Pxy assesses the MSM and Trump with his MAGA wealth and power movement

Pxy was asked to assess this.

Q: The mainstream media routinely refers to the destruction and/or defunding of federal government functions as cost-cutting. However, when the functions of most or all of the targets of cost cutting and the main goals of Project 2025 are carefully examined, the primary strategy does not appear to be cost cutting. Cost cutting appears to be a secondary effect of a broader goal. Instead, the most important goal of Trump and his MAGA wealth and power movement seems to be establishing some form of a kleptocratic authoritarian police state. In particular, the MAGA political wealth and power movement looks to be building a deeply corrupt dictatorship led by Trump aided and enabled by a deeply corrupt and morally rotted elite consisting mostly of Christian nationalist theocrats and wealthy individuals and corporations aiming for laissez-faire capitalism and some form of an oligarchy. The elites have to pay Trump to be protected and rewarded. The theocrats deliver votes and the oligarchs and corporations deliver cash. The overall changes amounts to a major shift in wealth and power to the corrupt authoritarian elites, which is taken from from the public interest, individuals and government functions that protect democracy, the public interest, the rule of law, and individual civil liberties. Although cost-cutting is constantly asserted to be the goal, the cuts are almost always seriously damaging to the public interest, democracy, honest governance, church-state separation, anti-corruption laws, civil liberties and the like. While average Americans and the environment are being deprotected, e.g., CFPB, NLRB, EPA, DoJ, FBI, FEC, FCC, etc. are all neutered, subverted or mostly destroyed, protections for elites remain rock solid and increasingly powerful. Is that assessment of Trump and his MAGA political movement as morally rotted, corrupt and authoritarian basically correct? Take into account (1) the years of mendacity, open tolerance of corruption and ruthless, divisive demagoguery that has empowered both Trump and the MAGA movement, and (2) USSC decisions since ~2010 that have damaged democracy, church-state separation, civil liberties, the rule of law, and pro-democracy institutions and functions. Summarize the most persuasive arguments that the Trump and MAGA elites are neither morally rotted nor authoritarian, but instead are true democrats working hard to defend democracy, the rule of law and civil liberties from aggressive socialist and progressive tyranny and kleptocracy, e.g., cruel oppression of Christians by brutal DEI initiatives and ruthless godless atheists. Are those defenses of Trump and MAGA mostly rational, fact-based and defensible, or do they mostly amount to sophisticated demagoguery and propaganda? Does the mainstream media misunderstand Trump and the MAGA movement, or has it largely been subverted or cowed into silent complicity by corporate ownership, clueless or cowed journalists and/or threats from Trump? .....

A: .... long analysis ....

The scholarly consensus suggests that the assessment of Trump and the MAGA movement as exhibiting authoritarian and kleptocratic characteristics is largely accurate based on extensive academic research and analysis.

High Confidence Rating: The evidence supporting authoritarian characteristics is substantial and well-documented. https://www.fulcrum.org/concern/file_sets/tq57nt973  https://socialscienceresearch.org/index.php/GJHSS/article/view/104276

Conservative Defenses of Trump and MAGA

Medium Confidence Rating: Conservative defenses exist but are largely based on grievance politics rather than factual analysis.  https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-hell-defend-christianity-from-radical-left-that-seek-to-tear-down-crosses https://www.fairobserver.com/world-news/us-news/its-simplistic-to-assume-trumps-devoted-voters-are-irrational/

.... more analysis ....

Conclusion  
The evidence strongly supports the assessment that Trump and the MAGA movement exhibit significant authoritarian and kleptocratic characteristics. While economic grievances and cultural anxieties driving support are real, the movement's response involves undermining democratic institutions rather than strengthening them. The Supreme Court has materially weakened democratic safeguards, and while mainstream media faces serious challenges, claims of total subversion are overstated. The primary threat comes from the systematic erosion of democratic norms and institutions rather than from any single cause.

Hm, Pxy's analysis asserts the MSM is not as weak and subverted as one might have thought. 

Blog note: Security fix

For people with Google Chrome, a urgent security update is needed, as discussed at this article. Update your Chrome browser to version 138.0.7204.157.158 for Windows and Apple macOS, and 138.0.7204.157 for Linux. To make sure the latest updates are installed, navigate to More > Help > About Google Chrome, let the update install and then select Relaunch. It took about 1 minute for the update and relaunch.

Congress Under Pressure: Trump, the Recissions Bill, and the Abdication of Oversight

At this moment, President Trump is pressuring congressional Republicans to retroactively authorize his earlier unilateral spending decisions—decisions that have already faced legal challenges for potentially violating Article I of the Constitution, which reserves the power of the purse to Congress (1)(2). The centerpiece is the recissions bill, which would approve billions in funding cuts already imposed by the executive branch, including dramatic reductions to foreign aid and public broadcasting (3). The strategy is clear: Trump uses the threat of political retaliation to drive near-total party-line support, so that—apart from three non-MAGA senators—the GOP has largely fallen in line, effectively relinquishing its traditional constitutional responsibility as a check on the executive.

The Three Non-MAGA Holdouts: Transparency and Bullying

The only open resistance has come from Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Mitch McConnell. All three have voiced concerns over the coercive atmosphere, with lawmakers expressing fear of direct retaliation if they dissent from Trump (4). Thom Tillis (who was driven to retirement for dissenting on the OBBB last month) They also cite being asked to vote amid extreme information scarcity, with the Office of Management and Budget providing little to no detail about which programs are affected or the scope of the proposed harm—an impoverished information environment, as Collins stressed. (5). This undermines not only basic legislative standards but also the legitimacy of Congress’s decision-making role. (Note: McConnell voted for the bill in the end as did both Wicker and Tillis who also complained about the lack of information on which programs would be affected.).

Beyond Ideology: The Rise of Personalist Rule

This situation reflects a pattern explored in prior analyses: the core organizing principle of today’s GOP is personalism, not classical ideology or oligarchy (6). Trump’s control is maintained less through established party traditions or organized interests, and more through direct loyalty, responses to threats, and deference to his preferences. These dynamics are distinct from rule by a stable economic or social elite; they prioritize individual influence, fear, and patronage over procedural or constitutional routine.

Reviewing the OBBB: Loyalty over Deliberation

Earlier Senate battles, notably over the “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB), showed the transformation in sharp relief. There, Republicans were threatened with lost committee positions, hostile primaries, and presidential rebuke if they failed to align with Trump’s legislative priorities (7). Figures like Thom Tillis were driven out after warning that independent legislators were becoming “endangered.” The OBBB episode turned conventional deliberation into a test of loyalty—an explicit harbinger for the even more overt discipline seen in the recissions debate.

Congress Sidelined from Oversight

The recissions bill marks an escalation. The overwhelming majority of the $9 billion in cuts does not target public broadcasting—the focus of Trump’s rhetoric on Truth Social—but covers retroactive approval for sweeping executive reductions in foreign aid and domestic federal agencies (8). Senators have objected to being given almost no information, and to being pressured to become mere “rubber stamps” for decisions already made by the president without prior congressional input (9).

Conclusion: The Eclipse of Congressional Independence

The arc from the OBBB to the current recissions vote is unmistakable: the Republican majority in Congress is evolving from an autonomous legislative body into a compliant instrument of the executive. Fear, discipline, and the erosion of deliberative process now dominate, cloaked in public narratives about “fighting the left” but underpinned by a pursuit of post hoc legitimization for executive overreach. The result is a historic retreat from checks and balances, with Congress risking its role as a counterweight to the presidency.

Endnotes

1. WHYY News, July 16, 2025, “Republicans advance bill to claw back foreign aid and public media funding, send measure to full Senate vote.”

2. Analysis of Article I, Section 9 implications in recent Senate debates (See statements by Sens. Collins, Murkowski, and McConnell).

3. Carmen Russell-Sluchansky reporting, Senate floor debate excerpts, and official procedural records.

4. Reuters, April 2025: Congressional Republicans reportedly fear retaliation from Trump for dissent (see remarks by Sen. Murkowski and others).

5. Public remarks by Senator Collins, as quoted in WHYY and major national outlets, on lack of detail and OMB’s failure to provide basic information.

6. “Personalism with Features of Kleptocracy and Crony Capitalism in Trump 2.0,” as discussed in previous essays (see genealogy of recent GOP internal discipline trends).

7. See Senate records on OBBB debate; interviews with outgoing Sen. Tillis and reporting on threatened sanctions against critical lawmakers.

8. Breakdown of rescissions bill content: WHYY News, July 2025; remarks by Sens. Collins, Murkowski, McConnell on floor debate.

9. Congressional analysis: bipartisan and journalistic review of the lack of transparency, oversight concerns, and abandonment of appropriations norms in 2025 cycle.

A MAGA-Trump cost benefit analysis

A cost-benefit assessment seemed to be in order, now that some of the fog has cleared. The full Q&A is at this link. The question included fact checking and debiasing instructions to reduce the error rate in the response.

Q: Make a reasonable estimate of the effects or cost-benefit that Trump and MAGA politics and policies have resulted in related to the US economy, American society and American interests globally. Consider impacts on federal research, public health, democracy, the rule of law, civil liberties, technology (green energy efforts, etc.), the environment, social civility, economic and environmental sustainability, higher education, ....

A: Long analysis summarized:

Economic Impact
Negative Economic Effects - Medium to High Confidence

Federal Research and Public Health
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Democracy and Rule of Law
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Civil Liberties and Free Speech
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Environment and Climate Change
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Higher Education and Academic Freedom
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Technology and Innovation

Negative Impact - Medium to High Confidence

(that feels like an underestimate)

Wealth Distribution and Oligarchy
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Is anyone sensing a pattern here? 

Social Civility and Polarization
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Media and Information Environment
Severe Negative Impact - High Confidence

Christian Nationalism and Theocracy

Severe Long-term Risk - Medium to High Confidence

Assessment of Democratic Survival
Likelihood of Authoritarian Transformation by 2029: Medium to High Risk

Conclusion
The evidence suggests that Trump and MAGA politics have imposed significant costs on American society, economy, and democratic institutions while providing limited benefits primarily to wealthy elites and certain traditional energy sectors. The risk of authoritarian transformation is substantial, with multiple democratic safeguards already compromised. The likelihood of replacing secular democracy with a corrupt autocracy tinged with Christian nationalism appears to be moderate to high, particularly given the weakness of institutional opposition and the Democratic Party's structural problems.

Welp, that's sobering. Most Trump and MAGA supporters would very likely at least vigorously disagree with that assessment and reject it out of hand. And that is where America is today.