A nice phrase from the Beeb today, asking if it’s snobbishness that makes us hate Don the One. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39849073
So I’ve asked myself the question. Do I react against him because he can hardly string three words together? And when he does, the words often fly in the face of the facts? Yes and yes.
No, I don’t expect heads of state to be academic icons, intellectual leaders; but I do expect them to have some grasp of their language, some awareness of the key issues facing them and some respect (yes, respect) for their peers’ qualities as heads of state. A quick jibe and a quick u-turn won’t do.
What’s your take on the soon-to-be-lame Donald duck?
32 thoughts on “Shooting from the lip”
The ultimate narcissist with an unhealthy need for adulation. Add a childlike demand to get his own way and you appear to come up with a recipe for ugly dictatorship a la ‘chairman Mao’ and currently ‘Fat Boy’.
Potentially very dangerous.
Fortunately American government has the facility to stall many of his worst efforts in Washington at one of several levels.
What does anyone expect from a family where the grandfather made his original fortune running brothels in Alaska? The quotation ‘No better than (s)he ought to be’ comes to mind.
That is, absolutely ghastly!
CO: Moreover, should he antagonise voters too much he can easily be removed from contention for re-election. LBJ chose to step aside when it became clear that he’d struggle to win enough primaries.Had anyone but Trump been the Republican candidate, the Republicans would have won in a landslide. Had the Democrats had any decent candidate — which they didn’t, Obama destroyed his party from within, they would have won comfortably. It was a choice between two equally vile candidates.
Psst! Arrers has a new avatar……… 🙂
Janus: some of us have known about this change for some time.
Yes Christopher, it is a never ending source of astonishment to me that out of 300 million people in this country that they failed to find two more repellent that the selection offered! Had one scoured the prisons surely they could have found some perverts and murderers even more dreadful?
Actually they should have picked a few at random out of the telephone book, would have been a far better choice all round.
Any luck and he’ll be impeached or worse before too much longer, the thought of that for four years is too much to bear. I have to admit I found the whole thing funny at the primaries stage but when it became self evident that he really WAS going to end up as the candidate the joke failed to amuse pretty bloody fast.
As to the original question re snobbery. Maybe partly but also an expectation that candidates should possess a modicum of probity and morality. Attributes notably missing in both people in the final choice. Amusingly I note that all my Republican friends no longer wish to discuss politics, one wonders why, not! Fancy having to admit to actually having voted for that bit of trash. Had I had a vote I would have been constrained to write ruderies on it and waste it.
God j, get a life! Do you actually look at such? Come round here and I’ll find you some jobs to do.
Well spotted Janus. 🙂
Regarding the Disaster that is Trump, I agree with you and Tina. I have tried very hard to like him and his ghastly family – a joke’s a joke but for goodness sake this man’s dangerous! Roll on the impeachment or the straitjacket!
CO: Trump, ironically, is influencing elections in Europe. People are observing how absolutely incapable he is of running an administration and are turning away from brash, populist candidates. In Hunland there has been a profound turn-around in political fortunes. Schulz’s support has started to collapse and his party have lost two regional elections in a row. The next one is this Sunday in North Rhine-Westphalia, Hunland’s most populous region. It’s possible that his party which is currently leading NRW’s government will come in second to Merkel’s CDU. Schulz sounded too many populist notes and has repeatedly raised the prospect of forming a coalition with the populist left much to the dismay of moderate voters.
Voters can be forgiving. Clinton was relatively popular in spite of his scandals. Bush Jr has had a rehabilitation in the eyes of many voters. He made some poor policy decisions, but he was a relatively nice man and his behaviour following the end of his presidency has been impeccable. Obama remained marginally popular despite his policies being absolutely hated. It isn’t necessarily snobbery. People don’t like embarrassing heads of government.
So the Dorset mafia knew about Arrers’ new pic. Grrumph…..
Janus: You mean I’m in the Dorset Mafia? Does that mean I can be Caporegime Don Skippyroo di Durnovaria?
Oh no, I escaped the Henley Mafia and now I have to contend with the Dorset Mob. 😦
Bein’ Dorset n’ all that must be the Hardy Boys- so you are Nancy Drew! 😎
Ah, yes, no wilting wallflower, Janus. I’ll whip Dorset into shape. 😉
Don the One has apparently dismissed the FBI director. This is highly unusual and somewhat disturbing.
Whatever one thinks of Trump, I would not hold the inability to speak clearly and articulately against him. There are too many snake oil politicians out there. That is why David Cameron beat out David Davis and Tony Blair beat John Major.
Many years ago, an uncle of mine, a very senior and successful banker was bemoaning the abilities of the then Chancellor. I told him that if he thought that way, he had a duty to stand against him. He replied that he was a lousy speaker and would have been torn to shreds.
Some people say and some people do. Ideally one should have both qualities in a leader, but if it comes to a choice, I would rather the latter.
As for his being a disaster, I am not aware that the US has collapsed yet, nor has the rest of the world. Certainly the US economy seems to be holding up if the Dow is anything to go by.
My biggest gripes against him are his support for Israel and his bombing of Syria, though maybe that has achieved its goal. As for North Korea, he is between a rock and a hard place with regards to taking action against him. Certainly his predecessors do not seem to been successful in diminishing the horrors of that regime.
I have no doubt that much of the dislike aimed at Trump is indeed based on snobbishness.
Was Comey’s firing a diversionary tactic by DT? An attempt to slow down the progress of the investigation into his own Russian connections? That won’t work! The hare is running and is unlikely to return to its box. Nice of DT not to fire him via Twitter – Comey received the news via the tv!
I agree with Mrs O, the fact that these two are being put in front of the punters as the best that the States has to offer, is irrefutable proof that the the electoral system is broken. Add to that the fact that the “intelligence services” seem to be able to come up with multiple slurs at crucial times, but always have reasons of “national security” for not showing the public the proof they hold of any such wrongdoings actually took place, a media that reflects the views of it’s owners and sponsors, rather than reporting fact and a public who devour sound bytes as opposed to reasoned discussion and I think that there is little hope that it will ever improve. End of rant
Janus: There isn’t any evidence that there “was” collusion. We’re discussing the US, not a civilised country. The Democrats will continue to harangue him on baseless charges until they find something that can be substantiated — and suddenly the Russian Connexion will be forgotten.
What about the MI6 fella’s report and the Russian loans to DT’s golf entreprise?
With the US as balkanised as it is, they would have already made more out of that if there was something to it. Once again, this is all about political expedience for the Democrats. They’ve collapsed electorally. Rather than reform themselves, they take shots at easy targets in order to survive the next election cycle hoping that a fall in support for Republicans will benefit them.
Well, I certainly agree with Christina that if Clinton and Trump were deemed the best that either political party could offer in the way of presidential hopefuls – God Help America (if he / she /it exists!)
What one does have to admit is that Trump isn’t completely stupid – even if he appears to be so. He certainly outmanoeuvred all his rivals to get to the Presidency. Whether that’s a good / bad thing I still don’t know…
But, then I find the whole process of voting in a US President to be little better than a fair-ground show where the Showman with the best patter and the Magician with the best sleight of hand gets the prize. It’s all glitter and glitz. It does not surprise me one bit that whoever takes the trophy is actually naught but a conman.
Like Sipu, I have become increasingly wary of people with silver tongues and I’d rather have someone who says it how they see it than a Blair or Clinton who managed to con ordinary people that they really cared for them while rubbing their hands all the way to the bank …
There are issues in Sipu’s comment that I don’t agree with, but I do think his last comment regarding snobbishness, has merit.
As for denigrating Trump for his ancestors – we shouldn’t forget that the Kennedy Clan had dubious roots, or that many snooty members of the H. of Lords are descendants of ‘Ladies’ who were able to sell their ‘virtue’ at a higher price than those poor souls working in the stewhouses of Southwark. Dig back far enough, and every very rich family has something that could be held against them.
Trump should be judged on his own performance – and, as far as I’m concerned, the jury is still out.
If plebs can denigrate nobs, why shouldn’t snobs knock chavs? Backside has just left me that message.
