Thank you for the kind response, and sorry for that.

Thank you for your detailed reply. I am always open to learning more. I have been reading since I was 5 years old, in my attempt to understand, and ultimately to survive, the world.

Impressive, and admirable. I do not remember when I started to read, though it was fairly early and I try to make up for it in volume.

Politics never seemed relevant to me until Obama.

Fair. Politics was of interest rather than true relevance to me from a young age, though not of real knowledge. But for me I am a child of 9/11, which remains the defining day of my life. I realized rather quickly then that I was involved in a war that well predated me and would almost certainly continue well after I died.

It is that that pushed me.

His color was not important to me, but what I was gradually learning about him was increasingly disturbing.

Agreed.

Meanwhile (at midlife), the bottom dropped out of my personal life, leaving me to deal alone with Survival 2.0.

God, my sympathies. That is an incredibly cruel blow, and I am lucky I haven’t suffered it yet. I am younger and while my family’s financial situation is worsening it remains comfortable (especially as I can help take in), but I feel I am likely going to end up in those straits. And even if I didn’t, I would not be able to call myself Christian or even properly human if I did not extend my apologies.

Now the bottom is dropping out of all Americans’ lives, and it is unclear whether anything can change that. Yes, we have to fight, however we personally can.

Agreed, and while we may differ on the best way to do that, that is ok.

A wise man once advised me to ask myself, “Will it matter in 5 years?” Trump will not “matter” in 5 years. America (if it exists) will.

Agreed with caveats. I do think Trump will matter in 5 years, at least in a limited way. Trump the matter will be a notable chapter in American history but probably less important directly than we think. Trump the symbol I think will be very important to America as it exists, or what doesn’t. The issue is how we manage both the symbol and the man in a beneficial way without letting them suck the air out.

I just hate to watch us “doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”. (Trump is “the same thing over and over”, and I am so heartily sick of it.) I am no longer supporting the RNC or any specific individual. And I will not be doing so unless I see someone/something worthy of my support

Understandable, and I can sympathize. Though this may not be reassuring, a big reason that helped propel Trump to prominence in the first place was reaction against the inefficiency of many on the right in the RNC..

The average person knows and understands only a fraction of what is going on. And can do even less about it. (I am probably one of those average persons.)

Understandable.

(i) Democrats’ abuses began before Trump and will continue after Trump.

So we agree there.

(ii) In 2023, Trump is uniquely unhelpful in fighting those abuses and, in many ways, facilitates them.

Had you been able to restrain yourself from writing “uniquely” i would probably have agreed with you. But UNIQUELY unhelpful? Have you no memory of 2008 or 2012, and of the still-strong McCain Camp? Of how “nobody” wanted to hear about Hillary Clinton’s Emails?

No. Trump is not uniquely helpful to the Left’s abuses. Period. Full stop. He at least is prepared to fight them and do so publicly. You can argue – and likely with a fair amount of reason – that several of his approaches are counterproductive or ineffective, but that is still a hell of a lot better than many of the alternatives, especially among the RINOs.

There are other Republicans who are willing and able to fight more effectively than Trump. Thus, sticking with Trump in 2024 is self-defeating.

Ok, then kindly underline them. And I will show other Republicans who have proven much worse than him. Which is why I continue to needle you for your posturing and claims, Bauxite, even though I am no Trump Cultist and have largely agreed with our host about his follies and shortcomings. Someone claiming that Trump is “uniquely unhelpful” In confronting the left’s abuses tells me nothing about Trump but plenty about their biases and preconceived notions.

Both of those statements can be true at the same time.

Correct, both of those statements CAN be true at the same time, they just AREN’T especially in light of the “uniquely” nonsense. Which is another reason why I needle you for obsessing over Trump in a manner rather similar to many of the Always Trumpers. Do you literally not remember what happened prior to 2016?

I sat through about a decade of George Dubya Bush being unable or unwilling to defend his own conduct and that of his troops when we discovered things such as the extensive documentation of Iraqi WMDs (such as they were) and connections to Al Qaeda, to the point where (because the left was so empowered to write the narrative) there are STILL people on this blog who do not know about things such as Saddam’s intelligence and diplomatic staff cooperating with Al Qaeda vassals in places like the Philippines for terrorist actions or the host of people who got wounded cleaning up Saddam’s WMD like the gas shells.

