MereMortal

More violent protesting of a Trump rally, this time in New Mexico. Trump protesters smash door, break through barriers

If you need some evidence that this will go badly for Clinton, here's a good analysis of Trump's new and effective campaign strategy. Top three reasons Donald Trump is surging in the polls right now I see the strategy clearly. Trump is hitting Clinton now on all of her negatives to erode her support. The next step will be to offer the alternative these folks are looking for to surge his own support and I think that's what Trump will use the convention to start doing.

If you haven't seen it already: Dead heat: Trump, Clinton tied in 3 swing-state polls

It's fair to say that there are enough supporters who are good, intelligent people and you have to ask yourself if their support of Trump carries enough weight to convince you of Trump's merits. Of course they need to properly explain their support. One thing: I do hear enough from people who's judgment I trust saying that Trump is dangerous and cannot be trusted. I wanted to think I should believe the same but I can't make myself feel it (Yeah, just like Hank Rearden when he wants to think Francisco is the guiltiest man in the room.) I'll merely advise myself and you to keep an active mind (not merely an open one of course for the obvious reason).

Incidentally, why do many people still think Clinton is nearly invincible against Trump? Trump just trounced Cruz in Indiana. Clinton just lost again to the aging socialist dope Sanders (sorry, couldn't resist). What is Clinton's appeal? I don't see it.

Ok, here's a link that will work: Poll: Trump Reaches 50 Percent Support Nationally for the First Time

Not sure why but this link leads to a dead end. I wonder if the article moved or was taken down.

What we may be looking for is the difference between a selfish act and an act of self sacrifice and asking if there is some personal benefit to the second that contradicts the idea that it IS in fact a self sacrifice. Do you serve the other at your own expense for some psychological or emotional return on the "investment". Does that negate it being a self sacrifice? Is the motive approval or the avoidance of disapproval or actual punishment? Would that negate it being a self sacrifice?

I just found this really good free online book by Bob Tisdale and it explains the global warming science and politics in layman's terms. On Global Warming and The Illusion of Control

Damn that's a laugh riot!

Yes that's true and that bothers me too but she's no longer with us. The rest of us have to correct the errors and move on. At least she provided the methods by which to think about these issues more clearly.

Brant, I'm afraid you missed my point. If one opines that a particular law is justified, it doesn't matter if the action being prohibited is occurring or not. The law itself is the issue, not whether or not the behavior being legislated is occurring or not occurring.

Rand isn't claiming anyone is forced to watch pornography. In fact, that wasn't even the issue. She was asked a question about sex and what can or cannot be prohibited. She simply said what she thought was appropriate to legislate in that area. It's like me saying that I think the government can properly outlaw private ownership of nuclear bombs in response to a question related to the 2nd Amendment and then a critic responds by saying "No one owns any nukes".

Perhaps of equal importance, Alex Epstein gave some testimony before a Senate hearing on energy. Here is a 15 minute clip of his statements and some of the reaction of Senators. Barbara Boxer's reaction is interesting to say the least.

Perhaps this is what he had in mind.

Is she from Europe? If she is, she apparently has the right to be forgotten. John Oliver helps to explain:

Damn Curry!

Stefan Molyneux posted this a few days ago.

As a President, yes, but in Sowell's defense, he likely means untested in the sense that this is the first and only political office he will hold in his entire life. At least with other President's there was some governmental experience behind them. This is the theory that you need work your way up the political ladder. Start with a secondary office (Governor, Senator, Representative) and then you have a track record and some experience. It isn't necessarily my theory but it does exist and it has some plausibility.

Has anyone seen this? The Boston Globe's attempt to scare everyone against electing Trump. Think this stuff actually works?

The most recent Sam Harris podcast gives a roundabout backhanded endorsement of Trump. On the subject of the Brussels attack, he openly admits that Trump identifies the problem while Clinton is lying. To be sure, he made it clear he thinks Trump is dangerously unqualified (perhaps to mollify the anti Trump faction listening to the podcast). https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/ask-me-anything-4

This should seal the deal for Clinton: KKK Grand Dragon endorses Hillary Clinton for President WTF? Can't these white supremacy jerkwads get it through their thick skulls that Trump is the bigot that will save the country??

On this point, I listened to a 2 part podcast debate between Yaron Brook and Leonard Peikoff with Brook taking the open borders position and Peikoff explaining why, in the current political and cultural context, open borders would be a disaster. Peikoff was actually mirroring the Trump position on Hispanic and Islamic immigration. I don't know if that surprises anyone here but it's refreshing. Peikoff vs Brook on Immigration Part 1 Peikoff vs Brook on Immigration Part 2

Let's get to the meat: Are you saying that Trump is a potential dictator because he is full of bluster? Might as well ask a simple yes/no question to see what your actual position is and if you can defend it.