Hi everyone.
Welcome to this week’s Daly Weekly, where I answer whatever questions you throw my way.
Before we get started this week, I’d like to invite you all to Reagan Caucus Action’s Substack. I co-host their weekly podcast, on which we feature a different guest every week to discuss numerous issues from a Reaganite perspective.
It’s totally free, and you can sign up here (I hope you do):
Now, let’s get to your questions…
John: This being midterm election week, I’m sure most of your questions will be about candidates and senate races. I want to ask you about a more longitudinal problem that seems to only be getting worse – fraud and waste at the state and local levels. We have heard a lot about Minnesota’s issues, what with the “Quality Learning Center” and all. Same in California with hospice billing, and Los Angeles’s egregious waste in housing the homeless. These programs are set up with huge funding, little oversight, and no accountability. The entire system is incentivized to be abused. If you want to tax me for the benefit of better social programs, OK, but it’s not too much to ask state officials to take care of my money in the process. What is the remedy for such a mess, other than our traditional conservative philosophy of smaller government? — Steve R.
Hi Steve. No, it’s not too much to ask for government officials to be good stewards of taxpayer money. It’s a very basic expectation, and yet, as you say, the failures are everywhere — not just at the local level, but all the way to the top of the federal government. We even have a president who’s repeatedly tried to direct taxpayer money to himself.
The small government philosophy of decentralization (pushing government decision-making, administrative authority, financial responsibilities, etc. down to the most local levels) is certainly part of the remedy. The closer these responsibilities are to the people, the more accountability (and tighter management) there will be. Holding relevant/responsible elected officials accountable at election time is another piece of the puzzle. I suppose citizens can also donate to government watchdog groups who investigate and identify such corruption, though one would obviously want to make sure any such watchdog is reputable first.
I wish I had more micro answers for you, Steve, but having never worked in government, it’s hard for me to get deep in the woods on that.
*Peeks out from under rock the day after Election Day, views the GOP carnage*
Wow. Well, I figured Democrats would take the House, but not by a 50 plus vote margin. A bit surprised but not shocked they took the Senate. I wasn’t even sure Paxton would lose, though he did. But I am truly shocked by the extent of the pummeling of the GOP in Texas of all places.
Indeed, this really comes across as the kind of Blue Tsunami that I haven’t seen since the time Democrats held a filibuster - proof Senate majority in 2009. But then again, Republicans had a good 2010 showing in those midterms, yet failed to win the WH back in 2012.
Since you’ll have a few days to ponder this before answering, I am really curious, do you think this was just a repudiation of Trump and some terrible Republican candidates who dragged down the rest? (Ecstatic that Max Miller lost, BTW). Or, can Democrats actually build on this for 2028, maintain control of Congress, and win back the WH? — Aylene W.
Hi Aylene. I think it was a repudiation of President Trump and his administration, including the very costly policies, abuses, and corruption. Poor candidates certainly didn’t help matters, but Trump’s to blame for a lot of those individuals as well. Paxton, Graham, and Ramaswamy, for example, owe Trump their nominations.
Can Democrats build on this, hold onto both branches of Congress, and win the presidency in 2028? Absolutely. That doesn’t mean they will. Like Republicans, Democrats are their own worst enemies, and they could easily derail the momentum they’re currently enjoying by advancing insane ideas, and scaring voters into swinging the pendulum back in the other direction. That said, Trump being in office, and continuing to steal the spotlight for the next two years, may give cover to some of their lunacy.
Do you think, as I saw one commenter here say this week, “America just committed suicide by voting in far left loons and Muslim cult members! We will end up like Europe with violence everywhere!”? — Ben G.
No. I think we’ll still be alive and kicking two years from now when Americans go back to the polls to vote again. I’m not sure I even understand what the commenter is getting at.
Regarding his Muslim fear: When the new Congress in sworn into office early next year, the number of Muslims in the U.S. Congress will go from five to eight. How are three more Muslim members, among 535 total members, going to cause “violence everywhere.” I’m guessing Muslim individuals picked up some local seats too, but again, I don’t get it. What’s the big cultural change that’s supposed to come from this?
If the worry is about left-wing policies, I don’t really get that either. Trump will be able to stop pretty much anything with a presidential veto. I think a more realistic fear would be Trump actually supporting and signing the Democrats’ left-wing legislation into law. He’s already enacted a number of left-wing (and even socialist) policies via executive order. Is it all that crazy that he would deliver more?
Do you think the GOP survivors in Congress will change their tune in any meaningful way? Self preservation is the only thing any professional politician actually cares about. So what is the self preservation strategy - circle the wagons and double down on MAGA/Trump, or distance themselves from him? — John M.
It’s a very good question, John.
Several of my fellow conservative pundits and observers genuinely seem to believe that this is the end of Trumpism, and that Trump’s death-grip on the GOP will soon be over. I’d love for that to be true, but I’m not at all convinced of that.
On the night of the midterm election, Heath Mayo of Principles First tweeted, “This is the kind of night that changes the direction of the country and forces an entire party to completely reevaluate itself if it wants to survive.”
I replied to him: “One would think (and hope). Then again, that's what I thought on January 6.”
I can’t tell you how many commenters (including Trump supporters), on this very website, insisted to me that Trump’s political career was over after January 6. And they used that rationale to argue that there was no point in impeaching him (which I was calling for).
I certainly understood where they were coming from. In sane political times, a U.S. president trying to overturn an election to stay in power, and provoking a deadly insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, would have made him so much of a pariah that he couldn’t have even been elected dog catcher after that. And that’s before you even consider the fact that between the 2018 and 2020 elections, Trump handed the GOP its worst political defeats in over 60 years.
And yet, within days of January 6, Republican voters already had Trump’s back on the issue. Despite Trump leaving office, Republicans in Congress were so terrified of him, and being harassed and primaried by his supporters in the next election, that only a small handful of them voted to impeach and convict him. Within weeks, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was down at Mar-a-Lago, groveling in front of the him. And when Trump chose to run again a few years later, most of his Republican presidential opponents were too scared of him to meaningfully criticize him on the debate stages.
So yeah, I’m very skeptical that Republican leaders will try and distance themselves from Trump now. If they do, it would be a good thing for the party and the country, but they’ve proven themselves to be very cowardly on this matter. I think what they’ll instead do (and we’re already starting to see this) is take Vice President JD Vance to the woodshed. That’s a much safer move, because Vance doesn’t have a cult following, and Trump doesn’t really seem to mind if people attack him.
Sir John — El-Sayed supporter Togochog attacked a conservative who disagreed with her when the conservative challenged that Togochog would not be allowed to walk around in public in Iran dressed as she was that day, at which point Togochog physically attacked her and threatened to kill her. So as of now, does it look as though that the University of Michigan intends to pursue any disciplinary action (as it would had a white blonde woman attacked a black person or a woman in a burka). Your thoughts? —“Open-Minded Liberal Tolerance” Regards from The Emperor
It probably won’t surprise you to learn this, Emperor, but I have no idea who “Togochog” is. A quick online search informed me just now that she’s been charged with assault, and that the University of Michigan hasn’t publicly commented on her student status (citing federal privacy laws). I have no idea if anything would be different if she were a white blonde who attacked a black person; that’s an assumption you’re making.
I’m not sure what I can say beyond that, other than that I’m glad she’s been charged, and if it were up to me, she’d be suspended or possibly even expelled from the university.
Something just occurred to me. Is Lauren Boebert your representative??? And if so, are you glad she’s gone? — Alex D.
Hi Alex. I used to live in the district Boebert currently represents, but they redrew the lines a few years back, and now I’m just outside of it. She apparently lives just ten or fifteen minutes from me, but I’ve never run into her (I used to run into her predecessor, Ken Buck, from time to time).
Also, it’s not certain, as of the time I’m writing this, that she lost her race. It’s still too close to call, though she’s behind and probably will lose. If or when that happens, I won’t shed a tear for her or her constituents. I think she represents many of the things that are wrong with our politics. Coincidentally, I spoke last year at a political event alongside her Democratic opponent, Eileen Laubacher. We had a good (and pretty long) conversation before it started, and I was pleasantly surprised by her moderate (an even conservative) positions on various issues. She’s a very nice person too. I think, if she does win, that she’ll be a good representative.
Thanks everyone! You can send me questions for next week by leaving a comment in the comment section.