lemonaz

I’m inclined towards the opposite: Kirk would have been too valuable to them. He’s been one of the biggest propagandists and doing good work. Plus his debate shtick works really well on unsuspecting people with no opinions because he comes off like a well informed and well meaning “debate me” dork rather than a chud sociopath (though he is more like that on his shows, especially the one with Jack Posobiec who’s a more unhinged nazi, but only the truly committed end up watching those since it’s a much less entertaining format than “Kirk DESTROYS student” vertical clips).

I mean, compare that to when Matt Walsh does public debates with young people: the sleaze on that guy is permanent, he gives off Handmaid’s Tale commander vibes. The newbie reaction is less “he seems to have a point” and more “why is he allowed around minors”. Basically what I’m saying is I think they would have picked someone less crucial to their operation if it were a Trump hit job, someone like Jack Posobiec or even smaller. It would have had literally the same effect.

To each their own, I suppose. I’m fine with people opting to work more, like maybe get a second job or something if they feel like they have too much time with nothing to do, but that’s the thing: they should be able to choose. A shorter work week wouldn’t impede someone like you, it would actually help you make more money by freeing up time for you to take on more projects. Think of it more as “my time, my choice”.

Nah, I need to unload all the work stuff from my brain for a straight few days. If anything, I’d rather have 2x10h days since I tend to overflow the 8-9h anyway.

Wouldn’t that be the reverse Martian?

Oh now the media wants to talk about Epstein. Goddammit.

Same, same. Whatever you do, you always end up at “the Jews run the world because look at what THEY did to us in the PLANdemic”.

I’m not hoping much, but if at least a small percentage of them get swayed, it might be enough to lose him the next election. (I’m automatically assuming he will keep running for a third term. These people don’t stop unless they are stopped.)

Yep. This too shall blow over, leaving at most a “shrug, I didn’t like how he handled the whole Epstein situation but I voted for him for a third term because he’s the only one who can save the country and make America great again”

The initial QAnoners were already rationalizing it away since 2019-2020 or so saying he went there undercover “to save the children”.

So like climate change, right?.. Right?

It’s not just policy, it’s energy.

Becoming a recognized name that sticks in people’s heads is the biggest battle — this is usually the incumbent advantage: this was Manchin’s advantage over Paula Jean Swearengin; but it was also Cuomo’s advantage over Zohran Mamdani… and Cuomo lost. So there’s another way to make yourself known: being disruptive.

I loathe MAGA. They are assholes, but that’s how they took over. That’s what gets them covered in the news, they do constant theater saying asshole things. Literally everyone knows who Marjorie Taylor Greene is, whether they’re into politics or not. Many MAGA politicians nowadays you know first from the podcast circuit. Yes they have an ecosystem but that doesn’t mean we can’t do guerrilla campaigning. After all, Mamdani still won, right?

Now I’m not saying we need progressives to be assholes. But they should be more performative — loudmouths even: get up in people’s faces, speak confidently and provocatively into the camera, tell people your values without them asking. Do things that aren’t necessarily stunts, but that get labeled as stunts.

Mamdani has done a bunch of this stuff, from telling Cuomo how to spell his name, to his full day walking through Manhattan and interacting with people, to how easily he answers even the hardest questions — I mean, you probably already know how good he is at this stuff and how easy he makes it look, so it might be tempting to think you can’t replicate his success because of how uniquely talented he is, but let me give you another example:

Kat Abughazaleh (YouTuber and investigative journalist for Mother Jones and Media Matters, currently running for Congress) has done arguably even more with her campaign: she’s using campaign money for mutual aid (anyone can walk into their office and get free stuff except for ICE), feeding the homeless, Pride and Drag Queen Story Hour; she gave bigots the finger on camera and doubled down; she did a campaign event in a comedy club and turned it into a TED-style stand-up presentation about “General” Michael Flynn wanting to sell your blood. Her campaign slogan as a Democrat is “What if we didn’t suck”! She started in single digits and now she’s single digits away from first place. Watch her explain it though, to get a sense of the energy. (All the other stuff is on her channel too, I highly recommend the Flynn one btw!)

You have to get creative and work the outrage media space, it’s the only way. Get eyes on you and stand up for your values, loudly!

Fair enough, but I was saying in the “this should become common practice” sense. I don’t think anyone can just post there since it’s owned by the creators, so you have to join them, it’s a package deal.

Where would be a general purpose place to use as the second platform? Something that’s easy to use (and ofc not even more immoral than youtube, so not rumble or things like that).

She also defended herself: “Contrary to brainwashed Democrat boomers think and protest about, Trump is not a king, MAGA is not a cult, and I can and DO have my own opinion.”

Well, maybe people think that because of the other paragraph in your tweet:

“It feels like a complete bait and switch to please the neocons, warmongers, military industrial complex contracts, and neocon tv personalities that MAGA hates and who were NEVER TRUMPERS!” she wrote on X.

See, everyone but you could have (and has) predicted the bait and switch. That’s why you’re a cultist. Not because you don’t have your own opinion, but because you trust a guy who is untrustable.

Well they won’t improve. Your move EU.

That second point is so much more applicable to Russia, but they sing a wholly different tune with regard to that.

Denny Crane

Do Americans not see how insane it is to allow such a “right” at a mass gathering? The risk is so obvious with literally no benefit.

These fucks always try to score legal kills, same as Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman. It’s not new, but innocent people always end up paying the price.

They care to a point. Most people want a populist anti-elite approach to politics and messaging but that’s off limits. In reality, what you see is the following dynamic:

• Republicans get their cues by testing various talking points on their base to see what sticks. They respond to the response of their base and double and triple down on the most popular. So in a sense get their policy cues from their base, but I left out one crucial thing: they’re extremely disingenuous about it because the talking points are mostly just culture war tabloid style outrage bait — moral panics filled with lies and half-truths. Still, to the common Republican voter, this seems like a dialogue.
• Democrats could do the same thing but with real stuff. Even appeals to emotion are fine as long as you’re being truthful, because a lot of the time you need to meet people where they are. But Democrats do not talk to their voters at all, they despise them and feel entitled to their vote because hey, look how bad the Republicans are. But then where do they get the policy if they don’t talk to voters? Oh, why, the Republicans of course! They triangulate a “common sense” position between their ivory tower ideas (mostly just “civility”), the Republicans and the (pre-programmed) Republican base. Except for the populism, you see, because that’s “going low” and they’re going to be the adults in the room who “go high”.

I hate this worthless octogenarian club of a party, sometimes more than the Republicans.

(I apologize that this turned into a rant. I do want Dems to win, I just want them to stop being, you know, them.)