Fellow Marxists, Fascists, and Communists, No Need to Break Out the Molotovs 

I have the slightest acquaintanceship with the novelist TC Boyle, whom I occasionally try to convince that his despair over what he sees as Trump’s inevitable election is unfounded, so I thought I’d summarize my arguments and share them with the public at large. 

So, ladies and gentlemen, bulldogs and babies, here’s why Trump’s going to lose the 2024 election.

Technical Reasons 

Donald Trump runs the Republican Party the way dictators run their fiefdoms, i.e., by purging professional bureaucrats and replacing them with family members, like daughter-in-law Laura, the head of the RNC, who would probably have trouble successfully running a laundromat, much less a complicated multi-state conglomeration.  This means that the party doesn’t have the organizational apparatus in place to competently run a campaign, to assemble a 50-state ground game, for example.

A case in point, the piss poor vetting of JD Vance. To win the election, Trump needs to increase his appeal among suburban women, and he’s not going to win them over by selecting a frothing at the mouth misogynist like the Senator from Ohio[1]. In 2020, on Eric Weinstein’s podcast Portal, Vance agreed with his host that “postmenopausal females” exist just to help take care of children. I’m certain some slick communistic Hollywood commercial maker is crafting an attack ad quoting Vance as I type this. Hey, JD, this is late empire America not Medieval Slovenia. 

With more states adding right-to-choose referenda – most recently Arizona and Missouri – more women will be inclined to vote. The women I hang with, postmenopausal and otherwise, don’t want some self-identified hillbilly or convicted rapist telling them what they can’t so with their bodies.

Perhaps the most salient technical reason that DJT is going to lose the election is that he seems incapable of attempting to broaden his coalition. All he does at these rallies is sling red meat to lost souls in attendance and promise massive tax cuts to CEOs who would rather increase their wealth than provide free school lunches to food-insecure children.

And by the way, as much as Donald would like the economy to crater before the election, with today’s strong retail sales report and a likely interest rate cut coming in September, that ain’t going to happen in the 90-odd days before the election. 

Fundamental Reasons

Donald Trump’s always suffered from Narcissistic Personality Disorder; however, now that pathology is compounded by his diminished mental acuity, the product of decrepit age, to use WB Yeats’ unlovely term. Some also suggest that Trump is addicted to Adderall, which they blame for his periodic sniffing. Anyway, he is, as he said the other day, who he is.

No way he’ll quit obsessing over crowd sizes or cease with the adolescent nicknames, and as the election intensifies, his infirmities will be increasingly obvious to those paying attention. 

Anyway, his song and dance is getting really stale, or as one wag put it on Twitter/X, Donald is in his fat Elvis stage. Diehard fans adore him, but who else enjoys being bombarded with a constant barrage of hyperbolic negativity – foreign hordes pouring into our cul-de-sacs, the future a Blade Runner hellscape if Kamala wins – a land in which saying Merry Christmas could land you in jail.

Only idiots believe shit like that.

Harris Walz

Trump could very well have defeated Biden, especially after the debate; however, now he’s running against a formidable ticket that exudes joy and points to a bright future where citizens collaborate to address problems, a ticket that doesn’t want to dismantle NATO, or coddle up to dictators.

Conclusion

So chins up, pinko-fascists, if we work hard to get out the vote and unloosen our purses and donate, we got this thing. I don’t foresee my deleting this post on November 7, the day Caroline and I are going to see fellow Trotskyite Sarah Silverman at the Charleston Music Hall.

So, chill thyselves.


[1] Note the authentic-sounding pundit-ese. – “the Senator from Ohio.” 

Unmaternal Republicans

179815_1873340594637_845954_n

Rush Limbaugh’s reemergence in the news as cancer victim/Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient reminded me of an incident about a decade ago when some of his usually supportive listeners turned on him for a minute or two. Rush had chided then First Lady Michelle Obama for being overweight. His typically trollish Yahoo commentators (sprawled on beanbag chairs in their darkened rooms), chided Rush, not because of the Rabelaisian hypocrisy of the equivalent of Fatty Arbuckle wagging his sausage-like forefinger at, say, Mae West. No, because the vast majority of Rush’s female listening audience considered themselves to be overweight and body-shaming uncalled for.

Meanwhile, the Far Right’s own Michelle Bachmann was inveighing against First Lady Michelle’s push to raise awareness of the benefits of breast feeding. “To think that government has to go out and buy my breast pump … You want to talk about nanny state, I think we just got a new definition,” she screeched.

Not, your breast pump, Miss Narcissist, an impoverished mother’s breast pump (perhaps one of those weak-willed abstinence-trained adolescents).

Leave it to the Radical Right to turn nanny into a dirty word. Next thing you know maternal will be a vile insult, like liberal. A maternal state that would like to see all its babies well-cared for is a pernicious place where the pocket of the patriarchal super rich is picked to redistribute their largesse among the issue of the lazy, the unwed, the unfit.

The fellow below has earned – well, actually, inherited –  his money; still, no matter how he got it, it’s unfair to skim a portion of that pile to fund the filling of  the cavities of impoverished children. Even the lightest redistribution of wealth, 5% say, would bring the economy crashing down around us like walls of Jericho. Wealth is a Calvinistic litmus test that determines who is blessed and who is not. Let the marketplace decide. We’re a patriarchy for Christ’s sake!

Capitalist Oligarchy

Suffer the children indeed.

This Orwellian manipulation of language is incredibly effective: if you repeatedly make good things sound bad, they become bad in the minds of the listeners. For example, when I taught high school, each year I’d ask my students if anyone in the class identified as a feminist.  The girls would cast their eyes floorward and mutter “no” or “not really.”  “What?” I’d ask, feigning incredulity, “so you believe that you should earn less money than men working at the same job?  You believe your husbands should be able to tell you how to dress? You’re against maternity leave?” To them, a feminist is not someone who believes in gender equality but, rather, Rush Limbaugh’s Jungian shadow: the late Andrea Dworkin: unattractive, militant, butch. Repeat the word feminist and flash Dworkin’s image often enough, and she becomes the incarnation of feminism.

Dworkin184

Andrea Dworkin

Alas, a deep acidic strain of misogyny, perhaps Bible-based, infects the worldview of the Radical Right. Otherwise, explain the visceral hatred that Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi evoke. What gives?  What is it about these women that can generate enough animus to spawn millions of dollars in bumper sticker sales? Name a male Democratic politician who has stoked as much animus as Hillary and Nancy. Certainly, would think self-proclaimed Socialist Bernie Sanders would be an unrelenting target of their scorn, but thus far he hasn’t.

pelosi

All that I can come up with is that for some strange, perverse psychological reason (I have my unscientific but intuitively rich guesses), members of the Radical Right resent their mothers and have projected their archetypal negative farrow-eating images on womankind in general.  Paradoxically, they’ll allow masculine models like Margaret Thatcher and Ayn Rand into their political and intellectual men’s clubs but banish more maternal women to domestic or secretarial duties. The females who carry the banner of the Radical Right – Ann Coulter, Laura Ingle, Katherine Harris – project hardness; sport inorganic, breakable hair; force their feet into corset-like stilettos; stomp toward the dais; spew sarcasm. They’re about as maternal as a backhand to the mouth.