This executive approach is certainly his "comfort zone." It is one of his strengths. He will have to adapt because no one person is powerful enough to bend all of the bureaucracy to his or her will -- at least for any length of time. His ability to make quick and decisive choices could be a real strength if used judiciously.
I think people underestimate his intelligence. Very few unintelligent persons have ever held the office at least since the outset of the 20th century (though I have my doubts about Harding). It remains to be seen if he is adaptable as well as intelligent, as well as how skilled he will be at molding those around him to work in his preferred fashion.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Have you ever had to work under anyone who held the title of manager? Ever? Have you been paying attention to how he behaves? He thinks with his ego.
The only reason he isn't shilling used cars right now is because he had the presence of mind to pass of his money making operations to people who actually knew what they are doing, and that his brand name is actually worth something. He is to intelligence as bitcoin is to a sustainable currency.
Requesting suggestions for new sig.
-><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
I don't know about the US but in the UK "nonce" is the same as paedophile.
Why Idaho wanted to bring that up I don't know.
In other news, looks like Trump will be good for the UK.
Returning the bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval Office is a significant step, as much as Obama removing it and replacing it with one of Martin Luthor King was. The fact that he wants to play "Ronnie" to May's "Maggie" is also likely to benefit us.
Not that I expect him to ever put himself out for us, the "Special Relationship" has always been one-sided in that respect.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Everyone has that ability, the question is whether the result is desirable.
If he had always made the right quick decisions, why did he have so many failed businesses?
He may have a very high social intelligence or so in the sense that he knows who to get drunk with or how to appeal to other rich white men, that does however not mean that he necessarily understands everything he does. And if he does, well, you're now being ruled by an orange Machiavelli...
"Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonce_(slang)
Why did he have so much money?
How did he win the Presidency?
He may not be an "Intellectual" like Obama but that doesn't mean he isn't generally Intelligent, or cunning.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
At least he is doing what he said he would do.
Not exactly?
But for your pleasure:There was a lot of commentary on Friday that President Trump had returned a bust of Sir Winston Churchill to the Oval Office. President Obama had famously removed it. But some news reports have got the issue mixed up.
Few people seem to understand that there are actually two busts, by the same artist. The bust that Obama had returned to the British government is not the same bust that Trump now has in the Oval Office, as Trump hinted at in his remarks to the CIA.
There are two busts of Churchill, virtually identical, which for the sake of simplicity we will call Bust A and Bust B.
Bust A was made by the English sculptor Sir Jacob Epstein. It was given to President Lyndon B. Johnson on Oct. 6, 1965. (Here’s Lady Bird Johnson’s diary entry about the gift, which was facilitated by Churchill’s wartime friends, including W. Averell Harriman.) So that bust has been in the White House for more than five decades.
Bust B also was made by Epstein. It was provided in July 2001 by then Prime Minister Tony Blair, via the British ambassador, as a loan to President George W. Bush because Bust A was being repaired. Bush said he would keep it in the Oval Office, and various news reports at the time said the bust would be returned once Bush left office.
According to a 2010 interview with White House curator William Allman, the decision to return the bust had been made even before Obama arrived, as the loan was scheduled to last only as long as Bush’s presidency. That narrative was confirmed by British ambassador Sir Peter Westmacott just before stepped down in 2015: “To be honest, we always expected that to leave the Oval Office just like everything else that a president has tends to be changed,” he told The Guardian newspaper. “Even the carpet is usually changed when the president changes.”
Bust B was shipped back to the library of the British ambassador’s residence.
You knew I was a snake!“The prime minister has agreed to loan the Churchill bust [Bust B] at the request of the Trump team,” a British Embassy spokesman said. “We are working out the details on the return.” It should not be a long trip: Bust B is still in the ambassador’s residence, which is next to the vice president’s residence on Massachusetts Avenue.
Note: Trump has indicated that the British made the request first. “The prime minister is coming over to our country very shortly, and they wanted to know whether I’d like it back,” he said. “I said, ‘Absolutely.’ ”
Vitiate Man.
History repeats the old conceits
The glib replies, the same defeats
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
1. From daddy and his friends. Didn't he even get new money when he was already bankrupt? Do poor people without connections get that, too?
2. Not by appealing to the most intelligent people and not by winning the popular vote either, while we're at it. I don't think intelligence is a requirement to win an election.
It is also entirely possible that he is a combination of all that as I said. He may know how to get (certain) people to support him, but that does not mean he knows how to run a country well. Otherwise every winner of "Country x has talent" would have to be a genius. If we derive intelligence from popularity, scripted reality shows have to be something we can learn a lot from.
"Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu
I am not suggesting it was a deliberate snub, but it was a deliberate decision to visibly replace the Churchill Bust with the King Bust. As Obama notes he had another Bust of Churchill that he could have moved to the Oval Office. Trump apparently found room for both Busts.
Rather like Obama saying the UK would "go to the back of the queue" for a trade deal behind China, it speaks to his attitude.
Before Obama became President he had essentially been an academic and a Senator, not any kind of executive. So how is Trump less qualified than Obama? they're qualified in different ways.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Trump didn't really earn that, he was born into it. That's not a qualification, it's a privilege.
He may have learned a bit over time, but Xiahou already showed that he would be even richer now had he not touched his money with his decisions... If we're to judge his "qualification" based on that, he's a terrible executive.
