"Nota bene: I’m not saying any of this because I want it to be true. "
It's sad that you have to mention that. But it's necessary because most people are clueless about the "is/ought" fallacy. Trump certainly is, yet has an uncanny instinct for baiting people into committing it.
Is it possible that without the pressure of getting re-elected as President, in a Trump 2nd term he’d dump the pro-lifers and Christian right? He has zero loyalty to anyone or any world view. We know he’s not anti-abortion or Christian. He takes joy in putting people in their place once he’s used them up. I wonder if the Christian right even sees how transactional the relationship is.
I knew someone would say this :) Ratifying an amendment to the constitution is a massive lift he won’t be able to do. In order for him to be on the ballot he has to defeat strong court cases saying he cannot be. The courts won’t side with him because the 22nd amendment is clear. SCOTUS won’t support it either. That means attorneys general don’t put him on the ballot.
Could he try a military coup? Sure. I’d argue that is his better bet.
I understand the fear of this. Because things have gone farther than we thought then there’s a fear they can go all the way. I just think the slippery slope thing doesn’t work with the third term argument.
True and true. Well, he’s predictable yet not. We’ll see. His people are working on a plan to bring in lawyers and civil servants who won’t say no. It could embolden him to try, as you said.
2) You are right about Trump vis-a-vis abortion. it isn't as useful a weapon against him as many seem to think.
The thing about Trump is that he isn't anything--at least not in the normal political spectrum. While he has his personal pecadillos, he has no ideology. He has no real alliegance to conservatism (and he certainly isn't a progressive or a liberal, either).
Trump actually sees himself as a dealmaker and a rather skilled one at that (except he isn't a dealmaker and isn't skillled). It is a big part of his self image. Trump also doesn't really understand deals. To Trump, a deal is something where he wins and the other side loses. It is a zero sum game.
Being a "dealmaker" means that Trump doesn't have to have a plan or a policy. He doesn't have to explain anything. It is just going to happen, because he is Trump and he is the best dealmaker ever (and I think he actually does believe this, it fits in with his narcissism and lack of larger principle).
In his mind, who wouldn't fall over themselves to make a deal with the Donald? I think one of the things that pisses him off over all of his legal issues is that no one seems to be interested in making deals. He made plenty of legal deals over the years--but all of a sudden things have dried up in that direction. Why don't these people want to make a deal?
And remember, making a deal means that he won (meaning he got what he wanted out of it).
There is an illuminating quote from a NPC in Starfield (RPG from Bethesda game company) where a CEO tells an underling:
We need a good deal..., not a fair deal, a GOOD deal.
Donald would make that statement, if he ever bothered to think that there was actually such an animal as a fair deal (but he doesn't).
Because Trump doesn't actually have a stake in (for exampl) the whole abortion thing (I doubt that he has ever wasted any effort over it other than realizing that it was an electoral loser). The win for Trump in this "deal" isn't what comes out of it WRT law or whatever, the win for him is in "brokering" the deal.
Because of his nature, Trump believes that he can make a deal on anything. He does not really believe that people have principles or goals that they will NOT make deals on. Which is why he tends to be confident about the idea that he can make deals.
Trump does not actually understand other people other than as (lesser) reflections of himself. In his heart he believes that everyone else is just like him (only not as good as him, not as strong, etc). This is totally in line with his narcissism.
The Republican debate looked like a flock of Compsognathi (you know the little nasty dinosaurs in Jurassic Park) bickering over a scrap while T. Rex is wrecking the park.
A desperately needed break from the trump 24/7 doom-loop we are and have been trapped in for far too long now. Thanks JVL, for sharing Sara's story. Never heard of her, but took the time to click on the link (sorry, at 75 i'm picky about who and where i spend what time i have left). I was not disappointed, not even a little. Good writers draw and ultimately drag you into their world and their characters. In this case, Sara was the character, not a fictitious creation of the mind, but the result of a life well lived. Can any of us ask more than that from the time we have been given?
JVL, love you a ton. But you are the winner of a dubious award. Someone had tweeted -"Tuesday night was a bad night for pundits who will have to work hard to come up with how it was bad for Biden." Ding ding. WE HAVE A WINNER!
JVL, your points are well taken and indeed we must remain clear eyed and sober. But don't forget the importance of hope and a dash of happiness - we have a long slog ahead and a break is and was needed, and is not based on only wishful thinking.
Trump can and will be tied to abortion IF the Biden campaign does its job effectively, and the money I'm sending to them sure hopes so. There is plenty of footage out there tying him to his bragging about Roe v Wade and how he delivered. Get it out there, DNC and everyone else.
I never thought I would say this but I would take DeSantis over Ramaswamy ten days out of ten. If I never heard Vivek’s voice again, I would consider it a mercy of biblical proportions
False equivalence. Anti-Trumpers don’t pretend that votes for Trump never happened, they attempt to persuade those voters to make a different choice next time through reasoned argument. A forlorn project perhaps, but not one remotely comparable to the promulgation of the big lie.
My problem with the anti-Trumpers is where they overlap with the Trumpers. Trumpers want to overturn Democracy because they don’t trust the young, non-white, educated voters. Anti-Trumpers say they want to save Democracy even while not trusting in it because of low information voters. I’m sorry some elections haven’t gone the way you wanted but Democracy is the voters, and if you don’t trust them then you don’t really trust Democracy.
If you remember, the founders had some concerns about Democracy too. That's why we have the checks and balances. I would still like to trust in the founders' judgment, Madison's in particular. For pure Democracy and its trustworthiness, take a look at how Turkey and Hungary have turned out.
The point there wasn't about direct versus representational democracy, though, it was just about turnouts.
From a short-term, practical partisan perspective, sure, *sometimes* a lower turnout works in your favor - it does not follow that less engagement by the demos is a *good* thing, in any long-term, theoretical or philosophical sense. Many of the recent election results that the Bulwark community likes have in fact worked the other way, with greater turnout driven by the more-direct-democracy ballot questions.
1) In how many elections do the Dems have to do better than predicted before the pundit class admits that abortion is still an issue that materially benefits the Dems? I have read too many articles over the past two years arguing that while abortion was a big issue LAST year, it doesn’t seem like that big of an issue THIS year.
2) I’m hardly a political savant so this might be too rosy, but I can’t see how Trump can triangulate the abortion issue. Sure there will be people who will buy his pig-in-a-poke answers about his abortion policy, but those people are the same ones who believed that Trump’s health care policy was going to provide “much better coverage at a much lower cost”. And they are going to vote for Trump anyway.
Trump is clearly identified with the GOP, and the GOP is clearly identified as the party that wants to restrict abortion access. So I don’t think that very many voters will believe Trump if he says that he would never sign a national abortion bill (I really think that the GOP overplayed their hand when two microseconds after the Dobbs decision came down, they changed their tune from one of state’s rights to one of a national abortion policy. Now abortion rights folks know that it really matters who is President.) I do think that will hurt Trump no matter how he tries to wriggle out of it.
There is irony here. Biden was unfairly accused of believing in defunding the police even though that idea came from others in his party and he personally never supported that idea. I believe that hurt him in the election. So now I believe that Trump is going to be hurt in the election because others in his party have proposed an unpopular program (abortion restrictions). And it won’t matter much if Trump really supports that program or not. It’s enough that his party is identified with that proposal.
"Nota bene: I’m not saying any of this because I want it to be true. "
It's sad that you have to mention that. But it's necessary because most people are clueless about the "is/ought" fallacy. Trump certainly is, yet has an uncanny instinct for baiting people into committing it.
There is tons of footage showing the blowhard boasting about ending Roe. I wish they'd start showing it everyday until the election.
