How Kamala Harris Dodged the Two Truths Problem
One reason fact checking doesn’t work with Donald Trump is that he has trained his followers to so distrust the press that even if Daniel Dale lays out 33 lies in one debate, Trump’s followers will simply write that off to press bias. Donald Trump has created a system in which there are two truths in the United States: one, the reality that sane people live in, and another, an all-encompassing system of false claims that Trump has spun with the help of Fox News.
So every time you try to fact check Trump, you simply reinforce the polarization in the US. You simply reinforce the belief of Trump’s supporters that the other half of society simply hates Trump’s truth. And so, counterintuitively, fact checking has the opposite effect you might want it to have: it reinforces the loyalty of Trump’s rubes, rather than leads them to doubt him.
Kamala Harris appears to understand that. One of the most fascinating aspects of last week’s debate is how, with one major and two lesser exceptions, rather than directly disputing Trump’s truth, Harris instead rebutted his false claims by making Trump look weak.
The one exception — over an hour into the debate — came when Linsey Davis invited Harris to respond to Trump’s accusation that she hates Israel.
LINSEY DAVIS: Vice President Harris, he says you hate Israel.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: That’s absolutely not true. I have my entire career and life supported Israel and the Israeli people.
But aside from Harris saying, “that’s not true,” or, “that’s a lie,” Harris usually doesn’t directly dispute any of the lies Trump tells. Often, she instead says things that suggest his incompetence.
For example, in response to Trump’s first answer in which he makes a claim about the economy under his term, instead of directly disputing it, Harris mocks what a mess he left her and President Biden.
Let’s talk about what Donald Trump left us. Let’s talk about what Donald Trump left us.
[snip]
And what we have done is clean up Donald Trump’s mess.
Trump claims that all the jobs created under the Biden Administration were just “bounceback” jobs as the economy reopened after the pandemic. Rather than disputing that, Harris describes how Trump is just trying to help rich people (and then notes that even Wharton assess his economic plans would bankrupt the country).
So, Donald Trump has no plan for you. And when you look at his economic plan, it’s all about tax breaks for the richest people.
[snip]
What the Wharton School has said is Donald Trump’s plan would actually explode the deficit.
Trump complains about inflation and brags that up to 90% of people think he’ll be better on the economy. Harris could have corrected the polling claim or — more importantly — talked about how the Biden Administration had tamed inflation. She didn’t (there are reports that some Biden insiders are hurt she didn’t defend him more, and this may be an example). Instead, she hit Trump for sending chips to China.
[Y]ou wanna talk about his deal with China what he ended up doing is under Donald Trump’s presidency he ended up selling American chips to China to help them improve and modernize their military basically sold us out when a policy about China should be in making sure the United States of America wins the competition for the 21st century.
Donald Trump tells his normal lie, claiming that everyone wanted abortion to be returned to the states, and Harris simply calls him a liar, before explaining how his hand-picked Justices did what Trump wanted.
Well, as I said, you’re going to hear a bunch of lies. And that’s not actually a surprising fact.
Trump’s claim that people are engaged in infanticide is one of three lies that ABC, in this case Linsey Davis, fact-checked in real time. So Harris starts her reply by first addressing Davis’ question about whether Harris would put any limits on abortion access by using Roe as a stand-in, she then translates Trump’s infanticide claim into what it would really mean, then describes even claiming it is an insult to women.
I absolutely support reinstating the protections of Roe v. Wade. And as you rightly mentioned, nowhere in America is a woman carrying a pregnancy to term and asking for an abortion. That is not happening. It’s insulting to the women of America. And understand what has been happening under Donald Trump’s abortion bans.
Trump interrupts and tries to refloat his infanticide claim and Harris successfully interjects — come on! But her first response to the infanticide is to emphasize that Trump hasn’t denied he would veto an abortion ban.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Come on.
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Would you do that? Why don’t you ask her that question —
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Why don’t you answer the question would you veto –
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: That’s the problem. Because under Roe v. Wade.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Answer the question, would you veto–
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: You could do abortions in the seventh month, the eighth month, the ninth month –
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: That’s not true.
David Muir invites Harris to respond after Trump’s cat screech. She starts by labeling him as extreme and pivots to talking about her Republican endorsers.
Talk about extreme. Um, you know, this is I think one of the reasons why in this election I actually have the endorsement of 200 Republicans who have formally worked with President Bush, Mitt Romney, and John McCain including the endorsement of former Vice President Dick Cheney and Congressmember Liz Cheney.
That leads to a long exchange between Muir and Trump in which Trump falsely blames crime on immigrants. Muir corrects Trump’s claim that crime is going up. But there’s still a false claim that Harris could have corrected: that immigrants are more likely to commit crimes than American citizens. Instead of doing that, she raises Trump’s own crimes.
Well, I think this is so rich. Coming from someone who has been prosecuted for national security crimes, economic crimes, election interference, has been found liable for sexual assault and his next big court appearance is in November at his own criminal sentencing. And let’s be clear where each person stands on the issue of what is important about respect for the rule of law and respect for law enforcement.
Trump responds with his tired lies about the legal cases against him being political. Again, Harris could fact check those lies (at least the ones that wouldn’t amount to command influence from a sitting Vice President). Instead, she doubles down on the “extreme” comment, then lays out the way SCOTUS’ immunity decision would immunize Trump for misconduct.
Well let’s talk about extreme. And understand the context in which this election in 2024 is taking place. The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that the former president would essentially be immune from any misconduct if he were to enter the white house again. Understand, this is someone who has openly said he would terminate, I’m quoting, terminate the constitution of the United States.
After Trump responds to Harris answer to a Davis question about fracking, he spurts out some of the other things that Trump claims she has flip-flopped on. Don’t lie, Harris answers after first saying that his claims were not true.
Uh, defund the police. She’s been against that forever. She gave all that stuff up, very wrongly, very horribly. And everybody’s laughing at it, okay? They’re all laughing at it. She gave up at least 12 and probably 14 or 15 different policies. Like, she was big on defund the police.
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: That’s not true. [mouthed, not audible]
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: In Minnesota, she went out — wait a minute. I’m talking now. If you don’t mind. Please. Does that sound familiar?
VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Don’t lie. [lie is audible]
Then Trump responds to a Muir question about whether he regretted his actions on January 6 by blaming Nancy Pelosi. Again, Harris could fact check Trump’s claim that it was Pelosi’s role, and not his own, to keep the country safe. Instead, she states clearly that he incited a violent mob and coddled right wingers on other occasions.
I was at the Capitol on January 6th. I was the Vice President-Elect. I was also an acting senator. I was there. And on that day, the president of the United States incited a violent mob to attack our nation’s Capitol, to desecrate our nation’s Capitol. On that day, 140 law enforcement officers were injured. And some died. And understand, the former president has been indicted and impeached for exactly that reason. But this is not an isolated situation. Let’s remember Charlottesville, where there was a mob of people carrying tiki torches, spewing antisemitic hate, and what did the president then at the time say? There were fine people on each side. Let’s remember that when it came to the Proud Boys, a militia, the president said, the former president said, “Stand back and stand by.”
Harris says, “we’re not going back” to this — a clear sign that when she uses the term, it’s not about incumbency, it’s about Trump’s fascism.
After the Israel exchange — the clearest moment, I argue, when Harris directly disputed a claim Trump made — and the commercial break, the discussion turns to Ukraine, to Trump’s unwillingness to answer whether he wants them to win. After Trump babbles a bunch about Biden before claiming he would end the Ukraine war before he took office, Harris accuses Trump of planning to just give up.
Well, first of all, it’s important to remind the former president you’re not running against Joe Biden, you’re running against me. I believe the reason that Donald Trump says that this war would be over within 24 hours is because he would just give it up. And that’s not who we are as Americans.
When Muir invites Harris to respond to Trump’s false claim that she met with Putin, Harris first notes she has predicted he would lie, then describes, again, meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy (I’ve seen Trump supporters complain that she didn’t deny meeting Putin).
Yet again, I said it at the beginning of this debate, you’re going to hear a bunch of lies coming from this fella. And that is another one. When I went to meet with President Zelenskyy, I’ve now met with him over five times. The reality is, it has been about standing as America always should, as a leader upholding international rules and norms.
Some questions later, Trump interrupts to respond to Harris’ observation that Trump uses race to divide America, making a rubber-glue argument. I’m not the most divisive presidency, you are.
Knowing that regardless of people’s color or the language their grandmother speaks we all have the same dreams and aspirations and want a president who invests in those, not in hate and division.
DAVID MUIR: Vice President Harris thank you. Linsey?
LINSEY DAVIS: President Trump, this is now your third time —
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: This is the most divisive presidency in the history of our country.
Trump is trying to revert to that two truths position, on which he usually operates. Rubber, glue. In such a world, you don’t have to decide who really has had a divisive presidency, you have only to decide who you trust, and your answer will come from there.
He somehow goes from there to inflation. Once again, Harris does not respond by pointing out that inflation has been tamed, but instead with her generational comment, which she uses as a way to list all the plans she has, in contrast to Trump.
I want to respond to that, though. I want to just respond briefly. Clearly, I am not Joe Biden, and I am certainly not Donald Trump. And what I do offer is a new generation of leadership for our country. One who believes in what is possible, one who brings a sense of optimism about what we can do instead of always disparaging the American people. I believe in what we can do to strengthen our small businesses, which is why I have a plan. Let’s talk about our plans.
After Trump sets off on a rant, it appears that Harris tries to interrupt to correct Trump’s claim that she wants to take everyone’s guns, which Davis cuts off.
She has a plan to confiscate everybody’s gun. She has a plan to not allow fracking in Pennsylvania or anywhere else. That’s what her plan is until just recently.
LINSEY DAVIS: President Trump, President Trump.
VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS: The former president has said something twice and I need to respond too. I just need to respond one time to what he has said multiple times.
She returns to both fracking (which as she notes, she answered in response to a question from Davis) and guns during a later response on healthcare.
I just need to respond to a previous point that the former president has made. I’ve made very clear my position on fracking. And then this business about taking everyone’s guns away. Tim Walz and I are both gun owners. We’re not taking anybody’s guns away. So stop with the continuous lying about this stuff.
But that’s it–the next most direct responses to a claim from Trump, after the Israel claim.
Some of these are admittedly closer to direct responses to Trump, but except where Trump makes claims about Harris, she does not directly dispute him.
The effectiveness of this approach is clear: Rather than saying Trump’s manufactured version of truth was false — again, setting up a clear dispute and inviting Trump’s supporters to simply dismiss her as someone opposing him because she hates him — she instead demonstrated, over and over, Trump’s weakness.
That recognizes an important fact about the cult-like following Trump has created: So long as his followers believe his strength, they will believe what he says as an article of faith. They believe in him, and so believe what he says.
But they believe in him because they believe his pose of being strong.
With some exceptions (such as a segment of the Jan6ers prosecuted because they believed him, and left with a lot of time to reconsider the actions they took in response), Trump’s people won’t start to rethink what he tells them to believe until they first doubt who he is, until they first begin to see through his con of being strong and successful.
And you demonstrate that not by telling them facts that might directly contest the belief system they’ve adopted from Trump, but by pointing not just to evidence that he’s weak — he is laughed at, he is insecure about his crowd size, his daddy gave him millions that he squandered in six bankruptcies.
It’s only after they step out of a belief system based on a false belief that Trump is strong will people listen to you.
There was a great deal that Kamala Harris did to succeed in the debate. The most important thing was to rattle the old man, so his own narcissism led him to meltdown of his own accord.
But even as that was happening, the Vice President didn’t stoop to a contest of two truths, a contest over which truth voters might pick. She instead made it clear that the basis of the “truth” Trump offers, is a base of weakness and fear. She didn’t refute individual aspects of Trump’s truth. She instead kicked at its foundations, and showed how flimsy it is.
Great analysis. Trump supporters have been told that Kamala Harris is not smart and not articulate and that she is weak and would buckle under the incredible strength and brains of their leader. She also used the debate to show, not tell, how wrong they are. I had no doubt she would do what she did, if anything, she did even better than I expected. People I know who are not in the Trump cult were worried about how she would hold her own against Trump. She convinced those people as well.
“Trump supporters have been told that Kamala Harris is not smart and not articulate and that she is weak and would buckle under the incredible strength and brains of their leader. She also used the debate to show, not tell, how wrong they are.”
Yeah, that’s why they’re now turning to the conspiracy theories they are (“She was wired!”, “She had the questions in advance!”), because they need to explain why someone who Trump called stupid managed to eat his lunch.
Harris seems to be carrying Lawyering 101 to a high level. Never defend; always attack. A good attack will also convey a defense, but a not-so-good attack is better than a straight defense.
Insightful! Thx!
This is helpful. I’ve been making calls for Harris and still thinking about an interaction I had with a MI voter. He seemed open to talking at first, and was concerned about the border and immigration. I mentioned that Trump had killed the bipartisan immigration bill and then he started to freak out and act like I was spewing fake news and trying to manipulate him. I recognized that I had stepped on a cult fault line and quickly got off the call as I could see I was only going to make it worse. I’ve been contemplating how to approach this problem since then.
That’s interesting, bc it is something Trump bragged about. I wonder if you were to share his own words, would be believe it?
How are other voters responding to that answer?
I didn’t try that approach again. My hunch was that with that particular person, I had treaded on a sore point in arguing back at all. If I had found a different way to first join with him and find something we could agree on, I wouldn’t have threatened him. Maybe. With others, (including an RFK PA voter), I spoke about Harris’ statements to provide a legal path to citizenship. That person seemed very much concerned about our involvement with Ukraine, and against gov’t overreach.
Anyway, it’s pretty rough out there!
Fellow journeyer – somewhat. I am an election worker. Even when you explain things to people to help them understand – people who have their mind made up take out their anger on you. I always try to remember that me, one person, is up against a well-oiled machine that is funded, coordinated and curated by the right-wing. We are all just one person. But, I don’t give up. I try not to let it get me down.
I have had a number of interactions with these voters. At a door, a registered D woman told me she was a D but a Trump supporter. “He’s a good Christian man and businessman who will do the right thing and fix the economy.” She complained about the business she and her husband run (he’s also a D, also a Trumper) , saying it was the worst years ever for their business. She said they are oppositional with their other D relatives. After a few minutes, I asked for the lit back, and thanked her for her time. Last night w friends, two women are Trumpers. One said Harris was not allowed to change her positions “on 8 things,” and said she would never change her mind. Several attempts were made to try to get her to talk about the policies she supports that Trump offers, (Harris, she said, has none), she would not articulate anything. She is not against abortion but says the Ds have “taken God out of our country.” The other woman abruptly said she had to go and left without saying anything. I think it is a waste of time to try to help tease out anything with these types. Better to work with people who are on the fence. Though you would not find that out unless they were willing to talk to you. I tried to understand how my friend, a person of faith, last night could support a rapist, liar, thief, etc. but it seems irrelevant to consider his “values” because that does not matter to “a conservative” who just likes “conservative policies.”
Establishing common ground is always good and is also consistent with the Harris message that we have more things in common than we have differences. I’ve found it helpful thoughout my life.
As an example, years ago my brother (a Tea Partier) and I were talking about climate change. He insisted that natural phenomena were occurring. I agreed 100% that natural phenomena were occurring (and I meant it.)
But on top of that, I said, there are people on Earth. And those people are doing things that ADD to the natural occurring phenomena. My brother got really quiet. He didn’t respond. And he didn’t argue. So, I knew that, at least, he might give it some thought.
So, maybe, there are some things you can agree with first, like border control is necessary in general and peace in Europe would be good in general. Then listen to the person’s opinion and see what you can add to help them see another point of view.
One small fact, I’ll call it a nuance, can change the conversation. We can agree that the climate can and does naturally change – we can also demonstrate (that nuance) that with the addition of our activities – we speed it up.
From there we can demonstrate that with that acceleration a problem is created outside of naturally occuring changes. From there we can demonstrate the consequences as in self-feeding acceleration – what happens when permanent snow/ice disappear for instance.
Anyhow, finding one “in” can open the door to a more fruitful conversation.
Baby steps.
There was a fascinating book a couple years ago called “How Minds Change” by David McRaney. Savage Librarian’s conversation with her brother sounds like it came directly from it. What I recall is if you just try to give someone the facts, it seems that someone should come around. Yet we all know that it doesn’t work like that. If you challenge deep seated, or tribal beliefs, the person will likely close up. You are the enemy. But, by listening to them, and then connecting with a story, like Savage did by adding that people are here, adding to the warming, you open a door to where the person afterwards can think it through while adding in the facts they may have been immune to previously.
I think we are missing a larger lie that Republicans have, that Democrats support illegal immigration.
Use being against illegal immigration as your point of agreement to build on. Your next point of agreement could be issues with our asylum laws, which contributes to unlawful border crossing, and an overburdened immigration court.
I think the issue is that Democrats aren’t addressing the Big Lies, because they are so far from reality- for example, that we have an ‘open border’ because we don’t have a physical wall across our borders. What we do have is a virtual wall, with 80 more towers planned for 2024. A virtual wall is cheaper, and doesn’t create the environmental impacts of a physical wall.
The problem with discussing immigration is the media encouraged simplistic pro/ anti portrayals.
Personally, I would choose to double down on enforcement of illegal employment and upping those consequences (if you pay them, they will come). I believe if we took that route, immigration reform would be able to be accomplished- businesses would push it through. Our economy needs immigrants.
[Welcome back to emptywheel. SECOND REQUEST: Please use the SAME USERNAME AND EMAIL ADDRESS each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment as “Mesaliving”; it has been edited this one time to match your established username “Namaste_MF.” Future mismatches of username may not clear for publication; check your browser’s cache and autofill. You also used a different email address; your established email began with “lb”; we don’t even ask for a working/valid emai, only that you use the same one each time. /~Rayne]
Marcy,
I’m reminded of my Hospice nursing again by this post because often times a hospice patient’s mentality is altered. Trump’s mentality is also altered mainly with falsities. Not confronting the patient’s truth, by denying the reality, of the patient speaking is the first rule of patient/nurse communicating. Kamala, by not denying Trumps’s false claims, similar to a patient’s altered sense of reality, allowed the debate communication to flow. As you say demonstrating a non contest of truths.
Good point. It’s like improv, where the goal is to build on what’s been said. By never denying his “truths,” Kamala Harris allowed him to run with them, taking them to their absurd extremes (trans surgery for immigrants in prison, for example) and highlighting his demented trains of thought.
Now this article is right on it, it says it all. Now we see the narrative of how “what someone says about us…” becomes an injustice. The following article really should be about how we as modern societies fall or buy in to the narrative.
Basically what you saw was the two truths on stage. And Harris did brilliantly. There is no question.
You could kinda replace the word “truth” with “USA”.
TRUMPER MINDSET
“I was doing time in the universal mind.
I was turning keys, I was setting people free.
I was doing alll right…”
She defeated the Gish Gallup both by showing her opponents weakness and by going around the lies to information she knew was true and material. She was verbally like water in a stream, flowing around the rocks and not moving them. I suspect it is one of the known methods of disabling the lies.
She also was very effective in presenting the opponent’s own words spoken over the last several years and the statements of others about the Republican nominee as evidence. That appears to be based on courtroom experience. I think a good prosecutor sticks to the convicting evidence and doesn’t get distracted in the smoke and mirrors offered by the defense.
I would be interested in what you have observed about Irish and English views to the American joint news conference.
She controlled the narration of the two truths is what Harris did. Isn’t that what an excellent prosecutor does? This is the mindset of the criminal at hand, this is the lawful truth that the rest of us follow.
And, Harris did have the monitors who maintained reality, like, you cannot execute a child after child birth was the explosion that went off in Donald’s aging brain.
But, yet, I still maintain that we are continuing to put a microphone in front of a psychopath’s mouth. Didn’t Vance admit to fabricating stories in the media to gain attention today? Fomenting racism appears to be the thing Vance wants to do. And he is a father?
The Republican party just created fear in a city of Ohio. I guess this is just another day in America.
It is disgusting the willingness of Republicans to sacrifice (other) people’s lives in their lust for power. Now we have had multiple bomb threats in Springfield.
Everybody’s life in that city has been disrupted and is at risk from Trumps fascist mob.
We had hundreds of thousands of excess covid deaths due to Trump desperately trying to maintain the presidency. Noone else matters.
The GOP for decades has been stoking the flames of hate, division, and fear. They have created a monster.
And slightly off topic, but didn’t Mr. Trump kind of look like that monster during the debate. His stiffness and angry face made it seem he was going for the Frankenstein look. I almost expected to hear Phil Hartman’s voice come out, yelling”fire bad”.
Also, her rebuttals to the garbage offered by the Republican nominee were general, with the exceptions Ms. Wheeler noted. She described the lies instead of wasting time in rebutting them, which seems to be an effective tactic.
One of the head scratching things I keep seeing from liberals of an ilk is the complaint that Harris and Democrats aren’t bringing up this fact or that, as if some bar chart that matters to them is relevant to the campaign.
Biden actually showed the way with his state of the union address this year which was much more a statement of principles than the typical laundry list presidents deliver.
Principles have to be grounded in facts in order to hold up, but far too many people confuse facts with principles.
Word. Voters care about principles and character, not policy. This also goes for Trump voters, where his lack of character is true to the vote-with-your-middle-finger principles he stands for.
I think people care a lot about policy, but in a coherent way, not as jumble of little elements. A candidate should talk about health care and back it up with facts, but the idea that a speech should start with antibiotic research and finish with zinc deficiency is nuts.
Yes, this. It’s a common sense approach when speaking to hundreds of millions. aka KISS.
I don’t know how much I should believe people who are “undecided”, but many of them say they don’t know enough about Harris to vote for her; others say that inflation is a big issue for them; I just wonder if she wouldn’t have gotten more mileage by talking about the economy: explain how inflation was the result of the pandemic, and supply chain issues, which led to a lot of price gouging etc, and how she and Biden had to fight to bring it down to where it is now close to what it was before the pandemic. There were 70 million people watching, and I don’t think she’s going to get many chances like that (especially considering that Trump won’t let another debate happen).
The biggest political error of this cycle is democrats essentially rolling over on inflation instead of pointing out that inflation started under Trump and climbed before the first Biden spending bill was passed, and that at least half of the spending made up for Trump’s abysmal covid response and broken promise on infrastructure.
As the saying goes, if you repeat a lie enough times, people start questioning the truth and their organic biases twist the lie into the ‘truth’ they WANT to hear.
Why do you think trump’s marketeers named his screech-site Truth Central? His personal fascist echo chamber of hate.
Marcy is correct, as usual, that Harris’s kryptonite retorts in the debate were designed to hammer on his weaknesses instead of one-upping his lies. And it was brilliant. Did it move the needle?
The MSM and for-profit news feeders are not going to help the 70% of We The People who know team trump plays dirty and cheats to stay in power. Because Mitch McConnell fixed the game: you don’t need to win elections, you just need to place biased judges in charge of deciding the truth when you’re in power…And let the EC do the rest. Nice job Mitch.
So how to undo the damage done?
More kryptonite, more pix of trump’s naked body, shriveled manhood, trumpian family history and addled moments of self destruction, please.
Excellent analysis. You identified a subtler but more effect technique she used. The standard MSM/Pundit analysis is she goaded him. This shows she addressed the problem of dealing with continual lies, believed by his cult. Bravo.
Thank you. For once, once, a Trump debate opponent found a way to avoid his maelstrom, and according to the media, not playing by his rules means she goaded him!
This framing of “the two truths problem” is very helpful! Thank you!
The standard model of refuting Trump’s lies with facts plays into Trump’s wheelhouse. He wants repetition of his memes, even if the repetition is through refuting the lies in the memes. It’s a variation of the old marketing adage about negative publicity is still publicity.
Presidential debates are debates in name only. They are more like auditions – like the “beauty contests” when a client is looking for the right law firm to represent him or her. Harris was smart to focus on what the debates really demonstrate – the ability to think on your feet, to respond coherently to questions, to cast doubt about your opponent’s abilities and to showcase your strengths. Save the wonkiness for interviews and speeches.
Once again, an outstanding post/piece showcasing your second to none research and analytical skills! Thank you!
Trump, the malignant narcissist sociopathic groomer, has been a bully and a groomer his entire life.
He also learned as a child that playing the role of victim when called a bully typically deflects the arguments that he is a bully.
Trump grew up a racist. His parents were both racists and it’s likely both sets of his grandparents were racists, too.
Consequently, with his racist beliefs, malignant narcissistic and sociopathic personality, learned victimization and grooming skills to influence and persuade other like minded individuals to join his MAGA cult, Trump is nearly impossible to debate. Charlie Manson was equally difficult to debate or even talk to for the same reasons.
Harris destroyed Trump in their joint television appearance last week by using the strategies and tactics you identified.
Trump’s core MAGA cult members are emotionally invested in Trump; therefore, they will always support him.
My question is so how does the Democratic Party get TFG to accept another debate. My opinion is TFG’s dementia from age is far worse than Biden’s stutter. So would a media campaign asking why TFG won’t debate again with questions such as, “Trump won’t debate again because; The dog ate his homework!” work?
Re: the dog ate my homework. There’s a great cartoon from the late New Yorker cartoonist, Danny Shanahan, which you can find on a memorial site for him (scroll down to the bottom):
https://bado-badosblog.blogspot.com/2021/07/danny-shanahan-1957-2021.html
Why would VP Harris want to do another debate with Trump? VP Harris should go out on top.
As I wrote on another thread, VP Harris should decline any more debates, citing the fact that she utterly humiliated him in the first debate, and she should state that humiliating Trump once again in a public debate would amount to elder abuse.
Why, because on all sorts of news sites I go to they talk about people not knowing enough about Kamala. Here on emptywheel Marcy explains the difference in a time factor of TFG’s months & months of campaigning (although terrible) in relation to Kamala’s (brilliant) newness.
Kamala is very intelligent, totally capable. She’ll knock him out again! In cartoon visuals, knocked flat out with stars & circles around his head, x’s over his god damned eyes!
I’ll give you an example of bias. Kamala & Doug own a home here in Los Angeles. Their hometown. I’ve lived here since the early eighties. Have been through all of the different owners of the Los Angeles Times newspaper. Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, a 6.2 billionaire owns the L. A. Times now. A Doctor, one who helps all?
On a non stop basis, the front page of the internet edition will have up to 5 different sized photos of TFG every day to rarely a photo of Kamala. Duplicates to an article or articles about TFG.
The current hometown of the Vice President of the United States.
I’m so pissed if I had time I’d stand at the door of the L. A. Times calling out the employees of such PREJUDICE for fucking MONEY!
The LA Times, and the few families that have owned it, has long been a voice for the white right.
Patrick Soon-Shiong may have a medical degree, but he’s primarily biotech guy who holds hundreds of patents and created some very successful cancer drugs. So he wanted to add newspaper ownership to his already-successful portfolio? Hello Jeff Bezos.
The Chandler family was always very Reagan-friendly. The Tribune Company’s brief ownership of the LA Times amounted to a business strategy that didn’t work out for them.
I’m pretty perturbed that the mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, where both Trump’s golf course AND the major landslide area are located was pictured (in the LAT) holding a red MAGA hat at Trump’s presser from the other day. I know he’s just trying to raise money to fix his city but either he felt he needed to pander to Trump to get his attention (Trump allowed him to speak briefly) or whether he was already a Trumper and happy to be a product-placement proxy for him is just odd.
A friend and I regularly ride bikes in the PV area, though the worst stretch of road (with the Trump golf course on the far side) is now closed to 2-wheeled vehicles because it’s so dangerous now. Anyway, in the last 3-4 weeks some enterprising Trumpeneur has set up a Trump merch booth on the sidewalk in front of Starbucks selling hats, t-shirts, flags etc. I now wonder if she had permission from Mayor Cruikshank or the city officials to do so, or not…
reply & to eoh & matt…
Very true past owners were white, right wing slanted. What gets me in this new billionaire owned news slanting is in the past those types knew to survive on a money making basis, they had to at least fake having some dignity and in this case covering that Kamala & Doug are residents of L. A. & a VP now running for President is legitimate Los Angeles, local & national news. It’s insulting and like, the now with absolutely not a shred of worldwide dignity or respect, the current SCOTUS.
The billionaires newspapers don’t have to make money. Maybe they write it off.
Somebody like Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, with enormous positive accomplishments, throws away his dignity to somebody who could destroy the world. INSANE! Ditto Elon Musk who weirdly is beginning to physically look i.e. morph into TFG’s sickly, fading blotched slickness appearance! Way weird!
Will balanced reporting in newspapers ever happen again?
Agreeing to debate is a sign of strength. Declining to debate is a sign of weakness.
Most of the time, those signals are more important to voters’ perception than the actual results of the debate.
So far, Harris has played this exactly right — she won the debate, and then she made Trump look weak by forcing him to refuse to debate again.
If for some reason Trump comes back with a reasonable debate challenge, she can’t refuse it — the refusal would do more harm to her than a loss would.
Harris absolutely would knock Trump out again, she has the formula for the likes of him. When she said “I know his type”, it wasn’t to insult or brag. She really does know his type.
I cannot imagine that happening at this point.
OTOH, we should also be getting a VP debate and I expect that to be a barn burner as well. Vance seems to be insistent about saying the quiet part out while also demonstrating foibles that seem, imo, to put him just a smidge on the spectrum. The capacity for neurodivergent folk to make enemies so unconsciously and effortlessly, you would think it impossible to make it this far in politics.
Vance isn’t neurodivergent, he’s just an asshole.
Furthermore, it is rather insulting to compare that asshole’s antics to neurodivergence.
A former high school social studies teacher is well-acquainted with having to deal with assholes.
Long ago, there was a Lutheran bishop with a congregation that was notorious for chewing up pastors and spitting them out. When he mentioned in a bishop’s meeting that he was sending the congregation a newly ordained pastor, one of the other bishops asked “Why in the world would you do that?” Said the first bishop, “She was an elementary school teacher before going to seminary. The folks at this congregation are acting like first graders, so I thought who better to send them than a pastor who dealt with first graders for 20 years.”
It worked with that pastor and congregation, and I predict it will work in the debate between Walz and Vance.
Indeed. Tim Walz had to keep order in high school cafeterias for a lot of years. He might also know the drill.
“This far in politics”? Dude’s won one election, been an elected official for less than two years.
Having only one election win puts him on equal footing with his boss.
Excellent analysis. It would help me if I could see actual examples of people this approach (expose his weakness) has worked on.
I doubt there is a one-size-fits-all approach to deprogramming MAGA cultists. Being a rational person who cares about truth and reality I don’t understand how they can deny all the facts of his lies and crimes. But that’s why I’m not in a cult. I lack the patience and temperament to use a “meet them where they are” approach, e.g., listening patiently, calmly pointing out the flaws in their argument, etc. I’ve watched The Good Liars try this at Trump rallies. When a MAGA cultist realizes the problem he just changes the subject to avoid cognitive dissonance. They’re too invested; the sunk cost fallacy is their friend..I suspect it’s just too painful and embarrassing to admit you’re in a cult. The realization has to come privately when you feel calm and safe.
I’m utterly heartbroken to hear about my fellow cartoonist Danny Shanahan’s untimely death. Such a genius. I absolutely loved his work. My deepest, deepest condolences to his family, friends and legions of fans.
Kamala Harris Campaign Name-Checks 28 Taylor Swift Songs in Statement Following Trump’s Anti-Taylor Tirade https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/kamala-harris-campaign-name-checks-28-taylor-swift-songs-in-statement-following-trumps-anti-taylor-tirade/ar-AA1qCvek
[1 hour ago]
LOL!
Not really funny though! This is how the article ends:
There is NO doubt he sees that benefit.
Translating, “I hate Taylor Swift” means “What has Taylor Swift ever done for me?” It is how Trump keeps score.
Asawin Suebsaeng links to something he co-wrote in January:
https://bsky.app/profile/swin24.bsky.social/post/3l47cz5v7su2t
September 15, 2024 at 11:38 AM
Links to:
Trump Allies Pledge ‘Holy War’ Against Taylor Swift
Taylor Swift hasn’t even endorsed Joe Biden’s 2024 campaign, but Trump is already privately grousing he’s “more popular” than her
Adam Rawnsley, Asawin Suebsaeng Rolling Stone January 30 2024
The intersection of the NFL and US Politics will seemingly reach a new level this season as the eyes turn towards the KC Chiefs. With TMZ elevating Brittney Mahomes’ support of Trump while Taylor Swift plays her hand, the NFL is going to be thrust into this presidential election as the weeks go by.
I did not get to watch the Bengals at KC until the last 47 seconds of the game so I was unaware of the Swift effect. I googled to see if she was there and yes she apparently went viral which was reported in the article I link below that had this quote
“The 34-year-old has seen a decline in production this season. Throughout the past few years, he’s been known as Patrick Mahomes’ go-to target, but his pass-catching opportunities have been restricted by the Chiefs’ coaching staff in 2024.”
First, for the 2nd game of the season that is a bold statement about the production of Kelce but it did get me thinking about the pressures the NFL and the KC Chiefs are under until the election. Disclosure: I am a long-suffering Bengals fan and hope we make Brittany, Patrick, Travis and Taylor weep in the postseason. .
https://athlonsports.com/nfl/kansas-city-chiefs/taylor-swifts-immediate-reaction-chiefs-win-bengals-going-viral-nfl
If true, they missed while he was playing golf and not campaigning?
From the way the AP is reporting, it seems the shots were from Secret Service agents:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-shooting-gunshots-florida-f62f8378d3a8ce7b2e99d6a8fb40aba9
Nothing so far I’ve read indicates that the suspect fired a shot.
The guy left all his stuff at the scene, and fled; he was arrested up I95 a way. Has a record in NC, too.
His stuff including bags of ceramic tiles. Some enterprising defense counsel will eventually claim he was just there to redecorate.
Goddammit this has to stop. While coup leaders are often shot, it’s widely known that you can’t kill a man that was born to hang.
Looks like you’ve been in TX long enough to pick up the vernacular!
A reminder from Marcy yesterday:
https://bsky.app/profile/emptywheel.bsky.social/post/3l47va5jdpz2m
September 15, 2024 at 5:04 PM
She mentions him in this post from 9/13 that’s still up:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/09/13/kamala-harris-is-not-goading-journalists-to-publish-emails-iran-stole-from-roger-stone/
The suspected gunman had said that he was willing to fight and die in Ukraine.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/15/us/politics/trump-shooting-suspect-routh.html
New York Times Reporter Revisits Earlier Interview With Suspect at Trump Golf Course Ryan Wesley Routh wanted to fly Afghan veterans to fight against Russia in Ukraine, an endeavor he seemed ill prepared to orchestrate. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/15/us/politics/trump-routh-ukraine-interview.html Thomas Gibbons-Neff Published Sept. 15, 2024 // Updated Sept. 16, 2024, 8:05 a.m. ET
I wonder WHICH “congressmen” ROUTH was hoping/planning to talk to.
Continuing directly:
Also, Jeff Jarvis looked at a map:
https://bsky.app/profile/jeffjarvis.bsky.social/post/3l47rmpm4d52s
September 15, 2024 at 3:59 PM
Did the NYTimes write-up in March 2023 inadvertently give Routh a feeling of credibility? Or a taste of fame?
The follow up article says that the reporter felt the man was clearly not capable of achieving his aims.
I’m going to link this conversation back to Marcy’s post that I linked above, where it might be a better fit.
Man accused of trying to kill Trump wrote a book urging Iran to assassinate the ex-president [In 2023] https://apnews.com/article/trump-assassination-attempt-suspect-ukraine-f76ed09f256f6bd21727a10901d92af7
Updated 1:18 PM EDT, September 16, 2024
I also added this to the comment thread on the other post.
Ain’t She Great
There she is, there she is!
There’s who keeps us in the fight,
Oh, gee whiz, Oh, gee whiz,
That’s why Trump is so uptight
Those flaming eyes, reclaiming youth,
Oh, Sister, Yes, Sister, tell us the truth
Chorus
Ain’t she Great,
We look forward to our fate
Now, I ask you very confidentially,
Ain’t she Great?!
Bill of Rights
She’ll keep Trump within its sights
Now we’ll claim it very confidentially
Bill of Rights
Just cast a vote in her direction
Oh, me! Oh, my!
Ain’t that perfection
She can beat
old Trump,
knock him off his seat
And I ask you very confidentially
Ain’t that sweet?!
Verse 2
Let’s go there, let’s go there
Harris really is all that
We declare, we declare,
Yes, for us she’ll go to bat
We know how sweet
her quips can be
Praise on it, doggonit
And she’s gutsy!
Chorus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVimTHiIHXM
“Roaring ’20s Hits On The Player Piano – AIN’T SHE SWEET”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xpSeaxRpCc
“Aint She Sweet?” (Gene Austin, 1927)
A good guide for, as well as a reflection on, Harris//Walz’s strategy to respond to Trump. Win or lose, Trump and Trumpism will survive so long as his followers believe his strength is undiminished. Puts into fresh light one purpose of his palling around with Laura Loomer, one of many ways to portray a demented, sick old man as having the strength of Samson and the wisdom of Solomon.
Also puts into better light Trump’s vainglorious, self-destructive comments, such as, “I really wanted to finish the hole,” meaning “I’m brave, invincible, and disregard all peril.” A neutral observer might have said he was obtuse, dim, and stubborn enough to put himself, his playing partners, and his protective detail in peril over a bloody golf game.
The USSS interrupted his golf game – he was winning, naturally, because he kept score – because an alleged shooter was targeting him with an AR-15 style rifle, from just outside his own golf course, and law enforcement had already fired shots in the alleged perp’s direction.
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-golf-club-shooting/
Read the transcript. An offensive comment stood out to me when the subject “race” was addressed.
The vulgar words by Trump “… that she put out. And, I’ll say that.” (UGH – Send him to Siberia)
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I don’t know. I don’t know. All I can say is I read where she was not Black, that she put out. And, I’ll say that. And then I read that she was black. And that’s okay. Either one was okay with me. That’s up to her. That’s up to her.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/harris-trump-presidential-debate-transcript/story?id=113560542
LOL. It’s definitely not OK with Trump. That’s his pose of normalcy. He’s afraid of women and hates people of color. Most people who applied to Howard over four decades ago, like Harris, self-identified as Black.
But truth is not the game Trump’s is playing. He’s projecting, and calls Harris illegitimate and a liar, someone who will say or do anything to get an advantage. That’s his game and Vance’s, not Harris’s.
“That she put out” is right up there with “stand back and stand by” for plausible deniability when saying something truly vile.
“Put out” is the sort of thing a virginal high schooler would say with longing, while making it sound as nasty as possible. Trump: always the best he can be.
“if you say one thing is another thing and you say it enough times, then it must be so, and if you keep saying it over and over people accept it as true – this is an old idea, of course, it really is nothing new, but you’re watching it happen in your own time and not in a book.”
Paul Lynch, Prophet Song
Harris went right after Trump’s Achilles’ Heel.
He’s full of bluster.
He’s all hat and no cattle.
He’s old.
He’s tired.
He’s weak.
He’s got nothing.
And she made Trump himself the best exhibit of what she was saying. As the debate went along, she looked stronger and he looked weaker — even (or especially!) to his own supporters.
Will they buy his crypto?
Now this is an interesting data point. In June, polls showed Trump with an 18-point lead over Biden in Iowa, with Kennedy pulling 9%. The latest poll has Trump leading Harris by 4, with Kennedy still in the poll and pulling 6%. If you give that 3% drop in Kennedy’s share to Harris and the other 6% to Trump, that still has her running 5% better than Biden in June.
Not that she will win Iowa, but Des Moines Register polls have an excellent track record and if it’s happening in Iowa, it will be happening in nearby red and purple states, too. Encouraging.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4880915-kamala-harris-donald-trump-iowa/
Don’t overthink it, don’t feel too much, think too much. Certainly, ignore pundits and media, their need for a “story”. There is no story – your foe is a third rate loser, not a rubiks cube – he’s the typical weak asshole bullshitting his way to power. Look at Europe, who came back and how? Third raters, the losers – using fringe politics, the dictator’s playbook.
Just speak truth in face of them. That’s what Harris did. No need to get exhausted answering a firehouse of lies. Take an offense approach, not defense. Punch your opponent in the face – don’t wait to be punched. We have the truth in our gloves. :-)
And if needs be, take the gloves off. Keep it classy. It’s not a horse race, that’s media’s chosen metaphor – not even effective if you know how a real horse race goes. It’s not my metaphor, don’t make it yours. Choose your own – mine is boxing. I like to think it’s Harris’ too. Certainly, she knows her opponent, pokes him about the ring, before delivering the last few punches – and the stupified idiot serves his face to the knockout.
She can do this again and again – and he knows it. So yes, she should insist on a rematch from now until November. 😂
But is he the opponent or is the Supreme Court?
He’s playing golf while the NYT says Roberts is doing everything to protect him and I feel when the election is questioned Roberts is going to answer the call.
The SCOTUS is there as is, fact.
November is the election, fact.
Focus.
Focus on winning first and foremost.
Stop overthinking it, getting lost in what if’s. Get from A to B FFS..
Win, then let’s talk about adding term limits to SCOTUS, adding more SC judges, making it represent over 340 million people – you need at least a dozen more judges IMO.
But you can’t do any if that unless you win – and win big.
And if at the end of the day it comes down to a contested election, as it likely will if Trump loses – your country will fight another battle. Don’t mistake a battle for a war – your country has and will face many battles. It’s what they signed up for in the Declaration of Independence – and you are a soldier these many years later.
Like the old dead guy said – a Republic, if you can keep it. I believe you will keep it.
Your founders, visionary, envisioned progressives in the future to take the helm after them.
There is no other way to interpret
their words IMO
IOW your country is an aspiration, the very best of such dreams. You’re almost there – perpetually.
Your country is the best country in the world for that very fact. You are never done – and that’s why America is Already Great.
Almost 50% of voters in 2020 voted that this country is not the best in the world. We’ll soon see if that holds up in less than two months.
On the other hand, maybe she’s just a prosecutor of fact. :-)
One of the reasons so many MAGA remain entrenched in their world view is that most of them are fundamentally authoritarian personalities. Some percentage are authoritarians as a response to perceived threats to their identities; they’ve fallen down Maslow’s hierarchy of needs not because they experienced true loss but because they’ve internalized what they’ve been told for decades are losses. Marginalized people have won rights and power, therefore they must have lost something because their world view is based on a simplistic zero sum model.
I can’t help think of Beck, Cowan, and Wilber’s work on Spiral Dynamics and integral theory. The lowest level/most regressive MAGA will never be changed (this may amount to 25-30% of the entire population). Higher level MAGA will have to be dragged along by those who’ve identified as Never-Trumpers who’ve been cowed by Trump’s authoritarian structure which subsumed the GOP.
What makes this possible is Harris destroying the authority figure. She didn’t just dodge the two truths problem; she upended the perception of authority. If this Black Asian woman can’t be cowed into this authority model, if she’s literally laughing at it, what good is that model? It can’t be real.
Rejecting traditional corporate media’s approach to covering elections has also been part of the authority destruction process. I don’t think we’ve fully digested how traditional media has constructed authority models, wittingly and unwittingly.
We should be asking ourselves how else can we support Harris’s destruction of the authority model. It’s a challenge as weak authoritarians are still going to migrate toward an authority figure as a power vacuum develops on the right.
thank you for that, Rayne. thought provoking and informative links.
The tailgating was over and the game had already started when I spied him walking toward the University of Wyoming High Altitude Center from what I surmised was the Cowboy Joe Club at War Memorial Stadium, where BYU was already trouncing its pathetic opponent.. Senator John Barrasso was flanked by two college aged young women as I caught his eye. I was listening to Patty Griffin songs on my Ipod when I inquired:
“Hey John, Why is the Grand Old Party, the Party of Hate?”
His gait grew noticeably short and his bookends clearly heard what I said, but this time he chose not to engage. One never knows when old John will take the bait.
While he did not engage me, two young college age males did hear my taunt and they decided to question me about my derision of the GOP. During the course of the discussion about immigration, the pet eating Haitians, Kamala Harris’s experience, one of the gentlemen did agree with my take that Donald Trump has been a bum all his life. This was a revelation to his friend.
I chalked that exchange up as a win and look forward to getting under John’s skin again.
No one needs an authority figure if anyone else actually listens and acknowledges their interests.
69% of Americans support legal abortion.
72% of Americans don’t own a gun.
90% of the country wants more gun laws.
72% of Americans believe the climate crisis is real.
71% of Americans approve of labor unions.
79% of Americans insist the rich must pay more in taxes.
70% of Americans believe marijuana should be legal.
73% of the country want student loan debt relief.
74% of Americans want more affordable homes.
65% support term limits on all Supreme Court judges.
84% of Americans want free Pre-K.
69% of Americans support same-sex marriage.
65% of Americans want to end the Electoral College.
89% of Americans oppose gerrymandering.
70% of Americans are demanding a permanent ceasefire in Gaza now.
There’s more, much more that Americans have in common than not.
Thanks for the provocative treatment of counter-gaslighting.
Reminder. We likely all know the following:the challenge is to motivate self-interested persons to, if unregistered, register and vote, and if registered but not a practiced voter, to support their moving from ‘unlikely’ to ‘likely’ voter. As a canvasser I keep the 80/20 ratio in mind.
There are upwards of 40,000,000 GenZ citizens who have reached voting age since the last presidential electoral cycle. Should their level of participation rise from its approximate peak of 50% so does their political power grow.
Yet, this is not a monolithic group. Any description of it will be ‘descriptions;’ variable; diverse; etc; and this in turn reflects differences in education, class, social learning, and experience.
John Dewey: in society we seek “a transformation of conditions once hostile or indifferent to characteristic human activities into friendly and favoring conditions.”
There is a flaw either in polling or in the idea of representative government, that being that active participation of the governed is required to justify the latter.
Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics: The Post. You are smoothing over electorate polarization just a tad. From the same article where you (I assume) draw your Gaza ceasefire statistic comes a similar survey than when presented the choice of “permanent ceasefire”, “ceasefire only when Hamas is destroyed” (an absolute impossibility of course), or “I don’t know”, THAT instrument is 50%-35%-15%. If we assume findings in the survey literature that open support of violence is considered “impolite” to profess, we can estimate that the true percentage of respondents fine with allowing Israel to keep ravaging Gaza approaches 40-45%.
I could do the same with abortion. Multiple polls suggest that more than half the population believe that once you reach a magical 3-month mark, abortion should suddenly be heavily restricted (and some polls indicate potentially including banned).
This is not JUST a hoodwinking job at the campaign level. Some of that sure. But I argue Americans generally are in disagreement about a lot of things because of a hoodwinking that begins MUCH earlier.
“dont like abortion? dont have one!” in a sane world that would be the proper rejoinder to those who think otherwise.
with most of the 15 personal choice categories cited above, apart from government policy, the clear-headed rejoinder to those who disagree would/should be the same.
I don’t disagree with your assessment. But that you chose to preface this with “in a sane world” is indicative of my point. There is a nontrivial group of people who fully believe they know the “right” way to live and others should do the same. There is another nontrivial group of people perfectly content to pay lip service to the first group as long as there are no restrictions to maximizing profits. I do agree in principle with Jan that overall your “sane” group holds the majority. But it’s much tighter than would be comfortable, further emphasizing the importance of mobilization efforts Stephen outlines in their reply.
I’d guess that the majority of Americans wanted that immigration bill passed – the bipartisan bill thatTrump, not elected, effectively killed – so he could fear monger about immigrants eating pets.
Trump is holding America back, a real drag on the country, a danger even as a private citizen, which is what he is FFS.
Authoritarians are a drag, a real drag on everyday people. They stick their noses in on your life, even into your bedroom – and your thoughts. Your work. Are you loyal to the regime?
Privacy gone. Free speech? Not anymore.
Let’s be frank here – the imagined benefits that Authoritarian minded people seek – security, conformity for their comfort – come with a heavy price. Americans in general will not, in the end, trade their freedoms for the cheap facade of superiority, security and comfort. But more than a few will seek it in the meantime. That is a real problem today.
INAL but I wonder? Sunday started out with TFG exclaiming “I hate Taylor Swift!” Considering Taylor had to cancel a series of concerts in Europe because someone was caught planning a mass shooting at the concert, although most likely she wouldn’t want to waste her time, could she sue TFG for defamation?
TFG is definitely in unhinged misogyny. It’s nauseating. He’s insane!
In earlier comments I posted about the slanted coverage of billionaire owned newspapers. I relay these notes so if you want to note to yourself about the news sites you visit. Today, the San Francisco Chronicle internet front page had an article about TFG saying he hates Taylor Swift. The Guardian internet front page had an article link in their bottom of the page article list. The L.A. Times nada.
I’m sure her millions of fans are not happy. Cool would be they could file a class action defamation lawsuit against the mfer! They will vote!
TRUMP’s “truth” [this FVCKER]:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/09/16/us/trump-shooting-news/3bd6e4ac-ec88-5bdf-8706-3a49f5b6afa4 September 16, 2024, 10:45 a.m. ET
Links to FOX: Trump blames Biden-Harris ‘rhetoric’ for latest assassination attempt, says he will ‘save the country’ Democrats have previously blamed Trump for raising the temperature and being a ‘threat to democracy’ https[:]//www[.]foxnews.com/politics/trump-blames-biden-harris-rhetoric-latest-assassination-attempt-says-he-save-country September 16, 2024 10:17am EDT
BIDEN: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/09/16/us/trump-shooting-news/d2306165-b176-5235-bed9-76c280c9e5d4
HARRIS: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/09/16/us/trump-shooting-news/698e9348-9952-54a6-bbe2-940c7854c230
This WHOLE FVCKING GANG:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/09/16/us/trump-shooting-news/44f9da08-d853-5b3d-98ac-5f26fb95b207
And NOW we know why DeSantis said that [from Jeff Jarvis]:
https://bsky.app/profile/jeffjarvis.bsky.social/post/3l4cd56wdde2q
September 16, 2024 at 4:18 PM
‘charged language’
How mealy-mouthed.
According to Trump and his whisperers, his ‘charged language’ apparently has no effect whatsoever on the actions of his military-grade-weapon-stashing cult whereas any time a ‘woke’ (whatever the hell that means these days) journalist asks an awkward question or points out a factual thing that Trump said it’s incitement to assassinate the dear leader.
Marcy is right to say that challenging the Hater-in-Chief’s lies is unlikely to work – his loyalists are immune to that: they believe in him and see it as mere rhetoric – but should aim at his psychological insecurities, of which he has plenty. He’s so emotional, trigger him until he pops :-)
Something for MAGA theocrats to ponder:
God allowed not one but two assassination attempts on Trump. If that’s not a sign God wants him to drop out then what is?
Didn’t stop Gerald Ford, who also had 2 assassination attempts against him.
MAGA prayer:
Dear God, please let our dear President Trump heed your warnings and drop out and confess his crimes.
But Gerald Ford played football without a helmet.
Trump could not play football, because of bone spurs.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/man-arrested-after-apparent-assassination-attempt-19768471.php (AP story)
Shall not be infringed! Like the MAGAs say, “Come and take it!”.
What’s particularly funny about Molon Labe is that the message was issued by the official leader of an official military to the official leader of another official military. Not exactly the “Guns for Everyone” history they might hope. Even funnier is that it likely never happened at all, an existence as illusory as the philosophy.
For those interested in the thread, https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2020/12/09/did-leonidas-really-say-molon-labe/ is a great piece on the topic (for all I know, CaptainCondorcet is the author. It’s not exactly a frequent topic of discussion out there). It’s just another aspect of the two reality problem – in this case, adopting something ahistorical, in other cases, twisting the meaning of existing phrases or taking them out of their original context (woke, CRT, cancel culture, etc.)
I like approach advocated here – pointing out what a word or phrase means in the broader reality (or that it’s ahistoric) is just going to raise hackles. Take a different route.
He was just a tourist. Not a single shot was fired and no one was harmed. MTG should visit him in prison until Trump pardons him.
That’s a well drawn line, MattF. I guess Trump might not be so hasty to assemble an angry mob that he knows is carrying a bunch of weapons as he was back on Jan.6, 2021:
From https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/28/trump-jan-6-rally-guns-capitol-attack
https://bsky.app/profile/ohiocapitaljournal.com/post/3l4bornkmfx24
September 16, 2024 at 10:14 AM
Links to Ohio Journal:
Voters’ ‘moral flexibility’ helps them defend politicians’ misinformation
September 16, 2024 4:30 am Minjae Kim
Disinformation researcher and professor Kate Starbird links to the above and responds:
https://bsky.app/profile/katestarbird.bsky.social/post/3l4bpsszko32g
September 16, 2024 at 10:32 AM
It is precisely because of this “deep story” form of a populist sense of authenticity, and the populist forms of authentication (ie validation of versions of reality advanced by trusted friends and trusted leaders) which is why a point by point rebuttal of Trump, particularly in a debate, is ineffective.
Undermining him, or better still getting him to undermine himself as the authenticator in chief of a populist version of reality, is the key.
Trump loves rallies, because he can meander at will through his various tropes, doing his “weave”. Nobody checks him in real time on the disconnect between empirical reality and his self serving manipulation of it.
In debate, what Kamala Harris has demonstrated is that his opponent, taking on the role of kindergarten teacher, or forensic therapist, effectively causes him to crumble.
The technique involves causing him to confront the reality that his grandiose claims —to being the brightest, the best, the most respected, the most feared, the strongest, the wisest, the saviour of the nation, the most stable genius – are just claims he makes to conceal the void at his core, since these claims conflict with the realities of eg the mockery of former aides, and world leaders etc etc.
And the purpose of engaging him in this particular confrontation, is to expose him and his inability to coherently maintain these psychological defences, and so to devalue all his claims to fitness for political leadership, and his claims to being the chief purveyor and authenticator of what is exposed to be a deeply distorted version of reality and society.
And so this is one of the paths to manage his psychopathy, and the psychopathy he induces and validates in others.
Stephen Colbert was way ahead pf the curve when his right-wing alter-ego coined the term “truthiness” in what – 2006?
And Colbert revised his observations with this in 2016
‘while truthiness refers to statements that feel true but are actually false, “Trumpiness” does not even have to feel true, much less be true. As evidence that Trump’s remarks exhibit this quality, he cited a Washington Post column stating that many Trump supporters did not believe his “wildest promises” but supported him anyway’
However Hannah Arendt got to this idea first:
“Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness”’ (pub 1Jan 1951)
OT, Brian Tyler Cohen’s Youtube interview today, ” Mark Cuban deals NIGHTMARE blow to Trump ” is worth a look
Which is why MAGAs won’t look at it. BTC exposes MAGA lies daily.
The latest MAGA tactic is to brag about Trump policy to deflect from his crimes. Which makes one ask why MAGA was so concerned about investigating Biden “crimes”.
I agree most Magas won’t look at it, but maybe a few will and also the undecided. Mark Cuban as a successful billionaire business owner thoroughly eviscerates Trump
MSNBC’s anchors and commentators seem nonplussed that Donald Trump continues to spew lies, after they’ve been proven false. Guffaw.
For starters, it’s because you take the bait and talk about him endlessly. He doesn’t care why you talk about him, just that you do.
A few of his lies distract from the more serious problems he faces: his convictions and pending prosecutions, the hatred he spews with every other word and the real world harm they do, the signs he has worsening dementia, his lack of policies and that the few he has are mindless attempts to enrich the wealthy and piss on everyone else.
Given that 30% really do want authoritarian government, we must ensure that this 30% doesn’t turn into 40% — which is where it is now. Democrat politicians of Biden/Clinton generation do not have good answers to: “why was no-one prosecuted for the Iraq war and the Global Financial Crisis?”. And Obama did not have the power (or the inclination?). This is what creates Tea Parties and MAGAts.
Harris and Walz have a pass on all that, and this may help.
And why was no-one prosecuted for the million dead and infected by covid19?