I agree with your point regarding Trump using the media. Obviously. You fail to see a pscyhological point about Trump as well, which I will address soon - why Trump must operate this way. It's not because he's Crooked like Hillary and will do anything to get elected - his motivation is different. I disagree that one should expect the media to be biased just because someone criticises them - that's not what one should expect because the media shouldn't be biased in the first place.But again your post proves me right — Baden
I think you misunderstand the psychology of great men - not saying Trump is a great man in the sense of being a moral man, please note that. But he is a great man in a different sense. He's great in the same way Alexander was great. He displays one quality that probably all other current politicians in the West lack - magnanimity of spirit. He doesn't care what lowly good-for-nothings think about him - he can care less. A man like him is a lone wolf. He doesn't need anyone's approval - nor does he want it. What he wants is that his greatness compels the approval of others. Not that they freely give it - but rather the same way when one stares at a beautiful painting and is forced to say "this is beautiful" so too when one looks at him, one is forced to say "Trump is great". That's what he wants - that's what he's always wanted. Such men treat their lives as pieces of art. Even if he loses the election - it doesn't matter to him - that's not proof that he's not great, like other common men would think. A great man will try again and again and will never stop trying to show his greatness - his capacity to undertake difficult actions and pull through with them. Because the source of his greatness isn't how the external world looks - it's not that he's in the ditch - the source of his greatness is that unshakable belief that he has inside of him that he is great and he can do great things, and the more failures and obstacles there are in his path the better it is because the greater he will be once he overcomes them. The more people oppose him, the more they hate him, the greater he will be once he overcomes them.and am thoroughly enjoying the beating his psyche must be taking through these non-stop attempts to assassinate his character. — Erik
Just like I'm trying to be Christian :P — Agustino
I respect and honour that choice - not voting for Trump. Trump certainly has a lot of negative aspects.Yes. What is an aspiring Stoic or Christian to do, though, in such a situation? Which megalomaniac is a more intelligent choice than the other? For my part, I can't choose Trump, who is now claiming that if he doesn't win it will be because of fraud and encouraging others to react accordingly--thereby undermining the process itself for purely selfish reasons. That seems to me to be the most irresponsible claim made by this serially irresponsible and seriously ignorant man, and for my part it in itself renders him the more objectionable, the greater evil. — Ciceronianus the White
But he is showing greatness of spirit in so doing. He's acting like Caesar in crossing the Rubicon (of course he lacks Caesar's intelligence, physical and political capabilities) - he's ignoring the consequences and going with his vision all the way. That's something of value - even if his vision is crooked, selfish, and so forth. And I might add that we're missing that in the last 60-70 years - greatness of spirit.who is now claiming that if he doesn't win it will be because of fraud and encouraging others to react accordingly — Ciceronianus the White
Because Trump is the first politician in the Western world in the past 50 years who displays one of the fundamental virtues that we're missing - greatness of spirit, courage to go at it all alone and fight for one's vision regardless of whether the vision is good or bad. Daring. Fighting and winning against all odds. All our other leaders are cowards - they really don't do shit (or better said they do only what is popular - only what they know will certainly get them elected - they have no real passions or beliefs - their beliefs are whatever is popular and will get them in office). We've become shielded by political correctness, by bureaucrats, by experts - someone else is thinking for us. People have no more passions - they have small passions, to go on Tinder, to shag their neighbour to do some pesky little and insignificant thing. Trump is the first one in recent history with a real passion and energy to move the world, to actually do something big and move everything he has to move to achieve it. That's refreshing to see - I thought the Western world was all but dead, with no passion or courage for anything, until I saw him dare. I thought everyone left was like Crooked - doing anything to earn another dollar, with no grander ambitions than merely hold office, be among "high society", remain (or become) amongst the powerful and so forth. It's refreshing to see someone dare to be different.If you aren't a US citizen, why do you give a flip? — Mongrel
But he is showing greatness of spirit in so doing. He's acting like Caesar in crossing the Rubicon (of course he lacks Caesar's intelligence, physical and political capabilities) - he's ignoring the consequences and going with his vision all the way. That's something of value - even if his vision is crooked, selfish, and so forth. And I might add that we're missing that in the last 60-70 years - greatness of spirit. — Agustino
I don't think so. I think he understands it's quite possible that he'll lose the election and seeks to convince people that if he loses it can only be due to fraud. That's not showing "greatness of spirit" in my book. It's shows meanness of spirit, a spiteful spirit, intent on undermining not only the authority and legitimacy of the victor but the election process itself if he's unsuccessful. — Ciceronianus the White
As I said before yes. But he's setting himself up for the future - in that he shows greatness of spirit. First he alienates the Republican Party because he wants his voters to remain Trump supporters, not Republicans. He wants to steal that electorate from the Republican Party. Why? Because he knows that the RNC will not allow him to run as a Republican the next time. So what has he got to do? He has to say that the elections were rigged. Then, the same way he carried the birther movement, he will carry the rigged movement. This will be formed of the supporters he has - roughly 20-25% of the American electorate will remain loyal to him (he has a group of supporters which already have a lot of loyalty to him). These people will be kept as his supporters as he continues throwing stones after Hillary and talking about the corruption of the system. Then next elections come, the Republicans don't want to let him run, and he threatens he'll run as an independent. The Republican politicians are greedy - anything to ensure they don't lose - and Trump running as an independent will ensure that they will in fact lose in the general election. By now they think Trump is discredited and hasn't got much chance in their primaries anyway. They let him run for the sake of not starting a war with him, so long as they make him agree not to run as an independent if he fails in the Republican race. Then Trump wins the Republican primary. Clinton is even more discredited and tarnished than she is now - the American people will never want another Clinton. Trump becomes President. This I think is his plan.I don't think so. I think he understands it's quite possible that he'll lose the election and seeks to convince people that if he loses it can only be due to fraud. That's not showing "greatness of spirit" in my book. It's shows meanness of spirit, a spiteful spirit, intent on undermining not only the authority and legitimacy of the victor but the election process itself if he's unsuccessful. — Ciceronianus the White
Great leaders are always great leaders regardless of the situation. Mastery over information and decision making isn't what a great leader is. That's what people under him have to do. This is precisely the problem - we have forgotten what leadership means. A leader shouldn't have to care how to get from A to B. A leader isn't a technician giving you the how. The President isn't there to be an engineer to say this is HOW we'll get to B. Only that we must get to B (and what that B is - that's what a leader needs to decide on. What is the B we need to get to? And all the information in the world can't decide that. All the big heads can't decide that. The big heads are always confused. They don't know what to do). That's what he has to do. He must direct everyone towards getting to B. Motivate and convince them to get to B. What makes someone a great leader is that they carve their own path - they are not servants to an electorate that's already existing. They have a vision, and they create the electorate to implement it. A great leader can be either moral or immoral - good or evil. Gandhi is a great leader - he effectively created the electorate - he got the people to follow his vision of a free India. Hitler on the other side (on the evil side) is also a great leader. He also carved his own path and got the German people to follow.2. We're facing problems that have unfolded over an extended period. It's stuff we've been fighting for years. It's already come up that we failed to listen to people who demonstrated that they did know what to do (as with the derivative market crash and maybe the invasion of Iraq.) It's time for a leader who has mastery over information management and decision making.
Which sort of situation are we in? Mostly 2. We might be presently sliding toward 1, but we aren't there now. — Mongrel
Gandhi is a great leader - he effectively created the electorate - he got the people to follow his vision of a free India. Hitler on the other side (on the evil side) is also a great leader. He also carved his own path and got the German people to follow. — Agustino
The President isn't there to be an engineer to say this is HOW we'll get to B. Only that we must get to B. — Agustino
All the visions for the US were similar until now. No big differences. This time it's different. — Agustino
You fail to recognise that in another century Ghandi wouldn't have attempted to achieve the same goal he had now. The capacity of the leader is precisely in choosing a goal and then getting people to follow. This greatly depends on their character - good character = good goal. Evil character = evil goal.Both these people were products of their times. In another century, Ghandi would have ended up dead in a ditch somewhere. Born a little earlier or later, maybe Hitler would have made it into art school and poured his bile out onto canvases. — Mongrel
I don't care about these a prioris that big heads think about leadership. I look in history and I see what leaders have actually done. The fact of the matter is that people who actually follow the big heads - they don't look anything like the real leaders we know from history. So there must be a problem with the big heads guiding them.You missed the 1980's when the "networking leader" was all the rage. — Mongrel
What do you mean?There is something cool about the USA. It doesn't usually show up in politics, in my experience. — Mongrel
Where's the recognition of your mistake? Seems like you're wiggling out of it again by not responding to what is actually being asked of you.But it's unimportant and has nothing to do with the issue in any case; but it does seem to demonstrate either your tendency to jump to conclusions about things you know nothing of; in this case about my psychology. Or else it shows your tendency to make disparaging remarks when you can't find any cogent arguments. This is shown yet again with your ridiculously childish and patronizing "baby".
Ho hum will the laughs ever cease. — John
Morality is like the roof of a house, where the walls are duty and their foundation is love. The walls without the foundation cannot stand, and the roof without either the foundation or the walls cannot stand ;)So, to return to the issue at hand and just for the record if you genuinely don't think morality is founded on religion or authority, then what is it founded upon? — John
Morality is like the roof of a house, where the walls are duty and their foundation is love. The walls without the foundation cannot stand, and the roof without either the foundation or the walls cannot stand ;) — Agustino
I don't care about these a prioris that big heads think about leadership — Agustino
What do you mean? — Agustino
No, I am not freakin kidding you (lemme guess: here comes the part where you rant about how Hillary supposedly laughed at a rape victim and sought to discredit the women who accused her husband of unwanted sexual advances).Rights of women, are you freakin kidding me? — tom
Yes, many people want to improve the ACA (some, like the House Republicans, in the classic definition of insanity, vote dozens to times to repeal it without hope of doing so). One cannot expect a program that massive to work perfectly from its initial roll-out.Both Clinton and Trump are against Obama Care as it currently stands. Both want to reform it. Trump was to only Republican candidate for universal healthcare provision.
More bullshit from the right-wing blogosphere. The Clinton Foundation has an "A" rating from Charity Watch, and a 95% rating from Charity Navigator. And, contrary to the baloney you linked to here, a bit more than 10% of its funds go to charity...the real figure is closer to 88%. Please leave the Fox News echo chamber and join reality.As for the Clinton foundation, have you been living under a rock?
http://www.latintimes.com/clinton-foundation-what-happened-39-billion-were-supposed-go-haiti-401841
Oh so this wanting people to desire you sexually is a good and honorable desire no? It's good and honorable to want others to feel like they are your property, under the spell and control of your beauty right? — Agustino
Ok so after you it's moral for her to do that right? It's moral for her to use her body to feel domination and power over another no? And the other should have no means of defence against this - no law on his side to for example call the police and to get that woman out of his face. Obviously she doesn't want to have sex - she wants to dominate me. That's a problem. — Agustino
Then if they're not available why the hell do they want to be sexually desirable if not in order to have power and dominate? — Agustino
At risk of the charge of being melodramatic, my view is that if Trump loses, democracy is over in US, at least until some sort of catastrophe happens. — tom
On the contrary, if Trump were to win, then that would be the catastrophe, and in so many ways, including internationally. — Sapientia
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.