I thought that between promoting the newsletter on the podcast and subscribers forwarding it to their friends, the newsletter would develop a following as large as, if not larger than, the podcast itself. And while hundreds of people have subscribed, that's far less than the listener base for the podcast, and subscriber engagement with the newsletter is a lot lower than I'd hoped - almost nobody forwards it (as far as I can tell) and we rarely get email related to the newsletter.

While in political campaign terms 'suspended' is a euphemism for 'ended' that isn't necessarily the case here. I still believe that the newsletter can be what I envisioned at the outset, but it's clear that it won't happen as things are set up now.

Here's where I'm hoping you can help, by emailing me (mike@politicsguys.com) and letting me know what you've liked and what you've disliked about the current newsletter. Are their any columnists you think are great (or awful)? Is there someone you'd like to see more of (or less of)? Should we have more people writing for the newsletter, or perhaps a different mix or people? Maybe you have some ideas concerning the format - is our 'commentary with links' approach your the best approach? Is there some other format you think we should try?

What I really want to know is what would make the Politics Guys newsletter something you'd love to see in you in box every week. What sort of content could you see yourself forwarding to your friends, telling them,'You should subscribe to this - it's great!'? (Keep in mind that as a plucky independent production we're subject to certain limitations. So, for example, while it would be amazing if we could get, say, Bill Clinton or Mitt Romney to write a column for us, it probably won't happen. (Bill or Mitt - if you happen to see this, and you've got some free time on your hands, send me an email and we'll talk.))

Finally, I want to thank Leah, Trey, Joe, Zach, and Jay for their contributions to the newsletter - you've written some great stuff and I've truly enjoyed reading your columns.
 

Mike is the founder and co-host of The Politics Guys. He's an Associate Professor of Political Science at Northern Kentucky University, specializing in American politics, public policy, and media. He's the author of Navigating the News: A Political Media User's Guide, which he thinks is a really useful book, though he wishes his publisher would set a lower price for it. He's also a big Pittsburgh Steelers fan, though he reluctantly admits that, for most of the last decade and a half, the New England Patriots have been better than his team.

Nothing was bigger than F.B.I. Director James Comey testifing before Congress. If you missed it President Trump claimed, on Twitter, that Obama wiretapped him. Unfortunately for Trump, James Comey, in a weird turn of events, shot that theory down during a Senate hearing. Such an unprecedented public rebuke is difficult for President Trump’s supporters, who keep backing up evidence-free claims and then are left hung out to dry when the facts eventually emerge. The most recent is Spicer explaining that Trump didn't mean wiretapping when he said wiretapping. The NYT has a good piece outlining the perils of being a Trump defender. While Trump may be truth’s teflon, his supporters seem to have a rougher time of it.

On the topic of Trump supporters, one of the most vocal of defenders, and coiner of "alternative facts," is Kellyanne Conway. The Atlantic has an in-depth look at Conway and her alternative universe. Conway is a good microcosm for Trump defenders. She represents both the risks and the rewards of living in the chaotic Trump White House. Reading her linguistic gymnastics is worth the price of admission alone.

On a side note Pew Research just released a report on crime. Despite the relevance of terrorism and violent crime in the most recent election, the actual rates continue to drop to all time lows. This isn't a big shock for those of us in political science. The literature has long demonstrated that it is coverage of information, rather than data itself, that's most influential in public opinion (the formal name is agenda setting). Yet the wide difference between reality and perception is fascinating in this particular election cycle. The Pew Research report is a reminder of the importance of agenda setting in a world unmoored from empirical data.

Harold “Trey” Orndorff is an associate professor of political science at Daytona State College where he has taught for six years. He teaches primarily in the honors college (called Quanta). His research interests are presidential politics, communication and new media. In addition to his disciplinary research Trey also writes on teaching in higher education, specifically the impact of new technologies on student outcomes. You can read more about him and his research at treyorndorff.com.

Health Care
Unlike Nancy Pelosi or Oliver Willis or no doubt all of YOU smart people I don't "do" Health Care Policy. I "know" that a free market would be the best approach and I know, that I know just enough to be dangerous to myself and others. Sadly, Nancy Pelosi, Oliver Willis or Paul Ryan can't seem to grasp that last fact & apply it to xheir own efforts. So, we have to wade thru or up up with them instead. Enough "Snark"; here we go.

The Republican Plan is Even Worse Than Obamacare
Megan McCardle and WR Meade are the Pundits everyone loves to hate, Progressives dislike them because they write "ungood thoughts" about Progressive policies and programs.....Conservatives dislike them because they voted for Obama. This is a nice little article explaining how Ryan and Co. have missed the boat with Ryan-TrumpCare. Meanwhile:

Grover Norquist on What Happened This Week
Ok here's ANOTHER Pundit we all love to hate, Grover Norquist. Conservatives don't like him because he has very close ties to the Saudis and seems a bit suspect on the whole Global War on Terror/Contingency Operations Combating Violent Extremism thing. Obviously, Progressives hate him because, well he's in favour of TAX CUTS, and SMALLER GOVERNMENT, very "DoublePlusUngood" Thoughts, indeed. Whether or not RyanCare is better than ObamaCare, is debatable, but I really question this Triumphal Proclamation of the Inevitable Triumph of Republicans. Not because I don't want Republicans to triumph, and parenthetically grind our enemies faces into the mire, but because I don't believe "X" is Destiny. Or that "X" GUARANTEES any outcome in the future. But anyway here is a bit of Triumphalism for the Republican stalwarts reading this newslettre and a bit of nausea-inducing verbiage for those or you who are wrong.

