He's not even capable of entertaining the notion of losing.
Hmmm...I wonder if the pretty clear prep work he's doing, stirring up his fans and stans (Lord. Trump stans - is there anything more frightening this side of Daesh or Paul Ryan?) in advance of the election might not mean he has indeed entertained the notion of losing, and is kicking futilely against the pricks?
But that's a notion I refuse to entertain.
No, he won't win. It's what will come afterward that will be of import.
I like what Joss Whedon is supposed to have called him: orange muppet Hitler (although I contend that he's actually closer to Mussolini.)
I'm afraid you're right about what he'd actually accept, but I'm hoping those around him will actually try to restrain him on Nov. 9, rather than encourage his undemocratic insanity.
Yeah. Even were he to suddenly turn polite, responsible and sane, and tell everyone not to be violent assholes after he loses, he won't be able to convince the ones he's already stoked to a freanzy.
Isn't that a great gif? Someone on my f'list gave me a bunch of wonderful gifs a year or so back, to help me start my collection; I can't recall who it was, unfortunately.
This is the first time I have ever wishes for a campaign to come to an end. I am a news person and a political junkie in many ways, and election campaigns have always been wonderful to watch.
Until now.
And thank you for reminding me not to bang my head against a wall. That's become an increasingly attractive possibility this year.
As Orange Muppet Hitler might say in one of his tweets: SAD.
Yeah, I get you. To be honest, I have the same feeling about French politics at the moment and we're nowhere near Trump levels, but it's just… all that populism and opportunistic personal ambition is driving me crazy. And I love politics too, but at some point you just want to scream at them all to wake up. And it's clearly a widespread trend, what with Brexit and all. It's scary, because there is so much to be done, such huge challenges to be faced and such opportunities as well—it's like we have to reinvent big chunks of our economies and societies, and we have to start doing it now, and you squint for the politician who has vision and get that feeling they all just want to get in office. And then you hear economists and experts throwing around novel and innovative ideas and no one picks them up. My god.
Sorry for the rant. You know it's bad when you start thinking "I really shouldn't be complaining, at least we don't have a senseless orange bigot running for president!". The world's standards are going down XD (Then again, we'd probably have had Dominique Strauss-Kahn for president if we hadn't randomly discovered he wasn't above trying to rape women, so who are we to judge.)
Never apologize for ranting over here - this is, as you may have noticed from time to time, Rant Central. And I'm not sure whether standards are going down, or whether they've always been that way under a thin skin of civility that has gradually been eroding to the point where we can see the nastiness.
And I don't really know, but sometimes I get the feeling that the media (I'm talking mostly TV and the social media craze) doesn't help much. What I mean is, somehow we seem to get stuck with a mindset in which politicians are better off trying to be the one that shouts the loudest and stays the limelight, rather than the one that tries to push forward structured plans. In France it's like every other day, a politician will say one awkward and/or problematic sentence, it'll get pulled right out of context and everyone will spend the week commenting the hell out of it while ignoring every other problem. It's like the Reign of the Sensational or something. And when we do get a few people who try to work out a real project, it's like it just doesn't catch, while the ones who "play the game" get all the attention (both positive and negative, of course). It's kind of disheartening. And it encourages that whole shallow, career-oriented, short-term-benefit attitude in politicians. Can't we ever break out of the catch-22s?!
What I mean is, somehow we seem to get stuck with a mindset in which politicians are better off trying to be the one that shouts the loudest and stays the limelight, rather than the one that tries to push forward structured plans.
Yes, it's what we call the horse race syndrome. We reporters and editors and opinion writers spend far too much time handicapping the campaign - the horse race - instead of paying attention to the policies each candidate espouses, and writing about those so that readers have the information with which to make up their minds. It's because a horse race is easy, and exciting. Policy comprehension, and the subsequent effort to make those policies equally comprehensible to our readers, is tough. So we don't do it, and that's not only a crying shame, it's almost a crime.
I don't know if we can break out of the cycle. We'd need a lot of brave and creative people at the top of the various media and print journalism heaps; brave, to start doing the right thing and sticking with it, when company bean-counters are saying, "No, you need to talk about the exciting thing, because that's bringing in more ads/clicks/etc.!" And creative, to successfully turn what could be dry policy material into the kind of gripping writing we normally employ as we talk about the horse-race. It is possible to write policy in a gripping manner; we just have to have the will to do it.
Yes, that's exactly it. I knew that with your media experience you'd have a lot of interesting things to say about the subject ;) But yeah, the temptation of handling things like this is heavy on every party involved. Like you said, it takes a lot of will and hard work!
I just...can't with The Donald. Can he fire himself? I mean, he already acts like this is the reality show that he is suppose to star in (except he keeps getting upstaged by 'That nasty woman' That's Madame President, to you, sir who is stealing his election...and his Emmy. UGH.
*snort* I wouldn't call him sir, but you're being more civilized than I would be.
You make a good point about his attitude ... he does, I think, imagine himself as the star of some reality show, not as the leader of a democracy. What I can't understand are why none of the people around him call him on his shit, even if it means they'll be shown the door. They all have to know the man's not going to win. They're all rats. Shouldn't they be leaving the sinking ship, rather than sticking around?
LOL! More civilized than he deserves, that's for sure!
His kids believe his bullshit, though there is evidence around them that it is bullshit. It's almost like they were originally gaslighted, now they're in on their own brainwashing...with a vengenance! Makes me wonder if they are deliberately goading him into the inevitable failure, even as it sets fire to their own escape-boat. As for the rest of his 'campaign help', they know they are sunk. Might as well ride him to the bottom, write books about it and get their own back that way. After all, the Trump name=shit now...and he won't have the financial ability to hit back with lawsuits when it is all over.
The GOP is rather finished as well - and they are just busy lasting out their terms, methinks, before remanning for an assault. Too bad the electorate they've been fleecing and fooling for the last 40 years have caught on...because The Orange Dumpster-Fire has outted all their bullshit for exactly what it is. Now they just have to try to save a few Senate seats and cling to the hope that they don't have to rethink (fully) their miserable positions for the last decade.
The Kochs will do what they can to soothe their ruffled feefees with liquid millions...until the House and senate make it harder for the brothers to do that. Then hopefully, they will eventual shuffle off this mortal coil and their progeny will sit back, shut up and live happily off of their billions.
Wow...guess I was feeling the GRR tonight, lol!!
Edited Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 11:54 pm (UTC)
Ultimately, they won't be; they'll bind their wounds and wait a few years (whether that reaches into the double digits, I don't know), and rise again. I can only hope the party rises in its earlier form of a moderate conservative party, socially un-crazy, and fiscally very conservative. I'd still never vote for someone from that type of Republican party, but it's a party that I reluctantly think is necessary for the American style of democracy to succeed. Having only a single healthy party is bad for the country, as we've increasingly seen during the GOP's meltdown (which I contend has been happening since about 2003, just before Obama's first term. (And they've been going increasingly toxic, of course, since the late 1970s, as Reagan ascended to power, but that's another whole bucket of rancid worms.)
That's what I'm hoping. Like the turning point that upended George Wallace's campaign (and party!) forcing it to change or die. We DO need opposing views. We need all people represented and find ways to compromise in efforts to bring about change and progress. NOT obstruction, doom-ladened, hate-mongering - which has been at the core of the GOP's rhetoric for the last decade (at the very least!) Nixon started us down this road and Trump is finishing it.
These debates are actually frightening in how much of a train wreck they have all been on Trump's end. All of them. He hasn't won a single one. He hasn't changed his tactics at all.
If anything, he's digging in his heels and worsening things even more.
Oh, aye, I agree with you completely. I mean, if he really doesn't see that he's going to go down like a boat anchor, he's living in an even more impenetrable bubble than Romney and his people were four years ago - and they were living in la-la land, as post-election stories and analyses showed.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 10:30 pm (UTC)Don't worry, I can answer that for you: He won't.
He's not even capable of entertaining the notion of losing.
AND he's already on record saying that if Clinton wins, that'll prove the system is rigged.
There is no way on Earth he will accept he result--unless the worst happens and HE wins, of course.
But that's a notion I refuse to entertain.
no subject
Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 02:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Saturday, 22 October 2016 07:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Saturday, 22 October 2016 07:10 pm (UTC)He's not even capable of entertaining the notion of losing.
Hmmm...I wonder if the pretty clear prep work he's doing, stirring up his fans and stans (Lord. Trump stans - is there anything more frightening this side of Daesh or Paul Ryan?) in advance of the election might not mean he has indeed entertained the notion of losing, and is kicking futilely against the pricks?
But that's a notion I refuse to entertain.
No, he won't win. It's what will come afterward that will be of import.
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 05:41 am (UTC)ETA: I already bet that the only way he'd accept the election results is if he won.
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 01:07 pm (UTC)I like what Joss Whedon is supposed to have called him: orange muppet Hitler (although I contend that he's actually closer to Mussolini.)
I'm afraid you're right about what he'd actually accept, but I'm hoping those around him will actually try to restrain him on Nov. 9, rather than encourage his undemocratic insanity.
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 01:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 06:25 pm (UTC)Yeah. Even were he to suddenly turn polite, responsible and sane, and tell everyone not to be violent assholes after he loses, he won't be able to convince the ones he's already stoked to a freanzy.
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 02:53 pm (UTC)ETA: "Sherlock" gif for the win!
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 06:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 04:47 pm (UTC)♥
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 06:28 pm (UTC)Until now.
And thank you for reminding me not to bang my head against a wall. That's become an increasingly attractive possibility this year.
As Orange Muppet Hitler might say in one of his tweets: SAD.
no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 07:24 pm (UTC)Sorry for the rant. You know it's bad when you start thinking "I really shouldn't be complaining, at least we don't have a senseless orange bigot running for president!". The world's standards are going down XD (Then again, we'd probably have had Dominique Strauss-Kahn for president if we hadn't randomly discovered he wasn't above trying to rape women, so who are we to judge.)
♥
no subject
Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 11:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Saturday, 22 October 2016 04:24 pm (UTC)And I don't really know, but sometimes I get the feeling that the media (I'm talking mostly TV and the social media craze) doesn't help much. What I mean is, somehow we seem to get stuck with a mindset in which politicians are better off trying to be the one that shouts the loudest and stays the limelight, rather than the one that tries to push forward structured plans. In France it's like every other day, a politician will say one awkward and/or problematic sentence, it'll get pulled right out of context and everyone will spend the week commenting the hell out of it while ignoring every other problem. It's like the Reign of the Sensational or something. And when we do get a few people who try to work out a real project, it's like it just doesn't catch, while the ones who "play the game" get all the attention (both positive and negative, of course). It's kind of disheartening. And it encourages that whole shallow, career-oriented, short-term-benefit attitude in politicians. Can't we ever break out of the catch-22s?!
*hugs*
no subject
Date: Sunday, 23 October 2016 06:57 pm (UTC)Yes, it's what we call the horse race syndrome. We reporters and editors and opinion writers spend far too much time handicapping the campaign - the horse race - instead of paying attention to the policies each candidate espouses, and writing about those so that readers have the information with which to make up their minds. It's because a horse race is easy, and exciting. Policy comprehension, and the subsequent effort to make those policies equally comprehensible to our readers, is tough. So we don't do it, and that's not only a crying shame, it's almost a crime.
I don't know if we can break out of the cycle. We'd need a lot of brave and creative people at the top of the various media and print journalism heaps; brave, to start doing the right thing and sticking with it, when company bean-counters are saying, "No, you need to talk about the exciting thing, because that's bringing in more ads/clicks/etc.!" And creative, to successfully turn what could be dry policy material into the kind of gripping writing we normally employ as we talk about the horse-race. It is possible to write policy in a gripping manner; we just have to have the will to do it.
no subject
Date: Monday, 24 October 2016 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Thursday, 20 October 2016 07:43 pm (UTC)That's Madame President, to you, sirwho is stealing his election...and his Emmy. UGH.*HUGS*
no subject
Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 11:35 pm (UTC)That's Madame President, to you, sir*snort* I wouldn't call him sir, but you're being more civilized than I would be.
You make a good point about his attitude ... he does, I think, imagine himself as the star of some reality show, not as the leader of a democracy. What I can't understand are why none of the people around him call him on his shit, even if it means they'll be shown the door. They all have to know the man's not going to win. They're all rats. Shouldn't they be leaving the sinking ship, rather than sticking around?
no subject
Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 11:54 pm (UTC)His kids believe his bullshit, though there is evidence around them that it is bullshit. It's almost like they were originally gaslighted, now they're in on their own brainwashing...with a vengenance! Makes me wonder if they are deliberately goading him into the inevitable failure, even as it sets fire to their own escape-boat. As for the rest of his 'campaign help', they know they are sunk. Might as well ride him to the bottom, write books about it and get their own back that way. After all, the Trump name=shit now...and he won't have the financial ability to hit back with lawsuits when it is all over.
The GOP is rather finished as well - and they are just busy lasting out their terms, methinks, before remanning for an assault. Too bad the electorate they've been fleecing and fooling for the last 40 years have caught on...because The Orange Dumpster-Fire has outted all their bullshit for exactly what it is. Now they just have to try to save a few Senate seats and cling to the hope that they don't have to rethink (fully) their miserable positions for the last decade.
The Kochs will do what they can to soothe their ruffled feefees with liquid millions...until the House and senate make it harder for the brothers to do that. Then hopefully, they will eventual shuffle off this mortal coil and their progeny will sit back, shut up and live happily off of their billions.
Wow...guess I was feeling the GRR tonight, lol!!
no subject
Date: Sunday, 23 October 2016 07:10 pm (UTC)Ultimately, they won't be; they'll bind their wounds and wait a few years (whether that reaches into the double digits, I don't know), and rise again. I can only hope the party rises in its earlier form of a moderate conservative party, socially un-crazy, and fiscally very conservative. I'd still never vote for someone from that type of Republican party, but it's a party that I reluctantly think is necessary for the American style of democracy to succeed. Having only a single healthy party is bad for the country, as we've increasingly seen during the GOP's meltdown (which I contend has been happening since about 2003, just before Obama's first term. (And they've been going increasingly toxic, of course, since the late 1970s, as Reagan ascended to power, but that's another whole bucket of rancid worms.)
no subject
Date: Monday, 24 October 2016 05:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 25 October 2016 06:31 pm (UTC)Oh, you're far too kind. I go back to whenever the hell Grover Norquist got into the game.
no subject
Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 03:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: Friday, 21 October 2016 11:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: Saturday, 22 October 2016 01:34 am (UTC)These debates are actually frightening in how much of a train wreck they have all been on Trump's end. All of them. He hasn't won a single one. He hasn't changed his tactics at all.
If anything, he's digging in his heels and worsening things even more.
no subject
Date: Sunday, 23 October 2016 06:58 pm (UTC)