Grifman wrote:It's easy to dismiss Drumpf supporters as a bunch of racist know nothing yahoos, but that would be ignoring the legitimate issues that are driving his popularity.
I don't think "legitimate" means what you think it means. There are perceived issues that are driving his popularity.
That is the spirit.
Who wouldn't be swayed by being told their issues aren't legitimate just perceived to be so?
Hopefully a little education would go a long way. Of course, education is the nemesis of the GOP. There was an article posted the other day about how the Koch brothers are trying to torpedo support for the expansion of a small suburbs library, in spite of a study that shows that each dollar spent on the library in that community translates into more than $5 worth of value. The only explanation for their opposition is a desire to keep the masses dumb.
Education has gone a long way. They have been educated by the people who made promises and didn't deliver. That kind of education doesn't fade.
Every two years the American politics industry fills the airwaves with the most virulent, scurrilous, wall-to-wall character assassination of nearly every political practitioner in the country — and then declares itself puzzled that America has lost trust in its politicians. ~Charles Krauthammer
Jeff V wrote:Hopefully a little education would go a long way.
Unfortunately, that is the one thing that the majority of Trump supporters specifically lack.
Yep, but it's also why you don't simply call them all loony whack jobs (well, I do, but just the ones I know) and attempt to manipulate their ill-gotten views through effective educational techniques. Whatever those may be (my sister recommended a book she said will help a lot with my toddler, so I presume the same tactics would work his mental-equivalents at the Trump rallies).
Grifman wrote:It's easy to dismiss Drumpf supporters as a bunch of racist know nothing yahoos, but that would be ignoring the legitimate issues that are driving his popularity.
I don't think "legitimate" means what you think it means. There are perceived issues that are driving his popularity.
That is the spirit.
Who wouldn't be swayed by being told their issues aren't legitimate just perceived to be so?
The Islamic takeover and the Mexican rapist invasion are both perceived issues rather than legitimate ones. Sure there are legitimate issues floating in the stew somewhere but they are more coincidental than core.
You are confused.
Islamic Extremism is an issue as is Illegal Immigration. The perception problem appears to be yours. What you are pointing at are perceived symptoms of the issues. Dispelling perceived symptoms != dispelling the issues themselves.
I don't think Islamists are taking over, nor do I think most Mexicans, even the illegal immigrant ones are rapists. I do believe in the issues which I can do without subscribing to the zany fringe rhetoric about the symptoms.
Rip wrote: I do believe in the issues which I can do without subscribing to the zany fringe rhetoric about the symptoms.
And that's all well and good. But the zany "fringe" rhetoric isbwhat is driving his popularity. And that's where the discussion was (see the quote thread above).
I'm not confused. I'm just following along.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
Grifman wrote:It's easy to dismiss Drumpf supporters as a bunch of racist know nothing yahoos, but that would be ignoring the legitimate issues that are driving his popularity.
I don't think "legitimate" means what you think it means. There are perceived issues that are driving his popularity.
That is the spirit.
Who wouldn't be swayed by being told their issues aren't legitimate just perceived to be so?
The Islamic takeover and the Mexican rapist invasion are both perceived issues rather than legitimate ones. Sure there are legitimate issues floating in the stew somewhere but they are more coincidental than core.
You are confused.
Islamic Extremism is an issue as is Illegal Immigration. The perception problem appears to be yours. What you are pointing at are perceived symptoms of the issues. Dispelling perceived symptoms != dispelling the issues themselves.
I don't think Islamists are taking over, nor do I think most Mexicans, even the illegal immigrant ones are rapists. I do believe in the issues which I can do without subscribing to the zany fringe rhetoric about the symptoms.
They are issues. The problem is they are used as critical issues to scare people, which is a problem. Most people don't want illegal immigration or ISIS setting up camp on Main Street, but we recognize that any administration is going to ensure it doesn't happen.
