From this substack

So. A thought experiment: If, in 2008, as Barack Obama was closing in on victory in the presidential race, he’d suddenly been mass-indicted by a long series of exclusively Republican prosecutors, would Democrats have abandoned him? “Oh, that’s it for me, if Obama has been indicted, I have to support someone else!” Or would the indictment of a popular Democratic politician by a bunch of Republicans have resulted in an immediate explosion of furious, redoubled support? This is the easiest question anyone has ever asked, by the way.

And throw in the fact that many other prominent politicians have done very, very similar things with no criminal persecution (Pence and Biden with documents, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore with election recounts and fraud allegations) and the feeling of unfairness is obvious, if not accurate. To steelman things, sure, Trump went slightly farther, and did things as abrasively as possible, but his supporters would say that is to be expected, and just Trump being Trump. Sensemaking is ever a constant struggle.

Our current political world in short form

By Kevin Williamson

That 2017 has been a year of lost opportunities is an important failure for Republicans, who are likely to accomplish even less in 2018, when the prospect of congressional elections held in the shadow of Trump’s unpopularity will brighten the already visible yellow streak running down the back of Republican Washington. Perhaps things will go differently. But it may very well be the case that 2017 represents all that Republicans will really get out of the Trump phenomenon: a little bit of reform, a lot of noise, and a reputation that may never recover and may not deserve to.

I’m amazed that my lack of interest in sports is now considered patriotic!  One thing to remember is that in the age of revenue sharing you can’t watch/participate in anything sports related without supporting the NFL.  Yay!  Let us read more books.

Meet one of the couples getting married on the Mall in between a pro-Trump protest and a Juggalo rally

also

crimes were committed by people who identified as Juggalos

I suppose we’re at the point where someone should point out that if you combine

• the presence of John Kelly selected as Trump’s chief of staff, Mattis as secretary of defense, and the host of other flag officers in his administration,
• Trump’s seeming aversion to the nitty gritty aspects of administration
• Trump’s inexperience with the subject matter

We largely have retired military rule – if they’re not making the actual decisions, they’re influencing the available options enough to where they might as well be.  It’s a good thing for the most part – Trump seems content to play court jester and social media director, and not much beyond that.  Seemingly he’s capable of  being somewhat presidential, but seems content to delegate any actual decision making to others, and just issue commentary.

What if we don’t live in meaningful times, and what if the truly notable facts of the 2016 election are

• A crowded Republican field – allowing the only candidate Trump an opening against more establishment types
• A phenomenally unpopular Hillary Clinton

Coupled with

• Advances in media engineering (like “financial engineering” creating new mortgage products, subprime and otherwise) allowing the media to profitably saturate America with “junk” (not necessarily fake”) news.
• Increases in generalized anxiety due to Facebook, lack of physical activity and sleep deprivation

Match those two things together and we feel like we’re in some deep important times, even if in terms of importance it’s like we’re stuck in the 50s with out the cold war.

Here is yet another article about Trump, and him saying offensive things, part 3939, to wit A Deal Breaker for Trump’s Supporters? Nope. Not This Time, Either.

Trump not apologizing for anything IS what people like about him – it doesn’t matter what he’s actually said, it’s the way he says it and defends it they actually like.  It’s the medium, not the message, much the same way the Democrats never minded Obama continuing Bush’s wars, NSA surveillance, or an official, not euphemistically named “Kill List”.  The more offensive, the more “courageous” it seems (courageous being something that prompts criticism, which is courageous by the standards of neurotic modern times, not in any actual sense).   If you’re a groupish person you are quite loath to criticize your “champion” (in the original sense of the word), and by and large you’ll come up with reasons for the behavior rather than condemn it.