Imho, here's the scary thing.

[Dill]

(12-24-2019, 10:25 AM)holloder0 Wrote:

(12-23-2019, 10:16 AM)Dill Wrote: Wrote:E.g., suppose it is Trump's judgment, not McConnell's, that finally determines whether the Senate trial will call witnesses and introduce primary documents, and that while Rudy and the DOJ are working disable Trump opponents. That makes it pretty clear to real independents how 1) power formerly distributed across the party has now become wholly concentrated in one man with the power to punish, and 2) how that concentration undoes the autonomy of institutions like the Senate and the DOJ, eliminating their independent power to check.

Yeah, one would think that. I just want to counter that by questioning the power of true independents. They did not really turn the last presidential election around. And though the data points regarding Trump were different ones, it's not like it wasn't totally clear what kind of person he is and what kind of leadership idea he brings with him.
The electorate, as a whole, went with someone known for being narcissistic, dishonest, indecent, racially insensitive (to put it way too mildly), running fraudulent universities and charities, extort tax payers, etc. etc. Now they know some additional things, but why will these change the outcome if the former things could not.

Let me reassure you that you are right to be worried. The path to authoritarian government that you see is really there.  And it is enabled by the bolded above. I am just offering a ray (or more) of hope here. A reminder that things are not going as smoothly as you think for the Grand Old Party of Trump.

Starting with a qualification to the bolded--not all those who voted for Trump believe he is narcissistic (in the clinical sense), and dishonest. A large number are fooled. That is very bad. Worse, the indecency and racial insensitivity are part of his appeal to a large fraction of the base. Some Trumpers, perhaps many, recognize and dislike all this; however, they still believe it is counterbalanced by his opposition to abortion and protection of Israel.  My "hopeful" analysis does not rest on persuading these voters to turn against Trump. I am not expecting them to "wise up" at some point and see "what he really is." To the degree that his dishonesty could be convincingly demonstrated to many, it would still only mean he was as bad as Hillary, but unlike her appointing the right judges. To others, what he really is, is still what they really wanted.

"True independents" have not moved the needle as much as you'd like--yet--because (and add this as part of my hypothesis) many still do not see the damage being done to government or to US credibility abroad.  In fact, the US government has worked pretty well over their life time. The level of material comfort and safety in this country is high, and has come to seem "natural" rather than the consequence of generations of people making good decisions, especially since 1945.  We have had "bad" presidents before, like Nixon, and managed to muddle through. (Remember how, after Trump was elected, there were people in this forum who assumed he would not do much damage, would even "grow into his office" and become responsible. One even predicted that US foreign policy would continue on as usual, largely unaffected by the election of a narcissist with little knowledge of history--but easily pushed to rash deed by approval from his base.) "Socialism" is still for many, somehow, a more imminent danger than any posed by vacuums of power emerging in the Near or Far East.

What Americans have not seen in my lifetime, however, is a party, president, and prominent media outlet moving in lockstep the way these are. You lament that the needle seems not to have moved much after 2018 and impeachment--still minimizing that sizeable Dem win and the reasons for it.  What I am saying is the depth and actual contours of the GOPT are only gradually becoming obvious to independents, and to people normally not interested in politics.  It is increasingly organized like parties in Weimar Germany were, with chaotic, often contradictory programs and proposals from advisors working against one another, but with a well-defined constituency and party-elite submission to charismatic, authoritarian leadership, convinced that winning battles for its fraction of the electorate is more important than sound governing and compromise in the national interest.

The impeachment process is hastening recognition that this submission to authority on the part of those BETWEEN the base and the leader is precisely what compromises the autonomy of the Senate and the DOJ in unprecedented manner, undoes checks and balances, accountability.  Add in Fox's proximity/complicity with the GOPT, and you have a media base which functions the way party newspapers did in Weimar.

But the US in 2020 will not be like Depression-era Weimar, with a majority of citizens unfamiliar with liberal democracy and nostalgic for strong leadership.  What I am counting on is that as the nexus of Exec-Senate-Fox is forced more into the open, its power to muddle, deny, accuse and equivocate will diminish. Impeachment will not be the only driver, as more and more of Trump's policies come home to roost, more civil servants resign rather than break the law, and the people defending Trump become more erratic and continue to be replaced--increasing the level of chaos which has to be covered.  

So--a little patience. The concentration of authoritarian power in the GOP will produce a counter-reaction, will outrun the ability of Fox to paper-over cracks and the ability of independents to dismiss the potential for long-term damage on the assumption "this too will pass."  Consider the first quarter of the coming year as the test of my hypothesis.  We'll see fewer independents complaining that people who constantly complain about Trump "go too far," more "'Mooch"-style turncoats, and not only a loss of Trump's recent impeachment bounce in the polls, but the lowest support by independents registered so far.