Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

[paperburn1]

Does anybody have the original of this broadcast? I have a feeling something was lost in translation.
Edit:
Just saw the link,haven't had my coffee yet.
To my untrained eye this was not a endorsement of trump or even praise.
I seemed to me he was just saying its not my problem what happens in Americas election, trump is your political problem. If he wants to play nice with the Russians that is his business. The Russians are masters of Minnesota nice when dealing with other peoples politics( at least in the press) .

Example of Minnesota nice.
You look great after losing all that weight, you should have done that years ago.

[mvanwink5]

Neocons would like nothing better than to bring back the cold war, and judging by their rhetoric would like to see the nuclear war threat second hand 10 seconds before midnight. Like we need to go to war with Russia, too.

[williatw]

Prediction: Short of a Romney choke, at this point the only question is how cheap will Trump get the White House 8 year lease for?

So far, he is $30 million under budget and no PAC money.
Criticize his delivery, but it seems to be effective.

It's called negotiate like you have a pair:


Trump: Canada Should Give US 25 Percent of Keystone Profits

"But I want a piece of the deal," he said. "When I say I want a piece, I'm now representing our country the way I would represent myself."

GOP front-runner Donald Trump gave an example Thursday of how he would act as president as he does as CEO of his multibillion-dollar company.

Asked about his support for the Keystone XL pipeline that President Barack Obama recently axed, Trump said not only would he support it, he would demand a quarter of the profits for the United States.

Thursday on Fox News Channel's "Special Report," Bret Baier told Trump some critics said that sounded a bit like Venezuela, where the socialist government owns 60 percent of foreign companies.

"No, I think it sounds smart," Trump said.

While the pipeline will create thousands of jobs, it also requires use of American land, which will be taken by eminent domain, he said.

"But you're selling Canadian product essentially," Trump said. "Now, that's not so helpful to us. But they have to get through our land to go to the certain area where it's best for them."
That's all fine, he said, especially as it helps the United States become less dependent on Middle East oil.

"But I want a piece of the deal," he said. "When I say I want a piece, I'm now representing our country the way I would represent myself."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/donald ... id/701901/

[palladin9479]

Recent events have had me thinking about the Donald. I really like that he is completely fearless in speaking his mind. Dig into what he says (not what is reported by the leftist media) and he is usually correct in a profound way. But it disturbs me how artless he is saying it. He really needs to take a breath and think about what he's saying, and how it can and will be twisted. We need someone in the White House who is not just fearless but who can actually communicate.

I know this is an old reply but I think I need to point out that Trump is doing this on purpose. He's not being careless with his words, he's choosing them carefully for maximum effect on target. Political correctness and through control has gotta so bad that it's created an undertone of resentment among Americans who feel they can't express themselves without facing severe consequences. We have ideas and feelings, but they aren't the publicly accepted narrative and thus can get us into trouble if spoken in the wrong place at the wrong time. People like Trump are masters of strategy and detecting opportunities that are missed by mainstream folks. Trump see's this opportunity, to attract and endear himself to Americans tired of the political correctness being shoved down their throats, and so he is deliberately speaking things that are big, bold and piss those who are running the social narrative off. Sans some huge ass scandal, which I doubt he is going to give them, Trump will be the next Republican candidate and will likely be the next President.

What can we expect? Lots of fireworks for sure, his election by itself would serve as a demonstration that the current political power brokers, whom Trump was a member of, can no longer control the political system by restricting who is electable. It would shatter their support and you can expect a surge of fresh young candidates who aren't career politicians. We can also expect to see congress suddenly get very good at making reasonable legislation. Long term I don't think Trump would make a great President, but we haven't had one of those for awhile now. Instead I think he would make a good catalyst for changing the old guard who currently have all the power and carefully control it via selection of options.

[williatw]

Scott Adams' Blog

How to Spot a Wizard


Over the past few weeks I have presented to you an alternative filter for understanding your world. I make no claim that this filter is a true version of reality, if such a thing even exits. I offer this filter for entertainment only. The fun is seeing how well it fits the data and predicts the future.

According to my Moist Robot Hypothesis (that we are programmable meat) and paired with the Master Wizard view of the world, one can imagine a world in which all the big changes in society are engineered by a handful of living wizards at any given time. The wizards, in this context, have learned the rules of hypnosis and persuasion. This knowledge gives them access to the admin passwords for human beings. And they use it.

Today I will tell you how to spot a wizard, if such people actually exist. Look for these clues:

1. The wizard succeeds in a high-profile field without the benefit of as much talent as you would expect should be necessary. (This is the biggest tell.)

2. People seem to have an irrational hate for the wizard that is not entirely explained by the wizard’s actions. Regular readers already know these unusual reactions are signs of cognitive dissonance. Wizards induce cognitive dissonance often, without trying.

3. Look for an inflated ego combined with an unusually strong ability to withstand withering criticism. (Wizards get a lot of criticism.) The common view is that wizards are egomaniacs. In reality, the wizard works hard to remain ego-free, and hence can handle criticism well.

4. Wizards are often more ambitious, and often more aggressive, than you think is normal.

5. One or more major PR disasters define the wizard’s history.

6. The wizard has a gift for simplification.

7. Observers detect a reality distortion field.

8. Wizards have an ability to succeed where other fail by changing the entire game as opposed to winning at the existing one.

9. Wizards use words to create images and emotions in people’s minds.

10. Wizards seek public attention.

The wizard filter on the world isn’t necessarily true in some objective sense. The fun is seeing if the data and predictions fit the filter.

For example, I see the early history of America as a handful of wizards manipulating world events. And I believe they were aware of their powers.


And I see Trump as a modern wizard who is baffling the media because he is playing three-dimensional chess on their two-dimensional chess board. Trump is talking directly to people’s subconscious. Everything else he says is just a carrier signal.

Someone asked me about Kanye West and his hilarious statement that he would someday run for president.

Ridiculous, right?

Except that Kanye is a wizard.

I spotted him several years ago, and blogged about his genius then. He’s the real deal. And he absolutely has the tools to become president if he makes it a priority.

Consider the reaction you are having right now to the idea that Kanye West could be president. Your reaction (plus the fact that he is a legitimate genius) is what tells you he can do it. At least according to my filter.

Oh, and he’s a musical superstar who admits he can’t sing well. How did that happen, you ask?


Scott

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1284749253 ... t-a-wizard

[williatw]

I have said this before and I have seen no reason to change my view: Trump is not a Conservative as paleo conservatives understand the word, and he has no real conservative theories: he is a pragmatic populist in the tradition of Andrew Jackson or Herbert Hoover. He has no experience in governing, but he does have considerable experience in management including management of what would have been considered enormous projects not all that long ago. Reagan learned from governing California; Trump will not have that experience if he becomes President. He will discuss goals with potential managers and engineers, form some notion of the possibilities of success and the costs of failure, and choose those projects which he thinks will make us look great, get employment growing, etc. He goes not try to look statesmanlike, but he can assume enough gravitas for the occasion when it arises. He will not be unintentionally rude. He knows he must enlist the services of people who don’t much like him; he has done that well in the past.

If you went by credentials, Jeb Bush is the most qualified; but you get his relatives and their friends with him, and that means the Republican Establishment and thus more of the same; and the country is sick of them. Both Democrats and Republicans have grown weary of what we have and want something different and new. No one asked Barrack the Magic Negro for blueprints of Hope and Change, and he hadn’t even managed the construction of a big building.

The US establishment went to war in 1940, and suddenly produced tanks, rifles, airplanes, trucks, bandages, ammunition, cargo ships and battleships; when the American people rose up they drowned Germany and Japan in war materiel. The German war machine used animal drawn transport to supply much of the Wehrmacht; The United States turned the last cavalry regiments into mechanized units and the Red Ball Express that supplied Patton. I used mules to plow cotton fields during World War II; but our soldiers did not depend on mules for ammunition. If all our plants had been in Frankfurt instead of Detroit, the outcome might have been different.

That, I believe, is how Trump sees things.

https://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosman ... r-matters/

[choff]

Regarding the Keystone Pipeline, it was cancelled before Obama put a stop to it, falling oil prices made it no longer viable. However, the company that was originally pushing Keystone is suing the Obama Administration under NAFTA rules for restricting free trade, to the tune of $15 Billion.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/t ... -1.3392446

Here's my outsiders take on the U.S. Presidential selection process so far.

http://mashable.com/2016/02/09/new-hams ... MKurA2ssqX

[williatw]

No Deference Is Called For on Judicial Nominees

There will be no reason for the Senate to vote on Obama’s nomination to replace Justice Scalia.

The justices favored by the conservative legal community that advises Republicans are those committed to faithful adherence to constitutional limits on the judiciary. We may be pro-life, but (by and large) we are not looking for a justice to invent a constitutional prohibition on abortion; we are looking for a justice who says the Constitution does not speak to abortion — it leaves the issue to be resolved by the people, through their representatives. We are looking for justices who respect the Constitution as a framework that promotes popular self-determination with certain well-known minority-rights exceptions, and who do not see litigation as an opportunity to impose a political agenda. Yes, we are looking to be protected from being dictated to by the Left under the guise of a “living Constitution”; but we are not asking to dictate our competing policy preferences — just to have a shot at persuading our fellow citizens of their merit through the democratic process.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... ent-senate

[williatw]

PEGGY NOONAN: Donald Trump and the Rise of the Unprotected:

There are the protected and the unprotected. The protected make public policy. The unprotected live in it. The unprotected are starting to push back, powerfully.

The protected are the accomplished, the secure, the successful—those who have power or access to it. They are protected from much of the roughness of the world. More to the point, they are protected from the world they have created. Again, they make public policy and have for some time.

I want to call them the elite to load the rhetorical dice, but let’s stick with the protected.

They are figures in government, politics and media. They live in nice neighborhoods, safe ones. Their families function, their kids go to good schools, they’ve got some money. All of these things tend to isolate them, or provide buffers. Some of them—in Washington it is important officials in the executive branch or on the Hill; in Brussels, significant figures in the European Union—literally have their own security details.

Because they are protected they feel they can do pretty much anything, impose any reality. They’re insulated from many of the effects of their own decisions.

One issue obviously roiling the U.S. and Western Europe is immigration. It is the issue of the moment, a real and concrete one but also a symbolic one: It stands for all the distance between governments and their citizens.

It is of course the issue that made Donald Trump.

Britain will probably leave the European Union over it. In truth immigration is one front in that battle, but it is the most salient because of the European refugee crisis and the failure of the protected class to address it realistically and in a way that offers safety to the unprotected.

If you are an unprotected American—one with limited resources and negligible access to power—you have absorbed some lessons from the past 20 years’ experience of illegal immigration. You know the Democrats won’t protect you and the Republicans won’t help you. Both parties refused to control the border. The Republicans were afraid of being called illiberal, racist, of losing a demographic for a generation. The Democrats wanted to keep the issue alive to use it as a wedge against the Republicans and to establish themselves as owners of the Hispanic vote.

Many Americans suffered from illegal immigration—its impact on labor markets, financial costs, crime, the sense that the rule of law was collapsing. But the protected did fine—more workers at lower wages. No effect of illegal immigration was likely to hurt them personally.

It was good for the protected. But the unprotected watched and saw. They realized the protected were not looking out for them, and they inferred that they were not looking out for the country, either.

The unprotected came to think they owed the establishment—another word for the protected—nothing, no particular loyalty, no old allegiance.

Mr. Trump came from that. . . . You see the dynamic in many spheres. In Hollywood, as we still call it, where they make our rough culture, they are careful to protect their own children from its ill effects. In places with failing schools, they choose not to help them through the school liberation movement—charter schools, choice, etc.—because they fear to go up against the most reactionary professional group in America, the teachers unions. They let the public schools flounder. But their children go to the best private schools.

This is a terrible feature of our age—that we are governed by protected people who don’t seem to care that much about their unprotected fellow citizens.

As I keep saying, we have the worst political class in American history. And people have noticed. There’s no particular reason why the outcome must be good. Bismarck said that God looks after fools, drunkards, and the United States of America, but as Jerry Pournelle noted: “Of course we were a much more devout nation” when Bismarck made that observation

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/227774/

[Diogenes]

Not a big Donald Trump fan. I think he will do some things right, but I think most of the time, he will make deals with the other side.


We don't need a compromiser, we need a Conan the Destroyer. Both parties are way too fat and happy living off the power and influence created from the government money they disburse.


We don't need someone who will rock the boat, we need someone who will blow the D@Mned thing up with a torpedo.


Our financial system is unsustainable. It is literally running on smoke and mirrors right now. It may not even be possible to repair it at this point.


If the system crashes, I predict millions of people will die just in our nation alone. We are not the hardy God-fearing people of the 1930s, we are now a bunch of sissified, self absorbed, adolescent minded people who throw hissy fits when things don't go our way. The riders of the Apocalypse will laugh at what we have become and simply start loping off heads.

[williatw]

Not a big Donald Trump fan. I think he will do some things right, but I think most of the time, he will make deals with the other side.

Well like Abraham Lincoln said about George McClellan "we must use what tools we have"; (before he finally had to fire him). Don't have to be a big Trump fan personally; I think he is the best we seem to have at the moment.

We don't need a compromiser, we need a Conan the Destroyer. Both parties are way too fat and happy living off the power and influence created from the government money they disburse. We don't need someone who will rock the boat, we need someone who will blow the D@Mned thing up with a torpedo.

Perhaps; but a deal making "compromiser" who knows how to get what he wants is better than business as usual; provided he (Trump) really means to do the things he says (I hope).

Our financial system is unsustainable. It is literally running on smoke and mirrors right now. It may not even be possible to repair it at this point.
If the system crashes, I predict millions of people will die just in our nation alone. We are not the hardy God-fearing people of the 1930s, we are now a bunch of sissified, self absorbed, adolescent minded people who throw hissy fits when things don't go our way. The riders of the Apocalypse will laugh at what we have become and simply start loping off heads.

Maybe...but despair is a sin; I prefer to live in reasonable hope that something can at least be done to perhaps blunt the worst effects. Ultimately most of our unsustainable debt is promised government largess; something that is infinitely renegotiable. There are no armies poised to invade if we stop making reparations like Weimar Germany getting invaded by France in the 1920's; people will get whatever promised gov benefit be it SS, Medicare, retirement, etc, that the government decides to pay you. They (the gov) can "renegotiate" what they decide to pay at will. Somebody might decide that cutting off and or reducing SS/Medicare makes more sense than getting rid of say food stamps. The former option old people will grouse, complain, bitch but can't do to much about; the later the cities might go up in flames.

[JoeP]

I was reading this bunch of quotes from Linus Torvalds (famous Linux creator/kernal guru)...couldn't help but wonder if this guy related to Trump? http://www.itworld.com/article/2873200/ ... tml#slide1

Sample

Quotes: “[XML] is probably the worst format ever designed…. it really doesn't scale as a file format, and it's generally a complete disaster.” March 6, 2014

“XML is crap. Really. There are no excuses. XML is nasty to parse for humans, and it's a disaster to parse even for computers. There's just no reason for that horrible crap to exist.” March 6, 2014

[williatw]

If Trump takes the nomination and the GOP OB club sits it out, Trump still wins. Some conservatives are skeptical of him (I am one), but my guess is that most will be willing to give him a chance, seeing that he is hated by both the Democrats — particularly the mainstream media

— and the GOP establishment that has betrayed them so often. They will be joined by many blue-collar Democrats as well. Bernie’s supporters will stay home or get drunk. Hillary may spend election day behind bars, out on bail, or at least under indictment. Certainly Trump will not play nice with her, as Romney did with Obama in 2012.

He will go after her like an angry pit bull on email, Benghazi, Bill’s women and much else.
We live in interesting times.

Richard White

Austin, Texas

https://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosman ... -tsunamis/

[ScottL]

Trump instills 0 faith. How many times has he mismanaged his ventures again?
http://content.time.com/time/specials/p ... 09,00.html

I feel like the guy has filed bankruptcy more times than I've taken shits in my life. Obviously I'm exaggerating, but you get the point. I think what some of you have said is probably true in that he isn't going to compromise unless it is in his best interest, not necessarily our best interest. Ultimately he's running for the presidency regardless of winning the nomination and has stated as such. If the republican party decides to contest his nomination at the convention putting up their own candidate, this will definitely split the party resulting in an almost guaranteed Hilary win. If they back him, I think most moderate conservatives and/or establishment conservatives will throw their support towards Hilary as at least she's a known quantity. I say this because people are scared to death of change and of the unknown. It takes a great deal of unrest to get people to accept such a large change (Ex: 2007/8 recession hitting and Obama getting elected). While there is definitely some unrest (honestly there always is,) it's not enough to sway people to something drastic like voting in Trump. I'm also concerned about the extreme reactions happening at Trump's rallies and his complete indifference to these violent acts. He says he wishes it were like "old times" when you could just beat a guy, well those old times include challenging a person and Trump strikes me as an ignorant entitled child who will go crying the first time he gets bopped on the nose. Obviously the above is my opinion, not stating as fact, just my prediction and opinion.

[williatw]

Trump instills 0 faith. How many times has he mismanaged his ventures again? I feel like the guy has filed bankruptcy more times than I've taken shits in my life. Obviously I'm exaggerating, but you get the point.

Yes the bankruptcies do concern me; his defense is that he used the tools the law gave him to his best interest. And he will negotiate/use whatever tools he has with the same alacrity when he is acting in our interest (as prez). Like for instance "renegotiating" trade deals that he maintains hurt American jobs.

If the republican party decides to contest his nomination at the convention putting up their own candidate, this will definitely split the party resulting in an almost guaranteed Hilary win.

He (Trump) has made it clear that if rolls into the convention with a high plurality of the votes (but not a majority) and they try to "steal" if from him, he makes it abundantly clear he will run as an independent. In other words he will fight like a tiger for what he feels (and many of his supporters feel) he deserves; the nomination. Good, as far as I am concerned, would expect nothing less from him; when he is in something he is in to win; not get a good sport metal for being a good loser.

If they back him, I think most moderate conservatives and/or establishment conservatives will throw their support towards Hilary as at least she's a known quantity.

Assuming she is not under indictment; probably won't happen under Obama but Trump has said that if he wins his Attorney General would definitely look at indictment; the statue of limitations would not according to him be up.

I'm also concerned about the extreme reactions happening at Trump's rallies and his complete indifference to these violent acts. He says he wishes it were like "old times" when you could just beat a guy, well those old times include challenging a person and Trump strikes me as an ignorant entitled child who will go crying the first time he gets bopped on the nose. Obviously the above is my opinion, not stating as fact, just my prediction and opinion.

I am concerned as well I admit but I think those "extreme reactions" are caused by the perception that many of these "peaceful demonstrators" are organized with the express purpose of disrupting Trump's rallies any way they can; not letting the man speak doing everything they can to subvert his and his followers rights to exercise their right of peaceful assembly/speech. Never heard too much said in the media about who these demonstrators are and who is behind them; they seem somehow a bit too orchestrated to provoke a response from Trump & his followers. The media seems a bit too interested in Trump's people's response to their (the demonstrators) attempts to disrupt then delving too deeply into who they are and who (if anyone) is behind them.