Widespread economic fear from debt and inflation creates a national 'fight or flight' mode. This anxiety is emotionally taxing, so people convert it to anger. Politicians exploit this by providing specific targets for that anger, mobilizing a populist base.

In analyzing a public scandal, Scott Galloway notes that the greatest damage in a crisis typically isn't the initial event but the subsequent "shrapnel": the attempts to cover up, excuse, or avoid accountability. An effective response requires acknowledging the problem, taking responsibility, and overcorrecting.

A political party might intentionally trigger a government shutdown not to win policy concessions, but to create a public narrative of a dysfunctional opposition. The true victory isn't legislative but reputational, aiming to sway voters in upcoming elections by making the ruling party look incompetent.

Much of government functions on decorum and unwritten rules. When political actors attack these norms—like challenging procedural traditions—it creates a cycle of retribution that destabilizes the entire system more profoundly than any single illegal act could.

Cheering for a president to use executive orders or emergency powers is short-sighted. The opposition will eventually gain power and use those same expanded authorities for policies you oppose, creating a cycle of escalating executive action.

An administration has no incentive to fully resolve a major public scandal because its unresolved nature makes it a perfect "red herring." It can be used repeatedly to distract the public and media from current policy failures or other damaging news, making perpetual ambiguity more politically useful than transparency.

The Epstein Transparency Act passed with near-unanimous, immediate support because voting against it has terrible optics. This contrasts with typical legislative delays, revealing how politicians prioritize public perception and speed when the "right" side of an issue is obvious to voters.

Effective political propaganda isn't about outright lies; it's about controlling the frame of reference. By providing a simple, powerful lens through which to view a complex situation, leaders can dictate the terms of the debate and trap audiences within their desired narrative, limiting alternative interpretations.

The War Powers Resolution's 60-day limit is triggered by "hostilities." The Obama and Trump administrations exploited the term's ambiguity, arguing that military actions like drone strikes against an enemy that cannot retaliate do not count as "hostilities," thus avoiding the need for congressional authorization.