2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
https://bonhoeffernowandthen.wordpress.com/2015/01/08/bonhoeffer-on-stupidity/

Perhaps this is relevant... (apologies if it's been posted previously, which is entirely possible)

Bonhoeffer wrote in the essay After Ten Years:

“Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed – in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.”
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Not good.

https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/trump-rally-tweets-jared-yates-sexton/

I wouldn't be surprised if the US descend into 1968 style chaos after the election.
Click to expand...

That's a really good read, actually. And while some Trump supporters will no doubt denounce it as being biased or twisted by someone against Trump, it's quite hard to take that seriously when the man has people tweeting him saying he'll be gassed.

What's funny is the sheer pettiness and victimhood that seems to fit these Trump supporters. They see their multi-millionaire, rich, famous candidate losing, and think it's a fecking media conspiracy against him.:lol: They're somehow trying to paint him as this brave, valiant underdog.

I don't worry too much about post-election violence because, funnily enough, I suspect many of these people are all talk and won't do jackshit when it comes down to it. Still worrying though when they see to be building this sense of togetherness and victimisation. Never something that can be seen as good.
 
Ramshock said:
He wont be fine at all, he has given HRC so much ammo her prep teams biggest problem will be to fit it all in.
Click to expand...

He is oblivious to much of that given that he can basically insult people during debates and they look stupid attempting to reciprocate.
 
@Raoul @Carolina Red

I keep reading Trump and his cronies all shouting the same as the rest of us about the importance of the Supreme Court picks and how it could shape American politics for a generation to come. Obviously they are looking at it from the other side than we are, but they keep mentioning the same thing about Hillary and the 2nd amendment. Now I haven't seen or read anything anywhere, I am sure she hasn't spoken about it (as far as I am aware) but do you know what her stance would be? I know she is actually more liberal on Gun Control than Bernie is, so that's a great thing in my opinion.

I bet Obama is gutted, he has tried so damn hard to get some much needed changes to gun control but he fought a losing battle with opposition in the house, Senate and Supreme Court. I don't think Hillary would ban guns completely, and obviously Trump and co are spreading hyperbole as usual, but how far would she really go with regards to gun control? I mean what are we talking here? Sensible restrictions like banning assault rifles, military grade weapons such as shot guns and sniper rifles and large clip semi auto's? Or not that far?
 
Ramshock said:
Yeah but its 2 people this time not 12 and he will be asked more questions including details about policies and will be grilled about tax returns
Click to expand...

He's a professional liar. He will just toss out shit loads of word salad as usual and he will lie through his teeth. He will also swing it back round against Hillary constantly, and he will also play the victim card and act all butt hurt all the time and he will just speak in his usual vague riddles and make feck all sense, but just enough to convince his supporters he knows what he is talking about.

However, there is the distinct possibility that he will get cornered and either storm off after a massive hissy fit or he will actually completely implode and kick right off and end up saying stuff he really won't be able to defend or lie and talk his way out of. (something @Raoul and I have been waiting for for months)
 
langster said:
@Raoul @Carolina Red

I keep reading Trump and his cronies all shouting the same as the rest of us about the importance of the Supreme Court picks and how it could shape American politics for a generation to come. Obviously they are looking at it from the other side than we are, but they keep mentioning the same thing about Hillary and the 2nd amendment. Now I haven't seen or read anything anywhere, I am sure she hasn't spoken about it (as far as I am aware) but do you know what her stance would be? I know she is actually more liberal on Gun Control than Bernie is, so that's a great thing in my opinion.

I bet Obama is gutted, he has tried so damn hard to get some much needed changes to gun control but he fought a losing battle with opposition in the house, Senate and Supreme Court. I don't think Hillary would ban guns completely, and obviously Trump and co are spreading hyperbole as usual, but how far would she really go with regards to gun control? I mean what are we talking here? Sensible restrictions like banning assault rifles, military grade weapons such as shot guns and sniper rifles and large clip semi auto's? Or not that far?
Click to expand...

