I believe that Democrats are constitutionally (as in their guts) unable to play the long game. Having said that, sucking up sounds like a great idea, IF you can get Tr*mp’s ear.
I would argue that Jonathan isn’t saying we give him what he wants. He’s saying we convince him he wants some of what we want. As horrible as he is, he’s not Hitler. He’s power hungry and sees Hitler as model of a powerful leader (I just threw up a little bit writing that, but it’s true.) and what we’ve been doing truly hasn’t worked. No one’s saying we should roll over and let him round people up.
I really appreciate this article's contents. Thanks for writing it. I desperately needed a repositioning of perspective and this has given me a modicum of hope.
I forget who you quoted in the article who said that T is highly transactional. That's true for all narcissists. Take a look around yourself and, if you're unfortunate enough to have close relationships with anyone who's transactional, chances are that they're high on the narcissistic spectrum.
It tastes gross, but it makes sense. He is an evil monster though and the people who voted for him seem to like to shove his evilness in other peoples faces. But to Obama’s point, when they go low, we go high.
This one dots the eyes and crosses the tees - do we really want progress or just to defeat the orange clown? I'm in - I'm about protecting those that need it, not my own self-righteous garbage. What good is it to be "right" if everything ends up worse than wrong.
I realize this is off topic, but I don’t know how/where else to ask you a direct question: Aren’t all these people shouting that racism and sexism is the main reason Harris lost (major Venn diagram overlap with the people telling Bernie to STFU) basically admitting that she shouldn’t have been the nominee?
I believe that Democrats are constitutionally (as in their guts) unable to play the long game. Having said that, sucking up sounds like a great idea, IF you can get Tr*mp’s ear.
Just one question:
Did giving Hitler what he wanted ever accomplish anything positive? Putin? Xi? Prince Bonesaw?
I would argue that Jonathan isn’t saying we give him what he wants. He’s saying we convince him he wants some of what we want. As horrible as he is, he’s not Hitler. He’s power hungry and sees Hitler as model of a powerful leader (I just threw up a little bit writing that, but it’s true.) and what we’ve been doing truly hasn’t worked. No one’s saying we should roll over and let him round people up.
I really appreciate this article's contents. Thanks for writing it. I desperately needed a repositioning of perspective and this has given me a modicum of hope.
I forget who you quoted in the article who said that T is highly transactional. That's true for all narcissists. Take a look around yourself and, if you're unfortunate enough to have close relationships with anyone who's transactional, chances are that they're high on the narcissistic spectrum.
It tastes gross, but it makes sense. He is an evil monster though and the people who voted for him seem to like to shove his evilness in other peoples faces. But to Obama’s point, when they go low, we go high.
This one dots the eyes and crosses the tees - do we really want progress or just to defeat the orange clown? I'm in - I'm about protecting those that need it, not my own self-righteous garbage. What good is it to be "right" if everything ends up worse than wrong.
My thought, too.
I realize this is off topic, but I don’t know how/where else to ask you a direct question: Aren’t all these people shouting that racism and sexism is the main reason Harris lost (major Venn diagram overlap with the people telling Bernie to STFU) basically admitting that she shouldn’t have been the nominee?