I have the same issue with this. What is considered significan't how many of those calls are crank calls? How many of those calls are people who actually ingested something? Those are legitimate questions and there are are biases in reporting negative stuff about Trump as well as positive stuff. Just look at yourself, actively searching for anything negative to post about Trump, there is an audience for both sides of the extreme. I am not knocking your post, just acknowledging that there is a cottage market on both sides that feeds into the negativity. In summary this significant increase of calls means what exactly?
The fake media was misrepresenting his sarcastic musings to make him look bad... let me see, did I capture all of his excuses?
If any previous president said something that was medically unsound... heck, said anything that caused ANY people to do something wrong (like ingest cleansers, or take a medicine like hydroxycloroquine for the wrong thing, or attack Asian Americans), then that president should be held accountable.
His problem is he can't simply admit he misunderstood. Here is what most likely happened: He had a brief conversation with Bryan prior to speaking. Bryan mentioned UV light and disinfectant ( to be used as one expects). Trump in his usual way, did not digest the information as a normal person in his position would. Trump decides to question Bryan (thus his sideways glances) further in public rather than privately. Trump showed his ignorance and misunderstanding in his stupid questions. Trump is too damn stubborn to admit he misunderstood.
This is what I mean by Trump has no filter and will use "cooler level" gossip talk in a official pandemic press briefing. When he gets his "knowledge" from gossip and cable news rather than lengthy nuanced briefings from subject matter experts, this is what happens.
I agree with all of this. But that has little to do with increased calls to hotlines IMO. How is tying him to increased calls holding him accountable? We all know Trump is despicable, we don't need to tenuously tie him to every negative thing. It's the equivalent to b****ing about Obama's tan suit.
With the more gullible among us listening to the babble of our Jim Jones-in-chief and ending up on the line with poison control, it may be time for the Texas Hammer to start advertising for a class action suit against America for damages. Or we can just flush the turd on November 3rd.
I think its worst than a simple misunderstanding, I think he really believes he was thinking out of the box and being clever. Or was parroting something one of his buddies said who also thinks he is clever. But yeah he did show his ignorance.
Sorry... its the farthest thing from "b****ing about Obama's suit". If you wanted to make a analogy involving former President Obama... it would be like Obama telling people that wearing hoodies would cause African America children to get killed... and an sudden increase in the number of homicides involving hoodie-wearing African American youths killing people. If you want to compare complaints about tan suits... you'd have a point saying people complaining about trump wearing his red Maga hat.
Clearly I am the one brainwashed by other people telling me what to think... You realize that it was Trump himself that said he was as being sarcastic, right? That isn’t someone else telling me what to think. That is actually interacting with the facts. You on the other hand apparently know better than Trump himself what he was doing and saying. Congratulations.
Trump says he was being sarcastic, @dachuda86 disregards trumps defense to defend him in another way. At what point do you wake up?
You realize that Trump is a pathological liar who never admits his mistakes? A bad combo for someone who is wildly incompetent.
Yes I do, although I’m confused by your post. Did you think I was defending trump by pointing out how dachuda is using an excuse that Trump himself isn’t using?
It means Trump's idiotic statement was enough to significantly increase calls to the poison control. We can speculate on the infinite number of reasons but sometimes the simplest is the easiest. People may be confused and sought veracity to Trump's claims. A call to them doesn't mean they ingested a substance this is from their website: "The Illinois Poison Center is a non-profit health service that provides those who live and work in Illinois with access to comprehensive and trusted information and treatment advice on potentially harmful substances via a free, confidential 24-hour hotline. The Helpline is staffed by specially trained medical experts, including physicians, nurses and pharmacists." You post claiming to be neutral. But if you can't see the harm in a presidents claims you may need to lay off the internet to do a deep introspection.
At best, it means his message is creating confusion amongst people and they are calling in for more info. At worst, it's ingestion of substances. Either way, it's not helpful to get people to take actual correct action. Pontificating on something you don't know about during a briefing meant to help keep the country informed is not leadership.
significant or crank/prank ingested or not there were more calls because of the president's stupidity/ignorance/carelessness
