Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 The following video by John Oliver has gone viral and anti-Trump people are eating it up. But guess what it's effect is on pro-Trump people and even those leaning toward Trump? It's like someone spit in their face. In practical terms, it's free advertising for Trump. I expect Trump to get far more new voters from this video than the number of people it persuades to switch from Trump to someone else. In fact, I expect the difference to be brutal. Why? Because John Oliver is another guy who doesn't understand why Trump is resonating. He doesn't have a clue. It's like the mistake Marco Rubio is making by trying to brand Trump as a con artist. That message may have worked in the beginning when Trump had few adherents, but not after masses of people have jumped aboard the Trump Train. How does Rubio or Oliver expect to convince anyone when their underlying message is that Trump supporters are dupes and rubes who have been conned? They're making the same mistake the elites have consistently done. They're looking down their noses at Trump supporters. If you don't like Trump, you will probably find this video hilarious and not understand why his supporters aren't laughing. But this issue is not about Trump. It's about them. It's about an elite class who habitually ignores them, and now is laughing at them. After the election, let's see how funny the video is. Since when has America ever been about protecting the sensibilities of an elite class, anyway? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I am shocked!!!! Voting fraud in Texas - LBJ would be insulted to get caught doing it!!!! Amateur little boy Rubio's campaign is like Nixon's dirty tricks amateurs. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Ann Coulter retweeted this: If Trump isn't more careful about his retweets, the media is going to start calling him a fascist. Can he survive that kind of bad press?— Conservative Pundit (@DemsRRealRacist) February 28, 2016 Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Why? Because John Oliver is another guy who doesn't understand why Trump is resonating. He doesn't have a clue. Maybe John Oliver should check his heritage for court fools, he certainly plays the part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Darrell, I want to say this kindly because I used to be right where you are at. Then I started studying persuasion, propaganda, etc. Your whole objection is based on an unstated premise: That the questioner is a paragon of logic and objectivity. And boy is that ever a false assumption. Just because a person says and acts like he is logical and objective, that doesn't mean he is. Logic and objectivity in politics NEVER have anything to do with a question by the press. Never. All political questions, even about pets, are front-loaded with so many techniques that once you learn them and can see them, you get irritated just watching it. It's like watching a comedian tell old jokes and dragging them out when you know all the punchlines. The ad hominem attack in this context is not a fallacy. It may be a logical fallacy, but logic is not the standard. Covert persuasion is the standard (image, body language, embedded commands, pattern interrupt, and on and on). In this case, an ad hominem attack is one of the few things that works to neutralize all the garbage under the surface. The reason? It makes the covert attack ostensive. People can see there is a fight. You put the opponent in front of you and call him out rather than allowing him to stab you in the back when nobody is looking. When you do that, you better be good at brawling, but Trump is good at brawling. If you want to see where Donald Trump uses logic and objectivity, look to what he does away from the cameras, not what he says in front of them. Is he a bigot? Well, look at his clubs, hotels, TV shows, etc. Does he discriminate against anyone? The answer is a big fat no. And this is not only enforced with logic and objectivity, he doesn't even allow bigotry to be a thing on his property. Is he unfair regarding immigrants? Well he married one. Actually, he married two. I won't talk about logic and objectivity with spouses , but look at his magnificent family. He raised his kids with logic and objectivity and look what magnificent kids he has. Kids who have an immigrant for a mother (except Tiffany). Is a warmonger? He didn't make his money from war profits. Instead, he built things. Not just any things. Top quality preeminent things recognized and procured the world over. You need a hell of a lot of logic and objectivity to do that and keep doing it. I could go on, but can you see the difference? The media circus (including ALL news outlets) is not about logic and objectivity. It is about persuasion, marketing and propaganda. Conveying information is a means to media folks, not an end. The product they are selling is not information and you are not the buyer. Their product is you. And they are selling you, the audience, to advertisers and government people. That's what they are selling. That's where their money and power comes from. That's why nobody trusts the media anymore. If you use logic and objectivity in the media circus to run an election campaign, you will lose. It's as simple as that. So, if you want to bemoan the lack of logic and objectivity when Trump answers a question in the press, why on earth presume the question was asked in all logic and objectivity to begin with? When you look and know what to look for, it never is. Shall we bemoan that this is the state of American media culture? OK... Michael MSK, This is very well said. I consider Trump's choice of persuasion to be recognition of reality. The culture today behaves and communicates in a certain way: Trump is looking out, seeing existence exists, making inductions on the people he sees, and uses persuasion to communicate with them. If you want to know the man, look at his accomplishments--his purpose, his attention to detail, his high standards. Persuasion is a tool he uses to accomplish things, to get people together, to get things done. It would be a mistake to expect to see Trump as a meek, eager politician begging for alms. Trump is a businessman, stern first, and nice later (if he chooses). If he were nice first, being stern later won't work. Go Trump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I could not help but laugh at the show he did on Stephen