I’ve been tired of it since 2016.

The worst part is whenever you see some subjective word use like this, and then you dig into the actual source event or material, 99% of the time, it’s absolutely nothing. Oh, did T “melt down” by tweeting in all caps? Ah yes, so rare, an occurrence. And not just articles about him, but usually articles about his reaction as being something crazy or whatever suffer from this kind of hyperbole.

Also in the same category are articles with “will” or “can” or some other version of “maybe maybe maybe” or “likely to” in the headline. 99% of the time, no it won’t. It’s just a workaround for Betteridge’s law of headlines (any headline with a question mark can be answered “no”) that any article that suggests something might happens can be answered with “nah, probably not.”

Same how the 14th Amendment to the Constitution is basically invalidated as long as some states hold off on challenging his EO undoing it.

He’ll do some “Elections will happen, but only in states that are nice to me and I expect to win” EO and will basically take CA and IL out of the results, and their results won’t be certified by Congress. Because right now it’s a race to rig 2026 to save donor campaign money.

I promise to be a reluctant and lazy leader, calling in sick at least 3 days a week just to stay in the WH residence and play NES games until the mobs arrive.

I don’t disagree, but I will push back on a couple points.

First, I would assert that that we’re a few years past the end of the late night personality decade. Colbert jumping to CBS was what made it mainstream, which is the point of the peak, about 10 years ago. Kimmel and Fallon don’t measure up at all. The era of monolithinc cultural icons is fading since the internet has fractured our media consumption patterns. Stewart and Colbert had a great dynamic while both were on comedy central, and if you’ll recall, Colbert actually try to run for President in 2008. It was a joke, but I think only a half-hearted one and he would have probably gone on a hell of a campaign. He didn’t want to pay $35K to get on the Republican primary ticket in SC, but the DNC actually rejected his application to be on the primary in 1 state.

As for leaders who are charismatic and capable, ultimately, it’s a shit job to be president and no one wants it unless they’re a little crazy or see personal benefit. Obama, for his few failings, was an exception across the board, both for being good enough that the DNC let him skip the fealty line, but also being competent enough to not make people regret voting for him, and I think genuinely a public servant at heart. Typically, the “Left” universe lets their nepo babies play around in Hollywood simply because money is the arbiter of success, and anyone can subsidize their kid for 3 years to live in LA and make a couple lousy documentaries, or as lobbyists and lawyers in Maryland. Once in one of those spheres, that’s your specialty and contact list.

No one is coming to save us from the DNC - is what I wrote meaning to say “No one from the DNC is coming to save us.” What a slip, right? The DNC would rather let it all burn down around them to “show leadership” be handing out brooms and telling people it’s time to clean up the mess, and wasn’t it nice they brought brooms, so vote for them.

Exactly this.

The Dems are so bereft of charismatic folks in their ranks because their own internal power-squabbling and pressure between dusty old skeletons to keep themselves in office, that anyone who HAS the skill set has had to spend that time in the entertainment industry at best. They’re so dogmatic about internal “it’s your time” protocols that they would rather sink AOC and Bernie forever so that the political equivalent of Assistant Regional Managers can get promoted to Regional Manager.

Both parties are broken to shit, and this is why Dems aren’t doing a single thing to fight anything, they expect to just sit back and have it handed to them later. It’ll be too late by then. We need an entire wave of new blood. Fuck this 2-party system.