(cache) How Trump's Supporters Understand His Foreign-Policy Views

It's Official: Hillary Clinton Is Running Against Vladimir Putin

Jeffrey Goldberg

Fulfilling what might be the Russian autocrat’s dearest wish, Trump has openly questioned whether the U.S. should keep its commitments to NATO.

The Republican nominee for president, Donald J. Trump, has chosen this week to unmask himself as a de facto agent of Russian President Vladimir Putin, a KGB-trained dictator who seeks to rebuild the Soviet empire by undermining the free nations of Europe, marginalizing NATO, and ending America’s reign as the world’s sole superpower.

I am not suggesting that Donald Trump is employed by Putin—though his campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was for many years on the payroll of the Putin-backed former president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych. I am arguing that Trump’s understanding of America’s role in the world aligns with Russia’s geostrategic interests; that his critique of American democracy is in accord with the Kremlin’s critique of American democracy; and that he shares numerous ideological and dispositional proclivities with Putin—for one thing, an obsession with the sort of “strength” often associated with dictators. Trump is making it clear that, as president, he would allow Russia to advance its hegemonic interests across Europe and the Middle East. His election would immediately trigger a wave of global instability—much worse than anything we are seeing today—because America’s allies understand that Trump would likely dismantle the post-World War II U.S.-created international order. Many of these countries, feeling abandoned, would likely pursue nuclear weapons programs on their own, leading to a nightmare of proliferation.

The Hollow Men

Jeffrey Goldberg

Why didn’t the most talented, most influential Republican politicians—men like Chris Christie, Tom Cotton, and Paul Ryan—do more to stop Donald Trump?

The neediness of politicians has always fascinated me; the pathological desire for relevance; the plasticity of belief in the service of self-aggrandizement; the depths plumbed in order to stave off insignificance, which can be as frightening as non-existence itself. One of my favorite politicians, Chris Christie, the governor of New Jersey, is almost morbidly needy. His desire for attention made him into a brilliant retailer, mainly of himself, but also of his ideas, and intermittently, of his state. His neediness made him greatly entertaining. But it also caused him to betray his own principles.

I recognize that it took millions of Republican primary voters to bring America to this frightening moment, a moment in which a preposterous grifter of authoritarian bent whose mental health is the subject of pervasive and anxious speculation, has become a major-party nominee for president. But it was men like Christie who were indispensable in the creation of this moment. Donald J. Trump could have been stopped. I believe he could have been stopped early, by a concerted effort to unify the party behind a single, viable, non-fraudulent candidate; and he could have been stopped late, if Republicans like Christie had not crumpled before Trump. A handful of honorable men did, in fact, try to stop him. But they were too few in number, and too marginal to make a difference. Collectively, the most influential and smartest Republican elected officials—people who fall into the general category of Them That Knew Better—just might have been able to devise a way to prevent what is happening from happening. But abdication of responsibility and self-debasement in the pursuit of power were the order of the day.

Michelle Obama's Glorious, Savvy Carpool Karaoke Clip

Spencer Kornhaber

In a week full of political propaganda, here's messaging done delightfully.

In a segment for James Corden’s “Carpool Karaoke” series that aired last night, Michelle Obama told the late-night host that this was one of the only times she’s been near the steering wheel of an automobile since arriving at the White House: “I’ve been in a car maybe months ago with my daughter who learned to drive, and we rocked out with her. But that was the only time in seven and a half years that I’ve been in the passenger seat, listening to music, rocking out like this.”

It’s one little anecdote that does so much: remind of how long we’ve all lived with this first family, of the isolating conditions they exist in, and also of their relatability as parents, as teenagers, and as people who love belting Beyoncé on their commute. The exchange also provides a near metaphor for what Michelle Obama has done with this instantly viral Late Late Show segment. She’s technically in the passenger seat, but really, she’s driving the car.

Donald Trump: Sociopath?

James Hamblin

Taking his biographer’s claim seriously

This week, the co-author of Donald Trump’s autobiography said in The New Yorker that if he were writing The Art of the Deal today, it would be a very different book with a very different title: The Sociopath.

To title a person’s life story with that label is a serious accusation, and one worth considering. The stakes are high. Tony Schwartz, the writer of the best-selling book, said that he “genuinely believe[s] that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes, there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization.” In that light, Schwartz said he feels “deep remorse” at having “put lipstick on a pig.”

That seemed to me to be something of a contradiction to the charge of sociopathy, as pigs have been found to show signs of empathy. If you call a pig by name, it will come and play with you, reciprocating affection like a dog. So which is it, pig or sociopath?

Translating Trump's Foreign Policy

Ron Fournier

The Republican nominee's comments to The New York Times are likely to be received very differently by his base than by Washington's elites.

Imagine that President Obama summoned the New York Times to the Oval Office and demeaned the United States, declared his support for an authoritarian leader, threatened to expose U.S. allies to Russian control, and offered a one-word solution to a globe afire: “Meetings.”

Donald Trump’s head would explode. Obama hates America! He’s leading from behind! Sad!

And yet these are the positions the Republican presidential candidate presented in an extraordinary interview on the eve of accepting his party’s presidential nomination.

Setting aside his hypocrisy and reckless rhetoric, the interview offers a chance to understand Trump. These comments are consistent with his populism—they appeal to his base and, more importantly, could find appeal beyond his nominating coalition.

Burned by a Margarita

Erica Cirino

Why lime juice and sunlight don’t mix

Last month, on a hot Saturday afternoon, Justin Fehntrich showed up to bartend at a swanky Fire Island Pines estate. The event he was working, a fundraiser for an LGBT-advocacy nonprofit, had about 100 guests and two other bartenders. He got the bar with the best view: the one in the sun, wedged between the sprawling, sparkling pool and the breezy ocean shore.

Just as he and the other bartenders were about to prep their stations, a representative from the event’s official liquor sponsor asked if they wouldn’t mind squeezing four bags of limes. Justin offered to drive to the supermarket and buy a bottle of juice, but the rep insisted on fresh, so Justin and another bartender sliced and squeezed about 100 limes into pitchers for cocktails.

NATO Shmato?

Krishnadev Calamur

Donald Trump’s apparent rejection of the cornerstone of global security after World War II has stunned U.S. partners in the alliance.

Updated at 10:21 a.m. ET

America’s NATO allies may be on their own after November if Russia attacks them.

Donald Trump, the GOP presidential nominee, appeared to make U.S. military support for NATO member states conditional on whether those states have met their financial obligations to the bloc, which has served as the cornerstone of global security after World War II. The comments, in an interview with The New York Times, represent a marked departure from the security policy of every presidential nominee from either of the two major parties since NATO’s founding in 1949.

The Times asked Trump: “If Russia came over the border into Estonia or Latvia, Lithuania, places that Americans don’t think about all that often, would you come to their immediate military aid?” The full exchange is worth reading:

Live Coverage of the Republican National Convention: Day 4

The Editors

On the final night in Cleveland, Donald Trump will finally take the podium as the official GOP nominee.

Ted Cruz Steals the Show

David A. Graham

It was supposed to be Indiana Governor Mike Pence's big night—but all eyes were on the unrepentant Texas senator, instead.

CLEVELAND—Senator Ted Cruz strode out on stage at the Quicken Loans Arena on Wednesday to thunderous, extended applause. He left, smiling tightly, to equally thunderous, equally extended boos.

The applause was Cruz’s reward for appearing at the Republican National Convention hosted by Donald Trump. The boos were his penalty for refusing to endorse Trump during the speech. It was the latest stunning turn at a convention that remains stubbornly fractured, despite pleas to paper over differences on three straight nights. The GOP simply isn’t ready to unify.

The rapturous reception when Cruz came out was striking but not so strange. After all, even though the feud between Cruz and Trump grew increasingly bitter as the primary campaign went on, polls showed substantial overlap between their two voter bases. But it became clear from the start of the speech that Cruz, like a trio of other famous Texans, wasn’t ready to make nice.

Karhan Ozer / Presidential Palace / Reuters

How Erdogan Made Turkey Authoritarian Again

Steven A. Cook

It wasn't so long ago that the Turkish leader was seen as a model democrat in the Islamic world. What happened?

It wasn’t supposed to be like this. In October 2004, the European Commission offered Turkey a formal invitation to begin negotiations for membership in that exclusive club of democracies, the European Union. The Justice and Development Party (AKP), which had been in power for just two years at the time, hailed the commission’s offer as validation of its self-described Muslim Democrat worldview.

Yet only a few years after that triumphant moment, Recep Tayyip Erdogan—who was prime minister for 11 years before becoming president in 2014—began to veer away from the political reforms that were a condition of the EU’s offer, and away from the promise of a democratic transition in Turkey. The authoritarian approach to politics that Erdogan has pursued for the better part of the last decade seems destined to accelerate after last week’s failed coup d’état, as the president directs a widespread crackdown against his enemies, both real and perceived. Turkey today looks less like a liberal European democracy and more like the kind of one-man autocracy commonly found in the Middle East. How did this country, which so many journalists, government officials, and analysts had once believed to be a model for the Arab world, become a case study in “re-authoritarianization”?