Harper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9thdoctor Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 6 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: The following video by John Oliver has gone viral and anti-Trump people are eating it up. That was really well executed. BTW, haven't said it lately, I really don't like Trump. But anyway, I keep hearing about the David Duke thing, and it isn't fair. It's plausible that Trump hadn't heard the name in 16 years and it didn't ring a bell right away. As opposed to what? What's the scenario under which he'd be welcoming to such an endorsement? Is this supposed to be like McCain's failure to denounce the South Carolina Confederate Flag flap? In case everyone missed it (good chance), here's Yaron Brook's attempt at a Trump takedown: http://www.peikoff.com/2016/02/15/to-yb-does-donald-trumps-popularity-signify-how-dumbed-down-the-american-population-has-become/ I say: Go Gary Johnson. And pray for Congressional gridlock no matter who wins. Trump? Hillary?? Time to go long in the barf-bag futures market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Any possibility that David Duke was trying to cause trouble for Trump? Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9thdoctor Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 12 minutes ago, Ellen Stuttle said: Any possibility that David Duke was trying to cause trouble for Trump? Ellen Any possibility? Sure. But it doesn't fit. I bet he was hoping to score some media attention for himself, and he definitely succeeded at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 The results of Super Tuesday are mostly in. Do I smirk or do I smirk? Nah... it's all good and I'm feeling in a upbeat mood. So banter is banter. It's not mockery. btw - I didn't know crows could sweat... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 1 hour ago, 9thdoctor said: In case everyone missed it (good chance), here's Yaron Brook's attempt at a Trump takedown: http://www.peikoff.com/2016/02/15/to-yb-does-donald-trumps-popularity-signify-how-dumbed-down-the-american-population-has-become/ Dennis, I tried to listen to it, but as with other people who hate Trump, Brook's tone of voice dripping all that vileness and spite was such a turnoff, I couldn't go on for long. His message was short but I only got halfway through it. Then nausea overtook me like it sometimes does when I witness pure forms of hatred. (And war--I felt this at the start of the invasion of first Iraq war.) Note, this nausea is not in response to the message. It's a visceral reaction when I witness frothing-at-the-mouth hatred that goes on and one of any kind. All I could think was here's another pompous prima donna who thinks Americans are stupid, especially Trump supporters. Not just stupid. Anti-conceptual, anti-principle, emotionalistic, immoral, superficial, probably evil in the end. One of his biggest beefs with Trump was that Trump makes deals. You have to hear this to believe it, but there it is. Listen and ye shall hear. So, to Yaron Brook, making deals is contemptible? It's evil? Gimme a break! What a joke. What does he want, a dictatorship? This guy may be in the self-congratulations business, but he's definitely not in the persuasion business. Or better, as head of ARI, he is in the persuasion business, but he's not very competent at it. I always suspected Brook was an elitist--and I mean that in the social metaphysician sense. Now I'm sure of it. At least Rand, even at the end in her bitterest down moments, talked about the heroic sense of life of the American people. She didn't despise normal Americans the way Brook does. She was worried about them like an intellectual and spiritual mother. I'm not sure Brook, qua elitist, would even know what I am talking about. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Amazing victory tonight! Proud of @realDonaldTrump #MakeAmericaGreatAgain — Eric Trump (@EricTrump) March 2, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 If anybody saw the victory speech by Trump, they saw what he will look like as president. Gracious and objective. I love how he commanded the Q&A, too. He gave an extensive answer to a reporter about the David Duke thing, then the reporter still tried to nail him and he said, without malice, something like, "You asked me a question and I gave you a long answer. Next." Then another reporter wanted to ask about the same thing and he simply said, "Come on. Let's not waste time here. Next." He looked like an intuitive leader, not just a leader with charisma. btw - Trump made this speech before all the results were in. Trump ended up with 7 states, Cruz 2 and Rubio 1, but Trump did not know that at the time. He only knew about 6 of his and 1 of Cruz. (I can't resist. Ann Coulter tweeted that the Somalis carried little Rubio to victory in Minnesota. And she said about Cruz that all that fire and brimstone was hardly very Canadian of him. ) Apropos, Chris Christie introduced Trump. He was sad or worried or something. Maybe he just had to go to the bathroom. People are speculating about the attacks on Christie from the establishment and left, but I think it's probably sadness that he wasn't the one making the speech. Either that, or a personal problem of some nature (illness in family or something like that). Here's the video. Christie comes on at about 47:02. The first half is nothing but people milling around. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Even Megyn Kelly gave it up for Trump. She said he sounded presidential. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I'm kinda chuckling, someone on Twitter referred to Christie's new name. "Reek". You'd have to watch game of thrones to see the reference. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Jules, I read a comment by someone out there in the Interwebs that got to me. (Can't remember who.) He said that Christie had the look his dog gets when he puts her in the car and she realizes they are going to the vet. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 3 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said: Any possibility that David Duke was trying to cause trouble for Trump? Ellen 3 hours ago, 9thdoctor said: Any possibility? Sure. But it doesn't fit. I bet he was hoping to score some media attention for himself, and he definitely succeeded at that. I don't know what fits, since basically all I know about David Duke is that he's prominent in the KKK, but considering how desperate the Old Guard Republicans are to scotch Trump, and suspecting that some of them aren't without connections to the KKK, I wonder if the endorsement was "encouraged." Ellen PS: Beats me how to use the new software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 He LOOKED Presidential...it was a JFK throwback look... When I saw the room, before he arrived, I turned to my friend and said, the man is a genius. He is assuming command as if he was the President. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Jules, I read a comment by someone out there in the Interwebs that got to me. (Can't remember who.) He said that Christie had the look his dog gets when he puts her in the car and she realizes they are going to the vet. Michael That about sums it up haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turkeyfoot Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Dont crow too loud. ) “Since 1988, the candidate to clean up on Super Tuesday has always gone onto win their party’s nomination,” the Dublin-based bookmaker said" "Trump’s odds indicate he has a 33 pecent chance of winning the White House, while Clinton has a 65 percent shot, Paddy Power Betfair said." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-02/bookmaker-pays-out-early-on-trump-winning-republican-nomination Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Ha! Did you see the difference between voter turnout for the Dems and Repubs? Not even close. A large percentage of a small number is still a small number. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 53 minutes ago, turkeyfoot said: Dont crow too loud. ) “Since 1988, the candidate to clean up on Super Tuesday has always gone onto win their party’s nomination,” the Dublin-based bookmaker said" "Trump’s odds indicate he has a 33 pecent chance of winning the White House, while Clinton has a 65 percent shot, Paddy Power Betfair said." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-02/bookmaker-pays-out-early-on-trump-winning-republican-nomination Other betting sites (e.g., Stossel/Lott) say closer to 25% for Trump winning in November. Basically 2 or 3 to 1 odds in favor of Hillary. If she doesn't get hauled off to prison or cough herself into the hospital. REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 btw - What were the odds of these illustrious institutions a short time ago about Trump winning the primaries? Or maybe the nomination? (I wish I had decent a devil emoticon. I'm going to try to find out how to get one. ) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 From The Onion: GOP Statisticians Develop New Branch Of Math To Formulate Scenarios In Which Trump Doesn’t Win Nomination March 2, 2016 The Onion From the article: The Onion said: In an effort to counter the real estate magnate’s rapidly growing lead in the delegate count, GOP statisticians announced Wednesday they had successfully developed an entirely new branch of mathematics for formulating scenarios in which Donald Trump does not win the Republican Party’s presidential nomination. “By expanding on pioneering work in the fields of applied statistics, higher-order logic, and number theory, we’ve arrived at a new branch of mathematics that provides for a multitude of feasible outcomes in which Donald Trump is not the 2016 GOP nominee,” said Dr. Jeffrey Larson, who has led a team of more than 30 statisticians who have been working around the clock at RNC headquarters to establish new mathematical properties since the wealthy businessman won the New Hampshire primary by a 20-point margin. “The new field required several breakthroughs on the manipulation of Boole’s inequality principle, and some of our models are still only predictive within certain artificial stochastic conditions. However, this new discipline of Nonlinear Computational Probability finally establishes a practicable methodology by which there exist possible paths to the nomination for Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz.” At press time, Larson announced the team had devised a new method of abstraction and mathematical induction in which lower numbers have a greater numerical value than their higher counterparts. Heh heh heh... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 Here's a guy who really dislikes Trump. After the David Duke thing, blood squirts from his eyes. But he's one of the most intellectually honest intellectuals emerging out of the black movement. For example, he loves Obama, but wrote a book detailing how black communities have not improved under Obama's government (The Covenant with Black America - Ten Years Later). He thinks Trump stands to get a huge chunk of the black vote. Tavis Smiley: Black America could get on Trump train by Tavis Smiley March 2, 2016 USA Today From the article: Smiley said: Something tells me that if Donald Trump is indeed the Republican nominee, it might be a miscalculation for Democrats to assume that black voters are a lock for their nominee, even with the first black president and Barack Obama both campaigning for her. For starters, charisma, charm and likeability aren’t transferable. ... . . . Second, the number of everyday black voters who we assume will dismiss Trump because of his anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim attacks might well be inflated. ... . . . Third, though it is true that black/brown political coalitions have had strategic successes, it is also true that there have been plenty of other occasions where the interests of black and brown voters didn’t exactly align. ... . . . Fourth, it’s telling how quiet the black elite have been, those who travel in social circles with Trump, even as he has been taken to task time and again for his racial if not racist language. . . . Finally, it’s mind-numbing to some of us that a reckless member of the billionaire class has somehow convinced hardworking, everyday people that he is their savior. But all rich guys aren’t created equal. ... For many black voters, I think it’s fair to say that, at the moment, at least, Trump is no Romney. Smiley left out the biggest part of Trump's appeal to blacks, but seeing a person honest enough to write what he wrote is refreshing in the current spin-on-steroids media environment right now. Trump's appeal to a wide swath of blacks is a four letter word: jobs. Sometimes the complex is so simple, nobody believes it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now