Great work. One thing though is notice how you default to the idea that Republicans are more hawkish on foreign policy, which I think is correct, despite what Trump sometimes says. At the same time, you forget the GOP is the more pro-capitalist party when it comes to economics and take the nice things Trump and Vance say about unions too seriously. I think Trump ends up giving the traditional GOP coalition what it wants in both areas.
Re-unions. I don't expect T/V to be nice to the unions, though TBF I still don't understand why you weigh them so heavily. There are some OECD countries where unions are a big problem, France, Italy, I'd even say UK if to a lesser extent, but the US isn't one of them.
More broadly, sure, it's likely that none of the more demented economics-related proposals from T/V come to fruition, but that's also true of a Kamala Presidency. However, we can be reasonably sure that Trump will be materially worse for the budget deficit and for long-term institutional integrity, and carries much heavier tail risks, even if by far the likeliest outcome is "business as usual."
> "It’s now a very angry, very conspiratorial, and much lower IQ movement (even as it’s come to profusely use “low IQ” as an insult). It is headed by a scammer who rants about the globalist elites who are ripping you off while selling his NFTs and shitcoins, a stable genius who went bankrupt running a casino, a felon who enjoys overwhelming support from felons across all creeds and race"
This is true, but such is democracy. Vance and Elon are the closest thing in the world to competent rulers, Trump and his entourage are there to get biomass to vote..
I very strongly disagree with this endorsement; Kamala will take the whole world towards communism and bring in tens or hundreds of millions more biomass from the Third World, which shifts the new equilibrium towards even more low-IQ grifting.
Anatoly has it right. Vance and Elon hitched their wagon to trump, and all it takes is the insinuation that they're the ones pulling the strings, or making Trump unpopular and Trump will ice them out. See Steve Bannon.
As for Kamala making the whole world communist and importing tens to hundreds of millions of "biomass"- this is the sort of conspiratorial low iq nonsense he was talking about.
> There is, of course, Elon Musk, who is nothing if not hyper-competent. Regardless of whether Elon decides to set aside his principles, I predict that Trump will marginalize Elon out of fear of being overshadowed. There’s already a hint of this — Lutnick, Trump’s transition team co-chair, apparently said in his recent interview that “tech entrepreneur Elon Musk would ‘help’ rather than serve in the government if Trump wins.” Principles aren’t the only threat to a cult of personality; another big, popular personality is also a threat.
Intelligent, well-expressed, if sometimes unorthodox, positions - and an impressive ability to address policy points in isolation, a la Hanania, without idealogical capture or adherence to traditional Right/Left distinctions. In the future, would be interested to see a fulsome discussion of the author’s support for Open Borders. While attractive on humanitarian grounds it does not appear to be even remotely practical. Nearly 45% of Americans do not pay federal income taxes. A permanent open border policy would likely drive US population levels to 10+ digits, with the majority of new citizens having completed less than full secondary education levels. Our national deficit is already at levels (trillions) beyond the imagination of most people. Who will fund social security and other entitlements in such a scenario, even if we could navigate the challenges of integrating so many people who come from regions, nations and cultures that, objectively, are not functioning as well as ours.
A lot to unwrap here. The good part of it's wrong about Russia and Iran. But regardless of all that, the author is ready to reward Biden/Harris for murdering 14000+ children with his vote. In fact, he didn't even bring up the genocide in Gaza, but we all know that the “strongman Putin” is bad, and the author pretends he doesn't know the real causes of the invasion. Congrats! You just repeated (in a long article) the deep state CIA talking points.
Trying to use Gaza to endorse voting for Trump is almost as obscene as the dead kids. There's a reason that Bibi has been actively trying to help Trump's campaign, and it's not that he thinks there's no daylight between the candidates.
The U.S. is a chief enabler of the genocide in Gaza. It's not rhetorical; it's factual. Biden/Harris are enablers of the genocide in Gaza. You support Harris; you are dismissing Genocide, regardless of what you predicted. Nowhere I said I supported Trump.
"Now, to be sure, there might be a reasonable case to be made that the American bureaucracy could benefit from some pruning. Despite my libertarian inclinations, I don’t view this as a particularly pressing issue." I would suggest it is one of the most pressing issues. Gutting 70% or more of it would eliminate red tape, unnecessary costs, corruption, and idiotic compliance, paving the way for the very innovation and agile governance models you desire. The OECD is not a standard. There can only be a maximalist ethic if you are fortunate enough to reside in a hot zone of competency, such as any US citizen.
