US Politics

Every single Seth Abramson Twitter thread I've seen over the past few years has culminated in him giving Absolutely Solid Cast Iron Assurance that Trump would be clapped in chains within hours of him posting it. He's the boy who cried big orange wolf too many times.

I have only seen him saying that things will come to a head in mid to late 2019. Are you sure you're not confusing him with somebody else?

Deffo him, though I haven't seen anything by him in a long while - maybe he's realised now it's a longer game.

Sorry, but that is rubbish. Seth has been very clear on his timelines and predictions and has always said that it will be a longer process than some think.

It is also true that his theories and ideas have all proved to be true or corroborated.

This guy doesn't seem to agree https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sharing-seth-abramson-not-once-not-ever.html

Abramson creates an atmosphere in which the collapse of the Trump administration and disgrace/imprisonment of everyone involved with it is perpetually imminent

Yip.

I just don't interpret it as that, given that he has repeatedly stipulated that he doesn't expect the shit to hit the fan until 2019 and a lot depends on the mid terms.

Seems like a view from somebody who has only read a handful of his tweets and not attempted to put them into context.

The guy has interesting points but the drama is high.

He could also benefit from some tips on brevity.

He's not a journalist, he's a creative writer who gets creative with what he can find online. His early schtick was full of predictions about what was going to happen today! tomorrow! next week! and seemed quite exciting until you realised he was just getting your confirmation bias all tumescent and how full of supposition, guesswork and dramatic leaps it all was. I suppose he's realised from doomsday theories that he can't keep predicting an imminent apocalypse without being called on it, but there's a lot of seductive stuff that doesn't hold too much water.

Also, 'please retweet and donate to fund my googling'.

Beat me to it Andy. He'd fit right in though on here.

Hmmm. You definitely haven't followed much of his stuff then.

I'm not saying he's correct or even particularly good at what he does but you seem to have a pretty whack interpretation of his style.

I don't follow Seth, but have read a few of his threads and my impression was exactly the same as kl. He seemed (to me) to be predicting the imminent fall of Trump in every thread. I think when Cohen was raided he said it was 'THE BEGINNING OF THE END!'

Not doubting any of his facts or investigations, but his style grated and I stopped reading him after a while.

I think the problem is that doing things on Twitter means that you have to read all of his tweets to understand his message. I agree that if you see a few, it can grate.

So far, he has been spot on in about 50% of his calls imo. More accurate than most commentators.

seemed quite exciting until you realised he was just getting your confirmation bias all tumescent and how full of supposition.

This

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/trump-white-house-anonymous-resistance.html

Politics aside, that article tells foreign leaders and military strategists that the US president probably doesn’t have any meaningful control of the nuclear deterrent. That seems.... dangerous.

Also shows an arrogant disdain for democratic process. Rather difficult to see what the author hopes to gain from having it published? Bizarre.

David Frum has it right.

http://on.theatln.tc/2eePTz7

I bet “the football” is just full of fidget spinners and Diet Coke these days.

This was my thinking too. Hopefully he doesn’t go full-Stalin.

It seems plain to me that, whoever wrote that article, assuming the NYT is correct about its source, had no intention to reassure but instead to provoke a constitutional crisis. The questions are who and why?

Thread arguing Op-Ed guy is Pence. Might be bollocks.
https://twitter.com/danbl00m/status/1037428190166347776?s=21

PS Seth Abramson is a left wing ZeroHedge, IMHO. Breathless clickbait which grabs onto your confirmation bias.

Rather difficult to see what the author hopes to gain from having it published?

Same. Reassure conservatives? Wind them up for the mid-terms? Provide an excuse for the FBI to raid the NYT offices? Whatever the motive it's hard to take at face value.

Pence was my first thought. Who has the most to gain from Trump going down? Pence.

Pence wanted to be President and has even less of a conscience than Trump. He is a lot smarter the Trump and knows a lot of Trump's ideas are nonsense. Push the old guy out of the way and take over. Claiming to be doing it for the common good might get him some votes in 2020.