Wait, what? Are you saying Melania actually wore the coat for that reason? Or are you saying the left's outrage is worse than the right?

My OP about Melania was sarcastic: she actually wore it to say she doesn't care about the bullshit articles the media runs with. I can't tell if you agree with me or not over text.

She either wore that coat for that reason, or because that consideration was so unimportant to her that she welcomed the interpretation. Either way it doesn't compare to a bad suit.

Oh jeez. The first lady didn't wear a coat to secretly tell people she hate children. Even if she did secretly hate children (despite all her charity work), why would she want to "secretly" tell the media this by wearing a coat, and then lying about her motivation? Turn off CNN and stop visiting /r/politics once in awhile my man.

Melania Trump wore a $39 jacket saying "I don't care really care", as she was getting on a plane to visit a children's shelter in a border town in Texas where many children were separated from their parents.

What's the Occam's Razor of why she did that, do you think?

Melania Trump — like all the first ladies — spent a great deal of time doing charity work for kids and so on. Most of the time, nobody paid any attention to her clothes. One time, she wears a jacket, and explains why she's wearing it: "to show the media I don't care what they think.". This day, just like the many other days, she is also doing some charity work (she didn't even wear it while with the kids, by the way). So use Occam's razor yourself: is she doing it to send a secret message that shat she doesn't care about the kids? What on Earth would be her motivation for doing that? To help win votes from people that hate children? If she hates kids, why would she bother getting on a plane in the first place? Or, is it more likely she's doing it for the reasons she literally said? Does she really hate kids? Or, does the media hate her? What's more likely? Use Occam's razor or Hanlon's razor.

Why on Earth are you quoting it being a $39 jacket? Why is that relevant? Your overly outraged, negative interpretation is just proving my point about how people are getting outraged over fashion for no good reason.

Man, I think both sides are ridiculous. I don't like myself when I get drawn into these kinds of discussions. It's obviously not going to be productive.

> "Guess I'll have to explain [because you're too dumb to get it]."

> "Are you ready [for the truth bomb I'm about to drop on your small mind]?"

Your comments just make me want to write something equally childish like: "Yeah, but who built the cages?"

These back and forth comments just have a way of sucking people in. It's just silly. You're not ready to have a good faith debate. Read back your comment. Was it ever going to convince me of anything? What was the point? I'm stepping away from this conversation.

You're breaking quite a few of the posting rules with your comment here, most notably the first one - "Be Kind" [0]

High quality discussion is what makes HN a unique place on the internet, so I ask that you re-read the guidelines before posting again as it benefits the community as a whole.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Okay I made the mistake of paraphrasing you. I neither think she hates children of any walk of life nor does so secretly. I do think she was sending the message that she didn’t care what was happening to them and wanted it to be well known.

Edit: not that I have any reputation at stake but I’ve literally never intentionally watched CNN or visited /r/anything.

Is this a “dog whistle”? Or what I like to call “political mind reading”?

“I have zero proof, but I knows it’s true because of how you are.”

That's literally what the conversation is about: debating what someone else is likely thinking. And look, on another thread I've already been called a racist haha. Just incredible, it's like clockwork.