This seems like a standard hopium piece on the left. Take the first anecdote:
Last June, the popular UFC fighter Sean Strickland surprised onlookers when, immediately following a victory, he ducked into the audience and took a photo with a bystander: Donald Trump. “President Trump, you’re the man, bro,” Strickland declared in his post-match interview with Joe Rogan. “It is a damn travesty what they’re doing to you. I’ll be donating to you, my man. Let’s get it done.” Video of the moment rocketed across social media, serving as an early indicator of Trump’s enduring strength with his base, despite his recent felony convictions.
Strickland went viral last week for a very different reason: opposition to the president and his plan to take over Gaza. “Man if Trump keeps this bs up I’m about to start waving a Palestinian flag,” the fighter posted on X. “American cities are shitholes and you wanna go spend billions on this dumpster fire. Did we make a mistake?! This ain’t America first.” Strickland’s lament racked up 159,000 likes and 13.2 million views.
This isn’t even buyer’s remorse - Strickland couldn’t even bring himself to make a statement rather than a question - but even assuming it is, the article fundamentally misunderstands MAGA believers’ relationship with Trump. Sure, they will question random one-off decisions, but even outright contradicting their own interests will at best draw this - momentary mild annoyance. Meanwhile, if next week Trump says something that can be contorted to be a show of support for their own goals, even if wildly improbable and incoherent, they’ll be back to fawning over him.
We see him as a toddler, or a middle-school bully who tears the legs off frogs for fun. Yes, that is true, but irrelevant. What this article writer doesn’t get is that parents will usually do anything to protect their baby, or live in denial that their middle-schooler is a psychopath.
These complaints are in reality just cries for the warm blanket of propaganda to lull them back to sleep with some easy answer, and annoyance at the vertigo of momentarily seeing reality. The thesis that Trump’s support will fall over time because of this is absurd.
This seems like a standard hopium piece on the left. Take the first anecdote:
This isn’t even buyer’s remorse - Strickland couldn’t even bring himself to make a statement rather than a question - but even assuming it is, the article fundamentally misunderstands MAGA believers’ relationship with Trump. Sure, they will question random one-off decisions, but even outright contradicting their own interests will at best draw this - momentary mild annoyance. Meanwhile, if next week Trump says something that can be contorted to be a show of support for their own goals, even if wildly improbable and incoherent, they’ll be back to fawning over him.
We see him as a toddler, or a middle-school bully who tears the legs off frogs for fun. Yes, that is true, but irrelevant. What this article writer doesn’t get is that parents will usually do anything to protect their baby, or live in denial that their middle-schooler is a psychopath.
These complaints are in reality just cries for the warm blanket of propaganda to lull them back to sleep with some easy answer, and annoyance at the vertigo of momentarily seeing reality. The thesis that Trump’s support will fall over time because of this is absurd.