Our residents have been attacked by a lawless entity, and we can't just stand by and pretend this is acceptable.
- Mayor Daniel Biss of Evanston,
commenting on Border Patrol attacks on Evanston residents
This week's featured post is "What would a Republican healthcare plan look like?" I feel good about this post. Even if you usually skip the longer articles, you might want to read this one.
Ongoing stories
- Trump's assault on American democracy. Tuesday's elections show that the clock is ticking on Trump's bid for autocracy. If he allows fair elections in 2026, he's going to lose control of Congress. Meanwhile, his thugs continue to abuse the citizens of Chicago.
- Climate change. The COP30 summit is meeting in Brazil this week, with no US participation.
- Gaza. The next step in the Gaza peace plan is to assemble a "stabilization force" of peace-keeping troops from other Muslim countries. The UAE has opted out. Turkey wants in, but Israel is dubious. Meanwhile, Netanyahu pledges to enforce the ceasefire "with an iron fist".
- Ukraine. The Russian advance continues, but it's very slow and costly.
This week's developments
This week everybody was talking about the Democrats' sweeping election victory
Every major contested race -- Virginia's and New Jersey's governors and other statewide offices, NYC's mayor, the California's Prop 50 -- went the Democrats' way, usually with high turnout and by unexpectedly large margins.
Many words have been written and spoken about what this means. To me, it comes down to this: In the rosy scenarios where the Trump autocracy fails and American democracy survives, winning big in 2025 was a key step. An autocrat's biggest strength is the myth of his invincibility. You go along with what he wants because there seems to be no other choice.
Certainly that has been the case inside the Republican Party. For 10 months, Congress has virtually ceased to be a factor in American government, because the Republican majorities are so cowed by Trump. The Senate approved cabinet nominees (like Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, and RFK Jr.) that everyone knew were unqualified and probably dangerous. Both houses have sat mutely while Trump usurps Congress' power of the purse and its war powers. Trump's Big Beautiful Bill needed near-unanimous Republican support to pass, and got it -- despite the fact that it will take Medicaid coverage away from millions of Republican voters. The House has simply gone home for six weeks rather than vote on subpoenaing the Epstein files.
After Tuesday, Republicans in elected offices have to wonder if they're committing political suicide by following Trump so blindly.
The big message comes from New Jersey, where Trump's 2024 gains among Hispanic and Asian voters vanished. Passaic County is 43% Hispanic, according to the 2020 census. But it went for Trump by 7% in 2024. Tuesday, it went Democratic by 26%.
Statewide, Trump lost New Jersey by less than 6%, but Mikie Sherill won by more than double that margin. A similar 6% swing in 2026 elections could flip a lot of Republican seats to the Democrats.
Of course, there is a downside to these results as well: Now that's it's obvious that MAGA candidates won't hold control of Congress in free and fair 2026 elections, the pressure to steal those elections grows.
I think it's important not to get caught up in the Democratic polarization narrative the mainstream media is pushing. Yes, Mamdani won as a Democratic Socialist, while Sherill and Spanberger won as moderate Democrats. I don't see this as a problem.
The unifying principles are to be authentic, to recognize that a large percentage of the electorate feels poorly served by our economic system and left out of our politics, and to say to those people: "I see you, and I want to do specific things to help you."
The specific policies, and whether they are leftist or centrist, are far less important.
Above all, don't get caught up in the Socialism vs Capitalism argument, as if these were two Manichean forces inevitably at each other's throats. We are all socialists and we are all capitalists. Do you support your town having a public fire department? To that extent, you're a socialist. Do you want your town's restaurants to compete on price and quality, letting the local market decide which ones thrive? To that extent, you're a capitalist.
The issue is where to draw the line between the public and private sectors. That's a serious and important question, but it has many viable answers and many opportunities for compromise that you'll miss if you see nothing but capitalist/socialist polarization.
A lot of people are angsting over the conflicting poll results: Trump's approval continues to sink, but the public's opinion of the Democratic Party hasn't improved. I don't think it's that mysterious: In most of the country, you can't win just by being a generic Democrat. People don't connect the Democrats with any particular message, so you have to bring your own message. You also have to be an individual and project a personality people identify with.
