• ZeroCool@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    137
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    Bottom line, if he can’t handle the stresses of a campaign then he can’t handle the stresses of the Presidency and you can bet your life that they’re already plotting to remove him by way of the 25th amendment inside of a year. So this isn’t about Trump anymore, this is about preventing a Vance Presidency Dictatorship.

    • rsuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      25 days ago

      Not gonna happen. The 25th Amendment would require a majority of cabinet members to sign off, and Trump will pick them as total loyalists. Trump has control over the party, many of them view him as an infallible prophet. If they haven’t turned against him so far, they’re not gonna do it later. If Trump gets elected, we’re all gonna be along for a ride on the crazy train with him until he dies.

      • deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        25 days ago

        That assumes Trump is a good enough judge of character to be able to tell actual loyalists from sycophants, which I strongly doubt he can.

  • Colour_me_triggered@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    ·
    25 days ago

    He’s suffering from frontotemporal dementia. This is relatively certain. The town hall was classic sundown syndrome. The fundamentalists know this and are going to have him removed from office shortly after the election (if he wins). The democrats would gladly take the opportunity to remove him, as would many republicans. Unfortunately that would put Vance in the oval office which should terrify anyone who doesn’t want to larp a handmaid’s tale.

    As a European I find it utterly bewildering that people seriously consider voting for him. But alas I don’t get a say in it.

    • Xanthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      That shit was harrowing at the retirement home I worked at. I only worked during the day, so the worst thing I saw was falls. My fiancé’s brother worked at night, though. The residents would get stir crazy at night. They’d try to “escape,” and they’d be found laying in the nearby hospital’s flower bead. This was in NON-assisted living. Trump definitely reminds me of those residents. They’d end up walking to the hospital because it was the only place they knew how to get to, but they didn’t know why they were walking there. They just wanted to escape. A lot of them expected their old house/ kid’s house.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      24 days ago

      If you watched exclusively right-wing media, you would get heavily edited (and mercifully brief) presentations of Trump, along with hours of talking heads playing him up while demonizing Harris (and of course heavily edited presentations of the Democrat). The issue is not with their choice of Trump but with their choices of what media to consume - the latter choices lead quite logically and inevitably to the former choice.

    • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      25 days ago

      The best explanation I’ve come up with after discussing politics at length with them is that they are gaslit. Pure and simple. They just have enough gullibility to see one tiny thing that coincides with something they were taught or otherwise believe. It also explains why they are being scammed so easily on truthsocial.

      Trump just has that dirty salesman skill of creating a story with just enough validity or truth and twisting everything to his favor.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        25 days ago

        There’s a lot more that we can add to that. Washington politics are so amazingly dirty, they have been for decades, everyone knows it, and Trump is different from other people. He’s actually even dirtier than most career politicians, but he feels different from them.

        You also have the problem that some government institutions are corrupt and big business is very corrupt. It’s easier for people to imagine that conspiracy theories are true when they can openly see badness happening around them left unchecked. For example, if I watch on TV or YouTube and I see a court case where the prosecutor, lead detectives, and the judge are all incredibly biased and some of them are bad liars, then I know something is wrong with that courthouse. I might extrapolate and conclude that something is wrong with all courthouses. Which is to say, I’ve become more vulnerable to conspiracy theories because real bad behavior is left unchecked.

        • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          24 days ago

          It’s also important not to forget the interpersonal aspect of how their lot get news. A lot of them believe their family and friends’ words more than a published news source. I see an echo to how urban myths got spread in pre-internet days: a neighbor’s cousin’s best friend’s coworker swears the story really happened to them! It must be true!

          When a story is emotionally-engaging enough, it will get spread without ever being questioned. Trump’s path to power basically hijacked (and reinforced) that pre-existing tendency.

    • thebigslime@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      25 days ago

      Damn, the behavioral variant describes him well. Impulsive, uninhibited, socially unacceptable, listless, and apathetic.

    • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      Careful with yer language there, pardner, lest you force us to export some freedom to your country. We’ve been spoilin’ for a real fight for some time now. Our poors would love nothing better than a meaningful mission, food, housing, and healthcare, and we’ve got all this incredible murder tech that we don’t get to use, all provided by Uncle Sam.

      JD Vance is a flawless beauty with wonderful concepts of ideas, and I won’t hear anything different, got it, Sharon?

  • dariusj18@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    ·
    25 days ago

    Remember: the presidency ages people. How long would he be president?

    Oddly, this is something that didn’t seem to happen to Trump. We all know why of course, he didn’t actually do the job of being President.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      ·
      25 days ago

      Because he doesn’t actually do any work, and only worries about himself.

      In contrast, presidents like Obama and Biden age quickly because they’re actually working nonstop, and stressing out about world events.

      • b34k@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        ·
        25 days ago

        That’s why he’s aging so fast right now… he’s working really hard to try and stay out of prison!

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      25 days ago

      Donald did no work. He only watched TV, golfed, held rallies. He spent more time on the toilet producing whatever it was that took so many flushes than he did on the job.

      Donald aged quickly afterwards and especially after the start of his court cases for the numerous crimes.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      25 days ago

      Raw Story may be on the same side as us but they are still complete trash. Headline is often a straight-up lie.

    • Wolf314159@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      25 days ago

      35 minutes doesn’t seem very long for an interview. Is expecting the presidential candidate to remain lucid and coherent for slightly more than a half hour too much to ask?

      • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        25 days ago

        No no, that’s not what I’m saying. Just that there’s no need to over dramatise the events in a way that makes your point shakier than it has to be.

          • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            24 days ago

            A few minutes is like, five minutes.

            Actually, now I’m remembering all the times I’ve disagreed with people on their use of the phrase “a few,” so I’m starting to see how this could be more a matter of opinion…

            Still something I wouldn’t expect a professional writer and/or editor to let slip unless they were purposely looking to embellish, though.

            • Wolf314159@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              24 days ago

              I think we agree here. “A few” is debatable, based on opinion, but also context matters. If I say I need a few minutes to either put on my shoes, prepare dinner, wake up, take a shower, or take dump, those are all different lengths of time. I just feel that conversation and interviews take a lot more time than the edited results we commonly see in print and on TV. Things like pauses to reflect on questions, introductions, and warm up questions never make it to publication. If I was asked to sit for an interview and it ended after 35 minutes, I would absolutely characterise that as “a few minutes”. And unless I’d ended it myself, I’d be concerned that it ended too quickly. If it had ended that wuickly, I’d be worried about what insane things I had done in those few minutes to provide them with enough material for a piece or that they had cancelled the piece entirely because they quickly determined I wasn’t worth continuing the interview. That is my opinion, but I feel that it’s well grounded in my experience and expectations, especially for a sit down interview with a candidate. I can see how calling 35 minutes “a few minutes” could be characterised as exaggerated, but getting incensed over it in a headline (a large font single line intended to grab attention in a few words) is overcompensating a bit.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    25 days ago

    Among the bizarre topics Trump discussed was his empathy for former producer Harvey Weinstein, saying that he was treated badly after being found guilty on one count of rape and two counts of sexual assault in New York.

    He recognizes fellow travelers. Creep.

  • elliot_crane@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    25 days ago

    According to Trump, Weinstein got “schlonged. … He got hit as hard as you can get hit."

    I uhh… don’t think that’s what that word means…

    • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      24 days ago

      I’ve never heard that word used like this, but I think he’s trying to say “boned” which equates to wronged. He (Trump) is wrong though. Weinstein got what he deserved.

    • Jeffool @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      25 days ago

      When Trump was running the first time for the 2016 election he got a lot of attention for using that word. I remember an NPR host saying how he’d used it before in a similar context that Trump did (a political loss), but at the same time he was regretful about it. I don’t remember the details but actually let me search…

      Neal Conan. I’m fairly certain I remember him talking about it on the radio, was why this rang a bell for me. But apparently he even wrote an op Ed about it: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1223-conan-schlonged-20151223-story.html

      Conan used it literally once in a political context and regretted it as you can read above. And he seems to have vaguely meant it in a way you might say “wow, they got fucked” as you might say about someone being cheated, or “fucked up” for beaten up. Like ruined in some way, not with a literal sexual meaning, just a vague association because of the word itself.

      Not that this makes it any more couth or anything; feel how you want to feel about it. Clearly saying “they got fucked” still has that same vulgar sound, so we avoid it in polite conversation, so I imagined a word that sounds so vulgar would probably be avoided by a high profile politician, as given people feel weird about it. And it happened twice.

      I just think it’s interesting that it’s come up again. Language is weird.

  • P_P@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    25 days ago

    I won’t be sad when this shit stain is gone from public life.

  • Tiefling IRL
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    25 days ago

    I really hate that the only people reporting anything like this are sites like rawstory and dailybeast. Meanwhile, NYT and NPR are reporting on how Kamala is testy and Trump is friendly.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      25 days ago

      Oh yeah. Seems that she’s “emotional”, unlike Trump. Think that people are probably projecting their misogyny.

      • Tiefling IRL
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        25 days ago

        I unfortunately think the majority of the country is more likely to vote for fascism than for a woman. I’m not holding my breath :( I need to find a way out

  • dance_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    25 days ago

    “Among the bizarre topics Trump discussed was his empathy for former producer Harvey Weinstein, saying that he was treated badly after being found guilty on one count of rape and two counts of sexual assault in New York.”

    From the clip it’s hard to get context, but it sounds more like he was saying things that were too crazy for his handlers.

    • WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      25 days ago

      Article says “‘They’re going crazy,’ Trump said, pointing off camera.” Which I think further strengthens your argument.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        25 days ago

        They were desperately trying to get him to not defend Weinstein. Probably trying to avoid him lighting the fuse on his own October surprise

    • just_another_person@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      25 days ago

      This is a narcissistic and delusional old man who has never really participated in society as a normal human being. When he says “they”, he literally thinks there is a shadow group of people doing this. The fact that someone rich got caught committing crimes and was found guilty by “normies” is all just a part of the shadow group’s plan to allow such things to happen. He literally believes “they” could have stopped that from happening IF they wanted to, but decided not to.

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      25 days ago

      I’m shocked you didn’t clip the quote where he claimed Weinstein got “schlonged.”

      lol what the fuck. I’m on set and we’re rolling sound and I almost burst out laughing when I read that line

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    25 days ago

    I have never wanted a month to go by as much as I do right now

    Americans are really starting to annoy me at this point

    We are slowly destroying ourselves with global warming but all we’re centring our attention on is on how 400 million people can’t decide between a sane young politician or an elderly sociopath with fascist leanings to lead their country.

    We’re screwed as a species

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      25 days ago

      Like it or not, the US presidential election has potentially dire worldwide consequences for global warming. If you think our attention is best spent on global warming – and I would agree – then paying attention to the election is that.

      • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        25 days ago

        I get that … but that third is a pretty loud obnoxious bunch and the other 2/3rds are either too quiet, don’t speak up, don’t vote or are just completely apathetic to everything happening around them.

        The problem is not the remaining 2/3rds saying or supporting one thing or another

        The problem is the 2/3rds just not participating and instead just stand around and watch the world burn.

        • Okokimup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          25 days ago

          Your numbers indicate 0 Americans standing up to this bullshit, which is just false. I get you’re frustrated. So are we.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    25 days ago

    I feel like the Democrats ought to be pivoting towards attacking Vance at this point. The possibility of Trump kicking the bucket from natural causes and the GOP getting a sympathy (/conspiracy-theorist) bounce in the votes this late would be devastating, so they ought to be pulling out all the stops to anticipate and mitigate that before it happens.

  • figaro@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    25 days ago

    So I just watched the clip. Granted the clip was only a few seconds, and yes I believe he is old and senile. But.

    The clip doesn’t seem to give evidence of anything specific. He might have to pee for all we know.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      25 days ago

      It was a couple minutes in. His handlers are pulling him out of events when he starts talking nonsense. The shit they accused the Democrats of doing with Biden that never actually happened.