An opinion that is over six years too late... but correct.
The focus of The Elect against Trump should never be Trump, it should be half or more of the nation of voters that would elect him. The Biden Democrats have finally figured that out, but instead of developing a political agenda to serve those voters, they have decided to threaten them with forced extinction... basically the same thing that the political establishment has been doing over the last 30+ years, but ramped up now.
That is the reason that Trump would be elected today if this were the general election. The American political establishment and connected corporate cabal is actually trying to kill half the nation so they can remain in power.
"is a man who attempted to orchestrate a coup to keep himself in power after losing a free and fair democratic election."
This is so stupid. The mantras around Donald Trump that come from Democrats are so irrational. "Coup", "Insurrection" -- the reason Donald Trump should definitely not be prosecuted is because Democrats want to do it for fantastical reasons that wouldn't be upheld in any rational court. If he is in fact prosecuted for the reasons that Democrats are throwing out, there could just well be an actual insurrection, because the prosecution would signify that the Democratic Party had lost its collective mind and would be willing to commit violence -- yes putting someone forcefully in jail on politically motivated garbage reasoning is violence -- toward any political opponent that vigorously challenged them. That would be the "attack on Democracy" that the fake "Democratic" Party so incessantly complains about.
The fact that Persuasion just had a "debate" between two people who irrationally hate Trump to the point of senselessness is a reflection of the general mindset of Democrats.
I view Trump as an evil, but I am currently viewing the Democratic Party as a much greater evil. And between Biden and Trump 2024, I'd vote Trump. This is from someone who campaigned for Obama in 08, voted for Hillary 16, and Jorgensen in 2020. After 4 years of failure by Biden and a declining economy and energy insecurity, and 4 years of Trump still being the obsession of the Democratic Party even when he isnt in office, there are going to be a lot fewer voters who hate Trump enough to vote the eggplant in again.
Very well reasoned and well written piece, Damon. And an excellent synopsis of our predicament. When the sitting POTUS has to go on TV to make a national case for democracy, we are in dangerous and uncharted waters. Thanks to the team at Persuasion for helping us all make sense of it.
I am so sick of Trump's defenders acting like the attacks on him are unprecedented. Were they in a coma between 2009 and 2017? No, it's the attacks BY Trump (on everything from the basics of democracy to the basics of decency) that are unprecedented. Typical abuser: he can dish it out, but how dare he have to take it.
“Because the law is already somewhat implicitly political, we should make it more—and more explicitly—political.
“To avoid the perception that law is not applied evenhandedly, we should intentionally apply it selectively and with political factors in mind.”
In other words, this guy is proposing to deliberately decrease the legitimacy of the USA’s laws in order to preserve the public impression of their legitimacy.
Damon begins by stating that Donald Trump on the ballot in 2024 is an "incredibly dangerous situation", and then ends by stating that the problem of Trump can only be solved if he IS on that ballot. He writes: "[Trump] needs to be taken down at the ballot box by such a wide and indisputable margin that it’s impossible to mistake him for anything other than a loser." But that is very unlikely to happen! If he makes it onto the ballot at all, the election probably won't be a blowout, especially since the Democrats don't have any candidates in the wings who could excite the electorate enough to drive millions to vote FOR that candidate instead of merely against Trump. The hard-core red states will stay red. The swing states will probably swing for the Democratic candidate, but not by a wide enough margin to prevent the kind of disputes that Damon correctly fears (over vote counting, certification, appointment of electors, etc.)
Maybe the ballot box that Damon is referring to is the Republican primary. But unless something happens between now and then to change how Trump is perceived by Republican voters, it seems likely that if he runs, he wins.
If Trump is on the 2024 general election ballot, it's already too late. So the interesting question to me is: does prosecuting Trump make it more or less likely that he will end up winning the Republican nomination? Immediately after the Mar-a-Lago search, the common wisdom was that all the other potential candidates might as well throw in the towel. But now, it's not so clear that the FBI search was good for Trump's prospects. The consequences of prosecuting Trump might be equally unclear.
We should also consider the consequences of NOT prosecuting Trump. I don't know the percentages, but I believe that a majority of all voters, and certainly a very high majority of Democrats, oppose and even despise Trump. They see him as someone who has committed criminal acts that would have landed an ordinary citizen in prison a long time ago. Failing to prosecute him will lead to deep cynicism and anger against the Democratic party and its dedication to the rule of law, making it even more likely that Trump, if he is the candidate, would win the 2024 election.
"Unfortunately, this [tRump's] MO works whether or not the person on the other side has done anything unprofessional or unfair."
So should we bend to tRump's will and his savvy twisting of reality?
His approach (MO) is now well known. Don't you think other politicians see the usefulness of his approach?
Either we stop this approach in its tracks or we will have an endless series of attacks on our institutions.
The outcome is either our institutions break and fascism prevails, or we find the means to reinforce our institutions' defenses against such attacks.
Given both parties' tendencies toward authoritarian rule, the former outcome seems much more likely.
I think the lesson learned from tRumpism is that any society will always have a segment of its population that desires authorization rule.
These Americans are simply not comfortable with the messiness and uncertainty of democratic governance and desire order at any cost.
The best we can do is apply the rule-of-law as best as we can and educate the entire population on our democratic values and constitutional protections.
Ignorance is our biggest threat, not a wanna-be dictator.
tRumpism is not some one-off phenomenon. It is always there waiting, biding its time, waiting for the right moment.
The activation of fascism now in our society is due to a long deterioration in our adherence to our values and consistent application of the rule-of-law.
You cannot expect our institutions to survive when we:
*start wars on WMD lies
*relentlessly pursue drone warfare through our executive branch
*allow a double standard of our rule-of-law between politicians and other citizens
*allow indiscriminate hatred and bashing of our minorities
*allow endless gun violence to persist for profit
*allow the corporatization of our government and politicians
*on and on, you get the picture...
Frankly, it is our widespread indifference as citizens to our daily governance that has gotten us into this mess. Again, ignorance and daily distraction are the keys to this indifference.
IMO, the outcome of a tRump trial is not important (he most likely would negotiate something before the final outcome anyhow).
The real work, and it will take time, is
* developing an educational structure for our citizens
* creating grass roots citizenship involvement for all citizens
* giving citizens time to step off of their daily personal life-treadmills to engage in our democracy
Until we have a fully engaged citizenry, we will continue to deteriorate as a democracy.
The closing paragraph of this essay makes exactly the argument that was made by opponents of the two impeachments.
Ultimately, the opponents got their wish. Trump was soundly defeated at the ballot box. However, the upshot was the state of affairs that we hsve now; not a solution to our Donald Trump problem.
The trouble is not that the margin of defeat was too narrow to silence Trump or turn his followers away from him. It’s that there is no such margin of defeat..
If there is concern about prosecuting a former president, then prosecute to the full extent of the law those who abetted his actions. Autocrats, especially those autocrats who are adverse to personal risk, would seem to rely on an inner circle of sycophants who have skills useful to the autocrat. Remove the inner circle and the problem goes away.
The keys are, of course, whether crimes were actually committed and whether those crimes can be proven in a court of law.
An opinion that is over six years too late... but correct.
The focus of The Elect against Trump should never be Trump, it should be half or more of the nation of voters that would elect him. The Biden Democrats have finally figured that out, but instead of developing a political agenda to serve those voters, they have decided to threaten them with forced extinction... basically the same thing that the political establishment has been doing over the last 30+ years, but ramped up now.
That is the reason that Trump would be elected today if this were the general election. The American political establishment and connected corporate cabal is actually trying to kill half the nation so they can remain in power.
"is a man who attempted to orchestrate a coup to keep himself in power after losing a free and fair democratic election."
This is so stupid. The mantras around Donald Trump that come from Democrats are so irrational. "Coup", "Insurrection" -- the reason Donald Trump should definitely not be prosecuted is because Democrats want to do it for fantastical reasons that wouldn't be upheld in any rational court. If he is in fact prosecuted for the reasons that Democrats are throwing out, there could just well be an actual insurrection, because the prosecution would signify that the Democratic Party had lost its collective mind and would be willing to commit violence -- yes putting someone forcefully in jail on politically motivated garbage reasoning is violence -- toward any political opponent that vigorously challenged them. That would be the "attack on Democracy" that the fake "Democratic" Party so incessantly complains about.
The fact that Persuasion just had a "debate" between two people who irrationally hate Trump to the point of senselessness is a reflection of the general mindset of Democrats.
I view Trump as an evil, but I am currently viewing the Democratic Party as a much greater evil. And between Biden and Trump 2024, I'd vote Trump. This is from someone who campaigned for Obama in 08, voted for Hillary 16, and Jorgensen in 2020. After 4 years of failure by Biden and a declining economy and energy insecurity, and 4 years of Trump still being the obsession of the Democratic Party even when he isnt in office, there are going to be a lot fewer voters who hate Trump enough to vote the eggplant in again.
Very well reasoned and well written piece, Damon. And an excellent synopsis of our predicament. When the sitting POTUS has to go on TV to make a national case for democracy, we are in dangerous and uncharted waters. Thanks to the team at Persuasion for helping us all make sense of it.
I am so sick of Trump's defenders acting like the attacks on him are unprecedented. Were they in a coma between 2009 and 2017? No, it's the attacks BY Trump (on everything from the basics of democracy to the basics of decency) that are unprecedented. Typical abuser: he can dish it out, but how dare he have to take it.
Here is how I summarize this pseudo-logic.
“Because the law is already somewhat implicitly political, we should make it more—and more explicitly—political.
“To avoid the perception that law is not applied evenhandedly, we should intentionally apply it selectively and with political factors in mind.”
In other words, this guy is proposing to deliberately decrease the legitimacy of the USA’s laws in order to preserve the public impression of their legitimacy.
What?
Damon begins by stating that Donald Trump on the ballot in 2024 is an "incredibly dangerous situation", and then ends by stating that the problem of Trump can only be solved if he IS on that ballot. He writes: "[Trump] needs to be taken down at the ballot box by such a wide and indisputable margin that it’s impossible to mistake him for anything other than a loser." But that is very unlikely to happen! If he makes it onto the ballot at all, the election probably won't be a blowout, especially since the Democrats don't have any candidates in the wings who could excite the electorate enough to drive millions to vote FOR that candidate instead of merely against Trump. The hard-core red states will stay red. The swing states will probably swing for the Democratic candidate, but not by a wide enough margin to prevent the kind of disputes that Damon correctly fears (over vote counting, certification, appointment of electors, etc.)
Maybe the ballot box that Damon is referring to is the Republican primary. But unless something happens between now and then to change how Trump is perceived by Republican voters, it seems likely that if he runs, he wins.
If Trump is on the 2024 general election ballot, it's already too late. So the interesting question to me is: does prosecuting Trump make it more or less likely that he will end up winning the Republican nomination? Immediately after the Mar-a-Lago search, the common wisdom was that all the other potential candidates might as well throw in the towel. But now, it's not so clear that the FBI search was good for Trump's prospects. The consequences of prosecuting Trump might be equally unclear.
We should also consider the consequences of NOT prosecuting Trump. I don't know the percentages, but I believe that a majority of all voters, and certainly a very high majority of Democrats, oppose and even despise Trump. They see him as someone who has committed criminal acts that would have landed an ordinary citizen in prison a long time ago. Failing to prosecute him will lead to deep cynicism and anger against the Democratic party and its dedication to the rule of law, making it even more likely that Trump, if he is the candidate, would win the 2024 election.
Alas, I agree. Trump is Anteus, son of Earth, who can't be defeated because every time he's forced down to Earth he's reinvigorated.
"Unfortunately, this [tRump's] MO works whether or not the person on the other side has done anything unprofessional or unfair."
So should we bend to tRump's will and his savvy twisting of reality?
His approach (MO) is now well known. Don't you think other politicians see the usefulness of his approach?
Either we stop this approach in its tracks or we will have an endless series of attacks on our institutions.
The outcome is either our institutions break and fascism prevails, or we find the means to reinforce our institutions' defenses against such attacks.
Given both parties' tendencies toward authoritarian rule, the former outcome seems much more likely.
I think the lesson learned from tRumpism is that any society will always have a segment of its population that desires authorization rule.
These Americans are simply not comfortable with the messiness and uncertainty of democratic governance and desire order at any cost.
The best we can do is apply the rule-of-law as best as we can and educate the entire population on our democratic values and constitutional protections.
Ignorance is our biggest threat, not a wanna-be dictator.
tRumpism is not some one-off phenomenon. It is always there waiting, biding its time, waiting for the right moment.
The activation of fascism now in our society is due to a long deterioration in our adherence to our values and consistent application of the rule-of-law.
You cannot expect our institutions to survive when we:
*start wars on WMD lies
*relentlessly pursue drone warfare through our executive branch
*allow a double standard of our rule-of-law between politicians and other citizens
*allow indiscriminate hatred and bashing of our minorities
*allow endless gun violence to persist for profit
*allow the corporatization of our government and politicians
*on and on, you get the picture...
Frankly, it is our widespread indifference as citizens to our daily governance that has gotten us into this mess. Again, ignorance and daily distraction are the keys to this indifference.
IMO, the outcome of a tRump trial is not important (he most likely would negotiate something before the final outcome anyhow).
The real work, and it will take time, is
* developing an educational structure for our citizens
* creating grass roots citizenship involvement for all citizens
* giving citizens time to step off of their daily personal life-treadmills to engage in our democracy
Until we have a fully engaged citizenry, we will continue to deteriorate as a democracy.
The closing paragraph of this essay makes exactly the argument that was made by opponents of the two impeachments.
Ultimately, the opponents got their wish. Trump was soundly defeated at the ballot box. However, the upshot was the state of affairs that we hsve now; not a solution to our Donald Trump problem.
The trouble is not that the margin of defeat was too narrow to silence Trump or turn his followers away from him. It’s that there is no such margin of defeat..
If there is concern about prosecuting a former president, then prosecute to the full extent of the law those who abetted his actions. Autocrats, especially those autocrats who are adverse to personal risk, would seem to rely on an inner circle of sycophants who have skills useful to the autocrat. Remove the inner circle and the problem goes away.
The keys are, of course, whether crimes were actually committed and whether those crimes can be proven in a court of law.