Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Trump elegantly and coherently explains his "some form of punishment" gaffe.
Wednesday morning, Trump was on MSNBC's Morning Joe and the show's hosts asked him how he planned to frame his various controversial positions, including the abortion/punishment answer, now that he's the presumptive Republican nominee. His response, which you can see in the video above, is one of the most garbled sacks of nonsense verbiage that has been emitted in the history of human civilization:
WILLIE GEIST: What about what you told Chris Matthews a few weeks ago, which is that women who get abortions should be punished? Do you still believe that to be true?
TRUMP: No, he was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and, asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer! But of course not, and I said that afterwards.
At no point in this rambling, incoherent response was Donald Trump even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone who clicked the video above is now dumber for having listened to it.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/05/04/trump_defends_abortion_gaffe_with_academic_word_salad.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top
WILLIE GEIST: What about what you told Chris Matthews a few weeks ago, which is that women who get abortions should be punished? Do you still believe that to be true?
TRUMP: No, he was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and, asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer! But of course not, and I said that afterwards.
At no point in this rambling, incoherent response was Donald Trump even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone who clicked the video above is now dumber for having listened to it.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/05/04/trump_defends_abortion_gaffe_with_academic_word_salad.html?wpsrc=sh_all_dt_tw_top
14 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Well spoken.
And Trump took that as support for his answer. 
It would make Charlie Sheen at his peak "winning!" stage seem coherent. 
