Republicans Wouldn’t Elect Christ Himself

Or: how a dead Russian novelist predicted Kamala Harris’s defeat 150 years early.

In 1976, a born-again Sunday School teacher named Jimmy Carter was elected president. By all accounts he remained a man of genuine Christian faith until the day he died in 2024, and his post-presidency — decades of swinging hammers for Habitat for Humanity well into his nineties — stands as a record of good works in the name of Christianity unmatched by any president before or since.

His great scandal? In a 1976 interview with Playboy (the extent of my literary reach at the time), Carter confessed he had “committed adultery in my heart many times” because he had looked at women with lust. The horror. A man so committed to honesty that he confessed his thoughts. He was the closest thing to Christ the Oval Office has seen since the founding of the republic.

So naturally, we fired him after one term in favor of an actor who promised that tax cuts for the wealthy would trickle down to the rest of us. Reagan cut the top marginal tax rate from 70 percent to 28 percent and nearly tripled the national debt — from $1 trillion to almost $3 trillion in eight years — all under the banner of smaller government. Fifty years and nearly $40 trillion in debt later, we know exactly how much trickled down. The mystery isn’t the math. The mystery is how the Republican Party stole religion and convinced the press it was better on the economy while doing it.

The religion heist has a paper trail. In 1979, Jerry Falwell and Paul Weyrich formed the Moral Majority. Conventional wisdom says it was a response to Roe v. Wade. But according to Weyrich himself — the man who coined the name — the founding grievance wasn’t abortion. It was the IRS revoking tax-exempt status from racially discriminatory private schools, specifically Bob Jones University. The movement that would spend the next four decades lecturing America about family values was organized, by its own architect’s admission, to defend segregation academies. However you slice it, Falwell’s machine delivered the 1980 election, and the GOP has claimed the mantle of “true Christianity” ever since.

And the press fell for the whole package. To this day, the media repeats the canard that Republicans own both the moral high ground and the economy, and the messaging matters, because Christian conservatives reliably vote the wedge issues — guns, God, and gays — while the actual budget picks their pockets.

Which brings me to a dead Russian.

More than 150 years ago, Fyodor Dostoevsky ran the experiment America keeps refusing to learn from. The premise of The Idiot is simple: what happens if you drop a genuinely good person — honest, compassionate, incapable of scheming — into actual society? His answer is Prince Myshkin, an epileptic returning to Petersburg from a Swiss sanatorium, Dostoevsky’s deliberate attempt to write a “positively beautiful man,” an almost Christ-like figure. Everyone who meets Myshkin is drawn to his sincerity. And then Petersburg society chews him up anyway. His honesty gets read as naivety, his compassion as weakness, his refusal to play the game as proof he can’t. They give him a nickname, and the nickname is the title of the book. Dostoevsky’s thesis: society doesn’t just fail to recognize goodness — it processes goodness as defect. In a fallen world, unguarded decency is indistinguishable from idiocy.

Sound familiar?

I thought Kamala Harris was the perfect candidate. I’m not claiming she was Christ-like — she was a tough prosecutor — but her platform sat closer to the Sermon on the Mount than the Republicans’ by a chasm of biblical proportions. Feed the hungry. Heal the sick. Care for children. And the country ran the Myshkin playbook on her: her laugh became an attack ad, her résumé got waved off with a three-letter acronym (DEI), her earnestness got recast as emptiness. With the media’s help, the voting populace chewed her up exactly like Petersburg society chewed up the Prince — all while insisting, with straight faces, that Donald Trump was the more Christian choice and better for their paychecks.

Which brings me to Moses Mike Johnson — a nickname the Speaker earned honestly, having told a gathering of Christian lawmakers that God had prepared him for leadership like Moses. Johnson says his policies come straight from his Bible. Here’s what the Bible apparently says: the Big Beautiful Bill he shepherded into law cuts Medicaid by roughly $1 trillion over the decade — the largest cut in the program’s history — with the CBO estimating around 12 million people losing health coverage once the ACA changes are counted. Federal nutrition assistance took its largest-ever cut in the same bill. School lunches, SNAP, health care for the poor: gone or gutted. Meanwhile, there is no defense budget too large — north of a trillion dollars now, with more on the way thanks to the Iran war going unchecked.

And when the Social Security trustees warned this summer that the retirement trust fund runs dry in 2032, Johnson went on Louisiana radio to explain that entitlement programs — Medicare, Medicaid, “and things like Social Security” — “have to be adjusted and fixed,” adding, “We have a plan to do that next year.”

Next year. As in, after the midterms. They have a plan for your Social Security; they’d just prefer you vote first and see it later. And the debt crisis Johnson cites as the emergency? The tax bill he sponsored added nearly $5 trillion to it, flowing overwhelmingly to the wealthiest households. Cut Medicaid for the poor, cut taxes for the rich, point at the debt, come for checks of the downtrodden. It’s Reagan’s magic trick performed a fourth time for an audience that just takes the media’s word for it.

There isn’t any bar too low for Moses Mike and the Republicans. Block release of the Epstein files? No problem. Defend January 6th? Sure, Donald. Explain away grab ’em by the pussy? Locker room talk. Explain away a rape conviction? He never said he was a choir boy.

None of this is Christianity. It’s blind loyalty and the Protestant work ethic filtered through Ayn Rand — a fusion where prosperity signals virtue and poverty signals moral failure. Which is a genuinely impressive theological achievement, given that Job, Ecclesiastes, Amos, and Luke’s Beatitudes (“blessed be the poor… woe unto you that are rich”) exist specifically to refute it.

Dostoevsky saw this coming too. In The Brothers Karamazov, the skeptic Ivan tells his devout brother Alyosha a story about the second coming. Christ returns — not in glory, just quietly walking among the people of Seville at the height of the Inquisition, the day after a hundred heretics were burned. The crowd recognizes him instantly. He restores sight to a blind man. On the cathedral steps he raises a dead seven-year-old girl from her coffin as her mother weeps.

At that moment the Grand Inquisitor passes by — a cardinal, nearly ninety, who watched yesterday’s burnings from the front row. He sees the miracles, understands immediately who this is, and orders his guards to arrest him. The crowd, conditioned to obedience, parts and lets it happen.

But the arrest isn’t the chilling part. The chilling part is the justification. That night the old man visits the cell and explains, with total serenity, that the Church has corrected Christ’s work. The people can’t handle what you actually taught, he says. So we manage them — for their own good. Everything we’ve taken from them, we took out of love.

Now listen to Moses Mike respond to the backlash over his entitlement comments: don’t believe the fake news, Republicans aren’t “reducing a single benefit” — they’re merely rooting out fraud in order to preserve the programs. We are cutting your health care to protect it. We are taking this from you because we love you.

They would jail Jesus himself if he walked the earth again — assuming he made it past the border, which, given his paperwork, is a generous assumption. And Republicans, conditioned to obedience, would part and let it happen.

The Many Faces of Christianity

What follows is a chapter from my upcoming book “It’s Complicated, Isn’t It?”

“You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”                            — Anne Lamott

I had a discussion with a Catholic family member. I made an observation: isn’t it odd that we have Catholics with such wildly disparate doctrinal views, all under the same roof? On issues like abortion, gun control, the need for a social safety net — same banner of Christianity, opposite ends of the spectrum.  His reply to me, in a nutshell, was “that’s expected.” I completely understand his point because after all, we’re dealing with human beings at the end of the day.

But I can’t help wanting to dig deeper, because the gap has widened significantly just within the decades of my own life. And in keeping with the theme of this book, I don’t think the issue is that simple. First, the what. I’m going to use Catholicism as the example in this case because that seems to be the easiest example to work from. But the issue isn’t unique to Catholicism, which I will address in the paragraphs that follow.

Catholics today draw their sense of what it means to be a good Catholic from a variety of sources. There’s the parish priest, the messages from Rome — but there’s also a plethora of high-profile political and media figures who wear the Catholic label and shape the thinking of the faithful in their own image. Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Stephen Colbert are Catholics, for example, and by all accounts, faithful ones — regular at weekly Mass, and sincere about living out Jesus’ message to support the downtrodden. I wouldn’t call them social justice warriors, but they lean that direction. And they seem far less concerned with Church doctrine — its stance on abortion, on LGBTQ rights — than with simply trying to live by the golden rule.

Then there’s the far-right wing of Catholicism, which includes media figures like Laura Ingraham, Bill O’Reilly, and Newt Gingrich, and Vice President JD Vance. Under the same umbrella we have people with enormous influence who are more aligned with the hardline doctrinal positions coming out of Rome — the more hardline the better.  Then there’s Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, who also has ties to the Heritage Foundation. Donohue holds no official Church position, yet he’s become a vocal media presence for the hard right of Catholicism — staunchly pro-life, a critic of same-sex marriage and LGBTQ visibility in public and civic life, and reliably first in line to minimize clergy sex-abuse accusations.  

Where the first group reaches for mercy, this group reaches for order.  

All of these people claim the Catholic label, and all of them are presumably sincere, yet their worldviews are from different planets. So what does it mean if “Catholic” contains both the cable-news culture warrior and the humble servant, and they agree on almost nothing that the faith supposedly implies? On Sunday they all check the same box. Monday through Friday they broadcast opposing gospels.

In trying to figure out the why, I have come up with the following. First, the way we consume news has changed radically since when I grew up. In the 1960s and ’70s, most of us got our news from three networks — ABC, CBS, and NBC — and they weren’t that different in their messaging; there was a good faith attempt at even-handedness. There was no internet or social media to contend with. Today, people get their news from a wide variety of sources, very few of which try to stay above the fray. Consequently, the voting populace gets a steady diet of one-sided news with little counterbalance. Watch MSNBC and you get Stephanie Ruhle’s left-wing view of world events; watch Fox News and you get Laura Ingraham’s. Both professed Catholics, complete with ashes on their foreheads on Ash Wednesday, delivering opposite messages. And these aren’t just policy differences over big government versus small government. We’re talking about foundational moral questions — school lunch programs, gun laws, immigration, the death penalty — where each camp is utterly certain the same Gospel is squarely on its side.

The second reason I have come up with has to do with the fact that the parish priest is now competing with 24/7 news outlets and a barrage of social media that facilitates a constant discussion about what social policy should and shouldn’t be. The priest gets one Mass a week, of which only about fifteen minutes is a sermon for messaging. There’s no way his message can compete with the other sources, which are ingrained into our daily lives like water and air.


My third and final root-cause explanation is outlined best by biblical scholar Dan McClellan, when he explains that Bible texts have no inherent meaning and no consistent message. Scripture is a mirror, not a map. Readers find in it whatever they carried to it. One group of Catholics can focus on the texts that speak of order, borders, tradition, and authority, and find their “be a good person, and don’t tread on me” message there. The other group can focus on welcome the stranger, feed the poor, blessed are the peacemakers, and find their message there. Both groups are drawing from the same well, and each is sure it got the pure water. Religion ends up being a tool to bless a conclusion you’ve already reached. It gets used as a blunt instrument for tribal and political ends.

And it cuts both ways, which is the part that keeps me honest. The conservative Catholic subscribes to Rome on abortion but wants little to do with its teaching on immigration, refugees, or the death penalty. The progressive Catholic does the reverse — devoted to the social gospel, but happy to part ways with Rome on sexual ethics. Nobody is actually obedient. Everyone keeps the doctrines that fit and quietly sets down the ones that don’t, and then calls the other side the bad Catholics.


Lest I spend my days critiquing Catholicism with a list of grievances, there’s more to the story. Catholics are just a small subset of a much wider ecosystem that weaponizes biblical teachings to advance an agenda — and in many ways they’re far less guilty of it, because Catholicism was never built on biblical literalism to begin with. Where many Protestant sects treat scripture as the sole, self-interpreting authority, Catholicism has always run on a different paradigm entirely: Church tradition, the authority of the Pope and bishops to say what a verse actually means, and centuries of treating the Bible more like a book of symbolic stories rather than an owner’s manual. The Bible is authoritative, but it isn’t read like a legal document — and that alone should complicate any claim that “the Bible says so.”

In 1998, the Southern Baptist Convention passed a “Resolution on the Moral Character of Public Officials.” It affirmed that a leader’s private morality matters to God and should matter to voters, warned that “tolerance of serious wrong by leaders sears the conscience of the culture,” and urged Americans to “elect those officials and candidates who, although imperfect, demonstrate consistent honesty, moral purity and the highest character.” It passed overwhelmingly. Everyone understood the target: Bill Clinton, mid–Lewinsky scandal. Character counted, the Convention said, and it mattered to God.

In 2011, the Public Religion Research Institute asked whether a public official who commits an immoral act in private life can still behave ethically in office. Thirty percent of white evangelicals said yes. By 2016 — same question — seventy-two percent said yes. A 42-point swing, the largest of any religious group, arriving precisely when it was their own side’s candidate whose character was in question. Nobody repealed the 1998 resolution. Nobody announced a change of heart. The principle just quietly evaporated the moment it became inconvenient.

I can’t think of a better example to support McClellan’s claim that religion is used as a tool, not a compass, than this one.

If someone walks up to me today and says “I’m a Christian,” it doesn’t tell me much. I have to use my best restraint to hold back my snarkiest response: “Traditional or Republican Jesus?” All of which is to say — no, Christianity isn’t simply explained. It’s quite complicated.

ICE at the Super Bowl

This ought to be interesting.

On February 9th, the Super Bowl will feature the Seattle Seahawks vs. the New England Patriots. In less than two weeks, two teams from two very liberal cities will play each other for the NFL title at one of the most left-leaning metropolises in the United States. Approximately 75,000 people will make their way to Levi Stadium in the Bay Area on Super Sunday. After the tragedies in Minnesota, I don’t think the good people of California, Washington, or Massachusetts are going to be in the mood to put up with ICE agents milling around the premises, searching for people with the wrong color of skin or accent. Yet Kristi Noem thought the Super Bowl presented a real opportunity to send her crackpot team of Proud Boys on a people-hunting safari.

The first problem Homeland Security has is that people no longer take ICE agents seriously. Since most of the recruits look like they couldn’t run a mile in under 15 minutes if their life depended on it, have no training in police work, and give off a strong vibe of societal dropouts, they are seen as the equivalent of Mall Cops in fake Army garb.

My guess is that if ICE starts hassling ticket holders for no apparent reason, they will be met with serious resistance and seriously outnumbered. GTFOH!

I don’t see this ending well for ICE. It’s kind of like throwing a party and then the Pharaohs decide to show up to crash it, only you have 75,000 people on your side.

Should We Let Fear or Conscience Motivate Us?

On January 7th, Renee Nicole Good’s life was taken by ICE officer Jonathan Ross. She was shot in the face while driving her Ford Explorer, trying to exit a hostile scene in Minnesota. Republicans couldn’t wait to get booked on news channels so they could spread the “Obey in Advance” message that aligns with their keeping people in fear strategy. The problem is, fear doesn’t work. It never has. The event sparked protests across the country, rivaling those of George Floyd and Trayvon Martin.

The citizens of the United States, in general, can protest without too much fear, but there are exceptions. That could change, though, depending on how far Republicans and the Supreme Court are willing to allow the Trump administration wage their war on people of color. As ICE raids more cities and our friends and neighbors are kidnapped from their schools and homes, there will be more and bigger protests. Bank on it.

The people of Iran, however, do live in fear. In the past month, it’s estimated that between 2,400 and 3,400 people have been killed in the Iranian regime’s crackdown on protests. Yet we see women throwing their hijabs in bonfires and dancing in the streets. That is courage. Everything to lose and no fucks left to give. My hat is off to them.

The thing is, fear works until it doesn’t. I have a nasty habit of relating everything back to religion, but it’s relevant in this case. Growing up, we’re taught to fear hell. The message is behave, or else! Youth are exposed to the idea of a fiery place where they’re being burned alive for eternity with no cookies and no Xbox. If that’s not an incentive, then I don’t know what is. But it only works as long as you believe the threat. Once the idea of a place like hell seems a little fishy, then fear of it no longer applies. It’s the same thing with protests in the United States and Iran. At some point, enough people get out in the streets and say, “We dare you to come get all of us.” The reward of gaining what you’re protesting for makes the risk of joining others in the protest worth it.

My siblings and I were raised in the Catholic tradition. For me, this included five years in parochial school. It was the full enchilada—Church, School, and Parish life, all reinforced at home. In grades 1-3, the message was more aligned with fear. In no uncertain terms, there was this omnipotent God out there, who could get mad and destroy things, even entire civilizations, if he didn’t like how things were going. And if you dared break any of the 10 Commandments, it’ll be eternity in hell for you. In retrospect, it was only a reflection of the fear and pestilence narrative from the Old Testament, but we didn’t know that at the time. We chose to obey in advance, if for no other reason, to keep the peace. The problem is that as kids get closer to the age of reason, many say, “Wait a minute! I’m not sure I buy into this eternity in hell narrative,” and the fear-factor strategy loses its effectiveness.

Catholicism has a well-deserved reputation as a religion heavily steeped in the guilt factor. I experienced this firsthand. It comes into play when the education system begins to focus on matters of conscience. So instead of talking about hell to get you to behave the way they want, they might ask, “How is your conscience doing following your nasty behavior towards John on the playground?” Of course, we would drop our heads and say, “Not so good.”

