Shoresy

I see you have an elevated sense of incentives and consequences.

Sure, establishment 90's Democrats for sure.

Musk has autism too. Just ignore the haters.

Even hardcore Trump haters have to admit either one of 2 things, that Trump is the luckiest idiot on a planet of billions of people, or that Trump is mostly misunderstood.

I would like to see some examples of these so-called "tough questions."

You know what… you got me. I don’t have any examples of Trump doing that after being asked tough questions, because the questions he gets asked are simple and relevant questions.

But if you want examples, start with quiet piggy.

So the example of a "tough question" you pointed out was "quiet piggy?"

Why would a reporter ask that question, tough or not?

It is the natural result of having a moron man baby in the White House. He does and says the stupidest things on a daily basis, of course the questions he gets asked are insane and impossible to answer. That’s not the reporters fault, it starts and ends with him.

So victim blaming. At least that's a logical reason for your behavior.

Yeah, getting a coherent reply to that will be impossible, I am afraid.

If he responds with anything other than examples, that's an auto-concession.

Why do you find joy in causing suffering? Seems like some sort of mental disconnect, it's really not normal. At some point you might want to ask yourself why provoking people is the only way you seem to regulate your dopamine.

 the fact that he attacks reporters by calling them stupid every time he gets asked a tough question

I would like to see some examples of these so-called "tough questions."

Are they questions designed to clarify information, or a regurgitation of recycled talking points framed with faulty premises? Perhaps questions designed to shut down clarification? Is that what a "tough question" is?

Or are they designed to shut down all discussion entirely as though deflection and censorship are somehow components of journalism, and that’s why you’re using the word “tough”?

If so, that’s not journalism. That’s performative chaos masquerading as information-seeking.

2 million dollars of hard working sweat paid out to a few to watch 99 invisible kids.

That's progressivism.

If you know, you know.

America is in late-stage Roman decline, where entertainment for the masses passes for what used to be civic virtue.

The citizens have forgotten the role of the government and the duty of the citizen to such an extent that they identify as equals with people from all over the world, including those who want to subjugate them just like the barbarians did to Rome. The start of the real downfall of Rome was when it granted citizenship to all the opposing cultures just because they worked in the army. With no real love for Rome, they helped rot it from within, just as America is rotting within, rewarding cheap illegal labor with citizenship, regardless of their disloyalty to America and her culture. For America, citizenship is reduced to a vibe, not a commitment. Generations tied to the soil replaced by paperwork, just like the Romans did.

To be fair, it's happening in Canada and much of Europe. After it finishes the rotting process, I suspect China, Russia, and maybe even Japan and India will quietly assume control with their far more stable cultures supported by real citizens. Just like what happened to Rome.

They tried to win on decency, resumes, and good faith while the other side was running character assassination, media amplification, and moral framing through vibes. Romney gets kneecapped with a literal dog story. Obama-style cares not for policy, not for governance, just “this man is a monster.” McCain gets slow-walked into irrelevance by the machine. Both played defense. Both lost before the argument even started because they had no idea where the attacks were coming from.

I don't think Oba'a was ever a boxer, and I'm not sure about Trump, but he has the moves

Obama learned all he needed to know from The Outfit.

Trump learned from Hollywood and the rough business world that's at times even more unforgiving than Chicago-style organized crime.

You can’t shame someone who grew up in a world where shame is just another tool used badly by amateurs.

After Obama permanently and decisively redefined the Democrat party, turning it into a Chicago-style grift machine, essentially destroying both parties, that gave Trump the only possible window to run and win. When politics stops being about policy and persuasion and starts being about raw control, the only viable counter is a chaotic disruptor. Someone loud, unembarrassed, immune to shaming, and willing to smash power control norms instead of respecting them. It's why they could jail him, have him shot at, and the Chicago-style tactics failed completely against him, whereas Romney and McCain flopped hard against the grift machine. Romney was destroyed with a stupid story about abusing his family dog....

Typical 90's Democrat policy.

Fine, I suppose I am just nitpicking on things that just seem obvious to me.

I didn't really like the framing of the poll questions. There are some principles that stand regardless of the esoteric conditional framings, such as: one of the questions describes a specific behavior toward someone who has that person blocked. That's straight-up harassment regardless of the framing or specifics. Another describes glorifying sexual violence. The specifics don't matter to the main objection of glorifying violence in general.... anyway i'll stop there because I don't want to bias the responses you get from your poll, but I simply ask that you word it in a more utilitarian way.

He doesn't want to admit that Trump, a creature of Hollywood, just might be acting for his audience. Because that would mean America is full of children.

I'm convinced Debby is simply Whiteflame's chatbot in his basement.

There is no viable "Right" in America anymore. It's mainly repackaged 90's Democrats and whatever the fuck you wanna call the people living in Blue States. I don't know a word that describes left of radical left. Blue Staters function less like a political movement and more like a managerial-ideological class. They blend identity moralism with institutional power. They don’t want to overthrow systems the way a 90s Democrat would have; they want to collectively own, administer, and moralize them. Control matters more than reform, and alignment matters more than outcomes. It's the only way to rationalize the objectively insane positions they hold as sacred dogma.

The left did that to themselves. Eating their own, including Trump. And others of course like Joe Rogan.....

Bill Maher

Glenn Greenwald

Tulsi Gabbard

Dave Chappelle

Matt Taibbi

RFK

Those are very cool pictures of a Democrat.

https://reason.com/2025/06/13/donald-trump-sounds-like-a-democrat-from-the-1980s

Most Americans are not smarter than a 5th grader. That goes for all voters, not one tribe or another.

The uncomfortable part is realizing this isn’t fixable with “more facts” or shaming. It’s about incentives. If thinking carefully had the same payoff as yelling, virtue signalling, or violence, we’d see a very different electorate. Instead, AI is incentivizing even more skill atrophy among the electorate. You don’t get smarter by outsourcing judgment to AI or "experts" any more than you get stronger by watching someone else lift.

So when one is flippantly accusing others of having a childlike mindset, they likely don't know that the source of it comes from the bottom of the tree, not the top.It’s a learned adaptation across the entire population, allowing individuals to adjust to a modernized society that penalizes depth of thought and systematically rewards noise and chaos.

There are worse things to waste money on, like Learing Centers.

It's well documented that Maduro raped the resources of Venezuela far more than any agreed-upon cut with foreign powers investing in resource extraction. He literally let rigs succumb to rust and salt till the pumps stopped pumping, and then moved on to the next pump. He took every cent of that money to fund his personal army. Foreign companies could never be able to do anywhere near that level of exploitation without a full army at their beck and call. Think Leopold II. Real resource devastation requires sovereign coercion, not just a profit motive. There's zero chance the USA public would allow anything close to what Leopold II or Maduro did.

Here is what's really going to happen: the USA govt will quietly pork-subsidize US oil companies to manage the fields with the next spending bill for one reason and one reason only, to secure the petrodollars of the Oil extracted and sold around the world, and to deny BRICS their own currency trading that petrol. It's actually true when they say they want to sell the oil and give a lot of the proceeds to Venezuela, but the real reward for the USA is the securing of ...what is it 19% of the world's oil reserves in US petrodollars? That's a massive win for the USA.

Continuing....and if your position is that USA has the responsibility to "Fix NATO" and realign their incentives. Just how would USA do that? Military force? Sanctions? Tariffs?

That is actually happening in real time, my friend.

If NATO incentives are misaligned, they can only realign when real costs are imposed. That’s not ideology, it’s how coalitions really work. Complaining about the how... tariffs, sanctions, or military pressure, while also demanding NATO alignment, is just wanting the desired effect without the necessary cause.

Also, you are woefully misinformed about USA's involvement with foreign oil. They don't really need the oil; what they absolutely need is the petrodollars, which comprises the current backbone of all USD.

NATO already buys more Russian petroleum than the aid they send to Ukraine, by far.

With allies like those, who needs enemies?

If NATO support was truly existential, NATO’s incentives would be aligned.

Since they aren’t, stop pretending it is.

Global institutions routinely tell us what they believe is “existential,” yet their actual behavior supplies a more reliable metric than their language. When NATO continues commercial arrangements that materially benefit the adversary of the USA while simultaneously claiming the conflict is existential, the contradiction isn’t rhetorical; it’s grounded in empirical data. Incentives are not peripheral details; they are THE constraints that shape action. When those incentives remain misaligned, it says that the cost of true alignment very well may exceed the cost of the threat itself. That assessment may be morally uncomfortable, but it is objectively informative. Genuine existential threats produce coordination by necessity, not by rhetorical declaration. The absence of that real coordination answers the question more clearly than any press release ever could. I am not saying NATO is evil or that Ukraine doesn’t matter. I claim coordination by necessity just hasn’t occurred, and that absence itself answers the question. That alone forces critics to either dispute the incentive logic or to admit they’re arguing from symbolism and vibes.

I watched Gangs of New York. That was a fun movie based on immigrant tribalism.

Not really about skin color inherently, just the power narratives we associate with skin color.

As opposed to black or brown tribes historically taking over an area, and the local population becomes Wakanda 2.0?

that had done the same thing on the same scale

Whites are a global minority, wdym by "scale"

Some of these nations act like an episode of Mean Girls. Sometimes it's better not to play the fake-drama game. Or most definitely not Trump's game.

If America were so great, embarrassment would never be used as an effective tool against it.

25 million is a much bigger prize than the measly 1 million from the Nobel. I suspect that takes precedence.