Let him. Why should we do the intellectual work of disassembling his bullshit only so the campaign can come back with what they actually mean. Just let him sound stupid.
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
508 points (98.3% liked)
politics
19043 readers
3844 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
We had this bullshit in Arizona too. The state GOP is convinced that Flagstaff is hoarding water somehow. That if Flagstaff just stopped hoarding water then Sedona wouldn't have any trouble. For the uninitiated, Flagstaff has what rains and that's it. It's as water stressed as the rest of the state because people won't stop moving there.
Uhm.
Ok. He should not be in charge of the executive office. We know he's stupid but, damn.
This isn't an idea, or even a promise. Trump thinks that there currently exists a faucet that could divert the Columbia River, a river he does not know exists and would probably think is in Mexico somehow, and that the faucet is purposefully moving water to the ocean as a way to spite the residents of California going through a water crisis. His only promise is that he would turn said faucet to eliminate the water crisis. Why are journalists ascribing so much intelligence to someone who has consistently bragged that he thinks at an 8-year old level?
There's a flood control gate somewhere around Vancouver, is that what he's talking about? It's a bit bigger than any wall though...
No, he is talking about a faucet because he doesn't understand any of it. There is no faucet. He's dumb. Move on.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
It’s definitely an intriguing idea, but it seems like this "faucet" plan might be more complicated in practice than it sounds in theory. Getting water from the Columbia River down to Los Angeles involves not just massive infrastructure but also overcoming significant ecological and legal challenges. Plus, as the experts pointed out, it's pretty costly and inefficient. While addressing water shortages is crucial, perhaps more feasible and sustainable solutions like improving water-use efficiency and investing in desalination plants would be better routes to explore.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The Columbia runs from a lake in British Columbia, down through Oregon and eventually ends up in the Pacific Ocean.
The Columbia does not run through Oregon, it is the northern border of it from just south of Kennewick, Washington to the Pacific Ocean. The only US state that the Columbia actually flows through is Washington, which makes sense since the river starts in Canada, which is north of Washington, which is north of Oregon. Odd choice of verbiage.
The Columbia is the border between Washington and Oregon. Cross a bridge between the two states and you will see a welcome to Oregon/welcome to Washington sign in the middle of the bridge.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Without the Columbia, the Idaho port city of Lewiston is doomed. Just in case anyone needed a silver lining.
~~promises~~
Deranged ramblings
Can't wait for the next forest fire in Canada and Trump to suggest a big fan to blow the smoke away from the US.
Just switch all our wind turbines from suck to blow. Easy.
Assuming we could actually create enough air flow to blow smoke out to sea, we'd be creating one hell of a weather phenomenon in the middle states.
I don't know why this triggered my brain but I can't stop imagining this in my head and laughing my ass off.
He’s such a fucking embarrassment. Someone needs to stop putting microphones in front of his hamberder hole.
I love that Trump has no ability to do any critical thinking, and thinks of everything as very literal now. He believes the planes are actually invisible, the only way to prevent Forrest fires is to actually rake the forest, and now that a literal giant faucet would be used to divert water in what kinda sounds like a Roman aqueduct to Socal.
I also agree that journalists should not be spinning Trump's word salad, that makes zero sense, by calling them "poetic" and then trying to explain what the hell he is maybe trying to say. He is running to the President of the US, if he can't explain how he wants to use plumbing to divert water from the Columbia river to Socal he should be asked about that over and over until he can articulate that. Journalists doing the heavy lifting of making real ideas out of Trump's babble should be looked down upon. Instead they continue to "both sides" anything left of the far-right.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Is this faucet from the same company that will sell the takes to sweep up the leaves in the forests to stop forest fires?
My favorite type of incoherent gibberish is the type that might be trying to talk about a terrible idea.
Politicians keep talking about building pipelines from places that have water to places that don't.
Maybe the answer is actually that California isn't the best place for agriculture once you get past the easy access to migrate labor, and they should price industrial and agricultural water usage accordingly.
Next you're going to term us farming the desert is a bad idea. We'll I can't hear you because I'm covering my ears. So nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah!
Trump also said: the faucet is made by ACME and managed by my good friend Wile E. Cayote.
Oregonian, here. We need that water to flush our absolutely gigantic toilet so California can't have it!
That explains Drain, OR. I always wondered what the actual drain looked like!
So you're saying trump has to decide what is more important, California or being anti low flow toilets. RIP California.
And we can solve the problem of climate change by going to the opposite side of the sun and turning off the Enormous Fan, thereby eliminating the solar wind.
I guess it was gradual, but when did it become the job of journalists to try and guess what politicians mean when they make statements? Shouldn't the meaning be made clear by the speaker? Right now it seems like its:
Trump: Speaks rambling gibberish saying something about a faucet
Journalists: "It seems like Trump is talking about the Columbia river and here's why that is significant..."
News Readers in USA have been paraphrasing a long time. Now "paraphrasing" works really hard.
Goes double for whether or not he's serious. The number of times I've heard something and have had a legitimately hard time telling if he's joking, or exaggerating, or just a complete fucking moron is absolutely crazy. Pretty much every sentence he utters becomes this endless game of trying to figure it out. It seems like his base just kind of randomly picks the option that makes the most sense to them and rolls with it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is what "sanewashing" refers to, if anyone was unclear on that.
“sanewashing”
The media is rightly concern that MAGA will have a fit if they tell the truth so they go full Onion. We have reached the point of, "Idiocracy", but here we are.
Oh I like that term. Will be applying it in my life. Thank you.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The difference is he could be the next president and try to turn whatever he's thinking into national policy, so it's worthwhile to try and dissect what he's saying.
But those experts are also (somehow, still) not really accustomed to Trump's bombastic language. He was like this long before he got into national politics, hyping real estate and business for the market (where it kind of worked). That's a totally different world, where half lies and crazy sales talk are the norm.
The problem is, he has no idea about policy and really no interest in it, except when the decision obviously benefits himself, or benefits those who pretty directly benefit him. So whatever he's saying at this point is just stuff he thinks sounds good. It bears no relation to what he'll do, except where there's obviously something in it for him and his associates. That's why "I'll take vengeance on my opponents" or "I'll increase fossil fuel use and suppress green technologies" are the kinds of statements to take seriously from him, but "I'll sort out your water problems" is not, unless we can find a benefit for him in it. The question to ask is, "Is he saying this because he thinks it benefits him to say it, or because he thinks it benefits him to do it?" (And for him, making people he dislikes suffer counts as a benefit.)
This does benefit him if it gets him votes. He wants voters to like him, and he'd absolutely build this crazy pipe and slap his name on it if he could.
But like you said, he'd drop it like a rock if it's inconvenient.
Unlike other politicians, Trump accepted there's no real consequence for making fantasies up and almost lying, just like he did in business.
“Is he saying this because he thinks it benefits him to say it, or because he thinks it benefits him to do it?”
And anyone who's on the fence about Trump is not thinking critically like this, they are looking at a few things he's saying and pondering if its a good thing and benefits them.
And again, fact-based news journalism does not have the luxury of assuming "Here's what we think he's saying, and we think he's making that up because it benefits him, so it's probably nonsense."
I get what you're saying but they really should just be pointing out that he's not making any sense. Trump's speeches are being treated like Nostradamus' prophesies now. He spews a bunch of nonsense and people make up what they think it means. The guy should be in a home, not on the campaign trail and the media should make that clear to voters.
It's not totally incoherent though, its vague and almost poetic.
This is kind of Trump's talent. He makes these grand statements that aren't quite lies. The crowd gets exactly what he's trying to say: all this water pouring out of snowy mountains into the ocean is a "waste" when it could just be diverted to LA, so let's fix that. It's worded almost like a dream. It's an attractive fantasy. But it's also vague, not quite enough to be a lie even if the implied facts are straight up wrong.
What can the news do? If they dig into it, he didn't really make any hard claims to roast. They can veer into opinion talk and say that sounds unpresedential and that his speech should be more clear, but making fun of his speech style at a rally is not supposed to be their job. So they do what they can, guess what he's saying and refute that.
Again, this was his talent before he got into politics. The Motley Fool did this great podcast on Trump (before Trump was big and political) where he sold massively overvalued real-estate from his private company to his public one, effectively "duping" the market, and it worked because he sold it as a vague fantasy just like this. He got plenty of criticism and it didn't matter, because he threaded the needle and what he's claiming is not hard enough to stick. This is what he does.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The worst part is they nitpick any piberal or progressive candidate on their exact phrasing while translating conservative hate speech into something less horrible.
It takes a day to turn
He really said that
Anyone still supporting this human shaped STD has herpes of the brain.
I disagree. He is not human shaped.
honestly even just saying "shaped" is a bit of a stretch
He's a single-celled organism and I live in fear that one day he'll divide by mitosis and then we'll have two of him
I'd imagine it would be like RimmerWorld episode of Red Dwarf where none of them stays in power for more than 15 minutes before being back stabbed and taken over by another.