"the question isn’t what Trump will do or say but how effective it will be"
People like me often stop at "Trump gonna Trump regardless." I appreciate this paragraph a lot as a response to that. It's true that Trump does not need and has never needed justification in his own mind, but many other people do. A lot of those people are only too happy to take "It's what Trump wants" as a sufficient justification, but that's not the only way everyone thinks. I don't have much to offer on how to address that person (other than "don't let him run the FBI"), but I can say that not everyone who does support Trump generally supports him with completely blind loyalty. But in bafflement and anger, we talk like that's the only logic there ever is in a Trump supporter's mind. "His" people can disagree with him and sometimes it even changes something, like the Attorney General pick. Considering justification and hypocrisy through that person's mind might help.
But, you see, the untold thousands of people who have died because of the depravations of the health insurance industry had just as much of a right to life as that CEO, and their deaths will not be publicly mourned like his has been.
Your argument is an example of "thinking only one move at a time in an iterative game".
Norms are created and maintained when both parties accept mutual restraint is in their interest. Trump broke the pardon norm. Will observing this dead norm revive it? How does that work? I think it actually leads to more norm breaking, it tells Trump Democrats can be played, they are chumps. My mind goes to Merrick Garland, his observance of the norms of an earlier time did nothing to restore a more civil order, on the contrary his weakness invites more abuse. Various parallels to domestic abuse are apt.
Unfortunately we are in a cycle of degradation that will only stop when Republicans see it no longer advances their interests, and we are far from that point. Democrats tried appealing to civility, had Republicans lost the election that could have been the lesson, but the public shrugged. This Trump's lesson to all Republicans: Transgression pays.
At this point I think the only way out is through. The Democrats must play as ruthlessly as Republicans, more in sorrow than anger, the goal being to attach costs until a new truce can be called. Various parallels to war apply.
"Giving Trump Just What He Wants" I think you have it backwards. Trump wants Democrats to continue observing rules he shamelessly flouts. This has worked his entire life, this is his playbook. Blanket pardons to entire classes of people he likes to threaten is not what he wants. He wants the "flexibility" (his word) to go after them whenever and however he wants. He wants a corrupt DOJ, political persecution is part of the corruption, desirable in itself, it makes the DOJ an extension of his will.
As far as voters at large, I still hope they will at some point rebel and insist on higher conduct. Unfortunately unilateral restraint was tried and failed. The infection has entered the bloodstream, the first line of defense breached, it will get worse before it gets better. Think chemotherapy.
"the question isn’t what Trump will do or say but how effective it will be"
People like me often stop at "Trump gonna Trump regardless." I appreciate this paragraph a lot as a response to that. It's true that Trump does not need and has never needed justification in his own mind, but many other people do. A lot of those people are only too happy to take "It's what Trump wants" as a sufficient justification, but that's not the only way everyone thinks. I don't have much to offer on how to address that person (other than "don't let him run the FBI"), but I can say that not everyone who does support Trump generally supports him with completely blind loyalty. But in bafflement and anger, we talk like that's the only logic there ever is in a Trump supporter's mind. "His" people can disagree with him and sometimes it even changes something, like the Attorney General pick. Considering justification and hypocrisy through that person's mind might help.
But, you see, the untold thousands of people who have died because of the depravations of the health insurance industry had just as much of a right to life as that CEO, and their deaths will not be publicly mourned like his has been.
I’m not sure if this is a counterargument or just an addendum?
Your argument is an example of "thinking only one move at a time in an iterative game".
Norms are created and maintained when both parties accept mutual restraint is in their interest. Trump broke the pardon norm. Will observing this dead norm revive it? How does that work? I think it actually leads to more norm breaking, it tells Trump Democrats can be played, they are chumps. My mind goes to Merrick Garland, his observance of the norms of an earlier time did nothing to restore a more civil order, on the contrary his weakness invites more abuse. Various parallels to domestic abuse are apt.
Unfortunately we are in a cycle of degradation that will only stop when Republicans see it no longer advances their interests, and we are far from that point. Democrats tried appealing to civility, had Republicans lost the election that could have been the lesson, but the public shrugged. This Trump's lesson to all Republicans: Transgression pays.
At this point I think the only way out is through. The Democrats must play as ruthlessly as Republicans, more in sorrow than anger, the goal being to attach costs until a new truce can be called. Various parallels to war apply.
"Giving Trump Just What He Wants" I think you have it backwards. Trump wants Democrats to continue observing rules he shamelessly flouts. This has worked his entire life, this is his playbook. Blanket pardons to entire classes of people he likes to threaten is not what he wants. He wants the "flexibility" (his word) to go after them whenever and however he wants. He wants a corrupt DOJ, political persecution is part of the corruption, desirable in itself, it makes the DOJ an extension of his will.
As far as voters at large, I still hope they will at some point rebel and insist on higher conduct. Unfortunately unilateral restraint was tried and failed. The infection has entered the bloodstream, the first line of defense breached, it will get worse before it gets better. Think chemotherapy.
Not sure i agree but the argument is quite compelling