Mediaboss Marketing

To the editor: Why might Republicans have abided weakening their party by ceding its control to President Trump? Its not just that he excels at manipulating the GOPs core constituency. (Sick of Trump? Blame our weak political parties, Opinion, June 30)

More important is Trumps unmatched ability to keep the Democrats befuddled and off-balance so much so as to preclude them from settling on a nominee until deep into the primaries, or even crafting a convincing campaign message.

Privately, most of my GOP friends readily concede that Trump is the antithesis of the capable, composed and prudent leader needed to guide our country to a sustainable future beyond the next election day. But while he so adroitly antagonizes and weakens the opposition party, Republicans will indulge him as the antidote to their own partys weaknesses.

Strange, since 2016 I havent heard anyone braying about American exceptionalism.

P. Jane Weil, Sacramento

..

To the editor: As a longtime reader, I pay particular attention to your conservative columnists and never miss one of Jonah Goldbergs columns. Recently, he unloaded a whopper that Vice President Hubert Humphrey obtained the 1968 Democratic nomination over Sen. Eugene McCarthy, despite the latters substantially better showing in the primaries, because the party mattered.

Methinks that in addition to failing to mention how limited the primary system was in 1968, Goldberg conveniently forgot about another event which abruptly ended in Los Angeles that year, one that made it clear a large swath of Democrats were hungry for an alternative to McCarthy.

Blaise Jackson, Escondido

..

To the editor: With all the unpresidential behavior, name-calling and worst of all, lack of competence for the job, I wonder if even very loyal Trump supports like Vice President Mike Pence, Atty. Gen. William Barr and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are tired of lying and making excuses for him.

Matthew D. Kerster, Gardena

See the original post:
Trump freaks out Democrats. That's why Republicans love him - Los Angeles Times

Senate Republicans fear President TrumpDonald John TrumpProtesters tear down statue of Christopher Columbus in Baltimore 'Independence Day' star Bill Pullman urges Americans to wear a 'freedom mask' in July 4 PSA Protesters burn American flag outside White House after Trump's July Fourth address MORE is putting them into a political no-win situation by threatening to veto a popular defense policy bill over bipartisan language to rename military bases named after Confederate generals.

GOP lawmakers are trying to wave the president off his veto threat and may end up delaying the bill to avoid a political disaster before Election Day.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellPublic awareness campaigns will protect the public during COVID-19 Democrats: A moment in history, use it wisely 'Comrade' Trump gets 'endorsement' from Putin in new mock ad by Lincoln Project MORE (R-Ky.) on Wednesday urged Trump not to veto the $740.5 billion bill over a provision sponsored by Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenThe Hill's Campaign Report: Biden chips away at Trump's fundraising advantage Warnock raises almost M in Georgia Senate race in second quarter The Hill's Morning Report - Trump lays low as approval hits 18-month low MORE (D-Mass.) mandating the secretary of Defense rename military installations named after Confederate generals.

I would hope the president really wouldn't veto the bill over this issue, McConnell told Fox News. I hope the president will reconsider vetoing the entire defense bill,which includes pay raises for our troops, over a provision in there that could lead to changing the names.

With Trump and several Senate GOP incumbents down in the polls to Democratic opponents, Republican lawmakers are not looking forward to a racially charged debate in Congress over preserving the memories of Confederate generals.

We are now in an era of live grenades lying around. Nobody wants to jump on them, said Sen. Pat RobertsCharles (Pat) Patrick RobertsPeter Thiel sours on Trump's reelection chances: report Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Cook Political Report shifts Montana Senate race to 'toss up' MORE (R-Kan.).

A messy partisan fight over bases named after Confederate generals could also further drive away swing suburban voters, who are already dropping away from Trump, according to recent polls.

Trump on Sunday tweeted and then deleted a video of a support at a retirement community in Florida chanting white power, further exacerbating the fears of GOP lawmakers that his style is too divisive.

If Trump doesnt relent on the threatened veto, its likely Republicans will not let the defense policy bill go to the presidents desk before the Nov. 3 general election.

