223
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.
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’m going to guess that Michael Moore is a little kooky.
He's a bit up himself these days, but he means well.
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.
load more comments
(5 replies)
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?
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
If I said the shit he says on a regular basis people would straight up say “ okay stoner” and laugh at me. Dude thinks he’s so fucking profound.
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.
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.
load more comments
(17 replies)
Has Michael Moore ever run for elective office?
Michael Moore and running should not be in the same sentence.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
223 points (93.1% liked)
politics
19170 readers
5560 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS