She emails me all the time, even though I never answer. Today I finally hit the reply button--because please. Kamala should have regrets pouring out of her ears, just like everybody else.
Regret has a purpose. It makes us want to do better. Every single day is another chance.
Unfortunately, Kamala Harris only has one day left. Today. She should regret not giving straight answers on the issues most important to swing state voters — immigration, government-financed sex change operations for prisoners, pretending President Biden was fit to serve a second term. It’s a strategy, but a cynical one no one should be proud to use even if she wins.
Rather than straight answers about Harris’ positions, the Democrats want to scare voters to the polls. If there was ever a year when that could work, it’s 2024 when the Republicans are running a monstrous candidate. Yet the Democrats can’t even get this right.
Look what they’ve tried so far:
A fascist Trump takeover of the federal government, soldiers patrolling the streets, no more elections?
Come on. You’re talking about a country that can’t wait to let AI and Amazon run their lives. Absolute abortion bans, with miscarrying pregnant women dying of sepsis in parking lots after hospitals deny them medical care?
Maybe half the population is biting their nails, when Democrats need voters to run screaming out of the room.
So here’s what I emailed Kamala:
Talk about utter devastation.
Talk charred desolation bereft of life for thousands of years.
Talk about nuclear war.
As we head into an election day when a majority of voters may pull a lever for Donald Trump, who could then press a button and end the world, it is time.
It’s not crazy. It’s the sanest way to think about it, if you can stand to think about it all.
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, a journal founded by scientists and intellectuals at the dawn of the Atomic Age, set its famous Doomsday Clock symbolizing the world’s danger of nuclear war at 90 seconds to midnight for 2023 — “the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been."
They reset the clock at the same dire warning point for 2024, “in large part because of Russian threats to use nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.”
Last week, the Forecasting Research Institute released a report that practically nobody heard about because we were all talking about garbage. The FRI asked 110 nuclear experts and 41 “superforecasters” to consider the risk of a nuclear catastrophe by 2045, the 100th anniversary of the atomic age.
They defined “catastrophe” as a nuclear event killing 10 million people.
“Experts assigned a median 5% probability of a nuclear catastrophe by 2045,” according to the FRI report, “while experienced forecasters put the probability at 1%.”
The experts add that several all-too-realistic future scenarios could double or triple those numbers.
Perhaps a 15% chance of nuclear war would sufficiently terrorize Americans to vote for you, Kamala Harris. Perhaps not. We revel in post-apocalyptic movies, from “Planet of the Apes” to endless “Mad Max” sequels. Tell voters the real thing isn’t nearly as entertaining.
![]() |
School uniform (Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum) |
The Atomic Heritage Foundation website includes this survivor testimony:
xxx
“The appearance of people was… well, they all had skin blackened by burns… They had no hair because their hair was burned, and at a glance you couldn’t tell whether you were looking at them from in front or in back… Many of them died along the road — I can still picture them in my mind — like walking ghosts.”
The first hydrogen bomb from 1952 was already 700 times more powerful. Today, nine nuclear weapons states hold 12,200 nuclear warheads, 90% in the U.S. and Russia.
That means 5,500 nukes are aimed at us. Did that make you do a spit take with your morning coffee?
Even a 5% possibility of nuclear war should scare voters. The FRI experts believe a NATO-Russia military clash would increase the likelihood of our incineration to 15%. They predicted a 5% chance that NATO and Russia will fight, but that might be overly optimistic now:
As the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists noted, Russian President Vladimir Putin “announced the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus” in 2023 as part of its invasive war against Ukraine.
This past September, Putin warned that if Ukraine uses its Western-supplied missiles to attack deeper into Russia, Russia would be at war with NATO.
This month, U.S. says it’s observed 12,000 North Korean troops training with Russian soldiers, and 3,000 transported to eastern Russian training sites.
Plus, North Korea — ruled by manifestly insane dictator Kim Jong-un — has its own nuclear weapons. They tested an intercontinental ballistic missile on October 24th. A week and a half ago. On Monday, North Korea fired a “barrage of short-range ballistic missiles” into the sea toward Japan. And according to South Korean intelligence, North Korea is getting ready for its seventh nuclear test.
Elsewhere, the FRI experts think China invading Taiwan would double the chance of nuclear war, and they calculate the chance of invasion at 25% by 2030.
Why? Last March, the U. S. Air Force’s Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs featured “The Ambitious Dragon: China’s Calculus for Invading Taiwan by 2030.” The article noted that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s speech to the 20th National Congress “repeatedly reinforced the narrative that ‘complete reunification of our country must be realized, and it can, without a doubt, be realized.’”
Two weeks ago, Taiwan President Lai Ching-te made a speech for Taiwan’s National Day declaring he’ll “resist annexation or encroachment.”
Then, China conducted a military exercise surrounding Taiwan with an aircraft carrier, a swarm of other ships, and 125 fighter jets.
Oh, and did I mention the FRI experts say there’s a 25% chance Iran will have a nuclear weapon by 2030? That, they think, will double the threat of nuclear war.
I doubt many Americans even remember that last year Vladimir Putin “suspended” Russia’s participation in the New START treaty, the final remaining arms control agreement between Russia and the U.S. START included regular communications and notifications between the two countries, to avoid the misunderstandings that make for good screenplays. “Dr. Strangelove,” anyone? Anyone??
Russia also backed out of its ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 2023 — which the U.S. never ratified at all.
Kamala: Tell voters they might trust Donald Trump more on immigration and the economy. Now they have to decide whether they also trust him with the nuclear football.
There’s time for one more play before the polls close. Better make it a Hail Mary.
Cate Plys is a former Chicago reporter and columnist who now writes the Chicago history website “Roseland, Chicago: 1972.” She participates on WGN host John Williams’ weekly current events podcast “The Mincing Rascals.”
![]() |
Genbaku Dome, Hiroshima |
This is well written and an apt warning about the state of the world. Bur I disagree that it would have been an effective strategy for Harris.
ReplyDelete1) It's more fear mongering. The myriad of dangers of a Trump admin are very real and bear repeating, but at some point it becomes exhausting.
2) Trump is a coward. I think he knows he's not smart and will be outmatched by any serious opponent in an armed conflict, he would never have the guts to start one.
3) The retort his supporters would give is that Trump is the guy who would appease tyrants like Putin and Xi. Harris is the one that would be adversarial with them.
The point Harris should have been making more is that Trump wouldn't be able to handle a crisis like the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The proverbial 3am call. Hillary tried to make that point in 2016, but fell short. We should know better now, with the experience of the pandemic.
Trump's awfulness is so vast and multi-faceted, it's hard to focus an argument against him. He's flooded the zone and the people trapped there are not willing to grab hold of a lifeline to get out. He lets people feel superior to "others" without shame and not even the threat of nuclear holocaust will outweigh that high.
I get you Mark K, I thought Harris would pivot from focusing on fear of Trump when her poll numbers stopped climbing and started falling. I really meant this as some ammunition for people to use on their Trump friends and relatives ahead of voting.
DeleteI agree completely. I can hear it already from the MAGATS, “Russia never invaded Ukraine on Fat Don’s watch! Hamas never attacked Israel when the Orange One was in charge!” The fact that Trump was doing Putin’s bidding by opposing NATO at every turn is lost on them, as is the fact that progress on normalized relations between the Saudis and Israel was a primary driver of Hamas’ terror. They are brainwashed and the length to which they will go and twist themselves into pretzels to justify his repulsive, pernicious and malicious behavior defies belief. Kamala MUST simply get more of the sane people vote because the MAGATS aren’t budging. That’s how cults behave. And thanks to the Electoral College it’s not even enough to get more of the sane people, they have to have the right address.
DeletePutin is blowing smoke, he isn't going to go nuclear against Ukraine or the West.
ReplyDeleteBecause if he were that stupid, it's doubtful his generals would obey such an order, because they all know that NATO can & would then destroy the Russian military in under a week with just conventional weapons!
So that's one thing I don't worry about.
The same here if the worst happens & the fat traitor wins today, our generals would also disobey an obviously illegal order from him to use nuclear weapons on some other country, especially if we were,'t attacked first!
I have been paying very close attention and I'm not terrified. I'm up early and I'm at the polls all week long. I've heard of long lines waiting at early polling sites.
ReplyDeleteI have confidence in the American people that they will get out and vote. A candidate will be elected and there will be a peaceful transfer of power to our next president
From my perspective, The use of nuclear weapons is certainly possible, but whoever the president is, it's possible one through recklessness and one through intentionality.
We the people must hold our Representatives accountable and be sure that this does not happen to us.
I hope everyone is headed out to the polls today. Thankfully our national nightmare of the political season. We'll have a break at least for a few months. It's hard to take
There is no basis for the assertion in your second paragraph. I would suggest it is both naive and wrong. First, "a candidate will be elected" implies that they're two sides of a coin, and they're not. And Trump has given every indication of trying to undermine the vote through any means necessary if he, please God, loses.
ReplyDeleteThe basis of democracy is that there is more than one choice on the ballot. People are free to choose the candidate that they support that is democracy. If we truly want our democracy to survive and Democratic principles to be upheld, we have to support this notion it's our responsibility
ReplyDeleteHopefully a candidate will be elected that it's not a tie that it's not so close that it gets wrapped up in court cases and it will have to wait days or weeks until it's determined who won
Out canvassing in WI yesterday, saw no signs for dt, but folks were jumping off buses and out of cars asking for the Harris yard signs we were schlepping. We're hanging on by a thread, if the thread snaps,and this country is so stupid to allow an adjudicated rapist, then we are unsavable.
ReplyDeleteIt still surprises me that the Democrats never played the nuclear card, and that we didn't see a remake of the 1964 "Daisy ad."
ReplyDeleteA memory refresher: The ad opens with a little girl, standing in a field, picking petals off a daisy and counting them incorrectly. As she counts, her innocent voice is replaced by a male voice counting down from ten, as if launching a missile. The screen zooms in on the girl’s eye, and a nuclear explosion fills the screen, followed by a voiceover from LBJ: “These are the stakes—to make a world in which all of God’s children can live, or to go into the dark. We must either love each other, or we must die.”
The screen then displays text urging viewers to vote for President Johnson on November 3rd. The ad’s message was clear: a vote for LBJ was a vote for peace and survival, while a vote for Goldwater was a vote for potential nuclear. catastrophe.
It only ran just one time, on September 7, 1964, during a segment of NBC’s “Monday Night at the Movies.” Despite being broadcast only once, it caused an immediate sensation. The stark imagery and powerful message resonated deeply with viewers. I saw it. I was 17, and the Cuban Missile Crisis had happened less than two years before. Experiencing a practice survival drill, in a 3000-kid high school, and thinking: "I'm gonna die a virgin!" is an experience one does not forget.
The threat of a nuclear holocaust has been the sword over our heads for so long...our whole lives...that it's hardly ever talked about anymore. A few ads during this past Sunday's NFL games would have easily been enough. The good guys may soon come to regret not having played the nuclear card. Combined with the message of "In your guts, you know he's nuts!"...which was also used in '64...might have put Kamala ahead for good.
Too late now. You snooze...you lose. JFC, I hope not.
YES! I said this on the Mincing Rascals podcast a couple of weeks ago, I can't believe they didn't do a terrific update of Daisy Girl!
DeletePutin wouldn't dare. He knows what would happen.
DeleteGood one, Grizz "in your guts, you know he's nuts..." yep, too late now
DeleteWas used against Goldwater in '64, when I was 17. I remember buying that button, one bright and sunny Saturday in September, from a vendor on State Street. And one that said "Bury Goldwater." Wore them proudly until November. Still have some 1960 JFK stuff, but not those two. (SG)
DeleteAs much as I'm hoping for a Kamala win today, the emphasis on the dangers of a nuclear war would seem to weigh more against her than Trump. We can be certain that Trump will just abandon Ukraine, obviating the need for Putin to start nuking it.
ReplyDeletejohn
Yeah, maybe. Trump claims he doesn't care about Ukraine and he'd let Putin do whatever he wanted to NATO countries that don't pay their dues, etc. But he's such an unhinged person with the need to always win, I'm not even sure how he would handle those instances if it would make him look weak. And I feel sure he would not handle any other diplomatic situation well.
DeleteThat's it exactly. Harris won't back down. Trump would cower like an eight year old bully that's been slapped in the face.
DeleteMr. Tangerine Man would let Ukraine fall today, followed by Poland tomorrow, and Germany the day after that. The domino theory, Eastern style. NATO, shmato. He might tru to pull us out of that outfit, too. Oh, for joy...
DeleteZager and Evans once asked if man was still alive, if woman can survive.
ReplyDeleteToday i am split between them and Barry McGuire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKQfxi8V5FA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_38SWIIKITE
2nd guessing and Monday morning quarterbacking of presidential campaigns is a pundits game. Harris was dumped into this with virtually no warning and has been impressive. If she loses to a guy who gives mics BJs, the force is just not with us.
ReplyDeleteAgree. The "coulda, shoulda, woulda" game is pointless loser talk. She ran a great campaign. Everyone knows who Trump is. If enough of us support him to put him back in office, collectively we deserve it.
DeleteAgree with what could have been done differently. Biden not stepping down sooner, was part of the problem.
ReplyDelete