For years, Donald Trump has leaned on all-caps social media posts to grab attention online.

His Truth Social feed often reads like a never-ending shouting match. However, that changed after Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) began mocking the president’s style in dozens of posts interspersed among his regular missives.

This has been going on for the better part of a week, and seems to have gotten to Trump’s ego, as his latest Truth Social posts aren’t in his classic all-caps style.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 179 points 1 year ago (44 children)

Mocking Fascists; Making them look foolish and ridiculing them, works. It's even more effective than just holding their feet to flame like Kamala.

This is probably why Jon Stewart is looking at running. Someone like him or Jordan Klepper is the worst case scenario.

  • source
  • hideshow 44 child comments
  • [–] 126 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    The best strategy the democrats had was calling republicans weird, but then it just got cut off as it was gaining traction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 60 points 1 year ago

    It’s been telling seeing how quickly many news sources abandoned any semblance of honesty when their owners tightened up on the reins.

    In the last two years I completely changed which sources I get news from, now I’m paying for more smaller sources and completely avoiding aggregators like Google or Apple news.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Oh no it’s alienating the (mythical and fictional) centrist voters!!! We don’t want to offend the republicans! Let’s stop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago (26 children)

    This is probably why Jon Stewart is looking at running.

    Is he? I thought it was just other people saying he should

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (24 children)

    He explicitly implied he was considering running on Charlemagne's show. Wouldn't mean much for most people but Jon has always aggressively shut down any such suggestion and here he brought it up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (17 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

    Go watch the clip. In the context of Jon Stewart it's weird. He hasn't given the idea serious thought since the rally to restore sanity in ancient times.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Even Jon Stewart cannot defy the rules of logic.

    Either he explicitly said "I am running for president" or he implied it by saying something other than "I am running for president."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    "I'm not saying I'm running for president but I'm not not saying that, if you know what I mean"

    (haven't seen the clip, just postulating)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    That's not explicit. At most, it strongly implies he's running.

    Pretty much whenever someone ends a sentence with "if you know what I mean", they are implying something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    It's not explicitly saying X, it's explicitly implying X. Really being explicit that they're implying the thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You can't explicitly imply something. You can either imply or be explicit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Our understanding of how words work is different and that is ok. We've clearly communicated how we each interpret the phrase, so there's no misunderstanding in this case and we are unlikely to encounter the same phrase together again in the wild.

    edit: root disagreement is that you believe the adverb "explicitly" cannot modify the verb "imply", whereas I believe it can. I doubt either of us will convince the other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    "Explicit" is literally defined as "fully revealed or expressed without vagueness, implication"

    Which makes sense, because "explicit" and "implicit" are antonyms. Do you think that something can "explosively implode"?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    He clearly implied. Leaving no room for confusion or doubt that he implied what he implied.

    The implication was explicit. He’s considering running. No one thinks he was implying he would run for a spot on Sesame Street, or as Chief of Staff, or any other position.

    You don’t think that works well enough, especially in the context of Jon’s relationship with the subject in the past?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    If you must interpret the meaning of his words based on additional context, then he was implying.

    If there is no need for interpretation, then he was being explicit.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    By explicitly implied, you mean he laughed and didn't explicitly deny it when asked, then changed the subject. Also keep in mind he's been asked this question publicly probably once a week for the last 20 years.

    I mean, it's possible. I'll just wait until he actually confirms he's exploring it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It's weird that you're implying you know he's answered the question weekly(going hard with the hyperbole) but have obviously never seen him give said answer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    He's been asked all the time since the George W. Bush administration. Incidentally the comments sections for The Daily Show have been filled with comments about it since their videos were first put on YouTube. Here's a random time he was asked. I found it in 5 seconds.

    https://youtu.be/RQMDZTAQsYE

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Mocking Fascists; Making them look foolish and ridiculing them, works

    I once heard "There's a reason neo-nazis idolize the nazi brother from American History X and not the Nazis in Springtime for Hitler." One takes the neo-nazi ideology seriously and provides counter arguments. The other is making Nazis look lame.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'd rather Stewart continue with his activism. Colbert on the other hand...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Look I can see that comment being made in person, but this is a pretty easily researched question being posed asynchronously.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert

    He was born in Washington, D.C.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment