Trump Thread II: The man make a tweet

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Trump Thread II: The man make a tweet

Lote: Aug 5, 2001; Place your bets

Calaveron posted:

So he's going on a near three week vacation after he's spent more than a month of his 6 month tenure golfing and after he's said that congress shouldn't take their August recess to keep working huh

He's going to work from home. It's a working vacation. Obama had more vacation time. He's worked so hard he deserves a break. Etc. Etc.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 11, 2024 07:36

skylined!: Apr 6, 2012; THE DEM DEFENDER HAS LOGGED ON

maybe it's like fox news and when trump goes on vacation he just won't return

also lol at demanding senate not take august recess and then he skips town. he thinks he's the boss of the senate

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:35

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

mcmagic posted:

You misunderstand what their base cares about. They care MUCH more about destroying the Black President's legacy and passing a bill that would upset Liberals than losing their health insurance.

Their bill had 17% support, so it would seem people do care about losing their health care.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:35

Space Gopher: Jul 31, 2006; BLITHERING IDIOT AND HARDCORE DURIAN APOLOGIST. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THIS SHIT DON'T STINK EVEN THOUGH WE ALL KNOW IT DOES BECAUSE I'M SUPER CULTURED.

Ex parte Grossman says he can definitely pardon criminal contempt (you failed to obey the court and are sentenced to pay a big fine/spend a long time locked up), but has less to say about civil contempt (you'll pay a per-day fine/stay in jail until you obey the court's order).

Of course, if we're going full give-no-fucks, he could also let them testify and then pardon them for any crimes committed during the testimony - like, say, perjury.

The only real remedies are political ones - impeachment or losing an election - and that's pretty much by design.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:36

vaginite: Feb 8, 2006; I'm comin' for you, colonel.

Fangz posted:

They think they will control whatever history is written.

I'm at a conference right now and one of our presenters, from TN, keeps unironically referring to the War of Northern Aggression.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:36

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

mcmagic posted:

You misunderstand what their base cares about. They care MUCH more about destroying the Black President's legacy and passing a bill that would upset Liberals than losing their health insurance.

Their base is also a demographic that are absolutely devastated by medical bankruptcy and american lifestyle epidemics but lack the college education to know a real solution and want help but are failing to look in the correct direction to get help.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:38

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Charlz Guybon posted:

Their bill had 17% support, so it would seem people do care about losing their health care.

It had like 60% support among Republicans.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

There base is also a demographic that are absolutely devastated by medical bankruptcy and american lifestyle epidemics but lack the college education to know a real solution and want help but are failing to look in the correct direction to get help.

They seem to care more about tribalism though.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:38

Eggplant Squire: Aug 14, 2003

The base cares about losing their healthcare (and they REALLY care about loving over Obama and liberals), they are just dumb enough to think the GOP is going to give them (and only them) a great deal at everyone else's expense.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:39

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Radish posted:

The base cares about losing their healthcare (and they REALLY care about loving over Obama and liberals), they are just dumb enough to think the GOP is going to give them (and only them) a great deal at everyone else's expense.

And they won't blame the GOP when their policies gently caress them over. (They might blame congressional republicans, but they won't blame Dear Leader)

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:41

theflyingorc: Jun 28, 2008; ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS; Young Orc

mcmagic posted:

It had like 60% support among Republicans.

They seem to care more about tribalism though.

They do care more about losing their healthcare, they're just delusional and think they won't be the ones that lose it, because they're the Good White People.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:41

Violator: May 15, 2003

Russia's Lavrov Says Trump May Have Met Putin More Times

quote:

�They might have met even much more than just three times,� he told NBC News� Keir Simmons in an exclusive interview, dismissing speculation about the leaders' meetings. "Maybe they went to the toilet together," he joked.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/trump-putin-may-have-met-more-times-says-russia-s-n785146

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:41

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

mcmagic posted:

They seem to care more about tribalism though.

Care more than what?

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:41

Paracaidas: Sep 24, 2016; Consistently Tedious!

FFS. Since we're doing this again:

Seth Abramson is the professor who believed that if he wrote enough stories about Bernie's inevitable victory, Bernie would win. You see, we are all slaves of the metanarrative but when we take that control back and craft the narrati :words:

If there is one person on LeftConspiracy twitter less credible than Mensch, it is him. His tweets are literally wishcasting.

Please treat his takes as you would those of Mensch or mcmagic.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:42

goethe.cx: Apr 23, 2014

Violator posted:

Russia's Lavrov Says Trump May Have Met Putin More Times

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/trump-putin-may-have-met-more-times-says-russia-s-n785146

That certainly puts a new spin on the pee tape

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:42

Spiritus Nox: Sep 2, 2011

Paracaidas posted:

FFS. Since we're doing this again:

Seth Abramson is the professor who believed that if he wrote enough stories about Bernie's inevitable victory, Bernie would win. You see, we are all slaves of the metanarrative but when we take that control back and craft the narrati

If there is one person on LeftConspiracy twitter less credible than Mensch, it is him. His tweets are literally wishcasting.

Please treat his takes as you would those of Mensch or mcmagic.

I dunno, even if I were as low on him as you seem to be I would probably still consider wishcasting to be more credible than the Mesch's ravings.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:43

HappyHippo: Nov 19, 2003; Do you have an Air Miles Card?

mcmagic posted:

It had like 60% support among Republicans.

First result I found:

quote:

Even among Republicans, only 26% support the Senate bill; 17% oppose it. A 52% majority say they need more information before they can express a view.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/28/suffolk-poll-obamacare-trump-senate-health-care-plan/103249346/

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:43

Fitzy Fitz: May 14, 2005

lol Sean Hannity has been throwing a tantrum over this all morning.

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/888389548065075201

https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/888392545323102209

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:44

Violator: May 15, 2003

Koyaanisgoatse posted:

That certainly puts a new spin on the pee tape

Maybe I just don't pay attention enough, but it sure seems like this guy trolls a lot more than I've ever seen anyone at high level politics�before. YOU'RE KIDDING?? YOU'RE KIDDING?? I'm surprised he would would joke about his own president and Trump going to the bathroom together.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:44

Dr Kool-AIDS: Mar 26, 2004

Violator posted:

Russia's Lavrov Says Trump May Have Met Putin More Times

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/trump-putin-may-have-met-more-times-says-russia-s-n785146

Lavrov is a troll. I'm not saying it's impossible that they did, but he regularly fuels speculation with poo poo like this. At the same time they deny reports of collusion, they also love to fuel the conspiracy idiots like Louise Mensch, because undermining American democracy is a long term goal that extends beyond whatever they can get from Trump.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:45

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

Care more than what?

Everything.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:47

Tart Kitty: Dec 17, 2016; Oh, well, that's all water under the bridge, as I always say. Water under the bridge!

Fitzy Fitz posted:

lol Sean Hannity has been throwing a tantrum over this all morning.

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/888389548065075201

https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/888392545323102209

"My girflriend is a Guess Jeans model, but you wouldn't know her. She lives in Canada."

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:49

CmdrRiker: Apr 8, 2016; You dismally untalented little creep!

Since Kushner's lawyers amended his security clearance with content that is now under scrutiny, isn't Ivanka Trump required to disclose information about her spouse's activities on her security clearance forms?

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:50

fsif: Jul 18, 2003

Fitzy Fitz posted:

lol Sean Hannity has been throwing a tantrum over this all morning.

https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/888392545323102209

https://twitter.com/perlberg/status/888390522682961920

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:50

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

mcmagic posted:

Everything.

It just seems like not a Nancy drew mystery why the demographic least well served by the us healthcare system has a venomous all consuming drive to change it. Even if they have bad ideas what to change it to.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:52

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

It just seems like not a Nancy drew mystery why the demographic least well served by the us healthcare system has a venomous all consuming drive to change it. Even if they have bad ideas what to change it to.

You're talking about WWC. That isn't the majority of republicans.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:53

Ague Proof: Jun 5, 2014; they told me
I was everything

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

I don't like that the Japanese First Lady thing is getting reported as "she pretended" and not "trump just saw an Asian woman and declared she could only speak Ching Chong"

He thought she couldn't say "hello."

quote:

TRUMP: Like, not "hello."

That's Sitcom dialogue.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:53

PIZZA.BAT: Nov 12, 2016

IRT The Republicans caring more about winning elections and stashing money away for their donors than American democracy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:57

Tayter Swift: Nov 18, 2002; Pillbug

Enter to win our WFB Award sweepstakes! (Must be present to win)

# ? Jul 21, 2017 15:59

Rigel: Nov 11, 2016

BlueberryCanary posted:

Just because the impact may have been negligible in the last election, does not mean it would negligible in future elections.

This power would absolve candidates of every crime up to and including assassination should they win the election. That is horrifying.

Murder is a state crime that can't be pardoned.

Backing off of crazy 24 scenarios, why is it horrifying? A sitting president can not be indicted or tried for a federal crime, and if Trump is removed from office, Pence will pardon him anyway to "allow the country to move on". So what difference does it make who pardons Trump?

The flaw in our government is the fact that we have no mechanism for calling early elections.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:00

theflyingorc: Jun 28, 2008; ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS; Young Orc

Rigel posted:

Backing off of crazy 24 scenarios, why is it horrifying? A sitting president can not be indicted or tried for a federal crime, and if Trump is removed from office, Pence will pardon him anyway to "allow the country to move on". So what difference does it make who pardons Trump?

If Trump finishes his term, it makes a pretty big difference

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:02

mcmagic: Jul 1, 2004; If you see this avatar while scrolling the succ zone, you have been visited by the mcmagic of shitty lib takes! Good luck and prosperity will come to you, but only if you reply "shut the fuck up mcmagic" to this post!

Rigel posted:

Murder is a state crime that can't be pardoned.

Backing off of crazy 24 scenarios, why is it horrifying? A sitting president can not be indicted or tried for a federal crime, and if Trump is removed from office, Pence will pardon him anyway to "allow the country to move on". So what difference does it make who pardons Trump?

The flaw in our government is the fact that we have no mechanism for calling early elections.

The Electoral College and the Senate are much bigger flaws.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:02

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

fsif posted:

https://twitter.com/perlberg/status/888390522682961920

I believe it was a boking accident.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:05

Paracaidas: Sep 24, 2016; Consistently Tedious!

Spiritus Nox posted:

I dunno, even if I were as low on him as you seem to be I would probably still consider wishcasting to be more credible than the Mesch's ravings.

Understandable, but...

The man himself, and only about half of his editorial posted:

What is left unsaid here is that master narratives are, of course, nonsense. They�re nonsense because every event is a confluence of many seen and unseen narratives; they�re nonsense because the act of observing an event does, as physicists well know, change that event in unpredictable ways (cf. universal wavelength function); and they�re nonsense for a third reason active metamodernists are unusually attuned to � because even when and as individual narratives unite to create the appearance of a master narrative (a metanarrative), there are always, at the very same time and in the very same space, other individual narratives uniting into other, indeed nearly an infinite number of other discrete metanarratives just as credible. We may not experience time in the fifth and sixth dimensions, in other words, but both those dimensions exist whether we inhabit them or not. The only question is whether literary art in the form of so-called �professional writing� can reproduce, in real time, at least the sensation of inhabiting these higher dimensions.

Metamodernists do not deconstruct; they encounter deconstructed landscapes and atop them aim to reconstruct the many overlapping possibilities those landscapes now obscure. Metamodernism is not cynical, or ironic, and it certainly has no interest whatsoever in deceit; it earnestly seeks to expand our sense of the possible by noting that multiple master narratives or metanarratives can co-exist in the same space. (Note that this is significantly more radical than saying many narratives can co-exist at once; that�s something all of us instinctively and from hard experience already know to be true.) While this might tend to destabilize corporate master narratives, and while it might also tend to unsettle individuals� guiding metanarratives, the aim of metamodern literature is not to expose how things can be unsettled or fractured but rather the opposite: how fiction and truth, creativity and analysis, optimism and cynicism, sincerity and irony, deconstruction and reconstruction � Art and Life � can be said to be and thereby can be seen as eternally juxtaposed and ineluctable. In other words, open up the possible and you find the impossible inside; raise up the impossible to the level of the possible and eventually it becomes as possible as everything else and sometimes even more so.

I�ve been a metamodernist creative writer for many years now, but had not seen an opportunity to bring this earnest, optimistic, and loving art practice into my professional writing activities until Bernie Sanders came along. Not only do I fully support and endorse Senator Sanders� agenda, I see in his political methodology evidence of the metamodern, just as I know for certain when I hear Clinton�s cynical incrementalism that I am in the presence of a postmodern political ethos. The reason we think of Bernie Sanders as impractical or even naive is that he is; what most fail to see, however, is that his is the �informed naivete� of metamodernism. He sees that our economic and cultural markets are in a terminal state of deconstruction, and yes, this makes him angry and �negative� in a certain respect, but he sees too that the opportunity this deconstruction affords us all is a moment in which we can reconstruct everything we�ve known in a way that better reflects our values.

Draw up blueprints for the impossible and you find, in time, that individual pieces of an impossible plan become first improbable and then merely unlikely and then even odds and finally, at long last, possible. Repeat that procedure enough times and universal wavelength function tells us that the very fabric of reality can be altered. In simpler terms, when Bernie Sanders tells Hillary Clinton that universal healthcare, universal higher education, and a living minimum wage are human rights, she may not realize it but that�s the end of the consequential part of the conversation. The long-term details of how these things are achieved pale in significance to the far grander and more audacious act of naming the impossible as possible in the first instance. Clinton demanding that Sanders compare his policies with hers as to these topics is so beside the point as to make the Secretary seem foolish; if I tell you I have the power to fly and in time will find a way to manifest that power to you in real time, your first response isn�t to ask whether I agree that all proposed flight plans should be pre-cleared with the FAA.

Bernie Sanders� �political revolution� is political only inasmuch as thought is political. What he is really asking us to do � or, rather, because he knows how many Americans grew up with postmodernism as their mother�s milk, what he is asking young people not so jaded to do � is participate in a metamodern Enlightenment that is, at base, a philosophical revolution. What he is saying is that, yes, a $15-an-hour minimum wage is absolutely impossible at the federal level right now, but if enough people adjust their perception at the local level to briefly imagine this impossibility as a possibility, suddenly Seattle can pass a $15-an-hour minimum wage. Then Los Angeles and San Francisco. Then New York City and D.C. Then smaller towns � perhaps a town like the one in Ohio that just passed, effective forthwith, six months� paid maternity and paternity leave for all municipal employees. That�s an idea that has no place whatsoever here in America � that is totally foreign to the intellectual infrastructure we�ve developed � but when you find fertile soil for the impossible it really doesn�t matter how large a plot of land you�re working with. By the very nature of things � we might call it perceptual entropy � the impossible, once perceived, enters a chain of causation whose natural conclusion is realization.

It�s hard to believe that no one�s noticed yet that Sanders� entire political agenda is a thought experiment � an instance of long-term ideation rather than immediate satisfaction. The idea that Sanders supporters will all, en masse, blindly vote for Hillary Clinton in the fall, or that Sanders attracting more than 40 percent of all Democratic hearts and minds means anything other than that the Democratic Party is about to fracture, is based on the fallacy that Sanders and Clinton represent political philosophies whose differences are in degree rather than in kind. In fact, when and as Sanders chooses not to lay out a policy in furtherance of an ambition; when and as he does offer a policy, but its implementation is murky; when and as he chooses to inspire emotion rather than a model UN-like legislative plan, it is because he sees that Washington is broken and knows that the only national politician worth a drat in that scenario is one who shows us each individually how we can act locally (not, or not yet, nationally) to reimagine the possible.

Sanders� much-maligned answer before a newspaper board as to how he might negotiate with Mitch McConnell over a disagreed-upon policy initiative � that he would tell Mitch to look outside his window and see the tens of thousands of people standing there demanding he act � is not the vision of a foolish old man or a political dunce. It is, in fact, the entirely predictable and logical conclusion of the very chain of events Sanders means to initiate with his candidacy. After all, once $15-an-hour minimum wages exist in hundreds and hundreds of American towns and cities the notion of a $15 federal minimum wage will indeed be standing outside Mitch�s window, metaphorically speaking. Those �people� Sanders refers to are towns and cities and states that have reimagined the possible and thereby in once-invisible increments changed the Real for the whole of us.

When I began blogging about Bernie Sanders, my goal was to imagine what an equally accurate and reasonable and just master narrative sitting alongside the one promoted by the corporate media would look like. I wanted to write editorials that came from that master narrative, not the corporate one, because I believed then and believe still that the experimental journalism of the future will embrace the multi-dimensionality of metanarrative. Write that Sanders is in the midst of a competitive primary race enough times � and support those claims with unimpeachable elements of the totalized �Real� � and in time we collectively can see that that seemingly impossible metanarrative is every bit as powerful and present and perceivable as any other. Over the last 90 days, my articles on the 2016 Democratic primary have been shared more than 200,000 times on Facebook, and with each share there were people who read the article and called it a fantasy and others who saw in it a master narrative equally plausible to the one they�ve been sold daily since that moment in the 1990s when Hillary Clinton decided she would become President.

My articles have been entirely factual and entirely accurate. They have also deduced from the range of the possible and impossible other metanarratives beyond those presently acceptable to mainstream journalists. For instance, the fact that Hillary Clinton beat Bernie Sanders in February early voting in Arizona by more than 30 points, but lost to Sanders 50 percent to 46.5 percent in live voting in Arizona in March, could be entirely explained by the demographics of the archetypal early voter � as the mainstream media claimed, per usual seeking a binary approach to their own master narrative, one in which a given analysis either �fits� or is �fiction� � or some part of that dramatic statistical disparity could be that Hillary Clinton wears on voters over time. That Clinton was leading Sanders in her home state by 42 points just a few weeks before the Illinois primary, and then only won there by less than two points, could be meaningless (�a win is a win�) or an instance of a cognizable error in the metanarrative the corporate media has adopted (�the polling was off�) or could, again, suggest that Clinton�s strength as a candidate is ebbing both in individual states and overall. Or perhaps a combination of all three.

So when I wrote that �Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I�ll Prove It to You,� I was offering a �minority report� of the Real: suggesting that something may actually have shifted in the Democratic race around March 15th. Illinois voted on that day, but so did North Carolina, a state thought to be unfriendly to Sanders which he somehow lost in only the mid-single digits in live voting, even as he was playing Clinton to essentially a tie in Missouri. Clinton�s early voting lead of well over thirty points in Ohio disintegrated in live voting, where Clinton appears to have won in the high single-digits or very low double-digits.

The mainstream media said only, of the March 15th primaries, �Clinton goes five-for-five.� I saw in the same data another possibility entirely. Another metanarrative. And as an experimental writer I wanted to write of, from, and for that metanarrative rather than any other then available for public use.

After I wrote my article, Sanders began winning the overwhelming majority of states. Clinton�s unfavorables rose. Sanders continued getting massive crowds even though it�d become obvious that at least the pledged delegate math was absolutely dire. His general-election poll numbers against Donald Trump both nationally and state-by-state started to exceed those of Clinton with such a startling consistency that it�s amazing the Clinton camp�s all-too-simple �spring polling is meaningless� spin placated the corporate media into silence. The polls didn�t fit their metanarrative, and as they had some � albeit spotty and contradictory � evidence suggesting spring polling isn�t probative, they went with that explanation. And then they dropped that pretense the moment it seemed Clinton was the likely nominee and spring polling made for a good (and, more importantly, consistent-with-metanarrative) news story. And yet what they failed to realize was that Clinton and the DNC�s (e.g. Howard Dean) view of super-delegates � that it was all right for Clinton to accrue hundreds of them in 2015 because super-delegates don�t cast their ballots based on the popular vote or the delegate count � could in time be seen to undercut Clinton�s narrative that, having failed to secure the 59 percent of pledged delegates needed to avoid recourse to the super-delegates, she should be given the nomination on July 25th anyway. And thus was the most surprising metanarrative of all born.

The master narrative employed by the mainstream media since early 2015 has been that Clinton is destined to finally get what she deserves: a general-election shot at the White House. The media is so steeped in this version of the Real that the fact that something entirely different from this is happening this election cycle has escaped them entirely. The minority report for this election, which I began writing on the day Donald Trump announced his candidacy, and I wrote a blog post entitled �Trump Is Serious: Why the Donald�s Presidential Campaign Is More Than Just Entertainment�, says the following: this is the first metamodern political campaign, and not only have all the old rules of politics gone out the window, so too have all the old modes of thinking about the Real.

The minority report for the 2016 presidential election says that we are in the midst of the end-times for the major political parties � yes, both of them � and that Sanders and Trump are the Angel and Devil (as it were) of the metamodern Garden of Eden whose lush overgrowth we now find ourselves surrounded by. I spent the fall writing about the Devil for Metamoderna � Trump as a post-policy, post-truth, post-personality entity whose �angry optimism� so dynamically synchronizes with the mood of the nation that voting for it means voting for one�s own self-contradictory macro-feelings more so than a candidate, making Trump in a certain sense unbeatable � and I�ve now spent three months writing about the better angels of our newly metamodern nature. I�m thrilled to say that the latter writings, the ones about Bernie Sanders, have been infinitely more popular than the former.

The old journalism is dead because the Real as it constructs it no longer coincides with the Real as Millennials either experience it or (far more importantly) can imagine it. It speaks only to and into the past; the language it speaks in is deconstructive, but on a landscape so already deconstructed that every word it pumps into the ether is another kick to a dead horse; it speaks from a form of power � temporal, monetary, geopolitical � that won�t have currency in the decades to come. The chief currency today is of course virtual, and it�s attention. Not the cynical breed of attention we associate with the vocal ministrations of a carnival barker � though this is the future Trump would sell us if he could � but the attention to multi-dimensional narrative that actually creates possibility from impossibility. And that�s the only means of production Sanders is hoping his movement will come to control. Sandersism isn�t dying out, and won�t die out, because it is born not of so-last-century hash-taggable philosophies like #FeeltheMath or even the impotent rage of, say, #NeverHillary, but a commitment to turning the feeling that there are other realities out there than the ones we�re being exposed to into a way of life and not just a slogan.

So #FeeltheBern has nothing, finally, to do with Bernie Sanders.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:06

Casey Finnigan: Apr 30, 2009; Dumb ✔
So goddamn crazy ✔

Rigel posted:

Murder is a state crime that can't be pardoned.

Backing off of crazy 24 scenarios, why is it horrifying? A sitting president can not be indicted or tried for a federal crime, and if Trump is removed from office, Pence will pardon him anyway to "allow the country to move on". So what difference does it make who pardons Trump?

The flaw in our government is the fact that we have no mechanism for calling early elections.

Well we don't know for sure that Trump is gonna be happily pardoned and absolved from all guilt, and if a precedent is established that any president can pardon themselves for any electoral misconduct, there is no country anymore.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:06

Blue Footed Booby: Oct 4, 2006; got those happy feet

Rigel posted:

Murder is a state crime that can't be pardoned.

Backing off of crazy 24 scenarios, why is it horrifying? A sitting president can not be indicted or tried for a federal crime, and if Trump is removed from office, Pence will pardon him anyway to "allow the country to move on". So what difference does it make who pardons Trump?

The flaw in our government is the fact that we have no mechanism for calling early elections.

If you don't see a difference between these two, you haven't really thought through what a government is. Hint: they aren't real things.

Edit to be less of a threadshit: this seems facile when it's typed out, but it's the answer to your rhetorical question. Laws aren't real things. They don't actually exist except as words on a page and an intention on the part of those who could enforce them to actually do so. The entire point of democracy is to provide a sword of Damocles over the heads of those with power to at least pretend to respect rule of law. Openly pardoning himself would be open, explicit statement that his power has literally no limits. As many traditions as he's violated so far, the idea that he's accountable even in theory is the last boundary between having a country, however hosed, and having nothing but words on old parchment. It would be not a symbol of the final destruction of the republic, but the act itself.

Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Jul 21, 2017

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:08

F_Shit_Fitzgerald: Feb 2, 2017

mcmagic posted:

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/888397450498777094

LOL

It's depressing - but not surprising - that the collusion stuff has become a partisan issue.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:10

DaveWoo: Aug 14, 2004; Fun Shoe

Fitzy Fitz posted:

lol Sean Hannity has been throwing a tantrum over this all morning.

He didn't even want their stupid award, anyway!

https://mobile.twitter.com/seanhannity/status/888398132328968196

For a self-styled manly man, it sure is easy to trigger him into a meltdown.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:15

theflyingorc: Jun 28, 2008; ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS; Young Orc

mcmagic posted:

The Electoral College and the Senate are much bigger flaws.

They are, but they aren't oversights - they were things done to get small states to actually agree to join the union.

Trump's revealing a whole bunch of dumb oversights.

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:15

Not a Children: Oct 9, 2012; Don't need a holster if you never stop shooting.

theflyingorc posted:

They are, but they aren't oversights - they were things done to get small states to actually agree to join the union.

Trump's revealing a whole bunch of dumb oversights.

gently caress it, let them secede

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 11, 2024 07:36

Guy A. Person: May 23, 2003

fsif posted:

https://twitter.com/perlberg/status/888390522682961920

lol because of course you can't give someone an award unless they're physically present, this has never before come up in the history of awards and there is just really no way around it

# ? Jul 21, 2017 16:17

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Trump Thread II: The man make a tweet

«‹›6022 »