Donald Trump and Berzelius Windrip

[BonzaiDuck]

There are enough Trump threads active.

I had mentioned the 1935 book by Sinclair Lewis in other posts.

It seems it has also gained the attention of Bill Moyers and friends.

I could've told you ten years ago that Trump is an unbridled narcissist, and that some prominent historical figures also had the same personality defect. In it's more extreme form, it is "narcissistic personality disorder."

As for comparisons with Hitler -- well -- it is also his diagnosis. And, for a few decades of my own life -- my own. Oh, there are a few others who left a positive mark on history, like Douglas MacArthur. One thing doesn't automatically assume another. But Trump plays funny-ball with the Truth.

He's not all that smart, or he lacks political common-sense. Hitler likely didn't announce his plans until after he was elected. In fact, he just didn't announce his plans. Period.

How is it, in the Age of Information, that we're almost a country of Lemmings? I'm trying to figure it out, and I can't.

Here's the link of a recent article:

http://billmoyers.com/story/trumps-bigotry-revives-fears-of-it-cant-happen-here/

Note that the author of the article mistakenly refers to Lewis' book as "an essay," but it's a novel. And what is quite stunning about it: the group of the megalomaniac's paramilitary supporters were called "The Minute-Men" -- a moniker drawn from the same historical setting as "The Tea Party." And we've got a group called "The Minute Men." I often incline to say that the real Tea Party was a group of covert-operators, who scapegoated Native Americans when they dumped the tea. And I think that says something.

 

[JSt0rm]

People use access to unlimited information to find things they agree with.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

People use access to unlimited information to find things they agree with.

. . . Which is why I always say, if you're going to read through the two volumes of Smith's "Wealth of Nations," you should also plod through "Das Kapital." Ideologies are for lazy minds.

And the lazy mind seizes on some belief-system, puts the cart before the horse, cherry-picks his facts, and then pats himself on the back: "I've found the Truth! I know the Truth!"

Well, signs and wonders. The forthcoming year is going to be more than interesting. Unpleasantly interesting -- unless there's an outcome a majority of informed people can live with. Oh, I can anticipate the reaction to that: "Hey, buddy! Who says you're all so damn informed?"

Maybe respond with something I take comfort in. The more I learn, the more certain am I that I know very little.

 

[JSt0rm]

Its a comfortable place to be, knowing the truth. lol.

 

[SP33Demon]

. . . Which is why I always say, if you're going to read through the two volumes of Smith's "Wealth of Nations," you should also plod through "Das Kapital." Ideologies are for lazy minds.

And the lazy mind seizes on some belief-system, puts the cart before the horse, cherry-picks his facts, and then pats himself on the back: "I've found the Truth! I know the Truth!"

Well, signs and wonders. The forthcoming year is going to be more than interesting. Unpleasantly interesting -- unless there's an outcome a majority of informed people can live with. Oh, I can anticipate the reaction to that: "Hey, buddy! Who says you're all so damn informed?"

Maybe respond with something I take comfort in. The more I learn, the more certain am I that I know very little.

If the lazy mind welcomes belief systems, then what is your take on muslims and sharia law? Isn't the epitome of a lazy mind to preach that you should fear and kill everyone who doesn't believe what you believe?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Its a comfortable place to be, knowing the truth. lol.

A potent thought. Ask anyone if they think they know the Truth, and you might get a majority of affirmatives.

In my own case, I've discovered something that even Vincent Bugliosi overlooked. Unless I can eventually lay it all out in print, it is a very, very lonely feeling. And just saying something like that, one finds that even close associates are dismissive. So -- I have to lay it all out in print, with circles and arrows.

So -- Truth about what? About Whom? Applied when and to which? I just think the Trumpists don't go after facts like kids go after the eggs at Easter time. They don't apparently think that's their role. They have some beliefs about how the world should be. They have some gripes -- like immigration. And they want Trump to tell them either what to think, or that their major concerns are as important at the moment as a myriad of other problems.

Immigration, but not climate change.

Immigration, but not the cartel violence in Mexico.

Terrorists, but not the spree killers.

Muscular application of military solutions, but no tax increases to pay for it.

I'm sure someone can think of some other contradictions, or argue that they are, in fact, contradictions.

When Trump hears them playing in one key, he simply changes his tune to fit.

 

[SP33Demon]

A potent thought. Ask anyone if they think they know the Truth, and you might get a majority of affirmatives.

In my own case, I've discovered something that even Vincent Bugliosi overlooked. Unless I can eventually lay it all out in print, it is a very, very lonely feeling. And just saying something like that, one finds that even close associates are dismissive. So -- I have to lay it all out in print, with circles and arrows.

