Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 18^th, 2018 at 8:33pm:


That's the problem, I don't know how without stooping to that level.

I don't want whoever goes up against Trump to do that.

Someone needs to show some decency and self-respect in an office that so many, especially children, look up to.

SadKangaroo wrote on Jun 18^th, 2018 at 9:14pm:


In Aquascoot's Utopia, your type would be hunted down and sent to Room 101.

Why don't you people consent to that?

Mattyfisk wrote on Jun 18^th, 2018 at 9:23pm:



there is no such thing as utopia.

the left dont like trump.

i get it.

they "blame ' trump for "infecting" the minds of the people of the USA.

you simply have it ass about.

Trump is just a dialed in guy who can read a crowd (thats a good skill to have by the way, far more useful then being an arrogant uni professor).

so trump goes out and he starts reading crowds.

and he says some things and the crowds dont seem aroused and then he says some other things and the crowds light up.  so he says more of those things.

the "crowd" is "infecting " trump.

the left have got an enormous problem.

they think they topple this one guy and the USA goes back to what their "false reality" told them the USA was.

wrong.

you still got 1/2 the population who just arent buying lefty ideology.

and the left (because they are "stuck in their heads" types of guys) have no real path forward to reconnect with that enormous cohort.

not really.

in desperation the left try to garner votes from various minority groups and victim groups but that only further alienates the people of 'real" america.

trump is not the cause of the problem.

not even remotely.

the lazy mind of the leftie (yet again) focuses totally on trump because thats the "easy" thing to do.

the left need to do the hard thing, they need to present a way forward for "joe lunchbox" from south dakota who drives a pick up and likes to go hunting.

who's going to do that?

the elite of hollywood?, anti-fa?, the vice chancellor of the humanities department at USC?, longy and marla and gweggy?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 19^th, 2018 at 7:08am:



well theres a fundamental problem there.

an election is a "popularity" contest.

so it aint much good criticising a candidate for being a populist.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 19^th, 2018 at 7:43am:



"more enlightened " is difficult to define.

to karmal, more enlightened would mean opening the borders to instil the rich tapestry of multi culturalism
to the mechanic , more enlightened would mean closing the borders to preserve the wonderful cultural heritage of the USA as the "light on the hill".

it just pushes the problem back one more step.


North, people arent going to give up on their belief systems.
the choices are

1  to fight
2  to submit
3  to have a conversation where both parties can say exactly what is on their mind.

options 1 and 2  arent very good.

we should be using option 3

but the radical left and their PC agenda have closed down the ability of the people to speak freely.

people CAN NO LONGER SAY WHAT IS ON THEIR MIND for fear of being labelled and indeed prosecuted and this is directly due to leftie intellectual control of free speech.

so the left are hoisted on their own pettard.

they did not allow "real' america to speak freely and "real' america has retaliated.

and trump is merely the messenger of the american heartland.

as long as donald continues to "speak" their thoughts (which the leftie PC have suppressed), this phenomenom wont go away.

and attacking donald is an attack on the collective subconcious

and that is a very very bad idea

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 19^th, 2018 at 8:22am:



you may unleash the collective unconscious. .

people need to educate themselves that there are good things about the left (they are more creative) and good things about the right (they are more conscientous).

but i dont see that it is the right who are trying to close down debate

i see that as the radical left and the various star chambers of political correctness.

they are a very very bad idea.

because when people cant say exactly what they want to say, you cant resolve these differences in temperament.

and the left think that the right should just submit to their moral authority.

i heard gillard say it one day "we are going to do this because it is the RIGHT thing to do" .
it shuts down debate.

in fact, the radical left will not engage with people who dont agree with their ideology.
they see that to engage with a conservative is to give the patriachy legitimacy.

peoples belief systems are very very important to them.
its how they manage their emotions in a chaotic world.

and when you mess with someones belief system, you mess with their emotions and they hate that.

the radical left and the radical right are "overly emotional".

the solution is to allow total free speech.
then you can reach consensus.

trump is a reaction to the overly PC world of western politics.

if the left didnt behave the way they do, trump would cease to exist.
if the left hadnt been so good dammed emotionally uncalibrated during the election, he would never have won.

its on the left to now open up a dialogue and face the challenges to their own belief systems.

this wont be easy, they are snowflakes , after all and closed to challenge.

its why they are so dammed confused.

