What was new rhetorically?Honestly ?
For USA Trump was something new more in the sense of rhetoric than in content.
What was new rhetorically?
I see your point. He also had his own TV show for many years, which I don't think people give enough credit to. It was relatively popular, pretty hard to compete with that.The whole "outrage and over the top" thing seems to have come with him. My impression is that before him no one did it at this scale.
It's more the familiarity that makes certain things scary to me.Theory: it's because for many people, things can only be properly scary if they are new.
There is nothing new under the sun.This whole "Try that in a small town" stuff really reminds me of the political climate of my high school years. There are a lot of commentators who refer to the inclinations, attitudes, beliefs, values, and social mores of the MAGA crowd as a "new" development for the republican party. These commentators should have spent time during Dubya's first term on AOL chatrooms or other places I'm too embarrassed to mention. Everything, even the cult-like adoration of a "dear leader" was there. Maybe this was "new" in 2003 but it is not "new" in 2023.
Trump created nothing new. He took advantage of something that already existed. Trump himself doesn't even represent something new; there's even an American precedent (Andrew Jackson).
I see your point. He also had his own TV show for many years, which I don't think people give enough credit to. It was relatively popular, pretty hard to compete with that.
People say we're in a post-truth era. It's true, but Trump didn't invent it.
I remember everyone saying Al Gore claimed to invent the internet (he did not). That seemed pretty mainstream.He didn't invent it but he is the one that made it totally mainstream. What is probably a much bigger deal than the invention itself.
They let anyone take a shit in the opinions section.‘Judeo-Christian’ roots will ensure U.S. military AI is used ethically, general says
Oh this is great news. This is like something out of some Dr. Strangelove sequel.
I don't know who the author is, but just the arguments mentioned in the piece just sounded like something out of that movie. Stuff like, it's ok if we do it because we're going to do it ethically, and the other side won't.They let anyone take a shit in the opinions section.