this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
485 points (97.1% liked)

Political Weirdos

605 readers
1058 users here now

A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 26 points 13 hours ago (6 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 46 minutes ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 hours ago

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

[–] [email protected] 12 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] dnick 3 points 7 hours ago

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 hours ago

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?

[–] [email protected] 53 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

You and I are seeing very different contexts:

“And they didn’t correct her once,” Trump told Greg Gutfeld. “And they corrected me, everything I said, practically. I think nine times or 11 times. And the audience was absolutely– they went crazy.”

That really sounds like he's talking about an audience he heard. I'm not sure how else he could make such a claim.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago

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.

[–] andrew_bidlaw 8 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

9/11? I wonder what the Qlerics would say about that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

It obviously was not that clear since there are multiple articles about it and people debating what he meant.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 hours ago

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.