ExMachina1000 wrote: » Wonder will he Cuomo? He has again been accused
Deleted User wrote: » https://twitter.com/EvanMcMullin/status/1366127117755293697
extra gravy wrote: » https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1366162981831266305?s=19
Sir Oxman wrote: » I think I might have missed him bombasting the past 6 weeks! He's funny as fck. Nick Abbot (LBC) who detests him but also admits he misses him for the comedy effect will be going through the highlights at about half 12. Even if the Trumpet is still speaking, which is very likely.
everlast75 wrote: Politics isn't supposed to be entertaining. There's a reason why populist politics is the absolute worst.
nolivesmatter wrote: » I know you're not a Trump fan so I'm not what you mean? You think MSNBC/CNN are making a mistake in some way by not showing it? If so I probably agree since like him or loathe him it probably is news worthy.
everlast75 wrote: » Referring to him as "funny" or "entertaining" is what got america into this mess in the first place. Giving him a pass or attention on that basis meant that the sinister stuff went unchecked. Politics isn't supposed to be entertaining. There's a reason why populist politics is the absolute worst. Anyway, this is an interesting piece...https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litigation-tracker-pending-criminal-and-civil-cases-against-donald-trump/
Sir Oxman wrote: » Pull your big girl/boy pants up. I don't give two shiney fecks about American presidents - bar the awful non-choices the working class have in that hellhole. PS If you think he was elected to begin with because 'he's funny or entertaining' you (if you're American) haven't learned a thing.
extra gravy wrote: » https://twitter.com/erinschaff/status/1366169491479146496?s=19 The narcissist has his aides carry a mirror around so he can check out his orange face. Imagine being impressed by this guy. Wonder does he practice his "speeches" in front of the mirror too like Adolf did.
everlast75 wrote: » Seems like someone has them on too tight. One of the contributors to him being elected was the free coverage he was given by various media companies. And that was because he gave them ratings. Because people found him bombastic. And yes, entertaining. Literally millions of dollars of free advertising. If you don't think that contributes to one's political success, then you have no clue. It was not the sole reason, but it was a factor. In addition, his politics was basically attacking the disenfranchised, foreigners, poor people, ethnic minorities - like I said, populist nonsense.
Tchaikovsky wrote: » I was expecting the inevitable gold statue to be bigger and less like the Monopoly man.
bocaman wrote: » The influence of Trump in the Republican party will live on for some time to come. The only way to combat this is by major electoral reversals for the Republicans.
Muahahaha wrote: » Yeah but electoral reversals for the Republicans are unlikely to happen, its more likely they will flip the Senate and maybe the House in elections next year and the Trump wing will be claiming it as their victory and as an endorsement for his 2024 campaign. They only need to win one seat in the Senate and then Mitch can spend the next two years leading up to the 2024 election frustrating the Biden administrations legislative agenda in the Senate.
8mv wrote: » I was recently listening to an old RTE documentary about Joseph McCarthy and it was striking the similarity in the MOs for McCarthy and Trump. The broad accusations made without any evidence whatsoever, doubling down on a lie when caught out, the total ignorance of or deliberate misinterpretation of history, the childish nicknames, threatening and demonising perceived opponents within his own party if they criticised him and, most especially, how the media of the day gave him so much oxygen because his accusations and behaviour were so outrageous. I wonder did the Trump team study the McCarthy era? The documentary was from the 1980's I think, but substitute Trump for McCarthy and you could be listening to a doc from recent years.
astrofool wrote: » trump is done, if he was going to run in 2024, he would have said so, it's just a long slide into obscurity from here on out. The only question is how much will he damage the GOP in the process. This president is no more! He has ceased to be!
briany wrote: » Eh, he has most of the party behind him. He was the star speaker at that conference. How does this add up to Trump being done? Everybody slides into obscurity on a long enough time scale, so how long would it take Trump? 2 years? 20? 200? 2000?
astrofool wrote: » Negative 5 months for trump it seems. If he was running, he would have announced just as he did in 2017 when president, all he's doing now is stringing some fools along with him. His numbers are well down since the election and will only get worse as the years go on.
BettyS wrote: » I have a question, which genuinely worries me. On the Daily Mail, pre-election, the top comments were fairly scathing re: Trump. Now, the top comments are adoring him and bemoaning the democrats. This worries me, as I wonder has the average vote forgiven him and now want him back? What is the reality on the ground?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a605da6df673e065ac5a7e976411f425.svg)
