Apparently Fox, Tucker, a number of others here noticed it. So, I'm surprised by all the pushback. I feel like I missed the memo that this guy is above criticism or critique. He's a politician. He should be criticized. Skepticism is a good thing.
Body language is pretty reliable. It is action. Body language often gives away truths people …
Apparently Fox, Tucker, a number of others here noticed it. So, I'm surprised by all the pushback. I feel like I missed the memo that this guy is above criticism or critique. He's a politician. He should be criticized. Skepticism is a good thing.
Body language is pretty reliable. It is action. Body language often gives away truths people are trying to hide. Police use it all the time. To be clear, it wasn't just a few nods.
If it was done to be polite, then why was he polite during that section of the speech and impolite for other parts? That really isn't a logical explanation.
I tend to trust Tucker more than most, and if Tucker's saying he's Establishment, then that's the way I'll lean until proven otherwise. And, FWIW, I really do hope the Speaker proves my skepticism wrong.
I'm mostly just cautioning against drawing major conclusions about someone's character or intentions (eg going all the way to "he's totally an establishment puppet and can no longer be trusted at all", vs healthy skepticism) based on just words or non-verbal reactions to speech. People are complex, it may be that Johnson genuinely thinks that Russia is an unjust aggressor but also believes in closing the border and getting the budget under control. Or, he may have been nodding out of habit or due to agreeing with just one part of something Biden said (I think someone above mentioned he said something positive about American troops, for example).
At the end of the day, I wish it would go without saying... draw your own conclusions. But I would advocate for looking at actions, especially those that take effort - like what bills has he brought up for vote, especially ones that got him a lot of criticism. (I get the impression he's been less aggressive that the more radical MAGA would like, but still a lot better than his predecessor.)
Apparently Fox, Tucker, a number of others here noticed it. So, I'm surprised by all the pushback. I feel like I missed the memo that this guy is above criticism or critique. He's a politician. He should be criticized. Skepticism is a good thing.
Body language is pretty reliable. It is action. Body language often gives away truths people are trying to hide. Police use it all the time. To be clear, it wasn't just a few nods.
If it was done to be polite, then why was he polite during that section of the speech and impolite for other parts? That really isn't a logical explanation.
I tend to trust Tucker more than most, and if Tucker's saying he's Establishment, then that's the way I'll lean until proven otherwise. And, FWIW, I really do hope the Speaker proves my skepticism wrong.
I'm mostly just cautioning against drawing major conclusions about someone's character or intentions (eg going all the way to "he's totally an establishment puppet and can no longer be trusted at all", vs healthy skepticism) based on just words or non-verbal reactions to speech. People are complex, it may be that Johnson genuinely thinks that Russia is an unjust aggressor but also believes in closing the border and getting the budget under control. Or, he may have been nodding out of habit or due to agreeing with just one part of something Biden said (I think someone above mentioned he said something positive about American troops, for example).
At the end of the day, I wish it would go without saying... draw your own conclusions. But I would advocate for looking at actions, especially those that take effort - like what bills has he brought up for vote, especially ones that got him a lot of criticism. (I get the impression he's been less aggressive that the more radical MAGA would like, but still a lot better than his predecessor.)