All's fair in love and war.
"You will start to win if I am elected. Win. Win. Win. You will win so much you will start to tire of it. But we will keep winning. You will call out to me, 'Let's stop winning so much, we are tired of winning,' but I won't stop. I will keep us winning and winning."
Final words of Trump speech, Boca Raton, Florida, March 2016
 |
| Indiana Jones: Guns to a knife fight. |
Cheating isn't just OK, it is smart. It is good.
It is popular.
It is popular.
Trump is a change agent. He ended a bi-partisan post World War Two grand consensus on America's role in the world. The understanding coming out of the wreckage of that war was that wars would continue--and the US would be drawn into them--unless the world created multinational organizations (like the UN and World Trade Organization, the World Bank, World Health Organization) plus alliances (NATO, SEATO), plus trade agreements (NAFTA) that created a rules-based order.
The USA would be the indispensable leader in that order, a force for peace, prosperity, and virtue. It would keep us out of the next world war.
The USA would be the indispensable leader in that order, a force for peace, prosperity, and virtue. It would keep us out of the next world war.
Trump said this global system was a fraud. He said the rules-based, global, multilateral system was a setup for the benefit of everyone but Americans. We were the sap, the stupid rich guy at the poker table being robbed. Our NATO allies weren't paying their share, our trade partners got the better deals, our factories and jobs were being lost, poor people were streaming into America and they weren't "sending their best" and indeed they were sending their drug dealers, criminals, and rapists.
The real world, he said, was dog-eat-dog, a no-rules fight, and he understood that and would win by doing it well on behalf of us alone, the US. America First.
In 2016 Democrats nominated a candidate poorly situated to counter that argument. Hillary Clinton was both a prime example of the bi-partisan establishment and a prime example of establishment privilege. She got rich making speeches to rich people.
Trump is being Trump. Democrats and the establishment punditry are shocked by some of Trump's behaviors, ones that make him subject to impeachment, and which are even carried on amid it. He openly said he fired Jim Comey to obstruct the investigation into Russian collusion with his campaign. So what? He openly said he would welcome and take opposition research from foreigners. "I'd take the meeting." So what?
He openly said "no quid pro quo" then of course quid pro quo. So what?
The day Roger Stone is found guilty of witness tampering he tweets an attack on an impeachment witness, Marie Yovanovitch. He just did it. So what?
There is a message in Trump's flagrant misbehavior. He doesn't consider it misbehavior. Trump is saying--signaling--that there is no law, that this is a fight and that he plans to win, on behalf of himself and his political base. If it involves ignoring laws that send other people to prison, he will do it. If it involves "fighting dirty" he will do it because it isn't bad-dirty, it is smart-dirty. Critics are enemies and you do whatever you can to destroy an enemy. He is fighting to survive so he can deliver what his political supporters want: gun rights, an abortion ban, conservative judges, tax cuts, and maintenance of white, Christians as the keystone of American culture. And if his winning frustrates and "triggers" liberals and woke politically correct scolds, all the better.
To Democrats, demanding Ukraine announce an investigation of Biden in order to receive the appropriated military aid seems wrong, an impeachable offense. To Trump and his base, it looks like the whole political racket is crooked anyway, and Trump is just doing what everyone does, and damned if he will get pushed around by weenie Democrats.
War is hell, but politics is war and Trump doesn't apologize for it. That sounds pretty good to Republican voters.
4 comments:
Roger "Stone".
I think this is a more articulate way of saying he is the “F*** You” President. His playbook has one play: contempt for anyone who is not a sycophant. Contempt is impossible to reverse once expressed and hard to combat. He models it for his followers and it is the new way of being. We’ll see if the swing voters will finally decide this not who we want to be.
Timely post.
It occurs to me that should Trump be found to have acted criminally, those who continue to support and enable his actions could be seen as guilty as accomplices, including voters. Yes? This may be occurring to some as things evolve. I think this consideration may be giving some in government and elsewhere some pause.
Let's not forget that 60+ were indicted, with some imprisoned, as a result of Nixon's actions.
"Altogether, the scandal resulted in the indictment of 69 people, with trials or pleas resulting in 48 being found guilty, many of whom were top Nixon officials." (Wikipedia)
The main determination was that in fact, the president is not above the law.
It's one thing to whine about the unfairness of the World, and portray yourself as a victim, but quite another to flaunt its laws and conventions when someone who will financially benefit from your actions assures you it's noble, even righteous.
There is a difference between civil disobedience and sabotage, protest and propaganda, reform and destruction, patriotism and self interest.
I think your characterization of the tactics are spot on. The question that remains is "Really?"
Is the United States so feeble that it demands the dismantling of its society, including its fundamental values, and the abandonment of its international leadership or is it in the personal financial interest of those who benefit from a chaotic world order?
Which makes more sense? Really?
Interesting article of a recent study that supports the notion that psychological profiles are regional, especially fear, anxiety and depression. A better predictor of which candidates will be attractive to voters. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/11/how-south-different-north/602074/
Post a Comment