It's really not sufficient to say that last night's debate was awful, though of course it was. The point of a debate is to compare the candidates for the job they're asking us to give them. And they differed pretty clearly on what they would do with the next four years.
Here is some of what Biden said he’d do with four years: Preserve and improve the ACA. Enact a public option. (Chris Wallace questioned him sharply on whether that public option would replace private insurance; Biden insisted it wouldn't.)
Biden said he opposes the Green New Deal but would invest in green energy. Said there will never be another coal fired power plant built in America. He talked of “ending the use of fossil fuels to generate electricity by 2035 and zero, none, emission of greenhouse gases by 2050.”
Biden said he wants the federal vehicle fleet to be electric. He said he would insist that the federal government buy American. There is a lot to debate on that latter point, though they didn't much get into it.
Biden also said there would be a battle in the courts over Roe v Wade and he wants to preserve it. He said he would raise some taxes. He said the corporate tax would climb from 21% up to 28%; Trump had lowered it.
In a curious moment, Trump asked why Biden hadn't rolled back Trump's tax cut when he was vice president, before Trump signed it.
TRUMP: Why didn’t you do it before, when you were vice president with Obama?
BIDEN: Because you in fact passed that, that was your tax proposal.
What did Trump say he would do with the next four years? Much, much less. He was far more likely to defend the prior four ("we built the greatest economy in history. We closed it down because of the China plague.") But he clearly differs with Biden on judges and the ACA.
The president vaguely acknowledged a human role in climate change ('to an extent") but when asked what he would do about it, pivoted to a general opposition to pollution: "I believe that we have to do everything we can to have immaculate, air immaculate water."
The president defended ending fuel economy standards because "the car is much less expensive and it's a much safer car and you talk about a tiny difference." That's a pretty stark difference with Biden, who spoke of dramatic changes in vehicles and electricity by 2035 and 2050.
It's not surprising the president said less about what he wants to do; his party drafted no 2020 platform. But he made it clear that he would not do many things that Biden favors doing. In short, the stylistic ugliness of the debate obscured genuinely large policy differences.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
“I voted for Donald Trump. But this is not what I was expecting. We didn’t think they were going to take a chainsaw to a silk rug.”
Before you react, a few points. 1/
The man said he was a Trump voter. He was fired by a White House whose officials have assumed, and said in TV interviews, that federal employees are almost all “far left.” 2/
He was dismissed as part of a widespread purge. Yet the form email reads, “The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest.”
The decline of rural Democrats: Just a few years ago the party could win a lot of rural counties, which made them a lot more likely to win elections. open.substack.com/pub/steveinske…
“In 2006, Brown won a lot of rural counties, including a broad band several counties deep in Appalachia. In 2012 and 2018 he won fewer, and by 2024 he triumphed in no rural counties, none. He won only around Cleveland, Toledo, Columbus, Dayton.”
“Even though Missouri had become a red state in presidential elections by then, a Democrat could compete down ballot in rural areas. By 2018, this had changed. McCaskill was beaten back into three metro areas: St. Louis, Kansas City, and Columbia.”
“The way to understand our fractured world is to think more deeply, which takes time. Social media demands and rewards the opposite—instant conclusions, biases, instant rage. Its corrosive influence is evident in some of the posts by its richest and most famous users.”
“Here’s another, and sadder, way the experience is manipulated: we’re given to understand that the algorithm chokes off links that recommend articles. This has been one of the most valuable functions of Twitter. Now that’s less common.”
Help me out. Has Fox told their audience who Dick Cheney endorsed for president?
Much of the Fox audience voted for him in 2000 and 2004.
A website search turns up nothing. Maybe some mention on TV was not transcribed?
Seriously, I mean to be fair. Anything?
Many complaints about what the media “don’t cover” are just wrong. Often it turns out media did cover it. Or some that didn’t, have not confirmed the facts so they wait. Or whatever. But in this case it’s a straightforward news item involving a frequent past guest on Fox.
By way of comparison, I checked The NY Times (which many on the political left have decided to believe is pro-Trump, but that’s another story). Not a huge story, but comes up in several items.
How could so many people believe Trump’s claims about the 2020 election after so much evidence exposed the lies? History offers an answer. open.substack.com/pub/steveinske…
This is the latest of my regular emails—on our divided past and present. Subscribe at: steveinskeep.substack.com
“Nativist power faded and grew over time, but never vanished. It’s always been a culture war. At first it pitted native-born Protestants against largely Irish Catholics. In later times, nativists turned against Muslims or people of color.”
This is the latest of ny regular emails, which I propose to send directly to you. Take a free or paid subscription here:
.steveinskeep.substack.com
“Brands weaves in stories and perspectives I never knew… We first learn of the Battle of the Little Bighorn neither from the soldiers’ perspective nor from that of the coalition of warriors who confronted them, but from a young woman who saw and heard the fight.”