968
Trump aides alarmed he's 'just golfing all day and stewing' as election slips away: WaPo
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2024
968 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3239 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ever play an arcade video game from the 1980s? I'm talking about the ones in the arcades where you had to pop a quarter into the machine to play.
Here's the thing about those games. The first 2 levels or so were usually pretty easy. Weak AI opponents. Easily distinguishable patterns. But then you hit level 3 or 4. And the difficultly skyrockets. With absolutely no warning. You go from "Hey, this game ain't so bad" to regretting all of your life choices. And if you don't know what you're doing, you're going to get owned, hard. Only a few people could get past a couple of levels, and only the best of the best were skilled enough to be able to play as long as they wanted until they clocked the game.
That's where we're at now. Trump played those first couple of levels. Clinton was a divisive figure in her own right and treated the 2016 race like she could skate to victory too. Biden had weaknesses that Trump could easily exploit. The real game has begun and Trump has absolutely no idea how to actually play. So Trump wants to start the game over. He doesn't want to make it to level 3 because he knows he'll never beat level 3. He's looking for a reset switch like on the Atari 2600 so he could keep playing the first two levels over and over and over. Because he knows how to beat those.
But he can't. So he's essentially stopped playing the game. He's telling everybody in the arcade how rigged that machine is, the joystick's broken, and you need to hit the fire button 10, 12, 15 times for it to fire. And he's getting jealous that all the cool kids in the mall aren't listening to him, and are circling around the new girl who popped her quarter in and has gotten to levels Trump hasn't even seen before, while he goes to the corner of the arcade, pops a quarter into the dusty, old Pong machine, and wonders why nobody fucking cares.
The first few weeks of Trump's presidency you could've easily seen what a terrible decision it occurred. Yet people will still vote for this dotard.
But he lost on level 2. The only candidate he's beaten is Hillary, who's one of the least popular politicians in the US.
He lost the first time. Then he inserted another quarter to continue and (essentially) beat him the 2nd time.
And after the brief intermission cutscene, he played level 3. He doesn't like level 3. He even tried to call the attendant over so he could play level 2 again. And when the attendant said "Um...you're on level 3 now, what's the problem?", he stopped playing. Because level 3 is fucking hard.
And he won only via the electoral college, while still losing the popular vote against her
It wasn't like a switch got flipped, no one would keep playing.
They'd make a tiny segment super hard so you'd have to drop a couple bucks to get past it. Go back to easy for a little. Then hit another hard part.
It's basically the whole reason for boss fights.
Once games started developing storylines, plots, etc. it was like that. It was an intentional strategy developed to keep you playing. But early developers weren't thinking that far ahead. The idea was to give you a couple of easy levels so you feel you got your 5 minutes worth of entertainment worth, then start punishing you at level 3 or 4 so you'd lose and the next person would play.
And some were made by simple oversight. Space invaders' increasing difficulty was solely the result of hardware limitations of the time that just happened to result in the exact difficulty spikes they were looking for. As a programmer, I could, for example, set level 1 vs. an opponent that was slow as festering dog shit, but be lazy and just double his speed with every level. As long as the player's speed stays the same, it would become nearly impossible to win in a couple of levels.
Either way, the results were the same: 25 cents for about 5 minutes worth of entertainment. That was the goal of the day. As you mentioned, they fine tuned it by the mid 80s with games like Mario and the like. but those early games were meant to get you off the cabinet as quickly as possible so soneone else could pop in their quarter.
Exactly, and long term people would stop playing because they always get stuck about the same time.
It's like how humans respond to rewards, a steady consistent reward is kind of motivating, it's why we go to work in the morning
But what works a shit ton better is sporadic rewards that have a tiny tiny chance of paying off.
That's why people get addicted to slot machines and not working at McDonald's. If a slot machine paid out 75 cents for every dollar everytime, no one would play.
Have them win $7.50 every tenth time they put a dollar in tho, and people will flush their entire lives away chasing that 1/10 of a time they "win".
So if you really want to exploit gamers, you can't steadily increase difficulty. Linearly or exponentially, it doesn't matter. To hook people they need those "wins" and they'll keep dropping quarters or spinning loot boxes.
In coin operated video games, that's when things get easy
A better example with Space Invaders is once they beat a level, they get to the next one and it's slow again due to the amount of enemies on the screen. Letting the player get that easy time again hooks them. If the next level they were all as fast as the last one from last level, it wouldn't have been as addictive
Wonderful metaphor. Although it's hard to suspend disbelief in a story about Trump wanting to / knowing how to play video games. He strikes me as the type that'll buy an arcade but never set foot in it. And then remove all that is good about it and fill it with ticket games.
Have you played those old games? Usually, the first level is easy. Easy enough where you actively have to try to lose. I mean, you get 3 lives. That means you have to make not just bad decisions, but the worst possible decisions, over and over and.......oh.
Never mind. You're right.
Hopefully his next move isn't to start tilting the machine
Only semi-related:
Hunter S. Thompson took great pains to speak in sports metaphors, because that's the language of "middle America."
I've thought that, for a while now, video games have become the language of "middle America" and whoever can speak to the gamers in their language will capture their minds.
Steve Bannon also understood this, and that's why he succeeded in capturing many young men's minds through Gamergate.
We need people better than Steve Bannon speaking this language and leaving gamers with positive, healthy understanding of the world around them.
Anyway, I write this because I think your video game metaphor really works here, and I think that's the way to speak to a large portion of our populace now.
The idea that Thompson was particularly accessible to middle America is so strange to me as a Midwesterner.
But also I agree. Gaming metaphors speak to the apolitical in ways sports metaphors used to
I don't know that arcade metaphors really work for most of the population now, though. Even when I was young they were dying.
Video games > arcades.
Playstations, Xboxes, desktop games are where gamers are playing.
Twovery evident impacts are regarding others as NPCs ( instead of humans) and the application of Min-Max philosophy to economic endeavors.
I think we might be talking about two different types of "arcades" here.
The arcades where you go and play pinball and pac man and street fighter are the ones we're talking about. That was the 80s. Those of us who remember those days fondly would probably be between 40 and 60. I don't know about the rest of my middle-aged community members, but I ain't planning on dying any time soon.
If you're living in a place where 40-60 year olds are dying on the regular, you're probably living around methheads.
I mean the arcades were dying, not the people in them.
... though there's that too...
There are dozens of us!
I mean, that's fair, but that's also why I said it was only semi-related.
The arcade metaphor works here on Lemmy with a mostly Gen X/Millennial audience, but you're correct that the people who need to be opened up politically are the Fortnite generation and younger.
~~Red Archer~~ Arcade Needs ~~Food~~ Quarters Badly!!!
Make the guy who makes tier zoo on YouTube teach all democrats.
Seriously, the devs took a big risk with the 2016 patch, they just didn’t like what the players did to that gorilla.
Correction, he puts a quarter into a pinball machine in the corner, then shortly after gets the tilt warning because he once again tries to cheat instead of having skill.
Tilts are perfectly valid in pinball tournaments, though. As long as the machine's setup only warns you instead of stopping the game, it's OK in most leagues. And if it does stop you, then you can continue to the next ball.
Interesting. It looks like the older games did just stop when sensing some movement, while newer ones allow it to some degree or times, so there's a fudge factor that I guess a professional would know how much to push things. Some might take away the power ups and just let you finish that ball on a "vanilla" setup.
Some old games do, some don't. The sensor is a plumb bob in a metal ring that completes a circuit. Been that way since the 1950s or so, and is still the same system in today's digitized games.
Trump is the kid who got good at PacMan. Then the arcade brought in MrsPacMan and no matter how high he scores and tries to get attention, the kid who scores well in Mrs PacMan is stealing his thunder because it's harder. And he's mad no one is paying attention to his New High Score because it's irrelevant in the face of the new game. But he can't get good enough at MrsPacMan, so he's sulking on PacMan setting new scores and slowly filling the board while his friends try to give him the new Guide for how to score better or get farther in MrsPacMan. Trying to get him to take on the new kid. But he's just broken from constantly being the loser every time he 2 players. He's scared of it because it's a new age where it's not a solved game, the enemies react to you, and he's not fast enough anymore to handle that and it scares him - no matter how much his friends try to get him to get good.
It's Ms. Pac-Man now, they got divorced some time ago sadly.
Ah yeah I realized it later. I got too carried away typing it to check that part
I don't believe for a second Trump is good at a single thing.
He's has a mastery of gish galloping. There's no way I could ever approach half of what he does.
But that's about the only thing I can think of that he's good at. And it's definitely something he's good at due to severe character flaws and mental development issues, not exactly a learned skill or intentional thing he applies. But good nonetheless.
He's okay at fleecing and grifting the rubes, but that's about it.
That's pretty easy to do. Most conservatives are gullible as fuuuuuuck.
Excuse me, but Trump would never play Pac Man. He can't handle Kamala Harris alone. He'd be complaining about having to go up against 4 non-white opponents at once.
And he'd certainly never play Ms. Pac Man. Sure, it's one thing playing an unidentifiable yellow mass that runs around popping pills and doing the same thing over and over while trying to avoid all the non-white people in town, but there's no chance in hell he'd play as a female.
God damn, how apt.
Picturesque and poignant.