Decoding Trumpism: a cult survivor explains how the GOP became a death cult

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Decoding Trumpism: a cult survivor explains how the GOP became a death cult

«‹›3 »

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

According to some recent research on the authoritarian personality type, it's not usually more common in one group or party vs another, but because authoritarians are so vigorous about policing their own group for purity and so suspicious of outsiders, American authoritarians became increasingly attracted to the Republican party starting in the 60s with the Democratic party's decision to make civil rights a big part of their platform. In turn, the Republican party began responding to the desires of these newly vigorous members and began an open feedback loop that continues to this day. Authoritarians have, according to these authors, moved rapidly since the 80s from a variation in personality type to a voting bloc.

The idea is that authoritarians are usually irrelevant to national or regional politics because there aren't that many of them and because they usually just believe whatever they were raised to believe, but because most of them are racists they have collected together in the Republican party and now have the power to swing it around and make it responsive to their crazy desires and demands. It's another way of understanding why most poor white people used to be all-in for a comprehensive social safety net while now only Democrats have any support at all for one.

It also explains why moderate Republicans can no longer control their own party:

http://www.amazon.com/Authoritarianism-Polarization-American-Politics-Hetherington/dp/052171124X/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

# ¿ Mar 25, 2015 12:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 15:50

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

America is a center-right culture. We don't even have socialists. Anyone with an authoritarian personality type won't find any left ideas to attach to. Authoritarians here go toward the structures that meet their needs, and we don't have any Stalinists or Zapatistas.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2015 19:00

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Is this a young authoritarian MRA?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollyw...ve-Away-America

quote:

I hope character assassinating gamers without regard for collateral damage over the last 2 months was worth it.
Tuesday resulted in several firsts for me. I�d never voted full ticket�not in 20 years of participating in my civic duty. I did on Tuesday. I�ve often considered or voted for third party candidates when at the polls over the last 20 years. Tuesday I did not. Over the past 20 years, I�d spent between 2 and 6 weeks studying candidates and ballot measures to be as informed as possible. This election cycle, I was finished in hours. On this day, I stand before you to say that I did my part to hand the Legislative branch of the American government to the Republicans. Not that one vote matters in the grand scheme of things, but every traditionally Democratic vote that goes Republican is a two vote swing. So the Republicans own the Senate, but not with a �super majority� to completely dictate terms legislatively.
From my new perspective after Tuesday, it�s one down and three to go: Super majority in the Senate, the Presidency, and one Supreme Court justice. I�m disgusted for writing that last sentence.
What choice did I have? It would appear that the DiGRA was right�The Playful is Political. It would also appear that my politics are now a matter of survival for pieces of my identity that I hold dear. It can never be emphasized enough that 10 news outlets on the same day said I was dead or needed to die because of those parts of my identity. Will I forgive? Eventually. Time heals all wounds, after all. Will I forget? Never. The imgur�s will exist forever, as will the archives and screen caps of everything the hypocrites, charlatans, and their willing media puppets said and did to make me question two parts of my identity: gamer and liberal. It is only by force of will and self-determination that I don�t let those people immure me in self-doubt and regret. Right now, there is virtually no price too high for them to pay for what they tried to do to my identity.
There are roughly 730 days until Election Day 2016. The media that drove me away from my political leanings is going to need every one of those days to convince me that bashing gamers from August 28th until Tuesday was just a misunderstanding. They will need every one of those days to convince me that my input into the liberal ideology is valued regardless of my hobbies, support for GamerGate, or my gender. The alternative is to hand both the Legislative and Executive branch of the US Government over to Republicans, and as I found out on Tuesday, it is well within my capability to do so.
Tick tock. Tick tock.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2015 19:15

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

quote:

It's worth noting that Altemeyer's theory of right-wing authoritarianism has not gained any widespread acceptance in academic psychology, or anywhere outside of the American and Canadian left (to my knowledge). I haven't read the book since 2010, but I remember being fairly unimpressed with the methodology. He played it really fast and loose with the evidence from those catastrophe games he runs, and he didn't really seem to reflect, either in his books or the papers I read then, on the fact that his larger theory A) doesn't propose a mechanism or B) make strong testable predictions.

