Gonna have to disagree here; this was always the plan, and anything more wonkish than a soundbite made it clear that this was always the plan, and frankly I'm surprised that people here are going down the "they lied" route than the much more fruitful "democrats are unable to speak without several implicit conditional clauses appended".
If you say so, but from the last 4 years of fact-checking Trump, I don't think that's even a meaningful observation to make, even if you could get to the point where you clear the semantic quagmire of whether or not they were intentionally misleading or simplifying for the sake of brevity (does someone who gets a $2000 direct deposit get to say they lied about being sent a $2000 check?). Which you can't.
Instead, point out the unchallengable observation that the people deciding on these things are robots so fare removed from the lives of ordinary people that the can't possibly advocate for them, and instead busy themselves with arcane means tested and conditional games.
This is something that has already been realized by the average person and led them to apathy rather than radicalization.. "where's your $2000 check?" speaks directly to someone's material interests and might at least make them less apathetic.
I’m surprised that people here are going down the “they lied” route than the much more fruitful “democrats are unable to speak without several implicit conditional clauses appended”.
Nah, I think there's a distinction. Accusing them of "lying" gives the horde of "well actually" types the opportunity to jump in with Snopes articles and more detailed contemporary write-ups to go on and on about how they weren't lying.
The second approach cuts right through that issue.
Look I'm just saying that this is a criticism that has lost its purchase in modern politics and I would have thought the 4000 "big Drumpf ultra-liar" articles would have made that apparent.
Gonna have to disagree here; this was always the plan, and anything more wonkish than a soundbite made it clear that this was always the plan, and frankly I'm surprised that people here are going down the "they lied" route than the much more fruitful "democrats are unable to speak without several implicit conditional clauses appended".
they knew how the sound bites would be interpreted and made no effort to prevent them being widely misinterpreted because it was advantageous to them.
in other words they lied
If you say so, but from the last 4 years of fact-checking Trump, I don't think that's even a meaningful observation to make, even if you could get to the point where you clear the semantic quagmire of whether or not they were intentionally misleading or simplifying for the sake of brevity (does someone who gets a $2000 direct deposit get to say they lied about being sent a $2000 check?). Which you can't.
Instead, point out the unchallengable observation that the people deciding on these things are robots so fare removed from the lives of ordinary people that the can't possibly advocate for them, and instead busy themselves with arcane means tested and conditional games.
This is something that has already been realized by the average person and led them to apathy rather than radicalization.. "where's your $2000 check?" speaks directly to someone's material interests and might at least make them less apathetic.
I don't really buy that; all the people I know that are living paycheck to paycheck are just happy to get any breathing room.
They're not exactly grateful to the Dem's but they're also not scornful of the amount.
I'm pretty fucking pissed off at the amount actually and I'm well under paycheck to paycheck at this point
Yeah well you're also posting on a leftist forum so let's just say you were predisposed to being mad at Dems.
It's the same picture
Nah, I think there's a distinction. Accusing them of "lying" gives the horde of "well actually" types the opportunity to jump in with Snopes articles and more detailed contemporary write-ups to go on and on about how they weren't lying.
The second approach cuts right through that issue.
The Snopes articles are also lying.
Look I'm just saying that this is a criticism that has lost its purchase in modern politics and I would have thought the 4000 "big Drumpf ultra-liar" articles would have made that apparent.