President Elect Trump

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets

I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.

i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.

i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.

it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?

Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration:
"Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.

Trump is definitely of the charismatic variety and hence, the Hitler references; however, I feel that's about the extent of the legitimate comparisons.

With that said, history has shown that charismatic leaders at various levels have managed to get people to do horrible things.

CM189191 said:

benjs said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets

I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.

i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.

i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.

it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?

Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration:
"Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.

I agree, not a big deal if it's a part of a healthy diet.

That's why it's important to note with trump, because he's not so big on intellectual health.

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets

I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.

i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.

i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.

it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?

Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration:
"Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.

I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.

I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.

Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets

I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.

i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.

i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.

it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?

Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration:
"Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.

I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.

I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.

Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?

Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets

I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.

i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.

i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.

it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?

Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration:
"Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.

I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.

I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.

Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?

Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.

They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.

it's not the style of a fascist dictator. it's the style of any good leader: the power of persuasion and leadership.

my take on it is looking at it objectively and intelligently, not emotionally.. as I'm trying to do now without the fear and world ending stuff that is being thrown around.

Go Beavers said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

Go Beavers said:

benjs said:

CM189191 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

vaggar99 said:

in all seriousness, i am somewhat disturbed at the misspelling of 'unprecedented'. i'm pretty sure that would have been a word that would have come up in a grade school spelling test or some required reading material. the word 'unpresidented' has never been published. How do you come up with that spelling? Only one way i can think of...you never read the word or read it so few times to not notice the 'ce' in the middle makes it unique enough to where 'precedent' and 'president' are not really close to the same words in appearance. just an observation. there are other tweets

I think it's a hilarious tweet mistake coming from the PE, but people are making wayyyyy too much about it. it's a simple spelling mistake. I highly doubt he actually thought the word was "unpresidented". who knows, maybe he did it on purpose to troll everyone who follows him.

i'd agree except for it comes from someone who thinks/says he's smart. i'm not saying that knowing how to spell well is a differentiating factor, but it does to me say that a person is not well read. i find that to be not only disturbing but dangerous.

i suppose i can just buy into the illusion that T. is smart and every dumb thing he says/does is just another joke on those who hate him. I guess that's what I had to do to get used to GWB. I guess that turned out ok.

it doesn't mean he's not well read. all it means is he doesn't give a shit about spelling mistakes on social media. at this level, he should, but he doesn't give a shit about much, so why would spelling be at the top of the list, or on the list at all?

Marie Brenner's 1990 profile of Donald Trump for Vanity Fair captured the real estate mogul in turmoil, as he struggled to hold onto his empire amid a nasty divorce fight. It's a juicy piece, but one anecdote in particular stands out: that Trump owned a copy of Adolf Hitler's speeches and allegedly read them for inspiration:
"Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler's collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed. Kennedy now guards a copy of My New Order in a closet at his office, as if it were a grenade. Hitler's speeches, from his earliest days up through the Phony War of 1939, reveal his extraordinary ability as a master propagandist."

I honestly don't see what the big deal is about this. Hitler was a despicable human, but owning his book doesn't mean someone is refuting that statement. Hitler was masterful and persuasive as a speaker and as a writer, and there's no reason to avoid studying his writings because of the nature of the words within.

I don't think the issue is to avoid or not, the issue is when you see a leader use the same methods fascists use.

I'm sorry, but that's a hell of a stretch. If I wanted to learn woodworking, I would seek an opportunity to learn from an expert. Fascist leaders and non-fascist leaders alike are welcome to study great historical speeches and essays to better their own skills of persuasion, and there's no shame in learning from an expert in persuasion and/or using those skills.

Did I just read that there's no shame in using the same persuasion methods that fascists use?

Yes. Fascist dictators must persuade if they wish to have people contribute optimally to a cause, so must I when I want to get the most out of our employees and get us acting as a team. Hitler's content should absolutely be condemned, but his methodologies of persuasion weren't inherently nefarious.

They were inherently nefarious. You're the boss at work and you think adopting the style of a fascist dictator is the way to get the most out your employees? Holy shit is about all I can say.

it's not the style of a fascist dictator. it's the style of any good leader: the power of persuasion and leadership.

You're speaking broadly about what makes a good leader. He was supporting Hitler's "methodologies of persuasion".

In relation to his speeches. Oration is what was being discussed.

Swamp swamp swamp .

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Typically speaking... getting the most of people means giving them value and purpose. Studies have shown these two qualities trump (no pun intended) money.

Benjs, I'm really not too sure where you are at with this Trump debacle. Is it possible to succinctly state your stance on the matter so I'm not scratching my head wondering? It seems as if you are on board. I'm hoping you are simply impressed with his manipulation of a population versus feeling a good thing has happened.

Absolutely, Thirty! I think to state my stance on Trump, I have to divide that a little bit further.

Trump the social commentator hides behind vague statements so as to have plausible deniability on any statement made which is seen by the public as racist, sexist, xenophobic, derogatory, etc. I feel that this has the potential to leave people exhibiting these sentiments feeling that their viewpoints are justifiable, and those people could feel empowered by that. In turn, I feel that this could be a significant social setback if not addressed properly (which I think will not come from the government, but must come from the mouths of the populace).

Trump the environmentalist has not only claimed that the causality between carbon emissions and global warming is unverified and unverifiable, but he has not even spoken up about the importance of pursuing why global warming is occurring at such unprecedented rates. Because of this, I can only assume that subsidies on research and development on climate change will shrink down to zero, and the extraction of oil will only speed up, which will exacerbate the issues at hand. I was listening to Noam Chomsky who stated his belief that environmental issues will start to bleed into military and political issues, as drinkable water becomes a rarer commodity, and global warming makes life unrealistic in nuclear-ready countries like India and Pakistan who already have a volatile relationship.

Trump the politician I find to be untested, and his appeal to the emotions of the populace (often contradicting yesterday's position) has ensured that everyone is completely unaware of his true positions. I am hopeful that his narcissism proves to be a positive factor in his tenure: in Trump's business', the gauge of success is his own personal wealth. The gauge of success in Trump's administration will not be his own wealth - it will be the nation's ability to convert potential into actual results, and to leave office with positive potential remaining (as opposed to negative potential). The way he's surrounded himself by a crew of deep pockets doesn't bode well to the direction he will take - but the truth is that no one can really say what he will do when in office.

I guess the ten-second answer would be that I find Trump's words to be socially destructive, but his actions to be uncertain. If Trump's narcissism sways him away from valuing personal wealth and towards valuing his political legacy in this new empire he's attempting to build, the potential exists for him to make great change, and the stars are aligned to make that happen with the aid of the Republicans in all levels of government who want success in the interest of the perpetuation of the power of their party. I feel that there is more upside potential than I think there would have been if Clinton was in office given the Republican penetration and party politics, but I also feel that there is a substantial downside potential, which I hope (but fear) is never realized.