IMG_1216 BW small
Blog powered by Typepad

« Enter Neville | Main | The 4D man »

Comments

The poll that I saw said that 52% of the 1,526 people surveyed agreed that Trump should be removed from office. Now that actual number is 794 people out of 330 million people in the United States of America. There was no indication of who those people were and one might surmise that they were college students. I think it is a gross exaggeration to say that the majority of Americans think that Trump is erratic and crazy. That is just not true. So you see, that is the problem with Democrat Socialists, they make up "facts' to agree with their agenda. - AOD

I think it is a mistake to base one’s view of politics or anything else for that matter on polls. All polls, especially these days, can be manipulated to show whatever result is desired. For example in the town in which I live, a smallish capital town of slightly over 100,000 people in fly-over country, one could poll people who enter a major supermarket on the east side of town, where a population of low income people live. To get a larger number of people one could additionally poll people on the west side of town, an area of middle to high income people where the mall is located. Many major stores are closing there but the remaining stores sell clothing for young girls. There is also one large store on one end of the mall with sports equipment including guns. One could also survey students at the local branch of a major state university with a lot of commuter students or set up a poll in the lobbies of two hospitals. There are many choices to poll people in my smallish town where one could get whatever result one wanted.

Now does anyone think that the results of all of those polls would be the same? In the same small town? Very unlikely! But any pollster could cherry-pick the poll that most closely fits their biases, discard the others and publish that the majority of Americans think that Trump should be removed from office.

I don’t put much stock in polls. They are all biased. (Probably!) - AOD

The Fox poll appears to have oversampled Democrats.

https://nypost.com/2019/10/12/fox-news-pollster-braun-research-misrepresented-impeachment-poll-analysis/

It also used a sample of registered voters, not likely voters. Polls surveying likely voters are more accurate, since half of all registered voters don’t vote.

Winners have to believe in themselves. Who would want a President of the United States of America who didn't believe in himself and the country or a president who was cowering in a corner wringing his hands. and saying 'Woe is me."

The goal of some mental health therapies is to encourage the patient to believe in himself or herself. Thinking that one is inferior or worthless is often at the core of depression and suicide. America needs a president who believes in his abilities to lead the country. A president who is humbly apologizing for his current policy decisions and past actions is not a leader who will lead with vigor and positivism.

It takes work to be positive. It takes work and courage to believe in what is the best for one's self and one's country. Muhammad Ali would not have won his fights if he did not believe in his ability to do so. He constantly reminded us that he was unbeatable. That belief gave him fortitude, strength and energy to battle through a fight and win. A President of the United States of America needs to believe in himself, especially in these days when, as is happening to the current president he is figuratively attacked every hour of every day by the news media and members of the House of Representatives and others with opposing political views. - AOD

Matt,
"By watching actual footage of him talking and reading his tweets. It's not a mystery, so I'm mystified by this comment. We couldn't get a direct impression of Reagan, Clinton, Dubya, etc., from watching their speeches, etc.?!"

So apparently today Trump was trying to have a serious bipartisan meeting over the Syria situation and the Democrats literally got up and walked after Pelosi screamed at Trump that "With you all roads lead to Russia".

Your people are back to insane puppet of Russia allegations.

It couldn't be that Trump ran on - and was elected on - the idea that the USA shouldn't be the world's policeman and should get out of the MENA. No. Of course not. He's a Russian agent!

Now who is crazy and erratic?

But your media sources will hype that Trump went berserk and is handing Syria to the Russians and you'll take that as further evidence of Trump's madness.

My friend, you're being propagandized. It's plain, simple and obvious.

Oh, and you guys are now apparently the party of never ending war. You can add that to your list of "moral" stances. Right there with handing illegal immigrant children to sex traffickers posing as their parents and flooding the labor market with cheap labor so that black and Hispanic citizens are harmed. Some high ground you've got there.

We cannot live together because you see a radically world than I do and we each think the other is immoral and crazy.

"But any pollster could cherry-pick the poll that most closely fits their biases, discard the others and publish that the majority of Americans think that Trump should be removed from office."

Right. Fox News is notorious for their anti-Trump bias. :)

Except Fox News is always bias for Trump. So much so that Trump frequently watches that news channel over every other channel. The point of Fox News poll is to show how not even Trump's favorite outlet can make him look good. Even New York Post's best spin on the Fox News polls (owned by Rupert Murdoch, who coincidentally met Attorney General William Barr after Trump threw a tantrum over the Fox News polls) still showcased that more people want Trump gone vs people who don't.

It also used a sample of registered voters, not likely voters. Polls surveying likely voters are more accurate, since half of all registered voters don’t vote.

Until now. Most registered voters don't vote because back then, they didn't think a man like Trump would somehow get into the White House by the slimmest margin. Now they are pissed by Trump's antics, which was why the 2018 midterm election had one of the largest voter turnouts in recent memory. And I don't think they'll rest until Trump is gone.

That's the reason why Moody's prediction is unreliable. It predicted that Trump would win if the economy holds up. Then consider that Moody's also said that the chances of global recession in 2020 are "uncomfortably high." Factor that into the equation, plus Trump's low approval ratings during a time where the economy hasn't gone down the gutter, the chances are grimmer for Trump assuming he actually makes it to 2020.

"But your media sources will hype that Trump went berserk and is handing Syria to the Russians and you'll take that as further evidence of Trump's madness.

My friend, you're being propagandized. It's plain, simple and obvious."

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that he is. Are you open to the possibility that you too are being propagandized by *your* sources? Or is propaganda a sin of the Left only?

Why do I do this? These political arguments bring me more pain than pleasure, and accomplish nothing, it seems.

Do me a favor, Michael: If I write any more comments to this thread, please don't post them.

Thanks. Signing off for now.

If Trump wasn't a puppet for Vladimir Putin, then he's doing a poor job of displaying it. When President Obama said, after the election mind you, that Russia interfered with our elections and seems to be disproportionally giving aid to Trump's campaign, Trump could have done this:

Proclaim that he didn't realize that Russia helping them and then promise to make next elections safe and secure from future foreign attacks.

What did he, instead?

Insisted that there was no foreign interference to begin with, then admits there was interferences and deflects blame on anyone but Russia, and did nothing to make the elections safe from future interferences.

Then he insisted to Comey to drop the investigations of Michael Flynn's ties with Russia. When Comey refused, Trump fired him and then told to Russian representatives that he did it to get rid of the Russian investigation. That led to the Mueller investigation.

When the CIA and FBI said that Russia was responsible for the election interference and Putin said he didn't do it, Trump sided with Putin's word over our own intelligence groups. Trump has been known to hurl insults and war threats to other leaders like Kim Jong-Un and Hassan Rouhani but I've never heard him say anything bad about Vladimir Putin. That is uncharacteristic of him.

This whole Russian scandal was Trump's fault. He could have act tough on Putin, come clean about his Trump Tower deal in Russia, or at least strengthen our elections. Instead, he acts as if he's got something to hide regarding Russia. As well as acting as if pleasing Putin is more important than making America "Great Again."

I'll never forget what he said during the 2016 election. His own damning words on record:

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Then consider the Ukraine Calls of today where he asked the president of Ukraine to do a favor for Trump by digging up dirt on Biden. I don't think he joking about asking foreign aid to help him win an election.

Bruce,
You are wisely pointing out that all of us are victims of propaganda. That is, we only know what we know and most of that, for those of us who are not in the middle of the fray ‘what we know’ depends upon news sources available to us---somebody else’s opinions and interpretations of the ‘news’. To the extent that those opinions and interpretations agree with our inner core values and belief systems, we believe them. Regardless of the source of information and regardless if it is actually true or not, we are being molded and manipulated to some extent by people whom we think are smarter and more knowledgeable than us but who---miracle of miracles agree with US! - AOD

@AOC

"Winners have to believe in themselves. Who would want a President of the United States of America who didn't believe in himself and the country or a president who was cowering in a corner wringing his hands. and saying 'Woe is me."

That is Trump your describing here. He may sound tough publicly but in private, he caves to foreign leaders who realized that he's a paper tiger. He rants about polls and news not giving him good press and treating "unfairly", and demoralized his own people working for him. The only good thing he has done is showcasing Nancy Pelosi as a tough leader who can stand up to any opposition.

The goal of some mental health therapies is to encourage the patient to believe in himself or herself. Thinking that one is inferior or worthless is often at the core of depression and suicide. America needs a president who believes in his abilities to lead the country. A president who is humbly apologizing for his current policy decisions and past actions is not a leader who will lead with vigor and positivism.

Which is why I never expected Trump to apologize. His ego won't allow it, not even for the simplest of mistakes. He doubles down and shifts blame towards other people except himself, which makes everything worse. It's honestly more courageous and stronger to admit fault and take responsibility for your sins and past sins of your predecessor than it is pretend you're perfect. That is why Christianity has this whole confess and repent your sins aspect to it.

It takes work to be positive. It takes work and courage to believe in what is the best for one's self and one's country. Muhammad Ali would not have won his fights if he did not believe in his ability to do so. He constantly reminded us that he was unbeatable. That belief gave him fortitude, strength and energy to battle through a fight and win. A President of the United States of America needs to believe in himself, especially in these days when, as is happening to the current president he is figuratively attacked every hour of every day by the news media and members of the House of Representatives and others with opposing political views.

And how did that work out for Hitler? Oh, he believed in himself to be invincible and that victory was right around the corner alright... just as the USSR was pounding at the door of his bunker in Berlin in 1945.

As for the Muhammad Ail comparison, it doesn't work for Trump because I, and many others, saw Trump blinked. He can't stand seeing a small crowd on his first day and insisted that it was larger than Obama's. He can't stand to being proven wrong about Hurricane Dorian, so someone used a sharpie to make himself correct. He caved to Kim Jong-Un. To Erdoğan. And of course, to Mexico over the wall fundings. He bleeds weakness for everyone to see.

"If you could make God bleed, people would cease to believe in Him." - Ivan Vanko (Iron Man 2).

Assassin,
I don’t comment just for the sake of argument. I understand that you don’t like President Donald Trump and have your particular view of his misdeeds. I don’t need to be convinced that he is not a perfect human being who makes impossible decisions with which everyone will agree. I just think that Donald Trump is the current legitimate President of the United States of America. That position in government which he holds deserves some respect and a modicum of support and knowing that his term will end now in a little over one year I am willing to let him play out his term for better or worse without any harassment from me. I would hope that others would sit down and just let the play continue. - AOD

"Let's say, for the sake of argument, that he is. Are you open to the possibility that you too are being propagandized by *your* sources? Or is propaganda a sin of the Left only?" - Bruce

Bruce, of course I am aware that I'm being propagandized. I have caught my media sources distorting the truth on many occasions; even outright lying.

How do I know they are trying to mislead me? Because in those instances I have expertise, or direct knowledge of events, or I know people who are experts. When I do rely on the perspective of others who are experts, I realize that even experts can be wrong or slanted to certain views based on various factors.

So I am, personally, an expert on healthcare economics. I work for a Fortune 100 company that is one of the major purveyors of healthcare insurance. They pay me well and they keep promoting me. The information and advice I am paid to assemble and present proves accurate. It has predictive power. It is backed by data. That's how I can be sure I'm an expert. I know that everyone touting Medicare for All and similar schemes is flat out lying to you.

I know that Medicare does not provide insurance at lower admin costs than private companies. Those who think it does are duped by a statistical artifact of how the admin cost is calculated. I know that Medicare (CMS) themselves admits they can't deliver as well as private insurance. Hence Medicare Advantage plans. Look it up!

I know The Who metrics that say that socializes systems deliver more bang for the buck are based not on clinical diagnosis to diagnosis outcomes comparisons, but on social justice measures. Look it up. I know that 50% of healthcare costs in Australia are through private insurance, not the socialized system. The socialized systems ration care. That's just a fact. No except the wealthy are going to get the same quality healthcare under a socialized system. That is a fact. I can offer concrete every day examples to illustrate.

I know that 40% of American healthcare costs are due to obesity and other life style choices. No one wants to talk about that route for cost reduction. Why not? If you're going to impose the govt on everyone, why not force healthy life styles instead of socialism? I can ask these questions because I know the truth.

I know a lot about the history of the MENA, especially with regards to Syria, Turkey, Kurds, Sunni Islam. I started with first hand stories from family members that actually came from the region. Being fascinated with those stories, I began studying the region as a child and have never stopped. I am in contact with people who live there (a few distant relatives). My daughter and Son in Law work in the intelligence community and have for a few years now. They are in counter terrorism. We sometimes discuss these matters. I read and exchange ideas with a retired Colonel who was the DIA's MENA chief after having served as a Green Beret officer. He speaks Arabic. He spent years in the region working with the governments there. His blog attracts people with similar background. He's an expert; not some talking head or politician. These are quality sources. Based on all of that, I know that the media is lying to us about the situation(s) there.

My in depth knowledge of statistics and study design tells me that "the polls" are full of it. That's how I knew Trump was going to win in 2016.

If I want to know what is going on in, say, the energy sector, I get in contact with people that actually work in that field and talk to them. I don't rely on some ditz reporter's take or some lying politician. I always find that situations are far more complex than media sources, left or right, make them out to be. I usually find that media sources are materially wrong in what they report.

Don't be intellectually lazy!

My knowledge of complex modeling tells me that the models used to conclude that there is a dangerous anthropomorphic global warming is just plain nonsense. There is no way a model with kinds of inputs is going to be accurate to 1 degree F. No way. Sorry. I would think that the margin of error must be at least 20 degrees and what they are telling is the trend is well within that margin of error (note that margin of error is never discussed - another red flag to my trained mind).

If you are going to offer illegal aliens free everything, as every Democrat has proclaimed is what they will do if elected, then you're going to attract yet more illegal aliens. That's microeconomics 101. I have a degree in economics. Then who will pay for all of that? The wealthy? Do the math. The wealthy don't have enough money, even if you took it all and put them to the guilotine to pay for it. But then I am good with numbers and have taken the time to understand what all of the social programs cost (and I already knew what healthcare costs).

This is not hard to do if you really care as opposed to all of the moral posturing and starry eyed dreaming.

If they're willing to lie to us about such massive issues, what else are they lying to us about?

Those are just a few examples.

I have an active mind, I'm smart, deeply trained in analysis and I have a few principles that serve me well when I'm trying to understand things; like if it's too good to be true, it isn't true. All politicians are liars. People frequently mistake opinion for reality. People talk out their asses on a regular basis. When assessing a situation emotions must be set aside. Once you start becoming emotional about a subject, you are about to come to the wrong conclusion. The scum always rises to the top and they seek power only and they don't care about you or me. If what you're seeing is as if you're wearing rose colored glasses, then you are. Look for places in your position where magical thinking or leaps in faith are required to hold it together.

Those principles will get you through life and keep you on the right track assessment-wise. If you can' abide by them because, say, you want to believe that most people are good and caring and some politician is really out to help "the people", then you are already lost.


Not all sources are created equal and not all people are able to think properly. Most people can't be objective. The staff of Mother Jones are not experts and they are ideologues. If you actually dig deeply into their positions, you can see that they are totally irrational. You can see the junctures at which they must rely on magical thinking to make their position work.

I'm not invested in any particular conclusion. If it turned out the "Green new Deal" was a good idea, I'd accept it. I don't accept it because it's economically idiotic to the point of being suicidal.

I like Trump because he's not trying to get the government into every little aspect of our lives and because he's for peace. I find he lies to me a lot less than the Democrats and their media outlets. When he does lie, it is mostly little things. Not all lies are created equal and everyone lies. Everyone. Look how all of the "liberals" now worship the CIA and look for every opportunity to get into a war. Doesn't that strike you as backwards?

So, that was a long answer, but yes, my being propagandized is something I am aware of and have been on guard against for many years. Sometimes I slip. Mostly I think I'm doing better than the average citizen.

Not everyone is bright, trained or motivated and the propaganda teams rely on that. Some people who are bright, just are good at analyzing. That's ok. They bring other talents to the society, but they shouldn't act as if they know the best direction forward.

I don't listen to what Hollywood personalities have to say. Which "side" has all of those people touting their policies?

And finally, that liberals tend to argue by moral posturing tells me that they are not being rational. It's all about feelings. That is no way to run a business or a country.

"Why do I do this? These political arguments bring me more pain than pleasure, and accomplish nothing, it seems." - Bruce

Hey man, you've got to roll up your sleeves and get down and dirty sometimes if you want to be an informed voter. Or you can just float around on a pink cloud believing that whatever pops into your head is the truth.

I’m with Bruce on this one. Arguing about politics can be pretty frustrating. I do think it’s worthwhile to be exposed to other viewpoints, but sometimes it just gets a little too confrontational for me.

By the way, I’ve avoided any exposure to political news this week, and I have to say I feel more relaxed and more productive. I’m also spending much less time online.

Re MP's exasperation with the stress and burnout of attending to the fray:

"Excessive brain activity linked to a shorter life" - The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2019/10/16/excessive-brain-activity-linked-shorter-life/?wpisrc=nl_rainbow&wpmm=1

"I’m with Bruce on this one. Arguing about politics can be pretty frustrating. I do think it’s worthwhile to be exposed to other viewpoints, but sometimes it just gets a little too confrontational for me."

True enough. Yet I still think it has to be done sometimes.

Here's another sign you've been a victim of propaganda (a subject I find more interesting than politics itself). You hold and repeat completely opposite views and you sound like a hypocrite and don't even know it.

Example 1 - OMG! He wants to be friends with Russia! Putin is an evil dictator! Doing business with China is fine. There's nothing wrong with the Chinese government and the way it treats humanity.

Example 2 - Christian conservators are terrible and I can't wait until they all die out! How dare you insult Muslims and seek to minimize their activities in this country you bigot!

This could be a very long list, but you get the point. Emotional decision making is bad. Ruling by moral superiority is bad. Freedom and reason are much better; the best we can do.

Micheal, here is a revised version of my last post. A man named Ken Leth had a NDE at the age of 8 where he received specific visions of the future such as the JFK assassination. He received much information including a time when a "vile, disruptive man" becomes president whose actions incites a short civil war. It is described in detail on an excellent 2019 IANDS Conference YouTube video entitled "Prophetic Visions in NDEs: Warnings For Our Current Times" by Robert and Suzanne Mays here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rf4H_1Yqf4g (beginning at 21:15)

Highlights:

+ A vile, disruptive man will become president.
+ The disruptive president is removed from office and incites violence.
+ The disruptive president falls ill and dies.
+ Widespread fighting flares up again, becoming a civil war.
+ There is much, much more.
+ Also, a simple Google search will show you the evidence that many Christians believe Trump is the biblical archetype known as "the Antichrist."
+ However, the future is not set in stone; but is based upon extrapolations of current probabilities.

Thanks, Kevin. I listened to the relevant part of the video. The problem is that, while the NDE allegedly occurred in 1963 when Ken was 8 years old, most of his prophetic memories only "returned" to him years later. The stuff about the vile, disruptive blond man came back to him "in early 2016." Of course by then, Trump was already the front runner for the Republican nomination.

Ken may believe he had this vision of the vile man decades earlier, but since it was "suppressed" (as he claims) until after events had caught up with it, it has no evidential value as a prediction.

The presenter, I think, is somewhat misleading in his remarks. Although he does acknowledge that Ken's memory was "suppressed" until 2016, he gives this salient fact little emphasis, and instead reminds us pointedly that Ken had the vision way back in 1963. But the date of the alleged NDE is irrelevant. What matters in terms of judging the accuracy of the prediction is *when Ken first made the prediction known.*

Someone could claim he had a vision in 1980 of the Twin Towers falling, but he told no one about it until after 9-11. How persuasive would this be?

What would have some value is if the rest of Ken's prediction going forward plays out as he says. *Some* value, but arguably not a lot, since even before Trump's inauguration, many people anticipated (or perhaps hoped) that his presidency would prove so divisive that he would not serve out his term. This idea, in other words, was very much in the air.

For reasons stated in the main post, I don't think Trump will be forced out of office, and therefore I don't think there will be civil unrest relating to his ouster. But time will tell!

The second Trump-related prophesy is even less impressive, since it came to this other person in "July of 2016." By then, Trump already had secured the Republican nomination! The rest of the prediction is a standard list of Trumpian evils — he will become a Fuhrer, establish martial law, abolish the other branches of government, rule as a dictator, etc. None of this has happened yet, except in the fever dreams of Trump's opponents.

Eric wrote,

||We cannot live together because you see a radically world than I do and we each think the other is immoral and crazy.||

I don't think we've discussed politics in enough detail, and certainly not recently, for you to come to this conclusion.

I think that a large portion of the political acrimony in the US is not due to two sides holding radically different positions but rather due to the lucrative nature of division. Though I do blame the right more than the left for this, it still benefits both sides to have radically distinct "brands" with angry bases. This solidifies the position of the politicians and brings more money overall into the system. IOW, polarization is a grift.

Matt,
First off, I'm pretty sure that if we met in real life and went out for a beer we'd get along quite well and enjoy each others' company. We could probably even discuss politics over that beer and still get along even though we differ greatly in our outlook on some policies that really do have great impact on how we live. I think it's challenging to discuss these matters on line where the necessary brevity of the comments makes them seem more terse and where body language and facial expression is absent. Sometimes it's easy to forget that there is actually another human on the other end of that statement that is getting us riled up.

And you're right, we haven't discussed politics in sufficient detail to truly understand the nuances and details of where each of is coming from. That said, we have both formed strong opinions based on how the other votes. As I see it, if you vote for any of the democrats, you are aiding and abetting some very terrible ideologies. I realize that you think the same of me because I vote republican and, specifically, for Trump.

To my point, that you quoted, I don't see why people hate Trump. He's a little odd; definitely unique in his presentation, but I don't see all the hate that others perceive. I really like his policies and I see them working. I see that he keeps his promises; which is unusual for a politician.

On the other hand, to my mind it is the democrats that are bat shit crazy and offering up terrible and destructive policies. Just a few; Open borders with full welfare benefits and healthcare for anyone who crosses it into the US. The Green New Deal. Gun confiscation. Medicare for All. Wealth confiscation to pay for the above goofy policies.

More importantly, democrats are the ones engaged in identity politics. Trump is about ALL Americans, whereas democrats are divisive by being for only certain Americans and for foreigners (foreigners that enter the country illegally and people in far away countries). I'm not inferring this. They come right out and say it.

Then there's the alignment of the "deep state" and the news media and the democrats. I find that highly disturbing and dangerous to the 1st Amendment. See Matt Taibi's wonderful piece re; permanent coup.

Again, democrats come out and proudly state these positions. These are serious issues that I oppose and I could never vote for anyone holding them. You could and do. That's where we have irreconcilable differences. I don't need to know more about your thinking to know that we just can't live in the same country.

Matt, as a follow-on to my first response to you, I want to explain my moral position as opposed to the more numbers crunching objections to Democrat policies.

I have long believed that MLK's "I have a dream" speech should be one of the pillars of American society. MLK was a great man with a great vision.

I also believe that going to war is an extremely serious decision. There is nothing more evil and ugly than war. It's the ultimate degradation of human values.

I see identity politics as undoing MLK's dream. IMO, we should all pull together as Americans and drop the hyphens. The liberal pols and media are always talking about and pandering to Hispanics think this and African Americans think that. Really? All of them? Isn't that prejudice and bigotry? I see Trump as approaching policies in terms of everyone becoming better off. I have not yet detected the alleged "divisiveness" of Trump, but I see it all over on the Democrats side. Setting minorities against the rest seems to be a primary tactic of the Democrats and it sickens me.

I see Trump as the only who opposes endless war around the world. These are wars that cost a huge amount of money, kill lots of people, increase hate and accomplish little to no positive lasting change. In fact, too often these wars backfire completely. Democrats seem to have never met a war they didn't like and want to delve deeper into with US resources.

I think the morality of these topics is far more meaningful than Trump University or uncouth p***y grabbing jokes. For me, these are deal killers. I can't hang with war mongers or racial dividers in my country.

"We just can't live in the same country."

And yet ... we do.

"And yet ... we do."

So far.

He hasn't announced his candicacy and he's really not qualified, but I expect to vote for him if he runs. He's bound to unite a divided country.

The result of a highly classified "black budget" experiment (originally designed to answer the question: Can clones be grown and trained in large numbers in case of a national emergency?) conducted in a hidden laboratory on the outskirts of Nashville, the Hank Williams clone can sing and play the guitar at least as well as the original.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCgicPdsxxg

I dislike Trump's personality, how he talks, what he looks like, his orange head, his vulgarity, Tweets, etc., and he may be the Antichrist; but because he is a capitalist genius, for which anyone with advanced credentials in economics can see, according to how he has Super-Charged the U.S. economy which is most important. It's the economony, stupid. I won't vote for anyone but a capitalist as I don't want the U.S. becoming Venezuela. It can easily be done. And the only color that really matters is green. From someone with a degree in business systems.

Michael, I also agree with your assessment of my comment about Trump. Especially in this NDE non-fiction genre where one must scrutinize the author of every type. And as long as Biden stays alive and capitalist, I could easily vote for him as well.

I went through all the comments last night because I had a free hour. Here's what I saw:

Leftists: "I'm waiting for all you evil, racist, Nazi rightey's to die so I can create my utopia. LOL. Internet tough guy."

Righteys: "I have guns and I know how to use them. Just try to get rid of me."

Leftists: "Why you got to be mean like that and threaten your fellow American, Rightey? All I did was wish you dead so I could create Utopia! Also, Drumpf has small hands and is orange and likes to pay hookers to pee on Obama's bed."

Also, in regard to the idea of "demographics is destiny", that leftists can just wait for righteys to die because a billion percent of da youf is leftist, if that's true than the right has three main advantages over the left:

1. Conservatives have significantly more children than liberals, coupled with a significant part of political persuasion being correlated with genetics, indicates that over the long run conservatives are out breeding, and will outnumber liberals.

2. SCOTUS has opened the door for Trump to build his wall (which is on schedule to be 1/4 finished - about 500 miles - by the end of his first term), which will cut off the flood of new Democrat voters, combined with Guatemala having been declared a safe third country, meaning existing illegal Democrat voters can be safely deported in accordance with all accepted human rights regulations to a country that actually has a culture and a language more in line with the homes they fled. This all means that the pool of liberals will begin drying up while the pool of conservatives continues to grow, meaning when Trump gets his second term (unless he dies in office, there are no viable Democratic candidates who could get more than a plurality of the base to side with them because the party has become divided by identitarianism) the country will begin to shift to the right.

3. When Trump gets a second term he will get at least 1, maybe 2 more Supreme Court appointments. SCOTUS governs public policy, meaning that for at least the next three decades the US judicial overseers will steer things toward the right. This will buy time while the children of conservatives grow up and reach voting age.

But that's just if you believe demographics to be destiny.

==========
In the interest of full frontal (and backal) disclosure, I am not a conservative. I don't smoke cigars, I despise cars, and highways, and spread out suburbs that make travel on foot or public transportation difficult to impossible, and I think the free market is a scam run by international banksters and corporate oligarchs to keep people debt slaves by not paying them living wages. I also don't want a Boy Scout as President, as several Boomers I talk to use to refer to some Mormon guy who lost spectacularly in 2012. I want Andrew Jackson or Theodore Roosevelt to cuss a lot, shoot people, and call his opponent a hermaphroditic bigamist. And I want him to stand for America, not Europe or the "personkind" or to kowtow to China.

I'm also not a liberal, or progressive, because socialism has never worked, does not now work, and never will work, I think only nouns have gender, biological organisms have sex, and as much as you or I or anyone desires that cannot be changed, I think affirmative action is institutionalized racism against Asians and whites, Title 9, divorce courts, and the rampant unfounded accusations rape that destroy lives without due process is institutionalized sexism against men, and as much as I'm an extreme environmentalist, that climate change is a hoax and the Green New Deal is nothing more than a scam to tax the West into oblivion and offshore industry to China or India where pollution regulations and workers rights are non-existent.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)