For all the negative things one might think about Trump....

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Xelor, Oct 1, 2017.

  1. gipper
    Online

    gipper Libertarian/Anarchist

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    20,503
    Thanks Received:
    4,021
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +20,890
    But the reality is we had two choices. There are often several candidates for POTUS, but we all know it will be either a D or and R.
     
  2. Votto
    Offline

    Votto Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Messages:
    13,756
    Thanks Received:
    2,158
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +10,289
    The dumb, dumb does not understand he is suppose to be an empty suit. That is why they are all against him and why he will "accomplish" nothing, which I say is far better than any empty suit in orifice, especially Hillary

    Trump has to understand that if wants things done, he will have to go it alone. That means if you want a wall write an Executive Order. If you want to stop the insane sanctuary cities then write an executive order. If you want to bypass Obamacare then write an Executive Order, etc.

    Both parties are out to destroy the man.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,156
    Thanks Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,229
    We are routinely presented with decent candidates. The majority of people choose for whom they'll vote based on things that don't really speak to the individual's actual knowledge, intellect, character and demonstrated strengths and weaknesses in areas of public policy.

    I for one don't much care whether a politician is likable. I care if they are highly competent, an excellent collaborative leader, and of high ethical character. Those are not average traits. Trump was clearly none of those things, and that was clear from the start. Moreover, the only thing that man has in common with most Americans is that he's an average guy, but even that is diminished by his complete lack of connectedness with average people. Every member of the royal family of England have more direct exposure to regular people, their concerns, their struggles, etc. than does Trump. The Queen served in the Women’s Auxiliary Territorial Service as mechanic and truck driver. Indeed, the only things not average about Trump are his wealth and his complete and lifelong isolation from all things not posh.
     
  4. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,156
    Thanks Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,229
    I doubt that Trump's existential wealth is the point of that remark. I don't because of the sardonic back end of the sentence: "managed to stay rich despite his best efforts to blow it."
     
  5. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,156
    Thanks Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,229
    As go matters having the scope and complexity of those a POTUS must usher to resolution, none get accomplished without others in power condoning them. Such is the design of the U.S. government; it's called separation of power. the POTUS is not an absolute monarch.

    That's rich coming from you.
    I guess EOs have miraculously become Constitutional?
     
  6. frigidweirdo
    Offline

    frigidweirdo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2014
    Messages:
    23,793
    Thanks Received:
    2,435
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +8,414
    A decent candidate has to do what? Appeal to 25% of the population AT LEAST. That's hard, and in doing so you have to not say stuff that will piss people off.

    Colin Powell was asked if he'd run for President, he said no, he'd piss 99% of people off by saying what he actually thinks. That sums up the Presidency. Even Trump didn't say what he thought for most of the time, he was contradicting himself 50% of the time, and preparing to contradict himself the other 50%.

    In Proportional Representation you have leaders who appeal to sections of the country, and they get power, because no one party usually gets 50% of the seats or votes in order to be able to control things.
     
  7. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,156
    Thanks Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,229
    That is why I didn't pursue elective office. I say what I think on here, but in the "real word," I have the sense to keep my mouth shut about all sorts of public policy matters -- sometimes because I just don't know enough to have a well informed opinion and sometimes because I do have a well informed opinion and I know it's not what people will care to hear and they will thus look for every immaterial "straw" they can find for rejecting it.

    One routinely sees examples of that here with all the tu quoque BS that people toss out when a member criticises "whatever" or whomever...as if that has any relevance to the critique itself and the validity or virtue of the behavior giving rise to it. And the sad thing is that every person in the country from the time they were small children have been taught that tu quoque arguments hold no water.
    • "I don't care what 'Billy's' parent let him do. That has nothing to do with what you will do."
    • "If everyone else jumped off a cliff, would you?"
    • Two wrongs don't make a right.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Votto
    Offline

    Votto Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Messages:
    13,756
    Thanks Received:
    2,158
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +10,289
    Likeable? Who in the hell wants likeable when likeable has gotten us a $20 trillion debt, wars abroad, enldess corruption, and uncontrolled immigration?

    Screw likeable. What we need I think is a real SOB, more so than Trump.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,156
    Thanks Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,229

    I think we need candidates who will simply say:
    • A is what the government is doing well; it's working.
    • B is what the government is doing at with so-so degree of effectiveness and efficacy; it's working to some degree
    • C is what the government is doing poorly; it's barely working
    • D is what the government is doing and it's mess; it's not working at all
    That part of the message should, quite frankly, be identical among every candidate who's running for elective office. The rest of the message should continue as follows:

    Given those realities and the fact that we don't have unlimited resources, I cannot legitimately promise to fix all things to the satisfaction of all people; therefore I have to prioritize what we fix, and of those things:
    • these are the two or three I'm prioritizing for getting done in four years of my term
    • these are the detailed arguments for why I'm prioritizing those ahead of other needs
    • these are my specific objectives pertaining to those key
    • here is the detailed approach I intend to use to achieve each of them
    Other things that need fixing will be addressed as circumstances and opportunities for multitasking above and beyond the the first tier priorities allow.
    Everyone can understand a message like that because having to choose among competing needs is something everyone -- at every wealth and income level -- must face in their lives. Because we all face exactly that situation, red flags should go up in every voter's mind when they hear messages that amount to "I'm going to fix everything and it's going to be wonderful for everybody."

    Messages like that and people who issue them do only one thing: over promise and under deliver. Anyone who does't call BS on people making such promises have no business voting, and anyone who persists in delivering such messages doesn't deserve to be voted for.

    Really, who should win any election should come down to who has the most well thought out and risk mitigated approach to solving the problems. Of course, listening to presentations of that sort isn't "exciting." It's really serious stuff and it's stuff one must pay attention to carefully, which is not really something most Americans seem given to doing.
     
  10. BrokeLoser
    Online

    BrokeLoser Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Messages:
    3,578
    Thanks Received:
    658
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    MEXIFORNIA
    Ratings:
    +3,843
    Like most exceptionally successful people...real leaders have an amazing ability to simplify problems and issues that appear to be extremely complex to most.
    The truth is "many people" love to create complexity in things that are simple to begin with...it makes self proclaimed smart people feel smarter when they think everything requires total dissection. These are the same people that will bust their ass using an expanded vocabulary which essentially causes confusion, misunderstanding and ultimately a disconnection. They'll write lengthy stories rather than saying what needs to be said in simple clarity. Do you know any of these types I speak of?
     

Share This Page