I seen it... with my EYES
I’ve encountered a few Trump supporters in my life. Some are family, some are friends, and some used to be friends, but were so disgusted by my political affiliation that they decided to shun and excommunicate me.
Folks in my community that wear Trump hats and shirts tend to be old, white men with a chip on their shoulder. They seem to have brash, abrasive attitudes toward everyone around them. In 2020, I stood in a grocery store in Banks, OR and heard an old, white Trump supporting country yokel exclaim to everyone within earshot, “All these mask mandates over a goddamn election!”
My own dad can’t help but speak negatively about Joe Biden when I talk on the phone with him. Additionally, I’ve seen posts from folks I’ve connected with online that lack any kind of compassion for anyone that opposes their political beliefs. Conservative Oregonians have additionally voiced their disdain and hatred of previous governor Kate Brown, going so far as to call for her execution.
Trump supporters proudly display all sorts of offensive products that tear down other Americans that don’t follow their political ideology.
“If you’re offended, I’ll help you pack.”
LGBT = Liberty, Guns, Beer, Trump
“Let’s go Brandon” = code for Fuck Joe Biden
Right Wing Death Squad
“FUCK YOUR FEELINGS”
These products are designed to provoke, offend and be purposely confrontational. They display explicit profanity, are mass produced and designed to humiliate or threaten, and are intended to be worn in public spaces as provocation. They’re historically abnormal and were not the norm before Trump.
Visual Evidence
What would happen?
I’ve always imagined what might happen if I were ever face to face with a Trump supporter, whether family, friend or stranger, and I imagine what I would say to them if they confronted me about why I don’t like Trump and the Republicans.
Of course, I would need to be ready with concrete evidence, and 100% factual, irrefutable truth about Trump’s wrongdoings that even a conservative couldn’t deny, as they are so prone to doing. One cannot simply make the same quick jabs and lighthearted quips that come from the likes of Jimmy Kimmel, Seth Meyers, or Jon Stewart.
What I need is documented proof that can’t be disputed. God knows, they will try. The problem with conservatives is that they attempt to invent their own reality even though the truth is staring them in the face. They’re so befuddled and misled, they’ll swallow anything FOX news throws at them and consider every other source to be fake. When Biden was president, there were massive groups that thought Trump was still president.
I found 8 absolutely un-spinnable facts that prove Trump and his cronies have done a bunch of bad shit and they need to get out of the White House immediately.
Perceived Threats to Democratic Norms & Institutions
After losing the 2020 election, Trump repeatedly tried to overturn the results by pressuring state officials and promoting baseless fraud claims. This included urging Georgia’s Secretary of State to “find … 11,780 votes” to flip the state. THIS ALONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH TO NEVER LET HIM RUN AGAIN. Wikipedia
Trump and allies pushed fake electors in several states and unsuccessfully sought to replace certified election results with pro-Trump slates. Wikipedia
Many observers (including law scholars/political scientists) see these efforts as attempts to subvert the normal democratic transition of power.
Example: Controversial Jan. 6 PardonsOn his first day back in office, Trump pardoned or commuted over 1,500 people charged in the January 6 Capitol attack — including leaders of extremist groups — which critics say effectively excuses an assault on constitutional processes. Vox
False or Misleading Statements & Erosion of Trust
Example: Repeated False Claims About Migration and Crime
Trump has repeatedly made demonstrably false claims about immigration, such as asserting migrants include “terrorists” and “mental patients,” and that crime has risen, despite official data showing otherwise. Wikipedia
Example: “Big Lie” Election Claims
Trump’s persistent assertion that the 2020 election was stolen — called the “big lie” — was rejected repeatedly in court and by election officials, but was widely amplified and spread, contributing to public distrust in electoral processes. Wikipedia
Polarizing Rhetoric and Social Division
Example: Calling the Press the “Enemy of the People”
Trump labeled major news organizations (including The New York Times, CNN, and others) the “enemy of the American people,” a phrase historically associated with authoritarian regimes and used repeatedly on social media. Wikipedia
Example: Polarizing Language That Correlates with Division
Academic and analytical reporting has documented that Trump’s aggressive and divisive language correlates with increased hostility against targeted groups (racial/ethnic minorities, media, political opponents). Perspectives on Terrorism
Age & Fitness for Office (Capacity/Leadership Concerns)
This point isn’t based on a single event but on consistent public polling showing broad concern about Trump’s age and cognitive fitness to govern — “too old” or “not mentally sharp enough” a persistent theme in global and U.S. polls.
Foreign Policy and Global Stability
Example: Retreat from International Human Rights Engagement
The Trump administration withdrew from various UN human rights processes and mechanisms, pursued a selective approach to international standards, and scaled back U.S. leadership in global human rights forums. Council on Foreign Relations
Example: Strained International Perceptions
Experts noted that these moves weaken the U.S.’s global advocacy role by reducing credibility and leadership capacity on human rights internationally — something critics argue undermines global stability and norms. Council on Foreign Relations
Immigration & Human Rights Concerns
Example: Family Separation and Zero-Tolerance Policy
Under the 2018 “zero-tolerance” immigration policy, the U.S. forcibly separated thousands of migrant children from their parents at the southern border — widely condemned as a human rights violation by legal scholars and institutions. International Society for Human Rights
Example: Harsh & Restrictive Immigration Enforcement
Human Rights Watch and other groups have criticized Trump’s immigration policies for dismantling asylum pathways and creating barriers to refugees and migrants worldwide. Human Rights Watch
Example: Report of Deportees Enduring Abuse
A 2025 Human Rights Watch/Cristosal report found hundreds of Venezuelans deported under Trump’s policy suffered systematic torture and abuse in Salvadoran detention — raising international human rights outcry. The Guardian
Political Violence and Social Climate
Example: Connection Between Rhetoric and Violence
Research and reporting link Trump’s aggressive rhetoric with increases in threats, intimidation, and actual physical violence against groups he targeted. Perspectives on Terrorism
Example: Recent Congressional Comments
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar explicitly tied Trump’s repeated personal attacks to a climate of political violence, citing threats against her and others that intensified with his rhetoric. The Guardian
Personal Conduct and Respect for Norms
Example: Staging a Controversial Photo Op Following Force
In June 2020, Trump ordered federal forces to clear peaceful protesters from Lafayette Square with force just so he could walk to a church for a photo op — widely condemned domestically and internationally as a violation of rights and norms. Wikipedia
Example: Defamation Lawsuit Against BBC
In December 2025, Trump sued the BBC for $10 billion over how his January 6 speech was edited — an extraordinary legal move that critics saw as weaponizing libel litigation to stifle press coverage. AP News
The Icing on the Shit Cake
Even though these 8 points demonstrate how despicable and selfish Trump is, there’s one thing he’s done that makes me absolutely livid:
His actions inspire his followers to become more aggressive against fellow Americans to the point of violence.
Trump normalized behavior that previously carried social penalties, signaling to some supporters that aggression, intimidation, and contempt toward “out-groups” was acceptable or even patriotic.
FBI data (verifiable)
FBI hate crime statistics show a significant increase starting in 2016, immediately after Trump’s election.
Hate crimes rose three consecutive years after 2016, reversing a prior downward trend.
Source: FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program
Key point: The spike is real and measurable.
Researchers at the FBI and Southern Poverty Law Center both flagged 2016–2018 as a turning point.
Perpetrators explicitly citing Trump during attacks – – Examples (verbatim statements, court records, police reports):
Post-election assaults where attackers explicitly invoked Trump
Victims reported being told things like:
“Trump is president now”
“Go back to where you came from — Trump will deport you”
These statements appear in police reports and court filings, not social media hearsay.
Source: DOJ Civil Rights Division summaries; SPLC incident tracking
This is not “media interpretation.” These are recorded statements from attackers.
LGBTQ+ violence tied to emboldened rhetoric
Example pattern (documented):
LGBTQ+ advocacy groups and law enforcement documented attackers citing Trump-era rhetoric or political slogans during assaults.
GLAAD and Human Rights Campaign reported sharp increases in harassment and physical attacks between 2016–2020.
Important nuance:
The attackers are a minority, but they became louder and more brazen, often acting in groups, sometimes displaying Confederate flags or MAGA symbols.
Charlottesville: the clearest single case
Charlottesville (2017)
White supremacists openly marched with:
Confederate flags
Nazi symbols
Pro-Trump slogans
One counter-protester was killed.
Trump’s response (“very fine people on both sides”) became a global symbol of perceived tolerance for extremist behavior.
This event is universally cited in political science literature as a legitimization moment for extremist groups.
Militia groups and “patriot” violence
Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and similar groups
These groups explicitly celebrated Trump’s election as validation.
Many members stated they felt they were now “defending America” against fellow Americans.
Court records from January 6 prosecutions show:
Members believed Trump’s presidency authorized or justified violence.
This is not speculation — it’s in sworn testimony.
Anti-mask violence and intimidation
Documented examples:
-
Mask mandates led to:
-
Assaults on retail workers
-
Threats against school officials
-
Armed intimidation at public meetings
-
-
Perpetrators frequently framed defiance as:
-
“Freedom”
-
“Trump supports us”
-
“This is tyranny”
-
Key point:
This wasn’t simple disagreement — it was aggressive noncompliance, often escalating into violence.
Political scientists: the “permission structure” effect
Researchers describe a “permission structure”:
When leaders model contempt, aggression, or dehumanization, followers who already hold those views feel permitted to act on them.
Studies from:
- Stanford
- Princeton
- University of Chicago
- Trump rallies or messaging
- Increases in hate incidents in surrounding areas
Correlation does not equal causation, but the pattern is consistent across datasets.
Trump’s presidency lowered social restraints for some people.
A subset of supporters interpreted his rise as:
Permission to intimidate
Permission to harass
Permission to “put others in their place”
That deepened internal division and increased fear among targeted Americans
Vice President JD Vance
At Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest in Phoenix (Dec 2025), Vice President JD Vance said:
“In the United States of America, you don’t have to apologize for being white anymore.”
AP reports he said this while celebrating ending DEI and rejecting “purity tests,” in a moment where the conference was also dealing with controversy around antisemitic figures and “platforming” debates. AP News
That matters because the line isn’t floating in space. It’s being used as a cultural victory claim: our side is in charge; the old rules are over.
Mechanism 1: Status-threat framing
The phrase “apologize for being white” is a status grievance claim: it implies that social norms and institutions have been unfairly punishing white identity. That framing re-categorizes equality efforts as anti-white persecution, which inflames group competition thinking (“us vs them”).
This is exactly the kind of “zero-sum” framing Vance explicitly leaned into at AmericaFest (AP describes his anti-DEI theme and his rejection of red lines over bigotry at that event). AP News
Mechanism 2: Permission structure
When high-status leaders say “you don’t have to apologize anymore,” that’s not just reassurance. It functions as a norm signal: social restraint is no longer required. Social science finds that leader rhetoric can shift expressed prejudice and behavior by changing perceived norms. ScienceDirect+1
Mechanism 3: Affective polarization
Division isn’t only disagreement on policy. It’s rising dislike/hatred of the other side as people. Pew has documented increases in partisan animosity and “very unfavorable” views of the opposing party in the modern era (including during the Trump period). Pew Research Center+1
- targets outsiders or dissenters as illegitimate
- treats conflict/escalation as strength, not as civic failure.
- validates a racial grievance narrative (“we were forced to apologize”)
- celebrates a reversal of social constraint (“anymore” implies a regime change)
Once Upon a Time
There was a time when Presidents could simply disagree with one another instead of threatening their opposition with harm, imprisonment or death.
Presidents of days past never posted videos on social media of themselves flying a jet over an opposing party to dump shit all over them.
Presidential candidate John McCain defended Barack Obama when a woman made false accusations against him during a debate. Trump would never do that.
The radicalization that Trump ignited the country with is the fire that separates me from those I used to call family and friends.
Furthermore, if someone calls themselves a Christian, how could they continue to uplift such a disgraceful sinner?
It’s more than what Trump does and how he does it.
It’s who he is, right down to his core.
One last thing...
...about what may come.
I don’t have a crystal ball.
I can’t predict the future.
Speculation isn’t always productive. Feelings are not facts.
ALTHOUGH, there are bits and pieces of evidence that point to future possibilities.
As I’ve been paying attention to articles, posts and videos I’ve seen on the internet recently, there are a few interviews, quotes and happenings that make me concerned, and they seem to be pointing toward…
...Trump attempting a third term.
He can't do that, can he?
It’s illegal for any President to serve a third term.
Unless the constitution is changed.
How likely is it that Trump and his posse would try to change it? Not at all.
They’re not gonna cancel the Constitution. They desensitize first.
How?
- Normalizing the unthinkable
- Testing institutional resistance
- Signaling loyalty hierarchies
- Creating leverage, not certainty
How do we know? Let’s look at Trump’s track record:
- He attempted to overturn the election that HE LOST
- Pressured state officials to change the outcome
- Supported alternate/slate elector schemes
- Refused to concede
- Encouraged a mob that disrupted certification
He’s testing the public’s tolerance for third-term talk. That’s DOCUMENTED.
Steve Bannon claims there’s a “plan” for 2028.
Trump has discussed third-term constitutionally with Alan Dershowitz.
Gavin Newsom has been sent Trump 2028 hats repeatedly.
The man who claimed the 2020 election was fixed, tried to fix it himself.
In the year 2028
Which devious ploy is most feasible with the highest success rate?
- Trump does not run in 2028
- A loyal successor runs (Vance? Who would vote for him? Answer: No one.)
- Trump remains the true power holder by playing kingmaker, fundraising nucleus, media focus and threat vector against defectors
It might work because:
- There’s no constitutional fight
- GOP elites keep their jobs
- Trump keeps influence and protection
- Courts mostly stay out of it
In The End
Even though a third elected term is unconstitutional, impossible and ridiculous, an attempt to force a constitutional crisis is plausible.
Whatever Trump’s plan is, Republicans will go along with it because the cost of defiance is higher than the cost of compliance.
All that bullshit about Trump 2028 isn’t about the ballots in the future, it’s about growing his power NOW.
Democracies don’t usually fall because everyone agrees to end them.
They erode because too many people decide resistance isn’t worth the trouble.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
