If you are a person who does not want the US to end up as an authoritarian or fascist state, what is the best thing for you to do? I am finding it hard to identify anything that will cause people in leadership roles to make different decisions, because they are driven by money I don't have and greed I don't have the means to indulge. The threat of being voted out of office doesn't seem to phase anyone and their response to protests is to stop appearing publicly and lock protesters up.
Good Morning! I think that protests can still be good because they really do bring attention to the issue. The news stations are always hungry for content and that gives them content. In politics, the classic counter to big money is organizing. Protests are one part of that. So are voter registration, deep canvassing, get out the vote efforts, and more. If everyone could figure out how to double their vote by bringing just one more person, we could do it!
As are many of us, I continue to receive myriads of fundraising emails and texts from candidates from all over the country. I'm 74, on Social Security and my small business (I'm a long-arm quilter) and so do not have much at my disposal. How do I donate the most effectively? I know this is a general question, but specifics in your reply would be most appreciated. Thanks!
If you're in Missouri, I think local candidates and Ann Wagner's house seat are probably the best bets. Otherwise, and this might sound crazy to some, but you should just donate to people you like and whose message you like. Your donations, in this case, are your voice, so you should use them to amplify a voice that you can be proud of and that you think makes a difference. You can do that by spreading around what you have to multiple candidates, or going all in on one you love. As a candidate who was not supported by big money, I can tell you right now that thousands of people making small dollar donations is the only way that type of candidate can survive and I am very grateful to you and so many others for making that happen.
Wow do I have an answer to your very important question! Please go to www.TurnUp.US where you will find the most effective operation run by former Harvard students who are registering and turning out tens of thousands of educated younger voters (mostly young women and of color) only in the 28 TRULY COMPETITIVE congressional election districts! These new registrations are based on protecting abortion rights, gun safety and fighting climate change, all of which are very important to younger potential voters 18 to 29! But the really effective key to their success is that they are involved significantly and effectively only in these 28 TRULY EFFECTIVE congressional districts rather than waste time and money in the remainder of congressional districts which are simply not competitive!! Thank you!
Lucas, my husband and I are Air Force vets (27 years each). We were furious, and kinda dumbstruck, when Donald Trump pulled us out of the Iran nuclear deal in his first term. We are hoping he will keep negotiating and not get us in a conflict with Iran this time. As a vet, what are your thoughts on this issue?
It seems that, as expected, the President wasn't able to resist the opportunity to bomb someone. Honestly, I can't say I blame him specifically, I don't think we've had a President in the 21st century who has been able to resist the allure of bombing someone. And for everyone who claims Trump was anti-war in his first term, he expanded all of our conflicts, didn't get out of any of them, and was probably the most proud I've ever seen him when he killed that Iranian general.
I think the real question now is what Iran does in response (they will have to do something) and if it is measured enough or ineffective enough that it doesn't give Trump an excuse to escalate. Because one thing I think we can all be sure of is that all of his supposedly anti-war Republicans will roll over for him if he wants a war.
Hello Lucas, I believe that one of the Democrats biggest mistakes during the Biden administration was not to fix the border situation and one of Kamala's biggest mistakes was not admitting that the situation was a disaster, including for the refugees themselves. Now we have to deal with the cruel, inhumane deportation tragedy. Which brings me to my question. Do you believe that the Democratic party has or has ever articulated a coherent immigration/ refugee policy? If so, what is it?
Hi Janet! No, I don't think they ever have. They haven't even really tried anything. And looking the other way has been an absolute disaster that, as you mentioned, led to an even worse situation not just at the border, but across the country. The border eventually became a top issue for people everywhere, including in blue cities. I think it was the biggest factor in the red wave this year.
The immigration bill in 2024 that was squashed by the Republicans made many positive and significant changes to the US immigration policy. Most importantly, it allowed the Border Patrol to hire people to decide whether asylum claims were valid. That would have the cycle from 3 to 4 years to 3 to 4 months.
Thank you Lucas for confirming that the Democrats do not have an immigration policy! I agree that the immigration bill might have helped, but it seemed to be a reaction to the Republicans not a coherent and clear policy. I think the Democrats (and here I should say "we" since I have been a loyal Democrat all my voting life) are afraid to say "no open borders" or that the US needs to determine how many immigrants can beneficially admit and for what economic sector. To me, refugees are different than immigrants and as the richest country in the Western hemisphere, the US should be focusing more on trying to help the Central American people who are suffering under collapsing governments and oligarchic rule. (Not collaborating with dictators in order to imprison people.) If the Democrats fought the internal battle and reached a consensus that could be articulated to the American people, I think they would find that most Americans are pretty compassionate and don't hate people from other countries. They just don't want chaos.
What do you think the GOP’s endgame is? They’re ignoring climate change, gutting social safety nets, and driving out the very workforce society depends on. I sometimes imagine it in apocalyptic terms—white nationalist elites ruling over a disenfranchised underclass doing all the labor for scraps. It’s all coming for everyone eventually, so what exactly are they "striving" for? What do you think the point of all this is for them?
I think, in many cases, people just want to have power at any cost and they will sacrifice all morals or ethics to get there. I don't think they hate the environment or poor people or anything. I just think they love power and and that power is the actual end-state for them, not accomplishing anything. When you look at it, the only thing Republicans have accomplished while in power have been mass tax cuts for corporations and the rich. So I suppose more of that.
I keep reading polls that Trump's approval is way down, but it sure doesn't seem like it since I'm in Chicago. What does it seem like to you on the ground in Missouri? I know it's human nature to defend our own decisions, so...
Sadly, in 2026 there won't be many opportunities for Democrats in Missouri but there is plenty of time for a surprise. However, it looks like Rep. Ann Wagner might be vulnerable.
Ann Wagner has been "vulnerable" for years and keeps winning. Her district was just improved during the last redistricting. A big blue wave may unseat her, but otherwise she will get reelected. But yes, I will donate to try to unseat her.
I think people here are generally satisfied with his presidency. That said, his support base is fairly unshakeable. The hope I think is that it won't extend to his cronies which, to a large degree, I don't think it will. I think 2026 is going to be a lot like 2018, a big year for Dems.
You presume this is politics as usual. We have become an autocracy already. Do you expect massive voter suppression for the 2026 election? Will an otherwise normal 52% majority win or will we need more like a 60% majority to actually achieve a win - if 10% of the vote is supressed.
I think Democrats will win the house in 2026 and I don't think voter suppression efforts will change that. Especially because those house seats are all over the country.
Thank you to everyone for the questions and conversation, I'm going to turn off commenting now and hope that everyone has a good rest of the weekend. Until next time!
Do you have any insight into how the National Guard and especially ICE agents are able to carry out orders that involve mask-wearing, incognito stalking, and often violent apprehension of people who may not even be immigrants? Is it really just about doing the job they’re paid to do and meeting a quota, no questions asked? It looks like they're turning into a secret police force. It’s hard to imagine all of them are fully gung ho about it, but maybe I’m being naive since I have no experience in that kind of environment.
I haven't seen cases of the National Guard going incognito, so I'll have to look that up. As for ICE, law enforcement has for a long time gone under cover and incognito, and we have let them do it. Underlying everything, though, I think is likely the belief that no one is going to get into any trouble for treating people badly in this war on immigration. And I think that belief is probably rooted in fact. Trump has shown a strong willingness to pardon people who are acting under his orders or supporting him, and I think a lot of people believe he will have their back, and he probably will.
You're right, I should not have included the National Guard in my question. I guess I'm still wondering about ICE agents at an individual level. I don't know anyone in the military or police so don't know what it's like - is every individual simply following orders for a paycheck, or is any of this as abhorrent to them as it is to many of us? Or, even if it is abhorrent, again, they need the paycheck? If so, that's a lot of people who seem really okay with violence and lack of due process as part of their daily job.
Some time ago, you wrote about a woman you canvassed who voted for Trump because she wanted to take the government back from the rich. You convinced her to vote for the local Democrat, but left her core assumptions about Democrats being evil unchallenged.
In hindsight, do you still believe this was a victory? Because I can draw a straight line from that conversation to the situation we are in today.
At the national level, Democrats were put into office by working people and then served big banks and the donor class, leaving behind working people. That's the straight line between where we were and where we are. And it happened well before I was on the scene. The good news about a lot of people is that they think both parties are corrupt, and there is an opportunity for Democrats to right the ship by being the anti-corruption party. Something they still choose not to do.
Challenging her core belief, that national Democrats are bad, would not have changed her mind, which I went into in depth in that article and which volumes of psychological studies back up. All it would have done was guarantee she wouldn't vote for Robbie and it would have confirmed all of her beliefs about the attitude of Democrats (that we know it all and like to tell people what to do and what to think, and that if we don't agree with them we think they are idiots). And until we have more Robbie's winning, we are never going to bounce back.
I have a ton of respect for you (that's why I subscribe, and why I supported your 2024 campaign), but we are on polar opposites of the "Democrats are corrupt" spectrum. I spent many years investigating all the right wing claims about the Dems after the 2016 election because I genuinely wanted to understand where the Trump voters were coming from.
I came to the conclusion that it was 95% bullshit. From the ACORN non-scandal to donor-states-as-welfare to the lib pedophile grooming rings to the "woke cult" to the stolen 2020 election*, what I saw was one party with some flawed individuals and another party that created an entire platform out of lies, slander, cruelty, more lies, hypocrisy, and yet more lies thrown in for good measure.
I also decided that both-sides-ism just helps the party that's more willing to lie and slander. Similarly, excessive hand-wringing just feeds the problem. The Democrats, to my eternal dismay, have engaged in a lot of both since the 2024 loss.**
The only thing that I think has any chance of working is to call out the bullshit immediately, as soon as it surfaces. Though I have some issues with Gov. Newsom, he at least has been doing just that on social media.
That may not convince individuals, but it at least stems the tide of a tilted conventional wisdom. It might not heal the wound but it at least stems the bleeding.
Meanwhile, Leaving MAGA (https://leavingmaga.org) seems to be taking the track you outline: giving people a permission structure without judgment. I support them too, but honestly my fury at the right is too endemic at this point for me to offer olive branches personally. Maybe someday I will be able to forgive all the people in my life who have helped destroy the country I love, but that day isn't today.
* That's just off the top of my head. I could go on almost indefinitely if I consulted my notes.
What do you think is an effective way to get "moderates" to care (and maybe even do) more about what is happening in the country? I ask because I've had a few conversations with people who are not Trump fans - in fact, they may have even voted against him. However, they also don't buy the view that Trump's actions are any sort of real threat to democracy. They feel that claims of democratic backsliding are exaggeration, and that partisans always claim that the other party is leading us to disaster. I realize this is a broad topic - I'm just more interested in what you've found (if anything) to counter apathy and encourage engagement.
The only message that really seemed to break through with people is an anti-corruption message, although it may paradoxically make people more apathetic rather than less. The way to motivate people who are otherwise apathetic is usually through a specific and personal single issue lens. Like labor, abortion, roads, etc. Not usually through large worldview things like democracy. Not sure if that helps, it's pretty individual-based for someone like you to take that approach, although at the macro level this is how parties can engage a lot of people they wouldn't have otherwise had engaged (think pro-life and Republicans).
Ultimately, I do not think he will vote against Trump's signature bill, no. The thing about Hawley is that the number one thing he clearly cares about is being President and all of his actions should be looked at through that lens. Which means that he will definitely spout off about this a lot and that he may even try to do some things to get the bill changed so that he can claim it in his Presidential run. But, for the same reason, if he is unsuccessful there it is very unlikely he votes against the bill because that would be bad for his Presidential ambitions in a Republican primary.
Are you and your fellow service members loyal to an illegitimate regime or the oath you took? Have you considered becoming a conscientious objector? If not, why not?
I believe most people in the military are loyal to the constitution and the oath, which generally means doing the job until given an unlawful order regardless of the party or the personality giving the orders.
You are honing your political answers. I do not think following an order that hasn’t been cleared by Congress can be considered lawful. Do you know the USA is under foreign occupation? Hard to believe someone as knowledgeable as you can’t read the writing on the wall but I guess living comfortably in the grey area is a new forte.
