Sunday, January 31, 2016

Sarah PAC - The Death Spiral Continues

By VinnieF

reported in July that Sarah PAC appears to be on the road to turning off the lights as the donations were not what they once were. This is confirmed by the PAC financials that just came out for the second half of the year.

The Overall Numbers

Three cash on hand amounts clearly show the PAC's trajectory:
January 1, 2015$ 825,556
July 1, 2015$ 565,830
January 1, 2016$ 380,963
Obviously, the drop between any two periods is the amount of spending more than you take in.

I'm again surprised at the amount she took in for the second half of the year - $457,459. This is only about $33,000 less than she did in the first half of the year.

She's doing a little better about spending in the second half of the year spending $642,326. It was over $750,000 in the first half.

NOTHING for Candidates or Organizations

We've laughed about Sarah PAC spending only 4 or 5 percent of their money doing something besides shuttling Sarah around the country. Well, this time there are NO donations to any candidates or organizations. Actually, it's worse than that. She received $1,500 from two candidates who never decided to cash the checks she gave them. (Why would a politician not cash a $1,000 check?) I could imagine Stephen Colbert doing a piece where he madly tries to figure out what percent of this organization's donation went to the cause when the number is negative.

Given that we're in a politically dormant season, giving nothing to candidates is not surprising. However, since it's a dormant season you should also cut back your spending since you're not doing anything. Instead, Sarah PAC spent over $640,000 to do nothing but keep the lights on!

Consulting Feeding at the Sarah PAC Trough.

This is the fourth time I've written about Sarah PAC's consultants spending like drunken sailors while having very little to show for it. This time I think the percentage spent on consultants is higher than it's ever been. Over $400,000 of the $672,000 total spent was on consultants! This includes a photographer, videographer and legal fees.

RAM (Rebecca Mansour, "Aries Petra") is out! She was paid her regular $6,000 a month through August but nothing after that. Maybe after her speech endorsing Donald she realizes that hiring a speechwriter wouldn't be such a bad thing.

The rest of the regulars keep pulling their monthly salaries and expenses. The figures below are their semi-annual take:
  • Tim Crawford - $78,260
  • Grey Strategies - $66,722
  • Northstar Strategies - $56,610
  • Andrew Davis - $33,750
  • Two Wasilla รข€˜clerical' workers - $15,000 each
I usually don't comment on the money spent on fundraising and postage because fundraising is a significant part of any similar organization. But things are getting a little ridiculous. They spent $205,179 on postage and fees, $78,260 on Crawford, their treasurer, and $20,000 on Kingston, a fundraising consultant. That's over $300,000 spent to raise only $457,000!

Then there are the books. We all know Sarah's latest book is horrible and its sales were as well. The PAC buys $18,500 worth of books and Sarah must get a cut on the books that are 'sold' to people willing to give her $75. I'm assuming that even if all of these books aren't given as gifts for a donation, Sarah still gets to consider the books as 'sold'. What a scam!

The Website that Wasn't

I've always been shocked not just at the amount spent on consultants but at how little work the PAC actually does. The website is a perfect example of this. I have to quote from my previous Sarah PAC article from July of this year.
The level of lethargy with regard to the Sarah PAC site is unreal. When the redesign was done early in the year they didn't have any new content. They took three articles from November of 2014 and simply changed the dates to 2015. Right now, if you go to "All Posts" the third most recent one listed is entitled "Victory" and dated January 28, 2015. It starts out saying "Last night was huge." The night they're referring to was the election night last November!
For that they paid $43,000. Harris Media continued to charge $6-7,000 a month for a total of $33,868 this reporting period. The lethargy continues. She finally posted two items recently after a lapse of three months. One was her FB post dated today (Jan. 28) on how dramatic her endorsement was. The other is dated January 16 but was definitely not there last night (Jan. 27). It's links to a bunch of her old videos. But those are from this year so they really don't count.

For all of 2015 there are only 17 posts. However, five of these are actually from 2014 with the date changed to 2015. Sometimes these have such deep thought as:
Happy 225th Birthday to the U.S. Coast Guard! Thank you for serving our great nation!
Yes, that and the Coast Guard's logo is the whole post. The five posts where they changed the dates are still there and it's still obvious from these that they fudged the dates. I just noticed that there's one about Joni Ernst that is doubly bad. It's dated January 28, 2015 and begins:
Hello, Iowa! It's time to get out the vote for conservative Joni Ernst for U.S. Senate tomorrow, June 3rd. ...
Wrong election Sarah! Oh, and every single post going back to June 3, 2014 is 'Posted in New'.
If the nerd in me may comment, the web designer was so bad that they didn't set the post content to be below the header. See below. It's scrolled all the way up. Note the headline is covered up. Amateurish! Sarah should ask for her $33,000 back.

Click to enlarge:

It's like they know no one visits the site so they're not even bothering.

A Vacation from Travelling?

One thing that she's spent less on, other than something useful, is travel. While she spent over $37,000 on travel this is far less than the $85,000 spent in the first half.
But as we know, Sarah has big plans to travel again. From one of her latest emails:
In order to get Sarah to political events to support endorsed candidates we need your help to fundraise for her travel
Will you do so by contributing what you can here?
This is rich! (Pun intended.) A multi-millionaire is asking working people to give her money so that she can travel on chartered planes and stay in plush hotels so that she can help get a billionaire elected. A billionaire that is with a tax plan that"Is A Big Giveaway To The Wealthiest" according to Think Progress.

If you're not yet convinced that Sarah is one of the most selfish person that exists, let's put her question back on her:
Will you do so by contributing what you can here?
Sarah's answer is a resounding NO. I looked through a number of campaign statements and found that Sarah herself does not donate to candidates. Only the PAC does. We've also seen that almost every trip she takes is funded by the PAC.

Her latest grift of endorsing Trump is also a lesson in self-centeredness. Her only interest in Trump is to grab some of his celebrity status for herself.



Many, many thanks again to our wonderful reader VinnieF for writing yet another of his excellent "SarahPAC reports"...!

The "Center for Public Integrity" also published a very detailed report about the latest SarahPAC filings, and published a very interesting chart as well.  This chart is particularly fascinating, because it shows the "death spiral" of SarahPAC very clearly. The raised money as well as the cash on hand dropped sharply, but the spending increased a lot since 2013.

You could call it the SarahPAC closing sale! Everything has to go!

Click to enlarge:


I also find it very amusing that Sarah Palin uses the photo of one politician in particular on the SarahPAC website to raise money for her flights, consultants and whatever her needs are: Ted Cruz!

Click to enlarge:

Thursday, January 28, 2016

The Republican Clown Party, tonight, without Donald Trump: We won't miss him! UPDATE - Puppy Jake Foundation will be one of the organisations to benefit from Trump's Vet fundraiser

By Patrick

Just a quick one: The Republican Clown Party might be a little bit less crazy tonight without Donald Trump. MAYBE! Nobody knows for sure right now. We will see! Please leave your thoughts in the comments.

However, one thing is obvious: Nobody will miss America's biggest baby.

The debate starts at 7.00 p.m. ET and can be watched for everybody online (no restrictions) here.

"The View" had a great discussion about Donald the coward:

Therefore, not tonight - thankfully:


A representative from the Puppy Jake Foundation, a local Iowa non profit supporting vets,named Josh, has announced that the Puppy Jake Foundation will benefit from Trump's fundraising event for veterans this evening. Josh says that the Puppy Jake Foundation is a non partisan organisation which only cares about veterans and that it doesn't care what political views supporters have.

Readers here will recall that the Puppy Jake Foundation trained and supplied Sarah Palin with a dog. The dog named Jill was at the center of a huge controversy after Palin posted photos of Trig Palin using the dog as a stepping stool.

Palin recently endorsed Trump and she has appeared at several events in Iowa on his behalf. Trump has declared that Palin is "Vice Presidential material". Palin has also promoted the Puppy Jake Foundation on Facebook.

Nicole Shumate of Paws & Effect, which is also a local Iowa non profit which has successfully trained and supplied dogs to support returning veterans suffering from various disabilities, made the following statement.

"Paws & Effect believes that veterans deserve the utmost dignity and respect. Veterans should seek care from organizations that hold themselves in the highest regard, free from criminal conduct, free from corruption and free from practices that risk their nonprofit status."

Will update again tomorrow. 

Friday, January 22, 2016

Sarah Palin and Donald Trump - Comedy edition - Also, who ARE they anyway?

By Patrick

Yes, it's like the old days. Sarah Palin everywhere in the media, on twitter, just everywhere. Only much, much crazier. We always knew that she would not just go away, despite the fact that many people were convinced that she would just quietly fade into obscurity. But she won't. You have to deal with it, America, or "dill" with it, as Sarah Palin would say in her very own way of pronouncing the "American language."

Actually, the Washington Post observed today that the US media actually has no clue any more how to deal with Sarah Palin, how to think of her, how to interpret her actions:

What is the central Palin storyline right now? Let’s just say the nominees are more diverse than those for the Oscars. Some are downright contradictory. Others simply reveal a Palin-esque lack of focus by the media. In no particular order:

  • She’s backing Trump
  • This is a big deal
  • Meh, don’t be so sure
  • Her endorsement speech was nonsensical, “post-apocalyptic poetry”
  • Her endorsement speech was full of “substantive, logical reasons”
  • Hey, her son just got arrested on domestic violence charges
  • She blamed the arrest on her son’s military service
  • No, wait, she blamed it on President Obama
  • Her support for Trump legitimizes him as a conservative
  • Her support for Trump delegitimizes her own conservatism
  • She could be Trump’s running mate
  • No, no, she’ll get a different position in his administration
  • What was up with that sparkly sweater, anyway?

This is the thing with Sarah Palin: She is confusing absolutely everybody, because she is just an "image" of your imagination. From years of experience, we all know very well that only very few people recognized Palin for what she really is: The big fraudster from Alaska, the crazy woman who constantly gets away with outrageous actions. and who is also very successful in completely messing up her family. But for all others, she is just whatever they want to believe. This can go from "saviour of the nation" to "insane, unhinged, dangerous woman."

Anyway, I am starting to get a bit of the good old "Palin fatigue" after reading so much about her during the last few days, so let's focus on the one thing that really saves us when it comes to Sarah Palin: COMEDY!

There are cartoons, but there is more: "Salon" created an excellent "Rap-Remix" of Sarah's already infamous endorsement speech, it is more than obvious that her speech really should have been a "rap" in the first place.


Here is another nice cartoon:

Andy Borowitz at the "New Yorker" proved again that he is one of the nation's most gifted satirists:


Palin said that Obama insured her defeat in 2008 “just like he has defeated so many other great Americans,” and that her family had paid the price.

“I can’t help thinking that, if I had been elected Vice-President, Bristol and Willow wouldn’t have gotten into that drunken brawl and Track wouldn’t have threatened his girlfriend and whatnot,” she said. “Thanks, Obama.”

OK, let's get serious for a moment again. "Salon" again did an excellent job in calling out conservatives in their latest article. The right-wingers are just as confused as everyone else. Is Trump a liberal or a fascist? Both, actually, according to "anti-Trump" conservatives:

It’s no mystery why the National Review and their supporters hate Trump. He’s vulgar and embarrassing and he does an even better job of exploiting the right-wing rubes and their racism and their provincialism and their ridiculous sense of oppression than they do. They are, in other words, haters. And Trump dismissed them as the haters they are with ease during his press conference Thursday night where he called the National Review a “dead paper” that almost no one reads anymore.

This impression is driven home by actually reading the issue. The editors can’t quite seem to decide what their exact objections to Trump are. Is it that he’s driving the right too far in the direction of fascism or that he’s a secret liberal in disguise? Both! Whatever you need to hear! The strategy is argument through overwhelming. They’ll throw everything they’ve got, even contradictory stuff, at the reader and hope the sheer volume of words impresses them enough to vote for Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush.

The everything-and-the-kitchen-sink strategy produces some hilarious contradictions. The main anti-Trump editorial, written by the editors, darkly warns that Trump isn’t the racist that his followers think he is. “Trump says he will put a big door in his beautiful wall, an implicit endorsement of the dismayingly conventional view that current levels of legal immigration are fine,” they write, even trying to get the reader to believe that Trump’s mass deportation plan is “poorly disguised amnesty”.

But then, in the writer round-up, we’re hearing a different story. “Not since George Wallace has there been a presidential candidate who made racial and religious scapegoating so central to his campaign,” David Boaz sniffs, adding that America “aspired to rise above such prejudices and guarantee life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to everyone.”

So which is it, guys? Is Trump offensive because he’s too nativist or because he’s not devoted enough to keeping the foreigners out? Whatever will make you not vote for him, I guess.

Well, yes, what is it?

Nobody knows. We need many more Trump-speeches and Palin-speeches to find out. Live on ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and C-SPAN. The world depends on it!






This is very, very funny:






Yes, it's SNL, yes, it's Tina Fey!

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

In her speech at Donald Trump's rally in Tulsa today, Sarah Palin blamed the troubles of her son Track, following his arrest for domestic violence charges, on PTSD and on President Obama - However, Track's military discharge form gives no indication that he has ever seen combat

Track Palin: The troubled son (picture from Jordan Loewe's instagram page)

By Patrick

Sarah Palin spoke at the beginning of the Trump-rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, today. Several readers, myself included, were unfortunate enough to listen to her screetch. Instead of being home with her suicidal son Track, who assaulted his girlfriend Jordan Loewe two days ago and was arrested, Sarah Palin did something even more ugly: During her speech, she blamed PTSD and President Obama for the troubles of her son Track.

TIME Magazine reports;

Track Palin was arrested Tuesday and charged with assault, interfering with the report of a domestic violence crime and possessing a weapon while intoxicated. At the Trump campaign rally, Sarah Palin blamed the Obama administration’s policies towards veterans for abandoning her son. (Track spent a year deployed with the Army in Iraq.)

“I can talk personally about this, I guess it’s kind of the elephant in the room,” Palin said. “My son like so many others, they come back a bit different, they come back hardened, they come back wondering if there is that respect for what it is that their fellow soldiers and airmen and every other member of the military so sacrificially have given to this country. And that starts from the top. It’s a shame that our military personnel even have to wonder, if they have to question, if they’re respected anymore. It starts from the top. The question though that comes from our own president where they have to look at him and wonder, do you know what we go through? Do you know what we’re trying to do to secure America and to secure the freedoms that have been bequeathed us?”

“I can certainly relate with other familes who kind of feel these ramifications of some PTSD and some of the woundedness that our soldiers do return with,” Palin continued. “And it makes me realize more than ever it is now or never for the sake of Americas finest that we have that commander in chief that will respect them and honor them.”

In addition, the "Washington Post" reports:

Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin on Wednesday addressed her son's recent arrest — which she called “the elephant in the room” — while stumping here for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, and accused President Obama of neglecting veterans and tied that to her son’s recent domestic violence charges.

What has been Sarah Palin's "standard procedure" since she entered the national spotlight many years ago has been put into action again: She is a VICTIM, her family are VICTIMS, whatever happens, whoever is responsible, it is NOT HER, it is somebody else, usually Barack Obama. Actually, it is virtually always Barack Obama.

So Sarah Palin claims that Track has PTSD. But is this really true?

A thorough examination shows that his is very unlikely.

Track Palin' discharge form, the DD Form 214 provides no indication that Track was ever in combat.

Here is a copy of the form (click to enlarge):

The form was issued (signed) 01/29/2010 - it indicates his RESERVE OBLIGATION ended 9/10//2015. He was DISCHARGED from ACTIVE DUTY on 1/29/2010.

By far not every soldier who served abroad is in fact a "combat veteran."

The "Veteran Disability Blog" explains:

That was the case today when speaking with a Veteran about combat. His question was: "What exactly makes anyone a combat Veteran?" Some may be quick to say that serving in combat makes you a combat Veteran, but there is more to it than that.

The VA lists several different ways in which a Veteran can prove he or she was in combat.

· If you received a combat service medal, then you are considered a combat Veteran

· If you received hostile fire pay, imminent danger pay or tax benefits

· If you received military service documentation that documents combat theater

So, does serving in a foreign country automatically qualify me as combat Veteran? Not necessarily. Even if you served in Iraq or Afghanistan during the past ten years, it does not guarantee that you are a combat Veteran.

