7 ms·

Talking as an outsider, what's really weird to me is how the things Trump clearly says or does on a whim result in serious, deep debate in all the media and pub

by kace91 6y ago

Talking as an outsider, what's really weird to me is how the things Trump clearly says or does on a whim result in serious, deep debate in all the media and public forums. He goes "I will build a wall spanning a continent to stop mexicans" and you see deep debate about how effective it would be, the price, the logistics of it... it's clearly a dumb idea, why does everyone pretend it's not and engage in deep consideration of it? Now I'm seeing the same thing. Extensive debates about public opinion, the first amendment and the difficulties of moderating a service with millions of subscribers, when it is painfully obvious that the only reasoning by the president is "they messed with me so I'm going to get revenge".

kthxbye123 6y ago
The American Presidency is a storied and historic office, not just a job but a symbol of the nation, of its civic and cultural identity, so it has been difficult for a lot of people to come to terms with it being occupied by someone who is quite so openly and vocally a gibbering idiot. Hence the need to pretend that these pronouncements represent proposals into which serious thought and effort has been invested, rather than the momentary whims of a bloviating narcissist.
thephyber 6y ago
> it's clearly a dumb idea, why does everyone pretend it's not and engage in deep consideration of it? I've learned that Trump is an incredibly dull instrument, but the points he raises (when you get past the verbal diarrhea) tend to be things that some significant fraction of his "base" care about or that are not actually novel policy ideas. "The wall" as he describes it is dumb. But it has existed in some form since the 1990s (albeit only segments) and the way he describes it is a simple symbol for people that tend not to know how to "solve" problems related to (illegal?) immigration. Most average people don't care about policy details so they don't know how to argue them to "win the argument". Trump gives them a sports team to cheer for and simple slogans to shout so they feel like they are participating. > when it is painfully obvious that the only reasoning by the president is "they messed with me so I'm going to get revenge". The problems that Trump has with social media companies go back far more than 2 days and a fact checking link. His Attorney Generals (both Barr and Sessions) have been working with Republican state Attorneys General for years to craft a response to what they see is "liberal Silicon Valley techies banning (or shadowbanning or remonetizing or ...) conservative voices". Trump doesn't see a downside to taking this action. The interesting thing is that there are far more than just political American conservatives that want to see regulation of {YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc}. Elizabeth Warren wrote a detailed essay on medium.com about why they should be more strictly regulated. A crazy YouTuber from San Diego got so pissed at YouTube for banning her account or demonetizing her channel that she drove up to San Bruno (not sure exactly which city/location) and shot up the building. There are quite a few stories of vague ToS being enforced in a not-so-predictable manner which leaves end users with banned accounts (which may be the nexus to more important accounts like email accounts).
- cm0000cm 6y ago
  I think a lot of people blindly follow Trump because they also hate who he hates. Trump is a divider, and his supporters feel empowered by agreeing with whatever he says.
loopz 6y ago
"The wall" was an issue long before Trump, as is section 230 for social media. So what may seem like childish tantrums, are in reality diversion and deception tactics in order to drum up thirst for reviving underlying political issues. Since there is already a somewhat stifled political debate, the diversion works on all levels, every single time, to spread FUD, disruption, renewed outrage, discordance and confusion.

by kace91 6y ago

kthxbye123 6y ago

The American Presidency is a storied and historic office, not just a job but a symbol of the nation, of its civic and cultural identity, so it has been difficult for a lot of people to come to terms with it being occupied by someone who is quite so openly and vocally a gibbering idiot. Hence the need to pretend that these pronouncements represent proposals into which serious thought and effort has been invested, rather than the momentary whims of a bloviating narcissist.

thephyber 6y ago

> it's clearly a dumb idea, why does everyone pretend it's not and engage in deep consideration of it? I've learned that Trump is an incredibly dull instrument, but the points he raises (when you get past the verbal diarrhea) tend to be things that some significant fraction of his "base" care about or that are not actually novel policy ideas. "The wall" as he describes it is dumb. But it has existed in some form since the 1990s (albeit only segments) and the way he describes it is a simple symbol for people that tend not to know how to "solve" problems related to (illegal?) immigration. Most average people don't care about policy details so they don't know how to argue them to "win the argument". Trump gives them a sports team to cheer for and simple slogans to shout so they feel like they are participating. > when it is painfully obvious that the only reasoning by the president is "they messed with me so I'm going to get revenge". The problems that Trump has with social media companies go back far more than 2 days and a fact checking link. His Attorney Generals (both Barr and Sessions) have been working with Republican state Attorneys General for years to craft a response to what they see is "liberal Silicon Valley techies banning (or shadowbanning or remonetizing or ...) conservative voices". Trump doesn't see a downside to taking this action. The interesting thing is that there are far more than just political American conservatives that want to see regulation of {YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc}. Elizabeth Warren wrote a detailed essay on medium.com about why they should be more strictly regulated. A crazy YouTuber from San Diego got so pissed at YouTube for banning her account or demonetizing her channel that she drove up to San Bruno (not sure exactly which city/location) and shot up the building. There are quite a few stories of vague ToS being enforced in a not-so-predictable manner which leaves end users with banned accounts (which may be the nexus to more important accounts like email accounts).

cm0000cm 6y ago
I think a lot of people blindly follow Trump because they also hate who he hates. Trump is a divider, and his supporters feel empowered by agreeing with whatever he says.

loopz 6y ago

"The wall" was an issue long before Trump, as is section 230 for social media. So what may seem like childish tantrums, are in reality diversion and deception tactics in order to drum up thirst for reviving underlying political issues. Since there is already a somewhat stifled political debate, the diversion works on all levels, every single time, to spread FUD, disruption, renewed outrage, discordance and confusion.