Well plenty of US Presidents have interfered with elections. Just not usually our own.
5 Likes
These are the comments that rile me up. Is indicting him unimaginable after the Jan 6 events? Then there are other things like fake electors or the Georgia calls. What needs to happen for it to follow that if a president does this he will be indicted because I think Trump crossed that threshold. What irks me the most is this guy is digging at the foundation of democracy and if he gets his way and this becomes the new norm we have a time bomb till someone else takes it a bit further.
3 Likes
Unfortunately, the conservative spin on this is “of course he was right to interfere in the stolen 2020 election after everything the Democrats did to cheat”. Painting him out to be a heroic figure for bravely standing up to the Deep State.
The narcissist’s prayer:
That didn’t happen.
And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.
And if it was, that’s not a big deal.
And if it is, that’s not my fault.
And if it was, I didn’t mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.
6 Likes
Trump reminds me of the show Are you smarter than a 5th grader?
Tucker Carlson interviewed a Nazi apologist, and called him “the most important popular historian working in the United States today.” Elon Musk then recommended the interview, called it “worth watching”.
2 Likes
When Tucker was at Fox I used to think that he probably was aware of what’s generally acceptable. Now I think he may see the world in a fundamentally different way to how I see it. smh
It’s disappointing that his campaign is boiling down to “white good brown bad”.
He used to at least pretend to have policies - “We’re looking very closely at that, and we have big, beautiful plans that will be revealed in the coming months…”
The quiet part is deafening.
1 Like
Side note: the story about an apartment complex in Aurora, CO that was controlled by a Venezuelan gang turned out to have been fabricated by the owner, and the residents held a press conference at the building to denounce it.
3 Likes
I didn’t know about that story, so I just saw Trump’s post and thought, “Okay, he’s saying that brown people are scary and bad. Got it.”
Knowing now that the post was based on racist disinformation, my thoughts have changed to “Okay, he’s saying brown people are scary and bad and he knows his voters are stupid.”.
1 Like
Hang on, they look pretty hispanic to me.
And in fairness face tattoos are doing most of the heavy lifting I think.
I’m not a big fan of facial tattoos, but on its own, its just a fashion choice I don’t like. I could find tens of thousands of pictures of worse-looking white people with facial tattoos, but they’re not being used for race-baiting propaganda.
The hair on center-left guy in the original photo is excellent. He’s a great-looking guy in general, in fact.
I suppose it’s a fashion choice. It’s also a pretty loud social signal.
Just nitpicking they aren’t brown 
And now we know why some Republicans have been saying some of the darndest things. Russia was paying them to say them.
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/05/nx-s1-5100829/russia-election-influencers-youtube
My mistake, on forms asking ethnicity it usually splits white into hispanic and non.
Yeah, government forms are weird. IIRC the census still classifies Middle Easterners as Black, though that info may be outdated.
At least census paperwork doesn’t go into the “one drop” rule in explaining how to answer.
At least I think it doesn’t…
It’s even more disappointing that this seems to be accepted by half of the voting country.
2 Likes
About a bunch of babies from the Republic party saying baby things for almost a century:
Excerpts:
As Donald Trump told a rally in 2018: “I call it the Democrat party. It sounds better rhetorically.” By “better”, of course, he meant “worse”, as he explained the next year: he prefers to say “the ‘Democrat party’ because it doesn’t sound good”.
That lack of awareness “shows how normalized it’s become”, says Larry Glickman, Stephen and Evalyn Milman professor in American studies at Cornell University, who likens the term to a “schoolyard taunt”. It suggests the party is “outside the mainstream of American politics so much so that we’re not even going to call them by the name they prefer. We refuse to give them that amount of respect.”
It’s part of a familiar pattern, as Holliday has written: “Intentionally calling a set of people by something other than their official and preferred form of reference is a common tactic of opposition that is designed to confer disrespect.” If someone named Christopher prefers not to be called Chris, and you do it anyway, it’s pretty clear you’re being rude – regardless of your politics, she says. And she and Glickman both point out that we’re seeing a new version of the same unpleasant phenomenon when it comes to the pronunciation of Kamala Harris’s first name. Almost half the speakers at the Republican convention got it wrong, according to the Washington Post. At a July rally, Trump said he “couldn’t care less” if he mispronounced the word.
Over the decades, the Democratic party became associated with liberal policies, and eventually, “the ‘Democrat party’ slur became a condemnation of liberalism itself”, Glickman wrote. The phrase was a huge hit in the 90s and 2000s; Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh and George W Bush played it on repeat. By the following decade, Trump was mandating the word: “The Democrat party. Not Democratic. It’s Democrat. We have to do that.”
Instead, Glickman suggests, it’s more about a “babyish” tendency to misname people. Also, as Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in the New Yorker in 2006, “it fairly screams ‘rat’.”
Perhaps it’s best, especially considering that many people don’t even know it’s an insult, to just keep ignoring it. Getting mad would be taking the bait. “This would be constructed as Democrats are weak pedants who can’t take a joke and they’re policing our language and see how they’re so heavy-handed with regulation?” Holliday says.