Is half of America nuts? And is it it the half that supports Harris?

[stevenkesslar]

Mark Halperin just said something really interesting that got under my skin on his 2Way podcast on Friday.  I am curious whether other people agree with him?

First I'll quote what he said directly, since it was long and nuanced.  It was in response to a viewer question, who referenced his statement to Stephen Colbert in 2016 that Trump's election was, other than the Civil War and WW2, the "most cataclysmic event the United States has ever seen".  Halperin just said he stands by that.  So here's what else he said. (This is a few minutes of talk at 59:00 in the slightly more than one hour video, if you would rather just watch it.)

Q:  "What would it mean if Trump got elected again to you?

Halperin:  "I think about 50 % of the country would have severe mental health difficulty.  I'm not saying that glibly.  I think it would plunge about half the country into an extreme mental health crisis, because they would not recognize the country in which they live."

Q:  Do you feel the same way if Kamala was President?  

Halperin:  No.  A lot of people would be upset, but it wouldn't plunge anything like the same number of people ... The people who oppose Donald Trump, there are two things that are generally true about them.  One is they don't understand on any emotional or intellectual level the basis for his support ... that nearly half the country supports him.   They just don't understand it at all. And two, they think he's the worst possible person to be President.  And they will be shaken to their core that the person who was President and showed us who he was, that he was chosen again.  That will shake their connection to their own country."

There's a lot there.  And it is serious stuff.  Arguably existential stuff, the way he frames it.  Do people agree with him?

------

 

I'll share three reactions, which are complicated and contradictory.  And this is edited.  I had like twelve immediate reactions.

First, Halperin did not say the words Trump Derangement Syndrome.  But it felt that way.  He clearly did say that people who support Harris don't have a clue what is driving close to half the country to support Trump.  So it kind of felt like, "Oh.  I have a disease."  But what's interesting is that Halperin right now, more than any journalist, is using his 2Way thing to test the limits of how much you can bring together people with wildly different and opposing views to talk calmly and respectfully.  If anything, I'd argue Harris has an edge at the margin because she is clearly talking about how America can unify and move forward.  While Trump is clearly talking about how America is in decline.  And it is because of murdering immigrants and communists among us.  Trump does not even try to disguise that he is trying to divide and conquer.

Second, Halperin is right.  Part of the reason 2016 was shocking, and a Trump win in 2024 would be shocking, is that I clearly don't get it.  I don't see how a majority of Americans could vote for him.  Because in a two way race, it will take a majority like Biden won - both nationally and in the key swing states - in 2020.  To add a few sentences, even though I am a liberal I could get how Reagan won two landslides because of his popular conservative ideas.  And his perceived success in turning the economy around and defeating real communism.  I was wildly opposed to W.'s Iraq War.  But, being in a clear minority at the time, I could get how the majority went along for the ride, for a while.  Because they wanted to believe what W. was saying was right.  I can't say the same things about Trump.  Yeah, before COVID the economy from 2017 to 2019 grew and was strong.  I get that.  But Trump is a raping, lying nightmare,   And an authoritarian who has proven he will push democracy to its limits.  And a felon.  Why do people not see that?  Or see it, and not care?

Third, Halperin is wrong.  Now I will sound like an elitist.  It's not that I don't get MAGA and Trump.  It's that they don't get the facts.  Or give a shit about facts.  Two clear examples.  First, violent crime went up 30 % in one year, 2020, under Trump.  And violent crime is now down about 20 % under Biden and Harris.  Harris was a prosecutor.  Trump is a felon.  So this notion that Trump kept us safe and is the law and order guy, and Democrats and their illegal aliens have brought on a reign of murder, is totally devoid of fact.  Trump supporters just dismiss all that.  It's Trump's Kool Aid.  Second, Trump lost the 2020 election.  When Democrats won by millions of votes in 2000 and 2016, but lost narrowly in the electoral college, we were graceful enough to play by rules we do not like or agree with.  Trump was an ugly liar and riot starter.  He sent a mob to the Capitol who beat cops, broke bones, and tried to overthrow a peaceful transfer of power. And now these thugs want to pretend somehow they were the victims of their own riot and authoritarian radicalism.  And if Harris wins - or any Democrat - it is because they cheated.  The only fair election is one Trump wins.  And any election Trump does not win was stolen, because Democrats cheat.

So I could argue that I will be shocked if Trump wins.  But not because I don't get it.  Because I do get it, very clearly.  And I am disgusted by it.  And I get other things as well.  That one hour Halperin podcast linked above is in itself a great encyclopedia of some of the reasons people support Trump that sound positive, or at least neutral.  He is an outsider.  People who don't usually vote, let alone trust government, wanted and still want someone to just flip the table and break the glass.  They don't want forever wars, including Ukraine.  They think Big Media lies to them.  I get all that.  That is all part of his appeal.  And RFK's.  It is complicated.

 

 

[RockyRoadTravel]

54 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:

Mark Halperin just said something really interesting that got under my skin on his 2Way podcast on Friday.  I am curious whether other people agree with him?

First I'll quote what he said directly, since it was long and nuanced.  It was in response to a viewer question, who referenced his statement to Stephen Colbert in 2016 that Trump's election was, other than the Civil War and WW2, the "most cataclysmic event the United States has ever seen".  Halperin just said he stands by that.  So here's what else he said. (This is a few minutes of talk at 59:00 in the slightly more than one hour video, if you would rather just watch it.)

Q:  "What would it mean if Trump got elected again to you?

Halperin:  "I think about 50 % of the country would have severe mental health difficulty.  I'm not saying that glibly.  I think it would plunge about half the country into an extreme mental health crisis, because they would not recognize the country in which they live."

Q:  Do you feel the same way if Kamala was President?  

Halperin:  No.  A lot of people would be upset, but it wouldn't plunge anything like the same number of people ... The people who oppose Donald Trump, there are two things that are generally true about them.  One is they don't understand on any emotional or intellectual level the basis for his support ... that nearly half the country supports him.   They just don't understand it at all. And two, they think he's the worst possible person to be President.  And they will be shaken to their core that the person who was President and showed us who he was, that he was chosen again.  That will shake their connection to their own country."

There's a lot there.  And it is serious stuff.  Arguably existential stuff, the way he frames it.  Do people agree with him?

------

 

I'll share three reactions, which are complicated and contradictory.  And this is edited.  I had like twelve immediate reactions.

First, Halperin did not say the words Trump Derangement Syndrome.  But it felt that way.  He clearly did say that people who support Harris don't have a clue what is driving close to half the country to support Trump.  So it kind of felt like, "Oh.  I have a disease."  But what's interesting is that Halperin right now, more than any journalist, is using his 2Way thing to test the limits of how much you can bring together people with wildly different and opposing views to talk calmly and respectfully.  If anything, I'd argue Harris has an edge at the margin because she is clearly talking about how America can unify and move forward.  While Trump is clearly talking about how America is in decline.  And it is because of murdering immigrants and communists among us.  Trump does not even try to disguise that he is trying to divide and conquer.

Second, Halperin is right.  Part of the reason 2016 was shocking, and a Trump win in 2024 would be shocking, is that I clearly don't get it.  I don't see how a majority of Americans could vote for him.  Because in a two way race, it will take a majority like Biden won - both nationally and in the key swing states - in 2020.  To add a few sentences, even though I am a liberal I could get how Reagan won two landslides because of his popular conservative ideas.  And his perceived success in turning the economy around and defeating real communism.  I was wildly opposed to W.'s Iraq War.  But, being in a clear minority at the time, I could get how the majority went along for the ride, for a while.  Because they wanted to believe what W. was saying was right.  I can't say the same things about Trump.  Yeah, before COVID the economy from 2017 to 2019 grew and was strong.  I get that.  But Trump is a raping, lying nightmare,   And an authoritarian who has proven he will push democracy to its limits.  And a felon.  Why do people not see that?  Or see it, and not care?

Third, Halperin is wrong.  Now I will sound like an elitist.  It's not that I don't get MAGA and Trump.  It's that they don't get the facts.  Or give a shit about facts.  Two clear examples.  First, violent crime went up 30 % in one year, 2020, under Trump.  And violent crime is now down about 20 % under Biden and Harris.  Harris was a prosecutor.  Trump is a felon.  So this notion that Trump kept us safe and is the law and order guy, and Democrats and their illegal aliens have brought on a reign of murder, is totally devoid of fact.  Trump supporters just dismiss all that.  It's Trump's Kool Aid.  Second, Trump lost the 2020 election.  When Democrats won by millions of votes in 2000 and 2016, but lost narrowly in the electoral college, we were graceful enough to play by rules we do not like or agree with.  Trump was an ugly liar and riot starter.  He sent a mob to the Capitol who beat cops, broke bones, and tried to overthrow a peaceful transfer of power. And now these thugs want to pretend somehow they were the victims of their own riot and authoritarian radicalism.  And if Harris wins - or any Democrat - it is because they cheated.  The only fair election is one Trump wins.  And any election Trump does not win was stolen, because Democrats cheat.

So I could argue that I will be shocked if Trump wins.  But not because I don't get it.  Because I do get it, very clearly.  And I am disgusted by it.  And I get other things as well.  That one hour Halperin podcast linked above is in itself a great encyclopedia of some of the reasons people support Trump that sound positive, or at least neutral.  He is an outsider.  People who don't usually vote, let alone trust government, wanted and still want someone to just flip the table and break the glass.  They don't want forever wars, including Ukraine.  They think Big Media lies to them.  I get all that.  That is all part of his appeal.  And RFK's.  It is complicated.

 

 

I think you have a little crush on Halperin.  I was listening to a podcast of Ezra Klein's today. Laying in bed with his soft voice, if it wasn't so interesting I would have masturbated.  Perhaps too much information. 

[Suckrates]

Much of Trumps base is just too uneducated, or just plain stupid, and dont understand the implications of the policys he proposes.  He repeats the same shit so often and makes them BELIEVE his policy changes will benefit THEM and make their lives better.

Covid during Trumps presidency masks the fact for Trumps base that they were really NOT better off during his 4 years, but they cannot make a comparison because they were living in a totally different infrastructure.    They were quarrantined, not able to go out and spend their money, so they had MORE of it.   But they really didnt, it just seemed that way.

Trumps base is an angry, grievanced one, and they like that he CLAIMS he is too.   They dont see he is just playing them, on their emotions to make them think he is aligned with them, and will Fix the things that are wrong with the country that are angering them.... They like that he is unlawful, breaks the rules and norms to his advantage, and BELIEVE with Trump in their corner it will be to their advantage too.....WITHOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES... They feel as if they are putting one over on a govt that treats them unfairly, although in REALITY they are just stupid, Lazy people who think they can be rich like Trump without having to work for it.  They want to be able to ride around in their pickup trucks, confederate flags blazing, swinging their long guns and yelling FUCK YOU ALL to everyone.....

As numbers show they are a limited base, although a pretty big number, but Trump cant grow those people.  They remained over time pretty stable, yet loyal and naive...

We've had almost 10 yrs of Trump, and HE HAS FIXED NOTHING....not with his rebellion or corruption or acts of Unhumanity.....   All he has accomplished is giving ta breaks to his rich cronies to make THEIR lives better... Shouldnt this show his base the truth ?    But it doesnt, so it really says more about them than Trump.   He he simply a Con Man running the biggest Con in history, and HALF of americans fell for it !   Thats the real TRAGEDY.   

