They’re arguably authorized by the US to signal displeasure with Zelensky, but since Zelensky is perceived as “too big to fail” by the US (for now at least) amidst the “war of attrition” against Russia, the US is unlikely to ever escalate such protests into a Color Revolution and Zelensky knows this.
Not just authorized; they need to be financed. And I suspect they're so cheap, they don't have be financed by a government; it could be non-governmental actors. Actors who can't be held down by Z-gang: Soros, or, who knows, some Rinat Akhmetov or something. It'll probably cost you ten bucks per head to recruit some students to hang out in the city center. 10,000 students - $100K/day, less then $1mil/week. For a multi-billionaire it's like a hundred bucks for you and me.
I find it hard to believe that the U.S. needed these demonstrations to pressure Zelensky to do anything. Zelensky a frequent guest in Washington where he gets his marching orders. I don’t doubt that the demonstrations were staged, I just think they were for other reasons.
Ukrains for your own good WAKE UP. The west is trying to push you down the drain. Remember you & the Russians are identical pople. Same DNA, Orthodox religion, Alphabet. Every day words are identical.
"The US requires political stability in Ukraine amidst the intense “war of attrition” that’s now being waged against Russia." Ukraine is anything but stable these days. Just yesterday, Zelensky dismissed the Ukrainian Ambassador in the US. Politicians and military commanders are turning on themselves; turnover is high and they are either getting sacked, are resigning and/or are getting implicated in corruption scandals. For the first time since the war broke, I am starting to see how the war of attrition against Ukraine will lead to the defeat of Ukraine by making it a failed state.
There have been leadership and other shuffles before without that impeding Ukraine's war effort. The SBU has politicians and military commanders under control, at least for now. Prior scenarios of them destabilizing the country (even if only inadvertently) and thus creating openings for Russia, which I myself admittedly entertained some time ago since they seemed credible, are not realistic at the moment from as far as can be told based on public info.
I agree that Ukraine is becoming a failed state, but it's dictatorship is still very strong, the only exception being the Achilles' heel of US-backed protest movements that have the power to force the SBU to back down and let them continue demonstrating. It's this factor, in my opinion, which is the most important of them all since it could hypothetically be activated to take Zelensky out one day.
There's also an opposition movement forming against Zelensky comprised of various malcontents from his government ranging from Zaluzhny to his former aide Mendel to Arestovich, who aren't working together just yet, but could form part of a "popular front" during future elections to decisively take down Zelensky by winning a large enough margin that's "too big to rig" (and if there's any rigging, a US-backed Color Revolution will begin).
Ukraine is already a failed state that only holds on thanks to Western IV drips. The Russian blockade of the Black Sea—about which no Western media is talking—in the middle of the harvest season, is ruining farmers, the last activity still functioning. Ukraine is now landlocked, with a increasingly hostile Poland to the north, and a rather hostile Slovakia and Hungary to the west.
Romania-Bulgaria-Greece could realistically serve as a corridor for Ukrainian agricultural exports given new logistics for connecting them with Ukraine from 2022 onward.
The domestic political consequences of the Black Sea blockade could also be managed by the SBU UNLESS the US decides to weaponize farmers' protests for whatever reason.
It's premature to expect that, however, with Trump doubling down on Ukraine this summer and whatnot, but it might become more possible by the end of summer, perhaps mid-September/early October.
Sorry, but no. No corridor through Romania-Bulgaria, nor via the Danube, nor by rail, can replace either the volumes handled by the Black Sea ports (and especially not the grain) or the cost prices offered by those ports.
You're right, but it's not the impossible situation that you made it seem like, it can still function as a pressure valve for getting some grain to market. It's already being used for arms imports and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the grain is either subsidized by EU or allowed to enter the EU (possibly through Romania) for export via its own Black Sea ports, if not Greece's Mediterranean ones.
After all, Ukrainian grain is getting to Black Sea ports through routes that don't exclusively involve rail since not every Ukrainian farm is next to a railway, so the only difference would be extending the length of time and distance between farm and port (Romania, Bulgaria, or Greece), which could include EU-funded subsidies for Ukrainian farmers or privileged access to some European markets via Romania or (today relatively more EU-friendly) Hungary.
