How can people entertain/believe the idea that Trump's COVID-19 infection is a hoax?

[Metaphor]

Trump never called the coronavirus a hoax.

Agreed. He called it a Democrat hoax.

No. He. Didn't.

 

[Patooka]

Trump never called the coronavirus a hoax.

Agreed. He called it a Democrat hoax.

No. He. Didn't.

You provided 3 links that state Trump didn't call it a hoax. Congratulations. Except the precise term I used was Democrat hoax. And seeing as you are so insistent on diving down the rabbit hole of "depends on what your definition of 'is' is" pedantry, I'll concede you are spot on. Trump referred to the Democrats response to corona as "their new hoax". Which actually fits the scenario I outlined here better than how I described it. Thank you for your help. Much appreciated.

To reiterate, yet again, it is not irrational to believe that Trump would manufacture drama to score political points even if such drama is readily proven false. Therefore it is rational to speculate that Trump announcing he has Covid to be a hoax less than 48 hours after the event when there is no verification available.

 

[laughing dog]

You're the one who interpreted "possibly a hoax" as "unassailable belief that it's a hoax". Those are the facts.

I agree that it is fact your interpretation is bullshit. I have no illusions that will stop your Goebbels practice of repeating a falsehood in the hopes of getting it accepted as fact.

You usually don't Godwin threads. Did it feel good?

If it stopped that your flinging of that particular turd, then it did its job - feeling has nothing to do with it.

 

[laughing dog]

Some of the people proclaiming their skepticism probably did not really believe it was a hoax: they were just lying about their doubts to virtue-signal about what a pathological liar Trump was,

This is a really really weird statement.
You are doing flips and twists to accuse unknown people of irrationally and unjustifiably distrusting trump.
Thinking about you twisting that up just makes me squint one eye and tilt my head at you.
Have you seen this guy Trump?

Apparently, since he is mimicking Trump's MO.

 

[Metaphor]

No. He. Didn't.

You provided 3 links that state Trump didn't call it a hoax. Congratulations. Except the precise term I used was Democrat hoax. And seeing as you are so insistent on diving down the rabbit hole of "depends on what your definition of 'is' is" pedantry, I'll concede you are spot on. Trump referred to the Democrats response to corona as "their new hoax".

No, he didn't. He called the Democrats' response to his own response a hoax.

To reiterate, yet again, it is not irrational to believe that Trump would manufacture drama to score political points even if such drama is readily proven false. Therefore it is rational to speculate that Trump announcing he has Covid to be a hoax less than 48 hours after the event when there is no verification available.

You are so irrational about Trump that in this thread you said that his COVID-19 announcement was the only thing he hadn't lied about.

 

[Metaphor]

Some of the people proclaiming their skepticism probably did not really believe it was a hoax: they were just lying about their doubts to virtue-signal about what a pathological liar Trump was,

This is a really really weird statement.
You are doing flips and twists to accuse unknown people of irrationally and unjustifiably distrusting trump.
Thinking about you twisting that up just makes me squint one eye and tilt my head at you.
Have you seen this guy Trump?

Apparently, since he is mimicking Trump's MO.

I'll confess I don't know who I'm channelling. First it was Goebbels, now it's Trump. I am the dizzy limit!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Dear Leader has defeated coronavirus single-handedly. He is The Chosen One. No one should ever entertain a thought The World's Most Powerful Man may have small hands, may have a mushroom penis, or may be lying again. He did this for us so we might live in freedom maskless, too, in His image.

 

[Deepak]

Trump never called the coronavirus a hoax.

Agreed. He called it a Democrat hoax.

No. He. Didn't.

Right, his followers have been going around flouting basic safety measures as if it were a hoax, but if one redefines every word in the English language, loosens all rules that are used to derive meaning from words, then recasts his original statement in light of the most charitable interpretation of his latest goalpost-shift. You seem to have some mushy standards for semantic analysis.

But hey, perhaps we should be charitable. It's not the virus that's a hoax, it's the Dems' interpretation of his response... wait - that can't right, right? Their interpretation of his response is an opinion, and everyone knows that a hoax is a fabricated factual event. It doesn't make sense to talk about an opinion as a hoax, unless there's some Andy Kaufman style comedy in play, where the Dems think his response was good but are pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q3PSISAZL8[/YOUTUBE]

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/08/24/the-militias-against-masks

 

[Metaphor]

No. He. Didn't.

Right, his followers have been going around flouting basic safety measures as if it were a hoax, but if one redefines every word in the English language, loosens all rules that are used to derive meaning from words, then recasts his original statement in light of the most charitable interpretation of his latest goalpost-shift.

What on earth are you talking about?

Patooka repeated a myth that won't die: that Trump called coronavirus a hoax. I corrected him on that. Now you are incoherently talking about goalpost shifting, as if I shifted any goalposts? No words need to be redefined, no standards loosened, no charity required. Trump never called the coronavirus a hoax. Get over it and move on.

But hey, perhaps we should be charitable. It's not the virus that's a hoax, it's the Dems' interpretation of his response... wait - that can't right, right? Their interpretation of his response is an opinion, and everyone knows that a hoax is a fabricated factual event. It doesn't make sense to talk about an opinion as a hoax, unless there's some Andy Kaufman style comedy in play, where the Dems think his response was good but are pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.

You don't need to be charitable. You need to be honest.

Trump called the Democrats response to his response to coronavirus a hoax. Whether calling criticism of his response a 'hoax' makes sense or not isn't the point (I would not use the word 'hoax' to refer to the criticism; Trump was trying to convey that their criticisms were fake, groundless, but in case you haven't noticed, Trump isn't the greatest orator in the world).

And now, 'Trump called coronavirus a hoax', which is a position even left-leaning media do not support (except NBC, because of course), gets recycled and remythologised on this board. Oy vey.

 

[Patooka]

What on earth are you talking about?

Patooka repeated a myth that won't die: that Trump called coronavirus a hoax. I corrected him on that. Now you are incoherently talking about goalpost shifting, as if I shifted any goalposts? No words need to be redefined, no standards loosened, no charity required. Trump never called the coronavirus a hoax. Get over it and move on.

Let's be very clear. Trump did as much as humanly possible to downplay and dismiss this pandemic.

Everything
Humanly
Possible

It lead to many of his supporters into believing that the pandemic was a hoax and dismiss advice from medical experts. At no time did Trump try to set the record straight - in fact he doubled down on what he implied. In that respect, whether Trump said it was a hoax or whether he was content in letting his supporters believe it was a hoax to further his own agenda is a difference with no distinction. I simply can't be fucked having a semantic bullshit debate that has no relevance to reality. That's why I wasn't debating the point with you. It's not because I think you are right; it's because you pettily focus on pedantic crap that is utterly unconstructive of no real importance. If you want to be this petty we can always walk back to:

1) your initial premise that "many people including journalists" believe this (which you have provided no evidence to support this assertion)
2) your belief that it is irrational to distrust what Trump says despite reality disagreeing with you
3) your telepathic abilities that lead you to be certain that people believe this hoax with their heart and soul and not simply be willing to be open to the possibility

See? I can be petty too. Seeing as you are insistent on absolute literal meanings of each and every single word and phrase and are unable to understand a colloquialism or what an idiom is, I shall now hold your posts the exact precise standard.

 

[Deepak]

You don't need to be charitable

...

Trump isn't the greatest orator in the world).

I need to be honest? The fuck are you asking for here other than charity? What exactly do any of your links ask for other than charity?

Try rereading my post again. Trump called the virus a hoax. Then he moved the goalposts (incoherently). Then people reinterpreted what he said to make it seem like some semblance of sense. Every single one of your links says that his statements were incomprehensible and were clarified by his later statement:

Factcheck.org: "Trump did use the word ‘hoax’ but his full comments, and subsequent explanation, make clear he was talking about Democratic attacks on his administration’s handling of the outbreak, not the virus itself."

The Washington Post Fact Checker: "The context of the full quote shows Trump criticized Democratic talking points and media’s coverage of his response to the coronavirus, but does not call the virus itself a hoax."

Snopes: "Despite creating some confusion with his remarks, Trump did not call the coronavirus a hoax."

AP Fact Check: "The accusation is misleading. So is the selective video editing that made it appear Trump was calling the coronavirus a ‘new hoax.’"

But his later statement is similarly incomprehensible:

“No, no, no.” he said. ”‘Hoax’ referring to the action that they take to try and pin this on somebody, because we’ve done such a good job. The hoax is on them, not -- I’m not talking about what’s happening here. I’m talking what they’re doing. That’s the hoax.”

He continued: “Certainly not referring to this. How could anybody refer to this? This is very serious stuff.”

Qualitatively I'd say it's worse, since that's putatively said with sober reflection and practice. And as you agree his clarified point in incomprehensible.

Rather than believing this incomprehensible blather, I'm instead believing that he was communicating the thing that his plague-bearing followers heard communicated.

 

[Metaphor]

What on earth are you talking about?

Patooka repeated a myth that won't die: that Trump called coronavirus a hoax. I corrected him on that. Now you are incoherently talking about goalpost shifting, as if I shifted any goalposts? No words need to be redefined, no standards loosened, no charity required. Trump never called the coronavirus a hoax. Get over it and move on.

Let's be very clear. Trump did as much as humanly possible to downplay and dismiss this pandemic.

Everything
Humanly
Possible

It lead to many of his supporters into believing that the pandemic was a hoax and dismiss advice from medical experts. At no time did Trump try to set the record straight - in fact he doubled down on what he implied. In that respect, whether Trump said it was a hoax or whether he was content in letting his supporters believe it was a hoax to further his own agenda is a difference with no distinction. I simply can't be fucked having a semantic bullshit debate that has no relevance to reality. That's why I wasn't debating the point with you. It's not because I think you are right; it's because you pettily focus on pedantic crap that is utterly unconstructive of no real importance. If you want to be this petty we can always walk back to:

1) your initial premise that "many people including journalists" believe this (which you have provided no evidence to support this assertion)
2) your belief that it is irrational to distrust what Trump says despite reality disagreeing with you
3) your telepathic abilities that lead you to be certain that people believe this hoax with their heart and soul and not simply be willing to be open to the possibility

See? I can be petty too. Seeing as you are insistent on absolute literal meanings of each and every single word and phrase and are unable to understand a colloquialism or what an idiom is, I shall now hold your posts the exact precise standard.

Well you're doing a shit job then, because each of those is false.

Many people do believe it, including journalists. I provided evidence for this in post #3. But the number of people believing it is irrelevant. I was interested in why people believed it, or expressed belief in it. I made this clear in my first post and in the title of my post.

It is irrational to automatically distrust every single utterance by Trump. It's deranged. Even fucking Pazuzu in The Exorcist mixed lies with the truth.

I never made the claim you claim I did in #3. I said some people expressed the belief and some people entertained the possibility. I said some people probably truly believed it and some people were probably virtue signalling.

Though I can see it doesn't fucking matter what I say, even though it's all fucking there in my first fucking post, because you don't give a fuck about being honest.

 

[Metaphor]

I need to be honest? The fuck are you asking for here other than charity? What exactly do any of your links ask for other than charity?

Try rereading my post again. Trump called the virus a hoax.

No, he didn't.

 

[Gospel]

I need to be honest? The fuck are you asking for here other than charity? What exactly do any of your links ask for other than charity?

Try rereading my post again. Trump called the virus a hoax.

No, he didn't.

Correct. Trump did not call the virus a Hoax, he called it the common flu.

 

[laughing dog]

Apparently, since he is mimicking Trump's MO.

I'll confess I don't know who I'm channelling. First it was Goebbels, now it's Trump. I am the dizzy limit!

And you appear proud of it. Wow.

 

[laughing dog]

Many people do believe it, including journalists. I provided evidence for this in post #3. But the number of people believing it is irrelevant.

Providing evidence that one person out of over 7 billion is not evidence that "many" people believe it.

I was interested in why people believed it, or expressed belief in it. I made this clear in my first post and in the title of my post.

Yes, but whenever anyone presented reasons, you dismissed them which suggests your were not interested in the "why".

It is irrational to automatically distrust every single utterance by Trump. It's deranged. Even fucking Pazuzu in The Exorcist mixed lies with the truth.

That is illogical. It is rational to initially disbelieve every single utterance made by a persistent liar until there is evidence to support an utterance.

Though I can see it doesn't fucking matter what I say, even though it's all fucking there in my first fucking post, because you don't give a fuck about being honest.

It does matter what you say because words have meaning. Because you are a pedant, posters expect you to come close to the standards you use to excoriate and ridicule others. For some reason, you continually blame others for misunderstanding your posts, even calling them "liars" and "dishonest" for taking your posts literally.

At some point, even a minimally self-aware and honest respondent would come to understand that such an abundance of misunderstandings from a wide range of readers is not caused by the audience's poor reading comprehension on but unclear or poor writing.

 

[Patooka]

Looks like I'm going to have to use baby steps to walk a certain individual through this.

Many people do believe it, including journalists. I provided evidence for this in post #3.

Your post provided 3 tweets. Three fucking tweets will never ever be considered "many" by anyone who is arguing in good faith. So let's walk through these tweets that have convinced you that many believe Trump catching corona was a hoax.
Tweet 1:
[tweet]1311880493776896001[/tweet]

No mention of Trump testing positive, no mention of a hoax, just the very sensible observation that no sane human being would consider this administration to be trustworthy.

Evidence that many people believe that this is a hoax - fail

Tweet 2:
[tweet]1311896144285376512[/tweet]

No mention of a hoax. Just some healthy skepticism with regards to anything Trump says

Evidence that many people believe that this is a hoax - fail

Tweet 3:
[tweet]1311917350065635328[/tweet]

Again basically I can't take Trump at his word. No mention of a hoax

Evidence that many people believe that this is a hoax - fail

This is all the evidence you have provided that "Many people on Twitter, including "journalists"," think this may be a hoax. I have provided more example and proof why your premise is absolutely asinine.

But the number of people believing it is irrelevant.

Firstly, if it isn't important, why are you making it a hill to die on when you haven't proven it to be the case? And secondly, yes it does fucking matter; it's twitter for fucks suck. You will find a handful of posts about anything on that platform. How many people believe it determines how seriously you should take it. 3 confirmed tweets mean not a lot.

I was interested in why people believed it, or expressed belief in it. I made this clear in my first post and in the title of my post.

Fuck off pal. You made it very clear that you dismissed their opinions by asserting "Some of these people are re-framing their willingness to believe conspiracy theories as 'skepticism'." and that people can only come to such an opinion because of their "visceral Trump hatred". You have no intention in exploring why such people hold such an attitude, and believe anyone with an opinion contrary to your own "beggars belief".

I said some people expressed the belief and some people entertained the possibility. I said some people probably truly believed it and some people were probably virtue signalling.

Oh good, we're back to ambiguous words like "some". Wonderful. Tell me, who is virtue signalling and how do you know this? How many people people this? What is the ratio between people who "expressed the belief" and people who "entertained the possibility"? I assumed you stated it was because you are psychic, but if you have proof, by all means share.

Though I can see it doesn't fucking matter what I say, even though it's all fucking there in my first fucking post, because you don't give a fuck about being honest.

Thank you. I've been trying to give my Indian neighbour a proper definition of the word chutzpah. And you have really helped me. I mean it. Much obliged,

 

[Patooka]

Postscript: I thought that I should nip this on the bud as well. When Metaphor originally posted the clip of these three tweets that prove conclusively that many people believe this, I was skeptical because of the source; a well known Australian right-wing conspiracy theorist. Metaphor's response was:

I don't know who Rowan Dean is. Either the Tweets are real or they are not. (They're real)

And he is 100% correct. They are real. If you watch the video he provided (which I don't recommend, Rowan Dean is a dishonest cunt), you will notice the the dates and times of each tweet was cropped out.

There is a reason for this. Bette Midler's tweet was posted before anyone knew Trump has coronavirus (by at least 45 minutes). So not only does Metaphor know when someone is being genuine in their skepticism or are just virtue signalling because of his psychic powers, Bette Midler is a fucking time traveller.

And yes metaphor, who you are using as a source does matter. Many people, particularly journalists know that.

 

[Elixir]

To the point:

How can people entertain/believe the idea that Trump's COVID-19 infection is a hoax?

a) Most of Trump's statements are lies, and most of what aren't lies are exaggerations.
b) Trump said he had tested positive for COVID-19

QED

This has to be the stupidest thread ever.

 

[Keith&Co.]

This has to be the stupidest thread ever.

I was going to point out the time Self-Mutation said that there were life forms that were sub-atomic in size, and for an example offered "ants." But that was more of an aside, not a whole thread. But if it had been, it would be a close call.