Abbreviated Pundit Roundup:Marjorie Taylor Greene files an MTV while Leader Jeffries says who dat?

Daily Beast:

MTG Officially Launches Revolt Against Speaker Mike Johnson

Due to the procedural details of the so-called motion to vacate the chair, it was unclear when exactly the vote on Johnson’s fate would be held—or if it would be held at all.

Greene did not notice the resolution as privileged, which would force a vote, but she can appear in the well of the chamber anytime to give her resolution that designation.

If the Georgia Republican makes that move, it would give House leadership two legislative days to have a vote on the measure. However, the chamber is scheduled to leave for a two-week recess on Friday, so any vote on a motion to vacate would happen at the earliest on April 9.

It’s a threat to make the motion privileged if Speaker Johnson puts Ukraine funding on the floor. Of course, Democrats would vote to keep him if johnson allows a Ukraine vote, so it’s a toothless threat.

In this week’s episode of the ever shrinking Republican majority, we have Ken Buck signing the discharge petition for Ukrainian aid on the way out the door, and Mike Gallagher announcing he’s leaving as of next month (ABC News):

Rep. Mike Gallagher to leave Congress next month, shrinking GOP's narrow majority

His departure will shrink the House Republican majority to a one-vote majority.

The Wisconsin Republican said his last day will be April 19. His departure will give House Republicans a one-vote majority with 217 Republicans and 213 Democrats.

Who would want to work with these—uhm—jokers?

Cas Mudde/VoxEurop:

Cas Mudde on the media and the far-right: a dangerous liaison worth breaking

News outlets have a complex love-hate relationship with the far right, marked by antagonism and mutual benefit. Far-right specialist Cas Mudde shares a few simple tips on how to inform citizens without falling into the traps of laziness, manipulation and connivance.

In essence, media coverage of the far-right should be both similar and different to that of other political phenomena. Readers, and democracy, profit from a critical media, which not just covers news but also analyses it. Critical is not the same as hostile, however. Hostility implies bias, criticalness implies scepticism. The media should approach all political actors sceptically, given that they have an interest in spinning the news. And they should cover most far-right actors even more critically, because they have an even bigger interest in spinning the news, given their generally more negative image.

But the media should also cover the far-right differently, because the far-right is different. First, the far-right (not only Trump) is particularly given to conspiracy theories and outright lies. Second, the far-right is hostile to some key institutions and values of liberal democracy, which constitute the legal and normative framework of our states.

Thomas Zimmer/”Democracy Americana” on Substack:

What Makes “Project 2025” So Dangerous

Will the Right be able to implement these radical plans? Is Trump on board? What happened to traditional conservatism? Let’s tackle some of the key questions surrounding “Project 2025”

“Project 2025,” launched in April 2022 under the leadership of the Heritage Foundation, stands out among these planning efforts because it unites much of the conservative movement and the machine of think tanks as well as activist and lobbying groups behind the goal of installing a more effective, more ruthless rightwing regime.

As the broader public turns its attention to these plans, and most people rightfully react with a mixture of horror and concern, a lot of skepticism remains. What is the role of Trump in all of this: Isn’t it more likely that he is going to mess things up, as he has never shown any interest in meticulous planning nor the necessary discipline to enact an ambitious agenda? The Right may try to present a unified front now, but there are so many groups and factions here, and they don’t all share the same ideas about what America should look like: Shouldn’t we expect a lot of infighting and self-sabotage rather than a well-oiled regime? And most importantly, perhaps, haven’t we been through this once before: Isn’t it more likely we get a repeat of the kind of chaos that was so characteristic of the first Trump presidency?

These questions are important. But too strong a focus on Trump’s erratic nature and the many rivalries on the Right obscures the fact that reactionaries are actually united by the desire to punish their enemies, “take back” the country, and restore the “natural order” of unquestioned white Christian patriarchal rule – a unity that is indicative of a broader realignment on the Right towards an aggressive embrace of state authoritarianism. 

Brian Beutler/”Off Message” on Substack:

The Case For 2024 Optimism

Biden's got a lot of upside potential, Trump's got a lot of downside risk.

But to me, the best case for optimism lies outside the realm of survey data. It’s better for Biden to be slightly ahead than slightly behind, but what he needs more than anything is upside potential to open a large lead. And as mainstream-media fixation on his age has faded, his real long-run advantages have become clearer.

Since American elections are zero-sum, you can spot Biden’s upside potential in two buckets. Anything that’s good news for Biden is good news for Biden (QED); but anything that’s bad news for Trump is also good news for Biden.

There’s good news for Biden in both buckets.

• The economy is bullish and charging, with growth driven by productivity while inflation falls—a recipe for election-year interest-rate cuts, which should keep the economy humming and improve economic sentiment.

• Because this boom really is, to a large extent, a product of Biden’s economic policies, it feeds dream retail-politics coups like this: announcing an $8.5 billion grant to build an Intel microchip plant in Arizona.

• Relatedly, we’ve reached the point where “are you better off than you were four years ago” comparisons are insanely favorable to Biden. Congratulations, you’ve made it four years since Trump lied about and (thus) exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic.

Tufts Public Opinion Lab/Medium:

What the 2022 midterm elections can tell us about what will happen in November

Up until 2020, there was basically no educational divide among Hispanic voters. In 2020, college educated Hispanics voted about 5 points more Democratic compared to non-college educated Hispanics. In 2022, this gap grew to 10 points, with non-college Hispanic voters voting 57% Democratic and college-educated Hispanic voters at 65% Democratic. This Hispanic “diploma divide” may be a key factor in fueling reduced success for Democrats among Hispanic voters in 2022, and may be pivotal in deciding who wins in 2024.

Another interesting trend was that the 2022 election was increasingly polarized on religious grounds, continuing a few trends from recent decades. On the right, Evangelicals have been a core base of the Republican vote since the 1980’s. On the left, one of the most significant trends in American society is the growing size of the “nones” — those who do not engage in religious life. A growing share of voters identified themselves as religiously unaffiliated in 2022 compared to 2020 and 2018. In 2022, nearly half (46%) of all Democratic voters are religiously unaffiliated, compared to 38% in 2018. If this group grows again in November, it would be a positive sign for Biden’s reelection chances.

Michael Hirsh/Politico Magazine:

From ‘I Love You’ to ‘Asshole’: How Joe Gave Up on Bibi

After decades of building a “close, personal” friendship with Benjamin Netanyahu, Joe Biden has had it with the Israeli prime minister. Now he’s hitting him hard — and it may be working.

But it is also apparent that Biden and his administration believe that Netanyahu has played the United States for far too long. And while Biden has built up huge credibility with the Israeli public over the decades, the same is not true of the Israeli leader’s stature in Washington — especially within the Biden administration. After months of being ignored and defied, Biden now recognizes that he may have put too much stock in his personal relationship with his old pal Bibi.

“For Biden, as an old school politician, personal relationships are how you get stuff done. Sometimes it is. But at some point, with someone like Netanyahu, you have to take the measure of this guy and realize relationships don’t mean anything to him,” says Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and former foreign-policy advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders. “Biden seems to have been taking way too long to figure that out.”

More of Cliff Schecter highlighting Jamie Raskin: