Dark Days

blackSo now we have 12/2 to go along with 9/11. And while the death and injury this time isn’t of the magnitude it was 14 years ago, the hysteria seems to be greater. Only five days after the tragedy, the leading Republican candidate engages in a form of hate speech not seen in mainstream American politics since Joe McCarthy.

To say that I’m appalled doesn’t begin to describe it. That people cheer on and support this blustering carnival barker speaks directly to the decline of real American values and principles. Trump is a childish clown seeing how much he can get away with.

It’s the people who follow him that scare the crap out of me. The ignorance and lack of critical thought is — as I have long said — very dangerous.

Look at it this way: When one of America’s premier princes of darkness, Dick Cheney, says you’ve gone too far… well, yikes!

It’s also been pointed out that Donald Sterling gets caught making private racial comments, and they take away his basketball team and ban him from the NBA for life. Donald Trump makes public campaign racial comments and is applauded.

The Chump 1

From entertaining clown…

And if don’t wake up and come to our senses, he may just end up winning the nomination.

The experts have been predicting his downfall since he started. And the phrase they use is that: “People will come to their senses.” His campaign is assumed to be a joke and that we’ll eventually see the punchline.

That punchline just might be: This country has lost its mind (or perhaps: soul)!

My misanthropy has never been stronger.

This is the flip side — the dark side — of the “heart” coin.

Everything we’ve seen in the last week, the terrorism and the hyperbolic emotional response to it, comes from leading with your heart and not your head.

We got here by being mentally lazy. We got here by abdicating our duty as citizens of a democratic society. (This would be a good time to go re-read my post about Leon Wieseltier, who touched on exactly these issues.)

In the search for solutions we constantly ignore the most important one: Be smarter. Take education seriously. Learn. Be smarter.

I’m still sorting through my thoughts about the shooting, our response on all levels, and terrorism in general. I have notes, but it’s so hard to wrap my mind around. I was born in NYC and became an adult in Los Angeles (and have family in San Bernardino), so both terror attacks have specific personal connections.

Now, perhaps because his polls are slipping, perhaps because the spotlight was on real news and not the absurd unreality show of his campaign, America’s strangest clown has stolen the spotlight. The 24-hour news coverage of his campaign is starting to equal that of the shootings themselves!

Think about what a stupid, sick society this must be that the terrorism-driven assassinations of 14 Americans at a Christmas party hold our attentions for three straight days and engenders strongly emotional — often agenda-driven — reactions from all sides…

The Chump 2

…to something much darker.

And now we’re on day two of solid coverage of The Chump who acts like a spoiled child. And the strongly emotional — often agenda-driven — reactions from all sides are pouring in…

I feel like an alien anthropologist studying a primitive race that has potential that might someday flower into intelligence.

Have we become so besotted on reality shows that people see politics as just more of the same? Is the whole world a kind of infotainment to people?

Our worst natures are coming to the fore.

We defend our own wrong behavior by pointing to the wrong behavior of others. As if two wrongs made a right.

We talk about what is successful or popular but we don’t talk about what is right or moral, about what coincides with our American values of liberty and freedom.

We increasingly have lost our way and, like all lost people, will seek solace in any port of refuge that seems strong and secure. But fear drives us to foolish, short-sighted, decisions.

The way out is to be smarter. For over forty years I’ve been stressing the idea that education is a major part of the solution. I believe it still.

Be smarter. You get fooled less.

About Wyrd Smythe

The canonical fool on the hill watching the sunset and the rotation of the planet and thinking what he imagines are large thoughts. View all posts by Wyrd Smythe

46 responses to “Dark Days

  • Lisa Smestad

    I think someone needs to start tracing the money pushing the news. Whose money is making the decisions to make Trump
    Dump the top headline? We have seen many a news story on media mergers, I think this is part of the effect of the mergers. The Daily Show pointed out several times how controled much of the media is when they showed multiple channels making the same stupid joke. Funny when it is a joke, chilling when it is this crap. Another media thing to watch, my kids keep telling me how popular Bernie Sanders is but he has very little media coverage. I loved when he said America is big enough to fight ISIS and save the middle class.

    On more of the Trump Dump it reminds me of the Bush-Cheney machine that was so effective, be afraid, be so afraid you will forgo every good thing about America. Bring on the Syrian refugees and South American children fleening war with such courage and daring. America could use the infusion of backbone and an assessment of what a real day-to-day risk looks like.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      This is exactly why it’s very useful to bounce around between all possible news outlets. If possible, include sources like the NY or LA Times — better journalism still exists in written media. Increasingly there are YouTube outlets devoted to news and views.

      In particular, I think it’s important not to shun sources you dislike or disagree with. They’re part of the picture, and if you only listen to those we already agree with, we get a one-sided picture.

      The trick is to find the convergence point among them, ’cause that’s probably the most accurate picture possible. Sadly, journalism isn’t what it used to be in these TL;DR times, and part of what really pisses me off is that it’s not entirely journalism’s fault.

      I will say I think we need to be careful about the Syrian refugees, and I’d prefer to see us spend money and resources to aid them without importing them. We’re very certain the IS will attempt to infiltrate that group. It’s becoming clear Tashfeen Malik came over already radicalized on the K1 visa, and that’s a little scary. That those two were so “American” but were radical terrorists planning (no doubt) a bigger attack is scary. The problem is very real.

      We need to be honest about that and deal with it, but we can forsake basic American values in the process. The question I wish they’d ask Trump is: “So,… 14 lives is your price on American values?”

  • Steve Morris

    As an outsider, I only get to hear about the worst excesses of the Trump campaign. Trump is the top headline in the UK news today, with his “Keep Muslims out” speech.

    Nothing new here, really. Aspiring leaders in many different countries have said very similar things before during troubled times and have been applauded. Some have gone on to become rulers. That never ends happily.

    Replace the word “Muslim” in Trump’s speech with “Jew” and it starts to sound horribly familiar. I don’t think America is ready for such a leader. The US in 2015 is not Germany in the 1930s.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      No, you’re right, it’s not new at all. That’s part of what’s so damn scary. You’d think we’d learn.

      Well, we probably would if we weren’t so thoroughly dedicated to being willfully stupid.

      I just hope that, when it comes to homo sapiens sapiens, the evolution of intelligence is a work in progress.

  • siriusbizinus

    I wrote my own post last week and delayed it for a day, cynically remarking about how buzz words are being used to increase readership of shootings and attacks like this. It’s terrible that even for educated people, it’s not easy for anyone to actually get facts after a tragedy like this. Other than casualties and locations, news agencies should not be reporting speculation. Despite that, we read and hear the lines, “No word on whether this is a terror attack…”

    The biggest purveyor of terror in this country is not ISIS, Al Qaeda, or any other Islamist group; it’s our media. They’re doing a great job of scaring people beyond reason.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Rachel Maddow devoted an entire show (or was it just a large part of a show?) to an interview with Jon Stewart (who was suffering from the flu). Stewart made, repeatedly, the point that the primary product produced by the 24-hour cable news channels is conflict. The may do journalistic things, too, but their main product is conflict.

      Just listen to the way they ask questions of their guests.

      Jon’s point went completely over Rachel’s head, and to the extent she got it, she saw it as criticism and pushed back in denial. I saw a guest comment on how media coverage of Trump distorted the conversation and the media talking head pushed back on that, too.

      Edward R. Morrow, Walter Cronkite, Huntley & Brinkley… those guys are spinning in their graves, I’m sure.

      It’s television, and television exists to sell commercial time. Everything else is secondary. The only reason television is ever any good at all is because if it wasn’t — if there wasn’t a chance you’d see something good — no one would see the commercials.

      Morrow gave a speech (the text of which I need to track down) in which he said that if we didn’t take television seriously in a journalistic way, it would end up as just a box of wires. He was right, and we did.

      But I don’t blame the media… the problem is us. We have the kind of government that reflects our values, and we have the kind of media that reflects our values.

      Nothing changes until enough people change (by which I mean: get smarter).

      • siriusbizinus

        I don’t know if it’s a product of us getting smarter. There also has to be a will to act. I saw Maddow’s interview with Stewart, and he took her to task for her tea baggers comment. People who watched Stewart and Colbert are fairly intelligent; they don’t vote, though.

        That’s a huge problem. We have a government that is invested in prodding stupid people to the polls, and this process also discourages intelligent people from engaging in the process.

      • Steve Morris

        It seems to me that one key characteristic of democracy is that it fails regularly and predictably, but rarely on a catastrophic scale (it did fail catastrophically in Greece, however.) In contrast, dictatorships tend to be stable for many years, or even decades, then fail suddenly and catastrophically.

        The constant low-level shittiness of democracy seems to be the price we pay for basic freedoms.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        @Steve:
        “It seems to me that one key characteristic of democracy is that it fails regularly and predictably”

        I might quibble over “predictably” but I think that’s a very good point. You’re talking about what I’ve called “dampening factors.” It might also be thought of as how many points of failure a system has.

        A dictatorship can have a brittleness (Cuba might be a sort of counter-example) that makes it fragile if hit the right way.

        Our messy system is more robust. (One might argue it’s designed to be that way.) In some regards, it’s the safety versus security issue all over again. Dictatorships, if you buy into the system, can be very safe.

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        The problem with dictatorships or oligarchies is that, no matter how seemingly benevolent they start out, they always eventually end up favoring the ruling class. In the meantime, most of the apparent efficiencies are more propaganda than reality. Democracies are ugly and messy, but in a lot of ways, it’s just that the ugliness and messiness is out in the open.

        Years ago I read a book comparing and contrasting Hitler and Stalin in WWII. The main thing these two had in common was how incompetent their leadership was, except for one thing, which was covering up that incompetence.

      • Steve Morris

        You get the same thing in corporations. I’m thinking Enron, for instance, and a lot of Japanese corporations. The bigger they get, and the less tolerant they are of failure, the more likely they are to fail catastrophically. Every time I learn of some new corporate merger, I cringe.

        I can’t help feeling that a large part of the financial crisis was caused by the banks being so large. Ironically, one reason for that is regulation – the more regulated an industry becomes, the more likely it is to consolidate and push out new competitors. I always want to see industries being shaken up!

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        I’m not a fan of giant conglomerates, particularly since most corporate mergers eventually fail. The governance of most corporations is a sad joke. The board of directors is typically made up of chairmen from other companies who all scratch each other’s backs. Most outside investments come in through mutual funds which leave the individual investors disconnected from the actual decision making processes.

        But I think the issue with the financial crisis was that there were a lot of investment companies doing banking. They carefully avoided calling it “banking” because that would have brought regulatory oversight down on them, which as it turns out might have stopped them from taking the risks they did.

        Not that the regulators were guilt free. They should have insisted that if a firm was doing things that are banking in everything but name, that it should be regulated as a bank, but they utterly failed to do that. That failure, which I’m sure was encouraged by the Bush administration, allowed an unregulated shadow banking industry to develop, and consequently an old-fashioned financial panic.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        All of that is descriptive. What is truly causative is sheer naked greed and materialism. Until we deal honestly with that, this will happen again (after all, it’s happened before).

        It is said that love of money is the root of all evil. I think “all” over-sells it, but materialism isn’t healthy.

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        Not sure if we’ll ever be able to get greed out of the picture. But we should definitely try to avoid what economists call “moral hazards”, incentives to do things that screw up the whole system.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        There’s an interesting general question concerning trying to fix something at its source (in this case: try to eliminate or reduce greed) or at the “business end” (regulation that prohibits undesired behavior; penalties after the fact). They’re separate endeavors and probably most problems benefit from both approaches.

        We’ll need to think about that source level versus operational level with regard to terrorism, too! In that case, most feel attacking it at the source may be the only truly effective strategy. (But we certainly can’t relax on the operational end, either!)

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        Totally agreed. Far too often we focus on the punitive solutions and not the motivation.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        And you see it being used as a form of deflection. The classic is that ‘guns don’t kill people; people kill people.’

        In fact, hey, it’s both, and fixing the problem means addressing both the people who kill and the tools they use. Deal with our love of violence and the means.

        (God, I wish we could stop being stupid about this. As one talking head said recently, “If Sandy Hook wasn’t enough to make us change, what is?” I absolutely agree gun control wouldn’t have done much for San Bernardino {{although it might have reduced their weapon power}}, but Sandy Hook, my god. What does it take?)

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        Agreed. I have a gun loving cousin, very protective of his right to be armed, but even he agrees that it’s way past time for common sense measures.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        Yeah, likewise with every gun owner I know!

      • Wyrd Smythe

        One of my favorite phrases: Evil doesn’t question itself. (Which, ultimately, leads to its failure.)

        “I can’t help feeling that a large part of the financial crisis was caused by the banks being so large.”

        To some extent, no doubt, but I think sheer, naked greed was probably the major factor. The system may have abetted the situation, but people made that system in the first place.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        “The main thing these two had in common was how incompetent their leadership was, except for one thing, which was covering up that incompetence”

        We see incompetence in all forms of governance. It’s generally a property of people.

        I’ve mentioned “dampening factors” to you, and this is a good example of that. That messiness of democracy — so many interests and agendas — creates a loose structure that’s harder to disturb. If you shake a loose structure (at one point), the slop in the connections dampens out the vibrations so they’re only local.

        Dictatorships (whether political or corporate) lack that loose structure, and there is generally only one agenda or set of interests allowed (as you say, usually those of the ruling class). Shake a tight structure and the whole thing vibrates. Shake it hard enough and is collapses.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        “There also has to be a will to act.”

        Absolutely! A crucial point for me is that they need to act with intelligence and education. (One would hope that the will to act can be engendered in the truly intelligent through rational argument.)

        “[T]hey don’t vote, though.”

        As you say, that’s a huge problem. It’s the one George Carlin bit I ever seriously disagreed with. His contention that it’s only if you don’t vote that you can complain. If you do vote, you’re part of the system, and you can’t.

        Bullshit, George. Firstly, one can complain regardless. Complaining is an American right. 😀 Secondly, if you don’t vote you’re an idiot and your complaining becomes a little pathetic.

        All that talk of big money in politics… we’ve seen it fail. (Jeb Bush has spent about as much as all other GOP candidates combined. Many well-funded local races have failed.) If people vote, all that fails.

        So yeah. Huge problem!

  • SelfAwarePatterns

    Well said Wyrd. That Trump gets any substantive support is an embarrassment for our country. The idea that this fool could get anywhere near the Presidency is appalling. If he gets the nomination, I’m pretty sure he would get soundly trounced, but it would be a major risk, with only a late October surprise separating him from the office.

    Personally, I doubt he’s going to get the nomination. Yes, he has a plurality of Republican primary voters, but the fact that it’s anywhere near a majority is comforting. (The fact that the other major candidates, such as Carson or Cruz, are only slightly less insane, isn’t.)

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Thanks. Trump is a sign of our times. Assertion as fact. All gut and no brain. Just like so many of our television “heroes” (ha!). We created him; now we’re stuck with him. Truly a Frankenstein’s monster.

      The scary thing is, as Steve points out above, we’ve seen this movie. Given a perceived threat from the outside, there is a strong tendency to over-react. This is one place where the “wisdom of crowds” can give way to the “tyranny of mobs” and we act stupidly.

      There’s speculation recently that Trump is deliberately trying to “blow up his campaign” (for reasons never quite made clear). I have wondered if this is a game to him, that the last thing he wants is to get stuck being president for four years (I hear it really cuts into your free time, plus it ages you).

      I wonder sometimes if he can’t believe he’s getting away with this and wondering just how much it takes for people to come to their senses. The thing is, his campaign is often at odds with the idea that he’s a savvy person. Any intelligent person… it’s hard to see how they could think like he does. (Or pretends to?)

      I’ve long thought Trump as a Democrat plot against the GOP would make a cool story. 😀

      The way he’s talking lately, I’m wondering now if he’s genuinely off his rocker. Given his tendency to ignore or fight back against any opposition, and given his money, who’d say no, don’t run? I’m wondering if we’ll see him melt down at some point…

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        It’d be nice if Trump’s campaign was a gag and he was just seeing how far he could push things before it fell apart. But I doubt it. I think he really wants it, and that he thinks all this is the way to get it. (Although it wouldn’t surprise me if he later claims that’s all it was after it’s all over.)

        I think the idea of it all being a game to him assumes more intelligence than he has. Trump struck me as reasonably intelligent when he was younger, but age has turned him into a reactionary bigoted ignoramus, a perfect example of what happens when someone gets power and surrounds themselves with yes-men.

        Assuming he doesn’t get the nomination, Republicans will be very lucky if he doesn’t stage a third party campaign, depriving them of the reactionaries they’ve courted (but rarely embraced) for years.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        “I think he really wants it, and that he thinks all this is the way to get it.”

        One of the reporters attached to his campaign suggested that what might have started out as a vanity project — a lark — might have evolved into something real due to the unexpected response.

        “…age has turned him into a reactionary bigoted ignoramus…”

        Yeah, could be. There do seem to be recent changes.

        It’s astonishing to me how he’s ramped up the level of preposterous each time. I’m reminded of how many people get sucked into crime: They do some small crime and get away with it. That can lead to an addiction to the action as well as a ramping up. The longer they get away with it, the more invulnerable they think they are.

        (I had a supervisor who went down that path. He was quite surprised when the police finally did show up. So were we when we saw the local cops searching his office!)

        “Republicans will be very lucky if he doesn’t stage a third party campaign”

        Well that’s exactly why they’re terrified and treating him with kid gloves. This situation for them has become very rock and hard place. Let him continue, and the GOP could go down in flames everywhere in 2016. Take him down, he could leave, and that could take voters they need.

        I’ve heard that the math indicates (i.e. “makes a wild ass guess”) he doesn’t actually have enough votes to win on either ticket, but running as a 3rd party would obviously probably ruin the chances for the GOP’s candidate.

        The GOP is increasingly seeing no way out of this! (And therefore the idea that this was a Dem plot all along would make a great story! 😀 )

        Maybe if we’re very, very lucky, when the dust settles, perhaps the GOP might shed itself of some of those reactionaries. I’ve been figuring the GOP would self-destruct the way it was going. If they don’t figure this out, it could be bad for them!

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        “I’m reminded of how many people get sucked into crime: They do some small crime and get away with it.”

        I’ve seen the same thing. I think it’s a common human failing. And it has precedence in politics. Historical figures like Joseph McCarthy or Charles Coughlin started off relatively mild, but gradually increased their rhetoric and tactics, with no one stopping them, until they were out of control and self destructed. In my state, Huey Long increased his dictatorial use of political power year after year, before he was assassinated.

        The GOP is in a pickle that’s far beyond the cause of any Democratic plot. Their current constituency is what gives them solid majorities in the House, but it’s based on demographics that will increasingly make the White House harder to reach. Politics 101 is to appeal to new categories of voters (i.e. non-white minorities), but their most conservative factions consistently punish any of their leaders who try it. Eventually they’ll have to shift, but it’s hard to see that happening anytime soon.

        Their one advantage right now is that their constituents vote far more consistently than the Democratic ones.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        “I’ve seen the same thing. I think it’s a common human failing.”

        Yep. And hence the old expression, “Give’m an inch and they’ll take a mile.” 🙂

        “The GOP is in a pickle that’s far beyond the cause of any Democratic plot.”

        No question they’re in a mess of their own making! My buddy, many years ago, used to generally vote GOP. His political views are unchanged, but as the GOP has shifted more and more right, he’s effectively been “left” ( 🙂 ) behind by his own party.

        Their alliance with the Tea Party hasn’t done them well. Their own Speaker resigned because he was being pounded for not being fanatically conservative. More and more people view the party as a problem.

        The problem is, you go to the right far enough and you end up with fascism. And Trump is very much a sign of that. That he is applauded, or even not thoroughly repudiated, speaks to how far right — and towards fascism — this country is.

        “Their one advantage right now is that their constituents vote far more consistently than the Democratic ones.”

        Yeah, that part pisses me off, too. We still do have the power of the vote. Pity we don’t use it.

      • SelfAwarePatterns

        I used to vote Republican when I was younger, mostly because I perceived them to be better at foreign policy. That illusion faded after the cold war, and George W. Bush thoroughly stomped over the last remaining embers of it. I was also more socially conservative, or at least more sympathetic to social conservatives.

        Now I find Republican foreign policy proposals childish, their social stances regressive, their economics pseudoscience on stilts, and their stance on scientific matters dangerous. About the only thing I agree with them on is the importance of free trade.

        Not that Democrats are perfect, but few of their hangups and delusions are currently as dangerous as the Republican ones.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        “Not that Democrats are perfect, but few of their hangups and delusions are currently as dangerous as the Republican ones.”

        No, both parties are far from perfect. I refuse to identify as Democrat, and I’ve been very unhappy with the President I elected. Twice. (But so much better than any alternative.)

        We need an honest and genuine conservative party to balance out the excesses of the liberals (and vice versa). What’s happened to the GOP over the last couple of decades is tragic.

  • Anne

    You are absolutely right! What is our society coming too have so many back this chump. He has no filter at all!

    • Wyrd Smythe

      More and more I’m wondering if he’s actually got a screw loose or is suffering from early signs of dementia. Even in the last few months the way he talks seems to have changed… more hysterical somehow.

  • Lady from Manila

    There’s no denying he remains as my favorite U.S. presidential candidate because methinks he might be able to bring to the table what others had failed to do for the citizens of your country. I have to thank the man, though, as he was the genesis of US Politics 101 on my part 🙂 — reading Yahoo links, MSNBC, and various commentaries I had managed to find online for several months now. Moreover, I’ve seen some videos of the debates, his speeches and interviews — and he didn’t sound as bad as what the media has depicted him to be.

    I don’t think the GOP establishment is going to hand him the nomination anyway. It seems they will never let him be their nominee. So you needn’t worry, Wyrd.

    • Wyrd Smythe

      Stranger things have happened. That he’s come this far is strange. He seems to have started out more benign — I liked him back when he appeared on Stephen Colbert’s new show — but lately he seems to have changed. Stress on the campaign trail? Trying (as some think) to blow up his campaign?

      Many agree the last thing he actually wants is to win and be stuck with a horrible job for at least four years. If so, his running at all is such a circus as to be a travesty in American politics. As a candidate he’s just a cardboard cutout and, given his current remarks, the idea that he could bring anyone to the table is kind of a non-starter.

      • Lady from Manila

        I watched that particular Colbert show, too, and I thought both the host and the guest did well.

        He’s impressed me with how hard he’s been working on his campaign not to mention his determination to win the election so I have ruled out the possibility he’s doing all this for the Clintons although there are more than a few who still believe so.

        He did have a meltdown during an Iowa campaign when he acted and spoke bizarre while criticizing the Iowans for boosting Ben Carson’s poll ratings.

        Yes, he is a blowhard and a narcissist. Yet none of the other candidates project the strength Trump has. None has a stronger stance on illegal immigration, which in my agreement with others, your country must seriously deal with asap.

        What stumps me is why a billionaire like him would be willing to put his life at risk in his desire to do something for his country. I’m kind of worried he’d be harmed if he went the distance.

        They say it’s either you love him or you hate him; there’s nothing in between. As for me: win or lose, Trump has my love and support. Now, Wyrd, please go easy on me 🙂 . I ain’t an American voter so I don’t count. It just happens the race to the U.S. presidency has been more interesting (all because of the Donald) to me than our own here which will also take place next year.

        Regards.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        Certainly a lot of people have taken to him as you have. In this Reality Show Era it only makes sense that a reality show star would do well with people. The question all along has been whether people will actually vote for him (rather than just watching the Donald Show).

