It’s an epidemic. Among the cohort of my friends and relatives who consider themselves liberal, there is an almost universal reaction to the 2024 election: “I just can’t look at the news.” Conversations overheard in town express the same sentiment. The voice and image of the president-elect are so repugnant to many people that they can’t bring themselves to tune in.I have had a similar reaction, which is a problem for someone who has spent his career as a news professional and who still writes about politics from time to time. It made me think about what is different between 2016 and 2024.The election of 2016 was a shock, and the reaction to it was distinctive. The day after Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, Vermonters gathered in what may have been the largest protest demonstration in the state’s history. The Women’s March in Montpelier brought thousands to the steps of the State House, motivated in part by Trump’s history of abusive behavior toward women and his crass, misogynistic language. Similar demonstrations occurred throughout the country. And there were other issues of concern. Trump was planning discriminatory immigration policies, which led to his so-called “Muslim ban,” which in itself produced huge protest demonstrations.Now Trump has been re-elected despite the fact that he has been found liable in civil court for defaming the woman he was found to have raped. So much for the ardent feminism of the Women’s March. In fact, he was re-elected despite a long catalogue of crimes and misdemeanors that led to two impeachments. So much for liberal outrage.In the aftermath of the 2016 election, Vermont found itself with a Republican governor, but one who had no use for Trump. At the same time, Vermont Democrats grew in power till they had achieved supermajorities in the Legislature capable of overriding the governor’s vetoes. The state is represented in Congress by three progressive Democrats, most famously by Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is a national figure, but also by Rep. Becca Balint and Sen. Peter Welch. The state’s liberal, anti-Trump tendencies couldn’t have been more clear.And then this year, Vermonters re-elected Scott and turned out enough Democrats from the Legislature that the supermajorities will no longer exist. Trump gained ground among Vermont voters even if Kamala Harris’s margin of victory was still overwhelmingly large. So if liberal outrage and strong progressive leadership have ruled the day during the past eight years, at least in some quarters, it’s understandable that people might be tuning out the news after a second Trump victory. What makes sense anymore? READ MORE As for me, I am monitoring my anti-news attitude. My aversion stems in part from the fact that the news from Washington these days is so predictable. Of course, Trump was going to name sycophants, cronies and billionaires to important positions. Of course, outrage would arise about how poorly qualified these people are. In 2016 and 2017 Trump at least tried out a number of qualified people with experience in government; then when they didn’t do his bidding, he turned to sycophants and cronies. This time he’s skipping the first part of that process, going right to Matt Gaetz and Kash Patel.It seems I haven’t exactly tuned out the news. It keeps seeping in. And looming in the future are the crises that will inevitably occur and the incompetence of those in office charged with addressing them. It’s what happened before. There are reasons all of this is happening, and some of them are decipherable in Vermont. During the recent years of Democratic dominance, Democrats in the Legislature pushed their agenda against opposition from Scott, who found many of their proposals would be too costly. Thus, the state has not moved quickly enough or extensively enough on climate change, among other issues. Meanwhile, other problems have arisen that neither Democrats nor Republicans have been able to forestall, notably rising property taxes and high health care and housing costs. These problems, combined with the inflation that beset the nation in the last few years have have added to the burdens of most people. Thus, the 40-year-long trend toward greater economic inequality has only gotten worse.One can point out several things. For most Vermonters, their property taxes are keyed to their income, easing the burden. Also inflation has been brought mostly under control within the past year. And Biden’s policies have done much to boost employment and direct public spending to essential needs. But economic hardship remains, and incumbent politicians are the ones who usually pay the price when that is so.Vermont’s cycle of change between Republicans and Democrats has been consistent. Ever since the 1960s when Vermonters elected their first Democratic governor since the Civil War, the governorship has passed back and forth between parties: from Philip Hoff to Deane Davis to Tom Salmon to Richard Snelling to Madeleine Kunin to Richard Snelling to Howard Dean to Jim Douglas to Peter Shumlin to Phil Scott. This year Scott was re-elected and the Legislature, still dominated by Democrats, has become a friendlier place for Republicans. Notably, the incumbent Progressive and Democratic lieutenant governor, David Zuckerman, lost to John Rodgers, a Democrat who turned Republican.But the shift in Vermont was not a Trumpian moment. It was a typically Vermont-like pendulum swing. At the national level our new Trumpian moment is likely to be one of unending crises. Battles over immigration, trade, tax policy and the anti-government fervor of Trump’s followers will ensue, and new economic hardship is likely to occur. Meanwhile, the Middle East and Ukraine are enduring and challenging problems with broad international implications.Thus, as events unfold over the next few years, it will be hard for people to remain impervious to the news. At the same time, it will be all the more important for people to hold closely to the democratic values that eschew violence and promote equality and fairness. The news is going to happen, and attention must be paid.Read the story on VTDigger here: David Moats: The election and the anti-news impulse.