Donald Trump and US politics

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

ChanBalam wrote:

No he just loves that they are marching for him. He sees that as an adoring crowd.

When cognitive dissonance hits you so you make up stuff in your mind to keep your view of the world consistent.

I know and when I noticed it in your post, I was reluctant to comment on it in fear of being offensive or too critical. ;)

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

At some point I'm going to make a new thread about how capitalism and corporatism are not only not the same thing, but actually opposites. For now, let me just say that Ayn Rand is well known as a fervent advocate for capitalism, yet every villain, major and minor, in Atlas Shrugged is a corporatist. The clear distinction between capitalism and corporatism has been part of our literature for decades, yet incredibly both major US political parties continue to offer poison as food and poison as antidote by saying the two are equivalent.

You didn't play Bioshock? It explore how a society based on Ayn Rand's ideals would dissolve into anarchy.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

ChanBalam wrote:

No he just loves that they are marching for him. He sees that as an adoring crowd.

When cognitive dissonance hits you so you make up stuff in your mind to keep your view of the world consistent.

Here's what you need to understand, Xav...

DEMOCRAT PARTISAN LOGIC
Major premise: Democratic Party candidates are superior to GOP candidates
Minor premise (mostly subconscious): Hillary Clinton was an aburdly corrupt and incompetent candidate for President
Therefore: Donald Trump must be an even more absurdly corrupt and incompetent candidate for President

Despite the results of the election, Democratic partisans cannot admit that their choice of candidate was laughably inept, because that would challenge their major premise. Therefore, Trump must be the Stupid Devil. Essentially, it is projecting; Clinton was (is?) demonstrably the Stupid Devil.

The major premise simply wasn't true this time around.

Red-pilled liberals and progressives realize that Clinton was not representative of left-wing populism, that the results of the election do not represent a rejection of left-wing populism, and therefore Clinton's nomination is not to be defended by Democrats, but to be attacked by Democrats. (Unfortunately, DNC leadership is doubling down.) Lefties lost not because the US is deeply conservative, but because they allowed corruption to fester within their own party — and even then, they​ almost won in spite of that.

The Bernouts were right, and they still are. Trump couldn't have defeated a populist Democrat with a relatively clean record.

"

deathflower wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

At some point I'm going to make a new thread about how capitalism and corporatism are not only not the same thing, but actually opposites. For now, let me just say that Ayn Rand is well known as a fervent advocate for capitalism, yet every villain, major and minor, in Atlas Shrugged is a corporatist. The clear distinction between capitalism and corporatism has been part of our literature for decades, yet incredibly both major US political parties continue to offer poison as food and poison as antidote by saying the two are equivalent.

You didn't play Bioshock? It explore how a society based on Ayn Rand's ideals would dissolve into anarchy.

I didn't intend to portray Rand as having the correct answers to the problem, so much as having a powerful and clear understanding of the problem. The ending of Atlas Shrugged shows that her reason had been added by ideological militancy at a certain point, in stark contrast to the earlier Fountainhead which expressly rejected it.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Here's what you need to understand, Xav...

DEMOCRAT PARTISAN LOGIC
Major premise: Democratic Party candidates are superior to GOP candidates
Minor premise (mostly subconscious): Hillary Clinton was an aburdly corrupt and incompetent candidate for President
Therefore: Donald Trump must be an even more absurdly corrupt and incompetent candidate for President

Despite the results of the election, Democratic partisans cannot admit that their choice of candidate was laughably inept, because that would challenge their major premise. Therefore, Trump must be the Stupid Devil. Essentially, it is projecting; Clinton was (is?) demonstrably the Stupid Devil.

The major premise simply wasn't true this time around.

Red-pilled liberals and progressives realize that Clinton was not representative of left-wing populism, that the results of the election do not represent a rejection of left-wing populism, and therefore Clinton's nomination is not to be defended by Democrats, but to be attacked by Democrats. (Unfortunately, DNC leadership is doubling down.) Lefties lost not because the US is deeply conservative, but because they allowed corruption to fester within their own party — and even then, they​ almost won in spite of that.

The Bernouts were right, and they still are. Trump couldn't have defeated a populist Democrat with a relatively clean record.

Interesting, but I think you got most of it wrong. The major premise you present is the basis for out two party system. Both parties go into an election thinking that their slate of potential candidates are superior to those of the other party. If they didn't, they would not be members of their atm selected party. The Dems were badly split by a Hillary who felt both entitled to the presidency and who was determined to be the first woman in that job, and a charismatic Bernie who actually disrupted her "deserved and inevitable" win. Bernie gave people a clear choice. Hillary was simply not a good candidate and in the end could not muster any enthusiasm in those who disgusted by the whole system and wanted to bust things up.

Along with that there was Trump, who from the beginning, no one thought could win the nomination let alone the election. His actions spoke accurately of who would be as President and they garnered enough votes to pull it all off. He won. What you are seeing now is not sour grapes. It is a response to how he has behaved since the election.

You may think that the media has created nothing but fake news in order to go after him, but you would be wrong. One can make a long list of the things he has done or done poorly and a list of the things he hasn't done, that he should have done as a President. All of those things have reflected badly on him, his staff, and his selected appointees. He looks totally incompetent. From Nov-Jan Trump had the chance to show off his management competence. He faced a press corps that was hostile and waiting to pounce. In the face of adversity you have to be better than expected and while you can make small errors, you cannot make big ones. Management 101. He failed every step of they way. he picked the wrong battles to fight, and he fought them poorly. And once in office everything got even worse. He continued the same pattern repeatedly showing his inability to do the job.

It is easy to keep saying "Hillary Hillary Hillary", but how do you a Trump supporter, explain his total failure so far? Trump is the principle actor on the stage and the media are responding to him and his team. Do you not see his failings and just blame everyone else? Isn't Trump responsible for his actions?

How do you explain trump merrily singing along the the national anthem at a Memorial Day ceremony today and getting the words wrong, or Ivanka Trump suggesting today is a great day to make champagne popsicles. Not only can't he get the big stuff right, he can't even get the small stuff right.

Please explain Trump's greatness to me.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I didn't intend to portray Rand as having the correct answers to the problem, so much as having a powerful and clear understanding of the problem. The ending of Atlas Shrugged shows that her reason had been added by ideological militancy at a certain point, in stark contrast to the earlier Fountainhead which expressly rejected it.

The ending is more of "what's up with the ending" moment. I don't think Rand understand the problem either. She failed at what she criticize people about being irrational. She does not have a sound moral rightness of selfishness. She criticize self-sacrifice as irrational. Her novels is contradictory in the sense that her heroes are willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of defending integrity and their values. She prove she is wrong.


Edit:

"

SarahAustin wrote:

Are you taking Bioshock serious? Lol. What if it worked out in the game? Would you still mention it as an example?

Quite Seriously. What caused the downfall of Rapture?