Pragmatic politics focused on the public interest for those uncomfortable with America's two-party system and its way of doing politics. Considering the interface of politics with psychology, cognitive science, social behavior, morality and history.
Etiquette
DP Etiquette
First rule: Don't be a jackass.
Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.
My Dutch husband tells me that’s a saying in Holland:
meaning, someone is just that lucky. Everything tends to go his way.
I can’t help but think of Trump in exactly that way. Off the top of my head, take a look at what’s happened of late:
$454 million bond case has been temporarily reduced on appeal to $175 million
Supreme Court gives immunity to former presidents for “official acts”
Biden “loses it” at a highly publicized debate, coming across as a doddering old man on the verge of senility, putting the Dem Party in crisis mode
Guilty verdict in Trump’s Hush Money trial gets delayed punishment (so-called in September, but don’t hold your breath)
Trump survives an assassination attempt by one-inch
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Trump Classified Documents case
Republicans get first crack at showcasing their convention, with cheering and adoring crowds
Flip-flopper J.D. "Trump is America's Hitler" Vance gets the VP nod
What am I forgetting?
Yes, the butter is coming fast and furious these days, for one Mr. Trump.
Question: Have you ever seen a luckier sob than DJT? Or is he deserving of his butter-coating? What is it about Trump that people find attractive? Explain it to me like I’m a 5-year-old. Because I(really)DGI.
Some authoritarians are quite intelligent and insightful about human nature. Consider this quote, for example:
All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.
That is probably at least part of why the big lie works so well for DJT.
Especially since DJT came on the scene in 2015-2016, the toxic influence of social media on politics and democracy has been increasingly researched. This Q&A came out of ongoing curiosity about the current state of research about social media dark arts. Perplexity describes it like this.
A: American social media appears to be more politically divisive and disinforming than uniting and informing. Here are the key points supporting this conclusion:
1. The United States is an outlier in its negative perception of social media's impact on democracy. Only 34% of U.S. adults think social media has been good for democracy, while 64% say it has had a bad impact.
2. Americans are consistently among the most negative in their assessments of how social media has affected politics and society. For example, 79% of Americans believe social media has made people more divided in their political opinions, the highest percentage among 19 countries surveyed.
3. 69% of Americans say social media has made people less civil in how they talk about politics, again the highest share among the nations studied.
4. Experts have concluded that the use of social media contributes to partisan animosity in the U.S. A group of 15 researchers summarized the scholarly consensus, stating that social media companies have played an influential role in political discourse, intensifying political sectarianism.
5. While social media may not be the main driver of polarization, researchers posit that it is often a key facilitator.
6. Social media algorithms and business models have been shown to exacerbate outrage and anger, and social media has been found to help recruit and provide platforms to extremists.
However, it's important to note that the research on this topic is not entirely conclusive:
1. Some studies have found that staying off social media platforms like Facebook can reduce polarization on policy issues, but not necessarily on party identity.
2. Recent landmark studies involving tens of thousands of Facebook and Instagram accounts found that social media algorithms did not affect users' polarization.
3. The problem may not be social media alone, but the country's entire media system. A literature review found that media in general was likely increasing ideological and affective polarization.
4. Most Americans do not use social media to discuss politics, as politics is a very incidental part of life for many people.
In conclusion, while the evidence suggests that American social media tends to be more politically divisive and disinforming, the issue is complex and multifaceted. Social media's role in polarization should be considered alongside other factors contributing to the current political climate in the United States.
Trump judge Aileen Cannon, a/k/a/ Loose Cannon Aileen, has dismissed the entire Mar-A-Lago stolen documents federal lawsuit against DJT. The dismissal was not on immunity grounds, but instead on grounds of Jack Smith as special prosecutor being unconstitutionally funded. His investigation and prosecution now simply vanishes into thin air. We have to wait for another year or two while appeals play out. DJT has been protected by his corrupt judge.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on Monday tossed former President Trump’s criminal charges accusing him of mishandling classified information, ruling that special counsel Jack Smith was not lawfully appointed.
The ruling hands a major victory to Trump, marking the first time one of his four criminal cases has been dismissed entirely.
Cannon ruled that no federal law authorized Smith’s appointment.
“The bottom line is this: The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers,” Cannon wrote in a 93-page ruling.
“The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers.”
Cannon said that, after “careful study,” she determined that no legal statute grants an attorney general authority to appoint a federal officer with the “kind of prosecutorial power wielded by Special Counsel Smith.”
The rule of law takes another major hit from American radical right authoritarians. The enemy is in our midst, not some foreign invaders like Mexican rapists and drug dealers. The enemy is the kleptocratic dictator DJT, and his kleptocratic, authoritarian, Republican Party. Both are thoroughly morally rotted.
