Trump 2016

[freemehul]

Water boarding is not torture by definition, because it does not cause lasting physical damage.

all lies again

First of all it is torture! So yeah that does mean that under Bush and even under Obama (as it continued) U.S. broke Geneva convention!

Second it can definitely cause long lasting physical damage. PTSS can be received as a result of waterboarding and that is physical! It includes catatonia which is physical! It has an over-release of neuro-transmitters which again is physical!

You handofthrawn are a liar! Really Shut the F up Already! I will say it to you again and again. LIAR LIAR LIAR!!!

[handofthrawn]

all lies again

First of all it is torture! So yeah that does mean that under Bush and even under Obama (as it continued) U.S. broke Geneva convention!

Second it can definitely cause long lasting physical damage. PTSS can be received as a result of waterboarding and that is physical! It includes catatonia which is physical! It has an over-release of neuro-transmitters which again is physical!

You handofthrawn are a liar! Really Shut the F up Already! I will say it to you again and again. LIAR LIAR LIAR!!!

Typical Democrat name calling and yelling because you have no actual facts. Even msnbc had good things to say about his tax plans. I get it you can't win on facts so you yell and name call. Many would say name calling is torture and you might cause me ptsd. Lol

[freemehul]

Typical Democrat name calling

I don't vote democrat. Whether its republican or democrat they both support the death penalty, which I'm against. ;)

...admittedly safe for one exception and that's genocidal dictators, they're too disruptive to society and too dangerous to be kept alive, people like Saddam, Gaddafi, Ceausescu, Mussolini

But let me continue with what you call name calling. You are clearly bereft of any conscience and ethics. You lie, you are racist, you condone torture and genocide! Lets be frank this makes you a monster! You have no humanity whatsoever. You are absolutely disgusting.

I pointed out your lies, you won't admit those. You admittedly condone torture. You clearly have racist motives if you support Trump. And lets not dillydally around this one, working on a database for muslims is the first stage for enacting genocide. Islam is the second biggest religion in the world after Christianity. This means you don't want some millions to die in a holocaust, but 1.6 billion.

Either you are the worst troll ever to have been on this board, or you have some serious issues and basically just as tragic a human being as someone who joins Al Qaida or ISIS. Now I don't think for a minute that you will see the light here. I am just that cynical about human nature, because your ability to reflect upon yourself and your views is pisspoor. You are like Tojo, even when they were ready to hang him, he still couldn't see it (and neither does his granddaughter btw).

...But I am optimistic about one thing...

Let me point to chapter one of Sun Tzu, first of the seven conditions. Since you don't have any ethics and therefore not imbued with any morality whatsoever, you are therefore weak and you can be defeated! But I bet you don't see it that way. In your mind, making a scapegoat out of billions of muslims makes you feel strong. It probably makes you feel like you can handle your dead-end job, or unemployment, or huge debts, your sick or addicted brother/sister/father/mother or whatever causes you to be the way you are. You know what I pity you, you are tragic. It's sad that you think you can solve things that way, because never in the entire history has it solved anything. I wish people like you had the ability to apply rationality to heuristics. Because I predict to you, whatever you choose now, ultimately you are going to end up dissapointed and in a worse position than you are now! You are like the German Nazi-sympathiser in the breadline after the war, assuming the worst of the Americans, limping about in your bombed out city, only to wonder what happened and how you ended up like this and what might have been. Lets face it you were already defeated the minute you started.

[handofthrawn]

I don't vote democrat. Whether its republican or democrat they both support the death penalty, which I'm against. ;)

...admittedly safe for one exception and that's genocidal dictators, they're too disruptive to society and too dangerous to be kept alive, people like Saddam, Gaddafi, Ceausescu, Mussolini

But let me continue with what you call name calling. You are clearly bereft of any conscience and ethics. You lie, you are racist, you condone torture and genocide! Lets be frank this makes you a monster! You have no humanity whatsoever. You are absolutely disgusting.

I pointed out your lies, you won't admit those. You admittedly condone torture. You clearly have racist motives if you support Trump. And lets not dillydally around this one, working on a database for muslims is the first stage for enacting genocide. Islam is the second biggest religion in the world after Christianity. This means you don't want some millions to die in a holocaust, but 1.6 billion.

Either you are the worst troll ever to have been on this board, or you have some serious issues and basically just as tragic a human being as someone who joins Al Qaida or ISIS. Now I don't think for a minute that you will see the light here. I am just that cynical about human nature, because your ability to reflect upon yourself and your views is pisspoor. You are like Tojo, even when they were ready to hang him, he still couldn't see it (and neither does his granddaughter btw).

...But I am optimistic about one thing...

Let me point to chapter one of Sun Tzu, first of the seven conditions. Since you don't have any ethics and therefore not imbued with any morality whatsoever, you are therefore weak and you can be defeated! But I bet you don't see it that way. In your mind, making a scapegoat out of billions of muslims makes you feel strong. It probably makes you feel like you can handle your dead-end job, or unemployment, or huge debts, your sick or addicted brother/sister/father/mother or whatever causes you to be the way you are. You know what I pity you, you are tragic. It's sad that you think you can solve things that way, because never in the entire history has it solved anything. I wish people like you had the ability to apply rationality to heuristics. Because I predict to you, whatever you choose now, ultimately you are going to end up dissapointed and in a worse position than you are now! You are like the German Nazi-sympathiser in the breadline after the war, assuming the worst of the Americans, limping about in your bombed out city, only to wonder what happened and how you ended up like this and what might have been. Lets face it you were already defeated the minute you started.

Lol your just silly and not worth my time even responding to you. But don't feel bad for me my life is great. Trump 2016. ;)

[freemehul]

not worth my time even responding to you. But don't feel bad for me my life is great.

you lied again, it's so incredibly obvious ;)
yup I definitely cracked a note there ;) one very unhappy monster ;)

You know, people like you are so easy to manipulate for people like Trump.

Had I flattered you, given you compliments, you would definitely responded to the obvious errors in your views. And what do you do, you vehemently deny you lied time and time again. Instead what I did to you is point to your obvious lack of morals. Your inmediate response like so many other Trump supporters, is the exact same response you gave to me. It's so very typical. You can't see past your own misery. You are easy prey to a predator like Trump, you're a wounded animal. I definitely predict to you, vote him in office, and your life is for sure going to be worse than it is now!

[smercjd]

I don't vote democrat. Whether its republican or democrat they both support the death penalty, which I'm against. ;)

...admittedly safe for one exception and that's genocidal dictators, they're too disruptive to society and too dangerous to be kept alive, people like Saddam, Gaddafi, Ceausescu, Mussolini

But let me continue with what you call name calling. You are clearly bereft of any conscience and ethics. You lie, you are racist, you condone torture and genocide! Lets be frank this makes you a monster! You have no humanity whatsoever. You are absolutely disgusting.

I pointed out your lies, you won't admit those. You admittedly condone torture. You clearly have racist motives if you support Trump. And lets not dillydally around this one, working on a database for muslims is the first stage for enacting genocide. Islam is the second biggest religion in the world after Christianity. This means you don't want some millions to die in a holocaust, but 1.6 billion.

Either you are the worst troll ever to have been on this board, or you have some serious issues and basically just as tragic a human being as someone who joins Al Qaida or ISIS. Now I don't think for a minute that you will see the light here. I am just that cynical about human nature, because your ability to reflect upon yourself and your views is pisspoor. You are like Tojo, even when they were ready to hang him, he still couldn't see it (and neither does his granddaughter btw).

...But I am optimistic about one thing...

Let me point to chapter one of Sun Tzu, first of the seven conditions. Since you don't have any ethics and therefore not imbued with any morality whatsoever, you are therefore weak and you can be defeated! But I bet you don't see it that way. In your mind, making a scapegoat out of billions of muslims makes you feel strong. It probably makes you feel like you can handle your dead-end job, or unemployment, or huge debts, your sick or addicted brother/sister/father/mother or whatever causes you to be the way you are. You know what I pity you, you are tragic. It's sad that you think you can solve things that way, because never in the entire history has it solved anything. I wish people like you had the ability to apply rationality to heuristics. Because I predict to you, whatever you choose now, ultimately you are going to end up dissapointed and in a worse position than you are now! You are like the German Nazi-sympathiser in the breadline after the war, assuming the worst of the Americans, limping about in your bombed out city, only to wonder what happened and how you ended up like this and what might have been. Lets face it you were already defeated the minute you started.

ouch - remember that sometimes arguing with those who aren't of the same...mind...as you can be irritating. But the end result of what you said is not going to work. You can't teach people by forcing them to do the right thing or think the way you think. Most of the time, people will learn on their own the hard way. It's best to simply give them your advice in the form of 2 or 3 cents and move on. And you don't need to go back and say I told you so later, either - not that you would necessarily, but they know already.

