Can we please keep this simple? When Donald Trump told a bunch of evangelical Christians that after 2024 "you won't have to vote anymore," all he meant was:
Just vote for me this year. I don't care what happens after that.
That's it. Trump doesn't care about anything but himself. He doesn't genuinely care one way or the other about abortion. He doesn't care about immigration. He doesn't care about being Christian. He doesn't care about either Israel or Ukraine. There are things that personally annoy him. And there are people he wants revenge on. But that's about it. His public stands are whatever he thinks will win him fans.
Everyone knows this. Trump is all about Trump, full stop.
Why repeat this bulshit?
Trump intends to end democracy in the US, but knows he shouldn't say that in public, and normally succeeds. This time he slipped.
In case it is not obvious: he adores dictators who are "strong", by which he means suppress the population, and he wants to be such a dictator too. That was true all his life, and is true now.
Why repeat this bullshit?
For the same reason our Paleolithic ancestors paid attention to saber-tooth tigers: so they could have descendants.
Nah. "He slipped" is like when sovereign citizens claim that the Uniform Commercial Code or fringe on the flag openly reveal the terrible, terrible secret.
Trump has a record of decades of adoring dictators and suppressive behaviour. Just because you ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Only idiots ignore it. You are an idiot.
This, totally.
Handwaving his actual, repeated words and actions for a preferred reality that is neither isn't the action of someone honest or intelligent.
I'm not ignoring his record. Indeed, his deeds more alarming than his words. That's my point: his peewee strongman inclinations are evident in his actions, not a "mask-off" remark.
That or he's saying that his election will bring The Rapture and they'll all be taken to heaven, leaving us sinners behind.
We should be so lucky.
No, the unsaved - the Jews that Greene hates while claiming to be a big supporter of Israel - are supposed to be consumed in the flames of Hades...or something. My family's church didn't regale us with Armageddon myths.
Oh, we can "guess' what he meant, but lets not go all NYT on this. Trump also cannot stop shutting up, on a daily basis, on how elections are rigged unless he wins.
Taken together, its a big deal. He could have said, if you haven't voted in the past please vote now. But he didn't.
It also is a nice goat f-er quote, and since he gets away with so much I don't mind him getting tarred with this one.
Bingo.
Agreed. The last time he was in office, he tried to do a coup to stay in power. He openly admires dictators, and has stated--repeatedly!--that he would "only" be a dictator himself on his first day.
I frankly don't give a shit about what he may or may not have meant by this particular statement in his deepest heart of hearts, and I'm not going to waste time puzzling out what he "really" must have meant. Dude said that if he gets elected, thereafter elections don't matter. He's unfit.
Trump said "you won't have to vote anymore,"
Kevin's interpretation: Just vote for me this year. I don't care what happens after that. (No quotation marks)
So I don't know how Kevin can get into Trump's head to know that's what he "really" meant. But I thought that a candidate should be judged by what he actually said. What he said was so clear that even MAGA Tom Cotton tried to excuse it, saying that it was "just a joke".
But unfortunately, Kevin is not alone in giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. He is joined by most of the American mainstream media. At least the MSM has the ulterior motive of trying to placate Republican subscribers in the interest of their bottom line.
I don't know what Kevin's excuse is.
Agreed--while Kevin is being reckless here in presuming that Trump cannot possibly mean what he said and instead must have meant something basically normal, you're right that it's dangerous to give Trump the benefit of the doubt.
Young Zaphod plays it safe.
Others around him may want to end democracy in the US, but Trump only cares about himself, full stop as KD says.
It seemed blindingly obvious to me when I first heard about this that it was TFG saying just get me back into office so I can make all my problems go away, and I don't care what you do after that.
His raging narcissism is a wonder to behold.
????. People are giving him way too much credit. He doesn't think ahead more than what's immediately beneficial. Right now it's winning 2024 and staying out of jail. What comes after isn't even on his radar.
Vote for me so I can cover up my crimes, and yours, and appoint still more judges that anybody can bribe, because that can only make our crooked judicial system fairer.
He's running on covering up his crimes, and so is every other Republican.
scott aaronson q&a
A: Look, my basic moral commitments remain pretty much as they’ve been since childhood. Namely, that I’m on the side of reason, Enlightenment, scientific and technological progress, secular government, pragmatism, democracy, individual liberty, justice, intellectual honesty, an American-led peaceful world order, preservation of the natural world, mitigation of existential risks, and human flourishing. (Crazy and radical, I know.)
Only when choosing between candidates who all espouse such values, do I even get the luxury of judging them on any lower-order bits. Sadly, I don’t have that luxury today. Trump’s values, such as they are, would seem to be “America First,” protectionism, vengeance, humiliation of enemies, winning at all costs, authoritarianism, the veneration of foreign autocrats, and the veneration of himself. No amount of squinting can ever reconcile those with the values I listed before.
Q9: Why do you care so much about Trump’s lies? Don’t you realize that all politicians lie?
A: Yes, but there are importantly different kinds of lies. There are white lies. There are scheming, 20-dimensional Machiavellian lies, like a secret agent’s cover story (or is that only in fiction?). There are the farcical, desperate, ever-shifting lies of the murderer to the police detective or the cheating undergrad to the professor. And then there are the lies of bullies and mob bosses and and populist autocrats, which are special and worse.
These last, call them power-lies, are distinguished by the fact that they aren’t even helped by plausibility. Often, as with conspiracy theories (which strongly overlap with power-lies), the more absurd the better. Obama was born in Kenya. Trump’s crowd was the biggest in history. The 2020 election was stolen by a shadowy conspiracy involving George Soros and Dominion and Venezuela.
The central goal of a power-lie is just to demonstrate your power to coerce others into repeating it, much like with the Party making Winston Smith affirm 2+2=5, or Petruchio making Katharina call the sun the moon in The Taming of the Shrew. A closely-related goal is as a loyalty test for your own retinue.
It’s Trump’s embrace of the power-lie that puts him beyond the pale for me.
https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8172
You do know that he's a full-on Zionist and incel-supporter who thinks that (some) men have gotten a raw deal from women, right? That he's a big fan Elizar Yudkowsky and 'rationalism', right? I wouldn't exactly hold him up as some sort of celebrity endorsement.
If you want someone more credible and of slightly higher caliber when talking on this subject, you could do worse than Hannah Arendt.
the link is there for anyone who wants to dig in on that, but i agree with the q&a answers i posted above
You may agree with his answers, but Scott has at this point got something of an er, reputation.
"If you want someone more credible and of slightly higher caliber when talking on this subject, you could do worse than Hannah Arendt."
True, if appeals to authority outweigh specificity, then yes, the great H.A. is the way to go. Unfortunately, Arendt died half a century ago, so she doesn't have anything to say particular to Trump.
I don't know who Scott Aaronson is, and don't particularly care about his reputation, but to the extent that he is otherwise a right wing weirdo in this instance at least he seems rather on the money, and I'd like it if more erstwhile right wing weirdos would take his tack.
You don't know who Scott Aaronson is? Just Google. Literally: https://www.google.com/search?q=scott+aaronson+incel&oq=scott+aaronson+incel&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDU0MzlqMGo3qAIIsAIB&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
As to the other, I'd say HA has a great deal to say about Trump; that fact that she said more than half a century ago just adds to the punch. And if you just have to have someone who mentions Trump specifically, well, Digby for one, gives you exactly what you need. And she's not in incel territory either.
On Edit: I take in you've never read Frankfurt's On Bullshit either.
SoV, I am well aware that if I wanted to learn about this Aaronson character, I could just google it. I don't care to--life is short.
My main point was simply that your implicit argument--that "lower-case" should have cited the person you prefer instead of the person that (I presume) lower-case preferred--is sort of silly.
So you're good with citing random people; they're all of equal providence. Gotcha. You're wrong, of course, but gotcha.
On Edit: Just in case it's not obvious, I think you deliberately misunderstood my point, namely that my 'implicit argument' is that you don't cite loons. I won't ask if you understand the difference, because I think you do get it just fine.
sigh. The reason that "appeal to authority" is a logical fallacy is because an idea, generally, stands (or falls) on its own. I honestly don't give a shit if something was said by Hannah Arendt or Hanna-Barbera: the thing itself is what is important, not who mouthed it first.
And so I repeat my (admittedly mild) criticism: you complaining that lower case was quoting person X when you'd prefer they quote person Y is rather pointless and silly.
Did I get this right?
Yes, Trump said something absolutely outrageous and anti-democratic (small d) but hey, it's Trump being Trump so let it go?
We gotta stop doing that. He promised those in attendance that after four more years of his hands on the levers of power, the country would be so "fixed" that future voting wouldn't be important.
If any other person in the country said this, it would be scandalous.
Yeah there's more than a whiff of "well whatever I'm a well-off White guy in a California suburb, so probably no skin off my nose, bygones, right?" about this.
It's annoying.
Agree to disagree. But I find it puzzling you feel so adamantly about it.
I agree that it's all ego, but not because he can't see beyond 2024. Rather, his next term will be so stupendous that nobody would conceivably oppose the GOP agenda. It's that stupid.
I wouldn't let down my guard re: antidemocratic, authoritarian maneuvering. But this Kinsley gaffe ain't it.
I think Kevin's point is right. I'll add that the biggest reason of all Trump wants to win is so that he is protected from going to prison.
Also, what Trump said was, "In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not going to have to vote.”
Sure, this is dumb Trump stuff for trying to win votes. But of course it can also be read as Trump planning to install authoritarianism, so future voting is pointless. Trump is too disorganized, chaotic, self-absorbed in the moment, clueless, and incompetent to pull off installing authoritarianism. However, if there is even a slight chance that he could somehow pull this off, we should all worry.
Hmm, if it appears that Trump will go to jail after 2028 for whatever reasons, wouldn’t he then pull out all the stops to remain in power? His choice is: remain as president, the most powerful person in the world, or go to prison. I think I know which path he will pursue.
It may also be his rudimentary understanding of what Project 2025 entails. He claims he doesn't agree with parts of, but hes probably lieing. He isn't the problem as much as Project 2025 is. That and the people who plan on implementing it.
"It may also be his rudimentary understanding of what Project 2025 entails."
That is absolute non-sense.
He initiated the project 2025 to vet people to have a cadre of people that are absolutely loyal to him to fill the administration, and that hasn't changed..
Agenda 2025 is a later addition, maybe intended to be a a fig-leaf for his intentions or maybe just Heritage trying to be clever. It seems to be very successful in confusing people of what is Project 2025 about.
ok then he has no clue what Agenda 2025 really entails. I don't think he really cares. As long as he wins, what the nutcases do in his name is irrelevant to him.
Being incarcerated would be the only reason to install himself as an authoritarian. I don't think he has an interest in being president for life otherwise.
He doesn’t “want” to be president. He thinks he deserves to be president. And he thinks he will always deserve to be president. He may not be alive in four years, but if he is he thinks he should continue to be president. There are no rules that apply to Trump. He is above them all.
"I don't think he has an interest in being president"
He sure is devoting a lot of time towards running for president for somebody who, you claim, is not interested in having the job.
Kevin's point is generous. When we see reciprocal generosity from the opposition, we can let off of quoting exactly and in context the disgraced, impeached, indicted and convicted former President, and providing a plausible, damning interpretation of what he meant.
But instead, the opposition quotes out of context, mis-quotes, and just plain lies about what Democratic politicians have said and advocated for. Remember "Death Panels"? I do.
I may agree with you, but there is no reason to try to defend that Orange piece of shit, or to give him the benefit of the doubt.
If attacking him with the statement helps, then I'm all for going with it. If it doesn't gain traction, then lets move onto the next stupid, racist, radical, anti democracy, bat shit crazy thing he says. Don't have to wait too long for that.
Rachel Maddow points out a more problematic issue,
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=of9OP_a6MNg
election deniers installed in positions where they will be responsible for certifying the vote throughout the country.
He knows a rigged election - when he arranges it. The takeover at the polling places, with so many previous ones afraid to take any more abuse, makes this election certification more worrying than when Pence did his duty. Vance would not.
The other thing that he said that surprised me was his claiming that "Christians don't vote" - just where did that originate - & why would he insult his evangelical Christian supporters?!
That's one thing Trump is missing this election that he had last time; a VP of his own party to bugger with the election certification. That job goes to Harris this time around, even if she is the president elect and will be certifying her own election.
It's about trying to motivate his followers by appealing to their imaginary victimization.
He is not as dangerous as his enablers. Trump wouldn't be a threat if it weren't for his accomplices in the GOP. They could have ended his career after the first impeachment. It's a cult and it's not going to end well for anyone.
Give it up already, Drum Why in the world do you keep cleaning up after Under Drumpfenführer and giving him more benefits of the doubts than he gets from the perpetually scowling Melania. Hey, lickspittle Laura Ingraham desperately gave him chance after chance to clean this up in an interview a couple of days ago, but he refused. He's referring, albeit in his incoherent and imprecise manner, to his intention to end democracy (which of course Drum also risibly refuses to accept). That's that and Drum is just wrong.
And if I sound pissed off, it's because I am. Kevin is like Chip Diller (Kevin Bacon in his first role) in Animal House, cluelessly and ineffectually walking through a shitstorm while repeating "Keep calm! All is well!"
+1
+1
You can see from the comments here that Kevin is not the only one that has this syndrome.
This is a real stretch. Yes, Trump is an idiot who can barely string two coherent sentences together but what he said and what you THINK he meant are not even close to the same.
The fake electors and January 6th showed that Trump was willing to do or condone anything to thwart the will of the people and remain in power. To me, his comment sounds more like he's expecting that to work next time.
All this time on the internet and Mr. Drum still hasn't figured out how it works. Heck, I get told to fuck off every day. I could make a perfectly benign comment entirely in good faith and I'd still get told to fuck off. It's hilarious. And so this is how it works with Trump. No matter what he says, tell him to fuck off. He loves it.
That he's in it for himself is why he's okay with installing those who'll rig the elections and install an authoritarian regime.
So it's both, and.
????
Olympic games 1908,
https://old.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/1egqpm6/1908_olympic_games_london/
This is all too crazy modern for Samuel Alito.
The right manages to unironically paint far more innocuous statements by democrats in worse light than they deserve.
About times Dems use this weapon back. Who cares how “real” it is?!
the hack gap piece.
So if he wins this time, he'll just ride off into the sunset when the term ends???
That might have been a plausible explanation, if Trump hadn't immediately followed that sentence with "We'll have it fixed so good, you're not going to have to vote." He is saying that he plans to "fix" voting so that Republicans can do what Maduro just did.
The antecedent of "it" is ambiguous. He could mean the country's problems will be fixed. Again, it's a childish thing to say and a moronic way to say it -- and that's sufficient argument against him.
Why do you want Dems to unilaterally disarm. The incessant spin from the right is mostly disingenuous, but heaven forbid a Democrat should take a Republican's words at face value to make points.
According to Wikipedia, Kevin is 65 years old, and has been blogging about politics for 20 years. How the hell can he still be this naïve about either Trump or Republicans?
The hard line evangelicals want power to control the lives of everyone else. Trump is promising to give them that power so that, even if elections continue , the evangelicals will be firmly entrenched to the point that it doesn’t matter who wins future elections. Evangelicals won’t have to soil themselves with politics once their priorities are the law, in a way that makes it difficult to impossible to overturn. Trump is too stupid to do this on his own but evangelicals who do know how to get that will just tell trump what to do.
"We will have fixed it so you won't have to vote again."
Stop carrying Trump's water.
Those are the important words indeed. And (to answer Shro above) there is no innocent explanation for "it", not even that the country rather than the elections will be fixed so good that individual votes won't matter.
Maybe Trump doesn't care what happens later, as Kevin surmises, but what he said is the precise opposite.
So how is that inconsistent with the idea that he doesn't plan to leave? Because he well knows that as soon as he leaves, he goes to prison.
The decline in evidence here has been very sad.
Hayzooz H. Kristo, Kevin, stop being so @#$%ing naive. He intends to end democracy in the US, turn us into a Potemkin republic, like Russia or Hungary. We'll still have voting and legislatures, etc., but to paraphrase Stalin, only the counting will matter, not the actual voting.
He @#$%ing means it.
+1
Kevin's opinion that Trump only cares about himself doesn't give any support for his decision to interpret Trump's words in a certain way. Obviously you can be completely self centered and also want to take actions that change or end the democratic process. The actions during and after the 2020 election seem like more important evidence than Kevins vibes....why these are ignored is not addressed.
Ignoring Trump's past actions and other declarations in order to arrive at this interpretation is the only way to get to Kevins naive assumption.....and it certainly seems like a foolish way to guess at Trump's true inner workings.
What he meant (wink,wink) was that if repubs control the mechanism of the vote count in swing states the fix will be in. And Republicans are openly moving to do just that.
A bit late to this comment thread -- but Tom the Dancing Bug nails this:
https://boingboing.net/2024/07/31/tom-the-dancing-bug-how-the-media-handles-trumps-fascism.html