If you're a Democrat running for president in 2028 and you're not promising to raze Trump's various monuments in D.C. to himself on Day One, just get outta here.
Another option, at least for the "Arc d' Trump," would be to just turn a blind eye and let vandals have it. Instead of destroying Portland or setting Waymos on fire in L.A., come on down to our nation's capital and have a go at this momument. Just leave Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson alone.
I know you're just fantasizing, but I can't imagine ordinary people tearing down a 20-story object half as tall as the Washington Monument. It would be like ants trying to dismantle a cinder block. Also, when you give any kind of social permission for vandalism on that scale, you are unleashing an impulse that I don't think we need to have unleashed.
The congress should vote to have it removed. Or as it being built, sometimes things just happen. No one can say why, but construction sites aren't always that sturdy.....or well guarded.
I lack the talent to pull it off, but that’s a pretty big canvas for someone to immortalize Trump’s double jerk off dance while leaving nothing to the imagination.
They need to be as big as our self-regard. Trump is our ego and our id. We are selfish and worship ourselves - Trump gets that. Giant statues of one White man, ballrooms only the very wealthy can visit, and reflecting pools built to no longer reflect: that's who we are. There's a reason the White House is now a pile of rubble.
Bigger, Mr. Trump. Make those monuments visible from space, and maybe someone in DC will finally figure out what those monuments commemorate.
I've had my money on that outcome for about 8 years now, yet I keep getting discouraged from it. This outcome is still in play. Yeesh, this is going to be a tough year.
Great analysis, but when was this study conducted? Let’s not forget, republicans are less than 25% of the population. Trump can’t win without significant independent votes, and everything I’m reading is that independents are really starting to abhor him!
And if we have a major recession in November, he is toast. The question is whether we can displace these clowns given the uphill environment the courts have handed us.
Seriously, whats up with these people: they think that because they have donned a black robe on the service of our judicial system; that somehow they have suddenly been bestowed a wisdom that eludes the rest of us?
What the hell were these VA judges thinking—who weren’t republicans….:)
I get the anger. At the same time, I thought Democrats were supposed to be committed to the rule of law. Razing major structures "on Day One" doesn't sound like that to me.
I also suspect that our ability to maintain the support of the American electorate could at least partly depend on focusing on what is important to them rather than what may be widely viewed as partisan tit-for-tat.
Here it can be important to keep in mind that just because the Republicans lose an election doesn't mean that they will be powerless going forward. For example, even if the Democrats win the presidency, the House and the Senate in 2028, the next census could result in Republicans taking back the Senate.
Will razing Trump's monuments without any sort of due process help Democrats hold Senate seats in purple and red states? My guess: It will just add to partisan polarization. And unlike new policies such as meaningful healthcare reform or saving the Social Security program, the average voter won't get anything tangible.
Instead of razing Trump's monuments, perhaps we should instead view them as a symbol of the dark side of American politics that we must continue to be vigilant in fighting against.
It would be a statement to the world that “this is not who we are”…a clear rebuke of the vanity and grift that allowed those structures to go up, against three quarters of the population (I believe I read only 28% of the public approve of the ballroom). In my opinion, we all need that
Do not ask permission. Just raze them. Offer to work with the Republicans on a bipartisan bill to prevent future Presidents from vandalizing public structures if they want to complain about the injustice of it.
I generally agree with you. But I just had this thought: Don't raze the arch. Let it stand. But cover it in "You did this!" shame graffitti. I think if we put everything back the way it was, we might easily forget how we let it get this bad. We need a reminder of the horror. We need a physical reminder not to do it again. A triumphal arch turned into a monument to shame at the entrance to the cemetary of our honored war dead (who this President disrespected) is a fitting reminder I think.
Tearing Trump's crap down is a no-brainer if it's all publicly funded. If the ballroom, arch, ets. end up being funded with taxpayer funds, then tearing them down with a wave of the hand becomes, and will be framed as, a waste of taxpayer money.
I worry about that. I fear even if the Democrats (especially the Democrats) say it would appear petty and vindictive to do that. I do NOT want future Americans to think this guy was anything but a stupid, self centered, dishonest, nepo baby.
Razing them isn’t even enough it has to be a show. Demolishing it into a fireworks show, or dropping it into the deepest part of the ocean. Or maybe do something philanthropic by donating some of them to North Korea let Kim Jong Un have it as a romantic keepsake.
