Trump 2018 - Road to Midterms/Nuclear War


Air Force One is on the telly just now and I’m very much enjoying imagining Trump in place of Harrison Ford all through it.



Sorry meant to add, this is important because Trump colluded with the Israeli regime re: settlement UN votes, which has been ignored by #resistance dweebs, so it’s good that DSA have at least offered solidarity, considering we know nobody in either party will touch this with a ten foot pole.


Also what the fuck is this


Good to see daft owd fools rattling on about bringing back national service isn’t just a thing over here.


This was on my Trumpocalypse mix for the mixtape club Music board nerds!


Can’t decide if Bannon apologising for his “treason” comments is a genuine apology or a means of adding weight to the idea that the book isn’t fictional. Inclined to think the latter given how much Trump has slagged him off in the last couple of days.





I’ve been thinking about this recently and it’s occurred to me that freedom of speech in the truest sense of the word is pretty much a minority position in the Republican party, as shown by legislation like the Patriot Act.

It’s interesting that so many Trumpsters focused on Donald Trump being able to say whatever came to his mind and seemed to gloss over the fact that so much of what he said on the campaign. I mean he literally discussed violently censoring his protestors.


Who is most likely to run for President

  • Oprah Winfrey
  • Mark Zuckerberg
  • Dwayne Johnson

0 voters


Currently a quarter of the way through “Fire & Fury”. As the extracts would suggest, it’s incredibly readable while also being shot through with a ‘fly-on-the-wall’ style that in many cases would simply have been impossible.

This just about sums it up:

Wolff’s book seems to occupy a middle ground: between the writing of White House newspaper reporters, who exercise preternatural restraint when writing about the Administration, and the late-night comedians, who offer a sense of release from that restraint because they are not held to journalistic standards of veracity. That middle ground, where there is neither restraint nor accuracy, shouldn’t exist. That “Fire and Fury” can occupy so much of the public-conversation space degrades our sense of reality further, while creating the illusion of affirming it.

I am absolutely going to read the whole thing, mind.


Two questions: Does it (so far) tell you anything you don’t already know (or suspect), and does it read as credible?

  1. yes, but that may speak more to my lack of knowledge about the backgrounds of the members of Trump’s team and campaign, particularly his family.

  2. It smacks of what Stephen Colbert would describe as “truthiness”, which is undoubtedly the key to its incredible success. The early chapters focus heavily on Bannon and so read as credible in the context of everything that’s been in the news over the last couple of days.

Hard ‘yes’ to 1, soft ‘yes’ to 2. but i realise that one undermines the other…


I suppose it’s believable in the sense that no matter what he wrote it could not be more insane than what Trump has actually said and done… see the point upthread about the gorilla channel, it’s not that far fetched and I’m sure there are plenty of things that are true that are far worse.


That speech she gave at the Golden Globes was one of the worst things I’ve ever seen so probably Oprah.


There we go:


Please let this be real



this is straight ethnic cleansing tbh


This, too. Just acts of out-and-out evil


Out of interest, do we think any of the stuff this administration does is specifically a Trump thing, rather than a Republican thing? The Muslim ban maybe? Mainly though I get the feeling we’d be getting all nearly this shit under a President Rubio/Jeb Bush etc. In which case the media really should start framing it as relating to the Republicans in general rather than just Trump. But then I guess they’d have to acknowledge that one of the two main parties are a bunch of reactionary twats.