What's Happening to Trump's Campaign?

[Unbeliever]

I guess the Republicans will have to find another rock under which to hide, since Trump's overturned the one they've been hiding under for 50 years or more.

[Hydra009]

GSOgymrat,

Sorry it took me so report back but I listened to the Sam Harris's Lesser Evil podcast where he and his guest give their thoughts on Clinton and Trump.  I didn't enjoy it as much as many of his other forays into politics because a lot of it seemed to be the guest's subjective impression of Clinton and Trump rather than objective facts about them.  There just wasn't a whole lot there where the rubber hits the road.

For example, one charge against both Clintons is that they're incredibly self-interested, money-grubbing people who seek personal power above all else.  I can't fact-check that.  Sam's guest might be right or he might be wrong in that accusation, but I've gotta plead ignorance there.  And already I can hear the low rumble of partisans on both sides preparing to wage holy war on the grounds that the Clintons are either demonic or angelic.  "Whattya mean you don't know she's a horrible human being!  She's been in the public eye for decades and you don't know how much of a corrupt piece of garbage she is?!  Look at my thousand Breitbart links!" And right after there's this:  "Do you believe that alt right misogynist?  He's completely off his rocker.  Clinton is a saint and the only reason she has a bad rep is because of the vast right-wing conspiracy against her!"  Uggh times 1000.

Granted, I've called Trump a self-aggrandizing maniac and I'm starting to regret that for the same reason.  I don't know the guy.  All I know about him are his media appearances.  His carefully orchestrated media appearances.  For all I know, that's an act and the real Trump is a very mild-mannered, low-key guy who created this larger than life image to get votes.

All in all, that podcast was alright. I recommend it for anyone who just wants an informal conversation about the candidates and doesn't plan on taking it too seriously.

For a more objective, analytical comparison, I recommend a couple videos that the vlogbrothers put out comparing actual policies:  taxes and healthcare.  Remember when elections were ostensibly about policy?  Man, the times have changed.

[Atheon]

GOP Silent After Jason Chaffetz Just Got Busted Using Personal Email

http://www.bluedotdaily.com/gop-silent-after-jason-chaffetz-just-got-busted-using-personal-email/

IOKWARDI (It's OK When A Republican Does It)

[Shiranu]

If we hold Clinton guilty, then we have to throw another 1/3rd of the govt in jail as well.

[Baruch]

If we hold Clinton guilty, then we have to throw another 1/3rd of the govt in jail as well.

Defenestrate all of them ... anarchism is necessary, from time to time ... please leave your name, address etc at Plac Du Concorde care of Monsieur Robespierre.

It isn't the private email that is the problem, it is mishandling government property (government emails).  Nobody cares about Chelsea's wedding planner ... but people would care if there is pedophilia involving the Clintons on that laptop (and it doesn't matter if it ever went thru a government office, it could be purely private).

[Nonsensei]

If we hold Clinton guilty, then we have to throw another 1/3rd of the govt in jail as well.

Plenty of people want that.

Hell, I want that. Nothing could be better for this country than a thorough congressional cleansing.

[SGOS]

Hell, I want that. Nothing could be better for this country than a thorough congressional cleansing.

I agree, but it has to be done by voting them out.  Much of what we refer to as law breaking is really unethical behavior, in fact egregious unethical behavior.   Most politicians walk close to the line, and this is usually approved by partisans.  Even politicians actually breaking the law are supported by party fanatics.  When we accuse them of breaking the law, a supporter will always be there to ask, "Can you prove it?"  If you can't, he will dismiss the claim, along with the recognition that egregiously unethical behavior is what you are talking about.

[Baruch]

The problem happens when the criminals decide what is legal or not.  At some point the whole system become illegitimate and extra-legal means are implemented ... either by the authorities or against the authorities.  When someone says the US is becoming a Third World country, I don't think they realize what they are saying ... they think it is going to be high tea.  George Washington didn't vote King George out of office .. and today the sins against the public are much greater than anything King George ever did.  American elite are like the administration of Caligula.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Well the question then becomes do you want someone who can effectively run a corrupt organization (us government)  or someone completely clueless and easily manipulated by outside forces running the corrupt organization? It's the old lesser of the two evils argument of course, but think back to the two evils during Bush v Gore or Reagan v Carter. The greater of the evil often leaves horrible legacies that take decades to undo. The lesser of two evils is almost always a false equivalent argument so imagine you're chained to a wall and you get the choice of a quick bullet to the head or being starved to death over a few weeks or months. You don't get to choose to be unchained with the chance to get laid by the sexiest person alive. So for many people right now the choice is stark. One choice is blatant terrible and corrupt with complete incompetence to competent, but corrup. One will almost assuredly fuck things up for years to come, but the other will maybe fuck things up, but we're not sure..

[SGOS]

The problem happens when the criminals decide what is legal or not.  At some point the whole system become illegitimate and extra-legal means are implemented ...

We have seen that happening over many years.  It's a slow attrition if democracy, maybe speeding up as of late.

When someone says the US is becoming a Third World country, I don't think they realize what they are saying ...

I usually think of bribery and corruption run rampant.  We may be heading that way.  Although these things are probably endemic throughout most forms of government.

George Washington didn't vote King George out of office .. and today the sins against the public are much greater than anything King George ever did.

I don't know what King George was like.  I only know George Washington's perception.  I suspect it was more than just high taxes and over charging the colonies.  I expect it had something to do with self serving needs, and why not if you can get away with it?  The Declaration of Independence was not written by the entire nation, just a handful of influential types that were able to gain enough support.  But I don't expect to ever know for sure. 

What we accused King George of, was an idea later hijacked by Seattle businessmen to stick it to the newly purchased Territory of Alaska. Maybe similar in size and population to the original colonial rebels.  While Seattle was not able to level taxes on the Territory, it was able to get the US congress to give them control over all trade that led to artificially inflated prices on exports, and abuse of the native population along with anyone else who moved there.  Pretty much what we said King George was doing to us.  And I can't imagine politicians in congress not making money off the deals too.

[Jason78]

I usually think of bribery and corruption run rampant.  We may be heading that way.  Although these things are probably endemic throughout most forms of government.

Have you seen the way other countries do democracy?

I don't know what King George was like.

He was the guy that was getting you to pay less tax than Washington. 

[Cavebear]

If you are against the elected government in general, then you have to unelect them locally.  But no one likes to do that.  A peaceful revolution requires national electoral vote here. 

I can't vote against YOUR Representatives and Senators and you can't vote against mine.  To change things, we would all have to agree on one party.  Are you ready to do that?

[Atheon]

How about revolution? With me as absolute dictator!

Free beer for everyone! 

My first act will be to abolish the Republican Party!

[Cavebear]

How about revolution? With me as absolute dictator!

Free beer for everyone! 

My first act will be to abolish the Republican Party!

Um, what brand of beer?

[SGOS]

If you are against the elected government in general, then you have to unelect them locally.  But no one likes to do that.  A peaceful revolution requires national electoral vote here. 

I can't vote against YOUR Representatives and Senators and you can't vote against mine.  To change things, we would all have to agree on one party.  Are you ready to do that?

My first response was, "Yes, it's about time," because I see the Federal government as being more sane than state government, but on further consideration state power my afford as some necessary checks and balances.  Although, at this time, state governments are often whacky and idiotic.  You get to meet these low level politicians personally, and they are not impressive people, often dumber than some of the worst of the national politicians.

But that comparison may not always remain true.  Right now, I'd take all power out of the hands of the states.  Someday, I suppose I could regret it, although honestly, I think that's doubtful.