Rip wrote: I do believe in the issues which I can do without subscribing to the zany fringe rhetoric about the symptoms.
And that's all well and good. But the zany "fringe" rhetoric isbwhat is driving his popularity. And that's where the discussion was (see the quote thread above).
I'm not confused. I'm trying to avoid non sequiturs.
I don't believe it is driving his popularity. It just isn't curtailing it as many assumed it would.
Sometimes, some people see rhetoric for just what it is, rhetoric.
Just like when Hillary starts talking all anti-wallstreet. You would think that would hurt her among them but it doesn't. They know it is just rhetoric to pull in the nutbag left just as Trump does to pull in the nutbag right.
Rip wrote:
Islamic Extremism is an issue as is Illegal Immigration. The perception problem appears to be yours. What you are pointing at are perceived symptoms of the issues. Dispelling perceived symptoms != dispelling the issues themselves.
I don't think Islamists are taking over, nor do I think most Mexicans, even the illegal immigrant ones are rapists. I do believe in the issues which I can do without subscribing to the zany fringe rhetoric about the symptoms.
Neither of those are deserving of the rhetoric being thrown at it by Trump. It is divisive and builds FUD that obfuscates real issues and solutions.
An insignificant percentage of Muslims coming to this country are radical extremists. Likely no more so percentage-wise than any other ethnic/religious group. Studies have also shown that crime statistics for illegal immigrants is extremely low -- much lower than the general population. This is because they don't want attention that could result in them being deported.
Statistically, you have much more reason to be wary of what your next door neighbor is doing instead of fretting about evil Muslims or raping illegal Mexicans.
Rip wrote:
Islamic Extremism is an issue as is Illegal Immigration. The perception problem appears to be yours. What you are pointing at are perceived symptoms of the issues. Dispelling perceived symptoms != dispelling the issues themselves.
I don't think Islamists are taking over, nor do I think most Mexicans, even the illegal immigrant ones are rapists. I do believe in the issues which I can do without subscribing to the zany fringe rhetoric about the symptoms.
Neither of those are deserving of the rhetoric being thrown at it by Trump. It is divisive and builds FUD that obfuscates real issues and solutions.
An insignificant percentage of Muslims coming to this country are radical extremists. Likely no more so percentage-wise than any other ethnic/religious group. Studies have also shown that crime statistics for illegal immigrants is extremely low -- much lower than the general population. This is because they don't want attention that could result in them being deported.
Statistically, you have much more reason to be wary of what your next door neighbor is doing instead of fretting about evil Muslims or raping illegal Mexicans.
You mean like saying Republicans want to put you back in chains...or this....
GreenGoo wrote:It's not rocket science. You just have to listen to him for 5 minutes, or listen to interviews with his supporters. What sort of proof would satisfy you?
A scientific based poll showing that Trump supporter supported racism. Otherwise, you just have your opinion, and we know what this worth
It's discussed on a 538 podcast 2/25/2016 1:11 PM
And New York Times article by Kynn Vavrek 2/23/2016. 20% of Trump supporters disagreed with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, compared to 5% of Rubio's supporters. Seems pretty clear.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
GreenGoo wrote:It's not rocket science. You just have to listen to him for 5 minutes, or listen to interviews with his supporters. What sort of proof would satisfy you?
A scientific based poll showing that Trump supporter supported racism. Otherwise, you just have your opinion, and we know what this worth
It's discussed on a 538 podcast 2/25/2016 1:11 PM
And New York Times article by Kynn Vavrek 2/23/2016. 20% of Trump supporters disagreed with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, compared to 5% of Rubio's supporters. Seems pretty clear.
GreenGoo wrote:It's not rocket science. You just have to listen to him for 5 minutes, or listen to interviews with his supporters. What sort of proof would satisfy you?
