[kenberg]

 PassedOut, on 2016-May-13, 07:32, said:

Seems Donald Trump is furious with Jeff Bezos and the Post. Looks like the fun part of the campaign has started: Donald Trump masqueraded as a spokesman to brag about himself


The more voters who see Trump as a comic figure, the better off we'll be.

This should be unbelievable. But I believe it. It is seriously bizarre.

[Zelandakh]

 Al_U_Card, on 2016-May-13, 09:28, said:

Just proved that I am like you.

In which way do you feel that you and I are alike?

[Al_U_Card]

Never heard of shameless self-promotion? You know, ego-maniacs that think that their acts, itinerary and exploits are of interest to everyone because, well, they are just fascinating individuals....
DT is a huckster, perhaps a flim-flam man and a narcissist but he is also the presumptive Republican nominee for President...

[Al_U_Card]

 Zelandakh, on 2016-May-13, 16:11, said:

In which way do you feel that you and I are alike?

We can fix posts by providing a differing viewpoint

[barmar]

 hrothgar, on 2016-May-13, 13:00, said:

Trump's claim to fame is "Look what a great business man I am. Look how much money I have made."

I am simply pointing that ability to enrich one's self isn't what we want from businessmen.
We want "Ability to create shareholder value."
We need "Ability to create wealth for the people who are trusting you with their money"

Of course. But most people are not interested in making that distinction. Being wealthy is intuitively seen as prima facie evidence of business success. They can't really tell the difference between Donald Trump and someone like Warren Buffet.

Quote

(And oh, BTW, his personal returns were significantly below that of the S&P 500)

But he's rich and famous! He must be successful.

You're not going to change his supporters' minds with facts like that. These people still think Obama was born in Kenya. They believe Trump's claim that most of the illegal Mexican immigrants are murderers, rapists, etc., even though statistics show that the proportion of criminals is much higher among American citizens than illegals.

[barmar]

The people who have drunk the Trump Kool-aid are like conspiracy theorists. If you try to argue with them, they just consider you part of the conspiracy, so nothing you say makes any difference.

[Winstonm]

 barmar, on 2016-May-13, 22:48, said:

They believe Trump's claim that most of the illegal Mexican immigrants are murderers, rapists, etc., even though statistics show that the proportion of criminals is much higher among American citizens than illegals.

Small minds do not have room to hold both facts and prejudices.

[helene_t]

 PassedOut, on 2016-May-12, 12:34, said:

It seems to me that the bankruptcies and the Trump University scam would be more effective to flog than would Trump's casino ownerships. The students scammed know they were suckered, but a lot of the suckers in the casinos don't see themselves that way and would be angered to be labeled that way.

Judging from my facebook feed, this argument is not used at all. I find that very strange. That he wants to deport Mexicans doesn't sound like a good argument - that is probably something most of his followers already take into account.

Is there a reason why the democrats don't play the Trump University card? Or is it just that my facebook feed is tailored to non-racists?

[kenberg]

 helene_t, on 2016-May-14, 08:48, said:

Judging from my facebook feed, this argument is not used at all. I find that very strange. That he wants to deport Mexicans doesn't sound like a good argument - that is probably something most of his followers already take into account.

Is there a reason why the democrats don't play the Trump University card? Or is it just that my facebook feed is tailored to non-racists?

Trump University probably requires more detail than is practical. A student takes classes and things don't work out. OK, students take classes at the community college, or at the state university, or at the Ivy League, and things don't go as hoped. Who is to blame? Well, you have to look at the details. I do not have a high regard for a lot of the online instruction available today. Some of it is pretty good, some less so. some of it seems to be close to a scam. Often the results don't match the hopes. I think it takes work to sort through which programs are realistic.

I think the troubles with TU could be an effective part of the general presentation. Trump makes a lot of money for himself, those who get involved with him often, for one reason or another, come to regret it. The fundamental truth is still that "It will be terrific" is no guarantee that it will be terrific. Everyone knows this, the task it to get it in front of people to think about. I think that it can be done.

Bankruptcy seems like simpler case, at least to me. But this may be a generational thing. The view of debt has evolved. I think I mentioned that at a forum for congressional candidates one of them was explaining that he and his wife were 160K in debt from student loans. He meant this as a reason people should vote for him, it showed that he understood their problems. He said nothing about why he could not have kept the debt lower by more conservative choices, nothing about what he had paid back, nothing about any plans to pay it back. "I've run up a massive debt, vote for me!". Well, he didn't win. But to me it was stunning that he thought of this as some sort of positive credential.

I may be a bit out of touch. But I can recognize a con man when I see one.

[barmar]

 kenberg, on 2016-May-14, 09:46, said:

Bankruptcy seems like simpler case, at least to me. But this may be a generational thing. The view of debt has evolved. I think I mentioned that at a forum for congressional candidates one of them was explaining that he and his wife were 160K in debt from student loans. He meant this as a reason people should vote for him, it showed that he understood their problems. He said nothing about why he could not have kept the debt lower by more conservative choices, nothing about what he had paid back, nothing about any plans to pay it back. "I've run up a massive debt, vote for me!". Well, he didn't win. But to me it was stunning that he thought of this as some sort of positive credential. \

Well, in order to rack up huge college debts, you have to get into expensive colleges, which generally means good colleges that are pretty selective about who they admit -- that by itself pegs you as an overachiever. It's not like getting into huge debt with a credit card, which could happen to anyone due to excessive spending on frivolous junk. No one would be considered "frivolous" for over-extending themselves to get a good education.

Also, debt in itself is not generally considered a bad thing, it's a normal part of the modern economy. Entrepreneurs are expected to go deep in debt to get a new business off the ground. Few people can buy homes without taking out a huge mortgage, and home equity loans are a common way to finance improvements. Government entities issue bonds all the time to finance expensive projects.

Except for my mortgage, I've very rarely gone into significant debt. I think I took 6-9 months to pay off my last car loan. I didn't have a huge college debt because my parents paid for most of it out of pocket (I think my contribution was to pay back the $7K in federal guaranteed student loans, which took me a few years). With so little experience with debt-based financing, I wouldn't be a good candidate for government office, where this is standard operating procedure.

[Winstonm]

 barmar, on 2016-May-14, 11:47, said:

Well, in order to rack up huge college debts, you have to get into expensive colleges, which generally means good colleges that are pretty selective about who they admit -- that by itself pegs you as an overachiever. It's not like getting into huge debt with a credit card, which could happen to anyone due to excessive spending on frivolous junk. No one would be considered "frivolous" for over-extending themselves to get a good education.

Also, debt in itself is not generally considered a bad thing, it's a normal part of the modern economy. Entrepreneurs are expected to go deep in debt to get a new business off the ground. Few people can buy homes without taking out a huge mortgage, and home equity loans are a common way to finance improvements. Government entities issue bonds all the time to finance expensive projects.

Except for my mortgage, I've very rarely gone into significant debt. I think I took 6-9 months to pay off my last car loan. I didn't have a huge college debt because my parents paid for most of it out of pocket (I think my contribution was to pay back the $7K in federal guaranteed student loans, which took me a few years). With so little experience with debt-based financing, I wouldn't be a good candidate for government office, where this is standard operating procedure.

The problem with many "for profit" colleges is that their job placement ratio is poor so the debt from student loans becomes a burden. It is also unrealistic to compare personal debt and government debt - apples and oranges.

[kenberg]

 barmar, on 2016-May-14, 11:47, said:

Well, in order to rack up huge college debts, you have to get into expensive colleges, which generally means good colleges that are pretty selective about who they admit -- that by itself pegs you as an overachiever. It's not like getting into huge debt with a credit card, which could happen to anyone due to excessive spending on frivolous junk. No one would be considered "frivolous" for over-extending themselves to get a good education.

Also, debt in itself is not generally considered a bad thing, it's a normal part of the modern economy. Entrepreneurs are expected to go deep in debt to get a new business off the ground. Few people can buy homes without taking out a huge mortgage, and home equity loans are a common way to finance improvements. Government entities issue bonds all the time to finance expensive projects.

Except for my mortgage, I've very rarely gone into significant debt. I think I took 6-9 months to pay off my last car loan. I didn't have a huge college debt because my parents paid for most of it out of pocket (I think my contribution was to pay back the $7K in federal guaranteed student loans, which took me a few years). With so little experience with debt-based financing, I wouldn't be a good candidate for government office, where this is standard operating procedure.

It's pretty easy to run up a substantial debt without getting all that great an education. "Expensive" and "good" are correlated but only to a limited extent. In his case he went to a private college and then on to law school, although he did not quite say he had gotten through law school, or passed the bar, or worked as a lawyer. But what really struck me was the importance he attached to being in debt while not speaking at all of paying back the debt either as something he had partially done or something he had any plans to do.

I brought this in to the discussion here because we were speaking of how people might see Trump's bankruptcies. Trump appears to regard it as simply a part of normal business. To me, that is weird.

[Al_U_Card]

 kenberg, on 2016-May-14, 18:11, said:

I brought this in to the discussion here because we were speaking of how people might see Trump's bankruptcies. Trump appears to regard it as simply a part of normal business. To me, that is weird.

Don't something like 80% of all businesses go bankrupt in the first (couple of) years?
Giving up and becoming an employee would then seem lack-lustre but also more normal.
Getting back in and "succeeding" would be testament to entrepreneurial spirit.
A banner that can be waved.

[kenberg]

 Al_U_Card, on 2016-May-15, 06:01, said:

Don't something like 80% of all businesses go bankrupt in the first (couple of) years?
Giving up and becoming an employee would then seem lack-lustre but also more normal.
Getting back in and "succeeding" would be testament to entrepreneurial spirit.
A banner that can be waved.

I have no idea what the percentages are. I suppose "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again" is a useful motto in some areas of activity. I don't really see it as a campaign slogan though.

For me, rejection of Trump is largely visceral. I cannot imagine him in a position where my welfare, and more broadly the country's future, is in any way dependent on either his ability or his whims. I don't care much for Obama, I didn't care much for W, I think the Rs have been extraordinarily irresponsible in their absolute refusal to work on anything with Obama, but Trump is in a whole different category. A fair number of R leaders seem to share this view, although many are having trouble following through on their conclusions.


Changing gears a little, I recommend
https://www.washingt...5f9a_story.html
This article won't change anyone's mind about anything, but I found it to be a very realistic portrayal of the problems we face.

[PassedOut]

 Al_U_Card, on 2016-May-15, 06:01, said:

Don't something like 80% of all businesses go bankrupt in the first (couple of) years?
Giving up and becoming an employee would then seem lack-lustre but also more normal.
Getting back in and "succeeding" would be testament to entrepreneurial spirit.
A banner that can be waved.

Overall, about half of all businesses last at least 5 years and one-third last 10 years or more, but this varies a lot by the type of business. And many businesses close for reasons other than failure: people retire, sell out to a larger business, or cash out and move onto something else. Nevertheless, there are a lot of real failures (not all of them bankruptcies) and the basic reason is incompetence: not finding out and then doing what one needs to be successful.

Not, in my opinion, a banner to wave...

[Al_U_Card]

Not all banners carry the same load (remember Mission Accomplished?) unless getting in deeper was the mission.
Isn't DT reviled by the R "establishment" because not only is he a wildcard in terms of policies but his "warts" are not hidden so he cannot be coerced by potential revelation añd as well, he is not beholden to any of the usual suspects. Understandable that this scares them more than DT's other attributes.

[Al_U_Card]

Now I recall the 80% referred to restaurants.....although serving up political pap might qualify...lol

[gwnn]

although, to be fair, ...



(I know Bernie will almost certainly not be nominated, but this is the best plot I could find)

[kenberg]

I suppose positive numbers are good but I am trying to work through "net favorability". If the number is, say, -60 this means 80% unfav and 20% fav?

In an attempt to understand, I went to the yougov site and clicked around.
https://today.yougov...s-toll-clinton/

I see that in a head to head, asking who they would vote for today, Clinton outscores Trump 42-40. Which is a little weird because when the question is who is qualified to be president, Clinton outscores Trump 55-31. I would like to hear from those who think Trump is unqualified to be president but plan to vote for him. Well, maybe I don't want to hear from them.

There is a similar Sanders/Clinton phenomenon. On "favorable view" Sanders outscores Clinton 49-41. On "qualified to be president", Clinton outscores Sanders 55-46. The mind boggles. People are favorably disposed to and plan to vote for candidates that they think are unqualified? No doubt I am missing a subtlety here.

For those who trust polls, I would imagine the 42-40 Clinton vs Trump number is worrisome. I am worried but I don't need a poll to tell me so.

Assuming netfav means what I take it to mean, I think it would be clearer if they just listed the score as 80unfav-20fav instead of -60. Of course I guess it could be 75unfav, 15 fav 10 no opinion. No doubt it means something.

[PassedOut]

Obama delivers commencement speech at Rutgers: 'Ignorance is not a virtue'

Quote

“In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue,” he said. “It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real or telling it like it is. That’s not challenging political correctness. That’s just not knowing what you’re talking about.”

Sad that this is even a point that needed making...