I think you’re right - but let’s hope it doesn’t come to that!
1 Like
Trump has called a few women ‘dumb’ because they are critical of him, including a TV host lawyer he’d seen on TV, interviewing Kamala Harris.
She’s in this show - ‘The View’ – with the other dumb women, rebuking Trump. This is her entertaining rebuke. Down loaded by me and edited.
1 Like
I have no wish to see this but hope it has tiny, little ………… hands.
1 Like
If Trump wins he will, no doubt, have the most stupid Margery Taylor Green in his administration and that is truly frightening.
She has accused the Democrats of controlling the weather and sending these damaging storms and hurricanes into Republican areas.
Serious question I’ve been asking myself – how would I feel if Trump stepped into the oval office again? How could I live with that?
Prince Charles, as he was then, considered a particular example of modern architecture to be ‘a monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much-loved and elegant friend’.
I think I’d feel that Trump is a cancerous carbuncle on the face of all that is decent, with no remedy. I asked ChatGPT to define ‘all that is decent’.
“All that is decent” refers to the fundamental values, morals, and principles that a person or society generally regards as being fair, just, and good. It encompasses ideas of integrity, respect, compassion, truthfulness, and ethical behaviour. When someone says “all that is decent,” they are often alluding to an abstract sense of righteousness or moral uprightness — essentially what they believe to be the foundation of a good, functioning society.
Trump represents the opposite of all that. I’m not religious but I pray that Kamala Harris wins!
2 Likes
UNFIT. This film explains a lot about how the USA has got to where it is today IMO. An interesting film about Trump.
There had to be unfortunate social conditions in America, as there must have been, to permit someone like him to infect such a large section of the population.
The claim is pretty bat-shit crazy (though I wonder if there is not an admission here that some in the Trump camp would happily do it to democratic states if they could).
More worryingly is the fact that people will readily believe this crap.
1 Like
Why they believe this type of crap will be explained I think in the film “untruth 2024 made by the same filmmaker as the above film “unfit 2020.
This is only the trailer.
Received this from a mate in London. Don’t believe it’s a fake. Did an image reverso search and it’s on Twitter.
He sent quotes from the film Waterloo -
“In politics stupidity is not a handicap”
“If you wish to be a success in the world promise everything, deliver nothing”
“In politics … never retreat, never retract, never admit a mistake”
“Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich”
“I can no longer obey, I have tasted command and I cannot give it up”
2 Likes
Of dubious veracity, Reuters says
Changing topic slightly - how on earth is this legal?
ChatGPT agrees! “There is no widely reported news article or verified source where Mary Anne MacLeod Trump made such a statement about her son, Donald Trump”.
I like Chat GPT! Very useful. This is its answer.
- Legality of the Pledge: If the pledge is seen as an attempt to influence voters or interfere with the electoral process, it could raise legal concerns, especially if it violates campaign finance laws. Offering money to voters could be construed as bribery or coercion, which is illegal.
- Feasibility and Intent: If there is a lack of genuine intent or capability to follow through on the pledge, it could be viewed as misleading or deceptive. If someone were harmed by relying on this statement, they might have grounds for a legal challenge.
- First Amendment Issues: The case could also involve First Amendment rights concerning free speech and political expression. Courts often have to balance these rights against the need to maintain a fair electoral process.
- Context of the Statement: If the pledge is made as part of a promotional or campaign strategy rather than a serious commitment, it might be less likely to warrant legal action.
- Public Reaction and Impact: If the pledge leads to significant confusion or disruption in the electoral process, it could prompt challenges from political opponents or advocacy groups.
The trouble is, Musk knows that any legal challenge would not come to court until after the election, by which time it will be too late, whether Trump wins or loses.
Same as the UK Electoral Commission declaring Boris Johnson’s “£350m for the NHS” Brexit slogan as a lie - it wasn’t enforced at the time and he got away with it. Not to mention all the social media shenanigans by Cambridge Analytica and others.
Courts need to act fast to stop such things, and they rarely do.
If so, it just goes to show how brazenly corrupt he is, if what he is doing is illegal.
I haven’t been that much of a fan of ChatGPT and would double check anything it claims but this effort by Musk feels like it should fall at that first hurdle.
I know the newer version is better at not lying.
Interestingly it looks like it might get harder and harder to train AIs using the Internet as source material - unfortunately AIs exposed to AI output in their training material degenerate.
When I read it earlier today it didn’t seem illegal to me. It’s open to Democrats and Republicans and seems to be a contact harvesting exercise masquerading as just encouraging citizens of all flavours to vote, though obviously it will be those that identify as Democrat that get full in baskets.
The funding model for US elections is just obscene overall.
Not all would agree (from the article)
Absolutely.
1 Like
I don’t take everything ChatGPT says as gospel.
I’m sure that Musk’s pledge will be taken up by one of the advocasy groups hard at work continuously right now, if it’s illegal. Like those rapidly picking up the Republican proposed changes to electoral law in the battleground states, and winning.
I won’t read all of that 
, but I think the headline is enough " $1 Million Per Day Lottery Prize Only to Registered Voters". Why not? It is not aligned to any party, it encourages people to vote amd it is not “a payment”, it’s a lottery. Much as I dislike Musk and I’m sure he probably didn’t get legal advice before embarking on his scheme it oooks to me as if one could cliam it as just good (wealthy) citizenship promotimg democracy 
Is he only doing it where a large turnout will help Trump?
1 Like