Life in the Trump Era, Part 2

[Ma'ake]

Ma’ake, I urge you to read the David Brooks op-ed in my post from yesterday.

I did. I like Brooks. He makes good points, as usual. I no longer expect impeachment, nor the 25th amendment.

Ezra Klein (via concerned - nice catch) also makes a good point. Brooks is following Graham in falling into line behind the new Republican savior, the normalization of what was previously considered horrific. (I would expect a Senator Romney to similarly exclaim how fantastic the Emperor's wardrobe is.)

My IT background tells me the states need to seriously beef up the security on their electoral hardware, but I think GOP state leaders in swing states might be a little lazy, this year. "Russian hackers? I thought they caught the Prince from Nigeria... right? We're good."

Most of the electorate is tuned out on the details, but on edge. Between Trump's extreme clumsiness, what will be an underwhelming initial Keynesian boost from tax reform, and lingering #MeToo energy, it will be a tough November for the GOP.

Most of the action in the early part of this year is whether Trump & his devotees can extract Mueller.

(I'm not a big fan of the prospect of a President Winfrey, but... the bar has been set so low. I do like the proposed "Stable Genius Act".)

[LA Ute]

Ezra Klein (via concerned - nice catch) also makes a good point. Brooks is following Graham in falling into line behind the new Republican savior, the normalization of what was previously considered horrific. (I would expect a Senator Romney to similarly exclaim how fantastic the Emperor's wardrobe is.)

I didn't read Brooks that way. I think he is simply saying that we need to separate substance -- the policy items that really matter and are subjects of serious concern -- from mere noise -- the general antipathy and near-hysteria about Trump, the belief that he is evil, mentally deficient or ill, and so forth:

More anti-Trumpers seem to be telling themselves a “Madness of King George” narrative: Trump is a semiliterate madman surrounded by sycophants who are morally, intellectually and psychologically inferior to people like us.

He also says:

I sometimes wonder if the Invisible White House has learned to use the Potemkin White House to deke us while it changes the country.

There does seem to be an awful lot that's going on, policy-wise, that is being obscured by the near-hysteria surrounding Trump in many left-of-center quarters. Judicial appointments and regulatory rollback, for example. More and more I suspect that Trump's tweet may be a diversionary tactic, at least in part.

[Ma'ake]

I didn't read Brooks that way. I think he is simply saying that we need to separate substance -- the policy items that really matter and are subjects of serious concern -- from mere noise -- the general antipathy and near-hysteria about Trump, the belief that he is evil, mentally deficient or ill, and so forth

I agree with a lot of Brooks' column - there are two operations underway. The flames and grandiosity of the Wizard of Oz we all see, and the folks who are running the executive branch in the background. My hunch is John Kelly has brought a lot of discipline and the POTUS operations are settling in for governing, and the strategy is to let Trump tweet whatever because it's the mother of all distractions while everything Obama did is undone as fast as possible.

I was reassured to see the Air Force General saying he would "resist" an "illegal" nuke launch order. Good to know there are adults in the operation, like Mattis, McMaster, Kelly, Tillerson, Haley, etc.

So, Brooks simultaneously provides some reassurance and points out all the Exec Branch policy shifts underway, the actual brains behind the Wizard of Oz production and things that make Oz run.

And Ezra Klein notes how far Brooks has moved, regarding his previous alarm / outrage about Trump, to sort of joining the tacit chorus "this is the new normal folks, accept it".

Elevating another 20,000 feet or so, up where the U2 loiters, where we can see the curvature of the Earth, the parties tend to mimic each other, if not in policy, in tactics and strategy. Reagan proved you don't need a brainiac at POTUS, Clinton was the political Michael Jordan who defied attempts to box him in, "W" showed how the public opinion polls matter and hubris about war can be exceptionally toxic, and Obama survived some serious adversity (Great Recession), etc.

Trump's precedent is do whatever you have to do stylistically - the bar is now so low that even Oprah will look great, with zero actual experience with the law, governing, etc. Knowledge and intelligence are completely irrelevant. Just get elected get people to the polls by whatever means necessary.

[jrj84105]

Trump is a lifelong narcissist with previously compensated dementia which is on the verge of becoming uncompensated due to the stress of the job. His narcissism is so predictable that it makes him easy to work around and easy to manipulate. That’s not so terrible because our government can function with a pretty limited POTUS.

the bigger issue at play is the Russian interference. Trump was too clumsy regardless of whether or not it crossed into criminality. There is going to be greater scrutiny going forward, and that’s bad for Russia-enabled nationalist political factions throughout the West- including the GOP. The GOP had a good thing going with Russia, and Trump is on the brink of screwing it all up with his own clumsy relationship with a less-desireable and more criminal face of Russian influence.

[Two Utes]

Trump is a lifelong narcissist with previously compensated dementia which is on the verge of becoming uncompensated due to the stress of the job. His narcissism is so predictable that it makes him easy to work around and easy to manipulate. That’s not so terrible because our government can function with a pretty limited POTUS.

the bigger issue at play is the Russian interference. Trump was too clumsy regardless of whether or not it crossed into criminality. There is going to be greater scrutiny going forward, and that’s bad for Russia-enabled nationalist political factions throughout the West- including the GOP. The GOP had a good thing going with Russia, and Trump is on the brink of screwing it all up with his own clumsy relationship with a less-desireable and more criminal face of Russian influence.

"that’s bad for Russia-enabled nationalist political factions throughout the West- including the GOP. The GOP had a good thing going with Russia, and Trump is on the brink of screwing it all up with his own clumsy relationship with a less-desireable and more criminal face of Russian influence."

