T HE NEW YORK TIMES INTERNATIONAL EDITION FRIDAY, AUGUST 2, 2019| 15
It would be ridiculous to imagine run-
ning-mate pairings this early for Demo-
crats in the 2020 presidential race.
So let’s be ridiculous. My subcon-
scious is advising: Yep, it’s absurd, but
just conjure Elizabeth Warren and Pete
Buttigieg on the stump together a year
from now, in whatever order: They exude
intelligence, and no candidates are
better at explaining complicated policy
ideas in a persuasive way.
Whoa, whoa, whoa! We’re almost a
year away from the convention, and
both have yet to show that they can
actually win over voters. That’s the acid
test.
Still, Warren and Buttigieg have
thrived in the campaign so far, and they
shone in the first night of the Democrat-
ic debates this week. While they are
quite different on policy — Warren is far
to the left of Buttigieg in worldview —
they each are outsiders with silver
tongues and massive intellects, and
each would embody the change that the
electorate seems to yearn for.
Warren would be the first woman
president or vice president. Buttigieg
would be the first openly gay person in
either office, as well as the youngest
president. (As vice president, Buttigieg
would be edged out by John Breckin-
ridge, who was barely 36 when he took
office in 1857. This is not a useful prece-
dent for Buttigieg, because Breckin-
ridge then betrayed the country by
joining the Confederacy).
As I’ve written, I started out skeptical
of Warren, because of the belief that she
had parlayed possible Native-American
ancestry into a career benefit, because
of concern that she shot from the hip,
and out of wariness that her only big
issue was financial reform.
Oops: I was wrong on all three counts.
Boston Globe reporting has disproved
the first allegation; she has been more
prudent about firing from the hip; and
she has emerged as the gold standard
for outlining a broad range of thoughtful
policies.
That said, she has occasionally of-
fered up pyrite as well. I worry thattelling more than 150 million Americans
that they will soon lose their private
medical insurance could turn health
care, which should be a winner for
Democrats, into a winner for Republi-
cans.
Likewise, it seems to me reasonable
that if we want a secure border, it should
remain a misdemeanor to cross without
permission — just as it’s a misdemeanor
to trespass on private property. War-
ren’s drive to decriminalize border
crossings would play into President
Trump’s false criticism that Democrats
want open borders.
As for Buttigieg, I
likewise misjudged
him. A small-city
mayor in his 30s?
Seriously? I was
very doubtful. But
he won credibility
with raw political
skills, not to men-
tion by raising more
money in the second quarter than any
other Democrat, including Biden.
Buttigieg is also a masterful speaker,
injecting nuance and thoughtfulness
even into sound bites. He speaks not
only Maltese and Norwegian, but also
religion. Buttigieg is particularly deft at
citing Scripture to highlight the hypocri-
sy of Trump and the G.O.P.
“So-called conservative Christian
senators right now in the Senate are
blocking a bill to raise the minimum
wage,” Buttigieg noted Tuesday, “when
Scripture says that whoever oppresses
the poor taunts their maker.”
Buttigieg’s website is sketchy on
policy, and his position on immigration
is evolving. But in an off-the-record
conversation, I found him more knowl-edgeable about issues than some other
candidates I’ve spoken with.
Could he win a general election?
Gallup found that 76 percent of voters
reported that they would be willing to
vote for a gay candidate, and 71 percent
for one under 40. Clearly, he would lose
some voters on both counts, but then
again, even fewer Americans (63 per-
cent) said that they’d be willing to vote
for a candidate over 70 (as Trump,
Biden, Sanders and Warren all are).
One reason for skepticism about this
entire column: Both Warren and
Buttigieg are unproven among national
voters, and there’s a risk that their
cerebral qualities will antagonize some
voters. Warren has not been particu-
larly popular even in her home state,
liberal Massachusetts, and the Real-
ClearPolitics polling average shows her
only 2.4 points ahead of Trump in head-
to-head polls, compared with 4.5 points
ahead for Bernie Sanders and 8.1 points
ahead for Biden. Buttigieg does even
worse, running only a hair ahead of
Trump in head-to-head polling; it’s fair
to object that pairing two middling
performers is not an optimal strategy.
Yet while Biden is seen in many quar-
ters as the safest Democratic candidate,
I’m wary. This is a moment when only 37
percent of Americans say that the coun-
try is on the right track, yet Biden repre-
sents continuity of the politics of the last
few decades — missing the opportunity
for a change candidate.
This entire reverie is, of course, ridic-
ulous, and Buttigieg and Warren still
must demonstrate an ability to win over
actual voters. But for brilliance, elo-
quence and the ability to embody
change, they would constitute a historic
partnership.Warren and Buttigieg on the ticket?
Nicholas Kristof
Sure, it’s way
too early to be
thinking about
running-mate
pairings. But
what the heck.ILLUSTRATION BY NICHOLAS KONRAD“You have to leave the country,”
Sharon Stone told Kathy Griffin, in the
wake of the controversy surrounding
the infamous 2017 photograph of her
holding a Donald Trump mask covered
with ketchup, “for eight years.”
Ms. Griffin thought about it. And
said, “You first.”
Ms. Griffin, one of the most success-
ful comedians in the country, was
recognized by Guinness World Records
for “most stand-up comedy specials.”
She has won two Emmy awards. All six
of her comedy albums were nominated
for Grammys; her breakout recording,
“For Your Consideration,” made her
the first comedian to debut at the top
of the Billboard Top Comedy Albums
chart. She estimates she’s earned over
$75 million in the course of her career.
But for the last two years, she hasn’t
gotten work.
Not the kind of work she wants,
anyway. Since the Mask Incident, she’s
traveled the world for her “Laugh Your
Head Off Tour.” But in the wake of the
scandal, her American appearances in
2017 were canceled. She was fired from
her gig as co-host, with Anderson
Cooper, of CNN’s New Year’s Eve
show. Her commercial sponsors —
including Squatty Potty — dropped her
in a heartbeat.
Because the makers of a special seat
designed to improve excretion found
their association with Kathy Griffin
bad for their image, I guess.
This story is about more than a
comedian and a disturbing photo-
graph. It’s about what America has
become: a place where in the wake of a
single mistake, a career can be can-
celed, a place where the president of
the United States can happily use the
power of his office to destroy an Amer-
ican citizen.
“I am an infinitesimal dot in this
frightening political landscape,” Ms.
Griffin told me. “I fought imperfectly,
but genuinely, with all my might.”
We think of so-called cancel culture
as an excess of the left. (The author
Meghan Daum, in reacting to the
movement, says, “Woke me when it’s
over.”) But in this case, it was the right
wing doing the canceling, with the
not-inconsiderable muscle of the De-
partment of Justice added in for good
measure.
That photo of the ketchup-covered
mask — can we agree on this much? —was beyond ugly. “What if Daniel
Pearl’s mother saw it?” Ms. Griffin
asked miserably, days after the photo
went viral. She issued a formal apol-
ogy, in hopes of forgiveness.
But Ms. Griffin has not been forgiv-
en. “You’ve been Dixie Chicked,” a
friend told her, referring to the singers
who found their career upended after
they had the temerity to question the
wisdom of invading Iraq. “I didn’t get
Dixie Chicked,” Ms. Griffin said. “I got
Dixie... ” — well, you can use your
imagination for what she said.
She received death threats, thou-
sands of them. “You’re no different
from Bill Cosby,” went one letter. “I’m
glad your sister died of cancer. I wish it
was you.”
She was put on the no-fly list for two
months. And her lawyers confirmed
she was investigated by the Secret
Service and the Justice Department.
They considered charging her with
conspiracy to assassinate the president
of the United
States, the sentence
for which is life in
prison.
Her new film,
“Kathy Griffin: A
Hell of a Story” —
which released for
one day in U.S.
theaters on
Wednesday —
shows the toll the
whole experience
has taken on her. In
the movie, which is
part stand-up, part documentary, you
hear her funny — and harrowing —
act.
But you also see her weeping under
the strain. She receives more threats;
she’s stopped and held at airports,
sometimes for as long as six hours, a
result of being placed on an Interpol
watch list. There are other things the
film does not show — a Trump sup-
porter outside of a Houston show
brandishing a switchblade; others
disrupting performances in San Fran-
cisco, Philadelphia and elsewhere.
To watch her performing is to see a
woman on the brink. There are mo-
ments when it seems Ms. Griffin is
going to snap in two.
Nevertheless, she persists.
Did Donald Trump and his support-
ers truly think that the spokeswoman
for Squatty Potty had joined the Is-
lamic State? Did they really think that
the star of “My Life on the D-List” and
“Suddenly Susan” was actually advo-
cating the decapitation of the presi-
dent?Or is it just possible that all of this
outrage was manufactured, that a
single act of truly bad taste was trans-
formed by the president’s men into an
instant excuse to unleash all their
hatred? How is it possible that people
who were appalled by Ms. Griffin’s
mistake appear, at the same time, to be
unconcerned with the antics of the
most dishonest man to ever occupy the
Oval Office? Because, in fact, Ms.
Griffin’s photo wasn’t a call for decapi-
tation. It was a call for resistance.
At one point, she says, the Secret
Service was attempting to get her to
come in for an interrogation wearing
an orange jump suit, in handcuffs.
Would you have done it, if you were
Kathy Griffin? Of course you wouldn’t.
You’d have feared the effect of that
image upon your supporters, many of
whom belong to some of the country’s
most marginalized groups.
“Over my dead body am I letting
anyone see me doing a perp walk in a
jump suit for my First Amendment
rights, which I did not violate,” she
said. “I’m not letting a woman see it.
I’m not letting a person of color see it.
I’m not letting a gay person see it. I
don’t care how much it costs — over
my dead body, a perp walk like a com-
mon criminal.”
Ms. Griffin is surely not the first
celebrity to find her career shattered
as a result of saying or doing some-
thing inappropriate.
But there’s something in her fate
unique to the Trump era, a special kind
of anger reserved for women, and
older women at that (Griffin is 58). Is
her photograph so much more unfor-
givable than, say, Johnny Depp asking,
at the 2017 Glastonbury Festival:
“When was the last time an actor
assassinated a president? It’s been
awhile, and maybe it’s time.” Later, just
like Ms. Griffin, he said he was “not
insinuating anything.”
These comments did not end Mr.
Depp’s career. Ms. Griffin, meanwhile,
is doing stand-up for medium-size
audiences in theaters. Neither CNN
nor Squatty Potty has called.
“What happened to me truly was
historic and unprecedented in the
worst kind of way,” she said. “But I
fought it tooth and nail.”
Is she going to keep doing this work,
in spite of the obvious toll it’s taken on
her?
“If you don’t stand up,” she said,
“you get run over.”JENNIFER FINNEY BOYLANis a professor of
English at Barnard College and the
author of the novel “Long Black Veil.”Jennifer Finney Boylan
Contributing WriterKathy Griffin.MATT LICARI/INVISION, VIA ASSOCIATED PRESSKathy Griffin will not stand down
Two years
after the
comedian’s
infamous
Trump photo,
she’s back —
battered but
unbowed by
right-wing
cancel culture.opinion
en? Investigate this corrupt mess
immediately!”
Mr. Cummings represents a major-
ity-black area encompassing much of
Baltimore as well as parts of Howard
and Baltimore Counties. Many people
live in that district by choice. In an-
other tweet, the president described
the district as “a disgusting, rat and
rodent infested mess” that is “FAR
WORSE and more dangerous” than the
nation’s southern border.
This outburst came on the heels of
the president’s denunciation of four
Democratic congresswomen of color as
anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. Although
three of the four were born here, and
all of them are, of course, Americans,
Mr. Trump said they should “go back”
to the “totally broken and crime in-
fested places from which they came.”
He also asserted his belief that the four
congresswomen were not “capable of
loving our country.”
Reporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
rants emboldened white hate groups
and reinforced racist blogs, news sites
and social media platforms. In re-
sponse to his tweets, one of the fourlawmakers, Representative Ilhan
Omar of Minnesota, said: “This is the
agenda of white nationalists, whether
it is happening in chat rooms or it’s
happening on national TV. And now it’s
reached the White House garden.”
She’s right.
To be clear, I am not accusing Presi-
dent Trump of inciting violence in
Gilroy or anywhere else. But he em-
powers hateful and potentially violent
individuals with his divisive rhetoric
and his unwillingness to unequivocally
denounce white supremacy. Mr. Trump
may be understandably worried about
the course of congressional inquiries,
but his aggressive and race-baiting
responses have been beyond the pale.
He has chosen a re-election strategy
based on appealing to the kinds of
hatred, fear and ignorance that can
lead to violence.
We’ve seen this movie before in the
radicalization of Muslims by internet
sermons delivered by charismatic,
father-figure clerics who inspire terror-
ism and martyrdom. The president has
fallen short of calling for overt violence
against minorities and immigrants, but
unbalanced minds among us may failto note the distinction.
