Well, the biggest problem with Trump, IMHO -- and strangely, the one thing that gives me a little hope for the future -- is that he isn't just a horrible person and a dangerous dictator, he's a very *charismatic* horrible person and *entertaining* dangerous dictator.
When he walks off the stage, there will be plenty of understudies as bad or worse than him in terms of policy, etc. But no one else (at the moment) seems to have that undeniable ability to be entertaining while being awful.
So yeah, let's put Vance out there more often! Once he's the lead, the show will close in three nights!
Well, the biggest problem with Trump, IMHO -- and strangely, the one thing that gives me a little hope for the future -- is that he isn't just a horrible person and a dangerous dictator, he's a very *charismatic* horrible person and *entertaining* dangerous dictator.
When he walks off the stage, there will be plenty of understudies as bad or worse than him in terms of policy, etc. But no one else (at the moment) seems to have that undeniable ability to be entertaining while being awful.
So yeah, let's put Vance out there more often! Once he's the lead, the show will close in three nights!
I agree with @windsofchange. trump has a weird draw for many in the US. Plus a strange ability to get the whole world talking about him. Meat and drinks to a toddler attention seeker.
Well, presumably, @Boogie meant the type of individual likely to come to power in the US political system.
By the time Trump and the SCOTUS have finished dismantling the US Constitution, what real defence will exist to protect the USA from an even more extremist populist leader?
So could there be some kind of revolution or uprising against Trump. I mean in a land with easy access to guns I hope not, political solutions are much better. But if the American people are pushed far enough could it happen. After the storming a few years ago I am not sure it isn’t.
Authorities have alleged the teams and the stockpile of arms were designed to get weapons into Oath Keepers’ hands quickly if they were needed to support a plot to stop the transfer of power from Republican Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden.
I'd rather he had backbone where Ukraine is concerned, or even just where Trump is concerned. He should resign and be like John Bolton except without being John Bolton.
Why has Marco Rubio sold his soul? He seemed slightly better than that.
What gave you that impression? I'd honestly discourage people from looking at things via a kind of 'shades of grey' framing, the people inside the administration know exactly what it is about, to the extent there is infighting it's largely to protect any part of the state that they currently monopolise.
I mean, why did he sell his soul by accepting a role in the administration. When he was running against Trump in the 2016 primaries he could clearly see that Trump was bad. And he had been strongly pro-Ukraine over the past decade. But he has sold this out to become a despicable lackey.
I mean, why did he sell his soul by accepting a role in the administration. When he was running against Trump in the 2016 primaries he could clearly see that Trump was bad. And he had been strongly pro-Ukraine over the past decade. But he has sold this out to become a despicable lackey.
He sold out long before accepting a role in the administration.
So could there be some kind of revolution or uprising against Trump. I mean in a land with easy access to guns I hope not, political solutions are much better. But if the American people are pushed far enough could it happen. After the storming a few years ago I am not sure it isn’t.
The trouble is that the political faction that's most enthusiastic about private gun ownership is also the one that's most loudly in support of the president.
This is kind of a paradox of American politics. Many of the folks who are most excited by the idea of overthrowing the state with violence are the ones who are most likely to cozy up with a poorly regulated police state.
This is kind of a paradox of American politics. Many of the folks who are most excited by the idea of overthrowing the state with violence are the ones who are most likely to cozy up with a poorly regulated police state.
Just as long as the police state is persecuting the right sort of people, of course.
Authorities have alleged the teams and the stockpile of arms were designed to get weapons into Oath Keepers’ hands quickly if they were needed to support a plot to stop the transfer of power from Republican Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden.
Plus there were the pipe bombs at the two parties' headquarters, which are still a mystery. The authorities still aren't sure whether they were intended to go off and didn't, or whether they were dummies of some kind to intimidate the party leaders.
Putin's MAGA-baiting is just that, it's just for show. It gets him an audience in the West. Witness the Putin-Tucker Carlson interview where he omitted all of it.
Putin's MAGA-baiting is just that, it's just for show. It gets him an audience in the West. Witness the Putin-Tucker Carlson interview where he omitted all of it.
By "Putin's MAGA-baiting" you mean Putin trying to sound supportive of MAGA? Because I think "X-baiting" is used to mean that someone is attacking X, eg. "Joe McCarthy was a red-baiter".
And re: the Putin-Carlson interview, do you mean Putin DIDN'T engage in pro-MAGA rhetoric? That could be. All I really know about that interview is that Putin said Poland had provoked Hitler into war, which was really off-message when he simultaneously whines about Russia being the victim of pro-nazi aggression.
Putin's MAGA-baiting is just that, it's just for show. It gets him an audience in the West. Witness the Putin-Tucker Carlson interview where he omitted all of it.
By "Putin's MAGA-baiting" you mean Putin trying to sound supportive of MAGA? Because I think "X-baiting" is used to mean that someone is attacking X, eg. "Joe McCarthy was a red-baiter".
Not necessarily. “Gay-baiting” and “queer-baiting” refer to when promotional materials for movies, tv shows, books, etc., give the impression that the movie or tv show or book will depict a gay, lesbian or queer romance, sex or whatever, in order to attract a larger audience, but then doesn’t actually deliver what was promised.
Putin's MAGA-baiting is just that, it's just for show. It gets him an audience in the West. Witness the Putin-Tucker Carlson interview where he omitted all of it.
By "Putin's MAGA-baiting" you mean Putin trying to sound supportive of MAGA? Because I think "X-baiting" is used to mean that someone is attacking X, eg. "Joe McCarthy was a red-baiter".
Not necessarily. “Gay-baiting” and “queer-baiting” refer to when promotional materials for movies, tv shows, books, etc., give the impression that the movie or tv show or book will depict a gay, lesbian or queer romance, sex or whatever, in order to attract a larger audience, but then doesn’t actually deliver what was promised.
Hm. I stand enlightened.
A google on "gay-baiting" turns up lots of articles on "queerbaiting". But when I type in
"gay-baiting politicians", I get articles about antigay politicians.
Personally, I always found it somewhat odd that "-baiting" was used to mean "-attacking", since bait is something that the targeted entity initially finds attractive. So the use in "queerbaiting" does make more logical sense to me.
Personally, I always found it odd that "-baiting" was used to mean "-attacking", since bait is something that the targeted entity initially finds attractive. So the use in "queerbaiting" does make more logical sense to me.
I think the context is bear- or bull-baiting, which is torture masquerading as entertainment.
Personally, I always found it odd that "-baiting" was used to mean "-attacking", since bait is something that the targeted entity initially finds attractive. So the use in "queerbaiting" does make more logical sense to me.
I think the context is bear- or bull-baiting, which is torture masquerading as entertainment.
Could be. My impression was that the politician was attacking whatever group, in order to lure them into a public argument that the politician ends up winning(as does happen in a bullfight), with the initial attacks being metaphorized as bait.
Bull-baiting is not the same as bull-fighting. In bull-baiting, a bull is intentionally injured, maimed or killed by dogs. In red-baiting, a political opponent is discredited through (alleged) association with left-wing ideology.
Bull-baiting is not the same as bull-fighting. In bull-baiting, a bull is intentionally injured, maimed or killed by dogs. In red-baiting, a political opponent is discredited through (alleged) association with left-wing ideology.
Comments
Oh I can imagine a few.
Well, the biggest problem with Trump, IMHO -- and strangely, the one thing that gives me a little hope for the future -- is that he isn't just a horrible person and a dangerous dictator, he's a very *charismatic* horrible person and *entertaining* dangerous dictator.
When he walks off the stage, there will be plenty of understudies as bad or worse than him in terms of policy, etc. But no one else (at the moment) seems to have that undeniable ability to be entertaining while being awful.
So yeah, let's put Vance out there more often! Once he's the lead, the show will close in three nights!
Indeed.
https://forums.shipoffools.com/discussion/comment/718835/#Comment_718835
Well, presumably, @Boogie meant the type of individual likely to come to power in the US political system.
I agree with @windsofchange. trump has a weird draw for many in the US. Plus a strange ability to get the whole world talking about him. Meat and drinks to a toddler attention seeker.
I doubt vance could be worse. But who knows?
By the time Trump and the SCOTUS have finished dismantling the US Constitution, what real defence will exist to protect the USA from an even more extremist populist leader?
What gave you that impression? I'd honestly discourage people from looking at things via a kind of 'shades of grey' framing, the people inside the administration know exactly what it is about, to the extent there is infighting it's largely to protect any part of the state that they currently monopolise.
The trouble is that the political faction that's most enthusiastic about private gun ownership is also the one that's most loudly in support of the president.
This is kind of a paradox of American politics. Many of the folks who are most excited by the idea of overthrowing the state with violence are the ones who are most likely to cozy up with a poorly regulated police state.
Just as long as the police state is persecuting the right sort of people, of course.
Plus there were the pipe bombs at the two parties' headquarters, which are still a mystery. The authorities still aren't sure whether they were intended to go off and didn't, or whether they were dummies of some kind to intimidate the party leaders.
By "Putin's MAGA-baiting" you mean Putin trying to sound supportive of MAGA? Because I think "X-baiting" is used to mean that someone is attacking X, eg. "Joe McCarthy was a red-baiter".
And re: the Putin-Carlson interview, do you mean Putin DIDN'T engage in pro-MAGA rhetoric? That could be. All I really know about that interview is that Putin said Poland had provoked Hitler into war, which was really off-message when he simultaneously whines about Russia being the victim of pro-nazi aggression.
A google on "gay-baiting" turns up lots of articles on "queerbaiting". But when I type in
Personally, I always found it somewhat odd that "-baiting" was used to mean "-attacking", since bait is something that the targeted entity initially finds attractive. So the use in "queerbaiting" does make more logical sense to me.
I think the context is bear- or bull-baiting, which is torture masquerading as entertainment.
Could be. My impression was that the politician was attacking whatever group, in order to lure them into a public argument that the politician ends up winning(as does happen in a bullfight), with the initial attacks being metaphorized as bait.
Okay, thanks.