|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 2:39:56 GMT
Merriam-Webster says it's also: "a major economic disaster. a market bloodbath" |
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 2:44:10 GMT
Re: trump and his "bloodbath". His supporters are backsplaining and offering what-he-really-meants. Again. If it is that innocent (it's not) then at best he's an awful communicator seeing > half the country (and probably world) "misunderstands" him. That's a huge part of the job he seeks. If elected again, his "miscommunications" could cause havoc to say the least. Been there, done that, not again, thanks. It's not a miscommunication. It's dishonest people presenting a video with the actual beginning of what he was talking about, removed. Yes, it is. Sloppy at best. Of course videos are not always posted in their entirety. But even listening to the entire thing it is not interpreted well by majority of people. He often talks in world salad and/or ambiguous speech that has to be dissected and backsplained over and over again. I think some of it is intentional on his part to see if it flies or falls like a lead balloon. Then he and his can reinterpret and back pedal if necessary. The other times is just his lack of intelligent and concise, not easily misconstrued speech. He's also not the brightest bulb but has learned how to slither and squirm his way through life. That's the problem (or one of many) with him being in power. Neither consistent or concise. Dangerous. |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Mar 18, 2024 2:44:49 GMT
Merriam-Webster says it's also: "a major economic disaster. a market bloodbath" i’m sticking with the definition I posted. Why won’t you answer the question? |
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 2:50:26 GMT
Just here on the board all the discussion and trying to "prove" his meaning is further proof that he sucks at communicating concisely. Again, probably by partial design in his part so he doesn't have to (in his mind) be held accountable because "that's not what I meant".
How many times has that discussion and dissection of his word salad(s) happened since 2016. Too many to count. What a waste of time. Him and this never ending discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 3:01:14 GMT
Merriam-Webster says it's also: "a major economic disaster. a market bloodbath" i’m sticking with the definition I posted. Why won’t you answer the question? I would put a lot of money on the probability that she is NOT calling for violence, as you're trying to insinuate. More like in terms of numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 3:04:14 GMT
Just here on the board all the discussion and trying to "prove" his meaning is further proof that he sucks at communicating concisely. Again, probably by partial design in his part so he doesn't have to (in his mind) be held accountable because "that's not what I meant". How many times has that discussion and dissection of his word salad(s) happened since 2016. Too many to count. What a waste of time. Him and this never ending discussion. That's gonna happen when you have a bunch of peas who want to see everything in the worst possible light. Even if it means they have to clip off or ignore things said that DON'T support the claims. I believe someone called that cult behavior, when it was reversed. Curious concept 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Mar 18, 2024 3:12:19 GMT
i’m sticking with the definition I posted. Why won’t you answer the question? I would put a lot of money on the probability that she is NOT calling for violence, as you're trying to insinuate. More like in terms of numbers. “Terms of numbers” means what exactly? Regardless of what definition one uses why would they (those honking for a bloodbath) want a bloodbath? |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:16:20 GMT
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 3:18:54 GMT
Just here on the board all the discussion and trying to "prove" his meaning is further proof that he sucks at communicating concisely. Again, probably by partial design in his part so he doesn't have to (in his mind) be held accountable because "that's not what I meant". How many times has that discussion and dissection of his word salad(s) happened since 2016. Too many to count. What a waste of time. Him and this never ending discussion. That's gonna happen when you have a bunch of peas who want to see everything in the worst possible light. Even if it means they have to clip off or ignore things said that DON'T support the claims. I believe someone called that cult behavior, when it was reversed. Curious concept 🤔 Or in the best possible light, defending and defending again despite the in your face facts and/or dog whistles. He's pure as the driven snow it seems. 🙄 And it's not just the peas. It's damn near the whole country. Which again shows his communication skills, "the best words" actually suck or it wouldnt be so easily debated. He's a simpleton that was born rich into position of power and has bullied his way through life through the same and repeated m.o. year after year, decade after decades. If he wasn't born with that silver spoon on third base he'd be someone he himself would ban from his often bankrupted businesses. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:20:30 GMT
Seems like clear choice to me. One candidate is giving doomsday predictions and defending his comments on a bloodbath. His bloodbath comment is so horrific, his description of immigrants as animals is not getting a lot of attention.
The other candidate is projecting hope.
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 3:23:48 GMT
That's gonna happen when you have a bunch of peas who want to see everything in the worst possible light. Even if it means they have to clip off or ignore things said that DON'T support the claims. I believe someone called that cult behavior, when it was reversed. Curious concept 🤔 Or in the best possible light, defending and defending again despite the in your face facts and/or dog whistles. He's pure as the driven snow it seems. 🙄 And it's not just the peas. It's damn near the whole country. Which again shows his communication skills, "the best words" actually suck or it wouldnt be so easily debated. He's a simpleton that was born rich into position of power and has bullied his way through life through the same and repeated m.o. year after year, decade after decades. If he wasn't born with that silver spoon on third base he'd be someone he himself would ban from his often bankrupted businesses. No, I never said that. There's a lot of difference between "pure as the driven snow" and pushing such obvious hoaxes. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:27:34 GMT
This is awesome. She calls it like it is - the message to Trump supporters was clear. Trump supporters don't care about tariffs. They heard there will be a bloodbath if he loses. That's the message Trump wanted to send and that's what they heard. Let's be honest. Let's be honest |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 3:30:15 GMT
Seems like clear choice to me. One candidate is giving doomsday predictions and defending his comments on a bloodbath. His bloodbath comment is so horrific, his description of immigrants as animals is not getting a lot of attention. The other candidate is projecting hope. Not when you apply it in the definition it was meant. Economically. He was talking about people that were raping children and killing women. They ARE animals. That's why you're not seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it and defending child rapists and murderers. |
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 3:32:15 GMT
Or in the best possible light, defending and defending again despite the in your face facts and/or dog whistles. He's pure as the driven snow it seems. 🙄 And it's not just the peas. It's damn near the whole country. Which again shows his communication skills, "the best words" actually suck or it wouldnt be so easily debated. He's a simpleton that was born rich into position of power and has bullied his way through life through the same and repeated m.o. year after year, decade after decades. If he wasn't born with that silver spoon on third base he'd be someone he himself would ban from his often bankrupted businesses. No, I never said that. There's a lot of difference between "pure as the driven snow" and pushing such obvious hoaxes. never said you specifically said that. It's the general consensus of his rabid supporters, if you fall into that category then probably true, spoken or not. "What Gramps really meant was..." Rarely if ever a misstep to be admitted. And definitely not from him. Always someone else's fault. Always. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:32:36 GMT
This is brilliant, too. Trump gave plenty of context that he supports political violence over the last 8 years. His praise of J6 insurrectionists as patriots and hostages as well as his promise to pardon them is all in support of political violence. His replacing the national anthem with a song by J6 criminals supports political violence. His call to fight like hell or you won't have a country incited political violence. That's all of the context that you need. context |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 3:36:53 GMT
No, I never said that. There's a lot of difference between "pure as the driven snow" and pushing such obvious hoaxes. never said you specifically said that. It's the general consensus of his rabid supporters, if you fall into that category then probably true, spoken or not. "What Gramps really meant was..." Rarely if ever a misstep to be admitted. And definitely not from him. Always someone else's fault. Always. "There's a lot of difference between "pure as the driven snow" and pushing such obvious hoaxes." covers a lot of areas. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:42:24 GMT
Seems like clear choice to me. One candidate is giving doomsday predictions and defending his comments on a bloodbath. His bloodbath comment is so horrific, his description of immigrants as animals is not getting a lot of attention. The other candidate is projecting hope. Not when you apply it in the definition it was meant. Economically. He was talking about people that were raping children and killing women. They ARE animals. That's why you're not seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it and defending child rapists and murderers. That was not the message that was delivered in either case. That's not what his supporters heard. If you believe that he meant bloodbath in an economic sense or that he was only referring to criminals as animals, you're living in an alternate reality. His comments on the auto industry and tariffs don't make sense in terms of an economic bloodbath. If the economy is strong while President Biden is in office, why would there be a bloodbath if President Biden gets re-elected? Doesn't even make sense. He was intentional and deliberate with both comments. Before he started talking about "migrant crime", he referred to immigrants as murders and rapists, vermin and said they were poisoning the blood of our country. He defended his comments today by saying he was trying to stir debate. Stir up his base, yes. But you don't have an honest debate on immigration when you start by dehumanizing people. abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-claims-attacks-migrants-stir-debate-announce-abortion/story?id=108212646As Donald Trump faced backlash for saying some immigrants who come to the U.S. are "not people" but "animals," the former president defended some of his divisive characterizations of people crossing the border, insisting that he has to use "certain rhetoric" to "stir debate." |
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 3:44:17 GMT
never said you specifically said that. It's the general consensus of his rabid supporters, if you fall into that category then probably true, spoken or not. "What Gramps really meant was..." Rarely if ever a misstep to be admitted. And definitely not from him. Always someone else's fault. Always. "There's a lot of difference between "pure as the driven snow" and pushing such obvious hoaxes." covers a lot of areas. There is a lot of differences between snow and the bs he speels, agreed. It's obviously not such an obvious hoax with the repeated and continual instances of having to explain his words over and over, time and time again. His communication skills suck. Full stop. Keep fighting the not so good fight. Good night. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:47:51 GMT
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 3:48:01 GMT
aj2hall said: That was not the message that was delivered in either case. That's not what his supporters heard. If you believe that he meant bloodbath in an economic sense or that he was only referring to criminals as animals, you're living in an alternate reality. That is part of what I think is intentional on his part. If what he says is accepted and embraced in the worst possible of terms, he'll take it and run with it. If not, let the backsplaining commence. Time and time again.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:52:43 GMT
I imagine it gets tiresome trying to defend someone who says despicable things with plausible deniability. Someone who is incapable of delivering a clear, coherent speech. Someone who is obviously unhinged, who routinely talks about and supports political violence. Someone who insults and demeans people on an almost daily basis. Must be exhausting.
Don't worry, Trump will say something equally reprehensible or worse within a week and attention will shift to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:56:00 GMT
aj2hall said: That was not the message that was delivered in either case. That's not what his supporters heard. If you believe that he meant bloodbath in an economic sense or that he was only referring to criminals as animals, you're living in an alternate reality. That is part of what I think is intentional on his part. If what he says is accepted and embraced in the worst possible of terms, he'll take it and run with it. If not, let the backsplaining commence. Time and time again. Exactly. It's all intentional on his part. The more discussion there is about his comments, the more attention he gets. And more of his supporters are likely to hear exactly what he intended - there will be a bloodbath if he loses and immigrants are not human, they are animals. (excluding his wife because she didn't cross the southern border, is not Latino and therefore, doesn't count) |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 3:59:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 4:06:56 GMT
Not when you apply it in the definition it was meant. Economically. He was talking about people that were raping children and killing women. They ARE animals. That's why you're not seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it and defending child rapists and murderers. That was not the message that was delivered in either case. That's not what his supporters heard. If you believe that he meant bloodbath in an economic sense or that he was only referring to criminals as animals, you're living in an alternate reality. He was intentional and deliberate with both comments. Before he started talking about "migrant crime", he referred to immigrants as murders and rapists, vermin and said they were poisoning the blood of our country. He defended his comments today by saying he was trying to stir debate. Stir up his base, yes. But you don't have an honest debate on immigration when you start by dehumanizing people. abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-claims-attacks-migrants-stir-debate-announce-abortion/story?id=108212646As Donald Trump faced backlash for saying some immigrants who come to the U.S. are "not people" but "animals," the former president defended some of his divisive characterizations of people crossing the border, insisting that he has to use "certain rhetoric" to "stir debate."Economically is exactly what he was referring to, despite your insistence that it can only be seen in the way that you WANT it to be seen. He was talking about people that are raping children, killing women and robbing. They ARE animals. That's why you're not seeing a lot of people losing their minds over it, because based on YOUR standards, that would be defending child rapists and murderers. "Stir up his base, yes." is your very biased interpretation. You can NOT have an honest debate when you WON'T admit reality. The reality IS that he was talking about people that are raping children and killing women and robbing. They ARE animals. If you won't admit to reality, you are INCAPABLE of having honest debate. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 18, 2024 4:08:40 GMT
Seems he said the cars were a small thing the rest it would get worse and be a bloodbath...
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 4:11:46 GMT
These are not patriots or hostages. They are violent criminals who were incited by Trump to commit political violence. J6 criminalswww.justice.gov/usao-dc/36-months-jan-6-attack-capitol-0Arrests made: More than 1,265 defendants have been charged in nearly all 50 states and the District of Columbia. (This includes those charged in both District and Superior Court).
Criminal charges:
Approximately 452 defendants have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers or employees, including approximately 123 individuals who have been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer.
Approximately 140 police officers were assaulted on Jan. 6 at the Capitol, including about 80 from the U.S. Capitol Police and about 60 from the Metropolitan Police Department.
Approximately 11 individuals have been arrested on a series of charges that relate to assaulting a member of the media, or destroying their equipment, on Jan. 6.
Approximately 1,186 defendants have been charged with entering or remaining in a restricted federal building or grounds. Of those, 116 defendants have been charged with entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon.
Approximately 71 defendants have been charged with destruction of government property, and approximately 56 defendants have been charged with theft of government property.
More than 332 defendants have been charged with corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding, or attempting to do so.
Approximately 57 defendants have been charged with conspiracy, either: (a) conspiracy to obstruct a congressional proceeding, (b) conspiracy to obstruct law enforcement during a civil disorder, (c) conspiracy to injure an officer, or (d) some combination of the three. |
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,840
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Mar 18, 2024 4:16:46 GMT
Seems he said the cars were a small thing the rest it would get worse and be a bloodbath... Yep as submitted as evidence by Cow a page back at approximately:55 into vid. but I'm sure that's not what he meant. 🙄 |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 18, 2024 4:16:52 GMT
Seems he said the cars were a small thing the rest it would get worse and be a bloodbath... Exactly. He did, which is part of the reason why his comment doesn't make sense in economic terms. He was talking about tariffs then zoomed out to talk about the country and said "that's going to be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country" www.npr.org/2024/03/17/1239019225/trump-says-some-migrants-are-not-people-and-warns-of-bloodbath-if-he-loses But Trump used the stage to deliver a profanity-filled version of his usual rally speech that again painted an apocalyptic picture of the country if Biden wins a second term.
"If I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that's going to be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country," he warned, while talking about the impact of offshoring on the country's auto industry and his plans to increase tariffs on foreign-made cars. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 18, 2024 4:19:18 GMT
"There's a lot of difference between "pure as the driven snow" and pushing such obvious hoaxes." covers a lot of areas. There is a lot of differences between snow and the bs he speels, agreed. That is not at all what I said, so we do not agree with your twisting of what I ACTUALLY said. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 18, 2024 4:22:13 GMT
But some conservatives aren't interested in ignoring the violent rhetoric. *** See...Trump didn't say 'It's going to be a bloodbath for the auto industry' and then the media cut off the words 'auto industry,'" he explained Sunday in reference to a post with a manufactured Trump quote. "He said: 'Now If don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole...That's going to be the least of it, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole country.' It's fine to say Trump was talking about auto industry, but don't change his quotes to make them more for favorable." Conservative attorney George Conway also chimed in on the issue. "There’s some commentary on here saying we should disregard Trump’s 'bloodbath' remarks last night because he was talking about potential harms to the auto industry. That is misguided," Conway said. "Trump may well have been referring to a 'bloodbath' in that industry. He’s sufficiently incoherent that, as is so often the case with him, it’s hard to tell one way or the other what exactly he’s talking about at any given moment. I’m willing to assume for the sake of argument that he was referring to cars. And it makes no difference to his malicious intent or to the danger he and his rhetoric poses." "What matters," Conway added, "is that he consistently uses apocalyptic and violent language in an indiscriminate fashion as a result of his psychopathy and correlative authoritarian tendencies, and because he’s just plain evil." He continued: "It’s a classic trait and technique of authoritarian demagogues. He catastrophizes *everything* to rile up his cultish supporters, and to bind them to him, and to make them willing to do his bidding. That’s dangerous all around because he’s encouraging them to believe that conditions are so bad or will become so bad, and that the political opposition is so awful, that anything is justified—including law-breaking and violence—to prevent those conditions and to destroy the opposition." So, for Conway, "it doesn’t matter what he’s specifically referring to at the moment. He could be talking about trans people in public bathrooms or the state of the auto industry or the border—it doesn’t matter." "He’s a dangerous psychopath, and after more than eight years of watching his sick behavior, we must not give him the benefit of the doubt," the attorney concluded. Another conservative, former Republican lawmaker Joe Walsh, echoed Conway's comments. "Trump deserves ZERO benefit of the doubt," Walsh said. "He’s spewed & incited so much hatred, cruelty, lying, ignorance, fear, & violence the past 8-9 yrs, it doesn’t matter if this time he was just talking about cars. He deserves ZERO benefit of the doubt." www.rawstory.com/trump-bloodbath-defense-debunked-conservatives/ |
|