A scientific based poll showing that Trump supporter supported racism. Otherwise, you just have your opinion, and we know what this worth
It's discussed on a 538 podcast 2/25/2016 1:11 PM
And New York Times article by Kynn Vavrek 2/23/2016. 20% of Trump supporters disagreed with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, compared to 5% of Rubio's supporters. Seems pretty clear.
I am wondering how many of those polled were in the South. I would think there it would be more like 80% disagreement. Not because they necessarily support slavery, but they would oppose the ability of Lincoln to dictate anything to states that considered themselves to be in a separate country.
GreenGoo wrote:It's not rocket science. You just have to listen to him for 5 minutes, or listen to interviews with his supporters. What sort of proof would satisfy you?
A scientific based poll showing that Trump supporter supported racism. Otherwise, you just have your opinion, and we know what this worth
It's discussed on a 538 podcast 2/25/2016 1:11 PM
And New York Times article by Kynn Vavrek 2/23/2016. 20% of Trump supporters disagreed with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, compared to 5% of Rubio's supporters. Seems pretty clear.
I am wondering how many of those polled were in the South. I would think there it would be more like 80% disagreement. Not because they necessarily support slavery, but they would oppose the ability of Lincoln to dictate anything to states that considered themselves to be in a separate country.
Respondents were selected from YouGov’s opt-in Internet panel using sample
matching. A random sample (stratified by age, gender, race, education,
and region) was selected from the 2010 American Community Study. Voter
registration was imputed from the November 2010 Current Population Survey
Registration and Voting Supplement. Religion, political interest, minor party
identification, and non-placement on an ideology scale, were imputed from
the 2008 Pew Religion in American Life Survey.
Weighting:
The sample was weighted using propensity scores based on age, gender,
race, education, news interest, voter registration, and non-placement on an
ideology scale. The weights range from 0.1 to 4.1, with a mean of one and a
standard deviation of 0.85.
Number of respondents 2000
Question 128.
128. Disapprove of the executive order which...
Do you approve or disapprove of the executive order which... (A) Freed all slaves in the states that were in rebellion against the federal government; (B) Created
military exclusion zones during World War II and allowed for the forcible relocation of Americans of Japanese descent to internment camps; (C) Desegregated the
U.S. military; (D) Restricted all non-governmental organizations that receive federal funding from performing or promoting abortion services as a method of family
planning in foreign countries; (E) Authorized enhanced interrogation techniques and established military tribunals to try foreign enemy combatants; (F) Deferred
deportation hearings for illegal immigrants who were brought into this country before they were 16 years old, have lived in the U.S. for at least 5 years, must be
younger than 30, and have graduated from high school in the U.S. or served in the U.S. military; (G) Require dealers who sell guns on the Internet and at gun shows
to obtain a federal license and require those dealers to conduct background checks on potential buyers; (H) Require manufacturers and dealers to report firearms
lost in transit between a manufacturer and a seller be reported to federal authorities.; (I) Instruct the FBI to hire 230 more additional examiners and other personnel
to help process new background checks 24 hours a day, seven days a week
By race.
Black;
A. 5%
B. 36%
C. 11%
D. 34%
E. 24%
F. 20%
G. 6%
H. 8%
I. 10%
Of course the idiocy of Trump is that he wouldn't even attempt to parse the data or cite sources, let alone actually solve anything. IMO that makes Rip more qualified to be President.
Trump is the living embodiment of un-ironic "Truthiness" from the Colbert Report. And the best you can say about Trump supporters is that they've extended internet trolling to politics.
Thanks, Drumpf.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
GreenGoo wrote:It's not rocket science. You just have to listen to him for 5 minutes, or listen to interviews with his supporters. What sort of proof would satisfy you?
A scientific based poll showing that Trump supporter supported racism. Otherwise, you just have your opinion, and we know what this worth
It's discussed on a 538 podcast 2/25/2016 1:11 PM
And New York Times article by Kynn Vavrek 2/23/2016. 20% of Trump supporters disagreed with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, compared to 5% of Rubio's supporters. Seems pretty clear.
