Alex Desk: Why do dams promote MAGA?
“The only thing . . . more nauseating than the GOP’s Trumpist turn”, Republican Rep. on Substack. Pete Meijer, “the ability of my Democratic colleagues to sell any pretense of principle for political gain by supporting MAGA candidates for the midterms in hopes of running Dems”. Against the fringe GOPers.
(The Dems are promoting their own Trump challenger.)
He argues that “politics is a difficult business,” yet “rigor is bound by certain ethical limits.”
And while “conventional wisdom dictates that these extreme candidates are less electable,” with a “historically unpopular president.” , , And with inflation at 40-year highs, less-electrable doesn’t mean non-electable.
“Republican voters will be to blame if any of these candidates are eventually elected, but . . . there will be Democrats’ fingerprints on the weapon. We must never forget that.”
From right: Munchkin hikes will impress everyone
No wonder majority leader Chuck Schumer “wanted a Senate vote on his partisan tax deal with Joe Manchin earlier this week,” quipped the editors of The Wall Street Journal: “The more Americans learn that this What’s in the tax-and-spend, the more they’ll dislike it.”
The bill claims it will curb inflation, but a major study found that “the impact on inflation is statistically indistinguishable from zero” by 2031.
Its tax increase on businesses could “slow down” inflation by fueling a recession, but “tax policy must work in the opposite direction” while encouraging investment to avoid a recession.
And the plan’s multiple tax increases will affect those who make less than $400,000 a year (breaking President Biden’s 2020 campaign promise). In fact, they would make fun of “almost every American.”
Liberals: The government’s student loans haven’t failed
When the Federal Direct Student Loan Program began in 1994, the government thought “it would generate $114 billion in revenue,” yet now cost $197 billion, “a staggering difference of over $300 billion”— Rail Reason’s Emma Camp, with the bill made public.
The “income-driven repayment plan”, which limits monthly payments to 10% or 15% of the borrower’s discretionary income, also highlights how the program is reversed: it provides “skills for students to acquire”. Failing to do so induces tutoring. Jobs that paid enough to pay off “modest” student-loan balances.
The program’s “contribution to the dramatic rise in college tuition prices” while falling short on a key goal is enough to “raise concerns”, but its cost of “hundreds of billions” adds “even more cause for alarm”.
Conservatives: Pelosi Profiles Courage
The “Chinese military chances” of shooting down Nancy Pelosi’s plane if she goes to Taiwan are “not high . . . but they are not zero either,” notes Jim Geraghty of the National Review.
But she has been tough on China for decades: “In 1991, two years after the Tiananmen Square massacre,” she and other delegates visited the square “and displayed a banner honoring the protesters.”
He also opposed the Clinton administration for granting Beijing Most Favored Nation status in 1998.
Anyway, now “if Pelosi doesn’t go, the United States will back down from a bully, and bullies are rarely satiated by a victory.”
Ukraine watch: win the war there and beyond
“The outcome of a war is written by its combatants,” argues Lieutenant General (retd) James Dubik in The Hill, so “how or when the Ukraine war will end is unknown.”
“Some Western strategists are predicting that even with Allied help, the best outcome will be a stalemate,” because “Russia is bigger and has more resources than Ukraine” and “could prevent Ukraine from winning.”
But Putin’s “vision and aggression have generated protests around the world. While he tried to weaken NATO, it has strengthened and will continue to grow.”
Indeed, “the Ukraine war is actually being fought and waged on two levels”: “in Ukraine” and “beyond Ukraine”, “to prevent the kind of world in which force plays an increasing role.”
“War is worth fighting on both levels. And both, worth winning.”
— Compiled by Post Editorial Board