Shots fired: JP Morgan Chase CEO Dimon insults Trump

Ophydian said:
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.
Click to expand...

I think Trump does know when not to display this trait. In private. In privately recorded conversations, he comes off as a lot more amiable and agreeable.

But he is like a turtle going into its shell when he deals with the media, in public. He absolutely refuses to entertain their ideas, probably because he has PTSD from 40 years of dealing with journalists and paparazzis. If you look at videos of Trump in his early days, he was not always like this.

Whether it's seen as a positive trait or not, it was certainly seen as a desirable trait by the people who voted for him. A lot of Americans distrust the media, so Trump's complete refusal to concede anything to the media, came off as very appealing compared to the usual groveling by politicians.

He does have a massive ego but so did a lot of the people who ended up in his position. Not all of them, but many of them.

Again, I don't think that Trump is necessarily a great man, certainly not a very virtuous man, but if there's one thing he has common with legitimately "great" men, it's his bulldozer mentality.
 
TheGreatA said:
Whether it's seen as a positive trait or not, it was certainly seen as a desirable trait by the people who voted for him. A lot of Americans distrust the media, so Trump's complete refusal to concede anything to the media, came off as very appealing compared to the usual groveling by politicians.
Click to expand...

You realize that almost all of the people who voted for him would have voted for any Republican, right? Most Republican plausible Republican candidates--none of whom were as *brazenly* dishonest as Trump--would have gotten even more votes. It's a mistake to attribute general-election success to that trait.
 
So a Rich guy talked some shit about Trump.

Fascinating.
 
Bo6fxiQ.gif
 
Jack V Savage said:
You realize that almost all of the people who voted for him would have voted for any Republican, right? Most Republican plausible Republican candidates--none of whom were as *brazenly* dishonest as Trump--would have gotten even more votes. It's a mistake to attribute general-election success to that trait.
Click to expand...

I doubt very seriously that the Jeb Bush types could've won the election.
 
TheGreatA said:
I doubt very seriously that the Jeb Bush types could've won the election.
Click to expand...

No way to know for sure, but other candidates were polling better (not sure about JEB specifically), and generally, candidates don't make that much of a difference.
 
Jack V Savage said:
You realize that almost all of the people who voted for him would have voted for any Republican, right? Most Republican plausible Republican candidates--none of whom were as *brazenly* dishonest as Trump--would have gotten even more votes. It's a mistake to attribute general-election success to that trait.
Click to expand...

This is what I've been saying.

They could have literally had any other Republican candidate and the exact same would have been accomplished.

Rubio, Cruz, Kasich... all of them would have cut taxes and done nothing else with a lot less baggage.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Not sure about Cruz, actually. I think Rubio and Kasich would have won by bigger margins (would have actually won the popular vote and would have taken the same states and more).
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. What we do know for sure, is that Trump did. And it had been unprecedented for about 30 years.

The last time Republicans won in Wisconsin? 1984.
The last time they won Michigan? 1988.
The last time in Pennsylvania? Also 1988.
And the last time Minnesota went red? 1972.
 
Jack V Savage said:
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.
Click to expand...

Michael Moore could use a Teddy Atlas pep talk
 
Jack V Savage said:
You realize that almost all of the people who voted for him would have voted for any Republican, right? Most Republican plausible Republican candidates--none of whom were as *brazenly* dishonest as Trump--would have gotten even more votes. It's a mistake to attribute general-election success to that trait.
Click to expand...

Most yes, but I wouldn't say "almost all". Both parties have their die-hards but the swing voters determine the outcome. It's a smaller group but really the most important. His anti establishment appeal won over enough of them. I would love to see the democrats try to appeal to those voters more, the way Bill and Obama did, but it doesn't seem to be the approach right now.
 
Tiny said:
Trump beat the liberals and Hillary's what? 1 billion dollar presidential campaign using mostly twitter.

Why couldn't this guy?
Click to expand...
He's a Democrat. The Democratic Party is currently undergoing a hard push to the left. He rightfully knows he'd have no shot against a progressive candidate in the Democratic primaries.
 
TheGreatA said:
Maybe, maybe not. What we do know for sure, is that Trump did. And it had been unprecedented for about 30 years..
Click to expand...

Yeah, demographics had been shifting. Look at other elections in those areas. I think the framework is odd. Voters decide the election.

Iceberg Slim said:
Most yes, but I wouldn't say "almost all".
Click to expand...

Might just be semantic. 95% or so, right? And Trump lost many voters that those guys would have gotten (for example, college-educated whites moved hard against Trump, and I don't think that would have been the case with a more-reasonable candidate).

Iceberg Slim said:
Both parties have their die-hards but the swing voters determine the outcome. It's a smaller group but really the most important. His anti establishment appeal won over enough of them. I would love to see the democrats try to appeal to those voters more, the way Bill and Obama did, but it doesn't seem to be the approach right now.
Click to expand...

Turnout decides the outcome more than swing voters. And again, if by "anti-establishment appeal," you just mean his vulgar manner and lack of knowledge of issues (note that Trump was running as a billionaire who was going to cut taxes on other rich guys, while his opponent was running on a pro-labor platform), that almost certainly cost him more votes than it won him.
 
MicroBrew said:
JP Morgan CEO and fellow New Yorker Jamie Dimon said earlier that he thinks he could beat Trump , is smarter than Trump and "And by the way, this wealthy New Yorker actually earned his money," he said, referring to himself. "It wasn't a gift from Daddy."

https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/12/news/companies/jamie-dimon-trump-jpmorgan/index.html

...But then he walked back the comment on running for President and winning, saying he couldn't beat the liberals. "I should not have said it," it was the wrong thing to do.

Yeah I added the "it was the wrong thing to do" as a little hat tip to a warroom meme
Click to expand...

Really set the bar high there...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LeonardoBjj
Economy Global economic risks ‘could eclipse anything since second world war’, says JP Morgan boss
Replies
4
Views
336
Kowboy On Sherdog
Kowboy On Sherdog

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,915
Messages
55,454,711
Members
174,787
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top