Shots fired: JP Morgan Chase CEO Dimon insults Trump

[7437]

That's precisely why dudes like this cannot beat Trump, no matter how much money they may have.

What Trump possesses is a 30 to 40 year old combative relationship with the media, a level of experience that few rich men or politicians possess, as well as a psychologically (if not necessarily scientifically or politically) perceptive mind.

He knows that you never, verbally, walk back on anything you've said, even if you may do so in action. He does not give in to other people's perceptions of what he ought to do or to say, but in most cases, decides to do the exact opposite, in a show of power (which is what appeals to the people he wants to appeal to).

Like him or not, many don't, but at the very least he possess this one particular trait of "great men".

I wouldn't call that the trait of a great man. It worked out for him since he was born rich. For the common man that is a disaster of a personality to have. I've seen people get fired from work because they forgot to wear a reflective vest, and then decided that arguing with the safety manager instead of just putting on the vest was a good idea. Because they didn't want to say they were wrong.

It is a terrible quality to have. Only the dumbest people in the world act that way. Idolizing stupidity seems a bit shocking.

 

[TheGreatA]

I wouldn't call that the trait of a great man. It worked out for him since he was born rich. For the common man that is a disaster of a personality to have. I've seen people get fired from work because they forgot to wear a reflective vest, and then decided that arguing with the safety manager instead of just putting on the vest was a good idea. Because they didn't want to say they were wrong.

It is a terrible quality to have. Only the dumbest people in the world act that way. Idolizing stupidity seems a bit shocking.

If you analyze the personalities of men such as Napoleon, Frederick the Great, Lenin, Franklin Roosevelt, Bismarck, etc. (all from a variety of political/ideological backgrounds), you'll notice that it's a trait all such men possessed.

Lyndon B. Johnson bulldozed the Civil Rights Act by relying solely on taking a "hard-line, give no ground" stance against his political rivals.

For the common man it might be a disaster of a personality, because he focuses on common things, and put forth no great argument in his favour, projecting very little power of personality outside pettiness and vindictiveness.

It's definitely a leadership quality, not a follower quality. Even Trump, despite his riches, has put a great many things at risk by applying this standard to himself, which is why we will see a guy like this JP Morgan CEO (despite being even richer) conceding from his position in order to avoid the potential gamble of standing behind his words, while a Donald Trump will not.

Trump's history shows that he was more of an "all or nothing" gambler, whereas many other rich men play the game more "conservatively", avoiding controversy, avoiding the spotlight, while incrementally increasing their riches by focusing on the easiest sources to make money with, the paths of least resistance. And that's why such men cannot beat Trump at his game. They would be "Jeb Bush'd" sooner than they would notice.

 

[MicroBrew]

If you analyze the personalities of men such as Napoleon, Lenin, Franklin Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, Bismarck, etc. (all from a variety of political/ideological backgrounds), you'll notice that it's a trait all such men possessed.

Lyndon B. Johnson bulldozed the Civil Rights Act by relying solely on taking a "hard-line, give no ground" stance against his political rivals.

For the common man it might be a disaster of a personality, because he focuses on common things, and put forth no great argument in his favour, projecting very little power of personality outside pettiness and vindictiveness.

It's definitely a leadership quality, not a follower quality. Even Trump, despite his riches, has put a great many things at risk by applying this standard to himself, which is why we will see a guy like this JP Morgan CEO (despite being even richer) conceding from his position in order to avoid the potential gamble of standing behind his words, while a Donald Trump will not.

Trump's history shows that he was more of an "all or nothing" gambler, whereas many other rich men play the game more "conservatively", avoiding controversy, avoiding the spotlight, while incrementally increasing their riches by focusing on the easiest sources to make money with, the paths of least resistance. And that's why such men cannot beat Trump at his game.

It didn't work in his favor when he explored a Presidential run in 2000 . I don't think his never admitting to mistakes is what made him president, it likely helped in some capacity but ultimately his Nationalist rhetoric (economic nationalism and race nationalism) , public's strong dislike for Hillary the person and perception of Trump as anti establishment and the culture of resentment against progressive ideals is what got him the White House.

 

[helltoupee]

If you analyze the personalities of men such as Napoleon, Frederick the Great, Lenin, Franklin Roosevelt, Thomas Jefferson, Bismarck, etc. (all from a variety of political/ideological backgrounds), you'll notice that it's a trait all such men possessed.

Lyndon B. Johnson bulldozed the Civil Rights Act by relying solely on taking a "hard-line, give no ground" stance against his political rivals.

For the common man it might be a disaster of a personality, because he focuses on common things, and put forth no great argument in his favour, projecting very little power of personality outside pettiness and vindictiveness.

It's definitely a leadership quality, not a follower quality. Even Trump, despite his riches, has put a great many things at risk by applying this standard to himself, which is why we will see a guy like this JP Morgan CEO (despite being even richer) conceding from his position in order to avoid the potential gamble of standing behind his words, while a Donald Trump will not.

Trump's history shows that he was more of an "all or nothing" gambler, whereas many other rich men play the game more "conservatively", avoiding controversy, avoiding the spotlight, while incrementally increasing their riches by focusing on the easiest sources to make money with, the paths of least resistance. And that's why such men cannot beat Trump at his game.

I understand digging in your heels and insisting you are correct when taking an informed and sophisticated position that might have a variety of interpretations.

Trump doesn't really show that he has any kind of an educated, nuanced understanding of most things. He just doubles down on his ignorance, which seems to me a lot different than what you are referring to.

 

[TheGreatA]

It didn't work in his favor when he explored a Presidential run in 2000 . I don't think his never admitting to mistakes is what made him president, it likely helped in some capacity but ultimately his Nationalist rhetoric (economic nationalism and race nationalism) , public's strong dislike for Hillary the person and perception of Trump as anti establishment and the culture of resentment against progressive ideals is what got him the White House.

I think you might under-estimate how much his confrontational, "politically incorrect" personality contrasted the much more mild-tempered, agreeable personality of Obama's, turning him into the optimal "protest" candidate for those that did not enjoy Obama's rule.

His nationalist rhetoric and the perception of him being anti-establishment and anti-progressivist, are an extension of his disagreeable, "take no prisoners" personality. Trashing all of the Republican candidates with personal insults, and exposing them as "meek pretenders", is what truly created his momentum. He would not have possessed, to be blunt, the balls to assume the positions that he did, if not for his personal qualities (or lack of qualities, to some).

He was able to perceive the people's demand for, as Michael Moorer put it, a "human Molotov cocktail", and he capitalized upon it. He knew that he was the perfect person, with the perfect personality, to assert himself as that "human hand grenade", thrown against a social order that people were growing increasingly tired of.

In previous times, he had not truly shown any real indication that he was a staunch nationalist, anti-Democrat or even anti-establishment. I do not think that he frankly cared too much about politics, because he was wholly immersed into what he was doing at the time.

 

[TheGreatA]

I understand digging in your heels and insisting you are correct when taking an informed and sophisticated position that might have a variety of interpretations.

Trump doesn't really show that he has any kind of an educated, nuanced understanding of most things. He just doubles down on his ignorance, which seems to me a lot different than what you are referring to.

Trump's method has nothing to do with an educated or a nuanced understanding of most things. It has simply to do with a rough understanding of power, and how to project it to his immediate environment.

I think he is fully capable of learning from mistakes, he just doesn't want to acknowledge to anybody publicly that he has made a mistake. If he was truly as stubborn and ignorant as he is often made out to be, he would have already failed somewhere along the path.

Let's not forget that for 30 to 40 years of his life, even before the presidency, his life consisted of being the target of paparazzis, chasing him around to expose private details about his life, messy divorces, economic problems, failed projects that he undertook.

To him, refusal to acknowledge a fault, all of which have been hyper-analyzed by the media and then some, is merely a means of survival, under "hostile circumstances". If he starts apologizing for the mistakes that he is deemed to have made, then he will be apologizing for the rest of his life.

 

[ultramanhyata]

that did no good for Forbes...who wasn't a horrible candidate btw.

Billionaire + Arrogant Swagger = Republican Primary Winner

Forbes comes off like a guy on the Asperger's spectrum.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

I'm going to need to see this guy color an American flag before I can form an opinion.

 

[DIDM]

If I used that bank, I’d literally pull all my money out. The banks exist because of the government keeping them afloat.

This should be fun to watch, I imagine Jamie will be gone before years end

 

[Ruprecht]

I don't think Dimon's reality TV resume and twitter chops are up to presidential level.

 

[MicroBrew]

If I used that bank, I’d literally pull all my money out. The banks exist because of the government keeping them afloat.

This should be fun to watch, I imagine Jamie will be gone before years end

Maybe that bank is a founding member of the government, and by that I mean JP Morgan was 1 of the most powerful men ever and undoubtedly was deeply involved in the direction of the US government. I'd presume that such a powerful financial entity as JP Morgan Chase , with its Old Money credentials is part of the deep state, which is the government.

 

[DIDM]

Maybe that bank is a founding member of the government, and by that I mean JP Morgan was 1 of the most powerful men ever and undoubtedly was deeply involved in the direction of the US government. I'd presume that such a powerful financial entity as JP Morgan Chase , with its Old Money credentials is part of the deep state, which is the government.

They will get caught in another bubble. And guess who won’t be bailed out?
It’s not a game anymore, there’s literal consequences now, no matter who founded the bank

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

They will get caught in another bubble. And guess who won’t be bailed out?
It’s not a game anymore, there’s literal consequences now, no matter who founded the bank

A banker needing bailed out and Trump whose filed bankruptcy a bunch of times sound like the best of friends.

 

[DIDM]

@Edison Carasio
A banker needing bailed out and Trump whose filed bankruptcy a bunch of times sound like the best of friends.

A banker wasn’t bailed out, the bank was.

For fucks sake you are dumber than the average bear

 

[Jack V Savage]

He was able to perceive the people's demand for, as Michael Moorer put it, a "human Molotov cocktail", and he capitalized upon it. He knew that he was the perfect person, with the perfect personality, to assert himself as that "human hand grenade", thrown against a social order that people were growing increasingly tired of.

Michael Moorer was the LHW mega prospect who moved up to HW and had a decent run that included a title and a memorable upset loss. Michael Moore is the HW documentarian who is pretty clueless about politics.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

THIs is like when two pussies fought in the locker room back in high school.

 

[Ophydian]

That's precisely why dudes like this cannot beat Trump, no matter how much money they may have.

What Trump possesses is a 30 to 40 year old combative relationship with the media, a level of experience that few rich men or politicians possess, as well as a psychologically (if not necessarily scientifically or politically) perceptive mind.

He knows that you never, verbally, walk back on anything you've said, even if you may do so in action. He does not give in to other people's perceptions of what he ought to do or to say, but in most cases, decides to do the exact opposite, in a show of power (which is what appeals to the people he wants to appeal to).

Like him or not, many don't, but at the very least he possess this one particular trait of "great men".

I’m sorry but “great men” know when and when not to display this trait. It’s Trumps default, says nothing about greatness and more about his ego.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

@Edison Carasio
A banker needing bailed out and Trump whose filed bankruptcy a bunch of times sound like the best of friends.

A banker wasn’t bailed out, the bank was.

For fucks sake you are dumber than the average bear

> Calls other people dumb
> Doesn't get jokes

Maybe JP Morgan can finance you some Trump steaks and you can treat yourself to a nice dinner.

 

[Bloody Pulp]

 

[DIDM]

@Edison Carasio
Calls other people dumb
> Doesn't get jokes

Maybe JP Morgan can finance you some Trump steaks and you can treat yourself to a nice dinner.



You weren’t joking though