Il Douché and His Discontents: The 2016 Primary Voting Thread, Part 4

Remember when we were torturing people and terrorism ended? People want a return to those halcyon days.

i don't think most people understand the motivations behind terrorism, which means they have weird notions about what can be done to fight against it. enter trump

i think that when faced with complex upsetting problems ppl often want simple, decisive answers. even if those answers are dumb (register all muslims, ban all muslims from coming to the US, torture suspects for information, kill terrorist families, wipe out isis) they satisfy the need to /do something/. by contrast the answer that there's nothing really we can do and these things will probably continue to happen is v unsatisfying.

there's also a great contrast between the simplicity of trump's response to terrorism - close the borders, torture people - compared to what people on the left advise - see this from john judis, for example, which ends like this:

Not doing anything – withdrawing collectively from the Middle East and waiting for these conflicts to play out won’t work. That would mean decades of continued strife and continued acts of terror. Half-measures like the Obama administration has attempted in Syria won’t work. What’s needed is the most comprehensive plan for the Middle East – one that tries to undo the past.

After 9/11, I put this in terms of waging war and peace at the same time – war against al Qaeda and peace in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians – but since then, the problem has vastly deepened and broadened. Borders created by the Europeans after World War I are being destroyed. Age-old religious and tribal conflicts have revived. Nothing less that the kind of concerted plan – on the model of Bush I’s coalition in the first Gulf War – would suffice to tamp down and began to resolve the conflicts in that region.

But I can’t see anything like that in sight. The EU is divided, and the American and European public understandably has no appetite for a more concerted intervention – one that would not only have to shake up older alliances, but also involve the military. And it’s a plan that even if fully implemented still might fail miserably. Think of the West in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda’s original strategy, which ISIS has carried forward, may have actually succeeded. I am pessimistic that any resolution will come out of this terrorist attack, except perhaps for a continued movement to the populist right in northern Europe and a boost for Donald Trump.

i think a lot of people crave the simplicity of closing border and bombing and winning. that's why trump gets a boost, as Judis says

oops, xpost, but yeah, mordy and i making the same point

when action is ambiguous or counterproductive, bellowing will do.

Fred Hiatt sounded as much of a dingbat as Trump did in that WaPo interview.

Sanders' speech vid here

In a speech from Salt Lake City, which had been offered to telecast to AIPAC — an offer that was denied — the Vermont senator reiterated his support for Israel’s security. He also insisted that “peace also means security for every Palestinian. It means achieving self-determination, civil rights, and economic well-being for the Palestinian people.”

Sanders called it “absurd” for Israel to pursue more settlements in response to violence. “Peace will also mean ending the economic blockade of Gaza,” he said. “And it will mean a sustainable and equitable distribution of precious water resources so that Israel and Palestine can both thrive as neighbors.”

While objecting to rocket attacks by Hamas, he also reiterated that he “condemned the [Israeli] bombing of hospitals, schools and refugee camps.” He insisted that while Israel is a friend to the United States, “as friends, we are obligated to speak the truth as we see it. This is what real friendship demands, especially in difficult times.”

https://theintercept.com/2016/03/22/bernie-sanders-spoke-up-for-suffering-palestinians-but-few-in-broadcast-media-covered-it/

what's interesting about trump pronouncements are that he appears to be unwilling or unable to speak in formal english or even in semi-educated language. Like, try reading this in trumpvoice

The EU is divided, and the American and European public understandably has no appetite for a more concerted intervention

The EU is divided, and the American and European public understandably has no appetite for a more concerted intervention. Sad!

there I did it

i'm good until i get to "concerted intervention" and i can't pretend anymore

yeah that is a few too many syllables

The EU is divided, and the American and European public, look, they're totally, they understand there's no appetite. Sad!

"has no appetite" is also antithetical to Trumpspeak

Europe, anger, America, me, you, anger. Sad! Torture, close border, America, great!

"And Europe doesn't get it! And the people don't wanna get involved! They don't wanna get involved."

just a few more generations and we can finally arrive at the much simpler Two Minutes Hate instead of bothering with arguing about what to do about things

what's interesting about trump pronouncements are that he appears to be unwilling or unable to speak in formal english or even in semi-educated language.

this is precisely the sort of thing that makes him strongly appeal to a certain person, and strongly anathema to even more people.

he never sounds rehearsed, because he isn't, really. he never pieces together a sentence that would sound out of place if you were making small talk with your mechanic while waiting for your brakes to be fixed.

I have never had small talk with a mechanic about the size of my hands.

live a little, DJP

My daughter's school is in the bluest of areas, like mega liberal territory. For some reason the PTA keeps catering events with Chik-Fil-A. I don't know whether it's political cluelessness, a deliberate sabotage operation from a closet social conservative on the board, or just a preference for a certain type of chicken sandwich that is strong enough to overrule all principles.

This is mainly owed to CFA having a serious community service interest--probably more so than any other fast food chain. Their franchisees are instructed as part of their corporate commitment to make a big presence in their communities by working with schools, charities, and community organisations by providing discount catering, food prizes, gift certificates, special nights at their restaurants etc.

http://wondermark.com/c/2016-03-22-1209destroy.png

funny you mention that. i went to Burger King yesterday for some onion rings and they had a big poster advertising how they will cater charitable events at a big discount.

xpost

plz book them for a PETA event and then film it

too soon

http://chronicle.com/article/On-One-Campus-a-Trump-Rally/235789

"It was very scary. A lot of racial slurs, a lot of vitriol, very, very, very angry, animated people," said Mr. Custer, who added that he had to create a human chain with other protest leaders to keep the groups separated. "There is not an exchange of ideas. There is violence, screaming, and shouting."

for some ppl violence screaming and shouting is the most idea exchanging they'll ever do

"Europe is a mess, and the people in America and the people in Europe are sick of trying to help people who treat them very, very badly. It's true."

he says that a lot. "it's very, very true." it's a rhetorical figure that seems to suggest he's worried about quite the opposite.

I think it was Tom Scharpling who pointed out a particular aspect of Trump's stupidity some time ago, the thing where he's clearly reading something representing his own opinion off a teleprompter or cue cards and punctuates it with, "That's true."

I think he's just a dumb idiot who barely understands English.

well it does often sound as if he literally just made up what he just said out of thin air (or it was whispered to him two minutes ago) so he seeks to reassure himself with phrases like, "that's very true," "that's true," "you wouldn't believe this," etc.

Oh god, I just realized that Trump is a bellowing Chauncey Gardner.

"people keep telling me"

"i hear this all the time"

he has a common rhetorical trick where he kind of outsources his authority to unnamed other folks, experts, just folks, whatever. same reason he re-tweets bullshit from dubious people.

Fifty or more people have complimented his strong, beautiful, completely normal (maybe even bigger than normal) hands.

http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2016/03/22/our-daily-barbarisms-leo-hurwitzs-strange-victory-1948/

Strange Victory is, it seems to me, the essential documentary of our moment. A nearly seventy-year-old film can remind us that, as the narration puts it, “hopelessness is next door to hysteria.” The frustrations, despair, and hatreds that surfaced during Obama’s tenure have crystallized in an American fascist movement of unprecedented breadth. The film reminds us that scapegoating is eternal, sometimes summoned quietly (they’re not like us, she’s a traitor, he knows exactly what he’s doing), sometimes conjured up in full fury. At a moment when America is one ISIS attack away from a Trump or Cruz presidency, it’s good to be reminded how the well-funded Hitler exploited Us vs. Them. Temporizing pundits give every sufficiently funded lunatic the benefit of straight-faced interviews, or even tongue-baths. Right-wing politicians and agitators, keen on power and uncommitted to principle, are ready to fall in line behind a leader if he might win. Forget Godwin’s Law. Facing today’s assault on peace and justice, Strange Victory can rekindle our energies, without a moment to lose.

Temporizing pundits give every sufficiently funded lunatic the benefit of straight-faced interviews

this is the most appalling thing to me; the media treats trump's demagoguery as if it's just another form of democratic deliberation.

is it true tho? fox news went after trump in that one debate more than i've ever seen a news org go after a candidate ever. what should they be doing? refusing to talk to him? badmouthing him to his face? why does anyone think that would turn off his supporters?

He thrives on people treating him very, very badly. It's true.

at what point will we see "gotcha" informational questions to the Yam, ie name the heads of state of these countries? The simpler the better.

is it true tho? fox news went after trump in that one debate more than i've ever seen a news org go after a candidate ever. what should they be doing? refusing to talk to him? badmouthing him to his face? why does anyone think that would turn off his supporters?

― Mordy, Tuesday, March 22, 2016 7:51 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

maybe they could ask follow up questions asking for specifics for the vague nonsense and bullshit he constantly spews

they do! did you see that wapost interview? but the question is still why you think his supporters would care that the NYT or CNN held trump's feet to the fire.

i feel like blaming the media for not doing enough to stop Trump, or for not letting enough people know about Bernie, is a cop-out that gives way too much power to a very decentralized industry in steep decline.

the point wdn't be to expose him to his committed supporters, but everyone else.

hell i wd only read an interview with him for money! time is precious.

one can understand the structural roots of the problem (="decentralized industry in steep decline") and still lament its effects on discourse and politics!

i think he exposes himself plenty the moment he opens his mouth but i love the idea of asking him easy trivia questions and trying to stump him

ok but isn't the consequence of a decentralized industry in steep decline that more ppl are getting their information from alternative and online sources and closing themselves off in echo chambers? whether network news is aggressive or not just seems like a total non-sequitar.

i was thinking of that too. i bet he couldn't specify any amendments beyond the first two. obviously this would play well to the anti-intellectualism of his "base," but it would repel everyone else.

i hope.