The War on Fair Taxes: How the Wealthy Rig the System at the Expense of Our Citizens

​As of March 2025, with Donald Trump serving as the 47th President of the United States, his administration has implemented policies that significantly impacted taxation and damaged our government and our most necessary social programs like social security, a: U.S. Federal Safety Net for Retirement, Disability, and Survivor Benefits.

Or skip all this for another more sane direction...Timothy Snyder @TimothyDSnyder - "The Imperialism Has no Clothes: JD Vance in Greenland" His latest essay

One more...

‘Never been done’: Why Republicans might approve a budget whose numbers don’t match up

​Tax Policies:

• Extension of the 2017 Tax Cuts: The administration has prioritized extending the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) provisions from 2017. This extension is projected to decrease federal tax revenue by approximately $4.5 trillion from 2025 through 2034. While proponents argue this could lead to a 1.1% increase in long-run GDP, critics highlight concerns about escalating deficits and the disproportionate benefits accruing to the wealthiest Americans. ​Tax Foundation

• Corporate Tax Rate Reduction: Proposals have been made to further reduce the corporate tax rate from the current 21% to potentially 20% or even 15%, aiming to stimulate economic growth. However, such reductions may exacerbate income inequality and increase the federal deficit. ​Doeren Mayhew

Impact on Social Programs:

• Budget Cuts to Social Safety Nets: The administration's budget proposals have included significant cuts to programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). These cuts are intended to offset revenue losses from tax reductions but have raised concerns about increased hardship for low-income individuals and families. ​The New Yorker

• Social Security and Medicare: While President Trump has pledged to protect Social Security and Medicare, budgetary pressures from reduced tax revenues have led to discussions about potential reforms or cuts to these programs. Critics argue that the administration's involvement with initiatives like Project 2025, which aims at federal government reform, contradicts promises to safeguard these entitlements. ​The New Yorker

Economic Implications:

• Deficit and Debt Concerns: The combination of tax cuts and increased spending has contributed to a significant rise in the federal deficit, which has increased by 248% since the implementation of the 2017 tax cuts. This trajectory raises concerns about the sustainability of fiscal policies and potential long-term economic consequences. ​Axios

• Income Inequality: Analyses indicate that the benefits of the tax cuts have disproportionately favored the wealthiest individuals and corporations, potentially exacerbating income and wealth disparities in the United States. ​

President Trump's policies as of 2025 reflect a continuation and expansion of earlier tax reforms, emphasizing reductions that primarily benefit higher-income groups and corporations. These policies have significant implications for federal revenue, social programs, and economic inequality, prompting ongoing debate about their long-term impact on American society.

The toxic Christian right?

The Christian nationalist right has played a significant role in supporting Trump and shaping his policies, particularly those related to taxation, social programs, and government priorities. Their influence is rooted in a broader ideological goal of reshaping the U.S. government to align with their vision of a Christian-based nation.

How the Christian Nationalist Right Supports Trump’s Economic Agenda

1. Belief in Limited Government & Free Market Capitalism

   • Many Christian nationalists align with libertarian and conservative economic principles, advocating for lower taxes and deregulation.

   • They support Trump’s tax cuts and reductions in social welfare, believing government assistance should be replaced by church-based charity and private sector solutions.

2. Tying Capitalism to Christian Morality

   • Christian nationalist leaders often argue that wealth is a sign of divine blessing and that government redistribution (e.g., welfare, progressive taxation) is anti-Christian.

   • This belief justifies cutting social programs like Medicaid, SNAP, and housing assistance, while keeping tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy.

3. Backing Project 2025 & Government Restructuring

   • The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a blueprint for a second Trump term, is heavily influenced by Christian nationalist ideology.

   • It includes gutting federal agencies, reducing the administrative state, and cutting safety nets, all while increasing executive power.

   • Many of its architects, like Russ Vought and Stephen Miller, are Christian nationalists who advocate for a government centered on their interpretation of Christian values.

4. Culture War as a Distraction from Economic Policy

   • While pushing tax cuts for the rich and budget cuts for social programs, Christian nationalist leaders focus public attention on issues like abortion bans, LGBTQ+ rights, and "anti-woke" policies.

   • This strategy diverts working-class and middle-class conservatives from noticing policies that economically harm them.

5. Strong Ties to Megachurches & Prosperity Gospel

   • Many evangelical megachurch pastors, such as Paula White and Franklin Graham, support Trump’s economic policies because they align with prosperity gospel teachings—the idea that wealth and success are signs of God's favor.

   • They push their followers to support Trump, portraying government assistance as a hindrance to self-reliance and faith-based solutions.

The Bigger Picture: Reshaping America

Christian nationalists view Trump as a vehicle to reshape the U.S. government into one that favors Christian dominance, enforces conservative social policies, and limits federal intervention in economic inequality. Their support helps justify tax cuts for the rich, reduced social programs, and deregulation, under the guise of religious and moral principles.

Doesn't it really come down to political priorities, power dynamics, and how narratives are shaped in public discourse?

1. Corporate Influence & Lobbying – Wealthy individuals and corporations spend vast amounts of money lobbying politicians and funding campaigns to ensure tax policies favor them. They have a direct hand in shaping laws that keep their tax rates low while cutting public benefits.

2. Trickle-Down Economics Myth – Since the Reagan era, there's been a persistent belief that lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy leads to economic growth that benefits everyone. Despite repeated failures, this idea keeps being pushed to justify tax cuts for the rich and austerity for the rest.

3. Deficit Scaremongering – When it comes to social programs like Social Security, Medicare, or infrastructure, politicians (usually on the right) suddenly become fiscal hawks, warning that the government can’t afford them. Yet, they have no problem with tax cuts for the wealthy, which also increase deficits.

4. Media Framing – Corporate-owned media often downplays wealth inequality and shifts blame for economic problems onto the poor, immigrants, or government inefficiency—rather than on tax loopholes and corporate welfare.

5. Historical Context – During the mid-20th century, when tax rates on the wealthy were much higher (up to 90% under Eisenhower), the U.S. experienced economic stability, a thriving middle class, and major infrastructure projects. But since the neoliberal shift in the 1980s, tax cuts for the rich have contributed to skyrocketing inequality.

6. Manufactured Resentment – Some political forces work to pit middle-class and working-class Americans against each other, making them think that their tax dollars are being wasted on “undeserving” people rather than questioning why billionaires and corporations are dodging taxes.

Ultimately, the struggle isn’t just about taxation—it’s about power. The wealthy and corporations have the influence to shape policies that benefit them, while everyday people are told they need to sacrifice. But history shows that when the rich paid their fair share, society was much more stable

Right now, the imbalance in tax policy and spending priorities is a result of both political parties, though in different ways. Here’s a breakdown of who holds power and who enables this system:

1. Republican Party (GOP)

• The GOP has long pushed for tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, arguing that it spurs economic growth (the trickle-down economics argument).

• Under Trump (2017), Republicans passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which slashed corporate tax rates from 35% to 21%—a massive giveaway to the wealthy while ballooning the deficit.

• Republicans also frequently call for cutting Social Security, Medicare, and other social safety nets, claiming that the country can’t afford them—yet they never say the same about tax cuts for the rich or military spending.

• Project 2025 (pushed by the Heritage Foundation) outlines an extreme agenda that includes privatizing Social Security, gutting social programs, and expanding corporate power even further.

2. Democratic Party

• Democrats typically oppose direct cuts to Social Security and Medicare, but not all of them are willing to push for higher taxes on the wealthy.

• Under Biden, there have been proposals to raise taxes on billionaires and corporations, but corporate-friendly Democrats like Senator Joe Manchin (WV) and Senator Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) helped block major tax hikes.

• Many establishment Democrats take corporate donations and don’t push hard enough for reforms. They sometimes offer compromises rather than fighting aggressively for economic justice.

3. Corporate Lobbying & The Billionaire Class

• Big corporations (Amazon, Google, Exxon, etc.) and billionaires (Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Charles Koch, etc.) fund political campaigns and lobby against tax increases.

• The Supreme Court's Citizens United decision (2010) allowed unlimited corporate spending in elections, meaning politicians are often more accountable to their donors than voters.

• Think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and Americans for Prosperity (backed by the Koch network) push for corporate-friendly policies and dismantling social programs.

4. Media & Misinformation

• Right-wing media (Fox News, The Daily Wire, etc.) convinces working-class people that tax cuts for the rich are good and that social programs are bad.

• Corporate-owned mainstream media (CNN, MSNBC, etc.) rarely challenges the status quo because their owners benefit from the system.

So, Who is Allowing This?

• Republicans push for tax cuts and social program cuts directly.

• Corporate Democrats don’t fight hard enough to reverse it.

• Lobbyists and billionaires buy influence to keep tax policies in their favor.

• Media distracts people from the real issue.

What Can Be Done?

• Elect leaders who support taxing the wealthy and corporations fairly.

• Push for campaign finance reform (to reduce billionaire influence).

• Demand protecting and expanding Social Security, Medicare, and safety nets.

• Fight against corporate-controlled think tanks and misinformation.

The good news? When people push back (like with recent strikes, protests, and voter initiatives), change can happen. The real question is: will enough people wake up to it before more damage is done?

Getting back to this mire of Church and State and who are the problematic individuals skewing America towards foolish beliefs and actions. Here are some key Christian nationalist leaders who have influenced Trump’s policies, particularly in taxation, social programs, and government restructuring:

1. Russell Vought – Architect of Government Cuts (Project 2025)

• Former Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Trump

• Played a major role in cutting social programs like Medicaid, food stamps (SNAP), and housing assistance

• Now leads The Center for Renewing America, which pushes Christian nationalist policies, including shrinking the federal government and cutting safety nets

• Influence on Trump: Helped write Project 2025, which includes mass firings of civil servants and replacing them with Christian nationalist loyalists

2. Stephen Miller – Driving Cuts to Social Safety Nets

• Trump’s top policy advisor, known for shaping immigration and economic policies

• Pushed to reduce government spending on “entitlements” (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid) while expanding tax cuts for corporations

• Helped craft policies that redirected government resources toward Christian nationalist priorities, like religious freedom exemptions for businesses

3. Paula White – Megachurch Pastor & “Prosperity Gospel” Influence

• Trump’s spiritual advisor, led White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative

• Promotes Prosperity Gospel, which teaches that wealth is a sign of God’s favor, justifying tax cuts for the rich

• Preached that government aid weakens faith, aligning with Trump’s efforts to cut social welfare

• Her influence helped Trump push policies that benefit corporate donors and megachurches, like tax breaks for religious institutions

4. Ralph Drollinger – Influencing Republican Lawmakers

• Runs Capitol Ministries, a Christian nationalist Bible study attended by Trump officials like Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, and Betsy DeVos

• Advocates for eliminating social programs, arguing that the Bible opposes welfare

• Encourages Republican lawmakers to replace government safety nets with faith-based charity, helping justify Trump’s economic policies

5. Betsy DeVos – Pushing Religious Control Over Public Funding

• Trump’s Secretary of Education, known for trying to defund public education in favor of private Christian schools

• Part of Christian nationalist efforts to redirect government funds to religious institutions

• Worked to weaken worker protections and unions, aligning with Trump’s pro-corporate tax policies

6. Tony Perkins – Policy Influence Through the Family Research Council

• Leader of Family Research Council, a major Christian nationalist lobbying group

• Pushed for tax benefits for religious groups, aligning with Trump’s tax cuts

• Supports cutting social programs, arguing that government aid promotes “dependency” instead of Christian charity

7. The Heritage Foundation – Policy Arm of Christian Nationalism

• Think tank behind Project 2025, which outlines drastic changes to government under Trump

• Advocates for cutting taxes on the wealthy and eliminating social safety nets

• Supports Christian nationalist policies like mandatory Bible classes in schools and limiting LGBTQ+ rights

---

How This All Connects to Trump’s Policies

• Tax Cuts for the Wealthy → Justified by Prosperity Gospel & free-market Christian ideology

• Cutting Social Programs → Based on belief that churches should provide charity, not government

• Deregulation & Corporate Favoritism → Backed by megachurches and religious groups benefiting from tax breaks

• Expanding Religious Influence in Government → Using tax policy and executive power to redirect public funds toward Christian institutions

Stephen Miller, however, is not a Christian nationalist in the religious sense, but works closely with them and advances their policies because they align with his broader authoritarian, nationalist agenda.

Stephen Miller’s Role in Christian Nationalist Policies

• Miller is a hardline far-right nationalist, known primarily for anti-immigration policies like the Muslim ban and family separations.

• He collaborates with Christian nationalist groups because their vision of a hierarchical, theocratic government aligns with his goal of consolidating power.

• He supports cutting social safety nets because a weaker government benefits authoritarian control—fewer government services mean more economic desperation, which can be manipulated for political gain.

• While not religious himself, he weaponizes religious rhetoric (e.g., “protecting Christian values”) to push policies that benefit the wealthy and corporate elites.

So, while Miller isn't a true Christian nationalist, he's one of their most effective enablers, helping implement their agenda through economic and governmental restructuring.

Stephen Miller has long been associated with far-right, white nationalist, and eugenics-adjacent beliefs, though he avoids openly embracing the term "eugenics." His policies and rhetoric reflect a worldview that prioritizes racial hierarchy, demographic control, and exclusionary nationalism, often aligning with historical eugenics movements.

Miller’s Eugenics-Adjacent Beliefs & Policies

1. Hardline Immigration Policies Rooted in Racial Purity Ideology

• Miller designed Trump’s immigration policies to heavily restrict non-white immigration, reflecting beliefs similar to early 20th-century eugenics laws.

• He was the architect of the Muslim ban, family separation policies, and the push to end birthright citizenship—all of which disproportionately targeted people of color.

• His policies echo the 1924 Immigration Act, which was influenced by eugenicists and sought to preserve the racial makeup of the U.S. by limiting immigration from non-Northern European countries.

2. Connections to White Nationalists & Eugenicists

• Leaked emails (2019) show Miller regularly cited and promoted white nationalist sources like VDARE and American Renaissance, which advocate for white racial superiority and demographic control.

• He pushed “great replacement” conspiracy theories, warning that immigration would “replace” white Americans—a claim often linked to eugenics-based fears of racial decline.

• Promoted The Camp of the Saints, a racist novel that portrays non-white immigrants as an invading force, mirroring eugenics-era fears of racial dilution.

3. Public Health & Eugenics Thinking

• During the COVID-19 pandemic, Miller’s faction opposed protections for marginalized communities, reinforcing a survival-of-the-fittest mentality.

• He supported policies that let the virus disproportionately kill disabled people, the elderly, and minorities, which aligns with past eugenicist views on “weeding out the weak.”

• Trump’s administration sabotaged asylum-seekers' medical screenings and proposed denying visas based on medical conditions, echoing past eugenics-based immigration policies.

4. Support for Christian Nationalist Demographic Goals

• While not religious himself, Miller works with Christian nationalists who advocate for higher birth rates among white Christians and restrictions on abortion and contraception.

• This aligns with historical eugenics movements that sought to increase white birthrates while limiting non-white reproduction.

• Groups like the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 promote these demographic goals, which Miller supports through policy implementation.

Conclusion: Miller’s Eugenics-Driven Policy Influence

Stephen Miller isn’t a scientist pushing for sterilization programs, but his actions, rhetoric, and policy decisions align with historical eugenicist and white nationalist goals. He frames his policies in terms of national security and economic interests, but their impact is clear: restricting non-white populations, promoting racial purity, and reinforcing social hierarchies.

Let's be clear.

Isn't this all Donald Trump's doing.

The statement "This is all Donald Trump's doing" isn't entirely a lie, but it oversimplifies a much more complex situation. While Trump certainly played a central role in shaping and implementing policies during his presidency, especially in areas like immigration, tax cuts, and deregulation, many of the actions and ideologies associated with his administration were influenced by a range of people, organizations, and historical trends.

Here’s why it’s not entirely accurate to say it’s "all Trump’s doing":

1. The Role of Advisers & Political Networks

• Stephen Miller, Russell Vought, Betsy DeVos, Mick Mulvaney, and other figures shaped Trump’s policies, often working behind the scenes or directly advising him on key issues.

• Miller, for instance, is a primary architect of Trump’s hardline immigration policies, but he also aligns with far-right and eugenics-adjacent ideologies, which Trump endorsed but did not fully craft himself.

• Think tanks and groups like the Heritage Foundation and Family Research Council helped craft policies that Trump endorsed, but the foundations of those ideas existed before he took office.

2. The Influence of GOP Ideology & Historical Context

• Trump did not create the political ideologies of tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, or anti-immigration stances. These ideas were long-standing Republican positions that Trump capitalized on.

• Christian nationalist groups existed and pushed these agendas before Trump, even in earlier Republican administrations. For example, the Heritage Foundation’s tax proposals had been in play for years.

3. Institutional Support

• Trump’s policies were supported and often pushed forward by Republican-controlled Congresses, especially early in his presidency. The tax cuts for corporations and cuts to social programs were pushed by Congress members aligned with Trump’s economic vision, but it wasn’t solely his agenda.

• Executive orders, which Trump issued frequently, were crafted with input from a wide range of advisers, but many stemmed from ideologies and agendas within the Republican establishment.

4. The Role of Political Activism

• Christian nationalist activists, evangelical groups, and far-right networks were pushing their vision of America as a Christian nation and restrictionist immigration policies long before Trump took office. Trump amplified their voices, but the foundational goals of these groups didn’t start with him.

Conclusion: Trump as the Figurehead, Not the Sole Author

While Trump was incredibly influential in pushing these agendas and gave a platform to these ideas, it would be misleading to say that everything—especially in terms of policy ideology—was entirely his doing. He was a vehicle for these forces rather than the sole originator.

Trump's current administration has faced rational and reasonable criticism for its rapid and amateurish policy implementations, leading to unintended consequences. For instance, the swift deportation of migrants resulted in logistical challenges, such as the return of Venezuelan women to Texas due to inadequate facilities in El Salvador. ​WSJ

Additionally, incidents like the "Chatgate" scandal, where confidential military plans were accidentally exposed, have raised concerns about the administration's competence in handling sensitive information. ​news

Furthermore, may observers, both domestic and international, have expressed alarm over actions perceived as steps toward authoritarianism, including undermining judicial independence and suppressing dissenting voices. ​The Guardian

In summary, while President Trump has secured a significant portion of public approval, his administration's policies and actions have sparked debate regarding their effectiveness and alignment with democratic principles.​

Finally, Donald Trump's childish beliefs in how the economy works have and continue to be damaging to the American economy and international relations. 

Tariffs were one of the most notable aspects of Donald Trump's economic policy during his presidency, and they remain a key topic in evaluating his impact on the U.S. economy and global trade. Here’s a breakdown of how tariffs were used and their effects:

1. The Trade War with China

• Trump’s Imposition of Tariffs on China: In 2018, Trump launched a trade war with China by imposing tariffs on $250 billion worth of Chinese goods. His goal was to reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China and address intellectual property theft and unfair trade practices.

• Retaliation: China retaliated with tariffs on U.S. goods, particularly agricultural products, which hurt American farmers. This caused significant disruption in global supply chains, especially in industries like technology, electronics, and steel.

• Phase One Deal: In January 2020, Trump signed a "Phase One" trade deal with China, where China agreed to buy more American goods. However, the tariffs largely remained in place.

2. Tariffs on Steel and Aluminum

• National Security Argument: Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, arguing that foreign-made metals threatened U.S. national security. The tariffs were set at 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum.

• Impact on Industry: While this benefited some domestic steel manufacturers, it led to higher prices for manufacturers that relied on foreign metal, including carmakers and electronics companies.

• Global Response: Several countries, including the EU, Canada, and Mexico, retaliated with tariffs on U.S. products. These tariffs led to trade tensions but also created uncertainty for industries in the U.S. reliant on foreign materials.

3. The Impact on American Consumers

• Increased Prices: The tariffs generally led to higher prices for goods like electronics, clothing, and machinery. This had a direct impact on American consumers, especially lower- and middle-class households, which bore the brunt of rising prices on everyday items.

• Economic Disruption: Although Trump's administration claimed the tariffs were needed to protect U.S. jobs, economists suggested that the costs outweighed the benefits. In particular, industries dependent on global supply chains were adversely affected by the uncertainty created by the tariffs.

4. Trump's Justification for Tariffs

• America First: Trump argued that the tariffs were a way to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. and shift away from the globalist trade agreements that he believed harmed American workers.

• Trade Balance: The tariffs were also meant to reduce the trade deficit, particularly with China, and force foreign governments to open their markets more to American products.

5. Long-Term Effects

• Global Relations: The tariffs contributed to a decline in U.S. relationships with several major trading partners. Countries like the EU and China felt that the tariffs were economically harmful and politically motivated, leading to retaliatory measures.

• Industry Shifts: While some U.S. industries benefited from reduced competition (such as steel producers), other industries struggled with the added cost of imports.

• Consumer Costs: Many economists argue that the tariffs did little to reduce trade deficits or protect jobs, and instead raised prices for American consumers.

6. Legacy and Ongoing Debate

• Trump's tariffs remain a point of debate. Some argue that they were a necessary tool for reshaping trade relationships and protecting U.S. industry, while others contend they damaged the U.S. economy and exacerbated the economic strain on working-class Americans.

Overall, Donald Trump's presidency, particularly his second term as POTUS47 starting in 2025, is marked by a continuation of his “America First” agenda, focusing on nationalism, economic protectionism, and law and order. While his policies and leadership have drawn strong support from his base, they have also sparked significant controversy, both domestically and internationally.

Key Aspects of Trump's Presidency:

1. Economic Policies: Trump's economic approach was centered around reducing the trade deficit, protecting American jobs, and boosting domestic manufacturing. This included implementing tariffs on imports, especially from China, and prioritizing policies that favored U.S. businesses. However, these actions led to trade wars and higher consumer prices, and while some sectors benefitted, others, like agriculture, suffered.

2. Immigration and Border Security: Trump's administration focused heavily on immigration reform, including building a border wall, implementing strict immigration laws, and taking a tough stance on undocumented migrants. These policies were divisive, with his supporters arguing they were necessary for national security, while critics viewed them as inhumane and discriminatory.

3. Foreign Policy and International Relations: Trump’s approach to foreign policy emphasized national sovereignty and America’s interests over multilateral agreements. His decisions to pull out of global pacts like the Paris Climate Agreement and the Iran Nuclear Deal, as well as his isolationist stance on international diplomacy, alienated many traditional U.S. allies. However, his policies did strengthen ties with right-wing and populist leaders.

4. Authoritarian Tendencies: Critics of Trump argue that his leadership style and certain actions, like undermining judicial independence and press freedoms, reflected a shift toward authoritarianism. His handling of protests, attacks on the media, and attempts to suppress dissent caused concern about the future of democratic norms in the U.S.

5. Public Support and Controversy: Trump's approval ratings, while higher among his base, have been polarized. His statements and actions on issues like race, gender, and immigration fueled division in the country. His supporters view him as a champion of American values and working-class interests, while detractors accuse him of exacerbating cultural divisions and undermining democratic institutions.

6. Social and Cultural Issues: Trump’s rhetoric on issues like LGBTQ rights, abortion, and reproductive freedoms often aligned with conservative Christian values, garnering support from the Christian nationalist right. His administration took steps to limit rights on these fronts, creating significant social tension.

7. The Role of the Christian Nationalist Right: Trump’s popularity among the Christian nationalist right can be attributed to his support for conservative social policies and his alignment with evangelical values. This group supported his stance on issues like abortion and religious freedom, making him a key figure in their political efforts.

