The American electorate, on the whole, is as wise as it is fair. Donald Trump gets that now and, most Americans believe as much as they hope, has learned from it. His first term popular downturn in office came, thanks in part to a relentless and unfair assault by the political Left but also by his miscalculation of making it about himself more than his supporters.
Authenticity was, is, his strong suit; certainly not Kamala Harris's or Joe Biden's.
So when Trump vows to voters that the "retribution" his partisan detractors are quick to claim will be his targeted payback against them, they highlight their own political shortcomings And they fail to grasp how the man is, and always has been, driven by a quest for success, which as President would be a nation's shared and overdue pleasure.
A honeymoon for Trump? Seriously? Let's remember that Trump ran for President to: 1) avoid multiple likely felony convictions, 2) Engage in all sorts of illegal and quasi-legal activities that will bring him enormous amounts of money, 3) to get the daily attention and adulation that a psychopath with hyper-narcissistic personality disorder craves, and 4) to carry out the Bannon/Musk/Oligarch goal: destroy the American government (aka "burn it all down") and sell off remaining valuable pieces to favored oligarchs (i.e., people who have shoveled the largest bribes to Trump).
We need to forget about a honeymoon and starting thinking about how to pour as much sand as possible into the gears of the Trump/MAGA oligarchy. Or shall we just surrender to fascism?
Every conclusion Halpin makes from Trump's favorability numbers is useless as a realistic assessment of the viability of his policy in the first term. And there remains a hang-over effect. The reason? The entire media, academic and corporate society tried at every turn to crush him ----creating an impossible milieu for rational thought.
Of course that increased popularity has no effect whatsoever on Democratic (or in some cases, Republican) Senators who will have to vote on filling out his administration. I know this substack likes to focus on economic policy but the incessant lawfare against Trump, his supporters and even his lawyers had an impact too. In some ways, it is unfair to either blame or credit Presidents for economic performance since the levers that the President has to move the economy are rather short. In foreign policy, by contrast, the President has a great deal of nearly unilateral power. While foreign policy doesn't move the needle much on electoral success, there is a realization that the working class fights the wars that the ruling class gets us into. J D Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Hegseth understand this very well. Trump's recasting of the Republicans as the peace party surely mattered too. The Biden administration and Democrats in general own the World in Flames despite neocon Republican diehards.
It is a wait and see situation right now as to how much he can really do. He has to get his choices for cabinet in place and he’s going to get a lot of pushback. So much false information is circulating about his picks that makes things uncertain.
The media and some Democratic senators do seem to be giving Trump a breather reflecting where the public is at maybe. Deportation will be tricky to handle, the resultant increase in wages for the working class will be welcome but inflationary. Trump himself seems less confrontational secure in an unequivocal win.
This all feels like a very Democratic way of evaluating things. Ask voters, of whom 99% haven't really even considered the question before getting the call, what they think Trump should do. And CNBC didn't include things like "Get the Federal Government out of your life," "End the sea of corruption in Washington DC," or "Drain the swamp."
This highlights the failures of focus group testing: asking people who haven't thought it over what you should do, when they wouldn't know, and having them pick from a limited selection of answers you've already chosen, when it's not even that you don't include the right answers, but rather that the answers you've chosen represent the wrong mindset and a failed way of looking at things in the first place.
If Trump appoints the right people to major federal agencies to severely reform them, if settles the situation in Russia and the Middle East, if he deports a lot of narco-gang members, if continues to pursue de-globalization trade policies, if he strengthens border security, and if he makes America's enemies so worried about him they behave for a short amount of time, then he's going to gain a lot of political capital. The average American is not following the order of when policies get done and does not comprehend the particulars of policies anyway.
The American electorate, on the whole, is as wise as it is fair. Donald Trump gets that now and, most Americans believe as much as they hope, has learned from it. His first term popular downturn in office came, thanks in part to a relentless and unfair assault by the political Left but also by his miscalculation of making it about himself more than his supporters.
Authenticity was, is, his strong suit; certainly not Kamala Harris's or Joe Biden's.
So when Trump vows to voters that the "retribution" his partisan detractors are quick to claim will be his targeted payback against them, they highlight their own political shortcomings And they fail to grasp how the man is, and always has been, driven by a quest for success, which as President would be a nation's shared and overdue pleasure.
A honeymoon for Trump? Seriously? Let's remember that Trump ran for President to: 1) avoid multiple likely felony convictions, 2) Engage in all sorts of illegal and quasi-legal activities that will bring him enormous amounts of money, 3) to get the daily attention and adulation that a psychopath with hyper-narcissistic personality disorder craves, and 4) to carry out the Bannon/Musk/Oligarch goal: destroy the American government (aka "burn it all down") and sell off remaining valuable pieces to favored oligarchs (i.e., people who have shoveled the largest bribes to Trump).
We need to forget about a honeymoon and starting thinking about how to pour as much sand as possible into the gears of the Trump/MAGA oligarchy. Or shall we just surrender to fascism?
Joy Reid - is that you?
Every conclusion Halpin makes from Trump's favorability numbers is useless as a realistic assessment of the viability of his policy in the first term. And there remains a hang-over effect. The reason? The entire media, academic and corporate society tried at every turn to crush him ----creating an impossible milieu for rational thought.
Follow the current media coverage of Trump and his nominees. Some honeymoon.
Of course that increased popularity has no effect whatsoever on Democratic (or in some cases, Republican) Senators who will have to vote on filling out his administration. I know this substack likes to focus on economic policy but the incessant lawfare against Trump, his supporters and even his lawyers had an impact too. In some ways, it is unfair to either blame or credit Presidents for economic performance since the levers that the President has to move the economy are rather short. In foreign policy, by contrast, the President has a great deal of nearly unilateral power. While foreign policy doesn't move the needle much on electoral success, there is a realization that the working class fights the wars that the ruling class gets us into. J D Vance, Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Hegseth understand this very well. Trump's recasting of the Republicans as the peace party surely mattered too. The Biden administration and Democrats in general own the World in Flames despite neocon Republican diehards.
It is a wait and see situation right now as to how much he can really do. He has to get his choices for cabinet in place and he’s going to get a lot of pushback. So much false information is circulating about his picks that makes things uncertain.
The media and some Democratic senators do seem to be giving Trump a breather reflecting where the public is at maybe. Deportation will be tricky to handle, the resultant increase in wages for the working class will be welcome but inflationary. Trump himself seems less confrontational secure in an unequivocal win.
This all feels like a very Democratic way of evaluating things. Ask voters, of whom 99% haven't really even considered the question before getting the call, what they think Trump should do. And CNBC didn't include things like "Get the Federal Government out of your life," "End the sea of corruption in Washington DC," or "Drain the swamp."
This highlights the failures of focus group testing: asking people who haven't thought it over what you should do, when they wouldn't know, and having them pick from a limited selection of answers you've already chosen, when it's not even that you don't include the right answers, but rather that the answers you've chosen represent the wrong mindset and a failed way of looking at things in the first place.
If Trump appoints the right people to major federal agencies to severely reform them, if settles the situation in Russia and the Middle East, if he deports a lot of narco-gang members, if continues to pursue de-globalization trade policies, if he strengthens border security, and if he makes America's enemies so worried about him they behave for a short amount of time, then he's going to gain a lot of political capital. The average American is not following the order of when policies get done and does not comprehend the particulars of policies anyway.