Twitch Boy
Defacing this tagline is a MAX foul
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Hey, Al Gore almost got elected...
Hey, Al Gore almost got elected...
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools?
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Huh. Maybe we give it a little more time before we start making Reagan/Clinton charisma comparisons in terms of Bernie?
Huh. Maybe we give it a little more time before we start making Reagan/Clinton charisma comparisons in terms of Bernie?
You can add Obama to the charisma chorus.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Yeah, yeah, take the easy shot. My comparison is in the type of charisma. Although Reagan was an actor through and through there is something that Democrats forget about him to their peril: his charisma derived from his ideas. His Marlboro Man persona helped him with the boobs, but Reagan's remarks even read well, and that testifies that they were coherent and forceful. We get all hung up on Saint Ronny's media persona because the rubes treated his appearances like the Nuremberg Rallies, but that only came after he was able to swing an entire political party and all its professional machinery away from the East Coast, elite-centric Rockefeller vision. That took ability and work in the trenches. The flag-waving cult of idiots that is now stamped indelibly on our picture of Reagan was a consequence, not a cause, of his "revolution" (such as it was).
Yeah, yeah, take the easy shot. My comparison is in the type of charisma. Although Reagan was an actor through and through there is something that Democrats forget about him to their peril: his charisma derived from his ideas. His Marlboro Man persona helped him with the boobs, but Reagan's remarks even read well, and that testifies that they were coherent and forceful. We get all hung up on Saint Ronny's media persona because the rubes treated his appearances like the Nuremberg Rallies, but that only came after he was able to swing an entire political party and all its professional machinery away from the East Coast, elite-centric Rockefeller vision. That took ability and work in the trenches. The flag-waving cult of idiots that is now stamped indelibly on our picture of Reagan was a consequence, not a cause, of his "revolution" (such as it was).
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
I'd actually call Obama's charisma leading from form rather than content. Obama is very smart and the things Obama said were factually correct, but he preached with inspirational rather than intellectual force. Ironically Obama's charisma is most like Dubya of all recent presidents. Dubya was an idiot and the things he said varied between vacuous platitudes and outright lies, but his leadership was inspirational. Insofar as there are types of presidents, {Obama, Dubya, Carter, Kennedy} make up the empirical group and {Clinton, GHWB, Nixon, Ike} make up the ideational group. Ford is SSS and LBJ seems to fall exactly between the two.
I'd actually call Obama's charisma leading from form rather than content. Obama is very smart and the things Obama said were factually correct, but he preached with inspirational rather than intellectual force. Ironically Obama's charisma is most like Dubya of all recent presidents. Dubya was an idiot and the things he said varied between vacuous platitudes and outright lies, but his leadership was inspirational. Insofar as there are types of presidents, {Obama, Dubya, Carter, Kennedy} make up the empirical group and {Clinton, GHWB, Nixon, Ike} make up the ideational group. Ford is SSS and LBJ seems to fall exactly between the two.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Simply put, Obama "stutters" when he's thinking.
It's very common in academia. There are "um" people, and there are quiet people who you're never really sure whether they've completed their thought (like my wife -- that is MADDENING!), and there are other ways of basically denoting "processing" to the person you're talking to while you're working through the thought.
When Obama (or any pol) is on his typical rhetorical roll there's no break because it's a continuous flow of a pre-thought-out idea. Even if it's not on the actual teleprompter it's on the "internal teleprompter". We all do this when the interaction is boilerplate. The more complicated the ideas get, the more pauses there are. Bill Clinton's way of filling pauses is to charmingly interact with the questioner -- "Well, George, here's what I have to say about that..." in his down home drawl occupies roughly .003% of his CPU while the rest of it is doing search / analysis / respond. But they're both doing the same thing underneath. Bill just seems more natural and poised.
What makes Trump so weird is he never actually seems to be thinking at all. There's no backroom processing -- it's all just happening out there in real-time with the carnival barker. Now that itself may be an act, but it supports the impression that Trump is always speaking completely off the cuff. You know what they say: once you can fake sincerity you can fake anything.
Simply put, Obama "stutters" when he's thinking.
It's very common in academia. There are "um" people, and there are quiet people who you're never really sure whether they've completed their thought (like my wife -- that is MADDENING!), and there are other ways of basically denoting "processing" to the person you're talking to while you're working through the thought.When Obama (or any pol) is on his typical rhetorical roll there's no break because it's a continuous flow of a pre-thought-out idea. Even if it's not on the actual teleprompter it's on the "internal teleprompter". We all do this when the interaction is boilerplate. The more complicated the ideas get, the more pauses there are. Bill Clinton's way of filling pauses is to charmingly interact with the questioner -- "Well, George, here's what I have to say about that..." in his down home drawl occupies roughly .003% of his CPU while the rest of it is doing search / analysis / respond. But they're both doing the same thing underneath. Bill just seems more natural and poised.
What makes Trump so weird is he never actually seems to be thinking at all. There's no backroom processing -- it's all just happening out there in real-time with the carnival barker. Now that itself may be an act, but it supports the impression that Trump is always speaking completely off the cuff. You know what they say: once you can fake sincerity you can fake anything.
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
She should wait 4 years for when Kanye enters the race.
She should wait 4 years for when Kanye enters the race.
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
...and he seems to be right when it comes out. Or at least right for consistency in what he feels and thinks. Those are traits of a fairly effective leader. Now whether that translates into any kind of president is another story.
...and he seems to be right when it comes out. Or at least right for consistency in what he feels and thinks. Those are traits of a fairly effective leader. Now whether that translates into any kind of president is another story.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Yep, usually when you get somebody like that they contradict themselves every other sentence. He doesn't. Maybe it's because he always turns things back to one of three subjects, all of which he seems completely devoted to: (1) China is eating our lunch because we're being stupid, (2) the bestial brown horde is coming for our chaste high cheek boned blonde women, and (3) Donald Trump is a winner, everybody else is a loser.
Yep, usually when you get somebody like that they contradict themselves every other sentence. He doesn't. Maybe it's because he always turns things back to one of three subjects, all of which he seems completely devoted to: (1) China is eating our lunch because we're being stupid, (2) the bestial brown horde is coming for our chaste high cheek boned blonde women, and (3) Donald Trump is a winner, everybody else is a loser.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
The Aristocrats!
About half of all GOPers who call themselves likely to vote in the IA caucus want to round up all 11 million undocumented immigrants and deport them. For Trump, the number is 73%.
The Aristocrats!
About half of all GOPers who call themselves likely to vote in the IA caucus want to round up all 11 million undocumented immigrants and deport them. For Trump, the number is 73%.
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
"So, there's this family, see. A mother, a father, a little girl, a grandfather, and they all enter the stage, and..............."
A man walks into a talent agent's office and says, "Have I got an act for you!" "What is it?" replies the agent.
"So, there's this family, see. A mother, a father, a little girl, a grandfather, and they all enter the stage, and..............."
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Good article. Surprising for the NYT!
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/o...rod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&_r=1
Good article. Surprising for the NYT!
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/o...rod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&_r=1
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
That is a good article. This sentence is a pearl:
Translation to plain English: "George Will and the other Republican elites know you have to use code and dog whistles so that educated and intelligent people will still be able to rationalize their voting for a racist party."
That is a good article. This sentence is a pearl:
Translation to plain English: "George Will and the other Republican elites know you have to use code and dog whistles so that educated and intelligent people will still be able to rationalize their voting for a racist party."
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Wow. More than half whites feel that discrimination against whites is as big of a problem as discrimination against minorities. Not sure how that's possible, whites control this country and its society.
Wow. More than half whites feel that discrimination against whites is as big of a problem as discrimination against minorities. Not sure how that's possible, whites control this country and its society.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
much like pro-life = anti choice & pro-choice = anti life, the two parties have done a great job in twisting "us vs them" from rich & powerful vs poor and suppressed into black vs white and white vs black.
much like pro-life = anti choice & pro-choice = anti life, the two parties have done a great job in twisting "us vs them" from rich & powerful vs poor and suppressed into black vs white and white vs black.
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
I definitely feel oppressed. I think a few extra tax breaks might improve my mood though.
Yes yes I know polls are of somewhat limited value, but when do non-crazy people on the right start worrying that the nutter caucus (Trump, Carson, Cruz, Huckleberry, etc) are pulling over 50% in every poll I've seen so far? Doesn't bode well for the so called Republican Jesus caucus that the media keep telling us are going to win (Jebbers! Walker, Rubio).
http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32...1087/6f102b2c-508f-4bc3-8cd9-6f650f4bcc3a.pdf
I definitely feel oppressed. I think a few extra tax breaks might improve my mood though.
Yes yes I know polls are of somewhat limited value, but when do non-crazy people on the right start worrying that the nutter caucus (Trump, Carson, Cruz, Huckleberry, etc) are pulling over 50% in every poll I've seen so far? Doesn't bode well for the so called Republican Jesus caucus that the media keep telling us are going to win (Jebbers! Walker, Rubio).
http://www.monmouth.edu/assets/0/32...1087/6f102b2c-508f-4bc3-8cd9-6f650f4bcc3a.pdf
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
People's capacity for resentment is boundless. There was a poll at the height (depth) of the Great Recession that showed that members of the 1% felt "prejudiced against" by the rest of society. Privileged groups never see their privilege -- it's just the air they breath.
People's capacity for resentment is boundless. There was a poll at the height (depth) of the Great Recession that showed that members of the 1% felt "prejudiced against" by the rest of society. Privileged groups never see their privilege -- it's just the air they breath.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 - A Trump l'oeil? Kepler's Laws of Election Motions? Ship of Fools
Nah, the whites have a point. I mean do you realize we can't even own blacks anymore? If that's not oppression I don't know what is.
Nah, the whites have a point. I mean do you realize we can't even own blacks anymore? If that's not oppression I don't know what is.
- Status