Trump to win?

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Trump to win?

i think the really dangerous content wars are not between the russians/chinese/us but the civil war here in the u.s.
daniel patrick moynihan is quoted as saying: "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
that's not true anymore.

there has long been a notion of the social construction of reality, but in the past there was mostly one mostly consensual version, with some differences of perspective among, e.g., racial or ethnic groups. now, trump and clinton supporters appear to be living in entirely different universes.

Well certainly the most ardent and emotionally driven people supporting Trump/Hillary would be driving the crazy social media bus, likely from the extreme ends of their respective political spectrums.

To reiterate, I don't see the Chinese EVER attempting to disrupt, disinform, distract US elections.

I think the Chinese were(and probably still are, but more discretely) focused almost exclusively on IP theft/espionage, and probably developing offensive sabotage tools since it would be easier to achieve parity or superiority against the US in that warfighting domain.

The Russians on the other hand have a long history of disruption, disinformation, and distraction in foreign elections.

Would it be in the best interest of Russia for the US to be distracted inwards?

Absolutely.

Sweden, Finland, the Baltics, Czech/Slovak republics are all reporting significant upwards trends in Russian "D,D,D" activity linked to rolling back US influence in Europe.

Russia's good at it, and it's pretty cheap Big Bang for the Buck activity.

And they've operated against the US, and as Woodsman will remind you if I don't, of course the US has done the same in return.

BUT the highly aligned Democrat message of Trump = (Putin X Evil Russia)/KGB is as silly, but a bit slicker, than some Trump camp claims.

I think it quite prudent to monitor for and mitigate against potential foreign influence operations(maybe starting with foreign countries/parties influencing with cash to candidates for a start!) because the potential is real.

But as you say, the US is mostly doing it to itself, any foreign influence would be extremely limited if the US voting population were more politically resilient and cohesive.

The fractures within the US voting population and the resultant vulnerabilities are what makes the US more vulnerable to potential foreign influence operations.

I think of it like a formerly healthy athlete with a surpressed immune system.

Better "political lifestyle choices" and "political hygiene" will reduce the external risk factors to near irrelevancy.

[Milton Kuo]

Re: Trump to win?

Michael Hudson offers his opinions on the Republican and Democratic candidates for president and what each candidate's election may bode for the U.S. and world.

Within the first two minutes, Hudson makes an observation that I thought was entertaining. Hudson states:

Trump missed his big chance to make a populist push. Instead of attacking, instead of saying he's going to cut taxes on Wall street, he can say, "Look, I stiffed the banks. I went bankrupt four or six times. I screwed the banks and they didn't get paid and I can screw the banks for you people. Vote for me. I know how to do it."

13 minutes:

[Thailandnotes]

Re: Trump to win?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_cKC0_sGu0

[gwynedd1]

Re: Trump to win?

Sure, but that's not what's happening here. Here one cohort seeks to assert consentual reality while another insists that the other is motivated by evil intent and so can offer nothing to those seeking to discern reality's outlines. The only reality is what this cohort asserts and to oppose it is said to evidence the deepest of moral deficiencies.

The insistence by good thinking liberals of making a show of their concern for and outrage over major and minor affronts to people of color, women, LGBTQI people, etc., while at the same time making jokes about toothless, inbred trailer-trash, has reached its limits and people are understandably pissed off.

For some reason Clinton supporters feel uninhibited by any potential sanction. They can slander and shame those with whom they disagree so long as they are white folks and particularly if they are mainline Christians who vote for Republicans and especially if they lack educational credentials with suffient social cachet.

The good liberals, on the other hand, are highly-educated, fundamentalist secular humanists, who’ve been to the right college and vote for Democrats and this makes them the annointed whose judgement the rest of us must accept or be made deplorable and irredeemable, if barely human.

That their incorrigible behavior against those they deem as their inferiors obviates any moral or intellectual standing they might claim seems utterly lost on them.

The 70s was when white male power , in the open, was displaced. Since the 70s its been a white female dominated society. They have the votes, were older and are very wealthy.
This is mostly due to the influence of the left naturally. That is why intersectional feminism came about. It is now time to displace the white women.
So we will soon see a war on the left with my guess Hispanics next on the list since they threaten to become a dominate majority on the Left. Trump has already caused a crack in the cement.

What an absurd way to run a society, not even making use of so much as a brain stem.

[gwynedd1]

Re: Trump to win?

Open forum discussion of finance/investment seems to have ended a LONG time ago.

It's devolved into political mud slinging.

Behaviour towards one another has reached a new "limbo low".

Which is ironic considering: https://lageneralista.com/mutuallyas...aldestruction/

And I have said as much. yet, I have never seen anyone stoop so low as to identify a group of people by race and sex, hatefully so, and then called them racist and tribal. Had he been anywhere near me at the time, he would be invited to leave with a baseball bat.

I am sick of race hating scum projecting their tribal world views on others while under the cover of some sort of victim group identity status. Now they are here.
They have even made it so complex they have to horse trade with intersectional feminist dogma, where a dark skinned female plays her card against a disabled , transsexual. Tough call. Had they been Asian, it might have tipped the balance. This is what's going on.
If you win you get to attack the identity of your rival.

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

...there has long been a notion of the social construction of reality, but in the past there was mostly one mostly consensual version, with some differences of perspective among, e.g., racial or ethnic groups. now, trump and clinton supporters appear to be living in entirely different universes.

Sure, but that's not what's happening here. Here one cohort seeks to assert consentual reality while another insists that the other is motivated by evil intent and so can offer nothing to those seeking to discern reality's outlines. The only reality is what this cohort asserts and to oppose it is said to evidence the deepest of moral deficiencies.

The insistence by good thinking liberals of making a show of their concern for and outrage over major and minor affronts to people of color, women, LGBTQI people, etc., while at the same time making jokes about toothless, inbred trailer-trash, has reached its limits and people are understandably pissed off.

For some reason Clinton supporters feel uninhibited by any potential sanction. They can slander and shame those with whom they disagree so long as they are white folks and particularly if they are mainline Christians who vote for Republicans and especially if they lack educational credentials with suffient social cachet.

The good liberals, on the other hand, are highly-educated, fundamentalist secular humanists, who’ve been to the right college and vote for Democrats and this makes them the annointed whose judgement the rest of us must accept or be made deplorable and irredeemable, if barely human.

That their incorrigible behavior against those they deem as their inferiors obviates any moral or intellectual standing they might claim seems utterly lost on them.

[gwynedd1]

Re: Trump to win?

Great closing argument.

You too.

I'd put you on ignore so long ago I'd forgotten why. Thanks for the reminder.

You are a terror to piñatas and donkeys everywhere.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

Open forum discussion of finance/investment seems to have ended a LONG time ago.

It's devolved into political mud slinging.

Behaviour towards one another has reached a new "limbo low".

Which is ironic considering: https://lageneralista.com/mutuallyas...aldestruction/

i think the really dangerous content wars are not between the russians/chinese/us but the civil war here in the u.s.
daniel patrick moynihan is quoted as saying: "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
that's not true anymore.

there has long been a notion of the social construction of reality, but in the past there was mostly one mostly consensual version, with some differences of perspective among, e.g., racial or ethnic groups. now, trump and clinton supporters appear to be living in entirely different universes.

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

I do not believe that most of the people who are thinking about voting for Mr. Trump are racist or sexist.
12:37 PM - 5 Nov 2016

https://mobile.twitter.com/BernieSan...41635931099136

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Trump to win?

i hope so. i know i've lost respect for certain people, but i'm not sure that matters when/if we get back to economic/financial/investment oriented discussions. part of the problem there, though, is that with a thoroughly managed economy there is less to discuss.

Open forum discussion of finance/investment seems to have ended a LONG time ago.

It's devolved into political mud slinging.

Behaviour towards one another has reached a new "limbo low".

Which is ironic considering: https://lageneralista.com/mutuallyas...aldestruction/

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Trump to win?

This maybe the last election before AI really starts to make jobs obsolete. Just wondering how the next election will be different.

Will the bankers offer to pay for universal basic income from their pockets?

http://fortune.com/2016/11/06/elon-m...-basic-income/

Or will India show what the world will look like in the future when there are more people than there are jobs?

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/02/as...r-census-secc/

Maybe both?

UBI for citizens, and nothing for illegals.

So a mix of Idiocracy and World War Z basically.

[jk]

Re: Trump to win?

So is iTulip going to survive this election?

i hope so. i know i've lost respect for certain people, but i'm not sure that matters when/if we get back to economic/financial/investment oriented discussions. part of the problem there, though, is that with a thoroughly managed economy there is less to discuss.

[touchring]

Re: Trump to win?

It's getting a bit zombie apocalypse-y up in here.

This maybe the last election before AI really starts to make jobs obsolete. Just wondering how the next election will be different.

Will the bankers offer to pay for universal basic income from their pockets?

http://fortune.com/2016/11/06/elon-m...-basic-income/

Or will India show what the world will look like in the future when there are more people than there are jobs?

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/02/as...r-census-secc/

India's latest Socioeconomic and Caste Census (SECC) paints a stark picture of widespread rural poverty and deprivation.

Of the 300 million households surveyed, an overwhelming majority (73%) live in villages. Of this rural population, less than 5% earn enough to pay taxes, only 2.5% own a 4-wheeler vehicle and less than 10% have salaried jobs.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Trump to win?

So is iTulip going to survive this election?

It's getting a bit zombie apocalypse-y up in here.

[Woodsman]

Re: Trump to win?

Santa, I don't understand. If you hate folks on iTulip and hold so much contempt for the majority of its members, particularly us old white people, why do you remain active?

You've caused a great deal of disturbance over the past several months with your insistence on slandering and insulting everyone with whom you disagree politically. You've added nothing to the conversation except to create dissention and discord in the community and for no appreciable reason other than yours seems to be in the minority opinion.

It's my sincerest wish that the owner of the community would ask you to leave and I encourage him to remove your access as soon as possible. I am happy to cover the cost of any refund he might make to you.

In lieu of that, I'd like to see you leave on your own and find a place more consonant with your view. Or ask that the community reach consensus and vote you off the island.

You're more trouble than this place can take. We can benefit from disagreement but your style of argument is a form of arson and threatens to burn the entire community down.

So just go, already.