Trump as tragicomedy

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Sun Mar 22, 2020 4:09 pm

I've now sees a lot of a few of New York Governor's lengthy daily solo briefings (complete with Power Point for those like me who prefer to read rather than listen).

QUITE the communicator in contrast to the person who shall remain unnamed in what I am writing here!

"I play basketball! There is no way you can maintain social distancing while playing basketball!"

I am such a constant C-Span viewer / listener these days that I'm just realizing this is the second time around I am experiencing this particular briefing.

Vinny

Cortopassi · Post by **Cortopassi** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:30 pm

This guy is president. When he was asked about the tweets he responded:

"Well, I've read that CNN doesn't want to cover them. I've read that -- except they can't help them because their ratings are so high. You know, if the ratings were low, they wouldn't be here. This man wouldn't be here. In 100 years you could bet your life that he would never be here with CNN and all their cameras....because we help their ratings. We help -- we lift up their ratings because their ratings are very low. ... But I think the American public ultimately they should be the decider, it's like if they don't want to watch, they shouldn't watch."

Yes, I watch them for you Mr. President. Not for news of the virus.

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:35 pm

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:30 pm This guy is president. When he was asked about the tweets he responded:

"Well, I've read that CNN doesn't want to cover them. I've read that -- except they can't help them because their ratings are so high. You know, if the ratings were low, they wouldn't be here. This man wouldn't be here. In 100 years you could bet your life that he would never be here with CNN and all their cameras....because we help their ratings. We help -- we lift up their ratings because their ratings are very low. ... But I think the American public ultimately they should be the decider, it's like if they don't want to watch, they shouldn't watch."

Yes, I watch them for you Mr. President. Not for news of the virus.

He did look somewhat shook yesterday when he was given and seemingly accepted the information given to him that if we did nothing that over 2,000,000 Americans would get killed by this virus.

But that was yesterday. That hour. That minute.

His instincts may well having him give different reactions today.

Vinny

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:51 pm

Perhaps this site could be useful to some. Take your pick and hope for the best. Unfortunately, or fortunately, we shall never know the real truth. That is why I minimize my time listening/watching "news". It isn't, and the opinions/talking head/ blathers "reports" are usually not actionable. And, not very entertaining.

After a quick scan, I did not see the NYT or WaPo listed.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/center/

Libertarian666 · Post by **Libertarian666** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:53 pm

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:30 pm This guy is president. When he was asked about the tweets he responded:

"Well, I've read that CNN doesn't want to cover them. I've read that -- except they can't help them because their ratings are so high. You know, if the ratings were low, they wouldn't be here. This man wouldn't be here. In 100 years you could bet your life that he would never be here with CNN and all their cameras....because we help their ratings. We help -- we lift up their ratings because their ratings are very low. ... But I think the American public ultimately they should be the decider, it's like if they don't want to watch, they shouldn't watch."

Yes, I watch them for you Mr. President. Not for news of the virus.

Yes, isn't it terrible that so many people are watching the President of the United States provide up-to-the minute information on a virulent pandemic that is killing Americans by the score? Even worse, he spends a long time answering questions from the press and makes his top advisors available to answer questions too!

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:01 pm

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:51 pm Perhaps this site could be useful to some. Take your pick and hope for the best. Unfortunately, or fortunately, we shall never know the real truth. That is why I minimize my time listening/watching "news". It isn't, and the opinions/talking head/ blathers "reports" are usually not actionable. And, not very entertaining.

After a quick scan, I did not see the NYT or WaPo listed.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/center/

I generally do not watch or listen to the news. Never have as reading has always been for me a far more efficient way of getting information.

However, for the "new" I do get via listening / watching it is almost 100% through C-Span. They promotes themselves as "unfiltered". You hear what is being said at the source. Like the Cuomo daily briefings. Oher governors' daily briefings. When Trump and company come on later today.

Vinny

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:04 pm

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:53 pm
Cortopassi wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:30 pm This guy is president. When he was asked about the tweets he responded:

"Well, I've read that CNN doesn't want to cover them. I've read that -- except they can't help them because their ratings are so high. You know, if the ratings were low, they wouldn't be here. This man wouldn't be here. In 100 years you could bet your life that he would never be here with CNN and all their cameras....because we help their ratings. We help -- we lift up their ratings because their ratings are very low. ... But I think the American public ultimately they should be the decider, it's like if they don't want to watch, they shouldn't watch."

Yes, I watch them for you Mr. President. Not for news of the virus.

Yes, isn't it terrible that so many people are watching the President of the United States provide up-to-the minute information on a virulent pandemic that is killing Americans by the score? Even worse, he spends a long time answering questions from the press and makes his top advisors available to answer questions too!

Except when he refuses to answer direct questions by attacking the questioner...among other "presidential" behaviors during these conferences...

VInny

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:09 pm

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:51 pm Perhaps this site could be useful to some. Take your pick and hope for the best. Unfortunately, or fortunately, we shall never know the real truth. That is why I minimize my time listening/watching "news". It isn't, and the opinions/talking head/ blathers "reports" are usually not actionable. And, not very entertaining.

After a quick scan, I did not see the NYT or WaPo listed.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/center/

When I go to their home page this is what I see / impressions I get.

1) "We are the most comprehensive media bias resource on the internet. There are currently 3100+ media sources listed in our database and growing every day. Don’t be fooled by Fake News sources. Use the search feature above (Header) to check the bias of any source. Use name or url." No one or two sentence explanation here of their methodologies, why we should trust their ratings.

2) Tons and tons of ads, including pop up ads.

3) The ads seem far from free from bias. Seem to all be far in only one direction.

All in all, does not give the impression of being the be all and end all of pronouncing what is or is not biased.

Vinny

Post by **Xan** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:17 pm

This one:
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart
seems a bit more reliable.

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:41 pm

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:53 pm
Cortopassi wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 2:30 pm This guy is president. When he was asked about the tweets he responded:

"Well, I've read that CNN doesn't want to cover them. I've read that -- except they can't help them because their ratings are so high. You know, if the ratings were low, they wouldn't be here. This man wouldn't be here. In 100 years you could bet your life that he would never be here with CNN and all their cameras....because we help their ratings. We help -- we lift up their ratings because their ratings are very low. ... But I think the American public ultimately they should be the decider, it's like if they don't want to watch, they shouldn't watch."

Yes, I watch them for you Mr. President. Not for news of the virus.

Yes, isn't it terrible that so many people are watching the President of the United States provide up-to-the minute information on a virulent pandemic that is killing Americans by the score? Even worse, he spends a long time answering questions from the press and makes his top advisors available to answer questions too!

I know you will have an answer to this but I will ask anyway.

Trump's hometown is New York City.

Yet when the question is asked of New Yorker's of their approval ratings for the handling of the virus we get:

1) Cuomo - 87%
2) Trump - 41%

I don't think that Trump yesterday in response to a journalist merely repeating Trump's own words back to him and he then going into a temper tantrum in front of his self-proclaimed "larger than Monday Night Football" audiences gains him any approval OTHER THAN FROM HIS SUPPORTERS FOR WHOM NOTHING HE DOES WILL LOSE THEIR SUPPORT.

Seems like they and much of the rest of the country are just not impressed with him.

VInny

ochotona · Post by **ochotona** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 3:43 pm

Trump is a 70-something baby.

Libertarian666 · Post by **Libertarian666** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 4:00 pm

I hope all you people with TDS are going to be able to come to your senses after he is re-elected in an epic landslide. He might even win 50 states.

Until then I'm not interested in reading your juvenile comments about him, so you're all on my ignore list.

Have a nice rest of the year until November 3rd.

Cortopassi · Post by **Cortopassi** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:27 pm

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 4:00 pm I hope all you people with TDS are going to be able to come to your senses after he is re-elected in an epic landslide. He might even win 50 states.

Until then I'm not interested in reading your juvenile comments about him, so you're all on my ignore list.

Have a nice rest of the year until November 3rd.

I think you have the other type of TDS...

Providing clear up to the minute information is not his strong point. Cuomo has him beat hands down on that. Going off on tangents, now that is Trump’s strong suit.

Juvenile? How about Tweets about getting better ratings than The Batchelor???

Cortopassi · Post by **Cortopassi** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:46 pm

That’s your choice, tech. I think we have a civilized discussion here. We obviously have a difference of opinion. This topic is Trump as tragicomedy.

Post by **dualstow** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:50 pm

You know what kind of bothered me about the NYTimes the other day?

There was that press conference video of Fauci stifling a laugh when Trump joked, “or as some people call it, the Deep State Dept.”
I posted the whole video cued up to that part, then linked to it again. Then Maddy posted it. Then Tortoise posted a gif of it. I think most of us have seen it. Fauci cracks up, and then covers his face because he wants to looks sincere and professional. So far, so good.

The Times then has an article stating that some Trump supporters are anti-Fauci. That may be true, but I think they are few and far between and it is a weird thing to focus us. There is a giant blow-up of the still screen showing Fauci with his hand over his face so it looks like a facepalm of disgust. They make zero mention in the article of Fauci smiling, and they don’t link to the original clip. So, in the process of saying there are a few wackos out there who hate Fauci, they’re also trying to give us the impression that Fauci hates the President. That’s so misleading, and it’s annoying!

There are times when Trump can be his own worst enemy and I wish he could try to sound a little humbler during the next four years. At the same time, the media really is a nightmare right now. Magnifying the worst things, minimizing the good.

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:00 pm

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:50 pm You know what kind of bothered me about the NYTimes the other day?

There was that press conference video of Fauci stifling a laugh when Trump joked, “or as some people call it, the Deep State Dept.”
I posted the whole video cued up to that part, then linked to it again. Then Maddy posted it. Then Tortoise posted a gif of it. I think most of us have seen it. Fauci cracks up, and then covers his face because he wants to looks sincere and professional. So far, so good.

The Times then has an article stating that some Trump supporters are anti-Fauci. That may be true, but I think they are few and far between and it is a weird thing to focus us. There is a giant blow-up of the still screen showing Fauci with his hand over his face so it looks like a facepalm of disgust. They make zero mention in the article of Fauci smiling, and they don’t link to the original clip. So, in the process of saying there are a few wackos out there who hate Fauci, they’re also trying to give us the impression that Fauci hates the President. That’s so misleading, and it’s annoying!

There are times when Trump can be his own worst enemy and I wish he could try to sound a little humbler during the next four years. At the same time, the media really is a nightmare right now. Magnifying the worst things, minimizing the good.

Tell me ANY TIME it was any different? Bill, Monica, the blue dress...

Vinny

Post by **dualstow** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:07 pm

Tell me ANY TIME it was any different? Bill, Monica, the blue dress...

Of course they were going to talk about Monica and the blue dress. How could they not. In Israel they even had a laundry detergent commercial in which the Secret Service gets the stain out of that dress.

But there wasn’t this onslaught against the president in which he could do no right.

Again, Trump invites a lot of it because he lacks humility, can’t laugh at himself, and picks fights with reporters. But they are out of control whereas they were way more balanced with Bill Clinton.

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:24 pm

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:07 pm
Tell me ANY TIME it was any different? Bill, Monica, the blue dress...
Of course they were going to talk about Monica and the blue dress. How could they not. In Israel they even had a laundry detergent commercial in which the Secret Service gets the stain out of that dress.
But there wasn’t this onslaught against the president in which he could do no right.

Again, Trump invites a lot of it because he lacks humility, can’t laugh at himself, and picks fights with reporters. But they are out of control whereas they were way more balanced with Bill Clinton.

You are missing the point

I don't think you denying that the media was all over Bill over that incident.

But to some of us EVERY DAY Trump has at least one of those incidents, if not more. Therefore he deserves this media attention in the same way that Bill did for his incident.

And, to some of us the media has been soft on him from day one.

Does anyone here remember when a certain element was in an uproar when Obama wore a tan suit? I know. That is just such a scandalous thing for any president to do.

Vinny

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:32 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:24 pm
dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:07 pm
Tell me ANY TIME it was any different? Bill, Monica, the blue dress...
Of course they were going to talk about Monica and the blue dress. How could they not. In Israel they even had a laundry detergent commercial in which the Secret Service gets the stain out of that dress.
But there wasn’t this onslaught against the president in which he could do no right.

Again, Trump invites a lot of it because he lacks humility, can’t laugh at himself, and picks fights with reporters. But they are out of control whereas they were way more balanced with Bill Clinton.
You are missing the point

I don't think you denying that the media was all over Bill over that incident.

But to some of us EVERY DAY Trump has at least one of those incidents, if not more. Therefore he deserves this media attention in the same way that Bill did for his incident.

And, to some of us the media has been soft on him from day one.

Does anyone here remember when a certain element was in an uproar when Obama wore a tan suit? I know. That is just such a scandalous thing for any president to do.

Vinny

You are kidding about the media being soft on Trump, right? Do you mean CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, WaPo, NYT, HuffPo, Vox, Politico, or something else?

stuper1 · Post by **stuper1** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:37 pm

Bogleheads is boring because they won't allow any political discussion.

This forum is maybe going too far the other way by having people talk about every little tweet that comes out of Trump.

My suggestion would be to talk about actual concrete actions (or lack thereof) taken by the President. If all you want to do is whine (again) because you don't like the way he talks or tweets, then my suggestion would be to keep it to your yourself. Believe me, we get it, we got it after the first 100 posts, you don't like his style and probably not him at all. That's fine. But when you have to react to each one of his tweets, it makes you look just as immature as him.

yankees60 · Post by **yankees60** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:41 pm

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:32 pm
yankees60 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:24 pm
dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:07 pm
Tell me ANY TIME it was any different? Bill, Monica, the blue dress...
Of course they were going to talk about Monica and the blue dress. How could they not. In Israel they even had a laundry detergent commercial in which the Secret Service gets the stain out of that dress.
But there wasn’t this onslaught against the president in which he could do no right.

Again, Trump invites a lot of it because he lacks humility, can’t laugh at himself, and picks fights with reporters. But they are out of control whereas they were way more balanced with Bill Clinton.
You are missing the point

I don't think you denying that the media was all over Bill over that incident.

But to some of us EVERY DAY Trump has at least one of those incidents, if not more. Therefore he deserves this media attention in the same way that Bill did for his incident.

And, to some of us the media has been soft on him from day one.

Does anyone here remember when a certain element was in an uproar when Obama wore a tan suit? I know. That is just such a scandalous thing for any president to do.

Vinny
You are kidding about the media being soft on Trump, right? Do you mean CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, WaPo, NYT, HuffPo, Vox, Politico, or something else?

I am saying he is getting all he deserves and not enough.

Vinny

Post by **dualstow** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:46 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:41 pm I am saying he is getting all he deserves and not enough.

So you’re saying he should get more flak than he deserves. Interesting.

Smith1776 · Post by **Smith1776** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:47 pm

How naive I was for thinking Bernie would win the nomination and beat Trump.

We now have 2 senile dudes bordering on dementia competing for the presidency. Both which have been accused of sexual impropriety.

Post by **dualstow** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:56 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:24 pm ...
You are missing the point
...
But to some of us EVERY DAY Trump has at least one of those incidents, if not more. Therefore he deserves this media attention in the same way that Bill did for his incident.
<snip>

I used to think so, too, but (A) They really don’t give him credit when his policies are working.
(B) It is not often that you see articles showing that Obama killed and deported with the same gusto as Trump. The articles are out there, but barely. It helps that people point you to them.
(C.) A lot of these “events” are non-events, and just Trump mouthing off.
(D) Some of the most terrible allegations, e.g. firing the pandemic expert staff months ago turn out to be false, or at least possibly false. I read about it in the Washington Post, I see guests on TV repeating it, I firmly believe it. And then I see a an article refuting this by someone who was there, pointed out by Tyler.

But I don’t have Tyler working on this all the time, and most people don’t have a Tyler. I don’t know what to believe anymore, and not because of right-wing propaganda. I don’t watch Fox. No, it’s because of the left’s incessant onslaught. I guess I need to read more from different conservative news sources but Jesus, I’m tired.

Cortopassi · Post by **Cortopassi** » Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:04 pm

I'm sorry that I set tech off here, not my primary intention.

I'll go back and reiterate for the 50th time. I voted for Trump. I don't think Trump, from a policy standpoint, has done a bad job.

But he's his own worst enemy. If the tirades and acrimony stopped with him, i.e. if he were able to let it roll off his back and rise above it and be presidential, Biden wouldn't stand a chance.

But since he's on national TV, during an effing pandemic, doing things like telling Pence "don't call the woman in Michigan," may give a good laugh to his base, but I bet he alienated a lot of people in Michigan.

Even though she criticized the Federal response, he does not need to go tit for tat back at her.

Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy

Re: Trump as tragicomedy