Question for Trump Supporters (2)

Author: Double_R

Posts

Hot
Total: 65
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?

If Yes, well I have quite a few more questions for you.

If No (the typical MAGA response), then can you please explain how you square your belief that someone whose words are not to be taken seriously can be fit for the most serious job on earth?

Bonus question: if you don't take his words seriously then on what basis do you form any judgement about him?
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,984
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Double_R
Is there a politician whose words you do take seriously?
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,876
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?

If Yes, well I have quite a few more questions for you.

If No (the typical MAGA response), then can you please explain how you square your belief that someone whose words are not to be taken seriously can be fit for the most serious job on earth?
No. Hyperbole is a thing. Negotiating is a thing. There’s a reason why our adversaries and allies act straight with Trump at the table.

Bonus question: if you don't take his words seriously then on what basis do you form any judgement about him?
His actions.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,876
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Savant
Is there a politician whose words you do take seriously?
Apparently Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Oh and Hillary Clinton
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,309
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Double_R
Last February, PolitiFact published its 1,000th fact check of a claim made by Donald Trump. The publication, which usually refrains from wading into political discussions or weighing in on a politician’s overall character, took the opportunity to release an analysis of those years of work. Its finding? Trump lies a lot.
“American fact-checkers have never encountered a politician who shares Trump’s disregard for factual accuracy,” the authors wrote. “Ever since he descended the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015, we have encountered a firehose of claims.” 
The analysis found in particular that Trump’s immigration-related claims tended toward inflammatory falsehoods and that more than 70 percent of PolitiFact’s checks on immigration, foreign policy, crime, COVID, and health care were largely false. It concluded, also, that “Trump’s falsehoods have fueled threats to democracy.”
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,854
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Double_R
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?
Not particularly.


then can you please explain how you square your belief that someone whose words are not to be taken seriously can be fit for the most serious job on earth?
Fools are less dangerous than cunning enemies.


Bonus question: if you don't take his words seriously then on what basis do you form any judgement about him?
Wisdom and comprehensive understanding are rare. That is what would make me take him seriously. It's harder to be sure about a man who chooses his words carefully than one who always says what's on his mind. In that sense a man without a filter is a far safer repository of public trust.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Savant
Is there a politician whose words you do take seriously?
Pretty much every single one, just as you probably do, just as the vast majority of people do when it comes to just about any other politician but Donald Trump.

Taking someone's words seriously =/= believing everything they say uncritically, nor does it mean believing that they will do/accomplish everything they say they will do/accomplish. All it means is that when they say something we assume they are being serious. This is basic English.

The political right certainly takes Kamala Harris seriously, that's why when she says she will go after price gougers you hear conservatives freak out and decry this as socialism. That's why when she says she will tax the rich they say this is class warfare. That's what taking someone seriously means. It doesn't mean you really think she'll do or accomplish these things, but that the proper response is to treat her and her proposals as if they are real and evaluate her accordingly.
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,520
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?
Of course they don't, Trump is the reality TV president, they see it as entertainment, it's about getting clicks.

They don't have the ability to take things they don't understand seriously, to them it's not reality, it's reality TV, big difference.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Pretty much every single one
All it means is that when they say something we assume they are being serious. 
X to doubt. I know no serious person that takes a Kamala word salad seriously. Forget the pandering flip flops and fake pandering accents...

You would be more believable admitting Kamala isn't a serious candidate but you are voting for her anyway because Orangemanbad. That's at least believably honest.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
No. Hyperbole is a thing.
So when a presidential candidate makes a claim in front of the entire nation alleging that a very specific group of people in a very specific place within the country are engaging in a very specific and heinous act (like eating the neighborhood's pets)... Is that hyperbole?

When a presidential candidate expresses that he believes his political opposition to be "the enemy from within" and that we should use the military against them, is this hyperbole?

When a presidential candidate says he's going to impose an across the board 20% tariff on all imported goods (something he would have the authority to do unilaterally), is that hyperbole?

if you don't take his words seriously then on what basis do you form any judgement about him?
His actions.
What actions does a presidential candidate engage in (other than using words) that tells you what they plan to do if (re)elected?
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
I know no serious person that takes a Kamala word salad seriously.
It never ceases to amuse me listening to people who support Donald Trump attack Kamala Harris's speaking as word salads.

That aside... So if Kamala said she planned to order the military to the streets to confiscate everyone's guns you would brush that off right? I mean, she's not serious so there's no reason to take what she says seriously... right?
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?
Not particularly.


then can you please explain how you square your belief that someone whose words are not to be taken seriously can be fit for the most serious job on earth?
Fools are less dangerous than cunning enemies.
Well, we agree Trump is a fool. Good enough.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
You would be more believable admitting Kamala isn't a serious candidate but you are voting for her anyway because Orangemanbad. That's at least believably honest.
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,520
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Covfefe
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Sidewalker
Middle class family.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,876
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
So when a presidential candidate makes a claim in front of the entire nation alleging that a very specific group of people in a very specific place within the country are engaging in a very specific and heinous act (like eating the neighborhood's pets)... Is that hyperbole?
There are reports that it was true. 

When a presidential candidate expresses that he believes his political opposition to be "the enemy from within" and that we should use the military against them, is this hyperbole?
Probably, but Dems don’t have the moral high ground after locking up grandmas for just walking in the Capitol

When a presidential candidate says he's going to impose an across the board 20% tariff on all imported goods (something he would have the authority to do unilaterally), is that hyperbole?
Now this is definitely hyperbole. Negotiating tactic 101

What actions does a presidential candidate engage in (other than using words) that tells you what they plan to do if (re)elected?
It’s about what he has already done. Economy was great under Trump until COVID, which was out of his control. If he says he can make the economy work again, I’m inclined to believe him because he has shown how to do it. Kamala on the other hand. Yikes (would’ve done nothing differently from Biden)
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,984
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Double_R
Pretty much every single one
Have to disagree with you there. Obama, Bush, both Clintons, Cruz, Ramaswamy, Vance, Kamala, Walz, and most other politicians you can name have very clearly dodged questions, stretched the truth, and changed their positions to be what people want to hear. I'd buy that they lie more believably than Trump or even less often, but politicians are not particularly honest people.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
That aside... So if Kamala said she planned to order the military to the streets to confiscate everyone's guns you would brush that off right? I mean, she's not serious so there's no reason to take what she says seriously... right?

Correct. She had 4 years to do it and never did. Nobody serious would take those lies seriously.
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 4,857
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
Do you take the things Trump says seriously?

If Yes, well I have quite a few more questions for you.

If No (the typical MAGA response), then can you please explain how you square your belief that someone whose words are not to be taken seriously can be fit for the most serious job on earth?
You’re treating this like it’s strictly one or the other. He frequently uses hyperbole, yes, but he’s made plenty of serious remarks as well. This is where you have to look at what he said in context, including the context of how he pitches himself.

The implication that usage of hyperbole somehow makes a person completely unserious is… a take, to say the least. Any politician marketing themselves has some more realistic ideas behind their exaggerations… it is no different for the man who exaggerates the most.

Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 4,857
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@Double_R
Tag
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ILikePie5
There are reports that it was true. 
Right, because that's how a serious presidential candidate get's their information, from the internet.

When a presidential candidate expresses that he believes his political opposition to be "the enemy from within" and that we should use the military against them, is this hyperbole?
Probably
Then he's unserious.

When a presidential candidate says he's going to impose an across the board 20% tariff on all imported goods (something he would have the authority to do unilaterally), is that hyperbole?
Now this is definitely hyperbole. Negotiating tactic 101
You can't have it both ways. If he's serious, then we would take him seriously. By calling it a negotiating tactic you're saying that he's obviously not really going to do it, at which point it has no negotiating power.

This is a tired excuse by MAGA to just ignore what this man actually says and insert whatever virtue in him you decide to make up. But this particular example is even worse because the president has unilateral authority to impose tariffs so there's nothing to negotiate. At best, you can claim he's using these as a threat to push lawmakers into concessions, in which case you're literally arguing that he's threatening to take a wrecking ball to the economy if he doesn't get what he wants.

It’s about what he has already done. Economy was great under Trump until COVID, which was out of his control. If he says he can make the economy work again, I’m inclined to believe him because he has shown how to do it.
The economy being great isn't an action so this answer has nothing to do with this thread.

But to address it anyway, Trump didn't make the economy great. It had already been growing for the prior 7 years and when Trump came into office nothing changed, all we did was continue the same trajectory we were already on. In fact we gained more jobs in the last three years under Obama than the first three years under Trump, so one could even argued things slowed down.

But what's really egregious here is to talk about how great things things were in the first three years but to just exclude the last one because it's inconvenient to your narrative. Again, you can’t have it both ways. Either we exclude Covid or we don’t. If we don’t, then his last year counts. If we do, then you don’t get to pretend Covid ended at noon on January 20th 2021 and everything that occurred as a result of the damage it caused is all Biden’s fault.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
You can't have it both ways. If he's serious
Actually, you can.

Words are mostly unserious, actions are mostly serious.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Savant
Have to disagree with you there. Obama, Bush, both Clintons, Cruz, Ramaswamy, Vance, Kamala, Walz, and most other politicians you can name have very clearly dodged questions, stretched the truth, and changed their positions to be what people want to hear.
I addressed all of this in my response. None of this is what makes a person unserious.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Again, do you find Kamala's words "mostly serious?"

If so, you would be in the statistical minority.
If not, gotchas never work for hypocrites.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Mharman
You’re treating this like it’s strictly one or the other.
It’s a generalization.

He frequently uses hyperbole, yes, but he’s made plenty of serious remarks as well. This is where you have to look at what he said in context, including the context of how he pitches himself.
But thats the problem. When a person “frequently” speaks in hyperbole (a generous way of putting it) it makes it nearly impossible to distinguish whether they’re being serious or not. So in the end what we get is a person whose supporters take whatever meaning out of his words they find convenient and hand waive away anything that can’t be positively spun, which is exactly where we are now. It’s a game of heads I win tails you lose.

Meanwhile, because Kamala Harris is taken seriously everything she says gets put under a microscope and held to an insane double standard.
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,077
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Again, do you find Kamala's words "mostly serious?"
I’ve already explained this in detail. You’re welcome to read it.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Meanwhile, because Kamala Harris is taken seriously everything she says gets put under a microscope and held to an insane double standard.
Maybe if you didn't take Trump's hyperbole so seriously, then the double standard would go away.

This thread, like most of your threads, attempts to understand anti-Kamala people using your own projected biased premises. It's never going to work. You started with a premise that they take hyperbole seriously. They don't.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,876
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Double_R
Right, because that's how a serious presidential candidate get's their information, from the internet.
There are police reports.

Then he's unserious.
Maybe. I personally would like it if he prosecuted Biden, Hillary, etc. Fight fire with fire.

You can't have it both ways. If he's serious, then we would take him seriously. By calling it a negotiating tactic you're saying that he's obviously not really going to do it, at which point it has no negotiating power.
You asked me what I think. I don’t know what he’s going to do. That’s his whole appeal. No one knows what he’s going to do. Could he put those tariffs? Sure. 

This is a tired excuse by MAGA to just ignore what this man actually says and insert whatever virtue in him you decide to make up. But this particular example is even worse because the president has unilateral authority to impose tariffs so there's nothing to negotiate. At best, you can claim he's using these as a threat to push lawmakers into concessions, in which case you're literally arguing that he's threatening to take a wrecking ball to the economy if he doesn't get what he wants.
I don’t think you understand what the purpose of tariffs are. Come back when you learn what negotiating means with respect to tariffs.

The economy being great isn't an action so this answer has nothing to do with this thread.
It explains why millions of people believe Trump.

But to address it anyway, Trump didn't make the economy great. It had already been growing for the prior 7 years and when Trump came into office nothing changed, all we did was continue the same trajectory we were already on.
It’s harder to grow it than get it out of a whole.

In fact we gained more jobs in the last three years under Obama than the first three years under Trump, so one could even argued things slowed down.
Native born worker jobs are down.

But what's really egregious here is to talk about how great things things were in the first three years but to just exclude the last one because it's inconvenient to your narrative. Again, you can’t have it both ways. Either we exclude Covid or we don’t. If we don’t, then his last year counts. If we do, then you don’t get to pretend Covid ended at noon on January 20th 2021 and everything that occurred as a result of the damage it caused is all Biden’s fault.
Trump didn’t cause COVID. And voters recognize Trump didn’t cause COVID. Blaming an economic crash on Trump because of something he couldn’t control is disingenuous, and voters recognize that.
Savant
Savant's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 1,984
3
7
6
Savant's avatar
Savant
3
7
6
-->
@Double_R
Taking someone's words seriously =/= believing everything they say uncritically, nor does it mean believing that they will do/accomplish everything they say they will do/accomplish. All it means is that when they say something we assume they are being serious. This is basic English.
I don't think everything needs to be taken seriously. When a politician says they relate to the middle class more than the rich while owning three homes, we can probably roll our eyes and ignore it. Many mainstream politicians have promised idealistic things that are obviously unconstitutional. I can't take Kamala seriously when she says "my values haven't changed" if I'm going to also take her new policy positions seriously.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,365
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
I don't take Kamala seriously when she says "let me be clear"

If I did, it would mean she was unclear all other times.