So Where was the Teleprompter?

[iluvatar5150]

It is a bit pointless to describe anybody's spoken language as word salad. Spoken language is hardly ever in sentences in the strict grammatical sense, and that is all right because the meaning is usually clear in context. So it is no surprise that Trump and Harris speeches cannot always be parsed.

It is not Trump's grammar that grates with me; it is the incoherent switches of subject, often within the same small segment.

I’m probably more forgiving than most of Trump’s verbal… improvisations - I can even handle the subject switches. There’s plenty in the content itself to criticize that I don’t usually have to nitpick the form. It’s just wild to me to see the right going after Harris for being wordy while championing his rambling nonsense for the last 8+ years.

 

[BPPLEE]

I’m probably more forgiving than most of Trump’s verbal… improvisations - I can even handle the subject switches. There’s plenty in the content itself to criticize that I don’t usually have to nitpick the form. It’s just wild to me to see the right going after Harris for being wordy while championing his rambling nonsense for the last 8+ years.

I criticize Harris but I make no excuses for Trump. I haven't heard him explain how he's going to do anything, just that it's going to be great, the best ever

 

[Ana the Ist]

I agree.

Word salad is more often associated with people in various psychotic or hallucinating states.

Perhaps, though I’d have to know the specific case.

This particular statement and this clip (minus the interviewer question) has been brought up....typically framed as a choice of his to focus his campaign on divisive and racist rhetoric. I've seen it in the media and even here amongst posters...

Now, I think someone can argue he's saying something racist (I don't agree, but I can understand why some would see it that way) or even divisive.

The claims that it's a choice he made to focus his campaign on that rhetoric is pure nonsense though. He was asked a question at some black journalists' convention. I think it's both understandable that he's going to be asked some racial questions...and therefore give some racial answers. Particularly in that setting.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I guess we are just going to have lots of smear threads here with nothing but innuendo and paranoia from those three posters who constantly flood this forum with anti Democrat nonsense.

I wouldn't call it all nonsense....

Certainly some is deserved.

 

[MrMoe]

Is word salad going to be the new misused talking point? It might be an unnecessary addition but it is perfectly cogent and understandable.

"In recent years, however, a slightly different use of the term which means something closer to “nonsense” has emerged. This use of word salad usually reflects a judgment on the logic or intelligence of a person’s language, rather than on the person’s mental state."

Making Sense of 'Word Salad'

It describes the disordered speech of the mentally ill—but now it's also being used to describe political speeches

www.merriam-webster.com

As I've heard others put it: "Kamala Harris speaks like she has to hit a word limit on a high school paper she’s done no research for."
Kamala likes to use a jumble of words to sounds like she's saying something deep and profound when she is saying very little that makes sense once you stop to think about it. Some call this a word salad.

And yes, there is the original meaning of deadline, the line past which prisoners will be shot.

How many Americans still know and use the original meaning of the word as it was used during the civil war back in 1860s as apposed to it's current meaning?

 

[Hammster]

I’m just calling it as I see it. When you guys point fingers as something completely sensible, it just makes you all look bad.

It makes you look bad when you think that’s what happened.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Word salad is more often associated with people in various psychotic or hallucinating states.




This particular statement and this clip (minus the interviewer question) has been brought up....typically framed as a choice of his to focus his campaign on divisive and racist rhetoric. I've seen it in the media and even here amongst posters...

Now, I think someone can argue he's saying something racist (I don't agree, but I can understand why some would see it that way) or even divisive.

The claims that it's a choice he made to focus his campaign on that rhetoric is pure nonsense though. He was asked a question at some black journalists' convention. I think it's both understandable that he's going to be asked some racial questions...and therefore give some racial answers. Particularly in that setting.

I figured that’s the example you were thinking of. First, he wasn’t asked about her race so much as he was asked about comments people in his camp had already made about her race. So, the ball was sort of already in their court. Then he responded with a fabrication about her race that didn’t answer the question.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It makes you look bad when you think that’s what happened.

I’ve been around the block on this matter a few times. If folks don’t like leaving the impression that they just don’t understand what was said, perhaps they ought to articulate their thoughts a bit more.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

It looks perfectly natural to me. You are creating your own reality. There's no reason to think she's using a prompt unless you assume she is. I think this should be moved to the conspiracy forum. Don't you?

I agree that she didn't have a teleprompter because there was no substance.

 

[JosephZ]

The edited one clearly....she originally did 45 minutes, that got cut to 18, and if you're saying that another 9 minutes got added....ok, I believe you.

CNN denies that Harris interview length was edited

CNN said its recent interview with Vice President Harris and her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), was not edited despite allegations that it was spliced and shortened.

A theory online among former President Trump’s supporters began to spread late this week that the 27-minute interview that aired was originally 41 minutes long, meaning a large chunk of it was edited out.

CNN confirmed to The Hill that the interview, which aired Thursday, aired in its entirety.

At the start of the program, CNN’s Dana Bash emphasized that the full interview would air.

 

[Belk]

"In recent years, however, a slightly different use of the term which means something closer to “nonsense” has emerged. This use of word salad usually reflects a judgment on the logic or intelligence of a person’s language, rather than on the person’s mental state."

Making Sense of 'Word Salad'

It describes the disordered speech of the mentally ill—but now it's also being used to describe political speeches

www.merriam-webster.com

As I've heard others put it: "Kamala Harris speaks like she has to hit a word limit on a high school paper she’s done no research for."
Kamala likes to use a jumble of words to sounds like she's saying something deep and profound when she is saying very little that makes sense once you stop to think about it. Some call this a word salad.

Yes. It means nonsense. The sentence quoted was not nonsense it simply had a superfluous word. That is not word salad even by its colloquial use.

How many Americans still know and use the original meaning of the word as it was used during the civil war back in 1860s as apposed to it's current meaning?

How many? I don't know. I knew so at least one.

 

[NxNW]

In the other thread, Hammster claimed Walz was there to babysit Harris. In this thread, Hark seems to think she had a secret teleprompter. Both can't be true.

 

[Whyayeman]

In the other thread, Hammster claimed Walz was there to babysit Harris. In this thread, Hark seems to think she had a secret invisible teleprompter. Both can't be true. It seems at least 50% of these threads are based on a false premise.

Which thread will be retracted?

Neither of course.

As it turned out Walz answered questions of his own, just as Harris did. There was no teleprompter and no editing of the interview, according to CNN.

 

[NxNW]

As it turned out Walz answered questions of his own, just as Harris did. There was no teleprompter and no editing of the interview, according to CNN.

In that case, I look forward to both threads being retracted.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Neither of course.

As it turned out Walz answered questions of his own, just as Harris did. There was no teleprompter and no editing of the interview, according to CNN.

The whole thing just speaks to how vacuous right wing media is. Nothing about the interview was remarkable. The answers were obviously rehearsed, but also obviously not read from a script. They weren’t especially clever or illuminating; many didn’t really even answer the question. Anybody with any kind of mid-high level executive experience can speak extemporaneously at least as well as they did. But listening to low quality right wing media apparently corrupts one’s perception of what’s normal with regards to communication skills or even intelligence, such that speaking in complete sentences is met with skepticism and conspiracy theories.

 

[Hammster]

In that case, I look forward to both threads being retracted.

I did start another thread.

 

[Ana the Ist]

CNN denies that Harris interview length was edited

CNN said its recent interview with Vice President Harris and her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz (D-Minn.), was not edited despite allegations that it was spliced and shortened.

A theory online among former President Trump’s supporters began to spread late this week that the 27-minute interview that aired was originally 41 minutes long, meaning a large chunk of it was edited out.

CNN confirmed to The Hill that the interview, which aired Thursday, aired in its entirety.

At the start of the program, CNN’s Dana Bash emphasized that the full interview would air.

It's a claim from whistleblowers inside CNN.

You certainly don't have to believe it.

 

[JosephZ]

It's a claim from whistleblowers inside CNN.

You certainly don't have to believe it.

Do you have a link or a source to this claim made by the whistleblowers?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I figured that’s the example you were thinking of. First, he wasn’t asked about her race so much as he was asked about comments people in his camp had already made about her race.

That's not what the interviewer said....

She said, "Do you believe that VP Kamala Harris is only on the ticket because she's a black woman?"

Not "People in your camp have suggested/argued/claimed that Harris is only on the ticket because she's a black woman, do you agree?"

You pointed out that I made a bad faith claim in the OP of another thread not long ago....don't make me do the same here.

Is there something either of them said prior to the question that justifies this rather unique frame you're placing around the question? Or can we just remove the frame as just something you personally read into the question?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Do you have a link or a source to this claim made by the whistleblowers?

Would it make any difference?