The Political Satire/Meme Thread

  • Thread starter Danoff
  • 13,689 comments
  • 749,848 views
IMG_20180712_011634.jpg
 
Someone reminded me on the bus this morning that the last time England reached the World Cup semi final during a massive heatwave, the female Tory Prime Minister resigned. Not sure whether that'll happen this time but it's an ill wind, as they say.
 
You know it's a meme right?
Sure do. Does that somehow change the fact that someone scoured a video clip for the exact moment someone they don't like looks their absolute worst?

I'm sure Strzok was sitting there, sucking his teeth, imagining how he'd "prepare" Trey Gowdy.
 
Sure do. Does that somehow change the fact that someone scoured a video clip for the exact moment someone they don't like looks their absolute worst?
Reminds me of people who explain the joke as they are telling the joke. Here goes. Memes aren't always accurate representations of people. They make a stupid face for a split second and you make a meme with a funny caption. Hope that explains why someone would use a video clip of someone at their worst in a meme. That's kind of the point of memes.
 
Reminds me of people who explain the joke as they are telling the joke. Here goes. Memes aren't always accurate representations of people. They make a stupid face for a split second and you make a meme with a funny caption. Hope that explains why someone would use a video clip of someone at their worst in a meme. That's kind of the point of memes.
Cool.
 
I mean, this is funny right?
trump-take-guns-without-due-process-trumpists-yeah-all-you-31232479.png
I'm so glad you picked that one, because it doesn't so much seemingly suggest he used any particular words that he did not, but actually repeats them, nearly verbatim, without distorting their meaning or the context in which they were used. If an image with the words superimposed over it isn't to your liking, how about a video?



To answer your question, no, it's not funny. It's actually rather disturbing, and a perfect example of him using the concept of due process in the manner that serves him and his agenda best, seemingly without fully grasping the meaning behind it. As much as I like the idea of keeping guns away from people who shouldn't have them, the implication that they should be removed without due process is something that every single person in this country should oppose. Due process takes time as he pointed out, but that time is used to determine if such an action is warranted and follows the letter of the law and Constitution. Without due process, where does the line get drawn? Should I not be allowed to possess a firearm because I'm a critic of his words and actions?

I've actually used him as an example when referring to the convention of using out-of-context images...

You mean someone snapped a picture of someone and that person's critics are using said picture out of context to jab at that individual? No way...

1*5yN1VX65SJvsqtRR28LJ7w.jpeg


Actually that may not be a fair comparison, because I'm pretty sure I know the picture you're talking about, and its graininess suggests it may be a low resolution still from amateur video taken during her celebration after defeating Joe Crowley. But I suppose anyone can look crazy if you go frame-by-frame in a video featuring them, scanning for a shot that looks crazy.
...in response to the implication that someone "looks as delusional as her campaign promises."

I suppose, as with nearly anything, there's a line to be drawn. Using an image out of context to suggest an individual's mental state is probably less appropriate than using it to indicate that they used words that they did, and [he says, shooting himself in the foot] using an unrelated image of an individual out of context to convey words they actually used is probably less appropriate than using a benign and/or contextual image of said individual to do so.
 
I'm so glad you picked that one, because it doesn't so much seemingly suggest he used any particular words that he did not, but actually repeats them, nearly verbatim, without distorting their meaning or the context in which they were used. If an image with the words superimposed over it isn't to your liking, how about a video?



To answer your question, no, it's not funny. It's actually rather disturbing, and a perfect example of him using the concept of due process in the manner that serves him and his agenda best, seemingly without fully grasping the meaning behind it. As much as I like the idea of keeping guns away from people who shouldn't have them, the implication that they should be removed without due process is something that every single person in this country should oppose. Due process takes time as he pointed out, but that time is used to determine if such an action is warranted and follows the letter of the law and Constitution. Without due process, where does the line get drawn? Should I not be allowed to possess a firearm because I'm a critic of his words and actions?

I've actually used him as an example when referring to the convention of using out-of-context images...


...in response to the implication that someone "looks as delusional as her campaign promises."

I suppose, as with nearly anything, there's a line to be drawn. Using an image out of context to suggest an individual's mental state is probably less appropriate than using it to indicate that they used words that they did, and [he says, shooting himself in the foot] using an unrelated image of an individual out of context to convey words they actually used is probably less appropriate than using a benign and/or contextual image of said individual to do so.

I thought your objection was
Does that somehow change the fact that someone scoured a video clip for the exact moment someone they don't like looks their absolute worst?
And after all that ^^^ I don't have any idea if you thought the Trump meme I used was an out of context frame grab. Or is it Trump so the same standards around out of context screen grabs don't apply?
 
I thought your objection was
That's what I said it is, not what I was objecting to.

And after all that ^^^ I don't have any idea if you thought the Trump meme I used was an out of context frame grab.
At no point in the video where he talks about taking guns without due process does he have a microphone so close to his face, nor does he bite his lower lip while thrusting his index finger into the air as if to evoke a surprise prostate exam--the image is clearly out of context as it relates to the words superimposed over it.

Or is it Trump so the same standards around out of context screen grabs don't apply?
How does it go?

"If it were anyone else, you wouldn--"

:lol:

Sorry.

"If it were anyone else--"

laughslap.gif


Hang on, I can do this.

*deep breath*

"If it were anyone else"...*snort*..."you wouldn't have any objections"...*snicker*..."to the assertions being made."

Whew! It's hard to keep composed while spewing such BS...I don't know how you manage to play that card as often as you do.
 
That's what I said it is, not what I was objecting to.


At no point in the video where he talks about taking guns without due process does he have a microphone so close to his face, nor does he bite his lower lip while thrusting his index finger into the air as if to evoke a surprise prostate exam--the image is clearly out of context as it relates to the words superimposed over it.


How does it go?

"If it were anyone else, you wouldn--"

:lol:

Sorry.

"If it were anyone else--"

View attachment 751011

Hang on, I can do this.

*deep breath*

"If it were anyone else"...*snort*..."you wouldn't have any objections"...*snicker*..."to the assertions being made."

Whew! It's hard to keep composed while spewing such BS...I don't know how you manage to play that card as often as you do.
Okay, I'm still thinking one of us doesn't understand what a meme is and I'm pretty sure it isn't me. An
image is clearly out of context as it relates to the words superimposed over it.
is pretty much literally the definition of a meme. It looks like you're objecting to a meme being...a meme...in the Political Cartoon/Image/Meme Thread?
 

Oh, the yooooge-manity.

Okay, I'm still thinking one of us doesn't understand what a meme is....pretty much literally the definition of a meme.

That's a captioned photo. You could literally read the Dawkins definition. In practical usage the meme is an idea based on an image or zeitgeist that spreads and evolves. Just sticking 2-pixel-black-stroked Impact over a picture does not create a meme, imbue memetic properties or necessarily build on a preconceived set of values related to the origin of the base image.
 
Last edited:
stream_10afb10c-bb38-4413-83f1-5c5ca12219f1-640x960.jpg


Love it, love it, love it. Would love it more had the flyover been approved, and am astonished the protester wasn't seen as a potential physical threat (come on...bomb vest?) and shot down, but that wordplay presented at Turnberry is fantastic.
 
stream_10afb10c-bb38-4413-83f1-5c5ca12219f1-640x960.jpg


Love it, love it, love it. Would love it more had the flyover been approved, and am astonished the protester wasn't seen as a potential physical threat (come on...bomb vest?) and shot down, but that wordplay presented at Turnberry is fantastic.
It's a golf resort. One'd certainly expect there to be snipers in play.
 
It's a golf resort. One'd certainly expect there to be snipers in play.

Supposedly there were, which isn't surprising, watching the situation. What is strange is he "got away" and the police were (when I last read on it) looking for him, yet media somehow knows he was a greenpeace activist and had been there to protest against Trump due to his environmental policy.

I don't think this is a wonderful thing, that people can get this close to an active sitting elected leader especially in a foreign country. Like him or not.
 
Supposedly there were, which isn't surprising, watching the situation. What is strange is he "got away" and the police were (when I last read on it) looking for him, yet media somehow knows he was a greenpeace activist and had been there to protest against Trump due to his environmental policy.

I don't think this is a wonderful thing, that people can get this close to an active sitting elected leader especially in a foreign country. Like him or not.
Pretty sure I read that he phoned it in a few minutes minutes ahead of time so I'd assume Greenpeace contacted the media about this stupid little publicity stunt.
 
Back