Unable to read the article even after giving WaPo my email address as they requested. Now, I will be stuck with their spam forever. I'll just assume the article is more made-up tripe like I've seen from them in the past. I do not believe all of the Constitutional safeguards can be by-passed to allow Trump to become a dictator. He is hated by at 50% of the voters, at least 50% of congress, 70% of the bureaucrats. five members of the Supreme Court and probably most of the upper-level military brass.
I suppose you will say I'm a participant in the groupthink that is exactly what led to the Israeli intelligence failure and could lead to a Trump dictatorship. I will continue to believe that Biden policies are more likely to lead to long-lasting damage to the USA than anything Trump could get away with.
Thanks. Mr. Kagan's comments are similar to my thoughts on the matter, but his approach is to instill fear of Donald Trump and downplay all of the Constitutional safeguards. Most WaPo readers already fear and despise Trump. I don't believe Trump's belligerence will allow him to gain unfettered control of the federal government. I do not buy Mr. Kagan's analogy about doing everything conceivable to prevent destruction of the earth by a comet or meteor. People can be dealt with far more easily than meteors.
Mr. Kagan is most likely correct in saying that Trump will be the Republican nominee. That's not ideal. I wish it weren't so, but it does not make me relish four more years of Biden/Harris. Trump's following is a creation of the media who could not bring themselves to acknowledge the truth in the leadup to the 2016 election. Hillary was a terrible candidate without a chance of winning. Maybe if they had endorsed a moderate candidate like Rubio or Jeb Bush instead of trying to force Hillary Clinton into office just because she's a democrat, we would be better off today.
Interesting post here Steve, (and I liked your previous post 'Will Nikki Turn?' In both posts you quoted other writers (Robert Kagan here, and David French in the other post) who are saying very strongly and urgently that Trump is a threat to democracy. (Kagan paints a particularly stark picture of just how dictatorial things might get with Trump as president).
All this leads me to ask you whether you have rethought a statement you made in a post over a year ago that you thought Trump was more dangerous out of the office (where he isn't constrained by pesky things like laws, rules and the constitution) than in office (as president). My guess would be that Mr. French and Mr. Kagan (along with just about every other pundit both on the left and on the right) would disagree with that previous position of yours.
One other reason I'm motivated to ask about your current thinking on that point is that you doubled down several times on the idea (in subsequent posts). Do you still believe Trump is more dangerous out of office than in office? Thanks.
I love your perception and very relevant, excellent question. It deserves a post for an answer. In short, I believe current events prove out my thought from 2020 more than refute them. Trump, out of office, is much more dangerous, now seeking the office again, still having enormous influence, and if he survives his legal challenges and wins, he will be orders of magnitude worse than if he had won in 2020 and we had endured four more years of his ineptness in the White House. But it's all speculation. I do think if Trump tried to implement Schedule F in 2021 as president he'd have been tied up in litigation for years. I believe his battles with the military and federal agencies would have restrained him much more than his four years of outside the WH, planning and plotting his revenge. I'll noodle this over and do a full post on it when I have time.
Interesting similarities across the article Steve. First the comparison between 10/7 and 9/11 are remarkably alike. Both knew (i believe) and both elected to minimize the threats with the simple premise; "who would dare?"
The answer for me is quite clear in the second comparison between trump and Netanyahu. Both have become more cult-like in their leadership styles and expectations from their followers. The hubris of their actions allowed those charged with the role of our safety and protection to again become minimized.
It is the singe best argument to reform and repair how and who we elect to lead us. Sadly, both Israel and the USA are trapped in hero worship of leaders who have no interest in the big picture and best interests of their country. Their goals are to win re-election...and stay out of jail.
As Jonathan Karl stated: the sourcing of what a second Trump administration would look like is coming from those who worked for him, not from Never Trumpers. It's these members of the previous administration that are saying that the plan is to use acting appointments at all levels; to replace career civil servants with vetted loyalists; to seek retribution against perceived enemies; to allow subordinates to break the law and then pardon them.
Unable to read the article even after giving WaPo my email address as they requested. Now, I will be stuck with their spam forever. I'll just assume the article is more made-up tripe like I've seen from them in the past. I do not believe all of the Constitutional safeguards can be by-passed to allow Trump to become a dictator. He is hated by at 50% of the voters, at least 50% of congress, 70% of the bureaucrats. five members of the Supreme Court and probably most of the upper-level military brass.
I suppose you will say I'm a participant in the groupthink that is exactly what led to the Israeli intelligence failure and could lead to a Trump dictatorship. I will continue to believe that Biden policies are more likely to lead to long-lasting damage to the USA than anything Trump could get away with.
Here. Try this.
https://wapo.st/46D8wKD
Thanks. Mr. Kagan's comments are similar to my thoughts on the matter, but his approach is to instill fear of Donald Trump and downplay all of the Constitutional safeguards. Most WaPo readers already fear and despise Trump. I don't believe Trump's belligerence will allow him to gain unfettered control of the federal government. I do not buy Mr. Kagan's analogy about doing everything conceivable to prevent destruction of the earth by a comet or meteor. People can be dealt with far more easily than meteors.
Mr. Kagan is most likely correct in saying that Trump will be the Republican nominee. That's not ideal. I wish it weren't so, but it does not make me relish four more years of Biden/Harris. Trump's following is a creation of the media who could not bring themselves to acknowledge the truth in the leadup to the 2016 election. Hillary was a terrible candidate without a chance of winning. Maybe if they had endorsed a moderate candidate like Rubio or Jeb Bush instead of trying to force Hillary Clinton into office just because she's a democrat, we would be better off today.
Interesting post here Steve, (and I liked your previous post 'Will Nikki Turn?' In both posts you quoted other writers (Robert Kagan here, and David French in the other post) who are saying very strongly and urgently that Trump is a threat to democracy. (Kagan paints a particularly stark picture of just how dictatorial things might get with Trump as president).
All this leads me to ask you whether you have rethought a statement you made in a post over a year ago that you thought Trump was more dangerous out of the office (where he isn't constrained by pesky things like laws, rules and the constitution) than in office (as president). My guess would be that Mr. French and Mr. Kagan (along with just about every other pundit both on the left and on the right) would disagree with that previous position of yours.
One other reason I'm motivated to ask about your current thinking on that point is that you doubled down several times on the idea (in subsequent posts). Do you still believe Trump is more dangerous out of office than in office? Thanks.
I love your perception and very relevant, excellent question. It deserves a post for an answer. In short, I believe current events prove out my thought from 2020 more than refute them. Trump, out of office, is much more dangerous, now seeking the office again, still having enormous influence, and if he survives his legal challenges and wins, he will be orders of magnitude worse than if he had won in 2020 and we had endured four more years of his ineptness in the White House. But it's all speculation. I do think if Trump tried to implement Schedule F in 2021 as president he'd have been tied up in litigation for years. I believe his battles with the military and federal agencies would have restrained him much more than his four years of outside the WH, planning and plotting his revenge. I'll noodle this over and do a full post on it when I have time.
Interesting similarities across the article Steve. First the comparison between 10/7 and 9/11 are remarkably alike. Both knew (i believe) and both elected to minimize the threats with the simple premise; "who would dare?"
The answer for me is quite clear in the second comparison between trump and Netanyahu. Both have become more cult-like in their leadership styles and expectations from their followers. The hubris of their actions allowed those charged with the role of our safety and protection to again become minimized.
It is the singe best argument to reform and repair how and who we elect to lead us. Sadly, both Israel and the USA are trapped in hero worship of leaders who have no interest in the big picture and best interests of their country. Their goals are to win re-election...and stay out of jail.
Go figure?
As Jonathan Karl stated: the sourcing of what a second Trump administration would look like is coming from those who worked for him, not from Never Trumpers. It's these members of the previous administration that are saying that the plan is to use acting appointments at all levels; to replace career civil servants with vetted loyalists; to seek retribution against perceived enemies; to allow subordinates to break the law and then pardon them.
Civil Service reforms enacted in the 1880’s were to avoid this sort of political strife.