This is why I quit the WP. They will not address the unhinged Trump. I sent a letter to 4 or 5 assorted people there letting them know that if they kept avoiding the issue, I would let my subscription lapse. So far, no good. I've seen nothing from the WP proper although Eugene Robinson did address the Las Vegas speech today. Thursday is my deadline. I'm not holding my breath.
The New York Times has been just as bad as they insist on emphasizing Biden's deficiencies, which are minuscule when compared to those of The Bloated Yam.
I gave up on them a while back, and there is nothing they can do at this point to convince me to spend another dime on their papers, even though I miss out on the quality stuff that comes out so seldom.
Yes, they definitely fill a niche but the way I look at it, they have a Constitutional Amendment dedicated to them and their brethren. Seems they should work harder to earn that dedication.
I quit my auto renewal, but my sub runs till early next April. I'm your basic cheap -- uh, make that "frugal"! -- New Englander but I'm seriously considering cutting the cord even if I don't get a refund. (I'm already getting almost-daily notices to renew, even though my sub hasn't expired yet. Hmm.)
WP or NYT? The WP is giving me a 30/yr offer as we speak. Last time I took them up on it. NYT gives me a standing 4/month offer. Seems they're willing but they've peed in the soup way too often. I will still read either or both, I just won't pay for it. If they quit sending that's fine too. Do you subscribe to the Globe? Used to be a decent paper, is it still?
Just reupped my WP subscription for $.99/month for a year. Can't even buy a lottery ticket for that much. I had cancelled, and they kept offering a new rate; kept refusing. When they got down to $.99, I took the bait
WP. I quit NYT shortly after the 2016 election -- right after they hired Bret Stephens. I do subscribe to the Globe, mainly because they keep making me offers I can't refuse, like $4/month, but I rarely do more than skim it. It's OK, but I live on the Vineyard, and the further you get from the Boston metro area, the scantier the Globe coverage is (unless of course there's some big scandal in the summer). I subscribe to the Guardian, both US and UK editions, and recently subscribed to Haaretz for Israel-Palestine coverage. I've been subscribing to +972 Magazine (online) for several years now.
Any suggestions? I look at/read about 6 daily papers (on line) every day. The WP and NYT will still send me headlines, I just won't give them $$ until they change their evil ways.
In his Washington Post column, Eugene Robinson quotes Trump’s babbling about sharks. The Democrats should not argue with Trump’s “positions,” because that would be treating him as a normal sane person. All they need to put in their ads are recordings of his deranged speeches. In fact, that is what Biden should do at the “debate” — read the orange turd’s words verbatim.
The last Biden commercial I enjoyed did just that: ran 15 seconds of Trump‘s Nevada rant about not caring about voters, only votes. I agree with J. Rubin‘s column in WaPo—squirt their word salad back at them in their media!
Unfortunately in debates the usual rule is that they cannot bring any written material with them. I think it would be pretty hard to memorize gibberish.
In the debate Biden should just respond to any tirade, and I'm sure that's all we'll hear from the Word Fuhrer, with "tell us another one of your Sir stories Donald."
I was at that Bethpage rally in the Grumman hangar too! I tucked my press pass inside my coat though and mingled with the magas. Talked at length to two former financial guys, white males rendered jobless by the 2008 greed fest explosion. Of course, they blamed democrats and Obama.
I just got my ticket at the Trump website, stood in line, and went in with the masses. On the bus, I sat behind two guys as we drove along Bethpage Avenue, lined with little shops and restaurants. They complained to each other that there wasn't a pizza joint on Long Island that was still owned by Italians. "All the Mex's came in a bought them," one said to the other. I felt like telling him that the Italian-Americans who sold out took their windfall and moved to Florida, and because the "Mex's" took over the place and kept it a pizza joint, you could still get pizza all over Long Island. Plus the new owners were hard-working, etc etc, but I knew how far I'd get with that and kept my mouth shut. I saw Michelle Goldberg walking around interviewing people. I just listened with mild horror to Trump and left....the horror was mild in those days, but not for long.
