Hugo Drax
Diamond Member
- Nov 20, 2011
- 5,647
- 47
- 91
Bush got elected twice. And Trump is 1000x smarter than Bush who was an alcoholic who could not keep a job and his dad had to clean his mess all the time. Yet he did get elected twice.
Bush got elected twice. And Trump is 1000x smarter than Bush who was an alcoholic who could not keep a job and his dad had to clean his mess all the time. Yet he did get elected twice.
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
- Feb 4, 2009
- 35,862
- 17,403
- 136
Trump is also 1000x more narcissistic than Bush which I'm not so sure is a good thing.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,615
- 2,023
- 126
"Moderately successful" is a relative description and depends on the eye of the beholder. Here's the bio-clip from Wiki:
"Trump is a son of Fred Trump, a New York City real estate developer.[10] Donald Trump worked for his father's firm, Elizabeth Trump & Son, while attending the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, and, in 1968, officially joined the company.[11] He was given control of the company in 1971, renaming it The Trump Organization.[12][13] Trump remains a major figure in the real estate industry in the United States and a media celebrity."
"Up from slavery!" "Self-made man!" Pulled himself up from his bootstraps!" Goll-eee-- Gee!
So a year older than I am, he's handed the company or "given control" at the age of ~ 24. The road is long, the way is hard, slogging our way to lifetime achievement!!
And you're citing Trump's own book, "The Art of the Deal," as a proper perspective on this?
Of course he started from nothing! He says so!
Donald's supporters fall way short -- for not having the slightest idea of personality disorders, character, or any remembrance of how those qualities rise or fall with American presidents since the turn of the last century.
They're lost!! Like a boat with its sail flapping in the wind, looking for momentum and guidance.
"Illegal immigration -- #1 priority." Who do you think you're kidding? It's a big problem, and needs solving. But it hasn't been a problem for a half century.
Somebody gave us this list:
the economy
wars
education
the diminishing middle class
corporate welfare
the constant invasion of citizen's privacy
the climate
medical and health issues
the homeless and hungry
I'll address that list, but why don't we add another one?
Good government
There's a long-standing myth, you know, that business success and net-worth are good indicators of potential presidential success. I spit on that myth! Because -- that's what it is!
If you want to suggest examples of how those things may apply, look at the two defense secretaries for Ike and JFK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Erwin_Wilson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McNamara
I suggest you ask yourself why these men were tapped for the position. What did the auto industry have in common with defense (or defense-contracting)? But if you look at McNamara, he was failing over Vietnam, because he was getting bad intelligence and locked into a stance of "no way out." So -- he quit. But he gave us seatbelts. And the way he gave us seatbelts had less to do with his "Ford experience" and more to do with his education and wartime government experience -- working with Curtis Lemay.
And you can now ask yourself why it was necessary earlier in Obama's presidency to bail out GM. Or look back to the mid-70s to see why Senator John Tower thought it imperative to bail out Lockheed Corporation.
Back to the "list."
What would happen to the economy if energy were free? A corollary question: What single thing or similar group of things is necessary for anything to move, for anyone to get to work, to wage war -- in this economy? So -- there's the economy.
What would happen to the "economy" of red-states along the Gulf Coast, with another Deep Horizon blowout? Where do you get your shrimp these days?
Wars. We had three presidents -- one Dem and one GOP -- from a single state since 1960. They gave us four wars. With some suspicion about the earliest one (mineral deposits in the South China Sea), what "thing" seemed to be associated with each and every one -- if only the remaining three?
Corporate welfare. If you look at just two big states which gave us 5 out of 9 presidencies between 1964 and the end of the 2004 presidential term, they have two big things in common. There's plenty of examples of corporate welfare, but those two industries either influence foreign policy behind closed doors, or seek a continuous infusion of cash through government contracts. "Strategic Minerals" gets special tax breaks.
Climate. That's all a matter of future cost, but we've seen costs in the present, although the deniers don't see or won't see the connection. The photo-chemistry is well-understood, the data is voluminous and goes back many decades, it can be demonstrated in a laboratory. Now -- about those future costs.
medical and health issues. In my cornpone s***a** local newspaper, the halfwits are constantly complaining about environmental regulation. Maybe the halfwits weren't around in 1968: I could stand on the edge of my UC campus, open my mouth and taste something like sour milk. I could not see the time on the clock of the campus carillon tower. We still have the worst air in the US, but compared to then? Crystal clear.
