How can anyone remain optimistic in the face of this incredible lawlessness by our king/emperor, aka the orange felon and his string pullers (not just the muskrat)?
The Democracy Index is primarily *descriptive*. It updates readers on actions by the Trump administration to erode American democracy, as well as other damaging actions like Signalgate. It describes WHAT is happening. I'm thankful for this service and the lively writing of this article series. However, let's examine the context a little deeper.
The American Press Association says that "The central purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society."
If the role of journalism is to provide the public with the "accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society," then shouldn't the Democracy Index also provide *prescriptive* information? That would describe WHY Trump is doing what he's doing, so that Americans can see deeper into the truth of the reality they live in and make better decisions on how to stop Trump's behavior, such as by requesting their congressional Republicans to stop supporting Trump's actions and if they don't, voting against them in the midterms.
For example, is Trump a Russian agent? If so, that is an epic journalistic conclusion. It would clearly explain why he's destroying America's economy and democracy, and siding with Russia.
If Trump is an active Russian agent, then all of The Contrarian's stories should have that frame. Such a frame has the potential to turn the tide by turning people against Trump, because they can see the truth. That's the kind of deeper, more important information that the Democracy Index and the Contrarian need to report on.
To help this happen, I've written an article on this topic: "Reframing the Debate: Is Trump an Active Russian agent? Yes he is. And if the public and the press feel that way, we can turn the tide." Please see:
If I am understanding your point - if the core purpose of journalism is to provide accurate and reliable information, this will inform my interpretation if characters and events in the news. If I also want analysis, opinion, or explanations, I will read an editorial, an op-ed or a trusted Substack/podcast. Prescriptions are rules (as in "here's what to do with this information"); speaking for myself, I normally would rather decide this for myself.
Consider -
"...prescriptivism is rarely a useful communication tool and it certainly doesn't help anyone to understand a complicated and diverse issue..."
Thanks. I was using "prescriptive" in the diagnostic sense. WHY is a patient ill. WHY is something happening. A doctor doesn't tell a patient what to do. They merely give them a choice, based on education about WHY the patient is ill. The decision is up to the patient, such as whether to take prescription.
Now I can see I choose the wrong word. My mistake. The Oxford Dictionary definition of prescriptive is "relating to the imposition or enforcement of a rule or method."
Despite my error in choice of words, the intent of my comment on the article still holds. Journalism about Trump should go beyond WHAT is happening to WHY it's happening. This is common. For example, going to the New York Times, the top story is "The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine."
Most of the story describes WHAT happened. But that's not enough for readers to reach sufficient understanding.
"Today that order — along with Ukraine’s defense of its land — teeters on a knife edge, as President Trump seeks rapprochement with Mr. Putin and vows to bring the war to a close." - You can replace "as" with "because", which explains WHY and connects the dots.
"Now, with negotiations beginning, the American president has baselessly blamed the Ukrainians for starting the war, pressured them to forfeit much of their mineral wealth and asked the Ukrainians to agree to a cease-fire without a promise of concrete American security guarantees — a peace with no certainty of continued peace." - The sentence explains WHY the negotiations are a bad deal for Ukraine.
"Mr. Trump has already begun to wind down elements of the partnership sealed in Wiesbaden that day in the spring of 2022. Yet to trace its history is to better understand how the Ukrainians were able to survive across three long years of war, in the face of a far larger, far more powerful enemy." - The author prepares the reader to read on about WHY "the Ukrainians were able to survive." And so on.
The story opens with "Frank Curnow, a retired Navy veteran, had a question for the Republican Party volunteers at an early voting site in Daytona Beach, Fla., on Thursday. WHY, he asked, were some polls suggesting a tight race for the open seat in his reliably conservative congressional district, Florida’s Sixth?" The story is all about WHY the race is tight.
That's what I expect would help American voters: stories about WHY Trump is doing what he's doing.
The fourth paragraph says "Before Trump’s recent trade moves, the U.S. had one of the most open economies on Earth — unless you were trying to sell Americans foreign-made pickup trucks, clothing, tobacco, cereal or several dozen other products. In that case, the U.S. government charges double-digit import taxes *designed to discourage* consumers from buying foreign goods and to protect domestic producers. Just like most other nations do."
"designed to discourage" explains WHY "the U.S. government charges double-digit import taxes."
News articles are full of WHY reporting. I'm just trying to encourage that practice to apply to Trump stores.
I heard an interview on the Maddow show that made a deep impression. A law professor, I believe from UCLA, said rather than reacting to all the things this administration has already done, we need to start anticipating what will come next and find ways to derail those moves and/or anticipate the diminish their effects. The professor said the big, big, big thing to begin planning for is: How to prevent this administration from staying in office beyond 2028. You may think this is paranoid, but I have now heard this concern raised by others who I respect. The thing I have not heard is: What should we do about this possibility? I scratch my head and realize the ultimate barrier is the courts and maybe the military. And given their current condition, this gives me small solace. I hope someone at the Contrarian will find a way to add to "The 15 Things We Should Do To Preserve Democracy" with this overriding concern in mind. Thank you.
Trump is a Labrador Retreiver! Labs crave attention, preferably positive attention...but absent that they will wilfully do something destructive so you will scold them. Negative attention is after all, still attention. "Splains" Trump to T!!!
The only way to train a Lab is shunning as a corrective measure. Unhappily...nearly impossible when the misbehavior is from the President!
One must wonder, how many other times have [tmurp's] cabinet gotten together to discuss Classified and/or Top Secret material over an insecure network? They seem to have a cavalier attitude about matters of National Interest and Security that, somehow, THEY are exempt from any possible harm. They're on very thin ice and very soon the ice will break under them.
How can anyone remain optimistic in the face of this incredible lawlessness by our king/emperor, aka the orange felon and his string pullers (not just the muskrat)?
The Democracy Index is primarily *descriptive*. It updates readers on actions by the Trump administration to erode American democracy, as well as other damaging actions like Signalgate. It describes WHAT is happening. I'm thankful for this service and the lively writing of this article series. However, let's examine the context a little deeper.
The American Press Association says that "The central purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society."
https://americanpressassociation.com/principles-of-journalism/
If the role of journalism is to provide the public with the "accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society," then shouldn't the Democracy Index also provide *prescriptive* information? That would describe WHY Trump is doing what he's doing, so that Americans can see deeper into the truth of the reality they live in and make better decisions on how to stop Trump's behavior, such as by requesting their congressional Republicans to stop supporting Trump's actions and if they don't, voting against them in the midterms.
For example, is Trump a Russian agent? If so, that is an epic journalistic conclusion. It would clearly explain why he's destroying America's economy and democracy, and siding with Russia.
If Trump is an active Russian agent, then all of The Contrarian's stories should have that frame. Such a frame has the potential to turn the tide by turning people against Trump, because they can see the truth. That's the kind of deeper, more important information that the Democracy Index and the Contrarian need to report on.
To help this happen, I've written an article on this topic: "Reframing the Debate: Is Trump an Active Russian agent? Yes he is. And if the public and the press feel that way, we can turn the tide." Please see:
https://analyticalactivist.substack.com/p/reframing-the-debate-is-trump-an
If I am understanding your point - if the core purpose of journalism is to provide accurate and reliable information, this will inform my interpretation if characters and events in the news. If I also want analysis, opinion, or explanations, I will read an editorial, an op-ed or a trusted Substack/podcast. Prescriptions are rules (as in "here's what to do with this information"); speaking for myself, I normally would rather decide this for myself.
Consider -
"...prescriptivism is rarely a useful communication tool and it certainly doesn't help anyone to understand a complicated and diverse issue..."
https://www.bizcommunity.com/Article/196/18/111509.html
Thanks. I was using "prescriptive" in the diagnostic sense. WHY is a patient ill. WHY is something happening. A doctor doesn't tell a patient what to do. They merely give them a choice, based on education about WHY the patient is ill. The decision is up to the patient, such as whether to take prescription.
Now I can see I choose the wrong word. My mistake. The Oxford Dictionary definition of prescriptive is "relating to the imposition or enforcement of a rule or method."
Despite my error in choice of words, the intent of my comment on the article still holds. Journalism about Trump should go beyond WHAT is happening to WHY it's happening. This is common. For example, going to the New York Times, the top story is "The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine."
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/29/world/europe/us-ukraine-military-war-wiesbaden.html
Most of the story describes WHAT happened. But that's not enough for readers to reach sufficient understanding.
"Today that order — along with Ukraine’s defense of its land — teeters on a knife edge, as President Trump seeks rapprochement with Mr. Putin and vows to bring the war to a close." - You can replace "as" with "because", which explains WHY and connects the dots.
"Now, with negotiations beginning, the American president has baselessly blamed the Ukrainians for starting the war, pressured them to forfeit much of their mineral wealth and asked the Ukrainians to agree to a cease-fire without a promise of concrete American security guarantees — a peace with no certainty of continued peace." - The sentence explains WHY the negotiations are a bad deal for Ukraine.
"Mr. Trump has already begun to wind down elements of the partnership sealed in Wiesbaden that day in the spring of 2022. Yet to trace its history is to better understand how the Ukrainians were able to survive across three long years of war, in the face of a far larger, far more powerful enemy." - The author prepares the reader to read on about WHY "the Ukrainians were able to survive." And so on.
The next story, on "A Competitive Race for Mike Waltz’s Seat Rattles Republicans." https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/30/us/politics/mike-waltz-florida-republicans.html
The story opens with "Frank Curnow, a retired Navy veteran, had a question for the Republican Party volunteers at an early voting site in Daytona Beach, Fla., on Thursday. WHY, he asked, were some polls suggesting a tight race for the open seat in his reliably conservative congressional district, Florida’s Sixth?" The story is all about WHY the race is tight.
That's what I expect would help American voters: stories about WHY Trump is doing what he's doing.
The first story in The Washington Post is on "Trump’s complaints about overseas tariffs ignore some of the U.S.’s own." https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/03/30/trump-countries-tariffs-eu-us-trade/
The fourth paragraph says "Before Trump’s recent trade moves, the U.S. had one of the most open economies on Earth — unless you were trying to sell Americans foreign-made pickup trucks, clothing, tobacco, cereal or several dozen other products. In that case, the U.S. government charges double-digit import taxes *designed to discourage* consumers from buying foreign goods and to protect domestic producers. Just like most other nations do."
"designed to discourage" explains WHY "the U.S. government charges double-digit import taxes."
News articles are full of WHY reporting. I'm just trying to encourage that practice to apply to Trump stores.
Thanks for pointing out my error!
MAHA-Making America Hate Again
I have a question. Is it possible for America to hope again??
I heard an interview on the Maddow show that made a deep impression. A law professor, I believe from UCLA, said rather than reacting to all the things this administration has already done, we need to start anticipating what will come next and find ways to derail those moves and/or anticipate the diminish their effects. The professor said the big, big, big thing to begin planning for is: How to prevent this administration from staying in office beyond 2028. You may think this is paranoid, but I have now heard this concern raised by others who I respect. The thing I have not heard is: What should we do about this possibility? I scratch my head and realize the ultimate barrier is the courts and maybe the military. And given their current condition, this gives me small solace. I hope someone at the Contrarian will find a way to add to "The 15 Things We Should Do To Preserve Democracy" with this overriding concern in mind. Thank you.
Trump is a Labrador Retreiver! Labs crave attention, preferably positive attention...but absent that they will wilfully do something destructive so you will scold them. Negative attention is after all, still attention. "Splains" Trump to T!!!
The only way to train a Lab is shunning as a corrective measure. Unhappily...nearly impossible when the misbehavior is from the President!
One must wonder, how many other times have [tmurp's] cabinet gotten together to discuss Classified and/or Top Secret material over an insecure network? They seem to have a cavalier attitude about matters of National Interest and Security that, somehow, THEY are exempt from any possible harm. They're on very thin ice and very soon the ice will break under them.
When will the Atlantic release Goldberg's articles from BEHIND THE PAYWALL?
Too bad all these nightmares are actually happening.