They are worried Hillary will appoint new Justices who will reverse the earlier Heller decision that reinforced the idea that individuals have a right to own firearms (more here). If the Dems get something like a 6-3 advantage in the court, which would be achieved if Scalia's replacement gets approved as well as if another justice like Kennedy were to retire, then a variety of cases would be re-looked at with a liberal bias.
 
langster said:
He's a professional liar. He will just toss out shit loads of word salad as usual and he will lie through his teeth. He will also swing it back round against Hillary constantly, and he will also play the victim card and act all butt hurt all the time and he will just speak in his usual vague riddles and make feck all sense, but just enough to convince his supporters he knows what he is talking about.

However, there is the distinct possibility that he will get cornered and either storm off after a massive hissy fit or he will actually completely implode and kick right off and end up saying stuff he really won't be able to defend or lie and talk his way out of. (something @Raoul and I have been waiting for for months)
Click to expand...

Its going to be compelling viewing. I just wish it was Obama v Trump
 
Raoul said:
They are worried Hillary will appoint new Justices who will reverse the earlier Heller decision that reinforced the idea that individuals have a right to own firearms (more here). If the Dems get something like a 6-3 advantage in the court, which would be achieved if Scalia's replacement gets approved as well as if another justice like Kennedy were to retire, then a variety of cases would be re-looked at with a liberal bias.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get the fear about the liberal bias, but didn't know the full facts regarding the Heller decision. Thanks so much :)

Ramshock said:
Its going to be compelling viewing. I just wish it was Obama v Trump
Click to expand...

Me too, poor Trump would be destroyed by Obama, and it would be nothing less than he deserved after all the BS he has spread about him over the last 8 or so years. Mind you, getting taken down by a woman would probably be more humiliating to Trump, especially in public, it really could send him over the edge. Just look at how he went after Megyn Kelly when all she did was have the audacity to ask him about something he actually said. Jeez. The debates could actually be a bloodbath. I can't wait. :D
 
langster said:
how far would she really go with regards to gun control? I mean what are we talking here? Sensible restrictions like banning assault rifles, military grade weapons such as shot guns and sniper rifles and large clip semi auto's? Or not that far?
Click to expand...
As Raoul said, one big thing will be if Heller is revisited.

As to gun control...
Per her website, she's for "expanding background checks, taking on the gun lobby, and keeping guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, violent criminals, and the mentally ill".

The site also mentions her involvement in co-sponsoring assault weapons ban legislation. I don't think she will push for that though unless Democrats control the entire legislature. I could see the other things mentioned above and additionally something like a high capacity magazine ban if that's not the case.
 
I don't reckon Trump will appreciate being micromanaged and will inevitably revert back to ill-advised statements, no matter how much he tries to compromise and follow the recommendations for cultivating a better image.
 
langster said:
There is NO WAY! Trump is or would ever be part of the Masons. Well, not unless the American version is full of complete feckwits. The one thing I know about them is they are exceptionally strict on who joins here in the UK. Part of it is connected to wealth and social standing for sure, but a huge part is personality and intelligence and honesty and integrity. There is no way Trump would get past the vetting section, he would be black balled for sure! They wouldn't want an embarrassment like that having anything to do with them, and it's one society you can't buy or bribe your way in to either, so I bet his answer would be "yeah, well I was asked to join, of course I was, but I declined, secret groups just aren't my thing"
Click to expand...

Ever visited rural parts of the US? In the South?

The Masons are certainly tainted with feckwits and numpties.
 
Ramshock said:
:lol: getting through, ok. She is an airhead but compared to Trump she had some political experience.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, McCain and her team were shitting it before the debates, but they gave her hundreds of cards to remember and she just had to remember soundbites and quick answers, which she did, and she did ok. But if pressed on any issue she would have crumbled. I think her team didn't want her to talk, like she did in the Couric interview.
 
langster said:
If I remember correctly, McCain and her team were shitting it before the debates, but they gave her hundreds of cards to remember and she just had to remember soundbites and quick answers, which she did, and she did ok. But if pressed on any issue she would have crumbled. I think her team didn't want her to talk, like she did in the Couric interview.
Click to expand...

Do you remember the post-Couric interview right-wing hysteria? Couric was so mean to her!

It was about that time I truly took notice of how delusional a portion of the Republican base was becoming, that some policies and thoughts weren't how I felt, and I finally figured myself more centrist than to the right. The next 2-4 years truly pushed me to the left, or maybe the right went so much further to the right it dragged the left to my doorstep.
 
MrMarcello said:
Do you remember the post-Couric interview right-wing hysteria? Couric was so mean to her!

It was about that time I truly took notice of how delusional a portion of the Republican base was becoming, that some policies and thoughts weren't how I felt, and I finally figured myself more centrist than to the right. The next 2-4 years truly pushed me to the left, or maybe the right went so much further to the right it dragged the left to my doorstep.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, definitely. I'm 42 now, and can't remember how or when I noticed how I vote. It just kind of happened, but I can completely understand where you are coming from there. American politics AND news are far more polarised than we have in the UK. I think it's because you only really have 2 parties and we have 5 or 6.
 
Cheesy said:
I don't worry too much about post-election violence because, funnily enough, I suspect many of these people are all talk and won't do jackshit when it comes down to it. Still worrying though when they see to be building this sense of togetherness and victimisation. Never something that can be seen as good.
Click to expand...

All it takes is a few feckwits with guns and explosives to create mass hysteria, and it's not like they are short on supply.

I don't know, really. Obviously Cleveland was fine after all but that was because the tangerine fecktard won. With racial tension at its highest since the bloody Civil War, mass shootings can at the very least be even more common.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
All it takes is a few feckwits with guns and explosives to create mass hysteria, and it's not like they are short on supply.

I don't know, really. Obviously Cleveland was fine after all but that was because the tangerine fecktard won. With racial tension at its highest since the bloody Civil War, mass shootings can at the very least be even more common.
Click to expand...

You´re going to really have to read up on 1967 before making a statement like this. I believe there were riots in over a 100 cities that year. Insane stuff. Ironically enough, at this time the black panthers were arming themselves to protect citizens from the police in urban areas at this time, and sure enough, the NRA could´t move fast enough to get gun control measures enacted. Remember, FBI boss J Edgar Hoover declared black militancy the number one threat against America.
 
Carolina Red said:
As Raoul said, one big thing will be if Heller is revisited.

As to gun control...
Per her website, she's for "expanding background checks, taking on the gun lobby, and keeping guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, violent criminals, and the mentally ill".

The site also mentions her involvement in co-sponsoring assault weapons ban legislation. I don't think she will push for that though unless Democrats control the entire legislature. I could see the other things mentioned above and additionally something like a high capacity magazine ban if that's not the case.
Click to expand...
But you'll still be able to drive around in a fully operational tank, right?
 
Raoul said:
.....and Manafort has just resigned. I suppose working for the Russians is better than working for Drumpf.
Click to expand...

He is probably owed 3 months pay by Trump so he decided to cut his losses. Call it inside info with a bit of historical data.
 
Sigma said:
Clinton is not the best speaker, but Trump is going to get ripped apart in the debates (if he decides to show). He flip flops on so many issues, doesn't have any real plans, he'll just say something like this:
Click to expand...


But he is fantastic at verbal rope-a-dope in debates.
 
Carolina Red said:
The author is a man after my own heart. I've written strongly worded emails to the "History" Channel before when they showed an Ice Road Truckers marathon on Memorial Day and Ancient Aliens on Veterans' Day.
Click to expand...

Yet you find Dane Cook hilarious? If ever there was a symptom of the dumbing down of America, it is Dane Cook. Just his popularity alone should´ve been a sign that a Trump candidacy was possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.