The Strengths and Weaknesses of Joe Biden and Donald Trump Heading Into the 2024 Election
Plus: A review of "Monsieur Spade" starring Clive Owen
A quick note: It’s come to my attention that reading these articles in email form may not allow you to interact with embedded features in the articles, such as hyperlinks and YouTube videos. To ensure access to those features, I recommend reading these articles directly on my Substack page, reasontobelieve.substack.com. (I hyperlinked that web address, by the way, so if you can’t tell it’s hyperlinked, I’d definitely encourage you to read this article at my website for the full Reason to Believe experience. Thanks.—Jason)
I’ve gotten a small kick out of reading all the Ron DeSantis campaign post-mortems this week. I only say a small kick because he turned out to be someone who wasn’t worth spending much time thinking about once he got into the race. DeSantis positioned himself as the “more productive Trump, but minus the stench” candidate (which, it turns out, tells you a whole lot about the depths the Republican Party is intent on plumbing right now) but when he finally did start campaigning, he proved toothless, unengaged, out of touch, inept, and just plain weird. He didn’t try very hard, and when he tried, well, the non-stench guy stunk. On many levels. It was so bad one anti-DeSantis commercial that aired frequently in Iowa over the holidays was just footage of a dumpster fire and voiceovers describing how awful his campaign operation was; not his policies, not his personal conduct, his campaign operation. How that guy ever got himself elected governor of a major American state is a mystery to me, but I’m told to consider the state.
On his way out the door, though, DeSantis left us with one last turd. During his concession speech, DeSantis, in a paint-by-numbers attempt to infuse his debased political career with some dignity, quoted Winston Churchill by declaring, “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” Problem is, Churchill never said that. It’s just Internet meme garbage that should have been caught by anyone with the sense to know social media feeds are founts of bullshit.
But it gets better: Turns out that quote is actually from a 1930s advertisement by Anheuser-Busch, a company DeSantis wanted Florida to investigate last year after the company cut a deal with a transgender social media influencer to promote their product. Leave it to DeSantis to surrender to Donald Trump by attributing the ad copy of a woke beer brand to a conservative icon.
Now the race is down to Trump and former South Carolina governor and Trump-era United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley, who is insisting a ten-point beatdown and a second-place finish in a two-person race in just about the only state she should be competitive in means her campaign is alive and kicking. One could argue Trump’s victory in New Hampshire was underwhelming since he only won with 54% of the vote. Maybe Haley does have some momentum. But the road forward for Haley is pretty narrow. The next big test is about a month from now in Haley’s home state of South Carolina, where Trump is currently thrashing her in the polls. If she loses there, she’s toast. But if she wins, it probably won’t be by much, and the Trump campaign will write it off as a state Haley should have won all along. After that, the campaign goes national, where Trump will have an insurmountable advantage in any state redder than a faded MAGA cap. To win, Haley would need to capitalize on what would most likely be a sudden mood shift among Republican voters concerning Trump’s electoral prospects in November. Not impossible, especially if polls start showing Trump’s edge over Biden shrinking or waves of unflattering news begin crashing into Trump (although, when is unflattering news not crashing into Trump?) but I suspect Trump would turn the tables on that by blaming Haley’s quixotic campaign for his poor poll numbers. That said, I’m still rooting for Haley to land some punches before her corner throws in the towel.
So the race for the Republican presidential nomination is all but over, which means we can turn our attention to the 2024 general election rematch between Trump and Joe Biden. I am hesitant to predict what will happen in about nine months time. Instead, I think it might be more useful to consider the strengths and weaknesses Trump and Biden have heading into this election. The more they can leverage these factors to their advantage, the better position they’ll be in to turn out the coalition they need to return to the White House. So keep an eye on these variables over the next few months.
