It came from the grass roots
January 16, 2024 4:56 AM Subscribe

How Trump went from disgraced insurrectionist to Iowa caucus winner - "By most accounts, the Republican old guard has no great fondness for the man who executed a hostile takeover of their party, saddled them with daily political headaches during his time in office, and then instigated an insurrection that nearly got some GOP leaders pummeled, if not killed. Yet McConnell and his allies have proven incapable of steering their party in another direction." (via)

Republicans’ inability to oust Trump is a symptom of deep, structural pathologies in American political life... Over the past half-century, changes in American society have shifted power away from formal party structures and toward donors, political action committees (PACs), issue advocacy groups, and the media... In their new book, The Hollow Parties, political scientists Daniel Schlozman and Sam Rosenfeld chart the decline of America’s major parties and the rise of the modern conservative movement. Schlozman and Rosenfeld persuasively argue that these two trends are deeply intertwined, and that the GOP’s lurch toward authoritarianism is inextricable from both...

[T]he qualities that made the conservative movement amenable to Trumpism were present from its inception. The modern right was born in opposition to the moderate Republicanism of the postwar years. Disenfranchised by a GOP leadership that had made peace with the existence of Social Security, labor unions, and a communist bloc, the conservative movement’s founding generation harbored contempt for the Republican establishment and a cynical attitude toward political parties as such. After all, in their view, America’s parties had delivered the nation into the tyranny of New Deal liberalism, and much of Eurasia into that of Soviet totalitarianism. (Such conservatives tended to attribute their ideology’s every setback to establishment treachery, rather than to the inevitable give-and-take of democratic politics or limits of American power.)

The conservative movement’s reliance on the cultivation of outrage and apocalyptic paranoia also dates back to its infancy. Many in the movement genuinely believed that the State Department was brimming with communists and that Eisenhower was dragging America down the road to serfdom. But even (relatively) level-headed conservatives recognized the political utility of promoting hysteria. In the 1960s, the advent of direct-mail fundraising expanded the resources available to conservative organizations and issue campaigns. And the right quickly discovered that their prospective donors were far more likely to put a check in the mail once worked up into a frenzy of terror and indignation. As the conservative movement’s “funding father” Richard Viguerie told NPR’s Terry Gross, when it comes to political giving, “people are motivated by anger and fear much more so than positive emotions.”

The right’s contempt for mainstream politics and penchant for catastrophism informed its ruthless approach to political combat. For the movement’s leading functionaries, the headlong pursuit of power took precedence over honesty or social responsibility. Conservative operatives therefore cheered the displacement of formal party committees by unaccountable, dark money PACs that facilitated smear campaigns. As Terry Dolan, co-founder of the National Conservative Political Action Committee, said in 1980, “A group like ours could lie through its teeth and the candidate it helps stays clean.”

Combine these three tendencies — to perennially blame every ideological defeat on a traitorous GOP establishment, to stoke apocalyptic rage about the direction of the country, and to pursue power by any means necessary — and you aren’t far away from a recipe for Trumpism...

From the era of Richard Nixon to that of George W. Bush, many white Christian conservatives understood themselves to be a silent (moral) majority whose will was frustrated by an overweening liberal elite. But demographic and cultural change gradually impeded on this self-conception. The election of an African American president, the increasingly unabashed social liberalism of corporate America, and the nation’s steadily declining religiosity have all deepened the conservative base’s sense of dispossession. In some parts of red America, economic decline compounded cultural alienation, as jobs and capital fled small industrial towns for major urban centers.

For the Republican Party, the declining demographic weight of white conservatives was happily mitigated by their coalition’s geographic efficiency. America’s state legislatures, House of Representatives, Electoral College battlegrounds, and Senate all tended to overrepresent white rural areas. And this overrepresentation could be enhanced through gerrymandering and (at least, theoretically) voter restrictions, such as voter ID laws and felon disenfranchisement. Add to this a conservative Supreme Court majority, and Republicans proved capable of exercising significant influence over public policy even as they lost the popular vote in seven of the last eight presidential elections.

The need to publicly justify this anti-majoritarian power, however, increasingly led conservatives to explicitly critique democratic government — or, more commonly, to suggest that some voters were more equal than others. After a Democrat won the Wisconsin governorship in 2018, Republicans in the state’s heavily gerrymandered legislature voted to transfer various official powers away from the incoming governor and toward itself. The Republican State House speaker Robin Vos justified this power grab by saying, “If you took Madison and Milwaukee out of the state election formula, we would have a clear majority. We would have all five constitutional officers and we would probably have many more seats in the Legislature.”

The insinuation that real Americans should not have to share power with Democratic constituencies gained a more coherent ideological expression in the “great replacement” narrative, a conspiracy theory that holds that Democrats deliberately flooded the US with obedient foreigners so as to permanently disempower white Americans... Put all of this together and you’re left with a conservative base that despises the Republican congressional leadership, believes that their most fundamental values and interests are under existential threat, trusts right-wing infotainers more than party officials, and views their nation’s majority party as illegitimate. In this context, McConnell and his allies had little prospect of persuading the Republican faithful that Trump had disqualified himself from high office by fomenting an insurrection on January 6.

We find ourselves on the brink of an astonishing watershed: a live possibility that government of the people, by the people, and for the people could conceivably perish from these United States.
@rickperlstein: "on what has happened to America since 2000, and how it can unhappen."

You Are Entering the Infernal Triangle - "As a historian who also writes about the present, there are certain well-worn grooves in the way elections get written about by pundits and political journalists from which I instinctively recoil."

On one side of the yawning gulf is the perennial fantasy that America is a nation fundamentally united and at peace with itself, “moderate,” “centrist,” where exceptions are epiphenomena entirely alien to settled American “norms.”

On the other side of the gulf is, well, reality.

The media habits that make it so hard to grasp that reality—that made Trump and his merry band of insurrectionists such a surprise to us—are perhaps as systematic as any foisted upon the public by state media in authoritarian nations. A little more innocent than, say, Pravda, however, because one wellspring of this stubborn fantasy, and why audiences are so receptive to it, is simple psychology. To acknowledge the alternative is to stare into a terrifying abyss: the realization that America has never not been part of the way to something like a civil war...

This is the infernal triangle that structures American politics.

In one corner, a party consistently ratcheting toward authoritarianism, refusing as a matter of bedrock principle—otherwise they are “Republicans in Name Only”—to compromise with adversaries they frame as ineluctably evil and seek literally to destroy.

In the second corner, a party that says that, in a political culture where there is not enough compromise, the self-evident solution is to offer more compromise—because those guys’ extremist fever, surely, is soon to break ...

And in the third corner, those agenda-setting elite political journalists, who frame the Democrats as one of the “sides” in a tragic folie à deux destroying a nation otherwise united and at peace with itself because both sides stubbornly ... refuse to compromise.

And here we are.

All three sides of the triangle must be broken in order to preserve our republic...

8 Most Exciting Things To Expect From A24's Civil War - "Alex Garland's dystopian thriller Civil War will be one of 2024's most talked-about movies, presenting a bleak picture of a divided United States."[1,2,3]

posted by kliuless (159 comments total) 37 users marked this as a favorite

To the point above about media habits, I'll note that the UK media now feels like CNN felt during the lead up to the last US presidential election. Yesterday and today, I got out of bed to turn off the radio alarm because two different news stations were just flat out giving extended airtime to Trump's speaking. Unchallenged, free of commentary, just flat out promotion under the familiar shield of "we're just doing our reporting jobs." I feel like media outlets generally are keen to gorge at the trough. Not that I'm saying anything new, but by now I get the impression that every set of stories like this should be treated as a situation that's not unique to the US, lest we limit the area of concern for the perishing of good governance.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 5:15 AM on January 16 [27 favorites]

> Yet McConnell and his allies have proven incapable of steering their party in another direction.

“Incapable” implies that they want to. Sooner or later the Republican party was going to reveal itself in full, Trump just ripped the bandages off all at once. I’m sure McConnell and the rest hate Trump on a personal level, but politically he’s been fascist rocket fuel, a useful idiot beyond their wildest dreams.
posted by The Card Cheat at 5:41 AM on January 16 [32 favorites]

In all likelihood, they don't want Trump, but they do want power. They can do the math. If they repudiate Trump they lose the n% who are hardcore supporters, and every election where there spread is less than n.

It would effectively take the Republicans out of power for 6-10 years, if not end it entirely. They're not willing to give uo power just to stop Trump.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 5:56 AM on January 16 [17 favorites]

Do we have a phrase for fiction that portrays journalists/journalism as noble while completely ignoring the way in which news outlets are complicit with the rise of Trump and both-siderism?

