Something tells me Kelly Loeffler will not be getting many black or brown or other minority votes with this picture
Yes ... She has of course insisted that she had no idea that he was KKK ... but HE knows very well where SHE stands, which is why HE likes HER ... So ...
Something tells me Kelly Loeffler will not be getting many black or brown or other minority votes with this picture
Yes ... She has of course insisted that she had no idea that he was KKK ... but HE knows very well where SHE stands, which is why HE likes HER ... So ...
I think you mean she insisted again that she had no idea he was KKK. As the HuffPost article notes, she also had to deny knowing Doles was KKK back in September. I guess racism is just one of those things that slips Loeffler's mind.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
It’s a dog whistle for the white supremacists and fellow travellers. Mind you, she’s remarkably stupid so it’s probably not her idea.
Her TV debate with Raphael Warnock showed her ability to parrot monotonously and repetitively, but not to argue sensibly about anything. It was like watching a puppet. “That’s the way to do it! That’s the way to do it!”
Apparently there is a lot of Wall Street money behind both GOP candidates. Well, there’s a surprise.
Her TV debate with Raphael Warnock showed her ability to parrot monotonously and repetitively, but not to argue sensibly about anything. It was like watching a puppet. “That’s the way to do it! That’s the way to do it!”
In general, the GOP folks come up with excellent bumper stickers ...
Her TV debate with Raphael Warnock showed her ability to parrot monotonously and repetitively, but not to argue sensibly about anything. It was like watching a puppet. “That’s the way to do it! That’s the way to do it!”
In general, the GOP folks come up with excellent bumper stickers ...
It can backfire though. Remember Marco Rubio getting demolished by Chris Christie during the 2016 Republican primary debates. After being called out on repetition Rubio started in again with his "Let's dispel with the fiction . . . " line, Christie called him on it (having already laid the rhetorical groundwork) and you can just see the horrified look on Rubio's face as he realizes that he can't stop himself from robotically plowing ahead with the soundbite he'd already used three times.
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
You're suggesting that "careful observers" in the GOP went out of their way to choose Trump because his "spontaneous conversation" was obviously smart, well-informed, well considered, indicative of wisdom ... ??
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
You're suggesting that "careful observers" in the GOP went out of their way to choose Trump because his "spontaneous conversation" was obviously smart, well-informed, well considered, indicative of wisdom ... ??
Not neccessarily. It's possible that someone could be turned off of voting for one candidate because he got caught using scripted phrases, but still get duped into voting for another candidate who was using stupid and ill-informed rhetoric.
It's like a professor might catch a student for turning in an obviously plagiarized paper. Doesn't guarantee that that same professor will never give good grades to a badly reasoned paper.
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
You're suggesting that "careful observers" in the GOP went out of their way to choose Trump because his "spontaneous conversation" was obviously smart, well-informed, well considered, indicative of wisdom ... ??
Not neccessarily. It's possible that someone could be turned off of voting for one candidate because he got caught using scripted phrases, but still get duped into voting for another candidate who was using stupid and ill-informed rhetoric.
It's like a professor might catch a student for turning in an obviously plagiarized paper. Doesn't guarantee that that same professor will never give good grades to a badly reasoned paper.
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
You're suggesting that "careful observers" in the GOP went out of their way to choose Trump because his "spontaneous conversation" was obviously smart, well-informed, well considered, indicative of wisdom ... ??
Not neccessarily. It's possible that someone could be turned off of voting for one candidate because he got caught using scripted phrases, but still get duped into voting for another candidate who was using stupid and ill-informed rhetoric.
It's like a professor might catch a student for turning in an obviously plagiarized paper. Doesn't guarantee that that same professor will never give good grades to a badly reasoned paper.
Yes, there are exceptions that prove the rule ... But "Lock her UP ... !!!" was very effective for the Red Hats in 2016 ... and etc., many times over ...
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
You're suggesting that "careful observers" in the GOP went out of their way to choose Trump because his "spontaneous conversation" was obviously smart, well-informed, well considered, indicative of wisdom ... ??
Not neccessarily. It's possible that someone could be turned off of voting for one candidate because he got caught using scripted phrases, but still get duped into voting for another candidate who was using stupid and ill-informed rhetoric.
It's like a professor might catch a student for turning in an obviously plagiarized paper. Doesn't guarantee that that same professor will never give good grades to a badly reasoned paper.
My prediction:
the Georgia run-off will give one Dem and one GOP Senator, resulting in another muddle-mess of "divided guv'mint," which many American people vote for, but then will complain about -- "Why don't they get things done ... ???"
The race is still too close to call, but should it be a split decision, I am thinking the Republican leadership will be so weakened it will be more open to compromise. After all, those who had hitched themselves to the Trump wagon are realizing they are being undercut. I really question whether the GOP will continue to be a viable party.
The race is still too close to call, but should it be a split decision, I am thinking the Republican leadership will be so weakened it will be more open to compromise.
My hope is that, whichever weakened party wins, they will be more open to compromise. ISTM that Biden has been showing the way forward. It remains to be seen whether anyone in Congress is interested in moving forward. Politics, at least on the national level, seems to have devolved into a game of stoking outrage among the troops to extract the maximum campaign donations. Actually addressing the causes of the outrage just threaten to kill the golden goose.
The race is still too close to call, but should it be a split decision, I am thinking the Republican leadership will be so weakened it will be more open to compromise. After all, those who had hitched themselves to the Trump wagon are realizing they are being undercut. I really question whether the GOP will continue to be a viable party.
Yes and No ...
The Red Hat Brown Shirt movement will be even more fired up than before (having their Hero cheated out of power) ...
yes, but is Trump still calling the system rigged against him? Why bother voting in a rigged election. Its the same problem the far left has - you can't get out the vote if you are telling your people not to trust the system.
yes, but is Trump still calling the system rigged against him? Why bother voting in a rigged election. Its the same problem the far left has - you can't get out the vote if you are telling your people not to trust the system.
Trump's behaviour since the election has been very odd, but in the last week or so, he seems to have gone much further. IANAE, but he now seems to over the edge and certifiable.
Trump's behaviour since the election has been very odd, but in the last week or so, he seems to have gone much further. IANAE, but he now seems to over the edge and certifiable.
Ummm ... Trump's behavior way back in 2016 was "very odd," and many of us with experience in clinical psychology already saw and heard him as "certifiable" ...
I would put most of them under the stupid category. Most of them never went beyond high school. They really do not keep up with current events. Most can't even point out where Palestine (for instance) is on a map.
Then too, when you have been fed lies for eight years, you eventually begin to believe them.
Trump hardly had the task of rebuilding a ruined country in the wake of a depression with the collapse of the currency.
No ...
But he promised to restore [.............] "Pride" and rebuild The Military and lift up working families left behind by economic changes and exclude/punish those *other* people (sub-people, actually) who have caused so much trouble for REAL citizens of the Reich ... etc. ...
Oh, yeah, knowingly or not -- RALLIES ... !!! ... FLAGS ... !!! ... CHANTS ... !!! -- The Leader has been following a familiar playbook ... It worked for him in 2016 and almost again in 2020 ...
Could have been worse; at least he has been thrown out before he could start a war...
There is still tomorrow when Congress is scheduled to count the electoral ballot. Trump wants is buddies to come to Washington DC to "protest" the count. The mayor of Washington has already told tourists to stay away tomorrow. I understand the National Guard is on standby to intervene should it get to that,
And there is also 20 January when the new president is sworn in.
He has already ordered an aircraft turned around because Iran seized a South Korean tanker.
Thngs can be pretty hot for the next couple of weeks.
Trump's behaviour since the election has been very odd, but in the last week or so, he seems to have gone much further. IANAE, but he now seems to over the edge and certifiable.
Ummm ... Trump's behavior way back in 2016 was "very odd," and many of us with experience in clinical psychology already saw and heard him as "certifiable" ...
He was certainly very odd, but since his recent defeat he's gone well beyond that.
I don't reckon that's right. His behavior now is very much like his behavior before the election, calling postal votes illegitimate, claiming that he would win the election or it would be rigged etc. His bullying is totally consistent with his bullying of Priebus, McGahn and others earlier in his Presidency and his tweets are as insane as ever. I can't see any change at all.
His behaviour is all of a piece with his behaviour as a businessman. He was constantly threatening to sue other people if they didn't give him what he wanted (and regularly being sued for his own misdeeds).
The man is nothing more than a narcissist who, thanks to inherited wealth, has always been in a position to maintain a bubble in which He is utterly wonderful and a genius and everyone else's worth is directly correlated to how good they make Him feel.
The man has been denigrating "losers" for years. It's one of his most beloved insults. It isn't remotely surprising that losing an election - a popularity contest no less - is completely unfathomable in his universe and must be explained away in any way possible. We're talking about a man who couldn't cope with the notion that his Inauguration had small crowds, and a man who invented his own fake Time magazine cover.
At this point what's more shocking and despicable is how others have enabled him, and are still enabling him.
EDIT: The world has rarely seen such a fine example of where wealth and privilege can get you in the profound absence of talent.
I don't reckon that's right. His behavior now is very much like his behavior before the election, calling postal votes illegitimate, claiming that he would win the election or it would be rigged etc. His bullying is totally consistent with his bullying of Priebus, McGahn and others earlier in his Presidency and his tweets are as insane as ever. I can't see any change at all.
His call to Raffensperger reminded me a lot of the summary memo of the Zelensky call. (Remember that?) The same mix of wheedling and threats. We don't have an actual transcript of the Zelensky call, but I get the impression that the Raffensperger call was worse. A difference of degree, not type, but a difference nonetheless. Blogger Paul Campos speculates why Trump seems so desperate to remain in office. He comes up with three possibilities.
Raging narcissism
Addiction to the attention and adulation that comes with being a cult leader who also holds the most powerful political office in the world
Legal jeopardy
Campos favors the last of those three, but admits it could very well be a both/and rather than an either/or.
Makes one wonder about the 70 million or so who voted for him. Does that make them collectively certifiable or just plain stupid?
Lyndon Baines Johnson once visited a community in Tennessee on a campaign stop. He noticed some racial epitaphs on some signs. He was reported to have said:
“I’ll tell you what’s at the bottom of it. If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
Remember almost the first thing Trump said when he first publicly announced he was running for the presidency? He said he was going to build a wall to stop the Mexicans (and Mexico was going to pay for it). It was all downhill from there.
Johnson made his comments many years ago. Trump proves we are not that far from them.
Blogger Paul Campos speculates why Trump seems so desperate to remain in office. He comes up with three possibilities.
Raging narcissism
Addiction to the attention and adulation that comes with being a cult leader who also holds the most powerful political office in the world
Legal jeopardy
Campos favors the last of those three, but admits it could very well be a both/and rather than an either/or.
From what we know of Trump, I would say that it is mainly the first of those three. We have known for some time that he is a malignant narcissist. Everything he has said and done since the election can be seen as him acting out this - demanding that everyone follows his lead and inventing any possible explanation that would avoid the conclusion that he is a Loser. As his niece has pointed out frequently, he regards being a Loser as the lowest form of insult.
I don't think he really worries about legal jeopardy because he genuinely believes that he can grant himself a pardon that will protect him from all possible legal action.
Everything about Trump is about his malignant narcissism.
His behaviour is all of a piece with his behaviour as a businessman. He was constantly threatening to sue other people if they didn't give him what he wanted (and regularly being sued for his own misdeeds).
The man is nothing more than a narcissist who, thanks to inherited wealth, has always been in a position to maintain a bubble in which He is utterly wonderful and a genius and everyone else's worth is directly correlated to how good they make Him feel.
The man has been denigrating "losers" for years. It's one of his most beloved insults. It isn't remotely surprising that losing an election - a popularity contest no less - is completely unfathomable in his universe and must be explained away in any way possible. We're talking about a man who couldn't cope with the notion that his Inauguration had small crowds, and a man who invented his own fake Time magazine cover.
At this point what's more shocking and despicable is how others have enabled him, and are still enabling him.
EDIT: The world has rarely seen such a fine example of where wealth and privilege can get you in the profound absence of talent.
Blogger Paul Campos speculates why Trump seems so desperate to remain in office. He comes up with three possibilities.
Raging narcissism
Addiction to the attention and adulation that comes with being a cult leader who also holds the most powerful political office in the world
Legal jeopardy
Campos favors the last of those three, but admits it could very well be a both/and rather than an either/or.
From what we know of Trump, I would say that it is mainly the first of those three. We have known for some time that he is a malignant narcissist. Everything he has said and done since the election can be seen as him acting out this - demanding that everyone follows his lead and inventing any possible explanation that would avoid the conclusion that he is a Loser. As his niece has pointed out frequently, he regards being a Loser as the lowest form of insult.
I don't think he really worries about legal jeopardy because he genuinely believes that he can grant himself a pardon that will protect him from all possible legal action.
Everything about Trump is about his malignant narcissism.
Yes ... He is a classic psychopath, devoid of conscience, incapable of empathy or insight ... He is also markedly stupid, which in this case is a good thing for the rest of us, else he could have been more successful in his predation ...
His behaviour is all of a piece with his behaviour as a businessman. He was constantly threatening to sue other people if they didn't give him what he wanted (and regularly being sued for his own misdeeds).
The man is nothing more than a narcissist who, thanks to inherited wealth, has always been in a position to maintain a bubble in which He is utterly wonderful and a genius and everyone else's worth is directly correlated to how good they make Him feel.
The man has been denigrating "losers" for years. It's one of his most beloved insults. It isn't remotely surprising that losing an election - a popularity contest no less - is completely unfathomable in his universe and must be explained away in any way possible. We're talking about a man who couldn't cope with the notion that his Inauguration had small crowds, and a man who invented his own fake Time magazine cover.
At this point what's more shocking and despicable is how others have enabled him, and are still enabling him.
EDIT: The world has rarely seen such a fine example of where wealth and privilege can get you in the profound absence of talent.
Recalls *1933* ...
He's a lot more like Berlusconi, Netenyahu or even Mussolini than he is Hitler.
His behaviour is all of a piece with his behaviour as a businessman. He was constantly threatening to sue other people if they didn't give him what he wanted (and regularly being sued for his own misdeeds).
The man is nothing more than a narcissist who, thanks to inherited wealth, has always been in a position to maintain a bubble in which He is utterly wonderful and a genius and everyone else's worth is directly correlated to how good they make Him feel.
The man has been denigrating "losers" for years. It's one of his most beloved insults. It isn't remotely surprising that losing an election - a popularity contest no less - is completely unfathomable in his universe and must be explained away in any way possible. We're talking about a man who couldn't cope with the notion that his Inauguration had small crowds, and a man who invented his own fake Time magazine cover.
At this point what's more shocking and despicable is how others have enabled him, and are still enabling him.
EDIT: The world has rarely seen such a fine example of where wealth and privilege can get you in the profound absence of talent.
Recalls *1933* ...
He's a lot more like Berlusconi, Netenyahu or even Mussolini than he is Hitler.
The world has rarely seen such a fine example of where wealth and privilege can get you in the profound absence of talent.
I guess that’s why reality TV is so popular - so many people spending so much time seeking easy fame and fortune rather than putting in the hard work to cultivate talents that probably won’t even get you as many rewards or as much privilege anyway.
He's a lot more like Berlusconi, Netenyahu or even Mussolini than he is Hitler.
I agree about the similarities to the first three, but I think you're wrong to believe Hitler was much different.
A year or so ago I read an account of Hitler by a Erich Kordt, a German career diplomat in the 30s, in which Hitler sounds a lot like Trump. (The only difference is that Hitler claimed without substantiating it to have read all of Clausewitz' On War, while Trump doesn't claim to have read anything.) In particular, Hitler largely governed as I understand Trump does, by issuing incoherent orders, setting his minions in competition with each other to come up with a way of interpreting them, and then taking credit for all the results he liked. The differences are I think largely down to political culture and the fact that Trump has less effective and more purely venal minions.
He's a lot more like Berlusconi, Netenyahu or even Mussolini than he is Hitler.
I agree about the similarities to the first three, but I think you're wrong to believe Hitler was much different.
A year or so ago I read an account of Hitler by a Erich Kordt, a German career diplomat in the 30s, in which Hitler sounds a lot like Trump. (The only difference is that Hitler claimed without substantiating it to have read all of Clausewitz' On War, while Trump doesn't claim to have read anything.) In particular, Hitler largely governed as I understand Trump does, by issuing incoherent orders, setting his minions in competition with each other to come up with a way of interpreting them, and then taking credit for all the results he liked. The differences are I think largely down to political culture and the fact that Trump has less effective and more purely venal minions.
Unquestioning Loyalty to The Leader figures prominently in a Fascist Regime ... and in a Crime Family ... Donnie J. Trump is into both of those ...
He's a lot more like Berlusconi, Netenyahu or even Mussolini than he is Hitler.
I agree about the similarities to the first three, but I think you're wrong to believe Hitler was much different.
A year or so ago I read an account of Hitler by a Erich Kordt, a German career diplomat in the 30s, in which Hitler sounds a lot like Trump. (The only difference is that Hitler claimed without substantiating it to have read all of Clausewitz' On War, while Trump doesn't claim to have read anything.) In particular, Hitler largely governed as I understand Trump does, by issuing incoherent orders, setting his minions in competition with each other to come up with a way of interpreting them, and then taking credit for all the results he liked. The differences are I think largely down to political culture and the fact that Trump has less effective and more purely venal minions.
Trump himself is pretty damn venal himself. The most astonishing thing about him as a politician is the complete howling void where ideological drive or principles might be. Hitler, as far as anyone can tell, was all-in on anti-semitism and German nationalism. There's a quote I've heard repeated often, apparently from The Big Lebowski "I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos." I think there's a grain of truth in that. Hitler was many fucking awful things, but he wasn't a coward, and he believed in things other than himself. Part of me believes that, whatever the magnitude and typology of our sins, our ultimate capacity for redemption is going to depend a lot on our ability to care about something or someone other than ourselves. On that measure even Hitler looks better than Trump.
Trump is definitely racist, xenophobic, and as much of an American nationalist as is compatible with his self-aggrandisement and his admiration for dictators. His appeal to the US far right is not a pure piece of calculation. I have not read Mein Kampf but I understand that it has all the intellectual coherence of a drunk calling LBC at one in the morning.
(Mussolini was actually rather more of a petty intellectual by temperament: the idea that he was less competent or intelligent than Hitler is I think merely a piece of anti-Italian stereotyping.)
Comments
Just returning from brief shore leave for personal business. Admonition acknowledged and absorbed.
Yes ... She has of course insisted that she had no idea that he was KKK ... but HE knows very well where SHE stands, which is why HE likes HER ... So ...
I think you mean she insisted again that she had no idea he was KKK. As the HuffPost article notes, she also had to deny knowing Doles was KKK back in September. I guess racism is just one of those things that slips Loeffler's mind.
Her TV debate with Raphael Warnock showed her ability to parrot monotonously and repetitively, but not to argue sensibly about anything. It was like watching a puppet. “That’s the way to do it! That’s the way to do it!”
Apparently there is a lot of Wall Street money behind both GOP candidates. Well, there’s a surprise.
In general, the GOP folks come up with excellent bumper stickers ...
It can backfire though. Remember Marco Rubio getting demolished by Chris Christie during the 2016 Republican primary debates. After being called out on repetition Rubio started in again with his "Let's dispel with the fiction . . . " line, Christie called him on it (having already laid the rhetorical groundwork) and you can just see the horrified look on Rubio's face as he realizes that he can't stop himself from robotically plowing ahead with the soundbite he'd already used three times.
The difference is, that was a chant(like eg. "Four more years!"), and was not purporting to be spontaneous conversation. Whereas when Rubio delivered his canned phrases in that debate, he was trying to make it sound like observations that had just popped into his head up on the podium, but careful observers knew they were anything but.
You're suggesting that "careful observers" in the GOP went out of their way to choose Trump because his "spontaneous conversation" was obviously smart, well-informed, well considered, indicative of wisdom ... ??
Not neccessarily. It's possible that someone could be turned off of voting for one candidate because he got caught using scripted phrases, but still get duped into voting for another candidate who was using stupid and ill-informed rhetoric.
It's like a professor might catch a student for turning in an obviously plagiarized paper. Doesn't guarantee that that same professor will never give good grades to a badly reasoned paper.
ummmmm ...
What exactly are you umming here?
I'll just let it *pass* ...
I think this will go about as far as the typical lead balloon.
the Georgia run-off will give one Dem and one GOP Senator, resulting in another muddle-mess of "divided guv'mint," which many American people vote for, but then will complain about -- "Why don't they get things done ... ???"
Yes and No ...
The Red Hat Brown Shirt movement will be even more fired up than before (having their Hero cheated out of power) ...
Bizzaro, yes ... ???
The entire GOP should be having ever deeper regrets about having gone out of their way to choose Trump in 2016 ...
Ummm ... Trump's behavior way back in 2016 was "very odd," and many of us with experience in clinical psychology already saw and heard him as "certifiable" ...
Then too, when you have been fed lies for eight years, you eventually begin to believe them.
It helps me understand *1933* ...
No ...
But he promised to restore [.............] "Pride" and rebuild The Military and lift up working families left behind by economic changes and exclude/punish those *other* people (sub-people, actually) who have caused so much trouble for REAL citizens of the Reich ... etc. ...
Oh, yeah, knowingly or not -- RALLIES ... !!! ... FLAGS ... !!! ... CHANTS ... !!! -- The Leader has been following a familiar playbook ... It worked for him in 2016 and almost again in 2020 ...
There is still tomorrow when Congress is scheduled to count the electoral ballot. Trump wants is buddies to come to Washington DC to "protest" the count. The mayor of Washington has already told tourists to stay away tomorrow. I understand the National Guard is on standby to intervene should it get to that,
And there is also 20 January when the new president is sworn in.
He has already ordered an aircraft turned around because Iran seized a South Korean tanker.
Thngs can be pretty hot for the next couple of weeks.
He was certainly very odd, but since his recent defeat he's gone well beyond that.
The man is nothing more than a narcissist who, thanks to inherited wealth, has always been in a position to maintain a bubble in which He is utterly wonderful and a genius and everyone else's worth is directly correlated to how good they make Him feel.
The man has been denigrating "losers" for years. It's one of his most beloved insults. It isn't remotely surprising that losing an election - a popularity contest no less - is completely unfathomable in his universe and must be explained away in any way possible. We're talking about a man who couldn't cope with the notion that his Inauguration had small crowds, and a man who invented his own fake Time magazine cover.
At this point what's more shocking and despicable is how others have enabled him, and are still enabling him.
EDIT: The world has rarely seen such a fine example of where wealth and privilege can get you in the profound absence of talent.
His call to Raffensperger reminded me a lot of the summary memo of the Zelensky call. (Remember that?) The same mix of wheedling and threats. We don't have an actual transcript of the Zelensky call, but I get the impression that the Raffensperger call was worse. A difference of degree, not type, but a difference nonetheless. Blogger Paul Campos speculates why Trump seems so desperate to remain in office. He comes up with three possibilities.
Campos favors the last of those three, but admits it could very well be a both/and rather than an either/or.
Lyndon Baines Johnson once visited a community in Tennessee on a campaign stop. He noticed some racial epitaphs on some signs. He was reported to have said:
Snopes story here.
Remember almost the first thing Trump said when he first publicly announced he was running for the presidency? He said he was going to build a wall to stop the Mexicans (and Mexico was going to pay for it). It was all downhill from there.
Johnson made his comments many years ago. Trump proves we are not that far from them.
From what we know of Trump, I would say that it is mainly the first of those three. We have known for some time that he is a malignant narcissist. Everything he has said and done since the election can be seen as him acting out this - demanding that everyone follows his lead and inventing any possible explanation that would avoid the conclusion that he is a Loser. As his niece has pointed out frequently, he regards being a Loser as the lowest form of insult.
I don't think he really worries about legal jeopardy because he genuinely believes that he can grant himself a pardon that will protect him from all possible legal action.
Everything about Trump is about his malignant narcissism.
Recalls *1933* ...
Yes ... He is a classic psychopath, devoid of conscience, incapable of empathy or insight ... He is also markedly stupid, which in this case is a good thing for the rest of us, else he could have been more successful in his predation ...
He's a lot more like Berlusconi, Netenyahu or even Mussolini than he is Hitler.
Nuremberg Rallies ...
I guess that’s why reality TV is so popular - so many people spending so much time seeking easy fame and fortune rather than putting in the hard work to cultivate talents that probably won’t even get you as many rewards or as much privilege anyway.
A year or so ago I read an account of Hitler by a Erich Kordt, a German career diplomat in the 30s, in which Hitler sounds a lot like Trump. (The only difference is that Hitler claimed without substantiating it to have read all of Clausewitz' On War, while Trump doesn't claim to have read anything.) In particular, Hitler largely governed as I understand Trump does, by issuing incoherent orders, setting his minions in competition with each other to come up with a way of interpreting them, and then taking credit for all the results he liked. The differences are I think largely down to political culture and the fact that Trump has less effective and more purely venal minions.
Unquestioning Loyalty to The Leader figures prominently in a Fascist Regime ... and in a Crime Family ... Donnie J. Trump is into both of those ...
When are the results likely to be known?
Trump himself is pretty damn venal himself. The most astonishing thing about him as a politician is the complete howling void where ideological drive or principles might be. Hitler, as far as anyone can tell, was all-in on anti-semitism and German nationalism. There's a quote I've heard repeated often, apparently from The Big Lebowski "I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos." I think there's a grain of truth in that. Hitler was many fucking awful things, but he wasn't a coward, and he believed in things other than himself. Part of me believes that, whatever the magnitude and typology of our sins, our ultimate capacity for redemption is going to depend a lot on our ability to care about something or someone other than ourselves. On that measure even Hitler looks better than Trump.
(Mussolini was actually rather more of a petty intellectual by temperament: the idea that he was less competent or intelligent than Hitler is I think merely a piece of anti-Italian stereotyping.)