Political Observer on the political desperation of a shopworn Zionist?

stephenkmacksd.com/

May 07, 2026

Editor: The rules of this game are predicated upon the fact that the reader must first accept the fact that Mr. Stephens plays a kind game here! That game is that Stephens can some how play the role of an objective observer, of Jake Auchincloss, of a particular kind or iteration ? While he is still in fact a Zionist Loyalist, whose desires somewow demonstarte that his flueny somehow denotes actual insights. While not forgettiing the propinquity of Class that features in the Auchincloss and Stephens maufactured relations.

…

Among Majority Democrats’ founding members are Abigail Spanberger, the governor of Virginia; Mikie Sherrill, the governor of New Jersey; Ruben Gallego, the senator from Arizona; and Elissa Slotkin, the senator from Michigan.

…

Mainly, though, it’s about championing working- and middle-class concerns against the interests of what he calls “an ossified American aristocracy.” And it’s about restoring an old type of patriotism, based on foundational American ideals, against the blood-and-soil patriotism championed by the likes of JD Vance.

In the interviews, I sometimes found myself disagreeing with Auchincloss. But I conducted them to learn things, not to get into an argument. He thinks deep and provoked me to think more deeply, whether the subject was the estate tax or the war with Iran. Our talks have been condensed and edited for clarity.

…

Editor: Reader always be aware, of the continuing note of self-congetulation in Stephens intejections/comments. And this exchange between the two as evidence of a kind of … see Auchincloss reply to Stephens comments in italics.

…

Bret Stephens: It looks right now like Democrats will do well in the midterms. Does that mean the overall state of the party is improving?

Jake Auchincloss: Yes, but I think what you’re also asking is: Can Democrats extrapolate from the midterms to potential for 2028? And my argument would be no. I think that we should be pretty cleareyed and introspective about that. You’ve written a lot, Bret, about “move to the center, Democrats.” I would complicate that a little bit because I think what you’re saying is move to the center as though there’s sort of a one-dimensional tug of war. And I’d say if we played that game, we’d probably lose in ’28.

…

Editor: Does this next exchange between Stephens and Auchincloss even surprise the the reader!

Stephens: You have been, much more so than most of your caucus, outspoken in your defense of Israel’s right to defend itself. Do you worry that the Democrats are becoming an anti-Israel party? And do you worry about the antisemitic current running in at least some parts of the progressive left?

Auchincloss: Yes, about the antisemitic current running in parts of the Democratic left, and the antisemitic current running on the MAGA right. We have a horseshoe phenomenon here. Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes are much more influential in their party than any antisemitic hashtags are in the Democratic Party, and we should be cleareyed about that. It’s unacceptable on both sides, and it needs to be called out by political leaders of their own parties when it happens on both sides.

When I think about antisemitism, in the arc of history, it’s usually a symptom of a failed society, of a rotten society. Whether it was medieval European cities, whether it was 19th-century Imperial Russia, whether it was parts of the Middle East, it’s usually societies that are degrading.

One of the early symptoms of that is the othering of the Jew and the scapegoating of the Jew. And when I think about modern antisemitism, I think of it as a very clear example of the fact that our digital realm has become a failed society. And antisemitism on TikTok and on X, which is where it is mushrooming, is really just an example that these social media platforms have become failed states and failed societies.

Which is why I’ve been directing so much legislation against them about their liability, about their tax profile and, frankly, just trying to drive the pitchforks toward them.

…

Stephens: Then what’s the best way of going forward?

Auchincloss: The assertion Democrats make right now is: This war was a failure. We want to insist that any agreement inked with Iran would require a two-thirds vote in the Senate. We say, War Powers Resolution, going to take over the steering wheel from a guy who should not be in charge of war and peace.

Then we have an “ideas primary” for the 2028 presidential contenders on the Democratic side, because we have to have a point of view about how to build back from strategic failure. My core argument would be that it has to be based on knitting together NATO with the Abraham Accords through energy, defense and infrastructure.

Stephens: Say more.

Auchincloss: So you’ve got a few projects underway. One is, you’ve got an air-defense concept of an Abraham Accords air-defense system. [Under relations established by the Abraham Accords, Israel is said to have sent air-defense systems to the United Arab Emirates to defend against Iranian attacks.] That needs to be put on the urgent level where you bring in Ukraine.

Ideally, you actually take the Russian frozen assets, you use them to invest in the Ukraine defense industrial complex, and you help Ukraine monetize its drone and counter-drone capabilities by selling them to the Gulf states to harden their energy infrastructure, which they desperately need.

Then we need to double down on IMEC, the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, which was put in place a few years ago. It’s sometimes called the new Golden Road — really the counter to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Functionally, it’s a series of energy and infrastructure investments that knit together India, the Middle East and Europe.

Stephens: Is part of the idea here a strategy of containment for the newer, younger, more hard-line Iran that emerges from this war as you see it?

Auchincloss: Yes, it’s neutralizing not just Iranian, but I would argue Sino-Iranian influence. In an even bigger context, it is finally making good on President Obama’s pivot to Asia.

It’s basically saying to NATO and to the Abraham Accords, all right, we’re going to work with you. We’re going to invest in you. We want to do all these things with you as allies. But you’re paying for it. And you’ve got to harden yourselves and knit yourselves together because we can’t let China have home field advantage in the Indo-Pacific. We’ve got to be there in the South China Sea. We’ve got to be there in Southeast Asia. And that’s where our focus has to be.

Stephens: Final question. If there is one thing you learned in the Marine Corps which every American should know, what is it?

Auchincloss: Officers eat last.

…

Editor: The Reader cannot be surprised by the comments by Stephens nor Jake Auchincloss they are fellow travelers!

Political Observer.