I wonder if this is how wine was invented.
1 Like
I’m sure the purpose is the same-- dudes trying to get laid-- but the mechanism here is opaque.
1 Like
huh I thought his comments about supporting BLM etc would tank his popularity on the right. I know they were in a rage after his interview but short memories I guess.
Someone in his right wing coaching orbit probably took him to the side and told him to stop saying that.
As long as Kyle doesn’t bring it up again, it’ll be forgotten.
Nah, deplorables have no problem with insincere “support” for black people. Some of their best friends are black!
5 Likes
Fake support for black people is fine but they consider BLM a terrorist anti white organization.
The right was enraged after that interview calling him a traitor and shit all over the internet.
1 Like
I don’t doubt it. If push comes to shove, they’ll invent a fantasy that he was forced to say that by traitorous RINOs etc. etc. I think in the post reality political world we live in people aren’t really sunk by one thing they say, there’s always going to be some hive mind calculus going on to determine which people are assets and which are liabilities, and then they’ll contrive whatever fantasies they need accordingly. I think stuff like a little burst of anti-Rittenhouse outrage that comes and goes is just the hive mind testing itself out and calibrating. When the outrage doesn’t “catch” and achieve critical mass, they realize that collectively they are better off maintaining him as a hero and they’ll just forget all about it.
3 Likes
It’s wild how normalized this kind of thing has become:
https://twitter.com/noraneus/status/1473274287939325953?s=21
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1473039073535213570
here’s the clip
https://twitter.com/existentialfish/status/1473315357377146885
Damn that’s wild even for a piece of shit like him
At least some of this insanity is being punished, but not as much as needed. In my mind, Trump directly encouraged this type of behavior, and supporting Trump means you support these types of threats. So I think the rank-and-file Trumpkin needs to be called out for this shit. Throw this evidence into their faces and ask them why they support it.
1 Like
The researchers found that toddlers who viewed the fair outcome spent significantly more time gazing at the interaction. This observation — which developmental psychologists widely accept to indicate surprise — suggested that the children didn’t quite expect someone who acted as a bully to make fair decisions in a different context. The finding indicates that children judge others from a holistic perspective of what being moral really means. In their view, a single action that is at odds with one aspect of a “good” representation implies that the individual should be expected to violate other moral principles.
But there’s a catch — it turns out that seeing an individual mistreating someone else does not always cause children to expect them to behave immorally in the future. The researchers saw this when they repeated their experiment, except this time the toddlers first witnessed a dog puppet mistreating a rabbit (as opposed to a fellow dog) before watching the dog share out a pair of toys.
While this outcome is not entirely surprising (other studies have documented children expecting others to give their in-group members special treatment), the present study is the first to discover something profound about the way children make their moral judgements, flawed as they might be. That is, the moral principles that children use do not operate in arbitrary isolation. They stem from a core mental representation of what makes someone a moral person. Whether this representation is “hardwired” or amenable to changes through development, experience, and age is an exciting question for future research to address.
GOPers are toddlers basically.
1 Like
Meh, he’s clearly speaking metaphorically. Getting worked up over this as some kind of violent threat is dumb.
I’m not sure if this is sarcasm, but he is speaking in a way that he knows (and maybe even hopes) someone in the cult could take his words literally. And that if they do, he can comfortably claim plausible deniability because, well, he was saying to figuratively or rhetorically kill him, obv!
Added bonus of owning the libs whether someone does or does not act on his words.
1 Like
That dude still supports Trump. If he serves the 3 years he won’t get to vote for him again. What a shame.
Similar to when Palin put a bullseye on a picture of Gabby gifford?
No.
No he isn’t. He’s clearly talking about harassing him with stupid gotcha”facts”
“When do we get to use the [facts]?”
5 Likes