''Today, ten retired senior military officials endorsed Harris, saying she “is the best—and only—presidential candidate in this race who is fit to serve as our commander-in-chief…. Frankly stated, Donald Trump is a danger to our national security and our democracy. His own former National Security Advisors, Defense Secret…
''Today, ten retired senior military officials endorsed Harris, saying she “is the best—and only—presidential candidate in this race who is fit to serve as our commander-in-chief…. Frankly stated, Donald Trump is a danger to our national security and our democracy. His own former National Security Advisors, Defense Secretaries, and Chiefs of Staff have said so.”''
''Donald Trump is a danger to our national security and our democracy.''
And that's all any patriotic American needs to know.
Rickey, from my viewpoint, there are now few Republicans, their having been shuttled aside by MAGA, a KKK cult. That's not to say that the Reagan Republican Revolution/War on the Middle Class was not successful - it destroyed America's Middle Class, leaving us today with 806 billionaires whose wealth is equal to one-half of the American population. That's 806 vs. 163,000,000. We are now an oligarchy, where the oligarchs control the economy and the government. Harris and Walz are on the right track, IMO, rebuild the Middle Class with a process of pragmatic capitalism, what's found in the Scandinavian countries.
I too, look to Scandinavian models. Sometimes we dither with returning to the Dark Ages, while (apparently) other nations squeak toward tomorrow, I say squeak because they are not without problems of the modern world including immigration, bullying from Russia, and international crime syndicates, but they've resolved the basics of being human; housing, education, health care and much better relatonships with each other.
A subject that can be discussed forever. But somehow, these countries (including Iceland BTW) have found a way to govern a society such that long term and short term goals can be integrated, all people are treated with respect, that people's health and well being are a given, and taxation to support government policies and programs is fair and can manage debt. Also, these countries regularly rank high in citizen satisfaction surveys. Yes they have their problems, but they manage their societies far better than we do. Gotta ask why. And Republicans are central to the problem.
The majority of workers in those countries belong to labor unions. Their theory of government appears to reflect that of our own Fances Perkins, the architect of The New Deal:
"The people are what matter to government, and a government should aim to provide the means by which all the people under its jurisdiction can access the best possible life." All the people, and not just 806.
Again this is misleading. A country like Sweden with a virtually all Anglo-European population of 10 million can hardly be compared to a huge multicultural population of 350 million a we have in the United States.
True, the task is easier because of the smaller population and the homogeneity. Still, we can do better than to permit a few to have unspendable wealth while others go hungry, poorly fed, homeless and struggling.
Watched John Oliver last night. The topic was school lunches. The cut off points were raised for free and partially paid lunches. The partially paid lunches were cut off if not paid. They had a 5 year old child and other elementary school boy raising funds to pay off lunch debts!!!!
I think Walz had the right idea with free lunches for all. A lot of eligible kids won't take them because of the stigma.
Of course school lunches should be free. Schools should be free all the way up to at least Bachelor's degree programs and possibly masters and doctorates. At the same time we should absolutely ELIMINATE any and ALL tax benefits for private colleges of all kinds and sizes, from Harvard and Stanford on down. If you want tax benefits, give up your endowments and highly paid football coaches and become a part of a country wide higher education system. Ditto for all parochial schools and private secondary schools including charters. There is simply no reason in this country for private organizations to receive special tax benefits. NONE.
And of course coupled with this should be a return to proper individual and corporate taxation levels for all. We need to return to the 90% (or at least 75%) income tax rate for annual income over some reasonable level like $5 million dollars, and 50% for corporations netting over $50 million.
People forget that it was high corporate tax rates in the 50s and 60s that BUILT the middle class by incentivizing corporations to pay better wages. Wages are deductions from income so higher wages lead to lower profits which in turn lowered corporate taxes. When tax rates were reduced for corporations (Reaganomics) there was less incentive to spend the "spare" dollars on higher wages and instead use those dollars to buy companies and pay higher bonuses to execs.
Speaking oif stigma. Hungry children spend time thinking about how hungry they are. Their brains have no fuel to help them think. Grades go down, and school performance goes down, So on goes the spiral. Maybe Congressional and Senatorial expenses accounts should be cut. They seem to have enough money to buy their cats a plane ticket, lavish lunches, I am sure.
Sorry to disagree with you at least somewhat but school lunches have administrative costs whether for one or for all. All governmental programs will have some administrative costs. It's just that when you provide the program universally the costs are distributed much more effectively across the system. But to say there is no administrative cost is ridiculous, there is no way to even have a program without some costs that must be paid for.
How would you propose to "break" this supposed "cycle"? We are still a nation that theoretically believes in free enterprise so like it or not media sources are so entitled to be owned by private citizens and espouse for causes they believe in regardless of whether or not you or anyone else likes it. I am being very serious in this question. It's easy to say "let's break up the media conglomerates", it's a lot harder to actually frame an approach that wouldn't be horribly dangerous to free press and free speech. I have my ideas but I'd love to hear yours as you brought this up.
It needs to be pointed out in fairness that the societies/countries you mentioned are far more homogenous, far less multicultural and much smaller than the United States. The total population of all Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark) is less than 30 million people not even 10 percent of the US population and smaller than several states (California, Texas, New York). Comparing the ability of those mostly similar cultural and ethnic populations with the issues found in multicultural and multiethnic states in the US is a serious stretch.
True, but we have states that are nations unto themselves, such as Texas, Louisiana, and Florida, which are among those trying to recapture the Dark Ages. Also, Scandinavian countries have their share of immigration from the Global South. IMO, they are pre-conditioned to have a much better sense of fairness. I think of the Republicans and Christian Nationalists who have devolved from fiscal conservatism to plain obstructionism, obscene income disparity, and inherent racism, which contribute to the imbalances here in America.
A Key is Cultural Assimilation.. The Nordic Countries have a Long-Tradition of Fairness... Don't Take more than your Share... Cooperate on Shared Issues, Be Fair... The Indigenous Societies had similar Traditions... Being a Member of a Group of People that were Invaded, and Long Suppressed, to Succeed in the Mainstream Society, Members had to learn the Language, and Tools to Succeed in the Mainstream Society... Right-Wing Populism is becoming an Issue in the USA, and Europe... It is one Reaction to Accelerating Global Change...
I agree about the sense of community and sharing within Indigenous Tribes. Although I am white, I spent a year on a Reservation. The people were poor as church mice but gave what they had when it was needed. Most Americans have been raised on an ideal of individualism, sometimes displayed as selfishness, contrasted with those raised in a community.
It's also true of Black people...at least for some. For example, there is a back-to-the-land movement of Black farmers, who are often an extended family.
It seems that much of the Impetus of the Modern European Invasion was Greed... In a Word, 'Gold'... Seems that many of these Pioneers were Second-Sons, or Religous Outcasts... Could be one of the Reasons that Wealth Disparity is tolerated more in the USA then Europe... Individualism? Try being an American Indian Warrior...
They don't have the 3 branches of government and a 2 party system and they do not have very diverse populations. Instead they have a coalition government where consensus is part of governing and they developed their constitutions and modern lifestyles while they were predominantly White countries, and did not factor racism into denying their citizens a good quality of life, just so that they could prevent a minority of the population from getting that too. A big problem in the US. I was reading a discussion of how with US politicians who have 4 year terms just do not do any long term planning because the system is not set up for them to be reelectable if they do. Look at what just happened to Biden for governing like that. He hit the rich people hard, and they hit back. Kamala is already going to tax the super wealthy at a lower rate than Biden was going to. I think she said 28% whereas I think Biden was going for 39%. That and Lina Khan going after the monopolies which are making filthy people, filthy rich, as they crap on the rest of us, is why they pressured Dems to push him out.
The Scandinavian countries are not just essentially homogeneous, but they all fought a common enemy on their soil in WWII. A common enemy is a unifying force. And it teaches a country that we really are all in this together.
The only war on US soil, besides 1812, was divisive and sowed decades long hatred’s.
Only WWII—even more than WWI—came close to being a unifier to the US. But it was “over there.”
It's a good point although it begs the question why Scandinavia which was NOT as heavily involved in WW2 is used as an example contrasted with England, France and the eastern European countries which were.
The Scandinavian countries managed to survive WW2 in better shape than the others mostly by ducking direct involvement and maintaining neutrality (mostly) with Hitler. They maintained their homogenous populations too, something Hitler loved because Scandinavians were "true" Aryans, and not mostly ethnically mixed, something Hitler abhorred.
The Reagan Revolution was actually a Counter Revolution... After leaving the CA Governorship in the early '70s, he hung out with the Reactionaries in the 1970s Palm Springs, who complained about the Social Movements of the 1960s.... The Intent of the Reagan Counter Revolution was to bring back the Roaring '20s... That eventually happened with the same result... The Great Depression, and the Great 2008-2015 Recession... For a Refresher of what inspired Reagan, watch the Brad Pitt Movie, 'Babylon'... Now back to where we are now... A.I. will displace Knowledge Workers... Look at the potential of iPhone 16... Visit an Amazon Warehouse, or a Modern Car Manufacturer Assembly Line... Robotics Rule.. Our Social Systems must Evolve... The Scandinavian Systems are just the beginning... One of the latest Blurbs is that the USA has over 800 Billionaires, and more Workers are working 2-3 Jobs to just stay afloat... Putin/Xi are Smiling...
Absolutely, Rickey! I firmly believe that MAGA won't go away until, or should I say IF, the GOP can oust them.
Way back years ago (okay, probably only prior to Trump, though that does seem an eternity ago) I also split my ticket. I realized that no candidate hit every single qualification that I wanted and sometimes, (esp at local issue), I felt like the Republican was the best. (Heck, I started my voting years in Chicago, and I've spent my life in Illinois. Nuf said)
Since Trump NO MORE. Straight ticket Democrat.
I am a believer in a two party system to create checks and balances, but I don't see how anything can get done with the extremists on the right.
Miselle, I also once split my ticket although I never voted for any R that would be in the Federal Government. Now I am straight D and I know some local Rs who are disgusted with MAGAs and death star. I did smile about your comment about voting in Chicago and Illinois. Good old machine politics.
I suppose the question is: is there now a Republican Party? MAGA, IMO, is 21st century KKK. It's core concern is a racist white Protestant theocracy, with racism trumping the religious aspect.
I left the Republican Party during the Reagan Administration. Reagan began the tax on Social Security, began the war on the Middle Class, turned the emotionally and mentally ill out onto the streets (I saw scores of them sleeping in boxes in San Jose, CA,) and began the massive tax breaks for the wealthy and large corporations. They used that money to indoctrinate the mostly white evangelicals to vote Republican. And, Republican politicians just kept piling tax break on top of tax break.
I suspect that the Old School Republicans in the 'Lincoln Project' would like to see MAGA Lose Massively in November 2024... That way the GOP can be purged, and rebuilt, or a new Center/Right Party can be started... We DO NEED more than one Political Party... Still Curious as to why we have only two mainstream Political Parties...
Exactly! How could a country as large and diverse as the US have only two parties to represent everyone? The only answer I can come up with as that the whole system is being choreographed to stay balanced. I really saw this in Obama's first term. He has so much momentum leading up to the election. Then, within months, the press started saying negative things about him, even NPR!. Then, by the 2010 mid-terms, he lost the House and he had to confront the strongest obstructionism in US history for the rest of his six years.
The best defense we have is to teach our children critical thinking skills so that they are not so swayed by the BS being spoon-fed to them by the MSM.
What I would like to know is who are the choreographers? The 806? (Or a subset of them?)
However, there are a lot of Americans who are not patriotic. They do feel that they are, but they are patriotic to an idea that has nothing to do with knowledge of the constitution or the laws, for the most part it is based on a feeling of their own relevance. Robert Ritchie shared this on Joyce Vance's Substack, on September 9, 2024, and I think it gets to the heart of who votes for Trump and why. So, it is the undecideds who must be made to see that that is not just patriotism but self interest that should have them voting for Kamala.
The Cult of Opposition: Understanding the Psychology Behind Trump’s Supporters
In modern political discourse, the relationship between leaders and their supporters often reflects a symbiotic exchange—one of mutual benefit. Typically, a leader provides tangible improvements to the supporters’ lives, who in turn offer their allegiance. However, Donald Trump's presidency introduced a paradigm shift that baffled many analysts. A significant portion of Trump’s base does not measure his success by what he does *for* them, but rather by what he does against those they consider adversaries. This phenomenon raises a critical question: why do Trump's supporters define his success not by policy achievements or personal benefit but by his ability to antagonize perceived enemies? In this research paper, we explore the psychology, sociocultural factors, and communication strategies behind this phenomenon, offering a deep dive into the mechanisms that sustain this unwavering loyalty.
The Psychology of "Othering"
At the heart of this dynamic lies a fundamental psychological concept known as *othering.* Othering refers to the process of creating a division between "us" and "them," where "them" are people deemed different or antagonistic to one's own group. Social identity theory posits that individuals derive part of their self-worth from their membership in groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). When Trump attacks certain groups—be they immigrants, Democrats, or marginalized communities—his supporters feel that their in-group (conservative, predominantly white Americans) is being validated. The "other," typically those outside their cultural or political bubble, becomes a target of scorn and aggression. By constantly positioning himself against these groups, Trump reassures his supporters that they are on the winning side of a cultural war.
This is where the success metrics diverge from typical political calculations. Success, in the eyes of Trump's supporters, is not rooted in economic growth or policy achievements, but in the symbolic victories won over those they disdain. Trump’s antagonistic rhetoric serves as a rallying cry for a base that measures success by how effectively he torments the "other."
Fear as a Unifying Emotion
The divisiveness Trump exploits is not built solely on disdain for others but on deep-rooted fear. Research has shown that political conservatism often correlates with heightened fear responses (Hibbing, Smith, & Alford, 2014). These fears manifest in concerns over demographic changes, perceived threats to cultural identity, and economic anxiety—particularly in the wake of globalization and immigration. For Trump’s base, he offers not only validation of their fears but also an outlet for their anxiety: the vilification of outsiders.
By acting against these outsiders—whether through harsh immigration policies, vilification of the media, or incendiary tweets targeting "leftist elites"—Trump provides a sense of catharsis to his supporters. It’s not about building bridges or creating new opportunities; it’s about protecting their identity and keeping perceived threats at bay. In their minds, Trump’s success is defined by his defense of the status quo against forces of change.
The Appeal of a Strongman
This dynamic is exacerbated by the allure of authoritarian leadership, often characterized by a leader who promises protection and order while silencing dissent. Trump's rhetoric—filled with hyperbole, aggressive language, and dismissive attitudes toward political correctness—resonates deeply with those who feel disempowered by societal changes. Studies have shown that authoritarian personalities are drawn to leaders who project strength and offer simple, binary solutions to complex problems (Feldman, 2003). Trump’s combative style against the "other" fits neatly into this framework.
In this context, Trump is seen as the protector, someone who will go to any length to defend his supporters from external threats. His aggressive behavior—though often condemned by critics—is perceived by his base as a strength. In their eyes, his relentless attacks on groups like the media, the "deep state," or racial minorities are evidence of his success as a leader willing to do whatever it takes to secure their safety and identity.
The Role of Media and Propaganda
An essential factor in maintaining this dynamic is the role of right-wing media in amplifying Trump’s actions *against* others while downplaying or ignoring any lack of substantive achievements. Fox News, Breitbart, and other conservative outlets often frame Trump’s attacks on immigrants, liberals, and the media as necessary battles in a larger cultural war. Through selective reporting, these outlets reinforce the idea that Trump’s presidency is less about improving the lives of his supporters through policy and more about the symbolic victories he achieves through opposition to their perceived enemies.
Trump himself understood the power of media manipulation, often stoking controversy to keep his name in the headlines. As noted by philosopher Hannah Arendt, in authoritarian regimes, propaganda serves to simplify the world into friend versus foe (Arendt, 1951). By keeping the public focused on his skirmishes against the "other," Trump ensured that his base remained engaged and energized, even when his policies provided little material benefit to their lives.
The Social Contract of Aggrievement
This relationship between Trump and his supporters can be understood as a kind of *social contract of aggrievement.* While traditional politicians offer economic benefits, infrastructure improvements, or social programs, Trump offers emotional validation. His base, particularly those who feel marginalized by economic shifts or demographic changes, finds solace in his outward displays of aggression. His ability to provoke outrage in the "other" reassures them that they are still relevant in a world they fear is changing too fast.
Interestingly, this contract does not require Trump to follow through on traditional metrics of success like job creation or healthcare reform. His supporters are not primarily concerned with how he improves their lives directly. Instead, they focus on how he reinforces their worldview—one where they are under constant attack and where Trump is their defender. This emotional satisfaction creates a loyalty that transcends policy, rooted instead in the shared sense of grievance and resentment.
Conclusion: A Loyalty That Transcends
In understanding Trump’s success, it is critical to recognize the unique metrics by which his supporters measure his achievements. His base does not primarily seek economic relief or policy victories; they seek validation of their fears and grievances. By acting *against* the "other," Trump provides emotional and psychological sustenance that traditional political figures often fail to deliver. His success, therefore, lies in his ability to symbolize and enact opposition rather than constructively improve the lives of his supporters. As long as Trump continues to antagonize those perceived as threats, his base will remain loyal, even in the absence of tangible benefits.
In the end, the tormenting of the "others" does more than sustain them—it defines them.
Isn't "Othering" the antithesis of being a "Christian"? This agnostic "None" would like to hear more about how millions of Americans can abandon the teachings of their prophet, Jesus Christ, and still claim his name to describe their life view.
I have never been fond of any religious sect or "faith". But I used to have real respect for those "believers" who said things like "All are welcome at our table" or "Welcome the stranger" or "Love thy Neighbor".
I don't know that one can find anyone more committed as an atheist than me, but that having been said, I think that Matthew 25: 34-46 is a great formula for all of us: "Even as you do it unto the least of these." That, and the political philosophy of Frances Perkins, the architect of the New Deal:
"The people are what matter to government, and a government should aim to provide the means by which all the people under its jurisdiction can access the best possible life."
What I hear in that article is "Trump makes it acceptable to think and feel all the ugliest things they do, so they don't have to feel bad about themselves". Many people, through nurture, later experiences, and yes even nature, find living by Christian or other religions' and atheist moral codes' finest precepts to be far too difficult and thus feel badly about themselves more than others who find it much easier. Finding belonging in Trump's cult gives them a way to achieve a positive self esteem more easily than belonging within a non-Trumpist Christian or other religious and philosophical group's teachings. The need is so powerful they're blind to the hypocrisy even if they aren't just ascribed in name only.
Considering Linda's excellent expose of the MAGA mindset, couldn't we say they are, in a sense, followers of Jesus, though perverted. Perhaps, it was radical to welcome the Other to the table, as Jesus preached. Now not welcoming the Other into our nation, which is a melting pot of immigrants, a nation made of immigrants, is a radical idea. Maybe it is always human nature to fight against the established.
They don't understand the meaning of "patriotic" just like they don't understand the meaning of "christian". THIS IS WHY trump LOVES UNEDUCATED PEOPLE.
Bill, you are right. "Othering" is not what Jesus was about. He was about "love your enemies" and "pray for those who persecute you." It's hard (impossible?) to live that way. To the communities he visited, he spoke peace and disallowed violence. To the Roman government, he was feared as a zealot because some people (f.ex., Judas) hoped Jesus was there to lead the troops against the oppressors. Jesus didn't fulfill people's desires. He was more radical than we can honor in our own lives. No wonder he was killed.
Agreed, Melinda. It's hard to really follow Jesus for the reason you state here. Following Jesus never smacks of triumphalism. "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth." It isn't a doormat in the face of injustice but "Instead, it doesn’t retaliate when wronged and doesn’t exude pride and narcissism." Meek people don’t envy, don’t retaliate, and exercise patience in the face of adversity.
Right! I wasn’t really believed, but as a preacher/pastor (ordained almost 70 years ago) I have stated that if one really lived by the example of Jesus the powers that be would destroy that person’s life, if not just murder.
Melinda, Jesus also spoke out and acted out about the hierarchy of the Temple, who were using their position to acquire power and wealth. He also spoke forcefully against hypocrisy, calling out those who prayed loudly in the Temple. The Romans may have crucified Jesus, but they had help from the Temple hierarchy. First century Palestine was full of people claiming to be Messiahs as the Jews chafed against Roman rule. Usually Romans were pretty tolerant in terms of other religions and gave the Jews special privileges and when Jews rebelled anyway, they were baffled, but did not tolerate rebellion, so Titus destroyed the Temple and put an end to the rebellion in AD 70.
Isn't "Othering" the antithesis of being a "Christian"?
Sadly, no. For most of its history, Christianity "Othered" the living hell out of Jews, Muslims, atheists, cultures with multiple or different gods or none at all, and anyone else who didn't fall into line. The Church used the power of the state to enforce its will, and got access to millions of "clients" every time a king or emperor conquered another people--the missionaries flooded the zone and the Church controlled the culture.
It is vastly better now, of course, but J.D. Vance, for instance, is the cover model for the Illustrated Bible of Using the Terrible Swift Sword to Other Your Enemies. Their love is power and fame, not Jesus.
Well, as you point out there is a long history of congregants and even leaders not actually being good Christians so the space is between the ideal and the enacted.
Absolutely. Not unlike life in general and the ideals of America laid out in our founding documents--ideals are ideals but people are people, so one can strive and fall short. Good news is Christianity long gave up the institutional Terrible Swift Sword and is a net positive for our culture, not a negative. One step at a time, right?
Bill, one of the things we noted last night on the meeting of the police and the latest school shooter and his father is that both father and son had crosses around their necks. It would be nice to see people who wear the cross symbol, including tattoos, actually act as Jesus taught. Richard S below mention Matthew 25: 34-46 as an example.