"Tariffs are one of the most regressive taxes, raising consumer prices across the board just to protect notable strategic industries such as toaster production." Why should we play by the rules when China is structurally incapable? My main problem with tariffs is that they are entirely insufficient unless China is technologically contained to prevent future dependency on Tianxia.
"Second, the Republicans have always been the more hawkish party." "Overall, it is foreign policy—the sector that causes many liberal pundits the most trepidation regarding a Trump presidency—on which I am, ironically, most unsure and conflicted." Geopolitical concerns outweigh economic concerns. Clearly, the latter depends on the former if you wish to secure resources and maintain your perimeter. Hitting your mark here is more critical than anywhere else. Just look at the Democrats and their record on China, Russia, and Iran. With a bit of practical sense, you might have been able to rescue yourself from such a ghastly endorsement.
You’re making a bigger deal over abortion than it merits. Roe was overturned and the question returned to the states. Neither side is happy with the outcome but now states and hopefully local communities at some point can craft their own policies determined by their own cultures and circumstances. Who cares if Missouri outlaws abortion while it remains legal in all ‘blue states.’ Trump mostly has evaded the issue. Partisans of the issue make a bigger deal out of it than most average people. Few ‘blue’ leaning voters will vote for Harris simply over abortion. The big questions are immigration, economics, and foreign policy.
Neoliberals really are Enemies of The People. Let’s hope of the destruction of the American political system in the long run. Hanania and his tech bro sponsors can bitch about unions and how much they despise proles and want to replace them with Asians and Pajeets but the GOP is an overwhelmingly a party of the white native-born working and middle classes, along with the lower levels of capital. MAGA base is the core rank and file of the GOP. They don’t want forever wars, warmed-over Reaganism, or more immigration. Trump is going to throw them a few bones if victorious. If Trump loses, the issues which motivated his campaigns and movement won’t be going away.
Trump can’t give big business and corporate interests everything it wants so Hanania and Karlin might be disappointed by what happens in the first two years in power.
This is just the beginning of a political and social realignment in the United States regardless who is elected on Tuesday.
“Asians and Pajeets” great intellectual and substantive debate here. Being disillusioned with immigration policy is fine, but why be hateful towards other people? It’s not like they forced Silicon Valley to hire them. Silicon Valley *chose* to hire them. They come here and for the most part are law abiding citizens. Take up your issues with the cause of those issues—companies run by **White** men—rather than spreading vitriol against Asians. Would you think me calling you a “cumskin” advances meaningful discussion?
I don’t care what you call me. It is natural to dislike or even hate those working against your interests, either individually or collectively. I don’t hate Asian or Indian tech dorks. They are mere opportunists. The top tier of our business and political elites are another matter entirely.
All living creatures pursue ‘opportunity’ aka optimum conditions favorable to survival of themselves individually and their group or species. Nothing special about that, and many immigrants are indeed opportunists who take advantage of what they can get out of a weak-willed and decadent host
society. We see it all the time here and in Europe.
I am not a fan of Trump or the Republican Party. He is not a particularly likable or trustworthy person and not likely to uphold any of his promises but perhaps buys more time. That’s about all. I don’t believe in America or its so-called potential. It is in inexorable decline and a bunch of tech bros won’t be able to preserve the great beast. It is already in decline not ascending.
"Opportunists" implies exploitation. They strive for the same milestones as you and your posse of self-congratulatory political outcasts. They aspire to accrue wealth, support their families, and improve their quality of life--goals that you wouldn't belittle when you pursue them. Asians and Indians aren't opportunists for pursuing the aforementioned goals, and all they are doing is *recognizing* an opportunity presented to them. This is being resourceful. Unless, of course, you think that a talented Chinese international facing repression and poverty in the CCP should turn down a comfy, salaried job in Silicon Valley so that a "true" American like you can get a job. I don't think its fair to have such an expectation, because you'd have the same desire in his situation. Your situation is not unique. You aren't the only poor group in America. Your grievances are just, and the contemporary two-party system has neglected a significant chunk of the American populace. But I believe that Trump is no better for the working class than the Democrats are. The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in their screwing of the working class is that the former tends to focus on people of color in their messaging, thus leaving White people feel left out, while the latter exploits those feelings of neglect to foster racial animus. At the end, what happens is that constructive and productive policy implementation is stymied by bullshit racial quibbles, while politicians line their pockets with funds. Democrats lionize people of color while demonizing Whites. Republicans lionize White people while demonizing people of color. Both parties exploit racial division.
You don't choose the country you're born in and you don't choose your race either, so there's no reason to obsessively identify with those factors TO THE EXTENT of dehumanizing those who AREN'T part of those groups. Patriotism is desirable and often effective; nationalism is corrosive and vain. You are CORRECT that the issues which motivated Trump's campaign will not disappear just because Trump loses. But they aren't going to go away even if he wins. At most, you'll get the illusion that things have changed. I just request you not to add race to your personal war against the State, because the real battle ought not to be between White and Black or White and Indian, but rather between citizens of this country and noncitizens. It is optimal for us to promote civic nationalism as opposed to ethnic nationalism, because we are all ultimately humans and race is a specious form of classification. Raise a White person in China and they're Chinese. Raise a Chinese person in America and they're American. It's called socialization--it's not genetics that make the nation or group affiliation, but influences from society, which is why we must push beyond the myopic ethnic nationalism that Trump peddles and move towards *civic* nationalism. This is consistent with Enlightenment principles, that "all men are created equal". The battle is between power-hungry politicians on both sides of the aisle intent on distracting us from shit that matters and citizens who just want good lives for their family members. For what its worth, I'm not a Democrat, and I agree with you that neoconservative/neoliberal policies have some massive holes in them. I would love an America First movement that is race blind and fosters amity between people of all citizens in the United States.
I don’t believe in civic nationalism, or at least a very limited version. Not all Enlightenment ideals are good. Some are very harmful and destructive. There is no society or country that exists without an ethnocultural foundation of some sort. For any kind of civic nationalism to be viable there has to be something tangible to assimilate into beyond liking money and Coca. a white person born in China or even raised there is not Chinese anymore than a Pole born in Nigeria becomes a white African.
Do you think that a White Russian born in America is not American? Or a White "American" born in Russia is not Russian? Because if no, then you aren't applying your logic fairly. And, what even is a "White American"? On what basis can we form an ethnocentric society, when what constitutes White has constantly been in flux? In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Irish immigrants were singled out for their Catholicism, Germans for not speaking English, and Eastern and Southern Europeans for being less educated. Italians were not considered White at one point in American history. The group of "White" people in America started small, with certain traits limited to the original settlers of the country; ever since then, it has consistently expanded. Benjamin Frankly castigated anyone who wasn't part of the minuscule English group. I believe that most Americans today aren't even English--they're Germanic.
Once again, we need to break up or at the very least, radically decentralize artificial polities like the United States, Canada, etc which aren’t nations but populated spaces or administrative zones. Patriotism in these societies is in decline since no one has anything in common with many of their ‘fellow Americans,’ etc.
A white American born in Russia doesn’t become Russian simply by being born and raised there. Now if he remains there and marries a Russian woman their offspring will be Russian culturally and at least partially ethnically.
White Americans are the core and foundational population of the United States. Whatever ethnic rivalries or historical religious conflicts existed, etc are irrelevant.
I don't want to nuke this already existing thread, but this blog is meant to be a bit more highbrow than X, and I would prefer not to see Low Human Capital rhetoric like "pajeets" and "neoliberals are the enemies of the people" in the comments. Consider this the first and final warning.
“…putting him back into power will further normalize a style of governance that rejects traditional American civic norms such as honest governance…”
Sounds like Trump derangement syndrome to me. Just what are those norms that you speak of? A current President who is in the later stages of dementia and a country run by who knows who? A presidential candidate that, although not demented, cannot put forth a coherent thought? Presidential elections fraught with controversy and accusations of fraud. Our how about a justice system that hold thousands of protesters in isolation and without bail as “terrorists”. What color is the sky on your world?
Great work. One thing though is notice how you default to the idea that Republicans are more hawkish on foreign policy, which I think is correct, despite what Trump sometimes says. At the same time, you forget the GOP is the more pro-capitalist party when it comes to economics and take the nice things Trump and Vance say about unions too seriously. I think Trump ends up giving the traditional GOP coalition what it wants in both areas.
Thanks - much appreciated!
Re-unions. I don't expect T/V to be nice to the unions, though TBF I still don't understand why you weigh them so heavily. There are some OECD countries where unions are a big problem, France, Italy, I'd even say UK if to a lesser extent, but the US isn't one of them.
