"With Each Briefing, Trump Is Making Us Worse People"
Bullshit.
I read stuff from the left. I try to maintain a hold on the perspective--bizarre thought it is--that has taken hold over there. I won't pay for that stuff anymore--which means the NYT and the WaPo are largely out, since I get tired of clearing my browser history all the time, and tired of going through the library which, off-campus, requires a VPN. I'm not going to pay organizations that are wrecking the country.
Anyway, I used to...weirdly, I find myself inclined to say adore--The Atlantic. I still find things to like there, and I admire the fact that they do print things on from a perspective external to their own now and again. They have Conor Friedersdorf--that's to their credit.
Anyway. Trump's demeanor is bad. An embarrassment to the country. When his dander's up, his demeanor is awful. At those times he's, as I keep saying, not merely unpresidential but anti-presidential. This is not merely a question of style. He's a representation of the nation--and, overall, he does a terrible job of it. And most people seem to vote as some function of (i) tribal/party allegiance and (ii) style/demeanor. I suppose it's a good thing that the left has become so repulsive since it's come off the hinges. Else there'd be no way for Trump to win in that battlespace.
Of course my current view is that Trump is actually pretty good in a fair number of ways on substantive matters--and clearly much better / less-bad than the new, extremist, left-wing, PC-identity-politics-semi-socialist Dems. (I don't really figure Biden into the equation since I kinda don't think he'll make it to November.) And: I don't think the frontman matters too much over there, anyway. It's the vocal vanguard that's setting the tone and agenda.
Anyway: even aside from everything else, we've got to worry about SCOTUS. You might not like textualist/originalist justices, but at least they won't wreck us. The most they'll do is slow down the change you think we need. Activists might well wreck us. I'm risk-averse about SCOTUS.
Though a Trump loss / Dem win would, I'm inclined to think, but catastrophe for the nation so long as the Dems are dangling off the leftward cliff, I'd be happy to be done with Trump. His behavior sickens me much of the time.
Although: much of the time his bad behavior is provoked by our horrifically terrible, extremely partisan news media. Presidents shouldn't be so easily provoked. One pines for the days of No Drama Obama... But journalists know--they can easily see--that Trump is a better president when not provoked. They choose to provoke him, mostly for partisan reasons (though sometimes it's an unavoidable part of doing their job). That is: they prefer doing damage to a Republican president to having a better country. But that's another can of worms. (He did lay a righteous smackdown on the reprehensible Jim Acosta the other day, incidentally.)
So...Trump's demeanor is bad. And that's bad for the country, IMO. I'd be happy to not have to observe the spectacle anymore. Even if it meant the catastrophe of a PC/identity-politics-addled administration.
But what's-his-name, the author of the Atlantic piece above, just plain loses his shit in it. Yet again I stopped reading. Probably less than halfway through.
I say again: criticize the real Trump, not the straw Trump. He's by no means soulless. He's not like a goldfish. (???) Spare me the speculation on his religious disposition or lack thereof (especially coming from atheists feigning horror at irreligiosity). He's not the least-moral president we've had--you realize he owns 0.00 slaves, right? He's conducted 0.00 genocidal campaigns. He's started 0.00 unjustified wars... He didn't "not have sex" with an intern in the Oval Office and then lie about it. You realize all this, yes? Cause the author of that piece seems not to.
Ah, forget it.
I read stuff from the left. I try to maintain a hold on the perspective--bizarre thought it is--that has taken hold over there. I won't pay for that stuff anymore--which means the NYT and the WaPo are largely out, since I get tired of clearing my browser history all the time, and tired of going through the library which, off-campus, requires a VPN. I'm not going to pay organizations that are wrecking the country.
Anyway, I used to...weirdly, I find myself inclined to say adore--The Atlantic. I still find things to like there, and I admire the fact that they do print things on from a perspective external to their own now and again. They have Conor Friedersdorf--that's to their credit.
Anyway. Trump's demeanor is bad. An embarrassment to the country. When his dander's up, his demeanor is awful. At those times he's, as I keep saying, not merely unpresidential but anti-presidential. This is not merely a question of style. He's a representation of the nation--and, overall, he does a terrible job of it. And most people seem to vote as some function of (i) tribal/party allegiance and (ii) style/demeanor. I suppose it's a good thing that the left has become so repulsive since it's come off the hinges. Else there'd be no way for Trump to win in that battlespace.
Of course my current view is that Trump is actually pretty good in a fair number of ways on substantive matters--and clearly much better / less-bad than the new, extremist, left-wing, PC-identity-politics-semi-socialist Dems. (I don't really figure Biden into the equation since I kinda don't think he'll make it to November.) And: I don't think the frontman matters too much over there, anyway. It's the vocal vanguard that's setting the tone and agenda.
Anyway: even aside from everything else, we've got to worry about SCOTUS. You might not like textualist/originalist justices, but at least they won't wreck us. The most they'll do is slow down the change you think we need. Activists might well wreck us. I'm risk-averse about SCOTUS.
Though a Trump loss / Dem win would, I'm inclined to think, but catastrophe for the nation so long as the Dems are dangling off the leftward cliff, I'd be happy to be done with Trump. His behavior sickens me much of the time.
Although: much of the time his bad behavior is provoked by our horrifically terrible, extremely partisan news media. Presidents shouldn't be so easily provoked. One pines for the days of No Drama Obama... But journalists know--they can easily see--that Trump is a better president when not provoked. They choose to provoke him, mostly for partisan reasons (though sometimes it's an unavoidable part of doing their job). That is: they prefer doing damage to a Republican president to having a better country. But that's another can of worms. (He did lay a righteous smackdown on the reprehensible Jim Acosta the other day, incidentally.)
So...Trump's demeanor is bad. And that's bad for the country, IMO. I'd be happy to not have to observe the spectacle anymore. Even if it meant the catastrophe of a PC/identity-politics-addled administration.
But what's-his-name, the author of the Atlantic piece above, just plain loses his shit in it. Yet again I stopped reading. Probably less than halfway through.
I say again: criticize the real Trump, not the straw Trump. He's by no means soulless. He's not like a goldfish. (???) Spare me the speculation on his religious disposition or lack thereof (especially coming from atheists feigning horror at irreligiosity). He's not the least-moral president we've had--you realize he owns 0.00 slaves, right? He's conducted 0.00 genocidal campaigns. He's started 0.00 unjustified wars... He didn't "not have sex" with an intern in the Oval Office and then lie about it. You realize all this, yes? Cause the author of that piece seems not to.
Ah, forget it.
posted by Winston Smith at
10:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home