No. of Recommendations: 3
That's not what they expect, I'm sure. But they also don't realize that is the result of the statement taken at face value.
So what? They realize that the statement is not intended to be taken at face value. The sign in the greasy spoon diner that says "World's Best Coffee" isn't intended to be a literal claim that the coffee there is actually the best in the world. It's hyperbole. It's figurative language, intended to convey a meaning that isn't taking the statement at face value.
When Trump talks about cutting costs 1000%, he's speaking colloquially. His audience knows that he's speaking colloquially. That he's using "1000%" as a figurative reference to "an awful lot," not a literal percentage. It's one of his signature mannerism, speaking in hyperbole. I have no doubt that this stems from his years in real estate. If you tell someone that your property is such a good deal it will make you a 12.6% annual return on your investment, that's a potentially actionable claim if it doesn't happen - but if you tell them it will make you a million times your investment in five years, then that's obvious puffery. So it's always safer to communicate optimism and future expectations in exaggeration and hyperbole, or vague terms, and it's become a habit. So he falls back on "1000%," or superlatives like "best" or "greatest" or "worst."
And honestly, I think his critics sometimes look like they're blindly misreading the context when they pedantically claim that this is evidence of his "stupidity" rather than his manner of using hyperbolic speech. Again, if you point out that "No, actually, no one can give 110%," that's not really going to make the baseball coach look stupid - it will make the critic look foolish for not identifying an instance of figurative and hyperbolic language.