I think he occasionally alludes to it, but it doesn't seem to stop him from making the grand claims, so yeah. Maybe the body of published research on RWA generally is better, but it doesn't seem like it from a quick glance at Scholar or WOS. He's emeritus, so he can write whatever he wants and if it makes sense to you, great, obviously, but I wouldn't put a lot of stock in the theory's scientific merits just because He's A Scientist.

Isn't his mechanism some kind of personality theory? Like, he's saying that some people have related clusters of dispositions and reactions that are common enough to be put onto a continuum? There are recent Pop-sci books by Joshua Green and Jonathan Haidt that say similar things about how personality works without speculating why or how people end up with those traits in the first place.

# ¿ Mar 25, 2015 20:06

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

FourLeaf posted:

So what IS going to happen in the 2016 primaries, when there's an inevitable battle between the Tea Party GOP candidate vs. the establishment GOP candidate (Jeb Bush).

Normally I'd bet that the establishment candidate will get forced through again despite what the base wants, but PJ's said we're building to something especially crazy after the SC gay marriage decision. Can anyone guess what that would look like?

This already happened with McCain and Romney. McCain got booed at one of his own rallies for saying that Obama is a good-hearted man promising to do what he believes is best for America, and that the election was about whose plan for America was actually better.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2015 01:29

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Altemeyer says he's center-right himself, as I recall, and has a forward to at least one edition of his book from John Dean, an American Republican who's terrified of the authoritarians in his party.

Remember that conservatives who score low on his index perform similarly to liberals low on the index. There are few left-authoritarians because no structures exist to cultivate them. Stalinists in the 40s and Larouche Youth today would qualify, as would some 9-11 Truthers.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2015 03:11

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Spazzle posted:

Prester john has posited a set of behaviors and trends, which I'll call X. X includes tiered naratives, radicalization of groups through purging of members, radicalization of members after they switch groups, and the convergence of naratives through political expedience.

Pj has has given examples of X in the context of authoritarian rear end in a top hat groups. I'll call this X + A.

Is only X + A interesting? Is X in general interesting? Is X synonymous with X + A in actual practice even if we can contrive examples where they may be distinct?

If X alone is interesting, I'm positing that a label other than authoritarian should be described. Then we can discuss Authoritarian X and non authoritarian X.

Authoritarian has been the preferred term in the literature to describe these people since the 60s. It's a lot more than just Bob Altemeyer.

# ¿ Mar 26, 2015 17:32

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Any chance that "watchmen on the wall" phrase in particular is an attempt to get some Game of Thrones crossover fans?

# ¿ Mar 28, 2015 20:44

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Hodgepodge posted:

Why do you think middle America was so terrified of school shooters after Columbine?

Most kids like that probably just learn to keep their heads down until they can leave. Or act out in culturally prescribed ways- self-cutting, etc. Some vanish into education programs that make ACE look like a hippy preschool, though.

If you want to know about authoritarian parents and Columbine, read She Said Yes, the biography of Cassie Burnell written by her parents. It repeats the untrue story that she was killed for professing religious belief, but that's at the end. Most of the book is about her parents reading normal adolescent attempts at identity formation as demonic possession. Like, the kid stayed out late and fought with her parents and tried to assert autonomy like any kid, and the parents responded by trying to break her will, pulling her out of school and keeping her away from all her friends and praying for hours every day telling her she was inhabited by a literal evil spirit. And they did it. They got her to cut herself off from all her friends and submit to their will, and they rewarded her by letting her back into school just in time to be murdered. Plus, one effect of this demonic possession was that it made her gay, but prayer fixed it all by driving the demon away.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2015 05:35

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

FAUXTON posted:

Nah, they're not.

He writes about it in Empathy Degree Zero. There's a Baron-Cohen in the same family who is a famous composer as well.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2015 05:38

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Why couldn't Beethoven find his teacher?

Because he was Haydn.

# ¿ Apr 3, 2015 03:20

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:

I am interested in what you did. If you don't want to share it here, you can private message me.

The reason why I ask is because I am involved with one of these Authoritarian types through a group of people trying to stop him from setting up a charter school in their town that uses "classical" education philosophy from Hillsdale College. Hillsdale College is a school that gives children raised in Authoritarian homes an Authoritarian higher education. Ted Cruz is a favorite keynote speaker at their commencement ceremonies, and they a statue of Margaret Thatcher on the campus grounds.

Anyway, the man trying to set up the charter school has already lost his cool in public enough times it's causing people to get arrested because he feels threatened if they're in the same room with him.

FYI this is the college where the last president had an affair with his daughter-in-law for like 20 years, then encouraged her to kill herself when she said she couldn't take the guilt any more. Which she did, in the college arboretum and with a gun from the president's private arsenal.

# ¿ Apr 6, 2015 19:46

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

AtomikKrab posted:

There is a big pedophilia ring scandal going down in England with evidence coming out that at BEST Thatcher knew about it and did nothing during her time in office and perhaps worse than that. I am fairly sure that a lot of inner narratives involve Thatcher to some degree with how she is idolized, so an attack against her could cause a nice big breakdown on their part.

Good news for you from America:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/pedophile-rings-in-thatchers-britain-myth-or-fact/

quote:

Parts of the story are plausible. We know that in that era�roughly, the decade following 1975�several British public figures were indeed involved in outrageous and exploitative sexual misbehavior, including some cases of child abuse and child pornography. One horrific example was Liberal MP Cyril Smith, a 300-pound blimp with a penchant for spanking teenaged boys. Although such cases of sexual malfeasance were well-known to police and media, they were thoroughly hushed up, a process made vastly easier by draconian British libel laws.

The �pedophile ring� rhetoric is, though, misleading. If we look at the known sexual scandals from the politics of this era, they tended not to be �pedophile,� in the sense of involving someone sexually focused on children at or below the age of puberty. The word is thus chosen to maximize seriousness, implying young child victims, compulsive serial offending, and incorrigibility. In fact, the recorded cases commonly involved homosexual men interested in male teenagers or young adults, usually male prostitutes. That does not for a second excuse the behavior, but it does put it in a different category from molesters preying on infants.

# ¿ Apr 6, 2015 21:30

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Xibanya posted:

Sadly in the group to which I refer, there is an accepted "truth," and the pillars are invoked in order to bypass critical thought just as is done on Fox News. I'm not making some "lol" they both do it! argument. You can see that there is a set of proscribed behaviors and actions that must be followed just as much as with gun-toting tea partiers. To be clear I am not talking about activists, I'm talking about those armchair activists who are people looking for something to latch on to. I could provide a bunch of examples but that would derail the thread.

What IS rather fascinating though is the key phrases that this group uses to bypass critical thought are starting to see some play in right-wing authoritarian groups due to cross transfer. It probably shows how effective they are, since they seem to tap something kind of basic or universal. I'm namely speaking of how real phrases developed by non-authoritarians have become circuit phrases by amateur internet activists, then picked up by amateur man activists (not called its standard name for the reason explained in my previous post) who have a lot of cross-pollination with various other right wing authoritarians. This has led me to see Christian fundamentalists using "activist" rhetoric, which would be hilarious if it wasn't depressing. But it's also fascinating to see how they all speak a strange sort of creole in a way.

That sort of appropriation has been going on for some time now. I remember hearing a turd who argued against gay marriage in a philosophy seminar when I was in college talk about "coming out" as a conservative, describing how that was hard knowing that there were people who wouldn't approve of his ideas, without a trace of irony.

But as far as tumbl teens go, aren't they just rigid and zealous because they're kids trying to figure out who they are and what group they belong to? A big part of adolescence is trying on different identities to see how they fit, and part of that is learning the codes of the cultures that go with those identities. They're just as zealous about liking Sherlock or Adventure Time or whatever, and I see no reason to believe that they won't grow out of both of those things by the time they're 20 or so. Didn't you ever have a phase where you got really into jazz or vegetarianism or atheism and became insufferable to everyone?

It's a bit different if you're over 50 and alienating your wife and kids and posting on freep about it.

# ¿ Apr 8, 2015 03:22

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Xibanya posted:

it's leaked out of tumblr, it's not just teens. Tumblr just made it more visible and accessible. As someone who reads a lot of blogs related to feminism it's a bit disconcerting to see what I can now call evocations of PJ's pillars going on in all the comments sections. (And of course radfems have been around quite a long time and they are terrible.)

Actually to steer back on topic and to something that should be dear to anyone who cares for PJ, radfems and rear end in a top hat right wingers actually get along on the topic of trans people. strange bedfellows indeed.

