Donald Trump is now openly threatening to strip U.S. citizenship from his critics, including public figures like Rosie O’Donnell. This is not a joke, a distraction, or an exaggeration. It is a direct challenge to the Constitution, and a test balloon for how far his administration can go.

CNN reports that O’Donnell had responded and wrote on Instagram, “you want to revoke my citizenship? go ahead and try, king joffrey with a tangerine spray tan. i’m not yours to silence. i never was.”

There’s a reason why his so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill” increased the ICE budget to an astronomical $150 billion—more than the annual budgets of the United States Marine Corps and the Russian military. That is not a coincidence. It is a reflection of priorities. Instead of focusing on education, health care, or housing, Trump is building out a massive internal force for surveillance, intimidation, and domestic policing.

His supporters are openingly calling for the death of Latinos (e.g. Loomer) and Native Americans (e.g. Coulter).

There’s also a reason why ICE is now arresting American citizens under vague charges like “resisting arrest” or “obstruction of justice.” These are the same charges long used to target civil rights protesters and marginalized communities. But now, their use is expanding under the Trump regime. According to an upcoming legal ruling, the administration has been racially profiling U.S. citizens, particularly Latinos, Muslims, and Black Americans. They are being detained, surveilled, and in some cases deported—despite being legal citizens.

At the same time, political dissent and free speech are being systematically suppressed under the guise of national security. Universities are being pressured to silence students. Protesters are being criminalized. Books are being banned. Public employees are being told to keep quiet or face retaliation. The message is clear: if you criticize this administration, you will be punished.

We are not witnessing isolated incidents. These are coordinated steps toward authoritarianism. And they are accelerating.

This is why dissenters are facing a dark road ahead. You must prepare. Know your rights. And yes, in today’s America, you may even need a disappearance plan. If that sounds extreme to you, ask yourself why stripping people of citizenship or punishing dissent no longer does.

“I Didn’t Vote for This”

Now come the rationalizations:

• “I didn’t vote for this.”
• “I thought he wouldn’t really do what he said.”
• “I only voted for him because the other person was worse.”
• “There was just one issue I cared about.”
• “I didn’t think it would go this far.”

You’ve heard these statements. Maybe from friends. Maybe from family. Maybe even from your own mouth. They often emerge right after a politician does exactly what he promised—only now, the consequences are undeniable, deeply unpopular, or horrifying.

This kind of response is not innocent confusion. It is weaponized incompetence.

What Is Weaponized Incompetence?

The first time I heard the term used in a political context was in a tweet by Jemele Hill. She used it to describe the willful ignorance and strategic naïveté that some voters adopt when it is time to face the consequences of their decisions. The phrase is powerful because it names a widespread habit: pretending not to know better in order to avoid responsibility.

The term is more commonly used in relationships or workplaces. For example, when a man claims he’s “bad at laundry” so his partner ends up doing it. Or when a boss fakes disorganization so others have to take on the extra labor. It’s not real confusion. It’s a performance—one that benefits the person pretending to be incompetent.

In politics, it works the same way. It’s the willful decision to ignore what a candidate has clearly said and done. It’s pretending that campaign promises weren’t explicit. It’s acting shocked when a leader keeps their word—when that word was cruel, regressive, or authoritarian from the start.

Voting Is a Responsibility, Not a Vibe

Too often, voting is treated like ordering off a menu. “I’ll take the tax cut, but hold the racism.” But that’s not how power works. When you vote for someone, you don’t just vote for their best ideas—you vote for all of them.

If you cast a ballot for someone who promised to ban books, criminalize abortion, target immigrants, restrict LGBTQ+ rights, or dismantle public education, and you’re now “surprised” they’re doing those things, that’s not betrayal. That’s follow-through.

Campaigns, debates, interviews, and policy documents made it plain. If you chose not to listen or to brush it off, that was your choice. And now others are paying the price.

The “Lesser Evil” Trap

Weaponized incompetence also hides behind the phrase “lesser evil.” “I didn’t like him, but the other side was worse.” That logic may offer emotional comfort in the voting booth, but it has real-world consequences.

It lowers the bar. It signals to politicians that they can be as harmful as they want, as long as they’re not quite as “bad” as their opponent. It tells voters that performance matters more than principle. And over time, it allows extremism to become the new normal.

Identity Isn’t Immunity

Some people vote based on shared identity—race, gender, religion, culture. Identity matters. It shapes how we understand the world. But identity is not a guarantee of justice. Weaponized incompetence often looks like assuming someone who “looks like me” will govern in my interest, without checking their record or platform.

Representation without justice is just performance. It looks good in photos. It sounds nice in speeches. But if the policies are harmful, identity cannot excuse them.

Many of us are not shocked. We warned people. Advocates, scholars, journalists, and communities on the front lines spelled out exactly what would happen. We were called dramatic. We were told to calm down. We were dismissed. Now those warnings have come true. And still, some voters are pretending to be surprised. This is not about hindsight. This is about whether you were willing to listen.

Ignorance Is a Choice

The people who voted based on principle, justice, and policy are still here. We are not checking out. We are organizing. We are showing up. And when our candidates fall short, we hold them accountable. Because democracy requires participation. Weaponized incompetence, on the other hand, walks away from the mess and says, “I didn’t know.” But we all know that’s not true.

This is not just annoying behavior. It is strategic. Weaponized incompetence is a tool that protects the powerful. It allows voters to excuse their role in electing dangerous leaders. It turns ignorance into immunity and distances people from the consequences of their choices. It is not just an excuse. It is a permission slip for injustice.

So What Now?

If you’ve ever said “I didn’t vote for this,” ask yourself: Did I read the policies? Did I listen to the people who would be most affected? Did I take the time to learn? This isn’t about shame. It’s about responsibility. It’s about growth. If you’re confused, ask questions. If you’re unsure, look deeper. If you’re overwhelmed, reach out to someone with lived experience. Ignorance can be overcome. Apathy is much harder to fix.

And the next time someone says, “I didn’t vote for this,” do not let it slide. Ask them what they plan to do now. Because democracy is not self-correcting. It depends on all of us being honest, engaged, and accountable. Especially now. Pay attention. Authoritarianism is not coming. It’s already here.