GG Riva Posted June 30, 2020 Report Share Posted June 30, 2020 Before the last US presidential election, I said there was no way Americans would ever elect the Donald. They're not that stupid. I hadn't reckoned with some of these guys. ☹ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superally Posted June 30, 2020 Report Share Posted June 30, 2020 Its bloody scary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1950Par Posted June 30, 2020 Report Share Posted June 30, 2020 Donald Trump defied all expectations from the very start of his presidential campaign Very few people thought he would actually run. He did. They thought he wouldn't climb in the polls. He did. They said he wouldn't win any primaries. He did. They said he could never overcome resistance from the Republican establishment and win his party's nomination. He did. Finally, they said there was no way he could compete for, let alone win, a general election match-up with Hillary Clinton. Now he's President-elect Trump. He staged the most unconventional of campaigns, running on gut instinct and his trademark bombast when others - both within his own party and outside - counselled moderation and a pivot to positions perceived to be more acceptable to mainstream voters. He stayed true to the methods and tactics that got him to the cusp of the presidency, and in the end he was rewarded for it. Down the stretch Mr Trump boasted that he was leading a movement, riding the crest of a popular revolution that would change the face of American politics. He was right. Trump is the fifth person in U.S. history to become president while losing the nationwide popular vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worldwiderab Posted June 30, 2020 Report Share Posted June 30, 2020 Is that interviews for the next Dumb and Dumber film? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piracy Posted June 30, 2020 Report Share Posted June 30, 2020 I keep hoping some homicidal maniac shoots the daft f*cker right between the eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanguinePar Posted June 30, 2020 Report Share Posted June 30, 2020 25 minutes ago, Piracy said: I keep hoping some homicidal maniac shots the daft f*cker right between the eyes. Nah, he needs to get voted out and then tried for his crimes. No good would come from him becoming a martyr IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Riva Posted July 1, 2020 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 I found this which helps explain the inexplicable:- Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information that confirms or supports one's prior personal beliefs or values.[1] It is an important type of cognitive bias that has a significant effect on the proper functioning of society by distorting evidence-based decision-making. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. For example, a person may cherry-pick empirical data that supports one's belief, ignoring the remainder of the data that is not supportive. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. The effect is strongest for desired outcomes, for emotionally charged issues, and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is a broad construct covering a number of explanations. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations). A series of psychological experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives ("myside bias", an alternative name for confirmation bias). In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way. However, even scientists and intelligent people can be prone to confirmation bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnie Posted July 1, 2020 Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 Trump is an absolute end of a bell. I know the title of President comes with a tag Leader of the World, he seems to think it allows him to say and do as he pleases without any repercussions. I see him winning a second term, which is far from ideal. Part of the trouble is that he had made progress to create jobs and boost the economy, and folk were seeing that he was making their part of America "great again", and that earns him some support when Politicians are usually liars and thieves. Its a shame its at the detriment of everyone else. His handling of COVID has been horrendous. Its a shame he hasnt caught it. The fact he hasnt gives him this air of invincibility - Americans love a President and a Hero and this kind of roles that all into one - and allows conspiracy theorists to claim its all a hoax. Its little wonder their infection is going through the roof - an idiot leading idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teuchter Posted July 1, 2020 Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 13 hours ago, SanguinePar said: Nah, he needs to get voted out and then tried for his crimes. No good would come from him becoming a martyr IMO. Agree about not making him a martyr, but what good would come from trying him? It would just be the liberal equivalent of “lock her up! lock her up!”. One side getting their jollies whilst another side rages. It would be the best way to continue his legacy of division and continue the slide towards ungovernability, where increasing numbers on each side refuse to recognise the elected mandate of the other. I actually think the U.S.A. is beyond hope and there is no going back. The best way to try however would be to move on from him as quickly as possible and don’t rake up the coals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanguinePar Posted July 1, 2020 Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 5 hours ago, Teuchter said: Agree about not making him a martyr, but what good would come from trying him? It would just be the liberal equivalent of “lock her up! lock her up!”. One side getting their jollies whilst another side rages. It would be the best way to continue his legacy of division and continue the slide towards ungovernability, where increasing numbers on each side refuse to recognise the elected mandate of the other. I actually think the U.S.A. is beyond hope and there is no going back. The best way to try however would be to move on from him as quickly as possible and don’t rake up the coals. The good that would come of trying him, would be to try someone for alleged crimes. It's not about jollies, it's about ensuring that it's quite clear that the President is not above the law. They had nothing on Clinton, just endless insinuation. Hence they've never done anything about her once he was in power, despite him loading the courts with his people and turning the AG into his personal attorney. Trump's different. Look at what the Mueller report said - paraphrasing here, but it was along the lines of not being able to try him for some things because he is president. Once he's out that won't apply (if it ever really did). Mueller was explicit in saying that he was not clearing Trump of certain accusations. That's not even to mention potential charges of treason over this recent story about Taliban bounties on US soldiers, nor breaches of the emoluments clause (not sure if those are actionable or not, admittedly), and his self enrichment through his endless golf holidays (at his own resorts, with the Secret Service paying Trump's own company for the pleasure of staying there) Also, New York State is apparently ready to try him for tax evasion, as soon as he's out of office. He doesn't get away with all that he may have done, just because doing the right thing might wind up his cultish supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worldwiderab Posted July 1, 2020 Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 49 minutes ago, SanguinePar said: The good that would come of trying him, would be to try someone for alleged crimes. It's not about jollies, it's about ensuring that it's quite clear that the President is not above the law. They had nothing on Clinton, just endless insinuation. Hence they've never done anything about her once he was in power, despite him loading the courts with his people and turning the AG into his personal attorney. Trump's different. Look at what the Mueller report said - paraphrasing here, but it was along the lines of not being able to try him for some things because he is president. Once he's out that won't apply (if it ever really did). Mueller was explicit in saying that he was not clearing Trump of certain accusations. That's not even to mention potential charges of treason over this recent story about Taliban bounties on US soldiers, nor breaches of the emoluments clause (not sure if those are actionable or not, admittedly), and his self enrichment through his endless golf holidays (at his own resorts, with the Secret Service paying Trump's own company for the pleasure of staying there) Also, New York State is apparently ready to try him for tax evasion, as soon as he's out of office. He doesn't get away with all that he may have done, just because doing the right thing might wind up his cultish supporters. Sanguine, is the second last word of the last sentence a spelling mistake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnie Posted July 1, 2020 Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 2 hours ago, worldwiderab said: Sanguine, is the second last word of the last sentence a spelling mistake? Reasonably easy mistake to make. The L and N keys arent too far apart! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.