Trump’s old tweets are becoming a minefield of hypocrisy

[IGIT]

LOL The CBC just said the PM called Trump a good listener and willing to change his position. How's that for awesome spin when Trump has lied about the Canadian Dairy Industry to pander to American farmers?

hello Rebound59,

thanks for that post, i didn't catch that bit of news.

like i said earlier, Mr. Trump is flip flopping like a fish, but i consider all his changes of heart kind of comforting.

- IGIT

 

[Rational Poster]

 

[InternetHero]

The election was more like choosing between a paper cut and severing your entire arm. The two candidates were not even close quite frankly. There are massive gaps in intelligence, knowledge of the policies, judgement, etc.. Shit, we now know that Trump is highly corrupt and very lazy. The corruption is out in the open but Rs in the house like his policies or know that he will pass anything without even understanding it so they won't do shit about it.

This "both choices were bad" is a false equivalence.

Seeing the incompetence, arrogance, and almost contemptuous corruption of the Clinton campaign, and in it's back biting break up, it is impossible to know, but I see losing an arm in either situation.

From the New York Review of books review of "Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign"

"Despite years of post-mortems, the authors observe, Clinton’s management style hadn’t really changed since her 2008 loss of the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama: Her team’s convoluted power structure “encouraged the denizens of Hillaryland to care more about their standing with her, or their future job opportunities, than getting her elected.”

In chronicling these missteps, Shattered creates a picture of a shockingly inept campaign hobbled by hubris and unforced errors, and haunted by a sense of self-pity and doom."

-----------------------------------------------------

A grossly incompetent and corrupt kleptocrat is a slower poison.

 

[HIMBOB]

I didn't vote. But do I guess he won the primary on the basis of being less of a politician than the others. As far as the general election, he won because that's just what happens after 8 years of a Democrat.

The issue is him condemning people for saying what he has said.

 

[Deleted member 196663]

The issue is him condemning people for saying what he has said.

Which is hypocrisy...what politicians are experts at.

 

[InternetHero]

Which is hypocrisy...what politicians are experts at.

Yeah, but we are to blame in the end, we just want whatever we feel we want so they tell us SURE SOUNDS SMART!

 

[Deleted member 196663]

Yeah, but we are to blame in the end, we just want whatever we feel we want so they tell us SURE SOUNDS SMART!

The mindless hordes are too easily moved by their mere perceptions.

 

[InternetHero]

The mindless hordes are too easily moved by their mere perceptions.

Sure, sure, but even most of the Technocrats can only see in a shade of white or black, which is even more disturbing.

 

[kpt018]

Seeing the incompetence, arrogance, and almost contemptuous corruption of the Clinton campaign, and in it's back biting break up, it is impossible to know, but I see losing an arm in either situation.

From the New York Review of books review of "Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign"

"Despite years of post-mortems, the authors observe, Clinton’s management style hadn’t really changed since her 2008 loss of the Democratic nomination to Barack Obama: Her team’s convoluted power structure “encouraged the denizens of Hillaryland to care more about their standing with her, or their future job opportunities, than getting her elected.”

In chronicling these missteps, Shattered creates a picture of a shockingly inept campaign hobbled by hubris and unforced errors, and haunted by a sense of self-pity and doom."

-----------------------------------------------------

A grossly incompetent and corrupt kleptocrat is a slower poison.

C'mon, there is a gigantic difference from campaign mistakes that Hillary made and in Trump's case, not even being able to point out countries on a map. They are so far apart in terms of intelligence, work ethic and understand of how the world works that pointing to campaign mistakes misses the big point.

Yes, Hillary is far from perfect. But Trump is flat out incompetent.

 

[Jack V Savage]

C'mon, there is a gigantic difference from campaign mistakes that Hillary made and in Trump's case, not even being able to point out countries on a map. They are so far apart in terms of intelligence, work ethic and understand of how the world works that pointing to campaign mistakes misses the big point.

Yes, Hillary is far from perfect. But Trump is flat out incompetent.

Observations might be disingenuously used to support the dogma, but Bothsidesism isn't *based on* observation. It's a religion.

 

[kpt018]

Observations might be disingenuously used to support the dogma, but Bothsidesism isn't *based on* observation. It's a religion.

I'm not sure if InternetHero falls into this category, but there are also those that are just incredibly lazy and don't care to do the thinking required to sift through policy differences ("fuck em all, they are all bad"). Same issue though, that the position isn't based on observations. Just pointing out some people are just lazy.

 

[InternetHero]

C'mon, there is a gigantic difference from campaign mistakes that Hillary made and in Trump's case, not even being able to point out countries on a map. They are so far apart in terms of intelligence, work ethic and understand of how the world works that pointing to campaign mistakes misses the big point.

Yes, Hillary is far from perfect. But Trump is flat out incompetent.

Why mention it as mistakes when a source favorable to Hillary Clinton plainly states it to be incompetence, paranoia, and the same old corruption?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Why mention it as mistakes when a source favorable to Hillary Clinton plainly states it to be incompetence, paranoia, and the same old corruption?

It's not corruption or incompetence at governance that you're discussing, though. It's a campaign that lost, which inevitably leads to finger-pointing and identifying missteps. To think that it's in any way comparable to what we're seeing with Trump's administration is absurd, and something only someone infected by some type of brainworm (partisanship, Bothsidesism, etc.) would even entertain.

 

[InternetHero]

Observations might be disingenuously used to support the dogma, but Bothsidesism isn't *based on* observation. It's a religion.

When it comes to Trumpism...

There are those who grudgingly accept him because they feel he will advance their politics, those who blindly follow every shift in position because they truly believe, and those whose tongues tie in knots trying to defend his shifts and bends, because they have invested too much of themselves in his success.

Realists (Or deniers, perhaps...) , believers, and boot lickers more or less.

There is no intellectual honesty in Trump, but in a private meeting Trump would not be ashamed of that.

He is a salesman, and will go with whatever he feels he can sell.

 

[InternetHero]

It's not corruption or incompetence at governance that you're discussing, though. It's a campaign that lost, which inevitably leads to finger-pointing and identifying missteps. To think that it's in any way comparable to what we're seeing with Trump's administration is absurd, and something only someone infected by some type of brainworm (partisanship, Bothsidesism, etc.) would even entertain.

The behavior was, as it was in 2008.

Why would it change?

 

[kpt018]

The behavior was, as it was in 2008.

Why would it change?

Why wouldn't it?

 

[Jack V Savage]

When it comes to Trumpism...

There are those who grudgingly accept him because they feel he will advance their politics, those who blindly follow every shift in position because they truly believe, and those whose tongues tie in knots trying to defend his shifts and bends, because they have invested too much of themselves in his success.

That's fine, but the point I've been making is that excessive and irrational cynicism is what got us to this point. People don't have the mental framework to notice when we actually have an incompetent, dishonest, corrupt dunce running because they've been conditioned to inaccurately believe that everyone in office is that way, and they don't have the capacity to comprehend the risk because things always turn out pretty well (not under Bush, but people-especially the young--have forgotten about that).

The behavior was, as it was in 2008.

Why would it change?

Who's saying anything about it changing? It's just that whether it does or not, it's not even comparable to anything we're talking about.

 

[InternetHero]

Why wouldn't it?

"Trump's old tweets are becoming a minfield of hypocrisy"

"Hillary's old campaign becoming a minfield of hypocrisy"

We should not hazard to deceive ourselves when it comes to simple truths.

If Hillary Clinton was the same decrepit, corrupt, stubborn, megalomaniac kleptocrat from 2008, chances are the reins of power would make her far worse than better, as it tends to do for everyone.

I believe Lincoln was given credit for saying, "if you want to test a (wo) man's character give him power." surely Trump and H. Clinton are monuments to this warning.

 

[InternetHero]

That's fine, but the point I've been making is that excessive and irrational cynicism is what got us to this point. People don't have the mental framework to notice when we actually have an incompetence, dishonest, corrupt dunce running because they've been conditioned to inaccurately believe that everyone in office is that way, and they don't have the capacity to comprehend the risk because things always turn out pretty well (not under Bush, but people-especially the young--have forgotten about that). (1)



Who's saying anything about it changing? It's just that whether it does or not, it's not even comparable to anything we're talking about. (2)

1. I have no disagreements.

2. We could agree over hundreds and hundreds of posts about the ills of Trump.

That makes me curious.

All morally relative comparisons of Trump and Hillary aside, could we also agree that Hillary Clinton is of rather poor character? Not a question of competence, or political skill, but rather, character.

Would you agree she is not trustworthy, considerate, or fair minded about those outside of her circle?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Would you agree she is not trustworthy, considerate, or fair minded about those outside of her circle?

I have no idea how considerate or fair-minded or whatever she is. I see no evidence that she's not trustworthy, though I have no idea what she's like in person. Seen lots of good things (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...more-important-than-electing-obama-in-08.html) and lots of bad things (not on the record as much). When she makes public statements, she takes more care to be accurate than most (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/...cians-lie-some-lie-more-than-others.html?_r=0), and I was impressed with her unwillingness to bullshit in the debates.

I think the charges of corruption are politically motivated, and her record is actually quite good on that score (especially impressive considering how desperately a lot of very powerful people have searched for evidence of that).