MONDAY, AUGUST 18,
Also, the cluelessness of NAME WITHHELD: By the time he was 12 years old, President Trump was already being mocked for his grandiosity by his older brother.
He'd been given the nickname "The Great I-Am." Or at least, so said the president's niece, Mary Trump, in Chapter 3 of her best-selling family memoir, Too Much and Never Enough:
CHAPTER THREE
The Great I-Am
[...]
Encouraged by his father, Donald eventually started to believe his own hype. By the time he was twelve, the right side of his mouth was curled up in an almost perpetual sneer of self-conscious superiority, and [his brother] Freddy had dubbed him “the Great I-Am,” echoing a passage from Exodus he’d learned in Sunday school in which God first reveals himself to Moses.
He was soon shipped off to military school. As we discussed at length in late April, Chapter 3 of the book is built around the development of those personality traits.
For the record, Mary Trump is a clinical psychologist. That doesn't mean that her assessments of her famous uncle simply have to be right.
With respect to her famous uncle, it isn't entirely clear that the grandiosity ever left. Today, the president is running the D.C. police. He's also reshaping traditions of congressional elections, and he's directing a sweeping program of "mass deportation" which may, or may not, match what he said he wanted to do when he ran for election last year.
As of today, he's also decided to stage a crusade to change the method by which many Americans vote. As usual, he's advancing his new ambition with the standard barrage of claims which are baldly inaccurate—claims he may even believe.
There he's gone again! Earlier today, CNN's Daniel Dale offered the ten millionth useless fact-check:
Fact check: Trump falsely claims US is only country that uses mail-in voting
President Donald Trump made a series of false claims about elections in a Monday social media post in which he pledged to “lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS” and voting machines—including an inaccurate assertion that states have to run elections in the manner the president tells them to.
Here is a fact check of some of Trump’s comments.
“We are now the only Country in the World that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED.”
False. Dozens of other countries use mail-in voting, as CNN and others have pointed out when Trump has made such claims before. These countries include Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, and Switzerland.
And so on from there.
That's the start of Dale's report on this latest blizzard of misinformation. With respect to the ludicrous claim that no one uses mail-in balloting but us, the president repeated that ludicrous claim as part of a rambling side trip during this afternoon's Oval Office press event with President Zelensky.
He's off on his latest crusade, trailing absurd misstatements behind him. Once an idea gets into his head, almost nothing can get it out.
With that, we'll briefly revisit another of the topics cited above:
The logic of district construction:
In last year's presidential election, Candidate Trump received 38.3% of the vote in California. That worked out to roughly 40% of the two-party vote.
A similar two-party distribution prevailed during last year's congressional elections in California. In those elections, Republican candidates received 39.2% of the votes across the state. Democratic candidates received 60.5%.
Once again, this raises a basic question:
If forty percent of some state's population belongs to Political Party B, is that political party entitled to something approaching 40% of the seats in that state's congressional delegation?
An outcome like that might seem to be fair, but the long-standing answer to that question is no. Indeed, if the political blend of that state's population is spread evenly across the breadth of the state, Political Party A may end up winning every House race by a 60-40 margin.
Political Party B may end up with no congressional seats at all! There's nothing in American law or tradition which entitles the less popular party in a state to any House seats at all.
We mention this because of NAME WITHHELD, one of our dumbest "cable news" savants. The gentleman keeps insisting that California must already be heavily "gerrymandered" because its current House delegation includes 43 Democrats and only 9 Republicans.
Was gerrymandering involved in that outcome? We have no idea. That said, the breakdown of the California delegation follows the basic demographic pattern of the state, in which less heavily populated eastern parts of the state are more heavily Republican.
As you can see in the map at this link, the nine (9) Republican seats mainly come from those Republican inner-state regions. The population of the rest of the state is heavily Democratic, as are almost all members of Congress from those districts.
Under normal rules and procedures, we know of no reason to assume that something was wrong with the way California's independent districting commission created the 52 districts which produced that lopsided delegation.
NAME ITHHELD lacks the first freaking clue about the logic of this situation. He does know what he's supposed to say as a major figure on the Fox News Channel. Within our pitiful public discourse, the cluelessness about this basic matter is never going to end.
Now we're engaged in a great civil war about mail-in balloting itself! No one votes that way but us, The Great I-Am is now saying again.
This is who and what we actually are! So is the silence of the various lambs at the various major news orgs of our self-impressed but unimpressive Blue American nation.
Mary Trump wrote a dangerous book. As we've noted in the past, everyone agreed to avoid those parts of her best-selling book!
Drain the swamp, sir! Don't stop until every bit of truth has been removed.
ReplyDeleteAnd every creature willing to speak the truth and understand their professional obligations has been eliminated. Almost there.
DeleteWe still have those working at the state and local levels, especially in blue states. It is unclear why Somerby chooses to denigrate them day in and day out, including today. Somerby has not linked Trump's attack on local police forces with attempts to disrupt operations at the state level.
DeleteThere's no escaping it: our constitutional framework is truly bad. It has not aged well. None of it makes much sense -- neither the districts drawn/gerrymandered by each state; nor the electoral college; nor each state having two senators.
ReplyDeleteAnd this is how we end up with Trump.
The solution is obviously to let AI draw the districts going forward.
Delete"Today, the president is running the D.C. police."
ReplyDeleteNo, he isn't doing that. The court said no and the police chief is still in charge.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2018769n1yo
Inflating Trump's achievements does nothing to puncture the balloon of childish grandiosity that still surrounds Trump. It is better for everyone when people tell Trump the truth instead of puffing him up, as Somerby does here with this misinformation.
According to developmental psychology, children learn in early childhood that they are not the center of the universe, especially if they have siblings. It seems more likely that Trump has constructed his grandiosity as a defense against the threat posed by the idea that no one cares about him. With everyone lying to him about his own performance, out of fear of his father or later, Trump himself, he can never learn to cope with his flaws or realize that there are people who will love him despite imperfections. His money has trapped him in his psychological dysfunction and it is way too late for that to change. But that is no reason to pity Trump. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that he wants to change.
ReplyDelete"Under normal rules and procedures, we know of no reason to assume that something was wrong with the way California's independent districting commission created the 52 districts which produced that lopsided delegation."
ReplyDeleteYou cannot use past voting as the basis for creating districts because there is no guarantee that future voters would cast their votes the same way. Further, people move between districting procedures, so there is no assurance yesterday's bluish district still has the same constituents. That is because people move for reasons that have little to do with their political views, such as to find jobs, to save money on housing, to live closer to relatives, to avoid natural disasters or recover from one. Under such non-political pressures, why should a district resemble its previous voting results after being redistricted?
CA set up an independent commission explicitly to avoid partisan political pressures on district creation. The existence of Democratic-voting districts neither proves nor disproves that this occurred after the last census. The assumption that each district must be 50-50 red/blue is not an assumption of the process (because that itself would be partisan). That means that Somerby's reasoning that if Democratic districts exist, the process is unfair or partisan, is itself mistaken and ridiculous.
It violates a law of logic called affirming the consequent, where someone assumes the antecedent (that partisan districting occurred) if the result is observed (some districts are Democratic in CA). There are many other ways that a Democratic-voting district could have been created, including largely accidental ones, producing Democratic districts in CA. That's why Somerby's conclusion does not proceed from the assumption that if partisan districting is employed, Democrats will benefit. Democrats are capable of having deep blue results no matter how districting occurs because even though non-partisan procedures are used, there are too many Democrats in CA to escape having blue districts all over the place. That is because the people who have the money and the higher education and the kinds of jobs that make them Democrats also are the main ones who can afford to live in an expensive state with progressive politics historically dominating the state.
And yes, there are some solid red counties in CA and they do tend to vote for Trump, but they are in rural and agricultural areas where population is sparse, so they do not dominate politics anywhere much. Even Devin Nunes was being mocked by his mother's cow and Bakersfield has become 55% Hispanic (more likely to vote blue due to Trump's harrassment of Latinos nationwide).
Somerby himself admits his argument is specious, but why then does he repeat it? And why is he calling blue voters "unimpressive" or whatever, when we are so thoroughly dominating and doing such a good job with the economy of our nation's most prosperous state? Based on outcomes, Somerby should be congratulating us blues for the success in places like CA.
You say that "Somerby's reasoning" is that "if Democratic districts exist, the process is unfair or partisan."
DeleteThat is not his reasoning, at all. In fact, it is close to the opposite of his reasoning.
You're welcome. (And you may wish to delete your post to avoid further embarrassment.)
Yes, upon re-reading I see that Somerby was talking about [NAME WITHHELD] when he presented that logic, as he did a week or so ago. But he also said that the strong blue voting record of the state is why some people think CA is dishonest in its districting (already gerrymandered).
DeleteNote that Somerby did not previously mention the independent districting commission enact in CA. I did that in comments, as I did again this time. Why wouldn't Somerby mention that as a defense against the misinformation he repeated today from [NAME WITHHELD]?
At least my comment corrects the misinformation. Somerby does not -- he repeats the invalid argument, which is what led to my confusion about him saying it, instead of [NAME WITHHELD]. I will let the correction stand, because it is valid whether Somerby was the clueless person or the other guy (who Somerby refuses to name).
If Somerby were concerned about misinformation, he wouldn't leave it floating around (twice in his own posts and also on TV) so that others could scratch their heads and say, "Yes, why are those CA voters so damned blue? It must be because of gerrymandering. And if they are doing it already, what's so bad about TX doing it too? They started it, after all." It is almost as if Somerby doesn't mind how many red voting morons reason like that, since he does nothing whatsoever to prevent them reaching that conclusion.
Somerby says: "Was gerrymandering involved in that outcome? We have no idea. " Well, he should have some idea, given the existence of a non-partisan Independent commission to do the districting, as mandated by the people of CA in a statewide vote to establish such a commission.
This is why Gavin Newsom must place a ballot initiative on the CA November ballot in order to change the non-partisan commission to a partisan one with the purpose of finding more seats to balance the TX gerrymandering plan. Given how blue CA is, it seems likely the initiative would pass, especially with the way Trump has been fucking around with CA using ICE raids and troops. People are upset about that, thus motivated to oppose Trump by changing the composition of the House. But keep in mind that blue voters in CA enacted a fair, unbiased, non-partisan commission in the first place because we Democrats care about fairness and the right of all voters to have an impact on elections in our state. That makes the insult of being called a previously gerrymandered state is so unfair. Somerby, as a supposed liberal and blue voter, should know what Dems are like and not join in the Republican slander, but he seems unwilling to tell the truth on this topic. Why is that?
Delete"Note that Somerby did not previously mention the independent districting commission enact in CA."
DeleteTDH, 8/6/25: "As everyone knows, California's current districts were created by what is described as a nonpartisan commission. Indeed, there may well have been zero attempts at gerrymandering in the creation of the current districts."
I'm geting embarrassed for you.
I appreciate your concern.
Delete8/6/25? How does that help today's discussion? Did he mention it today, that I overlooked?
DeleteToday I was listening to an interview with the Governor of MD, the state where Somerby lives. He was talking about the dramatic decreases in crime in Baltimore, achieved by investing in police, addressing the root causes of crime, and making a serious effort to decrease homicides and violent crimes, with dramatic results. But Trump says Baltimore is next as a destination for Troops. And the Gov is blue, yet is doing a manifestly good job. Why does Baltimore need troops? Perhaps Somerby can tell us that.
