Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

So, here's my question. How high or well low are the chances of that crazy Ocazio bimbo ever making into the white house?
Obama and (Bill) Clinton were able to pander very successfully to the moderates and were generally very charismatic in the right atmosphere and particularly photogenic. Ocazio openly insults moderates and doesn't have a scrap of charisma other than the kind she peddles to her "yas queen" Twitter following. She can barely manage to conduct a single, one-on-one interview with a friendly, left-leaning news company without making an ass of herself. If she ever had to go on a live, televised debate she'd be absolutely torn to pieces.
 
Obama and (Bill) Clinton were able to pander very successfully to the moderates and were generally very charismatic in the right atmosphere and particularly photogenic. Ocazio openly insults moderates and doesn't have a scrap of charisma other than the kind she peddles to her "yas queen" Twitter following. She can barely manage to conduct a single, one-on-one interview with a friendly, left-leaning news company without making an ass of herself. If she ever had to go on a live, televised debate she'd be absolutely torn to pieces.

Also, anyone who says this in politics:


Would not last A SECOND as president. If you ignore facts for emotions, everyone is going to expect you to please them and you're not gonna please everyone. That's why it's better to be feared than loved.
 
Also, anyone who says this in politics:


Would not last A SECOND as president. If you ignore facts for emotions, everyone is going to expect you to please them and you're not gonna please everyone. That's why it's better to be feared than loved.

For someone who hates Trump, she sure doesn't mind stealing from his playbook.
 
For someone who hates Trump, she sure doesn't mind stealing from his playbook.
She'd hardly be the first politician to steal what they think worked from somebody they ostensibly hate. Before Trump crashed the party the Republicans were clearly planning to steal Obama's "charismatic (sort-of) minority" schtick for either Cruz or Rubio (of course even without Trump there's the minor issue that Ted Cruz is about as charismatic as the corpse of Calvin Coolidge, but that's another issue)
 
Also, anyone who says this in politics:


Would not last A SECOND as president. If you ignore facts for emotions, everyone is going to expect you to please them and you're not gonna please everyone. That's why it's better to be feared than loved.
>Factually correct vs. Morally right

That's a fancy way of saying "It's okay when we do it."
 
Also, anyone who says this in politics:


Would not last A SECOND as president. If you ignore facts for emotions, everyone is going to expect you to please them and you're not gonna please everyone. That's why it's better to be feared than loved.

Don't woke people say morals are subjective? So couldn't she just do whatever?
 
So, here's my question. How high or well low are the chances of that crazy Ocazio bimbo ever making into the white house?
Ocazio-Cortez has the personality of a man child that aligns with Dobson and MovieBob. Plus, she panders to the woke millennial crowd while alienating the moderates, so that’s a sign of trouble.

To be president, you have to have temperament and be grounded with reality, which is what Trump has while maintain his brash persona. I doubt AOC could have that since she’ll likely be voted out.
 
But...facts determine the morally correct approach. Shooting someone who's attacking a kid may be generally morally justifiable, but it stops being morally correct if the only angle you can get on the bad guy is through his victim's head.

Though, this is Tumblr Cuntry, so I suppose the only fact you really have to stop and check before you start screaming is whether you're upset.
 
But...facts determine the morally correct approach. Shooting someone who's attacking a kid may be generally morally justifiable, but it stops being morally correct if the only angle you can get on the bad guy is through his victim's head.

Though, this is Tumblr Cuntry, so I suppose the only fact you really have to stop and check before you start screaming is whether you're upset.
You misunderstand; what she means is that some things are too morally virtuous in theory to be subject to scrutiny on logical or consequential basis. The hierarchy of “useful information” is being completely side-stepped for the hierarchy of “morally righteous”. It doesn’t matter if it works, only that it is, rhetorically, a strike against the injustice of the cosmos. The question isn’t whether water flows downhill, the question is whether the idea of water flowing downhill serves her moral aspirations or not.
 
And that leads to nonsense like passing legislation that all water must flow uphill.... when it's pointed out that it can't work, you are told "THat's not important, what's important is we show how much we all agree it SHOULD.... and if you aren't behind that, you're an immoral no-good meanie who must be made a social pariah"
 
And that leads to nonsense like passing legislation that all water must flow uphill.... when it's pointed out that it can't work, you are told "THat's not important, what's important is we show how much we all agree it SHOULD.... and if you aren't behind that, you're an immoral no-good meanie who must be made a social pariah"
Thomas Sowell was a fucking psychic.
Edit:
691532
 
Last edited:
It's the whole "But you shouldn't have to" approach to things. Women shouldn't have to protect themselves from rapists, so all attempts to help women protect themselves from rapists are actually empowering rapists. Because if you acknowledge that rapists gonna rape and deal with that reality, you're apparently condoning that reality, so the only actual approach is to do a lot of screaming and blaming men and victimizing yourself.

A ton of leftist thought, including hers, is built on this, where acknowledging the reality of a situation instead of just extolling the utopian ideal that their policies will somehow bring about is the worst possible thing. Acknowledging that some of the people illegally crossing the border are criminals and will commit crime here is racist, because it flies in the face of the utopian ideal that all brown people are virtuous and good and can only be a boon to our country. That sort of thing.
 
Oh I think there's always an end to the shitshow.

It's the whole "But you shouldn't have to" approach to things. Women shouldn't have to protect themselves from rapists, so all attempts to help women protect themselves from rapists are actually empowering rapists. Because if you acknowledge that rapists gonna rape and deal with that reality, you're apparently condoning that reality, so the only actual approach is to do a lot of screaming and blaming men and victimizing yourself.

A ton of leftist thought, including hers, is built on this, where acknowledging the reality of a situation instead of just extolling the utopian ideal that their policies will somehow bring about is the worst possible thing. Acknowledging that some of the people illegally crossing the border are criminals and will commit crime here is racist, because it flies in the face of the utopian ideal that all brown people are virtuous and good and can only be a boon to our country. That sort of thing.

Women should be allowed to kill rapists. They won't be a victim, and there won't be a rapist.
 
Women should be allowed to kill rapists. They won't be a victim, and there won't be a rapist.

What's that one comic? "I don't want a solution, I want to be angry!"
 
Women should be allowed to kill rapists. They won't be a victim, and there won't be a rapist.

But if there are no victims, then how will victim advocates make a living?!


Case in point.
 

What's that one comic? "I don't want a solution, I want to be angry!"

Well, don't rape women. Or people. Or children. How's that for a solution? Are you a rapist?
 
It's the whole "But you shouldn't have to" approach to things. Women shouldn't have to protect themselves from rapists, so all attempts to help women protect themselves from rapists are actually empowering rapists. Because if you acknowledge that rapists gonna rape and deal with that reality, you're apparently condoning that reality, so the only actual approach is to do a lot of screaming and blaming men and victimizing yourself.

Leftist logic is thinking that if you install a smoke alarm, your house may burn down to spite you for not trusting it......
 
Back