THURSDAY, JANUARY 25, 2024
This morning, we cite a new survey: Can President Biden do it?
As we embark on this fateful Year That Will Be, that seems like the only real question. Yesterday morning, we reported a sudden jolt of hope, thanks to one Keystone State survey:
New Pennsylvania poll shows Biden leading Trump in head-to-head
A new, too-early-to-mean-much poll of Pennsylvania voters shows incumbent President Joe Biden holding a 7.5 percentage point lead over former President Donald J. Trump.
Dear God, let the worm start to turn! We received an infusion of hope.
Then, late last evening, we stumbled upon a recent detailed survey by ABC News / Ipsos. It had been conducted two weeks back. Its results were released on January 14.
We don't think we'd seen its results reported. Some results were deeply dismaying:
Trump tops his opponents while Biden hits a new low in approval ahead of Iowa caucus: POLL
The 2024 primary season begins with Donald Trump well ahead of his Republican opponents on key measures of popularity, while Joe Biden's job approval rating has dropped to a low for any president in the past 15 years, a new ABC News/Ipsos poll finds.
[...]
Biden leads Trump, by 15 points, in one of three attributes tested in the survey—being honest and trustworthy. Forty-one percent say this describes Biden, vs. 26% who say it applies to Trump. That's down from a high of 38% for Trump, last reached in April 2017, three months into his presidency, and it's a point from his low on honesty and trustworthiness.
Trump comes back, though, with advantages in two other areas. Forty-seven percent say he has the mental sharpness it takes to serve effectively as president, compared with 28% who say this of Biden. And more, 57%, say Trump has the physical health necessary to serve, again compared with 28% for Biden.
Along this one survey's respondents, Trump was rated much higher than Biden on a measure of "the mental sharpness it takes to serve effectively." Trump was also rated much higher on a measure of "the physical health necessary to serve."
We can't say we were shocked to see that substantial divide. We can say we found it dismaying.
As with that Pennsylvania survey, so too here. These results came from one single survey. Such surveys can always be wrong, and November is far, far away.
Having said that, we'll add this:
We aren't surprised to see results like that from a serious survey. We ourselves regard Candidate Trump as badly disordered, presumably clinically so—but he doesn't seem that way to tens of millions of other American voters.
Beyond that, it's as we noted a few months back. Candidate Trump is spilling with a type of energy, much as Yeats famously said:
The Second Coming
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
For ourselves, we don't refer to people who are clinically afflicted in a serious way as "the worst." In our view, they need to be stopped from harming others and themselves, at which point they should be pitied for the loss of human potential involved in their affliction.
That said, Candidate Trump is very much full of passionate intensity; he can keep up the passion for hours. Attempting to seize on a few slips of the tongue as a bulwark against these passionate onslaughts strikes us as a bit of a ghost dance.
That said, the results of that ABC / Ipsos survey may explain why the White House seems to have moved in this new direction in its recent messaging, with blue tribe pundits following along behind.
Candidate Trump is filled with intensity; he can keep up the bullroar for hours. Now for a confession:
When we see old tape of President Biden, even from the 2020 campaign, we don't feel entirely sure that that person still exists. We've seen a lot of tape from the past year which fills us with concern about what might happen this year, as Candidate Trump seeks his own second coming.
Can President Biden do it this year? Will he be able to function as a forceful and effective candidate on his own behalf?
In our view, that remains to be seen.
Tens of millions of people are going to vote for Candidate Trump, as is their perfect right. We disagree with their view of this matter. But then, they disagree with our view, as is their perfect right.
This will be a year unlike any other. In our view, one major question remains:
Will Biden be able to do it?
Yesterday, we teased a bit of advice from one NeverTrumper. We tend to disagree with certain particulars in his view of this matter, but we think his overall advice is sound.
The NeverTrumper to whom we referred was New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, a man of the pre-Trump center right. Early in this week's version of The Conversation, he told Gail Collins this:
COLLINS (1/23/24): New Hampshire’s tomorrow, and even if Nikki Haley wins, it isn’t very likely she’ll be going any farther. Which means Trump will, for all practical purposes, be the nominee by the middle of this week. You want to offer up any positive thoughts?
STEPHENS: I have none.
