“Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us, this is horrible.”
Actually trying to read a transcript of what he says is like pulling teeth. He’s absolutely all over the place and takes half a dozen tangents to get to a one-sentence point
There was an article during his first term written by a French translator who was lamenting how her job was completely impossible - if she translates the general gist of his speech then it’s like she’s misrepresenting the nonsense, but if she translates it directly then a lot of people think that she’s being either incompetent or malicious
This is a famous example but you could have chosen any of his “speeches”. I’d claim that the newer ones are even worse.
Journalists around the world have been complaining about this ever since 2016: it’s impossible to write good political journalism about Trump. There was a collective sigh of relief in 2020, manifesting itself as pleasant silence. Then Jan 6 happened…
Idk I read that passage and I can mostly understand what he’s saying, I’d go as far as to say it’s just as understandable as a lot of the word salad non answers from typical politicians. This sounds like how someone might present themselves in conversation, someone who isn’t trained in how to give speeches or have a high level understanding of language construction. People vote on vibes and the vibes trump is giving up is some guy you might bump into in the pub. That is an exceedingly valuable thing to have as a politician in a society that largely doesn’t trust its politicians. And in my opinion they have good reason not to trust them, it’s unfortunate who was able to capitalise most on that distrust though.
Right, but there’s basically nothing there. He took all that time to say “Iran outnegotiated us”. Brevity alone isn’t a mark of quality obviously, but the point the person above was making is that underneath the bluster there really is very little substance. You had said you don’t know whether it’s actually dumb or just not what you’re used to hearing, and we’re both saying that yes it really is dumb. It can be effective and popular while being dumb as well, unfortunately
I read the original comment as referring to quality, not substance, of his speech. Both are lackluster but the average American isn’t eloquent so his style of speech appeals to them more than a typical politician.
No no, it’s dumb. It’s not the cadence that makes it dumb; it’s the substance, or sometimes utter lack of it in Trump’s case.
Actually trying to read a transcript of what he says is like pulling teeth. He’s absolutely all over the place and takes half a dozen tangents to get to a one-sentence point
There was an article during his first term written by a French translator who was lamenting how her job was completely impossible - if she translates the general gist of his speech then it’s like she’s misrepresenting the nonsense, but if she translates it directly then a lot of people think that she’s being either incompetent or malicious
This is a famous example but you could have chosen any of his “speeches”. I’d claim that the newer ones are even worse.
Journalists around the world have been complaining about this ever since 2016: it’s impossible to write good political journalism about Trump. There was a collective sigh of relief in 2020, manifesting itself as pleasant silence. Then Jan 6 happened…
He’s probably took a hit of nose powder before typing all of it
Idk I read that passage and I can mostly understand what he’s saying, I’d go as far as to say it’s just as understandable as a lot of the word salad non answers from typical politicians. This sounds like how someone might present themselves in conversation, someone who isn’t trained in how to give speeches or have a high level understanding of language construction. People vote on vibes and the vibes trump is giving up is some guy you might bump into in the pub. That is an exceedingly valuable thing to have as a politician in a society that largely doesn’t trust its politicians. And in my opinion they have good reason not to trust them, it’s unfortunate who was able to capitalise most on that distrust though.
Right, but there’s basically nothing there. He took all that time to say “Iran outnegotiated us”. Brevity alone isn’t a mark of quality obviously, but the point the person above was making is that underneath the bluster there really is very little substance. You had said you don’t know whether it’s actually dumb or just not what you’re used to hearing, and we’re both saying that yes it really is dumb. It can be effective and popular while being dumb as well, unfortunately
Part of being a politician is being appealing. He’s not just reciting information.
I read the original comment as referring to quality, not substance, of his speech. Both are lackluster but the average American isn’t eloquent so his style of speech appeals to them more than a typical politician.