If a president paints people of color
as the enemy, encourages them to be
sent back to where they came from
and implies that no humans want to
live in certain American cities, he gives
license to those who feel compelled to
eradicate what Mr. Trump calls an
infestation.
It doesn’t really matter whether Mr.
Trump is truly a racist or merely play-
ing one on television to appeal to his
base. Either way, his path can lead to
bloodshed. When that happens, we will
hear White House officials and the
Republican leadership claim their
hands are clean because malicious
people can’t be stopped from acting
out.
Don’t believe a word of it. Terrorists
aren’t born that way: They are in-
spired, cultivated and directed. Our
experience with online radicalization
has shown there is a clear path to
violence. I fear we are on it.Provoking race-based terrorism
F IGLIUZZI, FROM PAGE 1FRANK FIGLIUZZI, a former assistant F.B.I.
director for counterintelligence, is a
national security analyst for NBC
News.Order the International Edition today at
nytimes.com/discover
In unpredictable times, you need journalism that cuts through
the noise to deliver the facts. A subscription to The New York
Times International Edition gives you uncompromising reporting
that deepens your understanding of the issues that matter,and includes unlimited access to NYTimes.com and apps for
smartphone and tablet.Newspaper subscription offer:
Save 66% for three months.
Whatever happens
next, we’ll help you
make sense of it.
Offer expires December 31, 2019 and is valid for new subscribers only. This offer is not available in all markets and hand
delivery is subject to confirmation by local distributors. Smartphone and tablet apps are not supported on all devices.РЕ
Еand social media platforms. In re-and social media platforms. In re-Л
and reinforced racist blogs, news sites
Лand reinforced racist blogs, news sites
and social media platforms. In re-and social media platforms. In re-Лand reinforced racist blogs, news sitesand reinforced racist blogs, news sitesИИ
and social media platforms. In re-И
and social media platforms. In re-and reinforced racist blogs, news sitesand reinforced racist blogs, news sitesЗЗ
П
rants emboldened white hate groups
П
rants emboldened white hate groups
and reinforced racist blogs, news sites
П
and reinforced racist blogs, news sitesОReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
ОReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
rants emboldened white hate groupsrants emboldened white hate groupsОДReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
ДReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
rants emboldened white hate groupsrants emboldened white hate groupsДReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sГОloving our country.”
Оloving our country.”
Reporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sОloving our country.”loving our country.”ТТОcongresswomen were not “capable of
Оcongresswomen were not “capable of
loving our country.”loving our country.”ОВcongresswomen were not “capable of
Вcongresswomen were not “capable of
loving our country.”loving our country.”Вcongresswomen were not “capable ofcongresswomen were not “capable ofИИЛHe also asserted his belief that the four
ЛHe also asserted his belief that the four
congresswomen were not “capable ofcongresswomen were not “capable ofЛHe also asserted his belief that the fourHe also asserted his belief that the fourАА
Гfested places from which they came.”
Гfested places from which they came.”
He also asserted his belief that the fourHe also asserted his belief that the fourГ
Р
fested places from which they came.”
Р
fested places from which they came.”
He also asserted his belief that the four
Р
He also asserted his belief that the fourfested places from which they came.”fested places from which they came.”УУПto the “totally broken and crime in-
Пto the “totally broken and crime in-
fested places from which they came.”fested places from which they came.”Пto the “totally broken and crime in-to the “totally broken and crime in-ППАMr. Trump said they should “go back”
АMr. Trump said they should “go back”
to the “totally broken and crime in-to the “totally broken and crime in-А"What'sReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s"What'sReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
rants emboldened white hate groups
"What'srants emboldened white hate groups
and reinforced racist blogs, news sitesand reinforced racist blogs, news sites"What'sNews"congresswomen were not “capable ofNews"congresswomen were not “capable of
loving our country.”
News"loving our country.”
Reporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sNews"VK.COM/WSNWScongresswomen were not “capable ofVK.COM/WSNWScongresswomen were not “capable of
loving our country.”VK.COM/WSNWSloving our country.”
Reporting indicates that Mr. Trump’sVK.COM/WSNWSReporting indicates that Mr. Trump’s
rants emboldened white hate groupsVK.COM/WSNWSrants emboldened white hate groups
and reinforced racist blogs, news sites
VK.COM/WSNWSand reinforced racist blogs, news sites
and social media platforms. In re-and social media platforms. In re-VK.COM/WSNWS