Is Trump Video Surprising?

[Guest MormonGator]

4 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

This explains my tepid, begrudging use/support of FB.  :-)

lol. I love Facebook. It's helped me make friends and meet people whom twenty years ago, I never would have. Sure people can nitpick about this or that about it, but overall in my life it's been an enormous blessing. In fact, it got me interested in the church in the first place (at least partially). I took a test that asked what religion I'd be, and it came out LDS by about 100%. I said "Huh. Might have to look into this LDS thing." 

[prisonchaplain]

Label me a social media snob, but I've found that LinkedIn has most of the positives of Facebook, and far fewer of the negatives.  Posters behave themselves because they just might find a job/applicant/network opportunity. 

[Traveler]

This thread is not about who in the USA ought to be president but what politics has become -- a campaign of who should not be president and not how to make this country better.  I believe this is because secret combinations are so entrenched and desiring to make sure they are not discovered but that those that oppose them be denied liberties.

 

The Traveler

[Just_A_Guy]

On 10/10/2016 at 2:48 PM, prisonchaplain said:

Exactly why most of our eyes are glazed over, and we're ready to declare immoral equivalence.  We are so "stuck like Chuck," in this election.  So, who's that again that will be the better leader on economics, foreign affairs, immigration, and social issues--including appointing strict constructionists (rather than pro-abortion, anti-religious-liberties, pro-'degeneracy-is-natural') SCOTUS and federal judges?  I'm back to where I was a month ago.  Trump may garner a 5.  Clinton is a proud -10. 

Yeah, I think there are three fundamental reasons to disagree with Trump:

1)  Disagreement with his stated agenda (or disbelief that he will actually do the things he claims constitute his agenda);

2)  Concerns about the ramifications a Trump victory would have for American political culture generally, and conservatism in particular;

3)  Concerns about Trump's character.

In that respect, these new allegations shouldn't really change the calculus all that much; except that what some of us already suspected about Trump's character has now been confirmed out of the horse's own mouth.

17 hours ago, Jojo Bags said:

Who cares about the video.   The idiot Americans elected a rapist to the WH twice and a socialist twice.   Now the single most corrupt politician to ever seek the office of president is supposedly supported by a majority of know nothing,  low information,  plainly ignorant voters.  The released Wikileaks emails of Hillary show a continuous pattern of crime and corruption,  and that she used the State Department for personal gain.  She is a typical Gadianton, supported by other Gadiantons.   Trump is a boy scout compared to Hillary and her rapist husband.

Here's the difference, to me: 

Bill Clinton felt the need to deny he was a philandering rapist.  Barack Obama felt the need to deny he was a socialist.  Hillary Clinton feels the need to deny she is corrupt.

When the Gadiantons declare themselves openly--which is more or less what Trump has been doing for some time now--you're in a whole other world of hurt.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[prisonchaplain]

I suspect that a Trump administration would be an outlier.  There would be four years of carnival, with perhaps a few significant achievements (hopefully including a constructionist SCOTUS).  HRC is much more skillful at actually executing politics--and that frightens me.  So, I prefer the loud bluster and meager crops to an abundant harvest of weeds and infestation.  Who says prison preachers can't be poetic?

[Guest MormonGator]

27 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

  Who says prison preachers can't be poetic?

Move over Robert Frost. PC is in the house!! 

(Totally playing around!!) 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

I suspect that a Trump administration would be an outlier.  There would be four years of carnival, with perhaps a few significant achievements (hopefully including a constructionist SCOTUS).  HRC is much more skillful at actually executing politics--and that frightens me.  So, I prefer the loud bluster and meager crops to an abundant harvest of weeds and infestation.  Who says prison preachers can't be poetic?

To characterize a potential Donald Trump administration as four years of carnival is, I think, to mistakenly trivialize him and the likelihood that he will cause great damage. Although I perceive that he is every bit as much a liar as he and his supporters characterize Hillary Clinton to be, I also perceive that we can believe his actions when his actions (i.e. his bragging in the video) reveal his terrible character. And therein lies an important aspect of the relationship between what Trump thinks and what he says—and ultimately what he will do as a President of the United States. 

I’m encouraged by much of what I’ve read on this thread posted by @Just_A_Guy, as I was also encouraged by Nicolette Poulsen’s piece (Mormon Hub): Utah Mormons Vow Not to Vote For Trump. These strike me as voices of reason contrasted with the wilfull ignoring by so many of Trump’s supporters that the caricatures of him are true—“it will be amazing, very very amazing, you won’t believe how amazing” (in a much more frightening way than Hillary's skillful executing politics) what a Trump administration would really be.

 

[Blueskye2]

12 hours ago, MormonGator said:

lol. I love Facebook. It's helped me make friends and meet people whom twenty years ago, I never would have. Sure people can nitpick about this or that about it, but overall in my life it's been an enormous blessing. In fact, it got me interested in the church in the first place (at least partially). I took a test that asked what religion I'd be, and it came out LDS by about 100%. I said "Huh. Might have to look into this LDS thing." 

I took one of those tests, it came out Buddhist for me.  I didn't convert, though once upon a time I did study and practice some aspects of Buddhism.  

Edited October 12, 2016 by Blueskye2

[Guest Godless]

In other news, McMullin may have a legitimate shot at winning Utah (Link). If that happens and neither Trump or Clinton win 270 electoral votes, McMullin will be eligible for consideration in the House vote that the 12th Amendment mandates in such a situation. 

[Larry Cotrell]

1 hour ago, Godless said:

In other news, McMullin may have a legitimate shot at winning Utah (Link). If that happens and neither Trump or Clinton win 270 electoral votes, McMullin will be eligible for consideration in the House vote that the 12th Amendment mandates in such a situation. 

Clinton will win. As much as I don't like it, this election will be more of a landslide than the last one. I like McMullin, but no third party ever has a chance at winning. The electoral map is so democrat that no matter how many angry Bernie fans (or angry commies) there are, she will win far more than 270 votes.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

Clinton will win. As much as I don't like it, this election will be more of a landslide than the last one. I like McMullin, but no third party ever has a chance at winning. The electoral map is so democrat that no matter how many angry Bernie fans (or angry commies) there are, she will win far more than 270 votes.

Correct. And when you think about it Hillary was easily beatable but the Trumpers ruined it by being so easily duped by a snake oil salesmen. They are  the marks that carnies look for who can never admit the ring toss game is crooked. 

[anatess2]

On 10/12/2016 at 0:25 PM, MormonGator said:

Correct. And when you think about it Hillary was easily beatable but the Trumpers ruined it by being so easily duped by a snake oil salesmen. They are  the marks that carnies look for who can never admit the ring toss game is crooked. 

So easily duped...

Gee whiz lueez!  You just can't let up on the marginalization can you?  News flash.  We're not dumb and stupid.  Newt Gingrich is not dumb and stupid.  Jeff Sessions is not dumb and stupid.  Dr. Ben Carson is not dumb and stupid.  So you can wail about how Trumpers are easily duped.  That just makes you sound dumb and stupid.

Edited October 14, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest MormonGator]

12 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

So easily duped...

Gee whiz lueez!  You just can't let up on the marginalization can you?  News flash.  We're not dumb and stupid.  Newt Gingrich is not dumb and stupid.  Jeff Sessions is not dumb and stupid.  Dr. Ben Carson is not dumb and stupid.  So you can wail about how Trumpers are easily duped.  That just makes you sound dumb and stupid.

Duped doesn't mean stupid. I never said stupid and I don't think you are stupid. Sad that you said that thinking that way makes me sound "dumb and stupid". But again, it's typical for Trumpers to act like their leader. 

You are exhibiting classic signs of someone who has been duped. Extremely defensive, easy to anger, inability to withstand critique without getting emotional, inability to engage in self-criticism, refusal to consider you might be wrong, will defend Trump to the end... very sad.

It's like trying to talk with someone who thinks the earth is flat.

Edited October 14, 2016 by MormonGator

[anatess2]

26 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Duped doesn't mean stupid. I never said stupid and I don't think you are stupid. Sad that you said that thinking that way makes me sound "dumb and stupid". But again, it's typical for Trumpers to act like their leader. 

