Hillary's new book: "It Was My Turn"

[stuper1]

Moda, you've used the word "authoritarian" several times to describe Trump. Could you tell us which of his actions you find as displaying authoritarianism? I ask this out of true curiosity, not as any type of "gotcha" question. I just want to know, because I don't really see that.

By the way, I totally agree with you on your characterization of him as a smarmy, used-car-salesman type of guy. No argument there at all.

[Kriegsspiel]

Moda, you've used the word "authoritarian" several times to describe Trump. Could you tell us which of his actions you find as displaying authoritarianism? I ask this out of true curiosity, not as any type of "gotcha" question. I just want to know, because I don't really see that.

By the way, I totally agree with you on your characterization of him as a smarmy, used-car-salesman type of guy. No argument there at all.

Saying that football team owners should fire their players for failing to "respect the flag", saying that Hillary Clinton should be locked up before she was convicted of a crime are two I can think of off the top of my head. Posturing type stuff. He shows a lot of alpha traits, which are the same color traits as authoritarianism.

On the other hand, I get the impression he's libertarian on other things... trade deals, energy, healthcare.

EDIT
I gave myself 10 mins to zip through his Executive Orders:

You could also say these were authoritarian:
Executive Order 13766
13767
13768
13769/13780
13774

Libertarian
13771
13772
13781
13783

Seems like a pretty even mix.

[Maddy]

Does anybody seriously think that Trump meant that Hillary should go to prison without first being tried and convicted of a crime? Please, give me a break!

I've uttered exactly those words on more than one occasion, and there's no greater believer in the constitutional justice system than I. We say these things because the uncontroverted evidence that has been presented to date is overwhelming and would most certainly have resulted in a prosecution against anyone but a Clinton or a Bush. That this comment would be offered as proof of Trump's "authoritarianism" is ridiculous.

And offering the opinion that NFL players should be fired for utilizing the spotlight to further their own political agenda--an agenda that is so reprehensible to a majority of Americans that it causes stadiums to go empty? If that's "authoritarian," then every employer I know suffers from the same personality trait. When somebody hires you to do a job, you don't shit on them. Seems simple enough.

You'll get no argument from me when it comes to Trump's character. But the sad fact is that none of the cast of characters among which the American people were allowed to choose--save Rand Paul and possibly one or two others who failed to win the nomination--had any character. At least Trump has ruffled the feathers of the establishment, has shone light upon many of the cockroaches that were hiding in the woodwork, and has galvanized the will of constitutional conservatives to return power to the people. In that sense, I regard Trump as a symbol more than anything else.

[Michellebell]

I think the media puts a bad taste in people's mouths about Trump, and for some people, it is impossible to get rid of it because they choose to see only the absolute worst they possibly can.

I say that because I used to think he was really horrible too. The few times I did hear him speak, I was interpreting his words in the most negative way possible because I was expecting it.

Really, if you assume someone is arrogant, evil, whatever, you see it. If he says, "Things are going much better in our economy," you interpret it as, "Look at how wonderful I am! Look at me!! Praise me!!!" and think he’s an arrogant POS. If someone legitimately wrongs him or spreads lies about him and he retaliates, you interpret it as him saying, "I am perfect and can do no wrong so how dare that person pretend that I made a mistake. I'm going to go after that person and attack and insult that person for no reason."

I seriously had a sort of "waking up" moment last summer where I saw some posts on Facebook that shared information about some things he's accomplished that really sort of blew my mind. Then I went ahead and watched the Presidential debates (yes, finally watched them last summer when I had time) and was like, wow, he's really not as bad as everyone has been saying. Hillary seemed to me very two-faced and the policies she was promoting seemed costly and ineffective.

So no I don’t think he’s so bad anymore. In fact I think he’s working very hard for us, plus with all that’s going on internationally and also within our country, he’s in a really tough position. The way he’s being treated actually reminds me of the way I was treated my first couple years as a teacher. I was crying all the time because half my students HATED me so much. I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood and we treated our teachers with respect. College (and life overall) didn’t train me to deal with the social aspects of trying to get inner-city middle school students to learn math, something many of them were years behind on and had already decided they couldn’t learn. Many of the students expected to get an A even if they failed every test because they “completed their work” (entirely wrong) during class. Since I was reluctant to curve their grades for math (you either get it correct or you don’t – it’s math!) they really hated me. One of them wrote me a letter saying she hopes I choke on acid and die. Those first few years were seriously so painful. I was working my butt off for those students to try to make the math make sense to them. I gave them all these opportunities to retake failed tests, retaught lessons as much as I possibly could, wrote all of my own lessons because the textbook was too hard, brought in hands-on materials, etc. But they would throw the materials at each other, they would curse at me, threaten me, and if I sent them to the principal’s office or call home, they’d just come right back with all their hate. I think the disrespect in our society is especially rampant right now in many areas like that, such as the disrespect toward teachers, police, and of course, the Presidency.

I still say I’m kind of on the fence regarding Trump though because I’ve noticed that some people are so supportive of him it’s like he can really do no wrong. I’m not willing to go so far to say that I’ll vote for him in 2020 for sure because a lot can happen between now and then and I am still wanting to see what happens. Some of the stuff he says makes me nervous, especially with other countries. He’s super bold. But I do have to say that I’m more and more turned off to the Democrats so at this point I’m definitely leaning more in his direction.

Talking to other people though has been so weird and definitely disheartening. The people I knew growing up that I thought were really nice are saying the most awful things. I assumed that if I shared some of the stuff I learned about him they’d be surprised too and consider the validity of what I said, but no, instead they have just assumed the worst about me.

Also, regarding the conversation Trump had about women, it wasn’t as bad as people are making it out to be. His way of seriously hitting on a woman is buying her furniture. That doesn’t sound anything remotely like sexual harassment or assault. I don’t like that he was hitting on a married woman so I’m glad he apologized for the whole thing. The “grabbing by the p*ssy” comment was just a joke. I doubt he’d make a joke like that in front of a woman but he didn’t know he was being recorded. I saw an interview of Melania talking about it and she was saying that he never acts that way around her and that he treats his female employees very fairly and professionally. She said that he can act immature and said she feels like she has two boys in her home (it was kind of cute how she said it, and I definitely see that – he’s the only president goofy enough to throw paper towels at crowds). She also said that women have acted extremely inappropriately around both of them, hitting on her husband right in front of her. Furthermore, she was mad that this tape was released weeks before the election when it occurred so many years previously. Anyway, I’ve said things before in private that I wouldn’t want recorded and broadcast to the world either.

So no, he doesn’t fit into “slimeball” category with me. I just care about if he will be able to make a dent in all the problems we have that our country desperately needs to be solved.

[stuper1]

The one that I love is when people say that with Trump as our president, we are now the laughingstock of the world. Maybe we are the laughingstock of wimpy, socialist Europe, although I'm not even sure of that, but really who cares? I actually doubt we are the laughingstock anymore in a lot of places. Sure, he's a smarmy buffoon in a lot of ways, but at least they see we have a president who is hopefully a little bit serious about putting America first, instead of putting the rest of the world first. I mean is that so crazy to expect the leader of our own county to actually put our own country first ahead of other countries? Isn't that what we should expect?

Obama was suave, urbane, and intelligent, but meanwhile he did nothing to stop the slow-motion invasion of our country by foreigners, which is basically what's been happening for quite a while. Talk about laughingstocks, but anyway at least he looked and sounded good to the intellectuals.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we can't take some immigrants. I'm just saying that we need to slow it down a bit, so that we can assimilate the immigrants that do come. The reason people come from Mexico to the USA is because they see it's better here. However, if we take too many immigrants too fast, then they don't assimilate and pretty soon the USA just becomes an extension of Mexico.

[stuper1]

Moda, you've used the word "authoritarian" several times to describe Trump. Could you tell us which of his actions you find as displaying authoritarianism? I ask this out of true curiosity, not as any type of "gotcha" question. I just want to know, because I don't really see that.

By the way, I totally agree with you on your characterization of him as a smarmy, used-car-salesman type of guy. No argument there at all.

Saying that football team owners should fire their players for failing to "respect the flag", saying that Hillary Clinton should be locked up before she was convicted of a crime are two I can think of off the top of my head. Posturing type stuff. He shows a lot of alpha traits, which are the same color traits as authoritarianism.

On the other hand, I get the impression he's libertarian on other things... trade deals, energy, healthcare.

EDIT
I gave myself 10 mins to zip through his Executive Orders:

You could also say these were authoritarian:
Executive Order 13766
13767
13768
13769/13780
13774

Libertarian
13771
13772
13781
13783

Seems like a pretty even mix.

I guess we have a different idea of what authoritarianism is. The only reason he talked about football players was to win votes from his conservative followers. In my view, authoritarians don't worry about winning votes. An authoritarian would just have all the football players arrested and shot for treason if they disrespected the flag.