Launching them into the sun on one of Elon’s unmanned spacecrafts would be fun too. Or maybe just keep it simple and put them all on Epstein Island. So many ways this can go right…
Bill's write-up definitely read like preaching to the choir. Him recalling the "I'm with her vs I'm with you" is funny because that's just literally another instance of Trump being all-impulse. It worked on those who would be dumb enough to fall for it.
I have, but I’d suggest that her focus groups are a pale imitation of what I regularly run into when I post anything anti-Trump in the OpEd section of the Wall Street Journal.
Those people know Trump isn't for them. They just feel guilty saying out loud "I think we are better off with someone selfish and amoral in the White House."
I had thought that about his shirt too! So rumpled, especially around his belly. I think that was the reason for those ridiculous drapes over the statue—I think he’s pissed bc they gave him somewhat of a paunch
Since when was the Commandment against graven images limited to calves? I’m hardly an expert, but here’s what the noted theologian AI says: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image" (Exodus 20:4) is the second of the Ten Commandments, forbidding the creation and worship of physical idols (statues, carvings, or representations of gods) to ensure worship is directed only to the invisible, infinite God, rather than to man-made objects. Trump’s tacky statue, along with the tacky coins, tacky gold leaf decorations, proposed Arch de Trump….all fall into creation and worship of physical idols.
You didn’t use the word blasphemy as some have. To which one wit (maybe Gary Kasperov or Rick Wilson?) pointed out: if you’re worshipping your actual god then it’s not blasphemy 🤷♂️
"I remember thinking, Yikes. ‘I’m with her’ vs. ‘I’m with you.’ That could work."
History has a way of reminding us of bad ideas and their outcomes. In 2010, in Wisconsin, there were uncomfortably many yard signs and banners reading "I Stand With Scott Walker." I remember at the time wondering why anyone would put up a sign that essentially admitted that they were prostituting themselves for a candidate and a movement rather than demanding that the candidates represent them first and foremost.
To me it was a distinction with a pretty big difference. It also was a tacit admission that those voters were not going to hold Walker accountable for anything as long as he upheld their agenda and made life hell for any Democrats who stood in his way. And in a sea change election, they got their way, with the Governor, the state House, and the state Senate all flipping from Democrat to Republican at the same time. As the awareness of their good fortune sank in, they cheered with glee as Walker and the new red legislative majority foisted Act 10 upon us, demonizing public sector workers, seizing chunks of the compensation package, and stripping them of their bargaining rights, slashed higher ed budgets, and then threw money at private sector business interests at pretty much the exact rate of the Act 10 savings to the taxpayers, and of course continuously further demonized liberals in general and the Democrats as evildoers whose mess they were going to clean up and thus set things right, in their image. It took eight years to get rid of Walker, and we're still trying to undo much of the damage that they did in the name of the own extreme agenda and hyperpartisanship.
Sound familiar? Thus endeth for now the cautionary tale of what happens when voters surrender their objectivity and put self interest unreservedly ahead of the greater good, and assume that standing by a candidate is more important than the candidate standing by us all. This is in no way, shape, or form a defense of DJT and his agenda and his behavior over time. It does, though, tell us what happens when a candidate can wed the idea of serving the community to inflaming their opposition to the opposition -- a paradoxical toxic mix that, as we have seen, can end only badly for those not in the majority and on the winning team. Sometimes the messenger is very flawed. Worse still is when the masses are even more flawed. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: Mr. and Mrs. MAGA. Feel free to skip the toast to their success and future happiness.
Over the weekend, on a TV interview, Trump said, "the NFL can afford to make a little less money." Has anyone ever heard him say that about Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg? Has anyone ever heard him say, "Peter Thiel can afford to make a little less money?" "My family can afford to make a little less money for the sake of the country." Someone needs to take that statement, and run with it. It should be in the news all week.
I've had this same thought when Republicans say Americans need to tighten their belts. Why can't the wealthiest people in the history of the world just pay some more in taxes so the average American doesn't have to struggle even more? Why can't the oil companies do with a little less profit?
When the news came out recently that BP (I think it was) had record quarterly profits, I wondered how in the hell they made MORE profits when the price of oil and gas has been so much higher since the war started. Shouldn't they have made the same at best, if not a little less than usual?
Personally, I love it. However, much it pains me and it shouldn't make a damn bit of difference, Dems need to move on from slashed pronouns. There seems to be just enough snowflake swing voters and independents we need who it triggers.
"Trump’s For Himself, Not For You" "His narcissism is out of control." If you didn't know this in 2015, you shouldn't have been allowed to vote; if you don't know this now you should in a cult-deprogramming program.
The evangelical Trump mantra: "Jesus is my savior. Trump is my president." has an barrier problem that evangelicals w their statement of dichotomy above deny.
Granted Trump has taken actions to aid evangelicals, but how can he w his rapsheet and his uncharitable & unethical behaviors not vitiate their religious beliefs & their sense of the sacred? The raging cognitive dissonance.
The Trump arch at the entrance of the Arlington Nat'l Cemetery is one of many mind (heart & soul also) contaminations. The cemetery is a sacred place, yet that's juxtaposed W Trump and his fake, draft dodging bonespurs & statements abt the fallen as "suckers anc losers." How are MAGA, brain neuron synapses not exploding? Deep, corrupting dissonant denial, I suppose.
"Vitiate"? I had to look that one up. Very Charlie-esque of you!
Your post adds even more depth to Trump's successful PR campaign/charade with his evangelicals. His entire life has been one of focusing on PR to cover his bad antics...rather than ever having consideration of changing behavior. God forbid having to do that!
Because of the hantavirus outbreak...SNL showed a clip of Trump talking about Covid early-on and promising it was "all under control". He handled Covid like a PR problem and that's why our response was so pathetic and late. PR can only hide the truth for so long...especially with 100 year pandemics.
The ads don't have to say a thing. Just cut photos of rising gas prices and missles detonating with photos of the Golden Cankles and ballroom and arch mockup. No words necessary.
Here’s an idea for a campaign commercial: list all the projects for Trump’s glorification, alongside all the cuts that have been made for programs for regular Americans: the Trump arch paid for by cutting SNAP, the White House “renovations” paid for by cutting higher education, and the billion dollar ballroom paid for by cutting help for healthcare premiums. “Donald Trump is only for one thing-himself. The Democrats are here for you.” Perhaps it could be personalized for every market: Platner is Maine, Talerico in Texas, etc. “Trump is for himself: I’m here for you.” Finish with a shot of Trump’s golden statue and him giving a thumbs up.
I'd have more sympathy about the arch blocking Arlington if members of the military didn't vote in big numbers for Trump. Guess they need a bit of stove touching, too.
I've lost relationships with some shipmates over Trump. I just can't for the life of me understand why they still support him. Some of it is their choice of news intake and some of it is an unwillingness to ever consider they might not be right about some things.
It's almost as though that Fox News has been so effective that they literally cannot consider taking another position because that would be tacitly surrendering to the enemy.
Yeah, I feel bad that we no longer have an FBI, too. But I voted against the dismantling of the FBI while the FBI voted for it, so how bad exactly am I supposed to feel?
*The people felt he was with them, that he spoke for them*
(Sigh) This again? The 5th grade slogans that he always comes up with versus whatever slogans someone else is using are beside the point. The real point is that he indeed was speaking for them; he directly addressed and gave permission for his voters to embrace racism, misogyny, bigotry, and xenophobia.
Clinton didn't lose because her slogan was less snappy, she lost because she ran a mediocre campaign and her opponent gave millions of Americans permission to be ugly in public.
The real question to me is, if you voted for a loose cannon on the basis of people's pronoun use, how do we get you and your neighbors to realize you are dangerous and need to be stopped from voting until you stop treating people like things?
Quoting Home of the Brave's Ronn Easton: "Arlington is a place for solemn, serious reflection, where we memorialize American heroes. [Trump's 250-foot high triumphal arch] is a desecration of that." I think that is part of the purpose - Trump will (virtually) look down on the military's fallen. Why does he have such contempt for them? Is it because they get thanked for their service? Sadly, many voted for him despite his history with the military.
Oh, and Trump is the biggest freeloader in America. He doesn't know what food, housing, transportation, or health care costs Americans. And he doesn't care what food, housing, transportation or health care costs Americans.
"Arlington House stands at the top of a hill inside the cemetery, looking out over the Arlington Memorial Bridge, the Lincoln and Washington monuments, and the Capitol dome beyond. When you stand there looking out, it is awe-inspiring. You are overcome by the feeling that you are surrounded by heroes—more than 400,000 of them—people who stood for America, fought for it, and died for it. To have that view disfigured by an archway honoring a president who has spent his life denigrating servicemembers is simply a bridge too far."
I wonder how many servicemembers actually feel the same way? The vast majority of servicemembers voted for him, even after John Kelly went on the record that he heard Trump call them suckers and losers. I won't go so far as to call them losers like Trump did, but I can't argue with the suckers part. So here you go, have your monument to a draft dodger looming over your fallen comrades, a president who sees Arlington not as a solemn expression of gratitude for our greatest heroes, but as a sea of 400,000 suckers. It's the monument you deserve for voting for this, and who knows, maybe it's the monument many of you want anyway.
It does seem to be a revealed preference. That's why I say build it bigger. More golden calves please. Let's get this masochistic urge to denigrate our people right out in the open.
Bill: "One might think it ridiculous for Trump, this selfish and self-centered con man, to present himself as being for you the people. But he pulled it off. His opponents tried to show that Trump’s policies hurt the public, including those he claimed to care about most. But their arguments fell flat in the face of Trump’s demagoguery. The people felt he was with them, that he spoke for them."
He pulled it off because the people a bunch of unserious amoral femtowits. And as I believe in the moral necessity of paying the price for one's actions, it is fair and just that the people get fucked by Donald Trump. After all, they asked for it.
Also, Trump has the uncanny ability to be many things to many people, with none of them sensing any degree of hypocrisy, whatsoever. He is the avatar of the grievances of "the people", even when said grievances conflict with each other. The public was fed up with an ineffectual Congress. Throwing out the bums would include their own MoC, which most voters aren't ready to do ("s/he is not part of the swamp"). So voting for The Donald was seen by many as taking a fully-extended-claws swipe at ineffective federal governance, especially Congress, without the messiness of abandoning one's own MoC. And that p/o/v is certainly a measure of unseriousness and idiocy on the part of the voters. (And let's not forget the myth of Trump sold to America by Mark Burnett via The Apprentice.)
I have honestly come to believe that we can lay the chaos and crisis of this moment at the feet of Burnett and The Apprentice. If not for that, I don’t think he ever would have forged enough goodwill with the public to rise above being the failed casino owner those of us in Jersey knew him as. They created a new identity for him and he ran with it. Half the country fell for it, formed a weird pseudo-bond with him, and opened the door to this stupidest timeline. I always said reality television was going to destroy this country
If you're a Democrat running for president in 2028 and you're not promising to raze Trump's various monuments in D.C. to himself on Day One, just get outta here.
Another option, at least for the "Arc d' Trump," would be to just turn a blind eye and let vandals have it. Instead of destroying Portland or setting Waymos on fire in L.A., come on down to our nation's capital and have a go at this momument. Just leave Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson alone.
I know you're just fantasizing, but I can't imagine ordinary people tearing down a 20-story object half as tall as the Washington Monument. It would be like ants trying to dismantle a cinder block. Also, when you give any kind of social permission for vandalism on that scale, you are unleashing an impulse that I don't think we need to have unleashed.
Sarah's next book could be "How to Eat a Monument: One Vandal at a Time".
The congress should vote to have it removed. Or as it being built, sometimes things just happen. No one can say why, but construction sites aren't always that sturdy.....or well guarded.
I lack the talent to pull it off, but that’s a pretty big canvas for someone to immortalize Trump’s double jerk off dance while leaving nothing to the imagination.
Build them Bigger. Trump is thinking too small.
They need to be as big as our self-regard. Trump is our ego and our id. We are selfish and worship ourselves - Trump gets that. Giant statues of one White man, ballrooms only the very wealthy can visit, and reflecting pools built to no longer reflect: that's who we are. There's a reason the White House is now a pile of rubble.
Bigger, Mr. Trump. Make those monuments visible from space, and maybe someone in DC will finally figure out what those monuments commemorate.
It is no less than we deserve for allowing this.
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings; look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Don't raze, blow them up!
Another six months of this and there will be no need: his own base will let loose on him like the Iraqis did to Saddam Hussein: Poetic Justice!…:)
I've had my money on that outcome for about 8 years now, yet I keep getting discouraged from it. This outcome is still in play. Yeesh, this is going to be a tough year.
Robert, read this. It's a very good analysis of those who voted for Trump in 2024. Very few of the 2024 voters will be carrying pitchforks.
https://beyondmaga.us/the-four-types-of-trump-voters/
Great analysis, but when was this study conducted? Let’s not forget, republicans are less than 25% of the population. Trump can’t win without significant independent votes, and everything I’m reading is that independents are really starting to abhor him!
And if we have a major recession in November, he is toast. The question is whether we can displace these clowns given the uphill environment the courts have handed us.
Seriously, whats up with these people: they think that because they have donned a black robe on the service of our judicial system; that somehow they have suddenly been bestowed a wisdom that eludes the rest of us?
What the hell were these VA judges thinking—who weren’t republicans….:)
And take Fetterman with you.
I get the anger. At the same time, I thought Democrats were supposed to be committed to the rule of law. Razing major structures "on Day One" doesn't sound like that to me.
I also suspect that our ability to maintain the support of the American electorate could at least partly depend on focusing on what is important to them rather than what may be widely viewed as partisan tit-for-tat.
Here it can be important to keep in mind that just because the Republicans lose an election doesn't mean that they will be powerless going forward. For example, even if the Democrats win the presidency, the House and the Senate in 2028, the next census could result in Republicans taking back the Senate.
Will razing Trump's monuments without any sort of due process help Democrats hold Senate seats in purple and red states? My guess: It will just add to partisan polarization. And unlike new policies such as meaningful healthcare reform or saving the Social Security program, the average voter won't get anything tangible.
Instead of razing Trump's monuments, perhaps we should instead view them as a symbol of the dark side of American politics that we must continue to be vigilant in fighting against.
It would be a statement to the world that “this is not who we are”…a clear rebuke of the vanity and grift that allowed those structures to go up, against three quarters of the population (I believe I read only 28% of the public approve of the ballroom). In my opinion, we all need that
Do not ask permission. Just raze them. Offer to work with the Republicans on a bipartisan bill to prevent future Presidents from vandalizing public structures if they want to complain about the injustice of it.
I generally agree with you. But I just had this thought: Don't raze the arch. Let it stand. But cover it in "You did this!" shame graffitti. I think if we put everything back the way it was, we might easily forget how we let it get this bad. We need a reminder of the horror. We need a physical reminder not to do it again. A triumphal arch turned into a monument to shame at the entrance to the cemetary of our honored war dead (who this President disrespected) is a fitting reminder I think.
Be more specific. Say GOP did this.
Tearing Trump's crap down is a no-brainer if it's all publicly funded. If the ballroom, arch, ets. end up being funded with taxpayer funds, then tearing them down with a wave of the hand becomes, and will be framed as, a waste of taxpayer money.
I worry about that. I fear even if the Democrats (especially the Democrats) say it would appear petty and vindictive to do that. I do NOT want future Americans to think this guy was anything but a stupid, self centered, dishonest, nepo baby.
Razing them isn’t even enough it has to be a show. Demolishing it into a fireworks show, or dropping it into the deepest part of the ocean. Or maybe do something philanthropic by donating some of them to North Korea let Kim Jong Un have it as a romantic keepsake.
Launching them into the sun on one of Elon’s unmanned spacecrafts would be fun too. Or maybe just keep it simple and put them all on Epstein Island. So many ways this can go right…
“Trump’s for himself, not for you”
This is news?
Bill's write-up definitely read like preaching to the choir. Him recalling the "I'm with her vs I'm with you" is funny because that's just literally another instance of Trump being all-impulse. It worked on those who would be dumb enough to fall for it.
Unfortunately, there are legions of them.
Very true.
Yet election year needs an over arching message that places him at the root of congress inaction - or action only for T …Maybe
“ Republicans are ONLY for him.
We’re only for you”
When was his narcissism ever "IN control"?
It is to a lot of people. Listen to Sarah's Focus Group - if you can take it.
I have, but I’d suggest that her focus groups are a pale imitation of what I regularly run into when I post anything anti-Trump in the OpEd section of the Wall Street Journal.
Those people know Trump isn't for them. They just feel guilty saying out loud "I think we are better off with someone selfish and amoral in the White House."
I grit my teeth and listen to people justifying their own
A. Ignorance
B. Racism and insecurity
C. Lack of accountability
D. All of the above
For the stupidest 30% of the country, yes
It's not shocking anymore. The response is, "Tell me something I don't know."
It's an observation that comes from the, " Clearly Obvious," file.
If you have to say it is not a golden calf.... https://terrymckenna.substack.com/p/if-you-have-to-say-it-is-not-a-golden?r=1t8ls&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
Why are Golden Donald's pants so rumpled? Not a good look!
Rumpelthinskin
Imagine how the flesh being covered looks. No, wait, that is too grim for Spring.
Trump's no Shirley Eaton, that's for sure!
I was wondering the same thing. He doesn’t have the best suits but his pants do hang straight.
T only hires the best people, including artists!
NOT.
I had thought that about his shirt too! So rumpled, especially around his belly. I think that was the reason for those ridiculous drapes over the statue—I think he’s pissed bc they gave him somewhat of a paunch
Good explanation.😉👍
Since when was the Commandment against graven images limited to calves? I’m hardly an expert, but here’s what the noted theologian AI says: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image" (Exodus 20:4) is the second of the Ten Commandments, forbidding the creation and worship of physical idols (statues, carvings, or representations of gods) to ensure worship is directed only to the invisible, infinite God, rather than to man-made objects. Trump’s tacky statue, along with the tacky coins, tacky gold leaf decorations, proposed Arch de Trump….all fall into creation and worship of physical idols.
Another example why evangelicals are just hypocrites. Talk about their bible, want to use he Torah, and don’t understand either.
You didn’t use the word blasphemy as some have. To which one wit (maybe Gary Kasperov or Rick Wilson?) pointed out: if you’re worshipping your actual god then it’s not blasphemy 🤷♂️
You have to be a hypocrite to be a so called “evangelical “. They claim to take the bible literally, then ignore all the inconvenient things.
Good analysis, Kim, but too intellectual for the average MAGAt.
Those are not just any calves.
Fantastic.
THE FELON HELPS
THE RICH
AND VACUUMS UP
OUR GOLD
TO LINE HIS
FAMILY’S POCKETS
OUR DREAMS ARE
BOUGHT AND SOLD
Centered, THE FELON in red. This will be the sign I carry this week in front of the US Consulate in Frankfurt, Germany.
Way to go! Cheers!🥂
Thanks, 🥂🍾
"I remember thinking, Yikes. ‘I’m with her’ vs. ‘I’m with you.’ That could work."
History has a way of reminding us of bad ideas and their outcomes. In 2010, in Wisconsin, there were uncomfortably many yard signs and banners reading "I Stand With Scott Walker." I remember at the time wondering why anyone would put up a sign that essentially admitted that they were prostituting themselves for a candidate and a movement rather than demanding that the candidates represent them first and foremost.
To me it was a distinction with a pretty big difference. It also was a tacit admission that those voters were not going to hold Walker accountable for anything as long as he upheld their agenda and made life hell for any Democrats who stood in his way. And in a sea change election, they got their way, with the Governor, the state House, and the state Senate all flipping from Democrat to Republican at the same time. As the awareness of their good fortune sank in, they cheered with glee as Walker and the new red legislative majority foisted Act 10 upon us, demonizing public sector workers, seizing chunks of the compensation package, and stripping them of their bargaining rights, slashed higher ed budgets, and then threw money at private sector business interests at pretty much the exact rate of the Act 10 savings to the taxpayers, and of course continuously further demonized liberals in general and the Democrats as evildoers whose mess they were going to clean up and thus set things right, in their image. It took eight years to get rid of Walker, and we're still trying to undo much of the damage that they did in the name of the own extreme agenda and hyperpartisanship.
Sound familiar? Thus endeth for now the cautionary tale of what happens when voters surrender their objectivity and put self interest unreservedly ahead of the greater good, and assume that standing by a candidate is more important than the candidate standing by us all. This is in no way, shape, or form a defense of DJT and his agenda and his behavior over time. It does, though, tell us what happens when a candidate can wed the idea of serving the community to inflaming their opposition to the opposition -- a paradoxical toxic mix that, as we have seen, can end only badly for those not in the majority and on the winning team. Sometimes the messenger is very flawed. Worse still is when the masses are even more flawed. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: Mr. and Mrs. MAGA. Feel free to skip the toast to their success and future happiness.
Over the weekend, on a TV interview, Trump said, "the NFL can afford to make a little less money." Has anyone ever heard him say that about Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg? Has anyone ever heard him say, "Peter Thiel can afford to make a little less money?" "My family can afford to make a little less money for the sake of the country." Someone needs to take that statement, and run with it. It should be in the news all week.
I've had this same thought when Republicans say Americans need to tighten their belts. Why can't the wealthiest people in the history of the world just pay some more in taxes so the average American doesn't have to struggle even more? Why can't the oil companies do with a little less profit?
When the news came out recently that BP (I think it was) had record quarterly profits, I wondered how in the hell they made MORE profits when the price of oil and gas has been so much higher since the war started. Shouldn't they have made the same at best, if not a little less than usual?
Here's a tagline for the Dems. "Trump is for He/Him not You/Yours"
Personally, I love it. However, much it pains me and it shouldn't make a damn bit of difference, Dems need to move on from slashed pronouns. There seems to be just enough snowflake swing voters and independents we need who it triggers.
What about: "Republican politicians work for Trump. Democrats work for you."
Good one, but no. Pronouns are a sore subject among the electorate.
"Trump’s For Himself, Not For You" "His narcissism is out of control." If you didn't know this in 2015, you shouldn't have been allowed to vote; if you don't know this now you should in a cult-deprogramming program.
The evangelical Trump mantra: "Jesus is my savior. Trump is my president." has an barrier problem that evangelicals w their statement of dichotomy above deny.
Granted Trump has taken actions to aid evangelicals, but how can he w his rapsheet and his uncharitable & unethical behaviors not vitiate their religious beliefs & their sense of the sacred? The raging cognitive dissonance.
The Trump arch at the entrance of the Arlington Nat'l Cemetery is one of many mind (heart & soul also) contaminations. The cemetery is a sacred place, yet that's juxtaposed W Trump and his fake, draft dodging bonespurs & statements abt the fallen as "suckers anc losers." How are MAGA, brain neuron synapses not exploding? Deep, corrupting dissonant denial, I suppose.
"Vitiate"? I had to look that one up. Very Charlie-esque of you!
Your post adds even more depth to Trump's successful PR campaign/charade with his evangelicals. His entire life has been one of focusing on PR to cover his bad antics...rather than ever having consideration of changing behavior. God forbid having to do that!
Because of the hantavirus outbreak...SNL showed a clip of Trump talking about Covid early-on and promising it was "all under control". He handled Covid like a PR problem and that's why our response was so pathetic and late. PR can only hide the truth for so long...especially with 100 year pandemics.
This idea that the good Lord works in strange ways, using strange instruments, is about as subversive as it gets.
You said it better than I could!
It's been rattling around in my mind for a time how the evangelicals support Trump.
The ads don't have to say a thing. Just cut photos of rising gas prices and missles detonating with photos of the Golden Cankles and ballroom and arch mockup. No words necessary.
Here’s an idea for a campaign commercial: list all the projects for Trump’s glorification, alongside all the cuts that have been made for programs for regular Americans: the Trump arch paid for by cutting SNAP, the White House “renovations” paid for by cutting higher education, and the billion dollar ballroom paid for by cutting help for healthcare premiums. “Donald Trump is only for one thing-himself. The Democrats are here for you.” Perhaps it could be personalized for every market: Platner is Maine, Talerico in Texas, etc. “Trump is for himself: I’m here for you.” Finish with a shot of Trump’s golden statue and him giving a thumbs up.
I'd have more sympathy about the arch blocking Arlington if members of the military didn't vote in big numbers for Trump. Guess they need a bit of stove touching, too.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/09/30/military-veterans-remain-a-republican-group-backing-trump-over-harris-by-wide-margin/
I've lost relationships with some shipmates over Trump. I just can't for the life of me understand why they still support him. Some of it is their choice of news intake and some of it is an unwillingness to ever consider they might not be right about some things.
It's almost as though that Fox News has been so effective that they literally cannot consider taking another position because that would be tacitly surrendering to the enemy.
Given Ts disrespect for the military, how could veterans ever support him?
In 2016, enlisted persons voted for Trump, while the officer corps favored Clinton. I wonder if that holds among veterans.