It will probably be November by the time it would be coming to his desk anyway. A lot can happen between now and then, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James InhofeJames (Jim) Mountain InhofeRepublicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Senate rejects Paul proposal on withdrawing troops from Afghanistan Liberal veterans group urges Biden to name Duckworth VP MORE (R-Okla.) told reporters Wednesday. He said of course it would be a mistake to veto the defense bill and expressed hope the base-naming provision could somehow be removed from the bill, asserting theres lots of pathways to do so.

Sen. Josh HawleyJoshua (Josh) David HawleyRepublicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names McConnell: Trump shouldn't veto defense bill over renaming Confederate bases Trump warns of defense bill veto over military base renaming amendment MORE (R-Mo.), a rising conservative star, for example, has an amendment to remove the mandate for the Defense secretary to change the base names.

But others in the GOP, including SenateRepublican Whip John ThuneJohn Randolph ThuneRepublicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names McConnell: Trump shouldn't veto defense bill over renaming Confederate bases Senate Republicans defend Trump's response on Russian bounties MORE (S.D.), warn it will be extremely difficult to remove the base-naming language. Doing so on the Senate floor would require 60 votes, and the entire Democratic conference and several Republicans support the provision.

The prospects of taking it out in a Senate-House conference negotiation is also unlikely because the House is expected to add similar, if not stronger, language to its version of the bill.

That means the surest way to avoid a veto before Election Day is to keep the bill off Trumps desk until after Nov. 3 unless the president changes his mind.

Republicans view the defense bill, formally known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), as must-passlegislation. It has been passed annually for 59 consecutive years and is seen as a crucial benchmark of governance.

Republicans are leery about a battle with Democrats over preserving the legacies of Confederate generals at a time when the Black Lives Matter movement and social justice are dominating the national political conversation.

Three Republicans on the Armed Services Committee supported changing the names of military bases during the panel's voice vote last month.The trio included two Republicans in tough reelection races, Sens. Martha McSallyMartha Elizabeth McSallyACLU calls on Congress to approve COVID-19 testing for immigrants Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Political establishment takes a hit as chaos reigns supreme MORE (Ariz.) and Joni ErnstJoni Kay ErnstSunday shows preview: Lawmakers to address alarming spike in coronavirus cases Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Senate Republicans defend Trump's response on Russian bounties MORE (Iowa), along with Sen. Mike RoundsMarion (Mike) Michael RoundsRepublicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Republican rift opens up over qualified immunity for police GOP divided in fight over renaming bases MORE (S.D.).

Other Republicans such as Sen. Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyQAnon scores wins, creating GOP problem Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Overnight Defense: Lawmakers demand answers on reported Russian bounties for US troops deaths in Afghanistan | Defense bill amendments target Germany withdrawal, Pentagon program giving weapons to police MORE (Utah) also support changing base names.

I would support changing the names of bases that were named in honor of Confederate generals. Those individuals fought against the United States of American and we should instead be honoring people who fought for the United States of America, he told reporters Wednesday.

Senate Minority Leader CharlesSchumer (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday dared Trump to give Democrats a big gift before the election.

I dare President Trump to veto the bill over Confederate base naming. Its in the bill, it has bipartisan support, it will stay in the bill, he said.

Democrats say that Trump would look completely out of step with changing sentiments on race if he vetoed the defense bill, especially after Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) signed legislation this week to take down the Mississippi state flag, which has the Confederate battle flag embedded within it.

I just think it would be a mistake. I think hes out of sync with the opinion all across the country, said Sen. Jack ReedJohn (Jack) Francis ReedSunday shows preview: Lawmakers to address alarming spike in coronavirus cases Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names Senate Dems request briefing on Russian bounty wire transfers MORE (R.I.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. He noted that the state of Mississippi is moving to change its flag and NASCAR has banned the Confederate battle flag at races.

Other Republicans agree with McConnell that vetoing the massive defense bill would be a mistake.

I plan on voting for the bill if that provision is in there or if its modified, said Sen. Shelley Moore CapitoShelley Wellons Moore CapitoRepublicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names McConnell makes strong call for masks, saying there should be no stigma Ernst sinks vote on Trump EPA nominee MORE (R-W.Va.). I would hope the president wouldnt veto it."

Its a bipartisan effort to arm our military and arm our defenses, she said.

