Can you imagine the result if he actually attempted to adorn his public speeches with a little more eloquence? Even though it would be worse than Vogon poetry, I would love to see it.
Speaking of running his mouth, he is calling for NYT staff to resign because they wrote true things about him.
I call for the Resignation of everybody at The New York Times involved in the Kavanaugh SMEAR story, and while you’re at it, the Russian Witch Hunt Hoax, which is just as phony! They’ve taken the Old Grey Lady and broken her down, destroyed her virtue and ruined her reputation…She can never recover, and will never return to Greatness, under current Management. The Times is DEAD, long live The New York Times!
At least he didn’t ‘hereby’ call. Also, excellent misunderstanding of the meaning behind ‘the king is dead, long live the king’.
The McWhorter clip addresses the usual pushback from Trump supporters or apologists: “well, isn’t it good that he communicates in a way that simple people can understand?” Sure, clear communication is good, but simple isn’t the only way to achieve it. And while most presidents do some version of folksy, informal speech, they didn’t do it all the time. They had another gear they could shift to when the occasion called for it. Even George W. Bush was at least capable of striking a somber tone and properly reading what his speechwriters prepared for him; on those rare occasions where Trump is told he has to be presidential, he reads the speech like he’s in a hostage video, and can’t resist peppering it with his comments (“so true, so true!”).
well, isn’t it good that he communicates in a way that simple people can understand?
This is right up there with people who said they liked Dubya because they didn’t want a president smarter than they were.
I never understood this. The one thing I do want is a president that is smarter than I am. Especially about things like foreign policy, about which I have no more than a passing knowledge. He doesn’t have to be smarter than me about Ecology; he can hire advisors for that. He doesn’t have to be smarter than me about Playwriting; this is not a job required of presidents. But he does need to be smarter than me about the political minefields that strew our pathway with dangerous obstacles.
Most of all, he needs to be smart enough to recognize that he doesn’t know everything, and surround himself with good people who will tell him “Sorry, sir*, but you are out to lunch on that one. Here is how the world really works. Listen close…” and then said president listens close.
It just floors me that people think it’s a great idea for our president to be someone they can understand even when talking about a subject most people don’t understand. I don’t want them to obfuscate with empty rhetoric, but I don’t want them to talk to the country like they, and all of us, are in kindergarten. Anti-intellectualism? I’m sick to death of it.
*I apologize for all the “he” and “sir”, but, well, I begin to despair of the possibility of ever having a woman president, so I might as well not trans any of our presidents unless they personally identify that way. I wouldn’t want to accidentally misgender a president and commit actual violence.
If that’s what Trump supporters say they’re amazingly full of shit. Comprehensible to a wide audience does not mean illiterate or crude or dumb. (I know you all know this, I just need to rant about it.) It’s perfectly possible to speak both accessibly and eloquently. What do those supporters think preachers do?! What do poets do, what do songwriters do?
Take another look at King Lear for instance. It’s full of language of the utmost simplicity (and clarity) that rips your guts out. One-syllable words that knock you out of your seat.
It’s perfectly possible to speak both accessibly and eloquently. What do those supporters think preachers do?! What do poets do, what do songwriters do?
It’s what Barack Obama does.
ake another look at King Lear for instance. It’s full of language of the utmost simplicity (and clarity) that rips your guts out. One-syllable words that knock you out of your seat
But…it’s Shakespeare! He’s writing in old English! No one can understand that! (Yes, I know, he’s not old English. I don’t know how many times I have heard people say that at a Shakespeare production – “I couldn’t understand a word they said, but it was beautiful. Wish it wasn’t in Old English). I share your appreciation of Lear, by the way. Beautiful.
well, isn’t it good that he communicates in a way that simple people can understand?
This is right up there with people who said they liked Dubya because they didn’t want a president smarter than they were.
Here in .au, the equivalent is ‘I like ____ because I could sink a pint alongside him.’ Excuse me, but some of us don’t judge our national leaders by whether they’re good drinking company, we want someone whose skills lie in running a nation.
Exactly Holms @13, John Key was insanely popular as Prime Minister of NZ. He had a goofy grin, would amiably make a twit of himself from time to time and had a good aw shucks kind of manner. Total facade. He was a FOREX trader at Merrill Lynch and rose to be global head of foreign exchange, where he became know as the ‘smiling assassin’. He was ruthlessly opportunist, making sure that he and his government stayed popular by swinging with the tide of popular opinion. He surprisingly resigned months short of an election he would have been sure to win had he stayed. The cynic in me, actually the cynic in many people, has suggested that this was because so many public services had been starved of money for so long that in his next term (the current governments term) those chickens were going to come home to roost. They have. It never ceases to amaze me the shallow reasons people have for voting for any particular candidate.
Holms, we get that, too. Pundits endlessly parse which candidate the voters would most like to have a beer with, and the voters are more than happy to tell us which candidate that is. As for me? I think it would have been very enjoyable to knock back a bottle of wine with Hillary Clinton and have a nice, long chat. But that has little to do with whether I think a person would be a good president or not.
“well, isn’t it good that he communicates in a way that simple people can understand?”
It *would* be good, perhaps, if he *did* do that, but he can’t even do that much. NOBODY can understand what he says, because his thoughts are ill-formed and nebulous. He doesn’t know how anything works, so he says nonsensical and wrong things in his “simple” words about it. Beyond that, his simple words are either lies, or babbled idiomatic phrases with no cognitive content whatsoever.
Oh, come on, maddog, everyone knows what covfefe means. It means…uh…it means…let’s see, I remember that from fifth grade vocabulary…covfefe is…is…I know! It’s the only word that could possibly describe Trump’s hair.
