Donald, You Ignorant Slut

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Donald, You Ignorant Slut

EW YORK—All over America IKEA futons are groaning with the restless insomnia of journalists—tossing, turning, cursing the impotence of their melatonin capsules—burdened with the future of the Republic. Long nights of torment, and then . . .

Morning resolve! Before they’ve even microwaved their second Jimmy Dean Sausage Sandwich, they know that this will be the day of reckoning. They will fire up the Kia Sedona and take the long way to work, giving them more time to think about the epic 1,500 words that will make the difference between chaos and civilization.

Yes, they tell their wives, It’s time for my “Donald Trump is a Dickwad” column.

Let me make it clear here that I’m not talking about lesbian-rights vegans who organize fair-trade coffee boycotts at Maxwell House and agitate for medical marijuana in The Nation. Nor am I thinking of tweed-jacketed professors of sociology at Montana State submitting articles to the Journal of Spanish-American Diacritical Marks. Think-tank analysts at the Institute for Pan-Arab Non-Alignment are most certainly churning out white papers on why Donald Trump is a dangerous threat to the Maghreb treaty on fish hatcheries, but I’m not discussing them either. I’m not talking about intellectuals or activists or experts.

No. I’m talking about the guy who enrolled at McNeese State in the nineties and fell into deep reverence for Professor Rusty Naugahyde, the legendary teacher whose Newswriting 312 workshop was almost as inspirational as Lou “The News Is Sacred” Grant on The Mary Tyler Moore Show. Our starry-eyed undergraduate buys a safari jacket, takes an oath of objectivity and resolves never to be a member of a political party. After that it takes years of struggle to become the lead Metro columnist at the Lotus Tree, Kansas, Daily Arapaho, days spent chronicling the brutal fights over county bond issues needed to repair the Lost Frenchman Bridge. But now that he’s a 32nd-degree Mason and chairman of the Little League committee on maintenance and parking, he knows that it’s his responsibility, and his privilege, to tell the people of Lotus Tree that Donald Trump is a narcissistic disagreeable soulless callous rude arrogant authoritarian vicious egotistical vulgar braggart and megalomaniac, possibly a lunatic, definitely a psychopath, perhaps a fascist.

Donald does have an odd effect on journalists.

But let’s cut to the chase and look at what I’m calling the Big Eight. Of all the words used by the press to describe Donald Trump, the million-hit wonders are these:

bully 1.4 million
self-obsessed 2.5 million
vicious 9.1 million
rude 13.3 million
cruel 13.3 million
liar 16.2 million
angry 19.3 million
And the winner—drum roll, please:
idiot 20.5 million

Notice that five of the eight are internal attributes, only one can be fact-checked, and the most popular epithet of them all is the last refuge of sputtering incoherent rage. It’s reminiscent of the old Saturday Night Live routine, with Dan Aykroyd responding to anything Jane Curtin said with, “Jane, you ignorant slut.”

Ladies and gentlemen, most unjournalistic.

Some interesting questions follow later about who they think is the voter instead of who actually is the voter. Do journalists go out and look up anything anymore?

Here's something Democrats might want to remember - you're more likely to defeat him if you find out why people support him instead of decide why people support him.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

sputtering incoherent rage

Maybe you should find out why people dislike him? It shouldn't be that difficult.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

That's the easy part. Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

The hard part is when the people who don't like him try to understand the people who do like him.

 

[barbos]

That's the easy part. Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

The hard part is when the people who don't like him try to understand the people who do like him.

There is not much to understand about them. they are idiots like Trump.

 

[Angry Floof]

We know why people support him, and it's not the Muslim-terrorist-behind-every-lamp-post, Mexicans-are-rapists, Obama's-takin-r-gunz fear fantasy story in their heads.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

So you like his idiocy and racism, but you don't like his authoritarianism??? Why is that so mutually exclusive to you?

 

[laughing dog]

Here's something Democrats might want to remember - you're more likely to defeat him if you find out why people support him instead of decide why people support him.

What make you think the Democrats are not trying to find out why people support him? The media is not the Democratic Party.

 

[Ford]

The media is not the Democratic Party.

That's not what the right wing media tell me.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

That's the easy part. Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

The hard part is when the people who don't like him try to understand the people who do like him.

There is not much to understand about them. they are idiots like Trump.

You know, calling people "idiots" is really going to change their mind.

Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

So you like his idiocy and racism, but you don't like his authoritarianism??? Why is that so mutually exclusive to you?

Since I am not a Democrat I do not have to say "Squawk Republicans are Racist Squawk Polly Want A cracker Squawk" every third post.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I think people support Trump because they share his xenophobic tendencies and his lack of intellectual curiosity. It's not that they've decided they like him for these two things but rather that they perceive a kindred spirit, someone willing to express unabashedly their same feelings.

Is that about it?

 

[Frikki]

There is not much to understand about them. they are idiots like Trump.

You know, calling people "idiots" is really going to change their mind.

But they really are mostly idiots. They really are stupid, racist, impotent, shitcocks.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

There is not much to understand about them. they are idiots like Trump.

You know, calling people "idiots" is really going to change their mind.

Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

So you like his idiocy and racism, but you don't like his authoritarianism??? Why is that so mutually exclusive to you?

Since I am not a Democrat I do not have to say "Squawk Republicans are Racist Squawk Polly Want A cracker Squawk" every third post.

You didn't answer the question:

So you like his idiocy and racism, but you don't like his authoritarianism??? Why is that so mutually exclusive to you?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

To put it simply, very simply just for you, I do not view that up-until-recently-a-Democrat candidate as racist as you view him.

Since I see less racism there, I have less racism to oppose.

I don't reflexively automatically instinctualy brainlessly regurgitate the label "racist" to every Republican who becomes prominent

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Except that he doesn't like Mexican judges.

 

[laughing dog]

I don't reflexively automatically instinctualy brainlessly regurgitate the label "racist" to every Republican who becomes prominent

Not every Republican who becomes prominent does so by
1) calling Mexicans murderers and rapists (except for the few good ones), and
2) calling for the removal of a US judge in a lawsuit because he is Mexican (which he was not), and
3) calling to stop the entry of all Muslims (even vetted ones).

Trump said those bigoted things.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Trump is just saying that if you're a white judge you should recuse yourself if the case is about something having to do with white people and people of color because clearly you might be biased.

So that means if you're a black judge you can only preside over cases involving only black people. Red judges for red people, yellow judges for yellow people, irish judges for irish people, etc.

In cases where more than one group of people is involved you need judges of equally mixed ancestry to guarantee impartiality.

What's so hard to understand? Why would anyone call that racism?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

To put it simply, very simply just for you, I do not view that up-until-recently-a-Democrat candidate as racist as you view him.

Since I see less racism there, I have less racism to oppose.

I don't reflexively automatically instinctualy brainlessly regurgitate the label "racist" to every Republican who becomes prominent

Me either, but in the case of Trump he is clearly xenophobic and racist. No he's not a member of the clan, but he's got his at about the described level. So, again, and this time without the insults, why won't you oppose Trump for all of his racism, xenophobia, authoritarianism, and idiocy? According to you, you only oppose one thing about him...

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I did not write "only oppose one thing about him." You're making assumptions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A million hits? That's YUGE!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I did not write "only oppose one thing about him." You're making assumptions.

No, you are the one who made assumptions:

Of course the reason I dislike him doesn't match the reason most in this forum don't like him.

See, you claimed you only had one reason and then claimed that most in the forum only had one reason as well and that they didn't match. Now I've really given you a beating for making stuff up about people in the forum so take your medicine and answer the question.