Whoa...this guy should be a poster here.

[OCinBuffalo]

A very PPP-like post from Charles Hurt:

David Brooks should stay in his little bourgeois strata

A few highlights that are

 

Always gasping to sound intelligent, Mr. Brooks terms this national despair “declinism.” Because at this moment in American history, what we really need is another stupid political pundit sounding intelligent while completely ignoring the hailstorm of misery all around him.

 

 

All these social programs that you espouse to make yourself feel better, all the lying, all the punditry has become a trap that is destroying lives and destroying relationships between people, families and their communities.

 

As I have said 100 times at least on this board: most of what the left argues begins with designs on self-aggrandizement, and ends with self-congratulation. Gay people, illegals, women, children(of course ), college students, (insert newly formed victim class here), none of them actually matter to these people. All are merely just the vehicle. They aren't the noun in the sentence, they are only the object. The position of noun is always reserved for the leftist, and why shouldn't it be, after all s/he is the smarterst person in the room because they are on the left, and therefore, they should make all decisions about all things.

[GG]

 

As I have said 100 times at least on this board: most of what the left argues begins with designs on self-aggrandizement, and ends with self-congratulation.

 

And yet you still support trump

[Tiberius]

 

And yet you still support trump

[OCinBuffalo]

 

And yet you still support trump

What?

 

I see you are one of those people who are incapable of understanding the reality here. It's no surprise really, given that your brand of conservatism is: keeping things the same no matter how awful they are and/or "everybody should have to wear a suit and tie, because that's what I have to do. People that wear suits are serious people, and everybody who works buck naked from home is unserious".

 

Don't bother to deny it. You're not that far off from Brooks in many ways: you care infinitely more about the process, than the content.

 

Let's test this. I will put forward a simple premise, and then we will all watch you fail to conceive it properly, which will verify the above:

 

P1: How much more can Trump aggrandize himself beyond what he already has over the last 30 years? He cannot. He became a household name in the 80s. Thus, when you are at 100 on the famous/infamous scale, there's nowhere else to go. Contrast this with pissants on the left. They have no accomplishments. They have no real way to aggrandize themselves through personal achievement. So what do they do? They go for the anti-win, the humblebrag. The left tells us that they are more moral than the winners, and proceed to villify the winners for winning, because while the winners win, they care about children/gays/minorities instead, etc, complete with the 2 ton implication that anyone who doesn't agree with their idiot plans to solve problems, using their ill-defined problemn definitions, does not.

 

I mean: it's right there. It's obvious what levers are being pulled here and why. One could say that Trump represents the perfect anti-anti-win, which counters these phonies with an attack that they cannot defend. One could say that this is the only thing at work here, that supporting Trump is about supporting the anti-anti-win weapon's results, and that Trump is merely the delivery vehicle: Trump is only relevant in that the weapon needs someone who knows how to use it.

 

But, that one would be me: and you? You don't understand it. You're not a total idiot, so perhaps you'll understand it at some point. Probably not without consistent help from me. But, after all this is one of my functions here: Helping posters get past their psychological committments, and see truth.

 

Now, I am sure there's some indolent nonsense you have to say about me or Trump or bad language...but it all boils down to the same old thing: you want everybody to wear a suit, and be like you. Well, Mr. Romney, that doesn't work, and it hasn't worked for quite some time.

Edited May 3, 2016 by OCinBuffalo

[GG]

That's a lot of words, and nothing to refute the point that Trump is a self-promoter, self-aggrandizer and self-congratulator.

 

BTW, do you guys have a secret handshake in the narcissist guild?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

BTW, do you guys have a secret handshake in the narcissist guild?

[TakeYouToTasker]

That's an assessment that's beyond terrible.

 

I don't want Trump because he's going to set destroy the concept of small government forever in this country.

 

He's a small minded, leftist, proto-fascist whose presence in government will cast a long dark shadow over conservatism, undoing all gains made in state and local office, and in congress because in this age of sound-bites, short attention spans, 24 hour news cycles, and an ignorant electorate his massive unfavorables will paint all Republicans, be they old guard, libertarian, TEA Party, etc. as being like him.

 

Conservatism will be dead in this country, and you'll wake up living in a domestic Europe.

Edited May 3, 2016 by TakeYouToTasker

[IDBillzFan]

He's a small minded, leftist, proto-fascist whose presence in government will cast a long dark shadow over conservatism, undoing all gains made in state and local office, and in congress because in this age of sound-bites, short attention spans, 24 hour news cycles, and an ignorant electorate his massive unfavorables will paint all Republicans, be they old guard, libertarian, TEA Party, etc. as being like him.

 

Other than that, he's just swell!

[GG]

 

Other than that, he's just swell!

 

No, it will be the best, most amazing, beautiful version of Europe. Just think of all the gilded palaces that will spring up in Washington.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

No, it will be the best, most amazing, beautiful version of Europe. Just think of all the gilded palaces that will spring up in Washington.

Maybe it won't be such a bad thing?

[OCinBuffalo]

Why are you here? Shouldn't you be in your safe space?

 

Or, are you actually going to try and make an argument...of any sort?

That's a lot of words, and nothing to refute the point that Trump is a self-promoter, self-aggrandizer and self-congratulator.

 

BTW, do you guys have a secret handshake in the narcissist guild?

See?

 

In other words: you don't get it. One thing I can always rely on you for: predictability. You are so wrapped up in your archaic sensibilities that one can set their watch to them.

 

But, I became tired of pushing your button(you only really have 1) a long time ago. It's easy, and we always know the outcome, so, what is the point? All you've done here is once again demonstrate your single button functionality.

Edited May 3, 2016 by OCinBuffalo

[IDBillzFan]

 

No, it will be the best, most amazing, beautiful version of Europe. Just think of all the gilded palaces that will spring up in Washington.

 

Today Trump is pushing the Enquirer story about Cruz's father being involved in the assassination of JFK.

 

To paraphrase Rockhound...it's like watching a Greek tragedy.

[B-Man]

 

Today Trump is pushing the Enquirer story about Cruz's father being involved in the assassination of JFK.

 

 

 

 

Whatever happened to The Enquirer'' 5 Cruz Mistresses story ?

[OCinBuffalo]

That's an assessment that's beyond terrible.

 

I don't want Trump because he's going to set destroy the concept of small government forever in this country.

 

He's a small minded, leftist, proto-fascist whose presence in government will cast a long dark shadow over conservatism, undoing all gains made in state and local office, and in congress because in this age of sound-bites, short attention spans, 24 hour news cycles, and an ignorant electorate his massive unfavorables will paint all Republicans, be they old guard, libertarian, TEA Party, etc. as being like him.

 

Conservatism will be dead in this country, and you'll wake up living in a domestic Europe.

I don't know what "set destroying" is...but whatever.

 

You really don't understand either.

 

This "unfavorables" rant is as tired as it is stupid. Do you really believe that the black community is 95% against Trump? Really? NONE of the primary VOTING has shown that. But, of course the polls do. 95%? How? To borrow DC_Tom's standard Global Warming objection, that is "false precision". Why 95%? Why not 93, 90, or better: 89? Why do things cost $19.95 on TV? What can you point to in terms of word/deed that created that supposedly inviolate "statistic"? Saving time: nothing. There has never been an unfavorables stat like that that didn't come with some preceeding act, not words, to create it.

 

Yet, Trump has done nothing. He hasn't even said anything about race relations. You are a child if you can't see what's going on here: disinformation created by the establishment, of BOTH parties.

 

But, please, go ahead and tell me that all of these rants are happening ONLY because people care about the conservative ideal, and are all being totally selfless in their crusade to "stop Trump". Yeah, all their care about is the country, and the party, and keeping the liberals from...enough! It's a bald-faced lie!

 

I am infinitely more concerned with the behavior of supposedly "principled conservatives"...who see an end to their status/jobs/power...than I am with Donald Trump's behavior.

 

If anything, Trump has exposed these people for exactly who/what they are: even-year conservative heroes, but odd-year craven scumbags.

Edited May 3, 2016 by OCinBuffalo

[Magox]

I don't know what "set destroying" is...but whatever.

 

You really don't understand either.

 

This "unfavorables" rant is as tired as it is stupid. Do you really believe that the black community is 95% against Trump? Really? NONE of the primary VOTING has shown that. But, of course the polls do. 95%? How? To borrow DC_Tom's standard Global Warming objection, that is "false precision". Why 95%? Why not 93, 90, or better: 89? Why do things cost $19.95 on TV? What can you point to in terms of word/deed that created that supposedly inviolate "statistic"? Saving time: nothing. There has never been an unfavorables stat like that that didn't come with some preceeding act, not words, to create it.

 

Yet, Trump has done nothing. He hasn't even said anything about race relations. You are a child if you can't see what's going on here: disinformation created by the establishment, of BOTH parties.

 

But, please, go ahead and tell me that all of these rants are happening ONLY because people care about the conservative ideal, and are all being totally selfless in their crusade to "stop Trump". Yeah, all their care about is the country, and the party, and keeping the liberals from...enough! It's a bald-faced lie!

 

I am infinitely more concerned with the behavior of supposedly "principled conservatives"...who see an end to their status/jobs/power...than I am with Donald Trump's behavior.

 

If anything, Trump has exposed these people for exactly who/what they are: even-year conservative heroes, but odd-year craven scumbags.

 

I remember a time when you use to cite polling data to back some of your claims.

[IDBillzFan]

 

 

Whatever happened to The Enquirer'' 5 Cruz Mistresses story ?

 

It didn't test as well as the JFK story with Trump's key Enquirer demographic.

[OCinBuffalo]

 

Today Trump is pushing the Enquirer story about Cruz's father being involved in the assassination of JFK.

 

To paraphrase Rockhound...it's like watching a Greek tragedy.

Yeah?

 

And Lindsey F'ing Graham endorsed Cruz. Now, for you, and TTYT, and everybody else that is supposedly about "the conservative ideal" or "small government"...defend Lindsey Graham. He is literally the RINO that every single person in the TEA party hates. I know.

 

You think the TEA party isn't behind Trump's success? You think that Lindsey Graham's endorsement of Cruz didn't close the deal for a ton of TEA partiers support for Trump? You think making fun of McCain didn't have TEA partiers laughing? You think Mitt Romney attacking Trump didn't galvanize the TEA party behind Trump? I getting the exact opposite of what you intend was the province of progressives...but Romney proved that a supposedly "principled conservative" can bake himself a stupid cake as well.

 

Cognitive Dissonance. You're telling me about small government and at the same time, lining up onside with Lindsey Graham.

 

I/Trump are not your problem. You are your problem.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I don't know what "set destroying" is...but whatever.

 

You really don't understand either.

 

This "unfavorables" rant is as tired as it is stupid. Do you really believe that the black community is 95% against Trump? Really? NONE of the primary VOTING has shown that. But, of course the polls do. 95%? How? To borrow DC_Tom's standard Global Warming objection, that is "false precision". Why 95%? Why not 93, 90, or better: 89? Why do things cost $19.95 on TV? What can you point to in terms of word/deed that created that supposedly inviolate "statistic"? Saving time: nothing. There has never been an unfavorables stat like that that didn't come with some preceeding act, not words, to create it.

 

Yet, Trump has done nothing. He hasn't even said anything about race relations. You are a child if you can't see what's going on here: disinformation created by the establishment, of BOTH parties.

 

But, please, go ahead and tell me that all of these rants are happening ONLY because people care about the conservative ideal, and are all being totally selfless in their crusade to "stop Trump". Yeah, all their care about is the country, and the party, and keeping the liberals from...enough! It's a bald-faced lie!

 

I am infinitely more concerned with the behavior of supposedly "principled conservatives"...who see an end to their status/jobs/power...than I am with Donald Trump's behavior.

 

If anything, Trump has exposed these people for exactly who/what they are: even-year conservative heroes, but odd-year craven scumbags.

Read what I wrote rather than what you're trying to read in to what I wrote.

[GG]

Ok, the loquacious one, please explain how Trump will shrink the government, while building his wall, enlarging the military, maintaining the whole social safety net and waging a trade war?

[OCinBuffalo]

 

I remember a time when you use to cite polling data to back some of your claims.

Then you remember wrong. I have been citing massive errors in polling. And psuedo-scientific analytics.

 

Most recent example: Nate Silver's squad had Trump getting 71 delagates in New York....then, magically, the "science" told them to revise that number to 85, then 91, in the days just before.

 

Now, tell me: what scientific statistical modeling method allows you to be >2 std devations off, yet, at the same time, tells you to correct that just in time? Yeah, I'm sure that there was some variable in their model, whose range is broad, and its value exponential enough to produce those incredibly disparate, yet incredibly accurate results, such that it confirms not only those results, but the model itself?

 

Are you an idiot, or do you actually believe all of this to be "scientific"? I'll tell you what the variable is: it's called the "I don't want to look an idiot" delta.

 

People: just like with Charlie Joyner's "Football Scientist" crap from 8 years ago(which I also bashed), most polls today are bunk.

Read what I wrote rather than what you're trying to read in to what I wrote.

Yeah, chicken little, I read it. And I responded accordingly. Now answer my question: do you honestly believe that 95% of the black community is anti-Trump? If so, where does that data come from, and who is responsible for it?

 

Come on: oh keeper of the conservative flame. It's not a hard question, so what's so scary about giving a straight answer? Unless of course...you're a tiny bit skeptical of that number...which would not be new for you, since you are by nature, a skeptic.