Rant on POTUS 10/5/26 remark on Los Angeles and San Diego

CONTENT WARNING: American politics. Also, violent rhetoric.

Okay, so last night Donald Trump appeared at a rally in Nebraska and he made a rather disturbing comment regarding the high prices of gas and groceries during the US/Iran war. Please note: This was a very important topic for Trump to address ahead of midterm elections, since the high prices are legitimately the biggest failing the Republicans are facing due to Trump’s war and tariffs. If he ignores the costs rural Americans are suffering through, he risks losing single issue voters and swing voters, thus pushing the overall government more Democrat and less under his control. So here is what he said word-for-word:

”And again, remember, with the war, it’s just artificial. It’s a little bit high. It’s a small price to pay for keeping the world safe, keeping our country safe. They can take out a city. Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego This is a very small price to pay, and it’s going to be over with very soon. It’s essentially almost over with.”

I’ve got a lot of thoughts about this small quote.

1. Obviously, Trump’s administration can (and probably will) explain that the claims on the two cities were just a joke or even randomly picked cities as examples. I would argue the safety of over a million lives is not an appropriate subject for a world leader to joke about, which would normally necessitate an apology to the civilians of those cities. I’ll get into why these particular cities were unlikely randomly picked in point 3.

2. There was cheering that started when he said they could “take out a city,” but the cheering went wild when he mentioned Los Angeles and San Diego. Even if the audience interpreted it as an off-color joke - which I doubt - that seems a little extreme to cheer on the bombing of two highly populated cities. This is just a glimpse into the insane extremes his fanbase are pushing him towards.

3. Fun facts about Los Angeles and San Diego: For y’all in the UK, California is FAMOUSLY Democratic. Mentioning those two cities in particular immediately elicits a response from Republicans who view those cities as being fully populated by Democrats. I know that Los Angeles in particular is also famous for being immensely populated by Mexican immigrants and has a large LGBTQ+ community. San Diego, I imagine, is probably very similar.

4. Republican voters may be less aware of this, but one last fun fact about Los Angeles is that it has the highest population of Iranian immigrants in the USA. If Iran had the potential for bombing an American city in any way, that city is legitimately a likely target (behind the obvious of Washington D.C. and New York City). There is no other city in America with as many Iranian-born opposers of the current Iranian regime, and there’s even talk that some activists there are being targeted and surveilled already. So Trump probably wasn’t thinking about it, but he did pick a city that would specifically be in danger.

5. Of course I don’t have evidence one way or another, but I’d be AMAZED if Iran ever had the capability of hitting American cities, even if they manage to independently develop nuclear weaponry. I‘m fairly certain that would only be plausible with assistance from Russia and/or China, which would be insanely dumb and dangerous of them to invest ICBMs into Iran. Like, what good would that do for Russia/China? Yeah, Iran could attack America on their behalf, but the rule of “mutually assured destruction” would certainly pull them into that nuclear war, too. If Iran becomes a nuclear state, then they threaten US allies around the Middle East, NOT the USA directly. Trump mentioning Iran bombing any cities on American soil is stupid fear-mongering. It’s really Russia, China, and North Korea that pose that risk, not Iran.

6. Democrats are going to interpret this quote as Trump directly welcoming Iran to bomb those cities. I mean, he did say “Let them,” so that’s not a stretch of the imagination out of context. News headlines are obviously going to tout that interpretation for higher viewership. While that will serve only to further infuriate his myriad enemies, this is also a massive appeal to his fanbase (as I mentioned in point 2). He is dipping into a lot of desperate actions to excite his followers (remember, he recently promised $5,000 per citizen that will obviously never happen), so there is a possibility that he might throw out even more of this sort of violent rhetoric leading up to the midterms. This won’t be the last time we hear him support violence leading up to November, mark my words.

7. As always, Trump is promising a swift end to the war. It would be funny and ironic if so many lives weren’t in danger. Also, notice that all of my points focus on his statements regarding bombing cities? That’s the whole point of this message. He is once again deflecting blame for the high costs, this time by directing everyone’s attention to a mythical, fantastical vision of nuclear war.

So yeah, this small quote has excited a ton of emotions in me. It’s feeling like dangerous statements such as this are weirdly acceptable now here in the States since he gets no real reprimand for it, and I’m really worried about that.

Parents
  • The jokes are just more of the same poison rhetoric from Trump, aimed at his ("own the libs at any price") support base - I would just ignore it if you can as it does not seem to be policy (yet).

    The good thing is that if he is saying he wants Iran to do this then in the event Iran does do anything, it will leave these cities alone and go after something much closer to Trumps heart. Florida is just as accessible as the West Coast and a much stronger republican base.

    It’s feeling like dangerous statements such as this are weirdly acceptable now here in the States since he gets no real reprimand for it

    It has certainly become the new normal. At least all pointers are indicating that he will be severely curtailed at the midterms so will be able to do a lot less.

    I do have an unpleasant suspicion that he will either declare a state of emergency over some false flag operation to delay the elections indefinitely or will use his old mate Elon to do something with the voting machines again.

  • I do have an unpleasant suspicion that he will either declare a state of emergency over some false flag operation to delay the elections indefinitely

    I’m guessing you’ve been reading the conspiracies that are buzzing around American news outlets right now, then. Yes, there is a palpable threat that Trump is going to declare a state of emergency. Basically, the White House has done everything not to deny it as a possibility. Even if National Guards are deployed and do absolutely nothing at poll stations, that’s still enough to intimidate voters into voting Republican in fear of retaliation.

    In my opinion, there is no chance that the votes won’t be tampered with, even if just for a few swing states. Yes, I am also afraid that there will be a state of emergency, but honestly? He doesn’t have to declare one. Their success is already ensured whether Trump and his administration is fully aware of it or not. There are so many extreme MAGA fanatics out there and Trump has often declared that this is the most important midterm election in all American history, so someone behind the scenes is going to tamper with the votes. It’s practically guaranteed at this point, imo.

Reply
  • I do have an unpleasant suspicion that he will either declare a state of emergency over some false flag operation to delay the elections indefinitely

    I’m guessing you’ve been reading the conspiracies that are buzzing around American news outlets right now, then. Yes, there is a palpable threat that Trump is going to declare a state of emergency. Basically, the White House has done everything not to deny it as a possibility. Even if National Guards are deployed and do absolutely nothing at poll stations, that’s still enough to intimidate voters into voting Republican in fear of retaliation.

    In my opinion, there is no chance that the votes won’t be tampered with, even if just for a few swing states. Yes, I am also afraid that there will be a state of emergency, but honestly? He doesn’t have to declare one. Their success is already ensured whether Trump and his administration is fully aware of it or not. There are so many extreme MAGA fanatics out there and Trump has often declared that this is the most important midterm election in all American history, so someone behind the scenes is going to tamper with the votes. It’s practically guaranteed at this point, imo.

Children
  • Fantastic question! I wondered the same when I first saw this conspiracy, since if I vote I really don’t care if an I.C.E. officer is watching me, I’m going to vote for the LGBTQ+ community regardless. However, I’m very confident in what I believe in. Not everyone is.

    We have a rule that no one is allowed to wear political attire to poll stations (ex. MAGA hats or even Pride shirts), since there is a fear that could potentially lead to other people being intimidated into voting one way or another. I mean, let’s say you are a tiny Hispanic lady wanting to vote for Kamala Harris (Democrat), but the tall, imposing guy behind you has a MAGA hat on. Even though he isn’t supposed to see your vote, you may vote Republican just to feel safer in case he finds out and wishes to retaliate.

    Yes, the votes are supposed to be done in private in booths. We also have a rule not to have National Guardsmen at poll stations. If that rule is broken, who is to say they can’t intervene in the voting process? Okay, that issue is a slippery slope fallacy, and I know it. However there’s a bigger issue:

    National Guardsmen and I.C.E. officers can remove people from the premises for any reason they deem necessary.  You look like you’re not a citizen? Gone. You look threatening? Gone.

    My brother was a cop, and I remember him telling me something terrifying that stuck with me for decades: If a cop wants to arrest you - even if you are completely innocent - they can find a way to get you. There’s a ton of laws out there, and all it takes is to say that you looked at them funny to slap cuffs on your wrists. Same applies to this situation.

  • that’s still enough to intimidate voters into voting Republican in fear of retaliation.

    I'm curious as to why you think this. Are the votes themselves not done in privacy and kept private?

  • Even if National Guards are deployed and do absolutely nothing at poll stations, that’s still enough to intimidate voters into voting Republican in fear of retaliation.

    Why does that remind me of Putin's Russia?

    Thinking