I know this might sound abstract or overly philosophical, but I genuinely want to know what you think about GOP legislators and officials who are NOT true believers but still enable Trump -- what exactly is motivating them? Is it fear, self-preservation, hope for a future payday, or just a desire to keep their government healthcare and steady paycheck? If they know they are abandoning their oath to represent their constituents and uphold the Constitution, and instead are only serving one man’s self-serving agenda, then why don’t they speak out and/or step down?
They just want to have power. That's the end-state of a lot of people in politics. Prestige and power, and this is the easiest way for them to get it. I don't think they care about anything else.
If it is about power why aren't Republicans exercising it in congress today. Even on issues they once held dear, they remain quiet. It seems like it is about keeping their jobs (or fear of violence), since once elected, they don't exercise their power.
I will start with my favorite quote from Utah Phillips -
"Yes, the long memory is the most radical idea in this country. It is the loss of that long memory which deprives our people of that connective flow of thoughts and events that clarifies our vision, not of where we're going, but where we want to go."
My main concern is public education, past, present, and future. One of the main reasons for our current situation (aside from the unbridled greed of the rich) is a failure (both intentional and unintentional) of public education both in the history and science. The failure in history is well documented in the NPR interview of James Loewen author of "Lies My Teach Told Me" -
For science the problem is that people don't know when and where they can trust scientific judgements because they are not taught the history of science which explains how it works. There is no absolute knowledge in science (unlike religion) there are always error bars but despite this science still works. In high school the students should be shown "The Ascent of Man (BBC 1972) and the Cosmos sequels ("A Spacetime Odyssey" and "Possible Worlds"). Here is a short excerpt from "The Ascent of Man" to show why -
Now for some campaign advice. The biggest problem with our electoral system is that it is for all practical purposes a binary winner take all system. I have voted Democratic all my life but the Democratic current establishment disgusts me. Many times I wish that I had a real choice other that Democrat or Republican. We lose our choices during the primary process where either the party or big money backs certain candidates that almost always win the primary. Thus our choice in the general election comes down to candidates that do not represent the voters but the money that got them elected.
To say we need to take money from the rich to reduce their influence is equivalent to, "We had to bomb the village to save it!" Yes, I remember the Viet Nam War I am that old!
In the primaries and general election make the voters aware of where the candidates financial support is coming form and ask them whether or not those candidates are going to represent them. I think one thing that Democratic and Republican voters can agree on is how money has corrupted the political system.
A good reference for this are two books written by Mike Lofgren (former Republican staffer on the House and Senate budget committees), "The Party Is Over" and "The Deep State." Lofgren's deep state has nothing to do with the Republican fantasy deep state, they stole the term from him. Here are introductions to both books -
That's awesome, I do love ultimate frisbee! Although my right knee is a real drag on my ability to do much these days. I agree that our long memory is in trouble, and that trust in institutions, including science, being at an all time low is tragic for us. I wish we could publicly fund elections or have a way for a third party to break through. Here in Missouri the D's and R's are explicitly created and supported by statute. How crazy is that?
I think it's a coincidence regarding the bill. He obviously wasn't able to resist the allure of dropping bombs (like every president of the 21st century). The real question is going to be if he can resist the urge to put boots on the ground after whatever retaliation Iran does. Hopefully their response will be similar to what it was when Trump bombed and killed their General in his first term, and it doesn't escalate.
If you are a person who does not want the US to end up as an authoritarian or fascist state, what is the best thing for you to do? I am finding it hard to identify anything that will cause people in leadership roles to make different decisions, because they are driven by money I don't have and greed I don't have the means to indulge. The threat of being voted out of office doesn't seem to phase anyone and their response to protests is to stop appearing publicly and lock protesters up.
Good Morning! I think that protests can still be good because they really do bring attention to the issue. The news stations are always hungry for content and that gives them content. In politics, the classic counter to big money is organizing. Protests are one part of that. So are voter registration, deep canvassing, get out the vote efforts, and more. If everyone could figure out how to double their vote by bringing just one more person, we could do it!
Thank you! This is very helpful.
As are many of us, I continue to receive myriads of fundraising emails and texts from candidates from all over the country. I'm 74, on Social Security and my small business (I'm a long-arm quilter) and so do not have much at my disposal. How do I donate the most effectively? I know this is a general question, but specifics in your reply would be most appreciated. Thanks!
If you're in Missouri, I think local candidates and Ann Wagner's house seat are probably the best bets. Otherwise, and this might sound crazy to some, but you should just donate to people you like and whose message you like. Your donations, in this case, are your voice, so you should use them to amplify a voice that you can be proud of and that you think makes a difference. You can do that by spreading around what you have to multiple candidates, or going all in on one you love. As a candidate who was not supported by big money, I can tell you right now that thousands of people making small dollar donations is the only way that type of candidate can survive and I am very grateful to you and so many others for making that happen.
Wow do I have an answer to your very important question! Please go to www.TurnUp.US where you will find the most effective operation run by former Harvard students who are registering and turning out tens of thousands of educated younger voters (mostly young women and of color) only in the 28 TRULY COMPETITIVE congressional election districts! These new registrations are based on protecting abortion rights, gun safety and fighting climate change, all of which are very important to younger potential voters 18 to 29! But the really effective key to their success is that they are involved significantly and effectively only in these 28 TRULY EFFECTIVE congressional districts rather than waste time and money in the remainder of congressional districts which are simply not competitive!! Thank you!
Lucas, my husband and I are Air Force vets (27 years each). We were furious, and kinda dumbstruck, when Donald Trump pulled us out of the Iran nuclear deal in his first term. We are hoping he will keep negotiating and not get us in a conflict with Iran this time. As a vet, what are your thoughts on this issue?
It seems that, as expected, the President wasn't able to resist the opportunity to bomb someone. Honestly, I can't say I blame him specifically, I don't think we've had a President in the 21st century who has been able to resist the allure of bombing someone. And for everyone who claims Trump was anti-war in his first term, he expanded all of our conflicts, didn't get out of any of them, and was probably the most proud I've ever seen him when he killed that Iranian general.
I think the real question now is what Iran does in response (they will have to do something) and if it is measured enough or ineffective enough that it doesn't give Trump an excuse to escalate. Because one thing I think we can all be sure of is that all of his supposedly anti-war Republicans will roll over for him if he wants a war.
Hello Lucas, I believe that one of the Democrats biggest mistakes during the Biden administration was not to fix the border situation and one of Kamala's biggest mistakes was not admitting that the situation was a disaster, including for the refugees themselves. Now we have to deal with the cruel, inhumane deportation tragedy. Which brings me to my question. Do you believe that the Democratic party has or has ever articulated a coherent immigration/ refugee policy? If so, what is it?
Hi Janet! No, I don't think they ever have. They haven't even really tried anything. And looking the other way has been an absolute disaster that, as you mentioned, led to an even worse situation not just at the border, but across the country. The border eventually became a top issue for people everywhere, including in blue cities. I think it was the biggest factor in the red wave this year.
The immigration bill in 2024 that was squashed by the Republicans made many positive and significant changes to the US immigration policy. Most importantly, it allowed the Border Patrol to hire people to decide whether asylum claims were valid. That would have the cycle from 3 to 4 years to 3 to 4 months.
Thank you Lucas for confirming that the Democrats do not have an immigration policy! I agree that the immigration bill might have helped, but it seemed to be a reaction to the Republicans not a coherent and clear policy. I think the Democrats (and here I should say "we" since I have been a loyal Democrat all my voting life) are afraid to say "no open borders" or that the US needs to determine how many immigrants can beneficially admit and for what economic sector. To me, refugees are different than immigrants and as the richest country in the Western hemisphere, the US should be focusing more on trying to help the Central American people who are suffering under collapsing governments and oligarchic rule. (Not collaborating with dictators in order to imprison people.) If the Democrats fought the internal battle and reached a consensus that could be articulated to the American people, I think they would find that most Americans are pretty compassionate and don't hate people from other countries. They just don't want chaos.
What do you think the GOP’s endgame is? They’re ignoring climate change, gutting social safety nets, and driving out the very workforce society depends on. I sometimes imagine it in apocalyptic terms—white nationalist elites ruling over a disenfranchised underclass doing all the labor for scraps. It’s all coming for everyone eventually, so what exactly are they "striving" for? What do you think the point of all this is for them?
I think, in many cases, people just want to have power at any cost and they will sacrifice all morals or ethics to get there. I don't think they hate the environment or poor people or anything. I just think they love power and and that power is the actual end-state for them, not accomplishing anything. When you look at it, the only thing Republicans have accomplished while in power have been mass tax cuts for corporations and the rich. So I suppose more of that.
Sounds like a very empty and hollow way to be. Not how I want to live my life.
Very important question Lucus, isn’t it?
I keep reading polls that Trump's approval is way down, but it sure doesn't seem like it since I'm in Chicago. What does it seem like to you on the ground in Missouri? I know it's human nature to defend our own decisions, so...
Sadly, in 2026 there won't be many opportunities for Democrats in Missouri but there is plenty of time for a surprise. However, it looks like Rep. Ann Wagner might be vulnerable.
Ann Wagner has been "vulnerable" for years and keeps winning. Her district was just improved during the last redistricting. A big blue wave may unseat her, but otherwise she will get reelected. But yes, I will donate to try to unseat her.
I think people here are generally satisfied with his presidency. That said, his support base is fairly unshakeable. The hope I think is that it won't extend to his cronies which, to a large degree, I don't think it will. I think 2026 is going to be a lot like 2018, a big year for Dems.
You presume this is politics as usual. We have become an autocracy already. Do you expect massive voter suppression for the 2026 election? Will an otherwise normal 52% majority win or will we need more like a 60% majority to actually achieve a win - if 10% of the vote is supressed.
I think Democrats will win the house in 2026 and I don't think voter suppression efforts will change that. Especially because those house seats are all over the country.
Thank you to everyone for the questions and conversation, I'm going to turn off commenting now and hope that everyone has a good rest of the weekend. Until next time!
Do you have any insight into how the National Guard and especially ICE agents are able to carry out orders that involve mask-wearing, incognito stalking, and often violent apprehension of people who may not even be immigrants? Is it really just about doing the job they’re paid to do and meeting a quota, no questions asked? It looks like they're turning into a secret police force. It’s hard to imagine all of them are fully gung ho about it, but maybe I’m being naive since I have no experience in that kind of environment.
I haven't seen cases of the National Guard going incognito, so I'll have to look that up. As for ICE, law enforcement has for a long time gone under cover and incognito, and we have let them do it. Underlying everything, though, I think is likely the belief that no one is going to get into any trouble for treating people badly in this war on immigration. And I think that belief is probably rooted in fact. Trump has shown a strong willingness to pardon people who are acting under his orders or supporting him, and I think a lot of people believe he will have their back, and he probably will.
You're right, I should not have included the National Guard in my question. I guess I'm still wondering about ICE agents at an individual level. I don't know anyone in the military or police so don't know what it's like - is every individual simply following orders for a paycheck, or is any of this as abhorrent to them as it is to many of us? Or, even if it is abhorrent, again, they need the paycheck? If so, that's a lot of people who seem really okay with violence and lack of due process as part of their daily job.
Some time ago, you wrote about a woman you canvassed who voted for Trump because she wanted to take the government back from the rich. You convinced her to vote for the local Democrat, but left her core assumptions about Democrats being evil unchallenged.
In hindsight, do you still believe this was a victory? Because I can draw a straight line from that conversation to the situation we are in today.
At the national level, Democrats were put into office by working people and then served big banks and the donor class, leaving behind working people. That's the straight line between where we were and where we are. And it happened well before I was on the scene. The good news about a lot of people is that they think both parties are corrupt, and there is an opportunity for Democrats to right the ship by being the anti-corruption party. Something they still choose not to do.
Challenging her core belief, that national Democrats are bad, would not have changed her mind, which I went into in depth in that article and which volumes of psychological studies back up. All it would have done was guarantee she wouldn't vote for Robbie and it would have confirmed all of her beliefs about the attitude of Democrats (that we know it all and like to tell people what to do and what to think, and that if we don't agree with them we think they are idiots). And until we have more Robbie's winning, we are never going to bounce back.
I have a ton of respect for you (that's why I subscribe, and why I supported your 2024 campaign), but we are on polar opposites of the "Democrats are corrupt" spectrum. I spent many years investigating all the right wing claims about the Dems after the 2016 election because I genuinely wanted to understand where the Trump voters were coming from.
I came to the conclusion that it was 95% bullshit. From the ACORN non-scandal to donor-states-as-welfare to the lib pedophile grooming rings to the "woke cult" to the stolen 2020 election*, what I saw was one party with some flawed individuals and another party that created an entire platform out of lies, slander, cruelty, more lies, hypocrisy, and yet more lies thrown in for good measure.
I also decided that both-sides-ism just helps the party that's more willing to lie and slander. Similarly, excessive hand-wringing just feeds the problem. The Democrats, to my eternal dismay, have engaged in a lot of both since the 2024 loss.**
The only thing that I think has any chance of working is to call out the bullshit immediately, as soon as it surfaces. Though I have some issues with Gov. Newsom, he at least has been doing just that on social media.
That may not convince individuals, but it at least stems the tide of a tilted conventional wisdom. It might not heal the wound but it at least stems the bleeding.
Meanwhile, Leaving MAGA (https://leavingmaga.org) seems to be taking the track you outline: giving people a permission structure without judgment. I support them too, but honestly my fury at the right is too endemic at this point for me to offer olive branches personally. Maybe someday I will be able to forgive all the people in my life who have helped destroy the country I love, but that day isn't today.
* That's just off the top of my head. I could go on almost indefinitely if I consulted my notes.
** Was it a loss though? https://electiontruthalliance.org has produced some pretty suspicious data.
What do you think is an effective way to get "moderates" to care (and maybe even do) more about what is happening in the country? I ask because I've had a few conversations with people who are not Trump fans - in fact, they may have even voted against him. However, they also don't buy the view that Trump's actions are any sort of real threat to democracy. They feel that claims of democratic backsliding are exaggeration, and that partisans always claim that the other party is leading us to disaster. I realize this is a broad topic - I'm just more interested in what you've found (if anything) to counter apathy and encourage engagement.
The only message that really seemed to break through with people is an anti-corruption message, although it may paradoxically make people more apathetic rather than less. The way to motivate people who are otherwise apathetic is usually through a specific and personal single issue lens. Like labor, abortion, roads, etc. Not usually through large worldview things like democracy. Not sure if that helps, it's pretty individual-based for someone like you to take that approach, although at the macro level this is how parties can engage a lot of people they wouldn't have otherwise had engaged (think pro-life and Republicans).
What's the best way, in your opinion, to halt Trump's authoritarian agenda?
We have to start winning elections again! Seriously, we have to win in 2026.
Do you think Josh Hawley will take a stand against Medicaid cuts in the “big, beautiful, bill”?
Ultimately, I do not think he will vote against Trump's signature bill, no. The thing about Hawley is that the number one thing he clearly cares about is being President and all of his actions should be looked at through that lens. Which means that he will definitely spout off about this a lot and that he may even try to do some things to get the bill changed so that he can claim it in his Presidential run. But, for the same reason, if he is unsuccessful there it is very unlikely he votes against the bill because that would be bad for his Presidential ambitions in a Republican primary.
More than mouthing off, that is? Will he vote against bbb to protect healthcare for working poor, disabled and seniors in “retirement “ homes?
Are you and your fellow service members loyal to an illegitimate regime or the oath you took? Have you considered becoming a conscientious objector? If not, why not?
I believe most people in the military are loyal to the constitution and the oath, which generally means doing the job until given an unlawful order regardless of the party or the personality giving the orders.
You are honing your political answers. I do not think following an order that hasn’t been cleared by Congress can be considered lawful. Do you know the USA is under foreign occupation? Hard to believe someone as knowledgeable as you can’t read the writing on the wall but I guess living comfortably in the grey area is a new forte.
I know this might sound abstract or overly philosophical, but I genuinely want to know what you think about GOP legislators and officials who are NOT true believers but still enable Trump -- what exactly is motivating them? Is it fear, self-preservation, hope for a future payday, or just a desire to keep their government healthcare and steady paycheck? If they know they are abandoning their oath to represent their constituents and uphold the Constitution, and instead are only serving one man’s self-serving agenda, then why don’t they speak out and/or step down?
They just want to have power. That's the end-state of a lot of people in politics. Prestige and power, and this is the easiest way for them to get it. I don't think they care about anything else.
If it is about power why aren't Republicans exercising it in congress today. Even on issues they once held dear, they remain quiet. It seems like it is about keeping their jobs (or fear of violence), since once elected, they don't exercise their power.
Maybe just prestige.
First we have a weird connection. I graduated from Columbia High School (1964) where ultimate Frisbee was developed -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_frisbee
I will start with my favorite quote from Utah Phillips -
"Yes, the long memory is the most radical idea in this country. It is the loss of that long memory which deprives our people of that connective flow of thoughts and events that clarifies our vision, not of where we're going, but where we want to go."
My main concern is public education, past, present, and future. One of the main reasons for our current situation (aside from the unbridled greed of the rich) is a failure (both intentional and unintentional) of public education both in the history and science. The failure in history is well documented in the NPR interview of James Loewen author of "Lies My Teach Told Me" -
https://www.npr.org/2018/08/09/634991713/lies-my-teacher-told-me-and-how-american-history-can-be-used-as-a-weapon
For science the problem is that people don't know when and where they can trust scientific judgements because they are not taught the history of science which explains how it works. There is no absolute knowledge in science (unlike religion) there are always error bars but despite this science still works. In high school the students should be shown "The Ascent of Man (BBC 1972) and the Cosmos sequels ("A Spacetime Odyssey" and "Possible Worlds"). Here is a short excerpt from "The Ascent of Man" to show why -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltjI3BXKBgY
Now for some campaign advice. The biggest problem with our electoral system is that it is for all practical purposes a binary winner take all system. I have voted Democratic all my life but the Democratic current establishment disgusts me. Many times I wish that I had a real choice other that Democrat or Republican. We lose our choices during the primary process where either the party or big money backs certain candidates that almost always win the primary. Thus our choice in the general election comes down to candidates that do not represent the voters but the money that got them elected.
To say we need to take money from the rich to reduce their influence is equivalent to, "We had to bomb the village to save it!" Yes, I remember the Viet Nam War I am that old!
In the primaries and general election make the voters aware of where the candidates financial support is coming form and ask them whether or not those candidates are going to represent them. I think one thing that Democratic and Republican voters can agree on is how money has corrupted the political system.
A good reference for this are two books written by Mike Lofgren (former Republican staffer on the House and Senate budget committees), "The Party Is Over" and "The Deep State." Lofgren's deep state has nothing to do with the Republican fantasy deep state, they stole the term from him. Here are introductions to both books -
https://www.mikelofgren.net/introduction-to-the-party-is-over-book/
https://www.mikelofgren.net/introduction-to-the-deep-state/
Keep up the good fight!
That's awesome, I do love ultimate frisbee! Although my right knee is a real drag on my ability to do much these days. I agree that our long memory is in trouble, and that trust in institutions, including science, being at an all time low is tragic for us. I wish we could publicly fund elections or have a way for a third party to break through. Here in Missouri the D's and R's are explicitly created and supported by statute. How crazy is that?
What will Trump "decide" about dropping Bunker Busting Bombs? Is there any connection to the Big Beautiful Bill or is it all a coincidence?
I think it's a coincidence regarding the bill. He obviously wasn't able to resist the allure of dropping bombs (like every president of the 21st century). The real question is going to be if he can resist the urge to put boots on the ground after whatever retaliation Iran does. Hopefully their response will be similar to what it was when Trump bombed and killed their General in his first term, and it doesn't escalate.
That's the risk, probably related somehow to six bankruptcies.