Trump hits new low in approval poll

[pbrower2a]

Yada, yada, yada.

I consider it far more dangerous that Donald Trump has decided, unlike any prior President, that dissidence against him is a crime, and that America needs 'special' agencies to monitor demonstrators and critics of the President. Such is a secret police, and we don't need any Gestapo, KGB, Ovra (Mussolini's Italy), Kempeitai (Japan in WWII), Tontons Macoutes, Stasi, SAVAK, BOSS, or Mukhabarat (Satan Hussein's Iraq).  We need be free of such. It is up to our leaders to use the normal tools of convincing us that they are doing well for us, and not to fault us for failing to believe what those leaders believe.    

The President's deficiencies of intellect, rationality, and conscience are becoming evident to those who thought that he could serve their agenda. Now we know.

Conservatives are no more fascists than liberals are Marxists.  To be sure, "conservative" has often become a self-applied euphemism for right-wing, authoritarian extremists. Well, there are conservatives of the tradition of Edmund Burke, G K Chesterton, Sir Winston Churchill, and Dwight Eisenhower... and they need take their word away from fascists, demagogues, and political thugs or else find some new word and its derivatives for self-description.

Donald Trump is not a conservative; he is a fascist pig. He now has more in common with David Duke and Agosto Pinochet than with Ronald Reagan. He has exposed his despotic tendencies in ways that should leave no question of what he is. He insists that any disagreement with him is treachery.

We liberals may have disliked the Tea Party and its agenda... and despised its connections to people who believe that America defers to wealth and class privilege above all else. We did not call for its suppression. We thought that it was enough to ridicule people who made expressions like this:





or this collection of bumper stickers:



It is safe to assume that after a few decades that the mainstream view of Barack Obama  will be that he was an above-average President who did far more right than wrong, who was more effective than ineffective, who did what was possible under the political circumstances, and made no critical errors as President. Obama was quite conservative in his style as a leader. Stuff like what I show in the three images above will be embarrassments, especially the sticker that says "Don't Re-N*g". Obama got elected twice with clear majorities, so stuff like this insults anyone who voted for him. 


This map may suggest similarities between two Presidents. 


 
gray -- did not vote in 1952 or 1956
white -- Eisenhower twice, Obama twice
deep blue -- Republican all four elections
light blue -- Republican all but 2012 (I assume that greater Omaha went for Ike twice)
light green -- Eisenhower once, Stevenson once, Obama never
dark green -- Stevenson twice, Obama never
pink -- Stevenson twice, Obama once 

No state voted Democratic all four times, so no state is in deep red. 

...the biggest category in this overlay is "Eisenhower twice, Obama twice", suggesting that their temperaments well suited the political cultures of two very different times, even if in opposite political parties. In elections, such is good for Obama winning 325 electoral votes that with the same distribution of votes from states that voted in the 1950's as in 2012. (Obama won 332 electoral votes in 2012, and only seven of his votes came from places not voting in the 1950's -- DC and Hawaii).  Neither ran as a populist out to shake things up; both were sticklers for protocol and precedent; both had scandal-free administrations. Neither was effective in strengthening his Party's hold in Congress. Historians will assess their Presidencies similarly -- above average.  

Trump will be fair game as an example of how not to be President for debasing political discourse and insisting upon powers that the Founding Fathers never authorized to any President.