President Elect Trump

vaggar99

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

never trust rich people. they are shit.

rgambs

Go Beavers said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

You're getting closer and closer to troll status like PJfan with posts like this.

Seriously.
From an academic, no less.

my2hands

...

vaggar99

Dan Rather:
Donald Trump loves to tweet. And that poses a problem for journalists, as some of you have noticed in the comments. I have written on this in the past, but I think it bears a look again.
I know I sound a little like a broken record and this is something that I wish we could ignore, but we can't. It's our country's new reality. It's something the press has never encountered before either: how do you deal with a president-elect, and soon-to-be president, who regularly Tweets untrue, inflammatory or intimidating statements? And one who jumps into sensitive topics like nuclear weapons or our radical new policies towards countries like China confined to 140 characters?
By the nature of the office, when a president says something it's usually news. Words can move markets (we saw this happen a couple times since the election, including when Trump tweeted about GM early this past week). Words can also start wars and shift the direction of major domestic and foreign policy. That's why most presidents are constrained and careful with their public statements.
Not so Donald Trump. It's one of the things his supporters love about him and his critics despise. And anyone who thought Trump was going to change after the election, well, as the saying goes, the past seems to be prologue. Now the question is whether he will change the ways he tweets after he is actually in the Oval Office. His communications team has seemed to indicate he will keep tweeting what he wants, when he wants. Although you would hope he has other things to do at 6am?
Within the press (and amongst the general public) there is a brewing discussion about what these tweets mean and how to handle them. Because whether Trump is tweeting about the country's relationship with Russia (as he did in the last 24 hours), erroneously saying he won the popular vote, talking more about the wall he says will be built or getting into a Twitter fight with Arnold Schwarzenegger and bashing the ratings for a show he still owns a stake in, The Apprentice, these statements inevitably overwhelm the news cycle.
But in the meantime, there are a lot of other important stories that still aren't getting enough attention - like investigations into Trump's potential conflicts of interest from his business dealings (we still don't know exactly how he is going to separate himself his life as a businessman) or some of the more extreme positions taken by his cabinet choices. Many of whom are sure to face some rather interesting confirmation hearings.
Some in the press, and comments I have read on this page, have suggested that Trump's use of Twitter is a master stroke to deflect attention from more potentially damaging stories. Others have suggested that the more the media plays up the Tweets, the more Trump's base (which thinks the press is biased to begin with) gets riled up and the more Trump's message dominates the public discussion. I can see the merits of all of these points.
On the other hand, the president of the United States Tweeting out a lie, threatening people and institutions, betraying an obsession with conspiracy theories - that is all news too. And it's important that the press doesn't normalize it.
On this page I am going to try to walk a balance between bringing attention to tweets when I think they are serious enough to merit, but not allow my postings to be too distracted from other important news. It will be a process to figure it out and I would welcome your thoughts and continued engagement as we go through this.
In times like this I sometimes try to imagine what my journalistic hero Edward R. Murrow would do. in this case, I can imagine him shaking his head and shrugging in disbelief. "Son, I saw a lot in my time, but I never saw anything like this. Good luck, but I fear you're on your own."

PJfanwillneverleave1

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

vaggar99

^^^it would have taken 27 tweets to write that.

rgambs

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

He is one probably the second most respected journalist in the history of broadcast journalism, he isn't a lefty, and most people respect his ability to form complex and complete clauses, sentences, paragraphs and thoughts, an ability which Trump clearly lacks. I can see why you like Trump, he speaks in bite sized chunks that you are capable of ingesting.

PJfanwillneverleave1

I found this article interesting on the man.
http://archive.mrc.org/projects/rather20th/welcome.asp
“I think you can be an honest person and lie about any number of things.”
-- Dan Rather on The O'Reilly Factor, May 15, 2001

Gern Blansten

vaggar99 said:

Dan Rather:
Donald Trump loves to tweet. And that poses a problem for journalists, as some of you have noticed in the comments. I have written on this in the past, but I think it bears a look again.
I know I sound a little like a broken record and this is something that I wish we could ignore, but we can't. It's our country's new reality. It's something the press has never encountered before either: how do you deal with a president-elect, and soon-to-be president, who regularly Tweets untrue, inflammatory or intimidating statements? And one who jumps into sensitive topics like nuclear weapons or our radical new policies towards countries like China confined to 140 characters?
By the nature of the office, when a president says something it's usually news. Words can move markets (we saw this happen a couple times since the election, including when Trump tweeted about GM early this past week). Words can also start wars and shift the direction of major domestic and foreign policy. That's why most presidents are constrained and careful with their public statements.
Not so Donald Trump. It's one of the things his supporters love about him and his critics despise. And anyone who thought Trump was going to change after the election, well, as the saying goes, the past seems to be prologue. Now the question is whether he will change the ways he tweets after he is actually in the Oval Office. His communications team has seemed to indicate he will keep tweeting what he wants, when he wants. Although you would hope he has other things to do at 6am?
Within the press (and amongst the general public) there is a brewing discussion about what these tweets mean and how to handle them. Because whether Trump is tweeting about the country's relationship with Russia (as he did in the last 24 hours), erroneously saying he won the popular vote, talking more about the wall he says will be built or getting into a Twitter fight with Arnold Schwarzenegger and bashing the ratings for a show he still owns a stake in, The Apprentice, these statements inevitably overwhelm the news cycle.
But in the meantime, there are a lot of other important stories that still aren't getting enough attention - like investigations into Trump's potential conflicts of interest from his business dealings (we still don't know exactly how he is going to separate himself his life as a businessman) or some of the more extreme positions taken by his cabinet choices. Many of whom are sure to face some rather interesting confirmation hearings.
Some in the press, and comments I have read on this page, have suggested that Trump's use of Twitter is a master stroke to deflect attention from more potentially damaging stories. Others have suggested that the more the media plays up the Tweets, the more Trump's base (which thinks the press is biased to begin with) gets riled up and the more Trump's message dominates the public discussion. I can see the merits of all of these points.
On the other hand, the president of the United States Tweeting out a lie, threatening people and institutions, betraying an obsession with conspiracy theories - that is all news too. And it's important that the press doesn't normalize it.
On this page I am going to try to walk a balance between bringing attention to tweets when I think they are serious enough to merit, but not allow my postings to be too distracted from other important news. It will be a process to figure it out and I would welcome your thoughts and continued engagement as we go through this.
In times like this I sometimes try to imagine what my journalistic hero Edward R. Murrow would do. in this case, I can imagine him shaking his head and shrugging in disbelief. "Son, I saw a lot in my time, but I never saw anything like this. Good luck, but I fear you're on your own."

Dan Rather is coming out of retirement to cover Trump. I love it.

benjs

rgambs said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

He is one probably the second most respected journalist in the history of broadcast journalism, he isn't a lefty, and most people respect his ability to form complex and complete clauses, sentences, paragraphs and thoughts, an ability which Trump clearly lacks. I can see why you like Trump, he speaks in bite sized chunks that you are capable of ingesting.

I hate to say it, but I think it's irrelevant whether Trump possesses the ability to form statements of any depth, when the population at large has proven that he doesn't actually need to try in the first place.

tbergs

benjs said:

rgambs said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

He is one probably the second most respected journalist in the history of broadcast journalism, he isn't a lefty, and most people respect his ability to form complex and complete clauses, sentences, paragraphs and thoughts, an ability which Trump clearly lacks. I can see why you like Trump, he speaks in bite sized chunks that you are capable of ingesting.

I hate to say it, but I think it's irrelevant whether Trump possesses the ability to form statements of any depth, when the population at large has proven that he doesn't actually need to try in the first place.

And unfortunately, the only ones who care what Dan Rather has to say are those who actually take the time and care to read something more than 140 characters long, which our country is proving doesn't matter more and more everyday. The dumbing down of society.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

benjs said:

rgambs said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

He is one probably the second most respected journalist in the history of broadcast journalism, he isn't a lefty, and most people respect his ability to form complex and complete clauses, sentences, paragraphs and thoughts, an ability which Trump clearly lacks. I can see why you like Trump, he speaks in bite sized chunks that you are capable of ingesting.

I hate to say it, but I think it's irrelevant whether Trump possesses the ability to form statements of any depth, when the population at large has proven that he doesn't actually need to try in the first place.

This has been my point all along.

The buck toothed simpletons that voted the idiot in couldn't give two shits whether or not Trump acted liked a president. They wanted an idiot and they got one.

Stop letting stupid people vote and stupid people won't run your country. When stupid people pull up in their Fargo pick ups to vote, check their IQ cards... smile at them... and give them an all day sucker and colouring book.

vaggar99

^^^
haha...i used to firmly believe that if you voted GWB twice, you should not be allowed to vote again. I sort of let go of that, but really...why not? if you are the type of person that is willing to get us all killed, than you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

now before anyone goes nuts, I am not serious about implementing this.

Gern Blansten

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

benjs said:

rgambs said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

He is one probably the second most respected journalist in the history of broadcast journalism, he isn't a lefty, and most people respect his ability to form complex and complete clauses, sentences, paragraphs and thoughts, an ability which Trump clearly lacks. I can see why you like Trump, he speaks in bite sized chunks that you are capable of ingesting.

I hate to say it, but I think it's irrelevant whether Trump possesses the ability to form statements of any depth, when the population at large has proven that he doesn't actually need to try in the first place.

This has been my point all along.

The buck toothed simpletons that voted the idiot in couldn't give two shits whether or not Trump acted liked a president. They wanted an idiot and they got one.

Stop letting stupid people vote and stupid people won't run your country. When stupid people pull up in their Fargo pick ups to vote, check their IQ cards... smile at them... and give them an all day sucker and colouring book.

Yeah and they don't pay attention to anything or watch the news so their only interactions are likely right wing garbage on facebook.

vaggar99

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

benjs said:

rgambs said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

^^^
Not sure who that Dan Rather guy is but holy shit can he ever deliver verbal diarrhea.
He obviously didn't vote President Trump and his whining fits perfectly along here w/ some others on AMT.
This is the kind of left crap that is all fluff and dumbs your brain down after reading it.
That Dan Rather guy needs a lollipop.

He is one probably the second most respected journalist in the history of broadcast journalism, he isn't a lefty, and most people respect his ability to form complex and complete clauses, sentences, paragraphs and thoughts, an ability which Trump clearly lacks. I can see why you like Trump, he speaks in bite sized chunks that you are capable of ingesting.

I hate to say it, but I think it's irrelevant whether Trump possesses the ability to form statements of any depth, when the population at large has proven that he doesn't actually need to try in the first place.

This has been my point all along.

The buck toothed simpletons that voted the idiot in couldn't give two shits whether or not Trump acted liked a president. They wanted an idiot and they got one.

Stop letting stupid people vote and stupid people won't run your country. When stupid people pull up in their Fargo pick ups to vote, check their IQ cards... smile at them... and give them an all day sucker and colouring book.

being in TX and driving a lot for work, i see thousands of pickups every day. when i'm in the rural parts of the state, it makes sense to me. they look they are being used for their intended purpose. by why so many in the cities? if you need to haul stuff, wouldn't a cargo van be more appropriate?

vaggar99

back to business. someone has been sending this guy turtle food:
cbsnews.com/news/mitch-mcconnell-tells-democrats-hoping-to-delay-cabinet-confirmations-to-grow-up/

dignin

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

benjs

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Go Beavers

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

dignin

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

That wasn't the point being made though. Eggheads aren't successful and do nothing, the rich are successful and are doers.

The point is so so stupid the only response that is fitting is a hearty laugh.

I do agree that they will get shit done. Lot's of terrible policies will go through and good policies will fall.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

I just saw this post.

There's one bit of truth to it: if your 'egg head' peer group (you have expressed many times you are a distinguished professor from a really cool university) thinks like this... a country might do well limiting their influence.

Im curious... are you an egg head of the 'doer' variety? What makes you a doer if you are?

dignin

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

We need no crystal ball to know what's coming. The US is going to take some major steps back over at least the next 2 years.

benjs

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

Of course I have my own opinions on whether the actions of a Trump administration will be good or bad, but when possible I keep my opinions to myself if I feel they're insufficiently substantiated. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Go Beavers

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

Of course I have my own opinions on whether the actions of a Trump administration will be good or bad, but when possible I keep my opinions to myself if I feel they're insufficiently substantiated. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Congress wanting to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Good or bad?

vaggar99

Robert Reich:
It’s important to distinguish two lines of resistance to Trump:
1. Resistance to Trump’s regressiveness: repealing Obamacare, turning Medicare into vouchers (that will leave many elderly worse off) and Medicaid into state block grants (depriving the poor of health care); attacking Social Security; giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy and to large corporations; eviscerating environmental laws, regulations and treaties; defunding Planned Parenthood; putting people in charge of departments who are intent on doing the opposite of what the departments are set up to do (DeVos at Education, Puzder at Labor; Pruitt at EPA); putting a right-winger on the Supreme Court; and so on.
2. Resistance to Trump’s tyranny: repeatedly telling big lies; demeaning government scientists and intelligence officials; undermining the freedom and independence of the press; threatening critics and calling them "enemies"; creating “registries” of Muslim-Americans and a religious test for entering the United States; cozying up to foreign dictators; blaming economic stresses on immigrants and fomenting public bias and even violence against them; attributing acts of domestic violence to “enemies within,” and using such events as excuses to beef up internal security and limit civil liberties; creating a personal security force rather than a security detail accountable to the public; and personally profiting from public office.
Both resistances are critical. But the second has nothing to do with partisanship or the age-old fight between Republicans and Democrats over the reach or role of government. Resistance to tyranny must not be seen in partisan terms. We need Republicans to join in resistance to Trump’s tyranny. Conservative Republicans have traditionally been vigilant against tyranny, and they must be invited to the cause.
What do you think?

benjs

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

Of course I have my own opinions on whether the actions of a Trump administration will be good or bad, but when possible I keep my opinions to myself if I feel they're insufficiently substantiated. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Congress wanting to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Good or bad?

On that topic, I absolutely think it's abhorrent and despicable. My suspicion is that I won't appreciate the direction of Trump's administration, but again, I don't care to share my suspicions if I feel they don't have sufficient justifications. I'm pretty surprised to see you locking onto my "yet to be seen": when I know a mountain of strong evidence defining the administration will be arriving in no more than 12-15 days, I don't feel the need to talk about what's coming next today.

tbergs

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

Of course I have my own opinions on whether the actions of a Trump administration will be good or bad, but when possible I keep my opinions to myself if I feel they're insufficiently substantiated. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Congress wanting to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Good or bad?

On that topic, I absolutely think it's abhorrent and despicable. My suspicion is that I won't appreciate the direction of Trump's administration, but again, I don't care to share my suspicions if I feel they don't have sufficient justifications. I'm pretty surprised to see you locking onto my "yet to be seen": when I know a mountain of strong evidence defining the administration will be arriving in no more than 12-15 days, I don't feel the need to talk about what's coming next today.

Agreed. Much like Trump's campaign of extreme policy statements, we can't get ahead of ourselves on what may happen. The man's a magic 8 ball. You get a different response every day depending on his mood. I think we need to remain vigilant and monitor any proposed harmful policies and do what we can to influence our local politicians on the actual impact to the entire population. Yes, the man drives me crazy, but we can't let him foster a culture of fear.

my2hands

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

dignin said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I think BS is correct about at least the line predicting an administration of doers. For Republicans, their newly won control of multiple levels of government is like winning star power in Super Mario - they have a finite amount of time to take advantage of an unprecedented level of invincibility. If they have an iota of collective intelligence (and they do), they will seize the opportunity. The elevated level of 'doing' is pretty likely, but whether they will do good or do bad is yet to be seen.

Yet to be seen? Just look in the last few weeks what trump and the republican congress are pushing? You can't decide if that's good or bad?

Of course I have my own opinions on whether the actions of a Trump administration will be good or bad, but when possible I keep my opinions to myself if I feel they're insufficiently substantiated. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Congress wanting to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Good or bad?

Bad

bootlegger10

vaggar99 said:

BS44325 said:

dignin said:

So much this.

Donald Trump’s glorious victory for anti-intellectualism: “Drain the swamp” just meant the eggheads
For many Trump supporters, the wealthiest cabinet ever is no problem — as long as he gets rid of the smart people

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/donald-trumps-glorious-victory-for-anti-intellectualism-drain-the-swamp-just-meant-the-eggheads/

Trump supporters are not offended by wealth. They see successful people and are happy to have them put their vast knowledge to work in goverment. "Egghead" academics who have not achieved much in the real world have had their chance. This will be an administration of doers.

never trust rich people. they are shit.

Quite a blanket statement. Do you say that because Ed (a rich man) let you down when you were begging him to declare the vote null and void the day after the election? It is tough when your heroes let you down.

vaggar99

^^^
rich people are the ones who continue to want tax cuts when they already have massive stock piles of cash and assets.