They never should have stopped calling them “weird.”
Yeah, no kidding. It was Walz’s winning strategy until the corpos told him to cool it. They’d already decided it was trump’s time to win
That was so mild too. Call them creepy shrimp dick loners. Make them look deeply unsettling and unhinged and inhumane and illogical little unlikeable creeps they are and isolate them. Use whatever sticks. Their top guy is a proven rapist and was best buds with pedophiles. Keep hammering that!
Taking the higher moral stand doesn’t work with these people; grab them by their fucking hair and drag them through the mud kicking and screaming. Do you wanna win and maybe slow this country’s descent into full on fascism or do you want to “not stoop to their level” and “uphold decorum” with words? Because what’s coming is going to be much more unkind than words.
That is the only way to handle these types. Time to grow some ovaries and start calling these pieces of filth what they are.
The great thing about “weird” is that it’s not really aggressive but more disgust. Like, if some guy says women are inferior you can say “that’s freaking weird dude” and leave it at that.
It seems that internal polling put the “weird” message as not really helping (or hurting) the Harris campaign. Arguably, keeping up the “weird” message may have been useful, but they were likely trying to find something that seemed to have a larger impact.
Mostly cause they’ve never stopped being weird. We are governed by some weird fucking people.
“they”
We need to go back to mercilessly mocking them and calling them weird.
It didn’t work.
Nah, it works great. Narcissists cannot stand being mocked.
Just gonna leave this here.
If we look at the common exhibitionist subtype of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) that most people think of when they hear the term narcissist, it is fairly easy to see that they use a simple three-part defense to create a façade of extreme self-confidence. I call this the “GOD defense.”
G – Grandiosity: They act as if they are special and entitled to do or say whatever they want. Grandiose motto: “I am special.”
O – Omnipotent: They make all sorts of unrealistic claims about how powerful and knowledgeable they are. Omnipotent motto: “I can do anything, and I know everything worth knowing,”
D – Devaluing: They feel free to attack and devalue anyone who is not clearly above them in their status hierarchy. Devaluing motto: “You are worthless, defective garbage, and are here to serve me.”
Yeah, you could just put “Example: Donald Trump” on all three.
I had a theory during Covid that if I would be able to embarass the shit out of anti-vaxers on Nextdoor, that they’d stop showing up and spreading bad info. I never got to check / test / confirm any results to what I was (completely unscientifically) doing; but this is a great article to make me feel like I am getting a pat on the back.
Let’s adopt this as a manual…
I have big narc tendencies and lemme tell ya that shit would kill me. The only point I am saying this is to harden the fuck up through some niche forum so that ‚public embarrassment’ doesn’t feel like dying anymore.
It kinda worked. But it took a lot of trolling like a lot and multiple bans on any possible social media you can imagine to shape oneself into someone more resistant to words.
First gain resistance by learning to say whatever shit is on your tongue and feel nothing about consequences and then come back to reason and you feel like unlocking superpower. Finally not shaped by others but being more of a rock staying solid and unaffected by external factors whatever happens.
The hardest battles are those we fight with ourselves
I know you’re getting down votes, but I appreciate your honesty and willingness to do some introspection. Good on ya.
It’s a bit of tomfoolery to be honest. I have no idea what I written here but it sounds like ramblings of a lunatic the logic of who made some perverse sense few hours ago but it is too emphemeral to understand after some time passes.
I am method acting comments on lemmy for some reason, looking to see what happens I guess
The thing is I could craft a perfect comment that would be likeable but what would that give me other than empty dopamine?
It’s far more interesting to go against this desire of validation and see what happens.
Can we truly free ourselves from the need to conform? Is it possible?
Nothing I have written recently was written to please an audience. Maybe I have done too much to the other side now, to irritate the audience but that’s how you seek those ways.
All that effort to stop audience in defining who you are and seek authenticity. To stop “being perceived” as the prime factor in “being”
“If you push me, I am going to hit you with a Buick.”
I’ve lost “friends” over this philosophy, but the friends I’ve gained since taking on the philosophy feel a lot more real.
Likewise, if you’re being bullied, destroy the bully and the bullying will stop.
I never cease to be amazed at the “if you don’t treat bullies with respect you are the baddie” discourse in the US. It’s been the MO in schools for about 80 years and has become the standard operating procedure for many adults. Protecting yourself and others from bullies is an ethical imperative. As is supporting others who have defended themselves or others are being further victimized as a result. Bullies (and the people/systems that support them) lack empathy, compassion, reason, and accountability and are only happy when they feel powerful, which they achieve by harming anyone they think they can get away with. The only language they understand is force and any other tactic is as useful as yelling at a brick wall.
100% - Cheers!
Colonel Graff:
Tell me why you kept on kicking him. You had already won.
Ender Wiggin:
Knocking him down won the first fight. I wanted to win all the next ones, too. So they’d leave me alone.
This is Trump’s strategy too. Make a brutal enough example of a few universities, or law firms, or immigrants, or other countries’ economies, and the rest will comply in advance. Like Trump said in his West Point commencement speech recently: "As much as you wanna fight, I’d rather do it without having to fight. I just wanna look at them and have them fold.”
Reminder: Ender Wiggin is not a fucking hero.
There is a Buick still in the road in 2025?
If you don’t fight from a losing position, what incentive does anyone have to put you to win a winning when it is voting time? Counting on the Trump admin being awful enough for people to vote Dem is way too risky. Fight and inspire. Build collation and prepare to rebuild a new vision. You can’t just offer return to neoliberal politics is not the answer either. You’ll just restart the cycle over again for the next Trump.
They didnt fight from a winning position, and they still blame the voters. Short of some kind ofcoup in the party, they will keep trying to be republican-lite while working with Republicans, and then complain when Republicans vote for the real things and people who dont like Republicans simply dont vote, again.
I’ve said this for a while now. You want to make a dent? You go after the ego.
Picture this: an endless stream of totally “realistic” phone-recorded AI videos of Trump playing golf. He lines up the putt—misses. Tries again—air ball. It’s literally an inch away now—misses again. Doesn’t blink, just traps it in, smirks, walks off like he nailed it. Over and over.
The key is subtlety. These can’t look staged or flashy—make them feel like someone’s nephew filmed it from the cart. Make it look like he’s genuinely terrible but thinks he’s crushing it.
Then blast them everywhere. Flood the algorithm. Turn his “I’m the best at golf” schtick into a punchline.
This is how you use AI to actually take Trump down—with a thousand tiny ego papercuts.
Sprinkle some tacos in there and you’re good to go!
A prediction: Walz might be the George Washington of the Founding Parents for a Free States of America. Unlike most of our leftish politicians, he has some military experience and seems inclined to fisticuffs. Maybe Mark Kelly as well.
We are going to need that sort of person, who is willing to lead and fight by example.
We need people who do not care if they piss off the wealthy. People willing to forcefully and lawfully remove money from politics. People willing to challenge their own party members and even party leaders.
Primary every federal office in every election until the comfy incumbent lives in fear.
8647
If you become road kill you’ll then have RFK after ya so take this warning seriously.
And let me tell you, you do not want to be roadkill with this administration.
Nah, they don’t want to become a target. They’ll wait until it blows up on the streets, then point and say ‘see?’. Meanwhile, the public is waiting for the congressmen to do something. It’s something to watch.
Attack attack attack! No mercy! Down with TACO Don, down with the MAGA fascists!
I’m trying, Tim.
bullied bullies bully bullied bullies bullying bullied bullies
Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Incomplete. The full phrase is actually:
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
(The buffalo from Buffalo that buffalo (i.e. bully) buffaloes from Buffalo, buffalo (i.e., bully) buffaloes from Buffalo.)
i mean, by the grammatical rules, it’s still a valid reply to the comment.
[modifier][noun][verb][modifier][noun].gödel reminds us: “syntax all on its own cannot determine semantics”.
the point is to evidence grammaticalness despite apparent meaningfulness, and the commenter may just be seeking to simulate the point with a logically consistent application of the rules at play. “incomplete” with respect to [mimicking] or [reproducing] an [socio-historical cultural] artifact, but not inconclusive in evidencing the point (remixing to produce variations on the theme; i.e., there are evidences of +20-word recursive sentences, if not larger).
nothing about the buffalo sentence entails the social rule “when someone else posts the buffalo sentence, it must match the aforementioned sentence verbatim”. permutations on the point are totally fair game.
Based
