Donald Trump: Classic or Dud?

lord almighty that ny times piece

the quiet radicalism of doing absolutely nothing

makes u think

xpost lol yeah I read yet the other day. Classic clickbait title! She is a radical because she hates her husband so much and refuses to use her position to help people or take up some sort of cause that she believes in.

none of the trumps are worth a shit. people are making the mistake of thinking that because maybe the trump marriage isn't great, that means she actually gives a fuck about the people his policies are affecting. i would say the chances of that are pretty low.

She sees the opportunity as First Lady to try to make sure that at least ONE good thing happen during her family’s time in power, and she radically says “no”

She seems acquiescent, definitely. Complicit, maybe. Is that the same as terrible? I don't know.

In any case it is like fifty-seventh on my list of priorities right now. Is M. a basically passive person who thought she was signing up for luxury and ease, but got accidentally thrust into a media maelstrom because of her new husband's toxic cocktail of id, greed, and ambition? Or is she Lady MacTrump, urging him on to greater heights of monstrousness? Or somewhere in between?

Don't know, don't really care; I'm much more alarmed by the Trumpoid march through the agencies, like HHS sidelining women's health and refugee issues to focus on "religious liberty." With the Department of the Interior headed by an oil pipeline executive and an oil industry CEO as Secretary of State, how long until Federal employees' adherence to environmentalist causes becomes a disqualifying factor?

I know that people can walk and chew gum at the same time: we can oppose the president's horrible policies AND still find time to mock his tacky-ass household furnishings. But jeez, do we need to pick on the 10-year-old?

it's like when people creepily idealize Ivanka, gee i wonder why. anyway they're all terrible.

The nation was torn, the democracy imperiled, but she stepped bravely to the fore and presented a line of caviar-based skincare products.

she (melania) supported the birther campaign in the press too. vile

Is there a version of the Darwin awards for people who don't die but rather willfully maneuver themselves into a personal hell and then inexplicably choose to remain there? Because Melania would be a recipient of that award. Yes, I'm sure your life sucks. What exactly did you expect when you married and had the child of someone who has never hidden the fact that he's an irredeemably-awful person?

Wealth without responsibility

The life of almost all other wealthy people

The Pete Rose Prize

who gives a shit about the kids or anyone else not in a position of power in the trump admin. ivanka is the only one with any kind of power

flappy otm

I don't know, the sons may be chumps but they have business interests that certainly impact the president's decision making. It's a kind of power in the administration that's worthy of concern.

Eric might be more pleasant if they finally remove the multiple fecaliths from intestine

I don't know, the sons may be chumps but they have business interests that certainly impact the president's decision making. It's a kind of power in the administration that's worthy of concern.

― Pumpkin Soup and Mandy Patinkin (Hadrian VIII), Monday, January 29, 2018 11:27 AM (twenty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sure, maybe the sons. don jr. is involved in the mueller probe in a big way. but they're effectively sidelined, by all accounts not doing much & by many accounts trump doesn't think much of them ("they were in the back of the room when god was giving out brains")

Here’s an anecdote from Tina Brown’s Vanity Fair Diaries about Trump pouring a glass of wine down Marie Brenner’s back as revenge for a bad story and slinking away pic.twitter.com/Rfu1Ur1qM7

— Jia Tolentino (@jiatolentino) January 31, 2018

guessing no one watched it but Stormy Daniels on Kimmel last night was one of the weirdest interviews I've ever seen, she basically telegraphs up front "everything you read is true but I can't say a word about it"

she seems nice

sam rockwell to play her as female chuck barris

she seems nice

I met her once, about a decade ago, at a mutual friend's book party. She was professionally friendly. Nina Hartley was also there - she was genuinely nice.

guessing no one watched it but Stormy Daniels on Kimmel last night was one of the weirdest interviews I've ever seen, she basically telegraphs up front "everything you read is true but I can't say a word about it"

I watched some of it. The "you might think that, I couldn't possibly comment" about how the signature on her press-release denial of the affair not actually being hers meant that the denial was not to be believed was a curious opener, but she didn't seem bright enough to make dancing around not being able to say anything else actually fun or funny.

The only reason anyone wants to interview her right now is because of what she's not allowed to talk about, so the whole exercise is futile and stupid in a meta pomo way. Which I guess is appropriate for the current cultural moment?

this isn't 'new' anymore but it is very eye-opening

A new report from Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzes news coverage of President Trump’s first 100 days in office.

The report is based on an analysis of news reports in the print editions of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, the main newscasts of CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, and three European news outlets (The UK’s Financial Times and BBC, and Germany’s ARD).

Findings include:

President Trump dominated media coverage in the outlets and programs analyzed, with Trump being the topic of 41 percent of all news stories—three times the amount of coverage received by previous presidents. He was also the featured speaker in nearly two-thirds of his coverage.
Republican voices accounted for 80 percent of what newsmakers said about the Trump presidency, compared to only 6 percent for Democrats and 3 percent for those involved in anti-Trump protests.
European reporters were more likely than American journalists to directly question Trump’s fitness for office.
Trump has received unsparing coverage for most weeks of his presidency, without a single major topic where Trump’s coverage, on balance, was more positive than negative, setting a new standard for unfavorable press coverage of a president.
Fox was the only news outlet in the study that came close to giving Trump positive coverage overall, however, there was variation in the tone of Fox’s coverage depending on the topic.

Worth another look: In the Company of Men.

"Now, he's a new...breed of fuck. Like a special strain of fucker. Oh, I hate that little prissy cocksucker."

President Trump dominated media coverage in the outlets and programs analyzed, with Trump being the topic of 41 percent of all news stories—three times the amount of coverage received by previous presidents.

That is an astonishing statistic

nsfw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHwOMWGAg_o

That is an astonishing statistic

Yes. True. But we are speaking of a man who comes from an entertainment industry background where the byword is that there is no such thing as bad publicity or too much publicity. He actively courts media coverage on an hourly basis, almost to the exclusion of all else, and because he is president, he gets that coverage.

So is that clip of his "hair" real or not? I don't know any more.

The concepts Reality and Truth are meaningless.

also Hair

we all died on december 21 2012 iirc

"I slept [with] you because I like you."

interception: "a low-rent racist, a shameless misogynist, and an unbalanced narcissist [. . .] an unrelenting liar and a two-bit white identity demagogue"

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/16/trump-russia-election-hacking-investigation/

Americans must live with the uncertainty of not knowing whether Trump has the best interests of the United States or those of Russia at heart.

"By the way, I try like hell to hide that bald spot, folks, I work hard at it," Trump tells CPAC -- rare moment of self-deprecating humor!

— Eliana Johnson (@elianayjohnson) February 23, 2018

Bald "spot?"

You mean, your head?

This really happened. pic.twitter.com/DxI1AQG0hs

— VICE News (@vicenews) February 23, 2018

no humanizing of unmitigated evil pls

oh it's inevitable

Scott Adams probably nutting his Dilbert-shaped boxers right now

can't wait for the polls in 2028 which show that trump's post-presidential approval rating climbing above 50%

if Yam had found himself in an active shooter situation in civilian life, with his security detail taken out, which of his loved ones would he NOT use as a human shield?

all too easy to visualize

he can always buy a new wife

get the grift while the grifting's good

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/23/rnc-paid-trump-campaign-trump-tower-rent-after-paying-legal-bills.html

LISTEN - This is what Michael Wolff was HEARING in his earpiece when he claimed he couldn’t hear my question on @TheTodayShow this morning. pic.twitter.com/dl3ZvQfKWm

— BenFordham (@BenFordham) February 26, 2018

Have we been talking abt the absolute shit show Michael Wolff's been having as of late? Kids from a Dutch tv show asked him critical questions, causing him to cancel all Dutch interviews that were planned.

that clip is beautiful

Wow. Clearly he heard him the entire time. You gotta practice that routine in the mirror a few before times before attempting it on live tv