[freemehul]

ouch - remember that sometimes arguing with those who aren't of the same...mind...as you can be irritating. But the end result of what you said is not going to work. You can't teach people by forcing them to do the right thing or think the way you think. Most of the time, people will learn on their own the hard way. It's best to simply give them your advice in the form of 2 or 3 cents and move on. And you don't need to go back and say I told you so later, either - not that you would necessarily, but they know already.

You know, you are entirely true. You definitely can't teach them the way I did that. And truth be told I was indeed brutally blunt. You're absolutely right there. In fact to be honest I think the way Gene Simmons talked on Fox, yes I admit, is a far more effective way than what I did. I have a very non-conformistic perception about this whole thing. You see I am not a dominant right side brain kind of thinker like for example Simmons is, so I don't have his artistic optimism, for lack of a better expression. If you pardon the pun for being so cryptic here. I have a geography background (i.e. neither left nor right side dominant), with realpolitik kind of thinking (so I am skeptical) and I take after my grandfather (the very same one who moved to the United States). A Dutch Reformed reverand once used a saying about my grandfather, that he's "oer de wjuk", the literal translation "flies over one's wing". Meaning here: one changes ones expression according to what strategically suits ones interest best, but in a negative way it could also mean goes ahead of everyone else, where noone else can catch up and follow you.

But and there is a huge but here. And I hope you bear with me for a while. There is parable written about the author Sun Tzu by Sima Qian, which is probably not true, but makes for a good example here. The story goes as follows:

Sun Tzu is called to court by King Welu of Wu during the warring states era. He puts to Sun Tzu, I have a huge problem. I have a neighbouring state called Chu lead by the corrupt Nang Wa that wants to attack and conquer my kingdom Wu and destroy me. I hear from others that you Sun Tzu are gifted in warfare. What do I do? I have a mere 30.000 soldiers, and Chu has ten times the number of soldiers. It is impossible for me to win. Sun Tzu brags and says he can solve his problem. It is the first time Welu and Sun Tzu meet, so obviously they don't know eeachother very well and therefore Welu doesn't quite trust Sun Tzu yet. So Welu puts up a proposition to Sun Tzu that if he can do it, Welu will put all of his forces under the command of Sun Tzu.
The proposition is as follows and is something of a mockery of Sun Tzu and shows Welu's disbelief in him. Sun Tzu must train his harem of concubines as if they were soldiers. (sorry to offend any feminists out there, but remember its a parable about the person, not women in general let alone concubines). These spoiled women who only know about the luxuries of the court and nothing of warfare. Sun Tzu puts the two senior concubines in front and instructs them as officers. He tells them what to do and tells the remaining concubines to follow the officers lead. Sun Tzu sounds the drum to begin training, but to his dismay the two concubines appointed as officers laugh and so do the rest of the concubines. Sun Tzu instructs the concubines again only this time in simple terms so everyone can understand it, even concubines who never had any previous military training and are not familiar with military ways and therefore have no perception of it. He sounds the drum for the second time. And for the second time, they still laugh away. Sun Tzu says I was unclear the first time in my wishes, but I was perfectly clear the second time, so the second time its not my fault.
There's only thing I can do in these grave circumstances. The only thing he can do. So Sun Tzu takes out his sword. He walks to the spot where the two elder concubines are standing... and slashes both of their throats, killing them instantly. He inmediately appoints two new concubines as officers. He walks back and sounds the drum for the third time. This time the concubines follow his word to the exact letter and follow training correctly.
Welu at first shocked by him losing his two favorite concubines, freezes, and thus gives the illusion of Sun Tzu's support to the other concubines, is nevertheless impressed. He gives the command and allows Sun Tzu to train the troops. With the troops trained, next Sun Tzu wishes to invade Chu territory.
Yet again he meets with disbelief, now the people and other generals are shocked, for it seemed unwise to invade Chu territory when Chu clearly seemed ten times stronger. Yet Sun Tzu does not attack head on, he attacks borderposts, he skirmishes, he does guerilla warfare. Nang Wa of Chu who is corrupt and power hungry and unable to decisively defeat Sun Tzu on his own territory begins to lose support among his own vassals. One of his vassals eventually wants to break away, but is stricken with fear to do so alone and thus seeks the support of his former enemy Sun Tzu. Nang Wa knows this and starts moving his main army to the traitor vassal, knowing that he can defeat him and make an example out of him and at the same time humiliate Sun Tzu for not being able to support his new ally. Yet by now Sun Tzu knows this and has learned more about Nang Wa. Sun Tzu moves his forces to the capital of Chu. The state of Chu has forces near the capital so they could prevent Sun Tzu from taking the capital, but Nang Wa doesn't want any other general taking credit for the victory over Wu and moves towards the capital. Nang Wa loses a few skirmishes to Wu and ultimately Nang Wa is decisively defeated near a place called Boju by Sun Tzu.

But there is a second and far more obscure parable about Sun Tzu. Qin the ultimate victor of the warring states period (only to themselves being defeated by the Han) was a proponent of Chinese legalism. They're seen in the eyes of many Confucianists, particularly the Han dynasty and many Westerners with Taoistic symphaties as an unnecessary cruel regime. Well...Qin allied themselves with Wu and divided the Chu kingdom. In time Welu the ruler of Chu grew as corrupt as his predecessor Nang Wa he had defeated. Sun Tzu in disgust retired, feeling miserable that he had helped such a man to greater power, when all he had ultimately achieved was to replace one bad, corrupt and ineffective ruler for another. It is in his retirement that some say he wrote the book what we know by the name of the Art of War (though its probably not his alone and in truth its likely a Western title, I reckon that in the Confucian world it is known something like Sun Tzu says or Sun Tzu tells).

But I am drawing on oriental examples here. For something in a more Western tradition that's probably closer to home, though distant in time. I could have drawn a comparison with I dunno someone like Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus. "Thankless country, thou shalt not possess even my bones!" As his epitaph after he was disgusted with Roman politics when all he did was to save Rome from threats like Hannibal, where everyone else had failed. Only to suffer from the envy of his fellow politicians and being ridiculed by the likes of Cato for his love of Greek culture. Or I could have drawn a comparison with Trump and Marcus Licinius Crassus and his defeat at Carrhae. Just because you are rich does not make you a better person and be able to defeat an opponent, only because you have an innate feeling that you are better at it (and wrongfully so and btw just to be even more brutal also a telltale sign of a narcissist ;), but lets not keep hammering that one in and say I told you so ;) ), because you are rich and therefore must be a better or superior person. Btw to be even more spot on about Trump supporters, they listen to him and his rants, because they think he knows something, because he's rich. And to be even more brutally honest I also figure that handofthrawn believes this to be true, else he wouldn't have yelled and called me "silly" (it wasn't only for the long rant ;) ). It's a classical ad verecundiam fallacy that the Romans have consistently proven to be not true. Kinda tragic to be out of the loop of an at least 2000 years old knowledge, but meh to relativize them and him (or if you want to see it in a negative light not to personalize it too much and see it as an ad hominem attack on someone like handofthrawn) if emotion is the only thing you got going on, you have a very narrow perception anyway, so to me its quite logical that you don't see it and will never see it.

Anyhow to be even more brutally blunt then I was previously. And to ultimately get to the point I was making. ;) People like handofthrawn in my perception are like the concubines in this political situation. Its not that they're stupid per say, the trouble is that they don't see. What they know is the court, in other words the emotion. And Fred, Donald Trump's alcoholic brother is like Nang Wa. Donald Trump is like Marcus Licinius Crassus and his children are like Publius Licinius Crassus (the son who got shot trying to save face from a disastrous situation).

In case you're missing on how that perception comes about. You may want to look in on how Trump invested on a golf course in Scotland, bullying the neighbours into submission by cutting off the water supply in clever but entirely illegal ways, only to have himself being betrayed by his political backers (i.e. read bribed politicians imho), when they put wind turbines offshore ruining the view for his future golf course. There's one very nice documentary about it, that you may want to watch. The one very vocal opponent in it for Trump was a university professor, who was in the fight, simply because he hated the bullying, but ultimately didn't get far. Well, Bernie Sanders is like him.

And in case you were wondering why I am of the opinion where I said "read". You might wanna watch the Republican debate where Trump clashed with Jeb Bush (of all persons), about his opening a casino in Florida that never came about. Why? Because Jeb wouldn't budge, and frankly, though I could be wrong here (you never can tell for sure with a son of CIA man ;) ), I believe him there. Its one of those things that people like handofthrawn glance over, because they either don't see it at all, because they can't connect the details through sheer lack of knowledge (again the narrow perception), or they rationalize in ways like well that's the business he's in, it is necessary for his survival, when it clearly isn't true. People like him rationalize at the wrong time and wrong place, when they don't use heuristics, because of polarized politics. They are blinded by hatred for anything that doesn't agree with them.

But then I come to everyone else. The everyone else that has at least some possibility to see behind the polarization (whether its moderate Republican, or Democrat, or independent like I dunno a certain Iowa wrestler perhaps), well in my mind they are like Sun Tzu or Scipio, except in their retirement, older and wiser in some way, angered and embittered, not before their main battle, when they were optimistic and a bit naive perhaps. Why do you ask, do I paint it that way? Because people know what they got with the other candidates, they know the sh*t they pulled, so to speak, especially Hillary.

And look at the overall situation. Politics is more polarized, there really is no incentive to look outside of the current party for any politician that's running. And then look inside the parties and the primaries. You have Bernie who's basically being ostracised by the DNC and out of the knowledge loop because of that and therefore at a disadvantage. And he's the one who attracts the most young people, who probably won't turn up to vote, because he's out of the race then. And whoever is too moderate in the Republican primaries, read too much Democrat in handofthrawn's eyes, well they tend to lose. So lets say for simplicity sake Hillary does win at the Democrats and goes up against the Republican nominee. Lets say for simplicity sake that the primaries are true and Trump wins, because he is the most extreme (though of course it's long way to go). So now its Trump versus Hillary. Exactly who will win?

I want to draw a concerning analogy here for anyone that thinks that's going to be an easy victory for Hillary in case it does happen to be Hillary versus Trump. Lets look into some American electoral history. Like I dunno lets say the 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972 elections. There's one election in particular here that ended up in the biggest U.S. electoral landslide ever. It's the 1972 election where Nixon won. Yup the very same U.S. president who got impeached. Nixon could actually have fared better in the 1968 election were it not that he actually lost states in the south. But he didn't lose them to a Democrat, noooes it was George Wallace. ;) Yup that guy in favor of segregation. Dubbed by many left historians as a conservative racist reaction to 1964 winner Johnson who enacted some laws that were terribly unpopular there. But here's where the analogy ends, for that was the seventies, then that was a dividing factor, this is now.

You know Seth Meyers made a joke about Donald Trump, saying at how Trump thinks he's popular with "the Blacks" (I'm using his wording here btw), when Seth reckons that's true if "the Blacks" were a white family. Seth is actually wrong in some way. Some do like Trump, not because he's a rich white guy, but because he bashes on muslims and he insults Mexicans (perceived as their main competitor on the labourmarket for low wage jobs). Do you see what I am getting at here smercjd? Btw it's not so much that I think it's because Americans are racist, because that's just isn't true. No the real danger here lies in apathy.

Oh btw but in a way I am actually more cynical about politics in Washington. Suppose on the off chance Trump wins and becomes president and he does step all over the U.S. constitution (which I definitely reckon he will do, seeing as how he acted illegally in Scotland and therefore has no respect for any laws). There is another concerning situation I want to paint to you here. Exactly who is going to stop him? You know democracy depends on checks and balances, but its not the supreme court to impeach him when he goes too far. Its the house of representatives and the senate. I just don't think a republican held senate is going to drop him. Am I too cynical? Well, I hope so. But understand me here, the cynicism does not come from people who vote for a man like Donald Trump, nor from anyone who doesn't vote for him to be honest, it comes from the messed up situation and that people tend to learn from their mistakes after the damage has been done and not beforehand.

[smercjd]

You know, you are entirely true.

...

Am I too cynical? Well, I hope so. But understand me here, the cynicism does not come from people who vote for a man like Donald Trump, nor from anyone who doesn't vote for him to be honest, it comes from the messed up situation and that people tend to learn from their mistakes after the damage has been done and not beforehand.

I'm not quite sure what the intent of all that was when the end both the beginning and end result was you agreeing with me. As for the Dutch saying, you can't just tell people you're awesome and except them to agree with you. Nor can you tell them and explain how and why. Granted, it SHOULD be enough if you can explain how and why rationally, but it just isn't the case with the majority of human beings. I agree with you on your overview of the candidates discussed. Quite possibly in every way.

Now that you've agreed with me and I with you...lies the question - what will you do about it? My point was that you're being ineffective in teaching. How will you, in all your awesomeness, become better at it? How will you contribute to stopping this potential nationwide hazard effectively? You can't just cut their throats. Well, you can, but it won't work. Because cutting their throats back then was their life...here on an internet forum it looks less like intensity and more like anger. To those who read and understand, it's clear that it's intelligence, but your goal was to convince the...different perspective...thinkers.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that my links to poll questions are necessarily the most effective way...It may even be only slightly effective. I'm simply saying that, I'm not that awesome. I had to be a little creative. You, on the other hand, be it that you're not necessarily a right brained thinker, might have to engage that side of your brain anyway.