Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Strange Attractor: Donald Trump’s China Shop
Martin Gurri has written what I think is an interesting article in City Journal, Donald Trump’s Allure. I don’t know anything about Gurri, but he mentions his original aversion to Trump (who he once referred to as a “carnival barker” and a “master of disaster”), a mindset from which he has since recovered, the reasons for such recovery he explains in this essay.
He’s very on point about Trump’s physical courage, as demonstrated in Butler, PA last July, and I think he’s also right when he says, “[Trump] may be the only American politician who currently displays, and knows how to convey, a visceral affection for voters.” That was apparent to me in Trump’s exchanges at the drive-through, while he was “working” at McDonald’s last fall. Sure, the “customers” were selected and vetted beforehand, but the exchange between the Indian gentleman with his family who said “Thank you for making it possible for ordinary people to meet you,” and Trump’s response, without a moment’s pause for calculation of, “You’re not ordinary,” was nothing but genuine. As are his interactions with the mothers of American hostages, or the families of those killed in battle, or of those murdered by illegal aliens. Or even his heartfelt discussion with Theo Von about the horrors of drug addiction.
Feel free to compare any of these examples with Nancy Pelosi and her luxury ice cream stash, Elizabeth Warren and her “beer,” or John Kerry and his “huntin’ license.” And then tell me who’s the genuine article. (I exempt Tim Walz from the forgoing catalog because the list of his aberrations, and those of his wife [who opened the windows to inhale the scent of burning tires during the George Floyd riots, and who kept them open as long as she could because she felt it was “just such a touchstone of what was happening”], are so ludicrous and offensive as to leave even me at a loss for–all that many–words.)
What really made me chuckle, though, was the rest of Gurri’s explanation for his volte-face, in which he describes the “Trump effect” as something essentially out-of-this-world, one which defies the laws of space and time, and all the other laws of physics itself.
“For those too squeamish or skeptical to invoke the deity” (in relation to Trump’s uncanny ability to triumph over circumstances so adverse that they would poleaxe any normal human being), Gurri says:
I can produce a mathematical explanation: Trump is a “strange attractor,” an incarnation of coincidences so incredible that they would be rejected out of hand in the most preposterous Hollywood script. When he enters the room, the laws of probability that rule dynamic systems go haywire.
When I read that, I realized there’s been one other such in my life (and, on further reflection, that he, too, meets the standard in terms of physical courage and deep affection for the common man), and I commented on the Gurri article to that effect.
I often said about my father, “Things don’t happen to Dad. Dad happens to things.”
I think the same can be said of Donald Trump.
Gurri concludes his article thus:
The odds are massively against Trump replacing the existing system with one of his own—though, of course, there’s always that strange attractor force at work. But there will be no going back to some artificial version of the long-gone twentieth century; no reactionary fantasy world imposed by the analog mentality; no online censorship, no debankings, no politicized bureaucracy. We have crossed a boundary into the new, and we’ll have to deal with the consequences, fair and foul. The old is gone, not with the wind but with Joe Biden, the perfect symbol of senile government.
The causes of this epic collapse are partly structural and partly a matter of random luck. But much of the responsibility—credit or blame, depending on where you stand—falls on human agency, in the person of Donald J. Trump.
I think he is correct. And so I’m going to sit back and watch the next three-and-a-half years, always with fascination, sometimes with horror, sometimes with delight, and hope for the best. Donald Trump is the president, and a lifetime of experience tells me that wasting any portion of my life ranting about something he’s done or not done, wishing things were different, or even just the same as they used to be, and barking at the moon day in and day out, isn’t something a rational person of my age finds an enticing prospect.
Life’s too short. Or at least, what remains of it. (There’s gardening, and grandmothering, to be done!)
PS: The thought that I would hang any aspect of any post I ever wrote on any sort of mathematical theory (in this case, the strange attractor) is something that anyone who’s ever known me would find the height of preposterousness. However, I’ve read the first three paragraphs of the linked reference, and–since we live in a world where Gayle King, Lauren Sanchez, and Katy Perry pretend to the title “astronaut” and consider themselves “inspirational” because of their recent little ride up in the sky in their fancy designer suits–I think that, as a result of my strenuous effort in support of this post, I’m fully entitled to award myself a PhD in the field.
Published in General
Yes, the strange attractor theory I can go with because I was never really attracted to what our government has been delivering. I am enjoying watching the process of attempts to change that. I get some reaction to that position.
@EJHill 1:22 PM EDT ⋅ Apr 29, 2025
Are you? I hear a lot of Trump supporters talking about Trump’s value as entertainment. Putting the ChiComs on our northern border is hilarious, right? My 401K crash keeps me rolling in the aisles. It’s only money and survival, so why not enjoy the show?
Maybe two, if you want. Thanks for the interesting read. I zeroed in on this line about the position of a strange attractor and its effects.
The spelling error belongs to the scholars. Regardless, the “chaotic behavior” in Trump’s wake causes unease with those who believe or believed the system was secure and comfortable. I’ve previously mentioned this, but what you’ve done here is much better.
Donald Trump wrecks a certain type of person’s sense of security. This is not a bad person, but he or she will likely have a poor reaction to the perception of chaos. What is it? It’s viewing security as lack of change, or stillness. For my parents, security was 9-5 with one company for decades until retirement. This is what they wished for their children. That model was gone and even Dad was caught in the shift before I started a career. Even with Dad’s experience, it took more than a decade for them to admit things changed.
Security is navigating the chaos, not defying or denying it.
That’s what my wife and I think, anyway, and that’s why we started a small business. Some in our families think we’re doing acrobatics without a net. They all, by the way, dislike Trump. Their occupations match(ed) the model of security above. Any break from the stillness is a threat.
The wave is here. You can ride it or (try to) hide from it.
Excellent post, “She”. And superb essay. Thanks for sharing it.
At a couple of points while reading it, the following Eric Hoffer quote came to mind (boldings mine):
“In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.” — Reflections on the Human Condition, 1973
The author’s journey of self-reflection, allowing him to free himself of the comfort of long-held preconceptions, is one that not many people have the character to embark upon, and even fewer have the courage to publicize. He’s a Learning Man.
This passage from Mr. Gurri’s piece hits an important note, I think:
“[T]here will be no going back to some artificial version of the long-gone twentieth century; no reactionary fantasy world imposed by the analog mentality … We have crossed a boundary into the new …”.
Yup. Trump and “Trumpism” (whose short-lived predecessors, IMO, were the Tea Party movement (snuffed out by the Republican establishment) and the Occupy Movement (snuffed out by the Democrat establishment)) have sown the seeds of a new type of politics in our country, and there will indeed be no going back. Salena Zito, among a small number of others (e.g. Scott Adams) sensed it early, and wrote about it in her (and her co-author’s, Brad Todd) 2018 book, The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics.
My grandmother was like that. Somehow she didn’t have a problem with my brother the MD having his own practice, but me doing consulting/contract work in computers, somehow didn’t count in her world. In her world, you’re not “working” unless you’re working for someone else.
Congratulations to Mr. Gurri for discovering the charismatic charlatan. Donald Trump connects with people. So did Jim Jones. And Jim Bakker. And Jimmy Swaggart. And dozens of other people throughout history who drew large followings, many of which ended disastrously.
There’s an old saying that’s been attributed to everybody from French playwright Jean Giraudoux to George Burns: “Sincerity is everything. And when you can fake that you’ve got it made.”
Step into the Golden Tent and enjoy the show. The doors never close. Oh, we occasionally cordon off the lobby because of all the elephant manure. No, we don’t shovel it out, we just bring more in.
Can’t like this enough.
I watched all of the cabinet meeting yesterday, each cabinet secretary and major advisors and agency heads, and I didn’t hear of any ongoing effort to which I object or have mixed feelings about. Cannot get much better for me except the actual experience of accomplishment.
Of course you can’t. Because you’re entertained.
In the first 100 days of his first term, Donald Trump signed 28 pieces of legislation. This time he’s signed the Laken Riley Act, a continuing resolution and three pieces of the Congressional Review Act. His next piece of legislation is expected to be an anti-Deep Fake porn ban.
Everything else is ephemeral – executive orders that will wait for the next Democratic president to override them.
Trump is pushing the Congress to pass his “one big beautiful bill,” an omnibus piece of legislation where he can get a few things and hide all the bad stuff.
But,hey! Now we’ve added North Korean-style cabinet meetings where we go around the room and praise Dear Leader! More entertainment!
EJ, it doesn’t seem like you read the linked article.
I see the behavior you describe (the public praise of the leader, it has little appeal to me) but I heard each participant describe efforts that I favor.
The spending part of the “one big beautiful bill” is not available as yet. This is the important part of any new direction. It also has not been a very visible element in Trump’s stated positions so how much push he will engage in is a question. His involvement of DOGE and actions related to education, energy, and environment in this initial period is an encouraging sign. These prospects of improvements are what is entertaining, not Trump’s personal behavior, although he has obviously demonstrated admirable courage in this fight.
Democrat behavior is entertaining but very sad.
I did. It’s a testament to the force of personality and dumb luck. So, he moves the half-masses. Does he move the Congress?
@gpentelie half quoted something from the final paragraph. Let’s look at the whole line:
That’s a promise that can’t be met. No politicized bureaucracy? Have you been introduced to Brendan Carr at the FCC? Have you not witnessed the executive usurping what’s left of the Congressional power of the purse? No censorship? Who throws reporters out of the White House and replaces them with throne-sniffing podcasters, muscles his way into the editorial decisions of networks while threatening to withhold government permission for mergers and acquisitions that will save private, publicly traded businesses?
Again? Where’s the legislation? Where’s the permanence?
Double-barreled hate and anger don’t impress, so I could have read closer. I don’t disagree with some of it.
We’re all hungry for that permanence, and apprehensive about it. I’m with you fully on that. I do also appreciate that we wouldn’t be in a position to discuss permanent restriction of the bureaucracy were other personalities in leadership positions. So, continue to hate him, whatever, and do go on criticizing because it’s not all roses, but don’t pretend there aren’t reasons for appreciation. Or do. Go for it.
But God forbid you should criticize what you disfavor. Your friends may scream, “TDS!” and hit you with a pictogram.
What courage? He enjoys the brawl and the spotlight, not the work. Instead of hosting a televised slobberfest, he should be hosting Congressmen that can deliver him votes. Where is the legislation that’s going to abolish the Department of Education? And while USAID has been crippled, it’s not dead. That would take legislation. It’s just in hibernation until the next Democratic spring.
Meanwhile his head of DHS can’t even keep track of her purse, let alone keep an eye on the security of the nation.
By this time in 2021 Biden had increased the debt by $1.9T.
Biden did sign 42 Executive Orders and guess what? 21 of them drew lawsuits. And nationwide injunctions.
I wonder if you realize that, with each rhetorical expectoration like the above, you merely provide further validation for TDS characterizations.
First rule of holes is …
I wonder if you realize the above statement is true. Or do you only believe something after the meme takes hold?
Not what you think it is. The real lessons of holes is “survivorship bias.” Don’t look at the holes, look at what surrounds it. That’s where the vulnerability is. By seeking out the entertainment value as what you see as your opponent’s weaknesses, you ignore the real vulnerability to your own survival.
@gpentelie As an addendum to your “We are here” comment, I would remind you that your start date is a little off. Election Day was 77 days before that. And he’s not a novice to the office. That day was 8 years, 3 months and 9 days ago.
Do you think DJT so disrupts that he leaves no oxygen for others? Some of EJ’s comments come from a different angle, but are similar in concern. I don’t see much leadership coming from Congress, and it seems to me there are ample opportunities to step in and take ownership of some of these popular things. Not only that, but many of the changes do need legislation to be made permanent.
If Congress doesn’t already have those bills introduced, what are these jokers waiting for?
The courage began to show in 2016 and has been evident since.
President Trump is now demonstrating how much he has learned over that period when he showed the courage necessary to stay in the game.
I agree with your position that legislation is needed to make these corrective actions permanent but the Senate rules and the numbers today prevent most anything that cannot be addressed in the reconciliation process most all actions will be through EO’s and budgeting until the support base for action can overcome filibusters.
I never hear your agreement or any concurrence in the position held by me, and many others here, that our constitutional republican form of government is under attack by collectivists who push every day for absolute majority rule (they refer to it as “our democracy”, and it is theirs) and an extinguishment of individual rights including free speech and free agency.
Your credibility would be enhanced if you would distance your positions from those of our destructive Leftist mass media.
Precisely. One of the reasons I’m not escalating to DEFCON 1 and speaking shrilly. First, I can’t maintain such an effort for the next forty-four months, at which time I’ll be well on my way to my 75th birthday; second, I’m not so willfully blind that I insist on refusing to see some very good things that actually are happening; and third–as with constant invocation of vulgarities like the “F” word–sooner or later such heated and insistent outpourings lose their effect and people stop listening, at which point the only thing keeping me going, merely to please myself, would be pointless and inveterate spleen. And I’m just too old for that.
While such activities can be cathartic, and we can always console ourselves with the thought that our sense of outrage is “for the children” and in the common interest of humanity, I’d actually rather spend my time hardening the younger members of my family against the idiocies of the modern age, very few of which have been perpetrated by MAGAWorld, and very few of which come from Conservatives or the Right.
If that means that I have to throw in my lot with Donald Trump, a man in whom I find much with which to disagree and–occasionally–whom I find to be objectionable in many ways, then so be it. It’s been a journey for many, and I doubt I’m the only one on Ricochet who’s made it.
Maybe you’re limiting your timeframe, but I believe Biden signed 162 executive orders.
Trump’s going to have to get his skates on if he hopes to beat Teddy Roosevelt’s record of 1,081 executive orders over two terms. Currently, Trump appears to stand (as of April 20) at a measly 363.
There isn’t much leadership coming from Congress. But unlike some, I don’t think Trump is usurping Congressional authority; I think Congress has abdicated its authority, leaving a vacuum which recent Presidents have rushed to fill. Remember the President who said:
Hint for those with a one-track mind: It wasn’t Donald Trump.
Yes. And I recall a few weeks ago there was an accusation that Trump was manipulating the stock market through his actions with regard to tariffs. If anything, I would guess that there are multiple numbers of anti-Trump players from both political parties who possess market influence capabilities that could be in use to make Trump look as negative as possible.
What’s happening on Wall Street is not Donald Trump.
And many did not. Jesus Christ, for example. I think your comment #19 on “survivorship bias” may be relevant here in a way that’s not especially to your advantage.
I don’t think Trump was faking anything on July 13 in Butler, PA. I think that was real. And brave. Can you at least acknowledge that?
There’s something here about the old saying (sort of): “Better to have them inside the tent pooping out” than “outside the tent pooping in” that I am still trying to figure out…
Trump ain’t the only one playing five dimensional chess! Plan ahead and make sure you leave your purse in a place where it will be stolen by an illegal alien!!! 🤣🤣
When even CNN reports that the suspect was in the US “unlawfully,” then I think the story’s over.
I deliberately did not invoke names. But if you insist on comparing Trump to Jesus…
We’ve been around that bush multiple times. He was not exactly walking point in Fallujah.
When you figure it out let me know.
So, there really is nothing new, nothing bold or different that’s sweeping away the old of the 20th Century? No grand rebirth of Constitutional principles?
LOL. If anyone on this site compares Trump to Jesus, it won’t be me. What a bad faith, twisted and unpleasant comment.
Let’s recall what has gone before:
You said:
And you also–in another comment–referenced something called “survivorship bias” with a link to a Wikipedia post which I read. Here is what I took from it (it’s actually the lead-in for the page):
“Well,” thought I. “Here’s a person referencing all the persuasive lunatics and mediocrities (Swaggart, Bakker, Jim Jones) and so on,” and remarking that “dozens of other people, throughout history” have drawn large followings, “many of which ended disastrously.”
And so I simply say, “many [of those “throughout history who drew large followings”] did not” end disastrously. And cite Jesus Christ as an example of one such.
And you–somehow–get from this that I am equating or comparing Donald Trump to Jesus Christ.
What a cheap shot. Utterly unworthy of you, or the site for which you work.
One of the things that both the British, and the American, propaganda machines in WWII were so good at was in promoting the idea that acts of heroism could be performed by ordinary people. Mrs. Miniver. Rick Blaine. And so on.
When we lose our admiration for those ordinary people who–in extraordinary circumstances–rise above to act heroically and perhaps against their best interests and personal safety, then I think we’ve lost something as a society.
God bless all those who “walked point” in Fallujah. I’ve known a few of them myself. One is no longer with us. A couple are (I think) damaged beyond repair. A few others have managed to decompress and reintegrate into the larger society as a whole.
But there are–in real terms–very, very few of them. And as much as we must, and should, admire them for their exquisite bravery in combat, we should not be afraid to acknowledge bravery in others, in circumstances more familiar, and closer to home. The man who intervenes to stop a rape and is wounded or killed in the process: Well, I guess he’s “not exactly walking point in Fallujah.” The crowd that goes after, and subdues, the attacker of a senior citizen in Times Square: Well, I guess they’re “not exactly walking point in Fallujah.”
Your response, I think, simply amplifies my point.