The Path Forward

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 2118
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: The Path Forward

Post by Doctor Steuss »

canpakes wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 5:43 pm
We can give Elon credit for being a quick study ...

<snip pic>
Remember though, socialism is bad. Except when it flows in the direction of people like Trump and Musk.

If it helps a kid have something to eat at school though... *gasp*

Privatize the profits, and socialize the risk. Forever, and ever, amen.

ETA:
What do you suppose the odds are, that in reviewing efficiency, that Musk will say "hey that $1.6 billion in tax credits my single company got last year alone wasn't very efficient. It's also socialism, which is bad, mm'kay"?
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8268
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Path Forward

Post by canpakes »

Doctor Steuss wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 6:05 pm
What do you suppose the odds are, that in reviewing efficiency, that Musk will say "hey that $1.6 billion in tax credits my single company got last year alone wasn't very efficient. It's also socialism, which is bad, mm'kay"?

Image
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 2118
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: The Path Forward

Post by Doctor Steuss »

Another reason, as I have tried to express on the board for many months now, is the constant bullying and the complete lack tolerance for any alternate view.
The bullying from random left-wing people can be pretty bad. What's really "fun" (i.e. not fun at all) is when you're with a group of virtue-signaling left-wing people, and they fall into a cycle of trying to out left-wing each other. A perpetual game of "I'm more intolerant of intolerance than you." Nowhere near as fun as just hanging out with regular Democrats where you'll have 5 opinions being expressed for every 2 people present.

I have a hard time believing people voted for Trump because they have an aversion to bullying though. Why would people who are being peppered with bullying shrapnel go straight to the use of a bullying nuclear arsenal that predates, and is a reactive reason for some of the shrapnel? I know we're all hypocrites to an extent (I'm certainly no exception), but that seems pretty far out there to me. I mean, one doesn't even need to go to right-wing talking heads and politicians for bullying examples and an intolerance for alternative views, but only to the President-elect.
Trump's Twitter Insults from 2015-2021.
List of names Trump has called people.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8268
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Path Forward

Post by canpakes »

Doctor Steuss wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 6:51 pm
I have a hard time believing people voted for Trump because they have an aversion to bullying though.

Image
User avatar
Hound of Heaven
Priest
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2023 5:13 pm

Re: The Path Forward

Post by Hound of Heaven »

Marcus wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 6:04 pm
ceeboo wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 5:07 pm
...Another reason, as I have tried to express on the board for many months now, is the constant bullying and the complete lack tolerance for any alternate view...
Just like how those flat-earthers are bullied. It's so mean to be so intolerant of such nonsense!! On the other hand, someone who constantly interprets being disagreed with as being bullied just sounds like they want their intolerance to be tolerated. :roll:
Hound of Heaven wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 12:56 pm
In very simple terms, disruptive innovation takes place when a company, service, or product outperforms or is more affordable than current options, after going through changes. It seems quite clear that Trump is pursuing a form of Disruptive innovation strategy to enhance government efficiency, as evidenced by his latest cabinet selections. He isn't depending on experienced government employees who have a deeper understanding of the system than he does. He is appointing loyalists who will enable him to exert considerable influence across all government departments.

His objective is to examine every nook and cranny of the government, reduce the workforce by half, optimize the operations of each branch, and enhance overall productivity...
That's such an over-reach. Trump doesn't even have any of those words in his vocabulary, let alone the ability to formulate a plan around those concepts.
I genuinely believed Kamala would emerge victorious. I certainly didn't anticipate that the election would result in a decisive victory for Trump. However, my political disagreement with him does not imply that he is an idiot, as many people tend to depict. By continuing to portray him in this manner, we are allowing him to succeed. It’s hard for me to grasp that many Democrats fail to see that portraying Trump as foolish only enhances his ability to counter their arguments. Our primary objective should be to serve the American people rather than solely focusing on stopping Donald Trump.

If the goal is to engage in political discourse, we ought to aim to persuade others that Trump is among the most astute business figures in history, establishing a standard so elevated that it becomes unattainable for him. However, it seems we have established such a low standard for Trump that, in the perception of most Americans, he is incapable of making any mistakes at this point. Do you understand that?

I am truly astonished that the Democrat strategists thought lowering the bar for Trump would yield positive results for us! Trump desires that Democrats depict him as foolish. He desires for the Democrats to place him at the forefront of their focus. He seeks free air time from Democrats that portrays him in a negative light. It's an elaborate psychological game that he's mastering! We label him as foolish, and from the perspective of the American electorate, he continues to demonstrate that the Democrats are mistaken, as the expectations have been significantly diminished. It's becoming somewhat unsettling how frequently Democrats continue to discuss Trump. Trump and his flamboyant style are designed to capture as much airtime as mainstream media will permit.

It’s hard to recall the last occasion I tuned into liberal cable news without Trump being the focal point of discussion. We cannot persuade American voters that our agenda deserves their support if our focus remains solely on discrediting Trump. He’s not foolish. Calling him that may feel relieving, but it doesn't reflect the truth. We need to reflect the truth.
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 2118
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: The Path Forward

Post by Doctor Steuss »

I think it's important to distinguish between things like astuteness and genius, and someone having a lack of ethics.

Anyone who lacks ethics can succeed to an extent. Perhaps there's a level of intellect needed to avoid going too far into the realm of unethical behavior to where one ends up in jail (like keeping to the areas of fraud that keep things in the realm of tort, or white collar slaps on the wrist, like stealing from charities, or defrauding students, or falsifying business documents, etc.). Doing what most people won't do because their moral compass makes such actions unfathomable doesn't somehow make someone a genius. It's the exact opposite, and rewarding and elevating people who engage in unethical behavior unravels the social fabric.

If I hire several hundred people to do a job for me, and then I refuse to pay them, causing many of them to become bankrupt, and others to settle to receiving sums of money that are vastly lower than what I agreed to pay them, that isn't genius. A moron could do that, as long as they had no scruples. That's not genius, it's scumbaggery. If I paid everyone the agreed upon price, and went on to have a successful business endeavor, that's astute and intelligent business acumen. If I lie, and cheat, and steal, and still fail over and over again in the process of lying and cheating and stealing, and end up building a business empire that's less valuable than had I just parked my initial money in a blue chips mutual fund... that isn't exactly the sign of some kind of business savvy.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8268
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Path Forward

Post by canpakes »

Hound of Heaven wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 9:29 pm
It’s hard to recall the last occasion I tuned into liberal cable news without Trump being the focal point of discussion. We cannot persuade American voters that our agenda deserves their support if our focus remains solely on discrediting Trump. He’s not foolish.
These are three different and separate things.

From a casual observation of right-wing media, it’s easily seen that the first two work with great success when deployed by Republicans.

The third runs contrary to complaints about some folks calling Trump ‘fascist’ or pointing out that he displays fascist tendencies (in their opinion).

Calling him that may feel relieving, but it doesn't reflect the truth. We need to reflect the truth.
Reflecting on the truth about Trump is what MAGA voters call, ‘TDS’.
Marcus
God
Posts: 6538
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The Path Forward

Post by Marcus »

Hound of Heaven wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 9:29 pm
Marcus wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 6:04 pm

Just like how those flat-earthers are bullied. It's so mean to be so intolerant of such nonsense!! On the other hand, someone who constantly interprets being disagreed with as being bullied just sounds like they want their intolerance to be tolerated. :roll:

That's such an over-reach. Trump doesn't even have any of those words in his vocabulary, let alone the ability to formulate a plan around those concepts.
...However, my political disagreement with him does not imply that he is an idiot, as many people tend to depict. By continuing to portray him in this manner, we are allowing him to succeed...
No, I disagree.
It’s hard for me to grasp that many Democrats fail to see that portraying Trump as foolish only enhances his ability to counter their arguments.
No, it doesn't. He has exhibited no ability to learn from any encounters.
If the goal is to engage in political discourse, we ought to aim to persuade others that Trump is among the most astute business figures in history, establishing a standard so elevated that it becomes unattainable for him. However, it seems we have established such a low standard for Trump that, in the perception of most Americans, he is incapable of making any mistakes at this point. Do you understand that?
No, not at all. You are suggesting lies and dishonest manipulation.
It's an elaborate psychological game that he's mastering!
He's an empty person with a fourth grade vocabulary who is functioning on brute instinct. He hasn't mastered anything.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8268
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Path Forward

Post by canpakes »

Doctor Steuss wrote:
Thu Nov 14, 2024 9:44 pm
I think it's important to distinguish between things like astuteness and genius, and someone having a lack of ethics.

Anyone who lacks ethics can succeed to an extent. Perhaps there's a level of intellect needed to avoid going too far into the realm of unethical behavior to where one ends up in jail (like keeping to the areas of fraud that keep things in the realm of tort, or white collar slaps on the wrist, like stealing from charities, or defrauding students, or falsifying business documents, etc.). Doing what most people won't do because their moral compass makes such actions unfathomable doesn't somehow make someone a genius. It's the exact opposite, and rewarding and elevating people who engage in unethical behavior unravels the social fabric.

If I hire several hundred people to do a job for me, and then I refuse to pay them, causing many of them to become bankrupt, and others to settle to receiving sums of money that are vastly lower than what I agreed to pay them, that isn't genius. A moron could do that, as long as they had no scruples. That's not genius, it's scumbaggery. If I paid everyone the agreed upon price, and went on to have a successful business endeavor, that's astute and intelligent business acumen. If I lie, and cheat, and steal, and still fail over and over again in the process of lying and cheating and stealing, and end up building a business empire that's less valuable than had I just parked my initial money in a blue chips mutual fund... that isn't exactly the sign of some kind of business savvy.

Spot on.

astute:
adjective
having or showing an ability to accurately assess situations or people and turn this to one's advantage.
"an astute businessman"

I don’t think that there are too many folks who would deny that Trump can be astute. But, the word carries no determination of moral or ethical behavior. To wit, a Mafia don is astute. A con man is astute. Joseph Goebbels was astute.

Additionally, astute and foolish are not mutually exclusive. Application of either is entirely situation-dependent.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8268
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: The Path Forward

Post by canpakes »

.
John Fetterman weighs in on some things:
Exit polls show men aged 18 to 29 voted for Trump. From going to your campaign events in 2022, I know you have a lot of supporters who are young men. You went on Joe Rogan’s podcast this year. What have you learned about how to appeal to these voters?

I think this election was a serious flex for bros. And you know, it was strange that Democrats are like, “Oh, childless cat ladies. How dare you.” Okay, that is weird. I don't know why JD Vance would say that — you can be pro-family without insulting people that choose not to have kids or are unable to have kids. But it's the same thing. I mean, is the term “bros” positive? And the media use that so liberally, pejoratively. Like, well, they're unsophisticated, they're shallow, or they're crass. And we dismiss them.

I don't understand why you wouldn't go on Rogan. I've always been a long-term fan of his. I don't agree with him on everything. But don’t we all have the responsibility to challenge our views and to be a part of those conversations with people?

Forty-two million people witnessed the Trump interview [with Rogan]. The power that the platform that he created — to ignore that — I can't imagine why anyone would do that.

I show up on Fox News, and they've played it straight. I was even on Newsmax and they played it straight. I'll have a conversation with anybody if we play it straight.


One of the things that struck me was that none of the Harris abortion ads seemed to be aimed toward younger men. I would assume that a Barstool Sports guy would not want a national abortion ban. What did you make of that?

I'm straight up, 100 percent Roe, Roe, Roe. It should have never changed. It should stand. But now it's created a situation where states are able to select [abortion policies]. And I thought the GOP did as effective as they possibly could to kind of frame that. It's like, “Well, hey, where it exists, we're no problem with that.”
It’s kind of an equilibrium where we have pro- states and we have restricted states. I think enough Americans thought that's kind of where we are on those things.

You might have some lunatics that would maybe argue for [a national abortion ban]. But I think anyone on the Republican side knows that “we've kind of won” in that sense.


Are there any issues that you can work with Trump on?

Sure. Protecting the American steel industry. Being very unapologetically pro-Israel. Being very, very muscular against China.


You’re a big LGBTQ ally. Some Democrats have said in the wake of this election that the party should rethink its position on trans issues.

Picking on trans or gay kids is just un-American. And if you think that makes you tough or more of a man, then that’s just pathetic. My children have friends that are members of that community, and I know that they are sweet kids. And their lives are difficult enough.

I promise you, the kids that I know that are in those communities, that's not our problem in our nation right now and they deserve our support. It's an intensely personal kind of situation and they really need understanding. It's not a conversation that needs to be dropped into a meat grinder, because ultimately, the people that really are going to pay the terrible price are for these young kids.


We’ve seen some people say that children shouldn't be given gender-affirming care like hormones and surgeries. Do you have a position on that?

This is a deeply personal kind of conversation between doctors and between their parents and the child themselves. But what I'm saying, though, turning it into like, where we're weaponizing that — that's part of what’s gross in our American politics right now. It punishes the people that have these kinds of internal conflicts, or they happen to feel that way and how they identify. It's not appropriate to mock them or to say those kinds of things.
Post Reply