6 ms·

The example Thiel used in the original "seriously but not literally" argument was the wall. Of course Trump wasn't talking about a literal wall, he said, it was

by jaibot 8y ago

The example Thiel used in the original "seriously but not literally" argument was the wall. Of course Trump wasn't talking about a literal wall, he said, it was more of a metaphor for, you know, something. This argument was always embarrassingly stupid, but anyone still making it after Trump shut down the government for a month over literal wall construction has forfeited their right to be taken seriously at all.

mc32 8y ago
I disagree with Thiel there, His base, and most independents want a literal wall (and, as he claims, Dems used to be for a wall) But his speeches are littered with these blue collar type speech patterns (boasting, exaggeration, put-downs, etc., when trying to “win” an argument).
- ModernMech 8y ago
  > His base, and most independents want a literal wall Can you back up that most independents want a wall? The polling I've seen says otherwise. "CBS News polling from mid-November found that a majority -- 59 percent of Americans -- oppose building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. It's a partisan issue, though. A large majority of Republicans support the wall -- 79 percent. A majority of independents -- 66 percent -- oppose the wall, and 84 percent of Democrats are also against it." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-americans-dont-support-building-the-wall/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-americans-dont-su...
- disease 8y ago
  I think you are confusing 'blue collar' with narcissism, arrogance, entitlement, laziness and stupidity.
- dmode 8y ago
  Can we stop saying that "blue collar" people delve in boasting and exaggeration ? Most blue collar people I meet are very polite, mild mannered and focused on executing their tasks. The only people who talk like Trump are narcissists.
ltc5505 8y ago
Sadly, you'll still find people (even in this thread) that claim "of course Trump's campaign wasn't meant to be taken literally." With statements like "if you took what Trump said on the campaign literally, then you missed the point." So then if _The Wall_ was figurative, why did he shut down the government over its funding? "No he meant that one literally." Okay... So what about the fact that the wall would be funded by Mexico? He claimed that he would literally make them write a check. "That was obviously figurative." An exhausting stretch of logic by those who can't burden themselves with introspection.
- mc32 8y ago
  Like any politician, the "Mexico would pay for it" was an "argument" to get support. Did supporters care if Mexico itself would pay? No. But it fit their sentiment. It's win-win for him because the only people who would "care" would be people against the wall who politically don't matter. It's like when Dems say they want to abolish ICE. That's what their base want to hear. Do they really think ICE is going to be abolished? No, do they like hearing that because it rings nicely in their ears. yes! Let's abolish ICE is the lefts version of "Mexico will pay for the wall". When they say Abolish ICE, they mean we'll (try to) do the dreamer things and we'll be less literal on refugee interpretation (and include economic migrants as definition of a refugee) for example. And, if it doesn't happen (not enough internal support) we'll blame the Repubs, no loss on their side. This is how political comms works. Don't try and hang them on each and every word. You'll miss what they are saying.
  - Natanael_L 8y ago
    You're basically saying "one side says what they want to do even if they know they can't get it, the other says whatever they think you want to hear"
  - ineedasername 8y ago
    It is intellectually dishonest to attribute literal intent to some of his statements, but others made with the same bombastic style only obviously more ridiculous are hand-waved away as "it was the spirit of the thing he meant, not literally". And whether or not his followers care about Mexico paying for the wall, his various statements clearly indicated a literal intent on the topic. And while some on the left may mean "let's massively reorganize ICE and rethink its operational policies", it's clear that some also mean this literally. You're right about Occasio-Cortez: she is shaping up to be about as bad as Trump in this respect. I'm not quite sure which of them is worse, but I know the prospect of her someday getting to the White House is a chilling prospect, even though my political leanings are in that direction. She appears to be about as dangerously ignorant (and perhaps callous) of facts of situations. The only mitigating factor for her is that perhaps experience will temper this, and maybe she is just uninformed but not unwilling to learn.
chosenbreed37 8y ago
> This argument was always embarrassingly stupid, but anyone still making it after Trump shut down the government for a month over literal wall construction has forfeited their right to be taken seriously at all. Whether his statements during the campaign were taken literally or not it appears he was taken seriously by enough people to win him the nomination and the election. I think more than anything they bought into his intent. And his values however we may choose to the define them resonated with them.
mikeash 8y ago
What’s really hilarious is that the wall was originally intended to be figurative. His staff came up with the idea as a way of keeping Trump’s scattered brain focused on talking about immigration. Except the moron ran with it.
- chillwaves 8y ago
  That's President Moron to you.

by jaibot 8y ago

mc32 8y ago

I disagree with Thiel there, His base, and most independents want a literal wall (and, as he claims, Dems used to be for a wall) But his speeches are littered with these blue collar type speech patterns (boasting, exaggeration, put-downs, etc., when trying to “win” an argument).

ModernMech 8y ago
> His base, and most independents want a literal wall Can you back up that most independents want a wall? The polling I've seen says otherwise. "CBS News polling from mid-November found that a majority -- 59 percent of Americans -- oppose building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. It's a partisan issue, though. A large majority of Republicans support the wall -- 79 percent. A majority of independents -- 66 percent -- oppose the wall, and 84 percent of Democrats are also against it." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-americans-dont-support-building-the-wall/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-americans-dont-su...
disease 8y ago
I think you are confusing 'blue collar' with narcissism, arrogance, entitlement, laziness and stupidity.
dmode 8y ago
Can we stop saying that "blue collar" people delve in boasting and exaggeration ? Most blue collar people I meet are very polite, mild mannered and focused on executing their tasks. The only people who talk like Trump are narcissists.

ltc5505 8y ago

Sadly, you'll still find people (even in this thread) that claim "of course Trump's campaign wasn't meant to be taken literally." With statements like "if you took what Trump said on the campaign literally, then you missed the point." So then if _The Wall_ was figurative, why did he shut down the government over its funding? "No he meant that one literally." Okay... So what about the fact that the wall would be funded by Mexico? He claimed that he would literally make them write a check. "That was obviously figurative." An exhausting stretch of logic by those who can't burden themselves with introspection.

mc32 8y ago
Like any politician, the "Mexico would pay for it" was an "argument" to get support. Did supporters care if Mexico itself would pay? No. But it fit their sentiment. It's win-win for him because the only people who would "care" would be people against the wall who politically don't matter. It's like when Dems say they want to abolish ICE. That's what their base want to hear. Do they really think ICE is going to be abolished? No, do they like hearing that because it rings nicely in their ears. yes! Let's abolish ICE is the lefts version of "Mexico will pay for the wall". When they say Abolish ICE, they mean we'll (try to) do the dreamer things and we'll be less literal on refugee interpretation (and include economic migrants as definition of a refugee) for example. And, if it doesn't happen (not enough internal support) we'll blame the Repubs, no loss on their side. This is how political comms works. Don't try and hang them on each and every word. You'll miss what they are saying.
- Natanael_L 8y ago
  You're basically saying "one side says what they want to do even if they know they can't get it, the other says whatever they think you want to hear"
- ineedasername 8y ago
  It is intellectually dishonest to attribute literal intent to some of his statements, but others made with the same bombastic style only obviously more ridiculous are hand-waved away as "it was the spirit of the thing he meant, not literally". And whether or not his followers care about Mexico paying for the wall, his various statements clearly indicated a literal intent on the topic. And while some on the left may mean "let's massively reorganize ICE and rethink its operational policies", it's clear that some also mean this literally. You're right about Occasio-Cortez: she is shaping up to be about as bad as Trump in this respect. I'm not quite sure which of them is worse, but I know the prospect of her someday getting to the White House is a chilling prospect, even though my political leanings are in that direction. She appears to be about as dangerously ignorant (and perhaps callous) of facts of situations. The only mitigating factor for her is that perhaps experience will temper this, and maybe she is just uninformed but not unwilling to learn.

chosenbreed37 8y ago

> This argument was always embarrassingly stupid, but anyone still making it after Trump shut down the government for a month over literal wall construction has forfeited their right to be taken seriously at all. Whether his statements during the campaign were taken literally or not it appears he was taken seriously by enough people to win him the nomination and the election. I think more than anything they bought into his intent. And his values however we may choose to the define them resonated with them.

mikeash 8y ago

What’s really hilarious is that the wall was originally intended to be figurative. His staff came up with the idea as a way of keeping Trump’s scattered brain focused on talking about immigration. Except the moron ran with it.

chillwaves 8y ago
That's President Moron to you.