What's the right way of covering the endless stream of ugly and apocalyptic language that Donald Trump uses to inspire his MAGA followers? Here's an example from yesterday: many news outlets reported that Trump had threatened a "bloodbath" if he's not elected. But if you listen to his remarks, he's talking about a bloodbath in the US auto industry unless he's elected and places high tariffs on Chinese cars:
George Conway says, sure, Trump was probably talking about cars in this clip, but it doesn't really matter:
What matters is that he consistently uses apocalyptic and violent language in an indiscriminate fashion.... He catastrophizes *everything* to rile up his cultish supporters, and to bind them to him, and to make them willing to do his bidding.... And so it doesn’t matter what he’s specifically referring to at the moment. He could be talking about trans people in public bathrooms or the state of the auto industry or the border—it doesn’t matter.
Conway is right. At the same time, it's just plainly misleading not to make it clear that Trump was talking about US automakers.
The thing is, Trump is so relentless that there's really no conflict here. You can report his remarks accurately, as you should, and still have plenty of material left over to make Trump's overall tone clear. One obvious way is to put his comment in the context of all his other apocalyptic language: immigrants as vermin, Joe Biden as the most corrupt president in history, I am your retribution, death and destruction if he's charged with a crime, demonic forces destroying the country, this is the final battle, etc.
Or, even easier, just report the rest of his speech. For example, there's the very beginning, where, as usual, he ditched the national anthem in favor of a paean to the "hostages" of January 6.
There's just no good reason to exaggerate what Trump says. All it does is give him yet another excuse to call out how unfairly he's treated—with some justice—while accomplishing nothing that the truth doesn't accomplish just as well.
Remember the old newsreels with Adolf Hitler ranting? Trump needs to get the same treatment. Big 5-10 second blocs where he's shouting, red faced, spittle flying, waving his little arms around.
Give him the Fox News treatment. Only honestly. There's already plenty of material, and every day he generates more.
Doesn't work so easily in the modern world.
First, he wasn't shouting, red faced, spittle flying and waving his arms around when he said this.
Second, can you find any such clips?
Finally, the responses come back fast... https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1769455728941547695
You are right Kevin.
But, like even a blind squirrel every so often finding a nut, Trump is kind of right in that those factories producing cheap Chinese electric cars in Mexico will be something of a bloodbath for the US auto industry. But then, if there ARE those factories in Mexico shipping very cheap electrics to the US, there will be a lot more electric cars on US roads than there would be without them. Man, I hate it when I cannot square priorities...
Thanks for your comment, but Kevin (imho) is not right about this. Trump starts out taking about the US auto industry but then improvises to say, "that's gonna be the least of it, it'll be a bloodbath for the whole country...".
Mass it right. It is not even a dog whistle.
You are correct. Trump means it'll be a general calamity, and "bloodbath" is his choice of word for it.
In the context of his speech, the "whole country" subject to potential "bloodbath" could be China rather than the US.
>> China-based car component suppliers are building production sites rapidly in the suburb of Monterrey, the northeast of Mexico. They are forming a supply chain for Tesla's future Gigafactory in Nuevo Leon. The situation has concerned the US government.
Bloomberg reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk had invited Chinese suppliers to expand in Mexico, aiming to replicate the company's supply chain in Shanghai.<> The rise of Chinese EVs has prompted the US government to mull over import restrictions. Sources told Bloomberg that the curbs will be applied to China-made EVs and parts. Implementing higher tariffs will likely be one of many measures the Biden administration plans to take to prevent Chinese manufacturers from importing cars and components to the US through Mexico or other third-party countries.<<
https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20240219PD206/china-auto-components-mexico-us-market.html#:~:text=Chinese%20automotive%20suppliers%20establish%20plants%20in%20Mexico%2C%20aiming%20for%20US%20market,-Jerry%20Yang%2C%20Taipei&text=China%2Dbased%20car%20component%20suppliers,future%20Gigafactory%20in%20Nuevo%20Leon.