I am wondering how many of those polled were in the South. I would think there it would be more like 80% disagreement. Not because they necessarily support slavery, but they would oppose the ability of Lincoln to dictate anything to states that considered themselves to be in a separate country.
Respondents were selected from YouGov’s opt-in Internet panel using sample
matching. A random sample (stratified by age, gender, race, education,
and region) was selected from the 2010 American Community Study. Voter
registration was imputed from the November 2010 Current Population Survey
Registration and Voting Supplement. Religion, political interest, minor party
identification, and non-placement on an ideology scale, were imputed from
the 2008 Pew Religion in American Life Survey.
Weighting:
The sample was weighted using propensity scores based on age, gender,
race, education, news interest, voter registration, and non-placement on an
ideology scale. The weights range from 0.1 to 4.1, with a mean of one and a
standard deviation of 0.85.
Number of respondents 2000
Question 128.
128. Disapprove of the executive order which...
Do you approve or disapprove of the executive order which... (A) Freed all slaves in the states that were in rebellion against the federal government; (B) Created
military exclusion zones during World War II and allowed for the forcible relocation of Americans of Japanese descent to internment camps; (C) Desegregated the
U.S. military; (D) Restricted all non-governmental organizations that receive federal funding from performing or promoting abortion services as a method of family
planning in foreign countries; (E) Authorized enhanced interrogation techniques and established military tribunals to try foreign enemy combatants; (F) Deferred
deportation hearings for illegal immigrants who were brought into this country before they were 16 years old, have lived in the U.S. for at least 5 years, must be
younger than 30, and have graduated from high school in the U.S. or served in the U.S. military; (G) Require dealers who sell guns on the Internet and at gun shows
to obtain a federal license and require those dealers to conduct background checks on potential buyers; (H) Require manufacturers and dealers to report firearms
lost in transit between a manufacturer and a seller be reported to federal authorities.; (I) Instruct the FBI to hire 230 more additional examiners and other personnel
to help process new background checks 24 hours a day, seven days a week
By race.
Black;
A. 5%
B. 36%
C. 11%
D. 34%
E. 24%
F. 20%
G. 6%
H. 8%
I. 10%
Only 36% of blacks disapprove of WWII Japanese-American internment????
My take is that there is a vocal minority of supporters of Trump that are heavily racist. There are also some that actually have some real issue they believe in (anti-free trade, anti-illegal immigration). And there are a lot (a majority maybe?) that really like his personality/attitude. I think they are willing to brush aside his statements because they are caught up in Trumpmania.
(And those that just want Trump cause they want the whole system to burn down, fuck you).
While I won't shed any tears for his having his phone number revealed (since he's done it to others), what the hell makes them think revealing his Social Security Number is a good idea? Stop making him a victim so that his supporters will rally round him.
(Waiting to hear Trump blame Sanders for this in 3.. 2... 1...)
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
While I won't shed any tears for his having his phone number revealed (since he's done it to others), what the hell makes them think revealing his Social Security Number is a good idea? Stop making him a victim so that his supporters will rally round him.
(Waiting to hear Trump blame Sanders for this in 3.. 2... 1...)
Mmmmmm yea, old data. No longer accurate.
Last edited by Rip on Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
All of it is protectionist nonsense. If we impose barriers to trade, our trading partners will do the same. While we may gain some jobs by avoiding import competition, we will lose export-sector jobs (which tend to pay about 16% more than import-competing jobs, on average). Trump is playing on workers fears and feeding into the notion that specialization and free, voluntary exchange - which we all do on a daily basis to our individual and, thus, collective betterment - is somehow contrary to our best interests.
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
He also said today that Valeant was was a wounded tiger and that wounded tigers can't hunt so the eat people (??). I love how you throw out endorsements like a Pete Rose signed baseball and Cramer's ramblings as though they mean something.
And FWIW, trade deals and "offshoring" are issues of days passed. When an algorithm or a robot can do the work of 15 men, it doesn't matter if those men are in Sacramento or Pune or Mexico City.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
All of it is protectionist nonsense. If we impose barriers to trade, our trading partners will do the same. While we may gain some jobs by avoiding import competition, we will lose export-sector jobs (which tend to pay about 16% more than import-competing jobs, on average). Trump is playing on workers fears and feeding into the notion that specialization and free, voluntary exchange - which we all do on a daily basis to our individual and, thus, collective betterment - is somehow contrary to our best interests.
Don't be naive. There are always barriers on trade and the deals negotiate what they are. Bad negotiating means you always get the short end of the stick. They have as much to lose as we do if not more. That is leverage. Failing to use leverage is a fundamental error in bad deal making.
The deals they have made are bad for the workers in order to be not so bad for the bankers and large corps using mostly foreign labor. Not by accident.
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
OTOH, yesterday Cramer ripped Trump for his stance on Apple, (apple making biggest building in US and will move elsewhere if forced to manufacture here). Carrier,(Great move by Carrier he said, Cramer also does biz in Mexico), and Pfizer (way to late to complain). and some other company(I forget). Cramer was pleading with his listeners to look deeper into Trumps empty takes on Trade.
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
All of it is protectionist nonsense. If we impose barriers to trade, our trading partners will do the same. While we may gain some jobs by avoiding import competition, we will lose export-sector jobs (which tend to pay about 16% more than import-competing jobs, on average). Trump is playing on workers fears and feeding into the notion that specialization and free, voluntary exchange - which we all do on a daily basis to our individual and, thus, collective betterment - is somehow contrary to our best interests.
Don't be naive. There are always barriers on trade and the deals negotiate what they are. Bad negotiating means you always get the short end of the stick. They have as much to lose as we do if not more. That is leverage. Failing to use leverage is a fundamental error in bad deal making.
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
All of it is protectionist nonsense. If we impose barriers to trade, our trading partners will do the same. While we may gain some jobs by avoiding import competition, we will lose export-sector jobs (which tend to pay about 16% more than import-competing jobs, on average). Trump is playing on workers fears and feeding into the notion that specialization and free, voluntary exchange - which we all do on a daily basis to our individual and, thus, collective betterment - is somehow contrary to our best interests.
Don't be naive. There are always barriers on trade and the deals negotiate what they are. Bad negotiating means you always get the short end of the stick. They have as much to lose as we do if not more. That is leverage. Failing to use leverage is a fundamental error in bad deal making.
The deals they have made are bad for the workers in order to be not so bad for the bankers and large corps using mostly foreign labor. Not by accident.
Whether or not your agree with Donald Trump's overall message, his view on U.S. trade makes sense, said CNBC's Jim Cramer.
"I'm with Trump on this. Look, we lose on every trade deal. I ask all these people from either party: name me one trade deal we have had a surplus on in the last decade. They can't name any," Cramer said on "Squawk Box" on Thursday. "I always find it amusing to think people don't seem to mind that we lose in these deals because we're able to export a lot of premium products that are not made necessarily by people in our workforce."
Cramer said the only person to discuss the trade deficit before the election was Trump.
OTOH, yesterday Cramer ripped Trump for his stance on Apple, (apple making biggest building in US and will move elsewhere if forced to manufacture here). Carrier,(Great move by Carrier he said, Cramer also does biz in Mexico), and Pfizer (way to late to complain). and some other company(I forget). Cramer was pleading with his listeners to look deeper into Trumps empty takes on Trade.
Exactly. He isn't a Trump shill and I wasn't implying he was. Trump has some good stances and some ignorant ones. I was just highlighting the former. I expect the latter to get walked back once he secures the nomination and has to seek advisors for a more nuanced and detailed policy.
Euro thinktank considers a Trump presidency as having the same risk of destroying humanity as terrorism.
BBC.com wrote:
Donald Trump winning the US presidency is considered one of the top 10 risks facing the world, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit...
"Thus far Mr Trump has given very few details of his policies - and these tend to be prone to constant revision," the EIU said in its global risk assessment, which looks at impact and probability.
The EIU ranking uses a scale of one to 25, with Mr Trump garnering a rating of 12, the same level of risk as "the rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilising the global economy".
Jesus said, "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body."[Matt 10:28] God can totally destroy us.
Jesus also said, "For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”[John 6:40] Eternal life is conditional.
His disciple John wrote, "Whoever has the Son has eternal life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have eternal life. [1 John 5:12] Eternal life is optional.
Dave Allen wrote:Euro thinktank considers a Trump presidency as having the same risk of destroying humanity as terrorism.
BBC.com wrote:
Donald Trump winning the US presidency is considered one of the top 10 risks facing the world, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit...
"Thus far Mr Trump has given very few details of his policies - and these tend to be prone to constant revision," the EIU said in its global risk assessment, which looks at impact and probability.
The EIU ranking uses a scale of one to 25, with Mr Trump garnering a rating of 12, the same level of risk as "the rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilising the global economy".
Dave Allen wrote:Euro thinktank considers a Trump presidency as having the same risk of destroying humanity as terrorism.
BBC.com wrote:
Donald Trump winning the US presidency is considered one of the top 10 risks facing the world, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit...
"Thus far Mr Trump has given very few details of his policies - and these tend to be prone to constant revision," the EIU said in its global risk assessment, which looks at impact and probability.
The EIU ranking uses a scale of one to 25, with Mr Trump garnering a rating of 12, the same level of risk as "the rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilising the global economy".
Jesus said, "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body."[Matt 10:28] God can totally destroy us.
Jesus also said, "For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”[John 6:40] Eternal life is conditional.
His disciple John wrote, "Whoever has the Son has eternal life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have eternal life. [1 John 5:12] Eternal life is optional.
What they discovered, among other things, was a lot of support for Donald Trump, the GOP front-runner. For months, this enthusiastic backing of the obnoxious billionaire had generally baffled the chattering class — not to mention the GOP and Democratic establishment. But to Working America canvassers, it made plenty of sense.
“We hear the same refrains all the time,” said Karen Nussbaum, executive director of Working America, which has high membership in the Rust Belt. “That people are fed up and they’re hurting. That their families have not recovered from the recession. That every family is harboring someone still not back at work. That someone is paying rent for their brother-in-law.”
“And then a guy comes on the stage,” Nussbaum explained, “and says, ‘I’m your guy who will blow the whole thing up.’”
Trump’s pyromaniac approach to politics has earned him strong support from white, working-class voters and brought him to the cusp of winning the GOP nomination. It is an ascent that has shaken Republicans, who view the businessman as a fraud bound to splinter the party, and it’s leading Democrats and their allies to do what they do best: fret and panic.
Trump, the worry goes, is making precisely the right appeals at precisely the right time to fundamentally realign the Rust Belt working class electorate’s traditional political allegiances.
“And then a guy comes on the stage,” Nussbaum explained, “and says, ‘I’m your guy who will blow the whole thing up.’”
Unless that guy is also planning to pay their rent, that still goes back to the dumbest argument ever. Never underestimate the idiocy of the masses, I guess?
Donald Trump was able to deduct $39.1 million from his 2005 federal income taxes by pledging not to build houses on a New Jersey golf course he owns, according to public records.
They're conservation easements which permanently restrict building and commit to using the land only as "open space." Intended for forest and wetlands, but also farmland. Golf courses are at the edge but not over the line.
But the IRS HATES the tax deduction and litigates if there's even the smallest misstep. No wonder Trump gets audited every year.
"A lie can run round the world before the truth has got its boots on." -Terry Pratchett, The Truth "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to those who think they've found it." -Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
