Donald Trump

[Pcdunn]

Trump wants "payback" for Republicans who failed to endorse him as the party's candidate:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...asich-iqybu9m1

Reminds me of English history as portrayed in Shakespeare's plays. "Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown..."

[Mayerling]

Trump is a lot of hot air, who doesn't even seem to know about the checks and balances. He is the poster boy for a populist politician, saying whatever he thinks will win him the most support, and with a remarkable ability to flip-flop with no shame whatsoever. At the same time, he has no refinement and would be a diplomatic catastrophe of unprecedented proportions if elected. But because he has no refinement, his supporters think that he "tells it like it is". Of course, the only reason they think that is because he's saying stuff they happen to agree with. That is always the case when people say that such-and-such "tells it like it is". It is almost charmingly naive.

I accept most of the comments you made Karl, but I have to object to the twist given the term "populist" in this season of "Trump". While elements of a grass roots movement go back to Andrew Jackson (and even earlier to some aspects of Thomas Jefferson's followers against the "elitist" Federalists) the term of "populists" or "populism" really dates back to a grass roots movement that shook the two parties in the late 1880s through 1896. It led to a Populist Party who actually elected Congressmen, U.S. Senators, Governors, and state legislatures, and in 1892 nominated General James Weaver of Kansas for the Presidency. He did not win, but he set a high standard for a so-called third party by winning the electoral votes of four states. These Populists actually had solid reform plans concerning using Silver as an inflationary device for farmers to pay off debts, and for direct elections of senators, and even woman's suffrage. For every crappy promise by Trump to build a wall with Mexico Trump has no real platform goals he laid out carefully (he at one point suggested a super tax on the rich for one year, but he quickly dropped the idea). The only thing the Populists share with Trump is a negative view on immigrants - but they specified the new immigrants from middle, southern, and eastern Europe of the 1890s, and not Mexicans or Arabs (the latter rarely bothered to emigrate here). For all their defects, and their belief of the "silver panacea", the Populists wrote an impressive and long term good spot in the American record, as the reformed Democratic Party (after 1896) of William Jennings Bryan pushed many of the reforms they supported. Nothing Trump can or will do will match that.

Also the only major political figure to push a "populist style" agenda after the 1890s was Governor (later Senator) Huey Long of Louisiana in the 1920s and 1930s. Because of his tendency towards demagoguery (and certainly some corrupt practices) Long's actual accomplishiments in his state helping both white and African-American poor in the depths of the depression is frequently forgotten. I would not hold him up as a perfect man by any means, but he actually did things that helped people - unlike Trump!

Donald is simply an egomaniac who managed to capture a major nomination by slander and bullying tactics. Sometime in the future they are going to be returned with interest in his direction.

Jeff

[Wickerman]

I wonder how deep this wall is going to go. Hasn't anyone told him that drugs & illegals have been crossing the border through tunnels for goodness knows how long.

Part of me is interested in him winning this thing, just to see what a bloody mess he makes of it at home and abroad.
He's only interested in himself.

[GUT]

I am really confused,mpeople talk about Trump (and certain politicians here, and I guess all around the World) and call them "populists" and say they are just saying/doing what the people want to hear...

Isn't that what they are supposed to do?

What the people want.

[Mayerling]

I wonder how deep this wall is going to go. Hasn't anyone told him that drugs & illegals have been crossing the border through tunnels for goodness knows how long.

Part of me is interested in him winning this thing, just to see what a bloody mess he makes of it at home and abroad.
He's only interested in himself.

Trump just does not even notice that past experiences with "walls" did not work too well. Yes, China built that monument of stone, the Great Wall of China, but it ultimately failed to prevent the Mongols from sweeping in and taking over that country. The Berlin Wall just exacerbated the hostility of the two power blocs over the fate of the citizens of Berlin (and by extension Germany) in the presence of a physical proof of Russian intentions. You'll notice that when Reagan made the public plea, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Gorbabchev responded by allowing it to be torn down, thus unofficially ending the "Cold War". Israel has been working on a wall to seperate the Jewish sections of that country from "foreigners" (the Palestinians, many of whom work in Israel), to the almost universal condemnation of Israel for such a harmful act. Personally I find it ironic that Jews fought to get out of walled off ghettos in Europe for centuries, and when they have their own state they plan to make it the world's largest ghetto!

None of these have succeeded - so we really don't need to think of the business of reality and underground tunnels. But they exist too, adding to the futility of this concept. By the way, stretching it a little into chains of forts, consider the French "Maginot Line" too, quite modern in design and connecting links (you can visit it today if you are in France). It did not do too well in 1940 against units of mechanized tanks that drove around it's location in the Argonne. Nor for that matter the huge bunker like fortifications of Hitler's "Fortress Europa" on the Normandy Coast.

Jeff

[Karl]

I am really confused,mpeople talk about Trump (and certain politicians here, and I guess all around the World) and call them "populists" and say they are just saying/doing what the people want to hear...

Isn't that what they are supposed to do?

What the people want.

The trouble is that there is usually little correlation between what politicians say before an election, and what they will actually do after it.

Actually, that is probably a good thing considering most people are short sighted idiots who fail to see the big picture. "Build a wall and make them pay for it", indeed. Naturally, that isn't going to happen. The wall won't be built, and the Mexicans certainly won't pay for it. Obama said he would close down Guantanamo, too.

[John G]

For someone who's supposed to be a businessman Donald Trump seems to be amazingly ignorant when it comes to economic matters. I mean, not only would the high tariffs he's threatened to impose on imported goods lead to inflation-and retaliation against American exporters-he's also described himself as the "King of Debt", arguing that if heavy borrowing lead to an economic crash America could simply print more money:"You never have to default because you print the money" But, as economic ideas go, this is complete madness! I mean, doesn't realise that the inevitable result would be hyperinflation, which is exactly what's happened in Zimbabwe, where the local currency is now virtually worthless? Does he really think that Zimbabwean -style economics is the ideal that America should be aiming for?

[John G]

The trouble is that there is usually little correlation between what politicians say before an election, and what they will actually do after it.

Actually, that is probably a good thing considering most people are short sighted idiots who fail to see the big picture. "Build a wall and make them pay for it", indeed. Naturally, that isn't going to happen. The wall won't be built, and the Mexicans certainly won't pay for it. Obama said he would close down Guantanamo, too.

This is probably true. The problem is many voters are so easily manipulated-I mean, they fall for the same ridiculous rhetoric every time, and then feel cheated, and become angry and bewildered, when politicians either don't deliver or their promises don't exactly work out as hoped for. Priceless!

What also amazes me is the mentality of political activists. Thus, in Britain Jeremy Corbyn will probably be re-elected as leader of the Labour Party, with disastrous consequences. And, in America, what on earth possessed Republicans to think that Donald Trump was an ideal candidate and, likewise, Democrats to think the same thing about Hilary Clinton? I mean, almost half of Bernie Sanders' supporters-who you would think should be her natural allies- say they won't vote for her!

[Robert]

For decades politicians have been using the same dodge : "You may not like me, but if you don't vote for me you'll get the other side, and you dislike them even more." And so the pendulum game continues back and forth. Politicians accept that they'll be out of office for a while, and then it will be their turn again. It's all in the game, and it's a no-win game for voters.

So the voters should stop playing.

[Karl]

I have always felt that if, in an election, instead of votes you had anti-votes, ie. you vote against someone instead of for, then you would have a much bigger turn-out. This could lead to some interesting results, and independent candidates would then have a much bigger chance. Not that this would necessarily make anything better, mind you, but the turn-out would surely be greater.

[Ginger]

For decades politicians have been using the same dodge : "You may not like me, but if you don't vote for me you'll get the other side, and you dislike them even more." And so the pendulum game continues back and forth. Politicians accept that they'll be out of office for a while, and then it will be their turn again. It's all in the game, and it's a no-win game for voters.

So the voters should stop playing.

And that's why Trump has the support that he does.

[ChrisGeorge]

Trump wants "payback" for Republicans who failed to endorse him as the party's candidate:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...asich-iqybu9m1

Reminds me of English history as portrayed in Shakespeare's plays. "Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown..."

This new article by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker who interviewed Tony Schwartz, the man who ghostwrote Trump's The Art of the Deal, is revealing and scary about Donald Trump's character flaws:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

[Aldebaran]

This new article by Jane Mayer in The New Yorker who interviewed Tony Schwartz, the man who ghostwrote Trump's The Art of the Deal, is revealing and scary about Donald Trump's character flaws:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...iter-tells-all

Very interesting--revealing and scary for sure. I've never dreaded an election until this one.

[Pcdunn]

Chris: Wonderful article about "The Art of the Deal", thank you for the link. I think Schwartz's perception of The Donald ties in very well with what I've observed during Trump's campaign. And the comment that Trump loves ANY publicity, positive or critical, is one I've read elsewhere, from another source.

Trump is likely to be the worst President of the United States ever in our history, should be win the office (which I hope he does not!)

[MsWeatherwax]

I am really confused,mpeople talk about Trump (and certain politicians here, and I guess all around the World) and call them "populists" and say they are just saying/doing what the people want to hear...

Isn't that what they are supposed to do?

What the people want.

I'd really rather that they didn't to be honest.

There appears to be an ever increasing amount of people who get their political and world news from non-fact checked Facebook memes, leading to people who genuinely believe that the moon can magically duplicate itself 37 times, the US Government created AIDS and Bill Gates donates a dollar for every 'like'....