by Jack
The only reason there are so many scammers on the net is because they are farming stupid and gullible people and apparently the farming is good. So here is a brief heads up of some recent scams. Nobody at your bank needs to verify your bank account. You did not win the lottery and you don’t need to post a security deposit. Your Aunt Sally did not send you a mysterious email to an odd link to a website. Your son/daughter/friend/relative is not in jail and they didn’t get mugged while on vacation and they do not need you to wire them money. You are not going to be paid $200 to take opinion polls. You have not been selected to be the secret shopper. You have not been selected at random by an African Prince to smuggle his family fortune out of Botswana land. The IRS is not suing you and you don’t need to call a non-IRS 800 number to speak with a guy who has an Indian accent. (Hundreds more omitted for the sake of brevity)
Looking for free anti-virus or free tune-up software on the internet? Want to get up to 5000% more performance out of your old machine? Beware! Even legit sites use boiler room tactics to upsell you from the free product to the “professional” grade, whatever the heck that means. If you are directed to one of their “people” to “help” you install it – STOP! YOU DON’T NEED IT! Why not get them to help? Well, because the next thing you know is they will be controlling your computer, telling you how at risk you are and all the programs running in the background that are slowing down your machine. They may even ask how old you are in friendly conversation…the older the better Pidgeon you are and the harder they will work on you to sell you crap you don’t need and they try to squeeze any from a $100 or more out of you for their “help.” It’s not help – its a scam. Don’t do it. If you have computer problems go to a trusted local repair place, you will be much happier with the results.
Don’t be a putz, be smart and be aware of the latest scams.
Off topic, but I can’t contain myself. Unable to find ranking politicians willing to tank their careers, The Donald is trying to line up ball players to speak at the convention.
This is delightful.
Did you hear he invited Mike Tyson? As in, “convicted rapist Mike Tyson?”
Based on Trump’s non-stop antics, his lack of staffing and even deeper lack of competent standing, and above all his budget, I’m becoming more convinced that the entire Trump campaign was just a scam to sell hats.
It is delightful!
The Preamble to the Constitution declares “We the People…” not we the elitists politicians:
There will be plenty of our leaders at our convention.
The shameful reality of today is that even though your candidate is under criminal investigation, is unfit to be Commander-in-Chief, is a serial liar, and an enabler/protector of a woman abusing horndog, your party’s leadership will attend the convention and you the faithful will vote to elect her.
“There will be plenty of our leaders at our convention.”
Yes, I’m sure the ball players will be inspirational … to no purpose, as ball players do not make law. In fact, the presence of the ball players will amply demonstrate that The ELE has no support among the political class, and, as we are not electing a dictator, Trump will be able to get nothing … nothing … done.
Trump is also possibly a criminal (Trump U), is unfit to be Commander-in-Chief, is a serial liar, and is also possibly a woman abusing horndog.
If these are disqualifying factors for Clinton in your view, why are they not disqualifying factors for Trump?
Another scam to watch out for: The Trump campaign.
How about Obammycare? You think that ain’t a scam?
Do you and the rest of the liberals who infest this blog…er…I mean generously offer such wise opinions and graciously tell everyone how they should live their lives….(my, how could we live without you?)… think your Lord and Savior’s Unaffordable No Care Act will save us?
Health Care Costs Rising Sharply (And It Will Get Worse)
https://mishtalk.com/2016/06/29/health-care-costs-rising-sharply-and-it-will-get-worse/
Bob Mish says it all but my favorite is this: “The wage point varies, but many will say “Dear employer, please don’t pay me more. It will cost me a lot of money.”
That’s exactly what employers of minimum wage, who also get gov’t subsidies, told their employers whrn they raised the minimum wage.
People do what they believe is in their own best interests no matter what station they are in life. Meddling do-gooders in government mess that up
There are 17 million more Americans insured today due to “Obammycare.”
Wow, what a scam.
Yeah, and thanks to Colliefornia’s version of Obammycare they can and will come after your house.
http://ask-roxy.blogspot.com/2013/12/alert-go-on-obamacare-medi-calmedicaid.html
And just because Obammy sent millions onto the Medicaid roles or to the exchanges doesn’t mean doctors will see them.
Obammycare did nothing to increase the supply of healthcare. Obammy, being an economic illiterate, like most liberals, does not realize that increasing demand without increasing supply will only result in higher prices.
Which is why a civilized society removes bothe healthcare and education from the “for profit” realm.
Which is why a civilized society removes bothe healthcare and education from the “for profit” realm.
Libster, what about food or clothing? Aren’t they just as much necessities as healthcare? Why not remove those from the “for profit” realm?
Why not just remove the “for profit” realm completely?
Because there’s already SNAP, and always the Goodwill.
Why does this bother you so much?
Goodwill is not free and the government is drowning in hundreds of trillions of unfunded liabilities and debt. But please don’t let facts stand in your way.
Chris, here’s an article on the economics of Obamacare.
ObamaScare Looms – Health Insurers Are Looking For A Taxpayer Bailout
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-30/obamascare-looms-health-insurers-are-looking-taxpayer-bailout
The worst is yet to come for Obamacare. Obamacare is not economically viable and that is not surprising because Obama is an economic illiterate. But he is a shrewd politician which is why it will not implode on his watch.
But just wait a year or two into the next administration. Then there will be an immediate healthcare crisis that will have to be addressed.
Turns out Trump voters really *are* more likely to hold racist views than other voters:
(Reuters) – Supporters of U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump are more likely to describe African Americans as “criminal,” “unintelligent,” “lazy” and “violent” than voters who backed some Republican rivals in the primaries or who support Democratic contender Hillary Clinton, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll…
Nearly half of Trump’s supporters described African Americans as more “violent” than whites. The same proportion described African Americans as more “criminal” than whites, while 40 percent described them as more “lazy” than whites..
Trump voters consistently ranked African-Americans more negatively than other voters (though all demonstrated unfortunately high levels of racism, in my view).
Gee, I can’t imagine why racist voters would be more attracted to Donald Trump than other candidates. Anyone got any theories on that?
Imagine a poll finding exactly what it set out to find.
You people are incorrigible!
This is a propaganda poll with two goals: 1) rile up the minority base that isn’t all that excited about Hillary, and ,2) discourage Republicans to keep them home on election day.
Pollsters told us until the day Reagan won in a landslide that he would lose.
The majority of media, academics, and pollsters are pulling for Hillary.
Ask mothers in Chicago if minorities are violent. Ask the prison administrators if minorities are violent. Ask both if there is a disproportionate number of violence and criminal behavior involving minorities in their everyday experience. People use the word, “lazy” because they don’t know how else to describe an able bodied person who lives off of others. Call it short hand. They are communicating that they know something isn’t right and this stuff is what it looks like.
Republicans don’t believe this condition exists based on race! We see conditions, many of them designed and nourished by government to create dependency (See Plato, Aristotle, More, Hobbes, Marx), bad schools, and broken families. White people can’t do anything about this. Our government and state and city governments could do something but they don’t. I have to ask, “Why not? Why is this very high priority problem not addressed in any positive way? Even by a black president that had eight years! By the way, expect him to start putting this in his campaign speeches…progressives talk the talk.
Listen to the language in comedy routines, rap music, and other minority entertainment and tell me you can’t find what you call “racism” against cops and white people in that speech.
People are people. No party is exempt from attitudes about other people. the idea that there is systemic racism today is IDIOCY! Black folks in power STAY IN POWER by keeping alive the white’s hate minorities (Republicans) lie and ginning up the base they’ve developed with this rhetoric to come out to get out the minority vote.
You are a bunch of scammers and gamers…you play people…both sides! You can’t communicate clearly and honestly about race, it would destroy the game.
Tina, paraphrased:
“I’m not racist, but minorities are lazy and violent.”
Thanks, Tina. You confirm that you are everything I say you are with every new comment.
Christopher, get off the racism cr@p.
You are just trying to stir up trouble and division as you did when Trump affectionately said “my African American.”
You are on that old saw of saying the most outrageous things to sow discord and hatred so people will be driven from this blog.
“You are on that old saw of saying the most outrageous things to sow discord and hatred”
Are you saying I should run for president?
How about president of North Korea? You would be right at home there.
You say the most inflammatory things to drive people away such as Chuck Ness and Joseph, among others. If you were president I am sure you would send them to a FEMA camp for a bit of political re-education.
And Trump and his supporters are not racists.
You apparently like this blog. You must as you spend so much time here.
Now suppose Jack were black. Heck, he may well be for all I know, although I did see him once on the telly and he looked white to me. But I know several African Americans who are routinely mistaken for whites.
If Jack were black and you said something complimentary about this blog and then pointed to Jack and said, “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him. Are you the greatest?”
Do you think Jack would think you’re racist?
Bob: “You say the most inflammatory things to drive people away such as Chuck Ness and Joseph, among others.”
As I recall, Chuck has said that I deserve to burn in hell, that women never should have gotten the right to vote, and falsely accused the APA of supporting pedophilia.
Are those statements not “inflammatory,” in your view? If not, why not?
I responded to those statements appropriately. If that was enough to “drive Chuck away,” so be it. I’m not responsible for delicate flowers leaving this blog because they can’t handle criticism.
I don’t even remember Joseph, but again, if he left, that was his choice.
There is a commenter here who refers to me as “Piss” and does nothing but insult those who disagree with him with juvenile taunts. You have never spoken against him as I can recall. You are voting for a candidate who also does nothing but say inflammatory things for attention and insult others. Please stop pretending like you think saying inflammatory things is wrong. You don’t.
“If you were president I am sure you would send them to a FEMA camp for a bit of political re-education.”
Oh, you really *are* a delicate flower. Criticism isn’t oppression, bob, and the fact that I criticize your positions does not mean I want any legal action taken against you.
”
You apparently like this blog. You must as you spend so much time here.
Now suppose Jack were black. Heck, he may well be for all I know, although I did see him once on the telly and he looked white to me. But I know several African Americans who are routinely mistaken for whites.
If Jack were black and you said something complimentary about this blog and then pointed to Jack and said, “Oh, look at my African-American over here. Look at him. Are you the greatest?”
Do you think Jack would think you’re racist?”
I think those remarks would be evidence of racial insensitivity and cluelessness, which is what they were when Trump said them, not necessarily of “being a racist.” His remarks about Mexicans have been far more damning, and those remarks are why I call him a racist. “My African American” was simply stupid, not racist.
I can’t comment on your accusations against Chuck Ness because I have never seen the remarks you allege.
I think those remarks would be evidence of racial insensitivity and cluelessness…
Is this a micro-aggression?
If Jack and Tina were African American (and they could be for all I know) would that make them racist? Or just insensitive and clueless and if so are they guilty of micro-agression.
Also, if an African American said things similar to what they say (such as Tina’s remarks that you judge as racist) would these African Americans be racist?
“Is this a micro-aggression?”
Good question, bob. My understanding of the term “micro-aggression” is that it refers to personal experiences that, while relatively small and insignificant in themselves, ultimately add up to a larger experience of racism or bigotry. Things like a minority being told “You’re one of the good ones” or women being told to “smile” by strangers on the street could seem innocuous, but ultimately take a toll.
I think an African-American who was called “my African-American” by a white man could certainly experience that as a micro-aggression, but I have no idea if the man Trump referred to experienced it in that way. You would have to ask him. I still think it was a clueless and insensitive thing to say, though I don’t think it was the result of malice. Then again, I don’t know Trump’s personal feelings about black people; he has been more explicit in his racism toward Mexicans. (Though I do remember him tweeting bogus statistics about black crime that said something like 80% of white murder victims are killed by blacks, which was thoroughly refuted.)
“If Jack and Tina were African American (and they could be for all I know)”
They are white. In fact, I’ve asked before if this blog has any non-white readers and have been met with silence. From what I can tell all of the frequent commenters here are white.
“would that make them racist? Or just insensitive and clueless and if so are they guilty of micro-aggression.”
You’ll have to be more specific about what comments of theirs you are referring to here. I believe black people are absolutely capable of racism, if that’s your question.
“Also, if an African American said things similar to what they say (such as Tina’s remarks that you judge as racist) would these African Americans be racist?”
I think the comments above I quoted from Tina, who was defending the racism of Trump supporters as expressed in the poll I cited, were absolutely racist, and would be racist even if a black person expressed them the way she did. (Yes, someone can absolutely be racist against their own people).
Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams have said very similar things about blacks as what Tina, Jack and others have said in this blog.
Does that make Sowell and Williams racists?
Maybe. You’d have to quote specific lines of theirs for me to decide whether their comments were racist.
Do you accept that someone can be racist against their own race, bob?
Only someone who is self-hating.
Chris, are you an SJW?
bob: “Only someone who is self-hating.”
I think “self-hating” is a limited term. Many black people have internalized stereotypes and negative messages about their own race, because those are the messages they see every day. That doesn’t necessarily mean they “hate” themselves, but then, I don’t think most bigotry is about hatred.
“Chris, are you an SJW?”
I’d have to get a definition of this to confirm, since I’ve seen it used in so many different ways. I don’t label myself this way, as I see it used mostly as a pejorative; I also typically see it used in a way that means “someone who cares about an issue I don’t care about,” rather than it’s intended meaning as “someone who goes way too far in the pursuit of social justice.” I admit that there are many people who fit the latter description, but I don’t think I’m one of them, even though I do care about social justice.
Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell have said the same thing Tina said in her comments above.
Do you really believe black people with the intelligence and life experience of a Williams or Sowell have a racist attitude towards their own race?
Biggest scam, other than the totally invented climate change drivel, is the JV Team meme.
41 DEAD in Istanbul! Who’s next?
And how’s that Peace Prize looking now.
Grow up, or grow some stones, one or the other.
Better still, why don’t you go read something about the situation. So we don’t have to listen to your frightened, childish and ignorant complaints.
Trump getting a crowd to cheer for torture:
“We have to fight so viciously and violently because we’re dealing with violent people,” Mr Trump said.
At one point, he asked the crowd: “What do you think about waterboarding?”
They cheered as he gave his answer: “I like it a lot. I don’t think it’s tough enough.”
Disgusting.
Link: https://www.google.com/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/36664752?client=safari#
No idiot…they are cheering for the destruction of this enemy as swiftly and completely as possible to STOP the terrorism, torture, mass murder, rapes, real misogyny, real homophobia, genocide, tyranny and related barbarism that defies this enemy by any means necessary!
This enemy must be exposed as the monstrous human debris that they are. They must be shown up as socially and morally reprehensible! Your party does everything it can to make them seem normal and average. In doing so you make them appear to be the stronger, winning horse…and that is the best recruiting tool of all.
You don’t get it. You show absolutely zero inclination to even try to get it. You are a liability which is why people are attracted to Trump Hillary has failed in this regard, as has her former boss and the rest of the weenie, Kumbaya singing following that sits in adoration at their feet.
No, idiot, they really did cheer for torture.
Your capacity for denial is astounding. How do you do this?
More internet scam news: Is Donald Trump spamming foreign dignitaries asking them to donate to his campaign, or is someone spoofing his email address?
If so, it might violate federal electoral rules.
Presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump could be a spammer.
Politicians in both the U.K. and Australia say they have received e-mails from the Trump campaign and signed by both the nominee and his son Donald Trump Jr., asking that they donate cash to his campaign. At least one e-mail was published online by Natalie McGarry, MP for Glasgow East, who received it on June 22. In the email, signed by Trump’s son, he noted that the Trump Campaign raised millions of dollars to fight “Crooked Hillary,” the term Trump uses for his presumptive opponent Hillary Clinton.
http://fortune.com/2016/06/29/donald-trump-spam/
This could be someone unaffiliated with the campaign, but given Trump’s lack of professionalism and lack of knowledge regarding the law during this campaign, I wouldn’t be surprised if it really was him.
Yea these people are breaking the law so openly and if we allow any of them to get away with it we have only ourselves to Blame.
Look foreign money buying policy is the norm. But now they are so arrogant…why?..Because no one goes to jail or has repercussions?
So this must mean Hillary is a criminal.
*iss still has a chip, a prairie pie, and a wet one to boot, on his shoulder. Ho Hum. I wonder, will he ever spend as much of his hate speech energy hating Hillary? Oops, sorry, that was rhetorical. *iss is a Rat, through and through.
Under the title of “Why am I not surprised by this #537,418?”
Obama administration fascists target Fox News! Try this on for size Obama and the rest of you progressive fascist Rats like Libby, Dewey, Chris et. al.- EAT S*IT AND DIE!
Fox targeted by FEC Dems in first-ever vote to punish debate sponsorship
Pie …lol Fox news is crap, CNN the Clinton News Network is crap and MSNBC the new Fox Lite is Crap
I say off with all their heads!
Bottom Line Both parties are fascists…… Corporations and foreign govs buy policy and assets so our corrupt can have money and power
The whole election is a scam.
Another Republican against Trump:
It doesn’t sound like Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee is going to endorse Donald Trump anytime soon.
Asked why he has held off, Lee went on an extended rant that included Trump’s attacks on GOP rival Ted Cruz — Lee’s best friend — as well as the presumptive GOP nominee’s criticism of Muslims, a big issue in the largely Mormon state of Utah.
“I mean we can get into the fact that he accused my best friend’s father of conspiring to kill JFK,” Lee told Newsmax’s Steve Malzberg, who asked about the lack of a Trump endorsement.
“We can go through the fact that he has made some statements that some have identified correctly as religiously intolerance,” Lee added. “We can get into the fact that he is so unpopular because my state consists of members who were a religious minority church — a people who were ordered exterminated by the governor of Missouri in 1839 and statements like that make them nervous.
He concluded by telling his host: “Don’t sit here and tell me, Steve, that I have no reason to be concerned about Donald Trump.”
Those darn liberals, always accusing people of intolerance for silly things like advocating banning immigration based on a religious test!
And of course I’m sure you heard about George Will. That one had to sting.
Link: https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday.com/story/86546040/?client=safari#
The Liberals that haunt here are in rare form, one suggests the production of stones, why, because she has rocks in her head!. Another asking if the should run for POTUS, yeh that’s rich, see how much he gets in support after berating the public with “idiot, stupid and other such slurs in likely his first speech, and most likely in retort for not lock stepping on his beliefs. The other, well his temperament just “drips” with conspiracies paranoia. most consistent of all just meaning less blah blah blah, and not even on post subject.
Credit goes to Jack for trying to help make people aware, Thanks always a good reminder to be aware of scams.
Not one of them can even address why Hillary is even qualified to run for office, and why her party covers for her corrupt past, nope they just harp more anti anything about Trump, stuff most likely they regurgitate from liberal BS and googled spin.
Its no secret that GOP voters would have preferred another presumptive candidate , my self included.
I’ll wager most non anal, and even level headed Liberals are just as embarrassed about having Hillary as their Presumptive as well
Harold, Hillary is by definition more qualified than Trump, having served in high government positions for much of her life whereas Trump has no government experience whatsoever. That automatically makes her more qualified, even if you think she hasn’t done a good job in these positions.
Trump would be the first president ever with no experience in either government or military.
As for Hillary’s corrupt past, I think much of it is exaggerated, but some of it is real. I don’t think she’s any more corrupt than Trump, who has been involved in numerous scams, and is now being sued not only for conning people out of their money, but also for rape. Some of the conservatives here have assumed guilt on the part of Bill Clinton for similar allegations; will they hold Trump to the same standard?
I’m not that happy with Clinton as my party’s nominee, but she is better than Trump, and the major reason why is obvious: every single important critique of Clinton also applies to Trump, but not every critique of Trump applies to Clinton. If Clinton is a liar, Trump lies even more frequently. If Clinton is married to a closet misogynist, Trump is an open misogynist. If Clinton is a flip-flopper who changes her stances to appeal to different crowds, Trump doesn’t even seem to know what his own positions are. In addition, Trump is inarticulate, speaks like a third grade bully, has no knowledge of foreign affairs, and has neither the experience nor the temperament to be president.
Do you really think Trump is above having a private email server if he became president? Can you honestly say with reasonable certainty that is something he would never do? I can’t.
Now, can you see Clinton publicly accusing Bernie Sanders’ father of helping plot the JFK assassination? Can you see her mocking a journalist’s disability in public? Can you see her saying POWs aren’t heroes in public? Can you see Clinton saying a judge is biased against her because of his ethnicity? Can you see her bragging about the size of her reproductive organs in a debate?
I can say with reasonable confidence these are things Hillary Clinton would never, ever do. But there is nothing Clinton has been accused of that I can say with any degree of confidence that Trump would never, ever do.
That’s what it comes down to.
This election, for many, is about the lesser of two evils. It should be abundantly clear that while Trump and Clinton may share some of the same flaws, Trump has several additional crippling flaws that Clinton absolutely does not share.
Hot damn Chris and I agree!!! Hillary is far more qualified than Trump. She is a better serial liar, a damn foolish national security disaster and so sick of a misanthrop that she protects her rapist and child rapist husband and attacks his victims.
Yep, Hillary is the lesser of two evils, fer sure dude.
Chris has spoken!
Pie, do you believe Donald Trump is a rapist based on the allegations against him?
If not, what makes the rape allegations against Bill Clinton more convincing, in your view?
(This isn’t a rhetorical question; I am genuinely curious about your answer.)
