Many here joined the bandwagon of outrage over #Trump’s use of the word bloodbath, but I don’t think many realize how counterproductive that was.
#Conservatives have been milking that outrage to their benefit, using it to frame anti-Trump speakers as out of touch or flat out duplicitous, saying they’re intentionally misunderstanding or misrepresenting what Trump was saying.
The thing is, what Trump was [apparently] saying is actually idiotic. THAT is what needs to be called out.
It’s just the sad norm of strategic misstep: Trump will say something really stupid, but instead of pointing out how dumb he is, folks give him not only a pass but actual ammunition through unfounded attacks.
And that’s how we got and may get President Trump.
@LouisIngenthron again, the problem is that giving them ammunition helps their cause when there are better routes that would actually hamper their cause.
@LouisIngenthron you mean what are the better routes?
Instead of focusing on the language, point out how stupid what he actually said was, to put it simply.
@volkris What does the difference between those two look like? Can you give me an example?
@LouisIngenthron I think the current topic is a great example.
Supposedly what Trump was saying was that under the trade agreement foreign companies were decimating US business, and if they’re not stopped it’s going to be really really terrible for US businesses.
So many have claimed that he was talking about violence throughout the country, which Trump supporters used to say, hey look how absurd the critics are! Look how they’re lying to you! Fight back against them by voting for Trump!
The difference is that instead of giving them that opening to score points for Trump, I would have focused on Trump’s claims that the trade agreement was decimating US businesses to point out that IT WAS TRUMP’S TRADE AGREEMENT.
So you see the difference, one gives them an opening to score points while the other takes advantage of the opening that Trump stumbled into.
This sort of thing happens all the time with Trump where he basically gets let off the hook for dumb things that he did say because people focus on other things that he didn’t.
@volkris So you’re buying into their spin of what he said? If you look at the full quote, it was pretty clear that the “bloodbath” was a tangent and meant exactly what it sounded like. Then he said “That’ll be the least of it.” and segued back to his original topic.
The bottom line is that fact checking his economic policies does nothing for no one… But documenting his undemocratic and violent impulses is important for every voter to hear, even if some choose to listen to the lies and gaslighting from the other side instead.
You can’t base your strategy on tiptoeing around your opponent, because that gives them far more power in the long run than the single news cycle of nonsense that anyone can see for what it is via video evidence.
If we refuse to call out his bullshit because of how he’ll spin our reactions, then he’s already won.
@LouisIngenthron you’re misunderstanding.
I’m not at all talking about buying into their spin or fact checking Trump’s economic policies.
I’m talking about using their spin against him, instead of contributing to it, and then pointing out things that amount to Trump’s own admissions of his own failures.
Not tiptoeing around the opponent but loudly amplifying that his spun words actually undermine his promise to his supporters.
And again, I’m trying to point out that they won and he dodged his weak point through this response about the word rather than his record.
It played their game, and they’re good at using it to their advantage.
@volkris They do that with everything, though. If we only act with fear of how they’re going to spin it, we won’t get anything done.
Instead, we need to understand that they’ll lie about these things to their members as a foregone conclusion and continue to do what we know to be right (including calling out the word “bloodbath”) regardless of their bullshit response.