I just don't see the EU allowing Ukrainian farmers to go bottom-up, nor the US for the matter after how much gigantic American agricultural firms have reportedly invested in that country's farmland. They've invested so much already so I don't expect them to just give up now, let that industry go to waste, and possibly have that catalyze an even more intense and possibly partially uncontrollable protest movement like Poland's earlier farmer one.
I don't think MAGA, generally speaking, is increasingly rallying to Ukraine. I think Trump has disgusted a large part of MAGA supporters—precisely those who were in favor of an agreement with Russia. What remains of MAGA is the fascistoid core of its white supremacist supporters and other fanatical evangelicals, who have always been Russophobic. MAGA isn't rallying; MAGA is shrinking.
If you hadn't said it, I would have. I don't think "MAGA" is turning towards Ukraine. What I'm observing is that there's two groups who originally supported Trump - the Zionist Evangelicals and the true "MAGA" types - and the pro-Ukrainian sentiment is growing geometrically right now among the evangelical Christians. They're completely wrapped up in their weird sky god eschatology; I think more than anything it's AI that's accelerated their delusions because they threw Skynet and a Terminator end to the world on the bonfire of their mental disorders.
And there is some overlap between the MAGA and Christian Zionist crowds. So it *appears* that support for Ukraine is increasing among MAGA-types, when it's actually driven by the doom culters.
I disagree. The Christian Zionists focus more on the Middle East than Ukraine and see Kiev as an impediment to the "Greater Israel" project. Ukraine has gone out of its way to not offer meaningful, verifiable support to the Iran war (the drone offers to the Gulf Arabs were evidently insignificant, given a dearth of reports since March or so).
Proof of this is Zelensky rejecting Trump's strikes on Iran last year, saying high oil prices would aid Russia's SMO. I need not go into the claims that Ukrainian officials helped arm Hamas and Hezbollah before 7 Oct 2023 either; there is enough evidence that Kiev has always been cool on the Iran conflict (unlike the pro-Israel Christians):
I grew up in "flyover country". I have a good number of hard-core evangelical Christian Zionists in my circle of lifelong friends. They've spread out across the country over a lifetime, and we stay connected on Facebook. They're as obsessive about posting agitprop of various kinds as the leftists in my professional circle who I've connected with over the years on FB. I also see the opinions and profiles of their church circles by the comments on their posts and looking at the profiles of people they're reposting. I have a curious mind; I'm not interested in "converting", but trying to understand how other people (and especially groups of people) think.
The pro-Ukraine support in that crowd is ubiquitous. At least a third of them have Ukrainian symbols in their profile headers, and all of them post pro-Ukraine and anti-Russian content occasionally. This isn't a single megachurch or group, either, as far as I can tell it's fairly representative of the evangelical movement writ large.
These people are highly propagandized. It may be that Zelensky aided Hamas (which I doubt, Ukraine and Israel are wed at the hip as far as I can tell - Zelensky's parents live just north of Gaza, why would he be involved in endangering their lives with arms for Hamas?). But if Zelensky did arm Hamas or Hezbollah, news of that would never reach American evangelicals. And it wouldn't be believed if it did reach them; it would simply span a million memes denying it.
MAGA is first and foremost a cult. Anything Trump is for, they are for. Until Trump is against it.
Witness, to give one example, how the same people clamored for the release of The Epstein Files, only to insist that there were no files and they needed to be kept secret because Trump changed his tune, once he realized that *he* would be implicated.
There is no proof that the Epstein files "implicate" Trump in anything, given that eyewitnesses have refused to testify under oath. Short of testimony there is no legal basis to corroborate the many Epstein–Trump claims.
The fact that Trump was for their release until Bondi (who had been waving around folders which were purportedly "files" a day or so earlier) notified Trump that he was prominently named, after which he fought tooth and nail against their release should tell you all you need to know.
I think you let your leftist bias cloud your judgment. I am quite critical of Trump too, but from other angles, so I view the matter through other lenses.
Trump's problem is that he is a fraudulent "right-winger", not that he is a child molester, fascist, or any of the other charges the DNC left brings against him.
If there were truth to the Epstein claims, people would have testified about them UNDER OATH. They—the alleged "victims"—have refused to do so.
You don't address my point. Accusations of bias are what one does when the facts are not in your favor. What you imagine my ideology to be has nothing to do with it.
I am sure that people are eager to testify UNDER OATH against drug lords, the CIA, mafia bosses, etc. as well.
Since there's no membership card, defining who is "MAGA" is a bit nebulous. But it's not a cult, at least not in my understanding of it and relationship to it. It's a minority in the group of people who are at least "not left" / "not Democrat" who share several main issues:
- Opposed to further immigration, support deporting illegals in the country
- Oppose further foreign wars in the Middle East, especially on behalf of Israel
- Oppose "wokeism" in general, especially homo-everywhere-all-the-time and tranny stuff
There's probably more, but I think that's the core. Jewish elites are scared to death of the rise of a nationalist movement - that's what Breitbart is all about and designed to subvert - and MAGA is one vehicle it could travel in. So there is *all kinds* of serious, organized, coordinated manipulation of the "movement". Look what they did to the Tea Partiers; that previous nationalist attempt was completely subverted, and ended up putting a bunch of neocons in office under their banner. How exactly did that happen?
Your understanding of the globalist "left"'s take on Israel is, in my view, simply wrong, as is the view of a "Jewish" elite. The same Ds who support mass migration, ID politics, and the Ukraine war also want to isolate Israel; just look at Mamdani's base.
Zionists and the "woke" left are at odds on foreign as well as social policy, the latter arguing that Trump wants to spend too much on Iran instead of globalist pet projects such as DEI or "decolonization", be it in Palestine or Ukraine. The left is also socialist...
There is a split in the Jewish power structure between Zionists and globalists. Soros belongs to the latter and has a record of opposing Israeli policy; just look at the rash of Soros fronts backing "intersectional" anti-Zionism as part of "woke" politics (BLM etc.).
Jewish people support mass migration. In general, we're safer in multi-cultural societies where no one ethnic group is able to absolutely dominate power. Liberal Jews (which is a polite moniker for Reformist Ashkenazi) are ambivalent on Israel right now. There's the issue of the genocide making all Jews look bad, and inciting anti-Semitic sentiment as well as the moral issues.
But there's also the issue of Israel being taken over by fundamentalist Hasidim. There are one or two Ashkenazi in that camp, but the Mithrazi (Arab Jews) and Sephardi (Spanish and North African Jews) are nearly synonyms for the Orthodox. And Ashkenazi share almost nothing in common with them. They now dominate Israeli politics, and the turning point is final due to demographics (we have 1.2 children per woman, they have like 9).
Western Ashkenazi are leaving Israel and are not going back over it. The Ashkenazi left in Israel are the Ukrainian and Russian refuseniks and later emigres, but they're probably just going to die out in Tel Aviv and surrounding areas (like Zelensky's parents). Their birth rate is extremely low; no one's coming to replace them and bolster their numbers; and at least they have a couple of cities on the coast to retreat to and dominate.
What I see is the MAGA base has completely abandoned Trump, and those who appear loyal and still wearing the red hats are Christian Zionist evangelicals who support subservience to one foreign power.
I don't see anyone who supported Trump on his policy positions and also opposed further foreign wars on behalf of Israel saying nice things about the President. For my own part, I've never voted Democrat in my life - and I'm pulling a straight blue ticket this November. Nothing they support could be worse than what Trump has done, and I want to see him impeached and convicted for what he's done.
Don't miss the forest for the trees as far as who really supports Trump at this point.
Sounds like you are trying to distinguish "MAGA" (which you seem to define as those who support what you think are Trump's policies) from Trump's actual supporters, most of whom are, yes, evangelicals. The
"No True Scotsman" fallacy.
I won't go into dissecting this (didn't you say that "MAGA" has no membership?), but Trump has no real policy positions other than Trump, which is why he changes his policies as convenient. You can find an example of Trump being for or against just about anything.
After so many flips and flops, it should be obvious. I had it figured out in 2016. Anyone who still supports Trump after so many flips and flops is a cultist. And they exhibit all the cognitive dissonance one sees in a cult member.
That said, Trump has been the greatest electoral gift to normie politicians everywhere. They may be rightly hated, but they can tell their electorates that if they vote for a populist, this unfunny clown is what they will get.
I don't know why these can't be organic, more or less.
The increase in strikes on Kiev has made the war much more real.
When they complain about corruption, what they mean is that if it were not for corruption, Russia would not be striking Kiev regularly now, interrupting their life. That's more of a hope on their part than a fact of course.
