It’s how he normalizes his insane plans without being directly implicit. He starts with the “I’m not saying they should cancel the elections. But if they did… I’m not saying they should do it though. But I mean, it wouldn’t be unheard of.”
Anyone who has ever worked as a restaurant server knows the old “blame they, not yourself” trick. Forgot to bring out some table’s food, and now they’re upset that it’s taking so long? Don’t apologize for it and take the blame, because that will have them potentially tipping you less. Instead, say “Oh, did they not bring that out? Let me go take care of that real quick.” Now you’ve deflected blame off to some faceless entity, and have put yourself on the customer’s side as someone who wants to help. Your tip won’t be affected, because you’ve positioned yourself as helpful.
Notice that when Trump floats ideas like this, it’s almost always “they”, not “we”. “They” is a faceless, nebulous entity. It can be anybody or nobody, so placing blame on “they” is a convenient way to float potentially unpopular ideas without putting any individual (or himself) in the crosshairs. If he used “we”, he would naturally be the figurehead for the idea, and any blowback would land on him.
It’s a message to his followers on what he wants, without directly tying himself to it. And it allows the various talking heads to use it as a springboard to normalize the idea before it is ever implemented. That way when the thing actually happens, his followers have already been primed to accept it.
Insightful comment, thanks. The frustrating part for me is that the media has a tendency to parrot his talking points without directly challenging them in the same breath. That allows his narrative to take hold (especially when it is backed by other members of the government) and steer popular opinion in his favor.
It’s how he normalizes his insane plans without being directly implicit. He starts with the “I’m not saying they should cancel the elections. But if they did… I’m not saying they should do it though. But I mean, it wouldn’t be unheard of.”
Anyone who has ever worked as a restaurant server knows the old “blame they, not yourself” trick. Forgot to bring out some table’s food, and now they’re upset that it’s taking so long? Don’t apologize for it and take the blame, because that will have them potentially tipping you less. Instead, say “Oh, did they not bring that out? Let me go take care of that real quick.” Now you’ve deflected blame off to some faceless entity, and have put yourself on the customer’s side as someone who wants to help. Your tip won’t be affected, because you’ve positioned yourself as helpful.
Notice that when Trump floats ideas like this, it’s almost always “they”, not “we”. “They” is a faceless, nebulous entity. It can be anybody or nobody, so placing blame on “they” is a convenient way to float potentially unpopular ideas without putting any individual (or himself) in the crosshairs. If he used “we”, he would naturally be the figurehead for the idea, and any blowback would land on him.
It’s a message to his followers on what he wants, without directly tying himself to it. And it allows the various talking heads to use it as a springboard to normalize the idea before it is ever implemented. That way when the thing actually happens, his followers have already been primed to accept it.
Whenever he says “They say I’m not supposed to talk about X, I’ll get into big trouble, but maybe we should X”, then you know they’re planning to X.
Insightful comment, thanks. The frustrating part for me is that the media has a tendency to parrot his talking points without directly challenging them in the same breath. That allows his narrative to take hold (especially when it is backed by other members of the government) and steer popular opinion in his favor.