Noah Rothman, in the conservative journal, The National Review
It is the Democrats' best chance of winning in 2024.
The National Review said the same thing as the NY Times, Washington Post, and the broadcast networks, that Trump is grasping a political anchor. He did it vividly an hour after his rally in Manchester, New Hampshire. He embraced a convicted and formerly-jailed January 6 rioter, the one I stood next to in line for his Manchester rally. Here are 30 seconds that I uploaded to YouTube:
 |
| Click Here |
Rothman wrote that "This unnecessary display practically obliged the press to perform a deep dive into Larson-Olson’s background, and that’s exactly what they did."
Larson-Olson held nothing back in comments she provided NBC News. “The punishment for treason is death, per the Constitution,” she said, adding that the Republicans who certified the votes of the 2020 election “deserve death.” The Trump superfan hoped she would secure “a front seat” to witness “Mike Pence being executed.”
That is exactly the kind of thing she said to me and the people around us in line. It took no digging to get her to open up. She was a font of Fox-Newsmax-Q-Parler conspiracies. She said the Pope was somehow in cahoots on a vaccination conspiracy and the vaccine-manufacturers murdered children to make the vaccine. Sounds extreme? Heads up to readers: The people around me in the Trump lineup chimed in and generally agreed. She is an outlier in her appearance, but not in her overall orientation.
Trump may not endorse every one of her conspiracies, but he backed the single most visible and controversial thing she represents. Trump publicly backs the people who carried out the insurrection on the Capitol, even ones convicted of illegal acts. He calls participants patriots. Trump is unapologetic and unequivocal. Trump put his stake in the ground.
It is a minority opinion on a matter of importance. A majority of Americans are uncomfortable with what they saw on January 6. People who want to support Trump anyway need to avert their eyes. They look for a mental "out." Some claim it was really Antifa doing the rioting and planting a false flag, not Trump supporters. But the testimony of the people arrested show they were avid supporters; besides, Trump himself says they are his teammates. Tucker Carlson argued that it was an FBI-led takedown of Trump. That has unraveled. Carlson is getting sued by his chief target, Ray Epps. Some senators and media personalities say "it wasn't so bad, just a skirmish." But people saw video of hundreds of people climbing walls, breaking windows, pushing police. They cannot be hidden or diminished. Besides, Trump now calls them patriots valiantly breaking down doors in the cause of justice. We celebrate them, not hide them. Trump isn't giving voters any mental escape hatches to deny the reality that Trump supports the insurrection. It is a bad look.
Down-ballot candidates get caught in the undertow. It happened in nationally-watched races in Arizona and Pennsylvania. I watched it up close in a race that was winnable for a Republican, the state senate race in Southern Oregon. The GOP candidate, Randy Sparacino, the nonpartisan mayor of Medford, ran as the Republican candidate for the state senate. His local party made a splash claiming the 2020 election was stolen. He stayed on board as a loyal Republican soldier, lavishly funded by Republican PACs, in public fully on board the team wherever it led. The anchor pulled him under.
Democrats have their own problems. The only person Biden can defeat in a general election is Trump. Polls show voters are very uncomfortable with Biden's age. Stuff happens to people in the 80s. No mainstream Democrat is stepping up to offer an alternative. Biden is blocking the lane. Democrats are rolling the dice.
[Note: to subscribe to the blog and get it delivered by email every day, go to https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
39 comments:
Not just "pushing police." Attacking and chasing police. At least one officer DIED.
“Trump is grasping a political anchor.”
But only with one hand. The other has a death grip on the GOP.
“Down-ballot candidates get caught in the undertow.”
They deserve it. We’re judged by the company we keep, and Republicans are in a party dominated by some seriously crazy people. Trump is only the most obvious.
“The only person Biden can defeat in a general election is Trump.”
That’s the only person he needs to defeat. Trump “is not just morally obtuse but irredeemably stupid,” and Republicans love him for it.
She's clearly diminished, but it doesn't stop at mere fandom, these individuals have banded together with violent intent. They should be in institutions making baskets, but they are running amok, encouraged by cynics and sadists in politics and media.
I wish everyone could experience this delusional behavior up close as you have. It does have a visceral impact. Mob mentality is irrational, but if the mob is crazy to start with then the danger increases exponentially.
It's been said that, for lack of a better name, "Trumpism" is divisive, but, aided by toxic social media, it's served to unite previously isolated malcontents. It's safe to say that the internet can exacerbate previously existing mental illness, and needs a stricter standard for factuality. Online hucksterism is shredding free speech.
You are right about Democrats, but they are on defense at least for the time being. President Biden has advantages that offset the age issue, not the least of which is his margin with voters over a Trump candidacy. Democrats look to be solidly united behind him, and that's an indication of the seriousness of the situation.
It’s a shame that we can’t bring this ridiculous gal and her ilk into close contact with her equivalents on the left and have them annihilate each other like matter and antimatter.
Trump has successfully completed the merger and rebranded the GOP with the Trump name. GOP now stands for the old dead political party, Trump is the name of the new political party. Game over for former GOPers and Republicans that don't embrace Trump. Republicans had two opportunities to rescue the GOP and convict Trump in the House lead impeachment trial but failed. Now there is no going back for the old GOP. I worry that the political anchor you describe in actually made of cork; and, the grip on the throat of the old GOP is a death grip empowering Trump and Trumpism. Whether the voters in the next presidential election prevent his ascension remains to be seen.
I accidentally deleted a good comment and it is lost forever. Very sorry. I am trying to moderate comments on a tiny device.
Odd, but I haven't seen any Leftists shitting in the floors ifc y he US Captol building, or bearspraying the Police trying to defend that same building. I guess the Media is covering up the Lefts culpability in the attempted Coup d' etat on January 6th.
Republicans didn't just "fail" when they didn't convict Drumpf, they willingly, with malice aforethought, endorsed his actions.
I think you'll be forgiven, Peter. Stay safe back there.
I will resubmit the comment about Officer Sicknick if that comment was lost. I will add info about Officer Fanone, both ex-military.
Are you promoting violence? I expect better from readers of this blog.
Point of information: There is no equivalent on the left to the whack jobs that want to execute those who certified the election. In our current climate, Republicans have pretty much cornered the market on crazy. It's their base.
100 nights of violent “mostly peaceful” protests in Portland that included the launching of industrial fireworks at police, and arson attempts at the federal courthouse, were every bit as crazy and reprehensible in their own different way, as were the mobs of antifa, marching through the streets of residential neighborhoods at midnight, shouting, “Wake up, motherfuckers, wake up!“
There are deranged lunatics on both sides. I would be happy to see all of them rendered ineffective.
Thanks, Michael. Tho I didn’t see much about that, it believe youre right . Sorry
W
What do you think of peters rationale for allowing us to comment on his blog? I regret to say that I’m considering dropping out.
Malcolm,
I really like reading and participating in the comments here. I am happy that Peter has made this place for us.
I hope you don’t go. I would miss you…
Malcolm writes good comments. This section of the blog has a higher emotional tone than do most of my blog posts. I attempt a journalistic non-partisan analytical tone. Some people think that is dry and detached. Most of the comments are written by people who advocate a position. Anyone who reads the comments sees the difference between Mike and Michael Trigoboff. Rick Millward gives my posts a critique from the left. The comments are, indeed, part of the experience, if people want it.
My posts are my voice and I ask people to give me about three minutes--600-800 words. It seems only fair for me to offer people a place to respond. So it is most often a place where people agree or disagree.
The difference between the Portland rioters and the insurrectionists has been explored at length. Comparing them is a classic false equivalence, the right-wing's way of saying, "but look over there...whatabout blah blah blah."
Remaining objective and dispassionate while people attack our democracy, or simply ignoring it, isn't particularly admirable. Aiding and abetting them, as Trump and House Republicans have done, should be a crime.
Here’s how the Portland and January 6 rioters are equivalent: in both places, fanatics attacked government facilities that the government failed to competently protect. In both cases, the rioters should have been contained will before they were able to damage or invade those facilities.
But but but. The antifa jerks were not trying to prevent the duly elected person to be in office.
It's pretty sad when people can't appreciate the difference between a riot and an attempt to overthrow the government.
If our governments had been competent at defending their facilities, neither the antifa nor the January 6 rioters would have been able to do anything. Heads should have rolled in both cases regarding that incompetence.
The usual source is accusing me of “inability to appreciate the difference“. What about in ability to find common characteristics that point the way to solutions? Not slanted and ideological enough for him, I guess…
Sure, Michael, property damage is property damage. Who cares if one of the buildings is our nation's capitol, engaged in certifying a presidential election. To say that matters is obviously way too "slanted and ideological."
Regardless of how much “it matters,“ the solution in both cases is still the same: government competence at putting down riots. Your feelings could be a lot more intense in one case than in the other, but the intensity of your feelings does not change the obvious solution, which applies in both cases.
An overwhelming police presence in both situations would have saved a lot of trouble in Portland and Washington DC.
One's illegal protest, assault, and destruction of property; the other’s treason. Regardless of how much lack of police presence, they’re very, very, different!
Sorry, Malcolm, but this is post-truth America and facts are irrelevant.
Malcolm,
The situations are different in motive and purpose. They are similar with regard to how to stop them dead in their tracks.
We might not agree in the intensity of our level of outrage with respect to the two situations, but I think it’s quite likely we could agree on something that would prevent both of them.
How about it? Can we agree that the police should shut down riots with overwhelming force?
Heck, Michael, I would agree with that too, but it doesn't change the fact that that there is no equivalence between a riot and an attempt to overthrow the government.
Thanks, Mike.
Michael, I wild agree with that, as long as the police were not the ones who started the riots, which I’ve personally witnessed, in Eureka, Cal.
I specifically said that the “equivalence” was in what needed to be done to defeat the bad behavior in both cases. I also specifically said that the purposes and motives of the rioters were different in those two cases.
They were both riots, right?
Michael's actual quote was: "It’s a shame that we can’t bring this ridiculous gal and her ilk into close contact with her equivalents on the left and have them annihilate each other like matter and antimatter."
As I said, there is no equivalent on the left to the whack jobs that want to execute those who certified the election.
Regarding my quote:
Matter and antimatter are two different things. They are equivalent in some ways, but not in others,
When they are brought into contact, they annihilate each other. It was just a use of science as a metaphor to express the wish that we could get rid of the extremists of both the left and the right.
This apparently isn’t good enough for Mike, possibly because the thought isn’t ideologically slanted enough to suit him.
No, Michael, I just think the coup attempt you keep trying to minimize is a little too ideologically slanted.
Michael, do you at least acknowledge that the Jan 6 riot was treasonous? And that the main focus was to nullify the election results? (%who knows, the idea of hanging the VPOTUS and murder of Congress may not have been preplanned; maybe someone else could address this?)
Mike always has another accusation. I am not “minimizing“ anything. I am choosing to talk about solutions.
A competent defense of the US Capitol on Jan 6 would have prevented any threat to the democratic process. Performative outrage after the fact is just not my thing.
Mike apparently hates it that I do not share his proclivity for paroxysms of outrage and condemnation directed at his chosen targets. Too bad. He and I are different people. That’s OK with me, but apparently not with him.
Sure, Malcolm. Everything you said is true.
I am just more indignant that a mob of clowns and crackpots were allowed to get anywhere near the US Capitol, much less inside it. Who made the decision to leave the building so lightly defended? Why weren’t they fired?
Sorry, Michael, but I don't hate anything - I just love my country. At the risk of getting your knickers in a twist, I still say riots and coup attempts are totally different animals, even if both are predatory.
Mike apparently isn’t open to anything he doesn’t already think, and feels compelled to respond to ideas that are not his with insults. The Portland BLM riots and Jan 6 had both differences and similarities. Anyone without ideological blinders on their mind can see that.
I can easily acknowledge the differences; Mike can’t bring himself to acknowledge the similarities.
I am somewhat convinced that Trump managed to make sure there wasn’t an adequate number of guards to defend the capital. Think about it. He was the only one with the power to do such a thing, plus he was the one who incited the riot. I’m sure he knew what would happen. Plus, he refused to follow his advisors' advice to call off the riot; he was orgasmic about it-a new high!
Here’s the scoop. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2021/what-happened-trump-jan-6-insurrection/
The Capitol was under siege — and the president, glued to the television, did nothing. For 187 minutes, Trump resisted entreaties to intervene from advisers, allies and his elder daughter, as well as lawmakers under attack. Even as the violence at the Capitol intensified, even after Vice President Mike Pence, his family and hundreds of Congress members and their staffers hid to protect themselves, even after the first two people died and scores of others were assaulted, Trump declined for more than three ho
Post a Comment