Unfortunately a lot of it DOES come down to “I can’t spare this man, he fights.” You can have justified issues with how well he fights or if he does it in a self-destructive fashion, but we are in a situation where simply fighting is an improvement, and one reason I have come to appreciate people like Cruz and DeSantis greatly (though with reservations) is their tenacity in the fight and how smart they are in it.

Most of your replies to me focus on something similar to (i). But the truth of (i) doesn’t negate (ii). In fact, I completely agree with you about (i).

Which brings us back to discussing II, and the fact that I absolutely disagree that Trump is uniquely unhelpful at fighting leftist abuses,

I would also add:

(iii) Democrats are very much aware of (ii), which is why they would like nothing more than for Trump to be the GOP nominee in 2024.

Yeah, this is raw fantasy. They might want Trump to be the nominee because they believe he is a liability (though I am agnostic on the issue, ESPECIALLY after the humiliation they suffered in 2016), but they KNOW BETTER THAN YOU DO that he is not “uniquely” unhelpful at fighting back leftist abuses. Just look at the Supreme Court (one of the remaining bastions against the Left, at least as things stand) and his dogged pursuit of the Bidens for corruption.

Which brings us back to the fact that while Trump may not be the best candidate, he is VERY far from the worst or least helpful.

(i) Democrats’ abuses began before Trump and will continue after Trump.

(ii) In 2023, Trump is uniquely unhelpful in fighting those abuses and, in many ways, facilitates them. There are other Republicans who are willing and able to fight more effectively than Trump. Thus, sticking with Trump in 2024 is self-defeating.

Both of those statements can be true at the same time. Most of your replies to me focus on something similar to (i). But the truth of (i) doesn’t negate (ii). In fact, I completely agree with you about (i).

I would also add:

(iii) Democrats are very much aware of (ii), which is why they would like nothing more than for Trump to be the GOP nominee in 2024.

@Bauxite

If they really wanted to get Trump,

They obviously do. They would not have chased the Great Orange Whale for about a decade now even more fervently than you have if they did not want to get him. We can debate about how much they want him or when exactly they want the timing to get him to line up, but not that they do.

they would have the Bragg indictment dismissed (as it should be), perhaps have the Georgia DA decline to prosecute, and then have the DOJ Special Prosecutor indict him for obstruction and find a way to have a DC or Northern VA jury hear the case. That move would cut the legs out of a lot of the arguments against the prosecutors. (They would say, “Look, the poor cases were dismissed or not indicted. We’re only prosecuting the strong case.” – That argument would be persuasive to a big chunk of the public.)

Ok. I’ll bite. WHY would they do all of this if they “really” wanted to get him?

As Ted Stevens and Mark Steyn have noted: The Process is the Punishment. Legal Cases have usually been ugly wars of attrition, and so forcing Trump to fight on multiple fronts (even forlorn hopes where he is sure to win) will help drain his resources and undermine him. As it does with most of their targets. This is even more true if they can them bogged down, especially with narrative control.

But I think I agree with VDH, “getting Trump” is gravy. This is about power and 2024.

It’s always been about power and 2024 (and going on) but one of the ways to do that is to get Trump. And even after 2024 and a hypothetical Dem Victory I have no reason to believe they would let up.

They want to run against Trump in 2024. They’re trying to goad you into making that happen for them.

It’s working.

More than anything they want to cultivate division and weariness in the Republican camp. Which is working. It is not primarily about Trump, though they are happy to try and use him as they see fit. They may want to run against Trump in 2024, but NOT more than they want to delegitimize the entire Right Wing of American Political Life and divide the GOP. Which is why they are happy to engage in double messaging towards both Trumpists and Anti-Trumpists so the divide can do their job.

WE ALREADY GODDAMN SAW THIS IN 2015 AND 2016. Hell, we saw it long before then.

Which is why ironically I note that AlwaysTrump and NeverTrump advocates tend to fall into the same hole and have similar compulsions. It is all about Trump. That he is the magic talisman that will decide the fate of the election.

I’ve never believed that, because I’m old enough to have remembered the start of this century and BusHitler and the like.