Is Donald Trump

[essentialsaltes]

I'm going to go with a no on Trump, many good reasons have been cited but one major issue is that he hasn't proposed anything to mitigate climate change as far as I'm aware..in fact it seems to be a non issue in his campaign.

He has stated that he does not believe in climate change.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

He has stated that he does not believe in climate change.

That's why I think he would make a very dangerous president. It might be entertaining if I didn't have young kids, but I'd like them to have a future, and for that to happen we need a president that understands the science behind the big challenges we face.

 

[bhsmte]

But when people are angry, and fearful, they don't make good choices. The primitive, emotional part of the brain overrides the higher, analytic function. DT is exploiting this. He magnifies people's anxieties and uncertainty about the future. He scapegoats undocumented immigrants and Muslims as being responsible. And he claims that only he can deal with the dangers of the world, and make us safe. Don't you recognize this pattern? This is what wannabe dictators do. (And like other despots, he may well have Narcissistic Personality Disorder. You can do a seach to look up the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Trump seems to exhibit quite a few of them. Not to mention that he's a science-denier, and flirts with various crackpot conspiracy theories. Which to me is another sign of a brain that doesn't quite work right.)

I'm not at all crazy about Hillary. But I'm not crazy. I don't vote for egomaniacal, authoritarian demagogues.

I agree people are more prone to making illogical choices when they are emotional.

With that said, what we are seeing, is people being fed up with politicians in general, as they have lost touch with the average person. It is each parties and each politicians responsibility, to regognize this and earn the trust of people.

IMO, there is ample reason, to have lack of trust for either parties candidates.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But when people are angry, and fearful, they don't make good choices. The primitive, emotional part of the brain overrides the higher, analytic function. DT is exploiting this. He magnifies people's anxieties and uncertainty about the future. He scapegoats undocumented immigrants and Muslims as being responsible. And he claims that only he can deal with the dangers of the world, and make us safe. Don't you recognize this pattern? This is what wannabe dictators do. (And like other despots, he may well have Narcissistic Personality Disorder. You can do a seach to look up the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Trump seems to exhibit quite a few of them. Not to mention that he's a science-denier, and flirts with various crackpot conspiracy theories. Which to me is another sign of a brain that doesn't quite work right.)

I'm not at all crazy about Hillary. But I'm not crazy. I don't vote for egomaniacal, authoritarian demagogues.

Presidential elections have been decided by 'crazy' voters since the founding.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You are welcome to use any of the 6 alternative measures of unemployment. None of them are in double digits.

But do they add up to 20 percent. Remember that statistics are facts without a context.

 

[MotherFirefly]

I think it is important to look at what is happening behind the candidates, not just the candidates themselves..

I haven't seen any posts pointing towards world affairs.. and there is a lot of things going on.
I think if you spend the time researching behind the scenes, and take it seriously, Trump is the direction you will ultimately come to. Not because he is some expert choice for the spot, but because of what can and cannot happen if he makes it there, compared to what will and will not happen if Clinton is in the house instead.

Alot of things are in the works to go down soon, and the election may not even happen, and/or Trump may not make it to office even if he wins.
The nationalist movement is trying their darndest all over the world, so here is hoping things pan out in our favor.. otherwise, expect things to be very different, very soon.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That's why I think he would make a very dangerous president. It might be entertaining if I didn't have young kids, but I'd like them to have a future, and for that to happen we need a president that understands the science behind the big challenges we face.

I'm sure he believes in normal climate change. Like many others he probably doesn't think we can do much about it.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Since I am the OP, just a simple comment....at this point there are 66 comments on Donald and 1 on Clinton. It is telling, not sure what it is telling, but it is telling.
Now, back to the topic at hand.
Please feel free to comment on the lack of responses on Clinton on the Clinton thread.
Oh, and please stay on topic.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I think it is important to look at what is happening behind the candidates, not just the candidates themselves..

I haven't seen any posts pointing towards world affairs.. and there is a lot of things going on.
I think if you spend the time researching behind the scenes, and take it seriously, Trump is the direction you will ultimately come to. Not because he is some expert choice for the spot, but because of what can and cannot happen if he makes it there, compared to what will and will not happen if Clinton is in the house instead.

Alot of things are in the works to go down soon, and the election may not even happen, and/or Trump may not make it to office even if he wins.
The nationalist movement is trying their darndest all over the world, so here is hoping things pan out in our favor.. otherwise, expect things to be very different, very soon.

True, and 'end-time' stuff is on the horizon as well.

 

[Albion]

I'm sure he believes in normal climate change.

That's probaly the case. We all know that the climate fluctuates, but "Climate Change" -- those two words used that way -- has been made into a certain theory about that change. "Global Warming" didn't work, so the people who warned us that the Earth was cooling only a few years ago changed it to "Climate Change." That's much less specific and, therefore, safer.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That's obviously the case. We all know that the climate fluctuates, but "Climate Change" -- those two words used that way -- has been made into a certain theory about that change. "Global Warming" didn't work, so the people who warned us that the Earth was cooling only a few years ago changed it to "Climate Change." That's much less specific and, therefore, safer.

Actually global warming is still the best term. The oceans are slowly warming and acidifying. That's the real 'canary in the coal mine'.

 

[essentialsaltes]

But do they add up to 20 percent. Remember that statistics are facts without a context.

No, because each one already includes all the previous ones in its wider definition.

 

[MotherFirefly]

There are much more pressing and dangerous things happening than climate change.. just saying.. I hope that isn't a basis for your very important decision on what happens to the world in the next few years...

 

[Albion]

I think that the key item in all of the talk about science, being in favor of science, and about climate change is that it's all well and good to care if the world is warming, but the self-described science-lovers have absolutely no plan that will stop it.

Although that's the kind of thing they like to hurl at Trump ("Where's his plan?") they themselves have no idea of how to stop the "Climate Change." They just fly around the world in their private jets proclaiming the Gospel of Climate Change and berating anyone who thinks in real-world terms.

 

[Mountain_Girl406]

There are much more pressing and dangerous things happening than climate change.. just saying.. I hope that isn't a basis for your very important decision on what happens to the world in the next few years...

Not in my opinion.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Last Sunday's lesson included a reference to the sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" and a bit of description of the reaction of the congregation to the sermon. I propose we name this election cycle "Politicians in the Hands of an Angry Electorate" and the politicians should react accordingly.

 

[MotherFirefly]

Not in my opinion.

Our planet has dealt with much worse things in the past.. it will survive this one too. I am not saying it isn't important, but rather it isn't a top priority. Top priority is ensuring we as a people as the human race don't completely destroy eachother, as well as fighting to keep a one-world freedom, rather than a one-world government which is in the motions to come about.. sooner than we think.

At the end of the day global climate really isn't the top priority right now.. and Trump understands this. He has stated as much himself.

 

[bhsmte]

I'm sure he believes in normal climate change. Like many others he probably doesn't think we can do much about it.

How do you define; 'normal climate change'?

 

[civilwarbuff]

If you want to discuss climate change, please on another thread.
If you want to discuss Trumps take on climate change, then OK.

 

[TLK Valentine]

the right choice to be POTUS.

Why or why not?


Please keep comment on topic, there is a Clinton thread open also for comment about her.

No.

Donald Trump is an ignorant narcissist. He knows absolutely nothing that would dare contradict his firmly-held belief... in his own greatness.

He has no empathy for or even concept of people other than himself. They are nothing but stepping stones to him.

He had fed the American people a narrative about America as a doomed nation which he, and only he, can rescue... single-handedly, of course. It is utterly embarrassing how many Americans have fallen for it.

Trump has made his living profiting off the work of others, and then cheating them out of their share. The notion that he would do any different to the American people as POTUS is utterly without support or merit.