And back to an item under "health." How do you feel about shrimp with cancerous growths in your seafood linguini?
At least one of those industries or two components -- coal and oil -- do NOT want their product to be made obsolete for transportation, electricity, or heating homes. They've invested piles of excess profits into a vertically integrated refinement infrastructure that has a known lifespan and depreciation schedule. But they needn't worry too much about the investment: any new technological paradigm will phase in slowly. However, they're addicted to their short-term revenues like the world is addicted to their product. And businesses don't think so much about the long-term.
Good Government: The corruption of the Minerals Management SErvice. The appointment of a Horse-show organizer to FEMA. A crazy ditz turned congresswoman who worked at IRS in the 90s. Billions of dollars in fraudulent charges to DOD from Halliburton. Shall I go on with this?
Consider that all of this "magical black stuff" wonderfulness comes from the rot of 200-milliion-years ago -- a one-time fluke of prehistoric Nature.
That's the big, big long-term problem.
But the chuckleheads are worried about the Mez-kins in the Home-Depot parking lot. They're worried about illegals taking jobs that most Americans wouldn't take anyway (I did -- in high-school. Y'all should try it 10 hours a day, 6 days a week in the So-Cal summer sun.) I'm worried about the social security database with people acquiring phony IDs. So -- sure -- fix it.
But how hard do you think it is to do that? Something's wrong, because nobody has been able to do it. Obama pursued a record-high level of deportations, but the Cornpones still blame HIM for the problem!!
J'Accuse'! J'Accuse'! We have met the Enemy, and He be Us! Or -- he be AMONG us!
Last edited:
He should be targeted for being an oblivious tool who can only repeatedly state that everything is broken. The sad part is that Fox News lets other people slide on claims just like that who are part of the problem. Jeb claimed that the Washington DC establishment was the problem, and I can't believe no one has batted an eye. He has a father and a brother who were both presidents, and he's denouncing all the evil in DC. He's also the most successful Super PAC candidate for all of those lobbyists on K Street. But because he's the guy that Republican establishment wants in office, he doesn't get called out on it or anything else.
Anyone who watches Trump's closing statement should know he doesn't know or give a shit about the issues. All he did was try to tap in to people's anger by repeating the rants he gives in every interview. He doesn't actually have any idea of how to solve problems. Build a wall? Unless we build it 100 feet deep, it won't accomplish anything. He didn't even use all of his available time. He just said something like "our politicians are idiots and they are losing to China and Mexico", which is what he's being saying since he announced his candidacy.
Unfortunately, Fox News just went for the easy route and called him out on the opening question for not being willing to bow to the Republican establishment. Somehow he's become the Tea Party candidate while simultaneously being the kind of guy they all hated yesterday for being part of the rich elite who just privatize all of their gains and have the government pick up the check for all of their losses.
Last edited:
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,615
- 2,023
- 126
The point needs to be made about "advantage" and Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
Wealth generates income, and in a diversified portfolio, losses are manageable, risk is finite, and many returns are guaranteed.
Yes -- Bill Gates is a brilliant man. He built his company on an OS he bought from a programmer for $50,000. He had a $2 million trust-fund. If I were a Harvard freshman with the resources Ted Kascinski had in the late 50s, would I think it wise to drop out?
I know more than just a handful of people who personally can run circles around either Fiorina or Trump. The richest was worth $20 million the last I checked. Several more have a tidy retirement income, and that's about it.
If you spent your life seeking nothing but money, you very well may find it.
But one has to decide whether that's the only worthwhile pursuit in life.
So it's an issue of being fair and balanced? Imagine that. Still, Trump is low hanging fruit, an obvious idiot, and the easy target. Let's control ourselves with black helicopters and tin foil delusions.
Crazies like Trump bring out the crazies on the other side. A woman calls him out on some outrageous comments... this normally would have led to a collective, orgasmic high five, but listen to these people and it's obvious how disingenuous they are. Instead of a thumbs up they invent all manner of conspiratorial bullshit. Good grief.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,615
- 2,023
- 126
I must've said earlier that I DVR'd that debate so I can analyze it question-by-question.
FOX may have the right to do what they did -- exclusively (ex-clu-sively) hosting the debate. There's no doubt in my mind though that I'll find loaded questions, straw-man questions -- questions with as much intent for propaganda as for sorting out the candidates.
I also put forth a theory that the "fix is in" for the result. Not necessarily someone specifically, but someone equally supported by the same Super-PACs and industries.
