I had forgotten this video:
I just stumbled into that old post today. "If Trump wins..." Well, Trump did win. And it was one thing to watch that video last June, but how about now? Did you laugh? Did Al Franken laugh — Al Franken, who says Trump never laughs?
ADDED: Speaking of never laughs, Kanye West — who appeared at Trump's side today — has long made a brand out of never smiling.
"... I saw this book from the 1800s and it was velvet-covered with brass and everything. I looked at all these people’s photos, and they look so real and their outfits were incredible and they weren’t smiling. People, you know the paparazzi, always come up to me, ‘Why you not smiling?’ and I think, not smiling makes me smile. When you see paintings in an old castle, people are not smiling because it just wouldn’t look as cool.'"AND: In Trump's case, maybe he's not laughing because not to laugh fits his theme They're laughing at us...
ALSO: Here's a great example of Hillary relying on a laughing-it-all-off approach to dealing with a challenge — and Trump staying aggressively unjovial:
पोस्ट्स
५४ टिप्पण्या:
Immediately I thought of Wayne Newton singing "Dankest Memes, Darling Dankest Memes".
i remember this cool video. Makes you just want to give Trumpy a hug.
Donald Trump's Weird Old Videos
"Watch Trump Sing ‘Green Acres,’ Smooch Rudy Giuliani, and Other Weird Old Videos"
Trump and Kanye together today at Trump Tower. Secret Service said Kanye was no security risk and it was up to Trump if he wanted to allow Kanye in. Kanye got 15 minutes of time!
Was looking at a photo of my grandmother's family when she was 3 (ca. 1920, rural Indiana). 8 kids and my great-grandparents, and not a hint of a smile from any of them. My mother explained (I'd never given it much thought) that smiling for pictures is relatively recent. Back then, it was considered undignified to smile for a photograph. Regardless of the dignity aspect, I usually don't smile specifically for the fact that someone is taking my picture.
Hil bullied by press
“Look, this is a lesson learned,” Brock told me for this week’s episode of POLITICO’s “Off Message” podcast. “Donald Trump intimidated the press and bullied the press. I’m not saying you have to intimidate and bully, but you have to be tough. The press are animals and they need to be treated that way.”
Like..oh..I don't know..herding them with ropes?
Regardless of the dignity aspect, I usually don't smile specifically for the fact that someone is taking my picture.
12/13/16, 4:31 PM
There was a reddit post recently that was an AMA (ask me anything) by someone who had portrayed Goofy at one of the Disney parks. Among the comments was a short discussion by other people who had dressed in costume for various employers, talking about how they smiled when they had their pictures taken even though they were wearing a costume that hid their face.
Here is another meeting that is going to give Democrats heartburn.
Jim Brown and Ray Lewis at Trump Tower.
@walter,
David Brock, from the linked article:
They shouldn’t have bothered to defend the endless and endlessly damaging email story – they should have refused to defend it all and pivoted to a harsh, attention-grabbing attack on her real opponent: the press.
It's becoming clearer & clearer that the reason the Clintonistas lost is because they are all insane. I mean "Coo-coo for Coco-Puffs" level insane.
It's so full of fail for them..can't help but cheer them on with such thinking.
"Yes! That's it!"
Trump needs to hire Ray Lewis as a security personnel. That will win the respect of Putin. Ray has no hesitation killing anyone that gets out of line, and that is only at Super Bowls.
They probably spent more on making that video than Trump did on his whole campaign.
On a serious note, I have a half-baked theory that the new social media environment was fertile ground for places like 4-chan and Reddit to spread their influence. I watched the way it played out, and a lot of it seemed to be meme-war, with the usual suspects cranking out pro-Hillary memes (Cracked, Buzzfeed, the Occupy subset) and /TheDonald and /pol/ producing most of the pro-Trump stuff.
Well I laughed.
To be fair, Al Franken has seen a lot of people never laugh...
Crimso,
Most of the non-smilingness of old photographs arises from the very low film sensitivity of the day. Exposures often had to be quite long, and the subject of the images had to hold quite still. It is difficult to hold anything approaching a natural looking smile for more than a few seconds.
Here's a peppy explanation of the problem:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/videos/category/ask-smithsonian/ask-smithsonian-why-dont-people-smile-in-o/
Hillary trying to be funny has always been one of the creepiest things about her.
Hillary ain't laughing now, is she?
talking about how they smiled when they had their pictures taken even though they were wearing a costume that hid their face.
I wonder if that's because when you smile, your body language "smiles" along with you.
Gosh, those debates seem so long ago.
Thanks for the video reminder. Wow that video is crazy.
Hillary seems high in that clip. And that Japanese Trump plug was awesome!
Hillary had Google spending money creating her memes and Facebook spreading them. Maybe the most inspiring candidate has the best memes?
Trump and Hillary both have strange smiles and strange laughs--when you look at their eyes it reveals there's something unreal and joyless about them. Maybe they smile and laugh in private, but in public there's something missing.
Reagan--now there was a guy who laughed for real. Probably the most self-assured person we've had in the White House in the modern era (even more than Bush Jr., or Obama).
Trump is the master of Consensus, the master of Teamwork, a true American man with a true love for America in his heart. You will see, if he gets the chance....
The Usurper Hussein Obama was the true example of who should not be President, a "citizen of the world", born of a foreign father, and not a "child of our own", who wanted to "transform" America into a neutered shell of itself, and governed by a Central World entity. There was a reason that a natural born Citizen was required.
Foreign influence is death to the Republic---- see John Jay-- Federalist 2-5, "Concerning the Dangers of Foreign Influence", See G. Washington's Farewell Address.
"when you look at their eyes it reveals there's something unreal and joyless about them. "
Maybe if you are a Democrat or a NeverTrumper. I think Trump is enjoying this more than he ever dreamed and is doing a great job. Kellyanne has him doing exactly the right things, like the "Thank You" tour.
"Reagan--now there was a guy who laughed for real."
Oh I doubt that. He was certainly self assured. I have read a number of people who said he was quite a cold man personally. He and Nancy were a very closed pair. Maybe Steve Hayward has more on this. I think it's why the Morris biography was such a failure.
"The Usurper Hussein Obama was the true example of who should not be President, a "citizen of the world", born of a foreign father, and not a "child of our own", who wanted to "transform" America into a neutered shell of itself, and governed by a Central World entity. There was a reason that a natural born Citizen was required."
Mick, first of all congrats, I heard you have a new kid coming--quite a feat at age 73!
Second, I must advise you to not spill the beans on the Usurper's crimes. The Usurper is still president, and even after he's gone (if he does in fact relinquish power! We just cannot be sure) he has allies in high places. Once they realize you're on to their game, they may "take care" of you, making it look like an accident.
So what I propose instead is that you keep your revelations on the QT, maybe come up with some sort of code, like "ice cream lover" instead of "Kenyan" and "Chuck E Cheese" instead of "Central World Entity." This way we'll know what you mean but you'll keep the Usurper's allies off your track.
Meanwhile, please post frequently an "I'm still alive" message so we can be sure they didn't find you out.
"Maybe if you are a Democrat or a NeverTrumper. I think Trump is enjoying this more than he ever dreamed and is doing a great job."
He may be enjoying it, but he's not revealing that in his "smiles" or laughs. But just as you think I can't think otherwise because I'm a "Democrat" or "NeverTrumper" (or in other words, you either think Trump is tops or you're hopelessly biased against him) perhaps it is your own fandom that makes you so sure that only bias explains my take? Note--my observations about him and Hillary's smiles and laughs are not a judgment on either of them "doing a great job". Just an observation on their "smiles" and "laughs."
"Oh I doubt that. He was certainly self assured. I have read a number of people who said he was quite a cold man personally. He and Nancy were a very closed pair. Maybe Steve Hayward has more on this. I think it's why the Morris biography was such a failure."
Really? I admit I haven't read all there is to read on Reagan but I didn't get the impression of him being cold. Guarded, maybe, and with some distance with his children, but that even his critics found him to be a genuinely kind and warm man. But maybe there's more to the story.
mick, if i'm not mistaken trumps mommy was a fereigner too... however she was white, so i guess that doesn't count in your world... i always enjoy your crazy blogs and you did predict trump in a landslide (well you can't be right all of the time - at least you got trump = president right)... after sighting Jay and Washington regarding foreign entanglements, how do you feel about trump and his SoS being Putinphiles? .. this is a big win for russia, or is trump really 'dealing' with putin and using him?..
" it is your own fandom that makes you so sure that only bias explains my take?"
I have read your comments since and before the election. They lead me to believe you are a NeverTrumper. If I am wrong, I have misread your comments. My "fandom" has been discussed at length over the past year at Chicagoboyz where I have many blog posts on the topic.
You could start here.
I am not a Trump supporter but I am intrigued at the steady progress he is making toward success. I have been a fan of Angelo Codevilla’s characterization of America’s Ruling Class.
The recent collapse of Republican Congressional resistance to the left’s political agenda as noted in the surrender of Paul Ryan to the Democrats in the budget, has aggravated the Republican base and its frustration.
And so on...
AS soon as she opens her strange phony mouth with that big progressive lying grin - I am shaken to my core. wow - we dodged a bullet. She's hard to watch. She emits phony.
"this is a big win for russia, or is trump really 'dealing' with putin and using him?.."
And the delusion persists. Sometime you people might start to understand why you lost but that is not now.
"I have read your comments since and before the election. They lead me to believe you are a NeverTrumper. If I am wrong, I have misread your comments."
I've long been (and remain) a Trump critic, but never a "NeverTrumper"--I can't catalogue my previous comments over the past year and a half but while I criticize much about him I've also defended him from time to time. Generally I try to look at the issue at hand from the standpoint "would I feel differently if this were someone I otherwise supported" (and I've tried doing the same for Hillary and Obama, who I don't support either). I'm not a fan of anti-Trump or pro-Trump hackery, as it gets predictable quickly.
Likewise, if I've misread your comments to make you out a Trump fan, then mea culpa on that too.
Where's that silly re-set button?
Good thing Obama had more flexibility with the Russians after he was elected.
Leftwing progs? *Ignore* *Can't remember* Reset to Nowhere
"Good thing Obama had more flexibility with the Russians after he was elected. "
And what did he ever do with that vaunted flexibility? The only constant with Russia is that Russia does what is best for Russia. From FDR's courting of Stalin, our leaders have constantly made the mistaken assumption that they could handle their Moscow counterparts and always learn to their surprise that they don't share our utopian visions.
He may be enjoying it, but he's not revealing that in his "smiles" or laughs. But just as you think I can't think otherwise because I'm a "Democrat" or "NeverTrumper" (or in other words, you either think Trump is tops or you're hopelessly biased against him) perhaps it is your own fandom that makes you so sure that only bias explains my take?
1. Did you vote for Trump or not? When did you ever cut him a break of any kind?
2. How do you think you rate on the "warm, smiley, human" scale, Brando? You come off as rather the Vulcan manqué, and it seems you work at it.
3. Trump is not a frequent or easy smiler, true, but it peeps out from behind his mask of stern and dignified. I daresay he holds back on smiling and open expressions, as a social armor, and because, in Ayn Rand's words, 'have you ever noticed how the idiot always smiles?' Perhaps he was taught restraint.
We'll have to see more of him.
"1. Did you vote for Trump or not? When did you ever cut him a break of any kind?"
Of course I did. And in many previous threads I've defended him, when people made a huge deal out of his "pussy grab" remarks, for example. And here I don't even see what's so insulting about seeing no "joy" in his smile. Disagree with it, fine, but the defensiveness of many of you towards anything short of praise for the man is puzzling. I hadn't pegged you for a Trump fan.
"2. How do you think you rate on the "warm, smiley, human" scale, Brando? You come off as rather the Vulcan manqué, and it seems you work at it."
Maybe that's the way I come across online.
"3. Trump is not a frequent or easy smiler, true, but it peeps out from behind his mask of stern and dignified. I daresay he holds back on smiling and open expressions, as a social armor, and because, in Ayn Rand's words, 'have you ever noticed how the idiot always smiles?' Perhaps he was taught restraint."
Maybe so. I don't really care much whether a president smiles, or seems happy--sometimes it's the happy ones you need to watch out for.
GWash said...
"mick, if i'm not mistaken trumps mommy was a fereigner too.."
Trump's mother was naturalized upon the marriage to Trump's US Citizen father, ergo she was a US citizen before Trump was born in the US. Thus Trump was born in the US of 2 US Citizen parents--- a natural born Citizen (See Minor v. Happersett, 88 US 162, 167 (1875) and also quoting Minor v. Happersett, Wong Kim Ark, 168 US 649, @ 680 (1898), Both AFTER the 14th Amendment in 1866.)
"after sighting Jay and Washington regarding foreign entanglements, how do you feel about trump and his SoS being Putinphiles? .. this is a big win for russia, or is trump really 'dealing' with putin and using him?.."
Citing the "Real Fake News" GWASH?. There is NO EVIDENCE that Russia "influenced the election", but there is A LOT OF EVIDENCE that the crooked Old Lady sold foreign governments influence through her office and "Foundation".
Trump wants peace with Russia, that is as for as Russian "influence" goes. The Crooked Old Lady and the Usurper want war with Russia.
"Citing the "Real Fake News" GWASH?. There is NO EVIDENCE that Russia "influenced the election", but there is A LOT OF EVIDENCE that the crooked Old Lady sold foreign governments influence through her office and "Foundation".
Trump wants peace with Russia, that is as for as Russian "influence" goes. The Crooked Old Lady and the Usurper want war with Russia."
Code words, Mick! It's almost as though you don't really suspect what the Usurper is really up to! Just write this out as "Ice cream at Chuck E Cheese, it goes right to the top." That should be sufficient for us to decode.
1. Well, good, even if you lived in a safe state, with the popular vote bushwah it all counts even for PR purposes. I had written you off, but glad you came round.
It's not insulting per se, but it's concerning as an attack - I think it's valid to say that I perceive some horrible and dangerous specimen of humanity wrapped up in HRC's flesh which IMHO invalidates her from having power over me, and do not like the comparison. He may have issues, but I do not see him as fake.
2. Maybe the low smiling Trump is the Trump that Trump shows you.
3. Then, LOL, why raise the issue? I'm having to watch hard enough to keep up on substance.
"Code words, Mick! It's almost as though you don't really suspect what the Usurper is really up to! Just write this out as "Ice cream at Chuck E Cheese, it goes right to the top." That should be sufficient for us to decode."
Outing yourself as a .gov troll Brando. Yes #Pizzagate goes all the way to the top-- to the Fag in chief. Wonder why MSM does not report on this story about one of his biggest "bundlers being charged with molesting minors?
http://usaopenmagazine.com/insider-democrat-arrested-pedophilia-direct-ties-obama-hillary/
https://twitter.com/hashtag/pizzagate?lang=en
Podesta was his chief of staff, and has child torture art in his home. He also has made no claim of innocence.
"...and they weren’t smiling"
Actually the real reason people didn't smile in photos was that the first photography required exposures of 30 seconds or longer. People cannot hold a smile for that long. If you see someone smiling in one of these older photos, their lips are a weird blur. So photographers told the subjects not to smile. People came to believe that they shouldn't smile for a photo portrait for many decades after, even when exposure times became short, because that is what they believed to be normal in portraits.
And Brando, Mick's instincts have had a big scoop of validation served up this past November, maybe you noticed. I understand the desire to avoid witch hunts but the Wiki letter stank on ice, some psychos delight in showing you their 'coded' hand, and which five seconds of John Podesta's life have made you look at him and say, "No, he's normal, I'll put my hand in the fire for him?"
I say he warrants a look. Even if he's innocent, he's a major player who warrants hounding and harassment as a political tactic; besides, turnabout is fair play, and it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
"It's becoming clearer & clearer that the reason the Clintonistas lost is because they are all insane."
-- I just thought they were stupid, but the fact they truly believe the press was against me, and embrace this delusion, makes me think you may be right.
Crimso,
That's a just-so story. Where are the painted portraits of people smiling? Why do people in current -day primitive cultures, with NO exposure to the long exposure times of the early period of photography, almost universally adopt a non-smiling pose for photographs?
René Girard has a better explanation (I'd give you some page references but my copy is boxed up somewhere.)
I got an ad for Urban Carry Holsters before the Trump video. The ad shows a guy pulling from complete concealment a short barreled shotgun out of his tight blue jeans. Then in quick sequence, the same guy pulls every kind of handgun, one at a time, out of the same holster, showing how it works.
Interesting product. Interesting product placement. Merry Christmas.
"It's not insulting per se, but it's concerning as an attack"
See, I don't even see what I initially wrote as an attack. Sure, a "smile" that conveys no joy can be sort of fake, but so what? That's politics. It'd be like noticing that politicians talk slightly differently to different crowds. You seem to be concerned when I compare Trump to Hillary in any way, but I see much in common between them (not to say there are many differences too). But that doesn't mean he's as bad as her.
"Then, LOL, why raise the issue? I'm having to watch hard enough to keep up on substance."
I only raised the issue because it was the topic of the thread. But if you think I'm worried as in "oh no, fake smiles! This is terrible!" that wasn't where I'm coming from.
"And Brando, Mick's instincts have had a big scoop of validation served up this past November, maybe you noticed. I understand the desire to avoid witch hunts but the Wiki letter stank on ice, some psychos delight in showing you their 'coded' hand, and which five seconds of John Podesta's life have made you look at him and say, "No, he's normal, I'll put my hand in the fire for him?""
Admittedly I don't keep up with Mick's conspiracy theories. When he started in with Rubio not being native born (despite actually being born in the U.S.) I tuned out.
"Outing yourself as a .gov troll Brando."
Dammit Mick, hasn't it occurred to you that I'm in deep cover? If they get to me they're going to get to you. Now the whole operation is compromised.
Anyone else read the first comment and flash on Ferris Bueller?
It's easy to say - most things are easy to say - that H and D are alike. Hell, a New Yorker cover art with Trump as Miss Congeniality was almost deniable as a pic of either of them.
But much of that is on a level with calling them both New Yorkers. To put it kindly, superficial (And you, a New Yorker! Not that you said that), or perhaps glib is the word. The true differences between them are so glaring to my mind that 'twere invidious to compare.
Hillary can barely process in groups of people where two might speak at once. Trump plays with chaos, it slides off him. Trump is spontaneous and warm and human, certainly in comparison to H, who evidently must be tutored in how to laugh, smile, walk, or do anything but lie. Hillary Clinton has probably never put her hand in her pocket for another living being without it being on camera. Trump we'll never even know what he's done for people on so many levels. H's biggest achievement was flying a million miles, net result, to set the world on fire. T probably has flown a million miles, and at the end of it was successful business.
So different to my mind. You can judge Trump on his own merits and demerits, but to equate the two is like Robert Cook equating Left and Right in America. And it provides H cover. Fortunately, I think or hope, H is politically Sauron, watching Gollum biting Frodo's finger on the precipice of Mount Doom. I hope this electoral kamikaze act serves only to prolong her agony.
You think Trump wants the Ring for himself. The only way to learn is to see, I guess. Maybe Trump is Frodo, maybe Trump is Boromir, but he sure ain't Sauron.
Re Mick, I sure wish you would have treated Podesta instead. As it happens I abandoned Mick on pragmatical grounds, and because he would not engage me, but yes, I do seem to recall as a relic of my primary education that not only must an nBC be born here, but of citizen parents. I would have voted for him or Cruz anyway, because Hillary, but I would have felt very wrong doing it.
Meanwhile, Mick gleefully set the controls for the heart of the Sun, and prepared Smores. I held the faith as best I could, but though I supported T all the way, I thought we would lose - thought we'd have to lose - thought the D machine was unbeatable, too many hidden voters, hidden ballots, not to drag her bloated carcass over the finish line. When I stayed up election eve I just wanted to die - to watch the Republic die - facing the enemy.
Turns out there was no Democratic Sun and the hidden votes were ours. So maybe Mick is a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty, yet if you're stupid but you're right, you're not stupid.
You? You're a clever fellow, Brando, one can see that a mile off, but were you right? Were you helpful, even? Me, at least maybe I whipped a dozen votes into line among all my acquaintance here and IRL, even in the midst of my despair. What good were you to anyone except the makers of suicide pills? People like you, wisdom like yours, are what is meant by taking counsel of your fears.
Personally if I'm going to be raped, I'd rather be beaten unconscious first, than relax and enjoy it (or philosophize). And you know what,
Ni shagu nazad!
is right.
Or if you prefer English to Russian and Churchill to Stalin,
"Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."
You may be a lot of things, Brando, but you're not a fighter. Or if you are, beyond blogsnark, you hide it well.
Courage is always the right answer. Have some.
"You may be a lot of things, Brando, but you're not a fighter. Or if you are, beyond blogsnark, you hide it well."
And what is this comment thread but blogsnark? If this is where the "fighting" is to take place we must find other battlefields.
I think our disagreement is mostly on two issues, (1) that our comments here have any real influence or effect and (2) that because of this, any criticism of Trump here helps Clinton (or now that she's done, the Left opposition). First, I don't think our comments here have much influence outside of this small circle. Perhaps it'd be different if I was an influential pundit or something but that's not the case. And because of that, it makes little sense to not call it as I see it--should I withhold criticism of Trump if he does something I think is inane, or bad for the country, or bad for my view of the conservative cause? The thing I always liked about other conservatives is we've often been good about disagreeing with one another and able to self-reflect and call ourselves out on a case-by-case basis, which overall makes us stronger. To do otherwise makes us stagnant and weak. Particularly as the fights ahead are going to be tough ones.
Now, if on a given issue you think I've gotten something wrong or missed some fact, I'm always eager to hear it--it's not like I haven't been wrong before. But simply attributing my statements to "not being a fighter"--this isn't where the battle is.
Anyway, BL I do consider your criticism, and I appreciate it. These back and forths are worthwhile.
Thanks, Brando. I wouldn't bother if I didn't consider you worth the effort.
It's not about Donald Trump or votes. It's systemic and philosophical.
And this blog, and all social media, is a battlespace. Never doubt it.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा