In reply to: This is effing scary (link) posted by sprack
or edited? If not, the only concern would be giving ACYN potential revenue by viewing the message -- the venue that provides raw footage doesn't impact the veracity of the raw footage. Then it's easy enough to find the full rant and decide whether it's 'out of context' or not.
You know, there are people who believe this crap and do things like storm the Capitol.
...I found this in about 30 seconds, searching YT for "trump rally Dayton." It's the whole hour and a half or so from which the clip sprack posted is a portion.
I scrolled through it for about 5 minutes; it seems to be Trump's typical goofy stream of consciousness. He spent a minute saying over and over that J.B. Pritzker must like to eat; like, he must eat five cheeseburgers, there's J/B. in his office, "Do you want something to eat?" "Yeah 5 burgers." Trump, responding then to his own strange narrative: "Who eats five burgers?" Then he meanders to the next subject.
After seeing this, I'm not any more concerned about Trump as a future president than I was yesterday. He's an awful person and it would be a stain on our history if we returned him to that office. He's still the guy who said that if Ivanka wasn't his daughter, maybe he'd date her. Yikes. And Mike Huckabee thinks kids' minds are being poisoned about the good Trump.
I'd make a substantive distinction between a wacko website where someone spouts weird opinions or claimed facts, such as, the world is flat; Sandy Hook didn't happen; or Comet Pizza was a front for child molestation; and, on the other hand, the posting of a video of Trump (or Biden, or whoever) speaking at a rally.
You may be correct in your assessment of the source, whom I know not. I do watch MeidasTouch once in a while for fun. But the point Sprack was making was about what Trump said; and Trump really did say it, so downplaying the X source doesn't change that. I suppose this might be a case where I'm saying, don't shoot the piano player.
These statements will be pretty good circumstantial evidence of state of mind
"If I get elected − now if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath," Trump said as he discussed tariffs on car imports. "That's going to be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country."
I listened to the full minute Kayo linked and I agree context is important and Trump is known to make some dumb comments that are a little less harmful if you take it the full context. With that said, what the heck does he mean with his “bloodbath” comment, in light of the Chinese automakers in Mexico context? I still don’t see how it isn’t a side comment about what will happen in this country if he is not elected again. Does he mean it will be a bloodbath of Chinese cars that are made in Mexico that flood out streets red? Cars that no American buys to begin with? Mexico is a big car producer and has numerous car companies using their land for manufacturing, not just Chinese companies. Does he mean a bloodbath of Mexico made cars? Because he doesn’t allude to that during his “bloodbath” comment, he only talks about Chinese companies making cars in Mexico
To me, it’s just another side comment he makes about the potential dire consequences to this country if he is not elected. He likes to stroke fear to try to get on the fence voters to side with him. Just as he said
“If we don't win this election, I don't think you're going to have another election in this country” and
“If I don't win, it is my prediction that we will have a stock market 'crash' worse than that of 1929 – a Great Depression”
The “bloodbath” comment just continues this sad pattern.
(a) Adding length to a Trump comment often fails to increase the clarity
(b) My guess is that it is best understood as an aside from his predictions of economic doom to claim that the economics of situation are the least of the problem compared to the bloodbath to come.
(b) is far from certain. In general, going down the "what did Trump really mean" rabbit hole is treacherous. Random synapses make a connection with a variety of circuits: the "Jack Smith is a psychopath" circuit, the "I won the popular vote in 2016 and 2020" circuit, the "I'm richer than anyone" circuit, etc. I'm certain that the "If I lose there will be blood" circuit is in there. I can't be sure that that is the one which became connected in this speech.
His defenders are seizing on it as an attack on him by the fake media. He did say bloodbath in the same sentence as the economy.
Eventually, he'll totally undercut them. He also said if he loses, it'll be the last election. He saluted the traitors, er "hostages" who stormed the capital to overturn the election.
But at some point early in the pandemic he made a similar inane comment and his supporters were wrapping themselves I knots to defend it.
He then said it was a joke and there was silence from the loyal chorus.
When in doubt, assume Trump says things that make him feel good because it increases the adulation coming from his base.
Comments that can then spur outrage in the People His Base Doesn't Like? Even better!
I think any effort at discerning any actual policy positions other than "does it serve Donald Trump" is a lesson in futility.
Tell me “oh, but context” on this one.
..these traitors singing the National Anthem should immediately disqualify him.
Sadly, we could say that exact same thing about 50 other issues and yet he may well be President again in January 2025.
What a world!
Garbage. If you want to search for more links, be my guest. I won't be feeling any obligation to read or respond to your subsequent posts on this matter.