The Electoral College has spoken, but does the fat man still got a song?

 

As the Electoral College takes Donald Trump down for the count, his most fanatical supporters still seem to think they still have until January 20 to get Trump’s carcass off the mat. On Friday the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed in the most dismissive fashion possible the lawsuit brought by Texas’ pardon-hunting attorney general, signed on to by 17 Republican states and over 100 Republican members of the House of Representatives.  Even today before Wisconsin’s electors were allowed to conduct their business, the state Supreme Court still had to deal with another frivolous lawsuit. In another decision that was absurdly 4-3, two of the liberal justices had to remind the three dissenters that "Wisconsin voters complied with the election rulebook. No penalties were committed and the final score was the result of a free and fair election."

Adding to the sports analogy, Chief Justice Brian Hagedorn observed how late in the day it was for Republicans to complain about the election rules they themselves had approved: "Our laws allow the challenge flag to be thrown regarding various aspects of election administration. The challenges raised by the Campaign in this case, however, come long after the last play or even the last game; the Campaign is challenging the rulebook adopted before the season began.”

Such logic escapes the authoritarian fanatic, however. On Fox & Friends, that weasel-looking guy Stephen Miller announced that "The only date in the Constitution is Jan. 20. So we have more than enough time to right the wrong of this fraudulent election result and certify Donald Trump as the winner of the election. As we speak, today, an alternate slate of electors in the contested states is going to vote and we're going to send those results up to Congress. This will ensure that all of our legal remedies remain open. That means that if we win these cases in the courts, that we can direct that the alternate state of electors be certified."

Of course these “alternate” electors are technically voting illegally and have no force of law, but then again who ever said any of this had any “logic.” Just to show you how desperately stupid these people are: “Why did the Swing States stop counting in the middle of the night?”@MariaBartiromo“Because they waited to find out how many ballots they had to produce in order to steal the Rigged Election. They were so far behind that they needed time, & a fake ‘water main break’ to recover!”

Let’s try this one: Maybe people want to go to sleep at 2 AM after counting ballots all day?

In their book Authoritarian Nightmare: Trump and His Followers, John W. Dean and Bob Altemeyer describe Trump as a self-serving bully and power-mad—a pure and unadulterated demagogue who appeals to popular prejudices and fears, and in doing so, Trump’s supporters are willing to allow him any and all means to accomplish cleanning out the “rot.” If people hate “Mexicans” as Trump and Miller do, then any means necessary to rid them from sight is acceptable, whether by round-ups of working families by ICE Gestapo thugs, or by changing the rules of legal status. “Ordinary” Germans were quite willing to allow democratic institutions to be swept away in 1933, and be ruled by an authoritarian regime as long as the designated scapegoats were sought out and removed from sight, and how it was done didn’t matter to them as long as they perceived “benefit.”  

Trump may pretend that he does evil in the people’s name, but the reality is that Trump doesn’t even try to “lead”; like all demagogues, he stood on his stool and bellowed out his prejudices and bigotries, and to the “surprise” of many he attracted fellow haters like flies to a dung pile. As Dean and Altemeyer point out in their book, Trump was much better at this than Joe McCarthy and George Wallace. Still, when a demagogue with an authoritarian streak like Trump starts haranguing  at his rallies, does anyone really believe that he actually “respects” his audience as fellow human beings, or does he just see them as so many faceless “fans” of his “dynamic” personality? Sports and film stars receive great adulation from “fans,” but do the "fans" really mean anything to them on a personal level, save to further bloat their status and ego?

Trump and his supporters might be more “accepting” of the reality of his election loss had they spent more time viewing news programming that was not “fans” of Trump, and countered his demagoguery of personal bigotry and conspiracy theories with facts and reason. Even if they disagreed with the “other” side, maybe they wouldn’t have been so “shocked”  to discover that not only is not everyone a “fan,” but in fact hate Trump passionately. 

One wonders if Trump will ever leave us alone, or will we be forced to endure him for years to come. An “elder statesman” he will never be. What do people actually think? A poll commissioned by Fox News revealed the following: While Trump still had a 47 percent approval rating, there was an indication of weakness; while 30 percent “strongly” approved of Trump, this was in contrast to the 44 percent who “strongly” disapproved of him. This shows how “soft” Trump’s approval actually is, and the strength of the disapproval of him.

The poll also showed that only a bare majority approved of Trump’s handling of what is allegedly his strongest “case,” the economy. 66 percent currently believe the economy is only “fair” or “poor.” 11 percent actually believed the economy is in “excellent” condition, despite Trump’s mishandling of the pandemic; the only people who could possibly believe that are those who make their money off the stock market, or people too desperately supportive of Trump to want to believe anything else.

As far as personal opinion of the man is concerned, 45 percent view Trump favorably; 29 percent were “strong” in this view, while 42 percent “strongly” viewed Trump unfavorably. Only 32 percent believe the country is better off than it was four years ago; 55 percent believe it is worse off. This again suggests the tenuousness of those who “somewhat” support Trump.

Still, while it isn’t surprising that 42 percent believe Trump will go down as one of the worst presidents in history, what is surprising is that 22 percent actually believe he will be remembered as one of the greatest in history. Most historians will almost certainly opt for the former judgment on Trump, both the man and his presidency. That 22 percent certainly represents those whose dark vision of the country Trump has touched the most. Interestingly, while 29 percent of white men consider Trump one of the “greatest,” white women are not far behind, at 26 percent. Think about it: one out of every four white women you encounter thinks that Trump is one of this country’s “greatest” presidents.

36 percent, meanwhile, still believe that the election was “stolen,” including that percentage of white people with college degrees; both white men and women are equally likely to believe this, but the highest percentage of believers are, of course, white evangelicals, at 56 percent—and this group seems especially susceptible to authoritarian impulses. On a curious note, more GOP women (73 percent) believe that the election was “stolen” compared to GOP men, at 64 percent.  Still, "just" 58 percent believing that the election was not “stolen” is serious cause for concern, especially if Republican voters continue to be brainwashed into thinking every election is “rigged”—unless, of course, their side wins, and then it isn’t.

Will we see Trump running again in 2024? Only 32 percent think he should, and 57 percent emphatically think “no.” That doesn’t mean we won’t see another “Trump” running for office; that incredible swelling head named Ivanka is moving to Florida to “explore” a U.S. Senate run, taking on Marco Rubio in 2022; some advice if she does: that “who wants to read about fucking poor people” should come in handy as a campaign attack ad.