We might go into next November with the polls still close on whether people want Republicans or Democrats to control Congress. But if Democrats do their job right, people will look at the Democrat running in their district and find something they like or are even excited by.
Too much fun to pass up: A kindergarten teacher responds to Trump's tantrum after losing Tuesday.
and the shutdown
Which will probably end in a few days as the longest in history, breaking the record from Trump's first term. Senate Republicans got the exact number of Democrats they needed to pass their "compromise", which amounts to Democrats surrendering without getting anything meaningful in return.
The deal:
- funds the full government through January 30
- funds the Departments of Agriculture and Veterans Affairs for the full fiscal year (i.e., until October 1)
- funds SNAP (i.e. food stamps) for the full fiscal year
- gives federal workers fired during the shutdown their jobs back and prevents further layoffs through January 30
- grants backpay to all federal workers furloughed or working without pay during the shutdown
What it doesn't do: anything to help the tens of millions of Americans whose ObamaCare premiums are going to skyrocket for 2026. Majority Leader Thune has promised a vote on a bill to preserve the subsidies that kept those plans affordable, but that's a political concession rather than anything real. Even if the Senate passes that measure, Speaker Johnson has said it won't get a vote in the House. So basically, the Senate vote will frame the issue, positioning Democrats as the ones who voted for it and Republicans as the ones who blocked it. But it won't actually help anyone pay for health insurance.
Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, one of the eight Democrats who voted for the bill, exemplified the defeatist attitude Democrats so often bring to negotiations: "This was the only deal on the table." The Republican position is what it is, and Democrats just have to adjust to it.
The Democrats' surrender came in spite of all indications that they were winning the political battle of the shutdown: Polls showed Trump and the Republicans were taking more of the blame, and Democrats overwhelmingly won Tuesday's elections.
Josh Marshall recognizes all that, but finds this silver lining:
When the time came Democrats fought. They held out for 40 days, the longest shutdown standoff in history. They put health care at the center of the national political conversation and inflicted a lot of damage on Trump. At 40 days they could no longer hold their caucus together. And we got this.
That’s a sea change in how the congressional party functions. And that’s a big deal. Many people see it as some kind of epic disaster and are making all the standard threats about not voting or not contributing or whatever. That’s just not what I see. It’s a big change in the direction of the fight we need in the years to come that just didn’t go far enough. Yet.
... Meanwhile, keep purging all the folks who can’t get with the new program. If a senator is from a comfortably Blue State and wasn’t vocally in favor of fighting this out, primary them — toss them overboard. After March, Dick Durbin realized he needed to retire. Let’s see some more retirements. But don’t tell me nothing has changed or that this is some cataclysmic disaster. It’s not. This accomplished a lot. It demonstrated that Democrats can go to the mat when the public is behind them and not pay a political price. It dramatically damaged Donald Trump. It cued up the central arguments of the 2026 campaign. It just didn’t go far enough.
Meanwhile, passing the House is not a done deal yet. It'll be interesting to see how many Democrats hold out, and how many Republicans think even this victory isn't big enough.
And the House will have to come back into session to end the shutdown. Will Johnson find some new excuse not to seat Adelita Grijalva? Will he violate House rules to avoid a vote on subpoenaing the Epstein files? Expect a lot of soap opera in the next few weeks.
and Trump's violent thugs
Don't miss this interview, where Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss talks to a woman who was victimized by Border Patrol agents in an Evanston incident that has gone viral. "They're more afraid of us than we are of them," she says.
What they -- ICE and the Border Patrol -- are afraid of is not violence, but people following their vehicles, blowing whistles around their agents, and making videos of what they do. Biss was also interviewed by Democracy Now (the link at the top of the page) in a segment that included video of major ICE abuses in Evanston.
Well, on Friday, which was, by the way, Halloween, ICE and CBP were all over Evanston. It was a terrifying day. I couldn’t go two minutes without a notification coming up on my phone: They’re at this corner; they’re at this corner; they’re grabbing this landscaper, and so forth. And they were doing what they usually do these days, which is drive around town looking for someone working on a lawn whose skin is not white, and grab that person and abduct them. And so, the rapid responders were out in force, and there was a lot of activity, and I was driving around trying to do what I could.
And then, in the early afternoon, the following thing happened. The vehicle, which was driven by a CBP agent, for whatever that’s worth, that had been driving around the region and was being followed by residents — which is what happens all the time because our community is rising up against this invasion — they decided they don’t want scrutiny, they don’t want to be followed, they don’t want to be observed, they don’t want to be videotaped, and, most of all, they don’t want to be criticized. They appear to have acted deliberately to cause an accident. They jammed on the brakes right after going through an intersection and to force the car following them to rear end them, which, of course, created a scene. And there were people who gathered, who were watching and who were yelling at them and blowing their whistles and screaming. And then they appear to have just started beating people up for no reason. And folks may have seen these videos, that have gotten a lot of attention, including one where they’ve got this young man on the ground, and his head is on the asphalt, and they’re literally punching him in the head. And then, after a while of this, they jammed three people into their vehicle, abducted them, drove them around, and eventually, later on, released them.
If you're not familiar with the Chicago area, you may not realize how incredible this whole scene is. Evanston is the lakefront suburb just north of Chicago. It is the home of Northwestern University, and in general is very upscale. It's not a place where ICE or CBP should be looking for "the worst of the worst", as Trump promised during the 2024 campaign. So if you look at what Trump's thugs are doing and say, "That would never happen here, in my town", think again.
and the Supreme Court's tariff hearing
I have been deeply skeptical of this Supreme Court's ability to defend the Constitution against Trump. In particular, I've doubted they will apply the same standards to Trump that they did to Biden. They invented the "major questions doctrine" and greatly expanded the "non-delegation doctrine" precisely to limit Biden's executive authority. Now, those same standards clearly apply to Trump's sweeping tariffs, but I've doubted the Court will bother to notice.
I'm less sure about that skepticism now. Wednesday's oral arguments showed some of the conservative justices -- especially Gorsuch -- worrying about major questions and non-delegation. The issue in a nutshell is that tariffs are taxes, and the taxing power belongs so intrinsically to Congress that it can't be delegated to the President.
Gorsuch raised the question of whether Congress could also delegate its power to declare war, and later wondered what a more liberal president could do with the tariff power: Suppose a Democratic president declared a climate emergency and tariffed the importation of internal combustion engines?
You can't always deduce justices' final opinion from the questions they ask, but I expected the conservative justices to be creating room for themselves to give Trump what he wants, as they so often do. I didn't see that.
The Court also won't be reversing its same-sex marriage decision this term.
and you also might be interested in ...
Nancy Pelosi announced her retirement from Congress when her current term ends in January.
By any standard, Pelosi is a giant in congressional history. She was the first female speaker, and the most effective speaker of either party in my lifetime. She took criticism from the left because of her broadly centrist policies, but I can't remember her blocking any liberal proposal if the votes were there to pass it.
Retirement, like death, is one of those moments that calls for a magnanimous response. But of course, Trump doesn't have a magnanimous bone in his body. He responded to the news by calling Pelosi an "evil woman" and saying that "she did the country a great service by retiring".
I'm going to display my own lack of a magnanimous response by commenting on the death of Dick Cheney. I won't rehash all the things I fault him for, but I regret that now he will never stand trial at the ICC in The Hague.
When 60 Minutes asked Trump about pardoning crypto billionaire Changpeng Zhao, he claimed not to know who Zhao is. The company Zhao founded has made deals with the Trump family's crypto venture, but that couldn't have anything to do with the pardon, could it?
I'd like to ask Speaker Johnson which option is worse: that Trump is lying about a corrupt pardon, that he signs pardons without knowing who the people are, or that his dementia has progressed to the point that he can't remember the decisions he makes.
Here's a cartoonist's take on how media coverage has changed in the last 50 years:
and let's close with something natural
The Guardian has a spectacular gallery of nature photography.
