I do not consider myself a MAGA disciple b/c of the several reasons you listed and more. I agree with some on your list and disagree on others, but in general, I too disagree with some of POTUS’ actions. I too dislike his trolling on Truth Social, I too dislike some of the tariff games but agree with others, I believe that the US allowed itself to be taken advantage of via tariffs, I am not fond of the Iran war but I do not have a better scenario to stop Iran from developing their nuclear capabilities and then I read an article like this: https://rodmartin.substack.com/p/trumps-top-25-achievements-the-list?r=l2zts&utm_medium=ios. So I believe POTUS could be better (couldn’t all the Presidents have been better?) while also believing the current POTUS is doing a good job.
I actually don’t think the premise that “Only Nixon could go to China” is correct, because he also expended massive amounts of political capital from quarters where it would hurt him even more than it would have hurt, say, Humphrey. It was a very unpopular choice (https://www.ussc.edu.au/not-only-nixon-could-go-to-china, https://www.nytimes.com/1971/07/29/archives/11-conservatives-criticize-nixon-headed-by-william-buckley-they.html), and though the nominal reason was unrelated, we ought to remember that within 2 years of his trip, Nixon was in total political disgrace. That said, we should also remember that Nixon’s partisans were staunch for him up to the very end (there’s a contemporaneous newspaper editorial, I can’t recall the precise one, where one of Nixon’s critics satirizes how Nixon could still rely on a core diehard faction that would bring out the contemporary version of “TDS” on a dime “what about Chappaquiddick”).
The main reason “Nixon could go to China” was because in 1971, there was a general insider consensus that the biggest potential source of US advantage lay in exploiting and widening the Sino-Soviet split, an option that had become obvious to astute observers as early as 1969, and was well within the Overton window by 1971, when the Nixon administration began making its initial overtures. How obvious is it that Humphrey would also have “gone to China”? Well, Humphrey campaigned on it in 1968, for starters. See https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1968/11/4/an-interview-with-hubert-h-humphrey/.
Yes, but Nixon was not a political disgrace because he went to China.
"The main reason “Nixon could go to China” was because in 1971, there was a general insider consensus that the biggest potential source of US advantage lay in exploiting and widening the Sino-Soviet split,"
Correct, but any politician attempting it would have to consider the accusations that he was soft on communism. Nixon didn't have this problem.
I do not consider myself a MAGA disciple b/c of the several reasons you listed and more. I agree with some on your list and disagree on others, but in general, I too disagree with some of POTUS’ actions. I too dislike his trolling on Truth Social, I too dislike some of the tariff games but agree with others, I believe that the US allowed itself to be taken advantage of via tariffs, I am not fond of the Iran war but I do not have a better scenario to stop Iran from developing their nuclear capabilities and then I read an article like this: https://rodmartin.substack.com/p/trumps-top-25-achievements-the-list?r=l2zts&utm_medium=ios. So I believe POTUS could be better (couldn’t all the Presidents have been better?) while also believing the current POTUS is doing a good job.
I like some of what he's done but have reached the point where I think he's doing more harm than good.
I appreciate the comment Dave.
To me it looks they are not as blind as they pretend to be.
Pretending is the farce, the lie, the act.
Plausible deniabillity style playing deaf dumb and blind.
A circus act.
Magic...
Otherwise known as BULLSHIT
I actually don’t think the premise that “Only Nixon could go to China” is correct, because he also expended massive amounts of political capital from quarters where it would hurt him even more than it would have hurt, say, Humphrey. It was a very unpopular choice (https://www.ussc.edu.au/not-only-nixon-could-go-to-china, https://www.nytimes.com/1971/07/29/archives/11-conservatives-criticize-nixon-headed-by-william-buckley-they.html), and though the nominal reason was unrelated, we ought to remember that within 2 years of his trip, Nixon was in total political disgrace. That said, we should also remember that Nixon’s partisans were staunch for him up to the very end (there’s a contemporaneous newspaper editorial, I can’t recall the precise one, where one of Nixon’s critics satirizes how Nixon could still rely on a core diehard faction that would bring out the contemporary version of “TDS” on a dime “what about Chappaquiddick”).
The main reason “Nixon could go to China” was because in 1971, there was a general insider consensus that the biggest potential source of US advantage lay in exploiting and widening the Sino-Soviet split, an option that had become obvious to astute observers as early as 1969, and was well within the Overton window by 1971, when the Nixon administration began making its initial overtures. How obvious is it that Humphrey would also have “gone to China”? Well, Humphrey campaigned on it in 1968, for starters. See https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1968/11/4/an-interview-with-hubert-h-humphrey/.
Yes, but Nixon was not a political disgrace because he went to China.
"The main reason “Nixon could go to China” was because in 1971, there was a general insider consensus that the biggest potential source of US advantage lay in exploiting and widening the Sino-Soviet split,"
Correct, but any politician attempting it would have to consider the accusations that he was soft on communism. Nixon didn't have this problem.