BIDEN
Advantage: Incumbency—Consider: Over the past 100 years, which roughly equates to the era of mass media bully pulpit presidential politics, the United States has held twenty-five presidential elections. In seventeen of those elections, the then-current occupant of the White House was running for re-election, and in twelve of those elections, the incumbent won re-election. The five exceptions were 1932 (Republican Herbert Hoover lost in the depths of the Great Depression while Republicans attempted to retain the White House for a fourth consecutive term as the post-1896 Republican coalition collapsed); 1976 (Republican Gerald Ford—the only person to ever become president without having first received a vote for president or vice president—narrowly lost re-election following Watergate and in the midst of a downbeat 1970s economy); 1980 (Democrat Jimmy Carter, who presided over the collapse of the Democratic Party’s New Deal coalition and was hobbled by a hostage crisis and a downbeat economy); 1992 (Republican George H.W. Bush, who was attempting to retain control of the White House for Republicans for a fourth consecutive term while hobbled by a recession); and 2020 (Republican Donald Trump, who was mismanaging a pandemic and likely presiding over the collapse of the Reagan coalition). (One might also recommend considering 1952 and 1968, when Democratic incumbents declined to run because of their poor political standing.)
Incumbents have an advantage because they have a hand in shaping the political terrain upon which the election will be waged. Biden doesn’t have to hypothetically claim he wants to build a bridge; he can go stand in front of one and state “I built that.” Incumbents can make government work toward their electoral advantage.
That doesn’t mean, of course, that incumbents will always win. But revisit that list and note what conditions tend to lead to an incumbent’s loss: A party’s long-term control of the White House (with the obvious exception of the Democrats’ 1933-1953 run), economic catastrophe/downbeat economic mood, scandal, public dissatisfaction with the management of a crisis, the collapse of a party coalition. None of those conditions apply to Biden at the moment with the exception of a downbeat economic mood, which I’ll get to next. Otherwise, Biden is pretty well-positioned.
(Potential) Advantage: An Improving Economy—When it came to the economy, Americans were pretty down on Biden throughout most of 2022 and 2023. It seems, however, that as people started buying Christmas gifts last year, they discovered they could afford them. Consumer sentiment is rebounding sharply, unemployment remains low, wages have caught up to inflation, and while prices haven’t dropped, inflation isn’t rising anymore and people have grown more accustomed to the higher prices. The Fed looks set to lower interest rates through the year, which should make it easier for people to borrow money and keep the economy humming. The economy is good. Economists are predicting the economy won’t soar the way it did in 2023, but Americans will likely feel better about it this year. Presidents are often judged by voters on the performance of the economy, and it looks like Biden is set up pretty well in this regard, especially if lower-income earners begin feeling more of a bump as well. Not only might attacks on “Bidenomics” have a hard time sticking, but Bidenomics could very well be a winning proposition. We’ll just have to see if these better economic vibes start changing the public’s dejected mood.
Looming Disadvantage: Immigration and War in the Middle East—This is the disadvantage that comes with incumbency. Biden is in a pinch when it comes to Israel’s war in Gaza, as his support for Israel has alienated many young voters in the Democratic coalition who think Israel’s reaction to Hamas’s attack last November has gone too far and who believe Biden is not showing enough concern for the plight of Palestinians. The conflict also risks exploding into a larger regional war. Additionally, Biden appears to many Americans as unable to stem the flow of migrants across the southern border, and any deal he cuts with Republicans to address the issue has the potential to once again alienate young voters in his coalition.
There are opportunities for Biden to turn these issues to his advantage, however. Israel might be ready to accept a two-month ceasefire in Gaza to secure the return of hostages, which could help defuse the overall crisis. And Republicans, at Trump’s behest, look ready to kill a Senate immigration bill loaded with Republican priorities. (Trump apparently doesn’t want to hand Biden a victory on the issue before the election.) That would allow Biden to legitimately claim Trump and the Republicans are the problem when it comes to addressing the border. A lot will still happen on these fronts, though, and Biden will need to manage these issues carefully to keep the negative political fallout to a minimum.
Disadvantage: Alienated Young Voters—Simply put, Biden has struggled to enthuse voters between 18 and 35ish years old. He’ll still win the demographic in November, but to win re-election, he needs to drive up margins, and he’s struggling in this regard. I’ve already mentioned how many young voters are turned off by Biden’s unflinching support of Israel’s war in Gaza and the deal he appears ready to cut with Republicans on immigration. But despite his legislative accomplishments, many young voters would also like to see him go further on climate change, student loan debt, and economic inequality. There’s also a connection issue here. It’s not that Biden is too old, because one could say the same about Bernie Sanders, whom young Democratic voters respond well to. It’s that young voters really need to be inspired to participate in the political process, and that’s not in Biden’s political wheelhouse. Young voters came out for Biden in 2020 because the moment called to them; the urgency this year isn’t as palpable yet and many feel more jaded this time around, meaning Biden still has a lot of work to do on this front.