Sen. Marco RubioMarco Antonio RubioCongress eyes tighter restrictions on next round of small business help Trump administration eyes new strategy on COVID-19 tests ACLU calls on Congress to approve COVID-19 testing for immigrants MORE (R-Fla.) said he has some concerns with the details of the Warren provision because it mandates an outcome but told reporters that he "wouldnt vote against the bill because of that provision.

Ultimately, I dont think the name of a facility should be something thats divisive or offensive to people especially if there are better alternatives to it, he said. But it has to be through a process, a considered process.

The Warren amendment, which was adopted during a closed-door committee markup, would require military bases and other property commemorating the Confederate States of America to be renamed after an implementing commission reviews the issue for three years.

I personally dont have any problem with renaming bases. We have plenty of American military heroes that we can rename these things after, Rubio said.

The NDAA is so important and [has] so many important elements in it that I dont believe that alone should be enough reason to either vote against it or veto it, he added.

Sen. Ron JohnsonRonald (Ron) Harold JohnsonCongress eyes tighter restrictions on next round of small business help Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names GOP senators debate replacing Columbus Day with Juneteenth as a federal holiday MORE (R-Wis.) said hopefully we can get by that.

We obviously need to pass NDAA. It needs to be signed into law, he added.

Read the original here:
Republicans fear backlash over Trump's threatened veto on Confederate names | TheHill - The Hill

WASHINGTON (AP) In Republican circles -- with the notable exception of the man who leads the party -- the debate about masks is over: Its time to put one on.

As a surge of infections hammers the South and West, GOP officials are pushing back against the notion that masks are about politics, as President Donald Trump suggests, and telling Americans they can help save lives.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican, on Tuesday bluntly called on Trump to start wearing a mask, at least some of the time, to set a good example.

Unfortunately, this simple, lifesaving practice has become part of a political debate that says: If youre for Trump, you dont wear a mask. If youre against Trump, you do, Alexander said.

Its a rare break for Republicans from Trump, who earlier this month told the Wall Street Journal that some people wear masks simply to show that they disapprove of him. And the Republican nudges for the public -- and the president -- to embrace mask-wearing are coming from all corners of Trumps party and even from friendly conservative media.

Both Vice President Mike Pence and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in recent days have urged Americans to wear one when they are unable to maintain social distance. Sen. Mitt Romney, a Utah Republican, told reporters it would be very helpful for Trump to encourage mask usage.

Put on a mask -- its not complicated, McConnell, R-Ky., urged Americans during his weekly news conference Tuesday.

Last week, Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming tweeted a photo of her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, wearing a disposable mask and a cowboy hat. She included the message: Dick Cheney says WEAR A MASK #realmenwearmasks, a hashtag that echoed words spoken earlier by the Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Steve Doocy, co-host of a Trump friendly morning show Fox & Friends, said during an interview with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy that he doesnt see any downside in the president being seen more often wearing it.

McCarthy, R-Calif., responded that, for the upcoming holiday, we could all show our patriotism with a red, white and blue mask.

Jacksonville, the Florida city where Trump is scheduled to accept his renomination as Republicans presidential candidate in August, announced a mask requirement for indoor public spaces this week. The presidents eldest son said the new requirements were no big deal.

You know, I dont think that its too complicated to wear a mask or wash your hands and follow basic hygiene protocols, Donald Trump Jr. told Fox Business on Tuesday.

Trump aides have defended the presidents refusal to wear a mask by noting that he is regularly tested for the coronavirus, as are his aides. Those outside the administration -- including White House visitors and members of the media who are in close proximity to him and Pence -- are also tested.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany didnt directly address Republican calls for Trump to wear a mask in public more often, but noted that the president has said in the past he has no problem wearing one when necessary.

But even with safeguards, the virus has found its way into the White House. A top aide to Pence, as well as a military valet to Trump, in May tested positive for the virus.

Still, mask usage remains rare in the West Wing, said Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat who attended an intelligence briefing at the White House on Tuesday with senior members of the presidents staff.

At the briefing, which he said included about eight White House staffers, only national security adviser Robert OBrien wore a mask, Sherman said. He added that no one in the secure briefing room was able to maintain 6 feet (1.8 meters) of social distancing, as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

I learned something major, and that is the White House is a mask-free zone, Sherman told The Associated Press. The president is consistent. Hes fine with people not wearing masks.

Polls show how the partisan divide on masks has seeped into public opinion.

The vast majority of Democrats think people in their community should wear a mask when they are near other people in public places at least most of the time, including 63% who say they should always, according to a Pew Research Center poll published in early June. Among Republicans, 29% say masks should be worn always, and 23% say they should be worn most of the time. Another 23% say masks should rarely or never be worn.

Trump has been caught on camera once wearing a mask. But Pence and members of the White House coronavirus task force frequently appear in public wearing masks.

If you want the return of college football this year, wear a face covering. If you want a chance at prom next spring, wear a face covering, Surgeon General Jerome Adams urged Americans.

Over the course of the crisis, the government has sent mixed messages on masks. As the first COVID-19 cases were identified on U.S. soil, top public health officials insisted masks should be reserved for front-line workers.

In early April, the CDC issued a recommendation that people wear cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures were difficult to maintain.

But Trump immediately undercut the CDC guidance by flatly stating that he wouldnt be following it, suggesting it would be unseemly for the commander in chief to wear one as he meets with heads of states.

Other world leaders, including Canadas Justin Trudeau and Frances Emmanuel Macron, have worn masks in public and urged their citizens to do the same when they cant maintain social distance

Lawrence Gostin, a public health expert at Georgetown University, says he worries Republican calls for wearing masks might be too late.

The public has received such mixed messages from the administration, Gostin said. I fear we may be stuck with coronavirus until it burns through the American population and leaves hundreds of thousands dead.

___

Associated Press writers Jill Colvin, Darlene Superville and Hannah Fingerhut in Washington contributed to this report.

View original post here:
Republicans, with exception of Trump, now push mask-wearing - The Associated Press

Rich Lowry, editor of the conservative National Review and author of The Case for Nationalism, said in an interview, No one can dismiss this and say its completely implausible.

There is at the very least a significant faction within the Republican Party that [Carlson] has a huge stake in and arguably leadership over, Lowry, who writes a column for POLITICO, said. If he has political ambitions, he has an opening. He has a following and a taste for controversy. Hes smart, quick on his feet and personable. Political experience matters less than it once did.

Carlson has never run for office and has been dismissive of doing so in the past. In 2012, Nunberg said Republican operative Roger Stone unsuccessfully pushed Carlson to run on the Libertarian ticket. Stone told POLITICO in an email that [i]t is not inconceivable that I may have raised it in jest or in passing as repartee, but have no memory of that.

On his show, Carlson has made it abundantly clear that he thinks Trumps election in 2016 was not a freak accident. Instead, he views it as a righteous repudiation of a morally bankrupt Republican Party that had become obsessed with capital gains tax cuts and foreign wars. This week, he warned his viewers to watch out for vultures [who] wait just off stage to swoop in and claim the GOP for themselves once Donald Trump is gone, name-checking likely 2024 candidate Nikki Haley.

The moment Trump leaves, they will attack him, he said. Theyll tell you that Republicans lost power because they were mean and intolerant just like Donald Trump. ... Its a lie.

It is just one of many exhortations from the past month that have propelled Carlson to new popularity among the GOP base. As Republicans across the country and in Congress have expressed newfound openness to reforming the police and taking down Confederate monuments in the wake of protests, Carlson has denounced the Black Lives Matter movement and derided Republicans who have gone along with it.

This may be a lot of things, this moment we are living through. But it is definitely not about black lives, and remember that when they come for you, Mr. Carlson said in one 25-minute monologue on June 8 that has over 5.4 million views on YouTube. That lost him high-profile advertisers, including Disney, Papa Johns and T-Mobile, whose chief executive tweeted, Bye-bye."

A Fox News spokesperson said that Tuckers warning about when they come for you was clearly referring to Democratic leaders and politicians.

Carlson faced a similar advertiser exodus in 2018 after saying that immigrants make "our own country poorer and dirtier and more divided.

Carlson emerged from the backlash apparently unchastened.

The angry children you watched set fire to Wendy's and topple statues and scream at you on television day after day are truly and utterly stupid, he said on his show last week. And he has repeatedly pushed back on the idea that racism is systemic in the country. Overall, this is the least racist country in the history of the world, he said a few days earlier. Millions of Africans want to move here. Many already have. Our last president was black. What are you talking about?

His audience has rewarded him with blockbuster ratings.

What hes been saying speaks for a lot of people, and its basically not expressed or serviced by most Republican politicians, Lowry said. Theres a lot to be said for being fearless, and he is, while Republican politicians, as a breed, are not.

Carlson has also earned powerful enemies in the party for his regular missives aimed at lawmakers and power brokers attacks that he has kept up for the past month.

After Haley said the killing of George Floyd needs to be personal and painful for everyone in order for the country to heal, Carlson said, What Nikki Haley does best is moral blackmail. A Haley spokesperson declined to respond.

When Republican Sens. Ron Johnson and James Lankford this week proposed making Juneteenth a national holiday and doing away with Columbus Day in order to keep the number of national holidays the same, Tucker mocked the effort. "They describe themselves as conservatives, as improbable as that may seem," he said.

Carlson painted with a wider brush this week, saying Republican Party leaders so-called principles turned out to be bumper stickers they wrote 40 years ago. In a sentiment that drew praise from some conservatives and liberals alike, he added that, Instead of improving the lives of their voters, the party feeds them a steady diet of mindless, symbolic victories partisan junk food designed to make them feel full even as they waste away. Carlson apologized, to the extent this show has participated in it.

Carlson even tore into Trumps top aide and son-in-law Jared Kushner. No one has more contempt for Donald Trump's voters than Jared Kushner does, and no one expresses it more frequently, he said last month. He blamed Kushner for moderating the president on immigration, law enforcement and foreign policy.

The Kushner-bashing made some Trump-aligned Republicans wary of praising Carlson on the record. But several are bullish about a potential candidacy.

I think everybody views Pence the same: What a great guy. But I dont think anybody thinks hes the force of nature that it takes to win the presidency, said one former White House official. I think Day One, Tucker probably starts ahead of those people if he does run.

A Republican strategist close to the White House added: If you are a Republican politician and you want to know where Republican voters are, all you have to do is watch Tucker Carlson every night.

Read the original here:
Tucker Carlson 2024? The GOP is buzzing - POLITICO

Jul 4th 2020

Editors note: Each of these climate-change articles is fiction, but grounded in historical fact and real science. The year, concentration of carbon dioxide and average temperature rise (above pre-industrial average) are shown for each one. The scenarios do not present a unified narrative but are set in different worlds, with a range of climate sensitivities, on different emissions pathways

IN THE DETRITUS littering Phoenixs cavernous arena, the morning after the 2024 Republican convention, were the usual greasy corn-dog wrappers, coffee cups, shrivelled balloons and campaign flyersbut also evidence of the remarkable change Larry Hogan had brought to the party. The wrappers and cups were all recyclable, the balloons not red, white and blue but greenand mixed in with the bumf were copies of the Republican presidential nominees stirring pledge to the Earth: We, the party of Lincoln, mindful of the damage humanity is doing to Gods creation, commit to combating climate change, conserving species and environmental consciousness. Introducing the former governor of Maryland to the stage to deliver his address, Bill Gates called it perhaps the most hopeful statement ever made in American politics.

What a change this was from Donald Trumps pollution-boosting tenurewhich was of course largely the point. Mr Hogan, who had emerged from Americas coronavirus crisis as the countrys most popular governor, had been a somewhat reluctant environmentalist during his time in Annapolis. He claimed to have been fully converted to the climate cause during a post-gubernatorial fishing trip to Alaska. But the Republicans green shift was more obviously a response to the 2020 election, in which the party lost the presidency, both congressional chambers, a clutch of governors mansions, hundreds of state legislatorsand seemingly any prospect of returning to national power.

Trumpism had turned out to be a blind alley. Even in the partys southern heartlands, suburbanites, millennials and a multitude of younger voters, repelled by its philistinism, antediluvian social policies and race-baiting, flocked to the Democrats. A staggering 70% of college-educated Americans rejected the Grand Old Party. High time, then, to slay a holy cow. And as Republican strategists looked around, sharpening their knives, the appeal of abandoning their former antipathy to environmental policy was obvious. It would not only be a hit with science-respecting educated voters. It would also be relatively easy. Immigration reform would be a non-starter with the Trumpist rump. Evangelicals were never going to compromise on abortion. Far fewer conservatives were fundamentally against environmentalism, however.

As Mr Hogan loved to remind them, conservation shared more than a lexical root with conservatism; it was an expression of it. Republicans had been responsible for most of Americas environmental progress. Yellowstone National Park, the national forest reserves, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the emissions-trading scheme that fixed acid rainall were creations of Republican presidents. To renew conservatism, Mr Hogan insisted, Republicans need only look to their own noble past.

He was right. As recently as the mid-1990s some had worried about climate change just as much as the Democrats. The embrace of climate-change scepticism by the party and its supporters was driven (as Mr Hogan did not say) by a well-funded misinformation campaign by wealthy polluters, waged through conservative think-tanks, lobbyists and direct contributions to Republican candidates. Yet the partys donors had also shifted. Many traditional Republican backers, including oil companies, were now in favour of Mr Hogans greenery. And the party had, in addition, become increasingly dependent on the largesse of the renewable-energy companies that had burgeoned in many conservative states.

A boardroom terror of Democratic tax rises probably played a part in this corporate shift. But the main reason was realism. The combination of ever more alarming climate science and a solid electoral majority for addressing the issue had made ambitious climate action inescapable. Given this reality, the Republicans old and new donors alike reckoned that it would be better introduced by a pro-business Republican administration, rather than a hostile Democratic one.

President Joe Bidens business-throttling environmental policies had hastened that conclusioneven if, ironically, his Republican opponents were largely to blame for them. Having been prevented by the obstructiveness of Senate Republicans from passing almost any legislationincluding the carbon tax he had campaigned onMr Biden had instead been pushed down a regulatory path. This had in turn so delighted the rowdy Democratic left (which hated market-based solutions) that the president had doubled down.

The Biden EPAs latest rules made it almost impossible to cut urban trees, build large structures with more than 50% concrete content or develop shale-gas sites. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the climate secretary, even declared a war on gas. This leftward lurch opened up a space for a distinctively conservative approach. Mr Hogan could push his green capitalismbased on the carbon tax Mr Biden had wantedas an alternative to the Democrats green socialism.

He was not the only Republican presidential hopeful to have made this calculation. The partys primary contest had featured all sorts of climate talk. Mr Hogans main moderate rival, Nikki Haley, also proposed a carbon tax, but less compellingly. She called it a sustainability levy, a phrase that convinced no one it would be anything other than a tax. This encapsulated the South Carolinians much-hyped yet over-rehearsed and rather cloying candidacy. Mr Hogan called his proposed tax a polluter fee, a phrase that appealed to the partys still-aggrieved working-class base.

Another contender, Senator Marco Rubio, pitched what he called a pro-environment industrial policy. It would consist of heavy public investment in low-carbon technology and industries, for two main reasons, neither of which involved the climate: a need to out-compete China and high-quality job creation. Mr Hogan, a flexible small-governmentalist, purloined the proposal after Mr Rubios early exit from the contest.

Even the Trumpist candidate, the disgraced former presidents eldest son Donald Trump junior, had an environmental policy of sorts. This was down to his chief policy adviser, Steve Hilton, who had succeeded in getting a British Conservative Party leader, David Cameron, elected prime minister by the same means. Yet expecting Don junior to explain complicated geoengineering schemes proved to be a bad misjudgment.

In a televised debate the younger Trump launched a bizarre sales pitch for using capitalism to make these huge mirrors that are called aerosols for whitening the climate. Rightly fearing he had lost his audience, he then ended with a bump: But, whatever, its all green shit! Mercilessly, Mr Hiltons former employer, Fox News, cut away to show Mr Hogan, at the adjacent podium, disdainfully shaking his head. I like you, Don, he said. But Im green and youre full of it. It became his unofficial campaign catchphrase.

For more coverage of climate change, register for The Climate Issue, our fortnightly newsletter, or visit our climate-change hub

This article appeared in the The World If section of the print edition under the headline "The elephants U-turn"

Continued here:
What if the Republicans pivoted on climate? - The Economist