Harris Trump debate

[Swammerdami]

Could you provide the definition of "fawn" and "fawning" you are using?
I think you're exaggerating but I'm not up on all the latest internet slang.

Perhaps slight hyperbole, but not by much. The descriptions of her by posters like you and Rhea very very positive, praising her as "talented" and a "deft businesswoman" among other compliments.

My God! A woman who is obviously unusually talented as a song-writer, creative producer, etc. was called "talented"??
Many performers are better singers, better dancers and prettier, but Miss Swift makes up for her lacks with her special skills of song-writing, choreography, showmanship, and her magnificent demeanor and good-spirited personality. A truly inspirational woman.

The same woman, good enough businesswoman to be a self-made billionaire was accused of being a "deft businesswoman"??

And there were "other compliments" as well?? The horror! The horror!!

I suppose Derec's go-to example of talented performer is the "star" with the scripted reality show who liked to repeat "You're fired!"

Derec's musings require a double-click to view, but I wasted the click to see what all this fuss was about. His misogyny is so predictable: Does he get his learnings from an Incel board? He hates on Kamala Harris, hates on Nancy Pelosi and now hates on . . . Taylor Swift!

I suppose he holds up Miriam Adelson as a shining example of what a woman should be.

 

[Arctish]

Could you provide the definition of "fawn" and "fawning" you are using?
I think you're exaggerating but I'm not up on all the latest internet slang.

Perhaps slight hyperbole, but not by much. The descriptions of her by posters like you and Rhea very very positive, praising her as "talented" and a "deft businesswoman" among other compliments.

I haven't posted anything about her, but I do recognize that she's talented and I have read enough reports of her business savvy to believe "deft businesswoman" is an accurate description. Heck, even a top lawyer in the music industry speaking at an event at Harvard said she singlehandedly shifted copyright considerations when she took direct action to regain control of her music catalogue.

 

[jonatha]

I am against things like wealth taxes or taxing unrealized capital gains. Those ideas are not well thought out.

I agree. Taxation of unrealized capital gains in particular would be a bureaucratic nightmare.

I do wonder if taxation of amounts received for hypothecating shares (perhaps after first using such amounts to reduce the owner's basis to zero) could be implemented via Executive Order...

 

[Henry-Finland]

Germany just smacked the orange one good!

Trump receives brutal mockery from the German government over false debate claim

Germany’s Foreign Ministry took the time to publicly correct one of Trump’s false claim at the debate, while also mocking him over his racist lie about Haitian immigrants eating pets.

www.msnbc.com

Germany did not (as orangey claimed in the debate) slow down on green energy.

They are pretty committed to "renewable energy" even when they make little sense. For example, they do not get that much sunlight in Germany.

As the article admits, Germany had to increase coal consumption because of the Ukraine war. What the article does not mention is the other reason Germany has to rely on coal more than necessary - their boneheaded decision to shut down nuclear power plants.
Note also that US fracked gas was crucial to supplying our European allies. And that Kamala wanted to ban this technology.

As often, Trump finds himself in the neighborhood of a good point, but can't quite find his way there.

Just like Kamala said, the world leaders laugh at him.

When it comes to mismanaging energy, Olaf Scholz is pretty risible himself.

The sources of presented evidence are very one-sided.

• Solar energy is profitable with current technology even as far north as Northern Finland.
• Solar and wind energy have a significant share in Germany.
  
  ChatGTP gives:

In recent years, both wind and solar energy have grown significantly in Germany, making up a substantial portion of the country's energy mix.

• Wind Energy: As of 2024, wind energy contributes roughly 26-28% of Germany's total electricity consumption. Wind power has experienced steady growth, with new installations in early 2024 showing a 46% increase compared to the previous year. The country now has around 58.5 GW of wind energy capacity, mostly in the north, and is on track to reach 115 GW by 2030.
  
  
• Solar Energy: Solar power accounts for approximately 11-13% of Germany's electricity consumption. In 2023 alone, over 1 million new solar installations were added, increasing solar capacity by 85% from the previous year. This rapid expansion is key to meeting the government's target for 2030.

Overall, renewable energy, including both wind and solar, now generates over 50% of Germany's electricity, with significant growth in both sectors expected to continue.

 

[Henry-Finland]

To be fair, most of the damage was self-inflicted.

True. Kamala is being praised as a sharpshooter when the other guy just shot himself in the foot while cleaning his musket.

She ably set him up but he took the bait because he’s a sociopathic narcissistic with no impulse control. Everyone on his side was warning him not to do it but he couldn’t help himself.

Yes, he is sick.

 

[bilby]

A handful of people do not possess most of the money in in the US.

There's only one of me, and I assuredly do not posess most of the money in the US.

 

[bilby]

Overall, renewable energy, including both wind and solar, now generates over 50% of Germany's electricity, with significant growth in both sectors expected to continue.

Does it, though?

Or does it sometimes generate over 100%, with the excess being exported, and often generate next to nothing, with the shortfall being imported?

Germany can make these grandiose claims about how "green" it is, only because a) It is surrounded by countries that have far smaller installed capacities of wind and solar power; b) Because it sells cheap electricity, and buys expensive electricity from its neighbours; and c) Because it ignores the carbon footprint of the expensive imported electricity, because the carbon isn't released into the atmosphere inside Germany's borders.

If Poland, France, and Czechia were to try to emulate German energy policy, the lights would go out across Europe, (and we should not see them lit again in our lifetime...).

Germany has a grid powered by French and Czech nuclear power, and by Polish German and Czech coal power; and made more expensive by the stupid and utterly failed policy of energiewende.

And every so often, they make a stupid excess of wind and/or solar power, and have to pay their neighbours to take it off their hands.

We need low carbon emissions, not daft political games that look, to the untrained eye, like progress towards low carbon emmissions, but which never actually deliver them in any consistent fashion.

France has low carbon emissions from her electricity grid. Germany has only platitudes, promises, and loads of greenhouse gasses.



If I had a magical cow, that produced six month's supply of milk in a day, and then I had to give most of that milk away to my neighbours so it didn't spoil; And then I had to buy hugely expensive milk from the shop for fifty one weeks of the year, could I honestly say that my cow produced fifty percent of my milk consumption for the year?

 

[Bronzeage]

The idea that there were men in the world who could not find a woman, or whatever, to have sex with them, sounded like the pilot for a bad sitcom.

Why? It's not that easy for many men. Women generally can get laid if they want, but men face a much more difficult time with casual sex. On hookup aps like Tinder there is a marked discrepancy in how easy it is for women to get a reply vs. how difficult it is for men who are not in the top 10-20% of attractiveness.

I later learned it was actually whining raised to the level of a Zen art form.

Pointing out difficulties many men face is not "whining". It also illustrates why legal and destigmatized sex work is important for a society.

As I have told you before, if good advice and good example could solve a person's problems, the world would be a perfect place.

Anyone can generally get laid, if they lower their standard of acceptable partner enough. This is true for women and men. Whatever anecdotal data you have gathered on Tinder, if women chose a sexual partner based on his looks, humans would have gone extinct a long time ago.

And, yes. It's still whining.

 

[Bronzeage]

One critical difference between Swifties and INCELS is, INCELS can't reproduce, so they must recruit, while a Swiftie just looked at a man and thought, "He might not be Mr. Right, but he's Mr. Right Now."

And this "Swiftie" wants to get impregnated by this one night stand?
Is she in the room with you now?

Actually, yes. Although she is past breeding age and this is a 12,410 night stand.

 

[Elixir]

Yes, he is sick.

That’s harsh. What god gave Trump in coin, he took away in brains.
It’s really stupid to fault Harris for highlighting that fact for the benefit of the American electorate. Even Trumpsuckers will be better off for it if Harris beats him in the election as badly as she beat him in the debate.

 

[Toni]

Not only that but if only a handful of people possess most of the wealth, who will buy their products??

Bezos has no problem selling his products to most Americans. And most of those are far more affordable and useful than a ticket for the Eras tour.
Musk's products are more exclusive, but even so many people can afford at least the cheaper Teslas.

A handful of people do not possess most of the money in in the US.

It's ok if you don't like Taylor Swift but millions and millions of people do, many of whom are young women. If you considered just why young women and sometimes their parents are so willing to shell out so much money to see Taylor Swift, you might learn something.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

LoL, me pointing out that she is, in fact, a billionaire based on sales, is a fact, not a love letter.

You did more than that.

She has managed to take over a billion dollars into her pocket from people who like what she is selling.

So did Musk. So did Bezos.

Why would you want to introduce the hyperbole, the inaccuracy, of saying my description of her value to the democratic party strategists equals “fawning”?

Because of the uncritically positive portrayal of her in your post.

Fact: Her audience is a valuable demographic. And there are a lot of them. Dem strategists would be fools to miss that fact.

And yet Dem strategists do not see my demographic as "valuable".

What you are mistaking is that while Democrats push to turn out minority vote, because the +/- is huge, they scrape and scrap for every suburban (white) vote possible. In a sense, the most valuable votes are in the suburbs. The rural areas are conservative, the urban areas are liberal. Both parties, especially Trump regarding rural areas push hard for turnout in those areas. But both parties fight to death for the suburban vote because that is where elections are generally won and lost. To suggest Democrats don't care about white votes is brazenly ignorant.

You keep telling yourself that you want to believe a thing without checking it. Go right ahead.

Do you have a citation that "vast majority" of Swifties are 18-34 or not?

Swift has been around for over a decade. So I'd expect at least half of her fans to be of legal voting age.

Is it a personal attack to suppose that you might not value women for the value they bring - in an exchange where you are disparaging the nvalue a woman brings?

I am criticizing the uncritical portrayal of Taylor Swift by Democrats.

We aren't voting for Swift.

And I am contrasting it with the negative portrayal of most other billionaires. Elon Musk - "it was all luck, he played no role in the success of Tesla and Space X, he should be taxed heavily, he should not get to have a spaceship". Taylor Swift "talented and deft businesswoman, wasn't it great she flew from Tokyo to Las Vegas?".

You might need to take a step back and recognize that these two people are generally being judged by what they say and how they say it, not who they are. Also, I don't think Democrats are suggesting taxing Billionaires... except Taylor Swift. Wanna talk fawning?

Spoiler

People bought this ugly thing because Musk said to.

You keep using this word. You are not using it like the rest of the english-speakers use it.
Fawning is Mitch McConnel saying he supports Trump. Fawning is Elise Stefanik going to Mar-a-Lago.

How are these more "fawning" that excessive praise you Dems have for Swift?

Again with this nonsense. Taylor Swift fans might "fawn" over Taylor Swift, but Democrats in general aren't. No one in this forum is now supporting Harris because Swift suggested doing so. Some people in this forum are happy that she might aid in increasing turnout among a generally unreliable age group. In close states, 1 or 2% higher female turnout could mean the difference or help provide enough of a narrative that Trump can't try and steal an election again.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The “concept of a plan” should be a new meme. Imagine how this would have worked out historically:

“General Eisenhower, do you have a plan for the D-Day invasion of Europe?”

“No, but I have the concept of a plan!”

Saw a comment that said "gonna tell my boss I have a concept of a plan and see how that lands".

 

[laughing dog]

I certainly hope Ms Harris frequently wonders out loud how a nan who is afraid to debate his opponent can handle dealing with unfriendly world leaders.

 

[laughing dog]

How are these more "fawning" that excessive praise you Dems have for Swift?

“you Dems” is something I’d expect from a Trump fan.

 

[laughing dog]

[
To suggest Democrats don't care about white votes is brazenly ignorant.

In fact, there ate posters who would call such a suggestion “racist” while taking umbrage at such behavior.

 

[pood]

The “concept of a plan” should be a new meme. Imagine how this would have worked out historically:

“General Eisenhower, do you have a plan for the D-Day invasion of Europe?”

“No, but I have the concept of a plan!”

Saw a comment that said "gonna tell my boss I have a concept of a plan and see how that lands".

“I have the concepts of a plan.”

 

[Toni]

LoL, me pointing out that she is, in fact, a billionaire based on sales, is a fact, not a love letter.

You did more than that.

She has managed to take over a billion dollars into her pocket from people who like what she is selling.

So did Musk. So did Bezos.

Why would you want to introduce the hyperbole, the inaccuracy, of saying my description of her value to the democratic party strategists equals “fawning”?

