And Democrats Will Call This “Success.”

The GenForward poll, as reported by The Associated Press found that a majority of young adults, 57 %, regard Donald Trump as an illegitimate President. The number includes three-quarters of black respondents as well as large majorities of Hispanics and Asians.

President Trump is many things. Ethics Alarms began years ago documenting those aspects of his abilities, temperament, skills and character that made him, by the analysis here, an unqualified, undesirable President. One thing that he is not, however, is “illegitimate.” There is no basis whatsoever to consider him so. He was selected to run by the process put in place by the Republican Party, over a large number of experienced and accomplished politicians (and then there was Ben Carson.) He was extensively covered by a hostile press, that all but announced (and in the case of the New York Times, did announce) that it was dedicated to his defeat. His opponent was the allegedly unbeatable, anointed heir to Barack Obama and the previous Democratic President, her husband, both of whose policies were a matter of record. President Trump did not “buy the election,” as he spent about half what his opponent did. Illegal voters, to whatever extent they played a part in the election, probably did not vote for him.

Donald Trump was elected because the right number of voters chose him in the right combination of states, and under the rules in place since the U.S. Constitution was ratified, his was a legitimate election, and he is a legitimate President beyond question. There have been a few Presidents whose legitimacy could be challenged—John Quincy Adams, John Tyler, Rutherford B. Hayes—but not President Donald J. Trump.

So why does a majority of young Americans now regard the President of the United States as “illegitimate”? They believe this because a deliberate strategy has been followed by Democrats, progressives and the news media to make them believe that. They have been told that the Electoral College is undemocratic, as part of a two month long onslaught of propaganda to get a group of electors not chosen for the purpose to overturn the election results. Major figures in the Democratic leadership have declared the President “illegitimate,” without official rebuke. Most of the Congressional Black Caucus boycotted the Inauguration on that basis. Democrats have loudly claimed that an FBI conspiracy was afoot to wreck Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and then attributed her loss to Russian “interference.” Finally, Democrats have claimed that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to steal the election, essentially alleging treason. This last is the major artillery in the Delegitimize Trump battle plan, and it has always been intellectually dishonest, irresponsible, and reckless. Following on the theme, Democrats have even encouraged the use of the inflammatory term “the resistance” to sanctify those who claim the President is “illegitimate,” equating opposition to a duly, legally elected U.S. President with the underground French resistance to Nazi occupiers during World War II, a genuinely illegitimate government. This is indefensible and wrong.

Glenn Greenwald writes,

This fixation has persisted even though it has no chance to sink the Trump presidency unless it is proven that high levels of the Trump campaign actively colluded with the Kremlin to manipulate the outcome of the U.S. election — a claim for which absolutely no evidence has thus far been presented.

The principal problem for Democrats is that so many media figures and online charlatans are personally benefiting from feeding the base increasingly unhinged, fact-free conspiracies — just as right-wing media polemicists did after both Bill Clinton and Obama were elected — that there are now millions of partisan soldiers absolutely convinced of a Trump/Russia conspiracy for which, at least as of now, there is no evidence. And they are all waiting for the day, which they regard as inevitable and imminent, when this theory will be proven and Trump will be removed. Key Democratic officials are clearly worried about the expectations that have been purposely stoked and are now trying to tamp them down. Many of them have tried to signal that the beliefs the base has been led to adopt have no basis in reason or evidence.

Too late. As the poll shows, the Democratic strategy now has an entire generation of Americans believing that their President is “illegitimate,” meaning that they believe the electoral process and the government is illegitimate as well. I am certain that Democrats regard this as a great success, which is proof of the ethics rot and civic irresponsibility that has this once-great party by the throat.

Democracy, unlike every other form of government, exists because of trust: trust in the will of the people, trust in democratic institutions, trust that elected public servants genuinely care about serving the public, trust that the system works. Since the beginning of the Republic, only one party, the Democratic Party of 2016-2017, has set out to destroy that trust as part of a Machiavellian plan to win voters.  It is the most anti-American, dangerous, destructive, nation-rending and civil society threatening course any major group within the nation has charted, and the poll shows its results, which are catastrophic for the nation’s future success and comity

But beneficial for the Democratic Party! Is that really how Democrats reason now: destroying trust in the nation’s institutions is worth the carnage, as long as Democrats gain power? This isn’t a partisan complaint. A political party that sets out to undermine its own nation’s institutions should not be trusted or respected whatever its ideological bent, and indeed should be feared. Let’s see if there is enough integrity and patriotism left among Democrats to begin repairing the damage their party has done to the fabric of our society and the public trust.

___________________________

Pointer and Facts: The Hill

26 Comments

Filed under Ethics Train Wrecks, Government & Politics, U.S. Society

26 responses to “And Democrats Will Call This “Success.”

  1. Wayne

    Hopefully the Democrats will go the way of the Know Nothing Party. We do need a new party to counterbalance the corporate interests that have looked the other way regarding the flood of illegal immigrants entering this country and marginalized the middle class. Also one that will quit playing identity politics and clean house of the Nancy Pelosis, the Clintons, al Franken’s, and the friends of Barack Obama.

    • Chris

      “the flood of illegal immigrants entering this country”

      Citation needed.

      • Other Bill

        theweek.com/articles/650402/truth-about-americas-illegal-immigrants
        Sep 24, 2016 – How many illegal immigrants are there? About 11 million, or 3.5 percent of the total U.S. population.

        • Chris

          I realize we’re all very busy people, OB, but if you had bothered to read the first five sentences of that article instead of only the first, you would have seen this:

          But despite the scaremongering about foreigners “pouring in” to the country, the undocumented immigrant population has in fact been steadily falling since 2007, when it peaked at 12 million. The decrease is largely because fewer Mexicans are crossing the border, thanks to improved border controls, the recession in the U.S., and rising employment and prosperity levels in Mexico.

          So thank you for proving yourself wrong for me. A reduction in the number of illegal immigrants–which is exactly what we’ve seen for the past ten years–is not a “flood.”

          • Other Bill

            Sorry Chris. I’d call eleven million or so being here a flood, or if you prefer, the lake remaining after a flood. 3.5% of the population? You’re fine with that. I’m not. So the inflow has decreased, so that makes the inflow not a flood. Pure, classic pedantry. You’re favorite method of misdirection.

            And what do you propose to maintain the decrease in the flow? Let’s have another recession?

            • Chris

              You said “flood of illegal immigrants entering this country.” Present tense. There is no flood of illegal immigrants entering this country, and thinking there is is racial paranoia.

              My proposal for further reducing the number of illegal immigrants is reducing the number of immigration restrictions.

              • Chris

                I’m sure that Republicans, who love cutting unnecessary regulations that interfere with the free market, will jump right on board my proposal.

                *crickets*

                • Other Bill

                  Your proposal for reducing illegal immigration is to make all immigration legal?

                  • Chris

                    No. Read better.

                    • Other Bill

                      Okay. “My proposal for further reducing the number of illegal immigrants is reducing the number of immigration restrictions.” What’s that mean? And why are you so snide?

                    • Other Bill

                      Do you mean more visas? Evidently the vast majority of illegal immigrants are people who have over-stayed their visitor visas.More H1B1 visas? “Guest worker” programs?These are considered inhumane, even though they still operate in the agricultural industries. What did I misread?

                    • Chris

                      “Reducing immigration restrictions” doesn’t mean “making all immigration legal.”

                      Now, granted, I’m not exactly sure what restrictions need to go first. I don’t know where we should start. But this is the principle we should start with.

  2. Sharon

    For Jack and those who post here and don’t mind sharing…what do you consider your reliable sources of news. I am really getting tired of wading through several “sources” and trying to guess what the real story is. Thanks

    • I do not believe there are any reliable sources of news any longer (if there really ever were)

      Let me clarify that statement a bit: All major new sources have been tainted with click bait for so long as to have stained their reputation. This is as true for most larger right leaning news sources as it is for the rest, IMHO.

      Welcome to the world of comparing sources to get at the truth, if there is truth to be had.

      Maybe I am cynical these days, but we elected DONALD freakin’ TRUMP, and HE was the best alternative, so bizarro world has arrived.

    • On national political matters, there are none. Local papers are the best.

    • I rely exclusively on The Onion, whose byline is “All the news that fit to mock”.

      jvb

  3. Chris

    I agree with most of this. Use of the term “illegitimate” is factually incorrect. Trump was elected in a legal process. Even if it turns out he did collude with the Russians (I think there is more circumstantial evidence of this than you do), he would still be a “legitimate” president until he was impeached. Democrats in Congress who have used this term are acting irresponsibly, as are those who refuse to condemn them.

    I don’t agree on the “resistance.” I’ve seen it used more as a play on Star Wars than the French Resistance–it even uses the Star Wars symbol–and I don’t think it implies illegitimacy. I recognize Trump is a legitimate president, and I still think his agenda should be resisted.

  4. John Billingsley

    As the poll shows, the Democratic strategy now has an entire generation of Americans believing that their President is “illegitimate,” meaning that they believe the electoral process and the government is illegitimate as well.

    What have they gained by encouraging this belief? This strategy has created many adherents who are barking mad and evidently no longer believe in the democratic process. But this strategy also surely has created a large opposition who seeing that the Democrats will resort to the most deplorable devices if they lose will have less inhibition against using the same weapons themselves in that circumstance. What will the result be when the Democrats find themselves on the receiving end?

    I am not a conspiracy nut at heart, but I must float the idea that the ultimate goal of the Democrats is to delegitimize any other party. When the Democrats then win an election and the other party fights back using these same tactics they will have their Reichstag fire and can then create an essentially totalitarian system with themselves at the helm. Admittedly a far-out idea but I have to ask, why are the leaders of the party who were so hysterical about Trump accepting the results of the election in order to preserve the democratic process when they were sure he was going to lose, so unremitting in trying to break that process now that he has won?

    Let’s see if there is enough integrity and patriotism left among Democrats to begin repairing the damage their party has done to the fabric of our society and the public trust.

    I’m afraid at this point I’m not holding my breath. There have been too many opportunities where simple, direct statements by any of the senior Democratic leadership could have made a big difference but they don’t appear to have made them. I recollect that at various places you have given good examples of what they might have said. At this time America really needs a tough, honest opposition party but it seems to be getting a lynch mob. The Young Frankenstein mob scene comes to mind here.

  5. Steve-O-in-NJ

    Simple, Jack. The Democratic Party is of course the more secular party, due to both its stance on social issues and its disdainful attitude toward religion generally, especially Christianity. It has now started to move towards the point where it wants to be the most powerful force in people’s lives and the place they draw their values from, like Chavez’s party in Venezuela, like the Communist party in what was the USSR, and like the Nazi party in Germany. With that goes an attitude, whether truthfully believed or cynically held, that its positions are the only positions, its views are the only views, and anyone who disagrees is wrong at best, evil at worst, no different than the Teutonic Knights who rode into the Baltics with a sword in one hand and a Gospel in the other or the Arabs who thundered into Spain forcing conversion to Islam at the edge of the scimitar and threw the library at Alexandria on the fire because either the books agreed with the Koran and were not needed or disagreed with it and were not wanted.

    With that kind of thinking anything becomes possible, as the history of all those entities bears out. It was all right for Pravda and TASS to become de facto state agents, to make sure the people had only the right information. It was all right for Julius Streicher to spew all kinds of vicious lies against the Jews, because they were the enemies of the Reich. It was all right for writers who opposed the Soviet regime to be given a one-way ticket to Siberia, where their thinking would not infect the populace. Ultimately it was all right for those who disagreed or were not the regime’s type to meet worse fates, but we don’t need to rehash that.

    Given this history of what happens when a political party attempts to become more important than nation and more important than God in the minds of its adherents, it should come as no surprise that innuendo, spin, assuming the worst, and outright lying have become the order of the day among the party that once stood for the values of Jefferson, Jackson (to some degree the Trump of his day) and Truman, but that has now inherited only the worst values of Wilson (puritanism and moral certitude), FDR (government as elected king, packing the courts), Kennedy (cult of personality,moral double standards) and Clinton (deceit). This country’s toughest days may be yet to come.

    • Other Bill

      The Democrat Party “has now started to move towards the point where it wants to be the most powerful force in people’s lives and the place they draw their values from,”

      Can I get an “Amen?”

  6. Jack wrote: “Democracy, unlike every other form of government, exists because of trust: trust in the will of the people, trust in democratic institutions, trust that elected public servants genuinely care about serving the public, trust that the system works. Since the beginning of the Republic, only one party, the Democratic Party of 2016-2017, has set out to destroy that trust as part of a Machiavellian plan to win voters. It is the most anti-American, dangerous, destructive, nation-rending and civil society threatening course any major group within the nation has charted, and the poll shows its results, which are catastrophic for the nation’s future success and comity.”

    Having come into contact with this Blog, and having come under its influence to deeply examine ethics and morals, and of course to ask my own self what are mine and what I really think and believe, I find a few things. One is simply that it seems to me that the more that one defines one’s own understanding-base, what I call one’s ‘metaphysics’, the more that one is asked by what one sincerely believes to act in this world in some way or another.

    Put another way, if it should happen that a person lives in pure *relativism*, or perhaps if that person cannot find a base in logic within him or herself, and cannot really think at all, that person will not ever be able to actually make a moral and ethical choice, except perhaps every once in a while and by luck.

    So then, what is the process by which one clarifies, in oneself and to oneself, what one really and truly believes? I will suggest that it is there, in that activity, is the activity that defines man. But I will also say that in my view, which I admit to be somewhat limited, and I do not have a great deal of experience with the world in the administrative sense and that of ownership and rulership (by nature Machiavellian and I do not mean that necessarily in the bad sense), in my view I honestly notice, and I think it is true, that most people do not have enough of a base in thinking, or in having defined their metaphysics, to actually have a free and independent position on almost anything and possibly everything. Essentially, how can you ask people to get involved in truly momentous problems, ones that require profound understanding, and which if messed up lead to very very damaging consequences? But the more important question is How will I, and on what metaphysical basis, make these decisions and come to these conclusions myself? How can I know if I am *right* or if I am *wrong*? Competing narratives surround me. (I am reminded of The Torment of St Anthony, the most interesting version that of Michelangelo with the saint suspended over the abyss.)

    All this preamble — and much more preamble is required — just to get to the point where one can even talk about the idea on one’s mind!

    It may be true, in reality if not only abstractly, that democracy is based on trust. I follow you up to this point. But what I cannot push out of my mind, and thus out of my conscience, is that at every juncture, in dozens and dozens of different ways all of which can be catalogued, and over a long period of time, very real forces have acted para-democratically to manipulate, undermine, and subvert people’s thinking processes, within their organic selves, in fantastically perverse and deeply and profoundly unethical ways (immoral ways to put it more strongly). In this sense, and this is not *conspiratorial* and paranoid but an attempt to state the truth, people have been manipulated and coerced at the most fundamental level possible. And activities have been undertaken by oligarchic powers, by para-democratic forces and interests, to severely subvert and deeply to damage to abstraction that you often hold up — very idealistically — as ‘noble America’.

    My understanding is that for many many years now powerful interests have been working, and are working still, to manipulate people to be something they are not; to subvert natural and deeply-rooted cultural values and morals, and to create a perversion of culture and also democracy. If this is true, and I believe it is self-evident and obvious, then I simply cannot see what exactly I am to *trust* and who I am to trust and why I am to trust them. \

    I am to ‘trust’ the ‘will of the people’? This seems to me absurd and impossible facially! I do not trust anyone, ever, and especially when I notice they are unregenerated or when they demonstrate, in word, gesture and in deed, that they are not to be believed or trusted. And I am supposed to, as an article of pious democratic faith, to override my common-sense and factual knowledge of people to believe that a mass of unregenerated persons (I do mean this in a spiritual and moral sense), will when they come together in a mass, influenced by invisible interests which come at them through MSM, influenced by God only-knows what, come to take some decision? This is facially absurd.

