- Joined
- May 22, 2019
I'm personally of the mind that you can thank the Dubya years for giving them a guy who was easily mockable for coming off dumb, who also so happened to use spurious shit to get us into Iraq after Afghanistan. Who also had a VP who looked like he abducted and strangled orphans to live forever. Made it easy to mock.
They are now incapable of making new jokes and ads, because they lowered the basic standards for "journalists". I also think they're still not used to getting told to fuck off when they try the "PC" card that worked for a few years.
Nice to see Tlaib's cuntishness ran in the family. Now I wish the Qarmatians salted Mecca now.
I was thinking about this today. You know the saying "Generals prepare for the last war"? I think it's like that. It was easy to hit Bush as inept and a failure because of how bad he was in both policy and presentation, and because comedy and mockery covered up how the Democrats really had no alternative answers half the time and were often just as culpable.
Look at New Orleans and Katrina. FEMA made a mess of things, but New Orleans is a corrupt deep-blue city that made no attempts to prepare and embezzled as much money as possible (powerlevel: I work with roadways, their 3rd-world levels of greed and failure to meet even basic requirements (literally, like knowing where their bridges are) after the storm are legendary in the DOT. Bush fucked up, but he was just one of many people. But by mocking Bush, you covered up how bad everyone else was.
They're trying to run the Bush playbook against Trump, a larger than life caricature ruling over some pretty good times. Hitting him as a fundamentalist is a no-start, the economy is good, and he's kept us out of war. He's the anti-Bush, you can't hit him in even remotely the same way.
I also wonder if it's a form of clinging to youth? Like the hippies who were still talking about the Vietnam war under Reagan, they can't let it go because it means that they're now the adults they're trying to rebel against. On a certain level, they want to stay the radical youth that are destined to shape the future, even though many of them are in their mid-30s or older. And they want to fight the same battles again and again as the underdog whose destined to win, which is why you see so much focus on opposing evangelicals even though the religious right is barely a shadow of its old self.
Is TDS the politics of the eternal manchild?