And his xenophobic, racist supports won’t care
Is he filing Chapter 11 on his proposal?
The media is so awful with headlines this year. He wasn’t backing off from it in the actual interview. He meant it was a suggestion, as in, this is what I suggest we do, and then defended it.
Christ.
The problem is that Trump speaks in such vagaries, even when he is “backtracking”, that its impossible to pin him down to any position. The best one can do is note he threw in a new word to the salad and pretend its meaningful. But there he always provides himself enough wiggle room on either side, and when he doesn’t, he just denies he ever said it in the first place. How many times was he caught in outright lies during the debates…and he simply shrugged it off and said something completely different?
Reading the entrails of a sacrificed cow to determine a deity’s will is easier than trying to ascertain what Trump actually means in one of his statements.
Huh? He just doubled down what he’s kept saying, no? Calling it “just a suggestion” doesn’t change it.
A way to wiggle out of anything! “It was just a suggestion!” Say something dumb ass to your spouse or boss and follow it with a whiny, but it was just a suggestion and see what happens.
ETA: If you read daveyjones64’s post above you can skip this one, it’s essentially the same thing. Darn knee-jerk libs, they all sound like each other.
I’d put the onus on Trump for this myself. It’s his constant technique—he says an outrageous thing, gets tons of air time and riles up his rabble, then when there’s enough pushback he says things that soften it a bit so he can have it both ways depending on the audience and situation. If you angrily say “you want such and so” he’ll deny he ever said it, he offered a suggestion, it’s negotiable blah blah. If you say he waffled, he’ll say he’s consistently called for the such and so. It’s just hard to get that level of double-talk into a headline.
“Destroying Hillary Clinton really doesn’t count as a movement.”
Haha…JM nailed it…altho I have to point out that it might be considered a movement of the bowel persuasion.
Yeah yeah…“I didn’t mean all that radicalized shit I said to win the primary WINK WINK FUCKING WINK.” Yawn.
Trump says it like it is. And then like a cheap auto body shop, hammers to fit and paints to match. It’s good enough for the rubes.
But for a total, constant bullshitter, “just a suggestion” is one step above never having said it. Everything is hedged so he can cook it up and serve it any way he wants.
Good points. I am hoping Team Clinton is working with behavioral scientists/psychologists to understand the best ways to take this guy down.
Romney’s “Etch-a-Sketch” has morphed into Trump’s “Just Kidding.”
Here’s a suggestion Mr. Trump: put a sock in it.
That’s sort of my point. He didn’t soften it in the interview. This is entire story is the press spinning a narrative where one doesn’t exist.
They did the same thing with his tax release. He said he would release them after the audit weeks ago. He did an interview where he said he wouldn’t release them before November if the audit wasn’t complete. Immediate headlines “TRUMP WON’T RELEASE RETURNS BEFORE NOVEMBER!” He once again said, no, I said I would release them when the audit is done. If it is done before November I will release them. Immediate headlines “TRUMP REVERSES ON TAX RELEASE!”
I don’t care how you feel about Trump, but it is stupid. Literally just making stories where none exist by selective quoting.
I’ll say it again—if there is confusion, Trump is mostly to blame for creating it with his outrageous and constant obfuscation and lies. That’s how I feel about Trump, if you want to know. I’ve had a peek at your comment history which leads me to guess we differ on that.
I see what you (and davey) are saying, he’s been doing it throughout the primaries and most certainly will keep doing the coming months. But I do think the media has given him an easy way out by this “Trump says, Trump says” reporting when his double-talking style is clear.
Yes, it is nearly impossible as long as writers intend their articles and their headlines to be about his “positions.” However, it’s about his double talk, as well as his “positions,” that matter – his double-talking shows his lack of seriousness and accountability. I guess headlines should probably say straight “Trump double-talks” or something like that? Yeah that would be “unfair, biased reporting” but otherwise the real nature of his act couldn’t be reported.
Let’s just pick a word for when Trump shifts his position. (I know it is hard to see the difference between lime-orange jello and orange-lime jello, but stick with me here.)
I say we call it a “flip-flop”. That phrase has a long political history, and it can sting. Plus, the squishy, soft, flexible imagery fits; most of what Trump says in the first place is squishy, soft, and flexible.
And to the many people who know footwear by the term “flip-flop”, it also fits; Trump is cheap, likely to break, and not to be used for any serious matter.
It’s hard to discuss this adequately in a comment-board post, but bingo. American journalism has for a long time hobbled itself with so-called objectivity and unwillingness to “editorialize.” This has led to a situation of insane false equivalency and a self-imposed inability to simply say that bad behavior is bad. Journalists have discussed this problem for years, but the profession will evolve into something else before the discussions ever bear much fruit. : (
It can sting especially for people who are known, wrongly, for “telling it like it is.” But see above. : )