As political obsessives, we admit it: We are a little fed up with this “strange” thing. Hearing the same thing about these guys every day for weeks! There must be another way we can…
What is it? There is new audio output of JD Vance arguing with a podcast host who says that “the whole point of being a postmenopausal woman” is to help raise her grandchildren?
Okay, a few more days of “weird” won’t hurt. Happy Thursday.
—Bill Kristol
This morning I write to defend vibes. They have a bad reputation.
The good mood with Kamala Harris and Tim Walz only go so farsay the experts. You can’t just walk on vibrationswarn the commentators. Give us a real political agendathe columnists plead.
No.
First of all, when it comes to the political agenda, be careful what you wish for. The policies being put forward at this point in the presidential campaign are poll-tested and immature. The good news is that they probably shouldn’t be taken too seriously.
Harris needs to distance herself from Joe Biden, she needs to show that she cares about high prices, and she needs to make clear that she wants to help the middle class. She will do all of this in sensible, symbolic and silly ways. Most of it will have little to do with what she would actually do as president – or even what she would could as president.
But – if I may be allowed to say something heterodox and perhaps shocking – it is important that the political proposals do not stand in the way of the good mood.
The term “vibes” became popular thanks to the Beach Boys’ 1966 hit “Good Vibrations.” Before that, “vibe” was simply short for a vibraphone, a percussion instrument with metal bars. But Brian Wilson’s hippie mother told him that some people give off good “vibrations,” which led to the song he wrote himself, with lyrics by his cousin and fellow Beach Boy, Mike Love. Pretty quickly, “vibrations” became “vibes.”
The lyrics are simple and straightforward. Here is the chorus:
I sense good vibrations
She turns me on (oom bop bop)
I sense good vibrations (good vibrations, oom bop bop)
She makes me excited (excitement, oom bop bop)
Good, good, good, good vibes (oom bop bop)
She makes me excited (excitement, oom bop bop)
Good, good, good, good vibes (oom bop bop)
She makes me excited (excited)
But simplicity and directness can be effective – in pop music as well as in presidential politics.
What do we know about modern presidential politics?
That good vibrations – popularity, sympathy, a feeling of excitement and, yes, joy – are important.
Think of Barack Obama in 2008: “Hope and change” and “We are the ones we are waiting for.” We McCainites used to laugh at such things. But Obama won.
Think of Ronald Reagan in 1984. “Morning in America.” A slogan. Reagan won.
Think of Bill Clinton and Al Gore in 1992: “Change versus more of the same.” In reality, the country could have been much worse off than if it had continued the policies of the George HW Bush administration. But Clinton and Gore won.
I recently asked James Carville, the mastermind of the 1992 Clinton campaign, asked what the core issues of the Harris campaign against Donald Trump should be. “I have three points of attack,” he said. “One: past. Two: yesterday. Three: stale. Three things… but one.”
And that one thing is not deep politics. It’s a mood. All of this should be supported by a political agenda that underscores the theme of the campaign. But the mood is crucial.
I don’t want to go too far in this regard. And maybe I’m exaggerating with my pro-vibes argument. Politics are important. Values are important. But personal qualities, the image of the candidates, the overall spirit of the campaign, these are also important.
You know who understands this? Donald J. Trump.
What has always been his obsession and, in a way, his talent? Branding. The big picture, the big impression, the general feeling – the mood. Trump’s political talent – and it is always the talent of the demagogue – is to brand himself with positive vibes, like strength, sensationalism and making America great again, and to brand his opponents with negative ones, like weakness, dangerousness, unpatriotism and the like.
That’s why Trump is so unnerved by Harris. He’s watching her and he sees that she’s winning the sentiment war. Her campaign offers America a new lease of life. Her campaign stands for change, not more of the same. She’s the under-75 we’ve been waiting for.
Trump is aware of the power of all this. And he knows that he will lose because of it.
I’m no expert on sentiment, but to my friends in Chicago who are hard at work planning next week’s Democratic National Convention, I say this: Good speakers? Convincing rhetoric? Convincing. Core arguments that resonate with key voting groups? Convincing. Meaningful contrasts to Trump and Vance? Convincing.
But you always have to step back and ask: What is the mood?
I think the convention planners know this. And I’m looking forward to late Thursday night when the balloons drop after the presidential candidate’s speech and the Harris and Walz families are all on stage. The music starts blaring through the United Center.
It’s Carl Wilson’s voice.
I love the colorful dresses she wears…
Get in the mood: sign up for Bulwark+ today!
CURRENT MAJOR POLITICAL NEWS: Per the APPrices for 10 of the most popular and expensive Medicare drugs will be reduced under agreements between the government and drug companies. “White House officials said Wednesday night that they expect the new prices to save U.S. taxpayers $6 billion, while older Americans could save about $1.5 billion on their medications.” The cost of prescription drugs is consistently considered one of the most important campaign issues. Just as an aside.
THE YEAR OF MAGIC PRICE CONTROLS: Who’s ready to listen to Harris’ economic agenda? In a speech in North Carolina tomorrow, Harris plans to propose the “first nationwide ban on price gouging on food and groceries.” Her campaign team saidand threatens “tough penalties in the food industry” against companies that raise their prices beyond a level deemed acceptable by the federal government.
Not to be outdone, Trump engaged in some of his own imaginative economic statements yesterday. In a speech in North Carolina that was intended as an economic kickoff (but ended up more or less as a traditional campaign rally), he declared that under his leadership, the United States will “commit itself to the ambitious goal of cutting energy and electricity prices by at least half within 12 months, but no more than 18 months.” How You may be wondering if this will happen? Who knows!
One day, perhaps a group of people in or close to government will rediscover the idea that clumsy attempts by government to manipulate markets into a more favorable shape can ultimately do more harm than good. We hope that happens soon!
NO SHAPIRO REQUIRED?: The latest Quinnipiac poll from Pennsylvania gives Harris a three-percentage-point lead over Trump (48 to 45), with 4 percent planning to support Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Meanwhile, Democratic Senator Bob Casey has a more significant eight-percentage-point lead over Republican challenger David McCormick (52 to 44).
When Harris chose Tim Walz as her running mate, some observers — including your correspondents — feared that by not nominating popular Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro as her running mate, she was missing a chance to tie the state down for good. But so far, at least, the choice of Walz does not appear to be hurting the Keystone State.
THIS TYPE: The aforementioned Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appears to have approached Harris’ campaign team and offered to appoint him to the cabinet. That did not go well. Or, to be honest, not at all. Actually, it did not go well at all. Harris’ campaign team, according to the Washington Post, declined to contactBut like a Man stumbling over a dead young bear on the road, Kennedy is plowing forward. This morning he said“Vice President Harris’ Democratic Party would be unrecognizable to my father and my uncle.”
THIS GUY AGAIN: After years of blockade, the White House on Wednesday published records It shows that Hunter Biden asked the U.S. ambassador to Italy to lobby the Italian government on behalf of Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company on whose board he sat. That request – made in 2016, when Joe Biden was still vice president – worried the officials it was addressed to: “I want to be cautious and not overpromise,” a Commerce Department official wrote in an internal memo. “This is a Ukrainian company, and if only for our own protection, USG should not actively lobby the Italian government” without Burisma going through an official program.
