Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

shitting on affordability is such a suicidal move. you can lie about how secure the southern border is, or how successful some military campaign 7k miles away was. but you cannot lie to people about their own wages or what they pay at the store. any political movement that...

93,611 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

BOOM: Chris Cuomo just admitted the media can’t destroy Trump—because they destroyed themselves in the process. “Donald Trump is truly the Teflon Don. The media cannot take him down.” Why? Because Americans no longer trust the people doing the attacking. The media spent years torching their own credibility—and now, no one’s listening. A classic case of the boy who cried wolf. Maher kicked it off the exchange: “One of my pet peeves about the left... they like to judge you by moment.” Cuomo didn’t hesitate: “And that’s why MAGA is immune. Because they can ONLY do it to their own.” 🔥 Then came the knockout: “Donald Trump is truly the Teflon Don. The media cannot take him down. Because his people reject the basis of the criticism.” Cuomo explained that once people decide the messenger is corrupt, the message doesn’t matter: “There’s an old expression—if you have to decide whether or not to care about what someone says about you, the way you start is: ‘Well, who said it? What do I think of them?’” And that’s where the media lost the plot. “People have made that assessment about the media,” Cuomo said. “They’ve said: ‘I don’t care what you say about him, because I think you allow a lot worse, and I think you’re kinda what you say he is.’” “And there is a power in that for him.” The press built their empire on credibility—then lit it on fire. Now they’re powerless to stop the man they hate most.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

900,644 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Watch this game-changing dissertation on "expert writing." Expert writers write to "think" about the world. 99% of experts write and think at the same time. They use the writing process to help themselves think. This is how they do their best thinking. Write to think about the world. Do this because you care, because you want to be part of progress, because you want to make a dent in the universe. Write to inspire and influence. And when you are finished writing, and you click publish, think about your work this way... the intent of your text is to cause readers to change the way they think about the world. Engagement metrics don't really matter in comparison. Whether or not your text is valuable, depends on whether or not your readers perceive that you have valuably changed what they think, or what they do, or how they decide. One of the reasons it's so hard for smart people to write well is because they don't write to change the way people think about the world. They write to complete a project, to earn a grade, to be assessed. Or they write to publish *their* thoughts without going through a mental and soulful exercise of writing to think about the world, without writing to change how people think about the world. Write to think about the world. Change how people think about the world. In an era of #GenerativeAI, content isn't the end game. Your goal isn't just to get someone's attention, generate reactions, or show up in search. Your mission is to change how people think about the world. Change How People Think About the World. Thank you, Larry McEnerney (now-retired former Director of the University of Chicago's Writing Program).

Brian Solis

113,721 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

Gerry Adams in a recent interview said: “We all have to have a very assertive opposition to the far right or to the right generally.” Listen carefully to the language being This creates a false choice: either you support current immigration policies, or you are placed in the “far right” category. But questioning the scale of immigration, rapid demographic change, pressure on housing or the capacity of public services is not the same as blaming immigrants. No one is saying immigrants specifically are the problem, Gerry. The debate is about the decisions made by politicians, the policies, the planning and whether governments are putting the interests of the people they represent first. When public services are already struggling, asking whether they can cope with increased demand is a legitimate democratic question. A democracy depends on debate. Questioning immigration policy, borders, economic policy or aspects of progressive politics are legitimate views. Dismissing people with labels instead of answering their concerns is an attempt to create a culture where people feel they cannot speak openly. “At a certain intellectual level.” That comes across as incredibly dismissive. Just say what you mean: people who disagree are either racist, “far right” or not intelligent enough to understand. That is not how you build trust. The irony is that while some speak about unity, people from different backgrounds who were once divided are now finding common ground on issues affecting their communities. A united Ireland cannot be built by telling certain people their concerns are unacceptable. There is no unlimited right to move to any country of your choice. Countries have a right to control their borders and decide who enters, lives and works there…while still protecting those genuinely fleeing persecution. The real question is not about blaming immigrants. It is about asking whether political decisions are serving ordinary people. A united Ireland should mean unity among its people — not unity against those who question the direction of travel.

Melissa Ciummei

15,332 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat