Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.

What is Loopy Pro?Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.

Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.

Download on the App Store

Loopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.

How to understand the Cult of Trump and to defeat it

2

Comments

  • @Simon said:

    @McD said:
    Trump has raised the ante today by taking control of the Washington, District of Columbia.
    Probably an essential step to allow his followers to compete the coup of 2020 with the local Police
    under his control.

    Be afraid. Ve very, very afraid.

    “What kind of country do we have?”
    “A republic… if you can keep it.”

    Thoughts?

    I think Trump's takeover order only last 30 days.

    Interesting see what happens after that. And if it "fixes" the alleged "crime wave" in that 30 days.

    I bet FBI agents are unhappy with this - having to do regular police work.

    The “crime wave” was DOGE stooge “Big Balls of Reichstag Fire” being beaten up by two young men. Allegedly, over payment for a sexual encounter is the story going around the city…

    Street crime has been trending downwards.

  • edited August 2025

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    IMO if nothing else, Trump is a great communicator

    Looking at things from Europe, this is the point where I realise I have no hope of ever understanding American politics and culture. 🙂

    IMHO Trump simply cannot express coherent thoughts. He speaks at the level of a 7-year-old. Even most of the simple sentences he is able to utter have no meaning whatsoever.

    Mind you, I'm a big fan of using simple sentences in mass communication. I also know I'm not the target audience here. But he comes across as an imbecile. Yet I often read a statement like yours from all kinds of American authors.

    I have no idea how such a primitive con can work in the US. I'm totally baffled at how completely I fail to see it. 🤷

    Ps. Apologies for going off on a tangent, I know it's not helping.

  • edited August 2025

    @ervin said:
    I have no idea how such a primitive con can work in the US. I'm totally baffled at how completely I fail to see it. 🤷

    It works (for some people) because Trump's rather "basic" language sounds unscripted. It does not sound like any other politician's carefully worded statements. It doesn't sound contrived or planned. The mistakes and sloppyness of his talk makes it sounds real and honest. He speaks like people speak in real life - speaking half sentences, getting words wrong, hesitations, not always being clear or getting to the point. It gives some people the impression of "he's a regular guy".

    First time around Trump campainged on "not being a politician, being a real person like you". The anti-politician who was going to "drain the swamp". In his 2nd term as President he can't claim that now.

    One thing non-Americans forget is that before getting into politics Trump was in everybody's living room each week on the TV. Everybody already felt like they knew him. He was a family friend. They loved his no-nonsense "you're fired" attitude. Running for President didn't make him famous - he was already famous.

    Whoever said "he's a great communicator" is not 100% accurate. What he is, is a great salesman.

    Just as cosmetic companies say to women "use our face cream and it will make you look young again", Trump says "vote for me and I'll make Amercia great again".

    It's a sales pitch. And a great one. Anybody remember what Clinton's 2016 slogan was...?

  • @JeffChasteen said:
    The “crime wave” was DOGE stooge “Big Balls of Reichstag Fire” being beaten up by two young men. Allegedly, over payment for a sexual encounter is the story going around the city…

    Street crime has been trending downwards.

    Depends how far back you go to do your comparison.

    Lower than the last last few years but much higher than the previous decade perhaps?

    https://reason.com/2025/08/12/whats-really-happening-to-d-c/

  • Thank you for this reply, Simon. I’m not American so i can’t agree with it or dispute it. Good to know this may be the reason.

    This, however, I can’t pass without comment:

    @Simon said:
    [Americans] loved his no-nonsense "you're fired" attitude.

    Again, I have no knowledge or reason to doubt this. But from the outside, it paints a… remarkable picture of the American voter.

  • wimwim
    edited August 2025

    American here ...

    @Simon that's a real nice try at rationalizing the incomprehensible devotion to Trump.

    However, I really don't think anyone follows Trump based on past association to / fondness for / connection with his television career. Sure it helped him with name recognition to become a candidate the first time around, but I highly doubt anyone has a cache of relatability that would influence their vote. Many (most?) Americans are incredibly shallow, but we also have pathologically limited long-term memory.

    Anyone who thinks the seemingly incomprehensible devotion to Trump is due primarily to him and his personality is largely missing it. I know a lot of Trump fanatics. They are mostly only fixated on him because they're convinced he's the only one out there pulling for the things they think are vital to their interests. They're armchair revolutionaries, and he's the general. I rarely hear people affectionate toward him personally. But they do see him as the country's savior. In fact, many dislike much about him, but still celebrate him as the only "dear leader" available.

    I'll say it again. Railing against Trump himself is doomed to fail. If you hate the MAGA mindset, that's what you need to persuade a massive number of people is misguided, and you need provide an understandable and attractive alternative - or at least put an equally persuasive leader with some dumbed down rallying cry. So far the next Obama hasn't emerged. Newsom may be that guy, but so far I don't see him having the smarts to pull it off. We'll see.

    Or ... as others have said, perhaps by the next election cycle things will be bad enough that all it'll take is the next rebranded "Change!" to do it.

    Liberals need to be far smarter about how they fight. This administration is scary good at persuasion. Just watch the president's press secretary in action. It's jaw dropping how she can re-focus the narrative. Most of the faces of the administration (with cringeworthy exceptions) are remarkably good at deflecting fire. Bullets just bounce back at those who fired them. If y'all think your current efforts are working against the base, or even moderates, you're so, so wrong.

  • edited August 2025

    @wim said:
    However, I really don't think anyone follows Trump based on past association to / fondness for / connection with his television career. Sure it helped him with name recognition to become a candidate the first time around, but I highly doubt anyone has a cache of relatability that would influence their vote.

    Yes, that's the point I was trying to make. Like Schwarzenegger and Reagan he already had the advantage of brand name recognition. But, of course, so did Hilary in the 2016 election.

    I know a lot of Trump fanatics. They are mostly only fixated on him because they're convinced he's the only one out there pulling for the things they think are vital to their interests.

    100%. But I'm guessing that a lot of people (maybe most) who voted for him are not Trump "fanatics". They are regular citizens who felt that they would be better under Trump than Harris. Trump, the salesman, offered what seemed to be a more appealing deal.

    The Republicans control of The House is wafer thin and in the 2026 Mid Terms they will likely lose control of that chamber. Typically the incumbants lose something like 20% of seats. That would give it to the Dems. If things are really bad in Nov 2026 then they could lose even more. Maybe that's why the Reps are busy trying to jerry mander the election boundaries.

  • @ervin said:
    Thank you for this reply, Simon. I’m not American so i can’t agree with it or dispute it. Good to know this may be the reason.

    This, however, I can’t pass without comment:

    @Simon said:
    [Americans] loved his no-nonsense "you're fired" attitude.

    Again, I have no knowledge or reason to doubt this. But from the outside, it paints a… remarkable picture of the American voter.

    I hope I didn't paint a negative picture of the American voter.

    Lots of countries like politicians who project a "can do" image. They are seen as people who don't muck around and get things done.

    Like you, I'm not an American. Just watching from the other side of the World. It's quite a circus.

  • wimwim
    edited August 2025

    @Simon said:

    @wim said:
    However, I really don't think anyone follows Trump based on past association to / fondness for / connection with his television career. Sure it helped him with name recognition to become a candidate the first time around, but I highly doubt anyone has a cache of relatability that would influence their vote.

    Yes, that's the point I was trying to make. Like Schwarzenegger and Reagan he already had the advantage of brand name recognition. But, of course, so did Hilary in the 2016 election.

    But my point is, I don't think there's anything at all that harks back to his television career that explains why so many stay devoted to him. Its a minor point though. I was only offering a perspective from someone here on the ground.

    I know a lot of Trump fanatics. They are mostly only fixated on him because they're convinced he's the only one out there pulling for the things they think are vital to their interests.

    100%. But I'm guessing that a lot of people (maybe most) who voted for him are not Trump "fanatics". They are regular citizens who felt that they would be better under Trump than Harris. Trump, the salesman, offered what seemed to be a more appealing deal.

    I think you have to be fanatical in some degree to have still supported him for the 2024 nomination, to elect him, and to continue to support him now in the face of everything else about him. Giving him the nomination, turning a blind eye to the obvious issues with Biden for so long, and then foisting Kamala as a viable candidate are things that shook me to the core. We are in deep shit.

    The Republicans control of The House is wafer thin and in the 2026 Mid Terms they will likely lose control of that chamber. Typically the incumbants lose something like 20% of seats. That would give it to the Dems. If things are really bad in Nov 2026 then they could lose even more. Maybe that's why they are busy trying to jerry mander the election boundaries.

    Doesn't matter all that much. Even when the Republicans have the majority they don't accomplish anything. If the Democrats take control of the house, all they can do is slow Trump down somewhat and launch silly impeachment efforts, which play to the base, but do as much harm as good in swaying the electorate.

    OK. I'm out (again). I'm getting sick to my stomach.

  • edited August 2025

    @wim said:
    But my point is, I don't think there's anything at all that harks back to his television career that explains why so many stay devoted to him.

    Yes, I agree with you on that.

    OK. I'm out (again). I'm getting sick to my stomach.

    Hang in there!

  • wimwim
    edited August 2025

    So ... if everyone hates Trump and the Republicans as much as they seem to, why do I keep seeing things like this?
    https://www.politico.com/news/2025/08/18/dnc-fundraising-donor-problems-midterms-00512473

    Demonicrats with $15 million on hand vs. the Repulsivecans $80 million.

    Something just don't add up. Politico isn't exactly a conservative leaning publication (is it?), and numbers is numbers (sometimes).

  • On the other hand there's this within that story:

    The DNC’s money woes stand out among major Democratic groups, POLITICO’s analysis found: Democrats’ House and Senate campaign arms are near financial parity with their Republican counterparts, and several major donors who have withheld funds from the DNC are still giving to those groups.

    That seems to indicate the problems are centered in the party leadership and (lack of) direction rather than any bellwether for the midterms.

  • Something I’ve thought about for a while now:
    when you consider the technological advances of the last 50 years; microchips and computing, satellites, medical knowledge, astronomy, physics, etc., etc. all of which required teams with particular expert knowledge and how to lay-people it’s beyond understanding and almost magical.

    Then consider the technology of ‘persuasion’ i.e. propaganda, i.e. brainwashing. Why should we not assume that continual advances are similarly being developed beyond our understanding. Ways to make it more invisible, more seemingly trivial and beyond thinking about. Maybe some people are more susceptible than others. Remove the capacity to step back and reflect on why we think what we do.
    I think this is a significant problem/obstacle to deal with collectively.

  • @MrStochastic said:
    Then consider the technology of ‘persuasion’ i.e. propaganda, i.e. brainwashing. Why should we not assume that continual advances are similarly being developed beyond our understanding. Ways to make it more invisible, more seemingly trivial and beyond thinking about.

    It has.

    It is called "social media". :smiley:

  • @Simon said:

    @MrStochastic said:
    Then consider the technology of ‘persuasion’ i.e. propaganda, i.e. brainwashing. Why should we not assume that continual advances are similarly being developed beyond our understanding. Ways to make it more invisible, more seemingly trivial and beyond thinking about.

    It has.

    It is called "social media". :smiley:

    Yes, but that's just the vehicle.

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    I don’t think anything magical needed for that… a well placed seed will grow on its own…

    I'm thinking hybrid, genetically modified seeds.

  • I follow you @MrStochastic , and I not only agree, but think it's naive to think otherwise.

  • @0tolerance4silence said:

    @MrStochastic said:

    @Simon said:

    @MrStochastic said:
    Then consider the technology of ‘persuasion’ i.e. propaganda, i.e. brainwashing. Why should we not assume that continual advances are similarly being developed beyond our understanding. Ways to make it more invisible, more seemingly trivial and beyond thinking about.

    It has.

    It is called "social media". :smiley:

    Yes, but that's just the vehicle.

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    I don’t think anything magical needed for that… a well placed seed will grow on its own…

    I'm thinking hybrid, genetically modified seeds.

    I’m not sure I follow your analogy :)
    Any examples?

    No examples because I'm just speculating. But think how Pavlov was studying 'conditioning' in 1897 - think of telephones then and now - so think of research on conditioning then and now.

  • The examples I can think of are more in the line of marketing tactics, but if it's done to the extent it is in marketing you can bet your life such tactics are being used for ideological and political purposes as well.

    YouTube feed is a good example of something that could be used to influence people. Most people will tend to think something is true if the overwhelming volume of videos supporting that position favors it, and much more so if videos contradicting it are harder to find.

    In my many years working in IT I had some behind the scenes exposure to online profiling and how it's used to serve up advertising. It was shocking even 10 years ago the extent of the profiling that is built up based on our online habits. It's also shocking how easy it can be, despite the protections keeping any personally identifiable information linked to you from being tracked, that the pieces can be put together. This information gets bought and sold, and can be correlated to have a very high probability of recognizing your anonymous online presence, but also, in the wrong hands, a reasonable chance of knowing exactly who you are.

    That was 10 years ago and it was impressive. With where we are now with AI, I can't even imagine. It'd be nuts to think that nobody would be at least trying to use that for political ends.

  • wimwim
    edited August 2025
  • @wim said:
    The examples I can think of are more in the line of marketing tactics,

    Yeah I agree; and politics is marketing.

    With where we are now with AI, I can't even imagine. It'd be nuts to think that nobody would be at least trying to use that for political ends.

    I feel I'm being continually worn down by having to just think about it; all the cookies and what not that supposedly we can opt out of but it's always a continual new hoop to jump through.
    I've thought that every time trump made some new outrageous statement or behavior it was also a kind of marketing test to see how quickly we all just assimilate it.

  • It’s a cult made up of the venal, stupid, and insane. Watch this clown show:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/NoShitSherlock/s/qE7Z6BD1gJ

  • The way I see it, There’s a maga cult and then there’s also a hate maga cult. Both are rooted in anger and there’s not much difference otherwise

  • There is also “enlightened centrism”…but you already know that.

  • @Jaysynth said:
    The way I see it, There’s a maga cult and then there’s also a hate maga cult. Both are rooted in anger and there’s not much difference otherwise

    Do you have a character count limit that prevents you from typing the words “fascism” and “anti-fascism”?

    Just curious…

  • @0tolerance4silence said:
    Truly terrifying… but I guess it’s time to “clear the debris”

    Say hi to the troops in your town!
    Heil Hegseth! 🙋🏼‍♂️
    (Not sure which one will explode first, US or EU)

    Trump loves the military; he just despises the men and women who serve it.

    As for Hegseth?
    “Love” really doesn’t describe it. Reading that clown on the military is like reading Yukio Mishima on the military. You don’t need to be a Viennese doctor to figure out that one.

  • edited October 2025

    When Trump and his gang are out of office it will be interesting to read what the military and other experts in various fields have to say about Hegseth and the band of idiots that Trump has put in charge.

    A lot of people can't speak now for fear or reprisals. Sadly, that's what America has become - a country where people are scared to criticise their President or goverment. When I was a kid that was how you would describe Communist Russia.

  • wimwim
    edited October 2025

    @0tolerance4silence said:
    I would really like to hear from people with first hand experience… do you generally go about your life as usual or is it brewing around you in all areas of life?

    Life as usual for me and literally everyone I know or am related to across the country. It’s nowhere near as dramatic as the news makes it all seem for the vast majority of people IMO.

    Frankly, I don’t see a path to de-escalation… with military on the streets and potentially armed civilians, increasing tensions, government shut… a small mistake on either side can ignite it all.

    Military on a few streets. It’s a big country.

    I also believe that the real shitstorm is still yet to come, seeing how the financial markets completely ignore and disconnect from all this dysfunction, pumping money away from QoL into AI/military.

    You’re not wrong about the shitstorm to come. It’s Government debt that is going to bring it all down though, not spending on AI or the military.

    It all seems quite surreal, but at the same time it seems fairly quiet… so maybe it’s just my biased newsfeed, I wonder.

    Where there’s smoke there’s fire. But yes, it’s wildly amplified.

    We have had at least as bad times of unrest all my life. When I was a kid the National Guard used our apartment complex’s front lawn to camp on during the Watts riots. There were the Kent State shootings, an assassinated president and almost another, the Waco siege (massacre), Oklahoma City bombing, the first World Trade Center bombing, the 1968 Democratic convention riots…

    The shit may indeed be about to hit the fan, but to me the signs are no more there than they’ve ever been.

Sign In or Register to comment.