they are more open people but shut down to challenge of their belief systems.
its a very very bad idea

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jun 19^th, 2018 at 9:05am:


i think that apart from shouting fire in a crowded theatre, you should be able to do what you want.

and then you will be socialised by your peer group.

if you are a racist and hangs a sign saying "no niqqers" on your shop window, then people (black and white) will not trade with you and you will suffer economic loss and you will sit down without enough food to feed your family and you will be forced to rethink your position.

the market cuts all the rough edges off people.

peoples sanity depends on honest social interaction and then you can tell when you are out of line and course correct.

again, this is why trump has more legitimacy then a lefty professor in the humanities.

because trump has spent a lifetime pressing the flesh and being socialised by these interactions.

if all you do is mix with your PhD students in a leftie university, then you are going to continually drift.
and you will drift in the direction of your greatest weakness...probably in trait neuroticism and anxiety . and you will transfer that to your snowflake students.

we all know this.

that real estate agent or car salesman...like him or not...he has awesome social skills,
he understand people and what makes them tick
he's pretty dammed on the money with his gut instincts

Richdude wrote on Jun 19^th, 2018 at 1:31am:


I think you should take your own advice, however in this case, while entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts.

Keeping "everyone one"?

Trump's already broken most of his promises with healthcare and the outcomes of removing Obamacare.  I may only be highlighting a single example here, but it's a big one.

Then there are all the people who will be worse off because of his protections in one small sector of the economy and the ensuing trade wars that will impact a far greater number of people than those he's helped, vs his promises to the contrary.

Quote:


Being the loudest and running a campaign of "might is right" is pretty much the counter to an intelligent campaign. 

But credit where it's due, he did read and exploit is audience better than anyone in modern politics.

But if you want to call him intelligent, he needs to start listening to the experts rather than yes men and instead ignoring those informed on the given subject thinking he knows best.

He displays time and time again that he thinks he's always the smartest person in the room.  If he doesn't understand something, he'll say "Who knew" as if he's the first to discover the complexities of the issue at hand.  Sadly, it just shows that he's so uninformed that he's a perfect candidate for the Dunning Kruger effect until he learns just enough to realise how complex the issue is, often after it's too late, proclaiming "who knew" or "nobody knew",



Quote:


He controls both houses, he has a majority everywhere.
Again, entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.

Quote:


Why then is nobody ever willing or able to articulate the policies and the actions he's taken to achieve this and point to the statistics that show an increase over the previous Obama year or a positive change in tragectory under Trump?

The best we get is, "Him simply being President is enough".

Really..?

You'll find that the reason these questions go unanswered is, the moment you do the fact checking you'll see that the positive trends have slowed down under Trump. 

The biggest difference between Obama and Trump is that Trump is loudly taking personal credit for the jobs that have been created, even though they're less than the number created under Obama, and the sources you're getting your facts from are being deliberately misleading in claiming otherwise.

Since February, after Trump took office, the economy has gained nearly 1.7 million, according to preliminary data on nonfarm payroll for November which is great.

But once again, the job gains are part of a multiyear trend that started in 2010 while Obama was still in office.

Here’s yearly job growth since 2000:



You can see the big drop after the GFC thanks to the Bush era policies and lack of intervention/regulation in "the free market" and then the Obama recovery.

Now you add in Trump's first year where he's taking credit for the millions of jobs created and you can see he's created less than 5 out of the 7 of Obama's years,



And the reason Trump supporters are using whole job numbers and not the historical percentages is that if you compare his "unprecedented job growth" to Obama's strongest year, under Trump there has been a drop in jobs created by 33.4%, or more fairly to compare Obama's last year in office, Trump has created 13.2% fewer jobs than Obama.

If Trump had done nothing, it's likely there would have been more jobs created.

The same goes for the unemployment rate.  The decline in the rate has slowed since Trump took office.

What is actually happening is Trump is doing very little, but very loudly taking all the credit, that's all.

You want to judge Trump as effective because he's taken "Intelligent Action", how does that work when his outcomes are in the negative compared to his predecessor?

It's smart of him to claim otherwise, but again you've been duped.

Quote:


When the facts support your opinions I'll take your criticisms seriously.  Until then you're just another uninformed Trump Supporter using alternative facts to support Trump and credit him for all things positive and attack and blame others for anything negative.