$2000 to Own the Libs and Mitch McConnell?
By: Lauren Elizabeth
Tags: Economy, Politics, Government, Donald Trump, Elections

$2000 to Own the Libs and Mitch McConnell?

Donald Trump’s latest stunt is surreal, but if it gets the American people more money, I’m okay with that!

AP: Patrick Semansky

While erratic might accurately be described as the most cliche way to label President Donald Trump’s behavior, particularly since he lost his bid for re-election. That said, I’m not sure anyone could have anticipated his decision to reject the bi-partisan coronavirus pandemic relief bill because he felt that the $600 payments for the American people were too small. In a video posted to his Twitter account the President called the bill a “disgrace”, and discussed how congress “found plenty of money for foreign countries, lobbyists, and special interests, while sending the bare minimum to the American people”. Trump closed his remarks by calling for the $600 to be increased to $2000, and bizarrely insinuating that he might be the next administration.

Incredibly, the President is quite literally calling for $2000 just to send a middle finger to everyone he feels is not in his corner among the governing class.

Almost immediately, Nancy Pelosi called his bluff, and replied:

“Republicans repeatedly refused to say what amount the President wanted for direct checks. At last, the President has agreed to $2,000 — Democrats are ready to bring this to the Floor this week by unanimous consent. Let’s do it!”

While the Speaker of the House might be intelligent enough to at least attempt to fool people into thinking she deserves even a shred of credit for these calls for $2000, Adam Jentleson made the point that the language of unanimous consent is a significant red flag. While she pretends to be in favor of these $2000 checks, Pelosi is entirely aware of the fact that calling for unanimous consent means that all it would take is one “no” vote to block this from happening. In essence, though she is smart enough to disguise her lack of support for this proposal, unanimous consent means she isn’t exactly worried about if the American people get this money or not.

As always, the suffering and trauma that the American people are experiencing is nothing more than a political game to those with the power in congress to help alleviate it. That said, it’s worth reiterating I am not under the impression that the President actually cares about helping the American people, either.

The President is many things, but he is not without at least a few solid political, populist instincts.

In making the calls for $2000 checks in such a public fashion not only is Trump setting up his fairly inevitable 2024 run, but the loyalists in his ear also know the position that this puts Mitch McConnell in, particularly with Georgia being on the verge of a runoff election that will decide control of the Senate. Following the election I’m sure the President is undoubtedly aware of the perception that Mitch McConnell is the one whose truly got the most sway with the Republican lawmakers, particularly since he is the one their donors rely on for the implementation of the agenda they’ve paid for. It feels fairly obvious that this is Trump’s way of flexing his muscle, reminding the GOP that he has the base and populism in his corner, and that he is not to be crossed.

Of course, it isn’t all about Trump’s desire to put Mitch McConnell in a bad place when his loyalty proved to be insufficient after the electoral college voted. Before he leaves office Donald Trump seems bound and determined to do everything he can to ensure a successful run in 2024, and it feels almost as if he has a desire to prove to himself that he is in fact “popular”, and so are his ideas. It feels as though he has to remind himself once again of his true power within the party, and give a middle finger to those he will insist until his dying day never truly defeated him.

But hey, if Donald Trump wants to send everyone a $2000 check to own the libs and Mitch McConnell, I’ll take it.