3 ms·

There's a big practical difference between chewing coca leaves and smoking crack. Also, the shift in personality and tone from Bush to Trump are... not small. T

by psb217 2y ago

There's a big practical difference between chewing coca leaves and smoking crack. Also, the shift in personality and tone from Bush to Trump are... not small. The inconoclast and anti-establishment things are intentional, effective and, as you note, somewhat hypocritical branding on the part of Trump's PR team. After sitting through a few of his full length >1hr "speeches", it's incredible (in the strongest, most literal sense of that word) that he can even exist as a viable political candidate. If he were magically teleported back in time to the GW Bush years, current Trump would be laughed out of the room in pretty much any political setting.

asveikau 2y ago
> If he were magically teleported back in time to the GW Bush years, current Trump would be laughed out of the room in pretty much any political setting. That's really not how I see it. Trump sits on the shoulders of those who came before and set the stage for the Trump policy. My Alito example above is an instructive one. Bush can be seen as laying a 20 year foundation towards overturning Roe or the Chevron doctrine. I remember when Roberts was appointed, mainstream press talked up how moderate and reasonable he was, but I never bought it -- and how we see he isn't. The rhetoric appeals to the base... But that base got radicalized by prior eras. Decades of complaining about big government. Fox News demonizing Pelosi and "San Francisco values". Karl Rove's permanent campaign mode. Much of that discourse was fully formed in 2004. The Bush people knew to reign it in sometimes, that is the difference.
- psb217 2y ago
  In this case I'm talking strictly about his persona, on-stage performance, and overall "vibe". To an extent, these traits are orthogonal to his claimed policy/politics in the traditional sense, which I agree are basically a continuation and in particular areas an amplification of earlier trends in the Republican party. Eg, I grew up in Houston in the 80s and 90s with parents that listened to Rush Limbaugh on a regular basis, so the general direction of intent isn't unexpected. The way in which that intent is expressed is however well outside what would have ever made it to the "main stage" 20-30 years ago. It's a culmination of decades of propagandic ground laying. I suppose "any political setting" was too broad a claim. I was implicitly ignoring anything short of running for national office.

by psb217 2y ago

asveikau 2y ago

> If he were magically teleported back in time to the GW Bush years, current Trump would be laughed out of the room in pretty much any political setting. That's really not how I see it. Trump sits on the shoulders of those who came before and set the stage for the Trump policy. My Alito example above is an instructive one. Bush can be seen as laying a 20 year foundation towards overturning Roe or the Chevron doctrine. I remember when Roberts was appointed, mainstream press talked up how moderate and reasonable he was, but I never bought it -- and how we see he isn't. The rhetoric appeals to the base... But that base got radicalized by prior eras. Decades of complaining about big government. Fox News demonizing Pelosi and "San Francisco values". Karl Rove's permanent campaign mode. Much of that discourse was fully formed in 2004. The Bush people knew to reign it in sometimes, that is the difference.

psb217 2y ago
In this case I'm talking strictly about his persona, on-stage performance, and overall "vibe". To an extent, these traits are orthogonal to his claimed policy/politics in the traditional sense, which I agree are basically a continuation and in particular areas an amplification of earlier trends in the Republican party. Eg, I grew up in Houston in the 80s and 90s with parents that listened to Rush Limbaugh on a regular basis, so the general direction of intent isn't unexpected. The way in which that intent is expressed is however well outside what would have ever made it to the "main stage" 20-30 years ago. It's a culmination of decades of propagandic ground laying. I suppose "any political setting" was too broad a claim. I was implicitly ignoring anything short of running for national office.