lookin

Quite the contrary. I may have been a bit too cute with the irony in my post. I think you and I see things pretty much the same way. Most of the focus seems to be on the influencers and, in posts gone by, on the authoritarian 'leaders'. And that's appropriate, necessary and fine with me. But I also have been looking closely at authoritarian followers and, lately, on those who are influenced by the social media influencers. Authoritarian followers caused a lot of trouble in Hitler's Germany. I read an account from one of Hitler's secretaries about the day after Hitler committed suicide. Civilian staff in the bunker were slipping away to make it through Berlin toward the American soldiers in the west. Most of the military staff were trying to do the same thing, but many were shot outside the bunker by German soldiers who had taken an oath of loyalty to Hitler and they considered any soldier who wanted to escape to be a traitor and deserving of death. They considered this 'oath of loyalty' to Hitler to be in force, even though Hitler was dead. Those are the kind of authoritarian followers who give me the willies. The Trump followers who marched to the Capitol on January 6th to "Hang Mike Pence" give me the willies too. And, while I'm not as rattled by those who 'follow' the Tenet Media influencers who took money from the Russians to fill their followers' heads with anti-democratic ideas, the day may soon come when I am. A follower with a computer is one thing but a follower with brass knuckles and a gun is quite another. I think it's shortsighted not to understand these authoritarian followers, what makes them tick and, most important, how to make sure they don't end up following someone who wants to mobilize them against what still remains of our democratic society. We definitely need to pay attention to the influencers but, in my opinion, we need to pay attention to the 'influencees'. There are many more of them and, when led down a destructive path, they can tear a nation apart. My preference, of course, would be for a society full of independent thinkers who look at a wide range of information and reach their own conclusions. But history and social research tells us that there will always be a subset of followers. If that's the case, we need to find a way to reach them and make sure they don't get pulled along toward destructive behaviors.

Gotta admit, this whole ‘influencer’ thing pretty much snuck up on me. We had class presidents and prom kings and queens in my salad days but we didn’t follow them around and try to act like them. Fact is our ‘B’ group had more activities going on that the ‘A’ group would come and join. There were more of us and we were more active. So it seems strange to me now that millions of kids and young adults are latching on to some pretty shallow ‘influencers’ and trying to mimic their moves and their thoughts, such as they are. Maybe it’s because young folks spend so much time on their screens where shiny objects draw the most attention. The idea that Russia or anybody else would spend millions of dollars hiring ‘influencers’ to brainwash their followers - influencees? - caught me by surprise and made me worry that independent thinkers might be a dying breed. But I realize it’s the same kind of worrying that I do about authoritarian followers and that they’re probably cut from the same cloth as social media followers. If so, they'll likely be a steady third of the population. I try my best to understand what makes followers tick and to honor the choices they make - or, more likely - the choices they don’t make. I sure wouldn’t want to log in to a website every day to find out what I’m supposed to think. Except maybe this one. Every day, it seems my esteemed fellow posters do all the research and lay out the facts so thoroughly that all I need to do is hit the ‘Like’ button. And if Putin wants to slip them a fistful of rubles, who am I to make waves?

Personally, I've never cosied up to a Log Cabin Republican, but if someone is gay and also buys into a politically conservative worldview I imagine it's good to have a group who shares the same views. I wouldn't make it illegal, that's for sure, and I'd do my best not to be judgmental unless I felt that I was being judged for being a gay liberal. I might think they're naive or perhaps misinformed in some ways, but I expect they'd think the same of me. So I'd willingly enter into a debate and see where we come out. But, just like the mainstream Republican party has been infested by the Trump lunacy, the Log Cabin Republicans probably have too. And I doubt it's easy. To be a Mar-a-Lago Cabin Republican, I'd have to be attracted to guys, long for life pre-Stonewall, and pretend that Donald Trump should be America's boss and the leader of the free world. It would be a heavy lift. I think the hardest part would be finding some orange lip gloss so I didn't leave any prints on his ass. 💋

Seems like the stock price is a bet on whether or not Trump gets elected. If he doesn't, the company continues to lose money and DJT becomes a penny stock. If he does, I expect the price will go up. But even then, he couldn't unload his shares without cratering the stock price. My guess is that he's hoping to get elected and then sell the company to somebody with more money than sense. Hmm. I wonder who that could be.

Gosh, I sure hope they sent it to the cleaners first.

Perhaps he could hire a stand-in.

Apparently Melania's Mar-a-Lago speech to the Log Cabin Republicans cost them $237,500. I'm guessing Donald also made a tidy sum renting out the space and feeding them. Not that there's anything wrong with that. No doubt they brought in a lot more than that from members who wanted to hear what was on the former First Lady's mind. Personally, I've never heard her say anything that I'd pay to hear. I could see forking over a couple grand to go hear Dolley Madison speak but, when it comes to the Trumps, I'm more of a 'silence-is-golden' kind of guy.

This isn't a Valencia. Feels more like Silly Putty. All my feet are sticking. Terrible place to lay an egg. One quick dump and I'm outta here. 💩 🪰 🌀

Hmm. 🤔 Well let's see. First off, Haniyeh was Hamas' chief negotiator in peace talks being brokered by Egypt and Qatar. So those are now off the table, perhaps for good. Second, Haniyeh was in Tehran for the inauguration of Iran's newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, who publicly supported revisiting Iran's nuclear deal that Trump aborted in 2018. So that glimmer of hope has been squelched. And, third, right in the middle of installing a new more Western-leaning administration, Iran's territorial integrity was publicly and violently breached. So there's a sucker punch waiting to be avenged. If Israel had sat down specifically to create a plan for widening the war, I don't see how they could have done much more than they did with this assassination. Fortunately, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin is more optimistic than I am. "I don't think war is inevitable," Austin said. "I maintain that. I think there's always room and opportunity for diplomacy, and I'd like to see parties pursue those opportunities." Wouldn't we all?

Maybe he's postal, Maybe it's Maybelline© 🎶 🎶 🎶

As far as I can tell, there's a built-in problem for authoritarian followers. They have to wait until their leader has settled in on what they need to believe. If they head out on their own today, and the leader takes a different direction tomorrow, they've got some serious cleanup to do. Or they may be under the bus for good. Trump is unpredictable on the best of days. With the curves he's been thrown recently (Biden, Harris, Project 2025), he's going to take some time figuring out his targets. Anyone who speaks his mind before then is taking a big risk. I'd be surprised if someone as opinionated as Vance stays out of trouble. I wouldn't be surprised to hear radio silence from Trump's loyal followers until the cue cards are signed off and printed.

Perhaps Trump farts botox?

I continue to think that every Democratic candidate, especially at the national level, should focus like a laser on the implications of Project 2025. Trump should not have the luxury of mealy-mouthing his way around this plan to turn civil servants - many with decades of non-partisan skills and expertise - into political appointees. If Trump supports this plan, which is similar to threats he has made in the past, he needs to say so. If he rejects this plan, he should be forced to say so. Picking a lane is not something the chief deflector is likely to do. If he supports it, he's telegraphing his intent to force all citizens into compliance with the wishes of a few. If he rejects it, he's driving a wedge between himself and the oligarchs who want to replace democracy. If I were on the campaign trail, I'd make sure Trump has to confront Project 2025 in every rally, debate, interview and event he attends. In my opinion, it would be political malpractice to let this issue remain in the shadows.

Totally agree about Biden's governing ability and I've never related it to how old he was. Also totally agree about Trump's governing inability. But he was pumping mud four years ago too. And eight years ago. Pick an age and I'll show you a misfire.

Thanks, @stevenkesslar. 👍 You always dig deeper into issues and background than I've got the time and ability to do, and it provides valuable context and insight. Your 'elder statesman' role for Biden is really appealing. I think how lucky we are to have experienced and committed folks like Pelosi and Sanders and (if he follows your advice) Biden. And, if he needs a nap from time to time, I'd be happy to fluff his pillows.

Personally, I hope Democrats don't pick up the 'too old' cudgel and use it against Trump. It was misguided when used against Biden and I think it's misguided if used against Trump. Not necessary either. Trump's got a lot more wrong with him than the number of candles on his birthday cake. 🎂

In a recent survey conducted by the Presidential Greatness Project, two hundred scholars from multiple disciplines ranked Joe Biden as our fourteenth best President, a couple spots below Bill Clinton and a couple spots ahead of Ronald Reagan. They ranked Abraham Lincoln first and Donald Trump dead last. Isn't it strange that the party that brought us our greatest President of all time is now convinced it can bring back our worst? Of course two hundred Presidential scholars won't hold a candle to the combined wisdom of today's Republican strategists, so it was no doubt silly of me to even raise the question. I'll show myself out.

If you ask me, the Democratic campaign should start, first thing in the morning, with a laser focus on what Project 2025 has in store for American voters and their families. That would include what it proposes, who's behind it, and exactly how they plan to make it happen. For now, forget about Biden, forget about Harris, and let candidate selection take its course as it always does. If Democrats keep the focus on Project 2025, all of the messaging goes to defeating the current Republican agenda as outlined in Project 2025. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense right now for Democrats to focus all their attention on the Presidential election. What if Biden and Harris get elected and the Senate and the House go to Republicans? The Democrats need both the Executive and Legislative branches if they hope to get anything done and that includes retaining a democracy that's responsive to what its citizens want, rather than what the Heritage Foundation wants. I'm sure no political genius, but even I can see that there are bigger issues than squeezing out a narrow win for the Presidency and roiling up everybody in the process. Democrats need to let folks know every day in every way that Project 2025 and the Republicans who back it are planning to convert a democracy, in which citizens have a voice, into an autocracy, in which they don't. In fact, while Democrats take the next few weeks to sort out their ticket, I'll even propose an ad that can run in the meantime. Don't lose your voice! Keep 'em out.

Donald Trump: In this moment, it is more important than ever that we stand united, and show our true character as Americans . . . Melania Trump: This morning, ascend above the hate, the vitriol, and the simple-minded ideas that ignite violence . . . Donald Trump, Jr: (my father) will never stop fighting to save America, no matter what the radical left throws at him . . . I'm glad husband and wife are on the same page today and hope to hear similar messages in the days and weeks ahead. It would be nice if they could also bring Trump's firstborn under the tent. Divisiveness has brought us where we are today and continued divisiveness will take us further down a predictable road. There are 434 million guns in the US right now, including 23 million AR-15's. It's foolish to believe that anyone who circulates in crowds is out of range of a weapon that can kill at a distance of 300-400 feet. Congress can harass the Secret Service and the FBI all they like, but someone with an AR-15 and the intent to kill will find a way through. As far as I can tell, it's the intent to kill that needs to be throttled back. We can all see that social media algorithms have been designed to amplify - rather than reduce - the fear and dislike of "the other". Once a divisive message is sent, there's no limit to how many will receive it. And, just based on the odds, some who receive the message will attempt to act on it and will have the means to do so. Rather than wait for the next bullet to strike, I'd encourage us all to stop receiving and passing along divisive messages. At best, they clutter our brains with toxins and, at worst, they get amplified and push someone over the edge to violence. I'm not suggesting we all turn into Pollyanna. What I am suggesting is that next time someone makes a divisive comment, either ignore it or just call it out as divisive and let it drop. Without the feedback loop, these messages can fade into background noise and eventually die out. Until social media algorithms are tuned to filter out divisive messages, perhaps we could start doing it ourselves. I think even a little bit would help.🤞

We must have been separated at birth! 😄

Unlike Donald Trump and a few of my esteemed fellow posters, I've never believed that the President is the one and only person responsible for the accomplishments of an administration. In my opinion, the President sets the values and goals for his or her term in office, represents the country among other nations, and picks the right team to support her or him. For many years, 80% of my vote has been based on the compassion of a candidate. The other 20% would be based on the candidate's ability to select and empower the folks responsible for implementing those goals effectively. Trump may tell us that he's the only one who matters, but I don't believe it. So, in spite of Biden's recent fumbles, as well as his fumbles throughout his presidency so far, I'd be OK with voting for him again. I think with his values and a competent team around him, he could continue to deliver results that are good for the country. However, and it's a big however, the mental challenges he displayed in last night's debate are likely to increase over the next four years. There may come a time, for example, when he would not be considered trustworthy by other world leaders, or when he would pick the wrong battle or the wrong strategy to implement. Four years of keeping my fingers crossed ever more tightly, is not something I'd look forward to. The one good thing about last night's debate performance is that there's still time to do something about it. If we'd seen a Joe Biden firing on all cylinders, we'd have run the risk that he'd topple in the second debate with no time to find an alternative. So, sad as I am that Biden failed to impress last night, I'm glad the Democratic convention is still ahead of us, rather than behind us.

Barbara Res, an executive with The Trump Organization for nearly twenty years, offered some advice for the Biden debate team: “I wish [Biden] would goad him and make him go nuts, because when he goes nuts, he’s really crazy,” Res said. Not sure I can make it through the whole debate, especially as there's a test pattern on opposite, but I will be checking the late news to see if there's anything new for the scrapbook.

What's that awful stench? ... Dear Lord, please take me now . . It wasn't me, I did nothing wrong Just try to ignore it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Something just died in here

It occurred to me that, seventy-eight years ago, little Donnie Trump was soiling his diapers while little Joey Biden was fully potty trained. Fast forward to today, and I'm wondering how much has changed.

Perhaps they're busy sprucing up his cell.