Trump Against the Tweet-Riddled Mind

I wonder who it was who thought appending the word “rant” to the word “Twitter” would evoke anything but a contradiction in terms, let alone something newsworthy. One look at the real world proves that a man engaging in a “Twitter tirade” is indistinguishable from a man tweeting pictures of his cat. Both are expending the same amount of energy to contort their thumbs in such a way as to type, in less than 146 characters, some statement or other on his chosen device.

But all of that doesn’t stop the “press” (a term now worthy of scare quotes) and their parrots from reporting on a tweet as if it was something more than what it is.

Remember when Hilary Clinton said “A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons?” I wonder what grounds she (or rather, her social media handler) based this on but his or her own social-media-riddled brain. Remember when Seth Myers wondered whether Trump’s tweets were “calculated distractions or the ramblings of an unhinged narcissist?” According to what?

Twitter has become the bastion of evidence for those who refuse to look elsewhere. Not only do they get their news from the twitter-sphere, but they also get their jokes (SNL’s steals jokes from there), and apparently, the insight into the minds of their enemies.

CNN once remarked in a headline, “Chilled by Trump’s tweets? You should be”, in one of its opinion pieces from November 2016. This article turns out to be a monumental example of the projection we’re dealing with here.

After donning the Sherlock hat and sifting through the evidence of Trump’s tweets, the author described Trump’s behaviour as “lashing out”, “threats”, and not to mention, “stifling dissent”, instead of calling it what it is: namely, tweeting. From the evidence, the author had made the brilliant deduction that Trump was “so outraged”, that the mockery was “apparently too much for him” that Trump just had to respond in the most chilling way possible: in a tweet. Finally, again deriving truth and knowledge from the evidence of Trump’s tweets, the author offers this sobering thought:

“And one day we may find ourselves living in a nation where we have lost the ability to criticize our leaders. And that should concern every American who values freedom.”

Chilled? You should be.

But first, observe the unmitigated fantasy in this article, evidenced by the author’s request to “think about what Trump is saying with this tweet”, or in other words, to use your social-media-riddled imagination. In the crystal ball known as twitter, he saw Trump “going after” SNL as if a cat chasing a ball of yarn. Reading perhaps a little too far between the lines, he saw in the tweets that Trump was “so outraged”, that “he called for the show to be cancelled”, proof that “he seeks to stifle dissent”, which only emboldened “his followers in their intimidation” (tweets), resulting in anti-semitic tweets at jewish journalists: the “anti-semitic hate [tweets] from self-professed Trump fans”, which of course will ultimately result in a chilling effect for dissenters and critics, who are no doubt in perpetual fear of—yes—more tweets.

So long first amendment! so long free speech! so long freedom! All of this and not once did the author need to tear his eyes from the the twitter app on his iPad. This raises a question: Is the machinations of a paranoid and tweet-riddled mind newsworthy?

Not at all. In his last press conference, Trump proved the opposite. He was not ranting, he was not raving, he was not outraged, and all the projections turned out to be not true. Like any troll, he's just having fun, and it turns out, those who are baited by a troll's tweet cannot be trusted to deliver the news.

This should have been the tittle of the CNN article: "Chilled by Trump tweets? Then it is time to put down Twitter and go outside".

Thank you for reading,

LesMis

A tweet is just a tweet. A facebook comment is just a facebook comment. I wouldn't use what is said by a person on either of these social medias as something to judge the person by. Look how many people on Facebook lie about their true feelings. They say what they think others want to hear, just so they feel liked by other people.

I don't tweet and just got a facebook account. I did it for who knows why. I would much rather pick up the phone and call people or go over and visit.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Like any troll, he's just having fun, and it turns out, those who are baited by a troll's tweet...

There are lots of words I want to use to describe my president - you know, the person who represents me on the world stage - and "troll" isn't one of them. This is not a positive word. This is a bad thing for your president to be. 14 year old kids are trolls. The president's job is to lead the nation. The whole nation. He is commander in chief. Not troll in chief.

Reading perhaps a little too far between the lines...

As to the rest of your post, when the President's primary means of communicating with the nation is limited to 140 characters, sometimes all you can do is "read between the lines." It's this, or try to discern any meaning from the half-mad, rambling incoherence that he calls a press conference.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Well thought, planned, and executed post.

Bravo!

"Is the machinations of a paranoid and tweet-riddled mind newsworthy? "

Could this question not be applied to President Trump also? I think twitter serves his ego more than anything. FTR, I am not fully against Trump, I like some of his direction and will refrain from total judgement for now, but parts of his personality seem unstable, childish and impulsive. So imo, his tweets reflect poorly on his prowess.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Wow! Makes me glad I've never succumbed to the peer pressure to become a tweeter or a reader of tweets.
But then, I'm one of those people who believe that "cyberbullying" is a crazy notion. It's not bullying if you can turn off the machine that produces it. If you continue to read it and continue to get upset, you're just whackadoodle.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Wow! Makes me glad I've never succumbed to the peer pressure to become a tweeter or a reader of tweets.
But then, I'm one of those people who believe that "cyberbullying" is a crazy notion. It's not bullying if you can turn off the machine that produces it. If you continue to read it and continue to get upset, you're just whackadoodle.

Yes, if you can look around the room and not see any bullies, it is a clear sign your are not getting bullied.

originally posted by: MrSensible
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Like any troll, he's just having fun, and it turns out, those who are baited by a troll's tweet...

There are lots of words I want to use to describe my president - you know, the person who represents me on the world stage - and "troll" isn't one of them. This is not a positive word. This is a bad thing for your president to be. 14 year old kids are trolls. The president's job is to lead the nation. The whole nation. He is commander in chief. Not troll in chief.

Reading perhaps a little too far between the lines...

As to the rest of your post, when the President's primary means of communicating with the nation is limited to 140 characters, sometimes all you can do is "read between the lines." It's this, or try to discern any meaning from the half-mad, rambling incoherence that he calls a press conference.

What's worse is having social media handlers to compose posts for the politicians in lieu of the politicians themselves. I would much rather get a tweet from the real person as opposed to someone else hired to do it.

Twitter is the McDonald's of social media. As long as Trump uses a social media platform where you can only express yourself in 140 characters, people from all sides will interpret what he says according to what they want it to mean.

Either he's ignorant of this, or he's using it to foster the divisiveness that got him into the White House, in hopes that it will sustain him.

originally posted by: underwerks
Twitter is the McDonald's of social media. As long as Trump uses a social media platform where you can only express yourself in 140 characters, people from all sides will interpret what he says according to what they want it to mean.

Either he's ignorant of this, or he's using it to foster the divisiveness that got him into the White House, in hopes that it will sustain him.

Unless he's a magician, and the tweets of a man can "foster the divisiveness" in other people, it is more likely that yes, he uses Twitter for fun. I would worry more about people who think a tweet can foster divisiveness than a man who uses Twitter for fun. It appears from simply looking that they are the ones sustaining divisiveness.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks
Twitter is the McDonald's of social media. As long as Trump uses a social media platform where you can only express yourself in 140 characters, people from all sides will interpret what he says according to what they want it to mean.

Either he's ignorant of this, or he's using it to foster the divisiveness that got him into the White House, in hopes that it will sustain him.

Unless he's a magician, and the tweets of a man can "foster the divisiveness" in other people, it is more likely that yes, he uses Twitter for fun. I would worry more about people who think a tweet can foster divisiveness than a man who uses Twitter for fun. It appears from simply looking that they are the ones sustaining divisiveness.

People are going to react to it how they are going to react. You'd think a leader would realize that and tailor his habits.

No need to be a "magician" of any kind. Just the leader of the free world. It's apparent to anyone who's read his twitter feed he doesn't just use it for fun, but to communicate policy and ideas about policy.

Not to mention attack anything or anyone that happens to set him off, or that he disagrees with. And yes, the statements of the president can foster divisiveness if he isn't careful, no matter the medium used.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

In my state (Montana) we are having a special election because one of ours was tapped for a Trump position.

There is a Democrat running for the position who states that his first bill would be a bill to "Stop the Executive office from using Twitter". After all, he reasons that Trump should not be able to use social media to promote his policies.

The liberals are doubling down with an extra layer of tard-sauce. It's crazy.

Well thought out post, as always with you. S&F and have a happy weekend!

a reply to: underwerks

The point is is that it is a tweet. There is no way of getting around the absurdity of reacting to it in such a manner.

I read Trump's tweets everyday.

The @POTUS twitter account usually only contains government-type information such as cabinet nominees, swearing in of said nominees, meetings with world leaders, business leaders, etc...very presidential for those of you who are super sensitive to that aspect.

The @realDonaldTrump is well.....more real you might say. More entertaining for your reading enjoyment.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks

The point is is that it is a tweet. There is no way of getting around the absurdity of reacting to it in such a manner.

Like it or not, social media is a major part of life now. And as I said before, regardless of the medium used, those are still the presidents words, and should be treated as such.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks

The point is is that it is a tweet. There is no way of getting around the absurdity of reacting to it in such a manner.

Like it or not, social media is a major part of life now. And as I said before, regardless of the medium used, those are still the presidents words, and should be treated as such.

I don't care if social media is a major part of life. And of course they are the presiden't words. They will be treated as such.

But there is more outrage over Trump's tweets than there are outrages over terrorist attacks, Civil war in Central Africa, the plague of radical Islamic terrorism, the genocide of Yazidis, mass diaspora, sectarian violence—but a Trump tweet draws more press, attention and concern? Westerners protested world-wide over a temporary ban on immigration from certain countries, but will hesitate to protest genocide, the repudiation of free speech, the reduction of women to second class citizens. Instead of justice I see self-loathing, solipsism, censorship and religiosity. That will be treated as such.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: underwerks

The point is is that it is a tweet. There is no way of getting around the absurdity of reacting to it in such a manner.

Like it or not, social media is a major part of life now. And as I said before, regardless of the medium used, those are still the presidents words, and should be treated as such.

I don't care if social media is a major part of life. And of course they are the presiden't words. They will be treated as such.

But there is more outrage over Trump's tweets than there are outrages over terrorist attacks, Civil war in Central Africa, the plague of radical Islamic terrorism, the genocide of Yazidis, mass diaspora, sectarian violence—but a Trump tweet draws more press, attention and concern? Westerners protested world-wide over a temporary ban on immigration from certain countries, but will hesitate to protest genocide, the repudiation of free speech, the reduction of women to second class citizens. Instead of justice I see self-loathing, solipsism, censorship and religiosity. That will be treated as such.

Maybe you should tweet @ Trump about that. See how he would feel about raising awareness for those causes instead of attacking Nordstrom or whoever says or does something he doesn't agree with.

I wish he'd stop tweeting and hold detailed press conferences, but I doubt that's going to happen. In the meantime, the press and everyone else can only work with what he gives them.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks
Twitter is the McDonald's of social media. As long as Trump uses a social media platform where you can only express yourself in 140 characters, people from all sides will interpret what he says according to what they want it to mean.

Either he's ignorant of this, or he's using it to foster the divisiveness that got him into the White House, in hopes that it will sustain him.

Unless he's a magician, and the tweets of a man can "foster the divisiveness" in other people, it is more likely that yes, he uses Twitter for fun. I would worry more about people who think a tweet can foster divisiveness than a man who uses Twitter for fun. It appears from simply looking that they are the ones sustaining divisiveness.

True logic if he was just a man.

But he's not. He's the President of the United States, leader of the so called free world, representing the entire US government, tweeting from the Official POTUS account.

His tweets shouldn't "be for fun".

originally posted by: Connector

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks
Twitter is the McDonald's of social media. As long as Trump uses a social media platform where you can only express yourself in 140 characters, people from all sides will interpret what he says according to what they want it to mean.

Either he's ignorant of this, or he's using it to foster the divisiveness that got him into the White House, in hopes that it will sustain him.

Unless he's a magician, and the tweets of a man can "foster the divisiveness" in other people, it is more likely that yes, he uses Twitter for fun. I would worry more about people who think a tweet can foster divisiveness than a man who uses Twitter for fun. It appears from simply looking that they are the ones sustaining divisiveness.

True logic if he was just a man.

But he's not. He's the President of the United States, leader of the so called free world, representing the entire US government, tweeting from the Official POTUS account.

His tweets shouldn't "be for fun".

I prefer knowing our leaders are mammal. If you're looking for king I doubt you'll find one.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Connector

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: underwerks
Twitter is the McDonald's of social media. As long as Trump uses a social media platform where you can only express yourself in 140 characters, people from all sides will interpret what he says according to what they want it to mean.

Either he's ignorant of this, or he's using it to foster the divisiveness that got him into the White House, in hopes that it will sustain him.

Unless he's a magician, and the tweets of a man can "foster the divisiveness" in other people, it is more likely that yes, he uses Twitter for fun. I would worry more about people who think a tweet can foster divisiveness than a man who uses Twitter for fun. It appears from simply looking that they are the ones sustaining divisiveness.

True logic if he was just a man.

But he's not. He's the President of the United States, leader of the so called free world, representing the entire US government, tweeting from the Official POTUS account.

His tweets shouldn't "be for fun".

I prefer knowing our leaders are mammal. If you're looking for king I doubt you'll find one.

I enjoy your verbosity, superlatives. I wish more knew about French influence on the founding of the USA ( your nic ref). LOL Freedom Fries

Many are looking for a King. They think they found it in Trump.