Something like "copaganda?"
posted by oddman at 6:10 AM on January 16 [25 favorites]

That there’s a whole lot of words for ‘deplorable filth support nazi rapist’.
posted by chronkite at 6:13 AM on January 16 [22 favorites]

Maybe I'm living on a different planet, but I never, at any time, got the impression that the Republican party or electorate viewed Trump as a "disgraced inssurectionist" at any point. Anyone who is surprised that he won Iowa has had their head in the sand.
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:13 AM on January 16 [68 favorites]

You can't be disgraced if you never had any grace to begin with.
posted by Foosnark at 6:21 AM on January 16 [33 favorites]

I'm scared. I've been giving to political causes at a much higher level than usual.

And preparing options to leave the country on short notice.
posted by constraint at 6:23 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

There's clearly some level of split within the party. Not that the Iowa caucuses are representative of much of anything, but even there about half the people picked another candidate, though most of them will probably still vote for Trump in the general, however reluctantly. But it's not enough of a split to actually force him out; he has his "base", that fervent 35 or so percent, completely in his lap.

His appeal is completely lost on me, but for a big swath of the population it seems like a very genuine connection, and as long as it remains this strong I can't imagine the McConnells of the world doing anything to buck it.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:25 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

The modern right was born in opposition to the moderate Republicanism of the postwar years. Disenfranchised by a GOP leadership that had made peace with the existence of Social Security, labor unions, and a communist bloc, the conservative movement’s founding generation harbored contempt for the Republican establishment ...

It's always disheartening when articles like these contort and stretch and leap to avoid mentioning race and gender and sexual politics which are much more essential to the definition of the right wing today than any of the other things mentioned here. Republican voters these days (and going back to at least 50 years ago) aren't crazy rabid capitalists or rich they pride themselves on being true heartland blue collar workers standing in opposition to coastal elites. They may be controlled and fed by rich capitalists but that isn't who the rank and file voters are, and that isn't whom they support, more importantly. They're the people who are outraged by women and black people showing up in their labor unions, rather. People who want to keep the gays and trans people out of their social circles.
posted by MiraK at 6:30 AM on January 16 [42 favorites]

Iowa Caucus CNN Entrance Poll:

Do you think Biden legitimately won in 2020?

Yes: 29%
No: 66%

Trump fit for presidency, if convicted of a crime?

Yes: 65%
No: 31%

posted by 1970s Antihero at 6:36 AM on January 16 [19 favorites]

And preparing options to leave the country on short notice.

If I had a dollar for every time I've heard this over the past couple election cycles, I'd easily have enough money to leave the country myself. (And that's not even counting the times I've said it myself.) Leaving is a big decision and there aren't all that many welcoming destinations (and close to zero if you, say, have a chronic health condition); there's a reason so few people ever end up following through.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:45 AM on January 16 [28 favorites]

It would effectively take the Republicans out of power for 6-10 years, if not end it entirely. They're not willing to give uo power just to stop Trump.

Sometimes I try to cheer myself up with the following:

Republicans are so afraid of being out in the political wilderness for the next 6-10 years that they're willing to embrace fascism and shred the Constitution. What are they afraid of?

I'd like to think that a lot of the emergency legislation passed during the pandemic (the PPP, child tax credit, enhanced unemployment insurance, extra food assistance, rent stabilization, and ~~BBB~~ the infrastructure bill) is just a taste of what's coming. I'd like to think that the reason conservatives (and business leaders, etc) are debasing themselves so much to support Trump is because they know we're at a watershed moment where the last fifty years of conservatism is about to be swept away and they're just doing whatever they can to prevent it, even if it means embracing fascism.

Of course this way of thinking presupposes that Republicans aren't just power hungry for the sake of being power hungry or secretly into the kind of fascism that Trump is ushering forth. But maybe, being reactionaries, they're already reacting to some change that hasn't quite come forth yet?
posted by RonButNotStupid at 6:50 AM on January 16 [14 favorites]

You can't be disgraced if you never had any grace to begin with.

Disgrace under pressure
posted by chavenet at 6:53 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

Can someone like Liz Cheney not very easily fuck it up for Trump? Any somewhat popular Republican who was dead set against Trump getting into office could run as an independent and take enough votes away from him to ensure a loss, no?

Of course, they spend the rest of their days with a target on their back...
posted by dobbs at 6:58 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

I left once. It was really nice. I think I’m stuck here this time although I can definitely see fleeing my state at some point.

Conservatives always wanted a king. A bad king to them is better than no king so while I’m sure it rankles some of them to see someone so unworthy sitting on the throne they spent all this time building, they’ll take it.

I’m almost grateful to Trump. Between him and Covid I have learned so much about my countrymen.
posted by The Monster at the End of this Thread at 7:02 AM on January 16 [18 favorites]

If Trump's health stops his run, I think it would be best if a dozen lesser opportunists tried to take his place. Seems easier to fight a divided group than a powerful monolith.
posted by Richard Daly at 7:04 AM on January 16 [6 favorites]

Die or not die, win or lose, be removed from the ballot for insurrection or stay on the ballot all the way to Nov 4, it doesn't matter, Trump is still a mythical figure and dozens will run in his name. He remade the Republican party and it's his party now, and will be until the next major transformation of US politics. The most important thing is ensuring that movement does not get power again, and I think the establishment doesn't really grasp the gravity of the moment, not completely, given how vociferous all the centrist pieces have been about how "actually if we don't let trump run for president our democracy is dead". If we let him run, right now it seems incredibly likely that he will win, and when he wins, jesus, that's it, that's really the end of the rule of law in the united states. Back in power the Trump ghouls will begin on day one with political violence, we will see a first 100 days that unmakes the established order completely, courts be damned, senators be damned, laws be damned. And it may unmake the world, given the unpredictable chaos of the ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Levant. I generally thought the fear of trump in 2016 was slightly hyperbolic (although only slightly), given that he was basically going to pursue the policies of the establishment GOP, but he's the party now, it's an outright fascist party that explicitly argues that there are no legal limits on Trump's actions. When he wins this november the only way he'll leave is when he dies, and whoever replaces him will, like him, see no legal limits to his actions, including things like elections and court rulings.
posted by dis_integration at 7:05 AM on January 16 [18 favorites]

even if it means embracing fascism.

Why do you think they don't want fascism?

Not "why shouldn't they want fascism". Why do you think the Republican voters and the establishment of the Republican party doesn't want "their side" to brutally grab the reigns of power and destroy their political foes using the power of government?

The base definitely asks for it. The establishment is reluctant to try to grab it, but I don't see them opposing it very often; Pence consulted lawyers to ask if overthrowing the election would work, if he could do it, he didn't consult them to see how he could oppose overthrowing the election most effectively.
posted by NotAYakk at 7:08 AM on January 16 [19 favorites]

got the impression that the Republican party or electorate viewed Trump as a "disgraced inssurectionist" at any point.

Well there were those 12 hours during & after Jan 6th where a bunch of Republican Congresspeople & a few FoxNews folks were like, "Hey, WTF?"

That was about it, though.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:12 AM on January 16 [14 favorites]

Dip Flash I am extremely privileged - I have two other passports (only one is currently a war zone, huzzah) and right of abode in a third, but after making similar noises before, I've come to the conclusion that like hell am I going to be chased out of my home by a bunch of fascist goons who want "civil war" but can barely get off their own couches. Like. Hell.
posted by 1adam12 at 7:13 AM on January 16 [23 favorites]

I'd like to think that a lot of the emergency legislation passed during the pandemic (the PPP, child tax credit, enhanced unemployment insurance, extra food assistance, rent stabilization, and BBB the infrastructure bill) is just a taste of what's coming. I'd like to think that the reason conservatives (and business leaders, etc) are debasing themselves so much to support Trump is because they know we're at a watershed moment where the last fifty years of conservatism is about to be swept away and they're just doing whatever they can to prevent it, even if it means embracing fascism.

I don't want to rain on your parade, exactly, but that is kind of magical thinking. What will happen if the conservatives lose power altogether will be further Manchinization of the Democratic party in order to maintain control. The Republicans losing, if that happens, isn't a divine mandate for a wholesale New Deal. It just means that they lost. They will win again later, and 100% for certain will be extremely active in the meantime at the state and local level where national political trends are far less monolithic.

There is no such thing as a "we won, hooray" moment. There is only an endless series of battles which we must continue to fight in order to protect the values and rights we treasure. The Rs know that. They are really, really good at playing the long game. They have frightening tenacity. The Ds need that clarity of vision and long term thinking, and the liberal electorate needs to buckle down and vote in higher numbers for, in many elections, the least worst choice. And always in state and local elections. Nobody likes to hear "vote more" but that is truly the yucky bitter vegetable of democracy dinner.
posted by grumpybear69 at 7:20 AM on January 16 [28 favorites]

I left for Canada in 2008, and for the most part it's been fantastic, aside from the cost of living/housing and how tech jobs pay like 50% less factoring in exchange rates. I have not for one day regretted my decision to move here though, and can't tell you how much better my mental health has been since I stopped being "governed" by DC's dumpster fire. Took me two years to get PR, and then three? more years to get full citizenship.