COLLINS: Aw, c’mon. I know you’re anti-Donald, but at least tell us something chipper the rational part of your side is thinking.
STEPHENS: I think you’re referring to an essay I wrote called “The Case for Trump … by Someone Who Wants Him to Lose.” Some readers accused me of normalizing Trump. But it was written in the spirit of know your enemy.
Given the stakes, the jocular tone of these conversations has always driven us crazy. That said, when Stephens writes about Candidate Trump, he says that he is writing "in the spirit of know your enemy."
In this week's conversation with Collins, he continued directly from there:
STEPHENS (continuing directly): Trump’s opponents have consistently done us all a disservice by underestimating his strength, misunderstanding his appeal and misunderestimating (to borrow a word) his presidency. And we’ve done our side an even bigger disservice by too often being smug and moralistic.
COLLINS: You know, it’s been a long time since I heard a Trump critic articulate a defense of Trump. Appreciate the chance for a needed shaking-up. Not looking forward to it, but go on.
Collins almost never quits with the tongue in cheek approach. We think it's time to retire the tone, but we agree with Stephens in a general way—we think our blue tribe has often "done our side an even bigger disservice by too often being smug and moralistic," dating back decades and years.
We think that dates back many years, all the way back to the 1960s. Regarding the specific appeal of the man who established himself as the nation's top birther, we agree with some of what Stephens says, may agree less concerning a few other points.
We'll review those points tomorrow, venturing back to the earlier column to which Stephens refers. We'll close today with this:
The dumbest were filled with passionate bullsh*t on last evening's Gutfeld! program. Referring back to yesterday's Kevin Drum post, the destructive meltdown in the American discourse is one of those nagging "problems" our country has yet to solve.
This afternoon, we'll offer more on that general matter. But we think Kevin, whose work we have long admired, is playing a bit of a Pollyanna card in his recent ruminations.
Trump may crash and burn today. He may sign a plea deal tomorrow.
It's also possible that he'll power ahead and win again in November, perhaps while losing the popular vote.
Will our nation lose its democracy? We have no idea. That said, the dumbness was everywhere on Gutfeld! last night, dispensed by five stunningly empty heads and a new, slicker approach from Fox. Needless to say, Gutfeld himself referred to Gretchen Whitmer as a "ho," then said he was only kidding around.
The abused, angry fellow is like that.
The dumbness last night was astounding. On the other hand, we also despaired over the degree of dumbness driving the comments which followed Kevin's recent post.
There's no cure for the human condition! Historically, we humans form ourselves into tribes, then proceed downhill from there.
We deny and deny and deny and deny. We love it when you critique the others. We hate it when you say there could possibly be an improvement over here, among the giants universally found within our infallible side.
Tomorrow: Three anti-Trumpers offer advice. They span the political spectrum.
DiC - 4Q GDP growth 3.3%! How can it be that the Biden economy just keeps getting better and better and better?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete"Can President Biden do it this year? "
Having a genius abstract painter son is a UGE advantage. It should be emphasized, non-stop, everywhere.
And why aren't his genius paintings donated to the Louvre, for the whole world to enjoy?
That's unconscionable.
The mainstream and liberal media choose to show snippets where Trump mis-states or rambles or uses a wrong name. They don't show the same for Biden. Meanwhile the conservative media choose to show snippets where Biden mis-states or rambles or uses a wrong name. They don't show the same for Trump.
ReplyDeleteAs a result, we all think our candidate is mentally fine and the other candidate is showing signs of dementia.
Of course Biden does it nearly every day, and Trump once a month maybe.
DeleteLashing out at the Houthis, Biden is showing signs of political panic.
DeleteWell, obviously he has to do something to make sure that the genocide in Gaza goes as planned.
DeleteI mean, the military operation in Gaza.
DeleteYou mean normal people are not trying to destroy Biden and help your guy? Gee, I wonder why. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that your guy is an abomination fighting 91 felony counts, business fraud, and keeps stepping on the same rake in his defamation of EJ Carroll? You think Edward R Murrow should have treated Hitler the same as FDR? Go fuck yourself, David, you whiny ass crybaby. Your guy is a fucking unstable ignorant crazy lunatic who tried to overturn a fucking election. Get that thru your fucking thick skull. He has forfeited his claim to being treated fairly by the media.
DeleteDiC is upset that mainstream media is not being fair to the crazy lunatic who's been running around promising vengeance on the mainstream media. What the fuck is wrong with your brain, David?
DeleteI agree with all the factual claims you make here. All of them. And I think they're well-put.
DeleteI take issue with "Go fuck yourself, David, you whiny ass crybaby." I think Somerby's message is that lashing out like this is the normal human reaction, but that this normal human reaction will ultimately doom our nation.
I was referring to 12:37.
DeleteDana Milbank (Washington Post) recently described yet another symptom of dementia in is recent speeches. He said that even when Trump was reading from a teleprompter, he would insert short "factual" statements and stories, then later in his speech he would repeat the same story again, oblivious to having already said that same thing earlier in the speech. He didn't do this once, but repeatedly, with different stories and tangents. The problem that makes this a symptom of dementia is that he wasn't aware that he was repeating himself so much. Milbank, who has relatives with dementia, said that was triggering for him because it was such a familiar behavior among those with dementia.
DeleteThe press has not picked up on the at all, to my knowledge, beyond Milbank's personal opinion piece.
It isn't as if Milbank were a left wing operative. He says this about his politics:
"Milbank has stated that his policy on United States presidential elections is to vote for the best candidate who is not on the ballot. He voted for John McCain in 2000, Chuck Hagel in 2004, and Michael Bloomberg in 2008."
But Milbank is a critic of extremist Republican politics (going back to Newt Gingrich), calling them The Destructionists the title of his recent book).
Pied Piper, David in Cal is a troll. There is no reason to treat him like a persuadable voter who hasn't made up his mind yet. David is shilling for the right and he knows what he is doing. He deserves the vilification because, unlike actual voters, he is an agent of evil who is knowingly trying to get the worst president even reelected at a crucial point in history when we desperately need someone who knows what he is doing.
DeleteJust look for example at how Trump is behaving in his defamation and fraud trials, the contempt he expresses in court for the judges. Any other defendant would have been gagged and restrained by now.
DeleteHow is the "conservative media" reporting his antics in the court, David? You getting the full flavor?
Alina Habba may be in trouble for lying to the judge about feeling sick and having covid and then going to a party without a mask the same evening. Judges don't like it when attorneys lie to them.
Delete1:44 - DiC is "an agent of evil"? Really? Have you considered the possibility that you've lost your grip a little?
Delete(If so, I understand, for all the reasons (and more) that you so eloquently laid out at 12:37.)
But, more to the point: Have you considered how calling DiC (and Others) an "agent of evil" might, just possibly, be counterproductive to the essential task at hand -- the reelection of Joseph Biden?
David occasionally reveals that he is not here to actually discuss anything but to post Republican disinformation and propaganda in furtherance of Trump's election. I consider Trump evil. For one thing, he created unnecessary deaths during covid with his mishandling of the crisis (promoting quack cures that his cronies benefitted from financially, for example). Assaulting women is evil, in my opinion. Trump is an agent of evil. To the extent that David helps Trump to do this, that makes David an accomplice in Trump's evil. And yes, I think that fits the definition of "agent of evil." Unlike Somerby, I disagree that MAGA Trump supporters can be persuaded to abandon Trump by anything I say in blog comments. I did want to make it clear that David was propagandizing and not discussing, since he is one of the few trolls who does both.
DeleteSo, to answer your question, yes I have certainly considered whether calling Trump and by extension David agents of evil will affect Biden's reelection. I reached the conclusion that it will have no impact on that at all. But it might help those reading the comments who are undecided reconsider whether Trump is as universally supported as his or her family and friends might think.
And, I also have the right to express my own political opinion of Trump -- that he is majorly evil and without excuse or redemption -- because this is a free country if only temporarily, and if there is a real David, our opinions of him here might matter to him. He may have the shred of a conscience left.
I am an English cricketer, or an American soccer player, or an Australian politician. In any case, I am Kevin Corby.
ReplyDelete"Dear God, let the worm start to turn! We received an infusion of hope."
ReplyDeleteIt is foolish to let your hopes rise and fall from poll to poll, especially this early in the campaign. A better way to maintain hope is to do work yourself toward helping Biden win. Actively working toward the outcome you want gives a greater feeling of control over circumstances and that is important when the outcome will have such a large impact on all of our lives. Plus every bit of help is needed, especially for candidates at the local level.
Thank you for the DNC talking points.
DeletePied Piper -- here is another example of a troll comment that refuses to engage the content of the comment but merely insults the author.
DeleteSo is Bob saying his good friends and neighbors are clinically afflicted?” He would seem to be.
ReplyDeleteDavid is usually cognitive, but when he discusses certain subjects, he becomes ignitive. President Trump is one of those subjects.
ReplyDeleteSorry Bob, but other than taking away his high paying job which he will say anything to keep, the only one to solve Gutfeld is Gutfeld. And liberals have nothing to say about who gets hired at Fox. In addition, Bob, the only one who can solve you writing stupid shit like that is you.
ReplyDelete"Beyond that, it's as we noted a few months back. Candidate Trump is spilling with a type of energy"
ReplyDeleteThis may be the Republican talking point, but when you actually watch Trump speak, he is not "spilling with a type of energy" at all. He is lethargic, as if he were going through the motions. He talks in a monotone, ponderously, as if reflecting the mood of a funeral. He is only animated when angry, as he was toward Nikki Haley Tuesday night, but his "victory" speech in Iowa was very low energy.
And when you see snippets of Trump in the news, walking down a corrider at his court appearance or outside a building, he is not only low energy but seems to be shuffling, looks disoriented, and is unkempt in his usual grooming. People have tweeted pictures of him in which his hair is odd looking and his face is not its usual shade of spray-tan. He doesn't seem to be the same guy who campaigned in 2020, much less 2016.
So, I don't see why Somerby is talking about Trump's special energy when he doesn't display that any more. He carries him self like a beaten, defeated man.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/24/trump-rally-speeches-maga-vibes-00137364
"But something deeper than distraction or fatigue plagued the former president’s appearances in New Hampshire. Trump’s speeches have always been rambling and directionless, but in 2024, they have the additional drawback of being inescapably monotonous.
His rallies aren’t fundamentally different than they have been in past elections, but therein lies the problem: There’s little new substance or material in this year’s revival of the Trump Show. His core grievances — against the “radical left Democrats,” the deep state, the RINOs, the globalists, the media — are little changed since he first started running for president in 2015, and his schticks — spinning out new nicknames for his rivals, goading the crowd to boo the press — are all retreads. Trump may still be full of venom and fury, but his laugh lines feel wooden and rehearsed, his digressions lacking color and zing."
Why is Somerby seeing something that others don't? Especially since he says he doesn't want Trump to win?
DeleteSomerby quotes Stephens, but this is a theme Somerby himself has expressed here repeatedly:
ReplyDelete"And we’ve done our side an even bigger disservice by too often being smug and moralistic."
Shall we not stick up for the values we consider important? Shall we not point out the moral failures of a candidate for President of the United States?
Somerby/Stephens might have a point if we were discussing the way Mitt Romney strapped his dog's kennel (dog inside) to the top of his car. That is a dubious moral failure but many people care passionately about how dogs are treated.
But is that what liberals are doing with Trump? The man has 91 felony counts charge against him in upcoming criminal trials. He has already been convicted of business fraud on a massive scale. He has been found liable for sexual abuse and defamation and is now being tried again for repeating his defamatory remarks. Soon he will start the trial for paying off Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about his sexual liaison with her, using campaign funds (an illegal act from 2016). The trials for meddling in GA election results, and for his part in the 1/6 insurrection, and for stealing and refusing to return highly classified documents after leaving the presidency, will go on, even if not before the election in November. Voters should know about each of these moral failings. But there is more. There is his new relationship (outside court) with Alina Habba and his estrangement from Melania, his vicious public attacks on everyone he hates, his ongoing grifting by telling lies to his remaining followers in order to get more money.
One need not be smug or "moralistic" to be repelled by Trump and his behavior, so much of which has been inappropriate AND illegal, making a mockery of the presidency when he held office and making a mockery of campaign politics now. In his victory speech last Tuesday, he mocked Nikki Haley's dress and said she would be investigated for 5 matters (only he knows what they are), managing to phrase his remarks as thuggish threats.
But Somerby and Stephens think the problem is that we liberals are too smug and moralistic. We need to lighten up and give a guy a chance, apparently, because Republicans don't like having their crimes pointed out to their faces.
And Somerby seems to have no clue how ridiculous he sounds when he writes such things. That would make me wonder about Somerby's grasp on reality, if he weren't so obviously shilling for Trump and the right. And what is the morality of a person who calls himself a liberal doing that?
We may be smug but we aren't fools over here in our tribe.
Thank you. It's almost like you could be a spokesperson for the DNC.
DeletePied Piper, here is an example of a trolling comment (@3:18). This person responds to nothing in what was said by @1:42 but just namecalls by labeling the author as a DNC stooge (an insult with freight among Bernie types). You can't have a discussion when people refuse to participate and are only here to insult others.
DeleteThere's nothing to engage with. There's nothing to respond to. It's 100% DNC propaganda. You said the same thing over and over. Your side is 100% totally right all the time and the other side is 100% totally wrong. And any idea or any statement that is not 100% in line with the DNC talking points you espouse must be "shilling for the right". You say the same thing over and over and over. You're a DNC bot. You have not one interesting idea. Not one idea that deviates from the DNC Party line.
DeleteSo the only response really is "Yes. Thank you. We understand what the DNC thinks but thank you for repeating it here as you always do. Too bad you don't ever have one interesting or original idea or any idea at all that is not exactly in line with what the DNC thinks."
Here’s a novel idea — what if people hold opinions as individuals with their own views, not by adopting or joining sides and parroting lines dictated by others. You are describing what trolls do, not people. I am a person and I have never read any DNC statement or talked anyone at the DNC. You are boring and I am losing interest in you. I cannot see how anything you say will keep Trump from being president again.
DeleteSuper - you hold opinions as an individual with your own views that are exactly, 100 percent of the time, word for word what the Democratic Party wants people to think. Your opinions as an individual with your own views have no originality all all, ever. And not only that, you don't just repeat DNC talking points everyday, you discourage others from expressing any opinion that deviates from the party line. You discourage any debate and question people's loyalty if they do. Which is the behavior of a brown nosing, establishment ass kissing stooge for power.
DeleteAnd how is this going to keep Trump out of office?
DeleteYou keep Trump out of office by appealing to American people's values and making them feel like you understand and represent their interests.
DeleteInstead you do the opposite by trying to throw him in jail and questioning the loyalty of anyone exercising their right to freely speak their mind. That helps Trump. Enormously. And it's just shitty on a human level.
You don't keep Trump out of office by gaslighting people who freely express their opinions.
Delete"Somerby seems to have no clue how ridiculous he sounds when he writes such things. That would make me wonder about Somerby's grasp on reality, if he weren't so obviously shilling for Trump and the right. And what is the morality of a person who calls himself a liberal doing that?
"Gutfeld himself referred to Gretchen Whitmer as a "ho," then said he was only kidding around.
ReplyDeleteThe abused, angry fellow is like that."
What is the evidence that Gutfield was ever abused, or that he tells mean-spirited right wing jokes because he is "angry"?
Is Somerby now just automatically transferring his excuses for Tucker Carlson's misbehavior over to other right wingers, even Trump, without evidence or explanation? Gutfield may have had a happy, normal childhood, for all we know. It is wrong to automatically excuse wrong behavior by calling the perpetrator an abused, angry person.
Gutfield is responsible for his own behavior. So is Somerby and so is Trump. Even Melania is responsible for her behavior. Excusing Republicans for being awful is not how society works, nor should it work that way.
All of the efforts to normalize Trump, overlooking what he says and does, pretending he is performing well when he is just making money for himself and his cronies, these are the disservices to voters, readers of opinion pieces, and the rest of us who need a real president in office not the fraud with orange hair foisted upon us by Putin in 2016.
DeleteLiberals, all of them, they feel abused on account of not being aborted, in violation of women's rights. That's why they think the others must also feel abused.
@2:10 Your mistake in your otherwise unfunny joke is that Somerby is not a liberal at all, but he is the one calling Gutfield abused.
DeleteWhy do trolls have so much trouble with thinking?
Delete"It's also possible that he'll power ahead and win again in November, perhaps while losing the popular vote. "
ReplyDeletePerhaps while losing the popular vote? Of course while losing the popular vote. Trump didn't even win the popular vote in 2016, when he had his best chance.
Trump lies about when he won what but Somerby shouldn't pretend to believe him. Trump claimed to have won the Iowa primary three times, when he lost to Ted Cruz the first time around.
Somerby would of course say that "anything is possible," but that isn't true in the real world. So why is Somerby humoring Trump like that? If Somerby doesn't know that facts about what Trump has and hasn't won, shame on Somerby. If he does know, but says this stuff anyway, it is fair to ask why.
"On the other hand, we also despaired over the degree of dumbness driving the comments which followed Kevin's recent post."
ReplyDeleteDrum's commenters were mean to Somerby. Judging from the nyms, none of them are people who are currently commenting here, although they could be anonymous or using a different nym. Many said they used to read Somerby but consider it a waste of time now, and several noted his rightward shift (that is not our imagination).
This may have hit Somerby hard because he doesn't read the comments on his own blog. Why not? It might save him repeating mistaken information. But if he read his comments he would have no excuse for not responding to them and then he might have to either explain himself or change, and he clearly doesn't want to do either. So, in light of his laziness, I don't feel as sorry for Somerby as I might otherwise.
"This may have hit Somerby hard because he doesn't read the comments on his own blog. Why not?"
DeletePerhaps because this comment section is a cesspool?
I don't know why not. Ask Somerby. As a former standup comic, he should be used to heckling.
DeleteIt frequently happens that Somerby gets some technical point wrong, either factually or in terms of statistics (especially when he was discussing covid stats in 2020), but also when quoting a source. Then, the corrections have been factual or taken issue with interpretation of data, but Somerby doesn't care about being write, so these kinds of corrections have fallen on deaf ears. I had to go to Kevin Drum's blog to present the facts, links and arguments correcting Somerby's mistakes about retention in the MS schools and the relation to reading score improvement on the NAEP test. Drum finally retracted what he had said (following Somerby's mistaken discussion) but Somerby never did, even though he did seem to have read it. (It wasn't only me involved in that discussion.) It is frustrating when Somerby gets something wrong factually and won't correct it. And then he just keeps repeating the wrong info, over and over. That definitely isn't the way researchers and scientists work. So that leaves Somerby as a propagandist.
If that is what constitutes a "cesspool" to you, then you are perhaps not on the side of getting things right either. The rest of the noise in these blog comments comes from Somerby's refusal to moderate his comments. Trolls come here and say mean, aggressive, insulting things about regular commenters, who may or may not respond. That tends to suppress meaningful conversation about the issues Somerby has raised. Right wing trolls are the enemy of discussion because they feel they must "defend" Somerby from whatever anyone says, but they also spread right wing garbage in what is supposed to be a liberal blog. But all Somerby would have to do to eliminate the noise is to implement Disquis (or something similar) or edit out the spam.
Most of the conservative trolls here do not ever comment on anything substantive. They mostly attack other commenters, post OT right wing disinformation, post harrassing nonsense (like the corby posts), or present right wing views on pro-life, pro-Palestine, anti-black crime stats, etc. There used to be some graphic misogynist stuff but I think Blogspot got on Somerby's case about it and he filtered it out. He could do that with the rest of the cess too.
Anonymouse 5:03pm, it should be enough that you’ve had to put up with political contrarians and Somerby’s defenders, but being exposed to Bob’s opinions and his laxity towards people who aren’t you is a bridge too far for any blog reader who has simply graced a board with their presence.
DeleteI feel you, bro, I really do. The heart bleeds.
Right on schedule.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:35pm, I didn’t know you had one.
DeleteThere is so much you don’t know.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:48pm, keep it that way. There’s no telling what there is to know about you.
Delete"Tomorrow: Three anti-Trumpers offer advice. They span the political spectrum."
ReplyDeleteWhy would liberals take advice from anti-Trumpers when our party wasn't stupid enough to saddle themselves with Trump in the first place? Anti-Trumpers should be taking advice from us, but perhaps they are too embarrassed to admit it.
Given that only Republicans against Trump are properly called anti-Trumpers, while Democrats are called pro-Biden not anti anyone, how much of the political spectrum can the possibly span. Center-right to middle-right? Or maybe ex-MAGA to mental hospital escapee? There can't be many of the latter, since the South accepts such people as good ole boys (if they are white).
The bottom line is that Somerby going to keep feeding us right wing shit, day after day, no matter how often we complain, because, to Somerby, not reading your comments means never having to hear us choke on your vomit.
ReplyDeleteMy inerrancy issue is getting worse: I have to wear a diaper now.
Somerby is an ass.
I am Corby.
It is unclear why Somerby allows this spam into his comments while blocking other money-making comments.
ReplyDelete"Attempting to seize on a few slips of the tongue as a bulwark against these passionate onslaughts strikes us as a bit of a ghost dance."
ReplyDeleteHow, exactly, does Our Host think Candidate Trump built his advantage over Biden in perceptions of mental sharpness? It was done in exactly the way he now describes as a ghost dance--by seizing on every verbal bobble, each lapse of memory, and then promoting those as evidence of cognitive decline.
Are there better ways to blunt Trump's perceived advantage in mental acuity? Maybe. But those don't seem to be under discussion here.
Delete"How, exactly, does Our Host think Candidate Trump built his advantage over Biden in perceptions of mental sharpness?"
Could it be that, simply, Mr. Biden is obviously demented? You know, that simple.
And the "ghost dance" of accusing Mr. Trump is exactly what Bob suggests it is.
No, Biden is old but not demented. Thanks for trying.
DeleteTDH has convinced himself that Trump is clinically nuts. I think TDH is way off on this, and I've argued it several times before, without convincing TDH in the lease (likely because he hasn't even read my posts). (Well maybe trump his narcissistic with an ego that's gone berserk, but that characterizes a lot of world leaders. I'll make a few points. One - trump acts the way he does because it works. after all he was elected POTUS, a rare feat. He has millions of fans. Not everyone thinks the was TDH does, (or the way commenters here do), and there are reasons for that, rational and irrational. Two - Sasha Baron Cohen had a thing going where he played a character called Ali G. He'd somehow get interviews with various pols and other bigwigs; one I believe being Newt Gingrich. You'd have to see Ali G's act to get the drift. Newt Gingrich and the others that were roped in would take him seriously, it was a big joke on them. Trump appeared at one of Ali's skits. After a few short minutes of Ali's schtick, Trump simply walked off the stage. A third thing I observed. A tenant who had a restaurant in Trump's hotel in Washington D.C. brought a lawsuit seeking to break his lease (on the ground that Trump's unpopularity was killing his business). Online - it's probably still there - is a video of Trump being deposed. Trump's demeanor was nothing like the one we are familiar with where he's always boasting and exaggerating and insulting etc. He did it straight, probably has been deposed tons of times, seemed normal. TDH doesn't know Trump and doesn't seem to have any special insights about mental illness. I like TDH, have followed him for years, but TDH, in my opinion, should reconsider this Trump as mentally ill meme. Aside from anything else, if the press, which talks about Trump non-stop, decided somehow to follow TDH's advice, I can't see how it would make things better.
ReplyDeleteTrump was identified as a patsy by the Russian oligarchs he was in business with (introduced by Ivana). He was groomed and trained by becoming a vocal birther and Central Park 5 antagonist and taught how to be political. Then he parlayed The Apprentice into his political run, backed by Putin, in order to subvert American politics and foreign policy. That doesn’t make Trump talented. It makes him a traitor. They had to sabotage Hillary in multiple ways to win in 2016 and couldn’t repeat against Biden so Trump attempted a coup, which failed. So, I do not agree with point 1. Two, trump walked off from Ali G because a narcissist won’t share the stage.Beyond those quibbles, I agree that Trump cannot be considered mentally ill. He does not meet diagnostic criteria for anything except personality disorders. I do think he is showing dementia symptoms. I agree that the press cannot diagnose Trump and shouldn’t try. It just feeds the idea that he is being persecuted.
DeleteY'all need to stop watching old detective movies and get a life
Delete