Linguistic Analysis: Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader

[CrusaderFrank]

Hilarious, the Biden, 57 states, Fake Indian, I an't no way tie-red Party talking about substance

Comedic gold!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Frank, you are funny.

 

[hazlnut]

Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader: linguistic analysis

Republican presidential front runner Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader, according to a linguistic analysis performed by Politico's Jack Shafer. Shafer ran the text of Trumps' responses in the recent Republican debate through the Flesch-Kincaid test, designed to determine how difficult a given passage is to understand for English readers:

Run through the Flesch-Kincaid grade-level test, his text of responses score at the 4th-grade reading level. For Trump, that’s actually pretty advanced. All the other candidates rated higher, with Ted Cruz earning 9th-grade status. Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, and Scott Walker scored at the 8th-grade level. John Kasich, the next-lowest after Trump, got a 5th-grade score.

This explains his polls numbers and popularity with far-right GOPers.

Weak, frankie, weak...

 

[Pogo]

Hilarious, the Biden, 57 states, Fake Indian, I an't no way tie-red Party talking about substance

Comedic gold!

Oh come on Frank.

It's "ways". "I don't feel no ways tired".
I can't believe you clowns don't mine "from where I started from" as well. Straight out of the Department of Redundancy Department.

"Fake Indian" doesn't fit with the rest. And you never proved it anyway.
Sorry -- anyways.

 

[BluesLegend]

OMG the epic IRONY eat this libs

 

[MisterBeale]

What I wouldn't give to see Rump sit down for an interview with Bill Buckley.

Why? What a waste of time.

Buckley would have the laid out agenda of the establishment, with one goal, to destroy Trump.

Let's see. Buckley is CIA, CFR, SMOM, Skull and Bones, and a former Bilderberger. What could he possibly have to contribute to the conversation? The man is poison.

"Mr. Buckley," one non-fan wrote in 1967, "you are the mouthpiece of that evil rabble that depends on fraud, perjury, dirty tricks, anything at all that suits their purposes. I would trust a snake before I would trust you or anybody you support."

Responded Buckley: "What would you do if I supported the snake?"

You misread me. Not for the politics at all -- who cares about that, far as I'm concerned they could talk about football --- but for the intellectual mismatch.
Just to watch Rump squirm. That's it. I have no doubt immediately following the interview Rump would sue him. As he does with everything that doesn't rhetorically fellate the Hair Apparent.

It's directly related to my sigline below, which is as I read it the point of the OP article.

See, that's just the point though. I don't buy into the establishment controlled ad hominem that Trump is anti-intellectual.

The man is ostensibly very successful. One does not buck the establishment and become successful by being dim witted. I firmly believe that Trump would not only hold his own, but would rebuff Buckley's form of corporate cronyism.


The article makes scientific reference to the fact that Trump may be plain spoken, what of it? That doesn't mean a thing.

The fact of the matter is, if you study language, you know, that the more complex your usage of language, the more you use it to achieve complex things. I saw a lecture by Noam Chomsky about this.

Young children don't know how to deceive the way older children do. Teenagers are even better at deceiving. The more you have mastery of language, the better you can deceive. That is why we create more and more vague terms to cloak our meaning. The more honest or blunt our terms, the more plain spoken, the more honest a man's character. If you have no need for chicanery, than necessarily, your language is not going to be very flowery.



Let's face it, Trump is the kind of guy that would use the term, "shell shock," while every other candidate would use "post traumatic stress disorder." Americans are getting sick of it. They just want the truth. If that means he talks like a fourth grader, fine. Does that mean he is, "anti-intellectual?" Nope, it just means he doesn't hide behind language.


Ross Perot and the Debates of '92 come to mind. And who was right about NAFTA? Was it Bush? Was it Clinton? Nope. The "Giant Sucking Sound" of jobs leaving this nation, might not have been an ivy league inspired turn of phrase. . . but it was a spot on description of what happened to this nation.

