Donald Trump is Falling Apart
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- Folks. At this point, it's undeniable. Donald Trump has lost a step. A lot of steps. He's falling apart before our eyes. Here, we're going to look back to 2016, and see just how far Trump has fallen since then. Can anyone honestly say this man is fit to be President? Absolutely not.
This is just a hobby for me, but if you appreciate what I'm doing and want to say thank you, you can contribute here:
/ creationmyths
paypal.me/crea...
And if you want early access to pre-recorded videos, you can become a channel member: / @creationmyths
If you disagree with anything in this video and want an opportunity to make your case, email me: creationmythschannel@gmail.com. I'll give you as much time as you want, and then I'll take the time I want to respond, and we can have a conversation.
cognitive decline is a very sad thing, i saw some of my relatives suffer from and die of it... although a sad thing to watch one must have a leader that is fully capable to running the counrty properly..
thanks for the side by side. I had definitely forgotten that trump used to be a coherent liar.
*I* couldn't believe how relatively coherent he was eight years ago. Huge decline.
Trump is proof of cognitive entropy. We’ve gotta get Sanford to write a pamphlet about this.
Ultimately, JD Vance is unelectable. But with Trump first on the ticket, they could win (heaven forbid ). Then, as it is obvious he's unwell, just replace Trump and really take the brakes off.
That's one of the worries! If Trump wins, we're actually getting Vance, Miller, etc.
That is totally their plan.
It doesn’t look like Trump is falling apart
Two psychiatrists are doing a TH-cam/podcast called “shrinking trump” which is meant to point out his outward signs of incipient dementia. They are now on episode 24. Particularly, note how frequently he has phonemic paraphasias ( start one word, end with different word)- it’s a bad sign. He has them often, and is very well coached on how to mask them. He is now really disorganized and can’t follow through his ideas. Now coaches are helping him call it “the weave”- which he claims shows how complex his thoughts are…
THE WEAVE! Amazing way to pretend an incoherent ramble isn't an incoherent ramble. Yes, he totally means to wander off topic aimlessly for minutes at a time. Yes, we all believe that is the case. Totally.
It's scary enough that 2016 debate Trump sounds cogent now compared to 2024 debate Trump but now 2024 debate Trump sounds more cogent then earlier this week Trump
Yup, he's gotten visibly worse in the last month.
I don't know if I'd call it scary. Encouraging, I'd say. Maybe it means that in a day or two he'll be a literal drooling vegetable instead of just being accurately dismissable as one. Wouldn't that be great? All of his miserable supporters will have to _Weekend At Bernie's_ him to his rallies. And none of the people attending will notice the difference.
@@EdwardHowtonI am not encouraged.
Vance would be worse.
He may not have been as incoherent in 2016; but even then I could not bear his scatter-gun lack of focus on any subject. He was and is a terrible presenter, on any subject.
That is without referring to the content.
just noticed all the sanderson you have behind you! great books
Heck yeah.
In the end, the real TDS was the Trump who fell apart along the way.
Holy cow, watching Kristi Noem on that stage ...
Most embarrassing thing I've seen in a while.
Yeah that's its own can of worms, right? She's going to be one of the people trying to take over once Trump is out of the picture. Her and Vance and DeSantis...
Besides the cognitive differences, the energy difference is stark
It really is. Does anyone think he can do the job for four years?
Good work. Too many say, "NO POLITICS" in chat etc. They will; regret not doing the good work like you.
Nonono, *everything* is politics. Full court press. Thank you for getting it.
And it's worth keeping in mind always that Creationism is a cultural project, not a scientific one. It's the most useful pseudoscience conspiracy theory in an insidious political project.
@@benjaminnowack8433 Exactly
@@benjaminnowack8433 yes, it’s at the very least a bosom buddy of dominionism
I only visited my great grandmother a few times after she moved into a home specifically for people with dementia. She was about the same age as Trump then. And jeez, listening to Trump in that clip from the rally before they put the music on... that felt uncannily similar to sitting on the floral couch in the old folks home listening to my great grandma ramble incoherently about everything and nothing for hours uninterrupted. And then watching the woman on stage with him (I don't know who that was, sorry), standing there awkwardly leaning on the chair, waiting for a place to jump in, ugh, that just brought back some really sad memories. Uncomfortable is definitely the word for it.
