699 Comments
User's avatar
Don Roszel's avatar

He doesn’t have policies; he has whims

Expand full comment
Greg's avatar

Perhaps more like concepts of whims.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Alternative whims?

Expand full comment
Sandra P. Campbell's avatar

LOL Spew alert! That made me really laugh out loud, and that's hard to do in these times.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

You should be following Andy Borowitz for laughs:

JD Vance to Represent Satan at Pope's Funeral

VATICAN CITY (The Borowitz Report)—JD Vance will represent Satan at Pope Francis’s funeral this weekend, the Devil confirmed on Thursday.

In a rare public statement, the Prince of Darkness said that he could not attend the funeral himself because it conflicts with a Tesla board meeting.

Explaining his choice of Vance, Beelzebub said, “If you can’t have me, JD is the next best thing.”

https://www.borowitzreport.com/p/jd-vance-to-represent-satan-at-popes

Expand full comment
Sandra P. Campbell's avatar

Thanks, Frau Katze, I do.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

Humour can definitely help!

Expand full comment
Greg's avatar

It really is the only way to take in the evil absurdities that are happening every single day in the country.

Expand full comment
Ryan Collay's avatar

Whimpering whimpers, simpering surety…fear of not being wonderful!

Expand full comment
William Quinlivan's avatar

A whiff. A hint. A redolence. A rumor. A remembrance.

Expand full comment
D4N's avatar

🤣

Expand full comment
NubbyShober's avatar

Not so: He's always ready to convert whims into action if the price is right. How about getting a full tariff carve-out--or any other requested political favor--if you buy $30 million or more of his crypto tokens. The swamp has never been more swampy.

Expand full comment
JazzPaw's avatar

That may be the way things go. Business people are used to this kind of graft from other countries, so they will adapt.

This will be no particular moral problem for corporate leaders because they deal with it all of the time. Domestic company owners may end up being shocked and dismayed that it has become the norm in their own country.

Expand full comment
In tune's avatar

That's why we have to Define ethical capitalism and live by that standard people do business with Putin and Israel and maybe that's not ethical

Expand full comment
Bill Prange's avatar

How can we do that? Modern corporations, almost by definition have one value, greed.

The only thing that might help is to establish that there is no such thing as an externality.

Expand full comment
Jim Brady's avatar

I'm not sure what you mean, I suspect that is true of others as well. What are you saying, exactly?

Expand full comment
Bill Prange's avatar

Two ideas actually. Since the prime directive for corporations is to be profitable, that translates to a flesh and blood person being greedy.

The other is that every resource used has consequences, mostly negative, corporations should not be allowed to ignore the effects of any such use

I hope that helps.

Expand full comment
Waffles's avatar

Terd WORLD!!

Expand full comment
Craig Plank's avatar

All brain stem, no brain.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

That would explain the slithering.

Expand full comment
Howardsp's avatar

Snakes are much more ethical.

Expand full comment
Ryan Collay's avatar

Hind brain…all pain, no gain…

Expand full comment
D4N's avatar

🤣

Expand full comment
JoanC's avatar

And impulses. Don't forget impulses.

Expand full comment
Raul Ramos y Sanchez's avatar

Republicans were once the party of free markets. They claimed government intervention in the economy was the hallmark of communism. Enter Trump. Now, the U.S. is staking its economy on the decisions of a single commissar. Like the communists, Trump believes his word is law and should supersede any opposition. The GOP has always claimed Democrats would turn the U.S. into a communist state. It turns out, Trump is beating them to it.

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Government intervention is what all social democracies do. And whenever a country has a leader whose word is law - as the US now has - it is a DICTATORSHIP. That has nothing to do with "communism" and everything with the end of ALL freedom, not just the freedom of the market.

Aside from that, Democrats have never aspired to be communists or fascists, so the neofascist GOP has been lying about Democrats as much as the neocon GOP already did.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

The only countries that were ever officially "communist" were Leninist dictatorships, and the authoritarian features of these states seem more durable than the Marxists pretentions they started with. Lech Walesa's comments on Trump's meeting with Zelensky (how it reminded him of the 1980s Commissars he had to deal with in the old days) are a testament to Trump's adoption of the worst aspects of 20th century "communism."

Expand full comment
EUWDTB's avatar

Since communism was never supposed to be a real dictatorship in the first place, and since Marx defined it as what comes AFTER capitalism - stage in the economic development of a country that self-declared "communist" fascist countries skipped altogether - I really don't see how the word "communism" could be accurately applied to any existing country, today or in the past.

As to Lech Walesa: interesting, I hadn't seen his comments yet. Do you have a link, by chance?

Expand full comment
scoff's avatar

https://apnews.com/article/poland-trump-walesa-ukraine-russia-eab6a26169183760c844580f7742fd78

“We were also terrified by the fact that the atmosphere in the Oval Office during this conversation reminded us of the one we remember well from interrogations by the Security Service and from the courtrooms in communist courts,” they wrote.

“Prosecutors and judges, commissioned by the omnipotent communist political police, also explained to us that they had all the cards in their hands, and we had none. They demanded that we cease our activities, arguing that thousands of innocent people were suffering because of us. They deprived us of freedom and civil rights because we did not agree to cooperate with the authorities and did not show them gratitude. We are shocked that you treated President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a similar way,” they wrote.

Expand full comment
Jeff Luth's avatar

The GOP should set up their headquarters in the Kremlin. It would be way more efficient.

Expand full comment
Frau Katze's avatar

The WSJ keeps writing editorials about this, but he doesn’t pay attention to them.

Expand full comment
Dri's avatar
May 10Edited

I completely understand the main point you're trying to make. The only tweak I’d suggest is that Trump’s behavior (which you accurately described) aligns more with authoritarian fascism than communism. Other than that, your point is valid and well-stated. The "red scare" has always been a fear-mongering tactic used by the GOP to manipulate and control politically, distorting reality, defaming the opposition using lies and intentionally misleading the public. As the saying goes, when a Conservative Republican speaks, he’s lying.

Expand full comment
John Laver's avatar

The wack job believes that his whims

Will distract as he greedily skims

By arranging to purloin

From the rubes via meme coin

While America's prosperity dims

Expand full comment
HarryEagar's avatar

He is like a lot of con men I covered when I was a newspaperman: Say what it takes to get past the instant obstacle, and repeat and repeat, whether the next obstacle arises in 10 minutes or 10 weeks.

This is not, in my view, whimsical but simply the reaction of the 5-year-old to the missing cookies. That is, it is operational. But it means not only that the con man does not have a plan: He cannot have a plan.

Unlike most of the con men I knew, who essentially wiped their memories and had only a future, no past; trump hangs on grimly to the husks of old lies. Hence his weird repeated claim that egg prices are down 90%.

Even his blindest followers (Hello, Stuart Varney!) know that cannot be so, but they have gotten on this bus and by gum, they are going to ride all the way to the barn!

Expand full comment
Dri's avatar

There is a reason he is often referred to as "Don the Con," a nickname that has circulated for decades, possibly originating in the 1980s when Donald Trump first gained national fame as a flamboyant real estate mogul known for self-promotion and dubious business practices. Many of his voters remain largely unaware of his controversial past.

Expand full comment
Edwin Callahan's avatar

But they’re not just whims. They’re batshit crazy whims; and it’s only going to get worse.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

Not just random batshit crazy though--pretty much deliberately the most evil thing he can think of. Snuffing out anything that might bring comfort or joy to anyone but the most morally depraved.

Expand full comment
Dri's avatar

Trump's cold, callous demeanor and character didn’t come out of nowhere — it’s a legacy from his father, Fred Trump. From father to son, the torch of arrogance and cruelty has been passed down, and now Trump Jr. carries it proudly. Maybe even young Barron will be saddled with it too, though one can only hope the cycle ends. According to multiple family members, Fred wasn’t a warm or affectionate father. He raised Donald to believe that showing joy — smiling, laughing, expressing kindness — was a sign of weakness. That’s why Trump rarely looks genuinely happy; his face is usually locked in a grimace like he’s been constipated since the Reagan era. And that bloated midsection? It’s not just from McDonald’s cheeseburgers — it’s the weight of decades of emotional repression. =D

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

He lets his gut do the deciding, akin to a virus entering a cell and rearranging the functions.

Expand full comment
Vito Rasenas's avatar

Or a fart clearing the room.

Expand full comment
Monroe Bryant's avatar

LOL. Anything involving the butt. Never not funny!

Expand full comment
Vito Rasenas's avatar

Butt and gut.

Expand full comment
Dri's avatar

Larger brains are supposed to mean higher intelligence — and judging by the size of his Jupiter-class gut, you'd think we were dealing with a genius. But no. If that's where his “thinking” happens, its definately overflowing with s**t

Expand full comment
Stephen Brady's avatar

tRump is a lot like the 'Tasmanian Devil' in the old Warner Brothers cartoons, except nowhere as bright.

Expand full comment
Dave's avatar

More like Tourette syndrome....

Expand full comment
Jennie H.'s avatar

A blatant insult to those who have Tourettes.

Expand full comment
Robert Gustafson's avatar

Right

Expand full comment
Monroe Bryant's avatar

Artisan whims

Expand full comment
Robert Gustafson's avatar

Right

Expand full comment
JDinTX's avatar

When he’s not whining

Expand full comment
JB's avatar

Are they whims, or are they concepts of a whim?