More broadly, sure, it's likely that none of the more demented economics-related proposals from T/V come to fruition, but that's also true of a Kamala Presidency. However, we can be reasonably sure that Trump will be materially worse for the budget deficit and for long-term institutional integrity, and carries much heavier tail risks, even if by far the likeliest outcome is "business as usual."
The GOP hawks are almost all voting Harris this time around -- because the uniparty supersedes political parties.
Uniparty is based. Elite Human Capital is the uniparty per excellence
Incredible use of Tandy. Never thought I’d see a Fallout reference on Substack. 100/100
> "It’s now a very angry, very conspiratorial, and much lower IQ movement (even as it’s come to profusely use “low IQ” as an insult). It is headed by a scammer who rants about the globalist elites who are ripping you off while selling his NFTs and shitcoins, a stable genius who went bankrupt running a casino, a felon who enjoys overwhelming support from felons across all creeds and race"
This is true, but such is democracy. Vance and Elon are the closest thing in the world to competent rulers, Trump and his entourage are there to get biomass to vote..
I very strongly disagree with this endorsement; Kamala will take the whole world towards communism and bring in tens or hundreds of millions more biomass from the Third World, which shifts the new equilibrium towards even more low-IQ grifting.
Anatoly has it right. Vance and Elon hitched their wagon to trump, and all it takes is the insinuation that they're the ones pulling the strings, or making Trump unpopular and Trump will ice them out. See Steve Bannon.
As for Kamala making the whole world communist and importing tens to hundreds of millions of "biomass"- this is the sort of conspiratorial low iq nonsense he was talking about.
Kamala is the very opposite of communism, I have to cringe hard at that statement.
I don't think the chances of Kamala ushering in Communism or bringing in gazillions of Third Worlders is terribly high (appreciably above zero).
We have no idea what kind of rulers Vance and Elon are going to be, and that's even assuming they get to run things.
See here. On Noah's most recent post: https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/trumpism-is-kakistocracy
> There is, of course, Elon Musk, who is nothing if not hyper-competent. Regardless of whether Elon decides to set aside his principles, I predict that Trump will marginalize Elon out of fear of being overshadowed. There’s already a hint of this — Lutnick, Trump’s transition team co-chair, apparently said in his recent interview that “tech entrepreneur Elon Musk would ‘help’ rather than serve in the government if Trump wins.” Principles aren’t the only threat to a cult of personality; another big, popular personality is also a threat.
Intelligent, well-expressed, if sometimes unorthodox, positions - and an impressive ability to address policy points in isolation, a la Hanania, without idealogical capture or adherence to traditional Right/Left distinctions. In the future, would be interested to see a fulsome discussion of the author’s support for Open Borders. While attractive on humanitarian grounds it does not appear to be even remotely practical. Nearly 45% of Americans do not pay federal income taxes. A permanent open border policy would likely drive US population levels to 10+ digits, with the majority of new citizens having completed less than full secondary education levels. Our national deficit is already at levels (trillions) beyond the imagination of most people. Who will fund social security and other entitlements in such a scenario, even if we could navigate the challenges of integrating so many people who come from regions, nations and cultures that, objectively, are not functioning as well as ours.
I'll do an Open Borders post sometime within next few months.
A lot to unwrap here. The good part of it's wrong about Russia and Iran. But regardless of all that, the author is ready to reward Biden/Harris for murdering 14000+ children with his vote. In fact, he didn't even bring up the genocide in Gaza, but we all know that the “strongman Putin” is bad, and the author pretends he doesn't know the real causes of the invasion. Congrats! You just repeated (in a long article) the deep state CIA talking points.
Trying to use Gaza to endorse voting for Trump is almost as obscene as the dead kids. There's a reason that Bibi has been actively trying to help Trump's campaign, and it's not that he thinks there's no daylight between the candidates.
I'm not sure what there is to bring up about Gaza in principle.
I said it would be a disaster a year ago and that view has been validated: https://akarlin.com/enjoy-your-two-minute-hate/
The U.S. is a chief enabler of the genocide in Gaza. It's not rhetorical; it's factual. Biden/Harris are enablers of the genocide in Gaza. You support Harris; you are dismissing Genocide, regardless of what you predicted. Nowhere I said I supported Trump.
Why don’t you go to join the Palestinian resistance and save Palestinian children of your own? Go ahead follow the example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Coudroy
A few remarks:
"Now, to be sure, there might be a reasonable case to be made that the American bureaucracy could benefit from some pruning. Despite my libertarian inclinations, I don’t view this as a particularly pressing issue." I would suggest it is one of the most pressing issues. Gutting 70% or more of it would eliminate red tape, unnecessary costs, corruption, and idiotic compliance, paving the way for the very innovation and agile governance models you desire. The OECD is not a standard. There can only be a maximalist ethic if you are fortunate enough to reside in a hot zone of competency, such as any US citizen.
"Tariffs are one of the most regressive taxes, raising consumer prices across the board just to protect notable strategic industries such as toaster production." Why should we play by the rules when China is structurally incapable? My main problem with tariffs is that they are entirely insufficient unless China is technologically contained to prevent future dependency on Tianxia.
"Second, the Republicans have always been the more hawkish party." "Overall, it is foreign policy—the sector that causes many liberal pundits the most trepidation regarding a Trump presidency—on which I am, ironically, most unsure and conflicted." Geopolitical concerns outweigh economic concerns. Clearly, the latter depends on the former if you wish to secure resources and maintain your perimeter. Hitting your mark here is more critical than anywhere else. Just look at the Democrats and their record on China, Russia, and Iran. With a bit of practical sense, you might have been able to rescue yourself from such a ghastly endorsement.
You’re making a bigger deal over abortion than it merits. Roe was overturned and the question returned to the states. Neither side is happy with the outcome but now states and hopefully local communities at some point can craft their own policies determined by their own cultures and circumstances. Who cares if Missouri outlaws abortion while it remains legal in all ‘blue states.’ Trump mostly has evaded the issue. Partisans of the issue make a bigger deal out of it than most average people. Few ‘blue’ leaning voters will vote for Harris simply over abortion. The big questions are immigration, economics, and foreign policy.
It would help if you could define what "EHC" actually is.
Neoliberals really are Enemies of The People. Let’s hope of the destruction of the American political system in the long run. Hanania and his tech bro sponsors can bitch about unions and how much they despise proles and want to replace them with Asians and Pajeets but the GOP is an overwhelmingly a party of the white native-born working and middle classes, along with the lower levels of capital. MAGA base is the core rank and file of the GOP. They don’t want forever wars, warmed-over Reaganism, or more immigration. Trump is going to throw them a few bones if victorious. If Trump loses, the issues which motivated his campaigns and movement won’t be going away.
Trump can’t give big business and corporate interests everything it wants so Hanania and Karlin might be disappointed by what happens in the first two years in power.
This is just the beginning of a political and social realignment in the United States regardless who is elected on Tuesday.
“Asians and Pajeets” great intellectual and substantive debate here. Being disillusioned with immigration policy is fine, but why be hateful towards other people? It’s not like they forced Silicon Valley to hire them. Silicon Valley *chose* to hire them. They come here and for the most part are law abiding citizens. Take up your issues with the cause of those issues—companies run by **White** men—rather than spreading vitriol against Asians. Would you think me calling you a “cumskin” advances meaningful discussion?
I don’t care what you call me. It is natural to dislike or even hate those working against your interests, either individually or collectively. I don’t hate Asian or Indian tech dorks. They are mere opportunists. The top tier of our business and political elites are another matter entirely.
All living creatures pursue ‘opportunity’ aka optimum conditions favorable to survival of themselves individually and their group or species. Nothing special about that, and many immigrants are indeed opportunists who take advantage of what they can get out of a weak-willed and decadent host
society. We see it all the time here and in Europe.
I am not a fan of Trump or the Republican Party. He is not a particularly likable or trustworthy person and not likely to uphold any of his promises but perhaps buys more time. That’s about all. I don’t believe in America or its so-called potential. It is in inexorable decline and a bunch of tech bros won’t be able to preserve the great beast. It is already in decline not ascending.
"Opportunists" implies exploitation. They strive for the same milestones as you and your posse of self-congratulatory political outcasts. They aspire to accrue wealth, support their families, and improve their quality of life--goals that you wouldn't belittle when you pursue them. Asians and Indians aren't opportunists for pursuing the aforementioned goals, and all they are doing is *recognizing* an opportunity presented to them. This is being resourceful. Unless, of course, you think that a talented Chinese international facing repression and poverty in the CCP should turn down a comfy, salaried job in Silicon Valley so that a "true" American like you can get a job. I don't think its fair to have such an expectation, because you'd have the same desire in his situation. Your situation is not unique. You aren't the only poor group in America. Your grievances are just, and the contemporary two-party system has neglected a significant chunk of the American populace. But I believe that Trump is no better for the working class than the Democrats are. The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in their screwing of the working class is that the former tends to focus on people of color in their messaging, thus leaving White people feel left out, while the latter exploits those feelings of neglect to foster racial animus. At the end, what happens is that constructive and productive policy implementation is stymied by bullshit racial quibbles, while politicians line their pockets with funds. Democrats lionize people of color while demonizing Whites. Republicans lionize White people while demonizing people of color. Both parties exploit racial division.
You don't choose the country you're born in and you don't choose your race either, so there's no reason to obsessively identify with those factors TO THE EXTENT of dehumanizing those who AREN'T part of those groups. Patriotism is desirable and often effective; nationalism is corrosive and vain. You are CORRECT that the issues which motivated Trump's campaign will not disappear just because Trump loses. But they aren't going to go away even if he wins. At most, you'll get the illusion that things have changed. I just request you not to add race to your personal war against the State, because the real battle ought not to be between White and Black or White and Indian, but rather between citizens of this country and noncitizens. It is optimal for us to promote civic nationalism as opposed to ethnic nationalism, because we are all ultimately humans and race is a specious form of classification. Raise a White person in China and they're Chinese. Raise a Chinese person in America and they're American. It's called socialization--it's not genetics that make the nation or group affiliation, but influences from society, which is why we must push beyond the myopic ethnic nationalism that Trump peddles and move towards *civic* nationalism. This is consistent with Enlightenment principles, that "all men are created equal". The battle is between power-hungry politicians on both sides of the aisle intent on distracting us from shit that matters and citizens who just want good lives for their family members. For what its worth, I'm not a Democrat, and I agree with you that neoconservative/neoliberal policies have some massive holes in them. I would love an America First movement that is race blind and fosters amity between people of all citizens in the United States.
I don’t believe in civic nationalism, or at least a very limited version. Not all Enlightenment ideals are good. Some are very harmful and destructive. There is no society or country that exists without an ethnocultural foundation of some sort. For any kind of civic nationalism to be viable there has to be something tangible to assimilate into beyond liking money and Coca. a white person born in China or even raised there is not Chinese anymore than a Pole born in Nigeria becomes a white African.
Do you think that a White Russian born in America is not American? Or a White "American" born in Russia is not Russian? Because if no, then you aren't applying your logic fairly. And, what even is a "White American"? On what basis can we form an ethnocentric society, when what constitutes White has constantly been in flux? In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Irish immigrants were singled out for their Catholicism, Germans for not speaking English, and Eastern and Southern Europeans for being less educated. Italians were not considered White at one point in American history. The group of "White" people in America started small, with certain traits limited to the original settlers of the country; ever since then, it has consistently expanded. Benjamin Frankly castigated anyone who wasn't part of the minuscule English group. I believe that most Americans today aren't even English--they're Germanic.
Once again, we need to break up or at the very least, radically decentralize artificial polities like the United States, Canada, etc which aren’t nations but populated spaces or administrative zones. Patriotism in these societies is in decline since no one has anything in common with many of their ‘fellow Americans,’ etc.
A white American born in Russia doesn’t become Russian simply by being born and raised there. Now if he remains there and marries a Russian woman their offspring will be Russian culturally and at least partially ethnically.
White Americans are the core and foundational population of the United States. Whatever ethnic rivalries or historical religious conflicts existed, etc are irrelevant.
I don't want to nuke this already existing thread, but this blog is meant to be a bit more highbrow than X, and I would prefer not to see Low Human Capital rhetoric like "pajeets" and "neoliberals are the enemies of the people" in the comments. Consider this the first and final warning.
🤷♀️
Silence, vassal! Americans are speaking. We'll let you know when a ditch-digging position opens up.
“…putting him back into power will further normalize a style of governance that rejects traditional American civic norms such as honest governance…”
Sounds like Trump derangement syndrome to me. Just what are those norms that you speak of? A current President who is in the later stages of dementia and a country run by who knows who? A presidential candidate that, although not demented, cannot put forth a coherent thought? Presidential elections fraught with controversy and accusations of fraud. Our how about a justice system that hold thousands of protesters in isolation and without bail as “terrorists”. What color is the sky on your world?
It's amusing you seem to imply that Trump puts forth coherent thoughts.