• Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      4 days ago

      He’s just going to say “I’m the smartest person ever to be president, the doctor I paid said so. I took the test already: person, woman, man, camera, TV!”

      • Carvex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 days ago

        Technically 4 words, woman is a derivitive of man in their minds. Well 3 because person is gender neutral and can’t have that either.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 days ago

        And he keeps talking about the tests if he just took it. Which either means he can’t really process the fact that it happened in the past anymore, or they really do have to test him often. Neither is a good look for anyone’s grandpa, much less a grandpa who wants to run the free world.

  • neoman4426@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s wild that such intense questions like “Can you identify a giraffe?”, “Can you draw a clock?”, “Can you count backwards by 7s?”, and “Who is the current president?” was apparently such a grueling ordeal for Donald that he’s still bragging about it years later.

    • leds@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      4 days ago

      “Who is the current president?”

      Yeah that one might be an issue for him…

    • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Can you count backwards by 7s

      counting backwards in multiples of 7? i’d struggle with that and i consider myself at least average

      • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s probably like field sobriety tests, where how you struggle is relevant. If you miss one in a sequence, that says something different from repeatedly going up instead of down or counting backwards on your hands first.

        • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          I would need to use my hands or count out loud or do something after maybe two numbers if we are starting at 100.

          Trying it out just now and the only way I can really effectively do it is by subbing 10 and adding three each time.

      • toynbee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        If this were the entire question, I’d be confused. Another comment suggested starting from 0 and going into negatives, but my initial response would be “starting from what?” expecting to start at 100 or 77 or something.

        However, an elementary school teacher told me that negative numbers don’t exist, so that might be related …

      • Nalivai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Doing arithmetics quickly is a skill that is slowly dying out of the general population. When we all used cache we had this with us all the time, but now we just don’t use it that often, generally, on average

        • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          just as well, i always struggled with it.

          And my teachers at school used to say “You wont always have a calculator on you”

          Look at me now, i spend 7.5 hours a day paid to sit in front of an expensive calculator with two other expensive calculators in my pocket. after which i spend several hours on my own personal expensive calculator before going to bed and doom scrolling on one of the aforementioned… expensive calculators.

          Anything more than the most basic mental arithmetic at school was a waste of time that would have been better spent teaching me how to code. would have saved me teaching myself a few years later after working a soul crushing call centre job for 4 years (in which i used a not very expensive and dog shit slow calculator)

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 days ago

    the same one she takes? so not the one that asked him to name a handful of things that conveniently happened to be around him when he talked about it to the press?

  • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    4 days ago

    It must be wild being in her position, being so overwhelmingly more capable than her opponent, and having to find out how to get stubborn people to acknowledge that and care about it.

      • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Definitely! I honestly had never thought of that because I didn’t take Donald Trump seriously until he was projected to win on voting day. I was dumbfounded and blown away. It was a big wake up call for me about how I was out of touch with a large part of America.

        • marx2k@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Same in 2016. And I fell into the same exact trap this time around thinking ‘surely america has moved beyond that imbecile and his base is just weirdo alex Jones types. Surely america isn’t about to vote for a literal felon and rapist.’

          And now I’m watching daily as he or his peeps say one awful thing or another at rallies and it doesn’t move the polling needle at all.

          America is fucked regardless of who wins this election.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    New debate idea: instead of political questions, have the whole thing hosted by a panel of psychologists who give a thorough assessment to both candidates live on stage.

    At the end, they collectively review all findings and conclude the event by making any diagnosis the data merits.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Like with a TV Debate with Harris, he won’t agree to this, as he knows that he has no chance to win.

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    4 days ago

    She should disguise this test, and throw in basic questions about US history and politics. Trump will fail so hard it won’t even be funny.

    This is the guy who talked about the continental army in the 1700’s invading airports. He’s real fucking stupid.

    • auzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      No need to do that

      The guy is struggling enough as it is

      But you throw in questions about dictators and he’ll know the answers better than he knows what state he’s living in. It’s possible the only book he’s ever read is Mein kempf

  • Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’ve been dreaming of a Trump IQ test forever. I’m almost certain he would be below average. Someone should trick him to do one by saying it’s the crypto bro club test that Harris failed or something.

  • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I’ve been wondering why she doesn’t invite both of them to take one.

    These fucks blurt out all their motivations and weaknesses, you only need to aggressivey seize on them and hold their feet to the fire till they cry uncle

  • BoofStroke@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    She shouldn’t even say this. Cognitive tests are for those showing signs of dementia. That trump took one at all is all that we need to know.

    • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      People do “cognitive tests” for all kinds of reasons. The kind for dementia is only one of a large variety of tests that fit in this very broad category.

  • x0x7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    4 days ago

    Unfair. She could sober up before doing that. Which she won’t do while in office or on the campaign.

  • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    109
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Harris is lucky to have Trump running

    without Trump the Democrat’s whole campaign platform would crumble

    • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      I mean, with Trump running the race is still basically a dead heat, so I’m not sure how lucky they really are.

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        61
        ·
        4 days ago

        We’re not unlucky because trump is running necessarily. We’re unlucky because half the fucking country doesn’t see what an insane and horrific choice he is.

        • Elextra@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’m really scared for future elections when the GOP has a candidate that is actually charismatic or articulate…

          • MrVilliam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            4 days ago

            They’re kinda proving that those are unnecessary, though. They’re in uncanny valley and espousing literal Nazi ideology and still getting elected. At that point, why even buy lipstick for the pig in the first place? Their dog whistles have been packed up in boxes in the attic for years. Echo chambers that blame scapegoats, vilify opponents, and deify their candidates are all that is really necessary. They can literally get away with saying “well, Hitler had some good ideas too, though…” and the base will lap it up and show up to cast their ballots.

            Charisma and articulation are off-putting to their uncharismatic and inarticulate voters anyway. That might actually do more harm than good. Because “talking good is gay” or something. It’s dumb but it’s how they feel, and their feelings don’t give a fuck about facts.

      • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        She’s running against arguably the worst candidate in American history and it’s still a dead heat, what does that tell you?

        • AmidFuror@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Harris must be a nasty woman like Hillary Clinton. It can’t be because the other side has been propagandized until it went nuts.

            • Zorg@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 days ago

              I’m guessing they were being sarcastic. Unfortunately a lot of people have yet to realize sarcasm is anything but obvious online, at least not in this day and age.

              • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                I think I understood their sarcasm. They think I’m engaging in misogynistic tendencies and do actually think Trump voters are “nuts”.

                • AmidFuror@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  For the record, I don’t know if you personally judge Harris as a woman. I have no reason to think that’s true, and I don’t know if you hate Hillary, let alone your reason if you do.

                  But I think a lot of the hate for Hillary was misogynist, and many people made the argument that if Trump is awful, Hillary must have been worse to lose.

        • SeriousMite@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 days ago

          He might be the best candidate for hateful idiots though. The guy’s a chud whisperer. I’m not sure if any smarter more articulate Republican could hold together the same radical coalition.

        • marx2k@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          You could have a cockroach running against a smoked cigarette that’s been hydrating in a coffee cup for a week and as long as the cockroach was a Democrat and the cigarette were a republican, it would still be a dead heat.

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        The alternative, if the republicans had a candidate that wasn’t a weird 80 year old billionaire, the democrats wouldn’t have a shot in hell, facilitating a genocide while endorsing 90% of republican policies from 2016 and promising what amounts to fuckall help to most people.

    • auzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yeah. I mean, after all… who would want to vote for someone to run a country who has spent their life practicing law /s

        • marx2k@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          So instead they should be voting for the felon that screams to use the military against his political opponents and institute the death penalty for drug dealers…

        • auzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          Yeah… The hugely vast majority of those people are people who have done crime.

          The problem isn’t the DOJ necessarily, but rather, the laws need to be refined. Having experience in courts can help with that because lawyers have more information from their clients, and know about things like coercive control. They’ve spoken to people affected.

          They’ve seen which laws should be repealed and harm mostly innocent people such as weed laws regarding possession of small quantities.

          And to identify corruption and fix it.

          What America needs at the moment is someone who is 100% on top of the law, because it’s an open secret that Trump intends to try to exploit every law he can during the election, exploit every loophole and try to exploit corruption in the system. That’s why she’s perfect.

          Whereas, I’m fairly sure Trump wouldn’t even be able to decipher any amendments (he’d need a summary)

          And having Walz as VP is perfect too due to his extensive history in the military and equally valuable history as a school teacher (so he understands kids too)

          • Verdant Banana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            abortion is illegal in most places so now there are women who are considered criminals who have committed a crime

            are we including those women too as criminals?

            the homeless sleeping outside are committing a crime too

            should they be on this criminal list too?

            Walz and Trump worked well together too but that does not mean they did something great

            Resistance to the Line 3 pipeline expansion is led by Indigenous women and two-spirit people.[35] Ojibwe-led groups including Giniw Collective, Camp Migizi, Red Lake Treaty Camp, RISE Coalition, and Honor the Earth among others have been at the center of resistance.[36] Demonstrators and protesters organizing in opposition to the pipeline refer to themselves as “water protectors”[37] and follow a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience that includes direct actions.[38] Organizers aim to convince the Biden administration to revoke or suspend the pipeline project’s federal clean water permit.[23] Minnesota Governor Tim Walz has not taken a firm stance on the pipeline expansion, which received federal approval under the Trump administration.[18][23]

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Line_3_protests

            • auzy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Your abortion argument actually supports my argument entirely.

              Thanks for that

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      Oh yea! Because campaign platforms totally aren’t built around their opponent and don’t ever change and for sure aren’t strategic or anything!

      Nothin but a lil troll account.

    • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      4 days ago

      Are downvoters disagreeing even though the biggest slogan to come out of the DNC was “we are not going back” (plus the point of the stunt this article is about)? Or do they think any criticism whatsoever of democrats is bad? This shouldn’t be a controversial take.

      • Billiam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        4 days ago

        Because 1) it’s the usual “I’m totally a leftist that hates Trump yet will always blame the Dems for everything for some completely mysterious and unknown reason” bullshit, and 2) it’s a goddamn stupid take. Of course running an anti-Trump campaign wouldn’t work against anyone but Trump. Harris’ campaign strategy (which is a continuation of Biden’s) is to singularly point out the threat Trump represents, not to paint the entire GOP as a threat. And as much as it might piss off actual progressives (people who are going to vote Dem anyway because they understand what’s at stake, unlike, you know, the poster you replied to) they’re trying to reach Republican voters who don’t want Trump but need to be reminded it’s okay to vote for the other party if they have better candidates.

        • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago
          1. As a leftist that totally hates Trump, I am voting for Harris because it’s not strategic for me to do otherwise. I still have the ability to recognize that the dems are doing their damndest to uphold a broken status quo that is actively harming everyone, especially children in Palestine.

          2. Why shouldn’t they paint the entire GOP as a threat when they are the party America’s Hitler? The reason we have Trump in the first place is because the DNC wanted a bogeyman to get Hilary in in 2016, quickly found source from 2016. They shouldn’t be trying to court Republicans, they should be trying to motivate people with real progress. The reason Hilary lost was because people are sick of establishment politicians and she was the embodiment of that establishment.

          People are sick and tired of having 2 bad choices and nothing else.

        • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          The criticism is that a large portion of voters wouldn’t support her if she wasn’t running against someone like Trump. I know that criticism has at least some substance because it applies to me.

          Edit: more specifically her campaign is using Trump as a bogeyman more than she’s running on actual policy.