It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's Acceptance Speech: "Hyperbolic Exaggeration"?

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Part 1.

Donald Trump is a man with considerable achievements on his resume. As his daughter, Ivanka, points out, you can't call yourself a builder if you don't have a building to show, and her father has skylines to show.

Fair enough. Point taken.

Mr. Trump's acceptance speech at the RNC could have been made by Santa Claus. It was like Santa Claus comes to town. He named who was naughty and nice and outlined what the nice, taxpayers, minorities, labor, law enforcement were going to get. The named naughty were Mrs.and Mr. Clinton, President Obama, American trading partners, and the American oligarchy, he, if he is to be believed, being a "reformed" member of that last group.

Before people get too excited about the cornucopia of goodies dumped out on the table by Mr. Trump, it would be well to remember that he is a self admitted liar. He even has a pet name for it, "hyperbolic exaggeration". Anyone aware of this fact will read his speech in somewhat of a quandary. What to believe and what not to believe?

I'm going to respond/react, off the top of my head, to some of the things Mr. Trump said, attempting to form a realistic idea of what is likely to happen if Mr. Trump were to take office.

I'll be working from the copy of the speech released in advance to the press. (all bolding my own)

www.politico.com...

Mr. Trump said:


A number of these reforms that I will outline tonight will be opposed by some of our nation’s most powerful special interests. That is because these interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit.

Big business, elite media and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place. They are throwing money at her because they have total control over everything she does. She is their puppet, and they pull the strings.


This is a very interesting statement. It is a declaration of war on the American oligarchy, but it is a clandestine declaration, disguised as an attack on Mr. Trump's opponent, Hillary Clinton.

Mrs. Clinton is the collaborator with the oligarchy. Mr. Trump is the resistance. The oligarchy pulls her puppet strings. They will not be able to do that with Mr. Trump.

But will they have to?


The first task for our new Administration will be to liberate our citizens from the crime and terrorism and lawlessness that threatens their communities.


This to me signals an intention to expand the "prison industrial complex", which is essentially owned and operated by the oligarchy.


We must abandon the failed policy of nation building and regime change that Hillary Clinton pushed in Iraq, Libya, Egypt and Syria.


Again, Mr. Trump challenges decades of planning and execution that has been very profitable for the American oligarchy. It flies in the face of his own declarations with regard to Iraq, that America should "take the oil". It flies in the face of his undertaking to support America's most important ally in the Middle East, Israel, whose neocon dual citizen operatives were important architects of the American interventionist policy in the region, that he decries.

Is Mr. Trump declaring war on Israel in a covert manner, while giving lip service to supporting her?

The devil is always in the details, so I am left wondering if Mr. Trump is just blatantly lying about his intentions in the Middle East, or if he just doesn't know what is going on.


Decades of record immigration have produced lower wages and higher unemployment for our citizens, especially for African-American and Latino workers. We are going to have an immigration system that works, but one that works for the American people.


Mr. Trump completely ignores the problem here by keeping a tunnel vision focus on the symptoms of the problem.

Illegal immigrants do not come to America and strong arm American employers into paying lower wages. To say otherwise is just a twist on the old cliché that "the devil made me do it".

Illegal immigration is working for the American people. Something like 60% of illegal immigrants are hired by individual American households to do piece work and casual labor.

Illegal immigration is "American personal globalism". Suggested slogan, "Be your own globalist. Hire an illegal today."

I do agree with Mr. Trump, though, immigration should proceed in an orderly lawful manner.

People who hire illegals might possibly be arrested and put into the same holding facilities planned for the illegals themselves.

Mr. Trump recognizes no connection between illegal immigration and the lack of a federally mandated living minimum wage in the United States.


By ending catch-and-release on the border, we will stop the cycle of human smuggling and violence. Illegal border crossings will go down.


I don't think so, but enforcement complications will certainly increase.


I have a different vision for our workers. It begins with a new, fair trade policy that protects our jobs and stands up to countries that cheat. It’s been a signature message of my campaign from day one, and it will be a signature feature of my presidency from the moment I take the oath of office.


This statement and others that follow indicate a desire to disavow and repudiate the current global trade regime in favor of a return to bilateral agreements and a tariff wall around the US economy.

This is a "yuge" deal, which if carried out, will make Brexit look like a dropped teacup. Just let me say that this kind of initiative is not designed to make "government" smaller.


I am going to bring our jobs back to Ohio and to America – and I am not going to let companies move to other countries, firing their employees along the way, without consequences.


This kind of thing would be unprecedented in American history, unless I am mistaken. I've certainly never heard of such a thing. This is not Stalinism but it seems very interventionist. Donald!


I pledge to never sign any trade agreement that hurts our workers, or that diminishes our freedom and independence. Instead, I will make individual deals with individual countries.

No longer will we enter into these massive deals, with many countries, that are thousands of pages long – and which no one from our country even reads or understands. We are going to enforce all trade violations, including through the use of taxes and tariffs, against any country that cheats.


This is a revolution in the international trading regime. Brexit is already shaking up the economy of the UK and Article 50, inaugurating the process by which Britain would leave the EU has not even been invoked yet. The whole process is expected to take two years to be sorted out.

Mr. Trump wants to do a similar exercise between the world's most important trading economy and hundreds of nations. American negotiators are going to be very busy, not to say overwhelmed, if Mr. Trump is elected. Economic disruption is a certainty if Mr. Trump is elected, and does what he says he is going to do.
edit on 22-7-2016 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Part 2.


This includes stopping China’s outrageous theft of intellectual property, along with their illegal product dumping, and their devastating currency manipulation. Our horrible trade agreements with China and many others, will be totally renegotiated. That includes renegotiating NAFTA to get a much better deal for America – and we’ll walk away if we don’t get the deal that we want. We are going to start building and making things again.


The situation with China is not as cut and dried as Mr. Trump would have us believe. They have won cases at the WTO and also have had huge tariffs placed (by the evil President Obama) on steel "dumped" into the American market, well over 500%.

Mr. Trump really ought to stop blaming NAFTA on the Clintons, since the agreement was originally negotiated by Bush 41, who left office before he had the chance to sign it, mainly because it was being resisted by the Democrats in the Senate. President Clinton only signed it when protection for American labor was put into the agreement.

It still didn't work out as well as the United States would have wished, but let's be clear about this. NAFTA was a bi-partisan effort.

It is fine for Mr. Trump to repudiate it. Voters should know that Mr. Trump, in doing so, is "apparently" repudiating the American oligarchy in whose interest the deal was signed, American globalists.


Next comes the reform of our tax laws, regulations and energy rules. While Hillary Clinton plans a massive tax increase, I have proposed the largest tax reduction of any candidate who has declared for the presidential race this year – Democrat or Republican. Middle-income Americans will experience profound relief, and taxes will be simplified for everyone.

America is one of the highest-taxed nations in the world. Reducing taxes will cause new companies and new jobs to come roaring back into our country. Then we are going to deal with the issue of regulation, one of the greatest job-killers of them all. Excessive regulation is costing our country as much as $2 trillion a year, and we will end it. We are going to lift the restrictions on the production of American energy. This will produce more than $20 trillion in job creating economic activity over the next four decades.

My opponent, on the other hand, wants to put the great miners and steel workers of our country out of work – that will never happen when I am President. With these new economic policies, trillions of dollars will start flowing into our country.


Mr. Trump says a mouthful here. He is pledging to give Americans Chinese environmental standards, basically, increased acid rain and more air pollution. He is going to increase the risk to the natural environment of the United States through increased fracking and drilling in pristine areas. He is going to reduce the taxes available to deal with the resulting pollution problems.

I am in favor of putting coal miners and steel workers back to work, but this will entail technological prerequisites and a degree of central planning of the economy, not just tearing up the regulatory rule book on operations and lowering taxes.


An amendment, pushed by Lyndon Johnson, many years ago, threatens religious institutions with a loss of their tax-exempt status if they openly advocate their political views.

I am going to work very hard to repeal that language and protect free speech for all Americans.


Christian sharia? I would be more impressed if he promised to do away with religious tax exemptions entirely.


+10 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit

I often wonder how old some of the posters on ATS are because to have expectations that a nomination acceptance speech would be anything, but rah rah hyperbole is naive.


+4 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I'd normally agree with you, but in this case, mister Donald Trump is not a trained politician, so in my opinion, his words actually carry weight. Unlike Hillary for example.

But, the gist of it is that people don't see Donald as a politician, which leads them to believe he's going to be different.

Weather that is true, remains to be seen.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Nikola014

I don't think people have much hope he will be different, but we already know the alternative is more of the same. I find Donald a lot less interesting now that he is being put 'on script'.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Metallicus



But, the gist of it is that people don't see Donald as a politician, which leads them to believe he's going to be different.



Some people do not see him as a politician and some people do.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit

You might enjoy this article: Trump's bold vision: Make America hide under the bed again?

I think it plays well for a set of people - and his actions (such as ignoring musicians' requests that he STOP using their performances) label him as "untouchable." To some people, that's the same thing as "strong." But to a lot of us it shows that he'll tromp on anyone if it suits his ego and that he thinks his wealth and fame can protect him from it all.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Well, a lot of people here( not just on ATS i assume ) were complaining how Donald doesn't look presidential with his speeches. He changed it.

In my opinion, it doesn't matter if he's being put on some script, if the things he is saying are true, and telling the things as they are.

On script or not, he is not politically correct.


edit on 530k2016Fridayam014 by Nikola014 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: Metallicus



But, the gist of it is that people don't see Donald as a politician, which leads them to believe he's going to be different.



Some people do not see him as a politician and some people do.


He doesn't have years of experience as a politician, but I think once you are running you can't help but be corrupted by the process itself.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Nikola014

True enough.

However, I have seen decades of Presidents that 'look Presidential' and where has it gotten us really? I suppose I would rather just see someone be themselves.


+2 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: ipsedixit

I often wonder how old some of the posters on ATS are because to have expectations that a nomination acceptance speech would be anything, but rah rah hyperbole is naive.


I remember when these speeches had a lot more substance than Mr. Trump's hour-long serenade to himself.


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   
I think the reactions to Trump, his speech, his possible presidency have been "Hyperbolic Exaggeration" from his detractors.

But maybe not.

Maybe if Trump is elected, we'll all die.



hahahahahahahahahahaha too funny!



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ipsedixit

Your headline should have read thus;

Trump's Acceptance Speech: "Hyperbolic Exaggeration"...again.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




I think the reactions to Trump, his speech, his possible presidency have been "Hyperbolic Exaggeration" from his detractors.


Not the only that thinks that.

Just be glad over 22 million people watching his OWN words without the his haters spin.

That's not counting online streams of the event.

The gilded age of main stream demagoguery is dead.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: ipsedixit

I often wonder how old some of the posters on ATS are because to have expectations that a nomination acceptance speech would be anything, but rah rah hyperbole is naive.


I remember when these speeches had a lot more substance than Mr. Trump's hour-long serenade to himself.


I won't be voting for him, but he would still be better than Bush the wimp and Obama the apologist. We could use some swagger in the office after the last 16 years of epic failure.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96



Just be glad over 22 million people watching his OWN words without the his haters spin.


This is an outstanding point.

If I had simply taken what was reported at face value without ever watching him actually speak then I would have been doing myself a disservice. He is so much more interesting than past candidates.

Bob Dole had to be the most boring or maybe Michael Dukakis.


edit on 2016/7/22 by Metallicus because: sp



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   
It will be interesting to see what an operation does and how it acts when it owes no one. He will be able to tear Hillary up with full exposure as being a bought and paid for rag doll puppet.


At any rate he wasn't hyperbole when he talked about a "criminal" element out of control on all levels. Nor on the sloppiness and over sympathetic handling of things that actually threaten the republic.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: ipsedixit
I would be more impressed if he promised to do away with religious tax exemptions entirely.

I would have been impressed if he said he was getting rid of personal income taxes.

Bottom Line on Trump and anyone's ability to believe him: I'd rather be forced to trust Trump than forced to 'trust' Hillary.



posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: ipsedixit

I often wonder how old some of the posters on ATS are because to have expectations that a nomination acceptance speech would be anything, but rah rah hyperbole is naive.


I remember when these speeches had a lot more substance than Mr. Trump's hour-long serenade to himself.



Yea and just imagine someone talking that long as if they knew what they were talking about. Jezz! This day and age? Not supposed to do that.


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 22 2016 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

I think you must have watched a different speech.
The speech I watched was about America, Americans, and what he hopes to do FOR US.




top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join