While Trump did say those words, it’s unclear what he was communicating. He said the statement while criticizing Democrats and their approach to voter-identification laws. Critics framed it as evidence of an alleged plan to change constitutional provisions governing presidential terms. But the Trump campaign did not clarify what he meant by the “it” that would be “fixed,” and it’s also possible he misspoke.
Oh fuck off with the excuses that he might have misspoke. Him being serious is completely in line with his attempt at a coup in 2021. That is just putting lies on the same level as truth just because ‘someone said it’.
They are mimicking the news practices that also tend to just quote people who speak bullshit with a simple attribution and leave it to the reader to determine whether they are a lying liar. That approach doesn’t work when the reader isn’t aware they are a lying liar because all news sources avoid pointing it out.
When sowing doubt, possible can be even more effective than likely because it requires less evidence.
If the Trump shill had said it was ‘likely’ he meant something else it would suggest he intentionally misspoke OR doesn’t know what he is saying. By going with ‘possible’ it hints at a possible human error that we all make and allows what was said to be dismissed more easily.
Oh fuck off with the excuses that he might have misspoke. Him being serious is completely in line with his attempt at a coup in 2021. That is just putting lies on the same level as truth just because ‘someone said it’.
I’ve noticed this sort of equivocating and reaching to cast doubt a lot from Snopes for a while now.
"Sure, those are the literal words that were said but did they reallllllly mean it???”
Honestly feels like they’ve been intentionally both sidesing things. I’ve stopped paying them much attention as a result.
They are mimicking the news practices that also tend to just quote people who speak bullshit with a simple attribution and leave it to the reader to determine whether they are a lying liar. That approach doesn’t work when the reader isn’t aware they are a lying liar because all news sources avoid pointing it out.
I agree the word “possible” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here, but it shouldn’t be confused with “likely”.
When sowing doubt, possible can be even more effective than likely because it requires less evidence.
If the Trump shill had said it was ‘likely’ he meant something else it would suggest he intentionally misspoke OR doesn’t know what he is saying. By going with ‘possible’ it hints at a possible human error that we all make and allows what was said to be dismissed more easily.
Relevant username