Trump as tragicomedy

[Xan]

Gary has some "interesting" libertarian positions. Like that the baker should be forced to bake the homosexual cake. Audible gasps from the audience during the LP debate when he dropped that bombshell. Don't know how he still got the nomination. Says something about how crazy the other candidates were, I suppose. John McAfee was one.

[clacy]

Good point ... the list of candidates was spectacularly horrible. I knew when I found myself rooting for Ted Cruz, something was terribly wrong. What a shit show. We had a Bush, a Clinton, a Trump and a McAfee, all in one rotten campaign cycle. I hope to never hear any of those names again, in the next round. Maybe we can have a Sasse, a Booker, and some other new blood in the next election. Time to drain the swamp of the crazy oldsters.

Sasse and Booker are swamp creatures of the first order.

Cotton and Tulsi Gabbard would be much better IMO.

[moda0306]

Gary has some "interesting" libertarian positions. Like that the baker should be forced to bake the homosexual cake. Audible gasps from the audience during the LP debate when he dropped that bombshell. Don't know how he still got the nomination. Says something about how crazy the other candidates were, I suppose. John McAfee was one.

Hardly a bombshell... every "libertarian" has edges to their beliefs/principles. They just like to use fancy language to explain those away or are just simply honest and say "liberty isn't the most important thing all of the time," or something like that.

The idea that I should be forced at gunpoint to recognize AND pay for a defense mechanism for other people's vision of what is a legitimate property claim could be called equally "interesting," if not far-more so, but you hear all-but the most anarchist-leaning libertarians advocating for just that.

Yes, Gary Johnson tends to be more left-leaning in his libertarianism. There are some inherantly hairy contradictions that reveal themselves when you stake out those positions, but those exist almost everywhere on the political spectrum.

[moda0306]

Good point ... the list of candidates was spectacularly horrible. I knew when I found myself rooting for Ted Cruz, something was terribly wrong. What a shit show. We had a Bush, a Clinton, a Trump and a McAfee, all in one rotten campaign cycle. I hope to never hear any of those names again, in the next round. Maybe we can have a Sasse, a Booker, and some other new blood in the next election. Time to drain the swamp of the crazy oldsters.

Sasse and Booker are swamp creatures of the first order.

Cotton and Tulsi Gabbard would be much better IMO.

I love Gabbard but Cotton? Look at this pile of slime...

http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Tom_Cotton.htm

Hard on Drugs
Anti-environmentalist
Iraq & Afghanistan were just & necessary
Huge proponent of the perma-war surveillance state

I'm not saying anyone has to share my priorities on these issues, but from what I can tell, he is just a standard modern right-wing conservative on all issues. No nuance. Just a puke Arkansas conservative war-monger. If that's your thing, that is fine, but then Cotton should NOT be on a list with Gabbard. Is he a "maverick" on anything?

Tulsi on the other hand is awesome on civil liberties and perma-war issues, which IMO, similar to Rand Paul, earns her a ton of street cred as she battles her own party.

[MWKXJ]

Good point ... the list of candidates was spectacularly horrible. I knew when I found myself rooting for Ted Cruz, something was terribly wrong. What a shit show. We had a Bush, a Clinton, a Trump and a McAfee, all in one rotten campaign cycle. I hope to never hear any of those names again, in the next round. Maybe we can have a Sasse, a Booker, and some other new blood in the next election. Time to drain the swamp of the crazy oldsters.

Jim Webb was the best option from either party running during the last cycle, IMHO. He would have been a wonderful reboot for the Democratic party in particular.

[Libertarian666]

He really is. And I don't understand how they couldn't have come up with a better independent candidate, someone we could take seriously.

It is very difficult to find a good candidate for a position where the candidate knows in advance that:
1. He will not win, and
2. He will be subjected to scorn and other very unpleasant public treatment.

This is even aside from the effort and expense of being a candidate.

Would you want to do it? I wouldn't.

Thus, what you get is mostly weirdos with a very few patriots (like Ron Paul) mixed in.

[clacy]

Chalk another one up for Trump.....

http://www.businessinsider.com/north-ko ... ers-2018-5

[stuper1]

And yet the talk of impeachment continues unabated. The nation's so-called elite just can't get over the fact that somebody like Trump won the election. Frankly, I can't believe it either. It seems utterly surreal. And I'm one to believe he's not a monster, just another run-of-the-mill egomaniac, as I'm convinced anyone who would want to be president must be.

I was looking at an acquaintance's Facebook feed the other day. He's a very successful local businessman and apparently not a Trump hater. He has a big family and is not at all deranged. Back around the election time in 2016, he posted something which I found very interesting and read along these lines:

"To all the people out there who supported Obama and hate Trump, I have one question: what it is in Obama's life experience compared to Trump's life experience that makes you think that Obama was so much better qualified to be president than Trump?"

[Kriegsspiel]

Desert, how are you getting sadistic? Or rather, how are you considering him more sadistic than Obama?

[moda0306]

Desert, how are you getting sadistic? Or rather, how are you considering him more sadistic than Obama?

Ok so putting aside any "policy preferences" and just sticking to style, and understanding we aren't privy to either Trump nor Obama's private interactions behind closed doors, so all we have to go on is how they carry themselves to the public, is it even slightly debatable that Trump is more sadistic than Obama?

Definition of sadistic: "deriving pleasure from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others."

Now you could say that it's all an act and he's likely a statesmen (hence the Korea deal being struck), or that it's all part of a grander strategy, or that it doesn't matter because he has every right to be, and those might be true, but to argue that Trump behaves in a less sadistic manner than Obama is ludicrous to me. Maybe I'm missing something.

Personally, policy-wise, I think Obama was a modestly-left-of-center establishment Democrat, neo-liberal war-criminal. Nothing more, nothing less... Definitely not the boogeyman Faux News & the alt-right tried to make him out to be, but probably should be prosecuted for his crimes (as should Trump). But as a "dude," completely irrespective of policy positions, I like the guy. Trump, on the other hand, seems like the most insufferable personality to try to spend time with. I couldn't imagine having dinner with the guy trying to make conversation. He is an amalgamation of almost every slimy human trait that one might try to avoid.

If we bring policy preferences into it, I think you get the same effect, but Trump is pretty incoherent on all but a couple public policy topics.

[stuper1]

So, that's it, be a nice guy, a community organizer, and a law professor, oh, and don't be "sadistic", and boom, you're ready to be president of the U.S. Got it.

Seriously, I don't get the sadistic stuff. Looking at the world situation currently versus the previous 16 years under Obama and Bush, I don't see where the U.S. is causing more mayhem now than they were then, probably less.

If you're thinking of Trump's goal of strengthening our border, give me a break. That's a serious policy position. It has nothing to do with the color of people on the other side of the border. All it has to do with is that a sovereign nation should be able to decide how many and which immigrants to allow in, rather than letting them self select. In fact, we have laws on the books, but they just aren't being enforced. So much for being a nation of laws.

[Mountaineer]

So, that's it, be a nice guy, a community organizer, and a law professor, oh, and don't be "sadistic", and boom, you're ready to be president of the U.S. Got it.

Seriously, I don't get the sadistic stuff. Looking at the world situation currently versus the previous 16 years under Obama and Bush, I don't see where the U.S. is causing more mayhem now than they were then, probably less.

If you're thinking of Trump's goal of strengthening our border, give me a break. That's a serious policy position. It has nothing to do with the color of people on the other side of the border. All it has to do with is that a sovereign nation should be able to decide how many and which immigrants to allow in, rather than letting them self select. In fact, we have laws on the books, but they just aren't being enforced. So much for being a nation of laws.

Bingo. And red lines by the former o.

[clacy]

And yet the talk of impeachment continues unabated. The nation's so-called elite just can't get over the fact that somebody like Trump won the election. Frankly, I can't believe it either. It seems utterly surreal. And I'm one to believe he's not a monster, just another run-of-the-mill egomaniac, as I'm convinced anyone who would want to be president must be.

I was looking at an acquaintance's Facebook feed the other day. He's a very successful local businessman and apparently not a Trump hater. He has a big family and is not at all deranged. Back around the election time in 2016, he posted something which I found very interesting and read along these lines:

"To all the people out there who supported Obama and hate Trump, I have one question: what it is in Obama's life experience compared to Trump's life experience that makes you think that Obama was so much better qualified to be president than Trump?"

Wow. Well, Obama was a decent human being, not a ridiculous sadistic clown like Trump. I think the contrast is too obvious to even require comment. What has Trump shown us, other than a deranged, sadistic, uninformed showman? I can understand not agreeing with Obama's efforts to help the downtrodden. Conservatives are generally opposed to Christian values. But Trump takes the opposition to a whole new, ridiculous level.

Obama:

-death by drone program
-Paying Iran $2b to keep making nukes
-Abortion supporter (that's pretty sadistic, we can probably all agree)
-Allowed Isis to grow and thrive (probably created Isis with the help of the Neo-cons but that's conspiratorial).... don't hear much about them anymore. Took Trump about 6 weeks to squash that.
-Supported the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab Spring

Trump:

-Tweeted mean stuff to Rosie O'Donnell and Bob Mueller

[moda0306]

And yet the talk of impeachment continues unabated. The nation's so-called elite just can't get over the fact that somebody like Trump won the election. Frankly, I can't believe it either. It seems utterly surreal. And I'm one to believe he's not a monster, just another run-of-the-mill egomaniac, as I'm convinced anyone who would want to be president must be.

I was looking at an acquaintance's Facebook feed the other day. He's a very successful local businessman and apparently not a Trump hater. He has a big family and is not at all deranged. Back around the election time in 2016, he posted something which I found very interesting and read along these lines:

"To all the people out there who supported Obama and hate Trump, I have one question: what it is in Obama's life experience compared to Trump's life experience that makes you think that Obama was so much better qualified to be president than Trump?"

Wow. Well, Obama was a decent human being, not a ridiculous sadistic clown like Trump. I think the contrast is too obvious to even require comment. What has Trump shown us, other than a deranged, sadistic, uninformed showman? I can understand not agreeing with Obama's efforts to help the downtrodden. Conservatives are generally opposed to Christian values. But Trump takes the opposition to a whole new, ridiculous level.

Obama:

-death by drone program
-Paying Iran $2b to keep making nukes
-Abortion supporter (that's pretty sadistic, we can probably all agree)
-Allowed Isis to grow and thrive (probably created Isis with the help of the Neo-cons but that's conspiratorial).... don't hear much about them anymore. Took Trump about 6 weeks to squash that.
-Supported the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab Spring

Trump:

-Tweeted mean stuff to Rosie O'Donnell and Bob Mueller

You're not even trying now, are you?

[Kriegsspiel]

Desert, how are you getting sadistic? Or rather, how are you considering him more sadistic than Obama?

Ok so putting aside any "policy preferences" and just sticking to style, and understanding we aren't privy to either Trump nor Obama's private interactions behind closed doors, so all we have to go on is how they carry themselves to the public, is it even slightly debatable that Trump is more sadistic than Obama?

Definition of sadistic: "deriving pleasure from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others."

Now you could say that it's all an act and he's likely a statesmen (hence the Korea deal being struck), or that it's all part of a grander strategy, or that it doesn't matter because he has every right to be, and those might be true, but to argue that Trump behaves in a less sadistic manner than Obama is ludicrous to me. Maybe I'm missing something.

If we bring policy preferences into it, I think you get the same effect, but Trump is pretty incoherent on all but a couple public policy topics.

I thought he had done something particularly egregious recently. But if it's just a feeling you get about him.. eh. Then again I don't think Obama was sadistic either, it's just not a concept I think factors into their presidential decisions. Especially with regards to policies. For instance, people saying "Trump wants to secure the border so people can't come into America, that's sadistic"... that's just PR spin. If someone found out that Trump is telling the Border Patrol to kneecap illegal immigrants and leave them in the desert, I could be swayed.

Or the list Clacy wrote... none of that is sadistic. To quote It's Always Sunny, "that's politics, bitch!" Except abortion, maybe, but saying "we could all agree" about ANYTHING abortion related is teh Übersnark.

Personally, policy-wise, I think Obama was a modestly-left-of-center establishment Democrat, neo-liberal war-criminal. Nothing more, nothing less... Definitely not the boogeyman Faux News & the alt-right tried to make him out to be, but probably should be prosecuted for his crimes (as should Trump).

IIRC this is a common point for you. I make a different distinction between war and war crimes.

But as a "dude," completely irrespective of policy positions, I like the guy. Trump, on the other hand, seems like the most insufferable personality to try to spend time with. I couldn't imagine having dinner with the guy trying to make conversation. He is an amalgamation of almost every slimy human trait that one might try to avoid.

I think it would be fun to have dinner with Trump. But I have a really wide personality-tolerance.

[stuper1]

I've mentioned it before, but I'll do it again, because I thought it was striking. I came across some sort of thread on the internet (maybe Reddit) where it asked whether anyone had ever had any personal interactions with Trump. This thread was not on some right-wing website. If anything, I would have expected the people on that place to lean left.

Anywho, there were something like 100+ responses on that thread of people who had interacted somehow with the guy or knew someone who had been his housekeeper, etc. And something like 80% of the responses portrayed the guy to actually be relatively likable in person, and nothing I read made him seem to be a monster. Just because the media portrays someone as a monster doesn't mean that he actually is a monster. There is this thing called "spin".

For me, I don't really care about whether the president is likable or not (both for say Obama or Trump). All I care about is what their policies and actions are. So far, I haven't seen anything from Trump that seems unhinged.

The only position I've heard Trump take that I strongly disagree with is on torture of enemy combatants. That was my biggest complaint with Bush, although I really disagreed with most anything Bush did. I only hope that Trump's comments are just bluster. I certainly haven't seen any news reports that we've been torturing people lately.

[stuper1]

Here's an interesting analogy to the 2016 election that I came across today:

"Okay, so you need to hire someone to manage your ranch and mend the fences. Two dozen guys show up wanting the job. All but one are known criminals. They range from thieves to fraudsters to paid hit men. You know that most of them actually work for your rival rancher down the road and would have no loyalty to your business whatsoever.

The odd man out is a loudmouth braggart who claims he can do anything and has actually built and managed some pretty great stuff. You can tell he’s mostly full of hot air.

Those are your only choices.

With your great wisdom, who do YOU hire?"

[stuper1]

Well, see, that's the thing isn't it. The only reason we know that he is LITERALLY HITLER is because the media has force-fed us that story for quite a while (even though I still haven't seen any death camps springing up in the countryside). Could it be that maybe the media is in cahoots with that rival rancher down the road that was mentioned in the story?

[Libertarian666]

Well, see, that's the thing isn't it. The only reason we know that he is LITERALLY HITLER is because the media has force-fed us that story for quite a while (even though I still haven't seen any death camps springing up in the countryside). Could it be that maybe the media is in cahoots with that rival rancher down the road that was mentioned in the story?

No one is allowed to think that! You can expect a visit from the reprogramming squad any moment now...

[Mountaineer]

The media stopped being objective the moment Eve reported to Adam that the devil made her do it.

[Kriegsspiel]

The snake... a Russian agent? Tune in to find out!

[WiseOne]

If I had dinner with Donald Trump, I'd probably treat him exactly like that garrulous uncle we all have with the strong opinions who dominates family holiday dinners: Smile, nod and agree with everything, say nothing, and get away from the table at the first opportunity. To be honest, if I had dinner with Barack Obama it probably wouldn't be all that different.

Fortunately, electing someone president does not mean you have to have dinner with them. Even though Trump's tweets and silly statements make me squirm, they're irrelevant in the end. All that really matters is the legislation that outlasts the presidency. So far that's the new tax law. It looks like it may indeed be a good thing for corporations & small business, but it's definitely made it less pleasant to be a resident of a highly taxed blue state who itemizes deductions and not clear yet whether GDP will benefit measurably from an improved business climate given that many of the headwinds faced by businesses are unchanged. So not sure yet if it's going to be a net positive.

[Kriegsspiel]

So far that's the new tax law. It looks like it may indeed be a good thing for corporations & small business, but it's definitely made it less pleasant to be a resident of a highly taxed blue state who itemizes deductions and not clear yet whether GDP will benefit measurably from an improved business climate given that many of the headwinds faced by businesses are unchanged. So not sure yet if it's going to be a net positive.

I look at that facet of the new tax code in a different perspective. Instead of making it less pleasant, it makes it correctly pleasant. People who live in prodigal high-tax high-spend areas shouldn't expect people living in other states to subsidize their high local taxes.

[moda0306]

WiseOne,

If you were high into AMT you might be pleasantly surprised. We've been seeing a lot of people we thought were going to take a tax hit actually improve their scenario because AMT was taking away so much of their state tax benefit anyway. Especially if they have children in the home with the new expanded child tax credit.

[Xan]

And certainly anybody with self-employment income is in better shape.