May 30, 2016

"[O]ver the weekend I privately tested my claim that I could persuade an angry Trump-hater to become a Trump supporter in one hour."

"It turns out that I was wrong. It only took ten minutes."

Says Scott Adams — at the end of a post about his appearance on the Bill Maher show. He also says: "Some of you will say I persuaded him on the show to see the Clinton campaign as doomed. Did you see a turn?" Answer: yes.

ADDED: In case you're interested, here's Trump's entire "Rolling Thunder" event, with Trump arriving at 44:07:

110 comments:

mikee said...

I, for one, look forward to our new comics-driven political overlords.

Darrell said...

Try it on Chuck.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

I watched that Maher episode the other night, and while Adams sounded compelling, I would have to wonder at the prior fervor of the Trump hater. Although I have no hate, I despise the clown, and am hard pressed to envision an argument where I would morph to being a supporter.

traditionalguy said...

Rolling bikers are much in tune with Trump's realist approach and saying what he believes. That is their way of life too.

SteveR said...

The election of 2008 set the stage for this year's race. People are upset that we would consider this unserious and bombastic Trump character to be President. Well know you know how I felt then. The intervening 7+ years have not altered that reality. The alternative is Hillary. Pick one or the other. Your principled BS may fool you, but not me. What you like, or want, is unimportant.

Paddy O said...

The Democrats offer the least capable candidate and the Republicans offer, thus, the antidote candidate, the one who can outbluster the Clintons. Even as someone who does not, in the least, like Trump as a person and think he is the worst candidate to run for President in my lifetime, he still has more promise than Hillary Clinton.

Trump may surprise me. The Clintons will mire us in yet another long cycle of shame and scandal and lies. We know Hillary is not good at her jobs and is a congenital liar.

Trump is a blowhard, but in a job like this may work something out. I doubt I will ever like him as a person, but that's not really the choice.

I genuinely think the Clintons are dangerous for our political structure. Their open embrace of corruption and circling around their small tribe for wealth and protection reminds me much more of Spanish rule, which leads to corrupted societies full of privilege and abuse and built on bribes.

In a time of challenge, we're choosing between two highly flawed, awful candidates. It's going to be a very low turnout year.

Hagar said...

"May you live in interesting times."

Our world is going to look quite different by 2020.

Jason said...

The three best reasons to vote for Trump over Clinton or any third party candidate:

1.) Scalia's seat
2.)Ginsburg's seat
3.) Kennedy's seat.

This, plus a lot of essential liberties that were lost to or preserved only by 5-4 decisions, will propel me to crawl over broken glass to cast my vote to keep the libtards out of office, and out of the cabinet and sub cabinet positions from which they torment us and abuse their authority and the Constitution.

Trump doesn't have a constitutionalist bone in his body - but at least he's not actively hostile to it, unlike the woman who pushed to have one arrest filmmaker arrested to appease Islamist tyrants and who went to court to suppress the production or distribution of another film.

AReasonableMan said...

The arrogance of the right wing commentariat continues to amaze me. This is the WSJ‘s Bret Stephens: Trump Must Lose So Badly That the GOP Voters ‘Learn Their Lesson’. These people have become so comfortable dictating the terms of political thought that they still cannot grasp even the most basic principles of how democracies work.

Amexpat said...

In a time of challenge, we're choosing between two highly flawed, awful candidates. It's going to be a very low turnout year.

Agree with your first sentence, disagree with the second. Trump is going to generate a huge interest in the campaign and will get many people to vote who normally don't do so. I also think that the high negatives that they both have will motivate a lot voters to vote against one of them.

SteveR said...

@ARM The difference between establishment Republicans (to include those in the media like Bret Stephens) and liberals (to include anyone who votes democratic) is indistinguishable.

Rob McLean said...

Although I have no hate, I despise

Hmmmm?

Michael K said...

I agree with Paddy O and with ARM (This had better not get to be a habit).

When you see the train heading for the cliff, you pull the cord to stop it. You don't worry much about what comes after.

I particularly agree with this.

Their open embrace of corruption and circling around their small tribe for wealth and protection reminds me much more of Spanish rule, which leads to corrupted societies full of privilege and abuse and built on bribes.

I think this is why Spanish ruled societies don't work. Tell me what Spanish ruled society, even after 200 years, is successful ? It's not racial as Argentina is mostly populated by European immigrants.

I don't know what Trump will do but I am hopeful. Bill Clinton was over ruled by the voters in 1994 but that GOP which rescued us from his leftist muddle has also been corrupted.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

@Rob - Hate requires a level of emotion that I cannot muster for such a buffoon. You may not separate the two emotions, but I can.

Achilles said...

Constitutional Insurgent said...
"I watched that Maher episode the other night, and while Adams sounded compelling, I would have to wonder at the prior fervor of the Trump hater. Although I have no hate, I despise the clown, and am hard pressed to envision an argument where I would morph to being a supporter."

1. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform
2. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/second-amendment-rights
3. 3 supreme court nominations. Trump listed the judges he would consider. Compare that to who Hillary will elect.
4.https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/tax-reform
5. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform

If you can't take these arguments you are no conservative. The only people in the #nevertrump camp at this point are DC shills and Hillary moby's.

AReasonableMan said...

Michael K said...
I think this is why Spanish ruled societies don't work.


It is in large part endemic corruption that accounts for this. For their many faults, northern European societies have been some of the least corrupt societies in human history. Given the numerous benefits of living in a low corruption society it is amazing that this quality has not become more prevalent in other societies, but it hasn't. For a long time the US had corruption levels similar to northern Europe. I am not sure that this is true any more. My current lack of enthusiasm for more immigration is closely linked to this problem. Our society is steadily becoming less egalitarian and more chronically corrupt. It is not a racial issue, eastern Europeans are hopelessly corrupt, as are many southern Europeans. Once corruption becomes endemic in a society it is apparently almost impossible to eradicate. People conform to the prevalent social norms.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

@Achilles - Thank you for proving my point made in the other post. Thank you indeed.

M Jordan said...

The pundit class beclowns themselves daily with their groupthink. Fox News panels are now 1 anti-Trump moderator passing the ball around to 3 or 4 anti-Trump panelists. Yesterday it was all how terrible Trump's attacks on Susanna Martinez were. It's like an endless rerun where they keep shouting righteous outrage, keep being proven totally wrong, then repeat.

But yesterday I came upon a truly non-groupthink piece in Salon of all places that shows how the latest iteration of the groupthink narrative (Begrudging "Trump could, in a crazy world, eke out a win but most likely it's Hillary in a landslide") is as wrong as all the previous ones. It's at http://www.salon.com/2016/05/29/we_may_be_just_this_screwed_donald_trump_has_an_easier_path_to_victory_than_you_think/ and truly worth a read.

Achilles said...

Constitutional Insurgent said...
"@Achilles - Thank you for proving my point made in the other post. Thank you indeed."

And I just shot down your stupidity on the other thread.

Trump is campaigning on these positions. You support them or you don't. Saying you wont support him because you don't really think he believes in these positions is a cowards move. It is how conservatives lose to democrats. If you want to be a coward and lose to Hillary fine. But you are worthy of only contempt.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

And there you go......it's no wonder you support Trump. You're of like intellect.

boycat said...

Those wedded to seeing everything along a left-right axis are the ones who don't get and don't want Trump. Ideologues; the last thing they want is elected officials doing things for the right reasons.

Oso Negro said...

Scott Adams! Is there ANYTHING he can't do?

buwaya puti said...

I don't know that corruption is in itself the defining characteristic of Spanish governance. Countries have had overwhelming levels of corruption and yet managed to progress. South Korea's crony capitalism (massive corruption by US standards) worked, or at any rate did not preclude massive material progress. The same with Taiwan. Decades following the field of development economics tells me that all such dogmatic formulas are of very limited value.
The distinctive character of Spanish colonial governance was centralization. Power was concentrated in the colonial capital, for most things of substance, and a very great deal was, foolishly, reserved for Madrid. Oddly, Spain itself for most of the colonial period had quite decentralized governance. The best analogue for what the Spanish were trying to do was France.

Achilles said...

Constitutional Insurgent said...
"And there you go......it's no wonder you support Trump. You're of like intellect."

Not supporting Trump doesn't make you smart. It doesn't make you smarter than me. It is the last bastion of vanity for people who want to signal how smart they are. There are 2 groups of "smarter" people. The NRO crowd and the bitter Cruz supporters.

NRO and all of the smart people wont support Trump. You can be like them! Maybe they will let me on their Cruise so you can lick their boots. Maybe you can go to CPAC and hang out with all of the other wine drinking sots in DC. The parasite attached to Maryland sucking the life out of the country has a bunch of "conservatives" who just had their rice bowl kicked over.

Or maybe you are a despondent Cruz supporter. I started the campaign supporting Cruz. But it became clear he was a poor candidate very early on. Right ideas, sure loser.

The point is I understand these paradigms. I am not going to pigeon hole you into one yet but you have all of the hallmarks of a bitter Cruz supporter. Now Trump is championing all of the ideas you like and it is galling and his supporters are so... american. Look at all those... people out there. And Trump talks like one of them. He isn't erudite or smooth on the stump. He doesn't use a teleprompter and carefully plot out every word he says. They aren't true conservatives. You are a TRUE conservative. You are so conservative you can't possibly believe that Trump actually likes these ideas and will fight for them. Only an idiot would support this.

Most people think they are smarter than you actually are. Yes that includes me.

Chuck said...

I should like to meet Scott Adams for a drink. I think that in the course of one hour, there is not a single laudatory thing about Trump that I couldn't refute.

And of course, there are a tiny handful of reasons for someone like me to actually vote for Trump. They have absolutely nothing to do with anything that Scott Adams believes. Unless Scott Adams went secretly to law school and was secretly part of his law school's chapter of the Federalist Society.

As mentioned above by Jason, the (only?) three outstanding reasons to vote for Trump are as Jason stated:
1.) Scalia's seat
2.)Ginsburg's seat
3.) Kennedy's seat.


I can't imagine that Scott Adams wakes up every morning thinking about the results in Heller, Citizens United, the Scalia dissents in Lawrence, Windsor and Obergefell, or the implications of Holder v Shelby County on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

So without any of that, I presume Scott Adams' interest in the 2016 general election is his pop-culture interest in the prediction that Trump will win in a landslide.

Hagar said...

We spent eighty years getting into this mess. We are not getting out in four.

Chuck said...

And since today is Memorial Day and this thread kicked off on the subject of Rolling Thunder -- an event consecrated in order to honor the memories and the causes of Vietnam era POW's and MIA's -- let's all remember that Donald Trump is, perhaps alone in the sordid history of American political calumny, just about the only idiot with sufficient ignorance and arrogance to have said of one of America's bravest and most gallant Vietnam-era POW's, "I like people who weren't captured."

It is a sentiment that could induce vomiting.

buwaya puti said...

You can add to the reasons to vote for Trump his speech in North Dakota concerning energy policy and deregulation. This is my particular hobby horse, I don't know if it works for you.

buwaya puti said...

Chuck, your stomach seems a bit delicate for politics.

gadfly said...

Dilbert is wrong again. "He [Trump] was smart enough to pick the topics with the most emotional power. It was intentional."

Trump's selection of topics to engender emotional reactions is not smart, honest or ethical. As a principled candidate for the high office of President, we should demand to know his ideals, his motivation and his well-considered plans/vision for the future.

When Scott Adams appeared on Bill Maher's show, he himself abandoned honest opinion for entertaining banter - not to mention participating in the fake conversion of a so-called #NeverTrumper. Sorry - I do not like Trump and I cannot understand why Scott Adams finds him the least bit appealing.

Michael K said...

"For a long time the US had corruption levels similar to northern Europe. I am not sure that this is true any more. "

I think it is Protestant Ethic. It has been said that the revocation of The Edict of Nantes sent the Industrial Revolution to England as the Huguenots left France for England after 1685.

I was raised Catholic but the Protestant religion seemed to focus more on morality and less on life after death. The Calvinists were the most extreme, believing that salvation was a reflection of your behavior in life. If you lived a good life, it was evidence that you were to be saved. "Predestination" was one version but it is often misunderstood, I think. You behaved well to show you were a good person and deserved salvation.

My uncle, who was Anglican, explained his version of this to me as a child.

I'm an agnostic but it still seems the best explanation of the advantages of northern European society, after The Peace of Westphalia, of course.

Corruption among US elites has been common all through our history. Still, the common people followed the principles of the Protestant religion largely. Jews and Catholics also behaved as though they agreed. Now, we see a whole generation which adopted such things as global warming as religion and which seems unable to identify corruption when it is staring them in the face.

“I have known a vast quantity of nonsense talked about bad men not looking you in the face. Don’t trust that conventional idea. Dishonesty will stare honesty out of countenance, any day in the week, if there is anything to be got by it.”

–Charles Dickens

Bill Peschel said...

Chuck, if you want the power of the presidency to be curtailed, vote Trump.

Remember, dissent is the highest form of patriotism under a GOP prez, and treasonous (and in the last 8 years, racist) under a D.

How's that argument?

Michael K said...

"said of one of America's bravest and most gallant Vietnam-era POW's, "I like people who weren't captured."

It is a sentiment that could induce vomiting."

Chuck, Trump is not given to euphemism but I think he was expressing a sentiment that some of us agree. To quote another military person:

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his. "

McCain did not accept the NV offer to exchange him as the son of CINCPac but he broke under torture. I have no idea of how I would behave but there were others who did not break.

buwaya puti said...

I think a more complete explanation for (relative) British lack of corruption is that the British lacked the opportunity.
Where they had it they went for it wholesale. Consider the situation in India, the material dredged up in the impeachment of Warren Hastings.
Britain itself was essentially ungoverned domestically, until very late in the 19th century there being no central government presence to speak of.
British colonies tended to be governed with a very light hand, other than with respect to peace and order.

Chuck said...

Michael K said...
"said of one of America's bravest and most gallant Vietnam-era POW's, "I like people who weren't captured."

It is a sentiment that could induce vomiting."

Chuck, Trump is not given to euphemism but I think he was expressing a sentiment that some of us agree. To quote another military person:

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his. "

McCain did not accept the NV offer to exchange him as the son of CINCPac but he broke under torture. I have no idea of how I would behave but there were others who did not break.



Don't pull that shit on me. At least not in the name of Donald Trump.

Donald Trump was a draft dodger.

Kathryn51 said...

Blogger Amexpat said

".. . .I also think that the high negatives that they both have will motivate a lot voters to vote against one of them."

I live in a very blue state where my vote won't matter, but my intense, visceral hatred of Hillary may be the one reason I hold my nose and vote for Trump.

buwaya puti said...

The desire for a serious examination of plans, ideals, and etc. is understandable for a certain type of mind. But many years as a political aficionado has taught me that there are very few people indeed who want to bother. Even in an academic environment it is difficult to have a real discussion on substance, a dialectic, a comparison, verification and acceptance of facts, and dispassionate arguments based on agreed facts.
As it happens there is a lot of unrigorous argument that pretends to be the sort of thing we would like it to be, but with a bit of examination these prove to be a facade, a masquerade of rigor, designed for rhetorical effect just as much as any Trumpist slogan.
Political reality is much more as Scott Adams says, persuasion being an irrational thing. We can hate the truth but truth it is.

AReasonableMan said...

buwaya puti said...
I don't know that corruption is in itself the defining characteristic of Spanish governance. Countries have had overwhelming levels of corruption and yet managed to progress. South Korea's crony capitalism (massive corruption by US standards) worked, or at any rate did not preclude massive material progress. The same with Taiwan. Decades following the field of development economics tells me that all such dogmatic formulas are of very limited value.


South Korea, while not great, is not especially corrupt by global standards or even by the standards of the countries in question. Japan is pretty good. No one is saying that there is a single explanation. I agree with Michael that the Protestant religion is also a huge factor. I would also add the legal system, the Spanish and Italian legal systems make the US system look good, no small feat.

Countries in South America have tried a vast array of different governing systems over the centuries without noticeable improvement. Corruption and a lack of appreciation for the value of an egalitarian system (both closely linked to religion), as well as the legal system, are the constants.

Drago said...

lifelong republican" chuck: "Donald Trump was a draft dodger"

We are mere moments away from the moby's resuscitating "chickenhawk" as a campaign meme.

Chuck said...

There is nothing, other than Scott Adams's own description, to document that Scott Adams "tested [his] claim that [he] could persuade an angry Trump-hater to become a Trump supporter in one hour." And in fact did so in ten minutes.

