Archie Bunker knew what he was talking about.
I’ve never been much of a fan of twitter (X). However, it seems that every visit is an endless stream of leftist gaslighting (even though I do not follow any of those posting these toxic fumes). The saving grace is every post is inundated with 99% of the replies calling them out on their misinformation.
MSM is no better.
- Trump predicts ‘bloodbath’ if he loses 2024 election, ramps up anti-migrant rhetoric
- Trump says there will be a ‘bloodbath’ if he loses the election
- Trump Says There Will Be a ‘Bloodbath’ and Elections Will End if He Isn’t Reelected
- Trump says country faces ‘bloodbath’ if Biden wins in November
- Mary Trump’s Dire Warning After Donald Trump’s ‘Bloodbath’ Remark
- An Even Darker Trump: Warns Of ‘Bloodbath’ If Not Elected
- In Ohio, Trump warns of ‘bloodbath’ if he doesn’t win election
- Donald Trump talks about ‘bloodbath,’ attacks immigrants as he rallies for Republican Senate pick in Ohio
So, for those of you that STILL get your opinions from The View, Kimmel or Colbert, here is the context they won’t tell you.
Apparently, it is using the term “bloodbath” that is setting them off.
Really?
As I often respond, fewer and fewer are believing their BS anymore and every time they try something like this, they only manage to increase Trumps lead as those newly awakened souls emerge from their echo chambers alarmed at the level of gaslighting they have been subjected to. Hence, the record mistrust and rejection of the MSM. I always end my responses with a polite request to keep it up as it is doing wonders educating the public.
-
Taking his quote in the context of it pertaining to the auto industry only, please then explain what he meant in using the word “bloodbath”? That word usually describes violence or murder–so was he saying that foreign automakers will massacre domestic automakers in terms of sales? And if so, then why is the UAW on record as supporting Biden? And isn’t “bloodbath” a dramatically violent term to use for a competitive economic issue? He also said, “that’ll be the least of it,” so what more is he referring to? Care to expound on that? And finally, do you think a 100% tariff on foreign automobiles is a good idea? What will that do to supply/demand and the cost of vehicles in the US overall? Sounds like a very immature, knee-jerk policy idea that would have serious economic repercussions on the average American needing to buy, sell or repair their car.
I think the main problem with Trump (beyond his obvious dictatorial aspirations) is he is RARELY coherent, so the media constantly has to guess/infer what his word salads actually mean. Given Trump’s penchant for violence, it’s understandable to assume he meant the worst with this term. He certainly seems to prey on the fears of his followers, regarding all things “foreign,” whether it be immigrants or Toyotas.
I would love to see a little deeper analysis in your postings–and again invite you to answer any of the questions I posed in this response.
Look up the term bloodbath.
bloodbath /blŭd′băth″, -bäth″/
noun
Savage, indiscriminate killing; a massacre.
Indiscriminate slaughter; the killing of multiple persons.
Similar: bloodlettingbloodshedbattue
Substantial losses by many people, as in a mass termination of employment or widespread financial loss.
“the sudden market drop created a bloodbath among overoptimistic investors”
Also, apparently you agree bloodbath is ok to use in the numerous examples shown in MSM and Biden himself, but is ONLY inappropriate when Trump uses it.
Got it.
It seems you’re still unwilling to address the actual content (within context) of what Trump said. If he was using bloodbath to describe the auto industry if Biden is elected, then why is that? What do you think Trump meant by “that’ll be the least of it”? What other disasters will come about under Biden’s leadership (that aren’t occurring right now)?
For starters, and because this is an actual policy issue, why don’t you address his “100% tariff” threat? If anything, I think making it suddenly non-viable for foreign automakers to sell their vehicles would wreak far more havoc on our recovering economy than anything Biden has done–because, as I’ve pointed out and you continually ignore: Our economy is doing better than just about every other country post-Covid.
There’s no way that domestic automakers would be able to ramp up production to meet demand, the cost of existing vehicles would skyrocket, people wouldn’t be able to find parts or afford repairs, etc. Why don’t you talk about THAT for a minute? Do you actually think that would be a good economic move for a president to make?
I find it so interesting that you will NEVER answer a single question that I ask–even when they are about policy? Why is that?
The context is in the definition of bloodbath. “Substantial losses by many people, as in a mass termination of employment or widespread financial loss.”
I seriously doubt he’d impose a 100% tariff but would still expect a substantial one to make such purchases economically unfeasible. You’ve proven many times that you lack comprehension skills so I’ll explain. He never said ALL imports. He specifically stated Chinese autos manufactured in Mexico.
“Let me tell you something to China, if you’re listening President Xi, and you and I are friends, but he understands the way I deal. Those big monster car manufacturing plants that you’re building in Mexico right now, and you think you’re going to get that, you’re going to not hire Americans, and you’re going to sell the cars to us? No. We’re going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re not going to be able to sell those cars.”
What loss would we experience from that? How many Chinese cars do you see on the roads these days? I don’t think I have ever seen one but if China’s greatest asset remains in office, we’ll likely be overrun with them soon. I’m pretty sure GM, Ford, BMW, Toyota, Volkswagon, Volvo etc. can take up that slack (that doesn’t exist today).
I don’t sit here answering your question because THEY ARE STUPID QUESTIONS!!! When I see you STILL referring to points that have been established as false (NO police died on 1/6 BTW), it’s a huge red flag that you’re not to be taken seriously and I take the advice of others to simply ignore it.
Let me clarify STUPID QUESTIONS. That’s a bit harsh. But the point is they are usually already addressed. In this discussion, you ask why he used “bloodbath” to describe an economic catastrophe in the domestic auto industry – ignoring the dictionary definition that I listed “Substantial losses by many people, as in a mass termination of employment or widespread financial loss.”. Then, you continued to question it – ignoring the dozens of examples shown where it was the key phrase used by MSM and Biden himself. Just 3 days ago, MSM was screaming about the bloodbath when the RNC cleaned house.
Frankly, I don’t have time to waste pointing out the obvious to you. The only reason I had time today is because it is cold and windy and decided to wait on my outside projects.
I agree that there are two ways you can interpret trumps “bloodbath” remark. I think it’s important to remember, tho, that people assume the worst because he’s DEMONSTRATED the worst. His refusal to call off the attack on the capitol was heinous and negligent. He’s desperate and dangerous. We are NEVER going to agree on this Bill, and all I can do is shake my head and sadly wonder how in the hell we got here.
At this point, a person would have to be very stupid or naive to not recognize Trump’s typical dog-whistle style of riling up his base in a way that leaves plausible deniability about what he meant. He knows what he meant. We know what he meant.
Trump has done this 100x before. He uses violent language at every single one of his rallies. Most notably, he used the same kind of rhetoric leading up to and during January 6th. BTW: I never said police died on 1/6, but as a result of 1/6. This is another example of you focusing on irrelevant details and missing the bigger picture—the important detail is, people died as a result of trying to protect lawmakers against a mob that was incited by the former president.
Anyway, despite the fact that Trump is a liar and a buffoon, I don’t minimize the threat he poses to this country or the weird rapturous hold he has over otherwise sensible people like yourself.
I also know that Trump’s violent rhetoric will continue to ramp up more and more, the closer we get to the election and the more his legal problems start to snowball. It’s very clear how desperate he’s becoming as his house of cards begins to crumble and people can see that he was clearly lying when he was talking about his business acumen and wealth. Trump (and the current GOP) has no political platform. The only “policies” Trump stands for are 1) staying out of prison and 2) getting revenge on his enemies. That’s it. Every other “conservative principle” he supposedly holds dear is completely negotiable. He would turn on you and the rest of his base in a heartbeat, if it was politically expedient to do so.
So, while I feel compelled to try to get through to you, remembering the brother I loved and respected, there are frankly days when I can’t muster the energy to keep beating my head against a wall for someone who willingly defends a despot. Therefore, I’m going to do my best to ignore any future rants (but please don’t ever interpret my silence as any kind of implied agreement).
I’ve noticed however, that you don’t seem to get a lot of other commentary here, so you might want to reflect on that a bit—if “everyone” (as you say) is becoming enlightened as to all these Deep State conspiracy theories, etc., etc., shouldn’t more of the people in your life be commenting or agreeing with you? If they comment on your posts about life on the farm, what does it tell you that they remain silent about your political rants?