8. Election and Second Term: Trump’s victory in the 2024 election (POTUS47) was highly contested, with his rhetoric and policies continuing to appeal to a significant portion of the electorate. However, his second term has been marked by continuing polarization, with some Americans questioning his fitness for office and the direction of his policies.

Summary:

Trump's presidency has been one of extreme contrasts and an ongoing nightmare for MOST American citizens and many others: minorities, immigrants, and even undocumented or illegal citizens. 

"A country is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable and disenfranchised citizens," often attributed to Mahatma Gandhi.

While Trump's policies were allegedly designed to revive American industry, secure borders, and prioritize U.S. interests, on the other hand, they have often and purposely led to economic disruptions, political instability, and divisions within the country. His leadership was shaped by populism and nationalism, with a strong base of support from his followers but harsh opposition from many others, especially in terms of his handling of social issues, global diplomacy, and domestic governance.

In conclusion, there is little confusion in that Donald Trump was quite obviously and objectively not only not the "best choice" for POTUS47, but the worst as a convicted felon, adjudicated sexual abuser and career criminal. His presidency represents a divisive and polarizing period in American history, with lasting impacts on both domestic policy and international relations that may well take decades to heal from, both domestically and with our international security concerns and relationships.

Finally...

Russia benefited from a more isolationist U.S. foreign policy, a weakened NATO, and a less aggressive stance under Trump, allowing the Kremlin to expand its influence on the global stage. On the other hand, Trump's actions created both domestic challenges for the U.S. and increased global uncertainty, ultimately making Russia the bigger benefactor in the long run.

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT

ChatGPT Convo on Trump's Style and Form of "Thinking"

Leadership and Cognition: Examining Trump's Mental Framework or lack thereof.

First up, let's start with convicted Felon POTUS47 Donald Trump's State of the Union Address with all it's pomp, nonsense, and as our longest, rambling, incoherent address maybe ever.

I do this every once in a while to familiarize some who are still unfamiliar with using AI.

I was chatting with ChatGPT about how Trump thinks. I'm pasting that here in its raw form of the entire conversation without editing for several reasons. It shows to those who don't use AI, how it can go, and the content shows commentary about Trump. It also shows my process in using an AI to question it. Which can be daunting to those unused to it. 

Many will ask a question, get the wrong or not appropriate enough answer for what they are thinking or trying to ask, so you have to tune your questions to get the answers you're seeking. I do NOT mean, to make it answer incorrectly to satiate your beliefs, but to drill down to the point you're seeking actual and factual information about. 

I have actually asked a question, and been unable to receive a good response, so I've taken my question and asked it how can I state that question, to get my point across properly until it gives me the right question to ask it. 

Here we go... 

I asked::

How is this to be made more correct? It's not that Donald Trump is stupid, Right? He's shallow, his knowledge tends toward 1 or 2 levels rather than reality's version of 8-10. 

Donald's playing checkers when reality's playing Go.

ChatGPT said:

Your statement is already quite clear and conveys your point well, but if you want to refine it for greater accuracy or clarity, you might consider:

"Donald Trump isn't necessarily stupid, but he's shallow in his understanding. He tends to grasp issues at one or two levels, whereas reality operates on eight to ten. He's playing checkers while reality plays Go."

This version maintains your meaning while improving readability and flow. If you want to soften or add nuance, you could say:

"It's not that Donald Trump is unintelligent, but his understanding tends to be superficial. He engages with issues on a couple of levels, whereas reality operates on many more. It's like he's playing checkers while reality plays Go."

Would you like it sharper or more analytical?

I asked:

From what we know what kind of thinking does Donald Trump use because it seems different than me, or most others.

ChatGPT said:

Donald Trump's cognitive style has been a subject of extensive analysis by psychologists and political observers. Several key characteristics distinguish his thinking from that of many others:

1. Narcissistic Traits: Mental health professionals have observed that Trump's behavior aligns with characteristics of narcissistic personality disorder, such as grandiosity, a need for admiration, and a lack of empathy.

   Psychology Today

2. Dominant and Controlling Behavior: Analyses indicate that Trump exhibits dominant and controlling personality patterns, bordering on aggressive tendencies.

   digitalcommons.csbsju.edu

3. Extroversion and Restlessness: Trump is described as highly extroverted, driven, and restless, often engaging in constant interaction through rallies, interviews, and social media.

   theatlantic.com

4. Transactional Thinking: His approach to relationships and policy decisions is often transactional, focusing on immediate benefits rather than long-term alliances or strategies.

   The Australian

5. Simplified Communication Style: Trump's communication is characterized by simplicity and repetition, which some experts suggest could indicate cognitive decline.

   kffhealthnews.org

These traits collectively contribute to a cognitive style that differs from conventional political figures, emphasizing personal dominance, immediate gains, and straightforward communication.

