might be a lot of counting ahead of us. — Hippyhead
I said nothing about Trump being admirable or desirable. — Hippyhead
Trump is a realist. That is his gift. He's dealing with the world the way it really is. Stupid. The evidence for this is that his strategies are working. — Hippyhead
The ranks of the successful are everywhere populated by drooling mongoloids, as the current president-eject so amply illustrates. — StreetlightX
I think his "instinctive ability" is that he's a realist. He's not burdened with visions of how things should be and so can better see things as they really are. Here's an example to illustrate. — Hippyhead
The media typically presents itself as a public service, and we typically buy this story. Trump sees through this self flattering story the media tells itself about itself, and understands that corporate media is just another profit seeking business. He "instinctively" gets that the media is not in the news business, they are in the ad selling business, and that their business model is powered by drama. So Trump hands over a non-stop stream of drama and is rewarded by the media with a non-stop spotlight on his every utterance. — Hippyhead
he managed to lose the election by a bigger margin than any incumbent in modern history. — Baden
The theory that he plays into the fears of the beleaguered white man who sees his power escaping as the nation's culture and ethnicity change, so he harkens back to a non-existent time when things were great and can be now be made great again sounds like a better explanation. — Hanover
Trump is no more a genius than is the preacher who cries from the pulpit while he gathers the last dimes from the congregants. Believers aren't stupid, just vulnerable.
And this is what fanatic Trump supporters cherish the most. Forget what he actually says, the main fact is that he has gotten these people angry.Trump has had most of the corporate global media, Hollywood, the intelligence community, and Big Tech against him. The most lucrative, influential and comprehensive machinery of propaganda in human history delivered an undoubtedly anti-Trump message, fitting the propaganda model to a T. — NOS4A2
No. The simple reason is that I have to watch the whole press conference in Helsinki of the US president alongside the Russia president and NOT to refer to journalists (who indeed basically are biased against all Republican presidents), but use my OWN THINKING to see that it wasn't normal. Trump's behaviour isn't at all normal with Putin. No president of any country would take the view of a rival and be against his own team. Trump's behavior simply wasn't normal.The canard of a Kremlin-linked president still rattles in the heads of true believers while they remain mostly ignorant that the Chinese politburo had already reached the highest echelons of the opposing party. — NOS4A2
No, it doesn't mean that. The fact that you fail at something doesn't mean you didn't intend to do it. — Baden
Merkel didn’t stoop to criticize Obama when Snowden revealed his NSA was spying on her. Is this the normal you’re speaking of? — NOS4A2
Many of these judgements are worth reading. They emphasize how utterly pathetic these tinfoil hat challenges are.
"This petition falls far short of the kind of compelling evidence and legal support we would
undoubtedly need to countenance the court-ordered disenfranchisement of every Wisconsin voter.
The petition does not even justify the exercise of our original jurisdiction.
...
The petition’s legal support is no less wanting. For example, it does not explain why its challenge to various election processes comes after the election, and not before. Nor does it grapple with how voiding the presidential election results would impact every other race on the ballot, or consider the import of election statutes that may provide the “exclusive remedy.
These are just a few of the glaring flaws that render the petition woefully deficient. I therefore join the court’s order denying the original action. Nonetheless, I feel compelled to share a further observation. Something far more fundamental than the winner of Wisconsin’s electoral votes is implicated in this case. At stake, in some measure, is faith in our system of free and fair elections, a feature central to the enduring strength of our constitutional republic. It can be easy to blithely move on to the next case with a petition so obviously lacking, but this is sobering. The relief being sought by the petitioners is the most dramatic invocation of judicial power I have ever seen. Judicial acquiescence to such entreaties built on so flimsy a foundation would do indelible damage to every future election. Once the door is opened to judicial invalidation of presidential election results, it will be awfully hard to close that door again. This is a dangerous path we are being asked to tread. The loss of public trust in our constitutional order resulting from the exercise of this kind of judicial power would be incalculable.
I do not mean to suggest this court should look the other way no matter what. But if there
is a sufficient basis to invalidate an election, it must be established with evidence and arguments commensurate with the scale of the claims and the relief sought. These petitioners have come nowhere close. While the rough and tumble world of electoral politics may be the prism through which many view this litigation, it cannot be so for us. In these hallowed halls, the law must rule." — Baden
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.