It has long been a known tactic for lawyers to make sure their clients are cleaned up, wear coat and ties even if they have to loan them, and wear glasses because it's believed wearing glasses makes them look more bookish or studious and less apt to have been violent. It's staging. I suspect either a lawyer or the client themselves was engaging in staging.
Well said. Trump's supporters want him to crush the "undesirables," i.e., women's rights advocates, minorities, immigrants, gays and others. ["The Anger Games: Who Voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 Election, and Why?" published in the peer-reviewed journal, Critical Sociology in Feb. 2018. MAGA is 21st century KKK.
After further thought, I am adding to my response to Linda Weide's posting above: this analysis is brilliant and spot on. I am copying it and sending it to family and friends. I have been studying this phenomenon for several decades and this summary is the best that I've seen.
Richard, for centuries, white men have been top dogs and one of the problems, is that white men have seen others gain rights and assert themselves. Some of this, in my mind, is resentment for that happening.
Thank you so much Linda for your time invested to educate us further as to how this madman maintains his grip on people. Their lack of initiative and curiosity feeds right in to his manipulative strategy. I encourage others to read your essay. Maybe "Othering" shares space with "Kinning" as a means of creating a bond for lazy, unthinking people to find common ground. Thank you again. Your writing is always so thought provoking, and actionable. Regarding JV Dunce, methinks perhaps he had some hard times with cats growing up. He is such a petty little man , do we laugh, or cry watching him repeat jokes he heard about Kamala Harris in a little dive bar? Prompting them to laugh, hearing the boos, his Jeb Bush :"you're supposed to clap" moment has arrived!
Jim, I did not write the essay. I just thought it was informative and saved it to share. I agree JVD is horrid, but have read that his role is to draw some of the ire and shield Trump. Trump seems to often forget JDV and amplify people like Musk and Kennedy. In Project 2025, in Chapter 1 White House Office, the vice president is the last person named, and it is clear that he is supposed to just support whatever the president wants and have no other role than that. Who has the real power is the Chief of Staff. He is written in as the gatekeeper. Also, today in Popular Information I read that the Trump family has started a new crypto business that has them set to make millions if Trump gets back in to the White House. We should not let him. https://popular.info/p/trump-teams-up-with-pickup-artist
Marcia, what I take from it, is that we do not spend our time on them right now, and focus on getting lots of people signed up to vote and out to vote. That is the best strategy. However, we have to hope that as Kamala wins, and runs the country these people, who can hate it the whole time and her, as we know White Supremacists will no matter what. But the others, might be able to have a slow change of heart if Trump can be made to fade away and they do not embrace JDV in his place, or anyone else for that matter.
Linda, I agree with you 100% - spending time on "them" is a total waste of time. We need to get to the undecideds. All of the research and my own personal experience proves that they are committed to voting for their "Lord and Savior," Donald Trump, the bigot, racist, misogynist and xenophobe, who will crush the "undesirables," thrilling their cold, black, dead hearts.
This is my hope, too, Linda. Would it make a difference if Trump had a heart attack or something of the sort and there was no one, except Vance maybe, to replace him? I keep hoping Trump implodes like he might do at the debate tonight. At least, he will fizzle, I think.
“My mother…taught us to never complain about injustice but do something about it. She also taught us, ‘Never do anything half-assed.’ That’s a direct quote.” —Kamala Harris. With all due respect to Robert Hubbell, his analysis is half-assed. The following is the other half.
Human beings are all the same. We are all subjects of a social system. And we are all doing the same thing. We are all trying to understand that system, strengthen it, and protect it from external threats.
A subject’s potentially but not necessarily sufficient understanding of the system is the subject's “circle of concern.” The more powerful a subject is, the larger the subject’s “circle of influence.” If a subject’s circle of concern encompasses the subject’s circle of influence, then the subject is sufficiently mature. If a subject’s circle of influence extends beyond the subject's circle of concern, then the subject is immature.
Warning to human brain operators: Granting power to immature subjects is dangerous and can be fatal.
Strengthening the system by resolving within-system dilemmas takes a back seat to neutralizing external threats. Strengthening the system is important, but Trump knows that people intuitively perceive neutralizing threats as important AND urgent.
If a subject’s perception of the social system includes only some people within the subject's circle of influence while excluding other people, then “we” are always relevant whereas the “others” are opportunities to be exploited if time allows, threats to be neutralized as soon as possible, and otherwise utterly irrelevant.
What is the MAGA Republican circle of concern? That’s a good question to ask after we answer another question. What is our circle of concern? For the record, if the law allows you to vote in November, your circle of influence includes 50 states and 16 territories.
“We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.” —Jo Cox (1974–2016)
James, you ask: "What is the MAGA Republican circle of concern?" From my vantage point, the term Republican is now irrelevant and MAGA is now the direct descendant of the KKK. Racist to the core support White Protestant nationalism. That's the KKK.
It's complicated. Many MAGA supports do not identify with white supremacy, or Protestant nationalism, or the KKK. After all, many are not white, or identify as Catholic, or identify exclusively with Libertarianism.
And, in addition to being complicated, it is also simple. A MAGA supporter thinks some people are important, other people are not, and "I" am one of the important people. To be more specific, the former is a subset of the latter. To be even more specific, the former is the largest subset of the latter.
Please be clear. This was not written by Robert Hubbell, it was posted by someone commenting in his Substack and posted this, which I thought fit with a German documentary I had seen the night before called Trumpland.
A towering description that is elegant in its careful delineation of the issues.
I also read much of Hannah Arendt and Tim Snyder into this thesis. Now Linda Weide is to be explored for my understanding.
We must be certain we are aware the current situation is not an academic study but the real life drama of extremely well funded ideological evil intent on joining global authoritarian forces and get people out to vote.
Hap, the wealthy oligarchs have been funding the campaign of disinformation/misinformation and outright lies for decades. "What's the Matter with Kansas?" by Thomas Frank (2004)
Thank you, Linda, for posting this in full. This paper, and the Atlantic's promising new podcast series "Autocracy in America", are starting to answer the question that has puzzled me for this entire election cycle: how is it that a solid half of this country's electorate takes as their role model a man who is shallow, self-absorbed and totally driven by grievance, to the point of abandoning what could improve their existence to live out a revenge fantasy?
This, and little else, explains why half the country is willingly following a man whose middle finger is his moral compass.
I'll add this tidbit from the Atlantic podcast to Linda's contribution: people buy into Trump's lies not because they actually believe them, but because claiming to accept such obvious falsehoods is a code that shows they are part of the in-crowd. Trump is clever this way - start by forcing people to accept a small lie with no consequences ("my inauguration crowd was bigger than Obama's") and gradually ramp up to the point where your choice is accepting claims that are existentially dangerous or being cast out of the group you've worked so hard to identify with.
Perhaps Dr. Richardson could give some historical perspective on this moment, but isn't this the point at which the increasing extremism of past radical movements have led to the formation of new parties? Everyone talks about the "true Republicans" who have been cast out of the party because they didn't embrace MAGA. Instead of endorsing Harris, or perhaps after the election, why don't they form a new political party that promotes reasonable governance?
As a Democrat, I would look forward in the short term to the fight between Republicanism and MAGA, which would assure Democratic dominance for some time. But I would look forward even more to the long term return to a two-party system where neither side embraced nihilism and everyone could discuss policy differences with an eye toward resolving them rather than using them for political ammunition.
A Harris victory this November, backed up by Democratic legislative majorities, can be a first step toward this future. Vote Blue, top to bottom.
Mobiguy, I think that we all have struggled with how to make sense of the loyality from some that Trump commands. There are the usual suspects: racism, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia and more. Part of that more, I've finally concluded, is stupidity. They don't know what they don't know.
I have a hard time accepting stupidity as an answer. America has come through 250 years and no small number of crises, but has never come close to having a near-majority of the voting population manipulated to install the purveyor of such obvious and blatant lies. This in spite of a population that is, on average, far more educated (in the formal, public-school sense) than it has ever been.
I think Linda's post, and the Atlantic podcast series on autocracy, nail the problem. Trump may be an idiot or may just act like one on TV, but his feral instincts make him the most dangerous kind of idiot: one with an unerring instinct for self-preservation.
Decades ago I took a water safety and lifesaving course. One of the most important lessons was to stay out of the reach of a drowning person, who will instinctively grab on and use you as a flotation device, dooming both of you. Trump, faced with more prosecutions than he can handle, knows that he will drown unless he regains the power to make them go away. He has cultivated a following nearly large enough to allow him to do that, and is ready to drown them along with the rest of us if it's his last chance to save himself.
Trump has spent the nine years since the golden elevator ride creating an army ready to sacrifice themselves and everything around them for his own personal gain. Again, Dr. Richardson could provide perspective, but I don't believe this country has seen his like before, at least not anywhere this close to the levers of power. We are simply not mentally prepared to counter an attack of this type on our system.
I hope VP Harris does not underestimate the depths to which Trump will sink to save his own skin, or the level of support his minions will provide to let him get away with whatever actions he attempts. I personally hope her debate strategy takes this into account tonight. I try to avoid exaggeration, but this may be the most important night in the history of our country.
I feel that our schools have failed to teach two very important lessons: 1) critical thinking skills, and 2) government/history/civics. For example, those supporting Trump, IMO, are ignorant of what a Fascist-run state would be. Critical thinking could begin as early as the 6th grade. History, government, civics could lean more heavily on comparative systems.
Yes to both of those. Teaching these subjects in the schools would be an excellent first step, although the impact on voters wouldn't be felt until a number of years later, when those students reach voting age. We need a similar outreach effort for adults, which will unfortunately be labeled as propaganda by those who want to see it fail.
Let Us Hope For The Best... Sometimes Civilizations Get Tired... Read Up On Roman, Or Chinese History... When People get Tired, they often Yearn for a Strongman, a Savior...
Linda Weide, thank you! This brings a lot into focus, especially when tied with our species' deeply entrenched need to belong to a group or family or tribe to survive.
We do need to spend our time efficiently and not waste it. This from someone who made phone calls last night. It is an excellent way for each of us to get involved.
I did another 2 hours of phone banking to Pennsylvania last night. It's really fascinating. I talked to some strong supporters, but also some people who don't plan to vote, and to a physician named Ahmed who plans to vote for Jill Stein because of the Gaza issue. The talking points they gave us on how to respond to such arguments are quite good, so I may have made a little progress changing their minds.
C4C WHY VOTE - conversations with voters who won't or don't vote (Harris)
C4C WHY VOTE - conversations with voters who won't or don't vote (Harris)
WHY VOTE? Persuasion conversations | connecting with those who don’t / won’t vote Handy all-purpose phrases L...
You would be really good at phone banking because you know the issues so well and are persuasive. You could swing more voters that way than talking to MAGA stupidos or by talking to echo chambers.
The group I worked with last night is called Call 4 Change. You can call into whatever swing state or swing race you feel passionate about. There were over 800 people making calls last night. They do trainings for those who need it.
And, this is how to get in touch with the phone banking system:
You are receiving this message because you signed up for ZOOM PHONE BANKS FOR EXPERIENCED PHONE BANKERS - SWING STATES FOR THE SENATE+HELP KAMALA HARRIS WIN!.
SYLVIA RUSSELL
Organizer, ZOOM PHONE BANKS FOR EXPERIENCED PHONE BANKERS - SWING STATES FOR THE SENATE+HELP KAMALA HARRIS WIN!
Dear Phone Banking Community!
Thank you for signing up for today’s phone bank @ 3pm Pacific Time (6pm EasternTime).
We’re looking forward to seeing you. Please arrive at the phone bank on time to check in.
Training will be provided for those who need training after a brief introduction and phone bank instructions. The calling links will ONLY be dropped into chat after the instructions.
Candidates background and voting information per state---------- TIps on what to say when voters say they are not voting------------- Rebuttal points on the issues including where Dems and KH stands vs MAGA
Everyone must have their video on at the start of the phone bank. Once the calling gets started, you can turn your video off if you like.
Coaches are on hand throughout the entire phone banking session to help and support you. All you need to do is raise your Zoom hand and ask for a coach.
Thank you for sharing this clearly written article on how to understand the MAGA supporters and why it is so hard to get them to change their minds with our traditional ways of trying to convince them. I'm sharing this with family so we can keep it rolling along and maybe gather in some of the undecideds at least. any idea who should get the credits for it?
In my lifetime I’ve seen Republicans create horrendous damage by adopting “Othering” as a political strategy. In the 60s, hippies and Vietnam War protesters were the subject of vituperative attacks (anyone remember the bumper stickers: America- Love It Or Leave It?). In the 80s it was people on “welfare” (code for Black). After 9-11 there was the anti-Muslim enemy. It seems like every twenty years the GOP develops new enemies. But now we have Rightwing media, foreign trolls, and homegrown militia as the foot soldiers. It is terribly depressing.
And with social media playing an outsized role in influencing the young men in our country to be associated with conservatism, although I think extremism is more like it, we need to stop letting the tech companies determine who they go after with their products and start putting ratings on websites, making them off limits for minors, and frankly for anyone under 30, who does not have the emotional maturity to manage being on these websites radicalizing them and spewing hate.
Excellent... In Talking to many MAGAs in a non-Judgemental Fashion, this Validates a lot of my findings... Seems that a lot of the MAGAs feel 'Cheated' as they have to Work Harder for Less-And-Less... That Frustration results in Blaming Others... The Billionaires have been Glorified since the 'Greed-Is-Good' 1980s...
Actually, my Democrats Abroad Project 2025 Book club got into a discussion tonight about how men 30 and younger, who used to be part of the democratic party, are now turning to the Republican party. How they are not doing as well in school, or economically, as the number of women are moving ahead and what can the party do to show them that the policies are for them too. The Gen Zer males in my family are Democrats, but one of them, who just finished Chef school, is not as committed. He sees Dems as the lessor of evils. I know there are MAGA young women, still generationally, more young women are not going for being Trad wives, but for taking charge of their own lives. We do need to look at why young men are having a high rate of suicide, and some are turning to terrorism. Who is influencing them and apparently Trump is getting up in there are really relating to them on the platforms they frequent with the no nothing influencers that they follow. We need to be looking at how we can help young me. That is a bigger topic than I can address here.
I agree. As a teacher I have tried to do engage the boys I taught in existing beyond stereotypes and being active and creative. I am concerned at how physically inactive students are expected to be for long periods of time. We have to make learning more active. I think of Tim Walz as a great role model for young men. I am glad he is the model the Democrats offer. I wish that young men would see him as that.
Being Inert is Lethal... Activity Cleanses The Mind... The Common Lifestyle doesn't Help, along with a Poor Diet... Seems to Me that Sedentary Distractions such Video Games, which seems to be a Common Thread, among many of the Dysfunctional Disaffected, are not Helpful... I wonder if the Falling 1st-World Birth-Rate, and Sense Of Isolation are a Result... GO COACH!!!
I was reading yesterday in Dwell that Tim Walz does not own any property or stocks. Let us hope after time Middle Americans find that he is more relatable than JDV and DT. GO COACH!!!
The question that will end Trump’s career at tonight’s debate: “Mr. Trump, you have used a series of negative words to describe Vice President Harris. Assuming you believe she merits those words, would you advise your male supporters to use the same words to describe their mothers, wives, girl friends and daughters, when they merit it?”
Given what I know about Trump's supporters I would not expect them to be watching this debate. Also, from what I am learning they do not care if he does anything for them economically, as long as he appears to fight for who they are. That is White Supremacist, gun loving, Christians, who are cis-gender, straight, and hate anyone who is not all of those things. He tells them that who they are great, and in a changing world that reassures them that they still have validity and power.
I think you are 100% accurate, Linda. It is not about anything other than "restoring" them to their "rightful" place "atop" society and culture. Anyone who is not white, Christian, heteronormative, cisgendered, and male should be nowhere near the "top spot". Women are useful to them as chattel. That's it.
Trump's supporters should not be Harris's intended audience, at least not in real time. Her best strategy should be to pull away as many undecided voters as possible - and hopefully they will be watching tonight - and let the after-the-fact news coverage sow doubt among whatever persuadable Trump supporters there are.
The vast majority of engaged voters have already made up their minds. This race will likely be decided by a small margin of people who are just starting to pay attention to the race, and who will actually be paying attention between now and Election Day. For both Harris and Trump, these are the only people who matter.
The question isn’t for Trump’s male supporters. It’s for his female supporters, some of whom likely know nothing about his cruel misogyny, and for some fence sitters who never had the matter so starkly presented to them.
I expected quite a few trumpeters would watch the debate to see their king trounce the black woman. If so, I wonder how many actually listened to both candidates?
It is. And yet, every story I read still has Trump and Harris statistically in a dead heat. I don't understand the thinking of half my fellow Americans.
I think Josh Marshall in TPM is simply trying to look at overall polling trends rather than focus on the ones that either make us happy or freak us out. That’s the best way to handle this stuff I think, and probably Prof. Richardson would agree. We always knew there would be ups and downs before the election. Let’s try not to lose our enthusiasm and instead focus on GOTV efforts, which not only keep us sane, but may have a real effect on driving the outcome we want. Let’s get rid of this horrible man and his movement once and for all on Nov. 5th.
We are walking on a knife edge. The trump base is secure, few top repubs have abandoned him.. While many of his former military and civilian advisors have denounced him as unfit to serve, I fear that nothing Harris can do to shake his support. I think that only trump can destroy the trump image. Possibly he will become the Trojan horse for the oligarchs who will run or ruin this country.I can't breath.
Tfg is a guy who has bankrupted multiple companies over his life time. I haven't seen anything that makes me feel he'd do a better job with our national economy. From Wikipedia: "Although Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, hotels and casino businesses of his have declared bankruptcy six times between 1991 and 2009 due to its inability to meet required payments and to re-negotiate debt with banks, owners of stock and bonds and various small businesses (unsecured creditors). Because the businesses used Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they were allowed to operate while negotiations proceeded. Trump was quoted by Newsweek in 2011 saying, "I do play with the bankruptcy laws—they're very good for me."
". . . . Harris backs passing the bipartisan immigration bill that Republicans killed on Trump’s orders . . . ." In the debate tonight, ¿why should Vice President Harris NOT say the following?
"This guy [pointing toward the former President] had been screaming that there was an invasion at our Southern border. Yet both parties in the Senate together passed an immigration bill. Then the impeached President opted to instruct M.A.G.A. extremists in the House to kill that timely bill. The Speaker and others dutifully obliged him. Accordingly, President Biden and I stepped into the breach to address border security out of good faith. What gets me, here, is what Trump's actions said to all of us.
"Either there was no invasion or this old and desperate felon was willing to let an invasion proceed unabated for five months for his benefit only. The former alternative was a lie, the latter reeked of treason. So, candidate Trump, what gives? [Shrugs her shoulders.] Given this guy's [thumbing dismissively toward the former President] track record with the truth, I think we all know which alternative it is: a problem duly addressed by President Biden when Trump crippled Congress from doing so."
Endorsement by the ten top military experts is important but it seems to me at least as or more important is this portion of their letter:
"Ten former Generals, Admirals, and the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps issued a letter today blaming Donald Trump for the issues that led to the chaotic withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan". That is an extremely important statement. Trump is attempting to blame Biden for the deaths of the Americans at Abbey Gate.
The letter not only warns against putting Trump in power again but specifically addresses the Trump lie that led to his Arlington National Cemetery PR stunt:
"Without involving the Afghan government, he and his Administration negotiated a deal with the Taliban that freed 5,000 Taliban fighters and allowed them to return to the battlefield. Then, he left President Biden and Vice President Harris with no plans to execute a withdrawal, and with little time to do so. This chaotic approach severely hindered the Biden-Harris Administration's ability to execute the most orderly withdrawal possible and put our service members and our allies at risk." It could not have been put more clearly, and from these leading military strategy experts.
But we don’t have to take their word for it! Trump’s everyday detachment from reality shows his unfitness.
As does his record when he was president. For one thing, his miserable selfishness was on display during the pandemic. ( Don’t test so much, it makes me look bad! What will it do to the stock market and my reelection prospects?)
- Pulled Quote -
''Today, ten retired senior military officials endorsed Harris, saying she “is the best—and only—presidential candidate in this race who is fit to serve as our commander-in-chief…. Frankly stated, Donald Trump is a danger to our national security and our democracy. His own former National Security Advisors, Defense Secretaries, and Chiefs of Staff have said so.”''
''Donald Trump is a danger to our national security and our democracy.''
And that's all any patriotic American needs to know.
Vote.
Actually, and I must say all evidence supports this, it is the elected Republicans. ALL OF THEM that are the threat.
Rickey, from my viewpoint, there are now few Republicans, their having been shuttled aside by MAGA, a KKK cult. That's not to say that the Reagan Republican Revolution/War on the Middle Class was not successful - it destroyed America's Middle Class, leaving us today with 806 billionaires whose wealth is equal to one-half of the American population. That's 806 vs. 163,000,000. We are now an oligarchy, where the oligarchs control the economy and the government. Harris and Walz are on the right track, IMO, rebuild the Middle Class with a process of pragmatic capitalism, what's found in the Scandinavian countries.
I too, look to Scandinavian models. Sometimes we dither with returning to the Dark Ages, while (apparently) other nations squeak toward tomorrow, I say squeak because they are not without problems of the modern world including immigration, bullying from Russia, and international crime syndicates, but they've resolved the basics of being human; housing, education, health care and much better relatonships with each other.
A subject that can be discussed forever. But somehow, these countries (including Iceland BTW) have found a way to govern a society such that long term and short term goals can be integrated, all people are treated with respect, that people's health and well being are a given, and taxation to support government policies and programs is fair and can manage debt. Also, these countries regularly rank high in citizen satisfaction surveys. Yes they have their problems, but they manage their societies far better than we do. Gotta ask why. And Republicans are central to the problem.
