The People Have Spoken...

I received letters from my 401k reps stating that swings in the market could happen as a result of the election.
 
detmatt said:
Trumps demeanor changed noticeably a few weeks before Election Day, it was at that point that I think he knew he had it in the bag. Everything that happened before that I think was very carefully planned and scripted right down to some of the worst things that came out of his mouth. I think he knew exactly what he was doing the whole time.
Click to expand...
My sentiments exactly.
 
Is Trump part of the conspiracy by the Alt-right, or...
simply a tool of the Alt-right?

Don't get me wrong. I'm doing a happy dance over him winning. Sorry, Leftists.
 
Contest: Who first wrote the following?

1. Keep the dogma simple. Make only 1 or 2 points.

2. Be forthright and powerfully direct. Speak only in the telling or ordering mode.

3. As much as possible, reduce concepts down into stereotypes which are black and white.

4. Speak to people’s emotions and stir them constantly.

5. Use lots of repetition; repeat your points over and over again.

6. Forget literary beauty, scientific reasoning, balance, or novelty.

7. Focus solely on convincing people and creating zealots.

8. Find slogans which can be used to drive the movement forward.
 
Fratzog said:
Contest: Who first wrote the following?

1. Keep the dogma simple. Make only 1 or 2 points.

2. Be forthright and powerfully direct. Speak only in the telling or ordering mode.

3. As much as possible, reduce concepts down into stereotypes which are black and white.

4. Speak to people’s emotions and stir them constantly.

5. Use lots of repetition; repeat your points over and over again.

6. Forget literary beauty, scientific reasoning, balance, or novelty.

7. Focus solely on convincing people and creating zealots.

8. Find slogans which can be used to drive the movement forward.
Click to expand...
Without Googling...,,
I think Hitler.
 
I'm going to guess Dale Carnegie.
 
Fratzog said:
Contest: Who first wrote the following?

1. Keep the dogma simple. Make only 1 or 2 points.

2. Be forthright and powerfully direct. Speak only in the telling or ordering mode.

3. As much as possible, reduce concepts down into stereotypes which are black and white.

4. Speak to people’s emotions and stir them constantly.

5. Use lots of repetition; repeat your points over and over again.

6. Forget literary beauty, scientific reasoning, balance, or novelty.

7. Focus solely on convincing people and creating zealots.

8. Find slogans which can be used to drive the movement forward.
Click to expand...
Adolf Hitler
 
If I were a U. S. rust belt voter and not a Canadian a vote for Trump would have been a no brainer. People in the industrial heartland have been screwed over royally. More of the same would have been guaranteed with Clinton.
 
I figured it was going to be Hitler, it would have been more fun if it were Carnegie.
 
Fratzog said:
If I were a U. S. rust belt voter and not a Canadian a vote for Trump would have been a no brainer. People in the industrial heartland have been screwed over royally. More of the same would have been guaranteed with Clinton.
Click to expand...

Actually the people in the old industrial heartland are still screwed and I'll tel you why. First, the wrong man got elected if they were to see their economic situation to have a chance to improve.

Now what have we had this whole century. There are those who say the problems emanate from the liberal left elite. Ok, there are right but with blinders on. Problems also emanate from the conservative right elite. If Hillary is the elite of the left then Romney and Bush are the elite of the right. Both sides are interested in the status quo. The status quo between them with us left out except on Nov.8th.

Evey election there is the tried and true line about jobs. Makes sense since that is the number one factor that drives people. Yet in order to get them passionate the elections always devolve into other areas like social mores, immigrants, calling the other sides names. Sure gets people riled up to vote but then how do you turn off those emotions afterwards. Well, that is whole other post because without unity not a single thing will get achieved. The old house divided against itself routine.

An election is over and let's say the Republican candidate won with the promise of jobs among other emotional issues. In Washington the Republican Party is essentially the wealthy and corporations who have their front men they have made wealthy enough to make them reliable to them. Classic example is the Bush family. Connections throughout the generations of the family has made them wealthy and reliable to the conservative elite. Koch brothers are a good example of that elite. Citizen's United is now another example after the Supreme Court gave corporations personal rights. These, who make up this elite group, want to funnel money upwards towards them and not downwards towards the middle class.

Only how can the Republican candidate sidestep his promise about jobs with good wages which his elite backers don't want. You don't need to look far to see that. This whole century has been full of sleights of hand. You do it by distracting the voters by throwing out chum. Pick a subject from abortion, to gay rights, to gay marriage, to gun control, to prayer in school, to maybe a war in Iraq. Like magician you have distracted the audience from what is really going on which is you aren't filling your promise about jobs. Four years later the middle class is no better off and that has held true every single four year period since 2000.

I'm not going to leave out the liberal elite. They also preach jobs. Their problem is that once in office they can get too concerned with the above subjects I mentioned and also go off track. They are not for funneling money upwards to corporations and Wall Street they just forget why they are there and go off track. Hillary was a very clear example of forgetting why she was there and she went way off track. Since when does a union man vote for someone from the Republican elite who disdain the average worker as nothing more than a drain on profits.

So my take on Trump is that one he is from the elite. If you ask him he will tell you, away from a microphone, that he is the elitist of the elite. He has always catered to the elite through his businesses. Has he now had an epiphany, like Scrooge, and is now going to work for the average middle class worker whose prospects have declined? Will he take on Wall Street and the corporations that are the elite. I'm dubious and rate the chance that he takes them on, for the middle class, at 1 out of 10. Approving a pipeline is great press for him but the jobs created by building the line are fleeting while the money created by the line continues to flow upward. His appointments will be all telling. Would

Hillary have taken them on? I don't know. Maybe if it were 1988 when they were more middle class in Arkansas but they have been co-opted and made wealthy. In other countries they eliminate someone who is a threat while here you just need to throw money at them.

So who was the man in the first sentence? That man was Sanders. I didn't vote for him in the primary. However, I do think he is the only one who was genuinely concerned with the average middle class worker. Now he would have definitely taken on Wall Street. Only he was easy to isolate by calling him a socialist whose ideas couldn't possible work. Two things here. Calling him a socialist, like calling someone a commie, is done because it has always alarmed Americans. Second, you get voters to dismiss his ideas about the economy even though your ideas are no better in the end. Really can anybody change it for the better overnight? Probably as easy as stopping the earths rotation.

Here is an analogy I read about our situation today which I found very appropriate as I have compared our situation to evolution. Evolution happens over eons and some creatures are able to make the needed changes while other creatures can't and they die off. The key is to have time otherwise all would die off. For you history guys let's go back the the invention of the Gutenberg Press which brought movable type to printing. It was to printing what the cotton gin would have been to cotton. It allowed the printing a flyers, pamphlets and papers to happen faster and cheaper. No longer were printed items for the wealthy. However, the Gutenberg Press brought about massive changes in society. Ideas could be shared across tremendous distances. The flow up effects were the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the rise of democracy and the industrial and scientific revolutions. Those changes happened over centuries which allowed man to adjust to each upheaval with a cushion.

Today we have the tech revolution. Daily routines to international order are being undone and redone in a matter of years to months. How much more powerful and invasive can it get? I believe on the scary enough side myself. Enough so that people will have no time to adapt as in the past. Change over centuries is easier on the person that over years. In the meantime the tech elites will surf this wave and profit from it. Just look at the tech centers around San Jose and Boston to name a few. Yet for every zip code that profits there is going to be hundreds that don't. They won't see tech, on the coasts, lifting them up much but more as a speeding train about to run them over.

Nothing wrong with political and social changes as that is the way of the world. Taking the apple cart down another road is always worth a try but kicking it over is almost never good. Has Trump kicked over a cart? Have to wait and see. Has tech kicked over a cart? In my opinion yes.

I would really like to call for a seventh inning stretch. A stretch that lasts at least a decade so that everyone has a chance to settle down, relax, and have the luxury of some time to absorb these changes at a leisurely pace. Yeah, right I know.

I'm going out to work on a car!
 
tbm3fan said:
Actually the people in the old industrial heartland are still screwed and I'll tel you why. First, the wrong man got elected if they were to see their economic situation to have a chance to improve.

Now what have we had this whole century. There are those who say the problems emanate from the liberal left elite. Ok, there are right but with blinders on. Problems also emanate from the conservative right elite. If Hillary is the elite of the left then Romney and Bush are the elite of the right. Both sides are interested in the status quo. The status quo between them with us left out except on Nov.8th.

Evey election there is the tried and true line about jobs. Makes sense since that is the number one factor that drives people. Yet in order to get them passionate the elections always devolve into other areas like social mores, immigrants, calling the other sides names. Sure gets people riled up to vote but then how do you turn off those emotions afterwards. Well, that is whole other post because without unity not a single thing will get achieved. The old house divided against itself routine.

An election is over and let's say the Republican candidate won with the promise of jobs among other emotional issues. In Washington the Republican Party is essentially the wealthy and corporations who have their front men they have made wealthy enough to make them reliable to them. Classic example is the Bush family. Connections throughout the generations of the family has made them wealthy and reliable to the conservative elite. Koch brothers are a good example of that elite. Citizen's United is now another example after the Supreme Court gave corporations personal rights. These, who make up this elite group, want to funnel money upwards towards them and not downwards towards the middle class.

Only how can the Republican candidate sidestep his promise about jobs with good wages which his elite backers don't want. You don't need to look far to see that. This whole century has been full of sleights of hand. You do it by distracting the voters by throwing out chum. Pick a subject from abortion, to gay rights, to gay marriage, to gun control, to prayer in school, to maybe a war in Iraq. Like magician you have distracted the audience from what is really going on which is you aren't filling your promise about jobs. Four years later the middle class is no better off and that has held true every single four year period since 2000.

I'm not going to leave out the liberal elite. They also preach jobs. Their problem is that once in office they can get too concerned with the above subjects I mentioned and also go off track. They are not for funneling money upwards to corporations and Wall Street they just forget why they are there and go off track. Hillary was a very clear example of forgetting why she was there and she went way off track. Since when does a union man vote for someone from the Republican elite who disdain the average worker as nothing more than a drain on profits.

So my take on Trump is that one he is from the elite. If you ask him he will tell you, away from a microphone, that he is the elitist of the elite. He has always catered to the elite through his businesses. Has he now had an epiphany, like Scrooge, and is now going to work for the average middle class worker whose prospects have declined? Will he take on Wall Street and the corporations that are the elite. I'm dubious and rate the chance that he takes them on, for the middle class, at 1 out of 10. Approving a pipeline is great press for him but the jobs created by building the line are fleeting while the money created by the line continues to flow upward. His appointments will be all telling. Would

Hillary have taken them on? I don't know. Maybe if it were 1988 when they were more middle class in Arkansas but they have been co-opted and made wealthy. In other countries they eliminate someone who is a threat while here you just need to throw money at them.

So who was the man in the first sentence? That man was Sanders. I didn't vote for him in the primary. However, I do think he is the only one who was genuinely concerned with the average middle class worker. Now he would have definitely taken on Wall Street. Only he was easy to isolate by calling him a socialist whose ideas couldn't possible work. Two things here. Calling him a socialist, like calling someone a commie, is done because it has always alarmed Americans. Second, you get voters to dismiss his ideas about the economy even though your ideas are no better in the end. Really can anybody change it for the better overnight? Probably as easy as stopping the earths rotation.

Here is an analogy I read about our situation today which I found very appropriate as I have compared our situation to evolution. Evolution happens over eons and some creatures are able to make the needed changes while other creatures can't and they die off. The key is to have time otherwise all would die off. For you history guys let's go back the the invention of the Gutenberg Press which brought movable type to printing. It was to printing what the cotton gin would have been to cotton. It allowed the printing a flyers, pamphlets and papers to happen faster and cheaper. No longer were printed items for the wealthy. However, the Gutenberg Press brought about massive changes in society. Ideas could be shared across tremendous distances. The flow up effects were the Reformation, the Enlightenment, the rise of democracy and the industrial and scientific revolutions. Those changes happened over centuries which allowed man to adjust to each upheaval with a cushion.

Today we have the tech revolution. Daily routines to international order are being undone and redone in a matter of years to months. How much more powerful and invasive can it get? I believe on the scary enough side myself. Enough so that people will have no time to adapt as in the past. Change over centuries is easier on the person that over years. In the meantime the tech elites will surf this wave and profit from it. Just look at the tech centers around San Jose and Boston to name a few. Yet for every zip code that profits there is going to be hundreds that don't. They won't see tech, on the coasts, lifting them up much but more as a speeding train about to run them over.