Many times "Rump's" been shut out of the establishment and I think he's sick to death of their snobbery. Donald never squirms, he makes the interviewers squirm. Can he make a horse's ass of himself? You bet. But does the electorate care? Not the people that are sick of all the other crooks and liars. I've yet to see a better alternative. Name one other candidate that is preferable.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader: linguistic analysis

Republican presidential front runner Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader, according to a linguistic analysis performed by Politico's Jack Shafer. Shafer ran the text of Trumps' responses in the recent Republican debate through the Flesch-Kincaid test, designed to determine how difficult a given passage is to understand for English readers:

Run through the Flesch-Kincaid grade-level test, his text of responses score at the 4th-grade reading level. For Trump, that’s actually pretty advanced. All the other candidates rated higher, with Ted Cruz earning 9th-grade status. Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, and Scott Walker scored at the 8th-grade level. John Kasich, the next-lowest after Trump, got a 5th-grade score.

This explains his polls numbers and popularity with far-right GOPers.

Couldn't agree more, hard right conservatives have the mind of a child. They run on emotion and trump is all emotion. How else would someone be able to say they will build a huge wall on the Mexican border and make Mexico pay for it.

It is so laughable as to be pathetic, but hard right wingers eat that shit up and ask for more.

 

[boilermaker55]

You just identified about 98% of all the right wingers on the site.
TY>

Hey, when you got nothing, and you hate a man, rather than attack his policy positions, sling mud, right?


Some of my favorite people are kids. Kids are so innocent, they tend to tell the truth and be more honest than the ruthless, hating, deceitful, Machiavellian pieces of shit we have in DC now. Do you know what I mean?

 

[browsing deer]

There are a lot of legitimate reasons to critique Donald Trump. This one is simply stupid and childish and right on par with the kind of debate we've all come to expect from the OP.

Oh so very very very many. Starting with his being a stooge for the clintons and working through his support for 0bamacare, his giving campaign cash exclusively to democrats...

Truth to tell, Trump behaves in so infantile and spoiled that I am surprised his speech pattern reached so very very high.

 

[Pogo]

What I wouldn't give to see Rump sit down for an interview with Bill Buckley.

Why? What a waste of time.

Buckley would have the laid out agenda of the establishment, with one goal, to destroy Trump.

Let's see. Buckley is CIA, CFR, SMOM, Skull and Bones, and a former Bilderberger. What could he possibly have to contribute to the conversation? The man is poison.

"Mr. Buckley," one non-fan wrote in 1967, "you are the mouthpiece of that evil rabble that depends on fraud, perjury, dirty tricks, anything at all that suits their purposes. I would trust a snake before I would trust you or anybody you support."

Responded Buckley: "What would you do if I supported the snake?"

You misread me. Not for the politics at all -- who cares about that, far as I'm concerned they could talk about football --- but for the intellectual mismatch.
Just to watch Rump squirm. That's it. I have no doubt immediately following the interview Rump would sue him. As he does with everything that doesn't rhetorically fellate the Hair Apparent.

It's directly related to my sigline below, which is as I read it the point of the OP article.

See, that's just the point though. I don't buy into the establishment controlled ad hominem that Trump is anti-intellectual.

The man is ostensibly very successful. One does not buck the establishment and become successful by being dim witted. I firmly believe that Trump would not only hold his own, but would rebuff Buckley's form of corporate cronyism.


The article makes scientific reference to the fact that Trump may be plain spoken, what of it? That doesn't mean a thing.

The fact of the matter is, if you study language, you know, that the more complex your usage of language, the more you use it to achieve complex things. I saw a lecture by Noam Chomsky about this.

Young children don't know how to deceive the way older children do. Teenagers are even better at deceiving. The more you have mastery of language, the better you can deceive. That is why we create more and more vague terms to cloak our meaning. The more honest or blunt our terms, the more plain spoken, the more honest a man's character. If you have no need for chicanery, than necessarily, your language is not going to be very flowery.



Let's face it, Trump is the kind of guy that would use the term, "shell shock," while every other candidate would use "post traumatic stress disorder." Americans are getting sick of it. They just want the truth. If that means he talks like a fourth grader, fine. Does that mean he is, "anti-intellectual?" Nope, it just means he doesn't hide behind language.


Ross Perot and the Debates of '92 come to mind. And who was right about NAFTA? Was it Bush? Was it Clinton? Nope. The "Giant Sucking Sound" of jobs leaving this nation, might not have been an ivy league inspired turn of phrase. . . but it was a spot on description of what happened to this nation.

Many times "Rump's" been shut out of the establishment and I think he's sick to death of their snobbery. Donald never squirms, he makes the interviewers squirm. Can he make a horse's ass of himself? You bet. But does the electorate care? Not the people that are sick of all the other crooks and liars. I've yet to see a better alternative. Name one other candidate that is preferable.

I think you're still missing my point -- I don't care about Rump's politics. It's his personal approach, the endless Appeals to Ignorance I'm interested in (e.g. "they're rapists"). Whether he's actually that simplistic in his own head, or merely attributes that liablility to his audience, is irrelevant. I simply don't cotton to the dumb-down approach.

The PC bit is not an issue. I hate PC terms myself so I'd agree with that. It's the oversimplifications and reductions to out-of-context emotional sound bites that I find intellectually insulting.

It's kinda like on this board -- by and large I don't care what your position is, mostly I care whether you got there on a logical basis or not.

 

[Freewill]

There are a lot of legitimate reasons to critique Donald Trump. This one is simply stupid and childish and right on par with the kind of debate we've all come to expect from the OP.

It does actually fit the fourth grade level of most of the left's posts.

 

[Freewill]

Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader: linguistic analysis

Republican presidential front runner Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader, according to a linguistic analysis performed by Politico's Jack Shafer. Shafer ran the text of Trumps' responses in the recent Republican debate through the Flesch-Kincaid test, designed to determine how difficult a given passage is to understand for English readers:

Run through the Flesch-Kincaid grade-level test, his text of responses score at the 4th-grade reading level. For Trump, that’s actually pretty advanced. All the other candidates rated higher, with Ted Cruz earning 9th-grade status. Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, and Scott Walker scored at the 8th-grade level. John Kasich, the next-lowest after Trump, got a 5th-grade score.

This explains his polls numbers and popularity with far-right GOPers.

Damn you stole my thunder, I put this into Word and it rated it at a 4.9 grade level. That is without counting Obama mentioning the 57 Islamic states.

 

[MisterBeale]

What I wouldn't give to see Rump sit down for an interview with Bill Buckley.

Why? What a waste of time.

Buckley would have the laid out agenda of the establishment, with one goal, to destroy Trump.

Let's see. Buckley is CIA, CFR, SMOM, Skull and Bones, and a former Bilderberger. What could he possibly have to contribute to the conversation? The man is poison.

"Mr. Buckley," one non-fan wrote in 1967, "you are the mouthpiece of that evil rabble that depends on fraud, perjury, dirty tricks, anything at all that suits their purposes. I would trust a snake before I would trust you or anybody you support."

Responded Buckley: "What would you do if I supported the snake?"

You misread me. Not for the politics at all -- who cares about that, far as I'm concerned they could talk about football --- but for the intellectual mismatch.
Just to watch Rump squirm. That's it. I have no doubt immediately following the interview Rump would sue him. As he does with everything that doesn't rhetorically fellate the Hair Apparent.

It's directly related to my sigline below, which is as I read it the point of the OP article.

See, that's just the point though. I don't buy into the establishment controlled ad hominem that Trump is anti-intellectual.

The man is ostensibly very successful. One does not buck the establishment and become successful by being dim witted. I firmly believe that Trump would not only hold his own, but would rebuff Buckley's form of corporate cronyism.


The article makes scientific reference to the fact that Trump may be plain spoken, what of it? That doesn't mean a thing.

The fact of the matter is, if you study language, you know, that the more complex your usage of language, the more you use it to achieve complex things. I saw a lecture by Noam Chomsky about this.

Young children don't know how to deceive the way older children do. Teenagers are even better at deceiving. The more you have mastery of language, the better you can deceive. That is why we create more and more vague terms to cloak our meaning. The more honest or blunt our terms, the more plain spoken, the more honest a man's character. If you have no need for chicanery, than necessarily, your language is not going to be very flowery.



Let's face it, Trump is the kind of guy that would use the term, "shell shock," while every other candidate would use "post traumatic stress disorder." Americans are getting sick of it. They just want the truth. If that means he talks like a fourth grader, fine. Does that mean he is, "anti-intellectual?" Nope, it just means he doesn't hide behind language.


Ross Perot and the Debates of '92 come to mind. And who was right about NAFTA? Was it Bush? Was it Clinton? Nope. The "Giant Sucking Sound" of jobs leaving this nation, might not have been an ivy league inspired turn of phrase. . . but it was a spot on description of what happened to this nation.

Many times "Rump's" been shut out of the establishment and I think he's sick to death of their snobbery. Donald never squirms, he makes the interviewers squirm. Can he make a horse's ass of himself? You bet. But does the electorate care? Not the people that are sick of all the other crooks and liars. I've yet to see a better alternative. Name one other candidate that is preferable.

I think you're still missing my point -- I don't care about Rump's politics. It's his personal approach, the endless Appeals to Ignorance I'm interested in (e.g. "they're rapists"). Whether he's actually that simplistic in his own head, or merely attributes that liablility to his audience, is irrelevant. I simply don't cotton to the dumb-down approach.

The PC bit is not an issue. I hate PC terms myself so I'd agree with that. It's the oversimplifications and reductions to out-of-context emotional sound bites that I find intellectually insulting.

It's kinda like on this board -- by and large I don't care what your position is, mostly I care whether you got there on a logical basis or not.

I can't disagree with you, but I believe that the government and the corporatocracy are to blame for the situation we are in.


If one wants to appeal to the electorate, one might be best to know how to do it.

I find it insulting as well. But if you study the work of Edward Bernays, you would understand what he is doing. It is that same thing that any successful megalomaniac does.

 

[MisterBeale]

Trump stirring emotion based voters is no different than Hillary. Neither is basing their vote on logic.

 

[Unkotare]

What pointless nonsense.

 

[Lakhota]

Excuse me!

 

[Vigilante]

Yet he's at least twice as smart as the Hildebeasty!

 

[Carla_Danger]

Hey, when you got nothing, and you hate a man, rather than attack his policy positions, sling mud, right?


Some of my favorite people are kids. Kids are so innocent, they tend to tell the truth and be more honest than the ruthless, hating, deceitful, Machiavellian pieces of shit we have in DC now. Do you know what I mean?

His policy positions are that he's going to make everything great.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader: linguistic analysis

Republican presidential front runner Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader, according to a linguistic analysis performed by Politico's Jack Shafer. Shafer ran the text of Trumps' responses in the recent Republican debate through the Flesch-Kincaid test, designed to determine how difficult a given passage is to understand for English readers:

Run through the Flesch-Kincaid grade-level test, his text of responses score at the 4th-grade reading level. For Trump, that’s actually pretty advanced. All the other candidates rated higher, with Ted Cruz earning 9th-grade status. Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, and Scott Walker scored at the 8th-grade level. John Kasich, the next-lowest after Trump, got a 5th-grade score.

This explains his polls numbers and popularity with far-right GOPers.

Couldn't agree more, hard right conservatives have the mind of a child. They run on emotion and trump is all emotion. How else would someone be able to say they will build a huge wall on the Mexican border and make Mexico pay for it.

It is so laughable as to be pathetic, but hard right wingers eat that shit up and ask for more.

I want a Trump/Palin ticket.

 

[browsing deer]

Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader: linguistic analysis

Republican presidential front runner Donald Trump talks like a 4th grader, according to a linguistic analysis performed by Politico's Jack Shafer. Shafer ran the text of Trumps' responses in the recent Republican debate through the Flesch-Kincaid test, designed to determine how difficult a given passage is to understand for English readers:

Run through the Flesch-Kincaid grade-level test, his text of responses score at the 4th-grade reading level. For Trump, that’s actually pretty advanced. All the other candidates rated higher, with Ted Cruz earning 9th-grade status. Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee, and Scott Walker scored at the 8th-grade level. John Kasich, the next-lowest after Trump, got a 5th-grade score.

This explains his polls numbers and popularity with far-right GOPers.

Couldn't agree more, hard right conservatives have the mind of a child. They run on emotion and trump is all emotion. How else would someone be able to say they will build a huge wall on the Mexican border and make Mexico pay for it.

It is so laughable as to be pathetic, but hard right wingers eat that shit up and ask for more.

I want a Trump/Palin ticket.

I want Trump to take a ticket to Tehran