So -- Truth about what? About Whom? Applied when and to which? I just think the Trumpists don't go after facts like kids go after the eggs at Easter time. They don't apparently think that's their role. They have some beliefs about how the world should be. They have some gripes -- like immigration. And they want Trump to tell them either what to think, or that their major concerns are as important at the moment as a myriad of other problems.

Immigration, but not climate change.

Immigration, but not the cartel violence in Mexico.

Terrorists, but not the spree killers.

Muscular application of military solutions, but no tax increases to pay for it.

I'm sure someone can think of some other contradictions, or argue that they are, in fact, contradictions.

When Trump hears them playing in one key, he simply changes his tune to fit.

People in this vagina-like society with lower and lower testosterone are looking for someone to tell them what to do. It's much easier when you have a charismatic leader who purportedly has all of the answers and will protect your standard of living.

Domestic right wing "Spree killers" are killing at a lower rate per 100,000 than Islamic terrorists, so terrorists legitimately deserve the spotlight. That's not a contradiction, Islamic terrorists should be at the forefront of our consciousness b/c they are killing at 10-20X the rate of our gun owners (aka as our "right wing" if you ask a liberal pacifist).

"Muscular application of military solutions with no tax increases to pay for it" is a loaded statement. As tech progresses, we theoretically can defend ourselves more efficiently while spending the same amount. Your statement suffers from the same fallacy that the Population Bomb did (not enough food for world's growing population). E.g., a drone attack is much more efficient than having a human-manned F-18 attack.

"Immigration but not cartel violence in Mexico". And what do you propose we do about that violence? That is up to the Mexican government, how are we going to resolve a problem in another country without seizing control? Short of legalizing ALL drugs, nothing we do here is going to lower cartel violence.

"Immigration, not climate change". Climate change is borderless problem that again involves policing other countries to lower their carbon footprint. Good luck with that, especially when all the shit you just bought at WalMart contributed more to climate change than anything here ever will. Translation: China is doubling our carbon footprint to manufacture our goods. Yes, we are #2 on the list but money talks, BS walks. Try curbing corporations' footprints when they have the administration (and EPA) in their pockets.

 

[shady28]

Uh huh, as if the left's front-runner has something to offer...

DNC is killing Bernie Sanders, while the RNC is killing Carson.

That leaves us with Trump, and Hillary.

That's just fucking grand.

14 Percent of Democrats Will Not Support Hillary Clinton. Only Bernie Sanders Prevents Low Voter Turnout

 

[JSt0rm]

People in this vagina-like society with lower and lower testosterone are looking for someone to tell them what to do. It's much easier when you have a charismatic leader who purportedly has all of the answers and will protect your standard of living.

Domestic right wing "Spree killers" are killing at a lower rate per 100,000 than Islamic terrorists, so terrorists legitimately deserve the spotlight. That's not a contradiction, Islamic terrorists should be at the forefront of our consciousness b/c they are killing at 10-20X the rate of our gun owners (aka as our "right wing" if you ask a liberal pacifist).

"Muscular application of military solutions with no tax increases to pay for it" is a loaded statement. As tech progresses, we theoretically can defend ourselves more efficiently while spending the same amount. Your statement suffers from the same fallacy that the Population Bomb did (not enough food for world's growing population). E.g., a drone attack is much more efficient than having a human-manned F-18 attack.

"Immigration but not cartel violence in Mexico". And what do you propose we do about that violence? That is up to the Mexican government, how are we going to resolve a problem in another country without seizing control? Short of legalizing ALL drugs, nothing we do here is going to lower cartel violence.

"Immigration, not climate change". Climate change is borderless problem that again involves policing other countries to lower their carbon footprint. Good luck with that, especially when all the shit you just bought at WalMart contributed more to climate change than anything here ever will. Translation: China is doubling our carbon footprint to manufacture our goods. Yes, we are #2 on the list but money talks, BS walks. Try curbing corporations' footprints when they have the administration (and EPA) in their pockets.

vagina-like society? I mean wtf? D:

 

[dank69]

RNC is killing Carson? WTF?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

If you ask me, the worst possible outcome has Trump winning next November. It's a hole in the sieve of possibilities, and I comfort myself with my hopes that the voters who turn out are more rational than that. In other words, it has, at the moment, a very low probability attached to the possibility.

Sure -- I'd like to see more political parties with the elective offices in play, provided some sort of parliamentary system were stable. But it's always been the case that we have a political duopoly. Your choices as a citizen are limited to "lesser of two evils."

Neither the Trumpists nor the Tea Party could ever accept "the way things work," and the way things work is a source of frustration. Of course, ignoring that the book was ghost-written, "Profiles in Courage" offers the argument that compromise is a mainstay of the political process. What we've had since 2009 is a situation where the same crowd won't compromise on anything.

Just overheard Anderson Cooper talking to The Donald on the phone.

"I know how to get things done! I'm a very, very smart man!"

And there, in a nutshell, you have it. Smart people don't proffer themselves constantly with that last sentence. It's not the smart thing to do.

Had to laugh, though. You have to laugh at something . . . .

 

[shady28]

RNC is killing Carson? WTF?

They killed him a while back.

Lets be real. The media made a huge deal about Carson saying he was offered a scholarship to West Point.

If you look here, you'll find he wasn't lying. Westmoreland was indeed in Detroit, the ROTC did march for him, and Carson was there out in front. All of the evidence that is available corroborates Carson's story, but you can't corroborate a conversation that happened 50 years ago.

Read that, then go out and Google "carson westmoreland". You'll have a hard time finding any articles that printed the truth, and no retractions.

They did similar things to Sanders. It started with the fake / bullshit articles from the Dem debates saying Hillary won, when it was clear that Sanders support was spiking - and that got reflected shortly afterwards with higher polling numbers for Sanders.

Then it hit with the free college bankrupting the US BS the media spewed. Sanders didn't say he was going to send everyone to Princeton you know. Meanwhile countries like Kenya and Brazil offer free college, and 95% of Russians have an associates degree+


But every time they try to kill Trump, it backfires.

Maybe Sanders needs to study Trump a bit.

Here's a little picture that explains the media :

 

[feralkid]

*snip*

"Left Wing Extremist"?

Hillary may be a lot of things, but that definitely is not one of them.

 

[shady28]

"Left Wing Extremist"?

Hillary may be a lot of things, but that definitely is not one of them.

I agree, but the image is of Hillary getting angry and yelling about it not mattering when she got caught in a bald-faced lie go Congress.

Maybe that's the secret to controlling the press. Tell lies and, when called on it, get red-faced beat your fist and scream at the accusers that it doesn't matter?

I do wonder what a 1:1 debate between Hillary and Trump would look like.

 

[Subyman]

If you ask me, the worst possible outcome has Trump winning next November. It's a hole in the sieve of possibilities, and I comfort myself with my hopes that the voters who turn out are more rational than that. In other words, it has, at the moment, a very low probability attached to the possibility.

Sure -- I'd like to see more political parties with the elective offices in play, provided some sort of parliamentary system were stable. But it's always been the case that we have a political duopoly. Your choices as a citizen are limited to "lesser of two evils."

Neither the Trumpists nor the Tea Party could ever accept "the way things work," and the way things work is a source of frustration. Of course, ignoring that the book was ghost-written, "Profiles in Courage" offers the argument that compromise is a mainstay of the political process. What we've had since 2009 is a situation where the same crowd won't compromise on anything.

Just overheard Anderson Cooper talking to The Donald on the phone.

"I know how to get things done! I'm a very, very smart man!"

And there, in a nutshell, you have it. Smart people don't proffer themselves constantly with that last sentence. It's not the smart thing to do.

Had to laugh, though. You have to laugh at something . . . .

He did the same thing with Barbara Walters. She asked if he was a bigot and he said no and then followed it up saying he is very smart, a very good manager, and will make america great again.

Something else kind of sad is that he constantly says "xxx loves me." :wub:

Being realistic, he has ~30% of the republican approval right now. He won't get moderates or any democrats. He isn't going to move to the center as we edge closer to the election date. He is giving air time to ideas that a minority of people have learned to keep to themselves. Now they feel like they can freely express themselves and have previously latent anger behind them. Its a pressure cooker that is blowing off steam. I'm curious to see what the next target is.

As an aside, it is funny how you made a thread about seriously analyzing Trump and we have people throwing out Clinton meme pictures on page one.

 

[shady28]

...
Being realistic, he has ~30% of the republican approval right now. He won't get moderates or any democrats.

You've been called on that lie before. Trump polls very close to Hillary on national election polls, that's a fact.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

He did the same thing with Barbara Walters. She asked if he was a bigot and he said no and then followed it up saying he is very smart, a very good manager, and will make america great again.

Something else kind of sad is that he constantly says "xxx loves me." :wub:

Being realistic, he has ~30% of the republican approval right now. He won't get moderates or any democrats. He isn't going to move to the center as we edge closer to the election date. He is giving air time to ideas that a minority of people have learned to keep to themselves. Now they feel like they can freely express themselves and have previously latent anger behind them. Its a pressure cooker that is blowing off steam. I'm curious to see what the next target is.

There has always been this idea that there were some 100M to 150M eligible but unregistered, and it would make sense that the Right does better when turnout is lower, and other things happen when turnout is high.

So then you look at the possibilities that these people will vote -- that's "(a)." (b) -- do they follow news, events, politics and history to a degree that one could say they're reasonable informed? (c) Whether or not (b), would they really swing in the direction desired by the Left (if you want to call it "Left.")

The level of contention, sensation, whatever silliness you think you perceive -- it should have a real effect on this "dark matter" of the electorate.

And those 100M+ -- they come from all walks of life, all socio-economic categories, perhaps all various religions unless you think their indifference parallels their politics. One could infer that a lot of people don't vote because they are extremely present-oriented: a higher average among welfare recipients and working poor; drug-addicts and other groups. That group could have a whimsical direction in the way the poll records it in November.

But the extra 100M+ has always been in Bernie's mind. You can consult an economist named Richard Wolfe, formerly U Mass Amherst and then New School in New York. And I'll say it forthrightly: Wolfe is a professor of Marxist Economics, with a specialty in class analysis. And you also have some five or ten interviews in a series on Bill Moyers. But that's what he told me in a brief e-mail exchange: tremendous potential for grass-roots change, if you could tap the traditional non-voting registered or eligible.

That being said, which way will the Lemmings lean?

Or put another way -- what's possible? What was the turnout after Hindenburg in 1932?

 

[Subyman]

You've been called on that lie before. Trump polls very close to Hillary on national election polls, that's a fact.

Lie? You show Hillary winning and actually pulling away from Donald.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Lie? You show Hillary winning and actually pulling away from Donald.

All that needs to happen in this game would be a three-way race. And the odds are greater that it would turn out the expected way. But polls, while statistically accurate if they're done scientifically, reflect a point in time, and factors among the polled make their responses different than their final choice. Or -- they don't vote. This is December. There's another 10 or 11 months.

Hillary or Bernie, it will be interesting to see either in debates with Trump.

I'm even wondering if it would be less interesting if Trump's not the guy.

 

[SP33Demon]

Lie? You show Hillary winning and actually pulling away from Donald.

Less than a 4 point lead is pulling away? lol

 

[dank69]

They killed him a while back.

Lets be real. The media made a huge deal about Carson saying he was offered a scholarship to West Point.

If you look here, you'll find he wasn't lying. Westmoreland was indeed in Detroit, the ROTC did march for him, and Carson was there out in front. All of the evidence that is available corroborates Carson's story, but you can't corroborate a conversation that happened 50 years ago.

Read that, then go out and Google "carson westmoreland". You'll have a hard time finding any articles that printed the truth, and no retractions.

They did similar things to Sanders. It started with the fake / bullshit articles from the Dem debates saying Hillary won, when it was clear that Sanders support was spiking - and that got reflected shortly afterwards with higher polling numbers for Sanders.

Then it hit with the free college bankrupting the US BS the media spewed. Sanders didn't say he was going to send everyone to Princeton you know. Meanwhile countries like Kenya and Brazil offer free college, and 95% of Russians have an associates degree+


But every time they try to kill Donald "Please don't feel so stupid or insecure" Trump, it backfires.

Maybe Sanders needs to study Donald "Please don't feel so stupid or insecure" Trump a bit.

Here's a little picture that explains the media :

Nobody gives a shit about West Point. If you asked 100 people on the street about Carson and West Point, nobody would know what the fuck you are talking about. Carson can't get traction because he is fucking crazy. He is a goddamned doctor that says he doesn't believe in evolution. Do you understand the level of crazy that statement is? That is just one of many, MANY crazy things he has said.

 

[SP33Demon]

Nobody gives a shit about West Point. If you asked 100 people on the street about Carson and West Point, nobody would know what the fuck you are talking about. Carson can't get traction because he is fucking crazy. He is a goddamned doctor that says he doesn't believe in evolution. Do you understand the level of crazy that statement is? That is just one of many, MANY crazy things he has said.

I don't think Carson has stated whether he believes in microevolution, it's clear that he doesn't believe in macro. Most Christians believe in micro by definition. However, there is simply no proof of macro in the fossil record, i.e. the stupidity that is monkeys-->human.

 

[Subyman]

Less than a 4 point lead is pulling away? lol

Look at the graph, can you read a graph?

 

[SP33Demon]

Look at the graph, can you read a graph?

Yes, she increased her lead by 1 point in the last 45 days but it's "pulling away". Can you read a graph?

 

[Subyman]

Yes, she increased her lead by 1 point in the last 45 days but it's "pulling away". Can you read a graph?

That is the definition of pulling away. She is trending up, while Donald is stagnating. Keep arguing against a clear visual indicator.