Can’t get more stupid. Trump’s plunged to the utter depths.
Amen to this.
1 Like
This is a farce. He has been absent for months with genuine reasons to ask for proof of life. He is now going to vote and has not only not yet engaged with the public to demonstrate that he is actually fit to do so, they are actively preventing coverage of him
https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/2099621739785326966?s=20
https://x.com/AndrewDesiderio/status/2099632042942075245?s=20
1 Like
Guys, a question. Just out of idle curiosity. From which US person in the United States government, it’s administration, would one be the most likely to hear the “truth” from (or who should be taken seriously) ? Who would in your opinion be the man or woman who’s words would be considered most authoritative for you ? For me, it is probably Marco Rubio, at least of those who are often in the media.
I imagine it must sometimes be a nightmare for foreign diplomats, to intepret what is a “serious” message that will or could become policy and what is drivel.
Edit: Imagine the job it would be to be a diplomat and be tasked with following and reading every single Truth Social post Donald Trump makes. There are many people around the world, who undoubtedly has that job.
The simple answer is none. To the extent that those like Rubio or Greer are perceived as more serious people, they are also understood as quite liable to have the rug pulled out from under them on any given statement.
6 Likes
Nods
It’s must be a nightmare to have to predict, as well as intepret, what the current US administration will do, as there are serious consequences for your country if your analysis is wrong.
Which makes me think of NATO for some reason…
Surely the answer is the president? He is the self appointed chosen one and hes also our guardrail against AI:rofl:
1 Like
I mean, it is technically correct that he is the most credible source, and that is the problem. He is a nightmare to filter. “Take him seriously, but no literally”; US diplomats tells us. Yeah, but sometimes he says absurd things that we the day or even hours later, find out we were supposed to take literally.
Obviously in this specific case, I knew and had so much overwhelming data and background knowledge, that I could easily assess that the warring parties had no interest in ceasing bombing of energy targets. But in other cases, it is much harder. Therefore, I tend to take him seriously and I often must just be open to it being literally too, and that is a problem when it comes to cases such as Threat to Greenland (which we see is developing), Canada (far less likely) and comitment to NATO. But those are just a few examples. Others can be Britain, who were told to cede Diego Garcia by the US, and now is being battered for it. Another example, Falklands is suddenly up to debate.
Another. Trump is in Ireland, voices support for United Ireland. Okay, that is a shift and break of trust. But is this policy ? Will it become policy in the future ?
Countless examples. It is a problem that one must always take him seriously, since he is clearly mentally ill and governs on, often spontanious, God-Emperor whims.
2 Likes
The less he is taken seriously, the sooner he’ll be out of office. The problem is precisely that so many people still seem to take him so seriously, instead of laughing at that senile wreck, as they should do.
3 Likes
But you must always take him seriously, as I argue above.
The consequences of not taking him seriously are awful.
If I was a Swiss politician, I’d stall any negociations over tarriffs, without making any concession, and wait for the old wreck either to die, or to be dismissed by the electors. He can’t be trusted on anything, so what’s the point?
Instead of this, they are making concessions and crawl in front of him in the hope to get a less disastrous percentage. But it doesn’t work at all, that much is obvious.
4 Likes
Yes, his threat should be taken seriously. His words should be utterly disregarded. Its not just that he is liable to change his mind, its that the concept that is meaningless to him. What he says has no relationship to what he thinks at the time, what he understands, and certainly not what he is going to do.
One of the interesting things is that Emiratis and Saudis both spent lavishly thinking they had an advantage of having the money to buy his favour, and both now seem to be realizing that simply cannot ever be viewed as a reliable partner
5 Likes
The bold is true probably 99% of the time (figure of speech), but that 0.1% can bite your ass if you are a foreign state, maybe particularly partner, to the United States.
I mean, it is an issue that is often talked about among western diplomats. And as you know, various countres develop various strategies to “handle” Trump when they speak to him and there is literally a debate inside NATO (which is semi hush-hush) how best to talk to him so he doesn’t say X or do X. Trump-Handling has almost become an academic subject 
It’s a problem.
Obviously, certain statements, particularly his “facts”, can be discarded. But other statements, where he expresses intent, is harder to just discard due to risk.
I have to wonder how Strom Thurmond’s last 3(!) terms would have played out in the social media era
Saw a meme somewhere about discovering that Trump is not quite as orange as he looks
4 Likes
This is the underlying reason why the trade talks with Canada collapsed. A deal with the United States isn’t actually a deal, it is a pause.
3 Likes
It’s like dealing with a toddler who you have no authority over, but you have dependencies on and want/need them to do things.
2 Likes
You make it sound like a total nightmare that is sure to make you fall dead by stress and anxiety alone !
Wait…
But yes, that was a very apt comparison !