Imagine wanting four more years of Trump's Reign of Error? WTF is wrong??

Do MAGAnauts ever learn? As if I even need to answer that....

This blows my mind. Trump supporters aren’t blind; they saw everything the rest of us saw during Donald Trump’s Reign of Error ©, right? They saw the visits from the Fuck-up Fairy ©, the unrivalled stupidity, the shameless lies, and the Not My Circus, Not My Monkeys © disorganization in the Goya Beans White House ©.

They heard the propaganda, saw the COVID-19 Task Force daily briefings, and heard Donald J. Diaperfull pushing Ivermectin and drinking bleach as possible cures.

So how is it that more than 72 million otherwise lucid humanoids saw their way clear in 2020 to voting for someone with the intellctual and moral capacity of a sippy cup? After they’d been treated to four years of a moron universally proclaimed to be THE WORST PRESIDENT EVER??

Unfortunately, America spent four years enduring The Reign of Error ©, and Donald Trump received more votes than any Presidential candidate in history…except for the man who defeated him, Joe Biden. This, at least in my mind (and I’m a pretty smart guy), raises a serious question:

HOW COULD MORE THAN 72 MILLION AMERICAN BE SO FUCKING STUPID???

I’m not being facetious; I mean that question in all seriousness. I’d honestly like to know how so many Americans could cede their moral and intellectual agency to a sociopath so utterly devoid of intellect AND morality.

Then again, I’m not holding my breath in anticipation of an answer to that question.

You can’t explain it away by claiming that 72+ million Americans didn’t fully understand the depths of Trump’s moral and intellectual depravity. They had four full years to see him in action. He told, according to the Washington Post, north of 30,000 verifiable lies. His incompetence and ineptitude were legendary and impossible to miss, even to the casual observer. He turned America into an international laughing stock. He cozied up to dictators.

Donald Trump was a world-class, top-shelf, Grade A, USDA Prime, first class fuck-up.

After he lost the election, he fomented a coup that failed. He was the first President in this country’s history to ever fail to peacefully turn over power to an elected successor.

Now here we are, less than seven months prior to Election Day, facing the possibility that this may be America’s last Presidential election. If Donald Trump wins in November, he and his minions may well put Project 2025 into effect. While the “Mandate for Leadership” hasn’t (yet) been blessed by Trump or his campaign, it provides a blueprint for what a Trump Presidency will look like…and it’s not pretty.

[W]ith so many former Trump officials among its contributors, so much praise for him throughout its pages (he is mentioned some 300 times, compared with once for Nikki Haley) and such clear affinity between Trump’s impulses and the document’s proposals, it is easy to imagine “Mandate for Leadership” wielding influence in a second Trump term. It is an off-the-shelf governing plan for a leader who took office last time with no clear plan and no real ability to govern. This book attempts to supply him with both.

There is plenty here that one would expect from a contemporary conservative agenda: calls for lower corporate taxes and against abortion rights; criticism of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and the “climate fanaticism” of the Biden administration; and plans to militarize the southern border and target the “administrative state,” which is depicted here as a powerful and unmanageable federal bureaucracy bent on left-wing social engineering. Yet what is most striking about the book is not the specific policy agenda it outlines but how far the authors are willing to go in pursuit of that agenda and how reckless their assumptions are about law, power and public service.

“Mandate for Leadership” provides for a very different concept of federal government from what the Founding Fathers envisioned, and even though it calls for hewing closely to the Constitution, it’s really about consolidating power in the Oval Office.

It’s, though the word is never used or even intimated, about created a quasi-dictatorship…and many MAGAnauts are fully on board with the idea.

“Mandate for Leadership,” which was edited by Paul Dans and Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation, is not about anything as simplistic as being dictator for a day but about consolidating authority and eroding accountability for the long haul. It calls for a relentless politicizing of the federal government, with presidential appointees overpowering career officials at every turn and agencies and offices abolished on overtly ideological grounds. Though it assures readers that the president and his or her subordinates “must be committed to the Constitution and the rule of law,” it portrays the president as the personal embodiment of popular will and treats the law as an impediment to conservative governance. It elevates the role of religious beliefs in government affairs and regards the powers of Congress and the judiciary with dismissiveness.

What many in MAGA Nation want to see is the administrative state dismantled. They want anything that they deem to be of no discernible benefit to people like themselves- White Conservative Christian Cisgender Heterosexuals- to be carved out of the federal government and discarded. They see no reason why their tax dollars should go to help those they see as unwilling to help themselves- i.e., non-whites, refugees, Brown People, LGBTQ, etc.

MAGAnauts believe that America is and must remain the property and purview of White Conservative Christian Cisgender Heterosexuals…and that all others are “less than” deserving only of the crumbs from their table.

Precisely what Jesus would do, eh?

The mayhem of the Trump presidency’s early days might have occurred partly by design — recall Steve Bannon’s strategy to “flood the zone” with an expletive — but it is not an experience that the authors of this volume wish to repeat. The book’s existence is an implicit admission that the Trump administration’s haphazard approach to governance was a missed opportunity. Executing a conservative president’s agenda “requires a well-conceived, coordinated, unified plan and a trained and committed cadre of personnel to implement it,” the document says on its opening page. The phrasing quickly grows militaristic: The authors wish to “assemble an army of aligned, vetted, trained and prepared conservatives to go to work on Day 1 to deconstruct the administrative state.”

That deconstruction can be blunt. Portions of “Mandate for Leadership” read as though the authors did a Control-F search of the executive branch for any terms they deemed suspect and then deleted the offending programs or offices. The White House’s Gender Policy Council must go, along with its Office of Domestic Climate Policy. The Department of Energy’s Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations is a no-no. The E.P.A. can do without its Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights. And the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration should be dismantled because it constitutes “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.”

Sometimes search and destroy gives way to search and replace. At the Department of Health and Human Services, for instance, the Reproductive Healthcare Access Task Force, which the Biden administration created five months before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022, must be supplanted by a pro-life task force that ensures that all Health and Human Services divisions “use their authority to promote the life and health of women and their unborn children.” The document also asserts that the department should be known as the “Department of Life.” There is little interest here in the notion that different states can reach their own conclusions on abortion rights, as Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling. Instead, the next president should work with federal lawmakers “to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support.” (The focus on life is somewhat selective; while urging the next president to work on “restoring a culture of life in America,” the document also calls for “finality” in dealing with the dozens of inmates on death row.)

It’s also interesting to note what the “Department of Life” is not charged with- pursuing any sort of common sense gun control. Because “life” doesn’t mean preserving that kind of life, don’tchaknow? Every now and again, the Tree of Liberty © must be watered with The Blood of Patriots ©…so, mass shootings? Inconvenient, to be sure, but necessary to the furtherance of the Holy and Almighty 2nd Amendment.

In order to make all of the above a reality, Republicans must figure out how to convince women to vote for Donald Trump, who’s spent a lot of his time bragging about how he’s the one who shit-canned Roe v. Wade (Mama would be SO proud).

As it turns out, Right-wing men aren’t short of answers and suggestions…unsurprisingly, even though most of them have the intellectual agility of a tape dispenser.

The responses to this question were, unsurprisingly, indicative of exactly why the GOP loses with women. Especially since the most popular solution was “Repeal the 19th Amendment.”

I’d love to chalk this one up to trolling, but it’s become an increasingly popular take on the Right — and besides, today’s “Oh, we’re just trolling” is tomorrow’s “This is the GOP platform now.”

Morgan, displaying an impressive amount of pick-me energy, said that she agreed that barring women from voting would be a fantastic (“based”) idea, just not realistic enough.

“okay. you can reply ‘repeal the 19th,’ and i can sit here and agree with that sentiment, and that would all be very “based.” but we know that is not going to happen - ever. i’m asking about realistic solutions”

And then things get creepier….

“Strong men must provide safety & security for women through honorable courtship and eventually marriage Women typically become deradicalized through the security & safety found in the headship of a good man (whether it’s through their father, husband, older brother, etc)”….

So, you’re saying that first you need to find a woman with no self-esteem and a poor self-image whom you can make completely dependent on you. Sure, that sounds like a healthy relationship….

“‘date-fluencing’— when a conservative man both dates a woman and becomes the moral leader in the relationship who suavely influences her to be more based than she otherwise would be on her own”

Sure, find a woman unable to think for herself and is looking for someone to keep her barefoot and pregnant while you’re out hunting buffalo and bringing home the meat, right? As for “suave” Conservative men…is that even a thing?

I don’t think so.

1: Nationalize tiktok

2: Propagandize young women with videos about baking sourdough loaves and raising children instead of travel videos where they 'find themselves' by doing ayahuasca in a dirty shack in Peru.

Frankly, “doing ayahuasca in a dirty shack in Peru” sounds infinitely preferable to spending a lifetime with a Conservative man bent on keeping a woman shackled in “traditional” gender roles.

Yeah, y’all are going to have to do better than that…and yet, November’s election will still be close because of the low standards of so many MAGAnauts. They’ll vote for a man who’s been a loser his entire life because they’re buying the propaganda that he’s a “winner.”

But what has he ever “won” at, when virtually everything he’s touched in his life has turned to shit? He’s filed for bankruptcy, what, six times? His Trump Social IPO lost $1 BILLION in value during its second day. Everything he puts his name on loses money and ends up in bankruptcy. So what has he emerged victorious over…besides convincing rubes that he’s actually a brilliant businessman, when he’s living off other people’s money?

I’ve always believed we should be making voting as easy and as accessible as possible to maximize turnout. That said, sometimes I wonder if we shouldn’t also require a minimum IQ to vote for President, because Donald Trump sure as Hell isn’t bringing his best, knowhutimean?

Greetings from the set of Idiocracy, eh?

All of my posts are public at this time. Any reader financial support will be greatly appreciated. There’s no paywall blocking access to my work (except for a few newsletters), but that remains an option down the road. I’ll trust my readers to determine if my work is worthy of their financial support and at what level. To those who do offer their support, thank you. It means more than you know.