Trumpet’s back on sale

It’s the same recipe. But have tastes changed?

The orange man wants to climb back onto the biggest stage in the world to make Trump great again. This guy absolutely fascinates me. He inhabits a parallel universe where truth has a completely different meaning.

Merriam-Trumpster Dictionary definition:
truth, noun, plural: truths
1. Anything Trump says.
2. Anything said about Trump that is complimentary
Synonyms
lie, falsehood, fallacy, exaggeration, mislead, slander.

I don’t get:
1. How Trump can believe in his own bullshit
2. How his supporters are happy to swallow his statements hook, line, and sinker - regardless of the mountain of evidence that refutes his version of the facts.
3. Why his supporters are happy to support him when it is fecking obvious he only cares about himself? The office of the President of the US appeals to him because of what it can do for Donald Trump - not what he can do for it.

Looking in from the outside, he has been a national embarrassment. But it’s easy to jump on the bag-Trump bandwagon. I know I’m just as susceptible to the false consensus effect as anyone, so I try to understand alternative points of view.

I can sort of understand why he enjoys such loyal support from his fan base. Many have been left behind. The world has changed and adapting to these changes has been a struggle. His promises to bring back the good old days are seductive. But what I don’t understand is their degree of willingness to ignore the mountain of evidence that screams he is wholly unsuitable to hold the highest office in the land.

These are not isolated, out-of-character, easy-to-miss trivialities. They were weekly displays of incompetence, scandals, lies, international gaffs, flip-flops, and self-interested reasoning. My only conclusion is they disconnect the behaviour from the personality.

This is quite appropriate for out-of-character incidents. If someone is rude to you once, they’re probably having a bad day. If they are rude to you all the time then they’re probably a rude person. But the Trump supporters don’t want to go there with their orange overlord. His shit don’t stink!

The man is a walking headline, so I’m not surprised Musk has let him back on Twitter. (He is another bull in a china shop - but at least he owns the shop!) He put out a poll asking if Trump should return to Twitter. 51.8% were in favour and 48.2% opposed. I want to know which way the bots voted. Because with all the layoffs and resignations, the bots are probably breeding like rabbits...

There are some interesting similarities between Trump and Musk. Both have unshakable self-belief. Both are very command-and-control leaders who are entirely comfortable not conforming. But where they differ is Musk’s non-conformance has resulted in revolutionizing; the electric car industry, battery manufacture, space transport, and satellite broadband. The jury is out on Twitter, but you cannot deny the guy gets shit done!

Trump’s non-conformance has threatened democracy, divided families and communities, soured international relations, and hurt the planet. The biggest beneficiaries of his presidency appear to be the legal fraternity (who are hopelessly conflicted as they stand to benefit from lengthening disagreements, not resolving them quickly).

Now Trump has put his hand up to do more of the same. Rinse and repeat. MAGA. Will reason return to enough of his supporters to make his run falter? Or will they gallop through the turnstiles on mass and confound the punters again? The popular money was on him not even getting close when he first ran. If he has proved anything, it is the future is far less predictable than we would like to think. So logic would suggest Americans would want a leader who is well-equipped to lead in an increasingly uncertain world.

But logic seems to struggle to get a seat at the table in American politics. Self-interest, ego, tradition, corporate interests, and religion make little room for it.

What’s the solution? This one’s a toughie. I thought Obama could be the one to unite. But it seems Americans like to be divided. You’re with us or against us. It has become very binary and now one’s identity is increasingly tied up with their political belief.

If we cannot change people’s blind loyalty to their political party, then we should change the circumstance to one where blind loyalty is a good thing. I propose political parties use their pots of donations to create sports teams involved in a range of codes (to ensure wide appeal). It doesn’t interfere with people’s identity as they can still demonstrate their affiliation - it’s just with a sports team playing games rather than a political party making laws.

The next step is to completely reinvent and revolutionise their political system to something which makes sense, promotes consensus, is transparent, and provides for fair representation.

Hey Elon, got a minute?