Thanks for publishing these Chris. All it did for me was confirm that there is no SANE reason to vote for Trump. Supporters can rationalize all they want. They are voting for narcissistic criminal!
The arguments you present are both rational and logical. However, the part that your emails left out is that Trump has a vowed vengeance against anyone who opposes him, to the point of violence. Second, Trump is a convicted felon. No logical argument can be made for his criminal conviction to have been fabricated by the Biden administration Trump is a criminal and a liar, paranoid, and vengeful. And lastly, putting him in the oval office puts his finger on the nuclear trigger that itself should scare the living daylights out of any logical intelligent person.
In short...these are rational and logical arguments....what do they have to do with Trump?
I have been posting on FoxNews for 8 years and predominantly most of the posters are never as eloquent or logical as these arguments. And, again, most of the time, it seems like the arguments involve having to excuse Trump for something he said, tweeted or did. So...it feels like a lot of his support is either GOP muscle memory (Dem fear/hatred built up for decades) or just flat out cultish behavior.
ex-GOP guy (had to throw that in there for context)
Wow! A Putin apologist on the Chris Cillizza "So What" feed. So it's the fault of the current administration that Putin invaded Ukraine and freedom-loving people want to defend that country? The two people who wrote the "Trump vote" explanations had to work hard and wiggle a lot to make their implausible cases. But MarkS says the hidden part right out loud. Wow! Just, WOW!
Putin's invasion of Ukraine, WHICH BEGAN IN 2014, is a purely evil act.
So: I am in no way a Putin apologist.
But confronting his Pure Evil demands wisdom, lest he blow us all up (which he can do).
The sad history is that in the 2000s a whole bunch of former East Bloc countries, including ones that were actually in the USSR (like Ukraine), were admitted to NATO, but Ukraine was not. Putin said it would make him really mad if Ukraine was admitted, so the West acquiesced and left Ukraine out. This was a chicken-shit move and was the first big mistake on the part of the West.
Now, the WHOLE POINT of NATO is to be a one-for-all-and-all-for-one miltary pact. This has two purposes: (1) to maximize chances of winning a war against Russia (if it comes to that), and (2) to deter an attack by Russia on any NATO member country, precisely because it immediately leads to a total war, which Russia is likely to lose.
So: the West hung Ukraine out to dry. And Putin responded by invading Ukraine in 2014 and seizing 5% of its territory, the Crimean peninsula. (For comparison, Montana is a similar percentage of the continental US.)
The West's repsonse (Obama-Biden was in charge in the US) was to do absolutely nothing. This was the second big mistake of the West.
Still the West did nothing. This ongoing war got no attention at all in the US in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
Then in 2022, Putin launched a significant escalation, attempting to seize the capital Kiev quickly and install a puppet regime (a la Belarus).
Now, suddenly, the West went bananas and did a 180 in policy, declaring that Ukraine's freedom from Russia was existential for the West and that the West needed to arm Ukraine to fight back.
This was nuts! If the West wanted to protect Ukraine, Ukraine should have been admitted to NATO in 2000s along with the other former SSRs (Latvia, Estonia).
But then the West compounded the mistake by not going all-in. Of course the risk of total nuclear war was high, so it's understandable, but the policy of kinda-sorta arming Ukraine, but not nearly enough to allow Ukraine to win quickly and cleanly, just led to the destruction of vast amounts of Ukraine's infrastructure, along with mass death and injury and homelessness.
So here we are now, with Ukraine blasted to rubble and close to a million dead on both sides (the Russian soldiers are victims of Putin's Pure Evil just as much as the Ukrainians), no end in sight, and risk of all-out nuclear war still very much on the table.
I am just sick and tired of the mindless defense of Western policy on Ukaine by those (including many commenters here) who have absolutely no knowledge of the history, and I'm especially sick and tired of the lie (repeated by Harris during the debate) that the invasion of Ukraine began a few days after she met with Zelensky in 2022. The invasion had actually begun 8 years earlier, and her boss Biden (then VP) and his boss Obama did absolutely nothing about it.
I remember with Russua started in on Crimea. All the US did was drop care packages. I was disgusted then. In the time Russia started pushing forward more into Ukraine NATO has votes Sweden and Finland in and left Ukraine to blow in the wind again. Saying they didn't want to vote them in whole at war. We'll, maybe if you would've earlier they wouldn't be at war. I share your frustration. And Trump has basically said he'd let Russia do " whatever the hell they want."
I think that Obama felt very constrained by 2 things: 1) We were still divesting ourselves out of a decade of being in the Middle East costing US lives and billions of $'s. The American people were not keen on yet another overseas war...ESPECIALLY...with Russia 2) He had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and I think he felt starting a war wasn't aligned with that. Right or wrong...I'm guessing he felt that way.
Actually Biden has done a lot. The reality is Ukraine has been a very corrupt country and Obama/Biden did a lot to clean it up. So the reason we sent lethal aid under Trump was because of the reforms Ukraine had made leading up to that moment. Bush urged Sharon to withdraw from Gaza while supporting Abbas and then sent Abbas aid…and it ended up with Hamas. Duuuuuuuuh. 😉
You are kind of dismissing Ukrainian agency in all this. This started long before 2014. I'm not certain the poisoning of Yushenko was the opening shot, but it came 10 years earlier. The result was the Orange Revolution which sent Yanokovich scurrying away. However nothing happened then to shake Party of Regions' hold on about half the electorate. In the aftermath of the Orange Revolution, no Western country supported Ukraine like it should have.
Mostly Europe just told Ukraine to suck it up and deal with it when Moscow turned off the gas that transited to Europe through Ukraine. This made Yushenko a weak president. Meanwhile, Russia Moldiva'd Georgia. That is, they "liberated" part of the country so the border dispute would make them ineligible for NATO. Notably, only John McCain gave a damn about this.
In 2010, after Paul Manafort was sent to whitewash Yanokovich, Ukraine was left with two not great choices, either Yanokovich or Tymoshenko. Yanokovich won, but promised to work on an association agreement with Europe....and he did! Europe was prepared for a trade and visa agreement which would let Ukrainians visit all Shengen countries if they got a visa to one! Then, just before the agreement was to be signed, Russia bought out Yanokovich as he traded the EU association agreement for one with Russia instead. The protests to this are what we called EuroMaidan. Once Yanukovich's personal police shot some of the peaceful protestors, the people had enough. Yanukovich moved to Rostov, Russia annexed Crimea, then caused havoc in the Donbas. All the while, Ukrainians demanded more integration with Europe. And they got them.
Getting them meant that Putin was unable to do what he wanted. Also, free Ukrainians being able to go to Europe willy nilly meant that his agreementless Russians might notice their raw deal. That might cause them to want a different leader. So he declared all Ukrainians Nazis and invaded.
You can put whatever you want on the table for Putin in an attempt to advertise him using nukes. However, he is a liar and coward. No deal would ever be worth as much as the Budapest Memorandum where we, Britain, and Russia bowed to protect Ukraines borders if they gave up their nukes. Also, for Ukraine, this is a fight for their ethnic survival. They will not stop until they are all dead, including children, grand children, etc. And they will be free no matter what we offer Putin because we are scared of him. 🇺🇦
Wow...thanks for the great summation of the issue. I would also add that the election of Trump probably gave Putin some needed comfort level about what the West's response would be. I'm guessing that the invasion was actually planned for Trump's 2nd term but Trump lost. Putin made a calculation that it was now or never and went for it. (This is entirely my own personal speculation)
I think we are projecting a bit when we layer American politics over Putin's actions. We can't know what kind of Game of Thrones business is happening there. Ukraine has some of the best farmland in the world. Folks have been willing to fight and kill for it for a long time. :(
I'd be remiss if I didn't add that Russia annexing parts of former Soviet countries is exactly the behavior that made Ukraine want to join NATO. In early 2008, it was almost 50/50 in favor.
If Russia doesn't want NATO on their border, the stop threatening the countries on their border. Simple as that.
Yes...I often use the analogy that there were absolutely NO Russians on the Ukrainian border losing sleep over a potential Ukrainian invasion before Russia actually did invade.
It’s Substack. Substack is a ripoff as well as being a steaming pile of manure. My only subscription was one to Taibbi’s Substack because I subscribed to him before it was obvious he was conning gullible Trump voters out of $5/month. When I turned against Taibbi he first tried to get me to cancel my subscription for a full refund. I told him I wouldn’t renew my subscription and it was almost up and so he needn’t worry. One day during the Twitter Files BS he had enough of me and first banned me and then he got the Substack founders to delete my account and every comment I had made on Substack.
Putin says a lot of things, so the world is just going to sit idly by while he invades sovereign countries that are on his border because of something he threatens. Think the road to appeasement has demonstrated that it’s either now or then. His military is a fictional hegemonic threat. How many years did they fight in Afghanistan that’s on their border and was unable to conquer the Afghanis and install a Russian friendly ruler; their war with Afghanistan lead to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and provided an opportunity for Putin to consolidate power. Putin promoted a quick victory in Ukraine 2.5 years later he’s no closer than he was shortly after his initial invasion of Ukraine. Of course he’s going to make the ultimate threats of mass annihilation, and bring war to NATO, he’s already at war with NATO, they’re just not supplying troops; the actual provocation of NATO would accelerate his inevitable loss, he’s not that stupid; it’s easier and safer to make catastrophic ifs threats, while his apologist seek to undermine the coalition that has come to Ukraines support.
The quibble I have with Trump supporters is not their alienation from the system. It is the corrupt, criminal vessel they are using as an avatar for what in many cases are legitimate economic concerns.
My problem is that I view the Democrats in office as every bit as criminal: they all support the ongoing crime against humanity of mutilating and sterilizing children on the basis of pure medical quackery.
Where is your evidence that this is actually happening without a parent’s consent? Like many things that Trump and his supporters repeat and repeat, you offer zero hard facts to back up these assertions. When Trump’s challenged on this or anything else he says, and he knows he doesn’t have the receipts to back it up, he always dissembles with statements like “I have heard” and “people say”. Bring facts from reputable sources if you’re going to say things like this
My son is transgender, but he did not go to school one day as a girl and come home later that day as a boy after having surgery in some secret room. It was a long 2-year process that included visits with a therapist to make sure that this wasn't some phase that he would grow out of. My wife and I fully supported our son becoming the person he was, and he's never been happier.
Thank you for taking a chance by letting us know some intimate details of your family’s life!
I am truly *so* sorry that your family has to deal with this totally irrational fear of the transgender community and all of the ginned up outrage from MAGA that *totally* blows everything out of proportion…
Most of it IS with parental consent, but the parents have been gaslit by the false claim of "do you want a live son or a dead daughter" (or vice versa). The false claims of enhanced suicide risk from "watchful waiting" vs immediate affirmation have been discredited. See the Cass review from the UK for the most comprehensive analysis: https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/
These blue-state laws allow a kid (even from within the same state) to run away from home and get puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones (and ultimately surgery) without parental consent. It's not clear how many such cases have actually happened, but that these new laws give family court judges new powers to order it is unquestionable.
The evidence base for any sort of drug-based and/or surgery-based intervention is extremely weak (see the Cass review). These interventions have been severely restricted now in several European countries; in the UK, they are restricted to clinical trials only. This is because Europe's health-care systems are not-for-profit, and they are able to resist the push from Big Pharma to create a new pool of lifelong medical patients.
The US medical system has completely failed to protect our kids, and the Democrats are all-in on it. Not only are they passing those laws in blue states that remove parents rights, the Biden-Harris DOJ is suing to overturn child-protecting laws in red states that are similar to those in Europe.
I’m really glad that you are here to tell those parents — who have spent years with their own children, watching them grow and struggle — that you personally know better than them, despite never having met either parent or child, and you personal judgement should be substituted for their own, their child’s, their therapists, and medical doctors.
This is exactly what explains a Trump supporter for me. A lack of empathy or ability to put themselves in someone else’s shoes, or to find another persepctive.
What states have removed parents' rights? Your "facts" are rather selective and some are incorrect. My understanding is that courts get involved only when there is a dispute over treatment, not to usurp parental control. This is a complex issue and must be approached with great seriousness by all parties. Taking the Cass report into consideration may be part of a decision-making process. Those who are not participants in this situation owe respect to the challenges of those who are. This does NOT include ridiculous, intellectually insulting claims that schools are arbitrarily performing sex change procedures during recess.
California bill SB 107 was the model legislation for removing parental rights. It was passed with unanimous support by Democrats and has now been copied in multiple blue states.
