Donald Trump and US politics
|
*orders Chinese takeout*
*reads fortune cookie* Yep, that Trump, he's the man I want running my country. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
|
I can understand people putting their head in the sand and denying the obvious because 'their man' is top. It's a football team thing.
Denying certain activities, actions, approaches, recordings, contradictions, etc, etc make any difference, TRU-UMP Cha Cha Cha!!! What I cannot and will not ever understand is when people say he is very intelligent. It's a real life emperor's new clothes, fucking hell. How could anyone say this and seem to actually believe it? Casually casual.
|
|
" What is real does not matter. What matter is their perception. It is like religion, it is what you believe. People doesn't have to make decisions base on facts, they also do so base on their beliefs. |
|
" I wouldn't select a mechanic based on his personality. I wouldn't select a programmer based on her tweets. I wouldn't choose my doctor based off of their eloquence. So how does one go about choosing someone for a job that only 44 people in the world have had experience in? We try to look at a person's background experience, their perceived intellect, knowledge, trustworthiness and character. Prior to becoming a senator, Obama's experience was a community organizer. He was largely picked for senator based on the connections of his wife to Chicago power players. Trump has no prior government experience, but does have a fair amount of business experience. How relevant that experience seems depends on how someone views whether he had an easy ride, or had to work to make it happen. Personal political biases and BS aside, neither Obama or Trump is a dolt. Whether one thinks their opinions are just plain dumb, they are both astute and have sharp minds. As anyone with high intelligence knows, intelligence doesn't come in just one flavor. There are similarities that are usually present, but differences as well. The absent minded genius stereotype has roots in the various quirks people display. The person of high intelligence can usually correct deficient areas of knowledge (far quicker than your average person can) if they deem those areas to be worth knowing about. Some of their selective focusing will be based on personal interests, and some based off of life experiences - both positive and negative. Obama's relevant knowledge prior to becoming a Senator is questionable at best. 6 years of being a senator might as well be an overnight cram study session. Trump's knowledge may have a longer span of international exposure, but the functional knowledge of official government interplay is far less. As someone higher up in a large bureaucracy, both had relevant experience in delegating and techniques of persuasion and personnel selection for efficiency. Both relied extensively on the expertise of people that reported to them. Trump is outspoken, brash, and often rude. Obama is usually soft spoken, but subtly rude, dismissive and acts with an air of superiority. Both are narcissistic. Obama had a lot of people's trust initially, but the more his actions didn't line up with his words, the less people trusted him. People who are so liberal that they look at New York and Europe as Neocons no longer trusted Obama. Trump came in with a lot of mistrust. The bankruptcies and questionable proceedings and deals (forced, pressured etc) left people wondering whether he was just a con artist, or someone whose bark was worse than his bite. His outspoken nature actually worked in his favor on this aspect. It certainly isn't always pleasant, and there's a temper element, but once you get to know the person, you have a good idea of how far their temper will carry them, how much is just venting, and to what extent the person is telling you how they really feel. Unless they really distrust you, the chances are there's not a whole lot being hidden. That doesn't hold for things they would feel guilty about disclosing to anyone, but they tend to divulge more of themselves than most people do. Is the same thing true of a con artist? Of course it is. Could they just be conning you? They could, that is up to the person to judge. As for divisiveness - Trump didn't generate that. That has been building for decades and decades and half a decade at the very least. You lived in Texas, and I know you've traveled to other parts of the US, so I would suspect you have heard what other places think about Texas. Trump didn't generate that. With the overwhelmingly liberal media and schooling in the US, the people who were conservative didn't change their viewpoints. Those who were liberal became complacent and began abusing their power. Banning conservative speakers from campus while allowing liberal speakers for example. Trump didn't generate that. Having the IRS investigate Tea Party aligned businesses for another example. Obama, unfortunately did do that. Calling everyone who might have been thinking about supporting Trump a bigot, a sexist, an Islamophobe, a racist, a homophobe, a deplorable .... There's part of the divide. Think of it as a multiplier - MORE divide, rather than just INCREASED divide. The hatred that the left turned on those who didn't like Trump and wouldn't vote for him, but weren't going to vote for Hillary either. More divide. The MSM assured the public Hillary was a shoo-in. Had the liberals really believed Trump would win, more would probably have showed up to vote. Then Trump won, and the left was collectively shocked, angry and felt betrayed. They flipped their collective lid. We have countless videos, blogs and stories showing that. Had Hillary won, that level of emotional outrage wouldn't be there. So, you could ostensibly say Trump created that part of the divide, but the largest chunk of that anger was just that Trump won. It was like driving to go cash in a two hundred million dollar lottery ticket, and then having the ticket blow out the window and become irretrievably lost. So to answer your question directly, do I think Trump is the person who should be running our country? For the current circumstances, and the amount of cross party collusion, the stagnation and seeing the same problems administration after administration, I would say yes he is. We need an outsider. We need someone who isn't beholden to preexisting government interests. We need someone who understands that there is a bottom line and that the pockets of the tax payers are not bottomless oceans that can be endlessly dredged to fund every government whim. Is Trump over confident? I'm sure he is. Does he have an underdeveloped sense of just how difficult the presidency is? I'm 100% certain of that. Look at the grey hair every president accumulates and it is easy to tell that there is some serious shit they