Backside: Lord Bushbatten humbly requests me to inform you that he is very much in agreement. No one should have the right not to have the piss taken out of him/her/it at any given opportunity.
Bo, the Kennedy clan not only had dubious roots but branches and leaves too! Whole lot of them have always been dubious in various ways.
One wonders if there is a genetic predilection to loincloth laxity and other alleged calumnities?
Where the USA goes so dreadfully wrong is allowing endless finances to support worthless puppet candidates of choice and two years in which to atrophy the electorate into zombie like behaviour at the polls. They who have the biggest purse, wins. If money was restricted and time foreshortened, good candidates would have far more chance of surviving.
CO, remember Joe Kennedy’s plan to enter the British aristocracy via his daughter ‘Kick’? Tragedy for her and no luck for Joe.
Just so J, plus Chappaquiddick and heavens knows what else. Whole lot of them thoroughly disreputable.
Jackie Kennedy was only married to him because she was a Bouvier, dirt poor, but basically the nearest thing to American aristocracy.and could add class to dirty money.
And said Jackie quickly snared Onassis, no doubt to feather the Camelot nest.
“If plebs can denigrate nobs, why shouldn’t snobs knock chavs?”
I think there is a difference between a nob and a snob. Snobbery is arrogant and disdainful behaviour, while a nob is somebody with a degree of breeding. A chav who knocks a nob is every bit as much a snob as a nob who knocks a chav, or an oik as I prefer to call such people.
The double standards attached to this sort of prejudice is pretty overwhelming. The prevailing view tends to be that only whites can be racist, only men can be sexist only Christians can ‘phobic’. In most cases it is the whites, men and Christians who are the better behaved than their supposed victims. The same applies to snobbery. Blue collar classes can abuse White collar classes (I have avoided using ‘lower’ and ‘upper’ so as not offend) with impunity, but as soon as an individual with a coherent turn of phrase says a negative word about the habits of his counterparts, he is vilified.
Backside’s point, yes.
The Chappaquiddick incident put Ted Kennedy in disgrace for many years, although that seems not to have affected his political growth. When he finally emerged, rehabilitated in the public eye, it was as a respected and respectable – I’d even say “good” – US Senator.
Private and public personas can be managed, with a bit of luck and fair winds, so as not to invite disastrous collision. JFK’s womanizing habits were well known and, being thus well known, had lost their value as scandal material. I myself once saw him in a mini-motorcade heading to a place in a NYC suburb where, according to his White House schedule, he had no official business. Apparently this sort of evening “social call” was not unusual for him. Not only that, but he also smoked (shock, horror!). One of his staff leaked that the insides of his suit jacket pockets were all scorched because he wouldn’t throw away a perfectly good cigar but rather held it in his pocket for the short walk from an airplane to a waiting limo. Regardless of all such diversions, I personally regarded JFK as quite an effective President, as most notably illustrated by his handling of the Cuban missile crisis. What a pity we’ve had to wait so long for resolution of the Cuban cigar crisis. It just shows to go that smoking cigars may be regarded as an even greater sin than doing, erm, “things” to women.
My memory grows hazy but I can recall one case of incipient scandalmongering being tamed by direct confrontation. One of our past Presidents, a bachelor (I can’t remember who, curses be upon this leaky head of mine), was well known to have various ladies visit him overnight at the White House. When he became aware of certain hyperintellectual media types preparing to blow this out of all proportion, he responded by saying something like, “I’d have thought the American people would be glad to know that their President is *a real man*.” End of controversy.
@Sipu: I refuse to admit to being “phobic” of anything because I do not *fear* “them,” whoever “they” may be. My head still isn’t sufficiently together (I’ve been ill all week) for me to confidently come up with an appropriate Latinate substitution, something milder than “hate” but still strongly disapproving. “Aversatio,” maybe?
Cogitationator, I can assure you, the “” around the word were deliberate, for just that reason.
It will be interesting to see what happens when a president comes along who is of an alternative sexual orientation. Glory, glory hallelujah!
Cog, aversion is a fine word.