He is trying to say that we use energy (presumably he is talking specifically about fossil fuels) for everything and in ways that people may not even realize it. He is saying that without fossil fuels society can’t function.
It’s exhausting but if you examine what he says you’ll find there is some sense to his ramblings. It’s how he blurts them without any context that gives away his dementia
He’s talking about how energy is required for pretty much everything, like if you were going to make donuts (on a stove for some reason) it would take energy, it took energy for them to get to your home, etc. I always hated things like this, like this is one of the most coherent things he’s said, it’s like the boy who cried wolf, when it’s actually noteworthy we’re already tired of hearing it.
You’re doing what the media and his followers do, though. You’re interpreting for him.
There may be a coherent idea behind what he says but his ability to express it is severely deficient which is further evidence that he is unfit for the presidency.
Take a second to remind yourself that if “this is one of the most coherent thing’s he’s said,” how far the bar has been lowered for him and this behavior.
“It’s not fair to pick on him for this, he completed a full sentence!” Oh, well whoopity-fucking-doo for him.
“Energy is required for all work” is not really a noteworthy statement.
If he managed to say it as coherently as I just did, it might be noteworthy, except for the fact that it would be inevitably followed by an incessant stream of gibberish.
That’s the complete opposite of what NABDad said. “If he managed to say it as coherently as I just did,” implies a belief that the sentence is at the very least marginally incoherent. Which further implies that they do actually have a problem with the sentence itself.
Is your suggestion to the contrary a mistake made because you were overinvested in the point you’re trying to argue, or was it purposeful misinterpretation?
It’s a completely unnecessary statement for anyone with an elementary school level understanding of the world. However, if a candidate for president of the United States is going to make such an inane statement, he should at least speak coherently.
Work requires energy. That’s easy to say, and easy to understand.
Trump talks like a six year old trying to explain to his parents what he learned in school today.
What is he talking about again ?
Arnold Palmer
He is trying to say that we use energy (presumably he is talking specifically about fossil fuels) for everything and in ways that people may not even realize it. He is saying that without fossil fuels society can’t function.
Quite a thorough job of sane-washing here
As someone who has always been around people speaking broken English, it becomes very easy to interpret word jumbles and mistranslations.
It’s exhausting but if you examine what he says you’ll find there is some sense to his ramblings. It’s how he blurts them without any context that gives away his dementia
He’s talking about how energy is a stove, if you make donuts.
Picture of a stove?
it’s not a truck?
It’s a series of tubes.
Maybe if you don’t make donuts.
Energy is a truck if you transport donuts?!?
My love for you is like a truck berserker
Fuck Your Yankee Blue Jeans
Aww, shucks. I sorta feel drawn to you, like magnetically.
That’d be tacos
It’d have to be a big and amorphous one, though.
A dump truck specifically, one that you can drive a tube through.
Where are the science memes people when you need them
He’s talking about how energy is required for pretty much everything, like if you were going to make donuts (on a stove for some reason) it would take energy, it took energy for them to get to your home, etc. I always hated things like this, like this is one of the most coherent things he’s said, it’s like the boy who cried wolf, when it’s actually noteworthy we’re already tired of hearing it.
You’re doing what the media and his followers do, though. You’re interpreting for him.
There may be a coherent idea behind what he says but his ability to express it is severely deficient which is further evidence that he is unfit for the presidency.
I completely agree that he’s unfit for the presidency, I just didn’t think it was that bad of a sentence.
Take a second to remind yourself that if “this is one of the most coherent thing’s he’s said,” how far the bar has been lowered for him and this behavior.
“It’s not fair to pick on him for this, he completed a full sentence!” Oh, well whoopity-fucking-doo for him.
“Energy is required for all work” is not really a noteworthy statement.
If he managed to say it as coherently as I just did, it might be noteworthy, except for the fact that it would be inevitably followed by an incessant stream of gibberish.
So you have a problem with the sentence itself and not that it was spoken by Trump?
That’s the complete opposite of what NABDad said. “If he managed to say it as coherently as I just did,” implies a belief that the sentence is at the very least marginally incoherent. Which further implies that they do actually have a problem with the sentence itself.
Is your suggestion to the contrary a mistake made because you were overinvested in the point you’re trying to argue, or was it purposeful misinterpretation?
Actually, I have a problem with both.
It’s a completely unnecessary statement for anyone with an elementary school level understanding of the world. However, if a candidate for president of the United States is going to make such an inane statement, he should at least speak coherently.
Work requires energy. That’s easy to say, and easy to understand.
Trump talks like a six year old trying to explain to his parents what he learned in school today.
I don’t know if he even knows for sure