Yeah, I feel bad that we no longer have an FBI, too. But I voted against the dismantling of the FBI while the FBI voted for it, so how bad exactly am I supposed to feel?
*The people felt he was with them, that he spoke for them*
(Sigh) This again? The 5th grade slogans that he always comes up with versus whatever slogans someone else is using are beside the point. The real point is that he indeed was speaking for them; he directly addressed and gave permission for his voters to embrace racism, misogyny, bigotry, and xenophobia.
Clinton didn't lose because her slogan was less snappy, she lost because she ran a mediocre campaign and her opponent gave millions of Americans permission to be ugly in public.
Jim Comey did not help.
True that!
The real question to me is, if you voted for a loose cannon on the basis of people's pronoun use, how do we get you and your neighbors to realize you are dangerous and need to be stopped from voting until you stop treating people like things?
Quoting Home of the Brave's Ronn Easton: "Arlington is a place for solemn, serious reflection, where we memorialize American heroes. [Trump's 250-foot high triumphal arch] is a desecration of that." I think that is part of the purpose - Trump will (virtually) look down on the military's fallen. Why does he have such contempt for them? Is it because they get thanked for their service? Sadly, many voted for him despite his history with the military.
Oh, and Trump is the biggest freeloader in America. He doesn't know what food, housing, transportation, or health care costs Americans. And he doesn't care what food, housing, transportation or health care costs Americans.
"Arlington House stands at the top of a hill inside the cemetery, looking out over the Arlington Memorial Bridge, the Lincoln and Washington monuments, and the Capitol dome beyond. When you stand there looking out, it is awe-inspiring. You are overcome by the feeling that you are surrounded by heroes—more than 400,000 of them—people who stood for America, fought for it, and died for it. To have that view disfigured by an archway honoring a president who has spent his life denigrating servicemembers is simply a bridge too far."
I wonder how many servicemembers actually feel the same way? The vast majority of servicemembers voted for him, even after John Kelly went on the record that he heard Trump call them suckers and losers. I won't go so far as to call them losers like Trump did, but I can't argue with the suckers part. So here you go, have your monument to a draft dodger looming over your fallen comrades, a president who sees Arlington not as a solemn expression of gratitude for our greatest heroes, but as a sea of 400,000 suckers. It's the monument you deserve for voting for this, and who knows, maybe it's the monument many of you want anyway.
There’s some commonality in the evangelical and the military (chauvinist) mindset.
It does seem to be a revealed preference. That's why I say build it bigger. More golden calves please. Let's get this masochistic urge to denigrate our people right out in the open.
Bill: "One might think it ridiculous for Trump, this selfish and self-centered con man, to present himself as being for you the people. But he pulled it off. His opponents tried to show that Trump’s policies hurt the public, including those he claimed to care about most. But their arguments fell flat in the face of Trump’s demagoguery. The people felt he was with them, that he spoke for them."
He pulled it off because the people a bunch of unserious amoral femtowits. And as I believe in the moral necessity of paying the price for one's actions, it is fair and just that the people get fucked by Donald Trump. After all, they asked for it.
Also, Trump has the uncanny ability to be many things to many people, with none of them sensing any degree of hypocrisy, whatsoever. He is the avatar of the grievances of "the people", even when said grievances conflict with each other. The public was fed up with an ineffectual Congress. Throwing out the bums would include their own MoC, which most voters aren't ready to do ("s/he is not part of the swamp"). So voting for The Donald was seen by many as taking a fully-extended-claws swipe at ineffective federal governance, especially Congress, without the messiness of abandoning one's own MoC. And that p/o/v is certainly a measure of unseriousness and idiocy on the part of the voters. (And let's not forget the myth of Trump sold to America by Mark Burnett via The Apprentice.)
I have honestly come to believe that we can lay the chaos and crisis of this moment at the feet of Burnett and The Apprentice. If not for that, I don’t think he ever would have forged enough goodwill with the public to rise above being the failed casino owner those of us in Jersey knew him as. They created a new identity for him and he ran with it. Half the country fell for it, formed a weird pseudo-bond with him, and opened the door to this stupidest timeline. I always said reality television was going to destroy this country
As much as I want to disagree with you, I keep wondering what we're going to do when the Republicans get more votes in November.