By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a Friday address, the president claimed his new domestic policy bill was the most popular in US history, a statement directly contradicted by numerous polls. Surveys from Fox News, Quinnipiac University, and Pew Research Center consistently show significant public opposition to the bill. Data analysis indicates this legislation is more unpopular than any major bill passed since at least 1990, highlighting a substantial disconnect between the president’s claims and public opinion. Furthermore, the president made additional false statements, including assertions about social security taxes and migrant numbers.
Read the original article here
Fact check: Trump falsely claims his highly unpopular big bill is the ‘single most popular bill ever signed,’ a statement that, unsurprisingly, demands immediate scrutiny. The claim itself seems less about the reality of the bill’s reception and more about projecting a specific narrative, a familiar tactic from a politician known for his… let’s say, flexible relationship with the truth. The very assertion that this bill is the “single most popular” should immediately trigger alarm bells, given the general consensus surrounding the bill’s actual impact and how it’s perceived.
Consider the context. The comments surrounding this claim strongly indicate a widespread understanding that the bill in question is far from universally beloved. The fact that many perceive the bill to be unpopular among the broader population undermines the claim’s credibility. When you couple this with the mechanics of how the bill actually passed—with close votes, potential arm-twisting, and tie-breaking interventions—the notion of overwhelming popularity becomes even more difficult to reconcile with reality. It’s like saying a film is a box office smash hit when it barely squeaked by, or claiming a sporting team won by a landslide when in reality they eked out a last-minute victory.
The very language used by the person making the claim highlights the disconnect. Describing the bill as “the greatest,” “the most popular,” and unprecedented suggests a level of hyperbole that should raise eyebrows. It’s a pattern; a signal of manipulation designed to create a sense of inevitability, whether warranted or not. This style also implies who he believes his most important constituency is. Billionaires and those of the class who will be directly benefitting from the bill’s provisions. Those who are most likely to benefit from the bill may also be the only ones truly celebrating its passage.
The sentiment expressed in the comments reflects a deep-seated cynicism toward the source, suggesting this behavior isn’t a surprise. The comments express weariness at this constant gaslighting. A statement like “if his mouth is moving, he’s lying” speaks volumes about the level of trust, or lack thereof, the speaker garners. This isn’t just about disagreeing with a politician; it’s about the erosion of the very foundation of honest communication.
Then there’s the question of audience. The implication of the claim, and the apparent focus on the wealthy, suggests that the “popularity” being referenced might not be with the general public, but with a specific, influential group. It’s possible to construe the statement as a deliberate message, a nod to a particular constituency rather than a reflection of widespread approval. This idea is further reinforced by the belief that the beneficiaries of the bill might be the only ones genuinely enthusiastic about its passage.
Finally, there’s the overall tone. The comments clearly portray a sense of resignation and cynicism, a feeling that these kinds of exaggerations are simply part of the routine, rather than something genuinely surprising. This resigned tone, along with the comments’ sarcasm, underscores the deep divide between the claims and what’s likely true. The constant need for fact-checking highlights a fundamental problem: a consistent disregard for verifiable facts.