OFFICIAL LRC President Donald Trump SECOND TERM Thread

Wow guy wrote:

well, it’s still wildly imperfect in Canada, just as it’s always been here. American politicians have been a pretty sorry lot overall, but my longstanding position on Trump is that a number of voters expressed reasonable disgust with the venality and mendacity of politicians… and then a number of them decided that the best way to address that problem was to select someone 100x worse.

And then, every political victory he has would drive other politicians farther way from needing to tell the truth. It risks making nearly everybody, left and right, more dishonest.

Here’s someone who wouldn’t agree with that assessment. In fact, Dan McGlaughlin has been defending the administration in Minnesota more than just about anyone, save for the administration officials, numbskull right-wing social media types, the cable folks who always carry water for him, etc.

For me, it’s always been part of the answer against the “but what do you dislike about his policies?” folks: His very essence is to be a black hole where truth disappears, and his gravity draws others into his orbit. The various forms of the statement about the constant, brazen lying of authoritarians are familiar enough: you don’t have to believe the lie, they just have to obscure the truth. McLaughlin is one who wouldn’t agree be unwilling to pin that on the president as a goal, but look at how he describes the situation of Trump’s presidency. It is a description of similar problems:

“One of the frustrations of the second Trump term, as a writer, is quite how opaque the facts frequently are on so many fronts. This is a professional annoyance, but it’s more than just my own grievance: it’s also bad for democratic debate. And while some of this is the result of issue environments outside of the current administration’s control, it’s also a predictable side effect of executive-driven governance that is all about the use of power and leverage rather than the deployment of reason or principle or the defense of law.”

(“how opaque the facts are” is a soft assessment in part because his own reasoning leads him to a less critical stance of the president than I’d take, but it’s also reasonable enough to think that he’s tempering his critique for an audience that has, by a large margin, mostly voted for Trump.)

Oldrunningguy wrote:

Wow guy wrote:

Eh. I think he pushes to see what he can get away with, but I think you’re casting it as more nefarious than it is. Perhaps you don’t buy the WSJ assessment of Trump’s “frustration” in watching the weekend’s events in Minnesota. He seems at least somewhat aware of public sentiment (even apart from the protesters themselves and the far Left), and he wanted a change. For me, that doesn’t excuse decisions by anyone in the administration who advocated the previous tack, but it indicates some concern about things like polls.

His Frustration with the weekend events does not have anything to do with the guy that was killed. Nor with the citizens. Nor polling. It is all about him. He thinks it makes himself look bad. That is all. Every dictator must look good at all times. See Trump parades. See Trump arch. See Ballroom.

Don't mistake his malignant narcissism with political voter concern.

Oldrunningguy wrote:

Wow guy wrote:

well, it’s still wildly imperfect in Canada, just as it’s always been here. American politicians have been a pretty sorry lot overall, but my longstanding position on Trump is that a number of voters expressed reasonable disgust with the venality and mendacity of politicians… and then a number of them decided that the best way to address that problem was to select someone 100x worse.

And then, every political victory he has would drive other politicians farther way from needing to tell the truth. It risks making nearly everybody, left and right, more dishonest.

Here’s someone who wouldn’t agree with that assessment. In fact, Dan McGlaughlin has been defending the administration in Minnesota more than just about anyone, save for the administration officials, numbskull right-wing social media types, the cable folks who always carry water for him, etc.

For me, it’s always been part of the answer against the “but what do you dislike about his policies?” folks: His very essence is to be a black hole where truth disappears, and his gravity draws others into his orbit. The various forms of the statement about the constant, brazen lying of authoritarians are familiar enough: you don’t have to believe the lie, they just have to obscure the truth. McLaughlin is one who wouldn’t agree be unwilling to pin that on the president as a goal, but look at how he describes the situation of Trump’s presidency. It is a description of similar problems:

“One of the frustrations of the second Trump term, as a writer, is quite how opaque the facts frequently are on so many fronts. This is a professional annoyance, but it’s more than just my own grievance: it’s also bad for democratic debate. And while some of this is the result of issue environments outside of the current administration’s control, it’s also a predictable side effect of executive-driven governance that is all about the use of power and leverage rather than the deployment of reason or principle or the defense of law.”

(“how opaque the facts are” is a soft assessment in part because his own reasoning leads him to a less critical stance of the president than I’d take, but it’s also reasonable enough to think that he’s tempering his critique for an audience that has, by a large margin, mostly voted for Trump.)

“Black hole where truth disappears”. Top notch.

This is the area that intrigues me. Ever since Trump appeared on the stage, I don’t understand the widespread acceptance of the lies.

With Trump, it’s not merely excusing the lie. Or denying the lie. It is a celebration of the lies.

I don’t understand that human behavior.

Oldrunningguy wrote:

Wow guy wrote:

well, it’s still wildly imperfect in Canada, just as it’s always been here. American politicians have been a pretty sorry lot overall, but my longstanding position on Trump is that a number of voters expressed reasonable disgust with the venality and mendacity of politicians… and then a number of them decided that the best way to address that problem was to select someone 100x worse.

And then, every political victory he has would drive other politicians farther way from needing to tell the truth. It risks making nearly everybody, left and right, more dishonest.

Here’s someone who wouldn’t agree with that assessment. In fact, Dan McGlaughlin has been defending the administration in Minnesota more than just about anyone, save for the administration officials, numbskull right-wing social media types, the cable folks who always carry water for him, etc.

For me, it’s always been part of the answer against the “but what do you dislike about his policies?” folks: His very essence is to be a black hole where truth disappears, and his gravity draws others into his orbit. The various forms of the statement about the constant, brazen lying of authoritarians are familiar enough: you don’t have to believe the lie, they just have to obscure the truth. McLaughlin is one who wouldn’t agree be unwilling to pin that on the president as a goal, but look at how he describes the situation of Trump’s presidency. It is a description of similar problems:

“One of the frustrations of the second Trump term, as a writer, is quite how opaque the facts frequently are on so many fronts. This is a professional annoyance, but it’s more than just my own grievance: it’s also bad for democratic debate. And while some of this is the result of issue environments outside of the current administration’s control, it’s also a predictable side effect of executive-driven governance that is all about the use of power and leverage rather than the deployment of reason or principle or the defense of law.”

(“how opaque the facts are” is a soft assessment in part because his own reasoning leads him to a less critical stance of the president than I’d take, but it’s also reasonable enough to think that he’s tempering his critique for an audience that has, by a large margin, mostly voted for Trump.)

“Black hole where truth disappears”. Top notch.

This is the area that intrigues me. Ever since Trump appeared on the stage, I don’t understand the widespread acceptance of the lies.

With Trump, it’s not merely excusing the lie. Or denying the lie. It is a celebration of the lies.

I don’t understand that human behavior.

EqualsA wrote:

Oldrunningguy wrote:

His Frustration with the weekend events does not have anything to do with the guy that was killed. Nor with the citizens. Nor polling. It is all about him. He thinks it makes himself look bad. That is all. Every dictator must look good at all times. See Trump parades. See Trump arch. See Ballroom.

Don't mistake his malignant narcissism with political voter concern.

You but in line with the argument that both you and wow are making, it is POSSIBLE that if he can modify his behavior based on the reaction to Saturday’s murder, he could ALSO react in a similar way regarding planned or commenced election interference efforts. We should NOT assume that, but anytime he doesn’t go full steam ahead on something (Greenland, and now possibly Mpls), it can give one SOME hope that that could, at some point, also apply to election interference efforts.

hussars 1776 wrote:

Oldrunningguy wrote:

“Black hole where truth disappears”. Top notch.

This is the area that intrigues me. Ever since Trump appeared on the stage, I don’t understand the widespread acceptance of the lies.

With Trump, it’s not merely excusing the lie. Or denying the lie. It is a celebration of the lies.

I don’t understand that human behavior.

the way I understand it:

Under Obama and Biden, magaland felt humiliated. Someone else's culture was being imposed upon them. City people culture. So maga did what people normally do when feeling oppressed: Hunched their shoulders, rolled their eyes, didn't say a whole lot and waited for change.

Trump 2024 was the opportunity for that change. They didn't really care about issues other than immigration and transexuals...what they wanted was a warrior to let them stop feeling put upon and stupid by people with another culture.

DJT2 was an offer to let them be themselves again and have their culture rule the nation instead of that cosmopolitan stuff like the value of college and the Constitution.

So the truth/lies dichotomy you describe....is beside the point. Lies don;'t matter. They didn't vote for someone to tell them the truth. They already know they are falling behind and the blue states are richer and more thriving.

The point of getting behind DJT2 is having one of their own in the WH, one who let them be themselves and stop hunching over their shoulders so they didn't' get cancelled. They are completely willing to be lied to in order to get that. Could not care less about the lies.

EqualsA wrote:

hussars 1776 wrote:

the way I understand it:

Under Obama and Biden, magaland felt humiliated. Someone else's culture was being imposed upon them. City people culture. So maga did what people normally do when feeling oppressed: Hunched their shoulders, rolled their eyes, didn't say a whole lot and waited for change.

Trump 2024 was the opportunity for that change. They didn't really care about issues other than immigration and transexuals...what they wanted was a warrior to let them stop feeling put upon and stupid by people with another culture.

DJT2 was an offer to let them be themselves again and have their culture rule the nation instead of that cosmopolitan stuff like the value of college and the Constitution.

So the truth/lies dichotomy you describe....is beside the point. Lies don;'t matter. They didn't vote for someone to tell them the truth. They already know they are falling behind and the blue states are richer and more thriving.

The point of getting behind DJT2 is having one of their own in the WH, one who let them be themselves and stop hunching over their shoulders so they didn't' get cancelled. They are completely willing to be lied to in order to get that. Could not care less about the lies.

I don’t disagree that dynamics something like this applies to millions of less-educated, less well off Trumpers. But we should always remember not to let off the hook tens of millions of Trumpers/Trump voters NOT in those demographics. Tens of millions of people you went to college with, and who live in your nice neighborhood. Remember that his approval rating in GOP remains 85-90%. That’s TONS of people who you would think “know better.” But they don’t.