Obama didn't need to prove his intelligence by pointing to his bank account because he didn't talk like a dumbass and didn't lie with every second sentence. I'm also not aware that Obama went bankrupt several times or earned less money than he would have if he had merely invested his base capital instead of squandering his profits with bad decisions.
"Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu
As per the article, he has temporarily moved the older bust from the private residence, where Obama kept it after it was repaired, to the Oval Office. It does not seem he will have both busts in the office at once. Meanwhile, Trump's overall design seems to be refashioning the office to mimic its appearance under W Bush, with some degree of influence from the Farage connection.Trump apparently found room for both Busts.
That's rather glib. Of course if we stretch our parameters wide enough we might discover many tens of thousands more or less qualified to hold high office compared to past holders. Any number of politicians, corporate executives, professors or generals. Has there ever been an unqualified candidate, in fact?So how is Trump less qualified than Obama?
Vitiate Man.
History repeats the old conceits
The glib replies, the same defeats
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Sadly it has. Once we chose to ignore Washington's advice and thereafter made the special relationship, it should have been two-ways and full tilt.
There is a segment of the American political right -- and Trumps support base overlaps this portion -- who would be fairly willing to tell the EU to sod off while maintaining closer ties with Blighty. Even our staunchest "dump NATO" types tend to add a caveat about signing a mutual defense with England.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Well there are plenty of opportunities for those with a degree in gender studies, assuming they can find enough rubes whose own degree has overwhelmed with white guilt and whose parents haven't yet cut them off from daddy's money.
Last edited by Greyblades; 01-26-2017 at 08:10.
Gender studies aren't important. Researching societal flaws are not important. Providing assistance to members of the public who are categorically disadvantaged isn't important.
Also, didn't you complain about shi!posting a while ago and get the mods to make the Org politically correct again?
Requesting suggestions for new sig.
-><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Last edited by Greyblades; 01-26-2017 at 16:29.
I meant, unlike Obama he's found a way to fit Churchill and MLK into the Oval Office - which apparently Obama was unable to do.
Not at allThat's rather glib. Of course if we stretch our parameters wide enough we might discover many tens of thousands more or less qualified to hold high office compared to past holders. Any number of politicians, corporate executives, professors or generals. Has there ever been an unqualified candidate, in fact?
As I understand it prior to running the US the only thing Obama had run was the Harvard Law Review (was that the one?) as a student. I recall Obama's first election when it was him against John McCain and an American friend here at the time observed that people who have only been Senators, as opposed to Governors, make bad Presidents.
Being a Legislator is rather different to being the Chief Executive of the United States Corporation.
Has Trump been an unmitigated success?
No - but he has had successes as an Executive and he worked out, unlike Clinton, how to appeal to the broadest possible coalition of American voters. He shattered the "Democratic Firewall" that' was supposed to give them an in-built advantage.
Does he say some off - colour things?
Yes.
However, if you look at what he says on torture, what he actually said is Intelligence Chiefs tell him they think it's effective and therefore he thinks it should be available. As opposed to former US Presidents who would swear the US NEVER uses torture whilst in a langley basement somewhere someone is having his fingers broken.
At least he's honest.
He's also demonstrating a number of things by following the advice of his spooks:
1. Delegation of responsibility to experts.
2. Backing up your subordinates, in public.
These are usually considered positive qualities in a leader - except in this case the issue is the use of torture.
Overall, I see no evidence he's "stupid", more that he just doesn't care what he detractors think and he gives unfiltered opinions.
You know a Liberal Comedian recently said she didn't want to interview Melania Trump because she can barely speak English? She apparently speaks six languages, but she's Slovenian and therefore clearly Euro-trash.
There's a word for that sort of opinion... can't put my finger on it, though...
Last edited by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus; 01-26-2017 at 18:09.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Reminds me of some of my fellow undergrads complaining about professor Hung years ago in my International Relations class. Thick Vietnamese accent so they dismissed him and his opinions. I talked with him a little and his colleagues more. English was his 4th language after Vietnamese, French, and a passable Cantonese... He'd been part of the South Vietnamese national police force, acquired two degrees before leaving Vietnam ahead of "the chop," and managed both a thesis and dissertation in his 4th language.
My countrymen, as a whole, are reasonably intelligent, but the level of self-developed ignorance is cloying at times.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
What you speak of seems to be bare minimum, so it doesn't say much as to qualifications compared to any number of other individuals.
As for torture, your two points are confusing, leaving aside that I would be very interested to see where you get the US intelligence community vouching for torture "working". By definition, any person in office will be delegating and supporting in some way, since there is indeed government besides the POTUS and one would have to go far out of their way to publicly undermine and contradict every possible subordinate.
In other words, you don't ever actually offer concrete qualifications.
Vitiate Man.
History repeats the old conceits
The glib replies, the same defeats
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
I am only speaking in general terms, as I'm not an Intelligence Officer with a bug in the Oval Office.
Trump is saying his Intelligence Chiefs have told him torture works, so he is supporting it.
There are numerous examples of politicians, here and in the US, asking for expert opinions and then dismissing them.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Requesting suggestions for new sig.
-><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Do you even know what shitposting is? Hell for that matter do you know what complaining is?
Last edited by Greyblades; 01-26-2017 at 19:51.
Bookmarks