Right? WTF?

Did anybody read the latest Scott Adams blog post? It's one of his most banal, time-wasting entries to date on the subject of Trump.

Adams starts by breaking the American political world into a massively false dichotomy; "climate change"-believing Democrats, and another group which Adams presumes thinks that climate change is a "hoax."

I'll spare you the mindless blather between his first and last paragraphs, but in the end, Adams concludes that Donald Trump probably thinks that climate change is "real," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean, but that Trump might personally finesse the issue if he'd only take up Adams' suggestion to have a national televised debate with scientists and communications professionals to settle it once and for all. Adams thinks that partisans on both sides might like the fight.

Adams concludes with what he thinks is some private pearl of wisdom, to wit;

Does Trump really believe climate change is a hoax? Let me tell you the answer to that question in the clearest possible terms, based on everything I know about the field of persuasion.

Answer: No

But he might have doubts about the predictive ability of models. That’s a separate question.


Well, whaddaya know. Scott Adams could have read the OpnionJournal section of the Wall Street Journal, and figured that out. Yeah, Scott, the predictive ability of lots of models are in real doubt, and that's a pretty big issue. The Corleone Family had lotsa predictive models.




Hagar said...

I had not thought of it, but I think buwaya puti is onto something with the insight that Britain's very successful policy of loose and independent-minded colonial government was not due to any high-brow intellectual philosophy, but simply a consequence of not having much government at home either. The English has been a violent and unruly people - or conglomeration of peoples - all through known history and, at least until recent years, have not been much susceptible to central government control.

Chuck said...

Drago, I thought everybody knew the story about Trump's draft-dodging. Maybe not. Because I like to rub people's noses in stuff like this, here goes; the Smoking Gun's publication of Trump's draft record, with the full use of student deferments followed by a quick switch to a physical deferment based on "heel spurs." A condition that is treated by surgery in people who have it to the extent that it interferes with their lives. Except Trump never had any surgery. And he went skiing and played golf extensively over the ensuing years.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/trump-draft-deferment

Hagar said...

Chuck, that's babble. "Climate change" is entirely based on the predictive ability of models.

gadfly said...

Drago said...
lifelong republican" chuck: "Donald Trump was a draft dodger"

We are mere moments away from the moby's resuscitating "chickenhawk" as a campaign meme.

Good Idea! "Chickenhawk Trump" has that certain "ring" about it.

buwaya puti said...

South Korea now isn't what it was, and moreover I don't think those measures take into account the government-corporate collusion inherent in their system. Same with Japan.
I don't maintain the need for a single explanation, but rather that there is NO explanation, within the standard range of factors usually considered. If multiple factors were in play an explanatory model would be possible, with weighted factors in whatever complex interactions work best. After all, if we can pretend to model global climate we can pretend to model this. With a model, we can create formulas for remediation through public policies.
However, that approach in a vast range of variants has been attempted over 70 years, and it just doesn't work.

Hagar said...

I think you need to add at least one zero to those 70 years.

cubanbob said...

buwaya puti the mentality of the Spanish was El Dorado. Grab the gold. That they stayed for four hundred years was an afterthought. That mentality has lead to the governing ethos of every Latin American country: grab the gold. So the civilian leaderships robs as much as it can until the Army steps in and it grabs as much gold as it can until the communists come into power. There are occasional oscillations such as in Argentina between the fascists/socialists and the Army and in Chile's case the salvation of the country from the communist by the Army but on the whole Latin America has been and will continue to be a disaster.

Hagar said...

At that, "the American colonies" were all English, founded on the English system, and the inhabitants pretty much acting like the English, haven't they?

Chuck said...

Hagar said...
Chuck, that's babble. "Climate change" is entirely based on the predictive ability of models.


Of course it is. Models that are so complex and so untested that nobody can possibly know what sort of benefit, if any, we might get out of something like a Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standard of 33, or 43, or 53 m.p.g. Or 50 more, or less coal-fired power plants. Or the difference between 50 coal plants and 50 natural gas plants. Or 50% ethanol fuel.

If you are suggesting that Scott Adams is supplying "babble," I agree. If you are claiming that I am supplying babble, I don't understand. Scott Adams is suggesting that Donald Trump is likely a "believer" in climate change. (Which might make some of Adams' p.c. millennial readership feel yummy about Donald Trump.) But by the end of the column I have no idea what Adams really means. I don't know how anybody could possibly make sense of it.



AReasonableMan said...

buwaya puti said...
I don't maintain the need for a single explanation, but rather that there is NO explanation


This is nonsense, just look at the map. Low corruption states aren't created by magic, there are clearly common factors. Equally obviously, there is an explanation, as difficult as it may be to conclusively prove that explanation.

Your focus on government is wrong, full stop. People get the government they deserve. If they are tolerant of a corrupt system they never get anything better. The Euro zone contains uniformly intrusive governments yet the people in some countries are intolerant of corruption while others sink under the weight of endemic corruption.

buwaya puti said...

The Spanish philosophy, after the first few years, was definitely not to "grab the gold", or rather the silver, which was a much bigger deal. The gold was a state monopoly and was no sort of factor in colonial governance in most of the empire.

The Spanish ethic, the ambition, was rent-seeking, looking for government favors, contracts, land grants, monopolies, subsidies, employment and pensions.

buwaya puti said...

Yes, the map. I see corruption, most of it, as a reaction to conditions. Under many regimes corruption is in large part a way to bypass bad government and make life livable. Or a way to social mobility where it is otherwise impossible. More an effect than a cause.

buwaya puti said...

As per Trump in North Dakota, he has said that global warming is a fraud and his plank is to eliminate all such regulatory constraints based on it. Of course, he may say something else later.

Hagar said...

I apologize, Chuck. Should have read it one more time. It is Scott Adams that babbles. The predictive ability of (computer) models is not a separate question when the whole "Climate Change" theory is based on those models, ignoring all else we know about climate changes through the ages.

cubanbob said...

buwaya puti "grab the gold" means grab the money, the rest of what you said is simply expanding on my point. It was always about grabbing the money and still is today.

Rob McLean said...

Constitutional Insurgent said...
@Rob - Hate requires a level of emotion that I cannot muster for such a buffoon. You may not separate the two emotions, but I can.


Ah, nuance!

Never waste hatred on public figures. Hatred should be reserved for the people who really deserve it: your family and friends.

buwaya puti said...

Note that Spanish rent-seeking was a domestic, peninsular thing, not something only of the colonies. People would go to the colonies because they were looking for an opportunity to set themselves up as the local gentry.
This desire is loud and clear from the earliest days. Read Bernal Diaz, it's explicit. He and his plebian compatriots expected to be rewarded not with gold, but his own lands and Indians to rule.
I forget who said it -
"The ambition of every Spaniard is to marry a duchess"

cubanbob said...

Hagar said...
I apologize, Chuck. Should have read it one more time. It is Scott Adams that babbles. The predictive ability of (computer) models is not a separate question when the whole "Climate Change" theory is based on those models, ignoring all else we know about climate changes through the ages.

5/30/16, 1:58 PM"

I'll start taking "climate change" somewhat seriously when the models start predicting the present state from the model's origination point without "normalizing" and other data massaging and outcome techniques.

Char Char Binks said...

Maybe Adams will do a cold reading or a séance and concince people that George Washington, Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King want us to vote for Trump.

cubanbob said...

Char Char Binks said...
Maybe Adams will do a cold reading or a séance and concince people that George Washington, Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King want us to vote for Trump.

5/30/16, 2:12 PM"

Brilliant idea! Put it on pay-per-view and the proceeds could finance a large part of the budget deficit.

Chuck said...

Hagar

No hard feelings!

Honestly, I'm not sure how clear I was. It is such a trainwreck of a blog post by Scott Adams; it was hard to contextualize in less than an additional 1500 words. Gibberish doesn't lend itself to a concise summary.

Michael said...

Chuck:

Refute this. At around 35 years of age Trump acquired the shuttered Commodore Hotel from the bankrupt Penn Central Railroad. Think about that for a second and compare to your own accomplishment at 35. Trump then negotiated a management contract with the Hyatt Corporation for the branding and operation of the hotel, once re-opened. Again, think of that. Trump then negotiated with contractors, suppliers and all of the necessary trades in a heavily unionized city to have the shuttered hotel rebuilt to Hyatt's exacting standards. Et tu?

Refute as well, the job he did in reopening the skating rink in Central Park after years of disuse and the city's inability to get it fixed and opened again.

Refute away.

Chuck said...

My God, Trump has certainly got a lot of mileage out of a skating rink renovation project. For $2.25 million. Yeah, he did it better than the government of the Borough of Manhattan. Talk about low bars for performance.

Meanwhile, Jeb Bush was managing the $60 billion budget of the State of Florida.


AReasonableMan said...

Chuck said...
Meanwhile, Jeb Bush was managing the $60 billion budget of the State of Florida.


He was was also actively encouraging a massive property bubble that eventually wiped out the entire wealth of 30% of his subjects.

Nyamujal said...

"On a related note, over the weekend I privately tested my claim that I could persuade an angry Trump-hater to become a Trump supporter in one hour. It turns out that I was wrong. It only took ten minutes. "

Well Scott, I can only conclude that the person you tried this on isn't a sucker.

"We are not a rational species."

Sorry buddy, I guess not falling for your and Trump's BS makes us irrational.

John said...

Did you serve Chuck?

Nyamujal said...

If Trump loses this election, Scott Adams should switch careers and join the pick up artist community. He can use his powerful powers of persuasion to convince virgins that they can get laid too, only if they buy his books and seminars for 4 easy payments of $19.99.

Nyamujal said...

Well, seems like Chuck, and on occasion Simon, are the only interesting voices in an otherwise bland and boring pro-Trump circle jerk fest ya'll have going on here.

John said...


I'll start taking "climate change" somewhat seriously when the models start predicting the present state from the model's origination point without "normalizing" and other data massaging and outcome techniques.


Yeah, remember the hiatus that IPCC found in its 1913 (yr?) report? No warming at all since 1998?

Well, they went back and manipulated the formula by which the actual data are adjusted. Surprise surprise! No pause or hiatus. Temps went right on rising.

All caused by a 0.005 percentage point rise in CO2. (350 to 400ppm)

And no, unless you are a true believer and part of the cabal, you cannot see the original raw measurements nor the formula. You must take their word for it and if you dissent they will sue your ass.

Not a scam or hoax? Bullshit.

I am not necessarily a denier. We may have had as much as 5 degrees of warming over the past 100 years. Or 5 degrees cooling. The data is such shit that it is impossible to know.

Just for giggles, everybody does know that in addition to the 400ppm of CO2 in the air, you are also breathing 10,000ppm of argon, 210,000 ppm of oxygen and 780,000ppm of nitrogen!!!!

OMIGOD!!! 780,000ppm? Into our lungs 30 or so times per minute? WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!

John said...


Meanwhile, Jeb Bush was managing the $60 billion budget of the State of Florida.



Please clap.

John Henry

n.n said...

an opportunity to set themselves up as the local gentry

It continues today in America, South Africa, and around the world, where anti-native politicians groom minority leaders to mind class leverage. What the newly appointed leaders lacked in their homelands is granted to them through immigration and exodus by opportunistic parties. With sufficient redistribution of opiates and creating sanctuaries from normal human and civil standards, as well as common moral standards, the fiefdoms progress and usurp authority in established communities disenfranchising the people and posterity.

walter said...

"I like people who weren't captured."

Said the man who survived his bone spur.

Michael K said...

"Don't pull that shit on me. At least not in the name of Donald Trump.

Donald Trump was a draft dodger."

What branch did you serve in, chuck ?

Want to compare DD 214s ?

Military service is not a requirement for the presidency since draft dodger and liar Clinton defeated Bush who did serve honorably.

It is a shame that there is so little military experience among US citizens and politicians. It was once almost a requirement but that was a very different era.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

"It is a shame that there is so little military experience among US citizens and politicians."

On this I agree completely.

walter said...

"What branch did you serve in"

A redirect from the critique while engaging the sort of logic that some women use to disqualify men's view on abortion etc.

Michael K said...

"while engaging the sort of logic that some women use to disqualify men's view on abortion "

I just thought chuck might be an authority on the military since he was so nauseated.

eric said...

Blogger Chuck said...
Drago, I thought everybody knew the story about Trump's draft-dodging.


For a guy who said he was going to vote for Trump, it's sure not sounding like it.

eric said...

Blogger walter said...
"What branch did you serve in"

A redirect from the critique while engaging the sort of logic that some women use to disqualify men's view on abortion etc.


You're mixing things up here.

It's one thing to argue that you can't comment on Abortion if you're not a woman.

It's another thing entirely to be critical of someone for something that you've done yourself.

Michael K said...

"It's another thing entirely to be critical of someone for something that you've done yourself."

I am not pretending virtue, just asking. If chuck has been in the military, and there are commenters here with far more military experience than I have had, he has a right to criticize Trump for evading.

Clinton on the other hand lied to get out of serving and admitted it.

Heel spurs are disqualifying. We test for them.

jacksonjay said...

"I like people who weren't captured."

Said the man who survived his bone spur.

You failed to mention his heroic avoidance of STD's during his time of service!

Chuck said...

Michael, I have no military experience. It is one if my biggest regrets, and it is certainly my loss.

I registered and got a draft card in my senior year of high school (1974). I was 1-A. And then they ended the draft at almost the same time. I became, I think it was, 1-H. They ended the war in Vietnam while I was stil a freshman or sophomore at Michigan. ROTC recruiting was nonexistent; the public interest in the military was sadly at one of the lowest ebbs of the century and I was getting through without any college loans.

I am ten years younger than Donald Trump. I have an older brother, now on the medical faculty at Northwestern, who took his physical and was 1-A, but with a high lottery number. We both had friends with older brothers in what would have been Trump's age group. We knew of guys who had gotten shot up, and guys who had crossed the Detroit River into Canada to evade the draft. Our dad had served in the Eighth Air Force in WW II and an uncle who piloted a Superfortress in raids on Japan.

I know precisely what I would have done had my number been called, having thought hard about it in the last days of the draft. I would have served, with the blessing and support of my entire family.

And the older I get, the more I appreciate the sacrifice of everybody who wore a military uniform of any rank, and the more awestruck I am, by those who served in combat. I'd like to think I'd choke on the words, before saying what Teump did about PIW's.

Michael said...

jacksonjay

Good point. Plus he didn't get caught getting blowjobs from interns who worked for him. If he had I doubt if his wife, whichever one at that time, would have been all mad faced at the intern slut who asked for it.

walter said...

It's one thing to argue that you can't comment on Abortion if you're not a woman.
It's another thing entirely to be critical of someone for something that you've done yourself.
--
Except..he wasn't criticizing Trump for not serving period. Was criticizing him for evading draft. Now if heel spurs are disqualifying, perhaps he didn't.
But the parallel is there in terms of the woman suggesting if you don't share the status, you don't have right to an opinion.
In fact, there are certainly instances of being too close to a subject to prevent emotions overriding logic.
But it is awfully interesting to consider Trump's background when considering his opinion on being a POW. There is mobile home not far from where I grew up that still as an homage to POWs next to a flag. I wonder how that person took that mouthful.

Michael K said...

" I'd like to think I'd choke on the words, before saying what Teump did about PIW's."

I don't commend Trump on what he said and am well aware that he is a loose cannon.

One the other hand, there has been speculation, which may be wholly unjustified, about POW/MIAs who may not have been returned and McCain and Kerry's enthusiastic embrace of North Vietnam.

I was in before Vietnam and was content that I did not have to go there as I had already served. Both my partners in practice, like me, had been enlisted men in the military before medical school. The only people I knew in college who served, with the exception of one guy who I think became a fighter pilot, were doctors. Not many people were shooting at doctors but I did know one guy with a silver star.

Clinton is the worst example of a draft dodger I know of. Trump is just typical of kids who were in school and, like Cheney, avoided serving by perfectly legal means.

My only objection to your comment was the extreme terms about Trump. I am not a fan of his and have previously expressed my reservations.

However, what is is.

Michael K said...

"But it is awfully interesting to consider Trump's background when considering his opinion on being a POW."

I think that is fair and don;t think Trump helped himself with the comment. On the other hand, I am happy to support McCain's opponent in the Arizona primary. I was a volunteer for McCain in 2000 but that was 16 years ago.

PuertoRicoSpaceport.com said...

We might also mention that McCain's record as a Naval officer and Naval Aviator before being shot down was something less than stellar.

When released, the POWs got 2 step bumps in rank. McCain got just one, to commander (equal to Lt Col)

He managed to hang on as long as he did because of his father and grandfather.

He was not much of a sailor, though his POW behavior may have been exemplary.

narciso said...

I think he made captain, although his injuries probably made rising to cag difficult, but maverick has used the pow status as a shield to obscure his throwing the match in 2008, his support of libyan and syrian salafi rebels, etc,

John said...

I am firmly on the Trump train, more and more every day. I am, as several people have said in various places, yanking as hard as I can on that emergency stop cord before we go over the cliff. I'll take my chances on what happens after we stop.

I am all in for Trump, warts and all.

On the other hand, having just watched his speech (no notes, no teleprompters that I could see, straight from the heart as far as I can tell) there are a couple of things that bother the bejabbers out of me.

1) He says we don't manufacture anything in the US anymore. BS. We are still the largest manufacture in the world by value. By physical volume? Not so much. We specialize in high value stuff that pays workers well. At least better than sewing sock toes for minimum wage, for example.

2) Our manufacturing jobs have gone overseas. BS. Here is a chart showing the percentage of manufacturing jobs to total non-farm jobs since 1940.

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rqBqAjRKBYg/VwfLa0Y5uaI/AAAAAAAAK08/Nuve0SRC9CUfpovuqzw84pjkmXvbtoBQg/s640/Ratio%2Bof%2BManufacturing%2BEmployment%2Bto.png

Pretty steady and consistent decline from 1946 to today. Actually seems to have leveled off some in the past 10 years or so. The process that used to require 10-15 operators doing manual labor is now done by a machine. The machine requires less labor to build, run and maintain but the skill level and pay is much higher. It also triples or quadruples the output.

3) We buy trillion$ from China and they don't buy anything from us. BS. He then goes on to explain how they buy (lease) real estate from him. Does nobody besides me notice this? In the past he has talked about how the Chinese are some of his best customers for condos.

All you need do is ask what they do with their dollars. They buy US stuff with them. It's the only thing that can be done with them. Unfortunately, too much of what they buy is T-Bills and such but those dollars do get spent in the US.

So I am for Trump, warts and all. This is just one of the warts that drives me nuts because there is no way he (or Obama, or Hilary, or Sanders who say the same things) should be able to say stuff like this without the audience roaring back at them: BULLSHIT!!!!

John Henry

John said...

Narciso,

He did eventually make captain. But about 5 years after release. Had he been treated like the other POWs he would have been bumped to captain (2 steps) on release.

Nobody seems to know why he was the only one who was not. At least nobody that knows wants to talk about it.

John Henry

narciso said...

I don't ponder too much on it, I first became aware of him at the 88 convention, then he ran afoul of keating, and the soros braintrust played on his sense of honor to push campaign finance reform,

narciso said...

he seemed impressive then, but he we discovered he was too prone to slights, and too willing to break bread with the opposition, ie john kerry, a little like bill weld, who offered himself as us ambassador to mexico, under clinton,

William said...

I don't think anyone of that generation was in a big hurry to win a CIB. McCain and Bush served because it was part of the family tradition. I knew some guys who went to Vietnam. None of them came from wealthy, influential families........What Trump said about McCain was flat wrong, and he should apologize. Nonetheless, I will vote for him......Trump like Clinton probably didn't want to get shot at in jungle paddies, but Clinton was more of a sanctimonious hypocrite about it. It's amazing how often the high ideals of humanity coincide with the best interests of the Clintons.

narciso said...

Clinton's lecturing Colonel Holmes, who survived Bataan, is a piece of surrealism, that never seems to be referenced, yes trump scorches more earth than he needs to,

Michael K said...

"Trump like Clinton probably didn't want to get shot at in jungle paddies, but Clinton was more of a sanctimonious hypocrite about it. "

I know a guy who was an amazing fighter pilot in Vietnam. He is a legend in the Marine Corps and Leatherneck has a profile on him this month but a pay wall is in the way.

Anyway, his call sign was "Fokker" and he he did some crazy stuff, like 653 combat missions in Vietnam.

I was not that kind of guy. His father in law was a corsair pilot in WWII and was at Guadalcanal.

narciso said...

653 combat missions, wow that's amazing, he's the one that later worked in the white house,

narciso said...

I mentioned this on another thread,

http://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/this-us-army-sergeant-started-the-korean-war-by-selling-out-to-the-soviets

how dangerous can a single leaker be, of crytographic info, try 50,000 plus,

Michael K said...

"he's the one that later worked in the white house,"

Yup and Fawn Hall was his assistant, just like Ollie.

He retired from the Marine Corps after being passed over for general. So he went into business and and sold the business that he founded in 2012 for $23 million.

The general who damed him with faint praise after Gulf War I was cashiered for flying his girlfriend around in a Marine Corps plane.

He now has a 7,000 acre ranch in Montana and is raising cattle.

Michael K said...

"which is paying $110m for the unit."

His share was $23 million.

Harold said...

"Hagar said...
At that, "the American colonies" were all English, founded on the English system, and the inhabitants pretty much acting like the English, haven't they?"

Well, except maybe for the Dutch in New Amsterdam. And the Germans in Pennsylvania. And the Swedes in Delaware and NJ making up New Sweden. And some Belgians mixed in with the Dutch.

And the Scots and the Irish didn't really consider themselves English.

I'm nitpicking. But even so, we were pretty polyglot right from the beginning.

Terry said...

WaPo columnist Richard Cohen has written this anti-Trump, and anti-Trump supporter screed:
Trump has taught me to fear my fellow Americans
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-has-taught-me-to-fear-my-fellow-americans/2016/05/30/1b364736-242a-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html
It's just a little over the top:
"When Trump insisted that he could compel a military officer to obey an illegal order, I heard the echo of jackboots on cobblestone."
And there is this gem:
"It is the same with what Trump said about Mexicans being “rapists.” It was an ugly, bigoted thing to say — and, of course, wrong as hell."
One of the common tropes on the open-borders Left is that Americans commit some crimes at a higher rate then 'immigrants', which is just as bigoted as saying
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
You will here some pretty bigoted things written about working class Americans on the ol' Huffpo.
I find the tenor of Cohen's article interesting. Cohen is a progressive. If, fifty years after the CRA and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, we are capable of democratically electing the cartoonish fascist Cohen believes Trump to be, there is no progress. Without the blessing of a democratic majority, 'progressivism' is simply rule by an elite with a self-serving moral philosophy. Justification by arbtrary notions of 'social progress' is indistinguishable from justification by power.

narciso said...

cohen is a cartoon like the fountainhead's ellsworth toohey, it's been ages since he was ever on point,

narciso said...

nothing to see here,


http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/27646/

damikesc said...

Trump may surprise me. The Clintons will mire us in yet another long cycle of shame and scandal and lies. We know Hillary is not good at her jobs and is a congenital liar.

Hell, as has been pointed out recently, her recent scandals aren't Hillary's first "email problems". She was also involved with erasing emails back in 1998-9 as well. There is a pattern to her behavior.

When you see the train heading for the cliff, you pull the cord to stop it. You don't worry much about what comes after.

I was a Cruz guy, but in the end, I don't see an alternative to Trump. Johnson is as much of a "clown" and Hillary is abhorrent. When an existential crisis is faced, you must first stop making the problem worse before you can try and fix the damage. If your house is on fire, trying to repair termite damage isn't the first priority.

South Korea, while not great, is not especially corrupt by global standards or even by the standards of the countries in question. Japan is pretty good. No one is saying that there is a single explanation. I agree with Michael that the Protestant religion is also a huge factor. I would also add the legal system, the Spanish and Italian legal systems make the US system look good, no small feat.

I think you were right initially. Spanish colonial rule has led to little but corrupt nations in its wake. Northern Europe has been the cradle of freedom for centuries.

Northern Europe, sadly, doesn't want to do that anymore. I can get it as it is tiring to be sure...but the world needs the UK and the like to re-develop the standards to allow freedom.

Your focus on government is wrong, full stop. People get the government they deserve. If they are tolerant of a corrupt system they never get anything better. The Euro zone contains uniformly intrusive governments yet the people in some countries are intolerant of corruption while others sink under the weight of endemic corruption.

Good point. Germany and Greece both have intrusive governments. One tolerates mass corruption and one does not.

If we could name a former Spanish colony that was not a corrupt shithole, there might be a counter-argument. But when 100% of them are corrupt shitholes, there is a chance that the country that started things might have an issue.

John said...

Speaking of pows and not to take anything away from mccain, go look up John Stockdale.

Now that is one hardass sob. Won the medal of honor for his hardassedness in captivity.

Also extreme accomplished in and after the navu

Phunctor said...

In a time of challenge, we're choosing between two highly flawed, awful candidates. It's going to be a very low turnout year.

Benjamin Franklin says you're wrong, Paddy O. Are you on?

Rusty said...

Nyamujal said...
Well, seems like Chuck, and on occasion Simon, are the only interesting voices in an otherwise bland and boring pro-Trump circle jerk fest ya'll have going on here.

Is someone forcing you to participate?

Guildofcannonballs said...

"I'll spare you the mindless blather..." fair enough Chuck but when will you start doing that?

I will strike you the mindless blather Chuck, now.

Guildofcannonballs said...

"Gibberish doesn't lend itself to a concise summary.

5/30/16, 2:18 PM"

And nor do dictionaries Sir. Which is why your conciseness of gibbery is applaudable in this one instance.

Guildofcannonballs said...

"Blogger Nyamujal said...
Well, seems like Chuck, and on occasion Simon, are the only interesting voices in an otherwise bland and boring pro-Trump circle jerk fest ya'll have going on here.

5/30/16, 3:37 PM"

You are entitled to better Althouse voices and I applaud your High Courage to say so without fear of revealing yourself to lack interest others could become inspired by. Such a dangerous path for any ego, undertaking it with your level of I.Q. and self-awareness shall inspire Gods created by the next group of humans to create Gods, which is probably below your level of sophistication as children's myths are.

Disregard your "ya'll" typo as merely that, not any reflection of anything possibly other than that in fact.

grackle said...

buwaya puti the mentality of the Spanish was El Dorado. Grab the gold. That they stayed for four hundred years was an afterthought. That mentality has lead to the governing ethos of every Latin American country: grab the gold. So the civilian leaderships robs as much as it can until the Army steps in and it grabs as much gold as it can until the communists come into power. There are occasional oscillations such as in Argentina between the fascists/socialists and the Army and in Chile's case the salvation of the country from the communist by the Army but on the whole Latin America has been and will continue to be a disaster.

A very nice condensed version of history. North America was settled, South America was exploited. Spain was the one European nation that avoided most of the Enlightenment and the Renaissance. Spain hung on to her Middle Ages ways long after the others had reformed their political systems, ditched their peasant/nobility paradigms and started on societies more orientated toward meritocracy.

And Spain imported this corrupt system into their colonies in South America. They call it “La Mordita” in Mexico, which translates into “little bites.” It’s a system where every politician from the local village on up to the President of Mexico are on the take. It’s taken for granted and is informally considered as part of the benefits of the office.