I Suppose That I Missed the Gloating

 

Reports are that Trump-backed candidates were 15-0 in the Senate.  Now not all of them were the right sort of people, but we assume that a Trump-backed reprobate may be less ruined than a Trump-opposed and soon-to-be tarred and feathered reprobate.  Welllll, it’s a process, not a moment.

Red Wave inbound! (May be slow to load — stick with it)

I was looking for some more numbers I saw earlier today on the phone, and, well —  we did well.  In particular, Trump-backed candidates performed well.  So much for round three of “Trump is the kiss of death”.  Yeah, he can’t win, he should stay away, he’s poll-box-office poison… heard it before.  As I said a while back, the utilitarian Trump-Nopers with their “Trump is simply *bad* for the party’s prospects!” may be misjudging the American mood once again.

I’ll take a moment from my victory lap here to admit that I am not sanguine, but I think I’ve been keeping my doom pill under wraps pretty well these days, as the future is wide open, and we never know whether’s tomorrow’s harvest is more fertility or more fertilizer.  We do have excellent prospects, yet the GOP hosers are more than capable of hosing this up.  Maybe even by accident, although not necessarily.  Prophecy, prediction, warning, threat — there’s a spectrum.  Watch for the usual suspects (no, not people here on-site) to begin proving with geometric logic how this just means worse performance in the mid-terms, because now the cat is out of the bag or something.  My my my, the Democrats might wake.  We should hurry up and lose all of our elections so that never happens!

There may not be many reasons to be giddy, but we deserve a Mimosa to start the day this morning, and By Gum, two on Saturday morning.  Sunday?  Kari bar the door.

Oh, these are just primaries, or minor elections.  Yeah?  Where you at, NeverTrump?  Thought you were going to put us down once and for all, especially after the walls closed in on Trump what with the bombshell show trials, produced by real show people and everything.

I have a bottle of champagne which has gone unused since its purchase in November of 2020.  Might bust that out this weekend.  So now after the news has broken, but before the stunned Trump-Nopers regain their mathematical faculties (such as they are), I’m just savoring the sound of a pin dropping.  Tinnnng!

Thanks, Trump!

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 155 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    What we expect to happen:

    “Okay, guys! The primary contest is over! Now, onward to election day where we’ll beat the bloody Democrats!”

    What we get instead:

    “Stupid proles! You chose the wrong candidate! Now I’ll have to vote for the Democrats to teach you all a lesson!”

    Has Kari Lake been declared the winner yet?

    No. I think they’re still manufacturing votes.

    That is how it works. 

    • #121
  2. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Thanks, Mike “thirty” Pence.

    I like that.

    I stole it. That means it’s mine now. h/t pdw

    The nimblest of navigators.

    • #122
  3. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    @dontillman(View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):
    Thanks, Mike “thirty” Pence.

    I like that.

    I stole it. That means it’s mine now. h/t pdw

    The nimblest of navigators.

    Impressive.

    • #123
  4. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    It is interesting to me how goal posts can move. I have read some anti Trump types say they would vote for anyone who was not Trump later say they won’t vote for Trump approved candidates.

    I fully expect, if at some point DeSantis was running and Trump supported him whole hog, that suddenly he would be unacceptable. They might deny it now, but it will happen.

    There does seem to be an unbridled, destructive rapaciousness to the NTers. It seems as if people who were already predisposed to do so were given permission to focus all their jealousies, frustrations, anger and destructiveness on one thing. And it grows the more it is allowed and encouraged.

    But it also now seems that not having been able to humiliate and destroy Trump, they are casting about wider to find symbolic substitutions for him which are weaker and more vulnerable.

    I’m referring to the followers, not the paid professionals. They’re irrational and destructive. I mean, they’re saying that they would rather have Biden, who is leaving nothing left undestroyed, than the object of their monomaniacal hatred.

    So, yes, if Trump were ever to endorse DeSantis, even if DeSantis didn’t utter a word of encouragement or thanks, DeSantis would have to be destroyed as well.

    I would vote for DeSantis. I have given money to the Committee seeking to draft him. Have you?

     

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    There does seem to be an unbridled, destructive rapaciousness to the NTers. It seems as if people who were already predisposed to do so were given permission to focus all their jealousies, frustrations, anger and destructiveness on one thing. And it grows the more it is allowed and encouraged.

    But it also now seems that not having been able to humiliate and destroy Trump, they are casting about wider to find symbolic substitutions for him which are weaker and more vulnerable.

    I’m referring to the followers, not the paid professionals. They’re irrational and destructive. I mean, they’re saying that they would rather have Biden, who is leaving nothing left undestroyed, than the object of their monomaniacal hatred.

    So, yes, if Trump were ever to endorse DeSantis, even if DeSantis didn’t utter a word of encouragement or thanks, DeSantis would have to be destroyed as well.

    I would vote for DeSantis. I have given money to the Committee seeking to draft him. Have you?

    I wasn’t thinking about you or referring to you. And I don’t care about your donations.  Just because you can make this comments thread revolve about you, doesn’t mean you can make this personal about me.

    • #124
  5. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Same comment to four different people.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Oh Bryan.  I have repeatedly said that I would support DeSantis for President.  I have even given him money.  Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh kedavis! I have repeatedly said that I would support DeSantis. I have even given the Committee seeking to draft him money. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I would vote for DeSantis. I have given money to the Committee seeking to draft him. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh Drew!  I have already given to the Committee seeking to draft Ron DeSantis.  Have you?


    Same comment to two different people in different threads. 

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh Django!

    The difference between you and I is that you see Trump as some sort of victim.

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh my goodness.

    Drew, the difference between you and I is that you see Trump as some sort of victim.


    Same comment to two different people.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    The January 6th Select Committee has provided clear and convincing evidence that Trump was (a) the Creator of the Big Lie, (b) the Co-creator (or worse) of the Insurrection before it started and (c) then a Traitor to the nation as he disobeyed his oath of office to faithfully exercise the duties of this office during the 187 minutes of the riot at the Capitol (i) where officers were beaten by armed rioters to an inch of their lives, (ii) Congress had to flee for their safety, and (iii) Vice President Pence’s protective detail called their families due to the strong possibility that they could die.

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    The January 6th Select Committee has provided clear and convincing evidence that Trump was (a) the Creator of the Big Lie, (b) the Co-creator (or worse) of the Insurrection before it started and (c) then a Traitor to the nation as he disobeyed his oath of office to faithfully exercise the duties of this office during the 187 minutes of the riot at the Capitol (i) where officers were beaten by armed rioters to an inch of their lives, (ii) Congress had to flee for their safety, and (iii) Vice President Pence’s protective detail called their families due to the strong possibility that they could die.


    These were easily found. I know I could find more examples of the same comments being copy/pasted over and over to different people in different threads.

    I submit that the Gary Robbins account is not run by an actual person but rather operated by a SPAMBOT.

    • #125
  6. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Same comment to four different people.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Oh Bryan. I have repeatedly said that I would support DeSantis for President. I have even given him money. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh kedavis! I have repeatedly said that I would support DeSantis. I have even given the Committee seeking to draft him money. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I would vote for DeSantis. I have given money to the Committee seeking to draft him. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh Drew! I have already given to the Committee seeking to draft Ron DeSantis. Have you?


    Same comment to two different people in different threads.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh Django!

    The difference between you and I is that you see Trump as some sort of victim.

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh my goodness.

    Drew, the difference between you and I is that you see Trump as some sort of victim.


    Same comment to two different people.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    The January 6th Select Committee has provided clear and convincing evidence that Trump was (a) the Creator of the Big Lie, (b) the Co-creator (or worse) of the Insurrection before it started and (c) then a Traitor to the nation as he disobeyed his oath of office to faithfully exercise the duties of this office during the 187 minutes of the riot at the Capitol (i) where officers were beaten by armed rioters to an inch of their lives, (ii) Congress had to flee for their safety, and (iii) Vice President Pence’s protective detail called their families due to the strong possibility that they could die.

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    The January 6th Select Committee has provided clear and convincing evidence that Trump was (a) the Creator of the Big Lie, (b) the Co-creator (or worse) of the Insurrection before it started and (c) then a Traitor to the nation as he disobeyed his oath of office to faithfully exercise the duties of this office during the 187 minutes of the riot at the Capitol (i) where officers were beaten by armed rioters to an inch of their lives, (ii) Congress had to flee for their safety, and (iii) Vice President Pence’s protective detail called their families due to the strong possibility that they could die.


    These were easily found. I know I could find more examples of the same comments being copy/pasted over and over to different people in different threads.

    I submit that the Gary Robbins account is not run by an actual person but rather operated by a SPAMBOT.

    He reminds me a lot of Trump that way. He has to respond to everything he views as a criticism or an attack.

    • #126
  7. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Django (View Comment):

    He reminds me a lot of Trump that way. He has to respond to everything he views as a criticism or an attack.

    But the same words, often verbatim, are deployed over and over, even if (especially if) they’re non-sequiturs.

    It’s like he’s got this extra document open on his desktop labeled “TALKING POINTS” and he just copy/pastes them into threads at random.

    This is not a conversation. He’s a Chatbot. He’s ELIZA.

    • #127
  8. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    He reminds me a lot of Trump that way. He has to respond to everything he views as a criticism or an attack.

    All the negatives, none of the positives.

    • #128
  9. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Django (View Comment):
    He reminds me a lot of Trump that way. He has to respond to everything he views as a criticism or an attack.

    Maybe that’s why Gary hates Trump so much. They are so much alike. It’s like trying to bring two magnets together on the same pole. They repel.

    • #129
  10. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Just a reminder:

    https://ricochet.com/1144438/the-gary-problem-the-parts-and-the-whole/

     

    • #130
  11. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    She (View Comment):

    Guys.

    Pretend there’s an ignore button.

    Please.

    This could have been an interesting thread. But it’s not. It’s Boring, Repetitive, and Tense. (LOL.)

    And there’d be almost nothing left of it if there actually were an “ignore” button–for those that pressed it–that zapped every comment that Gary either made or which quotes a comment of his in a response by another. By my count, of the 111 comments on this thread to the point at which I’m writing this, 47 feature Gary, either via his own words, or in a response from someone else to something he’s said. Only a few more than that number (54)–30 of them on the first page, where Gary’s name doesn’t appear once–don’t mention him at all.

    What that means is that over the course of the past 81 comments, 47 (58%) have been either by, or about Gary.

    I can’t for the life of me understand why he lives rent-free in so many of your heads. Let the author of the post respond if he’s so inclinded (as he’s done rather well) and show everybody that Gary isn’t “who we are” and then move on.

    You really can’t blame Gary, when you elevate him to a place of such prominence, at the same time as you tweak him on posts where he isn’t, just trying to egg him into engaging so you can start this up again. Please stop.

    This thread is largely wrecked. Some of the fault is Gary’s. But not all of it.

    Yes, my view is that when someone is nice, you can respond to him, but when he is either misdirecting of outright lying, you should ignore him.  This is the ignore button of the mind.  But it is theoretical.

    Functionally, have you ever done the exercise in with four people are standing close together and one person is instructed to talk about whatever he wants to talk about, and the other three are instructed to have a conversation as if the one person isn’t in the room?  It’s extraordinarily hard to do, the best attempts usually progress from the three fitfully speaking over the one person, and progress to trying to speak when the other person isn’t talking, and then progresses to the three people raising their voices, all the while trying to pretend that they don’t hear the one person.  And even then the thread of the three-person conversation is hard to maintain.

    Functionally, the ignore button of the mind doesn’t quite work.  And at best it is a sham: in the back of everyone’s mind, most of their thinking is how to avoid acknowledging the one person.

    After a couple years of objecting to an ignore button on general principle, I have changed my mind and want an ignore button to allow decent conversations to flourish.

    • #131
  12. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Same comment to four different people.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Oh Bryan. I have repeatedly said that I would support DeSantis for President. I have even given him money. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh kedavis! I have repeatedly said that I would support DeSantis. I have even given the Committee seeking to draft him money. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I would vote for DeSantis. I have given money to the Committee seeking to draft him. Have you?

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh Drew! I have already given to the Committee seeking to draft Ron DeSantis. Have you?


    Same comment to two different people in different threads.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh Django!

    The difference between you and I is that you see Trump as some sort of victim.

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Oh my goodness.

    Drew, the difference between you and I is that you see Trump as some sort of victim.


    Same comment to two different people.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    The January 6th Select Committee has provided clear and convincing evidence that Trump was (a) the Creator of the Big Lie, (b) the Co-creator (or worse) of the Insurrection before it started and (c) then a Traitor to the nation as he disobeyed his oath of office to faithfully exercise the duties of this office during the 187 minutes of the riot at the Capitol (i) where officers were beaten by armed rioters to an inch of their lives, (ii) Congress had to flee for their safety, and (iii) Vice President Pence’s protective detail called their families due to the strong possibility that they could die.

    And

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    The January 6th Select Committee has provided clear and convincing evidence that Trump was (a) the Creator of the Big Lie, (b) the Co-creator (or worse) of the Insurrection before it started and (c) then a Traitor to the nation as he disobeyed his oath of office to faithfully exercise the duties of this office during the 187 minutes of the riot at the Capitol (i) where officers were beaten by armed rioters to an inch of their lives, (ii) Congress had to flee for their safety, and (iii) Vice President Pence’s protective detail called their families due to the strong possibility that they could die.


    These were easily found. I know I could find more examples of the same comments being copy/pasted over and over to different people in different threads.

    I submit that the Gary Robbins account is not run by an actual person but rather operated by a SPAMBOT.

    That’s been my hunch for a couple of years.  Seriously.  Either that or a group of people commenting under the same account name and replying from a common script.

    • #132
  13. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    I submit that the Gary Robbins account is not run by an actual person but rather operated by a SPAMBOT.

    It would have to have been built by a software engineer.

    With AI experience.

    And quite handsome. 

    • #133
  14. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    namlliT noD (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    I submit that the Gary Robbins account is not run by an actual person but rather operated by a SPAMBOT.

    It would have to have been built by a software engineer.

    With AI experience.

    And quite handsome.

    Are you admitting to something here?

    • #134
  15. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Flicker (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    Guys.

    Pretend there’s an ignore button.

    Please.

    This could have been an interesting thread. But it’s not. It’s Boring, Repetitive, and Tense. (LOL.)

    And there’d be almost nothing left of it if there actually were an “ignore” button–for those that pressed it–that zapped every comment that Gary either made or which quotes a comment of his in a response by another. By my count, of the 111 comments on this thread to the point at which I’m writing this, 47 feature Gary, either via his own words, or in a response from someone else to something he’s said. Only a few more than that number (54)–30 of them on the first page, where Gary’s name doesn’t appear once–don’t mention him at all.

     

    You really can’t blame Gary, when you elevate him to a place of such prominence, at the same time as you tweak him on posts where he isn’t, just trying to egg him into engaging so you can start this up again. Please stop.

    This thread is largely wrecked. Some of the fault is Gary’s. But not all of it.

    Yes, my view is that when someone is nice, you can respond to him, but when he is either misdirecting of outright lying, you should ignore him. This is the ignore button of the mind. But it is theoretical.

    Functionally, have you ever done the exercise in with four people are standing close together and one person is instructed to talk about whatever he wants to talk about, and the other three are instructed to have a conversation as if the one person isn’t in the room? It’s extraordinarily hard to do, the best attempts usually progress from the three fitfully speaking over the one person, and progress to trying to speak when the other person isn’t talking, and then progresses to the three people raising their voices, all the while trying to pretend that they don’t hear the one person. And even then the thread of the three-person conversation is hard to maintain.

    Functionally, the ignore button of the mind doesn’t quite work. And at best it is a sham: in the back of everyone’s mind, most of their thinking is how to avoid acknowledging the one person.

    After a couple years of objecting to an ignore button on general principle, I have changed my mind and want an ignore button to allow decent conversations to flourish.

    Good points. I also think that women are trained to ‘ignore’ better than men. They like to shun whatever they don’t like. They withhold as a tactic and strategy. Since men vie for their attention, he suffers and they often capitulate.

    Men generally feel they have to deal with pests or are expected to deal. Ignoring these louts doesn’t have the same effect. 

    • #135
  16. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Flicker (View Comment):
    After a couple years of objecting to an ignore button on general principle, I have changed my mind and want an ignore button to allow decent conversations to flourish.

    Learn more here:

    An Ignore Feature: How It Would Benefit Ricochet.

    It’s the thread Scott asked me to write, and then completely IGNORED it.

    That’s irony for you.

     

    • #136
  17. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

     

    AP called it for Lake: 

    • #137
  18. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Django (View Comment):

     

    AP called it for Lake:

    RAWR!

    • #138
  19. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    namlliT noD (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    I submit that the Gary Robbins account is not run by an actual person but rather operated by a SPAMBOT.

    It would have to have been built by a software engineer.

    With AI experience.

    And quite handsome.

    And can program with certain musicality.

    • #139
  20. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Franco (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    [snipped for word count]

    And there’d be almost nothing left of it if there actually were an “ignore” button–for those that pressed it–that zapped every comment that Gary either made or which quotes a comment of his in a response by another. By my count, of the 111 comments on this thread to the point at which I’m writing this, 47 feature Gary, either via his own words, or in a response from someone else to something he’s said. Only a few more than that number (54)–30 of them on the first page, where Gary’s name doesn’t appear once–don’t mention him at all.

     

    You really can’t blame Gary, when you elevate him to a place of such prominence, at the same time as you tweak him on posts where he isn’t, just trying to egg him into engaging so you can start this up again. Please stop.

    This thread is largely wrecked. Some of the fault is Gary’s. But not all of it.

    Yes, my view is that when someone is nice, you can respond to him, but when he is either misdirecting of outright lying, you should ignore him. This is the ignore button of the mind. But it is theoretical.

    Functionally, have you ever done the exercise in with four people are standing close together and one person is instructed to talk about whatever he wants to talk about, and the other three are instructed to have a conversation as if the one person isn’t in the room? It’s extraordinarily hard to do, the best attempts usually progress from the three fitfully speaking over the one person, and progress to trying to speak when the other person isn’t talking, and then progresses to the three people raising their voices, all the while trying to pretend that they don’t hear the one person. And even then the thread of the three-person conversation is hard to maintain.

    Functionally, the ignore button of the mind doesn’t quite work. And at best it is a sham: in the back of everyone’s mind, most of their thinking is how to avoid acknowledging the one person.

    After a couple years of objecting to an ignore button on general principle, I have changed my mind and want an ignore button to allow decent conversations to flourish.

    Good points. I also think that women are trained to ‘ignore’ better than men. They like to shun whatever they don’t like. They withhold as a tactic and strategy. Since men vie for their attention, he suffers and they often capitulate.

    Men generally feel they have to deal with pests or are expected to deal. Ignoring these louts doesn’t have the same effect.

    I asked my wife to corroborate this but I think she didn’t hear me.

    • #140
  21. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    After a couple years of objecting to an ignore button on general principle, I have changed my mind and want an ignore button to allow decent conversations to flourish.

    Learn more here:

    An Ignore Feature: How It Would Benefit Ricochet.

    It’s the thread Scott asked me to write, and then completely IGNORED it.

    That’s irony for you.

    Yes, I’ve changed my mind since then.

    • #141
  22. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Django (View Comment):

     

    AP called it for Lake:

    And this is where the Nevers cut off their noses to spite their faces and support the Democrat.  Later – 18 months after the election they will wonder why the place is falling apart. But never mind, no mean tweets at least.

    • #142
  23. She Member
    She
    @She

    Franco (View Comment):
    Men generally feel they have to deal with pests or are expected to deal. Ignoring these louts doesn’t have the same effect. 

    It’s the remedy that’s never been tried here.

    • #143
  24. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    She (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Men generally feel they have to deal with pests or are expected to deal. Ignoring these louts doesn’t have the same effect.

    It’s the remedy that’s never been tried here.

    The quality of trolling has really collapsed at this site.  Back in my day…

    I’m not even throwing stones here.  Heaven knows, I may do it from time to time.  But not up to the old standards.

    • #144
  25. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    She (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Men generally feel they have to deal with pests or are expected to deal. Ignoring these louts doesn’t have the same effect.

    It’s the remedy that’s never been tried here.

    Women have a different effect on men that men don’t have on other men. In the abstract, Camille Paglia claims (paraphrasing- read Sexual Personae) that women are ‘complete’ and men are outward directed or ‘incomplete’.

    My own anecdotal observation is from the old canard men don’t like to ask directions.

    Well, consider that men enjoy helping women. When a woman asks for directions she gets a nice positive interaction. When a man asks directions ( from another man) he often gets a more negative interaction. Because men act differently with each other and women don’t experience that. It’s a subtle difference but it adds up over time. Personally I don’t have a problem asking for directions but I’d rather have a map than depend on a series of turns any one of which could be wrong or misinterpreted.

    Concerning you-know-who, he rarely responds to me after I give him a piece of my mind. He can’t deal with my insights into his online personality. I never argue with him on his relentless cutandpaste screeds. I go right to his modus operandi and he runs away.

     

    • #145
  26. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Franco (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Men generally feel they have to deal with pests or are expected to deal. Ignoring these louts doesn’t have the same effect.

    It’s the remedy that’s never been tried here.

    Women have a different effect on men that men don’t have on other men. In the abstract, Camille Paglia claims (paraphrasing- read Sexual Personae) that women are ‘complete’ and men are outward directed or ‘incomplete’.

    My own anecdotal observation is from the old canard men don’t like to ask directions.

    Well, consider that men enjoy helping women. When a woman asks for directions she gets a nice positive interaction. When a man asks directions ( from another man) he often gets a more negative interaction. Because men act differently with each other and women don’t experience that. It’s a subtle difference but it adds up over time. Personally I don’t have a problem asking for directions but I’d rather have a map than depend on a sequential

    My husband likes to utilize a copilot. I’m the map.

    • #146
  27. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Stina (View Comment):

    My husband likes to utilize a copilot. I’m the map.

    I believe you mean . . .

    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’M THE MAAAAAAAAAP!!

    I'm The Map!

    • #147
  28. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    It’s been year since my kids were of the Dora-watching age, and that dang jingle is still stuck in my head.

    • #148
  29. She Member
    She
    @She

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    My husband likes to utilize a copilot. I’m the map.

    I believe you mean . . .

    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’M THE MAAAAAAAAAP!!

    I'm The Map!

    A map is a very useful thing, however, it is not the territory.  Sometimes, maps are wrong, and they always have limits.

    • #149
  30. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    My husband likes to utilize a copilot. I’m the map.

    I believe you mean . . .

    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’m the map
    I’M THE MAAAAAAAAAP!!

    I'm The Map!

    I looked that up after making the comment…

    • #150
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.