• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What do you think of Trump’s bloodbath comment?

What do you think of Trump’s bloodbath comment?

  • Total voters
    108
Real blank said:
I’m not being serious,but from what you are saying Trump sneaks in a code word for violence in the several hours of several speeches he does now I’m assuming people won’t do that but CNN will find the code word and present it to them .
Click to expand...
That there will be a bloodbath if he 's not elected....which is the "code word"?
 
ksu_aviator said:
I find it interesting that 65% of the people here voted that they believe the lie. It just goes to show that politics is about snapshots and soundbites.
Click to expand...
So, trump "lied" when he said there will be a bloodbath if he's not elected?
 
Ouroboros said:
I haven't read the thread yet-- has anyone mentioned yet how often Lefty pundits use the term "bloodbath" whenever it suits them?
Click to expand...
I'll be interested in seeing the quotes you come up with in which Democratic POTUS nominees say there will be a bloodbath if they lose the elections.
 
natman said:
Trump says a lot of stupid stuff, and he should be taken to task when he does. In this instance it's quite clear that he's talking about what will happen to the auto industry / the economy if he is or isn't elected. Yet another example of a biased media taking a snippet out of context and creating a mountain out of a molecule. It's a shame that the media wastes its credibility on stuff like this. If you just wait, Trump will say something that's really worth criticizing.
Click to expand...
The metaphoric use of "bloodbath" for economics is totally inappropriate, because it is using an implicit comparison with serious bodily disaster for a money disaster. Only a person who thinks money and blood are appropriately compared would do it.
 
Winston said:
What do you think of Trump’s bloodbath comment?

Just Trump being Trump. Trump believes in violence as a tribute to his greatness. He wants his supporters to lash out and “fight like hell”. Trump doesn’t believe in democracy. Trump doesn’t understand our form of government. And Trump sees violence as the last stand at securing the Presidency, which is all he cares about. The state of the country is of little concern. He just cares about enough people sacrificing their lives for his personal glory.

His view is, if we lose, foment an insurrection, and then rewrite the history books to say we won. That is his worldview and that assertion is supported by prior actions and statements from Trump.

If you don’t like that, Trump supporters, that is too bad.
Click to expand...


It's the next logical step in a progression of illogical claims.

He needs to up the ante on a regular basis.

I believe that he's ignorant of the impact of his words before the fact, that he has become adept at 'back filling', and more recently getting his mindless base to ease up on the strings after the fact.

He lives and breathes shock value. Having crawled out on a non-existent limb with non-existent assertions he has but two choices when stranded; go back down or leap to the next tree.

How many times has he garnered headlines with bold, brash, bullshit only to quickly move on before the mud dries?

He's a master of manipulation. He meant "bloodbath" in the strictest sense, as he continues to feed his 'base' with an undercurrent of riot and revolution.
 
Fearandloathing said:
It's the next logical step in a progression of illogical claims.

He needs to up the ante on a regular basis.

I believe that he's ignorant of the impact of his words before the fact, that he has become adept at 'back filling', and more recently getting his mindless base to ease up on the strings after the fact.

He lives and breathes shock value. Having crawled out on a non-existent limb with non-existent assertions he has but two choices when stranded; go back down or leap to the next tree.

How many times has he garnered headlines with bold, brash, bullshit only to quickly move on before the mud dries?

He's a master of manipulation. He meant "bloodbath" in the strictest sense, as he continues to feed his 'base' with an undercurrent of riot and revolution.
Click to expand...
His base appears to feed on talk of violence, especially when such threats are couched in terms of retribution.
 
choiceone said:
The metaphoric use of "bloodbath" for economics is totally inappropriate, because it is using an implicit comparison with serious bodily disaster for a money disaster. Only a person who thinks money and blood are appropriately compared would do it.
Click to expand...
It was a poor choice of words, especially when you (A) take it out of context and (B) parse it with a fine tooth comb.

I've provided a link:

But for those who prefer:

There's going to be a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line. And you're not going to be able to sell those cars. If I get elected. Now if I don't get elected it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole country. But they're not going to sell those cars.

When read IN CONTEXT, it's clear that the "bloodbath" is an economic disaster. If you take it completely out of context, and you're uninhibited by any sort of ethics, then it's possible to spin it anyway you want.

"Disaster" or "Catastrophe" would indeed have been a better choice of words. A danger of speaking without a teleprompter. But at least he can make a speech without one.
 
natman said:
It was a poor choice of words, especially when you (A) take it out of context and (B) parse it with a fine tooth comb.

I've provided a link:

But for those who prefer:

There's going to be a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line. And you're not going to be able to sell those cars. If I get elected. Now if I don't get elected it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole country. But they're not going to sell those cars.

When read IN CONTEXT, it's clear that the "bloodbath" is an economic disaster. If you take it completely out of context, and you're uninhibited by any sort of ethics, then it's possible to spin it anyway you want.

"Disaster" or "Catastrophe" would indeed have been a better choice of words. A danger of speaking without a teleprompter. But at least he can make a speech without one.
Click to expand...

It's clear that bloodbath relates to his losing the election. How do we know this? He said so.

Btw, you do understand that the whole....auto industry has never experienced a bloodbath during previous downturns, right?
 
ksu_aviator said:
You don't know what he was actually talking about? How is that possible?
Click to expand...
He was talking about his not being reelected.

If he's not, he said, there will be a bloodbath.

Given his history with fomenting violence, his threat is credible.
 
Pyrite said:
He was talking about his not being reelected.

If he's not, he said, there will be a bloodbath.

Given his history with fomenting violence, his threat is credible.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's not what happened.
 
Pyrite said:
I'll be interested in seeing the quotes you come up with in which Democratic POTUS nominees say there will be a bloodbath if they lose the elections.
Click to expand...
See earlier post.
 
Pyrite said:
He did link his not being reelected with "bloodbath".
Click to expand...

Nope. Go find the full context. It's all over this thread, X, Youtube, etc. You can find it.
 
He seems to have been talking about the auto industry.

Trump has called for the Constitution to be Overthrown, made it clear he wishes to be a dictator, and tried to launch a coup. We don't have to make *everything* he says The Wurst Evah for him to be a bad guy.

Worse, when we do so, we immunize him against when he actually says and does terrible things by giving people a permission structure to believe he actually didn't.
 
natman said:
It was a poor choice of words, especially when you (A) take it out of context and (B) parse it with a fine tooth comb.

I've provided a link:

But for those who prefer:

There's going to be a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line. And you're not going to be able to sell those cars. If I get elected. Now if I don't get elected it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole country. But they're not going to sell those cars.

When read IN CONTEXT, it's clear that the "bloodbath" is an economic disaster. If you take it completely out of context, and you're uninhibited by any sort of ethics, then it's possible to spin it anyway you want.

"Disaster" or "Catastrophe" would indeed have been a better choice of words. A danger of speaking without a teleprompter. But at least he can make a speech without one.
Click to expand...

His usage was inappropriate. I'm not one that thinks he was talking about queuing up an attack. However, I do think that it was intentional to keep violent thoughts in the heads of his supporters. That is a propaganda tactic, to relate anything a person, speaker, leader can to violence in order to basically desensitize people listening to them, following them to those pushes when it is being done for real issues. It is an association tactic.

Also, the entire comment was complete hyperbole and the last line sentence makes no sense in the context of the rest of the paragraph there.

He can't make a speech without a teleprompter or even with on in many cases. That's part of the point.
 
Even if it was directed at the auto industry, his previous rhetoric makes it come across like a dog whistle.
 
Pyrite said:
He was talking about his not being reelected.
If he's not, he said, there will be a bloodbath.
Click to expand...
You know you completely ignored the context of his statement, which completely negates your position.
Right?

 
Pyrite said:
It's clear that bloodbath relates to his losing the election. How do we know this? He said so.
Click to expand...
No question. But it's quite clear that the negative consequence of his losing the election refers to the economy, which is shown in the video AND the transcription I've provided and you've ignored.
Pyrite said:
Btw, you do understand that the whole....auto industry has never experienced a bloodbath during previous downturns, right?
Click to expand...
Really? I'd say one of the largest corporate bankruptcies in history qualifies:

General Motors Chapter 11 reorganization - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
natman said:
No question. But it's quite clear that the negative consequence of his losing the election refers to the economy, which is shown in the video AND the transcription I've provided and you've ignored.

Really? I'd say one of the largest corporate bankruptcies in history qualifies:

General Motors Chapter 11 reorganization - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
It wasn't a "bloodbath" for the industry, much the less for the country.

Trump has a record of fomenting violence. When he predicts - promises? - that his losing the election will result in a bloodbath, it's common sense to take him seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom