In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On July 22 2016 16:06 FiWiFaKi wrote: Exactly as CorsairHero says, bad apples in both parties, though probably more with the Republicans, also Republican bad apples send a stronger negative message, so there's that.
And GH, I think you can say that he's a bit narcassist, though I'd state it more as not humble, assertive, confident, with a touch of arrogance. I think the fact he's not humble is a big turn off for a lot of people, and it's seemingly a more important trait to have every year, but I think it's not a bad quality in a leader. It's just people jump to the conclusion that he must be an asshole, a bigot, and hence old fashioned, and hence all the -ist terms, unintelligent, and automatically disqualify him based off of that.
Yes, Trump stretches the truth and leaves out information, like when quoting statistics using inconsistent years for data that should use the same years (comparing voter turnouts of Republicans to Democrats), but its a skill and strategy that politicians utlitize all the time.
He's been quick to understand the game, and to win a political election, you need to use some of these political tricks... Such as saying stuff to appeal to a wide voter base, as every cabdicate does every four years, even when it's often fluff. At the end of the day, it's not representative of his character, and he's a far better man than people give him credit for... Hopefully the eyes were on him these last four days, and people learned something.
Apologies for any grammatical errors, I wrote this before I fell asleep on my phone, which usually leads to this stuff and my fingers and brain don't work at the same speed here.
Trump lies. They all do, he does it pretty frequently.
But I imagine most of the gap in the ism's idea between us is more about what we consider those 'isms rather than whether Trump has those behaviors.
I don't think it's really that important to the larger point though.
I think the bold part is what's important. I find it especially comical because so many backed Clinton with the idea that they could excuse her baggage as "playing the game", and now they are all upset because he's so much better at the lying part. But they have no problem bragging about her being better at the collecting "corrupting influence" money than Trump.
Hillary appears to not understand how badly she is crapping the bed by picking Kaine either. Everyone still think the convention is going to go smoothly?
75% of the time when Trump makes a statement (that can be fact-checked and aren't purely ideological) he lies. Source
But then again his politics is not about reason but about fear and hate.
On July 22 2016 16:06 FiWiFaKi wrote: Exactly as CorsairHero says, bad apples in both parties, though probably more with the Republicans, also Republican bad apples send a stronger negative message, so there's that.
And GH, I think you can say that he's a bit narcassist, though I'd state it more as not humble, assertive, confident, with a touch of arrogance. I think the fact he's not humble is a big turn off for a lot of people, and it's seemingly a more important trait to have every year, but I think it's not a bad quality in a leader. It's just people jump to the conclusion that he must be an asshole, a bigot, and hence old fashioned, and hence all the -ist terms, unintelligent, and automatically disqualify him based off of that.
Yes, Trump stretches the truth and leaves out information, like when quoting statistics using inconsistent years for data that should use the same years (comparing voter turnouts of Republicans to Democrats), but its a skill and strategy that politicians utlitize all the time.
He's been quick to understand the game, and to win a political election, you need to use some of these political tricks... Such as saying stuff to appeal to a wide voter base, as every cabdicate does every four years, even when it's often fluff. At the end of the day, it's not representative of his character, and he's a far better man than people give him credit for... Hopefully the eyes were on him these last four days, and people learned something.
Apologies for any grammatical errors, I wrote this before I fell asleep on my phone, which usually leads to this stuff and my fingers and brain don't work at the same speed here.
Trump lies. They all do, he does it pretty frequently.
But I imagine most of the gap in the ism's idea between us is more about what we consider those 'isms rather than whether Trump has those behaviors.
I don't think it's really that important to the larger point though.
I think the bold part is what's important. I find it especially comical because so many backed Clinton with the idea that they could excuse her baggage as "playing the game", and now they are all upset because he's so much better at the lying part. But they have no problem bragging about her being better at the collecting "corrupting influence" money than Trump.
Hillary appears to not understand how badly she is crapping the bed by picking Kaine either. Everyone still think the convention is going to go smoothly?
75% of the time when Trump makes a statement (that can be fact-checked and aren't purely ideological) he lies. Source
But then again his politics is not about reason but about fear and hate.
Your source is broken.
edit: If your source is Politifact or some other glorified blog don't bother fixing it.
On July 22 2016 21:41 SoSexy wrote: I will buy a salt factory, link it to this thread and when Trump will win the election I will be rich
Salt prices are going to collapse with all that free salt on the market... so don't do that. Wait for the salt factories to go bankrupt then buy them out.
For the supposed anti-establishment choice, I haven't seen anything resembling outside the establishment strategy at this convention. Same old scaremongering aimed at people that travel too little and read too much news, with the same old message of I can save you from this dystopian nightmare you live in but my oppenent can't. But I don't know how many people look around and refuse to believe their eyes when they don't see their world as the one described by Trump and Gingrich.
If I hadn't just seen some of the stuff that went on at the RNC, I would have dismissed this as an extreme reaction to something that is never going to happen...... I don't think I can now.
I am genuinely worried about some of the people here who continue to support this kind of scaremongering. No matter what your views on "policy", how can you rally behind such a group of people?
On July 22 2016 16:06 FiWiFaKi wrote: Exactly as CorsairHero says, bad apples in both parties, though probably more with the Republicans, also Republican bad apples send a stronger negative message, so there's that.
And GH, I think you can say that he's a bit narcassist, though I'd state it more as not humble, assertive, confident, with a touch of arrogance. I think the fact he's not humble is a big turn off for a lot of people, and it's seemingly a more important trait to have every year, but I think it's not a bad quality in a leader. It's just people jump to the conclusion that he must be an asshole, a bigot, and hence old fashioned, and hence all the -ist terms, unintelligent, and automatically disqualify him based off of that.
Yes, Trump stretches the truth and leaves out information, like when quoting statistics using inconsistent years for data that should use the same years (comparing voter turnouts of Republicans to Democrats), but its a skill and strategy that politicians utlitize all the time.
He's been quick to understand the game, and to win a political election, you need to use some of these political tricks... Such as saying stuff to appeal to a wide voter base, as every cabdicate does every four years, even when it's often fluff. At the end of the day, it's not representative of his character, and he's a far better man than people give him credit for... Hopefully the eyes were on him these last four days, and people learned something.
Apologies for any grammatical errors, I wrote this before I fell asleep on my phone, which usually leads to this stuff and my fingers and brain don't work at the same speed here.
Trump lies. They all do, he does it pretty frequently.
But I imagine most of the gap in the ism's idea between us is more about what we consider those 'isms rather than whether Trump has those behaviors.
I don't think it's really that important to the larger point though.
I think the bold part is what's important. I find it especially comical because so many backed Clinton with the idea that they could excuse her baggage as "playing the game", and now they are all upset because he's so much better at the lying part. But they have no problem bragging about her being better at the collecting "corrupting influence" money than Trump.
Hillary appears to not understand how badly she is crapping the bed by picking Kaine either. Everyone still think the convention is going to go smoothly?
75% of the time when Trump makes a statement (that can be fact-checked and aren't purely ideological) he lies. Source
But then again his politics is not about reason but about fear and hate.
Your source is broken.
edit: If your source is Politifact or some other glorified blog don't bother fixing it.
I'm pretty sure he means Politifact. But as far as I know not a single organized fact checking organition ("glorified blog" or not) has rated Trump as > 50% honest. If you're going to say they're all wrong and biased against him, where are the unbiased ones saying he's right that aren't themselves glorified blogs? And I've seen some egregious errors that were either lies or incompetency or both (TPP includes China, that his website doesn't slam Rubio in its immigration section, even this week that Melania Trump wrote her own speech, his statements about polls vs Clinton during the primary) and he avoids making factual statements so often to allow his supporters to interpret them however they want that >50% doesn't seem too odd.
I don't really know why no one has tried to set up "conservaFact" or whatever. It's not as though the left has a monopoly on fact checking with a slant. Even they would be biased against him probably, though.
On July 22 2016 22:06 Dan HH wrote: For the supposed anti-establishment choice, I haven't seen anything resembling outside the establishment strategy at this convention. Same old scaremongering aimed at people that travel too little and read too much news, with the same old message of I can save you from this dystopian nightmare you live in but my oppenent can't. But I don't know how many people look around and refuse to believe their eyes when they don't see their world as the one described by Trump and Gingrich.
They do believe their eyes. But only the portions of their field of vision that match what Trump/Gingrich describes. Just like Democrats often only believe the portions of their field of vision that match what Obama/Sanders/Clinton describes.
On July 22 2016 14:23 KwarK wrote: You're still trying to argue that the author fucked up by giving credit where it was due as if that wasn't both intentional and also his actual job. And if it's not within the power of the President why the hell is Trump talking about how bad it is. You wanna talk about implications, the implication of all the bad stuff Trump chose to list is that it'll be different if he was President. This is a Presidential campaign speech, you can't simply ignore that context.
By this logic, every new policy proposal to remedy a problem is an attack on the prior administration simply because the prior administration did not fix it. Sorry, but that's absurd. It's far simpler and more logically consistent to simply read the subject passages and take them at face value -- particularly when you are "fact-checking."
Do you not think it's a little dishonest to attack policies he has no ability to fix, should he win, at a Presidential rally? Or to put it another way, if you did a poll of audience members who heard that speech, how many do you think would believe Trump plans to end the release of those illegals ordered released by the courts? The entire purpose of the rally is to talk about how a bad job is being done and how you'll do a better job. He is interviewing for a position with the country. He is saying "give me the job and I will fix it", that context is inescapable.
No, that is not correct. For it to be correct, 1) we'd have to presume that the president is responsible for all of the problems that need to be fixed, 2) that a president who is not actively working to correct those problems is necessarily doing a bad job, and 3) that a candidate running on a platform to fix those problems is necessarily blaming the predecessor president. There are any number of scenarios where a particular problem may be a subject that a presidential candidate highlights to be fixed as part of his platform, but the problem is not attributable to the candidate's predecessor -- and the candidate chooses very specifically not to blame the predecessor. This happens all of the time when the candidates are in the same political party as the incumbent president.
Long story short, you're creating a contextual basis out of thin air to justify the author's hack job.
It is a good read and won't make to many people grumpy.
Think it was a great speech,lots of interesting facts to support it. He can use those to hammer Clinton in their first debate and she will have no response. Overall the republicans can be very satisfied with this convention. Democrats next week and then 3 months of throwing mud,this will be interesting.
On July 22 2016 14:27 ticklishmusic wrote: trump must have said "believe me" after every other sentence, seems like he himself is not very convinced he's making a good argument
What kind of attack is this even?
(boo)
its a comment on the fact he has shit delivery. the only person allowed to say believe me (or rather, believe it) like that is naruto. he comes of as either unsure of himself or a sleazy used car salesman.
Imo anyone who thinks that Trump has "shit delivery" is either too biased by the content to evaluate his effectiveness or doesn't understand his audience. Trump's speeches are actually pretty refreshing compared to the hackneyed speeches of almost every other politician--see for example most of the other speeches at the convention. Most people's eyes completely glaze over when they start to hear the cliched politicking of a Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton, but Trump is able to avoid that automatic response and garner attention, probably because he uses the vocabulary of a third grader with the rhetorical skill of an adult.
edit: it wouldn't surprise me if Trump has experience using NLP techniques in his business life and now in his speeches
On July 22 2016 14:27 ticklishmusic wrote: trump must have said "believe me" after every other sentence, seems like he himself is not very convinced he's making a good argument
What kind of attack is this even?
(boo)
its a comment on the fact he has shit delivery. the only person allowed to say believe me (or rather, believe it) like that is naruto. he comes of as either unsure of himself or a sleazy used car salesman.
Imo anyone who thinks that Trump has "shit delivery" is either too biased by the content to evaluate his effectiveness or doesn't understand his audience. Trump's speeches are actually pretty refreshing compared to the hackneyed speeches of almost every other politician--see for example most of the other speeches at the convention. Most people's eyes completely glaze over when they start to hear the cliched politicking of a Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton, but Trump is able to avoid that automatic response and garner attention, probably because he uses the vocabulary of a third grader with the rhetorical skill of an adult.
edit: it wouldn't surprise me if Trump has experience using NLP techniques in his business life and now in his speeches
yeah, his audience of people who fall for the used car salesman tricks. i would hardly call that rhetorical prowess.
you do realize that NLP is considered bullshit by the scientific community?
you do realize that NLP is considered bullshit by the scientific community?
It is lol? That's a shame,it is a very powerfull tool that many highly succesfull people in many different areas use. Its not only linguistic,its also visual.
On July 22 2016 23:10 pmh wrote: That's a shame,it is a very powerfull tool that many highly succesfull people in many different areas use.
There's plenty of 'highly succesfull people in many different areas' that swear by homeopathy, doesn't make it a powerful tool, it makes those people just as susceptible to bullshit as anyone else.
Very difficult to vote for a Hillary, impossible to vote for a Trump. Wow good luck americans, a fun election is coming.
On July 22 2016 14:56 FiWiFaKi wrote: For anyone who didn't watch the speech - from 37:15-39:15... Literally brought tears to my eyes. Question the truth of it, but the response was beautiful. Hard to tell right now for sure, but what Trump is bringing to the party might be exactly what it has needed.
Fucking brilliant. It's nothing but communication, but it's still brilliant.
On July 22 2016 14:27 ticklishmusic wrote: trump must have said "believe me" after every other sentence, seems like he himself is not very convinced he's making a good argument
What kind of attack is this even?
(boo)
its a comment on the fact he has shit delivery. the only person allowed to say believe me (or rather, believe it) like that is naruto. he comes of as either unsure of himself or a sleazy used car salesman.
Imo anyone who thinks that Trump has "shit delivery" is either too biased by the content to evaluate his effectiveness or doesn't understand his audience. Trump's speeches are actually pretty refreshing compared to the hackneyed speeches of almost every other politician--see for example most of the other speeches at the convention. Most people's eyes completely glaze over when they start to hear the cliched politicking of a Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton, but Trump is able to avoid that automatic response and garner attention, probably because he uses the vocabulary of a third grader with the rhetorical skill of an adult.
edit: it wouldn't surprise me if Trump has experience using NLP techniques in his business life and now in his speeches
yeah, his audience of people who fall for the used car salesman tricks. i would hardly call that rhetorical prowess.
you do realize that NLP is considered bullshit by the scientific community?
Being considered bullshit by the scientific community is irrelevant. It's a rhetorical technique that, if it has an impact, is felt in the affective register. In other words your objection appears to be that "good speeching" isn't scientifically proven. I was just pointing out that his speeches, with their repetition and use of emotionally charged, simple words, reminds me of NLP techniques. So yeah, a bit like a very good salesman.
CLEVELAND — It seemed possible that the balloons would never drop. This was not, after all, the celebration that the Republican Party had waited four years for. This was a reading of last rites. The Republican brand is now permanently sullied by the victory of a former reality television star with an adversarial relationship with the truth and a fluorescent rodent adorning his head. Donald Trump accepted his nomination as the Republican candidate and finished his speech, yet thousands of red, white, and blue balloons briefly remained suspended in the air in patriotic protest. He lingered onstage, greeting each member of his family and his running mate, Mike Pence. They smiled and waved, but the celebration did not begin on cue. Confetti began to rain slowly downward. And then the balloons. And then “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” started playing. Subtlety was never the theme of this election, after all. It had been 349 days since he announced his campaign for the presidency when he arrived onstage here Thursday evening. He emerged to the grandiose tune of the Air Force One theme song to accept his victory and to preside over the memorial for the Republican Party that he killed. He stood for a moment and looked out at the crowded arena, a sea of white people, white cowboy hats, and Trump campaign paraphernalia. Trump smiled his triumphant, half-smirk smile. “Thank you, thank you very much,” he said. “Friends, delegates and fellow Americans,” he said, “I humbly and gratefully accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States.” The Republican Party may eventually revive itself, Jon Snow-like, from Donald Trump’s death blow. But it will never be the same. Since January the GOP has watched Trump lure away their base with impossible promises of returning to a time long past. Along the way he threw out crucial Republican tenets—support of trade deals, antagonism towards dictators, discomfort with debt—and stomped on efforts to expand the party beyond its increasingly old, white loyalists. He barely pretended to share the Biblical values of the GOP’s evangelical core. He said nicer things about Vladimir Putin than the party’s last three nominees. He drove down the percentage of blacks voting Republican to literally zero in some key states. The Latino and women’s votes weren’t all that much better. No wonder that all week, the convention was a series of miniature wakes at bars and hotel rooms, ballrooms and rented restaurants. In between breakfasts, meetings, and speeches by a roster of speakers that were more suited for a seminar at Trump University than an event intended to convince the nation to vote Republican (who could forget the avocado farmer?) the conservatives here in town drank. They confessed, in hushed tones, that they did not support him. They looked, it was hard not to notice, helpless, like they knew the brand they’d long ago attached themselves to or aligned themselves with was slipping out of their grasp. From the convention floor up to the top of the stands, Trump’s audience cheered. He removed his hands from the side of the lectern and stepped back, as if the force of their applause was moving him. And then he said, as he often does, what many of us are thinking. “Who would’ve believed that, when we started this journey on June 16th last year we, and I say we—because we are a team—what have we seen?” he said.
On July 22 2016 14:27 ticklishmusic wrote: trump must have said "believe me" after every other sentence, seems like he himself is not very convinced he's making a good argument
What kind of attack is this even?
(boo)
its a comment on the fact he has shit delivery. the only person allowed to say believe me (or rather, believe it) like that is naruto. he comes of as either unsure of himself or a sleazy used car salesman.
Imo anyone who thinks that Trump has "shit delivery" is either too biased by the content to evaluate his effectiveness or doesn't understand his audience. Trump's speeches are actually pretty refreshing compared to the hackneyed speeches of almost every other politician--see for example most of the other speeches at the convention. Most people's eyes completely glaze over when they start to hear the cliched politicking of a Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton, but Trump is able to avoid that automatic response and garner attention, probably because he uses the vocabulary of a third grader with the rhetorical skill of an adult.
edit: it wouldn't surprise me if Trump has experience using NLP techniques in his business life and now in his speeches
yeah, his audience of people who fall for the used car salesman tricks. i would hardly call that rhetorical prowess.
you do realize that NLP is considered bullshit by the scientific community?
Being considered bullshit by the scientific is irrelevant. It's a rhetorical technique that, if it has an impact, is felt in the affective register. In other words your objection appears to be that "good speeching" isn't scientifically proven. I was just pointing out that his speeches, with their repetition and use of emotionally charged, simple words, reminds me of NLP techniques. So yeah, a bit like a very good salesman.
ok, that's fine. i agree that there are certain basic principles of persuasion, which are pretty sound, are incorporated into NLP (which is not).
he's an okay salesman. not a great one. when trump was at the poker table, he always had a good hand. he played it decently. on the other hand, a good player would have robbed the fucking bank if he were dealt trump's cards.
now nixon, he knew how to give a doom and gloom speech. and he won with it.
EPT
