Malkuth

The critical acclaim of the album is almost meaningless. You have to realize any media outlet who said its a bad album would flat out just look racist. They had no choice but to say it was amazing. Same with the awards too.

I got 28. It's not really accurate though, some of these artists you'd only know if you are older.

Do you mean decade-end chart? They use an inverse point system for the decade-end chart but for the year-end charts they don't, they just tally up the points of each song every week it charted within the year as far as I know.

I think I read somewhere that the average genetic makeup of a South American is around 60% white. And I think in the US it would be higher because someone with a white parent and a Hispanic parent may be 80% white for example but still call themselves Hispanic. Also a lot of white people will be like 1/16th black or native american or whatever and cling onto that like their life depends on it. Like people like Drake, Barack Obama, J. Cole are half white, but would pretend to be just black if asked what race they are.

To be honest, if you don't know something is a swear word, it doesn't make you a bad person. There are like 5000 ethnic groups all which have their own derogatory words used against them but people don't know about most of them. Like there are ethnic groups in Africa and Europe who have their own slurs that they use against neighboring ethnic groups, you can't realistically expect people to know all of them, and you shouldn't be punished for accidentally using one.

Aren't there like 100 artists performing? And multiple at any given moment? I feel like it doesn't really matter if he performs there. You're never going to be a fan of all the artists at Glastonbury and you just watch someone else if an act you don't like is on.

This is such a terrible idea. I can't believe he'd do this. The only way I think this could work out well for him is if he secretly has proof this was going on stashed away ready to release, but even if he did I still think a lot of the public would refuse to believe it anyway.

It's no way going to top Uptown Funk.

I'm glad to see Lose Control climb up to #4. I think it could become a big hit.

I think S Club 7 did pretty well. Back then 1 hit song would make you famous. As for mixed groups, ones like Paramore, Black Eyed Peas, Young Money, etc. managed to do well in the 00s.

I think sexual gestures, yes. Obese, ugly men (and women) are not seen in a sexual way, like AT ALL. A lot of people probably didn't even realize Trump made a sexual gesture until it was pointed out to them. Attractive people on the other hand, can literally just stand there doing nothing, fully clothed, and they are already causing sexual arousal in people, if they start doing sexual gestures, it's a lot more effective and noticeable.

It seems some of the staff at her label are worshipping her. Other artists don't get extra sales added and negative tweets removed.

Exactly. It's most likely actors trying to create a backlash against Trump voters.

There was a different version of this song which was more popular at the time that was more dancey, maybe you wouldn't hate that version as much. I'm really surprised they used this version for the music video tbh.

Most people aren't taking part I pop culture anymore. People just watch old movies, old TV shows and listen to old music.

I don't see any point in apologizing. Everybody has their own spiritual beliefs, and that's OK.

I think the only reason Billboard are saying that about That's So True is because it's the only song flying up the chart atm. Everything else is just staying stable. They need something to write about. And if it keeps up these gains it will overtake A Bar Song in a few weeks but that's not guaranteed of course.

Is the course going to include the bit when she flopped in 2011, which was really embarrassing and harmful to her image, so she spent the following 10 years refusing to release any music in the traditional way, so as to ensure she can never be called a flop again as nobody could ever know how successful she really was (or would've been?).

I don't know exactly. But for example if a YouTuber covers this story and uses a short clip of one of Charli's songs, or a clip of a Charli interview in it her label can do a copyright claim on it. But they wouldn't bother for a short clip if it was a positive video about her.

I think Bernie. He has some overlap in views with Trump (there's a small minority of people who like both). And he's not seen as establishment like Kamala and Biden, he's more of a populist. And he's apologized for the "white people don't know what it's like to be poor" comment so I think that shouldn't be a big issue, hopefully. The best hope is a "RINO" candidate wins the nomination, then Republicans will be toast.

I highly doubt Charli herself was involved in this. I doubt she called a massive meeting with the staff from her label into Conference Room F and shouted at them demanding that they manufacture sales to get her to number 1. Likely it's something the label staff decided to do of their own accord, probably without even telling her. Jelly Roll in that clip acknowledged this too that she likely might not have known this was going on.

There has most likely been a female President before. It is quite likely that one of the previous Presidents identified as a female but had to keep it secret. We can never know. There's also probably been a gay President already too, but again, they couldn't have come out at the time. Also you can be gender fluid too. Maybe Trump will identify as a female in a couple of years. Which will make her the first openly female President (and also the first lesbian President). You never can be sure. If someone is Trans or non-binary, it is wrong to invalidate their existance and refuse to recognize their gender identity, so if Trump identifies as a female at any point in the next few years, she will be the first female President.

Obviously a lot of celebrities are Secretly right-wing, but it's too risky to come out. The media attention is overwhelmingly negative if you do. When a Republican stans a left-wing pop star who makes a political social media post, they say "Stay out of politics. Go back to the studio, all we want from you is music". When a Democrat stans a right-wing pop star who comes out, they say "You are evil, I am never listening to you ever again, radio should ban you". It's obvious which choice is less risky. Republicans can stan Taylor Swift for example, because they either assume she's lying to avoid backlash, or they assume she's been paid to come out as Democrat, or blackmailed to do it. The worldview of Trump voters is that most celebrities are puppets being told what to do by "the elites". So 99% of celebrities being Democrats actually just reinforces their worldview and further convinces them that celebrities really are puppets being controlled behind the scenes.

I think there is definitely some truth to this, and I think it's a good suggestion. But the problem is, I genuinely think it's impossible. You either have to give up on the popular Democrat macho male role models, or give up on abolishing gender differences, gender roles and gender stereotypes. I don't think it's possible to do both. And the Democrats chose to give up on the macho men and instead focus on abolishing gender differences. A left-wing Andrew Tate simply cannot exist because by definition one would have to fully embrace gender differences to become one, and therefore is not left-wing. The best we've got is a few traditionally masculine Hollywood actors who are Democrats. But they don't have much influence on the public's political views (the same with pop stars). At the moment the Democrat messaging to men is "You are exactly the same as a woman. It's fine if your wife is the breadwinner. Any concept you have of masculinity is simply a social construct that you've been tricked into believing and you need to unlearn it. If you're ashamed that you rely in your girlfriend's income to survive, don't be, there's nothing wrong with that, so ignore your shame and vote for us". A younger version of Arnold Schwazenegger in 2024 would absolutely 100% be a Trump supporter unfortunately. You have to realize all his peers would be too. The days of the 80s, 90s, 00s, when you could say "I believe the man should be the provider for the family and I'm a proud Democrat" are gone, and probably never coming back, as that statement is highly offensive, if not downright evil for us progressives.

It was before the SJW/woke movement. I actually think Republicans would've never won another Presidential election ever again if it weren't for that.