Twitter User Roasts Trump's 'Stable Genius' Comments In A Very Gilbert And Sullivan Way

Much of the talk in Washington D.C. has been of Fire and Fury, Michael Wolff’s tell-all book from within the walls of the Trump White House. One of the book’s most significant claims is that many of Trump’s closest staff believe his mental acuity is slipping.  

In response, the President tweeted the following:

Clearly, these are the tweets of a very stable genius.

One tweet stood out. @hunttheshark knew exactly what Twitter needed — Gilbert and Sullivan references:

In fact, they enjoyed the song so much, they couldn’t help but join in for a second verse:

And the song wasn’t over yet…

Anyone down for… another verse?

Twitter seemed to have a lot of feelings they needed to get off their chest through song:

And it quickly became the song that could never end:

Tune in tomorrow for new verses inspired by whatever Trump does today.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

This Professor's Viral Tweets Explain Trump's Social Media Use

In the opinion of many, Donald Trump was able to win the election because of a carefully targeted social media campaign that focused on building a database of users and attacking those with ads and media, rather than focusing on pre-existing demographics.

By constantly vilifying Hillary Clinton, Trump managed to not only get people who liked and supported him to be mobilized to vote, but get a lot of voters who were on the fence to believe that anything would be better than voting for Hillary. To this day, I have family members who admit that they think Trump is an absolute moron and is unfit to be President, but that their hands were tied because Hillary was so evil they couldn’t vote for her.

As President, Trump hasn’t been able to do much aside from make headlines for erroneous, offensive, and borderline insane claims. When he does apologize for saying something wrong, he tends to sidestep the blame and place it on other sources, like the time he wrongly claimed an attack in Sweden was spearheaded by a Muslim immigrant. It wasn’t. So he said he wasn’t at fault because he saw it on Fox News.

Although Trump’s use of his Twitter account might seem like the ramblings of a mad uncle who trolls YouTube comments and parrots Alex Jones conspiracy theories, it turns out there may be a pretty brilliant strategy behind  his postings.

University of Berkeley Professor, George Lakoff, laid out Trump’s social media strategy after scrutinizing the President’s reactionary post patterns. Donald’s tweets, according to Lakoff, fall into one of four categories.

He provided examples of each and explains them in-depth.

According to this professor, almost all of the tactics employed by Trump are heavily rooted in deceit, lies, side-stepping issues or blaming them on others.

The first tactic, “pre-emptive framing” allows Trump to frame an argument that isn’t really rooted in fact or ends up making a mountain out of a mole-hill. An example of this would be Hillary Clinton’s housing of White House emails on a private server. Notice how Trump’s outrage at this practice stops at Clinton, as him and his administration are doing the same thing

Trump is able to get his message across after making such a bold claim because sites help disseminate his brazen idiocy. His supporters will inevitably come to Trump’s aid and vehemently attack anyone who attacks him fomenting an even greater hullabaloo over what he said. This theory suggests that Trump doesn’t care at the end of the day because, as the old saying goes: there’s no such thing as bad publicity.

Unfortunately, the media turned him into the popularity monster, love him or hate him, that he eventually became.

Because we’re constantly talking about him, we’re legitimizing him as a figure. Doesn’t matter if we think he’s a joke, we’re still talking about him, usually more than anything or anyone else outside of our immediate relationships with family and friends.

Pointing out Trump’s flaws and lies are seen as attacks by his loyal fan base and in a way, justifies the false, pre-emptive narrative that there’s a “crusade” against him. “Mainstream Media” and “Fake News” can bring up all the valid, backed-up sources and evidence that they want, oftentimes bringing up Trump’s old quotes and footage to show his hypocrisy, but much of his fanbase ultimately sees these as “attacks” and give them more reason to back the president.

Lakoff points out that reacting to Trump in this way and taking the low-hanging fruit isn’t an effective means of discrediting him. By “stooping” down to his level, we’re legitimizing his medium of communication and are thus legitimizing him.

Instead, Lakoff thinks that Trump’s bold claims should be met with this appropriate response:

Instead, if us, as the media, focused on things that actually matter, like how our government is tearing apart at the seams and not this drama fomented by a blowhard, we’d be able to lay the groundwork for some meaningful change.

So Lakoff proposed a simple three step plan for journalists and news commentators to follow:

Simply don’t share what he writes, and you’ll immediately help to focus on what is actually important.

Or we could laugh at him because he has small hands and tweets nonsensical words like “covfefe.” What do you think?

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

Man Goes On Twitter Rant About Trump's Recent New York Times Interview—And We Agree

Arguing on the internet is oftentimes about as useful as peeing against the wind. Sure, you might really need to get it out, but it almost always ends up spraying back in your face.

People’s opinions rarely change no matter how much evidence you bring to them. No matter how many good points you make, no matter how many other issues you present that are way more important to focus on than the inconsequential, often sensationalized issues they choose to focus on – you won’t change someone’s mind on the internet.

Oftentimes, merely criticizing someone’s point or questioning them will have them cry “persecution” and that you’re being unfair to them. It’s a trait tons of dictatorial regimes have utilized in discrediting media agencies for catching them in lies and exposing the weak points in their propaganda.

Trump’s popularized the term “fake news” and used it as a blanket statement to try and discredit any news agency that questions and disproves many of the President’s erroneous claims. 

The divisive nature of Trump’s election has left people with very strong opinions on how the press should treat him. However, the objective of traditional press has always been to provide factual evidence and question individuals on the facts. The media in America was expected to be a watchdog of the government to keep our elected officials honest, since the earliest days of our democracy.

Washington Star correspondent Daniel Dale offered an interesting take on the role journalists should take when interviewing Donald Trump and politicians like him who constantly lie in a manner that doesn’t destroy the entire q & a.

Dale stresses professionalism and politeness.

It’s much more powerful to allow a lying politician, President or not, acknowledge their lie in a follow up answer and just carry on with the interview.

He also highlighted the difference between interview and print lies.

It’s all about maintaining composure.

He stressed that basic questioning is a journalist’s job, there’s nothing “gotcha” about it.

Ultimately, Dale just wanted to highlight the correct way to interview someone like Trump who has a penchant for making wild claims without evidence in his q & a’s.

Some people responded to the thread by pointing out some of the worst lies Trump’s told in his interviews.

And how journalists let him get away with it.

Do you feel like the media needs to be tougher on Trump? Or is it a losing battle at this point?

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

President Trump's Official Presidential Coin Leaks Online―And Our Eyes Are Rolling

You may not have heard of the presidential “challenge coin” but indeed, presidents have had these coins made in order to hand out as mementos to people they meet, particularly members of the military.

In the past, these coins have generally been inscribed with the motto ‘E Pluribus Unum’ or “out of many one.” But this year the challenge coin got a makeover…

…of the Trumpian variety…

As The Washington Post puts it:

The presidential seal has been replaced by an eagle bearing President Trump’s signature. The eagle’s head faces right, not left, as on the seal. The 13 arrows representing the original states have disappeared. And the national motto, “E pluribus unum” — a Latin phrase that means “Out of many, one” — is gone.

Instead, both sides of the coin feature Trump’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.”The changes don’t stop there. In addition to his signature, Trump’s name appears three times on the coin, which is thicker than those made for past presidents. 

And forget the traditional subdued silver and copper: Trump’s coin, a White House aide marveled, is “very gold.”

Very. Gold.

It’s a minor interruption from a larger program of Trumpian headscratchers, but the internet is not on board with this – the AV Club wrote an article on the subject called ‘Big, Stupid Man Now Has His Own Big, Stupid Coin’. 

Twitter was pretty much on board with that assessment…

Nope, not The Onion, we wish.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

Reporter Shares Excerpt From Trump's Speech To The Navy–And Everyone's Perplexed

There may be literally nothing more confusing in this country than President Trump.

How do you even mix up the biggest loss of USA life in 100 years with a convenience store?

And in his speech to the US Navy, MSNBC reporter Kyle Griffin noticed that there was not one coherent thought to be found in Trump’s word salad.

INVISIBLE PLANES, Y’ALL.  INVISIBLE PLANES.  SO GOOD YOU CANT SEE THEM.

“I said, ‘That helps.   That’s a good thing.'”

Yes, this is all fun and games, but Trump is playing with lives here.  The US armed forces depend upon a Commander-in-chief to make informed decisions about their equipment as well as their plan of approach; and unless Trump is living in the DC Universe with Wonder Woman, there’s a good chance that plane is simply not invisible.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

'Cards Against Humanity' Buys Land To Prevent Trump's Border Wall

Cards Against Humanity’s been known for its huge publicity stunts. Like when the company dug a giant hole to represent the bleakness of the 2016 election.

And when they raised the price of their game by $ 5 on Black Friday 2016, resulting in a sales spike.

The company’s latest stunt, however, might be its biggest yet. To make a point to Donald Trump (and gain some serious publicity) the game manufacturer reportedly decided to purchase a plot of land right along the U.S. border to try and stop Donald Trump from building the wall.

As part of this year’s Black Friday promotion, “Cards Against Humanity Saves America” debuted with a press release directly aimed at Donald Trump in an attempt to foil one of his earliest campaign promises.

As per the company’s official statement, the “Saves America” edition of the game comes with a few special goodies.

People were smitten not only with the idea, but the promotional video associated with the special Black Friday edition of the game.

Fans also were stunned about the amount of planning and thought that went into the company’s idea.

Potential buyers who live outside the states came up with a great shipping idea to help Cards Against Humanity get their point across.

And the company might be getting political, but that doesn’t mean they’ve lost their edge, either.

People are already gifting the special edition to their friends.

It’s pretty surprising, considering such scathing and righteous political moves are being made by a company that makes a game that’s about being as vulgar, gross, and nihilistic as possible.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

Twitter Rejects Trump's Claim That Obama Didn't Call Families Of Fallen Soldiers

During a conference in the Rose Garden on Monday, Donald Trump was asked a question about four members of the U.S. Special Forces who died during an ambush in Niger almost two weeks ago. Trump had not yet made a statement about their deaths, nor contacted their families, as far as anyone knew. In response, Trump threw a pretty wild accusation in the direction of President Obama.

“If you look at President Obama and other presidents, most of them didn’t make calls. A lot of them didn’t make calls. I like to call when it’s appropriate, when I think I am able to do it,” he said.

Not only is Trump besmirching the name of Obama, he is also throwing every other president before him under the bus with this outrageous claim, one that was quickly refuted by the people who have the most authority—the families of fallen soldiers.

People quickly rushed to show the receipts, and let everyone know how they were comforted in their grief by the commander of chiefs of the past:

Even former White House photographer Pete Souza showed up to share some moments when Obama and his wife were there for grieving families:

Now, where is Trump’s proof?

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

Twitter Comedian Uses President Trump's Own Words Against Him–And It's Not Good

Hurricane Maria has devastated Puerto Rico, but President Trump didn’t bother to mention the storm for five days. Puerto Ricans are standing in line for food, water, and gas, and 95% of the island remains without electricity. On Friday, San Juan mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz unleashed a withering, emotional plea for immediate help.

Cruz said, “We are dying. What we are going to see is something close to a genocide.”

Not surprisingly, President Trump took the mayor’s desperate cry for help as personal criticism, because this administration has no concept of compassion, empathy, or responsibility for fellow Americans.

Trump attacked Cruz in a series of childish tweets that alternate between defensive and aggressive:

That’s the mayor wading through a flood of sewage in her own city with a bullhorn looking for people in need.

Are we tired of winning yet?

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

Woman Puts Trump's Qualifications Into His Points-Based Immigration System—It Didn't Go Well

It’s no secret that Donald Trump has been keen on cracking down on immigration since the day he stepped into office.

So when Trump endorsed a bill that would cut down legal immigration by half earlier this week, it didn’t come as much of a surprise.

The bill, called the RAISE Act, would institute a skills-based point system for entry, rewarding educated, English-speaking immigrants with high-salary job offers. The measure would also eliminate diversity visa lotteries, and maintains that immigrants who enter the country would be ineligible for welfare for a certain amount of time. 

The new rules clearly favor certain immigrants over others. Given the rigorousness of the standards proposed, Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell wondered what would happen if the tables were turned.

Rampell’s assessment, which is, of course, highly speculative, doesn’t give Trump much of a chance. 

In fact, according to Rampell, Trump would score a zero in several categories, including “Age,” “Record of extraordinary achievement,”  “English-language ability,” and “High-paying job offer,” based on the sometimes ambiguous, sometimes absurdly-specific language of the bill. 

Trump’s final score: 18. 

The minimum score to even be considered: 30.

Some could argue that Trump would score in the top 10% of the English-language test, which would garner him the 12 points needed to meet the threshold, but there would most likely be applicants who would score well over the 30 points, potentially knocking Trump off the list. 

Twitter wasn’t too shocked by the results:

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS

Merriam-Webster Got Super Petty About Donald Trump's Latest Spelling Mistake

Merriam-Webster Got Super Petty About Donald Trump’s Latest Spelling Mistake

It emerged this morning that President Obama warned then President-elect Donald Trump about hiring the now disgraced Michael Flynn during a meeting after the election. This claim was acknowledged by a senior Trump administration official, according to NBC News

Flynn was the director of the National Intelligence, and later the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, under Obama. In 2014, he retired from the military after openly criticizing the Obama administration’s stance on radical Islam. Flynn claimed that he was pushed into retirement. 

Trump named Flynn as his national security adviser. But he was fired less than three weeks into the administration after it emerged that he had private conversations with the Russian ambassador to the United States before he was in office, and for misleading Vice President Pence about the nature of those discussions. 

This week, former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who also warned the Trump administration about Flynn and was promptly fired for doing so, is set to testify that Flynn misled the White House.

And as usual, President Trump took to Twitter to defend his administration from the revelations. But see if you can spot something wrong with his tweet…

Yes. In his now deleted tweet, President Trump incorrectly used the word “council” instead of “counsel.” The tweet was deleted several hours later, and the misuse corrected…  

But not before Merriam-Website decided to tear him to shreds about it.

And then got incredibly petty.

As you can imagine, people gathered to warm themselves by the heat of this burn. 

Merriam-Webster continues to be our favorite dictionary. Step up your game, Oxford. 

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

home – Channel RSS