What will impact be with voters if Trump is forced to take a mug shot?

[Dill]

(08-24-2023, 11:20 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It appears former President Trump one of the most recognized people in the world will be forced to take a mug shot.
I know Democrats will cheer and Republicans will boo.
Is it a good thing for our country?
How will the independents view this staged event by a Democratic city?
Trump has turned the narrative into the majority of citizens already think he is being politically prosecuted. Will this embolden Trump and make him a martyr?
Or will this be harmful to his campaign? Will his approval ratings go up? Down? or stay the same?

Good questions, Luvnit.

For those who value democracy, it will be a good thing for the country to see that we are still, barely, a nation of laws.
I don't think many will see the event as "arranged by a Democratic City" unless prompted by certain news sources.

I expect Trump's approval ratings to go down, but not much before Nov. or Dec., i.e., until after the Georgia trial begins.

It's just a trickle now, but more and more of his base will connect Trump's problems with his own behavior. This is already occurring (and
part of the motivation to get Joe too, playing for a tie).

Right now, for a lot of people who don't follow news closely, this is just a "both sides" he said she said sort of thing. Dems are accusing Trump so it must be "politically motivated." People really "hate" Trump for some reason. Maybe the hair. And most of the news noise on the right buttresses that.

But as the trials go forward and evidence, testimony etc. become dissected in daily news, more people will see a relation between
evidence and charges, which will clarify why they were filed. People will get a sense of the many moving parts of the conspiracy, and
the damage it did to individuals and to trust in government. For more people, alternative narratives will begin to fragment, seem incomplete, or wrong.

E.g., if the trial is televised, people following the trial will get to revisit this phone call to Brad Raffensberger:

“The people of Georgia are angry, the people in the country are angry. And there’s nothing wrong with saying, you know, that you’ve recalculated. . . . All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state."

The public will hear the prosecution argue that at the time of this call: 1) all Georgia authorities positioned to determine whether fraud had occurred had investigated and found none. 2) Trump heard this from the only people actually positioned to know (all under the charge of a Republican), and that despite that 3) Trump's intent was to pressure Raffensberger to "recalculate" to "find votes" to win Georgia for himself regardless of fraud..

And then the public will hear Trump's will lawyers argue that, in his capacity as chief exec, Trump had heard of irregularities in Georgia voting and, taking his responsibility seriously, was only trying to insure that Georgie elections were fraud free. (This is what they are saying on Fox.) 

This time, though, the jury won't be a Republican Senate with a regime party sitting in judgment of their Dear Leader. It will be John Q. Public, following along with 12 men and women who don't depend on supporting Trump for their jobs. 

Some in the public will think "sounds like a 'perfect call' to me, just like the one to Ukraine that triggered the first impeachment." 

I think most independents will say "Don't piss down my leg and tell me its raining."