How can Trump-believers be persuaded that he lost an honest election?

[Ray-VIgo]

Something that's a little ironic, and the die-hard Trump people would not admit to, is that Trump's post-election strategy in Georgia may have actually hurt rather than helped the Republican candidates. From what I saw, and it seems part of his character, is that he would not pull back and focus on winning Georgia. Instead he would ramble on about how the election was "stolen" or about lawsuits, or about recounts. He seemed unable to set aside himself and focus on winning the swing voter, or the pro-Republican voter being ginned up into thinking that the whole thing was a "fraud" and that he should stay home.

His rallies had (and perhaps always had) a combination of tent revival, circus sideshow, and live infomercial. He's one part preacher, one part Barnum, one part QVC host at the rallies. But when the moment came to transcend himself and to focus on the task in Georgia, he fell short. He had the power to occasionally make a prescient point, but then a sentence later or a day later undermine his own position. He fought with a number of people who supposedly were supposed to be allies - Mattis, Bolton, Spicer, Preibus, Barr, Sessions, etc. Plenty of people were willing to hear a populist message, but many people were also turned off by the chaos and constant bickering with anyone and everyone within reach.

I am not sure what the future history of biographies and books and essays about the "historical Trump" will be, or whether there will ever be a "historical Trump". Perhaps it is all so controversial that he will never fully pass into history, but will remain a contentious figure permanently. I cannot, at least for now, see a "neutral" biography of Trump in 50 years' time, but that may just be the perspective of the present.