Trump wants you to believe he “found a nut” but he didn’t. It was something that was well known. He wants his idiot fans to believe he found out about something through his business connections that our pitiful government was unaware of and that he is the only person who knows what to do about it. And just for fun, do you think that story about the guy who specializes in building large auto plants exists? Do you think the “liberal” press will fact check him on that with the fervor they fact checked Biden on his Corn Pop story?
This is way beyond trump's abilities but, when you talk about squaring priorities:
1. If the U.S. auto companies (really two, GM and Ford) don't get it together soon there will be one U.S. auto company, Tesla.
2. That's because those companies are riding the "oooo..., EV's are weird and, ooo... sort of un-American in this rolling coal society" --to delay spending the money they need to spend, now, on converting their fleet. That delay is going to bite them in the ass, big time. That's because in a country which, unfortunately, has no alternative to private car ownership (regardless of taxis or robo-taxies or Waymo) while EV's may not be a perfect solution they are the only solution.
3. Whether you think (a) thank whomever you want to thank that Tesla is a US company, or (b) Elon Musk is working on being such a jackass that I'd rather eat a big pile of horse manure than buy a Tesla --- is up to you, flip a coin. But there aren't going to be a ton of GM or Ford EV's around any time soon. Ford might make it. Stellantis will just shut down US manufacturing. The European companies will have to pivot, laws there leave them no choice.
I think Biden understands this issue comprehensively. This is just one more area where Trump's lack of analytical ability is, unfortunately, no joke.
As for #2, from what I have read, the US automakers are investing a lot in EVs right now and barely produce any gas-powered passenger cars any more and are retooling themselves to go electric in a big way. See, for instance, https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a35432253/ford-ev-commitment-announced/ That said, I am worried about their ability to do a good job with it, even without these Chinese vehicles undercutting them on price.
I agree that Biden gets it far more than Trump ever possibly could (not a high hurdle), and if re-elected he would have a good response. But a 100% tariff would also do the job, although that may violate the son-of-NAFTA agreement or something.
GM and Ford are US Based SUV-and-Truck companies. They've already abandoned the car market (GM only has Malibu, Camaro, Corvette, and Cadillac CT4 and CT5; Ford only has the Mustang). If Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, Subaru, VW, Volvo, and Mercedes Benz can produce cars efficiently enough to drive Ford and GM out of the market, they will come for the SUV and Truck markets soon. And GM and Ford, judging by their track record, will soon find those markets are also no longer profitable.
Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, Subaru, VW, Volvo, and Mercedes Benz all already produce SUVs of all sizes. The only market they haven't quite cracked is the US big pickup truck one.
I bought a Chevy Bolt, a subcompact hatchback,last month. It's a 2023 because the Bolt was discontinued. However, the reaction to the discontinuation was so big that they’re going to start making it again in 2025. Newer battery technology and the learning curve around range anxiety will make EV adoption easier and less massive vehicles possible.
What goes around, comes around.
And it's not even that. Trump clearly said, "...that's (the effect on the auto industry) gonna be the least of it, it'll (if Biden's reelected) be a bloodbath for the whole country.
Kevin is wrong in this case. It was a generalized statement put into an argument about cars. That's how that rhetoric gets normalized. The camel's nose under the tent.
Why should he get a pass when he chooses to use blood-soaked, violent imagery when he is talking about a routine economic matter? He does that for a reason, because of the sound of the word and the emotional impact it has with his followers.
I see no reason to give Trump the benefit of the doubt - when does Trump ever give it?
And in this case, it's not even a matter of giving him the benefit of the doubt. Trump clearly said, "...that's (the effect on the auto industry) gonna be the least of it, it'll (if Biden's reelected) be a bloodbath for the whole country."
"There's just no good reason to exaggerate what Trump says. All it does is give him yet another excuse to call out how unfairly he's treated—with some justice—while accomplishing nothing that the truth doesn't accomplish just as well."
I agree with all this but I don't see how it applies here.
Trump clearly states, "If I don't get elected, it's gonna be a bloodbath (clearly referring to Chinese car imports and their effect on US auto manufacturing), the whole...that's (apparently referring to Chinese car imports and their effect on US auto manufacturing gonna be the least of it, it'll (apparently referring to what happens if he's not elected) be a bloodbath for the country, that'll (apparently again referring to Chinese car imports and their effect on US auto manufacturing) be the least of it."
By common English grammar Trump said if he's not elected then it'll be a bloodbath for the US auto industry but "that's gonna be the least of it" because it'll be a blood bath for the whole country.
Of course, there's a way Trump can easily resolve this debate. He can release a statement clarifying that he was speaking metaphorically about the US auto industry, and that he denounces any threat or use of violence in US politics, and he calls on all Republicans to join him in making that the clear policy of the party.
P. S. I encourage reading Michael Kruse's new essay on Trump's uses of comedy and comic ambiguity to advance his authoritarian aims. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/17/how-donald-trump-uses-humor-to-make-the-outrageous-sound-normal-00146119
I agree with your assessment. And there's one other thing everyone seems to miss. He starts out saying "If I win," then cuts off and pivots to "If I lose..." Not sure if he short-circuited or just went off script but he didn't wind up saying what he started to say. And by the middle, it clearly wasn't about autos.
It wouldn't surprise me if he'd short-circuited, because other than increasingly rare callouts to more tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, he never mentions any positive benefits for people if he wins, only his revenges on their (really his) behalf.
Sorry Kevin -
I listened to the speech in real time, and I did not think he was talking about the auto industry. In what way would a "bloodbath" refer to the auto industry, given the words he used?
I believe you're wrong in your assesment.
I heard two distinct thoughts expressed.
1. The auto industry will suffer.
2. It wont' ONLY be the auto industry. It will be a "bloodbath" for the rest of the country.
1 and 2 are different thoughts espoused. Just listen to it again in context. It's two thoughts.
Yes, Trump often talks in gibberish, but his clear meaning was clear to his MAGA followers and should be to the rest of us paying attention. The problem is the media has become afraid to call out his repeated clear calls for violence.
I see no good reason not to exaggerate and amplify every stupid, insane, bat shit crazy, hateful, racist, utterance coming out of that pathological liar's, pie hole, and I don't give a shit if it is misleading or taken out of context, as long as it's a good 5 - 10 second soundbite that shows him in as negative a light as possible.
Orange Il Duce is going to scream that his being unfairly treated no matter what you say about him and the MAGA morons and sycophant supporters will back him up. If the Democrats don't have the balls to ratfuck the MAGA party as much as possible, they are going to lose in November.
That's the problem. Dems tend to play by the rules. Reps don't give a crap about them. They are interested in owning the libs. Not much else. Oh, and being every bit the horrible racist, homophobic, women hating people they are. Ugh
This! The idea, at this point, that we have to "fight fair" is ludicrous. Democrats can fight fair all the way to defeat. Exaggeration is fine under the circumstances of an MSM that focuses on "but he's old" - just like '...but her emails"—enough of this. It is not out of context because the intent is abundantly clear. Want to win the war - and it is a war - stop being nice.
Yes, we should say that Trump had been talking about how he would put a 100% tariff on Chinese cars from Mexico if he becomes president. It would be proper and fair to acknowledge this. But let's not kid ourselves: He did skip directly to "If I'm not elected it'll be a bloodbath." His "supporters" will not hear anything about tariffs or the auto industry. They will hear "bloodbath," and they will think it's their job to make that happen.
He might as well have added "Stand down and stand by."
The ever prissy Kevin reminds me of the WaPo editorial board, whose latest risible editorial this weekend took Democrats to task for continuing to use (in Ohio) their tactic of trying to put their thumb on the scale of GQP primaries by letting Republican voters know that the candidate they consider their easiest opponent is a big, fat MAGAt. (How dare those dastardly Democrats try to use the stupidity, hatefulness, and gullibility of voters who live only to own the libs to their advantage!)
It's not our job to use Vulcan logic to parse every despicable pronouncement of Unser Drumpfenfuhrer and then perform the Merrick Garland Backflip of the Benefit of Doubt (for those of a certain age, it's the elderly white man version of the Rose Mary Woods Stretch) and be extra fair to an out and out Nazi. When Drumpf says something despicable and it can be used to his discredit (without lying about it), use the damn thing! The alternative is the Fourth Reich, for crying out loud.
You're absolutely right as to the need to keep showing trump at his worst, keeping him angry, sputtering, maybe actually defensive & off-balance.
But please don't call Kevin prissy - you must be mistaking him for Mike Johnson, who is obviously deserving of the word.
Mike Johnson is prissy you say? Hmmmmmm.
No, no, no.
Context? Here's your context. Trump incited a violent mob to attack Congress, telling them to "fight like hell." That was no metaphor. It was as literal as you get. At the rally in Dayton Saturday, he called the January 6 mob "unbelievable patriots" and "hostages" who were treated "terribly" and "very unfairly." He led the crowd in singing the national anthem in their honor. He also said some immigrants are "not people," just weeks after borrowing language from Adolph Hitler to call them "vermin" who are "poisoning the blood of our country." Is that enough context for you?
When you do all that you lose your "give him the benefit of the doubt" privileges. No one should mistake what Trump means. He uses words like "bloodbath" for a reason. He's not just talking about cars coming from Mexico.
+1
Exactly like the rise of Hitler. "When someone lobs those kinds of rhetorical bombs, it's sort of a natural human tendency to say, "Oh, that's just a figure of speech. They don't really mean it. It's just a way to whip up supporters."" https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/early-warnings-how-american-journalists-reported-the-rise-of-hitler/254146/
It’s not clear nearly as clear to me that Trump’s talking about a “bloodbath” in the automobile industry as it is to Kevin. Trump and other Republicans have a weird and unique syntax in which disassociated things or ideas are run together. There’s a pause between Trump’s remarks about the automobile industry and his talking about a bloodbath if Biden’s reelected.
These appear to be two separate things that have run together because of Trump’s unique syntax. He seems to be preparing his followers to commit violence but also he appears to be trying to terrify voters into voting for him to stave off his MAGA violence.
>"It’s not clear nearly as clear to me that Trump’s talking about a “bloodbath” in the automobile industry as it is to Kevin."
It's not a matter of being clear, its having plausible deniability.
I think this is right. Message-meisters on the left typically pick out a few choice words to highlight what they think are the most outrageous things he says. He knows this, so he deliberately says things designed to "trigger the libs," which works every time. The wailing outrage may please the liberal base, but to the people that determine elections -- the mushy middle -- they probably have little to no impact.
Example: "I'm not going to be a dictator -- except on Day One." It was pretty obvious that he was saying it this way to be funny and also poke fun at the standard talking point of political candidates promising over what they're going to do "on Day One." But because of the pundits fretting -- appropriately -- over his affection for authoritarians, the comment was seized on by the left, somehow foolishly thinking voters would awaken from their slumber and turn against him.
It didn't work, because anyone who saw the clip could tell he was not saying this in a serious way. But MSNBC pundits breathlessly announced "Look! He ADMITTED he wants to be a dictator!" That just makes them look foolish and distracts from the many, many other ways that trump is corrupt, incompetent, cruel, and dishonest.
It did not make them look any more foolish than they do every day and it was not a distraction form the many, many other ways that Trump is corrupt, incompetent, cruel, and dishonest. His supporters and every Republican loved Trump's basic message "bloodbath if I lose" and the political media loves the drama of it all.
Meanwhile, Democrats call each other to task for their inappropriate language.
Thanks for your comment. One of Trump's real communications talents is his use of humor. Take your example: "I'm not going to be dictator -- except on Day One".
That's an example of what the olds folks used to call "half in fun, whole in earnest". Yes, he's joking. And yes, even more importantly, he's dead serious. The joking is what helps him get away with it.
For a better description, see Michael Kruse's new piece in Politico: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/17/how-donald-trump-uses-humor-to-make-the-outrageous-sound-normal-00146119
Actually, after examining this some more (and digesting many of these comments), I have changed my view. Trump was doing what he does so often -- creating a double meaning for plausible deniability. There's a good take on this matter in the New Republic: https://newrepublic.com/article/179885/bloodbath-trump-auto-industry-media
Sorry I was too quick to agree with Kevin this time.
In the span of hours he's talking about not banning TikTok and raising tariffs on Chinese imports. Are you fucking kidding me?
The dude talks out of both orifices of his digestive system and his supporters eat it all, vomit and shit.
There's an entire "what Trump really meant" industry on the right. Trying to bandy words with them is a fool's errand. Nobody knows what Trump means half the time, least of all him.
But in this case, critics have missed the opportunity to make a much more damaging point. One of Trump's frequent brags is that he scrapped the "Democrats' terrible NAFTA deal" with some other alphabetical treaty which was infinitely superior. Now he claims that same treaty is so full of holes the Chinese can use it to flood America with cheap imports, and he's going to have to tear the treaty up to stop them by doubling the price of cars to consumers.
THAT should have been the Trump story du jour.
On the left, there’s an entire industry on “If what Trump meant when he said..(bizzare Trump comment)..was…(coherent thought pulled out of authors ass)….then he may have a point.”
It really is so reminiscent of the movie Being There.
This reminds me of the idiocy of Democrats impeaching Trump for incitement - which is a very, very slippery concept. They should have impeached him for dereliction of duty during the 3 hours the Capitol was under assault. But they were so enamored with their particular *linguistic interpretation* that they missed a clear and unambiguous charge, which if done fast enough might have resulted in conviction.
Just stop it. Stop with making arguments about language unless the language is *absolutely clear*. The bloodbath reference is not absolutely clear.
Unless language changes radically - which it will never do - you have to live in a world where hints and suggestions are not determinative. Live with it.
I've read all of Trump's social media posts since January 2023 and there are tons of over-the-top dire predictions. Why people are upset now about "bloodbath", while ignoring the many end-of-the-world pronouncements he's made, is a mystery.
Thanks for your comment. A couple of thoughts in response:
"they missed a clear and unambiguous charge, which if done fast enough might have resulted in conviction." Conviction was always up to Senate Republicans, and McConnell (among many others) wasn't going to vote to convict Trump of anything. (If he was, he had two opportunities and missed them both.)
" The bloodbath reference is not absolutely clear." 1) Grammatically, it is. It may not have been in his prepared remarks, but Trump clearly improvised to say the auto industry would be the least of it, and that the whole country would suffer a bloodbath if he loses in November. 2) It is a standard part of authoritarian speech/politics to use humor as a tactic to make extremist rhetoric easier to swallow. ("A spoon full of sugar" and all.) https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/17/how-donald-trump-uses-humor-to-make-the-outrageous-sound-normal-00146119
I'm going to take an alternate take here. Trump said it was going to be a bloodbath if he wasn't elected, and the China auto issue he was discussing was the "least of it". And that the totalitarian dictator of China is a "friend" of his.
Donald Trump and MAGA may have hit on an important vein though, as they claim the USA was captured by the CIA-driven deep state, and the traditional Republican party led by Reagan and Bush were the prime exemplars. George W. Bush was the head of the CIA, and Ronald Reagan a better-than-bad actor they hired. They dreamed up Operation Northwoods to false flag terrorism against the people of the United States (and Cuba), and after being rejected for that, and JFK assassinated, they got the green flag for the Gulf of Tonkin provocation. After the American public finally reacted against that, the CIA rather quickly rebounded and allied with GOP to manipulate the Iran hostage situation to regain control and put Reagan/Bush in charge, who Trump and MAGA are wholesale rejecting.
Today, one imagines our intelligence operators are getting a little smarter about what they do, who they do it with, and why, because the American Dream is not to dominate a paranoid world, but to navigate it to our values which is liberty and free markets, which is not ever accomplished by their clumsy stupid actions that lead to mass murder, massacre and chaos in other peoples, since this only leads them to hate rather than aspire to be "free" with us.
People aren't stupid, but our failsons both hereditary and otherwise corporate are.
The ultimate takeaway is that the CIA (and the FBI) have always leaned right, to more authoritarian values, and thus to the conservative GOP, who are being ridiculed as RINO's now and having faked and defrauded the country for the past few decades, including the Reagan administration, by the paranoids.
And some of the things they're saying are true, and not conducive to conservative reactionary control, which was what the deep military-industrial Republican state was all about, last I checked before the celebrity sociopath took over.
A lot of week-kneed "strong conservatives" now, we can thank God and glory for people with integrity like Mike Pence, whether or not we agree with his social mores.
This is not ultimately about Democrats or Republicans, but about taking this country back from military-corporate complex, corporations are not people, that's the whole point of a corporation, no personal responsibility, duh.
Right to public transparency (freedom of information), and right to privacy, both constitutional amendments along with rejecting corporate "personhood" (oligarchic farce), it's amazing how little we have to do to be back in charge!
No foreign money or gifts ever too, which already should be enforced, including taking a knee and bowing to Saudis for some stupid award they created just to see you prostrate yourself like that.
If Joe is listening, repealing corporate person hurts no one that matters, and is what John McCain ultimately was fighting for, but the rich will find and excavate their hollow outs of law and fair treatment, because to them they are fighting to keep what has never belonged to them (land), so they can keep rents high for the rest of us, scumbags all of them and they from all ethnicities and races, just the greedy.
If Joe is listening, repealing corporate person hurts no one that matters, and is what John McCain ultimately was fighting for, but the rich will find and excavate their hollow outs of law and fair treatment, because to them they are fighting to keep what has never belonged to them (land), so they can keep rents high for the rest of us, mostly scumbags tho many probably ignorant and from all ethnicities and races.
Yes yes. We should debate and parse the words coming from Mr. Trumps mouth. We should give him every consideration. What does it mean to call someone an "animal"? Where exactly are those "shit hole countries"? Are we about to find out if he could indeed "kill someone on Fifth Ave."? [He has lots of proxies]. A dictator on day one will not parse words. I give you Project 2025.
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/march-17-2024?publication_id=20533&post_id=142711409&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=true&r=otxgo&triedRedirect=true
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/18/2230031/-An-Open-Letter-to-the-Fools-at-the-New-York-Times-You-Need-to-Smarten-Up-Before-it-s-Too-Late?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=latest_community&pm_medium=web
Yes, lets give Donald the benefit of the doubt. Great idea.
Goodness, we will never learn.
Pingback: Yeah there’s always context | Zingy Skyway Lunch
The real bloodbath is all of the red ink spilling from Trump's finances. Can't make bond. Buh bye NY properties.
Being "honest" about the remark, and not "exaggerating," it seems most urgent to stop making excuses for or hyper-rationalizing these calls to arms that DJT is so skillful at. We have plenty of evidence of how he does it, couching his threats and stoking aggression in statements where they don't seem to belong, the whole plausible deniability BS. It has hurt us before and will again. Err on the side of hearing--and calling out--the unveiled threats cleverly placed in innocuous contexts.
Representative Steve Schiff had it right: you need to couch all of the Defendant's statements as "mob talk." Aimed for plausible deniability for people reading the transcripts, but clear as glass to his many toadies, bagmen, and dupes.
Which appear to include most of the mainstream "journalists" and teevie talking heads and newsreaders. It's past time for the left to start working the refs of the infotainment media, as the right wing has been doing almost forever.