16 Comments
User's avatar
Chris J. Karr's avatar

Or, Trump is the Boomer embodiment of Ye Olde E-Mail Chain Letters and isn't playing any game, but only reacting to stuff happening in the world the only way he knows how.

The world makes a lot more sense from that lens, as opposed to 11-Dimensional Calvinball. He's making it up as he goes along and lets other people figure out the "why" as they scramble to try and make heads or tails of it all.

Expand full comment
Steve Berman's avatar

There’s some truth in that. But he does plan. There is no way his history or even 4 presidential campaigns makes sense if he was totally reactionary.

Expand full comment
Curtis Stinespring's avatar

There's probably a fair amount of truth in what you have written so well. I hope I remain physically and mentally able to form a cogent opinion on whether we are better off at the end of President Trump's term. Many people have pre-supposed a bad outcome and are doing their best to make it happen.

Expand full comment
SGman's avatar
7dEdited

From my recollection Trump was already planning his 2nd administration to be far more subject to his whims back in 2020, using Schedule F as one example.

If he had won in 2020 I imagine that MAGA would have been thoroughly encouraged, and the Senate at least would have been in GOP hands.

Expand full comment
Steve Berman's avatar

Yes. He was planning. But the framework and feel was way different in 2020. Now it’s totally a middle finger fest.

Expand full comment
Cameron Sprow's avatar

How long are you and David going to beat the dead horse of Jan. 6th? Trump didn't cause it, the people who were involved did. It's like saying guns kill people. No, they don't, people kill people. Let it go already.

Expand full comment
Steve Berman's avatar

Umm. Beating a dead horse? All I did was mention the date, and what triggered your response? Trump did face a hard reality that day. And he was anything but stable in his actions that day. Look at the urgent and plaintive texts he got from everyone including Sean Hannity and Mike Johnson.

Expand full comment
SGman's avatar

People use guns to kill people, and thus people should be limited in what guns they may use.

Nice and logical, eh?

Expand full comment
Cameron Sprow's avatar

No, because of the 2nd amendment. We are allowed to bear arms, period. There are no limitations in the amendment.

Expand full comment
SGman's avatar

There are limitations to every right.

Expand full comment
Cameron Sprow's avatar

There are no limitations in the language of the amendment. Period

Expand full comment
Jay Berman's avatar

Only how the language and intent of the amendment is interpreted. Not everyone agrees.

Expand full comment
Cameron Sprow's avatar

Of course, but according to the language, if a billionaire wanted a stealth long range bomber, he or she could have one.

Expand full comment