Trump Dictatorship

[BillOfRights]

lol at you even mentioning “truth’ given the last 8 years of your media. Your media could say the grass you graze is red and you would just keep munching.

 

[sringwal]

I think you're right, but with an asterisk of sorts. I definitely believe that historically the "mainstream media" (by which I mean outlets like CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, WaPo, NPR, etc.) has had a significantly more liberal lean than conservative. I think it's for a lot of the same reasons that academia has historically had a more liberal lean than conservative, which is to say, that conservatives have largely eschewed going into the field of journalism altogether. I don't think that there was ever some Illumniati-esque meeting of the media minds where it was decided that mainstream media outlets would lean liberal versus conservative; I think a lot of it was self-selection, as I mentioned. In other words, I don't think that the mainstream media became liberal in the aggregate out of spite for conservatives or for nefarious reasons (to borrow a phrase from Michael Jordan: "conservatives buy newspapers, too"). I think it happened naturally as a result of the self-selection I mentioned, and then continued to perpetuate itself for decades.

Something that I think that conservatives have done, though, as a result of the mainstream media having a liberal bend, is absolutely kick the left's ass when it comes to creating and sustaining an entire media ecosystem dedicated to propping up the conservative party. CNN and MSNBC are child's play, IMO, compared to Fox- and by that I mean their reach and influence. (That's not to say that they aren't liberal-biased; they are. I just mean that they aren't nearly as effective at message-shaping and agenda-setting as is Fox).

So while the mainstream media is definitely liberal-biased, the right wing media ecosystem that started with Fox and has since spawned off countless podcasters, social media personalities, influencers, etc. is extraordinarily more successful at crafting and disseminating unified messaging that benefits the conservative party, than the mainstream media is at doing the same for the liberal party. I absolutely hate most of the right wing media ecosystem for its propensity for lying and grifting, but I am both envious and in awe of its effectiveness. It's something for which the left has had no match historically, currently has no match, and will likely never have a match- to the detriment of the Democratic Party. So while the historic norm has been that the mainstream media has been significantly biased in favor of liberals, I think that their effectiveness in crafting and disseminating messaging that favors the Democrats is at an all-time low compared to that of Fox & Co. And I think it's going to continue to cost Democrats dearly at election time.

Perfectly put.

 

[Duke Mu]

Let's be honest.

Trump, Gabbard are working for Russia. china as well.

 

[Mulberry Heel]

Serious question. Does the calendar on your wall say 1965? It's like you're posting from the other side of a time portal.

Indeed. Apparently some of our posters seem to be unaware of all of the changes to our news media in the last several years. The Washington Post has lost much of its staff and under Bezos has done a virtual 180 regarding Trump. The NY Times has become a relentlessly bosiding joke, as exemplified by an article in just the last few days in which they seriously discuss if there is an easier way for universities to cede control to Trump (they changed the headline after getting criticism on social media). CNN was bought by Discovery a few years ago, and one of their major shareholders, John Malone, is a Trumper and has pushed to move the network to the right, including eliminating shows like Reliable Sources which were seen as too critical of Trump. CBS News is being gutted by its new owners, Skydance, which promised the Trump Administration to appoint a "referee" to essentially make sure that nothing critical of Trump gets aired, leading to the resignations of its news chief and changes at 60 minutes.

Newsweek was once considered liberal, but for years has been a conservative website, and the LA Times, also once considered liberal, is now owned by a Trumper who has moved the paper to the right just as Bezos has at the WaPo. Anyone who believes that the "mainstream media" is still liberal-leaning simply hasn't been paying attention. But as it's easier to just continue with the comforting myth that only Fox News is out there bravely repping the "good guys" against the Evil Empire of librul mainstream media I'm sure that Trumpers will continue to cling to that belief like a man clinging to a cliff trying not to slip and fall.

 

[Zoo_View]

I think you're right, but with an asterisk of sorts. I definitely believe that historically the "mainstream media" (by which I mean outlets like CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, WaPo, NPR, etc.) has had a significantly more liberal lean than conservative. I think it's for a lot of the same reasons that academia has historically had a more liberal lean than conservative, which is to say, that conservatives have largely eschewed going into the field of journalism altogether. I don't think that there was ever some Illumniati-esque meeting of the media minds where it was decided that mainstream media outlets would lean liberal versus conservative; I think a lot of it was self-selection, as I mentioned. In other words, I don't think that the mainstream media became liberal in the aggregate out of spite for conservatives or for nefarious reasons (to borrow a phrase from Michael Jordan: "conservatives buy newspapers, too"). I think it happened naturally as a result of the self-selection I mentioned, and then continued to perpetuate itself for decades.