How can you find out? Well, your DD-214 is a great place to start. Your Discharge won’t automatically say that you were a combat Veteran though…that would be too easy. Box 13 on more modern DD-214’s is where they list medals, awards and ribbons. The VA does recognize certain medals etc. as a qualifier for combat service. (That list will appear in an upcoming blog.)

Also listed on your DD-214 is the type of pay you received. Box 18 would be the place to find out if you received Hostile Fire Pay, or the Imminent Danger Pay. It is important to note that this can appear in box 13, though it is rare for it to appear there.

An examination of Track's discharge form shows that he neither received a combat medal (in his case, this would have been the "Combat Infantryman Badge") nor received "hostile fire pay."

Information about the types of combat medals can be found here:

Therefore, Tracks's only chance to prove would be something that documents "combat theater", but the pure fact that he was stationed in Iraq seems to be a very weak claim for making him a combat veteran.

A report about Track's military service from October 2008 also does not mention combat.

I cannot find any reports that substantiate that Track has ever been in combat.

Therefore we rate Sarah Palin's "PTSD claim" as "Quittypants on fire" and also give her the "Bad Loser Medal" for still not coping with the fact that she lost the election to Barack Obama, and we think that she should care for her suicidal son instead of giving crazy speeches and also remove all the weapons from this home.

Over and out!





A dear friend found this comment at USA Today, which is really spot-on. I would just like to say in addition that asking for joint custody is actually no "offense" at all, and that Dakota Meyer has done nothing wrong at this point.

Note: It was not Sarah who remarked that a "real American hero doesn't ask for child support", but "Bristol Palin's representative" David Martin.

It should also be noted that Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer did in fact not ask for child support. This was false media reporting.



This performance by Stephen Colbert, celebrating the return of Sarah Palin, is already historic, which is strange, because it aired only yesterday:

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Sarah Palin is about to endorse Donald Trump, and the Palin-clan already starts a brawl with Ted Cruz - UPDATE: Just yesterday, Track Palin was charged with three serious charges of assault, including domestic violence! - UPDATE 2: Wasilla PD confirms that Track was arrested after he "committed a domestic violence assault on a female, interfered with her ability to report a crime of domestic violence, and possessed a firearm while intoxicated" - UPDATE 3: Read the devastating police report!

By Patrick

Yes, it is getting wild!!! It seems 99% certain that Sarah Palin is about to endorse Donald Trump in Iowa, given the fact that

a) the rumour is "everywhere"...

b) a private plane yesterday flew from Anchorage to Iowa

c) and finally, the Palins have already pretty much given it away, in a new post written by Nancy French aka "Bristol Palin", in which they slammed Ted Cruz because they were offended that they are about to endorse his opponent, despite the fact the "being offended" ought to be a "liberal thing", but who knows any more what is liberal these days, and what isn't? Nancy French aka "Bristol Palin" certainly appears to be quite confused on this issue!

Naturally, Sarah Palin tweeted "Bristols" post...

...but she probably did not expect that many conservatives are now shell-shocked, having to witness this new unexpected brawl between Trump and Cruz, with Sarah Palin / Bristol Palin / Nancy French vigorously punching for Donald Trump!

Sarah Palin - the woman who will NEVER go away!

This is going to be EPIC.



Gawker reports that Track Palin was charged with assault yesterday!


Per online court records, Track Palin, 26, was charged yesterday with assault, interfering with a report of domestic violence, and possession of a weapon while intoxicated. All three charges are misdemeanors. Here’s a screenshot of the charges as they appear online. Spokespersons with both the Wasilla Police Department and the district attorney’s office confirmed their existence.

Perfect timing, LOL!

Screenshots from the Alaska Court Records (click to enlarge):



Gawker has a update, and the story is getting more explosive by the minute:

The Wasilla PD issued the following press release regarding the incident:

On 01/18/2016 at approximately 2204 hours, Wasilla Police responded to a residence for a disturbance. An investigation revealed Track Palin had committed a domestic violence assault on a female, interfered with her ability to report a crime of domestic violence, and possessed a firearm while intoxicated. Palin was arrested and charges of assault in the fourth degree (domestic violence), interfering with a domestic violence report, and misconduct involving weapons in the fourth degree were forwarded to the District Attorney’s Office. Palin was held without bail until arraignment.


The devastating police report can be found here.

Screenshots (click to enlarge):

Sunday, January 17, 2016

The "authoritarians" are on the rise: How the "democratic disconnect" makes democratic societies "easy prey" for right-wing extremists like Donald Trump

“The receptivity of the masses is very limited, 
their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. 
In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda 
must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans 
until the last member of the public understands 
what you want him to understand by your slogan.”
Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf" 

By Patrick

The USA is heading with full speed into this fateful election year, and one thing seems already certain: This won't be an election like the previous ones. Even 2008 with Sarah Palin's demagoguery was most likely only a "mild prelude" to what is coming now. The leading Republican contenders are two extremists, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, and the "old GOP" is barely visible any more. The Republican base has been whipped into a frenzy, the obvious result of many years of relentless vicious right-wing propaganda. It appears that many Republicans now want the "real deal": A strong man who does not care too much about traditional views, but is willing to go to extreme measures to solve real or imagined problems.

In every democratic country there is a part of the population which is deeply distrustful of the democratic system. These people perceive the system as "weak" and favor the easy, quick solutions. Also, every country has a choice: Either a society pushes these people to the side, and treats them as outcasts, or you allow them to become part of the mainstream. Once they are in the mainstream, it is very difficult to get rid of these people again.

While "experienced countries" like Germany treat these people usually as outcasts, remembering very well how right-wing extremists once destroyed a German democracy and afterwards caused chaos and destruction all over the world, many people in a country like the USA are unfortunately much more open to treat these people as viable contenders for the highest positions in the country. These extremists like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz receive huge attention by the media, and their often ridiculous talking points as well as their shameless lies become part of the mainstream.

The "Transatlantic Academy", a US-German research organisation, published an extensive report in 2013 called "The Democratic Disconnect - Citizenship and Accountability in the Transatlantic Community." In this report,  the researchers provide an excellent summary of why Democracies are increasingly under threat (page 11):

Democracy is in trouble. The collective engagement of a concerned citizenry for the public good — the bedrock of a healthy democracy — is eroding. Democratic governments often seem crippled in their capacity to deliver what their people want and need. They are neither as responsive nor as accountable as they need to be in an era of hard choices and rising non- democratic powers.

There is widespread concern about apparent declining rates of voter participation and about the alienation or disaffection of citizens from the political process. In Europe, there is fear that the distance between ordinary citizens and the politicians and bureaucrats in Brussels compromises democratic legitimacy. In the United States, lamentations about gridlock and polarization are the order of the day. Canadians worry about the tendency of their political system to place largely unaccountable power in the hands of the prime minister.

Acute crises are putting political systems under stress, both in the United States after the 2008 financial crisis, and in Europe today. Angry demonstrations in Greece and elsewhere over externally enforced austerity programs inevitably raise questions about the stability of the democratic system itself. Citizens have ways of expressing themselves when their vital interests are being harmed — but increasingly in a manner that seems to challenge, rather than reinforce, democratic government. Democratic governments, for their part, frequently behave in ways that are incomprehensible to their citizens.

These two architectural features of liberal democracy — citizenship and governance — are connected, or ought to be. But today they seem increasingly disconnected.

Domestically, there is a deepening democratic disconnect between the formal government institutions of established and aspiring democracies, on one hand, and the lived democratic experience of their citizens, on the other. This report contends that both sides of this citizen-government relationship merit serious policy attention.

The democratic disconnect also shows itself in the international community’s half-hearted responses to persistent authoritarianism or to dynamic popular upheavals such as the Arab Spring. The engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan have left the very notion of liberal interventionism widely discredited. Democracy promotion is beset by self-doubt. The economic success of some rising nondemocratic regimes accentuates democracy’s malaise.

Established democracies in the West struggle to meet the demands of their people. Economic and financial globalization has been empowering for some citizens, but for many others, it appears to reduce government to a passive mediator between the demands of global financial markets and citizens’ expectations. Democratic governments themselves are hostage to the imperatives of international financial flows. Increasingly, we see the privatization of gain and the collectivization of pain. Meanwhile the global institutional infrastructure mutates from traditional multilateralism to “minilateralism” at a time when resilient institutions are ever more needed to address proliferating problems of global governance.

This report explains how the erosion of Democratic systems is a world-wide phenomenon, and unfortunately, a significant part of the society in the USA has become a "part" of this anti-democratic movement as well. The people who reject Democracy in its current form are now usually called "The Authoritarians." 

Seducing the disillusioned population: Nazi election poster from 1932 - "Our Last Hope - Hitler" 

Citizen in Berlin looking at this election poster

In December 2015, the online magazine "Vox" published excerpts from an extensive poll among Americans, showing that many US-citizens are not very keen on living in a Democracy any more.

The results of the research are actually truly shocking. Especially many young Americans apparently turn away from democratic values.


Just today, "Politico" published a very important article, explaining that there is one fact which unites the supporters of Donald Trump: The fact that they are authoritarians.

Politico writes:

If I asked you what most defines Donald Trump supporters, what would you say? They’re white? They’re poor? They’re uneducated?

You’d be wrong.

In fact, I’ve found a single statistically significant variable predicts whether a voter supports Trump—and it’s not race, income or education levels: It’s authoritarianism.

That’s right, Trump’s electoral strength—and his staying power—have been buoyed, above all, by Americans with authoritarian inclinations. And because of the prevalence of authoritarians in the American electorate, among Democrats as well as Republicans, it’s very possible that Trump’s fan base will continue to grow. My finding is the result of a national poll I conducted in the last five days of December under the auspices of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, sampling 1,800 registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate.

Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter.

Authoritarianism is not a new, untested concept in the American electorate. Since the rise of Nazi Germany, it has been one of the most widely studied ideas in social science. While its causes are still debated, the political behavior of authoritarians is not. Authoritarians obey. They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to “make America great again” by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations.

The power of the "authoritarians": Admiring the "strong man" who solves all the problems

There is a real danger in my opinion that "the authoritarians", the people who believe that problems should be solved with radical decisions by the government or the president, while ignoring the democratic process, will become more and more popular in the USA. Even if Donald Trump does not become President, there will be politicians who will be inspired by Trump's current success, and will try to imitate him. This is probably already happening.

The "old GOP" is already starting to disappear, but how will the "replacement" look like? It is obvious that a large part of the "base" is radicalized, and the "civil war" in the GOP will likely continue. My expectation is that eventually "the authoritarians" are going to take over the GOP, and this would be very bad news for the USA, and the world.

A very informative study about "The Authoritarians" can be found on the internet here, published by Canadian professor Bob Altemeyer already in 2006. His thoughts from 10 years ago read like a bad prophecy:

But why should you even bother reading this book? I would offer three reasons. First, if you are concerned about what has happened in America since a radical right-wing segment of the population began taking control of the government about a dozen years ago, I think you=ll find a lot in this book that says your fears are well founded. As many have pointed out, the Republic is once again passing through perilous times. The concept of a constitutional democracy has been under attack--and by the American government no less!

The mid-term elections of 2006 give hope that the best values and traditions of the country will ultimately prevail. But it could prove a huge mistake to think that the enemies of freedom and equality have lost the war just because they were recently rebuffed at the polls. I’ll be very much surprised if their leaders don’t frame the setback as a test of the followers’ faith, causing them to redouble their efforts. They came so close to getting what they want, they’re not likely to pack up and go away without an all-out drive.

But even if their leaders cannot find an acceptable presidential candidate for 2008, even if authoritarians play a much diminished role in the next election, even if they temporarily fade from view, they will still be there, aching for a dictatorship that will force their views on everyone. And they will surely be energized again, as they were in 1994, if a new administration infuriates them while carrying out its mandate. The country is not out of danger.

Yes, the USA is definitely not out of danger, and we will see during the course of 2016 whether our fears are justified. Let's just say that with "Trump-mania" in full swing, the year is off to a bad start.

(Many thanks to AnnetteK and junasie14 for providing the inspiration to this post!)