Thursday, 6 March 2025

"What if people with 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' in 2016 were right about pretty much everything, but premature about the timing?"


"What if people with “Trump Derangement Syndrome” in 2016 were right about pretty much everything," asks Nick Catoggio, "but premature about the timing?"

The Pax Americana is in flames and burned almost beyond recognition. And with a majority in both Houses of Congress willingly removing the Executive's constitutional guardrails against more destruction—politically, economically, globally—it sure does seem like Trump 2.0 is "shaping up to be what doomsayers thought his first term would be."

Yikes!

Just look:
  • Trump will appoint a Cabinet of lunatics. He did try in Trump 1.0. But eventually almost all left in a fit of sanity, leaving only their distaste at the buffoon. 
  • Not so this term, in which "Kash Patel is the Senate-confirmed head of the FBI, joining embarrassments like Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as America’s key policymakers."
  • Trump will engage in grotesque corruption. Trump 1.0 did try, but that pales into insignificance compared to "the breathtaking grifts he’s running now. Just yesterday, he announced a new 'U.S. Crypto Reserve,' a blatant scam to use taxpayer money to boost the value of investments held by his crypto-bro fans. 
  • Meanwhile, the main bureaucratic 'reform' initiative in his administration is being run by a mega-billionaire with immense financial interests in industries regulated by the very agencies whose databases he’s been rummaging through for weeks."
Also: 
  • Trump will let grudges and vendettas drive his policies. Check: To a degree unmatched in his first presidency, Trump’s new government brazenly divides politics into friends and enemies. Friends show their appreciation; enemies are apt to lose every public privilege that it’s within his power to deny them.
  • Trump will govern chaotically and malevolently. Check: "never did the first President Trump embark on a policy project as haphazard and destructive as DOGE, and not until Election Day 2020 did he do anything as nakedly malicious as pardoning violent loyalists."
  • Trump will destroy NATO and the American-led international order. Check: "It took until his second term, specifically this past Friday, for him to fully immolate the United States’ credibility as leader of the free world."
Check, check, and check again.

Trump 2.0, summarises Catoggio,
is what you get when you take Trump 1.0 and subtract nearly every element of accountability. Since his first term in office, the president has gained a considerable degree of legal impunity from the Supreme Court, almost limitless political impunity from his supporters and the cowards in Congress who represent them, absolute administrative impunity from the slavish cronies with whom he’s staffed his government, and electoral impunity from the fact that, one way or another, he’ll never face voters again. ...
    And so, six weeks in, Trump’s second term as president already looks like the sum of all fears that [never-Trumpers] felt nine years ago. If there ever were such a thing as irrational 'Trump Derangement Syndrome,' it died in the Oval Office on Friday.
You'll remember what happened then? You know, that the Western Alliance was split asunder  on national television in a fit of Ukraine-splaining”?
Shaking down Ukraine for mineral interests had a distinct Trump 1.0 feel, not unlike when he demanded that allies with U.S. troops stationed on their territory increase their payments to Washington. Because he perceives no strategic American interest in allying with liberal nations, he needs to believe that it’s in our financial interest to justify continuing that alliance. He’s a famously transactional politician; if you want something from him, you need to hand him some sort of victory, ideally involving cash.
    But dressing down Zelensky publicly on Friday had more of a Trump 2.0 feel. It wasn’t about finances. If it had been, Trump wouldn’t have refused to proceed with the minerals deal after things went south in the Oval Office. It was about 'respect.' Zelensky didn’t show enough of it, supposedly, and that was reason enough for the president and vice president to burn down the transatlantic alliance that’s prevailed since World War II on live television.
    If I had told you in 2016 that America would switch sides in a major war involving Russia and part of the reason would be that the guy we’re allied with didn’t wear a suit to a meeting, you would have accused me of the most hysterical case of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' you’d ever seen. Yet that’s what happened.
Yes, Orange Man really is Bad.

Really Bad.  You might even say: deranged.

I can't help but think back to 2016 when life-long Republican, the late humorist PJ O'Rourke endorsed Hillary Clinton.: 
I am endorsing Hillary, and all her lies and all her empty promises. It's the second-worst thing that can happen to this country, ... She's wrong about absolutely everything. But she's wrong within normal parameters.

2 comments:

Tom Hunter said...

273,000 views in the last 30 days. The click-baiting's really working well.

Duncan Bayne said...

The problem with O'Rourke's endorsement is that "wrong within normal parameters" *gave* us Trump.

Normal Presidents have normalised disregarding the Constitution by reserving powers for the Federal Govt. through court stacking, threats, and executive orders, instead of Constitutional amendments (see the NLRB, EPA, etc.).

https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/who-we-are/our-history/1937-act-held-constitutional

Normal Presidents have normalised lying to the public to such a degree that the US went to war on false pretenses numerous times, and at least in one case without an actual declaration of war, in a manner that vastly expanded Executive power.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ron_Paul%27s_Iraq_Speech

Normal Presidents have normalised corruption and cronyism to a staggering degree, such that the revolving door between Congress and industry is seen as unremarkable by most.

https://www.vox.com/2019/6/19/18683550/capitol-hill-revolving-door-in-one-chart

Normal Presidents have so disillusioned voters that they stayed home in their millions at the last election, of the opinion that neither of the choices they were offered was worth their vote.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-11-15/how-many-people-didnt-vote-in-the-2024-election

All Trump had to do to destroy what was left of the American Republic was to seize the levers that had been built and oiled by his predecessors, and move them a notch further. Yes, he and his administration are qualitatively different from any that have come before, but sometimes you get to qualitative differences by incremental quantitative differences.

If the US wants rid of Trump and his ilk, they can't have more any more Normal Presidents. They need Good Presidents.

The question is: can either party produce such a candidate, and, would people *actually* vote for them, if it meant giving up "their side's" unconstitutional boondoggles?

For the sake of the rest of the world, I hope the answer is "yes, and yes".