Trump doesn't negotiate. He uses leverage he already has. When he stiffed contractors and dared them to sue, he was using the leverage of him having money and lawyers. That basic relationship underlies all his "deal-making." This is what he does when he threatens to - or does - withhold federally-allocated money and say he'll give some of it back in exchange for some favor. Same thing with tariffs, ICE, and the military.
Trump can't identify his counterparties' wants. He can't identify abstract drives on either side. He views his counterparty being happy as an inherent loss for him. He has no negotiation skills. What he has is negotiation resources: money, lawyers, the US military, the DoJ. He uses resources other people have developed as leverage. It's the only play he has ever known.
"He views his counterparty being happy as an inherent loss for him."
Yeah, this. I personally feel that the phrase "the cruelty is the point" is overused (as an excuse to pretend that your opponents are motivated by malice, rather than simply disagreeing with you), but it does seem to apply to people with Trump's mindset. If your opponent isn't miserable, how can you be sure that you Won and they Lost?
Bonus points: the Trumps (Melania attacked first, then Donald joined in) went after Kimmel for a joke about wife outliving much older husband. Then, a few days later, Donald makes a joke with the same exact premise in front of Melania and the King and Queen of England.
I don't think he sees it as a huge problem for other people, either. He'll say the media and Democrats are unfair for pushing back on him when he says they wouldn't push back on anyone else for the same thing, but what he's objecting too is perceived prejudice/bullying, not hypocrisy. I think hypocrisy is just part of how he thinks the world does/should work, like tariffs and the weak submitting to the strong and everyone, at root, looking out for themselves.
Something I’ve noticed-all these comedians who are all over each other’s podcasts-Rogan, Gillis, Diaz-whomever-aren’t actually that funny. Are they intentionally keeping their jokes/powder dry for paying gigs? That would make sense.
And now thinking more about it, “he’s our son of a bitch” line coming from supposedly religious “christians” are extremely funny and rich.
Like the deal is supposedly support moral degenerates to “purge the enemy” as a tradeoff but they receive moral degenerates AND strengthened enemy lmao
And it is deeply ironic that Christian Nationalists seem to become more and more representative in ever shrinking MAGA platform - and I could be wrong but I don’t think it is a coincidence that they stopped talking about Trump as “he’s *our* son of a bitch” and rather “Akshually Trump is Christ adjacent being” lol
And this is how we get Pete Hegseth- another moral degenerates who also engages in equally stupid rage fueled vindictive behaviors. And he really sincerely believes himself to be moral religious warrior and what’s more he is not entertaining at all. (Now Stephen Miller seems to go MIA, Pete Hegseth has become the most disgusting person for me lol)
I thought it was Melania who was offended, not Trump himself? But I admit, I haven't been keeping up with this silliness.
But making jokes about Trump is too easy, in fact it's stale by now. Kimmel had a whole target-rich (see what I did there? heh-heh, so funny!) opportunity in front of him. Nearly 3,000 journalists there? What an opportunity! Jokes lamenting how the shooter didn't even get close enough to make a start (relax guys, I'm only joking! you can take a joke, can't you?) 3,000 journos and not even a scratch! America needs to close the assassin effectiveness gap! Find out what the most recent school/mass shooting was and joke that Cole should have taken lessons from that guy.
I'm sure none of the famously thick-skinned and able to take a joke media would have objected in any way to someone laughing at their spouses being widowed or their kids becoming orphans, right?
IIRC I think Kimmel made the joke before the dinner and assassination attempt in relationship to some photo or other. It was more a matter of extremely poor timing than anything else.
Though I will say your idea would make for a hilarious subversion of expectations for a late night show host's opening monologue.
There was some comment on social media about the person seen grabbing and making off with bottle(s) of booze from the dinner. I agree with that person, if there's a chance of getting shot and this is all free drink, hell yeah I'm not going out sober 🤣
Kimmel would have done better if he could have worked that into something funny, maybe riffing off the Lunchtime O'Booze reputation (in former times) of journalists.
I've said it before, I'll say it again, and I'll put money on it on Kalshi. Vance and the rest of them are waiting until after the midterms. Then if (when) there's a GOP wipeout, they can blame Trump's deteriorating mental capacities and chuck him out the door without anyone screaming about an internal coup. I know that JM's math says that using the 25th Amendment is a non-starter, but if there's a permission structure in place and everybody knows their lines then maybe the calculation adjusts, or maybe the GOP plays ball with a Dem impeachment. MAGA is pissed at Trump for Iran, Trump's corruption is laughably transparent, gas is through the roof, his ratings are in decline, and if they can wait until the second half of the term, then Vance can take over and it won't count as his first term.
Kimmel vs. Trump is essentially two fires keeping each other alive by giving each other oxygen and fuel. Don't ask me to explain the chemistry and physics of that analogy, but it's the best I can come up with right now. It's a symbiotic relationship between two fat retards.
This is peak 2026: we’ve got a live‑fire confrontation with Iran, but the big strategic insight is that Jimmy Kimmel is “outmaneuvering” the president because his Nielsen line ticked up after a dumb censorship gambit. That tells us something about late‑night economics and affiliate cowardice; it tells us almost nothing about whether the Iran strategy is coherent, reckless, or both.
The move here is the same one we keep seeing: collapse actual high‑stakes policy into a morality play about vibes and personalities. Trump’s Kimmel tantrum becomes the master key that supposedly explains everything from FCC enforcement to nuclear deterrence. It’s fun to read, but it’s also exactly how politics becomes entertainment: the real theater is ABC’s programming schedule, the Iran front is just set dressing, and the only questions we’re invited to answer are “who got their ass kicked?” and “whose team are you on?”
Trump lives by the attack of people his supporters (and the people who don't support anyone, especially the elite) dislike. Trump as underdog who succeeds is vote getter.
I first called my Republican House Representative demanding that she submit articles of impeachment against our current convict-in-chief the day after he pardoned the J6 crew.
I call her, plus both (Democratic) Senators several times a week.
And yet he’s still in office.
It’s almost like I have no say in how this country is being run.
Trump doesn't negotiate. He uses leverage he already has. When he stiffed contractors and dared them to sue, he was using the leverage of him having money and lawyers. That basic relationship underlies all his "deal-making." This is what he does when he threatens to - or does - withhold federally-allocated money and say he'll give some of it back in exchange for some favor. Same thing with tariffs, ICE, and the military.
Trump can't identify his counterparties' wants. He can't identify abstract drives on either side. He views his counterparty being happy as an inherent loss for him. He has no negotiation skills. What he has is negotiation resources: money, lawyers, the US military, the DoJ. He uses resources other people have developed as leverage. It's the only play he has ever known.
"He views his counterparty being happy as an inherent loss for him."
Yeah, this. I personally feel that the phrase "the cruelty is the point" is overused (as an excuse to pretend that your opponents are motivated by malice, rather than simply disagreeing with you), but it does seem to apply to people with Trump's mindset. If your opponent isn't miserable, how can you be sure that you Won and they Lost?
He’s lost any leverage he had
Bonus points: the Trumps (Melania attacked first, then Donald joined in) went after Kimmel for a joke about wife outliving much older husband. Then, a few days later, Donald makes a joke with the same exact premise in front of Melania and the King and Queen of England.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-melania-marriage-comments-charles-kimmel-b2966902.html
He really makes no effort to appear to not be a hypocrite.
I don't think he sees it as a huge problem for other people, either. He'll say the media and Democrats are unfair for pushing back on him when he says they wouldn't push back on anyone else for the same thing, but what he's objecting too is perceived prejudice/bullying, not hypocrisy. I think hypocrisy is just part of how he thinks the world does/should work, like tariffs and the weak submitting to the strong and everyone, at root, looking out for themselves.
You mean that "sailor rule" is not real?
Uh oh.....
🤣
Hot take!
The four Man Show hosts, as stand ups.
4. Rogan, obviously very successful as a media personality, decent comic actor, but stand up never felt like his forte.
3. Kimmel, again, can be funny, but more like a funny host than a real stand up.
2.Carolla, very funny, yes the whole fish-out-of-water man's man bit has been done, but who does it better? Not many.
1. Stanhope. My nominee for most underrated comic of his era. Unpolished,showbiz hating brilliance. Dark and proud.
"Don't try hard, you die anyway, stupid!"
🤣🤣
Something I’ve noticed-all these comedians who are all over each other’s podcasts-Rogan, Gillis, Diaz-whomever-aren’t actually that funny. Are they intentionally keeping their jokes/powder dry for paying gigs? That would make sense.
And now thinking more about it, “he’s our son of a bitch” line coming from supposedly religious “christians” are extremely funny and rich.
Like the deal is supposedly support moral degenerates to “purge the enemy” as a tradeoff but they receive moral degenerates AND strengthened enemy lmao
And it is deeply ironic that Christian Nationalists seem to become more and more representative in ever shrinking MAGA platform - and I could be wrong but I don’t think it is a coincidence that they stopped talking about Trump as “he’s *our* son of a bitch” and rather “Akshually Trump is Christ adjacent being” lol
And this is how we get Pete Hegseth- another moral degenerates who also engages in equally stupid rage fueled vindictive behaviors. And he really sincerely believes himself to be moral religious warrior and what’s more he is not entertaining at all. (Now Stephen Miller seems to go MIA, Pete Hegseth has become the most disgusting person for me lol)
It's as if these people have a lot of practice putting their faith in stupid things.
I thought it was Melania who was offended, not Trump himself? But I admit, I haven't been keeping up with this silliness.
But making jokes about Trump is too easy, in fact it's stale by now. Kimmel had a whole target-rich (see what I did there? heh-heh, so funny!) opportunity in front of him. Nearly 3,000 journalists there? What an opportunity! Jokes lamenting how the shooter didn't even get close enough to make a start (relax guys, I'm only joking! you can take a joke, can't you?) 3,000 journos and not even a scratch! America needs to close the assassin effectiveness gap! Find out what the most recent school/mass shooting was and joke that Cole should have taken lessons from that guy.
I'm sure none of the famously thick-skinned and able to take a joke media would have objected in any way to someone laughing at their spouses being widowed or their kids becoming orphans, right?
IIRC I think Kimmel made the joke before the dinner and assassination attempt in relationship to some photo or other. It was more a matter of extremely poor timing than anything else.
Though I will say your idea would make for a hilarious subversion of expectations for a late night show host's opening monologue.
There was some comment on social media about the person seen grabbing and making off with bottle(s) of booze from the dinner. I agree with that person, if there's a chance of getting shot and this is all free drink, hell yeah I'm not going out sober 🤣
Kimmel would have done better if he could have worked that into something funny, maybe riffing off the Lunchtime O'Booze reputation (in former times) of journalists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recurring_jokes_in_Private_Eye
https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/nationals/defence-lunchtime-obooze/
I've said it before, I'll say it again, and I'll put money on it on Kalshi. Vance and the rest of them are waiting until after the midterms. Then if (when) there's a GOP wipeout, they can blame Trump's deteriorating mental capacities and chuck him out the door without anyone screaming about an internal coup. I know that JM's math says that using the 25th Amendment is a non-starter, but if there's a permission structure in place and everybody knows their lines then maybe the calculation adjusts, or maybe the GOP plays ball with a Dem impeachment. MAGA is pissed at Trump for Iran, Trump's corruption is laughably transparent, gas is through the roof, his ratings are in decline, and if they can wait until the second half of the term, then Vance can take over and it won't count as his first term.
Jon: a guy can dream.....
Don't get me wrong though. I do NOT want a President Vance.
Kimmel vs. Trump is essentially two fires keeping each other alive by giving each other oxygen and fuel. Don't ask me to explain the chemistry and physics of that analogy, but it's the best I can come up with right now. It's a symbiotic relationship between two fat retards.
Nicely written
This is peak 2026: we’ve got a live‑fire confrontation with Iran, but the big strategic insight is that Jimmy Kimmel is “outmaneuvering” the president because his Nielsen line ticked up after a dumb censorship gambit. That tells us something about late‑night economics and affiliate cowardice; it tells us almost nothing about whether the Iran strategy is coherent, reckless, or both.
The move here is the same one we keep seeing: collapse actual high‑stakes policy into a morality play about vibes and personalities. Trump’s Kimmel tantrum becomes the master key that supposedly explains everything from FCC enforcement to nuclear deterrence. It’s fun to read, but it’s also exactly how politics becomes entertainment: the real theater is ABC’s programming schedule, the Iran front is just set dressing, and the only questions we’re invited to answer are “who got their ass kicked?” and “whose team are you on?”
Kimmel was on Ben Stein’s $$$?!? Ben is an old school conservative, Trump should have appointed him to something!
Trump lives by the attack of people his supporters (and the people who don't support anyone, especially the elite) dislike. Trump as underdog who succeeds is vote getter.
Kimmel is so much smarter than Trump. His fake drug ad for ReZyne was a brilliantly hilarious takedown. Check it out under “ReZyne”.
I first called my Republican House Representative demanding that she submit articles of impeachment against our current convict-in-chief the day after he pardoned the J6 crew.
I call her, plus both (Democratic) Senators several times a week.
And yet he’s still in office.
It’s almost like I have no say in how this country is being run.