It might be more helpful to write a follow-up regarding how those same psychiatric disorders can be used against him.

Fair enough. I wouldn't hold my breath for anyone who didn't get it by now to ever get it, though. Which leaves us with defending our own interests. And the weak spot for us to target is Trump himself.

Sanctions, in general, are just one of many instruments. A fragile, narcissistic ego can be exploited.

Think references to the Epstein, etc. at every rally, in official statements on the tariffs, you name it. Anything that would deter him from wanting it on the news.

"Real change" isn't really for Europe to decide, though.

I largely agree. I think it's important to point out, though, that Europe doesn't necessarily have to hit back at the US, it's completely sufficient to hit back at Trump as a person who doesn't seem to have his country's best interests at heart.

Since, so far, there is no viable unifying vision in sight thanks to C, best outcome would probably be B, at least unless we find a version of option D that foreign powers find even more undesirable.

It might become one, but it's not an earthquake yet. So far, pretty much everybody keeps following the same strategy. A non-negligible part of the rise is people caring less about AFD, not more.

As amusing as it would be if it happened again, it would be funnier to ironically nominate Vance and let jealousy take its course.

Essentially the political calculus behind bsky.app/profile/robi...

We are. Looking for an end game is kind of silly, though. Europe is busy trying to hold it together now.

On the one hand, I want to applaud you still playing cleanly. On the other hand, I can't help the observation that plastering the town with Epstein pictures would do a better job of spoiling the view for the administration.

Not too serious here yet, but we're getting to the point where the best response could be to introduce export tariffs on the same goods.

Using what narrative again?

Making things matter is virtually impossible. The working approach is to show how your point is about something that matters (to someone) already.

Maybe their actual complaint was meant to be that Biden didn't take large enough bribes but got lost in editing?

Well... I doubt investors suddenly became big fans of EU regulations. They're just looking for a place to drop their bets, and the risk premium for the US is currently just too damned high.

I think he tried taking on everybody at once last time, too. Result strange how the result seems to be similar.