DJT vs reality?

[Martha Adams]

How good is DJTrump's perception of reality? This is becoming
a topic for me as I see for instance, his disagreement with the
press regarding how many people attended the inauguration. And
I recall past details, so that DJT seems very loose about what
he says: that he can offer differing "facts" almost within the
same sentence. Is this really good for a man with Presidential
responsibility? Who it seems to me, speaks for America?

I notice a British betting agency gives DJT about a 60% chance
to complete his 4-year Presidential term.

All of which in my perception, amounts to warning of oncoming
political, economic, and financial instabilities. Provoked at
root, by DJT.

Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [2017 Jan 22]

[Tim Illingworth]

On 1/22/2017 4:02 AM, Martha Adams wrote:
> How good is DJTrump's perception of reality?

Much the same as ever: Politifact scored 70% of his statements as
"Mostly False", False" or "Pants On Fire".

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Hillary, for contrast, gets 26% on that ranking.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/

and Bernie Sanders 28%
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/

Tim

[Bernard Peek]

On 2017-01-22, Martha Adams <mh...@verizon.net> wrote:
> How good is DJTrump's perception of reality?

I don't think it is possible to say with any certainty. The naive
interpretation that DJT believes what he says is questionable.

For that reason I suspect that all of the attempts to discover what his
strategy is have failed for the simple reason that although it may exist it
isn't possible to discover it by interpreting what he says. Of course he
might just be flying by the seat of his pants. There's no way to tell.



--
Bernard Peek
b...@gizmodynamics.com

[Scott Dorsey]

Tim Illingworth <t...@smofs.org> wrote:
>On 1/22/2017 4:02 AM, Martha Adams wrote:
>> How good is DJTrump's perception of reality?
>
>Much the same as ever: Politifact scored 70% of his statements as
>"Mostly False", False" or "Pants On Fire".

That would only follow if he actually believed what he said. To be honest,
I am not really sure one way or another if he does.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Keith F. Lynch]

Martha Adams <mh...@verizon.net> wrote:
> How good is DJTrump's perception of reality? This is becoming a
> topic for me as I see for instance, his disagreement with the press
> regarding how many people attended the inauguration.

Who knows? As I learned the hard way 40 years ago, lots of things
that "everyone knows" are completely wrong. I've long been of the
opinion that the wrongful conviction rate, unemployment rate, and
inflation rate are all much higher than is officially claimed. Trump
agrees with me about the unemployment rate, but apparently thinks that
the wrongful conviction rate is actually *lower* than is officially
claimed. Last year he said that the Central Park Five, who were
proven innocent 15 years ago, and won $41 million in compensation,
should have been executed.

> And I recall past details, so that DJT seems very loose about what
> he says: that he can offer differing "facts" almost within the
> same sentence.

True. What bothers me is how *certain* he is of everything, even
things where he changes his mind. I am slightly skeptical of global
warming, largely because there is much more government funding for
scientists who say it's real than for those who are skeptical, and
scientists aren't all incorruptible. But Trump flatly asserted that
global warming was a "hoax." Even if it is, how can he possibly
know that?

> Is this really good for a man with Presidential responsibility?
> Who it seems to me, speaks for America?

He doesn't speak for me.

> I notice a British betting agency gives DJT about a 60% chance to
> complete his 4-year Presidential term.

Interesting. I'd be more interested in how Americans are betting,
since almost everyone is more knowledgeable about their own country
than about other countries.

> All of which in my perception, amounts to warning of oncoming
> political, economic, and financial instabilities. Provoked at
> root, by DJT.

We live in interesting times. That's not a good thing. I like to
read adventure stories, but I don't like to live them. ObFandom:
The most enjoyable cons are the ones where nothing went horribly
wrong. The most enjoyable cons *to talk about* are the ones where
everything went horribly wrong.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

[Tim Merrigan]

On 22 Jan 2017 13:33:04 -0500, klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Tim Illingworth <t...@smofs.org> wrote:
>>On 1/22/2017 4:02 AM, Martha Adams wrote:
>>> How good is DJTrump's perception of reality?
>>
>>Much the same as ever: Politifact scored 70% of his statements as
>>"Mostly False", False" or "Pants On Fire".
>
>That would only follow if he actually believed what he said. To be honest,
>I am not really sure one way or another if he does.
>--scott

My room mate, suggests that he sincerely believes what he says when he
says it, and when, a few minuets later, he says something
diametrically opposed he sincerely believes THAT when he says IT.
--

I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America,
and to the republic which it established, one nation, from many peoples,
promising liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.

Tim Merrigan

[Martha Adams]

On 01/22/2017 02:18 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
> Martha Adams <mh...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> How good is DJTrump's perception of reality? This is becoming a
>> topic for me as I see for instance, his disagreement with the press
>> regarding how many people attended the inauguration.

%Big Snip%

Keith says,

> We live in interesting times. That's not a good thing. I like to
> read adventure stories, but I don't like to live them. ObFandom:
> The most enjoyable cons are the ones where nothing went horribly
> wrong. The most enjoyable cons *to talk about* are the ones where
> everything went horribly wrong.

Concerning which, *YES!*.

OK on Cons, which are a reality in themselves, but where DJT comes
in it's a matter of us individually and us as members of millions of
others, all impacted by DJT's actions and choices. And I can imagine
hordes of clever swindlers, ideologists, even militaries, who can
use DJT's vagaries and variable policies as license to Do Their
Thing. Recent history shows too well where *that* can get us to. I
keep feeling "Well, that can't happen *here*," cannot be anything
other than a self deception: It *can* happen here and I believe the
the odds it will, are now greatly improved by this DJT.

Did everyone here see the Nazi salutes in our news a few weeks ago?
Responding to one of DJT's pre-election speeches? How did *that*
happen? (Hint: it wasn't an accident.)

[Keith F. Lynch]

Martha Adams <mh...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Did everyone here see the Nazi salutes in our news a few weeks ago?
> Responding to one of DJT's pre-election speeches? How did *that*
> happen? (Hint: it wasn't an accident.)

To be fair, nobody can be held responsible for all their supporters.

Also, it's possible that the Nazi salute was intended as a protest,
i.e. as a way for some of those who oppose Trump to call him a Nazi.

[Keith F. Lynch]

Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com> wrote:
> My room mate, suggests that he sincerely believes what he says
> when he says it, and when, a few minuets later, he says something
> diametrically opposed he sincerely believes THAT when he says IT.

I think your roommate is right. Trump doesn't live in an alternate
reality; he doesn't believe in an objective reality at all. This
seems to be common among politicians and lawyers.

Some have claimed Trump is an Objectivist, a follower of Ayn Rand's
philosophy. I think he's the exact opposite, and not just because the
big-name official Objectivists are all against him. Objectivism is
often linked to some forms of political conservatism, but it is above
all based on the concept that there's just one objective reality.

[Cryptoengineer]

"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote in news:o63uhv$664$1
@reader1.panix.com:

> Martha Adams <mh...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Did everyone here see the Nazi salutes in our news a few weeks ago?
>> Responding to one of DJT's pre-election speeches? How did *that*
>> happen? (Hint: it wasn't an accident.)
>
> To be fair, nobody can be held responsible for all their supporters.
>
> Also, it's possible that the Nazi salute was intended as a protest,
> i.e. as a way for some of those who oppose Trump to call him a Nazi.

No, it wasn't. It was sincere, though its legit to question whether it
was consciously evoking the Nazi salute.

Here's a "debunking" Youtube video of the event.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SH61mG94uA

I can't read too much into this. The US used to have the 'Bellamy
Salute'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute

which greatly resembled the Nazi version.

I detest Trump, and regard his supporters as fools. But I won't
call *every* straight arm salute a conscious evocation of the
Nazis.

pt

[Kevrob]

And are we to take every raised, clenched fist a protester displays
as a sign of dedication to one or another political cause?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clenched_fist

Even the white power goons have a their own veersion of that!

Kevin R

[pete...@gmail.com]

Of course not - that's my point. There's a limited number of ways to do
a salute, and they get overloaded and repurposed.

pt

[Kevrob]

Oh, definitely a post in support.

Enjoy some of Athur Rimmer's Greatest Salutes!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=al5bErqFrDQ

Kevin R

[Gary McGath]

On 1/22/17 9:01 PM, Martha Adams wrote:
>
> Did everyone here see the Nazi salutes in our news a few weeks ago?
> Responding to one of DJT's pre-election speeches? How did *that*
> happen? (Hint: it wasn't an accident.)

It's difficult to look something like that up. The most-publicized Nazi
salutes related to Trump were at a gathering of white nationalists on
November 19, in response to Richard B. Spencer's saying, "Hail Trump!
Hail our people! Hail victory!" The last is equivalent to the German
"Sieg Heil."

It's not surprising that those people like Trump, but he can't be held
directly responsible for them.

As for Nazi salutes in response to a speech of his, I missed that, and
I'd consider it more likely that any were mocking unless there's more
information available. I once yelled "Sieg Heil!" at someone who was
ranting that all "fascists" (which in that case meant opponents of rent
control) must be silenced.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

[Keith F. Lynch]

Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:

> pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Of course not - that's my point. There's a limited number of ways
>> to do a salute, and they get overloaded and repurposed.

> Oh, definitely a post in support.

Still, I was profoundly creeped out when New York City replicated
Albert Speer's "cathedral of light" to memorialize the World Trade
Center. Certain things should never be overloaded and repurposed.
At least not for the next few centuries.

I'm even more against reverse repurposing. The Charleston church
shooter doesn't get to redefine the meaning of symbols of the
Confederacy. If he had used the US flag, or the Christian cross,
would everyone be required to stop using those, lest their use be
considered in support of his murders?

[Cryptoengineer]

"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote in news:o66hsq$b3j$1
@reader1.panix.com:

> Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Of course not - that's my point. There's a limited number of ways
>>> to do a salute, and they get overloaded and repurposed.
>
>> Oh, definitely a post in support.
>
> Still, I was profoundly creeped out when New York City replicated
> Albert Speer's "cathedral of light" to memorialize the World Trade
> Center. Certain things should never be overloaded and repurposed.
> At least not for the next few centuries.

As a New Yorker (in exile) who worked literally across the street
from the WTC for several years, I really liked the Tribute in Light.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribute_in_Light

I actually went down to see it the first year. It in no way
'replicates' the Nazi 'Cathedral of Light'. The claim doesn't
stand up to even casual examination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_of_light

pt

[David Goldfarb]

In article <o66hsq$b3j$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>I'm even more against reverse repurposing. The Charleston church
>shooter doesn't get to redefine the meaning of symbols of the
>Confederacy. If he had used the US flag, or the Christian cross,
>would everyone be required to stop using those, lest their use be
>considered in support of his murders?

The symbols of the Confederacy were already the symbols of treason,
torture, rape, and murder. If Dylann Roof helped people to recognize
that, then that's one tiny silver lining to his horrible crime.

--
David Goldfarb |From the fortune cookie file:
goldf...@gmail.com |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu |"You have at your command the wisdom of the ages."

[Gary McGath]

On 1/24/17 2:10 AM, David Goldfarb wrote:

> The symbols of the Confederacy were already the symbols of treason,
> torture, rape, and murder. If Dylann Roof helped people to recognize
> that, then that's one tiny silver lining to his horrible crime.
>

Putting treason in the same category with slavery (torture, rape, and
murder) seriously disturbs me. Treason, according to the US
Constitution, means levying war against one's own country, or adhering
to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort. When a government is
sufficiently in the wrong, treason is the right thing to do. Washington
et. al. committed treason against George III. Trump calls whistleblowers
"traitors," and to the extent that the government regards free Americans
as enemies, he's right.

[Keith F. Lynch]

David Goldfarb <goldf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The symbols of the Confederacy were already the symbols of treason,
> torture, rape, and murder.

The same is true of the symbols of any government.

First, let me emphasize that I am not a Confederate sympathizer.
In that war both sides were entirely in the wrong.

Treason? The US flag is a symbol of treason against Britain. The
British flag is a symbol of several treasons, e.g. 1066, 1688, and
2016. Of these, 2016 ("Brexit") is the best analogy. In 1861
Virginia held a voter referendum on whether to remain in the US or
leave, very much like the 2016 British referendum on whether to remain
in the EU or leave. Nothing in the US constitution said that states
couldn't do that.

No Confederate soldiers or sailors were charged with treason, and no
Confederate was convicted of treason.

You didn't mention slavery, the usual complaint against the
Confederacy. But I'll answer that argument anyway. Slavery was
practiced in the Union states, not just in the Confederate states,
and I don't just mean decades before the war. General Lee owned
slaves, but so did General Grant. Slavery was once practiced almost
everywhere, and is now practiced almost nowhere. The only places
where its abolition was accompanied by great violence was in the
United States and Haiti.

Slavery by governments is still all too common, though it's seldom
called that. I was worked as a slave for a year in a prison farm.
Would I have been worse off if my "owner" was a person rather than a
government? I don't think so. Indeed, prisoners at that prison farm
competed for the privilege of being loaned to local farmers to work
for them instead of for the state.

Torture and murder? The current president of the US spoke in favor of
torturing suspected terrorists and murdering their innocent relatives.
And today's headlines say that a homeowner in Pennsylvania was shot
by police when they mistook him for a burglar in his own home. Okay,
maybe that's a "tragic accident" rather than deliberate murder, but
there sure seem to be a lot of similar "tragic accidents."

[Kerr Mudd-John]

Cant resist.. It's *Arnold* Rimmer!


--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[Kevrob]

Quite right.

Though, in an alternate universe, he's "Ace."

Kevin R

[The Presumptive Mr. RASFF of 2016]

trump is the god-emperor...never go against trump...never ever....