"the arguably US-authorized protests"
Not just authorized; they need to be financed. And I suspect they're so cheap, they don't have be financed by a government; it could be non-governmental actors. Actors who can't be held down by Z-gang: Soros, or, who knows, some Rinat Akhmetov or something. It'll probably cost you ten bucks per head to recruit some students to hang out in the city center. 10,000 students - $100K/day, less then $1mil/week. For a multi-billionaire it's like a hundred bucks for you and me.
I find it hard to believe that the U.S. needed these demonstrations to pressure Zelensky to do anything. Zelensky a frequent guest in Washington where he gets his marching orders. I don’t doubt that the demonstrations were staged, I just think they were for other reasons.
The attached photo shows mostly young faces.
Ukrains for your own good WAKE UP. The west is trying to push you down the drain. Remember you & the Russians are identical pople. Same DNA, Orthodox religion, Alphabet. Every day words are identical.
"The US requires political stability in Ukraine amidst the intense “war of attrition” that’s now being waged against Russia." Ukraine is anything but stable these days. Just yesterday, Zelensky dismissed the Ukrainian Ambassador in the US. Politicians and military commanders are turning on themselves; turnover is high and they are either getting sacked, are resigning and/or are getting implicated in corruption scandals. For the first time since the war broke, I am starting to see how the war of attrition against Ukraine will lead to the defeat of Ukraine by making it a failed state.
There have been leadership and other shuffles before without that impeding Ukraine's war effort. The SBU has politicians and military commanders under control, at least for now. Prior scenarios of them destabilizing the country (even if only inadvertently) and thus creating openings for Russia, which I myself admittedly entertained some time ago since they seemed credible, are not realistic at the moment from as far as can be told based on public info.
I agree that Ukraine is becoming a failed state, but it's dictatorship is still very strong, the only exception being the Achilles' heel of US-backed protest movements that have the power to force the SBU to back down and let them continue demonstrating. It's this factor, in my opinion, which is the most important of them all since it could hypothetically be activated to take Zelensky out one day.
There's also an opposition movement forming against Zelensky comprised of various malcontents from his government ranging from Zaluzhny to his former aide Mendel to Arestovich, who aren't working together just yet, but could form part of a "popular front" during future elections to decisively take down Zelensky by winning a large enough margin that's "too big to rig" (and if there's any rigging, a US-backed Color Revolution will begin).
Ukraine is already a failed state that only holds on thanks to Western IV drips. The Russian blockade of the Black Sea—about which no Western media is talking—in the middle of the harvest season, is ruining farmers, the last activity still functioning. Ukraine is now landlocked, with a increasingly hostile Poland to the north, and a rather hostile Slovakia and Hungary to the west.
Romania-Bulgaria-Greece could realistically serve as a corridor for Ukrainian agricultural exports given new logistics for connecting them with Ukraine from 2022 onward.
The domestic political consequences of the Black Sea blockade could also be managed by the SBU UNLESS the US decides to weaponize farmers' protests for whatever reason.
It's premature to expect that, however, with Trump doubling down on Ukraine this summer and whatnot, but it might become more possible by the end of summer, perhaps mid-September/early October.
Nobody cares about Ukrainian exports. Ukrainian imports are of concern to everyone.
Sorry, but no. No corridor through Romania-Bulgaria, nor via the Danube, nor by rail, can replace either the volumes handled by the Black Sea ports (and especially not the grain) or the cost prices offered by those ports.
You're right, but it's not the impossible situation that you made it seem like, it can still function as a pressure valve for getting some grain to market. It's already being used for arms imports and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the grain is either subsidized by EU or allowed to enter the EU (possibly through Romania) for export via its own Black Sea ports, if not Greece's Mediterranean ones.
After all, Ukrainian grain is getting to Black Sea ports through routes that don't exclusively involve rail since not every Ukrainian farm is next to a railway, so the only difference would be extending the length of time and distance between farm and port (Romania, Bulgaria, or Greece), which could include EU-funded subsidies for Ukrainian farmers or privileged access to some European markets via Romania or (today relatively more EU-friendly) Hungary.
I just don't see the EU allowing Ukrainian farmers to go bottom-up, nor the US for the matter after how much gigantic American agricultural firms have reportedly invested in that country's farmland. They've invested so much already so I don't expect them to just give up now, let that industry go to waste, and possibly have that catalyze an even more intense and possibly partially uncontrollable protest movement like Poland's earlier farmer one.
I wrote this in early 2024 and it's still relevant:
https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-polish-president-revealed-that
I don't think MAGA, generally speaking, is increasingly rallying to Ukraine. I think Trump has disgusted a large part of MAGA supporters—precisely those who were in favor of an agreement with Russia. What remains of MAGA is the fascistoid core of its white supremacist supporters and other fanatical evangelicals, who have always been Russophobic. MAGA isn't rallying; MAGA is shrinking.
If you hadn't said it, I would have. I don't think "MAGA" is turning towards Ukraine. What I'm observing is that there's two groups who originally supported Trump - the Zionist Evangelicals and the true "MAGA" types - and the pro-Ukrainian sentiment is growing geometrically right now among the evangelical Christians. They're completely wrapped up in their weird sky god eschatology; I think more than anything it's AI that's accelerated their delusions because they threw Skynet and a Terminator end to the world on the bonfire of their mental disorders.
And there is some overlap between the MAGA and Christian Zionist crowds. So it *appears* that support for Ukraine is increasing among MAGA-types, when it's actually driven by the doom culters.
I disagree. The Christian Zionists focus more on the Middle East than Ukraine and see Kiev as an impediment to the "Greater Israel" project. Ukraine has gone out of its way to not offer meaningful, verifiable support to the Iran war (the drone offers to the Gulf Arabs were evidently insignificant, given a dearth of reports since March or so).
Proof of this is Zelensky rejecting Trump's strikes on Iran last year, saying high oil prices would aid Russia's SMO. I need not go into the claims that Ukrainian officials helped arm Hamas and Hezbollah before 7 Oct 2023 either; there is enough evidence that Kiev has always been cool on the Iran conflict (unlike the pro-Israel Christians):
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-iran-israel-zelenskyy-ba2a52ce82897f16f76f52d4b8e53b34
I grew up in "flyover country". I have a good number of hard-core evangelical Christian Zionists in my circle of lifelong friends. They've spread out across the country over a lifetime, and we stay connected on Facebook. They're as obsessive about posting agitprop of various kinds as the leftists in my professional circle who I've connected with over the years on FB. I also see the opinions and profiles of their church circles by the comments on their posts and looking at the profiles of people they're reposting. I have a curious mind; I'm not interested in "converting", but trying to understand how other people (and especially groups of people) think.
The pro-Ukraine support in that crowd is ubiquitous. At least a third of them have Ukrainian symbols in their profile headers, and all of them post pro-Ukraine and anti-Russian content occasionally. This isn't a single megachurch or group, either, as far as I can tell it's fairly representative of the evangelical movement writ large.
These people are highly propagandized. It may be that Zelensky aided Hamas (which I doubt, Ukraine and Israel are wed at the hip as far as I can tell - Zelensky's parents live just north of Gaza, why would he be involved in endangering their lives with arms for Hamas?). But if Zelensky did arm Hamas or Hezbollah, news of that would never reach American evangelicals. And it wouldn't be believed if it did reach them; it would simply span a million memes denying it.
MAGA is first and foremost a cult. Anything Trump is for, they are for. Until Trump is against it.
Witness, to give one example, how the same people clamored for the release of The Epstein Files, only to insist that there were no files and they needed to be kept secret because Trump changed his tune, once he realized that *he* would be implicated.
There is no proof that the Epstein files "implicate" Trump in anything, given that eyewitnesses have refused to testify under oath. Short of testimony there is no legal basis to corroborate the many Epstein–Trump claims.
The fact that Trump was for their release until Bondi (who had been waving around folders which were purportedly "files" a day or so earlier) notified Trump that he was prominently named, after which he fought tooth and nail against their release should tell you all you need to know.
I think you let your leftist bias cloud your judgment. I am quite critical of Trump too, but from other angles, so I view the matter through other lenses.
Trump's problem is that he is a fraudulent "right-winger", not that he is a child molester, fascist, or any of the other charges the DNC left brings against him.
If there were truth to the Epstein claims, people would have testified about them UNDER OATH. They—the alleged "victims"—have refused to do so.
You don't address my point. Accusations of bias are what one does when the facts are not in your favor. What you imagine my ideology to be has nothing to do with it.
I am sure that people are eager to testify UNDER OATH against drug lords, the CIA, mafia bosses, etc. as well.
Since there's no membership card, defining who is "MAGA" is a bit nebulous. But it's not a cult, at least not in my understanding of it and relationship to it. It's a minority in the group of people who are at least "not left" / "not Democrat" who share several main issues:
- Opposed to further immigration, support deporting illegals in the country
- Oppose further foreign wars in the Middle East, especially on behalf of Israel
- Oppose "wokeism" in general, especially homo-everywhere-all-the-time and tranny stuff
There's probably more, but I think that's the core. Jewish elites are scared to death of the rise of a nationalist movement - that's what Breitbart is all about and designed to subvert - and MAGA is one vehicle it could travel in. So there is *all kinds* of serious, organized, coordinated manipulation of the "movement". Look what they did to the Tea Partiers; that previous nationalist attempt was completely subverted, and ended up putting a bunch of neocons in office under their banner. How exactly did that happen?
Your understanding of the globalist "left"'s take on Israel is, in my view, simply wrong, as is the view of a "Jewish" elite. The same Ds who support mass migration, ID politics, and the Ukraine war also want to isolate Israel; just look at Mamdani's base.
Zionists and the "woke" left are at odds on foreign as well as social policy, the latter arguing that Trump wants to spend too much on Iran instead of globalist pet projects such as DEI or "decolonization", be it in Palestine or Ukraine. The left is also socialist...
There is a split in the Jewish power structure between Zionists and globalists. Soros belongs to the latter and has a record of opposing Israeli policy; just look at the rash of Soros fronts backing "intersectional" anti-Zionism as part of "woke" politics (BLM etc.).
Jewish people support mass migration. In general, we're safer in multi-cultural societies where no one ethnic group is able to absolutely dominate power. Liberal Jews (which is a polite moniker for Reformist Ashkenazi) are ambivalent on Israel right now. There's the issue of the genocide making all Jews look bad, and inciting anti-Semitic sentiment as well as the moral issues.
But there's also the issue of Israel being taken over by fundamentalist Hasidim. There are one or two Ashkenazi in that camp, but the Mithrazi (Arab Jews) and Sephardi (Spanish and North African Jews) are nearly synonyms for the Orthodox. And Ashkenazi share almost nothing in common with them. They now dominate Israeli politics, and the turning point is final due to demographics (we have 1.2 children per woman, they have like 9).
Western Ashkenazi are leaving Israel and are not going back over it. The Ashkenazi left in Israel are the Ukrainian and Russian refuseniks and later emigres, but they're probably just going to die out in Tel Aviv and surrounding areas (like Zelensky's parents). Their birth rate is extremely low; no one's coming to replace them and bolster their numbers; and at least they have a couple of cities on the coast to retreat to and dominate.
And yet Trump betrays his promises over and over again, but MAGA remains loyal.
Yeah, that's a cult.
Facts is, Trump has no principles other than Donald Trump. Yet his cult follow him like he was Jim Jones.
What I see is the MAGA base has completely abandoned Trump, and those who appear loyal and still wearing the red hats are Christian Zionist evangelicals who support subservience to one foreign power.
I don't see anyone who supported Trump on his policy positions and also opposed further foreign wars on behalf of Israel saying nice things about the President. For my own part, I've never voted Democrat in my life - and I'm pulling a straight blue ticket this November. Nothing they support could be worse than what Trump has done, and I want to see him impeached and convicted for what he's done.
Don't miss the forest for the trees as far as who really supports Trump at this point.
Sounds like you are trying to distinguish "MAGA" (which you seem to define as those who support what you think are Trump's policies) from Trump's actual supporters, most of whom are, yes, evangelicals. The
"No True Scotsman" fallacy.
I won't go into dissecting this (didn't you say that "MAGA" has no membership?), but Trump has no real policy positions other than Trump, which is why he changes his policies as convenient. You can find an example of Trump being for or against just about anything.
After so many flips and flops, it should be obvious. I had it figured out in 2016. Anyone who still supports Trump after so many flips and flops is a cultist. And they exhibit all the cognitive dissonance one sees in a cult member.
That said, Trump has been the greatest electoral gift to normie politicians everywhere. They may be rightly hated, but they can tell their electorates that if they vote for a populist, this unfunny clown is what they will get.
I don't know why these can't be organic, more or less.
The increase in strikes on Kiev has made the war much more real.
When they complain about corruption, what they mean is that if it were not for corruption, Russia would not be striking Kiev regularly now, interrupting their life. That's more of a hope on their part than a fact of course.
Fixed, thanks for catching that!