Donald Trump is leaving the White House within the hour. Re-reading his inaugural speech from four years ago, it’s clear the two words he wanted to define his presidency were “America first.” But the two words that ultimately did were “American carnage.” /1

Even the opening lines are a reminder of what his presidency cost us: “Every four years, we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power.” That tradition ended on Jan. 6. /2
(He also thanks President and First Lady Obama “for their gracious aid throughout this transition,” which suggests he can recognize grace, but not actually offer it.) /3
The speech was packed with familiar promises about rebuilding the military, bringing back jobs, boosting the economy, building the wall. Trump loved talking about infrastructure even then, though “Infrastructure Week” ended up as a punchline, not a program. /4
The promises were almost all broken. The unemployment rate is 2 points higher than when he took office, the stock market is up but the economy is weak, international alliances are frayed and America’s reputation is in tatters. /5
In his inaugural, Trump talked about how the U.S. stood ready “to free the Earth from the miseries of disease.” Instead, it has failed to even adequately respond to a pandemic that, in less than a year, has killed 400,000 Americans. /6
There is, though, one part of the speech that held true. Posing as a populist, Trump talked about returning power to “the people.” The people he imagined were his supporters, who *did* feel empowered: empowered to reject masks, empowered to storm the Capitol. /7
Violent far-right groups felt empowered, too. The threat of right-wing violence, which had grown during the Obama years, grew more visible and deadly in the Trump years. Some adopted Trump’s slogan, America First, and his banner. /8
But those who opposed Trump grew empowered, too. From the Women’s March that flooded DC with peaceful protesters the day after inauguration, to the rush to airports to stop the Muslim ban, to the Black Lives Matter uprisings, Americans organized in historic ways. /9
Civic participation, from protests to organizing to petitions, became a way of life for many Americans. An irony of the Trump years is that, while it saw existential threats to democracy, it was also a time of massive voter turnout and active participation in politics. /10
More Americans no doubt understand the importance of democracy now in a way they didn’t before. Of course, more Americans are skeptical of democracy than they were at the start of the Trump era. That’s one of the many challenges we face going forward. /11
Trump reoriented the axis of American politics from liberal vs. conservative to liberal vs. illiberal, pro-democracy vs. anti-democracy. That legacy will last long after he leaves the White House. /12
In his inaugural address, Trump used “American carnage” as a descriptor, an American wasteland he vowed to heal. Instead, “American carnage” turned out to be a promise, one of the few that, in the final hours of his presidency, he managed to fulfill. 13/13

More from Trump

To those who want to actually help Claudia Conway after her mom (Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s former aide) posted her underage daughter’s nudes to Fleets, fill out a report on the NCMEC CyberTipline.
CPS refused to help her.
#HelpClaudia


Kellyanne Conway has a well-documented history of verbally abusing, gaslighting, and threatening her daughter. It gets worse when highly public things go viral (such as exposing the truth about Trump and Conway catching COVID-19 last October). Kellyanne coerces false statements.

Insider did a thorough chronological background of the history of exposing her parents abuse and control of her here:
https://t.co/ncjaEyLOSC

We all know that “statement” last year was coerced. She talks constantly about being abused by them.


Personally? I suspect Kellyanne is a narcissist. From my own experience being sexually and emotionally abused by a narcissist, they are obsessed with controlling the narrative (coerced typed statement), discrediting their victim (posting her nudes) & gaslighting

If you haven’t experienced gaslighting or aren’t familiar with it, it’s when someone causing you harm (physical, emotional, sexual, financial, etc) twists the facts and asserts that reality is just you being delusional and you don’t actually understand what happened.
1. Yes, Trump will claim to intend to target GOP senators up for reelection in '22 (like he did to Thune with Kristi Noem) if they don't join in @HawleyMO's sedition on Jan. 6, but the fact is, it's not clear whether Trump will be successful in ANY of those efforts & voting yes


2. to hedge off these threats will also create fissures & fractures for these incumbents among other elements of their party that could complicate their renominations. Indeed, what worries me the most about the potential for the country to slip into @anneapplebaum territory is

3. that what should be robust and intense push back from the party establishment against actually ending democracy- bc that's what Trump's request would do, if it was granted, is fairly muted. What we SHOULD be seeing from the mainstream of the party is threats to strip committee

4. assignments, chairs, privileges, even reelection funds, if anyone gets involved in this bullshit- in the House & the Senate, and the fact that you don't see it is more than a story of McConnell & McCarthy being afraid of Trump & his base. Its a story of receptivity, of the

5. level of receptivity the congressional and party leadership is dealing with both within the rank and file membership of the party and within its donor class, and THAT, my friends, is why you find me so concerned. That, and my decision to finally pull @anneapplebaum's book
This is mostly right but strikes me as it needing said that I don't think the left or the intelligentsia have the slightest idea how low institutional trust in anything coming from a left mouthpiece is now. Except in-network, the best heuristic is "the opposite of what they said"


If you look at the situation from a predictive models perspective instead of the more rigorous and appropriate (under normal circumstances) "prove your case or gtfo" perspective, trusting the opposite of whatever the left side says has an AMAZING track record, as we know it.

Literally, the best heuristic most people have right now, in terms of how often it gets things right versus *completely* wrong, is "whatever CNN, the NYT, public health officials, and the Democrats said... yeah, the opposite." That is, they're wrong WAY outside of statistics.

They're also not just wrong. They're *completely* wrong, backwards, often transparently covering something up that they don't want known or refuse to believe. This isn't just a legitimation crisis because there's a heuristic: whatever the official left narrative is, is wrong.

There are a few reasons why such a heuristic would be more predictive than not. One of those is conspiracy, and another is mass hysteria with ideological capture. We know at least one of those is happening and have rather strong evidence both are. That makes conspiracy reasonable

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?