There are many tactical advantages with having Trump, but I think the long term strategic goal is the one I suggested, one that has gathered considerable attention in Russia. Presidents come and go- but a serious internal weakening is the rift that keeps on giving for nations like Russia.
And from the looks of things Putin hit the ball out of the ball park on that one. We have no likely president, Trump or otherwise, that many Americans will not regard as an illegitimate usurper.
— Gus
..An “illegitimate usurper”. That is the republican theme republicans have used to demonize Dems, especially President Obama, for many years now.
From the article written just prior to the 2016 election:
— by Gus DiZerega | November 2, 2016
In an inexplicably naïve article Brendan Gauthier at Salon argued that Russia was the only country that seemed to want Donald Trump to be president. But rather than asking why this is so, or wondering what Russia might reasonably do to promote that outcome given that it is so, Gauthier simply repeated a conclusion from a NYT article that referred to unnamed FBI sources saying there was no Russian connection to Trump, at a time when the FBI is obviously seriously partisan. The Times did no more to offer reasoning for its conclusions than he did. Perhaps pride at being scooped by Slate and Mother Jones is the explanation for their openness to claims a careful reporter would want backed up.
just a couple of excerpts:
What’s in it for Russia?
In fact Russia’s interest in Trump makes plenty of sense and does not involve Trump being a knowing conspirator serving Putin. It simply involves Trump being Trump- an exceptionally vain man who responds to flattery and with a fairly well established record of very poor business judgment. Further, what has already been uncovered makes perfect sense. Here’s why and how. However, it requires taking a Russian point of view.
Russia has a vested interest in weakening the US. [...]
After positing some reasons why, the author continues with this:
A useful idiot
Trump’s entire campaign has focused on exacerbating internal tensions. If I were Putin I would certainly see his efforts as potentially useful to my goals and Trump needn’t be in on it. he simply needed to be encouraged “by one strong leader to another” to pursue his goal to become President. Helping him financially would encourage his self-confidence. This would explain his secret bank connections.
More evidence? As Samantha Bee demonstrated by interviewing them, Russians are being paid to get involved on social media sites, claiming to be Americans, and always favoring Trump. Why would anyone in Russia pay Russians to imitate Americans on US social media, and to do so always taking Trump’s side? They have never done this before so far as we know.
Similarly, all hacks we know of have been of Democrats. The Republicans have not been hacked by the Russians or anyone else. If the Russians for some mysterious reason simply wanted to mess with the election wouldn’t they mess with both sides?
(UPDATE 12/11: We now know the Republicans were also hacked– but apparently nothing was done by the Russians with this information other than, perhaps, blackmail.)
Not just weakening the US, but NATO:
Finally, Trump has spoken in ways to weaken the NATO alliance and also moved the US closer to civil violence than any time since the Civil War. He has said he would not necessarily defend NATO members if they were attacked (which violates the treaty) and has threatened to jail his opponents and curtail the press. Some of his advisers have even suggested killing Clinton.
This raises the stakes of politics far beyond what can sustain a democratic country and if pursued, promotes, even guarantees, civil conflict. Such conflict will weaken the US and so give Russia a freer hand.
None of this is proof of course, but it does tie all the evidence together along with a motive and strategy for why and how the Russians would do this. There is no countervailing evidence that I know of.
And it does not require anything more of Trump’s motives that what we already know: extreme narcissism, openness to flattery, and not having nearly as much money as he claims to have.
This piece made a lot of sense that I thought was worth sharing.
And the point made about “raising the stakes of politics far beyond what can sustain a democratic country” especially important after reading this article:
— an emphatic YES
...the article is an excellent read, but one that I would add another aspect into the numerous examples cited; that it is the GOP/”conservatives” completely beholden to their plutocrats and corporate paymasters that are a real direct threat to this country and our democracy. As useful as Donald Trump is to Putin, he is also a tool for the GOP as their “useful idiot” too — Today’s GOP does not value democracy. They have proven this over and over by their actions (not just voter suppression & disenfranchisement, but in every move they’ve made for decades including the rwnj’s on the supreme court)
Republicans like Bill Kristol and his ilk may whine a lot, but when it gets right down to it, the coin operated republican politicians in North Carolina tell the real tale of the “conservative” movement in this piece by Paul Waldman:
Paul Waldman writes:
another damn good read for raising questions and for future planning in an ...
...spelled out by a woman who has lived it — Masha Gessen
— the plain fact is, today’s republican party does not believe in nor uphold democracy and the democratic process. It’s time we Dems made that absolutely clear — imo