Oh, you mean like when even many conservatives agree with liberals when 82 percent of Americans think wealthy people have too much power and influence in Washington, 82 percent of Americans think economic inequality is a “very big”, 96 percent of Americans—including 96 percent of Republicans—believe money in politics is to blame for the dysfunction of the U.S. political system, 80 percent of Americans think some corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes, 74 percent of registered voters—including 71 percent of Republicans—support requiring employers to offer paid parental and medical leave, 60 percent of Americans believe “it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage.”?
As for still insisting that hatred for Trump is irrational, you really just show that you are willing to ignore a lot of information that does not fit your views.
I am just pointing out that 3 million more Americans voted for Hillary than Trump. He isn’t liked by most Americans and nothing is going to make that fact go disappear.
I think you’re doing a bit of projecting here, and I think you’re obviously unfamiliar with my posting history because I’m (among) the first to fairly credit Trump when he says or does something right. For example he’s consistently right about interest rates being too high (though for corrupt reasons) and he was correct to engage North Korea without a bunch of ceremonial dick-waving (though, half marks on that, he executed poorly and didn’t follow through). He’s been decisively right on some other things. These things are difficult to recall because they’re fairly minor and easily overwhelmed by the copious stream of criminal bullshit emanating from him and his racket.
You’re really in no position to demand that I not respond to your dreck wherever I see it.
I always know I’ve won when someone resorts to lurid imaginative mind-reading. Thanks for failing, enjoy being whatever miserable thing that entails.
"I am just pointing out that 3 million more Americans voted for Hillary than Trump. He isn’t liked by most Americans and nothing is going to make that fact go disappear.’
Wait. Are you sure about that? Weren’t there millions of votes fraudulently cast during the 2016 election, all in favor of Clinton? And wasn’t there some sort of commission formed that investigated this, found and then presented the evidence of this and rampant voter fraud throughout the country? I’m certain that I heard this somewhere. Fox?
I hate to beat a dead horse but… fifteen days since I first asked anyone (generally) and Wrenching Spanners (specifically) to defend Trump’s non-stop lying. Not a peep. I can only conclude that no one is defending Trumpnoccio because he is, in fact, indefensible in this regard and any attempt to do so will be met with logic, truth and actual facts with citations. I will go my grave not understanding how people can be O.K. with his inarticulate, babbling lies and bullshit because “Look at the economy!” or “I like what he’s doing”. BTW, I’m equally puzzled by the Democrats inability to come with a candidate that isn’t a shoe-in for 2020. It was said that only Trump could beat Hillary and only Hillary could lose to Trump. We will never know about the first part of that but the second part?
The explanation is that, in Trump’s mind, he is not lying. Trump was raised in the ministry of Norman Vincent Peale. He was taught to only deal with the world as he wants it to be and the world will bend to his will. It’s the Power of Positive Thinking. It kind of works for a billionaire with dependent minions.
In the world of positive thinking there is no past and there are no objective facts, only the world as you imagine it to be. If your faith is strong enough the world will conform to your view.
Much was made of the views of Barrack Obama’s minister. Views that had nothing to do with Obama’s actions. It is odd that the ministry that defines Trump is ignored by the press and his critics.
I’m not a Trump voter myself, but I don’t see why this is hard to understand. Plenty of people are perfectly willing to tolerate (not like, but tolerate) something bad on the side if they get a main course of what they want. Patriots fans may not be thrilled about their team’s cheating, but they’d never trade in those 6 Belichick-won championships for “honor’s” sake. Patton was an SOB to many people in World War II, but all the Allies cared about was a general who could win. Steelers fans may acknowledge the refs were biased in Super Bowl XL, but they sure aren’t giving back that championship. Etc. etc.
As long as the benefits of whatever Trump is doing (in the eyes of his voters) outweigh his inarticulate babbling lies, they’ll happily turn a deaf ear to the latter.
I think it’s a mistake that each state gets two extra electoral votes for its “Senators”; however Trump would have won the electoral college without this. A big reason the popular vote was circumvented in 2016 is that Clinton won California by almost 4,300,000 votes but 4,299,000 of these votes were just “wasted” surplus. Trump won Michigan by only (almost) 11,000 votes and only 10,999 of these were “wasted” surplus.
However it is true that the extra 2 ev’s per state gave Bush victory over Gore in 2000. Without those evs the 2004 election would have been much closer, but Kerry still would have lost. (I think you have to go back to 1916 for another election where the extra 2 evs made a difference. The incumbent Woodrow Wilson would have lost in a squeaker, if the states voted the same way!)
I’m afraid it is you who is desperately “in a bubble.” Where do you get your news from, BTW?
Not only aren’t ALL Democrats focused on “transgender bathroom stuff”, VERY few of them even care about this issue. It is right-wing liars like Sean Hannity or Alex Jones who focus on such stuff, hoping to confuse and anger Common People who don’t access competent news sources. I’m afraid we see yet more evidence that they succeed.
Well, according to this poll, a full 90.51% of responders said they’re definitely not voting for Trump, so I’m thinking maybe this isn’t the best place on the internet to ask this sort of question. A vast majority of answers are going to come from extremely hostile Trump opponents, thereby suppressing any honest discussion, so I don’t see the point. Perhaps prefacing it with “Trump supporters ONLY” might help, but I doubt it.
I do understand that sort of thinking when it comes to things like football teams. In other words, things that don’t really matter. As far as your Patton example goes - did he lack credibility or was he just a prick? When it comes to national leadership, don’t Trumpers ever take pause and think “Well, if he is lying about THAT what else might he be lying about? My economic future, maybe?” or “My health?”. The inability to think critically is a hallmark of true Trumpers.
My oldest son is a die hard Trump supporter. His views and logic are cultural - Louisiana good old boy. He understands why I believe as I do, but my well meaning liberalism is just an artifact of another time. He thinks critically in a different frame of reference from mine. He has insight into the vast conspiracies of the deep state. Trump is the instrument of needed change. Trump will restore the Constitution. My generation, and it’s values, will soon be gone.
Y’know I used to not give this much importance but looking it over with the passing of time, there may be something to that.
He knows what he’s saying is contrary to reality, but to him it’s not “lying”, it’s declaring what *should *be. Name It and Claim It, the more recent Prosperity Gospel calls it.
Probably because NVP is seen as an artifact of another time and a lot of the mainstream see nothing wrong or dangerous with his preaching (unlike a scary black-church firebrand) – and also because they do not want to be countered with both-sidesism.
Right. The Democrats never “turned” on the common folk. But they did decide that people other than their old popular base ALSO deserved to be taken care of, and that’s where things began going downhill.
Again, to them he is not lying. To them, he’s saying how things should be. And yes, to them is IS something at the level of winning a football championship. Don’t underestimate the effect that to a lot of that hardcore “base”, they already see that their chances at a good economic future or the security of their health are already done deals. What counts now is affirmation that the way they feel and the values they hold matter and are not wrong or deserving of eradication. As I said that elsewhere, many of them hear us liberals make our points and what they hear is “the path for your children’s future is for them to grow up to be, act, and talk like US, NOT like you”. To them, having their children foreswear their ways is a fate worse than economic ruin or ill health. They’ll happily chose a prick who prevents that.
Interesting… so, pretty much the same POV we get from progressives, that the establishment position is doomed to pass away, displaced by the new? With the notable variant of a higher degree of personalization.
If “good old boy” and “insight into the vast conspiracies of the deep state” mean what I think you mean, then it sounds like logic based off of cherry picked and made up “facts” in a culture that actively rejects education, science, or the concept of caring how their actions may impact other people.
It’s like Trump supporters explaining Trump constantly advocating hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19. Their argument is “if you are dying, isn’t trying anything better than nothing at all?” Sure, but that doesn’t mean it WORKS. Maybe some anecdotal evidence exists that some people treated with hydroxychloroquine got better. But maybe they would have gotten better anyway. Until they actually do formal, scientifically-based trial tests, we won’t know if it actually works. And there is a cost associated with using those drugs if they don’t work, both in depriving people who actually need hydroxychloroquine and wasting time that would be better spent on other treatments.
It’s an argument not based on science or logic. If Trump happens to be right about hydroxychloroquine, it would be by accident, not because he actually knows what he is talking about. But that doesn’t matter to his supporters.
This is a claim that has no logical or evidentiary support.
It’s extremely popular among Trump apologists, of course, because it makes Trump look sane and normal. But it’s easily disproved by the fact that the vast majority of Trump’s lies are negative rather than positive.
Here’s a link that’s a good starting place for verifying the negative–not positive–slant of most of Trump’s lies. Wikipedia, yes,but it compiles a very large number of sources that catalog and classify Trump’s lies: False or misleading statements by Donald Trump - Wikipedia
Anyone attempting to sell the ‘Trump is following the tradition of Norman Vincent Peale’ theory must explain Trump’s most famous lies, such as: TRUMP’S HERITAGE:
(ibid)
-----How is being born in Sweden rather than Germany “positive thinking”? How is Trump’s later lie, about his father being born in Germany (rather than in the Bronx), “positive thinking”?
TRUMP’S 9-11 LIES: Famously Trump claimed
Politifact awarded Trump’s claim their “pants on fire” designation.
In what way is a false claim that “thousands and thousands” of Muslims in New Jersey cheered the results of the 9-11 attacks, an example of “positive thinking”? How does such a claim reflect the ministry of Norman Vincent Peale? TRUMP’S HURRICANE DORIAN LIES:
How does a lie that a particular state would be hit by a hurricane, represent “positive thinking”? How is being hit by a hurricane a ‘positive’ outcome? How does lying about it demonstrate having been “raised in the ministry of Norman Vincent Peale,” as you claim in your post (quoted above)?
This abbreviated list merely scratches the surface of the many “negative thinking” lies Trump has been documented to have told.
The claim that Trump’s conduct somehow is shielded by religion or exemplifies religious principles is, frankly, offensive to actually-religious people.
Well, no. What Trump is saying is nothing to do with positive thinking. It’s about aggrandizing himself—making himself look good, via the use of false claims.
There’s no way a person of integrity can interpret such naked self-interest as being something holy or pious or even merely ‘admirable.’
The pretense that Trump lying to make himself look good is a positive trait, stains the character of the person doing the pretending.
Your post examines the phrase ‘Positive Thinking’ as normal English syntax, but in this case it is a term of art coined by Norman Vincent Peale. A practitioner of ‘Positive Thinking’ believes his thoughts can change reality:
"When you want something to happen, you first pray about it and then picture it as if it’s already happened. Hold the picture firmly in your mind. Release it into God’s hands, and do whatever work you need to do to make it happen.
…… When you hold the picturization firmly in mind, the picture can actualize; it comes to be because you’ve invoked God’s power and released creative energy." NVP
If the practitioner wants to have been born in Sweden, or wants Obama to have been born in Kenya, he treats it as though it has already happened. To him it has. A 70 year old lifelong practitioner does it without thinking. It’s automatic. Perhaps even psychotic.
Trump was given enough money to allow him to exist only in his fantasy world that he learned in Peale’s church. The backlog of false hoods, that you correctly refer to as lies, are history to Trump. To Trump reality is a lie.
I don’t see this as justification for Trump. I am curious why it does not get closer scrutiny.
Because there are insufficient provisions in government against a Kakistocracy. Volumes of books will be written about how government bureaucracy, checks & balances, co-equal branches, norms and regulations utterly failed, or were proven to be entirely inadequate in protecting America’s democracy from the rise of a dangerous autocratic sociopath.
p.s.: Which may end up being somewhat good news to the Founding Fathers because they can finally get some rest from their burden of virtual infallibility, and modern America can finally take responsibility for it’s future without constantly looking to the past.
You want me to agree that lying is bad? Okay, I agree that lying is bad. I think politicians should be upfront and honest and I don’t think that Trump is either of those things. I’m hardly going to defend Trump’s character, much less his honesty. I’m actually not defending Trump at all. To the extent I’m defending anyone, it’s Trump supporters. The OP asks how anyone could continue to support Trump in spite of his bad actions. My answer is the polarisation of American politics, tribalism, and dislike of the agenda of the hard-left. If someone identifies as a Republican or a conservative, they may well decide to vote for Joe Biden based on the character issue, even if they don’t like some of his policies. But for a lot of those people, there’s no way in Hell they would vote for Bernie Sanders, and they view the position of the American left as essentially Sanders’ version of the Green New Deal. Others are firmly Republican and will simply vote the party line, same as many Democrats.
I agree that Trump believes that reality bends to his will. I agree he doesn’t understand the difference between lies and truth.
I disagree that this was Peale indoctrination. Magical thinking is inherent to the human condition. It may be that his family’s detachment from reality, combined with oodles and oodles of money to back it up, allowed this part of his mind to run rampant and take over. But Trump is not following any sort of doctrine.
What is irrational is the people who were trying to impeach Trump before he even took office. Trump Inauguration: Impeachment Campaign Launch | TIME Note that their effort was supported by the ACLU. I also think it was irrational for the House of Representatives to impeach Trump when there was zero chance he was going to be removed from office. It was political grandstanding and a waste of time. It was also a message to Trump supporters that their vote wouldn’t be respected. Which is yet another reason they’re rejecting the politics of the left.
May be so, QuickSilver. The founders either could not conceive of a world where personal honor and virtue would be irrelevant, or else deluded themselves about it. Their initial writings warned heavily against the influences of political parties, and against unfettered popular democracy. But by the time they were themselves getting elected to offices, they were founding parties and happily enlisting popular support.
It’s a government of laws, not of men… but laws don’t enforce themselves, it takes people to make them worth anything.
Because as **Sherrerd **points out, here in America we presume religious influences (well, some of them…) are privileged from critical scrutiny. And as HMSIrruncible states, it does not necessarily follow, since NVP was not unique about this world view.
There is a phrase I’ve often used and thought about turning into my signature:
Explanation is NOT justification.
And that applies whether the explanation holds water or not.
Notice these statements:
I have no idea where the Hell **Sherrerd **drew that any of us was saying this was a positive or admirable trait of Trump.
I get it: for many of us here, there is NO other answer than “TRUMP IS EVIL AND STUPID, full stop, end of discussion”. Well, he IS. But “full stop end of discussion?”, not necessarily.
The President is *** observed to speak and act like reality is supposed to be whatever’s in his head: A world where it is a fact that teen models are willing to let rich men grab them by the py; that he is a very stable genius; that foreign leaders love him; only “nasty” women talk back; 3,000 dead in Puerto Rico were made up to make him look bad; tariffs are paid by the country of origin; phone calls and conversations that went disastrously were “perfect”; his inauguration crowd filled the Mall; he never said what you have him on tape saying just last week; etc.
Whether this is plain and simple general assholery, or a deliberate policy to gaslight the world for profit (in which case he is–or his handlers are-- *not *stupid), or a psychopathology, or a sign of neurological degeneration, or a delusion planted by a pop preacher decades ago that by now he has turned into a cult of himself, it’s just as destructive and harmful. But speculating on the “why” is not out of place.
Crane’s theory may fail upon further examination since though it may seek to explain something about Donald J. Trump it does not explain the entire apparatus of his administration, campaign, satellites and enablers. There are a whole range of people with a trajectory of until now normal-seeming careers, plus reasonably savvy opportunists, who cannot possibly argue they do not see what’s happening, but are enabling it because they figure they might as well become rich or powerful enough to ride out the cataclysm. THERE is where the evil lies.
