It’s hard to see how or when or why or indeed whether things go back to what we might call the pre-Trump normal in the functioning of our poor dear nation’s system of politics and government.
The old normal wasn’t as great as perhaps many Americans assume. Our system is screwy and dysfunctional in many basic ways. We have a system in which a plurality or even a majority of Americans can vote for a presidential candidate who nonetheless “loses” thanks to the workings of the anachronistic Electoral College system.
Our system is particularly prone to gridlock, in which each party is able to block the other from governing, in the sense of implementing the program on which it was elected. In its current partisanized condition, the Supreme Court can function as an unelected superpower, able to further prevent the elected branches that are supposed to be in charge of making and executing the laws from doing so. The fundamental nature of the U.S. Senate, in which the two members from Wyoming have equal weight with the two members from California, notwithstanding the one of them having 68 times more population, is hard to reconcile with a modern understanding of how a democracy should be organized.
But in addition to those longstanding structural problems, we now have an enormous cult, comprising about a third of one of our two major parties, clinging to beliefs that are provably wrong.
That last paragraph refers not exclusively but specifically to the recent polls indicating that three in 10 Republicans (29%) believe that Donald Trump not only won the election that he lost last year, but will soon be reinstated as president, according to a new Politico/Morning Consult poll.
I’m sure you’ve heard this before. And the expected reinstatement will absolutely not happen unless Trump somehow manages to be elected in 2024 to a fresh term, which, unfortunately, is not beyond the realm of the imaginable. I would like to say that the “reinstatement” scenario is beyond that realm, but obviously that would be incorrect if millions of Americans not only imagine it but expect it to occur.
Now 29 percent of Republicans is not a majority of the country, nor even, thank goodness, even of the party. But it is many millions of Americans, and we saw on Jan. 6 how much trouble and carnage a much smaller number of motivated Trump supporters can cause.
The estimate of how many believe that this will occur is based on a Politico/Morning Consult poll completed a week ago. Although it’s been noted elsewhere, I’m relying on this writeup of the poll in Vanity Fair, which appropriately acknowledged that on the one hand, 61 percent of Republicans did not expect the Trump reinstatement to occur, but also declared that one third of a major political party is an “unnervingly high percentage.”
Sorry, not shocked, we still have a flat earth society, folks that think the south will rise again, and on and on and on, there is a plague on this planet called ignorance and stupidity, seems like a lot of folks voluntarily get infected and love it that way!
Ian, that was as they say philosophical!
That is a great saying! Although apparently the quote isn’t quite accurate:
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/03/04/self-doubt/
But I still love the concept!
My guess is the 29% of Republicans who think he will be reinstated didn’t understand the question. For a lot of people, thinking and wanting is the same word. Also, where are the 13% of Democrats who think he will be reinstated coming from (!).
“How likely do you think it is that former President Donald Trump will be reinstated as U.S. President this year, if at all?”
Kind of hard to misunderstand that one.
“Also, where are the 13% of Democrats who think he will be reinstated coming from (!).”
Perhaps they are the ones who are concerned that Trump could really pull off a military coup (we need another Smedley Butler!). Thinking and wanting is not always the same word.
If you are dumb enough to think Trump will be reinstated, you’re plenty dumb enough to misconstrue the question. And 13% of Democrats thinking Trump will pull off a military coup is not a good look, no matter how you slice it.
Precisely. I’m a Democrat and I’d have answered that question with somewhat likely. We’ve seen one coup attempt already, and it was a stupid failure, but that doesn’t mean they won’t try again, with greater strategy and use of force.
As RB says, they do not necessarily WANT Trump to be president; they are afraid that the Republicans will find a way around the Constitution to stage a coup.
I’m not big on conspiracy believers. I think numbers are overblown. But I gotta tell ya, barring the question being misunderstood, 29% of Republicans and 13% of Democrats is a whole lot of crazy.
Are you trying (somewhat vaguely) to say that the number of conspiracy believers has been exaggerated?
They’ve been absolutely exaggerated. If you’re on the left, everyone on the right is a conspiracy theorist. And vice versa on the right. Isn’t this completely obvious? Isn’t the term “conspiracy theory” largely a label to horsewhip the opposition?
I could be wrong. I still wouldn’t label the 29% Republicans and 13% Democrats who believe Trump will be reinstated conspiracy theorists. More like idiots. Or untethered from reality-ists.
Yes, quite so. I had seen that 13% figure, too, and was baffled. What Democrat would actually believe such a thing? But it does depend on exactly how a question is worded, and in how such question is interpreted. After all, Johnny, who can’t read, is not always a Republican.
I can tell you what unnerves me is the possibility that state legisltures will find a way to block the casting of electoral votes in the next presidential election, if those votes were won by the party not controlling the legislature.
Also, I got unnerved a lot this morning when I heard that Mitch McConnell say effectively that if he is the majority leader of the senate next year, he will not allow a Biden nominee to the Supreme Court to be approved.
Step one: Repubs barely retake the US House and Senate in 2022, getting less votes in total than Dem candidates, but relying on extreme gerrymanders in FL, TX, etc.
Step Two: Repub secretaries of state in 2024 refuse to certify election results that Dem candidate won, and/or Repub state legislatures across the US refuse to accept a state election result that the Dem presidential candidate won, send a slate of Repub electors to DC instead.
StepThree: Repub Congress accepts all these Repub electoral vote slates without question. Declares Repub won the election.
Step Four: “conservative” super majority on Trump’s Supreme Court says it’s all up to state legislatures and Congress and court has no role in saying that historic popular vote-losing Repub didn’t “win” election.
viola, President Trump.
On behalf of violas, I resemble that remark.
It’s actually kind of comical. The only thing that a little unnerving to me is that so many of these people never ever get tired of being wrong… so they just keep going. It will interesting to see what they do when Trump isn’t reinstated. If Trump and his allies weren’t so completely incompetent and idiotic I would worry about them developing some kind plan or strategy… but they obviously don’t have the skill sets to pull that off.
“…provably wrong” is a more polite way of saying “delusional.” Most of what Trump has asserted (not all – even a blind monkey hits the right key on the keyboard occasionally) is demonstrably false, but that hasn’t kept millions of people from ignoring factual reality and embracing the fantasy that suits them. That the fantasy closely resembles Mussolini’s Italy in the 1930s (except the trains here still don’t run on time) doesn’t bother them in the slightest. The Trumpian method of dealing with inconvenient facts – ignore them – seems to me to still be very much alive and well.
Hiram Foster’s point about state legislatures is one worth noting, and if it happens, we won’t need any more evidence than what’s in front of us to prove that the American experiment has failed. Like many a mob boss, Trump doesn’t want to do any of the dirty work himself, but I’m not nearly as sanguine as is Paul Udstrand about the incompetence of both Trump and his advisors. As has been suggested elsewhere on the web recently, January 6th might just as easily be viewed as an opening act, rather than the culmination, of prolonged right wing agitation. An extended temper tantrum, if you will.
It’s one thing to believe in “angels”, and ghosts, and miracles, and the science of astrology. As Americans, “that ye shall always have with ye”. But the level of ignorance (both wilful and functional), as well as the lack of critical thinking skills necessary for a citizen to “believe” this latest “August reinstatement” idiocy is off the charts.
And as Eric says, as of 2021, they number in the tens of millions in the good ol’ US of A.
As for whether the coaches of Team Conservative can come up with a plan to implement minority faction rule in 2024, Mr Foster’s comment details how they plan to do it. This isn’t going away.
“We saw on Jan. 6 how much trouble and carnage a much smaller number of motivated Trump supporters can cause.”
The New York Times and the Washington Post are reporting that a Virginia couple entered pleas to a single count of trespass today. Apparently the two went into the Capitol rotunda and did nothing else. Their range of sentencing is 0 to 6 months. The US Attys made no recommendation as to sentencing. It will be up to the judge if they do any time at all.
They were part of a violent mob.
If in fact they themselves did nothing they were still breaking the law and contributing to a violent insurrection.
Paul, expecting any kind of legitimate or serious moral or legal reasoning from some people is like expecting a dog to pick up a violin and play a concerto.
And what exactly is your point? That out of the hundreds who invaded and desecrated the capital, battled police, threatened lawmakers and interfered with the democratic process, there were a couple who got caught up in the moment, used extremely poor judgement, entered peacefully, and then left peacefully?
OK, I’ll give you that.
Well, 29% of a 45% party tops out at 13%.
13% Of the voting public unhinged reality deniers? Not surprising.
The best hope is that with every report like this, the other 71% of Rs consider if maybe it is time to jump off the Trump train. There is little doubt that the R voting public leads their elected representatives in courage and perception. At what point do the likes of Cruz, Hawley and Graham look around the room and ask where did everyone go? We better go there too.
Perhaps delusional, perhaps below-average intelligence. Perhaps.
There are also overly trusting people, intelligent if not always wise, people who support a cause or candidate and, having experienced a very successful presidency (in their eyes) are going to stick with him/her to the end, and believe the most enthusiastic pillow-clutching priests among them. Their trusted sources of information don’t contradict their reasons for believing in nonsense, or when they do they no longer are trusted.
Imagine if, in 1974, Nixon has the support of a major network (ABC most likely, although its conservatives were professional and relatively democratic) and Republicans keep standing up for him. Nixon has political cover and Republican opinion. The “smoking gun” is “fake news.” His resignation won’t happen. He’ll be impeached by the House, but can he be convicted? Either way the country is worse off, more divided, more like it is now.
Hair on fire! Republicans Republicans! Those delusional Republicans put the Republic at risk!!!
Meanwhile, Biden tacitly supports the idea of Ukraine inclusion in NATO, right before his summit with Putin, which is courting an open act of war against Russia – A thing Liberals used to understand…But Trump didn’t like NATO so I guess that means Liberals have to love it no matter what the potential consequences…
https://quincyinst.org/2021/06/14/sorry-liberals-but-you-really-shouldnt-love-nato/
“Yet current progressive enthusiasm for NATO is anomalous. After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, depriving NATO of its original reason for being, skeptics of the alliance included liberals as much as conservatives. In 1998, 10 Democratic Senators joined nine Republicans in opposing the first, fateful round of NATO enlargement, which would soon extend the alliance to Russia’s border.
“Among the dissenters was Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota. In between voting against the first Iraq war in 1991 and the second after Sept. 11, Mr. Wellstone warned that expanding NATO would jeopardize Europe’s hard-won gains. “There is peace between states in Europe, between nations in Europe, for the first time in centuries,” he said. “We do not have a divided Europe, and I worry about a NATO expansion which could redivide Europe and again poison relations with Russia.”
Quincy’s statement makes the assumption that Ukraine voluntarily joined the Soviet Union. In fact, while Ukraine for most of its history was part of the Russian Empire (which Putin has said he wants to restore), this was hardly voluntary.
The only part of Ukraine favoring union with Russia is the Eastern edge, which is populated by ethnic Russians — long a tactic of Russian empire expansion.
Which comment entirely avoids the point of my comment, that attempting to include Ukraine in NATO is militarizing to Russia’s border, is a direct provocation of war, little different than the Cuban missle crisis turned around.
As to your point, Ukraine is a basketcase Nation State, the Western half wanting to join the EU, the Eastern half mostly ethnic Russians desiring to join the Russian federation, and neither the EU nor Russia wanting to take on the responsibility. Otherwise Russia simply will not accept NATO inclusion of the whole of Ukraine, nor will it accept the slaughter of ethnic Russian’s in the East by government and paramilitary forces of West Ukraine.
The Blame America First school of thought.
If a key domestic pipeline was shutdown by Russian agents sabotaging components on site in the middle of the night would that be a “provocation of war”?
How about shutting down key food processors by Russian agents sabotaging components on site in the middle of the night would that be a “provocation of war”?
These are absolutely provocations of war and if they did these actual things we would be in a shooting war right now.
But when Russia does it through cyber attacks it is just an annoyance? Russia has already declared war and Trump ignored it hoping for a hotel deal and to keep a lid on all the pictures that Vladimir had.
Hopefully Biden will express to Putin the he is the head of a failed nation state with a GDP less than 1/4 of that of the average of G7 countries. Russia and Brazil are economic equivalents and Brazil is not a criminal enterprise.
And if Putin wants to continue to sponsor these acts of terror, Ukraine will be welcomed into NATO and severe trade restrictions will be put in place and Russian Oligarchs will have their Premier League Soccer franchises confiscated along with any other property they have outside of Russia.
“if they did these actual things”
That is the most important thing you said Edward.
Otherwise one of the reasons Putin remains in power, I think, are the immense sanctions we have on Russia, mostly because he won’t let our corporations and banks operate there. As for Brazil, I would argue that the Bolsanaro regime, supported by the likes of the Wall Street Journal and our corporations and banks generally, is very much a criminal enterprise.
It always seems curious that you are relentless on the evils of wealth and the richest person in the world is Vladimir Putin.
And he got there by throwing the then richest Oligarch into a box in a Moscow court room, stripped him of everything he had and threw him into jail.
And looked at the rest of the oligarchs and asked “are we partners or who wants to be next?”
Suggest you read “Red Notice” and Putin’s role in the evolution of the Oligarchs and the Magnitsky Act.
I don’t live in Russia. I live in America, therefore I am most concerned about American oligarchs and the cozy arrangement they have with our government. I am concerned about our oligarchs and our government wanting to get rid of Putin so they can plunder and control Russia as they control America. I am concerned that they will start a war no one wins but in which a lot of people will die.
Dude, he has immense support in Russia because he is perceived to stand up and prevent American and European Imperialists from plundering Russia like they attempted to after installing Yeltsin.
It really is a lost cause.
Ah, yes, building a wall on our southern border should be construed by Mexico as a direct provocation for war! Where is Santa Anna when you need him?
Is the wall a provocation to war, or the unceasing illegal immigration into this Nation State?
Of course I do not want to go to war against Mexico or legal immigrants, or really illegal immigrants, any more than I want to go to war against Russia. Though I might consider a kind of metaphorical war against a Party that acts like unlimited illegal immigration into this country isn’t a kind of war against the working class citizens of this country.
Further, the analysis appears to ignore Russian actions against Ukraine. Sure, there are risks to adding Ukraine to NATO. Not including Ukraine has resulted in Russia retaking the Crimean peninsula, shooting down a civilian airliner, and ongoing warfare in eastern Ukraine. We could leave Ukraine to its own devices, but would that be the moral choice?
As to your assessment of Ukraine, when the CIA and State Dept facilitated the coup against Yanukovich, the Crimea held a referendum. They were fearful of the new regime, which was talking about outlawing the Russian language, talking about Russians like they are dogs and the like dehumanization, and the Crimea is like 94% ethnic Russian. So they voted overwhelmingly to join the Russian Federation.
There is no evidence of any kind Russia shot down that airliner. There is circumstantial evidence that the Eastern ethnic Russian Ukrainians did, and there is suspicion that the invading western, government supported militias shot it down.
Russia did not invade Eastern Ukraine. They supported and continue to support the ethnic Russians there, who were attacked and are attacked by militias from west Ukraine.
Yours is the narrative of the CIA, State Dept and major Media. Mine is more as it is and was with no desire to demonize Putin or Russia.
Russia (in the sense of official government troops) may not have invaded Ukraine; Russians wearing Russian Army green uniforms with no identification (sound familiar?) did.
Surely Russia would not have, if what you say is true, if our CIA and State Dept had not facilitated the coup against Yanukovich, installing a vehemently anti-Russian government sending militias into west Ukraine to wreak havoc?
Just as a matter of caution, I don’t think most people when polled really listen to the substance question. Mostly they give a tribal response. My party good, the other party bad.
A Gallup poll released August 20 shows 78% of Democrats believe not only that Russia interfered in 2016 election but that it changed the result, despite a lack of evidence for this view.
Do they think that Russia changed votes, or that Russia-sponsored social media campaigns changed minds? The former is unsupported by the evidence; the latter is difficult to disprove.
The only proof of a social media campaign I have ever heard of was a reported $100,000 ad buy. That may have changed a few minds, but compared to the many, many billions spent by domestic interests, or the 2 billion of free face-time the cable news industry gave Trump, methinks the Russian influence was mostly an excuse to not take responsibility for losing.
I know you don’t want to hear it, but there is a lot of evidence that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election. How much influence that may have had on the outcome is debatable.
The evidence of Russian interference is overwhelming and beyond dispute. Even the Senate Republicans investigating reached the same conclusion. I get that Republicans aren’t interested in the truth, but its sad that 22 percent of Democrats got it wrong.
One Russia strand offered up here was a deflection into a (hoped-for) “Dems do it worse” discussion.
The other strand offered up by Mr Gotzman is the approved “conservative” talking point that understanding the (overwhelmingly documented) existence of determined Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election on Trump’s behalf by Dems is the exact equivalent of most Repubs today believing the 2024 election was stolen, and (I guess) that a large number of such worthies think Trump will (somehow) soon be “reinstated” as president.
So pretty much business as usual.
Here is Matt Taibbi, interviewing NYT reporter Barry Meier about his book “Spooked”, about how his fellow journalist fell for BS from the Steele Dossier and fed a mostly BS narrative about Russia owning Trump for 4 years.
TK: “What’s the ultimate lesson in this book for journalists?”
Barry Meier: “You’ve written about this, and it’s crystal clear that we’re living in an era of hyper partisanship, where media’s concerned. People are just talking to their constituents, and telling them what they believe their constituent audiences want to hear. That’s a very unfortunate situation. It’s also a situation that private operatives thrive in, because they’re usually working for an entity that wants to feed that hyper partisanship. It’s not just, as you know, it’s not just on one side of the political spectrum, it’s on both sides, and maybe working its way towards the middle.
“I quoted you in the book, when you’re kind of ripping on this being a repeat of WMDs. I forgot what your exact line is, but the idea is, basically, when are we going to learn? When are we going to learn?
“When are we going to demand to see the evidence? That’s the same thing here. Why didn’t we demand to see the evidence? Why didn’t we demand to be introduced to Steele’s source? Why didn’t we demand to know more about him, even if we weren’t being introduced to him? Why did we accept these things on faith, and without scrutinizing them? These are the questions we have to ask.”
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/interview-with-barry-meier-author?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjozMzA4MjcyLCJwb3N0X2lkIjozNzYzMTI0MywiXyI6ImRKR1JhIiwiaWF0IjoxNjIzODQ4MDI1LCJleHAiOjE2MjM4NTE2MjUsImlzcyI6InB1Yi0xMDQyIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.JuJwGxdU0pkxTIwuQIJJQ2gmocW4PDa4t6xmnbpJXsI
If, like you, Mr Meier and Mr Taibbi imagine that the Steel dossier turned out to be the only evidence of the Trump campaign’s connections to Russian intelligence agents during the 2016 election, then they are fools, and misleading credulous readers as well. Further, “partisanship” had nothing to do with the FBI’s opening of a counter-intel investigation against Trump, as every Inspector General has concluded.
So this “analysis” is rather, um, muddled…but hopefuly you’ll enjoy his book, WHD!
Unnerving? Ninety-some percent of Republicans voted for Trump, and nearly as many maintained the view throughout his term that he was performing well as President. These views equally reflect the complete inability to process or make sense of one’s world. If we’re down to 30 percent, I’d say we’re making astounding progress.
Wow, all of this really just all about Russia and Putin. Weird.
More Trump, more Trump! And some thought that he alone was responsible for the January 6th events. Sad.
His was not the sole responsibility, but more than any other individual’s.
The efficient cause.
Probably the only case of him being efficient ;-).
“Unnerving” is right. I’ve broached this subject with a half-dozen or so Republicans I know; some are friends, and some just acquaintances. And, frankly, the overall effect was unnerving, mostly because, among them, there was practically no difference of opinion. I might as well have been talking to the same person six times.
All are very much pro-Trump, and all were of the opinion that this is, at least, possible. None were willing to concede that this could never happen. All believe it’s very likely or certain the election was stolen from Trump. And most unnerving of all, none was willing to admit that any of their opinions was anything less than 100% fact. Nothing I said, suggested, or even offered as a possible alternative was of any interest to them whatsoever. It was, basically, “you’re a Democrat; anything you say is a lie, so don’t even go there!” Whoa….
Thanks for the recon report.
There is a dystopian society (which shall go nameless) depicted in “Star Trek the Next Generation” that pretty much mirrors what you are saying about our 21st Century Repubs….
Their steadfast disconnection from reality and their beliefs is the equivalent of believing 2+2 = 5 because math is evil.