Trump Thread

[Montmorency]

I think right now the Democrats are involved in similar internal debates like we've had on here. Should they double down on progressive-liberal politics or appear more centrist to try and win over splitters from the Rs in the wake of Trump's chaotic governance?

I mean, disavowing everything negative you've ever said about Trump and formally licensing his unlimited lawbreaking and looting doesn't sound centrist, it sounds like the Democrats (in the eyes of their critics) admitting to being corrupt hypocrites anyway. Has everything the US government has been based on in living memory just been a criminal and illegitimate con, like Musk and Trump say? If not, Dem hypocrisy in not standing up is a disgrace. If Trump and Musk are right, then they should get all the credit for 'saving' the country from Dems, not the Dems suddenly deciding to bend the knee to the ones doing God's work.

Practically, a few things are happening:

1. Most Democrats (base and electeds) seem to be angry about Schumer's decision, which was in support of a conservative flank of just a few senators. Even Pelosi came out against him, and they worked in lockstep for decades as party leaders. We'll see if he faces a strong primary challenge.
2. Trump's approval has been sinking slowly since January, but consistently. This was a missed opportunity to reinforce that.
3. As a historical matter, Republicans always get blamed for government shutdowns. To be fair, they've always been the ones who caused government shutdowns, but as one liberal blogger puts it, average voters think of Republicans as anti-government (certainly the American bureaucratic state has had no greater enemies in 200 years than Musk/Trump), and of Democrats as the party of government. Given what's been going on, amid unified Republican government, who but the most committed MAGA is going to buy that it's actually Democrats who are anti-government right now in the event of a shutdown.
4. Government shutdowns have a habit of reminding people of the value of stable and effective government, at least for a few minutes.

Seeing as no political reckoning can really happen until the midterms next year I imagine that the Democratic 'game' is let Trump do his thing (while still challenging in courts) and let that dissuade voters as their own rhetoric didn't reach the voters as needed.

Democrats need to eventually unify around a replacement ideology and program to legacy 20th century liberalism, because that project and movement is not only exhausted (as we can observe with our own eyes), but with the way the political "resistance" is going there's just not going to be much left of it to salvage or rebuild in the coming years and decades. Democrats winning back a Senate seat and two-four districts or whatever in 2026 is utterly meaningless if Trump continues to rule autocratically and Democrats continue to have no hope of either regaining a unified government to counteract Trumpism, nor even of wielding it fully should they be delivered such an electoral miracle in 2028.

To phrase it differently, if Republicans even allow Democrats to retake the presidency anytime in the foreseeable future, what are the Democrats prepared to do with that power? Nothing?

[spmetla]

I mean, disavowing everything negative you've ever said about Trump and formally licensing his unlimited lawbreaking and looting doesn't sound centrist, it sounds like the Democrats (in the eyes of their critics) admitting to being corrupt hypocrites anyway. Has everything the US government has been based on in living memory just been a criminal and illegitimate con, like Musk and Trump say? If not, Dem hypocrisy in not standing up is a disgrace. If Trump and Musk are right, then they should get all the credit for 'saving' the country from Dems, not the Dems suddenly deciding to bend the knee to the ones doing God's work.

Believe me, I'm not sold on a thing Trump is doing and am more surprised and trying to see if there's any strategy in the way the Democratic leaders went ahead of this CR.
As for the Dem leaders being corrupt hypocrites, I view the majority of our long-term politicians as such. The current MAGA republicans are more than just hypocrites though, they are dangerous hypocrites threatening our constitutional system. Schumer has been a disgrace in the way he handled this and he's clearly out of touch.

To phrase it differently, if Republicans even allow Democrats to retake the presidency anytime in the foreseeable future, what are the Democrats prepared to do with that power? Nothing?

I agree, there is no true platform for the Democrats to rally around. Like with the Republicans they've allowed too many years of political dynasties to rule their leadership. Obama was the outlier and applauded for being such and Biden only came in because thankfully the US was at the time sick of Trump (and COVID) but even then, was just a 'centrist' tried and true Washington DC politician still trying to milk his blue collar reputation from nearly a half century before.
Obama was "change we can believe in" and "yes we can" but there's no such rallying cry anymore.

Too much of the US wants change, a more efficient and effective yet smaller government, less war, and still maintain national pride and international respect, but can't figure out how to get there which is how we'll get folks that voted for Obama, then wanted Sanders, and now support Trump.

[Montmorency]

[Shaka_Khan]

[Montmorency]

Nice Godwin blog post on discursive and political pscyhology trends in Nazi Germany and their implicit analogy in present times (themselves an enhanced version of much from the first Trump era):

Here, then, are things to watch for, all warnings from the well-known story of the Third Reich.

Daily life will take on a surreal quality and, if we do not take some action or join an organized resistance, our discussions will consist of merely repeating the latest horror.

Sebastian Haffner, writing in 1939, noted that “life went on as before, though it had now become ghostly and unreal, and was daily mocked by the events that served as its background…. We were not equal to the situation, even as victims.” Then as now, “many adapt to living with clenched teeth. Unfortunately they form a majority of a visible 'opposition' in Germany. So it is no wonder that this opposition has never developed any goals, plans, or expectations. Most of its members spend their time bemoaning the atrocities. The dreadful things that are happening have become essential to their spiritual well-being. Their only remaining dark pleasure is to luxuriate in the description of gruesome deeds, and it is impossible to have a discussion with them on any other topic.”

People around you will forget that they once were anti-Trump.
Christopher Isherwood wrote of his Berlin landlady in 1933: “Already she is adapting herself, as she will adapt herself to every new regime. This morning I even heard her talking reverently about Der Furher to the porter’s wife. If anyone was to remind her that at the elections last November she voted Communist she would probably deny it hotly and in perfect good faith. She is merely acclimatizing herself in accordance with a natural law, like an animal which changes its coat for the winter.”

[...]

MAGA will continue to believe what the leader says up until the very brink of disaster.

In the summer of 1939, three months after Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia, Robert Jamieson, a British English teacher living in Essen, wrote to Lord Londonderry, who had recently acted as a go-between British and Nazi leaders: “[The Germans] really believe that the Czech government had voluntarily sought Hitler’s protection and that they would all starve if they do not get this lebensraum and colonies.

[spmetla]

This "signal chat" controversy is certainly an interesting one. If this were normal times it would probably result in a cabinet official or two being forced to resign.

1. They should not have been using signal chat for this conversation at all, this is something belongs in a SCIF.

2. It seems likely that some if not all were using personal phones, so this would be more spillage.

3. The entire conversation being set to auto-delete is completely against all norms for retaining government records.

4. It seems that Witcoff was in Russia during this conversation, possibly even in the Kremlin. Makes it very likely that his device and the conversation may have been intercepted by the Russians.

5. That this was the 'small group' and the list of attendees wasn't scrutinized is sheer incompetence. We can just be happy the Journalist did the responsible thing and not immediately publish or leak the whole thing as that could get ships sunk and pilots shot down.

This is already been spun as a 'nothing burger' by Fox and the rest of the MAGA information universe when in fact it is a serious and egregious violation of OPSEC, records keeping, etc...

As a guy in the National Guard, I know that the Army in general loves WhatsApp and Signal chats for quickly coordinating day to day things. Makes it super easy for following up on admin tasks, putting out information to a group, and coordinating little things.

It does not surprise me at all that this admin has so many that were using Signal Chat for secret/ top secret things against all norms. I think this is a telling sign that they do not trust the rank and file, especially within the security/intelligence community that would normally facilitate this type of conversation over secure means. They want deniability, they want as few 'professionals' in the room as possible, and they do not trust the 'deep state' even for routine inter agency coordination for something as sensitive as military strikes.

I can only hope that this is the end of Sec Def and DNI and they are forced to resign but it looks as Mike Waltz will be the fall guy and the rest will just deny, minimize and skate away as there's so much damn news this administration creates that this story will go away in a few weeks as the ones that need to check these violations are the same ones that committed them.
The Dems will hold more hearings, the Atlantic will probably publish red-acted images of the rest of the conversation to show that there was indeed secret information, Trump will tell one guy to resign to make this problem go away and then we as a nation will just go on to the next scandal/travesty that's currently happening.

[Montmorency]

1. Every MAGA appointee deeply believes the rules don't apply to them, at all. (Rules are for abusing your lessers.)
1.a. This is a fundamental principle of the MAGA appeal in general.

https://x.com/urtropicalgal/status/1884737281757528135 [VIDEO]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Accountability means the right people are in charge. It's not a question of what objectively, or even tendentiously, constitutes more or less accountability in behavior or policy.

2. Everyone in that conversation seemed to defer to Miller, even (especially) Hegseth.
3. Miller used phrasing like "as I heard" and other uncertain language to communicate Trump's orders, or at least Trump's intent. On policy of the highest international import. It may be the case more than before that Trump is being treated as a mad king by more energetic underlings. I don't think he even does rallies anymore, a regular feature during Trump I and one of his lifetime favorite activities.
4. Vance doesn't understand the inner circle operation of Trumpism and never will. NEVER suggest that the big man may not understand something or may have got something mixed up.
5. Vance and the others still don't understand the basics of world trade.
6.

My high-level takeaway is “what you see is what you get. These guys might look like idiots, and talk like idiots, but don’t let that fool you: they really are idiots.

As for Signal, there are reasonable circumstances in which to use it, securely, such as when dealing with quick, simple procedural updates. And who knows, by the way, how many people other than these in the Trump admins and beyond have been setting their communications to autodelete.

Even during the first Trump era it was so poetic that Trump was essentially delivered to office by the manufactured moral panic (with Russian assist) over Hillary Clinton's secure and otherwise-regulated handling of a private email server for non-classified materials. Remember something as petty as how they tried to censor Trump's White House schedule and visitor lists years ago (he was occupied with TV, Twitter, golf, and general leisure), after Obama took the unusual steps of making as much info public as possible?