# Post ts_114477701321152097

- Post ID: `ts_114477701321152097`
- Platform: Truth Social
- Posted: 2025-05-09T11:44:56.819Z (UTC)
- Deleted: no
- Repost: no
- Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/ts_114477701321152097
- Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/ts_114477701321152097/analysis
- Audio narration: https://static.trump.fm/audio/ts_114477701321152097.mp3 (a synthesized voice reading the post text, not a recording)

## Post text

> The problem with even a “TINY” tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers, is that the Radical Left Democrat Lunatics would go around screaming,“Read my lips,” the fabled Quote by George Bush the Elder that is said to have cost him the Election. NO, Ross Perot cost him the Election! In any event, Republicans should probably not do it, but I’m OK if they do!!!

## Engagement

- Likes: 4,545
- Reposts: 1,095
- Replies: 704
- Views: unknown
- Metrics collected: 2026-02-01T01:19:51.311Z (UTC)

# Analysis

_Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-03-22T01:26:20.675Z (UTC): a model's reading of this post, not his words. Its psychological terms describe the language, not a clinical assessment of him._

## Psychological Analysis: Tax Increase Post (2025-05-09)

### Content Summary
Trump addresses the Republican debate over a "tiny" tax increase on the rich within the reconciliation bill. He frames himself as willing to accept it but warns against it by invoking George H.W. Bush's "Read my lips" political disaster. He then corrects the historical narrative (blaming Ross Perot, not the tax pledge, for Bush's loss) and concludes with characteristic ambivalence: "Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!!"

### Authorship
Posted at 11:44 UTC = 7:44 AM ET. Trump was likely at the White House or traveling (UK trade deal period). Early morning but not deep night. The post has authentic Trump markers: stream-of-consciousness structure, tangential historical digression, the scare-quoted "TINY," emotional capitalization, and the characteristic hedging conclusion that avoids commitment. The parenthetical historical correction is classic Trump—he can't resist relitigating a decades-old political debate mid-argument.

### Psychological Analysis
This post reveals a sophisticated political operator hedging. He signals openness to taxing the rich (populist positioning) while simultaneously giving Republicans permission NOT to do it by invoking a cautionary tale. The "I'm OK if they do!!!" ending preserves deniability in all directions.

The invocation of "graciously accept" is notably self-aggrandizing—framing tax compliance as personal magnanimity. The Ross Perot correction is tangential but reveals Trump's compulsive need to assert superior political knowledge.

### Defense Mechanisms
Rationalization is primary—the entire post constructs an elaborate justification for political fence-sitting. The Bush Sr. anecdote serves as displacement, shifting the debate from policy substance to electoral strategy.

### Rhetorical Techniques
- Appeal to authority (self as generous rich person)
- Historical analogy (Bush Sr. cautionary tale)
- Strategic ambiguity (supports both positions simultaneously)
- In-group/out-group framing ("Radical Left Democrat Lunatics")
- Populist signaling ("help the lower and middle income workers")

## Fact Verification

| Claim | Verdict | Evidence |
|-------|---------|----------|
| "George H.W. Bush's 'Read my lips, no new taxes' pledge cost him the 1992 election" | **Half True** | The broken pledge was widely considered a significant factor in Bush's 1992 loss, but multiple factors contributed including the recession and Clinton's campaign strength. |
| "Ross Perot cost Bush the 1992 election" | **Half True** | Perot won 19% of the popular vote, but exit polls showed his voters split roughly evenly between Bush and Clinton, making it debatable whether he was decisive. Some analyses suggest Perot hurt both candidates roughly equally. |

Overall Veracity: 50%

## Authorship Analysis

**Self-Written** (score: 82%)

### Indicators

- Stream-of-consciousness structure
- Tangential historical digression mid-argument
- Characteristic hedging/ambivalence in conclusion
- Scare quotes around TINY
- Triple exclamation marks

## Psychological Profile

### State

**Grandiose State**

**Trigger:** Maintenance (Intra-party tax debate in reconciliation bill)

Sentiment: +0.15

### Clinical

**Malignant Narcissism:**
- Narcissistic: 50%
- Antisocial: 10%
- Paranoid: 20%
- Sadism: 5%

**Defense Mechanisms:**
- rationalization (neurotic)
- splitting (immature)

**Cognitive Complexity:**
- Complexity: 55%

Cognitive Markers:
- tangentiality

**Parasocial Techniques:**
- Positioning as fellow taxpayer willing to sacrifice
- Strategic ambiguity inviting projection of preferred position

## Fact Checks (2)

_The model's verdicts from 2026-03-22._

> George H.W. Bush's 'Read my lips, no new taxes' pledge cost him the 1992 election

**HALF TRUE**

The broken pledge was widely considered a significant factor in Bush's 1992 loss, but multiple factors contributed including the recession and Clinton's campaign strength.

Sources: Historical consensus

> Ross Perot cost Bush the 1992 election

**HALF TRUE**

Perot won 19% of the popular vote, but exit polls showed his voters split roughly evenly between Bush and Clinton, making it debatable whether he was decisive. Some analyses suggest Perot hurt both candidates roughly equally.

Sources: 1992 exit polling data; Political science literature

Overall Veracity: 50%

## Tags

- tax_policy (80%)
- strategic_ambiguity (90%)
- historical_analogy (60%)
- intra_party_dynamics (70%)

## That day

_From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._

**UK Trade Deal Victory Lap Curdles Into Media Rage as Validation Fails to Materialize**

The day centered on trade policy — celebrating the UK deal, floating an 80% China tariff, and teasing more deals to come. The mood was upbeat through the morning, but turned sour around midday when media coverage of the tariff agenda didn't deliver the praise he expected. That frustration produced the day's sharpest moments: a demand that MSNBC face government penalties for its coverage, a call for Rupert Murdoch to replace the Wall Street Journal's editorial leadership, and a pointed personal attack on an MSNBC anchor. By late afternoon, the storm had passed entirely, replaced by a batch of routine congressional endorsements that read like they were written by staff.

Full digest for 2025-05-09: https://trump.fm/date/2025-05-09/analysis

## Citation

- APA: Trump, D. J. (2025, May 9). The problem with even a “TINY” tax increase... [Social media post]. Truth Social. trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/ts_114477701321152097
- MLA: Trump, Donald J. "The problem with even a “TINY” tax increase for the..." Truth Social, 9 May. 2025. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_114477701321152097. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026.
- Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "The problem with even a “TINY” tax increase for the...," Truth Social, May 9, 2025, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_114477701321152097.

## For agents

- Site overview: https://trump.fm/llms.txt
- API specification: https://trump.fm/openapi.json
- MCP server: https://trump.fm/mcp (search and fetch tools, no auth)
- This post as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/posts/ts_114477701321152097
- Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/ts_114477701321152097
- All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/ts_114477701321152097
- Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2025-05-09
- The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/ts_114477701321152097.md?analysis=false

_Markdown view of a trump.fm page. Post, analysis, date, feed, contradictions, search and about pages answer in markdown at their URL with `.md` appended (`/index.md` for the home page), or when sent `Accept: text/markdown`._