537
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
537 points (100.0% liked)
Political Weirdos
724 readers
1 users here now
A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.
- Focus on weird behaviors and beliefs
- Follow Iemmy.world TOS
- Don’t be a jerk
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
Ok I’m gunna be thay guy:
In the context of what we’re given in the article he could have very well been talking about the people at home and how mad they are about him(and all of his obvious lying) being corrected. He does know now, well after the debate ended, that the MAGA losers are foaming at the mouth over this.
So he’s probably not imagining an audience that wasn’t there but I’m still not ready to be 100% confident in that.
You and I are seeing very different contexts:
That really sounds like he's talking about an audience he heard. I'm not sure how else he could make such a claim.
I definitely see that too, which is why I’m aaying I’m not 100% confident. Man’s insane and I wouldn’t put hallucinations or a broken memory past him.
Anyway, I don’t want to get too involved in defending that shitheel so I’ll leave my thoughts there.
9/11? I wonder what the Qlerics would say about that.
Funny how "we" always have to interpret and deduce WTF Trump is talking about... you'd think that a candidate for President would have a coherent thread of thought and, at least, a modicum of clarity in his speech
This is white washing his crazy. There is no reason to give someone who constantly babbles nonsense the benefit of the doubt. If it sounds like he meant something crazy he probably meant it just so.
The problem with that is that, being on the reasonable side, if we just assume the obvious and then are somehow 'proven' wrong on a specific topic (there are thousands of them, so it's bound to happen sometime) we legitimately lose actual credibility in the eyes of people who matter.
Like the 'they're eating the dogs!' things. It's perfectly reasonable to mock him for it being an issue, but insisting it has never happened and that even the idea is ridiculous, opens the entire side to being wrong if even one crazy or oblivious person of color has ever done it, which it almost certainly has. I mean if you look hard enough, you could probably find a crazy example of that from any cultural group. One example and pretty much all the mocking gets flipped around in the minds of anyone only half paying attention, and certainly from the other side next time we insist something doesn't happen.
People so stupid as to believe this crap are on average too stupid to change their mind by communicating with them. You don't win them over any more than you convince creationists or flat earthers. Picture a series of concentric circles. In the center is 20% of the US pop true MAGA believers. They are unconvincable and vocal. Neither they nor their audience reacts to reasoned careful discussion. You humiliate them and make them look like the evil garbage they are. The next 15% or so is watching the humiliation and getting quieter. The next 10% at the fringes you pick away as the bottom 20% get less and less cool.
By the time the entire group has shrunk from 45 to 35 rendering it perceptibly impotent to get anything done and making its proponents look like losers. The 15% publicly claims not to have been that into you and even the true believers get quieter.
People rely on social proof of truth more than logic or reason.
In the US white supremacist ideals are held by 1 in 10 but publicly these are humiliating ideas to hold and defend and as long as this is so they wont be making a come back
Having low standards for ourselves just because they’re mean and stupid is lazy and sad. There are a trillion things that we can point to about these wretched people that don’t require even the slightest bit of a reach. They’re brain-dead because it’s literally required to adhere to that entire ideology, what would your excuse be?
Taking obvious crazy at face value isn't having low standards its having low expectations.
We all speak carelessly in our daily lives, but people who speak professionally, whose words really matter and they're going to be on camera, they practice what they're going to say in order to avoid it.
And if they make a mistake, it's very easy for them to get back on camera and correct their mistake. If they don't do that, it's usually because they don't think they made a mistake.
So I want to ask you, why do you think Trump misspoke when he doesn't?
I mean I literally said that I my belief is not that he misspoke but that we took a bit of a leap there when an easy enough explanation for the chosen words exist. I went as far as to say that I won’t rule out him just being a moron, either. I assumed I was quite clear in all of that.
Seriously, I get bummed when I hear that assassination attempts on him fail, I hate the guy as much as anyone. But I’m also not going to debase myself into jumping to conclusions like a common MAGA dipshit just because I feel like his nastiness gives me permission to lower my standards. That’s literally JD Vance type shit and I have no intention on sharing a “level” with him, either.
I was gonna say this, actually. I hate trump with a passion, I think he is a jackass and a moron, and I can't stand his brainwashed, braindead cult of idiot followers. That said, I'd like our hatred and anti trump rhetoric to stay valid and focused in this reality. He was clearly talking about the people watching the debate across the world. Let's not stoop to his level by misrepresentation.
It obviously was not that clear since there are multiple articles about it and people debating what he meant.
Of course there are multiple articles about it? Trump is garbage. People are going to talk shit even though they know exactly what he meant. I'd like to be better than that, personally.
You want to be better than considering what someone actually means when they speak? I'm not sure I agree that that's better.
Yeah, Trump already looks bad without us making shit up. The only thing that would do is cast doubt on the veracity of real critique and ironically give him more legitimacy.