Side note: Jack posted it earlier, but when I saw the article at the NYT, I was livid. Trump was told that it was illegal to just shoot migrants, which he called for. He wanted to do that. So he kept trying to figure out ways to end this manufactured border “crisis” that were legal, and was told, repeatedly, “No, Mr. President,” you can’t do that.” He changed to shooting them in the legs, electrifying the fence, putting flesh-ripping spikes on the top of the wall, adding moats with snakes and alligators in them.

The man is a sadist and a monster.

At this point, going back to the topic above, the main reason why he keeps his base gives support for some recent studies on levels of stubbornness in humans. Those right of center, ideologically, the studies showed, tend to dig in even more when they’re confronted with facts. As in, they cling even harder to their stances, if criticized. Left of center people tend to reassess and give up on older positions, if the facts warrant this.

Obviously, these studies were about aggregate behavior, not individual. Exceptions galore exist and are assumed.

In my view, people are attributing far too much to Trump himself, as far as his “base” is concerned. He inherited the vast majority of it, simply by being the GOP standard bearer. The same people who voted for Romney, McCain, Dubya, Bush Sr, etc. etc. voted for Trump. If they’re old enough, the same people who voted for Reagan, Nixon, Goldwater and so on.

There’s no doubt in my mind that if Trump had run as an independent, he would have been crushed by the GOP nominee. If Kasich or Rubio, for instance, had won, they would have had at least as large a group of diehards behind them, if not larger.

Trump, on his own, brings very few new people into the GOP, and he loses more than most would to the Dems.

This is why I think the Dems make a huge mistake if they think the answer is to chase after Trump voters. They’re not going to vote Dem anyway. Smarter way to win in 2020? Go after the people who staid home who lean left. They’re virtually the only ones available in the “undecided” column.

Quick follow up. Please know that none of this is about you. I kinda feel I have to say that again, cuz I know I sometimes react harshly to posts like this. It’s a bad habit.

;>(

In no way, shape or form am I trying to get you to stop posting the stuff you think is important here. The more the better. I love reading your take on things. Always have. That’s not gonna change.

Hope all is well in the Mountain State.

Not sure if you remember this, WV. But old Wallace Stevens is among my favorite poets, evah. I think he was, in fact, the greatest American poet of the 20th century, and in the running for greatest English language poet of that century.

I have his collected poems and prose, in a fine edition from The Library of America, plus this or that paperback. And recently purchased and read a really great bio by Paul Mariani.

I recommend it highly:

https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Whole-Harmonium/Paul-Mariani/9781451624380

Theoretical, and controversial, but some studies say meditation is kind of similar in its effects. Helps bring the conscious mind in sync with the subconscious. Again, that’s the theory. Religious ecstasy does this as well, which also can be “practiced.” Buddhists do this daily. Born again Christians say it happens the moment they accept Jesus as their savior. But if they’re not mystic adepts, it never happens to them again.

(Have always been fascinated by mysticism. Included much about it in a coupla of my unpublished novels. Well, all of my novels are unpublished!)

Psychedelics would be another route to the same thing, though far more intense and direct. A short cut of sorts? Merging the conscious and unconscious minds is likely pretty damn healthy, but it also likely needs guidance . . . Too bad Carlos Castaneda is no longer alive. At least not on this astral plane.

One of my favorite poets and writers in general is Henri Michaux, the Belgian genius. He experimented with mescaline and other drugs and wrote about that. Painted under the influence too.

I went to a sports bar to watch most of the game. Wish I hadn’t. Though there were a couple points in the game that brought me some joy. The joy quickly ebbed away, though, after this or that interception, missed tackle, missed block, etc. etc.

I may end up trying to get the Sunday Ticket earlier than I had planned — hoping to save money suspending the service a bit longer, etc.

In a nutshell, the Rams embarrassed themselves. That might have been their worst defensive performance in ten years. Can’t remember the last time they tackled so poorly. Just atrocious. And Goff was like a rookie again, flailing away, though his line gave him little help. Poor performance on the line is going to lead most QBs into major errors. But I think a lot of that still falls on Goff. And the coaches. And the staff. etc.

Trap game? Were they looking past the Bucs to Seattle? I have no idea. But they better get a handle on this and soon, or they’re not even going to reach the playoffs. Yes, they have great talent . . . perhaps top three in the league overall. But sloppy play can negate that against most teams, and the Bucs were hungrier this Sunday.

Anyone else think the guy who speared Peters in the endzone should have been flagged, fined and thrown out of the game for that?

Players Only meetings are warranted, regardless.

I’d add this kind of thing to the impeachment articles:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/29/ireland-paid-trump-resort-100k-for-hosting-officers-protecting-him

Excerpt:

Donald Trump’s resort on the west coast of Ireland was paid €100,000 (£89,000) by the Irish state to provide food to police officers protecting the US president during a two-night visit this year, it has emerged.

The Trump-owned hotel and golf course at Doonbeg received the largest slice of a bill for accommodation and food that came to more than €900,000. The expenditure covered police deployed across County Clare in June.

Trump’s visit to Doonbeg was his first since he was elected president in 2016 and involved about 3,820 members of the Irish police service, the Garda Síochána, working overtime at a cost of €7.49m.

Again, previous presidents at least had the decency to wait until after they left office to cash in.

Excellent post, Zooey.

I favor impeachment, as mentioned already. In fact, I was for it long before this call came out. I think the Dems should have begun the inquiry on Day One, after they took the majority. But they were too afraid to be aggressive and actually fight tyranny. It seems that now, with this call, and the whistleblower report, they just have no other choice.

Trump has committed more than enough to do this, from kids in cages, to moving funds appropriated for schools to build his racist wall instead, to his unprecedented roll backs of our already too weak environmental standards, etc. etc. He’s also broken the law several times via emoluments and obstruction of justice. Even though Mueller’s sad, awkward testimony basically ended that stream of inquiry, his report is clear about Trump’s lies and obstruction. At least ten examples of his and his administration’s breaking the law concerning that.

The list is endless of his abuses of power, his cabinet’s grifting, his own self-dealing, his nepotism, his wheeling and dealing to enrich himself and his kids, etc. etc.

America has actually never dealt with such breadth of corruption before. Yes, we have a history of shady politics and shady politicians that rivals the worst of the worst around the world. But Trump is sui generis when it comes to this, and no president, at least in the last 100 years, has been so brazen in enriching himself while in office. Others have at least had the decency to wait until they left.

;>)

Trump, if he stays out of jail, will do both, which will be a first in our history. Slashing his own taxes, using taxpayer dollars to cash in now, and then the usual book deals and speeches and media plans once he’s out, etc.

It’s time to take a stand against this, regardless of outcome.

wv wrote:

How bout the Dems impeach the Pentagon.

w
v
==============================
Caitlin:https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/want-to-save-the-environment-de-fund-the-pentagon-c51f01b6f8ab

Want to save the Environment? De-Fund the Pentagon
Caitlin Johnstone

“…And that’s just greenhouse gas emissions, which the Pentagon’s poisonous effects on our environment are in no way limited to. As journalist Whitney Webb highlighted in an excellent article for Mintpress News about the wildly neglected subject of the US military’s ecological toxicity: “Producing more hazardous waste than the five largest US chemical companies combined, the US Department of Defense has left its toxic legacy throughout the world in the form of depleted uranium, oil, jet fuel, pesticides, defoliants like Agent Orange and lead, among others.”

Webb documents how the US “has conducted more nuclear weapons tests than all other nations combined”, how US military interventionism in Iraq “has resulted in the desertification of 90 percent of Iraqi territory, crippling the country’s agricultural industry and forcing it to import more than 80 percent of its food,” and how “US military bases, both domestic and foreign, consistently rank among some of the most polluted places in the world.”

“While the US military’s past environmental record suggests that its current policies are not sustainable, this has by no means dissuaded the US military from openly planning future contamination of the environment through misguided waste disposal efforts,” Webb writes. “Last November, the US Navy announced its plan to release 20,000 tons of environmental ‘stressors,’ including heavy metals and explosives, into the coastal waters of the US Pacific Northwest over the course of this year.”…see link…”

I’m in favor of that, WV. Can we defund the entire empire while we’re at it?

Ya know, this really could be an awesome world for everyone, if we’d get to something like Hagglund’s vision. As long as it’s run for profit, for control, for geopolitical advantage, it won’t be. And we won’t survive as a species for much longer, either.

nittany ram wrote:

I understand why some people don’t see the point of impeaching Trump when there’s little chance of him being removed from office.

Polls show that less than half of the country wants him to be impeached. The same was true for Clinton’s impeachment and it backfired on the Republicans. His approval rating shot up to 60% as a result. Impeachment could be the best thing that could happen to Trump.

Another way to look at it, Nittany:

Impeachment may well curb his worst impulses, which include using the power of his office to smear his opponents and try to put them in jail. Note the recent disclosure of the war against Obama state department officials and yet another investigation of Clinton and her email/server. They’ve retroactively classified relevant information, thus threatening dozens if not hundreds of former civil servants with jail time. This is 1984 stuff, and it will only get worse if Trump is set free and feels no restraints.

Remember, he made that call to Ukraine just a day after Mueller’s testimony landed with a thud in Congress, which Trump took as releasing him from further worries.

As for the effects of impeachment on Clinton and the Republicans. Did they really pay a price? They won the next election for the White House, and had majority control of Congress for most of the next eight years. I don’t see it as backfiring on the GOP at all.

wv wrote:

“…Trump may have withheld military aid to seek a probe into Biden, but it is hypocritically being framed by Democrats as an abuse of power out of the ordinary. But it is very much ordinary…”
=====================

Well, I just dont get yall’s take on impeachment. Cuz if you agree with that quote up there, from the article up there, I just dont see how you can think Dems voting yes on Impeachment, and Reps voting no on Impeachment leads to…anything. I just dont see how any of it changes anything in today’s political landscape.

I mean read that quote slowly. Let the consequences of it sink in.

w
v

This is just me, WV:

I don’t accept that quote as logical or right. I don’t think it’s a valid conclusion, given the premise. First off, it’s simply not the norm for a sitting president to use taxpayer dollars as bait, threat, carrot and stick to go after political opponents in the upcoming election. Second, the Dems aren’t responsible, now, today, for what other administrations have done in the past. Each new Congress, each new Executive branch, each new Judiciary, is responsible for their own actions, not those of others in prior times. I don’t believe in “sins of the fathers” other than in the sense that we should learn from them, show humility because of them, and work hard never to repeat them.

But “hypocrisy”? Naww. The Dems gets to focus entirely on Trump’s actions in the here and now, and they should not, ever, not ever, not even remotely, feel afraid to do so simply because previous regimes have acted in bad faith or worse. This is now. That was then.

Just my take.