We need to talk about Donald: the cursing & swearing thread

[Hermit]

I saw his Tweet where he punches a CNN-man. Is this real?

No.

[Tero]

Boring by now, Trump news cycle

Trump tweets something despicable.
Elected Republicans say, “I don’t approve of this.”
White House spokespeople offer laughably pathetic defenses of his behavior.
Journalists and commentators point out that as vulgar and infantile as Trump is being, his base loves this stuff, and therefore it may be a clever strategy and not just a hypersensitive, insecure man-child having a tantrum.

The problem with Step 4 of this cycle is twofold. First, by assuming his supporters are in fact a bunch of Cro-Magnon mouth-breathers who grunt in approval at any intimation of violence from their hero, it is deeply condescending. And second, it lets Trump off the hook, in effect excusing whatever he does as long as it can be hypothesized that it will be met with approval by his supporters.

But when we say that Trump’s base loves this stuff, we should be clear about what we mean when we refer to his “base.” As Trump’s pollster Tony Fabrizio said:

“They like him, they believe in him, they have not to any large degree been shaken from him, and the more the media attacks him, the more it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy on the side of the Trump supporters who fervently believe the media treat him unfairly.”[

However, that may be only partially true. Trump’s approval ratings are down in the 30s, meaning there are quite a few Republicans who voted for him last year but don’t approve of him now. In one recent poll by NPR and PBS, Republicans were evenly split on whether Trump’s use of Twitter is “effective and informative” or “reckless and distracting.”

But more importantly, if you react to the latest vile Trump tweet with “Whatever else you want to say about it, Trump’s base loves it,” you’re excusing his behavior. You’re putting it into a value-free context where the only thing that matters is whether it works. It probably doesn’t work, but even if it did, the president of the United States is sending out videos created by racist Reddit trolls that fantasize violence against the news media. That’s what’s important here, and if you don’t acknowledge that central and horrifying fact, you’re doing everyone a disservice.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... fff6a7b77a

[pErvinalia]

The CNN-man needs to see a medic about that growth on his head too!

I was watching some alleged expert commenting about this thing and Trump's motives for doing it, and he had all these contrived and complex reasons for his theory. It was all bollocks, IMO. My view on Trump is that he is a man-child. So I was trying to think of an appropriate situation of a child acting like Trump does. First thing that came to mind was that fat french kid bully in the movie Hancock. Anyone seen it and remember him? The kid is appropriately fat and fleshy and has a 1% whiff about him. He's a bully, but you can see that he is a small little man. All it took was someone who was actually physically strong to come along and he cried like a baby.

Speaking of the 1%, have you seen what Trump supporter Chris Christy was busted doing? Sums up the 1% perfectly.

[pErvinalia]

Boring by now, Trump news cycle

Trump tweets something despicable.
Elected Republicans say, “I don’t approve of this.”
White House spokespeople offer laughably pathetic defenses of his behavior.
Journalists and commentators point out that as vulgar and infantile as Trump is being, his base loves this stuff, and therefore it may be a clever strategy and not just a hypersensitive, insecure man-child having a tantrum.

This is exactly the type of thing this supposed "expert" I just mentioned was suggesting as well. To think that there's anything more behind Trump's tweeting than an impulsive man-child having mini tantrum is just ridiculous.

[Tero]

But the toddler is harder to remove from office than the asshole.

[pErvinalia]

Yeah. It's a serious problem.

[Animavore]

[Tero]

Fake president with fake fake...but terrific!...facts:
U.S.
DID TRUMP JUST LOSE HIS WAR WITH CNN? POLL FINDS MORE PEOPLE TRUST THE NETWORK THAN THE PRESIDENT
BY HARRIET SINCLAIR ON 7/4/17 AT 12:06 PM Newsweek

[Tero]

North Korea ready for missile intercourse
North Korea claims it test-launched its first intercontinental ballistic ...over 1700 miles
USA TODAY 9h ago
Over to you Trump...

[Brian Peacock]

Now, North Korea offers Trump a chance to be a true statesman in the traditional American mould - he can bomb some poor people in a far away place who offer no credible threat and boost his ratings any time he likes. I think the US is officially at Code Orange now.

[pErvinalia]

Was this a Type O Dong, or some new weaponry?

[Forty Two]

Now, North Korea offers Trump a chance to be a true statesman in the traditional American mould - he can bomb some poor people in a far away place who offer no credible threat and boost his ratings any time he likes. I think the US is officially at Code Orange now.

North Korea poses no credible threat? Tell that to South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, etc., and anyone within the 8,000 kilometer range of their longest range missile.

DPRK doesn't pose an existential threat to the US, but it does pose a significant threat to Japan and South Korea. This is brutal, monstrous regime in North Korea. There doesn't appear to be any need to propagandize against it. The people in North Korea are effectively living in a prison, some in actual prison camps. Movement between cities requires passports. Curfews at night. Informing on friends and family members. Unanimous election results. Three generations of punishment. Executions by artillery shells. Purges. Political prisons. A petrified people who are compelled in an Orwellian nightmare to literally worship two dead leaders and one live one.

[Brian Peacock]

And what do you think would be the response from Russia, China, the US and the rest of the international community if NK actually tried to bomb someone? A stiffly worded letter? NK are trolling - and Trump is easily trolled - but to launch a missile at any nation would represent an existential threat only to North Korea.

[Forty Two]

And what do you think would be the response from Russia, China, the US and the rest of the international community if NK actually tried to bomb someone? A stiffly worded letter? NK are trolling - and Trump is easily trolled - but to launch a missile at any nation would represent an existential threat only to North Korea.

What would be the reaction if they actually bombed someone? Like Seoul or a city in Japan? Obviously, the response would have to be overwhelming. That's the problem. It would be truly awful, for the people in North Korea as well as the people in South Korea and elsewhere, and globally for the massive impact such a conflict would have on the global economy.

Nobody on our side actually wants to blow up north Korea, so the goal is to prevent the Kim regime from starting another Korean war, like they started the first. So, this brinkmanship is all about that. The regime tries to bolster its position through convincing its opposition that any attempt to harm the regime will result in a devastating blow to the South, or others. Their goal is to put parts of the US at risk in that same way. The US goal is to isolate the Kim regime so that they know that if they do any of that, they will be annihilated, but the US does not want to annihilate them.

That kind of detente or mutually assured destruction is not a good thing, and it is inherently risky. We don't know when the Kim regime will or may reach a point of no return. They're never going to be arrested and put on trial. They'll die in a blaze of glory first. And, the more threats they can pose to foreign cities, the more they will be able to extort from their opponents and the US.

Existential threats aren't the only threats. Blowing up one city is enough. 3,000 people on 9/11/01 rocked the world economy, and started a continuing war and offshoot wars to this day. The fallout from, say, 10,000 people, or 100,000 people, from a Taepong Dong missile attack, even with conventional warheads, would be something none of us has seen, and none of us really wants to see.

It's really a bad situation, and comparing it to "trolling," in my view, minimizes the seriousness of it. Kim is not trolling. He is engaged in serious brinkmanship - geopolitical politics for keeps - laying it all on the line. He learned it from his father and grandfather, and their regime.

[pErvinalia]

Nobody on our side actually wants to blow up north Korea,

I do.