Rusty Bowers Got a Front-Row Seat to Trump's Coup Attempt and...Would Vote for Him Again?

Rusty Bowers, speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, should be commended for refusing to go along with Donald Trump's outlandish schemes to steal the electoral votes of the various swing-states he lost, including Arizona. I'd like to think that, if asked to toss millions of our fellow Americans' votes in the shitter so that a vicious, half-bright gameshow host could stay in power after losing an election, most of us would have no trouble saying no. Doesn't seem that complicated to me. The continuing viability and integrity of the world's oldest democracy, a testament—whatever its flaws—to the notion that a people can govern themselves? Or make that guy a king in everything but name? Because if you think there would have been another legitimate election had Donald Trump succeeded in seizing power, you're playing yourself. There's no going back from that one.

Anyway, Bowers is the talk of the town this week, at least among people who remain latched onto the reality that Trump lost the election and tried to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States in the weeks after. But the first clue that Bowers might not be Unequivocal Hero Man was his—admittedly moving—testimony that he felt compelled to defend the Constitution in the face of Trump's frontal assault because the document was "divinely inspired." This brings to mind George Carlin's old rant about "rights," in which he points out that if God gave us the Bill of Rights—and the Constitution more generally—he seems to have forgotten a few things. "Like...slavery! Just fuckin' slipped his mind."

Is God against women voting? Is God a big fan of the Electoral College? Moreover, if the document was written with God's guiding hand, why have we had to amend it seventeen times? If God allowed the Founders the free will to botch the document in these fairly serious ways, in what way is it "divinely inspired"? Is He claiming credit for the good parts and blaming them for the bad ones? Did God encourage them to add the feature where the document can be amended, an acknowledgement that it would be unavoidably imperfect and would need to be adapted to changing times? Why not just get everything sorted out up front? Doesn't God already know what's going to happen in the future? Can't we just say the guys who wrote it did a good job in many ways but we've had to do some fairly substantial revisions—which is, of course, the aforementioned process of self-government? Can't we defend the Constitution on its own merits, rather than on the basis that it's God's work?

But we're getting sidetracked. The reason Bowers most merits discussion here is another thing he said: "If he is the nominee, if he was up against Biden, I’d vote for him again." That is, if the guy who tried to overthrow the government of this country, a scheme to which Bowers had a front-row seat, were in a position to assume the most powerful office in the world, he would support him taking those powers again. If the guy whose fans terrorized Bowers at his home—based on that guy's relentless campaign of lies and fear—were close to getting back into the big time, he'd support him. I saw him abuse the powers of the presidency in the most singularly unforgivable way—and I'd give him those powers again!

Of course, the key part of the sentence is, "If he was up against Biden." You could substitute anyone with a "D" next to their name there. This is negative partisanship run wild, the destructive power of unchecked factionalism that the aforementioned Founders so feared. I'm sure there would be various things presented as reasons to vote Biden out of office, and he stands a very good chance of getting defenestrated. The first argument will be "inflation," despite the fact that many advanced nations are seeing 40-year highs. Biden's gas-tax-holiday scheme is unlikely to fix the problem and could backfire, but some people behave as if he's just sitting in the Oval Office turning up a dial that says, "GAS PRICES." There's the argument he botched the Afghanistan withdrawal, which was chaotic and disgraceful, though there's never much of an alternative approach offered. His State Department fucked up the process of evacuating non-military people, but most prescriptions ultimately involve us leaving a few thousand troops there—as we'd been doing for years and years. Biden has failed to act on the housing crisis and monopoly power (despite some good staffing choices) and a number of other issues, in part due to intransigent key figures in Congress. But the fact remains that there is no Republican plan to deal with any issue because there is no Republican platform.

The fact is that even Responsible Republicans like Rusty Bowers subscribe to the notion that every election is us vs. them, and no matter who's wearing the jersey, you vote for us. You could say the same for Democratic voters, but they so far have not nominated an authoritarian freak for president—and are not happily offering to double down on that should the opportunity arise. It's not like Trump kicked off his authoritarian turn in November 2020. He seized money Congress refused to allocate for his Big, Beautiful Wall in an outright assault on the separation of powers. He made a mockery of the Senate's advise-and-consent process on appointments by abusing the Acting designation. His entire platform revolved around the notion there were True Americans and Others trying to usurp them and destroy the country. He claimed both elections he contested would be rigged before they happened. And this is a bit underrated, but he was also just a complete asshole to everyone all the time.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants to forgive student loans and move to single-payer healthcare, though. Extreme!

You Might Also Like

• HOW TO FIND THE PERFECT SUNGLASSES FOR YOUR FACE SHAPE

• If You Don’t Have a Denim Shirt Yet, What’s Stopping You?

• Why You'll Never Understand Mezcal Like You Understand Scotch