“I’ve been trying to figure out why I’m more optimistic now than I was before the election, even though I was so against the guy who won. I know now. MAGA is not my mortal enemy (and neither is the extreme left). My mortal enemy is the establishment. And they have been defeated!” - He tweeted on Fri

As you can imagine, this is another advertisement for my favorite book. It points to the capricious nature of representative democracy. Election campaigns are fertile ground for manipulation by unscrupulous and powerful actors, or, as the author says, spin doctors and extreme interest groups.

or
2) A portion of voters, sufficient to determine the outcome of an election, are, on the contrary, excessively rational. They expect that the party in power will not fulfill most of its promises, and if they do, they will punish them.

However, later on, partly contradicting the original interpretation of the authors' idea of Democracy for Realists, voters punish the party when reality proves, that power is a harsh mistress and does not match their fantasies;

This may be described as reinforced bias, to minimize cognitive dissonance. When a person holds conflicting opinions or beliefs, voters adjust their views to those of their preferred party or avoid figuring out the party's position if it contradicts their own.

1) Only limited rationality confirms the idea of Christopher H. Achen and Larry Bartels about voting. Voters tend to base their decisions on party loyalty and use information to rationalize their own opinions rather than challenge them.

From this, we can conclude that voting for a particular party by participants in the tent has either:

However, the president's party faces severe punishment only if they controls Congress.

But you shouldn't eat up the trouble with quantity, but the details... as Latour taught, life is learning to distinguish increasingly subtle nuances of the environment in order to interact with it more accurately, so let's train our noses with wine and our minds with books.

However, while you are engaged in reassembling the worldview, you must live and overcome. Here it remains to put more emphasis on the usual everyday practices that were not destroyed, instead of abandoning them, they should be replenished with new ones. Rituals and simple pleasures are to help.

One of the options is to cast a wider net in philosophy, although many modern philosophers who can help build a very flexible system of worldview partly because of this speak in too birdlike a language of dispositives and habits, but you can start small or go with popularizers.

It is clear that emotionally such situations, especially if they are connected with close people, the foundations of self-identity, are extremely destructive, but what does not kill, let it make stronger.

But it is still good that we are sometimes forced to reconceptualize, to rationalize anew, and not to engage in simple self-deception.