In Diana Taylor’s article titled “The Politics of Passion”, she states that, “by politics of passion, then, I refer to the mobilization of affect for political ends on collective, structural, and trans-ideological levels that skirt the traditional organization of political parties and practices (such as lobbying and voting)”. This highlights the current political situation in the States and in other countries, where there is an establishment of “passion politics” which aim to de-politized political movements and create a space where these movements thrive on emotions. People gathering together to protest a common goal has been a form of bringing change to a political and moral change, however currently there are many representations of gathering bodies to present an ideological change, that may not be the norm that gathering bodies reflected in the past. In this technological age, different movements are spread widely on the internet, which creates a different space for this kind of mobilization. Thus, “while flesh bodies expand into their electronic and digital bodies, the balance between online and off does not always work in the same way”. Many of these online movements do not function in the same ways as the mobilization of bodies in a public space, it also is a form a spreading information quickly, where the traditional media outlets exclude from their platforms. In Benjamin Arditi’s article, he addresses the way in which insurgents have bridged the gap between the traditional media and the use of technology in their political movement. They provide a passionate movement that reminiscent of this sense of hope and bringing something new, there is something that is coming and will be present soon. Therefore, “tactics and practices devised by activists become part of a collective political know-how, a political jurisprudence of sorts that functions as a toolbox available for anyone else to use”. This furthers the movements of these groups because there is an archive left for many with the same ideological background can use to continue the movement and keep mobilizing bodies in the technological space. On the hand, Trumps presidency is marked by online performative politics, where twitter is now his place for putting out his ideas and catering to his base. This strategy is very effective for him and it blurs the line between him as a president and his accessibility to the public in various forms. Thus, “Trump occupies what Donald Pease has called a “short circuit” in a network within which the potential for liberation and domination cross” (p. 40 Brian T. Edwards).