Donald Trump

[The Fish 10814]

3 hours ago, trophyshy said:

If any of the assassination attempts were legitimate pre-election, surely there will be more now until the job is done?  
 

And that’s how the civil war starts?

You're expecting the liberal elites to take up arms, some kind of Hollywood homicide?

[Dazzler 9556]

3 hours ago, trophyshy said:

If any of the assassination attempts were legitimate pre-election, surely there will be more now until the job is done?  
 

And that’s how the civil war starts?

 

Knowing the repetitive nature of history someone will take a crack at trump and it'll be RFK jr who eats it.

 

[Alex 34952]

Why not both? 

[Dr Gloom 21868]

1 hour ago, Renton said:

Phew. I'm so glad this Jacob Ress Mogg fellow (not a global elite) has told us about how grateful we should be that Donald Trump (not a global elite), backed by Elon Misk (definitely not a global elite) has crushed the global elites! 

 

 

 

JRM, man of the people 

 

 

[trophyshy 7075]

54 minutes ago, The Fish said:

You're expecting the liberal elites to take up arms, some kind of Hollywood homicide?

 

I am expecting them to defend themselves when the MAGAs seek revenge. 

[trophyshy 7075]

Baldy.

[Dazzler 9556]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

Why not both? 

Because god hates the Kennedy's more.

[Toonpack 9314]

I left twitter so I wouldn’t have to see or listen to the opinions of cunts like him, so thanks for that Renton 🙄

[The Fish 10814]

1 hour ago, trophyshy said:

 

I am expecting them to defend themselves when the MAGAs seek revenge. 

I can't see Kristen Wiig or Josh Gad taking any extraordinary measures.

[Dazzler 9556]

22 minutes ago, The Fish said:

I can't see Kristen Wiig or Josh Gad taking any extraordinary measures.

I dunno like the Film Actors Guild took up arms when Team America were doing their thing so there is precedent.

[Rayvin 5189]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/08/young-men-donald-trump-kamala-harris

 

This is a superb article on why the Democrats fucked it with men, informed by Richard Reeves who is the President of the American Institute for Boys and Men. I think his comments are bang on personally, and I say this as someone farther to the left than most people on here.

 

EDIT - One more key excerpt that I feel compelled to add: What men heard from the right was: you’ve got problems, we don’t have solutions. What they heard from the left is: you don’t have problems, you are the problem.

 

I could take excerpts from it all over the place that I agree with but I'm going to pick this one on its own:

 

I presume the conclusion they’re also going to reach is that they can’t run a female candidate for a really long time?
I really, I really, I really hope they don’t draw that conclusion.

There’s a reason the General Social Survey stopped asking the question about a female candidate in 2010: because it hit 96% support, and it’s even higher among young men. I suppose it’s possible that those men are secretly sexist or racist and won’t tell pollsters that, but that’s an unfalsifiable hypothesis, we can’t know.

If Democrats draw the conclusion that it was because it was a female candidate, that will be the wrong conclusion. Empirically. It will insult the male voters they need and it will hobble the careers of female politicians, potentially for a long time.

[Toonpack 9314]

There’s growing evidence of toxic masculinity already. Seen numerous screenshots off twatter of “your body, my choice” responses to women and a fair few comments on bluesky of young teen girls being harassed with same phrase at schools.

 

 

[Rayvin 5189]

13 minutes ago, Toonpack said:

There’s growing evidence of toxic masculinity already. Seen numerous screenshots off twatter of “your body, my choice” responses to women and a fair few comments on bluesky of young teen girls being harassed with same phrase at schools.

 

 

 

Think I'd be tempted to say that this is trolling the losing side more than any sincerely held belief. I'm seeing it online too and at least there it seems to be designed entirely with the aim of winding up the more ardent feminists. Our side is giving plenty back though, don't worry. Plans for mass castrations are well under way  

[Renton 21435]

7 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/08/young-men-donald-trump-kamala-harris

 

This is a superb article on why the Democrats fucked it with men, informed by Richard Reeves who is the President of the American Institute for Boys and Men. I think his comments are bang on personally, and I say this as someone farther to the left than most people on here.

 

I could take excerpts from it all over the place that I agree with but I'm going to pick this one on its own:

 

I presume the conclusion they’re also going to reach is that they can’t run a female candidate for a really long time?
I really, I really, I really hope they don’t draw that conclusion.

There’s a reason the General Social Survey stopped asking the question about a female candidate in 2010: because it hit 96% support, and it’s even higher among young men. I suppose it’s possible that those men are secretly sexist or racist and won’t tell pollsters that, but that’s an unfalsifiable hypothesis, we can’t know.

If Democrats draw the conclusion that it was because it was a female candidate, that will be the wrong conclusion. Empirically. It will insult the male voters they need and it will hobble the careers of female politicians, potentially for a long time.

 

I kind of agree on the generality here Rayvin about drawing the wrong conclusions, and its very likely the democrats will (although I am sure they will do their own research). But I think Harris's sex was definitely a problem. No idea about how that survey was conducted or how representative it was but:

• Even 4% is a massive thing in US elections.
• There is psephological evidence from the actual election as well as masses of anecdotes that "maleness" was a factor this time round. 
• They stopped asking the question 14 years ago, which is probably the most moronic thing I have ever heard. 14 years is a long time and the World is a very, very different place now. They seem to have assumed the trend could only go in one way. To this, I think you can only say:

 

[Rayvin 5189]

Just now, Renton said:

 

I kind of agree on the generality here Rayvin about drawing the wrong conclusions, and its very likely the democrats will (although I am sure they will do their own research). But I think Harris's sex was definitely a problem. No idea about how that survey was conducted or how representative it was but:

• Even 4% is a massive thing in US elections.
• There is psephological evidence from the actual election as well as masses of anecdotes that "maleness" was a factor this time round. 
• They stopped asking the question 14 years ago, which is probably the most moronic thing I have ever heard. 14 years is a long time and the World is a very, very different place now. They seem to have assumed the trend could only go in one way. To this, I think you can only say:

 

 

I mean I'm not the one making that claim particularly, I'm citing experts who have made it. You are of course free to disagree with their conclusion but I think the Tory party shows that women being in charge really isn't the factor we all want to believe it is...

[The Fish 10814]

2 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I mean I'm not the one making that claim particularly, I'm citing experts who have made it. You are of course free to disagree with their conclusion but I think the Tory party shows that women being in charge really isn't the factor we all want to believe it is...

Calm down Sabrina.

 

 

[The Fish 10814]

2 hours ago, trophyshy said:

Baldy.

Hah! you need to get out in the world, touch grass, take a walk down Hanover street.

[Renton 21435]

5 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

I mean I'm not the one making that claim particularly, I'm citing experts who have made it. You are of course free to disagree with their conclusion but I think the Tory party shows that women being in charge really isn't the factor we all want to believe it is...

 

I'm just saying the data is 14 years old, before the modern age of autocracy and popularism. The author has made the assumption the data could have only moved one way. Do you really think this is reasonable? 

Edit: And, sorry, haven't you previously posted about the rise of angry young men, incels etc, or was that someone else? 

Edited November 8 by Renton

[Rayvin 5189]

Just now, Renton said:

 

I'm just saying the data is 14 years old, before the modern age of autocracy and popularism. The author has made the assumption the data could have only moved one way. Do you really think this is reasonable? 

 

I do take your point, it's just that having plunged into the murkier parts of the right wing discourse online at least, I've never seen anyone other than the absolute fringe mentalists (which depressingly, we cannot now consider Trump to be) say that women are not fit to lead. The young men I've been observing, none of them have said that. Ever. They're all about sticking it to the left because they view us as preachy, self righteous bellends who refuse to listen.

 

So sure, maybe it's swung hugely back the other way - but you'd think someone somewhere would have picked up on that. And why in an interconnected and online era, would it only be a US specific thing? We lack the evidence to know based on just that article, I'm open to a revised opinion if further relevant data comes to light. 

[The Fish 10814]

watching you two argue, it's like a dead heat on a merry go round.

[Rayvin 5189]

2 minutes ago, The Fish said:

watching you two argue, it's like a dead heat on a merry go round.

 

I feel like we're just discussing something tbf, but I do think Renton and I are two people with nearly identical views, separated by perspective alone

[Renton 21435]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

I do take your point, it's just that having plunged into the murkier parts of the right wing discourse online at least, I've never seen anyone other than the absolute fringe mentalists (which depressingly, we cannot now consider Trump to be) say that women are not fit to lead. The young men I've been observing, none of them have said that. Ever. They're all about sticking it to the left because they view us as preachy, self righteous bellends who refuse to listen.

 

So sure, maybe it's swung hugely back the other way - but you'd think someone somewhere would have picked up on that. And why in an interconnected and online era, would it only be a US specific thing? We lack the evidence to know based on just that article, I'm open to a revised opinion if further relevant data comes to light. 

 

I'm not saying I don't think they should run with a female leader btw, they should, if she is the best candidate. Because 1) its morally correct and 2) she will pick up votes from female voters. But I just think there are a sizable amount of men who are bigots and mysogynists now, unfortunately. Depressing that gender should even come into it. 

 

As to your point about the US and the interconnected world, the US is still completely an alien country to the UK. The societies are just so different I don't think its worth drawing comparisons. The internet can darw you into false perceptions because no matter where you are from you will tend to drift into your preferred silo. Not so in person over there. Americans want a leader who projects an image of power most of all. In america, it more important to be powerful than correct. A woman could fit this bill but I don't think Harris did. 

 

Look, tbh, at this point I just think the US is a rancid society. I'd follow in Gemmill's footsteps and be done with it but it still fascinates me and like it or not I know it affects me. 

[The Fish 10814]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

I feel like we're just discussing something tbf, but I do think Renton and I are two people with nearly identical views, separated by perspective alone

I'm only playing. It's the conversation.

[Rayvin 5189]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

I'm not saying I don't think they should run with a female leader btw, they should, if she is the best candidate. Because 1) its morally correct and 2) she will pick up votes from female voters. But I just think there are a sizable amount of men who are bigots and mysogynists now, unfortunately. Depressing that gender should even come into it. 

 

As to your point about the US and the interconnected world, the US is still completely an alien country to the UK. The societies are just so different I don't think its worth drawing comparisons. The internet can darw you into false perceptions because no matter where you are from you will tend to drift into your preferred silo. Not so in person over there. Americans want a leader who projects an image of power most of all. In america, it more important to be powerful than correct. A woman could fit this bill but I don't think Harris did. 

 

Look, tbh, at this point I just think the US is a rancid society. I'd follow in Gemmill's footsteps and be done with it but it still fascinates me and like it or not I know it affects me. 

 

The thing I would put to you I guess is this - if you're right, it feels like there's nothing we can do about it. If I'm right, there is something we can do about it. So we may as well assume I'm right because it's the only assumption that we can do anything about 😉

[The Fish 10814]

6 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

The thing I would put to you I guess is this - if you're right, it feels like there's nothing we can do about it. If I'm right, there is something we can do about it. So we may as well assume I'm right because it's the only assumption that we can do anything about 😉

I guess, I just want to witness what lies beneath the fugitive on air force one.