For me, I couldn't care less. I don't watch football any longer, because it's too violent and I feel like a jerk getting my jollies out of watching grown men destroy their bodies. Plus, the whole national anthem thing before the games is too nauseatingly nationalistic for my taste. It's funny, because my personal attitude is that I am not nationalistic at all in terms of thinking that Americans are somehow better than people from other countries. Nevertheless, I don't want America to turn into Mexico or India, which is what will happen if we don't slow down our immigration rate. And I can understand why voters would want to vote for a president who is nationalistic. To me, that just makes sense. It seems like a president should be nationalistic. Isn't that supposed to be his job, to do what is best for his nation?

[Michellebell]

I think of nationalism and putting America first kind of like how we put our own children and families first. I like kids and think that people who adopt are very noble to do it, but you don't see any families feeding all their neighbors' kids ahead of their own.

[Maddy]

The whole Hollywood meltdown shows just how far they've gone with the attributions of "rape." I'll bet you dollars to donuts that when the dust clears, the vast majority of the allegations will boil down to "I didn't want to do it, but it was the only way I could further my career."

Of course, pedophilia is an entirely different ball of wax, but even then I'll wager that in the vast majority of cases there was a hard-driving parent in the background who turned a blind eye to the obvious.

[Libertarian666]

The whole Hollywood meltdown shows just how far they've gone with the attributions of "rape." I'll bet you dollars to donuts that when the dust clears, the vast majority of the allegations will boil down to "I didn't want to do it, but it was the only way I could further my career."

I suspect very strongly that you are correct. The good thing about this is that it is causing the left to turn on itself and expose its hypocrisy.

Of course, pedophilia is an entirely different ball of wax, but even then I'll wager that in the vast majority of cases there was a hard-driving parent in the background who turned a blind eye to the obvious.

You are probably right about that as well. Of course that doesn't excuse such behavior.

[Maddy]

My intent was to point out how absurd some of the complaints about Trump are. I wasn't expecting my comment to be taken seriously.

The comment was not difficult to recognize as pure satire. The exaggerated font was an essential part of the political commentary being offered--a commentary, incidentally, that this moderator has made abundantly clear is disagreeable to him.

If moderation on this forum has come to this, I won't be long here.

[stuper1]

My intent was to point out how absurd some of the complaints about Trump are. I wasn't expecting my comment to be taken seriously.

The comment was not difficult to recognize as pure satire. The exaggerated font was an essential part of the political commentary being offered--a commentary, incidentally, that this moderator has made abundantly clear is disagreeable to him.

If moderation on this forum has come to this, I won't be long here.

Agreed totally. Tip to moderator: be extra careful with your comments when moderating on topics that you may be biased about or have the perception of being biased about. Otherwise, you run the real risk of ending up with that echo chamber that you said you don't want.

[Kriegsspiel]

Does anybody seriously think that Trump meant that Hillary should go to prison without first being tried and convicted of a crime? Please, give me a break!

I've uttered exactly those words on more than one occasion, and there's no greater believer in the constitutional justice system than I. We say these things because the uncontroverted evidence that has been presented to date is overwhelming and would most certainly have resulted in a prosecution against anyone but a Clinton or a Bush. That this comment would be offered as proof of Trump's "authoritarianism" is ridiculous.

And offering the opinion that NFL players should be fired for utilizing the spotlight to further their own political agenda--an agenda that is so reprehensible to a majority of Americans that it causes stadiums to go empty? If that's "authoritarian," then every employer I know suffers from the same personality trait. When somebody hires you to do a job, you don't shit on them. Seems simple enough.

You'll get no argument from me when it comes to Trump's character. But the sad fact is that none of the cast of characters among which the American people were allowed to choose--save Rand Paul and possibly one or two others who failed to win the nomination--had any character. At least Trump has ruffled the feathers of the establishment, has shone light upon many of the cockroaches that were hiding in the woodwork, and has galvanized the will of constitutional conservatives to return power to the people. In that sense, I regard Trump as a symbol more than anything else.

Well, I wasn't making any comment about his character. I thought about an authoritarian-libertarian axis and two actions (statements, at any rate) that displayed towards the authoritarian side, since stuper1 asked. It seemed pretty obvious that these were authoritarian statements; nobody has said anything that would make me think they were libertarian yet. If they were "good" or "bad" is a different aspect.

I guess we have a different idea of what authoritarianism is.

Maybe, did you mean something more like 'tyrannical' instead of authoritarian?

[Michellebell]

Does anybody seriously think that Trump meant that Hillary should go to prison without first being tried and convicted of a crime? Please, give me a break!

I've uttered exactly those words on more than one occasion, and there's no greater believer in the constitutional justice system than I. We say these things because the uncontroverted evidence that has been presented to date is overwhelming and would most certainly have resulted in a prosecution against anyone but a Clinton or a Bush. That this comment would be offered as proof of Trump's "authoritarianism" is ridiculous.

And offering the opinion that NFL players should be fired for utilizing the spotlight to further their own political agenda--an agenda that is so reprehensible to a majority of Americans that it causes stadiums to go empty? If that's "authoritarian," then every employer I know suffers from the same personality trait. When somebody hires you to do a job, you don't shit on them. Seems simple enough.

You'll get no argument from me when it comes to Trump's character. But the sad fact is that none of the cast of characters among which the American people were allowed to choose--save Rand Paul and possibly one or two others who failed to win the nomination--had any character. At least Trump has ruffled the feathers of the establishment, has shone light upon many of the cockroaches that were hiding in the woodwork, and has galvanized the will of constitutional conservatives to return power to the people. In that sense, I regard Trump as a symbol more than anything else.

Well, I wasn't making any comment about his character. I thought about an authoritarian-libertarian axis and two actions (statements, at any rate) that displayed towards the authoritarian side, since stuper1 asked. It seemed pretty obvious that these were authoritarian statements; nobody has said anything that would make me think they were libertarian yet. If they were "good" or "bad" is a different aspect.

I guess we have a different idea of what authoritarianism is.

Maybe, did you mean something more like 'tyrannical' instead of authoritarian?

I always thought "authoritarian" referred to a "my-way-or-the-highway" style, often when referring to parenting styles. I think the word is appropriate for this conversation, but I don't think Trump was acting authoritarian in these situations. I think of these things as him just speaking his mind. And people who agree with him love it, whereas people who disagree hate it. In that sense, he does cause more division. But then again, anyone voicing strong opinions in public would cause division. I happen to agree with him on a lot of the things he says, like regarding the NFL.

[Kriegsspiel]

I always thought "authoritarian" referred to a "my-way-or-the-highway" style, often when referring to parenting styles. I think the word is appropriate for this conversation, but I don't think Trump was acting authoritarian in these situations. I think of these things as him just speaking his mind. And people who agree with him love it, whereas people who disagree hate it. In that sense, he does cause more division. But then again, anyone voicing strong opinions in public would cause division.

The way I see it, a libertarian stance on the NFL protests would be that they can do whatever they want, as long as they aren't hurting someone or taking their stuff. An authoritarian would be angry that they're defying a norm and being rebellious, and would demand that they get back in line. The "lock up Hillary" comment wasn't a good example, looking back on it now.

The other axis (Authoritarian–Libertarian) measures one's political opinions in a social sense, regarding the amount of personal freedom that one would allow: "libertarianism" is defined as the belief that personal freedom should be maximised, while "authoritarianism" is defined as the belief that authority should be obeyed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass

[Maddy]

The way I see it, a libertarian stance on the NFL protests would be that they can do whatever they want, as long as they aren't hurting someone or taking their stuff. An authoritarian would be angry that they're defying a norm and being rebellious, and would demand that they get back in line. The "lock up Hillary" comment wasn't a good example, looking back on it now.

i think there would be an acknowledgement of the difference between what a citizen can do on their own time and what an employee can do on company time in the libertarian perspective, it doesn't seem anti libertarian in any way to me for a businessman to take the POV that the employer can set the rules which employment are contingent on, and that creating a rule against behaviors that hurt the brand and the bottom line are needed.. if trump came out in favor of a law against anyone taking a knee at any place the anthem is played = authoritarian.. but i don't get that from the statements he made, it seemed more like the above mentioned businessman perspective to me.

Obviously, Trump cannot fire these players. He cannot direct anyone to fire these players. Accordingly his comment could not be construed--and could never be construed--as anything more than a personal opinion directed to what the team owners should do. So I'm left shaking my head about how the term "authoritarian" applies--no matter how you define it. Is an employer "authoritarian" for demanding that an employee refrain from behaving in a manner that insults customers? For disparaging the business to the point where losses begin accruing? Perhaps so in the minds of those who regard individual liberties as meant only for them, but if that's the working definition of "authoritarianism," we've gone past the point where discussion makes any sense.