Greg Sargent: Trump promoted a video of one of his supporters attacking "blowjob liberals" and raging that if Trump is elected, he will "get rid" of liberals, who will be "gone." The video also attacked @JoeNBC as a "scumbag." How is this not bigger news? 1/ (Link) newrepublic.com/article/1819...

Trump promoted a video of one of his supporters attacking "blowjob liberals" and raging that if Trump is elected, he will "get rid" of liberals, who will be "gone." The video also attacked @JoeNBC as a "scumbag." How is this not bigger news? 1/ (Link) newrepublic.com/article/1819...

Trump’s Ugly, Hateful Attacks on Media Suddenly Take a Dangerous Turnnewrepublic.com His posting of a video of a man cursing at Joe Scarborough sends a broader message: If elected, he’ll use state power to come after countless other Americans.

The video Trump posted got notice for attacking @JoeNBC, but there's also this: "He’ll get rid of all you fucking liberals. You liberals are gone when he fucking wins." By promoting this video, Trump endorsed that sentiment about libs generally. 2/ newrepublic.com/article/1819...

Yes, we often play "what if Biden did it." But here it's appropriate! A battalion of pundits is always ready to pounce on mere hints of demeaning language about conservative voters. Here the GOP nominee promoted vile language about liberals as a class. 3/ newrepublic.com/article/1819...

It is undeniable that a leading rationale of Trump's run is the threat to target and persecute a large but ill-defined class of Americans who will be designated as enemies of Trump and his MAGA movement. This exists in the form of concrete plans. 4/ newrepublic.com/article/1819...

Some blame Trump's rise on elite lib failings. Fine, but the story can't end there. What if some Trump voters back him not despite the criminality/threats to inflict suffering on other groups, but *because* of those things? 5/ can't top @adamserwer.bsky.social here newrepublic.com/article/1819...

When Trump threatens to disregard the next election's outcome, he's showing contempt for the aspirations of millions of American voters. When he threatens to target "vermin," prosecute enemies and destroy the deep state, he's talking about ordinary Americans. 6/ newrepublic.com/article/1819...

If Trump voters are sticking with him through all these things, we should be asking whether these factors are a key driver of some of this support, not credulously treating them as self-evidently incidental to it. 7/7 newrepublic.com/article/1819...

that fucker needs a stroke.

He is talking about us

I'm blown away by this line. Trump is the poster child for this phenomenon, not the solution for it

Guy who pissed away his multi-million dollar inheritance? Yup. Guy who failed repeatedly at his businesses (and lost money running casinos)? Double yup. Trump is the epitome of wealthy white men getting a pass for everything, no matter how badly they fuck up.

Am I going crazy or this not the exact thing Hillary Clinton meant by "deplorables" that was immediately misconstrued?

Yes, and she was far too generous when she only put half of them in that basket.

YES. I’ve been screaming this into the void for years.

I heard you. And started to provide the stereophonic effect.

They hate us, and they want to do bad things to us, simple as that. They want to see us suffer. And they think trump will do that

Yup. We wanted them to have health care and decent wages and clean air and water, and to leave gay people alone. And this is how they chose to respond.

"What if some Trump voters back him not despite the criminality/threats to inflict suffering on other groups, but *because* of those things?" Then, that realization takes one closer to reality.

they are nothing but monsters so yes - of course redloraine.wixsite.com/website/post...

Principles of abuse and the internal failures of racistsredloraine.wixsite.com

This piece I wrote in 2020 remains relevant: www.mediamatters.org/donald-trump...

Outrage over offending red America highlights a major double standard in mediawww.mediamatters.org

See the current definition of "conservatism" from kottke.org/21/02/conser... Accusing them of any hypocrisy completely misses the point. "Rules For Thee, But Not For Me" is their essential principle.

Conservatism and Who the Law Protectskottke.org I’ve seen this quote, or ones very much like it, a few times in recent years: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind...

I didn't know there was an option for 'blowjob liberal'. Where do I sign up?!

I am not a BJ liberal myself, but I wholeheartedly endorse their platform

My thinking is a BJ liberal is a liberal who likes them. I mean how is that even a slur?

Turns out LBJ stood for something other than the 36th US President...

I think the insinuation is that it’s liberal men who like giving them. Too scared to say gay I guess

Probably. So much closeted homosexuality among those MAGAts, I'm surprised they aren't all just randomly exploding from repressed sexual urges, like drummers in Spinal Tap.

Or it’s the crew that thinks anything other than PIV-resulting-in-pregnancy is gay.

Pretty sure the guy wanted to either say "cocksucker" or "faggot" but wasn't brave enough.

There's that economic anxiety again

I remember seeing a lot of this sentiment in 2016. He did not, as it turns out, get rid of the liberals, and by 2020 people weren't really thinking he would.

he COULDN'T after winning in 2016 project 2025 would make sure he could

What the fuck is a blowjob liberal?

I’m guessing it’s rightwing shorthand for emasculated men and queer people But their language is less about being precise and more about evoking emotional responses and signaling group membership

"You blowjob liberals are done" sure sounds like a threat to kill gay people.

Btw, I used to consider myself an FDR liberal, but I gotta go with blowjob liberal now. Is there an emoji for us?

Greg, you just used the term "libs," yourself. Next you'll be typing "Democrat Party."

Let’s not forget that Gov Abbott just pardoned a man who murdered a BLM protestor. They have made it clear that they are all domestic terrorists (CPAC), so why are we still treating them with kid gloves?

"Yeah but Biden is not hard enough on Israël so we must not vote for him"

This remembers me once before 2018. I was at a bank in an ATM queue and there was an old man, clearly in trouble with operating the ATM. Suddenly, he exclamed that when Bolsonaro takes the presidence, "that clownage would end". I did not understood what he was talking about.

Funny how uttering the word “deplorable” kept one candidate out of the White House.

Yet he'll claim it was an intern who reposted it, or that rt's don't = endorsement, and people will forget and move on. The number of outrageous things he's done which are simply drowned out by the firehose of bullshit is incalculable.

#DehumanisingLanguage is part of the fascist playbook: It is one step on the ladder - downwards: Streamlining the press/media Having brown shirts patrol around Singling out groups of people to downgrade and attack Putting those into #camps and so forth and so forth. Humaneness -110%

When is scotus gonna tell us if Joe can end this nonsense simply by conduction ‘an official act’?

I was a t-shirt that reads "A Proud Libtard!"

[jotting “blowjob liberals” down in my notebook for future analysis]

what is a 'blowjob liberal' and why is does it sound like some dumbass slur that both maga fascists with weird psychosexual baggage and tankies with weird psychosexual bagge might use

I don't know but I'm guessing he didn't mean it positively

I'm confused by the polarity of the blowjobs. He says "blowjob liberal" like it's an insult, but then he seems to use "half a blowjob" as a bigger insult. Is he criticizing libs for an alleged dearth of blowjobs and implying a good MAGA-ite will give you at least five blowjobs?

Post