For me, this paragraph sums it up:
_Several campaign officials had told me, throughout the spring and summer, how excited they were about working in the next Trump White House. Now those same people were telling me—as paperwork was being distributed internally to begin the process of placing personnel on the transition team and in the prospective administration—that they’d had a change of heart. The past three months had been the most unpleasant of their careers. Win or lose, they said, they were done with the chaos of Donald Trump—even if the nation was not. _
They had to be right next to Trump to realize how toxic he is. How voluntarily blind can you be?
They’re gonna save themselves (of course), but will they do anything to save the country from Trump? No, of course not, that would require a spine.
Dude. Killer piece. So many inner-circle first-hand accounts here. Source density is off the charts: details, quotes, no fluff, just nonstop mayhem.
I seriously had no idea how much those close to Trump truly detest him. Why did I assume they were mostly rabid devotees? But no one respects him, and clearly many no longer even fear him, so I take it they either expect his downfall or want it so badly they’re willing to risk anything for it.
And maybe it’s not even heroism. At least, no one in this story displays a shred of virtue. These are backbiting cynical bastards, a carousel of political thugs. That really makes reading this piece feel like watching a ruthless mobster’s former crew participate in a ritual assassination.
So, if you’re in need of some catharsis: first vote, but then come back and bogart this article. It’s the good shit.
It’s a long read, but it’s a damn good one.
You’re not kidding. I feel like I have actual real reason to permit a modicum of hope now.
Now everybody capitalize on their fumble and vote!
As a non-american, somehow this article rubs me the wrong way. I have a suspicion that all the talk about public relation disasters and staffers worried about their candidate‘s reputation does not accurately portrait what is really going on there. To me it looks like everything that happened including the MSG shitshow was absolutely the way they wanted it to go. It’s a page out of the fascist playbook and it uses the same tactics that have been proven successful since Germany 1933. The explicit goal is to strengthen the collective bonds with voters who already made their decision and to kick it up a notch at the same time. They don’t give a shit about angering Puerto Rican voters or even maintaining a modicum of decency in general. They are trying to provoke a mania in their own base that spirals out of control and so far it works pretty well for them. This is an endgame strategy. The only thing that is not going according to plan is that their candidate is falling apart mentally and it’s a race against time to get him back into office. Or is it, Mr. Vance?
I could of course be completely wrong on this and I would be more than happy to be proven wrong.
I could of course be completely wrong on this and I would be more than happy to be proven wrong
Actually, that feeling of being rubbed the wrong way (even in the metaphorical sense) is inherently subjective. So, it’s not something I or anyone else can disprove to you or “prove wrong”.
As a non-american, somehow this article rubs me the wrong way.
I guess, it seems like a whitewashing here, that the folks on the campaign aren’t as evil as we’d otherwise assume (e.g. all of them being racist Nazis)?
You’re correct that we shouldn’t assume otherwise - it’d be dangerous to bend over backwards and assume they aren’t Nazis if they really are - but at the same time, it’s plausible that there are still some “adults in the room” in the campaign, along the lines of https://www.vox.com/world/2018/3/14/17114444/rex-tillerson-fired-rexit-trump-adults
I have a suspicion that all the talk about public relation disasters and staffers worried about their candidate‘s reputation does not accurately portrait what is really going on there.
I think the reason this sounds reasonable is because a lot of the folks on the GOP campaign are longtime GOP folks, who know - or at least have certain long-held beliefs about - how this conventionally works.
The other aspect at play here is that they jumped onto MAGA for entirely self serving purposes even though this doesn’t reflect what they really thing.
Or is it, Mr. Vance?
Interesting you bring him up. In some ways he’s the perfect example of this.
Vance in 2012,
Republicans … their policy proposals are … or openly hostile to non-whites.
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20140305032241/http://centerforworldconflictandpeace.blogspot.com/2012_11_01_archive.html via https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/17/politics/jd-vance-delete-2012-blog-post-attacking-gop-anti-immigrant-rhetoric/index.html
Vance in 2024,
J.D. Vance tripled down on his debunked claims that Haitian immigrants are killing and eating local pets in Springfield, Ohio, while also admitting, ‘If I Have to Create Stories… That’s What I’m Going to Do’
To me it looks like everything that happened including the MSG shitshow was absolutely the way they wanted it to go. It’s a page out of the fascist playbook and it uses the same tactics that have been proven successful since Germany 1933.
I think this best describes the candidate. But not everyone on the campaign is going to share these views, as it were.
The explicit goal is to strengthen the collective bonds with voters who already made their decision and to kick it up a notch at the same time.
But this is not really how one wins. You need a broad coalition backing you to win - playing to a smaller base may make them feel good, but it’s not going to bring enough folks backing you to the polls on election day. And again a lot of the folks on the GOP campaign are longtime GOP folks, who know how this conventionally works, so this mean they’d have the understanding (correct or not) that this not the direction a winning GOP campaign should take.
They don’t give a shit about angering Puerto Rican voters or even maintaining a modicum of decency in general. They are trying to provoke a mania in their own base that spirals out of control
and so far it works pretty well for them.
Citation needed. In fact there’s some evidence that (after a delay in the polling to reflect the latest updates and information) this really hurt them. See for example, https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/ or https://www.axios.com/2024/11/03/harris-iowa-poll-trump-women or even https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/election_2024_harris_49_trump_48_in_michigan
This is an endgame strategy.
I’d argue that part of the strategy is for the candidate to campaign with the “principles of restraint and competence” to ensure his re-election. Only then can he do his damage.
Expose this too early and they have the issues I noted above.
The only thing that is not going according to plan is that their candidate is falling apart mentally
Hmm … perhaps he’s failing to restrain himself and exposing this ugly side early, specifically because he’s falling apart mentally? Thus screwing up his own campaign’s endgame?
Hey, thanks for the long and thorough reply. I’m a bit overwhelmed :)
I think the reason this sounds reasonable is because a lot of the folks on the GOP campaign are longtime GOP folks, who know - or at least have certain long-held beliefs about - how this conventionally works.
This is exactly where my doubts come from. The whole piece has the air of “conventional politics“ but at the same time, from an outside perspective, it looks like the whole party has been thoroughly streamlined towards their leader in the past 8 years. And a cult of MAGA would probably not resemble much of traditional politics. It will be interesting to see if they can put a lid on it and return to politics that at the very least appears less crazy and unhinged in case Trump loses the election.
But this is not really how one wins. You need a broad coalition backing you to win - playing to a smaller base may make them feel good, but it’s not going to bring enough folks backing you to the polls on election day.
True, but who is Trump going to convince to switch sides a week before the election? You might as well turn up the rhetoric to 11 and say the quiet part out loud, in order to convince your own base to vote for you.
This is a slippery slope of course, and the outcome could either be losing people with this radicalisation or making sure even more radical people who did not plan to vote show up at the booth. And to deter people from voting for someone else, out of fear. Also, even if it was possible for Trump to extend a hand and suddenly appear reasonable who would believe him after all that happened? I guess he doesn’t have a choice but take the route of last-minute radicalisation. We’ll see how this turns out. Personally I am so sick of seeing the orange conman dominate public discourse worldwide for eight years in a row. It is time to move on and I can only hope the majority of Americans has had enough too.Hey, thanks for the long and thorough reply. I’m a bit overwhelmed :)
Yeah, I think we all are at this point. It’s been a tough election year for everyone.
This is exactly where my doubts come from. The whole piece has the air of “conventional politics“
I can see how someone would see that. For me, the first thing that stood was how unconventional the candidate really is, even compared to his own, presumably super MAGA, team.
but at the same time, from an outside perspective, it looks like the whole party has been thoroughly streamlined towards their leader in the past 8 years.
It really does, doesn’t it? Of course there’s a major contingent that isn’t still - ranging from those who are endorsing Harris to folks like Mitt Romney who believe in a post-MAGA GOP.
And a cult of MAGA would probably not resemble much of traditional politics.
So, we already know what it would look like. The guy is running for re-election, not for first-time election. The simple answer is that this guy went with folks like Rex Tillerson and John Kelly and H.R. McMaster in the first place because the pro-MAGA crowd, while enthusiastic, didn’t have members who could fill in and do these jobs.
True, but who is Trump going to convince to switch sides a week before the election?
Well, certainly not me. SHHHHH, you don’t tell him either!!!
You might as well turn up the rhetoric to 11 and say the quiet part out loud, in order to convince your own base to vote for you.
Except they were already going to turn out for him no matter what happened. So he didn’t need to do that to convince them to get on board - he would have been better off listening to his more traditional advisors and keeping himself restrained to maintain the broadest possible coalition.
This is a slippery slope of course, and the outcome could either be losing people with this radicalisation or making sure even more radical people who did not plan to vote show up at the booth
… and vote for the other candidate (Harris).
Yep, fortunately, he couldn’t do he couldn’t restraint himself, and hopefully not only the US but the whole world benefits when he loses - exactly for the reasons you state above.
It will be interesting to see if they can put a lid on it and return to politics that at the very least appears less crazy and unhinged in case Trump loses the election.
Spoiler alert: This won’t happen. At least not right away. This isn’t the first time - what we saw back in Jan 2021, we have every reason to expect again, and zero reasons not to.
And to deter people from voting for someone else, out of fear.
Sadly, I am seeing on the news that this may already be happening this election, regardless.
Also, even if it was possible for Trump to extend a hand and suddenly appear reasonable who would believe him after all that happened?
So the point of the article, or at least the claim they are trying to make, is to state that the MAGA candidate was doing really well prior to these dog whistles, and at least some folks on his campaign along with some senior traditional Republican strategists attributed it to him having appeared reasonable and not crazy. Then afterwards, the dog whistles ruined things moments before reaching the finish line.
I guess he doesn’t have a choice but take the route of last-minute radicalisation.
Again, the article is claiming he did have a choice - and that he would have been better off not taking this late-minute route. As I wrote earlier this also seems to be backed up somewhat by the polling.
Of course, just because the article claims something doesn’t mean they’re right. A healthy dose of skepticism is reasonable and in this case, warranted. But at least parts of it seem plausible, based on what we know from living under him after he took office in 2017, along with the recent changes happening in the polls for 2024.
We’ll see how this turns out. Personally I am so sick of seeing the orange conman dominate public discourse worldwide for eight years in a row. It is time to move on and I can only hope the majority of Americans has had enough too.
Same here. Remember he lost the popular vote in 2016? So yes, the majority was likely already sick of him back them. And then he lost it by a larger margin in 2020.
I doubt he’d be running in 2028. He’d be older than Biden is now (who is already the oldest US President ever I think), and he’ll likely be incarcerated then too if he’s lost. (Remember, he’s already been convicted of federal crimes, he is just awaiting sentencing - I think November 26 was one expected date).
He smirked at the compliment. “What’s discipline got to do with winning?”
That right there tells me all I ever want to know about Trump and how he sees competition.
great article, thanks for the link
MAKE AMERICA HATE