These guys are not generally "deep thinkers," a systematic study of our evolving political and economic system even on the level routinely available to college students is apparently something they find irksome, why should they have to think? Thinking can be hard work!
No, I want to wake up and and discover I have a corner office, a flirtatious, buxom secretary, a bunch of flunkies who do the real work, a clear path to the board of directors, outrageous bonuses and stock options, and a corporate credit card along with a really cool vehicle, maybe a Maserati colored racing green, bebe!
Actually, movies and tv tell you that is going to happen spontaneously. Just like women will magically find love. People need their fantasies to get through their shift at Walmart or wherever. Those people know they are being screwed but they can't stop working and become homeless vagabonds, they have children and they have responsibilities so they dream and build up resentment. Trump obviously feeds that anger.
The Apartment (1960) | Official Trailer | MGM Studios
Amazon MGM Studios 1.21M subscribers
214,683 views Jun 28, 2021 #MGM #TheApartment
Ambitious insurance clerk C.C. "Bud" Baxter (Jack Lemmon) attempts to climb the corporate ladder by loaning his apartment key to his superiors for their extramarital affairs, but the plan backfires when Bud unwittingly falls for the top executive's current girlfriend, Fran Kubelik (Shirley MacLaine). Fred MacMurray co-stars in this Billy Wilder classic that would go on to win five Academy Awards® including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Original Screenplay.
Trump draws most of his following from the temporarily embarrassed millionaire's club of small business owners who want less red tape and lower taxes, and....from the Southern states, where people, in general, seem to be reliably clueless.
And they are, as you describe, for the most part. Really sad.
Interestingly, Lucian, you spent more time watching his speech than , evidently, half of the audience who showed up and left well before half time of his rambling diatribe. OK it was 105 in the shade but, as we used to say in Texas where I was stationed in the military, "it was a dry heat" so that kind of abandonement shoule tell us something.
What it tells me is not what you might expect. He drew that large of a crowd because his movement is based not on what he says but what he represents. And, what he represents is a complete rejection of our political and civic norms by a way too large cohort of our body politic. They showed up initially to show their support not for what he says but what he means to them.
This election is going to boil down to two competing visions and realities. The visions are democracy vs. retrograde fascism as the law of the land. The realities are what we have vs. what we believe we are entiled to. IMHO the Trump cohort is comprised of far too many of us who seem to believe we are entitled to a prosperous life style and rules we "believe" in even if those rules disenfranchise/disqualify others from full participation in the system which is enriching us. Or put another way, Trump rules. Has he not live his entire life in such a system? He has now convinced millions of us we can have that also.
The polls show how many of us now fall into his camp. The top three issues according to polls are : 1) inflation, 2) the economy and 3) immigration/the border. The first two align with my "prosperity theory" because those espousing such opinions are really telling us "I do not have enough and am terrified what I have will not be enough" and the third issue is all about " we are now allowing into this country a mongrel group out to steal my job, rape my daughters and sell drugs."
Never mind most economic indicators are positive since Biden took office . The economic illiteracy of the average American voter allows simplistic appeals to their ignorance to work. Another poll shows 58% of registered voters believe we are in a recession! I interpret that to mean 58% use the price of a dozen eggs as their measure of recession. OBTW this is the same group which likely believes SS and Medicare are a God given right they can never lose.
We need to face the facts. This election is going to be uphill for Biden and the Democrats because such a large portion of our electorate is choosing to be dumb and dumber about economics. A way too large portion of our electorte is conditioned to think in the past and present and not the future.
So what to do. Reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion it is folly to appeal to the rational side of the American electorate. There are not enough ot them to convert. So, insted if I am advising Joe and his fellow Democrats I am of the considered opinion it is time to begin a scorched Earth campaign on what is going to be lost if Trump and The Rs gain control. Your SS and Medicare, The ACA. School lunch programs, Fedreal assistance for a wide range of programs for the poor and elderly, Yes, a woman's rigth to choose along with a woman's right to just about any kind of healthcare having to do with her nether regions. The right for people of color to vote....at all. And, yes, the rights of the LGBT community so hard won over the past twenty years.
Of course, if we get Trump we will see a reordering of the new world order toward authoritarianism but to most Americans that will always be an abstract concept because "what goes on overseas has no impact on us" and "that cound never happen here."
Sorry to ramble on so long but I have reached the end of my rope. This election is not going to be about Donald Trump. It is going to be about the masses of civicly and economically illilterate voters who are sleepwaling toward a disaster for all of us with bad information and even worse motivation. Time to wake them up with the only thing which seems to work in our system. Scare the crap out of them and show them how much of the cheese they now take for granted is going to disappear.
Right on, Lucian. I love the part in Las Vegas when he said something like, "everyone's worried about heat and the crowd. What about me? I'm up here sweating like a dog!"
Yep...always with the "me, me, me" bit. Imagine the uproar in the media should President Biden let loose with such an absolutely cra-cra, free association, stream of (semi) conscience nonsense. It is getting very noticeable that without the teleprompter he can't even complete a full sentence without bouncing to another random thought...and oh yeah, imagine telling your supporters--people who have come out in triple digit heat to see and hear you in person--that you don't care about them; you just want their vote. Judas H. Priest--UNbelievable!
Not Presidential material at all! It's more than unhinged! Unhinged maniac! I just used my App Power Thesaurus. I love the App! The other synonyms I found are: demented, unbalanced, disturbed, crazed, daft, mad, bonkers. Which one do you like best? I like daft and bonkers. I those words are English (Great Britain not American but I could be wrong!
Why doesn't the Times' Linda Qui do another big fact check story, this time on the Trump "Sir" stories? A compendium of them would be entertaining. I love the ones with the big burly men coming up to Trump "with tears in their eyes" and begging him with "Sir" requests. Linda and the Times must certainly take them seriously.
It’s hard to believe anyone, even a Jumbo Dumbo supporter, would believe those “sir” stories.
In an interview with John Bolton on Stephanie Ruhle’s program, Bolton stated that Trump has the “attention span equal to a fruitfly.” I suppose that’s why he speaks in a stream of consciousness manner, jumping from one inane topic to another.
Chris Cillizza does substack pieces with the nuttiest lines from Trump's rally speeches...he calls out those "Sir" stories with "Sir alerts". Trump apparently loves to hear himself called "Sir".
Sorry I should written: Apparently, Trump would love to hear himself addressed as "Sir". I do believe those "Sir" stories are what some folk would refer to as "harmless flights of fancy" and others would more likely refer to them as "bullshyt". A "Sir" story always will be full of lies and delusional fantasies.
Can't remember if I've shared this before (apologies if so) but here's the single best anatomy of why the followers of 45 are utterly committed to their belief system I've yet seen. It's from an exchange on Charlie Sykes Bulwark newsletter, 4 June 2020, six months prior to J6.
####
Hello Charlie
I am a pediatric cancer doctor and I study communication and ethical decision making in medicine. Yesterday, I realized that a central concept from my field can help to explain why so many appear to accept the president's lies: mutual pretense. The president has a relationship with his base in which he lies, he knows he lies, they know he lies, but none of them acknowledge the lie, because the lie provides them with stability and comfort. Recognizing mutual pretense matters, because attempts to shine light on the deception often lead to resentment towards the person shining the light.
Mutual pretense was first discovered by Glaser and Strauss, two anthropologists who observed conversations between doctors and patients with cancer in the the VA in the 1960s.(Their first paper showed a breathtaking lack of bedside manner - see attached) In the 1970s, Myra Bluebond-Langner found the same thing in a pediatric cancer ward. (see her book, "The Private Worlds of Dying Children") For some parents and children, this mutual pretense was central to their relationship. It allowed each of them to protect the other and avoid a difficult truth. Most importantly, attempts to force the families to address hard truths often backfired on the physician, leading to decreased trust and greater frustration. I have known about this literature for years, but a recent encounter with a loved one suggested that a similar phenomenon is happening with some of the president's most fervent supporters.