Today in “Donald Trump Has No Idea What He’s Talking About:” Trump doesn’t seem to know how many Supreme Court justices there are.
It took a few days, but this morning the presumptive GOP nominee broke his unexpected silence in an interview with conservative radio host Mike Gallagher.
“Now if we had Scalia was living, or if Scalia was replaced by me, you wouldn’t have had that, OK? It would’ve been the opposite.”
Actually, no, it wouldn’t have. This week’s ruling was actually a 5-3 decision. Yes, Antonin Scalia’s passing meant the Supreme Court was down one justice, but it doesn’t take a mathematician to know 3 +1 does not equal 5.
Remember, the decision was on Monday, and today’s Thursday. Trump and his team had three days to come up with the candidate’s response to a major court ruling, and this is what they came up with.
In the same interview, the New York Republican complained about Chief Justice John Roberts, telling the host, “He could’ve killed [the Affordable Care Act] twice and he didn’t. That was terrible. And that was a Bush appointment. That was so bad, what happened. And you know, to me, you know, almost not recoverable from his standpoint. Very, very sad situation.”
Actually, the second time the justices considered the constitutionality of “Obamacare,” the law was upheld in a 6-3 ruling. When Trump said today Roberts “could’ve killed” the ACA, his math is still wrong — because 6 – 1 does not equal four.
Do you ever get the impression that Trump hasn’t really thought this issue through? Ever wonder if there’s an issue he has thought through?
https://www.google.com/amp/www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trump-flunks-supreme-court-arithmetic/amp?client=safari#
Do you ever wonder why Hillary’s lies and scandals are treated with kid gloves by the press?
Do you ever wonder why she does so few interviews and when she does she never really says anything nor does she answer the questions she’s asked?
Have you seen her appearances on the love fest talk shows? Impressive!
You are preparing to award the presidency AGAIN. This time to a woman with enough ugly, reprehensible, criminal baggage to down a jetliner. There is nothing to recommend in Hillary. Anyone would be a better choice, even Donald Trump.
She IS that bad!
Except, as I have explained over and over again, every significant critique that applies to Clinton also applies to Trump, and thensome. Trump may give more interviews, but that’s to quench his appetite for attention. He also lies more and has been accused of crimes that are just as serious, including soliciting donations from foreign government officials.
Go ahead, give me a critique of Clinton that does not also apply to Trump.
My opionion about Clinton, I trust Clinton less than Trump. for me that’s enough.
I read you evaluation of Clintons strengths. My evaluation is:
I just could not agree with you on your ideologue assessments of her service while a State Senator, and especially as S.of S.
I would have used SOS , but we all know she is far from any SOS cry for help!
I can easily see Clinton attacking anyone or issue she FEELS she needs to just to win the POTUS, people are aware she does carry the CLINTON verbal knife. I can say with complete confidence these are things Hillary Clinton would do.
At Best she was even less effective than Kerry, and Clinton was way to timid in dealing with problems in the middle east.
If trump is lacking in a area of expertise, he would have the foresight and effective leadership style to surround himself with people that will have knowledge needed to analyze the issues, not just a yes man puppet cabinet likely to follow suit like Obamas, if Hillary does get the nod.
I do not see Trump as a lock step politician, which is something America could use today. Which is easily why Trump is the lesser of two evils.
Harold: “I can easily see Clinton attacking anyone or issue she FEELS she needs to just to win the POTUS, people are aware she does carry the CLINTON verbal knife.”
OK. But has Clinton attacked her opponents in the same way Trump has? Has she publicly insulted their wives and fathers? Has she said of any of the candidates, “Who would vote for that face?” Has she made it a habit of referring to each of her opponents with juvenile nicknames? Has she called them “losers,” “lightweights” and so on? Has she falsely claimed that her opponents are constitutionally ineligible to run? (Before anyone says it: No, Clinton did *not* originate or even repeat the birther lie.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/05/06/donald-trumps-ridiculous-claim-that-hillary-clinton-started-the-birther-movement/
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/was-hillary-clinton-the-original-birther/
I’ve no doubt that Clinton is underhanded and knows how to attack her opponents, but she does so within normal means of public discourse. She has not stooped to the low personal attacks that Trump has made a central part of his campaign.
“If trump is lacking in a area of expertise, he would have the foresight and effective leadership style to surround himself with people that will have knowledge needed to analyze the issues, not just a yes man puppet cabinet likely to follow suit like Obamas, if Hillary does get the nod.”
Why do you believe this, Harold?
Trump’s campaign staff has been an embarrassment. His lawyer said that spousal rape is legal. His campaign manager assaulted a right-wing reporter. His other campaign manager tweeted that neither Obama or Romney were “pure breeds.” His campaign is now losing staff on a weekly basis because no one wants to work with him. He can’t even find people willing to speak at the convention. How is he even going to convince “the best people” when they don’t want their names associated with him at all?
His foreign policy experts have been denounced by Republicans as being unqualified nobodies.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/donald-trump-foreign-policy-advisers-221058
http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/06/on-foreign-policy-clinton-is-bad-and-tru
There is no reason to believe that Trump would “surround himself with the best people” when you look at who he surrounds himself with now. He doesn’t even know who the best people are, and has repeatedly denounced more educated and informed Republicans as out-of-touch “elites,” essentially waging an anti-intellectual “war on experts.”
“I do not see Trump as a lock step politician”
There’s a middle ground between being a “lock step politician” and not having any coherent policy positions whatsoever. Trump fits in the latter category. He can’t even decide if taxes on the rich should go up or down! At this stage, for a major candidate for president to not have a clear position on this is ridiculous. He has also contradicted himself on abortion, first saying women should be punished for abortions before contradicting that later that day. He has even started to play down his bigoted anti-Muslim policy, originally stating it would be a temporary pause on *all* Muslim immigration, then saying it would only apply to countries with a history of terrorism.
He just…says stuff. He has no plan at all, because he isn’t doing this for America, he is doing this for attention and his own personal gain. That’s why so much of his campaign money has been spent on his own businesses; this campaign is a slush fund. He’s not going to be elected president–no one with his disapproval rating ever has been–and I think he knows it, but he is determined to waste the public’s time and secure a nomination that his own party doesn’t even want to give him, and are desperately trying to stop.
Note that I am not saying Clinton is not also corrupt. But she is corrupt within normal means, and is also a serious politician. Trump is a clown and a child, and we are far safer in Clinton’s hands than Trump’s.
Harold, you really must read that Reason article. Everyone should. An excerpt:
In this realm, as in most areas of government obligations, he combines ignorance and arrogance. He didn’t know what the nuclear triad is. He came up empty when asked about Brexit—Britain’s possible exit from the European Union. He insists “we are not a rich country.” His chief idea for combating the Islamic State is to “bomb the s— out of them.”
Trump made a big speech on foreign policy in April at an event sponsored by the Center for the National Interest—which used to be called the Nixon Center, after a president who knew a great deal about the world and how to pursue America’s interests in it. Richard Nixon was a terrible president. But had he known less, he would not have been better.
On her worst days, Clinton evokes memories of him—stiff, charmless, overly enamored of air power, even paranoid. But she also has a wealth of knowledge of the world and many of its leaders, and she needs no on-the-job training in international affairs. At the routine daily business of international diplomacy, Clinton offers competence and predictability.
Trump, however, has Nixon’s darkest impulses and none of his understanding. The idea of someone so vindictive, petty and psychologically unbalanced having the power to start World War III ought to induce stark terror in every corner of the globe.
Much of Clinton’s Thursday speech consisted of airy banalities—”We need to be strong at home,” for example, and “we need to embrace all the tools of American power.” Sometimes she sounded less like a former secretary of state than like Captain Obvious.
But Trump’s example makes her platitudes appealing. It’s true that he avoids the obvious. No one but him would think to ask, “Who the hell cares if there’s a trade war?” No one else would say John McCain, who was tortured during his five years in a North Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp, was not a war hero. But unconventionality can be a symptom of insanity or stupidity rather than creativity.
Clinton, for all her flaws as a public official and a person, is neither crazy nor clueless. Her establishment credentials and outlook mean her mistakes fall within a predictable range. Knowing something about crafting policy and dealing with foreign leaders might also steer her clear of hazards…
…Trump is doomed to make mistakes because he not only doesn’t know much but thinks his lack of knowledge is actually an asset. The less you know, the simpler the world appears. But that’s a dangerous illusion.
Giving the presidency to Clinton is far from ideal. But if you needed a major operation, would you choose a surgeon with a haughty manner and a checkered past who loses more than the usual number of patients? Or would you trust the job to a taxidermist?
http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/06/on-foreign-policy-clinton-is-bad-and-tru