您现在的位置: 纽约时报中英文网 >> 纽约时报中英文版 >> 观点 >> 正文

美国总统怎么能是特朗普这种人?

更新时间:2016-9-29 10:15:17 来源:纽约时报中文网 作者:佚名

Trump? How Could We?
美国总统怎么能是特朗普这种人?

My reaction to the Donald Trump-Hillary Clinton debate can be summarized with one word: “How?”

本人对唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)和希拉里·克林顿(Hillary Clinton)辩论的感想可以总结为一个词:怎么能?

How in the world do we put a man in the Oval Office who thinks NATO is a shopping mall where the tenants aren’t paying enough rent to the U.S. landlord?

他认为北约好比是商场,而租户没给美国房东交够租金。说到底,面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?

NATO is not a shopping mall; it is a strategic alliance that won the Cold War, keeps Europe a stable trading partner for U.S. companies and prevents every European country — particularly Germany — from getting their own nukes to counterbalance Russia, by sheltering them all under America’s nuclear umbrella.

北约并非商场,而是一个战略联盟。它打赢了冷战,让欧洲始终充当美国企业的稳定贸易伙伴,还阻止各欧洲国家——尤其是德国——自行研发核武器来抗衡俄罗斯,而交换条件是将它们全都置于美国的核保护伞下。

How do we put in the Oval Office a man who does not know enough “beef” about key policies to finish a two-minute answer on any issue without the hamburger helper of bluster, insults and repetition?

他不了解关键政策的“料”,不乱炖一通狂言、侮辱和重复之词就没法填满两分钟的答案。面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?

How do we put in the Oval Office a man who suggests that the recent spate of cyberattacks — which any senior U.S. intelligence official will tell you came without question from Russia — might not have come from Russia but could have been done by “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds”?

他表示近期的一轮黑客攻击——任何一位美国高级情报官员都会告诉你,毫无疑问这是俄罗斯的手笔——或许并非来自俄罗斯,而是“坐在床上的某个重400磅的家伙”。面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?

How do we put in the Oval Office a man who boasts that he tries to pay zero federal taxes but then complains that our airports and roads are falling apart and there is not enough money for our veterans?

他吹嘘自己竭尽全力地不付一个子儿的联邦税,但又抱怨我们的机场公路残破不堪,没有足够的资金用于退伍军人。面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?

How do we put in the Oval Office a man who tries to prove he was against the Iraq war — even though he publicly stated his support for it when it began — by saying he said so privately to his pal Sean Hannity at Fox News? Trump is so caught up with his own infallibility that he didn’t think to respond in the debate: “Yes, I supported the Iraq war as a private citizen, but Hillary voted for it as a senator when she had all the intelligence and whose job it was to make the right judgment.”

他试图证明自己当年就反对伊拉克战争——尽管他在战争伊始公开表示了支持——声称私下告诉了他在Fox新闻频道的好友肖恩·汉尼提(Sean Hannity)。特朗普太执着于自己毫无过失,以致没有想过可以在辩论中这样作答:“的确,我以普通公民的身份支持过伊拉克战争,但希拉里以参议员的身份投了赞成票,她当时手握各种情报,做出正确判断是她的本职工作。”面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?

How do we put in the Oval Office someone who says we should not have gone into Iraq, but since we did, “we should have taken the oil — ISIS would not have been able to form … because the oil was their primary source of income.”

他表示我们不应该出兵伊拉克,但既然都去了,“我们应该把油拿走——那样伊斯兰国(ISIS)就不能成事了……因为石油是他们最主要的收入来源。”面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?

ISIS formed before it managed to pump any oil, and it sustained itself with millions of dollars that it stole from Iraq’s central bank in Mosul. Meanwhile, Iraq has the world’s fifth-largest oil reserves — 140 billion barrels. Can you imagine how many years we’d have to stay there to pump it all and how much doing so would tarnish our moral standing around the world and energize every jihadist?

在开采出哪怕一滴油之前,伊斯兰国便已成型,靠着从摩苏尔的伊拉克央行盗取的大把美元维持。与此同时,伊拉克拥有世界第五大的石油储备,达1400亿桶。大家能想象我们得在那里待上多少年才能把石油采干吗?而这么做又会让我们的道德立场在全世界受到怎样的损害,并让圣战分子个个干劲十足?

How do we put in the Oval Office someone whose campaign manager has to go on every morning show after the debate and lie to try to make up for the nonsense her boss spouted? Kellyanne Conway told CNN on Tuesday morning that when it comes to climate change, “We don’t know what Hillary Clinton believes, because nobody ever asks her.”

他的竞选经理不得不在辩论后的第二天早上去每个晨间秀露脸,用撒谎的方式来尝试弥补老板喋喋不休的胡说八道。面对这样一个人,我们怎么能把他送入椭圆形办公室?凯莉安娜·康维(Kellyanne Conway)周二上午告诉CNN,在气候变化议题上,“我们并不知道希拉里·克林顿相信什么,因为根本没人问过她。”

Say what? As secretary of state, Clinton backed every global climate negotiation and clean energy initiative. That’s like saying no one knows Hillary’s position on women’s rights.

她说啥?担任国务卿期间,克林顿支持了历次全球气候谈判与清洁能源计划。康维的说法等同于宣称没人知道希拉里在女性权益议题上的立场。

Conway then went on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” and argued that Clinton, who was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, had never created a job and was partly responsible for the lack of adequate “roads and bridges” in our country. When challenged on that by MGM Resorts’s C.E.O., James Murren — who argued that his business was up, that the economy was improving and that Clinton’s job as secretary of state was to create stability — Conway responded that Clinton had nothing to do with any improvements in the economy because “she’s never been president so she’s created no financial stability.”

康维接下来上了CNBC的节目《财经论谈》(Squawk Box),声称在2009到2013年间担任国务卿的克林顿从未创造出任何的工作岗位,还要为美国缺少令人满意的“路桥”负责。美高梅国际酒店集团(MGM Resorts)的首席执行官詹姆斯·莫伦(James Murren)则表示,自家生意变好了,整体经济亦有改善,而身为国务卿,创造稳定环境才是克林顿的工作。针对他的反驳,康维的回应是经济的改善完全不关克林顿的事,因为“她从来没当过总统,所以也没创造过金融稳定。”

I see: Everything wrong is Clinton’s fault and anything good is to the president’s credit alone. Silly.

我懂了:每次有差池都是克林顿的错,而每次有佳绩都是总统一个人的功劳。愚蠢。

The “Squawk Box” segment was devoted to the fact that while Trump claims that he will get the economy growing, very few C.E.O.s of major U.S. companies are supporting him. Also, interesting how positively the stock market reacted to Trump’s debate defeat. Maybe because C.E.O.s and investors know that Trump and Conway are con artists and that recent statistics show income gaps are actually narrowing, wages are rising and poverty is easing.

《财经论坛》的这一段节目针对的是一个事实:尽管特朗普宣称自己能让经济增长,但美国大企业的首席执行官当中,并没有什么人支持他。此外,特朗普辩论失利之后股票市场的反应特别积极,实在有趣。这或许是因为,首席执行官和投资者知道特朗普和康维是大骗子,也了解近期的数据显示,收入差距其实在缩小,薪资水平在上升,贫困正得到缓解。

The Trump-Conway shtick is to trash the country so they can make us great again. Fact: We have problems and not everyone is enjoying the fruits of our economy, but if you want to be an optimist about America, stand on your head — the country looks so much better from the bottom up. What you see are towns and regions not waiting for Washington, D.C., but coming together themselves to fix infrastructure, education and governance. I see it everywhere I go.

特朗普和康维的固定把戏就是贬损美国,这样他们便能恢复我们的伟大荣光。事实上,我们的确存在问题,也不是每个人都享受到了经济果实,不过,倘若你想对美国保持乐观,不妨倒过来——从基层往上看的时候,美国要美好得多。你能看到,村镇与地区并未等待华盛顿,而是自己团结起来维修基础设施、整顿教育、改善治理。无论去到哪里,我都能看到这一幕。

I am not enamored of Clinton’s stale, liberal, centralized view of politics, but she is sane and responsible; she’ll do her homework, can grow in the job, and might even work well with Republicans, as she did as a senator.

我并不倾慕克林顿所抱有的倾向自由派、主张将权力集中起来的陈旧政治观,但她理性负责;她会做好功课,能在工作中成长,甚至还可能重复自己在参议院的做法,与共和党人合作。

Trump promises change, but change that comes from someone who thinks people who pay taxes are suckers and who thinks he can show up before an audience of 100 million without preparation or real plans and talk about serious issues with no more sophistication than your crazy uncle — and expect to get away with it — is change the country can’t afford.

特朗普则认为缴税的是傻瓜,认为他出现在一亿观众面前的时候不必做准备,无需拿出具体方案,可以用堪比疯大叔的成熟度来谈论严肃议题——还指望能对付过去。纵使他许下变革的诺言,但此人做出的变革,美国无力承受。

Electing such a man would be insanity.

选这样一个人上台,实在是疯狂。

“全文请访问纽约时报中文网,本文发表于纽约时报中文网(http://cn.nytimes.com),版权归纽约时报公司所有。任何单位及个人未经许可,不得擅自转载或翻译。订阅纽约时报中文网新闻电邮:http://nytcn.me/subscription/”

相关文章列表