News Donald Trump's Popularity To Date

[hodge]

I'm so sorry to hear you have received threats, JMH. I felt threatened often when I was politically active in a rather incendiary situation, but that was way pre-PTSD. I don't know if I could even put myself out there these days, though I'd like to think I could.

This is such a violent election season, and I think Trump is to blame for much of it with the way he riles people up. He is a major trigger! A sure sign of some evil lurking in there, I think.

You guys are commendable for refusing to engage in violence. Non-violent protest is the only way to go. At least it has to be completely and utterly exhausted before resorting to any other tactics, such as when it doesn't work in the face of a genocidal dictator(s), i.e., WWII.

I and many others went through training in techniques to try to quelch violence from erupting during protests some years ago when I was active in the labor movement, and believe me, it's worth it. Sadly, some of the worst offenders are people on the justifiable side of things (IMO) and they end up disrupting the whole action, out of uncontrolled passion, I think.

Anyway, good for you all for standing on the higher ground.

 

[EveHarrington]

And one by one, Trump's Republican Party supporters are defecting------

Ryan after just a day!

Gotta love it.

 

[hodge]

Oh, wow, I haven't heard that. I never did trust Ryan's "endorsement." Lol.

 

[hodge]

Um, sorry, guys, but this is the only wall I want to hear about:

 

[Anarchy]

This is such a violent election season, and I think Trump is to blame for much of it with the way he riles people up. He is a major trigger! A sure sign of some evil lurking in there, I think.

A couple of thoughts - however much I despise trump, he is riding on the back of conditions which other people's policies have lead to -

Spoiler

most particularly IMO the hang over from Greenspan's easy money (for some) party at the fe'ral reserve in the 90's which inflated the dot com speculative bubble

The hangover from that party wascured by even easier money when the dot coms crashed at the end of the 90s, inflating the housing and subprime bubble which popped 2007-2008, and even easier money again since then. The next bust is estimated to be about eight times larger than 2008 was.

The artificially low interest rates transfer purchasing power away from the productive side of the economy that is in accord with consumers, and into speculative investments with long (and very uncertain) payoff periods.

The low interest rates also make saving, next to impossible.

I and many others went through training in techniques to try to quelch violence from erupting during protests some years ago when I was active in the labor movement, and believe me, it's worth it. Sadly, some of the worst offenders are people on the justifiable side of things (IMO) and they end up disrupting the whole action, out of uncontrolled passion, I think.

There is also the strong possibility of provocateur activities to disrupt and discredit protests. The disrupting and hijacking of protests is a long standing tactic, both of "authorities" and demagogues.

I may well be wrong on this, but to my mind, far better to work on hearts and minds and discredit the people and policies of the would be rulers.

Fully in agreement with you @hodge and JMH in not getting lured into violence.

 

[Anarchy]

For some reason my browser is refusing to load your vid Hodge. what was it?

 

[EveHarrington]

IMHO people are giving trump way more credit than he deserves perhaps because the power of (some) personality disorders is vastly ignored/underestimated.

He self funded his primary campaign. "I'm rich and want to be president so I'm going to campaign!" This is soon going to come back and create problems for him.

Many people aren't all that intelligent and simply lack forethought. "Tell me what I want to hear! It doesn't matter that you're promising things that are impossible----!"

He tells so many lies that he can't keep them straight and when the media points it out, he plays victim. (Typical narcissistic behavior.)

And-----yesterday a number of his staffers gave interviews to the media. Trumps campaign is bare bones. He has no media team. He has no one for a lot of typical campaign positions. This man is running for the most powerful position in the world and getting by solely on his narcissistic charisma. He has no political experience and no clue how to run the country.

I'm not sure if I'm more irritated with Trump or if I'm more irritated with his supporters.

His endless rant about the judge of Mecican heritage? Oh, I'm loving this! It's a tipping point, but it's a tipping point that's come too late for the Republican Party. And they all start to fall away-----

As an aside------Libertarians can be pretty hateful, too. Don't buy into the best of both worlds BS! At their convention the nominee was asked if he would have supported the civil rights act years ago------he said yes. He was BOO'ED! Please don't back this up with the idea of less government being desired so that's why they're against the civil rights act. It's hate through and through. This isn't being socially liberal.

 

[hodge]

For some reason my browser is refusing to load your vid Hodge. what was it?

I don't know, Anarchy. It's not loading here where I sit, either. It was a video of Pink Floyd's "The Wall."

 

[hodge]

You are so right, Eve. On every point you articulated. At this point, I just pray that at least some of my fellow misguided Americans will wake the f_ up!

 

[Anarchy]

As an aside------Libertarians can be pretty hateful, too. Don't buy into the best of both worlds BS! At their convention the nominee was asked if he would have supported the civil rights act years ago------he said yes. He was BOO'ED! Please don't back this up with the idea of less government being desired so that's why they're against the civil rights act. It's hate through and through. This isn't being socially liberal.

It's an interesting area

American neo liberals are (imo rightly) outraged that the threat of state sector force is used to prevent, for example samne sex couples having equal respect to mixed sex couples. There's a less consistent level of approval on the left for freedom to ingest certain substances, dress in certain ways etc.

However, there is much less sympathy on the current American left for freedom to self defence, to own certain kinds of property, and to undertake certain transactions, and a willingness to see some other transactions forced to happen - an example of that would be forcing soneone who doesn't want to bake a cake for a gay couple, being forced to, or being punished for refusing.

You generally would tend to see the opposite on the present day american right, but there certainly isn't much consistency

I have to qualify those with reference to time and place, as at different times and in different places, there is no consistency between what is considered "left" and what is considered the political "right", for example in Italy, gun ownership and hunting were strongly supported on the left.

Neither the left nor right, tend to disagree with force being initiated against non aggressive people, but they do disagree about who it is to be used on and for what.

I'm not going to claim any great virtues for "libertarians" who still vote, for example you can still see some of them in favour of immigration controls

however you might start to see an approach toward a "zero aggression principal" from them. If actions are not creating a victim, then they do not deserve to be forcefully surpressed.
They're still not entirely consistent, because they still vote for people who will direct the initiation of force, but they are starting to get there,

I'd actually be interested to see a clip of the piece, to check up on the wording that was used.

One thing that can cause confusion is, a libertarian can be strongly for FREEDOM of association - but strongly opposed to any laws FORCING association.

if a "good thing" is forced to happen, then the actors have been denied the chance to make the moral (and IMO good) choice, so you will find consistent libertarians who have no problem with people setting up separatist communities, on their own land, so long as they are not initiating force.

 

[EveHarrington]

I think someone should open a cake shop and do widespread advertising that they won't make cakes for interracial couples because their religion is against it. (To make a point.)

It's the same thing.

I don't believe in it------the bottom line is that discrimination shouldn't be tolerated.

God is up there looking down saying "you all are wrong if you really think I don't want you to bake a cake for a gay wedding."

 

[Anarchy]

and cakes for pedophiles?