Trump administration says sign language services ‘intrude’ on Trump’s ability to control his image

[Belk]

Has he advocated for anything as ridiculous as open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds yet?

No?

Well, in that case, I would presume his supporters will do whatever kind of gymnastics are required to make sure your side doesn't win until Democrats drift back toward the middle in a way that at least somewhat resembles moderation on the social issues.

It's a real shame too... your team has quite a few economic proposals that are solid and are pretty popular with >75% of the US voters (including myself... I'm a fan of paid family leave, I think there are some good arguments for single-payer, etc... but as long as my choices are "bombastic narcissistic combover guy who trash talks more than a pro-wrestler" vs. "adults who know better, but still opt to take all of their marching orders from 22 year old philosophy majors with rainbow hair and septum piercings anyway"

...I'll continue to leave that part of the ballot blank and just vote for my local and state stuff.

He has advocated for shooting protesters in the legs, killing the families of suspected terrorists, "freedom cities" replete with flying cars, buying Greenland, and annexing Canada as our 51st state.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

He has advocated for shooting protesters in the legs, killing the families of suspected terrorists, "freedom cities" replete with flying cars, buying Greenland, and annexing Canada as our 51st state.

Hence the reason I haven't ever voted for him...

But this expectation of "as long as Trump's worse, the moral thing to do is helping our side take power so we can do all of our crazy stuff" doesn't fly with me.

Apart from the fact that it lowers the bar in general, it's a bad incentive structure.

Because as long as you can make a case for why "the other teams worse, so you should just focus on that and only that", it allow the opposing team to cram through a bunch of nonsense in the name of "lesser of two evils".

I don't like that.

It rewards bad behavior. I'd prefer to see one of the parties actually be good, not just a little better than the other party.

It's basically saying "as long as you're not as bad as the worst guy, you can get on a moral high horse", which in a two-party system, isn't saying much.

If a person had two children.

Little Danny gets a bit of a smart mouth and refuses to put his toys away and gives a lot of back sass.
Little Reggie spits at them and kicks them in the nuggets when they won't buy him a toy.

Little Reggie is obviously worse, but telling Reggie "Why can't you be more like Danny at least he doesn't spit at me?" or telling Danny "I'll give you extra allowance because you behaved a little better than Reggie this past week" sets up a race to the bottom that I don't want to be complicit in.

 

[Belk]

Has he advocated for anything as ridiculous as open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds yet?

No?

Well, in that case, I would presume his supporters will do whatever kind of gymnastics are required to make sure your side doesn't win until Democrats drift back toward the middle in a way that at least somewhat resembles moderation on the social issues.

It's a real shame too... your team has quite a few economic proposals that are solid and are pretty popular with >75% of the US voters (including myself... I'm a fan of paid family leave, I think there are some good arguments for single-payer, etc... but as long as my choices are "bombastic narcissistic combover guy who trash talks more than a pro-wrestler" vs. "adults who know better, but still opt to take all of their marching orders from 22 year old philosophy majors with rainbow hair and septum piercings anyway"

...I'll continue to leave that part of the ballot blank and just vote for my local and state stuff.

Hence the reason I haven't ever voted for him...

But this expectation of "as long as Trump's worse, the moral thing to do is helping our side take power so we can do all of our crazy stuff" doesn't fly with me.

Apart from the fact that it lowers the bar in general, it's a bad incentive structure.

Because as long as you can make a case for why "the other teams worse, so you should just focus on that and only that", it allow the opposing team to cram through a bunch of nonsense in the name of "lesser of two evils".

I don't like that.

It rewards bad behavior. I'd prefer to see one of the parties actually be good, not just a little better than the other party.

It's basically saying "as long as you're not as bad as the worst guy, you can get on a moral high horse", which in a two-party system, isn't saying much.

If a person had two children.

Little Danny gets a bit of a smart mouth and refuses to put his toys away and gives a lot of back sass.
Little Reggie spits at them and kicks them in the nuggets when they won't buy him a toy.

Little Reggie is obviously worse, but telling Reggie "Why can't you be more like Danny at least he doesn't spit at me?" or telling Danny "I'll give you extra allowance because you behaved a little better than Reggie this past week" sets up a race to the bottom that I don't want to be complicit in.

I see. So, to be clear, the things he does advocate are somehow not as bad as "open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds"? Because it sure looks like you are singling out one side as having off the wall ideas and claiming their need to move towards the middle while saying of the other side "Well, ya, but I didn't vote for him". So my question is how does not voting move either side towards the middle? Just seems like absenteeism. You say "it rewards bad behavior" but not voting does that as well in a two party system. It just does so in a passive fashion.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I see. So, to be clear, the things he does advocate are somehow not as bad as "open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds"?

In the eyes of conservative people who make up half of the country (for religious reasons or otherwise), no, the Trump stuff isn't as bad.

Again noting, I didn't vote for him...but from their perspective, he's the lesser of two evils.

Because it sure looks like you are singling out one side as having off the wall ideas and claiming their need to move towards the middle while saying of the other side "Well, ya, but I didn't vote for him". So my question is how does not voting move either side towards the middle? Just seems like absenteeism. You say "it rewards bad behavior" but not voting does that as well in a two party system. It just does so in a passive fashion.

I'm singling out the democrats on that because on the key issues that defined the 2024 election, they were the ones who had more of the "off the wall" ideas in the court of public opinion.

And astute democratic "players" know that now, hence the reason why Kamala made a scramble to move more toward the middle (albeit too late), and why people like Newsom (who's the likely 2028 front runner) have moved more toward the center on those issues. They know why they lost, it's not some cryptic mystery.

Biden originally presented himself as a moderate (and cleaned house and won by a large margin), his admin then did a hard left turn immediately after taking office. (and put a bunch of people off)

Trump's numbers between 2020 and 2024 didn't shift a whole lot. It was disenfranchised center-left and centrists staying home during the 2024 election that cost Harris the victory.

Thus the reason why we've seen the push toward the middle from prominent democrats on those issues.

They know they need the moderates and independents to vote (and vote for them) in order to win.

The concept of "swing voters" exists for a reason.

The far-left folks the west coast are always going to vote D, the rural far-right types in East Texas are always going to vote R, that's a given. Nobody's winning or losing elections based on those types of voters. The "Red or Dead" and "Blue no matter who" type voters have been omnipresent for a few decades now.


I've mentioned it before, winning elections is based winning the votes you want to get, not the votes that you're already guaranteed to have. Anyone with a (D) next to their name is winning Cali, anyone with an (R) next to their name is winning Alabama & Texas.

All of the solid blue states still went blue in 2020 despite Biden not being their cup of tea based on the way he was presenting himself in the lead-up. The difference being... me (and people like me) voted for Biden in 2020, because we thought it was a return to moderation. When we opted to "sit this one out" or "vote 3rd party" in 2024, it was the difference maker.

 

[Belk]

In the eyes of conservative people who make up half of the country (for religious reasons or otherwise), no, the Trump stuff isn't as bad.

Again noting, I didn't vote for him...but from their perspective, he's the lesser of two evils.

OK. Understood, you were channeling their perspective.

I'm singling out the democrats on that because on the key issues that defined the 2024 election, they were the ones who had more of the "off the wall" ideas in the court of public opinion.

And astute democratic "players" know that now, hence the reason why Kamala made a scramble to move more toward the middle (albeit too late), and why people like Newsom (who's the likely 2028 front runner) have moved more toward the center on those issues. They know why they lost, it's not some cryptic mystery.

Biden originally presented himself as a moderate (and cleaned house and won by a large margin), his admin then did a hard left turn immediately after taking office. (and put a bunch of people off)

Trump's numbers between 2020 and 2024 didn't shift a whole lot. It was disenfranchised center-left and centrists staying home during the 2024 election that cost Harris the victory.

Thus the reason why we've seen the push toward the middle from prominent democrats on those issues.

They know they need the moderates and independents to vote (and vote for them) in order to win.

The concept of "swing voters" exists for a reason.

The far-left folks the west coast are always going to vote D, the rural far-right types in East Texas are always going to vote R, that's a given. Nobody's winning or losing elections based on those types of voters. The "Red or Dead" and "Blue no matter who" type voters have been omnipresent for a few decades now.


I've mentioned it before, winning elections is based winning the votes you want to get, not the votes that you're already guaranteed to have. Anyone with a (D) next to their name is winning Cali, anyone with an (R) next to their name is winning Alabama & Texas.

All of the solid blue states still went blue in 2020 despite Biden not being their cup of tea based on the way he was presenting himself in the lead-up. The difference being... me (and people like me) voted for Biden in 2020, because we thought it was a return to moderation. When we opted to "sit this one out" or "vote 3rd party" in 2024, it was the difference maker.

Everything I have seen in polling was that the reason Trump won was his promises on the economy and the democrats tone deaf response to it. While I agree the off the wall ideas do not help that was not what was the deciding factor and I have a hard time crediting the idea independents thought the democrats more off the wall then Trump and that was why they voted for him.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Everything I have seen in polling was that the reason Trump won was his promises on the economy and the democrats tone deaf response to it. While I agree the off the wall ideas do not help that was not what was the deciding factor and I have a hard time crediting the idea independents thought the democrats more off the wall then Trump and that was why they voted for him.

Noting again, it's not that a bunch of moderates voted for Trump, it's that a lot of moderates didn't vote for the other team.

The R team gained 3 million voters, the D team lost over 6 million...

That's a lot of people "sitting that one out"

155 million voters came out for 2020
152 million came out for 2024

Evidently I'm not alone on that, I'm joined by 3 million other people.

 

[Bradskii]

Has he advocated for anything as ridiculous as open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds yet?

The Dems do not support open borders. They don't support defunding the police (or refunding as it was originally meant to be understood). Problems in sport will be dealt with by those in charge of their own sports and if you don't like Drag Queens reading to children, then you be sure to avoid those events.

...but as long as my choices are "bombastic narcissistic combover guy who trash talks more than a pro-wrestler" vs. "adults who know better, but still opt to take all of their marching orders from 22 year old philosophy majors with rainbow hair and septum piercings anyway"

...I'll continue to leave that part of the ballot blank and just vote for my local and state stuff.

But be that as it may, please pay attention here, because it's important. You won't have to vote for anyone else for another three years. So your somewhat trite comparison isn't valid. Notwithstanding that the worst president in the history of your country won't even be on the ballot. So your only decisions you need to make right now are 'Do I support what this idiot is trying to do now, or not'.

And seeing as you've spent more posts than anyone else trying to defend this idiotic claim by Trump that having someone sign for the blind is bad for his visuals, then that's your position.

But honestly, if anyone else spends as much time as you do supporting almost everything he does and then excuses themself by glibly saying 'Oh, but of course...I personally think the man is despicable', then I swear I will lose my lunch.

 

[Belk]

Noting again, it's not that a bunch of moderates voted for Trump, it's that a lot of moderates didn't vote for the other team.

View attachment 374572

View attachment 374573

The R team gained 3 million voters, the D team lost over 6 million...

That's a lot of people "sitting that one out"

155 million voters came out for 2020
152 million came out for 2024

Evidently I'm not alone on that, I'm joined by 3 million other people.

I fail to see how this refutes the polling results on the reasons Trump was elected?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

But honestly, if anyone else spends as much time as you do supporting almost everything he does and then excuses themself by glibly saying 'Oh, but of course...I personally think the man is despicable', then I swear I will lose my lunch.

It's not that I support everything he does...it's that I vehemently object to the premise that "because Trump is bad, the right thing to do is let our team do whatever we want for 4 years and you just have to zip your lip and go along with it, because orange man bad".

And anyone saying that he's the "worst president in the history of the country" is expressing an opinion that gels with why I don't take some democrats seriously. That's the exact type of exaggeration that's attempting to justify the aforementioned premise of "the moral thing to do is abandon 75% of your principles and go along with the democrats"

This is all gonna happen again in a few years, the talking points will just shift a tad...

"Vance was aligned with Trump, the worst orange man president in the history of presidents, men, and oranges, so that's why you have a duty to support whatever Democratic candidate we send out there if you care about democracy"

The only way the Democratic rhetoric would change on this, is if the GOP goes back to throwing squishy "easy to beat" candidate like Romney and McCain out there again.

 

[Hans Blaster]

22 year old philosophy majors with rainbow hair and septum piercings anyway"

And here I thought the real divide between philosophy majors and CS majors is that the philosophy majors were not "here to get a jerb."

 

[BCP1928]

I'm not saying that.

To suggest so would be an example reductio ad absurdum.

I'm suggesting that translators/interpreters (of any kind) can skew an underlying sentiment or meaning.

There's a reason why the phrase "lost in translation" was coined and has become a household saying.


That's especially true for statements being made that are heavy on the "play on words" or English phonetics and/or "Rhyming" or "catchy illiteration". (which happens to be a huge part of some peoples' repertoires)


Just as a simple example.

"I used to be a banker, but I lost interest."

"What do you call a bear with no teeth? A gummy bear"

Try to translate that to another language and still have it make sense.

If it's any language where the words for "Interest" (being interested in something) and "Interest" (a rate charged for money lending services) are different, that "play on words" officially makes no sense.

How do ASL translators avoid difficulties like that?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Just as a simple example.

"I used to be a banker, but I lost interest."

"What do you call a bear with no teeth? A gummy bear"

Try to translate that to another language and still have it make sense.

If it's any language where the words for "Interest" (being interested in something) and "Interest" (a rate charged for money lending services) are different, that "play on words" officially makes no sense.

I think you're going to have to use your vast knowledge of ASL to show that there are different signs for "interest" in these two contexts and for gum(my). (Just in case you are tempted to make other claims, it doesn't matter if these jokes don't work in German or Klingon.)

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I think you're going to have to use your vast knowledge of ASL to show that there are different signs for "interest" in these two contexts and for gum(my). (Just in case you are tempted to make other claims, it doesn't matter if these jokes don't work in German or Klingon.)

Another poster suggested that ASL and written English are two very different (to the point where closed captioning isn't sufficient), that's what I was replying to.

Is the other poster wrong about that?

 

[Stopped_lurking]

Has he advocated for anything as ridiculous as open borders, defunding police, males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds yet?

Did either Joe Biden or Kamala Harris actually advocate for open borders, defunding police (in general, that sounds unlikely), males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds (in some kind of compulsory way) during the election cycle?

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Did either Joe Biden or Kamala Harris actually advocate for open borders, defunding police (in general, that sounds unlikely), males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds (in some kind of compulsory way) during the election cycle?

No, but everyone knows that was the plan after they stole the election. Thankfully enough true patriots showed up to thwart their nefarious plans.

 

[BCP1928]

It's not that I support everything he does...it's that I vehemently object to the premise that "because Trump is bad, the right thing to do is let our team do whatever we want for 4 years and you just have to zip your lip and go along with it, because orange man bad".

And anyone saying that he's the "worst president in the history of the country" is expressing an opinion that gels with why I don't take some democrats seriously. That's the exact type of exaggeration that's attempting to justify the aforementioned premise of "the moral thing to do is abandon 75% of your principles and go along with the democrats"

This is all gonna happen again in a few years, the talking points will just shift a tad...

"Vance was aligned with Trump, the worst orange man president in the history of presidents, men, and oranges, so that's why you have a duty to support whatever Democratic candidate we send out there if you care about democracy"

The only way the Democratic rhetoric would change on this, is if the GOP goes back to throwing squishy "easy to beat" candidate like Romney and McCain out there again.

Neither was "squishy." Romney opened his mouth at the wrong time about what he really thought of the poor and working classes and it cost him. (Just like it did Hillary when she spoke of Trump supporters.) I would have voted for McCain (better a genuine conservative than a neoliberal) but he got saddled with a prototype MAGA for a running mate. I think most people take Buchanan to be the worst President, although Trump still has time to catch up.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Another poster suggested that ASL and written English are two very different (to the point where closed captioning isn't sufficient), that's what I was replying to.

A news conference is a spoken, improvised medium. Reading the transcript can be quite different than hearing it for fluent readers and speakers of the language. ASL is a "spoken language" and the comprehension of live communication is likely improved in the same way that for decent, but non-native speaker of English, having a translation is useful for better comprehension. (The other language is translated by a professional interpreter.)

Is the other poster wrong about that?

You'd have to ask them. I wanted to know why you thought two jokes would be a problem that use words of the same spelling and pronunciation but different meaning/usage in English. Since you seem to think those jokes might not translate to ASL, do the words in question look different in ASL?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Did either Joe Biden or Kamala Harris actually advocate for open borders, defunding police (in general, that sounds unlikely), males in women's sports, and drag performances for 8 year olds (in some kind of compulsory way) during the election cycle?

Biden reversed several Trump1 era immigration restrictions.
- halted deportations
- ended the "remain in Mexico" program
- rescinding restrictions on presenting at ports of entry

For Harris:
Harris was repeatedly asked about the idea of defunding the police, and each time she did not push back on the idea, but rather demonstrated her commitment to shift funding away from law enforcement to other priorities.

‘We have to reimagine public safety in America,’ Harris said. ‘It’s been upside down, for too long, people have confused achieving public safety with putting more cops on the street,’ Harris said in an interview with Power 106 Los Angeles host Nick Cannon.

Harris proposed using funds typically earmarked for police officers to be redirected into public schools, and funding health programs.

‘The way we achieve that is one, don’t spend over a third of the cities budget on policing when public schools need those resources,’ she said.

Harris also endorsed the “defund the police” movement in an interview with the hosts of the Ebro in the Morning show in June 2020.


For males in women's sports

https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5051866-biden-transgender-athletes-student-debt/

Biden did try to advocate for that, and only reversed course after it received a bunch of pushback.



Harris spoke at the DC Pride festival (which featured a "Family Friendly zone" including drag story time), and then appeared on the series finale of Ru Paul's Drag Race show.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

Biden reversed several Trump1 era immigration restrictions.
- halted deportations
- ended the "remain in Mexico" program
- rescinding restrictions on presenting at ports of entry

How is this an open border policy? An open border policy would be that all that come are welcome, would it not?

For Harris:
Harris was repeatedly asked about the idea of defunding the police, and each time she did not push back on the idea, but rather demonstrated her commitment to shift funding away from law enforcement to other priorities.

‘We have to reimagine public safety in America,’ Harris said. ‘It’s been upside down, for too long, people have confused achieving public safety with putting more cops on the street,’ Harris said in an interview with Power 106 Los Angeles host Nick Cannon.

Harris proposed using funds typically earmarked for police officers to be redirected into public schools, and funding health programs.

‘The way we achieve that is one, don’t spend over a third of the cities budget on policing when public schools need those resources,’ she said.

Harris also endorsed the “defund the police” movement in an interview with the hosts of the Ebro in the Morning show in June 2020.

Did she propose to dissolve the FBI or any other federal law enforcement agency as a candidate? What does defund the police mean if it is not the plain interpretation of the text?

For males in women's sports

https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5051866-biden-transgender-athletes-student-debt/

Biden did try to advocate for that, and only reversed course after it received a bunch of pushback.

So did he campaign on it?

Harris spoke at the DC Pride festival (which featured a "Family Friendly zone" including drag story time), and then appeared on the series finale of Ru Paul's Drag Race show.

You are reaching here, how is this some kind public position that everyone should be going to storytelling sessions?

 

[BCP1928]

Biden reversed several Trump1 era immigration restrictions.
- halted deportations
- ended the "remain in Mexico" program
- rescinding restrictions on presenting at ports of entry

Which is not the same thing as open borders.

For Harris:
Harris was repeatedly asked about the idea of defunding the police, and each time she did not push back on the idea, but rather demonstrated her commitment to shift funding away from law enforcement to other priorities.

‘We have to reimagine public safety in America,’ Harris said. ‘It’s been upside down, for too long, people have confused achieving public safety with putting more cops on the street,’ Harris said in an interview with Power 106 Los Angeles host Nick Cannon.

Harris proposed using funds typically earmarked for police officers to be redirected into public schools, and funding health programs.

‘The way we achieve that is one, don’t spend over a third of the cities budget on policing when public schools need those resources,’ she said.

Harris also endorsed the “defund the police” movement in an interview with the hosts of the Ebro in the Morning show in June 2020.

None of which comes up to "defund the police" with the meaning of "abolish" that the right tries to impute.

For males in women's sports

https://thehill.com/homenews/lgbtq/5051866-biden-transgender-athletes-student-debt/

Biden did try to advocate for that, and only reversed course after it received a bunch of pushback.



Harris spoke at the DC Pride festival (which featured a "Family Friendly zone" including drag story time), and then appeared on the series finale of Ru Paul's Drag Race show.

Now that is really seriously evil. Obviously she is an avid proponant of grooming children to be gay.