We’ve all seen the video, so we all know that both explanations are pure BS. And they’re the kind of thing an embarrassed child might say after such a goof. But why purposefully show your ass like this? He can’t think that anyone buys it. Or can he? Is this simply stubborn refusal to acknowledge a harmless mistake? Or part of a carefully crafted years-long piece of performance art called “Hey, Look Over There!”?
I realize the can of worms I’m opening. My lib friends say, “Yes, he’s precisely that dumb,” and shake their damn heads once again. I’m sure there are a few gullible cons who actually believe he said “TimCookApple”. But most, I think, consider both the gaffe and the aftermath as part of a grand “pwn the libs” campaign. And I’m starting to wonder if they’re right. We’re talking about his outrageous budget today, but not as much as if he hadn’t simultaneously stuck his foot in his mouth again.
If it’s all intentional, then he is truly The Great Communicator - Reagan was a piker. He is a completely believable buffoon, and many of us are buying it. Myself, I think everything from “covfefe” to “Melanie” to “Tim Apple” are honest goofs, caused by a combination of real cognitive impairment, laziness, and stubborn determination to never admit a mistake. But I’m willing to be convinced otherwise.
And I think that’s where we should be headed. Not to believe that he isn’t dumb enough to naturally but accidentally say dumb things, and stubborn and insecure enough to double down on them. Rather to stop letting them eat up so much of the news cycle, and focus instead on the very real and long-term problems that he’s causing.
And see, it’s his denial of a relatively harmless mistake that brings his deeper, underlying psychological problems to the fore.
Instead of laughing it off and moving on, he makes us some B.S. about saying “Cook” in there somewhere. It’s patently false.
He can’t admit he is wrong. About anything. Doing so would imply weakness and is the anithesis of “winning”…he absolutely cannot allow himself to do that. Once he does, the house of cards he has built up may come falling down.
But one thing Trump does excel at is changing the narrative. Now we’re discussing whether he said Tim Cook Apple, Tim - Apple, or Tim Apple instead of the zillion scandals and crimes to testing the WH.
You have to give him credit for masterfully manipulating the media.
I don’t disagree with a thing that you said. I just think we need to stop focusing on it. First, he’ll never change. Second, it’s not where he’s doing the most damage.
No, for the same reason I don’t wade through the settling ponds at the local wastewater treatment plant.
But you’ve made the right point. Both sides are guilty of getting butt hurt, and of making it all about anger. That’s what discourse in general, and political discourse in particular have exclusively become - flame wars. We’re so dug in on “Trump’s a moron!” vs. “Trump’s the Messiah!” that we’re losing focus on the really shady stuff happening in the background.
I’ve even seen identical memes from both left and right posted with only the keywords changed.
I mean picture and intent are absolutely the same, only interchangeable text are Democrats/Republicans or Obama/Trump.
And I still remember BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) which was followed by ODS and now has of course, evolved into TDS.
When our side complains we are always speaking the truth ; when the other side does it - they’re butt-hurt and whining. It’s all ego; ego fosters strong opinions about what’s right or wrong; therefore empathy is reduced to rubble when only your side is perceived to know the Absolute Truth.
But it isn’t difficult to see the same human nature in all points of view , all it takes is dropping the egoic view for a split second; one can always go back to it later.
Outstanding point. Now, how do we translate that into effective political discourse, and how can we effect positive change from that discourse? I don’t mean on this forum necessarily, but in our daily interactions with family, friends, coworkers?
My first instinctive reaction to that question - we don’t. Political discourse itself isn’t meant to be pleasant, or even particularly productive. And I definitely think many people enjoy because they like strife, and arguing.
But thinking about a bit more, I guess one thing we could all do is listen, and try to understand. Sounds cliche, but to so many people even trying to understand is a huge hurdle. Remember, understand does not mean you endorse, or even agree with someone. You can oppose something with every fiber of your being and still be able to understand what drives that viewpoint.
