Jump to content

DonkeyCigars

crowd sourced
  • Posts

    2934
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DonkeyCigars

  1. 2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Yes. Do you want feel Trump improved that disconnection, after 4 years?

    I don't think he improved that disconnection, nor do I think any President could at this point with how long the cake has been in the oven. Is it a noble goal? Sure. Is it the will of the people? Not so sure. Seems like people want to make things black or white. Either you are a socialist or a nazi. Evil or good. etc.

    Here is what I personally think and I could be wrong:

    I think that the divide is as extreme as it ever will be.

    I think that due to demographics and culture that it is overwhelmingly likely that the GOP/Republicans/Trump voters will never be the majority again in America.

    I think eventually the progressive wave and democrat ethic will be the American standard.

    I think if you are a GOP/Trump/Republican as defined by the last 4 years (read: not a former conservative), you'd do well to adapt and get along to get along. Find a way to carve out a pocket of life you can enjoy. This is all temporary anyways.

  2. 12 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Oh, I see. You're going to equivocate. Well, the folks form the Handmaid's Tale certainly think it's better for men to subjugate women. Racists think it's great to subjugate blacks and jews. Lets be certain to take their feelings into account. Actually, lets not. Because some things AREN'T actually that tricky. It's pretty easy to say that "The democratic model that until recently was the envy of the world is better than Not Democracy."
     

    So why don't you tell us the "Something better" that you think your vote for Donald Trump represented. Please, be specific, unlike his complete lack of a 2nd Term agenda he refused to put forth, or a party Platform that was just "More Donald Trump." You're implying that your vote for Trump could represent something BETTER than American Democracy. So by all mean, tell us what that means to you.

    I think you conflated two different streams of conversation (I think it got muddy when you responded to a conversation Brisket and I were having in a different swim lane). My vote for Trump had nothing to do with my belief in my thought that America needs something better if DJT is the stress test that breaks the American experiment/idea.

  3. 12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    If your idea of "BETTER" involves autocracy and a reduction in answerabilty of the governing class, it is by definition NOT "BETTER."  Means/mechanism are more important than ends.

    I may have the best ideas in the world for governing this country.  But if the MEANS of me implementing them is to make me the Grand Emperor, Answerable to Nobody (and I actively demonize and punish anyone who did not agree with my plan), then that is a non-starter.  Because the only mechanism left for the disaffected (those fools who disagree with my brilliant platform) is violence.

    I agree with you. When I say better, I mean a stronger democracy.

    I think ultimately the problem is that America has grown, through manifest destiny, explosive population growth, and immigration, that democracy as we exercise it actually does not do a great job of aligning the people's desires/will with the direction and strategy of the country. At best the straight throughput is what? 50-60% these days? Meaning 40% of Americans, amounting to what? 150mm people? feeling disconnected and unheard and unrepresented.

    That is a fundamental problem. And it is a both sides problem, which fuels the division and creates a grand canyon between reasonable conversations, I think.

  4. 8 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    I'll go ahead and field this one too. It means Democracy is fragile and people are fucking stupid. That's fine. 

    So tell me, do you believe that democracy is fragile and people are stupid it means that millions of people deserve to suffer more than they are currently with the removal of democracy because...reasons? Please justify that to me. Because if it's "Well, it wasn't that iron clad so we should all live in a country like Russia" that's not a compelling argument either. Let me try a more stark illustration that is meant to be offensive. Just because I CAN overpower a woman and rape her forcibly, probably doesn't mean I should. But you know, I can. I just happen to find the idea horrific. Under your premise, if the American experiment can be overcome, I guess it's perfectly acceptable for it to be raped and tossed aside like so many Baylor Co-eds. Is that what you're saying?

    This is an intense post but I appreciate the attempt to drive the stark contrast, as you said.

    I fundamentally believe that if the American experiment can be overcome by something BETTER, then it should be rationalized. The monkey wrench in the works is that term BETTER. What does better mean to you? What does it mean to me? What does it mean to the 40% of Americans who voted for Trump? What does it mean to 60% of Americans that voted for Biden?

     

  5. 7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    It means we are weak, and always have been.  So, we should avoid submitting ourselves to stress tests that other western democracies have undergone.....and failed.  You think we're better than the Germans?  We're not.

    We are weak and have always been. So we should avoid stress tests. 

    All I hear when you say this is the American Experiment/Idea and/or Democracy is a weak architecture and bad policy/government for the American people--a people of very disparate values, judgements, beliefs, experiences, and goals, across a very wide swath of land spanning very different geographical and regional needs and desires, interconnected through Cat-5 cable and 5G and the good of those in major metropolitan areas, but disconnected in almost every other way.

    This is a very different conversation and topic of discussion for another thread and time, however, but I appreciate the response.

  6. 6 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Yeah, I read it the first time, which is why in my first response I said "limited upside." Your limited upside is one more justice maybe, of limited value when you own a 6-3 majority now. Where you are being DISINGENUOUS is when you say there's NO DOWNSIDE. You claim there is no downside to voting for him again after several posts saying you want him to GTFO, he is immature, an egomaniac unstable, etc. After years of evidence. THIS is why your posts are disingenuous. Because you just said a childlike piece of shit who has stoked racial tensions, ignored a pandemic, and seems only interested in himself over the needs of the American people, as has been demonstrated repeatedly over the last 4 years and YOU YOURSELF has admitted he is demonstrating RIGHT NOW with this non concession bullshit...THAT man deserves your vote because you don't see any downside. 

    How can anyone take you seriously after that? So tell us, Donkey, do you see a potential downside NOW? 

    Cowardice, comfort, and laziness. Now that I believe. 

    I think I see the disconnect now and it's completely my fault. When I said "no downside" I wasn't referring to a Trump presidency not having negatives or downsides, which after rereading seems to be what I was suggesting to you.

    I was meaning that I was in a win/win situation in that if my candidate of choice, Trump, wins with his low probability upside (which is huge in reality, but limited in probability) and his downsides, then I would have felt good about four more years of his being able to hopefully set and steer to his strategy to which I'm most aligned, but if he loses, I'm more than comfortable with 4-8 years of Biden. There was no downside to me as a voter in whatever the result was on November 4th (or 8th as it were), was my point. Sorry for the confusion.

    Read Brisket's post/response as an example of someone getting what I meant by downside if the above explanation doesn't help, maybe.

  7. 22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    This is also true.  And why folks like Donkey need to wake the fuck up.  What made Germany horrific wasn't fanatical nazis.  It was ordinary folks, just wanting to do well, and have a great 401k, that sort of thing......going ALONG with an evil, destructive regime.  They are a necessary piece.  The bad shit can't happen without them and their support, either overt or tacit.

    So....STOP THAT SHIT.  I don't care if his platform is nothing but ideas that you like, if his means of accomplishing them is "destroy our institutions and norms, so that his regime is not answerable for its actions," NOPE.  DO NOT support him.

    If a coach comes to Texas and says "let me do things my way, and we'll win every game" (our goal), but I find out that "his way" is to physically threaten and harm the families of players on opposing teams in order to coerce them to throw the game to Texas, nope, I ain't hiring that guy.  The ends do not justify the means.  In fact, once you take a broad view of the world, the means matter MORE than the ends, because having valid and effective means/process that stand regardless of the agenda of a particular person or movement is necessary for ALL people to have a voice and  chance to have that voice heard.  Never, ever trust a "benevolent dictator" -- because once the word "dictator" is in play, "benevolent" is irrelevant.

    I agree with you, which is why I stated if DJT tries to actually keep power after Jan 5th or whatever the turn-into-a-pumpkin date is, then off with his head.

    And I think you are a very smart and reasonable poster from what I have gathered so I am really interested on an answer to the question posed upthread:

    Hypothetically of course, if the stress test that is Donny J Trump is enough to undue the American experiment (or idea, as you put it), what does that mean?

  8. To edit: in response to SydneyCarton's post about not being heartfelt.

     

    Great post. Here is where I would say we got disconnected:

    You say:

    Then you voted for him again anyway with no more justices to fill.

    I said and earlier up thread I mentioned:

    Because there was no downside to not voting for him from the perspective of supreme court nominations (and in fact, there was an incentive if you were to believe the adding seats to the court talk in the run-up of the election), in the off-chance another judge could prematurely pass between now and 2024

    To restate, because I responded to you directly and either I didn't land the point or you missed it:

    I voted for Trump again in the off-chance that another justice could untimely or prematurely pass and he can fill the seats, as well as in defense of the chatter in the run-up to the election of a Dem president strategically and proactively adding seats to the supreme court to dilute what Trump accomplished. 

    It's like when you have a Board of Directors with preferred equity, and there are 9. You don't want some cheap, new money flooding in to get 9 more board seats and diluting your power to vote on and set strategy with a bunch of noise, if that makes sense. You don't want that unless you are the current minority with strong opinions.

    And I'll even offer something extraconversational here that I've said about my decision in the past on another thread that I haven't mentioned or referenced here:

    I thought I had it in me to vote against Trump or write-in a candidate, but when push comes to shove I defaulted to what was easy and that was probably cowardice from a place of comfort and laziness and all the other flaws and negative attributes I have as a person. Or it might have been the right choice, for me. I am still processing.

    My exact quote from November 3rd. Maybe this will help you with some additional context or damn me further in your eyes as disginenous. Heck I might be disgenious, I don't even know what that word means. I certainly can't spell it:

    I thought I might not vote for Trump and had vaguely, sort of wishy-washily built up some mental justifications and a case for not doing so over the past few weeks in anticipation of it being crisis of self, but when it came down to the actual ballot and myself staring down that barrel, I reverted back to what was comfortable and easier for me to do (both socially/culturally and politically) and I voted for Trump again.

    I don't know if I have kept my integrity or if I am a coward. Probably equal parts both, ammirite?

  9. 13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Had my meeting with a bunch of Trumpers this morning.  They spent most of the time shitting on Joe Biden.  Things like, “he’s going to fuck up my taxes if he can even remember what his plan is.”  Mostly just nonsense they hear off Fox News.  They shit on Cuomo too which was funny.  The good news is none are in denial about the election results. They’re ready to hate on Joe Biden all day. 

    I think we will find in time these folks will enjoy a Biden presidency as well, but not for any of the right reasons.

    I think inherently a lot of these folks viscerally understand that being the underdog or marginalized is actually more enjoyable than being in power. Disruptive movements thrive in the margins for a reason, and it's much more enjoyable for these folks to tune into the local squak box and be on the offensive, cribbing about every minor thing Biden does for the next 8 years, rather than having to play defense and deflect all the smoke that Trump got everyday. 

    Plus their victim and persecution complex needs the oxygen that the Dems insulting them and being in power will give to conflagrate.

     

  10. 16 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    But you knew who he was. You knew who he was, and you'd achieved your Supreme Court goals, and 8 days ago you voted for him ANYWAY. And despite that, you were comfortable voting for a petty troll prone to throwing tantrums and happy to cause confusion and sew mayhem and who exists without a humble bone in your body. You knew this and THAT was the guy you selected to be your president. Because nothing has and could continue to go wrong with that. 

    So even if you were a single issue voter, and having achieved your single issue, you chose to vote for him anyway. THIS is why many people on this site and in the world have issues with Trump voters and are happy to generalize them. Because of this shit right there. It's easy to be dismissive of people like this. "Well, sure, Hitler sucked, but look at the Autobahn!" 

    I feel like I'm a reasonable guy and if you want to write me off as deplorable or piece of crap human being or whatever, I'll respect that and give you your space and not encroach, both online and in person. Which is what these posts are all about-- how do people interact and get along or have discussions with folks who voted for Trump, right?

    My point was exactly what another poster made which was to just not discuss politics with friends, family or business partners. Even if they agree with you, it's a low value exercise in my opinion because everyone has internalized emotions and beliefs built around facts. One fact set can be shared by both a Trumpkin and an Antifa, and those two can both have such a different response and belief pattern arise out of that same fact set based on experiences, values, circumstances, motives, and ideals. 