But here’s the thing. Instilling a conscience in students can be an effective tool for a person for an entire lifetime. Maybe Catholicism went a little overboard with it, but I’m glad they finally shifted away from the fear factor and onto another message I could actually relate to. Be considerate. Other people’s feelings matter. Don’t be a pig. And if you don’t, you should feel guilty! Not because God is going to send you to a fiery place, but because you want to be a good human being, don’t you? Don’t you?

When I used to interview candidates for jobs at a former employer, we tried to look for people who weren’t job hoppers. We were about to make an investment in a new hire, and the investment doesn’t pay off unless the person can actually use the training we’ve invested in them and move the ball forward for the company. If I liked a candidate enough, I’d probe a little into their background to see whether they had more long-term interests and might stay a while. Of course, they can lie, and the company would have no recourse, but I played this one straight up. I would just make a statement to appeal to their conscience, but in a humorous way. “We really like it when candidates work out and stay a few years, and that’s what we would hope from you. Of course, every employer is at-will, and you can do whatever you need to, but if you were to leave, we would want you to feel guilty [usually laughs].” Nothing threatening about it, just appealing to your good sense of a fair deal.

Sadly, the conscience strategy has no chance with the Trump administration because they don’t have one, so we have to fight their egregious, racist, greedy policies with activism and resistance, and then vote people in at all levels who have a conscience.

Conquerers Beware

This mystery of who killed JFK still remains unsolved. The Warren Commission concluded that Oswald acted alone, but some believe that Oswald’s connection to Cuba was more than a coincidence. JFK did attempt to invade Cuba in the now infamous Bay of Pigs incident.

If anything were to happen to Trump, the right-wingers would love nothing more than to blame it on a woke liberal with Trump Derangement Syndrome. Odds are, though, that if there were to be an unhinged assailant, it’s far more likely to be a nut-case from his own party. You don’t have to look any further than the incident that nicked Trump’s ear in Wilkes-Barre, PA, or Utah Valley University and Charlie Kirk’s unfortunate demise to find examples of disgruntled MAGAs with a gun and an axe to grind.

As recently as yesterday, Trump, having visions of grandeur, waxed poetically from Air Force One about taking over Colombia, Cuba, Greenland, Iran, and Mexico, in addition to his recent ‘capture’ of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. Greenland wasn’t a huge surprise, as he’s shared his unfiltered thoughts about a hostile takeover there in the past, but the others on the list are new territory for him.

The problem for right-wingers, then, is that once your leader threatens over eight percent of the world’s population with hostile takeover, it will be much harder to blame it on a bleeding heart liberal in your own country. The Secret Service would be wise to hire more personnel to keep an eye on Pelé (that’s what his caddies call him, because he kicks his golf ball out from behind trees), lest he suffer the same fate as the guy who pissed off Castro.

2025 Year in Review

In 1985, when I lived in Marysville, Washington, my good friend Dave Aldrich sent out his annual Christmas letter. A Berkeley grad, activist, and FDR Democrat, Dave was convinced that Republicans have been working to unravel the New Deal since it was enacted. Needless to say, he was not a fan of the Reagan Administration at the time.

In his annual holiday letter, Dave went on a two-page, nonstop, political rant about everything that was wrong with the country, railing against Republicans using George Will-level vocabulary, and then signed it “Merry Christmas.” It was the funniest Christmas letter I have ever received.

I’ve often been tempted to steal his idea, but there’s no way I could ever match his wit or vocab, so I’ll just admit up front that, after the cruelty I witnessed in 2025, I seriously considered it.

I’m thankful that I don’t need to, because for those who reached this site via a link from me, I’d be preaching to the choir. It was encouraging to see you out at the protests. Keep up the good work. We all know the assignment.

Other than living in Orwellian times, there were a lot of positives to share about this past year.

To say that retirement is agreeing with Donna and me might be the understatement of the year. We are both thriving. After spending the first couple of years in retirement getting health issues out of the way, we feel we’re engaged in fulfilling activities independently and with friends, family, and each other. We appreciate the freedom that comes with being retired and don’t take it for granted for one second.

Donna joined the Dahlia Society and is learning how to fill the yard with … more dahlias. There’s a lot more to it than meets the eye. Some people are really into it. They have shows and competitions with people judging dahlias that cost hundreds of dollars… for a flower. Donna isn’t like that. She just wants to learn how to make our little plot of land beautiful with dahlias and meet like-minded people. She’s been able to spend more time in the shop doing her art projects. Bold ideas are starting to surface. We’ll keep you posted.

Donna’s mom, Janet, turned 95 this past year and is requiring more care than in the past. We’re thankful that she’s agreeable in her environment, and that the staff at her care center enjoys her. Donna has reached full stride as a sports fan this past year. The very thought of March Madness brings her immense joy. She’s now an avid viewer of sports on television, especially when it’s playoff time. When I look at our shared calendar, all the Duck games and times are already listed. Her golf game gets better every year, and the sports attire section of her closet is growing. I picked the right wife.

I spend my days making difficult decisions among my seemingly endless list of hobbies. I’m still involved in sports officiating (added volleyball to the mix this year), get out for some golf, walk with my buddy Dan, and am still writing the same book I wrote about last year (It’s Complicated, Isn’t It?”). It’s a work in progress. The more I write, the more I discover. I spent considerable time in the music studio this year, recording songs and putting them out on YouTube (William Toner).

Our travel schedule included exotic destinations like Seattle, Neskowin, Port Townsend, and Altoona, Washington. We have adopted a ‘short getaway’ strategy that fits well with our lifestyle and retirement budget. We try to pick places where we can bring Pickles because Pickles is spoiled, and snorts if we leave her at home.

I helped my son Robby build a shed this past year from a set of plans he bought online (see pics). Those who know me know it wasn’t work, it was all fun. I love building stuff, though I’m far from being a pro. What we didn’t know, we figured out. Emilia helped by adding artwork to the project with her felt pens. Rob and Ariana thought it might even be too helpful.

Two days ago, we welcomed Nicholas William Toner into the family. Proud parents Dan and Emily are now a family of five, complete with 3 car seats in the back. We really enjoy hearing what comes out of the mouths of babes. It’s hard work raising a family, but when the kids crack you up with what’s on their mind, it’s all worth it. When we see Gwennie and Ellie, they never disappoint.

We are looking forward to seeing Kelli and the boys at Christmas and learning about their football season. Kaden graduates this year, and Karter is a Freshman. We are very proud of the young gentlemen they have become. Sports fanatics and good students. What more could you want?

With that, in no particular order, I leave you with some memories from 2025.

The Affordability Crisis

James Carville famously quipped, “It’s the economy, stupid.” We know that the Biden / Harris ticket took it on the chin for the price of eggs. That’s why democrats would be wise to latch onto the latest catch-phrase, “The affordability crisis”, and make it a party platform message until republicans are so sick of hearing it that they run for cover. They should repeat those three words 20 times a day, every day, running up to the midterms.

Trump likes to pretend there’s no problem, but the grocery bill doesn’t lie. Everything is up, and there’s no relief in sight. Outside of the kitchen table, everything else is up too. The tariffs have increased the price of cars, clothes, furniture, appliances, and lumber, just to name the biggest hitters. And then there’s health care. Premiums have skyrocketed to the point of pricing people out of insurance entirely, and they haven’t even cancelled the Affordable Care Act yet.

So keep saying those three special words, my friends. The affordability crisis. They don’t like to hear it, but they can’t deny it. It’s a winning strategy, and besides, what goes around comes around.

The Thrill is Gone

I believe we are about to see karma come full circle. Donald Trump has used people his entire life. Many have gone bankrupt in servitude to the teflon Don. Michael Cohen was useful until he wasn’t. Rudy Giuliani got taken to the cleaners for his association with Trump, and Trump hasn’t helped him one iota. So long as they provided him with some benefit, they got a seat at the table. Once the benefits stop, you’re out.

Trump is under the illusion that his populist movement has been successful. What he doesn’t realize yet is that Peter Thiel, Sheldon Adelson, Harlan Crow, and Ken Griffin have been using him. While he’s been useful to the mega donor class and the Republican Congress, they have looked the other way and put up with his tantrums.

What is going to be interesting in the next year is to see how long it takes for the mega donors and Republicans to throw Trump under the bus. He’s already a lame duck. If he’s as ill as what our eyes are seeing, he could be subjected to 25th Amendment treatment at any time. You can bet that the people holding the purse strings have been thinking strategically for some time now, and that there’s no way they are going to go down with the ship.

I think he’ll be out in ’26, assuming he lives that long. The MAGA movement has run its course. The thrill is gone.