I remember when liberals liked to present themselves as the smart people. But these are not normal times.
OH: Are these times when I must say that my "these are not normal times" is sarcasm?
ADDED: I think Trump's comment is easily understood, so the tactic of focusing on it gets it more widely heard and contemplated.
Does anyone think Trump is actually confused and just getting something wrong? He's making an attack and getting it spread virally. It's memorable and (darkly) funny. I could see thinking that a President shouldn't indulge in figures of speech that can be misunderstood, but the current criticism is mostly trying to deprive Trump of the power to say things in a vivid, effective way. Trump knows that, as his dialogue with Hugh Hewitt shows:
DT: No, it’s no mistake. Everyone’s liking it. I think they’re liking it.... do you not like that?Yes, they do, so it's effective... until it's not effective. And that's what Trump's antagonists would like to take away from him. They would like us to hear his speech as evidence that this man is mentally unbalanced. That is, they want to unbalance our minds, so we no longer hear him and understand but hear him and are triggered to think he's mentally unbalanced.
HH: I don’t. I think I would say they created, they lost the peace. They created the Libyan vacuum, they created the vacuum into which ISIS came, but they didn’t create ISIS. That’s what I would say.
DT: Well, I disagree.... I mean, with his bad policies, that’s why ISIS came about.... If he would have done things properly, you wouldn’t have had ISIS.... Therefore, he was the founder of ISIS.
HH: And that’s, I’d just use different language to communicate it...
DT: But they wouldn’t talk about your language, and they do talk about my language, right?
पोस्ट्स
१३६ टिप्पण्या:
Although has strange choice in targets.
And my tablet has strange choices in autocorrect
It irritates me, but it seems to be working to turn a lot of people against Trump. At least that seems to be the case for a lot of people I am meeting in day to day life. Ugh. How can they be such suckers?!
I remember when liberals liked to present themselves as the smart people.
"Oh boy. I have watched this unintentional slapstick scene over and over again. It’s golden. pic.twitter.com/E1L83E6d4F "
I would add that these are the same people who thought Sarah Palin really said, "I can see Alaska from my house!" So, obviously, I associate with stupid people.
Trump is literally Hitler.
"I remember when liberals liked to present themselves as the smart people."
Liberals will to do anything to gain and hold power.
They've been playing protector to the victim classes they continually create, so playing dumb is kind of a relief. It only requires the ever-compliant media, and not some social group expecting real results, to play along.
Its a tactic. It works if you have a big enough megaphone.
You have to feed such a megaphone, and if such is all that comes to hand, you use that.
Its about the megaphone, not the material.
The only thing off here is the urge to analyze. I understand why you do, its your thing to dive into words and arguments, but these things are tangential in this case.
I think the point that at least some of the "smart people" are making is that people wanting to be the most powerful person in the world have a greater obligation than the ordinary person to speak in ways that don't risk misunderstanding, confusion, and needless provocation.
Lyssa said...
Trump is literally Hitler.
Adolfnald Hitrumpler.
It seems to me at this point that it might take a generational paradigm shift to get past this sort of emojification of thinking, where thought and language has collapsed to the level of animal signals and calls. The Millennials don't strike me right now as that generation. Maybe the next one, or the next, assuming that the ability to think and to use language thoughtfully is passed that far along.
As I was on bike at the gym this morning, I was staring at the talking heads on CNN. The caption read something like, "Claim that Obama founded ISIS proved false!"
Apparently they found the original ISIS articles of incorporation and Obama's name wasn't on them.
I object to Trump's tweet because it's not sarcasm. It's figurative.
Liberal Media-types have been saying that the US--and specifically Republican politicians--are responsible for Al Qaeda, for ISIS, and for pretty much all of the terrorism that goes on around the world. It's George W. Bush's fault, it's Ronald Reagan's fault, it's all the fault of the Right. That has been repeated over and over again, and no one objected.
Trump blames Obama for ISIS, though, and everyone loses their minds. Outrageous! What a terrible libel! No one is responsible for the acts of terrorists except terrorists! Etc etc. It would be funny if it weren't so damn sickening.
The Left and Reporters (excuse the redundancy) do not mind appearing as dumb as rocks if it helps Hillary, so pretending to "misunderstand" and "misinterpret" and "misquote" Donald Trump is just one more set of Journ-O-List techniques they will use to help drag the stinking carcass of Clinton over the finish line. It is tiring to the casual news viewer, who cannot understand why the people who hold themselves out as experts in general can be so dumb in specific instances, unable to "comprehend" the very broad and obvious humor Trump deploys.
Just like we are supposed to pretend someone is "the smartest woman in the world" even though she is pretending she doesn't know what "wiping a server" means or how exactly email security works.
Just like the media ALWAYS says the Republican is dangerous and stupid but we are supposed to overlook "57 states" and "bring a gun to the fight" and "get in your neighbors' faces" from Black Jesus.
So we have here the public torment of a media that is out of ideas and a playbook that is looking dogeared and tired. One more citation in the "Washington is out of touch" snowball rolling toward November.
The media aims at women, where the stupidity that rules is the narrative, not anything about ability in language.
I think the point that at least some of the "smart people" are making is that people wanting to be the most powerful person in the world have a greater obligation than the ordinary person to speak in ways that don't risk misunderstanding, confusion, and needless provocation.
Perhaps, but it is certainly central to the pretense to journalism that the hearer or reader plumb even the most obscurantist or ambivalent language for whatever truth can be gleaned from it. Those failing that pretense, the ones we're speaking of, are simply competing performance artists in their own right.
No doubt, the new favorite pastime of the MSM nattering class is gasping with faux incredulity at whatever random thought passes through Trump's word hole.
Trump's been compared to that loud uncle at the family get-together who, after he's got a few in him, starts spewing all sorts of opinions extemporaneously about this and that in a completely unfiltered way. Topics like religion, politics, and private family stuff that everyone else isn't comfortable talking frankly about. You know, things that aren't said in "polite company".
And the MSM is playing the role of an offended Aunt or Grandmother or whatever, gasping and staring icy daggers at Trump the loud upstart.
Also, I continue to watch and read CNN. It's 24/7 Trump bashing. The only Republicans shown are those that they found are voting for Hillary. You get the occasional person representing the view that Trump isn't PURE evil, just mostly evil.
The Trump claim is that it's so that it might as well be literally true.
It's not pure exaggeration because there's hidden connections in how systems work that makes it more than just a figure.
It's fairly complex.
The childhood experience of what Althouse is talking about is the taunt that one is using big words. That gambit only works with certain audiences.
They want Trump to produce copies of the Obama-signed and the Hillary-signed "Articles of Incorporation" (signed in their capacities as the Board of Incorporators) of "ISIS, Inc.," as filed with the Secretary of the State of [Wisconsin, New York, California, and so forth] before they even begin to think that Obama and his crew might be the enablers of ISIS.
Hey, does anyone else remember when Lefty and Media heroine Elizabeth Warren said Republican Senators voted to sell weapons to ISIS? Remember that? Dem Senator Chris Murphy said it, Warren seconded it in a tweet, and sen. minority leader Reid said he agreed. CNN: Senator Warren accuses SenateGOP of voting to sell guns to ISIS
The Media didn't object to that. Oh, it's a metaphor, see you idiots - you're not supposed to take it literally! Where was the fact check on that statement--where was the debunking? I don't remember seeing it.
With Trump, though, that's all you see. Fuck the Media. (Side note: as far as I know Warren hasn't ever apologized for saying what she said. She's at least as terrible a person as is Donald Trump.)
Lisa the Vegetarian
[At school, the other kids tease Lisa about her vegetarianism]
Sherri and Terri: Look, it's Mrs. Potato Head! She has a head made out of lettuce!
Ralph: I can't believe I used to go out with you.
Janey: Are you going to marry a carrot, Lisa?
Lisa: [sarcastically] Yes, I'm going to marry a carrot.
Sherri and Terri: Ooh! She admitted it! She admitted she's going to marry a carrot!
Sherri and Terri now work for NBC News.
As far as I'm concerned, the Republicans threw their party away early, and the candidates were terrible. Trump won because the others were completely unacceptable. But that doesn't make Trump acceptable. He's running a campaign that can't win.
What is clear to me, is that Trump has no friends. I believe he is a drug addict. I think he's been on speed for the whole year and now his body is shutting down.
It's like he wants to be the CEO of a public company and there are no stock holders that like him. You can't fake being someone you aren't, and Trump is faking it big time.
In the end, once the people step up to the ballot, they will discount Trump big time. He is going to lose in a landslide. If he isn't hospitalized for drug related problems first.
Igv, i would imagine all of the trump talking head apologists are resting after the last trump gaffe... wake them up.. CNN is calling...
I am not a troll...
This is Trump's rope-a-dope of the MSM. And the MSM didn't get it!
We flyover people, however, got it.
Consider this. If Trump said, "Obama and Clinton created the conditions for the rise of ISIS." Zero coverage by MSM. Trump says "co-founders of ISIS" and MSM goes wild.
I'd like to see Trump attack Obama for his sticking with the name "ISIL" when everyone else calls them "ISIS." The deaper meaning is that ISIL concedes the entire Levant to IS while ISIS restricts IS to just Iraq and Syria.
"He doubled down on those comments"
It seems like this is the phrase du jour these days. It reminds me of the old "gravitas" bologna from a couple cycles ago.
"I remember when liberals liked to present themselves as the smart people." They still do. It's smart to dispense with any pretense to logic and evidence and common sense when all you care about is destroying the opposition in order to achieve maximum power. They assume the few people who care about such things are smart enough to know that anything prog say is just a tool without truth value, strictly meant to vilify the opposition and rally the troops, by any rhetorical means necessary. Of course, logic and evidence and common sense being situational in prog politics, that won't keep anyone from invoking them against the next con, as needed.
What do you expect when they constantly troll the left side of the bell curve.
Whether or not we should understand the joke, I doubt every foreign leader will be laughing when he does this in the White House.
He seems incapable of being serious, which is kinda important for internatonal relations.
But keep trying to explain his every statement. I am sure Russ Feingold enjoys the lead weight of Trump around Ron Johnsons neck. The Marquette poll made his reelection look even less likely post Republican convention.
This is one of the most insulting things I think you've ever written, Professor Althouse.
No; to state the painfully obvious, nobody thought that Trump was talking about a true, corporate "founder." Yes, we understood what Trump's meaning was.
And we also understood that Trump had tried to make his point in a way that was idiotic and boorish. Hugh Hewitt tried to engage Trump in a reasonable and intelligent discussion of the words and the meaning of the words. And Trump refused.
So now, Trump is backing down. In Trump's simplistic world, he has lost. He's been put in a corner where his only way out is to claim the obvious (and stupid) response that he was only using "sarcasm," and that others were too silly or too serious to understand that part. Trump is backing down now. Trump lost, and is effectively confessing that he lost. Now, instead of articulating an intelligent argument that Obama and Clinton created a power vacuum into which ISIS found a way to flourish, the bottom line is that Trump's claim that Obama was an ISIS "founder" is defeated, and now the bottom line is that Obama was NOT an ISIS "founder." That was only sarcasm.
Trump succeeded in hogging some media time for his own personal foibles; and he wasted another 2-3 days in which Mrs. Clinton went unscathed.
What a vain ignoramus Trump is. What a shitty candidate. What a loser.
So don't you dare to insult me with any notion that I am not clever enough to understand Trump. I am smart enough to laugh at Trump.
"I think the point that at least some of the "smart people" are making is that people wanting to be the most powerful person in the world have a greater obligation than the ordinary person to speak in ways that don't risk misunderstanding, confusion, and needless provocation."
- Bush Lied, People Died.
- "I can see Russia from my house!"
- Trump is Hitler.
- GHWB had never seen a checkout scanner.
- Romney gave one of his employees cancer.
- Trump is the #1 recruiter for ISIS.
I think the "smart people" you're talking about have habitually used exaggeration to great political effect and don't like anyone else bing able to use the same tactic against them.
They are smart to try to limit the use of the tactic to themselves. But they are in no way taking a principled stand.
As I was saying yesterday. Some of us speak Trump. Those who don't speak Trump go crazy when they hear him speak.
I'm expecting you to be lectured by Chuck at any moment.
I think the point that at least some of the "smart people" are making is that people wanting to be the most powerful person in the world have a greater obligation than the ordinary person to speak in ways that don't risk misunderstanding, confusion, and needless provocation.
Yeah, that's a bunch of bullshit.
Of course people who want to be the most powerful person in the world have an obligation to not be corrupt, incompetent, amoral individuals who are either unable to grasp fundamentals of computer security that can easily be explained to a 6 year old or are just so corrupt (and stupid) that they prioritized covering up their misdeeds over protecting national security secrets.
I saw some study a while back that the collective left wing bias of the media gives the Dems 2-3 extra points in a Prez election. That's what these hacks do. Ignore 93 Million out of the labor force; Ignore the ridiculously feeble economic growth, pretend that Obama is a political genius playing the long game; but hyper scrutinize any "statements" however trivial by Trump or any other right-winger trying to address the real problems of the country, however inartfully done.
Same old story.
Wow. I seriously didn't see Chuck's comment until after I wrote my post. That's funny.
That is, they want to unbalance our minds, so we no longer hear him and understand but hear him and are triggered to think he's mentally unbalanced.
OK, I'm going to stop you right there. In fact, the man is unbalanced. He has no friends, and only a naked Slav is going to marry him for his money.
I personally believe he talks funny because he is on speed. Then a couple days later after they detox him, he reads the shit he's been spouting, and like a drunk sailor with no pictures of evidence, he can say they never had sex with the Filipino she-male.
Then it's back to more speed to get through the day.
lgv said...
Also, I continue to watch and read CNN. It's 24/7 Trump bashing. The only Republicans shown are those that they found are voting for Hillary. You get the occasional person representing the view that Trump isn't PURE evil, just mostly evil.
Well, for one, CNN features Jeffrey Lord (a third-tier Republican pundit from the American Spectator) who is pretty close to being the biggest Trump Toadie in the entire world. Lord is a regular commenter, on every big CNN election show this year. He is, explicitly, the Voice of Trump on CNN.
It is probably the best, and last noteworthy, job that Jeff Lord ever gets in politics.
When figures of speech are outlawed, only outlaws will use figures of speech.
Even as I type this, NPR's Korva Coleman has just finished informing me that Trump's claim that Obama founded ISIS is false. False. Also false is his claim that Hillary Clinton co-founded ISIS.
Let me repeat people, NPR voice actor Korva Coleman feels no discomfort attaching to her resume the item that she has declared Trump's claim that Obama founded ISIS to be false and unsupported by fact.
This is the value one gets for the NPR contribution dollar.
It's weird, for the longest time in order to be a successful national level politician you had to adopt a certain style of public speaking and interview responses. There were all these unwritten rules about the things you could say, how you must phrase them, intonation, inflection... all these had to be within a set of parameters. These parameters were strictly enforced by the MSM. Anybody who violated them was to be excommunicated from public life.
Of course, anyone with half a brain knew that that whole speaking style was BS. Anyone with half a brain knew full well that it was just a game and not an accurate reflection of what might really be in a given politician's mind and heart. And yet everyone just accepted it, because that's the way things were done.
Then along comes this boorish lout who refuses to behave as he should.
It's sort of darkly funny.
I knew that the media was corrupt and partisan. I knew that the government was as well. But nonetheless, I am still astounded at the complete and utter mendacity.
I doubt if Tammany Hall is still taught to school children as an example of government corruption (Democrats and immigrants after all), but our current state of affairs is far worse, and far more widespread.
Kevin wins the thread.
If only Trump would use Kevin's words, verbatim.
soph·ist·ry
noun
the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving. a fallacious argument.
Some of the Never Trumpers need to reread Br'er Rabbit.
Nonapod said...
It's weird, for the longest time in order to be a successful national level politician you had to adopt a certain style of public speaking and interview responses. There were all these unwritten rules about the things you could say, how you must phrase them, intonation, inflection... all these had to be within a set of parameters. These parameters were strictly enforced by the MSM. Anybody who violated them was to be excommunicated from public life.
Of course, anyone with half a brain knew that that whole speaking style was BS. Anyone with half a brain knew full well that it was just a game and not an accurate reflection of what might really be in a given politician's mind and heart. And yet everyone just accepted it, because that's the way things were done.
That is so untrue.
Naturally, leading politicians weren't supposed to say stupid and deliberately inflammatory things. But they could be blunt, articulate, and enlightening all at once, if they were good at what they were supposed to be good at which was communicating ideas and advancing policies in the public square.
Mitch McConnell is good at it. Ted Cruz is good at it. I hate to say it, because the guy is such an unctuous cocksucker, but Dick Durbin is good at it. Rand Paul is one of the very best, and when he is on, Marco Rubio is excellent.
Donald Trump is a joke. A bad joke. Now, my calling Trump "a joke" is just sarcasm. Because he is not literally a "joke"; he is a man who lives in New York City.
As long as it works, people will do it.
I agree with HH.
But is it working? I think it gives the DNC-MSM an excuse to ridicule him. they fall all over themselves to do so for any reason.
David Begley,
"I'd like to see Trump attack Obama for his sticking with the name "ISIL" when everyone else calls them "ISIS." The deaper meaning is that ISIL concedes the entire Levant to IS while ISIS restricts IS to just Iraq and Syria."
But if Trump did that, he'd actually be demonstrating his ignorance (albeit an ignorance that is common and widespread in the West). Contrary to your (mistaken) assertion, the "S" in ISIS did not actually stand for Syria. It stood for ash-Sham, the Classical Arabic name for the region that roughly corresponds with the Levant, a term which itself came into use around the 16th century. Sham and Levant are not quite interchangeable, but neither one of them is confined to just Syria. The Islamic State have since dropped Sham and Levant from their title, as they purport to be a global empire.
For the record, those who want to degrade the Islamic State (for example, King Abdullah II of Jordan) refer to them as "Da'ish" (sometimes spelled "Daesh") an acronym for al-Dawlah al-Islamiyah al-Iraq wa al-Sham, but which when pronounced corresponds with the Arabic word for "someone who crushes." For marketing reasons, Daesh do not like this term and its use is punishable by beatings, torture, death... Which is reason enough for Westerners to know they should use it.
Then again, maybe Trump should use it: the media would slam him for being stupid, the talking heads would pretend like they all knew it stood for ash-Sham all along, and in the process maybe you civilians might actually learn a little something about this enemy that the professionals have been fighting on your behalf all these years.
Trump is a mass communications genius. His skillful manipulation of his political and media opponents is so freaking effortless. They really are clueless about how they've been enlisted to spread his message and promote his brand. Their perpetual outrage at everything he says just gives him more free airtime and rent inside their heads.
What's even more impressive is how Trump seems to do most of this on his own. He doesn't follow a script that's been tested by consultants and focus groups. By contrast, I seriously doubt Hillary is the author of more than 5% of the things she says.
Let's see:
1) Trump dominated several news cycles.
2) Trump was invited on several network and cable shows for extended interviews.
3) Trump got to excoriate Obama and Hillary to millions over and over again for days.
4) Cost to Trump campaign $0.
5) The many thousands at the rally where he made those remarks were cheering him on, loudly.
6) The offended will never vote for Trump ever, as they will tell you ad nauseam.
"I think the point that at least some of the "smart people" are making is that people wanting to be the most powerful person in the world have a greater obligation than the ordinary person to speak in ways that don't risk misunderstanding, confusion, and needless provocation."
-- If that were true, think of all the ways they'd have checked Democrats and never do. No. This is a power play to hurt Republicans that is used because it works.
Which is fine; politics ain't beanbag, after all.
Founder, founders, foundation! Obama, Hillary, the Clintons! All this inference, all these implications and interconnections. All these interstices.
Is Trump foundering? His campaign? His movement?
Time will tell.
My thought is stay tuned. Everytime Trump has jumped in with both feet into a controversial accusation of Obama and/or Clinton the claque of media push backers form a mob to ridicule him, it has only set up the public for the revelation of a new story that shows Trump had it right again.
He is calmly driving the Lying Media Industrial Complex insane. And we love him for it.
@Althouse, what makes you think they're "playing" or "pretending" to be dumb?
I was wondering how the MSM was going to try to take out Trump after the conventions, and now we kinda know. Most of the MSM have college degrees of some sort, even if they are journalism degrees, so probably most have IQs on the right end of the spectrum. Som they understand. They just think that maybe you don't. That they might confuse you. Kinda like Chuck and some of the Unknowns here. But the reality is that most of those confused by this are already voting for Crooked Hillary because she has promised them more free stuff (I remember Obama voters dumbfounded that he wouldn't get them free houses and cars). I too think that this is going to backfire on the left - it gets people listening to what Trump is saying, and when they do many agree with him. Meanwhile the fake outrage by the media just paints them as partisan operatives.
...and of course it is even not true.
"For starters, the terrorist group’s roots pre-date Obama’s presidency and Clinton’s role as secretary of state."
gopers broke and own it...
The Levant has always meant the Mediteranean coastal crescent of composed of Syria, Lebanon, and Judea that must be crossed or occupied by invading armies from Persia, Syria, Babylon and Egypt setting out to conquer the weaker ones of that group.
And by the way the RCP general election polling averages show Trump moving up and Hillary moving down.
I remember when liberals liked to present themselves as the smart people.
Yah. Dukakis, Kerry, any lesser Kennedy was always the intellectual candidate.
With Romney even the lefties knew they had to stop selling that one.
Trump is so awesome, that's why he trails the most corrupt person to ever seek the office.
BTW, Trump still mentally unbalancedm Just saying.
Here's a good comparison.
No one believed Biden LITERALLY meant Republicans would re-enslave minorities. And anyone who interpreted him as meaning that was laughed off for not understanding what he meant.
While also letting people wink and say, "But you know, they really would if they could."
Different rules for different parties; Republicans need to accept that's how the game is played.
"Well, for one, CNN features Jeffrey Lord (a third-tier Republican pundit from the American Spectator) who is pretty close to being the biggest Trump Toadie in the entire world. Lord is a regular commenter, on every big CNN election show this year. He is, explicitly, the Voice of Trump on CNN.
It is probably the best, and last noteworthy, job that Jeff Lord ever gets in politics."
He's the setup guy. He is there to make Trump look even worse by getting the shit kicked out of him by everyone else. He's the equivalent of what Alan Colmes was to FOX, only Colmes was actually likeable.
Blogger Matthew Sablan said...
Here's a good comparison.
No one believed Biden LITERALLY meant Republicans would re-enslave minorities.
I think the latest SNOPES rates it as True. Republicans do want to physically enslave minorities. Yes, it is factually correct. Slavery is part of the Republican platform.
BDNYC said...Trump is a mass communications genius.
Bohemianism is when the person is more or less required to live an unconventional life. They marry naked Slavs, they borrow money and they build around vice.
This Genius is released as an all-powerful, radical, and unequaled event. A gift of nature that must be allowed to run its course, no matter how disruptive to common perceptions, of the proletariat.
It's the duty of these genius's to tear-up the norms, to shatter the confines of rules and to permit a whole new world of reality.
Let's go to your Number 6, shall we, viator?
If those who are offended by Trump are a majority (and polling suggests a supermajority), then his chances of getting elected are near zero, right?
Chuck said... That is so untrue.
Naturally, leading politicians weren't supposed to say stupid and deliberately inflammatory things. But they could be blunt, articulate, and enlightening all at once, if they were good at what they were supposed to be good at which was communicating ideas and advancing policies in the public square.
Mitch McConnell is good at it. Ted Cruz is good at it. I hate to say it, because the guy is such an unctuous cocksucker, but Dick Durbin is good at it. Rand Paul is one of the very best, and when he is on, Marco Rubio is excellent.
Donald Trump is a joke. A bad joke. Now, my calling Trump "a joke" is just sarcasm. Because he is not literally a "joke"; he is a man who lives in New York City.
I'm not seeing where you demonstrated that anything I asserted was untrue. You listed some politicians who are "good at which was communicating ideas and advancing policies in the public square". That doesn't change the fact that they did so within an unwritten protocol, a mode of speech that wasn't necessarily reflective of their true thoughts or motivations.
I'm not dismissing the validity of having a more formal way of talking and behaving. I'm not trying to denigrate good manners and behavior any more than I would dismiss dressing up in formal clothing. I'm just saying that just because a person dresses up in formal clothing doesn't automatically mean that they're not a sleezebag. And just because you speak in a formal and defined way and communicate an idea clearly doesn't mean that you actually believe what you're saying or that you're not full of s$#@.
All I was saying was that Trump obviously doesn't follow those formal rules and it's fascinating. Don't get me wrong, I still think he's full of s%$#, but his bluntness elicits telling responses from certain corners. Trump's the guy that showed up to the fancy dinner party in a tank top, cargo shorts, and flipflops, and I'm paying more attention to everyone elses response to that.
But is it working? I think it gives the DNC-MSM an excuse to ridicule him. they fall all over themselves to do so for any reason.
The MSM is going to do that no matter what. I have a friend who still thinks Palin said she could see Alaska from her house. When I said that Tina Fay said that, not her, he got defensive and insisted that it "was on the Internet." That image has been put in his head and I don't think anything will ever dislodge it. After all, if he admitted that I was correct that would mean acknowledging that he was duped.
Did you know that a lot of people will not report that they have been the victim of a confidence game because of embarrassment. In fact, a lot of people will not even admit to themselves that they have been "had." Thus allowing allowing the grifter to continue to extract money from his victims over an extended period of time. Senior Citizens, worried about being perceived as losing their mental faculties, are especially prone to this.
In any event, its perfectly obvious to anyone not invested in finding fault with Trump, no matter what he does, that the statement was a bit of hyperbole meant to illustrate his point. And demands that every statement he makes be perfectly stated so that no misunderstanding can possibly take place are simply bullshit. The whole point of the current MSM onslaught is to signal to everyone that Trump is an outsider. NOT. OUR. SORT. By definition, everything he does is wrong.
Trump campaign response to news reports of RNC come to Jesus meeting in Florida: "It's just a meeting." Learning sarcasm from the master.
I remember when liberals liked to present themselves as the smart people. But these are not normal times.
"And You People Are Supposed To Be Sensitive And Sharp?"
It has been my experience that many Liberals really are that dense. And we know it's always the Democrats who really want to keep minorities down. Down and firmly Democrat.
Here's a good piece on this topic.
Ron Winkleheimer said...
...
In any event, its perfectly obvious to anyone not invested in finding fault with Trump, no matter what he does, that the statement was a bit of hyperbole meant to illustrate his point. And demands that every statement he makes be perfectly stated so that no misunderstanding can possibly take place are simply bullshit. The whole point of the current MSM onslaught is to signal to everyone that Trump is an outsider. NOT. OUR. SORT. By definition, everything he does is wrong.
Oh I am laughing so hard at your bullshit, Ron.
Nobody is holding Trump to a standard "that every statement he makes be perfectly stated so that no misunderstanding can possibly take place..."
Hugh Hewitt tried NOT to do that! Hewitt bent over backwards, to suggest a better way of saying exactly what the Trumpkins are now all claiming. Hewitt practically coached Trump on a better way to make his point. Trump refused. Trump -- pretty clearly without any coaching or intervention -- repeated the phrasing over and over. Until someone apparently intervened overnight when Trump got his customary two hours of sleep.
Trump wasn't being held to any unfair, or even unusual standard. Trump made the claim, and then was asked about it. Trump then answered, freely, several times. He talked with Hugh Hewitt, and refused any more reasonable and nuanced language. No one misquoted Trump.
You say the Trump statement was "hyperbole" on Trump's part. And sure, it was. We all know that. It was outrageous hyperbole. But then, there was Hugh Hewitt, who virtually asked Trump, Why are you using this hyperbole?, and Trump virtually answered, It isn't hyperbole.
So now Trump is forced into admitting that yes it was just hyperbole. Just the way that he talks.
"It has been my experience that many Liberals really are that dense."
They aren't, most of them - or at any rate not those on, as mentioned above, on the right hand of the Bell curve, who are the people most of us talk to of substantive matters, if we do - we all are in our bubbles. Ron Winkleheimer is correct, much of the pushback you may get is just personal amour-propre fighting back.
In the back of the mind other things may be going on. It takes a lot of intelligence to rationalize.
I've been listening to Trump pretty carefully for quite some time now. Long enough to understand his sense of humor, such as it is. But to my mind it's Trump's supporters who are trying to have it both ways. His comment about Obama being the "Founder of ISIS" ascwell as their "MVP" was clearly not intended to be taken literally. It was a joke, expressing whatever sense of humor Trump has.
But it's equally obvious to me that his comments about "Second Amendment People" were also not intended to be taken seriously. Not as an invitation to violence, but also not as a sober analysis of the political influence of the NRA. That comment, too, was an example of Trump's sense of humor...such as it is.
If it's too politically incorrect to say that Trump is "unbalanced," can we at least agree that he has a lousy sense of humor and poor impulse control?
Well Trump coverage sure makes Chuck look unbalanced. Trump told Hugh Hewitt, "I can say it your way and be ignored or say it my way and everybody is talking about Obama and ISIS for days."
He knew exactly what he was doing and saying "sarcasm" today is his way of saying to the Press "y'all are dumbasses for getting the vapors" over it. Chuck is a dumbass for geting the vapors too. Obama and Clinton and Fauxcahontas all have said many times that Republicans "cre4ated ISIS" or "want to arm ISIS" or "are terrorists" and we gt not one peep out of the vapors crowd (like Chuck).
That's how we know Trump is breaking through the MSM fog, by the rubes that self-identify (like Chuck) by getting the vapors in public like some Victorian housewife would.
Assange promised a stream of Hillary memos showing that Hillary intentionally armed ISIS after misreading the situation is the Middle East. We shall see.
Quite a lot of important people have had sex with naked Slavs.
Napoleon Bonaparte for one, a lot it seems. He should have married her, and better yet taken her advice.
Mistresses were geographically limited for a long time, merely the women locally available, but with improvements in transportation the search went further afield. By the mid-19th century the market was already Europe-wide.
Louis XV famously had an Irish mistress, though he was a notably conservative fellow who liked the familiar, so much so that he mainly took mistresses upon the recommendation of his other mistresses, and had, at various times, four out of five sisters for mistresses. I suppose he was impressed by the family. He was another man who was probably better off on the whole for taking his mistresses advice, with the notable exception of the Seven Years War.
I hope Assange has a food tester, armed-doors, full bullet proof jackets, and 24/7 armed guards.
The Millennials don't strike me right now as that generation.
That the media is lavishing praise on them all of the time, rest assured, they are not that generation. They will be the same brain dead imbeciles as the Baby Boomers who took a great country and shat on it. The Millenials will take a great culture, Western culture, and shit all over it.
Trump succeeded in hogging some media time for his own personal foibles; and he wasted another 2-3 days in which Mrs. Clinton went unscathed.
I'm sure the media was ready to report on the leaks of emails involving the Clinton Foundation but, DARN IT, Trump said something and they couldn't do so. They don't have enough manpower or something. Makes one wonder why the media is important. I'd have few problems, since religion is ignored now, to just do away with the First Amendment.
But keep the 2nd.
Let the nannies try some shit.
In fact, the man is unbalanced. He has no friends, and only a naked Slav is going to marry him for his money.
How is Hillary different?
She has no friends, just underlings. Her husband has zero desire to fuck her. She is CLEARLY imbalanced.
Mitch McConnell is good at it. Ted Cruz is good at it. I hate to say it, because the guy is such an unctuous cocksucker, but Dick Durbin is good at it. Rand Paul is one of the very best, and when he is on, Marco Rubio is excellent.
...unless any of them oppose a Democrat running for the WH.
They pulled this shit with Mitt Romney, one of the more plain spoken people who has run in years.
You cannot make your speech idiot-proof enough for reporters.
"For starters, the terrorist group’s roots pre-date Obama’s presidency and Clinton’s role as secretary of state."
It's roots started in 1999. Who was President?
nuanced
Whenever I hear someone start talking about nuance I know they are trying to piss on me and say it is raining.
According to Politifact ISIS was founded in 2004, four years before Obama took office. Trump gets a pants-on-fire rating
George W. really screwed up in Iraq. He did not understand the Iraqi people nor the Sunni/Shia/Kurd divisions. He clearly did not understand the culture and the lack of experience with democracy. And where were the 'weapons of mass destruction'?!? Obama didn't help by pulling out so quickly - but the damage was already done
Trump is a little boy in an adult body. Things are way more complex than he seems to understand...
Lefties really are that dumb when it comes to accounting, finance and economics. To lefties raising marginal rates is free money for government with no strings attached. Price controls don't lead to shortages. Liz Warren actually believes GE doesn't pay taxes or at least she said so until she learned GE is moving its headquarters to her state.
Politifact is one of the chorus. Disingenuous is a good start to describe this statement of theirs.
I suspect also that Sunsong is one of the chorus.
Little known fact. While other young men his age were serving in Vietnam, Trump was apprenticing to a London gang, Dinsdale and Doug Piranha. As reported by the BBC:
Doug. I was terrified of him. Everyone was terrified of Doug. I've seen grown men pull their own heads off rather than see Doug. Even Dinsdale was frightened of Doug.
Interviewer What did he do?
He used sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and satire.
Personally, I think Trump should focus more on the litotes.
Things are way more complex than he seems to understand...
Or maybe not. 'Complexity' is a much-used ruse to avoid calling things by their definitive names. Einstein was able to explain his Theory of Relativity in understandable terms.
For all of the category label throwers out there, it is necessary to get to the root of the Muslim Jihad Terrorists. They are all offshoots of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood teachers of the 1950s that made the SS Nazis look merciful.
We either suppress it or it kills first the Jews and then the Christians.
Hussain Obama and his sidekick Hillary founded this eruption calling itself a Caliphate by intentionally removing the suppressing Dictators whom we had been allied with, just like Carter removed the Shah of Iran.
We can reverse the insanity up until the pointIran has nukes. That has been Obama and Hillary's second founding act. The Deal with the Devil.
I think that Chuck is working overtime to prove Ann's point. And very effectively too.
- Krumhorn
Oddly, I find myself no more in need of having a self-appointed fact checker check my facts for me than I am in need of NPR breaking down all these complex issues into the sort of simple glucose I can subsequently understand the way I should.
It all started when the United States, United Kingdom, and France did a Pearl Harbor on Iraq.
Once that infamy was done, the lid was off, and it won't be over until French and British people speak Arabic as a first language.
I give Iran 25 years, and Palestine will border Greece and Libya.
"So don't you dare to insult me with any notion that I am not clever enough to understand Trump. I am smart enough to laugh at Trump."
Bravo Chuck. And it's almost unbelievable that this clown of a candidate is still being given any credibility whatsoever by people who are considered of normal intelligence. This is a powerful country that needs a serious leader.
"This is a powerful country that needs a serious leader."
The "serious leader" owns a private foundation, that takes enormous amounts from often shady foreigners, that she empowers to give orders to government employees.
I find that "pretending not to understand" is a fairly common tactic among "liberals" (and by "liberals" I mean of course "tax-happy, coercion-addicted, power-tripping government sniffers and State fellators"). Their proclaimed self-image is that they're always the Smartest Guys in the Room (especially because they get their news from NPR and the NYT), yet confronted with a dissection of their stupid ideas they suddenly become Phil Hartman's Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer: "This 'statism' and 'collectivism' you speak of . . . these are terms I know not," etc., etc. Anything to avoid a logical argument.
ISIS was founded in 2004
Shouldn't that be "around 600 AD?"
Oh right. Bush wasn't president then.
It is kinda funny watching lifelong republican chuck dance to trumps tune.
Why do lefties call for the release of Trumps tax returns. It's not like they'd understand what's in them.
Swiss Bank Account! Ooooooooo....!
Chuck + Unknown sitting in a septic tank
S-T-I-N-K-I-N-G
Mike you are setting yourself and every other Trump True Believer up for a very, very bad fall. And a bad four years thereafter.
Trump has already won the votes of all of the Obama-hating yokels from Virginia to Arizona. The votes that Trump desperately needs now are the votes of the college-educated Republicans. Trump may need to fight to win Utah!!!
And this not the way to do it.
You all can make all if the whiny-ass comments about media bias; but Trump is 90% self-inflicted wounding and 10% media bias right now.
President Trump will co-exist with Chuck. Chuck can work to keep open-border, pre-amnesty, globalist Republicans in some office or another.
According to Politifact ISIS was founded in 2004
Couldn't find a reputable source?
"The Organisation of Monotheism and Jihad", which is being claimed as the original part of ISIS, was founded in 1999.
"According to Politifact ISIS was founded in 2004.."
But ISIL was founded in 2013 partly as an extension of ISIS into Syria, but also as it's own thing; ISIS in Syria if you will. ISIL is the more violent, focused and fanatical of the two; so much so, al-Quaeda cut ties with ISIL. It appears that since 2013, the two groups have coalesced around ISIL's much more fanatical outlook.
(To use a corporate analogy; it's like a failing company creating a wholly owned subsidiary, which then buys out the parent.)
Hell, the first time "Islamic State" appears at all is 2006, with Islamic State of Iraq, which "The Organisation of Monotheism and Jihad" (not going to try and type out the alphabet soup that is Arabic) was a part of. Politifact cannot even fact check THE FUCKING DATE.
But ISIL was founded in 2013 partly as an extension of ISIS into Syria, but also as it's own thing; ISIS in Syria if you will. ISIL is the more violent, focused and fanatical of the two; so much so, al-Quaeda cut ties with ISIL. It appears that since 2013, the two groups have coalesced around ISIL's much more fanatical outlook.
Remember, these same people think that segregationists were Republicans, when approximately one of them was (Strom Thurmond, after spending years as a Democrat being one). They believe that feelings and hope trump reality.
To be fair, Hillary relied on advice from Middle East experts like Huma Abedin who said that ISIS were the good guys before she armed them. Huma also heaped praise on her sponsors, the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary and Barack smiled and nodded their heads in agreement.
Even if Chuck is right in his conclusion I'd take a bad four years of Trump over a bad four years of Hillary. She's the devil we know too well, to coin a phrase. Maybe you read something into my comments that I'm not putting there. I'm not whining about media bias I'm calling it a failure for it's obvious and hyperbolic nature.
90% of what Trump's streams-of-consciousness ranting is standard political positioning in his own style. The other 10% is 90% harmless rambling and broad (as I said above) humor. The media getting the vapors instead of rolling with his style (like they did for the 30 years he was a media darling and not a contender) reveals them to be empty icons of the mainstream media's slide into irrelevancy. The coverage doesn't matter this year. Look at 2015. It didn't turn out like ANYONE predicted -- except Trump. It's a weird cycle. Two "hated" figures. But the Trump hate has been mostly ginned up whereas the Hillary hatred has been earned over the same 30-year period when Donald was just an obnoxious but lovable billionaire.
And as the media OVER REACH (that thing they always predict righties will do) and overcompensate and try to obscure Hillary's downsides while playing character assassins toward Trump they just lose even more credibility. The MSM claim to fame is OBJECTIVITY which they are quickly shedding even more rapidly then they did in 2008 when their MSM slobber created a wave on which Obama rode into office. But that was selling CHANGE. Not MOREOFTHESAME.
I'll take my historical headwinds and public zeitgeist over your enslavement to Hillary any day.
Lots of proud members of political parties casually slur other members of their party as "yokels." Happens all the time--that's how people who are proud members of a political party talk about fellow members of that party. Totally normal.
They are not playing dumb. They literally are dumb.
Re Politifact, keep in mind that "Islamic State" is a basic concept for jihadists, so the re-purposing of variants of the name doesn't necessarily imply the same entity as such, though with the shifting relations and mixing and re-mixing of terrorist elements, finding some link is likely.
@coupe, what's your obsession with naked Slavs? I married one myself, and it's great. Not that she's naked all the time. Just when appropriate.
Why would anyone want to listen to Trump jabber on in his childish short sentences, oversimplifying all issues to irritating sound bites that always end with like or dislike opinions and questions designed to make The Donald the "be all" and "end all" in the conversation. The man is socially incapable of conducting a two-way conversation because he would have to listen to what people say to him.
Hugh Hewitt's advanced vocabulary makes talking to Trump difficult, but the radio talker has had nothing but bad to say about The Donald in the past. A couple of months ago, HH opined: “Trump’s task now is clear. It’s time to abandon his off-the-cuff remarks, disengage from his battles with the media and methodically prosecute the case that throughout her career, Clinton has consistently displayed a disqualifying lack of judgment . . .”
Yeah, that's going to happen!
mockturtle: Einstein was able to explain his Theory of Relativity in understandable terms.
mock, you know I'm a fan. But this is the purest ray of BS, and I surely hope you know it. Consider that general relativity rests on 4D curved non-Euclidean (specifically, Riemannian) spacetime. Very few people who have not studied it, and nothing else, for many years on end has anything like an understanding of it, and won't, ever.
Paul, I meant 'relatively' speaking, LOL. He actually did explain the fundamentals so that even I could fathom the basics. You're probably too deeply knowledgable about physics to see the beautiful simplicity of E=mc2. Forest? Trees?
Jaime, don't mind coupe, he's a wet-brain.
Prof. Althouse:
I agree with your analysis in this post of the way in which the media reacts to Trump's spectacularly -- often deliberately and provocatively -- loose language.
That people are deliberately pretending to misunderstand him, though, doesn't make him any more appealing as a candidate.
And from my point of view, his calculated overstatements and misstatements are just another sort of lie. The man is fundamentally untruthful, from his small misstatements all the way through his grand lies -- and everything from small exaggerations to gigantic objective whoppers spew from his mouth daily. It's certainly part of why I, personally, can't bring myself vote for the GOP presidential nominee for the first time since 1976.
Not that she's naked all the time. Just when appropriate.
Yeah. 16-39.
So was he being sarcastic or not? When you first heard what he said did you take it literally [as he claimed was the case] or did you know he was being sarcastic? Come on. I've read your blog enough to know you are fairly bright. But if you really think Trump is running a smart campaign then I have to question your thinking. Outside of Breitbart no one thinks he is running a good campaign. He knows he will lose so he's just passing the time at this point.
So you're saying that Trump's language is vivid and effective, and should be understood by any sane person who cares to listen to it. The only problem is that "they" are trying to unbalance our minds. And given Trump's sinking poll numbers, I should say succeeding in unbalancing our minds. FIe on this wicked and insidious plot to brainwash us, and thanks for your brave work in exposing it!
"I said the founder of ISIS. Obviously I’m being sarcastic -- But not that sarcastic to be honest with you."
"To be honest with you."
Now THAT'S sarcasm.
We all knew he really meant it. When faced with the blowback, he caved in to pressure momentarily and claimed it was sarcasm. And the dummies here believed him. Now he is being honest, so he says, and decides he won't be pressured into backtracking afterall. So, he doubles and triples down. What a leader, just what America and the world needs. Now that was sarcasm.
Trump is -1 in today's poll.
Meaning Trump leads by +20.
Seems clear that both Trump and his foes in the media are playing dumb. Trump plays at being a little thick to make the point Hillary made a hash of the Middle East. His foes play dense taking his hyperbole at face value in order to make the point Trump speaks recklessly.
Trump apologists spend a lot of energy attacking Trump's attackers. Judge Curiel, the fallen soldier's parents, and the "media" all come in for criticism. To be sure, I won't be voting for the judge, the parents, or any talking head for president, so to that extent the attacks have been successful. I suppose the idea of this is to make us think all criticisms of Trump are illegitimate because some critiques are exaggerated. Who is pretending to be dumb now?
A better question is whether Trump's continued strategy of turning hyperbolic statements into free media is a good one. Undoubtedly, it was during the primary, but that was a different game. In the general, would merely being a sober, responsible-seeming candidate be enough to defeat Hillary? Trump pulled into a tie just by letting Comey's email revelations sink in.
Why didn't Trump continue that winning approach? The sad truth is Trump has major impulse control when he is attacked. He could not resist going after the soldier's mom despite all of his advisers and family members telling him to lay off. And there you have the answer as to why the media strategy of playing dumb that Althouse doesn't like may be plenty smart. Most undecided voters are not going to check too carefully if Trump's latest cry for attention is being exaggerated. Trump showed the world he is not always the master of his own words. His foes are going to be less than scrupulously careful when the opportunity comes to reinforce this idea.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/12/politics/clinton-trump-swing-state-polls/
Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton has opened up commanding leads over Donald Trump in several critical battleground states, including North Carolina and Colorado, according to a new poll Friday.
Clinton leads Trump 46%-32% in Colorado, 44%-39% in Florida, 48%-39% in North Carolina and 46%-33% in Virginia, according to new NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist polls.
Friday August 12
Results Spread
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Clinton 44, Trump 43 Clinton +1
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 44, Trump 39 Clinton +5
Florida: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 41, Trump 36, Johnson 9, Stein 4 Clinton +5
North Carolina: Trump vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 48, Trump 39 Clinton +9
North Carolina: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 45, Trump 36, Johnson 9, Stein 2 Clinton +9
Virginia: Trump vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 46, Trump 33 Clinton +13
Virginia: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 43, Trump 31, Johnson 12, Stein 5 Clinton +12
Colorado: Trump vs. Clinton NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 46, Trump 32 Clinton +14
Colorado: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC/WSJ/Marist Clinton 41, Trump 29, Johnson 15, Stein 6 Clinton +12
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Obama-Clinton-ISIS
Obama-Clinton-ISIS
Obama-Clinton-ISIS
Yeah -- clearly a bad strategy by Trump! Lulz
Fabi, so you were thinking this is an LBJ style rope-a-dope? If I recall correctly, the story is that a rumor was spread that a political opponent of his had sex with barnyard animals. Someone said, but it isn't true! LBJ said I know, I just want him to go on record denying it. (paraphrased)
No link to Scott Adams' post on the cognitive dissonance Trump's statement caused? Color me surprised.
Chuck said... nobody thought that Trump was talking about a true, corporate "founder." Yes, we understood what Trump's meaning was.
And we also understood that Trump had tried to make his point in a way that was idiotic and boorish. Hugh Hewitt tried to engage Trump in a reasonable and intelligent discussion of the words and the meaning of the words.
--
So..everyone knew what he meant, but Hewitt wanted to discuss the meaning of the words.
So it's really the tone of it that has yer undies in a bundie.
By the way, anyone find a transcript that shows the lead up to the comments in question?
@ walter: The full transcript is at HughHewitt.com. Hewitt and his staffers almost always post full transcripts of all his interviews within hours.
You can also find the full audio at that link, by the way.
Beldar,
Not Hewitt, Trump's rally bit that's in contention...media excerpts have isngled out the line. I'd like to know what was before it.
@Unknown -- I have no idea if it's a rope-a-dope or not, but I like that it has people discussing those three names as a cluster.
For the record:
Who knows how it's gonna turn out.
---
Better to tend one's own garden (as much, determinedly, and quickly as possible) than to engage in speculations, in whatever ways.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा