Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Read the article hoping Moore elaborated the quote in the headline. It’s not there and I wanted to know what “do weird and cringe until the debate, then nail him” means specifically from his perspective.
Anyone have a guess?
I don't think it is anything specific, just support for the current approach the Harris/Walz campaign tactics and then to take it more seriously at the debate. Which is probably the plan already.
I’m going to guess that Michael Moore is a little kooky.
He's a bit up himself these days, but he means well.
My guess: Harris/Walz should continue to play up the weird and cringe because it's effective. This frames everything Trump will say during the debate as weird and he will constantly be fighting not to be weird the entire time. He probably will say many weird things due to this (and let's face it, he does say some weird shit anyway), so Harris can "nail" him by simply calling it out and asking for details on any weird response. This will cause things to not only get heated but act as a multiplier on the weird content since it's common for Trump to double down. 🍿🍿🍿
I too was wondering about that line.
At first I thought he was suggesting Harris/Walz should be weird and cringy. I only just realized he's suggesting that they keep referring to Trump/Vance as being weird and cringy - to keep pointing out the those two are not normal.
That line would have been clearer if written...
...do 'weird' and "cringe" until the debate...
How my parents hated Michael Moore. He reminded them of a guy who they felt always got the best of them. There was a resemblance. The person in question was well educated and pretty smart. He could see my parents manipulation of events and always got ahead of them. He wasn't a bad person. He wasn't religious but donated 100 grand to a church that was rebuilding from a fire because most of his employee's attended it. My parents tried to make the donation a bad thing. My parents also died maga chumps.
There's gonna be a debate? I would probably enjoy a VP debate the most.
Walz has already agreed to one on I believe October 1st. CBS maybe? Just waiting on Weird couch fucking, cross dressing Vance
Are we sure we want to paint crossdressing in a negative light? I know they hate it, but it's kind of friendly fire, no?
Hypocrisy. We are painting hypocrisy in a negative light
No, you're painting crossdressing in a negative light and you should do better.
Cool collected old neighbour schooling and ridiculing the weird asshole?
Yeah, this might be delicious. But it is seriously worrying that this is supposed to be a debate and a political reality.
Tell Michael Moore to join Neil deGrasse Tyson in the "We don't want to hear from you anymore" line.
Add Maher to the list. Good god he's so in love with himself.
Maher is a straight up conservative hack though, not in the same category.
How is he comparable to Neil? I've been listening to Michael Moore's podcast off and on since 2020 and he's only come across as humble and empathetic to me which is not how I'd characterize Neil.
I honestly don't know who he is off the top of my head. I'm glad more people are sick of NDT though. He just seems like a conceited ass that refuses to be wrong
We need a reincarnation of Carl Sagan. He was a great science communicator.
Was Bill Nye really as bad as people acted upon his return? I feel like he just took off the child gloves and talked to his audience as adults. Unfortunately, he failed to realize a large majority of the population is childlike in mentality
The people who hated on Bill Nye were conservatives, and they did so because he explained concepts like Gender which they did not appreciate (i.e. does not fit into their reductionist misogynistic harmful ideology). Bill Nye is great.
Yeah, my partner explained it to me a bit. Go Bill! I think my point stands though. He tried to talk to them like adults. They are fucking children
Ah, good point! That’s also the impression I get from his work. His Netflix series was pretty much written for adults who watched him on PBS as kids.
Shit, am I OOTL? i like NDGT, but should i not? Did he do something shitty?
He's conceited and refuses to admit that he could be wrong because his views are based on science, ignoring that they're just his interpretations of it. This is a good example:
(He did apologize for this)
But to tweet something with the connotation of "gun violence isn't that bad" while ignoring half of the gun violence stats in your own list, and ignoring that there can be multiple problems that can be solved at once (guns, mental health, car dependency, etc.) isn't the best. I don't think he's like objectively a bad person, he's just overconfident and IMO annoying. He does communicate science though, so props for that.
Thanks for the larger picture
Always happy to disappoint :-)
He's overly interested in kissing himself in a mirror. Nuff said.
Conservatives got mad that a black man was publicly pro-vaccination, started a smear campaign, and anti-intellectualism took over from there for the brainless masses.
Has Michael Moore ever run for elective office?
Michael Moore and running should not be in the same sentence.