The majority of workers in those countries belong to labor unions. Their theory of government appears to reflect that of our own Fances Perkins, the architect of The New Deal:
"The people are what matter to government, and a government should aim to provide the means by which all the people under its jurisdiction can access the best possible life." All the people, and not just 806.
Again this is misleading. A country like Sweden with a virtually all Anglo-European population of 10 million can hardly be compared to a huge multicultural population of 350 million a we have in the United States.
True, the task is easier because of the smaller population and the homogeneity. Still, we can do better than to permit a few to have unspendable wealth while others go hungry, poorly fed, homeless and struggling.
Watched John Oliver last night. The topic was school lunches. The cut off points were raised for free and partially paid lunches. The partially paid lunches were cut off if not paid. They had a 5 year old child and other elementary school boy raising funds to pay off lunch debts!!!!
I think Walz had the right idea with free lunches for all. A lot of eligible kids won't take them because of the stigma.
Of course school lunches should be free. Schools should be free all the way up to at least Bachelor's degree programs and possibly masters and doctorates. At the same time we should absolutely ELIMINATE any and ALL tax benefits for private colleges of all kinds and sizes, from Harvard and Stanford on down. If you want tax benefits, give up your endowments and highly paid football coaches and become a part of a country wide higher education system. Ditto for all parochial schools and private secondary schools including charters. There is simply no reason in this country for private organizations to receive special tax benefits. NONE.
And of course coupled with this should be a return to proper individual and corporate taxation levels for all. We need to return to the 90% (or at least 75%) income tax rate for annual income over some reasonable level like $5 million dollars, and 50% for corporations netting over $50 million.
People forget that it was high corporate tax rates in the 50s and 60s that BUILT the middle class by incentivizing corporations to pay better wages. Wages are deductions from income so higher wages lead to lower profits which in turn lowered corporate taxes. When tax rates were reduced for corporations (Reaganomics) there was less incentive to spend the "spare" dollars on higher wages and instead use those dollars to buy companies and pay higher bonuses to execs.
I heard something about catholic/private schools getting all of the government education vouchers.
Walz was right because giving everyone free lunch has no administrative costs, as well as no stigma. All the money goes to feeding the kids.
California has extensive administrative costs, and kids receiving free breakfasts & lunches sit in a separate section. So dumb.
Speaking oif stigma. Hungry children spend time thinking about how hungry they are. Their brains have no fuel to help them think. Grades go down, and school performance goes down, So on goes the spiral. Maybe Congressional and Senatorial expenses accounts should be cut. They seem to have enough money to buy their cats a plane ticket, lavish lunches, I am sure.
Sorry to disagree with you at least somewhat but school lunches have administrative costs whether for one or for all. All governmental programs will have some administrative costs. It's just that when you provide the program universally the costs are distributed much more effectively across the system. But to say there is no administrative cost is ridiculous, there is no way to even have a program without some costs that must be paid for.
And billionaire owned media sources are central to creation and maintenance of Republican voters. It's a cycle that must be broken.
Absolutely, without those tools they couldn't control the masses that they manipulate.
How would you propose to "break" this supposed "cycle"? We are still a nation that theoretically believes in free enterprise so like it or not media sources are so entitled to be owned by private citizens and espouse for causes they believe in regardless of whether or not you or anyone else likes it. I am being very serious in this question. It's easy to say "let's break up the media conglomerates", it's a lot harder to actually frame an approach that wouldn't be horribly dangerous to free press and free speech. I have my ideas but I'd love to hear yours as you brought this up.
It needs to be pointed out in fairness that the societies/countries you mentioned are far more homogenous, far less multicultural and much smaller than the United States. The total population of all Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark) is less than 30 million people not even 10 percent of the US population and smaller than several states (California, Texas, New York). Comparing the ability of those mostly similar cultural and ethnic populations with the issues found in multicultural and multiethnic states in the US is a serious stretch.
True, but we have states that are nations unto themselves, such as Texas, Louisiana, and Florida, which are among those trying to recapture the Dark Ages. Also, Scandinavian countries have their share of immigration from the Global South. IMO, they are pre-conditioned to have a much better sense of fairness. I think of the Republicans and Christian Nationalists who have devolved from fiscal conservatism to plain obstructionism, obscene income disparity, and inherent racism, which contribute to the imbalances here in America.
A Key is Cultural Assimilation.. The Nordic Countries have a Long-Tradition of Fairness... Don't Take more than your Share... Cooperate on Shared Issues, Be Fair... The Indigenous Societies had similar Traditions... Being a Member of a Group of People that were Invaded, and Long Suppressed, to Succeed in the Mainstream Society, Members had to learn the Language, and Tools to Succeed in the Mainstream Society... Right-Wing Populism is becoming an Issue in the USA, and Europe... It is one Reaction to Accelerating Global Change...
I agree about the sense of community and sharing within Indigenous Tribes. Although I am white, I spent a year on a Reservation. The people were poor as church mice but gave what they had when it was needed. Most Americans have been raised on an ideal of individualism, sometimes displayed as selfishness, contrasted with those raised in a community.
It's also true of Black people...at least for some. For example, there is a back-to-the-land movement of Black farmers, who are often an extended family.
It seems that much of the Impetus of the Modern European Invasion was Greed... In a Word, 'Gold'... Seems that many of these Pioneers were Second-Sons, or Religous Outcasts... Could be one of the Reasons that Wealth Disparity is tolerated more in the USA then Europe... Individualism? Try being an American Indian Warrior...
What does your last sentence mean, Apache? I don't quite know if you mean an individual or a protector of the tribe.
They don't have the 3 branches of government and a 2 party system and they do not have very diverse populations. Instead they have a coalition government where consensus is part of governing and they developed their constitutions and modern lifestyles while they were predominantly White countries, and did not factor racism into denying their citizens a good quality of life, just so that they could prevent a minority of the population from getting that too. A big problem in the US. I was reading a discussion of how with US politicians who have 4 year terms just do not do any long term planning because the system is not set up for them to be reelectable if they do. Look at what just happened to Biden for governing like that. He hit the rich people hard, and they hit back. Kamala is already going to tax the super wealthy at a lower rate than Biden was going to. I think she said 28% whereas I think Biden was going for 39%. That and Lina Khan going after the monopolies which are making filthy people, filthy rich, as they crap on the rest of us, is why they pressured Dems to push him out.
The Scandinavian countries are not just essentially homogeneous, but they all fought a common enemy on their soil in WWII. A common enemy is a unifying force. And it teaches a country that we really are all in this together.
The only war on US soil, besides 1812, was divisive and sowed decades long hatred’s.
Only WWII—even more than WWI—came close to being a unifier to the US. But it was “over there.”
It's a good point although it begs the question why Scandinavia which was NOT as heavily involved in WW2 is used as an example contrasted with England, France and the eastern European countries which were.
The Scandinavian countries managed to survive WW2 in better shape than the others mostly by ducking direct involvement and maintaining neutrality (mostly) with Hitler. They maintained their homogenous populations too, something Hitler loved because Scandinavians were "true" Aryans, and not mostly ethnically mixed, something Hitler abhorred.
Hitler needed the dairy cows and farming in the Scandinavian countries. He took over the countries, but they weren't bombed.
But the general populations were starved as the Nazis took the food. .
The Reagan Revolution was actually a Counter Revolution... After leaving the CA Governorship in the early '70s, he hung out with the Reactionaries in the 1970s Palm Springs, who complained about the Social Movements of the 1960s.... The Intent of the Reagan Counter Revolution was to bring back the Roaring '20s... That eventually happened with the same result... The Great Depression, and the Great 2008-2015 Recession... For a Refresher of what inspired Reagan, watch the Brad Pitt Movie, 'Babylon'... Now back to where we are now... A.I. will displace Knowledge Workers... Look at the potential of iPhone 16... Visit an Amazon Warehouse, or a Modern Car Manufacturer Assembly Line... Robotics Rule.. Our Social Systems must Evolve... The Scandinavian Systems are just the beginning... One of the latest Blurbs is that the USA has over 800 Billionaires, and more Workers are working 2-3 Jobs to just stay afloat... Putin/Xi are Smiling...
Absolutely, Rickey! I firmly believe that MAGA won't go away until, or should I say IF, the GOP can oust them.
Way back years ago (okay, probably only prior to Trump, though that does seem an eternity ago) I also split my ticket. I realized that no candidate hit every single qualification that I wanted and sometimes, (esp at local issue), I felt like the Republican was the best. (Heck, I started my voting years in Chicago, and I've spent my life in Illinois. Nuf said)
Since Trump NO MORE. Straight ticket Democrat.
I am a believer in a two party system to create checks and balances, but I don't see how anything can get done with the extremists on the right.
Miselle, I also once split my ticket although I never voted for any R that would be in the Federal Government. Now I am straight D and I know some local Rs who are disgusted with MAGAs and death star. I did smile about your comment about voting in Chicago and Illinois. Good old machine politics.
I suppose the question is: is there now a Republican Party? MAGA, IMO, is 21st century KKK. It's core concern is a racist white Protestant theocracy, with racism trumping the religious aspect.
I think you've defined what used to be my Republican Party perfectly. The only thing they're missing is the pointy hoods.
I left the Republican Party during the Reagan Administration. Reagan began the tax on Social Security, began the war on the Middle Class, turned the emotionally and mentally ill out onto the streets (I saw scores of them sleeping in boxes in San Jose, CA,) and began the massive tax breaks for the wealthy and large corporations. They used that money to indoctrinate the mostly white evangelicals to vote Republican. And, Republican politicians just kept piling tax break on top of tax break.
I suspect that the Old School Republicans in the 'Lincoln Project' would like to see MAGA Lose Massively in November 2024... That way the GOP can be purged, and rebuilt, or a new Center/Right Party can be started... We DO NEED more than one Political Party... Still Curious as to why we have only two mainstream Political Parties...
Exactly! How could a country as large and diverse as the US have only two parties to represent everyone? The only answer I can come up with as that the whole system is being choreographed to stay balanced. I really saw this in Obama's first term. He has so much momentum leading up to the election. Then, within months, the press started saying negative things about him, even NPR!. Then, by the 2010 mid-terms, he lost the House and he had to confront the strongest obstructionism in US history for the rest of his six years.
The best defense we have is to teach our children critical thinking skills so that they are not so swayed by the BS being spoon-fed to them by the MSM.
What I would like to know is who are the choreographers? The 806? (Or a subset of them?)
Exactly, they are here to stay.
Ricky Woody - you just said it all 🗽🇺🇸🗳️
However, there are a lot of Americans who are not patriotic. They do feel that they are, but they are patriotic to an idea that has nothing to do with knowledge of the constitution or the laws, for the most part it is based on a feeling of their own relevance. Robert Ritchie shared this on Joyce Vance's Substack, on September 9, 2024, and I think it gets to the heart of who votes for Trump and why. So, it is the undecideds who must be made to see that that is not just patriotism but self interest that should have them voting for Kamala.
The Cult of Opposition: Understanding the Psychology Behind Trump’s Supporters
In modern political discourse, the relationship between leaders and their supporters often reflects a symbiotic exchange—one of mutual benefit. Typically, a leader provides tangible improvements to the supporters’ lives, who in turn offer their allegiance. However, Donald Trump's presidency introduced a paradigm shift that baffled many analysts. A significant portion of Trump’s base does not measure his success by what he does *for* them, but rather by what he does against those they consider adversaries. This phenomenon raises a critical question: why do Trump's supporters define his success not by policy achievements or personal benefit but by his ability to antagonize perceived enemies? In this research paper, we explore the psychology, sociocultural factors, and communication strategies behind this phenomenon, offering a deep dive into the mechanisms that sustain this unwavering loyalty.
The Psychology of "Othering"
At the heart of this dynamic lies a fundamental psychological concept known as *othering.* Othering refers to the process of creating a division between "us" and "them," where "them" are people deemed different or antagonistic to one's own group. Social identity theory posits that individuals derive part of their self-worth from their membership in groups (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). When Trump attacks certain groups—be they immigrants, Democrats, or marginalized communities—his supporters feel that their in-group (conservative, predominantly white Americans) is being validated. The "other," typically those outside their cultural or political bubble, becomes a target of scorn and aggression. By constantly positioning himself against these groups, Trump reassures his supporters that they are on the winning side of a cultural war.
This is where the success metrics diverge from typical political calculations. Success, in the eyes of Trump's supporters, is not rooted in economic growth or policy achievements, but in the symbolic victories won over those they disdain. Trump’s antagonistic rhetoric serves as a rallying cry for a base that measures success by how effectively he torments the "other."
Fear as a Unifying Emotion
The divisiveness Trump exploits is not built solely on disdain for others but on deep-rooted fear. Research has shown that political conservatism often correlates with heightened fear responses (Hibbing, Smith, & Alford, 2014). These fears manifest in concerns over demographic changes, perceived threats to cultural identity, and economic anxiety—particularly in the wake of globalization and immigration. For Trump’s base, he offers not only validation of their fears but also an outlet for their anxiety: the vilification of outsiders.
By acting against these outsiders—whether through harsh immigration policies, vilification of the media, or incendiary tweets targeting "leftist elites"—Trump provides a sense of catharsis to his supporters. It’s not about building bridges or creating new opportunities; it’s about protecting their identity and keeping perceived threats at bay. In their minds, Trump’s success is defined by his defense of the status quo against forces of change.
The Appeal of a Strongman
This dynamic is exacerbated by the allure of authoritarian leadership, often characterized by a leader who promises protection and order while silencing dissent. Trump's rhetoric—filled with hyperbole, aggressive language, and dismissive attitudes toward political correctness—resonates deeply with those who feel disempowered by societal changes. Studies have shown that authoritarian personalities are drawn to leaders who project strength and offer simple, binary solutions to complex problems (Feldman, 2003). Trump’s combative style against the "other" fits neatly into this framework.
In this context, Trump is seen as the protector, someone who will go to any length to defend his supporters from external threats. His aggressive behavior—though often condemned by critics—is perceived by his base as a strength. In their eyes, his relentless attacks on groups like the media, the "deep state," or racial minorities are evidence of his success as a leader willing to do whatever it takes to secure their safety and identity.
The Role of Media and Propaganda
An essential factor in maintaining this dynamic is the role of right-wing media in amplifying Trump’s actions *against* others while downplaying or ignoring any lack of substantive achievements. Fox News, Breitbart, and other conservative outlets often frame Trump’s attacks on immigrants, liberals, and the media as necessary battles in a larger cultural war. Through selective reporting, these outlets reinforce the idea that Trump’s presidency is less about improving the lives of his supporters through policy and more about the symbolic victories he achieves through opposition to their perceived enemies.
Trump himself understood the power of media manipulation, often stoking controversy to keep his name in the headlines. As noted by philosopher Hannah Arendt, in authoritarian regimes, propaganda serves to simplify the world into friend versus foe (Arendt, 1951). By keeping the public focused on his skirmishes against the "other," Trump ensured that his base remained engaged and energized, even when his policies provided little material benefit to their lives.
The Social Contract of Aggrievement
This relationship between Trump and his supporters can be understood as a kind of *social contract of aggrievement.* While traditional politicians offer economic benefits, infrastructure improvements, or social programs, Trump offers emotional validation. His base, particularly those who feel marginalized by economic shifts or demographic changes, finds solace in his outward displays of aggression. His ability to provoke outrage in the "other" reassures them that they are still relevant in a world they fear is changing too fast.
Interestingly, this contract does not require Trump to follow through on traditional metrics of success like job creation or healthcare reform. His supporters are not primarily concerned with how he improves their lives directly. Instead, they focus on how he reinforces their worldview—one where they are under constant attack and where Trump is their defender. This emotional satisfaction creates a loyalty that transcends policy, rooted instead in the shared sense of grievance and resentment.
Conclusion: A Loyalty That Transcends
In understanding Trump’s success, it is critical to recognize the unique metrics by which his supporters measure his achievements. His base does not primarily seek economic relief or policy victories; they seek validation of their fears and grievances. By acting *against* the "other," Trump provides emotional and psychological sustenance that traditional political figures often fail to deliver. His success, therefore, lies in his ability to symbolize and enact opposition rather than constructively improve the lives of his supporters. As long as Trump continues to antagonize those perceived as threats, his base will remain loyal, even in the absence of tangible benefits.
In the end, the tormenting of the "others" does more than sustain them—it defines them.
Isn't "Othering" the antithesis of being a "Christian"? This agnostic "None" would like to hear more about how millions of Americans can abandon the teachings of their prophet, Jesus Christ, and still claim his name to describe their life view.
I have never been fond of any religious sect or "faith". But I used to have real respect for those "believers" who said things like "All are welcome at our table" or "Welcome the stranger" or "Love thy Neighbor".
To quote EW&F: "Where is the love?"
I don't know that one can find anyone more committed as an atheist than me, but that having been said, I think that Matthew 25: 34-46 is a great formula for all of us: "Even as you do it unto the least of these." That, and the political philosophy of Frances Perkins, the architect of the New Deal:
"The people are what matter to government, and a government should aim to provide the means by which all the people under its jurisdiction can access the best possible life."
All the people, and not just 806 billionaires.
What I hear in that article is "Trump makes it acceptable to think and feel all the ugliest things they do, so they don't have to feel bad about themselves". Many people, through nurture, later experiences, and yes even nature, find living by Christian or other religions' and atheist moral codes' finest precepts to be far too difficult and thus feel badly about themselves more than others who find it much easier. Finding belonging in Trump's cult gives them a way to achieve a positive self esteem more easily than belonging within a non-Trumpist Christian or other religious and philosophical group's teachings. The need is so powerful they're blind to the hypocrisy even if they aren't just ascribed in name only.
Considering Linda's excellent expose of the MAGA mindset, couldn't we say they are, in a sense, followers of Jesus, though perverted. Perhaps, it was radical to welcome the Other to the table, as Jesus preached. Now not welcoming the Other into our nation, which is a melting pot of immigrants, a nation made of immigrants, is a radical idea. Maybe it is always human nature to fight against the established.
A committed atheist- I like it.
They don't understand the meaning of "patriotic" just like they don't understand the meaning of "christian". THIS IS WHY trump LOVES UNEDUCATED PEOPLE.
Bill, you are right. "Othering" is not what Jesus was about. He was about "love your enemies" and "pray for those who persecute you." It's hard (impossible?) to live that way. To the communities he visited, he spoke peace and disallowed violence. To the Roman government, he was feared as a zealot because some people (f.ex., Judas) hoped Jesus was there to lead the troops against the oppressors. Jesus didn't fulfill people's desires. He was more radical than we can honor in our own lives. No wonder he was killed.
If you really want to piss "some" people off, tell them Jesus was a liberal.
Yup, that works. & "some" people don't even know that cool carpenter wrote the hit song, 🎶 I believe in Miracles🎶
The MAGAts already use The Sermon on the Mount to claim Jesus was a communist.
Agreed, Melinda. It's hard to really follow Jesus for the reason you state here. Following Jesus never smacks of triumphalism. "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth." It isn't a doormat in the face of injustice but "Instead, it doesn’t retaliate when wronged and doesn’t exude pride and narcissism." Meek people don’t envy, don’t retaliate, and exercise patience in the face of adversity.
Right! I wasn’t really believed, but as a preacher/pastor (ordained almost 70 years ago) I have stated that if one really lived by the example of Jesus the powers that be would destroy that person’s life, if not just murder.
Melinda, Jesus also spoke out and acted out about the hierarchy of the Temple, who were using their position to acquire power and wealth. He also spoke forcefully against hypocrisy, calling out those who prayed loudly in the Temple. The Romans may have crucified Jesus, but they had help from the Temple hierarchy. First century Palestine was full of people claiming to be Messiahs as the Jews chafed against Roman rule. Usually Romans were pretty tolerant in terms of other religions and gave the Jews special privileges and when Jews rebelled anyway, they were baffled, but did not tolerate rebellion, so Titus destroyed the Temple and put an end to the rebellion in AD 70.
Isn't "Othering" the antithesis of being a "Christian"?
Sadly, no. For most of its history, Christianity "Othered" the living hell out of Jews, Muslims, atheists, cultures with multiple or different gods or none at all, and anyone else who didn't fall into line. The Church used the power of the state to enforce its will, and got access to millions of "clients" every time a king or emperor conquered another people--the missionaries flooded the zone and the Church controlled the culture.
It is vastly better now, of course, but J.D. Vance, for instance, is the cover model for the Illustrated Bible of Using the Terrible Swift Sword to Other Your Enemies. Their love is power and fame, not Jesus.
Well, as you point out there is a long history of congregants and even leaders not actually being good Christians so the space is between the ideal and the enacted.
Absolutely. Not unlike life in general and the ideals of America laid out in our founding documents--ideals are ideals but people are people, so one can strive and fall short. Good news is Christianity long gave up the institutional Terrible Swift Sword and is a net positive for our culture, not a negative. One step at a time, right?
Bill, one of the things we noted last night on the meeting of the police and the latest school shooter and his father is that both father and son had crosses around their necks. It would be nice to see people who wear the cross symbol, including tattoos, actually act as Jesus taught. Richard S below mention Matthew 25: 34-46 as an example.
It has long been a known tactic for lawyers to make sure their clients are cleaned up, wear coat and ties even if they have to loan them, and wear glasses because it's believed wearing glasses makes them look more bookish or studious and less apt to have been violent. It's staging. I suspect either a lawyer or the client themselves was engaging in staging.
Did they really have crosses around their necks ? Jesus would weep .
Yes, they did. The father's was large.
Absolutely spot on!
Well said. Trump's supporters want him to crush the "undesirables," i.e., women's rights advocates, minorities, immigrants, gays and others. ["The Anger Games: Who Voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 Election, and Why?" published in the peer-reviewed journal, Critical Sociology in Feb. 2018. MAGA is 21st century KKK.
After further thought, I am adding to my response to Linda Weide's posting above: this analysis is brilliant and spot on. I am copying it and sending it to family and friends. I have been studying this phenomenon for several decades and this summary is the best that I've seen.
Richard, for centuries, white men have been top dogs and one of the problems, is that white men have seen others gain rights and assert themselves. Some of this, in my mind, is resentment for that happening.
Thank you so much Linda for your time invested to educate us further as to how this madman maintains his grip on people. Their lack of initiative and curiosity feeds right in to his manipulative strategy. I encourage others to read your essay. Maybe "Othering" shares space with "Kinning" as a means of creating a bond for lazy, unthinking people to find common ground. Thank you again. Your writing is always so thought provoking, and actionable. Regarding JV Dunce, methinks perhaps he had some hard times with cats growing up. He is such a petty little man , do we laugh, or cry watching him repeat jokes he heard about Kamala Harris in a little dive bar? Prompting them to laugh, hearing the boos, his Jeb Bush :"you're supposed to clap" moment has arrived!
Jim, I did not write the essay. I just thought it was informative and saved it to share. I agree JVD is horrid, but have read that his role is to draw some of the ire and shield Trump. Trump seems to often forget JDV and amplify people like Musk and Kennedy. In Project 2025, in Chapter 1 White House Office, the vice president is the last person named, and it is clear that he is supposed to just support whatever the president wants and have no other role than that. Who has the real power is the Chief of Staff. He is written in as the gatekeeper. Also, today in Popular Information I read that the Trump family has started a new crypto business that has them set to make millions if Trump gets back in to the White House. We should not let him. https://popular.info/p/trump-teams-up-with-pickup-artist
Thank you for this insight. Is there any strategy that would redirect this kind of thinking? Is there another way to change this kind of thinking?
Marcia, what I take from it, is that we do not spend our time on them right now, and focus on getting lots of people signed up to vote and out to vote. That is the best strategy. However, we have to hope that as Kamala wins, and runs the country these people, who can hate it the whole time and her, as we know White Supremacists will no matter what. But the others, might be able to have a slow change of heart if Trump can be made to fade away and they do not embrace JDV in his place, or anyone else for that matter.
Linda, I agree with you 100% - spending time on "them" is a total waste of time. We need to get to the undecideds. All of the research and my own personal experience proves that they are committed to voting for their "Lord and Savior," Donald Trump, the bigot, racist, misogynist and xenophobe, who will crush the "undesirables," thrilling their cold, black, dead hearts.
This is my hope, too, Linda. Would it make a difference if Trump had a heart attack or something of the sort and there was no one, except Vance maybe, to replace him? I keep hoping Trump implodes like he might do at the debate tonight. At least, he will fizzle, I think.
I watched his face during the debate and expected his head to explode at any minute, splattering the moderators and vice President with orange goo!
“My mother…taught us to never complain about injustice but do something about it. She also taught us, ‘Never do anything half-assed.’ That’s a direct quote.” —Kamala Harris. With all due respect to Robert Hubbell, his analysis is half-assed. The following is the other half.
Human beings are all the same. We are all subjects of a social system. And we are all doing the same thing. We are all trying to understand that system, strengthen it, and protect it from external threats.
A subject’s potentially but not necessarily sufficient understanding of the system is the subject's “circle of concern.” The more powerful a subject is, the larger the subject’s “circle of influence.” If a subject’s circle of concern encompasses the subject’s circle of influence, then the subject is sufficiently mature. If a subject’s circle of influence extends beyond the subject's circle of concern, then the subject is immature.
Warning to human brain operators: Granting power to immature subjects is dangerous and can be fatal.
Strengthening the system by resolving within-system dilemmas takes a back seat to neutralizing external threats. Strengthening the system is important, but Trump knows that people intuitively perceive neutralizing threats as important AND urgent.
If a subject’s perception of the social system includes only some people within the subject's circle of influence while excluding other people, then “we” are always relevant whereas the “others” are opportunities to be exploited if time allows, threats to be neutralized as soon as possible, and otherwise utterly irrelevant.
What is the MAGA Republican circle of concern? That’s a good question to ask after we answer another question. What is our circle of concern? For the record, if the law allows you to vote in November, your circle of influence includes 50 states and 16 territories.
“We are far more united and have far more in common with each other than things that divide us.” —Jo Cox (1974–2016)
James, you ask: "What is the MAGA Republican circle of concern?" From my vantage point, the term Republican is now irrelevant and MAGA is now the direct descendant of the KKK. Racist to the core support White Protestant nationalism. That's the KKK.
It's complicated. Many MAGA supports do not identify with white supremacy, or Protestant nationalism, or the KKK. After all, many are not white, or identify as Catholic, or identify exclusively with Libertarianism.
And, in addition to being complicated, it is also simple. A MAGA supporter thinks some people are important, other people are not, and "I" am one of the important people. To be more specific, the former is a subset of the latter. To be even more specific, the former is the largest subset of the latter.
Please be clear. This was not written by Robert Hubbell, it was posted by someone commenting in his Substack and posted this, which I thought fit with a German documentary I had seen the night before called Trumpland.
I apologize for not being careful enough to notice that Robert Hubbell was not the person who wrote the comment.
James, I apologize for my lack of clarity.
A towering description that is elegant in its careful delineation of the issues.
I also read much of Hannah Arendt and Tim Snyder into this thesis. Now Linda Weide is to be explored for my understanding.
We must be certain we are aware the current situation is not an academic study but the real life drama of extremely well funded ideological evil intent on joining global authoritarian forces and get people out to vote.
Hap, the wealthy oligarchs have been funding the campaign of disinformation/misinformation and outright lies for decades. "What's the Matter with Kansas?" by Thomas Frank (2004)
Thank you, Linda, for posting this in full. This paper, and the Atlantic's promising new podcast series "Autocracy in America", are starting to answer the question that has puzzled me for this entire election cycle: how is it that a solid half of this country's electorate takes as their role model a man who is shallow, self-absorbed and totally driven by grievance, to the point of abandoning what could improve their existence to live out a revenge fantasy?
This, and little else, explains why half the country is willingly following a man whose middle finger is his moral compass.
I'll add this tidbit from the Atlantic podcast to Linda's contribution: people buy into Trump's lies not because they actually believe them, but because claiming to accept such obvious falsehoods is a code that shows they are part of the in-crowd. Trump is clever this way - start by forcing people to accept a small lie with no consequences ("my inauguration crowd was bigger than Obama's") and gradually ramp up to the point where your choice is accepting claims that are existentially dangerous or being cast out of the group you've worked so hard to identify with.
Perhaps Dr. Richardson could give some historical perspective on this moment, but isn't this the point at which the increasing extremism of past radical movements have led to the formation of new parties? Everyone talks about the "true Republicans" who have been cast out of the party because they didn't embrace MAGA. Instead of endorsing Harris, or perhaps after the election, why don't they form a new political party that promotes reasonable governance?
As a Democrat, I would look forward in the short term to the fight between Republicanism and MAGA, which would assure Democratic dominance for some time. But I would look forward even more to the long term return to a two-party system where neither side embraced nihilism and everyone could discuss policy differences with an eye toward resolving them rather than using them for political ammunition.
A Harris victory this November, backed up by Democratic legislative majorities, can be a first step toward this future. Vote Blue, top to bottom.
Mobiguy, I think that we all have struggled with how to make sense of the loyality from some that Trump commands. There are the usual suspects: racism, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia and more. Part of that more, I've finally concluded, is stupidity. They don't know what they don't know.
I have a hard time accepting stupidity as an answer. America has come through 250 years and no small number of crises, but has never come close to having a near-majority of the voting population manipulated to install the purveyor of such obvious and blatant lies. This in spite of a population that is, on average, far more educated (in the formal, public-school sense) than it has ever been.
I think Linda's post, and the Atlantic podcast series on autocracy, nail the problem. Trump may be an idiot or may just act like one on TV, but his feral instincts make him the most dangerous kind of idiot: one with an unerring instinct for self-preservation.
Decades ago I took a water safety and lifesaving course. One of the most important lessons was to stay out of the reach of a drowning person, who will instinctively grab on and use you as a flotation device, dooming both of you. Trump, faced with more prosecutions than he can handle, knows that he will drown unless he regains the power to make them go away. He has cultivated a following nearly large enough to allow him to do that, and is ready to drown them along with the rest of us if it's his last chance to save himself.
Trump has spent the nine years since the golden elevator ride creating an army ready to sacrifice themselves and everything around them for his own personal gain. Again, Dr. Richardson could provide perspective, but I don't believe this country has seen his like before, at least not anywhere this close to the levers of power. We are simply not mentally prepared to counter an attack of this type on our system.
I hope VP Harris does not underestimate the depths to which Trump will sink to save his own skin, or the level of support his minions will provide to let him get away with whatever actions he attempts. I personally hope her debate strategy takes this into account tonight. I try to avoid exaggeration, but this may be the most important night in the history of our country.
I feel that our schools have failed to teach two very important lessons: 1) critical thinking skills, and 2) government/history/civics. For example, those supporting Trump, IMO, are ignorant of what a Fascist-run state would be. Critical thinking could begin as early as the 6th grade. History, government, civics could lean more heavily on comparative systems.
Yes to both of those. Teaching these subjects in the schools would be an excellent first step, although the impact on voters wouldn't be felt until a number of years later, when those students reach voting age. We need a similar outreach effort for adults, which will unfortunately be labeled as propaganda by those who want to see it fail.
Let Us Hope For The Best... Sometimes Civilizations Get Tired... Read Up On Roman, Or Chinese History... When People get Tired, they often Yearn for a Strongman, a Savior...
Linda Weide, thank you! This brings a lot into focus, especially when tied with our species' deeply entrenched need to belong to a group or family or tribe to survive.
We do need to spend our time efficiently and not waste it. This from someone who made phone calls last night. It is an excellent way for each of us to get involved.
I did another 2 hours of phone banking to Pennsylvania last night. It's really fascinating. I talked to some strong supporters, but also some people who don't plan to vote, and to a physician named Ahmed who plans to vote for Jill Stein because of the Gaza issue. The talking points they gave us on how to respond to such arguments are quite good, so I may have made a little progress changing their minds.
C4C WHY VOTE - conversations with voters who won't or don't vote (Harris)
C4C WHY VOTE - conversations with voters who won't or don't vote (Harris)
WHY VOTE? Persuasion conversations | connecting with those who don’t / won’t vote Handy all-purpose phrases L...
You would be really good at phone banking because you know the issues so well and are persuasive. You could swing more voters that way than talking to MAGA stupidos or by talking to echo chambers.
The group I worked with last night is called Call 4 Change. You can call into whatever swing state or swing race you feel passionate about. There were over 800 people making calls last night. They do trainings for those who need it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p5WCcPmFJMKQV6qCVHZEfnocLXBg1uUDn0QYiKiJ4yw/edit?pli=1
And, this is how to get in touch with the phone banking system:
You are receiving this message because you signed up for ZOOM PHONE BANKS FOR EXPERIENCED PHONE BANKERS - SWING STATES FOR THE SENATE+HELP KAMALA HARRIS WIN!.
SYLVIA RUSSELL
Organizer, ZOOM PHONE BANKS FOR EXPERIENCED PHONE BANKERS - SWING STATES FOR THE SENATE+HELP KAMALA HARRIS WIN!
Dear Phone Banking Community!
Thank you for signing up for today’s phone bank @ 3pm Pacific Time (6pm EasternTime).
We’re looking forward to seeing you. Please arrive at the phone bank on time to check in.
Join Zoom Meeting https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88945424130?pwd=OWhyTUx4elAvOXhMT21HVlBaeCtpUT09 Meeting ID: 889 4542 4130 Passcode: 036033
What to expect when you join phone bank:
Training will be provided for those who need training after a brief introduction and phone bank instructions. The calling links will ONLY be dropped into chat after the instructions.
INFORMATION PROVIDED CLICK ON LINK: https://rb.gy/r8qgm
Candidates background and voting information per state---------- TIps on what to say when voters say they are not voting------------- Rebuttal points on the issues including where Dems and KH stands vs MAGA
Everyone must have their video on at the start of the phone bank. Once the calling gets started, you can turn your video off if you like.
Coaches are on hand throughout the entire phone banking session to help and support you. All you need to do is raise your Zoom hand and ask for a coach.
Watch training video on Scale 2 Win dialer - https://rb.gy/rsoa8
If you encounter any problems getting onto Zoom please TEXT our Facilitators Jo at 916-606-2671 OR Nanci, at 415-730-6115 and they will assist you.
Looking forward to seeing you soon!
Sylvia Russell Call 4 Change, Director
It is more effective than postcards.
Forgive me but simply said is this not just fascism defined?
Thank you for sharing this clearly written article on how to understand the MAGA supporters and why it is so hard to get them to change their minds with our traditional ways of trying to convince them. I'm sharing this with family so we can keep it rolling along and maybe gather in some of the undecideds at least. any idea who should get the credits for it?
In my lifetime I’ve seen Republicans create horrendous damage by adopting “Othering” as a political strategy. In the 60s, hippies and Vietnam War protesters were the subject of vituperative attacks (anyone remember the bumper stickers: America- Love It Or Leave It?). In the 80s it was people on “welfare” (code for Black). After 9-11 there was the anti-Muslim enemy. It seems like every twenty years the GOP develops new enemies. But now we have Rightwing media, foreign trolls, and homegrown militia as the foot soldiers. It is terribly depressing.
And with social media playing an outsized role in influencing the young men in our country to be associated with conservatism, although I think extremism is more like it, we need to stop letting the tech companies determine who they go after with their products and start putting ratings on websites, making them off limits for minors, and frankly for anyone under 30, who does not have the emotional maturity to manage being on these websites radicalizing them and spewing hate.
Linda, mille fois merci for sharing this!
Excellent... In Talking to many MAGAs in a non-Judgemental Fashion, this Validates a lot of my findings... Seems that a lot of the MAGAs feel 'Cheated' as they have to Work Harder for Less-And-Less... That Frustration results in Blaming Others... The Billionaires have been Glorified since the 'Greed-Is-Good' 1980s...
Actually, my Democrats Abroad Project 2025 Book club got into a discussion tonight about how men 30 and younger, who used to be part of the democratic party, are now turning to the Republican party. How they are not doing as well in school, or economically, as the number of women are moving ahead and what can the party do to show them that the policies are for them too. The Gen Zer males in my family are Democrats, but one of them, who just finished Chef school, is not as committed. He sees Dems as the lessor of evils. I know there are MAGA young women, still generationally, more young women are not going for being Trad wives, but for taking charge of their own lives. We do need to look at why young men are having a high rate of suicide, and some are turning to terrorism. Who is influencing them and apparently Trump is getting up in there are really relating to them on the platforms they frequent with the no nothing influencers that they follow. We need to be looking at how we can help young me. That is a bigger topic than I can address here.
Maybe Young Males need better Role Models, and need better Socialization... We tend to become what we Aspire To...
I agree. As a teacher I have tried to do engage the boys I taught in existing beyond stereotypes and being active and creative. I am concerned at how physically inactive students are expected to be for long periods of time. We have to make learning more active. I think of Tim Walz as a great role model for young men. I am glad he is the model the Democrats offer. I wish that young men would see him as that.
Being Inert is Lethal... Activity Cleanses The Mind... The Common Lifestyle doesn't Help, along with a Poor Diet... Seems to Me that Sedentary Distractions such Video Games, which seems to be a Common Thread, among many of the Dysfunctional Disaffected, are not Helpful... I wonder if the Falling 1st-World Birth-Rate, and Sense Of Isolation are a Result... GO COACH!!!
I was reading yesterday in Dwell that Tim Walz does not own any property or stocks. Let us hope after time Middle Americans find that he is more relatable than JDV and DT. GO COACH!!!
Thank you Linda Weide, for including this spot on article
Thank you. This was really helpful.
The question that will end Trump’s career at tonight’s debate: “Mr. Trump, you have used a series of negative words to describe Vice President Harris. Assuming you believe she merits those words, would you advise your male supporters to use the same words to describe their mothers, wives, girl friends and daughters, when they merit it?”
Given what I know about Trump's supporters I would not expect them to be watching this debate. Also, from what I am learning they do not care if he does anything for them economically, as long as he appears to fight for who they are. That is White Supremacist, gun loving, Christians, who are cis-gender, straight, and hate anyone who is not all of those things. He tells them that who they are great, and in a changing world that reassures them that they still have validity and power.
Bingo. Trump could commit first degree murder in plain sight and it would not make an iota of difference for them. None. It wouldn't.
I think you are 100% accurate, Linda. It is not about anything other than "restoring" them to their "rightful" place "atop" society and culture. Anyone who is not white, Christian, heteronormative, cisgendered, and male should be nowhere near the "top spot". Women are useful to them as chattel. That's it.
Trump's supporters should not be Harris's intended audience, at least not in real time. Her best strategy should be to pull away as many undecided voters as possible - and hopefully they will be watching tonight - and let the after-the-fact news coverage sow doubt among whatever persuadable Trump supporters there are.
The vast majority of engaged voters have already made up their minds. This race will likely be decided by a small margin of people who are just starting to pay attention to the race, and who will actually be paying attention between now and Election Day. For both Harris and Trump, these are the only people who matter.
The question isn’t for Trump’s male supporters. It’s for his female supporters, some of whom likely know nothing about his cruel misogyny, and for some fence sitters who never had the matter so starkly presented to them.
I expected quite a few trumpeters would watch the debate to see their king trounce the black woman. If so, I wonder how many actually listened to both candidates?
I'm sure they already do...
That is wonderful news.
It is. And yet, every story I read still has Trump and Harris statistically in a dead heat. I don't understand the thinking of half my fellow Americans.
Visceral.
That Springfield, Ohio, story is ironic, because Trump hates dogs and Vance hates cats.
Is Vance coming to the defense of cats as an attempt to regain the childless cat lady demographic?
I don't have a cite for this, but Heather has often explained that we shouldn't pay too much attention to political candidate polls.
Read this from Robert Hubbell: Check out this article on TPM: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/another-poll-check-in
I think Josh Marshall in TPM is simply trying to look at overall polling trends rather than focus on the ones that either make us happy or freak us out. That’s the best way to handle this stuff I think, and probably Prof. Richardson would agree. We always knew there would be ups and downs before the election. Let’s try not to lose our enthusiasm and instead focus on GOTV efforts, which not only keep us sane, but may have a real effect on driving the outcome we want. Let’s get rid of this horrible man and his movement once and for all on Nov. 5th.
But I still can't come up with one solid reason to vote for Trump.
thanks - still doesn't really put the whole 'polling' thing into the kind of perspective I've heard from Heather.
We are walking on a knife edge. The trump base is secure, few top repubs have abandoned him.. While many of his former military and civilian advisors have denounced him as unfit to serve, I fear that nothing Harris can do to shake his support. I think that only trump can destroy the trump image. Possibly he will become the Trojan horse for the oligarchs who will run or ruin this country.I can't breath.
Tfg is a guy who has bankrupted multiple companies over his life time. I haven't seen anything that makes me feel he'd do a better job with our national economy. From Wikipedia: "Although Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy, hotels and casino businesses of his have declared bankruptcy six times between 1991 and 2009 due to its inability to meet required payments and to re-negotiate debt with banks, owners of stock and bonds and various small businesses (unsecured creditors). Because the businesses used Chapter 11 bankruptcy, they were allowed to operate while negotiations proceeded. Trump was quoted by Newsweek in 2011 saying, "I do play with the bankruptcy laws—they're very good for me."
Read Linda Weide's post above. Light will come to the darkness at once when you do!
TY - it's an excellent coment
I don't either.
". . . . Harris backs passing the bipartisan immigration bill that Republicans killed on Trump’s orders . . . ." In the debate tonight, ¿why should Vice President Harris NOT say the following?
"This guy [pointing toward the former President] had been screaming that there was an invasion at our Southern border. Yet both parties in the Senate together passed an immigration bill. Then the impeached President opted to instruct M.A.G.A. extremists in the House to kill that timely bill. The Speaker and others dutifully obliged him. Accordingly, President Biden and I stepped into the breach to address border security out of good faith. What gets me, here, is what Trump's actions said to all of us.
"Either there was no invasion or this old and desperate felon was willing to let an invasion proceed unabated for five months for his benefit only. The former alternative was a lie, the latter reeked of treason. So, candidate Trump, what gives? [Shrugs her shoulders.] Given this guy's [thumbing dismissively toward the former President] track record with the truth, I think we all know which alternative it is: a problem duly addressed by President Biden when Trump crippled Congress from doing so."
Endorsement by the ten top military experts is important but it seems to me at least as or more important is this portion of their letter:
"Ten former Generals, Admirals, and the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps issued a letter today blaming Donald Trump for the issues that led to the chaotic withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan". That is an extremely important statement. Trump is attempting to blame Biden for the deaths of the Americans at Abbey Gate.
The letter not only warns against putting Trump in power again but specifically addresses the Trump lie that led to his Arlington National Cemetery PR stunt:
"Without involving the Afghan government, he and his Administration negotiated a deal with the Taliban that freed 5,000 Taliban fighters and allowed them to return to the battlefield. Then, he left President Biden and Vice President Harris with no plans to execute a withdrawal, and with little time to do so. This chaotic approach severely hindered the Biden-Harris Administration's ability to execute the most orderly withdrawal possible and put our service members and our allies at risk." It could not have been put more clearly, and from these leading military strategy experts.
https://meidasnews.com/news/retired-generals-admirals-blame-trump-for-afghan-withdrawal
But we don’t have to take their word for it! Trump’s everyday detachment from reality shows his unfitness.
As does his record when he was president. For one thing, his miserable selfishness was on display during the pandemic. ( Don’t test so much, it makes me look bad! What will it do to the stock market and my reelection prospects?)
And donate. We need a deeply BLUE congress.