You really do not understand the nature of evil, do you.

Perhaps, but I understand the nature of snobbery, arrogance and sanctimony, which is what your little diatribes amount to.

Whether you'd have made a good Nazi is open to question, but you'd have made a fantastic apologist for them. Or is that what you are, an apologist for neo-fascism and neo-fascists?

I oppose bigotry and injustice and I champion liberty and free thought. I wouldn’t make a good Nazi in that respect. Since you understand the nature of evil, I wouldn’t mind hearing your arguments as to why Trump is evil.

why Trump is evil. — NOS4A2

Because he hurts, damages, and betrays seemingly everyone and everything he comes into contact with. And those not close enough for him to directly hurt, damage, or betray, he contents himself with defrauding. He's clearly toxic, and only those of similar toxicity can be around him for long. It's not that he doesn't hurt, damage, or betray them, but rather that they're already very damaged people.

As for his children, are you familiar with a Hawthorne story, Rappaccini's Daughter? Trump has poisoned his children to the extent that they are in-themselves poison, Donald Jr., and Ivanka especially.

Now you tell me if that and those are the actions of a good man, or what a good man would set out to accomplish with his life. What good man does anything that Trump does?

Thats a false dichotomy, that because Trump is mot a good man, that he is an evil man. Surely you recognise a sprectrum?

That's a false dichotomy, that because Trump is not a good man, that he is an evil man. Surely you recognize a spectrum? — DingoJones

I put Trump near the end of the spectrum, say about ten standard deviations from the mean. Where do you put him? And a dichotomy is false if it is false, not because it might be false in contexts that themselves would make it false.

So instead of keeping countries like Russia at bay with military force, we partner with them. — NOS4A2

Yeah, like cyber security!

:down: :shade:

I agree with what you say. The Middle East policy is a disaster and an utter failure. All the more reason to get out of there. — NOS4A2

One does have to remember that the US is (or was) a Superpower. Hence when (if) the US leaves any place, it will create a huge void where other countries will, basically out of necessity, try to fill in the gap. And this can turn ugly. So the thought that the US going back home will solve everything is wrong. It can also open up a can of worms.

This actually is already totally evident in the Middle East already. Previously the US did show leadership. The US could call the shots and form not only a Western, but a huge Arab & Muslim alliance when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. That Syria was fighting in this alliance showed well that American diplomacy could muster support from surprising directions. Unfortunately from this experience some Americans learnt only hubris and we got the worst cabal in US history that has ever taken over US foreign policy: the neocons. Perhaps it isn't emphasized just how different the Iraqi Invasion was from any other Post-WW2 endeavor for the US. Both in Vietnam and Korea there was a country asking for US help. The invasion of Afghanistan was something new, but that invasion was largely understood and tolerated. The Iraqi invasion was something totally new and lead to a situation where there was no turning back.

The cracks were totally evident during the Obama years. In Libya you had the worst example of the new defunctness when Arab allies of the US chose to back up different and opposing sides in the civil war, an event that ought to have been totally unthinkable. This dispute nearly ended up with Saudi-Arabia invading a GCC member with a large US Naval base, which tells how fractured the Arab coalition is. But also how Arab states are competing now for power and leverage in the new void.

Im not familiar with your system of measuring where he is on the spectrum so its hard to answer your question.
For myself, id reserve “evil” for the most extreme end of the spectrum and I wouldnt say Trump belongs there, not based on the information I have.
Wouldnt be all that surprised though. I wouldnt call most people “good” either, I dont think most people put much more thought into ethics or morality than Trump does.

I don't think most people put much more thought into ethics or morality than Trump does. — DingoJones

FYI, most people do. To be sure, most people do it automatically.

One quick test: make two lists. On one put all (that you know of) the good things Trump has done, on the other, all the bad. No need to publish it here. But how do your two lists match up?

Standard deviations are not rocket science. If a thousand people run 100 yards as fast as they can, most will run near some average (mean) speed (maybe twenty-five seconds?). Some fewer will be faster, some slower. And some even fewer faster and even fewer slower. And so on until you get to the fastest and the slowest. A standard visualization of how that works is a standard bell curve. Usually about 2/3rds of the runners will be "near" the average, 1/3rd faster, 1/3rd slower, or one standard deviation faster and one slower. About 95% will be within two standard deviations (that is, a spread of four standard deviations centered on the mean). And about 99% within three standard deviations. You can see, I hope, that ten standard deviations means way out near the extreme. If you do not think that Trump is an extremely and unusually evil man, then you haven't been paying attention - or don't understand.

If you do not think that Trump is an extremely and unusually evil man, then you haven't been paying attention - or don't understand. — tim wood

Seldom would I call a politician evil. No matter what kind of corrupt sexual predator he is. You will be then accusing people of supporting evil. Evil is something one shouldn't even tolerate.

Hence I don't say that Marxism is evil, to give one example.

FYI, most people do. To be sure, most people do it automatically. — tim wood

That wasnt very convincing, sorry.
So you think that anyone who doesnt think Trump is extremely and unusually evil is dumb or ignorant? No one of at least average intelligence and well educated on the subject would disagree that Trump is extremely and unusually evil? Is that your position?

Not if they've been paying attention. What by your standards is evil? Far as I know, Trump has never by himself murdered anyone. Pretty much most other crimes he's pretty certain to have committed. Even treason. Unless you call furthering the causes of Vlad at the expense of your own, in violation of law, just being friendly by other means. And indirectly? Of course people are dead because of him. And hurt and damaged and betrayed. Children taken from parents wholesale and then lost! Almost every action he's taken or tried to take calculated - seemingly - to divide. And stupid? Is Trump really stupid enough to believe that any wall on the southern border will work? But if not that stupid, then what?

All of the evidence, taken by the piece, makes not much sense. Does anyone with any sense believe Trump thought it a great idea to extort the Ukrainians because he was afraid of Joe Biden? But put it all together and we get a comprehensive picture of a traitor working at the direction of Vlad and Vlad's buddies, which he does because Vlad has something on him, and Vlad is very likely a master of the squeeze.

Which implies bad things, very bad things, about some Republicans.

I personally entertain the notion that the Russians have long been engaged, probably from even before WW2, in creating assets out of US citizens. Probably not as bought-and-paid-for agents, but rather as people subject to a little blackmail, who might be asked to do this or that little thing, almost nothing in itself, but with hundreds of other little things, with a nice little reward thrown in, together amounting to sometimes some big things. And I think they caught Trump a long time ago, and that turned out to be a very big catch indeed.

But perhaps you disagree with me and think Trump is a great man - do you?

There you go again, the false dichotomy of either you are right, or Trump is a great man. Not the only two choices in assessing the man, not at all.
To answer your question, Id have to know what standards for greatness you have.
For myself, no I wouldnt call Trump a great man, or even a good man. It seems pretty clear to me he is a bad actor, a con man at best...though sometimes its difficult to see a distinction between a con man and your run of the mill business man.

'Evil' is a good term to avoid. Ignorant, narcissistic, incompetent, mendacious, malevolent, duplicitous - they would be more accurate. And someone with no idea of the standards of democratic governance. 'Evil'? Meh.

I have had a horrible thought about Trump - that the impeachment will turn out to be the Coronation of the Emperor. Meaning that, if/when the supine Senate Republicans absolve him of sin, then he has completely untrammelled reign, of the kind that he's behaved as if he's had since elected. I think if that happens we will begin to see the real Trump for the first time.

But I've just been reading about Chuck Schumer's letter. He wants to call Bolton, Mulvaney and others as witnesses and table many of the documents that Trump has been withholding. It's going to be interesting to see how that plays out. If McConnell tries to stonewall, that will be a clear breach of process, but if they do testify, one can assume that they won't be able to say anything much exculpatory about Trump. Mulvaney has more or less already acknowledged Trump's guilt at a press conference.

So at least the facts of Trump's corruption will be forever on the public record, no matter how much a corrupted Senate wishes to bury them.

I have had a horrible thought about Trump - that the impeachment will turn out to be the Coronation of the Emperor. Meaning that, if/when the supine Senate Republicans absolve him of sin, then he has completely untrammelled reign... — Wayfarer

I've had the same thought. I hope it's just a knee-jerk alarmism.

If he's acquitted by the Senate (and I still say it's an 'if', as a lot could happen in January, and it's not a foregone conclusion), then what does that say about the corruption of the Republican party?

Anyone who has followed the impeachment proceedings can see as clearly as day that Trump's been caught red-handed. All the witness testimony, and all but one of the consulting legal scholars, made it clear there was evidence of impeachable offenses having been committed. Even the original call transcript was damning. And Trump himself hasn't said or done anything in his own defense - instead he's committed the further offense of obstruction and simply asserted that it's all a 'hoax and a witch hunt'. His utter contempt for Congress, the constitution, and the law, is abundantly obvious.

So, as the Democrats have been saying, if the Senate clears him on all of this, then really they've become accessories to an impeachable offense, were there such a crime. It really will imperil the rule of law in America. This is not 'moral panic' or alarmism, it is really happening.

The Great Scapegoat. Blame him for everything; give him credit for nothing. But as far as we know the worst he’s ever done is said things you don’t like—thoughtcrimes. His heresies lead the prudes and hypocrites to expose themselves as they cry wolf.

The Great Scapegoat. Blame him for everything; give him credit for nothing. But as far as we know the worst he’s ever done is said things you don’t like—thoughtcrimes. His heresies lead the prudes and hypocrites to expose themselves as they cry wolf. — NOS4A2

Now you're just being absurd. And a liar. And a troll. We just have to adjust to the fact that you really are defective, and this is your outlet. Do you get out much?

Yet with all your bluster you have not produced a single evil act.

I have had a horrible thought about Trump - that the impeachment will turn out to be the Coronation of the Emperor. Meaning that, if/when the supine Senate Republicans absolve him of sin, then he has completely untrammelled reign, of the kind that he's behaved as if he's had since elected. I think if that happens we will begin to see the real Trump for the first time. — Wayfarer

Now this is great thinking from a fellow PF member, the reason why I participate in this Forum.

I totally agree with your view. The notion that Trump just springs back up after every put down will be seen as this positive sign of his abilities. The constant barrage of negative news about Trump will in the end help him. He is constantly repeating the mantra that everything, everything is a concentrated witch-hunt. It's a conspiracy against him. This actually is a winning formula. No matter how the facts wouldn't say that (like starting with Comey's October Surprise that made a devastating blow to Clintons campaign just before the election, that is totally forgotten in Trump's narrative). To repeat this mantra is simply soothing and makes people to close their ears. It's just the Trump derangement syndrome of the Trump haters. And when, I repeat when the GOP members of the Senate don't go with the impeachment, then Trump can truly say he has been vindicated, that it all was a witch-hunt. And republicans will do that. It will be the ticket for Trump to have a far better chance on winning again.

If you’re ever bored read through these Reddit threads. They are anecdotes of people who have worked for him or have met him. If what they say is true he it seems he is a very nice and likeable man, and not the villain people make him out to be.

People who have met or dealt with Donald Trump in person prior to the race, what was he like?

People who have worked for a Trump company - what was your experience like?

If you’re ever bored read through these Reddit threads. They are anecdotes of people who have worked for him or have met him. If what they say is true he it seems he is a very nice and likeable man, and not the villain people make him out to be. — NOS4A2

Yes, a guy who worked in a movie theatre that Trump visited is sorted to be the best answer.

Well, now we know how you make your opinion about him. :wink:

Yet how about making your opinion just listening what the man says and following what decisions he makes as President? The character issue is meaningless as we already know after many years what kind of President he is. Just a thought.

I have had a horrible thought about Trump - that the impeachment will turn out to be the Coronation of the Emperor. Meaning that, if/when the supine Senate Republicans absolve him of sin, then he has completely untrammelled reign, of the kind that he's behaved as if he's had since elected. I think if that happens we will begin to see the real Trump for the first time. — Wayfarer

@Maw and I had talked about this in this thread and this is my gut feeling as well. Maw is convinced the support for impeachment with voters is such that if the republicans acquit it will cost them dearly in the election, leading to an extensive win for the Democrats. I'm not so sure because Trump's character was quite clear during the previous election and it didn't make a difference.

And Democrats in power will only be meaningful if Bernie wins. Otherwise you get more of the same minus the dickishness.

Im comfortable with the information I already have, and put very little stock in such a source anyway. No offence, but I am not interested in this peddling you do about Trump. Just because I recognise someone like Tim Wood has Trump Derangement Syndrome doesnt mean Im open to your own rose tinted take on the guy.

Maw is convinced the support for impeachment with voters is such that if the republicans acquit it will cost them dearly in the election, — Benkei

Unless they rig it again. And who would be there to prevent that, if he’s been acquitted in the Senate? What if he outright declares that the Mueller enquiry and the impeachment hearings really were a coup attempt and declares a state of emergency? He recognises no law above his say-so, and holds Congress in contempt. Who would stop him?

None taken.

He’s doing a great job. It’s hard to believe how much time we’ve wasted hiring politically-correct lawyers to run a country, when we should have been hiring billionaire playboys.

Giuliani is going off-the-wall insane, suggesting that not only was Shokin fired, but also poisoned!

He was poisoned. It was the tuna salad.