A great analysis of the evolution of Trump. No humanitarian bone in his body. His lies are part of his persona and just roll off his tongue. I could go on in this vein.
My fear is that all the protests and court decisions are not going to change his outlook or policies. Only getting the Republican Members Congress to turn on him will the "good guys" have a chance.
How do we go about helping people see that this government trajectory isn’t what “they” want (and who is the “they” we are trying to reach?)? I found a recent interview with conservatives in the New York Times useful to get into the mindset of non-liberals. Many people are happy with what is happening now - for many, this is democracy functioning correctly: votes put people in power with a very different view on how the country should operate and now the government is changing its priorities as a result. Some of what is happening are things that democrats / liberals should fight because we disagree with their goal of dismantling our programs, but their desire to dismantle the programs is not necessarily illegal or contrary to democracy. Other parts of what is happening are genuinely a threat to democracy. Both are important but they are not the same. We want to rally people to stand up for programs that are valuable to them that they might not want to throw away. We also want to alert people about actions that represent a scary trajectory towards the loss of democracy as a political framework. But those two efforts are distinct to me and I find them all bound up together in most of what I’m reading, which I find challenging to unravel.
For those that are not very politically engaged, it is likely hard to distinguish polarized and rabid political and cultural fighting, the dismantling of programs that they should genuinely want to save for the country’s benefit, and concern for the future of the country as a democracy. And in terms of feeling an oppressive and over-powered executive / government in their lives, the COVID times were much more intrusive and controlling in people’s lives than anything happening now, which i think will confuse people about what is government overreach and what is an appropriate reaction to a crisis. And as you highlight, fairly normal court and economic practices continue in parallel even if a government goes towards autocracy. I think it makes the narrative hard to explain and for every day people to feel real urgency about
Thanks for a great comment. You are right to point out the difficulties of separating-out what policies and actions are legitimate forms of political action reflecting the priorities of the party elected into power, versus policies and actions that are illegitimate (e.g., illegal, corrupt, etc.) or even just poorly conceived and executed. This is exactly the conundrum we face; and the polarization of our population into not simply competing political camps, but into relatively walled-off information environments, makes this all the harder.
I have written earlier about the likelihood that the biggest vulnerability in the Trump 2.0 agenda is Trump himself. In his first term (Trump 1.0), he perpetually over-promised and under-delivered, while alienating and worrying enough people (not least by his leading an assault on the electoral process) to get Biden elected. I believe that Trump 2.0 is different, but also quite vulnerable.
Trump 2.0 is all about really delivering this time. But his delivery is so indiscriminate, destructive — and its scope so wide — that it is increasingly having untoward impacts on a broad swath of the American people, including many who supported him in the last election. Polling has shown that there are a lot of people out there who are not MAGA-faithful acolytes, but instead ‘went along’ with Trump for a variety of reasons. These softer supporters are going to be much more sensitive to ‘untoward’ impacts and can be the basis of a swing of critical support away from Trump and republicans in coming elections.
What I argued in this latest post (and in many before) is directed mainly at liberals and moderates trying to figure out what to do about policies and actions that they believe are wrong and/or worrisome — and especially where the chaos resulting from widespread actions and proclamations, etc., is overwhelming and paralyzing. It is an argument trying to provide a coherent framework within to process and understand the enormity and seriousness of the Trump 2.0 agenda. I argue, essentially, that the overall thrust of Trump 2.0 is the consolidation of power in an ‘imperial presidency.’ And I suggest that those of us who get this should be looking to do the best one can in engaging where one can in bringing knowledge and clarity about this to others.
Trump is his own worst enemy, but he’s an extraordinarily gifted snake oil salesman. He has an incredible gift for winning-over and seducing people whose instincts tell them that much of what’s going on doesn’t seem quite right or very well thought-out. At least part of what we can do about that is to articulate and press another way of seeing what’s going on that, for those whose intuitions were moving in that direction, can realize that they were on the right path after all.
So, this is only a start at getting at some of the issues you raise, but I hope this is a good start. Thanks.
Something that has been very worrisome to me is how Trump's approval rating is only slightly underwater right now, whereas in March of his first term, it was already in tatters. Why do you think Trump has been less unpopular so far in his second term?
A great analysis of the evolution of Trump. No humanitarian bone in his body. His lies are part of his persona and just roll off his tongue. I could go on in this vein.
My fear is that all the protests and court decisions are not going to change his outlook or policies. Only getting the Republican Members Congress to turn on him will the "good guys" have a chance.
How do we go about helping people see that this government trajectory isn’t what “they” want (and who is the “they” we are trying to reach?)? I found a recent interview with conservatives in the New York Times useful to get into the mindset of non-liberals. Many people are happy with what is happening now - for many, this is democracy functioning correctly: votes put people in power with a very different view on how the country should operate and now the government is changing its priorities as a result. Some of what is happening are things that democrats / liberals should fight because we disagree with their goal of dismantling our programs, but their desire to dismantle the programs is not necessarily illegal or contrary to democracy. Other parts of what is happening are genuinely a threat to democracy. Both are important but they are not the same. We want to rally people to stand up for programs that are valuable to them that they might not want to throw away. We also want to alert people about actions that represent a scary trajectory towards the loss of democracy as a political framework. But those two efforts are distinct to me and I find them all bound up together in most of what I’m reading, which I find challenging to unravel.
For those that are not very politically engaged, it is likely hard to distinguish polarized and rabid political and cultural fighting, the dismantling of programs that they should genuinely want to save for the country’s benefit, and concern for the future of the country as a democracy. And in terms of feeling an oppressive and over-powered executive / government in their lives, the COVID times were much more intrusive and controlling in people’s lives than anything happening now, which i think will confuse people about what is government overreach and what is an appropriate reaction to a crisis. And as you highlight, fairly normal court and economic practices continue in parallel even if a government goes towards autocracy. I think it makes the narrative hard to explain and for every day people to feel real urgency about
Thanks for a great comment. You are right to point out the difficulties of separating-out what policies and actions are legitimate forms of political action reflecting the priorities of the party elected into power, versus policies and actions that are illegitimate (e.g., illegal, corrupt, etc.) or even just poorly conceived and executed. This is exactly the conundrum we face; and the polarization of our population into not simply competing political camps, but into relatively walled-off information environments, makes this all the harder.
I have written earlier about the likelihood that the biggest vulnerability in the Trump 2.0 agenda is Trump himself. In his first term (Trump 1.0), he perpetually over-promised and under-delivered, while alienating and worrying enough people (not least by his leading an assault on the electoral process) to get Biden elected. I believe that Trump 2.0 is different, but also quite vulnerable.
Trump 2.0 is all about really delivering this time. But his delivery is so indiscriminate, destructive — and its scope so wide — that it is increasingly having untoward impacts on a broad swath of the American people, including many who supported him in the last election. Polling has shown that there are a lot of people out there who are not MAGA-faithful acolytes, but instead ‘went along’ with Trump for a variety of reasons. These softer supporters are going to be much more sensitive to ‘untoward’ impacts and can be the basis of a swing of critical support away from Trump and republicans in coming elections.
What I argued in this latest post (and in many before) is directed mainly at liberals and moderates trying to figure out what to do about policies and actions that they believe are wrong and/or worrisome — and especially where the chaos resulting from widespread actions and proclamations, etc., is overwhelming and paralyzing. It is an argument trying to provide a coherent framework within to process and understand the enormity and seriousness of the Trump 2.0 agenda. I argue, essentially, that the overall thrust of Trump 2.0 is the consolidation of power in an ‘imperial presidency.’ And I suggest that those of us who get this should be looking to do the best one can in engaging where one can in bringing knowledge and clarity about this to others.
Trump is his own worst enemy, but he’s an extraordinarily gifted snake oil salesman. He has an incredible gift for winning-over and seducing people whose instincts tell them that much of what’s going on doesn’t seem quite right or very well thought-out. At least part of what we can do about that is to articulate and press another way of seeing what’s going on that, for those whose intuitions were moving in that direction, can realize that they were on the right path after all.
So, this is only a start at getting at some of the issues you raise, but I hope this is a good start. Thanks.
I hope heads roll for the email that was sent to the editor of the Atlantic and it shows the wrong people are in positions of great importance.
Something that has been very worrisome to me is how Trump's approval rating is only slightly underwater right now, whereas in March of his first term, it was already in tatters. Why do you think Trump has been less unpopular so far in his second term?
Here's a good explainer. If it's paywalled, let me know and I will post the essence here.
https://open.substack.com/pub/gelliottmorris/p/chart-of-the-week-trump-is-not-popular?r=mrvx1&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false