ReplyDeleteWhy should Somerby be calling blue America unimpressive when we have concrete results to point to that contradict that idea? Trump's lies about crime in America are lazy and don't fit the idea that blue states are doing something wrong that needs fixing using the military. Why does Somerby not defend us blues, when the data is on our side, not Trump's?
Why does Somerby call this guy "Name Withheld"? Why would he protect a Fox News host who has said something majorly wrong from the consequences of his own stupidity? This trademark coyness is one of Somerby's most irritating traits. I refuse to think about someone he refuses to identify while slamming.
ReplyDeleteWe in the US have a tradition of rooting for underdogs but also of facing whoever we are accusing of malfeasance so that they can defend themselves and know who is out to get them. Failure to say something to someone's face is a sign of cowardice, most of us were taught to think. And this is at least the second time Somerby has raised this accusation.
I almost think that Somerby wants readers to believe the misinformation about how CA districts got so blue, but he doesn't want to say it himself (because it is mistaken), so he attributes to some unnamed person, makes a half-assed denunciation of the conclusion and then leaves it hanging, repeated again for all to consider without rebuttal. Why else would Somerby keep repeating misinformation without telling us who is spreading it over at Fox News?
We need a new constitution.
ReplyDeleteGo to your room and write one, then let us know when you are finished.
DeleteI don’t know how to do that. But the present constitution is dying.
DeleteRead the constitution. Pick out the parts you think are dying and try to improve or strengthen them. If you can identify the problem, it is easier to find a solution.
DeletePretty much the entire document, meaning the constitution, is antiquated. Needs to be tossed and replaced wholesale. It's just bad.
DeleteHow about if you write the replacement and let others decide if it is better than what we have?
DeleteYou don’t tear down your house without first finding another place to live.
DeleteRepublicans have ruined our current Constitution, because it was set-up so that political participants are acting in good faith. Obviously, that's a "no go" for the Republican Party.
DeleteWhy is Somerby talking about some Fox News idiot who doesn't know anything about redistricting? There is more important news, such as Trump's fiasco with Putin over Ukraine.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.jefftiedrich.com/p/stop-bugging-marco-rubio-about-ukraine
..."oh, come the fuck on. Witkoff doesn’t speak the language, doesn’t use a US embassy notetaker, and relies on a translator provided by Putin. it’s a recipe for disaster, and guess what: a disaster is exactly what we got.
every day, it’s a new debacle caused by some unqualified, incompetent dumbfuck. if it’s not a Fox News dunk-tank clown texting classified war plans to a reporter, it’s a real estate crony getting played by the dictator of Russia.
so that thing that happened during the despot bestie playdate, where Putin supposedly told Donny about how mail-in balloting sucks all ass, and that’s why Donny lost in 2020, and how Donny should man-up and ban it, because Russia would never allow that shit?
here’s Fiona Hill to explain that Putin was just winding Donny up.
“this is Vladimir Putin, as usual, trying to manipulate US domestic politics… President Trump asserted in his Fox interview there were no countries in the world that allow mail-in voting. Well, Russia allows mail-in voting. In 2020, President Vladimir Putin signed into law Russians being able to vote by mail and also on the internet. more than 30 other countries also allow some forms of mail-in voting. so it’s just not true that other countries, including Russia, don’t use this. it’s a pure blatant piece of manipulation and that’s the kind of thing that Putin likes to do.”
Fiona Hill knows first-hand all about Putin’s ability to manipulate America’s Mad King. she saw it happen back in 2018, when she was an advisor to the Helsinki Summit — the one where Donny ended up utterly defeated.
just last week, Hill was warning Dear Leader’s handlers not to let Donny be alone with Putin.
“Putin will lure you in in a moment,” she said. “He likes to do the two guys chatting routine, but what he’s really doing is making you complicit in all kinds of things he wants.”
But what I don't understand is what kind of idiot would go to any high level meeting with a foreign leader without having a translator and note-taker? There can be no record of what was agreed to if there is no record of what was said by each person. Business deals are not done this way, so why did this happen with Putin?
It has always made Trump look like an idiot, that he has done this from his first term. Trump doesn't speak Russian either. By some accounts, he cannot even read. And if Trump is confidant that Putin has his back, why should that be so? Only Putin's ownership of Trump would explain that circumstance -- and there are plenty of people on the internet speculating about the kompromat Putin still holds over Trump, because it explains the complete sell-out that happened in Alaska in ways that nothing else can.
"Mary Trump wrote a dangerous book. "
ReplyDeleteThis is ridiculous. She said in her book, repeatedly, that she was not diagnosing Trump because he has not been evaluated professionally and would not agree to it. Without that, Mary Trump said, it would be unethical for her to claim any diagnosis of Trump.
The book is mostly about the unfair things done to her own father, Trump's older brother Fred, who died of alcoholism because he could not escape the strings attached to family money. He apparently wanted to become an airline pilot while his father insisted he take over the family business. Fred Trump had insufficient gumption to leave the security of family money in order to pursue his own goals. Mary Trump blames everyone except her own father for his drinking and his lack of spine, but that is a daughter's loyalty and blind spot. It is the main focus of the book, not Donald Trump, and most of the book has nothing to do with Trump or his many crimes. There are better books about Trump's earlier life.
Somerby tries, against Mary Trump's will, to use her statements (disclaimed as diagnostic) to buttress the stuff Bandy Lee said first, about Trump's psychiatric problems. That got Bandy Lee dismissed from her appointment at Yale because CT wouldn't renew her license to practice. It was and still is unethical for a professional to pretend they are diagnosing someone they have not examined and assessed. Somerby has been told that repeatedly but he doesn't want to listen.
It does not matter why Trump does what he does. It matters a lot that he is a criminal, sex offender, incompetent grifter who only cares about amassing wealth and power at the expense of our nation. Somerby does not appear to want to point out the ways in which Trump has failed us all. I do not understand why Somerby will not tell the truth about Trump, his damage to our country, and the collusion with other criminals in both the US and abroad. That is the meat of history, not Mary Trump's whining about her father's supposed mistreatment.
Somerby could have been part of the solution to Trump's perfidy. Instead he has a different agenda. Who knows what it is, but Somerby won't come out and say what so many blue pundits say daily about Trump. Somerby has never offered a word of encouragment to the resistance, just finger-pointing, blaming and nagging blue America because we are supposedly feeble and ugly and no one likes us because our mothers dress us funny. We in blue America are the only ones who can save our country now. Depressing us by telling us we are awful is not the best way to keep people fighting for a better America.
MAGAs will find out. They have already fucked around and now they are beginning to feel the consequences of their actions. When it really comes home to them, we in blue America will help them put the pieces back together. But not Somerby. Somerby has nothing of value to offer anyone except Trump. That's why it seems obvious that Trump is who Somerby is performing for these days, like the fucking trained seal he has become.
"blaming and nagging blue America"
DeleteThat's your negative bias. I would call it constructive criticism.
"That's why it seems obvious that Trump is who Somerby is performing for these days, like the fucking trained seal he has become."
DeleteLet me show you how obvious it is. Below are actual quotes from Somerby's actual column today (not the one in your imagination):
"He’s (Trump) off on his latest crusade, trailing absurd misstatements behind him. Once an idea gets into his head, almost nothing can get it out."
"the president repeated that ludicrous claim as part of a rambling side trip this latest blizzard of misinformation."
"he's (Trump) advancing his new ambition with the standard barrage of claims which are baldly inaccurate"
"Fact check: Trump falsely claims US is only country that uses mail-in voting"
Now don't you feel like a dumb bunny?
And yet he pushes the idea that Dems started gerrymandering first so it is ok for Trump to ask TX to rig their districts to get Trump more seats in 2026. That helps Trump. Trump won’t mind a little pretend name-calling to put that idea across.
DeleteIt would be better if Somerby criticized Trump's crimes, especially his extensive history of sexual predation of minors, but anytime Somerby isn't repeating Right-wing grievances on his blog, it's a small step in the correct direction.
DeleteJUST IN: Former Attorney General Bill Barr officially testifies under oath that President Trump is not at all implicated in the Epstein files.
ReplyDeleteThe narrative is officially done.
He didn't say that. He testified about Epstein's death and said there was no client list, to his knowledge.
DeleteWe wouldn't need an Epstein client list, if we listened to women.
DeleteYou don't need to be a trained psychologist to see Trump's grandiosity. It's blatant. But grandiosity can be beneficial. Trump's grandiosity leads him to take action against any problem he sees. But, a lot of time he solves the problem, or at least makes progress. E.g., Iran's nuclear program. Illegal immigration over the Southern border. Inadequate military recruitment. Reverse discrimination.
ReplyDeleteBeing out of touch is dangerous in all situations, especially for leaders who need to have good judgment. Grandiosity is a form of being out-of-touch with reality. You are trying to equate it with self-confidence, which does help leadership. A person who is way out of touch will make dangerous mistakes whose damage may outweigh whatever other good they have done.
DeleteYou don't have to be a trained psychologist to see that Trump's main problem goes way beyond being grandiose. He's a fool.
DeleteIs there a silver lining you can paint around that adjective?
Great point, @7:27. Yes, I was equating grandiosity with self-confidence. Perhaps that's because Trump actually achieved some things that sounded like grandiosity, such both Presidential elections. OTOH Trump always indulges in absurd exaggerations, which is part of the definition of Grandiosity.
DeleteHector -- the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Trump's many enormous accomplishments show that he's a capable person. By comparison, I haven't been elected President even once. And, I'm still working on earning my first billion
DeleteHere's Trump today, picked up on a hot mic. After months of negotiating with Putin, with zero Russian concessions to show for it: "I think he wants to make a deal for me."
DeleteSad. A pathetic old fool so easily manipulated.
Hector - what's wrong or embarrassing about Trump's comment? Does Putin want a peace deal or not? That's pretty important. Trump might be wrong about Putin's desire for a deal, but, in that comment, Trump was addressing an important matter.
DeleteYou are right David, no other President has led an autogolpe, pulled military support from an ally under attack from our mutual enemy, or shit his diaper in court.
DeleteThanks for teaching me a word I didn't know.
DeleteWe know you're a dumbass, you don't have to brag.
DeleteTrump deserves credit for giving woke Disney a huge tax break.
DeleteTrump's many enormous accomplishments have gotten him a 38% approval rating. Not as bad as his 31% after the Capitol insurgency he instigated, but trending in that direction in consecutive polls. Consumer prices have gone up and over 80% of discretionary spending in this country is accounted for by the upper 20% in wealth. The US public consistently polls negatively regarding his treatment of immigrants, foreign policy, tax policy, and tariffs. Oh yeah, and Epstein. About the only thing Trump scores well on is border security. As the economic slowdown kicks in and people have to deal with tariff - induced economic pain, that 38% number may seem quite generous.
DeleteIt's all so unfair to Democrats.
DeleteWhat word did you have to look-up, David?
DeleteWas it "ally"?
Trump and the Republican Party are worse for children, then they are for Democrats.
DeleteTriggered, Hillary?
ReplyDeleteAnd then an odd bass note was heard coming from my fanny. It registered as D2 sharp on the musical scale, and sounded much like a tuba.
ReplyDelete- Fanny Horn
David in Cal is a standard-issue Republican bigot. He just plays an ignoramus on the internet, because it supports his bigotry.
ReplyDeleteDon't be fooled by his act.
David has me completely fooled. I believe everything he says.
ReplyDelete