A bit of initial fallout from the assassination attempt: Trump’s chances of winning have spiked to roughly 70 percent from 60 percent before the shooting attempt at betting site Polymarket.
It’s fine to say “I refuse to speculate” — but does that mean you think the consensus is misguided? Personally, I have no basis to think the consensus is wrong here. You can get cute if you like and try to draw historical analogies, like to the assassination attempts against Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 or Ronald Reagan in 1981 (which produced a sharp but short-lived boost in his approval ratings). But I think that’s barking somewhat up the wrong tree. In the present moment, this at the very least makes Trump much more sympathetic and undermines the implicit premise of the Biden campaign to restore order and stability to America,
There are, however, two major sources of uncertainty. One is whether the Trump campaign will take the high road or the low road. In rare possession of the moral highground, will Trump ask the nation to come together? Or, like one of his potential VP picks, Senator J.D.Vance of Ohio, will he plunge us further into darkness, blaming his political opponents for the attempt on his life? The high road is probably the more electorally rewarding course, believe it or not, especially given that Trump was winning to begin with. But candidates with authoritarian tendencies can obviously seize on moments like these also.
It seems we are in store for a kinder, gentler Trump.News reports are saying “he” has “rewritten”
his speech with the motive of “bringing the country together.”
What he’s saying: “This is a chance to bring the whole
country, even the whole world, together,” Trump told the Examiner.
The speech will be a lot different, a lot different than it would’ve
been two days ago,” he said.
“It is a chance to bring the country together. I was given
that chance.”
1. Do you believe it, that his goal is to "bring the country together?"
2. Is he just having a momentary bout of a “significant negative emotional experience,” something I always cite as a game-changer, with this weekend's assassination attempt on his life?And
in reality, this [kinder, gentler feeling] too shall pass?
3. What do you make of this new and improved DJT?Are you buying it?Should we “Give peace a chance?”
A NYT article discusses support for political violence in the US:
A nationwide poll last month found that 10 percent of those surveyed said the “use of force is justified to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president.”
Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago who has studied American attitudes toward political violence since the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob, conducted a nationwide poll on the topic last month. It found that 10 percent of those surveyed said that the “use of force is justified to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president.” A third of those who gave that answer also said they owned a gun.
Seven percent of those surveyed said they “support force to restore Trump to the presidency.” Half of them said they owned guns.
The shooting at Mr. Trump’s rally “is a consequence of such significant support for political violence in our country,” Mr. Pape wrote in an email. “Indeed, significant lone wolf attacks motivated by political violence have been growing for years in the United States, against members of Congress from both parties as well as federal officials and national leaders.”
Other studies on political violence have also found small but not insignificant numbers of Americans who support the idea of using violence to advance political ideas.
In October, the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, published a report that found nearly 14 percent of those surveyed strongly agreed that there would be a civil war in the United States in the next few years.
Nearly 8 percent of respondents to the study said they believed there would be a situation in the next few years where political violence would be justified and were intending to arm themselves.
One can wonder if the assassination attempt yesterday is going to influence some people into adopting a more pro-violence mindset. That seems to be more likely than not.
One can also wonder if people who anticipate a coming civil war wind up being a factor in that actually happening. At this point, civil war still seems quite unlikely to me, maybe ~3% chance within the next 2 years and ~1% in the following 2 years. But, one recent poll indicated that 41% of likely U.S. voters believed the United States is likely to experience a second civil war sometime in the next five years, including 16% who considered that very likely.
At the least, a lot of people are thinking about major political violence.
A number of prominent MAGA Republicans blamed Biden for the shooting at yesterday's Trump rally in Pa. The accusatory statements started being issued even before there was any reporting on the shooter, or his possible motives. Among well known Trump allies who quickly stated that Biden bears responsibility for the shootings are Lauren Boebert, Rep. Mike Collins, Senator Tim Scott, top Trump campaign advisor, Chris LaCivita, VP hopeful, JD Vance, and others.
At the same time, many who witnessed the event at the rally spontaneously spewed similar accusations to members of the media including photographers and journalists who were covering the rally. WaPo writes:
As people passed the press risers elevating the cameras, some took out their anger on the media.
“You’re not safe. It’s your fault.”
“You wanted political violence, now you got it. Hope you’re all f---ing happy.”
“The shot heard ’round the world.”
“The liberal media is responsible!”
“Every f---ing one of y’all!”
Trump was apparently hit by a bullet that grazed his ear, and was quickly rushed to the ground and surrounded by security. As they stood him up to rush him out, Trump, according to WaPo and other accounts, said, "Wait," and defiantly raised up his fist, with blood dripping on his face, turned to the crowd and said, "Fight. Fight." Loud chants came back at him from the crowd, "USA, USA!," as Trump was protectively shuffled offstage by security personnel. The photographs of Trump's defiant pose raising his arm with clenched fist and bloody face are likely to become iconic, according to presidential historian, Douglas Brinkely. He said,
There’s something in the American spirit that likes seeing fortitude
and courage under pressure and the fact that Trump held his fist up high
will become a new symbol... By surviving an attempted
assassination, you become a martyr, because you get a groundswell of
public sympathy.
Lauren Boebert took to a local Denver news program, directly blaming Biden. Citing language he used earlier in the week stating that it was "time to move on from the debate discussion and put Donald Trump into a bulls-eye," she said he was directly responsible.
Rep. Mike Collins went even further, writing on X, "Joe Biden sent the orders."
Top Trump advisor, Chris LaCivita, also took to X, writing, " “[W]ell of course they tried to keep him off the ballot, they tried to put him in jail and now you see this …”
JD Vance and Morgan Taylor Greene -- who will be featured speakers at this week's RNC in Milwauki, both chimed in as reported here:
“Today is not just some isolated incident,” Vance wrote on X.
“The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald
Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs. That
rhetoric led directly to President Trump’s attempted assassination.”
“Democrats wanted this to happen,” Greene posted on X. “They’ve wanted Trump gone for years and they’re prepared to do anything to make that happen.”
She
continued, calling out members of Congress who she wrote “cosponsored
legislation to TERMINATE Trump’s Secret Service protection. Why would
they want that? You know the reason.”
Written before it was
confirmed that an audience member was killed, she continued, “Others may
have been killed — innocent people that were there supporting President
Trump and all they wanted was to Make America Great Again and they may
have been murdered for it. Thank GOD Secret Service was there for Trump
and everyone else at today’s rally.”
These are just a few of the better known Republicans who immediately accused Biden before the name of the shooter was even known to the public, much less his motives. Several Republicans said that Democrats want a "Civil War." While many said they will get their revenge "at the ballot " in November, there can be little doubt that this medley of incendiary accusations of Biden and Democrats more generally (with some accusations being as vague as blaming "left wing rhetoric") will do much to fire up the already gun-obsessed extremists among the MAGA crowd who take their cues from the Boeberts and JD Vances of the world. This is a very dangerous and volatile situation. It is not clear just how it can be safely and peacefully navigated in this explosive election cycle. Much will also depend on how Trump frames the events going forward.
One thing I'm sure we'll see a lot more of during the campaign is photos and video footage of Trump's "iconic" and defiant pose and exhortations to "Fight, Fight" We are now closer, in my judgment, to civil war than at any time since the 1860s.
Once again, a male dipstick with a gun comes on the scene, pulls the trigger and we all get to helplessly stand by and watch to see if it unleashes Armageddon or amounts to just a tempest in a teapot.
Yes, we all condemn the assassination attempt on DJT. It was horrible, vicious, evil, stupid and arrogant beyond words. One jackass with a gun was going to impose his desires on all of us according to his deranged intentions.
Is this going to be a non-trivial factor in the outcome of the 2024 election? Probably. My guess is ~60% chance it will noticeably help DJT at election time. Will DJT play the victimized martyr card? My guess is ~95% chance he will play it good and hard from now until Nov. 5.
But this is not going to stop me from criticizing DJT for being what he is, a treasonous, chronically lying, kleptocratic dictator and convicted felon.
What a fracking mess. One self-righteous jackass with a gun can cause so much damage. The rest of us in opposition who play by the rules can only go pound sand in frustration.
Some reactions
A couple of Peanut Gallery comments:
Peanut 1: Trump's own words on Jan 6 to Kevin McCarthy when he was asking for help, begging the president to tell the mob clad in Trump gear to end the violence. Trump blithely responded: “Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are.” I guess someone got even more upset than that.
Peanut 2: Well, at least Biden's age and his problems will be off the front page for a few days.
Peanut 3: Well Project 2025, there goes your bloodless revolution!
Peanut 4: thoughts and prayers
Peanut 5: The violence he preaches has spread to someone with violent tendencies, and there you have it.
Peanut 6: Trump just won reelection.
Peanut 7: Yeah, and the last best hope of Man on Earth just died. America was the hope of the world. It will not be under dictatorship.
Peanut 8: This was Biden's fault!
Peanut 9: According to the Supreme Court the shooting would be OK as long as the president ordered it.
Qs:
1. Is that assessment of DJT too harsh or unreasonably cruel and/or callous?
2. Will at least some Christian nationalist theocrats see this as a sign by God that God wants to protect DJT and his Christian Sharia plan for America?
