President Trump

[Kinkybyname]

remarkably fickle and inconsistent, on the one hand seemingly doesn't give a fuck about how people feel or what they think about him - he can't do - the way he acts and looks you' think he'd have skin like rhino hide and yet he becomes remarkably thin-skinned when people point out certain truths about him

 

[JOGAMIGMOG]

He’s a man baby how the fuck he’s in charge is beyond me

One word to explain it:
Yanks

 

[BlueHammer85]

He’s a man baby how the fuck he’s in charge is beyond me

Sadly he’s relating to most voters who are dumb as fuck, they’d rather read a rant about Bruce Springsteen and Taylor Swift rather than any actual policy change to do with the economy, health care, education etc. politics is dead.

 

[Blue Maverick]

Sadly he’s relating to most voters who are dumb as fuck, they’d rather read a rant about Bruce Springsteen and Taylor Swift rather than any actual policy change to do with the economy, health care, education etc. politics is dead.

Populism at its finest

 

[threespires]

The key thing about that Springsteen post isn't really the man baby ranting, it's the sinister thinly veiled threat towards the end. Without going far enough to truly implicate himself (a trick Farage has down too) you can easily read it either as the threat of state sponsored retribution upon return or encouragement / 'permission' for a nutter to take matters into their own hands.

This sort of stuff isn't just about a thin skinned narcissist, it's about silencing people either through indirect threats of violence, or escalating their costs for security or using the state to make their life difficult. The man baby bit is faintly amusing, the rest of it is anything but.

 

[ballbag]

Badmouthing Springsteen and Biden

What an embarrassing ****.

 

[MouldensChippy]

What an embarrassing ****.

Which one, the orange embarrassing ****, or the one who was paid to perform a concert for his fans, but had a political rant about a politician that nobody in this country was involved in voting for embarrassing **** ?

 

[ballbag]

Which one, the orange embarrassing ****, or the one who was paid to perform a concert for his fans, but had a political rant about a politician that nobody in this country was involved in voting for embarrassing **** ?

What an embarrassing ****

 

[noseve]

Incredible how Trump always reacts to all this stuff, the (brilliant) Jon Peters and Jimmy Kimmel stuff etc... but isn't even aware of who attends Ukraine-Russia head-to-heads, or a 5-day-old video of the ant-DEI lynch mob dragging people off the streets.

I agree with the comment about the threat at the end, apart from maybe the 'thinly-veiled' bit - I think it's blatant. By putting it out there, he's hoping that his followers will at least boycott Springsteen, but also that one might just pick up his rifle, to ingratiate himself with MAGA and his leader, assuming that there'll be a pardon coming along after a few months.

I'd have been angry if I'd been at that gig, though - hardly the time or the place.

 

[jimharri]

 

[ChicagoBlue]

There’s no way in hell he wrote that! It is far too cogent, lacks required spelling errors and not enough bile. Sounds more like a Steven Miller bashing!

Either way, it’s never nice to see a little threat left dangling from the POTUS on a national treasure.

LOVE that he did it in Manchester…home of the Industrial Revolution, the first steam locomotive, the trade union movement and even Marx & Engels musings! So apropos!!

FDJT

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I'd have been angry if I'd been at that gig, though - hardly the time or the place.

The right time. The right place.
And then 3 hours of Bruce to help you get iver your anger…(eye roll)

Or, you could just stay home with your AirPods in and listen to your Kid Rock album if you don’t want the Bruce experience!

 

[Blue Maverick]

Incredible how Trump always reacts to all this stuff, the (brilliant) Jon Peters and Jimmy Kimmel stuff etc... but isn't even aware of who attends Ukraine-Russia head-to-heads, or a 5-day-old video of the ant-DEI lynch mob dragging people off the streets.

I agree with the comment about the threat at the end, apart from maybe the 'thinly-veiled' bit - I think it's blatant. By putting it out there, he's hoping that his followers will at least boycott Springsteen, but also that one might just pick up his rifle, to ingratiate himself with MAGA and his leader, assuming that there'll be a pardon coming along after a few months.

I'd have been angry if I'd been at that gig, though - hardly the time or the place.

Throughout history musicians have always been political look at Lennon, Dylan etc maybe they think it might help rather than doing or saying nothing, then they get lambasted for been rich pricks who don’t stand up.

 

[The perfect fumble]

The right time. The right place.
And then 3 hours of Bruce to help you get iver your anger…(eye roll)

It does beg the question, if not on stage where is the right time and place for Springsteen? In the bath?

 

[MouldensChippy]

Bet you'll all love it if you've paid hundreds of pounds for a ticket to the match when suddenly, at a throw in, a player turns around, grabs a microphone and starts lecturing you. :-)

 

[noseve]

The right time. The right place.
And then 3 hours of Bruce to help you get iver your anger…(eye roll)

Or, you could just stay home with your AirPods in and listen to your Kid Rock album if you don’t want the Bruce experience!

That second paragraph is MAGA-like - so because I disagree with his actions (albeit not his sentiment), you make assumptions?

Even if my favourite artists did this, I'd have the same opinion.

 

[noseve]

It does beg the question, if not on stage where is the right time and place for Springsteen? In the bath?

Springsteen has access to a mike - or prime-time chat - any time he wants it.

He doesn't need to - and is wrong to - force it down the throats of a captive audience. That audience didn't pay serious money because of his powerful political rhetoric. They wanted to hear his songs.

Of course, if he brings out a single of his speech and it reaches the charts, I'll happily agree that I'm wrong.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Springsteen has access to a mike - or prime-time chat - any time he wants it.

He doesn't need to - and is wrong to - force it down the throats of a captive audience. That audience didn't pay serious money because of his powerful political rhetoric. They wanted to hear his songs.

Of course, if he brings out a single of his speech and it reaches the charts, I'll happily agree that I'm wrong.

Rock music is not all about girls and taking drugs, it's an art form.

Take this....

John Singer Sargent, ‘Gassed’ (1919)

You reckon he should've stuck to painting flowers?

How about these?









And Springsteen has never been politically neutral...



Not all popular music is corporate mush.

 

[noseve]

Rock music is not all about girls and taking drugs, it's an art form.

Take this....

John Singer Sargent, ‘Gassed’ (1919)

You reckon he should've stuck to painting flowers?

Did he force people to look at it, then? No, he didn't.

Read mine again - You've clearly completely missed the point.

 

[MouldensChippy]

Rock music is not all about girls and taking drugs, it's an art form.

Take this....

John Singer Sargent, ‘Gassed’ (1919)

You reckon he should've stuck to painting flowers?

Maybe he should just let his music do the speaking...

After all it's what the audience actually paid lots of cash for.

And the where.. How about he does speeches on Trump in the USA where they actually elected him, and where they maybe able to do something about him. The folk of Manchester didn't elect the clown.