So we must conclude that they support this behaviour. Kinda weird considering his audience is super conservative especially on sexual topics.
But I've given up trying to understand it. I'm just glad I don't live in the US.
Based on how intensely they despised the thought of voting dem, I got the feeling the republican candidate could literally have been Satan and they'd still vote rep.
I too gave up trying to understand.
Right after the 9/11 attacks, one of the TV channels here started sending Fox News during the night (previously they had no 24/7 programming).
This was the first chance I got to really watch US news for more than a few minutes at a time, and the experience was quite eye-opening.
From what I can gather, it's way worse these days.
Still, no, I just won't understand why anyone "in the land of the free" would vote for someone so blatantly against freedom.
I've tried to 'disarm' this in some of my ex-friends with actual facts to show that they've been duped into many of their sources of anger. But it's like they don't want to know. Like you say, they want to hold on to it.
I don't see them anymore because I can't deal with that negativity.
Democrats are really bad at appealing to their base. During the election, they attempted to flank Trump from the right on several conservative talking points like immigration and the Israel-Palestine conflict, while promising their base mostly "fundamentally nothing will change" vibes.
We're hoping this leads to the collapse of the democrat party into a new party (both parties currently represent billionaire elites), but I suppose the Democrat party can remain irrational longer than you can remain unrepresented.
Everyone who said "Democrats want to trans our kids" got their information from right wing information sources, and they did it willingly and purposely, and EXCLUDED OR IGNORED any source that tried to carry the actual left wing message.
What the hell counter-party to this system do you think could possibly rise out of the ashes? Any counter to the republicans has to contend with the same effect of a population that willingly and purposely opt in to a propaganda outlet?
Fox News lost viewership after they said the 2020 election wasn't stolen!
My brother, who agreed the 2020 election wasn't stolen, still spends his time in right wing information spheres and still votes for republicans. "For guns" he says, but no democrat has ever done anything to his guns and our supposedly liberal state enacted constitutional carry. He still wants to shoot all democrats.
Hell, my most right wing uncle who consistently posts hateful anti-women memes on facebook (to the point that the rest of my conservative family members who mostly agree with "women are lesser" in practice still thought he was problematic!) insisted that he wished Trump would get the fuck off twitter. You can bet he reads all of trump's tweets.
There is ample study that shows that people who vote republican will APPROVE of a progressive ideology right up until you tell them a democrat wants it.
I’m confused as ever, but republicans love Trump.
/s (just in case...)
I agree we should be honest about politician's warts, and I'll even go so far as to say that some things go too far, and should be impeachable.
"If you are famous, they let you grab them by the pussy."
Which may still raise eyebrows, but is a whole lot different from an instruction/suggestion to "Grab them by the pussy!" The above is just locker room talk which probably 90% of American men have participated in.
But go ahead, this kind of distortion and power games is exactly what got Trump elected in the first place. I'm not even entirely happy about him winning, but as you demonstrate, the alternative might have been worse.
If that's the case then you have far worse issues than your president.
>Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
>Bush: Whatever you want.
>Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.
The mental gymnastics required to believe this is ok.
I've found that sort of talk is vanishingly rare. It probably depends on what your particular social circle is like, though.
Nope. Do you know what we did in the locker room? Mostly dick helicopters. Locker rooms filled with men are hilariously homoerotic. The only people who brag about how much pussy they get are exclusively losers and sad people with no identity other than "I must seem cool to other men", which is hilarious again, because healthy, well adjusted men see right through that horse shit. Sometimes they have a gaggle of lonely losers who look up to them as if getting pussy would somehow fix their lives that are miserable for entirely different reasons. I once thought the same.
When I was 14. And pathetically sad from all sorts of problems and maladjustments. I got better, though I had to learn some things the hard way and that brought me immense suffering and involved me hurting someone I insisted I cared deeply about.
Dick helicopters are hilarious though and I would vote for a president who made dick helicopters in the locker room.
Yes!!
Now, to qualify, I don't mean all Trump voters voted for this, or would align themselves with other individual things, say, stopping the development of an oral covid vaccine, or pardoning violent criminals and international dark web drug kingpins, or giving a billionaire essentially unfettered control over the federal government (and then pretending someone else is in charge when called on it).
I don't even mean that the reasons people vote for people are individual (though of course they are).
What I mean is, the promises the Trump campaign made were highly segmented and targeted, in ways that are not obvious from a national or international media perspective because that media perspective was dominated by what Trump says. And Trump voters don't listen to the words, they listen for the tone -- the shared anger and the feeling of being heard.
For example, Latinx voters were sold a very different, more nuanced picture of immigration reform through outreach than the national picture. Muslims in Dearborn will have seen voter suppression efforts if not outright claims that Trump would get a better deal in Israel. Clearly libertarians believed, with some justification, that they'd get RFK Jr (a priapic lunatic) in charge of healthcare and they'd get Ross Ulbricht (a man who is credibly accused of having purchased a murder) pardoned.
I strongly suspect that if you dig through the outreach they made to the young-manosphere on social media, on Tiktok etc., you will see ways they presented themselves as sympathetic to the Tates' plight that will make this look like acting on a hinted, if not explicitly stated, promise. Someone will have said "we're going to strongly look into that".
Now, I am not going to pretend I think Trump is good for anyone. He's not. And I am not an American.
But I think the Democrats need to understand something important: they spent all that time laughing at the hamfistedness of Elon Musk's wasteful ground game, which probably was useless and counterproductive, and they ignored how effective, organised, and segmented weird little Charlie Kirk's ground game was.
It's clearly one of the greatest successes in campaigning history: they sold a crooked, bullying, manipulated, intellectually ignorant felon to an electorate and won.
Do I think first-time-voting and angry divorced twenty-and-thirtysomething men were targeted by a campaign that spoke to them in Andrew Tate's language and suggested he was being unfairly treated? Fuck yes.
(Posting throwaway because I no longer have an account)
Perhaps then other politicians should think about what they will offer that demographic other than "you're the scapegoat."
Trump at least threw a couple scraps of pardons, even if he is a lying evil bastard or whatever the long form of that is. You've got to do something to get votes.
And I agree, they did not. They ran a late, modified, campaign that deep-down assumed enough people were "post-Trump" that it was inevitable.
Trump ran a campaign knowing what Trump knows personally: people can be manipulated with needful things.
I guess they thought "not having a candidate who would destroy the country" was enough of a thing to get votes. But it wasn't, so here we are with a president who's destroying the country.
They literally are the problem. Women don't like them because, surprise surprise, angry young men don't have much to offer.
These angry young men are lonely because they refuse to see themselves as the problem. They make a pass at one or two girls and get mildly rejected and utterly reject modern reality, instead of doing what their grandparents did which was usually try again, or try someone else, or just otherwise persist in attempting to be valuable to women in general. There are plenty of women who actually want the tradwife lifestyle, where they stay at home and raise a family like it's 1940.
But even those women don't want to be abused, or manipulated, or treated like a lesser person because they don't bring home a paycheck, or get refused basic medical rights because some old white guys can't read the bible and just listen to whatever their asshole pastor with no formal training says on Sunday.
People keep saying the democrats should offer these people something they want, but what they want (as evidenced from voting for trump) is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and individual freedoms of women. They usually want a world in which they are valuable just by virtue of being men, which they believe the past held, but they completely ignore the blunt reality that in the past, men like them just died alone and sad.
There is less sex and drugs and rock and roll nowadays because people socialize less in general, thanks to social media scratching the same itch and preventing people from being forced to go out and touch grass and meet strangers to fulfill that basic biological need.
Instead, these lonely men blame the liberalization of women, and some imaginary "feminist" movement that wants to harm men, actively. Zero sum thinking.
Democrats cannot offer them what they want, because what they want is lies.
In the old days we'd have described Rick Grenell as "openly gay" -- a term people very justifiably think should be left in the old days that described people, usually men, who adopted any position beyond simply not lying to anyone. Nowadays this is what we expect for any gay person: they should not have to lie to anyone, or adopt any particular position of downplaying their identity.
But in Trump world I think it probably has some meaning and currency: Grenell is an openly-gay Trumpist.
It must really upset Tate that this man is being sent to save him.
Because Tate is a throwback: he is not fond of the openly gay. (Emphasis yours.)
interesting perspective; I hadn't really thought about the MAGA being more concerned with Trump's tone than his actual words. Makes a lot of sense.
Trump's incoherent misdeeds of this past month are just the beginning. Without wholehearted and unyielding opposition to more of this, Trump will push us all into depths of slime never before imagined in America.
It's amazing to me he wasn't arrested in the US before he ever left for Romania.