election just like they failed to turn out for Hillary Clinton.
Lord I hope the Blacks don't saddle us with another pig-in-a-poke candidate like Joe Biden. If they do it is going to be four more long years with Trump as President.
#NotMeUs #Bernie2020
8
Bernie and Liz (and Yang to an extent) supporters are stubborn, usually demanding purity tests. But if any lesson was learned in '16 it is: support your candidate with all your time, money and heart. Then, after the dust has settled, join each and every Democrat and vote for the nominee. Whoever it is. No staying home to sulk, no protest vote. It's the only way we win. And we gotta win this time folks.
739
@Leading Cynic
You've just articulated one of my greatest fears for the 2020 election - that Democrats think it's ok to wait until AFTER the nomination to lend their support to a candidate who is not their first choice.
What good is it, for example, if a Bernie supporter votes for Elizabeth Warren as the next president when (let's be honest) Warren has no chance to beat Trump in the general election? There are alot of combinations that result in another four years of Trump regardless of whether Democrats unite behind their nominee.
The issue of primary importance is not healthcare, or climate change, or age, or anything else but this: which candidate has the best chance of turning individual voters from 2016 red to 2020 blue?
I hope Democrats can unite around determining the answer to that question BEFORE the nomination.
19
@Andrew We were uniting behind Elizabeth Warren until the mainstream media and establishment figures went into overdrive to scare everyone away from her! Biden looks worse once people see him in action, and he is uninspiring. So Dems really have about the same chance, I think, with him, Sanders, or Warren.
13
@JS27 - I am with you and have a comment to that effect - at 9 recommends.
Biden is for me totally uninspiring and in my comment I, 87 years old, make the additional case against him given the age he would be were he to win and then head for a second term.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
9
I lived in England for eight years. I had friends straight across the social/economic spectrum, left to right, poor to wealthy, educated and uneducated, urban and rural. Initially I opposed Brexit, but after months of conversations with my friends, I came to support it.
What people in the States don’t understand is that this is not about economics, it is not about left/right ideologies, it is about the culture!! Working class, trades, small business owners, rural people, farmers, traditionalists, and English patriots of all sorts feel that they are losing England, that the culture they love is washing away like sand on the beach underneath their feet.
Liberal, college educated, urban elites in the UK, Europe, Canada, and the States simply don’t get this. They really don’t know, understand, or care about traditional culture. All they care about is their ‘progressive’ reforms, which don’t actually work. That is why they will continue to lose elections.
448
@Observer
How about FDR, a wealthy New Yorker and Harvard graduate, the very definition of an urban elite yet somehow won four presidential elections..
And Obama graduated from two Ivy League schools and lived in Chicago.
And is Bernie Sanders from Vermont who grew up in a working class family also an urban elite?
And as Trump is even more of an urban elite than any of the Dems running, I guess that the way to overcome this is to appeal the basest instincts of the voters.
134
@Steve - you are really missing the point. I am referring to left-liberal urban college-educated elites in the West who simply don't even bother to try to understand the experiences and feelings of those who care about traditional culture.
If you read FDR's Thanksgiving proclamation (don't know the year), it is very respectful of the cultural and religious tradition of what was then the American mainstream. Obama and Sanders completely lost touch with that.
Trump and Johnson, even though of the urban elite, have not lost touch with that. That has a lot to do with their appeal.
51
@Observer Well said! And I absolutely agree with the importance of traditional culture and the sadness many people feel at its erosion. I live both here and in the UK (and have friends across the economic spectrum too though most of my US friends are urban and educated). Few I know in the US care about our traditional cultured and old values.
The only thing I disagree with you on is progressive reforms here: some could work and the country would be better for them -- though I agree that politicians who mouth cliches and come across as smug and self-righteous will (I hope!) lose elections. It seems to me that a winning platform would be popular economic reforms and unifying language that acknowledges and respects our common values -- surely we have some left?
25
This is one of Bret's best columns. It's a bitter pill, but good analysis.
But there's more. There are costs to come, not just inevitable happenstance.
As amazing as things may be here now, keep in mind that Americans are not at peace with one another. It is terribly unpatriotic to excuse abominations because one is enjoying prosperity. It is terribly dangerous when foreign countries are invited to influence our elections. And it's terribly dangerous when they get away with it in broad daylight.
The resilience of our gangbusters prosperity is more tenuous that you acknowledge. There was a lot of crying wolf for years leading up to financial collapse a decade ago. The only people who got a tax break from Trump are foreigners with business interests in the United States. The rest of us got a loan.
The United Kingdom's triumphant expression of self-rule will have unforeseen costs too. To wit, it may be the word "United." Watch Scotland and Wales wrestle with independence. Watch Ireland become united.
And we, not at peace with ourselves, may lose the word "United" too.
359
@Schaeferhund The Republic of Ireland will not find unification an easy road traveled. There are already intimations of sectarian violence to come in regards to certain ramifications from the Brexit vote. If Ireland does become united, it will come at the cost of many lives. It's not like they don't already know this. 400 years of history is hard to erase.
11
Fine comment. But we weren’t “crying wolf” given that the financial collapse actually occurred (and it was, come to think of it, caused by wolves of a sort).
8
@Spanky This is a very important point. Beneath the surface in places like Belfast are sectarian differences that will make reunification a costly endeavor. Good point, Spanky.
2
It's going to take at least another four years for the pendulum of political sanity, normalcy, morality and hypocrisy to swing back, If ever, since this country is no longer a true democracy, but an autocracy. As for the similarities between Boris and Don, a divided kingdom instead of a united one, ditto for the divided states of America instead of the united. The bigger question is whether we have enough time left to save either one of them.
In 2016 I was a big Bernie supporter who dutifully pulled the lever for Clinton in the Election. I still love Bernie, and would be happy to see him (or Warren, or Booker or Mayor Pete) as the standard bearer. But now I'm scared. Poll after poll here in Wisconsin says Trump beats everyone but Biden. Until that dynamic changes, I'm voting for Uncle Joe. We simply can't afford four more years of Trump.
817
@PJO
That's not true - Sanders leads in Wisconsin.
78
Many polls focus on “likely voters” and use a narrow definition for that term. Polls don’t reflect the voters who have been suppressed in all the ways that the powerful have conceived, including closing polling places, eliminating weekend early voting, purging voter rolls etc. The Democratic Party needs to defeat voter suppression and nominate candidates who know how to turn out the vote. I’m supporting real, unbought progressives who will fight for economic and social well-being standards found in every rich democracy except the US. It is only if I have no choice in the general that I will vote for Joe Biden.
37
@PJO If Democrats focused on retaking the Senate, and nominated a Presidential candidate that was most effective in helping flip red senate seats to blue, defeating Trump would be a foregone conclusion. Why doesn't some enterprising NY Times reporter ask knowledgable and shrewd campaign staff for Democratic senators in competitive states currently held by Republican senators who they would like to see at the head of the ticket? There is too much focus on Trump and the presidential race. Retaking the senate is at least as important.
154
Beware of right wing pundits bearing tidings of ill will. Concern trolls like Stephens do not have progressive interests at heart. He wants us to be afraid and to scale back our ambition. Funnily enough, this concern us rarely directed at the right that just keeps pulling right, directly towards authoritarianism.
No thanks. The Dems are doing just fine. Any nostalgia here is for the 50s where white men ruled the roost and everyone else knew their place. That’s not an American dream I believe in or many others. Enough people yearn for a more equal America that the Democrats will be fine. The class system and rabid nationalism still holds Britain back. There are very few parallels between the political cultures despite sharing a common language.
The problems facing America are clear and Liz and Bernie are resonating with voters for their clear-eyed vision of a better future. If we keep the faith, we will prevail.
4
Wow. This piece completely ignores the fact that Corbyn ran a terrible campaign, his views on important policy issues remained unexplained throughout. And he never fully renounced his connections with anti-Semitic actors. Looked at this way, he's the one who's more like Trump, who will lose the next election. At least Mr Stephens is finally coming right out with it, instead of continuing to tear down the Democratic contenders, one by one.
3
Right wing populism and nationalism will wear off once people come under a tighter economic squeeze in this country. Republicans will dismantle restraints on business and income inequality will soar. Employees' right will disappear and people will become increasingly shackled to produce. As common people won't be able to buy much of what is produced, the powers-that-be in this country will need to export in order to stay afloat. That means a crushing tax burden and austerity on the lower classes to pay off the national debt.
So let's see where Trumpism goes. The Republicans are likely hoping they can get an authoritarian government in place to rule by fear to enact their agenda before the people wake up to this.
4
This opinion piece is worth considering by all who oppose the current administration. I grew up in the NYC area but have lived in a rural part of NYS for over fifty years. The make up of my part of NY is comparable to that of rural Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. The folks around here might consider Joe Biden, Amy Klobuchar or Mayor Pete—- but not Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. They will then either vote for Trump or not vote at all. I suspect that may be true in a number of the other states that are not on either coast.
19
Oh Brett. you and a few other editorialists have presented this argument. While the theme might be correct...your audience isn't listening.
We Americans dont learn from our own mistakes, you expect us to learn from foreigners? Even if they're British and kin?
All I need do is present the recently published Afghanistan Papers and their similarities with the Pentagon Papers. Clearly not a lesson was learned. Our leaders still believe in our abilities to wage and win war, no matter the evidence to the contrary. No matter the lack of any viable and recent proof in an ability in Democratic nation building.
Are we truly gonna learn any lessons, that stick, from The Trump Circus? At best for another term or two...but we'll be back around this way soon enough.
1
Warren and Sanders need to be unequivocal on Brexit. The people want it to be over with.
6
The question posed to one sizeable bloc of US voters is whether they still believe that Trump is capable of fixing things, or whether he is likely to make them worse.
The question for a second sizeable bloc is whether Trump's claim to have helped the economy is false, since it has not prevented prices of healthcare, education, and housing from rising, creating an effective decline in family income.
The third major question -- and the one mildly comparable to the British election -- is whether the creeping governmental breakdown (including impeachment) caused by Trumpism can be tolerated for another four years.
The commonality between Trump and Johnson doesn't go much beyond that strange stuff on the tops of their heads.
5
@Sequel:Relechissez:" Either Bureau of Labor stats. are wrong,and the Trump economy is not a rising tide that lifts all vessels or they are accurate. Likewise for 2 of the most reliable sondages, Emerson and Rasmussen which show that 30 to 35 percent of African Americans now support the president, and that his own poll numbers have risen during the impeachment hearings or they are misleading us. U should be aware that what is trending is that more and more minority citizens are turning towards Trump, not because of his "charming personality," but because he keeps his promises, at least tries to, and he was not saying"n'importe quoi n'importe comment" when he boasted that we will tire of winning. When did u see the US as energy independent before Trump, a job market so strong it is now a sellers market and demand exceeds supply. Everyone wants to be like Trump, to emulate him because he exudes success, financially.If his health holds out he just might be unbeatable come election day in 2020.Snarky remarks about "strange stuff on top of their heads"are unworthy.Am sure that Nancy Pelosi has a facial scrubbing each time she goes out to meet the press , but so what?
@Sequel :BE aware that you do not "pose a question,"but rather that you formulate a question, or put a question to someone. But you do "pose a problem!"Anne Wilson, late editor at Carnegie Foundation who was there when I contracted, along with colleague from French Cultural Services, Bernard Phillips, author of "Easy Terms,"autobiography of his life as an intellectual drifter in Paris in early 1960's, to translate into English "le Conflit Franco Marocain" into English by Stephane Bernard.pointed out the correct word usage or diction. to me.She was an editor of great finesse!
When will some pundit tell the GOP that they shouldn’t go too far to the right or they will lose the election?
31
What is of most concern is that so many Americans are willing to look the other way at Trump's amoral comportment and attacks on the the very institutions that serve to balance power and serve values that transcend a given president. The German people in the first half of the 1930's did exactly that in part due to the strong economy and a sense that they had been victimized by the Allied elites after World War One. The tolerated a strong man who populated their institution with his own people...and the rest is as they say history.
9
Most of America is centrist, yet our President has found enough support among the ultra-right to lean in the direction of that wind, confidant that the Democrats will run a candidate who is too"leftist" to inspire a large enough block of centrists to join that base and vote him out of office. Meanwhile the Democrats, convinced that they can change the national makeup, continue as though the magic formula to recapturing Washington involves large doses of Progressive ideology while centrist America goes off looking for a third party anybody, convinced that the major parties are all talk and no listen. If only the Democrats were smart enough to know that priority one for 2020 is the removal of Donald Trump from office. And that's going to be hard to do with the like of Warren or Sanders. It's not that hard to understand the value of someone who can actually defeat Trump: if you're not in a position to take three steps forward then two steps backward is rather moot.
8
Given how far the Democratic party has moved to the right over the past generation , and given the need for a serious 'correction' regards to inequality and the favourisation of the rich, and the lack of social amenities for a average citizen, any argument for a "middle of the road" or "moderate" approach is an argument for the status quo. I wish I believed that such advice was well meant. Coming from this columnist, I do not.
5
Moved to the right? Nothing could be further from the truth. As the conservatives have moved right the liberals have moved left on every metric except abortion.
1
Sitting here on the sidelines up in Canada, I see the Democrats as living dangerously, by which i mean nominating someone who scares or turns off a substantial segment of the 56% or so of the electorate who would prefer to de done with Trump. Millions will gladly vote for any Democrat except the scary ones or those against whom they have deep, even if inadmissible, prejudices.
Among those candidates who are polling well or have even a chance of gaining traction, Warren and Sanders, especially the latter, are just too scary. Buttigieg will turn off or fail to relate to too many voters. Bloomberg, who would probably be my choice, is just too much the capitalist for the moment. That leaves Biden and Klobuchar. I think either can beat Trump handily, but I think Klobuchar would make the better President. And I don't think the Hillary fiasco says much about the electability of a woman. I think Americans are quite ready for that.
10
Mr. Stephens,
Perhaps your best analysis ever both in terms of clarity of writing and able insight.
Thank you.
I hope Democrats are listening, but, for sure, Bernie Sanders is not.
Bernie is passionate in his thinking and his speech. In his mind he has been "right" his whole life.
He probably would have beaten Trump the first time out, compared with Hillary, who was the most disastrous candidate choice for President in election history.
But, now? Trump will Sherman tank Bernie in an election.
Elizabeth Warren is smarter, more flexible, more adept, but, Christian evangelists will not vote for a woman.
I am not exactly sure how the Christian right convinced women that men are primacy, that women are subjects.
But, they have. No evangelist Christian woman or man will vote for a woman President.
God's message is clear. "Man" should rule.
Sounds nutty, but, what I am saying is true.
So, I have already resigned myself to, maybe, watching Trump be President for the rest of his life.
That certainly is where he is headed.
5
As far as I can tell the Progressive/Liberal wing of the
Democratic Party just sees 2016 as a pot-hole on the
Highway they wish to continue to speed on, ignoring
all the warning signs from Middle America, from those
who have to compete with Immigrants for jobs, from those
who fail to have the right "minority" identity.
Nominate Bloomberg and Amy.
Let Amy deal with Middle America,
Bloomberg can deal with the Coastal Elites.
Bloomberg should go to Flint, Michigan and pay
whatever it takes to get clean water to its citizens.
Amy should spend time with the Farmers and assure them
that the Democrats will help small Farmers not Corporate
Farming.
Both should promise that they will not send the young people
who serve in our Military to un-necessary wars where they have to serve three, four or five tours of combat duty while 95 %
of their age group never spend a day in the military let alone
an hour in combat.
Promise to do something about the Cost of College.
Help expand Obama Care and make it cheaper.
Produce a whole new plan on Immigration.
Let Americans know that Citizens are as or even more
important than Immigrants who cross the border.
Work out a plan to ensure that whomever is working a
minimum wage job is paid a living wage and will not have
to put their life in danger every time they show up at work.
Provide a route to citizenship for Immigrants
that is sensible.
In short: Be proud that you are an American
and
promise a better America for all its citizens.
36
@John Brown "Nominate Bloomberg and Amy.
Let Amy deal with Middle America,
Bloomberg can deal with the Coastal Elites."
I guess the rest of us can buzz off. We're just supposed to vote for whoever the candidate is, no matter how far they turn from the base, and instead, we should cater to a small group of centrists - because *they* can't be relied on to make a responsible vote.
Sorry but no. Buttigieg scares me. If you care about so-called moderates and independents getting scared, care about progressives as well. Especially since they're the first people everyone will blame if some centrist candidate loses to Trump. Again.
2
@DataCrusader
Most Americans are moderates,
willing to allow one party have the
Presidency for 8 years then the other Party.
In between they usually vote in the opposite
party into one or both Houses of Congress.
Hillary was not a Centrist Candidate.
She liked hob-sobbing with the Rich in the
Hamptons during the Summer of 2016.
What dis she say to Wall Street that led her
not to release the Transcripts.
If the Democrats run someone one the left
they will lose once again, if Trump is not impeached, or does something so outrageous
that the 25th Amendment is invoked.
2
@John Brown Please point to a single data point that suggests this. Either the assertion that most Americans are moderate or the assertion that moderates support some sort of regular switching between political parties. Because I've been following politics most of my life and have never heard of such a thing.
And I'm not sure what you're suggesting she is, but in the American political spectrum, Clinton was exactly a centrist candidate. All of the polling suggested she would struggle against Trump where Sanders trounced him. We went with Clinton anyway, and look where it got us. I'm not sure why you're suggesting we try that again.
But anyway, are you going to address the massive disconnect of a point of view that says that all leftists should vote for any candidate, whoever it is, but that centrists shouldn't, and that EVERYONE in the left should move over to the center. It sounds like you think the overwhelming majority should sacrifice their priorities so a small sliver in the center doesn't have to. It is the most anti-democratic sentiment you can find coming from the ground up.
Perhaps centrists should find their own party instead of invading ours and telling us we all have to bend over backwards for them.
1
I am a progressive democrat. I will not vote for Warren. I will not vote for Sanders. I am not alone. I would like to see Pelosi removed from leadership of the house, while the dems still have control. Next year, under Pelosi and Schumer, we will not control either chamber.
6
@Robert Black
Any progressive steps achieved by a president Warren or Sanders will be hard fought and incremental. Furthermore, neither is a corrupt raving narcissist.
Trump’s manifest moral hollowness leaves no alternative. Vote for the Democratic nominee no matter who it is. Commit to that now and tune out the noise between now and November.
If Stephens is correct, then Trump wins the next election, period. Trump's appeal to right-wing thuggery goes unrivaled by any Democrat. Every centrist Democrat is indelibly pegged already as a tribune of the, "supercilious political elites." The fate of Hillary Clinton awaits all centrists.
So what should Democrats do? Taking a chance that Stephens is mistaken comes to mind. Democrats could run a progressive candidate and see what happens. That, at least, would advantage Democrats for a post-Trump future.
Unless it can figure out how to sustain a political party to represent the interests of ordinary Americans, there will be no future for public life in this nation. Accepting that as a political work which may require multiple-election cycles to accomplish looks a wiser bet than re-endorsing everything which has brought so many to political despair.
If Trump is a lock, then the most constructive political step available becomes, blow up the Democrats—to make it unmistakable that they will not only lose, but lose big, and repeatedly. Democratic "centrists" are pro-corporate Republican oligarchists at heart. It is that which has made Trump formidable, not anything to do with progressivism, which has been a non-factor.
Sanders ought to run as a third party candidate. Lay the groundwork for a progressive victory post-Trump. Election 2024 becomes the goal—it is already shaping up as a generation-shifting wave election. Don't let "centrist" Democrats blow that one too.
5
S.P. It is the messenger and the message that is the problem. Less than half of democrats want what the two leading “socialist” have to offer because of the messengers. Try this. Turn off the sound when they speak and just watch. Then turn off the picture and listen. not very inspiring, for me.
@S.P.
What you propose is fantasy. Aside from most of my friends
and a few campus intellectuals and urban dwellers, there are not enough "progressives" to win. The only person adept enough to beat Trump is Bloomberg. I'm just trying to live in the real world. I voted for HRC and Biden is just Clinton, Part 2. A sure loser with his talk of "record players" and "malarkey". Malarkey!! Sad to think how out of touch the democrats have become. Free college and free health care is a non starter for most Americans. No sale.
You know, if Johnson had run for President in the USA, all the pundits would be calling him a socialist and saying he was too far left to be elected. One of Johnon's core promises was to shore up Britain's socialised medicine. Other promises included easing austerity - meaning, easing back on welfare restrictions.
Both Trump and Johnson got lucky, going up against candidates that ordinary people took a visceral disike to, not just because of their politices, but because they didn't like Corbyn and Clinton as people.
Let's see Trump go up against candidates with a strong likeability factor and see what happens.
11
@Fenella
Agreed. And where are such candidates among the Dem field? I am a lifelong Democrat and find none in the current crop, even among the top ranked, who didn't make me throw up my hands (and nearly my lunch) during those awful debates. Not that those scenarios are the only bellwether. But likeability, even moreso in this consumer age, does remain a factor.
You are correct about Clinton. A terrible, wooden candidate who could not rise above her Wall Street and corporate affinities to overwhelmingly connect with voters. The meme of "she won by 3 million votes" is pointless. Even with the help of superdelegates, and even with the manipulations of the DNC, she was not reaching enough voters' hearts to garner an unequivocal Electoral College win. Both Clintons are neoliberal globalists and DINOs in every sense. Many Democrat supporters like me had to hold our noses in that election, because voting for Trump was unthinkable. Democrats need to get serious about 2020 and figure this out. Soundbites will not cut the mustard.
@Fenella The news media smearing the daylights out of Corbyn might have contributed as well.
To me this is the crux of the matter: "Like Johnson, Trump is a formidable incumbent. To oppose him with Corbynite candidates and progressive primal screams is to ensure his re-election." American progressives are as deaf as its right-wing radicals. They don't hear the difference between "never Trump" and "let's veer sharply leftwards."
Trump is going to run against Sanders, Warren, and even AOC and the young "squad" members no matter who the Democratic candidate is. But his message won't ring true with many Americans who are liberal or moderate but not progressive. Let's give ourselves a real chance to beat the narcissist in chief by offering a Clinton-ian or Obama-ian candidate.
15
As somebody that is currently an expat and have done business in 25 different countries, I can tell you with certainly that comparing British and American politics is a waste of time. The parallels are not the same. What happened over there (and I know many Brits in my expat role and have had many discussions about Brexit), is unique to their environment and history.
What happens in the US is unique also. (For example, it's always important to realize that if we had British style elections, Hillary Clinton would be president since she got 3 million more votes than Trump.)
Writers love to do that because it gives them something to talk about, but I wouldn't put much credence in it.
120
@American Expat
Another American expat agrees with you. For starters the U.S. has valid opposition to Trump whereas there is little solid opposition to Boris at the current time.
22
@W. Fulp
Agreed. Plus, they really had little that they could do about immigration, whereas we control our destiny.
10
@American Expat
"if we had British style elections, Hillary Clinton would be president". That is ABSURD. The British system is in all functional respects identical to the US electoral college. You have posted about something you seem to havezerok owledge of. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_United_Kingdom
4
Columnists in my Swedish newspaper, Dagens Nyheter, are writing the same thoughts today.
And yet I, only one voter in a securely Democratic state, New York, find it hard although not impossible to accept Biden.
I add only one n = 1 anecdote picking up on a reservation I have only seen recently expressed.
I am 87 and have kept meticulous health records since getting three stents in my heart 10 years ago after experiencing a "stunned myocardium" event.
If he is elected then he will take the oath of office in 2021 when he will be 79 years old and in 2025 83. My records show that a 79 year old will face one new adverse health symptom or worse year after year and show a general energy decline.
Anecdotes are useful, if at all, only in suggesting that it might be wise for all involved to examine the best epidemiological studies concerning aging from 70 on.
Biden does not inspire me at all but perhaps the other discussion that should be underway is who should be made his vice president running mate.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
9
The whole debate over whether the Democrats should nominate a centrist or a leftist is very 2015.
About 40 percent of the U.S. electorate embraces authoritarian rule! We're in uncharted territory.
17
"Britain’s Ominous Portent for Democrats"
Could be titled "Britain’s Ominous Portent for Democrats, Republicans, and other Friends Of The Constitution".
Democrats are not the only saviors needed. We'll need help on the lift this time. Everyone else has a responsibility to make the right decisions too!
4
Corbyn lost because he was ambivalent about Brexit. He misjudged how important Brexit is in the working class forgotten towns of north England - their most important concern was keeping Poles, Italians and europeans out - get out of Europe. They believe joblessness is the fault of Europe. No amount of lefty promises was going to change that. Sorry, but I don't see how this has anything to do with the 2020 election in USA - probably more to do with the 2016 USA election.
11
@larry I believe that Brexit has a lot more than just "get the foreigners out" behind it. The people of Britain never wanted to be part of a European superstate; we understood that this was a Common Market, and that's all. I voted for Brexit, and I did so because of the appalling corruption and the anti-democratic nature at the heart of the EU.
Whenever another nation wants its independence, they are lauded as brave freedom fighters. Why is Brexit alone identified as the product of bigotry and a supposed wish to "return to the days of the British Empire"? I doubt you'll find many in the UK who long for any such thing.
10
@Adam The EU is no more corrupt or undemocratic than the UK itself.Brexit is an example of narrow (English)nationalism in a little country that still has illusions about itself. Good luck!!
Labour had a very, very poor candidate. In a Facebook, Instragram world he just didn't have the modern "look" of electability. He drove the party too far left, and many Conservative votes were Labour tactical votes against Labour Cobynites. Labour will win again with someone who looks smart, with the flexibility and articulateness to sell the Labour Manifesto, which was a good deal for most of the people.
8
The US is not the UK, and trying to map the UK result onto the US is a waste of time. There is not going to be a blowout either way. America is divided more or less 50-50 and that is not going to change. The marginal votes that tilt the Electoral College will depend on the particulars of the campaign and on other contingent events yet to happen.
In retrospect, the best prediction for 2016 would have been "too close to call." The same holds for 2020. Nobody really knows what is going to happen. Self-promoting media types who claim deep insights from demographic trends or lessons from abroad or whatever are just blowing smoke.
17
We are we looking to the UK election for "portents"? Why not look to our own election of 2016?
1) The people want real change.
2) A centrist cannot beat Trump.
5
@Chris. If polls are anything to go by, most US voters don't want the sort of change Warren & Sanders are proposing. (I assume that's what you mean by "real change".)
To claim that a centrist cannot defeat Trump is too simplistic. Trump in 2016, like Johnson 2 days ago, won due to everything falling into place; Hillary was a bad candidate, with a stupefying "strategy" and a political tin ear; the 12% of Sanders supporters who voted for Trump; the low turn-out amongst minorities and young voters; Comey's letter and Russian interference (though marginal), etc.
A better example is 2018. There were few if any "progressives" who defeated incumbent Republicans in the midterm elections. Too many of our presidential candidates seem to have forgotten the lesson of 2018, that a focus on affordable health insurance, economic inequality, and Trump's corruption brought us victory. Abolishing ICE, providing free health insurance to illegal aliens, slavery reparations (opposed by a majority of black Americans), single-payer health insurance, and other such progressive policies were avoided.
Based on the evidence, it would seem that a centrist is indeed our best bet to defeat Trump, though centrism is a necessary but insufficient condition for that to occur.
8
@Danny --You think Sanders supporters are going back to a centrist this time? Trump may indeed be a lock, but the largest turnout Democrats can muster will be for a progressive. Centrists generally pledge to back whomever the party chooses. Progressives will not do that.
1
@S.P. No, I don't think Sanders supporters will vote for a moderate; they'll probably do as they did in 2016, and either vote for Trump or sit in the corner and sulk. Either way, they bear a portion of the responsibility for Trump and the demise of our democracy.
Yes, I am finally convinced we need a centrist Democrat to win the next election. I think we will have to wait for the next economic downturn to advocate for things that Europeans have had for decades, that is universal health care, maternal leave, family leave, real vacation time, and so forth. Of course the right centrist or centrist oriented politician might deliver those things with an un frightening gradualist approach. Like medicare for those who want it, or adding the public option to Obamacare. Now I am looking at Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, and, of course, Joe Biden.
12
Trump just gave us parental leave for governmental workers. He is giving raises to the military. He is spending more for our defense. He is getting us out of entanglement wars. He cut our taxes. He solved the tariff war. He gave Ukraine military assistance. What have the democrats done? Impeached our leader. Fought him over tax cuts for us. At least this is the message i hear and NO OTHER message.
2
The Democrats failed to heed what the June 2016 vote for Brexit meant and adapt the Clinton campaign accordingly. Thus they were shocked when Clinton lost and Trump won. If the Democrats fail to heed the implications of yesterday's vote in Great Britain, they will again be shocked in 2020.
An aspirational candidate will not win against Trump in 2020. Instead the Democrats must nominate someone who speaks to the values and near-term needs of the voters as the voters themselves define them, not to the values and needs the candidate thinks the voters should care about.
At the moment, a Biden/Klobuchar ticket looks most promising to defeat Trump, though the Democrats seem insistent on a course devoted to perfecting a circular firing squad while holding interviews for God.
Most folks do not remember Presidential candidates actually being chosen by a multi-ballot convention. It is possible such could occur with the Democrats this year, and that might produce a candidate not currently being given much attention or even still running, someone with a fairly clean slate. The pseudo-debates are merely the Democrats version of The Apprentice, with the spin doctors, punditocracy, and commentariat getting to feel powerful by saying, "You're fired!" or "You're hired!" A truly open convention would be genuine drama, probably giving the Democratic Party visceral credibility it currently does not have. Of course that only would work if they keep their eyes on the ball: defeating Trump.
8