DC Unrest Megathread

[afleitch]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

[GoTfan]

I cannot in good conscience advocate for sedition charges being given to either of them because of how terribly abused the precedent in this instance, however valid it could possibly be argued to be, would end up being, years down the line.
A censure is painful enough. Word it as harshly as befits the situation, which is to say, very harshly.

I am really tired of hearing how we can't hold politicians accountable for their actions because of some vague notion of "precedent." Very disappointing.

A harshly worded censor would still go a very long way in dragging their political brand in the mud, so I find your argument here to be utter weaksauce.

A censure is basically a slap over the wrist and nothing more. You honestly think they'll care if they get censures? You think the people they're trying to line up to support them in 2024 will care? They'll wear it as a badge of honour and Trumpies will worship them as heroes.

A censure passed by a massive margin, with a number of Republicans voting in favor, could pretty effectively used by a primary challenger. The fact that many GOPers would be voting in favor would give political cover to their opponents and impart political liability on part of Hawley and Cruz.

In fantasyland, maybe. In the real world, they'll be heroes to Trump supporters.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

Wouldn't he be caught as ban-evading if he used it?

[Alben Barkley]

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

this is the pivot folks. Except it didn't come from Trump, it came from 4chan.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

Wouldn't he be caught as ban-evading if he used it?

He very probably would. Though obviously the root problem is Trump's behavior, not whichever account he uses. Trump's decision to use his personal account as his official one in practice, does say a ton of things about how he acts almost purely on basis of what helps himself.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

Wouldn't he be caught as ban-evading if he used it?

He very probably would. Though obviously the root problem is Trump's behavior, not whichever account he uses. Trump's decision to use his personal account as his official one in practice, does say a ton of things about how he acts almost purely on basis of what helps himself.

It just boggles my mind when I hear some of his voters exalt him for his "protecting unborn right", "protecting the guns, "protecting faith."

It's fine if you, as a voter, want representatives and politicians who embody these protections.

But Donald Trump does not give a rat's a** about any of these things.  He only cares about what he's told to support and what's in it for him. 

[Gass3268]

Discord has baned TheDonald

https://twitter.com/CaseyNewton/status/1347690173748834309?s=20

[randomusername]

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1347524201549242372

When even the Dilbert guy abandons Trump you know it's bad.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

Wouldn't he be caught as ban-evading if he used it?

He very probably would. Though obviously the root problem is Trump's behavior, not whichever account he uses. Trump's decision to use his personal account as his official one in practice, does say a ton of things about how he acts almost purely on basis of what helps himself.

It just boggles my mind when I hear some of his voters exalt him for his "protecting unborn right", "protecting the guns, "protecting faith."

It's fine if you, as a voter, want representatives and politicians who embody these protections.

But Donald Trump does not give a rat's a** about any of these things.  He only cares about what he's told to support and what's in it for him.  

Trump would not have rose to the heights he did if he was unable to serve as a vessel for a huge section of middle America unhappy about TPP, unhappy about Bushism, unhappy with movement conservativism, and unsatisfied about the Obama years. Trump ultimately drew his political power not from his Twitter account, not from even his presence as a media superstar. He drew it from the fact that America's recovery from the 2000s recession was uneven, that many people disliked the moves in the Democrats' cultural messaging, that enough people yearned for something new and disliked the atmosphere in Washington.

Hence was the spring from which Trumpism sprang. Mainly a cultural grievance at the idea of the country moving away from their beliefs, economic grievances at how jobs had went overseas and how the new jobs were mostly in urban centers, and racial grievance at the country's diversification and at perceived (key word: percieved, not strictly real) wrong on part of left-associated groups. And this came with a big helping of anti-liberal tribal feeling on the side. Not all Trumpists care about these things, some care about only one of those things. But these people all wanted a champion in the ring, and Trump fit that role well, so they stuck with him throughout, all the way. This is why GOP politicians were so scared of turning on Trump - these people cared for Trump and saw him as their fighter in the ring and going against Trump implicitly meant, in the eyes of GOP voters, siding with liberals who hate the flag, hate the cops, and hate America. Polarization force-fitted the two camps on an anti-Trump vs pro-Trump axis, and the hostile partisan feelings did the rest.

Since Trump is leaving the scene or at least Oval Office, and even more importantly, is not actually winning against Democrats anymore, we will see his stock fall, as many tribal anti-Democrats search for another hero to lead them. It will take a while to find one, and we can be very happy few GOPers have the sheer crowd-creating ability of Trump, who has been among the most successful GOP leaders in this century in electoral terms. Trump ran strongly in the last election. It is fortunate that at least Trump's crowd-raising angle is now making him look very bad.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

Wouldn't he be caught as ban-evading if he used it?

He very probably would. Though obviously the root problem is Trump's behavior, not whichever account he uses. Trump's decision to use his personal account as his official one in practice, does say a ton of things about how he acts almost purely on basis of what helps himself.

It just boggles my mind when I hear some of his voters exalt him for his "protecting unborn right", "protecting the guns, "protecting faith."

It's fine if you, as a voter, want representatives and politicians who embody these protections.

But Donald Trump does not give a rat's a** about any of these things.  He only cares about what he's told to support and what's in it for him.  

Does it really matter if he gives a rat's ass about "protecting unborn right" and "protecting guns" or not? What matters is what he actually does. I think if his actions protect the right to life for unborn fetuses and the right to bear arms, that matters 100x more than what he personally thinks in his head.

Note: To be clear, I am pro-choice. I'm just not really interested in what a politician thinks in their head. What matters is what they actually do.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Remember, the White House inherited the @potus account. Trump used his personal account by choice.

Wouldn't he be caught as ban-evading if he used it?

He very probably would. Though obviously the root problem is Trump's behavior, not whichever account he uses. Trump's decision to use his personal account as his official one in practice, does say a ton of things about how he acts almost purely on basis of what helps himself.

It just boggles my mind when I hear some of his voters exalt him for his "protecting unborn right", "protecting the guns, "protecting faith."

It's fine if you, as a voter, want representatives and politicians who embody these protections.

But Donald Trump does not give a rat's a** about any of these things.  He only cares about what he's told to support and what's in it for him. 

Does it really matter if he gives a rat's ass about "protecting unborn right" and "protecting guns" or not? What matters is what he actually does. I think if his actions protect the right to life for unborn fetuses and the right to bear arms, that matters 100x more than what he personally thinks in his head.

They do say actions speak louder than words. Trump did keep his word in naming anti-Roe judges. Even if he didn't, the fact the Democrats are seen in much more hostile light in terms of cultural messaging would have forced them to stick by Trump.

[GeorgiaModerate]

CNN is running a special Sunday night (10pm ET) called "The Trump Insurrection".

[CultureKing]

Do we think Trump will issue a blanket pardon to all these people?

..I feel like he may lash out once the Ds start up with impeachment proceedings.

[Badger]

I do hope that his tweets are preserved somewhere because I think that there is definitely an intellectual/scholarly use to his tweets over the years.  I am a little uncomfortable with a slippery slope with social media bannings, but I also can't say that it was unjustified.

Yeah, I agree more or less. I hope his tweets are archived somewhere.

I have less than zero doubt Twitter has complete access to every single tweet of his

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I do hope that his tweets are preserved somewhere because I think that there is definitely an intellectual/scholarly use to his tweets over the years.  I am a little uncomfortable with a slippery slope with social media bannings, but I also can't say that it was unjustified.

Yeah, I agree more or less. I hope his tweets are archived somewhere.

I have less than zero doubt Twitter has complete access to every single tweet of his

I didn't doubt that. I just wanted them to be publically available somehow.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

I do hope that his tweets are preserved somewhere because I think that there is definitely an intellectual/scholarly use to his tweets over the years.  I am a little uncomfortable with a slippery slope with social media bannings, but I also can't say that it was unjustified.

Yeah, I agree more or less. I hope his tweets are archived somewhere.

I have less than zero doubt Twitter has complete access to every single tweet of his

I didn't doubt that. I just wanted them to be publically available somehow.

Unless they are material evidence to his trial, I never want them seeing the light of day again.

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1347674222194253825

4:1 against is a better ratio than I was expecting tbh.

Another poll conducted either that same day or the following day if I recalled showed 45% of Republicans feeling that the capital takeover was somewhat or greatly Justified, compared to only 43% who thought it was at least somewhat unjustified.

[Badger]

Reminder that many people on this very forum cited that poll earlier about how 45% or so of Republicans seemingly supported the attacks, and in the process acted prematurely before things settled.

And you are certain that this one is correct and the other one incorrect, or the actual level of support of somewhere in between, because....?

Incidentally, as one of those individuals you refer to, I don't see how this changes the analysis of how to act in this matter what I owe, nor does it change my analysis whatsoever oh, other than it creating the tiniest glimmer of hope that maybe there is hope for at least tepid changes away from trumpism in the Republican Party

[GeorgiaModerate]

Even if he didn't, the fact the Democrats are seen in much more hostile light in terms of cultural messaging would have forced them to stick by Trump.

This touches on something I was discussing with a work colleague this afternoon.  The Republicans have indeed been successful recently in unfairly portraying the Democrats as the party that's out of touch with the values of mainstream Americans.  I think this first happened in the mid-1960s (when I was becoming politically aware), a time when one of the lasting images to most people was rioting in the cities that was tied to the Democrats in the minds of many.  This helped the Republicans take the Presidency in 5 of the next 6 elections (1968-1988), the only exception being Carter's narrow victory over Ford, who was unelected and damaged by Nixon and Watergate, and eventually led to Republican gains in Congress as well.  Essentially, it screwed the Democratic Party for a generation.

Now the same thing is likely to happen to Republicans.  The aftermath of Trump is going to leave a party that's deeply divided, and the image that will remain the strongest is the attack on the Capitol.  I won't be surprised if it's the GOP's turn to be screwed for a generation.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Reminder that many people on this very forum cited that poll earlier about how 45% or so of Republicans seemingly supported the attacks, and in the process acted prematurely before things settled.

And you are certain that this one is correct and the other one incorrect, or the actual level of support of somewhere in between, because....?

Incidentally, as one of those individuals you refer to, I don't see how this changes the analysis of how to act in this matter what I owe, nor does it change my analysis whatsoever oh, other than it creating the tiniest glimmer of hope that maybe there is hope for at least tepid changes away from trumpism in the Republican Party

I think that it's relevant in regards to what language we use when referring to Trump voters/supporters overall. There was substantial underestimation of just how normal their views actually were, and it contributed to the rather silly-in-retrospect panic over how GOPers, as a group, think and are willing to behave.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

Do we think Trump will issue a blanket pardon to all these people?

..I feel like he may lash out once the Ds start up with impeachment proceedings.

That would significantly worsen his changes at escaping without a conviction, so I really doubt it. And we all that know he doesn't really care about his supporters, so the only reason he would do anything like that is out of pure spite.

[CultureKing]

Do we think Trump will issue a blanket pardon to all these people?

..I feel like he may lash out once the Ds start up with impeachment proceedings.

That would significantly worsen his changes at escaping without a conviction, so I really doubt it. And we all that know he doesn't really care about his supporters, so the only reason he would do anything like that is out of pure spite.

..so 50/50 then?

Also, seems like he may like the fact that it would potentially serve as a tool of intimidation (ex: send yet another signal to his supporters that they can pretty much do anything and get away with it).

[Badger]

Do we think Trump will issue a blanket pardon to all these people?

..I feel like he may lash out once the Ds start up with impeachment proceedings.

With the possible exception of the individuals responsible for killing the one Capital officer, yes, I think that is a very real risk. And that's all the more important to impeach this son of a b**** now.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

Do we think Trump will issue a blanket pardon to all these people?

..I feel like he may lash out once the Ds start up with impeachment proceedings.

That would significantly worsen his changes at escaping without a conviction, so I really doubt it. And we all that know he doesn't really care about his supporters, so the only reason he would do anything like that is out of pure spite.

..so 50/50 then?

Also, seems like he may like the fact that it would potentially serve as a tool of intimidation (ex: send yet another signal to his supporters that they can pretty much do anything and get away with it).

Yeah, as I was typing that I did have to remind myself just how strongly inclined towards spite he really is, so definitely can't rule it out. It's definitely just about the worst thing he could do politically if he's trying to dodge any problems with Congress, but his political instincts are not exactly impeccable.