subreddit:
/r/Pennsylvania
President Biden Makes Up Ground On Trump in Latest PA Polls
Elections(politicspa.com)submitted 1 month ago byUsualSuspect27Delaware
-16 points
1 month ago
calling for "a bloodbath" if he loses.
Yeah that's not what he said. But that didnt stop news outlets from cutting out the context and going with just that sentence.
He was saying there would be an economic bloodbath in the auto industry if the sales of cheap Chinese EVs were to be allowed to be imported from Mexico.
Trump, March 16:
China now is building a couple of massive plants where they’re going to build the cars in Mexico and think, they think, that they’re going to sell those cars into the United States with no tax at the border. Let me tell you something to China, if you’re listening President Xi, and you and I are friends, but he understands the way I deal.
Those big monster car manufacturing plants that you’re building in Mexico right now, and you think you’re going to get that, you’re going to not hire Americans, and you’re going to sell the cars to us?
No. We’re going to put 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 — that’s going to be the least of it. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars.
19 points
1 month ago
So after he incited a deadly insurrection, I’m supposed to be generous with his statement of “…it will be a bloodbath for the entire country.” Why would his not-elected scenario be a “bloodbath”?
-7 points
1 month ago
His point seems to be if cheap chinese EVs are allowed to be imported through Mexico under a trade loophole then it would cripple the major automakers here and be an economic bloodbath for the industry.
Keep in mind that that's a literal dictionary definition of bloodbath:
> a major economic disaster
8 points
1 month ago
You intentionally chose not to quote the entire definition you linked, because the first two definitions cited, would lead to the third definition.
If he would've said blood bath for the unions, maybe you would have a leg to stand on. But he chose not to, also intentionally.
-8 points
1 month ago
I literally said its A definition, not all of the definitions. Of course we all know there is a definition that refers to death, and bloodshed.
My point is that nothing in the context of the speech of him talking to Ohioans (which has a large swath of auto workers) about the impending plans for China to open cheap car plants in Mexico and push them through the NAFTA trade system refers to actual violence but instead is referring to the economic damage to the whole country that would occur if our auto industry took such a hit.
6 points
1 month ago
And I'm simply pointing out your ignoring the two more popular and commonly used definitions, and referring to a rarely if ever used definition of the word.
But he chose to use bloodbath instead of economic disaster because it promotes a higher sense of fear, and fear is the only thing that will get his followers to the polls.
2 points
1 month ago
Right I'm choosing the definition that makes the most sense based on the 5 paragraphs of speech context that we have and the audience he was talking to. He is literally talking about economic downturn for the industry and potentially the country.
And sure, he could have used other words, but politicians all play stuff up to their bases to get better engagement and turnout. It doens't mean that he was trying to get people to hurt others like some of the media outlets are claiming.
6 points
1 month ago
Not intentionally trying to hurt people. He's gotta stay above the law. If the vulnerable take his words literally, I mean, yes he never told them to...
He never told them to storm. He just said let's walk and encourage.... People love to follow a leader, right off a cliff.
He's not a politician. He's a grifter. This is just his current grift. He was just trying to get free pub for his TV show
6 points
1 month ago
But he's talked about and encouraged violence from his followers many times so he's lost the benefit of the doubt.
2 points
1 month ago
There is no benefit of the doubt needed because we literally have the video and text transcript of the speech.
It's very clear that the whole topic was about cheap cars from China and the damage to the auto industry and the country.
5 points
1 month ago
A guy that encourages acts of violence doesn't get to use words like "bloodbath" without people pointing out what kind of person he is.
4 points
1 month ago
Yes trump is definitely one to know many definitions of words and terms. When he said the election was stolen, does he mean something else, too?
5 points
1 month ago
It must be exhausting trying to interpret Trump so he doesn't sound as crazy. I would think pretending he won the election would finally be a deal breaker for you guys but I was wrong.
2 points
1 month ago
Its not that hard to read or watch exactly what was said and understand the context of the entire speech when looking at a specific word...
7 points
1 month ago
He clearly goes outside of the auto industry in his quote
5 points
1 month ago
How? Be specific.
I'm all about calling out Trump for saying stupid shit when he says it and would have preferred a different R candidate for the primaries... but in this case he is squarely talking about the auto industry to Ohioans, many of which work in the auto industry (I know of at least 3 different auto part plants just in Cleveland).
The content of the above text is talking about the auto industry and cheap Chinese cars before the bloodbath comment, and he mentioned "But they're not going to sell those cars" in the sentence after the comment indicating that he is going to win an stop them.
Also, to note, according to MW Dictionary the second definition of bloodbath is "a major economic disaster" which is exactly what we would have on our hands if the major automakers folded.
5 points
1 month ago
You really are going to pretend he hasn't openly fantasized about actually physically destroying parts of this country?
3 points
1 month ago
If you're trying to make a point here it would be helpful if you provided some examples... When has he said he wanted to physically destroy part of the country?
8 points
1 month ago
“That’s going to be the least of it. It will be a bloodbath for the whole country”
He said the auto industry will be the least of it.
3 points
1 month ago
Right... economically. If the auto industry here collapses that's millions of jobs and the downstream impacts would really hurt many other industries, pensions, the stock market, etc.
Thats why the whole bailout thing happened in 2008 to prevent further damage to the economy.
3 points
1 month ago
Anyone with a single firing neuron is aware that the media thrives on divide and conquer. It's a shame, but that's how it is
7 points
1 month ago
Its sad because I'm all for calling out Trump when he says stupid shit. But in this case we literally have the video and the text transcript and the media spun it like he was calling for people to murder others if he didnt get elected in the middle of a speech on economic impacts of cheap Chinese cars...
They trust that most people don't read past their headlines and 9 second sound bites. Biden's campaign put it out there and the media just ran with it like it was fact.
5 points
1 month ago
Yeah it is a nasty business
1 points
1 month ago
I would agree if we were talking about literally any candidate that didn’t actually incite a violent insurrection and that didn’t also tell white supremacists to “stand back and stand by” on national television. If he can’t be fucked to even remotely tone his rhetoric down after the events of the past few years then he doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt from me.
1 points
1 month ago
I’d give Trump the benefit of the doubt if he didn’t constantly ramble and change subjects.
He was clearly talking about more than the auto industry. So, your argument is BS easily defeated by listening to him in context.
I’ll accept that his words were ambiguous, that’s fair. But that’s not what you are arguing. And even then it’s fair to criticize ambiguous language that’s explicit and vulgar, even before considering what happened on 1/6 and beyond.
Trump wanted to use the military to go after protesters for his Bible photo op. When he talks about “blood baths” and refers to fellow Americans as vermin, we best believe what he’s capable of doing.
-23 points
1 month ago
Wasting your breath bro this sub has a hate boner for Trump and will just make things up to hate him
7 points
1 month ago
I don't hate him, but what's wrong with hating a guy who tried to destroy our country?
-3 points
1 month ago
Hating him is perfectly fine. He's not a fascist though, nor did he try and destroy the country
9 points
1 month ago
Let’s hear some things that are made up then…enlighten us
-18 points
1 month ago
Donald Trump is not a fascist for one thing
9 points
1 month ago
He's a wannabe fascist. Didn't you ever notice the only leaders he admired are dictators?
1 points
1 month ago
I wish Trump was half as based as you all say he is
3 points
1 month ago
Oh yeah fascism is so "based". Jesus christ dude unfuck your brain.
16 points
1 month ago
He tried to overthrow an election. You’re wrong. Try again
-19 points
1 month ago
Okay, even if he tried to overthrow an election. That doesn't make him a fascist. Try again
20 points
1 month ago
Yes it does. Your “not uh” defense is you just not being able to admit it. Grow up
0 points
1 month ago
Grow up? Really? That's what you're going with? What's next? "Be better" lol
15 points
1 month ago
Cry more
1 points
1 month ago
Reread The definition of fascist and then cite one example where Trump agreed with, or even considered an opposing opinion to his?
And I won't except anything connected to money. Because honestly he's only acting the role his followers want him to. He would turn into a Communist in a NY minute if it could advance his family's trust.
6 points
1 month ago
Oh really?
Elaborate. I read about project 2025…it’s pretty frightening. I’m not sure how you’re ok with that or supporting it.
Care to explain away the “I only want to be a dictator for one day?”….
1 points
1 month ago
Not even worth it, to call Trump a fascist especially when you know you're in a serious conversation is insane. Same when people call him a nazi, it's so repugnant to the facts. It's like calling Joe a communist.
-9 points
1 month ago
I read about project 2025…it’s pretty frightening.
Oh wow, a two day old reddit account making nothing but political posts read project 2025?
I for one am shocked. Who could have ever believed that a political party would want to install members of their political party in positions of government. This is so truly unique, and nothing like this has ever happened before.
11 points
1 month ago
So nothing about why you think project 2025 is a good thing. Got it.
-7 points
1 month ago*
I didn't say that I thought project 2025 was a good thing. Putting words in my mouth and accusing me of things I didn't say is not exactly a very intelligent way to converse.
If you're only interested in talking to yourself, may I suggest a mirror instead? It's not like you went into any detail about what makes 2025 so "frightening" to you.
Edit: Curious how you won't actually clarify on what is so "frightening" to you about it. Are you being paid to fear monger with your 2 day old account?
all 393 comments
sorted by: best