Welcome to Political Humor!
Rules:
It still requires qualifications but doesn't get anywhere near the same level of respect.
Nursing.
Nurses used to be all male and were highly respected. Then the world wars happened and women started entering the field to replace men who went off to fight. Now nursing doesn't hold the same weight as it used to because "women bad" or something idfk.
I think it has to do with a significant portion of nurses were hugely antivax during covid. Has nothing to do with gender. Imagine going through the trouble of nursing school only to be antivax. π€¦ββοΈ
Being an expert used to require a degree or something - now all it takes is a login!
The President is very much a figurehead - he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.
https://hitchhikersguidetoearth.fandom.com/wiki/President_of_the_Imperial_Galactic_Government
Real estate agents
Who ever found that to be respectable?
The Supreme Court, especially if you're talking about North Carolina
I have often quipped that the movie Pixels is actually more acceptable now because when it came out the idea of the President of the US being a complete buffoon was totally implausible. But after Trump it became not only plausible but too entirely realistic.
Exactly my first thought.
Judging by the current example, conservative tastes are firmly in Pennywise territory.
Donβt forget SCOTUS. itβs worse.
I know some people are saying it was always this way, but never have I ever seen (since the '60s) or heard of a president propose annexing sovereign nations and buying countries as casually as this one.
I hope it's just some strange psychological ploy, but it's just too weird and informal to have a Presidential precedent.
The biggest change is that in the past, what the president thought and said was private, the messages transmitted to the public were carefully controlled, and there were several filters they had to pass through to get to the ordinary people.
Today, through social media, we have unfiltered access to the president's thoughts. And we're learning why this is a bad idea.
All other presidents of the social media age so far have managed not to make complete fools of themselves, so maybe it has to do with this particular one.
I assure you, Jimmy Carter did not have thoughts of using military intervention to annex Greenland. Twitter in 1978 would have been "OMG, I got attacked by a swimming rabbit!"
Trump really is more dangerous than all past presidents. Not even Andrew Jackson threatened to court martial politicians that didn't support him.
But did Woodrow Wilson?
Nope. Woodrow Wilson only had private hate for blacks. Which Trump also has.
Similar thing happened with CSPAN.
Back in the day, a Congressmember could make a speech on the floor that only their hometown press would cover. Then they could scoot to the cloak room and cut a deal to vote the opposite way. Bipartisanship was the rule.
Once everything got read into the public record, the members were forced to actually vote for stuff they knew was crazy, but that the locals were hot for.
know some people are saying it was always this way
There have been periods of fascism in the United States that have echoed what we are seeing today, namely the silver legion in the 30s. However, no one who has been so transparently fascist has ever been the head of state.
hope it's just some strange psychological ploy, but it's just too weird and informal to have a Presidential precedent.
I don't really think it's a ploy, moreso I think he's just testing the waters and seeing who will stand up to his rhetoric. Anyone in the Republican party who actually tries to resist will be politically attacked or isolated.
Fascist always purify their own hierarchy of organization before making moves on others. Unfortunately, it seems our republica future is in the hands of the Republican Senate. Now we get to see if the founding fathers were correct in their hopes that the Senate would be more resistant to rampant populism.
I wouldn't get my hopes up though, the founding fathers had a lot of idiotic notions reliant on decor and tradition.
At some point every government relies on good will. Hard to blame the founding fathers when that breaks down.
The founding fathers were more than aware they had to put up guard rails to prevent "mob rule", they just didn't believe in the same guiding rules for their own class.
Founding fathers couldn't predict the question of banning TikTok would ever arise.
They didn't think anything could replace Vine.
I don't know how true that is, but I wouldn't immediately say they're wrong. Presidential debates are like a shouting match in kindergarten
It's amazing how almost every interaction between nations and superpowers can very easily explained in kindergarten terms. It's so often exactly "I want all", "I can't have I break it", intimidating and slapping others just because they are smaller.
International relations are in a state of anarchy. Ultimately, nobody is in charge. But it's the shitty pop version of anarchy, not the kind that any self described anarchist would want.
Anarchism in practice is always the shitty kind. Every experiment turns out something like this
Libertarian β Anarchist
My dad once showed me a music video where world leaders went into the boxing ring by themselves. Now that would be fun!
Trump vs Mark Rutte, let's go!
Trudeau did it.
You know I realize just now that Trudeau could have saved his job and won the next election just by betting Canada to Trump on a boxing match between them
In some alternate reality of history, this is what corrects the timeline.