Jump to content

TahoeHorn

banned
  • Posts

    617
  • Joined

Everything posted by TahoeHorn

  1. Horseshit. I've made the exact argument before on topics other than race. I think it's important to understand what drives a populist, particularly Trump. If you want to accuse him of doing racist things you'll have no argument from me. I didn't and won't defend his discriminatory actions. I'm opining on a message board in an academic type discussion (this thread has no bearing on real life) what I think drives him. I think the desire to discriminate against Blacks, or even a subconscious bias, does not explain his behavior. I explained why. I certainly didn't, as you allege, attack anyone other than Trump. You consistently totally misunderstand and misrepresent my views. I'm not sure why you care so much.
  2. I watched a movie many years ago which had a scene like that. There was a board meeting at some obviously mega-corporation. The board room was just what you'd expect - very elegant and very formal. All the board members looked like peas in a pod and all deferred greatly to Mr Big. A lady came in with a tea cart of deserts, many very fancy deserts. Mr Big looked them all over very carefully. After a bit he finally said "I'll have the blueberry pie." Going down the row each member studied the cart the same way for the same time then finally said "I'll have the blueberry pie." Every other board member seemed to be totally bored and paying no attention. But when it got to the movie protagonist, a newly minted board member, he selected the chocolate cake. Suddenly about thirty heads snapped and looked at him in horror. Noticing the looks he said "On second thought I'll have the blueberry pie". And all members visibly relaxed and resumed their bored distant look.
  3. I can't readily think of anyone but Trump. I think almost everybody has a complex set of values so that the longer you know them the more you learn about how they balance various priorities. When, for example, does a coworker chase the deal and when does he go to his kid's big soccer game? It's an n-dimensional problem and the weighting of various variables is not readily understood. I see Trump as being about Trump. You can only understand a variable when there is no Trump component in the situation and you have no such data. So if I want to know how he thinks about Federalist Society judges or the Bible I have to see info where it has no impact on him. I would bet the house that if he thought his reelection depended on being pro civil rights, and he thought he could sell it, he'd have pro-civil rights rhetoric more flamboyant than anybody in Washington. He has no core beliefs. None. It's why this stuff about Russia is spooky. He'd sell out the USA if he thought he could pull it off. It's why he lies. His brain doesn't care whether something is true or whether he believes it. If, in the moment, he can get you to buy the building by saying it was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright he says it, and has no memory that he said it. The only variable he considers is Donald. If you think that's a defense you're a scary dude.
  4. No. I'm arguing that I have no clue as to his belief system on any topic including race. There are many definitions of racist. Some are very strict, would characterize only a small part of the population to be so, and describe truly despicable people. Some consider almost any discriminatory act based on race and include essentially everybody. Some have the foolish contention that it matters who does it (e.g. Blacks can't be racist). Some look at belief systems; some look at acts. Many seem to have a bizarre definition that changes with the wind. I don't opine on whether somebody is racist. I think the discussion has lost its practical meaning and is just a rhetorical vehicle. Trump has clearly made unfair statements about some Black people. What I wrote about Trump can't be considered a defense. It is a criticism that I consider to be equal to or far worse than being a racist, depending on which of the many definitions of racism you use.
  5. And the patterns indicate he supports Federalist Society type judges and "Two" Corinthians. But I believe his support for Federalist Society type judges is not because he believes in that. It's because he believes that if he presses that purple button good things happen for Donald Trump. And the day he believes that pressing that purple button is not good for Donald Trump he will not favor Federalist Society judges. I believe we have no fucking clue what he thinks about Federalist Society judges other than that it is good for Trump. I don't think he knows or cares about any criterion other than what's good for Donald. If he gets pissed or if his ego gets bruised by Republicans, evangelicals, Billy Bob or whomever he will not favor Federalist Society judges. I don't think he cares whether something is true or ethical - only if it is good for Donald. That's my assessment of the data. Everything is about Donald. I take absolutely nothing he says at face value. If you believe as I do you are being intellectually dishonest to pick and choose what you think he believes. Ascribing all his negative views (e.g. racism) as beliefs and ascribing all his positive views (e.g. "Two" Corinthians) as lies is just simple-minded rhetorical garbage.
  6. I think you can easily test theories about people's motives. You just have to collect the data and look for the patterns. You see which priorities rank highest. When two priorities are present which prevails? If you see any pattern to Trump's motives other than self-interest and ego I'd like to hear it. I think his positions are totally without principle and flexible. I see no positive and no negative motives. That includes race. If you believe otherwise show me an example where he was racist when he perceived that there was a cost to that. Hell show me anything he has done at a price to his selfish interests or ego.
  7. Yes I did. I totally support the right of NFL owners and players to protest within the law. They are acting within the law and I support their right to continue. They are not providing a product I like watching. I totally support Joe's Fast Food's decision to let its cashier give me their political views when I buy food. I won't, however, go to Joe's Fast Food. Get it?
  8. That's not at all what I said. I fully support the laws of our country of free speech. I think the NFL and players and Wendy's should do what they think is in their interest. But I'm not going to buy a product from a business which insists on raping my ear.
  9. I'm not sure I buy that as a rule. Well, I don't. I will guess that game theory would show that as the effect in a three person race. But in a ten person race where nobody has big name recognition you'll likely get two extremists with strong special interest bases. I don't think we'll see the phenomenon catch on.
  10. My favorite fast food place is Wendy's. (I like their burgers but not so much their fries.) Wendy's founder was an orphan and supports a lot of orphan-oriented philanthropy. I also think highly of his philanthropy. I have no problem with ads supporting that. I have no problem with signs in a store about it. But if some cashier, at Wendy's or elsewhere, expected me to listen to their orphan spiel, however brief, I'm picking a ne fast food place. I would find it offensive. When I go to an SEC football game and I see people walking to their seat during the national anthem I get pissed. And so do many others. Most people heed the many signals of disapproval, stop and show respect. If they don't the signals often get stronger. It's part of the culture. I live in a world where club meetings always begin with a prayer and the pledge. All clubs I know. If somebody showed obvious disrespect as a way to protest an issue people would get very, very pissed. The NFL protest has two strikes against it. And if they wanted to sell their cause they'd do it without pissing people off. I think pissing people off is the objective. For those of you who think the objections to the tactics are about race there is a simple test: Use different tactics. Don't take my time selling your product and don't show disrespect for US symbols and you won't piss people off. Do your protest on Colin Cowherd where I don't have to watch to get my NFL game.
  11. I like wet t-shirt contests.
  12. We have thirteen regular (elected by the public) seats. Only two races were on the ballot. I was unopposed so I wasn't on the ballot. If I were I'd probably lose. Usually candidates don't even campaign except on Facebook or to their friends. The seats have little power. It's for people who stuff envelopes and bring doughnuts. We (450 or so) meet twice a year and largely rubber stamp the stuff decided by the 21 person Steering Committee.
  13. I won, btw. For a state committee seat just like the one Kayla wanted. Like most candidates I was unopposed. I was also unopposed for a county seat. I suspect Kayla was targeted. The way candidates are targeted is to have a popular person run against them, filing after the targeted person files. (The targeted person can't refile for a different seat.) The filing fee is only $50 for a state seat and $25 for a county seat. I did not check to see her opponent was, as if I'd know anything if I did. Most committee members are nobodies like me, with essentially zero name recognition. A contested race almost always goes to the person who has a smidgen of name recognition in their precinct (e.g. goes to a big church in their precinct). It is bizarre that somebody with the obvious name recognition of Kayla could lose. There is obviously a story there - either a big anti-Roy sentiment or a prominent player who bushwhacked her by filing to run against her instead of a nobody.
  14. Absolutely. And I have numerous posts critical of populism and populists. I just laid out how advocates of the issue could better serve their cause if that were their goal. But it isn't. Their goals are populist crap. Populists find a real issue and the associated anger and focus on stoking the anger instead of fixing the problem. They don't want the issue fixed - whether it's Huey Long, Donald Trump, George Wallace, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Yassir Arafat or a Teamster's boss they want the anger. They don't want the issue causing the anger fixed. They want a life as spokesman of anger. I find that contemptible.
  15. Whatever Populism 101 says. Trump doesn't lead; her figures out which way the parade is going and jumps to the lead. And he's very good at it. Poll Billy Bob. I live with Billy Bob and think I understand him, which makes it easy for me to predict Do you? Billy Bob doesn't like an attack on any US symbols. I can give you a long, long list. As soon as I heard that Jane Fonda went to Hanoi I knew how Billy Bob would take it. He's still mad, fifty years later. Trump understands Billy Bob and talks to him. Race is a dimension of the message but far from the most important. And the problem would exist without a race dimension and wouldn't exist if race were the only dimension. The Left is making a mistake thinking that this is about race. That's because they want it to be about race. There's an easy test to all this: Continue the protest but use a different vehicle. Don't use the flag, the anthem or the game. Use something that isn't part of the broadcast, something not visible to the fan in the stands. I suggest a separate post-game meeting. If ESPN wants to talk to you say I want part of the interview to be about the issue of police treatment of Blacks. If you want to hear me talk about the blitz on 3rd and 8, I want to tell you about little Jimmy Washington in Baltimore. Billy Bob thinks that's fair. He may not agree. Some Billys may be racist. But most will not be offended and Trump will lose his issue. But the people who want this to be about race will also lose the issue.
  16. If that's the case the owners should aggressively support the players.
  17. If this is a non-issue manufactured by Trump, the obvious smart thing to do is not to bite - to ignore it. They could render Trump's rhetoric useless if they used a different tactic to send their message. My recommendation would be to use post-game interviews as their vehicle. That would have the support of people who think as I do, where using the anthem, flag or even the game as the vehicle does not. My recommendation to any employee is to find a platform that you own, not one your employer owns, unless your employer endorses your use of the company's platform.
  18. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2779699-report-nick-foles-only-confirmed-eagles-player-planning-to-attend-white-house?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial
  19. Trump did not create the reaction. Trump doesn't create any reactions. He's just operating out of the populist playbook. The tactics have been around for millenia.
  20. They don't do it to their customers against their will. If a customer wants to buy Exxon gas without listening to Exxon politics he can. But I am distinguishing between a corporate message and the actions of a disgruntled employee with a personal message. It's different if Price Waterhouse decides to present a corporate message on tax policy to their clients than if a disgruntled junior auditor starts talking about abortion. Price Waterhouse needs to (and does) give careful thought to when it sends political messages to their clients. And if they let junior auditors harass their clients about abortion their clients should have the good sense to find a new auditor. As I sit here I know of no company other than the NFL that lets its employees protest politics to their customers while the customer is buying the product. It's a foolish management position.
  21. Where did this come from? Here's the way you should be looking at this issue: - When people buy gas at Exxon they don't want the clerk to start preaching about abortion - When people buy milk at Safeway they don't want the cashier preaching about gun ontrol - When people get their IBM server fixed they don't want the techie to yammer about gay marriage - When people have the Price Waterhouse auditor looks at their books they don't want him talking about the Fair Tax. - When people go buy a new trash can at KMart they don't want their stock boy complaining about health care policy. - When people to Bugtussle Bowling Alley they don't want the manager bitching about the war in Afghanistan - When people go to Home Depot for a ladder they don't want they sales guy whining about steel imports - When people go to an NFL game they don't want they employees protesting the police Whether it's Exxon, Safeway, IBM, Price Waterhouse, KMart, Bugtussle Bowling, Home Depot or the NFL management needs to understand that customers don't like their employees bitching to customers about politics. Or religion. Or whatever. They don't want to hear their shit. Any kind. And every place I know fires employees that don't understand that. And people I know do business elsewhere if they get hassled by employees. And it doesn't have squat to do with the validity of the issue. It's like getting a robo call about some issue you like. You still don't like the robo call.
  22. Even odds he can sing his ABCs. As an experiment somebody should post this about Obama somewhere and see what the reaction is. I think I know.
  23. No doubt. And their new product will sell worse. P.S. Or maybe they've decided to sell to women instead of men. I'm serious.
Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...