Something that I think that conservatives have done, though, as a result of the mainstream media having a liberal bend, is absolutely kick the left's ass when it comes to creating and sustaining an entire media ecosystem dedicated to propping up the conservative party. CNN and MSNBC are child's play, IMO, compared to Fox- and by that I mean their reach and influence. (That's not to say that they aren't liberal-biased; they are. I just mean that they aren't nearly as effective at message-shaping and agenda-setting as is Fox).

So while the mainstream media is definitely liberal-biased, the right wing media ecosystem that started with Fox and has since spawned off countless podcasters, social media personalities, influencers, etc. is extraordinarily more successful at crafting and disseminating unified messaging that benefits the conservative party, than the mainstream media is at doing the same for the liberal party. I absolutely hate most of the right wing media ecosystem for its propensity for lying and grifting, but I am both envious and in awe of its effectiveness. It's something for which the left has had no match historically, currently has no match, and will likely never have a match- to the detriment of the Democratic Party. So while the historic norm has been that the mainstream media has been significantly biased in favor of liberals, I think that their effectiveness in crafting and disseminating messaging that favors the Democrats is at an all-time low compared to that of Fox & Co. And I think it's going to continue to cost Democrats dearly at election time.

Please show me the ongoing lies told by CBS, WAPO, NY Times, NBC, ABC, LA Times, NPR, The New Republic, New Yorker, The Atlantic, etc. that are comparable to Fox, WSJ Editorial Page, Washington Times, Washington Examiner, Manchester Union Leader, etc.

Actually, show me the liberal bias in NEWS REPORTING by the above “leftist” outlets.

Not an editorial piece…..news reporting.

Let’s start with one obvious bit of news…….the 2020 elections. Some reported facts; some “reported” Trumplican lies.

 

[Centerpiece]

Please show me the ongoing lies told by CBS, WAPO, NY Times, NBC, ABC, LA Times, NPR, The New Republic, New Yorker, The Atlantic, etc. that are comparable to Fox, WSJ Editorial Page, Washington Times, Washington Examiner, Manchester Union Leader, etc.

Actually, show me the liberal bias in NEWS REPORTING by the above “leftist” outlets.

Not an editorial piece…..news reporting.

Let’s start with one obvious bit of news…….the 2020 elections. Some reported facts; some “reported” Trumplican lies.

I can’t think of anything right off hand.
I also don’t agree with everything CFordUNC said.
For example, what he described is not “to the detriment of the Democratic Party” it’s actually to the detriment of Democracy itself.
But what I think doesn’t matter.

 

[ColdBlueSteel]

Indeed. Apparently some of our posters seem to be unaware of all of the changes to our news media in the last several years. The Washington Post has lost much of its staff and under Bezos has done a virtual 180 regarding Trump. The NY Times has become a relentlessly bosiding joke, as exemplified by an article in just the last few days in which they seriously discuss if there is an easier way for universities to cede control to Trump (they changed the headline after getting criticism on social media). CNN was bought by Discovery a few years ago, and one of their major shareholders, John Malone, is a Trumper and has pushed to move the network to the right, including eliminating shows like Reliable Sources which were seen as too critical of Trump. CBS News is being gutted by its new owners, Skydance, which promised the Trump Administration to appoint a "referee" to essentially make sure that nothing critical of Trump gets aired, leading to the resignations of its news chief and changes at 60 minutes.

Newsweek was once considered liberal, but for years has been a conservative website, and the LA Times, also once considered liberal, is now owned by a Trumper who has moved the paper to the right just as Bezos has at the WaPo. Anyone who believes that the "mainstream media" is still liberal-leaning simply hasn't been paying attention. But as it's easier to just continue with the comforting myth that only Fox News is out there bravely repping the "good guys" against the Evil Empire of librul mainstream media I'm sure that Trumpers will continue to cling to that belief like a man clinging to a cliff trying not to slip and fall.

That’s an awfully long post about outdated media

 

[Mulberry Heel]

That’s an awfully long post about outdated media

I was replying to a Trumper poster's contention that the mainstream media is still liberal and only Fox is conservative. And as you just said our news media has changed, and in several different ways. And it's not outdated in the sense that large numbers of older voters still watch that media, especially the right-wing versions like Fox.

 

[ColdBlueSteel]

I will leave this here and won't comment much, as I often just post then flee. Because I don't really feel like talking.

But here's what's going to happen:

Assuming this guy lives, due to his age and health, he's going to declare at some point that he was robbed for 2020 and that he's due another term because non-sequence.

The economy will be bad at this point, but because the right wing basically controls the media, he will be able to manipulate people into believing it was all somehow Joe Biden's or Obama's faults. And many dumb Americans will believe it.

And if you think 2028 will be a free and fair election, I've got some news for you! Perhaps 2026 mid-term will be, but I have my doubts about that too.

I hate to say this but the only hope we really have at this point, barring some magnificent left populist coming out of the middle of nowhere, is corporatists deciding their tax cuts aren't worth it anymore.

Too many things at play, but I think this is how it will basically go down.

I was replying to a Trumper poster's contention that the mainstream media is still liberal and only Fox is conservative. And as you just said our news media has changed, and in several different ways. And it's not outdated in the sense that large numbers of older voters still watch that media, especially the right-wing versions like Fox.

True. Just my perspective but as I was reading the post was thinking that there are so many info sources, good/bad/ugly/biased/unbiased that are not referenced but readily available.

 

[rodoheel]

That shit is literally happening now

For most Americans, it isn't. I'm talking about perception as much as anything here. The vast majority of Americans have not seen anything approaching "martial law." Even in LA, where the military was deployed, there was nothing approaching "martial law" and the military presence, such as it was, was only in a small portion of the city, and they basically just stood around for a couple of weeks.

As for the "concentration camps" I am as horrified by "Alligator Alcatraz" and its ilk as much as anyone, but again, for most Americans these are just abstractions, and in any event they are (at least people perceive) only used for illegal immigrants, so most Americans can just imagine the problem away because it doesn't affect them.

I am not trying to downplay all the bad stuff, the ICE raids and conduct, or the true evil that rests in the minds of Stephen Miller and others like him. We absolutely should stay vigilant because some of the stuff the OP mentioned likely is in the playbook. But the point remains that, perception-wise, warning of these types of extreme political actions like in the OP when the average American doesn't see what's happening as close to that is not productive. We need to focus on the immediate dangers and immediate harms in front of our faces, and educating people about them and why they're bad, not in doomsaying predictions about what is going to happen in 2028. People simply do not respond to that kind of messaging, as much because they don't want to believe it as anything.

 

[dukeman92]

We need to focus on the immediate dangers and immediate harms in front of our faces, and educating people about them and why they're bad, not in doomsaying predictions about what is going to happen in 2028. People simply do not respond to that kind of messaging, as much because they don't want to believe it as anything.

I understand your point about perception. But I'm not doomsday predicting. I'm talking about this administration violating Constitutional and Civil Rights on a daily basis. Those ARE the immediate dangers. And this administration is ABSOLUTELY systematically testing the waters to find out what they can and cannot get away with and how far they can push and when. Ignoring this stuff is how we allow those doomsday predictions to come to fruition.

 

[rodoheel]

I understand your point about perception. But I'm not doomsday predicting. I'm talking about this administration violating Constitutional and Civil Rights on a daily basis. Those ARE the immediate dangers. And this administration is ABSOLUTELY systematically testing the waters to find out what they can and cannot get away with and how far they can push and when. Ignoring this stuff is how we allow those doomsday predictions to come to fruition.

I think we are agreeing. We absolutely should be pushing back against everything the administration is currently doing. No one is suggesting "ignoring" anything. What I am saying is unproductive is the sort of doomsday hypothesizing shown in the OP.

 

[336Heel]

Please show me the ongoing lies told by CBS, WAPO, NY Times, NBC, ABC, LA Times, NPR, The New Republic, New Yorker, The Atlantic, etc. that are comparable to Fox, WSJ Editorial Page, Washington Times, Washington Examiner, Manchester Union Leader, etc.

Actually, show me the liberal bias in NEWS REPORTING by the above “leftist” outlets.

Not an editorial piece…..news reporting.

Let’s start with one obvious bit of news…….the 2020 elections. Some reported facts; some “reported” Trumplican lies.

Not necessarily a lie but the coverup of Biden's mental capacity decline. That'll be the first thing folks point to.

 

[Oddball]

lol at you even mentioning “truth’ given the last 8 years of your media. Your media could say the grass you graze is red and you would just keep munching.

This is truly bizzaro world level of redirection.

I don't have "my" media, I am an independent. As such, I question all sources and search for accuracy.

The main stream media certainly leans left, and I factor that into what I take from certain articles. But the MSM does not generally conjur their own facts, which is what "your" media certainly does.

While you clearly believe what you state about the "other" side, you might want a moment of introspection as to exactly what you believe and why. There is only 1 current political party that is operating as a cult, and you you appear to be all in there....

 

[heelinhell]

"but because the right wing basically controls the media,"

Maybe the most unaware, ignorant comment ever posted on the old zzl or new zzl. This is the equivalent of radicalized jihadist level of brainwashing (without the violence) and completely ignores all recent instances of leftist media's lies. When you can't even acknowledge the left's grip on the media, outside of fox and a few others, its time for the cult branding.

The right wing does not have full control of the media so I agree with you on that

ABC, CBS, NBC ,NYT, WaPo dominate media and offer neither real left nor right reporting . They seek to split the baby to secure and placate their audience without much concern whether their reporting reflects what our country is actually facing .

CNN tips it little toe in to inform what what our democracy is facing but balances it out with giving bullshitters a platform like David Urban and Scott Jennings.

Fox " News " is the American Pravda which never has a problem reporting lies as facts to dupe their audience. It's as if facts reported would undermine the MAGA agenda

MSNBC certainly has a liberal perspective but ,unlike Fox, MSNBC does not have to rely on lies to create a context to present their reporting and perspective

 

[superrific]

As usual, the idea of "media bias" is a risible attempt to cover for disinformation.

Here's what I do: I trust nobody. Well, just about nobody. I trust no companies; I trust writers who I have found to be truthful over the years. E.g. Steve Vladeck (a former poster vouched for him, as they were colleagues, not that I needed vouching).

So when someone reports on something that happened, I go look at the primary source. Reporting on a Supreme Court opinion -- I go read it. Reporting on oral argument? I read it. Reporting on a policy document? A regulation? An executive order? I read them. And in case people haven't noticed, I'm absolutely willing to call anyone out -- right or left -- on bullshit, misleading reporting, false claims, etc.

What I have found is that the NYT reporting typically matches reality on these topics. Slate less so, but they are pretty good (but too breathless for my tastes). Fox is comically wrong. The guy at Vox is pretty good. Guys like Ezra Klein and Matty Yglesias are super sold and you can usually take what they say -- their reporting, not their conclusions -- to the bank.

 

[Centerpiece]

I think we are agreeing. We absolutely should be pushing back against everything the administration is currently doing. No one is suggesting "ignoring" anything. What I am saying is unproductive is the sort of doomsday hypothesizing shown in the OP.

Sometimes it’s something simple and non threatening like a canary in the coal mine. Sometimes it’s something like the OP: screaming doomsday coming. One is quiet, rather mundane and, on the surface, not alarming unless you’re dialed in. The other is loud, almost obnoxious, but alarming and downright scary and makes one sit up and pay more attention. But their message is still the same.

People can ignore the seemingly crazy guy screaming while watching the canary drop dead. Either way.

I’m reminded of the recent movie Zone of Interest. People can go on with their rather mundane way of life and turn a blind eye - and try not to be alarmed by the dead canary… or we can allow the the crazy guy’s screaming to get our attention and help us realize we’d better wake the fuck up.

I realize no one is suggesting we turn a blind eye, but perhaps we shouldn’t downplay the guy screaming either.

 

[rodoheel]

Sometimes it’s something simple and non threatening like a canary in the coal mine. Sometimes it’s something like the OP: screaming doomsday coming. One is quiet, rather mundane and, on the surface, not alarming unless you’re dialed in. The other is loud, almost obnoxious, but alarming and downright scary and makes one sit up and pay more attention. But their message is still the same.

People can ignore the seemingly crazy guy screaming while watching the canary drop dead. Either way.

I’m reminded of the recent movie Zone of Interest. People can go on with their rather mundane way of life and turn a blind eye - and try not to be alarmed by the dead canary… or we can allow the the crazy guy’s screaming to get our attention and help us realize we’d better wake the fuck up.

I realize no one is suggesting we turn a blind eye, but perhaps we shouldn’t downplay the guy screaming either.

I don't know that I'm "downplaying" the guy screaming. I'm suggesting that screaming in this fashion is not a good or helpful approach in trying to convince people of the danger, and stop that danger.

It reminds me of the mythological story of Cassandra, the priestess in Troy who prophesied the destruction of the city. She was cursed in that her prophecies would be true and not believed, and so ultimately she was ignored. Obviously that part is entirely mythological, but I think it speaks to a very genuine part of human nature which is that people largely do not want to believe or accept that terrible things are going to happen. You are not going to convince a large percentage of Americans 9especially people who are agnostic towards politics) that we're on the verge of a dictatorship that will be enforced by martial law any day now. if you want to convince these people of the dangers of Trump, the way to do it is opening their eyes to the horrible things happening right now, not with dire predictions of Trump become a Hitler-esque dictator for life in 2028. Because not only is that just going to make people ignore you, if will make the actually really concerning aspects of Trump's rule seem not so bad by comparison if he doesn't name himself dictator for life at some point.

 

[lawtig02]

I don't know that I'm "downplaying" the guy screaming. I'm suggesting that screaming in this fashion is not a good or helpful approach in trying to convince people of the danger, and stop that danger.

It reminds me of the mythological story of Cassandra, the priestess in Troy who prophesied the destruction of the city. She was cursed in that her prophecies would be true and not believed, and so ultimately she was ignored. Obviously that part is entirely mythological, but I think it speaks to a very genuine part of human nature which is that people largely do not want to believe or accept that terrible things are going to happen. You are not going to convince a large percentage of Americans 9especially people who are agnostic towards politics) that we're on the verge of a dictatorship that will be enforced by martial law any day now. if you want to convince these people of the dangers of Trump, the way to do it is opening their eyes to the horrible things happening right now, not with dire predictions of Trump become a Hitler-esque dictator for life in 2028. Because not only is that just going to make people ignore you, if will make the actually really concerning aspects of Trump's rule seem not so bad by comparison if he doesn't name himself dictator for life at some point.

Yeah, I get your point, but the way I see it, a Godwin's Law critique had a good bit of merit in 2015. It still had some merit from 2016 through January 6, 2021, largely because of the "deep staters" who remained in Trump's first administration. It hasn't made much sense at all since then, and after the last seven months, you have to be a fucking dolt not to see the comparisons between Trump 2.0 and the 1930s Nazis. It's almost like they're TRYING to create those connections. I'm 100% certain Stephen Miller is.

So yes, I get that comparisons to Hitler will always be viewed with a bit of a side eye. But there has NEVER been ANYTHING in this country even APPROXIMATING the rise of the Nazis more than what we have seen over the last five years.

 

[rodoheel]

Yeah, I get your point, but the way I see it, a Godwin's Law critique had a good bit of merit in 2015. It still had some merit from 2016 through January 6, 2021, largely because of the "deep staters" who remained in Trump's first administration. It hasn't made much sense at all since then, and after the last seven months, you have to be a fucking dolt not to see the comparisons between Trump 2.0 and the 1930s Nazis. It's almost like they're TRYING to create those connections. I'm 100% certain Stephen Miller is.

So yes, I get that comparisons to Hitler will always be viewed with a bit of a side eye. But there has NEVER been ANYTHING in this country even APPROXIMATING the rise of the Nazis more than what we have seen over the last five years.

I both agree with you and disagree with you.

I agree in this sense: there are people within the Trump administration - particularly Stephen Miller, who holds an immense amount of power - who have legitimate white nationalist sympathies and who seem to very intentionally be copying the Nazi playbook in some aspects, particularly with regard to "blood and soil" nationalism, demonizing immigrants, and beefing up ICE as sort of a domestic paramilitary group. There should not be any underestimating how evil these people are and the danger that they pose. I am not in any way trying to downplay that danger. They have already broken our government and the entire world order - one built by the US, for the benefit by the US - in ways that will be difficult to recover from, at least in the near term. They deserve whatever opprobrium people want to launch at them, and more.

