That was me.
But I guess Merriam-Webster and I could have it wrong.
Donald, go home and get your fuckin shinebox.
Thank you for explaining “bemused.” I hate it when people use it incorrectly, and they almost always do.
AND I used solar, wind, and geothermal together above because they all renewable energy sources AND they can be utilized by individuals, not doled out by a central utility monopoly at preconceived rates.
But I assume you knew that, because you are not a moron.
Nicely said. I agree with this.
What was she supposed to do but smile? If she had kept a serious expression, then the pundits would have said she looked worried or lacked self-confidence. She is a self-confident woman, and why should she not be? When you cut through all the bluster and the garbage, she really is extremely qualified for the job. She’s paid her dues, and while I don’t believe anyone is entitled to the presidency, she’s more than earned her shot. No one has worked harder.
I was very glad to see her wearing her red suit. I actually relaxed when I saw that. She meant to project power, and she did. Plus I am of the opinion that red is a great color on her.
Honestly, I think those who are saying Trump looked good in even the first 15-20 minutes of the debate are being generous. Even when he was supposedly doing well, he was already repeating himself, looking uncomfortable, making faces and had started with the sniffing. I knew she had him by the shorts within the first 10 minutes. You could almost hear him thinking, “How the fuck am I going to keep this up for the next 90 minutes??”
It went about as well as I expected it could but was afraid it would not.
I do think that M-W has it wrong, but only because I think meaning no.3 should be meaning no.1.
When people are describing someone who is confused they usually use the term “confused”. When people are describing someone who is being caused to have feelings of wry or tolerant amusement, they use the term “bemused”.
In other words, IME “bemused” is almost always used with meaning no.3 given by M-W.
Ukelele Uke, don’t thank him for giving you bad info! Definition number #3 only exists because sadly people have been, well, bemused by the word for so long that M-W has given in to the tide of ignorance. See also infer and nonplussed. Note that even M-W has it only as the final alternative, indicating that the first two definitions are preferred.
(I mean hell, if you want to say “amused,” we have a word for that too. It’s called “amused.”)
But hey, knock yourselves out and use “bemused” to mean “amused” if you like; go on and call me pedantic. But words are my career and I will not go gentle into the good night of sloppy English.
Is there a word for maintaining a polite grin while being mansplained to? Maybe “Hillarying”?
If you want to say, more clearly and specifically, “wryly or tolerantly amused”, we have a word for that too: Bemused.
Okay, you’re pedantic. And wrong.
None of this “common usage” nonsense for you. 
In this situation, I just write “she has been distracted by invisible muses,” for clarity.
I found this interesting discussion of the phenomenon (the meaning of bemused being assumed to be “detached amusement”) by the fine folks at the New York Times: Bemused? Bewildering - The New York Times
However, I find myself, shall we say, puzzled by their conclusion. They wish to fight the trend of bemused meaning “detached amusement,” because:
But in fact, defining bemused as “detached amusement” gives us three useful words: confused, bemused, and amused - all with distinct and useful meanings. Treating bemused as a synonym for confused leaves us with three words and only two states of mind. Where’s the advantage in that?
I’ve already issued my judgment: I will never - EVER - vote for a republican in any office, for any reason as long as I live.
EVER.
This “bemused” hijack is interesting but can we please get back on the main topic: is solar energy going to replace carbon fuels??
There’s an interesting article in the New York Times about his debate prep, and how Trump seemed unwilling to do much:
With the next debate being a Town Hall format, maybe Trump will be able to handle that better. But I could still imagine some questions throwing him off. And even if he takes debate prep somewhat seriously, he’s not going to want to take all of his time doing that instead of having rallies and interviews on Fox News, since that’s much easier and more fun for him.
Sniffles.
Sniffles are making more of a dent in Trump’s debate than what was said.
“He’s on coke.”
“I had a defective mic.” “Was it intentional?”
Fast forward 2018
“I didn’t mean to push the button, it was defective.”
“Only the losers died in the nuclear exchange, the losers, lots of losers, they died, believe me, they were losers.”
I don’t know how old you are but you’re rather dramatically underestimating the likelihood of party realignment.
It is wholly possible than in 20 years, the GOP will be the party of decency and sanity. It can happen that fast.
I’ve been waiting almost 60 years, and it hasn’t happened yet. I too have never and will never vote for a Republican.
I have a rough definition for an “honest conservative”, being someone who accepts the need for change and supports it, but counsels caution and prudence. And so long as I can trust them for that, I can argue with them in good faith.
If I see such a man, it is possible I would vote for him. Alas.
Perhaps. Prior to the Civil Rights Act, Republicans were as good or better than Democrats on race issues. Then the Southern Strategy and all the old racist Democrats switched uniforms.
But there are some things that seem quite stable, Republicans have been the party of business since forever and Democrats the party of labor since forever. I don’t really see that changing in the immediate future.
I suspect that you voted for such a man twice in the last 8 years.
If he were the Republican candidate? I would exercise my royal perogative as Queen of Romania and name him the Duke of URL.
I’m waiting for one who talks about taxing and spending as if those numbers are related to each other in some way.