Are you sure they're not teens? Kids have the time and attention to devote to something as meaningless as a talkback fight. I have never been tempted to do so.

# ¿ Apr 8, 2015 03:34

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Xibanya posted:

Why are you having a hard time taking my claim at face value?

holy poo poo that sentence now has like three or four layers of meaning now.

I'm afraid. I don't want to believe it. This new world scares me and I can't keep up.

# ¿ Apr 8, 2015 03:40

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Prester John posted:

Their salvation is their ~~white~~ "natural" DNA, whose principles if everyone just adhered to would bring about harmony.

Anti-vax is actually pretty racist underneath it all, like in how they largely blamed mexicans for causing the outbreak of measles at disneyland. I'd say that it's a movement tied to affluence and its attendant cultures of mommy blogs and parenting social circles than it is anything particularly liberal--it's just that affluent young parents are more likely to be liberal.

# ¿ Apr 8, 2015 22:10

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Yeah, I've never heard "kill all men" or anything similar as anything but an ironic joke designed to infuriate mental infants who think that feminists really think that. It's like the definition of hyperbole in that it both communicates something of the truth of women's negative experiences with men to other women who understand that it's a joke while also getting under the thin skin of narcissistic misogynists who take irony as persecution.

# ¿ Apr 9, 2015 02:53

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Xibanya posted:

I invoked those as shorthand to mention a few non-feminist groups. As for the jokes themselves, I'm not particularly concerned with them as they stand literally, but now that you mention it, they are jokes that serve a function similar to "lol woman make me a sandwich." Not sincerely felt by most, but for some it's something like "ha ha, just kidding (but seriously, gently caress those guys.)"

Oh yeah and PJ already agreed with me so it looks like the person making GBS threads up her framework is you.

"lol woman make me a sandwich" is sincerely felt by the people who say it. Race anger felt by those oppressed by racists is not the same thing as race anger felt by oppressive racists.

# ¿ Apr 9, 2015 02:57

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Xibanya posted:

OK so it was a mistake to literally include the phrases "die cis scum" and "kill whitey," but it's not a mistake that some small fraction of social justice activists have an absurdly large demographic that they consider an enemy that they actually hate. (Example, some self-professed feminists who genuinely hate men and fear that any man will destroy them if given the chance.)

Have you ever heard of a woman so ruled by hatred for men that she dragged one to death from a chain attached to the hitch of her pickup truck, or a gang of women whose hatred for men was so great that they gathered together to beat one to death?

There are certainly women who make some hasty negative generalizations about men, but pretty much all women have to live and work alongside men every day of their lives. I think this probably tempers their negative feelings to some degree in a way that doesn't happen with, say, white racists in segregated communities who go out and kill an arab or a gay person because they feel threatened by the very existence of those people.

Women who hate men generally have some legitimate complaints that have come to relax their critical faculties, while racist scum use completely irrational hatred to give their pathetic lives meaning. It's not the same thing.

If a black person expresses hatred for all white people, what do you think might have caused that hatred? If a white person hates all black people, what do you think might have caused that hatred?

# ¿ Apr 9, 2015 03:16

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Xibanya posted:

Yo, you don't have to tell me, a feminist woman, how women are hosed by men day in and day out.

But I believe that the lack of harm perpetrated by women is not due to any inherent goodness on their part but rather because they are already so disadvantaged, lacking the institutional support that men have.

Arguing that women somehow possess a better nature than men is about as othering as suggesting they have an inferior nature.

Please do not explain feminism 101 to me again.

I don't know. There are for sure no inherent meaningful differences between men and women when it comes to being radicalized generally, or at all as far as I know. I certainly don't think there's any moral difference between the sexes, and I didn't intend to make a moral argument at all.

# ¿ Apr 9, 2015 04:03

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Prester John posted:

This is very close to my own thoughts on the matter. The hypothesis I have been considering as a model for the childhood environment that creates the ideal atmosphere for the development of the behaviour pattern would be an environment in which the child develops ritual like behaviours (either internal or external) as a means of feeling some level of control over the environment they find themselves contending with. This environment would be furthermore:

1.) Abusive in an active form (not simple neglect, but active, if periodic, abuse) of either a physical or nonphysical nature.

2.) Extremely stifling to the childs inward exploration of self. There is a single "correct" idea behind everything, and the importance of having these correct ideas is impressed on the child repeatedly. Not having the "correct" view on something is likely a trigger for abuse from the Parent, so the child associates having this correct view as a sort of ward against the parents abuse. The child tries to mimic what the parent says is correct as much as possible, and when successful, probably is rewarded with a greater degree of protection from the Parent's unpredictable abuse than they otherwise might have. (In addition, even a moderately skilled abuser would eventually contrive to include the view that the abuse/group punishment is justified in amongst these super important "correct" views)

The child then concludes that having these "correct" views on everything is of supreme importance, and in conjunction with never having developed introspection as a result, unmet psychological needs will arise. Having the "correct" view takes on a ritual like importance, "knowing" is in and of itself protection against danger. These needs can be to some extent met by participation in a Grand Narrative. (The level a given individual takes this impetus too will vary widely as well as being influenced by what local Authoritarian groups exist to meet the needs of the Grand Narrative.)

Given then that the behaviour (in children at least, there are other methods via which this behaviour pattern can spread) emerges naturally as a probable (but by no means guaranteed) outcome of a certain type of child abuse in conjunction with the child never being able to freely explore themselves (thus the lack of developed introspection) I feel that this behaviour pattern is inherently a-political. And as has been extensively discussed already in the thread, there is no need for a line by line discussion of the Outer Narrative's of various groups (ideology) as under this model all Outer Narratives are to a large extent conscious lies covering a set of internalized beliefs (Inner Narrative) that, no matter what form they ultimately take, will have certain important common features as a result of the collective unmet psychological needs of Authoritarians. (Grand Narrative)

George Lakoff has some books that get into this. Not child abuse specifically, but how parents' behavior coupled with the metaphors they use to frame and describe the world can end up giving kids specific worldviews.

# ¿ Apr 9, 2015 20:24

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

This argument is ancient. Plato makes it in the Euthyphro.

# ¿ Apr 15, 2015 03:27

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

site posted:

I'm only about a third of the way through, but Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics by Hetherington and Weiler (2009) seems like a good companion to this subject so far.

E: the recommendation that i used to pick it up may actually have come from this thread, i can't remember. sorry if this is a rehash

I have no idea if I said so in this thread, but I am a pretty big fan of it and also think it fits the thread pretty well.

# ¿ Apr 16, 2015 01:47

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Polybius91 posted:

I realize I'm rather late on this, but would Valerie Solanas' assassination attempt on Andy Warhol count? That's the only thing I can think of that could qualify.

She was an unmedicated schizophrenic. That's pretty different from the dynamic that makes otherwise healthy people put on robes and cut people apart with corkscrews.

# ¿ May 24, 2015 06:53

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

The Politics of Denial is also pretty relevant to the question of childhood abuse and later religious fundamentalism and reactionary politics:

http://smile.amazon.com/Politics-De...itics+of+denial

The authors specifically read the birth of the moral majority as a result of 80s republicans using the rhetoric of authoritarian parents in their campaigning in a way that mobilized people carrying around religious abuse from childhood:

quote:

Anger and resentment appear to be playing an increasingly important role in politics, as evidenced by the vociferous opposition to welfare, abortion, and immigrants, and by the rise of the radical Religious Right. The Politics of Denial presents a compelling explanation of these phenomena, providing solid empirical evidence for the role of rigid, harsh childrearing practices in the creation of punitive, authoritarian adult political attitudes. The authors show how political processes in the United States are distorted by the unresolved negative emotions (such as fear, anger, and helplessness) that remain from punitive parenting, and by the politicians and conservative religious leaders who exploit those emotions. Among the many public figures discussed are Patrick Buchanan, Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, and Billy Graham.

It's dated, but very relevant for the generation we're talking about, and PJ's own upbringing.

# ¿ May 24, 2015 18:09

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

CowOnCrack posted:

This thread is fascinating to me. I believe I am an authoritarian, because I am a Baptist. I accept the authority of God. It seems to me that authoritarianism covers everyone who believes in God. I say this because believing in God, if it is not lip service, has the necessary consequences of subordinating oneself in all aspects to a higher authority which would produce the characteristics you are examining here. Perhaps dogmatic adherence to some other ideology would as well.

I consider my views to be quite thought out - as thought out as I am able to make them. My faith is not blind but my faith is my faith. What of people like me? What is the use in this broad labeling exercise?

Authority, and rebellion towards or adherence to it, are part of human nature. I don't believe there is an alternative, or at least not one that is sensible to me. Even if we reduce society to the family unit, there needs to be a decision making authority in the home.

For what it's worth, I'm willing to be an Authoritarian under scrutiny in this thread.

What do you think about Quakers or Presbyterians as people of faith as compared to you?

# ¿ May 28, 2015 07:20

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Also, he didn't publish an article in the school paper. He printed it out and made copies that he handed out to everyone he saw like he was a streetcorner preacher, hoping that the woman would eventually see one.

# ¿ May 29, 2015 17:09

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Also what is that mindfuck of a thread? He's not even a featured player, it's so nuts.

# ¿ May 29, 2015 17:10

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

my dad posted:

I'm sorry, but this is complete and utter bullshit. Go check out the ancient history thread for an explanation of why, there was a derail about it fairly recently. It's a well thought out, beautifully described theory that just happens to be horseshit once you get down to the actual facts.

Link?

# ¿ May 29, 2015 18:21

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

For one, the police report confirmed that the Duggars practice the method of blanket training proscribed by Michael Pearl, and presumably the rest of his method of total control, which they had previously denied employing:

http://www.amazon.com/To-Train-Child-Michael-Pearl/dp/1892112000

It's very much systematic abuse designed to make children completely subservient to the parents.

As far as why TLC has decided not to show the tension within the family, the Duggars probably believe that they are exploiting TLC as much as TLC believes it's exploiting them. They use their show and fame as a platform to promote their crazy lifestyle. It's possible they put on a rehearsed show every time the crew shows up. And TLC is a different kind of exploiter than VH1. They really foreground the fiction of wholesome entertainment with all their freakshows, or they did when the Duggar show first started.

# ¿ Jun 1, 2015 00:50

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

snorch posted:

Also what the hell is with the idea that any act of disobedience is out of malice?

I expect they believe that children are naturally wicked as a consequence of their fallen state.

# ¿ Jun 2, 2015 14:20

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Best Korea posted:

McVeigh thought he was avenging Waco; just as you predicted in your earlier post.

Ruby Ridge as well, which is like a textbook case of how these sorts of people end up doing things like trying to overthrow the government:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

# ¿ Jun 6, 2015 19:05

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

This new guy is a disappointment. Step up your game. It's not 2002 any more.

# ¿ Jun 7, 2015 03:56

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

I hope the best for you, PJ. May you find greater peace as you continue to heal.

# ¿ Jun 30, 2015 01:21

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Trump might legitimately have some kind of personality disorder. He's gone bankrupt like five times and pretty much just gets by on his reputation as a celebrity these days. It wouldn't shock me to learn that he's been bluffing the whole time and has always been completely delusional.

# ¿ Aug 8, 2015 17:40

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Didn't fox news go to court for the right to lie on the air? And win?

# ¿ Aug 11, 2015 00:24

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Prester John posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiNGP9Rn_xs

Whoever is behind this campaign to take down PP is really, really loving stupid. This isn't just playing with fire, this is kicking a 55 gallon drum of kerosene onto a bonfire. Narrativists who buy into this particular Narrative will find it almost impossible to regard themselves as Americans while PP continues to exist. Some may even find it impossible to consider themselves "good guys" while evil baby harvesting is freely taking place and they sit back and "do nothing". The direction this propaganda campaign is driving the Narrativists into is a very black place that puts extremely powerful psychological demands for action on to Narrativists.

This is really loving stupid and I would love to meet the sociopath designing this because Jesus Christ whoever is behind this must just want to watch the world burn.

They're what internet trolls grow up to be.

# ¿ Aug 22, 2015 16:51

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

The whole abortion is murder thing just really reinforces either their hypocrisy or their laziness, as they've been at it 50 years and killed at most a dozen people. The majority shout out the standard rage lines and at most march in front of a clinic on Saturday. They don't really care or they don't really believe it's murder.

# ¿ Aug 22, 2015 17:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 15:50

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

If only the pissing contest were literal and aimed into their open mouths.

# ¿ Aug 26, 2015 20:13

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Decoding Trumpism: a cult survivor explains how the GOP became a death cult

«‹›3 »