What Would Our Missing 1 Million COVID-19 Dead Think Today?

As of March 2025, the United States has reported approximately 1,222,603 deaths due to COVID-19. Some of them died still believing in the Trump disinformation campaign. Many died horrified they ever believed Trump or voted for him...

The missing one million

More than one million Americans died during the Covid-19 pandemic. Five years later, they remain largely invisible.

Jason Steinhauer

The question of how the "missing 1 million" Americans who died from COVID-19 would vote is an interesting and speculative one, as it's impossible to know their individual preferences. However, we can make some broad inferences based on various factors:

1. Demographic Impact: The pandemic disproportionately affected certain groups, including older individuals, communities of color, and those with pre-existing health conditions. Historically, demographic factors like age, race, and health status have influenced political preferences. Older Americans, for example, tend to lean more conservative, while younger, more diverse groups lean more liberal. However, COVID-19’s disproportionate impact on vulnerable groups could have influenced future voting trends, potentially affecting both parties’ base.

2. Policy and Governance Influence: Many of the "missing" Americans died during the Trump administration, which led to significant political division over the handling of the pandemic. Some individuals may have become more politically active or altered their political leanings due to the perceived mishandling of the pandemic, with criticisms of the government’s response to COVID-19 potentially leading to a shift in voter sentiment away from certain political figures or policies.

3. Healthcare and Economic Factors: The pandemic underscored deep divisions in the country over healthcare access, economic support, and pandemic response. Those who suffered due to poor healthcare or financial hardship might have developed stronger support for policies promoting universal healthcare or better social safety nets, which are generally associated with the Democratic Party. Alternatively, those who felt that COVID-19 restrictions were overblown might have been more inclined to support conservative candidates who favored less government intervention.

4. Changes in Political Awareness: Some people may have been more motivated to vote as a result of losing loved ones to COVID-19, especially if their deaths were influenced by systemic issues like inadequate healthcare infrastructure or political negligence. This could have led to greater support for candidates promising change in those areas, such as those advocating for stronger public health systems, better pandemic preparedness, or healthcare reform.

Ultimately, it’s not just about who those "missing" Americans would vote for, but also about how their deaths impacted the political landscape. Their absence could contribute to changes in voting patterns, particularly in swing states, where their votes could have had a significant impact on elections.

Many of our dead were MAGA voters who changed their minds on their deathbed, shocked at what they had done, and Trump hadn't. How would they see reality different today?

It's a thought-provoking question, and while it's speculative, there are some possible angles to consider based on the nature of political shifts and the impact of personal experience.

1. Cognitive Dissonance and Reflection: For many people, political identity is deeply tied to their worldview, and shifting political views—especially later in life or during major personal crises—can create cognitive dissonance. If some of those who passed away from COVID-19 were MAGA voters who experienced profound regret on their deathbeds, it's possible they felt a deep internal conflict between their previous beliefs and the reality of what they experienced during the pandemic. In this case, they may have come to see the actions (or inactions) of leaders like Donald Trump as not only ineffective but potentially harmful, especially if they felt that more could have been done to save lives.

2. Disillusionment with Leadership: Many MAGA voters supported Trump, especially for his promises around American exceptionalism, economic prosperity, and law-and-order policies. However, if those same voters felt betrayed or misled by Trump's handling of the COVID-19 crisis, they might have come to view his leadership in a more negative light. For those who were directly impacted by the pandemic, this could lead to a significant change in how they viewed reality, potentially seeing Trump’s downplaying of the virus and lack of immediate action as a serious failure.

3. A Shift in Trust: If they were among those who regretted supporting Trump, they might have begun to see the need for a different type of leadership—one that prioritized science, healthcare, and empathy. This could lead them to question other aspects of their political beliefs, particularly regarding social safety nets, healthcare access, and government intervention during crises. The realization that their previous choice didn’t protect them or their loved ones might have sparked a deeper desire for change.

4. Impact of Pandemic Deaths on Political Consciousness: If these individuals came to the realization, particularly near the end of their lives, that the political system—and by extension, their support for a certain political figure—was contributing to their suffering or the suffering of those around them, it could have led to an emotional and intellectual awakening. Their regret might not just be about Trump, but about the broader political environment that enabled such inaction or misinformation.

5. How They'd See Reality Today: Assuming that many of these individuals, had they lived, were to engage in the political discourse of today, it’s likely they would be looking for leadership that acknowledges mistakes, prioritizes public health, and focuses on healing divisions rather than exacerbating them. They may be more receptive to candidates who emphasize unity, truth, and compassion over partisanship and conspiracy. For those who had been staunch MAGA voters, this shift would represent a significant departure from the political ideologies they once supported.

In essence, if those voters who passed away from COVID-19 had the chance to reflect and reconsider, they might see reality today as one where leadership is judged not by loyalty to a personality but by the ability to effectively address crises and protect people. Their regret could lead them to support policies and candidates that offer tangible solutions, rather than rhetoric.

Likely today, they would not be for Trump as they had originally been, considering they died because of his purposeful missteps and lack of empathy and compassion.

It's quite plausible that many of the Americans who died from COVID-19, particularly those who were staunch supporters of Donald Trump as POTUS45, might have experienced a shift in their perceptions of him and his administration's handling of the pandemic. Indeed, there are reports of exactly that. 

Also, studies have shown that counties with higher support for Trump in the 2020 election experienced higher COVID-19 death rates, suggesting a correlation between political affiliation and pandemic impact.

CIDRAP

Furthermore, the Trump administration's response to the pandemic faced significant criticism, including downplaying the virus's severity and promoting unproven treatments.

Times Union

These actions may have led some supporters to question their previous endorsement. It's conceivable that, in their final moments, some individuals reflected on the leadership decisions that contributed to the crisis, leading to feelings of regret or disillusionment.

However, it's important to acknowledge that political beliefs are deeply ingrained and can be resistant to change, even in the face of contrary evidence. While personal experiences, especially those as profound as facing a life-threatening illness, can influence one's views, they don't always lead to a complete reversal of political allegiance. Therefore, while some individuals might have reevaluated their support for Trump due to the pandemic's impact, others may have remained steadfast in their beliefs, interpreting events through their existing political lens.

DEATH after all, IS the greater arbiter of Reality, and the biggest form of being unable to face one's mistakes

Death is the ultimate and most irreversible Reality we all face. It's a stark confrontation with the consequences of our lives and decisions. For many, especially those nearing the end of life, it can serve as a powerful moment of reflection, a time when the weight of past choices becomes undeniable.

In the case of people who may have voted for Trump and later died due to the mishandling of the pandemic, it's possible that, in their final moments, they faced an undeniable reckoning with the consequences of their support for someone whose decisions might have directly impacted their survival. That moment could create a deep sense of regret, especially if they felt let down by someone they trusted to lead through such a critical time.

The emotional and existential impact of death can certainly amplify those realizations, as there's no escape from it. It can also lead to a reevaluation of beliefs and choices—especially in the context of a public health crisis where those choices had life-or-death consequences.

Ultimately, the reality of death does bring a clarity that nothing else in life can—forcing individuals to come face to face with their mistakes, their legacy, and the world they leave behind. In this way, it could lead to a profound shift in perspective, even if only in the final moments.

Here's a potential thought process for a MaGA voter who, in their final moments, begins to grapple with their regretted support for Donald Trump, particularly in light of how he unfolded the pandemic against us for what he perceived as best for his national perception, mostly only by his supporters:

---

Initial Thoughts: "I always believed in Trump. He promised to make America great again. He spoke to my frustrations—about the elites, the government that didn't care about us, the economy, and our place in the world. I voted for him because he seemed like someone who understood our struggles. I believed he was tough, that he could get things done."

Facing the Pandemic: "But then the pandemic hit. At first, I didn’t think much of it—just like Trump said, maybe it wasn’t as bad as people were saying. But it kept spreading. People were dying, and the hospitals were overwhelmed. I watched as friends and family got sick. Some survived, but others didn't. I heard the way he downplayed the virus, calling it a hoax, telling people not to worry, and that we didn’t need to wear masks. I thought he knew best. I trusted him."

Cognitive Dissonance: "But now... looking back, I can’t help but wonder—was he wrong? Why didn’t he do more? Why didn’t he listen to the doctors? Why didn’t he act faster? There were experts saying we needed more testing, more precautions. And he just dismissed it all. Maybe he didn't care. Maybe he never really cared about us, the people he said he was fighting for."

Regret and Realization: "Now, here I am. I didn’t take the virus seriously enough. I thought I was invincible, or maybe I just didn’t want to believe it. But people died—so many people. And Trump... he kept pushing lies. How did I not see this sooner? I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but now it’s clear—he didn’t have a plan. He didn’t even try to fix it. If he had done more, maybe my friends would still be here. Maybe I’d still be here."

Reflection on Choices: "I’m looking back at all of this, and I realize that I was so blinded by my anger at the system, by the idea of someone shaking things up, that I couldn’t see the bigger picture. Maybe I was so focused on what Trump promised that I ignored what he was actually doing—or not doing. This isn’t just about politics anymore. This is about lives. About my life. About the people I love. And the truth is, Trump failed us. He let us down. And now we’re paying the price."

Final Thought: "I wish I had listened more, thought more critically about what I was supporting. I wish I had taken the time to see the flaws, not just in him, but in my own thinking. I’m sorry—sorry for all the people I encouraged, the things I believed that turned out to be lies. Maybe if I had done things differently, things might have turned out better for all of us. But it’s too late now. The damage is done."

---

In this thought process, the individual would likely feel a profound sense of regret, realizing too late that their choices, their trust in a leader, may have contributed to a crisis that cost lives, including their own. The deathbed reflection could be a stark moment of clarity, where the realization of the failure of leadership and the pain of lost opportunities becomes undeniable. It would be a moment of confronting the truth about how their support for Trump, driven by anger or a desire for change, ultimately led them down a path of destruction that they hadn't fully understood until it was too late.

It's plausible that many MAGA voters who experienced personal loss during the COVID-19 pandemic underwent a significant shift in their perception of Donald Trump and his administration's handling of the crisis. Facing the death of loved ones due to the pandemic, some may have felt profound regret and disillusionment, especially considering Trump's downplaying of the virus and lack of decisive action. This disillusionment could lead them to reevaluate their previous support and decide against voting for Trump in subsequent elections.

Research indicates that Trump's approval ratings were significantly influenced by his handling of the pandemic. For instance, Gallup's data shows that Trump's approval ratings rarely topped 50% during his tenure, with notable fluctuations during the pandemic. Additionally, families of COVID-19 victims expressed anger towards Trump's comments minimizing the virus's severity, feeling that such remarks disrespected their experiences and losses.

Given these sentiments, it's quite reasonable to infer that some MaGA voters, particularly those directly affected by the pandemic's toll, might have reconsidered their support for Trump. This change in perspective could manifest in their decision not to vote for him in future elections, driven by a reassessment of his leadership during a critical time.

Following through with their thought process ending on the reality that Trump was a mistake...would they vote for him today...from what they could "see in the afterlife"? IS he even worse this go around? Here's a potential thought process that might conclude with the realization that voting for Trump was a mistake, followed by a reflection on his current state:

---

Initial Thought:
"I remember how I felt back then—Trump spoke to my frustrations. He promised change, a better life for people like me. I believed he could fix what was broken in America. But now... looking back, it's clear he failed us. He failed me. The pandemic hit, and he couldn't even keep us safe. He lied, downplayed the virus, pushed false cures, and let people suffer."

Reflection:
"I can't undo what I did, but I can see now that supporting him was a huge mistake. I thought I was doing the right thing, but in reality, I was just holding on to a man who didn't care about the people he promised to protect. Too many lives were lost—lives that didn't have to be lost. Families torn apart. I could’ve taken a different path, seen the truth earlier, but I was too blinded by my anger and distrust in the system."

The Regret:
"I wish I could tell my family and friends that I see it now. I see the failure. I see how his lies hurt us all, how his refusal to take action cost lives—my life, maybe. I was loyal to a man who only cared about himself, not about us, not about America. Trump was the wrong choice, and I know that now. I won’t make that mistake again."

Looking Ahead:
"And if I could see the world now, from wherever I am—looking at what's happening today—it’s even worse. Trump is still pushing the same tired rhetoric. Still stoking fear, still dividing people. He's worse now, more dangerous than ever, and it’s clear that his intentions haven’t changed. The chaos, the lies, they haven’t stopped. If I could be there, if I could vote today, I wouldn’t vote for him. Not now, not ever. It was a mistake before, but it’s even more of a mistake now.

Now, if only all those still living and still supporting Donald Trump, could just see before they too die, for they kill our country, seeing it live on as an autocracy, an oligarchy, a kakistocracy... the dire reality of our current situation that they had a lot to do with bringing into our reality.

There is still time...if we can wrest control from these unAmerican actors under the Trump and MaGA authoritarian umbrella and bring America back to what our Founding Fathers had originally intended:

A nation based on freedom, self-governance, Laws, and the protection of individual rights. They sought to escape Tyranny and build a government with limited power, ensuring people’s freedoms were protected and giving them a voice in how their government protected them, and their interests...rather than the interests of merely the few and the powerful.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Tyranny of the Executive

We are currently suffering under the "Tyranny of the Executive" as Connecticut Representative John Larson said in blasting convicted Felon POTUS47 Donald Trump, his cohort Elon Musk and those autocrat's DOGE device to disable the American Government. Listen to his comments in the video, they are amazing, needed, and demand a response.

For what? Brief aside, see the section below at the bottom for a conjectured comment by our Founding Fathers on what might be their consideration of Donald Trump.

VIRAL: Trump exposed in SCATHING takedown

From the Foreign Affairs article, The Renegade Order: "Here, unfortunately, lies the real problem with the optimistic framing: it requires assuming that Trump, a man who assiduously nurses his personal and geopolitical grievances, will discover—at the very moment he feels most empowered—the best, most globally minded and most diplomatically savvy version of himself. All those in the United States and elsewhere with a stake in the survival of the liberal order should hope that Trump rises to this challenge. But they should probably brace for the prospect that Trump’s world could become a very dark place."

As I mentioned this week in another blog on the 25th Amendment or impeachment of Donald Trump, today, our first career criminal and actually convicted felon POTUS...things are exactly what they seem to most of the world about Donald Trump while being ignored by those who support him. 

In his interview with NPR's A Martinez, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, associate dean at the Yale School of Management, discussed how business executives are coping amid economic policy whiplash. Sonnenfeld noted that some executives choose to remain silent, waiting until situations worsen before speaking out. He emphasized that this approach can be detrimental, as early engagement is crucial for effective leadership and navigating uncertainties.

National security experts have expressed concerns regarding the impact of economic policy fluctuations on global stability. For instance, Ian Bremmer, a political scientist and founder of Eurasia Group, introduced the concept of a "geopolitical recession" to describe the current environment where the traditional U.S.-led global order is unraveling. He argues that deteriorating relations between the U.S. and its allies, coupled with China's rise and the creation of alternative political and economic structures, contribute to a fragmented approach to global governance. This fragmentation increases geopolitical risks and hampers effective responses to international crises.

Additionally, recent political and economic actions, such as cuts to government agencies and strained alliances, have raised investor concerns about the erosion of trust in U.S. institutions and assets. This erosion threatens America's "exorbitant privilege," a term referring to the benefits the U.S. gains from high global demand for its assets. While no major fractures are evident in long-term U.S. borrowing costs, declining equity prices and a weakening dollar signal growing unease.

These perspectives highlight the intricate link between economic policies and national security, emphasizing the need for stable and predictable economic strategies to maintain global stability.

SRSS POLL: More Americans Support Ukraine Than Support Donald Trump 68% of Americans support aid to Ukraine. 46% of Americans Approve of Trump. 

Recent polling data indicates that a majority of Americans continue to support aid to Ukraine, while former President Donald Trump's approval ratings are lower. A CNN/SSRS poll conducted from March 6 to March 9, 2025, found that 55% of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the situation in Ukraine, with only 41% expressing some level of approval.

Politico

Additionally, a Reuters/Ipsos poll revealed that over half of Americans, including 27% of Republicans, believe Trump is too closely aligned with Russia.

Reuters

These findings suggest that public support for Ukraine remains strong, while Trump's approval ratings on this issue are comparatively lower.

National security experts have raised significant concerns regarding President Trump's actions since his inauguration in 2025, highlighting potential threats to democratic institutions and national security:

Undermining Election Integrity: The Trump administration has been accused of efforts to destabilize free and fair elections. These actions include voter suppression initiatives, challenges to election protection measures, and the appointment of officials who have previously denied election results. Such measures are viewed as direct threats to the democratic process.

Trump Is Still Trying to Undermine Elections

Now that Trump has installed election deniers throughout his Administration, he has been busy dismantling the guardrails protecting voting and voters.

Weakening Cybersecurity Infrastructure: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has experienced significant staff reductions and leadership challenges under the current administration. The loss of key personnel and the disruption of critical projects have weakened the agency's ability to defend against cyber threats, posing risks to national security.

‘People Are Scared’: Inside CISA as It Reels From Trump’s Purge

Employees at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency tell WIRED they’re struggling to protect the US while the administration dismisses their colleagues and poisons their partnerships.

Authoritarian Governance Proposals: The introduction of "Project 2025" has alarmed many experts, who argue that its implementation could lead to an authoritarian takeover. The plan proposes restructuring federal agencies and consolidating power within the executive branch, actions that could undermine the rule of law and civil liberties.

en.wikipedia.org

Foreign Policy Concerns: President Trump's approach to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine has raised alarms among national security analysts. His willingness to negotiate directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin, potentially without Ukrainian involvement, and the suggestion of imposing tariffs and sanctions on Russia if a ceasefire is not accepted, have been criticized as undermining traditional alliances and emboldening adversarial nations.

Trump threatens sanctions if Russia does not accept ceasefire — as it happened

Trump administration adds to pressure on Russia to agree to truce after President Zelensky of Ukraine welcomed the US minerals deal and 30-day ceasefire

Collectively, these actions are viewed by experts as eroding democratic norms, weakening institutional checks and balances, and compromising the nation's ability to respond effectively to internal and external threats.

Top diplomats from G7 countries meet in Canada as Trump threatens more tariffs on US allies

The agenda for the G7 meeting includes discussions on China and the Indo-Pacific; Ukraine and Europe; stability in the Americas; the Middle East; maritime security; Africa; and China, North Korea, Iran and Russia.

National security experts and former officials have expressed deep concerns regarding President Trump's actions since his 2025 inauguration, highlighting potential threats to democratic institutions and national security. While there is no unified call for his removal, the apprehensions center around several key issues:

Authoritarian Governance Proposals: The introduction of "Project 2025," developed by the Heritage Foundation, proposes significant restructuring of federal agencies and consolidation of power within the executive branch. Experts argue that its implementation could lead to an authoritarian takeover, undermining the rule of law, separation of powers, and civil liberties. Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a scholar of fascism and authoritarian leaders at New York University, described it as "a plan for an authoritarian takeover of the United States that goes by a deceptively neutral name."

en.wikipedia.org

Influence of Private Individuals in Governance: Elon Musk's prominent role in the current administration, despite lacking an official position, has raised alarms about the influence of private individuals on national policy. Musk's support for controversial policies, such as withdrawing from NATO and the UN, aligns with the ultraconservative Project 2025 plan. Experts warn that this could lead to increased unpredictability and danger in global affairs.

‘Crumble before our eyes’: Scary hint of what Donald Trump will do next

Billionaire Elon Musk wants the US to make a huge and “troubling” change – and the President shows every sign of agreeing.

Erosion of Democratic Norms: Analysts have observed a culture of sycophancy and fear within the administration, where loyalty to President Trump is enforced through blind obedience and cronyism. This environment suppresses criticism and manipulates facts, drawing parallels to historical authoritarian practices. Such dynamics are seen as detrimental to democratic institutions and the nation's international standing.

Sycophancy and toadying are de rigueur in Trump’s court of self-aggrandizement

Gestures of servility from administration members and world leaders alike are sickeningly common in the mad king’s court.

Collectively, these developments have led experts and former officials to voice concerns about the potential erosion of democratic norms and national security under President Trump's leadership. While discussions about the implications of these actions are ongoing, there is no consensus or coordinated effort among national security experts and former cabinet members advocating for his removal from office.

Donald Trump and Elon Musk Are Driving America Over the Edge

The president and his billionaire sidekick turned the White House into a makeshift Tesla showroom amid a recession scare—a perfect encapsulation of the Trump-Musk regime.

Billionaire Elon Musk wants the United States to quit the United Nations - And President Donald Trump shows every sign of agreeing.

Donald Trump and Elon Musk Are Driving America Over the Edge

The president and his billionaire sidekick turned the White House into a makeshift Tesla showroom amid a recession scare—a perfect encapsulation of the Trump-Musk regime.

Trump’s actions, particularly his erratic foreign policy and efforts to weaken alliances, align with the interests of international adversaries like Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump's undermining of NATO, his praise for authoritarian leaders, and his disdain for traditional alliances create openings for Russia to exert more influence in global affairs. Putin has long sought to weaken Western unity, and Trump’s rhetoric and policies play into this by fracturing international cooperation, which benefits Russia’s geopolitical goals.

National security experts and former officials warn that Trump’s actions since his 2025 inauguration pose serious threats to democracy, national security, and global stability. Concerns include efforts to undermine elections, weaken cybersecurity, appoint controversial officials, and alienate allies. While there isn't a unified call for his removal, many argue that his leadership—along with the GOP’s support—risks long-term damage to democratic institutions.

We all need to come to present and come together to save America as well as Western democracies and turn our backs firmly on these current Trumpian forms of toxicity in his autocracy, abusive capitalism, foolish kakistocracy, and its eventual fruition...Fascism. This isn't about tribalism or hatred of liberals by conservatives or conservatives by liberals or progressives.

It's about saving a long-respected nation, and all of Western democracy which as we all know, Winston Churchill mentioned in a 1947 speech:

"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."

Donald Trump and his silent partner, Vladimir Putin, need to be stopped in their attempts to undermine our previously great country. Their actions are a threat to our government and the values we hold most dear.

All others which benefit most greatly, the worst of us and the truly worst of all forms of government.

A Statement in the Spirit of the Founding Fathers on the Leadership of Donald Trump

First, how might they have referred to Donald Trump?

The Founding Fathers had a formal and often biting way of referring to those they disapproved of. If they were to name Donald Trump, they might use language reflective of their era, such as:

• "Donald the Dissembler" – A dissembler was someone who deceived or manipulated the truth, a term they often used for demagogues.
• "Trump the Pretender" – A reference to monarchs who falsely claimed a throne, as they deeply opposed rulers who sought unchecked power.
• "Donald of the House of Falsehoods" – They often framed names in a way that conveyed a person's character or legacy.
• "His Excellency, the Demagogue of Mar-a-Lago" – A sarcastic nod to his self-styled grandeur, much like they mocked those who sought to elevate themselves beyond republican principles.
• "Citizen Trump, the Profaner of the Republic" – They used "citizen" to emphasize equality, but in a critical tone when addressing those they saw as threats to democracy.

If they were feeling particularly cutting, they might even invoke comparisons to figures they despised, like calling him "Donald the Destabilizer, Heir to George III in Spirit."

Their statement on Donald the Destabilize, Heir to George III in Spirit:

We, the architects of this Republic, having studied the histories of fallen democracies and the rise of tyrants, issue this solemn warning: A leader who places personal ambition above the common good, who seeks to govern by division rather than unity, and who undermines the rule of law for his own benefit, is a danger to the liberties of a free people.

A republic survives only when its leaders uphold truth, respect institutions, and serve the public with virtue and restraint. A man who wields power through falsehoods, sows distrust in the very foundations of governance, and seeks to bend the law to his will, bears the hallmarks of the demagogues we so greatly feared.

The Constitution was designed to guard against such men—those who would inflame passions for personal gain, who disdain the limits of authority, and who, in the pursuit of power, endanger the fragile experiment of self-government. It falls to the citizens, and to the institutions we forged, to resist the creeping shadow of despotism, lest liberty be lost to the ambitions of one man.

Let history judge not by the fleeting passions of the moment, but by the enduring principles of justice, reason, and the rights of all to live free from the tyranny of a would-be monarch.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

Escaping the Political Gravitational Pull: Hope Beyond Destructive Ideologies

Time dilation, as described in general relativity, explains how time moves slower in stronger gravitational fields or at higher velocities. The closer you get to a massive object, like a planet or a black hole, the more time slows down. It's a concept that challenges our common-sense understanding of time, making it seem almost fluid and relative based on the circumstances.

Now, applying this concept to politics is a fascinating idea. Just as gravitational fields warp time, political ideologies warp perceptions of reality. People within certain political "fields" experience time differently, based on the ideologies and alliances they subscribe to. For example, in the case of Trump, JD Vance, and Lindsey Graham, we might see this "time dilation" in how their political careers and actions unfold in different contexts.

Trump, as the central political figure in this metaphor, can be seen as a massive force, akin to a black hole of political gravity. His rhetoric, controversies, and style have created a gravitational pull that bends the perceptions of time for his followers and opponents alike. For Trump supporters (MaGA), time seems to be running at a different pace—they experience a political reality that is far removed from what others perceive as "normal." Political events that might cause outrage or concern for those outside this gravitational field barely register within it.

JD Vance and Lindsey Graham, though caught in Trump's orbit, have a different relationship with the political "time" in which they exist. Vance, for example, has leaned into Trump's narrative, shaping his political career around that gravitational pull. His time in the political sphere is marked by accelerated movements toward policies that align with Trump’s worldview, even if they are seen as eccentric or extreme to outsiders. Meanwhile, Graham, often oscillating between support and criticism of Trump, might experience a form of political "time" that feels constantly shifting, like an object in a fluctuating gravitational field. His oscillations between positions create a sense of instability in his political trajectory.

The contrast between these figures is like observing different time rates in close proximity to one another. Some are accelerating toward certain extreme views, while others are caught in a cycle of adaptation and change, constantly orbiting the larger force of Trump’s political influence.

In this "political time dilation," the slower-paced areas—the moderates or those outside the immediate gravitational influence—see the actions of Trump, Vance, and Graham as more extreme, out of step with conventional political time. Meanwhile, inside their orbit, it feels like a natural progression, even if it appears wildly inconsistent or erratic to outsiders.

Just as in general relativity, where different observers experience time differently depending on their proximity to a gravitational source, political observers feel the impact of major political figures and ideologies in dramatically different ways. Time, in politics, isn’t just a measurement—it’s shaped by the power dynamics that govern who is in control of the "gravitational field."

Fascism has an outsized weight or density to politics and sensibilities, just as does Donald Trump.

Destructive ideologies, like fascism, tend to have greater weight in politics for several reasons, much like how heavy gravitational fields have a more profound impact on time or objects within their reach. Here’s how this works in both a theoretical and practical sense:

1. Centralized Power and Charismatic Leadership: Fascism often gravitates toward a highly centralized, authoritarian structure, where a single leader or a small group controls the political system. The leader becomes a focal point of authority and influence, much like a massive object that pulls everything toward it. This concentration of power makes it easier for destructive thought to spread quickly, because the state machinery, propaganda, and security forces can all be harnessed to reinforce and normalize these ideas.

   In this sense, fascism becomes like a political black hole—everything around it gets drawn in and warped. Once established, fascism tends to consume all opposing views and consolidate its power by eliminating or silencing dissent. Over time, this centralization of control allows fascism to dominate and reshape the political "field" around it.

2. Us vs. Them Mentality: Fascist ideologies thrive on creating clear divides between groups—often based on race, ethnicity, nationalism, or other identity markers. This "us vs. them" mentality can serve to polarize societies and make opposing political thought feel like a threat. By establishing an "enemy" or "outsider," fascism has the power to unify its base under a common cause while justifying the marginalization or violence against those who don’t align with the ideology.

   This division acts like a political gravitational force, warping public discourse and leading to the normalization of violence or oppressive policies. Once this narrative takes hold, it’s harder for more moderate or inclusive viewpoints to be heard, much like how time dilation makes it harder for external observers to perceive events within a gravitational well.

3. Crisis Exploitation: Fascist movements often emerge during times of crisis—whether economic, social, or political. During crises, people tend to feel more vulnerable and desperate for solutions. A charismatic leader promising strong, decisive action can appeal to these anxieties. This creates fertile ground for fascism to flourish, as it promises a way out of chaos through authoritarian control, scapegoating, and radical change.

   The weight of fascism in such contexts is amplified because it feeds on fear and uncertainty. The longer it can dominate the discourse, the harder it becomes for more rational or democratic ideas to push through the distorted political landscape. In a way, the crisis acts as the "initial mass" that accelerates the pull of fascist ideologies, making them even harder to resist.

4. Cultural and Historical Memory: In many cases, fascism doesn't just present new ideas; it taps into historical grievances, cultural myths, and long-standing fears. This historical resonance makes fascist thought more weighty, as it draws on deep-seated prejudices, resentments, and fears. For example, fascist rhetoric may appeal to a nostalgic sense of "lost glory," "national pride," or the idea of restoring a mythical past, creating a sense of urgency to act in a way that is seen as "patriotic" or "necessary."

   The historical weight behind these ideas can be powerful, distorting perceptions of the present and future. Much like how an object with immense mass can alter the trajectory of smaller objects around it, fascist ideas can change the course of political movements and societies.

5. Media and Propaganda: In the modern age, fascist movements have effectively utilized media and propaganda to disseminate their views. By controlling or influencing the narrative, they can shape public opinion and distort the reality of a situation. Propaganda serves as the vehicle that carries fascist ideas, amplifying their weight and reach. The more they saturate public discourse, the harder it becomes for other ideologies to break through.

   In this sense, fascist ideologies spread like a gravitational field that distorts the political conversation. The more people are exposed to the narrative, the more likely they are to accept or normalize it, even if it’s destructive or oppressive. Over time, this manipulation of the media and information becomes a powerful tool to ensure the ideologies maintain their weight in politics.

6. Resistance to Change: Once fascism has taken root in a society, it can create a feedback loop that makes it difficult to break free from. Institutions, laws, and societal norms may be reshaped to align with fascist principles, and these changes become entrenched. The longer this lasts, the harder it is to undo the damage, much like how time becomes irrevocably distorted near a black hole. Even if the political environment changes, the lingering effects of fascism—through laws, economic systems, and social divisions—can persist.

In short, the weight of fascism in politics stems from its ability to consolidate power, create fear-driven unity, exploit crises, draw on historical memory, manipulate media, and resist change. Just as a black hole’s immense gravity warps space and time, fascism warps political systems and societies, often making it harder for moderate or democratic forces to challenge its dominance. The more these elements combine, the greater the ideological pull—and the more difficult it becomes to break free from its influence.

Despite the heavy gravitational pull of destructive ideologies like fascism, there is always potential for resistance and renewal. Just as light can escape from the edges of a black hole if the right conditions align, so too can societies break free from oppressive political forces when people come together with shared values of justice, equality, and democracy. History has shown us that even in the darkest times, movements for freedom, human rights, and progress have emerged stronger, challenging the status quo and restoring balance.

The key is the power of collective action—individuals and communities who refuse to be swayed by fear or division, who seek truth, and who build inclusive political environments. Whether through peaceful protest, the advocacy of truth, or the formation of resilient democratic institutions, it is possible to create a political "field" where hope, compassion, and understanding have a greater weight than fear, hate, and division.

In the end, while ideologies may hold sway for a time, they are not permanent fixtures. People have the power to reshape the trajectory of politics, to rewrite the story, and to move toward a future where the forces of justice and compassion are the ones that define the pace and direction of change.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

 

If Trump Were Zelensky: From 2020 Russian Invasion of Ukraine Until Today

Timeline of Zelensky’s/Trump's Leadership From the 2022 Russian Invasion to the 2025 Oval Office Meeting

1. February 24, 2022 – Russia Invades Ukraine

• Zelensky's Response: Refused to flee Kyiv, rallied Ukrainians with defiant speeches, and secured international military aid.
• If Trump Were President of Ukraine: Likely would have tried to negotiate with Putin instead of resisting, possibly delaying military mobilization while claiming he could "make a deal."

2. March 2022 – Kyiv Under Siege

• Zelensky's Response: Walked the streets of Kyiv in defiance, rejected U.S. evacuation offers with "I need ammunition, not a ride."
• If Trump Were President: Would likely have fled to Western Ukraine or abroad while claiming the war would have never happened if he were in charge. Would have blamed NATO, the EU, or past Ukrainian leaders. He would have prioritized evacuation to ensure his personal safety, potentially accepting the "ride" offered.

3. April–May 2022 – War Crimes in Bucha, Defense of Mariupol

• Zelensky's Response: Exposed Russian atrocities, secured more weapons, and rallied Western nations.
• If Trump Were President: Likely would have downplayed war crimes, possibly saying "both sides have done bad things." Would have obsessed over who praised or criticized him, rather than military strategy.

4. September 2022 – Ukrainian Counteroffensive in Kharkiv

• Zelensky's Response: Oversaw one of the war’s most successful counterattacks, reclaiming occupied territory.
• If Trump Were President: Would have taken full credit for any success while attacking his own generals if anything went wrong.

5. December 2022 – Zelensky's Historic Speech to U.S. Congress

• Zelensky's Response: Addressed Congress in person, securing more military aid and strengthening U.S.-Ukraine ties.
• If Trump Were President: Would have demanded personal loyalty from Congress, attacked critics, and likely insulted allies who weren’t giving Ukraine “enough.”

6. 2023–2024 – Stalemate and Struggles for More U.S. Aid

• Zelensky's Response: Maintained global support, pressed Congress, and kept morale high despite heavy losses.
• If Trump Were President: Would have blamed NATO and Europe for not doing more, possibly considering deals with Russia to end the war on unfavorable terms.

7. February 2025 – Oval Office Meeting With Trump

• Zelensky's Reality: Berated and pressured while standing firm on Ukraine’s needs.
• If Trump Were in Zelensky’s Shoes: The meeting would have been a complete disaster:
• Trump would have taken everything personally, likely ranting about unfair treatment.
• He might have threatened to walk out, insulted Congress, or refused to take responsibility for Ukraine’s struggles.
• Instead of rallying support, he would have blamed allies and possibly hinted at withdrawing from the war altogether.

If the roles had been reversed—meaning Zelensky was in Trump's position as the U.S. president, and Trump was the leader of a nation at war facing Russian aggression—Zelensky would likely have handled the situation very differently.

Zelensky’s Likely Approach:

1. Respectful Diplomacy: Zelensky has consistently treated world leaders with diplomatic courtesy, even in difficult situations. Instead of berating Trump, he would have likely expressed firm support while encouraging a strong alliance.
2. Commitment to Aid: Given Zelensky’s track record, he would have reassured Trump that the U.S. remains committed to providing assistance, whether in military aid, humanitarian relief, or diplomatic efforts.
3. Clear Communication: Zelensky is direct but measured. He would have likely acknowledged Trump’s struggles while emphasizing the importance of international unity against Russian aggression.
4. Public Support: Rather than embarrassing Trump in front of the press, Zelensky would have reinforced a public show of unity, avoiding the kind of humiliation that Trump subjected him to in the real meeting.

In contrast, Trump’s actual behavior toward Zelensky was dismissive and condescending, showing little empathy for a wartime leader. Had the situation been reversed, Zelensky would have approached it with far more tact and leadership.

Final Takeaway

Zelensky has led with resilience, diplomacy, and unwavering focus on Ukraine’s survival. If Trump had been in his position, Ukraine might not have lasted this long, as his need for personal praise, deal-making tendencies, and lack of military strategy would have played into Putin’s hands.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT