Splicetoday

Politics & Media
Aug 14, 2024, 06:29AM

It Only Takes a Million Maniacs to Ruin Everything

Lisping Trump, trips to China, couches and drag, and the ongoing assault of tribal politics in an American election year.

Trump aggro dr1ft.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

Donald Trump on Joe Biden, August 12, 2024: “Actually, he had a low IQ thirty years ago, now, he probably has no IQ at all, there’s nothing on the boards that goes that low.” He says he’s going to build an iron dome over the United States just like Israel, “because it only takes one maniac to ruin everything.” The former President returned to Twitter in a “live space,” a feature that might’ve come with Musk, maybe not, I don’t remember, do you? “Congratulations on all these people listening to your… chat, we’ll call it a chat. You’re an interesting character.” Trump is lisping like Julianne Moore in May December and it’s obvious he thinks Elon Musk is as much of an idiot as everyone else. “You’ll be great, you’re a great… I won’t name the company, but they go on strike, you say, ‘Okay, you’re gone. Thank you.’ You’d be great.” Elon: “Happy to help.” Trump demurs. “You’re an interesting character."

So and so is “a big MAGA fan.” He’s Zooming in, it’s cute. Trump talks about himself and his campaign like a rock band, or a director would his films, and he’s running out of steam. Who wouldn’t after a near-death experience? He should go to the beach for a year, but there’s no time, and I doubt he’d be happy sitting on a beach, doing nothing. The rest of the media calls him and his party “weird,” and he responds, “They’re not saying that about me, they’re saying that about J.D.” His Vice Presidential nominee J.D. Vance has been embarrassed every day of his candidacy with a new story, a new photo, a new meme that makes its way into the mainstream. Tim Walz telling Vance that he’s ready to debate “if [you’re] willing to get off the couch” is an uncharacteristically clever line delivered by a Democratic politician.

The election is in a freeze-out until the Democratic Convention next week, and if that produces any real news, it’ll be the protestors, unable to be blacked out by the media like they were in 2004 and before. Will pro-Palestine protestors make it into the hall? Only as theater—but again, I doubt the Democrats are clever enough to acknowledge their sorest internal opposition, even in a one-sided attack on their turf. The next real news will be on September 10th, when Trump and Kamala Harris debate for the first time. They are both wacky in their own way. It might be as boring as the June 27 debate was mesmerizing, whose broad outlines—known victim of dementia Joe Biden blanks out on live television—could be predicted, but actually seeing it in full detail was intoxicating and overwhelming. If the next debate is exciting, it’ll be because one of them trips up and completely loses focuses. I think it’s possible either way.

Will Harris agree to a previously scheduled third debate if she “wins” the September 10th debate? No—the Democrats will try and win another election by keeping their inadequate candidate at home as much as possible, and allow Trump to spin his wheels and embarrass himself in boredom. He’s drifting off now, probably too freaked out by the assassination attempt to successfully win reelection, but if he wins, it’ll be because Harris just isn’t there. One of them will break on stage.

—Follow Nicky Otis Smith on Twitter and Instagram: @nickyotissmith

Discussion
  • I believe the author of the couch smear has now admitted that that upholstery was as fabricated as Harry Reid's claim that Mitt Romney did not pay taxes. In fact I believe that had been admitted before Walz made this claim. All in all the level of lies and smears coming from Harris, Walz, and the DNC is even more than usual, but perhaps what you would expect from someone who used kneepads to climb the career ladder and someone who made 30 trips to China, both of very suspect morality. The new thing is that not only are the hiding from reporters and anyone else other than handpicked NEA/SEIU rally goers, and running websites with almost no policy proposals, but she is copying Trump policies like no taxes on tips and border security, which she opposed before and actively worked against as a vice president.

    Responses to this comment
  • Why would a Trump fan even bring up the topic of suspect morality in criticizing a Democrat? You support him despite his suspect morality e.g. Trump University, banging a porn actress while his wife was pregnant, mocking a disabled journalist, etc., so it's not an issue for you to call anyone out on. Same with the lies and smears, for that matter, also specialties of Trump. You don't understand that those issues are off the table for you, for some reason.

    Responses to this comment
  • Walz met the Dalai Lama and Hong Kong democracy activists, and worked on a committee that calls out China's human-rights abuses. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgewpzyd91o As for Kamala, she's won elective office multiple times, which makes the "kneepads" comment moronic.

    Responses to this comment
  • In general, it was moronic commentary.

    Responses to this comment
  • When Kamala Harris first started dating the married California State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown she was 29 and he was 60. Subsequently Speaker Brown appointed Kamala Harris to two State Commissions the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and then to the Medical Assistance Commission. He later supported her for her first race for district attorney of San Francisco. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/01/27/willie-brown-kamala-harris-san-francisco-chronicle-letter/2695143002/. When the references of "kneepads" Harris or Kamala "heels in the air" Harris gets tossed about one might fairly conclude that these nicknames are well earned...Politics by nature can get pretty sleazy and sleeping your way up the political ladder seems to me to be mild by comparison to what some politicians do even if the person that kickstarted your political career and launched it forward is a married man over 30 years your senior who you are having an affair with. I don't begrudge Kamala for her opportunism after all this is a person who failed her first bar exam and she was self aware enough to know that she was no intellectual heavy weight. She did have some other skills which she could rely on though. Perhaps the former Ca State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown could fill us in on some of those skills....

    Responses to this comment
  • I stand by my assertion that unless you're going to sleep with much of the population, you don't win elected office that way. Also, Willie Brown was separated from his wife prior to this and other relationships. https://www.factcheck.org/2024/08/posts-mislead-about-harris-romance-with-willie-brown/

    Responses to this comment
  • There is little doubt that the politically influential Willie Brown who was the mayor of San Francisco at the time was instrumental in Kamala Harris's successful run for the position of DA of SF, her first elected political position. This happening on the heals of her benefitting from her lovers political patronage after he appointed her to two high paying Ca. State board commissions. These appointments reek of cronyism and are a clear conflict of interest but they did raise Kamala's political profile and enabled her with the support and connections of Willie Brown to eventually run for DA of SF..

    Responses to this comment
  • There's a good article at https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/24/kamala-harris-2020-history-224126/ about Kamala getting elected DA (years after she dated Brown). One of the factors in her victory was a backlash against her opponent for making the exact same argument you're making.

    Responses to this comment
  • I am familiar with this politico article and while the backlash against Kamala’s opponent who ran a feckless campaign was a factor, a bigger factor was the support she received from the SF Brown/Burton political machine who acted as king makers in SF area politics. The Brown/Burton machine refers to her one time main squeeze former Ca. Assembly Speaker and SF Mayor at the time Willie Brown and John Burton Ca. State Senate President. Without their support and connections which opened up the spigot to campaign contributions she never would have even made it to the starting line for DA of SF. Years of political patronage by her lover/former lover and confidant elevated her to the DA of SF. She does deserve some credit for surveying the political landscape and tapping into the cultural ethos at that time. SF being one of the most superficial cities in the U.S and a place that is obsessed with identity politics, she embraced her role as a minority and a woman of color which helped to carry her to her first elected political office. It also helped her in her subsequent victories for AG of Ca. and U.S Senate. A prime reason for Biden choosing her for his running mate as VP was based on identity politics. It certainly wasn’t based on merit seeing as she garnered close to zero support in the 2020 Dem primaries dropping out before the Iowa caucus or her lackluster term in the U.S Senate or even less impressive term as Ca. AG. The fact that it has been nearly a month since she was anointed as the Dem. Presidential nominee and still hasn't given a press conference or challenging sit down interview exposes her as the empty pant suit that she is.

    Responses to this comment
  • I wonder what "San Francisco is a superficial city" means. It didn't seem superficial when I lived there, but I think it just means you don't like the politics there. So you probably don't think, say, Dallas, is superficial, I'm guessing.

    Responses to this comment
  • One definition of superficial is based on what is apparent rather than what is actual. As it pertains to public policy superficial would refer to policies that feel good rather than policies that substantively do good. San Francisco is a city that has been rife with formulating and implementing superficial and destructive policies that are fiscally irresponsible and have made living conditions far worse. A case in point is SF homeless policies which rather than dealing with the underlying issues regarding homelessness and addressing it in a substantive way, instead in a feel good move decided to throw billions of dollars towards a mismanaged crises and gave homeless people benefits with no accountability which acted as an incentive for more homeless people to move to SF. In a 6 year period starting in 2016 SF spent 2.2 billion on homeless programs and their homeless population increased from 12,249 to 19,086 which comes out to $57,000 per homeless person per year while the SF homeless population has increased to over 12 times the national average.https://www.hoover.org/research/despite-spending-11-billion-san-francisco-sees-its-homelessness-problems-spiral-out... Another superficial policy is the SF reparation policy which would give up to 5 million to each eligible black resident. Rather than working on real solutions to help improve the lives of their residents SF comes up with unworkable and divisive feel good policies based on identity politics. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64965277. There are numerous other examples available that fit the theme of superficial people making superficial policies which have led to destructive results. I also once lived in SF in the late1980s and have visited it several times since. It use to be one of my favorite cities, physically beautiful with a vibrant business climate, eclectic, and fun. It also used to be relatively safe. Not anymore. Today SF is a mess. It is striking how in just a few decades incompetent superficial people implementing superficial and destructive policies can F#%K everything up...

    Responses to this comment
  • So you'd describe people whose politics you disagree with as superficial. I get it. And you define a whole city run by a handful of such people simply as "superficial."Maybe you're suoerificial due to your inability to separate politics from a much larger picture.

    Responses to this comment
  • You missed the point Subbeck, It has nothing to do with policies I disagree with it has to do with policies that have objectively failed and that were implemented based on feel good superficial reasons not based on pragmatism or what actually works. By almost every metric SF has gone downhill over the past several years due not only to “a handful of people” who run the city as you say but also to the people who continually keep voting them into office despite the poor results. Superficial is one word to describe SF but perhaps a better way to describe SF would be self destructive.

    Responses to this comment
  • It has nothing to do with politics. Just policies, which are political. Sounds legit.

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment