Mark, I'm not sure I'm following you (maybe you put your comment in the wrong section?). My two questions for Gary Marcus weren't about whether Trump was pantomiming fellatio at that rally.
But my answer to the question is Trump was ranting about being supplied bad mics and low mic stands and he made a pantomime fellatio joke that the peo…
Mark, I'm not sure I'm following you (maybe you put your comment in the wrong section?). My two questions for Gary Marcus weren't about whether Trump was pantomiming fellatio at that rally.
But my answer to the question is Trump was ranting about being supplied bad mics and low mic stands and he made a pantomime fellatio joke that the people in the rally laughed at. I think the audience response best answers the question - that Trump pantomiming fellation was a joke and they found it funny. The video you linked to provided context. I've not seen them, but I imagine somebody might make a 5-second clip that leaves out the low mic stand rant and leaves the viewer of a hypothetical 5-sec clip to just assume Trump was pantomiming fellatio for no reason.
"Mark, I'm not sure I'm following you (maybe you put your comment in the wrong section?)."
No, I was responding to your second comment:
"2. You've already said you're not a clinician, but pretend you were (kind of like an AI) and tell us what your differential diagnosis would include other than dementia."
But before I responded to your second point, I wanted to make sure we agreed to a fact. We do agree. He was pantomiming fellatio. And I assume we agree that behavior is extremely unusual in a presidential candidate. In fact, I'm certain it has never happened before. And if someone had said even 10 years ago, that it ever *would* happen--a presidential candidate simulating fellatio at a political rally--I think most people would have said, "No way! That's crazy! That will never happen."
So we both agree that it was extremely unusual behavior, representing a total lack of inhibition. Therefore, the only question is whether that total lack of inhibition stemmed from onsetting dementia or some other possibility. I was putting forward the possibility that Donald Trump has simply come to the conclusion that not following norms of any kind will get him elected President of the United States in a few days.
I already told I thought Trumps pantomiming fellation was a joke following a rant about being provided a mic stand that was too low. I'm sure we both agree about that. I've seen other presidents make jokes, so it's not a first. I'm glad we both agree about this too.
"I've changed my mind. Trump did not simulate fellatio. It was a non-fellatio joke about a mic stand that was too low. I know you agree with me."
"I already told I thought Trumps pantomiming fellation was a joke following a rant about being provided a mic stand that was too low."
Try to agree with yourself, first.
"I've seen other presidents make jokes, so it's not a first."
You've never seen a presidential candidate simulate fellatio at a rally. No presidential candidate has ever been *remotely* that crude. (Feel free to disagree, but if you disagree, provide evidence. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.")
When one changes one's mind, one no longer agrees with the first position. That's how changing one's mind works. I know you agree with this. Or at least you will if you think about it.
We both know Trump did not crudely simulate fellatio and have both said so because we both watched the video. We both know that the video is the evidence that we both made our decision on.
You might want to try to agree with yourself. Part of you is really onto something.
I changed my mind--that Trump did actually simulate fellatio--after looking at the video more carefully. When I first watched the full video, I simply watched the entire approximately four minutes, without focusing on what he did at 3:00 into the video.
You "changed" your mind, because your acknowledgement that he did simulate fellatio became inconvenient for you.
You've changed your mind twice. Now that you have you changed it again you should go to you other comments where you were last in the "no Trump fellatio" camp and let them know. Be consistent.
I haven't changed my mind twice. I initially wrote, after looking at the full video, that it was clear Trump didn't simulate fellatio. But I looked at the full video more carefully, and agreed that he did indeed simulate fellatio. I even appended a previous comment, on Sunday morning, November 3rd, stating that I'd changed my mind.
You claim to have "changed" your mind, once you realized that acknowledging that a candidate for President of the United States publicly simulated fellatio, is acknowledging that he did an incredibly crude and bizarre act.
I'm not talking about an incredibly crude and bizarre act done in private. I'm talking about an incredibly crude and bizarre act done at a campaign rally. I trust you agree that nothing done at a campaign rally has come close to miming fellatio on a microphone holder?
I trust you agree that we've both already agreed that Trump did not simulate fellatio at the rally.
Don't you remember agreeing to that? If you don't remember, re-read your own posts. Not remembering could be a sign of dementia. You might want to get Dr. Marcus to check you out.
And I agree with Hillary that Bill never should have penetrated that intern with a cigar.
But if you insist on public bizarre acts there's away Joe "the child sniffer" Biden.
Sounds like you're not going to update you other comments.
I think you, and I, and most importantly Hillary Clinton, can strongly agree that Bill gets the "incredibly crude and bizarre act award." Bill gets extra points for being in the White House at the time and for the cigar story lasting in the media for so long.
But I commend you for trying to make this nothingburger last so long here in the comments. Even the leftist press has moved on.
Mark, I'm not sure I'm following you (maybe you put your comment in the wrong section?). My two questions for Gary Marcus weren't about whether Trump was pantomiming fellatio at that rally.
But my answer to the question is Trump was ranting about being supplied bad mics and low mic stands and he made a pantomime fellatio joke that the people in the rally laughed at. I think the audience response best answers the question - that Trump pantomiming fellation was a joke and they found it funny. The video you linked to provided context. I've not seen them, but I imagine somebody might make a 5-second clip that leaves out the low mic stand rant and leaves the viewer of a hypothetical 5-sec clip to just assume Trump was pantomiming fellatio for no reason.
"Mark, I'm not sure I'm following you (maybe you put your comment in the wrong section?)."
No, I was responding to your second comment:
"2. You've already said you're not a clinician, but pretend you were (kind of like an AI) and tell us what your differential diagnosis would include other than dementia."
But before I responded to your second point, I wanted to make sure we agreed to a fact. We do agree. He was pantomiming fellatio. And I assume we agree that behavior is extremely unusual in a presidential candidate. In fact, I'm certain it has never happened before. And if someone had said even 10 years ago, that it ever *would* happen--a presidential candidate simulating fellatio at a political rally--I think most people would have said, "No way! That's crazy! That will never happen."
So we both agree that it was extremely unusual behavior, representing a total lack of inhibition. Therefore, the only question is whether that total lack of inhibition stemmed from onsetting dementia or some other possibility. I was putting forward the possibility that Donald Trump has simply come to the conclusion that not following norms of any kind will get him elected President of the United States in a few days.
I've changed my mind. Trump did not simulate fellatio. It was a non-fellatio joke about a mic stand that was too low. I know you agree with me.
I already told I thought Trumps pantomiming fellation was a joke following a rant about being provided a mic stand that was too low. I'm sure we both agree about that. I've seen other presidents make jokes, so it's not a first. I'm glad we both agree about this too.
"I've changed my mind. Trump did not simulate fellatio. It was a non-fellatio joke about a mic stand that was too low. I know you agree with me."
"I already told I thought Trumps pantomiming fellation was a joke following a rant about being provided a mic stand that was too low."
Try to agree with yourself, first.
"I've seen other presidents make jokes, so it's not a first."
You've never seen a presidential candidate simulate fellatio at a rally. No presidential candidate has ever been *remotely* that crude. (Feel free to disagree, but if you disagree, provide evidence. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.")
When one changes one's mind, one no longer agrees with the first position. That's how changing one's mind works. I know you agree with this. Or at least you will if you think about it.
We both know Trump did not crudely simulate fellatio and have both said so because we both watched the video. We both know that the video is the evidence that we both made our decision on.
You might want to try to agree with yourself. Part of you is really onto something.
I changed my mind--that Trump did actually simulate fellatio--after looking at the video more carefully. When I first watched the full video, I simply watched the entire approximately four minutes, without focusing on what he did at 3:00 into the video.
You "changed" your mind, because your acknowledgement that he did simulate fellatio became inconvenient for you.
I changed my mind once and I'm sticking to it.
You've changed your mind twice. Now that you have you changed it again you should go to you other comments where you were last in the "no Trump fellatio" camp and let them know. Be consistent.
"You've changed your mind twice."
I haven't changed my mind twice. I initially wrote, after looking at the full video, that it was clear Trump didn't simulate fellatio. But I looked at the full video more carefully, and agreed that he did indeed simulate fellatio. I even appended a previous comment, on Sunday morning, November 3rd, stating that I'd changed my mind.
You claim to have "changed" your mind, once you realized that acknowledging that a candidate for President of the United States publicly simulated fellatio, is acknowledging that he did an incredibly crude and bizarre act.
And the winner of the "incredibly crude and bizarr act" award is:
Slick Willie, in the East Wing, with the cigar.
I'm not talking about an incredibly crude and bizarre act done in private. I'm talking about an incredibly crude and bizarre act done at a campaign rally. I trust you agree that nothing done at a campaign rally has come close to miming fellatio on a microphone holder?
I trust you agree that we've both already agreed that Trump did not simulate fellatio at the rally.
Don't you remember agreeing to that? If you don't remember, re-read your own posts. Not remembering could be a sign of dementia. You might want to get Dr. Marcus to check you out.
And I agree with Hillary that Bill never should have penetrated that intern with a cigar.
But if you insist on public bizarre acts there's away Joe "the child sniffer" Biden.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H5NJZMDumY
Sounds like you're not going to update you other comments.
I think you, and I, and most importantly Hillary Clinton, can strongly agree that Bill gets the "incredibly crude and bizarre act award." Bill gets extra points for being in the White House at the time and for the cigar story lasting in the media for so long.
But I commend you for trying to make this nothingburger last so long here in the comments. Even the leftist press has moved on.
Yes, what Bill Clinton did with Monica Lewinsky was crude and bizarre. But it wasn't being filmed for broadcast to a TV audience.
"But I commend you for trying to make this nothingburger last so long here in the comments. Even the leftist press has moved on."
It's not a "nothingburger." It's by far the most crude and bizarre thing any U.S. presidential candidate has ever done speaking at a campaign rally.
If it's not a nothingburger then you might want to get the media on it instead of prattling on here in the comments. Convince them.
Once you've convinced them, I consider reconsidering.