Nichols on the Dime

Information, Greg. It’s like a bottle of fine wine.

By
225

The Remnant’s streak of obvious guests who have inexplicably never appeared on the program continues today, as professor turned Atlantic staff writer Tom Nichols joins the show to provide some uncut, fiercely nerdy analysis of our current political malaise. Much of his conversation with Jonah concerns the ongoing conflict in Ukraine—namely, how America has handled it, and what’s really motivating Putin. But after that, the stage is set for an epic debate between the duo on what it means to be “Never Trump” in 2023, and where principled conservatives should go from here. Also, fans of Succession may recognize Tom from his appearances on the show; tune in to learn some behind the scenes secrets.

Show Notes:

– Tom’s page at The Atlantic

– Tom’s latest book, Our Own Worst Enemy

– Orlando Figes’ The Story of Russia

– Tom: “The Ukrainian Counteroffensive Is Not an Action Movie”

– Tom: “I Was a Pundit on Succession”

By
Comments (225)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    squarooticus

    3 months later, and my main criticism of Tom and like-minded never-Trumpers constantly warning of doom should Trump get a second term is that none of them are willing to do the things that might actually prevent that outcome. At this point (mid-December), they should be campaigning for Nikki Haley and/or relentlessly calling for Biden to withdraw from the race so the Democrats can hold a real primary. Until I see them doing those things, I am forced to conclude they aren't actually serious about just how unparalleled the badness of a second Trump term would be.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Pat @ Tavi Hall

    On the Glock, I'm seeing reporting that the recent Jacksonville (I think) Florida shooter's gun was bought and labeled at one of a chain of stores that includes the store Trump went to in SC. They've also marketed a gun with a Hawaiian shirt print and a name that sounds like Boogalo.

    I'm not a big fan of "dog whistle" reporting, and I hope that the store was just the closest or most cooperative to the campaign. But it does strike me as a pretty bad choice.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Andy Napoli

    I am totally in Jonah's corner on the "why are so many Never-Trumpers, such cheap dates?" argument.

    If Biden and the Dems want Never-Trumper votes, they HAVE TO EARN THEM just like they have to earn the votes of the other elements of their coalition. I live in Northern Virginia, so when election day 2024 nears, and if Trump is the nominee, I am going to see how close the race is between Biden and Trump, and if Biden has done absolutely nothing to earn my vote, and Biden seems to be ahead of Trump by five or more percentage points in Virginia, I will probably vote third party. If the race is a dead heat, or too close to call, I'd reluctantly vote for Biden, and then vote for the rest of the GOP candidates.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Matt Stokes

    Great conversation and long overdue. Similar to Steve Hayes' conversation with Tim Miller. We need more of these, at least occasionally.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    David Jenner

    Hey all, enjoyed the show and I really like Tom in general, agree with Jonah that he should come back soon. Gotta say though, by far the least interesting part of this was the rehash of the "Burn in All Down" debate from a few years ago re: the GOP. I think people on the anti-Trump right give each other way too much crap about that stuff in general and it just gets to be a salty topic for everyone after a while. I can respect the squishier folks like Tom that found a new home with the Dems that wingnuts like me can't/won't, but I think everyone who is serious about this topic in our neck of the political woods figured out what they are going to do one way or another a while ago.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Xsearnold

      I couldn't help thinking when hearing this, "You guys are too late." The 'burn it all down' card was played in 2016. It was a prominent argument from many of my friends at the time justifying their support of Trump in the primary. They felt the "establishment" had failed them (and they had a point), so they were willing to tear it down and start over.

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    John.Rogers

    Is Trump really an existential threat? We know Tom Nichols and Bill Kristol believe he's existential threat to our democracy. No, he's an insufferable douche but the institutions of our government will hold. The systems of checks against his power will be ready for him. I won't vote for him, I never have. I just think the chicken littles of the political chattering class over estimate his power. He'd be a lame duck on day one.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Xsearnold

      This, for me, was the crux of the argument. Nichols kept saying "where you and I part company..." just ahead of stating a position Jonah was never taking. I agree that our republic can withstand virtually any moron in the Oval Office, especially when they will only get a single term. I would have loved for Jonah to probe Nichols on what it is he thinks Trump will be able to do to our democracy that both Congress and SCOTUS will let him get away with.

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Quinntheeskimo98

    Since it sounds like Tom could use a little more love in the comments, I appreciate you being able to civilly disagree on this, and Jonah can usually win me over on a lot of points, but I think I'm with Tom on this, allow me to extrapolate.
    For context, I'm the quintessential Wisconsin swing voter, I lean right overall, but on some issues I'm somewhat or very liberal. my vote matters, at lease symbolically, it's voters like me who decide elections.
    I agree with Tom in this, I think that Donald Trump poses a potentially existential threat to fundamental American Institutions, and to the liberal democratic order, I consider myself an institutionalist, and believe those institutions are fundamentally more important than most (if not all) policy disagreements, as such, I will vote for Joe Biden, who I disagree with on a lot of policy, but who generally works within the norms of American institutions, over Trump who will attempt to burn it all down.
    Now Here's where I agree with Jonah:
    People like Tom, and voters like me, are kind of cheap dates, we're willing to put up with a lot of the Democrats nonsense in opposition to the illiberalism of Trump and Trumpism, and as long as that is a clear and present threat we an be counted on to support them with our votes, our justifications, or our defenses. where I think that reasoning falls short is the assumption that Tom (who seems to have a fair track record of criticizing Biden and the dems) or others like him are just buying wholesale into progressivism. Some might be, I don't doubt that. some may have given reconsideration and changed their beliefs on some things, I know I have. and some may be vocally criticizing dems, and trying to bring them toward the center and are just being ignored, but Trump has made them uncomfortable bedfellows anyway. all that's to say, if intellectuals are saying things they don't believe just to justify allying with dems that's wrong. but if, like Tom, they are doing it to fight a bigger common foe, or if they just had a serious reconsideration of their priors, I think we should give a lot of grace to those people and assume they come to their positions in good faith.

    Collapse
  8. Tmbaer

    it is obvious Mr Nicholls knows far more about Soviet Russia than Tsarist Russia. it seemed like he missed your point about how Russia was bad even before the Soviets. He points to how bad the eastern front was during WWII as evidence of this, but the eastern front during WWI was really bad, too!

    and the comment that Ukraine is now dealing with a 1914-style slog must have been a simple mistake. 1914 was a blitzkrieg compared to much later in the war, when the Germans pioneered the layered defense playbook that Russia has obviously studied

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Shannonrobertson903

    If we can do this - disagree honestly and humanely and in good faith- all the while respecting the blazes out of our debate partner, we will be fine. This is what we should be doing. Very very interesting conversation.

    Collapse
  10. Aaron H Frank

    Mr. Nichols, like many others, accuses Trump and the MAGAs of wanting to lock up their political opponents when President Biden and Merrick Garland are actually doing just that.

    Collapse
    1. Markr.Mpt

      Is there something Trump could do that would be deserving of indictment?

      Collapse
Load More