Recent Analyses on Donald Trump's Cognitive Style

The Guardian

Inside the mind of Trump - a president who talks tough but surrenders to Putin

6 days ago

Financial Times

Ugly showdown or lovefest, Trump is all about the message

2 days ago

The Guardian

Donald Trump's body language uncovered: 'If you're the silverback, you stand proud'

5 days ago

I asked:

Is it a highly functional style in being our POTUS?

ChatGPT said:

Trump’s cognitive style is highly functional for certain aspects of being POTUS but problematic for others.

Where It Works Well:

✅ Messaging & Branding: His simple, repetitive communication style helps him connect with a broad audience, especially those who respond to strong, clear messages.
✅ Dominance & Disruption: His aggressive, transactional approach makes him effective at dominating political opponents and reshaping norms.
✅ Media Manipulation: His instinct for commanding media attention keeps him at the center of public discourse, drowning out opposition.
✅ Short-Term Negotiations: His deal-making mentality can sometimes yield quick political wins, particularly in one-on-one negotiations.

Where It Fails as POTUS:

❌ Complex Decision-Making: His tendency to think in simple, binary terms (winners/losers, loyal/disloyal) limits his ability to navigate nuanced policy issues.
❌ Long-Term Strategy: His transactional approach often sacrifices long-term stability for immediate gains, damaging alliances and institutions.
❌ Crisis Management: His need for dominance and control can make him resistant to expert advice, which is crucial in high-stakes crises (e.g., COVID-19 response).
❌ Governing Institutions: His focus on personal loyalty over institutional norms weakens governmental structures, leading to dysfunction.

Final Take:

His thinking style is highly functional for gaining and maintaining power but is less effective for governing a complex nation. It works well in a campaign setting but creates instability in actual governance due to its short-term focus, resistance to expertise, and prioritization of personal image over systemic success.

I asked:

What's a word that seems like dissonance but means dysfunctional

ChatGPT said:

A good word that conveys dysfunction in a way similar to dissonance is "discordance."

• Discordance suggests a lack of harmony or coherence, often implying dysfunction in relationships, ideas, or systems.
• If you want something stronger, "dysregulation" conveys a failure to function properly, especially in decision-making or governance.
• "Incoherence" works if you mean something that lacks logical consistency.
• "Maladaptive" describes thinking or behavior that is counterproductive or poorly suited to a situation.

Would you like something even sharper or more nuanced?

I asked:

How many levels could one say reality does function at?

ChatGPT said:

The number of levels at which reality functions depends on how you define "levels," but in broad terms, reality can be understood as operating on multiple layers, from the simplest to the most complex. Here are some ways to break it down:

1. Physical and Natural Levels

• Quantum Level – The subatomic world of particles, waves, and probability.
• Atomic Level – How atoms interact to form elements and compounds.
• Molecular Level – The chemistry that governs materials, biology, and reactions.
• Biological Level – The functioning of cells, organisms, and ecosystems.
• Ecological Level – How life interacts with the environment, from food chains to climate systems.
• Cosmological Level – The vast structure of the universe, from planets to galaxies to dark matter.

2. Cognitive and Human Levels

• Neurological Level – How the brain processes information, emotions, and consciousness.
• Psychological Level – Individual thoughts, biases, and behaviors.
• Sociological Level – How people interact in groups, societies, and cultures.
• Political and Economic Level – The structures that govern nations, economies, and global power.

3. Abstract and Philosophical Levels

• Logical and Rational Level – How arguments, science, and reasoning function.
• Moral and Ethical Level – Principles guiding right and wrong, justice, and fairness.
• Metaphysical Level – Theories about existence, reality beyond physical observation.

So How Many Levels?

Depending on how detailed you want to be, you could say reality operates at:

• A few basic levels (physical, cognitive, social, philosophical).
• 8–10 levels (as in a structured breakdown like the one above).
• An infinite number, since each level contains deeper sublevels.

So if you’re saying someone like Trump functions on only 1–2 levels, you’re implying he lacks depth beyond the immediate and transactional (perhaps only engaging at a psychological and political level while ignoring deeper scientific, sociological, or ethical dimensions).

I asked:

How many levels is Go compared to checkers?

ChatGPT said:

Go is vastly more complex than checkers in terms of strategy and possible game states. Here’s a breakdown of their relative complexity in "levels":

1. Board Size & Possible Moves

• Checkers: 8×8 board (64 squares), each player starts with 12 pieces, limited move options.
• Go: 19×19 board (361 intersections), players can place stones almost anywhere, leading to vastly more possibilities.

2. Complexity in Terms of Possible Game States

• Checkers: ~$10^{20}$ possible game states.
• Go: ~$10^{170}$ possible game states (more than the number of atoms in the observable universe).

3. Levels of Strategic Thinking

• Checkers:

  • Basic tactics (forced captures, piece advantage).
  • Intermediate strategies (controlling the center, kinging).
  • Advanced play (setting traps, positioning).
    (3–5 strategic layers at most).

• Go:

  • Local tactics (life and death, capturing stones).
  • Positional judgment (influence, territory control).
  • Global strategy (balancing multiple areas of the board).
  • Psychological play (forcing moves, misleading opponents).
  • Endgame precision (squeezing out the last points of advantage).
    (8–10+ strategic layers, with almost infinite variations and meta-strategies).

Final Comparison

If you equate complexity with "levels of reality," then:

• Checkers functions at around 3–5 levels.
• Go functions at 8–10+ levels, making it far deeper in terms of decision-making, long-term planning, and emergent complexity.

So when you say, "Trump is playing checkers while reality is playing Go," you’re essentially saying he operates in a simple, short-term, low-dimensional way, while reality demands multi-layered, high-dimensional thinking.

I asked:
Trump's trade war will lead us to a what?

ChatGPT said:

President Trump's recent escalation of trade tariffs against major partners such as China, Canada, and Mexico is poised to have significant repercussions on the U.S. economy.

Immediate Economic Impacts:

• Increased Consumer Prices: The implementation of 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico, along with heightened levies on Chinese goods, is expected to raise production costs for U.S. businesses. This surge in costs is likely to be transferred to consumers, resulting in higher prices for various products.

  Associated Press

• Stock Market Volatility: Following the announcement of these tariffs, U.S. stock markets experienced notable declines. The S&P 500 decreased by 1.2%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by 1.6%, and the Nasdaq Composite dropped by 0.4%, erasing gains achieved since President Trump's inauguration.

  The Times

Sector-Specific Consequences:

• Manufacturing and Technology: Industries heavily reliant on global supply chains, such as manufacturing and technology, are facing increased production costs. The technology sector, in particular, is bracing for significant impacts due to its dependence on components from China.

  Business Insider

• Automotive Industry: The auto industry is especially vulnerable, as vehicles produced under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) framework cross borders multiple times during production. A 25% tariff on all goods crossing the border could lead to compounded cost increases, disrupted supply chains, and higher prices for consumers.

  brookings.edu

Long-Term Economic Outlook:

• Potential for Stagflation: Economists warn that sustained tariffs could lead to stagflation, characterized by slowed economic growth coupled with rising inflation. This scenario poses significant risks to global economic stability.

  Business Insider

• Job Market Effects: Studies have indicated that previous tariffs imposed during the 2018-2019 trade war reduced long-term U.S. GDP by 0.2% and resulted in the loss of approximately 142,000 full-time equivalent jobs.

  Tax Foundation

In summary, President Trump's trade war is anticipated to lead to increased consumer prices, stock market volatility, sector-specific challenges, and potential long-term economic slowdowns, underscoring the complex dynamics of international trade policies.

Economic Fallout from Trump's Escalated Tariffs

Associated Press

Businesses scramble to contain fallout from Trump's tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico

Today

The Times

US stocks erase post-election gains after Trump tariffs

Today

Business Insider

Here are the likely market winners and losers if Trump stays aggressive on tariffs

Today

I said:

Thanks ChatGPT.

ChatGPT said:

You're welcome! If you have any more questions or need further information on this topic, feel free to ask. 🚀

Me to YOU...
On the topic of being polite to AI:

"I stopped saying thanks to ChatGPT – here's what happened" | from TechRadar

Finally...

Multiple individuals have offered sharp critiques of Donald Trump, highlighting concerns about his fitness for office, policies, and character. Here are some notable examples:

Bandy X. Lee, a forensic psychiatrist, organized a 2017 Yale conference where mental health professionals discussed their "duty to warn" about Trump's psychological state. They expressed that his mental impairments could pose a national emergency, stating, "our survival as a species may be at stake."

en.wikipedia.org

John D. Gartner, a clinical psychologist, launched the "Duty to Warn" initiative in 2017, gathering signatures from over 25,000 mental health professionals who deemed Trump "unwell" and "dangerously unfit." He described Trump as having a "malignant personality" causing significant harm.

en.wikipedia.org

Robert Kagan, a historian and foreign policy expert, left the Republican Party in 2016, endorsing Hillary Clinton. He warned that Trump resembled a "Frankenstein monster" and cautioned about the potential rise of fascism in America.

en.wikipedia.org

Maxine Waters, a U.S. Congresswoman, has consistently criticized Trump, labeling him "the most deplorable person I've ever met." She called for his impeachment, stating he was "leading himself" to it due to conflicts of interest and actions causing "chaos and division."

en.wikipedia.org

These individuals have made significant and impactful comments regarding their concerns about Donald Trump's suitability for the presidency.

Recent Critiques of Donald Trump's Policies and Actions

The Guardian

Seth Meyers on Trump's address to Congress: 'Interminable and excruciating'

Today

Associated Press

New Zealand's most senior diplomat in London loses his job over remarks about President Trump

Today

The Guardian

Stephen Colbert on Trump's second term: 'The last five weeks have been shock and awful'

Compiled with aid of ChatGPT