Thread by @ClaireBerlinski

It's more boosterish than warranted, and glosses too lightly over the cruelty of Europe's refugee policy--although he is also right to say, "Yes, it was cold-hearted, but failing that, Europe ran the danger of fascism."

But he's right that those predicting Europe's demise were wrong--and that includes me, more than a decade ago. (Although I've not thought so at all, recently.) And he's right that the EU is better-run and more effective than the US, Russia, or China. This is a low bar, sadly.

It's easy to make Europe's Covid-19 response look good compared to the US. But by the standards of East Asia, it has been miserable. And you're right to say that the EU's failures on rule of law in member states such as Hungary and Poland is profound.

Still, for a Continent that in 1914 entered the greatest period of madness, slaughter, and self-destruction history has seen, and emerged from it only in 1945 bombed to smithereens, rescued from the Nazis by the USSR and the US, divided, shamed, and occupied--

Europe's cohesion, peace, and ability to promote itself as a model are and should be sources of real pride.

But not complacency.

And while at this point Trump's defeat seems a foregone conclusion, it's not over until it's over. If he survives, and goes on to be reelected--a minute possibility, but real--his confidence that the US wouldn't destroy NATO because it's not in our interests is misplaced:

Should that happen, I have every confidence Trump's instinct for destruction would ensure our withdrawal from NATO: He will be reinforced by his survival and reelection in his sense of magical invincibility:

His second term would be Trump without any checks, balances, or logic. No one will be able to prevent him from doing exactly what he pleases. It's a remote chance, but there should be no complacency: a 1-in-a-100 chance is still too high for any of us to sleep well.

On the other hand, it's better than a 25 percent chance, which is what we were looking at last week.