Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

Brian?

RIGOLO wrote: »

I didnt say her sexuality was important to me... your jumping on a point that doesnt exist.

I said it seemed a big deal to the anti-TRumpers...

see below .....

If her sexuality or singing ability aren’t important to you , then why include them in your post? Seems a tad childish to me.

“anti-TRumpers are celebrating that a lesbian who wont sing the US National Anthem won a football world cup.”

There’s clear emphasis on both her sexuality and her unwillingness to sing here. Why?

Why do you care if she won’t sing the US national anthem?

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

the anti-TRumpers are celebrating that a lesbian who wont sing the US National Anthem won a football world cup.

You're gonna bring up the national anthem?

Really?

She can not sing it if she chooses not to. On the other hand, should I post the video of Trump, the US f'n President not *knowing* the words to the national anthem?

Igotadose

Riggles, you still haven't answered my budget question from yesterday. What would you have done at the start of 2009 with the economy careening down a hill?

MrFresh

There was an interesting post on Reddit from a remedial teacher who explained in very good detail how Trump was very similar to his students who struggled with basic reading. It made a lot of sense.

So I'm pretty sure I know exactly what happened here. I haven't seen anyone else post about this, but as a teacher who works with struggling readers, I know that highly literate people (including most general-level teachers) have a hard time understanding how someone like this approaches written text, since for many of us reading comes so naturally. From my perspective it's pretty easy to see why Trump said this weird thing, given what we know about him. We know:

Donald Trump does not read well. Like most of the students I work with, he avoids reading both because he wants to avoid being embarrassed, and because reading costs him a lot more mental energy than for proficient readers. We know from lots of different reports that his staff does not give him anything long or complex to read, because of this avoidance.

For this reason, when Trump does have to read something out loud, it is clear that he is not processing the meaning of what he is saying. For a struggling reader, all their concentration goes into pronouncing the words out loud, and simultaneously processing the meaning is very difficult. We see this when is giving a prepared speech and mispronounces a word in a way that makes no sense. A proficient reader would immediately stop and self-correct. Trump often doesn't, because he is not processing what he is saying. Other times I know I've heard him notice his mistake, but instead of correcting it, he covers it up with a bit of lame word-play, pretending that the mistake was intentional. I can't think of any specific examples of this, but I know I've heard him do it. (Edit) snatchi found some examples: "through their lives... and though their lives." "authority... and authoritarian powers." "They sacrifice every day for the furniture... and future of our children." It's Trump's go-to move when he misreads a word.

There are other times when he reacts to a line in his speech like he hasn't heard it before. He noticeably stops and inserts a comment of his own before going back to the reading. He does not know how to gracefully glide between reading and impromptu speaking, since reading is so unnatural for him.

Trump also has a relatively small vocabulary. Remember his remarks about "the oranges of the Mueller report." He was parroting something that he had heard before, but not having a firm grasp of the word "origins," he used a more familiar word instead, because that was how his mind remembered the word.

The speech he was giving made heavy use of language from "The Star Spangled Banner." For many struggling readers, this would be helpful, since it would rely on familiar chunks of language that would reduce the mental load of reading it. However, we've seen that Trump does not know the words to the anthem. He has tried and failed to sing along with it but couldn't fake it very well.

Keeping all that in mind, let's look at what he said:

Our army manned the air, it rammed the ramparts, it took over the airports, it did everything it had to do, and at Fort McHenry, under the rockets’ red glare, it had nothing but victory.

Based on my experience, here's what I think happened, step by step.

Our army manned the air

Here I think it's likely that Trump skipped a line on his teleprompter. The line was probably "manned the ramparts," and later on I'm guessing there was a reference to "bombs bursting in air." We all do this sometimes, but struggling readers do it a whole lot more. And furthermore, when a proficient reader makes this mistake they can quickly self-correct, but someone like Trump, who is not totally processing the meaning of what he is reading, can get totally derailed when they do this.

it rammed the ramparts

Trump seems to have noticed that "manned the air" was a mistake, and he went back to do the line over. But he got "manned" and "ramparts" mixed up, so it came out as "rammed." But he's immediately fallen into another pit: the word "ramparts." He doesn't know what it means. It's a very uncommon word that most Americans only know from this line in "The Star Spangled Banner." Trump, however, doesn't even know that, since he has never learned the words to the song. So I think that at this point, already a little flustered from covering up his last mistake, he thinks he has mis-read another word. "Ramparts?" I must have misread something, he thinks to himself.

it took over the airports

This is a repair strategy that Trump has used in the past. Mess up a word? Pretend it was the first in a sequence of rhyming or similar words and carry on from there. What's a word he knows that sounds like ramparts? Airports. And "air" was already on his mind from just before, when he accidentally read "manned the air." So they manned the ramparts, they took over the airports. He's hoping that nobody will notice. It's worked before.

it did everything it had to do

This sounds like an impromptu comment that he inserted into the written text. It uses the simple and non-specific language that he is known for in his impromptu speeches. The comment bought him a second where he could find his place after getting completely lost before.

and at Fort McHenry, under the rockets’ red glare, it had nothing but victory.

And now he's found his place again. He's back to the written speech that uses lines from "The Star Spangled Banner." He might not even realize how ridiculous his last few sentences have sounded, since again, he's not really able to process the meaning of what he is saying.

My kiddos who are in this situation have a hard time. I and their other teachers have to work really hard to help them learn strategies to overcome these difficulties with the way they process written text. It requires just as much hard work on the kids' part. I strongly suspect that Donald Trump never went through this process and remains in a not fully literate state. Usually we're afraid that someone who graduates with this level of reading ability will have very limited career prospects in the future.

The suggestion that he cannot read and comprehend simultaneously can explain a lot of his gafs and sidebars during many of his speeches.

mcmoustache

RIGOLO wrote: »

The last guy added 8 trillion to the debt , averaged 1.6 % growth added 5 million or more to foodstamps and all with a friendly Fed holding rates at 0%
If you like that economy thats okay its a free world.

TRump has taken 5 million off foodstamps, got record low unemployment rates, and the stock market is booming.
The Trump supporters like that economy.

The only legacy Obama left TRump in the economy is the interest repayments TRump has to make on the 8 trillion extra debt Obama handed him.
Remeber it was debt Obama took at out effectively 0% interest which as it rolls over Trump is having to pay back at a much higher rate.

Obamas economy sucked, thats why he lost over a 1000 legislaive seats during his 8 years and why TRump knocked Hilary off her pedastal.

You left out your usual boasting about the black unemployment rate which you're so fond of touting.

I'm just wondering if you just slipped up or if some news came out recently which might have shown that the claim might be a bit dubious and misleading.


Also, when you say that the stock market is booming, which markets do you mean? Off the top of my head, the S&P and the Dow Jones had better and more consistent growth under Obama than under Trump. I've posted the S&P one before and the one for the Dow can be seen here. They clearly show that for those two markets, Obama achieved far better growth than Trump has managed.

Yet you come on here claiming that Obama did a bad job of managing the economy while at the same time claiming that Trump is doing a better job. I could understand if you were making such claims about something subjective such as who has the better skin complexion but you're bringing up markets and these are objectively described by numbers and these numbers, at least for S&P and the Dow, show that your claims about Trump doing a better job than Obama are completely ill-informed.

So which markets are you talking about?

amandstu

MrFresh wrote: »

There was an interesting post on Reddit from a remedial teacher who explained in very good detail how Trump was very similar to his students who struggled with basic reading. It made a lot of sense.



The suggestion that he cannot read and comprehend simultaneously can explain a lot of his gafs and sidebars during many of his speeches.

Thanks,really interesting. We don't have to start feeling any sympathy for the man now though ,do we?

(I see your own post was a bit iffy too https://www.dailyedge.ie/conor-mcgregor-gaf-2698085-Apr2016/ vs https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaffe)

Cody montana

RIGOLO wrote: »

The anti-TRumpers seem desperate for any victory, however pyrrhic ..

So whilst Trump Administration supporters celebrate 244,000 new jobs in June and 3% wage growth,
the anti-TRumpers are celebrating that a lesbian who wont sing the US National Anthem won a football world cup.

Why you using being a lesbian as an insult?

everlast75

amandstu wrote: »

Thanks,really interesting. We don't have to start feeling any sympathy for the man now though ,do we?

(I see your own post was a bit iffy too https://www.dailyedge.ie/conor-mcgregor-gaf-2698085-Apr2016/ vs https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaffe)

I read it as an opinion we have Ron Burgundy as President

amandstu

I went to the US some 40 years ago and was amazed by the loudmouth ,bragging, money strewn conversation in the seat behind me on the airport bus.

Later that evening ,in Penn Station I was amazed to see a white man attempt to engage a black man in conversation,get ignored and head over to a policeman on some obviously trumped up story which got the black guy dragged off for minding his own business.

No surprise they "chose" someone like Trump . A true representative.

serfboard

pixelburp wrote: »

is there a link to Trump with the Epstein arrest?

Newsweek wrote:

Epstein had a "friendly" relationship with Trump.

"They went to dinner parties at each other's houses ... And the other interesting thing is Trump had a modeling agency, and Epstein also had a stake in a modeling agency, which they suspect he used to bring in underage girls from overseas."

"There is a comment in one of the court files where Epstein is quoted as saying, 'I want to set up my modeling agency the same way Trump set up his modeling agency.' I don't know what that means, but it is curious he was trying to do something similar to Trump." Brown said.

In 2002, Trump told New York magazine Epstein "enjoys his social life."

"I've known Jeff for fifteen years," Trump said. "Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."

Is there any way to read this that is not exceedingly creepy?

duploelabs

serfboard wrote: »

Is there any way to read this that is not exceedingly creepy?

This twitter thread by Seth Abramson makes it worse

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1147873176141074441?s=19

peddlelies

Is that the same fellow who made millions off all the useful idiot Russiagators?

Great source I'd say.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1148200057444769792?s=19

"Another" one of the swamp that wasn't drained by Trump.

Client number 2 of Mr Cohen (number 3 being Hannity). Inside info from Cohen must be of assistance to the prosecutors in this one.

everlast75

Also Rigolo, as you keep citing figures re Trump's financial performance, care to comment on this from Forbes?

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1148207842622619651?s=19

peddlelies

Epstein's indictment is being unsealed this hour apparently.

Stop moaning ffs

Might we see Epstein sing like a bird in order to reduce the damage?
He may about to take a whole lot of people down with him.

Igotadose

everlast75 wrote: »

"Another" one of the swamp that wasn't drained by Trump.

Client number 2 of Mr Cohen (number 3 being Hannity). Inside info from Cohen must be of assistance to the prosecutors in this one.

Elliot Broidy again. Paid for an abortion, which might've actually been to a woman impregnated by Trump.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-07/elliott-broidy-wins-bid-to-sanitize-ex-playmate-lover-s-lawsuit

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

Also Rigolo, as you keep citing figures re Trump's financial performance, care to comment on this from Forbes?

That's actually what prompted my questions further up the thread. I keep hearing from Trump supporters that Trump is doing such a better job on the economy than Obama but whenever you look at the numbers it's obvious that this isn't the case. These numbers are recorded in real time and publicly available for anyone to look at. They don't lie.

Here are the numbers, according to Forbes for the first two years of both Obama's and Trump's presidencies:

The short answer is that Trump has quite a way to go. Under Obama, the S&P 500 grew by 56.4%. The Dow Jones Industrials Average was up 50.6% and the Nasdaq, 92.9%.

The numbers under Trump were 21.4% for the S&P 500, 25.2% for the Dow, and 34.2% for Nasdaq.

Trump has basically only managed half of the growth that Obama achieved and you didn't have people in the US Politics forum popping in to sing his praises to the extent that we see here. Is this just a case of telling a lie often enough?

For those of us that like pictures, here's what the difference looks like:



Trump's gains are flat in comparison. Anyone repeating the claim that the stock market is doing better than it was under Obama, especially after being presented with evidence to the contrary is lying.

ancapailldorcha

RIGOLO wrote: »

I didnt say her sexuality was important to me... your jumping on a point that doesnt exist.

I said it seemed a big deal to the anti-TRumpers...

see below .....

Stop goading people please or you may have your access to this forum revoked.

peddlelies

Epstein indictment is out

https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1148226551596625920

DrumSteve

peddlelies wrote: »

Is that the same fellow who made millions off all the useful idiot Russiagators?

Great source I'd say.

The odd thing is he's not the source of his work per se; he goes to great lengths to explain that his sources are all publically available information.

peddlelies

DrumSteve wrote: »

The odd thing is he's not the source of his work per se; he goes to great lengths to explain that his sources are all publically available information.

That's what he wants people to think I guess. He turns garbage into sensationalism and makes a tonne of money doing it.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sharing-seth-abramson-not-once-not-ever.html

duploelabs

peddlelies wrote: »

That's what he wants people to think I guess. He turns garbage into sensationalism and makes a tonne of money doing it.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sharing-seth-abramson-not-once-not-ever.html

So you post an article that denounces the messanger for using hyperbole (not the actual message) and then use the term 'useful idiot Russiagaitors', pot kettle black?

Also what 'garbage' are you exactly referring to?

peddlelies

duploelabs wrote: »

So you post an article that denounces the messanger for using hyperbole (not the actual message) and then use the term 'useful idiot Russiagaitors', pot kettle black?

Also what 'garbage' are you exactly referring to?

Tweets like this. For someone who uses "available sources" he sure tweets a lot of conspiratorial garbage with no foundation. He spent 2 years begging for retweets claiming that Trump was a Russian asset and even wrote a book about it. I hope you weren't one of the ones who got burned, I'd def ask for your money back. The guy is smart and knew how to abuse the Trump Presidency for money, that's about the sum of his parts. Sorry if you don't see that.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/846455259430051842?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E846455259430051842&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pastemagazine.com%2Farticles%2F2017%2F04%2Fstop-listening-to-seth-abramson-on-donald-trumps-r.html

TomOnBoard

peddlelies wrote: »

DrumSteve wrote: »

The odd thing is he's not the source of his work per se; he goes to great lengths to explain that his sources are all publically available information.

That's what he wants people to think I guess. He turns garbage into sensationalism and makes a tonne of money doing it.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sharing-seth-abramson-not-once-not-ever.html

I suppose you can be forgiven for hating Abrahamson, you being a Trumpeter and all and him being extremely good at pulling together previously published facts and sources and joining the sleaze dots that the Donald and his cronies drop like dandruff every time they move about. Seth present highly plausible theories based on those dots that are frightening and so very credible. He makes nothing up, unlike President of the 11000+ lies, but interprets facts and makes no bones about the fact that they are interpretations, albeit ones that are very soundly based.

peddlelies

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I suppose you can be forgiven for hating Abrahamson

I don't hate him, I just think it's obvious what he's doing. He seen an opportunity to make a lot of money and took it. Before Trump he was riding the Bernie wave and filling them with fantasy nonsense too.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/liberal-fever-swamps/530736/

"And throughout last year’s primaries, Seth Abramson, assistant professor of english and writing specialist at the University of New Hampshire (and a former public defender), used his HuffPost perch to churn out a procession of increasingly delusional blog posts explaining why Bernie Sanders would likely win the Democratic nomination.

Abramson’s arguments not only denied political realities and delegate math as the race wore on; they often denied basic human logic. But thanks to the hordes of Bernie fans desperately scouring the internet for some hope to cling to, Abramson’s posts consistently went uber-viral. (He eventually wrote a post defending this shameless play for clicks as a form of “experimental journalism” that embraced “the multi-dimensionality of metanarrative.” The Washington Post’s Matt O’Brien responded via Twitter: “Area Academic Writes Barely Comprehensible Defense of Lying.”)"

mcmoustache

I'm not a fan of Seth at all. Sure, he sticks to legit sources but adds too much speculation for my liking. That and I'm not reading a 77-tweet thread - it's not why I have twitter. He could well be correct about a lot of things but he could also be reaching somewhat and that's a standard that I'm not prepared to run with, especially when there is so much actual information out there.

If he wants to sell books, though, I can't really fault him for that. It's better than putting them into a 2371-part tweet.

Inquitus

President Trump renews attack on UK ambassador Darroch over leaked emails, saying "we will no longer deal with him"

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48914294

Water John

He says, good riddance, to Teresa May also.

RobertKK

The UK is made to look like beggars by Trump. The UK needs to have some self respect and not accept what Trump said. But Brexit has left them as beggars...needing Trump for a trade deal that maybe Congress won't agree to...