Wait, so, the Democrats are the "good guys" and the Republicans are the "bad guys" who Russia supports because they Republicans are bad for America and if the Democrats won that would be really bad for Russia?

Do you honestly beleivie this?

[Ma'ake]

"that’s bad for Russia-enabled nationalist political factions throughout the West- including the GOP. The GOP had a good thing going with Russia, and Trump is on the brink of screwing it all up with his own clumsy relationship with a less-desireable and more criminal face of Russian influence."

Wait, so, the Democrats are the "good guys" and the Republicans are the "bad guys" who Russia supports because they Republicans are bad for America and if the Democrats won that would be really bad for Russia?

Do you honestly beleivie this?

I saw an interesting TV segment about some Senator from the Russian Senate who has taken on the cause of cultivating support in America, so he goes to NRA conventions and interacts with evangelicals, and it has paid some dividends. There are businessmen in Texas who believe we should have much closer relations with Russia, who think Putin would make a good evangelical (but is currently misguided, or whatever).

There are definitely authoritarian tendencies shared by Putin and some Americans. I don't think (hope) it's not widespread, but the views of the Texan entrepreneur interviewed were striking, along the lines of Trump responding to criticism about Putin by saying "our government has killed a lot of people, too!"

[LA Ute]

Food for thought:

The Atlantic’s Caitlin Flanagan made an intriguing argument that even the heavily anti-Trump tenor of late-night comedy shows actually helped Trump: “Though aimed at blue-state sophisticates, these shows are an unintended but powerful form of propaganda for conservatives. When Republicans see these harsh jokes—which echo down through the morning news shows and the chattering day’s worth of viral clips, along with those of Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Meyers—they don’t just see a handful of comics mocking them. They see HBO, Comedy Central, TBS, ABC, CBS, and NBC. In other words, they see exactly what Donald Trump has taught them: that the entire media landscape loathes them, their values, their family, and their religion. It is hardly a reach for them to further imagine that the legitimate news shows on these channels are run by similarly partisan players—nor is it at all illogical. No wonder so many of Trump’s followers are inclined to believe only the things that he or his spokespeople tell them directly—everyone else on the tube thinks they’re a bunch of trailer-park, Oxy-snorting half-wits who divide their time between retweeting Alex Jones fantasies and ironing their Klan hoods.”

https://www.hoover.org/research/revolt-masses

[jrj84105]

"that’s bad for Russia-enabled nationalist political factions throughout the West- including the GOP. The GOP had a good thing going with Russia, and Trump is on the brink of screwing it all up with his own clumsy relationship with a less-desireable and more criminal face of Russian influence."

Wait, so, the Democrats are the "good guys" and the Republicans are the "bad guys" who Russia supports because they Republicans are bad for America and if the Democrats won that would be really bad for Russia?

Do you honestly beleivie this?

I didn't make any value judgments in that post.

none.

zero.

putin's primary goal is to re-establish Russia's sphere of influence in the former Soviet block. He sees NATO as the primary impediment to that end. His strategy for weakened NATO is two-fold

1) support isolationatist nationalist parties throughout the NATO footprint. In the US that's the GOP and Putin has worked hard to support and promote the GOP especially its more nationalist and isolationist elements. I don't think anyone would argue any of those points.

Now if you think that expansion of Russia's sphere of influence is bad and that parties who further that expansion are by extension "bad guys" then that's you applying your own value judgment, because I said nothing of the sort.

2) the other arm of the strategy is to attack Western ideals of multiculturalism, pluralism, and equality. Putin does this by supporting racist, xenophobic, and homophobic political factions in the NATO footprint, and in the US those elements are the core of the modern GOP. I'm not saying that makes the GOP "bad guys"; everyone is free to make his/her own value judgment.

[Rocker Ute]

I didn't make any value judgments in that post.

none.

zero.

putin's primary goal is to re-establish Russia's sphere of influence in the former Soviet block. He sees NATO as the primary impediment to that end. His strategy for weakened NATO is two-fold

1) support isolationatist nationalist parties throughout the NATO footprint. In the US that's the GOP and Putin has worked hard to support and promote the GOP especially its more nationalist and isolationist elements. I don't think anyone would argue any of those points.

Now if you think that expansion of Russia's sphere of influence is bad and that parties who further that expansion are by extension "bad guys" then that's you applying your own value judgment, because I said nothing of the sort.

2) the other arm of the strategy is to attack Western ideals of multiculturalism, pluralism, and equality. Putin does this by supporting racist, xenophobic, and homophobic political factions in the NATO footprint, and in the US those elements are the core of the modern GOP. I'm not saying that makes the GOP "bad guys"; everyone is free to make his/her own value judgment.

Completely ridiculous post. You think the GOP has an isolationist policy? I should have stopped reading right there.

The bottom line on Russian interference in US elections is they saw Trump for who he was, a buffoon, and worked to support him to instill chaos. They know they can play him like a fiddle.

I guarantee had he been on the Democratic ticket they would have done the same thing.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocker Ute]

(I would expect a Senator Romney to similarly exclaim how fantastic the Emperor's wardrobe is.)

As mentioned in my post of dealing with my own workplace narcissist, if I were forced to work with Trump I'd be telling him how wonderful he was too. We can all be disgusted with Orrin Hatch's slobbering over Trump (and it was disgusting) but I think Orrin knew that by ingratiating himself in such a way to Trump he'd be able to get his stuff done. Do I really think Hatch thinks Trump is the greatest president in American history? No. Do I believe Orrin Hatch is a politician who will say and do anything despite what he really believes to get what he wants? 40 years of doing it would indicate that is a strong 'yes'.