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