have to deal with that they never expected. It is stuff that would turn all of our hair grey if we knew about it. Obama had a similar sense of changing the world. Unfortunately he spent all of his political capitol trying to force Obamacare through. Trump has very little political capitol - which is part of the reason he is still out there tweeting and stumping for himself. Trump still has his enthusiasm and goals. How much he will accomplish will depend on how well he can compromise. No compromising and the buck will stop here, rather than here. There's a congress and a judiciary to keep Trump in check as well. We've already seen that in action. The media, as biased and untrustworthy as they are, will also keep us well informed of anything nefarious that Trump does. Trump is no Ross Perot, but he's the closest thing we are likely to get for a while. If he succeeds and does well for two terms, than I think our choices for future presidents will be far more open and less constricted by who the democrats or republicans want in office. That alone would be a major victory. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
| |
" I fucking love this community. | |
" A Hyena boasted about how much smarter it was than the giraffe, citing stories where it had outsmarted a cheetah and gotten away with its kill. It bragged about how much braver and stronger than the Giraffe it was and talked about how it had faced off with and driven away a large lion. The Giraffe nodded its head in agreement with the Hyena, then spotting two young lion cubs at a distance, the Giraffe bounded away. "That's exactly what I'm talking about, the Hyena said to himself. "Those cubs can't hunt and they are still a long ways off. I cold probably make a meal of them myself if I was hungry enough." The Giraffe heard the yelping sound and looked back to see the pride of lions that had been sneaking up, begin to tear into the hyena. The Giraffe ran for another minute and saw the two cubs wander up and begin to chew on what was left. PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910 Last edited by DalaiLama on Mar 5, 2017, 5:25:21 AM
| |
" Well, let's say someone has no relevant experience whatsoever for a job they want. And let's also say that finding truly relevant experience for that job is pretty hard. One of the first things I'd look for is how willing someone is to learn. How eager they are to pick up new ideas, expand their understanding, and get better at the job. So, for example, when judging a neophyte candidate who knows very little about foreign policy a week into the campaign, it might be useful to see if they've shored up these weaknesses a year into the campaign. Trump didn't. His statements on foreign policy were often nonsensical and misguided, and this didn't change much from day one right up to the election. In the presidential debates, he seemed completely lost on what was the big foreign policy issue of the day, the fall of Aleppo. Far from an understanding one might expect from a presidential candidate, he didn't even display the understanding one might gain by reading the newspaper. And then you hear that he's not regularly taking his intelligence briefings. " Two things. 1. Are you fucking serious? The right-wing throughline on Clinton was literally "Lock her up". That she was a criminal, a traitor, responsible for ISIS, murdered a US ambassador (only the latest on a long kill list - remember Vince Foster?), and was taking part in a pedophile ring beneath a Washington pizza restaurant. You seriously think that the mature, sane, rational people* behind those lovely opinions would have turned around and said, "Well, you win some, you lose some, time to get back to work making this country great again." 2. Even if I believed for a second that that were the case, there's really no comparison between a normal politician and Donald Trump. What we're looking at is a president who ran on a platform tinged in white nationalism, who clearly has little idea what he's doing (if you propose giving the national debt a haircut because "that worked for my businesses", you officially cede any claim you might have had to any understanding of economics), who has consistently had good things to say about autocrats and dictators, who has been going after the press non-stop, who invents and buys into insane conspiracy theories, and who was bolstered in no small part by foreign efforts. I think Vox put it best - this was a battle between normal and abnormal, and abnormal carried the day in grand fashion. And the ways in which it was abnormal are why there's so much more outrage here. *And because it's been unclear in the past, let me clarify: if I rolled my eyes any harder my optical nerves would snap off. " That reminds me, you never got back to me on evidence for your claims that FOX News was less biased and more accurate than other mainstream news networks. Did you see that post? Luna's Blackguards - a guild of bronies - is now recruiting! If you're a fan of our favourite chromatic marshmallow equines, hit me up with an add or whisper, and I'll invite you!
IGN: HopeYouAreFireProof |
|
" I have no idea WTF that analogy(?) was all about. Maybe I'm not intelligent enough, but I can tell you one thing for sure, Trump has no idea, either. People who said I was very intelligent would also be incorrect. I would never run for president, people, countries, deserve better. OK, I get it, the hyena was saying stupid things but thinking he's clever, the giraffe saw how stupid the hyena was and GTFO. The hyena got eaten because stupid. I'm a giraffe? Trump is a hyena? He's "like a smart animal". Lions = Dems? Voters? Rest of the world? Casually casual. Last edited by TheAnuhart on Mar 5, 2017, 5:51:34 AM
|
|
" I think They are saying you are the hyena, they are the giraffe. Trump is the lion. Trump isn't as dumb as people think he is. He is the deceiver. Telling his audiences what they wanted to hear. Playing dumb to avoid responsibility. There is also plenty of plausible reasons why trump tell such obvious lies. I think he is for his own profit. A malicious present. His apparent concern for the welfare of his supporters is a pretent to achieve what he want. His supporters think otherwise, he is gonna make America great again. This is what I disagree. You do not ask a lion whether he is hungry or not. The Lion convince people he is for the welfare of the giraffe. Crazy shit, right? Last edited by deathflower on Mar 5, 2017, 6:00:51 AM
|
|
|
See, I get that scenario.
But I really can't get that Trump isn't as stupid as he comes across. You'd have to be next level genius to pull off that level of stupidity without ever actually not coming across as stupid. I have yet to see the slip where a tiny bit of even moderate intelligence pokes through. Casually casual.
|
|
