Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[froot loops]

I still think there is a lite too much overinterpretation. He got 46 percent of the vote. 30 percent of his voters thought he was unqualified. He won Michigan by actually campaigning there whereas Clinton didn't campaign at all until the last week. If he gets into stupid trade wars or a war, twitter won't mean crap.

[Jeff Buchanan]

This is a debate which will continue for some time I think.

His use of twitter for example...I have heard it described as revolutionary, but I dunno. I mean, Hillary Clinton had a Twitter account too, but she didn't hop on it at 3am to say crazy, incendiary shit. So maybe campaigning like a Jerry Springer episode is ingenious. Or maybe its just who he is, and it happened to work within the existing circumstances. Maybe a little of both.

Here's the thing. Realty doesn't give a shit about what we perceive about it. For us, to ignore it, can have painful consequences.

This is the scary thing about Donald Trump. I'm not sure he has a handle on realty. He can go on and create this alternate one where he appears to be something he is not - e.g., a brilliantly successful entrepreneur capable of draining the swamp, running government like the successful business he claims he operates and making America great again - but the facts are that if he deludes himself by ignoring them, the consequences of that could be disastrous.?Things and actions are what they are, and the consequences of them will be what they will be; why then should we desire to be deceived?? (Bishop Joseph Butler) .....

....... and the facts, not giving a shit, will ultimately catch up with him and, very unfortunately, all of us who would be deceived by him. I''d say there is a pretty good chance that is going to happen during his presidency.

[hack]

It would be a big mistake to think that he won because people believed him. Had they believed him they would hardly have voted for him: putting a man like Trump in charge really would spell the end for American democracy, because it would have left him free to do his worst. People voted for him because they didn’t believe him. They wanted change but they also had confidence in the basic durability and decency of America’s political institutions to protect them from the worst effects of that change. They wanted Trump to shake up a system that they also expected to shield them from the recklessness of a man like Trump. How else to explain that many people who reported themselves alarmed by the idea of a Trump presidency also voted for him?

The headline is very alarmist but I like the overall take. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n23/david-r...democracy-ends

[Jeff Buchanan]

The overall take is ....... depressing.

Good read though.

I think Runciman says in that piece that it takes an intellectually astute politician to advance his (party's) agenda by focusing on real problems given the current state of American Democracy to do anything about them.

Sort of fits my own meme that Trump (who is not that intellectually astute poltico that Runciman is talking about) not only does not see the real problems but is doing nothing more than blundering his way along until reality - the facts - smack him squarely in the ass.

The sooner the better!

[Da Geezer]

Jeff: What are the "real problems"?

[The Oracle]

Himself

[CGVT]

Here's one.


This person should be nowhere near the education of our children.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/meet-the-devos-family-super-wealthy-right-wingers-working-with-the-religious-right-to-destroy-public-education/

[The Oracle]

In a long line of awful hires already, she's the worst.

[CGVT]

In a long line of awful hires already, she's the worst.

Terrible. Just terrible.

[Whitley]

Terrible. Just terrible.

Pretty much. She has been working to kill public education in Michigan for a couple decades now (and has done a pretty good job).

[froot loops]

I thought the GOP wanted to eliminate the department of education.

[CGVT]

I thought the GOP wanted to eliminate the department of education.

Looks as if they just want to eliminate public education

[froot loops]

Fortunately it certainly can't be done from that position.

[Whitley]

Looks as if they just want to eliminate public education

Winner Winner chicken dinner!

[Da Geezer]

By "public education" I assume you mean government education. Charter schools are public schools.

Charter Schools are overwhelmingly preferred by the poor, particularly in the inner city. Those parents are concerned with their kids. What concerns most of you here is not the kids, it is the entire education industry and the lavish money that many of you receive for your part-time job. I would be afraid too if I were you. BTW, how many here are educators?

Betsy DeVos' first job should be to eliminate tenure, then Trump should propose a law prohibiting the unionization of public employees. Just use the words that FDR used when he came out against that unionization. As I said at least two years ago, public sector unions are the single biggest domestic problem facing the US.