But I disagree in this sense: while the messaging and some of the tactics are the same, any comparison to the rise of the Nazis in the 1930s is not going to line up in particular with respect to the violence and brutality of the Nazis' rise, in a way that is fairly easy for even casual observers of history to understand. For example: on this board, I have seen predictions that the LA ICE/immigration riots would be like Trump's version of the Reichstag Fire, and that Trump's reaction to elements of his part calling for the release of the Epstein Files was something of a "Night of the Long Knives" moment.

But those comparisons really don't bear out. The LA immigration riots were mostly a big nothingburger; they only affected a small part of LA, there was little, if any, in the way of violent clashes between the military/ICE and protestors; and the whole situation is basically over now. Compare that the to the Reichstag fire, which was followed almost immediately by the complete suspension of civil liberties like free speech, free movement, and freedom of the press, and also by the imprisonment of numerous Nazi political opponents. And the Night of the Long Knives featured the callous murder of hundreds of people, including many Nazis and other political allies, by Hitler and his regime.

Ultimately what this means is that The Trump admin may ape the style and messaging of the Nazis, but with some important exceptions (especially when it comes to the treatment of immigrants/Hispanics, which again, has been ghastly and horrifying on every level) they are not actually aping their methods. To wit: Trump has egged on crowds chanting "lock her up" in reference to Hillary Clinton, and "lock him up" in reference to Joe Biden, and of course recently accused Obama and many other Dems of treason and threatened to prosecute them, but there has been no real effort to jail, kidnap, or murder political opponents. Similarly, while Trump is engaging in strongman-style coercive tactics to silence critics in academia and the media, in ways that I think are extremely problematic, it's not like we are in a place where people truly need to be worried for their safety if they criticize the administration; the government isn't, like, shutting down South Park or MSNBC with armed thugs. So while it absolutely should be chilling to all Americans that Trump is willing to engage in this sort of Nazi-esque rhetoric, I don't actually think we're on the precipice of the wide-scale suspension of civil liberties, murder of prominent political opponents, or anything approaching the broad imposition of "martial law." And so when you argue or imply that we are on the precipice of those things, rather than being concerned, most Americans are just going to roll their eyes and turn away. because even though they may not understand or know about the disturbing parallels between the rhetoric and political strategies of the Nazis and the Trump admin, they do know that nothing in their daily lives feels like we've made some dramatic dystopian turn in the last six months, even if they might have some concerns about ICE tactics in particular, as a majority of Americans do.

Could Miller et al be slowly building up to the point where er actually do see ICE being used like the brownshirts against the general population, the jailing and execution of political leaders, shutting down media publications that criticize Trump, etc.? And could Trump actually be considering a way to stay in office past 2028? I think those things are absolutely possible. But I think we also have to consider that a Nazi-esque takeover and repression would be practically much more difficult in the modern-era USA than it was in Nazi Germany. The current USA has something like 5x the population of 1930s Germany, spread over a much larger area. There are a ton of major population centers; too many for the Trump admin to attempt to control more than a fraction of them with a military presence. There are a million ways for ordinary citizens to broadcast atrocities live to a worldwide audience, something that barely existed in 1930s Germany; in other words, the growing media decentralization that has been so beneficial to Trump and his media allies in undermining the "traditional" media would make it more difficult to control the narrative through state-controlled media organs (they would basically have to shut down/throttle the entire internet, a la China or Russia, something that would immediately a huge red flag to all Americans and something I really doubt Trump has any genuine desire to do.)

That's why, I think, Trump has focused more on the protection racket-style of coercion through the power of the federal government than true government control and violence. He's trying to compel what he wants gradually, not take it by force, and I honestly don't think he intends to take it by force. And that's why the better parallel to what he's dong is, IMO, Orban's Hungary, not Nazi Germany (even though Orban himself, of course, has used some of that same Nazi-style messaging).

So ultimately, instead of spiraling and fearmongering about what could happen years down the line, I still think it's most important to focus on the clear and present danger in front of us - not that Nazi-esque widespread political violence is around the corner, but that what we're seeing right her, in front of us, is a scale of corruption and dismantling of critical institutions that we have never seen before. So that when these changes inevitably begin noticeably making Americans' lives worse, they (or al least a large number of them) have some understanding of who is to blame and what happened. But the fearmongering that Trump is about to be dictator for life - I honesty believe that will turn off more people, or push away more people, than it will reach.