        Tonight we find out… the Iowa Primary is finally here! o_O

      • Lady from Manila

        Ted Cruz just won the Iowa caucus. I don’t think I feel well right now… 🙂

      • Wyrd Smythe

        Well, just remember that Rick Santorum won Iowa in 2012, and Mike Huckabee won it in 2008. New Hampshire often votes contrary — almost in spite of — Iowa, so there could easily be different results there.

        OTOH, the high turn-out was supposed to help Trump, but he barely beat Rubio, so we might be seeing the beginning of the end for Donnie Boy. (At least, several political “experts” have hopefully suggested such might be the case, but those same experts have been consistently wrong about him thus far, so who the hell knows. I sure don’t!)

      • Lady from Manila

        Yes, several winners of past Iowa caucuses didn’t end up becoming presidents. I’m heartbroken nonetheless. I’ve seen how Trump worked so hard to demolish Cruz’s lead in that state. I wasn’t a fan of his reality show; I disagree with him as well on his views as to gun control and his denial of climate change. But his love for his country is admirable and in spite of his brash image, I find him endearing and very likable.

        It’s true…my heart is crushed by his defeat today. Thank you, though, for making me feel better, Wyrd.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        Heh, not just not presidents, but not even nominees (in Huckabee’s and Santorum’s case… we have yet to see about Trump’s).

        Consider what you’re saying about Trump there. You like his appearance, but not his views. It may not matter for you, but for Americans it does, and it’s a pretty shitty way to pick a leader. We should judge books by their content.

      • Lady from Manila

        Hah! Are you trying to tell me I’m that shallow? 😀 Excuse me, my dear, but if I base my choice upon the looks of a presidential candidate, it’s gonna be Marco Rubio hands down.

        Seriously, I like both those men with Cuban origins. Cruz is brilliant but strikes me even before as, you got it right, nutty and, as Donald said, “a bit of a maniac.” Between the two young presidential hopefuls, I’d choose Marco Rubio — saner and, okay okay, much better looking. (*whispering*) Btw, Rand Paul is cute, too. 😉 Really, Rubio has always impressed me in the debates.

        I simply love Trump’s strength and his sincere desire to limit the influx of illegal immigrants to the U.S. I’m now curious: how do you feel about the whites, like you, ending up as the minority in your country in the near future? A mere thought, that’s all.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        “Excuse me, my dear, but if I base my choice upon the looks of a presidential candidate, it’s gonna be Marco Rubio hands down.”

        I never said anything about looks. Personally, on looks, I’d go for Rand Paul. Both Cruz and Rubio are wing-nuts, but Paul has some sense and some decent policies. I don’t cringe when I listen to him.

        “I’m now curious: how do you feel about the whites, like you, ending up as the minority in your country in the near future?”

        Oh, I think it’s inevitable, and I’m fine with it. (Science fiction authors have been painting such worlds for a long time. No, not Star Wars, but Star Wars is a fairy tale for three-year-olds.)

        So long ago that singer Tom Jones still had a variety show on TV, he and guest star Dionne Warwick sang a duet about how someday we’d all be “coffee-colored people.” I thought that sounded awesome, and I’m still waiting for that day…

      • Lady from Manila

        I thought you were somewhat referring to looks when you used the word “appearance.” My bad. 🙂

        Trump skipping the last debate couldn’t have cost him the Iowa caucus, imo. I’ve read his kind of politics just wouldn’t fly in the U.S. where the citizens have gotten quite used to their voting ways for many generations. And that there’s no stopping the, as they say, “browning of America” now.

      • Wyrd Smythe

        Yeah, “appearances” is a much more inclusive word than “looks” (which is just one way we appear to the world).

  • Wyrd Smythe

    Heh! CNN is discussing the possibility that Trump is a plant by the Clinton campaign. XD

  • Wyrd Smythe

    Meanwhile, the big theory at MSNBC (as of last night) was that Trump is trying to blow up his campaign. They don’t believe he wants to be president.

%d bloggers like this: