X Close

Post-Trumpism could save America The Republicans have been splintered into four factions

Trumpism did not appear out of nowhere. Credit: BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

Trumpism did not appear out of nowhere. Credit: BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images


April 4, 2023   7 mins

Just as Elizabeth I would have been disheartened to learn that she had lived during the Age of Shakespeare, I am sure that no living US president, from Jimmy Carter to Joe Biden, wants to be a footnote to Donald Trump. But I don’t make the rules. It seems very likely that historians of the future will agree that the presidency of Donald Trump, like those of William McKinley, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan, marked the end of one American political era and the beginning of another.

The date dividing B.T. (Before Trump) and A.T. (After Trump) was June 16, 2015. On that day, America’s 45th president descended Trump Tower’s golden escalator to announce that he was running for the Republican nomination. Within hours, the traditional patterns of US politics were shattering and crystallising into new formations. Whether Trump is sent to jail by vengeful Democratic prosecutors, re-elected to the White House, or fades away playing golf in Florida, today, in the Year 8 A.T., America’s Left, Right and centre have all been redefined in relation to him.

To understand this transformation, one must first understand that Trumpism did not appear out of nowhere in 2015. The migration of the educated and affluent to the Democrats, as well as the white working class and more recently a minority of the non-white working class to the Republicans, dates back to the Sixties. Politically, it first manifested itself in the 1972 presidential election, in which white working-class Democratic voters switched and helped Richard Nixon win a landslide victory over George McGovern.

But this shift was far from fixed. Instead of building on Nixon’s Main Street populism and centrism, Ronald Reagan bequeathed the Republican Party to K Street neoconservatives who sought to build a post-Cold War American global empire ruled by Wall Street free marketeers. This was not what “Nixon Democrats” or “Reagan Democrats” were looking for. Alienated by an increasingly upscale and socially liberal Democratic party, many white working-class voters in the Northern industrial states, which would later vote for Trump, rallied behind the Texan billionaire Ross Perot in 1992, when, by denouncing the offshoring of US manufacturing jobs, he won 19% of the popular vote — more than any third-party candidate since former president Theodore Roosevelt had run as the Progressive Party candidate in 1912.

After winning fewer votes in his 1996 run, Perot withdrew from politics. His personal vehicle, the Reform Party, was contested by would-be successors, with its Right wing led by the “paleoconservative” populists Patrick Buchanan and former KKK leader David Duke, and its relative Left wing dominated by the TV wrestler Jesse Ventura and one Donald J. Trump. Trump withdrew from the Reform Party presidential race and Patrick Buchanan became its nominee in 2000. Ventura went on to become a one-term governor of Minnesota, while Trump became a — so far — one-term president of the United States.

In the following years, a strain of Nixonism-Perotism continued to exist in the Republican party, but it was represented by economically populist, socially conservative figures such as Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee. They were easily caricatured in the media and blacklisted by Republican donors. Trump, however, was able to win the nomination in spite of donor-class opposition because, like Perot, he could fund his own campaign (although at later stages he came to rely on other big donors as well).

What this shows is that, between Nixon and Trump, there existed a constituency of Republicans, independents, and some Democrats who could be rallied behind pro-manufacturing economic nationalism, a preference for national-interest realpolitik over costly crusades abroad, and a moderate social traditionalism — even if it lost most of its battles to shape the Republican Party to the globalist neocons and libertarians.

Of course, had Trump not run, and had he not been a self-funded billionaire candidate, the populist candidates in 2015 would have been defeated by the big-money candidates. But while neocon-libertarian control of the Republican Party under Jeb Bush and others might have lasted into the 2020s or 2030s, at some point it was doomed to collapse under the weight of its incompatibility with domestic and global realities. Whatever else might be said about Trump, by toppling the Bush and Clinton dynasties and the establishments they embodied, he accelerated that moment. And in its wake, the Republican Party has been split into four factions: Only-Trumpists, Never-Trumpists, Pseudo-Trumpists, and Post-Trumpists.

The Only-Trumpists

Any hope that Trump might promote the Nixon-Perot alternative to Reaganism-Bushism was dashed soon after his unexpected electoral college win. Trump fired Steve Bannon, who had helped him win by tapping into populist themes. For the rest of his presidency, he relied on his son-in-law Jared Kushner, a completely conventional establishmentarian.

Lacking any ideological fuel, Trump was the weakest president in his relations with Congress since another anti-Washington outsider in the White House, Jimmy Carter. The congressional Republican leadership, for instance, which controlled both the House and the Senate between 2017 and 2019, humiliated him by refusing to allocate any funding for the central promise of his campaign, a “wall” along the US-Mexican border. Instead, the president was forced to meekly sign into law a massive tax cut for the rich pushed through Congress by Paul Ryan and others, which turned out to be the only major legislative achievement of his presidency. He may have sought a dĂ©tente with North Korea and did not start any new foreign wars, but he did not end US involvement in any of the Forever Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya.

In 2020, for the first time since the party was founded to oppose the extension of slavery in the 1850s, the GOP did not have a policy platform. The old Republic offering of global military intervention, free-market fundamentalism and economic appeasement of China was gone. But Trump failed to fill it with any new programme. Instead, he himself filled the void, something which remains the case to this day. Last month, on his personal social media platform, Truth Social, Trump released a 2024 platform calling for up to 10 new American cities on federal land, flying cars, and Tony Blair-style baby bonds — proposals that had nothing to do with anything he had run on in 2016 or anything he had achieved in office. Trump’s policy agenda has descended into improvisation. The sole continuity is Trump himself.

Meanwhile, the true number of Only-Trumpists remains unclear. High levels of support for him in polls about preferences for the Republican nominee in 2024 are probably misleading and, at this preliminary stage, reflect lack of public knowledge about rivals such as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. A more representative sample may be the mob that stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, which contained a mixture of conspiracy theorists, radical reactionaries, misguided patriots, mischief-makers, and a shaman wearing buffalo horns — a far cry from the army of armed white nationalists who, many Democrats warn, are awaiting the signal from their orange leader to rise up, seize control of most states and the federal government, and end American democracy. Donald J. Trump — disorganised, incompetent, and unable to keep his mouth shut — is the last person in the US who could lead a successful conspiracy.

The Never-Trumpists

Compared to when neoconservatives defined Republican foreign policy and free-marketeers and supporters of mass cheap-labour immigration controlled Republican economic policy, the Never-Trumpists are a shadow of what they once were. In less than a decade, they went from paramountcy to pariah status in the Grand Old Party. Paul Ryan, once seen as the future of the party, was driven out of Congress in 2018, while many prominent former Republican neoconservatives such as William Kristol have formally switched their allegiance to the Democratic party (beware, Democrats!).

Once Trump is gone from the scene, the Never-Trumpists and Only-Trumpists will vanish. In their absence, the battle for the GOP will be played out as a struggle between the two remaining groups: the Post-Trumpists and Pseudo-Trumpists.

Pseudo-Trumpists 

The largest faction among today’s Republican policymakers might be described as pseudo-Trumpists. These are former Reagan-Bush Republicans, some of them former Never-Trumpists. They are unwilling to abandon the Republican Party, and afraid to abandon Trump’s still significant followers.

Their solution is to focus on criticism of “woke” topics, such as transgender ideology and critical race theory, in the hope that this will allow them to win office without discarding their prior commitments to free trade and foreign wars of choice. In effect, this is just a revival of the old culture-war politics of the Bushes, particularly George W. Bush — who ran on hot-button social issues such as gay marriage and then governed as a libertarian in economics and a neoconservative in foreign policy.

Today, as governors, Glenn Youngkin in Virginia and Ron DeSantis in Florida have both been able to win by running against Left-leaning local school boards, while keeping their views of foreign policy and national economic policy vague. But is that enough? When DeSantis recently criticised the extent of America’s commitment to Ukraine, much of the Republican establishment criticised him for his heresies and he walked back his comments, suggesting that, under a thin orange coating of Trumpwash, a lot of Republicans remain Bushites.

Post-Trumpists

Of all of the factions in contemporary American politics, the Post-Trumpists are the most promising. They are also the most interesting, given they can be found in both parties.

A small number of Republicans in Congress, including Senators Josh Hawley, Marco Rubio and J.D. Vance, are committed to building a Republican Party and a conservative movement that reflects the transformation of the party in the last few decades: from one dominated by business elites and affluent professionals to one with an increasingly multiracial working-class base. While remaining staunch social conservatives, Hawley and Rubio have battled for higher tax credits for children and families. Rubio, in particular, has also defended striking workers and the idea of organised labour in the abstract, while Vance has called for making childbirth free for all Americans.

Most of the brainpower on the centre-Right is found among the editors and contributors to Julius Krein and Gladden Pappin’s American Affairs, Oren Cass’s American Compass think tank, and Compact, a heterodox journal uniting mavericks of Right and Left, edited by Sohrab Ahmari and Matthew Schmitz. The latter has links to Britain’s post-liberal movement and to Catholic critics of liberalism such as Patrick Deneen. They are post-Trumpist insofar as they see their reform project as one that is independent of Trump, whatever their views of the man himself.

Another strain of Post-Trumpism can be found in the Democratic party. Since Trump’s election, the Democrats redefined themselves as reflexively anti-Trumpist. Indeed, in many areas, the presidency of Joe Biden has been theatrically anti-Trumpist — from more or less abandoning enforcement of US immigration laws to supporting “gender-affirming care” for youth.

In trade and foreign policy, however, Biden has been Post-Trumpist, building on Trump’s policies and themes and trying to appeal to his working-class supporters in industrial states. Biden had the nerve to cut America’s losses in Afghanistan, which Trump failed to do. And Biden has waged a trade war against China as vigorously as Trump, but with more sophistication. Now, with an eye to re-election in 2024, Biden is even tentatively taking a tougher line on illegal immigration. Margaret Thatcher once said that her greatest achievement was Tony Blair. Perhaps Donald Trump’s will turn out to be Joe Biden.

There are certainly causes for optimism. More than any other faction, Post-Trumpists have been willing to work across party lines on particular issues. Hawley collaborated with Bernie Sanders to push for higher spending on childcare, while Vance teamed up with fellow Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, to advocate more regulation after the recent toxic train accident in Ohio. Both cases hint at the best thing that could happen to the US: the triumph of Post-Trumpism in both the Republican and the Democratic Parties, and the abandonment of Reaganism and Clintonism.

And the worst thing? A political civil war between Democratic anti-Trumpists, perpetually trying to whip up mass hysteria over the imaginary prospect of a Trump Reich, and Pseudo-Trumpist Republicans — Bush-style militarists and libertarians, crouching inside not a Trojan Horse, but a Trojan Trump.


Michael Lind is a columnist at Tablet and a fellow at New America. His latest book is Hell to Pay: How the Suppression of Wages is Destroying America.


Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

114 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

The real question is as simple for Americans as it is for Brits and Europeans: do we want to retain the nation state and therefore democracy or do we wish to be ruled by a global superclass answerable to nobody but their bankers?

Everything else is just waffle.

Laura Creighton
Laura Creighton
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

I think the global superclass own the bankers, too.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

The bankers are superclass! Though not all superclass are bankers.. but they are all banksters and many are bast…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

They are NOT Bankers!
The correct description is ‘Money Lenders’, always has been, always will be!
Incidentally they work in ‘Counting Houses’ and NOT Banks to be perfectly correct.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

They are NOT Bankers!
The correct description is ‘Money Lenders’, always has been, always will be!
Incidentally they work in ‘Counting Houses’ and NOT Banks to be perfectly correct.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

The bankers are superclass! Though not all superclass are bankers.. but they are all banksters and many are bast…

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Bankers have not done so well recently

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago

Jamie Dimon just stated that this is not the final bankers’ hour. Quite simplistic to see them as a unified powerful superblock, especially after the meltdowns of Credit Suisse, Silicon Valley Bank, and so on. Remember how hopeless and helpless the bankers were in 2008? Lehmann? Bear Stearns?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

The head of SVB presided over two previous bank failures.. and will likely preside over one or two more.. like all vampires they are unkillable!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Really?
One of my sons has recently “ trousered” a ‘bonus’ of over £3million.
Completely undeserved, I might say.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago

Jamie Dimon just stated that this is not the final bankers’ hour. Quite simplistic to see them as a unified powerful superblock, especially after the meltdowns of Credit Suisse, Silicon Valley Bank, and so on. Remember how hopeless and helpless the bankers were in 2008? Lehmann? Bear Stearns?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

The head of SVB presided over two previous bank failures.. and will likely preside over one or two more.. like all vampires they are unkillable!

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Really?
One of my sons has recently “ trousered” a ‘bonus’ of over £3million.
Completely undeserved, I might say.

Johnathan Galt
Johnathan Galt
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

More like do we want to restore win-win (healthy) Classical Liberalism (Liberty) as our predominant philosophy, or revert to win-lose (dysfunctional) “social liberalism” (totalitarianism) in keeping with the vast majority of history?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Johnathan Galt

It’s socialism for the bankers and austerity for the people.. it’s what we call a mixed economy! It resulted in a $50 trillion wealth transfer from working class to the super rich in the last 30 years.. that’s why US wages have stagnated and the super rich are now obscenely rich.. it’s not difficult to understand. You just need MSM to kowtow and endless propaganda concerning the enemies at the gate: Russia, China, Mexican migrants .. works every time. If your population is gullible, naive and/or stupid it is easier still.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Johnathan Galt

It’s socialism for the bankers and austerity for the people.. it’s what we call a mixed economy! It resulted in a $50 trillion wealth transfer from working class to the super rich in the last 30 years.. that’s why US wages have stagnated and the super rich are now obscenely rich.. it’s not difficult to understand. You just need MSM to kowtow and endless propaganda concerning the enemies at the gate: Russia, China, Mexican migrants .. works every time. If your population is gullible, naive and/or stupid it is easier still.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Rather disappointed by the author of this article brushing so lightly over Trump’s achievements, which were sadly totally unravelled by Biden. Far from Biden continuing with Trump’s so-called populist policies, he actively returned to the left-wing Democratic establishment business as usual. Demented Biden is just a puppet for the US left. It is not just globalist bankers, who allegedly “rule” the world, but the big global institutions, led by unelected bureaucrats. Trump’s first executive orders were against a globalist cabal of corrupt UN institutions, which try to establish an Orwellian future for mankind. He first signed an executive order to get out of the Paris Agreement, trying to establish U.S.’ energy independence, and then he put a stop to funding the WHO (of course Gates tried to fill this gap with his own money). But sadly after Covid hit the States, Trump followed the advice of corrupt establishment people like Fauci and other advisers, who were in the pocket of big Pharma, to lock down the country and fast track the vaccines, paying billions to big Pharma in “Operation Warp Speed”. So Covid was his real downfall, and he can’t wriggle out of his biggest error and try to rewrite history by blaming his political rival DeSantis not to open up his State fast enough.
I hope that the U.S. will not elect a post Trumpian “populist” Biden, but a politician in Trump’s original mould (preferably without his huge narcissism), who can turn around the woke, leftish nightmare we are currently experiencing everywhere in the Western World.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephanie Surface
Wm. Brown
Wm. Brown
1 year ago

Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize many times over. The Abraham Accords were a miracle of statesmanship.

Simon Mundy
Simon Mundy
1 year ago

Trump’s original and only mode is narcissism.

Wm. Brown
Wm. Brown
1 year ago

Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize many times over. The Abraham Accords were a miracle of statesmanship.

Simon Mundy
Simon Mundy
1 year ago

Trump’s original and only mode is narcissism.

Laura Creighton
Laura Creighton
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

I think the global superclass own the bankers, too.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Bankers have not done so well recently

Johnathan Galt
Johnathan Galt
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

More like do we want to restore win-win (healthy) Classical Liberalism (Liberty) as our predominant philosophy, or revert to win-lose (dysfunctional) “social liberalism” (totalitarianism) in keeping with the vast majority of history?

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago
Reply to  Hugh Bryant

Rather disappointed by the author of this article brushing so lightly over Trump’s achievements, which were sadly totally unravelled by Biden. Far from Biden continuing with Trump’s so-called populist policies, he actively returned to the left-wing Democratic establishment business as usual. Demented Biden is just a puppet for the US left. It is not just globalist bankers, who allegedly “rule” the world, but the big global institutions, led by unelected bureaucrats. Trump’s first executive orders were against a globalist cabal of corrupt UN institutions, which try to establish an Orwellian future for mankind. He first signed an executive order to get out of the Paris Agreement, trying to establish U.S.’ energy independence, and then he put a stop to funding the WHO (of course Gates tried to fill this gap with his own money). But sadly after Covid hit the States, Trump followed the advice of corrupt establishment people like Fauci and other advisers, who were in the pocket of big Pharma, to lock down the country and fast track the vaccines, paying billions to big Pharma in “Operation Warp Speed”. So Covid was his real downfall, and he can’t wriggle out of his biggest error and try to rewrite history by blaming his political rival DeSantis not to open up his State fast enough.
I hope that the U.S. will not elect a post Trumpian “populist” Biden, but a politician in Trump’s original mould (preferably without his huge narcissism), who can turn around the woke, leftish nightmare we are currently experiencing everywhere in the Western World.

Last edited 1 year ago by Stephanie Surface
Hugh Bryant
Hugh Bryant
1 year ago

The real question is as simple for Americans as it is for Brits and Europeans: do we want to retain the nation state and therefore democracy or do we wish to be ruled by a global superclass answerable to nobody but their bankers?

Everything else is just waffle.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

This is as good an analysis of the current American political scene as I have seen on Unherd. The author successfully cuts through the smoke and mirrors of identity politics, race-baiting, woke culture wars, and all the other diversionary tactics used by both sides of the globalist establishment to create artificial divides and keep themselves in power. There is indeed hope that even as Trump becomes an increasingly ineffective hindrance to populist goals, his election will still be identified centuries hence as a catalyst for the change that is most needed. Effective change throughout history need not necessarily come through bloody revolution. It is far better for all concerned when those in power instead make reasonable concessions out of fear of bloody revolution. I have to wonder if the transition from true monarchy and feudal aristocracy towards representative democracy in Britain would have been as smooth or as peaceful had they not witnessed the violent destruction of the French aristocracy at the end of the eighteenth century. Fear is, as ever, a great motivator. Trump, Jan 6th, and the continued undercurrent of revolutionary and secessionist sentiment in the US has the establishment rattled. Biden’s continuation of certain aspects of Trump’s populism reflects their fear of both regional uprisings and more realistically, a smoother, more polished, more competent, and more committed outsider blowing up the political process using Trump’s model. People shouldn’t be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. That governments, and others with power, are actually afraid represents real progress towards the sort of change the world needs.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Great comment.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

“It is far better for all concerned when those in power instead make reasonable concessions out of fear of bloody revolution”
I do not think history bears that out. As far as I can see history tells us that once a totalitarian regime starts to make concessions it is finished

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

Well, it isn’t the concessions that bring down these regimes, totalitarian or otherwise. It’s the fact that historical circumstances change what works and what doesn’t. What was good policy in 1800 won’t necessarily work in 1900 or 2000. The world never stands still. If a regime fails to adapt to new conditions for whatever reasons of ideology or incompetence or both (and I think in this case it is both), they find their governance is increasingly ineffective and their rule unpopular. They become unstable and vulnerable to both internal uprisings and foreign interference. So, you’re technically correct. By the times most regimes make concessions, they’ve already lost. In hindsight, we know feudalism was basically invalidated by the industrial revolution. By 1800, the writing was on the wall for anyone with enough foresight to read it. Some did, like the British, and adapted their systems over the years to account for a changed reality. As a result, they remained largely peaceful and prosperous through the transition from feudal monarchy to modern nation-state. Tsarist Russia, on the other hand, dug in and tried to push back against the tide of history, and by the time they made any concessions, the beginning of the 20th century, it was far too little too late. We know how that ended up. The globalists of today are in the same boat that the feudal lords of the early 19th century were in. There is no possible path towards the globalist vision of one unified planet governed by unchecked economic competition and legions of unelected ‘experts’ in international alphabet organizations. They have lost, past tense. The only question is how quickly they realize it and how much damage they do trying to stop it. That remains to be seen.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Jolly
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

On the one hand I do not disagree. On the other hand Stalin v the Czars, Pol Pot and Saddam were not bought down by internal forces yet the Shah was.
The Czars were who I hd in mind when i made my original comment. They made no real attempt to push back. They were soft and that is what destroyed them. If I had executed Lenin’s brother (rightly as it happened) I would have rounded up and executed the entire family

Last edited 1 year ago by Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

But eventually someone else would have come along and led a revolution, maybe not exactly the same time or the same philosophy, but inevitable in the long run.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

But eventually someone else would have come along and led a revolution, maybe not exactly the same time or the same philosophy, but inevitable in the long run.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

On the one hand I do not disagree. On the other hand Stalin v the Czars, Pol Pot and Saddam were not bought down by internal forces yet the Shah was.
The Czars were who I hd in mind when i made my original comment. They made no real attempt to push back. They were soft and that is what destroyed them. If I had executed Lenin’s brother (rightly as it happened) I would have rounded up and executed the entire family

Last edited 1 year ago by Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

Well, it isn’t the concessions that bring down these regimes, totalitarian or otherwise. It’s the fact that historical circumstances change what works and what doesn’t. What was good policy in 1800 won’t necessarily work in 1900 or 2000. The world never stands still. If a regime fails to adapt to new conditions for whatever reasons of ideology or incompetence or both (and I think in this case it is both), they find their governance is increasingly ineffective and their rule unpopular. They become unstable and vulnerable to both internal uprisings and foreign interference. So, you’re technically correct. By the times most regimes make concessions, they’ve already lost. In hindsight, we know feudalism was basically invalidated by the industrial revolution. By 1800, the writing was on the wall for anyone with enough foresight to read it. Some did, like the British, and adapted their systems over the years to account for a changed reality. As a result, they remained largely peaceful and prosperous through the transition from feudal monarchy to modern nation-state. Tsarist Russia, on the other hand, dug in and tried to push back against the tide of history, and by the time they made any concessions, the beginning of the 20th century, it was far too little too late. We know how that ended up. The globalists of today are in the same boat that the feudal lords of the early 19th century were in. There is no possible path towards the globalist vision of one unified planet governed by unchecked economic competition and legions of unelected ‘experts’ in international alphabet organizations. They have lost, past tense. The only question is how quickly they realize it and how much damage they do trying to stop it. That remains to be seen.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Jolly
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

…Trumpite repatriation of US industry and military forces to keep order at home as civil upheaval follows de-dollarisation fueled poverty? This will be even more traumatic as protectionist barriers are raised to keep foreign goods out and American industrialisation is rebuilt NazÂĄ style. That will take a couple of decades after which I’d worry about Canada and Mexico’s futures, 3rd Reich style..

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

“Where there is coal, or oil, or hydroelectric power, there a new weapon can be forged against the heart of the Faustian Civilization. Here begins the exploited world’s revenge on its masters. It is no mere crisis, but the beginning of a catastrophe.

Faced with this destiny, there is only one worldview that is worthy of us, the aforementioned one of Achilles: better a short life, full of deeds and glory, than a long and empty one. The danger is so great, for every individual, every class, every people, that it is pathetic to delude oneself. Time cannot be stopped: there is absolutely no way back, no wise renunciation to be made. Only dreamers believe in ways out. Optimism is cowardice.”

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Could happen

Michael McElwee
Michael McElwee
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

“Where there is coal, or oil, or hydroelectric power, there a new weapon can be forged against the heart of the Faustian Civilization. Here begins the exploited world’s revenge on its masters. It is no mere crisis, but the beginning of a catastrophe.

Faced with this destiny, there is only one worldview that is worthy of us, the aforementioned one of Achilles: better a short life, full of deeds and glory, than a long and empty one. The danger is so great, for every individual, every class, every people, that it is pathetic to delude oneself. Time cannot be stopped: there is absolutely no way back, no wise renunciation to be made. Only dreamers believe in ways out. Optimism is cowardice.”

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Could happen

Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Konstantinos Stavropoulos
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Such a peacefully revolutionary comment..!
Jolly good Steve Jolly..!!!

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

Thanks. I think most of us would prefer a peaceful process, even if needed changes may take longer that way. Tyranny must always be confronted for what it is, but violent revolution should always be the very last resort of a civilized people.

Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Konstantinos Stavropoulos
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Exactly..!

Revolution is the very last resort for various reasons. To name a few, it is bloody and murderous, it is often used, exploited and misguided and as a result usually fails the cause. While some nasty folks are eager to grasp the opportunity and ran things anew for their very own profit.

Last edited 1 year ago by Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

And no matter how it plays out, the innocent always suffer alongside the guilty.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

And no matter how it plays out, the innocent always suffer alongside the guilty.

Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Konstantinos Stavropoulos
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Exactly..!

Revolution is the very last resort for various reasons. To name a few, it is bloody and murderous, it is often used, exploited and misguided and as a result usually fails the cause. While some nasty folks are eager to grasp the opportunity and ran things anew for their very own profit.

Last edited 1 year ago by Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

Thanks. I think most of us would prefer a peaceful process, even if needed changes may take longer that way. Tyranny must always be confronted for what it is, but violent revolution should always be the very last resort of a civilized people.

Wm. Brown
Wm. Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

“When the government fears the people, you have good government.  
When the people fear the government, you have tyranny.”
      –Thos. Jefferson

Simon Mundy
Simon Mundy
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Some credit also needs to be given to the British experience of Cromwellian insurrection.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Great comment.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

“It is far better for all concerned when those in power instead make reasonable concessions out of fear of bloody revolution”
I do not think history bears that out. As far as I can see history tells us that once a totalitarian regime starts to make concessions it is finished

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

…Trumpite repatriation of US industry and military forces to keep order at home as civil upheaval follows de-dollarisation fueled poverty? This will be even more traumatic as protectionist barriers are raised to keep foreign goods out and American industrialisation is rebuilt NazÂĄ style. That will take a couple of decades after which I’d worry about Canada and Mexico’s futures, 3rd Reich style..

Konstantinos Stavropoulos
Konstantinos Stavropoulos
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Such a peacefully revolutionary comment..!
Jolly good Steve Jolly..!!!

Wm. Brown
Wm. Brown
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

“When the government fears the people, you have good government.  
When the people fear the government, you have tyranny.”
      –Thos. Jefferson

Simon Mundy
Simon Mundy
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

Some credit also needs to be given to the British experience of Cromwellian insurrection.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
1 year ago

This is as good an analysis of the current American political scene as I have seen on Unherd. The author successfully cuts through the smoke and mirrors of identity politics, race-baiting, woke culture wars, and all the other diversionary tactics used by both sides of the globalist establishment to create artificial divides and keep themselves in power. There is indeed hope that even as Trump becomes an increasingly ineffective hindrance to populist goals, his election will still be identified centuries hence as a catalyst for the change that is most needed. Effective change throughout history need not necessarily come through bloody revolution. It is far better for all concerned when those in power instead make reasonable concessions out of fear of bloody revolution. I have to wonder if the transition from true monarchy and feudal aristocracy towards representative democracy in Britain would have been as smooth or as peaceful had they not witnessed the violent destruction of the French aristocracy at the end of the eighteenth century. Fear is, as ever, a great motivator. Trump, Jan 6th, and the continued undercurrent of revolutionary and secessionist sentiment in the US has the establishment rattled. Biden’s continuation of certain aspects of Trump’s populism reflects their fear of both regional uprisings and more realistically, a smoother, more polished, more competent, and more committed outsider blowing up the political process using Trump’s model. People shouldn’t be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. That governments, and others with power, are actually afraid represents real progress towards the sort of change the world needs.

Cho Jinn
Cho Jinn
1 year ago

Well, one must realize that Trump’s opponents are singularly interested in dissolving the American experiment and subjecting it to the whims of foreign or other unaccountable bureaucracies. The point, then, isn’t so much to support Trump as it is to defeat his enemies, and his fellow republicans are often part of the same necocon / neoliberal problem: a sad state of affairs. Fundamental change is certainly necessary, but our polity won’t let it happen.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Cho Jinn

This is the deal. Do the believers of Classic Enlightenment Liberalism Win? The sort of thinking which created, Industry, Prosperity, Rule of Law, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the ‘one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all’.

Or do the global Elite useful idiots win, and do as planned, and destroy this Noble Nation so it may become a 1984-esk Neo Feudalism; degenerate, godless, bankrupt, divided, and a second world Corporatocracy and Tyranny?

If you wish the first, then only one rout is possible, Trump Wins 2024.

If you wish the second choice, then if a Democrat, RINO, Deep State, or Uni-party, candidate wins, that will be what you get. The deep state, the MSM, Social Media, Education industry, the Corporations and Finance, they are one more degenerate President away from their goal of utter destruction of all which is decent and which made the West great.

silly article, a total Wan* fest…

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

I’m with you, although I think Trump II will be very different to Trump I.

Will Longfield
Will Longfield
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

The writer is a hopeless Trumpohobe, but he does make a good point – the Great Orange One didn’t DO much, did he? “The wall” was not built, after all that.

Let’s hope Trump II has grown up a bit. And let’s end these debates 
 some sly left wing shill serving up softball questions to a grouchy confused old man while Trump blathers and sputters and throws haymakers wide …

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  Will Longfield

It is a point in Trump’s favor that he didn’t “do” extravagant legislature. True, the wall wasn’t completed, unfortunately.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

He did what his able advisors advised: the man is a cretin, who is devoid of knowledge and intellect.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

No indeed, you can’t accuse Trump of being an intellectual!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

…which one?

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago

No indeed, you can’t accuse Trump of being an intellectual!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

…which one?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Paul Hendricks

He did what his able advisors advised: the man is a cretin, who is devoid of knowledge and intellect.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  Will Longfield

It is a point in Trump’s favor that he didn’t “do” extravagant legislature. True, the wall wasn’t completed, unfortunately.

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

Because your old dog learns lots of new tricks, I’m sure.

Will Longfield
Will Longfield
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

The writer is a hopeless Trumpohobe, but he does make a good point – the Great Orange One didn’t DO much, did he? “The wall” was not built, after all that.

Let’s hope Trump II has grown up a bit. And let’s end these debates 
 some sly left wing shill serving up softball questions to a grouchy confused old man while Trump blathers and sputters and throws haymakers wide …

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

Because your old dog learns lots of new tricks, I’m sure.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

For what it is worth, I agree. The middle-class, horribly misguided, do-gooders have taken over in the UK. They have passed new laws which say that you can’t disagree with them. All political parties are in collusion. Censorship has reached an unbelievable level.
I don’t understand why people can’t see this. They talk about the Left as the enemy but there is no Right. To be Right is to be an outcast.
Trump could perhaps do nothing but his very presence keeps the state police quiet.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Middle class? In UK we’ve had 10 years of being ruled by Private School Eton or Winchester Head Boys complemented by Grammar school Head Girls – one quiet posh one slightly mad. All supported by their private school supporters in the media. That couldn’t be more ruling class establishment

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Does it matter what label you give them. Presumably, you would agree that the teachers are middle class. So why are they teaching this drivel? You would say the the unions are middle class. Why are they not striking? You need to open your eyes.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

I think if you want to label the leaders of the UK for the last 13yrs middle class that’s fine, but doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny. Establishment been in charge and made right hash of things. Now doing the usual find someone else to blame and keep it fairly unspecific so can cover as many bases as poss. Total cobblers.

Last edited 1 year ago by j watson
Rick Lawrence
Rick Lawrence
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

You really need to read what Chris Wheatley actually said instead of pushing forth your own agenda. Nothing particularly wrong with your agenda but you need to read the points being made.

Rick Lawrence
Rick Lawrence
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

You really need to read what Chris Wheatley actually said instead of pushing forth your own agenda. Nothing particularly wrong with your agenda but you need to read the points being made.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

..run that one by me again as well please: “why are UK TUs not striking? haha. lol.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

I think if you want to label the leaders of the UK for the last 13yrs middle class that’s fine, but doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny. Establishment been in charge and made right hash of things. Now doing the usual find someone else to blame and keep it fairly unspecific so can cover as many bases as poss. Total cobblers.

Last edited 1 year ago by j watson
Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

..run that one by me again as well please: “why are UK TUs not striking? haha. lol.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Please do not compare Eton and Winchester with grammar schools.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Sadly, Winchester has fallen badly behind in recent years! No doubt the admission of girls has much to do with it.

Eton on the other hand has theoretically gone from strength to strength.
Once the home of the ‘cream of society’, ie the rich & thick, the meritocratic revolution of the 1980’s has produced a far more intellectually equipped Etonian.

However everything has its cost, and the clever little swots of today are nothing like their well rounded, robust predecessors, who at least knew how to speak with the ‘voice of authority.

“Sic Gloria Transit Mundi.”

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
1 year ago

Well of course Winchester has fallen behind since the admission of girls! Thus passes the glory of the good-ole white male only world. About time.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
1 year ago

Well of course Winchester has fallen behind since the admission of girls! Thus passes the glory of the good-ole white male only world. About time.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

Sadly, Winchester has fallen badly behind in recent years! No doubt the admission of girls has much to do with it.

Eton on the other hand has theoretically gone from strength to strength.
Once the home of the ‘cream of society’, ie the rich & thick, the meritocratic revolution of the 1980’s has produced a far more intellectually equipped Etonian.

However everything has its cost, and the clever little swots of today are nothing like their well rounded, robust predecessors, who at least knew how to speak with the ‘voice of authority.

“Sic Gloria Transit Mundi.”

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

can I have some ketchup to dip one of your shoulder chips?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

“In UK we’ve had 10 years of being ruled by Private School Eton or Winchester Head Boys”

More like two centuries and more, and jolly good too!

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

The decline is because the mercantile has taken over from land as source of wealth. The job of public schools was to turn businessmens’ sons into gentlemen which they have been failing to do for decades.
When it came to education Manchester Grammar and the other Direct Grant Grammar Schools were superior to Eton and Harrow.
Ernie Bevin had great respect for Eton and Harrow but little for the LSE. Very astute judge of character was Bevin.
The greatest saviour for the public schools was the destruction of grammar schools and the introduction of progressive education in comprehensives. The reality was that apart from Winchester and Westminster most public schools were comprehensive in academic ability but the education was not progressive: it was Classics, Competitive Sports and Christianity with an instilled duty to die for Britain, hence Bevin’s respect.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Utter rubbish: the entrepreneurial 19th Century Quakers who were enobled, sent their boys to Eton, and were you to read your Victorian history you would know that what you refer to as mercantile wealth was in full Eton and Harrow sending form even before the middle of the 19th Century.. banking, brewing, confectionary, food, glass, coal, steel was all in full flow as was its wealth creation….As for the use of the term ” superior” in reference to Manchester and other grammar schools, I suggest that you look at lists of old boys achievements? Eton produced artists, authors, actors, academics, racehorse trainers, racing drivers, as well as soldiers, and landowners… interestingly now the rising following star is Radley, as so many Etonians are now not sending their sons to Eton, ditto Harrow… just as when all the dross starting wearing Barbours… they donned Schoffels!!!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles Hedges

Utter rubbish: the entrepreneurial 19th Century Quakers who were enobled, sent their boys to Eton, and were you to read your Victorian history you would know that what you refer to as mercantile wealth was in full Eton and Harrow sending form even before the middle of the 19th Century.. banking, brewing, confectionary, food, glass, coal, steel was all in full flow as was its wealth creation….As for the use of the term ” superior” in reference to Manchester and other grammar schools, I suggest that you look at lists of old boys achievements? Eton produced artists, authors, actors, academics, racehorse trainers, racing drivers, as well as soldiers, and landowners… interestingly now the rising following star is Radley, as so many Etonians are now not sending their sons to Eton, ditto Harrow… just as when all the dross starting wearing Barbours… they donned Schoffels!!!!

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago

The decline is because the mercantile has taken over from land as source of wealth. The job of public schools was to turn businessmens’ sons into gentlemen which they have been failing to do for decades.
When it came to education Manchester Grammar and the other Direct Grant Grammar Schools were superior to Eton and Harrow.
Ernie Bevin had great respect for Eton and Harrow but little for the LSE. Very astute judge of character was Bevin.
The greatest saviour for the public schools was the destruction of grammar schools and the introduction of progressive education in comprehensives. The reality was that apart from Winchester and Westminster most public schools were comprehensive in academic ability but the education was not progressive: it was Classics, Competitive Sports and Christianity with an instilled duty to die for Britain, hence Bevin’s respect.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Does it matter what label you give them. Presumably, you would agree that the teachers are middle class. So why are they teaching this drivel? You would say the the unions are middle class. Why are they not striking? You need to open your eyes.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Please do not compare Eton and Winchester with grammar schools.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

can I have some ketchup to dip one of your shoulder chips?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

“In UK we’ve had 10 years of being ruled by Private School Eton or Winchester Head Boys”

More like two centuries and more, and jolly good too!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

..just run that description of those in charge in the UK again would you? ..it’s so funny I want to hear it again and again! ..do-gooders did you say… haha. lol. hilarious!

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Middle class? In UK we’ve had 10 years of being ruled by Private School Eton or Winchester Head Boys complemented by Grammar school Head Girls – one quiet posh one slightly mad. All supported by their private school supporters in the media. That couldn’t be more ruling class establishment

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

..just run that description of those in charge in the UK again would you? ..it’s so funny I want to hear it again and again! ..do-gooders did you say… haha. lol. hilarious!

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

I think Trump is the only candidate who can do what is necessary and take a wrecking ball to the establishment, and given the way he was stitched up last time he should have the appetite for it

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Interesting analogy.

If you hired a wrecker to knock down a building, but after 4 years the building was still standing stronger than ever and the wrecker was giving you nothing but excuses and promises, would you re-hire him to do the same job?

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

Another swing of the wrecking ball is preferable to the other option: a cabal of con artists telling the neighbors that the rotting building is in great shape, and the rats and squatters don’t exist! It just needs a new coat of rainbow paint. While paying off the reporters and silencing dissent. . . Oh and how about some more government funding, some lawyers, a DEI evaluation, an academic study. . . ! All funded by the neighborhood, whom we know are called “deplorables,” and we would rather they not start families around here. . .

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I’m going to try this again without some of the possibly offending words. . . Unless I’m auto-m0derated at this point?

Another swing of the wrecking ball is preferable to the other option: a c@b@l of con artists telling the neighbors that the rotting building is in great shape, and the rats and squatters don’t exist! It just needs a new coat of r@inbow paint. While paying off the reporters and silencing d!ssent. . . Oh and how about some more government funding, some lawyers, a D3I evaluation, an academic study. . . ! All funded by the neighborhood, whom we know are called “depl0rables,” and we would rather they not start f@milies around here. . .

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I think you are guilty of looking at 2016 with today’s eyes. This is not very astute!

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I think he imagined that the civil servants would do what they were told. This time round sack the lot.

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

Another swing of the wrecking ball is preferable to the other option: a cabal of con artists telling the neighbors that the rotting building is in great shape, and the rats and squatters don’t exist! It just needs a new coat of rainbow paint. While paying off the reporters and silencing dissent. . . Oh and how about some more government funding, some lawyers, a DEI evaluation, an academic study. . . ! All funded by the neighborhood, whom we know are called “deplorables,” and we would rather they not start families around here. . .

Paul Hendricks
Paul Hendricks
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I’m going to try this again without some of the possibly offending words. . . Unless I’m auto-m0derated at this point?

Another swing of the wrecking ball is preferable to the other option: a c@b@l of con artists telling the neighbors that the rotting building is in great shape, and the rats and squatters don’t exist! It just needs a new coat of r@inbow paint. While paying off the reporters and silencing d!ssent. . . Oh and how about some more government funding, some lawyers, a D3I evaluation, an academic study. . . ! All funded by the neighborhood, whom we know are called “depl0rables,” and we would rather they not start f@milies around here. . .

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I think you are guilty of looking at 2016 with today’s eyes. This is not very astute!

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I think he imagined that the civil servants would do what they were told. This time round sack the lot.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

Wrecking ball I can relate to.. he’ll have to better than Jan6 next time though!

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Interesting analogy.

If you hired a wrecker to knock down a building, but after 4 years the building was still standing stronger than ever and the wrecker was giving you nothing but excuses and promises, would you re-hire him to do the same job?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago

Wrecking ball I can relate to.. he’ll have to better than Jan6 next time though!

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Somehow I find it hard to say Trump and Classic Enlightenment Liberalism in the same sentence.. that’s some choice you’ve got there: between Satan and Lucifer??

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Trump is incapable of achieving anything as President. Four more years of him would just bring more chaos and lunacy, from both him and his enemies.
If you want the US nation to have a real chance against the global elites, you better support someone like DeSantis who can actually build a coalition and get things done.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

That’s what the uniparty fears most, thus they want Trump and are doing all they can to martyr him.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

That’s what the uniparty fears most, thus they want Trump and are doing all they can to martyr him.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

I’m with you, although I think Trump II will be very different to Trump I.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

For what it is worth, I agree. The middle-class, horribly misguided, do-gooders have taken over in the UK. They have passed new laws which say that you can’t disagree with them. All political parties are in collusion. Censorship has reached an unbelievable level.
I don’t understand why people can’t see this. They talk about the Left as the enemy but there is no Right. To be Right is to be an outcast.
Trump could perhaps do nothing but his very presence keeps the state police quiet.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

I think Trump is the only candidate who can do what is necessary and take a wrecking ball to the establishment, and given the way he was stitched up last time he should have the appetite for it

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Somehow I find it hard to say Trump and Classic Enlightenment Liberalism in the same sentence.. that’s some choice you’ve got there: between Satan and Lucifer??

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago
Reply to  Elliott Bjorn

Trump is incapable of achieving anything as President. Four more years of him would just bring more chaos and lunacy, from both him and his enemies.
If you want the US nation to have a real chance against the global elites, you better support someone like DeSantis who can actually build a coalition and get things done.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Cho Jinn

..a narrow divide between fundamental change and fundamentalism perhaps?

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
Reply to  Cho Jinn

This is the deal. Do the believers of Classic Enlightenment Liberalism Win? The sort of thinking which created, Industry, Prosperity, Rule of Law, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the ‘one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all’.

Or do the global Elite useful idiots win, and do as planned, and destroy this Noble Nation so it may become a 1984-esk Neo Feudalism; degenerate, godless, bankrupt, divided, and a second world Corporatocracy and Tyranny?

If you wish the first, then only one rout is possible, Trump Wins 2024.

If you wish the second choice, then if a Democrat, RINO, Deep State, or Uni-party, candidate wins, that will be what you get. The deep state, the MSM, Social Media, Education industry, the Corporations and Finance, they are one more degenerate President away from their goal of utter destruction of all which is decent and which made the West great.

silly article, a total Wan* fest…

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Cho Jinn

..a narrow divide between fundamental change and fundamentalism perhaps?

Cho Jinn
Cho Jinn
1 year ago

Well, one must realize that Trump’s opponents are singularly interested in dissolving the American experiment and subjecting it to the whims of foreign or other unaccountable bureaucracies. The point, then, isn’t so much to support Trump as it is to defeat his enemies, and his fellow republicans are often part of the same necocon / neoliberal problem: a sad state of affairs. Fundamental change is certainly necessary, but our polity won’t let it happen.

David Owsley
David Owsley
1 year ago

A good read and generally correct. The only part I have issue with is the 3rd from last paragraph, which includes the lines “Biden had the nerve to cut America’s losses in Afghanistan, which Trump failed to do. And Biden has waged a trade war against China as vigorously as Trump, but with more sophistication.
This is simply wrong:
1.Trump had arranged a decent and possible win-win exit from Afghanistan. Biden and Blinken dumped that plan and just ran, literally, making a laughing stock of the USA. This possibly even gave Putin the extra nudge he needed to invade Ukraine.
2.Plus, on China, Biden is so in deep with his corrupt ties along with his son – somehow still not in gaol. There is evidence of so much illegal activity of Biden as VP and now, plus the crime family, yet the weak Republicans fail to even mention impeachment. With Trump there was ZERO real evidence yet twice impeached (and cleared).

Last edited 1 year ago by David Owsley
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  David Owsley

Trump does not even know where Afghanistan or Ukraine are?

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Neither did the late Herman Cain, but he still would have made a better President than Hillary Clinton.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

Herman Cain, the pizza guy who died from coronavirus because he refused to wear a mask? LMAO!

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

Herman Cain, the pizza guy who died from coronavirus because he refused to wear a mask? LMAO!

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

the only thing one can say about this comment is ‘it is beyond stupid’.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

what a cerebral, profound comment, professor…

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

what a cerebral, profound comment, professor…

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Neither did the late Herman Cain, but he still would have made a better President than Hillary Clinton.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

the only thing one can say about this comment is ‘it is beyond stupid’.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  David Owsley

Trump does not even know where Afghanistan or Ukraine are?

David Owsley
David Owsley
1 year ago

A good read and generally correct. The only part I have issue with is the 3rd from last paragraph, which includes the lines “Biden had the nerve to cut America’s losses in Afghanistan, which Trump failed to do. And Biden has waged a trade war against China as vigorously as Trump, but with more sophistication.
This is simply wrong:
1.Trump had arranged a decent and possible win-win exit from Afghanistan. Biden and Blinken dumped that plan and just ran, literally, making a laughing stock of the USA. This possibly even gave Putin the extra nudge he needed to invade Ukraine.
2.Plus, on China, Biden is so in deep with his corrupt ties along with his son – somehow still not in gaol. There is evidence of so much illegal activity of Biden as VP and now, plus the crime family, yet the weak Republicans fail to even mention impeachment. With Trump there was ZERO real evidence yet twice impeached (and cleared).

Last edited 1 year ago by David Owsley
Nik Jewell
Nik Jewell
1 year ago

Good article. None of the pseudo-Trumpists nor post-Trumpists are WEF members or WEF Young Global Leaders, I believe, which is a good sign.
I had always assumed until Biden came along that if I lived in the US I would vote Democrat, but Biden has been a much worse president for the world than Trump, and we have yet to find out the full truth about his connections with, and the activities of, Metabiota in Ukraine (especially pertinent given the eye-opening Expose story from March 31st, which people are only just becoming aware of after Redacted covered it last night).
I do have a soft spot for DeSantis for his handling of Covid, and his anti-globalist stance, and would vote for him if he stood against Biden in the next election were I a US citizen.
I’ve seen quite a few clips of Hawley in action recently and he is a pretty impressive performer.
I fear though that the fragmentation in the Republicans that you describe will lead to another Biden victory, a man now patently unfit for office on health grounds and just the puppet of the deep state actors who control him.

Last edited 1 year ago by Nik Jewell
Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Nik Jewell

If Biden wins then surely there’s a good chance he’ll die in office. In which case the VP candidate is the one to keep an eye on.

R Kays
R Kays
1 year ago

Biden has already “died” in office. A semi-automated mannequin bumbling his way along as his Handlers direct him. Dangerous to no one and to everyone all at once. Be very afraid of a Biden 2024 presidency.

R Kays
R Kays
1 year ago

Biden has already “died” in office. A semi-automated mannequin bumbling his way along as his Handlers direct him. Dangerous to no one and to everyone all at once. Be very afraid of a Biden 2024 presidency.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Nik Jewell

Any time anybody uses the term “deep state” it is time to dismiss them as just another right-wing paranoid.

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Really? Define “interagency consensus.”

Then give me the name of the “whistleblower” who precipitated President Trump’s first impeachment.

Nik Jewell
Nik Jewell
1 year ago

Never voted for a right-wing party in my life.

David Yetter
David Yetter
1 year ago

What precisely do you have against the Turkish short-hand for the indisputable fact that permanent bureaucracies, and especially the intelligence services, act in their own guild interests often against those of the government as a whole and even more frequently against those of the citizenry who elected that government?

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Really? Define “interagency consensus.”

Then give me the name of the “whistleblower” who precipitated President Trump’s first impeachment.

Nik Jewell
Nik Jewell
1 year ago

Never voted for a right-wing party in my life.

David Yetter
David Yetter
1 year ago

What precisely do you have against the Turkish short-hand for the indisputable fact that permanent bureaucracies, and especially the intelligence services, act in their own guild interests often against those of the government as a whole and even more frequently against those of the citizenry who elected that government?

Simon Blanchard
Simon Blanchard
1 year ago
Reply to  Nik Jewell

If Biden wins then surely there’s a good chance he’ll die in office. In which case the VP candidate is the one to keep an eye on.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago
Reply to  Nik Jewell

Any time anybody uses the term “deep state” it is time to dismiss them as just another right-wing paranoid.

Nik Jewell
Nik Jewell
1 year ago

Good article. None of the pseudo-Trumpists nor post-Trumpists are WEF members or WEF Young Global Leaders, I believe, which is a good sign.
I had always assumed until Biden came along that if I lived in the US I would vote Democrat, but Biden has been a much worse president for the world than Trump, and we have yet to find out the full truth about his connections with, and the activities of, Metabiota in Ukraine (especially pertinent given the eye-opening Expose story from March 31st, which people are only just becoming aware of after Redacted covered it last night).
I do have a soft spot for DeSantis for his handling of Covid, and his anti-globalist stance, and would vote for him if he stood against Biden in the next election were I a US citizen.
I’ve seen quite a few clips of Hawley in action recently and he is a pretty impressive performer.
I fear though that the fragmentation in the Republicans that you describe will lead to another Biden victory, a man now patently unfit for office on health grounds and just the puppet of the deep state actors who control him.

Last edited 1 year ago by Nik Jewell
J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

A really interesting article. Bring on the post-Trumpists, I say. We need a new political model for the US. The old ideas, and the current gerontocrats who enforce them, are no longer fit for purpose.
Unfortunately, the hardcore left in the Democratic party sense that post-Trumpism will be a winning formula, hence the show trial of Trump intended to stir up the fight between left and right. The old order doesn’t die easily.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

There is NO Left in the US, apart from a few crying in the political wilderness like AOC, Sanders and Warren.. mostly what you call Left are at best Centrists or Right of Centre. What you call Right is far right, some very far right.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

There is NO Left in the US, apart from a few crying in the political wilderness like AOC, Sanders and Warren.. mostly what you call Left are at best Centrists or Right of Centre. What you call Right is far right, some very far right.

J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

A really interesting article. Bring on the post-Trumpists, I say. We need a new political model for the US. The old ideas, and the current gerontocrats who enforce them, are no longer fit for purpose.
Unfortunately, the hardcore left in the Democratic party sense that post-Trumpism will be a winning formula, hence the show trial of Trump intended to stir up the fight between left and right. The old order doesn’t die easily.

Matt Hindman
Matt Hindman
1 year ago

There are a great many similarities between the Post-Trumpists and the Eisenhower era of the Republican party. It was a time when the party was skeptical of corporate monopolies, supported reasonable social programs, and was pragmatic on foreign policy.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt Hindman

Slightly rose tinted that. Also acquiesced in McCarthyism and continuation of Jim Crow in the South. Ike was regularly criticised for spending too much time on the Golf course, esp in 2nd term.
But same time something also in your point.

Alan B
Alan B
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Ike was the exception to a nearly unbroken line of Democratic party rule in the mid 20th century. New Deal Democrats suborned Jim Crow and they alone could undo it (the northerners, that is, with the aid of northern Republicans) . In Jim Crow states the number of Republicans in office could be counted on one’s fingers.

Last edited 1 year ago by Alan B
Alan B
Alan B
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

Ike was the exception to a nearly unbroken line of Democratic party rule in the mid 20th century. New Deal Democrats suborned Jim Crow and they alone could undo it (the northerners, that is, with the aid of northern Republicans) . In Jim Crow states the number of Republicans in office could be counted on one’s fingers.

Last edited 1 year ago by Alan B
j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Matt Hindman

Slightly rose tinted that. Also acquiesced in McCarthyism and continuation of Jim Crow in the South. Ike was regularly criticised for spending too much time on the Golf course, esp in 2nd term.
But same time something also in your point.

Matt Hindman
Matt Hindman
1 year ago

There are a great many similarities between the Post-Trumpists and the Eisenhower era of the Republican party. It was a time when the party was skeptical of corporate monopolies, supported reasonable social programs, and was pragmatic on foreign policy.

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

The USA would be a healthier wealthier and the world a safer place if Trump had stayed put.

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

The USA would be a healthier wealthier and the world a safer place if Trump had stayed put.

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Here’s the tragedy.

Donald Trump is the most powerful political force in America. There is no one else who can summon 57,000 ordinary Americans to a field in Nowhere, Pennsylvania on a couple of day’s notice. No one.

He also has a couch cushion mind, one that accepts the impression of the last person who sat on it.

Finally, he has a tremendous desire for praise and affirmation. Flattery will get you everywhere with him.

So what’s the tragedy?

That the smartest people on our side, the folks like Lind, Vermuele, Vance, Cass, Ahmari, etc. did not recognize and flock to this incredible political force as soon as he appeared in 2015 and guide him into accomplishing the crucial things this dying and decadent empire need reformed.

Instead they dallied and caviled and left him to the mercies of grifters like Bannon and devious corrupt insiders like McConnell.

Tragedy.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

Well, do you really think that Trump was sufficiently biddable and predictable that a cabal of smart people could effectively have taken him over and used him as a puppet? Faced with competing groups of other smart people with different agenda’s trying to do the same thing? Was he not always too unpredictable and thin-skinned, too much of a loose cannon, for anyone to use him to implement a sensible set of policies? The president does have a lot of input in what policies end up being followed, after all.
I have seen it claimed that the policies of Reagan were effectively devised by his underlings – which would certainly explain how a man who never demonstrated a deep understanding of matters could get so impressive results. But Reagan, at a minimum, seems to have had the talent to select a good people, and to know whom to trust and which general directions to push. Which would have been enough to make him a successful president. Trump has hardly shown those talents.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

Well, do you really think that Trump was sufficiently biddable and predictable that a cabal of smart people could effectively have taken him over and used him as a puppet? Faced with competing groups of other smart people with different agenda’s trying to do the same thing? Was he not always too unpredictable and thin-skinned, too much of a loose cannon, for anyone to use him to implement a sensible set of policies? The president does have a lot of input in what policies end up being followed, after all.
I have seen it claimed that the policies of Reagan were effectively devised by his underlings – which would certainly explain how a man who never demonstrated a deep understanding of matters could get so impressive results. But Reagan, at a minimum, seems to have had the talent to select a good people, and to know whom to trust and which general directions to push. Which would have been enough to make him a successful president. Trump has hardly shown those talents.

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

Here’s the tragedy.

Donald Trump is the most powerful political force in America. There is no one else who can summon 57,000 ordinary Americans to a field in Nowhere, Pennsylvania on a couple of day’s notice. No one.

He also has a couch cushion mind, one that accepts the impression of the last person who sat on it.

Finally, he has a tremendous desire for praise and affirmation. Flattery will get you everywhere with him.

So what’s the tragedy?

That the smartest people on our side, the folks like Lind, Vermuele, Vance, Cass, Ahmari, etc. did not recognize and flock to this incredible political force as soon as he appeared in 2015 and guide him into accomplishing the crucial things this dying and decadent empire need reformed.

Instead they dallied and caviled and left him to the mercies of grifters like Bannon and devious corrupt insiders like McConnell.

Tragedy.

Richard Ross
Richard Ross
1 year ago

Hard to see how gifting an 80-billion-dollar military to the Taliban qualifies as “cutting America’s losses in Afghanistan”, but whatever. The main point of this article is well-made.
“a thin orange coating of Trumpwash” – excellent!

Richard Ross
Richard Ross
1 year ago

Hard to see how gifting an 80-billion-dollar military to the Taliban qualifies as “cutting America’s losses in Afghanistan”, but whatever. The main point of this article is well-made.
“a thin orange coating of Trumpwash” – excellent!

Elena Romanova
Elena Romanova
1 year ago

I wonder what makes @Hugh Bryant believe in the equivalency between democracy and nation state. Probably, examples of Russia or China. Germany, Italy or Spain in 1939. The list is endless.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Elena Romanova

One observation is that multi-ethnic empires tend to break up when democracy comes. So do multi-ethnic nations. 1848 Denmark, modern Iraq or Syria, post-war Yugoslavia. For a democracy you need a demos, a people who feel united in some kind of common destiny, and who can jointly control their country. It doees not go the other way, sure. Russia and China are empires, not nation-states, but as you point out there have been dictatorial nation-states too. Still, he is right to note that both multiethnic nations / empires and supranational organisations are bad for democracy.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
1 year ago
Reply to  Elena Romanova

One observation is that multi-ethnic empires tend to break up when democracy comes. So do multi-ethnic nations. 1848 Denmark, modern Iraq or Syria, post-war Yugoslavia. For a democracy you need a demos, a people who feel united in some kind of common destiny, and who can jointly control their country. It doees not go the other way, sure. Russia and China are empires, not nation-states, but as you point out there have been dictatorial nation-states too. Still, he is right to note that both multiethnic nations / empires and supranational organisations are bad for democracy.

Elena Romanova
Elena Romanova
1 year ago

I wonder what makes @Hugh Bryant believe in the equivalency between democracy and nation state. Probably, examples of Russia or China. Germany, Italy or Spain in 1939. The list is endless.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

In the last election Pres. Trump got 75million legit. votes and you write piffle like this.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago

In the last election Pres. Trump got 75million legit. votes and you write piffle like this.

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

Good read that. Balanced and also left one feeling more positive about the post Trump world. Now if we can just get past him…

j watson
j watson
1 year ago

Good read that. Balanced and also left one feeling more positive about the post Trump world. Now if we can just get past him…

Neil Ross
Neil Ross
1 year ago

And the Democrats are United in perfect harmony?

Neil Ross
Neil Ross
1 year ago

And the Democrats are United in perfect harmony?

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
1 year ago

I think it would be better to try to find some order behind the cat-fight of this that and the other Trumpists.
My analysis is that the Democratic Party is the party of the educated class and the underclass, and the Republican Party can’t quite figure out how to become the party of the ordinary middle class.
The big thing is that the ordinary middle class is Not That Interested in Power, or in politics. So it’s hard to get the ordinary middle class riled up for politics, because politics is about the enemy.
And the other side of politics is handing out the loot and plunder. The ordinary middle class is not that interested in loot and plunder, but it sure expects to get its pensions and health care.
Trump, love him or hate him, obviously struck a chord with the ordinary middle class. But how to keep them on the team when they are Not That Interested in Power.
The guy that figures that out will rule for a hundred years.

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
1 year ago

I think it would be better to try to find some order behind the cat-fight of this that and the other Trumpists.
My analysis is that the Democratic Party is the party of the educated class and the underclass, and the Republican Party can’t quite figure out how to become the party of the ordinary middle class.
The big thing is that the ordinary middle class is Not That Interested in Power, or in politics. So it’s hard to get the ordinary middle class riled up for politics, because politics is about the enemy.
And the other side of politics is handing out the loot and plunder. The ordinary middle class is not that interested in loot and plunder, but it sure expects to get its pensions and health care.
Trump, love him or hate him, obviously struck a chord with the ordinary middle class. But how to keep them on the team when they are Not That Interested in Power.
The guy that figures that out will rule for a hundred years.

Sisyphus Jones
Sisyphus Jones
1 year ago

Is it just me or is the author’s prose laboriously unmusical and tedious to read?

Sisyphus Jones
Sisyphus Jones
1 year ago

Is it just me or is the author’s prose laboriously unmusical and tedious to read?

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

Best analysis of American politics I’ve seen in at least a year, and it comes from a British commentary magazine. Sometimes only those outside the forest can actually see it.

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

You can read Lind in Tablet and American Affairs, among other publications. He’s very prolific.

His book, “New Class War, was very good.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I read The New Class War, just didn’t connect the author to this article. Thanks.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago
Reply to  William Hickey

I read The New Class War, just didn’t connect the author to this article. Thanks.

William Hickey
William Hickey
1 year ago

You can read Lind in Tablet and American Affairs, among other publications. He’s very prolific.

His book, “New Class War, was very good.

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
1 year ago

Best analysis of American politics I’ve seen in at least a year, and it comes from a British commentary magazine. Sometimes only those outside the forest can actually see it.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

“(Trump) did not end US involvement in any of the Forever Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya.”
Your statement is not correct. As with ‘the wall’ on the southern border, the USA military thwarted Trump’s attempts to pullback in Syria and Libya…and when Trump left office he had been working on an Afghan withdrawal which was stalled when Trump realized that the Taliban weren’t going to honor the deal that was being laid down. Ironically, just this week, Biden blamed Trump for the withdrawal. The phrase ‘ dishonest doofus’ for Biden comes to mind; Biden signed over 50 executive orders during his first month as President negating Trump’s four years, yet he did not redefine Trump’s Afghan deal, but instead went forward with the pullout in a most egregious way and then had the gaul to blame Trump.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

“(Trump) did not end US involvement in any of the Forever Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya.”
Your statement is not correct. As with ‘the wall’ on the southern border, the USA military thwarted Trump’s attempts to pullback in Syria and Libya…and when Trump left office he had been working on an Afghan withdrawal which was stalled when Trump realized that the Taliban weren’t going to honor the deal that was being laid down. Ironically, just this week, Biden blamed Trump for the withdrawal. The phrase ‘ dishonest doofus’ for Biden comes to mind; Biden signed over 50 executive orders during his first month as President negating Trump’s four years, yet he did not redefine Trump’s Afghan deal, but instead went forward with the pullout in a most egregious way and then had the gaul to blame Trump.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
1 year ago

Hawley, Rubio and Vance…. a gallery of opportunistic lowlives who exemplify the moral failure of the Republican Party. In 1874, cartoonist Thomas Nast used the elephant as a symbol of “the Republican vote” standing on the edge of a pit. Might as well have been 2023/24.

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago

So what happens to the evangelical block in all this? And other culture warriors?

Walter Schwager
Walter Schwager
1 year ago

So what happens to the evangelical block in all this? And other culture warriors?

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago

Trump sounded different, but actually he didn’t do anything much that was different. Then he came dangerously near to subverting the constitution

Reagan was the great reformer in the true spirit of the Republic and in spite of what Mr L8nd seems to think, won a second term, and via G Bush, a third. That does suggest a reasonable degree of support.

Unlike Dangerous Don, who lost. And if he wins in 2024, it will be through the utter stupidity of Jeopardy Joe.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago

Trump sounded different, but actually he didn’t do anything much that was different. Then he came dangerously near to subverting the constitution

Reagan was the great reformer in the true spirit of the Republic and in spite of what Mr L8nd seems to think, won a second term, and via G Bush, a third. That does suggest a reasonable degree of support.

Unlike Dangerous Don, who lost. And if he wins in 2024, it will be through the utter stupidity of Jeopardy Joe.

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago

Yawn…….

Elliott Bjorn
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago

Yawn…….

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

The last election in 2020 is estimated to have cost $14billion, for both the Presidential and Congress elements. The next election cycle will certainly cost more so you probably need to follow the money and ask what do the donors want? A more equal country, a fairer tax system, more onshore well paid jobs etc.? I doubt it somehow.

Plus however neatly you categorise all the various tribes, Trump himself will remain a major factor and he is a sociopath whose special sauce is stirring up division and hatred, grievance politics and forever culture wars. He is still the likeliest Republican nominee, because the other candidates so far are just offering variants on Trump-lite, and would his base and primary voters really prefer that to the real thing? Plus they are all scared stiff of him.

If Trump is the candidate more people will vote Democrat than Republican once more so he can only win by the vagaries of the Electoral College system or trying to steal the election again.

Whatever happens, I don’t see the sunlit uplands the author hopes for, as I don’t see a Republican Party rejecting Trumpism and the forever culture wars any time soon. While they and their voters think dead kids and equally forever school shootings, just as one example, are an acceptable outcome of ‘owning the libs’ I don’t see the meeting of minds on the best way forward for everyone which would be required.

Sisyphus Jones
Sisyphus Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Do you consider the trans/gender debate to be part of the culture wars and if so, in what way is Trump responsible for the conflict between the opposing sides? Has Trump been diagnosed as a sociopath by a psychiatrist, are you the psychiatrist who diagnosed him, and is he currently undergoing treatment?

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Sisyphus Jones

The trans/gender debate is complex and both sides pretend there are simple all encompassing solutions, but do I think politicians on the right use it to demonise others as part of a culture war, then yes I do.

I would be interested why you think Trump doesn’t demonstrate all the characteristics of a classic sociopath, because I think he is a perfect fit.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Minus 14! Back to Twitter with you JM!

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Shouldn’t you be out cottaging, Uncle Monty?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Come, come, even you can do better than that surely?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

slip em on like a well worn sea boot, I say….

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Come, come, even you can do better than that surely?

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

slip em on like a well worn sea boot, I say….

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago

Shouldn’t you be out cottaging, Uncle Monty?

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

There should be no transgender debate. It’s very simple: men can’t be women. The fact that there is even debate on this issue is a damning indictment on how how soft-minded we’ve become.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

And yet shockingly there is, because transgender people exist, but in the same world as narrow minded bigots such as yourself.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

You are a’guest’ over here JM, and you should remember that.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The sort of man who cleans his car ” of a Sunday”…!!!!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago

The sort of man who cleans his car ” of a Sunday”…!!!!!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Snip snip and Bob’s your Autie, Joanna dear…

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

You are a’guest’ over here JM, and you should remember that.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Snip snip and Bob’s your Autie, Joanna dear…

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Julian Farrows

And yet shockingly there is, because transgender people exist, but in the same world as narrow minded bigots such as yourself.

Sisyphus Jones
Sisyphus Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

John Murray, you answered one of my questions. Would you please answer the others.

Last edited 1 year ago by Sisyphus Jones
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Minus 14! Back to Twitter with you JM!

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

There should be no transgender debate. It’s very simple: men can’t be women. The fact that there is even debate on this issue is a damning indictment on how how soft-minded we’ve become.

Sisyphus Jones
Sisyphus Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

John Murray, you answered one of my questions. Would you please answer the others.

Last edited 1 year ago by Sisyphus Jones
Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago
Reply to  Sisyphus Jones

For all whom are infected with any stage of TDS, Trump is everything from a sociopath to the reincarnation of Hitler himself.

John Murray
John Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Sisyphus Jones

The trans/gender debate is complex and both sides pretend there are simple all encompassing solutions, but do I think politicians on the right use it to demonise others as part of a culture war, then yes I do.

I would be interested why you think Trump doesn’t demonstrate all the characteristics of a classic sociopath, because I think he is a perfect fit.

Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago
Reply to  Sisyphus Jones

For all whom are infected with any stage of TDS, Trump is everything from a sociopath to the reincarnation of Hitler himself.

Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Sociopath(noun): a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience.
So someone who is able to garner widespread populist support is anti-social ey? You could have gone with arrogant or cocky and those would fit but those don’t have that same hateful sounding tone that sociopath does, do they? This reads like as if you have a slight case of TDS.

Sisyphus Jones
Sisyphus Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  John Murray

Do you consi