Donald Trump and English

Thanks for the insight.

So in a sense, we can (at least in the case of my parents) pinpoint the plants moving to Mexico due to NAFTA, but we can also pinpoint liberal policies that lead to their reeducation to the liberal policies. Would that be a fair assessment?

We ended up better off, to be entirely honest. I was just thinking that not everyone can expect to come out of college with an applicable degree. Luckily my parents were smart and ended up in the medical field.

 

1. The platform development of all forms of energy that are marketable. Which I agree with but would like to see more put toward research.

2. Taxes - I can agree with encouraging business and there by growth by tax breaks. I would like to see more for the middle class. The poor pay very little 9or nothing in income tax now and a large number get back money they didn't put in. I don't want that to change to take it away but cant see giving them more of a break.

3. I support a bit more of an isolations policy not total but there are thing we need to back away from.

4. SCJ- I want to see someone appointed that will uphold some conservative views but not all of them.

I actually look to the democrats to move some of the things in the platform more to the center if the republicans try to intact them.

There are a number of things I disagree with in the republican platform and hope the democrats center up them. It would take a while to go through all of them but there are plenty.

 

I mean, the entertainment value this man has brought us is 100X that of any other presidential candidate. Ever listen to his speeches? Fucking hilarious!

 

Not really making an ideological point there (at least as it relates to the past). NAFTA isn't responsible for a noticeable decline in manufacturing employment, and I don't know the specifics of your parents' re-education. I'm saying that I would favor policies helping more re-education (and Clinton is proposing stuff that would make that easier, while Trump isn't) and would not favor protectionism or attempts to slow down technological development.

But your parents' example is a good one--people lose jobs and find new ones, sometimes leaving them better off and sometimes leaving them worse off. That's why it's best to look at the big-picture effects rather than personal stories.

 

I agree. What do you imagine will happen when the inevitable occurs, whereby technology replaces nearly all jobs? I mean, it's possible in the future even the most educated among us are replaced.

Have you read Robert Anton Wilson's "The RICH economy?" He presents the idea (and I'm sure there were some before him) that unemployment has no cure because it's not a disease, just part of the path toward advancement of the human species.

 

Trump is a man who gets people to pay him millions to run or consult on running a business into bankruptcy.

 

I'm concerned about the possibility, but I don't think it's inevitable, and I'm not sure how likely it is. I think moving past scarcity should be a really good thing (will require "giving fish" though), and a bigger immediate concern is slow productivity growth.

Haven't read the book, but that's a very long-run perspective, no? We're nearly at full employment now (that is, unemployment is almost as low as it can possible get)--a spending burst would get us all the way there (where pretty much everyone who looks for a job will find one soon).

Bertrand Russell had an essay called "In Praise of Idleness" a while back that was interesting (though I don't necessarily endorse it).

http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html

I recommend the whole thing, but here's a bit:

Again, the problem is that the other half eventually find other work, and more stuff gets made, leaving people as a whole better off, etc. Could be that we reach a point where maybe we do prize leisure more, though.

 

Special all right...

 

I thought Obama was supposed to take away our rights to guns? Now it is Clinton? Listen, the 2nd amendment will never be abolished. Will there be restrictions to what type of gun and who can obtain it? Yes and that is how it should be to begin with. Something that can easily take life should have more restrictions around it than most anything else. The NRA and gun lobbyists love democrats because they scare gun owners to go out in droves and buy up everything in sight. Remember not to long ago it was next to impossible to find ammo because of impending restrictions.

Trump the lesser of two evils argument is a gem. He only says mean things and makes people upset, he's never sent anyone to their deaths like evil Killary. So you want to give him the chance? I know it's a dumb question to ask because you've already looked past all of his mental issues with thin skin, not having a real position on anything of substance, wanting to ratchet up torture and nuking the Middle East back to a time before the Crusades.

What is great about the general Trump support is his fascination/Admiration with Russia. For Reagan Republicans this must be the hardestt pill to swallow. I am sure Putin would gladly welcome a Trump Presidency just to screw with Reagan legacy.

 

Bill Clinton seemed to struggle with the language, too. I mean, he did have to question what the definition of "is" is, after all.

 

I've got plenty of things to entertain me, I don't need it with a presidential election. Electing a president it serious, it requires serious people and serious discussions.

I pray this is just an anomaly of an election and we go back to being a dignified country. Republicans are so unbelievably shit though I'm not sure if they can be normal any more.

 

English is my third language and even I knew what sarcasm means. why would he be sarcastic in front of his supporters about Obama founding ISIS?

 

Sure I guess the other candidate's husband said something a couple decades ago.

 

Watching the republicans try to reconcile with this godawful faction among their base is going to be hilarious. They deserve it too. They drew the boundaries, they riled up the bigots. They made their bed. I just hope the democrats don't pander to the anti-liberal left or this is going to be us in ten years.

 

I'm not a republican, but good way to demonize half the country. Surely broad generalizations about 100 million "shit" people are something only those sophisticated democrats, like yourself, can pull off. Besides, everyone that doesn't think like you is shit, don't ya know?

You know democracy works best when the Republican party is strong and the Democratic party is strong? You know what a one party system is called?

Get a clue.

 

I posted these in another thread, but they bear repeating. This third on is my favorite.

 

You don't make the GOP any stronger by pretending that it's something it's not. The best hope is that if they lose bad enough, there will enough motivation for them to reform.

 

Exactly my point, also exactly the reason many conservatives are hoping Trump doesn't get elected (as it may go down an "unchangeable road").

 

Im so sick of republicans playing this fucking victim card of "I'm entitled to my opinion so fuck your" excuse. The ideas of trump and what he wants are fucking anti American and you should be fucking ashamed for letting a con man like trump even come close to becoming president.

The fuck is the matter with you. Are you an adult? Do you have a brain and understand basic concepts of decency? Yes? Then you have no fucking excuse for this. Either you are a bad person, stupid, ignorant, or a combination of the three. Nothing else explains the motivation a grown adult would have to support a man like this.

Time to grow the fuck up and be an adult.