Is it possible that without the pressure of getting re-elected as President, in a Trump 2nd term he’d dump the pro-lifers and Christian right? He has zero loyalty to anyone or any world view. We know he’s not anti-abortion or Christian. He takes joy in putting people in their place once he’s used them up. I wonder if the Christian right even sees how transactional the relationship is.
I knew someone would say this :) Ratifying an amendment to the constitution is a massive lift he won’t be able to do. In order for him to be on the ballot he has to defeat strong court cases saying he cannot be. The courts won’t side with him because the 22nd amendment is clear. SCOTUS won’t support it either. That means attorneys general don’t put him on the ballot.
Could he try a military coup? Sure. I’d argue that is his better bet.
I understand the fear of this. Because things have gone farther than we thought then there’s a fear they can go all the way. I just think the slippery slope thing doesn’t work with the third term argument.
True and true. Well, he’s predictable yet not. We’ll see. His people are working on a plan to bring in lawyers and civil servants who won’t say no. It could embolden him to try, as you said.
No one did. Just a performance for a confederacy of dunces without trump
Tis why I said it, I was checking on the level of education tooooo🤩
1) Yes, that essay was a treasure. TY.
2) You are right about Trump vis-a-vis abortion. it isn't as useful a weapon against him as many seem to think.
The thing about Trump is that he isn't anything--at least not in the normal political spectrum. While he has his personal pecadillos, he has no ideology. He has no real alliegance to conservatism (and he certainly isn't a progressive or a liberal, either).
Trump actually sees himself as a dealmaker and a rather skilled one at that (except he isn't a dealmaker and isn't skillled). It is a big part of his self image. Trump also doesn't really understand deals. To Trump, a deal is something where he wins and the other side loses. It is a zero sum game.
Being a "dealmaker" means that Trump doesn't have to have a plan or a policy. He doesn't have to explain anything. It is just going to happen, because he is Trump and he is the best dealmaker ever (and I think he actually does believe this, it fits in with his narcissism and lack of larger principle).
In his mind, who wouldn't fall over themselves to make a deal with the Donald? I think one of the things that pisses him off over all of his legal issues is that no one seems to be interested in making deals. He made plenty of legal deals over the years--but all of a sudden things have dried up in that direction. Why don't these people want to make a deal?
And remember, making a deal means that he won (meaning he got what he wanted out of it).
There is an illuminating quote from a NPC in Starfield (RPG from Bethesda game company) where a CEO tells an underling:
We need a good deal..., not a fair deal, a GOOD deal.
Donald would make that statement, if he ever bothered to think that there was actually such an animal as a fair deal (but he doesn't).
Because Trump doesn't actually have a stake in (for exampl) the whole abortion thing (I doubt that he has ever wasted any effort over it other than realizing that it was an electoral loser). The win for Trump in this "deal" isn't what comes out of it WRT law or whatever, the win for him is in "brokering" the deal.
Because of his nature, Trump believes that he can make a deal on anything. He does not really believe that people have principles or goals that they will NOT make deals on. Which is why he tends to be confident about the idea that he can make deals.
Trump does not actually understand other people other than as (lesser) reflections of himself. In his heart he believes that everyone else is just like him (only not as good as him, not as strong, etc). This is totally in line with his narcissism.
The Republican debate looked like a flock of Compsognathi (you know the little nasty dinosaurs in Jurassic Park) bickering over a scrap while T. Rex is wrecking the park.
A desperately needed break from the trump 24/7 doom-loop we are and have been trapped in for far too long now. Thanks JVL, for sharing Sara's story. Never heard of her, but took the time to click on the link (sorry, at 75 i'm picky about who and where i spend what time i have left). I was not disappointed, not even a little. Good writers draw and ultimately drag you into their world and their characters. In this case, Sara was the character, not a fictitious creation of the mind, but the result of a life well lived. Can any of us ask more than that from the time we have been given?
Thx for sharing Sara’s essay.
JVL, love you a ton. But you are the winner of a dubious award. Someone had tweeted -"Tuesday night was a bad night for pundits who will have to work hard to come up with how it was bad for Biden." Ding ding. WE HAVE A WINNER!
JVL, your points are well taken and indeed we must remain clear eyed and sober. But don't forget the importance of hope and a dash of happiness - we have a long slog ahead and a break is and was needed, and is not based on only wishful thinking.
Trump can and will be tied to abortion IF the Biden campaign does its job effectively, and the money I'm sending to them sure hopes so. There is plenty of footage out there tying him to his bragging about Roe v Wade and how he delivered. Get it out there, DNC and everyone else.
Yes, a 25% decrease in the first politically optimistic high that I've had since the midterms.
That doesn’t get around it
Voters are pretty skeptical of Republicans on abortion
As they well should be.
I never thought I would say this but I would take DeSantis over Ramaswamy ten days out of ten. If I never heard Vivek’s voice again, I would consider it a mercy of biblical proportions
False equivalence. Anti-Trumpers don’t pretend that votes for Trump never happened, they attempt to persuade those voters to make a different choice next time through reasoned argument. A forlorn project perhaps, but not one remotely comparable to the promulgation of the big lie.
My problem with the anti-Trumpers is where they overlap with the Trumpers. Trumpers want to overturn Democracy because they don’t trust the young, non-white, educated voters. Anti-Trumpers say they want to save Democracy even while not trusting in it because of low information voters. I’m sorry some elections haven’t gone the way you wanted but Democracy is the voters, and if you don’t trust them then you don’t really trust Democracy.
If you remember, the founders had some concerns about Democracy too. That's why we have the checks and balances. I would still like to trust in the founders' judgment, Madison's in particular. For pure Democracy and its trustworthiness, take a look at how Turkey and Hungary have turned out.
The point there wasn't about direct versus representational democracy, though, it was just about turnouts.
From a short-term, practical partisan perspective, sure, *sometimes* a lower turnout works in your favor - it does not follow that less engagement by the demos is a *good* thing, in any long-term, theoretical or philosophical sense. Many of the recent election results that the Bulwark community likes have in fact worked the other way, with greater turnout driven by the more-direct-democracy ballot questions.
JVL my least favorite.
I love JVL. Don’t forget his continual, thoughtful, generous, clear-eyed support for Joe Biden.
I just think on this one GE went a little overboard.
Lisa
dagger
Ugh
A few comments…
1) In how many elections do the Dems have to do better than predicted before the pundit class admits that abortion is still an issue that materially benefits the Dems? I have read too many articles over the past two years arguing that while abortion was a big issue LAST year, it doesn’t seem like that big of an issue THIS year.
2) I’m hardly a political savant so this might be too rosy, but I can’t see how Trump can triangulate the abortion issue. Sure there will be people who will buy his pig-in-a-poke answers about his abortion policy, but those people are the same ones who believed that Trump’s health care policy was going to provide “much better coverage at a much lower cost”. And they are going to vote for Trump anyway.
Trump is clearly identified with the GOP, and the GOP is clearly identified as the party that wants to restrict abortion access. So I don’t think that very many voters will believe Trump if he says that he would never sign a national abortion bill (I really think that the GOP overplayed their hand when two microseconds after the Dobbs decision came down, they changed their tune from one of state’s rights to one of a national abortion policy. Now abortion rights folks know that it really matters who is President.) I do think that will hurt Trump no matter how he tries to wriggle out of it.
There is irony here. Biden was unfairly accused of believing in defunding the police even though that idea came from others in his party and he personally never supported that idea. I believe that hurt him in the election. So now I believe that Trump is going to be hurt in the election because others in his party have proposed an unpopular program (abortion restrictions). And it won’t matter much if Trump really supports that program or not. It’s enough that his party is identified with that proposal.
Payback is a bitch!
And that giant bald guy with the eighteen biceps has come to collect from the Republicans.