It strikes me that he is like the Bible. He/it says a few phrases here and there that people like, and people say he/it is a great communicator, clear as a bell, meanwhile ignoring all the utter nonsense and awful crap and blatant contradictions.
Can you imagine the result if he actually attempted to adorn his public speeches with a little more eloquence? Even though it would be worse than Vogon poetry, I would love to see it.
His attempts are what we see. For instance “in a very short period of time” – that’s his idea of being eloquent and educated.
The Vogon poetry of someone with no vocabulary is pointless empty elaboration of that kind.
Speaking of running his mouth, he is calling for NYT staff to resign because they wrote true things about him.
At least he didn’t ‘hereby’ call. Also, excellent misunderstanding of the meaning behind ‘the king is dead, long live the king’.
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173728490618671106
Not to mention the leering claim that they’ve yanked up the Times’s skirt and forced their penis up her, which is rich coming from him. Ugh.
Oh, God! I didn’t see that one.
The McWhorter clip addresses the usual pushback from Trump supporters or apologists: “well, isn’t it good that he communicates in a way that simple people can understand?” Sure, clear communication is good, but simple isn’t the only way to achieve it. And while most presidents do some version of folksy, informal speech, they didn’t do it all the time. They had another gear they could shift to when the occasion called for it. Even George W. Bush was at least capable of striking a somber tone and properly reading what his speechwriters prepared for him; on those rare occasions where Trump is told he has to be presidential, he reads the speech like he’s in a hostage video, and can’t resist peppering it with his comments (“so true, so true!”).
This is right up there with people who said they liked Dubya because they didn’t want a president smarter than they were.
I never understood this. The one thing I do want is a president that is smarter than I am. Especially about things like foreign policy, about which I have no more than a passing knowledge. He doesn’t have to be smarter than me about Ecology; he can hire advisors for that. He doesn’t have to be smarter than me about Playwriting; this is not a job required of presidents. But he does need to be smarter than me about the political minefields that strew our pathway with dangerous obstacles.
Most of all, he needs to be smart enough to recognize that he doesn’t know everything, and surround himself with good people who will tell him “Sorry, sir*, but you are out to lunch on that one. Here is how the world really works. Listen close…” and then said president listens close.
It just floors me that people think it’s a great idea for our president to be someone they can understand even when talking about a subject most people don’t understand. I don’t want them to obfuscate with empty rhetoric, but I don’t want them to talk to the country like they, and all of us, are in kindergarten. Anti-intellectualism? I’m sick to death of it.
*I apologize for all the “he” and “sir”, but, well, I begin to despair of the possibility of ever having a woman president, so I might as well not trans any of our presidents unless they personally identify that way. I wouldn’t want to accidentally misgender a president and commit actual violence.
@iknklast:
I share your despair; if the Dems nominate Warren and lose they’ll never* nominate a woman again.
If that’s what Trump supporters say they’re amazingly full of shit. Comprehensible to a wide audience does not mean illiterate or crude or dumb. (I know you all know this, I just need to rant about it.) It’s perfectly possible to speak both accessibly and eloquently. What do those supporters think preachers do?! What do poets do, what do songwriters do?
Take another look at King Lear for instance. It’s full of language of the utmost simplicity (and clarity) that rips your guts out. One-syllable words that knock you out of your seat.
It’s not the stupidity; it’s the lying.
It’s what Barack Obama does.
But…it’s Shakespeare! He’s writing in old English! No one can understand that! (Yes, I know, he’s not old English. I don’t know how many times I have heard people say that at a Shakespeare production – “I couldn’t understand a word they said, but it was beautiful. Wish it wasn’t in Old English). I share your appreciation of Lear, by the way. Beautiful.
Here in .au, the equivalent is ‘I like ____ because I could sink a pint alongside him.’ Excuse me, but some of us don’t judge our national leaders by whether they’re good drinking company, we want someone whose skills lie in running a nation.
Exactly Holms @13, John Key was insanely popular as Prime Minister of NZ. He had a goofy grin, would amiably make a twit of himself from time to time and had a good aw shucks kind of manner. Total facade. He was a FOREX trader at Merrill Lynch and rose to be global head of foreign exchange, where he became know as the ‘smiling assassin’. He was ruthlessly opportunist, making sure that he and his government stayed popular by swinging with the tide of popular opinion. He surprisingly resigned months short of an election he would have been sure to win had he stayed. The cynic in me, actually the cynic in many people, has suggested that this was because so many public services had been starved of money for so long that in his next term (the current governments term) those chickens were going to come home to roost. They have. It never ceases to amaze me the shallow reasons people have for voting for any particular candidate.
Holms, we get that, too. Pundits endlessly parse which candidate the voters would most like to have a beer with, and the voters are more than happy to tell us which candidate that is. As for me? I think it would have been very enjoyable to knock back a bottle of wine with Hillary Clinton and have a nice, long chat. But that has little to do with whether I think a person would be a good president or not.
“well, isn’t it good that he communicates in a way that simple people can understand?”
It *would* be good, perhaps, if he *did* do that, but he can’t even do that much. NOBODY can understand what he says, because his thoughts are ill-formed and nebulous. He doesn’t know how anything works, so he says nonsensical and wrong things in his “simple” words about it. Beyond that, his simple words are either lies, or babbled idiomatic phrases with no cognitive content whatsoever.
Oh, come on, maddog, everyone knows what covfefe means. It means…uh…it means…let’s see, I remember that from fifth grade vocabulary…covfefe is…is…I know! It’s the only word that could possibly describe Trump’s hair.
Re #16
It strikes me that he is like the Bible. He/it says a few phrases here and there that people like, and people say he/it is a great communicator, clear as a bell, meanwhile ignoring all the utter nonsense and awful crap and blatant contradictions.