Gyroscopic Investing

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 1:45 pm

stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 11:11 am

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:49 am

I will. And I assume it will dispute a lot of the accounts. The problem is, you can easily imagine that's the state of the White House given how he acts in public and on Twitter.

On the way Trump operates -- I have had 13 different jobs in almost 30 years of working. I have worked at companies where the owner/CEO/manager was a tyrant, a bigot, a narcissist, a back stabber, and a few where they were genuinely good people and motivators. Sure you can lead with a stick, but I have always performed my best when I had respect for my manager and/or the CEO vs. hating/fearing them.

From what you know, has Trump generally been a success or a failure as a businessman? Sure, he had a headstart by being born into a rich family. But a lot of people had a headstart like that and ended up with a lot less money than when they started. How much ahead of where he started is Trump versus yourself? I know he's far ahead of me. If you conclude that he's fairly successful as a businessman, do you think he achieved that by being a tyrant or by being a good boss? Do you ever wonder if the media might just have some sort of hidden agenda for wanting us all to think that he's just a tyrant?

Are they writing his tweets for him? Sure seems like a tyrant to me, without any help from the media. Do I have to clip some tweets in this post?

Sure, he's more successful in business, and he can go to his deathbed thinking about all the money he's made and the women he's bedded. That's not the stuff I'd be looking to reminisce on, on my deathbed.

All I can say is I would not function well in the environment that he seems to create around him.

And what I'm saying is that I really doubt that the environment he actually creates around him is much like what the media wants us to think it is. If it was how the media paints it, I seriously doubt he would be a successful businessman.

Then what are the tweets meant to do, seriously, other than piss off approximately 50% of the nation and endear him to his base? There is no attempt to unify. There seems to be little attempt to reach bipartisan agreements. Not all Trump, for sure, but he exacerbates it.

Just imagine if he spent a few days tweeting crap about medical monopolies and it's time to break them up and reduce costs.

I'll hand it to him currently, getting out of Syria seems to have pissed a lot of people off, but I agree with that.

He has such a grasp of tweeting to incite and cause people to love him or have their heads explode that I wish it was put to better use.

If the environment is not as the media portrays, why do you have Cohen's comments, Tillerson's comments, Mattis with his letter, his berating of Sessions and such happening?

If he stopped the tweeting, 75% of the negative news bias goes away. Nearly every story in recent memory, negative on Trump, always starts with a "And this is what President Trump tweeted early this morning...."

stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 4:14 pm If it was how the media paints it, I seriously doubt he would be a successful businessman.

I'm also starting to think that my hope that this would be the saving grace, that he has business experience, would be great. I think it serves him poorly because while he may be a great businessman, he was the lone top guy, and everyone worked for him. Government doesn't work that way and he seems to want it to, which is a large part of the dislike of Trump IMO. Screw you we're doing it my way might work when you're the CEO, but usually not when the president.

Too bad Trump’s charity went under. I was just going to donate my life savings.

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:09 am

MangoMan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:31 am

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:39 pm Then what are the tweets meant to do, seriously, other than piss off approximately 50% of the nation and endear him to his base? There is no attempt to unify. There seems to be little attempt to reach bipartisan agreements. Not all Trump, for sure, but he exacerbates it.

Just imagine if Twitter didn't exist. How would anyone know what he actually thinks, as the media twists and spins everything?

That is exactly correct.

I think this is why we tend to have a much more positive view of Presidents in the era before mass media started focusing so much on minutiae and sensationalism. If JFK or FDR were Presidents today, I wonder how they would be portrayed? Both had extramarital affairs while in the White House, for instance.

As for Trump's White House dysfunction problem...like Cortopassi, I had also hoped that his business experience would serve him well. Not so much unfortunately. But, it's not always the case that following conventional wisdom on every issue is the best way to govern. The most respected figures are the ones who stuck to their principles and made unpopular decisions. Sometimes that doesn't work out well, but it can also succeed spectacularly. And on balance, I prefer that sort of person to the slave to conventional wisdom type. In short, I want the country run by its government, not according to the dictates of CNN and the like.

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:09 am

MangoMan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:31 am

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:39 pm Then what are the tweets meant to do, seriously, other than piss off approximately 50% of the nation and endear him to his base? There is no attempt to unify. There seems to be little attempt to reach bipartisan agreements. Not all Trump, for sure, but he exacerbates it.

Just imagine if Twitter didn't exist. How would anyone know what he actually thinks, as the media twists and spins everything?

That is exactly correct.

How does anyone know what he really thinks even with his voluminous Twitter habits? I think his Tweets are closer to being theater than reality, whatever reality really is in his mind. And, in the big scheme of things it matters little what he thinks, only what he does matters - e.g. somehow get bipartisan agreement to revise the criminal justice system as his latest success story. But, on the downside, that revision will have unintended consequences just like the last revision proved to have.

MangoMan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:31 am

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:39 pm Then what are the tweets meant to do, seriously, other than piss off approximately 50% of the nation and endear him to his base? There is no attempt to unify. There seems to be little attempt to reach bipartisan agreements. Not all Trump, for sure, but he exacerbates it.

Just imagine if Twitter didn't exist. How would anyone know what he actually thinks, as the media twists and spins everything?

Saying that Mattis “retired.” That’s spin. That’s like, spinissimo.

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 8:48 am

dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 6:31 am Too bad Trump’s charity went under. I was just going to donate my life savings.

No problem. You can donate them to me, and I promise to use them well!

You, I trust. Your being gaga for Trump notwithstanding.

WiseOne wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:32 am The most respected figures are the ones who stuck to their principles and made unpopular decisions. Sometimes that doesn't work out well, but it can also succeed spectacularly. And on balance, I prefer that sort of person to the slave to conventional wisdom type. In short, I want the country run by its government, not according to the dictates of CNN and the like.

Agreed.

I'm getting the impression that Trump has come to the realization that he has to actually do the things he campaigned on if he is to win again in 2020. Basically - build the wall, bring the troops home, drain the swamp.

Could get very interesting. Sometimes I also get the impression that the only people supporting him are the voters. Must be a very lonely job.

dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:42 am

WiseOne wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 10:32 am The most respected figures are the ones who stuck to their principles and made unpopular decisions. Sometimes that doesn't work out well, but it can also succeed spectacularly. And on balance, I prefer that sort of person to the slave to conventional wisdom type. In short, I want the country run by its government, not according to the dictates of CNN and the like.

Agreed.

Of course, not to imply that Trump will ever be respected, principles or no. Just doesn't seem to be in the cards for him

MangoMan wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 9:31 am

Cortopassi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 21, 2018 7:39 pm Then what are the tweets meant to do, seriously, other than piss off approximately 50% of the nation and endear him to his base? There is no attempt to unify. There seems to be little attempt to reach bipartisan agreements. Not all Trump, for sure, but he exacerbates it.

Just imagine if Twitter didn't exist. How would anyone know what he actually thinks, as the media twists and spins everything?

That and the somewhat pertinent fact that he can barely speak on any topic coherently, and usually contradicts himself within a week of making a statement about any of the following:

- Foreign policy
- National Debt
- Interest Rates
- Tax Cut priorities
- The electoral college
- Stock market performance
- Every
- Other
- Topic
- Besides Trade and Immigration... and only sort of on those.


Yeah, the media twists things. But it doesn't take the media to make him look like an ignoramus. He does that by simply speaking.

That said I'm happy to see the wars ending and the criminal justice reform bill that was passed. I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

Boeing executive without military experience as Defense Secretary. We can see where this is going. Endless war, principally from the air. Someday this little squire will be CEO of Boeing or Lockheed Martin.

The swamp is draining... right into the Oval Office!

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 12:29 pm Thanks. As for being gaga for Trump, he wasn't my first choice of the 19 candidates in 2016. That would be Rand Paul.

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:55 pm I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

"My friend Lindsay Graham is a bit mad right now. You see, he’s never seen a war end before. He’s going to have to console himself with the fact that we still are in about 8 more. I have to tell you; I haven’t seen a Senator who loves war this much since the Star Wars Prequels,"
- Rand Paul airing his Festivus grievances

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:55 pm That said I'm happy to see the wars ending and the criminal justice reform bill that was passed. I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

If Trump succeeds in taking on the Military Industrial Complex and transforming what Pat Buchanan calls "The War Party" into a party committed to non-interventionism that would be no small feat, would it not?

Now, pray tell, who is going to do that for the Democratic party? They have been showing their true colors as just another branch of the The War Party since Trump announced the policy of middle east withdrawal.

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:02 am

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 12:29 pm Thanks. As for being gaga for Trump, he wasn't my first choice of the 19 candidates in 2016. That would be Rand Paul.

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:55 pm I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

"My friend Lindsay Graham is a bit mad right now. You see, he’s never seen a war end before. He’s going to have to console himself with the fact that we still are in about 8 more. I have to tell you; I haven’t seen a Senator who loves war this much since the Star Wars Prequels,"
- Rand Paul airing his Festivus grievances

Well, Mr. Graham is only 6 years younger than me so I'm sure he has seen a war end before. If not, he can watch the last episode of the Ken Burns Vietnam War documentary on Netflix to see how nearly 20 years of effort succeeded in accomplishing nothing but making a bad situation orders of magnitude worse than it would have been if we had simply minded our own business.

Interesting that you say we are still in "about 8 more" wars. Does anybody really know how many - either where we have boots on the ground or are clandestinely working hard to light a match to a tinder pile?

jacksonM wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:19 am

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:55 pm That said I'm happy to see the wars ending and the criminal justice reform bill that was passed. I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

If Trump succeeds in taking on the Military Industrial Complex and transforming what Pat Buchanan calls "The War Party" into a party committed to non-interventionism that would be no small feat, would it not?

Now, pray tell, who is going to do that for the Democratic party? They have been showing their true colors as just another branch of the The War Party since Trump announced the policy of middle east withdrawal.

As a near lifetime member of the military industrial complex, we need to bring back the draft. I think the vast majority of American's could care less about foreign policy and foreign wars unless it affects them personally. The whole thing has been "outsourced" to the all volunteer military and has created a disengaged citizenry when it comes to this stuff who will not check their government's stupidity. It wasn't always like this (but then again the Legislative Branch wasn't always like this either.). I am beyond baffled why anyone thinks it's a good idea to be in Afghanistan 18 and the Iraqish area 15 years later.

Kbg wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:55 am

jacksonM wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:19 am

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:55 pm That said I'm happy to see the wars ending and the criminal justice reform bill that was passed. I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

If Trump succeeds in taking on the Military Industrial Complex and transforming what Pat Buchanan calls "The War Party" into a party committed to non-interventionism that would be no small feat, would it not?

Now, pray tell, who is going to do that for the Democratic party? They have been showing their true colors as just another branch of the The War Party since Trump announced the policy of middle east withdrawal.

As a near lifetime member of the military industrial complex, we need to bring back the draft. I think the vast majority of American's could care less about foreign policy and foreign wars unless it affects them personally. The whole thing has been "outsourced" to the all volunteer military and has created a disengaged citizenry when it comes to this stuff who will not check their government's stupidity. It wasn't always like this (but then again the Legislative Branch wasn't always like this either.). I am beyond baffled why anyone thinks it's a good idea to be in Afghanistan 18 and the Iraqish area 15 years later.

I agree. Being way beyond draft age, I vividly recall how scared I was filling out that selective service card (~1985) and that I would be somehow drafted. I would have become seriously engaged in any anti-whatever-war effort if my ass was on the line.

jacksonM wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:51 am

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:02 am

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 22, 2018 12:29 pm Thanks. As for being gaga for Trump, he wasn't my first choice of the 19 candidates in 2016. That would be Rand Paul.

moda0306 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:55 pm I thought when the market tanked he'd be cranking up wars... not winding them down. Kudos to him for that.

"My friend Lindsay Graham is a bit mad right now. You see, he’s never seen a war end before. He’s going to have to console himself with the fact that we still are in about 8 more. I have to tell you; I haven’t seen a Senator who loves war this much since the Star Wars Prequels,"
- Rand Paul airing his Festivus grievances

Well, Mr. Graham is only 6 years younger than me so I'm sure he has seen a war end before. If not, he can watch the last episode of the Ken Burns Vietnam War documentary on Netflix to see how nearly 20 years of effort succeeded in accomplishing nothing but making a bad situation orders of magnitude worse than it would have been if we had simply minded our own business.

Interesting that you say we are still in "about 8 more" wars. Does anybody really know how many - either where we have boots on the ground or are clandestinely working hard to light a match to a tinder pile?

It was a facetious.

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 1:32 pm

jacksonM wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:51 am

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 10:02 am



"My friend Lindsay Graham is a bit mad right now. You see, he’s never seen a war end before. He’s going to have to console himself with the fact that we still are in about 8 more. I have to tell you; I haven’t seen a Senator who loves war this much since the Star Wars Prequels,"
- Rand Paul airing his Festivus grievances

Well, Mr. Graham is only 6 years younger than me so I'm sure he has seen a war end before. If not, he can watch the last episode of the Ken Burns Vietnam War documentary on Netflix to see how nearly 20 years of effort succeeded in accomplishing nothing but making a bad situation orders of magnitude worse than it would have been if we had simply minded our own business.

Interesting that you say we are still in "about 8 more" wars. Does anybody really know how many - either where we have boots on the ground or are clandestinely working hard to light a match to a tinder pile?

It was a facetious.

Yes, I realized that. Merry Christmas.

Hard to read "match" and "tinder" in 2018 without thinking of other stuff.

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 2:48 pm Hard to read "match" and "tinder" in 2018 without thinking of other stuff.

Yeah, I actually thought about that myself after my post.

So what would be a better metaphor for what I was trying to say in 2018 now that those words have been co-opted?

Your metaphor is fine.

> why anyone thinks it's a good idea to be in Afghanistan 18 and the Iraqish area 15 years later

Either we civilize/police them, or a dictatorship/theocracy moves in (Russia/China/Iran)
https://old.reddit.com/r/neoconNWO/

boglerdude wrote: ↑Mon Dec 24, 2018 11:49 pm > why anyone thinks it's a good idea to be in Afghanistan 18 and the Iraqish area 15 years later

Either we civilize/police them, or a dictatorship/theocracy moves in (Russia/China/Iran)
https://old.reddit.com/r/neoconNWO/

Yes, because "nation building" has always worked so well for us!

For anyone who thinks that Trump is wrong to label the mainstream media as fake news, can you please explain their current coverage of his conversation with a child about Santa Claus?

First of all, who cares? Second of all, now it's news when somebody tells another person the truth? It's really quite rich when you think about it. You certainly won't hear much of the truth from the mainstream media.

Just one more small example of exactly what he rightly describes as fake news.

And yet people are saying, apparently with straight faces, that he is threatening our First Amendment rights by using this type of language. Guess what? The president also has a first amendment right. The voters will get to choose which version of reality they believe more. If I were a voting man, which I'm not, I know which version I would choose. Frankly, for the first time in 34 years, I'm tempted to register to vote for Trump in 2020, just because I'm so tired of reading all the propaganda against him.