Nothing wrong with political and social changes as that is the way of the world. Taking the apple cart down another road is always worth a try but kicking it over is almost never good. Has Trump kicked over a cart? Have to wait and see. Has tech kicked over a cart? In my opinion yes.

I would really like to call for a seventh inning stretch. A stretch that lasts at least a decade so that everyone has a chance to settle down, relax, and have the luxury of some time to absorb these changes at a leisurely pace. Yeah, right I know.

I'm going out to work on a car!
Click to expand...

I like your thoughtfulness. In the past when "America was Great" we had the best cars in the world - fascinating and creative styling, good and innovative engineering and more desired than any others in the world. We had good engineers who were being graduated at high rates, and we knew how to stay ahead. So we could sell a lot of them and charge relatively high prices and could afford to pay workers well and unions thrived. I mean, look at this - what other country had anything close?

300C #1 (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1).jpg




But we got lazy and greedy and started turning out increasingly shitty cars in the late 70s and early 80s, and that edge evaporated. Now we have cars that are about equal to others in the market from Europe and Asia (at least Hyundai and Japan, Inc.) So how do our manufacturers stay in business unless they have labor rates that are competitive with the rest? That is why assembly is shipped to Mexico and elsewhere. So the rust belt seems to feel they are entitled, like our youths' attitude to the world, to have their old union jobs back that gave them good wages, and they want Trump to fix it for them. I don't think it will be as easy as he or they think.

When the world changes, we have the responsibility to make ourselves valuable in a changing world - and it doesn't all fall on the government to fix our lack of skills. We have the responsibility to learn new skills and trades and be innovative to compete with the rest of the world that has caught up to us in technology and ingenuity and even quality of life. I don't see it as the mostly the government's job personally, although it should be involved in creating new jobs too. And we the public still like to buy cheap goods at Costco, etc. that are assembled outside the U.S., so we want things both ways.

My biggest concern with Trump is that he isn't so wise to know how to fix all these things, but he is good at making money in real estate and definitely shrewd. I am not so sure he understands the world's dynamics very well and how the big picture all fits together. But we are gonna find out, and soon it appears. Despite my hopefullness that his early statements portend a more wise President than I saw during the campaign, down deep I feel he will be a one 4 year term President. And all the money will still be going to the top.

Then it will be time to get someone like Bernie to really start to fix our real problems. People dismissed him prematurely by calling him a communist/socialist because that is what the rest of politics/establishment used to get rid of him quick. And I don't believe the public really looked carefully at his real policies. The U.S. should be doing better than it is for our citizens, but the system is rigged for the wealthy who are smart and manipulative and they also know how to buy politicians and news stations to pump out their pablum for us to consume mindlessly, and get all angry at each other. That way nothing will get fixed and they will keep most all of it. Shame on us.
 
Last edited:
Again, "what have you got to lose" he said . I agree. The country is in horrible shape no more establishment in office, this is our last chance.
 
polara71 said:
Again, "what have you got to lose" he said . I agree. The country is in horrible shape no more establishment in office, this is our last chance.
Click to expand...
Maybe some of the things we take for granted......................... No one knows yet the wisdom of this choice, but no one disagrees that the establishment had to go............................ I personally would have much preferred Bernie, but Trump is probably second, but we don't really know how it will turn out. We live in a complicated world, and his choices might also make things worse. Time will tell.
 
We have had generations of the elites. I hope that is changing. I don't believe that the current state of our country can be measured in the terms of what a political party stands for. the elites in both parties stood for themselves.
 
Rwc said:
We have had generations of the elites. I hope that is changing. I don't believe that the current state of our country can be measured in the terms of what a political party stands for. the elites in both parties stood for themselves.
Click to expand...



GREAT point! :thankyou:
 
polara71 said:
Again, "what have you got to lose" he said . I agree. The country is in horrible shape no more establishment in office,
Click to expand...
I agree with that but He already is picking RNC establishment members for his Cabinet. Look at His Cheif of staff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

1978 NYB
The Fall of the Iron Curtain
Replies
14
Views
2K
dart4forte
dart4forte
Turboomni
1969 Dodge, and the changes that should not have been made
Replies
15
Views
6K
fury fan
fury fan
MarPar
The #1 Best Reason For Accepting Personal Responsibility.
Replies
7
Views
2K
dart4forte
dart4forte
Back
Top