Those people were covered in 1. Outright bad people.

You should try having a casual chat sometime with people who voted for and/or like Trump. You'll quickly discover how wrong this statement is.

It's always easy to spot a person who has enclosed themselves in a political or ideological bubble. They're typically first to apply a label to a large group of people and then assume all the people with that label are the exact same.

This has never been true for any group of people and as it turns out, it's the same for people you disagree with politically.

> It's always easy to spot a person who has enclosed themselves in a political or ideological bubble. They're typically first to apply a label to a large group of people and then assume all the people with that label are the exact same.

Your recent posting history here includes calling the entire European Union a "non-contributing toddler" to the world. Hmm.

Digging through my chat history to misrepresent something I've said only underscores my original point.

I've had two such chats with Trump supporters, and one said in great detail that this statement is true. He acknowledged that Trump has done a number of ethically and legally problematic things, and that supporting Trump means enabling this, but feels that he has to accept that necessary evil in order to achieve his policy goals on various issues. (The other flatly denied that Trump has ever done anything wrong and refused to keep talking when I produced examples of the most pointlessly cruel stuff.)

Have you heard differently in your own casual chats on the topic?

What were the policy goals?

Reducing illegal immigration seemed to be the primary one. Some stuff on civil rights too, but I'm not sure if that was a big concern for the guy I was talking to or an attempt to find common ground where he knew I'd be more sympathetic.

Would you give the same leeway to a supporter of Hitler? Stalin? Pinochet?

This feels like it needs a MAGA vs Republican distinction. There are plenty of Republicans who (privately) have issues with some things Trump is doing.

Talk is cheap; actions are what matters. Based on their actions (or lack thereof), the group you're describing must be a very small minority indeed.

They aren't in Congress, they are working in the states, I would guess. The Republicans in Congress mostly volunteered for a spinectomy when Trump was elected again.

Can you name any currently serving?

That's part of it: many felt the winds and simultaneously made the choice to "focus on family" and step back from politics during the 2nd Trump administration.

But the wheel turns, and there's going to be a lot of folks in the party with very sharp axes to grind during the lame duck period.

Yeah, and I'm sure the Pelosi wing of the Democratic Party will be first in line to help rehabilitate their image.

Ten years ago, that distinction may have been a valid one.

by and large the "anti-trump republican" has ceased to be a relevant political bloc. they have either vote for trump / pro trump candidates and are functionally indistinguishable from MAGA, vote for the most moderate democrat possible, or have given up politics entirely. I suspect you didn't mean this, but the largest group of self identified republicans who have an issue with trump are angry he isn't far right enough (ie groypers, klansmen, neonazis, and like).

Absolutely not. Almost every non-MAGA Republican voice that served in federal public office has been ousted, and it's not like they were good to begin with.

That distinction ended when Romney left Congress. It’s entirely MAGA now.

It’s not even historically rare for a party to merge or be subsumed like that. Here’s the historical list just for the US

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_t...

If you keep your issues with Trump private, you're complicit with those who follow him blindly.

The meme is that Susan Collins is “always concerned”. But still votes along with the MAGAs. If they are silently going along, what difference does it make? They are still MAGA.

The difference comes when Trump needs help but no longer wields power.

His dyed in the wool followers will still support him.

The convenience crowd? I wouldn't take that bet. Especially after he's been such a dick to so many folks in his own party.

But we'll see.

No one except the Freedom Caucus in the House are true MAGA to their core the rest are just opportunists. I’m not sure who are the true believers in the Senate.

I get the sense that Republican senators have always been more willing to see this administration as a passing tide.

E.g. Thune's propensity for letting Trump's more excessive ideas die on the vine.

No. Having issues with them privately and not speaking out is half of the problem.