"Culture is (pause) ... It is a reflection of our moment in our time, right? And, and present culture is the way we express our feeling about the moment. And, and we should always find time to express how we feel about the moment that is a reflection of joy 'cause, eeeh, you know, it comes in the morning (cackles). We also have to find ways to also express the way we feel about the moment in terms of just having language and, and and, a connection to how people are experiencing life and I think about it in that way, too."
I tried to get a link directly from ABC, but it would only play for a few seconds and then freeze. But this one actually works better because you can see what Kamala HQ posted vs what the news report states.
Edit: per @Eric's response, here is a new link. Important part at around the 2:00 mark.
So before you saw this, did you believe what you were seeing was:
1) 100% the truth
2) Some truth with some deception
3) 100% false.
Because let me tell you, I don't believe 90% of what the media shows. And that includes FoxNews. Gallup's recent polling on trust in media shows that only 31%
Americans' confidence in the media is at its lowest point, as Democrats' confidence is near the record low and Republicans' is almost nonexistent.
news.gallup.com
The interesting thing is that Independents are only at 27%. Kind of expect the far right to not trust them, but they have lost Independents as well. And with Democrats at 54%, they are close to going negative with them (lost 16% since 2022). So you may be in the 31% that believes what you are being fed, but the rest of the country doesn't. And this is an example why, but it isn't because Kamala HQ posted it. That is what they are kind of supposed to do, but that spread across the news networks like wildfire. Thankfully ABC News was honest enough to report the actual truth.
So as to the other things, I am not casting a judgement on you for posting them, I simply don't trust your sources. This could be why no one seems to care what Trump has reportedly done: they don't believe it. We have been misled by the media too many times.
Boy you surely picked the wrong game. You want to get into a quote fight? I’m sure you can cherry-pick examples where Harris said something that was not perfectly eloquent. Or you can look up literally any of Trump‘s speeches or interviews. The man is unable to open his mouth without producing some sort of rambling lunacy.
P.S. Even your cherry-picked quote demonstrates deep thoughts and understanding of historical processes that form culture. Is that really the best you can do?
I'd argue that she already doesn't have their vote. So I'm failing to see a downside here.
At worst she wastes some time that could have been spent elsewhere. At best some people walk away impressed. Based on what the competition has had to say about her, they've set the bar SUPER LOW for her to impress people. It was just yesterday that some yahoo tried to convince me that she can't even answer a question. These are the people she needs to reach. Fox and Joe's show are some of the best places to reach these people.
If she's as stupid as your side likes to pretend, what's the harm in letting her prove that? Your side should want her to be demonstrating that stupidity at every turn.
I'd argue that she already doesn't have their vote. So I'm failing to see a downside here.
At worst she wastes some time that could have been spent elsewhere. At best some people walk away impressed. Based on what the competition has had to say about her, they've set the bar SUPER LOW for her to impress people. It was just yesterday that some yahoo tried to convince me that she can't even answer a question. These are the people she needs to reach. Fox and Joe's show are some of the best places to reach these people.
If she's as stupid as your side likes to pretend, what's the harm in letting her prove that? Your side should want her to be demonstrating that stupidity at every turn.
If Trump goes on I wouldn't say it would be a good listen so much as interesting listening to Rogan trying to navigate that dumpster fire with enough kickback to not lose the respect of his listeners or anybody else.
It does require some heavy parsing to extract what she is trying to say there. But, the entire statement is a complete though that stays on subject, rather than wandering aimlessly into the dog that bit my brother and all the dogs that are streaming across the border bringing in Chinese watches and what a nice watch it was my father gave me, on ad finitum.
Her brain functions in a reasonable way. ShitGibbon's brain reminds him to inhale and to exhale, and any more than that stresses its capacity to the limit.
I think it's safe to say nothing she could ever do would make you happy. So why in the world should she cave to the demands of a party whose only goal is to swiftboat her the second she capitulates to one of your demands?
I personally think she should be doing these interviews as she sees fit but any Republican who demands she do something can go F themselves.
At least this is more honest. You don’t like the way Kamala talks and don’t think highly of those who speak like that.
What would you rather have, someone who speaks by forming their sharts into a language? Because even that would be a huge improvement over Trump.
If Harris speaks in word salad, at least it’s fresh and in the bowl, not already digested and blasting with violent speed out of Lardo’s sphincter.
Here’s Trump’s far more eloquent and very intelligent answer on if he would break up Google. Notice he doesn’t even answer the question first, and when he does address it, it’s personal grievance mixed with nonsense about China.
JOHN MICKLETHWAIT: Maybe we can change the subject to technology, seeing you wouldn’t answer about the Federal Reserve. The U.S. Justice Department is thinking about breaking up Alphabet, as Google likes to be known now. Should Google be broken up?
DONALD TRUMP: I just haven’t gotten over something the Justice Department did yesterday, where Virginia cleaned up its voter rolls and got rid of thousands and thousands of bad votes, and the Justice Department sued them that they should be allowed to put those bad votes and illegal votes back in and let the people vote.
So I haven’t gotten over that. A lot of people have seen that. They can’t even believe it.
JOHN MICKLETHWAIT: The question is about Google, President Trump.
DONALD TRUMP: Yeah, look, Google’s got a lot of power. They’re very bad to me. Very, very bad to me. I mean, I can speak from that standpoint. They only have bad stories. In other words, if I have 20 good stories and 20 bad stories, and everyone’s entitled to that, you’ll only see the 20 bad stories. And I called the head of Google the other day, and I said, I’m getting a lot of good stories lately, but you don’t find them in Google. I think it’s a whole rigged deal. I think Google’s rigged just like our government is rigged all over the place.
JOHN MICKLETHWAIT: You would break them up, in other words.
DONALD TRUMP: I’d do something, but you have to have… Look, I give them a lot of credit. They’ve become such a power. It’s such a power. And you’ve got to give them credit for that. How they became a power is, you know, really the discussion.
At the same time, it’s a very dangerous thing, because we want to have great companies. We don’t want China to have these companies. Right now, China is afraid of Google. Right now, you know, China is a very powerful, very smart group of people. I will tell you that from very personal…
Do you plan to watch all/part of it? Or will you skip it? Just curious. For the record, I plan to check it out. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts if you watch it. Not links or quotes from elsewhere, just your opinion.
Do you plan to watch all/part of it? Or will you skip it? Just curious. For the record, I plan to check it out. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts if you watch it. Not links or quotes from elsewhere, just your opinion.
Unsolicited advise should Trump win or successfully steal the election through dubious means or leaning heavily on the minority rule segments of our institutions. Unless you truly plan to be an activist, dial back your exposure to the news. Democrats already took freedom and positive patriotism away from the Republican Party. You don’t need to add living in a constant state of fear and anger to the list. Let Republicans keep that one.
If Harris wins, there needs to be mass public shaming of any republican on the ballot with Trump who contests the election. Fine, if there was a problem with the ballot you were on, you should resign your seat in protest or refuse to be sworn in. If the person at the top of the ticket won through fraud, so did you.
No election prior to the Trump era, regardless of the outcome, ever caused me to question the fundamental decency of America.
www.theatlantic.com
The nominee for the Republican Party, Donald Trump, is a squalid figure, and the squalor is not subtle. His vileness, his lawlessness, and his malevolence are undisguised. At this point, it is reasonable to conclude that those qualities are a central part of Trump’s appeal to many of the roughly 75 million people who will vote for him in three weeks. They revel in his vices; they are vivified by them.
But what makes this moment different, and unusually dangerous, is that we have never before had a president who is sociopathic; who relishes cruelty and encourages political violence; who refers to his political opponents as “vermin,” echoing the rhetoric of 20th-century fascists; who resorts to crimes to overturn elections, who admires dictators and thrives on stoking hate. Trump has never been well, but he has never been this unwell. The prospect of his again possessing the enormous power of the presidency, this time with far fewer restraints, is frightening.
I wish it would make a difference to those still planning to vote for him but either they are in deep, delusional denial over his behavior or as said above, they revel in it. I don’t think there’s any way to reach them.
I think she did a great job with that question. Overall, I wanted to see her answer more of the questions she was asked and do less dancing around them. Of course I rarely see any politician just answer the questions, so that's the usual frustration. I also thought she did too much finger pointing, especially given the audience. Trying to drag down their god in front of the people who built his alter didn't strike me as a good strategy. But what do I know? Maybe she thought dragging him through the mud would be something they would understand and respect. They do seem to enjoy that behavior. Bravo to her for having the balls to do that interview. Now they can't say she's too scared to do a tough interview. And last I've heard, she hasn't whined at all about how mean they were to her. So either she's happy with her performance, or she's not a whiny-ass, entitled man-baby.
I think she had a decent interview, but I'd be lying if I said I thought she knocked it out of the park.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
news.gallup.com
www.theatlantic.com
