Here's TPM contributor Sarah Posner on why the corporate media has missed the story of the Christian right. It's a bit disorganized and self-referential so it's difficult to summarize, but I think the last two paragraphs tell the basic tale:
Trump fully understands how his Christian nationalist base uses spiritual warfare to paint a picture of an America under siege by anti-Christian, anti-American, satanic forces that only an anointed strongman leader can vanquish. Trump’s rise to power did not happen in a vacuum, or just because many Americans thought he was a successful businessman, or because most Americans support his brutal deportation policies. (They don’t.) A radical religious movement that views strongman leaders, even abusive ones, as essential to carrying out a divine plan for themselves and for America, helped propel him to power, and keep him there.
Just because Trump now occupies the White House (again) doesn’t mean that this movement is mainstream. It is maddeningly possible for the country to be led by an authoritarian fundamentally at odds with the desires of the majority, owing to how this movement, fueled by deep-pocketed donors, has become the core of the Republican electorate. It’s a challenge to tell that story, to help people understand that they do not have to accept the fringe as mainstream, or to accede to their mythic claims to represent the “true” America. Especially now, as Trump seeks to punishingly control the media, maintaining this kind of coverage is absolutely essential to the task we have before us as Americans.
3 comments:
Yes. How refreshing it would be to have some mainstream media outlet tell the truth. Timely, too. Past time.
This may be obvious to everyone, but it just struck me lately:
It's easier to fund your project with donations from a few uber-rich than a bunch of folks in the middle even though their total wealth may be similar, for more than the obvious reason that it's easier to convince a few than a multitude.
"Disposable income" means different things to the wealthy than to the little people. For you and I it is money left over after all the necessary expenses have been paid. But if you're like me you have a lot of things that you'd really like to have/do even if you don't actually need them. I look at those things with gimlet eyes when deciding where to dispose of that fraction of my income. If you're like me the money runs out before all my desires are satisfied. Political donations would be one of those on that list fighting for air.
The problem for a billionaire is quite different. He (statistically) has long since taken care of his normal desires, but he still has a ton of money left over, and he needs to find a reason to explain to himself exactly why he should have it. If he was a Russian oligarch he could just buy a larger yacht, but he'd look a little silly in a contest to see who has the biggest one.
Politics to the rescue! It's "adult" and "serious" and it can be custom fit to the needs of his ego. I don't know, but I'd be willing to bet (a small sum) that there are ultra rich folks out there looking for a respectable enterprise to support, up to a level that will assuage their conscience.
PS:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/11/11/2353215/-The-Epstein-Files-Are-Said-to-Be-Very-Very-Damaging
Post a Comment