MongGrel
Lifer
- Dec 3, 2013
- 38,466
- 3,067
- 121
MongGrel
Lifer
- Dec 3, 2013
- 38,466
- 3,067
- 121
Sunburn74
Diamond Member
- Oct 5, 2009
- 5,076
- 2,635
- 136
I think the bigger issue is there is no set of qualifications for president.
In this day and age, it seem all you need is to be popular enough. There are some studies that show when it comes to presidential elections, when it comes down to just 2 guys, whoever has the nicer hair wins. Heck if tom brady ran for president, I'm sure he'd give hilldog and jeb a serious battle.
I would say no president in the history of the US has ever had the qualifications I would require to be a president. I think at the very least I would require a world-class knowledge of both US and world history, some sort of physical fitness requirement, dementia screening, evidence of 2 years of forced living on a minimum wage during adult-hood, and an agreement that after your term in office is completed you are promptly executed publicly (as a means of ensuring that candidates really want the job for the good of the country and not for personal gain)
No conspiracy theory is required to recognize that FNC and their financial supporters don't want Trump being nominated. The first freakin' question of the debate was meant to make him stand alone on the stage. Then they asked him about personal issues while letting people like Jeb claim he wasn't part of the DC establishment.
There are favorites, and FNC is all about making sure they get to the final table.
Last edited:
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,615
- 2,023
- 126
While I'm more inclined to public executions after a few incidents including but not ending with Dylan Roof's episode, I don't think that will attract wise men.
I DO think two generations of Shrubbery should have been held to account for high crimes and misdemeanors. And how do you make compensation for a trillion in squandered public funds?
My view of this comes with a lifelong bias -- for a career I chose and stuck to, when I should've cut bait and lobbied the personnel office of Microsoft.
There are various interlocking disciplines: Public Administration, Law, Economics, Business Administration and so on. But "business" either as discipline or experience is neither adequate, nor mutually exclusive to the rest.
Would Elliot Richardson have made a good President? I'd like to think so; the power of his thought in published articles, op-eds and other demonstrations leads me to conclude as much. But because of "Principle" associated with the Public Trust, he was deemed "disloyal" to a party that too often invokes "Principle" as a political symbol.
Every president is a spokesperson. He depends on an army of people -- appointees from various backgrounds, career civil servants -- to process information and make judgments about it. Cabinet officers are important.
I object to a president acting as spokesperson for concentrated industries which already have the public by the cajonies. That's "corporatism" -- a euphemism for something else. I suggest -- merely suggest -- that you will find a grand intersection between such people with mediocre talent and a short presence of mind. The selection always makes it easier for the Masters of the Universe to call him on the telephone and get his time and attention.
Character matters. "Personality disorders" also matter. Knowledge matters, and knowledge through experience has its place.
Professional training? That's at odds with our concept of "of the people, by the people and for the people" as the electorate might view something like "meritocracy." But I think those things I mentioned can be acquired through experience no less than at a place like West Point or just "some good state U."
Perhaps the problem is the electorate as a manifestation of Hegel's "National Spirit." Are they awake? Do they wake up blind? Or do they see? Do they look but fail to see? I can only report what I observe.
And by the way -- "A knowledge of history." Abso-freakin-lutely.
Now that raises in my mind a question about how much we really know. Ever since the National Security Act of 1947, what we're told and what is "done in our name" has consequences.
There's this inclination and kneejerk reaction to disclosure and hindsight criticism that those who voice it are unpatriotic -- they "tear down America."
But if you "know" something not commonly held to be true, and something else is generally accepted as true, those comfortable with the latter are lost in the woods. You can't grow and build a country on a Lie. Oftentimes, we don't even realize the implications of the Lie, in terms of attitudes about public expenditure and other current, pressing decisions.
Last edited:
TheGardener
Golden Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 1,945
- 33
- 56
The more I see of the idiot and biased members of the media and the pompous Washington establishment trying to keep Trump out of the race, the more I want him to stay in and fight. Would he make a great or even a decent President? All I know is, I haven't seen one President who is for me since Ronald Reagan. At this point, I have no confidence I'll ever again see a President who will call me a constituent.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,615
- 2,023
- 126
Well . . . I won't pontificate on our differences about this.
There are obvious signs of problems with different people. Narcissistic personality disorder, even folklore about domestic violence, a raw count of spouses in the marital history, a choice to raise issues suggested by just one constituency, a lack of discipline or inclination to maintain civil discourse.
I'm fine with Trump's campaign, but not for the same reasons.
We've lost a sense for how these campaigns and debates are useful. This derives from an extreme sense of partisanship and a divided electorate. We've recently seen vocal advocates, elected representatives and others damn the entire notion of compromise.
If 49% of the electorate wants a basket of public policies and goods, and 51% wants a different basket, how is a 2% margin justification to pursue one direction without compromise?
Look to the sources of gridlock for the last 7 years. Don't tell me the source of it is in the Oval Office.
But the message I get -- for instance, over the Iran negotiations or the ACA -- "We're absolutely right! You're absolutely totally wrong! Period!"
Maybe that can be appended to the definition of insanity.
TheGardener
Golden Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 1,945
- 33
- 56
They are all biased. The late Andy Rooney said as much. Not many have the courage like him to admit it.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 16,615
- 2,023
- 126
I just don't see it as "courage" for someone who needs the spotlight so much.
There IS an "Emperor with no clothes" that nobody is criticizing outright -- for fear of losing PAC money, or simply a failure to see it in its naked magnificence.
I explained what it is. It is perhaps the "Sovereign" of today corresponding to Hobbes' more simplistic and explicit idea of a "Sovereign."
The Sovereign sends lobbyists to Washington. It promotes its own candidates. IF it wants more influence, it picks a candidate from its own. It has influence now; it had influence "then;" it will continue to have influence until it can be made obsolete.
Or, until someone just flat out says "The Emperor has no Clothes! Look!"
TheGardener
Golden Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 1,945
- 33
- 56
That's the beauty of Donald Trump. He doesn't need the PAC money, lobbyists or the establishment Republican politicians. He is interesting that way. The last time we saw this was Ross Perot, and that was 25 years ago. I saw CNN complaining that the media should stop giving Trump so much time. But then again, CNN struggles for an audience. So they have to.
The only thing I can hope for is entertainment. None of them will do anything positive for me. They only want is to suck me dry. Trump provides that entertainment.
The only thing I can hope for is entertainment. None of them will do anything positive for me. They only want is to suck me dry. Trump provides that entertainment.
MongGrel
Lifer
- Dec 3, 2013
- 38,466
- 3,067
- 121
Trump actually hits on a few of these, which is amazing in this day and age. Plus he's as entertaining as fuck.
01. Repeal Dodd/Frank and replace it with proven legislation in the Glass Steagall Act.
02. Repeal NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA and TPP and all illegal trade agreements.
03. Pull the US out of the WTO
04. Secure our porous borders
05. Prosecute all players in LIBOR fixing and subsequent insider banking scandals.
06. Prosecute Wall St. precipitants of the 2008 financial collapse
07. Break up a media monopoly where 90% ownership is allowed to six corporations
08. Institute term limits for Congress
09. Confront China on trade relations, including removing 'Most Favored Nation' MFN/PNTR trade status.
10. Make the actions at K-Street completely transparent and open investigations on this private/public sector revolving door.
11. Put an end to fascistic Presidential Executive Orders and Memoranda. Only Congress can enact legislation. Repeal any unconstitutional orders starting with the most troublesome.
12. Wake up the American People from the false dichotomy of a corrupt two-party system.
01. Repeal Dodd/Frank and replace it with proven legislation in the Glass Steagall Act.
02. Repeal NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA and TPP and all illegal trade agreements.
03. Pull the US out of the WTO
04. Secure our porous borders
05. Prosecute all players in LIBOR fixing and subsequent insider banking scandals.
06. Prosecute Wall St. precipitants of the 2008 financial collapse
07. Break up a media monopoly where 90% ownership is allowed to six corporations
08. Institute term limits for Congress
09. Confront China on trade relations, including removing 'Most Favored Nation' MFN/PNTR trade status.
10. Make the actions at K-Street completely transparent and open investigations on this private/public sector revolving door.
11. Put an end to fascistic Presidential Executive Orders and Memoranda. Only Congress can enact legislation. Repeal any unconstitutional orders starting with the most troublesome.
12. Wake up the American People from the false dichotomy of a corrupt two-party system.
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
- Feb 4, 2009
- 35,862
- 17,403
- 136
KMFJD
Lifer
- Aug 11, 2005
- 32,632
- 52,036
- 136
That would make an entertaining comedy show...the odd couple in the white house
Fanatical Meat
Lifer
- Feb 4, 2009
- 35,862
- 17,403
- 136
I know, Trump would have to be VP but I'd probably vote for them.
**Assuming the list is true**
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter