Did I imply “business as usual”? I don’t think so.
At the same time, I actually think that characterization lacks usefulness. For instance, in some cases there’s clearly breaking norms (most poeple would porobably mostly for the worse, and in some limited cases for better).
In other cases it is just more overt (or in some cases, more extreme) expression of typical American policy.
You're smack in the middle of accepting the unacceptable because of normalization of deviance. None of this is 'typical American policy'.
It is utter chaos, both internal and external. Your calibration point should not be Trump 1 but the Obama or Clinton administrations which were if not super popular at least competent.
> You're smack in the middle of accepting the unacceptable because of normalization of deviance.
To get a little personal, I will just say that you don't know what's in my heart or on my mind.
To get back on point:
> None of this is 'typical American policy'.
Mabye you will say I'm being pedantic, but I think that's a categorically false statement.
> Your calibration point should not be Trump 1 but the Obama or Clinton administrations which were if not super popular at least competent.
Why cherry pick those two? What about more recent (Biden) or further back? I think you will find that there's a lot of things that are persistent over the last 250 years, including political violence, xenophobia, detaining people without due process, invading other countries, tarriffs, rhetoric that Europe should pay for its own defense, etc.
To be clear, I'm not saying any of these are OK.
There are also other positive dynamics that persist, like Americans pushing back and the administration needing to retreat and adjust.
