• solsangraal@lemmy.zipOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    you’re sitting there trying to convince everyone that trump means something OTHER than that he plans to crown himself supreme dictator, which he’s been implying for YEARS. in ALL the contexts.

    i AM emotional, and maybe even broken. but one thing i’m NOT is gullible. “it was a joke” please… again, GTFO with this “out of context” bullshit. trump said voting is going away if he wins. cotton said it was a joke. the end.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Your argument is that Trump said he wants to be supreme dictator so when he says the sky is pink we should interpret that statement to mean he wants to be supreme dictator.

      I’m arguing that we should focus on why he’s claiming the sky is pink in addition to focusing on the threat of him intent on being supreme dictator.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Thank you for proving my point so succinctly 😩

          Donald Trump: I will be a dictator on day 1.

          This has nothing at all to do with this topic.

          I wish people actually gave a crap about words and context and responsible journalism. There are real issues to discuss and this is a gigantic distraction. I genuinely don’t understand how people are so blinded by their emotions that they can look the facts in the face and reject them.

          Our inability to separate rhetoric and disinformation from facts, or in this case, our inability to separate two entirely different statements, is our greatest threat. It’s all garbage in garbage out. It’s terrifying.

          • BassTurd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            It has everything to do with this topic. You can’t just ignore years of precedent and take a current snapshot in time and say nothing prior matters.

            The words used matter, and responsible journalism will call out when someone says something like this. We should be less accepting of rhetoric like this, and if it was just poorly phrased, then he seems to do that a lot and should be scrutinized and lambasted for it.