I've been grappling with this. I've been grappling with the naysayers who insisted American democracy would die November 2019. I've been grappling with all the journalists and pundits born under authoritarianism or whose countries slipped into authoritarianism pointing at the US and going "you're next." I've been grappling with Tim Snyder, who wrote an entire book about the rise of Hitler and then taped on a couple dozen paragraphs that went "because Germany therefore USA."

And by god it's made me an American exceptionalist.

There's a bit in last night's For All Mankind (no spoilers) where the president is dealing with a very Lewinsky-like dilemma and says "but if I do that it will weaken the office of the presidency for me and every president who comes after" and I almost said "like that's a bad thing" aloud. 'cuz that's how we got William Barr. Dude wanted a unitary executive, Trump wanted a unitary executive, and Barr lied to himself about whether or not Trump was fit to lead.

I think Trump has weakened the office of the presidency, and I think that's about the only good thing he did. Much like Congress didn't want anybody running for a 3rd term for president after FDR won it, a lot of shit Trump did won't be doable in the future. But more than that, I think anyone with a sober understanding of American politics wouldn't have done most of the shit Trump did. He didn't have a plan, he was probing for weakness. Dude took a pop quiz on executive authority and failed. And I think the only way we end up with another Trump is if somehow everyone on both sides of the aisle manages to not learn a single goddamn thing and we somehow stumble into another feckless, vainglorious narcissist in a time when both parties are offering up heaping plates of bullshit for the electorate to swallow.

I don't like Mitch McConnell, but I recognize that he's an exemplar of how an effective legislator becomes a powerful man. I don't like Dick Cheney, but I recognize that he's an exemplar of how a backroom dealer becomes a powerful man. I don't like Paul Ryan, but I recognize that he's an exemplar of how a charismatic politician becomes a powerful man. And I draw the conclusion that Paul Ryan hung up his spurs because there can be only one.

We don't talk about the National Front, we talk about Marine Le Pen. We don't talk about Fidesz, we talk about Viktor Orban. We do talk about the Five Star Movement but only in terms of spoilers now that Conti's out. And we do that in a legendarily fractious political system that elected a porn star in the '80s. When a populist took over Italy? He took it over again and again and again. Berlusconi knows what to do with power, and he knows what he can do with it. In a political system like Italy, he's got a lot of room to run.

Trump is like a fail version of Berlusconi. He couldn't assume the presidency without conditions being perfect, and once assumed, he accomplished fuckall. I don't even think that's Trump's fault - in order to govern a bureaucracy you need to be a decent bureaucrat but in order to run as a populist you must eschew bureaucracy.

I've come around, more and more, to contemplating Trump as a vaccine for democracy. It was fuckin' rough, we thought we were gonna die, but we're in the process of generating a fuckton of antibodies.

Fuckin' Kansas, dawg. Kansas should have been a shitshow:

Why would members of the legislature schedule a vote on a proposed Constitutional amendment for a primary election? In Kansas, primary elections are closed, meaning normally only registered Republicans and Democrats vote. And in Kansas, registered Republicans (851,882) vastly outnumber Democrats (495,574). Registered independents in Kansas (560,309) could vote on the Constitutional amendment but aren't in the habit of showing up to primaries. Further, in the high-profile Governor's race, incumbent Laura Kelly (D) was running unopposed.

So the anti-abortion legislators behind the Constitutional amendment were hoping for a smaller electorate that was skewed toward opponents of abortions rights.

Then, they made the text of the Constitutional amendment itself incredibly confusing:

    Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. To the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States, the people, through their elected state representatives and state senators, may pass laws regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, laws that account for circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or circumstances of necessity to save the life of the mother.

The proposed text makes it seem like the Kansas government funds abortions, which it does not. It also makes it seems like voting for the proposed amendment means voting in favor of allowing abortion in cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother. But that isn't true either. The impact of the proposed amendment would be to allow the legislature to ban abortion, with no requirement that the ban include any exceptions.

If that wasn't confusing enough, a PAC run by former Kansas Congressman Tim Huelskamp (R) sent out deceptive text messages to Kansas voters falsely stating that voting YES would protect abortion rights.

Things went better than expected:

The number of people who voted against the Constitutional amendment (534,134) exceeded the combined number of Democrats who voted in the primary and independents who just voted on the Constitutional amendment (445,155). That means that a significant number of Republican voters — in excess of 20% — also opposed clearing the way for an abortion ban.

Eventually, all this bullshit has to hit the bulk of the population. The bulk of the population of Kansas does not want the legislature to revoke their constitutional right to abortion. And the bulk of the population of the United States did not want Donald Trump to take away any part of their American experience.

And I don't think that's an anomaly. I think that's the system at work.