Finally, the Democrats have found Trump’s Achilles heel: ridicule him
Finally, the Democrats have found Trump’s Achilles heel: ridicule him
Kamala Harris gets it. Yes, we should fear Trump—but we should also mock him mercilessly, because it drives him nuts.
Kamala Harris gets it. Yes, we should fear Trump—but we should also mock him mercilessly, because it drives him nuts.
Donald Trump is in free-fall. Read this description from Sunday’s Washington Post of how the GOP nominee spent last week: “[A]ides did not want a situation where he was watching the convention every night, getting angry, and then just golfing all day and stewing, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private interactions. Trump also had grown annoyed with the news coverage that depicted him as not working as hard as his opponent, one person who talked to him said.”
If you didn’t know that the article was about Trump and you just read it cold without knowledge of the context, you might think it was a description of parents trying to figure out how to handle an ungovernable four-year-old. So they convinced Trump to get out of Bedminster and hit the road, trading suck-ups with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In the past, Trump has called Kennedy the “dumbest member” of the Kennedy family and a “radical left lunatic.” Kennedy has calledTrump a “terrible human being” and “probably a sociopath.”
You're viewing a single thread.
It took them 8 years to realize what Thomas Jefferson found out in 1816
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."
Bullies don't like when you hit back because they base their power on the fact that they think you're going to play by the rules while they're free to break them. You so much as look like youre bending a rule and they'll cry foul. Look at how Trump responded to Biden dropping out.
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.”
I've never heard that quote before, but I love it.
Extra funny because Jefferson had plenty of unintelligible propositions himself, for which he was ridiculed while he was alive
Like what?
(Not arguing, I just really need a refresher in colonial + early American history)
Like how you can own people if "all men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Men and only men.
I think it makes more sense if you were mentally fucked up like they were. All men are equal, aka whoever they considered civilized races were aesthetically thought of as equal. Everyone deserves to be happy and to thrive, but of course lesser beastlike races can only do that under the yoke of their superiors.
What a shitty "defense" though right? "He's not a hypocrite, he's just monstrously delusional by our standards."
He also thought black people were incapable of being educated. Fairly late in life, he met a black person who actually had the opportunity to be educated, took it, and was every bit the equal to any educated white person. Jefferson took him as an exception to the rule.
Wasn’t he also fucking all of his slave girls? Or am I thinking of someone else?
Well, he raped at least one.
And it is important to establish that it is rape; a slave has no right to refuse consent.
I don't know about all.
I do know of one, though, that he had children with, and didn't free after he died. A lot of people know this.
What a lot of people don't know, is that she was his wife's half sister. She was the off spring of his wife's father raping a slave. When the half sister was born, she was given to her half sister as property because of the mother that gave birth to her.
Slavery is always monstrous, but it was made even worse by the monsters in human flesh that practiced it in the south.
Remember this story when you have some southern fuck wit try and romanticize that time period.
I have taken to using my a quote of my own with people recently, on both sides in different situations. Quote: "Those who neither ascribe to nor participate in the social contract of tolerance are not afforded the protection it brings."
I say it to the right when they complain about me calling them out on their BS or making it known that they are generally shit human beings.
I say it to the left when they try to call me out for saying that literal Nazis holding signs on the side of the road should have beverages thrown at them by passing cars at the tamest. I would prefer throwing much heavier objects, but the law protects them. The Law, not the social contract of tolerance. Within the confines of the law, people like that should not be tolerated and should be informed with as much force as possible.
Arguing with someone, within the confines of the marketplace of ideas, about how the marketplace of ideas should be abolished, is a fools errand
If they refuse to even agree to the basic social ground rules of discourse whatever they have to say isn't even worth entertaining
Bullies also only punch down. If they find out they're not punching as far down as they thought they leave
Doesn’t that also implying the 0 tolerance policy in schools for bullying would only help the bully? Cause I do agree
I believe the zero tolerance rules do help bullies, they're the ones who've made a habit of playing jussst outside the rules but with enough deniability that they can feign ignorance. Zero tolerance is great at catching people who don't make a habit of breaking rules though. Teachers always seem to notice when the quiet one does something, but a bully being a bully is just another day for them. Been a long time since I was in school though so grains of salt and what not.