Donald trump. what is your take on him?

[Phrazemaster]

That's a pretty broad statement :

As one myself, I grew up with rationing until I was four years old.  Only 1 or 2% were able to afford to go to university back then so we all went out to work at 16.  We saw our parents and grandparents trapped in paying rent to landlords so we wanted none of that for our old age, so we saved deposits and bought run-down properties and renovated them.  We didn't drink to excess because we needed the money to pay the mortgage.  We bought clapped out old cars and learnt how to repair them ourselves or got a mate to help.  We learnt how to do loads of DIY on houses that our parents hadn't a clue about.

My kids all went to university but they had to pay for it themselves, I never had the cash to give them a free ride.
I scrimped and saved to contribute to a pension for my retirement, only to have it trashed by the financial crunch.  I signed up for £13k a year pension (all I could afford) and made payments for 26 years only to find out 5 years before it started, it was going to pay me £2k/year.  Yes that's right £2000.

I have had to sell my house in the UK and buy a cheap house in France (none in UK) so we can live off the equity. I had to start  renovating at age 65, I may finish by the time I'm 70.  Now we have had Brexit and the devaluation has given my pension a further 20% pay cut.

Now please tell me what part of that should I be ashamed of ?

DaveP

That's just...disgusting! Wow! This world is structured so incredibly poorly, working so well for so few and so badly for so many.

Well you gotta hang with your peeps here at GDIY so you can stop thinking about money woes!

 

[Phrazemaster]

Hillary and Donald are two sides of this same coin.

Yup. Evil shadows of each other. I really don't think it will matter which one is elected; the elite have their plans and damn the torpedos! I seriously believe the vote itself is rigged anyway, if not sabotaged by the electoral college system itself, then by hacked electronic voting machines. They already proved in 2000 it doesn't matter how America voted when the Supreme Court prevented a recount and declared Bush the winner.

What democracy? Demo-crazy.

 

[Phrazemaster]

Human nature is what it is. We can try to mitigate the bad parts of it and nurture the good, or the opposite, or anything in between.

If we had free market capitalism then some of this mess would indeed not be present, but we'd have other issues. The very foundation of capitalism is what drives what we see today. John's "crony capitalism" is nothing peculiar but instead entirely foreseeable in a capitalist system. It's a flaw of that system, inherently.

Very well stated. The heart of the system is based on need and greed. There can be no harmony and overall good in a system like that as long as people are encouraged to be "every man for himself" and damn the rest of ya. We don't have a cooperative system; we have an antagonistic system designed to allow those with the most agressive tendencies to crawl over the carcasses of others to get to the top. I expect dog eat dog, but this is people eat people.

 

[mattiasNYC]

So which system do you then propose is best that has actually worked well in the real world?

The problem with the question is how you define "worked". And 'no', I'm neither trying to be cute nor evasive.

 

[mattiasNYC]

Too strong an emphasis on 'criticism of capitalism' unwillingly runs the danger of feeding populist propaganda.

Not our fault but a lot of anti-democratic propaganda does just that: it points to capitalist democracy and declares it degenerated. Pair that with projections of  moral and intellectual superiority and the clock starts turning backwards.

When it comes to populism and 'intellectual superiority' I think it's nicely offset by an appeal to anti-intellectualism. These days opinions are equal to facts, and since everyone is allowed to have an opinion nobody is really right about anything. That's why Trump can say anything, literally anything, and some supporters will simply ignore fact and assume that whatever they feel must be correct, because opinions = facts.

The irony is that parts of the often-quoted 'People' apparently don't seem to realize that by voting for such actors they will actually perpetuate that very same system they have been told to abhor so fervently. Just look at the political formula being propagated:

nationalism + neoliberalism

I don't want any of the two in pure form -- but in combination they look highly unfavourable.

I agree.

 

[mattiasNYC]

I'm still somewhat baffled by Americans though. I mean, there's just a seemingly endless stream of lies coming out of the Trump campaign and his supporters just NEVER seem to care. Truth to them seems to be entirely irrelevant.

Just recently he was rushed off stage and the campaigned tweeted that it was an assassination attempt. It wasn't. They didn't take it down. The campaign manager just talks around the issue in a CNN interview like it's no big deal.

Imagine what this does to US voters who think that Trump's their man and that their country is in the toilet and under attack from criminal Mexicans and Muslims; their candidate was just subjected to an attempted assassination. That's the information they get. Then couple that with him repeatedly saying that the election will be rigged if he loses. This is dangerous stuff and Trump voters just don't care, 'cause "EMAILS" and "BENGAZI"....

 

[JohnRoberts]

I'm still somewhat baffled by Americans though.

Just like many americans are baffled about foreigners. Actually it is the human condition to ASSume everybody thinks exactly like we do... but people with different life experiences process information using different filters.

I mean, there's just a seemingly endless stream of lies coming out of the Trump campaign and his supporters just NEVER seem to care. Truth to them seems to be entirely irrelevant.

Truth..? ? ? Hillary has lied to congress and the public repeatedly about her emails. Less politically connected people than her go to prison for lying to the government less than that..

Just recently he was rushed off stage and the campaigned tweeted that it was an assassination attempt. It wasn't. They didn't take it down. The campaign manager just talks around the issue in a CNN interview like it's no big deal.

CNN the (clinton news network).  Somebody in the crowd yelled gun, and that was probably the same guy they carted off in handcuffs. Lets try to figure out why someone was trying to disrupt a Trump rally? Any guesses?

Imagine what this does to US voters who think that Trump's their man and that their country is in the toilet and under attack from criminal Mexicans and Muslims; their candidate was just subjected to an attempted assassination. That's the information they get. Then couple that with him repeatedly saying that the election will be rigged if he loses. This is dangerous stuff and Trump voters just don't care, 'cause "EMAILS" and "BENGAZI"....

You need to add clinton foundation (also being investigated by FBI) and decades of funny business since she was first lady of AR.

You may be underestimating the silent majority. Tired of being told what to think by media. I haven't watched much TV all week... Damn last week I saw Michael Moore on a business news stock analysis program... WTF??  he was pimping his Trump movie during a stock investing show.  At least Moore is a capitalist.  ;D ;D

I have heard Trump say a lot of incorrect stuff out of ignorance, Hillary has overtly lied about things she knew were wrong. However after decades in politics she may not think of them as lies like you or I would. Toeing the official administration line about Benghazi being caused by a video, was just her following the talking points from above.  Trump likewise doesn't parse his words carefully (like a lawyer) but spews them out like a blunt instrument painting verbal images. So I doubt he views himself as a liar either. I consider one (the  lawyer) should be more cognizant of when she is not speaking the truth, but answering some questions truthfully could have a bad outcome for her. Perhaps that is why she "did not recall" 39 times when questioned by the FBI.  Technically not caught in a lie with those, but do you believe she really did not recall 39 times?

Draw your own conclusions about who is lying (worse)... to some degree both lie, since a politician who speaks only the truth would never get elected. They all have to promise that they can create jobs and other crazy stuff that they can't actually deliver. At some point it becomes a slippery slope blurring the line between factual statements  and political promises. 

JR

PS: If you tell your wife or girlfriend you will love her forever is that a lie?  (probably) 

 

[DaveP]

I'm still somewhat baffled by Americans though.
Just like many americans are baffled about foreigners. Actually it is the human condition to ASSume everybody thinks exactly like we do... but people with different life experiences process information using different filters.

I am not  baffled by Americans half as much as I am by cultures that value family honour and "Shame" over the love they have for their own children.

I don't know about the USA, but in the UK, nearly everyone in the media and the teaching professions is liberal/ left wing.  But there are several newspapers that have right wing views.  I have noticed that liberals I have known have a kind of arrogance about them that looks down on other viewpoints as "How could you possibly think otherwise?"  I think Clinton summed up what they think of half of Americans when she called them "Deplorables".  Definitely a Freudian slip.

She just confirmed with that comment that she is part of the ruling elite and thereby confirming what many hate about the existing system, it was certainly a gaffe on par with some of Trump's.

I've just heard that the FBI have cleared her emails on Wiener's devices, interesting to see if she will pull away from Trump now.

DaveP

 

[living sounds]

About that new Michael Moore movie - I've seen it, it's brilliant. Watch it if you can, preferably before you go out and vote.

I don't think there's anything like the old "silent majority" any more. A long-term realignment has been underway for some time now (and let's face it, without the trickery in 2000 and 9/11 Bush would never have been president [twice]), and a long-lasting progressive era is really likely.

At least long as people actually got out and vote and reject the fashist with the orange fur on his head.

Clinton is not perfect. But comparing her to Trump is like comparing a hangover to lung cancer.

 

[living sounds]

  I think Clinton summed up what they think of half of Americans when she called them "Deplorables".  Definitely a Freudian slip.

She was referring to the racists in Trumps camp (not one half of US people, I hope). It was hypothesized she said that to make non-racist Republicans ashamed of voting for Trump. She's so very cautious, it's unlikely she said something like this by accident.

 

[DaveP]

She's so very cautious, it's unlikely she said something like this by accident.

If I was secretary of state I would follow the rules to the letter, that is very cautious.

There are so many nasty surprises in politics you can't afford to be otherwise.  She was not being cautious when she set up her own private server to circumvent official scrutiny.

She was either ignorant of the rules...... Yeah right.

Thought she was above the rules.....Arrogance.

Thought she could get away with it.......Dishonest.

None of these possibilities has a wiff of caution about them.

DaveP

 

[JohnRoberts]

More curves ahead...

Yup... buckle up your seat belts.

JR

 

[Script]

...and ask the juice pusher/trolley dolly for a barf bag...

 

[mattiasNYC]

Truth..? ? ? Hillary has lied to congress and the public repeatedly about her emails. Less politically connected people than her go to prison for lying to the government less than that..

Well, you'll have to quote her then and accompany her exact wording with the facts that show she lied. As far as I can see this is all just regurgitation of anti-Clinton propaganda which amounts to an assertion one has to check oneself by digging into official public records etc. With Trump it's different because it's in our face and easy to find. With him all one has to do is check his Twitter feed to see his lies. Not only that, but media has showed his many lies many times.

(I know you won't quote her though)

CNN the (clinton news network).  Somebody in the crowd yelled gun, and that was probably the same guy they carted off in handcuffs. Lets try to figure out why someone was trying to disrupt a Trump rally? Any guesses?

You just did EXACTLY what Trump's campaign manager did! You instantly started talking about Clinton/Democrats and avoided answering the actual question.

Did you even notice you did that?

If you don't think it's significant that a presidential candidate's campaign leaves a tweet up that the candidate was subjected to an assassination attempt WHILE KNOWING IT WASN'T THE CASE, then I really don't know what to say.....

You need to add clinton foundation (also being investigated by FBI) and decades of funny business since she was first lady of AR.

And which of the above two foments hatred in the masses by actively speaking to said masses? That's the difference here.  Just consider this for a second, all messages directed to voters:

- Muslims shouldn't be allowed to enter the US
- Mexicans consist of rapists and drug peddlers
- Build a wall against Mexico (it pays)
- Polls are rigged (when they say I'm behind)
- The election is rigged (if I lose)
- If I win I'm going to put my opponent in jail
- Someone just tried to assassinate me

You look at history and tell me the above isn't smelling tremendously foul. It really should bring back memories. This is dangerous rhetoric. Clinton and her foundations aren't responsible for the same.

You may be underestimating the silent majority. Tired of being told what to think by media.

But the irony is that as I pointed out you just did exactly what Trump's campaign manager did, so what does that tell you about what media?

I have heard Trump say a lot of incorrect stuff out of ignorance, Hillary has overtly lied about things she knew were wrong.

I don't dispute that Clinton probably misleads people, but if that to you puts her on the same level as Trump all you've managed to do is to redefine the word "overtly" to mean something else, making it effectively meaningless..... again assuming I didn't miss something.

 

[desol]

That's just...disgusting! Wow! This world is structured so incredibly poorly, working so well for so few and so badly for so many.

No kidding....the whole thing is disgusting. It all leads back to Darwin...animals feeding off of other animals. When will humans learn to control their sub-conscious selfish animal instinct.

Doubtfully ever. That would require being honest with themselves.

Yawn. Rant over.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Just consider this for a second, all messages directed to voters:

- Muslims shouldn't be allowed to enter the US
- Mexicans consist of rapists and drug peddlers
- Build a wall against Mexico (it pays)
- Polls are rigged (when they say I'm behind)
- The election is rigged (if I lose)
- If I win I'm going to put my opponent in jail
- Someone just tried to assassinate me

Against which her opponents' main counterattack has been the pathetic emailgate, which shows that the issue is not only Hillary's, it's a complete system of communication and a number of agencies that have not done their job. She wants to use a Blackberry? Give her an environment that works with a Blackberry! No, they had to stick to a rigid and unpractical system. And it's not like she didn't say she didn't like it, but they just didn't care; you'll do it that way because I tell you, I know better...pheew!
Add to that the overclassification issue.
So, I agree, she's been a bad girl, but it doesn't deserve more than a tap on the wrist (and a good make-over of the communication system), whilst Trump's chauvinist racist xenophobic ever-conflicting Putinist revenging affabulating attitude should be accepted as just a casualty of "new" politics?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Well, you'll have to quote her then and accompany her exact wording with the facts that show she lied. As far as I can see this is all just regurgitation of anti-Clinton propaganda which amounts to an assertion one has to check oneself by digging into official public records etc. With Trump it's different because it's in our face and easy to find. With him all one has to do is check his Twitter feed to see his lies. Not only that, but media has showed his many lies many times.

(I know you won't quote her though)

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/15/house-gop-lays-out-perjury-case-hillary-clinton/

Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz of Utah said evidence the FBI collected during its investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s email practices contradicts what she herself told Congress in testimony last year.
======
Mr. Goodlatte and Mr. Chaffetz said FBI Director James B. Comey’s depiction of what he called Mrs. Clinton’s “extremely careless” email practices pokes holes in a number of statements Mrs. Clinton gave to Congress during her 2015 testimony to the House committee investigating the Benghazi terrorist attack.
Mrs. Clinton testified at that time that she never sent or received information marked classified, but Mr. Comey told Congress last month that three such documents were in fact marked at the time she handled them via email.
Mrs. Clinton also testified that when she belatedly agreed to comply with open-records laws and return her work-related emails to the government, she had her attorneys go “through every single email.” But Mr. Comey said Mrs. Clinton’s attorneys used only search terms and subject lines to decide which emails to return and did not read each one.

The FBI director said his investigators discovered thousands of work-related messages Mrs. Clinton failed to turn over to the State Department, raising questions about yet another statement in Mrs. Clinton’s testimony last year. Mr. Comey also said Mrs. Clinton had multiple servers during her time using the secret account.
“Although there may be other aspects of Secretary Clinton’s sworn testimony that are at odds with the FBI’s findings, her testimony in those four areas bears specific scrutiny in light of the facts and evidence FBI Director James Comey described,” the chairmen said in a letter Monday referring the case to U.S. Attorney Channing D. Phillips, the chief federal prosecutor for the District of Columbia.
Mr. Phillips’ office referred questions to the Justice Department, which didn’t respond to a request for comment Monday afternoon.
-----------

The Justice department in in the tank for Hillary refusing to convene a grand jury or pursue. Obama made public statements code for instructing his people that she should not be prosecuted. 

Of course Hillary didn't lie when interviewed by the FBI, she did not recall 39 times. 

You just did EXACTLY what Trump's campaign manager did! You instantly started talking about Clinton/Democrats and avoided answering the actual question.

Did you even notice you did that?

I'd have to be watching her to know that I copied her, maybe she copied me?

If you don't think it's significant that a presidential candidate's campaign leaves a tweet up that the candidate was subjected to an assassination attempt WHILE KNOWING IT WASN'T THE CASE, then I really don't know what to say.....

And which of the above two foments hatred in the masses by actively speaking to said masses? That's the difference here.  Just consider this for a second, all messages directed to voters:

- Muslims shouldn't be allowed to enter the US
- Mexicans consist of rapists and drug peddlers
- Build a wall against Mexico (it pays)
- Polls are rigged (when they say I'm behind)
- The election is rigged (if I lose)
- If I win I'm going to put my opponent in jail
- Someone just tried to assassinate me

You look at history and tell me the above isn't smelling tremendously foul. It really should bring back memories. This is dangerous rhetoric. Clinton and her foundations aren't responsible for the same.

But the irony is that as I pointed out you just did exactly what Trump's campaign manager did, so what does that tell you about what media?

I don't dispute that Clinton probably misleads people, but if that to you puts her on the same level as Trump all you've managed to do is to redefine the word "overtly" to mean something else, making it effectively meaningless..... again assuming I didn't miss something.

This is an ugly contest and we disagree about which candidate is uglier.

You should be happy that the stock market broke its week long losing streak.  This signals that Hillary is more likely to beat the Donald.

JR

PS: Today is a good day for my portfolio... only gold is down and that is only 1% of my portfolio JIC. At least I will get a consolation prize. Hillary likes wall street, and big business.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Hillary likes wall street, and big business.

Is it what's important for your portfolio? I would think it's important that wall street and big business like her.
Now, I can't believe one second Trump doesn't like wall street and big business..like the Pope wouldn't like cathedrals and rite. He may say so in his inflamed ramblings, but he is definitely in awe, has tried all his life to be part of the cenacle, and has been constantly put at arm's length because he stinks socially.

 

[mattiasNYC]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/15/house-gop-lays-out-perjury-case-hillary-clinton/

Like I said, you won't quote her.

The Justice department in in the tank for Hillary refusing to convene a grand jury or pursue. Obama made public statements code for instructing his people that she should not be prosecuted. 

Sounds like a conspiracy.

I'd have to be watching her to know that I copied her, maybe she copied me?

The way the Trump campaign generally functions works on you in exactly the same way you imply the biased media works on those with views opposing yours was my point.

 

[DaveP]

Thank God this will all be over in a few hours! :

I noticed some interesting differences when Clinton and Trump supporters were asked what they would do if the other candidate won.

The Clinton supporters said they would move to Canada and one said he would go back to the Philippines, (I wonder if he knows about Duterte?) .

The Trump supporters were more sanguine and said they would just have to get on with it.

Personally, I don't think it will make any difference which one gets in because of the power of the Senate and Congress, the President is largely window dressing to the world.  I think Clinton is the more confrontational vis a vis Putin and Trump is a climate change denier, both of those traits are very detrimental to the safety of the Planet.

Good luck America!

DaveP