Posted on 06/02/2016 9:22:53 AM PDT by Trumpinator
...snip....
The FBI Profiler Approach
..snip....
Donald Trump has about five decades of track record in business that includes no violent acts whatsoever. Nor have we heard stories of any Trump temper tantrums in the business world that go beyond the scope of what any CEO does on a bad day. Somehow Trump built hundreds of business entities, amassed great wealth, and raised a great set of kids. And nowhere in the story is the part where he did something scary or dangerous. That sort of behavior doesn’t pop up suddenly when you’re a grandfather.
...snip....
Chemical Cyborgs
In my view, we are already in the Age of Cyborgs. You probably have a friend who has one kind of personality without drugs (legal or illegal) and a completely different personality when using drugs, including alcohol. Maybe the drugs are curing depression, or anxiety, or loneliness, or something. But people are different when they are on them. That’s the point of taking drugs.
Trump doesn’t drink. He never has. He doesn’t take illegal drugs either. He’s the same guy at night that he is in the morning. He’s not a chemical cyborg with a personality that is driven by big pharma.
Clinton, on the other hand, is part human, part pharmacological grab-bag. Her personality is at least partly determined by whatever cocktail of meds and wine are in her system at any given moment. In other words, she is just like most adults. Our personalities are the product of the drugs in our system, for better or for worse.
Do you make the same decisions when you are tired? Do you make the same decisions when you’re angry, depressed, or in pain? Probably not. So if meds are fixing those conditions, those meds are also controlling your decisions. And that introduces risk.
Trump brings with him all the risks of being Trump, but he does seem to be the same person every day. Clinton brings with her all the risks of being Clinton, plus any extra risks from a glass of wine or doctor-prescribed meds. That risk could be nearly nothing. Or not. We have no way to know.
Scaring Foreign Leaders
I hear voters say they worry about Trump offending world leaders and triggering wars. But keep in mind that world leaders have been putting up with dangerous and shitty U.S. presidents for hundreds of years. It hasn’t been a problem yet.
One of the things Trump has going for him is that he’s a well-known entity. People hate surprises. Any foreign leader would know exactly what they are getting with Trump. Like Reagan, a President Trump would talk tough – for effect – but he is likable in person, and he has a strong bias to avoid any problems that are bad for business. China would have no problem with any of that. Putin would have no problem with Trump either. They know what negotiating looks like.
Do foreign leaders WANT a President Trump? Hell, no. Trump says he plans to negotiate better deals for America, which means worse deals for everyone else. Of course foreign leaders are going to tell us Trump is risky, scary, and anything else bad, just to stop him.
I doubt any foreign leader is literally afraid of Trump. But they might want you to think they are afraid of him, so you won’t elect him. Foreign leaders are not idiots. To some extent, they are playing us.
Racism
What about all of Trump’s racism? An FBI profiler would assume a person’s pattern of racism would continue, maybe worsen.
But Trump’s racism exists solely in the minds of his opponents. He has proposed no racist policies and he has no racist acts in his past.
Trump opposes illegal immigration. But he loves legal Americans of every color and flavor. He says so often. That’s not racism. That’s more like the opposite.
Trump did say Mexicans are rapists. But you’d have to be dumb to think he meant every single Mexican coming into the country is a rapist. Literally no one – ever – has believed all Mexicans are rapists. If you think Trump believes it – or wants us to believe it – you have abandoned any hold on reason.
But we agree that Trump says outrageous things, because doing so gets him elected, apparently.
Religious Discrimination
What about Trump’s idea to temporarily ban Muslim immigration until we figure out what the problem is? Isn’t that religious discrimination?
Yes, it is. But it is the legal kind because it would only apply to non-citizens trying to enter the country. And keep in mind that Islam – as commonly practiced in Muslim countries around the world – is not compatible with the Constitution of the United States. That’s different from the situation with Presbyterian immigrants, for example, whose beliefs fold neatly into the current system.
I don’t have an opinion on the best way to handle Muslim immigration because I don’t know how effectively we can screen people. But common sense says we should treat different risk classes in different ways. That’s the way we price car insurance, and it is the way we make all data-driven decisions. Ignoring risk is noble, but it isn’t always smart.
Trump also suggested creating a government list of which residents of the country are Muslim. That’s some scary shit. Until…you realize the government already has that list. You know they do, right?
And if they don’t, they can pull it together from existing Big Data any time they want. That risk is already baked into our current situation. The government knows what you are up to as well. They know your religion (with high probability), your spending habits, your porn preferences, and your health. Or at least they can know those things any time they want.
The privacy ship already sailed.
...snip....
Risk of Business as Usual
Have you wondered why Republican Bill Kristol and others are looking for a third-party candidate who will guarantee a Clinton win over Trump? That’s probably because they know Clinton is in the pockets of the defense industry, and perhaps so are they.
The defense industry needs America to fight wars. History suggests Clinton will be a normal president who starts wars when the defense industry tells her to do so. Trump is less likely to play that game because he doesn’t need their money. That makes Trump the lower risk of starting a war. He has no profit motive.
When to Increase Risk
As a general rule, you want to keep risks low when things are going well and nothing is broken. But when things are heading in the wrong direction, sometimes the only way to fix the situation is to introduce a reasonable, entrepreneurial risk.
So, if you think the country is heading in the right direction, you probably don’t want someone like Trump as president. Trump is more likely to introduce change than Clinton. But if you think the government is broken, you might want some Trump-like entrepreneurial risk in your future.
To hear Hillary, she says Trump’s university depicts who the man is, and how he will act as president. In short, “look at what this person has done, and it’s a good example of what they will do in the future. woof woof.”
Based on Hillary’s past performance, it’s safe to say that Trump, tonight, is going to have a field day with this one.
I started reading Scot Adams blog some time back. He has interesting thoughts and reasoning...He is NOT a Trumpster and has that in plain sight on his blog...but he analyzes the Donald Vs. The Hillary.
He likes the Pursuasive aspects of Donald...Adams has background in advertizing and hypnosis which is basically mind control...
Intresting read...
What I have told anti Trumpsters in the past...This guy has a 50 year track record with all the 10’s of thousands of people he has worked with you dont find legions saying...”Donald Trump screwed me on a deal!”
It has not happened
Donald Trump has not left a body of “put some ice on it” behind him like the Clintons
Donald Trump has left no bodies in Fort Marcy park or anywhere else.
When Donald makes money he does it in areas where he has made it before not on futures which Hillary made a fortune in the one and only time she dabbled in it...
I vote for TRUMP!
Freegards
LEX
A surprisingly good article. Uses a different approach to look at Trump and Trump coms out even better off.
Man, I was the only one posting Dilbert’s analysis. Dang it!
I was the only one posting his blog on here now I have others. I guess I made a difference!
Two things first.
Re: Obama being in the top 20 president category
Come back to me in 20 years. Can anybody imagine a GWBush-like non-presence from either of the Obamas after they leave the WH? Look at Jimmah Carter. The only thing going for Buraq is that he’s so sickly, chances of him lasting till he’s in his 90’s with brain tumor are zilch.
Secondly, risk of a Trump presidency is that we won’t ever hear Putin says “Do You Realize What You Have Done?”
The Left will have a vested interest in preserving Obama’s Legacy, you’ll be a “racist” if you don’t think Obama should be honored. I suspect once he dies, they will push to make his birthday a National Holiday.
bkmk
“When Donald makes money he does it in areas where he has made it before not on futures which Hillary made a fortune in the one and only time she dabbled in it...”
What actually happened was that this was (obviously) an attempt to bribe then Gov. Bill Clinton of Arkansas. Well, they’re not so stupid as to have someone cut them a check, or hand them a suitcase full of cash - so they did it differently. They had some not-so-poor sucker who wanted to bribe him invest in 2 different accounts, invested in exactly the opposite way. Both were held in Hillary’s name (but, since the guy/company involved certainly had sufficient resources to invest, this presented no proble). One account did very well, and the transaction was closed and Hillary withdrew the money (and, to keep up the illusion of legality, reported it on their tax return). The other account was likely written off as a loss by the person/company involved - which Uncle Sam (i.e. all of us) helped to subsidize. Nice, isn’t it?
THIS is who we are dealing with - an utterly corrupt and self-interested person. Donald Trump would never do such a thing, and if he did somehow or other allow it, would likely have been prosecuted on multiple charges had he done so. But not the Witch or her philandering (very infrequent) consort.
Looks like you did make a difference. And Adams is fantastic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.