If you're thinking about leaving and have the option, I fully recommend it, plus you can still continue to vote in US elections from abroad.
posted by neon909 at 7:27 AM on January 16 [6 favorites]

I looked into moving to Canada years ago and turns out Canada would not want me.
posted by jenfullmoon at 7:29 AM on January 16 [14 favorites]

I'd like to think that the reason conservatives (and business leaders, etc) are debasing themselves so much to support Trump is because they know we're at a watershed moment where the last fifty years of conservatism is about to be swept away and they're just doing whatever they can to prevent it, even if it means embracing fascism.

Sorry, but this is right up there with "as soon as the boomers die, a glorious progressive future will be born." A lovely (if problematic) fantasy, but not anywhere remotely close to reality. The only watershed we are at is the choice between business-as-usual or the-actual-for-real-end-of-democracy.

And, even if Trump is soundly defeated in November, we will still have all those nasty republican-controlled state legislatures to deal with. A Trump loss won't necessarily be part of some massive wave against conservative policies. It will be more of a singular "oh, hell, no, not that guy" vote against Trump. Sure, the overturning of Roe will probably affect a few close downballot races, but not enough to keep state legislatures from continuing their slow secession-lite from the USA.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:37 AM on January 16 [7 favorites]

It would be nice if people didn't immediately shit on all hope on here...I mean, I get it, but also refuse to listen to it.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:41 AM on January 16 [26 favorites]

As someone who moved to Canada from the UK some time ago, I would caution those who think that Canada is going to be some kind of 'woke Shangri-La'. We have our own problems with (admittedly, so far, largely inept) 'swivel-eyed loons' and fascist-adjacent politicians. Here in my own province, we have christo-fascists coming out of the woodwork at an alarming rate. Our next national election is likely to precipitate a political sea-change towards populism which could align with the trajectory of our southern neighbours. Just sayin'...
posted by aeshnid at 7:43 AM on January 16 [20 favorites]

A few comments and responses removed. Don't make comments about wishing for anyone's death, it is Inappropriate Content.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:45 AM on January 16 [2 favorites]

I was glad to see Richard Viguerie get a shout out in this, speaking as someone who wrote a bit in my journalism days about how the infamous cult leader Sun Myung Moon kept the lights on at his right-wing direct-mail factory.

Nixonland author Perlstein (above) is part of a small world of people who, years before Trump, were on top of bringing to light the true proto-Trumpy history of the right-wing conservative movement, at a time when John McCain was helping it pass for respectable.
posted by johngoren at 7:45 AM on January 16 [13 favorites]

Sorry, but this is right up there with "as soon as the boomers die, a glorious progressive future will be born."

One of my favorite jokes:

What's the difference between a capitalist fairy tale and a communist fairy tale?

A capitalist fairy tale starts "Once upon a time, there was..." and a communist fairy tale starts "One day, there will be..."
posted by Pickman's Next Top Model at 7:46 AM on January 16 [36 favorites]

The only watershed we are at is the choice between business-as-usual or the-actual-for-real-end-of-democracy.

But that's the problem: Business as usual sucks. Hard. And if you're going to stomp over the fantasy that there's some real progress to be had, if only we can get through the next election, then.....like...what's the point?

This is what makes things so goddamn depressing. No one's even promising incremental progress, it's just vote to (hopefully) buy us another four years until the next existential crisis. I'm sick and tired of this. Trump tried to overthrow the goddamned government. The fact that he's getting a do-over is already a failure of institutions.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 7:46 AM on January 16 [63 favorites]

Assuming a close-to-even split between Democrats and Republicans, a 50% win in Iowa means about 25% of the total electorate can be put in a very particular basket, one which Hillary was pilloried for, but... she knew what she was talking about.

I honestly think it's the most important thing to understand about American politics, that 1 out of 4 voters are a lost cause and comprise various versions of deplorable shitheels.

But it's also important to understand 3 of 4 aren't that. 1 out of 2 GOP voters refused Dear Leader. The key for saving us from the darkest timeline is convincing most of the remaining 75% to stay sane, and that's 100% doable. The GOP primary cycle is getting more breath than it deserves. Of course TFG is going to win it, he's the master of the basket.
posted by mcstayinskool at 7:48 AM on January 16 [30 favorites]

Reminder for everyone who’s feeling as much anxiety as I am this morning, you’re not alone.
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 7:49 AM on January 16 [21 favorites]

Thanks Abehammerb Lincoln, that helps.

I had been unaware of the upcoming Civil War movie. Watching the trailer... didn't help.

Do we know the plot of the movie? Now I'm worried that somehow it will encourage more MAGA-right violence.
posted by digibri at 8:05 AM on January 16 [1 favorite]

I swore off traveling to the United States after Trump won the first time, and the way things are going I very much doubt I'll ever step foot there again. Of course, if he wins or otherwise takes power in November the U.S. could very well invade Canada at some point, and as others in this thread have pointed out there are millions of Canadians who would vote for Trump if they could, so it's not like I can assume I'm safe even if he doesn't win.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:07 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

Do we know the plot of the movie? Now I'm worried that somehow it will encourage more MAGA-right violence.

It does not even matter what the plot is, seeing how MAGA embraced songs like Born in the USA and bands like Rage Against The Machine all based on one line in the chorus they liked.
posted by Harald74 at 8:09 AM on January 16 [12 favorites]

Sorry, but this is right up there with "as soon as the boomers die, a glorious progressive future will be born.

You're also ignoring the fact that Biden was elected to office on an pretty progressive platform--way more progressive than anything Democrats have offered in decades--that really only unraveled because Joe Manchin and Kristen Sinema thoroughly debased their reputations in a desperate act to keep it from happening.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:12 AM on January 16 [43 favorites]

the U.S. could very well invade Canada

at some point in my life this became a question of when, not if

it will be stupid and violent and there will be plenty of useful idiots this side of the border. if it's "really" about something, I'm guessing water
posted by elkevelvet at 8:14 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

sigh
I picked a bad year to quit sniffing glue...
posted by digibri at 8:17 AM on January 16 [14 favorites]

Why would the U.S. invade Canada? I think it's much more likely the U.S. invades Mexico in the guise of stamping out the cartels.
posted by rhymedirective at 8:19 AM on January 16 [3 favorites]

Why would the U.S. invade Canada?

To stamp-out teh evils socialism? To unify both sides of Niagara Falls?
posted by Thorzdad at 8:22 AM on January 16 [2 favorites]

The headline makes no sense. To the people who made him the caucus winner and presumed nominee, he was never disgraced. To those of us for whom he was a disgraced insurrectionist, he still is. Nothing has changed. This is not a horse race election, it is an existential turning point, and any media that covers it as the former rather than the latter is complicit in the destruction of democracy.
posted by rikschell at 8:22 AM on January 16 [9 favorites]

Because we'd be a sparsely-populated, resource-rich, relatively progressive non-fascist democracy affronting MAGA by virtue of existing.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:23 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

(Canadian political and cultural climate subject to change, of course)
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:25 AM on January 16

I don't really buy it. I'm not saying it's not possible, but no one is talking about it and there is zero political upside to invading Canada, whereas there is a ton of political upside to invading Mexico (cartels, migrants, general racism)
posted by rhymedirective at 8:26 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

I would hope that even the absolute idiots who rule the Republican party would see that trying to occupy Mexico would be... problematic at best. And they don't want a bunch of Mexicans mixed up in our business. They just want a compliant dictator down there, and there are easier ways of installing one than invasion.
posted by rikschell at 8:32 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

I don't really buy it. I'm not saying it's not possible, but no one is talking about it and there is zero political upside to invading Canada, whereas there is a ton of political upside to invading Mexico (cartels, migrants, general racism)

Also, Mexico is down and Canada is up.

This is Trump we're talking about here.
posted by chavenet at 8:34 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

Rigidly bipolar political party system succumbs to divisive manipulation. Who knew.

Seriously, when a voter is motivated more by identity and a baked-in loathing for the only other choice, what do people expect? Add anachronisms like the electoral college and the two-seat-per-state senate, and remove any constraints on the influence of big money. Serve hot.

You ARE scaring me with the Invade Canada stuff. A US Civil War plus deteriorating global climate situation would put that on the table. Hope I die before that comes to pass.
posted by Artful Codger at 8:34 AM on January 16 [3 favorites]

I'm not sure I buy it either, but I will say that if Trump takes office I believe concepts like "political upside" aren't going to be relevant in the same way anymore. It'll be completely uncharted territory.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:34 AM on January 16 [1 favorite]

Trump barely cleared 50% on a very unpleasant night in Iowa, against candidates no one believes has a chance to beat him. If New Hampshire is similarly unemphatic, I think you could see quiet moves by the RNC to put in place a facility to disqualify him for the nomination if he's convicted of any of the felony charges.

That said, Biden will be re-elected unless unemployment ramps up badly or inflation takes another run. If one of those things happen, he likely loses, as would any incumbent in his position. Trump 2.0 will take office and forget all about his radical supporters and promises and let Jared and Ivanka's real estate and private equity buddies run the government.
posted by MattD at 8:35 AM on January 16 [8 favorites]

He’s still a disgraced insurrectionist, by the way. That never changed.
posted by chronkite at 8:38 AM on January 16 [6 favorites]

The 'invasion' of Canada is most likely to come from (uncontrolled) mass migration of Americans fleeing instability/violence/persecution as the union fails. If the Canadian government has a plan for managing this, they're tight-lipped about it.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 8:43 AM on January 16 [1 favorite]

I never, at any time, got the impression that the Republican party or electorate viewed Trump as a "disgraced inssurectionist"

"January 6th was a disgrace. American citizens attacked their own government. ... Fellow Americans beat and bloodied our own police. They stormed the center floor. They tried to hunt down the Speaker of the House. They built a gallows and chatted about murdering the vice president. They did this because they’d been fed wild, falsehoods by the most powerful man on earth because he was angry he lost an election. ... There’s no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it.

The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president and having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories, and reckless hyperbole, which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth. ... The increasingly wild myths about a reverse landslide election that was somehow being stolen. Some secret coup by our now president.

The leader of the free world cannot spend weeks thundering that shadowy forces are stealing our country and then feign surprise when people believe him and do reckless things. .... This was an intensifying crescendo of conspiracy theories orchestrated by an outgoing president who seemed determined to either overturn the voters decision or else torch our institutions on the way out. The unconscionable behavior did not end when the violence actually began.

...A mob was assaulting the Capitol in his name, these criminals who are carrying his banners, hanging his flags and screaming their loyalty to him. It was obvious that only President Trump could end this. He was the only one who could. Former aides publicly begged him to do so. Loyal allies frantically called the administration. The president did not act swiftly. He did not do his job. He didn’t take steps so federal law could be faithfully executed and order restored. No, instead, according to public reports, he watched television happily as the chaos unfolded. He kept pressing his scheme to overturn the election. Now, even after it was clear to any reasonable observer that Vice President Pence was in serious danger. Even as the mob carrying Trump banners was beating cops and breaching perimeters their president sent a further tweet, attacking his own vice president."

Mitch McConnell, February 13, 2021.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 8:45 AM on January 16 [24 favorites]

> I think you could see quiet moves by the RNC to put in place a facility to disqualify him for the nomination if he's convicted of any of the felony charges.

Personally, I doubt it. If they did anything to anger or alienate MAGA it would basically destroy the Republican party ~~for a generation~~ for this election cycle. They're all in on Trump, he gives them maybe the best chance they'll ever have to replace democracy with the dictatorship they've always wanted.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:48 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

McConnell has done as much as anybody to empower MAGAts. Look at the Supremes. He's no fool; he knows that a GOP government under Trump is still a GOP government.
posted by Artful Codger at 8:52 AM on January 16 [8 favorites]

Canada is a member of NATO, and by invading Canada the US would get kicked out of NATO, and then... well, WWIII begins I suppose, Canada + NATO vs America + whatever countries in NATO sided with the US.
posted by lefty lucky cat at 8:52 AM on January 16 [1 favorite]

Mitch McConnell, February 13th, 2021

Mitch McConnell, February 25th, 2021
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:54 AM on January 16 [13 favorites]

If New Hampshire is similarly unemphatic, I think you could see quiet moves by the RNC to put in place a facility to disqualify him for the nomination if he's convicted of any of the felony charges.

If they do this it'd be full of so many loopholes, it'd be a joke.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 8:56 AM on January 16

Talking about invading Canada or Mexico is just silly. It's not being proposed or considered currently and hasn't been for a very long time, aside from some goofy proposals during Trump's administration of somehow striking the carrtels with missiles (which basically received a "lol, nope" response).

For all of Trump's whackadoodle nuclear talk, he has made the contrast between the Washington establishment's interest in foreign intervention a major contrast with his isolationism, and it's a significant part of his appeal to many of his supporters.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:59 AM on January 16 [11 favorites]

The invasion of Canada would be first pitched as a "tighter union" to share resources, remove trade and migration barriers, and later "entering into a protective arrangement" with the US military supplanting oops I mean supplementing Canada's forces. Add money, political influencers, and stir. If you look at how Canada's right wing has already started embracing US right-wing tactics and hiring US political consultants, the process has already started.

Fuck I hate even thinking about this stuff. I agree that it's not part of Trump's agenda, but his ascendance is a step towards making such things possible.
posted by Artful Codger at 9:03 AM on January 16 [3 favorites]

Talking about invading Canada or Mexico is just silly.

Agreed. Military force (outside of the usual policing of international trade routes) will be used domestically.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 9:05 AM on January 16 [6 favorites]

LOL @ quoting Mitch McConnell as an example of someone in the Republican party who is holding Trump to task. that dude is a wretch of a turd of a human being who will say whatever is most advantageous at the moment.
posted by grumpybear69 at 9:09 AM on January 16 [10 favorites]

Maybe I should have been more explicit, but that's exactly why I quoted his speech from 3 years ago. I thought the contrast from his current lack of criticism would be clear to most readers.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 9:16 AM on January 16 [22 favorites]

Having five million stunned migrants who have grown up being taught that their form of government is the greatest ever conceived suddenly arrive expecting equivalent living standards will certainly lead to trouble.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 9:16 AM on January 16 [1 favorite]

He’s still a disgraced insurrectionist, by the way. That never changed.

A disgraced insurrectionist rapist. A fact decided by the Court in the E. Jean Carroll case.
posted by mikelieman at 9:20 AM on January 16 [11 favorites]

Disgraced insurrectionist rapist traitor.
posted by chronkite at 9:23 AM on January 16 [6 favorites]

> for all of Trump's whackadoodle nuclear talk, he has made the contrast between the Washington establishment's interest in foreign intervention a major contrast with his isolationism

except it's all bullshit. He made a show of isolationist rhetoric and then just let the "big beautiful generals" do whatever they wanted. All you'd have to do is flatter him enough and he'd agree to invade anywhere, I dunno, France tomorrow.
posted by dis_integration at 9:25 AM on January 16 [8 favorites]

The caucus system is completely wacky, and tends to bring out fringe elements in either party. It's worth noting that only 7% of registered Iowa Republicans voted for him in the caucus. The fact that he got barely more than 50% of the caucus votes can be looked at in a variety of ways. It could be viewed as a lack of widespread support of Trump considering that 49% of the caucus votes went to deeply unlikeable DeSantis, Haley and Ramaswami. On the other hand, considering that those three are MAGA-adjacent, if could be viewed as an indication of the enduring popularity of Trumpism among GOP voters.
posted by slkinsey at 10:00 AM on January 16 [7 favorites]

I looked into moving to Canada years ago and turns out Canada would not want me.

I don’t want to belong to any country that would accept me as one of its citizens.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:02 AM on January 16 [16 favorites]

except it's all bullshit. He made a show of isolationist rhetoric and then just let the "big beautiful generals" do whatever they wanted. All you'd have to do is flatter him enough and he'd agree to invade anywhere, I dunno, France tomorrow.

Sure, he's a complete moron and easy to influence, I agree. But he also didn't invade anywhere in his term in office, and really didn't even come close to doing so. Who knows what he'd do with another term, but his isolationism seemed to be pretty genuine last time around.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:20 AM on January 16 [2 favorites]

Republicans’ weird plan to abandon Ukraine and invade Mexico

In 2020, Defense Secretary Mark Esper realized that President Donald Trump was serious about attacking Mexico when he twice asked Esper about using missiles to destroy Mexican drug labs and making it appear that “no one would know it was us.”
posted by credulous at 10:26 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

But he also didn't invade anywhere in his term in office, and really didn't even come close to doing so.

It's a different world situation now, that has dragged the US into new interventions and escalations,with more provocations from opponents and demands from allies. Imagine how a Trump would have responded to 9/11. How will he approach the Gaza conflict as it expands?
posted by Artful Codger at 10:30 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

It's worth nothing that Trump sounds increasingly Fascist rather than merely right wing authoritarian. And I think that is what appeals to much of his base.

Remember that the difference between Fascism and other forms of right wing authoritarianism is that is populist(ish) and that it has a completely different mythos.

Fascism is a story, and the story goes something like this:

Once upon a time we were great, mighty, rich, and the unquestioned superiors of the lesser people. But then the dark times came and we were cast down by hordes of jealous inferiors who hated us because of how great we are. Now we are at the turning point, either we will rise like the phoenix and reclaim our lost birthright, rule the world like gods, and the force those lesser people to bow to us as they should, or the evil lesser people will utterly eradicate us. Our only two options are conquest, or extinction.

All their lives, American conservatives have been told that they were destined for wealth, power, and glory. But the environmentalists, the unions, the Communists, the Jews, the Mexicans, the liberals, the college professors, the LGBT people, immigrants, whoever, SOMEONE has stolen their good job and decent middle class life.

Fascism tells them that all of the above is true, and appeals to their ego by explaining it's because they're so gosh darned better than everyone else.

It gives them a convenient target to be enraged at so they aren't enraged at the billionaires who are actually at fault for the problems they face (or, depending on what problems they have, their own shortcomings because not every failure is due to billionaires being awful).

That's always been part of what Trump preaches, but he's going there increasingly often and abandoning other talking points.

I think this is especially worrysome because Fascism does have a track record of successfully taking power. It then has a track record of failing miserably because Fascists have no actual interest in governing, but that's cold comfort to those killed by the Fascists during their victorious phase.

And in the third corner, those agenda-setting elite political journalists, who frame the Democrats as one of the “sides” in a tragic folie à deux destroying a nation otherwise united and at peace with itself because both sides stubbornly ... refuse to compromise.

Yup, that right there is a big part of it. I hate to be one of those "ugh, the media is awful", but damnit, "the media" by which we mean the major news/opinion stations, channels, and websites, IS awful. They are firmly devoted to BothSides(tm) and they are convinced that doing the real work of reporting, telling us what the truth is and who's wrong or lying, is too difficult so decades ago they retreated into just being stenographers rather than reporters. They show BothSides(tm) and if one is lying, well, then that's up for us to decide!
posted by sotonohito at 10:30 AM on January 16 [24 favorites]

Why would the U.S. invade Canada?

Again? We're 0-2.

Also, Canadanschluss
posted by kirkaracha at 10:47 AM on January 16 [5 favorites]

Why would the U.S. invade Canada?

In 2077 our bold troops with the help of T-45 power armor, liberated Canada!

Less jokingly, there is oil up there and you know how America is about countries with oil...
posted by sotonohito at 11:01 AM on January 16 [3 favorites]

Less jokingly, there is oil up there and you know how America is about countries with oil...

Yes, we turn a blind eye when their authoritarian leaders dismember journalists or oppress their populations. So if Canada decides to go down that path, we'll happily keep buying your oil and fail to do anything more than give empty platitudes about human rights.

More generally, I guess the doom-theorizing is fun since everyone is doing it in this thread, but from where I am sitting it's mostly wildly disconnected from reality.
posted by Dip Flash at 11:09 AM on January 16 [8 favorites]

Disgraced insurrectionist rapist traitor bigly as geebus

or D.I.R.T. B.A.G.
posted by chavenet at 11:29 AM on January 16 [4 favorites]

from where I am sitting [a US invasion of Canada is] mostly wildly disconnected from reality.

In 2015, the thought that a Trump would rise to take over the GOP and become president was wildly disconnected from reality*.

* as most of us perceived what was reality in 2015, anyway

But yeah, agreed that it's not a likely thing in the near future. I hope. And not even necessary if Canada remains complacent and pliable enough. Why invade the dairy farm if the milk's almost free?
posted by Artful Codger at 11:39 AM on January 16 [2 favorites]

I think one thing too many explorations of the origins of U.S. "movement conservatism" leave out is: They were just straight up racist. "Oh economic this and religious that." No. Racist. Just racist. Any other avowed motivation is cover for the racism.

Cf. Rightlandia by Seth Cotlar
posted by ob1quixote at 11:42 AM on January 16 [17 favorites]

I don’t want to belong to any country that would accept me as one of its citizens.

Groucho reference aside, the deal with Canada is all about their healthcare system. You can move there, but you'll have to pay about $250K into their pension system, at least if you're over 50. It's easier if you're young and employable in an industry that's in-demand.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 11:57 AM on January 16 [3 favorites]

kirkaracha : Why would the U.S. invade Canada? Again? We're 0-2.

Don't forget the Fenian Raids -- a bunch of patriot weekend warriors slash terrorists playing army, trying to take over a country? It'll never happen!

Although the Fenians I at least sympathize with, despite my Orangemen ancestors
posted by AzraelBrown at 12:18 PM on January 16 [2 favorites]

Fascism is a story, and the story goes something like this:

Once upon a time we were great, mighty, rich, and the unquestioned superiors of the lesser people. But then the dark times came and we were cast down by hordes of jealous inferiors who hated us because of how great we are. Now we are at the turning point, either we will rise like the phoenix and reclaim our lost birthright, rule the world like gods, and the force those lesser people to bow to us as they should, or the evil lesser people will utterly eradicate us. Our only two options are conquest, or extinction.

Which is, of course, America.txt.

More than half of the population of America were not treated as full citizens -- and by "treated as full citizens," I mean that the court system and the federal government would act with authority to uphold their basic civil rights and attempt to squash discrimination against their ethnicities, genders, sexual identities, countries of origin, religion, lack of religion, and/or anything else deemed inferior and un-American -- until within the lifetime of many reading these words, four-fifths of the way into America's history as a nation.

Reagan's open racism seems almost quaint compared to the modern variety of xenophobic ranters, howling about invasions and hostile migrant armies and treason and Great Replacements and The Camp of the Saints Happening In Real-Time.

America has always had a fascist underbelly. It's simply a matter of how openly it is displayed.
posted by delfin at 12:27 PM on January 16 [12 favorites]

Mitch McConnell and the Republicans were running on the platform that Congress was full of cheats, liars, and freaks for years, long before Trump was doing anything more than daydreaming about being president and flogging steaks and real estate classes. What did he think was going to happen?

The Republican leadership believe the majority of plebians, including their own voters, to be a lesser class of people who need - and in the case of their less-lesser voters, want - to be led. They thought they could control things, not that the fascist populists would come for them. Yes, it’s an obvious blind spot if you’re an outside observer with a different view of human behavior. But it is very much consistent with the worldview of McConnell and related Republicans.
posted by eviemath at 1:50 PM on January 16 [4 favorites]

"the Trump put" and "the Trump hedge"
posted by infini at 2:31 PM on January 16

I’m nervous about the future too but this Canada invasion talk is panic hyping yourselves up. Please keep the discourse thoughtful and helpful; the last thing the internet needs is hyperbolic doom and gloom keyboard speculation.

I'm inclined to agree. This just . . . perhaps a lack of imagination on my part but I'm not sure where it's coming from? My guess is the primary aggression against neighbors would be resuming the policy of kidnapping and permanently separating Central American and Mexican migrant children from their parents.
posted by kensington314 at 2:37 PM on January 16 [4 favorites]

Most countries have a 20-30% potential fascist/totalitarian voters. Hitler was elected with about 30%. Maybe just after WW2 the fascists were down to 10-15% in many Western countries. The current US situation is a confluence of a lot of different things: the electoral system, the reaction to the civil rights movement and then the southern strategy, the right wing media, the role of money and donors in US politics, and more, some of it conscious strategy on the side of the Republican Party and some of it just windfalls for them. (I mean who could have seen The Apprentice coming as a vehicle for politics?)

In 2016, I was confused by the Obama to Trump voters. They didn't make sense to me, because I didn't understand the role fear plays in racist voters. Racists are fearful because they know they are evil, and they expect to be punished. With Obama, they hoped and believed they would be forgiven in that special sense that is very apparent with Trump, where they can continue doing their sinning. And it turned out that wasn't the case. Racism is still evil and thus racists are still fearful. The way they describe it is that they are mortally afraid the Democrats will turn the US into a communist country and take away their guns. But what they mean is that they are mortally afraid the Democrats will turn the US into a society with true equal rights and they will be punished.
posted by mumimor at 2:48 PM on January 16 [11 favorites]

Why would the U.S. invade Canada?

I hope it ends up being because of either Ryan Gosling or poutine.
posted by thivaia at 3:19 PM on January 16 [5 favorites]

revenge for when melania was eyefucking justin
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 3:23 PM on January 16 [6 favorites]

Littering and...?
posted by Windopaene at 3:27 PM on January 16 [1 favorite]

as soon as the boomers die, a glorious progressive future will be born.

Heh. Back in the 60s the Boomers used to say stuff like that about their parents.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 4:46 PM on January 16 [12 favorites]

he's every bad thing you can say he is

he's the best of course of all the worst
posted by flabdablet at 5:35 PM on January 16

In 2016, a certain segment of people voted for Trump because he was a celebrity and an agent of chaos. It was a "fuck you" to politics as usual and at least partially akin (for some people) to electing a dog to be mayor or class president. Some of those people might have lived to regret their decision, but some of them became the core of the anti-mask anti-vax lunatic fringe. It's incredible how much weight people will give to someone who's been on a reality TV show.
posted by rikschell at 5:41 PM on January 16 [2 favorites]

“We Really Don't Have to ‘Understand’ Trump Voters Anymore,” Parker Molloy, The Present Age, 16 January 2024
posted by ob1quixote at 8:34 PM on January 16 [21 favorites]

Yeah, I think Hillary's error was mainly in her choice of a ten-dollar word.

There's a certain rebellious cachet to being a basket of deplorables that would be harder to maintain for a gang of rubes and fuckwits.
posted by flabdablet at 9:12 PM on January 16 [10 favorites]

Racists are fearful because they know they are evil, and they expect to be punished.

Content warning for description of racism in the abstract.

Possibly this is different in the US, but if I could weigh in as a white South African who grew up in the last years of apartheid: I don't think this statement is accurate.

Racists (like people who are sexist, transphobic, abelist, ect) don't think there's anything wrong with their belief system. To them, it's a just, kind, "natural" and logical way to understand the world, and if everyone would just accept their proper place in the hierarchy, all would be well. By no accident, the correct place in the hierarchy for "them" is below the person in question.

Because it's all about power over others, and fear of losing what you have when "they" come to take it away.

The milder version is the belief that black people, women, migrants, gay people, trans people would all be better off if they just behaved themselves and performed the roles assigned to them.

Behind that mild mask is the belief that, if these people aren't willing to fall in line with the roles assigned to them, they should not exist.

"They" aren't fully human, and therefore there's nothing wrong with treating them as less than human, that's just rational and common sense.

"They" (black people, women, disabled people etc) are believed to be like children, and by no accident, fascists, racists, and all the rest of this patriachal set do not believe that children are fully human either, and definitely don't deserve autonomy and respect.

So to them it's absolutely clear and logical that "they" (like children) don't deserve autonomy and respect.

This is one of the reasons why trans rights have become such a flash point right now, because it's impossible to believe in trans rights without also accepting that children have the right to decide who they are.
posted by Zumbador at 10:33 PM on January 16 [43 favorites]

Only 100K voters turned out in Iowa... 10% of republican voters, is anyone reporting this? The actual death of the republican party? Biden/Cheney2024 will carry Iowa easily.
posted by specialk420 at 11:07 PM on January 16 [4 favorites]

At some point the US will demand our water. It's as basic as that. And, because we are a former colony permanently in search of new colonial masters, we will acquiesce; whether through idiotically one sided trade deals, which we have signed off on in the past, or force, etc, it will happen.
Also, the growing army of Chuds up here literally think we have things like first amendment rights and other such American features and they will be more than happy to slavishly welcome 'Merica.
posted by Phlegmco(tm) at 1:47 AM on January 17 [4 favorites]

Man I know everyone is stressed, but it's weird how this thread started out about political scientists charting the roots of Trumpism and became about invading canada.
posted by johngoren at 4:10 AM on January 17 [20 favorites]

~~Blame~~ Invade Canada!
posted by jenfullmoon at 4:42 AM on January 17 [6 favorites]

I really need this country to hold together for four more years so I can retire and GTFOH.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 4:50 AM on January 17

Only 100K voters turned out in Iowa... 10% of republican voters, is anyone reporting this? The actual death of the republican party?

Iowa is a very old state demographically and the GOP electorate is even older. You have to show up to vote, and there were 40 below windchills. In a race whose outcome was pre-ordained. The low turnout should have probably gotten more press, but there isn't a lot to infer from it.
posted by mcstayinskool at 5:56 AM on January 17 [3 favorites]

i’m expecting low turnout in every contest in the republican nomination race because they are treating trump as the incumbent who is basically already the nominee. if there was another candidate that anyone was actually excited about maybe turnout would be better but this show is already over. i expect the rest of the candidates to drop out by super tuesday if not before. poor ron desantis, you wore those cowboy boot lifts for nothing
posted by dis_integration at 6:12 AM on January 17 [2 favorites]

Because it's all about power over others, and fear of losing what you have when "they" come to take it away.

Got it in one.

Throughout most of American history, the default state of the social order has been that women are prizes to be won or property to be held, non-whites comprise servile classes that must be controlled, coddled and contained, LGBTs are freaks and degenerates choosing to subvert traditional morality, non-Christians (non-the-RIGHT-kind-of-Christians, to be precise) are inherently suspect, and so on. Individual examples may vary, but the general trends have been passed down through generations.

The nature of the beast, to fear that which is different, has been breaking down over the last handful of decades. Diversity efforts in hiring and admissions, laws and government programs and court rulings working to level the playing fields, positive representation and inclusion in media, and other factors have made it far easier for people to simply be themselves in the public eye, without feeling the need to hide defining characteristics or assimilate into the cast of Little House on the Prairie. Kids are growing up around, going to school with, spending time with peers who differ from themselves and learning firsthand, hey, there's nothing to be afraid of here! They're just like me in the ways that matter.

And Trump's message is blunt and direct: We're going to overturn all of that and put things back the way they used to be, when America was "Great," when the traditional social order was firm and those class-based, race-based, gender-based, sexual identity-based, ethnicity-based, religion-based boundaries were daunting. When brands and stores didn't dare to try to be inclusive, because Normal People wouldn't shop for that sort of thing. When gays were mincing stereotypes in media if they appeared at all, because Normal People wouldn't stand for gays being depicted otherwise. When THEY knew their place, and if they raised a ruckus, THEY got kicked back down into that place.

It's the same message Republicans have projected for decades, just without any of the subtlety. A Reverse Atwater, I like to call it; people who used to feel inherently above Those Kinds Of People are tired of nuanced arguments and debate and incremental gains and just want to say the derogatory slurs again, without penalties, without judgment, without question.

It is a rare group that can have power over others and choose to voluntarily discard that power.
posted by delfin at 6:49 AM on January 17 [22 favorites]

...by invading Canada the US would get kicked out of NATO

This is would actually be an upside for a future Trump administration.
posted by Uncle Ira at 7:54 AM on January 17 [3 favorites]

> poor ron desantis, you wore those cowboy boot lifts for nothing

I hope he experiences foot, leg and back pain as a result of wearing those stupid boots for the rest of his life.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:50 AM on January 17 [4 favorites]

In 2016 Ted Cruz won the Iowa caucus with pretty much the same number of votes that Trump got. Vivek spent 30 million of his own money to get 8,000 votes. It was an extremely poorly attended caucus and one that was only going to attract the most rabid of voters.
posted by misterpatrick at 9:40 AM on January 17 [3 favorites]

A calendar of Trump’s upcoming court dates — and how they could overshadow the GOP primary
posted by 1970s Antihero at 9:56 AM on January 17 [1 favorite]

The hysteria around the Mango Messiah is fully exemplified by this thread. People, the USA is not going to invade Canada (although bits might secede at some point)! Trump won a 'victory' with a tiny number of votes in a farm state which does not provide any kind of indicator for the upcoming election. His social media presence currently remains muted, and despite the best efforts of captured media, his current incoherent rantings and accumulating legal woes are not likely to be connecting with swing voters. Trump is a sad loser who is in a downward spiral - our focus now should be to ensure that those who hope to inherit his sticky orange mantle don't succeed in further enshittifying the US of A. My 2 Canadian cents.
posted by aeshnid at 9:59 AM on January 17 [6 favorites]

In 2016 Ted Cruz won the Iowa caucus

Yeah, didn't Pete Buttigieg win Iowa, too?
posted by Snowishberlin at 10:02 AM on January 17

I hope he experiences foot, leg and back pain as a result of wearing those stupid boots for the rest of his life.

i hope he gets recurring bouts of (hand), foot, and mouth disease
posted by i used to be someone else at 10:03 AM on January 17

Individual examples may vary, but the general trends have been passed down through generations.

I’ve noticed a bit of dollar-store rhetoric the last couple of years (which may well have been around longer, but this particular iteration is new to me): when someone raises an issue showing systemic discrimination, the commenters with a skin the general shape and hue of my own chime in with (a) “this has never happened to me, so this is fake and we can dismiss it,” or (b) “this has happened to me as well, so if it happens to normal people then there is not anything systemic here, so we can dismiss it.”
posted by ricochet biscuit at 10:38 AM on January 17 [4 favorites]

I will worry about Trump invading Canada when he can find us on a map.
posted by joannemerriam at 10:47 AM on January 17 [2 favorites]

I will worry about Trump invading Canada when he can find us on a map.

Maybe he can negotiate a two-for-one deal with Canada added as a sweetener for buying Greenland?
posted by Dip Flash at 11:00 AM on January 17 [2 favorites]

Sure, the overturning of Roe will probably affect a few close downballot races, but not enough to keep state legislatures from continuing their slow secession-lite from the USA.

I don't have any cites at the moment, but this is not the general vibe I'm getting at all. Republican women are FURIOUS about their rights being taken away. Some people are saying that this issue alone will not only soundly defeat Trump, but also all the local elections as well.
posted by Melismata at 11:03 AM on January 17 [2 favorites]

A calendar of Trump’s upcoming court dates — and how they could overshadow the GOP primary

It's fine. He's got a judge looking out for him.
posted by CheeseDigestsAll at 11:14 AM on January 17

> Yeah, didn't Pete Buttigieg win Iowa, too?

Bernie won the vote but Pete got one more state delegate equivalent because of how dumb the caucus system is. However, that doesn’t tell us much because Trump won Iowa by a margin that we almost never see in the caucuses. He dominated, so it’s not really a Santorum kind of win where someone destined to get crushed on super tuesday wins the Iowa caucuses
posted by dis_integration at 11:21 AM on January 17 [4 favorites]

Republican women are FURIOUS about their rights being taken away.

what exactly did they think the leopards were going to do?

forgive me if i don't have any faith in Republicans. I'm guessing enough fear mongering "the immigrants are coming for your children" rhetoric will keep them voting red.
posted by kokaku at 11:55 AM on January 17 [8 favorites]

Canada added as a sweetener

Canada is already exporting butter tarts via international Tim Horton’s franchises, I believe.
posted by eviemath at 12:16 PM on January 17 [1 favorite]

So they're blaming the cold weather for their small caucus?
posted by schyler523 at 12:34 PM on January 17 [5 favorites]

Laura Loomer theorized recently that the military-industrial complex was using HAARP to send artificial blizzards to Iowa to depress turnout and attempt to rig the Iowa caucus for Nikki Haley.

So, yes, they're pointing fingers. (And as mad as a box of frogs on mescaline, obviously.)
posted by delfin at 12:40 PM on January 17 [3 favorites]

as mad as a box of frogs on mescaline

Are they ever otherwise?
posted by susiswimmer at 1:12 PM on January 17 [2 favorites]

schyler523: there was significant shrinkage
posted by Saxon Kane at 1:21 PM on January 17 [3 favorites]

Racists (like people who are sexist, transphobic, abelist, ect) don't think there's anything wrong with their belief system. To them, it's a just, kind, "natural" and logical way to understand the world, and if everyone would just accept their proper place in the hierarchy, all would be well. By no accident, the correct place in the hierarchy for "them" is below the person in question.

There's a lot of truth in what you say, but growing up as a trans Gen-X'er I never felt like I had any place in the hierarchy. Trans people were simply deviants. Punchlines at best, scary freaks at worst. We've very slowly fought our way up to second class citizens, and the conservatives are losing their minds over it. They don't want us to shut up and behave; they want us to not exist.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 2:18 PM on January 17 [16 favorites]

Only 100K voters turned out in Iowa... 10% of republican voters, is anyone reporting this?

Oh, shit, I had not heard that--and I think it might be important information. (Not with respect to changing my behavior, necessarily, but certainly with respect to understanding the Iowa win.) Certainly more important than the Canada invasion doomposting that had me slacking on paying attention to the conversation.

Here's a report from CBS, which notes that this is the lowest Iowa GOP turnout in more than a decade. Admittedly, in 2020, there wasn't a notable GOP primary, since Trump was running as a sitting president. But in 2016, when Trump also won the GOP primary, he did so in a field where turnout was unusually high at 180k votes--almost double. It fascinates me to see turnout return to relatively normal levels so quickly.

(Because primaries don't happen in years when a GOP candidate is running for a second term as sitting president, we have data samples from only 7 elections since 1980. Looking at those raw numbers, 100k seems to be in approximately the same ballpark as 2012 and 2008... and certainly no farther from them than it is the real historic turnout low point in 2000, when the Iowa caucus was only attended by 85k people.)
posted by sciatrix at 2:33 PM on January 17 [5 favorites]

100k seems to be in approximately the same ballpark as 2012 and 2008... and certainly no farther from them than it is the real historic turnout low point in 2000

the amount of money and canvassing and media attention spoiled all so 100k or so politics weirdos can fail on average to pick the person who will be nominated by the party never ceases to amaze me. no shade to iowans or caucus goers but there is no good reason for anyone to care this much about what happens in the caucuses just because they happen first
posted by dis_integration at 5:13 PM on January 17 [9 favorites]

>> the military-industrial complex was using HAARP to send artificial blizzards to Iowa...

Using Canada as a staging ground?
posted by Molesome at 3:49 AM on January 18

The caucus turnout may have been low-to-medium, but the end result will remain the same; Trump is going to coast to primary victories, simply because is a constituency out there that is energized and driven to vote for Trump and there is no such constituency out there for any other GOP candidate.

It's not as pronounced as in 2016, in which Trump won several contests with 30-40% because the remaining vote was split amongst the cattle car of candidates, as most of the NeverTrump candidates have fallen off. But there is no one person on the GOP stage who can draw the lion's share of the "...please, not HIM again" vote, and there won't be. DeSantis is a punching bag and a charisma vacuum, playacting "Trump but TOUGHER" and being mocked from all corners. Haley is a "well, how about X instead?" flavor-of-the-month searching for votes from people who happily use her birth name as an ethnic slur against her. Both are sitting back and waiting and praying for a sudden medical emergency.

Now, I do remain convinced that in the GENERAL election, things are more promising; there is nothing that should attract anyone to Trump who wasn't 120% in the bag for Trump from the beginning. There are plenty of warning signs, there are paths that will require deft footwork from the Biden campaign to navigate, and there are issues to overcome, but it is very doable.
posted by delfin at 7:10 AM on January 18 [7 favorites]

I'm cautiously optimistic as you are, delfin, provided that the damn media stops masturbating over him.
posted by Melismata at 7:52 AM on January 18 [1 favorite]

^^ This.

It's bad enough to see TFG in the headlines daily, but they HAVE to post a pin-up-sized photo of His Orangeness with EVERY story?? Being headline news and visually omnipresent not only strokes his ego, it makes him unavoidable. I'm certain this delights his campaign team.

I wish that publications would come up with a persistent "Trump" banner to mark all of the stories on him. Like some block caps "TRUMP" and a same-height solid-colour silhouette profile. Instead of that sphincter with a combover burning my retinas daily.
posted by Artful Codger at 8:20 AM on January 18 [3 favorites]

Now, I do remain convinced that in the GENERAL election, things are more promising; there is nothing that should attract anyone to Trump who wasn't 120% in the bag for Trump from the beginning. There are plenty of warning signs, there are paths that will require deft footwork from the Biden campaign to navigate, and there are issues to overcome, but it is very doable.

I try to imagine Biden campaigning against Haley and I just can't see him winning. He just doesn't have the ability to compete with her on the level of public performance, and you also lose some urgency among Dems and independents who won't see her as apocalyptic (even though she may be!). It's a higher risk thing having Trump in the race, but it still feels like the easiest path to a Democratic victory (Electoral College be damned) and shoring up at least a little bit of the two houses of Congress.
posted by kensington314 at 10:04 AM on January 18 [1 favorite]

I try to imagine Biden campaigning against Haley and I just can't see him winning. He just doesn't have the ability to compete with her on the level of public performance, and you also lose some urgency among Dems and independents who won't see her as apocalyptic (even though she may be!). It's a higher risk thing having Trump in the race, but it still feels like the easiest path to a Democratic victory (Electoral College be damned) and shoring up at least a little bit of the two houses of Congress.

Haley's sales pitch basically boils down to "I can beat Biden in the general election," and so far at least that hasn't turned into the successful pitch that she was hoping for, despite Trump's notable weaknesses in a general election. To me, it's really interesting because I agree with Haley that she has a much better chance in a general election than Trump does, but that doesn't seem to matter to a big swath of voters.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:40 AM on January 18 [1 favorite]

I agree with Haley that she has a much better chance in a general election than Trump does, but that doesn't seem to matter to a big swath of voters.

I puzzle over how big the swath though: "Importantly, only a third of Republican primary voters say they're following the primary race very closely . . . "

A third of Republican primary voters is a small number. Smaller, even than a third of registered Republicans, which is only 35 million people to begin with. (That's 11% of people living in the U.S. and less than 15% of the voting age population.) There were shy of 20 million Republican voters in the 2020 primaries, and probably there will be fewer this time around. Sixty percent of that small group is polling die-hard Trump. There are going to be around 150 million votes, give or take, in the next general election. So we can say for sure that 12 million Republican voters are die-hard Trump regardless of how it plays in the general. That's less than 1 of 10 voters overall.

Is this math wrong? I ask because this is the version of the math I do whenever I want to feel optimistic about my country, a land where only 2 of 10 people living here have ever voted for Donald Trump.

None of this claims to quantify the overall amount of Trumpy sentiment or "woulda vote for Trump if they voted at all," but it does leave a person with a sense that the race is pretty wide open in terms of possible outcomes, ranging from "fucking nail biter" to "Trump utterly collapses in the polls two months before the general."
posted by kensington314 at 11:04 AM on January 18 [1 favorite]

He just doesn't have the ability to compete with her on the level of public performance

Bullshit. The woman literally just claimed out loud and in public that the US has never been racist. Joe would wipe the floor with her in any debate or any comparison of accomplishments. The main question would be how hard the "liberal media" like the NYT and CNN would have their thumb on the scale for Haley.

also lose some urgency among Dems and independents who won't see her as apocalyptic

That would be the main problem - a bunch of anti-Trump voters would either stay home or go back to voting Republican since Haley is presenting as an "old school" Republican where the bigotry is mostly behind a veneer of civilized responsibility.
posted by soundguy99 at 11:11 AM on January 18 [1 favorite]

soundguy99, I hope you're right!! I just don't totally agree. I think Nikki Haley--who, to be clear, I think she is nuts--kinda comes off as a mainstream or even "moderate" Republican to a public who is hungry for that particular cryptid to actually exist. I find her to be a scary candidate for this reason. And while I'm not huge on the "Joe is too old" talking points, it is in fact the case that Joe is too old and he's a bit creaky. I'm not saying that he's lost his marbles. I'm not even saying they're hiding him from the public--the guy's boarding a fucking plane somewhere or another in his actual capacity as president every time I open the newspaper. I'm just saying he's creaky and your average moderate not-paying-too-much-attention types are less scared of Nikki Haley than Donald Trump. And that's before the media determines its ad revenue strategy for this coming cycle.
posted by kensington314 at 11:17 AM on January 18 [2 favorites]

So many Republicans hate women that I have a hard time believing a woman would have their vote.
posted by tiny frying pan at 11:30 AM on January 18 [4 favorites]

So many Republicans hate women that I have a hard time believing a woman would have their vote.

Yeah, I agree with this. It's definitely a dynamic! But so many Republicans hate Kamala, specifically, more, and are convinced that she's going to let Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro annex the US of A or whatever, that I wonder if the misogyny is a wash in the general.
posted by kensington314 at 11:41 AM on January 18 [1 favorite]

I'm personally not feeling that at this juncture. The first female president will be a Democrat.
posted by tiny frying pan at 11:46 AM on January 18 [3 favorites]

And I am still hoping to live to see it. I'm 43.
posted by tiny frying pan at 11:46 AM on January 18 [6 favorites]

And I am still hoping to live to see it. I'm 43.

I'm 41 and will be happy to join you at the party when this happens.
posted by kensington314 at 11:54 AM on January 18 [2 favorites]

To me, it's really interesting because I agree with Haley that she has a much better chance in a general election than Trump does, but that doesn't seem to matter to a big swath of voters.

That would be the main problem - a bunch of anti-Trump voters would either stay home or go back to voting Republican since Haley is presenting as an "old school" Republican where the bigotry is mostly behind a veneer of civilized responsibility.

Well, her problem is that the Trump base has been taught via repetition that anyone who is to the left of Trump on any issue, or who is simply not 100% in lockstep with Trump, is a globalist warmonger RINO treasonous Democrat deeply in love with illegal immigration, the WEF, Communist China, the New World Order and the Legion of Doom.

Take her name for a spin around Twitter and witness the fury and bile propelled in her direction from Trumpoids calling her evil and deceitful, questioning her true identity and her citizenship, describing her as "Paul Ryan in pumps," and claiming that she was planted as a candidate by Democrats and that she's in league with the Epstein posse and that she'll happily destroy the American way of life in order to fund Ukraine. That she's worse than a Democrat because she IS a Democrat who's pretending not to be.

Those are the people she has to count on coming out to vote for her, and not losing more there than she'd gain from NeverTrump "moderates" returning home.
posted by delfin at 12:24 PM on January 18 [1 favorite]

I mean I guess the question is partly whether she's harder to beat in Michigan, Pennsylvania, NC, and a couple other states. And maybe Trump's harder to beat in those places. Honestly it's probably ignorant of me to speculate, because I don't know those places politically.
posted by kensington314 at 12:30 PM on January 18

The first female president will be a Democrat.

The first female president will be AOC.
posted by dobbs at 7:30 PM on January 18 [4 favorites]

(Weird, since she's not going to run for Prez. I'd love her, but last I heard she was not interested, and partly for the reason I mentioned...the misogyny. Will read your fan fiction tho)

last i heard
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:46 PM on January 18 [1 favorite]

Dahlia Lithwick has just written an article called "The Law Alone Cannot Curb Donald Trump’s Lawlessness" [Slate]

It concludes with:

The relevant legal question in the coming months cannot be limited to How do we best use the law to hold Donald Trump to account? Even holding Donald Trump to account will not necessarily save us from electing Donald Trump the dictator—it could be too slow, or too unpersuasive, or totally steamrolled by his own destruction tactics. The relevant question is: Whether we realize in time that the law alone cannot save us, are we directing all our efforts, right now, to doing everything and anything else that will?

It's an interesting take from someone who specializes in reporting on US law and court matters. If she's warning us that all the legal goings-on may not stop Trump's reelection, then ... what? The election, I guess? Scary.
posted by Artful Codger at 11:38 AM on January 19

Well, her problem is that the Trump base has been taught via repetition that anyone who is to the left of Trump on any issue, or who is simply not 100% in lockstep with Trump, is a globalist warmonger RINO treasonous Democrat deeply in love with illegal immigration, the WEF, Communist China, the New World Order and the Legion of Doom.

This has been the standard GOP playbook for decades. Haley's attempts to defend herself from those attacks while simultaneously using them against Biden are sadly hilarious in a watching-someone's-face-get-eaten-by-leopards sort of way.

You'd think the media would finally catch on that this is all bullshit, but they're still happy to repeat whatever these idiots say about their opponents at face value.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 12:03 PM on January 19

Haley said this week that America "has never been a racist country."

Her brain really thought that up and sent it to her mouth to say and her mouth was all, "Fuck it. I hate her, too. Let's say it."
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:55 PM on January 19 [7 favorites]

Haley said this week that America "has never been a racist country."

Boy, the real truth of that statement is going to bite her in the butt hard in the not distant future. She's not only 'not white' but also 'not male' and though for a big slice of people that is not an issue, for an at least as big slice it is. In the ugliest way imaginable, it for sure is.

(There was a bunch of interesting punditry about her understanding of herself within the framework of 'racism in America' and where she might think she's on the 'privilege' side of that line, I can't imagine she really is. Racists are fucking assholes, and she is 'other' - it does not matter what she thinks.)
posted by From Bklyn at 2:26 PM on January 19 [2 favorites]

Trump is already running birther attack ads on her and (falsely) claiming she is for open borders. She signed up with the leopards and leopards are what she is getting.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:37 PM on January 19 [2 favorites]

Oh wow, now he's confusing her with Nancy Pelosi.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:10 PM on January 20 [2 favorites]

There was a bunch of interesting punditry about her understanding of herself within the framework of 'racism in America' and where she might think she's on the 'privilege' side of that line, I can't imagine she really is.

Her father taught at a HBCU (Voorhees) for thirty years, encompassing her entire childhood and young adulthood. You know. Just for the record. If she's that ignorant of the concept... whooooooeeee.
posted by sciatrix at 4:50 PM on January 20 [3 favorites]

Can somebody point me to the Iowa caucus thread

I got turned around somehow and ended up in a weird Canadian Bacon thread
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:29 PM on January 20

Heh. It’s payback for all the times US politics has derailed other threads, eh?
posted by eviemath at 10:50 PM on January 20 [3 favorites]

DeSantis drops out, endorses Trump (WaPo)
posted by Iris Gambol at 12:18 PM on January 21 [1 favorite]

Probably worth remembering that DeSantis was a pretty formidable candidate until he picked a fight with the Walt Disney corporation. That was when things started to unravel.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:53 PM on January 21 [1 favorite]

DeSantis scared me, so a small yay! from me here.Trump is an accidental fascist; fascism just sits the best with his narcism and megalomania. DeSantis is the real deal.

What's the proper amount of time that must pass before Meatball Ron is named as Trump's VP pick? I guess that can wait til the convention? Or has that bridge been irreparably burnt?
posted by Artful Codger at 1:15 PM on January 21 [1 favorite]

(There's a new FPP about Tiny D dropping out.)
posted by box at 2:11 PM on January 21

« Older Fossils Reveal a Possible New Tyrannosaur Species | New York is not just NYC Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

MetaFilter

It came from the grass roots
January 16, 2024 4:56 AM Subscribe

Tags

Share

It came from the grass roots January 16, 2024 4:56 AM Subscribe

Tags

Share

It came from the grass roots
January 16, 2024 4:56 AM Subscribe