US Polling 'Nostradamus' Issues Trump 'Authoritarian' Warning "One of the grave mistakes good people have made throughout history is not taking would-be authoritarians at face value," Lichtman said. "That's exactly how you lose your freedom. Because it's not just the evil people who wreak havoc on the world, it's the good people who, maybe unwittingly and with good intentions, simply do not do enough to stop them."
You will never see Trump speak without spewing out a bunch of lies. People wonder why they call it cult mentality to gather and watch a pathological liar onstage feeding them lies over and over..
I see a person who struggles to handle respectful but tough questions. Trump immediately disrespected the interviewer and attacked the news organization, a tactic he often uses. This messaging style frames all questions as unfair to him, unfortunately misleading some people into adopting this perspective. It's a well-known strategy that Trump has consistently used: deflecting tough questions by attacking the questioner and the news organization. A way to defend yourself from being manipulated by such tactics is to notice the tactic itself and to factually analyze his responses and answers. When you do that, you see that Trump consistently deflects by attacking the question, the person asking the question, and the news organization, and is consistently lying. Opening question: 'Mr. President, we appreciate you giving us an hour of your time. I'd like to start by addressing a significant concern. Many people feel it's inappropriate for you to be here today because you've made false claims about rivals like Nikki Haley and former President Barack Obama, questioning their birthplace despite clear evidence to the contrary. You've told four Congresswomen of color, who are American citizens, to go back to where they came from. You've described Black District Attorneys with derogatory terms like "animal" and "rabid." You've attacked Black journalists, calling them losers and labeling their questions as stupid and racist. You also had dinner with a white supremacist at your Mar-a-Lago resort. Given that you are now asking for the support of Black voters, why should they trust you after you've used such language?' Trump Response: "I have never been asked a question in such a horrible manner, first question. You don't even say, 'Hello, how are you?' Are you with ABC? Because I think they are a fake news network, a terrible network." https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/jul/31/fact-check-donald-trump-chicago-at-nabj/
good point. Althouse has a more in-depth analysis of the exchange today here: The effort to trick Trump into making race the central issue and Trump's countervailing trickery. @KingCheetah
Is this the bigotry of low expectations? Like Donald Trump is such a toddler that you have to make an argument that he was baited... He was baited into calling under minimum wage jobs that illegal migrants take as "black jobs"? Was that him being "baited" About the whole dei thing.... Hundreds of memes about it here. Making fun of pretty much any black person in positions of power or authority as a dei hire, not just from posters here, but many famous conservatives, many of whom are active in the Trump campaign...... So I ask you why do you think that question is a bait? So you disagree with those who spam the term "dei" Everytime they see a black person with a career? You are against that on the record? Because you've been silent this entire time when hundreds of comments are spammed about "dei hires".
Personally, I want to see journalists doing their job better. In the U.S., many journalists often go out of their way to be too nice. An appropriate response when faced with disrespect is to directly address it and immediately educate the audience about the tactic being used. Something along the lines of the below example. Journalists aren't typically trained to handle someone who disrespects them from the start as a deliberate tactic, so they need to adapt. Mr. President, I appreciate your response. I want to inform our viewers that attacking the questioner and the news organization is a common tactic used to deflect from answering tough questions. My role is to ask challenging but fair questions to provide clarity on important issues. Let's refocus on the questions...
I finally got opportunity to watch the thing in entirety. Trump hasn't done anything different than what he has been doing. He lied, answered out of context, attacked and finally claimed victim of reporter's nastiness. From where I stand, I see it as a mission accomplished for him. Now his army will go about defending every part of it. Added Bonus, now Kamala became 'Indian not black' for a chunk of US population
The Althouse piece leaves a lot out to try and force her own angle. Trump and his party made all of the comments Scott brought up. As a journalist, Scott is right to ask about those questions. She went through the analysis trying to show that Trump didn't want to talk about race but they kept going at him about it. She then tries to make it look like they were the ones making race the issue. This ignores the fact that Trump and Republicans said all of those things before this interview ever took place. The interviewers were following up on things that Trump and his GOP already put out there. She never really addresses that. The audience and the interviewers deserve to have some follow up and further explanation. The fact that Trump tried to evade and they kept with it is a good thing.
honestly I'm surprised she spends as much time as she does trying to parse Trump's speeches. I understand the philosophical principle of charity, but sometimes a banana is just a banana, Anna.
That's who he is. He can't change that. He lives his life lying, claiming to be something he isn't, attacking others, and portraying himself as the poor victim. He's a sociopath.
I guess I would add that he also insinuates that she is some kind of race traitor by denying her Indian heritage to be more black. I don't think he has a particular idea of his it will turn out but I think he has an instinct that if he pushes these buttons something good might happen for him. He got mileage before about Obama's heritage and Elizabeth Warren's. I think he chose this event to do it because he knew his comments would be outrageous and would get a ton of press to spread the poison and maybe this distrust about identity will lodge in people's brains in the long run in a way that is somehow to his benefit. He is instinctual, like a monitor lizard.
I don't think it has anything to do with principle, if the principle is only applied to people on one side of the political aisle. It seems to me that she has cultivated a rationalist conservative following with her posts, and she is writing mainly to suit their tastes. Part of that is bending over backwards to rationalize the statements coming from Trump world. I think that's all there is to it.