From the SB 107 Bill Summary: "The bill would authorize a court to take temporary jurisdiction because a child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care."
(a) A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to, or threatened with, mistreatment or abuse, or because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code [definition quoted below].
(b) If there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this part and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive, a child custody determination made under this section remains in effect until an order is obtained from a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive. If a child custody proceeding has not been or is not commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive, a child custody determination made under this section becomes a final determination, if it so provides and this state becomes the home state of the child.
(b)(3)(A) “Gender affirming health care” means medically necessary health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient, and may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(i) Interventions to suppress the development of endogenous secondary sex characteristics.
(ii) Interventions to align the patient's appearance or physical body with the patient's gender identity.
(iii) Interventions to alleviate symptoms of clinically significant distress resulting from gender dysphoria, as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition.
(B) “Gender affirming mental health care” means mental health care or behavioral health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient, and may include, but is not limited to, developmentally appropriate exploration and integration of identity, reduction of distress, adaptive coping, and strategies to increase family acceptance.
Perhaps reading the first paragraph you quoted in its basic form would help clarify something? (Please correct me if this is not a proper sentence deconstruction):
* A court has temporary jurisdiction if a child has been abandoned or mistreated or abused (or threatened with same) because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care *
Further simplified:
* A court CAN assume TEMPORARY, EMERGENCY jurisdiction:
IF a child has been abandoned or mistreated
and/or
IF a child has been threatened to be abandoned
or mistreated
and
IF that abandonment, mistreatment and/or
abuse occurred because the child has been
unable to obtain gender-affirming care…*
Further simplified:
* If a child is abandoned, mistreated and/or abused (or threatened with same), because ___________,
a court may intervene, temporarily, and assume jurisdiction of the child.*
You can fill in the blank however you wish, but my reading of this tells me that, essentially, if a child is being abused, the court may intervene to stop that child abuse.
I suppose there are some who believe it is acceptable for a parent or legal guardian to abuse a child for whatever reason they want (and maybe especially regarding gender-affirming care), but…
This Bill seems to be saying that if a child desires gender-affirming care and the parent does not want/ does not allow the child to receive that care AND THEN ABUSES THE CHILD because of the gender-affirming care issue, the court may step in to protect the child from abandonment, abuse or mistreatment.
The court is NOT assuming jurisdiction so that it may then provide gender-affirming care to the child.
Once again, if I have this wrong, please correct me!
You seem like maybe you chose one study that supports your opinion, rather than talking with actual people who are/were dealing with children who felt they had been born into the body with the "Wrong" sex.
No. The Cass review took four years, was done for the UK National Health Service by a pediatrician with impeccable credentials and reputation (Hilary Cass), and is comprehensive. There were similar earlier reviews in France, Norway, and Sweden, and they reached similar conclusions. There was also a review commissioned from Johns Hopkins by the trans-activist "World Professional Organization for Transgender Health" (WPATH) that reached similar conclusions, but was suppressed by WPATH because they didn't like the results. Here is a good summary of that: https://can-sg.org/2024/06/28/scandalous-suppression-of-research-on-transgender-health/
You guys don't understand, but three years ago I was just like you, a lifelong (I'm 68) blue-no-matter-who Democrat. Then the 30ish son of a friend of mine, a very nice young man but who'd had some lifelong on-and-off mental health issues, declared himself trans and started on estrogen. His mom and dad (my friend) were fully supportive, but to me it just didn't track. So I started digging in, because that's the kind of person I am: confronted with a mystery, I feel like I have to try to understand it. What I found was just so absolutely shocking and appalling that it ultimately converted me to being a hard-core Republican voter. The Democrats, who claim to be the party of "science", are just dead flat wrong on this, and the receipts are there. It is all slowly coming out now, and will go down in history as the greatest medical scandal of all time, easily eclipsing the lobotomy craze of the 1940s and 50s. Weirdly (or maybe not), the primary victims of both crazes are gay people: https://www.attitude.co.uk/culture/sexuality/the-dark-gay-history-of-lobotomies-and-walter-jackson-freeman-ii-419069/
So, the presence of people transitioning sexes is quite small. I am in favor of people being supported in their decisions, and not dehumanized or stigmatized. So, let's talk about problems faced by the rest of the 99.98% of us, surely there are some areas of agreement?
51% of us are women, and women's rights to the privacy, safety, and security of single-sex spaces are being systematically taken away from them by the Democrats' full-on endorsement of the transactivists' claims (now written into law in most blue states) that any man can declare himself to be a woman, at will, at any time, for any length of time, and while so declaring have the legal right to enter any women's single-sex space, place, event, competition, etc etc etc.
>The Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021.
>Among teens, “top surgery” to remove breasts is more common. In the three years ending in 2021, at least 776 mastectomies were performed in the United States on patients ages 13 to 17 with a gender dysphoria diagnosis, according to Komodo’s data analysis of insurance claims. This tally does not include procedures that were paid for out of pocket..
>At least 14,726 minors started hormone treatment with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2017 through 2021, according to the Komodo analysis.
Clearly you have never experienced the often-suicidal anguish of gender dysphoria. I haven’t either, but that doesn’t stop me from empathizing with those who do. It’s a good idea to stay in our lane and do no harm to those who are not harming us in any way at all.
You likely will not believe me, but I DO empathize with them. I have been suicidally depressed several times in my life, and once came very close to going through with it; I had the means at hand. I am currently doing much better (that was about 15 years ago), but I still take daily medication for depression.
But empathy is not the question. The question is, what is the best possible course of treatment? For children, the evidence is very much in favor of "watchful waiting", as the not-for-profit health-care systems of the UK and severl European countries concluded after extensive evidence reviews. A majority of children with gender dysphoria desist when reaching puberty (estimates of the percentage vary by study, but there is little doubt that today it is more than 50%), and the problem with affirmation (via puberty-blocking drugs followed by cross-sex hormones and surgery) is that it makes irreversible changes.
And, nobody knows how to tell apart kids whose dysphoria will desist (again, the large majority) from kids whose dysphoria will persist. There is not even a proposal on the table for how to do this, much less any sort of research-verified protocol. No one has the slightest clue. The activists have all been preaching pure affirmation as the only path, and so no studies have been done.
And this is just medically irresponsible (at best). Using life-altering major drugs and surgeries as treatment for a mental condition that a majority will grow out of on their own really does not make any medical or moral sense.
There is a lot more that could be said here, especially about the explosion in the numbers of kids, girls in particular, who claim gender dysphoria after the advent of social media.
So, no, I'm not going to "stay in my lane", any more than I would if I was driving down the road and saw a car crash. I would stop and call 911. And that's what I'm doing now: trying to get as much attention paid as possible to this ongoing calamity.
Thanks for sharing those stories from the FP and U.K. Appalling, indeed, and I do hope any instances of this that come to light are swiftly dismantled and, where warranted, punished.
That said, your belief that all Democratic leadership supports such extreme and harmful practices is misguided. The support is for those who truly need it to not be denied professional and ethical care. Just as I don’t believe every Republican supports a total or effective ban on abortion.
But this thread is about why people support Trump and your comment of “criminal A or criminal B” is a wild false equivalent. Trump has broken so many laws, and deals so dirty—all for personal gain—that no matter what you may think of his policies, he is unfit to be president. Given the scores of leading Republicans warning about him and even supporting Harris—even Dick Cheney!!—I do hope you can see that Trump is a far bigger danger than what is happening in a handful of transgender clinics.
I only care what laws and administrative policies (which often have the force of law, such as the recent Ed Dept and EEOC rulings) the leadership pushes or doesn't push; whatever they believe in their hearts is irrelevant. And the laws and administrative policies being pushed by the Democrat leadership at both the federal and state level are egregiously bad, so bad that I cannot possibly make myself vote for any Democrat.
>The Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021.
>Among teens, “top surgery” to remove breasts is more common. In the three years ending in 2021, at least 776 mastectomies were performed in the United States on patients ages 13 to 17 with a gender dysphoria diagnosis, according to Komodo’s data analysis of insurance claims. This tally does not include procedures that were paid for out of pocket..
>At least 14,726 minors started hormone treatment with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2017 through 2021, according to the Komodo analysis.
Because this is an ongoing crime against humanity, and my tribe, the Blue Tribe (I have been a registered Democrat for 50 years and still am) is fully endorsing and enabling it. I am deeply ashamed about that, and I feel compelled to do all I can to help stop it.
There is another aspect to the issue, and that is the destruction of the right of women and girls to single-sex spaces, places, events, competitions, etc, for their privacy, dignity, security, and safety. And I care about this because I have women in my life that I love. In every blue state, Democrats have passed laws allowing any boy or man who claims a female "gender identity" full, complete, immediate access to all girls' and women's single-sex spaces, facilities, etc. The Biden-Harris Ed Dept and EEOC have issued rulings (with the full force of federal law) with the same effect at every school and every workplace in the country. Red state AGs have filed multiple lawsuits against these rulings, but the Biden-Harris DOJ is fighting them furiously. SCOTUS will likely ultimately rule for the red states, but only because Trump got to appoint 3 justices. Biden's appointee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, declared under oath that she does not know what a woman is, and so we know how she's going to rule.
I am an academic scientist, and I always thought that the Democrats were the party of science. I was wrong. They are no better on that than the Republicans are, they are just as prone to anti-science manias as the Republicans are. Theirs are just different. It's so sad and disappointing.
Do you know anyone that is transgender? It is very, very complicated.
This is still an emerging human condition that society doesn’t quite yet know how to process. I’m sure societal mistakes are being made but I think the so called “blue tribe” is doing what they think is equitable and the right thing to do. Versus the red tribe that simply doesn’t accept anything they don’t understand or even try to understand. Certainly there is no consideration of science.
Out of all the things that are outrageous in this country… why this issue? Why not the 49 school shootings this year and the resulting 24 dead children?
There is no perfect political party. While I think your voice and concerns deserve a serious discussion, I don’t think this issue justifies an endorsement of Donald J. Trump from a lifelong Democrat.
No, you clearly said “mutilating” which refers to breast reduction surgery. But hold your head high voting for the party of Dennis Hastert and Dick Cheney who slaughtered thousands of innocent Muslim children.
I’m a lifelong Democrat who finds common ground with Never Trump Republicans. Sorry, but I just read all of these opinions and I consider them either profoundly uninformed, ignorant or flatly ridiculous. I will not take the time or space here to shred every single one of those points. I’m done trying to find any common ground with these views. So, yes thanks for posting these in yet another attempt to understand theses voters. And I challenge you to find a similar attempt in trumpistan to understand me or the people I find common ground with.
Robert, I have voted for Republicans and Democrats, but I have been a Democratic voter for at least twenty years now. Beginning pretty much as soon as Obama was elected, the relationships with most of my Republican friends and family went from good-natured joking to personal, vicious attacks on my intelligence and morality. No longer was there any discussion or sharing of viewpoints and information. No, I was WRONG and apparently the spawn of Satan.
So sorry, not sorry, and no thanks to all of it. For the preservation of my sanity, I am done with all of them.
People vote for Nazis because they ARE Nazis... or at a minimum Nazi sympathizers. The best that can be said of them is that they are ignorant racists that don't realize they are playing with fire.
There is no sugar-coating this. You cannot separate the candidate from the vote. If you vote for a Nazi, you ARE a Nazi. Those people represent an existential threat to our democracy and way of life - the era of equally valid points of view or political parties is long dead.
This is exactly the kind of rhetoric that leads to assassination attempts on Trump and dehumanization of half the country. Compare what you wrote to what Ryan Routh wrote: "Trump is MASA: Make Americans Slaves Again. DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose. We cannot afford to fail. The world is counting on us to show the way."
Ignoring for the moment the fact that both assassination “attempts” were made by Trump supporters… I believe that there were more than 20 attempts made on Hitler’s life. If any of them had been successful, untold millions would have been spared misery and death. Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek, and Chelmno would be towns unknown outside of Poland.
What if we all were to take Trump and his minions at their words? What if we were to assume that they will do EXACTLY what they say they will do? Does that then justify “heated” rhetoric”?
At what point is it appropriate to use blunt and painful words? Must we wait until martial law is declared? Or until the first internment camps are opened for political opponents and journalists? How about when immigrants are “resettled” and never heard from again?
We are not in normal times. Our country could easily become a Fascist kleptocracy run for the benefit of the Trump family. Trump and his MAGA meatheads represent an existential threat to our democracy and way of life.
Hitler told the world exactly what he planned to do. The world - outside of Germany - didn’t believe him and laughed at him. Until the laughing stopped… Let’s not repeat the mistake with Trump.
I couldn't agree with you more. I had an average understanding of Hitler (HS and some college history) but certain things Trump would say over the last 4-5 years started to concern me. And I did some digging into the similarities. And the. I watched a Netflix doc on Evil on Trial. I couldn't believe what I was learning. The thi is he's done, said and said he's going to do are right out of Hitlers playbook. I wish that wasn't the case. But it is. Dem's have been called quite frequently demonstrated worshipping pedophiles foe goodness sake. I don't know who people are to be educated if people or speaking out.
I believe that we are falling into the same trap as previously. The media wasn’t/isn’t outraged by Trump. They treat him indulgently and as a source of entertainment for their audience. They aren’t appalled by the things that he says, and they aren’t relentlessly pursuing the story of how dangerous he is.
Your comments would be pathetic if they weren’t so totally blind and dangerous.
If you want to talk about “violent rhetoric”, just look at what Trump has said, starting with the golden elevator. How many times did he tell his supporters at rallies to just haul off and hit someone, that he’d “pay for their legal representation” (which is a total joke, given that he won’t even pay his OWN lawyers who are defending him), telling a violent militia to “stand back and stand by”, and easily a hundred other comments? J6, the attacks on FBI offices by his supporters, the Ohio state police having to sweep the schools in Springfield OH due to credible threats, etc., make it VERY clear how HIS violent rhetoric is calling HIS people to violent action.
As is typical for Trump and MAGA cult members like you, every accusation is projection.
You cannot simply write off half the country that voted for him. The fact that a man can still garner that amount of votes should tell you that the democrats need to adjust.
Here’s the thing about that. I’ve long shared that same sentiment, that many Trump supporters are not racist. And yet Trump can’t seem to get through a speech or debate without stoking racism, and the guy he picked for vice president is copying him. So are we saying that he doesn’t know his audience?
How do we know if somebody is a rasist? What’s in his/her heart? I do not know and I do not care. Somebody who gives material support to a rasist is a rasist. And a vote is material support.
Why not write their ignorant and racist selves off??
I have nothing in common with Nazis. I don’t share their beliefs - do you? I can’t quite believe that those people are citizens of the same country as I. They need to crawl back under the rocks that they came from.
If you vote for a supporter of child mutilation, then you ARE a child mutilator.
And by the way, does "our democracy and way of life" include having access to single-sex showers and changing rooms?
Because the Biden-Harris Ed Dept and EEOC have issued rulings (which took effect on Aug.1) making those illegal at every school and every workplace in the country.
And yet somehow, here in "our democracy", I did not get to vote on that. My representatives in Congress did not get to vote on that. But still it's now federal law.
Key change is the 4th bullet point: "Clarifies that sex discrimination includes discrimination based on sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity."
The issue is that "gender identity" has no written federal legal definition but is widely interpreted to mean what it says in the (proposed but not yet passed) Equality Act: "The term ‘gender identity’ means the gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth." This is entirely determined by the individual, there is no external test or condition. So if I (a man) say I now have a "female gender identity", then I do, and no one can question it. This self-declared "female gender identity" then gives me access to all female-only facilities. Barring me would be illegal discrimination under this ruling.
The EEOC made a similar ruling for workplaces:
> Employers who repeatedly misgender their employees or deny them access to a bathroom consistent with their gender identity are committing workplace harassment under federal anti-discrimination laws, according to a new guidance released Monday [April 29 2024] by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Where’s the part about outlawing same sex showers??? Please point out where those are specifically mentioned in writing, not just your interpretation or personal opinion. Thanks!
I explained how the law works. It grants access to any person claiming a female gender identity to any female-only facility. It does not have to list every conceivable facility to have that effect, it applies to all of them.
But the school boards can't do anything about it, even if they wanted to. The videos are from California, where this is also state law, and where almost every school board is all-in on gender identity.
Those regulations will be challenged in court. Most likely given the current reluctance of Federal courts to allow regulations by government agencies to stand where legislation should be employed, those regulations will be overturned. Changes like you are describing should be enacted via legislation, in my opinion.
They are being challenged in federal court, by the attorneys general in red states.
Blue-state administrations, on the other hand, are all-in with the changes. Most blue states already have similar state laws on their books. If you want to change your gender marker on your state-issued ID in (for example) Pennsylvania, you just need to fill out this form: https://www.dot.state.pa.us/Public/DVSPubsForms/BDL/BDL%20Form/DL-32.pdf
The red-state AGs have been winning injunctions against the rulings, which are now on hold in most red states because of that. This will of course all end up before SCOTUS, which will likely grant a permanent nationwide injunction, but only because Trump was able to appoint three Justices. Had Hillary appointed them instead, they would have all been like Biden appointee Ketanji Brown Jackson, who declared under oath that she does not know what a woman is.
So, Ms. Jackson was asked a question after a long diatribe and articulation by Republican Senator Blackburn of TN, decrying many of the same arguments that you make here (which have merit). At the end, she asked Ms. Jackson what was a “loaded” question: how would she define a woman. Ms, Jackson realizing that this issue was likely to appear before the Supreme Court answered “ask a biologist”. Had she answered someone with a certain genetic code, Sen. Blackburn would have run to FoxNews and said this woman can not rule on this issue without bias, because she already has an opinion. The answer she gave allowed Senator Blackburn to appear on FoxNews and make this claim that you are repeating today. So, the judge was literally damned either way. Republican Senator Kennedy from LA, no less opposed to Jackson asked questions, that led to the point where the judge had to state there was a point where the judge had to form an opinion based upon the law and the facts of the case. Something, which Senator Kennedy was not going to trust a democratic nominee to make, but a much more intellectually honest and less grandstanding way to make his opposition known. Like I have stated in an earlier thread, these trans issues affect > 1% of the population, so let’s talk about issues that affect the other 99 % of us. I understand that you have strong feelings about this matter. Much stronger than mine, and I respect your opinion.
Jackson’s “ask a biologist” answer was disingenuous. The context of the question was how a woman should be defined IN LAW, which is a very salient question for a prospective Justice of the Supreme Court. The current situation is that there is no legal definition: until recently, it was considered too obvious a question to require one. What should happen is that Congress should write a law with a definition of “sex” for purposes of federal law. But that won’t happen, so it will fall to SCOTUS to define “sex”. Is Jackson actually going to “ask a biologist” when she writes her opinion on that? Twenty years ago, every biologist in the world would have given the same answer (the female of a sexually dimorphic species has a body that, if and when fully functioning, produces large gametes, as opposed to the small gametes produced by the male of the species), but now there are any number of politically “trans captured” biologists who will natter on about how “sex is a spectrum”. (This is totally false; there are only two kinds of gametes.) So it’s going to depend on which biologist she asks, if she bothers to ask one at all. I predict that she will, strictly as a CYA move, but she will carefully choose the biologist to give the answer she wants, which is to bow down before the transactivists. She doesn’t want the torrent of death and rape threats that she will get if she goes against them (see JK Rowling).
And trans issues do not effect <1% of the population, they effect EVERYONE, women in particular, who are being forced to give up their rights to the privacy, dignity, security, and safety offered by single-sex spaces. This in principle is bad for men too, but since men are very commonly larger and stronger than women, men do not feel unsafe if women enter their spaces. The opposite is very definitely not true. And there is data out of the UK showing that "transwomen" (that is, men who claim to be women) commit sex crimes at a higher rate than men, who commit sex crimes at much higher rate than women.
Men and women are not the same. One cannot become the other. Saying otherwise, and making it a matter of law, affects EVERYONE.
"But that won’t happen, so it will fall to SCOTUS to define “sex”. Is Jackson actually going to “ask a biologist” when she writes her opinion on that?" - Neither you nor I, know that answer. Perhaps the judge's answer was her coded way of saying the extent and extremism of this transgender stuff has gotten out of hand, and if asked to define her judge's opinion of what a woman is, she would define it much the same as a biologist. (I do not speak fluent biology, like you do, so I will take your definitions to be correct). I realize that you think that the judge was dancing around the question. Perhaps she was, but perhaps not. I will wager that her answer was less dishonest than Judges Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Barrett and Roberts who stated that Roe V. Wade was a settled matter in the law. But I guess you disagree with that too. Which is okay, this is America, for now, there is a first amendment to the constitution allowing the two of us to disagree.
I get what you are saying and I respect it. And I understand if a person born as a man, walks into a women's bathroom, and says I am now a woman, that is a problem, for reasons that I never in a million years expected to ponder.
1) Trump voters who think that they aren't dumb and racist themselves are willing support someone who is dumb and racist for their own benefit. This makes them dumb and racist, as well as entirely self-serving. Many Democratic voters are willing to vote against their own economic self-interest, for example, because it means that life doesn't get a lot worse for a whole lot of people in this country under a second Trump term.
2) The guardrails these "sensible" Trump voters they think will be in place to thwart Trump's worst impulses will not be there, especially with the recent SCOTUS ruling on immunity. To think he is not aware of how untouchable he would now be is willfully naive and dangerous. And he will not likely make the "mistake" of putting establishment Republicans in his administration again. It will be yes-men (and women) all the way down.
I am a republican but not a Trump voter. (I also have a degree in economics but will not get into the details that the MAGA economic agenda is short-sighted and is dangerous in the long run.)
My main issue to the first email is on point #4. 7+ years ago, Trump had the opportunity to follow in the path of Lincoln and surround himself with smart people and listen to their advice. Unfortunately, he did not. Today, with more knowledge of how the system works he will surround himself with MAGA "Yes-Men" and fire anybody who dares to disagree or even question him.
Both of these respondents appear to be uniformed. Like the majority of the 74 million that voted for Drumpf. For starters, he is a con man who simply does NOT represent them, understand them, or have policies in mind to benefit them. Also, the notion that Drumpf or the GQP is somehow better for the economy is just empirically incorrect. Drumpf has not offered one thing on the campaign trail that earns him the higher polling on the economy. Nothing. You would do better to highlight that fact please.
For Trump supporters, “the economy” is code. Under a Trump administration, they may genuinely feel better about the political landscape and their status in it, but it’s not because of jobs reports, unemployment, inflation, etc.
They retained SOME of Trump’s tariffs…on the bad faith trade partners of the U.S. You should know this. The fact that you don’t says more about you than what you have been typing.
Same. Leaves a lot of space to allow for a particularly "kind" interpretation of their reasons in an effort to not hate friends/co-workers/family. Trump voters justify and defend having intentional blinders to Trump's horrific behavior on in order to continue living in a fantasy world where Trump or someone "in power" will defend and represent them. That's easier than doing the real work of researching and understanding issues and then voting/advocating for those issues. I have many issues that I do not agree with Democrats on. But until we are a country of folks working to find solutions instead of name calling and finger pointing, there is nowhere to go with those efforts. So democrats it is without question! Because Trump supporters choose to live in an echo chamber media world, it allows a belief system where Dems are "evil" and "communists" with absolutely no proof that they actually are as such or are interested in being so. Simply SAYING it enough times is evidence. The only thing this "Understanding Trumpists" exercise has done, is allowed me to start articulating exactly what I see as the issues with Trump supporters that encourage this ridiculous "magical thinking" from otherwise reasonable and intelligent folks.
Point 1: How are the Democrats trying to remake the Judeo-Christian tradition? By fostering an inclusive society where everyone who isn’t white and heterosexual is accepted for who they are? Yeah, that’s terrible. And lose the dumb straw man kitty litter argument. It’s ridiculous
Point 2: Fine. You oppose abortion. How do you feel about women, some of whom are girls, being raped and forced to carry the baby to term? How do you feel about women who need therapeutic abortions so they don’t die, having to bleed out in the parking lot of the hospital because doctors in red states are afraid of being arrested for providing critical medical care that is contrary to draconian abortion laws. You say Trump won’t actively support the end of abortion. It’s likely he will do whatever the most persistent group of supporters want him to because he has no core beliefs. But even if he does nothing, we will have a horrible status quo where cases like I described will continue apace
Point 3: His instincts on economics are better than Harris’s? He blew up the budget deficit with an unneeded and unsound tax cut. And the first thing he will do if elected is double down on that insanity. Said tax cuts exacerbated an already unacceptable level of inequality. He has no comprehension of the impact of tariffs. He thinks an across the board 10 or 20% tariff will be paid by China, will not be inflationary, and will not impact any consumer. He favors abolishing the independence of the Fed. We have a nascent but growing green energy technology sector thanks to the investment provisions in the IRA. He will kill them because climate change is a “hoax”. None of his policies will do anything but severely damage our economy.
Point 4: There will be nobody around him to stop his worst impulses. In Term 1 he had those people to start. Then he drove them all away and replaced them with unqualified hacks who will do exactly what he wants them to do. There is not one qualified and serious Republican who will throw away their career and reputation by going to work for him
The assertions in point 4 are the most egregious and the easiest to refute by a cursory examination of the history of Trump’s 1st Administration. It’s complete wish casting and it’s dangerous
There is not one persuasive argument put forth by the “smart” friends
My concern for the first response is that perception Trump voters have on what he will accomplish for them as opposed to a Harris administration. Where did these perceptions of the candidates originate? It also tells me that Harris and Walz have to reach out to the non-college educated crowd in a much more concerted way over the next 50+ days to give specifics on policies that will benefit those voters.
The idea in the second response that the guardrails of government will deter him from his most extreme plans is complete nonsense. Former Trump staffers know he will banish anyone who speaks against him, and he'll hire only sycophantic individuals who will do his bidding. They have said so, and as they were part of his inner circle the first time around, I believe they are not just "disgruntled former employees" but extremely worried about the future of the US if he has a second term as POTUS.
The notion that Trump’s incompetence can be managed by those around him is one of the most dangerous arguments his supporters make. It reflects a profound misunderstanding of the catastrophic damage an unqualified and unfit leader can do, even with so-called “adults in the room” trying to contain him. The reality is that Trump’s incompetence was on full display throughout his presidency—and no amount of surrounding him with advisors could mitigate the chaos he unleashed.
January 6th, 2021, is the most glaring example. Trump incited an attack on the very heart of American democracy, and the people around him were unable—or unwilling—to stop him. This wasn’t a minor “impulse” that could be managed. It was a full-scale assault on the rule of law, and it showed how dangerous it is to believe that Trump’s worst tendencies can be reined in. The stakes are far too high to gamble on a leader who repeatedly demonstrated that he is willing to subvert democratic norms for his own gain.
Moreover, Trump’s presidency was marked by a revolving door of advisors and officials, many of whom left in disgrace or frustration because they could not control his erratic behavior. His foreign policy was similarly chaotic, alienating allies and emboldening adversaries. To claim that incompetence is preferable to capability because of a fear of policy disagreements is not only absurd—it’s reckless.
Leaders must be competent, principled, and capable of making decisions in the best interest of the nation. Trump is none of these things. His incompetence is not something that can be mitigated—it is a fundamental danger to the nation. We have seen the damage he caused when given the chance, and it is irresponsible to suggest that another four years of this chaos is an acceptable risk.
So, basically you do not have any explanations of why people vote for Trump from any actual Trump voters.
The second hand reasons have little to do with reality based gripes.
No, there has been NO “discussion” (except from Trump supports) of “installing kitty litter in the bathrooms to accommodate those who identify as furies”.
No, abortion is not “the intentional ending of a human life” to the vast majority of voters. To those that believe it IS the only logical policy to support is to end all types of abortion from the moment of conception including several forms of birth control methods.
Most of the GOP and Trump are running from that reality like it’s toxic because it IS a toxic position to the overwhelming majority of voters.
No, Trump’s “instincts of economic issues” are NOT “better than her (Harris’s) formulated beliefs”. Trump has terrible economic instincts and was (and still is) a terrible failed businessperson.
Tariffs have been FALSELY sold by Trump as “China pays”. It IS A TAX ON AMERICANS. Mostly falling of the bottom 90% of Americans while “unrealized capital gains” is almost exclusive fall (if it ever got passed, which is probably won’t) the top one tenth of a percent as it would apply only to people with wealth above $100 MILLION.
This idea that he IS a great businessman is a mirage and a con, propagated by years of HIS saying so and that silly reality TV show that was ALL FAKE!!
No, the “binary choice” clearly points to the only sane person running, Kamala Harris.
No, the “Forgotten man” is a canard. Most Trump supports are very well off financially in relations to the coast of living where they live. It’s a LOT more expensive to live in NYC, LA, Chicago and most big voters were Democrats vastly out populate GOPers, and the cost of living in rural areas is exponentially less.
No, Donald Trump does NOT “understand the frustrations of this group (“non-college educated Americans”) as he has ALWAYS been an elitist, born with a platinum spoon up his ass, and regularly RIPS OFF “non-college educated Americans” when they try to collect for work they have done for him.
Trump’s WHOLE CAREER has been as an ELITIST “sticking it to” the regular folks.
His “understanding” of the “frustrations” is almost ALL based on demagoguery and RACISM. Anti-immigrant racism that is his main message since the day he ran in 2015. Of course, based on LIES!!
My opinion of why people vote for Trump is he hates the people they hate. That hate is based in large part of race centric feelings of the loss of white privilege.
Trump opening and actively speaks to and APPEALS to people with this feelings of the “other” getting an unfair leg up (which is FALSE…the truth is that non-whites have been and still are at a disadvantage in almost every walk of life.)
EXCEPT sports, where merit is the ONLY measure of success.
Maybe “Too many people — especially liberals — dismiss ALL Trump voters as dumb, racist or dumb and racist.”….I am not one of them.
BUT, it is more accurate that MOST Trump voters are gullible and purposely ignorant to the truth (hence Trump full-on war against objective truth) and are extremely receptive to racist appeals and rhetoric.
This, 100%. If you have to lie and make something up to support your political opinion, then what does that say about your political position? In addition to the examples in these emails (kitty litter in schools?), see JD Vance’s admission of lying about the Haitian immigrants in Springfield last weekend.
It's pretty clear that the Trump/Vance campaign (and almost the full GOP) cannot express any ideas without either gross misrepresentation or outright lies.
This is well beyond the usual political spin. The Harris/Walz campaign is the opposite.
Trump is a pathological liar. He lies even when he does not have to. The GOP has taken on the persona of their leader...full stop.
Respect for publishing these letters. You are one of the few left-leaning writers who would dare post anything like this. MSM failed for the past decade to do a simple job: talk to real people with diverse perspectives and hearing them out.
Sadly, there are too many leftists who demonize Trump and his "MAGAt" supporters to the point of physical violence and multiple assassination attempts. Data shows most Democrat voters live in bubbles where they don't never socialize with Republicans and are much more likely to ostracize friends or family who vote differently. So much for tolerance ;)
Trump demonizes himself. He needs no one to do that for him. The list of the people he has made fun of, called out or destroyed with his ugly comments has no end. Ask the people of Springfield. He has done this to himself.
I might ask . . why were these young people driven to think like that? Could it be the demonizing, violent, dehumanizing rhetoric we hear from Trump and his surrogates?
"MSM failed for the past decade to do a simple job: talk to real people with diverse perspectives and hear them out." Do you read the Washington Post? They have had numerous articles over the past 8 years on who trump supporters are, going across the country and interviewing them.
Fair points, but please stop with the alleged assassination connections. Trump, by his actions and words, has provided ample evidence to charge that he is a threat to the democracy. If accurately stating a candidate’s positions puts the candidate in danger, that’s on the candidate. What would be the alternative? Besides that, there is no evidence that I know of that either of these crackpots was responding to Democratic rhetoric. It was Trump himself who declined in last week’s debate to back Ukraine. A few days later a guy obsessed with Ukraine apparently was preparing to take a shot at him. If an anti-abortion nut took a shot at Harris over her stance, would you blame Republicans?
I get it. You can’t expect people to sacrifice their own well being for the “greater good” whatever that may be. If you’re reason for voting Trump is ,despite his racism and lack of intelligence him as president is better for me and my family I can’t argue with that. In my opinion Trump is actually worse for you in the long run but it is an argument I can respect. This is an excellent piece.
If everyone did what was best for me and my family, would anyone ever sign up for military service and be willing to go die in a war for the sake of the country? I'm not a vet myself, but I appreciate the sacrifices that all of our vets made. Trump doesn't seem to respect the "suckers and losers".
The argument that Trump represents some kind of bulwark against a radical cultural shift promoted by the Democratic Party is a deeply flawed mischaracterization of what is really at stake. The suggestion that Democrats are on a crusade to destroy “Judeo-Christian” values is fearmongering at its worst—designed to stir up resentment and obscure the fact that Trump himself is a walking contradiction of the moral values his supporters claim to cherish. We’re not talking about “personal failings” here; Trump’s actions in office reflect a dangerous pattern of undermining the rule of law, stoking racial and social divisions, and peddling conspiracy theories that threaten democratic institutions.
Let’s be clear: The idea that Trump isn’t trying to “recreate culture” is false. His constant attacks on truth, his encouragement of extremist groups, and his willingness to legitimize hate speech are direct assaults on the cultural fabric of America. He’s not a protector of tradition—he’s a destabilizer, turning public discourse into a toxic battleground where civility and decency are abandoned in favor of rage and division. If anything, it is Trump who has done more to erode the sense of shared national values than any policy debate over LGBTQ+ rights or other cultural issues that his supporters rail against.
Moreover, the “kitty litter” narrative is not only a falsehood but a cynical distraction from real issues. The fact that it is even invoked as an argument is a testament to the intellectual bankruptcy of this position. We have serious challenges to address—education, healthcare, the climate crisis—and instead, Trump supporters cling to culture-war talking points to justify their support for a man who has no coherent moral or cultural vision beyond his own narcissism.
Thanks for publishing these Chris. All it did for me was confirm that there is no SANE reason to vote for Trump. Supporters can rationalize all they want. They are voting for narcissistic criminal!
The arguments you present are both rational and logical. However, the part that your emails left out is that Trump has a vowed vengeance against anyone who opposes him, to the point of violence. Second, Trump is a convicted felon. No logical argument can be made for his criminal conviction to have been fabricated by the Biden administration Trump is a criminal and a liar, paranoid, and vengeful. And lastly, putting him in the oval office puts his finger on the nuclear trigger that itself should scare the living daylights out of any logical intelligent person.
In short...these are rational and logical arguments....what do they have to do with Trump?
I have been posting on FoxNews for 8 years and predominantly most of the posters are never as eloquent or logical as these arguments. And, again, most of the time, it seems like the arguments involve having to excuse Trump for something he said, tweeted or did. So...it feels like a lot of his support is either GOP muscle memory (Dem fear/hatred built up for decades) or just flat out cultish behavior.
ex-GOP guy (had to throw that in there for context)
I'm far more scared of Putin's finger.
The ongoing insistence of the Western powers (with the full support of Biden and Harris) to keep provoking him is terrifying.
> Putin says NATO will be "in the war" if U.S. or allies let Ukraine fire long-range missiles at Russia
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/putin-nato-ukraine-war-us-long-range-missiles/
Wow! A Putin apologist on the Chris Cillizza "So What" feed. So it's the fault of the current administration that Putin invaded Ukraine and freedom-loving people want to defend that country? The two people who wrote the "Trump vote" explanations had to work hard and wiggle a lot to make their implausible cases. But MarkS says the hidden part right out loud. Wow! Just, WOW!
Putin is Pure Evil, Putin is Sauron.
Putin's invasion of Ukraine, WHICH BEGAN IN 2014, is a purely evil act.
So: I am in no way a Putin apologist.
But confronting his Pure Evil demands wisdom, lest he blow us all up (which he can do).
The sad history is that in the 2000s a whole bunch of former East Bloc countries, including ones that were actually in the USSR (like Ukraine), were admitted to NATO, but Ukraine was not. Putin said it would make him really mad if Ukraine was admitted, so the West acquiesced and left Ukraine out. This was a chicken-shit move and was the first big mistake on the part of the West.
Now, the WHOLE POINT of NATO is to be a one-for-all-and-all-for-one miltary pact. This has two purposes: (1) to maximize chances of winning a war against Russia (if it comes to that), and (2) to deter an attack by Russia on any NATO member country, precisely because it immediately leads to a total war, which Russia is likely to lose.
So: the West hung Ukraine out to dry. And Putin responded by invading Ukraine in 2014 and seizing 5% of its territory, the Crimean peninsula. (For comparison, Montana is a similar percentage of the continental US.)
The West's repsonse (Obama-Biden was in charge in the US) was to do absolutely nothing. This was the second big mistake of the West.
So Putin continued, waging a low-level conflict in the Donbas region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War
Still the West did nothing. This ongoing war got no attention at all in the US in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.
Then in 2022, Putin launched a significant escalation, attempting to seize the capital Kiev quickly and install a puppet regime (a la Belarus).
Now, suddenly, the West went bananas and did a 180 in policy, declaring that Ukraine's freedom from Russia was existential for the West and that the West needed to arm Ukraine to fight back.
This was nuts! If the West wanted to protect Ukraine, Ukraine should have been admitted to NATO in 2000s along with the other former SSRs (Latvia, Estonia).
But then the West compounded the mistake by not going all-in. Of course the risk of total nuclear war was high, so it's understandable, but the policy of kinda-sorta arming Ukraine, but not nearly enough to allow Ukraine to win quickly and cleanly, just led to the destruction of vast amounts of Ukraine's infrastructure, along with mass death and injury and homelessness.
So here we are now, with Ukraine blasted to rubble and close to a million dead on both sides (the Russian soldiers are victims of Putin's Pure Evil just as much as the Ukrainians), no end in sight, and risk of all-out nuclear war still very much on the table.
I am just sick and tired of the mindless defense of Western policy on Ukaine by those (including many commenters here) who have absolutely no knowledge of the history, and I'm especially sick and tired of the lie (repeated by Harris during the debate) that the invasion of Ukraine began a few days after she met with Zelensky in 2022. The invasion had actually begun 8 years earlier, and her boss Biden (then VP) and his boss Obama did absolutely nothing about it.
I remember with Russua started in on Crimea. All the US did was drop care packages. I was disgusted then. In the time Russia started pushing forward more into Ukraine NATO has votes Sweden and Finland in and left Ukraine to blow in the wind again. Saying they didn't want to vote them in whole at war. We'll, maybe if you would've earlier they wouldn't be at war. I share your frustration. And Trump has basically said he'd let Russia do " whatever the hell they want."
I think that Obama felt very constrained by 2 things: 1) We were still divesting ourselves out of a decade of being in the Middle East costing US lives and billions of $'s. The American people were not keen on yet another overseas war...ESPECIALLY...with Russia 2) He had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and I think he felt starting a war wasn't aligned with that. Right or wrong...I'm guessing he felt that way.
Actually Biden has done a lot. The reality is Ukraine has been a very corrupt country and Obama/Biden did a lot to clean it up. So the reason we sent lethal aid under Trump was because of the reforms Ukraine had made leading up to that moment. Bush urged Sharon to withdraw from Gaza while supporting Abbas and then sent Abbas aid…and it ended up with Hamas. Duuuuuuuuh. 😉
Thank you, Wayne.
You are kind of dismissing Ukrainian agency in all this. This started long before 2014. I'm not certain the poisoning of Yushenko was the opening shot, but it came 10 years earlier. The result was the Orange Revolution which sent Yanokovich scurrying away. However nothing happened then to shake Party of Regions' hold on about half the electorate. In the aftermath of the Orange Revolution, no Western country supported Ukraine like it should have.
Mostly Europe just told Ukraine to suck it up and deal with it when Moscow turned off the gas that transited to Europe through Ukraine. This made Yushenko a weak president. Meanwhile, Russia Moldiva'd Georgia. That is, they "liberated" part of the country so the border dispute would make them ineligible for NATO. Notably, only John McCain gave a damn about this.
In 2010, after Paul Manafort was sent to whitewash Yanokovich, Ukraine was left with two not great choices, either Yanokovich or Tymoshenko. Yanokovich won, but promised to work on an association agreement with Europe....and he did! Europe was prepared for a trade and visa agreement which would let Ukrainians visit all Shengen countries if they got a visa to one! Then, just before the agreement was to be signed, Russia bought out Yanokovich as he traded the EU association agreement for one with Russia instead. The protests to this are what we called EuroMaidan. Once Yanukovich's personal police shot some of the peaceful protestors, the people had enough. Yanukovich moved to Rostov, Russia annexed Crimea, then caused havoc in the Donbas. All the while, Ukrainians demanded more integration with Europe. And they got them.
Getting them meant that Putin was unable to do what he wanted. Also, free Ukrainians being able to go to Europe willy nilly meant that his agreementless Russians might notice their raw deal. That might cause them to want a different leader. So he declared all Ukrainians Nazis and invaded.
You can put whatever you want on the table for Putin in an attempt to advertise him using nukes. However, he is a liar and coward. No deal would ever be worth as much as the Budapest Memorandum where we, Britain, and Russia bowed to protect Ukraines borders if they gave up their nukes. Also, for Ukraine, this is a fight for their ethnic survival. They will not stop until they are all dead, including children, grand children, etc. And they will be free no matter what we offer Putin because we are scared of him. 🇺🇦
Wow...thanks for the great summation of the issue. I would also add that the election of Trump probably gave Putin some needed comfort level about what the West's response would be. I'm guessing that the invasion was actually planned for Trump's 2nd term but Trump lost. Putin made a calculation that it was now or never and went for it. (This is entirely my own personal speculation)
I think we are projecting a bit when we layer American politics over Putin's actions. We can't know what kind of Game of Thrones business is happening there. Ukraine has some of the best farmland in the world. Folks have been willing to fight and kill for it for a long time. :(
I'd be remiss if I didn't add that Russia annexing parts of former Soviet countries is exactly the behavior that made Ukraine want to join NATO. In early 2008, it was almost 50/50 in favor.
If Russia doesn't want NATO on their border, the stop threatening the countries on their border. Simple as that.
Yes...I often use the analogy that there were absolutely NO Russians on the Ukrainian border losing sleep over a potential Ukrainian invasion before Russia actually did invade.
It’s Substack. Substack is a ripoff as well as being a steaming pile of manure. My only subscription was one to Taibbi’s Substack because I subscribed to him before it was obvious he was conning gullible Trump voters out of $5/month. When I turned against Taibbi he first tried to get me to cancel my subscription for a full refund. I told him I wouldn’t renew my subscription and it was almost up and so he needn’t worry. One day during the Twitter Files BS he had enough of me and first banned me and then he got the Substack founders to delete my account and every comment I had made on Substack.
People like Trump who bow before Putin and do his bidding scare me far more than Putin himself.
Putin has done the nuke bluff enough that we should all be able to recognize it.
He'd be signing his own death warrant if he dropped nukes.
Putin says a lot of things, so the world is just going to sit idly by while he invades sovereign countries that are on his border because of something he threatens. Think the road to appeasement has demonstrated that it’s either now or then. His military is a fictional hegemonic threat. How many years did they fight in Afghanistan that’s on their border and was unable to conquer the Afghanis and install a Russian friendly ruler; their war with Afghanistan lead to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and provided an opportunity for Putin to consolidate power. Putin promoted a quick victory in Ukraine 2.5 years later he’s no closer than he was shortly after his initial invasion of Ukraine. Of course he’s going to make the ultimate threats of mass annihilation, and bring war to NATO, he’s already at war with NATO, they’re just not supplying troops; the actual provocation of NATO would accelerate his inevitable loss, he’s not that stupid; it’s easier and safer to make catastrophic ifs threats, while his apologist seek to undermine the coalition that has come to Ukraines support.
The quibble I have with Trump supporters is not their alienation from the system. It is the corrupt, criminal vessel they are using as an avatar for what in many cases are legitimate economic concerns.
My problem is that I view the Democrats in office as every bit as criminal: they all support the ongoing crime against humanity of mutilating and sterilizing children on the basis of pure medical quackery.
So for me, it's Criminal A or Criminal B.
Where is your evidence that this is actually happening without a parent’s consent? Like many things that Trump and his supporters repeat and repeat, you offer zero hard facts to back up these assertions. When Trump’s challenged on this or anything else he says, and he knows he doesn’t have the receipts to back it up, he always dissembles with statements like “I have heard” and “people say”. Bring facts from reputable sources if you’re going to say things like this
My son is transgender, but he did not go to school one day as a girl and come home later that day as a boy after having surgery in some secret room. It was a long 2-year process that included visits with a therapist to make sure that this wasn't some phase that he would grow out of. My wife and I fully supported our son becoming the person he was, and he's never been happier.
Thank you for taking a chance by letting us know some intimate details of your family’s life!
I am truly *so* sorry that your family has to deal with this totally irrational fear of the transgender community and all of the ginned up outrage from MAGA that *totally* blows everything out of proportion…
Most of it IS with parental consent, but the parents have been gaslit by the false claim of "do you want a live son or a dead daughter" (or vice versa). The false claims of enhanced suicide risk from "watchful waiting" vs immediate affirmation have been discredited. See the Cass review from the UK for the most comprehensive analysis: https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/
Then there are the "trans state sanctuary laws" passed by Democrats in blue states: https://stateline.org/2023/06/22/more-blue-states-declare-themselves-sanctuaries-for-transgender-health-care/
These blue-state laws allow a kid (even from within the same state) to run away from home and get puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones (and ultimately surgery) without parental consent. It's not clear how many such cases have actually happened, but that these new laws give family court judges new powers to order it is unquestionable.
The evidence base for any sort of drug-based and/or surgery-based intervention is extremely weak (see the Cass review). These interventions have been severely restricted now in several European countries; in the UK, they are restricted to clinical trials only. This is because Europe's health-care systems are not-for-profit, and they are able to resist the push from Big Pharma to create a new pool of lifelong medical patients.
The US medical system has completely failed to protect our kids, and the Democrats are all-in on it. Not only are they passing those laws in blue states that remove parents rights, the Biden-Harris DOJ is suing to overturn child-protecting laws in red states that are similar to those in Europe.
I’m really glad that you are here to tell those parents — who have spent years with their own children, watching them grow and struggle — that you personally know better than them, despite never having met either parent or child, and you personal judgement should be substituted for their own, their child’s, their therapists, and medical doctors.
This is exactly what explains a Trump supporter for me. A lack of empathy or ability to put themselves in someone else’s shoes, or to find another persepctive.
What states have removed parents' rights? Your "facts" are rather selective and some are incorrect. My understanding is that courts get involved only when there is a dispute over treatment, not to usurp parental control. This is a complex issue and must be approached with great seriousness by all parties. Taking the Cass report into consideration may be part of a decision-making process. Those who are not participants in this situation owe respect to the challenges of those who are. This does NOT include ridiculous, intellectually insulting claims that schools are arbitrarily performing sex change procedures during recess.
California bill SB 107 was the model legislation for removing parental rights. It was passed with unanimous support by Democrats and has now been copied in multiple blue states.
From the SB 107 Bill Summary: "The bill would authorize a court to take temporary jurisdiction because a child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care."
https://pluralpolicy.com/app/legislative-tracking/bill/details/state-ca-20212022-sb107/1035849
Family Code, Section 3424, as amended by SB 107:
(a) A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to, or threatened with, mistreatment or abuse, or because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code [definition quoted below].
(b) If there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this part and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive, a child custody determination made under this section remains in effect until an order is obtained from a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive. If a child custody proceeding has not been or is not commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under Sections 3421 to 3423, inclusive, a child custody determination made under this section becomes a final determination, if it so provides and this state becomes the home state of the child.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FAM§ionNum=3424.
Welfare and Institutions Code, Section 16010.2:
(b)(3)(A) “Gender affirming health care” means medically necessary health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient, and may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(i) Interventions to suppress the development of endogenous secondary sex characteristics.
(ii) Interventions to align the patient's appearance or physical body with the patient's gender identity.
(iii) Interventions to alleviate symptoms of clinically significant distress resulting from gender dysphoria, as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition.
(B) “Gender affirming mental health care” means mental health care or behavioral health care that respects the gender identity of the patient, as experienced and defined by the patient, and may include, but is not limited to, developmentally appropriate exploration and integration of identity, reduction of distress, adaptive coping, and strategies to increase family acceptance.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=16010.2&lawCode=WIC
Perhaps reading the first paragraph you quoted in its basic form would help clarify something? (Please correct me if this is not a proper sentence deconstruction):
* A court has temporary jurisdiction if a child has been abandoned or mistreated or abused (or threatened with same) because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care *
Further simplified:
* A court CAN assume TEMPORARY, EMERGENCY jurisdiction:
IF a child has been abandoned or mistreated
and/or
IF a child has been threatened to be abandoned
or mistreated
and
IF that abandonment, mistreatment and/or
abuse occurred because the child has been
unable to obtain gender-affirming care…*
Further simplified:
* If a child is abandoned, mistreated and/or abused (or threatened with same), because ___________,
a court may intervene, temporarily, and assume jurisdiction of the child.*
You can fill in the blank however you wish, but my reading of this tells me that, essentially, if a child is being abused, the court may intervene to stop that child abuse.
I suppose there are some who believe it is acceptable for a parent or legal guardian to abuse a child for whatever reason they want (and maybe especially regarding gender-affirming care), but…
This Bill seems to be saying that if a child desires gender-affirming care and the parent does not want/ does not allow the child to receive that care AND THEN ABUSES THE CHILD because of the gender-affirming care issue, the court may step in to protect the child from abandonment, abuse or mistreatment.
The court is NOT assuming jurisdiction so that it may then provide gender-affirming care to the child.
Once again, if I have this wrong, please correct me!
You seem like maybe you chose one study that supports your opinion, rather than talking with actual people who are/were dealing with children who felt they had been born into the body with the "Wrong" sex.
No. The Cass review took four years, was done for the UK National Health Service by a pediatrician with impeccable credentials and reputation (Hilary Cass), and is comprehensive. There were similar earlier reviews in France, Norway, and Sweden, and they reached similar conclusions. There was also a review commissioned from Johns Hopkins by the trans-activist "World Professional Organization for Transgender Health" (WPATH) that reached similar conclusions, but was suppressed by WPATH because they didn't like the results. Here is a good summary of that: https://can-sg.org/2024/06/28/scandalous-suppression-of-research-on-transgender-health/
You guys don't understand, but three years ago I was just like you, a lifelong (I'm 68) blue-no-matter-who Democrat. Then the 30ish son of a friend of mine, a very nice young man but who'd had some lifelong on-and-off mental health issues, declared himself trans and started on estrogen. His mom and dad (my friend) were fully supportive, but to me it just didn't track. So I started digging in, because that's the kind of person I am: confronted with a mystery, I feel like I have to try to understand it. What I found was just so absolutely shocking and appalling that it ultimately converted me to being a hard-core Republican voter. The Democrats, who claim to be the party of "science", are just dead flat wrong on this, and the receipts are there. It is all slowly coming out now, and will go down in history as the greatest medical scandal of all time, easily eclipsing the lobotomy craze of the 1940s and 50s. Weirdly (or maybe not), the primary victims of both crazes are gay people: https://www.attitude.co.uk/culture/sexuality/the-dark-gay-history-of-lobotomies-and-walter-jackson-freeman-ii-419069/
So, the presence of people transitioning sexes is quite small. I am in favor of people being supported in their decisions, and not dehumanized or stigmatized. So, let's talk about problems faced by the rest of the 99.98% of us, surely there are some areas of agreement?
51% of us are women, and women's rights to the privacy, safety, and security of single-sex spaces are being systematically taken away from them by the Democrats' full-on endorsement of the transactivists' claims (now written into law in most blue states) that any man can declare himself to be a woman, at will, at any time, for any length of time, and while so declaring have the legal right to enter any women's single-sex space, place, event, competition, etc etc etc.
Who is mutilating and sterilizing children?
The gerbils in his mind, Ruth….the gerbils in his mind.
Nope, actual doctors, like "Yeet the Teets" surgeon Dr. Sidhbh Gallagher in Miami:
https://www.tiktok.com/@gendersurgeon/video/6889485602199227653
https://www.instagram.com/drsidhbhgallagher/
From the news agency Reuters, two years ago:
>The Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021.
>Among teens, “top surgery” to remove breasts is more common. In the three years ending in 2021, at least 776 mastectomies were performed in the United States on patients ages 13 to 17 with a gender dysphoria diagnosis, according to Komodo’s data analysis of insurance claims. This tally does not include procedures that were paid for out of pocket..
>At least 14,726 minors started hormone treatment with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2017 through 2021, according to the Komodo analysis.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/
Clearly you have never experienced the often-suicidal anguish of gender dysphoria. I haven’t either, but that doesn’t stop me from empathizing with those who do. It’s a good idea to stay in our lane and do no harm to those who are not harming us in any way at all.
You likely will not believe me, but I DO empathize with them. I have been suicidally depressed several times in my life, and once came very close to going through with it; I had the means at hand. I am currently doing much better (that was about 15 years ago), but I still take daily medication for depression.
But empathy is not the question. The question is, what is the best possible course of treatment? For children, the evidence is very much in favor of "watchful waiting", as the not-for-profit health-care systems of the UK and severl European countries concluded after extensive evidence reviews. A majority of children with gender dysphoria desist when reaching puberty (estimates of the percentage vary by study, but there is little doubt that today it is more than 50%), and the problem with affirmation (via puberty-blocking drugs followed by cross-sex hormones and surgery) is that it makes irreversible changes.
And, nobody knows how to tell apart kids whose dysphoria will desist (again, the large majority) from kids whose dysphoria will persist. There is not even a proposal on the table for how to do this, much less any sort of research-verified protocol. No one has the slightest clue. The activists have all been preaching pure affirmation as the only path, and so no studies have been done.
And this is just medically irresponsible (at best). Using life-altering major drugs and surgeries as treatment for a mental condition that a majority will grow out of on their own really does not make any medical or moral sense.
There is a lot more that could be said here, especially about the explosion in the numbers of kids, girls in particular, who claim gender dysphoria after the advent of social media.
So, no, I'm not going to "stay in my lane", any more than I would if I was driving down the road and saw a car crash. I would stop and call 911. And that's what I'm doing now: trying to get as much attention paid as possible to this ongoing calamity.
Thanks for sharing those stories from the FP and U.K. Appalling, indeed, and I do hope any instances of this that come to light are swiftly dismantled and, where warranted, punished.
That said, your belief that all Democratic leadership supports such extreme and harmful practices is misguided. The support is for those who truly need it to not be denied professional and ethical care. Just as I don’t believe every Republican supports a total or effective ban on abortion.
But this thread is about why people support Trump and your comment of “criminal A or criminal B” is a wild false equivalent. Trump has broken so many laws, and deals so dirty—all for personal gain—that no matter what you may think of his policies, he is unfit to be president. Given the scores of leading Republicans warning about him and even supporting Harris—even Dick Cheney!!—I do hope you can see that Trump is a far bigger danger than what is happening in a handful of transgender clinics.
I only care what laws and administrative policies (which often have the force of law, such as the recent Ed Dept and EEOC rulings) the leadership pushes or doesn't push; whatever they believe in their hearts is irrelevant. And the laws and administrative policies being pushed by the Democrat leadership at both the federal and state level are egregiously bad, so bad that I cannot possibly make myself vote for any Democrat.
Mutilating and sterilizing children?
From the news agency Reuters, two years ago:
>The Komodo analysis of insurance claims found 56 genital surgeries among patients ages 13 to 17 with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2019 to 2021.
>Among teens, “top surgery” to remove breasts is more common. In the three years ending in 2021, at least 776 mastectomies were performed in the United States on patients ages 13 to 17 with a gender dysphoria diagnosis, according to Komodo’s data analysis of insurance claims. This tally does not include procedures that were paid for out of pocket..
>At least 14,726 minors started hormone treatment with a prior gender dysphoria diagnosis from 2017 through 2021, according to the Komodo analysis.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/
Note also that 2020-2021 had a lot of pandemic restrictions on elective surgeries, holding down the numbers.
Why is this your cause?
Because this is an ongoing crime against humanity, and my tribe, the Blue Tribe (I have been a registered Democrat for 50 years and still am) is fully endorsing and enabling it. I am deeply ashamed about that, and I feel compelled to do all I can to help stop it.
There is another aspect to the issue, and that is the destruction of the right of women and girls to single-sex spaces, places, events, competitions, etc, for their privacy, dignity, security, and safety. And I care about this because I have women in my life that I love. In every blue state, Democrats have passed laws allowing any boy or man who claims a female "gender identity" full, complete, immediate access to all girls' and women's single-sex spaces, facilities, etc. The Biden-Harris Ed Dept and EEOC have issued rulings (with the full force of federal law) with the same effect at every school and every workplace in the country. Red state AGs have filed multiple lawsuits against these rulings, but the Biden-Harris DOJ is fighting them furiously. SCOTUS will likely ultimately rule for the red states, but only because Trump got to appoint 3 justices. Biden's appointee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, declared under oath that she does not know what a woman is, and so we know how she's going to rule.
I am an academic scientist, and I always thought that the Democrats were the party of science. I was wrong. They are no better on that than the Republicans are, they are just as prone to anti-science manias as the Republicans are. Theirs are just different. It's so sad and disappointing.
Do you know anyone that is transgender? It is very, very complicated.
This is still an emerging human condition that society doesn’t quite yet know how to process. I’m sure societal mistakes are being made but I think the so called “blue tribe” is doing what they think is equitable and the right thing to do. Versus the red tribe that simply doesn’t accept anything they don’t understand or even try to understand. Certainly there is no consideration of science.
Out of all the things that are outrageous in this country… why this issue? Why not the 49 school shootings this year and the resulting 24 dead children?
There is no perfect political party. While I think your voice and concerns deserve a serious discussion, I don’t think this issue justifies an endorsement of Donald J. Trump from a lifelong Democrat.
You do realize that competitive female athletes get breast reduction surgery??
Some do.
But cosmetic surgery does not change sex. That's the whole point.
And it should not be undertaken by children, who in many states (including California and New York) cannot even get a tattoo before age 18.
No, you clearly said “mutilating” which refers to breast reduction surgery. But hold your head high voting for the party of Dennis Hastert and Dick Cheney who slaughtered thousands of innocent Muslim children.
Breast reduction on a child for a non-medical reason is indeed mutilation, and should be banned.
Dick Cheney has endorsed Kamala.
And you believed Cheney had great judgment. I never voted for Cheney and don’t care about his opinions one way or another.
I’m a lifelong Democrat who finds common ground with Never Trump Republicans. Sorry, but I just read all of these opinions and I consider them either profoundly uninformed, ignorant or flatly ridiculous. I will not take the time or space here to shred every single one of those points. I’m done trying to find any common ground with these views. So, yes thanks for posting these in yet another attempt to understand theses voters. And I challenge you to find a similar attempt in trumpistan to understand me or the people I find common ground with.
Robert, I have voted for Republicans and Democrats, but I have been a Democratic voter for at least twenty years now. Beginning pretty much as soon as Obama was elected, the relationships with most of my Republican friends and family went from good-natured joking to personal, vicious attacks on my intelligence and morality. No longer was there any discussion or sharing of viewpoints and information. No, I was WRONG and apparently the spawn of Satan.
So sorry, not sorry, and no thanks to all of it. For the preservation of my sanity, I am done with all of them.
People vote for Nazis because they ARE Nazis... or at a minimum Nazi sympathizers. The best that can be said of them is that they are ignorant racists that don't realize they are playing with fire.
There is no sugar-coating this. You cannot separate the candidate from the vote. If you vote for a Nazi, you ARE a Nazi. Those people represent an existential threat to our democracy and way of life - the era of equally valid points of view or political parties is long dead.
Please don’t with the Nazi talk.
Will do.
I promise to come visit you at the internment camp for journalists that Trump doesn't like....!
Hi Chris - you might find Steve Schmidt’s post today interesting……….
https://steveschmidt.substack.com/p/i-know-enough-history-to-know-what
Maybe you could borrow Tim Miller's pearls 🤷♀️
This is exactly the kind of rhetoric that leads to assassination attempts on Trump and dehumanization of half the country. Compare what you wrote to what Ryan Routh wrote: "Trump is MASA: Make Americans Slaves Again. DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose. We cannot afford to fail. The world is counting on us to show the way."
Ignoring for the moment the fact that both assassination “attempts” were made by Trump supporters… I believe that there were more than 20 attempts made on Hitler’s life. If any of them had been successful, untold millions would have been spared misery and death. Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, Majdanek, and Chelmno would be towns unknown outside of Poland.
What if we all were to take Trump and his minions at their words? What if we were to assume that they will do EXACTLY what they say they will do? Does that then justify “heated” rhetoric”?
At what point is it appropriate to use blunt and painful words? Must we wait until martial law is declared? Or until the first internment camps are opened for political opponents and journalists? How about when immigrants are “resettled” and never heard from again?
We are not in normal times. Our country could easily become a Fascist kleptocracy run for the benefit of the Trump family. Trump and his MAGA meatheads represent an existential threat to our democracy and way of life.
Hitler told the world exactly what he planned to do. The world - outside of Germany - didn’t believe him and laughed at him. Until the laughing stopped… Let’s not repeat the mistake with Trump.
For those of you who might believe that I am engaging in hyperbole, here are parallels with pre-1933 Germany and the US in 2024:
1. A population suffering the impacts of inflation and unemployment
2. A dysfunctional government that is unable to address any of the population’s problems
3. A doddering old man as President, who is unable to provide the necessary leadership
4. A wannabe dictator seeking complete power
5. A manifesto that documents the extreme actions that the wannabe dictator’s party will take if in power
6. Law enforcement, the military, and veterans who are more loyal to the wannabe dictator than their country
7. Blaming social/economic problems on a minority, and advocating persecution/
expulsion of that minority as a solution to those problems
8. A party that fanatically supports the wannabe dictator and is willing to use violence to achieve their goals
9. Legal justification that allows the President/
Chancellor to do anything they please as long as it can be justified as within their official role
Those who do not learn from history’s mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
I couldn't agree with you more. I had an average understanding of Hitler (HS and some college history) but certain things Trump would say over the last 4-5 years started to concern me. And I did some digging into the similarities. And the. I watched a Netflix doc on Evil on Trial. I couldn't believe what I was learning. The thi is he's done, said and said he's going to do are right out of Hitlers playbook. I wish that wasn't the case. But it is. Dem's have been called quite frequently demonstrated worshipping pedophiles foe goodness sake. I don't know who people are to be educated if people or speaking out.
I believe that we are falling into the same trap as previously. The media wasn’t/isn’t outraged by Trump. They treat him indulgently and as a source of entertainment for their audience. They aren’t appalled by the things that he says, and they aren’t relentlessly pursuing the story of how dangerous he is.
This mistake was made 90 years ago….
Your comments would be pathetic if they weren’t so totally blind and dangerous.
If you want to talk about “violent rhetoric”, just look at what Trump has said, starting with the golden elevator. How many times did he tell his supporters at rallies to just haul off and hit someone, that he’d “pay for their legal representation” (which is a total joke, given that he won’t even pay his OWN lawyers who are defending him), telling a violent militia to “stand back and stand by”, and easily a hundred other comments? J6, the attacks on FBI offices by his supporters, the Ohio state police having to sweep the schools in Springfield OH due to credible threats, etc., make it VERY clear how HIS violent rhetoric is calling HIS people to violent action.
As is typical for Trump and MAGA cult members like you, every accusation is projection.
You cannot simply write off half the country that voted for him. The fact that a man can still garner that amount of votes should tell you that the democrats need to adjust.
Really? In what way? The other "half of the country" voted against him. Where's the adjustment t for that?
Excellent point. I’m not a Trump supporter, but many of his supporters are NOT racist. Many are fed up with many things in this country and see him
As a change agent. I personally will not vote for him, yet I understand why some people would
Here’s the thing about that. I’ve long shared that same sentiment, that many Trump supporters are not racist. And yet Trump can’t seem to get through a speech or debate without stoking racism, and the guy he picked for vice president is copying him. So are we saying that he doesn’t know his audience?
How do we know if somebody is a rasist? What’s in his/her heart? I do not know and I do not care. Somebody who gives material support to a rasist is a rasist. And a vote is material support.
Bingo. If you vote for a racist, you ARE a racist.
Sounds familiar to “I don’t hate the Jews, I had Jewish friends in school, but I like majority of his policies so I’m voting for hitler”
I would have thought that it's the MAGA Crowd that REALLY needs the adjustment. Don't you think?
Why not write their ignorant and racist selves off??
I have nothing in common with Nazis. I don’t share their beliefs - do you? I can’t quite believe that those people are citizens of the same country as I. They need to crawl back under the rocks that they came from.
It's not 1/2 the country... it's a third. There's the 1/3 of this country that doesn't vote. 🙄
I say, of you voted for a man with dementia, it is because you have dementia (or u r just a little on the slow side).
Stuart Stevens correctly said if your plane is being hijacked you don't like the hijacker. The GOP likes the hijacker so they're complicit.
If you vote for a supporter of child mutilation, then you ARE a child mutilator.
And by the way, does "our democracy and way of life" include having access to single-sex showers and changing rooms?
Because the Biden-Harris Ed Dept and EEOC have issued rulings (which took effect on Aug.1) making those illegal at every school and every workplace in the country.
And yet somehow, here in "our democracy", I did not get to vote on that. My representatives in Congress did not get to vote on that. But still it's now federal law.
Some "democracy" that is.
So if someone votes for an adjudicated sexual offender, does that make that person one too?
Fascinating. Can you please provide links to these rulings? Or is this just something you picked up on QAnon….
I'm very happy to provide links.
Here is Ed Dept: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9-final-rule-summary.pdf
Key change is the 4th bullet point: "Clarifies that sex discrimination includes discrimination based on sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity."
The issue is that "gender identity" has no written federal legal definition but is widely interpreted to mean what it says in the (proposed but not yet passed) Equality Act: "The term ‘gender identity’ means the gender-related identity, appearance, mannerisms, or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, regardless of the individual’s designated sex at birth." This is entirely determined by the individual, there is no external test or condition. So if I (a man) say I now have a "female gender identity", then I do, and no one can question it. This self-declared "female gender identity" then gives me access to all female-only facilities. Barring me would be illegal discrimination under this ruling.
The EEOC made a similar ruling for workplaces:
> Employers who repeatedly misgender their employees or deny them access to a bathroom consistent with their gender identity are committing workplace harassment under federal anti-discrimination laws, according to a new guidance released Monday [April 29 2024] by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/29/eeoc-workplace-harassment-guidance/
Here are comments on the Ed Dept ruling by the women's rights group WDI-USA:
https://womensdeclarationusa.com/wdi-usa-statement-regarding-title-ix-rule-changes/
As far as I can tell, it has to do with gender related discrimination by ignorant and hateful homophobes. That’s not you, right?
Correct. I fully support LGB rights, and organizations that work to protect those rights, such as the LGB Alliance: https://lgbausa.org
Do you support the TQIA+ crowd too or did you leave them off on purpose?
I respect that Mark. And I will look into anything that you send me. Cheers!!
Where’s the part about outlawing same sex showers??? Please point out where those are specifically mentioned in writing, not just your interpretation or personal opinion. Thanks!
I explained how the law works. It grants access to any person claiming a female gender identity to any female-only facility. It does not have to list every conceivable facility to have that effect, it applies to all of them.
You can see two short videos of kids complaining about it to their local school boards here: https://karadansky.substack.com/p/california-girls-have-had-it
But the school boards can't do anything about it, even if they wanted to. The videos are from California, where this is also state law, and where almost every school board is all-in on gender identity.
Those regulations will be challenged in court. Most likely given the current reluctance of Federal courts to allow regulations by government agencies to stand where legislation should be employed, those regulations will be overturned. Changes like you are describing should be enacted via legislation, in my opinion.
They are being challenged in federal court, by the attorneys general in red states.
Blue-state administrations, on the other hand, are all-in with the changes. Most blue states already have similar state laws on their books. If you want to change your gender marker on your state-issued ID in (for example) Pennsylvania, you just need to fill out this form: https://www.dot.state.pa.us/Public/DVSPubsForms/BDL/BDL%20Form/DL-32.pdf
The red-state AGs have been winning injunctions against the rulings, which are now on hold in most red states because of that. This will of course all end up before SCOTUS, which will likely grant a permanent nationwide injunction, but only because Trump was able to appoint three Justices. Had Hillary appointed them instead, they would have all been like Biden appointee Ketanji Brown Jackson, who declared under oath that she does not know what a woman is.
So, Ms. Jackson was asked a question after a long diatribe and articulation by Republican Senator Blackburn of TN, decrying many of the same arguments that you make here (which have merit). At the end, she asked Ms. Jackson what was a “loaded” question: how would she define a woman. Ms, Jackson realizing that this issue was likely to appear before the Supreme Court answered “ask a biologist”. Had she answered someone with a certain genetic code, Sen. Blackburn would have run to FoxNews and said this woman can not rule on this issue without bias, because she already has an opinion. The answer she gave allowed Senator Blackburn to appear on FoxNews and make this claim that you are repeating today. So, the judge was literally damned either way. Republican Senator Kennedy from LA, no less opposed to Jackson asked questions, that led to the point where the judge had to state there was a point where the judge had to form an opinion based upon the law and the facts of the case. Something, which Senator Kennedy was not going to trust a democratic nominee to make, but a much more intellectually honest and less grandstanding way to make his opposition known. Like I have stated in an earlier thread, these trans issues affect > 1% of the population, so let’s talk about issues that affect the other 99 % of us. I understand that you have strong feelings about this matter. Much stronger than mine, and I respect your opinion.
Jackson’s “ask a biologist” answer was disingenuous. The context of the question was how a woman should be defined IN LAW, which is a very salient question for a prospective Justice of the Supreme Court. The current situation is that there is no legal definition: until recently, it was considered too obvious a question to require one. What should happen is that Congress should write a law with a definition of “sex” for purposes of federal law. But that won’t happen, so it will fall to SCOTUS to define “sex”. Is Jackson actually going to “ask a biologist” when she writes her opinion on that? Twenty years ago, every biologist in the world would have given the same answer (the female of a sexually dimorphic species has a body that, if and when fully functioning, produces large gametes, as opposed to the small gametes produced by the male of the species), but now there are any number of politically “trans captured” biologists who will natter on about how “sex is a spectrum”. (This is totally false; there are only two kinds of gametes.) So it’s going to depend on which biologist she asks, if she bothers to ask one at all. I predict that she will, strictly as a CYA move, but she will carefully choose the biologist to give the answer she wants, which is to bow down before the transactivists. She doesn’t want the torrent of death and rape threats that she will get if she goes against them (see JK Rowling).
And trans issues do not effect <1% of the population, they effect EVERYONE, women in particular, who are being forced to give up their rights to the privacy, dignity, security, and safety offered by single-sex spaces. This in principle is bad for men too, but since men are very commonly larger and stronger than women, men do not feel unsafe if women enter their spaces. The opposite is very definitely not true. And there is data out of the UK showing that "transwomen" (that is, men who claim to be women) commit sex crimes at a higher rate than men, who commit sex crimes at much higher rate than women.
Men and women are not the same. One cannot become the other. Saying otherwise, and making it a matter of law, affects EVERYONE.
"But that won’t happen, so it will fall to SCOTUS to define “sex”. Is Jackson actually going to “ask a biologist” when she writes her opinion on that?" - Neither you nor I, know that answer. Perhaps the judge's answer was her coded way of saying the extent and extremism of this transgender stuff has gotten out of hand, and if asked to define her judge's opinion of what a woman is, she would define it much the same as a biologist. (I do not speak fluent biology, like you do, so I will take your definitions to be correct). I realize that you think that the judge was dancing around the question. Perhaps she was, but perhaps not. I will wager that her answer was less dishonest than Judges Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Barrett and Roberts who stated that Roe V. Wade was a settled matter in the law. But I guess you disagree with that too. Which is okay, this is America, for now, there is a first amendment to the constitution allowing the two of us to disagree.
I get what you are saying and I respect it. And I understand if a person born as a man, walks into a women's bathroom, and says I am now a woman, that is a problem, for reasons that I never in a million years expected to ponder.
Um yeah. I guess so…
I agree 💯
Two points:
1) Trump voters who think that they aren't dumb and racist themselves are willing support someone who is dumb and racist for their own benefit. This makes them dumb and racist, as well as entirely self-serving. Many Democratic voters are willing to vote against their own economic self-interest, for example, because it means that life doesn't get a lot worse for a whole lot of people in this country under a second Trump term.
2) The guardrails these "sensible" Trump voters they think will be in place to thwart Trump's worst impulses will not be there, especially with the recent SCOTUS ruling on immunity. To think he is not aware of how untouchable he would now be is willfully naive and dangerous. And he will not likely make the "mistake" of putting establishment Republicans in his administration again. It will be yes-men (and women) all the way down.
I am a republican but not a Trump voter. (I also have a degree in economics but will not get into the details that the MAGA economic agenda is short-sighted and is dangerous in the long run.)
My main issue to the first email is on point #4. 7+ years ago, Trump had the opportunity to follow in the path of Lincoln and surround himself with smart people and listen to their advice. Unfortunately, he did not. Today, with more knowledge of how the system works he will surround himself with MAGA "Yes-Men" and fire anybody who dares to disagree or even question him.
Sadly, you are completely correct on all accounts, Dan.
#4 is really laughable- sane people around him didn’t stop him the 1st time around.
Both of these respondents appear to be uniformed. Like the majority of the 74 million that voted for Drumpf. For starters, he is a con man who simply does NOT represent them, understand them, or have policies in mind to benefit them. Also, the notion that Drumpf or the GQP is somehow better for the economy is just empirically incorrect. Drumpf has not offered one thing on the campaign trail that earns him the higher polling on the economy. Nothing. You would do better to highlight that fact please.
For Trump supporters, “the economy” is code. Under a Trump administration, they may genuinely feel better about the political landscape and their status in it, but it’s not because of jobs reports, unemployment, inflation, etc.
"the notion that Drumpf or the GQP is somehow better for the economy is just empirically incorrect"
So how do you explain Biden-Harris retaining the Trump tariffs?
They retained SOME of Trump’s tariffs…on the bad faith trade partners of the U.S. You should know this. The fact that you don’t says more about you than what you have been typing.
Exactly. How people can claim that a guy with multiple bankruptcies, including failed CASINOS is somehow a business genius is completely beyond me.
I thought it was interesting that neither of the emails were from actual genuine Trump voters.
Same. Leaves a lot of space to allow for a particularly "kind" interpretation of their reasons in an effort to not hate friends/co-workers/family. Trump voters justify and defend having intentional blinders to Trump's horrific behavior on in order to continue living in a fantasy world where Trump or someone "in power" will defend and represent them. That's easier than doing the real work of researching and understanding issues and then voting/advocating for those issues. I have many issues that I do not agree with Democrats on. But until we are a country of folks working to find solutions instead of name calling and finger pointing, there is nowhere to go with those efforts. So democrats it is without question! Because Trump supporters choose to live in an echo chamber media world, it allows a belief system where Dems are "evil" and "communists" with absolutely no proof that they actually are as such or are interested in being so. Simply SAYING it enough times is evidence. The only thing this "Understanding Trumpists" exercise has done, is allowed me to start articulating exactly what I see as the issues with Trump supporters that encourage this ridiculous "magical thinking" from otherwise reasonable and intelligent folks.
Let’s examine the first pro-Trump argument.
Point 1: How are the Democrats trying to remake the Judeo-Christian tradition? By fostering an inclusive society where everyone who isn’t white and heterosexual is accepted for who they are? Yeah, that’s terrible. And lose the dumb straw man kitty litter argument. It’s ridiculous
Point 2: Fine. You oppose abortion. How do you feel about women, some of whom are girls, being raped and forced to carry the baby to term? How do you feel about women who need therapeutic abortions so they don’t die, having to bleed out in the parking lot of the hospital because doctors in red states are afraid of being arrested for providing critical medical care that is contrary to draconian abortion laws. You say Trump won’t actively support the end of abortion. It’s likely he will do whatever the most persistent group of supporters want him to because he has no core beliefs. But even if he does nothing, we will have a horrible status quo where cases like I described will continue apace
Point 3: His instincts on economics are better than Harris’s? He blew up the budget deficit with an unneeded and unsound tax cut. And the first thing he will do if elected is double down on that insanity. Said tax cuts exacerbated an already unacceptable level of inequality. He has no comprehension of the impact of tariffs. He thinks an across the board 10 or 20% tariff will be paid by China, will not be inflationary, and will not impact any consumer. He favors abolishing the independence of the Fed. We have a nascent but growing green energy technology sector thanks to the investment provisions in the IRA. He will kill them because climate change is a “hoax”. None of his policies will do anything but severely damage our economy.
Point 4: There will be nobody around him to stop his worst impulses. In Term 1 he had those people to start. Then he drove them all away and replaced them with unqualified hacks who will do exactly what he wants them to do. There is not one qualified and serious Republican who will throw away their career and reputation by going to work for him
The assertions in point 4 are the most egregious and the easiest to refute by a cursory examination of the history of Trump’s 1st Administration. It’s complete wish casting and it’s dangerous
There is not one persuasive argument put forth by the “smart” friends
Also, is it really Christian to vote a convicted felon who cheated & has so many rape scandal multiple times?
My concern for the first response is that perception Trump voters have on what he will accomplish for them as opposed to a Harris administration. Where did these perceptions of the candidates originate? It also tells me that Harris and Walz have to reach out to the non-college educated crowd in a much more concerted way over the next 50+ days to give specifics on policies that will benefit those voters.
The idea in the second response that the guardrails of government will deter him from his most extreme plans is complete nonsense. Former Trump staffers know he will banish anyone who speaks against him, and he'll hire only sycophantic individuals who will do his bidding. They have said so, and as they were part of his inner circle the first time around, I believe they are not just "disgruntled former employees" but extremely worried about the future of the US if he has a second term as POTUS.
The notion that Trump’s incompetence can be managed by those around him is one of the most dangerous arguments his supporters make. It reflects a profound misunderstanding of the catastrophic damage an unqualified and unfit leader can do, even with so-called “adults in the room” trying to contain him. The reality is that Trump’s incompetence was on full display throughout his presidency—and no amount of surrounding him with advisors could mitigate the chaos he unleashed.
January 6th, 2021, is the most glaring example. Trump incited an attack on the very heart of American democracy, and the people around him were unable—or unwilling—to stop him. This wasn’t a minor “impulse” that could be managed. It was a full-scale assault on the rule of law, and it showed how dangerous it is to believe that Trump’s worst tendencies can be reined in. The stakes are far too high to gamble on a leader who repeatedly demonstrated that he is willing to subvert democratic norms for his own gain.
Moreover, Trump’s presidency was marked by a revolving door of advisors and officials, many of whom left in disgrace or frustration because they could not control his erratic behavior. His foreign policy was similarly chaotic, alienating allies and emboldening adversaries. To claim that incompetence is preferable to capability because of a fear of policy disagreements is not only absurd—it’s reckless.
Leaders must be competent, principled, and capable of making decisions in the best interest of the nation. Trump is none of these things. His incompetence is not something that can be mitigated—it is a fundamental danger to the nation. We have seen the damage he caused when given the chance, and it is irresponsible to suggest that another four years of this chaos is an acceptable risk.
So, basically you do not have any explanations of why people vote for Trump from any actual Trump voters.
The second hand reasons have little to do with reality based gripes.
No, there has been NO “discussion” (except from Trump supports) of “installing kitty litter in the bathrooms to accommodate those who identify as furies”.
No, abortion is not “the intentional ending of a human life” to the vast majority of voters. To those that believe it IS the only logical policy to support is to end all types of abortion from the moment of conception including several forms of birth control methods.
Most of the GOP and Trump are running from that reality like it’s toxic because it IS a toxic position to the overwhelming majority of voters.
No, Trump’s “instincts of economic issues” are NOT “better than her (Harris’s) formulated beliefs”. Trump has terrible economic instincts and was (and still is) a terrible failed businessperson.
Tariffs have been FALSELY sold by Trump as “China pays”. It IS A TAX ON AMERICANS. Mostly falling of the bottom 90% of Americans while “unrealized capital gains” is almost exclusive fall (if it ever got passed, which is probably won’t) the top one tenth of a percent as it would apply only to people with wealth above $100 MILLION.
This idea that he IS a great businessman is a mirage and a con, propagated by years of HIS saying so and that silly reality TV show that was ALL FAKE!!
No, the “binary choice” clearly points to the only sane person running, Kamala Harris.
No, the “Forgotten man” is a canard. Most Trump supports are very well off financially in relations to the coast of living where they live. It’s a LOT more expensive to live in NYC, LA, Chicago and most big voters were Democrats vastly out populate GOPers, and the cost of living in rural areas is exponentially less.
No, Donald Trump does NOT “understand the frustrations of this group (“non-college educated Americans”) as he has ALWAYS been an elitist, born with a platinum spoon up his ass, and regularly RIPS OFF “non-college educated Americans” when they try to collect for work they have done for him.
Trump’s WHOLE CAREER has been as an ELITIST “sticking it to” the regular folks.
His “understanding” of the “frustrations” is almost ALL based on demagoguery and RACISM. Anti-immigrant racism that is his main message since the day he ran in 2015. Of course, based on LIES!!
My opinion of why people vote for Trump is he hates the people they hate. That hate is based in large part of race centric feelings of the loss of white privilege.
Trump opening and actively speaks to and APPEALS to people with this feelings of the “other” getting an unfair leg up (which is FALSE…the truth is that non-whites have been and still are at a disadvantage in almost every walk of life.)
EXCEPT sports, where merit is the ONLY measure of success.
Maybe “Too many people — especially liberals — dismiss ALL Trump voters as dumb, racist or dumb and racist.”….I am not one of them.
BUT, it is more accurate that MOST Trump voters are gullible and purposely ignorant to the truth (hence Trump full-on war against objective truth) and are extremely receptive to racist appeals and rhetoric.
This, 100%. If you have to lie and make something up to support your political opinion, then what does that say about your political position? In addition to the examples in these emails (kitty litter in schools?), see JD Vance’s admission of lying about the Haitian immigrants in Springfield last weekend.
SPOT ON Steve.
It's pretty clear that the Trump/Vance campaign (and almost the full GOP) cannot express any ideas without either gross misrepresentation or outright lies.
This is well beyond the usual political spin. The Harris/Walz campaign is the opposite.
Trump is a pathological liar. He lies even when he does not have to. The GOP has taken on the persona of their leader...full stop.
Damn basket of deplorables!
Respect for publishing these letters. You are one of the few left-leaning writers who would dare post anything like this. MSM failed for the past decade to do a simple job: talk to real people with diverse perspectives and hearing them out.
Sadly, there are too many leftists who demonize Trump and his "MAGAt" supporters to the point of physical violence and multiple assassination attempts. Data shows most Democrat voters live in bubbles where they don't never socialize with Republicans and are much more likely to ostracize friends or family who vote differently. So much for tolerance ;)
Trump demonizes himself. He needs no one to do that for him. The list of the people he has made fun of, called out or destroyed with his ugly comments has no end. Ask the people of Springfield. He has done this to himself.
Can I see a link to said data Yuri?
https://www.axios.com/2021/12/08/poll-political-polarization-students
I might ask . . why were these young people driven to think like that? Could it be the demonizing, violent, dehumanizing rhetoric we hear from Trump and his surrogates?
A solid reputable poll.
Thanks for sending.
"MSM failed for the past decade to do a simple job: talk to real people with diverse perspectives and hear them out." Do you read the Washington Post? They have had numerous articles over the past 8 years on who trump supporters are, going across the country and interviewing them.
MAGA
Fair points, but please stop with the alleged assassination connections. Trump, by his actions and words, has provided ample evidence to charge that he is a threat to the democracy. If accurately stating a candidate’s positions puts the candidate in danger, that’s on the candidate. What would be the alternative? Besides that, there is no evidence that I know of that either of these crackpots was responding to Democratic rhetoric. It was Trump himself who declined in last week’s debate to back Ukraine. A few days later a guy obsessed with Ukraine apparently was preparing to take a shot at him. If an anti-abortion nut took a shot at Harris over her stance, would you blame Republicans?
I get it. You can’t expect people to sacrifice their own well being for the “greater good” whatever that may be. If you’re reason for voting Trump is ,despite his racism and lack of intelligence him as president is better for me and my family I can’t argue with that. In my opinion Trump is actually worse for you in the long run but it is an argument I can respect. This is an excellent piece.
If everyone did what was best for me and my family, would anyone ever sign up for military service and be willing to go die in a war for the sake of the country? I'm not a vet myself, but I appreciate the sacrifices that all of our vets made. Trump doesn't seem to respect the "suckers and losers".
The argument that Trump represents some kind of bulwark against a radical cultural shift promoted by the Democratic Party is a deeply flawed mischaracterization of what is really at stake. The suggestion that Democrats are on a crusade to destroy “Judeo-Christian” values is fearmongering at its worst—designed to stir up resentment and obscure the fact that Trump himself is a walking contradiction of the moral values his supporters claim to cherish. We’re not talking about “personal failings” here; Trump’s actions in office reflect a dangerous pattern of undermining the rule of law, stoking racial and social divisions, and peddling conspiracy theories that threaten democratic institutions.
Let’s be clear: The idea that Trump isn’t trying to “recreate culture” is false. His constant attacks on truth, his encouragement of extremist groups, and his willingness to legitimize hate speech are direct assaults on the cultural fabric of America. He’s not a protector of tradition—he’s a destabilizer, turning public discourse into a toxic battleground where civility and decency are abandoned in favor of rage and division. If anything, it is Trump who has done more to erode the sense of shared national values than any policy debate over LGBTQ+ rights or other cultural issues that his supporters rail against.
Moreover, the “kitty litter” narrative is not only a falsehood but a cynical distraction from real issues. The fact that it is even invoked as an argument is a testament to the intellectual bankruptcy of this position. We have serious challenges to address—education, healthcare, the climate crisis—and instead, Trump supporters cling to culture-war talking points to justify their support for a man who has no coherent moral or cultural vision beyond his own narcissism.