When they look through him they see… themselves looking back. Upset that the world is not the way they wish it were, and that they get told to shut up and suck on it or else if they complain, and Big Bully Establishment will put them down if they try to do what they please. HE, however, gets to complain out loud about how unfair the world is and try to do as he pleases, and no Bigger Bully shows up to smack his face so it must mean he’s strong. And if at some point one does arise, it will only confirm their belief in a universe run on Bigger Bully Rule.
Here’s an good example of the “How” the OP asks:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/18/politics/bill-barr-donald-trump-vote/index.html
So you can have direct, first hand knowledge of how far Trump would go, be able to verify that the claims he made to attempt to overthrow the government were bogus, be attacked by him, hear him threaten you directly for being disloyal, but when it comes down to choosing between your team (R) and (D), the Democrat is obviously worse for “reasons”.
“I’ve said all along given two bad choices, I think it’s my duty to pick the person I think would do the least harm to the country,” Barr replied. “And in my mind, I will vote the Republican ticket. I will support the Republican ticket.”
“I think the real danger to the country — the real danger to democracy, as I say — is the progressive agenda,” he continued. “Trump may be playing Russian roulette, but a continuation of the Biden administration is national suicide in my opinion.”
I personally read this as “I hate Trump, but only one party will work to ensure that I, as a wealthy, white, male Christian, will have perpetual deference and primacy in our society.”
I’ve heard Barr say this before, that the ‘progressive agenda’, whatever that might be, is worse than anything else that might come along. He’s a smart guy, but I really really wish he’d expound on this.
I think ParallelLines already nailed it.
Barr will never actually say what his coded phrase means, because if he did, the explanation for "progressive agenda would be:
- Fair taxation for the Uber-rich
- Equal treatment for all - white men no longer get special privileges
These things are an anathema to Barr and his ilk. But they can’t say this out loud, so the must rely on coded language to express this.
Exactly. There’s no way someone as smart as Barr actually believes this nonsense about Biden and his “agenda”. He’s just straight-up lying to promote his actual interests, which he’ll never articulate in public.
The Green New deal did go overboard in parts, but it was a solid start for negotiation.
Moderating:
Let’s keep this on how Trump can be considered a viable candidate and not wander into the Green New Deal.
Thanks.
The plural of anecdote isn’t data, and in Texas this doesn’t mean much, but in the past week I’ve heard four people who voted for Trump in 2016/20 mention about how tired and exhausted he looks. “Biden might be old, but Trump is just beaten up.” “He looks a LOT worse than he did when he left the WH!” and a jaw-dropping “I don’t think it would be right to send that poor man back to DC”.
Now, in the end, 3 of these four will probably vote for Trump (I know that one will NOT vote for him, which itself is a 25% drop in my small-sample-sized, extremely-unscientific, poll). But, anecdotally, it appears that in 2024, being in the news all the time is not helping the man as it did in 2016.
The House passed a bill to aid Ukraine and that’s further evidence Trump’s grip on the party is failing. In order to save face, Trump even announced that Ukranian independence was important to the United States which is a complete change from what he’s wanted in the past. While Trump is still the Republican’s only choice, I think more and more of them are coming around to the idea that he probably won’t be our next president.
So what? Changing on Ukraine won’t damage him.
Trump has never cared about consistency. He only cares about himself. And his voters don’t care either…they vote for his image, not his specific policies.
I think the “so what” was in my post. It’s a sign that Trump’s control over House Republicans is slipping. Trump changed his position because the House passing the bill without his blessing hurt his image.
It is “consistent” though with his usual pattern of trying to “pick a winner” and then if that doesn’t work it’s never his fault and he knew all along where it was going. On the Ukraine bill a slight majority of the R bench still voted against it so give him a day or two and he will start talking about how it was the ones who voted in favor who failed. Or he will claim, with, of course, no real basis whatever, that he was able to delay it until it had hyooooge tremendous (nonexistent) changes like adding clauses about buying American or removing DEI language or whatever.
Actually it is-
You may have heard the phrase the plural of anecdote is not data. It turns out that this is a misquote. The original aphorism, by the political scientist Ray Wolfinger, was just the opposite: The plural of anecdote is data.
Wolfinger’s formulation makes sense: Data does not have a virgin birth. It comes to us from somewhere. Someone set up a procedure to collect and record it. Sometimes this person is a scientist, but she also could be a journalist.
Blood is in the water. The sharks… being sharks… are going to do what sharks do.
That’s effectively my take from Aaron Rupar’s interview with Hopium’s Simon Rosenberg. Usually paywalled, Aaron decided to open this one to the public and I thought it worth sharing. It’s an opinion piece… as most of these things are… but it captures what I’ve been seeing ‘out there’.
emphasis mine.
Thanks for posting. This was a heartening read – and though Rupar’s guest Simon Rosenberg is partisan, his pronouncements are typically based on something concrete (e.g. a given set of poll numbers, the slant of recent news coverage, etc.).
@Aeschines, you’ll appreciate the Aaron Rupar piece, I think.
Thank you, just read it. It makes sense!
Closed primary. Trump losing over 17% of the vote to someone who dropped out a month ago.
I love Simon Rosenberg. He’s partisan, but he’s extremely experienced as a pollster and his eyes are clear. My observations are much the same and have been for some time.
Awhile ago – rather a long while ago, now – I recall reading that sooner or later, everyone tires of Trump and his schtick. Me, I was sick of him before he ever slimed his way down that escalator. I never imagined it would take so long for the rest of the country to tumble to his con games and how compromised he is by Putin. Of course, he had a lot of help working to “legitimize” him, and I think that’s why.
In any case, I agree with you. It’s happening now, and once the dam collapses, the ensuing flood soon becomes a deluge.
We have a much longer road away from Trumpism. But I think breaking the fever dream with respect to Trump himself is underway at last and that’s a good start. Thank fuck.
Pedal to the metal through November 5th, all the same.
Well said, all of it.
Let’s stay focused on the “pedal to the metal” part, people…
Another indicator is last night’s PA primary: the Dems, with an incumbent President and two Senators who aren’t even running this year recieved 50,000 more votes than the Republicans.