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Trump and Trumpism are cancerous, and like many cancers, have grown quite awhile in the dark, before rising to a sufferer's awareness. And we are suffering. Sometimes I think a too-large portion of my life, my liberty and my happiness has been eaten away throughout this past decade. But perhaps 'suffering' is the operative word. At some point suffering will force greater awareness and consequent efforts to rid ourselves of the tumors. Hopefully, we'll also learn a thing or two about the changes we're going to have to make to avoid a relapse.

Expand full comment
Charles Bastille's avatar

Yep, definitely a cancer. I liked Paul's analogy, too, in this case, because he's referring to the how the Covid virus disruptrd the supply chain, but now it's just his insanity doing it.

But yes, this Trump cancer has been attacking the American body politic for almost a decade now. The prognosis is grim.

Expand full comment
Sherri's avatar

Yes, and it's maddening. It started decades ago but for the majority of the public, it started in 2015 and they don't seem to get it (one person said he doesn't have anything in the stock market) or they do and that's just as bad.

As you say, they had ten years to do something effective but nothing seemed to work.

The only good that may come out of this is Canada is looking like they're voting for a sane person - not the right wing nut. They don't want to be what we've become.

Expand full comment
Barb George's avatar

They may have indirect investments in the stock market, bank savings, IRAS, retirement savings (hopefully) through others, etc.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

Anyone who has any money at all has an interest in the stability of the dollar, but most people don't understand that.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

👆🎯Yes, since the dollar is yet the "world currency, at least until we lose that based on the tangerine toddler's destructiveness, and stupidity.

Expand full comment
Sherri's avatar

I looked as them after the Ira was transferred. It was enough to make me look again, saw very little then put it into another ostensibly safe fund (top 10 holdings were shown). Thanks for that, though. I didn’t think of it before putting it in but found out quickly. It’s still okay and I don’t know why.

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Some think he's a symptom, not a cause, but who's quibbling?

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

Putin’s Apprentice is both a symptom of decades of undermining education, rightwing hate talk radio and Faux News and a cause of rapid destruction of our government and foundational institutions.

Expand full comment
Teri C's avatar

The cancer analogy works if you use it as a framework for necessary short and long term strategies and planning.

The treatment for this disease is to flood the streets with protests, and to have (long overdue) general strikes. These actions would reactivate the immune system - congress and the judiciary. People have the power, it’s time to use it.

The vaccines would be for preventing reoccurrence, something like constitutional amendments to end the Citizens United sellout, add D.C. to the states, bring SCOTUS to accountability, limit the power of the executive branch, harden civil and voting rights, reinstate the fairness doctrine in media with a way to ensure that it is followed, bring responsibility to gun ownership, and much more.

When the pendulum swings back we should be ready.

Expand full comment
Sam Beam's avatar

I agree that lasting economic strikes are going to be a critical part of resisting this regime. The economy is going into a decline and that must be exacerbated to magnify the effects and duration.

Expand full comment
Lee Peters's avatar

General strikes might have worked in February and March, but once the tariffs were announced on April 2 it became clear they don’t care if the economy implodes and massive unemployment follows. A general strike and massive unemployment are effectively the same thing, and our overlords are obviously unfazed by unemployment. They actually welcome it with their DOGE layoffs, and they’re pushing to eliminate pesky humans from work with their robo-taxis, AI, and automated production lines.

All they care about is collecting more currency, which doesn’t make sense long term because money is a tool humans use to make bartering among themselves easier. Eliminating most humans from the equation devalues the importance of money. Robots and AI don’t need money, they need energy sources.

Now they might notice if we peons stopped accepting their money and started bartering among ourselves, but that would require levels of coordination and self discipline unseen since WWII. Our best hope is other nations move away from the dollar and shun our overlords. That would get their attention, as has been shown recently with exchange rates and bond market valuations.

Expand full comment
Sam Beam's avatar

Disagree.

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

Their will be no need for general strikes to weaken the economy. Putin’s Apprentice is doing that on his own. I would argue he is doing it at Putin’s direction. Let Putin’s Apprentice take credit for the declining economy.

I don’t think we need a nation wide strike. Not that there would be enough unity at this time to have one. I think organizing mass rallies and targeted boycotts, supporting local businesses would be more effective. Boycotts have already punched a hole in Musk’s bottom line. It was so enjoyable watching the clip of him whining on Faux News about the mean people picketing his companies and taking pleasure in the decline of his fortune. His indifference to the suffering he has caused by his efforts to destroy the Federal Government make it clear he is as evil as Putin’s Apprentice and as delusional as Curtis Yarvin.

Expand full comment
Michael Shapiro's avatar

You beat me to this analogy!

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Ha ha. Maybe because I've unwillingly become intimate with cancers.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

This is an unfortunate facile analogy. Some cancers cannot be cured. For some cancers the cure is devastating as the disease, killing the patient, weakening the patient, causing a battle of the spirit as well.. Be careful with the cancer analogy...

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

No analogy is perfect, and I make no apology. Nothing is ever guaranteed, including a cure for any given disorder. And even a common cold can kill people. What I am trying to say here is that there is an opportunity inherent in this phase of our history for ridding ourselves, or at least reducing, some of the metaphorical cancers which have plagued us as a society since Europeans first landed on these shores. And please don't lecture me about cancer. My previous husband died of cancer, I have had cancer, and my present husband is six years out from successful treatment of cancer. I'm not sure what you mean by 'battle of the spirit,' however, and I would be grateful for any insights you have on that aspect of your statement.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

Yes walking across the street one can get killed. Of course no analogy is perfect. And this is not "any given disorder". The so call disease is humanity, human nature. That was *way before* Europeans landed here, not only since.They brought their humanity disease with them.We are in an existential battle now because we were unaware or we tolerated, thought we were curing, thought we had the answers, "it can't happen to us”. We relaxed and were tolerant.

So is cancer for some at least existential. Cancer grows spreads.The cure also kills. People also are SCARED of cancer, of dying of the battle, of the cures. It IS a battle and not always successfully treated, though we have more treatments and *cures*. You and your 2nd husband came through. GREAT. Not everyone does.You have to be careful and watch though.

The political situation here will be always begging to come back if we get through it to a better democracy after years of battle. But we may fall asleep again. (I/you won't be here and I hope our kids/progeny will be vigilant).We have to maintain our health though. We have to pass on our wisdom and knowledge.

So take this analogy to it's fullest if you will. If we rid ourselves of the tumors, new ones may very well grow,... ones we did not see, microscopic, ones.They grow and THEN make themselves known, like now. But we cannot battle what we do not see, what we are not aware of and what we don’t understand.

I do know cancer too (intimately) and almost all of us do. We should not get into a stupid argument comparing cancers. "Battle" is the word, of the body, of the spirit.

Now we battle politically. You candigyour heels in about this analogy.I just don't use it anymore. I don't like it. You HAD cancer. It was cured apparently. Great. I hope past tense. Many are. Many are not as you know. Many in the recent past were not because they did not have the advances we have now.

This societal threat IS a battle. The “disease" is something we may hope to cure (we have been hoping a long time) but will be happy to suppress enough, IF we don't lose spirit, discover RX's, keep trying.

We are in difficult times. There is and will be suffering and pain and loss.This IS for me an unfortunate analogy on a sensitive issue because it does not follow completely. It engenders fear hopelessness and resignation for some.That is a battle of the spirit. Cancer as analogy does mesh in aspects admittedly and at times. But that depends on how one feels about cancer, whether you have it, have beaten it, fear it, suffer the loss from it. I imagine hardly anyone has no experience with cancer and who does not fear it?. I'll dig my heels in about my criticism about using this as too facile an analogy or maybe that I just don’t like to use it.

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Okay, Potter, maybe my little squib needed more footnotes, or maybe it was just plain wrongheaded. If it caused you pain, I apologize. And I enjoyed reading your very generous reply, large parts of which I agree with completely. This is a long term battle of the soul which will not be won in a generation, and even if we do ultimately win it, nothing lasts forever, and as someone a lot wiser and more articulate than me observed, 'The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.'

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

It seems to me you are making Leigh Horne’s point. The purpose of an analogy is to facilitate understanding not precisely mimic the phenomenon being analogized. If you prefer a more scientific approach, I suggest looking at the quantitative political science and sociological studies.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

I am helping to make the point by engaging in the discussion agreeing and disagreeing with what I know about the disease. But also I am concerned about the flippancy of usage without deeper discussion given that everyone has a different reaction to the word/analogy to cancer which then migrates to the subject... i.e. fear, fear of death, confidence in cure (a long struggle), hopelessness. People have different experiences dealing with cancer... like Leigh Horne. What do you think when you hear cancer? The "body politic" is not a human body. So if we facilitate further understanding and do not fool ourselves that there will be a cure to this general threat throughout history regarding the nature of humanity, and think maybe we can hold it back here with a lot of hard work ( we must and must be vigilant), the cancer analogy works somewhat. But I initially said we should be careful. I think it is too facile an analogy to just throw it around. Use it, be clear, though, what you mean. I don't use it casually.

PS off this topic but about word usage and analogies, I feel that way about mental illness- particularly schizophrenia because I have dealt with this in my family. We talk about Trump being mentally off and try to match it with what we know I.e. psycho-social disease, sociopath. I just keep saying he is unfit, and mentally off... which I believe firmly. This last is not an analogy, but begging diagnosis. We do not and do not care it seems about that. We just go around and around following this insanity where it takes us... captured by it. This is for me the real tragedy of this situation. This person is unfit and he has a lot of people propping him up for personal gain.

So basically this is not about scientific definition but usage and understanding, reactions.

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

I think discussions of “human nature” are more likely to take us in the wrong direction than analogizing the current political crisis to a cancer.

Expand full comment
Sam Beam's avatar

If you think the cancer anology is inappropriate I think that reveals denial on your part of how bad this could all go. Beyond just the economic downturn alone, Trump and the other personality disordered psychopaths in his regime will go to extreme lengths to prevent authoritarian power from being pried from their hands. This might very well end in the death of the victim, if in this analogy the victim is the Republic, and could likely end in the actual deaths of many thousands of Americans, and the destruction of our social system. The regime is already using illegal state violence, which they are clearly trying to expand as rapidly as they are able, and we aren't even 3 months in.

More violence is coming, whether the violence of a virulent, deadly cancer on the body, or the violence of a desperate and risky radical surgery.

Expand full comment
In tune's avatar

I've stopped calling it the Trump regime and now I call it the Trump Fiasco

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

I am not in denial about how bad this all could go. We are in a battle. Read my above about why I don't like the cancer analogy. The cancer analogy is complicated and tends to be facile. Many people are resigned to cancer being fatal. Many are afraid of it. We are afraid of dying. We all have different reactions to cancer. We don't need to complicate this battle that we fight for our country and our children with these emotions. Cancer can be used as a scare. It's just too facile.. and some may even be inured to it. Others have had cancer, been cured ( for now), and still more I would dare to say, have suffered pain and loss. Denial is rampant out there I think...by the way. Not me. You basically prove my point by scaremongering.

PS/FYI for some denial is a coping mechanism for many.

Expand full comment
Sam Beam's avatar

No, I think your reaction is just a personal one, and you don't like people using a word that bothers you. You keep repeating that it's "facile", but that's not really a rebuttal.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

You obviously have not read my long rebuttal. It's not the word. Facile is a perfect word to summarize my POV which I have explained. You too are having a personal reaction!! Apparently mine bothers you.

Expand full comment
Sam Beam's avatar

I understand that is how you feel, and clearly others feel differently. I think the cancer anology is valid.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Viruses can lead to cancer.

Expand full comment
Light Warder's avatar

Many viruses directly cause cellular transformation that lead to different cancers. The list is long. Trump is a virus loaded with many oncogenes. If one doesn’t get you, another will. EVIL = Exonic Viral Insanity Locus.

Expand full comment
Paul Olmsted's avatar

Is Kool-aid cancer forming ?

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

No one has ever lived long enough to find out.

Expand full comment
Jenny Evans's avatar

Maybe that’s why it’s actually a good analogy. There’s no guarantee this ailment (Trump) can be cured.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

I admit this deeper discussion is beneficial. I was saying to be careful using the analogy flippantly because it can mean different things to different people. I do not feel hopeless about our survival. This is a battle though. It’s not by any stretch useless. But some are scared negative or running from it. We need to fight. Trump by the way is not the ailment. Our vulnerability is. Our ignorance and selfishness is. Trump is the awful result and now it’s existential. We will need to be ever watching and alert if/ when we overcome this. I suppose like cancer. Thanks.

Expand full comment
RickRickRick's avatar

My preferred metaphor is parasite. But I guess they all fit. He’s a parasitic virus that causes cancer.

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Ha ha, Maybe he's a parasitic brain worm that takes away your ability to discriminate between what's been shown to be true and what's just lurking in your imagination? And then causes a neoblastoma.

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

so not a coincidence that he is married to Melanoma....?

Expand full comment
Light Warder's avatar

These mixed metaphors are great and all relate to the body politic being ravaged by invasive challenges of our own making. In a metaphorical way we are means testing our form of democracy. Do we qualify for receiving the benefits of freedom, self determination and the pursuit of happiness? If not, the metastatic spread of fascism will eventually commandeer the critical physiological functions of our republic. If our immune systems can stop this toxic coup of maga, we have a chance to beat it.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

They are very mixed and sometimes confusing metaphors that don’t follow through deeply. Someone here in this discussion switched to vaccines needed to prevent this. There are no vaccines for cancer yet that I know of. But the cure comes with early detection a lot of the time. That is useful to note. I think we are in an advanced stage of something very toxic obviously. What are the vaccines against autocracy? That starts with education and having a common vision and moral view.

Expand full comment
Light Warder's avatar

Actually, the HPV vaccine prevents many cancers, including cervical carcinoma, as well as, some head&neck SCCa, that’s a fact.

I agree Potter, that metaphorically, eduction can be thought of as a vaccine against autocracy (and fascism) but only if we have a healthy immune system; that being a common vision and moral view.

What’s happening now is the maga cells within our body politic do not share a common world vision or moral view; their “education” is misguided and has allowed these cells to express checkpoint beliefs thus escaping detection and destruction. It’s how cancers grow and we now desperately need immunotherapy (i.e. checkpoint inhibitors in the form of massive voter turnout).

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

Metaphorically yes maybe. Immunotherapy does not work for all cancers and for everyone who is battling. Immunotherapy, a miracle of sorts, is needed on the body politic (metaphorically) if it can work enough. Many, including myself until recently, did not know or want to know about cancer very deeply/widely. It's an existential battle for many. Cancer comes many forms, some treatable or more treatable, some less so. Using it as a metaphor depends on what the individual perception and experience of it is.

Education is sorely needed regarding what we face. And this, had it happened years ago and *well* in our population, would have served us. WE have been in a great experiment as our forefathers said and knew. We have, I have to say, a lot of ( willful) ignorance about our country ( 's vision) and world history, about social psychology, and basic science. So Trump and his media and hyper-partisan support system built over the years, very destructive, have advanced our ills to life threatening when before it was held it in check. We had more of a majority about our basic vision and cooperation needed. So we wake up now, painful, in the late stage... not the prevention stage, and feel threatened and without the architecture we built to deal with it ( checks and balances). Hyper-partisanship dishonesty greed ate the GOP.

Prevention had to and has to start early and continue... passed on. It seems this has not happened. We have been distracted into "getting and spending" (Wordsworth) and have " laid waste our powers", the power of the people, distracted away from what kind of country, society, we want to live in, what freedom and democracy means and requires.

So cancer analogy has limited use and can be a depressing/scary comparison yielding hopelessness for some who back away from the fight or who give up and maybe even leave...including our immigrants, students and other people we need who have helped us thrive. This is so sad. But we fight on. Thanks for your indulgence.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

I prefer toxic, poisonous. Any disease that takes advantage of weakness and vulnerability works. Cancer is pervasive, has been defying escaping in some forms a cure, especially late stage. Trump’s evil has evolved and been perfected for a long long time as he realized his opportunities to capture the vulnerable which has grown ignorant been, distracted, brainwashed. He plays to that. Encourages it.

Expand full comment
Lynn McKenna's avatar

Very well stated. And my personal grief, like yours, is oversized. I will stay active and engaged, showing up, getting to town halls, writing to political leaders. But I must balance with time in nature, prayer and enjoying loved ones. One ‘up side’ is that even my activism is along side my loved ones.

Take care of yourself to find your joy.

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

Clearly a huge improvement in education will be needed if we want future electorates to be able to distinguish “reality TV” from reality and to actually understand how government works and what it does.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

👆🎯The dumbing down of the populace with so-called "reality TV" has been successful beyond their wildest dreams.

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Including new forms of education, such as entertaining series along the lines of the new Pitt (I live in the Burgh and worked in ERs in Baltimore for years, so maybe I'm biased!). And some of the YouTube, Substack and podcast-verse!

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

To each their own. I find drama too dramatic if you get my drift. I prefer saving my emotional energy for dealing with real people and real events. My partner on the other hand likes what might be referred to as “chick flicks” to change the channel before going to sleep. I do find her analysis of the “hidden messages” interesting but I don’t need to watch them myself.

Expand full comment
Dr Jen Adjacent (Todd)'s avatar

This cancer didn’t grow in the dark. It was more like we knew it was there but sought some fake homeopathic cure based on wishful thinking. Then, when it didn’t go away, only then did people take action only to have the cancer cause major damage, if not actual kill them.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

Maybe progressivism is the fruit juice cure in this analogy? Not a bad thing in itself, but definitely not the cure for the problem we're confronting.

Expand full comment
scoff's avatar

The efforts of "progressives" have pared way a lot of the tumors that had infected the body politic of the nation since its inception. Their work brought about the inclusion of blacks and women in the electorate, child labor laws, the 40-hour work week, the EPA and OSHA among many other accomplishments.

The list is long and distinguished, and the value of their contributions to the welfare of the people of this nation is inestimable. Those things are what progress is all about.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

Not talking about that, talking about the last 10 years when things turned from positive accomplishments to trying to shame people who didn’t use the “right” words for everything. When progressives stopped trying to expand the circle and turned to excluding anyone who didn’t share all their beliefs. Progressives have made themselves very unpopular, in spite of many voters sharing underlying values.

Expand full comment
Grizzly96's avatar

I disagree with your diagnosis. I think the goal was to protect marginalized groups from offensive speech. Unfortunately a sizable part of the population likes to disparage these groups and they love Putin’s Apprentice because he gave them “permission” the mock the handicapped and anyone else they deem as lesser. That Lyndon Johnson quote: "I'll tell you what's at the bottom of it. If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." describes it best.

That is why Putin’s Apprentice is so popular with the lower class whites. Big tax cuts make him popular with rich.

Expand full comment
Jim H.'s avatar

The comparison to cancer is unfair to cancer. I think it's more like Tourette Syndrome.

Expand full comment
Leigh Horne's avatar

Arf arf you MFing piece of @#$%^&*!

LOL?

Expand full comment
Joseph Tucker's avatar

Hope you are correct we must make some serious changes in who runs our Government!!!

Expand full comment
mary thiel's avatar

Yes, I resent the anxiety and attention seeking, all the time.

Expand full comment
Dirk  Faegre's avatar

It’s all Trump, Trump,Trump. But it should be Republicans, Republicans, Republicans.

We’re going to get nothing but trouble from Trump (indeed his whole adult life has been about nothing but trouble).

So the focus on him is guaranteed to get us nothing.

However, Republicans can alter this train wreck.

We only require about 6-7 in the House and 3-4 in the Senate to go to work on this madman.

Focus on the R’s.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

They can - but they won't. At least not until they're more afraid of their constituents than they are of King MAGA.

Expand full comment
Texan By Birth's avatar

They obey their funders — always. When these say “Impeach”, it will be done. And that will happen when the economy starts to shrink the funders’ fortunes.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

They obey their funders up to the moment when their constituents start coming at them with tiki torches and pitchforks - and maybe guillotines and gallows.

Expand full comment
Barb O's avatar

I will be carrying a cardboard pitchfork at the next protest. Small steps.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

As will I. A cardboard pitchfork is a perfectly good start. Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

//

Don't let up folks, it's working:

Boycott TE卐LA! Boycott Swastikar!

Short TE卐LA! Short Swastikar!

Boycott 卐tarlink!

Boycott 卐/Twitter!

Curb your DOGE!

https://generalstrikeus.com/strikecard

https://www.fiftyfifty.one/

https://indivisible.org/

https://handsoff2025.com/

https://www.teslatakedown.com/

https://www.riseandresist.org/

https://thirdact.org

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

First their constituents have to abandon Trump. That won't happen until the damage is done.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

That's already happening. Just witness Republican town halls. The people are pissed!

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

*Some* people are *extremely* pissed. Many aren’t affected yet, but they will be.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Oh yeah, they will, soon enough.

Expand full comment
Will Liley's avatar

It’ll take a while: it’s reported that he has 90pc support among Republicans. If that’s the same as the 2024 election vote, it means 0.9 x 0.50 or 45pc of the country still is behind him. Sobering.

Expand full comment
Lois Henry's avatar

Bring out Madam Guillotine

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

"Let them eat cake!" Chop!

Expand full comment
Henry Kramer's avatar

This is so very true. The R’s have the majority and they could stop him. They are completely complicit in this disaster and everyone needs to remember this election time!

Expand full comment
Erwin's avatar

Yes, at this point it is the entire Republican Party in power. We can no longer separate "Maga Republicans" & "other Republicans"; the Party is completely Maga.

Expand full comment
Steve Richmond's avatar

Excellent point.

Expand full comment
shellygal's avatar

Agreed! Dems could focus on the Republicans and the devastating CR bill. Pound the message repeatedly how devasting and make the GOP own it.

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

I prefer to call them MAGA, or maga. To call them Republicans confuses them with the people whom I used to disagree with on policy but whom believe in real democracy. There has always been a bit of an authoritarian streak in the Republican party, but there were some real nasty elements in WOKE as well. People who were ready to destroy people's lives and careers over bad word choices.

Think of all the Republicans who have fallen on the sword. True it wasn't enough, too many were cowards who deluded themselves into thinking America was better with them in the room than outside.

I like to use MAGA, for the big movers and grifters, and maga, for all of the ignorant, misguided fools who have created the means of their destruction.

I have always been a Democrat. But we need to look to our own deficiencies. Why, even if it's messaging, has the rural and working class abandoned the party? Why can't blue states get housing and major infrastructure built?

Expand full comment
William Quinlivan's avatar

What genius came up with the idea that making life sweeter for our oligarchs will fix what's wrong with America, anyway?

Expand full comment
William Quinlivan's avatar

Republicanism is an utterly debauched political theory. If you subtract the Victim Porn, Cowardice In The Face of Facts, Pursuit of Unearned Privilege, and the Choice of Tribe Over Principle, there’s just nothing left!

Expand full comment
Howardsp's avatar

Tiffany of Wisconsin is a mindless R. He won’t even show up at his office in Wisconsin.

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

The citizens of the United States elected a vicious old fool. They did so because they allowed their voters to come under the influence of expert election campaigners armed with vast amounts of money.

The nasty old fool has surrounded himself with vicious younger fools, who obtained their positions and retain them by flattering him. The levels of corruption in this administration are absolutely staggering.

There is no policy. Trump can barely string a sentence together and hasn’t had a new idea in years.

We Europeans will not forgive you for selling out Ukraine. Remember that.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I'm sorry you feel that way, as do most Americans. Most of us didn't vote for this Scourge, and I know that the media overseas has been covering our uprisings on April 5 and April 19, unlike our own media. So it makes me wonder why you don't notice that and the fact that most of us fully support Ukraine?

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

I do, of course. But, frankly, a good American in 2025 is as much use as a good German was in 1938. You are collectively responsible for the treason, the corruption, the assault on your liberties and above all the stabbing in the back of the Ukrainians.

You are the slaves of your 18th century Constitution which prevents you from regaining any control over what your nation does until 2028, which will be far too late.

I know perfectly well that many of you are nice people and have sound ideas. But you are all in the grip of the depraved bunch who form your Administration, the terrified ninnies in your Executive and the venal old fools in your Supreme Court.

So far as your former Allies are concerned, the best thing that you can do is to overthrow your government and, as Jefferson said, institute new Government.

Otherwise we will just have to leave you to shrink into global insignificance with corruption and wickedness tempered by incompetence.

Expand full comment
Diane Findley's avatar

I hate trump and MAGAs with a red hot passion. But easy for you to sit where you are and be critical of those of us who really have no power at the moment. Perhaps it would be better for Europeans to support the resistance in America, as we supported the resistance in Europe during hitler's regime.

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

We are supporting you. What more do you want us to do?

Expand full comment
Diane Findley's avatar

That's surprising given this comment you made: "You are collectively responsible for the treason, the corruption, the assault on your liberties and above all the stabbing in the back of the Ukrainians."

Seems like you are painting us all with your condescending brush.

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

My statement is correct; you are collectively responsible.

That is how this works.

You are more used to doing the condescending; we can all understand that and sympathise with you, but you are a nation which has elected your very own tyrant with his retinue of courtiers, and you, collectively, are reneging on your commitments, threatening your friends (who are becoming your ex-friends) aligning with Putin’s Russia and so on and so on. I’m just holding the mirror up to you.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Your comments haven't been very supportive. Indeed, they're rather hateful.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Yes! Well said. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Mea culpa, Mea maxima culpa. You speak the truth. We are complicit and deeply remorseful. For a people so fortunate our behavior is reprehensible. Amid all our we're #1 boasts and lifestyles of the rich and famous aspirations we forgot where we came from and who we stepped on to get here. Your contempt for us is deserved. Thank you for expressing it so clearly. Many will react defensively and attempt to avoid the mantle of shame. That response will likely be the majority opinion. Knowing thyself is one thing, doing something about it another. In between the two lies the difficult truth we will expend every effort not to uncover. However, this sorts out thank you for telling a friend that he is wrong. We'll just have to see if we can accept the truth and work to overcome our weaknesses.

Expand full comment
Jenny Evans's avatar

As another Brit, I’d like to point out that Brits also have a lot to answer for, especially in relation to our colonial past.

But unfortunately I do think that when you’re part of a nation you do take on the mantle of the responsibility. If you’re living in the US now you do have to get out and make your voice heard, one way or another. Protest in some form is the way to meet that responsibility. And as a Brit you do need to be supporting ways to make amends for a colonial past.

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

Chapeau!

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

And a tip of the hat to you as well:-)

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Hogwash. We're not 1938 Germans. Have you not noticed the uprising? 1938 Germany didn't have that. And we're just getting warmed up. We're not just "nice people" - we're angry, we're infuriated and we are Rising and Resisting ✊✊✊.

We have revolution in our DNA, we're not going down without a fight!

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

Report back when you have locked them up.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

1. I don't report to you any more than I report to Trumpkopf.

2. You'll know when we have them locked up, unless you live under a rock.

Expand full comment
Almost Over's avatar

Nasty response.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Clear as a bell. Will do.

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

I'll believe it when I see it (and I very much hope to see it. I just don't see it yet.)

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I saw it when I went out there on April 5 and April 19. A million people clogging 5th Ave. all the way from Bryant Park down to 23rd St. Another million clogging 5th Ave. and Madison Ave. from Bryant Park all the way up to Central Park South.

I'm not sure how you're missing it, but make no mistake about it, it's there, it's happening. And it's just getting warmed up.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

You know, back when George W Bush decided to invade Iraq based on false pretenses, I had hope that Europe would fall support the French position and recognize that the US was unfit to lead a global alliance. Of course it wouldn't be possible to turn on a dime, but Europe has had plenty of time to build up its own capabilities and be less dependent on the US for leadership, given how obvious it should have been that the US electorate had the capacity to choose an idiot to be Commander in Chief. And yet, it has taken over twenty years and a second Trump administration for Europe to finally see the light. I think there is plenty of blame to go around here.

Expand full comment
Francis Accardo's avatar

Yes. But in partial defense of the Europeans, we should acknowledge that the election of Obama in response to Bush and the election of Biden in response to Trump 1 could look like, from a distance, sane and responsible action by a sane and responsible citizenry.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

That is not the point—and anyway, the election of Obama was largely in response to the financial crisis, and anyone paying the least attention to American politics (i.e. just checking polls) would have had to note that Biden was underwater in popularity from late 2021 on. But even aside from particular bad choices on the part of US voters, no democracy has ever had as much power as the US has, and none ever should (obv no dictatorship should, either—a sole superpower is never good). The European Union has had the potential to be a superpower but has never stepped up, now it is being forced to.

Expand full comment
Robert Gustafson's avatar

How would you overthrow it? Seriously

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

(As an aside, this shows the weakness of the US Constitution as opposed to Parliamentary systems where the Executive is by definition the majority in the Legislature - Britain got rid of Liz Truss in six weeks; the USA has to wait four years).

I think the only practical way to proceed is by non-violent mass civil action. I don’t mean mere demonstrations at weekends. I mean shut the country down.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Shutting things down is the advice we have received on this forum. One of the harbingers is a trend towards liquidity, another is reduced shipping activity. What if like the Montogomery bus boycott we all stopped flying? Crickets in the airports. Zoom and staycations. Air Force One flying solo from Florida to New Jersey. Congress schlepping about on trains cars and buses. That will be the spur to action.

Expand full comment
Darrell Cadieux's avatar

'Most of us didn't vote for this scourge' Actually yes you did, Trump was within a hair of an actual majority of those who voted:

Nominee Donald Trump Kamala Harris

Party Republican Democratic

Home state Florida California

Running mate JD Vance Tim Walz

Electoral vote 312 226

States carried 31 + ME-02 19 + DC + NE-02

Popular vote 77,302,580[2] 75,017,613[2]

Percentage 49.8%[2] 48.3%[2]

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

The key words are "of those who voted". Fairly half of eligible voters didn't vote at all. of the remainder, yes, Trumpkopf was within a hair of an actual majority - discounting the possibility of counting machine tampering on the part of MuskRat and his crew of hacker punks. Aside from that, "yes you did", actually >no< >I< didn't vote for the Orange Scourge, and neither did the remaining half of eligible voters. So my comment remains valid.

Expand full comment
Robert Gustafson's avatar

Had it not been for the pandemic induced inflation, Kamala Harris—who came within a point & a half of Trump—would he president today. The economic whiplash of the pandemic & its aftershocks guaranteed incumbent-party defeat in 2024 as well as 2020

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

Under the influence of their own racism is more like it.

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

True. But Elon is over in Europe working his magic. You've got your right wing weirdos too. Don't let them take over. Figure out what we did wrong and don't make the same mistakes.

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

True and fair. We have Orban, Erdogan and a whole bunch of wannabes.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Americans will never forgive our selling out Ukraine.

Expand full comment
Rainer Dynszis's avatar

"We Europeans will not forgive you for selling out Ukraine. Remember that."

Would you kindly explain who exactly appointed you to speak for Europe?

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

I did 😉

Expand full comment
Rainer Dynszis's avatar

You failed to comprehend the concept of a rhetorical question, didn't you?

Expand full comment
Andrew Craig-Bennett's avatar

No, I didn’t. You failed to understand sarcasm. But then, you Americans were Top Nation for so long, and you must be finding it hard to adjust.😉

Expand full comment
Sharon McDonald's avatar

I did not vote for him and I hate what he is doing to Ukraine - at least 1/2 of us do - he's a destryer we can nt get rid of 🙏💔

Expand full comment
B.E. Turpin's avatar

The vaccine in this case would be a successful impeachment resulting in conviction.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

I think you mean a successful conviction. He was successfully impeached twice.

Expand full comment
B.E. Turpin's avatar

Thx for that, I edited it accordingly.

Expand full comment
Oldsalt65's avatar

If he were successfully impeached he would simply ignore it and remain in power. Trump has the military, all federal law enforcement and the Supreme court on his side. And don't for get the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and others. In short, all the guns. Congress has nothing but fear and greed.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

He has much of federal law enforcement and the SCOTUS in his back pocket, along with reichwing "militia's". I don't believe he has the entire military on his side. For every Michael Flynn, there's at least one Mark Milley. If he were successfully impeached - and convicted in the Senate, he would ignore it, and things would get ugly from there.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

In order to be successfully impeached, he would have to lose a very substantial portion of Republicans, along with his legal authority to command the armed forces. He's already losing the Supreme Court. Of course he would have a backstop in VP Vance, who would be legally enabled to step in and protect Trump unless he were somehow impeached first...

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Yeah, the current congress won't likely do it. In the unlikely event that it did, we'd need a dozen GOP Senators to nail the conviction. We'd definitely have to take them both down, along with Jackass Johnson, for it to really stick. I'm not yet convinced that the SCOTUS isn't just putting on a show. I hope they're not. From a legal standpoint, his authority to command the armed forces doesn't include sending them after citizens, and I believe there would be a split if he were to attempt it.

Expand full comment
Connie weeks's avatar

But if he were impeached and convicted, I believe enough of us will fight , and most of the military will back us.

Expand full comment
Oldsalt65's avatar

German Soldiers of WWII were mostly good Christians (Catholic, Lutheran) raised in a Democratic country, the Weimar Republic. Yet....

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

Not ALL of the guns.

Expand full comment
Neil Laslett's avatar

True! Don't forget about all the brave 2nd Amendment patriots and their military grade weaponry, standing tall in case tyranny should raise its ugly head over free American soil! Oh...wait... They're all on his side, aren't they?

Expand full comment
Andrew Grossman's avatar

Mark Carney is at the center of isolating the USA diplomatically, economically and politically, inoculating the rest of the world from trumpian infection, RFK Jr being irrelevant to that. As a nationality-law academic I am watching huge numbers of Americans reclaiming ancestral citizenship—or even “golden passports far cheaper than Musk’s $5mn version—with many of the best and the brightest scientists and scholars leaving America for Canada, Europe and elsewhere. (One issue I’ve been looking at: will the USA honor its 30 Social Security totalization agreements with other countries? The Senate never ratified the treaty with Mexico, denying Mexicans benefits of FICA and SET contributions they paid.)

Expand full comment
Darrell Cadieux's avatar

"Mark Carney is at the center of isolating the USA diplomatically, economically and politically, inoculating the rest of the world from trumpian infection". Good! I am proud of our Prime Minister...who BTW is poised to win a majority government in our national election. He is the ONLY person to ever be in charge of two G7 currencies being the former governor of both the banks of Canada and the bank of England. As a result he has excellent 'Friendly' relations with the non-US top people in the rest of the financial world. We are building stronger trade relationships with them...instead. What Trump is attempting to do Canada (the 51st state bullshit) has enraged us to a point where the relationship is now irretrievably broken, I will probably never set foot in the US ever again...even after the orange A-hole is long gone. In stores we are reading labels...if it says USA it stays on the shelf. In my opinion, the best thing that could happen the the US right now would involve one KFC chicken bone.

Expand full comment
Sharon McDonald's avatar

Not a single person I know agrees on the 51 state , I know when I read that I laughed so hard and then a hell NO , now humpty dumpy you are making Canada hate us you dick tater !! And no worries - I predict he has someone /s shot a peaceful gathering and that will be when we go after them hard

Expand full comment
D4N's avatar

",,, 30 Social Security totalization agreements" Not familiar.. Might you expound on that Andrew ?

Expand full comment
Andrew Grossman's avatar

Totalization treaties date from an era of defined benefit pensions but still have imports and continue to be negotiated. I was an economic office at the sus Embassy in London 1977-70 when James Ammerman, Treasury Attaché across the hall from me and specialists from SSA and Treasury began negotiating an early treaty with the U.K. At the time, and to a lesser extent now with defined contribution pensions, multinational firms’ pensions were “integrated” with Social Security. For that reason the retention of the right to continue paying FICA and not paying National Insurance contributions (or in Canada CPP or QPP — there are agreements with both Ottawa and Quebec) for up to five years was important. Persons who paid into a foreign scheme for less than the ten years that both U.S and U.K. schemes require could “totalize” those contributions into the other scheme. (Many countries have no minimum number of years to collect a pension; most will pay beneficiaries abroad.) it is almost always more advantageous to get a separate pension rather than totalize. The U.K. (and Switzerland and some other countries) allow voluntary contributions. For the U.K. scheme Class 2 and Class 3 contributions are a bargain. Class 2 can be as cheap as £129 a year and 35 years of NICs entitles a pension of £209 or so a week, inflation protected. Social Security is skewed to benefit the low paid. Until 1 Jan. 2024 the Windfall Elimination Provision clawed back that benefit: until then I was getting £475 or so a month. Since Biden signed the WEP abolition act on 5 Jan. 2025 I get £1,000 retroactive to 1 Jan. 2024. I also get a small QPP payment and I inherited my late wife’s U.K. State Pension. You can find all you want to know on this subject on the internet. The SSA site lists all 30 treaty countries. An agreement was signed with Mexico years ago but the Senate has refused to ratify it (“Too costly”). They’d rather rip off Mexicans who paid FICA and SET sometimes for decades. U.S. citizens in Mexico (and for all I know citizens of totalization countries) do get SS payments there. While totalization treaties permit U.S. citizens not to most FICA or SET when they live and work in a signatory country that right can be waived. It may be advantageous to do so especially with the WEP abolished. One can usually pay back FICA  or SET up to 6 (sometimes 3) years. One can pay U.K. NICs six years in arrears. U.S. taxpayers in a nonsignatory country, notably India and Israel, are double taxed unless they are employed by a local, not a U.S. employer and are not self-employed.

Expand full comment
D4N's avatar

Thank you for this generous educational effort. Count just this one topic that the average American has scant knowledge of that's relative to "Immigration" law. Most of the 30 percent that voted for the "OiD", aka Orange il Duce are of the low information sort that only get further enraged when told that immigration law is far more complicated than erecting a fence. I've tried and tried, alas. If you can, please bear this in mind when / if resentments get the better of you. The 'tail' is wagging the entire 'dog' here. Hope necessitates a weak belief that a reckoning will come and can't come soon enough for this American victim. In solidarity, yours.

Expand full comment
What Have You Done?'s avatar

I wish! I just can’t help thinking though that if they didn’t impeach him for J6, there’s no hope now!! However I would like to ask - is there a limit to how many times articles of impeachment can be brought? Even if there is no chance of it getting the votes? Couldn’t we bring them every day???

Expand full comment
Karen Mohr's avatar

I wish House Democrats would get together and individually file articles of impeachment every day for the next 200 plus days. This Impeachorama wouldn’t result in an actual impeachment and certainly not a conviction at this point, but it would show that Democrats have some spine and are taking control of the narrative. The media would pay attention.

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

It would succeed just as much as the NY case against Trump for naughty financial practices. That political stunt gave Trump a lot of support because he was able to claim to be a victim of left wing/woke judicial warfare.

Bad idea.

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

support only among the illiterate. The jury carefully considered a LOT of business records and heard a lot of witnesses besides Stormy Daniels, and T. had as many lawyers as he wanted, and they helped select the jury - and the jury had no difficulty deciding he was guilty on every count as charged.

Tax fraud is not just a 'naughty financial practice'. In fact one forgets - why does the press allow us to forget? - that after an even more thorough review of Trump's records for decades, he was held to have defrauded New York State of $350 million in taxes.

So nothing left wing or woke about the legal proceedings. A belated attempt to hold a lifelong criminal accountable for some of the costs he has imposed on the society he grifts on.

Expand full comment
Will Liley's avatar

John, all true but actually the FELONY wasn’t falsifying business records (a misdemeanour) but using them to mislead New York voters to help his election chances. And but for the lottery of him getting a Trumpist judge in Florida in his secret documents theft - a case that even his lickspittle former A-G Bill Barr said he was clearly going to lose - he would be a twice convicted felon. The “warfare” slur is a total GOP invention, especially the J6 lawsuits. Trump has had the luck of the Devil all his life.

Expand full comment
Robert Gustafson's avatar

He runs on that anyway

Expand full comment
Chris Martin's avatar

Democrat Al Green "vowed" to file the first articles against Trump at a rally back on April 7th. That barely made a blip. When/if he does so it'll also barely make a blip, and your analogy with the ACA repeal doesn't work in this case.

Democrats don't control the House. Which obviously means they also don't control any of the committees. Articles of Impeachment first go through the House Judiciary Committee, they don't automatically receive a floor vote. Any articles filed between now and January 2027 have *zero* chance of getting past the Judiciary Committee. If they somehow did, they'd likely die in the Rules Committee, which is always stacked with not just members of the majority party, but loyalists of the Speaker so he or she can control the legislation that reaches the floor.

Your analogy doesn't work because the noteworthy and media attention grabbing attempts to eliminate the ACA got floor votes, because Republicans controlled the House. I believe the actual total attempts by House Republicans to kill the ACA is over 100. Some of them were defeated in committee. Nobody from the legacy media (and few voters) cares much about legislation that dies in committee, because that happens on a regular basis.

Lastly, the House is already a symptom of the clown show the Republican party, and to some extent our society, has become. We *really* shouldn't contribute to this. Democrats are the only adults left in the "room."

In our political system, the House has actual, important work that needs to get done. Instead, the Republicans have done things like depose McCarthy and take over two weeks to find a replacement, nearly default on the debt by taking until the 11th hour to raise the debt ceiling, shut down most of the federal government on multiple occasions because of their failure to pass a CR or actual appropriations bills, and come close to shutting down the government on even more occasions. Then there's the 70+ times they've voted to kill the ACA when they knew most of those attempts would die in the Senate.

Congress isn't supposed to be a performative clown, aka reality, show! We got into this mess because (low information) voters voted for a "reality" show "star" to become President, and most Republicans have cared more about making political "points" on Faux Noise than they do about legislating for over a decade.

Expand full comment
Karen Mohr's avatar

I appreciate your thoughtful, thorough, and well-informed critique and am interested to know what you recommend Democrats do since the administration is ignoring court orders and creating a constitutional crisis.

Expand full comment
Chris Martin's avatar

The hard truth of the matter is, from a legislative perspective there simply isn't anything substantive Congressional Democrats can do about Trump's lawlessness until 2027, and even then it's unlikely to result in conviction and removal from office.

The courts are not completely unarmed, and Alito and Thomas aren't complete roadblocks. However, because our judicial system is (supposed to) give a lot of weight to precident, I think this crisis is based on the fact nobody wants to be the first judge to "go full nuclear" and the administration knows it. This is why we've seen judges repeatedly try to give the administration an off ramp from the insanity they've created. None of them want to do things like be the first judge to hold a sitting cabinet member in civil contempt of court...or even more, go completely around DOJ and do things like appoint a special prosecutor to indict, and then empower another court officer to arrest anybody in the administration because the answer to "What's next?" after that may be "political violence of the kind the US hasn't seen since the 1850s."

What may be more disturbing is the fact that even if a judge does go "full nuclear" there are practical hurdles to fixing some of this mess, like bringing Garcia and others back from El Salvador, that the court system (and even Congress) will have difficulty getting around.

I don't like any of this criminality and general insanity any more than anybody else. Perhaps the most unfortunate part of this is the clowns are the "face" of Trumpism, but some of the actual policies like deportation were formed by some intelligent, but IMO evil, people who have been thinking about ways to use the cracks in our political and judicial systems against us for years. Some of what they've done is so diabolical we need to accept that there aren't quick solutions, it's going to take years. Once Trump's gone, we also will need to accept that we can't "play nice" and seek bipartisan solutions like Biden did if we want to fix this mess.

Expand full comment
Karen Mohr's avatar

What you're saying makes total sense, but it doesn't take into account how public pressure might impact Congress and even judges. Do you believe that resistance in the form of protests and contacting representatives is futile and we just need to wait for elections to turn things around? Do we just accept that the courts are only willing to go so far and that no Republicans will align with Democrats against Trump even if his approval ratings continue to fall and their seats are in jeopardy as a result? If we resign ourselves to what's happening, we can guarantee that nothing will change, but if we push back, at least there's the possibility we can move the needle. Or don't you think so? There have been successful pro-democracy movements in other countries. Why not here?

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

The media attention would not be positive though...it would be on the order of "what a stupid thing to do, proves Democrats are hopeless."

Expand full comment
Karen Mohr's avatar

You may be right, but Republicans tried 70 times to eliminate the Affordable Care Act when it was clearly a hopeless endeavor, and it appears not to have hurt them in the least.

Expand full comment
Sarah's avatar

This is exactly what I keep hoping for; it can’t hurt and trump certainly provides brand-spankin’-new impeachable offenses every day!

I also think it’s time for congressional Dems to start “whistleblowing” on their Republican peers. We all know the elected republicans say things “off camera” that do not align with what they say in public. Republicans kiss Trump’s ass, left/right/center, they have abandoned their constituents, they’ve crapped on their oaths to this country, and they sure aren’t doing a damn thing in the Senator or the house. Democrats need to realize that republicans are not their “friends”, and forget that republicans are scared….Screw ‘em. Elected republicans are a threat to our Constitution and democrats need to grab every journalist they can find and throw those republicans under buses. Quote ‘em and name ‘em. Call their words lies and call them liars.

Imagine democrats ad American soldiers fighting on the front-lines in a war. Now imagine that they know other US soldiers are actively betraying our military, and aiding the enemy. The Dems would report those treasonous soldiers immediately, right? Congress may not literally be a military battlefront, but for all intents and purposes, war is being waged and the democrats are looking away while republicans conspire against and betray our nation.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

There's no limit.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

Not as long as Republicans hold the House.

Expand full comment
stuart burstin's avatar

But the cure of impeachment would require action on the part of the legislature that supports the executive overreach that they have enabled (government is now by executive order and and executive structure that does what the regime wants). Changing the legislature would involve voting in a large majority that values the founders ideals. To achieve that outcome would involve an educated populace with skills in reasoned analysis. HG Wells mentioned a race between education and catastrophe. We have lost that race, and there is no Time Machine.

Expand full comment
Charles Bastille's avatar

That's why we shouldn't be giving up on the midterms. No excuses should be tolerated for sitting them out. Not even legitimate concerns that Republicans will try desperately to stifle votes. (Our reaction to that should be record turnout, in fact).

If our resident Nobel prize winner is right about the supply chain, among other things, we should be able to get even Trump voters on board.

Expand full comment
Bill Riley's avatar

Impeach, convict, and remove from office. Then, form a bipartisan, coalition government to serve only until 2028. During this period, all committees in both chambers will have even numbers of members. This is the way forward—DO IT.

Expand full comment
Susan Hofstader's avatar

If you're going to fantasize, at least make it something fun--maybe involving Trump and Musk both getting put in a rocket bound for a one-way trip to Mars. It's more likely than what you're proposing.

Expand full comment
Charles G Hanson's avatar

Don't forget to include Vance in the one way tickets!

Expand full comment
Robert Gustafson's avatar

Recipe for gridlock even at committee level. The madness of “MAGA” predates DJT, and will postdate him too.

Expand full comment
Turgut Tuten's avatar

I was thinking of Chlorox, his favorite virus treatment.

Expand full comment
Al Keim's avatar

Chug a lug chug a lug

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Or a guillotine.

Expand full comment
John Howard's avatar

Let's not forget that by confirming unqualified nominees to cabinet positions and passively tolerating (and even blessing) the administration's incompetence, the Republican-dominated House and Senate share complicity in this national tragedy.

Expand full comment
Essmeier's avatar

Every single Cabinet nominee was unqualified for the job for which they were nominated.

Yet not one of them declined, saying, "I'm not qualified for this job." That's the part that baffles me.

Expand full comment
William Quinlivan's avatar

They were selected for their loyalty to Trump only, and here their erect tongues testify satisfactorily to their ample qualifications. They could spear a donut from across the table!

Expand full comment
Sharon McDonald's avatar

One did , just one

Expand full comment
Charles G Hanson's avatar

For those of us old enough to remember M.A.S.H.

Pete Hegseth = Frank Burns

Kristy Noem = Hot Lips Houlihan

Donald Trump = Henry Blake

Expand full comment
Mark Silverstone's avatar

Please correct me if I am wrong. But I doubt Dr. Krugman would ever have posted these comments in his previous position at the New York Times. The ideas are similar. But the tone is, perhaps, more blunt. But there are still data included that support the ideas. I think it's great.

Of course, the news is different from anything we've seen before. That may account for it too.

Anyway, thanks.

Expand full comment
Joe Palau's avatar

Paul’s analogy with an abused spouse grasping for evidence contrary to the pattern of abuse is 100% accurate. That hurts but it’s true. That’s what to be made of stock market fluctuations based on “tone.” They are superficial indicators of change for the better

Nothing but the voting public can save this nation and that won’t come before irrevocable damage is done to our constitutional order, the rule of law and our economy. We hoped for the Mueller report, for conviction after two impeachments, Jan 6 indictments and now the Supreme Court and its judicial orders. None came to pass

Nothing will happen until the decided majority of the nation turns on him. That is when the hard work of repair and recovery will begin.

I’m rooting for a second coming of our nation. I believe we can and will survive as a constitutional democracy. But not before Fox News and right wing social media voices are drowned out by the roar of an angry nation devastated by the MAGA revolution.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

America is in denial.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

Far too many of us are. I blame a steady diet of Fox propaganda channel, and so-called "reality TV" slop. No intellectual fiber there.

Expand full comment
Piotr Szafranski's avatar

Prof Krugman mentioned that over the years, the NYT editorial policy gradually changed in the direction of "equally presenting both sides of the argument", and he was increasingly discouraged from taking firm stands.

As some of the economics is quite exact and sometimes a given thesis follows from rules of math or massive decisive data and not from opinions or political leanings, Prof Krugman was increasingly unable to comply with this NYT "balanced presentation" policies. How do you write a balanced article on the validity of 2+2=4?

All this is funny in a way, as prof Krugman has the academic habit of quoting the opposing opinions, to a much larger degree than most newspaper authors I usually read. He should have been the last NYT writer the editors would harass for "lack of a balanced presentation".

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

The NYT editorial policy has moved away from math into more of a "he said, she said" format. Present the facts, but then present the "alternative facts". As if such a thing even existed in reality. "Let's be more like Faux Newspeak".

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

and the sane-washing - so that Trump's "immigrants are poisoning American blood" became in the NYT "Trump discusses genetics"...

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Yeah, that too. A perfect example of why we call it "lamestream" media.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

👆🎯

Expand full comment
Mark Silverstone's avatar

Thanks. I was not aware of this.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

The Times would never have printed a column like this. Dr. Krugman had to be more circumspect when writing for NYT.

Expand full comment
Ethereal fairy Natalie's avatar

You are correct, look here on his Substack for his explanation of why he left the NYT, in short they were rewriting his articles, to say something less truthful.

Expand full comment
Rikeijin's avatar

Trump still gets 42% support rate in recent poll.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-approval-rating-dips-many-wary-his-wielding-power-reutersipsos-poll-finds-2025-04-21/

If American people don't realize Trump is actually ceding the world to China. The US allies are doomed, especially Taiwan.

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Those 42% are comprised of Trump’s billionaire bros, ignoramuses, and just downright stupid people. They have caused America to be the laughing stock of the entire world.

Expand full comment
Scott Helmers's avatar

Absolutely. Anyone who is still fully behind Trump is irredeemable and beyond rehabilitation. They must be marginalized. Trump is ignorant, corrupt, and mean spirited. Someone who loves him for those qualities is hardly a good and mentally healthy person.

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Yes Scott! That's exactly why America's reputation has been trashed. These people actually voted for this fraud even after knowing what a disaster he was the first time. People around the world are just shaking their heads at Americans, asking - how could we be so stupid to elect Trump AGAIN?...

Expand full comment
NLTownie's avatar

To be fair, many people in America have been convinced that Fox News is the truth and the NYT, even mushy and compromised as the political coverage is, and other traditional news sources are fake news and *we* are the deluded ones. How to bridge the divide? Until that happens, many of Trump’s grassroots supporters will remain loyal. It is well established that people who have been taken in by fraud are reluctant to admit they have been fooled, even when confronted with hard evidence that they have been deceived.

This traces back to when Reagan agreed to Rupert Murdoch’s ask that the Fairness Doctrine be scrapped. That regulation said that in order for tv content to be called news and presented as such, it had to be something that actually happened, ie the truth. Once that was relinquished, Americans were flooded with “alternate facts” and fifty years later, here we are.

Expand full comment
David McIntosh's avatar

"To be fair, many people in America have been convinced that Fox News is the truth"

This is no excuse. It is a personal choice to follow Fox News rather than other possible sources of information. What leads anyone to make such a choice? In many cases, it is because Fox tells them what they want to hear, confirming what they already believed.

The huge audience for Fox News points to a widely embedded culture of nastiness. There is nothing fair to say about it.

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

When you are that easily duped by propaganda then you fit in the ignoramus category...

Expand full comment
NLTownie's avatar

That seems too easy a dismissal. Trump supporters say the same about us. I can’t help but think, every time I hear or read a pejorative remark about Trump supporters, that it’s another brick in the wall that divides people. This is only going to get worse unless people of good will and common decency on both sides try to find common ground. I think that begins by finding things we can agree on rather than things to fight over. Here in Canada we are not as far down the road of animus as the US but there are people and organizations fanning the flames meant to burn down the countries on both sides of the border.

At least Canada has a third party - the New Democratic Party, that in the last government joined an uneasy coalition with the Liberals in return for the Liberals starting dentalcare and pharmacare programs in Canada to go with our universal Medicare. There is at least the possibility of a third way but many NDP supporters in Canada are so concerned that the Conservative Party lead by Pierre Poilievre will win that many NDP supporters are voting Liberal.

Expand full comment
Sharon's avatar

Empty Walmart shelves might get the 60% who either didn't vote or voted for Trump to question their decision. Most Americans aren't interested in economics, business, history, science etc. They're interested in celebrities, cooking, fashion...etc. A huge amount of people have turned away from politics thinking it doesn't involve them. Empty Walmart shelves, raising prices, unemployment rising and cuts in the social safety net might make them reconsider the choice to be ignorant.

We still have the FOX, right wing lies to deal with.

Expand full comment
Marco Lara's avatar

Most of his supporters are normal, good people that are lied to every day by their news sources. The vaccine against the assault on our democracy is getting through to them.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I'm not so sure I would say most, but certainly many.

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Marco, consider this: (👇 link below)

Note that this was written BEFORE Trump's current disastrous regime started destroying America.

And, spoiler, he ends with this:

"Because if you’re NOT stupid, we must turn to other explanations, and most of them are less flattering."

https://www.populist.com/stories/why-do-liberals-think-all-trump-supporters-are-stupid,5030

Expand full comment
Marco Lara's avatar

Justin, the Trump supporters I know don't hear about any of the horrible things he has said and done because they get their news from Fox and social media. They are not stupid or evil, but certainly miss-informed. This is why the president it putting pressure on news sources like the broadcast networks with lawsuits and regulatory pressure. We need to to reach them, not alienate them.

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Regarding these propaganda dupes you're referring to: There is none so blind as he who will not see. I suspect a lot of them want to believe the propaganda...

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Certainly, they are welcome to join the resistance, if and when they wake up! 😊

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Marco, when you are that easily duped by propaganda then you fit in the ignoramus category.

Expand full comment
Scott Turner's avatar

My guess —There are a lot of people who think their overtime work will get a tax break, who really don’t care about much else and won’t realize how much Trump sucks until they are paying more for imports to fund a corporate and billionaires’

tax cut.

Expand full comment
Will Liley's avatar

Not so, I’m afraid. 90pc of Republicans still support him; that’s where the 42pc overall number comes from. Pretty depressing actually.

Expand full comment
justin SG's avatar

Will,

What makes you think that 90% of people who STILL self identify as "Republican" aren't either ultra-wealthy, incredibly ignorant or just plain stupid?

Just consider this: (👇 link below)

Note that this was written BEFORE Trump's current disastrous regime started destroying America.

And, spoiler, he ends with this:

"Because if you’re NOT stupid, we must turn to other explanations, and most of them are less flattering."

https://www.populist.com/stories/why-do-liberals-think-all-trump-supporters-are-stupid,5030

Expand full comment
Will Liley's avatar

Justin, I did consider that but the poll was indeed after his latest disasters. Other insights are required beyond calling those 90pc of Republicans (42pc of Americans!) “ignorant” and “stupid” - they might be, but some presumably are not. And yes, the conclusions are not flattering: one is that they LIKE what he’s doing. They are so invested in “owning the Libs”, are so hostile to any and all immigrants; are so nativist that ANY policy that claims to “put ‘mericans first” will get their support no matter how dumb or counter-productive it is. The malice and the cruelty are the point. The stupidity is a bonus.

Expand full comment
Rainer Dynszis's avatar

Me, I'm too terrified to laugh, and I suspect this is a sentiment widely shared.

Expand full comment
p.j. melton's avatar

The core problem is not laughter. Being a laughingstock would be fine if it happened because we did something right.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

I look at the title of that article and what I see is "approval rating dips". Trumps approval rating has been steadily declining right from the start, and the rate of the dip is increasing over time. It will soon be a vertical drop straight down.

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

it is a bit depressing how slow the decline is. How can he still have 43% of Americans thinking he's doing a good job? why is it not 15%? (Fox poisoning is a large part of the explanation...)

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Yeah, Faux Newspeak is a big part of it. So too their millionaire preachers telling them that TrumPox is the second coming - and they believe it.

But just remember, the rate of decline isn't linear, it is curving downward, and will accelerate over time. I know it's not easy, but try to have patience.

Expand full comment
Francis Accardo's avatar

Many of these folks have been voting against their interests for decades - since Reagan's "welfare queens" and Rush Limbaugh's various toxicities. By now, expecting these folks to question their commitments is not realistic. The problem is ontological, not epistemological.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Unfortunately, that's mostly true. I believe however that it really applies primarily to the hardcore MAGAnuts, who have been guzzling the Kool-Aid for so long that they're just hopelessly lost. I believe there's a small segment of not such hardcore Republicans who will look at what's happening and say "wait a minute, something isn't right here". Those are the ones we can reach, and that's really all we need. Just a few converts will make a big difference.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

Your mouth to God's ears, as my wife is wont to say.

Expand full comment
Francis Accardo's avatar

I sincerely wish I did not sound like a crazy conspiracy theorist, but lacking rational answers causes me reluctantly to move to the irrational: Trump seems intent on destroying EVERYTHING that makes our country strong or admirable (including the relatively beneficial use of our strength), as though he is following Putin's instructions/suggestions.

Expand full comment
Charles G Hanson's avatar

And if Taiwan is absorbed by China, then the U.S. will eventually be absorbed by China because 90% of the semiconductors that make the U.S. military effective come from Taiwan.

Ponder that fact!

Expand full comment
William Quinlivan's avatar

Yes - while Trump was dancing with Vladimir, Xi waltzed away with the prize: America falling to #2 or beyond, leaving ’Gina unchallenged and without economic equal.

Expand full comment
Mary Silva Watkins's avatar

Enjoy your bike ride! Thanks for your insights!

Expand full comment
Zach Schläppi's avatar

Trump and MAGA is a tumor. FTFY

Expand full comment
Christine Witte's avatar

Three years and three months? Keep on dreaming! Does anybody seriously think he will leave after his second term??? He already said he won't. Isn't it time to see this for what it really is? Namely a hostile takeover with the goal to destroy all democratic institutions so a few billionaires can get even richer.

Expand full comment
Lois Kallunki's avatar

"We’re stuck with this chaos agent for three years and three months?" Try three years and nine months. It may feel like we have put up with him for 9 months already but its only been three.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

It feels like we've put up with him for 9 years already.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

Do you honestly think he'll still be alive in 3 years and 3 months.

The dude is not in good health.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

🤞🤞🤞🤞🤞

Expand full comment
NLTownie's avatar

Would President Vance be any better? I think he would be even worse because he’s actually had a good education. Educated corruption is more to be feared than selfish, greedy, vengeful corruption.

Expand full comment
John Gregory's avatar

but Vance does not have the cult, so maybe minds can be changed when the Trumpian scales are removed from some MAGA eyes.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

Exactly.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

Vance would be better, if only because he's such a coward. Fat Donnie is a coward too, but a coward with no sense of shame or honor.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

No, certainly not. We have to do away with him too, along with the entire Evil Klown Kar. And Jackass Johnson to boot.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

That's why it's imperative that we Rise! Resist! ✊✊✊

May Day is the next nationwide rally, be there or be square!

//

Don't let up folks, it's working:

Boycott TE卐LA! Boycott Swastikar!

Short TE卐LA! Short Swastikar!

Boycott 卐tarlink!

Boycott 卐/Twitter!

Curb your DOGE!

https://generalstrikeus.com/strikecard

https://www.fiftyfifty.one/

https://indivisible.org/

https://handsoff2025.com/

https://www.teslatakedown.com/

https://www.riseandresist.org/

https://thirdact.org

Expand full comment
DrBDH's avatar

He’s the product of the Project 2025 laboratory gain of function experiments.

Expand full comment
WinstonSmithLondonOceania's avatar

Yeah, a mutant virus.

Expand full comment
James addison's avatar

He’s more like a cancer, but the idea’s the same.

Expand full comment
Doug Tarnopol's avatar

HPV-induced tumor? He can be both!

Expand full comment
Hubcap Brian's avatar

I’ve already seen announcements from manufacturers that they are no longer taking orders from the US on certain products due to instability of the tariff costs. DHL has suspended handling packages worth less then $800 arriving from China for the same reason, so no more AliBaba and Temu for US consumers.

Expand full comment
MICHAEL'S CURIOUS WORLD's avatar

Jaguar Land Rover has halted deliveries to the US.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

I read yesterday that China has cut off AliBaba and Temu shipments at their end. I forget what the new dollar amount is, but it's quite low.

Expand full comment
Terence J. Ollerhead's avatar

If there is another election, by no means a certainty, there is a possibility that Trump will run again, or that a Trumpite will win. And no Democrat has emerged as a leader for the opposition, which is very disappointing, as the movement needs a galvanizing leader at this perilous time. Apart from AOC and Bernie, there has hardly been a squeak, an appropriate word as it turns out.

Expand full comment
Will Gerard's avatar

Overall, most people are still very comfortable with their lives. When and if that changes, the country will be more open to listening to a Democratic leader.

Expand full comment
Terence J. Ollerhead's avatar

And THEIR lives, not the well-being of the nation, is what matters. Other people, other causes, be damned. That has led the US to where it is now.

Expand full comment
p.j. melton's avatar

Indeed. Well said.

Expand full comment
William Quinlivan's avatar

Face it. Most of us are too comfortable to take risks and act for our own survival. It’ll make a terrific and damning epitaph for us!

Lifestyle yes. Better future for our kids and beyond? No.

Expand full comment
Dirk  Faegre's avatar

Keep your eyes on Pete Buttigieg also.

Expand full comment
Terence J. Ollerhead's avatar

I would but he's near invisible.

Expand full comment
frnkr's avatar

Democrats are simply allowing Trump to do their work. Nothing they could say will be more powerful than watching Trump Live.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

He's already selling "Trump 2028" merchandise.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

How's Trump going to run again, exactly? You'd have to overturn a Constitutional amendment to allow that to happen.

Expand full comment
Terence J. Ollerhead's avatar

Seriously? Trump has shown no regard for the Constitution or the Courts. Who would stop him? You're in an autocracy now. What he has done already is more egregious than a third term.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

Having said all that, what is much more likely - assuming he doesn't die or become physically incapacitated in the interim, which is a big supposition - is that he attempts to declare martial law in order to cancel the elections altogether. THAT is a realistic scenario of which I think we're all aware and about which all of us who believe in democracy are deeply concerned.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

I didn't say that he's shown regard for the Constitution. But if the Constitution were not an impediment, why is he expending the time, effort and political capital to go to the Supreme Court to overturn - just to name an example - birthplace citizenship (the 14th Amendment)? Why not just issue an executive order and be done with it? Because we're not there yet, that's why.

Also, elections are administered by the states. Most states in the US would not tolerate someone running for a third term, and that would be upheld by most (if not all) of the state supreme courts. If he "runs" for president in 2028, he would need to appear on the ballot in each state. But that would not happen. Groups in every state would successfully sue on the basis of the 22nd Amendment - which is absolutely unambiguous - and they would win.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

Well, there IS some clown who's pushing an amendment that would allow DonnyJon to run again. There's zero chance of it passing, of course.

Expand full comment
Chuck's avatar

EXACTLY my point.

Expand full comment
Will Liley's avatar

Chuck, one ploy would be for his place-man to run for President with him as V-P, with the nod-wink that he’d resign after the election so Trump could take over. It’s cynical beyond belief but probably legal (simply because the Founders never thought anyone would be that brazen).

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

No, it's not legal. The vice-president must be able to serve as President if the President dies or is incapacitated. Trump cannot serve as President a third time, so he cannot run as vice. Similarly, he cannot be appointed Speaker of the House.

And the founders had nothing to do with this. This term limit is defined in an amendment to the Constitution, passed and approved after FDR was elected four times.

Expand full comment
George Patterson's avatar

The sooner a Democratic leader emerges, the more time there is for the Republicans to slander and attack him or her. It makes sense to wait until the last year, though the party did put it off too long with Kamala.

Expand full comment
shannon stoney's avatar

I wonder how long it will take before all the Republicans in my town realize what they did to themselves. Even if there are no plastic toys from China to buy at Walmart, they will probably not figure out that they did it. They will find a way to blame liberals like me. Another way this is like an abusive relationship: when the abuser does something bad, he (they) blame(s) the victim.

Expand full comment
Michiel Nijk's avatar

Yeah, they'll blame the Biden Crime Family. Or Hillary. Or Canada. Or the EU. Or Powell. Basically whomever Caving Don will tell them to blame...

Expand full comment