SATURDAY: It's the sheer stupidity, Stupid!

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2024

As the social order turns: Believe it or not, we're going to have a debate next week!

More likely, we're going to pretend to have a debate. Or perhaps it should be stated this way:

We're going to have what poses as a debate.

We're going to have something presented as a debate—but it seems there will be only one. Back in 1960, Candidates Kennedy and Nixon held four. Initially, the Kennedy camp had suggested five.

Such as it was at the time, nationwide polling switched after those famous debates, with Candidate Kennedy taking the lead away from Candidate Nixon. By the end of the fourth debate, Gallup had Kennedy leading Nixon by three points, 49-46. 

There's no way to know if those figures were accurate. In the end, the nationwide popular vote was a virtual tie, with Kennedy at 49.72 percent, Nixon at 49.55.

In The Making of The President 1960, Theodore White assessed the performances of the two candidates in their famous debates. When it came to the value of these debates as a way to educate the public, he offered a gloomy assessment, built around a complaint which seems almost quaint today.

By what rules did those debates proceed? By mutual agreement, opening statements by the candidates were eight minutes long, White noted. 

No one would tolerate that today! Grumpily, he offered this larger assessment: 

WHITE (page 291): It is much more difficult to measure the debates in terms of issues, of education of the American people to the tasks and problems before them. For there certainly were real differences of philosophy and ideas between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon—yet rarely in American history has there been a political campaign that discussed issues less or clarified them less.

The TV debates, in retrospect, were the greatest opportunity ever for such discussion, but it was an opportunity missed. It is difficult to blame the form of the debates for this entirely; yet the form and the compulsions of the medium must certainly have been contributory. The nature of both TV and radio is that they abhor silence and “dead time.” All TV and radio discussion programs are compelled to snap question and answer back and forth as if the contestants were adversaries in an intellectual tennis match. Although every experienced newspaperman and inquirer knows that the most thoughtful and responsive answers to any difficult question come after long pause, and that the longer the pause the more illuminating the thought that follows it, nonetheless the electronic media cannot bear to suffer a pause of more than five seconds; a pause of thirty seconds of dead time on air seems interminable. Thus, snapping their two-and-a-half-minute answers back and forth, both candidates could only react for the cameras and the people, they could not think. And, since two and a half minutes permit only a snatch of naked thought and a spatter of raw facts, both candidates, whenever caught out on a limb with a thought too heavy for two-minute exploration, a thought seemingly too bold or fresh to be accepted by the conditioned American mind, hastily scuttled back toward center as soon as they had enunciated the thought. 

Their opening statements were eight minutes long! After that, the candidates were restricted to a mere two and a half minutes in their answers to the questions they were asked to address.

This time limit "permitted only a snatch of naked thought and a spatter of raw facts," White complained. As an exploration of the day's major issues, the debates thereby turned out to be "an opportunity lost."

So said the famous journalist in his iconic book. It's safe to say that he had never seen anything like the sheer stupidity, joined to undisguised propaganda, which defines our public discourse today.

When it comes to our current White House campaign, only one summary captures the state of the culture:

It's the stupidity, Stupid!

We refer to the sheer stupidity put on display by "interviews" like the one we discussed in the course of this past week. Also, by the "interviews" described by Helen Lewis in her recent painful essay for The Atlantic.

Lewis writes from across the pond. Under current arrangements, this frees her to jettison the blinders which are widely maintained Over Here.

In her painful essay. Lewis describes the broader array of "interviews" in which one current nominee has been participating. We can't repost every word, but Lewis starts like this:

Trump’s Red-Pill Podcast Tour

One weirdness of listening to Donald Trump talk for any length of time is that, amid the syllable minestrone, he occasionally says something that is both intelligible and honest.

One such moment came during his appearance on the popular podcast hosted by the computer scientist Lex Fridman this week. “To get the word out,” Trump said, is important in politics, and television was becoming “a little bit older and maybe less significant.” The online sphere—podcasts and forums such as Spaces, on X—has usurped its importance. “I just see that these platforms are starting to dominate; they’re getting very big numbers,” Trump added.

Way back when, White complained about the way the TV debates failed to educate the public. 

Speaking with a computer scientist, Candidate Trump has now said that television itself has been losing importance—is being overtaken by the newer medium known as the podcast.

Trump said this to a computer scientist living in Texas. A bit later in her essay, Lewis describes the sheer stupidity which define the types of "interviews" in question:

...[I]n the past few months, Trump has become a fully fledged podcast bro, talking with the livestreamer Adin Ross about the prosecution of the rapper Young Thug, shooting the breeze with the YouTuber turned wrestler Logan Paul about German shepherds, and interrogating the former stand-up comedian Theo Von about cocaine. His running mate, J. D. Vance, meanwhile, sat down with the Nelk Boys, where he manspread luxuriantly between cases of their hard seltzer, Happy Dad. (Product placement is a big feature of interviews on popular bro influencers’ shows: A proprietary energy drink or iced tea, or a copy of their book, is usually floating around in the back of the shot.)

