Who Pledges Their Lives and Fortune to Trump

[yossarian22c]

I dunno, maybe it's not logical. Maybe he's making emotional decisions and trying to squeeze the last bit of control he can out of the end of his term, even if to no avail. The thing is, you can't have it both ways. Either Trump is a know-nothing basketcase who never knows what he wants or has any plan, lying and golfing his way through his Presidency, or he's an arch-schemer with devious plans and everything is calculated. Depending on what people don't like in a given day he's one or he's the other, whatever works. I don't see any reason to believe he is orchestrating a master plan to take over the country today, when yesterday he supposedly wasn't doing his job, spent all his time golfing, and didn't even bother reading reports. I think a guy planning to take over would want to know the terrain, not ignore reality. I don't even know which version of Trump-hate is more accurate, if any, but they are not consistent.

Or Trump is an impulsive, lazy, power hungry, populist con man who will say and do whatever thinks will benefit himself the most in the moment. Because he is sometimes good at reading people/the population it can make some of his actions look more calculated than they really are. I don't think he's a brilliant strategist but he is an opportunistic con man. Given the chance, the right cover, and the right situation at the DOD I can see him making a grab for power if he thought it would work. So him trying to install people calling for martial law at the DOD is an opportunity play. If he thinks he can get public sentiment and enough of the power structure in line he'll make the play otherwise he'll pass. Given his personality, his personnel choices post election, his public statements about the election, I think we ignore he's considering some unconstitutional play for power at our own peril.

[rightleft22]

I dunno, maybe it's not logical. Maybe he's making emotional decisions and trying to squeeze the last bit of control he can out of the end of his term, even if to no avail. The thing is, you can't have it both ways. Either Trump is a know-nothing basketcase who never knows what he wants or has any plan, lying and golfing his way through his Presidency, or he's an arch-schemer with devious plans and everything is calculated. Depending on what people don't like in a given day he's one or he's the other, whatever works. I don't see any reason to believe he is orchestrating a master plan to take over the country today, when yesterday he supposedly wasn't doing his job, spent all his time golfing, and didn't even bother reading reports. I think a guy planning to take over would want to know the terrain, not ignore reality. I don't even know which version of Trump-hate is more accurate, if any, but they are not consistent.

I think your framing the question as Either or maybe a false choice. Trump may be a arch-schemer without a clear plan?
Based on his actions its clear that one of his main motivations is to 'be a winner' and keep it all about him

His last days in office are odd. Refuses to admit he lost while not seeming to care about being President.

[Grant]

I dunno, maybe it's not logical. Maybe he's making emotional decisions and trying to squeeze the last bit of control he can out of the end of his term, even if to no avail. The thing is, you can't have it both ways. Either Trump is a know-nothing basketcase who never knows what he wants or has any plan, lying and golfing his way through his Presidency, or he's an arch-schemer with devious plans and everything is calculated.

I get what you're saying.  It reminds me of the SNL skit they had of Reagan, where he would appear as a bumbling and forgetful octogenarian one second, and then transform into a devious mastermind the next. 

But I don't think that a bunch of people are subscribing political masterminding to Donald Trump.  We're not talking about Iran-Contra here.  We're talking about hiring people for senior DOD jobs that are advocating for maxing out the executive powers and declaring martial law.  Over an election.  Where the courts have shot him down.  Over and over again.  And Republican Governors and legislatures are denying him.  This isn't a Brain move.  This is kind of a Pinky move.  Regardless of it's capacity to succeed, it's still somewhat over the line of what you'd want going on. 

If an idiot tries to steal my truck, and just can't seem to figure out how to hotwire it, it's still attempted theft.  Generally you really don't want a President that tries to pressure state government officials to overturn election results that have been certified by their respective boards and upheld by the court system, regardless of how lame the attempt is. 

[Fenring]

But I don't think that a bunch of people are subscribing political masterminding to Donald Trump.  We're not talking about Iran-Contra here.  We're talking about hiring people for senior DOD jobs that are advocating for maxing out the executive powers and declaring martial law.  Over an election.  Where the courts have shot him down.  Over and over again.  And Republican Governors and legislatures are denying him.  This isn't a Brain move.  This is kind of a Pinky move.  Regardless of it's capacity to succeed, it's still somewhat over the line of what you'd want going on. 

I get that it's not a strict binary either-or. But all I'm saying is that I've seen pretty much every accusation and epithet thrown at him, and often it strikes me as being whatever will suit the purpose of showing he's no-good. If he carries out a plan that was promised in advance (like trying to expand the wall) he's an evil racist; if he neglects to do something people think he should do he's a golfing president who doesn't take his job seriously. It's like, whatever he does there is a character trait (racist, lying, lazy, etc) that can be attributed to explain why it's bad. And I'm not even saying some of his moves aren't bad, that's not really the point. It's more like I have had a lot of trouble taking seriously these accusations any more. Just above Aris made yet another reference to the murder on 5th avenue schtick, which is just rhetorical game-playing in taking a stupid boastful statement and trying to attribute a murderous character to it. It's this kind of "proof" that has me rolling my eyes in terms of showing evidence of how much of a 'dictator' he is, and how much he 'loves and admires' Putin.

I can't even rule out that it's possible some idiot might try to declare martial law to avoid losing an election. But IMO the jump from any datum whatsoever to that conclusion seems both immediate and certain by the people who hate him. I guess my face will be red if he declares martial law next week.

[TheDrake]

The thing about Trump's 5th avenue statement wasn't that he's going to go out and shoot someone, its that he considers his support above the law. The sentiment says, "I can get away with anything illegal or unethical"

[rightleft22]

What ever label one applies to Trump he has been very effective at maintaining his base and dividing the country.
History will have to judge if their was intent and planning behind this 'achievement'  or if there was a specific endgame other then 'winning'  Trump was aiming for.

That we can't identify with certainty the intention behind much of Trumps actions and behavior suggests brilliance or something else. 

[Fenring]

The thing about Trump's 5th avenue statement wasn't that he's going to go out and shoot someone, its that he considers his support above the law. The sentiment says, "I can get away with anything illegal or unethical"

I even think that's an illogical parsing of it. The most reasonable interpretation of it is that he's so popular that his supporters wouldn't even care if he did that. Imputing some kind of legal implication is totally contextually unwarranted. The idea of getting away with a crime implies the courts will not prosecute. The idea of doing it and not losing any voters has nothing to do with getting away with it, it has to do with how inflexible voters' attitudes are and how they would support him even if he did that. It's a statement about them, not about him. I mean, it's about him insofar as it's his own popularity he's talking about, but it's about them in terms of them not deviating from supporting him.

[Aris Katsaris]

The most reasonable interpretation of it is that he's so popular that his supporters wouldn't even care if he did that.

1. Which is a bad thing, and which only a bad person would brag about. It'd be an insult to any good people supporting him.

2. The comment was not about not about the extent of his popularity (how *many* supporters he has) but about the depth of their loyalty.

--

Let's imagine the Pope saying to an audience of believing Catholics: "Thank you for your love. You love me so much that you wouldn't care even if was personally sexually abusing children."

Again, one couldn't even imagine a movie villain saying something that bad, unless it was a parody of a movie villain in a *comedy*. Trump is instead his own parody movie villain.

[Fenring]

1. Which is a bad thing, and which only a bad person would brag about. It'd be an insult to any good people supporting him.

I don't believe you would make this argument if it was anyone else and any other context. I see nothing inherently "bad" about stating that the American voters are nuts, which is basically what it amounts to. Or perhaps more broadly, that the American political landscape is nuts. Which it is. There, I'm saying it too, does that make me a bad person?

Now I can see how if you believe he enjoys how nuts it is and likes it the way he is, then I would tend to classify that as a fatcat aristocrat attitude; 'sure the system is unfair, but it's unfair in my favor '  I don't think that's a great attitude, but it's probably much more prevalent than you realize. I would hesitate to call anyone feeling that way "bad" since at it is the American social and political landscape tends to function on a 'winner takes all' mentality; success = personal worth, failure = you're a loser. It's not just bad people who think like that, it's practically the norm. Trump probably just takes it to a higher level since he's a self-involved 'winner' (i.e. is in the limelight).

[Wayward Son]

Actually, that is bad, Fenring.  It makes our country just another immoral and selfish country that only wants to dominate everyone else until we are eventually overthrown by another immoral and selfish country.

It drags through the muck every American ideal of fairness, lawfulness, justice, equality, and opportunity.  Not to mention democracy.  It makes us Russia.  It makes us China.  It makes us North Korea.  It makes us every other stinking nation where the rich rule and the poor and minorities only recourse is bloody revolution.

It may be more prevalent that I realize.  In fact, from the number of people who voted for Trump, I know it is.  And it saddens me, because it means this great nation of ours, this City on a Hill, is being undermined by the small-mindedness of a large portion of our population who never believed in American ideals, though they are more than happy to crucify anyone who disrespects the flag. 

[rightleft22]

I don't believe you would make this argument if it was anyone else and any other context. I see nothing inherently "bad" about stating that the American voters are nuts, which is basically what it amounts to. Or perhaps more broadly, that the American political landscape is nuts. Which it is. There, I'm saying it too, does that make me a bad person?

Saying it may not be 'bad'
If you manipulated, encourage and weaponized the crazy to metaphorically murder then I would say that makes you a immoral person and most definitely not a leader that should be followed/worshiped.

I thought that when Trump made that statement it wasn't about the crazy it was about his narcissism. Look how popular I am I can murder someone and grab any woman's pussy.  They let you do it when your famous you know.