Why Trump Won

[gandalftw]

Well I think God has chimed in on Trump's inauguration. This was South Lake Tahoe on 1/20/17:

 

 

 

 

From the article here:

 

https://weather.com/storms/winter/news/winter-storm-leo-forecast-california-west-plains-midwest-storm-snow-rain

 

 

Ok,man,no offense but that's really cold...

[gandalftw]

Why Trump won?

“It is the level of stupidity that is incredible. I’m telling you, I used to use the word incompetent,” Trump explained. “Now I just call them stupid. I went to an Ivy League school. I’m very highly educated. I know words, I have the best words. I have the best, but there is no better word than stupid. Right? There is none, there is none. There’s no, there’s no, there’s no word like that.”

[skyquest32]

Hes yet to play his trump card.

[gandalftw]

Hes yet to play his trump card.

Hehehe,give him time i'm sure he will...

[PoorlyAged]

 

 

 

 

There is no 'lie'.

 

Check out this article from FactCheck.org.

 

Truth in the current era is subjective to most partisans on both sides. With the plethora of news choices available most people simply retreat into their own mental bunker only accepting 'truths' that agree with their own opinions and dismissing the rest as propaganda. In the past the mainstream media made at least a pretense of being neutral, now that fig leaf is long gone. The days of national media outlets with a strong sense of journalistic ethics governing their reporting is in the past tense. There are no more Waltter Cronkites or Edward R Murrows, just talking heads with an agenda.

Welcome to the information age where people want immediate rather than accurate. One has to really give a damn to track down and confirm what is being spoon fed to you, most people are just too lazy for that.....just my two cents.

 

Truth is never subjective. It is binary. A proposition is true or false. A statement is truth or lie. There is no middle ground. And should you recall the rules of testing; In a T/F question, if one part if false, the whole is false.

 

What you are describing is the disparity between truth and credibility. What is or is not credible is subjective. Credibility is based solely on the views, beliefs and hopes of the receiver and is only incidentally related to truth. Robert Heinlein described it thus “The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.”

[MajKrAzAm]

 

 

 

There is no 'lie'.

 

Check out this article from FactCheck.org.

 

 

You don't understand my point. Pedantically analyzing the accuracy of one of Trump's statements does nothing to understand the motivations of people who voted for him. Most people are not autistic and so don't care about about the individual details or correctness of a statement. No one really analyzes the tiny policy differences between candidates because it truly doesn't matter. Instead they vote according to broader issues and grievances.

 

Fact checking was the swan song for progressives in 2016. You cannot win people over with 'logic' (or more accurately: debased pseudo-rationality). People are emotional creatures, and it is to emotional arguments that they respond. Most people instinctively know that something is fundamentally wrong with America. Donald Trump spoke of saving a once great nation from the abyss. I'm sure he has been given all the facts on immigration, the economy, and the stupid foreign wars, but instead of beating his supporters over the head with worthless data and statistics, he went right for the emotional heart.

 

Obsessiveness over Fact-checking is why progressives don't understand human nature. It appeals to the kind of people who were shoved into lockers at schools. Let me know when someone fact checks the destruction of Libya and Syria, our border being a joke, multinationals screwing over American workers, the disaster of Obamacare, and mass racist Black violence and riots.

[PoorlyAged]

This quote pretty much sums up Donald Trump's path to victory.

 

“You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.” Robert A. Heinlein, Revolt in 2100/Methuselah's Children

 

 

It mattered not if Donald Trump prevaricated, some people already believed the lie. It mattered not if Donald Trump mimicked the disabled, some people enjoyed it. It mattered not if Donald Trump made comments disparaging those with more melanin than he, some people believed him. It mattered not that Donald Trump stated his misogyny on an open microphone, some people felt the same way. Donald Trump appealed to the basest prejudices in the United States, and no journalist, no fact checking, no truth telling, no reality check was going to dissuade those who already believed the lies.

 

But the part that scares me the most is that Donald Trump generates so much hate on both sides of any discussion. The hate speech, threats of violence, petty name calling and foolish insults are more destructive than any weapon in the arsenal. It rends at the fabric of the United States and will surely tear our nation asunder.

 

 

You just don't get it. At this point in time, many Americans would have voted for Mao if he ran on a ticket of economic nationalism and anti-immigration. Trump is an imperfect messenger for Trumpism (populism + economic nationalism + white identity politics).

 

There is no 'lie'. This is the consequence of the past twenty years of the ideological and physical shrinking of mainstream conservatism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is no 'lie'.

 

Check out this article from FactCheck.org.

 

 

You don't understand my point. Pedantically analyzing the accuracy of one of Trump's statements does nothing to understand the motivations of people who voted for him. Most people are not autistic and so don't care about about the individual details or correctness of a statement. No one really analyzes the tiny policy differences between candidates because it truly doesn't matter. Instead they vote according to broader issues and grievances.

 

Fact checking was the swan song for progressives in 2016. You cannot win people over with 'logic' (or more accurately: debased pseudo-rationality). People are emotional creatures, and it is to emotional arguments that they respond. Most people instinctively know that something is fundamentally wrong with America. Donald Trump spoke of saving a once great nation from the abyss. I'm sure he has been given all the facts on immigration, the economy, and the stupid foreign wars, but instead of beating his supporters over the head with worthless data and statistics, he went right for the emotional heart.

 

Obsessiveness over Fact-checking is why progressives don't understand human nature. It appeals to the kind of people who were shoved into lockers at schools. Let me know when someone fact checks the destruction of Libya and Syria, our border being a joke, multinationals screwing over American workers, the disaster of Obamacare, and mass racist Black violence and riots.

 

 

As I said originally (quoted above) whether Trump lied or not was immaterial. MajKrAzAm, you denied that there was any lies (also quoted above). I provided you with evidence that Trump disregarded the truth. You arbitrarily dismiss that information and attempt to turn the verification of the veracity of a candidate into a shortcoming (quoted above). Which proves my point "It mattered not if Donald Trump prevaricated, some people already believed the lie" (quoted from above).

 

And MajKrAzAm, I do get it. I understand your point entirely. I stated such originally, "Donald Trump appealed to the basest prejudices in the United States, and no journalist, no fact checking, no truth telling, no reality check was going to dissuade those who already believed the lies."

 

I do understand human nature. Racism exists. Homophobia exists. Misogyny exists. Jingoism exists. Radical theologists exist. Ignorance exists. Hatred exists. Intolerance exists. Greed exists. Xenophobia exists. War mongers exist. I just find pandering to these human foibles to sway voters reprehensible. And that is where we disagree and must continue to disagree. You justify Trump's behavior. I do not.

 

I also understand that tolerance, acceptance, understanding, empathy, generosity of soul, and humanitarianism exists. I prefer to live in a society that values these human aspects of human nature and does not denigrate them. Caring about the whole of humanity and the planet which we all share is not weakness. Yet you label such human characteristics "PC" and ridicule these finer qualities of human nature. You propagate the hate.

 

And finally, I know enough about human nature to know that nothing I have said here will dissuade you from your beliefs. I attempted to address your intellect, and you established quite clearly that such attempts do not work. On this point, we agree.

[gandalftw]

What a pompous bore.Nothing like stating the obvious over and over again.

Edited January 25, 2017 by gandalftw

[skyquest32]

 

This quote pretty much sums up Donald Trump's path to victory.

 

“You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.” Robert A. Heinlein, Revolt in 2100/Methuselah's Children

 

 

It mattered not if Donald Trump prevaricated, some people already believed the lie. It mattered not if Donald Trump mimicked the disabled, some people enjoyed it. It mattered not if Donald Trump made comments disparaging those with more melanin than he, some people believed him. It mattered not that Donald Trump stated his misogyny on an open microphone, some people felt the same way. Donald Trump appealed to the basest prejudices in the United States, and no journalist, no fact checking, no truth telling, no reality check was going to dissuade those who already believed the lies.

 

But the part that scares me the most is that Donald Trump generates so much hate on both sides of any discussion. The hate speech, threats of violence, petty name calling and foolish insults are more destructive than any weapon in the arsenal. It rends at the fabric of the United States and will surely tear our nation asunder.

 

 

You just don't get it. At this point in time, many Americans would have voted for Mao if he ran on a ticket of economic nationalism and anti-immigration. Trump is an imperfect messenger for Trumpism (populism + economic nationalism + white identity politics).

 

There is no 'lie'. This is the consequence of the past twenty years of the ideological and physical shrinking of mainstream conservatism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is no 'lie'.

 

Check out this article from FactCheck.org.

 

 

You don't understand my point. Pedantically analyzing the accuracy of one of Trump's statements does nothing to understand the motivations of people who voted for him. Most people are not autistic and so don't care about about the individual details or correctness of a statement. No one really analyzes the tiny policy differences between candidates because it truly doesn't matter. Instead they vote according to broader issues and grievances.

 

Fact checking was the swan song for progressives in 2016. You cannot win people over with 'logic' (or more accurately: debased pseudo-rationality). People are emotional creatures, and it is to emotional arguments that they respond. Most people instinctively know that something is fundamentally wrong with America. Donald Trump spoke of saving a once great nation from the abyss. I'm sure he has been given all the facts on immigration, the economy, and the stupid foreign wars, but instead of beating his supporters over the head with worthless data and statistics, he went right for the emotional heart.

 

Obsessiveness over Fact-checking is why progressives don't understand human nature. It appeals to the kind of people who were shoved into lockers at schools. Let me know when someone fact checks the destruction of Libya and Syria, our border being a joke, multinationals screwing over American workers, the disaster of Obamacare, and mass racist Black violence and riots.

 

 

As I said originally (quoted above) whether Trump lied or not was immaterial. MajKrAzAm, you denied that there was any lies (also quoted above). I provided you with evidence that Trump disregarded the truth. You arbitrarily dismiss that information and attempt to turn the verification of the veracity of a candidate into a shortcoming (quoted above). Which proves my point "It mattered not if Donald Trump prevaricated, some people already believed the lie" (quoted from above).

 

And MajKrAzAm, I do get it. I understand your point entirely. I stated such originally, "Donald Trump appealed to the basest prejudices in the United States, and no journalist, no fact checking, no truth telling, no reality check was going to dissuade those who already believed the lies."

 

I do understand human nature. Racism exists. Homophobia exists. Misogyny exists. Jingoism exists. Radical theologists exist. Ignorance exists. Hatred exists. Intolerance exists. Greed exists. Xenophobia exists. War mongers exist. I just find pandering to these human foibles to sway voters reprehensible. And that is where we disagree and must continue to disagree. You justify Trump's behavior. I do not.

 

I also understand that tolerance, acceptance, understanding, empathy, generosity of soul, and humanitarianism exists. I prefer to live in a society that values these human aspects of human nature and does not denigrate them. Caring about the whole of humanity and the planet which we all share is not weakness. Yet you label such human characteristics "PC" and ridicule these finer qualities of human nature. You propagate the hate.

 

And finally, I know enough about human nature to know that nothing I have said here will dissuade you from your beliefs. I attempted to address your intellect, and you established quite clearly that such attempts do not work. On this point, we agree.

 

Radical PC is more harmful to society than all the things you mentioned because its more insidious. Bringing corruption in the name of good intentions. A philosophy the hides in the false light of delusion, flawed on so many fundamental levels in practice,

 

The PC ideal world in totality would be my definition of hell on earth. Its not as simple as you make it out. Its not about compassion or lack thereof it goes deeper.

 

Dont give hollow platitudes or assume you know the totality of the nature of man if you can say such things so simply with no understanding of the consequences of the implications of what you say.

 

 

Also Misogyny Trump? Based on what total data do you make that assumption? One unguarded remark that was more connected to ego? That simple huh? How presumptuous and unforgiving you are. It was rude, no more.

 

I think from his relationships and mannerisms that trump is a purely heterosexual, lover of women, in all senses.

 

I also don't think a woman like the one he has would have remained with him this long otherwise. He excretes confidence, even vanity from his very pores. Not a confused man, or one with too many issue that would be relevant to that type of resentment.

 

No highly unlikely he would ever develop that complex, but this is by the classic definition not pc make believe bs that attempts to disregard behavioral sciences, the relevant aspects of sociology, and genetics.

 

He also dose not seem to fit the psychological profile of Misogyny. I know the types that mostly fail into the category profiles and patterns, would seem to suggest trump is not. If hes responding to anything it would be a reaction to pc influences on society. Sort of a rebellion. Hes perfect for this.

 

Hes the sort of man that given the right situation, if allowed would be chivalrous to women, but not at personal cost to his honor, just in the classic sense...but being essentially corrupted and perverse,pc nature would abhor this too..and greed, haha too funny.

Edited January 25, 2017 by skyquest32

[PoorlyAged]

SMH.