Trump need not deport eleven million people, only four or five: two families, a couple of hoody-looking guys and someone just getting out of drug rehab. Just make sure the deportations are roughly handled with lots of tears and screaming and make sure it gets all over TV and social media and the MAGAs will be happy, just like with The Great Wall.
*****Orwell once said that in our time, “restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.”
So here’s an obvious fact: Even in a well-established and long-functioning democracy, even in the exceptional United States of America, even in the enlightened 21st century, the majority can be wrong.
This shouldn’t be a controversial or startling statement. It’s self-evidently true.*****
Rather than Orwell, Yeats, or Horace, I invoked Churchill and Mencken (and politely left out the latter's most acerbic comment on democracy).
The bottom line for me is that right-wing propaganda – which warps the perceptions of the polity – will continue to pose a dangerous threat to our democracy. Our prospects for saving our democracy rely upon addressing it.
Musk has promised $2 trillion in cuts to the government. RFK Jr. has said he wants to eliminate entire FDA departments. At least in the short term, the economic effects of such actions would be uniformly negative, sowing chaos and kicking more people out of employment.
Wont lack a job for long, someone has got to pick the fruits and vegetables, all part of the plan
The direct answer to your question is yes. If he does indeed execute the plans he and Elon Musk have outlined, you will see a recession by mid year and a depression by 2025. Musk has said as much. They want an America with less old, sick, and non-white people. And like with the Covid vaccine they don't really care if they hurt and kill many of their supporters. After all I believe they don't think they will need them anymore.
I just canceled my paid subscription to the Bulwark - for two reasons: the website does not offer a way to return to a free subscription, and there was no way to share my $10/month subscription with my wife. I'm probably not allowed to comment anymore, so I'll end with a link to a NYRB interview of Joseph O'Neill that, for me, sums up better than I've seen elsewhere, including from the Bulwark, about the state of the country and "what Democrats should do next".
Just watched Velshi's opening remarks today. He made a few points we keep forgetting. 7/4/1776 was only a year into the Revolution. America wasn't free until 1783. We had a confederation first, and it failed before we got the Constitution. April 1, 1861 was only the beginning; it didn't end until nearly 1 million American boys and men died by April 1865. The suffrage movement lasted from the late 19th century to 1920s when women earned the right to vote. The Civil Rights movement took decades. Heck, WW2 started 9/1/1939 and there were very dark days ahead that took millions of lives. The point being - those American revolutionists didn't give up, the men under Grant didn't give up, the suffragettes didn't give up, the black fighters along with their white supporters didn't give up, Britain and the other Allies give up. Now, it's our turn to not give up. What's coming won't be pretty for those Trump voters and those who didn't vote and the rest of us. Right now, what's going to happen in 2026 might be even more important to the US than what happened in 2024.
On one hand I (a Republican Never-Trumper) would love a '26 congressional "blue wave." And if '18 & '22 are any indication, because GOP candidates do poorly without the "coattail effect," a '26 blue wave is likely. But on the other I worry that it would only give Trump and his celebrity idol worshipping voters another excuse to wrongly blame Democrats if they don't get what they want. Unless of course if they suffer enough damage before then, with a GOP majority in House (now almost certain) and Senate. Which is also very likely, now that the "guardrails" of Trump's first term won't be there to protect the very voters who "thanked" them by throwing them under the bus.
My Dems path to power, sadly, runs thru Trump's utter failure on the economy. It must be 1930 with working people suffering and looking for relief from a truth-telling, charismatic, YOUTHFUL leader with a NEW plan for governing. Wailing about the unjust, cruel deportations won't do it. Economic misery for working folks is coming (actually it arrived some time ago for many because no party has solved the growing economic inequality). Whether my Dems can develop a new approach to relieving the pain is unknown. As far as I can tell, they haven't even started.
Thank you, Bill, for your wisdom. This is a good time to be reminded of, and take comfort in, the fact that we don’t have a pure democracy. Our founders understood the danger of the tyranny of the majority. That’s why we have separation of powers and the bill of rights.
We are also incredibly lucky to have Marbury v Madison establishing judicial review. If the Dems’ leadership have half of the political shrewdness of Justice Marshall, we should have nothing to worry about.
To those who advocate for getting rid of the filibuster or the electoral college, or lament Supreme Court rulings as being undemocratic, I invite you to let this sink in. We are now in the minority. Let’s appreciate the protections we have.