    I guess what I'm saying is that there are no such things that humans can abstract from the world as timeless, sacrosanct facts that stand on their own as a universal truth. (This is why, to me, people who say flatly "You are a nazi" or "you are evil" or whatever get immediately written off as unstable or unreasonable. Anyone who uses those terms for anyone who voted for Trump is employing a heuristic to short-cut the effort and level of thinking and I get it, it's exhausting and I don't judge them for doing it, but it's a tell to me). So any fact-based appeal or discussion or argument isn't going to be effective unless there is previous alignment on what those facts mean and you can sing from the same sheet of music.

    And I'm fully aware that I'm not helping any cause here by belaboring points and using a lot of words to not say much, but I'm really trying to explain and express a perspective in a decent way that is unmoored of disrespect and insult and that I know is unpopular here, and apparently as the election told us last week, in America in 2020.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  11. Just now, Brisketexan said:

    Actually, you overestimate the strength of our democracy and institutions.  You've heard the phrase "America is an idea!"?  Well, it's also true to say that America (and really, any country and system of government) "is an agreement."  That's all it is.  It's a mutual agreement by the people in society that we'll accept and follow rules and norms, both written and unwritten.  All it takes to kill that -- seriously, all it takes -- is for enough people in positions of power to decide that they aren't going to follow them anymore.

    Then it becomes rule of the fist/gun.

    If the stress test that is Donny J Trump is enough to undue the American experiment, what does that mean? Serious question.

    Does that mean that our fragile nation was a house of cards and civic studies propaganda about democracy and capitalism was so strong that we were unable to see we were leaving in the straw house when the run-of-the-mill wolf came a-blowing?

    Does that mean DJT is such a force of brilliance and brains and charisma and "Great Man Theory" make-up that he was able to fell the great and might American empire and just bad luck we ran into the greatest and most able villain of all time?

    Does it mean that America as an experiment, as evolved and outlived the controls and confines for which it was meant. It's unwieldy in population and values and geography and unable to be a controlled fire anymore due to the rapid expansion of technology and lightspeed spread of ideas?

    Or maybe I don't take your point.

     

  12. 7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    So you're a single issue voter for the Supreme Court, which you'd already achieved. But you're ignoring the fact that, even as you admit to myriad and legion issues with him being and staying in office, you voted for him anyway with at best minimal upside for the courts. But with him attempting to tearing down democracy and promoting racial tension et al never factored into your math. Makes perfect fucking sense. 

     

     

    I'll join you, and everyone else, in the outrage and be on the front row of calling for his head if the clock hits double zero and he's still in the office refusing to leave. Until then, he's being a petty troll throwing a tantrum and trying to cause confusion and mayhem because he's a poor sport without a humble bone in his body. Completely on-brand for this guy (and by the way, completely legal, if indeed also in defiance of tradition, good taste and professionalism) and not something to catastrophize about in the "tearing down the literal piers of capital D Democracy that American exceptionalism created on the 8th day!" type of way I'm hearing from people who should be pleased at the new day.

  13. 48 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    If you you truly believe that, then why did you vote for him TWICE? Because he delivered those judges before the elections. 

    Because there was no downside to not voting for him from the perspective of supreme court nominations (and in fact, there was an incentive if you were to believe the adding seats to the court talk in the run-up of the election), in the off-chance another judge could prematurely pass between now and 2024. I say there is no downside because Joe Biden, to me, is not some horrible outcome from our binary, winner-take-all election.

    I would suggest that for many of the tens of millions who voted for Trump--probably a good silent majority-- they aren't horrified by a Biden presidency for the next 4-8 years. Biden was absolutely the best-case scenario from the Democrat camp and I think we saw his cross-appeal (or begrudging comfort by most Republicans) in that he re-took independents/undecideds/battle-grounds. 

    God bless Joe Biden, I say. He's not going to fundamentally change anything and he won't rock the apple cart too much when it comes down to it and, if the markets are any indication, the economy and wealth-building vehicles are looking forward to a return to a stability and stasis which I think is an appeal to everyone except the fringe lunatics on both sides (but especially the right side and on parlar) with nothing to lose. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Fuck You 1
  14. 2 minutes ago, TeeDubya said:

    In all seriousness, I think the business travel sector is too.

    Amazon saved a BILLION bucks on T&E.

    I think a lot of companies might think, "hey, our profits are decent because we saved all this money on expenses and we are still selling decently."

    But I also think there could be a leading indicator effect, in that a lot of what companies have seen during earnings for Q2 and Q3 and probably Q4, were put in motion the 12-18 month cycle in the past. The real tell will be in Q3 and Q4 of FY21 to see if the lack of meaningful and intentional f2f/onsite time has done anything to slow or reduce revenue/sells. 

    Let's see, but I for one am super excited about this news and what it means for the world we inhabit.

  15. 52 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

    Yes, you are a useful idiot if you vote based on that one issue.  They keep dangling that abortion carrot in front of you and you keep pulling the wagon.  They will never give you that carrot, it’s the only power they have.  

    You’re probably right, but for as much as I can control and as far as I can throw politicians, I can just vote and try and do the best I can in my life and with my family in my tiny sphere of influence. Just do the next best thing and if I’m being strategically lied to as you suggest, then I’m a fool.

    The political system is probably best analogized as a rigged game ran by carnies, but I’ll take the a chance at shooting the ball into the bent rim as even a .01% of making the goal is better than the 0% with just not taking a shot at all.

  16. 45 minutes ago, Mole said:

    The Hilary comparison is a tacit admission of the outgoing president’s failure of leadership. The standard isn’t Hilary trying to convince the opposition party to not kill themselves and each other; the standard is a potted fern. Had the president simply modeled proper behavior, his followers would have mostly followed and the current situation would be far better. Had he done nothing at all we would all be better off. The potted fern as president would have saved lives. The presidency is a leadership role. 

    His failure to mode good behavior, and even actively working against really basic measures, quite obviously led to numerous deaths. Writing that off as conjecture isn’t intellectually honest. At a minimum, his rallies killed his followers and at least one colleague. 
     

    So yeah, it’s life and death.

    I get your points, I think. I just don’t subscribe to them on the whole. I’m willing to grant that DJT has a lot of responsibility and he should wear the deaths of Americans on his heart. On the other hand, I think the whole potted plant rhetoric, as well as laying all the dead at the feet of DJT isn’t intellectually honest, but rather an emotional overreaction. I am not invalidating your feelings or opinions by saying this, by the way, I hear you and am trying to put myself in your shoes and I respect you and our differences.

  17. 6 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

    I won’t call you that, but you are useful to his administration. Your mindset with the judge comment is one that is not helpful to the country as a whole. It is strikingly selfish in tone. I am not certain you care about how that comes across though. Feel free to correct me if you would like to. 

    If not subscribing to the cult of Trump and worshipping him and thinking he can do no wrong, and instead will say "your usefulness is up, now away with you and I didn't really like you anyways but you were one of the two figureheads remaining from the process we use to choose a champion for a set of ideas/goals/values for American people", then sure.

    • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  18. 2 hours ago, Mole said:

    Temporary is a relative term. When is the heat death of the universe? Does his movement accept the loss? When he claims victory (repeatedly) and fraud (repeatedly), does that increase or decrease the odds of violence? Does that contribute to a Texas teen planning the assassination of Biden on social media? Trump’s claims are much more inflammatory than simply trying to clear up any irregularities,  calling for recounts, and not conceding. He’s creating a dangerous situation. He’s giving fuel to the crazies, who appear to be replicating at a rapid rate.
     

    And “we didn’t die....” How many 10s of thousands have died this year because Trump politicized basic medical recommendations — not even his policy decisions — just constantly undermining sound medical advice? How many more will die this winter for the same reason? In other words, had he simply led by wearing a mask/social distancing and telling America to do the same (same policy of doing nothing, bullying the states, grifting off the PPE), who would be alive today? At a minimum, a Stanford study suggests that he killed 700 of his followers with his super spreader rallies. So yeah, people died because of him — just by his words and example. More will in the coming months.

    Temporary is a relative term, for sure. I also think you assign too much credit (and responsibility/conjecture) to a butterfly effect in your first paragraph-- especially when you consider the operations are within the bounds of legality. 

    To your second point, I guess it's fair, but I don't share the belief and definitely not the sentiment. But it is fair that ultimately you can put the deaths at the feet of the leader after accounting for what he did and didn't do, on a balance. I'm not so sure what the delta would be with an alternative leader (presumably, Hillary?). I would guess that she would have modeled mask hygiene and communicated for her base to to be responsible, but I also don't believe the basket of deplorables would have listened and you would have had a same net result. All conjecture of course, mine and yours, which really leads me to the tenet of my thinking:

    The politicians we elect to President are temporary and ever-changing. To get worked up about it seems pointless and short-sighted. Capitalist society is set up for this to be this way. The guys and gals occupying the oval office every 4-8 years aren't much more (with the anomaly being DJT) than a finely-degreed, decently polished professional figurehead representing the popular sentiment of roughly 45-55% of Americans depending on the year.

    And the American people are growing more divided by the day due to the inertia of explosive population growth, a finite/scarce resources economic architecture, and ideas, beliefs, cultures and values that can be shared at lightspeed, across geographies, and can increasingly live without much oxygen in closed-loop systems of echo chambers and silos due to rapid advancements in technology.

    So, hey. Trump lost. I gave it 30 seconds of regret before moving on with my life, as I would counsel for all reasonable and decent folks who voted for Trump. Don't worry about things out of your control.

    Also, I should edit to add...Trump lost to Biden! I mean, you can't really ask for much more. That's barely a loss. I feel like CK Louis in that skit, "You can't even hurt my feelings!"

  19. Just now, bad_teammate said:

    Well he's never had stakes like this. I don't know if he knows how to back down/back away.

    Which speaks to the narcissism, or at the very least a massive ego issue, where you can't back down/back away because of how it would look. But this is DJT we are talking about, not Wyatt Earp. DJT is a weasel. He will back down at the 11th hour and find a way to spin it as a win anyhow and then spend the next 4 years throwing shots at Biden and every misstep or mistake or bad thing that happens in the economy or world (and bad things happen all the time so it's a guarantee there will be fodder for that cannon).

    That is what I think is on brand for the guy I voted for, which I know sounds ridiculous, but that's where we are in this conversation and society.

    Someone upthread said I sounded like a useful idiot. Maybe I am, I don't know, I'll leave y'all to judge that. But I think DJT is the useful idiot and he delivered the Supreme Court Justices, he's done his job, now out with him. 

  20. 22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    I know you're not for that. And I'm not saying he's doing that now.

    My poorly-phrase question (my fault, apologies) merely asks this: If Trump eventually did call for rebellion on his behalf, would you consider that on or off brand?

    I wouldn't see it as off-brand.

    I would see it as off brand. Being a pest up until the very end and even wink-wink-nod-nod to some of the more loony toons (e.g. quanon and parlor and etc.) I could see, but outright calling for a rebellion, no.

    It's like in business, he finds loopholes and abuses lawyers to do things around the farthest edges of the law, but he doesn't outright rob the bank. That's beneath a Wharton fella raised in Manhattan.

    I think he might dance around the topic (e.g. Standback and standby) but he doesn't have the balls or the convictions to call for an outright rebellion, which is also why I was shocked when I thought he did/you said he did-- I'm not even sure he has the desire and wants that smoke, but narcissism knows no bounds from what I'm told.

  21. 4 minutes ago, Gourmand said:

     

    Get your head out of your ass. Trump just lost an election resoundingly and his administration is openly refusing to acknowledge the will of the electorate and fomenting distrust in the foundational exercise of American democracy. You're okay with that? 

    Is he doing anything illegal? Is he outside the lines of anything other than tradition, decorum and good taste? Because in I think all our opinions, he's never been inside those particular lines, and so I'm not confused, shocked or aggravated that he's leveraging his bully pulpit until the final whistle is blown.

    It's like a defensive lineman trying to jump over the center and hit the kneeling QB when he's down by 21 points but there is 5 seconds left on the clock.

    I'll join you in the outrage when he is doing this foolishness after the clock hits double zero, my friend. Until then, completely on brand for DJT.

×
×
  • Create New...