In this presidential election, both candidates are mostly avoiding set-piece interviews with traditional outlets—but only one can rely on a ready-made alternative media ecosystem. Kamala Harris finally did her first full-length sit-down last week, bringing Tim Walz along as a wingman. Instead of submitting Harris to adversarial accountability interviews, her team is wildly outspending the Trump campaign on digital ads, taking the Democrats’ message directly to voters. The Republicans have a cheaper, punkier strategy: hang out with all the boys.

“The funniest component of the Trump campaign’s media strategy so far is its commitment to dipshit outreach,” the Substacker Max Read wrote last month. The constellation of influencers with whom Trump has become enmeshed does not yet have a widely accepted name. “Manosphere” comes close, because it links together the graduates of YouTube prank channels, the Ultimate Fighting Championship boss Dana White’s sprawling empire, shitposters on Elon Musk’s X, and the male-dominated stand-up comedy scene. This is a subset of the podcast world with its own distinct political tang; it is suffused with the idea that society has become too feminized and cautious, and the antidote is spaces dedicated to energy drinks, combat sports, and saying stupid things about Hitler. Think of this as Trump’s red-pill podcast tour.

These podcasts are often self-consciously anti-intellectual, marketing themselves as the home of deliberately dumb acts, edgy jokes, and rambling conversations about UFOs and sports statistics. Their spiritual daddy is Joe Rogan, but whereas he presents himself as a disaffected liberal, the new generation is happy to back right-wing causes and candidates: The Nelk Boys danced the YMCA with Trump at a rally in 2020, and Ross has explicitly endorsed Trump for president.

In his famous book, White described a presidential campaign which was presented to the public by "forty or fifty men, all veterans of their craft, all proud of their integrity and their calling."

According to White, these menand at the time, they probably were all menwere "the finest in the profession of American journalism." They were "men of seniority and experience, some of them men of deep scholarship and wisdom."

That was White's assessment. Today, those journalists have been replaced by the assortment of flyweights and clowns to whom Trump turns for his interview sessions.

That includes the fellow who pretended to interview Trump for two hours on the Fox News Channel last weekend.

On that same "cable news" channel, the propaganda flows smoothly all day and all night, with D-list comedians and former professional wrestlers invited on the air to pretend to analyze the events of the day. For better or worse, the jugglers and clowns have replaced the proud professional journalists, with ranking journalists at organizations like the New York Times refusing to notice, report or discuss this remarkable cultural phenomenon.

For better or worse, this is the classic revolt from below. In classic fashion, the elites who still sit at the top of the heap avert their gaze as it happens. 

Across the pond, Lewis takes notice.

It's the stupidity, Stupid! The sheer stupidity of the "shitposting" which happens on Fox, joined to the sheer stupidity of the way the finer elements agree to avert their gaze, as they once did at Versailles.

Within this context, we're going to have a debate next week. No one knows what's going to happenbut we're scheduled for only one, not the traditional three, and surely not four or five.

In her essay, Lewis describes the sheer stupidity which now defines the cultural context. We tried to do the same thing with respect to the recent imitation of journalism performed on Fox by Mark Levin, AKA The Man Who Screams.

Our high priests today are screamers and clowns. In the finer precincts of Blue America, the stars avert their gaze.

This includes the stars of MSNBCthe overpaid "beloved colleagues" in whom we who live in Blue America been told to believe.


89 comments:

  1. "No one knows what's going to happen—but we're scheduled for only one, not the traditional three, and surely not four or five."

    If these are pretend debates, as Somerby contends, why have more than one? If they are as bad as Somerby claims, why does he want more of them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wish we could have debates without outside questioners from the media — just someone to manage the clock and see that they don’t interrupt each other. I would like to the candidates directly question each other.

      Never happen :(

      Delete
    2. Even in formal college debates, there is a question supplied to the teams to discuss. They don't just get up and shout back and forth at each other.

      Delete
    3. @10:39 The topic is automatic: Resolved — you should elect me rather than my opponent

      Delete
    4. Way too broad. This would invite a Republican-style gish gallop in which Trump would jump from subject to subject without ever addressing anything brought up by his opponent. That isn't a debate. It is more of what he already does in his interviews.

      Delete
    5. @11:40 - IMO the point of the debate is to help us decide who to vote for, not necessarily to have a good or coherent show.

      Yes, Trump might do what you said. That's been his pattern. If he did, that would turn off voters and he'd lose the election. In other words, if the debate went as you describe it, the debate would be a success, because it would tell people not to vote for Trump.