Many years ago Jon Stewart in an interview question of what do Americans believe, said: “Americans’ believe that if you buy 10 sandwiches you get one free.” Still true.
Trump is just being a convicted sexual predator and a political predator with complete immunity for whatever he wants to do. Very dangerous. This also makes him a fascist. No one knows what a fascist is but they do know what a predator is. They wouldn't want one living in their neighborhood. His disclosed intent is to surround himself with loyalists, who are most likely predators themselves. That should motivate us to continually remind everyone, who voted for him, to buckle up because they voted in a narcissistic predator, which there couldn't be any worse. No one is safe from what he may do. We need to REMIND EVERYONE that TRUMP IS A PREDATOR WITH IMMUNITY and will attract and surround himself with other loyal predators who will willingly act as he directs. Pretty scary how ChatGPT describes how a sexual predator and a political predator behave like. Look to see.
It's worse. He's a fascist who's been bought by Musk, who is listening in on phone calls to Putin and Zelensky and also talking to China. Sorry, you fools who thought he was going to help YOU. Trump is literally selling you to Musk and Thiel and Putin and China and everyone else.
At least we are not pretending that the majority of the people who got off their couches to vote were right in choosing Trump. I also am not into blaming the Democrats. According to Robert Hubbell, 93 million eligible voters did not vote in this election. Who will be harder to sway in the future? Die hard MAGAs or non-voting eligibles? All of the non-voting eligibles that I know are millennial men who say they don't vote because their vote doesn't count, but really have comfortable lives and naively think nothing will happen to change that no matter who governs. All of their wives or girlfriends voted. I see this election as The Fall of the American Empire. That is after spending 5 months reading and discussing Project 2025. We got through 20 chapters in which we were most interested, and it is a formula for turning the US into a third world economy.
Just watched Velshi's opening remarks today. He made a few points we keep forgetting. 7/4/1776 was only a year into the Revolution. America wasn't free until 1783. We had a confederation first, and it failed before we got the Constitution. April 1, 1861 was only the beginning; it didn't end until nearly 1 million American boys and men died by April 1865. The suffrage movement lasted from the late 19th century to 1920s when women earned the right to vote. The Civil Rights movement took decades. Heck, WW2 started 9/1/1939 and there were very dark days ahead that took millions of lives. The point being - those American revolutionists didn't give up, the men under Grant didn't give up, the suffragettes didn't give up, the black fighters along with their white supporters didn't give up, Britain and the other Allies give up. Now, it's our turn to not give up. What's coming won't be pretty for those Trump voters and those who didn't vote and the rest of us. Right now, what's going to happen in 2026 might be even more important to the US than what happened in 2024. It's gonna be a bumpy ride as others have said.
Prof Thomas Zimmer made the point a few weeks ago in his Substack that the US was not a democracy until the 1960s. I believe he means with the Voting Rights Act. I personally am grateful I am able to access a variety of media. Those who voted for Trump often live in good media deserts, and they do not have the time, know-how or resources to get good media and are instead stuck with corporate and social media that spreads disinformation.
He's a "populist" only in the sense that his crude style, combined with a superficial patriotism, makes a lot of people think "He's one of us," even though he is disinclined to mingle with them. After soaking up their reverence, he goes back to his private club and hobnobs with wealthy donors who seek favors.
Musk and Thiel are obviously not populists either. They're oligarchs who want to be masters of the universe.
From Sam Stein's piece: "Some party operatives stress that the debate over legitimizing Fox News specifically is, to a large degree, immaterial—that the network’s legitimacy should simply be accepted as a fait accompli. After all, a vast swath of the country regards Fox as legitimate."
Then the goal should be to reach this swath--making a case that Fox is not legitimate. And I don't this is necessarily the job of Democrats, but this is an important story that needs to reach the casual news consumers.
Why did so many vote for Trump? Why do so few congressional Republicans speak about against Trump? Fox News is the biggest reason for this in my view. They give their viewers what they want, casting Trump in a positive light and hiding much of Trump's appalling behavior and rhetoric--all of which politically empower Trump, making it politically impossible for Republicans to turn against him. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if more Americans realized that Fox News doesn't operate as a legitimate news outlet, that would weaken Trump's political power.
Why can't we comment under Sam Stein's article? I mean literally--why are comments not allowed under Sam Stein's article? I am new this platform and boy, was that article good and boy, did I want to comment.
How is a person to get news and chat about it? I want to read an article today on the Atlantic--apparently i have read too many articles for free. I subscribe to Apple News, NYT, LA Times(recently cancelled). Just joined Bulwark @ $100. How much must I pay to be informed?
For whatever reason, some articles don't allow comments. Maybe the author decides--maybe the author prefers not to have comments? (One reason: Comments about be quite negative, and wading through a deluge of such comments can be a drag.)
One scary thing is how many people have moved on from Fox to Newsmax and even fringier outlets. I don't know how to even have a conversation about what *makes* a legitimate news outlet. I'm almost nostalgic for when Fox was the main problem. Epistemic fubar.
I may be wrong, but I'm less worried about Newsmax as it seems more fringe-y, and I don't think it has the same reach as Fox News.
With regard to a legitimate news outlet, I had a conversation with a casual news consumer, someone who is confused on what to believe. I mentioned the Fox News-Dominion case, the way the texts and emails of Fox News executives and staff revealed how they didn't want to be honest with their viewers and promoted stories that undermined the faith in elections, including enabling if not actively pushing conspiracy theories. For me, this would go a long way to de-legitimizing any news outlet.
I think it's a hidden and false assumption that Trump needs a good economy. Granted, if he causes the next Great Recession then Democrats chances significantly improve. But as a whole, I think Trump and MAGA can win elections even in a down economy because the Democrats absolutely cannot be counted on to provide a coherent and united opposition, and one that unites around something important to voters. Republicans also have Teflon on everything economic. They can tell absolutely lies about things done on their watch and everyone judges in their favor.
Trump need not deport eleven million people, only four or five: two families, a couple of hoody-looking guys and someone just getting out of drug rehab. Just make sure the deportations are roughly handled with lots of tears and screaming and make sure it gets all over TV and social media and the MAGAs will be happy, just like with The Great Wall.
Bill wrote:
*****Orwell once said that in our time, “restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.”
So here’s an obvious fact: Even in a well-established and long-functioning democracy, even in the exceptional United States of America, even in the enlightened 21st century, the majority can be wrong.
This shouldn’t be a controversial or startling statement. It’s self-evidently true.*****
.
I take this opportunity to flog my "November 6 Reflections on Our Democracy": https://decencyandsense.substack.com/p/november-6-reflections-on-our-democracy
Rather than Orwell, Yeats, or Horace, I invoked Churchill and Mencken (and politely left out the latter's most acerbic comment on democracy).
The bottom line for me is that right-wing propaganda – which warps the perceptions of the polity – will continue to pose a dangerous threat to our democracy. Our prospects for saving our democracy rely upon addressing it.
Short answer: yes. Long answer: if we are completely wrong about him, he won’t, and the economy. If we are right about him, we are screwed
Mr Kristol never disappoints.
Musk has promised $2 trillion in cuts to the government. RFK Jr. has said he wants to eliminate entire FDA departments. At least in the short term, the economic effects of such actions would be uniformly negative, sowing chaos and kicking more people out of employment.
Wont lack a job for long, someone has got to pick the fruits and vegetables, all part of the plan
The direct answer to your question is yes. If he does indeed execute the plans he and Elon Musk have outlined, you will see a recession by mid year and a depression by 2025. Musk has said as much. They want an America with less old, sick, and non-white people. And like with the Covid vaccine they don't really care if they hurt and kill many of their supporters. After all I believe they don't think they will need them anymore.
I just canceled my paid subscription to the Bulwark - for two reasons: the website does not offer a way to return to a free subscription, and there was no way to share my $10/month subscription with my wife. I'm probably not allowed to comment anymore, so I'll end with a link to a NYRB interview of Joseph O'Neill that, for me, sums up better than I've seen elsewhere, including from the Bulwark, about the state of the country and "what Democrats should do next".
https://www.nybooks.com/online/2024/11/09/all-bets-are-off-joseph-oneill/
Loved Bill's column - even though I have read that he doesn't read comments, I thank him for it!
Just watched Velshi's opening remarks today. He made a few points we keep forgetting. 7/4/1776 was only a year into the Revolution. America wasn't free until 1783. We had a confederation first, and it failed before we got the Constitution. April 1, 1861 was only the beginning; it didn't end until nearly 1 million American boys and men died by April 1865. The suffrage movement lasted from the late 19th century to 1920s when women earned the right to vote. The Civil Rights movement took decades. Heck, WW2 started 9/1/1939 and there were very dark days ahead that took millions of lives. The point being - those American revolutionists didn't give up, the men under Grant didn't give up, the suffragettes didn't give up, the black fighters along with their white supporters didn't give up, Britain and the other Allies give up. Now, it's our turn to not give up. What's coming won't be pretty for those Trump voters and those who didn't vote and the rest of us. Right now, what's going to happen in 2026 might be even more important to the US than what happened in 2024.
On one hand I (a Republican Never-Trumper) would love a '26 congressional "blue wave." And if '18 & '22 are any indication, because GOP candidates do poorly without the "coattail effect," a '26 blue wave is likely. But on the other I worry that it would only give Trump and his celebrity idol worshipping voters another excuse to wrongly blame Democrats if they don't get what they want. Unless of course if they suffer enough damage before then, with a GOP majority in House (now almost certain) and Senate. Which is also very likely, now that the "guardrails" of Trump's first term won't be there to protect the very voters who "thanked" them by throwing them under the bus.
My Dems path to power, sadly, runs thru Trump's utter failure on the economy. It must be 1930 with working people suffering and looking for relief from a truth-telling, charismatic, YOUTHFUL leader with a NEW plan for governing. Wailing about the unjust, cruel deportations won't do it. Economic misery for working folks is coming (actually it arrived some time ago for many because no party has solved the growing economic inequality). Whether my Dems can develop a new approach to relieving the pain is unknown. As far as I can tell, they haven't even started.
I've said it before: we need FDR 2.0
And you must also have a free and fair election. And I don't see that happening after t***p takes power.
Thank you, Bill, for your wisdom. This is a good time to be reminded of, and take comfort in, the fact that we don’t have a pure democracy. Our founders understood the danger of the tyranny of the majority. That’s why we have separation of powers and the bill of rights.
We are also incredibly lucky to have Marbury v Madison establishing judicial review. If the Dems’ leadership have half of the political shrewdness of Justice Marshall, we should have nothing to worry about.
To those who advocate for getting rid of the filibuster or the electoral college, or lament Supreme Court rulings as being undemocratic, I invite you to let this sink in. We are now in the minority. Let’s appreciate the protections we have.
Many years ago Jon Stewart in an interview question of what do Americans believe, said: “Americans’ believe that if you buy 10 sandwiches you get one free.” Still true.
Thanks for the Yeats and perspective, Bill. I appreciate you all.
Trump is just being a convicted sexual predator and a political predator with complete immunity for whatever he wants to do. Very dangerous. This also makes him a fascist. No one knows what a fascist is but they do know what a predator is. They wouldn't want one living in their neighborhood. His disclosed intent is to surround himself with loyalists, who are most likely predators themselves. That should motivate us to continually remind everyone, who voted for him, to buckle up because they voted in a narcissistic predator, which there couldn't be any worse. No one is safe from what he may do. We need to REMIND EVERYONE that TRUMP IS A PREDATOR WITH IMMUNITY and will attract and surround himself with other loyal predators who will willingly act as he directs. Pretty scary how ChatGPT describes how a sexual predator and a political predator behave like. Look to see.
It's worse. He's a fascist who's been bought by Musk, who is listening in on phone calls to Putin and Zelensky and also talking to China. Sorry, you fools who thought he was going to help YOU. Trump is literally selling you to Musk and Thiel and Putin and China and everyone else.
At least we are not pretending that the majority of the people who got off their couches to vote were right in choosing Trump. I also am not into blaming the Democrats. According to Robert Hubbell, 93 million eligible voters did not vote in this election. Who will be harder to sway in the future? Die hard MAGAs or non-voting eligibles? All of the non-voting eligibles that I know are millennial men who say they don't vote because their vote doesn't count, but really have comfortable lives and naively think nothing will happen to change that no matter who governs. All of their wives or girlfriends voted. I see this election as The Fall of the American Empire. That is after spending 5 months reading and discussing Project 2025. We got through 20 chapters in which we were most interested, and it is a formula for turning the US into a third world economy.
Just watched Velshi's opening remarks today. He made a few points we keep forgetting. 7/4/1776 was only a year into the Revolution. America wasn't free until 1783. We had a confederation first, and it failed before we got the Constitution. April 1, 1861 was only the beginning; it didn't end until nearly 1 million American boys and men died by April 1865. The suffrage movement lasted from the late 19th century to 1920s when women earned the right to vote. The Civil Rights movement took decades. Heck, WW2 started 9/1/1939 and there were very dark days ahead that took millions of lives. The point being - those American revolutionists didn't give up, the men under Grant didn't give up, the suffragettes didn't give up, the black fighters along with their white supporters didn't give up, Britain and the other Allies give up. Now, it's our turn to not give up. What's coming won't be pretty for those Trump voters and those who didn't vote and the rest of us. Right now, what's going to happen in 2026 might be even more important to the US than what happened in 2024. It's gonna be a bumpy ride as others have said.
Prof Thomas Zimmer made the point a few weeks ago in his Substack that the US was not a democracy until the 1960s. I believe he means with the Voting Rights Act. I personally am grateful I am able to access a variety of media. Those who voted for Trump often live in good media deserts, and they do not have the time, know-how or resources to get good media and are instead stuck with corporate and social media that spreads disinformation.
He's a "populist" only in the sense that his crude style, combined with a superficial patriotism, makes a lot of people think "He's one of us," even though he is disinclined to mingle with them. After soaking up their reverence, he goes back to his private club and hobnobs with wealthy donors who seek favors.
Musk and Thiel are obviously not populists either. They're oligarchs who want to be masters of the universe.
And Musk and Thiel are already moving in on Trump. It's not going to be pretty.
From Sam Stein's piece: "Some party operatives stress that the debate over legitimizing Fox News specifically is, to a large degree, immaterial—that the network’s legitimacy should simply be accepted as a fait accompli. After all, a vast swath of the country regards Fox as legitimate."
Then the goal should be to reach this swath--making a case that Fox is not legitimate. And I don't this is necessarily the job of Democrats, but this is an important story that needs to reach the casual news consumers.
Why did so many vote for Trump? Why do so few congressional Republicans speak about against Trump? Fox News is the biggest reason for this in my view. They give their viewers what they want, casting Trump in a positive light and hiding much of Trump's appalling behavior and rhetoric--all of which politically empower Trump, making it politically impossible for Republicans to turn against him. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think if more Americans realized that Fox News doesn't operate as a legitimate news outlet, that would weaken Trump's political power.
Why can't we comment under Sam Stein's article? I mean literally--why are comments not allowed under Sam Stein's article? I am new this platform and boy, was that article good and boy, did I want to comment.
How is a person to get news and chat about it? I want to read an article today on the Atlantic--apparently i have read too many articles for free. I subscribe to Apple News, NYT, LA Times(recently cancelled). Just joined Bulwark @ $100. How much must I pay to be informed?
For whatever reason, some articles don't allow comments. Maybe the author decides--maybe the author prefers not to have comments? (One reason: Comments about be quite negative, and wading through a deluge of such comments can be a drag.)
Comments are for readers to shoot the shit. Authors--check your ego at the door and appreciate the debate for the win.
To be clear, I was speculating. I have no idea why the Bulwark allows comments for some articles and not others. Peace.
One scary thing is how many people have moved on from Fox to Newsmax and even fringier outlets. I don't know how to even have a conversation about what *makes* a legitimate news outlet. I'm almost nostalgic for when Fox was the main problem. Epistemic fubar.
I may be wrong, but I'm less worried about Newsmax as it seems more fringe-y, and I don't think it has the same reach as Fox News.
With regard to a legitimate news outlet, I had a conversation with a casual news consumer, someone who is confused on what to believe. I mentioned the Fox News-Dominion case, the way the texts and emails of Fox News executives and staff revealed how they didn't want to be honest with their viewers and promoted stories that undermined the faith in elections, including enabling if not actively pushing conspiracy theories. For me, this would go a long way to de-legitimizing any news outlet.
I think it's a hidden and false assumption that Trump needs a good economy. Granted, if he causes the next Great Recession then Democrats chances significantly improve. But as a whole, I think Trump and MAGA can win elections even in a down economy because the Democrats absolutely cannot be counted on to provide a coherent and united opposition, and one that unites around something important to voters. Republicans also have Teflon on everything economic. They can tell absolutely lies about things done on their watch and everyone judges in their favor.
Then that is the definition of a devolving country.