    Only moral persons, gestated in a moral matrix, who resist everything that we understand to be of lower-orders in human interests and human activities, and who set their eyes in one way or another on higher goals and aspirations, can ever be relied on to make a moral choice. When that matrix is destroyed, or when it is perverted, and when what it is that made moral persons is no longer there making them, how are we to regard This Present? How are we to regard the powers that operate behind the scenes? either in the market where they purvey absurdity and erroneous focus, or for example toward excessive and totally unethical and deeply immoral military activity that results in death, destruction and misery in communities far away form our pious ‘moral republic’?

    How can ‘moral people’ not know of these things? How can they not speak out about them? I suggest to you that the Invasion of Iraq and the open murder of people and culture, if it is not seen and recognized as the primary moral evil of recent years, and symbol and an emblem of many others, than any conversation about ethics and morals is simply absurd. It is this, and it is many other things that go on daily, that have to be brought into the light and discussed.

    Government as it is now established, massive, entrenched bureaucratic powers of the ‘deep state’ in profound collusion with private interests, dominate and control thinking and ideation for the man of the masses. That is a simply stated fact.

    But in order to make an analysis of any of this requires a stepping-away from those perverse Powers. One has to reject them, to separate oneself from them. How?

  7. The illegitimacy comes in four forms:

    1. Hillary Clinton did not win. Therefore, any other candidate is illegitimate.

    2. Trump seeks to undo, repeal, wipe out, many of the Obama Administration policies. That is simply wrong. Therefore, he is illegitimate.

    3. Young people believe that Trump stole the election from the most qualified candidate in the history of qualified candidates, with Russian help (why do I keep typing Rush when I mean Russia? Could it be that might affinity for the Canadian Triumvirate has finally taken over my Dr. Pepper-addled mind, now controlling every aspect of my life?)

    4. Trump colluded with Russia to defeat Clinton. That is a very complicated argument, and it goes something like this:

    a. Trump and the Trump campaign openly expressed admiration for Putin during the election cycle, declaring that he was good for Russia.

    b. Trump’s advisors and early cabinet met secretly with Putin and the Russians to sway the election in his favor.

    c. Trump did not criticize Putin for his/Russia’s invasions into Crimea and the Ukraine. Trump even said he thought Obama Administration sanctions of Russia were ineffective.

    d. Flynn (ousted!), and other cabinet members, had, have, and still have close ties with Russia. Tillerson, especially, has close ties with the Russian oil and gas interests, which is why Crimea is an important part of Russia’s national and strategic interests. Moreover, Trump’s Russian business ties are not well known because he won’t release his tax returns. The proverbial Trump-Russia dossier has some bad stuff in it but there is some stuff that needs some close scrutiny.

    Once Trump’s close business ties are known, there will be a direct link to Moscow’s interference with the election, which Trump knew about and used to his advantage. Therefore, he should resign or Congress should file articles of impeachment.

    That seems to be what is happening in the hearings today.

    jvb

  8. Some people claim that a new election could be ordered if it turned out that Trump “colluding” with Russia was a violation of the Logan Act, despite the lack of any constitutional text outlining the procedure for a new presidential election.

    I pointed out that the only remedy (assuming a Logan Act violation) would be the impeachment process. They then claimed that it is insufficient, because what if everyone in the succession list was involved. One of them even suggested that the only alternatuive, aside from someone in the government ordering a new presidential election, would be a civil uprising.

    And let us again remember the nature of this alleged interference, which was releasing hacked e-mails. How is this different from what NBC did with releasing a tape recording? How is it different from Dan Rather releasing those memos in 2004?

    • Chris

      And let us again remember the nature of this alleged interference, which was releasing hacked e-mails. How is this different from what NBC did with releasing a tape recording? How is it different from Dan Rather releasing those memos in 2004?

      This has been answered numerous times. If you still don’t understand how a foreign government influencing our election process is different from citizens doing the same, it’s because you don’t want to understand it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s