      Delete
    6. 12:17 that is what is going to happen, Trump will look like a buffoon and it will slightly enhance Harris’ chance of winning, so we don’t need some convoluted setup as you prescribe.

      Delete
    7. David, you admit that Trump does that during debates (and any public appearance, really), so why are you still supporting him? You should be as turned off by this as other viewers are.

      His staff is worried that he will let his negative attitude (bigotry) toward Harris show through and appear to be a mean bully, instead of engaging in meaningful discussion. I think that is highly likely, along with his non-responsive filibustering during his timeslots.

      Delete
    8. @12:55 - I support Trump because things went so much better when he was President. We didn't have inflation, dead Palestinian children, Russian atrocities in Ukraine, virtually uncontrolled illegal immigration, military unable to recruit enough qualified people, massive rocket attacks by Hezbollah on Northern Israel, putting opposing people in jail based on bogus, Trumped up charges..

      You may think Trump doesn't deserve credit and Biden deserve blame. Maybe you think it's just luck. In that case, let's say I'm voting for Trump because he brings good luck to the country and the world and the Democrats bring bad luck.

      Delete
    9. David, things may have gone well for you but they did not go well for the nation in general under Trump. Statistically, Democrats have better administrations than Republicans on a variety of measures.

      Delete
    10. David,
      What do you think Trump will do to streamline immigration, and make it easier to navigate?

      Delete
    11. Quite the laundry list from DIC. Worldwide COVID-related inflation was caused by Biden. Rockets targeted at Israel began in the last 4 years. Netanyahu is not responsible for the genocide of Gazans. Illegal immigration didn't spike under Trump compared with Obama. The Russian war with Ukraine that Trump threatened to assist the Russians with and got impeached for, didn't exist during his term. And massive COVID deaths during his term were not any of his failed police's fault. LOL.

      Delete
    12. @4:31 wrote, "The Russian war with Ukraine...didn't exist during [Trump's] term." Exactly. That's my point. A lot of bad things happened after Trump was gone that didn't happen when Trump was President.

      BTW maybe covid can be blamed for Biden's 9% inflation earlier in his term. But, Biden has no excuse for the current 3% inflation that's been hanging around for the last year. Inflation has remained too high despite strong actions by the Fed. The cause is Biden's profligate spending. Exhibit 1 is Biden's enormous gift to people with debt from college loans, which was estimated to cost $400 billion.

      You want to blame Trump for covid deaths, but
      Biden had a lot more covid deaths than Trump did.

      Delete
    13. You're so fucking dishonest, Dickhead.

      Delete
    14. The Russian war with Ukraine began in 2014. Are you really this ignorant?

      Delete
    15. The NY Times reported "Russian forces began their full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022"
      However, @7:59, you're right if you're thinking about Crimea.

      These two Russian invasions are reasons to vote for Trump. Under Trump, the Russians left Ukraine alone. Under Obama and Biden, the Russians grabbed Ukrainian territory. It's a safer world when Trump is President.

      Delete
    16. No, Trump let Russia keep Crimea and infiltrate Ukraine inpreparation for their invasion.

      Delete
    17. "It's a safer world when Trump is President."

      The weather was better, too.

      Delete
    18. Wrong about COVID deaths as well.
      https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-have-more-americans-died-covid-under-joe-biden-donald-trump-1661528
      You would like to include the period between Biden winning the election in November 2020 and his inauguration Jan 20, 2021 in order to blame Biden for a large spike in that winter. Does not fly. Or you would like to count 4 years of Biden vs roughly 1 year of Trump. Does not fly either. Have math and statistics changed since you did them at work as an actuary or are you basically a dishonest troll?

      The Fed's target for inflation is stated to be between 2 and 3%. The inflation rate for the YEAR ending in August 2024 was 2.9%. It has been on the steady decline for the 12 months ending last month. By comparison with inflation in Europe during 2021 it is estimated that The American Rescue Plan was responsible for 25% of rising inflation at that time, which is not miniscule, but not a primary driver. Have someone who understands math explain that to you. Better yet, have someone explain to you that Trump, whose economic plans going forward are widely panned in the financial/ economic community, is no longer running against Biden. And while they are at it, let Trump in on the secret.

      Delete
    19. No, @8:45, The Fed's target for inflation is not between 2% and 3%. The target is 2%.

      The Fed's own website says, "The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) judges that inflation of 2 percent over the longer run, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent with the Federal Reserve’s mandate for maximum employment and price stability."
      https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/economy_14400.htm

      Delete
    20. Holding Harris responsible for Biden's track record is about as logical as holding Mike Pence responsible
      for January 6th. Historians and presidential scholars are surveyed intermittently to rank presidents.
      Trump most recently came in dead last in a survey of roughly 150 such experts; even among those self identifying as conservative he landed in the bottom 5. This is in complete concordance with 40 out of 44 of Trump's appointees, who say he is unfit for office. But go ahead and continue drinking that Kool Aid.

      Delete
    21. @8:45 - over two and a half years ago, Newsweek reported, "Joe Biden, Elected to Tame the Virus, Sees His COVID Death Toll Surpass Donald Trump's".
      https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-elected-tame-virus-sees-his-covid-death-toll-surpass-donald-trumps-1654136

      Of course all the deaths since then were also during Biden's Presidency.

      IMO one reason for the continuing high death rate is that a lot of people are not getting vaccinated because they simply don't trust Biden.

      Delete
    22. "one reason for the continuing high death rate is that a lot of people are not getting vaccinated because they simply don't trust Biden."

      If only we had a leader we could trust. A simple, honest man of the people, who'd walk a mile in the rain rather than tell a fib, a man who doesn't just slap his name on any old product and try to make a cheap buck, no sirree, because a huckster like Biden who's just in it fer himself, why folks just naturally don't cotton to a feller like that, but if we had a regular 'ole blow-dried feller, a made-up feller, a feller with the grace to accept defeat without a lot of whining and lying and Capitol-stormin', why the world would be a peacefuller place with no diesease. And better weather too.

      If only we had a man like that.

      Delete
    23. In 2020 I was standing in the hospital room of an unvaccinated middle aged patient with COVID who would be dead in a week or so. The TV was on. Fox. The five mid-day talking heads were discussing the vaccine and denigrating Biden for promoting it as a cynical ploy to appeal to his liberal base. Nice enough guy; had a family. You can bet on his grave that he did not trust Biden. The right wing media outlets that spew this trash to rubes like DIC can rot in hell for their very active role in the debacle that was Trump's response to COVID, but Trump, being an impressionable, mentally impaired old man, was key to that disaster.

      Incidentally, how many right wing media outlets and influencers do you reckon are getting paychecks from Putin? WTF happened to Reagan's party?

      Delete
    24. David conflates "death toll" to "continuing high death rate" in support of his up-is-down, black-is-white claim. What continuing high death rate?

      Yet he's commandeered a large thread, in no small part due to his polite, seemingly genial patter which inevitably amounts to so much bullshit followed by a Gish gallop to something else which turns out to be more bullshit. Wash , rinse, repeat.

      Keep in mind, I'm not attacking him personally. Just what he insists on propounding. Like Somerby would say, I'm sure he's a very nice person.

      He needs to be shunned. Maybe then he'll go away.

      Delete
    25. I was gonna say I liked your debate format comment, but then you shit the bed again. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. Can you not remember the first impeachment? Where Trump was withheld military aid to Zelensky to fight the Ruskies unless he helped Rudy and his Russian spies dig up dirt on the Biden's. Come on man.. You are not that dumb.

      Delete
    26. If you Google " When did the Rusśo- Ukrainian war start?" an exact date comes up: February 27th 2024. And yet here we have DIC arguing that it started during Biden's tenure, completely ignoring the history of Trump (with Manafort) changing the Republican platform to the
      benefit of the Russians during the Republican convention and later being impeached for threatening to withhold needed arms for the defense of Ukraine. If Biden or any Democrat had done either of these things we would be hearing about it ad nauseam from DIC and the MAGA cult. Instead he pretends that there was no such war when Trump was president. There in fact was, Trump supported Putin, and likewise right wing media outlets have been nourished with Kremlin money to support Trump and promulgate a pro-Russian narrative. And yes, Leo, my time would be better spent not feeding the troll.

      Delete
    27. "I'm voting for Trump because he brings good luck to the country and the world and the Democrats bring bad luck."

      Superstition, in a plain word.

      Delete
    28. "Inflation has remained too high despite strong actions by the Fed. The cause is Biden's profligate spending. Exhibit 1 is Biden's enormous gift to people with debt from college loans, which was estimated to cost $400 billion."

      Spending blocked by the courts can't be blamed for inflation, Davey Dave.

      Delete
    29. "IMO one reason for the continuing high death rate is that a lot of people are not getting vaccinated because they simply don't trust Biden."

      Buh..buh...but Operation Warp Speed!

      Delete
    30. Quaker: There's always going to be an exhibit 2 to be discredited.

      Speaking of which, the % of total weekly deaths occurring in patients infected with COVID now varies somewhere between 1- 2.5 %, largely in the 75+ age group. Deaths due to COVID pneumonia are much lower. The raw numbers are 663 and 218 respectively for the week ending August 31. By comparison, COVID accounted for 13.3% of all deaths in 2021. It doesn't take a retired actuary to recognize that this is much improved. Or does it?

      Delete
    31. David in Cal,
      If Trump wins in November, I'd like to follow you around with a camera. Is that okay with you?
      I'm hoping to get a good shot of the look on your face when you, and your fellow Jews are pushed into cattle cars.

      Delete
    32. I am actually kind of curious how Dickhead in Cal doesn't suffer cognitive dissonance knowing his candidate is supporting a holocaust denier in the NC Senate race, Mark Robinson.

      It seems Robinson is willing to entertain all manner of conspiracy theories, too. He’s a Holocaust denier and has a history of antisemitic remarks. He’s suggested that the 1969 moon landing might have been fake, that 9/11 was an “inside job,” that the music industry is run by Satan, and that billionaire Democratic donor George Soros orchestrated the Boko Haram kidnappings of school girls in 2014.

      Last night Trump threatened that the mass deportations he is promising will "be bloody".

      Dickhead in Cal is not a nice guy.

      Delete
  2. "Our high priests today are screamers and clowns. In the finer precincts of Blue America, the stars avert their gaze."

    The left has been complaining that Trump's obvious dysfunction is being normalized by the press. How is that averting our gaze?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems odd to be criticizing screamers and clowns when Somerby had a career as a screamer and clown.

      Delete
    2. Bob is saying Trump is being treated as a 'normal' candidate rather than an historically dysfunctional megalomaniac.

      Delete
    3. So Somerby agrees with the left and the blue press? Why then does he say:

      "In the finer precincts of Blue America, the stars avert their gaze."

      Somerby isn't making any sense today.

      Delete
    4. He feels Blue America is "averting its gaze" from the decline in the quality of public discourse and journalism. Despite being aware of this cultural decline, the elites in Blue America choose not to confront it, much like the elites at Versailles ignored the changes happening around them.

      "For better or worse, the jugglers and clowns have replaced the proud professional journalists, with ranking journalists at organizations like the New York Times refusing to notice, report or discuss this remarkable cultural phenomenon."

      Delete
    5. Somerby is channeling his inner teenager, lashing out and calling everything “stupid”, since his “brilliance” has been largely unrecognized and thoroughly debunked.

      Furthermore, much like how Trump “fixed” his lie about that hurricane by using a Sharpie to draw a new path, Somerby is trying to bolster his nonsensical screed against the democratization of media, using cherry picked and misleading anecdotes.

      Delete
    6. Why isn't Somerby talking about the infiltration of right wing media by Russian operatives? That seems like a bigger scandal than Blue America averting its gaze (whatever that means).

      Delete
    7. “Somerby should be writing about X!”

      If you think X is more important than what Somerby wants to talk about, why don’t you start your own blog and write about X?

      Delete
    8. If Somerby thinks the media is averting it's gaze, why doesn't he just start his own media that gazes?

      Delete
    9. I think Russian infiltration of media is THE MOST IMPORTANT aspect of media criticism and I do not understand why Somerby is averting his gaze on it.

      Delete
    10. "If Somerby thinks the media is averting it's gaze, why doesn't he just start his own media that gazes?"

      Isn't that precisely what he's doing?

      Delete
    11. No, he's criticizing (or what the Right call "cancel culturing") the media.
      Akin to when commenters at TDH criticize (or what the Right calls "cancel culture") Somerby.

      Delete
    12. Criticizing is not the same as cancelling. Bob can describe flaws in the New York Times, but he cannot shut the paper down or fire its Editor. OTOH Scott Adams’s nationally syndicated Dilbert cartoon was removed from every newspaper in the country.

      Delete
    13. No one wanted to read him any more and the papers were getting complaints. That is the market at work.

      Delete
    14. Thank you, David.
      I had been confused about the difference between cancel culture and criticism. I now see the difference.
      However, now you have me confused about the difference between cancel culture and Capitalism.
      Perhaps you can clear that up for me, too.

      Delete
    15. When you market a product to the general public there are consequences to expressing ideas that are objectionable. Scott Adams should have known where his money was coming from and the potential consequences of his public statements. Maybe he did. More power to him if he decided to go public with his musings irrespective of the potential consequences in the print newspaper realm. If print media owners didn’t like writing checks to an asshole, that was their prerogative. So you would like to limit their freedom to do what they want with their money, DIC? Cathy Griffin ruined her career, likewise, by a stupid act. So what.

      Delete
  3. The NY Times is emphatically not "Blue America."

    Today, Somerby mocks the podcasts and social media that Trump has been employing to reach the disaffected bros who are his base now. At least Somerby is acknowledging that cable news is not the only way campaigns are reaching voters. Harris has been using social media as well, and the right wing together with the legacy cable and newspaper sources have been claiming she is avoiding exposure, hiding out. Meanwhile Trump holds "press conferences" where he takes no questions at all and town halls where no voters ask questions. Crickets from Somerby on that.

    Somerby needs to go back to square one and ask "where do people get their news today?" Then he might begin to understand why candidates are not campaigning in the old way, and especially why it is a waste of time to prepare and hold four or five debates in the remaining weeks of this election.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Meanwhile Trump holds "press conferences" where he takes no questions at all and town halls where no voters ask questions. Crickets from Somerby on that."

      Bob has recently done several posts on the vapid nature of interviews Trump has given.

      Delete
    2. But it is Blue America that is averting its eyes. How do you figure that?

      Delete
    3. @ 11:47 AM - What Bob doesn't muse nearly enough about is the media's sanitizing and normalizing Trump's unfocused, often venomous gibberish.

      Delete
    4. We all saw Trump’s response to the child care question, which was as bad or worse than anything Biden did in their debate. So the real story is that corporate media and Republicans are averting their gaze from Trump’s decline which has been ongoing for some time. This has nothing to do with “Blue America” which has always viewed Trump as a loon and a con, and is busy about trying to progress us towards a more equitable society.

      Delete
  4. Trump held a press conference (no questions allowed from the press) in which he "confessed" to the several dozen assaults alleged by women he has attacked. He is asking for the E.Jean Carroll verdict to be thrown out, attending the appeals court session. He attacked his lawyers and maligned the proceedings by misunderstanding that this appeal was not a place to introduce "new evidence". Surely someone on Trump's legal or campaign teams could have convinced him this was a bad idea!

    There are a lot of celebrities who do not have scores of women accusing them of sexual assault, so this idea that Trump attracts false accusations because he is wealthy or visible is ridiculous. But beyond that, the purpose for his appeal is that a court (judge and jury) has already convicted him of defaming one of his accusers, who he is judged to have raped. That is not an empty accusation, as Trump claims, but the result of judicial due process.

    We know who Trump is and what he has done throughout his life. His past is catching up with him, and it is about time! He is squealing, like the misogynistic pig he is. Right wingers with any brains are distancing themselves from Trump. He is going to lose this election and with it, the shield that has protected him from the consequences of his actions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exhibit No. 98253 proving what a fucking miserable bully coward Little Donny Chickenshit is. He avoided the trials and testifying under oath where he would be subjected to cross examination, but he is a big brave lying sack of shit when he can stand up in front of the cameras and spew his slanderous allegations safe in the knowledge that his target cannot defend themselves. What a fucking coward. No integrity. No shame. A punk coward cheap shot artist. And his fucking moronic cult fans keep telling me how strong he is. LOL

      Delete
  5. Maybe this kind of analysis is what has Somerby's panties in a bunch:

    "Sitting in with the hosts of MSNBC's "The Weekend," political analyst Basil Smilke suggested Donald Trump's bizarre answers to questions earlier this week —specifically a baffling response to childcare needs in America — is a sign that he is losing the plot.

    Speaking with the hosts, Smilke stated that it looks to him like the pressure of running against Vice President Kamala Harris may be affecting Trump's ability to make the case for his third presidential run.

    After watching a clip of the former president rambling about Harris with a series of personal attacks, Smilke was asked, "How do you see his approach to Kamala going into this campaign?"

    "They have become more more personal," he began. "When you combine that with the way he has been speaking in the last week, particularly the Economic Club of New York, he sounds more incoherent than I think we have ever heard him."

    "It sounds desperate," he continued. "It clearly sounds like he and his team know they are behind and they are losing the narrative. I think if he feels and the team feels that they cannot grow the support the best way to win is to diminish her."

    "The way they are doing it is trying to tap into a sense that this woman of color is not qualified for a role, isn't smart, does not do her homework is not up to the task. we have heard that 1000 times before," he elaborated. "If you are a person of color, a very common attack by your opponent who is not a person of color, is that you are not qualified. it is a very old tactic."

    "I said when she became the nominee that his attacks would get bad and they are. What I like is I do not think they are working, it is not sticking," he added." [Rawstory]

    Somerby could not wrap his head around the idea that Ketanji Brown Jackson is qualified by her education, experience and prior accomplishments to be on the Supreme Court. Now he cannot conceive of Harris being similarly well-qualified, so he is calling her mediocre and attacking the election process.

    Somerby claims that Blue America is averting its eyes, but Trump is sinking in the polls and even Republicans are abandoning his sinking ship, so how exactly is the left responsible for anything bad going on? Somerby's complaints increasingly make no sense, just like Trump's statements are increasingly incoherent. Harris is winning. A liberal would be happy about that. Somerby instead says the elites of Blue America are lounging about at Versailles and averting their eyes. We are ALL averting our eyes these days -- because watching a grown man deconstruct is not a pretty sight and Trump's flailing is about as pathetic as it gets in public. Trump is hanging himself with his own rope, while only crazies are still supporting him (and his own kids are grabbing everything they can before their chance to grift goes away). We on the left didn't know how Trump would go away, but now we are all getting a glimpse and it isn't pretty.

    Is burying oneself in past elections, the way Somerby has done the last few days, a kind of averting one's eyes too? I think so. Arguing that we should not look away when a grown man loses his footing, as Trump is doing, denies us the chance to make sure he really goes away. Who, during George Bush's days, would have thought that Dick Cheney would ever vote Democratic? No wonder Somerby is confused and blathering on about JFK's press coverage. This must be a very confusing time for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The rest of us know what we must do. I am voting enthusiastically for Kamala Harris. I support whichever journalists are willing to tell the truth about Trump's condition and WHY so many Republicans are still supporting Trump. It isn't only Trump who needs to go, but those who joined Trump, using him to enrich themselves.

      Here is CO, I am hoping that the Republicans in Boebert's district will get rid of her too. I would like to see Cruz go away in TX. Rick Scott cannot be allowed to win in FL. It is time to get rid of ALL of the grifters who allied with Trump to harm our nation while seeking their own profit. After the GA shooting and MTG's lack of response, she needs to go away. It is time for Republicans everywhere to come to their senses and get rid of the cancer afflicting their party. That is what sane people are saying everywhere. Except here at Somerby's blog, where Somerby never discusses the most important issues, always averting his own eyes from the most obvious circumstances.

      Delete
    2. We have always averted our gaze about the appeal of Trump - scapegoating it as bigotry or a lack of intelligence when it has always been about a rejection of neoliberalism and its failure to address the economic needs of working people and marginalized business owners.

      Delete
    3. lol 12:03 troll on brother, troll on, it’s good for a laugh.

      Delete
    4. I believe it is Arlie Hochschild who recently did a piece emphasizing the effect of the Iraq War on alienating middle America from neoliberalism.

      Which is why Trump's pacifist foreign policy has such appeal.

      Delete
    5. Trump gave himself and his rich buddies a HUGE tax break. What more do working people need?

      Delete
    6. 12:03,
      Trump needs to more clearly call out Libertarianism as the cancer it is on society.

      Delete
    7. 12:03,
      Neo-liberalism's natural enemy is Communism.
      Why is FoxNews calling Harris as a Communist? To take votes from Trump?

      Delete
    8. Trump's "pacifist foreign policy" is nothing more than hype.

      Delete
  6. Calling something stupid is not media analysis.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Heather Cox Richardson describes the Russian attempts to subvert American opinion using social media:

    "Through fake social media profiles, their operatives posed as Americans or other non-Russians, seeding public conversations with Russian propaganda.

    In August 2023 they launched the “Good Old USA Project” to target swing-state residents, online gamers, American Jews, and “US citizens of Hispanic descent” to reelect Donald Trump. ​​"They are afraid of losing the American way of life and the ‘American dream,’” one of the propagandists wrote. “It is these sentiments that should be exploited in the course of an information campaign in/for the United States.” Using targeted ads on Facebook, they could see how their material was landing and use bots and trolls to push their narrative in comment sections.

    “In order for this work to be effective, you need to use a minimum of fake news and a maximum of realistic information,” the propagandists told their staff. “At the same time, you should continuously repeat that this is what is really happening, but the official media will never tell you about it or show it to you.”

    According to the documents, one of the three companies, Social Design Agency (SDA), monitors and collects information about media organizations and social media influencers. It collected a list of 1,900 “anti-influencers,” whose accounts posted material SDA workers thought operated against Russian interests. About 26% of those accounts were based in the U.S.

    SDA also identified as pro-Russian influencers more than 2,800 people in 81 countries operating on various social media platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram. Those influencers included “television and radio hosts, politicians, bloggers, journalists, businessmen, professors, think-tank analysts, veterans, professors, and comedians.” About 21% of those influencers were in the U.S. "

    That Russian narrative includes the idea that American media are unreliable. This is advanced not only by their paid shills, but also by bots and trolls in comment sections. Part of the Russian narrative is also to push Trump's reelection, as occurred in 2016 and 2020.

    Ths support for this is provided in the DOJ documents charging Russian operatives who have recruited and paid those working on this orchestrated campaign to undermine American media.

    https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/september-6-2024

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "That Russian narrative includes the idea that American media are unreliable ... support for this is provided in the DOJ documents charging Russian operatives"

      That is false - there's nothing in the DOJ documents that make that claim.

      Delete
    2. See the citations here (at the end of her article):

      https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/september-6-2024

      Delete
    3. The last two paragraphs of the original post are not from Richardson's essay. It's misleading to put the link below those two paragraphs.

      Delete
    4. Richardson's essay is the source for my opinion. The sources you are seeking are at the end of Richardson's essay. American readers tend to know what quote marks mean.

      Delete
  8. “manspread luxuriantly between cases of their hard seltzer”
    Looks like Helen Lewis of The Atlantic is a naughty broad who has the hots for JD Vance. Vance should tell her my eyes are here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Men engage in manspreading for a reason.

      Delete
    2. Mansplaining, like manspreading, is real. My daughter and I text each other at least twice a week about the latest mansplain via her daddy.

      The most recent was his instructions to her on cleaning her car.

      Delete
  9. “Every, every opportunity, that Donald Trump gets to show the American people who he is. He pretty clearly– and look, his running mate is doing this too I mean, you know. This is my diplomatic way of saying it. They’re misogynistic pigs. . .”

    —Liz Cheney

    https://www.mediaite.com/politics/liz-cheney-rips-into-misogynistic-pigs-trump-and-vance-to-hoots-and-hollers/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please please please don’t call him a misogynistic pig —- BS

      Delete
    2. Liz Cheney's father is one of the lowest war criminals alive. He lied to the American people to justify a war under false pretenses and profited from it immensely as it took life and limb from hundreds of thousands of people and got us nothing in the end. He ain't worth the blood that runs in his veins. Harris should fully reject him on every level. She can win without the endorsement of one of the most immoral, treacherous scumbags that ever lived.

      Delete
    3. Disagree, 11:56. Harris should ignore it. Let the GOP fight among themselves.

      Delete
    4. I agree at a minimum she should ignore it. Harris herself said he was "a well respected leader" and she was "honored to have his endorsement". I don't think I can vote for her after that. I'm just one vote and don't matter but I find that so offensive. She did not need to do that and had a chance to make a moral stand. Dick Cheney is not well respected, he is a devious war criminal that should be in prison. He should illicit repulsion not honor. The Bush administration with Cheney running things was far worse than the Trump administration imo. Fuck Dick Cheney. And fuck calling him respected. FUCK THAT!!!

      Delete
    5. Harris is trying, by example, to welcome all and any other Republicans who want to switch their votes to her. In contrast, Trump is scorning Nikki Haley voters.

      Delete
    6. We don't have to approve of Republicans who vote for Harris, but we DO have to defeat Trump.

      "Trump, who spoke in Mosinee, Wisconsin, was called out by CNN for a "lie" about transgender kids. But he also made another statement that caught the attention of political observers on social media, including actress Bette Midler.

      "I better win or you're gonna have problems like we've never had. We may have no country left," Trump said at his weekend swing-state rally. "This may be our last election. You want to know the truth? People have said that. This could be our last election."

      This comment caught the attention of Midler, who is no stranger to being attacked by Trump himself.

      The statement was flagged by Republican Voters against Trump, and Midler responded, saying, "Trump is threatening us, and he means it."

      "If he doesn’t win, he will call for Civil War. Kamala has to win in a landslide so this pig is faced with the truth: Most Americans despise him and everything he stands for," the actress added.

      And she wasn't the only one with something to say.

      Journalist Jim Stewartson said, "Wow." He also called Trump "clinically delusional."

      "This is a narcissistic crisis. A total breakdown of the ego," Stewartson added. "He’s drowning in terror."

      Theologian Jared Stacy, PhD also chimed in, saying, "Same rhetoric, stoking fear."

      Luke Zaleski, legal affairs editor for Condé Nast, said, "Threats as usual."

      Former GOP writer Zorek Richards said, "That's called threatening the voters."

      "Outside of 1930s Germany I am not aware of that working anywhere else," Richards added.

      Retired lawyer Don Frickel added, "Oh my, what drivel. I don’t know a single soul who is worried about the future of our country under Joe or Kamala. On the other hand, we all know why real Rs are joining the Democracy Coalition. They don’t necessarily agree with all D policies, but they know the country and our democracy will be in big trouble if TFG gets another term."

      Delete
    7. "Reacting to a Donald Trump posting on Truth Social late Saturday where the former president issued a threat aimed at election poll workers, a furious Michael Steele hammered the ex-president for threatening people just trying to do their jobs."

      Rawstory

      Delete
    8. "Exchange of the Day
      September 7, 2024 at 7:31 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard

      CNN interviewed two voters in Pennsylvania:

      REPORTER: Who will you vote for?

      VOTER: Kamala Harris.

      REPORTER: Were you Democrats before?

      VOTER: I’m a Republican.

      REPORTER: Why are you voting the other way?

      VOTER: Because she behaves more like a human."

      Delete
  10. Trump went crazy at his rally yesterday and repeated a series of false conspiracy theories mixed with threats that should make every Republican think twice about voting for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump's a genius, we should all admire. Imagine being so smart, you choose to run for President in a country where the media doesn't care one tiny bit about the age and/ or cognitive decline of Presidential candidates.

      Delete
  11. https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/bonhoeffers-theory-of-stupidity-explains-the-world-perfectly-957cbb3fbac1

    ReplyDelete