RationalWiki:Saloon bar
To do list • Vandal catcher • Stubs • New pages • Lonely pages • Dead ends • Filter log • All public logs • Articles for deletion • Duplicate articles • Brainstar candidate articles • Drafts |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To do list |
---|
- - Currently, there are 2 pages marked for deletion
- - and 1 page marked for demotion.
What percent of Gab posts contain reality?[edit]
Since Gab has a "News" group, I will show you some common "news" sites that appear in it.
- Gateway Pundit - Fake News site that actually worships Trump (I think).
- Rumble - Site where Andrew Tate and friends stream. Also has some MAGADerpians on it.
- Other Gab posts. - Shocking news: A site that relies on kooks will inevitably rely on itself to survive.
- YouTube - Has some good channels (like Some More News), but has a lot of cranks. Guess which type Gab likes more?
- Just the News - probably an average MAGA news site.
So...what percent of Gab's "News" section is in reality? (probably 0 percent) ResurrectingDeadLinks (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
- The thing with Gab, Rumble, and all these other "alt-tech" sites that really focus on political-conspiracy shit: there is no real reason to use them unless your political worldview is so far out there, it is too much even for the likes of major social media sites that already have large amounts of political-conspiracy crap. Like YouTube, Facebook, and Elon Musk's Twitter. You have to be pretty nutty to be too nutty for these places.
- Looking, Gab's news does actually contains legitimate news sources (when something occurs that reinforces their worldview), but their focus is pretty obviously on right-wing Dominionist / nativist propaganda. Fox News is probably the most "reliable" "news feed" that they highlight (it's not reliable of course, but compared to Gateway Pundit?) One little oddity about this site (probably reflecting the CEO's ultra-fundamentalism) is that the presently irrelevant WND show up pretty frequently in their current news feed, as if it were still 2010. BobJohnson (talk) 21:56, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
Charity, and Its Existence without Religious Motivations[edit]
So it's been a while since there have been some fun atheist rants in the bar. I am speaking specifically to Pascal's Wager, whether it would be better to believe in a God that offers eternal joy for believing or eternal punishment for not believing, or whether it's safe to just ignore that wager altogether. Let's say under a modern Christian view, A la Ray Comfort, any sin is weighty, hell worthy and punishable by eternal torment. The only way to eternally survive this is to profess that you have turned your immortal soul over to Jesus. Only then, can your sins be forgiven in the eternity of your everlasting life. I, and I know this is probably a surprise to all of you, don't think everlasting eternity should be the motivation to do things that are good. If I went to hell because I'm not baptised and have spent my life worried about things social and physical, rather than the divine or the letter of some translated self contradictory rulebook on how to live ethically in 1000 BC, am I supposed to apologize to Satan? Would Ray Comfort ever apologize to Satan for proselytizing? Matthew 23:15," Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.". So preaching that doing bad shit can be eternally forgiven, and doing good shit doesn't matter is fucking ignorant and dangerous. You do good things, not for an eternal reward, but because good things actually help society, and any amount of sacrifice you accept in order to enact a greater good may not go in the God of Breath's eternal tome, but it matters down here in the real world, regardless of how any cult wants to minimize it or claim it for themselves. There is no wager that denies you your right to love thy neighbor. You can just be a good person, that's enough. Torrent (talk) 03:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
- There is a short story to the effect that a rabbi is asked why God allows atheism, and the response is that the atheist acts out of true charity/goodness because they choose to, not in the expectation of some future reward.
- There are many views of what heaven and hell are (the Vikings Valhalla and the Christian Heaven, the Buddhist concept of escaping rebirth etc) - and there is the concept of what you do coming back to you threefold, and for many people 'being good or neutral' (and avoiding adding to the tragedy of the commons) is A Good Thing, whatever the expectations of reward or otherwise. Anna Livia (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I am also constantly miffed by the 'Karma is a bitch' idea that good and bad happen proportionally to your actions. Karma doesn't affect you until your next reincarnation, morons... I mean, people. But they don't know what they are talking about, and I only know a little bit more, so whatever, good things happen to bad people as much as bad things happen to good people. I have chosen to get over it and get real tough. Maybe I'll come back in my next life as a tree that isn't in danger of deforestation and I could live 1000 years without having to worry about this crap, just getting my bark gnawed on by jungle beavers or whatever a tree has to survive. But I don't think I've earned that yet. Torrent (talk) 06:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
Articles for deletion[edit]
Should 'Articles for deletion' be a Sysop only privilege? BONs have taken to using it a lot methinks. Scream!! (talk) 00:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think it should be. I also feel that we need to put in a quorum and percentage threshold on votes too - no more '11-10 for delete with 9 Goats' situations which I don't consider a ringing endorsement of change. KarmaPolice (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be opposed to either, especially for nomination or voting. Sysop-only feels a bit extreme, though. Let the autopatrolled have a say? If this might become policy, it shouldn't be in the Bar; move it here.
– Regards, Avarice 01:10, 24 June 2025 (UTC)- Any proposed changes to who and what is allowed to create an AfD should be addressed on the community standards talk page. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 01:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- There are several categories/types of deletable - 1) 'rubbish, look-at-me trolls and similar' (which can be whack-a-moled by anyone, 2) 'in the news/passing mentions encountered' of topics which are potentially RW-mission-worthy but which do not develop and/or which can be included as subsections of and/or mentions in other pages, 3) regularly raised topics in these categories, and 4) everything else: 2) and 3) can be partially handled by judicious use of redirects (after a sufficient grace period). Anna Livia (talk) 09:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think the process could well be tightened up a bit. And ,yes, CS would be the place for this.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 11:25, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
- There are several categories/types of deletable - 1) 'rubbish, look-at-me trolls and similar' (which can be whack-a-moled by anyone, 2) 'in the news/passing mentions encountered' of topics which are potentially RW-mission-worthy but which do not develop and/or which can be included as subsections of and/or mentions in other pages, 3) regularly raised topics in these categories, and 4) everything else: 2) and 3) can be partially handled by judicious use of redirects (after a sufficient grace period). Anna Livia (talk) 09:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- Any proposed changes to who and what is allowed to create an AfD should be addressed on the community standards talk page. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 01:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be opposed to either, especially for nomination or voting. Sysop-only feels a bit extreme, though. Let the autopatrolled have a say? If this might become policy, it shouldn't be in the Bar; move it here.
Wait is Johnney Deep Innocent. (sic)[edit]
How a day's people are saying Depp is not the victim while Amber is the actual victim. I understand that public opinion might be wrong, but I'm honestly lost all thing considered I was recommended a series of videos called the Cult Of Depp. I see some people saying he's the abuser so could I have some help in this 1.43.236.241 (talk) 11:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC) Irony-Man.
- A big problem with the world is that people care a great deal about this sort of small-scale personal shit, and meanwhile Trump, ICE kidnappings, Gazan genocide… Duncan from Teflpedia (talk) 02:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- That comes off as kinda snobby and condescending - 'oh, why aren't the proles using that time to do something worthwhile'. It's part of the hymn to the 'cult of busy'; that we should spend [ultimately] every waking moment doing 'productive'/'useful' things and everything else is a waste of time. We all have a limited amount of 'bandwidth' [physical, mental, emotional] and constantly going over-capacity is going to drive you nuts - esp if the things you're 'supposed to be doing instead' is watching the Great Orange trying to make himself King of Gilead. I mean, you cannot assume all the people engaging in celeb gossip [or other 'small scale personal shit'] are not also paying attention to the bigger shit about them. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
I know but still I feel like there has been a change in recent years so I'm curious 1.43.236.241 (talk) 07:00, 27 June 2025 (UTC)Irony-Man.
- Innocent of what? Marrying an emotionally unstable actress half his age while having no intention to create a stable living environment? Lock em both up, statute of limitations be damned. But seriously, Who even cares about Johnny Depp and Amber Heard anymore? Who the fuck cared in the first place? I remember there is all this drama about who got drunk and mean, and who threw a wine bottle at who, and who shit the bed, who cares, who married who? Lock em both up, I can't believe somebody still cares about this here. Torrent (talk) 07:45, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry about that it just interested me. 1.43.236.241 (talk) 07:49, 27 June 2025 (UTC)Irony-Man.
- I have no idea what this (presumably celebrity gossip) story is about and I care even less.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:56, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Anything can be discussed here pretty nearly. There is actually an argument this topic is missional since Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire (et al.) got involved with attacking Amber Heard on social media and it became an antifeminist talking point, although this has since disappeared as far as I can see. Chillpilled (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't mean to make you apologize. I am very sick of the take that Johnny Depp did nothing wrong. But I'm also not going to relitigate something that has such low stakes. Spousal abuse is a real thing. A messy divorce is a real thing. It's theater but it can't help you and can't help people get better at surviving the real thing because these are two immensely well off people. They might never be normal, but they will be fine. Torrent (talk) 06:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- Anything can be discussed here pretty nearly. There is actually an argument this topic is missional since Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire (et al.) got involved with attacking Amber Heard on social media and it became an antifeminist talking point, although this has since disappeared as far as I can see. Chillpilled (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
Anti-Woke UK?[edit]
Context: The ToryGraph
And the continuation of the 'bonfire of woke' continues; now with the MoJ scrapping all mention of LGBT. Note at the end it talks about 'routine changes to follow Civil Service guidelines' which is code for 'this is now the policy for all parts of national government'. This I have manually confirmed; the MoD and DoE D/I pages have zero mention of race/gender/sexuality now and at least for the MoD, they used to. The fact that D/I policies etc still exist is better than the policies of the fag-end of the Sunak regime but not by much.
The 'how' is simple enough; that they're doing their best to 'hide in plain sight' by hacking it up into penny-packets and doing it in the most greige manner possible in the hopes few if any notice.
But why? My two theories are this;
a) Starmer and Co actually don't believe in anything at all except keeping power and think becoming more Farage than Farage is the way to do it.
b) This is the 'secret paragraph' in the tariff-reduction agreement the UK got off the Orange King earlier this year. He demanded we 'drop woke' and while we didn't publicly acquiesce in the demand coincidently shit like this happens in the background, doing it in penny-packets and in the most greige manner possible in the hopes nobody notices.
Thoughts? KarmaPolice (talk) 14:19, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Both a and b are plausible. Spud (talk) 14:47, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I hate to know I'm in the same group as Galloway and Spiked, but I have now 90% reached the conclusion that Starmer is the 'desiccated calculating machine' [ie passionless and emotionally dead technocrat who only sees the world in numbers and charts] which Nye Bevan warned against having as a Labour leader back in the 50s. Which is partly why the 'backbench grumbles' are more serious than they look on the surface - because it speaks of a deeper malaise with MPs who feel utterly ignored, having zero input in policy and treated imperiously by whips who only threaten. It's almost like he's decided to go flat against all known convention that a PM cannot afford to remain aloof, cold and rigid to their own backbenchers - that they need to basically 'press the flesh' in the corridors, tearooms, bars etc. A good example of this was John Major; that even 'the bastards' liked him as a person and he was quite slippery in his ability in one-on-ones to appear to be in full agreement with the MP - a skill which he honed as a whip [one of his charges was Harvey Proctor who said Major had a very good 'listening mode' and was most courteous even when it became apparent he was going to rebel].
- The one thing I do find interesting is that the govt is 'sneaking this out' which tells me that they are [perhaps] starting to become aware of the 'left bleed-out' of progressives/socialists to the LDs and Greens and realising they, despite telling us to go fuck ourselves for the last five years might actually need us electorally and so are trying to be a bit more sneaky about their Farage-ing. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I have long pegged Starmer as a completely unprincipled apparatchik who wouldn’t balk at copying his opponents’ politics if he thought he could get away with it or possibly gain some tactical benefit. His only goal seems to be to attain and keep power and his “ideal society” seems to be some version of “Blair’s Britain”, incl. the kind of laws that keep down the “yobs and troublemakers”.
- The one thing I do find interesting is that the govt is 'sneaking this out' which tells me that they are [perhaps] starting to become aware of the 'left bleed-out' of progressives/socialists to the LDs and Greens and realising they, despite telling us to go fuck ourselves for the last five years might actually need us electorally and so are trying to be a bit more sneaky about their Farage-ing. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- Starmer’s authoritarian streak (and untrustworthiness) was already obvious when he basically purged Labour’s top ranks of most of those of a more leftist persuasion, despite running as a “conciliation candidate”. And he’s obviously cribbing from both Tory austerity and Farage “anti woke” stuff, while also trying to play the “tough sheriff” clamping down on any kind of protest that isn’t nice, conformist “placard and banner waving”, but may actually inconvenience someone. Starmer’s/Cooper’s ban on Palestine Action for basically being a terrorist organisation is beyond absurd, but clearly designed to appeal to Tory/Reform UK vote.
- It would appear that Starmer thinks that he can triangulate in multiple dimensions:
- Between Trump, the EU and the Commonwealth.
- Between disgust with the Tories, Blairism and Farage.
- Between affluent “I’m alright, Jack” middle class Litte Englanders, City financiers and bureaucrats/technocrats with some performative politics to appease more traditional Labour voters.
- It would appear that Starmer thinks that he can triangulate in multiple dimensions:
- The only reason this has worked so far is that the Tories are still a total basket case, that Reform is just as politically chaotic as Farage’s previous outfits, that the LibDems and the Greens currently can’t present a viable alternative/threat and that the regionalist parties, especially SNP, are also weak.
- This should be a golden opportunity for Labour, because it’s comparatively stronger than it’s probably ever going to be, yet Starmer is behaving as if he’s George Osborne in the coalition cabinet (or even more hesitantly), because his vision for society doesn’t seem to be markedly different from the one he inherited from Sunak. ScepticWombat (talk) 19:00, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think a major issue [perhaps the issue] with Starmer is that he a) does not possess 'a labour spirit', b) is not a real politician and c) is not a real leader. I personally loathe Blair, but I shall not for one moment doubt that he possessed all three of those [though they all failed him re: Iraq]. I'd put the deficiency of spirit as the worst of the three; it's like Starmer simply does not get neither the motivations of the some ~20% of the UK which is genuinely 'left' or the 'labour left' in particular. Someone with a 'labour spirit' would have known instantly that those welfare cuts would have been unpalatable to a lot of MPs and someone with decent political nous would [or should have] known the fact they've been able go 'get this far' without a major bustup because said MPs had for a long time been swallowing a lot of misgivings, of which they've done near fuck all to assure.
- As for 'acting like he's George Osborne in the coalition cabinet' reminds me of the tale of Ramsey McDonald - I'm not one to link to the Morning Star much but I think they're on the money here, with Reeves as his 'Iron Chancellor' Snowden. Except unlike McDonald Starmer doesn't have either the oratorical ability to waffle or even a better 'rooting' within the party.
- I fear Starmer shall follow the McDonald path to the end; lurching ever-rightwards in the vain hope that support will magically appear [while telling your previous supporters to go fuck themselves] and perhaps more critically, as they get weighted down with 'Treasury Brain', vested interests and what the Hate Mail says. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- Dang, despite it being the Morning Star, the historical analogy seems depressingly apt in terms of Starmer’s constant rightwards move.
- I fear Starmer shall follow the McDonald path to the end; lurching ever-rightwards in the vain hope that support will magically appear [while telling your previous supporters to go fuck themselves] and perhaps more critically, as they get weighted down with 'Treasury Brain', vested interests and what the Hate Mail says. KarmaPolice (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sadly, formally “leftist” social democratic/labour parties slashing benefits to demonstrate their “fiscal responsibility” is not a uniquely UK phenomenon. The Danish coalition government led Social Democratic PM Mette Frederiksen has just announced a serious benefit “reform” scheme, which not only creates a three tier system of “lowest, basic and highest” levels, but also sets the “basic” level at the rate of the public student benefit grant, which any student will tell you can’t cover living costs for the vast majority of students, despite discounted housing etc., hence why they work on the side.
- This “reform” also removes the legal ability for municipalities to supplement housing costs for benefit recipients (something municipalities are currently allowed to do, but only if they can’t help the recipient find a cheaper place to live), which is set to leave quite a lot of these people on benefits homeless.
- The responsible cabinet minister (also a Social Democrat, btw) even let the cat out of the bag in terms of the problem with the “reform”, which is ostensibly yet another “from benefits to work” scheme, when she mentioned that an offset of the reduced benefits is that medicine cost will now be completely covered (instead of just being capped).
- As unemployment rates in Denmark are extremely low right now, and most people who are “only” unemployed will be covered by the temporary (and much higher) unemployment insurance schemes, most people on the purely public “unemployment benefits” are actually unemployed because they have serious physical and/or mental health problems, not just because they can’t find work.
- However, rather than being granted the kind of disability/early retirement schemes they should have, they’re kept in the benefit system, because the municipalities are having a part of the much lower benefit rates reimbursed by the state, but have to pay most or all of the higher disability/retirement rates themselves. Thus, the municipalities keep on trying to “rehabilitate and test” benefit recipients’ “residual work capabilities” to keep them on the cheaper unemployment benefits, rather than granting them permanent disability/retirement status.
- This has all been well known for years, if not decades and this “reform” will thus do nothing but impoverish most benefit recipients and probably leave a lot of them homeless. Then why do it? Because it looks good on paper and in terms of “fiscal responsibility” and is supposedly part of “financing” the drastic increases in military expenditure. ScepticWombat (talk) 19:04, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
Introduction And Concern That The World Is Getting More Terrifying[edit]
Hi its my first day having an account i will try to contribute to this great RATIONALWIKI!! but first some thing horrible.
I have just found out today that Kirk Cameron YES THAT KIRK CAMERON the former child actor and Ray Comforts partner in debating has a television show!!!!!, its called Adventures of Iggy and Mr. Kirk the shorthand is Iggy and Kirk. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31407414/ there have been 5 episodes as of the time of this post 27th of June first impression looks like a rip off of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood the Neighborhood of Make-Believe were small so Kirk had to go big and now his friends puppets look like a rip off of the muppets (good rhyming) iggy is a rip off of kermit though more like a lizard then a frog specifically a chameleon to avoid the wrath of the us legal system and trigger happy copyright lawyers, This crowdfunded tv show had to be formed when kirk cameron read television history and saw Mister Rogers' Neighbourhood and thought I could do better than that show here is why Seth Andrews - The Copycats: How Christianity Steals The Best Ideas I thought that people would have Hope For The Future got to wait and see if things will change for the better.
My Apologies if i have made you sick to your stomach Wise If Only (talk) 15:24 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- I would say that the world is the same as it ever was. You are probably becoming more aware of the modes of being that can and do conflict with your personal epistemes.Zatoichi (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
I heard that buzz aldrin is a lurker here[edit]
What do you think of him? :s Spacewizard9000 (talk) 23:30, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- I doubt it. A somebody. (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- I'll punch him in his gosh darned mouth. The moon is a celestial object orbiting the earth like any number of man made satellites, okay then explain why it follows me home while I'm driving. I'm glad he's still alive because these fists gonna swing through his orbit like Apollo 13. But if he does actually read this, man, what a cool dude, and what an achievement, and how brave must a person be to try something like landing on the moon. Torrent (talk) 02:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- You heard where? – Regards, Avarice 02:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- As a 95-year old, he clearly has better things to do: his 3-decades younger new wife, legal battles with his kids, cheerleading for tRump, and the usual things that 95-year olds struggle with: eating, pooping, getting up from the chair, and sleeping. Bongolian (talk) 02:32, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- Well, I didn't know or really know or care about any of that, but now I'm less concerned about punching him in his gosh darned mouth, I had a hard time opening a pickle jar last night, but put me up against a 95 year old military dude and maybe I can predict what he's gonna throw at me. Torrent (talk) 02:40, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- As a 95-year old, he clearly has better things to do: his 3-decades younger new wife, legal battles with his kids, cheerleading for tRump, and the usual things that 95-year olds struggle with: eating, pooping, getting up from the chair, and sleeping. Bongolian (talk) 02:32, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- You heard where? – Regards, Avarice 02:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- I'll punch him in his gosh darned mouth. The moon is a celestial object orbiting the earth like any number of man made satellites, okay then explain why it follows me home while I'm driving. I'm glad he's still alive because these fists gonna swing through his orbit like Apollo 13. But if he does actually read this, man, what a cool dude, and what an achievement, and how brave must a person be to try something like landing on the moon. Torrent (talk) 02:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
So, where did you hear this remarkable claim?Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 10:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- Hey, Buzz! If you're here, I'd just like to say that I've always been a big fan of The Buzz Aldrin Show. Spud (talk) 15:12, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- My joke was reliant on knowing Buzz Aldrin punched a flat earther that accosted him. I hate explaining jokes, but sometimes forget about my special kinda memory castle neurodivergency. If I don't know he was a specific kind of old man American military celeb trash, maybe y'all didn't know he punched a flat earther in the mouth. I'm not walking back my statements on his bravery. I don't think it is less than nutso bonkers to try and walk on the moon, and I think that's actually cool. Torrent (talk) 05:49, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- I also have tried to find short videos of Daniel Hamrick finding his way on stage at the Hetero 'we're not gay we swear we just love festivals' Awesome Fest to sing a pro trans song, but I can't find it outside of commentary. A true dude literally stepped up to be bigger than the festival's creator. When the festival's Creator's big brained not fragile body tried to rip his own Mic off his own stage to stop free speech, some guy a lot bigger than him was like 'don't you fucking dare.' Not because he was especially informed, or really understood what he was defending or against who, but he is also a real one. Torrent (talk) 08:46, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- My joke was reliant on knowing Buzz Aldrin punched a flat earther that accosted him. I hate explaining jokes, but sometimes forget about my special kinda memory castle neurodivergency. If I don't know he was a specific kind of old man American military celeb trash, maybe y'all didn't know he punched a flat earther in the mouth. I'm not walking back my statements on his bravery. I don't think it is less than nutso bonkers to try and walk on the moon, and I think that's actually cool. Torrent (talk) 05:49, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
What is the dumbest antisemitic theory that you have heard of?[edit]
A genuine example that I found once: Jews make hygiene products to ruin the life of the goyim (AKA Non-Jew). Yes, the person who tweeted that actually believed it. I am seriously afraid to smell whoever they are... (Note: I could swore that I found it through either a RW Article source or a FSTDT quote, probably the former.) ResurrectingDeadLinks (talk) 03:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- There's a ton of casual anti-Semitism that I have grown up around. Calling a bad deal getting 'jewed' or even somebody having a prominent nose being called a jew for it. I was seeing a girl who was smoking hot, like guys approached her constantly, and she was worried about her nose. She said people called it a Jew nose, and I said 'It's not a beak, if that's what you're worried about.'There was nothing wrong with her nose. But the idea of any protest being funded directly by George Soros is the most outlandish and stupid idea. But it has also become shorthand for 'I don't like this.' I watched the first episode of South Park when it aired. I never thought calling somebody 'a stupid Jew' was funny, but you better believe it is hilarious to a big population. Torrent (talk) 04:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think “the jews are reptilians” is a good contended. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 14:59, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think that among dumb things that people verifiably believe or have asserted, Jewish Space Lasers ranks near the top.Zatoichi (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- Ah - Illuminati the card game...... brings back memories of the good old days.... I even featured in it :) Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 20:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think that among dumb things that people verifiably believe or have asserted, Jewish Space Lasers ranks near the top.Zatoichi (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- I was nicknamed "Jew" at high school (Catholic, boys) - can't really remember why - have always thought it was because I never had any money to spend at the school shop so was seen as someone hoarding cash ... Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 20:17, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- Like, that's what I don't get about anti-Semitic satire. It wins big if people actually think it's funny, sure. But South Park, Borat, the people who it wins big with don't get it as well as you'd want them to. I remember Gran Torino came out and a huge majority of my peers had the takeaway that racial slurs were actually just funny. People learned new slurs for Asians, and I guess for polish people or whatever, but Polish descent is not an easy spot in white America. I think it's dumb and cheap, always have. Guess I had an upbringing that actually taught me 'racism is not okay.' I cannot imagine having parents that would just call people Jews or zipperheads or the n word, or tell me it's important that I'm white, but it must be a thing, people don't learn that from nowhere. And anyone who thinks they can make a funny joke out of it, please, there are funnier jokes to be made. I did a DNA test with my mom and it turns out I'm whiter than bread with the crust cut off. I wouldn't consider myself a cracker though, I've always felt more like a honkey. What do you get when you mix a German with an Englishman? A white supremicist, I guess. What's a white guy's favorite pastime? Baseball. That's a joke because baseball is boring, it's a game where two guys try to play catch while 7 people stand in a field hoping nothing happens. It is also more beloved by many countries that aren't the US or predominantly white. And you know why it's okay to make fun of baseball and white guys? It doesn't turn into a violent conspiracy. It's okay to like baseball, your taste in a sport that is very boring is fine, I support your choice to nap or get blackout drunk for no reason other than to claim you cared about the score at the end of a game that takes a million hours to finish. Look at me, I didn't even call white America out on Nascar, probably rampant tokenism on my part. Torrent (talk) 12:26, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- I was nicknamed "Jew" at high school (Catholic, boys) - can't really remember why - have always thought it was because I never had any money to spend at the school shop so was seen as someone hoarding cash ... Aloysius the Gaul (talk) 20:17, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
Idolatry[edit]
There is a phrase 'Never Meet Your Idols' and I think it's valid enough, but why fucking idolize anyone in the first place? Harry Potter meant a lot to a lot of people. J.k. Rowling is a piece of shit for trying to use that to discriminate against people she does not care about, and I guarantee she does not care about you. Neil Gaiman has been a progressive author for decades, and it turns out he's comfortably weird and abusive in a power dynamic, which sucks. People enjoy Louis C.K. I also think some of his jokes are funny, but he jerks off in front of people that can't excuse themselves from the situation. People also like Elon Musk, which I never understood even as a green energy simp, there is no person in this world that should make you you feel like their achievements diminish your own or absolve them of bad behavior. I guess this is also about separating the artist from the art, but it is very possible for somebody to accidentally create something bigger than what they intended. The artist is a human too, don't fucking listen to them like they know something you don't. They can do really great things, but they are still people, and probably assholes. You can't do great things by acting like somebody else, and there is no level of famous that grants you the right to be absolutely deviant about your weird sex stuff. Informed consent, informed consent, informed consent. Don't ever think sucking a dick will grant you power. Torrent (talk) 03:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know 'Louis C K' but on the rest I agree wholeheartedly. Scream!! (talk) 15:22, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- One might admire a wild animal, like a lion or a bear but, come to despise it when it injures someone one cares about. I don't care about any of those people. If someone says something I don't like, I will say so if queried. Whatever it is, I only hope to accomplish eliminating the disagreeable experience from my immediate consideration. My reason is, the world spontaneously generates all the worst opinions whether we like them or not. If one stops acting like a racist, sexist, bigoted asshole, then one no longer is one. If you are, at least you are ineffective at it, and I have more interesting things to look at. The bottom line is my own sphere of existence, small as it is, can be conditioned to satisfy my own personal sentiments. The world almost never changes, moment to moment, in ways that accord with my own desires. Sometimes there are too many of such people, and I have to go away from them for my own peace of mind. Zatoichi (talk) 16:58, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- People can't 'just separate the artist from the art' because the whole 'celebrity industry' does not allow you to. In fact, the whole business model demands that you enter a parasocial relationship with the target. Or more correctly, the artist's persona. This means there often will be a crash-up when the curated/imagined persona in the fan's head and reality collides [the latter is worse, because the imagined persona can be completely made-up]. Or course Rowling doesn't 'care about you'? Who are you? Does she even know you exist? No. You developed a crush from afar, silently stalking her, weaving BS narratives in your head and then she had the gall to contradict said BS you throw a strop.
- One might admire a wild animal, like a lion or a bear but, come to despise it when it injures someone one cares about. I don't care about any of those people. If someone says something I don't like, I will say so if queried. Whatever it is, I only hope to accomplish eliminating the disagreeable experience from my immediate consideration. My reason is, the world spontaneously generates all the worst opinions whether we like them or not. If one stops acting like a racist, sexist, bigoted asshole, then one no longer is one. If you are, at least you are ineffective at it, and I have more interesting things to look at. The bottom line is my own sphere of existence, small as it is, can be conditioned to satisfy my own personal sentiments. The world almost never changes, moment to moment, in ways that accord with my own desires. Sometimes there are too many of such people, and I have to go away from them for my own peace of mind. Zatoichi (talk) 16:58, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, you can 'do great things by acting like someone else'. Ignoring the simple fact this is the entire stock in trade of professional actors, it's the whole basis of said celeb industry. You don't know a celeb's genuine personality etc, you know their public persona - something which usually is on a sliding scale of reality between 'kinda real, but curated' to 'totally artificial'. It's a kind of kayfabe; that all the celeb media output is 'real', like stage magicians, wrestling and sporting rivalries. The existence of gossip sites etc are a tacit admission of this - that they are trying to 'see behind the curtain' [however in true matryoshka fashion, a lot of major celebs have curated 'inner selves' to show on these occasions]. Ask any agent or a C/D/E-list figure and they'll tell you [if they're being honest] that they need to build up a fanbase because that's their fucking bread/butter. And these days, this means social media, the #1 place for unhealthy parasocial relationship developments and later-regretted oversharing.
- Alas, there shall always be people who 'take this too far', who invest far too much into the one-sided relationship - similar to the creepy guys who think the 'professionally pleasant' demeanour they're getting from a [normally younger, attractive female] means they think they're being hit on or something. KarmaPolice (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- I really want to disagree with this take, Karma, so I'm going to in a very pedantic way, but it won't take long, I promise. Is "acting" as in a job where you pretend to be a person in itself that important a job, or is the storytelling that enables that job more important? Fantasy characters can embolden people [1] but finding a way to use the fantasy in reality means you've done work yourself, it was always in you, or maybe it wasn't in you before, but if it is the impetus to do it, I guess it gets complicated there. Inspiration is not "acting like somebody else." Use inspiration to do great things, but don't ride coattails, I think is the bigger point I was trying to make. Torrent (talk) 10:16, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- Alas, there shall always be people who 'take this too far', who invest far too much into the one-sided relationship - similar to the creepy guys who think the 'professionally pleasant' demeanour they're getting from a [normally younger, attractive female] means they think they're being hit on or something. KarmaPolice (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
Good riddance[edit]
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/07/01/us/jimmy-swaggart-dies
Jimmy Swaggart is dead. If Hell exists then he is going there. --Trans Fem Agenda 20:51, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- 'Well you see Mr Swaggart, this is where all the creators of megachurches get sent, and those who think they understand Christianity better than the God of the Christians get sent. Anna Livia (talk) 20:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
I walked probably a prostitute to a motel just because she was having a clear psychiatric break.and asked me to[edit]
I was walking back from a gas station because drinking and driving is a no in my book, and I don't live far. A lady stopped me and asked me a bunch of insane questions at top speed, so I said 'hold on' and asked her if I could give her a couple cigarettes. She said no, she wanted me to walk her to the Motel 6. I told her I'm not bargaining, take the cigarettes or leave em, and she pulled out the stupidest looking vape I've ever seen and offered it to me. I said no thank you. Then she started going off in a very psychotic way about how people have stolen her babies but she never had babies and I interrupted her and said 'Look, if you need me to walk you to the Motel 6, I can do that much' As we walked, her breath kinda became shorter, we were hoofing it, so she couldn't fit as much into each sentence, but it was still a lot of bad news. I was only kinda pretending to listen to her anyway, full disclosure. We did jaywalking across a pretty busy street that was mostly dead tonight, and when a car came up I said 'Ope, we gotta get quick' and she said 'quick and slick' and we were fine. As we continued to walk, a young bunny jumped out in front of us probably 30 yards up ahead, so I said 'look, A bunny!' And she broke her rant, and said 'I don't remember what it means when a bunny crosses your path' and I said 'Well, to me, it mostly means spring is over and it's about to get hot outside for a long time.'. We kept walking and she told me something, said it would make me laugh, and I don't remember exactly what she said because we were getting into unfamiliar territory, but it was a joke like you'd hear from a 5 year old, so I laughed like it was a joke a 5 year old would tell and she finally gave up trying to tell me about her grievances and we had fun the rest of the walk. When we got to the motel, it was built a little into a hill, so the parking lot Had those old railroad tie retaining walls. and as I said 'this is as far as I'm going with you' she started to beeline towards a 15 foot jump. I shouted 'hey, are you gonna jump those ties?' And she laughed and said 'yes I am'. So I said 'Good luck out there' and she shouted back some nonsense about being able to laugh when things suck, and then said 'you're not gonna give me a tip or nothin?' From such a distance that it was actually a good joke, she laughed while she said it, so it might have been a little protective. On laughing helping you feel better, it is not something I ever said directly to her. I turned around and started walking back before I ever watched her try and make that drop, woof, good luck, my ankles couldn't take it. We did see a probably plain clothes cop, just a very clean lady out for a jog at the exact intersection where you'd expect to see no one, but that doesn't exactly mean she was a cop,.as much as I'm not a cop, but this lady I was walking was sure she was a cop. And I did get a quick drive by from a police vehicle on my walk back, barely slowed down but did slow down, and it's not a concern to me because no I didn't pay for sex with a crazy lady, I was asked by a lady to walk her home, and that's what I did. From where she started, there are probably not many marks after 1 am anyway. But stay woke. Torrent (talk) 08:32, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- I have lived in some high crime areas. Generally, they are safe for a guy like me, it's not because I'm big and strong, it's because I know boundaries and how to be kind within them. I guarantee most homeless don't want to take advantage of that, they experience rudeness and feel like they are people not treated like people, that doesn't help anyone who is biologically prone to things like paranoia. I can't give up dollars because I'm broke due to my own bad behavior, I don't have to actually carry cash anymore, and they get it too. These people don't scare me. If I don't have a dollar, I can tell them I don't have a dollar, if they want something else from me, you can't get in my car and I'm not taking you home, but I can listen as best I can. Torrent (talk) 09:19, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Lettuce rules[edit]
I have encountered yet another 'news story' commenting upon Trump's actual or supposed mental decline.
One can see 'a political leader' who knows that they have limited acuity (in particular areas), but employing competent members of the Cabinet and advisers so that it is not an issue, etc - but what happens if they become too incompetent or their views too 'strange'/potentially dangerous etc? In the UK there would be various ways of proceeding (including sufficient of the party grandees and other MPs 'crossing the floor' (removing themselves from the government benches, a vote of no confidence, and as a last resort which would create a constitutional crisis, the monarch speaking out) - but what would happen in the US? Anna Livia (talk) 15:40, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- Theoretically this is covered by the fourth section of the 25th constitutional amendment. If enough people agree that the president can't preform his duties, even if he himself would argue he can, his powers can be transferred to the vice president. The vice president initiates this process but they must get a lot of people to agree before anything happens. Section 4 has never actually been invoked. Section 4 is worthless in practice-at least in our hyper partisan age-because it requires a significant amount of "defections" from the party of the president in order to work.-Flandres (talk) 18:25, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- How far eastward along the line from Barking (mad) Station to Shoeburyness Station (and into the North Sea)/war games on Burpelson Air Force Base before 'everybody else's sense of self-preservation' comes into play? What if the President becomes totally incompetent and the cabinet is not capable of creating a façade-Presidency aided by an Autopen? (The period between the election and the inauguration would probably be different - old and new governments would cooperate - under normal circumstances) Anna Livia (talk) 19:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
Why is it when someone has a pride flag or something it's always considered "father-less" behavior.[edit]
It really just baffles me I don't know why. — Unsigned, by: 1.43.236.241 / talk / contribs
- Because you've spent too much time in the drekkier ends of social media in which socially traditional fuckwits attempt to portray not being anything but cis/straight/monogamous is somehow a) a perversion and b) all stems from having 'daddy issues' which is because you weren't brought up like you were in Leave It To Beaver? KarmaPolice (talk) 13:57, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- Same reason why some people claim that NEETs sleep in the basement: memes. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 14:26, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- It's due to they themselves lacking a fatherly figure in their own lives, and as such, seeing someone who doesn't conform to the norm scares them and tickles their "projection node". Really, the genuine reason is stated above; these people think that their norm should be how everyone is, and if somebody goes against that they're automatically considered to obviously have lacked something the hater had in their life. Effectively: no matter what, do not listen to them, because they are simply projecting onto you to compensate for something they're missing. (Sorry if my signature is incorrect, I'm still new to this) SchmoovBrain (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
Can someone please make a side by side article on this gish gallop final boss?[edit]
https://archive.ph/LRe05 is the link. Get your keyboard prepared. Good luck. ResurrectingDeadLinks (talk) 05:32, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- I don't quite get what you're getting at. That we must all be keyboard warriors? I mean, Rationalwiki does a pretty good job of engaging, and I really don't see a reason to engage directly with a weird personal grievance to refute this level of, as you accurately called it, Gish Galloping. It's not exactly important to side by side a gish gallop, but if you would like to start on your own, I don't think you're not allowed. I personally don't think this archive of hate is actually informing anyone in a meaningful sense, it's not The Bible, but if you want to, go off... Anybody, really, is allowed to be as autistic as they want in my opinion. Because the amount of work going into it must have been very draining. That's kinda the point of a Gish Gallop, to make it impossible to respond. Maybe if there was a side by side and a way to discuss the counterpoints, but nobody here is trying to be an absolute authority. I'm not 100% sure but I think sand boxing is a thing that might work for this. But you would have to initiate it yourself and be very patient, because 700 points all at once is like Gish Gallop final boss mode over a person's feelings/takes, as bad as they may be. Torrent (talk) 08:42, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- Give me one take yourself here in the bar, consider it practice. Please don't clown on Ressurector until iunno, 72 hours have passed without a response sounds fair. After that, statute of limitations. I think that's fair. Torrent (talk) 11:58, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- I said "get your keyboard prepared" because there was a lot of wharrgarbl in it. As in, there is enough wharrgarbl to make a article seven times longer than 101 evidences for a young age of the Earth and the universe long. Most of the sources are pure bollocks, with a few .gov/.edu sources in between. ResurrectingDeadLinks (talk) 18:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- Give me one take yourself here in the bar, consider it practice. Please don't clown on Ressurector until iunno, 72 hours have passed without a response sounds fair. After that, statute of limitations. I think that's fair. Torrent (talk) 11:58, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- It would take me like a week or two of nonstop editing to do that. I can tell you at least some of these IQ and HIV statistics are based on awful selection bias. Sometimes for HIV numbers if you dig into it it's literally some number from gay prostitutes in the 1980s (see this page for example), and for IQ it could be as bad as they surveyed only a rural school for children with Down's syndrome then extrapolated that to a whole nation (I believe I'm thinking of one of Lynn's numbers).
- I have been thinking of trying RationalWiki:Side-by-side type articles soon. It might be a good format to revive. Chillpilled (talk) 21:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Anyone have no idea what Trump's motives are at this point?[edit]
Is he all in it for power and money? Or is he just trying to destroy the USA? Or does he just have no idea what he's doing? What even is his motive for damaging the country? What personal benefit does he get from it all? CriticalMind (talk) 18:37, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- Now there's a stupid question - 'what personal benefit does he get from it all'? Hmm, so far...
- - 1b of free legal assistance.
- - At least 1.5m in hotel fees at Trump-owned locations.
- - At least 600k in Secret Service renting golf carts etc from Trump.
- - At least 2m of free 'upgrades' of Mar-a-Lago, including helipad.
- - 35-40m each year for Secret Service protection.
- - 400k salary, 100k travel, 50k expenses per year and 19k entertainment.
- - 246k annual pension, with ~500k of services.
- - At least 15m personally from his tax cuts (more a-coming with the new cuts).
- - Rent-free living at the White House, worth perhaps 1m a year.
- - 1.1b from pump-dumping crypto (which he'd not be able to pull off if not POTUS).
- - Effectively being given immunity to prosecution (see #1 for details).
- - Silencing the American media from criticising/mocking him.
- - At least 10m from merch.
- - 5.6m in personal legal fees he instead charged to his PAC.
- - 5m from the election PAC to Trump's own hotels etc.
- - The effective ending of all investigations into the Trump empire, including cases of fraud, insider trading and corruption.
- - Upto 160m in foreign business deals during his first reign (the vast amount he wouldn't have gotten if not POTUS).
- It's all about the grift and gratification. The money, the cult, the worship, the parades, the fuckers sucking him off and calling him 'daddy' in the most sycophantic manner and being immune to anything anyone can throw at him. He wants to be a God-King. He is truly the new Nero.
- KarmaPolice (talk) 19:40, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- Man another gish gallop. There was a point made that ex presidents get Secret Service details forever and onwards, which I don't think is a bad idea, we can't find it in our military budget to protect all elected officials, but that's a different argument. Donald Trump needs, and I mean needs for real, a secret service detail. So when he stays at his, now childrens' Trump owned hotels and resorts, the American tax payer is also paying for his service detail to stay with him, no matter the cost. I'm not saying put them in a tent behind the white house, and I'm not saying stop protecting the president from violent actual factual would be assassins. I'm just saying it's a little fucked up that the more expensive a place he goes, the more it costs America. Single drop in the bucket, for sure, but if Elon Musk can cut waste by firing American Federal workers and Donald Trump can claim he's so rich he doesn't need a single taxpayer dollar or political bribe, this is one suggestion, let the people staying there to keep you alive live rent free for real, I mean actual loss, not federally compensated loss, just put them up because your dad needs protection. I think this is about your second point, but I've already been writing so long about it that it doesn't really matter what any of your other points were. That is the unspoken danger of a gish gallop, even if I'm pretty sure we agree it's a fucking vexing way to come to an agreement. Torrent (talk) 04:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- That's a remarkably comprehensive response KarmaPolice! Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- -That is not a 'Gish Gallop' because all the points raised are evidence of the same point I was making, rather than a kaleidoscope of random points in which to snow under your opponent. I'm sorry that you found 183 words overly taxing for you. Which I am gonna point out now is shorter than a lot of the responses you give including the 265 words your reply was. Some things in this world can't be covered well enough in say, 20 words.
- -I listed 'Secret Service detail' is because Trump is an anomaly in the respects he was a man before his election possessed his own security detail. He is now getting something for free which he previously paid for. Therefore, it's a perk and thus listed. Similar to the White House free staff etc - he would have had cleaners, a personal cook etc which he no longer has to pay for.
- -Mar-a-Lago had to get upgrades and costs more for the Secret Service to operate out of - even before we take into account the accusations they are being deliberately overcharged [captive market, it's not like the Secret Service can go and rent something else down the road, is it?]. Trump knows this - and continues to do this anyway. This is in stark contrast to VP Rockefeller under Ford - he continued to use his own private plane, vacation home etc in the belief 'he was saving the govt money'. The moment he was informed in fact he was in fact costing them even more, he quit it and used the official stuff for the rest of his term.
- -I know my list is not comprehensive, and unless someone stole a ledger or ten from Trump Org, may never be known. The worrying thing I found was that while my look was cursory, it's like nobody has thought of making such a list before! KarmaPolice (talk) 13:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- You could probably re-format it as an article so itlives longer than this talk page.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think that Karma's list proves something important that I'm not sure I've said before: many of these people, including Trump himself, aren't stupid, or at least not as stupid as some people here seem to think. Evil, perhaps, but they can be dangerous and smart at the same time. Just because they support ideas that don't seem to work for the vast majority of the population doesn't mean that they are Disney villains. They are perfectly rational agents seeking their well-being at the expense of the tax payer. One may argue that this is truth to most politicians since Cincinnatus, but very few were as as successful as Trump in what is, at least in theory, a democratic country with an educated population, and I'm sick of pretending that the Hanlon's razor is some form of universal rule. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Being competent at gaming the system does not equate to being competent at governance. Trump is demonstrably incompetent at the latter, but he is a master at the former. Antares (talk) 19:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- (EC) I'd argue that Trump is in fact one of the most competent policians in recent history. Yes, I agree, the results of his policies are generally disastrous for most people, but he is doing exactly what he wants to do (and indeed profiting from it). GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:26, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- While Trump's approval rate are plummeting, he is still endorsed by millions. Deceiving millions for so long is not easy, especially when you're passing bills that haven't worked for them during literally decades. Underestimating Trump and his crew is clearly not working in my opinion. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- I’d add to KarmaPolice’s point about silencing media criticism by noting that that too came with financial benefits, courtesy of the various settlements, such as the $16 million paid by CBS, despite it being a case that should have been easily dismissed or won by CBS. Trump would never have been able to pull that off if he wasn’t POTUS.
- While Trump's approval rate are plummeting, he is still endorsed by millions. Deceiving millions for so long is not easy, especially when you're passing bills that haven't worked for them during literally decades. Underestimating Trump and his crew is clearly not working in my opinion. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- (EC) I'd argue that Trump is in fact one of the most competent policians in recent history. Yes, I agree, the results of his policies are generally disastrous for most people, but he is doing exactly what he wants to do (and indeed profiting from it). GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:26, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- Being competent at gaming the system does not equate to being competent at governance. Trump is demonstrably incompetent at the latter, but he is a master at the former. Antares (talk) 19:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- I think that Karma's list proves something important that I'm not sure I've said before: many of these people, including Trump himself, aren't stupid, or at least not as stupid as some people here seem to think. Evil, perhaps, but they can be dangerous and smart at the same time. Just because they support ideas that don't seem to work for the vast majority of the population doesn't mean that they are Disney villains. They are perfectly rational agents seeking their well-being at the expense of the tax payer. One may argue that this is truth to most politicians since Cincinnatus, but very few were as as successful as Trump in what is, at least in theory, a democratic country with an educated population, and I'm sick of pretending that the Hanlon's razor is some form of universal rule. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 19:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- You could probably re-format it as an article so itlives longer than this talk page.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
- As for whether Trump is a “competent politician” that would defend on the definition of the latter. If simply getting elected and creating short term financial and legal gains, as well as accruing power, for yourself is “being a politician”, then yes, he has been very competent.
- What Trump has been extremely and unambiguously very competent at, is his personal branding, which is what essentially holds his “odd bedfellows” coalition together and has created the cult like devotion to him personally, which is what keeps the GOP party apparatus and its Congress critters in check (for now, at least). ScepticWombat (talk) 21:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)