Obamacare: Snatching a ‘Win’ from Repeal Defeat
Just a nice piece on repeal or not to repeal or what to repeal.

Screed Alert
For those of you who are "Brights" or who are Progressives, just skip this article and skip the screed, though you are absolutely wrong-headed, I feel there's no reason to raise someone's blood pressure unnecessarily. I'm a tRumpkin, but not (Completely) Heartless. This is why I am no longer a Conservative. The author makes the point that some Christians, and I add Conservatives, have become determined to be "Liked" or "Respected" by their "Opponents". Which is absolutely a "Mugs Game". One, "they" are not your "Opponents", they are your "Enemies." Why, Christian/Conservative, "they" view YOU as THEIR "Enemy." It's like University of Kentucky and Duke or UK and Northern Kentucky University. In the latter case, NKU is the OPPONENT of UK. Sure we want to win, but we don't hate NKU, in fact when they are off the court we can admire them as a spunky team making good and IF they weren't playing UK we'd pull really hard for them. Whereas Duke, Duke is "Coach K" and "Duke Does it right" and "Duke isn't about 'One & Dones'' and Christian Laettner. We HATE Duke, at a cellular level....were Duke playing the Russian National Team we'd pull for the RUSSIANS-especially if Paul Manafort paid us to. Duke is our "Enemy", we will never admire or pull for them, in short we WILL NEVER RESPECT OR LIKE DUKE.

Which segues into my larger point, though hating Duke is a good point in-and-of itself, it is pointless for Christians or Conservatives to try for the Respect or Favour of Progressives. They hate you. They will never like or respect you. Oh yes, they may applaud you today when you savage Milo Yiannoupolos or support "National Health Care" or criticize Bush/Bush/Trump/Cruz, because you are splitting from your allies and making YOUR coalition smaller/weaker, but rest assured tomorrow they will turn on you because of your sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia, Climate Denial or the all-purpose Progressive “sin” of “Hypocrisy.” They only like the fact that your side becomes weaker, not that you showed any principle or the like. Only that their position became stronger and more likely to prevail. They didn’t like you or your stand on Principle, they liked that it made their job easier. So why try to curry favour with folks who don’t like you and most likely never will?

Secondly, then there’s the idea of “respect’ and “liking.” I mean who doesn’t want to be thought of as all-around “Good Joe?” EXCEPT, Christians and Conservatives are letting their ENEMIES determine, at least in part, what being an All-Round Good Joe, is or is not.

GODWIN ALERT, Christians/Conservatives falling into this trap are like Jews, letting Anti-Semites determine what makes a “Good Jew.” Rest assured Christians/Jews/Conservatives, a “Good” Christian/Jew/Conservative is meek and mild and reasonable and seeks compromise. A Good Christian/Jew/Conservative will find fault with his/her side of the aisle at least as often as with their Enemies’ side of the aisle. All the while not demanding or even expecting the same from THEIR Opponent, really their ENEMY. I hope this is clear, when “you” let your enemy define what makes a “good” opponent for them, it should come as no great surprise that a “Good”, “Reasonable” “Respectable” Christian or Conservative is also an INEFFECTUAL one.

Lastly, who cares about “Respect” or “Liking”? This is about the larger Body Politic. It’s about “Winning” & “Losing”. To bring back basketball, I’m sure Coach Calipari wants to be “liked” and “respected” by his coaching peers and sportswriters, who wouldn’t? But he cares more about winning a National Championship. The goal is to change Public Policy to reshape the Body Politic, for Conservatives. That means Progressives have to LOSE. And that means hurt feelings. And that means that if you prosper, they are angry and hurt. Hence there will be NO “liking” involved….and since “your’ positions are, by Progressive definition sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, Climate Denialist or hypocritical there can never be “respect” either.

Conservatism, at least the Conservatism of Will, Stephens, Beck, Loesch, Williamson, Lowry, and Goldberg seems to have degenerated into a desire to be Right & Smart & well-thought-of, rather than about achieving anything in the larger sphere. It’s why their preferences were McMullin > Hillary > Trump. Since Evan McMullin and his running mate Mindy Finn weren’t ever going to be in the White House - except as painters or fence jumpers - they preferred HILLARY to Trump. They had Principles and they expected to be Respected and hopefully Liked for upholding those principles...and that was a Fool’s Errand. Hillary and Chuck Schumer were never going to like them or employ them. Revealing, to this tRumpkin, at least the utter folly of wanting to be liked or respected, by the other team.

“Joe” is an ink-stained wretch, at a firm that specializes in public policy analysis & advocacy. Xe/xhe has BA in political science from the Flagship University of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Xe/xhe is blessed with the most wonderful, capable, & loving partner any person or otherkin could ever want.  Joe is an Apostate Conservative, having been cast out of the High Church during the Great Rectification of 2015 & avid Trumpkin. Xis/xer focus will be on the creation of a “Subversive Counter-Narrative” to the Intersectional Progressive Establishment Narrative to be found in today’s Corporate Media & faculty lounges. Current interests include the phrases “This is how you got Trump” and “This is how you get MORE Trump.” Joe also has an interest in Defense Affairs, with a focus on Herstory & Logistics & Program Evaluation. Xe/xhe finds any media source that includes: 1) person-hours of maintenance/flight –hour or 2) discussions of optimal depot maintenance schedule of almost any Infernal Device to be a fascinating read.