You are exhibiting classic signs of someone who has been duped. Extremely defensive, easy to anger, inability to withstand critique without getting emotional, inability to engage in self-criticism, refusal to consider you might be wrong, will defend Trump to the end... very sad.

It's like trying to talk with someone who thinks the earth is flat.

Oh wow... Now you attribute magical powers to Trump to be able to dupe non-dumb-and-stupid people like Newt Gingrich, Jeff Sessions, Ben Carson, etc. etc... or is it that you're saying those people are complicit in the duping?

I've been posting issue after issue after issue starting with my very first post on here about Trump last May.  I have several super long, thesis worthy position write-ups on here about why I support Trump.  You have been posting nothing but marginalization of Trumpers since May.  And you're the one telling me I am extremely defensive, can't withstand critique without getting emotional, and can't engage in self-criticism.  And then you add a zing about relating me with flat-earth folks.  Good try.

Edited October 14, 2016 by anatess2

[Guest]

On 10/12/2016 at 8:57 AM, Larry Cotrell said:

Clinton will win. As much as I don't like it, this election will be more of a landslide than the last one. I like McMullin, but no third party ever has a chance at winning. The electoral map is so democrat that no matter how many angry Bernie fans (or angry commies) there are, she will win far more than 270 votes.

True.

In fact, I predict about the same numbers as we saw when Obama beat McCain.

[Guest MormonGator]

11 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

True.

In fact, I predict about the same numbers as we saw when Obama beat McCain.

Very generous of you Carb. In reality I think it'll be like Goldwater losing to Johnson or McGovern losing to Nixon. Trump will be lucky to carry Texas. He'll lose 49 states. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Very generous of you Carb. In reality I think it'll be like Goldwater losing to Johnson or McGovern losing to Nixon. Trump will be lucky to carry Texas. He'll lose 49 states. 

I'd forgotten about Goldwater.  But I don't think it will be quite that bad. Just almost.  I predict he'll probably get around 100 to 120  electors.

[Guest MormonGator]

8 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I'd forgotten about Goldwater.  But I don't think it will be quite that bad. Just almost.  I predict he'll probably get around 100 to 120  electors.

This election is genuinely tragic because Hillary was easily beatable and we had a crop of wonderful candidates. Trump and his Trumpers have absolutely destroyed the party and set back the conservative movement by easily forty years. It is absolutely devastating. 

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

This election is genuinely tragic because Hillary was easily beatable and we had a crop of wonderful candidates. Trump and his Trumpers have absolutely destroyed the party and set back the conservative movement by easily forty years. It is absolutely devastating. 

That's your perspective.

This is the Trumper perspective:

The Bush Presidency and Congress gave us record debt and an economic crisis to add to the pro-longed war engagement.  It didn't matter that both the Presidency and Congress were ruled by Republicans.  The flavor of Congress was stonewall.  Democrats and Republicans don't debate issues, rather they stonewall and use party allegiances and re-election campaign funding to threaten their side of Congress into compliance.  There is no debate.  They stand on their side of the fence and instead of debating the merits or demerits of bills they strong-arm votes or filibuster.  Nothing gets through... they can't agree on much of anything.  Bush got his objectives through executive orders.

This just got worse in the 8 years of Obama.  The TEA Party came out in full force The conservatives seeded Congress with highly trustworthy, upright, moral conservative torch-bearers.  The GOP has silenced all of them as it didn't align with their party objectives (note, that these party objectives have no bearing on people's objectives).  Congress became a sham of a legislative body and Obama, as a result, ruled with executive orders.

THIS IS A BROKEN GOVERNMENT.

Think of any of the 16 people that was running for the Republican Primaries and imagine a single one of them 1.) Beating the Democrats - remember, Romney lost, 2.) Beating entrenched establishment in Congress.

Ted Cruz, a staunch conservative, would have been another partyline stonewall on steroids.  Strict ideology would have continued to cause Congress to be do-nothing... continue almost 16 years of no debates.

John Kasich... a laugh.  He is too weak.

Chris Christie - do you really believe he can win against Clinton?

Ben Carson - Romney can't even win, how much more for Carson.  Nice guys are easy fodder for Democrat negative attacks.

Rubio - donor class puppet.  He can't even stand up to his bipartisan immigration bill.  He crafted something in a gang of 8 and threw out his voters.

You can go on down the line.

Trump's appeal IS he does not think by ideologies.  He thinks by execution.  Therefore, he has the unique ability to ram right through the Congressional blockade and break this party-line stagnation.  He correctly identifies the donor class and put them on notice.  He is impervious to negative campaigns - from both sides - and he is impervious to ideology smears.  Because what really does it matter what he thinks about which bathroom we're supposed to use?  How does that solve our $19T national debt and the ravages of ISIS?  So, he can say - sure, Kaitlyn Jenner can use whatever bathroom he wants - without having to pay an electorate price and get that issue out of the table for other people to worry about.  Meanwhile, he does WHAT A PRESIDENT CAN DO to get "other people that has to worry about it" on the side of Constitutionalist Americans by promising a Scalia-like SCOTUS.  This kind of thing is instinctive to Trump.  He may not be able to explain to you what conservatism means but his actions side with true conservatism - not this buzz-word conservatism - Free Trade... yeah, when you're running major trade deficits, free trade is just a buzz word.  So conservatives like Sessions can get their voices heard.

Conservatism is practical.  Liberalism is emotional.  Trump understands practical very well.  Conservatism is also effective and has a track record of success.  So, in the arena of ideas, Trump will instinctively agree with Sessions on things that are actionable.  BUT - Trump is a celebrity - he knows instinctively how to reach people emotionally.  So, you got a bonus of a guy that is easily persuaded into conservative governance, you got the guy who can lead people to it.

So that's why conservative powerhouses like the TEA Party darling Jeff Sessions - who has experienced not getting his voice heard in a majority Republican House - went out for Trump very early in the campaign.  People like Newt Gingrich - the guy who ran a successful conservative Congress under a Bill Clinton Presidency - saw the opportunity of breaking this stupid Congressional blockade with Trump.

Now, you can say the Trumpers have absolutely destroyed the party.  GOOD.  THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.

 

 

Edited October 14, 2016 by anatess2

[anatess2]

Okay, I just wrote another long post on this.  Guess what, I have no doubt you are going to marginalize me and Trumpers again.

But hey... I'm not averse to wearing the Proud to be Deplorable t-shirt.

Edited October 14, 2016 by anatess2

[yjacket]

The only other R candidate who could possibly beat Clinton be Rand Paul. Cruz is like Rand Paul without the libertarian flare.  And that libertarian flare is needed to bring in the moderates and independents.  But both Cruz and Paul would be destroyed like Trump from the corrupt establishment media. We have documented proof from wikileaks that the media is in the tank for the Establishment.

So blame Trump if you like-but it just isn't the reality of the situation.

[Traveler]

 

It is interesting that we are concerned about which candidate will be worse for this country.  I wish more were educated in the ploys of “brain washing” and deceptive propaganda.  Seriously – just by editing video and handpicked selected data – It would be possible to take the worse team in the NFL and make them appear to be the far superior championship deserving team and take the team that actually won the championship and make them appear to be the worse bumbling team to ever play professional football.

The one great problem with democracy is that it gives too much power to sheepeople idiots with misplaced loyalty to a specific political party over country.  We are losing our freedoms and liberties when someone (anyone) starts to believe that they could never vote for someone in a particular political party because they are of that party and not for anything else.   

We are facing serious problems in our social political environment that are a cancer in our society; that are like termites destroying a great structure from the inside out.  I believe that the first sign of a secret society taking a deadly grip in the hearts of a people is the existence of propaganda that fosters - for some reason, that laws should not be enforced the same for all – that there is some reason or excuse that for some elements or groups in our society – the law should be liberal or not even enforced and for others, that the same issues of the law need to be more burial and punishing.  This is a great gateway political drug that the opens the door to an entire landscape of corruption.  But is it not the only gateway to brainwashing technique for a foolish generation.

Christians should know that the very Son of G-d; that is full of mercy, love compassion, kindness, justice and truth was made into a blasphemous traitorous villain threating the very core of human traditions of divine respect and rightful compliance of both religious and secular law.  And was put to death for crimes proven and demonstrated sufficiently before magistrates of law by which the people ware governed.  And it was all a lie.

In our current election there is a one candidate that has so challenged a corrupt system that the secret forces within our government are actually threatened.  And we get to see what happens under such conditions – my first concern is that the whole thing is a sham and part of a cleaver scheme to take down the freedoms of liberties of a foolish – stupid – lazy society and prove to them and the world the freedoms and liberties are problematic, ineffective and insufficient government considerations for the type of people they are.  In case anyone is not certain – I am not too pleased or confident with the course of things.  I think a corrupt political insider is going to get elected and I am quite certain that many innocent (including future innocent generations) and otherwise freedom loving people will suffer greatly for what we are watching unfold before us - and doing very little beyond following some well-placed propaganda into an abyss of deception.

 

The Traveler

[Blueskye2]

On 10/14/2016 at 3:03 PM, anatess2 said:

That's your perspective.

This is the Trumper perspective:

The Bush Presidency and Congress gave us record debt and an economic crisis to add to the pro-longed war engagement.  It didn't matter that both the Presidency and Congress were ruled by Republicans.  The flavor of Congress was stonewall.  Democrats and Republicans don't debate issues, rather they stonewall and use party allegiances and re-election campaign funding to threaten their side of Congress into compliance.  There is no debate.  They stand on their side of the fence and instead of debating the merits or demerits of bills they strong-arm votes or filibuster.  Nothing gets through... they can't agree on much of anything.  Bush got his objectives through executive orders.

This just got worse in the 8 years of Obama.  The TEA Party came out in full force The conservatives seeded Congress with highly trustworthy, upright, moral conservative torch-bearers.  The GOP has silenced all of them as it didn't align with their party objectives (note, that these party objectives have no bearing on people's objectives).  Congress became a sham of a legislative body and Obama, as a result, ruled with executive orders.

THIS IS A BROKEN GOVERNMENT.

Think of any of the 16 people that was running for the Republican Primaries and imagine a single one of them 1.) Beating the Democrats - remember, Romney lost, 2.) Beating entrenched establishment in Congress.

Ted Cruz, a staunch conservative, would have been another partyline stonewall on steroids.  Strict ideology would have continued to cause Congress to be do-nothing... continue almost 16 years of no debates.

John Kasich... a laugh.  He is too weak.

Chris Christie - do you really believe he can win against Clinton?

Ben Carson - Romney can't even win, how much more for Carson.  Nice guys are easy fodder for Democrat negative attacks.

Rubio - donor class puppet.  He can't even stand up to his bipartisan immigration bill.  He crafted something in a gang of 8 and threw out his voters.

You can go on down the line.

Trump's appeal IS he does not think by ideologies.  He thinks by execution.  Therefore, he has the unique ability to ram right through the Congressional blockade and break this party-line stagnation.  He correctly identifies the donor class and put them on notice.  He is impervious to negative campaigns - from both sides - and he is impervious to ideology smears.  Because what really does it matter what he thinks about which bathroom we're supposed to use?  How does that solve our $19T national debt and the ravages of ISIS?  So, he can say - sure, Kaitlyn Jenner can use whatever bathroom he wants - without having to pay an electorate price and get that issue out of the table for other people to worry about.  Meanwhile, he does WHAT A PRESIDENT CAN DO to get "other people that has to worry about it" on the side of Constitutionalist Americans by promising a Scalia-like SCOTUS.  This kind of thing is instinctive to Trump.  He may not be able to explain to you what conservatism means but his actions side with true conservatism - not this buzz-word conservatism - Free Trade... yeah, when you're running major trade deficits, free trade is just a buzz word.  So conservatives like Sessions can get their voices heard.

Conservatism is practical.  Liberalism is emotional.  Trump understands practical very well.  Conservatism is also effective and has a track record of success.  So, in the arena of ideas, Trump will instinctively agree with Sessions on things that are actionable.  BUT - Trump is a celebrity - he knows instinctively how to reach people emotionally.  So, you got a bonus of a guy that is easily persuaded into conservative governance, you got the guy who can lead people to it.

So that's why conservative powerhouses like the TEA Party darling Jeff Sessions - who has experienced not getting his voice heard in a majority Republican House - went out for Trump very early in the campaign.  People like Newt Gingrich - the guy who ran a successful conservative Congress under a Bill Clinton Presidency - saw the opportunity of breaking this stupid Congressional blockade with Trump.

Now, you can say the Trumpers have absolutely destroyed the party.  GOOD.  THAT'S WHAT WE WANT.

 

 

This is actually the clearest explanation I have ever seen, for the phenomena of Trump having the support he does. Thanks for taking the time to write it. 

I totally get your points, and can see the attraction. I don't get why you think Trump is going to do GOOD for the country.  There is a leap from, what has been going on wrong for nearly two decades, to Trump as savior...that I'm still not getting. 

In other words, I see he has a symbolic attraction but not tangible evidence that could take Trump from symbolic leader to an actual leader. He in fact, speaks in symbolic terms (which isn't unusual in a campaign, Obama did the same thing).

Edited October 16, 2016 by Blueskye2

[yjacket]

20 hours ago, Traveler said:

We are facing serious problems in our social political environment that are a cancer in our society; that are like termites destroying a great structure from the inside out.

Bingo,

There are really good people in government, but it's like the pot boiling. First one thing happens, then another, then another.  A little corruption here, a little there.  People inherently understand it is there but think well someone should stop them-they don't. Okay well if the people in charge didn't get stopped then that means what they did is okay.  People get used to it and then it becomes accepted. It's a slow process (but can happen very, very quickly too).  Those involved in it get more and more brazen in an attempt to keep control and power.  Then boom in 5-10 years you look back and you think, what the heck has happened? How did we get here?

Traveler, for the 1st time in my life I am actually really worried that it is getting close.  There is some really weird stuff going on over the last 10 months. Stuff that makes me thing the line "The Revolution will not be Televised" is real.

Rich Seth, Shawn Lucas. (oh and believe me the Rs are not innocent either).

There is enough in the e-mails from what I've read (the vast majority are innocuous but the others they lay out a very nasty pattern and I'm talking crazy crap), that I think there is a high likelihood that Scalia was assassinated (and I have stayed away previously from conspiracy websites about that thing thinking "yeah right, come on that is just ludicrious. . . ."). Either the e-mail leaks are fake and put out by some entity (which the things I've read have a long enough track record and multiple layers that seem to track that it is hard to spoof it or fake it) or we are in for a massive crap storm.

I honest to goodness hope I am wrong. 

Edited October 17, 2016 by yjacket

[yjacket]

19 hours ago, Blueskye2 said:

I totally get your points, and can see the attraction. I don't get why you think Trump is going to do GOOD for the country.  

It's not that I think he is good, it's that I think we are at a very pivotal moment in American History.

Let's just think this through here.  Trump politically is unknown.  Say people are right and he'd be a pompous jerk and break laws.  If you think we have a legitimate functioning government of laws, then if he does something illegal he will be prosecuted.  4 years go by you elect someone else, big deal. If we have a legitimate functioning government then there is no way he could execute something like the "night of the long knives"? Just freaking impossible.

If we don't have a legitimate functioning government, then you are scared that he gets in there and executes a "night of the long knives" or something like that?  If you are worried about him doing something like that, then you are already admitting we do not have a legitimate functioning rule of law government. Our system of government is set up such that if things are working properly no one man can literally destroy the country. There are checks and balances on the judges, the congress, etc. all to make sure that power is diffused so no one man/women can bring it's downfall.

If you are already worried that we don't have a legitimate functioning government that will bring people to justice if they commit crimes (as you worried about Trump) then do you really want to take a chance on her?  

For Clinton, we know her crimes, she is corrupt, there is no doubt about this-the e-mails prove it you just have to read them.  Is it possible that she isn't just corrupt but deadly?  Do you really want to take that chance?

If this is the case then you have to forget how we got here (forget Trump winning, etc. Cruz, etc.), and only deal with how we can possibly ensure that someone so crooked never touches the White House.  

Again for me, I'll take the chance of a Trump presidency to stop someone so evil.  Maybe he isn't any better-but if he isn't and we have a legitimate functioning rule of law government he will be brought to justice.