Ben Wittes and Quinta Jurecic at Lawfare nailed it six years(!) ago. "There’s only one problem with Trump’s eligibility for the office he now holds: The idea of Trump’s swearing [the oath of office] or any other oath 'solemnly' is, not to put too fine a point on it, laughable—as more fundamentally is any promise on his part to 'faithfully' execute this or any other commitment that involves the centrality of anyone or anything other than himself."
"What does it even mean for a person who contradicts himself constantly, who says all kinds of crazy things, who has unknown but extensive financial dealings that could be affected by his actions, and who makes up facts as needed in the moment to swear an oath to faithfully execute the office?"
Spoiler alert, it meant nothing. Trump was a rogue president, which was bad enough, but he turned most of the GOP into a rogue, anti-American party. And turned his apologists at anti-anti-Trump publications like the WSJ and National Review and activists at outfits like Judicial Watch, the Federalist Society and Heritage into rogues too. They could stanch the bleeding today, and may do so, by simply accepting that the indictments against Trump deserve to be taken seriously, and accepting the results of the judicial process, whatever they are. Early signs are not encouraging, but one might as well be an optimist.
Great explanation of the situation. My concern is if a Republican wins the Presidency and pardons him. In some sense this may be good for Biden, but it can cause the 75 million who voted for trump in 2020 to turn out again. There's no assurance that more people will turn out to vote against him. What was good was the kiss of death from the Southern Baptist Convention. That might have an affect on the Republican turnout.
That was a good idea though you could make a case for the document case being serious and the Jan 6th/Georgia being mega-serious and the the latter two being 'smoking guns' and the document case being "smoking gun caught going off in camera. But hey political scientists can have some simplifying poetic lisence for the general public.
Good start (frankly I like 2x2 tables) but I think you underestimate the weight of the charges under the Espionage Act.
Ben Wittes and Quinta Jurecic at Lawfare nailed it six years(!) ago. "There’s only one problem with Trump’s eligibility for the office he now holds: The idea of Trump’s swearing [the oath of office] or any other oath 'solemnly' is, not to put too fine a point on it, laughable—as more fundamentally is any promise on his part to 'faithfully' execute this or any other commitment that involves the centrality of anyone or anything other than himself."
"What does it even mean for a person who contradicts himself constantly, who says all kinds of crazy things, who has unknown but extensive financial dealings that could be affected by his actions, and who makes up facts as needed in the moment to swear an oath to faithfully execute the office?"
Spoiler alert, it meant nothing. Trump was a rogue president, which was bad enough, but he turned most of the GOP into a rogue, anti-American party. And turned his apologists at anti-anti-Trump publications like the WSJ and National Review and activists at outfits like Judicial Watch, the Federalist Society and Heritage into rogues too. They could stanch the bleeding today, and may do so, by simply accepting that the indictments against Trump deserve to be taken seriously, and accepting the results of the judicial process, whatever they are. Early signs are not encouraging, but one might as well be an optimist.
Great explanation of the situation. My concern is if a Republican wins the Presidency and pardons him. In some sense this may be good for Biden, but it can cause the 75 million who voted for trump in 2020 to turn out again. There's no assurance that more people will turn out to vote against him. What was good was the kiss of death from the Southern Baptist Convention. That might have an affect on the Republican turnout.
That was a good idea though you could make a case for the document case being serious and the Jan 6th/Georgia being mega-serious and the the latter two being 'smoking guns' and the document case being "smoking gun caught going off in camera. But hey political scientists can have some simplifying poetic lisence for the general public.