Deceiving Disadvantage: Low Approval Ratings—Biden’s overall approval ratings aren’t just bad; they’re in the range of one-term presidents like Carter and Trump. His campaign would certainly feel better if those numbers began rising. But there are three reasons why they may not be cause for serious alarm: 1.) In today’s political environment, presidents can’t expect the high levels of support previous presidents received, as conservative voters are loathe to say anything positive about Democrats and liberal voters are loathe to say anything positive about Republicans. An average mid-40s approval rating may be the best a president can hope for; 2.) The voters holding out on Biden aren’t swingy voters. Instead, they’re voters who constitute his base. The challenge, therefore, is not persuading a group of people to vote for Biden over Trump but rather engaging people who are already inclined to vote Democratic and getting them to the polls; and 3.) A low approval rating may not matter in a two-person race against Trump. For instance, a recent poll found Biden had a 38% approval rating in New Hampshire yet was beating Trump by 7 points.
Disadvantage: He’s Old—Yes, Biden is in his 80s, and it shows. Trump is old, too, and it’s showing on him as well, but Biden suffers more politically for it. The concern has to be that his age will catch up to Biden on the campaign trail. I suppose there are ways his campaign could put him in settings that maximize his “Old Uncle Joe” appeal—maybe by surrounding him with surrogates who do most of the speaking or holding events where he listens (and sympathizes) with the stories shared by average Americans—but he will need to be able to hold massive rallies and rev up crowds. Still, Biden needs to get ahead of his age. He may just have to own it (“You hit a certain age, you do need to watch your step a bit more”) or, better yet, neutralize it (“I may have a little less spring in my step, but I still got a whole lot of heart, and that’s what counts.”)
Advantage/Disadvantage: He’s Normal—Anyone running for president wants to generate enthusiasm for their candidacy. You want people excited to vote for you. Admittedly, there isn’t a whole lot of enthusiasm out there for average Joe Biden. That could suppress turnout. But it may not matter. Biden may not be flashy, but he is steady, competent, normal. At worst he’s prone to verbal gaffes and messing up stage directions. He’s not torching the country on a daily basis. He’s not creating debt ceiling showdowns and government shutdown crises every other month. He’s not preoccupied with political sideshows or throwing hissy fits on the regular. He’s not intent on dividing the country against itself. Maybe, after all the hell this country’s been through over the past ten years, a majority coalition of exhausted voters will trudge to the polls to pick the guy promising a drama-free presidency. Biden does not inspire passion, but maybe he doesn’t have to in order to win.
TRUMP
Advantage: An Energized Base (and Republican Party Members Who Can’t Convince Themselves to Quit Him)—The MAGA base is ride or die with Trump. They’re committed and passionate, and there’s nothing Trump could do to lose their support. Unlike Biden, who is struggling to energize his base voters, Trump has his base voters banked, and Trump’s presence on the ballot will draw them to the polls. Trump also appears to have a knack for connecting with low information voters sympathetic to his message who do not consume traditional or mainstream media, meaning he has the potential to find new (if more unreliable) voters.
Furthermore, the Republican Party faithful have an unfortunate tendency to fall in line by the time Election Day rolls around. They always seem to find some reason (her emails, Hunter’s laptop) that allows them to justify a vote for Trump. I know pundits keep coming back to polls suggesting 40% of Haley voters in New Hampshire won’t vote for Trump in the general election, but these are still voters who showed up to vote in a Republican primary. That’s certainly a red flag for Trump, but he also has to feel he can demonize Democrats enough to convince skeptical Republicans to swallow their dignity and sense of civic responsibility to vote for him.
Disadvantage: He’s Still Toxic—Yet those polls may be on to something. It could be a portion of that 40% of Haley voters were pro-Biden never-Trumpers trying to salvage their party, meaning they’ve always been in Biden’s camp. But they could also be Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who have finally had enough. It wouldn’t take many of them to tip an election to Biden in a swing state (so long as they actually vote for Biden, and Biden turns out his base as well.) Trump has not done much over the past four years to endear himself to disenchanted Republican voters. They may conclude this election is an opportune moment to send a message to their party about their continued embrace of Trump, since the only consequence would be returning a milquetoast lame duck Democrat to the White House. Also: Trump is going to spend the next month viciously attacking not Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris but a prominent female Republican looking to build a national constituency. He’s already alienated many moderate Republican and independent female voters; if he’s not careful, he could push them further away.
Advantage: A Pissy National Mood—For about a year now, about 70% of Americans have said the country is on the wrong track, which is higher on average than how Americans generally felt during the Trump administration. Now take that worth a grain of salt: There are undoubtedly many Republicans who feel that way about the country right now, but there are also probably many Democrats who feel the same way given their frustrations with issues like abortion, gun control, climate change, and democratic decline. But still, the nation’s mood is pretty sour—definitely not upbeat 1984 or 1996 vibes—and Trump feeds off that. If the nation’s mood stays that way, a positive Biden message won’t resonate the way Trump’s “this country has gone to hell” message will.
Advantage: Polarization—The nation’s political divide should benefit both parties equally. The catch, though, is that it probably benefits Trump more. It’s not just because Biden is more temperamentally inclined to reach out to a dwindling number of persuadable voters, but because polarization keeps reality checks from breaking through to Republican voters. Just consider how the two sides now frame the 1/6 Capitol riot. Democrats characterize it as a “violent insurrection;” maybe some would call it a riot, but it’s in the ballpark. Trump and right-wing media refer to it as a “demonstration” that was mostly peaceful, and often describes those sentenced to prison for their actions that day as “hostages” who are being “persecuted” by the state. This isn’t just spinning facts, but offering up a counter-reality. No matter how fragile that counter-reality may be, though, the forces of polarization work to preserve it. That works to Trump’s advantage, as he is a serial fabulist whose credibility would be shattered if his party held him to a higher epistemological standard.
Advantage: He Has Made the Abnormal Normal (At Least For Himself)—Remember when Nikki Haley couldn’t/wouldn’t cite “slavery” as the cause of the Civil War? That was kind of a big political story for about a week at the end of 2023, and Haley faced a lot of scrutiny over it. Had Trump said that, though, it would have blown over pretty quick. Left-wing media would have covered it relentlessly, but few beyond that would have taken notice or dwelled on it, as such behavior is what people have come to expect of Trump. I don’t know whether this is a net positive or negative for Trump when it comes to actual support—more people voted for him in 2020 than 2016, after all—but many people now take for granted that while his boorish behavior may be distasteful, it isn’t ultimately disqualifying, which allows him to get away with far more than other politicians.
Disadvantage: He’s a Loser—Trump lost the popular vote in 2016. He only became president because of our fluky electoral college system. He lost in 2020; again, it was only close in the electoral college. Trump featured prominently in the 2018 and 2022 midterms, and Republicans underperformed badly in both of those elections. All of this suggests there is a ceiling to Trump’s appeal. Unfortunately, when the Trump brand loses, it doesn’t get wiped out, leaving MAGA opponents little room for error. Any sense of exhaustion or dip in enthusiasm among Democrats could cost them an election. But since 2016, the record shows that in toss-up contests and the places where majorities are won or lost, the Trump brand isn’t a winner.
Unknown Advantage or Disadvantage: His Trials—I have no idea how the many trials Trump is involved in will ultimately play out. Will Americans, a bare majority of whom already think Trump is criminally culpable for something, tire of the circus that accompanies the former president everywhere he goes and reject the ringmaster? Would a conviction (if we ever get to one) finally disqualify him in the eyes of many? Maybe the election will come to revolve around the question of whether a president of the United States is constrained by the law, which probably isn’t a winning issue for Trump. Or maybe the trials (along with Trump’s courtroom shenanigans) will only serve to energize his followers? What if his lawyers successfully muddy the prosecutors’ cases, so that persuadable voters regard it all as an irresolvable political dispute? It’s impossible to predict the effect Trump’s trials will have on the presidential race.
CONCLUSION
There’s a lot of pessimism surrounding the Biden campaign at the moment. I’ve contributed to that by arguing over the past few months that Democrats would be better off nominating a fresher face (although that could backfire, too, if the new candidate can’t withstand the scrutiny or falls flat on the campaign trail; see DeSantis, Ron.) But I think Biden may be in a stronger position vis a vis Trump than many believe.
Democratic political operatives keep pointing to poll numbers indicating many undecided voters who voted for Biden in 2020 have not factored a rematch with Trump into their political calculus yet. They’re assuming the GOP would never re-nominate a scoundrel like Trump. Now that Republicans are ready to run Trump at the top of their ticket for the third consecutive time, these voters may start coming around for Biden.
Other pundits have speculated that thus far some voters, when asked to choose between Biden and Trump, have picked Trump not because they like Trump but to register their disapproval of the incumbent president. I’ve always been skeptical of this argument—no matter how unbelievable a third Trump campaign seems, Biden vs. Trump is far from an abstract proposition—but again, with Trump now the presumptive nominee, the reality of a 2020 rematch may start to sink in.
I know I may be whistling past the graveyard on this, but I have a hunch things are beginning to turn around for Biden. He still needs to find a way to mobilize younger voters (something Trump may do for him) but if the economy continues to improve, he’ll be able to say he’s got the country moving in the right direction and that it would be too much of a risk to put a chaos agent like Trump back in charge. And for all of Trump’s bluster, which certainly excites his base, his message is not only pessimistic but tired. Trump keeps complaining about the past ten years; Biden can say he’s focused on the next ten years to come. Experience has taught us never to underestimate Trump’s political appeal, but I suspect his doomsday message will pack less punch against an incumbent who can not only claim these are indeed better days but that more will come if voters return him rather than the clown to the White House.
Signals and Noise
“Stop treating this like it’s fantasy football. You don’t make trades. We have our nominee. He’s the leader of the free world. He’s the leader of our party and he’s objectively good at this job.”—Democratic Hawaii Senator Brian Schatz, about Joe Biden
The title of this article is hyperbolic, but bookmark it and share it as it’s a pretty thorough and rather concise defense of Joe Biden and a takedown of Don Trump: “Trump is a Combination of Every Threat We Have Ever Faced in Our History” by David Rothkopf and Bernard Schwartz of The New Republic
By Matt Lewis of The Daily Beast, on Don Trump’s victory in New Hampshire: “Now, I don’t want to conflate the GOP with the rest of America. But we are talking about one of our two major political parties here. It stands to reason that the kind of people we choose to lead us says something about who we are, too. And what does Trump’s success suggest? We are not a serious country. We love entertainment. We are tribalistic, and we crave an exciting strongman. But I’ll reserve most of my criticism for the party that just (effectively) renominated Trump as its standard bearer. It’s time to drop the crap about reluctantly making a ‘binary choice’ or Trump being the ‘lesser of two evils’ when compared to Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden. Having rejected the options of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis or U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, you decided to give us Barabbas. Again. Republican voters aren’t merely settling for Trump. For many, his chaotic behavior is a feature, not a bug.”
By Alexandra Petri of the Washington Post: “Trump Accepts Election Results, Outraging His Base” (“A primary election happened, and Donald Trump just accepted it. As though tallying who got more votes in an election could possibly be used to determine who had won it. As though he were going to just participate in democracy now, as though nothing had happened.”)
By former Republican Peter Wehner of The Atlantic: “The Party of Malice” (written in response to Trump’s racist and xenophobic attack on Nikki Haley by questioning her birthright citizenship and referring to her as “Nimroda”, a mangling of her birth name Nimarata. Wehner ends the piece by writing, “I hope my former party will one day be reformed. For now, it needs to be defeated.”)
“There’s a great man in Europe. Viktor Orbán… He’s a very great leader. He’s a very strong man… It’s nice to have a strongman running your country.”—Don Trump at a New Hampshire rally openly praising autocracy again. (Unfortunately, Americans have no idea who Viktor Orbán is.)
Revisiting the way the magazine he currently writes for raved over Benito Mussolini’s pro-business bent in the 1930s (“Fascism’s gift of order and progress”) Edward Luce of the Financial Times writes about how business leaders in the United States (including JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon) are making their peace once again with Don Trump.
Isaac Schorr wonders in Mediaite how far Republican Senator Tim Scott is willing to debase himself to become Don Trump’s vice president.
Trump’s explanation of how missile defense systems work is enlightening. To quote the former commander-in-chief, “Bing ding ding ding ding ding…bomp…Pssshew, boom.”
Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen of Axios note that despite his unhinged speeches, Trump’s campaign operation is more disciplined than during his previous two White House runs.
“[I]f you want Donald Trump not to screw with the elections anymore and you think he’s really gonna screw with the elections, you ought to vote for Donald Trump, and then he’ll be in for another term, and then he’ll be done.”—Brain genius and former Never-Trumper Ben Shapiro
If Don Trump says we shouldn’t support Taiwan if invaded by China because Taiwan “took our business away,” does that make him soft on China? Asking for a friend…
Beth Mole of Ars Technica reports the White House has its own pharmacy and it was shady AF during the Trump presidency.
Hunter Walker and Luppe B. Luppen of TPM write former president Barack Obama is sounding the alarm over the Biden campaign’s engagement with young voters. And Ken Thomas of the Wall Street Journal writes Democrats in Michigan are sounding the alarm over Biden’s standing in that state.
By Jason Linkins of The New Republic: “It’s Time For Democrats to Make Some Enemies” ([I]t pays to locate some less esoteric enemies, to whom everyone can relate. Here, a slew of corporate enemies abound: junk-fee crooks; private equity goons; the gangsters of the pharmaceutical industry; banks plucking high overdraft fees out of the pockets of people living paycheck to paycheck; a small universe of price gougers, wage thieves, and consumer predators.”)
Having watched New York Republican Representative and potential Trump VP Elise Stefanik struggle to address the fact that Don Trump was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault, Greg Sargent writes in The New Republic that Democrats need to press Republicans to defend their likely presidential nominee.
Philip Elliott of Time calls Mike Johnson a “SINO—Speaker in No Only”, a conservative who has alienated his fellow conservatives, who Democrats care nothing about, and who is occupying an office his party members handed to him out of desperation before he built the relationships needed to allow him to do the job well. His only source of strength at this point is that no one else would want the job.
Senate negotiators have reached a deal on a border bill that would significantly restrict illegal border crossings and expedite asylum claims. The bill would enable the government to shut down the border if daily migrant encounters exceeded 4,000 migrants per day. In a statement after the deal was announced, President Biden said, “[the bill] would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.”
Dan Pfeiffer argues House Republicans oppose the border deal the Senate is working on because they’d rather keep Biden saddled with a border crisis, which they believe will benefit Trump. (NOTE: If Republicans insist there is a “crisis” at the border but want to wait for President Trump to fix it, is it really a “crisis”?)
“We have nothing. In my opinion, we have nothing to go out there and campaign on. It’s embarrassing.”—Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) admitting Republicans preside over a do-nothing Congress.
With the resignation of Bill Johnson (R-OH) this past week, House Republicans currently have a 1-vote majority, which is further diminished by the absence this month of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise.
“I will not be complicit in paving a path towards socialism.”—Republican Rep. Pete Stauber (MN) opposing the 2021 infrastructure bill.
“I'm proud to announce that Duluth, MN and Superior, WI have received over 1 billion in federal funding to help replace the Blatnik Bridge. This is a HUGE win for #MN08 and I was proud to advocate for these funds!”—Stauber on social media proudly supporting the construction of a bridge funded by the 2021 infrastructure bill he opposed.
A federal jury has ordered Don Trump to pay E. Jean Carroll $83 million in damages for continuing to defame her after he was found guilty in a civil trial last year of sexually assaulting and defaming her. Trump—who apparently can dish it out but can’t take it—lumbered out of the courtroom during prosecutor’s closing arguments in an attempt to distract from the jury’s decision.
Amy Gardner and Holly Bailey of the Washington Post identify a common refrain that has emerged from allegations Fulton County DA Fani Willis hired a romantic interest to lead the Trump prosecution in Georgia: It’s not illegal, the case must go on, but Willis was a fool for doing so and almost certainly damaged her and the case’s credibility.
“[If you told Trump] that Martians came and stole the election, he’d probably believe you.”—Republican Senator Lindsey “Goose” Graham, testifying in the Georgia election fraud case, from a new book by Michael Isikoff that reports Goose threw Maverick (Orange Version) under the bus during his testimony. He also reportedly thanked and hugged Fani Willis afterwards for letting him get all that off his chest, to which Willis was, like, whatevs.
Philip Bump of the Washington Post compares the transcript of a House witness deposition in the Hunter Biden investigation with Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer’s description of that testimony and finds Comer completely misrepresented the witness’s testimony.
The Utah House of Representatives passed a bill that would create a process by which state legislators could choose to ignore federal laws and regulations.
Florida police aren’t charging the former head of the Florida GOP with sexual assault after reviewing a video recording he made of a sexual encounter with his accuser, but they are now investigating whether he made the recording without the woman’s consent (she says she did not give her consent.)
Louisiana’s redrawn congressional map will net Democrats an additional seat.
A study by the American Medical Association estimated there have been over 26,000 rape-related pregnancies in Texas since the state made it practically impossible for a woman to get an abortion sixteen months ago.
The US economy grew at a much faster rate and inflation declined more than expected during the fourth quarter of 2023.
Jeanna Smialek and Ben Casselman of the New York Times investigate what economists got wrong when they predicted a recession would occur in 2023.
The United Auto Workers endorsed Joe Biden for president after Biden became the first president to join a picket line last year during UAW’s strike. UAW president Shawn Fain called Trump a “scab.”
Obamacare enrollment has hit an all-time high (21 million people). Trump keeps talking about repealing it.
A recently released report found the cost of rent in unaffordable for half of all renters in the United States.
In The Atlantic, Alex Kotlowitz reviews Benjamin Harolds’ new book about suburban America titled Disillusioned and how once prosperous white suburbs have fallen into decline after white residents cut taxes, neglected city services, and eventually sold their aging homes to lower-income minorities, who are left with underfunded community infrastructure and mortgages on homes that need extensive repairs.
Joshua Keating of Vox examines the recent worldwide increase in armed conflict and what’s behind the new outbreak in war.
Robert L. Carlin and Siegfried S. Hecker of 38North are worried North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has made the strategic decision to go to war.
Stephen Wertheim writes in The Atlantic that Biden is making a mistake by centering American foreign policy around the defense of democracy.
Barak Ravid of Axios reports Biden told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to scale down the war in Gaza and that he was not onboard with a year of war.
Peter Baker of the New York Times writes the loss of American lives in a strike by Iranian-backed forces would likely be the red line that pushes the US into a broader war in the Middle East. There have been a number of incidents recently that have injured American personnel.
The Wall Street Journal reports the United States passed along intelligence to Iran alerting them that ISIS was preparing to carry out the terrorist attack that killed more than 80 people earlier this month.
US intelligence estimates Israel has killed 20-30% of Hamas’s fighters in Gaza, which at this point in the war is regarded as far short of Israel’s wartime goal.
The United Nations’ human rights office has said Israel’s treatment of Palestinian prisoners may amount to torture.
Saudi Arabia said they will not normalize relations with Israel unless a path exists for the creation of a Palestinian state. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ruled out that possibility.
Yuka Hayashi of the Wall Street Journal writes that to compete with China and boost a developing area of the American economy, the Biden administration is set to announce billions of dollars in subsidies to promote the domestic production of advanced microchips.
The Washington Post reports the United States does not anticipate Ukraine will be able to regain territory this year and is aiming instead to bolster Ukraine’s military might, defensive capabilities, and economy.
Jon Stewart is coming back to host The Daily Show! (Only Monday nights, but still!)
Vincent’s Picks: Monsieur Spade
The hardboiled detective may be a quintessentially American creation, but stories and films featuring such characters also resonate with the French. It was a French critic who labelled the moody, highly-stylized crime movies that emerged in the 1940s film noir (“dark film”). And one of the genre’s most iconic character types—the mysterious, alluring, yet dangerous woman—bears a French name: The femme fatale. Why do these stories such a natural fit for the French? I’ll hazard a guess: The bleak yet romanticized underworld of film noir, one in which noble yet hardened men must navigate a rogues gallery of shady, duplicitous characters, may have spoken to the citizens of a country that had spent four years under Nazi occupation, an occupation some citizens resisted and that others accepted.
It would make a whole lot of sense, then, to set a hardboiled detective story in the shadowy streets and smoky nightclubs of Paris, but maybe it takes a mad genius to transplant the main character of Dashiell Hammett’s classic 1930 crime novel The Maltese Falcon from Depression-era San Francisco to the French countryside of the early 1960s for a six-part television miniseries. That’s what viewers are getting with Monsieur Spade, a show created by Scott Frank (The Queen’s Gambit; screenwriter of Out of Sight, Minority Report, and Logan) and Tom Fontana (Oz) currently airing on AMC. It may not be what you think viewers in the year 2024 would demand, but it’s a show worth immersing yourself in.
Monsieur Spade stars Clive Owen (Children of Men, The Knick) as Sam Spade, the (almost) OG hardboiled detective Humphrey Bogart portrayed on screen in the 1941 John Huston black-and-white classic. Spade first arrives in France in the 1950s with the ten-year-old daughter of Brigid O’Shaughnessy, the femme fatale he slept with and then locked up in The Maltese Falcon. Long story short, Spade got O’Shaughnessy out of jail back in the 30s but she jumped bail; she’s been travelling the world ever since in search of “antiquities.” She calls on Spade to return her daughter Teresa to Teresa’s father in rural Bozouls, France; shortly thereafter, O’Shaughnessy is killed in a train derailment in Turkey. When Spade shows up in France with Teresa, her no-good father Philippe is nowhere to be found, leaving Spade to look after the child. Within a matter of hours, though, Spade meets Gabrielle (Chiara Mastroianni), falls in love with her, and permanently relocates to France.
Fast forward to 1963. Gabrielle has died, leaving her villa to Spade, who has retired. His lifelong smoking habit has left him with emphysema. Teresa (Cara Bossom), on the verge of inheriting a large sum of money when she turns eighteen, is enrolled in an all-girls school at a local convent. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Philippe (Jonathan Zaccaï) has shown up again with a renewed interest in his daughter. Soon enough, threats are made, blood and guns show up, a ghastly crime is committed at the convent, and Spade is back on the case.
Owen plays Spade as completely unflappable. Whether irritated or smitten, the expression on his face barely changes. Nothing impresses or surprises Spade much. He walks into danger and confrontations with only his wits. When he is shot at from behind while driving an automobile, he stops, looks back, then comes at the shooter in reverse. The second shot that barely misses him is simply noted. When one character tells him, “Not caring doesn’t make one bulletproof,” he responds with his trademark acerbic wit, “You should needlepoint that one on a pillow.” Maybe that emphysema diagnosis has led him to stare down his own mortality. Knowing Spade, mortality might blink.
Transplanting Spade to rural France is surprisingly effective. The Maltese Falcon took place in the foggy, vertiginous streets of San Francisco; film noir and hard-boiled detective stories are usually set in the city at night. Yet Monsieur Spade finds echoes of that sinister urban world in sunny pastoral southern France. The gendarmerie, presided over by the callous Chief of Police Patrice Michaud (Denis Ménochet) seems one level up from a dungeon. The local nightclub feels like a cavern. The convent seems as though it might be hiding some sort of old world secret. Like any good film noir, the world of Monsieur Spade feels both elegant and grotesque, sophisticated and debased at the same time.
The 1963 setting also works. Spade is certainly a man out of time when he hears John Kennedy talking about the space race on the radio. Part of the—I don’t know, would you call it “charm”?—of the show, however, is that its rural setting feels a few decades removed from the 1960s. At the same time, you also get the sense the country is haunted by the trauma of World War II and the war in Algeria. The characters feel like stranded souls, abandoned by the present but lost in a past they can’t escape. Frank, who worked wonders evoking the 1960s on The Queen’s Gambit, succeeds again here.
TV is offering up a number of promising mystery shows to keep us company this winter: A Murder at the End of the World (also starring Owen) and the locked-room series Death and Other Details on Hulu, as well as a new season of True Detective starring Jodie Foster on Max. Monsieur Spade is the least flashy of these shows, but it’s certainly worth settling in with.