Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
A Malaise Speech for the Current Time
(03-29-2017, 03:27 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:
(03-29-2017, 02:20 PM)Galen Wrote:
(03-29-2017, 01:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I feel the need to bring up several points to rebut this long screed.

Beechnut79 Wrote:The recent defeat of healthcare reform, rather sarcastically referred to as Trumpcare, went down to defeat last week. Who was reinforcing the need to see its defeat?

Actually among the politcially active it was primarily called Ryancare or Obamacare Lite.  The need to defeat it came straight from the administration through reverse psychological methods.  I don't expect the MSM commentariat to understand the psychology of GOP reps, nor do I expect the likes of Odin to understand it either.  When the President's Chief strategist is openly telling Reps to vote for something--it is in their very nature to give him the middle finger.

Pretty much what I thought except that I think the real target is Ryan.  Given Ryan's past behavior toward Trump it would be just like him to sink Ryan as Speaker.  This also gives Trump the bonus of having the Dims still owning Obozocare as the system continues to collapse.  This is what I have come to expect from Trump and is why his apparent mistakes seems to work out in the end.

I don't think he actually makes mistakes--or at least not many.  I think he's playing a completely different game than the Establishment.  Just like how he campaigned was completely different from campaigns that came before.  Relying more on the Meme Team, the internet and the like as opposed to Tee-Vee and MSM.

Strategy? He's an effective demagogue as a campaigner. As a strategist as a political leader? Being President is more about creating allies than about defeating enemies. If anything it is the Establishment that has a deep strategy. America has lasted as a federal republic for 115 years before Donald Trump became President and tried to act as a dictator. That is 115 years of political heritage just in the current form, and a heritage that precedes that. It's a heritage with no use for despotism or dictatorship.

If by "Establishment" you mean Big Business and special interests not on President Trump's side, they have the potential allies in liberals. The "social justice warriors". The "tree huggers". The "union bosses". The intellectuals. Religious minorities. Intellectuals and intellectual poseurs.

Quote:I have said in other threads that Trump had to get rid of Ryan (who is a dangerous snake), however, he has to do so without getting his hands dirty.  So, get him to initiate a major proposal, attempt to force it through the House and then throw a wrench into the machine just as it's about to hit the floor so the whole bill blows up.

Donald Trump is not winning friends from the sorts of people who usually vote Democratic. He has nothing to offer and he has little cause for trust.  The Establishment likes its machines working well. It does not want the sort of regime that either creates a pre-revolutionary situation that can lead to the overthrow of capitalism and it doesn't want an apocalyptic war that can destroy the assets that the Establishment needs for its profits and class privilege. A new serfdom might be optimal for a while for plutocratic elites, but fascism has a way of starting wars that leave industrial assets in rubble and puts asset-owners and executives at risk of dispossession if not imprisonment or execution.

Quote:Over all who ends up owning Obamacare?  The (Democrats -- derogatory name modified to the conventional) .  Who has egg all over his face?  Ryan.  Who ends up getting a new speaker eventually?  Trump.  Ryan wasted a lot of political capital on Ryancare, he can't afford too many more mistakes before the Republican Caucus decides it's time for someone else.  I would suggest Louie Gohmert.

Donald Trump has put the Republican majority in the House at risk, and he has little to show for it.  The next Speaker of the House could be a Democrat -- perhaps as early as January 2019.

Things are not going according to plan for President Trump -- if he had a plan. The failure is coming at a time in most Presidencies in which the President appeals to the base and tries to extend his support. Even Dubya did that. President Trump had a golden opportunity to achieve his agenda with the aid of an obedient Party in the majority in both Houses of Congress and Democrats seemingly irrelevant. He does not know how the Presidency works. He has done little more than do exactly what President Obama would not have done.

If I am to replace a manager, then the first thing I will want to know is what the previous manager did right. I might hone that some as necessary to fit my style, but I am not going to change what doesn't have to be changed. Even Dick Cheney has given up on Trump.

By 2020 Americans will have an idea of what sort of President they want. It won't have to look like Barack Obama, but that person had better have much the same virtues. Caution, respect for precedent and protocol, not making everything personal, knowledge of one's intellectual limits, and enough humility with which to know when to ask an expert. Most likely a sharp legal mind, as attorneys are intellectual generalists (unlike Donald Trump, whose intellectual talents other than telling enough people exactly what they want to hear somehow escape me). Above all, not being a malignant narcissist or outright sociopath. Even the cautious take risks, and they are the ones that one wants managing risks. When they have to make decisive choices, the cautious are the ones to get the best results.

He's a good businessman? I could have done every bit as well as he did had I been in his position, inheriting highly-desirable rental properties in a place with a permanent shortage of desirable rental properties. I would have extended my investments in real estate to Boston and northern Virginia and not dabbled in steak, vodka, or some "university for winners". Any college that has my name on it would likely be well-endowed and appear as such only after I am dead... like Stanford, Colgate, Carnegie-Mellon, Vanderbilt, or Rice. Maybe I would establish it in a place with a paucity of good colleges -- like West Virginia. That would be a university that creates real winners -- people who make the world a better place as engineers, scientists, physicians, and entrepreneurs... maybe teachers, clergy, and shop stewards.

Any mediocrity can exploit shortages. I doubt that he really counts as a job-creator.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Messages In This Thread
RE: A Malaise Speech for the Current Time - by pbrower2a - 04-02-2017, 11:42 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Ken Burns, commencement speech. Stanford University, 2016. pbrower2a 2 2,309 06-14-2016, 08:02 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)