[Pete1111]

An interesting question, how would Americans take the news, if Trump returns to the White House.

A lot of people shed real tears the first time he was elected, when the topic was raised during the days that followed.  People were distraught.

Voters are much more alarmed this cycle, due to Trump's track record and due to very specific issues that pose dangerous consequences to Democracy and to specific segments of the population.  It is possible that mental health crisis centers and therapists would deal with an increase in individuals seeking relief.  However, Halperin's claim we will face a mental health crisis gets under my skin, too, for additional reasons than what S.K. posted.  

I don't agree with Halperin.   I am not familiar with him.  As a first taste of his worldview, I start off with some doubts.

 

 

 

[RockyRoadTravel]

25 minutes ago, Pete1111 said:

Voters are much more alarmed this cycle, due to Trump's track record and due to very specific issues that pose dangerous consequences to Democracy

 

 

In a second term there would be no adults in the room, no guard rails, or however one wants to describe his disinterest/opposition to institutions and norms, or the rule of law. 

[stevenkesslar]

2 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

I think you have a little crush on Halperin.  I was listening to a podcast of Ezra Klein's today. Laying in bed with his soft voice, if it wasn't so interesting I would have masturbated.  Perhaps too much information. 

I have a crush on Halperin, for sure.  But it is all mind.  He's very smart and he talks to everybody.   

Since you mentioned Klein, I listened to a podcast of his about JD Vance and the new Republican worker populism.   There is something about Ezra's voice that I just finding annoying.  So he is all yours.

[Suckrates]

37 minutes ago, Pete1111 said:

An interesting question, how would Americans take the news, if Trump returns to the White House.

A lot of people shed real tears the first time he was elected, when the topic was raised during the days that followed.  People were distraught.

Voters are much more alarmed this cycle, due to Trump's track record and due to very specific issues that pose dangerous consequences to Democracy and to specific segments of the population.  It is possible that mental health crisis centers and therapists would deal with an increase in individuals seeking relief.  However, Halperin's claim we will face a mental health crisis gets under my skin, too, for additional reasons than what S.K. posted.  

I don't agree with Halperin.   I am not familiar with him.  As a first taste of his worldview, I start off with some doubts.

 

 

 

If Trump wins FREE & FAIR which we know he CANT, so a Trump win will be shady, but a win nonetheless,  50 of Americans will be enraged, but unlike Trumps supporters, will ACCEPT his win.  They wont be storming the Capital .....  But ya never know...Support for Harris is diverse and strong, and Americans that support her really hate Trump and are really angry with Trumps strangle hold on our culture for all these years. He dominates the GOP and our Media...There is no escaping him, and I think we've just about had enough.....  So, did I answer your question ?    Not really, but its something to chew on. 

[RockyRoadTravel]

52 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:

I have a crush on Halperin, for sure.  But it is all mind.  He's very smart and he talks to everybody.   

Since you mentioned Klein, I listened to a podcast of his about JD Vance and the new Republican worker populism.   There is something about Ezra's voice that I just finding annoying.  So he is all yours.

He kind of slow jams the news and opinions. It's not for everyone.  He'd have to go home after we were finished. 

[Pete1111]

47 minutes ago, Suckrates said:

If Trump wins FREE & FAIR which we know he CANT, so a Trump win will be shady, but a win nonetheless,  50 of Americans will be enraged, but unlike Trumps supporters, will ACCEPT his win.  They wont be storming the Capital .....  But ya never know...Support for Harris is diverse and strong, and Americans that support her really hate Trump and are really angry with Trumps strangle hold on our culture for all these years. He dominates the GOP and our Media...There is no escaping him, and I think we've just about had enough.....  So, did I answer your question ?    Not really, but its something to chew on. 

We are not going to lose to Trump.  I agree, we have had enough.

So I don't want to worry about losing.   But to answer, it seems ridiculous to predict mass mental illness. 

I'd say Americans would start counting the days until he is gone, while trying to remain as calm as possible.  Sadly, that is how they deal with Putin in Russia.  Sad to think that is what we would become.

You are absolutely correct.  Trump dominates the media.  I look for him to appear on the news constantly.  We may get effed over by the lamestream media.  Let's hope not.

I just hope the Dems have put together the right stuff for a blue wave to appear up and down the ballot.

[RockyRoadTravel]

5 minutes ago, Pete1111 said:

We are not going to lose to Trump.  I agree, we have had enough.

So I don't want to worry about losing.   But to answer, it seems ridiculous to predict mass mental illness. 

I'd say Americans would start counting the days until he is gone, while trying to remain as calm as possible.  Sadly, that is how they deal with Putin in Russia.  Sad to think that is what we would become.

You are absolutely correct.  Trump dominates the media.  I look for him to appear on the news constantly.  We may get effed over by the lamestream media.  Let's hope not.

I just hope the Dems have put together the right stuff for a blue wave to appear up and down the ballot.

Even as a poor candidate Hillary only lost by 80,000 votes across three swing states, her VP candidate was also safe/boring. Harris is a much better candidate, with a better strategy (so far) and a better VP running mate. There are also more Democratic governors in those swing states now, and I think that makes a difference.   

[Suckrates]

 

WATCH FOR IT !

[stevenkesslar]

2 hours ago, Pete1111 said:

But to answer, it seems ridiculous to predict mass mental illness. 

Since you have posted that twice, and since I started the thread, I feel like I should defend Halperin a little.  Maybe it's my alleged crush on him.   😉

What got under my skin wasn't the part about the mental health of those of us who despise Trump.  If you read Halperin's words I cited but did not watch him say them in the video, they might sound more literal. I don't think he was predicting mass mental illness.   What did resonate me for, and I think is what he meant, is the idea that if Trump wins my connection to my own country would be shaken.   I used "my" because that is true for me.  If Trump wins, I won't go nuts.  But it will make me feel sick about my own country.  Like, "Oh, we are a failed democracy now.  We're Hungary now, or worse.  Let's have an authoritarian leader who just lies about everything and gets away with it.  Crime is law.  Felon is saint." 

The part that got under my skin the most was the idea that somehow this is about my ignorance about Trump supporters.  Again, Halperin did not say Trump Derangement Syndrome, which I would have taken as an insult.  I don't think he was trying to insult, and I would not say I felt insulted.  The way I felt is this is an interesting question, so I asked here.  Is Halperin right?  Is there something about Trump or MAGA that those of us who deeply object to it just don't see?  And, again, I can see how for most of Trump 1.0 what a lot of people liked about him was just that the economy hummed along.  And I can see how now the way a lot of people see it - especially young people who were kids when he was President - is we just like it that when he was POTUS rents and home prices were more affordable, gas was more affordable, interest rates were lower.  If he wins, that's the most likely reason.  And it's not based on lies or flawed perceptions.

4 hours ago, Pete1111 said:

Voters are much more alarmed this cycle, due to Trump's track record and due to very specific issues that pose dangerous consequences to Democracy and to specific segments of the population. 

You said two things that really resonate.  First, I think the distinction you made is right.  Whatever people might have thought before Trump was elected, by the end of what he actually did as POTUS and especially after Jan. 6th it was impossible to me not to see him as dangerous.  Second, you're obviously right that people won't go into a mental institution if Trump wins. I will just start counting the days, months, and years until 2028 - assuming he leaves in 2028.  But you are also right that I would feel like you said.  Oh, we're like Russia now.  This is how they deal with Putin.  To quote you, "Sad to think that is what we would become."

So the rest of this is a long rant about this issue of Trump voter ignorance.  And whether they are ignorant, or Harris supporters like me are just ignorant about MAGA.  Or both.

I Googled "polls that show Trump voters are ignorant" to see if there was any brief and objective way to reassure myself that the problem is not me, and my ignorance about Trump voters.  So I came up with a few interesting articles that only take a few minutes to scan.

Voter ignorance is Trump’s superpower. It can also be his weakness.

That's very smart and very fact-based Never Trumper Republican Charlie Sykes objectively laying out how Trump voters believe all kinds of shit that is simply not true.  In this article, Sykes focuses on Trump's own criminality.  His own supporters don't know he was indicted.  Or, if they do, it was a witch hunt.  Not a crime.   And, of course, it makes sense that if there is anything Trump will completely lie about (other than lying about everything), it is his own crimes and attacks on democracy.  And if there are any lies his supporters wish to believe, they will be about why their hero isn't a lying felon.  Regardless of how they feel, it is just objectively true that much of Trump's support is built on a massive mountain of sheer ignorance.  To quote Halperin's precise words, this is a great example of how I really "don't understand on any emotional or intellectual level the basis for his support."  If this is why Trump wins, then yes.  It feels like the US is now Russia.  This isn't how a democracy works.

Sykes is also right that Trumpism is a house of cards built on quick sand.  Which we already learned in 2020.  He relies on people who don't particularly believe in government or democracy, or even voting.  And who know less than than the average college educated voter.  So that is a very unstable coalition or movement.  This is why I think there could be surprises, like in the Florida Senate race.  The whole thing in 2022 is Trump helped convince Florida voters with dark skin from some other country who are legal immigrants that Biden wants to bring about the socialism you fled from.  What if they instead see Harris as the dark skinned prosecutor who wants to uphold the law against a felon?  Unlikely, but not impossible.  Low information voters can have their minds changed.  Which is why Harris is surging now.

Stocks are up 12% this year, but nearly half of Americans think they’re down. What’s going on?

I Googled that because that is an even harder one to get my mind around.  I can much more easily accept that half of Americans feel like we are in a recession.  Even though we are not.  I think there are lots of people who voted for Biden in 2020 who were playing footsy with voting for Trump.  Who would say that inflation and high rent and high interest rates feel like a recession.  Even if they are not.  And now they are making their way back to Harris.  It's a different thing to say the S& P is doing shitty, when it is actually doing great.  

I think the general all purpose explanation in that article that made it worth citing is two words:  social media.  It has helped create a world where Trump tells any lie he wants, all the time.  And people who don't vote much just listen to him rant in their social media silo, which could mean some wrestling video on Tik Tok.  And you can believe any fucked up and false thing you want.  It's not like Trump is the first authoritarian demagogue ever.  But social media does arguably explain why someone like him was able to come to power now.  He needs lots of ignorant followers on social media who know almost nothing factual about Ukraine or the S & P 500.  

Again, like Sykes said, what makes Trump strong also makes him weak.  People may not follow the S & P 500.  But polls show most people do believe some corporations gouge them on prices.  And big corporations should pay higher taxes.  Further up the policy food chain, if the polls are right, most Hispanic parents know that those expanded child tax credits concretely helped them for one year in 2021.  So they would be supportive of Harris wanting to bring them back, and Walz having passed just such a credit in Minnesota.  You could communicate that idea effectively in 60 seconds on Tik Tok.

One last interesting story that addresses who is ignorant and nuts, and who isn't:

Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally

Quote

Most voters are ignorant or misinformed because the costs to them of acquiring political information greatly exceed the potential benefits.  They can afford to indulge silly, false, delusional beliefs — precisely because such beliefs cost them nothing. After all, the chances that any individual vote will decide the election is vanishingly small. As a result, individual voters tend to vote expressively, to show their commitment to their worldview and team.

That sounds like a fair and accurate description of MAGA, in particular.  To be a little less polite, instead of a worldview and team you could simply call it a "cult".  Especially when you get to how it's really just a witch hunt that Trump was indicted for sending cop beating rioters to The Capitol to overturn an election.  Halperin might argue "there you go again", not understanding at all Trump's basis for support.  But I would argue it is precisely understanding Trump's basis for support.  Trump supporters have mountains of silly, false, delusional, and dangerous  beliefs.

I think it is true that this is a problem at the core of democracy.  And there are plenty of examples in any democracy and in any party of particularly bad apples. 

One theory about Trump that makes sense to me is that democracies simply rely on having relatively decent leaders who will not relentlessly lie and break laws.  And won't just constantly count on and build ignorance the way Trump does.  Bill Clinton is the interesting fairly recent example on the Democratic side.  I know plenty of Democrats who feel he is a sexual predator who lied and abused the system to save his ass.  And the tribe just rallied around him. Trump was obviously able to use that to his advantage against Hillary in 2016.  But whatever you think about Clinton's personal flaws, he was a master politician and policy maker in a way Trump definitively proved he will never be.  The proof of concept with Clinton is that, when he left office, a lot more Americans trusted in their government than when he started.  Which is the last President who was able to pull that off.

[stevenkesslar]

3 hours ago, Suckrates said:

 

WATCH FOR IT !

So my long rant above was a throw shit at the wall to see what sticks rant that is inherently about negative stuff.  Like why ignorant voters believe Trump's lies.  This will be a positive post in which  I play off your blue wave idea.

The last article I cited in my post above made an interesting and at least partly true argument about democracy.  Which is not flattering.  The headline says it all.  The problem is that Trump voters are ignorant.  The argument is that most voters are ignorant, to one degree or another, most of the time.  And the argument is clever.  It's not that we're stupid.  We will be smart when we buy a car.  Because we pick the car, and live with consequences of choosing a lemon.  Which we have a strong incentive to avoid.  But we have no incentive to avoid picking a lemon President.  Since one vote will never be THE decisive vote, anyway.  So instead we make it about being part of the team and the vibe.  And why not believe whatever lie or delusion we want?  Maybe it's more fun - for your team, at least.  There is a lot of truth in this, as Trump is proving.

The alternative positive theory is Allan Lichtman.  No, he'd say.  Voters are mostly wise, not ignorant.  They make serious decisions based on important things, like the economy.  And I have proved that by guessing who they will pick correctly ten times in a row, he'd argue.  It's going to be based on Important Stuff, he'd say.  And he's about to say, based on Important Stuff, wise voters will choose Kamala Harris in the end.  He's not going to predict a blue wave.  But in the next few weeks he will predict a Harris victory.

If he predicts as I think he will and if he is right again, the sweet part in the context of this thread is this:  TRUMP NEVER WON BECAUSE OF HIS LIES OR BULLSHIT.  Not in 2016.  Not in 2020. Not in 2024.  NEVER.  Trump will be a poster child for why bullshit and lies, in and of themselves, actually don't work.   That doesn't make me nuts.  That makes me happy.  😀

Lichtman's view is that 2016 was a thumbs down on Democrats, period.  Any Republican would have won.  I buy that.  I'd argue that if Kasich had been nominated and won in 2016, he probably would have won again in 2020.  Because he would have governed much more effectively than Trump.  We know he governed from the center and won re-election as Ohio Guv overwhelmingly.  I think he is probably part of the reason Ohio has stayed red ever since.  (JD Vance is not.)  Meanwhile, Lichtman argues, Trump's one chance to prove he could win by having governed well was in 2020.  And he fucked it up, and lost.  And his argument about 2024 will be that Trump doesn't even matter, anyway.  Biden (and Harris) did a good enough job that she can run and win a second Democratic term.  It is the Democrats to lose, and they won't lose.  So Trump is just a small lying felon who is losing and shrinking.

If that happens, my mental health will be just fine.  Hopefully the MAGA folks will be able to get over it.  Even though it's clear Trump can't accept being a loser.

[RockyRoadTravel]

2 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

Since you have posted that twice, and since I started the thread, I feel like I should defend Halperin a little.  Maybe it's my alleged crush on him.   😉

What got under my skin wasn't the part about the mental health of those of us who despise Trump.  If you read Halperin's words I cited but did not watch him say them in the video, they might sound more literal. I don't think he was predicting mass mental illness.   What did resonate me for, and I think is what he meant, is the idea that if Trump wins my connection to my own country would be shaken.   I used "my" because that is true for me.  If Trump wins, I won't go nuts.  But it will make me feel sick about my own country.  Like, "Oh, we are a failed democracy now.  We're Hungary now, or worse.  Let's have an authoritarian leader who just lies about everything and gets away with it.  Crime is law.  Felon is saint." 

The part that got under my skin the most was the idea that somehow this is about my ignorance about Trump supporters.  Again, Halperin did not say Trump Derangement Syndrome, which I would have taken as an insult.  I don't think he was trying to insult, and I would not say I felt insulted.  The way I felt is this is an interesting question, so I asked here.  Is Halperin right?  Is there something about Trump or MAGA that those of us who deeply object to it just don't see?  And, again, I can see how for most of Trump 1.0 what a lot of people liked about him was just that the economy hummed along.  And I can see how now the way a lot of people see it - especially young people who were kids when he was President - is we just like it that when he was POTUS rents and home prices were more affordable, gas was more affordable, interest rates were lower.  If he wins, that's the most likely reason.  And it's not based on lies or flawed perceptions.

You said two things that really resonate.  First, I think the distinction you made is right.  Whatever people might have thought before Trump was elected, by the end of what he actually did as POTUS and especially after Jan. 6th it was impossible to me not to see him as dangerous.  Second, you're obviously right that people won't go into a mental institution if Trump wins. I will just start counting the days, months, and years until 2028 - assuming he leaves in 2028.  But you are also right that I would feel like you said.  Oh, we're like Russia now.  This is how they deal with Putin.  To quote you, "Sad to think that is what we would become."

So the rest of this is a long rant about this issue of Trump voter ignorance.  And whether they are ignorant, or Harris supporters like me are just ignorant about MAGA.  Or both.

I Googled "polls that show Trump voters are ignorant" to see if there was any brief and objective way to reassure myself that the problem is not me, and my ignorance about Trump voters.  So I came up with a few interesting articles that only take a few minutes to scan.

Voter ignorance is Trump’s superpower. It can also be his weakness.

That's very smart and very fact-based Never Trumper Republican Charlie Sykes objectively laying out how Trump voters believe all kinds of shit that is simply not true.  In this article, Sykes focuses on Trump's own criminality.  His own supporters don't know he was indicted.  Or, if they do, it was a witch hunt.  Not a crime.   And, of course, it makes sense that if there is anything Trump will completely lie about (other than lying about everything), it is his own crimes and attacks on democracy.  And if there are any lies his supporters wish to believe, they will be about why their hero isn't a lying felon.  Regardless of how they feel, it is just objectively true that much of Trump's support is built on a massive mountain of sheer ignorance.  To quote Halperin's precise words, this is a great example of how I really "don't understand on any emotional or intellectual level the basis for his support."  If this is why Trump wins, then yes.  It feels like the US is now Russia.  This isn't how a democracy works.

Sykes is also right that Trumpism is a house of cards built on quick sand.  Which we already learned in 2020.  He relies on people who don't particularly believe in government or democracy, or even voting.  And who know less than than the average college educated voter.  So that is a very unstable coalition or movement.  This is why I think there could be surprises, like in the Florida Senate race.  The whole thing in 2022 is Trump helped convince Florida voters with dark skin from some other country who are legal immigrants that Biden wants to bring about the socialism you fled from.  What if they instead see Harris as the dark skinned prosecutor who wants to uphold the law against a felon?  Unlikely, but not impossible.  Low information voters can have their minds changed.  Which is why Harris is surging now.

Stocks are up 12% this year, but nearly half of Americans think they’re down. What’s going on?

I Googled that because that is an even harder one to get my mind around.  I can much more easily accept that half of Americans feel like we are in a recession.  Even though we are not.  I think there are lots of people who voted for Biden in 2020 who were playing footsy with voting for Trump.  Who would say that inflation and high rent and high interest rates feel like a recession.  Even if they are not.  And now they are making their way back to Harris.  It's a different thing to say the S& P is doing shitty, when it is actually doing great.  

I think the general all purpose explanation in that article that made it worth citing is two words:  social media.  It has helped create a world where Trump tells any lie he wants, all the time.  And people who don't vote much just listen to him rant in their social media silo, which could mean some wrestling video on Tik Tok.  And you can believe any fucked up and false thing you want.  It's not like Trump is the first authoritarian demagogue ever.  But social media does arguably explain why someone like him was able to come to power now.  He needs lots of ignorant followers on social media who know almost nothing factual about Ukraine or the S & P 500.  

Again, like Sykes said, what makes Trump strong also makes him weak.  People may not follow the S & P 500.  But polls show most people do believe some corporations gouge them on prices.  And big corporations should pay higher taxes.  Further up the policy food chain, if the polls are right, most Hispanic parents know that those expanded child tax credits concretely helped them for one year in 2021.  So they would be supportive of Harris wanting to bring them back, and Walz having passed just such a credit in Minnesota.  You could communicate that idea effectively in 60 seconds on Tik Tok.

One last interesting story that addresses who is ignorant and nuts, and who isn't:

Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally

That sounds like a fair and accurate description of MAGA, in particular.  To be a little less polite, instead of a worldview and team you could simply call it a "cult".  Especially when you get to how it's really just a witch hunt that Trump was indicted for sending cop beating rioters to The Capitol to overturn an election.  Halperin might argue "there you go again", not understanding at all Trump's basis for support.  But I would argue it is precisely understanding Trump's basis for support.  Trump supporters have mountains of silly, false, delusional, and dangerous  beliefs.

I think it is true that this is a problem at the core of democracy.  And there are plenty of examples in any democracy and in any party of particularly bad apples. 

One theory about Trump that makes sense to me is that democracies simply rely on having relatively decent leaders who will not relentlessly lie and break laws.  And won't just constantly count on and build ignorance the way Trump does.  Bill Clinton is the interesting fairly recent example on the Democratic side.  I know plenty of Democrats who feel he is a sexual predator who lied and abused the system to save his ass.  And the tribe just rallied around him. Trump was obviously able to use that to his advantage against Hillary in 2016.  But whatever you think about Clinton's personal flaws, he was a master politician and policy maker in a way Trump definitively proved he will never be.  The proof of concept with Clinton is that, when he left office, a lot more Americans trusted in their government than when he started.  Which is the last President who was able to pull that off.

If Trump won - God help us if that were to pass - I could see the States rights mantle being morphed into more regional coordination by liberals and leftists as a rear guard action against an authoritarian federal government. For example, there could be more coordination at a State level amongst California, Oregon and Washington, to salvage social and economic gains and protections.   

[Suckrates]

8 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

If Trump won - God help us if that were to pass - I could see the States rights mantle being morphed into more regional coordination by liberals and leftists as a rear guard action against an authoritarian federal government. For example, there could be more coordination at a State level amongst California, Oregon and Washington, to salvage social and economic gains and protections.   

Of course perhaps the states could form an American NATO of sorts to pushback oppressive Trump policy, but remember, Trump now can use US Troops to STOP protesters, he can shoot them dead if he chooses, and the Supreme Court will applaud him for doing his job.... When you have every side of govt coming at you, there is not much you can do, and now, no Help to be found....  It would be Trumps WET dream.... and Americas demise. 

Worst of all it will reinforce every GOPs opinion of Trump, that he is NOT the Loser people claimed, but he is their WINNER, and they will get in formation to back EVERY corrupt, illegal and immoral act he will attempt.   And we can be almost certain HE will be our last President until his death....and his dad died at 93

[Mavica]

21 hours ago, Pete1111 said:

We are not going to lose to Trump.

 

[RockyRoadTravel]

17 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

So my long rant above was a throw shit at the wall to see what sticks rant that is inherently about negative stuff.  Like why ignorant voters believe Trump's lies.  This will be a positive post in which  I play off your blue wave idea.

The last article I cited in my post above made an interesting and at least partly true argument about democracy.  Which is not flattering.  The headline says it all.  The problem is that Trump voters are ignorant.  The argument is that most voters are ignorant, to one degree or another, most of the time.  And the argument is clever.  It's not that we're stupid.  We will be smart when we buy a car.  Because we pick the car, and live with consequences of choosing a lemon.  Which we have a strong incentive to avoid.  But we have no incentive to avoid picking a lemon President.  Since one vote will never be THE decisive vote, anyway.  So instead we make it about being part of the team and the vibe.  And why not believe whatever lie or delusion we want?  Maybe it's more fun - for your team, at least.  There is a lot of truth in this, as Trump is proving.

The alternative positive theory is Allan Lichtman.  No, he'd say.  Voters are mostly wise, not ignorant.  They make serious decisions based on important things, like the economy.  And I have proved that by guessing who they will pick correctly ten times in a row, he'd argue.  It's going to be based on Important Stuff, he'd say.  And he's about to say, based on Important Stuff, wise voters will choose Kamala Harris in the end.  He's not going to predict a blue wave.  But in the next few weeks he will predict a Harris victory.

If he predicts as I think he will and if he is right again, the sweet part in the context of this thread is this:  TRUMP NEVER WON BECAUSE OF HIS LIES OR BULLSHIT.  Not in 2016.  Not in 2020. Not in 2024.  NEVER.  Trump will be a poster child for why bullshit and lies, in and of themselves, actually don't work.   That doesn't make me nuts.  That makes me happy.  😀

Lichtman's view is that 2016 was a thumbs down on Democrats, period.  Any Republican would have won.  I buy that.  I'd argue that if Kasich had been nominated and won in 2016, he probably would have won again in 2020.  Because he would have governed much more effectively than Trump.  We know he governed from the center and won re-election as Ohio Guv overwhelmingly.  I think he is probably part of the reason Ohio has stayed red ever since.  (JD Vance is not.)  Meanwhile, Lichtman argues, Trump's one chance to prove he could win by having governed well was in 2020.  And he fucked it up, and lost.  And his argument about 2024 will be that Trump doesn't even matter, anyway.  Biden (and Harris) did a good enough job that she can run and win a second Democratic term.  It is the Democrats to lose, and they won't lose.  So Trump is just a small lying felon who is losing and shrinking.

If that happens, my mental health will be just fine.  Hopefully the MAGA folks will be able to get over it.  Even though it's clear Trump can't accept being a loser.

The Underdog label.  She's the sitting Vice-President and ahead in the polls. Democrats are the underdogs because of the unfairness of the system, recognizing that the candidate with the most votes might not win. Democrats need to win by 3-4% just to be even in the Electoral College I believe (correct me if I go that estimate wrong). Under the current election rules Democrats are always the underdogs.

But I also I think that the underdog label she is embracing for the Democratic ticket is that of the underdog middle class candidates against the plutocrat born into wealth, who's never worked a day in his life for anyone else.  So far I think it's a subtle and effective message. 

 

[Suckrates]

2 hours ago, Mavica said:

 

That was BEFORE.   We now have seen what Trump does, or DOESNT do more so as President,   And his rhetoric is far more dangerous, and his circle of acolytes are far more accommodating to him.   Hes not the 2016 Trump, he's the new and deranged Trump 2024.....   If Harris loses to Trump now, WE really are a damaged, backwards country.

[unicorn]

I must confess that I didn't read the wordy OP, but, let's face it, most people will believe a smooth talker who's saying something they want to hear, no matter how preposterous the statements the talker expounds. One has only to witness the number of people who believe the ridiculous stories in the Bible. 

  

[stevenkesslar]

3 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

Democrats need to win by 3-4% just to be even in the Electoral College I believe (correct me if I go that estimate wrong). Under the current election rules Democrats are always the underdogs.

That is THE huge question.  And no one knows.  Or can know the answer.

If Trump or Harris win in a landslide, this of course does not matter.  There was a good argument for a Trump landslide when Biden was the nominee.  There is an emerging argument for a Harris landslide.  But it is too early, and also just seems improbable. 

The argument I buy is that she has had a one month honeymoon.   And it is still a close race, where she has perhaps a small lead.  In a very divided 47/47 nation.  So there is no reason to expect a landslide, and every reason to expect a close election.  Therefore, the difference in these polls matter.  Therefore, I think it is best to conclude nobody knows.  We will all learn on election day how close the polls actually were to the results.

The clear argument to think you are right is that in 2016 and 2020 the polls underestimated Trump.  So at the very least Democrats should plan on the fact that it COULD happen again.  And that, whatever the outcome is, Harris will do worse in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin than she will nationally.  

This is twofer bad news for Harris, as 2020 showed.  Biden's last RCP polling average said he was supposed to win nationally by 7.2 points. He won by 4.2 points.  So that was off.  But he did do worse in the swing states.  He was supposed to win Michigan by 4.2 points.  He won by 2.8 points.  He was supposed to win Wisconsin by 6.7 points.  He won by only 0.7 points - that was way off.  If there is good news, he was supposed to win Pennsylvania by 1.2 points, and he did win by 1.2 points.    So my benchmark takeaway would be that Harris will have to be leading in both the national polls AND the swing state polls.  And we should assume that however much the state polls say she will win by, the actual number will be lower.  Assuming it is a positive number at all.

 For reasons I would not even speculate about, Wisconsin has to be viewed as the loosest cannon.  It was most off in 2020. It was also way off in 2016. Hillary was supposed to win easily there, based on the state polls.  And add that Ron Johnson is one of the few US Senators who managed to win in a state (in 2022)  that voted for the other party for POTUS (in 2020).  By comparison, as I said, Pennsylvania polls were right on the money in 2020.  So the logical thing to conclude is that Democrats better be especially paranoid that even if they win in Michigan and eke out a win in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin could be the nail in Kamala's coffin in 2024.

That said, for reasons we have both stated, 2024 could be different.  Some of the reason 2020 turned out the way it did could be the turnout problem you cited:   because of COVID, Democrats were timid while Republicans were aggressive.  That could explain some of the difference.  And now, in 2024, there is every reason to think it will be the opposite.  Democrats will probably have a much better ground game in the swing states.  Plus, to use Wisconsin as an example, since 2020 - and especially because of Roe v. Wade - Democratic turnout (Madison!) has been very strong in statewide elections in Wisconsin.   Those college kids that were cool on Biden love Kamala!

But, again, Ron Johnson was able to eke out a narrow win in 2022.  Every poll in RCP in the month before his re-election showed Johnson winning in 2022.  Recall there was supposed to be a red wave.  The RCP poll average said Johnson would win by 3.5 %. He actually won by 1 %.   Meanwhile, the final RCP average in Pennsylvania in 2022 showed Oz ahead by 0.4 %. Fetterman won by 4.9 %.

So this is what Lichtman has been arguing.  In most elections since 2020, the pollsters may have overcompensated for 2020 and are now biased to the Republicans. But, even if that is true, there has been no election since 2020 when Trump was on the ballot.  The basic common sense idea it all goes back to is that Trump consistently attracts marginal and more ignorant voters (or people who rarely vote) who are especially hard to poll correctly.  And who are actually much more ignorant about questions like whether Ukraine is part of NATO, or whether the S & P 500 is up or down for the year.  They are very loose cannons.

I'll end on what is positively the best sign for Democrats.  Even when Biden was on the top of the ticket, most swing state Democrats in Senate races had healthy leads.  Under Harris, they have grown.  Casey is now + 7.6 % in Pennsylvania.   Baldwin is now +6.7 in Wisconsin.   Compare that to polls in 2022 that showed Republicans Johnson and Oz in the lead in the same states.   You can't say Democrats are doing worse.  If Democratic Senate candidates are way ahead, and Harris is seen as a generic Democratic POTUS, she should win both states, it seems.

Bottom line:  it's another one of my Dad's nobody nobody knowsers.  Until election day, when we all know.  😉

[stevenkesslar]

19 hours ago, RockyRoadTravel said:

If Trump won - God help us if that were to pass - I could see the States rights mantle being morphed into more regional coordination by liberals and leftists as a rear guard action against an authoritarian federal government. For example, there could be more coordination at a State level amongst California, Oregon and Washington, to salvage social and economic gains and protections.   

Several things there.  Which fit with @Pete1111's idea that people will not go insane.  They will bide their time and wait for Trump - and MAGA - to age out.  And I'll add, they will organize.

Just like Republican state AG's have banded together to fight Biden, AGs in California and NY and many blue states would band together to fight Trump.  There have been a lot of good arguments made that even the worst versions of Trump 2.0 have to take into consideration that there are many external democratic guardrails.  That said, Viktor Orban is the model that authoritarian loving MAGA types openly embrace.  He has been able to do a tremendous amount to stifle opposition as an authoritarian.  Trump has promised to do the same, or worse.  We should be very, very, very scared.

Arguably, a Trump win could be the final nail in the electoral college coffin, which a majority of Americans consistently oppose.  The mechanics of how you get rid of the racist, slave loving electoral college, which was put in place so that White men could kill and rape Black men and women at will, and which has the blood of centuries of dead slaves dripping from it, is very complicated.  People in 21st century Montana may or may not respond well to what I just wrote.  In theory, why would a small blue state like Vermont want to cede power to California or New York?  But the obvious answer is that if the electoral college gave us Trump - twice! - Vermont (and Maine, and New Hampshire, and Hawaii, and the list of smaller blue states goes on) could decide it is finally time for this anomaly to go.

Halperin is NOT an organizer.  And I have always felt he has a realistically cynical view of politics.  My point is that I think Trump 2.0 would have a tremendous reaction and organizing impact.  There will be a tremendous reaction to end this nightmare once and for all.  It will also reinforce what is happening already, I think.   Which is a drive to cultural centrism on the part of Democrats who want to undercut Trump's culture war appeal.  And I think since Harris took over it reinforces that time is not on the side of MAGA.  Young Black men and Hispanic women and White women are not flocking to MAGA.  They are in fact running away from MAGA, mostly.  So the silver lining in a 2024 election that is like 2016 is it also sets up elections like 2018 and 2020.  But who wants to live through that?

[RockyRoadTravel]

On 8/25/2024 at 5:43 PM, stevenkesslar said:

 I feel like I should defend Halperin a little.  Maybe it's my alleged crush on him.   😉

 

Steve and Halperin sitting in a tree, "p-r-o-g-n-o-s-t-i-c-a-t-i-n-g"

[Stable Genius]

[Suckrates]

Although they are basically right wing media, interesting article from the Hill, which gives perspective into the mind of the un-moving Trump supporter.....

https://www.aol.com/opinion-why-donald-trump-anything-110000146.html