Thoughts about politics and failure

A NYT sports article (not paywalled) focused on a commencement speech that retired tennis great Roger Federer gave at Dartmouth in 2024. He focused on his failures and how he dealt with them.

Federer:  “Now, I have a question for you. What percentage of points do you think I won in those matches? . . . . . . Only 54 percent. When you lose every second point, on average, you learn not to dwell on every shot. You teach yourself to think, ‘OK, I double-faulted. It’s only a point.’ When you’re playing a point, it has to be the most important thing in the world, and it is. But when it’s behind you, it’s behind you. This mindset is really crucial, because it frees you to fully commit to the next point and the next point after that, with intensity, clarity and focus. .... You can work harder than you thought possible and still lose. Perfection is impossible. Negative energy is wasted energy. You want to become a master at overcoming hard moments. .... Effortless is a myth. It’s not about having a gift. It’s about having grit.”

Why did that resonate? It feels like that can translate to politics. 

One can treat political disagreements as a marathon of “points”, to keep focus on the  what’s next. Instead of fixating on losses and spending negative energy, one can maintain clarity for continuing efforts. That helps maintain resistance against aggressive authoritarian backsliding and democracy defender burnout.

Unpleasant truth about Christian nationalism and the damage it causes

In the first 3 minutes of this video, the speaker quotes someone who is honest and blunt about what Christian nationalism (CN) is under MAGA and Trump's toxic influence. In short, MAGA-style CN is intolerant, bigoted, cruel, closed-minded, and deeply hypocritical. The speaker, Jennifer Welsh, is careful to distinguish regular Christians from the theocratic CN wealth and power movement.

Obviously, most CN believers would vehemently disagree with this description of the Trump/MAGA brand of "Christianity". Most of them do not truly understand what they are supporting. Polls indicate that when they are told what they understand, many of them find they are uncomfortable with their brand of Christianity.

Poll data indicates there is a major disconnect between general or rank and file support for vaguely-defined "Christian nation" and CN concepts, and endorsement of Christian nationalism's specific policy agenda. Many rank-and-file supporters simply do not understand what CN leaders advocate. When presented with some details, significant majorities reject core Christian nationalist policies. Hence the need for CN demagoguery weaponized with cruel lies, slanders, irrational emotional manipulation and crackpot reasoning to maintain. That moral rot is necessary for both deceit-driven ignorance and unknowing support for CN elites in power.

Evidence of ignorance includes internal contradictions in CN supporters' views. Among those who say the US should be a Christian nation​, 52% say the government should never declare any official religion. That is a direct contradiction. About 28% actually want Christianity declared as the official faith, while about 52% say government should advocate for moral values shared by SEVERAL religions, not Christian values alone.

What a lot of people do not know or understand, really can get a lot of us killed or seriously damaged. Like demagoguery, ignorance can be deadly.

Qs: Since CN elites are fully aware of majority public sentiment against CN theocracy and policy, what does that say about their personal morality by their knowing use of cruelty, lies, slander, and etc., to deceive people and win their support? Does the means of deceiving people to support CN theocracy amount to moral rot, or a sacred crusade fighting a sacred war to reach sacred Christian theocratic ends that justify morally rotted means? 

Data sources:

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/10/27/views-of-the-u-s-as-a-christian-nation-and-opinions-about-christian-nationalism/

https://religionnews.com/2022/10/27/poll-nearly-half-of-americans-think-the-u-s-should-be-a-christian-nation/

https://prri.org/research/christian-nationalism-across-all-50-states-insights-from-prris-2024-american-values-atlas/

https://ffrf.org/news/releases/good-news-most-americans-continue-to-oppose-christian-nationalism/

A train of thought about rising authoritarianism

CONTEXT

Nowadays, my thinking about politics tends to go back over events and trajectories I've considered multiple times before. Based on their track record, my level of trust in Trump and MAGA elites is nil. That makes sense. Evidence is abundant that they and their motives are morally rotted. That's obvious to almost everyone not trapped in MAGA's demagoguery, lies, slanders, cynical emotional manipulation, bigotry, racism, crackpottery, etc. To most of those trapped minds, MAGA's moral rot is inconceivable and simply not true.

COMMENTARY

A NYT article (not paywalled), How a Scholar Nudged the Supreme Court Toward Its Troop Deployment Ruling, triggered alarms. It instantly elicited a very bad smell, so to speak. The MSM reporting says, more or less, the USSC put the brakes on Trump's efforts to convert America into a military dictatorship. The MSM boobs framed the decision as slapping Trump down or something about like that. My intuition was that (1) the MSM's reporting was dreadfully misplaced, and (2) something really bad had happened in that shadow docket decision. 

Was my intuition right? Yes, it was mostly right. In a long Q&A session with Pxy, I analyzed my reflex assessment. It was basically right. The USSC shadow docket decision wasn't so bad for Trump or the continuing rise of corrupt authoritarianism. Trump is free to continue to build his dictatorship that includes a military police state. 

The MSM reports that the decision seriously limited Trump's power, but the MSM got that wrong. MAGA elites can use different paths to the same end. But why decide this at all? For political reasons, that's why. The three MAGA judges can use this decision to try to hide their pro-kleptocracy and pro-dictatorship sympathies. The decision is MAGA political theater in support of dictatorship and corruption. The three Democratic judges are trapped and powerless to do squat about it.

Pxy's analysis and commentary is TL/TC*/DR. So, I'll post just two of my 7-9 queries. You can probably guess the gist of Pxy's responses to these two.

* TC = too complicated

• This was the last query in the whole Q&A series -- it raises the matter of the one-way ratchet (and this) from democracy to dictatorship I have raised here before: Were the three Democratic judges in a lose-lose situation in this shadow docket decision?

• This query deals with the MSM's constant reporting failures: Your analysis asserts this: "The answer appears to be: treat mainstream media as compromised, seek alternative sources, read critically for structural distortions, and recognize that defending democracy requires building information infrastructure that corporate media can no longer provide." I deal with MAGA people online all of the time. They have been taught to deeply distrust the MSM. Now, with the MSM being compromised as you assert, and I believe to be true, there is no source of authority left to point to. Almost all political discourse has been corrupted into shouting matches over opinions, regardless of whether facts support or contradict those opinions. That is my current experience. Even when I cite rock solid facts that support my arguments, the facts are rejected out of hand by many MAGA people as lies, and I am insulted as a liar, stupid, a communist or something else bad. How the hell can anyone carry on a rational discussion any more? To me, this collapse of trust in facts, sound reasoning, experts and the MSM are harbingers of the failure of our democracy, rule of law and civil liberties. Am I over-reacting here?

Onesies for the little MAGAfers!

Democrat chances in 2026.

 Depends off course which pundits one believes. Which media outlet can spin the likelihood.

So, how about a dose of reality?

The underrated factors limiting the power of a blue wave next year

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2025/democrats-2026-midterm-flips-redistricting-data/

There’s a key factor limiting the power of a potential Democratic surge next year: the number of seats that are realistically competitive.

Even as this year’s election results have left many in the party encouraged they can mount a massive blue wave, next year’s battleground is a far cry from 2018 — with fewer Republican-held seats for Democrats to easily target.

Gerrymandering is the major cause of the shrinking House map. Even before some states redrew their maps this year — and others potentially do so early next year — partisan redistricting after the 2020 U.S. Census had already left fewer battlegrounds on the table. After the 2020 election, for example, there were 93 congressional districts that had been within 10 points at the presidential level. But when the maps were redrawn, there were just 79 such districts.

BUT.............

In a wave year, Democrats can still play in some truly red seats. 

Snowflake's bold prediction: The Blue Wave will win the House, but not the Senate.