I'm having trouble finding anything worth writing about today, however ...
Don Surber makes a strong case for conservatives voters in Georgia to give up the Senate to the crazies:
It's a longish blog, with Surber riffing off Senator Tim Scott's appeal to Georgia conservatives to get out and vote, and then running through the many ways the GOPe has betrayed conservatives generally and, in the last few years, Trump specifically. However, Surber's argument can be boiled down to two quite brief paragraphs:
A Republican Senate amplifies the power of Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and other Never Trumpers. This will enable them to sell their swing votes to the highest bidder in the name of principle.
And they dare ask for our votes while allowing Democrats to steal the presidential election uncontested!
I'm normally one to argue that a bird in the hand is most likely worth two in the bush, but ... It's hard to gainsay Surber. The Senate should be made to pay for their betrayal of Trump--if they aren't held to account, then what will ever change? What other options are there?
The strongest argument against Surber's view may be contained in Monica Showalter's blog on So what did Nancy Pelosi promise The Squad? Showalter explains that the vote was actually much closer than even the final tally of 216-209 would suggest. She then argues that to get the Speakership certainly had to give away the house to the Squad crazies. This will have results:
What did Pelosi offer them in exchange for their votes? What did she offer that would disgust other Democrats and put them in an even more desperate position for re-election? Why did she throw moderation away?
It comes as a red wave is building in the House, what with Democrats losing more than a dozen seats in the November presidential election, and traditional U.S. political patterns suggesting the Republicans are on track to win anyway. Kowtowing to the Squad and buying them off is going to make the red wave ahead much bigger.
There are a number of things that can be said. Has Pelosi ever been "moderate"? Not by my lights. That other bird, the one in the bush, the coming "red wave"--how red will it really be?
But perhaps the most important consideration is in the question that Showalter left unanswered: "Why did [Pelosi] throw moderation away?" Is she really desperate to hold on to the Speakership for the prestige alone, or do the Dem power brokers believe that only Pelosi can guide their radical agenda through the House and on to what may well turn out to be a Dem Senate? Would Dems really go for broke in what may be only a two year window, counting on their agenda being cemented in place, never to be repealed by the typically feckless GOP and the Roberts judges? It's possible. It's also out of our control at this point. It was within the control of the GOP, if they had chosen to fight for Trump.