Because of the uncritically positive portrayal of her in your post.

Fact: Her audience is a valuable demographic. And there are a lot of them. Dem strategists would be fools to miss that fact.

And yet Dem strategists do not see my demographic as "valuable".

You keep telling yourself that you want to believe a thing without checking it. Go right ahead.

Do you have a citation that "vast majority" of Swifties are 18-34 or not?

Is it a personal attack to suppose that you might not value women for the value they bring - in an exchange where you are disparaging the nvalue a woman brings?

I am criticizing the uncritical portrayal of Taylor Swift by Democrats. And I am contrasting it with the negative portrayal of most other billionaires. Elon Musk - "it was all luck, he played no role in the success of Tesla and Space X, he should be taxed heavily, he should not get to have a spaceship". Taylor Swift "talented and deft businesswoman, wasn't it great she flew from Tokyo to Las Vegas?".

You keep using this word. You are not using it like the rest of the english-speakers use it.
Fawning is Mitch McConnel saying he supports Trump. Fawning is Elise Stefanik going to Mar-a-Lago.

How are these more "fawning" that excessive praise you Dems have for Swift?

Honestly Derec, you should consider why mostly young women love Taylor Swift. You talk about feeling as though Democrats do not care about 'your demographic' (I am not certain what demographic that you mean, tbh. Clarification?) Let me give you a clue: 1. Taylor Swift writes and performs music that many young women can relate to. I find her music to not be my particular taste but she just won a bunch of awards so I have to recognize that my music tastes are not what is now mainstream. Which is fine by me. I think her tickets are obscenely expensive and do not understand how her demographic affords them, including my nieces and their friends who adore Swift.

That Taylor Swift demographic: young women have been left out of political consideration by the GOP for decades, really, forever. The current GOP candidates for (pick an office but let's start with POTUS/VP) tell young women that they are only valuable for their ability to produce and raise infants, that their bodies are under the control of the government and that they should not hold office, have jobs outside the home or do anything aside from raise their husband's children. Indeed, POP culture has largely left women out altogether, except as accessories and victims and of course, prostitutes. It has only been very recently when my local movie multiplex has shown more than one, and often, zero films with female cast members as anything other than background, if at all. Men lost their minds over the Barbie movie, and the re-boot of Ghostbusters with a mostly female cast. There are whole genres of music that feature heavily misogynistic lyrics, often quite popular with young men or just men.

Turns out that there is a market for female singers who appeal to young women, as Swift and Beyonce well know.

Not only that but Swift famously gave everyone on her crew for her ERAS tour, to the tune of $55M, including $100K to each of the truck drivers. Compare and contrast how Amazon workers are reportedly treated or Musk's employees who are suing for harassment and gender discrimination.

One party uses the music of various artists at its events without getting permission and stops using that particular artist only when they are threatened with a lawsuit before it moves on to the next artist whose music it uses without permission. For some odd reason, they don't just stick with the musical stylings of Kid Rock.

Lots of people are still angry over Hillary's basket full of deplorables comment. I am, as well and she was not talking about me. How many years ago was that? I totally get that. It hurts to be reduced to one disrespectful offhand comment by someone powerful. Women have put up with that for eons. It is not surprising that they turn out in droves to hear people who lift them up instead.

edited to add because I totally forgot: Elon Musk posted a rather creepy post about Taylor Swift on twitter:

Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life,

Which may have been an attempt at humor but trust me, is very, very creepy.

 

[Elixir]

Swift makes up for her lacks with her special skills of song-writing, choreography, showmanship, and her magnificent demeanor and good-spirited personality. A truly inspirational woman.

NO FAWNING!!!


I was going to post my opinion that Bonnie Raitt, Linda Ronstadt, Carol King and even Stevie Nicks are “better” musicians than Swift, but Swift’s showmanship and business acumen are next level.
Decided not to because I didn’t want to be accused of FAWNING. (I was a little jealous when someone I knew was dating Stevie Nicks*).
OH SHIT. Now I’ve fawned. I hope the gods forgive me.

* an overweight 5’9” unremarkable looking guy. Try harder, Derec. It’s probably not your superficial self that turns them off.

 

[pood]

More great memes.