All that being said, my great grandmother was not able to drive, she was not able to leave the home without assistance, she was not able to prepare her own food, and she ABSOLUTELY WAS NOT CAPABLE OF BEING THE LEADER OF AN ENTIRE COUNTRY
Your comment draws on a personal experience, and while that can be a powerful way to express how something feels, it's important to recognize that personal anecdotes aren't a basis for logical conclusions, especially about someone's cognitive health. Comparing behavior seen at a rally to symptoms of dementia is not a substitute for a medical diagnosis, which should be conducted by qualified professionals.
Leaders, especially those in high-stakes roles, are expected to exhibit clear communication and sound decision-making. If concerns about cognitive fitness arise, there are established procedures to assess these abilities objectively. Making assumptions based on a few observations can lead to misleading conclusions.
Ultimately, your perspective underscores the importance of ensuring that leaders are capable of fulfilling their responsibilities. However, to address these concerns properly, it’s essential to rely on objective evaluations rather than personal impressions.
Did.. did he have a stroke? I'm serious. The right side of his face is all droopy. Is anyone else seeing this?
I am not a medical doctor and don't want to spread rumors based on a few videos, but...YES. I noticed the same thing and pointed it out privately to several people.
You got the title of your vid wrong. It should be Drumpf FELL Apart.
We're still technically doing evolution stuff. Trump is damning evidence against intelligent design.
He's nuts! It should be obvious to anyone.
So is Putin, yet he still is a president.
Election stuff. Apocalyptically spooky this time
It doesn't surprise me that Trump was elected in 2016, he used to have real charisma and his opponent was someone nobody liked. But now he doesn't look 8 years older, he looks 16 years older. He can barely string a sentence together. He's cooked.
Absolutely cooked. The difference in 8 years is striking.
I'm not sure he'd still be alive at the end of his term if he gets elected. That job AGES people who do it. Any country you care to name, when someone is in charge, the stress ages them. And normally when they stop, it reverses a bit, they can look younger once the stress comes off.
His voice is a lot more monotone now. He doesn’t emphasize important words in his sentences. It’s all run on, like someone reading off a script on a subject that he doesn’t care about.
As a German I approve this message...!!!
We Americans obviously don't learn from history.
Thanks 4 doing that which News ‘producers’ have failed
Thanks Dr. Dan!
You're welcome!
To be honest, as bad as the current year clips that you showed look, you could have actually chosen much more unflattering options - the child care policy answer from the New York Economics Club, saying that nuclear weapons are the greatest current threat to automotive manufacturing in the United States, the 39 minutes of swaying to music in Oakes, PA - you’re really quite spoiled for choice. Thanks for a great video!
Edited to add: Damn, commented too early. 😂
Oh don't worry, no way I was leaving out that recent event.
Is that a Stop Making Sense T shirt you have on?
It sure is!
His cronies will probably try to get federal funding to the Ark Encounter. That's why this topic is directly relevant to this channel's main messaging.
time for some real talk, the holidays are coming up and the elderly need our care, spend time with your loved ones. the policies set in place by Harris will help care for our elderly and disabled, yes even trump needs human compassion. Vote pro-reality 💙😻💙
Person, woman, man, camera, TV.
He turned that Oaks rally into a church service!
He can't function. You can tell Kristi wants to take him to the gravel pit, stat.
Is this a scientific method, and if so, what is the pier review?
I can’t wait to watch the full video later!
More people voted to vote Trump out. More people will vote this time to keep him out.
We tried.
DonOLD has lost the sauce. Kamala 2024
Hell yeah
@@RunQC that’s just your warped perspective, not reality
@@RunQC That’s not what the polls today are showing. The Marist poll shows Harris leading among independents in the swing state early voters
@@RunQC I already gave you many reasons in the previous thread. Are you not capable of remembering things for more than 3 hours?
@@RunQC We can talk about each of those points, but you only asked me to name one thing so I did. You must be some kind of moron to say the department of education does nothing and asking me about what public education has to do with the economy. Are you stupid? A more educated population is more economically productive.
Trumps tariffs are pro-inflationary, as are his economically idiotic deportations. Do you want labor shortages? Do you want higher prices? Then vote for Trump lol. If you’re economically literate you’ll understand tariffs create higher prices and so does deporting the countries cheapest labor
Hey, I despise Trump - but that doesn't somehow magically make Harris any better. I despise both of them. I refuse to vote for either of them. Like, if all you can do is rag on Trump while using that to promote Harris, that just shows a flaw in your thinking. They're both garbage candidates. The fact that one of them is garbage doesn't change the fact that other one is also garbage.
And, by the way, because of the topics covered by this channel, I would merely *suggest* that you not use it to engage in political ideology.
You think a literal fascist and a normie Democrat are equally bad. Worse reasoning than most creationists.
Everything I do here is political.
"Sure one candidate is a literal fascist that has threatened to kill his political opponents and engage in ethnic cleansing, but have you heard his opponent is a woman?"
Gtfoh
@@CreationMyths "a literal fascist"
That right there shows bad reasoning.
"Worse reasoning than most creationists."
Over exaggeration isn't helping you either.
"political"
I don't see critiquing pseudoscience, or religion-based pseudoscience in particular as political, and you're very good at that.
@@steveg1961 we’ve got news outlets literally quoting the dictionary definition of fascism. It’s not 2016 anymore.
And yes, counter-programming against pseudoscience, and creationism in particular, is a political endeavor.
It is exlusively right wingers who are pushing for creationism in schools. As such, critiquing creationists is inheritly political.
Trump has said, that immigrants are bringing "bad genes" into the country. It is this type of pseudoscience that this channel fights against.
Trump also calls climate change a hoax. It is this type of pseudoscience that this channel fights against.
Trump, like creationists, is anti-science, and as such being against him is as political as it is to be against teaching creation science.
don't forget who the former Democratic Presidential nominee was until they pushed Harris to the front
vote green
What a stupid viewpoint.
@@gabek1381 how so? it's not like that's the only reason to vote green lmao. it's just ironic how they wanted us to vote for a declining ancient, and are now criticizing Trump for things that can be said of biden. they should find unique criticisms that don't apply to both parties. and also improve their own party, but they have no real incentive to do that as long as they have people like Trump around. it's why Hillary elevated him in the first place.
@@katiebarber407 Stein is a huckster only in the race to help Trump get elected. If you're voting for Stein you're okay with Trump but won't admit it. Just be upfront that you're okay with the wannabe fascist.
@@CreationMyths i would believe u if Hillary hadn't spent money to literally help Trump in 2016. Jill hasn't done that, nor has she ever helped him. got anything else?
@@CreationMyths as long as you're upfront about support for genocide, okay with fracking, no Medicare for all, record oil drilling., no free college, increasing police and military budgets,
I'm British so i don't have a dog in this fight (i mean, if Trump wins then it will be worse than if Harris wins) but this was a pretty terrible and biased 'analysis'. It was a case of you seeing what you wanted to see (there was virtually no difference between those clips other than the expected influence of an 8-year gap on a guy in his 70s).
And therein lies the problem from the left since 2015 when they eventually took it seriously that Trump was running. They won't admit what's in front of them. They see only what they want to see. And they think that if they repeat something long enough that'll make it true. It won't and it doesn't. (Incidentally, i say "they" because, whilst i am predominantly liberal - or, if i'm forced to take a side: left - I will not associate or subscribe to the radical left or even what the word 'liberal' has become).
The progress Trump made in the Middle East and even the killing of the Iranian General would have been lauded were Obama to have accomplished it. Indeed, Obama got a Peace Prize essentially for dropping the most bombs ever by a US President. Then when Trump was deporting illegal immigrants he was lambasted for splitting families up. Yet it was Obama who got the ball rolling with that one. I don't like hypocrites of any persuasion (i point it out on the right, too) it's just that i've been seeing it from the left most recently.
Anyway, back to the video. I get that it is getting closer to election time and you may want to help people who are either on the fence or leaning the other way but i suspect the audience for an atheistic, anti-creationist channel will probably be what, 90, 95% left-wing liberal? Personally, i prefer the anti-creationist videos - or rather, I don't like the political ones - particularly if they're biased or when they seems more (excuse the pun) preaching to the choir than informing.
who are you listening to who doesn't criticise obama? maybe you aren't actually listening to anyone one the left
Trump's policies will without a doubt affect Britain, Liberals / democrats are mostly right-wing, Obama faced heavy criticism from the left, and creationism, like most forms of anti-intellectualism, is a VERY political issue. You are wrong about everything you just said.
Lotta Trump-curious among the very dude-centric skeptic online community. Part of my goal here is for (mostly young) men who are open to Trump but don't follow politics closely to see this and realize he's physically and mentally unfit, and decide to either vote Harris or stay home.
Maybe you need more context to the clips. They themselves (aside from the content of what Trump is actually saying) are not that convincing and probably better recent examples of his decline could have been found. When you're confronted with this character all day every day, you see it better. It was surprising to see Trump being more coherent (although just as screamingly lying, false and wrongheaded) back in 2016. Because when I first heard him in 2015 I thought he was spouting word salad. Now, even more frequently than back then, he loses track of his sentences, frequently mispronounces words in a way characteristic of dementia, wanders off on other topics, gets up in a huff if asked a direct question he doesn't like, or just stands there "dancing." He has always been an arrogant, ignorant jerk, but now he's a fading arrogant, ignorant jerk. Watching him now, you can see that he will likely never make it through 4 years. Instead, we will have Project 2025 Vance (and the whole fascist culture behind him) as president.
Now do a video for Kamala, I hate the options we have. It’s scary when the vice options are better than the presidential ones.
Harris f'ing rocks and I have no idea why people think otherwise. This is the easiest choice ever.
@@CreationMyths if you had to try, would you be able to do a video with criticisms of Harris just as you did for Trump?
@@ReapersOcean Nope! And why would I?
@@CreationMyths just wanted to know if this was something that was possible. I guess it isn’t. thank you for answering.
@@Bogudarz Conservatism is a failed philosophy. Socially, economically, politically, and scientifically, conservatism has been on the wrong side of history.
Hasty Generalization:
The text suggests Trump is "clearly unfit to be president" based on selective clips from debates and rallies. While these might indicate a decline, they don’t conclusively prove a general incapacity without more comprehensive evidence (e.g., medical diagnosis or consistent performance issues across various settings). This is a form of hasty generalization, drawing broad conclusions from limited examples.
Appeal to Emotion:
The author encourages viewers to feel discomfort while watching Trump at a rally to persuade them of his incompetence. While discomfort might be a valid reaction, it is not a substitute for objective evidence. This relies on emotional appeal rather than a structured argument based on facts.
Confirmation Bias:
The clips shown are presumably chosen to emphasize Trump's decline, which indicates a selective presentation of evidence. If there were no equivalent clips demonstrating coherent moments, this could suggest confirmation bias, where only data supporting the author's argument is presented.
False Equivalence:
The comparisons between Trump’s 2016 and 2024 debates are presented as "apples to apples," but they lack acknowledgment of context changes, including Trump’s age, health status, or external circumstances. Without such context, comparing the two periods directly can be misleading.
Scientific Errors:
Lack of Medical Basis:
The text claims that Trump has declined "physically and mentally" without providing medical evidence. Determining someone's fitness for a demanding role like the presidency typically requires medical assessments, not just subjective observations. Making medical claims without this data could lead to misinformation.
Misinterpretation of Behavior:
The text critiques Trump’s rally behavior, such as "bobbing and dancing" for over half an hour, as evidence of mental decline. While unusual, this behavior alone doesn’t scientifically indicate cognitive impairment. Drawing medical conclusions from such isolated incidents could be inaccurate.
Political Errors:
Misrepresentation of Project 2025:
The text states Trump’s intent to enact policies from "Project 2025," which include ending overtime pay, banning contraception, and politicizing the government. However, it attributes these goals directly to Trump without clarifying his actual level of involvement or endorsement. Misrepresenting or overstating policies without specifics or verified sources can mislead readers.
Ambiguity About Policy Claims:
The text lists controversial policies supposedly endorsed by Trump, like banning contraception or using the military to suppress political opposition. These serious claims are not substantiated with specific references to actual proposals or statements, which weakens the argument. Without clear citations, these assertions risk being perceived as hyperbolic.
Potential Straw Man Fallacy:
The text mentions things like Trump "forcing Evangelical Christianity into schools," which is an extreme claim. If the actual policy proposals are less severe than what is described, this would be a straw man fallacy, misrepresenting the position to make it easier to attack.
Overall Analysis:
The text effectively uses clips and personal observations to build an argument about Trump's fitness for office, but it falls short in providing a robust, logically sound, and scientifically valid case. Emotional appeals and selective evidence undermine the argument's objectivity, and bold claims lack adequate substantiation. For a stronger argument, more context, references to Trump’s actual policy proposals, and objective medical or cognitive assessments would be needed.
I like that the "false equivalence" point says that trump may have mentally declined lol making the comparisons not equal.
can't trust LLMs btw, they're just complicated markov chains made to trick humans. at least you're honest about using though, most aren't.
Even if these fallacies are valid... So what?
He's still a demogogue.
He still cozies up to autocrats.
He's an aspiring tyrant.
He lacks a moral core and he is a broken human being who can in no way relate to the common person. He is not fit to be president. He should never have been in office in the first place and his presence will forever stain the presidency.
Was this written by an AI or did you dedicate the whole afternoon to writing it? 😂
We all wish we could have some kind of medical evidence of his fitness for the office, but Trump refuses to release his medical records, so no such evidence is available. All we have is the evidence of our own eyes and ears as to his obvious decline.
Confirmation bias? Well, there are many, many examples of his incoherent babbling. We saw an hour and a half of his unedited remarks in his debate with Harris. Trump spoke for 42 minutes and 52 seconds of that time. How many coherent moments can you refer to in that debate?
You say that comparing 2016 and 2024 lacks acknowledgement of his age or health status, but that's exactly the point. The aging and failing health are obvious when you watch the comparison. And consider the fact that if Trump manages to serve out his term, he will become the oldest president in American history. If he's this bad now, what will he be like four years from now?
Project 2025: Yes, Trump denies any knowledge of it, but it's absurd to think that it would have gone forward without Trump's knowledge and consent. It was written by no less than 18 members of his campaign and administration, and Trump is mentioned by name 312 times. And you expect us to believe that he knows nothing about it? Everyone in the country knows about it, why is he the only one who doesn't? Is he really that out of touch?
Contraception: As with many issues, Trump has not been consistent about this one. In an interview he gave to KDKA-TV on May 21, 2024, he was asked: "Related to this is the whole issue of contraceptives. Do you support any restrictions on a person's right to contraception?" Trump replied, "We're looking at that", but then afterwards he posted on Truth Social, "I HAVE NEVER, AND WILL NEVER ADVOCATE IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON BIRTH CONTROL, or other contraceptives." So which statement was a lie? It's anybody's guess.
As for the military, he told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo, “We have some very bad people, some sick people, radical left lunatics…. And it should be easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.”
And the problem with referencing Trump's actual policy proposals is that he has very few, and the ones he does have tend to change every time he opens his mouth.
@@LimeyLassen I mean, the idiot's username is "ChatGPTcopyPASTE"!
No thanks. I subscribed for debunking Creationists, not politics.
Their not really separate issues
Creationism is political. Same fight.
Both Trump and Creationism are Harbingers of White Christian Nationalism.
@@antondovydaitis2261 Bingo. Exactly.
@@CreationMyths How so?
15:47
Yikes, what a rant... look at that guy's yawn, lmfao