Post your favourite meltdowns over President Trump's victory

[Smark]

@anon7035031 when he first joined here was quickly regarded as a top contributor, that dissipated among the majority (some of us stayed on side) during the election when a few screaming mullallys were calling his election predictions off the wall and that he was out of touch with reality, but he has been comprehensively vindicated in recent days and should be very proud to have stuck to his guns against the ridicule from some doubters. He rightfully has his place now as one of the top, top posters on this site (unlike that weirdo who constantly self describes himself a top, top poster. Bustyourballs I think he goes by, I don’t remember).

[Ambrose_McNulty]

@anon7035031 is in charge here.

[Smark]

He fairly sent that busted flush @Sidney home with his tea in a mug anyway.

[anon61956325]

He truly is our new overlord.

[Ambrose_McNulty]

He shot his e-load all over @sidney.

[Tassotti]

@Sidney

Petrified bedwetters and imagined victim complex, hate-mongering, keyboard fantasy bullies like @HBV, @caoimhaoin and @ProjectNoSex can feel free to laugh at this on the meltdown thread.

The cult of personality is both a very powerful thing and a very dangerous thing.

Western society promotes individualism and the cult of the self. There are both positive and negative implications arising from this. But when a powerful and charismatic individual emerges to “lead”, people can fall in behind them unquestioningly, and any sort of critical thought on the part of the led can vanish.

Ordinary people have always found it difficult to understand complex issues. The last 15 years, going back to September 11th, 2001, have seen an attitude of negativity and despair pervade western societies. Adam Curtis has theorised that no longer are the major international issues of our time easy to understand, no longer can they be framed in a good versus evil narrative, and so ordinary people are confused. This engenders a pervasive attitude of negativity and despair in societies. The perception of threat is everywhere.

September 11th was initially framed as a straightforward good versus evil battle, but subsequent events mutated and developed into contradictory and confusing tangents. The US invaded Iraq, who were not involved in 9/11, in revenge for 9/11. The Saudis, who were involved in 9/11 (it was at least carried out by Saudis), were the west’s allies. The deposing of Saddam Hussein, which was supposedly a nudge to accelerate the overthrow of a dictator and let the “good, freedom-loving people” rise up in the way they had in Eastern Europe in 1989, instead mutated into a bloody civil war which is still going on today.

The Arab Spring, initially framed as a straightforward good versus evil battle and another event which was framed as a repeat of Eastern Europe in 1989, also mutated into various bloody and ongoing civil wars.

The West’s allies in Syria turned out to be arguably as bad as the brutal dictator they were trying to depose. Then the almost cartoonishly evil ISIS arrived to complicate matters even further. Outside actors such as Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Kurds and the Arab Gulf states add yet more layers of complication. Fleeing civilians were the innocent victims while they were still in Syria, but once they reached European shores they were portrayed as a potential enemy. There were no longer any goodies and baddies, only destruction, only despair.

The global financial crash is similarly beyond the understanding of the ordinary person. Was it the banks, was it the government, was it corruption, was it globalisation, was it capitalism, was it “socialism”, was it even “the lazy, good for nothing unemployed”, was it even us, the “ordinary people” in some way who were to blame? Any narrative can be spun. But most of all, nobody wants to believe it was “us”.

Since the rise of the INTERNET, information comes at us from all angles and overwhelms us. The ordinary person does not have either the time, the interest or the critical filters required to separate reality from lies and untruths. But the INTERNET is designed to promote our sense of self, and we feel we have to be part of the conversation, even if we are not equipped to comment knowledgeably. But our self also seeks out other like-minded people. We are individuals who also like to be part of a crowd. When angry individuals gather, a mob forms.

Anger creates fertile ground for the demagogue. Their confidence and charisma seduces people. They simplify all the complicated problems into easy to understand narratives. They blame others. It doesn’t matter if the promises and the grand statements they make are based on lies. They are easy to understand. They seduce.

Donald Trump is not so much “the art of the deal” as “the art of seduction”. All dictators, demagogues and people who use their charisma and the cult of personality to “lead” are similar in this way.

Hitler did it. Mussolini did it. Lenin did it. Thatcher did it. Chavez did it. Paisley did it. Ayatollah Khomeini did it. Putin does it. Farage does it. Michael O’Leary does it. Steve Jobs did it. Jose Mourinho does it. Eamon Dunphy does it. George Hook does it. Joe Brolly does it.

Some of those named are or were clearly a lot worse than others named but they all employed similar techniques (I’m not comparing Brolly to Hitler, by the way). Brolly has written recently about Tony Robbins. Trump also reminds me of Robbins and the worst of that sort of charismatic cult of the self and the self-help, self-delusion industry surrounding it, as, occasionally, and ironically, does Joe himself. It’s the power of the preacher.

US right-wing media has also employed the same techniques. Charismatic talk show hosts simplify narratives. They portray strength while also leading you, the “victim”. “Others” are to blame. Euphemistic language and lies are employed to fool people, to both explain things in “common sense” to the ordinary person, and to fool them. In the US, euphemistic language means “states’ rights”, “wealth creators”, “enhanced interrogation techniques”, “freedom”, “small government”, “voter ID laws”. “Common sense” is the ultimate euphemism."

And some things now no longer have to be cloaked. It’s “rapists”, “criminals”, “lock her up”, “you’re going to jail”.

Oppressors and the powerful become “the victims”. The genuinely victimised or powerless are portrayed as “the oppressors”. “Free speech”, “common sense” and “telling it like it is” are invoked to justify vilification. When reasonable people challenge abhorrent views and genuinely “tell it like it is”, the real oppressors are the first to take offence and hide behind their straw man version of political correctness (which the rest of the time they vilify). In reality the ones who loudly proclaim that they “tell it like it is” are the easily offended, they are exact same people they claim to rail against. The supposed “PC brigade” of cliche are in reality the ones who tend to genuinely tell it like it is.

Extreme politics relies on that sort of charismatic power of seduction. Everybody has an inner bully. Simplifying matters, understanding the psychology of crowds and using that to create a seductive, easy to understand message based on blaming others can release that inner bully, or at least make a willing follower of the “honest, charismatic” bully. The follower becomes subsumed into an almost quasi-religious, cult-like social order led by the Pied Piper bully.

It’s pretty much always doomed to fail and merely leave destruction behind it.

[gilgamboa]

Just to be clear…did Labane not give Trump next to no chance before the election as well?

He was more right than most but I still don’t think he predicted a Trump win

[Tassotti]

he never wavered, he never flinched, he never blinked

[Smark]

He said many times he thought Trump would win and a few dopes laughed him out of the building. Fellas standing behind printers in Oireland who think they understand America better than someone living there.

[Tassotti]

@Smark

Fellas standing behind printers in Oireland who think they understand America better than someone living there.

you couldn’t make itup

[gilgamboa]

I know he said at times he thought he would won but by the end was he not thinking clinton would do it

[ProjectX]

Is @Sidney still posting here?

He was going to retire his user alias if Trump was elected President of the United States of America

[Tassotti]

he’s a beaten docket

[iron_mike]

@Tassotti Is there asomething much groaning across the pond as there is over here?

[Tim_Riggins]

The Guardian are losing their minds

[Tassotti]

Donald Trump is a friend of the UK, he loves us, he’s grandmother is Scottish

[anon7035031]

Correct, I predicted a Clinton win before the election. I honestly didn’t think he could pull it off, given all the negatives against him, much of it self inflicted. I was as shocked as anyone on Tuesday as the evening unfolded, and blue state after blue state flipped to red. At the end of the day, people who vote Republican or lean Republican held their noses and voted for him, and she couldn’t get enough of the Democratic vote out in the battleground states.

When all the hysteria dies down and the screamers have had their 15 minutes of fame, reality will set in. This election was always about the economy, and specifically the economy in the states outside the North East and the West coast. After 8 years of Bush and 8 years of Obama, working people (of all demographics) living in those states are earning the same or less than they were 16 years ago, and their expenses have skyrocketed, especially health care and education for their kids. Fundamentally they didn’t believe Hillary could or would do anything to improve that situation, and frankly there was nothing she said in the campaign that suggested otherwise.

[backinatracksuit]

Top poster alright. I don’t agree with much of what you say but you paddle your own canoe, unlike the edgy sheep circle jerk club.

[GeoffreyBoycott]

@gilgamboa

Just to be clear…did Labane not give Trump next to no chance before the election as well?

He was more right than most but I still don’t think he predicted a Trump win

@anon7035031 was the real hero of this election and by a country mile provided the most astute, insightful and thought provoking analysis. He might have wavered a bit amidst the forces that were lined up against us and the attempts by Crooked Hillary and her associates to rig it.

i reckon I can lay claim to the most blinded faith in President Trump to pull it off. I nearly wavered myself even in the face of relentless campaign against him. As late as last Saturday I had doubts and even on Tuesday with those early exit polls from @Sidney. Ultimately I never lost faith in our man and I just knew he’d find a way to pull it off. I doubt I would have had the level of faith I had in President Trump without all that insightful analysis from @anon7035031.

@GeoffreyBoycott

Crooked Hillary has always been bizarrely popular with the Hispanics – over and above the Democrats natural advantage with them – and to make matters worse it now appears she’s tearing into one of the GOP’s most reliable Floridian constituencies, namely Fidel’s boys, or at least the younger generations among them. Overall it appears she has a sizable lead among FL Hispanics, which augurs badly – people maybe don’t realise that the Kennebunkport boys were winning amongst that group down in Florida in the 00s, in fact I think exit polling even suggested JEB was winning even if you left out the Cubans. It will take a lot of angry white property developers to make up the deficit for Mr Trump. Back about 10 years ago I would have described FL as a swing state that’s mildly more GOP than the nation on average, now I’d say it’s mildly above-average Democrat. The Hispanic factor means that Colorado and Nevada – are back-breakers for Mr Trump and the same is true of New Mexico, a State that the GOP might have had a sliver of hope of carrying in a tight election year. Bottom line is to win overall he needs to carry one of Pennsylvania, Michigan or Wisconsin. This sums up his problem – none of those states have looked particularly tight this year. Wisconsin is a perennial ‘swing state’ yet always goes to the Democrat – I think Reagan was the last to carry it although Dubya came to within an ace of doing it in 2000. There’s also a Senate race ongoing where the Democrats seemed poised to oust the incumbent GOP with a bit to spare. Michigan is another that is theoretically in play every year but again realistically goes Democrat. Pennsylvania does tend to be tight though but it hasn’t gone to the GOP since 1988 and even that was tight I think. So truly Mr Trump is up against it, which will only make his victory next Tuesday all the sweeter.

[[quote=“GeoffreyBoycott, post:3631, topic:19437”]
These are early morning tallies and would naturally be skewed heavily in favour of the Democrats. Our people will be hard at work and are more likely to turn out later in the day. Democrats are mostly crusties and layabouts who don’t work and would be in a position to go the polling station in the morning. I can recall gleeful outpourings from the other side in 2004 when exit polling data showed John Kerry winning, yet when raw numbers were released their faces were soon longer than the aforementioned John Kerry as George Walker sailed home
[/quote]

[Tassotti]

@anon7035031 is the most astute political commentator on USA politics, he remanded me of my unwavering stance on Brexit