Last week, I was talking with a loved one about COVID-19 and the real challenges we face as a country. As she laid out hopeful statements (hydroxychloroquine will prevent the disease, we will have a vaccine in the next few months, scientists will find a preventive medication soon), I continued to highlight the impediments to each of these hopes (hydroxychloroquine is a dud, vaccines take a long time to develop and often fail, preventive medication for 100 million people is hard to imagine). I also explained that the president is lying and failing to show leadership. My loved one did not agree (to say the least). After arguing back and forth for a few minutes, she raised her voice and nearly yelled, "Don't you think I know how bad things are? Don't you think I understand that we have a lot of problems? Don't you think I know all of this? I can't focus on these negatives all the time because I have to live somehow."
Then it struck me - she knows the same things I know. She knows that that we are in a tough spot. She knows that hydroxycloroquine probably won't work. She knows that preventive medicine is probably a fantasy for the general population. She knows that the president is not being honest with her - but she accepts this deception because it helps her to cope. When I forced her to acknowledge these truths, her faith in the president did not waiver. Her relationship with me, however, was strained.
If many of the president's faithful maintain mutual pretense with him, then how do we address his lies? While highlighting the falsehoods can help those willing to be convinced, this might actually drive the president's base closer to him.
Perhaps the answer is framing the difficult news as reason for hope.
Rather than focusing on the failure of hydroxychloroquine, focus on the multiple clinical trials that are a real source of hope. Instead of saying, "The president is lying about hydroxychloroquine," perhaps we can say, "I really wish the president would not focus on hydroxychloroquine, because it is distracting from other really promising clinical trials."
We can frame his lie as an assault on a greater hope, a hope that acknowledges the harsh reality but promises to push toward better days. We never would have made it to the moon if we didn't realize how hard it would be.
This approach might allow individuals to re-calibrate their goals and hopes. Whether this works is an empirical question, but nothing else has helped... Maybe it's worth a shot.
Stuart Stevens insists that most voters are going to interrupt their busy lives in October, tune in for the first time, and when they hear this kind of word salad (a perfect term, hope it sticks around), will hasten to the polls to vote Biden and decide the election. Given Stevens's long history as a top GOP mainstream operative, I pay attention.
As for descriptors, back in the time of Hillary's "basket of deplorables," maybe pre-MAGAts, Stevens invented the MAGAt synonym "Trump-drunk" that I resurrected the other day—brilliant, I thought, but he abandoned it after one Salon essay. The "big liar" nom de don is a tidy reminder without torturing or romanizing the language of what he has brought it all down to.
This is why I quit the WP. They will not address the unhinged Trump. I sent a letter to 4 or 5 assorted people there letting them know that if they kept avoiding the issue, I would let my subscription lapse. So far, no good. I've seen nothing from the WP proper although Eugene Robinson did address the Las Vegas speech today. Thursday is my deadline. I'm not holding my breath.
The New York Times has been just as bad as they insist on emphasizing Biden's deficiencies, which are minuscule when compared to those of The Bloated Yam.
Yes. I gave them the same chance of course. No go. And then I read this article
https://presswatchers.org/2024/03/why-is-new-york-times-campaign-coverage-so-bad-because-thats-what-the-publisher-wants/ and several others on the site.
They still send me the offers and the headlines trying to entice me back. But no. I'm done.
I gave up on them a while back, and there is nothing they can do at this point to convince me to spend another dime on their papers, even though I miss out on the quality stuff that comes out so seldom.
Yes, they definitely fill a niche but the way I look at it, they have a Constitutional Amendment dedicated to them and their brethren. Seems they should work harder to earn that dedication.
I skip the opinion page -there really is too much I find worthwhile to quit them altogether
Great article! Thanks.
I quit my auto renewal, but my sub runs till early next April. I'm your basic cheap -- uh, make that "frugal"! -- New Englander but I'm seriously considering cutting the cord even if I don't get a refund. (I'm already getting almost-daily notices to renew, even though my sub hasn't expired yet. Hmm.)
WP or NYT? The WP is giving me a 30/yr offer as we speak. Last time I took them up on it. NYT gives me a standing 4/month offer. Seems they're willing but they've peed in the soup way too often. I will still read either or both, I just won't pay for it. If they quit sending that's fine too. Do you subscribe to the Globe? Used to be a decent paper, is it still?
Just reupped my WP subscription for $.99/month for a year. Can't even buy a lottery ticket for that much. I had cancelled, and they kept offering a new rate; kept refusing. When they got down to $.99, I took the bait
Wonder if I'll see that. ?? But how long, and how many subscribers before they go broke. Too bad they didn't pay their staff to begin with.
WP. I quit NYT shortly after the 2016 election -- right after they hired Bret Stephens. I do subscribe to the Globe, mainly because they keep making me offers I can't refuse, like $4/month, but I rarely do more than skim it. It's OK, but I live on the Vineyard, and the further you get from the Boston metro area, the scantier the Globe coverage is (unless of course there's some big scandal in the summer). I subscribe to the Guardian, both US and UK editions, and recently subscribed to Haaretz for Israel-Palestine coverage. I've been subscribing to +972 Magazine (online) for several years now.
I canceled the Washington Post
I guess I will join you!
The Post and Times are quitting...based on results. Now what?
Any suggestions? I look at/read about 6 daily papers (on line) every day. The WP and NYT will still send me headlines, I just won't give them $$ until they change their evil ways.
I think he would be better off avoiding the subjects of sinking electric boats and sharks. The only way I can describe him is being "beyond unhinged."
I'm for calling him what he is - a fat, old crazy convicted felon.
I don't know that he was ever "hinged" to begin with!
Good point. :)
How much longer will the corporate media be able to ignore or excuse the obvious paranoid dementia?
Forever
Demented or exhibits dementia is one possibility. On top of his personality disorders, he clearly has early to mid-stage dementia.
Probably FTD
https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/frontotemporal-disorders/what-are-frontotemporal-disorders-causes-symptoms-and-treatment#:~:text=Frontotemporal%20disorders%20(FTD)%2C%20sometimes,work%2C%20or%20difficulty%20with%20walking.
Totally. But the clinical name may not have a good enough ring to it!
It also sounds like a floral delivery service. lol
Or a sexually transmitted disease. Which probably is true too.
Thanks, I'm still laughing [giggling?].
Rump is a great stain on the fabric of our country.
How about “batshit crazy”?
You had me stunned at "watching the entirety of Donald Trump's speech..."
The SNL skits referencing "needles in my eyeballs" comes to mind.
In his Washington Post column, Eugene Robinson quotes Trump’s babbling about sharks. The Democrats should not argue with Trump’s “positions,” because that would be treating him as a normal sane person. All they need to put in their ads are recordings of his deranged speeches. In fact, that is what Biden should do at the “debate” — read the orange turd’s words verbatim.
The last Biden commercial I enjoyed did just that: ran 15 seconds of Trump‘s Nevada rant about not caring about voters, only votes. I agree with J. Rubin‘s column in WaPo—squirt their word salad back at them in their media!
Unfortunately in debates the usual rule is that they cannot bring any written material with them. I think it would be pretty hard to memorize gibberish.
In the debate Biden should just respond to any tirade, and I'm sure that's all we'll hear from the Word Fuhrer, with "tell us another one of your Sir stories Donald."
I was at that Bethpage rally in the Grumman hangar too! I tucked my press pass inside my coat though and mingled with the magas. Talked at length to two former financial guys, white males rendered jobless by the 2008 greed fest explosion. Of course, they blamed democrats and Obama.
I just got my ticket at the Trump website, stood in line, and went in with the masses. On the bus, I sat behind two guys as we drove along Bethpage Avenue, lined with little shops and restaurants. They complained to each other that there wasn't a pizza joint on Long Island that was still owned by Italians. "All the Mex's came in a bought them," one said to the other. I felt like telling him that the Italian-Americans who sold out took their windfall and moved to Florida, and because the "Mex's" took over the place and kept it a pizza joint, you could still get pizza all over Long Island. Plus the new owners were hard-working, etc etc, but I knew how far I'd get with that and kept my mouth shut. I saw Michelle Goldberg walking around interviewing people. I just listened with mild horror to Trump and left....the horror was mild in those days, but not for long.
Did you take a tranquilizer first, before getting on that bus? I can’t fathom doing that, Lucian. You’re a brave soldier. West Point should be proud.
These guys are not generally "deep thinkers," a systematic study of our evolving political and economic system even on the level routinely available to college students is apparently something they find irksome, why should they have to think? Thinking can be hard work!
No, I want to wake up and and discover I have a corner office, a flirtatious, buxom secretary, a bunch of flunkies who do the real work, a clear path to the board of directors, outrageous bonuses and stock options, and a corporate credit card along with a really cool vehicle, maybe a Maserati colored racing green, bebe!
Actually, movies and tv tell you that is going to happen spontaneously. Just like women will magically find love. People need their fantasies to get through their shift at Walmart or wherever. Those people know they are being screwed but they can't stop working and become homeless vagabonds, they have children and they have responsibilities so they dream and build up resentment. Trump obviously feeds that anger.
I admit my "go to" example for most of this, just pushed and shoved a bit into a comment, context-wise, is one of my favorite films, easily top five:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcslkrBMLGc
The Apartment (1960) | Official Trailer | MGM Studios
Amazon MGM Studios 1.21M subscribers
214,683 views Jun 28, 2021 #MGM #TheApartment
Ambitious insurance clerk C.C. "Bud" Baxter (Jack Lemmon) attempts to climb the corporate ladder by loaning his apartment key to his superiors for their extramarital affairs, but the plan backfires when Bud unwittingly falls for the top executive's current girlfriend, Fran Kubelik (Shirley MacLaine). Fred MacMurray co-stars in this Billy Wilder classic that would go on to win five Academy Awards® including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Original Screenplay.
I rest my case.
Trump draws most of his following from the temporarily embarrassed millionaire's club of small business owners who want less red tape and lower taxes, and....from the Southern states, where people, in general, seem to be reliably clueless.
And they are, as you describe, for the most part. Really sad.
Many aren't even shallow thinkers.
Get on the Supreme Court!!!
Interestingly, Lucian, you spent more time watching his speech than , evidently, half of the audience who showed up and left well before half time of his rambling diatribe. OK it was 105 in the shade but, as we used to say in Texas where I was stationed in the military, "it was a dry heat" so that kind of abandonement shoule tell us something.
What it tells me is not what you might expect. He drew that large of a crowd because his movement is based not on what he says but what he represents. And, what he represents is a complete rejection of our political and civic norms by a way too large cohort of our body politic. They showed up initially to show their support not for what he says but what he means to them.
This election is going to boil down to two competing visions and realities. The visions are democracy vs. retrograde fascism as the law of the land. The realities are what we have vs. what we believe we are entiled to. IMHO the Trump cohort is comprised of far too many of us who seem to believe we are entitled to a prosperous life style and rules we "believe" in even if those rules disenfranchise/disqualify others from full participation in the system which is enriching us. Or put another way, Trump rules. Has he not live his entire life in such a system? He has now convinced millions of us we can have that also.
The polls show how many of us now fall into his camp. The top three issues according to polls are : 1) inflation, 2) the economy and 3) immigration/the border. The first two align with my "prosperity theory" because those espousing such opinions are really telling us "I do not have enough and am terrified what I have will not be enough" and the third issue is all about " we are now allowing into this country a mongrel group out to steal my job, rape my daughters and sell drugs."
Never mind most economic indicators are positive since Biden took office . The economic illiteracy of the average American voter allows simplistic appeals to their ignorance to work. Another poll shows 58% of registered voters believe we are in a recession! I interpret that to mean 58% use the price of a dozen eggs as their measure of recession. OBTW this is the same group which likely believes SS and Medicare are a God given right they can never lose.
We need to face the facts. This election is going to be uphill for Biden and the Democrats because such a large portion of our electorate is choosing to be dumb and dumber about economics. A way too large portion of our electorte is conditioned to think in the past and present and not the future.
So what to do. Reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion it is folly to appeal to the rational side of the American electorate. There are not enough ot them to convert. So, insted if I am advising Joe and his fellow Democrats I am of the considered opinion it is time to begin a scorched Earth campaign on what is going to be lost if Trump and The Rs gain control. Your SS and Medicare, The ACA. School lunch programs, Fedreal assistance for a wide range of programs for the poor and elderly, Yes, a woman's rigth to choose along with a woman's right to just about any kind of healthcare having to do with her nether regions. The right for people of color to vote....at all. And, yes, the rights of the LGBT community so hard won over the past twenty years.
Of course, if we get Trump we will see a reordering of the new world order toward authoritarianism but to most Americans that will always be an abstract concept because "what goes on overseas has no impact on us" and "that cound never happen here."
Sorry to ramble on so long but I have reached the end of my rope. This election is not going to be about Donald Trump. It is going to be about the masses of civicly and economically illilterate voters who are sleepwaling toward a disaster for all of us with bad information and even worse motivation. Time to wake them up with the only thing which seems to work in our system. Scare the crap out of them and show them how much of the cheese they now take for granted is going to disappear.
Word squirts.
Right on, Lucian. I love the part in Las Vegas when he said something like, "everyone's worried about heat and the crowd. What about me? I'm up here sweating like a dog!"
Too bad he didn't stroke out from the heat. Another lost opportunity.
Topped only by "I don't care about you. I just want your vote." Or something like that.
Yep...always with the "me, me, me" bit. Imagine the uproar in the media should President Biden let loose with such an absolutely cra-cra, free association, stream of (semi) conscience nonsense. It is getting very noticeable that without the teleprompter he can't even complete a full sentence without bouncing to another random thought...and oh yeah, imagine telling your supporters--people who have come out in triple digit heat to see and hear you in person--that you don't care about them; you just want their vote. Judas H. Priest--UNbelievable!
Not Presidential material at all! It's more than unhinged! Unhinged maniac! I just used my App Power Thesaurus. I love the App! The other synonyms I found are: demented, unbalanced, disturbed, crazed, daft, mad, bonkers. Which one do you like best? I like daft and bonkers. I those words are English (Great Britain not American but I could be wrong!
Barking mad.
Mouth Frothing
Those words are too kind. They are very gentle words for insanity.
Why doesn't the Times' Linda Qui do another big fact check story, this time on the Trump "Sir" stories? A compendium of them would be entertaining. I love the ones with the big burly men coming up to Trump "with tears in their eyes" and begging him with "Sir" requests. Linda and the Times must certainly take them seriously.
It’s hard to believe anyone, even a Jumbo Dumbo supporter, would believe those “sir” stories.
In an interview with John Bolton on Stephanie Ruhle’s program, Bolton stated that Trump has the “attention span equal to a fruitfly.” I suppose that’s why he speaks in a stream of consciousness manner, jumping from one inane topic to another.
Chris Cillizza does substack pieces with the nuttiest lines from Trump's rally speeches...he calls out those "Sir" stories with "Sir alerts". Trump apparently loves to hear himself called "Sir".
I thought that all of the Sir stories are completely made up. Has anyone ever recorded someone coming up to Trump and addressing him as "Sir?"
Sorry I should written: Apparently, Trump would love to hear himself addressed as "Sir". I do believe those "Sir" stories are what some folk would refer to as "harmless flights of fancy" and others would more likely refer to them as "bullshyt". A "Sir" story always will be full of lies and delusional fantasies.
People say "sir" to the orange one an awful lot in his imaginary world.
Doesn't everyone call him "sir" in conversation? He'll be satisfied only when all address him as "your highness."
Or “Heil Trump!”
Of course!
Der FUHRER
Can't remember if I've shared this before (apologies if so) but here's the single best anatomy of why the followers of 45 are utterly committed to their belief system I've yet seen. It's from an exchange on Charlie Sykes Bulwark newsletter, 4 June 2020, six months prior to J6.
####
Hello Charlie
I am a pediatric cancer doctor and I study communication and ethical decision making in medicine. Yesterday, I realized that a central concept from my field can help to explain why so many appear to accept the president's lies: mutual pretense. The president has a relationship with his base in which he lies, he knows he lies, they know he lies, but none of them acknowledge the lie, because the lie provides them with stability and comfort. Recognizing mutual pretense matters, because attempts to shine light on the deception often lead to resentment towards the person shining the light.
Mutual pretense was first discovered by Glaser and Strauss, two anthropologists who observed conversations between doctors and patients with cancer in the the VA in the 1960s.(Their first paper showed a breathtaking lack of bedside manner - see attached) In the 1970s, Myra Bluebond-Langner found the same thing in a pediatric cancer ward. (see her book, "The Private Worlds of Dying Children") For some parents and children, this mutual pretense was central to their relationship. It allowed each of them to protect the other and avoid a difficult truth. Most importantly, attempts to force the families to address hard truths often backfired on the physician, leading to decreased trust and greater frustration. I have known about this literature for years, but a recent encounter with a loved one suggested that a similar phenomenon is happening with some of the president's most fervent supporters.
Last week, I was talking with a loved one about COVID-19 and the real challenges we face as a country. As she laid out hopeful statements (hydroxychloroquine will prevent the disease, we will have a vaccine in the next few months, scientists will find a preventive medication soon), I continued to highlight the impediments to each of these hopes (hydroxychloroquine is a dud, vaccines take a long time to develop and often fail, preventive medication for 100 million people is hard to imagine). I also explained that the president is lying and failing to show leadership. My loved one did not agree (to say the least). After arguing back and forth for a few minutes, she raised her voice and nearly yelled, "Don't you think I know how bad things are? Don't you think I understand that we have a lot of problems? Don't you think I know all of this? I can't focus on these negatives all the time because I have to live somehow."
Then it struck me - she knows the same things I know. She knows that that we are in a tough spot. She knows that hydroxycloroquine probably won't work. She knows that preventive medicine is probably a fantasy for the general population. She knows that the president is not being honest with her - but she accepts this deception because it helps her to cope. When I forced her to acknowledge these truths, her faith in the president did not waiver. Her relationship with me, however, was strained.
If many of the president's faithful maintain mutual pretense with him, then how do we address his lies? While highlighting the falsehoods can help those willing to be convinced, this might actually drive the president's base closer to him.
Perhaps the answer is framing the difficult news as reason for hope.
Rather than focusing on the failure of hydroxychloroquine, focus on the multiple clinical trials that are a real source of hope. Instead of saying, "The president is lying about hydroxychloroquine," perhaps we can say, "I really wish the president would not focus on hydroxychloroquine, because it is distracting from other really promising clinical trials."
We can frame his lie as an assault on a greater hope, a hope that acknowledges the harsh reality but promises to push toward better days. We never would have made it to the moon if we didn't realize how hard it would be.
This approach might allow individuals to re-calibrate their goals and hopes. Whether this works is an empirical question, but nothing else has helped... Maybe it's worth a shot.
Thanks for your time.
Best,
Bryan Sisk, MD, MSCI
####
SIDEBAR: the author, Bryan Sisk MD, is a a pediatric oncologist bioethicist whose work on the politicization of COVID research **from the inside** is...well, see for yourself {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343243854_Research_Ethics_during_a_Pandemic_A_Call_for_Normative_and_Empirical_Analysis}
Stuart Stevens insists that most voters are going to interrupt their busy lives in October, tune in for the first time, and when they hear this kind of word salad (a perfect term, hope it sticks around), will hasten to the polls to vote Biden and decide the election. Given Stevens's long history as a top GOP mainstream operative, I pay attention.
As for descriptors, back in the time of Hillary's "basket of deplorables," maybe pre-MAGAts, Stevens invented the MAGAt synonym "Trump-drunk" that I resurrected the other day—brilliant, I thought, but he abandoned it after one Salon essay. The "big liar" nom de don is a tidy reminder without torturing or romanizing the language of what he has brought it all down to.
'Bat shit crazy' works for me.