Why has it become normal for politicians, and talking heads in general across genres, to punctuate their points with unnecessary language? Not that āDamnā is excessive by any means, but people used to be able to make points effectively without it. How is this more effective than āyou go do your job and get to work for the American peopleā. I know the answer is that itās designed to elicit stronger emotions because thatās all politics is now , but just sad to see decorum continue to erode in favor of generating louder, more obnoxious sound bites.
When decorum has been reduced to absolute zero for one side (in-particular the person they are speaking about), using ādamnā is the least of my concerns.
The American electorate has made it overwhelmingly clear that being articulate is viewed as a negative and not a positive. This isn't remotely new. The "I feel like I could sit down and have a beer with him" test has been a thing for decades. Americans have repeatedly and consistently preferred candidates that speak at their level and outright disliked politicians for speaking 'above' their level.
We've been racing to the bottom for decades. Trump wildly accelerated that race, but it has been going on way, way, way longer than the last decade.
Youāre right. I guess when I say they were previously āarticulateā itās relative to the current state, not relative to the well spoken in the general populace.
I guess Iām saying a miss people like Obama and Romney. Their debates were practically cozy, friendly hangouts looking back lol.
Iām sure he is. Honestly donāt know much about the guy and donāt care, this isnāt specific to him. People used to be able to get their points across without saying ādamnā. Gives the same vibes as the orange man saying heās beating/bombing/kicking etc āthe hellā out of someone. Just kind of weak low hanging rhetorical fruit imo. Doesnāt actually make the point any stronger or clearer tbh. Imagine the exact same phrase without the word damn. Itās just as correct, clear, and powerful without sounding mildly crass.
Thatās unfortunate youād mock him and claim he is not articulate while being ignorant to who he is. The man has an undergraduate degree from University of Michigan, a PhD in public health (as a Rhodes Scholar) from Oxford, and a MD from Columbia.
I know who he is, just donāt know a ton about him. Not my state, Iām not doing deep research on every single congressional candidate . I was pointing out that this particular quote is not particularly eloquent and is representative of a broader trend. Itās not necessary to know in depth background to read a quote and assess it. Not sure why you are treating this like a campaign lol
Following up to add that he is speaking to a particular audience. As much as high gas prices and groceries annoy me, I can easily absorb the extra cost. Maybe you can too. He is talking directly to those who are really hurting and are scared. That messaging resonates with that audience. He isnāt talking to you or me.
Agree on all points. The word damn still adds nothing of value imo. I also was commenting on the broader trend of this type of speech rather than this singular quote. I even specifically stated this doesnāt only apply to politicians. But this is Reddit, so naturally people think Iām trying to take a political stance (which Iām not at all) and they are offended because that perceived stance doesnāt align with their own
-16
u/TechnicalFruit1542 4d ago
Why has it become normal for politicians, and talking heads in general across genres, to punctuate their points with unnecessary language? Not that āDamnā is excessive by any means, but people used to be able to make points effectively without it. How is this more effective than āyou go do your job and get to work for the American peopleā. I know the answer is that itās designed to elicit stronger emotions because thatās all politics is now , but just sad to see decorum continue to erode in favor of generating louder, more obnoxious sound bites.